Washington Public Records Act
From Sunshine Review
Contents |
The Washington Public Records Act (PRA) is a series of laws designed to guarantee that the public has access to public records of government bodies at all levels in Washington.
The introduction to the statute explains the reason for the PRA: "The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies that serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may maintain control over the instruments that they have created."[1]
The Washington Open Public Meetings Act legislates the methods by which public meetings are conducted.
[edit] Recent news
[edit] Transparency blocking
- State lawmakers urge against pricey ballot measures
- Kirkland found to be in violation of public records law
- Bellingham, WA withholding Amtrak records after death
More transparency blocking news from across the country.
[edit] Litigation
- Washington Supremes say judicial records not public
- Secret camera records must be made public, judge rules
- City's new budget policy put on hold
More FOIA litigation news from across the country.
[edit] Legislation
- Washington Task Force Suggests New Records Office
- Council approves ordinance to increase 'transparency'
- Suit Prompts Mason County to Examine Public Records Procedure
More FOIA legislation news from across the country.
[edit] Sunshine Guardians
No recent news. If you have news add it here
Other Sunshine Guardians from across the country.
[edit] Transparency report card
A 2008 study, BGA - Alper Integrity Index, conducted by the Better Government Association and sponsored by Alper Services, ranked Washington #4 in the nation with an overall percentage of 62.10%. [1]
A 2007 study, Graded state responsiveness to FOI requests, conducted by BGA and the NFOIC, gave Washington 56 points out of a possible 100, a letter grade of "F", and a ranking of 16 out of the 50 states.[2]
A 2002 study, Freedom of Information in the USA, conducted by IRE and BGA, ranked Washington's law as the 8th best in the country, giving it a letter grade of "C+".[3]
[edit] Features of the law
The statement of purpose of the Washington Public Records Act state that, "The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies that serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may maintain control over the instruments that they have created." [4]
[edit] What records are covered?
Washington law defines records as "any writing containing information relating to the conduct of government or the performance of any governmental or proprietary function prepared, owned, used, or retained by any state or local agency regardless of physical form or characteristics". [5]
Washington law contains a great number of exemptions the most important being the exemption of documents that if released constitute an invasion of privacy [6] Other exemptions can be found at The Official Washington Public Records Act page from statutes 210-480.
[edit] Deliberative process exemption
Another important exception to all Washington records requests is the deliberative process exemption found under section under section 42.56.280, which exempts predecisional material like opinions and recommendations.[7]
[edit] Major deliberative process cases in Washington
- ACLU v. City of Seattle, This case declared that deliberative process exemption was not limited to intra-agency documentation.
[edit] What agencies are covered?
The act applies to all state and local agencies.
It is questionable whether the act applies to all records of the state legislature. The Washington State Supreme Court issued an unclear decision in Cowles Publishing Co. v. Murphy in 1981.[8]
In May 2009, the Washington State Sunshine Committee held a hearing on whether to abolish the state legislature's exemption.[9]
In October 2009, the Washington State Supreme Court affirmed in City of Federal Way v. Koenig its 1986 opinion in Nast v. Michels that courts do not fall under the definition of "agency" given in the PRA.[10]
[edit] Who may request records?
Anyone may request records in the state of Washington.
[edit] Must a purpose be stated?
Washington law does not require a statement of purpose and explicitly states that purpose cannot factor into the rejection of a claim unless provided for explicitly by statute. [11]
[edit] How can records be used?
There are no restrictions placed on the use of records.
[edit] Time allowed for response
- See also: Request response times by state.
Washington allows 5 days for records responses.
[edit] Fees for records
Washington allows to charging of fees for duplication not to exceed $.15 per page. The fees charged cannot include overhead costs which include the maintenance of equipment and the labor required to search and copy the records. [12]
[edit] Open meetings
"The legislature finds and declares that all public commissions, boards, councils, committees, subcommittees, departments, divisions, offices, and all other public agencies of this state and subdivisions thereof exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of this chapter that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.
