“central to the cultural dysfunction and instability”
Outside investigator · October 2023.
OFFICIAL FINDINGS · SOURCE DOCUMENTS
ONE LAWMAKER.
A TRAIL OF RED FLAGS.
The state Ethics Board found 3 violations and ordered $52,457.98 in fines and costs. Simmons also admitted a rule was broken when her campaign sent $30,000 in leftover funds to a nonprofit. A group she helped start later fired her.
FROM THE WORKPLACE REPORT“No individual that we interviewed expressed a belief that Ms. Simmons is a capable leader.”Civil Survival investigation · 2023 · See report ↓
3ethics violations found
$52,457.98fines and costs ordered · under appeal
$30,000improper campaign transfer admitted
THE DOCUMENTED RECORDFour facts. Click for proof.
01STAFF SAID THEY FEARED RETALIATION.Outside investigators reported threats tied to jobs and funding. Workplace report; disputed.↗
02ETHICS BOARD: SHE SOUGHT A COMPLAINANT’S FIRING.One of three findings: she tried to make an employer fire the complainant or lose her legislative help. Ruling under appeal.↗
03$30,000 IMPROPER TRANSFER.Simmons signed an admission and paid a $300 civil fine. Case closed.↗
04A NEW ETHICS HEARING.Another case is set for May 10–11, 2027. No decision yet.↗
Read the full record: Simmons appealed the ethics ruling. She disputed the workplace claims. A court set aside her old convictions in 2023.
NEW DEVELOPMENTSEPARATE ETHICS PROCEEDING · NO RULING YET
ANOTHER CASE
Separate case • hearing scheduledNEW HEARING: MAY 10–11, 2027.
A new case asks if Simmons used her power as a lawmaker in a fight over a state grant tied to a former employer.
Simmons turned down a proposed $500 deal and says the claims are wrong. The board has not ruled on this case.
PENDING PROCEEDINGMAY 10–112027Hearing set. No ruling yet.
01 / CIVIL SURVIVAL
Outside report · 2023SHE HELPED START IT. THE BOARD FIRED HER.
Civil Survival fired Simmons in 2024 after staff spoke up and outside experts looked into their complaints. She said the claims were false.
“No individual that we interviewed expressed a belief that Ms. Simmons is a capable leader.”
Outside investigator · October 2023. Some staff hoped things could improve.
WHAT INVESTIGATORS DOCUMENTED
October 2023 investigationBackground checks on people she dated.
The report says she used the group’s resources to check the backgrounds of people she dated.
Body-shaming comments.
The report says she called someone “disgustingly obese” and compared another person to a whale. She later apologized for a comment.
Staff feared for their jobs.
Staff feared they could be punished for speaking up. The report raised concerns about payback, but did not find enough proof of an illegal hostile workplace.
BOARD ACTION
FIRED IN JULY 2024.
The board said she broke workplace rules more than once. Simmons denied this and sued. Both sides later settled the case.
These were workplace findings, not criminal convictions. Another review did not find that Simmons faced illegal bias.
02 / ETHICS BOARD
Official ruling · 20263 VIOLATIONS. $52,457.98 ORDERED.
The state Ethics Board found three rule violations. Each came with a $5,000 fine. The board also ordered legal costs. Simmons appealed.
VIOLATION 1
STATE MONEY FOR HER EMPLOYER.
The board found she had a conflict of interest tied to state money for a group that paid her.
VIOLATION 2
USING HER OFFICE TO HELP THAT EMPLOYER.
The board found she used her power as a lawmaker in a fight over funding for that group.
VIOLATION 3
TRIED TO GET A COMPLAINANT FIRED.
The board found she tried to get a person fired after that person filed a complaint. She tied her help as a lawmaker to the firing.
The money
$500,000 WENT TO HER EMPLOYER.
The ruling named $500,000 in state money for her employer. She earned $120,000 a year there. The board did not find that she took the $500,000 herself.
Penalty: $15,000 in fines plus $37,457.98 in costs.
Also: A 2023 ethics case involved a $1,000 payment for speaking.
The board threw out three other claims. Simmons appealed the 2026 ruling.
03 / CAMPAIGN FINANCE
Admitted campaign-finance violation$30,000 TRANSFER. RULE BROKEN.
TWO $15,000 PAYMENTS.
Simmons signed a statement admitting her campaign broke the rules. It sent $30,000 in leftover money to Better Minds Better Communities.
She paid a $300 civil fine. The PDC closed the case.
Past donations also drew a formal warning. The PDC said campaign money had gone to groups that were not registered charities. See the PDC record ↗
Official PDC case 184074
$30K
Improper surplus transfers
$300 penalty paid
04 / POLICE & COURT RECORDS
Historical cases · 2001 and 2011AN ASSAULT. DRUG SALES. A STOLEN GUN.
Two old cases. Photos from police files. A court later set aside the convictions.
ORIGINAL CASE FILEB11-009105Bremerton Police Department
September 2011
September 2011
01 / THE 2001 ASSAULT · SIMMONS' OWN ACCOUNT
BEATEN WITH A BAT AND BOTTLES.
In a 2018 NPR interview, Simmons said she invited a man to her home after talking about getting back at him. Other people beat him with a bat and bottles. Simmons said the man had sexually assaulted her. She was convicted in the 2001 assault case. A court set that conviction aside in 2023.
Read Simmons' account in the NPR interview ↗ Read the Washington Supreme Court opinion ↗02 / THE 2011 POLICE INVESTIGATION
DRUG BUYS. PILLS. A STOLEN HANDGUN.
Bremerton police arranged test buys of prescription pills in 2011. After Simmons was arrested, police found pills and a stolen handgun during a search. A court later set aside her convictions in this case.
Source: File 1, p. 2; Washington Supreme Court, In re Simmons (2018).2011 POLICE EVIDENCE
SEE THE PHOTOS.
See the real police photos and page numbers. The gun was not part of the 2001 assault case.
05 / MORE RECORDS
One official finding · one reported concernMORE QUESTIONS IN THE PUBLIC RECORD.
$1,000 SPEAKING FEE.
In 2023, the Ethics Board found Simmons took a speaking fee she should not have taken. It ordered her to pay it back.
LAWYERS LAID OFF. TWO IN THREE TURNED AWAY.
InvestigateWest reported that Simmons backed cuts to legal aid in 2025. Civil Survival said it had to lay off lawyers and now turns away about two out of three people seeking help. Simmons said she did not target the group.
Read the reporting ↗06 / BAR REVIEW
2017 recommendation • reversedTHE BAR PANEL SAID NO. THE COURT SAID YES.
In 2017, a bar panel questioned Simmons’ judgment. The state Supreme Court later disagreed.
BOARD MAJORITY • 6–3
6–3 VOTE TO DENY.
The bar panel questioned her judgment and called out a “sense of entitlement”. It voted against letting her take the bar exam.
But the panel did not have the last word. Every judge on the Washington Supreme Court voted to overturn that decision. She was allowed to take the exam.
ORIGINAL SOURCES
DON’T TAKE OUR WORD FOR IT.
Open the reports and court files. See the records for yourself.
Not all records prove the same thing. Some claims were denied. Some convictions were set aside. Open cases have no final ruling.