Washington state lawmakers have some unfinished business to attend to regarding public records.

Last year, they tightened the rules on when records requests can be rejected because they are deemed “overly broad.” But they couldn’t resolve issues related to attorney-client privilege, a much abused concept routinely invoked by agencies trying to conceal uncomfortable information.

In a 2004 case involving a resident’s request for records related to a pending light-rail project, the state Supreme Court liberalized attorney-client privilege by accepting Seattle’s invocation of the “controversy exemption,” which traditionally had been limited to ongoing litigation.

This sets the stage for agencies withholding records whenever it deems a matter controversial and a staff attorney has been apprised.

The prospect of abuse has prompted Rep. Toby Nixon, R- Kirkland, to introduce a package of public records bills. Among them is HB 2515, which would limit the attorney-client exemption to those records where specific legal questions or advice are conveyed. No longer could agencies dodge records requests by merely copying information to lawyers or inviting them to attend meetings.

Two other necessary bills – HB 2547 and HB 2548 – would hold public officials accountable for intentionally violating public records laws. Penalties would increase to a maximum of $5,000 and a year in jail. The current penalties, which Nixon says “are kind of a joke,” are $100 per incident or day of delay. Idaho allows for a $1,000 penalty.

Stiff penalties are important because when public officials violate the law, we all pay. For example, the taxpayers of King County are on the hook for $425,000 because courts have ruled that public officials wrongly withheld information related to sports stadiums.

If public officials face tough penalties, they’re more likely to comply with requests. As it is, many will gladly risk the token fine or slap on the wrist to conceal embarrassing information.

It’s sad that these bills are even necessary, but lawmakers have adopted 70 exemptions to the public records law passed by citizen initiative in 1972.

This cloaking of government activity is an invitation to corruption and an affront to the wishes of the people for open government.

We expect that various public agencies will quietly lobby the Legislature to water down or scuttle these reforms. They figure the public won’t notice or won’t care.

That’s precisely why these laws are needed.