No easy answers in public records case
Sunday, June 15, 2008 12:57 AM PDT
Printable version
E-mail this articleJune 15 Daily News editorial
Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna has always been a staunch advocate for open government in general and the state’s Public Records Act in particular. Last year, he successfully promoted legislation aimed at strengthening the 36-year-old Public Records Act establishing a process to annually eliminate unnecessary exemptions to the law.
So it was at first surprising — and a little troubling — to learn last week that McKenna had proposed to the state Court of Appeals that convicted felons who have not had their civil rights restored should not have the same rights as others to access public records. But once we’d read beyond the headlines, our initial misgivings subsided. The attorney general argues somewhat convincingly that what he proposes is neither radical nor damaging to the public records law.
McKenna’s proposal is part of a friend-of-the-court brief filed in a case involving public records requests by a imprisoned arsonist, Allan Parmelee. Parmelee has been attempting to use the public records law to gather information on judges, lawyers and corrections officers. He’s made hundreds of requests for records that include addresses, photos, work schedules and birth dates of Washington State Patrol troopers of Corrections Department staff, according to Associated Press writer Rachel La Corte.
The attorney general argues that, “The state doesn’t allow inmates to physically harass or intimidate corrections officials or other officials, it doesn’t make sense that the law would allow them to use the public records as a means of coercion.” McKenna notes that Parmelee isn’t the only inmate who is making questionable use of the public records law. In 2007, corrections staff devoted more than 12,000 hours to requests from inmates at a cost of more than $250,000. They were seeking such information as user names and log-ins for corrections employees. One inmate requested all records that show how many plastic bags are purchased by the Corrections Department.
McKenna contends that, “The massive abuse of the Public Records Act by inmates is a threat to the use of the sunshine laws by legitimate requesters.” He may have a good point. But so may Toby Nixon, president of the Washington Coalition for Open Government, who worries about the implications of what McKenna proposes. Nixon told La Corte that not only imprisoned felons would lose their access to public records, but all convicted felons who are out of prison but haven’t had their civil rights restored. “Does this mean that anyone who makes a public records request is subject to a criminal background check?” he asked.
The problems McKenna cites with allowing inmates full access to the public records law are real. At the same time, the concern raised by Nixon would seem valid. It’s a tough call for the Appeals Court.
Viewpoint wrote on Jun 15, 2008 11:38 AM:
Past Month's Most Commented Stories