Ordinance 32530006.900000
WSS /sds
05/20/99
ORDINANCE NO. 3253
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF
CHAPTER 5.01, PRELIMINARY ARTICLE, BY THE REPEAL
OF SECTION 5.01.040 CONTEMPT, AND THE
ENACTMENT IN ITS PLACE OF A NEW SECTION 5.01.040
CONTEMPT TO READ AS FOLLOWS.
Section 1. The Edmonds City Code, Chapter 5.01 Preliminary Article is hereby
amended by the repeal and reenactment of Section 5.01.040 Contempt to read as follows.
Section 5.01.040 Contempt. The following statutes of the State of Washington
are hereby adopted by reference:
RCW Description
7.21.010 Definitions.
7.21.020 Sanctions — Who May Impose.
7.21.030 Remedial Sanctions — Payment for Losses.
7.21.040 Punitive Sanctions — Fines.
7.21.050 Sanctions — Summary Impositions — Procedure.
7.21.060 Administrative Actions or Proceedings — Petition to Court
for Imposition of Sanctions.
7.21.070 Appellate Review.
233628 -1-
Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi-
cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect
five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the
title.
APPROVED:
i I _
MAYOR, BARBARA S-"FAH
'7A
ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED:
'Ode e4-d..'
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
BY ) &—c5to'&
FILED WITH THE CITY CLE 05/28/1999
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: 06/01/1999
PUBLISHED: 06/06/1999
EFFECTIVE DATE: 06/11/1999
ORDINANCE NO. 3253
233628 -2-
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 3253
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the 1 s` day of June, 1999, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance
No. 3253. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as
follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF
CHAPTER 5.01, PRELIMINARY ARTICLE, BY THE REPEAL
OF SECTION 5.01.040 CONTEMPT, AND THE
ENACTMENT IN ITS PLACE OF A NEW SECTION 5.01.040
CONTEMPT.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this 2' day of June, 1999.
2-4� 'do -
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
Document
Revised Code of Washington
TITLE 7 RCW SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS AND ACTIONS
CHAPTER 7.21 RCW CONTEMPT OF COURT ,.
Adopted by Reference
Ordinance # 3253p one 6 -1- 99
City Clerk
RCW 7.21.010 Definitions.
14 Applicable Cases
The definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter:
(1) "Contempt of court" means intentional:
(a) Disorderly, contemptuous, or insolent behavior toward the judge while holding the court,
tending to impair its authority, or to interrupt the due course of a trial or other judicial proceedings;
(b) Disobedience of any lawful judgment, decree, order, or process of the court;
(c) Refusal as a witness to appear, be sworn, or, without lawful authority, to answer a
question; or
(d) Refusal, without lawful authority, to produce a record, document, or other object.
(2) "Punitive sanction" means a sanction imposed to punish a past contempt of court for the
purpose of upholding the authority of the court.
(3) "Remedial sanction" means a sanction imposed for the purpose of coercing performance
when the contempt consists of the omission or refusal to perform an act that is yet in the person's
power to perform. [1989 c 373 § 1.]
RCW 7.21.020 Sanctions - -Who may impose.
A judge or commissioner of the supreme court, the court of appeals, or the superior court, a
judge of a court of limited jurisdiction, and a commissioner of a court of limited jurisdiction may
impose a sanction for contempt of court under this chapter. [1998 c 3 § l; 1989 c 373 § 2.]
RCW 7.21.030 Remedial sanctions -- Payment for losses.
7 Applicable Cases
(1) The court may initiate a proceeding to impose a remedial sanction on its own motion or on
the motion of a person aggrieved by a contempt of court in the proceeding to which the contempt is
related. Except as provided in RCW 7.21.050, the court, after notice and hearing, may impose a
remedial sanction authorized by this chapter.
(2) If the court finds that the person has failed or refused to perform an act that is yet within
the person's power to perform, the court may find the person in contempt of court and impose one
or more of the following remedial sanctions:
(a) Imprisonment if the contempt of court is of a type defined in RCW 7.21.010(1) (b) through
(d). The imprisonment may extend only so long as it serves a coercive purpose.
(b) A forfeiture not to exceed two thousand dollars for each day the contempt of court
continues.
(c) An order designed to ensure compliance with a prior order of the court.
(d) Any other remedial sanction other than the sanctions specified in (a) through (c) of this
subsection if the court expressly finds that those sanctions would be ineffectual to terminate a
continuing contempt of court.
(e) In cases under chapters 13.32A, 13.34, and 28A.225 RCW, commitment to juvenile
detention for a period of time not to exceed seven days. This sanction may be imposed in addition
to, or as an alternative to, any other remedial sanction authorized by this chapter. This remedy is
specifically determined to be a remedial sanction.
