BILL REQ. #:  Z-0467.1 



_____________________________________________ 

SENATE BILL 5712
_____________________________________________
State of Washington59th Legislature2005 Regular Session

By Senators Kline, Johnson and Rasmussen; by request of Board For Judicial Administration

Read first time 02/03/2005.   Referred to Committee on Judiciary.



     AN ACT Relating to administration of the courts of limited jurisdiction; amending RCW 3.30.020, 3.38.010, 3.38.020, 3.38.030, 3.38.040, 3.38.060, 3.42.010, 3.46.010, 3.46.040, 3.46.120, 3.50.005, 3.50.010, 3.50.060, 3.50.075, 3.50.805, 3.58.050, 3.62.050, 35.20.010, 39.34.030, 39.34.180, 42.12.010, 82.14.320, and 82.14.330; adding new sections to chapter 3.46 RCW; repealing RCW 3.30.090, 3.46.020, 3.46.030, 3.46.050, 3.46.060, 3.46.063, 3.46.067, 3.46.070, 3.46.080, 3.46.090, 3.46.100, 3.46.110, 3.46.130, 3.46.140, 3.46.145, 3.46.150, 3.50.007, 3.50.030, 3.50.800, 3.50.810, 3.62.070, 3.62.100, 35.22.425, 35.23.555, 35.27.515, 35.30.100, and 35A.11.200; providing an effective date; and declaring an emergency.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

Sec. 1   RCW 3.30.020 and 1991 c 363 s 4 are each amended to read as follows:
     The provisions of chapters 3.30 through 3.74 RCW shall apply to ((each)) every county ((with a population of two hundred ten thousand or more: PROVIDED)), except that any city having a population of more than four hundred thousand may by resolution of its legislative body elect to ((continue to)) operate a municipal court pursuant to the provisions of chapter 35.20 RCW((, as if chapters 3.30 through 3.74 RCW had never been enacted: PROVIDED FURTHER, That if a city elects to continue its municipal court pursuant to this section, the number of district judges allocated to the county in RCW 3.34.010 shall be reduced by two and the number of full time district judges allocated by RCW 3.34.020 to the district in which the city is situated shall also be reduced by two. The provisions of chapters 3.30 through 3.74 RCW may be made applicable to any county with a population of less than two hundred ten thousand upon a majority vote of its county legislative authority)).

Sec. 2   RCW 3.38.010 and 1995 c 37 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) There is established in each county a district court districting committee composed of the following:
     (((1))) (a) The judge of the superior court, or, if there be more than one such judge, then one of the judges selected by that court;
     (((2))) (b) The prosecuting attorney, or a deputy selected by the prosecuting attorney;
     (((3))) (c) A practicing lawyer of the county selected by the president of the largest local bar association, if there be one, and if not, then by the county legislative authority;
     (((4) A judge of a court of limited jurisdiction in the county selected by the president of the Washington state district and municipal court judges' association)) (d) The presiding judge of the district court; ((and
     (5)
)) (e) The mayor or city manager, or representative appointed by the mayor or city manager, of each city or town with a population of ((three)) ten thousand or more in the county provided that if there are more than three cities or towns with a population of ten thousand or more, three persons shall be selected by a majority vote of the mayors and city managers of those cities and towns to represent cities and towns with a population of ten thousand or more;
     (((6) One person to represent the cities and towns with populations of three thousand or less in the county, if any, to)) (f) The mayor or city manager, or a representative appointed by the mayor or city manager, of each city or town with a population of less than ten thousand in the county provided that if there are more than three cities or towns with a population of less than ten thousand, three persons shall be selected by a majority vote of the mayors and city managers of those cities and towns to represent cities and towns with a population of less than ((three)) ten thousand((. However, if there should not be a city in the county with a population of ten thousand or more, the mayor, or the mayor's representative, of each city or town with a population of less than three thousand shall be a member));
     (((7))) (g) The presiding judge of the municipal court of each city or town in the district with a population of ten thousand or more provided that if there are more than three municipal courts of cities or towns with a population of ten thousand or more, three presiding judges shall be selected by a majority vote of the presiding judges of those courts to represent municipal courts in cities or towns with a population of ten thousand or more;
     (h) The presiding judge of the municipal court of each city or town in the district with a population of less than ten thousand provided that if there are more than three municipal courts of cities or towns with a population less than ten thousand, three presiding judges shall be selected by a majority vote of the presiding judges of those courts to represent municipal courts in cities or towns with a population of less than ten thousand;
     (i)
The chair of the county legislative authority; and
     (((8))) (j) The county auditor.
     (2) The districting committee shall elect a chairperson from among its members. The chairperson shall serve a term of five years and until a successor is elected.

Sec. 3   RCW 3.38.020 and 2003 c 97 s 4 are each amended to read as follows:
     The district court districting committee shall meet at the call of the prosecuting attorney to prepare ((or amend)) the plan for the districting of the county into one or more district court districts in accordance with the provisions of chapters 3.30 through 3.74 RCW. The plan shall include the following:
     (1) The boundaries of each district proposed to be established;
     (2) The number of judges to be elected in each district or electoral district, if any. In determining the number of judges to be elected, the districting committee shall consider the results of an objective workload analysis conducted by the administrator for the courts;
     (3) The location of the central office, courtrooms and records of each court;
     (4) The other places in the district, if any, where the court shall sit;
     (5) The number and location of district court commissioners to be authorized, if any;
     (6) The departments, if any, into which each district court shall be initially organized, including municipal departments provided for in chapter 3.46 RCW;
     (7) The name of each district; and
     (8) The allocation of the time and allocation of salary of each judge who will serve part time in a municipal department.

