Amid rising threats, WA lawmakers look to conceal addresses in public records

OLYMPIA – State lawmakers are pushing to conceal their home addresses in a vast swath of public records, citing a climate of increased violence and threats against public officials.

But the proposal is facing criticism from representatives of open government and media groups, and some public agencies, who warn it would expand a zone of secrecy for elected officials while creating costly headaches for the offices that hold public records.

House Bill 2333, sponsored by state Rep. Liz Berry, D-Seattle, would prohibit the disclosure of the residential addresses for state and local elected officials in property records, campaign finance filings, voter registrations and other documents.

Berry and other supporters said the bill is needed more than ever to protect elected leaders and candidates from deranged stalkers and politically motivated assassination attempts.

“Political violence is on the rise, and that should alarm all of us. And together, we must say firmly and without exception: That is not OK,” Berry said at a public hearing on the proposal Wednesday.

She cited the 2011 shooting of her former boss, then-U.S. Rep. Gabby Giffords, and the recent killings of Minnesota state representative Melissa Hortman and of conservative activist Charlie Kirk saying political violence “is no longer isolated, and we have to stop it.”

But the proposal was criticized at the hearing by open-government advocates and some state agency officials as an overbroad expansion of secrecy that could create a huge and expensive workload for those who manage public records.

Rowland Thompson, a lobbyist for newspaper publishers and broadcasters, said “what is going to happen with the public records here is very broad and it’s very difficult to implement – in fact, it may be almost impossible.”

Thompson said the proposal’s goal is laudable but questioned whether its aims of shielding politicians home addresses could be accomplished at all given that such information is widely sold and made available online by commercial data brokers.

The bill contains an exemption allowing journalists to obtain address information of elected leaders. But it would require them to submit public records requests, and says the media could not share that information with anyone – a provision that Thompson said amounts to an unconstitutional “prior restraint” on publishing.

Elected officials and others facing serious threats already can apply to enter the state’s address confidentiality program, which shields disclosure of many of the same records. But the new proposal would allow all elected officials to enter the program, in addition to its other provisions.

Representatives of Secretary of State Steve Hobbs’ office and the Public Disclosure Commission also testified Wednesday with concerns about the cost and burden of the bill’s requirements to redact thousands of public documents.

But a stream of supporters Wednesday, including local prosecutors and groups that encourage women to run for office praised the bill for addressing what they said is a serious obstacle for many people who might otherwise want to enter politics or government service.

Caroline Djamalov, a senior deputy prosecuting attorney for King County, said she had received multiple death threats, including two years ago from a man with a history of assaults who was angry with her office over a charging decision – and began a “campaign of harassment” while making it clear he knew where she lived.

“I was hypervigilant entering and exiting my home for weeks, especially when I had my toddler in my arms,” Djamalov said, saying the bill would provide “peace of mind” for public servants.

Louisa Duggan, policy director for the Vote Mama Foundation, said officials are being targeted “at alarming rates” and that for those with young children, “those dangers extend beyond personal risk and threaten the safety of their families – often pushing them out of public life altogether.”

The proposal to cut off access to some public information comes amid a larger push by Democrats in the Legislature, who have advocated to shield their emails and other documents by asserting “legislative privilege.”

But top leaders in the state capital have seen threats in recent years – including the breaching of the governor’s mansion in 2021 by supporters of President Donald Trump.

Since then, the governor’s residence has had security upgrades including installation of a taller fence, guard posts, video surveillance and lighting upgrades costing an estimated $8.76 million, according to the state Department of Enterprise Services.

In addition to the public records carveout, Berry’s bill includes other help for lawmakers and other public officials, which appeared less controversial at Wednesday’s hearing.

The measure would allow lawmakers to use campaign money and potentially their public office funds to buy security equipment, such as locks, camera systems, gates, fencing and alarms.

It also would also raise criminal penalties for harassing elected officials because of their official actions, making the offense a Class C felony. The crime is now generally a gross misdemeanor.

The proposal also would allow state legislators to request security assessments of their homes and require the State Patrol to provide security details for lawmakers at public events if local police are unable or unwilling to do so.

Berry’s bill appears to have substantial support, as it is co-sponsored by 15 other House Democrats. A companion bill in the state Senate has 13 sponsors.

In an interview, Berry said she too has faced personal threats, which had required her to involve police and pay a commercial service to try and scrub personal information from the internet. She said she did not want to discuss details out of safety concerns.

Berry said she has heard the objections to her proposal from open-government advocates and others and is willing to discuss changes to her proposal.

Even if the bill cannot prevent all harassment, she said removing addresses from easily findable public records would stop “random people Googling” lawmaker home addresses from “being drunk and coming to your house and doing crazy stuff.”