Resident Action Council v. Seattle Housing Authority

Resident Action Council v. Seattle Hous. Auth., 177 Wn.2d 417, 300 P.3d 376 (2013) · Supreme Court of the State of Washington · May 9, 2013 · No. 87656-8

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court held that Seattle Housing Authority grievance hearing decisions are public records subject to the Public Records Act. Although personal information concerning welfare recipients is exempt, the records must be redacted and disclosed to the extent possible. The court also upheld orders requiring electronic production, adoption of related policies and procedures, and statutory damages, and awarded attorney fees on appeal.

Holdings

  1. SHA's grievance hearing decisions were public records because they related to the provision of public housing and were retained by a local agency. They were therefore subject to the Public Records Act.
  2. The welfare-recipient personal-information exemption did not categorically exempt entire grievance hearing decisions from disclosure. SHA was required to redact exempt information and disclose the remainder whenever effective redaction could render the exemptions inapplicable.
  3. Applicable federal regulations neither exempted the unredacted grievance hearing decisions from disclosure nor preempted the Washington Public Records Act.
  4. The trial court acted within its discretion by ordering SHA to produce properly redacted records in electronic format and to establish policies and procedures governing public-records requests, exemptions, redaction, explanations of withholding, and electronic records.
  5. Because SHA violated the Public Records Act, the statutory-damages award was authorized, and RAC was entitled to attorney fees on appeal.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether SHA's unredacted grievance hearing decisions were public records subject to the Public Records Act's redaction and disclosure requirements.
  2. Whether the welfare-recipient personal-information exemption categorically exempted the entire grievance hearing decisions from disclosure.
  3. Whether applicable federal housing regulations exempted the unredacted decisions from disclosure or preempted the Washington Public Records Act.
  4. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by ordering electronic production and requiring SHA to establish public-records policies and procedures.
  5. Whether statutory damages and attorney fees were authorized under the Public Records Act.

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (25)

  • Progressive Animal Welfare Soc'y v. Univ. of Wash., 125 Wn.2d 243, 884 P.2d 592 (1994)(followed)
  • Kucera v. Dep't of Transp., 140 Wn.2d 200, 995 P.2d 63 (2000)(followed)
  • Turner v. Perales, 869 F.2d 140 (2d Cir. 1989)(followed)
  • King v. Smith, 392 U.S. 309, 316-17, 88 S. Ct. 2128, 20 L. Ed. 2d 1118 (1968)(cited)
  • Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618, 645, 89 S. Ct. 1322, 22 L. Ed. 2d 600 (1969)(distinguished)
  • Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 671, 94 S. Ct. 1347, 39 L. Ed. 2d 662 (1974)(overruled_authority)
  • Lankford v. Sherman, 451 F.3d 496, 510 (8th Cir. 2006)(cited)
  • Hearst Corp. v. Hoppe, 90 Wn.2d 123, 580 P.2d 246 (1978)(followed)
  • Hangartner v. City of Seattle, 151 Wn.2d 439, 448, 90 P.3d 26 (2004)(followed)
  • Bellevue John Does 1-11 v. Bellevue Sch. Dist. #405, 164 Wn.2d 199, 218-19, 189 P.3d 139 (2008)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 25.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Download CaseDownload Case DataDownload Case and DataDownload AI Instructions

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Washington Supreme Court Of The State