Municipal Research News

MRSC Publications › News › Municipal Research News - December 1997

Note: Some of the information on this archival Web page may no longer be current.

Resources for Local Government
December 1997

Articles

Congratulations...You Won!
Records Retention Schedule in Effect
State Holidays of 1998
The Cascade Center for Public Service Courses Announced
Property Tax Reform - Implementing Referendum 47 - the good, not so good, and ugly
Telecommunications and Right-of-Way Compensation
Heads Up
Publication Corner
Web News
Resource Sharing
New Ordinances

Archives

Municipal Research News is published quarterly by the Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington, 2601 4th Avenue, Suite 800, Seattle, WA 98101-1159. Your ideas and comments are appreciated. If you have news you would like to share or if you would like to write a short feature article, please contact us.

Editor: Connie Elliot
Desktop Designer: Holly Martin

Congratulations...You Won!
Municipal Research News
December 1997

The campaigning is over, the elections are over and . . . you won. The dust has settled, and you've just received your certificate of election. Soon you'll be sworn in and you're ready to get down to work. You have some clear ideas of things you want to accomplish, and things you want to see changed.

Maybe you're the new mayor, or maybe you were on the council and have just been elected to replace the mayor. Maybe this is your first run at an elected position, and you chose the county commission slot to shoot for. Maybe you were the incumbent, didn't have any real opposition, and were confirmed by the voters in the primary. Maybe nobody ran against you.

Or maybe . . . pick your own scenario. In any case, the election is now over and - you're it!

Welcome aboard. A city, town, or a county is a very complex organism. As governmental entities go, all are at the lower end of the financial food chain, while also being very close and most visible to the people. There are many things for you to be concerned about, to learn about, and to be able to inform your constituents about. Following are some random comments on a few of these things.

The Mayor. Like it or not, you're going to have to get along with her or him. If you don't, and you display strong feelings in public, especially at council meetings, those meetings are going to run very long. Do you really want your council meetings to become known as the Tuesday night fights? Whom would that really serve? That doesn't mean that you and the mayor should always agree. Even agreeing to disagree in a polite or sensitive manner is possible if you both work at it. And chances are if you do, the public will respect both of you for it. The mayor has one clear role. In all cases, it is to chair the council meetings. Depending on the organization and classification of your city, it may alsobe to serve as the ceremonial "chief of state"; or in mayor-council cities and towns it's to be the chief administrative officer. You need to become knowledgeable about the role of the mayor in your organization. That understanding will help both of you.

Those other Councilmembers! You may like most of them. Or maybe you don't. That is not the issue. The issue is - you have one vote, and each of them has a vote. You'll have to learn about consensus building. They won't always all agree with you. Your job will be to educate and convince them. And you'll have to do that with your constituents, too.

Those other Commissioners. They may be of a different political party from you. And you simply don't understand how they can often be so wrong! If you're the new county commissioner not in home rule counties, you'll soon find that the "art" of compromise and finding common ground are things that will make your new job possible. And despite the apparent differences in the ways you see the world or perceive your respective roles, you'll all get to know what objectives drive each other. When you do, hopefully the board of commissioners can begin to be a cohesive, policy-making body.

Those other elected Officials. If you're in a county without home rule, besides you and the other two commissioners, there are all those other elected people: the assessor, the auditor, the clerk, the coroner, the superior court and district court judges, the prosecuting attorney, the sheriff, and the treasurer. Depending on the size of the county, some of these positions may be combined. Nevertheless, there is still a bunch of other elected officials. Each of them is also elected and occupies a position called for in the state constitution or state statutes. (See RCW 36.16.030.) The complex organization resulting from so many people being elected can lead to competition and strife. Be prepared!

Taxes. You want them to be lower. Don't we all? However, chances are you'll have to get to know a lot about how they work in your city, town or county before you can just lower them. Taxes are just one revenue source that enables you to provide well-rounded operations and to meet citizen needs and desires. You'll need to know about all revenue sources available to your city or town or county. You'll learn that you need to look at the "big picture" of all sources of funds and all services before doing a lot of adjusting. Sometimes what might look like a small "tweak" in a limited area can have impacts on other parts of your operation. And neither you nor the citizens will like the result. You need to be a real student of taxes and all other financial matters. And the recent passage of Referendum 47 will definitely impact your thinking on this subject.

Streets and roads. That means potholes. You'll get to know about them, about how they need to be repaired, and how much it costs to repair them. As the newly-elected councilmember or commissioner, you may already be getting phone calls from citizens about them. Or . . . the state highway goes through your city or town, or through your district. During the campaign it was clear that a lot of people who live along the highway really want to have the speed limit decreased to slow the traffic. So now that you'll be on the council or commission, you'll just bring in an ordinance, get it adopted, and fix the problem. Right? Wrong! You don't have that authority. RCW 46.61.415 specifies how and within what limitations you can change speed limits. Talk with your city or townattorney, or to the prosecuting attorney, and your public works person before you offer to change a speed limit. It can be done, but it has to be done properly.

