Washington State

Office of the Attorney General

Attorney General

Bob Ferguson

AGO 2006 NO. 9 > Apr 17 2006

If a fire protection district issues non-voted, limited tax general obligation bonds, and a portion of the district is subsequently annexed by a code city, the fire protection district retains the authority to levy a tax on property in the annexed area for the purpose of repaying its existing bond obligations.

AGO 2003 NO. 9 > Sep 30 2003

Lands owned by a city, which are located within the corporate limits of the city and also within the boundaries of a mosquito control district, are subject to assessment by the district pursuant to RCW 17.28.255, to the extent that the city-owned lands receive a special benefit from the operation of the district.

AGO 2000 NO. 9 > Dec 11 2000

1.  A municipality lacks authority to expend lodging tax revenues for the support of a tourism-related facility in which the municipality has no ownership interest.  2.  A municipality may expend lodging tax revenues for the support of a tourism-related facility in which the municipality has a joint interest; the degree of support must be proportional to the extent of the municipality’s ownership interest in the facility.

AGO 1998 NO. 9 > Jul 30 1998

A code city lacks authority to determine, by local ordinance, who shall serve as chair of the city's LEOFF disability board; this subject is pre-empted by state statute.

AGO 1977 NO. 9 > Mar 25 1977

(1) The 106% limitation on regular property taxes imposed by RCW 84.55.010 does not apply to the taxes levied by a city for the maintenance of its local improvement guaranty fund under RCW 35.54.060.  (2) Property taxes levied by a city for the maintenance of its local improvement guaranty fund, however, may not in any year exceed five percent of the outstanding obligations guaranteed by the fund and further may not, in any event, be in excess of a sum which is sufficient, with other sources of the fund, to pay warrants issued against the fund during the preceding fiscal year and establish a balance therein.

AGO 1971 NO. 9 > Feb 17 1971

The notice requirements of RCW 58.17.080 relating to the filing of a preliminary plat of a proposed subdivision adjacent to or within one mile of the municipal boundaries of a city or town do apply to a proposed subdivision which is located totally within a certain city but is also located within one mile of the municipal boundaries of some one or more other cities or towns.

AGO 1955 NO. 10 > Jan 17 1955

A statute enacted by the state legislature providing that the city council may determine by ordinance whether certain city officials shall be elective or appointive would not constitute an invalid delegation of legislative power under Amendment VII of the Washington Constitution.

AGO 1989 NO. 10 > May 17 1989

1.The 1985 amendments to chapter 2.42 RCW, codified as RCW 2.42.110 through .180 [2.42.180], relate only to interpreter services for the hearing impaired.2.The pre‑1985 portions of chapter 2.42 RCW, codified as RCW 2.42.010 through 2.42.050, apply only to interpreter services for persons with speech defects or non-English speaking cultural backgrounds, except that RCW 2.42.050 applies also to interpreter services for the hearing impaired.3.With respect to criminal proceedings, the government whose officer is responsible for initiating the proceeding, usually the county, is responsible for the cost of providing the interpreter as defined in RCW 2.42.040.

AGO 2003 NO. 10 > Nov 19 2003

Under RCW 82.02.020, a city may lawfully (1) require an owner seeking a building permit to install sidewalks assuming the city can meet the standards set forth in the statute for imposing such a condition; and (2) offer owners the option of deferring the installation of sidewalks for a reasonable time; and (3) at the end of the deferral period, offer owners several options, including the option of paying the city a specified portion of the cost of installing sidewalks, the money to be used for right-of-way improvements in the city.

AGO 1995 NO. 10 > Aug 24 1995

1.  The term "tourist expansion" as used in RCW 67.28.210 refers to activities designed to increase tourism and tourist activity in a given geographical area.   2.  RCW 67.28.210 does not generally permit counties or cities to use tax revenues generated thereunder for the production or resale of shirts containing the logo of an annual community event; however, the proviso added to the statute by Laws of 1995, Ch. 290, section 1 does permit the proceeds to be used for advertising and promotional materials, which might include promotional shirts, where the conditions set forth in the proviso are met.   3.  RCW 67.28.210 governs the expenditure of revenues authorized by its language; RCW 35.21.700 is a more general statute covering expenditure by cities of other available revenues.