Sec. 4   RCW 3.38.030 and 1991 c 363 s 5 are each amended to read as follows:
     Upon receipt of the original districting plan, the county legislative authority shall hold a public hearing, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 36.32.120(7), as now or hereafter amended. At the hearing, anyone interested in the plan may attend and be heard as to the convenience which will be afforded to the public by the plan, and as to any other matters pertaining thereto. If the county legislative authority finds that the plan proposed by the districting committee conforms to the standards set forth in chapters 3.30 through 3.74 RCW and is conducive to the best interests and welfare of the county as a whole it may adopt such plan. If the county legislative authority finds that the plan does not conform to the standards as provided in chapters 3.30 through 3.74 RCW, the county legislative authority may modify, revise or amend the plan and adopt such amended or revised plan as the county's district court districting plan. The plan decided upon shall be adopted by the county legislative authority not later than six months after the county initially obtains a population of two hundred ten thousand or more or the adoption of the elective resolution.

Sec. 5   RCW 3.38.040 and 2003 c 97 s 5 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) The districting committee ((may)) shall meet for the purpose of amending the districting plan:
     (a) Not later than January 1, 2006, and every four years thereafter;
     (b) Within forty-five days of the effective date of changes in the number of judges to be elected in each district court district, or electoral district, if any; and
     (c) A
t any time on call of the county legislative authority, the chairperson of the committee, or a majority of its members.
     ((Amendments to the)) (2) In addition to the elements required under RCW 3.38.020, the amended districting plan shall include:
     (a) Consideration and documentation of the number and location of municipal courts, if any, located within the district;
     (b) Consideration and documentation of the caseload and related services, including hours and days of operation, provided at each district and municipal court location in the district;
     (c) Incorporation of the interlocal agreements, if any, entered into by the county and a municipality under chapters 3.46 and 39.34 RCW;
     (d) A method, based on use, for determining the portion of district court expenses to be paid by a municipality for court services provided by the district court pursuant to an interlocal agreement; and
     (e) The effective date of the amended plan.
     (3)(a) The amended
plan shall be submitted to the county legislative authority not later than ((March 15th of each year for adoption by the county legislative authority following the same procedure as with the original districting plan. Amendments shall be adopted not later than May 1st following submission by the districting committee)) seventy-five days after the districting committee meets under subsection (1) of this section. Any amendment which would reduce the salary or shorten the term of any judge shall not be effective until the next regular election for district judge. All other amendments may be effective on a date set by the county legislative authority.
     (((2) The districting committee shall meet within forty-five days of the effective date of changes in the number of judges to be elected in each district court district, or electoral district, if any. Amendments to the plan concerning the number of judges to be elected in each district court district, or electoral district, if any, shall be submitted to the county legislative authority not later than ninety days after the effective date of changes in RCW 3.34.010, and the amendments shall be adopted not later than one hundred eighty days after the effective date of changes in RCW 3.34.010.))
     (b) Upon receipt of the amended plan, the county legislative authority shall hold a public hearing, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 36.32.120(7). At the hearing, anyone interested in the plan may be heard as to the convenience that will be afforded to the public by the plan, and any other relevant matter.
     (c) Within sixty days after receipt of the amended plan, the county legislative authority shall either approve the plan, or, if it finds that the plan is not in the best interests and welfare of the county as a whole, or does not conform to the standards in chapters 3.30 through 3.74 RCW, approve an alternative plan. If the county legislative authority fails to act within this time frame, the plan submitted by the districting committee shall be deemed approved by the county legislative authority and shall take effect on the date specified in the plan.
     (d) A final plan shall be adopted by the county legislative authority not later than six months after receipt of the amended plan.
     (4) An amended districting plan shall be submitted to the administrative office of the courts not later than the date such plan takes effect.

Sec. 6   RCW 3.38.060 and 1984 c 258 s 29 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) Joint districts may be established containing all ((or part)) of two or more counties. The county containing the largest portion of the population of a joint district shall be known as the "principal county" and each joint district shall be deemed to lie within the principal county for the purpose of chapters 3.30 through 3.74 RCW.
     (2) A joint district may be established by resolution of one county concurred in by a resolution of each other county((: PROVIDED, That the county legislative authority of a county containing the largest portion of the population of a city may include the portions of such city lying outside the county in a joint district without concurrence of the other counties)). The resolution shall establish a method and basis for the apportionment of costs between the counties.
     (3)
Elections of judges in joint districts shall be conducted and canvassed in the same manner as elections of superior court judges in joint judicial districts.

Sec. 7   RCW 3.42.010 and 1984 c 258 s 30 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) When so authorized by the districting plan, one or more district court commissioners may be appointed in any district by the judges of the district.
     (2) Each commissioner shall be a registered voter of the county in which the district or a portion thereof is located, and shall hold office at the pleasure of the appointing judges. Any person appointed as a commissioner authorized to hear or dispose of cases shall be a lawyer who is admitted to the practice of law in the state of Washington or who has passed, by January 1, 2003, the qualifying examination for lay judges as provided under RCW 3.34.060.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 8   A new section is added to chapter 3.46 RCW to read as follows:
     A municipality operating a municipal department under this chapter prior to the effective date of this act may continue to operate as if this act were not adopted. Such municipal departments shall remain subject to the provisions of this chapter as this chapter was written prior to the adoption of this act.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 9   A new section is added to chapter 3.46 RCW to read as follows:
     The legislature finds that there are a multitude of part-time municipal courts in the state of Washington. This situation is confusing to the citizens of this state, creates inaccessible courts, and results in the unnecessary duplication of administrative judicial branch functions within local governments. The legislature therefore finds that permitting municipalities to contract with counties or with other municipalities for judicial branch functions will allow municipalities to provide more cost-effective services and encourage the creation of regional courts of limited jurisdiction that provide the full range of judicial functions and are open and accessible to the citizens of the state of Washington.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 10   A new section is added to chapter 3.46 RCW to read as follows:
     The definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter unless the context clearly requires otherwise.
     (1) "Primary jurisdiction" means a county or municipality designated in an interlocal agreement as receiving compensation for providing judicial branch functions to a municipality.
     (2) "Municipality" means any incorporated city, town, or township designated in an interlocal agreement as receiving judicial branch services from the primary jurisdiction for which compensation is provided.

