in the House Commerce and Labor Committee, the Executive Director of Washington’s Public Disclosure Commission wrote to the committee chair in January 1991, urging the committee to “consider carefully, before approving this bill, its apparent conflict with” the PDA. 1 Suppl. CP at 675. 11 See Progressive Animal Welfare Soc’y v. Univ. of Wash., 125 Wn.2d 243, 251, 884 P.2d 592 (1994) (PAWS II); Dawson v. Daly, 120 Wn.2d 782, 788, 845 P.2d 995 (1993). 12 RCW 49.17.250 describes the program. 13 In a statement of additional authority (RAP 10.8) filed on August 5, 2004, the Newspapers draw our attention to a passage from Laborers International Union of North America, Local No. 374 v. City of Aberdeen, 31 Wn. App. 445, 449, 642 P.2d 418, review denied, 97 Wn.2d 1024 752, 755 (D.D.C. 1977) (<HOLDING>). On the other hand, OSHA Data/CIH, Inc. v.
holding that the lower court erred both in requiring production of copies of the defendants income tax returns and in receiving the returns into evidence over objection holding that agency could not claim confidentiality for tax returns that had been exhibits in tax court and were therefore public records holding that tax returns and tax return information cannot regain their confidential status once the returns have become part of the public record by their use in a public trial holding the conduct element satisfied where debtor earned income during the tax years at issue but did not make any estimated tax payments had inadequate or no withholdings and latefiled his tax returns holding that a tax refund claim must be dismissed if the principal tax deficiency has not been paid in full