Should you throw away a tool because you disagree with how others use it?
As reported Tuesday in The Herald, a tentative agreement would settle a lawsuit by an Olympia man and the City of Everett, regarding a public records request for police surveillance videos of bikini barista stands, related to an investigation by Everett police and the FBI of prostitution and corruption.
Arthur West, who over many years has made numerous public records requests of state agencies and local governments, sought electronic copies of the videos. The city’s initial response to West was to allow him to view the videos but said it would not provide copies of the videos. The city feared that copies of the videos, which show baristas partially clothed and nude and engaging in sexual acts, could result in their release on the Internet, violating the privacy rights of the women shown.
In December, Snohomish Superior Court Judge George Appel ruled against the city’s request to prevent the release of the videos, finding that the state’s Public Records Act explicitly requires “inspection and copying” of records.
“The City’s argument,” Appel wrote, “would seem to call for the redaction of the statute, not the records.”
Following the ruling, the city and West began discussing a settlement, which the Everett City Council is expected to review at its meeting tonight. After an initial demand for $175,000 to settle, West is now agreeing to accept $45,000. West, for his part, will agree to not release the videos on the Internet, with the exception of those that show police misconduct. (A former Snohomish County sheriff’s sergeant was sentenced last week for conspiring to launder money connected to prostitution at the coffee stands.)
Considering that the city faced daily fines for violating the records act, a settlement for $45,000 and a commitment that should respect the privacy concerns the city raised, is a reasonable outcome.
It’s worth noting that Judge Appel in his ruling said the city could have satisfied the Public Records Act by releasing select still images of the video.
The episode is another example of the tension that exists between a law that is intended to provide public transparency and the agencies and governments that feel the law is too easily abused by those more interested in money than keeping government actions out in the open. The Herald has reported before about frivolous records requests, including one that sought all Snohomish County Sheriff’s records going back to 1776.
Among West’s wins in 2015 were a $187,000 settlement with the Port of Olympia and a $192,000 settlement with the state Liquor Control Board regarding records related to the state’s recreational cannabis laws.
The payouts and the expense of fulfilling public records requests can be a burden from the largest state agency down to the smallest town, but the Public Records Act’s role in good government is too vital to attempt to limit by court order or legislation.
A bill proposed last year and refiled this year, House Bill 1691, seeks to give courts more leeway to decide whether agencies would have to reimburse legal costs of those who prove violations of the records law. It would also divert per-day penalties to a state records management account, rather than the person filing a complaint.
Rowland Thompson, executive director of Allied Daily Newspapers and an open government advocate, told the The News Tribune last year that the legislation would disadvantage those filing suit because they rely on court awards to compensate the time they spend in fighting for release of records.
There may yet be a legislative solution that protects the act’s goals while at the same time saving governments from frivolous requests. Until then, we’ll have to rely on reason and good faith efforts — both of governments and those seeking release of records — to balance those interests.
Correction: An earlier version of this editorial gave an incorrect first name for Arthur West.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
