Political committee · Washington State

ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF WASHINGTON’S BUILD PAC (AGC’s BUILD PAC)

ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF WASHINGTON’S BUILD PAC (AGC’s BUILD PAC) is a political committee registered with the Washington Public Disclosure Commission for the 2026 cycle. It reported $366,307 from 573 contributors.

  • 2026 cycle
  • Political Committee
  • 573 contributors

$366K

raised

$205K

spent

$639

average contribution

The total divided by the reported contributor count.

Source Public Disclosure Commission committee filings · as of 2026-07-28

01

Money in — who funds this committee

The largest reported contributions. Washington requires committees to itemise contributions above a threshold; smaller gifts are reported in aggregate.

Largest reported contributors
Contributor City Amount
HD Fowler Company Bellevue $21,035
SMALL CONTRIBUTIONS $13,699
STAR RENTALS Kent $9,625
AGC OF WASHINGTON Seattle $8,612
ABSHER CONSTRUCTION Puyallup $7,450
Northwest Cascade Puyallup $5,193
Osborne Matthew Redmond $5,000
Combined Construction Mukilteo $4,979
LINCOLN CONSTRUCTION Puyallup $3,993
N C MACHINERY CO. Tukwila $3,846
MOUNTAIN STATES CONST. CO. Sunnyside $3,550
Ahlers Cressman & Sleight Seattle $3,522
LIBERTY MUTUAL SURETY – WESTERN REGION Seattle $3,434
WASHINGTON PATRIOT CONSTRUCTION Gig Harbor $3,308
IMA Corp Bellevue $3,267
Korsmo Construction Tacoma $3,210
Triton Marine Bremerton $3,188
OSBORNE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Redmond $3,087
EXXEL PACIFIC Bellingham $2,990
Larson Gross Bellingham $2,960

Contributions are not broken down by size, and employers are not named. Washington collects an employer field for individual contributions, and gift-size banding is what separates a committee funded by a hundred neighbours from one funded by three donors. We store only the largest contributors, so neither analysis is possible here — and computing concentration from a top-ten list would produce a confident number that is simply wrong.

Last checked 2026-07-28

Source Public Disclosure Commission contribution filings · as of 2026-07-28 · $115,948 of $366,307 shown across 20 of 573 contributors

02

How concentrated the money is

Computed from every itemised contribution rather than from the largest few, which is what makes the share meaningful.

20.8%

from the top 10 donors

Out of 573 itemised contributors in total.

573

itemised contributors

Who it came from

The PDC types every contributor. This does not follow a PAC’s own money back to a person — see what this page will not compute — but it does say how much arrived from individuals rather than from other organisations.

Contributions by contributor type
Contributor type Amount Share Gifts
Business $340,434 96.6% 529
Individual $9,493 2.7% 18
Union $2,500 0.7% 1

Employers behind more than one donor

Across the whole cycle rather than a single day. Weaker than the table above, and included because a slow accumulation from one workplace is still worth being able to see.

Employers with more than one contributor
Employer Donors Total
Lockton Companies 2 $1,000

Only 1.5% of itemised donors stated an employer. The field is filled in by the donor and left blank more often than not, so both employer tables show what we can see rather than everything that exists. Treat the counts as a floor. Occupations reported in the employer box — “retired”, “self-employed” — are excluded, because they are not a shared workplace.

Last checked 2026-07-28

Source Public Disclosure Commission contribution filings · as of 2026-07-28

03

Money out — where it went

$205K

total spent

56.1%

of what it raised

Spending as a share of contributions received.

15

largest payees listed

Who it paid

Largest payees, with the category the committee chose when filing. A consultancy, printer or polling firm appearing across many committees is a fact about who runs campaigns in Washington.

Largest payees reported by this committee
Payee Amount Payments Category as filed
Fairwood Golf & Country Club $44,717 1 Charity
Gold Mountain Golf Club $23,192 2 Charity
Jobs PAC $15,000 1 Monetary contributions to PAC or candidate
Apple Tree Golf Course $13,923 1 Charity
Evergreen Leadership Fund $10,000 1 Monetary contributions to PAC or candidate
AGC OF WASHINGTON $8,612 6 Inkind contribution
The Leadership Council $7,500 1 Monetary contributions to PAC or candidate
Apple Tree Resort $4,483 1 Charity
Hub International $4,476 1 Interest
CARDPOINTE $4,310 4 Bank and payment processing charges
Geiger $3,730 1 Charity
Friends to Elect John Ley $2,400 1 Monetary contributions to PAC or candidate
COMMITTEE TO ELECT STEPHANIE MCCLINTOCK $2,400 1 Monetary contributions to PAC or candidate
Stuebe for State Rep. $2,400 1 Monetary contributions to PAC or candidate
AMY WALEN FOR STATE HOUSE $2,400 1 Monetary contributions to PAC or candidate

A further $319 was reported as small expenses. Washington lets a committee report spending below a threshold as a single lump with no payee. That money is in the total above and cannot be broken out by anyone, including us.

Last checked 2026-07-28

Source Public Disclosure Commission expenditure filings · as of 2026-07-28

04

Does it add up

The arithmetic, in the open. Reported contributions less reported spending is what the committee should still be holding.

Reported contributions $366,307
Reported expenditures − $205,434
Implied balance $160,874

This is what the two filings imply, not a bank balance. Committees also report cash on hand directly, and the two figures can differ where a report is outstanding.

Source Public Disclosure Commission committee filings · as of 2026-07-28

05

Across cycles

Other filings under the same PDC committee id.

Only one cycle on file. We hold a single filing for committee 2197. That means it registered for one election, or that our sync covers only the cycles this one falls in — the filings do not distinguish the two.

Last checked 2026-07-28

06

What this page will not compute

Each of these is a number a reader might reasonably expect. None of them follow from the records we hold, so we do not publish them.

Who is really behind a committee that funds this one
We show every contributor the committee reported, and how much of its money came from organisations rather than individuals. A committee funded by another committee is common, and following that chain to the people at the end of it means joining filings across organisations and cycles — a join we have not made, and one that would be wrong to guess at.
Who the independent spending was aimed at
The filings name the candidate or measure each independent expenditure supported or opposed. We hold the amounts and which way they cut, but have not joined them to those records, so the page says how much and not against whom.
Whether the spending worked
We hold what was raised, what was spent, and in some cases the result. Connecting them would be a causal claim from two numbers, and spending is not the only thing that moves an election.
Anything below the itemisation threshold
Washington lets small contributions and small expenses be reported as lump sums with no counterparty. That money is in the totals and cannot be broken out by anyone, including the PDC. Where a lump is large, the page says so.

Cite this page

This is public-records reporting. Use it, and say where it came from.

“ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF WASHINGTON’S BUILD PAC (AGC’s BUILD PAC),” WashingtonIndependents.org, data as of 2026-07-28, accessed 2026-08-10. https://washingtonindependents.org/committee/associated-general-contractors-of-washington-s-build-pac-agc-s-build-pac/

06

Where this page comes from

Every figure above is read from a primary source and rebuilt on a schedule. Nothing here is modelled or inferred; where a source is silent the page says so rather than filling the gap.

Public Disclosure Commission committee filings
Registration, contribution and expenditure totals, and the largest reported contributors. The original record is at the PDC.
Not loaded
Itemised expenditures, contributor employers, gift-size banding, and independent expenditure filings. Each is named where the page would otherwise use it.