Board weighs whether legislators can include government-agency postings in printed newsletters

At a public meeting the board considered an advisory-opinion request from the chief clerk about whether legislators may include information from other governmental agencies in constituent newsletters. Staff counsel Jennifer explained the statute’s safe-harbor language allows posting information "originally provided or published by other governmental agencies which provide information about government resources" to official legislative websites and official social-media accounts, but noted printed newsletters are typically distributed differently and are not explicitly listed in the statute.

Jennifer summarized the practical example raised in the request: "On April 15, Thurston County is hosting a bike education event where they will provide free helmet fittings and bike checks," and asked whether that sort of announcement falls under the safe harbor. Jennifer advised the board that newsletters are typically mailed and intended as letters to constituents, so they do not automatically fit the statute’s listed categories. A committee member said the safe-harbor list is not exclusive and argued it would be "close enough" to allow such government-posted resource information in a newsletter, adding, "I personally think that it's close enough." The chair cautioned about turning newsletters into a community forum, saying, "You cannot use the newsletter as a community forum — that's what we've advised in the past."

Board members debated the practical and policy differences: one member argued mailed newsletters ‘push’ content to constituents and thus raise different concerns than on-demand website postings; others said limited newsletter space makes abuse unlikely. The board did not adopt a final opinion at the meeting but directed Jennifer to rewrite the advisory-opinion draft narrowly to reflect the group’s inclination that government-produced resource information may be included in newsletters as a logical extension of the statutory safe harbor. Jennifer said she would revise the draft and return it for future board consideration.