BILL REQ. #:  S-2299.1 

READ FIRST TIME 02/27/07.   

     AN ACT Relating to courts of limited jurisdiction; amending RCW 3.50.003, 3.50.005, 3.50.020, 3.50.805, 39.34.180, 10.14.150, 3.50.040, and 3.50.050; adding new sections to chapter 3.50 RCW; providing an effective date; and declaring an emergency.

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

Sec. 1   RCW 3.50.003 and 1984 c 258 s 125 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) "City" means an incorporated city or town.
     (2) "Contracting city" means any city that contracts with a hosting jurisdiction for the delivery of judicial services.
     (3) "Mayor((,))" ((as used in this chapter,)) means the mayor, city manager, or other chief administrative officer of the city.
     (4) "Hosting jurisdiction" means a county or city designated in an interlocal agreement as receiving compensation for providing judicial services to a contracting city.

Sec. 2   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)) continuing to permit cities to contract with counties or other cities for judicial services will allow cities 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 that are open and accessible to the citizens of the state of Washington. This chapter provides a court structure which may be used by cities and towns with a population of four hundred thousand or less which choose to operate under this chapter.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 3   A new section is added to chapter 3.50 RCW to read as follows:
     A city may meet the requirements of RCW 39.34.180 by entering into an interlocal agreement with the county in which the city is located or with one or more cities. The host jurisdiction in any such agreement must be located within reasonable proximity to any contracting city or cities. For purposes of this section, "reasonable proximity" shall be determined after consideration of the factors set forth in RCW 39.34.010. The interlocal agreement shall provide that a judge of the hosting jurisdiction sit as the municipal court judge for the contracting city or cities and hear those cases specified in RCW 39.34.180.

Sec. 4   RCW 3.50.020 and 2005 c 282 s 14 are each amended to read as follows:
     The municipal court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over traffic infractions arising under city ordinances and exclusive original criminal jurisdiction of all violations of city ordinances duly adopted by the city ((in which the municipal court is located)) and shall have original jurisdiction of all other actions brought to enforce or recover license penalties or forfeitures declared or given by such ordinances or by state statutes. A hosting jurisdiction shall have exclusive original criminal and other jurisdiction as described in this section for all matters filed by a contracting city. The municipal court shall also have the jurisdiction as conferred by statute. The municipal court is empowered to forfeit cash bail or bail bonds and issue execution thereon; and in general to hear and determine all causes, civil or criminal, including traffic infractions, arising under such ordinances and to pronounce judgment in accordance therewith. A municipal 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. 5   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 or terminate an interlocal agreement entered into under section 3 of this act unless the ((municipality)) city has reached an agreement with the appropriate county or another ((municipality)) city under chapter 39.34 RCW under which the county or ((municipality)) city is to be paid a reasonable amount for costs associated with prosecution, adjudication, and sentencing in criminal cases, or traffic infractions that are 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)) city and the county or ((municipality)) city 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)) city and the county or ((municipality)) city 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)) city that has entered into agreements with other ((municipalities)) cities that have terminated their municipal courts may not thereafter terminate its court unless each ((municipality)) city has reached an agreement with the appropriate county or city in accordance with this section.
     (2) A ((municipality)) city 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)) city 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, or traffic infractions that are 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)) city 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)) city 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)) city 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)) city 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, or traffic infractions that are 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)) city 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)) city 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. 6   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 carry out these responsibilities through the use of their own courts, staff, and facilities, or by entering into contracts or interlocal agreements under this chapter to provide these services. 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)) the parties, 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)) parties 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. 7   RCW 10.14.150 and 2005 c 196 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) The district courts shall have jurisdiction and cognizance of any civil actions and proceedings brought under this chapter, except the district court shall transfer such actions and proceedings to the superior court when it is shown that the respondent to the petition is under eighteen years of age.
     (2) Municipal courts ((may exercise)) shall have jurisdiction and cognizance of any civil actions and proceedings brought under this chapter ((by adoption of local court rule)), except the municipal court shall transfer such actions and proceedings to the superior court when it is shown that the respondent to the petition is under eighteen years of age.
     (3) Superior courts shall have concurrent jurisdiction to receive transfer of antiharassment petitions in cases where a district or municipal court judge makes findings of fact and conclusions of law showing that meritorious reasons exist for the transfer. The municipal and district courts shall have jurisdiction and cognizance of any criminal actions brought under RCW 10.14.120 and 10.14.170.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 8   A new section is added to chapter 3.50 RCW to read as follows:
     (1) The legislature finds that having a judiciary free from undue political pressures is the cornerstone of our system of justice. However, differences over the method to best ensure judicial independence have also been a part of our system since its inception. Part-time municipal courts serve a vital role in many communities, improving access to justice for residents. Therefore, the legislature finds that having a broad group of judges, practitioners, and laypeople serve as a nominating commission to inform the appointing authority will improve the selection process.
     (2) Cities that appoint part-time judges according to this chapter shall by ordinance create and convene a nominating commission to consider applicants for part-time municipal court judge. Recruitment for the position shall be conducted in a manner consistent with the practices of the jurisdiction, while making every effort to advertise as widely as possible to attract the broadest possible selection of applicants. Cities choosing to appoint the elected district court judge are not required to convene a nominating commission.
     (3) The commission shall include:
     (a) One judge practicing in a court of limited jurisdiction, serving on the bench at the time the commission is convened, appointed by the district and municipal court judges association;
     (b) Two citizens of the jurisdiction served by the court, appointed by the mayor;
     (c) One private criminal defense attorney appointed by the Washington association of criminal defense attorneys;
     (d) One prosecuting attorney, appointed by the Washington association of prosecuting attorneys;
     (e) The municipal court judge currently serving in the jurisdiction if there is an incumbent who is not a candidate for the position;
     (f) The city attorney from the jurisdiction in which the court is located;
     (g) A court administrator, appointed by the district and municipal court management association;
     (h) One member of the executive branch of the city, appointed by the mayor; and
     (i) A representative of the human resources department, or equivalent, from the jurisdiction in which the court is located.
     If the mayor serves in any of the positions listed in this subsection, he or she is prohibited from participating in the commission.
     (4) The commission shall be staffed by the jurisdiction in which the court is located, unless specifically provided for otherwise. Whenever practicable, members should be selected from areas within reasonable proximity to minimize costs. For purposes of this section, "reasonable proximity" shall be determined after consideration of the factors set forth in RCW 39.34.010. All costs related to attending commission meetings shall be borne by the individuals or their appointing organizations.
     (5) Commissioners shall:
     (a) Select a chair from amongst its members;
     (b) Convene initially at the request of the mayor;
     (c) Comply with a timeframe, when practicable and reasonable, set by the mayor for making their recommendations;
     (d) Consider all applicants deemed to have met the minimum qualifications by the human resources department, or equivalent, of the jurisdiction in which the court is located. The commission may limit the applicants interviewed, if necessary;
     (e) Evaluate applicants for their suitability for the bench, including the applicant's legal training, professional skills, interpersonal skills, writing ability, knowledge of and experience with alternative dispute resolution, and ability to manage a courtroom environment, the applicant's reputation for fairness, integrity, and preparedness, moral courage, open-mindedness, and objectivity. The evaluation may include, but is not limited to, materials submitted by the candidate, information from applicants' financial records, law enforcement agencies, and disciplinary bodies;
     (f) After collecting information to evaluate each applicant, recommend to the appointing authority a ranked list of applicants from which he or she must appoint, subject to confirmation by the legislative authority according to RCW 3.50.040; and
     (g) Disclose potential conflicts of interest and personal connections with the applicants.
     (6) Any municipal judge appointed under this section shall serve an initial two-year term of office. Thereafter, the judge is eligible to serve an additional consecutive four-year term, but must first participate in an uncontested retention election, which will be held and administered in the same manner as elections for other city officials, except to the extent that such elections differ from the following procedure. In the retention election, the judge must garner more than fifty percent of the vote which affirmatively answers the following question: "Shall [name of judge] be retained as a judge of [name of city or town] for four years?" To serve any additional consecutive four-year term thereafter, the judge must submit to a similar election in the manner prescribed above.
     (7) Judges who are holding an office subject to this section on the effective date of this section shall serve for the remainder of their unexpired terms, and until their successors are appointed and qualify.

