HOUSE BILL REPORT

                      HB 1881

                     As Reported By House Committee on:

                                 Judiciary

Title:  An act relating to determining the number of district court judges.

Brief Description:  Changing the method for determining the number of district court judges.

Sponsor(s):  Representatives Appelwick, Padden, Paris, May, Winsley, Wood and D. Sommers.

Brief History:

   Reported by House Committee on:

Judiciary, March 5, 1991, DPS.

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON

JUDICIARY

Majority Report: That Substitute House Bill No. 1881 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass.  Signed by 18 members:  Representatives Appelwick, Chair; Ludwig, Vice Chair; Padden, Ranking Minority Member; Paris, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Belcher; Broback; Forner; Hargrove; Inslee; R. Meyers; Mielke; H. Myers; Riley; Scott; D. Sommers; Tate; Vance; and Wineberry.

Staff:  Jeff Fishel (786-7191).

Background:  The base number of district court judges for each county is set by statute.  Under another statute a county may by resolution add one more full-time district judge, but otherwise is limited to adding new judges only when there is an increase in the population of the court's district.

A district court judge who serves a district of 40,000 or more people, or who is paid more than $40,000, must be a full-time judge.  Other judges are part-time and may have other jobs or professions.

In 1987, the Legislature required the administrator for the courts to study how a weighted caseload analysis may be used to determine the number of district judge positions and to present recommendations to the Legislature by January 1, 1989.  The 1987 act stated that it is the intent of the Legislature that the weighted caseload method be the basis for determining additional district court positions.

The administrator for the courts currently determines the need for superior court judges using the weighted caseload analysis.

Summary of Substitute Bill:  After January 1, 1992, any changes in the number of district court judges will be determined by the weighted caseload analysis.  After consulting various organizations involved with the administration of the courts, the administrator for the courts must develop and present to the Legislature by December 1, 1991, a process to implement the analysis.

Based on the data collected, the administrator will recommend to the Senate Law and Justice Committee and the House Judiciary Committee that the number of district court judges in a particular county be increased or decreased.  Along with each recommendation the administrator must provide a state and local cost analysis.  If new positions are recommended and adopted by the Legislature, a county must approve the additions and agree to pay for them before the positions become effective.  The county may pay for the new positions with funds from the Criminal Justice Account.  The county may phase in a new position over two years from when the position becomes effective.

Substitute Bill Compared to Original Bill:  The original bill required that increases in district court judge positions be in increments of full-time equivalents, and the substitute bill does not.

Fiscal Note:  Available.

Effective Date of Substitute Bill:  Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.

Testimony For:  The only method for the number of district court judges to increase is if the population of the district court district increases or if the Legislature amends the statute to increase the base number.  The weighted caseload analysis enables counties to keep up with the demand for district court time and accomplishes the intent of the Legislature expressed in 1987.

Testimony Against:  None.

Witnesses:  Judge Robert McBeth, Washington State District and Municipal Court Judges Association (did not testify - pro); Kurt Sharar, Washington State Association of Counties (pro); and Rick Wickman, Washington State Association of Counties (pro).