BILL REQ. #: Z-1128.1
| State of Washington | 59th Legislature | 2006 Regular Session |
Read first time 01/17/2006. Referred to Committee on Judiciary.
AN ACT Relating to administration of the courts of limited jurisdiction; amending RCW 3.30.020, 3.30.090, 3.38.020, 3.38.030, 3.38.040, 3.38.060, 3.42.010, 3.46.010, 3.46.030, 3.46.067, 3.46.070, 3.46.120, 3.46.150, 3.50.005, 3.50.010, 3.50.030, 3.50.060, 3.50.075, 3.50.805, 3.58.050, 3.62.050, 35.20.010, 39.34.030, 39.34.180, 82.14.320, and 82.14.330; adding new sections to chapter 3.46 RCW; repealing RCW 3.46.020, 3.46.040, 3.46.050, 3.46.060, 3.46.063, 3.46.080, 3.46.090, 3.46.100, 3.46.110, 3.46.130, 3.46.140, 3.46.145, 3.50.007, 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; and providing an effective date.
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 3.30.090 and 1979 ex.s. c 136 s 15 are each amended to
read as follows:
A violations bureau may be established by any city or district
court ((having jurisdiction of traffic cases)) to assist the court in
processing ((traffic)) infraction cases. ((As designated by written
order of the court having jurisdiction of traffic cases, specific
offenses under city ordinance, county resolution, or state law may be
processed by such bureau. Such bureau may be authorized to receive the
posting of bail for such specified offenses, and, as authorized by the
court order, to accept forfeiture of bail and payment of monetary
penalties. The court order shall specify the amount of bail to be
posted and shall also specify the circumstances or conditions which
will require an appearance before the court. Such bureau, upon
accepting the prescribed bail, shall issue a receipt to the alleged
violator, which receipt shall bear a legend informing him of the legal
consequences of bail forfeiture. The bureau shall transfer daily to
the clerk of the proper department of the court all bail posted for
offenses where forfeiture is not authorized by the court order, as well
as copies of all receipts. All forfeitures or penalties paid to a
violations bureau for violations of municipal ordinances shall be
placed in the city general fund or such other fund as may be prescribed
by ordinance.)) Each court shall designate the specific infractions
under state laws, county ordinances, or city ordinances which may be
processed by the violations bureau. The bureau may be authorized to
accept payment of monetary penalties for such infractions. All
((forfeitures or)) penalties paid to a violations bureau for violations
of state laws ((or)), county resolutions, or city ordinances shall be
remitted at least monthly to the county or city treasurer for deposit
in the current expense fund or such other fund as may be prescribed by
state laws, county resolution, or city ordinance. ((Employees of
violations bureaus of a city shall be city employees under any
applicable municipal civil service system.))
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, 2010, 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) At 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) Documentation of the number and location of municipal courts,
if any, located within the district, as provided by the administrative
office of the courts and districting committee members;
(b) Documentation of the caseload and related services, including
hours and days of operation, provided at each district and municipal
court location in the district, as provided by the administrative
office of the courts and districting committee members; and
(c) 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)) ninety 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 ninety 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 city 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, except RCW 3.46.150 as amended by 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 courts of
limited jurisdiction in the state of Washington. This situation
creates confusion for the citizens of this state 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, including jurisdiction over all applicable state
laws, county and city ordinances, civil and small claims, 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) "City" means an incorporated city or town.
(2) "Host county or city" means a county or city designated in an
interlocal agreement as receiving compensation for providing judicial
branch functions to a contracting city.
(3) "Contracting city" means a city designated in an interlocal
agreement as receiving judicial branch services from the host county or
city 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 city may meet the requirements of RCW 39.34.180 through an
interlocal agreement with the county in which the city is located, or
with one or more cities including at least one host city located within
a reasonable proximity to the contracting city. For purposes of this
act, "reasonable proximity" shall be determined after consideration of
the factors set forth in RCW 39.34.010. At a minimum, the interlocal
agreement shall provide that a judge of the host county or city sit as
the judge for the contracting city and hear those cases specified in
RCW 39.34.180 with respect to the contracting city.
