Author Photo of the Washington State Legislative Building Accepting Harsh Light
This is going to be a multi-story Sunday morning Beehiv, so buckle up and cinch your seat belt please. Multiple matters from the Attorney General’s proposed model rules having a new revision requiring public comment, to Rep. Rude being rude, and an update on ongoing projects as the first of a planned six sequential Sunday morning Beehivs as the Attorney General’s Office model rules on public records comment period proceeds.
Table of Contents
Rep. Rude Being Rude - Part 2 of a Series
Shortly after the first part of this story published discussing how Rep. Rude never returned requests for interviews, input from the League of Women Voters, and even constituent e-mails… I was made aware by another public records requestor that Rep. Rude had sent one form of outreach to government lobby groups and another to the Washington Coalition for Open Government regarding 2026’s HB 2661.
Clearly, one message to one group and another message to another group is a problem. Even though one last attempt was made this week to give Rep. Rude a chance to clear the air by 9 PM May 23, “no joy” as the fighter pilots say. But before we get to the below, to be fair to Rep. Rude, the Representative did speak on the House floor in 2019 in favor of remote legislative testimony:
Rep. Rude also was the prime sponsor of the state law requiring school boards to record their meetings. With that, the meat of today’s matter:
Two Different Pitches to Two Different Groups
Not surprising, especially considering that Rep. Rude made two different pitches for supporting his legislation HB 2661. For instance, Rep. Rude pitched to an Association of Washington Cities (AWC) lobbyist,
“I introduced bill yesterday to create a task force to review the public records act to find ways to reduce frivolous and harassing requests.”
Rep. Rude also pitched to several organizations such as the Washington State School Directors Association (WSSDA) and the Washington State Public Records Officers association (WA-PRO) his original bill.
Photo of Washington State House Chambers by Legislative Support Services
How WashCOG was Treated
But to the Washington Coalition for Open Government (WashCOG), Rep. Rude proffered this:
I am drafting a bill to create a work group to recommend improvements to the Public Records Act. I would like to include COG as a member, but wanted to check with you first. Thanks!
WashCOG didn’t get to see the bill and the fine print before the bill was filed. When so, WashCOG pulled their support. As WashCOG President Mike Fancher explained on TVW,
It warmed our heart until we read the bill, we were asked, would we participate in a task force to modernize the PRA, and we said, heck, yes, we will. We'd be delighted to. Then we read the bill, and the legislative language basically told us that this was not trying to modernize it, it was in fact to deal with closing off access, and that the net effect, because of the way it was teed up, the net effect would be less access, not more, which was really disappointing,
Fancher then went on to share,
I think the modernization ought to have as its goal making it easier, more efficient, less expensive to actually let citizens get the records more timely that they're entitled to have, and I'm hoping that we can do that going forward. I think that would be very healthy for the public.
One can and arguably should please watch the whole Inside Olympia episode below:
Derek Sarley Responds
Nonetheless, Rep. Rude’s Democratic Party opponent Derek Sarley - who also has served on the Walla Walla School Board - kindly replied to this Beehiv when I asked for his thoughts on public records and the state of play. Mr. Sarley did share regarding the Public Records Act (PRA) and the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA),
The PRA exists -- along with other laws like the OPMA -- so that the residents of the state of Washington have visibility into the actions of their government and are therefore empowered to hold that government accountable.
How HB 2661 “Goes Wrong In Two Ways”
Mr. Sarley then shared - worth noting several hours before TVW published their aforementioned Inside Olympia episode - that in his words, although, “There is a legitimate and compelling interest in reducing the cost associated with fulfilling public records requests”, especially in regards to student privacy issues - Rep. Rude did not get the balance right. As Mr. Sarley explains:
I think the approach of Rep. Rude's bill goes wrong in two ways. The first is the focus on the intent of the requestors, and the perceived "abuse." I think it's hard to bring the community of open government advocates along when that's your starting point.
The second is that this bill is a rather typical example of legislation that doesn't bring a proposed solution forward, but rather tosses out another half million dollars of state money we don't have to fund a task force or workgroup to talk about a problem. …It's one of many bad spending habits we need to break.
