BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF
WASHINGTON:
Sec. 1. RCW 35.10.460 and 1985 c
281 s 9 are each amended to read as follows:
((Ballot titles on
the questions shall be prepared as provided in RCW 35A.29.120.)) If a
proposal for assumption of indebtedness is to be submitted to the voters of a
city in which the indebtedness did not originate, the proposal shall be
separately stated and the ballots shall contain, as a separate proposition to
be voted on, the words "For Assumption of Indebtedness to be paid by
the levy of annual property taxes in excess of regular property taxes"
and "Against Assumption of Indebtedness to be paid by the levy of
annual property taxes in excess of regular property taxes" or words equivalent
thereto. If the question of the form or plan of government is to be submitted
to the voters, the question shall be separately stated and the ballots shall
contain, as a separate proposition to be voted on, the option of a voter to
select one of the three forms or plans of government. If the question of
the name of the proposed consolidated city is to be submitted to the voters,
the question shall be separately stated and the ballots shall contain, as a
separate proposition to be voted on, the option of a voter to select one of the
names of the proposed consolidated city.
Sec. 2. RCW 35.10.470 and 1985 c
281 s 10 are each amended to read as follows:
The county canvassing
board in each county involved shall canvass the returns in each election. The
votes cast in each of such cities shall be canvassed separately, and the
statement shall show the whole number of votes cast, the number of votes cast
in each city for consolidation, and the number of votes cast in each city
against such consolidation. If a proposal for assumption or indebtedness was
voted upon in a city in which the indebtedness did not originate, the statement
shall show the number of votes cast in such a city for assumption of
indebtedness and the number of votes cast against assumption of indebtedness.
If a question of the form or plan of government was voted upon, the statement
shall show the number of votes cast in each city for each of the optional forms
or plans of government. If a name for the proposed consolidated city was
voted upon, the statement shall show the number of votes cast in each city for
each optional name. A certified copy of such statement shall be filed with
the legislative body of each of the cities proposed to be consolidated.
If it appears from such
statement of canvass that a majority of the votes cast in each of the cities
were in favor of consolidation, the consolidation shall be authorized and shall
be effective when the newly elected legislative body members assume office, as
provided in RCW 35.10.480.
If a question of the
form or plan of government was voted upon, that form or plan receiving the
greatest combined number of votes shall become the form or plan of government
for the consolidated city. If two or three of the forms or plans of government
received the same highest number of votes, the form or plan of government shall
be chosen by lot between those receiving the same highest number, where the
mayor of the largest of the cities proposed to be consolidated draws the lot at
a public meeting.
If a proposition to
assume indebtedness was submitted to voters of a city in which the indebtedness
did not originate, the proposition shall be deemed approved if approved by a
majority of at least three-fifths of the voters of the city, and the number of
persons voting on the proposition constitutes not less than forty percent of
the number of votes cast in the city at the last preceding general election. Approval
of the proposition authorizes annual property taxes to be levied on the
property within the city in which the indebtedness did not originate that are
in excess of regular property taxes. However, if the general indebtedness
in question was incurred by action of a city legislative body, a proposition
for assuming the indebtedness need only be approved by a simple majority vote
of the voters of the city in which such indebtedness did not originate.
If a question of the
name of the proposed consolidated city was voted upon, that name receiving the
greatest combined number of votes shall become the name of the consolidated
city. If two proposed names receive the same number of votes, the name shall
be chosen by lot, where the mayor of the largest of the cities proposed to be
consolidated draws the lot at a public meeting.
Sec. 3. RCW 35.10.480 and 1985 c
281 s 11 are each amended to read as follows:
If the voters of each
of the cities proposed to consolidate approve the consolidation, elections to
nominate and elect the elected officials of the consolidated city shall be held
at times specified in RCW 35A.02.050. If the joint resolution or the
petitions prescribe that councilmembers of the consolidated city shall be
elected from wards, then the councilmembers shall be elected from wards under
RCW 35A.12.180. Terms shall be established as if the city is initially
incorporating.
The newly elected
officials shall take office immediately upon their qualification. The
effective date of the consolidation shall be when a majority of the newly
elected members of the legislative body assume office. The clerk of the newly
consolidated city shall transmit a duly certified copy of an abstract of the
votes to authorize the consolidation and of the election of the newly elected
city officials to the secretary of state and the office of financial
management.
