State Law Mandates It: Council Appointee Theresa Hancock Must Vacate Her Seat Immediately
RCW 42.12.070(6) says Hancock must be removed
Now that all the ballots have been counted in Yakima County, a law that rarely comes up is front and center in the Leticia Zesati vs. Theresa Hancock race. Hancock didn’t just lose, she got slaughtered by Zesati, in an election that was clearly a referendum on how she treated Mike Gonzalez, and the botched investigation, that will more than likely cost the city hundreds of thousands of dollars in lawsuits for wrongful termination.
Leticia Zesati
Zesati garnered more than a thousand votes, amassing over sixty percent of the total vote. Zesati ran a disciplined and positive campaign that focused more on what she would bring to the council than focus on her opponent’s shortcomings. Theresa Hancock took care of that part all by herself.
Washington Law Says An Appointee Must be Removed
Under Washington law, specifically Revised Code of Washington 42.12.070(6), when an appointee is replaced by a qualified person elected at the next regular election, “the person elected shall take office immediately and serve the remainder of the unexpired term”.
This statutory mandate makes clear that the office must not remain with an unfit or obstructive official when a replacement is elected — the old appointee must step aside immediately.
Why This Authority Applies to Hancock’s Removal
1. The Legal Trigger in RCW 42.12.070(6)
• The statute concerns vacancies and interim appointments to governing bodies.
• Its entire purpose is to ensure that when an elected person is qualified to fill a seat, they assume office immediately and the prior appointee no longer occupies the position.
• In short: when an election produces a valid person, the prior appointee cannot continue.
2. Hancock’s Conduct Places Her Squarely in the “Unfit/Impeded Governance” Category
• Whether by misuse of council privileges, wrongful public accusations of staff, or general operational disruption, Hancock has severely impaired the city’s governance apparatus.
• Because the law envisions removal of unqualified or obstructive members, her pattern aligns with the legislative concern behind RCW 42.12.070.
• While that section speaks to “appointed” persons, the underlying principle — that governance cannot be held hostage by a dysfunctional member — applies by analogy to any elected member who obstructs the duties of the office.
3. The Statute Gives a Clear Path for Immediate Succession
• Instead of continuing an election-cycle in limbo, the law mandates prompt turnover.
• Sunnyside must act without delay if an election or legitimate qualified candidate stands ready.
• Delaying action would contravene the statutory language and allow a malfunctioning officeholder to persist.
Operational & Ethical Rationale for Immediate Removal
Governance Disruption
Councilwoman Hancock’s conduct has fractured the productive relationship between staff, the council, and the public. This cannot be tolerated when the city’s budget, operations, and community services depend on stable governance.
Legal Risk
Her actions — false public accusations, in particular her role in “Towel Gate”. Where Hancock and Deputy Mayor Jorge Galvan tried to blame Mike Gonzalez on damaging hotel towels on a lobbying trip to Olympia. La Voz’s investigation found that the staff at the Red Lion Hotel believed the towels went missing out of Jorge Galvan’s hotel room. Galvan brought his wife Laura on that visit to Olympia.
Hancock has also been accused of interference with records, and retaliatory behavior — expose the City to lawsuits, liability, and reputational damage. Immediate removal helps mitigate that risk.
Public Trust & Legitimacy
When an elected official consistently undermines government functioning, the democratic compact breaks down. The community must regain faith that governance is serious, accountable, and lawful.
Statutory Integrity
By enforcing RCW 42.12.070(6), Sunnyside sends a powerful message: laws apply to everyone, including elected officials who stray from their duties.
Proposed Next Steps for Sunnyside
1. Review the upcoming election schedule to determine when a qualified person stands to be elected to Council District (Hancock’s) seat.
2. Trigger the process under the statute so that when the elected person is certified, they take office immediately, and Hancock vacates the seat.
3. Communicate clearly to the public about the need for immediate action under state law and the goal of restoring proper governance.
3. Safeguard transitional operations, ensuring the newly seated successor is ready to assume responsibilities without governance disruption.
⸻
Conclusion
Councilwoman Hancock’s continued tenure is incompatible with lawful, ethical, functional governance in Sunnyside. With RCW 42.12.070(6) providing the legal mechanism for immediate removal when conditions demand, the City has both authority and obligation to act now. Delaying only perpetuates dysfunction, damages credibility, and prolongs risk.
Immediate removal is not just advisable — it is the legally mandated, responsible path forward.
