Wash. Rev. Code » Title 14 · Chapter 14.08
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 14.08.330 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Every airport and other air navigation facility controlled and operated by any municipality, or jointly controlled and operated pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, shall, subject to federal and state laws, rules, and regulations, be under the exclusive jurisdiction and control of the municipality or municipalities controlling and operating it. The municipality or municipalities shall have concurrent jurisdiction over the adjacent territory described in *RCW 14.08.120(2). No other municipality in which the airport or air navigation facility is located shall have any police jurisdiction of the same or any authority to charge or exact any license fees or occupation taxes for the operations. However, by agreement with the municipality operating and controlling the airport or air navigation facility, a municipality in which an airport or air navigation facility is located may be responsible for the administration and enforcement of the uniform fire code, as adopted by that municipality under RCW 19.27.040, on that portion of any airport or air navigation facility located within its jurisdictional boundaries.
[ 1985 c 246 s 1; 1945 c 182 s 15; Rem. Supp. 1945 s 2722-44.]

Notes:

*Reviser's note: RCW 14.08.120 was amended by 2020 c 96 s 1, changing subsection (2) to subsection (1)(b).
PDF

RCW 14.08.330

Jurisdiction of municipality over airport and facilities exclusive—Concurrent jurisdiction over adjacent territory—Fire code enforcement by agreement. (Effective January 1, 2026.)

Every airport and other air navigation facility controlled and operated by any municipality, or jointly controlled and operated pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, shall, subject to federal and state laws, rules, and regulations, including RCW 19.430.010, 19.430.020, and 19.430.030, be under the exclusive jurisdiction and control of the municipality or municipalities controlling and operating it. The municipality or municipalities shall have concurrent jurisdiction over the adjacent territory described in RCW 14.08.120(1)(b). No other municipality in which the airport or air navigation facility is located shall have any police jurisdiction of the same or any authority to charge or exact any license fees or occupation taxes for the operations. However, by agreement with the municipality operating and controlling the airport or air navigation facility, a municipality in which an airport or air navigation facility is located may be responsible for the administration and enforcement of the uniform fire code, as adopted by that municipality under RCW 19.27.040, on that portion of any airport or air navigation facility located within its jurisdictional boundaries.
[ 2025 c 406 s 7; 1985 c 246 s 1; 1945 c 182 s 15; Rem. Supp. 1945 s 2722-44.]

Notes:

Findings—Intent—Effective date—2025 c 406: See notes following RCW 19.430.010.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1979–2015 · leading case: Filo Foods, LLC v. City of SeaTac, 357 P.3d 1040 (Wash. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Filo Foods, LLC v. City of SeaTac, 357 P.3d 1040 (Wash. 2015). · cites it 42× “Moving to the substance of Proposition 1, we next consider whether it can be validly enforced at the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport under state law. II. Application at the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport ¶14 The trial court ruled that Proposition 1 could not be…”
Port of Seattle v. Washington Utils. & Transp. Comm'n, 597 P.2d 383 (Wash. 1979). · cites it 2× “" However, the court made that statement in conjunction with its holding that under RCW 14.08.330, King County may not exact license fees with respect to an exclusive taxicab franchise granted by the *797 Port.”
Robinson v. Avis Rent a Car Sys., Inc., 22 P.3d 818 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “RCW 14.08.330 states that "[e]very airport .”
Robinson v. Avis Rent A Car Sys., Inc., 106 Wash. App. 104 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “RCW 14.08.330 states that “[e]very airport.”
Filo Foods, LLC v. City of SeaTac (Wash. 2015). · cites it 45× “9 Fila Foods, LLC v. City of SeaTac 89723-9 II.”
Filo Foods, LLC v. City of SeaTac (Wash. 2015). · cites it 40× “Application at the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport The trial court ruled that Proposition 1 could not be applied at the Seattle- Tacoma International Airport because it would conflict with the Port of Seattle's jurisdiction over the airport under RCW 14.”
City of Normandy Park v. King Cnty. Fire Dist. No. 2, 717 P.2d 769 (Wash. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 3× “5) RCW 14.08.330 gives the Port exclusive police jurisdiction over its Sea-Tac Airport properties.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.