Opaque Transparency

That's essentially what the state legislators did in 48 minutes; passed a bill touted as aiding in government transparency to skirt around a court jude's ruling, while at the same time effectively hiding public records from media and other entities seeking to keep check on law makers activities.

Here's a link to a MyNorthwest article calling on Gov. Inslee - "Sleepy Jay" as some know him - to veto the bill.

Below is a response to an email on this issue I sent back to one legislator who listed multiple excuses that supposedly would make it too onerous for them to function... I ask, what's new? They don't when Democrats are in power anyway!

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Rep. Shelly Kloba,

Since you've sent me a communication, I wish to respond on a few points from it for your feedback.

First, the Taylor's beautiful child, Brayden, is obviously in a loving and caring family. However, as a retired public school teacher, I'm confused that you state he's being discriminated against by being segregated from a "regular" class experience. There were students like Brayden at my school who were regularly integrated into our daily activities.

Second, your hypothetical situation is very weak. The state legislature has all the funds and means necessary to sufficiently protect a potential hacker from harvesting data for malicious intent. In an age of technology, it's not difficult to hire competent IT specialists to construct a "cloud" arrangement which could allow access to only those with a viable need to know in order to access records which are pertinent to their work, while requiring them to not use or divulge personal information of any innocent parties not related to the matter under penalty of prosecution. How is that so different than the already onerous bureaucracy of our state's government?

Third, I'm also unconvinced that this ruling produces unworkable results. Legislators have done fine thus far in an ever increasingly bogged down process for achieving results, what would be any different with having to appoint your own public records officer? Work in the 147  legislative offices are already slow, so it doesn't seem things would be much different if this ruling were in effect.

Fourth, I don't buy the excuse about the timeline forcing such a quick decision. It  does not take into consideration the fact that constituents were not consulted, or communicated that it was even happening; 48 minutes has got to be a record for the legislature's House and Senate to pass this bill. Listing excuse after excuse for not adhering to the ruling is only an admission that there's ulterior motives involved here. The people can smell corruption, or nefarious motives, are  going on, when such things happen the way it did.

If you view these changes as a significant step toward transparency, then I view moving out of state to avoid onerous taxation as my only remaining prerogative to escape such a corrupt governing body.

Respectfully,