A Comparison:

Planning and land use. You want your city, town, or your county to do its best to be and remain a nice, livable place. How do you do that? For one thing, you don't want that new solid waste transfer station to locate right next to the nicest neighborhood in the area. Or you want nice commercial enterprises to be built in a sound development rather than just in strips along both sides of that new stretch of highway that's under construction. That's where planning and zoning come in. And those things can be very controversial. You'll probably find that after you're on the council or commission, you'll spend as much as a third of your official meeting time dealing with land use issues. Educate yourself about them. Learn what the state laws authorize and require, particularly the state's Growth Management Act (GMA). Talk with experienced councilmembers or commissioners in nearby cities, towns, or counties and learn about their good and bad experiences. And give some thought to how those examples could impact you if applied to your jurisdiction.

Intergovernmental relations. You might not even like the term. But in these days of scarce dollars for services, you may not have a choice. There are many examples of cities, towns, and counties that routinely do something in concert with another government, be it a special district, city, town, county, or whatever. Or it's done jointly with a private organization, all correctly documented and contracted. The result can be a better service for less money, or one that provides better service for the same amount. Those kinds of success stories reflect very positively on elected people. In some instances, federal and state mandates are approved by higher level legislative bodies that require you to do things in concert with others. In those cases you won't have any choice about being involved in intergovernmental relations. It's probably best if you can view the subject as a potential opportunity.

Appearance of fairness. This means that if something even appears to be not quite right, you'll hear about it! Washington has a strong law on this subject. It's known as "The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine" and is contained in Chapter 42.36 RCW. It applies only to local quasi-judicial land use actions. Briefly, it requires that you publicly disclose any personal interest you might have in a matter coming before you. Or if you have a real personal interest, because you are the owner of the property in question, you cannot vote on it. You shouldn't even be at the council or commission table or in the council or commission chamber when the matter is heard. It requires that you not prejudge issues that might be presented in a public hearing coming before you. This means you shouldn't go look at a situation or talk with anyone beforehand. You have to be impartial. Your city or town attorney or your prosecuting attorney should be anxious to have you understand all about it.

Ethics. Yes! And they're required by law in all cities, towns, and counties in Washington. Hopefully, your city or town attorney or your prosecuting attorney, or perhaps another of your city or county officials will talk with you about the subject. It's covered in Chapter 42.23 RCW, "Code of Ethics for Municipal Officer - Contract Interests." And in this case "municipal" means cities and counties. You need to get familiar with it.

Orientation. As a new (or old) councilmember or mayor, you will have the opportunity to go to one or more sessions designed to orient and train you for your new role. These are put on by the Association of Washington Cities (AWC). It's not a session designed to brainwash you with the way it's "always been done," or with the "good old boy" (or girl) network. It should help you to hit the ground running. It will be an opportunity for you to meet others from other cities and towns who are in the same boat as you. You'll also get to meet experienced councilmembers. If possible, you should attend one of these sessions. You'll find it very helpful. It's likely that the staff of the city you're about to serve will give you a tour of facilities and help familiarize you with how things have been done in the past. That doesn't mean that the staff is unwilling to listen to your ideas. It will be good to learn as much as you can so you have a background that will enable you at least to talk the same language. And knowing names and faces of those who work for the city or town is helpful. The county organizations (see below) also put on an orientation session for newly elected county commissioners. If you're one of them, you should be receiving an announcement if you haven't already received it.

Resources. If you're in a city or town, two major resources outside your own city hall are available to you, the Association of Washington Cities (AWC) and Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington (MRSC). AWC, in Olympia, is the lobbying and coordinating organization serving Washington cities. It holds many meetings of city officials at various places around the state each year. AWC keeps your city or town posted on what's happening for you and to you based on what's going on in the legislature and in some state departments. Every city in Washington is a member and pays dues for that membership. AWC's phone number is (360) 753-4137.

Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington (MRSC) in Seattle, is a nonprofit organization that houses a large specialized library of local government materials and 12 consultants and other staff to serve you. The organization has served cities for many years, and effective July 1, 1997, entered into a contract to serve counties also. They will "talk through" a question with you, or research your question and, in many cases, send you sample materials. MRSC services are delivered primarily by phone, FAX, E-mail, UPS, or mail. In essence your city, town, or county has already paid for this service. In addition, you may also access MRSC through its Web site at www.mrsc.org. The site contains links with many other sources of local government information. MRSC can be reached at (206) 625-1300 in the Seattle area, or at 1 (800) 933-6772.