Sec. 11   RCW 3.46.010 and 1984 c 258 s 72 are each amended to read as follows:
     ((Any city may secure the establishment of a municipal department of the district court, to be designated "The Municipal Department of (city)." Such department may also be designated "The Municipal Court of (city)."))
     (1) A municipality may meet the requirements of RCW 39.34.180 through an interlocal agreement with the county in which the municipality is located or with an adjacent municipality. At a minimum, the interlocal agreement shall provide that a judge of the primary jurisdiction sit as the municipal court judge for the municipality and hear those cases specified in RCW 39.34.180 with respect to that municipality.
     (2) Any such interlocal agreement shall comply with the provisions of this chapter and chapter 39.34 RCW, except that an interlocal agreement for facilities only is not required to meet the requirements of this chapter.

Sec. 12   RCW 3.46.040 and 1984 c 258 s 74 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) Establishment of ((a municipal department)) an interlocal agreement between a primary jurisdiction and a municipality shall be initiated by a petition from the legislative body of the ((city)) municipality to the ((county)) legislative authority of the primary jurisdiction. Such petition shall be filed not ((less than thirty days prior to February 1, 1962, or any subsequent year)) later than February 1st of a year in which judges of the primary jurisdiction are subject to election, and shall set forth((: (1) The number of full time and part time judges required for the municipal department; (2) the amount of time for which a part time judge will be required for the municipal department; and (3) whether the full time judge or judges will be elected or appointed. In a petition filed subsequent to 1962 provision shall be made for temporary appointment of a municipal judge to fill each elective position until the next election for district judges. The petition shall be forthwith)) the municipality's proposal regarding the provisions specified in section 13(1) of this act.
     (2) The legislative authority of the primary jurisdiction shall accept or deny the petition within thirty days after receipt. If the legislative authority of the primary jurisdiction and the municipality have not agreed on the terms of the interlocal agreement within one hundred twenty days after the petition is accepted, the legislative authority of the primary jurisdiction may reconsider its acceptance of the petition and the municipality may withdraw the petition.
     (3) After an agreement is reached between the primary jurisdiction and the municipality, a copy shall be
transmitted to the districting committee((. The organization of the municipal department shall be)) of the county in which the primary jurisdiction is located and the districting committee of the municipality if the municipality is not located in the same county as the primary jurisdiction and its terms incorporated into the districting plan or plans. ((The districting committee in its plan shall designate the proportion of the salary of each judge serving as a part time municipal judge to be paid by the city, which shall be proportionate to the time of such judge allotted to the municipal department by the districting plan. A city may withdraw its petition any time prior to adoption of the districting plan by the county legislative authority, and thereupon the municipal department pursuant to this chapter shall not be established.))

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 13   A new section is added to chapter 3.46 RCW to read as follows:
     (1) An interlocal agreement between a primary jurisdiction and a municipality for the provision of judicial branch functions made under this chapter shall specify the following:
     (a) The organizational structure for providing such functions and its designation, if any, such as "The Municipal Court of (City)" or any other designation;
     (b) The number of full-time and part-time judges to be assigned to provide judicial branch functions for the municipality, and how such assignments will be made;
     (c) The type of cases to be handled by the judges;
     (d) The locations of courtrooms, offices, and other facilities to be used to provide court services for the municipality, and the entity responsible for supplying such facilities;
     (e) The days and times of operations of such facilities, including whether any night sessions will be authorized;
     (f) The appointment and compensation of all personnel, including whether they will be employees of the primary jurisdiction or the municipality; and
     (g) Provisions for an annual review and update of the terms of the agreement.
     (2)(a) The interlocal agreement shall also establish the portion of primary jurisdiction's court expenses to be paid by the municipality to the primary jurisdiction under the agreement, based on the municipality's use of primary jurisdiction's court services. The term "expenses" as used in this chapter includes salaries of judges, commissioners, clerks, and other personnel; facilities; equipment; probation services; and other expenses associated with the operation of the primary jurisdiction's court.
     (b) The primary jurisdiction's court shall take all steps necessary to promote efficiencies in calendaring in order to minimize costs to the municipality. The municipality shall cooperate with the primary jurisdiction's court in order to minimize those costs.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 14   A new section is added to chapter 3.46 RCW to read as follows:
     (1) An interlocal agreement under this chapter shall be for a term of not less than four years. If the judges of the primary jurisdiction's court are elected, the expiration of the interlocal agreement shall coincide with the end of the elected judge's term of office.
     (2) The primary jurisdiction and the municipality shall review the interlocal agreement on an annual basis and update its terms as needed. If a dispute arises between the primary jurisdiction and the municipality during this annual review, either party may invoke binding arbitration under chapter 7.04 RCW by notice to the other party. The existing terms of the interlocal agreement remain in effect until an agreement is reached as to new terms or until conclusion of the arbitration proceedings. The primary jurisdiction and the municipality each select one arbitrator, and the initial two arbitrators pick a third arbitrator. The primary jurisdiction and the municipality have the same rights and are subject to the same duties as other parties who have agreed to submit to arbitration under chapter 7.04 RCW.
     (3)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, either party may choose not to renew the interlocal agreement at the expiration of the agreement. The party that wishes not to renew the agreement must provide written notice of this intention to the legislative authority of the other party not later than one year prior to the expiration of the agreement.
     (b) A municipality may not give notice of its intention not to renew an interlocal agreement under this chapter unless the municipality will have established a municipal court under chapter 3.50 or 35.20 RCW or entered into an agreement with another primary jurisdiction effective by the date such agreement will expire.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 15   A new section is added to chapter 3.46 RCW to read as follows:
     (1) An interlocal agreement under this chapter may provide for the establishment of a violations bureau to assist in processing traffic infractions committed within the jurisdiction of the municipality.
     (2) As designated by written order of the presiding judge of the primary jurisdiction's court, traffic infractions under city ordinances, county resolution, or state law may be processed by the bureau.
     (3) The bureau may be authorized to accept payment of monetary penalties for such infractions.
     (4) All penalties paid to a violations bureau for violations of municipal ordinances or state laws shall be placed in the general fund of the municipality or such other fund as may be prescribed by ordinance of the municipality or the laws of the state of Washington.

