County administrator outlines coroner options: elected, appointed or split responsibilities; timing and qualifications cited as obstacles

County Administrator Todd Mulkey briefed the Clallam County Charter Review Commission on March 10 about the administrator’s role and the options for the county coroner’s office, telling commissioners that decisions about whether the coroner should be elected or appointed hinge on qualifications, legal constraints and timing.

Mulkey said the coroner position is “a highly technical position” and that the county’s current senior coroner staff member has a background in microbiology, a death investigator certification and advanced forensic training. He said the county faces three practical tradeoffs when deciding whether to require qualifications or change how the position is filled: (1) if the county keeps the coroner as an elected office, statutory candidate-qualification rules limit how much the charter can restrict who may run; (2) if the county moves to appointment, it can set more precise qualifications and can remove an unqualified appointee through employment mechanisms; and (3) timing matters — placing a charter amendment on the ballot this November to create an elected coroner would mean the earliest an elected coroner could take office would likely be the November 2026 general election, creating a two‑year window to manage the office in the interim.

Mulkey said an appointment route would allow the county to require technical credentials and to replace an appointee more readily if performance concerns arise. He also warned that if the county leaves the coroner elected, "anybody can run" and, under state law, candidates may be able to meet minimum statutory requirements by completing certain certification classes after election; that makes specifying pre‑election qualification thresholds difficult under general-law constraints.

Commissioners asked detailed questions. Commissioner Hodgson asked whether there is precedent elsewhere for filling vacancies from runners‑up; Commissioners Richards, Fain and Pickett raised legal and timing questions about elections and ballot schedules. Mulkey said the Growth Management Act and other state statutes frame certain county authorities and that some county functions are constrained by state law. He suggested staff could prepare a section‑by‑section list of charter language that lacks clarity or that creates operational problems; he said he could produce that analysis for the commission.

Mulkey also outlined practical matters affecting candidates and elections: certification of election results typically takes about two weeks; placing a charter amendment that creates an elected office on the ballot for the coming general election requires adherence to statutory deadlines and, if enacted, would delay filling the office until the next scheduled election. Mulkey suggested an alternative path: ask voters in November whether the coroner should be an appointed position; if that passes, the commissioners could then appoint a qualified coroner sooner than waiting for an election cycle.

Why this matters

The coroner’s office performs legally sensitive functions — death investigation and certification — with consequences for public health, law enforcement and legal processes. How the office is structured (elected versus appointed) affects the county’s ability to require technical qualifications, to supervise or remove the officeholder, and to fill the office quickly if the statute or charter is found to be in conflict.

Next steps

Commissioners asked staff for more legal research and for a list of the charter sections that may need clarification. Mulkey said he would help produce a list of operationally problematic charter provisions and that the commission should consider the timing ramifications of any ballot action.