Bill would let some fire protection districts dissolve local civil‑service systems, sponsors say

Representative Suzanne Schmidt, prime sponsor of House Bill 1172, told the House Local Government Committee the measure would let some fire protection districts end locally adopted civil‑service systems after a resolution by the board of fire commissioners and a majority vote of affected civil‑service employees.

The bill matters because state civil‑service rules govern hiring, promotion, discipline and related personnel matters for public employees. Elizabeth Allison, staff to the committee, summarized the bill’s effect: a fire protection district that adopted civil service may dissolve that system if the district’s board adopts a resolution and a majority of the civil‑service employees vote to dissolve the system within 60 calendar days of the board resolution.

Supporters — including the Washington Fire Commissioners Association and several fire district officials — said the requirement to remain in civil service can be cumbersome for a very small number of districts and can delay hiring. Ryan Spiller of the Washington Fire Commissioners Association said the change affects “a small amount of people” and called it “a good little bill.” Frank Sottojourner, fire chief of Spokane Valley Fire Department, said civil‑service timelines and quorum requirements had forced his district to pause hiring: “We’ve had to put hiring on hold for up to 1 year … because of people who were resigning as commissioners or as a chief examiner.”

Spokespeople for affected districts and for rank‑and‑file employees told the committee they had local labor and union support for letting employees vote on dissolution. Spokane Valley speakers said IAFF Local 876 had provided a letter of support and that the district’s civil‑service board had participated in discussions.

Committee members asked about the practical effect of the change on hiring and on employee protections. Patrick Birch, a Spokane Valley fire commissioner, described the bill as a “balanced and reasonable process,” emphasizing that the requirement for a majority employee vote would ensure staff input: “The requirement for a majority vote of the employees guarantees that their voices are heard.”

This item was presented as a public hearing; no committee vote or final action was recorded in the transcript. Committee staff framed the proposal as an option available only to fire protection districts that previously adopted civil service; municipal departments that are required to have civil service were excluded from the change.

Looking ahead, sponsors and district officials said they would continue local discussions with unions and civil‑service boards about the detailed steps needed to implement any dissolution if the Legislature approves the change.