Other LanguagesRCW 41.14.260 provides that a city police officer transferring to a county sheriff's office pursuant to RCW 41.14.250 shall have the same rights, benefits and privileges as the officer would have been entitled to if the officer had been a member of the sheriff's office since the beginning of the officer's employment with the city. Pursuant to this statute, the officer's seniority is determined by the date of the officer's original hire with the city.
The Legislature clearly intended, by amending RCW 41.04.190 in 1983, to authorize county commissioners to accept increases in health benefits on a midterm basis; the Attorney General will not comment on the constitutionality of the 1983 amendments.
(1) The validity of a local ordinance making it either a criminal or civil offense to be in possession of a firearm while under the influence of alcohol or other drugs will not turn on RCW 9.41.290, in the sense that such a local ordinance is, or is not, thereby statutorily preempted; instead, it will depend upon the effect which a particular ordinance has on constitutionally-protected rights. (2) A local ordinance providing for the mandatory forfeiture of a firearm in the possession of one who is intoxicated would be within the purview of RCW 9.41.290 and, therefore, would be required to be consistent with its state statutory counterpart (RCW 9.41.098) in order to be legally effective.
RCW 70.116.020 establishes the procedure for adopting coordinated water system plans in areas designated as critical water supply service areas. RCW 36.93.090(5) provides that a boundary review board may review extension of water service by a city or town outside existing corporate boundaries. A boundary review board does not have authority under RCW 36.93.050(5) to review extension of water service beyond corporate city or town limits if it is consistent with the coordinated water system plan adopted pursuant to RCW 70.116.020.
Under existing law a county and a city located therein lacks the authority to enter into a contract whereby the sheriff will provide law enforcement services to the city on a contractual basis under the terms of which the city would reimburse the county for the men and services utilized.
1. RCW 36.70A.040 provides that if a county is required or chooses to adopt comprehensive land use plans and development regulations under the Growth Management Act, each city located within the county must also adopt comprehensive land use plans and development regulations under the Act. This requirement applies to cities located partially within a county planning under the Act and partially within another county.2. A city that adopts comprehensive land use plans and development regulations because it is partially located in a planning county must adopt plans and regulations for the entire city, even that part of the city located within a county that is not planning under the Act.
A county may, by ordinance, require the platting of subdivisions in accordance with chapter 58.17 RCW in any case in which the smallest lot within a subdivision is fifty acres or less in area.
1.A county may lawfully eliminate its provision of medical, dental, and life insurance benefits to its superior court judges when the judges, who are also state officers, receive similar benefits from the state.2.Where superior court judges as state officers are receiving health and life insurance benefits from the state, a county is not legally required to provide superior court judges with the same type of benefits, whether or not the state benefits are as comprehensive as those offered by the county to its other officers and employees.
1. There is a proposal by a county to establish a sick leave bank. Under the proposal employees who have accrued vacation leave or sick leave may donate the leave to the sick leave bank. In the event of catastrophic illness or injury, employees who have exhausted their vacation leave and sick leave may apply to the sick leave bank for additional leave. Article 8, section 7 of the Washington Constitution prohibits gifts of public funds. The proposal is not a gift by the county. There is consideration to the county since the donating employees performed service in order to accrue the donated leave. There is donative intent on the part of the donating employee, not the county. 2. Under RCW 41.40.010(8)(a), (b), vacation leave and sick leave donated to the sick leave bank are not compensation earnable of the employee making the donation. Although the employee accrues the leave, he or she is never paid for it. 3. Under RCW 41.40.010(8)(a), (b), leave paid from the sick leave bank is not compensation earnable. Although the employee receives payments from the sick leave bank, the payments are not made in return for services to the county by the receiving employee. The leave was accrued as a result of services performed by the donating employee.
(1) When a board of county commissioners enters into a contract for the construction or improvement of county roads under chapter 36.77 RCW, the board is required to comply with the bidding requirements of RCW 36.77.020 through 36.77.040 even though the estimated cost of the project does not exceed $25,000.(2) A board of county commissioners may direct the performance of road construction or improvements by "day labor," rather than pursuant to contract, if the estimated cost of such project does not exceed $25,000. (3) Where a board of county commissioners hires one or more pieces of equipment and their operators, individually, to perform road construction or improvements in connection with a project having an estimated cost of less than $25,000, it may do so without complying with the bidding requirements of RCW 36.77.020 through 36.77.040 only if the operators so hired acquire the status of county employees rather than serving as independent contractors.