Sec. 16   RCW 3.46.120 and 2004 c 15 s 7 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) All money received by the clerk of ((a municipal department)) the primary jurisdiction's court from municipal cases including penalties, fines, bail forfeitures, fees and costs shall be paid by the clerk to the ((city)) treasurer of the municipality.
     (2) ((Except as provided in RCW 10.99.080,)) The ((city)) treasurer of the municipality shall remit monthly thirty-two percent of the noninterest money received under this section, other than for parking infractions, and certain costs to the state treasurer. "Certain costs" as used in this subsection, means those costs awarded to prevailing parties in civil actions under RCW 4.84.010 or 36.18.040, or those costs awarded against convicted defendants in criminal actions under RCW 10.01.160, 10.46.190, or 36.18.040, or other similar statutes if such costs are specifically designated as costs by the court and are awarded for the specific reimbursement of costs incurred by the state, county, city, or town in the prosecution of the case, including the fees of defense counsel. Money remitted under this subsection to the state treasurer shall be deposited as provided in RCW 43.08.250.
     (3) The balance of the noninterest money received under this section shall be retained by the ((city)) municipality and deposited as provided by law.
     (4) Penalties, fines, bail forfeitures, fees, and costs may accrue interest at the rate of twelve percent per annum, upon assignment to a collection agency. Interest may accrue only while the case is in collection status.
     (5) Interest retained by the court on penalties, fines, bail forfeitures, fees, and costs shall be split twenty-five percent to the state treasurer for deposit in the public safety and education account as provided in RCW 43.08.250, twenty-five percent to the state treasurer for deposit in the judicial information system account as provided in RCW 2.68.020, twenty-five percent to the ((city)) general fund of the municipality, and twenty-five percent to the ((city)) general fund of the municipality to fund local courts.

Sec. 17   RCW 3.50.005 and 1984 c 258 s 101 are each amended to read as follows:
     ((The legislature finds that there is a multitude of statutes governing the municipal courts of the state. This situation is confusing and misleading to attorneys, judges, court personnel, and others who work with the municipal courts. The legislature therefore finds that a reorganization of the municipal courts of the state would allow those courts to operate in a more effective and efficient manner.)) This chapter provides a court structure ((which may be used by)) for cities and towns with a population of four hundred thousand or less ((which choose to operate under this chapter)).

Sec. 18   RCW 3.50.010 and 1984 c 258 s 103 are each amended to read as follows:
     Any city or town with a population of four hundred thousand or less ((may)) that does not contract for judicial branch functions pursuant to an interlocal agreement under chapter 3.46 RCW shall by ordinance provide for an inferior court to be known and designated as a municipal court, which shall be entitled "The Municipal Court of . . . . . . . . . (insert name of city or town)", hereinafter designated and referred to as "municipal court", which court shall have jurisdiction and shall exercise all powers by this chapter declared to be vested in the municipal court, together with such other powers and jurisdiction as are generally conferred upon such court in this state either by common law or by express statute.

Sec. 19   RCW 3.50.060 and 1984 c 258 s 108 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) A city or town electing to establish a municipal court pursuant to this chapter may terminate such court by adoption of an appropriate ordinance. However no municipal court may be terminated unless the municipality has complied with RCW 3.50.805((, 35.22.425, 35.23.595, 35.24.455, 35.27.515, 35.30.100, and 35A.11.200)).
     (2) A city or town newly establishing a municipal court pursuant to this chapter shall do so by adoption of an appropriate ordinance on or before December 1 of any year, to take effect January 1 of the following year.

Sec. 20   RCW 3.50.075 and 1994 c 10 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) One or more court commissioners may be appointed by a judge of the municipal court.
     (2) Each commissioner holds office at the pleasure of the appointing judge.
     (3) A commissioner authorized to hear or dispose of cases must be a lawyer who is admitted to practice law in the state of Washington or a nonlawyer who has passed, by January 1, 2003, the qualifying examination for lay judges for courts of limited jurisdiction under RCW 3.34.060.
     (4) A commissioner need not be a resident of the city or of the county in which the municipal court is created. When a court commissioner has not been appointed and the municipal court is presided over by a part-time appointed judge, the judge need not be a resident of the city or of the county in which the municipal court is created.

Sec. 21   RCW 3.50.805 and 1984 c 258 s 203 are each amended to read as follows:
     (((1))) A municipality operating a municipal court under this chapter shall not terminate that court unless the municipality ((has reached)) meets its requirements under RCW 39.34.180 by entering into an interlocal agreement with the appropriate county or another municipality under chapters 3.46 and 39.34 RCW ((under which the county or municipality is to be paid a reasonable amount for costs associated with prosecution, adjudication, and sentencing in criminal cases filed in district or municipal court as a result of the termination. The agreement shall provide for periodic review and renewal of the terms of the agreement. If the municipality and the county or municipality are unable to agree on the terms for renewal of the agreement, they shall be deemed to have entered into an agreement to submit the issue to arbitration under chapter 7.04 RCW. Pending conclusion of the arbitration proceeding, the terms of the agreement shall remain in effect. The municipality and the county or municipality have the same rights and are subject to the same duties as other parties who have agreed to submit to arbitration under chapter 7.04 RCW. A municipality that has entered into agreements with other municipalities that have terminated their municipal courts may not thereafter terminate its court unless each municipality has reached an agreement with the appropriate county in accordance with this section.
     (2) A municipality operating a municipal court under this chapter may not repeal in its entirety that portion of its municipal code defining crimes while retaining the court's authority to hear and determine traffic infractions under chapter 46.63 RCW unless the municipality has reached an agreement with the county under chapter 39.34 RCW under which the county is to be paid a reasonable amount for costs associated with prosecution, adjudication, and sentencing in criminal cases filed in district court as a result of the repeal. The agreement shall provide for periodic review and renewal of the terms of the agreement. If the municipality and the county are unable to agree on the terms for renewal of the agreement, they shall be deemed to have entered into an agreement to submit the issue to arbitration under chapter 7.04 RCW. Pending conclusion of the arbitration proceeding, the terms of the agreement shall remain in effect. The municipality and the county have the same rights and are subject to the same duties as other parties who have agreed to submit to arbitration under chapter 7.04 RCW.
     (3) A municipality operating a municipal court under this chapter may not repeal a provision of its municipal code which defines a crime equivalent to an offense listed in RCW 46.63.020 unless the municipality has reached an agreement with the county under chapter 39.34 RCW under which the county is to be paid a reasonable amount for costs associated with prosecution, adjudication, and sentencing in criminal cases filed in district court as a result of the repeal. The agreement shall provide for periodic review and renewal of the terms of the agreement. If the municipality and the county are unable to agree on the terms for renewal of the agreement, they shall be deemed to have entered into an agreement to submit the issue to arbitration under chapter 7.04 RCW. Pending conclusion of the arbitration proceeding, the terms of the agreement shall remain in effect. The municipality and the county have the same rights and are subject to the same duties as other parties who have agreed to submit to arbitration under chapter 7.04 RCW
)) to provide judicial branch functions to the municipality.

