§2.2 PUBLIC POLICY
This section discusses the purposes and public policy of the PRA.
(1) Statements of public policy in the PRA
The PRA contains express provisions as to its purposes and policy. For example, it specifies that in reviewing agency actions taken or challenged under the PRA, courts "shall take into account the policy of [the PRA] that free and open examination of public records is in the public interest, even though such examination may cause inconvenience or embarrassment to public officials or others." RCW 42.56.550(3).
Particularly noteworthy is that the Act specifies three times that courts must construe it liberally in favor of disclosure:
| (1) | It is hereby declared by the sovereign people to be the public policy of the state of Washington ... that, mindful of the right of individuals to privacy and of the desirability of the efficient administration of government, full access to information concerning the conduct of government on every level must be assured as a fundamental and necessary precondition to the sound governance of a free society .... The provisions of [the PRA] shall be liberally construed to promote ... full access to public records so as to assure continuing public confidence of fairness of ... governmental processes, and so as to assure that the public interest will be fully protected."RCW 42.17A.001(11) (emphasis added) |
| (2) | "The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies that serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may maintain control over the instruments that they have created. T[he PRA] shall be liberally construed and its exemptions narrowly construed to promote this public policy and to assure that the public interest will be fully protected." RCW 42.56.030 (emphasis added). |
| (3) | "The provisions of this act are to be liberally construed to effectuate the policies and purposes of this act In the event of conflict between the provisions of this act and any other act, the provisions of this act shall govern." RCW 42.17A.904 (emphasis added). |
See King County v. Sheehan, 114 Wn.App. 325, 338, 57 P.3d 307 (2002) (referring to the "thrice-repeated" mandate of interpreting the Act in favor of disclosure); see also West v. Port of Olympia, 146 Wn.App. 108, 116 n.10, 192 P.3d 926 (2008), review denied, 165 Wn.2d 1050 (2009). Virtually no other legislation repeats three times how it should be interpreted. Courts should never ignore this "thrice-repeated" demand.
(2) Purposes for adopting PRA
When interpreting an initiative, courts look to the official voters' pamphlet to determine the purpose of an act. The 1972 voters' pamphlet on the PRA made clear that the initiative
was partially intended to change the common law rule that a citizen could examine public records "required by law to be maintained" only if he or she could show a "legitimate interest"; and further, that examination of all other public records was "within the discretion of [the] official" having custody of the records. As explained by the voters['] pamphlet: "The initiative would require all such 'public records' of both state and local agencies to be made available for public inspection and copying by any person asking to see or copy a particular record ...."
Michael C. McClintock, Steven A Crumb, & F. Douglas Tuffley, Washington's New Public Records Disclosure Act: Freedom of Information in Municipal Labor Law, 11 Gonz. L. Rev. at 25-26 (citations and footnotes omitted).
Explanatory statements and arguments in the official voters' pamphlet are tantamount to legislative history and can be used as an aid to construction. State ex rel....
