By Michael Phillips | CABayNews
Olympia, WA — A newly pre-filed bill in Washington’s Democrat-controlled legislature is drawing sharp criticism from transparency advocates and conservative watchdogs, who argue it could make it harder for journalists and taxpayers to verify how public child care dollars are being spent.
On December 22, 2025, State Senator Lisa Wellman (D–41st District) pre-filed Senate Bill 5926 (SB 5926) ahead of the 2026 legislative session. The bill would significantly expand exemptions under Washington’s Public Records Act by concealing personal identifying information for all licensed or certified child care providers—not just those operating out of private homes.
What SB 5926 Would Change
Under current law (RCW 42.56.640), family home child care providers receive limited privacy protections to prevent harassment and protect personal safety. SB 5926 extends those same exemptions to every licensed child care provider in the state, including commercial centers and school-age programs.
If enacted, the bill would exempt from disclosure:
- Names of providers
- Home addresses
- Personal phone numbers and email addresses
- Birth dates
- Driver’s license information
- Photos not voluntarily made public
- Other personally identifying details
The legislation does not restrict disclosure of:
- Business locations
- Licensing status
- Program capacity
- Inspection and compliance reports
- Public safety or enforcement findings required by law
Supporters say the change is about safety and consistency. Critics say it goes much further than necessary.
Timing Raises Red Flags
The controversy surrounding SB 5926 has less to do with its stated intent than its timing.
The bill arrives amid heightened national scrutiny of child care subsidy programs following the massive fraud scandal uncovered in Minnesota, where federal authorities froze funding and charged dozens of operators accused of billing taxpayers for non-existent children.
In Washington, independent journalists have recently used publicly available records from the Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF) to verify whether taxpayer-funded providers were actually operating at listed locations. While no systemic fraud has been proven in the state, several reports raised questions about oversight, prompting calls for tighter verification—not reduced transparency.
To critics, SB 5926 appears less like a safety measure and more like a preemptive shield.
Transparency vs. Privacy
Senator Wellman’s bill argues that child care workers face harassment, doxxing, and intimidation when personal information becomes public. State officials and community leaders have echoed concerns about unverified accusations and inappropriate visits to providers’ homes.
But conservative outlets and government-watchdog journalists counter that public records are a cornerstone of accountability—especially when billions in taxpayer dollars are involved.
“Business addresses remain public, but removing provider names and identifiers makes cross-verification significantly harder,” said one media researcher familiar with subsidy audits. “That’s not a minor tweak—it’s a structural barrier.”
No neutral or mainstream outlet has confirmed claims that SB 5926 is intended to cover up fraud. However, critics note that the bill does not include parallel provisions to strengthen audits, inspections, or enforcement—only new secrecy rules.
A Pattern Seen Elsewhere
Washington’s proposal mirrors a broader trend in deep-blue states where lawmakers respond to scrutiny by narrowing public access rather than expanding oversight. From procurement exemptions to sealed disciplinary records, transparency advocates warn that “privacy” is increasingly used as a justification to limit public accountability.
Minnesota’s child care crisis demonstrated how long fraud can persist when verification systems fail. Opponents of SB 5926 argue that Washington should be learning the opposite lesson.
Where the Bill Stands
As of December 31, 2025:
- SB 5926 remains pre-filed
- No committee assignment
- No hearings scheduled
- No listed co-sponsors
The bill will likely receive its first test when the 2026 legislative session begins. If it advances, lawmakers will be forced to answer a fundamental question:
Should protecting providers from potential harassment come at the cost of making it harder for the public to follow the money?
For now, SB 5926 has become an early flashpoint in a larger national debate—one pitting transparency against privacy, and taxpayer accountability against political convenience.
CABayNews will continue tracking developments as the bill moves forward in the Washington Legislature.
Support Independent Journalism
California Bay News is part of the Bay News Media Network — a growing group of independent, reader-supported newsrooms covering government accountability, courts, public safety, and institutional failures across the country.
Support independent journalism that isn’t funded by political parties, corporations, or government agencies
Submit tips or documents securely — if you see something wrong, we want to know
Independent reporting only works when readers stay engaged. Your attention, tips, and support help keep these stories alive.
California Bay News 
Leave a comment