Three major resources are available to you if you're in a county. They are the Washington State Association of Counties (WSAC), the Washington Association of County Officials (WACO), and, as mentioned above, Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington (MRSC). Both WSAC and WACO are in Olympia, and share the same building. WSAC is comprised of county commissioners, county councilmembers, and county executives. The phone number is (360) 753-1886. WACO is comprised of the other elected county officials (not commissioners or members of county councils). WACO's phone number is (360) 753-7319. Both organizations have staff that canassist with your questions. Both also lobby the state legislature for county issues.

Now it's time to go to it. Hopefully, you won't regret that you ran for the council or commission seat you're about to assume. And hopefully, you'll like doing your bit for the city, town, or for the county, where you live. You don't have to become an instant expert in everything. You owe it to yourself to become educated. And you owe it to the people who elected you to be able to teach them that being an elected official isn't always easy, and that many issues are complex. You need the necessary background information to make knowledgeable and wise decisions.

Enjoy!

Ron Bartels, Public Policy and Management Consultant

Reminder... to all city and town clerks, please fill out the Directory of Washington City & Town Officials 1998-99 Confirmation Form that was mailed to every city and town in Washington. We need these forms returned to MRSC no later than January 2, 1998 (council-manager cities and towns have until January 30 to complete their forms).

If you have any questions, please contact Holly Martin at 1-800-933-6772 or (206) 625-1300.

New Records Retention Schedule in Effect

The Local Records Committee has recently approved and issued a revised Local Government General Records Retention Schedule & Records Management Manual that became effective in September 1997. New sections have been added for electronic mail and other types of records not previously addressed and other sections have been significantly revised and expanded.

The new schedule has changed the retention period for audio tapes, including audio tape recordings used to prepare official minutes. Audio tapes must now be retained for six years, or possibly one year if a full verbatim transcription is made of the proceeding. This is a significant change from the former option of retaining tapes for 90 days after approval of the official minutes. The Local Records Committee concluded that the retention period for audio tapes should be the standard six-year period as these records are often the best source documentation of local government action. In addition, the life span and low cost of magnetic tape now makes it practical to retain them for a longer period.

Cities, towns and counties need to review their records retention schedules and practices for audio tapes and other records retention periods that may have changed.

State Holidays for 1998

The following are Washington's legal holidays for 1998. Cities, towns, and counties do not have to follow this holiday schedule. The MRSC office will be closed these days.

New Year's Day

Martin-Luther King's Birthday

Presidents' Day

Memorial Day

Independence Day

Labor Day

Veterans' Day

Thanksgiving Day

Day After Thanksgiving Day

Christmas Day

Floating Holiday

The Cascade Center for Public Service Courses Announced

The Cascade Center for Public Service promotes innovative and effective leadership in public service by providing leaders in public and nonprofit agencies with opportunities to strengthen their management skills and judgment. If you have questions or would like to receive brochures and/or registration material, please call (206) 685-0523 or access Web site at http://www.cascadecourses.org/.

Cascade Management Series - January 26 - October 23, 1998. This set of six courses presents an integrated approach to management in public and nonprofit organizations by developing key skills and improving leadership capacity. (Many managers take two to three years to complete the course.) The nonresidential courses are held at the University of Washington. Regular tuition is $1,295 per course with a discounted tuition of $995 for registrations received by January 31, 1998.

Cascade Public Executive Program - May 11-22, 1998. This intensive, residential program presents current and practical information on major aspects of public and nonprofit leadership. Program fee - $4,295; discounted fee of $3,995 for applications received by January 31, 1998. A limited number of partial scholarships are available.

Property Tax Reform
Implementing Referendum 47 - the good, not so good, and ugly

Kitsap County Assessor Carol Belas explains

Now that we've got it, what do we do with it? "It" refers to property tax reform recently approved by more than 60 percent of Washington's voters. As an assessor, I had been asking myself that question long before election day. We may be facing the three-pronged horns of a dilemma: the good, the not so good, and the ugly.

The Good

The best and easiest part of Referendum 47 reduces the state school levy by 4.7187 percent; thus continuing a reduction approved by the Legislature for tax years 1996 and 1997. However, there is a difference with Referendum 47. The two previous reductions did not affect potential future years' levies; after the 1996 reduction, the tax base used to calculate 1997's levy was the amount the levy would have been without the reduction. Under 47, the 1998 levy will be reduced by 4.7 percent and that reduced levy will be the base for calculating the 1999 levy.

The mechanics of this process occur at the Department of Revenue (DOR). Each assessor will receive a letter from DOR with the levy rate for his or her county. Taxing jurisdictions can relax and do nothing on this one. All taxpayers may expect a nominal reduction in their property tax bill next year. This is good.

