The following informational news release was written by David Cuillier of AccessNorthwest for the Washington Coalition for Open Government.

May 12, 2004
Washington Supreme Court deals blow to public records law

OLYMPIA - A Washington Supreme Court ruling today will make it more difficult for the public to access government records by hiding documents through lawyers and making it harder to ask for records.

The court ruled in Hangartner v. City of Seattle that a public agency can keep secret public documents under "attorney-client privilege." Therefore, if a document is run past a government agency's attorney for legal advice, the information could be kept secret.

"This is a surprising and troubling decision from our Supreme Court," said Scott Wilson, president of the Washington Coalition for Open Government (WCOG). "It creates a broad new hole in our Public Disclosure Act by allowing government agencies to avoid disclosure by hiding behind their attorneys."

Also, the court ruled that government agencies do not have to comply with requests that are too large or not specific enough. This will make it difficult for the public to ask for documents about an issue if they don't know what documents exist about the issue, said Jim Andersen, a retired Supreme Court justice, legislator, and current member of WCOG.

"The majority also holds that a citizen's request for copies of documents can be denied simply because she or he asks for too many of the agency's records," Andersen said. "The requestor must specifically identify records the citizen can not possibly identify because he or she does not know what exists."

The court ruling today combined two cases, both involving records sought by citizens regarding controversial transit issues in Seattle. In one case, Hangartner v. City of Seattle, Rick Hangartner had sought records related to Sound Transit's light rail project. In the other case, Citizens Against the Monorail v. The Elevated Transportation Company, the group wanted all records regarding a monorail project.

The ruling affects the public in two ways:

... More records made secret through "attorney-client privilege."
This privilege is afforded to lawyers to protect them from being forced to betray their clients' secrets. Now government records can be kept secret from the public, even though the public is the client as served by government officials and agencies. While the court made it clear that government agencies shall not use lawyers as a way to hide everything, dissenting justices stated that the ruling guts the Public Disclosure Act and citizens' access to government.

... A public records request can be denied if it is too big or not
specific enough. In Citizens Against the Monorail v. The Elevated Transportation Company, a group asked for all of the public records held by the government agency. The court majority stated that requests must be for specific identifiable records. The dissenting justices stated that it's impossible for a citizen to ask for specific records if they do not know what records the agency maintains.

Justices Gerry Alexander, Faith Ireland, Bobbe Bridge, Susan Owens and Mary Fairhurst were the majority who voted for the restricted access. The four dissenting judges who advocated public access were Barbara Madsen, Charles Johnson, Richard Sanders and Tom Chambers.

"The Washington Coalition for Open Government agrees 100 percent with the dissent written by justice Johnson and concurred in by justices Madsen, Sanders, and Chambers," Andersen said.

The Washington Coalition for Open Government is an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting and defending the people's right to know in matters of public interest and in the conduct of the public's business.

For the full text of the case:
Washington Supreme Court: http://www.courts.wa.gov

For reaction to the case, including newspaper editorials and commentaries, see the Washington Coalition for Open Government Web site:
http://www.washingtoncog.org