HOUSE BILL REPORT

HB 2074

BYRepresentatives Wang and Locke

Clarifying that superior court judges are not considered county employees for purposes of entitlement to employee benefits.

House Committe on Appropriations

Majority Report:  Do pass.  (28)

      Signed by Representatives Locke, Chair; Grant, Vice Chair; H. Sommers, Vice Chair; Silver, Ranking Minority Member; Youngsman, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Appelwick, Belcher, Bowman, Braddock, Brekke, Brough, Doty, Ebersole, Ferguson, Hine, Holland, May, McLean, Nealey, Padden, Peery, Rust, Sayan, Spanel, Sprenkle, Valle, Wang and Wineberry.

House Staff:Nancy Stevenson (786-7136)

AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS MARCH 2, 1989

BACKGROUND:

Under the constitution, the state pays one-half the salary of superior court judges and the counties pay the remaining half. While not required by law, historically because of administrative complications, health insurance benefits for superior court judges are paid entirely by the state.  In addition, some counties also provide health insurance coverage to superior court judges.  A survey by the Office of the Administrator for the Courts indicates 17 counties provide the same level of benefits to superior court judges as the rest of their county employees. It is estimated that if county coverage was eliminated, approximately $216,000 would be saved each year by these counties.

SUMMARY:

Any county authorized by its board of commissioners to enter into contracts to provide health care services and/or group insurance benefits for its employees shall not include superior court judges.

Fiscal Note:      Requested February 26, 1989.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    None Presented.

House Committee - Testified Against:      None Presented.

House Committee - Testimony For:    None Presented.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      None Presented.