Internal DOL documents raise questions about impartiality and transparency

A state administrative judge was briefly suspended for sending internal messages deemed "unprofessional, violent, biased and prejudiced" in nature, according to disciplinary records obtained by The Seattle Times.

Attorneys involved in the case say the messages are concerning not only because law judges for the Department of Licensing are supposed to be neutral and independent, but also because the records reveal a broad disregard for the state's Public Records Act.

In Washington, DOL law judges preside over administrative hearings at the agency, such as in cases where the department is considering whether to suspend a driver's license. They are required to operate independently from the department and expected to make impartial decisions.

A letter provided to The Times showed that Will Jacobson, a law judge at the DOL since April 2024, was suspended without pay for seven days in October 2025 when records obtained by defense attorneys revealed Jacobson communicating with other law judges about a case he was presiding over as it was taking place. Jacobson was found to have violated several DOL policies and the rules of professional conduct.

The messages between Jacobson and other law judges were discovered after a records request was filed by Jeremy Burke and John Brangwin, attorneys with the Wenatchee law firm Woods, Brangwin & Bratton, while Burke and Brangwin were representing a client facing a license suspension.

A superior court judge later reversed the department's decision to suspend the person's driver's license and ordered the agency to pay $558 to the client.

"When Washington citizens are losing an important right, such as their driver's license, they should get a fair hearing," Brangwin said. "And I think the Department of Licensing has proven that they don't give fair hearings."

A spokesperson for the department declined to comment on Jacobson's conduct, but disputed the assertion that law judges are attempting to skirt public disclosure rules.

A review of internal documents showed Jacobson joking about hitting either Burke or Brangwin with a car hard enough to be hospitalized, and showed Jacobson and other law judges mocking and insulting attorneys as well as coordinating on responses to defense arguments.

Burke said he filed the request in 2025 for internal messages sent via Microsoft Teams after noticing Jacobson taking actions that were unfair or demonstrated bias, such as limiting how hearings could be conducted. Burke had also learned of a $225,000 settlement at the Department of Children, Youth and Families in a lawsuit that alleged the agency destroyed Teams messages that were responsive to a records request.

The state's Public Records Act requires all records created by state or local government to be made available to the public, with some exceptions such as attorney-client privileged information.

Following the DCYF settlement, Gov. Bob Ferguson suspended a policy that for years allowed state agencies to destroy their Teams messages, which oftentimes included work-related material, after only seven days of retention. Ferguson ordered a six-month evaluation, but has not yet disclosed findings of the evaluation.

Other internal documents obtained by Burke show Audrey Ross, a hearings assistant administrator at DOL, giving judges directions on how to "double-delete" emails if they didn't want them to be released in records requests.

"But of course, that requires both the sender and the recipient to delete for that to be 100% effective," Ross added in the email.

Ross told others in the email that she had created a file called Supervisory File - Do not release for (public records) requests" as a precaution, noting she and another law judge had discussed whether that would make those records in the file exempt from disclosure. She said she had also created a folder called "delete now" for "short-term" documents.

"Records that have met their retention schedule or are transitory can and should be deleted for fiscal responsibility," said Nathan Olson, director of communications for DOL. Olson said "double deleting" means clearing the "deleted items" folder in an email inbox, and that it is "standard records management."

Olson told The Times that because some personnel records are exempt from disclosure under the Public Records Act, "the employee was likely using a shorthand for the exemption that protects from disclosure certain records and information held in personnel files."

Additionally, Ross said she had asked the administrative law office if it was possible in the future to use different apps, such as Jabber, an instant messaging app, for "transitory communications."

"We did manage to ascertain that Jabber is being replaced by another application, but that the state does have several types of transitory communication methods, so maybe we can have one of those approved for us," she wrote.

Burke told The Times he believed that inquiry was a "clear intent to circumvent" the Public Records Act.

In the email, dated June 17, 2025, Ross dismissed the DOL public records officers who are tasked with collecting and releasing documents to the public, noting that she doesn't "trust them. Similar sentiments were reflected in other communications between hearing examiners, one of whom said they believed the state's public records laws should not "enrich" records requesters because it only incentivizes them.

Requesters can seek financial penalties as a remedy for PRA violations.

Burke and Brangwin represented another attorney in Washington who was seeking public records from the DOL and found their records request from the agency to be incomplete. During litigation, the agency produced additional responsive documents to the request. The case settled for $160,000 on June 25.

Olson said the email from Ross came as a result of frustration about certain medical information being disclosable.

George Erb, secretary at the Washington Coalition for Open Government, said he found the email troubling because of its "contemptuous attitude toward the Public Records Act and the agency employees who handle records requests."

"It confirms our concern that a culture of secrecy has taken root in state government," Erb said. "Too many agency employees and their superiors see disclosure laws not as a duty to the public but an annoyance to be undermined."

Copyright 2026 Tribune Content Agency. All Rights Reserved.

This story was originally published July 2, 2026 at 4:50 PM.