The Not So Good

Limiting the 106 percent lid is not quite as simple. The premise is easy enough. If a taxing district has a population under 10,000, they may levy the usual 6 percent revenue increase without "official" justification. If a taxing district has a population greater than 10,000, they must establish a "substantial need" by a supermajority of their council or two out of three commissioners to justify raising their revenue take above the IPD (1.9 percent for 1998) to a maximum of 6 percent. (IPD is the implicit price deflator for personal consumption - a measure of the percentage change in inflation.)

The population requirement is the first "not so good" part of 47. How many counties have population counts by taxing district (cities being the exception)? How can there ever be an accurate population count when the census happens once every ten years? Guesstimates will be the rule. Taxing districts must decide which scenario applies to them with no verification possible.

The sEcond problem is political. Considering the strong message from voters, taxing district electeds are under a great deal of pressure to give taxpayers a reduction. Some districts obviously have no problem establishing a valid need; however, it is difficult to fly in the face of the vote tally and levy the full 6 percent increase. County government officials will especially find this a difficult decision given their official support of SB5835 (which became Referendum 47) during the legislative session via Washington State Association of Counties (WSAC). Philosophically and politically, giving a tax break is a great idea. Nevertheless, when budget directors start cranking out bottom line figures, there are bound to be cries of anguish among department heads who must provide mandated taxpayer services with less money.

The "good" part of this is that true tax reduction will be realized by each and every taxpayer - if taxing jurisdictions align their levy with the IPD.

The Ugly

Referendum 47's greatest challenge will be implementing a new method of valuing property called value averaging. Two serious questions arise: (1) Given the constitutional requirement of uniformity, how can assessors value some properties at market value and some not? and (2) Will taxpayer expectations of property tax reduction be realized by this method of valuation?

Value averaging will not lower property values; rather, it will slow the increase during periods of inflation. Value increases above 15 percent will be averaged over a four year period. Theoretically this sounds great, but the result will not be all that thrilling for taxpayers whose property value does not increase 15 percent. As an example, Bainbridge Island in Kitsap County experienced a period of inflation in 1991 - a 40 percent increase in value. If Referendum 47 had been in effect at that time, all other parts of the County would have paid taxes on full market value of their property while Bainbridge Island residents would not. The bottom line is when one person receives tax relief, someone else pays for that relief. This is called "tax shift."

In addition, a tax shift will be felt between counties in adjustments to the state levy rates. For example, Kitsap County's overall value increase in 1992 was about 24 percent. Under Referendum 47, Kitsap County taxpayers would not pay taxes on 100 percent of market value, while taxpayers in counties with smaller increases would pay on full market value.

It's difficult to predict the impact on individual tax bills for this portion of Referendum 47, but it is likely that taxpayer expectations of lower tax bills will fall short of being realized. Department of Revenue statistics show that value averaging will actually negate part of the reductions created by the reduction in the state levy and the 106 percent levy option, as previously explained. They can no longer routinely increase their levy by 6 percent. The International Association of Assessing Officers summarizes the problem, "Limits that constrain changes in assessed or appraised value of property may appear to provide control, but actually distort the distribution of the property tax, destroying property tax equity and increasing public confusion and administrative complexity."

Speaking of confusion, imagine going to your county assessor's office and asking for an explanation of how your property was valued. The conversation will go something like this: "First we looked at last year's value. Then we determined the market value increase. If that increase was less than 15 percent, your assessed value is full market value. If it was more than 15 percent but less than 60 percent, assessed value will increase by 15 percent each year until it catches up to market value. If it increased by more than 60 percent, we take last year's value and increase it by 25 percent of the market increase," etc. We can no longer say, "The value is determined by market analysis - the price a willing buyer would pay to a willing seller." This, I fear, will not engender a user-friendly taxation process.

Oh, by the way, did I mention the cost? Reprogramming to implement the value averaging portion of Referendum 47 will not come cheap. Check with your county assessor on this. Counties with the least sophisticated computer system may say, "No problem." Other higher tech counties will face substantial reprogramming costs.

There we have it - the good, the not so good, and the ugly. How will you play the hand you are dealt?

Telecommunications and Right-of-Way Compensation

Much debate and confusion surround the issue of compensation that cities, towns, and counties can or should receive from telecommunications companies for the use of the rights-of-way. There are ambiguities in the statutes, at least partially due to the advances in technology that the legislature has not yet addressed. For instance, should the transmission of voice data be treated or taxed any differently than the transmission of other data, particularly now that technology is pushing all of that commerce into digital format? This issue will be addressed in the upcoming legislative session. Stay tuned. The stakes are high and the telecommunications companies are making a strong push for legislation that favors their interests. The Association of Washington Cities is following this issue closely. Contact Victoria Lincoln at AWC for an update regarding legislative activity.

