Op-Ed: Transparency in Short Supply in Olympia This Year

By Michael Reitz, general counsel of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, Board Member of the Washington Coalition for Open Government

The idea of transparency in government is old as democracy itself. The people cannot maintain control over government entities if they have no idea what their public officials do. The Washington Legislature, unfortunately, has signaled a severe indifference—if not hostility—toward transparency during its 2010 session.

For example, one of the problems in the existing legislative process is that major spending bills are rushed through with very little public review or deliberation. Seeking to correct this problem, HB 2872 mandates a 72-hour review period before the legislature could vote on budget bills. This bill, which had bipartisan support, never received a vote and died in committee.

Love or hate Tim Eyman, his 2007 offering (Initiative 960) gave taxpayers more information about the costs of legislation. Among its less controversial provisions, I-960 required the Office of Financial Management to determine the 10-year cost to taxpayers of any proposed tax or fee increase. This information is available on a public listserv, along with the contact information of the legislators sponsoring the increase. This week the Senate, in a near party-line vote, suspended I-960’s requirement that tax increases be approved by a two-thirds vote. But imagine the majority leaders’ horror when they discovered they had passed the “wrong” version of the bill and had failed to suspend I-960’s transparency provisions as well. The Senate quickly remedied the oversight, passing a new bill the next day.

Other bills have been rushed through the legislative chambers with inadequate consideration. SB 6853 has been called a “ghost bill” by critics. It contains a title (“Relating to creating the legislative review of tax preferences act of 2010”) and no other details. Yet the Senate managed to introduce the title-only bill, hold a public hearing, and vote it out of committee—all in one day. Justice should be blind, yes, but should the legislature?

The legislature has also targeted the commission designed to expand transparency. The state’s Public Records Act requires that public documents are to be made available to citizens upon request, but there are more than 300 exemptions to that law. In 2007, at the request of Attorney General Rob McKenna, the legislature created a blue ribbon committee to review these exemptions for possible elimination. This year the “Sunshine Committee” found itself on the chopping block, with the governor recommending that the panel be disbanded.

Other pieces of legislation have targeted the idea of open government. One of the powerful incentives in the Public Records Act is the financial penalty a public agency can incur for violating the law. If an individual is improperly denied a record, the agency is required to pay the person a fine plus attorneys fees. Sen. Darlene Fairley sought to make attorneys fees optional, while the fine would be remitted to a separate public agency. Another bill requires citizens to “confer” with an agency before filing a lawsuit for a violation of the Public Records Act—a hurdle that could be used to deny citizens proper legal recourse.

Meanwhile, the legislature has left untouched several good ideas that would expand open government.

Concerned that citizens may be improperly denied public records when faced with the high cost of litigation, Attorney General McKenna and State Auditor Brian Sonntag proposed an Office of Open Government. This office would serve as an independent, cost-effective agency to review public records denials. The bill died in the House and never received a hearing in the Senate.

The Sunshine Committee has been reviewing the 300+ exemptions to the Public Records Act and has provided the legislature with a list of unanimous recommendations for elimination. The bill died in the House last year and could face a similar fate this session.

For several years now, House Majority Leader Lynn Kessler has attempted to require public bodies to tape their closed-door meetings. This would ensure that deliberations and decisions meant to be held in open wouldn’t be reserved for executive session. Cities and counties erupted when this idea was introduced, refusing to even agree to a compromise bill that would only record the bodies found in violation of the open meetings law.

Lest you believe the legislature is simply too busy in a 60-day session to address open government, let’s review some of the bills important enough to earn its attention: SB 6207 allows people to drive golf carts on city roads; SB 5383 prohibits the ownership or breeding of wolf-hybrids; SB 6329 allows grocery stores to host beer and wine tastings; and HB 1838 allows a recreational rainbow trout fishing in Spirit Lake.

Let’s hope the legislature begins to give open government more than lip service.

Comments