(2) The presiding judges of the affected courts of the host county
or city and the contracting city shall be necessary parties to the
negotiation of the interlocal agreement(s) and the presiding judge of
the district or municipal court of the host county or city shall be a
necessary signatory to the interlocal agreement.
(3) Any such interlocal agreement shall comply with the provisions
of this chapter and chapter 39.34 RCW. An interlocal agreement for
facilities only is not required to meet the requirements of this
chapter except for subsection (2) of this section.
Sec. 12 RCW 3.46.030 and 2005 c 282 s 13 are each amended to read
as follows:
((A municipal department shall have)) Where two or more cities have
entered into an interlocal agreement for the provision of judicial
branch functions, the court shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction of
matters arising from ordinances of the ((city, and no jurisdiction of
other matters except as conferred by statute)) cities and concurrent
jurisdiction with the superior and district court in all civil and
criminal matters as now provided by law for district judges. Appeals
from judgment or order of the court in such cases shall be governed by
the law pertaining to appeals from judgments or orders of district
judges operating under chapter 3.30 RCW. A ((municipal department))
court participating in the program established by the administrative
office of the courts pursuant to RCW 2.56.160 shall have jurisdiction
to take recognizance, approve bail, and arraign defendants held within
its jurisdiction on warrants issued by any court of limited
jurisdiction participating in the program.
Sec. 13 RCW 3.46.067 and 1993 c 317 s 5 are each amended to read
as follows:
Where two or more cities have entered into an interlocal agreement
for the provision of judicial branch functions, a judge of ((a
municipal department of a district)) the court need not be a resident
of ((the city in which the department is created)) one of the cities
served by the court, but must be a resident of ((the)) a county in
which ((the city is)) one or more of the cities are located.
Sec. 14 RCW 3.46.070 and 1984 c 258 s 76 are each amended to read
as follows:
((In each district court district where an election is held for the
position of municipal judge, the county auditor, prior to the date for
filing declarations for the office of district judge, shall designate
the proper number of municipal judge positions, commencing with number
one, and if there is more than one municipal judge in any municipal
department, one or more positions may, at the request of the
legislative body of the city, be further designated as municipal
traffic judge positions. Only voters of the city shall vote for
municipal judges.)) Where a court serves the residents of more than
one city by virtue of an interlocal agreement between two or more
cities, the judge position or positions serving the court shall, for a
term of four years commencing January 1, 2010, and every four years
thereafter, be filled by election and such position or positions shall
appear on the ballot of each participating city and shall be elected by
a majority of all votes cast by residents of the participating cities.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 15 A new section is added to chapter 3.46 RCW
to read as follows:
(1) An interlocal agreement between a host county or city and a
contracting city 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 contracting city, and how
such assignments will be made, provided that the number so assigned
shall be consistent with the objective workload analysis;
(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 contracting city, 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; and
(f) The appointment and compensation of all personnel, including
whether they will be employees of the host county or city or the
contracting city.
(2)(a) The interlocal agreement shall also establish the portion of
the host county's or city's court expenses to be paid by the
contracting city to the host county or city under the agreement, based
on the contracting city's use of the host county's or city'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 host county's or city's court.
(b) The host county's or city's court shall take all steps
necessary to promote efficiencies in calendaring in order to minimize
costs to the contracting city. The contracting city shall cooperate
with the host county's or city's court in order to minimize those
costs.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 16 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 and provide for automatic renewal of the
agreement unless a party exercises its right to terminate the agreement
under subsection (2)(a) of this section. The expiration of the
interlocal agreement shall coincide with the end of the elected judge's
term of office.
(2)(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 two years prior to the expiration of
the agreement.
