HB 2391
In CommitteeHouse
PRA/lists of individuals
Concerning disclosure of lists of individuals under the public records act.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill updates Washington’s Public Records Act (PRA) to clarify how agencies must handle and disclose lists of individuals, and to strengthen transparency by requiring agencies to publish and maintain indexes of key records and lists of applicable exemptions. It also explicitly protects labor organizing activities from being treated as prohibited solicitation.
- Requires state and local agencies to publish and maintain a current list of all laws (other than the Public Records Act itself) that exempt or prohibit disclosure of agency records.
- Mandates that local agencies create and make available a public index of specific categories of records (e.g., final opinions, policy statements, factual reports, enforcement correspondence) unless doing so would be unduly burdensome.
- Requires state agencies to establish and maintain indexing systems for certain types of records (e.g., adjudicative orders, interpretive statements, policy statements), and to make those indexes publicly available.
- Clarifies that public records used as precedent or cited by agencies must either be publicly indexed or provide affected parties with timely notice.
- Prohibits agencies from providing lists of individuals (e.g., names, addresses) for commercial, solicitation, or fundraising purposes unless specifically authorized by law — with an exception for professional licensees and applicants shared with recognized professional associations or educational organizations.
- Expands the definition of 'solicitation' to exclude labor organizing efforts, clarifying that unions may contact public employees for collective bargaining purposes without violating the list-disclosure restriction.
Who is affected
- General public — Members of the public who request public records or want to access government documents, as the bill clarifies how agencies must handle and index records, especially regarding privacy and commercial use of lists of people.
- State and local government agencies — Agencies at the state and local levels must now publish lists of non-PRA exemptions, maintain public indexes of certain records, and clarify policies on copying fees and redaction practices.
- Professional associations and educational organizations — Professional associations and educational organizations may gain access to licensees’ contact information for legitimate professional or educational purposes, subject to agency rules and fees.
- Labor organizations — Labor unions and other groups seeking to contact public employees for organizing or collective bargaining purposes are explicitly protected from being classified as engaging in 'solicitation' under this law.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
Requiring agencies to publish a list of all non-PRA exemptions increases transparency and enables the public to understand why records are withheld—this empowers individuals and watchdog groups to challenge improper non-disclosure and hold agencies accountable for overbroad claims of exemption.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)Mandating public indexes of key records (e.g., policy statements, adjudicative orders, enforcement correspondence) significantly improves public access to government decision-making frameworks—especially benefiting journalists, researchers, and advocates seeking to understand how rules are applied and enforced.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1(3) and (5)Requiring that records used as precedent be either publicly indexed or subject to timely notice ensures due process in administrative proceedings—protecting individuals and businesses from being held to unpublicized or inaccessible agency interpretations.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1(6)Clarifying that copying fees may only include direct, verifiable costs (e.g., paper, postage, cloud storage) and excluding overhead or staff salaries makes public records more affordable and accessible—particularly for small businesses, journalists, and community organizations with limited budgets.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(7)(a)(i) and (b)Explicitly excluding labor organizing efforts from the definition of 'solicitation' under the list-disclosure restriction protects workers’ right to self-organization and collective bargaining—ensuring unions can lawfully contact public employees without fear of legal reprisal or misclassification.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1(8)(b)
Potential Concerns (5)
Agencies must publish and maintain a list of all non-PRA exemptions, which could increase administrative burden and require legal review to ensure completeness—though the bill allows agencies to charge fees to offset copying costs, it does not provide new funding for this work.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)Mandates for local and state agencies to create and maintain public indexes of certain records (e.g., policy statements, adjudicative orders, enforcement correspondence) may impose significant operational costs and technical overhead, especially for small or under-resourced local governments with limited staff or IT infrastructure.
Local GovernmentLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(3) and (5)The requirement that cited or precedent records be publicly indexed or provide timely notice to affected parties may inadvertently restrict agency flexibility in administrative proceedings—agencies may avoid citing records unless indexed, potentially limiting consistency or fairness in adjudication where unindexed but relevant precedents exist.
Rights & LibertiesLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(6)Allowing agencies to include costs of cloud-based data storage and processing in copying fees may disproportionately burden frequent or bulk record requesters (e.g., journalists, researchers, advocacy groups), especially if fees rise unpredictably due to inflation in tech infrastructure costs.
Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(7)(a)(ii)Prohibiting inclusion of staff salaries and overhead in copying fees—while beneficial to requesters—may disincentivize agencies from staffing robust public records offices, potentially slowing response times and reducing service quality over time.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 1(7)(b)
Who Is Most Affected
The general public benefits significantly—especially those seeking to monitor government conduct, file PRA requests, or understand agency policies. The indexing and transparency requirements lower barriers to civic engagement and accountability.
State and local agencies face increased administrative and technical obligations (e.g., indexing, publishing exemption lists), but the bill allows fee recovery for copying and does not mandate new funding—net impact is modestly negative but manageable for most agencies.
Professional associations gain access to licensees’ contact information for legitimate professional/educational purposes, but only if agencies approve their recognition and charge reasonable fees—net impact is mixed but likely positive for well-established associations.
Labor unions gain explicit legal protection to contact public employees for organizing purposes without violating solicitation restrictions—this is a clear win for worker organizing capacity and rights.