HB 1617

Title: An act relating to interlocal agreements for court services among municipalities.

Brief Description: Facilitating interlocal agreements for court services among municipalities.

Sponsors: Representatives Clibborn, Flannigan, Jarrett, Upthegrove, Cairnes, Tom, Moeller, Rockefeller and Anderson.

Hearing Date: 2/11/03

Staff: Bill Perry (786-7123).

Background:

Cities are authorized to create and operate courts of limited jurisdiction. These courts may be either municipal departments of the county district courts, or separate municipal courts. If a city decides to stop operation of a municipal court, it may enter into an interlocal agreement with the county, or with another city, for court operations. Municipal courts have jurisdiction over traffic infractions and criminal cases arising under municipal codes.

Interlocal agreements generally may be used by two or more units of local government to do jointly whatever those governments are authorized to do separately.

There is nothing in either the law on courts of limited jurisdiction or the law on interlocal agreements, however, that expressly authorizes a city that is not operating its own municipal court to enter into an agreement with another city for court operations. The law on interlocal agreements and the law on municipal courts both have provisions that expressly refer to criminal jurisdiction but not jurisdiction over infractions.

Summary of Bill:

The law on municipal courts is amended to expressly authorize two or more municipalities to operate a joint municipal court.

A section of the law on municipal courts dealing with termination of a court is amended to refer to "all" cases instead of just "criminal" cases in a provision dealing with any agreement to pay for judicial services.

Appropriation: None.

Fiscal Note: Requested on February 5, 2003.

Effective Date: The bill takes effect ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.