(1) The restrictions upon the use of excess property tax levy revenues for salary increase purposes imposed by § 4(3) of chapter 325, Laws of 1977, 1st Ex. Sess. (the "levy lid act") also apply to revenues from levies authorized prior to the effective date of the act which either (a) have not yet been collected or (b) have been collected but were not yet disbursed or obligated for salary increase purposes, as of the effective date of the act. (2) School districts may use other funds appropriated by §§ 96 through 109 of Chapter 339, Laws of 1977, 1st Ex. Sess. (the 1977-79 biennial appropriations act), or any non-state appropriated funds (such as receipts from the one percent tax on real estate transactions) which are legally available for the payment of salaries, to increase salaries of certificated or classified employees beyond the increases specifically funded by subsection (1) of § 96 of Chapter 339, supra .
Under chapter 28.56 RCW a county committee on school district organization may propose and the state board may approve a nonhigh participative plan which is equitable notwithstanding the amount of money to be raised by a nonhigh district as its share in the building program may be greater than the amount of money which could be raised by the district solely by the issuance of bonds. Where the bonding capacity is reached, any additional amount required must be raised by an excess levy. RCW 28.56.050.
1. A proposition submitted to the electorate of a school district to obtain authorization for the levy of property taxes in excess of the specific and aggregate levy limitations may be in terms of the rate of millage to be authorized to be levied or it may be in terms of the specific amount of money authorized to be levied.2. Property taxes must be levied in specific amounts of money, even in situations where the levy is pursuant to authority granted by the electorate of the taxing district to exceed the specific and aggregate limitations, which authorization has been stated in terms of the rate of levy so authorized.Opinion of January 5, 1951, to the Prosecuting Attorney of Pierce County [[Opinion No. 49-51-416]]is hereby overruled.
The three mill levy authorized by law for public hospital districts is subject to the forty mill limitation contained in the Seventeenth Amendment of our state constitution.
The provision of chapter 11, Laws of 1950, Extraordinary Session forbidding an election on the same proposition for a tax levy in excess of the specific and aggregate limitations "oftener than once in such year" precludes the obtaining of the approval of the electorate of the same proposition submitted for the second time within the same fiscal tax year, but in a different calendar year.