Sec. 22   RCW 3.58.050 and 1984 c 258 s 38 are each amended to read as follows:
     Except as otherwise provided in an interlocal agreement entered into under chapters 3.46 and 39.34 RCW, the county legislative authority shall furnish all necessary facilities for the district courts, including suitable courtrooms, furniture, books, stationery, postage, office equipment, heat, light and telephone and may lease or construct courtrooms and offices for such purpose. The county legislative authority shall not be required to furnish courtroom space in any place other than as provided in the districting plan.

Sec. 23   RCW 3.62.050 and 1987 c 202 s 114 are each amended to read as follows:
     Except as otherwise provided in an interlocal agreement entered into under chapters 3.46 and 35.20 RCW, the total expenditures of the district courts, including the cost of providing courtroom and office space, the cost of probation and parole services and any personnel employment therefor, and the cost of providing services necessary for the preparation and presentation of a defense at public expense, ((except costs of defense to be paid by a city pursuant to RCW 3.62.070,)) shall be paid from the county current expense fund.

Sec. 24   RCW 35.20.010 and 2001 c 68 s 3 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) There is hereby created and established in each incorporated city of this state having a population of more than four hundred thousand inhabitants, as shown by the federal or state census, whichever is the later, a municipal court, which shall be styled "The Municipal Court of . . . . . . (name of city)," hereinafter designated and referred to as the municipal court, which court shall have jurisdiction and shall exercise all the powers by this chapter declared to be vested in such municipal court, together with such powers and jurisdiction as is generally conferred in this state either by common law or statute.
     (2) A municipality operating a municipal court under this section ((may)) shall not terminate that court ((if)) unless the municipality has ((reached)) entered into an interlocal agreement with the appropriate county under chapters 3.46 and 39.34 RCW ((under which the county is to be paid a reasonable amount for costs associated with prosecution, adjudication, and sentencing in criminal cases filed in district court as a result of the termination. The agreement shall provide for periodic review and renewal of the terms of the agreement. If the municipality and the county are unable to agree on the terms for renewal of the agreement, they shall be deemed to have entered into an agreement to submit the issue to arbitration under chapter 7.04 RCW. Pending conclusion of the arbitration proceeding, the terms of the agreement shall remain in effect. The municipality and the county have the same rights and are subject to the same duties as other parties who have agreed to submit to arbitration under chapter 7.04 RCW.
     (3) A city that has entered into an agreement for court services with the county must provide written notice of the intent to terminate the agreement to the county legislative authority not less than one year prior to February 1st of the year in which all district court judges are subject to election. A city that terminates an agreement for court services to be provided by a district court may terminate the agreement only at the end of a four-year district court judicial term.
     (4) A county that wishes to terminate an agreement with a city for the provision of court services must provide written notice of the intent to terminate the agreement to the city legislative authority not less than one year prior to the expiration of the agreement
)) to meet its requirements under RCW 39.34.180.