(b) A contracting city may not give notice of its intention not to
renew an interlocal agreement under this chapter unless the contracting
city will have established a municipal court under chapter 3.50 or
35.20 RCW or entered into an agreement with another host county or city
effective by the date such agreement will expire.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 17 A new section is added to chapter 3.46 RCW
to read as follows:
An interlocal agreement under this chapter may provide for the
establishment of a violations bureau to assist in processing
infractions committed within the jurisdiction of the contracting city
consistent with RCW 3.50.030.
Sec. 18 RCW 3.46.120 and 2004 c 15 s 7 are each amended to read
as follows:
(1) Unless otherwise provided for in the interlocal agreement, all
money received by the clerk of ((a municipal department)) the host
county's or city'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 contracting city.
(2) ((Except as provided in RCW 10.99.080,)) The ((city)) treasurer
of the host county, host city, or contracting city 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 contracting city 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 contracting city, and twenty-five percent to the ((city))
general fund of the contracting city to fund local courts.
Sec. 19 RCW 3.46.150 and 2005 c 433 s 33 are each amended to read
as follows:
(1) Any city((, having established)) continuing to operate a
municipal department ((as provided in this chapter)) under section 8 of
this act may, by written notice 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, require the termination
of the municipal department ((created pursuant to this chapter)). A
city may terminate a municipal department only at the end of a four-year judicial term. However, the city may not give the written notice
required by this section unless the city:
(a) 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 termination if these
costs are going to be incurred. 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 7.04A 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 7.04A RCW; and
(b) Has established a municipal court pursuant to chapter 3.50 RCW
or has entered into an agreement with the county or another city for
the provision of judicial branch functions pursuant to this chapter and
chapter 39.34 RCW.
(2) A county that wishes to terminate a municipal department of the
district court must provide written notice to the city legislative
authority at least one year prior to the date of the intended
termination. A city receiving written notice shall establish a
municipal court pursuant to chapter 3.50 RCW or enter into an agreement
with the county or another city for the provision of judicial branch
functions pursuant to this chapter and chapter 39.34 RCW effective the
date of the intended termination.
(3) Upon the termination of a municipal department pursuant to
subsection (1) or (2) of this section, a city may not reestablish a
municipal department.
Sec. 20 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. 21 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)) a court of limited jurisdiction 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. 22 RCW 3.50.030 and 1984 c 258 s 105 are each amended to
read as follows:
Every city or town may establish and operate under the supervision
of the municipal court a violations bureau to assist the court in
processing ((traffic)) infraction cases. Each municipal court shall
designate the specific ((traffic offenses and traffic)) infractions
under city or town ordinances which may be processed by the violations
bureau. The bureau may be authorized to accept payment of monetary
penalties for such infractions.
((A violations bureau may be authorized to process traffic
infractions in conformity with chapter 46.63 RCW.)) All penalties ((
A violations bureau may be authorized to receive the posting of
bail for specified offenses and, to the extent authorized by court
order, permitted to accept forfeiture of bail and payment of penalties.
Any violations bureau, upon accepting the prescribed bail, shall issue
a receipt therefor to the alleged violator, acknowledging the posting
thereof and informing the accused of the legal consequences of bail
forfeiture. Any person charged with any criminal traffic offense
within the authority of the violations bureau may, upon signing a
written appearance, a written plea of guilty and a written waiver of
trial, pay to the violations bureau the fine established for the
offense charged and costs and this shall have the same effect as a
court conviction.and forfeitures)) paid to a
violations bureau for the violation of municipal ordinance shall be
placed in the city ((or town)) general fund or such other fund as may
be prescribed by ordinance of the city ((or town)) or laws of the state
of Washington.
Any employees of an existing violations bureau of any city shall
continue as city employees.
Sec. 23 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. 24 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. 25 RCW 3.50.805 and 2005 c 433 s 35 are each amended to read
as follows:
(((1))) A ((municipality)) city operating a municipal court under
this chapter shall not terminate that court unless the ((municipality
has reached)) city meets its requirements under RCW 39.34.180 by
entering into an interlocal agreement with the appropriate county or
another ((municipality)) city 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 7.04A 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
7.04A 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.)) to provide judicial branch functions to the city.
