Wash. Rev. Code » Title 35 · Chapter 35.21

Wash. Rev. Code § 35.21.090

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Any city or town shall have power to provide for the protection of such city or town, or any part thereof, from overflow, and to establish, construct and maintain dikes, levees, embankments, or other structures and works, or to open, deepen, straighten or otherwise enlarge natural watercourses, waterways and other channels, including the acquisition or damaging of lands, rights-of-way, rights and property therefor, within or without the corporate limits of such city or town, and to manage, regulate and control the same.
[ 1965 c 7 s 35.21.090. Prior: 1911 c 98 s 4; 1907 c 241 s 68; RRS s 9355.]

Notes:

Eminent domain: Chapter 8.12 RCW.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1956–2008 · leading case: City of Seattle v. Yes for Seattle
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Seattle v. Yes for Seattle (2004) washctapp “090, which delegates the authority to construct dikes, levees, and embankments: Any city or town shall have power to provide for the protection of such city or town, or any part thereof, from overflow, and to establish, construct and maintain dikes, levees, embankments, or other…”
City of Seattle v. Yes for Seattle (2004) washctapp “090, which delegates the authority to construct dikes, levees, and embankments: Any city or town shall have power to provide for the protection of such city or town, or any part thereof, from overflow, and to establish, construct and maintain dikes, levees, embankments, or other…”
Sado v. City of Spokane (1979) washctapp “RCW 35.21.090. Whether a city elects to act pursuant to its authority is discretionary; the statute contains no mandate to construct any improvement, much less one of specific character and design.”
Papac v. City of Montesano (1956) wash “This court has held that the power given to cities by statute (RCW 35.21.090, Rem. Rev. Stat., § 9355), to construct dikes or improve natural water courses, is confined to public purposes; and a city is not authorized to put in a culvert on private property to keep open a…”
City of Port Angeles v. Our Water-Our Choice (2008) washctapp “For example, RCW 35.21.090 granted authority to cities to manage watercourses; RCW 35.”
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.