FINAL BILL REPORT

SSB 5127

PARTIAL VETO

                               C 84 L 89

BYSenate Committee on Governmental Operations (originally sponsored by Senator McCaslin)

Eliminating boundary review boards.

Senate Committee on Governmental Operations

House Committe on Local Government

SYNOPSIS AS ENACTED

BACKGROUND:

State law creates a boundary review board in every class AA (King) and A (Pierce, Spokane, and Snohomish) county, and permits a boundary review board to be created in all other counties.  In these counties, they may be created by either resolution of the county legislative authority or by a petition method (no boundary review boards have been formed by the petition method).  A boundary review board has been created by resolution of the county legislative authority in each of the following counties:  Benton, Chelan, Clark, Cowlitz, Douglas, Franklin, Grant, Kitsap, Pacific, Skagit, Skamania, Thurston, Walla Walla, Whatcom and Yakima.

Boundary review boards may review and approve, reject, or modify and approve the creation, dissolution, annexation, or consolidation of governmental units, defined to be cities, towns, and special purpose districts (sewer, water, fire protection, drainage and diking improvement, flood control zone, irrigation, metropolitan park, drainage, or public utility district engaged in water distribution).

The factors to be considered and the objectives of a boundary review board are stated in statute.

Many representatives of local government feel that these boards are insensitive to the needs of local government and should not be second-guessing elected local officials.

SUMMARY:

The power of a boundary review board to deny a vote by the people on an incorporation petition or a disincorporation petition is eliminated; modification of a proposed incorporation of a city by adding or removing territory from the proposal is restricted.

The procedure is altered by which appointments are made for persons to sit on boundary review boards.  Instead of having the Governor make all appointments, the cities, county, and special districts are allowed to appoint their own representatives.  The terms of office of boundary review board members are reduced from six to four years; no person may serve on a boundary review board for more than eight consecutive years.  Whenever an appointment(s) has not been made in a timely manner, the size of the boundary review board is considered to be reduced by one for each position remaining vacant or unappointed.

Other less significant changes made to boundary review laws include:  (1) providing that a boundary review board shall authorize an annexation as it was approved; and (2) referencing the potential for review of boundary changes in the statutes of cities and special districts.

A new city boundary cannot be located within a right-of-way, except where the boundary runs from one edge to the other edge of the right-of-way.

The governing bodies of a county and a city may agree to include or exclude that portion of the right-of-way from the city's boundaries when it is located on the edge of the right-of-way.  Such a revision is not subject to potential review by a boundary review board.

A process is provided for two cities to agree on an adjustment of their boundaries, if the two cities are separated by all or part of a right-of-way, or the two cities share a common boundary within a right-of-way.  The adjustment would place all of the portion of the right-of-way inside one of the cities.  A mandatory process is provided for the adjustment of similar boundaries between two cities that would arise from a new annexation or incorporation.  Such revisions are not subject to potential review by a boundary review board.

The boundaries of a city may be adjusted to include or exclude that portion of a parcel of land partially located inside a city and partially outside the city on petition of the owner and acceptance by the city.  Such a boundary adjustment shall not be subject to potential review by a board if the adjustment places the parcel entirely inside or outside of the city and is approved by the respective county legislative authority or city council.

A single ballot proposition could combine authorization for an annexation and acceptance of a portion of the city's indebtedness.  The ballot proposition must be by a 60 percent/40 percent margin.  However, if the ballot proposition were approved by only a simple majority vote, the city is authorized to permit the annexation without the assumption of indebtedness.

A city or town may provide factual information on the effects of a proposed boundary change on the city or town and the area potentially affected by the boundary change.

VOTES ON FINAL PASSAGE:

     Senate   36   12

     House 92  4 (House amended)

     Senate   38    7 (Senate concurred)

EFFECTIVE:July 23, 1989

Partial Veto Summary:  All provisions eliminating the authority of boundary review boards to disapprove a proposed city or town incorporation or disincorporation are vetoed.  (See VETO MESSAGE)