The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created."[13]
[edit] Proposed changes
A raft of new legislation to change the law has been introduced in the state's 2009 legislative session. [14]
Senate:
- SB 5119 - Eliminate the Washington Sunshine Committee. [15]
- SB 5130 - Prisoner access to public records.[16] Sen. Mike Carrell (R-Lakewood) is the sponsor and says he has concerns that the current law (which allows prisoners to file FOIA requests) may be too liberal. [17]
- SB 5249 - Changing public records request provisions.[18]
- SB 5250 - Increases the maximum per page copying charge under the public records act.[19]
- SB 5251 - Defines per page cost for the purpose of copying costs under the public records act.[20]
The Seattle Times editorialized against the three bills proposed by Sen. Darlene Fairley (D-Shoreline): SB5249, SB5250 and SB5251, calling their common theme of increasing the costs of obtaining open records "a move sure to discourage people with the right to keep tabs on their government". [21]
House:
- HB 1017 - Creating a committee to study the feasibility of creating a board with public records act and open public meetings act responsibilities. [22]
- HB 1105 - Regarding public disclosure of records relevant to a controversy to which an agency is a party. [23]
- HB 1106 - Removing the ability of agencies to enjoin the examination of a specific public record. [24]
- HB 1107 - Regarding local government self-insurance programs and public records. [25]
- HB 1181 - Regarding prisoner access to public records.[26]
- HB 1288 - Exempts the annual parental declaration of intent to home school from the public disclosure act.[27]
- HB 1316 - Provides a court procedure to enjoin the production of public records the court deems were made for the purpose of harassment.[28]
- HB 1317 - Governs the disclosure of public records containing information used to locate or identify employees of criminal justice agencies.[29]
- HB 1471 - Removing the public records exemption for certain records addressing public sector collective bargaining. [30] [31]
[edit] Relevant legal cases
- See also: Court cases with an impact on state FOIA
Here is a list of lawsuits in Washington. For more information go the page or go to Washington sunshine lawsuits.
(The cases are listed alphabetically. To order them by year please click the icon to the right of the Year heading)
[edit] Notable requests
[edit] 2009
The Evergreen Freedom Foundation's request for a copy of documents pertaining to Gov. Gregoire's list of 87 ideas for how to solve the Washington state budget's woe was declined by the governor's office on the grounds of "executive privilege." The Evergreen Freedom Foundation denies that an "executive privilege" exemption exists in Washington's sunshine law and has requested reconsideration.[1],[2]
[edit] 1997
- Main article: Yousoufian v. Office of Ron Sims
In 1997, prior to a vote in King County on a ballot initiative on whether the county should help fund what became Qwest Field/Seahawk Stadium, Armen Yousoufian requested documents from the county regarding feasibility studies it had performed and which it said supported building the Field. King County could have produced the records within five business days, but took four years. In 2009, the Washington State Supreme Court said that a fine against the county of $124,000 levied by a lower court isn't enough to punish the county for its foot-dragging, and ordered the lower court to beef up the fine.[3]
In its ruling, the court referred to King County's "grossly negligent noncompliance with the Public Records Act. Under the facts of this case we hold the trial court abused its discretion by imposing a penalty at the low end of the PRA penalty range."[4]
[edit] See also
[edit] External links
- Revised Code of Washington public records act
- Revised Code of Washington open meetings act
- Open Government Guide to Washington
- Washington on WikiFOIA
- Washington Attorney General open records ombudsman
[edit] References
- ↑ Governor's budget office should release its secret stash of budget ideas, January 15, 2009
- ↑ Letter from Evergreen Freedom Foundation to Governor's office requesting copies of budget-saving ideas
- ↑ Seattle Post-Intelligencer, "Bigger fine for King Co's withholding of records", January 15, 2009
- ↑ News Tribune, "Supreme Court says judge fined King County too little for giving citizen runaround on records request for Seahawk stadium", January 15, 2009
| |||||||||||
