WA lawmakers consider bills affecting journalism
Published 1:30 am Wednesday, March 4, 2026
By Ayeda Masood
WA State Journal
Washington state lawmakers are considering several bills this session that could affect journalism. Those include bills that affect public records access, how journalists cover court proceedings and funding for local newsrooms — changes that could ultimately affect the public’s access to reliable information and the transparency of democracy.
SB 5400
SB 5400 would establish the Washington Local News Sustainability Program within the Department of Commerce to provide grants supporting journalists covering civic affairs in underserved communities. Eligible publishers, broadcasters and certain digital outlets could receive funding based on the number of qualifying journalists they employ.
To fund the program, the bill would create a 1.22% business and occupation tax surcharge on certain large social media platforms and search engines, with revenue deposited into a Local Journalism Investment Account. That revenue would support both newsroom grants and a journalism fellowship at Washington State University.
In a special to The Seattle Times, two of the bill’s sponsors, Sen. Marko Liias, D-Edmonds, and Sen. Rebecca Saldaña, emphasized the importance of SB 5400’s effect on marginalized communities.
Liias and Saldaña said communities of color often rely on ethnic media for coverage on issues affecting them, and often, local news sources are their only forms of trusted information. Without media diversity, fewer stories highlight voices and perspectives that are underrepresented.
Without intervention through bills like SB 5400, communities could become “news deserts,” leaving residents with limited access to reliable information about how tax dollars are spent and how public officials make decisions, Mario Lotmore, publisher of the Lynwood Times, said in an interview.
Washington is currently experiencing a local news crisis. Since 2004, a third of Washington’s newspapers have closed, according to Alan Fisco, the CEO of The Seattle Times.
“We have to do everything we can to protect our journalism jobs that remain and provide incentives to grow the number of journalists in our State, and Senate Bill 5400 will do that,” Fisco said.
Critics of SB 5400 say the bill is built on a flawed premise.
“Technology and social media companies did not create the structural challenges facing journalism today,” Amy Harris, director of government affairs at the Washington Technology Industry Association, said.
Harris also mentioned how SB 5400 raised concerns under the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act, which does not allow states to impose discriminatory taxes highlighting online activity. Currently, the bill is in the Senate Committee on Ways & Means.
SB 6113
Section 27 of SB 6113, and its companion bill, HB 2257, would have removed a long-standing exemption that has kept most advertising services from being taxed in Washington.
On Feb. 17, the bill passed out of the Senate with an amendment that removed Section 27, highlighting how quickly the tax environment surrounding advertising and news media can change.
Currently, most traditional advertising services, including newspaper advertisements, are subject to a tax exemption. If that exemption is removed, newspapers would owe additional business taxes on advertising revenue, likely increasing costs for local advertisers. For newspapers that rely heavily on advertisement revenue, that decline could mean significant budget strains, such as fewer staff, smaller pay raises and even closures.
Ileana Martinez, publisher of the SunnySide Sun, said in an interview that even modest annual rate increases in the past have led some advertisers to temporarily pull back.
Lotmore said the change would have likely cost his paper several thousand dollars annually in additional business and occupation tax payments. While that may not immediately eliminate positions, he said it would directly impact employee compensation and retention.
Lotmore also added that reduced advertising revenue could have negative effects on local businesses that rely on newspapers to reach customers and potentially lead to staff cuts or closures. Without local newspapers covering school boards, city councils and tax decisions, communities risk losing reliable oversight of how public money is spent.
While lawmakers debate how advertising revenue is taxed, other bills proposed this session focus on access to government information.
HB 2661
The Public Records Act requires government agencies to make records available to the public unless a specific exemption applies, and the law must be interpreted in favor of disclosure.
HB 2661 would require the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee to examine the impact of “frivolous, retaliatory, or harassing” public records requests on school districts and explore strategies to deter them, as the bill states.
Rep. Skyler Rude, R-Walla Walla, said in testimony that increasingly large and complex requests strain school resources and divert funding from classrooms.
Rep. Gerry Pollet, D- Seattle, warned that claims of widespread abuse are overstated.
While HB 2661 does not directly change the Public Records Act, it could shape future restrictions on public records access, potentially affecting journalists and everyday citizens who rely on broad records requests to hold the government accountable. HB 2661 is scheduled for a House floor vote.
HB 2520
Washington lawmakers are considering HB 2520, which would allow county legislative bodies to hold emergency meetings outside of their usual location (the county seat) or remotely when immediate action is needed due to an emergency, as long as transparency rules under the Open Public Meetings Act are met. While current Washington state law allows emergency meetings during disasters, it does not explicitly authorize bodies like county councils to meet at a new location to handle affairs.
The bill aims to provide that flexibility because of historic flooding in Skagit Valley that forced officials to meet outside the county seat.
Rep. Debra Lekanoff, D-Bow, the bill’s sponsor, said it helps local governments respond quickly and effectively in emergencies. However, transparency advocates, including Pollet, a member of the Washington Coalition for Open Government, raised concerns.
Pollet argues HB 2520 does not require agencies to provide the public with a call-in option or live access, meaning officials could take action without real-time public observation. Although the bill requires meeting recordings and minutes to be made public afterward, Pollet said that is not enough to ensure transparency. HB 2520 is in the House Rules Committee for review.
SB 6164
Washington Technology Solutions manages the central network and data centers and directs Washington’s IT initiatives to ensure state, city, county and tribal government operations are efficient, according to its website.
SB 6164, and its companion bill, HB 2491, requested by WaTech, would exempt certain information submitted to WaTech from public disclosure under the Public Records Act. It would protect information submitted to WaTech when it is providing digital experience platform services, such as online portals, applications or websites, through which people access government services.
Sen. Jeff Wilson, R- Longview, said the exemption is narrowly focused on protecting sensitive personal data and would not prevent people from accessing necessary public records directly from state agencies.
Colette Weeks, a member of WashCOG, testified that SB 6164 grants WaTech an overly generalized exemption from the Public Records Act as WaTech moves toward centralizing more state data. Weeks argued that while a unified digital system may improve efficiency, without more specific definitions, decisions about what is exempt could reduce transparency. SB 6164 is scheduled for a Senate floor vote.
SB 6239
Washington and local governments can be sued for tort claims the same way a private party can. Civil trials involving the government are usually heard in open court, where filings, testimony and jury decisions are public records.
SB 6239, and its companion bill, HB 2700, would require certain tort claims against the state or local governments to go through a private dispute process before being scheduled for trial. The bill would require claims more than 10 years old to go through a required arbitration process before reaching a courtroom. Other tort claims could proceed to arbitration with the consent of both parties.
Paul Jewell, the government relations director of the Washington State Association of Counties, said in testimony that requiring arbitration would create a more efficient path to resolving claims and help address rising liability and insurance costs.
Debbie Silberman, an attorney at Bergman Oslund Udo PLLC, said SB 6239 would move cases behind closed doors and shield institutions from public accountability. Civil trials held before juries allow the public and press to scrutinize government misconduct, while private arbitration proceedings reduce transparency.
Because civil court proceedings are generally open to the public, testifiers against the bill warned that requiring arbitration as a first step could limit the transparency that has historically allowed journalists to expose systemic failures within government agencies. SB 6239 is scheduled for a Senate floor vote.
The Wa. State Journal is a nonprofit website operated by the WNPA Foundation. Learn more: wastatejournal.org.
