Search EFFWA Site:

EFF's Election Report ·  
Gonzales Letter ·  
Welfare Reform ·  
Boeing Contract ·  
Budget & Taxes ·  
Business Climate ·  
K-12 Fact Sheet ·  
EFF Health Study ·  
Paycheck Protection ·  
Transportation ·  
Unemployment Ins. ·  

Receive Updates ·  
Bookmark EFF ·  
Contribute ·  
EFF in the News ·  
How Can I Help? ·  
Join EFF ·  
Media Center ·  

POLICY HIGHLIGHTER

Volume 14, Number 20
September 29, 2004

State auditor denied access to state records
Some agencies even attempt to charge auditor for copies of records

In a troubling blow to open government, the elected state auditor is being denied access to records necessary to hold Washington state government accountable to the people. While the difficulty with which some agencies have in providing access to public records is well documented (please see EFF PH 14-14), perhaps even more disturbing to the cause of open and accountable government is the opposition the state auditor's office (SAO) is encountering in its efforts to audit and review the conduct of state government.

This fact is illustrated by the following comments from SAO's 2003 Statewide Accountability Report under the caption "Current Audit Challenges":

In some cases, agencies have resisted our requests for access to data. Sometimes this has occurred through delays in providing the information; other times, we have been required to go through lengthy request processes, including the signing of detailed confidentiality agreements. Some agencies have attempted to require us to pay for the information.

Generally agencies have used confidentiality issues related to clients' personal information or the cost of providing the information as reasons for denying or delaying our records requests. However, our employees are required to maintain confidentiality regarding all audit procedures and results during the course of an audit and are aware of the on-going need for confidentiality regarding personal data, in accordance with the Governor's Executive Order 00-03, Public Records Privacy Protections.

In addition, charging us for information would be counter-productive because the charges would be added on to the audit bill. No private entity engaging a firm to audit the entity's records would charge the auditor to obtain those records.

This unacceptable behavior by some state agencies is occurring despite the explicitly clear intent of Governor Gary Locke's 00-03 executive order on public records privacy:

I am a strong believer in open government and the people's right to know. The very existence of our democracy depends on the fundamental principles embodied in our laws ensuring that we never have secret government. People must be able to trust their government . . . With this executive order, it is my intent to ensure that state agencies comply fully with state public disclosure and open government laws, while protecting personal information to the maximum extent possible . . . Nothing in this executive order shall be construed to prohibit or otherwise impair a lawful investigation or protective activity undertaken by or on behalf of the state.

The occurrence of agencies denying the state auditor records and threatening to charge for access to state documents leads to a curious question of whether or not Washingtonians and legislators really want SAO to incur additional public expenditures to gain access to records needed for audit purposes.

The answer for most legislators and taxpayers is an unequivocal NO.

Currently, RCW 43.09.165 grants SAO the ability to subpoena documents and testimony needed to conduct audits of state government and provide for open and accountable government. However, Washington's elected state auditor should not be forced to subpoena state agencies and officials to obtain cooperation with required audit investigations.

Rather than force the state auditor to obtain court orders and spend additional tax dollars to receive copies of records necessary to conduct an audit, the legislature should amend RCW 43.09.165 to make it explicitly clear that state agencies must fully and unconditionally cooperate with any state initiated audit. Such audit compliance should be extended to any future performance audits conducted as well as the standard fiscal and compliance audits currently authorized.

The spectacle of a state agency denying the people's elected state auditor access to the documents needed to hold government accountable should never be tolerated.

Prepared by: Jason Mercier | Budget Research Analyst | 360-956-3482


Evergreen Freedom Foundation
P.O. Box 552, Olympia, WA 98507
Phone: (360) 956-3482, Fax: (360) 352-1874
Email: effwa@effwa.org


Election Reform


Grassroots Washington

Performance Audit Pledge
View pledge results

Health Plan 4 Life

Ten-Minute Citizen

WashingtonVotes.org

ChoosingLiberty.org

1 Part Honesty; 2 Parts Arrogance

At a March 23, 2005, House Appropriations hearing on a bill to gut the voter-approved I-601 spending limit, Rep. Jim McIntire (D) asked a supporter of I-601’s two-third supermajority requirement for the legislature to raise taxes the following question:

"Can you name a time when we [legislators] have actually not just set it [supermajority requirement] aside by majority vote? I mean, this is in many respects a procedural motion that has no bearing. It’s a statutory constraint that cannot constrain any legislature that chooses as a majority to set it aside . . . have we ever used a supermajority [to raise taxes]?"

- Rep. Jim McIntire (D - 46)
(360) 786-7886

Despite the arrogance of some state officials, Washington's constitution is clear: "All political power is inherent in the people..."

Court of Appeals Ruling AG's WEA Appeal What is the WEA Hiding? Determining Government's Core Functions Priorities of Government Stewardship Series School Directors' Handbook Professional Choices For WA Educators Congressional Testimony (6/20/02) Agency Rule Change Request Social Security Calculator Tax Dividend Calculator Public Records Requests