For telecommunications information such as sample ordinances, leases, franchise agreements, FCC documents, and articles etc., visit MRSC's telecommunications Web page at http://www.mrsc.org/subjects/telecomm/tcapage.htm.

Heads-Up
Emerging Information for Local Government

This column is designed to present information about interesting new trends and developments affecting local governments.

Video E-Mail

A small camera may soon sit on your desktop, sending and receiving video e-mail. The desktop camera is designed to send video messages to any computer user with e-mail access. The device, currently available from one manufacturer, can be used for real time audio and video telEconferencing and for adding visuals to chat rooms.

Don’t Run Afoul of the Software Police

The software industry is cracking down on the use of illegal software that is running on computers everywhere, often unintentionally. The most common problem is that organizations buy fewer licenses than they eventually need, losing track when more people start using a program. Suddenly, 40 people are using 20 licenses - a violation of licensing agreements.

Governments can be sued for violation of copyright laws, and it can be expensive. The Ohio State Lottery Commission agreed to a "cooperative audit" rather than be sued by the Software Publishers Association, which polices licensing requirements for the software industry. It cost them $195,000 in penalties for using pirated software and buying new software to replace it. Philadelphia and several towns in Texas and Louisiana have been caught using illegal software.

Most violations are reported by disgruntled employees. Unless all of your employees are perfectly happy with the way your city or county is run, pay close attention to this law.

'Cyber-democracy'

The Metropolitan King County Council has become one of the first governments in the country to take official public testimony over the Web. The "electronic testimony" is delivered from an e-mail form on the County Council's Web site. The same rules applying to public testimony given at a public hearing pertain to "electronic testimony": citizens must give their name and address and are asked to limit their remarks to 300 words or less. Testimony is routed daily to the 13 councilmembers and becomes part of the official record of the deliberation on a subject.

Surcharge for Sprawl

One California city, Lancaster (population 125,000) imposes a distance surcharge for a whole variety of city services if they have to be provided outside the designated city center. The surcharges are levied for 20 years and increase with distance. Since this surcharge went into effect in 1992, the population of Lancaster increased by 16%, yet little of this growth has gone outside the urban core. It is now more cost effective for developers to build on land near the urban core rather than cheaper land on the urban fringe.

Honoring the Parking Meter

East St. Louis dismantled its two person parking enforcement division this summer due to fiscal troubles - a budget shortfall of $2 million. Salaries of the meter reader and repair person were running $20,000 more than the revenues being brought in by the meters. A funny thing happened after the city quit enforcing the meters. People kept feeding them. Word has gotten out that parking in East St. Louis is on the honor system. City officials plan to evaluate this de facto approach for three months before deciding whether to revert back to ticketing, privatizing parking enforcement, or making parking free to boost downtown business. (Summarized from October 1997 Governing.)

Publication Corner

They're here... the Open Public Meetings Act and Utility Billing & Collection Issues have recently arrived on the shelves at MRSC. These publications may be ordered by contacting our office.

Web News

As more small cities obtain access to the Internet, and with the introduction of counties to the MRSC program, usage of the MRSC Web site continues to grow rapidly. As of October, we were logging more than 20,000 users each month. Thank you for all of the positive feedback. We are interested in your suggestions on types of information you would like to see us add to the site.

Receive E-mail Notification of Web Updates

You may now receive a monthly E-mail notifying you of selected updates to MRSC's Web site by subscribing to the mrscweb mailing list (listserv). From the home page of the MRSC site, click on "Monthly Updates by E-mail" in the left-hand column, and type: subscribe mrscweb your name in the body of the message, and press "send" (leave the subject line blank). You may have your name removed from the list at any time by following the directions in the welcome message you will receive after subscribing.

New Topics Added

We have recently added or updated pages on forest practices, welfare reform, FLSA, annexation agreements, biennial budgeting, civil service and adult entertainment. You may view or download the full text of two new publications on open public meetings and utility billing. You may also search new codes, including the Port Angeles Municipal Code and the city of Bellevue Policy Library. The Bellevue Policy Library includes the following plans: comprehensive, parks and open space, pedestrian and bicycle, water, and drainage. In the coming months, watch for new pages describing the structure of county government in Washington State, and the roles and responsibilities of county officials.

Search Tips

You may search the MRSC Web site in two ways. The Search button that appears at the top and bottom of each page allows you to enter a keyword or phrase to search all documents on the site except for the separate legal databases (RCW, WAC and municipal codes). To search these databases, you will see a link to "Searchable Databases - RCW, WAC, Municipal Codes" in the left-hand column of the home page. Search by keyword, by using the table of contents, or if you are looking for a particular title, chapter or section, use search strings of the following pattern:

Resource Sharing
Information Partnership Program

One of the benefits in gathering many sample policies from different cities on a particular topic, is that it enables the MRSC library to package them together and create a bound compilation. The library creates two to three compilations a month on a variety of topics. Last month we put together compilations on house numbering ordinances, juvenile curfews, and skate parks. The materials recently gathered by the Information Partnership Program will enable us to put together a fine compilation of travel reimbursement policies. Thanks again for your helpful contributions!

