Wash. Rev. Code » Title 35 · Chapter 35.21
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 35.21.200 (2025)

Residence qualifications of appointive officials and employees

✓ laws through the 2025 session: 2026 session laws are not yet included
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Any city or town may by ordinance of its legislative authority determine whether there shall be any residential qualifications for any or all of its appointive officials or for preference in employment of its employees, but residence of an employee outside the limits of such city or town shall not be grounds for discharge of any regularly appointed civil service employee otherwise qualified: PROVIDED, That this section shall not authorize a city or town to change any residential qualifications prescribed in any city charter for any appointive official or employee: PROVIDED, FURTHER, That all employees appointed prior to the enactment of any ordinance establishing such residence qualifications as provided herein or who shall have been appointed or employed by such cities or towns having waived such residential requirements shall not be discharged by reason of such appointive officials or employees having established their residence outside the limits of such city or town: PROVIDED, FURTHER, That this section shall not authorize a city or town to change the residential requirements with respect to employees of private public utilities acquired by public utility districts or by the city or town.
[ 1965 c 7 s 35.21.200. Prior: 1951 c 162 s 1; 1941 c 25 s 1; Rem. Supp. 1941 s 9213-3.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1952–1976 · leading case: Mosebar v. Moore, 248 P.2d 385 (Wash. 1952).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mosebar v. Moore, 248 P.2d 385 (Wash. 1952). · cites it 2× “446, Laws of 1951 (RCW 35.21.200) amended the 1941 act. It became effective June 6, 1951, prior to the effective date of respondent’s discharge.”
Bjorseth v. City of Seattle, 551 P.2d 1372 (Wash. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 7× “In effect, the employees challenge the validity of the entire residence preference system as utilized by the Seattle Civil Service Commission alleging it to be in contravention of RCW 35.21.200. The trial court, after hearing motions for summary judgment on behalf of both…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.