A college may increase the vacation leave of its employees without thereby increasing their "salaries" for purposes of interpreting salary increase limits contained in the 1993-95 state operating budget.
The Department of Agriculture may use funds from the fruit and vegetable account, created by RCW 15.17.240, to pay for the Department’s administrative overhead expenses incurred in the implementation and enforcement of RCW 15.17.
1. The maximum occupancy cost per square foot provision of subsection (8) of the capital budget authorization for the “Wheeler Block” development applies only to the “office building” component of the proposed project. 2. In calculating the occupancy cost per square foot on the “Wheeler Block” project, the calculation may be performed on both a square foot and a per employee basis, but it is not necessary to perform both calculations on the same structures. 3. The lease rate adjustment that is to be performed based on “level of service” should take into account differences in essential systems and general services that are typically provided to office tenants. 4. The total cost of the “Wheeler Block” facilities to be financed will effectively be limited by a guaranteed maximum price development agreement. 5. With respect to the Office of Financial Management (OFM) certification referred to in the budget authorization for the “Wheeler Block” project, the Legislature assumes that OFM will properly exercise its discretion in making the certification; the law does not permit the state Treasurer to reject the certification as “inaccurate.” 6. A properly drafted financing contract that complies with RCW 39.94 and which is accompanied by (1) a properly drafted Finance Committee resolution and (2) properly drafted transaction and offering documents will not create state indebtedness; the use of 63-20 financing would not change this result. 7. Facilities that are constructed under properly authorized and structured “63-20 financings” do not constitute “public works” under RCW 39.04.
Section 116(2) of the 2005-07 biennial operating budget sets certain amounts aside for corrective actions to clean up Hood Canal as described in a Conservation & Recovery Plan; the budget does not expressly require that these funds be “co-managed” as described in RCW 90.88, also enacted in 2005.