Skip to main content

SB 5364

In Committee

Senate

Sheriffs, chiefs, etc.

Modernizing, harmonizing, and clarifying laws concerning sheriffs, chiefs, marshals, and police matrons.

This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.

How does a bill become law?
  1. Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
  2. Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
  3. Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
  4. Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
  5. Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
  6. Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
Introduced: January 19, 2025
Last Action: January 12, 2026
Status: S Law & Justice
Companion Bill:

AI Analysis

This analysis was generated by AI and may contain errors. It is not legal advice. Always refer to the official bill text for authoritative information.
People & CommunitiesPeople-leaningCorporate & Wealthy Interests

This bill standardizes eligibility, background investigation, and accountability requirements for sheriffs, police chiefs, and marshals across Washington, ensuring consistent certification and conduct standards. It also restricts the duties of non-certified volunteers and specially commissioned officers to non–law enforcement roles and repeals obsolete statutes on police matrons.

  • Establishes uniform eligibility requirements (e.g., U.S. citizenship, age 25+, high school diploma or equivalent, clean criminal record, two years of law enforcement experience, and certification within 12 months) for sheriffs, police chiefs, and marshals—whether elected or appointed.
  • Requires mandatory background investigations for all candidates and appointees, including criminal history, prior employer records, psychological and polygraph exams, social media review, and verification of citizenship or immigration status.
  • Creates automatic vacancy for sheriffs, chiefs, or marshals if their peace officer certification is revoked, lapsed, or if they fail to meet eligibility requirements during office.
  • Limits the roles of volunteers and specially commissioned officers (non-reserve) to non–law enforcement functions (e.g., animal care, chaplaincy), prohibits them from carrying weapons or using force unless certified, and requires agencies to have written policies ensuring they are visibly distinguishable from sworn officers.
  • Repeals outdated laws governing 'police matrons' and related municipal police authority provisions (RCW 35.66.010–050 and 36.28.011).

Who is affected

  • Sheriffs, police chiefs, and marshals (elected or appointed)Must meet updated eligibility standards (e.g., citizenship, age, education, clean criminal record, two years of law enforcement experience, and certification within 12 months of taking office) to be elected or appointed; may face automatic vacancy if certification lapses or other requirements are not met.
  • Candidates for sheriff, chief of police, or marshalMust undergo a standardized background investigation before appointment or election, including checks of criminal history, prior employer records, psychological and polygraph exams, and social media review; must provide sworn statements verifying eligibility.
  • Local law enforcement agencies (cities, towns, counties)Must ensure volunteers and specially commissioned officers (non-reserve) are limited to non–law enforcement roles (e.g., administrative, animal care, chaplaincy), cannot carry weapons or use force unless certified, and must be visibly distinguishable from sworn officers.
  • Appointing authorities (mayors, county executives, county legislative bodies) and Washington State PatrolMust conduct and pay for background investigations for appointed chiefs/marshals; the Washington State Patrol must conduct and pay for background investigations for sheriff candidates.
  • Current and prospective peace officers, corrections officers, and reserve officersMust submit to a comprehensive background investigation before being hired or appointed as any type of peace officer, corrections officer, or law enforcement executive; must authorize access to personnel files, social media, and prior employer records.
Effective: July 28, 2025Fiscal impact: The Washington State Patrol will incur costs to conduct background investigations for sheriff candidates; local agencies will bear costs for background investigations of police chiefs and marshals. The Criminal Justice Training Commission may incur costs to develop and implement new background investigation standards and maintain the public database.
Model: Intel/Qwen3-Coder-Next-int4-AutoRoundGenerated: Mar 19, 2026 at 8:53 PM

