HOUSE BILL REPORT

2SHB 1911

BYHouse Committee on Local Government (originally sponsored by Representatives Cooper, Ferguson, Nutley, Haugen and Raiter)

Revising and adding provisions on special districts.

House Committe on Local Government

Majority Report:  The second substitute bill be substituted therefor and the second substitute bill do pass.  (14)

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

House Staff:Bill Lynch (786-7092)

AS PASSED HOUSE FEBRUARY 6, 1990

BACKGROUND:

Various special districts can be formed to provide diking and drainage-type improvements and services, that have voting rights restricted to property owners, including diking districts, drainage districts, diking improvement districts, drainage improvement districts, and flood control districts.

Concerns have been expressed that few voters realize that they are eligible to vote or seek office in special district elections.  In addition, the costs of conducting a special district election are often very expensive when viewed on a per vote basis.  Special districts are also only required to keep the voting site open for two consecutive hours. Although there are requirements that apply to the filing period, declaration of candidacy, and arrangement of names on the ballot for the initial election of governing body members, there are no such requirements for other special district elections.

It is suggested that the cost of conducting special district elections would be significantly cut if these elections were eliminated if no one or only one person filed.  Moving the date of these elections from December to February might also increase voter awareness. It is also suggested that more voters would file as candidates for the governing body of these special districts if more notice is provided about the filing periods.

SUMMARY:

The voting scheme in special districts that provide diking and drainage-type of improvements is altered so that each property owner receives two votes at any election.  If the property is held as community property, both spouses receive one vote, if otherwise eligible to vote, unless one spouse designates in writing that the other spouse may cast both votes.  If other multiple undivided interests exist, the owner or owners of undivided interests at least equal to a majority interest cast the votes.  A corporation, partnership, or governmental entity may designate a natural person to cast its votes.

The maximum number of votes that a property owner may possess is doubled from 20 to 40 in the three types of these special districts (diking improvement districts, drainage improvement districts, and flood control districts) that have additional votes for property owners based upon the acreage held by the property owner.

No election is to be held if no one or only one person files for a position of a governing body of such a special district.  If only one person files, the person is deemed to have been elected to the position.  If no one files, the position is filled as if a vacancy occurs when the current office holder's term expires.  However, if no one files for that position at the filing period at an election held to fill the vacancy, the person who was appointed remains in office for the remainder of the unexpired term.

The authority of a city or town, that is located outside of a diking or drainage district, to levy assessments on taxable property within the city or town that benefits from the diking or drainage district's facilities and give these moneys to the district, is altered so that the city or town may impose assessments on any benefited property in the city or town for such purposes.

A statute is repealed that appears to grant intercounty diking and drainage districts the authority to impose property taxes.

A provision of law relating to diking improvement districts and drainage improvement districts is recodified in the appropriate chapter of laws.

If a special district has less than 500 qualified voters, then the district must contract with the auditor to conduct the election.  These special district elections may be conducted by mail in the discretion of the county auditor.  The requirements for conducting a nonpartisan special election by mail apply to special district elections conducted by mail.

If a special district has at least 500 qualified voters, then the district may conduct the election on its own or contract with the county auditor.  If the district conducts the election on its own, then it must enter into an agreement with the county auditor that outlines the responsibilities of both parties.  The voting site must be kept open at least six consecutive hours.

The time for holding special district general elections is changed from the second Tuesday in December in each odd-numbered year to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in February in each even-numbered year.

If a special district has at least 500 qualified voters, then the county auditor must publish in a newspaper of general circulation in the district a notice stating the filing period and the place for filing a declaration of candidacy to become a member of the governing body at least seven days before the closing of the filing period.  If a special district has less than 500 qualified voters, then the county auditor must mail or deliver this notice to each qualified voter at least seven days prior to the closing of the filing period.  The requirement to post notice of special district elections is repealed.

The procedures used for the initial election of members of the governing body regarding the filing period, the method for filing declarations of candidacy, and the method for arranging candidates names on the ballot also apply to other special district elections.  All declarations of candidacy must be filed with the county auditor.

Fiscal Note:      Requested January 16, 1990.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    John Pearson, Secretary of State's Office; and Bob Terwilliger, Snohomish County Auditor.

House Committee - Testified Against:      No one.

House Committee - Testimony For:    Some special districts, especially the smaller ones, forget to even conduct the elections.  People sometimes file as candidates when they are not eligible to vote in the district.  There is a need to standardize election procedures.  Better notice to voters of these elections will increase voter participation.  Election costs per vote will drop markedly.  Costs will drop if uncontested elections are not required to be held.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      None.