Ultimately, let’s give Derek Sarley the concluding thought cloud:
I don't think "frivolous and harrassing" is the best way to think about these issues. There may be obvious cases where most people can agree that definition could apply, but the vast majority of situations are going to be much more nuanced and in the eye of the beholder. And if the government reserves to itself the power to make that determination, the opportunities for abuse are obvious.
Public Comment on Public Records Model Rules
On that note, in an event expected by insiders, the Washington State Attorney General’s Office released a revised public records model rules packet to help advise & counsel public agencies how to address public records requests. There will be a hearing on June 30 with details below - as well as a future Beehiv before June 30 with more detailed analysis from me & others.
One can also review all the comments from Round 1 of this process. I know I will as I form mine and intend to reply to at least the AWC’s and the Washington State Transit Association’s (WSTA’s).
But for now, one small detail in this version of model rules has my attention - namely that “preventing irrepairable harm” is now “protecting the rights of others”. However, “rights of others” is not defined. Stay tuned.
June 30 Public Hearing Details
The public hearing is scheduled for June 30, 2026, from 3:00 pm to 5:00 pm in the John A. Cherberg Building, Rooms ABC, 304 15th Avenue SW, Olympia WA.
Submit written comments by email at [email protected]. The deadline for submitting written comments is June 30, 2026, at 5:00 pm.
To watch the hearing on Zoom and not provide oral comment: Use this Zoom link at or after 3:00 PM on June 30, 2026.
To provide oral comment via Zoom: Register by noon on June 30 using this registration link.
After you register, you will receive a Zoom link via email that you can use to attend the hearing and that will allow you to be called to provide oral comment.
Again, you can expect a June Sunday Morning Beehiv on my thoughts regarding the fine details. I also suspect some public records officer podcast may offer an episode. ;-)
Beehiv Stories Being Assembled…
"A view of unfinished Boeing 777X fuselages at the Being Everett Factory, seen from the nearby Boeing Freeway" by WikiCommons Contributor SounderBruce
In what will become a new regular concluding section to these Beehivs, a short update on stories in the works…especially as I intend to publish each Sunday until the Attorney General’s Office model rules on public records hearing on June 30.
Sedro-Woolley City Council + Mayor and Skagit Transit management are currently in a standoff over who represents Sedro-Woolley on the Skagit Transit Board. Oh do I have thoughts…
The Washington State House Press Pass Saga continues - with a couple of court filings in April by the Capitol Correspondents Association (CCA) attempting to be excused from further legal proceedings. Additionally, the Public Disclosure Commisison (PDC) is working on two separate complaints with Brandi Kruse a de facto subject of said complaints. Stay tuned.
I will attempt to move up research on Utah’s Public Records Portal.
Research on British Columbia’s solutions to pressing freedom of information problems continues with plans to publish signficant June Beehivs.
British Columbia’s legislators are pressing ahead with Bill 9, a controversial reform of Freedom of Information. One of the big changes is to allow the denial of requests intended to harass governments in British Columbia. But Bill 9 may also allow for more data sharing, according to one expert on LinkedIn. Additionally, the nature advocacy news outlet The Narwhal is reporting in depth and that Bill 9 has until May 28 to pass - or wait until at least October. Finally, former BC legislator Selina Robinson published a piece about how the Bill 9 debate is going - as a display why opposition matters.
This Beehiv is going to attempt to focus between now and June 30 on improving public records production when possible - while keeping folks informed on emerging issues.
The Last Word
This Beehiv’s last word goes to WashCOG President Mike Fancher,
People need to call time out and appreciate how bad things could be if we do lose this war. How much would be lost in terms of trust and accountability? So that's one reason why we're at this moment of reckoning. The other is, I, you know, I think to try and help people understand what it means to them. We're starting to call our members champions, because we need people who are going to be champions.
Indeed, as this Beehiv ends at 1766 words to pay tribute to the first Freedom of Information law out of Sweden passed on December 2, 1766. The law, according to Britannica, also concurrently increased freedom of the press.