AN ACT Relating to persons requesting disclosure of lists of individuals under the public records act;
Summary
HB 1964 amends Washington’s Public Records Act to narrow and clarify how agencies must respond to requests for records, especially requests that seek lists of individuals. The bill states that a request must be for identifiable records, and that a request for all or substantially all records held by an agency is not a valid request for identifiable records, while still allowing requests for records on a particular topic or containing a particular keyword or name. It also provides that requests for school district recordings are valid only when a date or date range is specified, and that school districts need only search using date criteria when producing those recordings.
The bill further requires a person requesting a list of individuals to sign a declaration under penalty of perjury stating that the request is not for commercial purposes and describing the purpose of the request. The Attorney General must provide a template declaration for agencies to use. Agencies may deny multiple bot-generated requests from the same requester within a 24-hour period if responding would excessively interfere with essential agency functions. The bill also clarifies that agencies are not required to honor requests that would violate exemptions or prohibitions on disclosure in other statutes.
Impact
HB 1964 would amend RCW provisions governing public records requests by adding procedural limits and disclosure conditions for agencies, particularly when requests seek lists of individuals or large volumes of records. It would affect how state and local agencies, including school districts, evaluate request validity, process recordings, and manage high-volume or automated requests. The bill also creates a new declaration requirement for list requests and authorizes denial of certain bot-generated request patterns, thereby changing public records administration and potentially reducing burdens on agency staff.
Sentiment
The bill’s apparent purpose is to reduce overly broad, repetitive, or automated public records demands while preserving access to identifiable records. Based on the text alone and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the overall sentiment appears to favor administrative efficiency and clearer request standards rather than expanding disclosure. The measure is framed as a procedural clarification to help agencies respond more effectively to public records requests.
Contention
The main points of contention likely involve the balance between transparency and agency burden. Supporters would likely emphasize that agencies need tools to manage broad, repetitive, or bot-generated requests and to prevent disruption of essential functions. Critics may argue that the bill could make it harder for requesters, journalists, advocates, or commercial users to obtain lists of individuals or large sets of records, especially because it adds a noncommercial declaration requirement and allows denial of multiple automated requests. The school district recording limitation and the definition of valid requests may also be seen as narrowing access.
AN ACT Relating to exempting from public inspection and copying requirements email addresses of individuals who subscribe to regular communications of certain agencies as defined under the public records act;
AN ACT Relating to expanding the public records exemption for personal information of family home child care providers to all licensed or certified child care providers;