(3) The court may, in addition to the remedial sanctions set forth in subsection (2) of this
section, order a person found in contempt of court to pay a party for any losses suffered by the
parry as a result of the contempt and any costs incurred in connection with the contempt
proceeding, including reasonable attorney's fees. [1998 c 296 § 36; 1989 c 373 § 3.]
NOTES:
Findings -- Intent - -1998 c 296 §§ 36 -39: "The legislature fmds that an essential component of the children in
need of services, dependency, and truancy laws is the use of juvenile detention. As chapter 7.21 RCW is currently
written, courts may not order detention time without a criminal charge being filed. It is the intent of the legislature to
avoid the bringing of criminal charges against youth who need the guidance of the court rather than its punishment.
http: / /www.mrsc.org /cgi- binlom Cgi.exe ?clientlD= 14622973& hitsperheading= on &infobase= rcw.fi&&gi mp =7.
Document
Page 2 of 4
The legislature further finds that ordering a child placed in detention is a remedial action, not a punitive one. Since the
legislature finds that the state is required to provide instruction to children in detention, use of the courts' contempt
powers is an effective means for furthering the education and protection of these children. Thus, it is the intent of the
legislature to authorize a limited sanction of time in juvenile detention independent of chapter 7.21 RCW for failure to
comply with court orders in truancy, child in need of services, at -risk youth, and dependency cases for the sole purpose
of providing the courts with the tools necessary to enforce orders in these limited types of cases because other statutory
contempt remedies are inadequate." [1998 c 296 § 35.]
Findings -- Intent - -Part headings not law- -Short title - -1998 c 296: See notes following RCW 74.13.025.
RCW 7.21.040 Punitive sanctions -- Fines.
3 Applicable Cases
(1) Except as otherwise provided in RCW 7.21.050, a punitive sanction for contempt of court
may be imposed only pursuant to this section.
(2)(a) An action to impose a punitive sanction for contempt of court shall be commenced by a
complaint or information filed by the prosecuting attorney or city attorney charging a person with
contempt of court and reciting the punitive sanction sought to be imposed.
(b) If there is probable cause to believe that a contempt has been committed, the prosecuting
attorney or city attorney may file the information or complaint on his or her own initiative or at the
request of a person aggrieved by the contempt.
(c) A request that the prosecuting attorney or the city attorney commence an action under this
section may be made by a judge presiding in an action or proceeding to which a contempt relates.
If required for the administration of justice, the judge making the request may appoint a special
counsel to prosecute an action to impose a punitive sanction for contempt of court.
A judge making a request pursuant to this subsection shall be disqualified from presiding at
the trial.
(d) If the alleged contempt involves disrespect to or criticism of a judge, that judge is
disqualified from presiding at the trial of the contempt unless the person charged consents to the
judge presiding at the trial.
(3) The court may hold a hearing on a motion for a remedial sanction jointly with a trial on an
information or complaint seeking a punitive sanction.
(4) A punitive sanction may be imposed for past conduct that was a contempt of court even
though similar present conduct is a continuing contempt of court.
(5) If the defendant is found guilty of contempt of court under this section, the court may
impose for each separate contempt of court a fine of not more than five thousand dollars or
imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, or both. [1989c373§4.]
RCW 7.21.050 Sanctions -- Summary imposition -- Procedure.
(1) The judge presiding in an action or proceeding may summarily impose either a remedial or
punitive sanction authorized by this chapter upon a person who commits a contempt of court within
the courtroom if the judge certifies that he or she saw or heard the contempt. The judge shall
impose the sanctions immediately after the contempt of court or at the end of the proceeding and
only for the purpose of preserving order in the court and protecting the authority and dignity of the
court. The person committing the contempt of court shall be given an opportunity to speak in
mitigation of the contempt unless compelling circumstances demand otherwise. The order of
contempt shall recite the facts, state the sanctions imposed, and be signed by the judge and entered
on the record.
(2) A court, after a finding of contempt of court in a proceeding under subsection (1) of this
section may impose for each separate contempt of court a punitive sanction of a fine of not more
than five hundred dollars or imprisonment in the county jail for not more than thirty days, or both,
or a remedial sanction set forth in RCW 7.21.030(2). A forfeiture imposed as a remedial sanction
under this subsection may not exceed more than five hundred dollars for each day the contempt
continues. [1989 c 373 § 5.]
RCW 7.21.060 Administrative actions or proceedings -- Petition to court for imposition of
sanctions.
A state administrative agency conducting an action or proceeding or a party to the action or
proceeding may petition the superior court in the county in which the action or proceeding is being
conducted for a remedial sanction specified in RCW 7.21.030 for conduct specified in RCW
http: / /www.mrse.orglcgi- binlom cgi.exe ?clientlD= 14622973& hitsperheading =on &infobase= rcw.fi&&*mp =7.
I Document
Page 3 of 4
7.21.010 in the action or proceeding. [1989c373§6.]
