[Nos. 42774-5-II; 43500-4-II. Division Two. October 29, 2013.]
Derek E. Gronquist, pro se.
Robert W. Ferguson, Attorney General, and Brian J. Considine, Assistant, for respondent.AUTHOR: J. Robin Hunt, J. We concur: Lisa Worswick, C.J., Bradley A. Maxa, J.J. Robin Hunt
FACTS I. PRA REQUESTS TO DOC A. July 30, 2007 Request 1. All [DOC] inmate identification badges/cards from undocumented alien workers employed by DOC's Class II Industries 2. All records demonstrating the payment of any wages, gratuities, or other forms of payment to undocumented alien workers employed by the DOC [. . .]; 3. All records revealing internal DOC communications and/or deliberations concerning the use of undocumented alien workers in DOC's Industries program. Clerk's Papers (CP) at 252-53. Gronquist clarified that "'undocumented alien worker'" meant "any person who is not a [U]nited [S]tates citizen and who does not possess a current and valid work permit or similar document authorizing such person to be employed in the [U]nited [S]tates." CP at 253. DOC received this request on July 30. The next day, DOC responded that it had no records to disclose in response to Gronquist's request because DOC's Class II Industries program did not identify offenders by citizenship and citizenship was not a part of its employment process. B. August 9, 2007 Request I am requesting the following records concerning an assault and/or extortion attempt that happened to me at the Clallam Bay Correction[s] Center on June 17, 2007: 1. All documents created in response to, or because of, this incident; . . . . 4. The surv[e]illance video of C-unit from 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. of June 17, 2007; 5. The surv[e]illance video of the chow hall used for C-unit inmates on . . . and for the [b]reakfast meal on June 17, 2007; . . . . 9. The complete [i]nternal [i]nvestigations file. CP at 215-16. In response to this request, on October 26, DOC staff (1) mailed Gronquist 96 pages of documents, from which 1 page was inadvertently missing; and (2) claimed that the surveillance video recordings were exempt from PRA disclosure under former RCW 42.56.420(2) (2005), providing a brief explanation for this claimed exemption. On November 2, the Stafford Creek Corrections Center intercepted this mail and withheld 39 pages of documents and 11 photographs in accordance with DOC's mail rejection policy. II. JUDICIAL REVIEW A. December 18, 2009 PRA Order, Findings, and Penalty B. Motion To Dismiss; January 3, 2011 Order C. Motion To Amend; February 27, 2012 Order ANALYSIS I. RCW 42.56.565(1): ABSENCE OF BAD FAITH BARS PRA PENALTY FOR PRISONER [1] [2, 3] [4] A court shall not award penalties under RCW 42.56.550(4) to a person who was serving a criminal sentence in a state, local, or privately operated correctional facility on the date the request for public records was made, unless the court finds that the agency acted in bad faith in denying the person the opportunity to inspect or copy a public record. (Emphasis added.) [5] II. SURVEILLANCE VIDEO RECORDINGS; STATUTORY EXEMPTION [6] The following investigative, law enforcement, and crime victim information is exempt from public inspection and copying under this chapter: (1) Specific intelligence information and specific investigative records compiled by investigative, law enforcement, and penology agencies, and state agencies vested with the responsibility to discipline members of any profession, the nondisclosure of which is essential to effective law enforcement or for the protection of any person's right to privacy. CP at 191. Since the resources are not available to accomplish 100 [percent] surveillance at all times, it is mission critical that offenders and their cohorts not know the capabilities and the limitations of DOC's surveillance capabilities. . . . . It is a significant advantage to have offenders uncertain as to what is being monitored, what is recorded, and what is in the field of view. Offenders will often use "blind spots" (locations that have infrequent staff presence and no electronic surveillance) to commit acts of violence and purveying contraband. In reconstructing incidents and interviewing offenders, it has been found that incident location is often chosen due to a perceived lack of surveillance. In my expert opinion, surveillance, real or imagined, is a powerful deterrent to assaults and other problematic behaviors by offenders. CP at 290-91. Morgan concluded, "Providing offenders access to recordings of DOC surveillance videos would allow them to accurately determine which areas are weak or devoid in DOC's ability to capture identities in the aftermath of an incident or crime." CP at 291. The record contains no controverting evidence. [7] III. MOTION TO VACATE IV. REQUEST FOR NONEXISTENT "UNDOCUMENTED ALIEN LABOR" RECORDS A. Unidentifiable Records Request B. Objectively Reasonable Search for Records V. MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT VI. ART I, $ 5 CLAIMS A. Mail Room Seizure Claim Abandoned B. RCW 72.09.530 Constitutionality Claim Moot WORSWICK, C.J., and MAXA, J., concur. Reconsideration denied December 10, 2013.