(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 7.04A 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
7.04A 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 7.04A 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
7.04A RCW
Sec. 26 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. 27 RCW 3.62.050 and 2005 c 457 s 6 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 and))
the portion of district court judges' salaries distributed by the
administrator for the courts pursuant to RCW 2.56.030, shall be paid
from the county current expense fund.
Sec. 28 RCW 35.20.010 and 2005 c 433 s 37 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)) city operating a municipal court under this
section ((may)) shall not terminate that court ((if)) unless the
((municipality)) city has ((reached)) entered into an interlocal
agreement with the appropriate county or another city 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 7.04A 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 7.04A RCW.)) to meet
its requirements under RCW 39.34.180.
(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
Sec. 29 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/
(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. 30 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. 31 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. 32 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. 33 The following acts or parts of acts are
each repealed:
(1) RCW 3.46.020 (Judges) and 1987 c 3 s 1, 1984 c 258 s 73, & 1961
c 299 s 36;
(2) RCW 3.46.040 (Petition) and 1984 c 258 s 74 & 1961 c 299 s 38;
(3) RCW 3.46.050 (Selection of full time judges) and 1975 c 33 s 2
& 1961 c 299 s 39;
(4) RCW 3.46.060 (Selection of part time judges) and 1984 c 258 s
75 & 1961 c 299 s 40;
(5) RCW 3.46.063 (Judicial positions--Filling--Circumstances
permitted) and 1993 c 317 s 3;
(6) RCW 3.46.080 (Term and removal) and 1984 c 258 s 77 & 1961 c
299 s 42;
(7) 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;
(8) RCW 3.46.100 (Vacancy) and 1984 c 258 s 79 & 1961 c 299 s 44;
(9) RCW 3.46.110 (Night sessions) and 1961 c 299 s 45;
(10) RCW 3.46.130 (Facilities) and 1961 c 299 s 47;
(11) RCW 3.46.140 (Personnel) and 1961 c 299 s 48;
(12) RCW 3.46.145 (Court commissioners) and 1969 ex.s. c 66 s 6;
(13) 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;
(14) RCW 3.50.800 (Repeal of municipal criminal code -- Agreement
covering costs of handling resulting criminal cases -- Arbitration--Renewal) and 2005 c 433 s 34 & 1984 c 258 s 202;
(15) RCW 3.50.810 (Termination of municipal court--Notice) and 2001
c 68 s 1 & 1993 c 317 s 2;
(16) 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;
(17) RCW 3.62.100 (Promotion of efficiency) and 1993 c 317 s 7;
(18) RCW 35.22.425 (Criminal code repeals by city operating
municipal court -- Agreement covering costs of handling resulting
criminal cases -- Arbitration) and 2005 c 433 s 38 & 1984 c 258 s 204;
(19) RCW 35.23.555 (Criminal code repeals by city operating
municipal court -- Agreement covering costs of handling resulting
criminal cases -- Arbitration) and 2005 c 433 s 39, 1994 c 81 s 52, &
1984 c 258 s 206;
(20) RCW 35.27.515 (Criminal code repeals by town operating
municipal court -- Agreement covering costs of handling resulting
criminal cases -- Arbitration) and 2005 c 433 s 40 & 1984 c 258 s 207;
(21) RCW 35.30.100 (Criminal code repeal by city operating
municipal court -- Agreement covering costs of handling resulting
criminal cases -- Arbitration) and 2005 c 433 s 41 & 1984 c 258 s 208;
and
(22) RCW 35A.11.200 (Criminal code repeal by city operating
municipal court -- Agreement covering costs of handling resulting
criminal cases -- Arbitration) and 2005 c 433 s 42 & 1984 c 258 s 209.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 34 This act takes effect July 1, 2006.