Wash. Rev. Code » Title 35 · Chapter 35.23
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 35.23.121 (2026)

City clerk—Duties—Deputies

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The city clerk shall keep a full and true record of every act and proceeding of the city council and keep such books, accounts and make such reports as may be required by the state auditor. The city clerk shall record all ordinances, annexing thereto his or her certificate giving the number and title of the ordinance, stating that the ordinance was published and posted according to law and that the record is a true and correct copy thereof. The record copy with the clerk's certificate shall be prima facie evidence of the contents of the ordinance and of its passage and publication and shall be admissible as such evidence in any court or proceeding.
The city clerk shall be custodian of the seal of the city and shall have authority to acknowledge the execution of all instruments by the city which require acknowledgment.
The city clerk may appoint a deputy for whose acts he or she and his or her bondspersons shall be responsible, and he or she and his or her deputy shall have authority to take all necessary affidavits to claims against the city and certify them without charge.
The city clerk shall perform such other duties as may be required by statute or ordinance.
[ 2007 c 218 s 75; 1995 c 301 s 36; 1965 c 7 s 35.24.120. Prior: 1915 c 184 s 25; RRS s 9139. Formerly RCW 35.24.120.]

Notes:

Intent—Finding—2007 c 218: See note following RCW 41.08.020.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2004–2004 · leading case: Harberd v. City of Kettle Falls, 84 P.3d 1241 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Harberd v. City of Kettle Falls, 84 P.3d 1241 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “Sanders was not empowered to accept service of process on behalf of the City pursuant to RCW 35.23.121. The City also contended Mr.”
Harberd v. City of Kettle Falls, 84 P.3d 1241 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “Sanders was not empowered to accept service of process on behalf of the City pursuant to RCW 35.23.121. The City also contended Mr.”
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.