Lawmakers Hear Conflicting Testimony on Bill to Make County Coroners Appointed
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Supporters said appointment would improve professionalism and allow counties to remove problematic elected coroners; opponents, including elected coroners, said appointment risks political pressure and removes an independent check such as the inquest.
The committee heard extensive testimony on House Bill 2094, a measure that would require coroners and medical examiners in non-charter counties to be appointed rather than elected once current terms expire. Committee staff summarized the current statutory patchwork — elected coroners in counties in a specific population band, options in charter counties and use of appointed medical examiners in the largest counties — and said the bill would make appointment the default for non-charter counties.
Sponsor Representative Dufault said the bill responds to operational failures in his district and would improve recruitment and accountability. "This bill will solve a very big problem in my district," he said, describing a prolonged period when Yakima County lacked an effectively operating coroner's office and the fiscal and service consequences that followed.
Opposition testimony was led by elected coroners and association representatives. William Leach, elected coroner for Benton County and vice president of the Washington Association of Coroners and Medical Examiners, warned that removing election would eliminate direct public accountability and could threaten the coroner's independence to order inquests. Warren McLeod, elected coroner of Lewis County, cited RCW 68.50.015 and noted coroners are already subject to judicial review and voter accountability.
Yakima County Commissioner Ladon Linde recounted a local case in which an elected coroner suffered substance-related misconduct, alleged misconduct with evidence, and only left office after a recall effort; Linde said the county lacked timely tools to replace the official and supported appointment as a remedy. Opponents at times framed the bill as a broader assault on voters' rights; proponents, including Andrew Villeneuve of the Northwest Progressive Institute, said appointment would depoliticize a technical, medical and legal function and reduce ballot complexity.
No committee vote on HB 2094 is recorded in the transcript; the hearing included seven testifiers and a mix of local officials, elected coroners and policy advocates. The bill raises a central tension lawmakers must weigh: the value of independent, publicly accountable coroners with inquest power versus the desire for professional, vetted medical examiners appointed by local executives.
What happens next: The committee closed the public hearing and did not record final action on HB 2094 in the provided transcript; the bill remains under consideration.