Sec. 25   RCW 39.34.030 and 2004 c 190 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) Any power or powers, privileges or authority exercised or capable of exercise by a public agency of this state may be exercised and enjoyed jointly with any other public agency of this state having the power or powers, privilege or authority, and jointly with any public agency of any other state or of the United States to the extent that laws of such other state or of the United States permit such joint exercise or enjoyment. Any agency of the state government when acting jointly with any public agency may exercise and enjoy all of the powers, privileges and authority conferred by this chapter upon a public agency.
     (2) Any two or more public agencies may enter into agreements with one another for joint or cooperative action pursuant to the provisions of this chapter: PROVIDED, That any such joint or cooperative action by public agencies which are educational service districts and/or school districts shall comply with the provisions of RCW 28A.320.080; and, PROVIDED FURTHER, That any such agreement for municipal court services shall also comply with the provisions of chapter 3.46 RCW. Appropriate action by ordinance, resolution or otherwise pursuant to law of the governing bodies of the participating public agencies shall be necessary before any such agreement may enter into force.
     (3) Any such agreement shall specify the following:
     (a) Its duration;
     (b) The precise organization, composition and nature of any separate legal or administrative entity created thereby together with the powers delegated thereto, provided such entity may be legally created. Such entity may include a nonprofit corporation organized pursuant to chapter 24.03 or 24.06 RCW whose membership is limited solely to the participating public agencies or a partnership organized pursuant to chapter 25.04 RCW whose partners are limited solely to participating public agencies and the funds of any such corporation or partnership shall be subject to audit in the manner provided by law for the auditing of public funds;
     (c) Its purpose or purposes;
     (d) The manner of financing the joint or cooperative undertaking and of establishing and maintaining a budget therefor;
     (e) The permissible method or methods to be employed in accomplishing the partial or complete termination of the agreement and for disposing of property upon such partial or complete termination;
     (f) Any other necessary and proper matters.
     (4) In the event that the agreement does not establish a separate legal entity to conduct the joint or cooperative undertaking, the agreement shall, in addition to items (a), (c), (d), (e) and (f) enumerated in subdivision (3) hereof, contain the following:
     (a) Provision for an administrator or a joint board responsible for administering the joint or cooperative undertaking. In the case of a joint board, public agencies party to the agreement shall be represented;
     (b) The manner of acquiring, holding and disposing of real and personal property used in the joint or cooperative undertaking. Any joint board is authorized to establish a special fund with a state, county, city, or district treasurer servicing an involved public agency designated "Operating fund of . . . . . . joint board".
     (5) No agreement made pursuant to this chapter relieves any public agency of any obligation or responsibility imposed upon it by law except that:
     (a) To the extent of actual and timely performance thereof by a joint board or other legal or administrative entity created by an agreement made hereunder, the performance may be offered in satisfaction of the obligation or responsibility; and
     (b) With respect to one or more public agencies purchasing or otherwise contracting through a bid, proposal, or contract awarded by another public agency or by a group of public agencies, any statutory obligation to provide notice for bids or proposals that applies to the public agencies involved is satisfied if the public agency or group of public agencies that awarded the bid, proposal, or contract complied with its own statutory requirements and either (i) posted the bid or solicitation notice on a web site established and maintained by a public agency, purchasing cooperative, or similar service provider, for purposes of posting public notice of bid or proposal solicitations, or (ii) provided an access link on the state's web portal to the notice.
     (6) Financing of joint projects by agreement shall be as provided by law.

Sec. 26   RCW 39.34.180 and 2001 c 68 s 4 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) Each county, city, and town is responsible for the prosecution, adjudication, sentencing, and incarceration of misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor offenses and traffic infractions committed by adults in their respective jurisdictions, and referred from their respective law enforcement agencies, whether filed under state law or city ordinance((, and must)).
     (2) A city or town shall
carry out ((these)) its responsibilities under subsection (1) of this section through the use of ((their)) its own ((courts, staff, and facilities)) municipal court established under chapter 3.50 or 35.20 RCW, or ((by entering into contracts or)) through an interlocal agreement((s)) entered into under this chapter ((to provide these services)) and chapter 3.46 RCW.
     (3) Nothing in this section is intended to alter the statutory responsibilities of each county for the prosecution, adjudication, sentencing, and incarceration for not more than one year of felony offenders, nor shall this section apply to any offense initially filed by the prosecuting attorney as a felony offense or an attempt to commit a felony offense.
     (((2) The following principles must be followed in negotiating interlocal agreements or contracts: Cities and counties must consider (a) anticipated costs of services; and (b) anticipated and potential revenues to fund the services, including fines and fees, criminal justice funding, and state-authorized sales tax funding levied for criminal justice purposes.
     (3) If an agreement as to the levels of compensation within an interlocal agreement or contract for gross misdemeanor and misdemeanor services cannot be reached between a city and county, then either party may invoke binding arbitration on the compensation issued by notice to the other party. In the case of establishing initial compensation, the notice shall request arbitration within thirty days. In the case of nonrenewal of an existing contract or interlocal agreement, the notice must be given one hundred twenty days prior to the expiration of the existing contract or agreement and the existing contract or agreement remains in effect until a new agreement is reached or until an arbitration award on the matter of fees is made. The city and county each select one arbitrator, and the initial two arbitrators pick a third arbitrator.
     (4) A city or county that wishes to terminate an agreement for the provision of court services must provide written notice of the intent to terminate the agreement in accordance with RCW 3.50.810 and 35.20.010.
     (5) For cities or towns that have not adopted, in whole or in part, criminal code or ordinance provisions related to misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor crimes as defined by state law, this section shall have no application until July 1, 1998.
))

Sec. 27   RCW 42.12.010 and 1994 c 223 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:
     Every elective office shall become vacant on the happening of any of the following events:
     (1) The death of the incumbent;
     (2) His or her resignation. A vacancy caused by resignation shall be deemed to occur upon the effective date of the resignation;
     (3) His or her removal;
     (4) Except as provided in RCW ((3.46.067 and)) 3.50.057, his or her ceasing to be a legally registered voter of the district, county, city, town, or other municipal or quasi municipal corporation from which he or she shall have been elected or appointed, including where applicable the council district, commissioner district, or ward from which he or she shall have been elected or appointed;
     (5) His or her conviction of a felony, or of any offense involving a violation of his or her official oath;
     (6) His or her refusal or neglect to take his or her oath of office, or to give or renew his or her official bond, or to deposit such oath or bond within the time prescribed by law;
     (7) The decision of a competent tribunal declaring void his or her election or appointment; or
     (8) Whenever a judgment shall be obtained against that incumbent for breach of the condition of his or her official bond.

