CERTIFICATION OF ENROLLMENT
ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 1881
1991 Regular Session
Passed by the House March 20, 1991
Yeas 97 Nays 0
Speaker of the
House of Representatives
Passed by the Senate April 12, 1991
Yeas 38 Nays 0
President of the Senate
Approved Place Style On Codes above, and Style Off Codes below.
Governor of the State of Washington
I, Alan Thompson, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives of the State of Washington, do hereby certify that the attached is ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 1881 as passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate on the dates hereon set forth.
Secretary of State
State of Washington
ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 1881
Passed Legislature - 1991 Regular Session
State of Washington 52nd Legislature 1991 Regular Session
By House Committee on Judiciary (originally sponsored by Representatives Appelwick, Padden, Paris, May, Winsley, Wood and D. Sommers).
Read first time March 6, 1991.
AN ACT Relating to determining the number of district court judges; amending RCW 3.34.010 and 3.34.020; adding a new section to chapter 3.34 RCW; and creating a new section.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
Sec. 1. RCW 3.34.010 and 1989 c 227 s 6 are each amended to read as follows:
number of district judges ((
to be elected in each county shall be: Adams,
three; Asotin, one; Benton, two; Chelan, one; Clallam, one; Clark, four;
Columbia, one; Cowlitz, two; Douglas, one; Ferry, two; Franklin, one; Garfield,
one; Grant, one; Grays Harbor, two; Island, three; Jefferson, one; King,
twenty-four; Kitsap, two; Kittitas, two; Klickitat, two; Lewis, two; Lincoln,
one; Mason, one; Okanogan, two; Pacific, three; Pend Oreille, two; Pierce,
eight; San Juan, one; Skagit, three; Skamania, one; Snohomish, eight; Spokane,
eight; Stevens, two; Thurston, one; Wahkiakum, one; Walla Walla, three;
Whatcom, two; Whitman, two; Yakima, six: PROVIDED, That this number may be
increased in accordance with a resolution of the county commissioners under RCW
3.34.020)) in each county shall be the base number of full and part-time
district judges that are in office as of January 1, 1992, and may only be
changed thereafter as provided in RCW 3.34.020 and section 3 of this act.
Sec. 2. RCW 3.34.020 and 1987 c 202 s 112 are each amended to read as follows:
each district having a population of forty thousand or more but less than sixty
thousand, there shall be elected one full time district judge; in each district
having a population of sixty thousand but less than one hundred twenty-five
thousand, there shall be elected two full time judges; in each district having
a population of one hundred twenty-five thousand but less than two hundred
thousand, there shall be elected three full time judges; and in each district
having a population of two hundred thousand or more there shall be elected one
additional full time judge for each additional one hundred thousand persons or
fraction thereof. If a district having one or more full time judges should
change in population, for reasons other than change in district boundaries,
sufficiently to require a change in the number of judges previously authorized
to it, the change shall be made by the county legislative authority without
regard to RCW 3.34.010 as now or hereafter amended and shall become effective
on the second Monday of January of the year following. Upon any redistricting
of the county thereafter the number of judges in the county shall be designated
under RCW 3.34.010. In a district having a population of one hundred twenty
thousand people or more adjoining a metropolitan county of another state which
has a population in excess of five hundred thousand, there shall be one full
time judge in addition to the number otherwise allowed by this section and
without regard to RCW 3.34.030 or resolution of the county legislative
authority. The county legislative authority may by resolution make a part time
position a full time office. The county legislative authority may by
resolution provide for the election of one full time judge in addition to the
number of full time judges authorized.))
(1) Any change in the number of full and part-time district judges after January 1, 1992, shall be determined by the legislature after receiving a recommendation from the supreme court. The supreme court shall make its recommendations to the legislature based on a weighted caseload analysis that takes into account the following:
(a) The extent of time that existing judges have available to hear cases in that court;
(b) A measurement of the judicial time needed to process various types of cases;
(c) A determination of the time required to process each type of case to the individual court workload;
(d) A determination of the amount of a judge's annual work time that can be devoted exclusively to processing cases; and
(e) An assessment of judicial resource needs, including annual case filings, and case weights and the judge year value determined under the weighted caseload method.
(2) The administrator for the courts, under the supervision of the supreme court, may consult with the board of judicial administration, the judicial council, and the district and municipal court judge's association in developing the procedures and methods of applying the weighted caseload analysis.
(3) For each recommended change from the number of full and part-time district judges in any county as of January 1, 1992, the administrator for the courts, under the supervision of the supreme court, shall complete a judicial impact note detailing any local or state cost associated with such recommended change.
(4) If the legislature approves an increase in the base number of district judges in any county as of January 1, 1992, such increase in the base number of district judges and all related costs may be paid for by the county from moneys provided under RCW 82.14.310, and any such costs shall be deemed to be expended for criminal justice purposes as provided in RCW 82.14.315, and such expenses shall not constitute a supplanting of existing funding.
(5)(a) A county legislative authority that desires to change the number of full or part-time district judges from the base number on January 1, 1992, must first request the assistance of the supreme court. The administrator for the courts, under the supervision of the supreme court, shall conduct a weighted caseload analysis and make a recommendation of its findings to the legislature for consideration as provided in this section.
(b) The legislative authority of any county may change a part-time district judge position to a full-time position.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. A new section is added to chapter 3.34 RCW to read as follows:
Any additional district judge positions created under RCW 3.34.020 shall be effective only if the legislative authority of the affected county documents its approval of any additional positions and its agreement that it will pay out of county funds, without reimbursement from the state, the expenses of such additional judicial positions as provided by statute. The additional expenses include, but are not limited to, expenses incurred for court facilities. The legislative authority of any such county may, at its discretion, phase in any judicial positions over a period of time not to exceed two years from the effective date of the additional district judge positions.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 4. The supreme court shall compile a report for the law and justice committee of the senate and the judiciary committee of the house of representatives no later than December 1, 1991, that documents the number of full and part-time district judges by county, and a process to be used in applying a weighted caseload analysis to changing the number of district judges after the effective date of this act. The report may recommend any suggested changes that may be made to a weighted caseload analysis, its impact, costs, or any other issues affecting the number of district judges in the state.