(1) In order to engage in the logging of timber within "shorelines of the state" as that term is used in chapter 90.58 RCW, the Shorelines Management Act of 1971, a person will be required to obtain a permit under RCW 90.58.140 (2) under certain factual circumstances.
(2) The Shorelines Management Act of 1971 applies to the activities of the state department of natural resources on state‑owned lands under its administrative jurisdiction where such lands are within the "shorelines of the state."
If a vacancy occurs in one position of a House of Representatives district which encompasses two counties and part of a third county, the boards of county commissioners of the three counties, acting jointly pursuant to Wash. Const. Art. II, § 15 (Amendment 52), may not appoint one of their own members to fill such vacancy.
Although the privilege from arrest in Article II, § 16 of the Washington Constitution extends beyond the term of a legislative session, it relates to the possibility of civil arrest only and is not a privilege from arrest for the commission of a crime; therefore, Article II, § 16 does not preclude the arrest of a member of the Washington State Legislature for the commission of a traffic offense within the purview of RCW 46.61.010.
Neither RCW 66.28.010 nor RCW 66.28.020 prohibit a person who has a contract vendor's interest in a restaurant holding a retail liquor license in the state of Arizona from legally serving as a licensed agent of a wine wholesaler and importer in the state of Washington.
The certification by the governor of designated energy facilities under chapter 80.50 RCW will have the effect of permitting the construction and operation of the facilities thus certified at whatever location is specified therein even where the otherwise applicable provisions of a county, city or regional zoning code are to the contrary in view of the preemptive language of RCW 80.50.100, as amended by § 37, chapter 108, Laws of 1975-76, 2nd Ex. Sess.
(1) Neither the superintendent of public instruction nor the state board of education has the authority under any existing statute or constitutional provision to formulate and implement a state‑wide [[statewide]] affirmative or corrective action policy for disadvantaged groups such as women or racial minorities which would be binding on all local school districts in their employment of personnel; under the supervisory authority granted to him by Article III, § 23 of the state constitution, however, the state superintendent of public instruction may require local school districts, in connection with their employment of personnel, to formulate and implement their own affirmative action policies for such disadvantaged groups, subject to such constitutional standards as may be applicable to those kinds of programs. (2) Such a requirement may be enforced by a mandamus action against any noncomplying school districts. (3) The state superintendent of public instruction has the authority to enforce federal affirmative action programs by refusing to disburse federal funds to noncomplying school districts.
The department of Social and Health Services is not authorized to provide and pay for tax deferred annuities for those employees of the department eligible for such annuities pursuant to § 403(b) of the Internal Revenue Code; however, those employees may be covered by the state deferred compensation program authorized by RCW 41.04.250-41.04.260.
A statute providing that the state superintendent of public instruction shall be subordinate to the state board of education and be subject to its direction in matters pertaining to the public schools would be unconstitutional.
The legislature may not provide for the use of the principal assets of the permanent common school fund, scientific school permanent fund, university permanent fund, normal school permanent fund, agriculture college permanent fund, Millersylvania Park fund and C. E. P. & R. I. fund for capital outlay or current operations.
that the timber excise tax imposed by RCW 82.04.291 will expire on
December 31, 1978, under existing legislation, if the legislature were
to reimpose the tax during its next (1979) regular session, effective
January 1, 1979, such an enactment would be constitutionally valid;
moreover, this would be so even if the rate of the tax as reimposed were
to be different than the present rate; however, in order to strengthen
the defensibility of any such legislation it is recommended that it be
enacted into law and signed by the governor on or before March 1, 1979.