RCW 7.21.070 Appellate review.
1 Applicable Cases
A party in a proceeding or action under this chapter may seek appellate review under
applicable court rules. Appellate review does not stay the proceedings in any other action, suit, or
proceeding, or any judgment, decree, or order in the action, suit, or proceeding to which the
contempt relates. [1989 c 373 § 7.1
RCW 7.21.900 Severability- 4989 c 373.
If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the
remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not
affected. [1989 c 373 § 30.]
CHAPTER 7.24 RCW
UNIFORM DECLARATORY JUDGMENTS ACT
Sections
7.24.010 Authority of courts to render.
7.24.020 Rights and status under written instruments, statutes, ordinances.
7.24.030 Construction of contracts.
7.24.050 General powers not restricted by express enumeration.
7.24.060 Refusal of declaration where judgment would not terminate controversy.
7.24.070 Review.
7.24.080 Further relief.
7.24.090 Determination of issues of fact.
27 4.100 Costs.
7.24.110 Parties- -City as party -- Attorney general to be served, when.
7.24.1.20 Construction of chapter.
7.24.130 "Person" defined.
7.24.135 Severability -4935 c 113.
7.24.140 General purpose stated.
7.24.144 Short title.
7.24.146 Application of chapter -- Validation of proceedings.
7.24.190 Court may stay proceedings and restrain parties.
NOTES:
Rules of court: Cf CR 57.
RCW 7.24.010 Authority of courts to render.
31 Applicable Cases
Courts of record within their respective jurisdictions shall have power to declare rights, status
and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed. An action or
proceeding shall not be open to objection on the ground that a declaratory judgment or decree is
prayed for. The declaration may be either affirmative or negative in form and effect; and such
declarations shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree. [1937 c 14 § 1; 1935 c
113 § 1; RRS § 784 -1.]
RCW 7.24.020 Rights and status under written instruments, statutes, ordinances.
23 Applicable Cases
A person interested under a deed, will, written contract or other writings constituting a
contract, or whose rights, status or other legal relations are affected by a statute, municipal
ordinance, contract or franchise, may have determined any question of construction or validity
arising under the instrument, statute, ordinance, contract or franchise and obtain a declaration of
rights, status or other legal relations thereunder. [1935 c 113 § 2; RRS § 784 -2.]
RCW 7.24.030 Construction of contracts.
A contract maybe construed either before or after there has been a breach thereof. [1935c
113 § 3; RRS § 784 -3.]
RCW 7.24.050 General powers not restricted by express enumeration.
3 Applicable Cases
http: / /www.mrsc.org /cgi- binlom cgi.exe ?clientID= 14622973& hitsperheading =on &infobase= rcw.fi&8gump =7.
STATE OF WASHINGTON,
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH,
SUMMARY OF
RD N
—3253
of the ity o mon s,
Washington
On the 1st day of June, 1999,
the city council of the City of;
Edmonds, passed Ordinance No.
3253. A summary of the content
of said ordinance, consisting of
the title, provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, AMENDING I
THE PROVISIONS ` OF j
CHAPTER 5.01, PRELIMI.. i
NARY ARTICLE, BY THE
REPEAL OF 'SECTION
5.01.040 NTEMPT, AND
THE ENA M N IN ITS j
PLACE OF A NEW SEC - 1
TION 5.01.040 CONTEMPT.
The,Gl'leid of t Is r, finance'
will be mailed upon request:
DATED this 2nd day of June,
1999.
CITY CLERK,
SANDRA S. CHASE
Published: June 6, 1999.
B -2 -1
ss.
Affidavit of. Publication
The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says
that she is Principal Clerk of THE HERALD, a daily newspaper
printed and published in the City of Everett, County of Snohomish,
and State of . Washington; that said newspaper is a newspaper of
general circulation in said County and State; that said newspaper
has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior
Court of Snohomish County and that the notice ......... ...............................
Summary of ordinance No. 3253
.............................................................................. ............................... ..... ...................
City of Edmonds Washington ....
... .... ............................................................................................ ............................... ...
a printed copy of which is hereunto attached, was published in said
newspaper proper and not in supplement form, in the regular and
entire edition of said paper on the following days and times, namely:
June 6, 1999
....................... ............................................................................................ I..................
. ....................................... ............................................. .................................................
and that said newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers
during all of said period.
!` �` .� ," l -' y ...... - :::�.; !f "'Prm ci a p 1 Clerk
'
7th
Subscribed and sworn to before me this ............................
day f ........... .:
June ........: ............/—ia ........1 19 .........
..9
--
...... {
�I Notary Public in and for the of ashington,
residing at Everett, Snohomi unty
p��pB @i'tlTi f 9,1'�d 0�
4� �A °•
NOTARY
PUBLIC % Z
• o