Holding special city election in conjunction with state general election in even-numbered year

ELECTIONS – PUBLIC OFFICERS – CITIES AND TOWNS – CHARTERS – COUNTY AUDITOR – Holding special city election in conjunction with state general election in even-numbered year.

Where a first-class city has amended its charter to create new officer positions, and the charter amendments provide that the initial special election to fill the new positions will occur in conjunction with the state primary and general election in an even-numbered year, RCW 29.13.020 permits the conduct of a city special election under these circumstances.

***********************

July 28, 2000

 Dear Representatives Gombosky and Sommers:

By letter previously acknowledged, you have asked for an opinion on a question we have rephrased as follows:

QUESTION

BRIEF ANSWER

RCW 29.13.020 does not preclude a first-class city from conducting a special election (such as for an unexpired term in city office or for an initial "short" term) in conjunction with the state primary and general election in an even-numbered year.

ANALYSIS

As noted above, your question concerns a proposal to fill two new city offices created in a recent amendment to the charter of a first-class city. The proposal would fill these offices initially through election to "short" three-year terms in 2000 so that these offices would next appear on the ballot in four-year intervals in odd-numbered years, such as 2003, 2007, etc. The charter amendments generally leave elections to be held in odd-numbered years but make an exception for the initial "short" terms for the two offices in question.

Your question is whether the amendments are consistent with RCW 29.13.020(1), which provides that:

Id. Cities of the first class may, through their charters, determine their forms of organization and the manner in which they exercise their powers. Const. art. XI, § 10. See also RCW 35.22.020. However, the Constitution provides that "all charters thereof framed or adopted by authority of this Constitution shall be subject to and controlled by general laws". Const. art. XI, § 10. It is true, therefore, that any general statute would control over an inconsistent provision of a city charter. The Oakwood Co. v. Tacoma Mausoleum Ass’n, 22 Wn.2d 692,157 P.2d 595 (1945), Ewing v. City of Seattle, 55 Wash. 229, 104 P. 259 (1909).

RCW 29.13.020 is not, however, inconsistent with the notion of conducting a one-time special city election in an even-numbered year. Subsection (1) of RCW 29.13.020 provides that all city general elections will be held in odd-numbered years. Thus, a city would be precluded from adopting a charter provision or an ordinance providing that, as a general matter, that city would elect its officers in even-numbered years. However, this does not preclude the city from conducting a special election in an even-numbered year.

An election to fill a newly created position is not a "general" election as defined in statute, but rather a "special" election. RCW 29.01.070 (defining "general election") and RCW 29.01.170 (defining "special election"). Special elections are governed by subsection (2) of RCW 29.13.020, which provides as follows:

Id. Nothing in this section limits special elections in cities or towns to odd-numbered years. Therefore, it is clear that a special election—that is, one not conducted to fill a regular term—is not a "general" election as that term is used in RCW 29.13.020(1).

Furthermore, in a closely related situation—a special election to fill an unexpired term—the Legislature has exempted cities of the first class from a general requirement that such city elections be conducted in odd-numbered years. RCW 29.21.410 provides as follows:

Id. Were we discussing a city of another class, this language would require that any election to fill a vacancy be conducted "in conjunction" with the city’s next general election, which would be in an odd-numbered year because of RCW 29.13.020(1), discussed above. However, this

statute applies only to one type of special election: an election to fill vacancies. It does show, however, that the Legislature tends to be deferential to charter cities in determining such things as the timing of city elections.

We conclude that a city of the first class may conduct a special election in any year, with the consent of the county auditor, to fill offices newly created by amendments to the city charter, and that city elections to be conducted in conjunction with the state primary and general elections in 2000 are not inconsistent with state statutory law.

Very truly yours,

JAMES K. PHARRIS
Senior Assistant Attorney General

JKP:pmd