RCW 42.17.030-42.17.120 and RCW 42.17.240 are inapplicable to candidates seeking election to United States Senate or House of Representatives because of the federal preemption contained in Public Law 93-443.
State agency lobbying under Initiative No. 276; exception of governor from reporting under § 19 (3); contents of reports required by other state offices.
(1) If the welcome service requests the name of individuals who are identified as new to the area on public records, and receives such names in list form, it is requesting a list of individuals for a commercial purpose under RCW 42.17.260(5) with the consequence that a public agency without specific authority by law to provide the list is precluded from doing so by that section. (2) The answer to the first question is not modified in any way by the conclusions that (a) the agency would probably be required to make the same information available to raw (nonlist) ‑ form‑-of AGLO 1973 § 113 [[to George Sellar, State Senator on December 12, 1973, an Informal Opinion, AIR-73613]], and (b) the most economical, practical, and indeed perhaps only way to make the information available is in list form.
Senate Bill No. 2697, currently pending before the legislature, does constitute a proposed amendment to Initiative No. 276 so as to cause this bill to be subject to the restriction of Article II, § 41 (Amendment 26) of the state Constitution that no law approved by a majority of the electors voting thereon shall be subject to amendment during the first two years following its enactment except by a vote of two-thirds of all of the members elected to each house of the legislature.
Lawfulness of the expenditure of funds or use of facilities by a community college for the purpose of conducting a campaign for the support of or opposition to a political campaign or issue; legal status of certain political science course in practical politics as offered by North Seattle Community College; use by students of work product of such course; constitutional ability of the legislature to regulate or prohibit the conduct of a given course of study by a community college.
Although it remains unclear that RCW 42.17.240 is now unenforceable with respect to candidates seeking election to the United States Senate or House of Representatives, in view of the legal opinion of federal counsel on this question the attorney general will, if requested, present the matter before the courts for adjudication; to the foregoing extent only, AGLO 1976 No. 27 [[to Graham E. Johnson, Administrator, Public Disclosure Commission on April 5, 1976 an Informal Opinion, AIR-76527]]is withdrawn.
(1) The provisions of Initiative No. 276 which require candidates for public office to make reports of their financial interests and of their campaign contributions and expenditures are applicable to election campaigns for the various elective offices of the city of Seattle even though certain of these matters are also currently regulated by an ordinance of that city. (2) The existing Seattle city ordinance relating to campaign financing, unless it is in conflict with Initiative No. 276 in some respect, must be deemed still to be of full force and effect ‑ along with the initiative ‑ insofar as any election campaigns which are regulated by its provisions are concerned.
Read in the light of Initiative No. 276, RCW 66.16.090 does not now prohibit the liquor control board or its employees from disclosing the identity of, or permitting examination of its records regarding liquor sales to, purchasers of liquor for resale by the drink under RCW 66.24.420-66.24.450; the contents of those records may properly be disclosed to the department of revenue in response to an administrative subpoena issued pursuant to RCW 82.32.110 and such action will not be violative of the protective provisions of RCW 42.17.260.
The members of a citizens advisory committee will only be required to register and report as lobbyists under Initiative No. 276 if (1) their activities are such as to constitute "lobbying" as defined in RCW 42.17.020(16), and (2) they are compensated in connection with those activities in a manner other than as employees of the legislature.
(1) If a state legislator receives compensation for preparing, supporting or opposing particular legislation he is required to report that compensation under RCW 42.17.240(1)(e). (2) The person making the payments thus referred to is required to report those payments as a lobbyist under RCW 42.17.170(2)(a). (3) Funds received by a legislative candidate during his electoral campaign are to be reported as contributions under RCW 42.17.08-42.17.090 where paid with the understanding that the funds are to "cover" the candidate's time spent as such.