Sec. 9   RCW 3.50.040 and 2002 c 136 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:
     Within thirty days after the effective date of the ordinance creating the municipal court, the mayor of each city or town shall appoint a municipal judge or judges of the municipal court for a term of four years, except that if a municipal judge is serving less than a full-time equivalent position as provided under RCW 3.50.055, section 8(6) of this act shall apply. The terms of judges serving on July 1, 1984, and municipal judges who are appointed to terms commencing before January 1, 1986, shall expire January 1, 1986. The terms of their successors shall commence on January 1, 1986, and on January 1 of each fourth year thereafter, pursuant to appointment or election as provided in this chapter. Appointments shall be made on or before December 1 of the year next preceding the year in which the terms commence.
     The legislative authority of a city or town that has the general power of confirmation over mayoral appointments shall have the power to confirm the appointment of a municipal judge.
     A person appointed as a full-time or part-time municipal judge shall be a citizen of the United States of America and of the state of Washington; and an attorney admitted to practice law before the courts of record of the state of Washington: PROVIDED, That in a municipality having a population less than five thousand persons, a person who has taken and passed by January 1, 2003, the qualifying examination for a lay candidate for judicial officer as provided by rule of the supreme court may be the judge. Any city or town shall have authority to appoint a district judge as its municipal judge when the municipal judge is not required to serve full time. In the event of the appointment of a district judge, the city or town shall pay a pro rata share of the salary.

Sec. 10   RCW 3.50.050 and 1984 c 258 s 107 are each amended to read as follows:
     The legislative authority of the city or town may, by ordinance, provide that the position of municipal judge within the city or town shall be an elective position. The ordinance shall provide for the qualifications of the municipal judge which shall be the same as the qualifications necessary for the appointment thereof; and further, shall provide that the municipal judge shall be elected in the same manner as other elective city officials are elected to office, and that the term of the municipal judge shall be for a term of four years commencing on January 1, 1986, and every four years thereafter. However, if a municipal judge is serving less than a full-time equivalent position as provided under RCW 3.50.055, section 8(6) of this act shall apply.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 11   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, 2007.