Wash. Rev. Code » Title 35 · Chapter 35.43
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 35.43.150 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Notice of the hearing upon a resolution declaring the intention of the legislative authority of a city or town to order an improvement shall be given by mail at least fifteen days before the day fixed for hearing to the owners or reputed owners of all lots, tracts, and parcels of land or other property to be specially benefited by the proposed improvement, as shown on the rolls of the county assessor, directed to the address thereon shown.
The notice shall set forth the nature of the proposed improvement, the estimated cost, a statement that actual assessments may vary from assessment estimates so long as they do not exceed a figure equal to the increased true and fair value the improvement, or street lighting, adds to the property, and the estimated benefits of the particular lot, tract, or parcel.
[ 1989 c 243 s 3; 1983 c 303 s 2; 1965 c 7 s 35.43.150. Prior: 1957 c 144 s 9; prior: 1929 c 97 s 1, part; 1911 c 98 s 10, part; RRS s 9361, part.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1966–2005 · leading case: Cammack v. City of Port Angeles, 548 P.2d 571 (Wash. Ct. App. 1976).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cammack v. City of Port Angeles, 548 P.2d 571 (Wash. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 2× “The minutes of the hearing conducted pursuant to RCW 35.43.150 show only that plaintiff and several other property owners within the LID appeared and “verbally objected to their assessments.”
Corp. of the Catholic Archbishop of Seattle v. City of Seattle, 418 P.2d 1008 (Wash. 1966). · cites it 2× “With the adoption of resolution 18168, notice of a preliminary hearing on the LID (RCW 35.43.150) was given to each property owner subject to assessment, and respondent was informed therein that its assessment would be $21,427.”
Tiffany Fam. Trust Corp. v. City of Kent, 119 P.3d 325 (Wash. 2005). “180 provides: "The mailing of any notice required in connection with municipal local improvements shall be conclusively proved by the written certificate of the officer, board, or authority directed by the provisions of the charter or ordinance of a city or town to give the…”
First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. City of West Richland, 39 Wash. App. 401 (Wash. Ct. App. 1985). “Pursuant to RCW 35.43.150, a city is instructed to notify by mail the "owners or reputed owners" of all property to be "specially benefited by the proposed improvement", as shown on the county assessor's rolls.”
Peoples Nat'l Bank v. City of Anacortes, 721 P.2d 1003 (Wash. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 3× “At trial, Peoples argued that the City had not followed the statutory notice requirements contained in RCW 35.43.150. Specifically, Peoples contended that the City's notice of the public hearing on the LID failed to set out the estimated benefits from the improvements as…”
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.