HOUSE BILL REPORT

EHJR 4200

BYRepresentatives Haugen, Ferguson, Winsley, May, Rayburn, P. King, Cooper and Jones

Amending the Constitution to provide an alternative method for the framing of a county charter.

House Committe on Local Government

Majority Report:  Do pass with amendment.  (13)

      Signed by Representatives Haugen, Chair; Cooper, Vice Chair; Ferguson, Ranking Republican Member; Horn, Nealey, Nelson, Nutley, Phillips, Raiter, Rayburn, Todd, Wolfe and Wood.

House Staff:Steve Lundin (786-7127)

AS PASSED HOUSE JANUARY 12, 1990

BACKGROUND:

The State Constitution requires the Legislature to enact legislation providing for a uniform system of county government throughout the state, that includes an elected board of county commissioners, and an elected auditor, clerk, prosecuting attorney, sheriff, and treasurer, and such other officers as specified by statute.

The State Constitution provides for a process to alter county government in any county.  This process can be initiated by resolution of the county legislative authority, or by petition of county voters, and involves the election of a board of freeholders to frame a proposed county "home rule" charter that is submitted to the county voters for their approval or rejection.  A county "home rule" charter can alter the make-up of county government.  Five out of 39 counties in the state have adopted such a charter.

SUMMARY:

An alternative process is provided for the framing of a proposed county "home rule" charter that is submitted to county voters for their approval or rejection.

This alternative process involves the appointment of a fifteen member temporary county home rule commission by the governor to draft five alternative county "home rule" charters.  The temporary commission could exist no longer than one year.  At least one-third of the commission members must be members of the legislature and elected county officials.  Any one of these alternative county "home rule" charters could be placed directly on the ballot for the approval or rejection of county voters in the same manner as the existing process is initiated to frame a proposed county charter, i.e., by either resolution of the county legislative authority, or by the filing of petition that has been signed by county voters at least equal in number to ten percent of the number of voters in the county who voted at the last preceding general election.

The ballot title for the constitutional amendment shall be "Shall an additional procedure be permitted to simplify the process by which a proposed county charter is placed upon the ballot?"

Effective Date:If approved by the voters, at the next General Election.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    Jim Metcalf, Washington State Association of Counties.

House Committee - Testified Against:      None Presented.

House Committee - Testimony For:    This provides for an alternative process - the elected freeholder process could still be used.  Sometimes one of the charters proposed by a board of freeholders contains a provision reflecting a temporary situation or problem that is not appropriate in the long run.  The voters rightfully reject the proposed charter.  This alternative process could lead to more neutral alternative charters.  This will reduce local costs which can be tens of thousands of dollars to support a board of freeholders.  This could provide for a range of options that perhaps fit smaller counties more than any existing charter does.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      None Presented.

VOTE ON FINAL PASSAGE:

      Yeas 90; Nays 3; Absent 1; Excused 4.

Voting Nay: Representatives Chandler, Holland and Padden

Absent:     Representative Mr. Speaker

Excused:    Representatives O'Brien, Peery, Silver and Wineberry