The Information Partnership Program seeks current materials from the cities, towns, and counties of Washington. The materials received provide answers and support to the challenges faced by municipalities every day. You may order the materials below by contacting the MRSC library at 1-800-933-6772 or (206) 625-1300, fax (206) 625-1220, or e-mail us at mrsc@mrsc.org. Due to space limitations, the list below is not complete. A comprehensive list of Information Partnership Program materials received may be requested from the library or viewed on our web site at www.mrsc.org/library/rshare.htm.

We encourage you to make this list available to those departments who would benefit from its contents.

Hazardous Material Emergency Response Agreements

Bellevue & Kirkland - Joint powers agreement hazardous materials response unit and teams [11 p.]; Eastside hazardous materials team operational guidelines 1997, [20 p.]. (PS 1.4400); Omak - Public works emergency response mutual aid agreement, 1997, [4 p.]. (PS 1.2000); Port Angeles - Public works emergency response mutual aid agreement for signatory agencies in the state of Washington 1997, [6 p.]. (PS 1.2000); Poulsbo - Mutual aid agreement between Bangor Navel Submarine Base, Kitsap County Fire Protection District No. 18, and Poulsbo Fire Department, 1996, [8 p.]. (PS 1.2000); Spokane - Hazardous waste collection, handling, and disposal agreements between city of Spokane & Pend Orielle County [3 p.] (PS 1.4400); Mutual aid agreement between Spokane Fire Dept. and Fairchild Air Force Base [4 p.] (PS 3.7200); Tumwater - Mutual aid agreement for hazardous material response, 1988, [9 p.]. (PS 1.4400).

Meals/lodging/travel Reimbursement Policies

Anacortes, 1993, [5 p.]; Bellevue, 1997, [22 p.]; Des Moines, 1995, [3 p.]; Dayton, n.d., [1 p.]; East Wenatchee, 1991, [7 p.]; Ellensburg, n.d., [2 p.]; Federal Way, n.d., [1 p.]; Grand Coulee, n.d.,[1 p.]; Kirkland, 1993, [1 p.]; Leavenworth, 1992, [3 p.]; Monroe, 1995, [5 p.]; Port Angeles, 1997, [17 p.]; Poulsbo, 1997, [8 p.]; Shelton, 1997, [3 p.]; Spokane, 1997, [11 p.]; Soap Lake, 1997, [12 p.]; Stanwood, 1997, [2 p.]; Tumwater, 1995, [6 p.]; Vancouver, 1995, [11 p.]; Winthrop, n.d., [2 p.]; Yakima, 1996, [6 p.]

Parks and Recreation Commission Rules and Procedures

Bellingham, 1983, [2 p.]; Ellensburg, n.d. [2 p.]; Federal Way, 1991,[4 p.]; Monroe, 1997, [4 p.]; Omak, 1997 [2 p.]; Port Angeles, n.d.[3 p.]; Soap Lake, 1997 [2 p.]; Spokane, n.d. [18 p.]; Tumwater, 1996 [2 p.]; Yakima, 1994 [2 p.]

Solid Waste / Garbage Hauling Contracts

Anacortes-Agreement for collection & disposal of yard waste between the city of Anacortes and Waste Management-Northwest [5 p.], 1994. (UR 3.8400); Contract for residential recycling services between the city of Anacortes and Waste Management-Northwest [13 p.], 1997. (UR 3.8200); Bellevue-Solid waste, recyclables, and yard waste collection agreement between the city of Bellevue and Rabanco Companies [61 p. + addendums], 1994. (UR 3.2100 B44 S65 1994); Camas- Agreement between city of Camas and Evergreen Waste Systems, Inc., an Oregon corporation, for collection, transportation and disposal of recyclables, with 2 addendums [18 p.], 1995. (UR 3.8200); Des Moines-Exclusive contract for the collection of solid waste [22 p.],1997. (UR 3.2100); Short form contract for material recycling [6 p.], 1997. (UR 3.8200); Special collection events [5 p.], 1997. (PR 7.2000); East Wenatchee-Contract between East Wenatchee and Washington Waste Hauling and Recycling for solid waste and recycling management services [17 p.],1997. (UR 3.2100); Ellensburg-Ordinance No. 3470 approving and issuing a 15-year permit for garbage disposal and collection to Bayside Waste Hauling and Transfer, Inc. [1 p.], 1985. (UR 3.2100); Federal Way- Agreement for purchasing agent for recycling equipment and materials [12 p.], 1997. (UR 3.8200); Grand Coulee-Landfill/disposal agreement with Sunrise Disposal, Inc. [5 p.], 1997. (UR 3.2100);