Pro/Con Analysis

Stronger case for benefits

Potential Benefits (5)
  • Uniform eligibility standards—including citizenship, age 25+, education, clean record, two years of law enforcement experience, and certification within 12 months—raise baseline professionalism and reduce variability in executive qualifications across jurisdictions, directly benefiting communities by improving consistency and competence in law enforcement leadership.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(a)-(j), Sec. 7(1)(a)-(j), Sec. 8(1)(a)-(j)
  • Public posting of sheriff candidates who pass background investigations on the Criminal Justice Training Commission website enhances transparency and enables voters to verify candidate eligibility before casting ballots, strengthening democratic accountability.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 8(1)(i)(iii) & Sec. 8(1)(iv)
  • Expanded background investigation requirements—including review of prior disciplinary records, impeachment lists, extremist affiliations, and social media—improve identification of candidates with histories of bias, misconduct, or instability, supporting safer, more equitable policing.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 10(2)(i)-(viii)
  • Limiting non-certified volunteers and specially commissioned officers to non–law enforcement roles (e.g., animal care, chaplaincy) and requiring visible distinction from sworn officers reduces risk of impersonation, misuse of authority, and public confusion during incidents.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 6 & Sec. 7(8)(a)-(b)
  • Background investigations conducted *before* appointment or election—especially for sheriffs, where the Washington State Patrol conducts and pays for investigations—ensure only qualified candidates assume office, protecting public resources and community safety from poor leadership choices.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(j), Sec. 7(1)(j), Sec. 8(1)(j)
Potential Concerns (5)
  • Volunteers and specially commissioned officers (non-reserve) are prohibited from carrying weapons, using force, or performing law enforcement functions unless certified — reducing risk of untrained individuals engaging in high-risk enforcement activities. This enhances public safety by ensuring only qualified personnel exercise coercive authority.

    Public SafetyRef: Sec. 6 & Sec. 7(8)(a)-(b)
  • Mandatory background investigations—including criminal history, psychological exams, polygraph, social media review, and verification of citizenship/immigration status—improve vetting rigor for law enforcement executives, reducing likelihood of hiring individuals with histories of misconduct or disqualifying behavior.

    Public SafetyRef: Sec. 2(1)(j), Sec. 3, Sec. 4, Sec. 5, Sec. 7(1)(j), Sec. 8(1)(j)
  • Automatic vacancy provisions for sheriffs, chiefs, or marshals whose certification lapses or who fail eligibility requirements strengthen accountability and ensure officeholders remain current on professional standards, reinforcing public trust in leadership.

    Public SafetyRef: Sec. 9 & Sec. 14 (repeal of obsolete statutes)
  • Repealing outdated statutes on police matrons and related municipal provisions modernizes statutory framework, reducing administrative confusion and redundant or obsolete regulatory burdens for local governments.

    Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 13 & Sec. 14 (repeal of police matron statutes)
  • Mandatory polygraph or similar assessments during background investigations may improve detection of material misrepresentations or undisclosed misconduct, though reliability of polygraph is contested and could produce false positives.

    Public SafetyRef: Sec. 10(2)(vii)

Who Is Most Affected

Sheriffs, police chiefs, and marshals (elected or appointed)Mixed Impact

Sheriffs, especially elected ones in rural or smaller counties, may face increased administrative burden and potential disqualification if they lack two years of prior law enforcement experience or fail to obtain certification within 12 months. However, the uniform standards may reduce political appointments of unqualified allies and improve legitimacy.

Candidates for sheriff, chief of police, or marshalNegative Impact

Candidates for sheriff, especially those without prior law enforcement experience (e.g., retired military, business owners), may be excluded unless they meet the two-year law enforcement employment requirement. This could reduce diversity of background but increase professional competence.

Local law enforcement agencies (cities, towns, counties)Mixed Impact

Local agencies gain clarity on volunteer roles and avoid liability risks from untrained personnel performing law enforcement functions, but must invest in training, policy development, and administrative oversight for compliance.

Appointing authorities (mayors, county executives, county legislative bodies) and Washington State PatrolMixed Impact

The Washington State Patrol incurs new costs to conduct sheriff background investigations, but this is offset by state funding and improved interagency coordination. Agencies appointing chiefs/marshals bear their own investigation costs.

Current and prospective peace officers, corrections officers, and reserve officersPositive Impact

Current and prospective officers benefit from standardized, rigorous vetting that raises industry standards and reduces risk of hiring unqualified peers. However, some may face higher personal costs (e.g., polygraph fees, time for investigation).

Sponsors

Senator Lovick(Democrat)District 44Primary
Senator Valdez(Democrat)District 46Secondary
Senator Dhingra(Democrat)District 45Secondary
Senator Nobles(Democrat)District 28Secondary
Senator Pedersen(Democrat)District 43Secondary
Senator Trudeau(Democrat)District 27Secondary