Green v. Pierce Cnty.

487 P.3d 499

Brian GREEN, Respondent,

v.PIERCE COUNTY, Petitioner.

No. 98768-8

Supreme Court of Washington.

Argued October 29, 2020

Filed: May 27, 2021

Daniel Ray Hamilton, Attorney at Law, 955 Tacoma Ave. S. Ste. 301, Tacoma, WA, 98402-2160, for Petitioner.

Joseph Thomas, Attorney at Law, 170 S. Lincoln Street, Suite 150, Spokane, WA, 99201, for Respondent.

Joseph William Evans, Attorney at Law, Po Box 519, Bremerton, WA, 98337-0124, for Amicus Curiae The First Amendment Clinic At Duke Law.

James Michael Cline, Cline & Associate, 520 Pike St. Ste. 1125, Seattle, WA, 98101-4058, Clive Alexander Pontusson, Attorney at Law, 1001 4th Ave. Ste. 4400, Seattle, WA, 98154-1192, for Amicus Curiae Pierce County Corrections Guild.

Katherine George, Johnston George LLP, 2101 4th Ave. Ste. 860, Seattle, WA, 98121, for Amici Curiae Allied Daily Newspapers of Washington, Wa State Assoc. of Broadcasters, Radio Television Digital News Assoc., and Washington Newspaper Publishers Assoc.

MONTOYA-LEWIS, J

¶ 1 The Public Records Act¹ (PRA) was created to inform the people of Washington of the actions of state agencies and to ensure access to the records of the same. RCW 42.56.030. It requires state agencies to produce records at the public's request. Certain records relating to public employment—including photographs and the month and year of birth of people who work in state criminal justice agencies—are exempt from public request. RCW 42.56.250(8). However, members of the "news media" are entitled to these exempt records. Id ; RCW 5.68.010(5). In this case, this court must determine whether an individual or his YouTube channel qualifies as "news media." We conclude that the statutory definition of "news media" requires an entity with a legal identity separate from the individual. Here, Brian Green has not proved that he or the Libertys Champion² YouTube channel meets the statutory definition of "news media," and, thus, he is not entitled to the exempt records. Therefore, we reverse the trial court in part. We affirm the trial court's denial of Pierce County's motion to compel discovery.

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

A. Factual Background

1. The County-City Building Incident

¶ 2 On November 26, 2014, Green and Peter Auvil went to the County-City Building in Tacoma to file a document and pay a parking ticket. As they went through security, the guard asked to search Auvil's bag. Auvil refused. A Pierce County deputy sheriff came to assist, and Auvil began to record a video of the interaction on his phone. The deputy told Green and Auvil that if they refused to allow the security guard to search the bag, they could either enter the building without the bag or just leave with the bag. Green and Auvil refused to leave, pointing out that the building is a public space and that they had legitimate reasons to be there. Auvil continued to refuse to allow the security guard to search the bag, arguing that the security checkpoint was a violation of his privacy rights. The conversation escalated, and the deputy asked the men to leave. When Green stood too close to him, the deputy shoved Green and caused him to fall backward onto the floor. The deputy arrested Green for criminal obstruction and took him to jail. He was released approximately 24 hours later. The prosecuting attorney's office dismissed the charge.

2. The PRA Request

¶ 3 On December 14, 2017, Green e-mailed a PRA request to the Pierce County Sheriff's public records office. He requested "[a]ny and all records of official photos and/or birth date and/or rank and/or position and/or badge number and/or date hired and/or ID Badge for all detention center and/or jail personnel and/or deputies on duty November 26 & 27 2014." Clerk's Papers (CP) at 15. He requested the office "construe [the] request in the broadest possible terms under the Public Records Act." Id . His e-mail also stated that "[n]one of the following request(s) for documents will be used for commercial purposes." Id . He sent the e-mail using the e-mail address for his musical band, the "Brian Green Band," and he signed the e-mail with the title, "Investigative Journalist." Id .