Kirkland-Solid waste removal contract agreement with Washington Waste Hauling and Recycling, Inc. [37 p.], 1997. (UR 3.2100); Business recycling program [6 p.], 1997. (UR 3.8500); Special collection events [5 p.], 1997. (PR 7.2000); Omak-Interlocal agreement for Okanogan County solid waste management [4 p.], 1991; Agreement between Omak and Sunrise Disposal, Inc. to collect and dispose of garbage and refuse [4 p.], 1996. (UR 3.2100); Port Angeles-Project manual, contract, bid documents for collection of recyclables [36 p.], 1994. (UR 3.8200); Poulsbo-Agreement for provision of curbside recycling services by Bainbridge Disposal, Inc. [11 p.], 1992. (UR 3.8200); Stanwood-Stanwood Resolution 91-8 granting a license to Stanwood-Camino Disposal Inc. to provide solid waste service for the city [2 p.], 1991; Interlocal agreement for solid waste management between Stanwood and Snohomish County [10 p.], 1990. (UR 3.2100); Vancouver-Comprehensive garbage collection contract between the city of Vancouver and Browning-Ferris Industries of Washington, Inc. [1 vol], 1997. (UR 3.2100 V35 C65 1997); Multifamily recyclables collection contract by and between the city of Vancouver and Evergreen Waste Systems [45 p.], 1996, (UR 3.8200 V35 M75 1996).

Stormwater Management Plans

Comprehensive stormwater management plan / HDR Engineering [1 vol.],Yakima, 1993 (US 5.3000 Y33 C65 1993)

Erica Zwick, Coordinator
Information Partnership Program

Ask MRSC

This column contains summaries of recent inquiries answered by MRSC consultants.

General obligation bonds - May a city or county issue a voter-approved general obligation bond topay for a fire truck?

No. Voter-approved bonds may only be issued "for capital purposes, which shall not include the replacement of equipment . . . " RCW 84.52.056.

Holiday schedule - Must cities and counties follow the state holiday schedule set out in RCW 1.16.050?

No. The state has adopted an official holiday schedule by state statute. However, that law specifically provides that other political subdivisions, such as cities and counties, may establish by local policy the holiday schedule they wish to observe. Many cities and counties do follow the state holiday schedule, but are not required to do so. This is a decision for the local legislative body to make.

Oath of office - Does state law mandate a particular oath of office be used to swear in newly-elected officials?

No state statute sets out the oath of office for newly-elected officials. There are several variations used, although most are similar to the one set out below:

I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the State of Washington, and all local ordinances, and that I will faithfully and impartially perform and discharge the duties of the office of _____, according to law and the best of my ability.

Official newspaper - May a newspaper that is only published once a month be selected as the official newspaper for a city or town?

No. To be selected as the official newspaper for a municipality, the newspaper must constitute a legal newspaper. The term "legal newspaper" is defined in RCW 65.16.020 and must meet the following criteria: be published regularly, at least once a week; be in the English language; be a newspaper of general circulation in the city or town; have been published for at least six months prior to the time of selection; be compiled either in whole or in part in an office maintained at the place of publication; must contain news of general interest rather than just of interest to a particular group or organization; and must have a sEcond class mailing permit.

Public works performance bonds - Is there a prohibition on one municipal corporation requiring a performance bond from another municipal corporation for a public works project?

Yes. RCW 35A.21.250 (for code cities), RCW 35.21.470 (for noncode cities), and RCW 36.32.590 (for counties) prohibit cities and counties from requiring from another unit of local government or from a state agency a performance bond as a condition of issuing a permit for a "building construction project." A "building construction project" includes, in addition to its usual meaning, "associated landscaping, street alteration, pedestrian or vehicular access alteration, or other amenities or alterations necessarily associated with the project."

Short subdivision -If a county or city defines short plats to include land divided into up to nine lots, are all short plats, including those creating more than four lots, exempt from SEPA review?

Yes. Short subdivisions or short plats, except those involving lands covered by water, are categorically exempt from SEPA review under WAC 197-11-800(6)(a). The categorical exemption for short plats is not limited to short plats involving four lots or less. The exemption would include short plats as defined by the county or city.

Small claims court - What statute provides that cities and counties can sue and be sued in small claims court?

For code cities the statute is RCW 35A.11.010, which provides that each code city "may sue and be sued in all courts and proceedings . . . " For other cities and towns the relevant statute is RCW 35.21.010, but the statute is worded more generally. The statute applicable to counties is RCW 36.01.060.

Tuition payment for employee - May a city or county pay the tuition for a work-related course that an employee is taking and deduct the amount of the tuition from his pay check?

