[No. 42647-1-II. Division Two. September 10, 2013.]
Robert W. Ferguson, Attorney General, and John D. Clark, Assistant, for appellant.
David P. Moody and Martin D. McLean (of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP), Carter W. Hick (of Connolly Tacon & Meserve), and Paul J. Lawrence and Kymberly K. Evanson (of Pacifica Law Group LLP), for respondent.AUTHOR: J. Robin Hunt, P.J. We concur: Joel Penoyar, J., Thomas R Bjorgen, J.J. Robin Hunt
FACTS I. PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS A. First Request, March 26, 2007 [I]f you are seeking all DSHS records I will need to forward your request to the other agencies . . . . My understanding is that you are only seeking Children's Administration records and [I] will begin processing your request. If I am in error and you wish these other agencies to [be] contacted please let me know. CP at 154. B. Second Request, May 20, 2008 [C]opies of any and all documents already produced to any person or agency regarding Amber Wright. . . . This includes, but is not limited to, the following documents: 1. Any and all documents produced to the Pacific County Prosecutor's Office; 2. Any and all documents produced to the Sumner Police Department[;] and 3. Any and all documents produced as a result of any prior public disclosure and/or records request not listed above. CP at 11. II. PROCEDURE ANALYSIS I. NO PRA REQUEST FOR DSHS PRIDE MANUAL AND INVESTIGATION PROTOCOLS [1] A. Standard of Review [2-4] B. Wright's PRA Request [5-7] The [PRA] was enacted to allow the public access to government documents once agencies are allowed the opportunity to determine if the requested documents are exempt from disclosure; it was not enacted to facilitate [the] unbridled searches of an agency's property. [A] proper request under the [PRA] must identify with reasonable clarity those documents that are desired. Hangartner, 151 Wn.2d at 448 (emphasis added). The PRIDE manual and investigation protocols provide general DSHS guidance and procedures for numerous DSHS clients and other members of the public; they are not specific to Wright's individual Child Protective Services (CPS) referral history and records. [A]ny and all documents relating to Amber Wright and/or David Wright. . . . . This includes, but is not limited to any and all intake documents, any and all notes, e-mails, letters, faxes, photographs and/or other documentation generated or received by Department personnel during investigation of this complaint. This request also includes, but is not limited to, any documents relating to the resolution of this complaint including reports, compliance agreements, revocation letters, etc. CP at 11-12 (emphasis added). Wright argues that the above italicized language required DSHS to disclose the investigative protocols and PRIDE manual. But the second half of this sentence clarifies that Wright was seeking case-specific documents and not general internal guidance manuals and protocols.» II. JUVENILE RECORDS COVERED EXCLUSIVELY BY chapter 13.50 RCW A. Standard of Review; PRA Disclosure Policies [8] [9, 10] B. "Public Records," RCW 42.56.010(3) [11] any writing containing information relating to the conduct of government or the performance of any governmental or proprietary function prepared, owned, used, or retained by any state or local agency regardless of physical form or characteristics. RCW 42.56.010(3). Because DSHS prepared, used, or retained the juvenile records C. Independent chapter 13.50 RCW Exemption from PRA [12] If the legislature had intended to provide PRA sanctions in cases in which DSHS wrongfully denies access to chapter 13.50 RCW records, then it would have specified this in RCW 13.50.100(10). K.B., 150 Wn. App. at 923. We further noted that the legislature passed chapter 13.50 RCW to specify the exclusive "process, including sanctions, for obtaining juvenile justice and care agency records, after the PRA." K.B., 150 Wn. App. at 923. Here, we similarly hold that the PRA does not provide Wright with an applicable remedy for her unsupported claim that DSHS violated the PRA, based on its alleged "late" disclosure of the audio recorded interview and its transcription, available only under chapter 13.50 RCW. D. Juvenile "Records" under chapter 13.50 RCW Subject to the rules of discovery in civil cases, any party to a proceeding seeking a declaration of dependency or a termination of the parent-child relationship and any party's counsel and the guardian ad litem of any party, shall have access to the records of any natural or adoptive child of the parent.» [13] [14] [15] PENOYAR and BJORGEN, JJ., concur.