¶ 4 Susan Stewart, an office assistant in the "Public Disclosure Unit" for the Pierce County Sheriff's Department, timely responded to Green's PRA request. She provided him with 11 pages of records, but she did not include the photographs or dates of birth he requested. In her e-mail response, she explained that this information was exempt pursuant to RCW 42.56.250(8).³ They exchanged a series of e-mails in which Green asked Stewart to release the photographs and dates of birth because he believed he was entitled to those records. Green said he was "working on a story concerning the Pierce County Jail" and again signed his e-mail with the title, "Investigative Journalist." Id. at 20. Stewart cited to the statutory definition of "news media" under RCW 5.68.010(5) and asked Green to provide further information about who he was working for. Green explained he met the definition of "news media" because he was

a journalist that primarily covers local court cases on my Youtube [sic] channel. My channel is called "Liberty's Champion" [sic] .... I appear in many of the videos giving commentary on events. My channel has nearly 6,000 subscribers. My Youtube [sic] channel meets the definition of RCW 5.68.010(5) because it is a news agency that is in the regular business of gathering and disseminating news via the internet.

Id. at 27. He also provided Stewart with a link to the Libertys Champion YouTube channel.⁴ Stewart reviewed the link and conducted a Google search regarding Green's assertion that he was a journalist. She discovered the website for Green's musical band and noted that the band's name matched the e-mail address that Green used for his PRA request. Stewart also sought legal advice regarding Green's PRA request before concluding that Green and the Libertys Champion YouTube channel did not meet the statutory definition of "news media." She again denied his PRA request for the officers’ and jail staff's photos and dates of birth.

B. Procedural History

¶ 5 Green filed a complaint against Pierce County, seeking disclosure under the PRA. He alleged that he and the Libertys Champion YouTube channel met the statutory definition of "news media" and that Pierce County violated the PRA when it withheld the photographs and dates of birth he requested. Green alleged that the statutory definition of a "news media" should be interpreted broadly to include him and his YouTube channel because he gathers and reports news on the Libertys Champion YouTube page, which purportedly exposes government corruption in Washington State. Further, he alleged that he, individually, was also news media because he researches, creates, and posts videos on the Libertys Champion's YouTube page.

¶ 6 Pierce County responded, stating that its decision to withhold the records was proper under the PRA. It alleged that Green and the Libertys Champion YouTube channel were not "news media" because the statutory definition requires Libertys Champion to be a legal entity separate from Green. Otherwise, it cautioned, every person with a social media account would be considered news media. It posited that to be "news media," Libertys Champion must have corporate structure, generate revenue, have employees, and pay compensation.

¶ 7 To that end, Pierce County served Green with interrogatories and a request for production, seeking information about Libertys Champion's organizational structure and Green's legal relationship with it. When Green did not respond, Pierce County filed a motion to compel discovery. Before ruling on Pierce County's motion to compel or Green's complaint, the trial court first considered the issue of whether Green or the Libertys Champion YouTube channel met the statutory definition of "news media."

¶ 8 The trial court held a hearing and found the Libertys Champion YouTube channel and Green are "news media." It concluded that the statutory definition of "news media" does not require a specific corporate form or financial profit. It also noted that the Libertys Champion YouTube channel has been in existence for several years and publishes videos approximately every week with the purpose of gathering and disseminating news. Therefore, it found that the YouTube channel meets the statutory definition of "news media." Even though the trial court thought that it was not necessary to determine Green's role because "Mr. Green is Liberty's Champion," it found in the alternative that Green also meets the statutory definition because he was acting as Libertys Champion's agent. Id. at 443. The court also concluded that additional discovery was not necessary to resolve the issue and denied Pierce County's motion to compel.

¶ 9 The trial court then stayed proceedings and certified the issue for immediate appeal under RAP 2.3(b)(4), which this court accepted. Order Certifying Appeal for Transfer, Green v. Pierce County , No. 53289-1-II, at 1 (Wash. Ct. App. July 10, 2020); Ruling Accepting Certification, Green v. Pierce County , No. 98768-8, at 1 (Wash. July 14, 2020). Four amici curiae briefs were filed by the following interested organizations: the First Amendment Clinic at Duke Law School; the Pierce County Corrections Guild; the Washington State Association of Broadcasters, the Radio Television Digital News Association, and Washington Newspaper Publishers Association; and Allied Daily Newspapers of Washington.

¶ 10 We conclude Green and the Libertys Champion YouTube channel do not meet the statutory definition of "news media," and we reverse the trial court in part. We affirm the trial court's denial of Pierce County's motion to compel discovery.

II. ANALYSIS

¶ 11 This court reviews questions of statutory interpretation de novo. Dep't of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn, LLC , 146 Wash.2d 1, 9, 43 P.3d 4 (2002). When interpreting a statute, "[t]he court's fundamental objective is to ascertain and...