Wash. Rev. Code » Title 35 · Chapter 35.02
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 35.02.200 (2026)

Annexation/incorporation of fire protection district—Ownership of assets of fire protection district—When less than sixty percent

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) If a portion of a fire protection district including less than sixty percent of the assessed value of the real property of the district is annexed to or incorporated into a city or town, the ownership of all assets of the district shall remain in the district and the district shall pay to the city or town, or, if the city or town has been annexed by another fire protection district, to the other fire protection district within one year or within such period of time as the district continues to collect taxes in such incorporated or annexed areas, in cash, properties or contracts for fire protection services, a percentage of the value of said assets equal to the percentage of the value of the real property in the entire district lying within the area so incorporated or annexed: PROVIDED, That if the area annexed or incorporated includes less than five percent of the area of the district, no payment shall be made to the city or town or fire protection district except as provided in RCW 35.02.205.
(2) As provided in RCW 35.02.210, the fire protection district from which territory is removed as a result of an incorporation or annexation shall provide fire protection to the incorporated or annexed area for such period as the district continues to collect taxes levied in such annexed or incorporated area.
(3) For the purposes of this section, the word "assets" shall mean the total assets of the fire district, reduced by its liabilities, including bonded indebtedness, the same to be determined by usual and accepted accounting methods. The amount of said liability shall be determined by reference to the fire district's balance sheet, produced in the regular course of business, which is nearest in time to the certification of the annexation of fire district territory by the city or town.
[ 1997 c 245 s 2. Prior: 1989 c 267 s 1; 1989 c 76 s 3; 1986 c 234 s 19; 1967 c 146 s 1; 1965 c 7 s 35.13.248; prior: 1963 c 231 s 4. Formerly RCW 35.13.248.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1993–2002 · leading case: Yakima Cnty. (West Valley) Fire Prot. Dist. No. 12 v. City of Yakima, 858 P.2d 245 (Wash. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Yakima Cnty. (West Valley) Fire Prot. Dist. No. 12 v. City of Yakima, 858 P.2d 245 (Wash. 1993). “RCW 35.02.200. Although enforcement of the OUA's may make annexation easier, the validity of the OUA's is not determinative of annexation because the City's OUA's cover only about 66 percent of the value of the property in the area sought to be annexed.”
Grant Cnty. Fire Prot. Dist. No. 5 v. City of Moses Lake, 42 P.3d 394 (Wash. 2002). “NOTES [1] Yakima County Clerk's Papers at 262. [2] The BRB estimated the annual loss to YCFD12 at $28,465.”
Grant Cnty. Fire Prot. Dist. No. 5 v. City of Moses Lake, 145 Wash. 2d 702 (Wash. 2002). “The BRB estimated the annual loss to YCFD12 at $28,465. YCFD12 conceded that this represented a minimal financial impact but expressed concern about the cumulative effect of multiple small annexations.”
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.