CASE SUMMARY

On December 9, 2021, a Washington-based non-profit filed a state lawsuit against the State of Washington, the state's redistricting commission, and the commission's members challenging the commission's conduct as violating various state constitutional and statutory open government and transparency requirements. First, plaintiff alleged the defendants failed to complete the requisite training on compliance with Washington's Open Public Meetings Act, citing an allegedly insufficient presentation to the Commission by the Assistant Attorney General. Next, plaintiff asserted in the course of the defendants' final meeting, the commission held private discussions and votes pertaining to the adoption of final redistricting plans in violation of the Open Public Meetings Act and the commission's own mission statement. Finally, the plaintiff asserted that in violating the Open Public Meetings Act, the defendants also violated the Washington Constitution's redistricting provisions relating to transparency, secret ballots, and open meetings. They sought a declaratory judgment the defendants acted outside the scope of their authority and in violation of the Washington Constitution and Open Public Meetings Act; an order enjoining future violations, declaring the commissioners' votes taken in private as void and unenforceable, and mandating compliance with the Open Public Meeting Act's training requirements; and a civil penalty imposed against each individual defendant commissioner.

  • On February 23, 2022, the parties agreed to settle the case and presented a consent decree to the Thurston County Superior Court for approval which established that Washington's Open Public Meetings Act applied to the Commission and its Commissioners and that the Commission violated the OPMA's transparency rules by holding private negotiations on final maps. It further stipulated all future commissioners and staff would complete open government training within 30 days of their hiring or appointment, the Commission would publicly release all proposed plans prior to making a motion to approve them as final and would collect public comment on such final approval motions prior thereto. Finally, under the settlement, the Superior Court would deny the plaintiff's request to invalidate the final redistricting plans.
  • The Superior Court approved the settlement on March 4, thereby ending the case.

CASE LIBRARY

Washington Superior Court, Thurston County - No. 21-2-01069-34 [together with No. 21-2-01949-34]