Defiance on the part of Skagit County Prosecutor Rich Weyrich is nothing new. He has refused to enforce State Law regarding the improperly filed Oaths of Office by County Commissioners Don Munks and Ken Dahlstedt. Should he be allowed to pick and choose which Statutes are to his liking and which are not? If so, then you and I should be allowed to do the same when it comes to laws with which we disagree.
In his case, Weyrich did file his Oath of Office according to the terms set by RCW 36.16.060. That is, he had his Oath of Office filed with the County Auditor before entering upon the duties of his office. In that Oath of Office, Weyrich did solemnly swear that he “will support the Constitution and Laws of the United States, and the Constitution and Laws of the State of Washington. . .”
After a year of stonewalling by the Prosecutor’s Office, the people of Skagit County are still waiting for an explanation as to why Munks and Dahlstedt have not been held accountable and removed from office for their failure to qualify for their positions. They entered upon the duties of their offices on January 3, 2005. The Oaths of Office for Munks and Dahlstedt were not filed until a week later on January 10, 2005. Big deal, you say? Try getting pulled over with expired license tabs.
State Law is clear on the penalty for missing the filing deadline for the Oath of Office. RCW 42.12.010 states:
Every elective office shall become vacant on the happening of any of the following events:
(6)His or her refusal or neglect to take his or her oath of office, or to give or renew his or her official bond, or to deposit such oath or bond within the time prescribed by law.
At one point, the Prosecutor’s Office attempted to deceive by citing obsolete case law, claiming that failure to qualify for office did not result in immediate forfeiture of the position.
According to an Attorney General’s Opinion from 1963, the vacancies are real:
Our supreme court has held that the occurrence of an event designated in RCW 42.12.010 occasions immediate forfeiture of office and creates a vacancy. State ex rel. Guthrie v. Chapman, 187 Wash. 327, 60 P.2d 245 (1936); State ex rel. Zempel v. Twitchell, 59 Wn. (2d) 419, 367 P. (2d) 985 (1962).
I have one suggestion for Mr. Weyrich — If you do not like the law, work to change it. Until then, do your job, honor your Oath of Office, and support the Constitutions and Laws. Anything less is Official Misconduct per RCW 9A.80.010.
