The good news is Democrats and Republicans in the state Legislature have finally found something they can agree on.
The bad news is that common ground is apparently secrecy and a desire to hide their actions and communications from the people of Washington.
On Friday, lawmakers voted on a bill that retroactively exempts them — along with all of their associated agencies, members and employees — from the requirements of the Public Records Act. It will go into effect immediately, and it will prevent the release of everything from correspondence and phone records to past histories of sexual harassment or other improprieties. The legislation was produced rapidly and rammed through the Legislature with surprising ease.
The same two parties that couldn’t come up with a capital budget in three extra sessions last year have found their stride. All it took was the threat of their records being made public. It brings to mind a classic question: What in the world do they have to hide?
The Public Records Act applies to all government officials and agencies, whether it’s a county, city, fire district or school board.
The purpose of the law is simple. Our government officials work for us. What our state lawmakers are attempting to do is the equivalent of a worker refusing to show a supervisor the full company ledger.
Lawmakers, though, have long held that the rules don’t apply to them. A Thurston County judge ruled otherwise after news organizations, including the Washington Newspaper Publishers Association, of which The Reflector is a member, filed a lawsuit demanding the legislators follow the law.
This legislation, Senate Bill 6617, is a clear attempt at sidestepping that ruling.
Frankly, it’s despicable, both in its intent and its timing.
News organizations have not been able to testify on the matter. The bill was introduced last Wednesday and was voted on, and passed, only two days later on Friday afternoon. Locally, all legislators representing the 17th, 18th and 20th Legislative Districts voted for the bill with the exception of one: Vicki Kraft, R-Vancouver, who voted against it.
If indeed there must be a change in law, the public should be allowed full opportunity to comment and take part in the process.