Sec. 28   RCW 82.14.320 and 1998 c 321 s 12 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) The municipal criminal justice assistance account is created in the state treasury. Beginning in fiscal year 2000, the state treasurer shall transfer into the municipal criminal justice assistance account for distribution under this section from the general fund the sum of four million six hundred thousand dollars divided into four equal deposits occurring on July 1, October 1, January 1, and April 1. For each fiscal year thereafter, the state treasurer shall increase the total transfer by the fiscal growth factor, as defined in RCW 43.135.025, forecast for that fiscal year by the office of financial management in November of the preceding year.
     (2) No city may receive a distribution under this section from the municipal criminal justice assistance account unless:
     (a) The city has a crime rate in excess of one hundred twenty-five percent of the statewide average as calculated in the most recent annual report on crime in Washington state as published by the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs;
     (b) The city has levied the tax authorized in RCW 82.14.030(2) at the maximum rate or the tax authorized in RCW 82.46.010(3) at the maximum rate; and
     (c) The city has a per capita yield from the tax imposed under RCW 82.14.030(1) at the maximum rate of less than one hundred fifty percent of the statewide average per capita yield for all cities from such local sales and use tax.
     (3) The moneys deposited in the municipal criminal justice assistance account for distribution under this section, less any moneys appropriated for purposes under subsection (7) of this section, shall be distributed at such times as distributions are made under RCW 82.44.150. The distributions shall be made as follows:
     (a) Unless reduced by this subsection, thirty percent of the moneys shall be distributed ratably based on population as last determined by the office of financial management to those cities eligible under subsection (2) of this section that have a crime rate determined under subsection (2)(a) of this section which is greater than one hundred seventy-five percent of the statewide average crime rate. No city may receive more than fifty percent of any moneys distributed under this subsection (a) but, if a city distribution is reduced as a result of exceeding the fifty percent limitation, the amount not distributed shall be distributed under (b) of this subsection.
     (b) The remainder of the moneys, including any moneys not distributed in subsection (2)(a) of this section, shall be distributed to all cities eligible under subsection (2) of this section ratably based on population as last determined by the office of financial management.
     (4) No city may receive more than thirty percent of all moneys distributed under subsection (3) of this section.
     (5) Notwithstanding other provisions of this section, the distributions to any city that substantially decriminalizes or repeals its criminal code after July 1, 1990, and that does not ((reimburse the county for costs associated with criminal cases under RCW 3.50.800 or 3.50.805(2))) comply with RCW 39.34.180, shall be made to the county in which the city is located.
     (6) Moneys distributed under this section shall be expended exclusively for criminal justice purposes and shall not be used to replace or supplant existing funding. Criminal justice purposes are defined as activities that substantially assist the criminal justice system, which may include circumstances where ancillary benefit to the civil justice system occurs, and which includes domestic violence services such as those provided by domestic violence programs, community advocates, and legal advocates, as defined in RCW 70.123.020, and publications and public educational efforts designed to provide information and assistance to parents in dealing with runaway or at-risk youth. Existing funding for purposes of this subsection is defined as calendar year 1989 actual operating expenditures for criminal justice purposes. Calendar year 1989 actual operating expenditures for criminal justice purposes exclude the following: Expenditures for extraordinary events not likely to reoccur, changes in contract provisions for criminal justice services, beyond the control of the local jurisdiction receiving the services, and major nonrecurring capital expenditures.
     (7) Not more than five percent of the funds deposited to the municipal criminal justice assistance account shall be available for appropriations for enhancements to the state patrol crime laboratory system and the continuing costs related to these enhancements. Funds appropriated from this account for such enhancements shall not supplant existing funds from the state general fund.

