Other Languages(1) The requirement of WAC 251-12-285 that employers pay the initial costs of transcribing the record for appeal under RCW 28B.16.130 is not enforceable in personnel actions arising under RCW 28B.16.120 in view of the Washington Supreme Court's decision in the analogous case of Zoutendyk v. Washington State Patrol, 95 Wn.2d 693, 628 P.2d 1308 (1981).
(1) The members of the board of directors of an irrigation district are "elected officials" within the meaning of § 24 of Initiative No. 276, requiring annual reports of the financial interests of elected officials. (2) Section 24 (1) (b) of Initiative No. 276 which requires the reports of a candidate or elected official to disclose certain financial interests does not include financial interests in tangible personal property but it is, instead, limited to such interests in intangible personalty. (3) Section 24 (1) (b) of Initiative No. 276 only requires the reporting of financial interests in excess of $5,000 in a bank or savings account or cash surrender value of any insurance policy, or in excess of $500 in other items of intangible personal property; it does not require the lumping together of separate items in any given class which themselves have a lesser value so as to require reporting if the aggregate value of all items in the class exceeds the applicable minimum reportable amount.
(1) Prosecuting attorney is not legally authorized to appoint a special deputy who is a nonresident of the county to assist him either before a grand jury or in trying a criminal case. (2) The attorney general is not legally authorized to appoint a special assistant attorney general to assist a prosecuting attorney in proceedings before a grand jury.
(1) The supreme court's adoption of the new juvenile court rules does constitute a "nondebatable" emergency so as to justify the expenditure of those county funds which are necessary to implement, and comply with, the rules, under authority of RCW 36.40.180. (2) The duties which are imposed upon a prosecuting attorney by the new juvenile court rules are such as to render his office and that of the county juvenile probation officer incompatible, to the end that the two positions may not simultaneously be held by the same person.
(1) In view of the amendment to chapter 128, Laws of 1972, 1st Ex. Sess. (Referendum 26) which is contained in chapter 242, Laws of 1972, 1st Ex. Sess., the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant thereto may not be made available to counties or other public bodies for the acquisition of trucks or other vehicles to be used in the transporting of garbage from its source in residential, commercial and industrial areas either to drop-box or transfer stations or directly to landfills and recovery facilities.
(2) The foregoing bond proceeds may, however, continue to be used for the acquisition of land and equipment for use in relation to the operation of sanitary landfills, resource recovery facilities, drop-box and transfer stations, and equipment for the transfer of solid waste from such stations to landfills and recovery facilities.
In a county in which federal forest funds or public utility district funds are disbursed to the school districts of the county, the offices of county commissioner and school district director are incompatible.
A public utility district commissioner is entitled to receive only the compensation specified for the position in RCW 54.12.080, and is not entitled to any additional compensation for serving as president or secretary of the board of commissioners.
Under certain described factual circumstances the correct salaries currently to be paid to the various county elective officials in Grays Harbor county, except for the county commissioners themselves, are those which were provided for in the 1975 county budget adopted on December 6, 1974.
The provisions of RCW 70.39.140 et seq., under which hospital rates and related matters are regulated by the state hospital commission, are applicable to hospitals maintained and operated by public hospital districts formed under chapter 70.44 RCW.
There is no authority, under existing state law, for the adoption and implementation, by the board of county commissioners of a noncharter county, of a county personnel system covering the employment, compensation, subsequent promotion, suspension or discharge of all county employees‑-including those appointed by other, independent, county elected officials; there are, however, certain limited actions which may be taken in this area pursuant to a joint agreement between all affected county offices.