Washington State

Office of the Attorney General

Attorney General

Bob Ferguson

AGLO 1972 NO. 1 >

By letter previously acknowledged you have requested an opinion of this office on several questions regarding the legal authority of the State of Washington to carry out an implementation plan to be submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pursuant to Sections 107 and 110 of the Federal Clean Air Act. 

AGLO 1971 NO. 1 >

This is written in response to your recent letter requesting that we review and comment upon your tentative responses to certain questions relating to a student dress policy covering students attending schools in the Pasco School District, which have been submitted to your office by the superintendent of that district.  This policy statement, entitled "Good Grooming Policy," reads as follows:

AGLO 1970 NO. 1 >

This is written in response to your recent request for our opinion on a question pertaining to the relationship between two statutes which were passed by the 1969 legislature; namely, chapters 188 and 234, Laws of 1969, Ex. Sess.  We paraphrase the issue raised by your request as follows:

AGLO 1972 NO. 2 >

19We are in receipt of your letter requesting our opinion on the following question:  "In view of RCW 36.34.330, is a county forbidden by RCW 36.87.130 to negotiate an exchange of properties, involving the vacation of a county road, where the exchange would enable the county to acquire substantially similar property within the same plat and which also abuts upon the same body of salt or fresh water, where the purpose is to enable the county to retain equivalent public access for park, viewpoint, recreational, educational or other public purposes while allowing a re‑plat of the property involved."

AGLO 1971 NO. 2 >

By letter previously acknowledged, you have requested an opinion of this office on a question which we have divided and paraphrased as follows:

AGLO 1970 NO. 2 >

By letter previously acknowledged, you requested our opinion as to whether the present provisions of RCW 46.61.470 ‑ commonly known as the "speed trap" law ‑ preclude the admission in court of evidence as to the speed of a motor vehicle which is obtained through the use of a certain electronic computer device known as Vascar.

AGLO 1970 NO. 3 >

Responding to your letter dated December 31, 1969, we would refer you to the decision of the Washington Supreme Court in State ex rel. Evans v. Brotherhood, Etc., 41 Wn.2d 133,247 P.2d 787 (1952), which was cited in our earlier letter to you of December 24, 1969.

AGLO 1972 NO. 3 >

This is written in response to your recent letter requesting our opinion on the following question: "'Is it the duty of the Prosecuting Attorney to represent the County Disability Boards as authorized in RCW 41.26.110?'"

AGLO 1971 NO. 3 >

We acknowledge receipt of your recent letter requesting our opinion as to the ability of the incumbent justice of the peace for Columbia county to continue in office after having attained the age of 75, in view of the provisions of § 1, chapter 6, Laws of 1969, Ex. Sess.

AGLO 1970 NO. 4 >

By letter dated January 12, 1970, you requested the opinion of this office as to the "constitutionality and/or legality" of the recent decision of the director of the department of public assistance to implement a plan of program changes with respect to the expenditure of funds appropriated to the department of public assistance for the 1969-71 biennium, as more fully set forth in a document headed "Appropriation Balancing Program," referred to in your letter.