Sec. 4. RCW 35.10.490 and 1985 c
281 s 12 are each amended to read as follows:
A joint resolution
or the petitions may prescribe the name of the proposed consolidated city or
may provide that a ballot proposition to determine the name of the proposed
consolidated city be submitted to the voters of the cities proposed to be
consolidated. If two alternative names are submitted, the name receiving the
simple majority vote of the voters voting on the question shall become the name
of the consolidated city. If the name for the proposed consolidated city is
not prescribed by the joint resolution or petition, or a proposition on the
name is not submitted to the voters of the cities proposed to be consolidated,
then the newly consolidated city shall be known as the city of
. . . . . . (listing the names of the cities that were
consolidated in alphabetical order). The legislative body of the newly
consolidated city may present another name or two names for the newly
consolidated city to the city voters for their approval or rejection at the
next municipal general election held after the effective date of the
consolidation. If only one alternative name is submitted, this alternative
name shall become the name of the consolidated city if approved by a simple
majority vote of the voters voting on the question. If two alternative names
are submitted, the name receiving the simple majority vote of the voters voting
on the question shall become the name of the consolidated city.
Sec. 5. RCW 35.21.010 and 1991 c
363 s 37 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) Municipal
corporations now or hereafter organized are bodies politic and corporate under
the name of the city of . . . . . ., or the town of
. . . . . ., as the case may be, and as such may sue
and be sued, contract or be contracted with, acquire, hold, possess and dispose
of property, subject to the restrictions contained in other chapters of this
title, having a common seal, and change or alter the same at pleasure, and
exercise such other powers, and have such other privileges as are conferred by
this title((: PROVIDED, That)). However, not more than two
square miles in area shall be included within the corporate limits of a town
having a population of fifteen hundred or less, or located in a county with a
population of one million or more, and not more than three square miles in area
shall be included within the corporate limits of a town having a population of
more than fifteen hundred in a county with a population of less than one million,
nor shall more than twenty acres of unplatted land belonging to any one person
be taken within the corporate limits of a town without the consent of the owner
of such unplatted land((: PROVIDED FURTHER, That)).
(2) Notwithstanding
subsections (1) and (3) of this section, a town located in three or more
counties is excluded from a limitation in square mileage.
(3) Except as
provided in subsection (2) of this section, the original incorporation of a
town shall be limited to an area of not more than one square mile and a
population as prescribed in RCW 35.01.040.
NEW SECTION. Sec.
6. A new section is added
to chapter 35.10 RCW to read as follows:
Unless a commission
form of government is prescribed or submitted to the voters under RCW
35.10.430, a joint resolution or petition may prescribe that wards be used to
elect the councilmembers of the consolidated city. The joint resolution or
petition must contain a map of the proposed consolidated city that clearly
delineates the boundaries of each ward. Each ward in the proposed consolidated
city shall contain approximately the same population. To the greatest extent
possible, the integrity of the boundaries of the cities that are proposed to be
consolidated shall be respected when the wards are drawn so that the territory
within each city is: (1) Included within the fewest number of wards, to the
extent the city has a population that is greater than the maximum population
established for each ward; or (2) included wholly within one ward, to the
extent the city has a population that is equal to or less than the maximum
population established for each ward. After the election specified in RCW
35.10.480, election wards may be modified in the manner specified in RCW
35A.12.180.
Sec. 7. RCW 35.10.420 and 1985 c
281 s 5 are each amended to read as follows:
The submission of a
ballot proposal to the voters of two or more contiguous cities for the
consolidation of these contiguous cities may also be caused by the filing of a
petition with the legislative body of each such city, signed by the voters of
each city in number equal to not less than ten percent of ((the votes cast))
voters who voted in the city at the last general municipal election
therein, seeking consolidation of such contiguous cities. A copy of the
petition shall be forwarded immediately by each city to the auditor of the
county or counties within which that city is located.
The county auditor or
auditors shall determine the sufficiency of the signatures in each petition
within ten days of receipt of the copies and immediately notify the cities
proposed to be consolidated of the sufficiency. If each of the petitions is
found to have sufficient valid signatures, the auditor or auditors shall call a
special election at which the question of whether such cities shall consolidate
shall be submitted to the voters of each of such cities. If a general election
is to be held more than ninety days but not more than one hundred eighty days after
the filing of the last petition, the question shall be submitted at that
election. Otherwise the question shall be submitted at a special election to
be called for that purpose at the next special election date, as specified in
RCW 29.13.020, that occurs ninety or more days after the date when the last
petition was filed.
If each of the
petitions is found to have sufficient valid signatures, the auditor or auditors
also shall notify the county legislative authority of each county in which the
cities are located of the proposed consolidation.
Petitions shall conform
with the requirements for form prescribed in RCW 35A.01.040, except different
colored paper may be used on petitions circulated in the different cities. A
legal description of the cities need not be included in the petitions.
