Hangartner v. City of Seattle; Citizens Against the Monorail v. Seattle Popular Monorail Authority, 151 Wash. 2d 439

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court considered consolidated public disclosure requests involving the City of Seattle and the entity responsible for planning a proposed Seattle monorail. The court held that a request for all agency books, records, and documents was overbroad, that public debate alone did not establish a controversy under the Public Disclosure Act, and that records protected by the statutory attorney-client privilege are exempt from disclosure. The court reversed and remanded the Hangartner matter for a determination whether the withheld documents were privileged and reversed the Citizens matter based on the overbreadth of the request.

Holdings

1. A valid Public Disclosure Act request must identify the desired documents with reasonable clarity; a requester cannot satisfy that requirement by simply requesting all of an agency's books, records, and documents. An agency is excused from complying with such an invalid request.
2. The controversy exemption applies to records relevant to completed, existing, or reasonably anticipated litigation; mere public debate or a litigation-charged atmosphere is insufficient.
3. Documents protected by the attorney-client privilege codified in RCW 5.60.060(2)(a) are exempt from disclosure under the Public Disclosure Act's other-statute exemption in RCW 42.17.260(1), regardless of whether they relate to a controversy under RCW 42.17.310(1)(j).

Questions Presented

1. Whether a Public Disclosure Act request for all of an agency's books, records, and documents is impermissibly overbroad.
2. Whether public debate or a litigation-charged atmosphere surrounding a transportation project constitutes a controversy under RCW 42.17.310(1)(j).
3. Whether documents protected by the statutory attorney-client privilege are exempt from disclosure under the Public Disclosure Act's other-statute exemption.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded