CERTIFICATION OF ENROLLMENT

HOUSE BILL 1394

57th Legislature

2001 Regular Legislative Session

Passed by the House April 18, 2001

Yeas 92 Nays 0

Speaker of the House of Representatives

Speaker of the House of Representatives

Passed by the Senate April 12, 2001

Yeas 46 Nays 0

CERTIFICATE

We, Timothy A. Martin and Cynthia Zehnder, Co-Chief Clerks of the House of Representatives of the State of Washington, do hereby certify that the attached is HOUSE BILL 1394 as passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate on the dates hereon set forth.

Chief Clerk

President of the Senate

Approved

FILED

Governor of the State of Washington

Secretary of State

State of Washington

AN ACT Relating to clarifying the use of county road funds in salmon recovery projects; amending RCW 36.79.140 and 36.82.070; and creating a new section.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. The legislature recognizes that projects that remove impediments to fish passage can greatly increase access to spawning and rearing habitat for depressed, threatened, and endangered fish stocks. Although counties are authorized to use county road funds to replace culverts and other barriers to fish passage, and may conduct streambed and stream bank restoration and stabilization work in conjunction with removal of these fish barriers, counties are reluctant to spend county road funds beyond the county right-of-way because it is unclear whether the use of road funds for this purpose is authorized. The purpose of this act is to clarify that streambed and stream bank restoration and stabilization activities conducted in conjunction with removal of existing barriers to fish passage within county rights-of-way constitute a county road purpose even if this work extends beyond the county right-of-way. The legislature intends this act to be permissive legislation. Nothing in this act is intended to create or impose a legal duty upon counties for salmon recovery work beyond the county right-of-way.

Sec. 2. RCW 36.79.140 and 1997 c 81 s 6 are each amended to read as follows:

At the time the board reviews the six-year program of each county each even-numbered year, it shall consider and shall approve for inclusion in its recommended budget, as required by RCW 36.79.130, the portion of the rural arterial construction program scheduled to be performed during the biennial period beginning the following July 1st. Subject to the appropriations actually approved by the legislature, the board shall as soon as feasible approve rural arterial trust account funds to be spent during the ensuing biennium for preliminary proposals in priority sequence as established pursuant to RCW 36.79.090. Only those counties that during the preceding twelve months have spent all revenues collected for road purposes only for such purposes, including removal of barriers to fish passage and accompanying streambed and stream bank repair as specified in RCW 36.82.070, and including traffic law enforcement, as are allowed to the state by Article II, section 40 of the state Constitution are eligible to receive funds from the rural arterial trust account: PROVIDED HOWEVER, That counties with a population of less than eight thousand are exempt from this eligibility restriction: AND PROVIDED FURTHER, That counties expending revenues collected for road purposes only on other governmental services after authorization from the voters of that county under RCW 84.55.050 are also exempt from this eligibility restriction. The board shall authorize rural arterial trust account funds for the construction project portion of a project previously authorized for a preliminary proposal in the sequence in which the preliminary proposal has been completed and the construction project is to be placed under contract. At such time the board may reserve rural arterial trust account funds for expenditure in future years as may be necessary for completion of preliminary proposals and construction projects to be commenced in the ensuing biennium.

The board may, within the constraints of available rural arterial trust funds, consider additional projects for authorization upon a clear and conclusive showing by the submitting county that the proposed project is of an emergent nature and that its need was unable to be anticipated at the time the six-year program of the county was developed. The proposed projects shall be evaluated on the basis of the priority rating factors specified in RCW 36.79.080.

Sec. 3. RCW 36.82.070 and 1997 c 189 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:

Any money paid to any county road fund may be used for the construction, alteration, repair, improvement, or maintenance of county roads and bridges thereon and for wharves necessary for ferriage of motor vehicle traffic, and for ferries, and for the acquiring, operating, and maintaining of machinery, equipment, quarries, or pits for the extraction of materials, and for the cost of establishing county roads, acquiring rights-of-way therefor, and expenses for the operation of the county engineering office, and for any of the following programs when directly related to county road purposes: (1) Insurance; (2) self-insurance programs; and (3) risk management programs; and for any other proper county road purpose. Such expenditure may be made either independently or in conjunction with the state or any city, town, or tax district within the county. County road purposes also include the removal of barriers to fish passage related to county roads, and include but are not limited to the following activities associated with the removal of these barriers: Engineering and technical services; stream bank stabilization; streambed restoration; the placement of weirs, rock, or woody debris; planting; and channel modification. County road funds may be used beyond the county right-of-way for activities clearly associated with removal of fish passage barriers that are the responsibility of the county. Activities related to the removal of barriers to fish passage performed beyond the county right-of-way must not exceed twenty-five percent of the total cost of activities related to fish barrier removal on any one project, and the total annual cost of activities related to the removal of barriers to fish passage performed beyond the county rights-of-way must not exceed one-half of one percent of a county's annual road construction budget. The use of county road funds beyond the county right-of-way for activities associated with the removal of fish barriers is permissive, and wholly within the discretion of the county legislative authority. The use of county road funds beyond the county right-of-way for such activities does not create or impose a legal duty upon a county for salmon recovery work beyond the county right-of-way.