Thurston shows well in draft audit

The state auditor's spot check of state, city and county governments shows some are honoring public-records requests better than others.

A draft report from a months-long audit of government performance shows a great range — from the top timeliness and responsiveness by the state Department of General Administration to the slower, spottier responses by Seattle, Yakima County and the state Department of Corrections.

Officials with Thurston County, the lone South Sound government examined, insisted their responses were good. By some measures, the county fell into the middle of the pack, but it also got noticed for examples of several "best practices."

Mindy Chambers, a spokeswoman for state Auditor Brian Sonntag, said the audit was not meant as a compliance measurement, but rather as a broad measure that might shed light on better ways of doing business.

"It is a spot check, but several things we were trying to find out in the course of the performance audit is what kinds of systems are in place that help people do a good job of this," Chambers said. "What we found was in the culture of compliance … that training is very good to have."

Ten state agencies and the 10 largest cities and counties were audited by teams of people who made 10 requests by e-mail, by letter or in person in ways that shielded their affiliation with the state Auditor's Office.

Thurston County rated a bit slower than some governments but was judged to be responsive in eight of 10 instances.

For the two other requests, the county did not provide records but did see if it had any, then sent the records requester to the independently elected county sheriff and auditor.

The county insists that was appropriate.

"The county commissioners cannot compel these independently elected officials. They are accountable to the voters independently," chief county administrative officer Don Krupp said Tuesday. "In the same way the public lands commissioner cannot tell the director of the community trade and economic development how to respond to public-records requests."

Krupp added, "The bottom line is that through all of these, the county followed the law."

Chambers said that even if Thurston County did refer requests to independently elected officials, residents find it frustrating to be referred. So it often is better to have a centralized place to keep track of requests, she said.

Thurston County Commissioner Diane Oberquell criticized the audit last year, calling it a "sting" and asking for hundreds of pages of documents detailing what the Auditor's Office project entailed. Oberquell contended the audit was wasting county resources.

The draft audit cost about $600,000, Chambers said.

The audit awaits formal responses by the audited groups and notes that Thurston County refused to let its public-records officer, Robin Courts, be interviewed one-on-one — instead insisting upon having Oberquell, a deputy administrator or a county deputy prosecutor present.

Thurston County's responses also were found to be slower than other counties, although responses beat the average response time three out of 10 times.

One of those quick responses was for information on employee-recognition awards, but it took the county 15 business days to provide employee travel vouchers versus 10 days average time for counties.

Krupp did not comment on that relative tardiness of the county, and Chambers said it is up to the county to determine if it would take actions to make replies timelier.

Krupp said the county expects to submit comments in writing by April 17 and to have what he called "an exit interview" with the Auditor's Office on April 14.

Krupp also said the county was singled out in several areas where best practices were noticed, including acknowledgements of requests and one response exceeding expectations.