Wash. Rev. Code » Title 39 · Chapter 39.34
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 39.34.010 (2026)

Declaration of purpose

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
It is the purpose of this chapter to permit local governmental units to make the most efficient use of their powers by enabling them to cooperate with other localities on a basis of mutual advantage and thereby to provide services and facilities in a manner and pursuant to forms of governmental organization that will accord best with geographic, economic, population and other factors influencing the needs and development of local communities.
[ 1967 c 239 s 1.]

Notes:

Joint operations by municipal corporations and political subdivisions, deposit and control of funds: RCW 43.09.285.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2004–2023 · leading case: City of Medina v. Primm, 157 P.3d 379 (Wash. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Medina v. Primm, 157 P.3d 379 (Wash. 2007). · cites it 2× “RCW 39.34.010 (emphasis added). ¶16 Read together, RCW 3.”
City of Bellevue v. Pine Forest Props., Inc., 340 P.3d 938 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “010, RCW 39.34.010, and RCW 39.34.060. 9. Roads, sidewalks, and other transportation facilities constitute public uses justifying condemnation.”
Exendine v. City of Sammamish, 113 P.3d 494 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “RCW 39.34.010 describes the purpose of the Interlocal Cooperation Act: to permit local governmental units to make the most efficient use of their powers by enabling them to cooperate with other localities on a basis of mutual advantage and thereby to provide services and…”
Exendine v. City of Sammamish, 113 P.3d 494 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “010 describes the purpose of the Interlocal Cooperation Act: to permit local governmental units to make the most efficient use of their powers by enabling them to cooperate with other localities on a basis of mutual advantage and thereby to provide services and facilities in a…”
Pub. Hosp. Dist. No. 1 v. Univ. of Washington, 327 P.3d 1281 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “22 RCW 39.34.010. RCW 39.34.030(1). Terminal Enters.”
Swinomish Indian Tribal Cmty. v. Skagit Cnty., 158 P.3d 1179 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “RCW 39.34.010. RCW 39.34.080. RCW 39.34.020.”
City of Auburn v. Gauntt, 160 Wash. App. 567 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “3d 379 (2007) (emphasis added and omitted) (quoting RCW 39.34.010). 15 (Emphasis added.) RCW 3.”
Hous. Auth. v. City of Pasco, 86 P.3d 1217 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “RCW 39.34.010. RCW 39.34.030(3) outlines the procedure for entering into joint ventures.”
City of Auburn v. Gauntt, 249 P.3d 657 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “3d 379 (2007) (quoting RCW 39.34.010) (emphasis in original omitted) (emphasis added).”
Swinomish Indian Tribal Cmty. v. SKAGIT CTY., 158 P.3d 1179 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “[24] RCW 39.34.010. [25] RCW 39.34.080. [26] RCW 39.”
Cooper v. Whatcom Cnty. (W.D. Wash. 2023). “” 14 RCW 39.34.010; see also Dkt. No. 147-16 at 6 (declaring in the Interlocal Agreement that “[t]he 15 Counties participating as members of this Council have agreed that there is a mutual interest in 16 working together to facilitate joint attention to and action on matters of…”
Pub. Hosp. Dist. No. 1 v. Univ. Of Washington & U.w. Med. (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “24 In Terminal Enterprises, 22 RCW 39.34.010. 23 RCW 39.34.030(1). 24 Terminal Enters.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
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.