No. Although the employee would benefit by using before tax dollars to pay for his course, there is nothing in the IRS code that permits this, whether the course is work-related or not. A city or county may, however, after establishing policies, pay for the tuition for undergraduate courses as permitted by section 127 (Employer Provided Educational Assistance) of the IRS code. This tax-free fringe benefit was extended until May 31, 2000, when President Clinton signed the Taxpayer Relief Act on August 5, 1997. Note that the extension does not apply to graduate courses. Therefore, if an employer pays for an employee's graduate tuition, the employee must pay income tax on that amount.

Zoning for wireless communications - May a city or county enact a zoning regulation that prohibits wireless telecommunications antennas from being placed in residential zones?

If there are adequate nearby commercial or industrial zoned areas where wireless telecommunications facilities are permitted to be placed, and if placement of antennas in these non-residential zones would enable telecommunications providers to install a system that provides adequate service to the entire jurisdiction, then prohibiting placement in residential zones would not violate the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996. Each jurisdiction will need to assess their particular zoning configuration and topography. Expert technical assistance may be needed for a jurisdiction to evaluate whether wireless facilities will need to be permitted in all zones of the city.

New Ordinances

Finance

Bainbridge Island Ordinance No. 97-29 authorizes the use of a collection agency to collect fundsowed to the city and a fee for the use of collection agency services, passed 9-97. (F 1.1030)

Newcastle Ordinance No. 97-140 establishes policies and procedures for use of credit cards, passed 5-97 (F 1.1150)

Port Angeles Ordinance No. 2698 applies the monthly Medic I charge to licensed care sleeping room units, passed 10-97. (H 2.1500)

Personnel - Leaves

Lakewood Ordinance No. 141 establishes a bereavement leave policy, passed 10-97. (PE 6.8000)

Othello Ordinance No. 1000 creates a shared leave program, passed 9-97. (PE 6.8100)

Planning

DuPont Ordinance No. 97-559 relates to documentation required by the city for the city's geographic information system, passed 2-97 (PL 2.1110)

Leavenworth Ordinance No.1053 authorizes coffee roasting operations in the tourist commercial district, passed 8-97. (PL 5.2400)

Puyallup Ordinance No. 2504 establishes an agriculture overlay zone and protects the right to engage in agricultural activities, passed 1-97. (PL 5.2300)

Public Safety

>Auburn Ordinance No. 4881 adopts a juvenile curfew and parental responsibility ordinance; establishes a new ch. 9.50 of the city code, passed 10-97. (PS 7.4271)

Marysville Ordinance No. 2156 makes unlawful intentional aggressive begging and intentional obstruction of pedestrian or vehicular traffic, passed 11-97. (PS 7.4370)

Special Events

Newcastle Ordinance No. 97-141 provides that "Any fees established in other city ordinances shall be waived in part or in full by the City Manager for city sponsored events," passed 6-97. (S 5.0500)

Duvall Ordinance No. 849 requires events sponsored in whole or in part by the city of Duvall to obtain special event permits and allows the city to waive permit fees for events sponsored in whole or in part by the city of Duvall, passed 7-97. (S 5.0500)

Telecommunications

Cheney Ordinance No. R-7 adopts a new chapter relating to Wireless Communications Facilities, passed 4-97. (PL 8.3725)

Clyde Hill Ordinance No. 770 relates to wireless communications facility siting; permitting and leasing on property within the town; cancels the existing moratorium, passed 9-97. (PL 8.3725)

Gig Harbor Ordinance No. 771 establishes siting standards for amateur radio antennae, satellite dish antennae, television and radio broadcast towers and telecommunication facilities regulated under the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, passed 10-97. (PL 8.3725)

Kennewick Ordinance No. 3728 establishes regulations for the siting of the communications facilities; amends provisions, passed 10-97. (PL 8.3725)

Marysville Ordinance No. 2145 provides standards for the siting of wireless communication transmission facilities to licensed commercial mobile services and commercial common carrier wireless exchange access services, passed 9-97. (PL 8.3725)

Pierce County Ordinance No. 97-75 adopts interim wireless telecommunications facility siting regulations to restrict the proliferation of wireless telecommunications facility sites in Pierce County until comprehensive regulations can be developed, passed 10-97. (PL 8.3725)

Puyallup Ordinance No. 2507 adds new chapter to the zoning code, Ch. 20.59 - Wireless Communications, passed 3-97. (PL 8.3725)

SeaTac Ordinance No. 97-1013 establishes the process and standards for siting of commercial wireless telecommunications facilities, passed 8-97. (PL 8.3725)

Wishing you and yours a joyous holiday season!

Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington
2601 Fourth Ave, Ste 800
Seattle, WA 98121-1280
TEL (206) 625-1300 - FAX (206) 625-1220