Letter Opinion 1971 No. 132

- - - - - - - - - - - - -
 
 
                                                                December 7, 1971
 
 
 
Honorable D. James Costanti
State Representative, 40th District
1215 Doser Street
Edison, Washington 98246
                                                                                          Cite as:  AGLO 1971 No. 132 (not official)
 
 
Dear Sir:
 
            We are in receipt of your letter dated December 3, 1971, requesting our opinion on the following two questions:
 
            "(1) Can a Park and Recreation District formed under the provisions of RCW 36.39 in a third class county, upon appropriate approval by the voters of the district, levy an annual tax for the purpose of retiring a general obligation bond where such annual tax would result in taxation over the 40 mill limit?
 
            "(2) Can such a district, upon appropriate approval of the voters collect taxes under a special levy for operation of the district in excess of the 40 mill limit."
 
                                                                     ANALYSIS
 
            In response to these questions we would refer you to the specific provisions of RCW 36.69.140, as last amended by § 20, chapter 42, Laws of 1970, 1st Ex. Sess., reading as follows:
 
            "A park and recreation district shall not have power to levy an annual authorized levy, but it shall have the power to levy a tax upon the property included within the district, in the manner prescribed for cities for the purpose of exceeding the limitations established by Article VII, section 2, as amended by Amendment 17, of the Constitution and by RCW 84.52.052.  Such special, voted levy may be either for operating funds or for capital outlay, or for a cumulative reserve fund.  A park and recreation district may issue general  [[Orig. Op. Page 2]] obligation bonds for capital purposes only, not to exceed an amount, together with any outstanding general obligation indebtedness equal to three‑eighths of one percent of the value of the taxable property within such district, as the term 'value of the taxable property' is defined in RCW 39.36.015, and may provide for the retirement thereof by levies in excess of millage limitations in accordance with the provisions of RCW 84.52.056."
 
            We believe that this statute supports an affirmative answer to both of your questions.
 
            It is hoped that the foregoing will be of assistance to you.
 
Very truly yours,
 
FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
 
 
Philip H. Austin
Deputy Attorney General