Sec. 29   RCW 82.14.330 and 2003 c 90 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) Beginning in fiscal year 2000, the state treasurer shall transfer into the municipal criminal justice assistance account for distribution under this section from the general fund the sum of four million six hundred thousand dollars divided into four equal deposits occurring on July 1, October 1, January 1, and April 1. For each fiscal year thereafter, the state treasurer shall increase the total transfer by the fiscal growth factor, as defined in RCW 43.135.025, forecast for that fiscal year by the office of financial management in November of the preceding year. The moneys deposited in the municipal criminal justice assistance account for distribution under this section, less any moneys appropriated for purposes under subsection (4) of this section, shall be distributed to the cities of the state as follows:
     (a) Twenty percent appropriated for distribution shall be distributed to cities with a three-year average violent crime rate for each one thousand in population in excess of one hundred fifty percent of the statewide three-year average violent crime rate for each one thousand in population. The three-year average violent crime rate shall be calculated using the violent crime rates for each of the preceding three years from the annual reports on crime in Washington state as published by the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs. Moneys shall be distributed under this subsection (1)(a) ratably based on population as last determined by the office of financial management, but no city may receive more than one dollar per capita. Moneys remaining undistributed under this subsection at the end of each calendar year shall be distributed to the criminal justice training commission to reimburse participating city law enforcement agencies with ten or fewer full-time commissioned patrol officers the cost of temporary replacement of each officer who is enrolled in basic law enforcement training, as provided in RCW 43.101.200.
     (b) Sixteen percent shall be distributed to cities ratably based on population as last determined by the office of financial management, but no city may receive less than one thousand dollars.
     The moneys deposited in the municipal criminal justice assistance account for distribution under this subsection shall be distributed at such times as distributions are made under RCW 82.44.150.
     Moneys distributed under this subsection shall be expended exclusively for criminal justice purposes and shall not be used to replace or supplant existing funding. Criminal justice purposes are defined as activities that substantially assist the criminal justice system, which may include circumstances where ancillary benefit to the civil justice system occurs, and which includes domestic violence services such as those provided by domestic violence programs, community advocates, and legal advocates, as defined in RCW 70.123.020. Existing funding for purposes of this subsection is defined as calendar year 1989 actual operating expenditures for criminal justice purposes. Calendar year 1989 actual operating expenditures for criminal justice purposes exclude the following: Expenditures for extraordinary events not likely to reoccur, changes in contract provisions for criminal justice services, beyond the control of the local jurisdiction receiving the services, and major nonrecurring capital expenditures.
     (2) In addition to the distributions under subsection (1) of this section:
     (a) Ten percent shall be distributed on a per capita basis to cities that contract with another governmental agency for the majority of the city's law enforcement services. Cities that subsequently qualify for this distribution shall notify the department of community, trade, and economic development by November 30th for the upcoming calendar year. The department of community, trade, and economic development shall provide a list of eligible cities to the state treasurer by December 31st. The state treasurer shall modify the distribution of these funds in the following year. Cities have the responsibility to notify the department of community, trade, and economic development of any changes regarding these contractual relationships. Adjustments in the distribution formula to add or delete cities may be made only for the upcoming calendar year; no adjustments may be made retroactively.
     (b) The remaining fifty-four percent shall be distributed to cities and towns by the state treasurer on a per capita basis. These funds shall be used for: (i) Innovative law enforcement strategies; (ii) programs to help at-risk children or child abuse victim response programs; and (iii) programs designed to reduce the level of domestic violence or to provide counseling for domestic violence victims.
     The moneys deposited in the municipal criminal justice assistance account for distribution under this subsection, less any moneys appropriated for purposes under subsection (4) of this section, shall be distributed at the times as distributions are made under RCW 82.44.150. Moneys remaining undistributed under this subsection at the end of each calendar year shall be distributed to the criminal justice training commission to reimburse participating city law enforcement agencies with ten or fewer full-time commissioned patrol officers the cost of temporary replacement of each officer who is enrolled in basic law enforcement training, as provided in RCW 43.101.200.
     If a city is found by the state auditor to have expended funds received under this subsection in a manner that does not comply with the criteria under which the moneys were received, the city shall be ineligible to receive future distributions under this subsection until the use of the moneys are justified to the satisfaction of the director or are repaid to the state general fund.
     (3) Notwithstanding other provisions of this section, the distributions to any city that substantially decriminalizes or repeals its criminal code after July 1, 1990, and that does not ((reimburse the county for costs associated with criminal cases under RCW 3.50.800 or 3.50.805(2))) comply with RCW 39.34.180, shall be made to the county in which the city is located.
     (4) Not more than five percent of the funds deposited to the municipal criminal justice assistance account shall be available for appropriations for enhancements to the state patrol crime laboratory system and the continuing costs related to these enhancements. Funds appropriated from this account for such enhancements shall not supplant existing funds from the state general fund.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 30   The following acts or parts of acts are each repealed:
     (1) RCW 3.30.090 (Violations bureau) and 1979 ex.s. c 136 s 15, 1971 c 73 s 4, & 1961 c 299 s 9;
     (2) RCW 3.46.020 (Judges) and 1987 c 3 s 1, 1984 c 258 s 73, & 1961 c 299 s 36;
     (3) RCW 3.46.030 (Jurisdiction) and 2000 c 111 s 5, 1985 c 303 s 13, & 1961 c 299 s 37;
     (4) RCW 3.46.050 (Selection of full time judges) and 1975 c 33 s 2 & 1961 c 299 s 39;
     (5) RCW 3.46.060 (Selection of part time judges) and 1984 c 258 s 75 & 1961 c 299 s 40;
     (6) RCW 3.46.063 (Judicial positions--Filling--Circumstances permitted) and 1993 c 317 s 3;
     (7) RCW 3.46.067 (Judges--Residency requirement) and 1993 c 317 s 5;
     (8) RCW 3.46.070 (Election) and 1984 c 258 s 76 & 1961 c 299 s 41;
     (9) RCW 3.46.080 (Term and removal) and 1984 c 258 s 77 & 1961 c 299 s 42;
     (10) RCW 3.46.090 (Salary -- City cost) and 1984 c 258 s 78, 1969 ex.s. c 66 s 5, & 1961 c 299 s 43;
     (11) RCW 3.46.100 (Vacancy) and 1984 c 258 s 79 & 1961 c 299 s 44;
     (12) RCW 3.46.110 (Night sessions) and 1961 c 299 s 45;
     (13) RCW 3.46.130 (Facilities) and 1961 c 299 s 47;
     (14) RCW 3.46.140 (Personnel) and 1961 c 299 s 48;
     (15) RCW 3.46.145 (Court commissioners) and 1969 ex.s. c 66 s 6;
     (16) RCW 3.46.150 (Termination of municipal department -- Transfer agreement -- Notice) and 2001 c 68 s 2, 1984 c 258 s 210, & 1961 c 299 s 49;
     (17) RCW 3.50.007 (Cities and towns of four hundred thousand or less to operate municipal court under this chapter or chapter 3.46 RCW -- Municipal judges in office on July 1, 1984 -- Terms) and 1984 c 258 s 102;
     (18) RCW 3.50.030 (Violations bureau for traffic cases -- Disposition of moneys collected) and 1984 c 258 s 105, 1979 ex.s. c 136 s 18, & 1961 c 299 s 52;
     (19) RCW 3.50.800 (Repeal of municipal criminal code -- Agreement covering costs of handling resulting criminal cases -- Arbitration--Renewal) and 1984 c 258 s 202;
     (20) RCW 3.50.810 (Termination of municipal court--Notice) and 2001 c 68 s 1 & 1993 c 317 s 2;
     (21) RCW 3.62.070 (Filing fees in criminal cases and traffic infractions--Arbitration if no agreement) and 1994 c 266 s 15, 1993 c 317 s 8, 1984 c 258 s 39, 1980 c 128 s 14, 1979 ex.s. c 129 s 1, 1973 1st ex.s. c 10 s 2, & 1961 c 299 s 111;
     (22) RCW 3.62.100 (Promotion of efficiency) and 1993 c 317 s 7;
     (23) RCW 35.22.425 (Criminal code repeals by city operating municipal court -- Agreement covering costs of handling resulting criminal cases -- Arbitration) and 1984 c 258 s 204;
     (24) RCW 35.23.555 (Criminal code repeals by city operating municipal court -- Agreement covering costs of handling resulting criminal cases -- Arbitration) and 1994 c 81 s 52 & 1984 c 258 s 206;
     (25) RCW 35.27.515 (Criminal code repeals by town operating municipal court -- Agreement covering costs of handling resulting criminal cases -- Arbitration) and 1984 c 258 s 207;
     (26) RCW 35.30.100 (Criminal code repeal by city operating municipal court -- Agreement covering costs of handling resulting criminal cases -- Arbitration) and 1984 c 258 s 208; and
     (27) RCW 35A.11.200 (Criminal code repeal by city operating municipal court -- Agreement covering costs of handling resulting criminal cases -- Arbitration) and 1984 c 258 s 209.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 31   This act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and takes effect July 1, 2005.

--- END ---