Other LanguagesA county legislative authority is generally prohibited from entering into contracts that bind the future legislative actions of the county. The application of this principle depends upon a distinction between actions that are legislative in nature and those that are merely administrative or proprietary.
1. A district court judge lacks authority to engage a judge pro tempore to assist in handling an excess court workload.2. When a judge pro tempore serves a district court for more than 30 days in a year because of the absence of the regular judge owing to disqualification from hearing one or more cases, the salary of the regular judge must be reduced as specified in RCW 3.34.130(1), unless the judge's absence meets one of the exceptions specified in the statute.3. RCW 3.34.130, which generally requires a reduction in a district court judge's salary when a judge pro tempore serves in the judge's place for more than 30 days in a year, does not apply when a visiting judge from another court serves pursuant to RCW 3.34.140.
1. Chapter 17.21 RCW authorizes the Department of Agriculture to regulate pesticide application and use. This chapter preempts cities and counties from regulating pesticide application and use, except the first class cities and the counties in which they are located can regulate structural pest control operators, exterminators, and fumigators. 2. Chapter 15.58 RCW authorizes the Department of Agriculture to regulate formulation, distribution, storage, and disposal of pesticides. This chapter does not preempt cities and counties from regulating these activities, so long as the local regulations do not conflict with state law.
Blanket Bonds for non-elective county employees are not restricted by statute to annual basis.
RCW 35.21.830 and 36.01.130 preempt local governments from imposing rent controls on residential structures or sites. An ordinance that prohibits landlords from terminating residential tenancies by increasing rent is a type of rent control and is preempted by these statutes.
1. A county health board may lawfully order the fluoridation of a water supply system owned and operated by a public utility district and located within the county’s jurisdiction. 2. Subject to constitutional requirements, a county health board may lawfully order a public utility district to fluoridate a discrete portion of the PUD’s water supply system. 3. A county health board may enact a regulation requiring the fluoridation of water supply systems generally but, subject to constitutional requirements, a generally applicable regulation is not prerequisite to the issuance of enforcement orders on the subject. 4. A county health board may lawfully order the fluoridation of a water supply system where the order is contingent upon a third-party source of funding for the fluoridation process.
1. A county may use the local option sales and use tax authorized under RCW 82.14.370 for any of the following purposes if the activity in question relates to a public facility as defined in the statute: capital facilities costs, including acquisition, construction, rehabilitation, alteration, expansion, or improvements of public facilities; costs of development and improvement for the public facilities; project-specific environmental costs; land use and permitting costs; costs of site planning and analysis; project design, including feasibility and marketing studies and plans, and debt and revenue impact analysis.
1. The requirements of chapter 58.17 RCW, enacted in 1969 and relating to platting and subdivisions, apply to land platted before 1937 under chapter 58.08 RCW or its predecessor statutes. 2. Cities and towns may accept plats and subdivisions filed pursuant to the 1937 platting act (chapter 58.16 RCW, repealed in 1969), but are not obligated to do so.
Where, within an existing land subdivision established pursuant to either chapter 58.16 or 58.17 RCW, the owner of an individual lot proposes to divide that lot into four or fewer smaller lots for the purpose of sale or lease, such action will not constitute the establishment of a "short subdivision" as defined in RCW 58.17.020(6) and, thereby, be subject to the city or county's short subdivision ordinance as enacted pursuant to RCW 58.17.060; instead, such action will constitute a "resubdivision" and thus be subject to the general provisions of chapter 58.17 RCW relating to subdivisions.
1.When one government disposes of property to another government pursuant to chapter 39.33 RCW, RCW 43.09.210 requires that the transferring government receive "full value" for the transfer; "full value" has a flexible meaning depending on the circumstances of the transfer.2.RCW 39.33.020, which requires public notice and a hearing before a government disposes of property having a value of more than $50,000, applies only to intergovernmental transfers of property made pursuant to chapter 39.33 RCW.