Guest column: Keeping transparency while preventing request abuses

Mark Twain is often quoted: “Never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel.” Perhaps that may be partially why, after years of trying, lawmakers have still not passed legislation that would prevent the expensive abuse of Washington’s Public Records Act (PRA).

Under the PRA, government agencies, including cities, counties, and even school districts, must make available all public records for public inspection and copying, unless a record falls within certain exemptions. A person denied that opportunity may sue in court. If the plaintiff prevails, he or she must be awarded all costs, including attorney fees, plus up to $100 for each day of denial of that record.

Unfortunately, some are gaming the system with so-called “fishing expeditions” or retaliation requests. Some have profited from the abuse while costing government agencies so much that they’ve been forced to reduce public services. In some cases, they are pushed to the edge of bankruptcy.

In 2007, the community of Mesa was forced to pay a $246,000 fine to an individual who issued 172 records requests. This crippled the town’s budget of $340,000.

Prosser settled a public records lawsuit with an individual for $175,000, who admitted his goal was to “bankrupt the city.” The city had to hire an additional staffer to handle his requests that have cost Prosser $325,000.

Public records requests have taken up 80 percent of the Port of Kingston’s tax revenue. In Yakima, requests skyrocketed from 321 in 2011 to 1,096 last year. In Palouse, population 998, an individual submitting excessive requests told a reporter, “I am doing this for pure pleasure.”

So why aren’t legislators addressing this costly abuse?

We’ve tried.

Before I took office in 2009 and each year since, there have been numerous legislative attempts to create a balance that would accommodate legitimate public records requests and preserve transparent government, but would make it harder to abuse the system.

However, each year, newspaper lobbyists in Olympia have fought vociferously against these measures and notified their newspaper editors back home. The result is usually an editorial in the newspaper that skewers a bill’s sponsors for attempting to limit the public’s access to public records. Predictably, the bill then dies. Who wants to pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel?

Meantime, the abuse continues. Local governments are forced to spend more of their limited resources to honor the requests. Requestors make thousands of dollars. And taxpayers are fleeced.

This year, I co-sponsored House Bill 2576, which would allow agencies to adopt policies limiting hours devoted to requests under certain conditions. It would also set up a commission to resolve disputes, and allow a fee to be charged for those using the requests for commercial purposes. The bill doesn’t stop the public from accessing public records. Instead, it seeks a balance of accommodating legitimate requests while reducing frivolous ones. Some newspaper editors are coming apart at the seams about this bill, as if lawmakers are determined to block open government access, which is not the case.

Editorializing against these bills doesn’t solve the problem. We really must address this issue and find a balance.

If we don’t change the status quo, each legitimate requestor — even newspapers — may suffer lengthy delays to government records because of the growing backlog created by illegitimate requests.

I’m willing to work with all interests, our newspapers included, and join forces to find a solution — one that preserves open government as we all wish to do, but stops abusers of the system from profiting at the expense of our taxpayers.

This story was originally published February 20, 2016 at 11:19 PM with the headline "Guest column: Keeping transparency while preventing request abuses."