Withholding public records can be costly – and so can judges who neglect to recuse themselves from cases that pose conflicts of interest.
That’s the pair of lessons stemming from a recent Thurston County court ruling, in which the state Department of Labor & Industries was slammed by a $500,000 judgment for failing to turn over public records.
A Benton City man who was cited by L&I for allegedly improper electrical work on his house had requested copies of inspections and permits issued by the department for that work. He waited more than 300 days to get those copies, an inexcusable delay.
Of all the public records that ought to be immediately forthcoming, documents that could help citizens defend themselves against government actions ought to top the list.
A half-million dollars does seem stiff, given that L&I did not contest that it was at fault for withholding the records. An agency spokesman told The Olympian that an employee had failed to take proper action in response to the records request.
The Thurston County judge set the fine relying in part on a January decision by the state Supreme Court. That decision encouraged courts to assess high-end penalties to deter public agencies from denying access to public records.
But on the same day the Thurston County judge ruled against L&I, the Supreme Court withdrew its January decision. King County had challenged it on the basis that Justice Richard Sanders, the author of the majority opinion, had his own public-records lawsuit pending and stood to benefit.
Sanders should have recused himself from the start. Now the L&I case is one of several public-records cases stuck in legal limbo. The agency is planning to appeal because the fine was based on a court ruling that’s now moot.
More of that Benton City’s man time and money will be tied up in court – and taxpayers could wind up still on the hook for a hefty fine, since the Supreme Court isn’t likely to issue a wildly different second decision. The original six-member majority is still five members strong after Sanders’ recusal.
This is one reason this newspaper harps on complying with public disclosure laws and avoiding possible conflicts of interest. Correcting such mistakes is expensive – and it’s usually done on the public’s dime.
JOIN THE DISCUSSION | Register here
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part — and abiding by these simple rules. A thorough explanation of rules of conduct can be found in our Terms of Service. If you have any questions, including why your comment may not be showing immediately after you submit it, be sure to visit the commenting FAQ.