Wash. Rev. Code » Title 41 · Chapter 41.04
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 41.04.180 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Any county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state acting through its principal supervising official or governing body may, whenever funds shall be available for that purpose provide for all or a part of hospitalization and medical aid for its employees and their dependents through contracts with regularly constituted insurance carriers or with health care service contractors as defined in chapter 48.44 RCW or self-insurers as provided for in chapter 48.62 RCW, for group hospitalization and medical aid policies or plans: PROVIDED, That any county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state acting through its principal supervising official or governing body shall provide the employees thereof a choice of policies or plans through contracts with not less than two regularly constituted insurance carriers or health care service contractors or other health care plans, including but not limited to, trusts of self-insurance as provided for in chapter 48.62 RCW: AND PROVIDED FURTHER, That any county may provide such hospitalization and medical aid to county elected officials and their dependents on the same basis as such hospitalization and medical aid is provided to other county employees and their dependents: PROVIDED FURTHER, That provision for school district personnel shall not be made under this section but shall be as provided for in RCW 28A.400.350.
[ 1991 sp.s. c 30 s 18; 1974 ex.s. c 82 s 1; 1973 1st ex.s. c 147 s 6; 1970 ex.s. c 39 s 10; 1969 ex.s. c 237 s 1; 1967 c 135 s 1; 1965 c 57 s 1; 1963 c 75 s 1.]

Notes:

Effective date, implementation, application—1991 sp.s. c 30: See RCW 48.62.900.
Effective date—Effect of veto—Savings—Severability—1973 1st ex.s. c 147: See notes following RCW 41.05.050.
Severability—1970 ex.s. c 39: See note following RCW 41.05.050.
Effective date—1969 ex.s. c 237: "The effective date of this 1969 amendatory act shall be July 1, 1969: PROVIDED, That health benefit contracts awarded under the provisions of RCW 41.04.180 which expire after July 1, 1969 may be extended up to one year with the approval of the state employees' insurance and health care advisory committee as established under the provisions of section 8 of this act." [ 1969 ex.s. c 237 s 10.]
Retirement allowance deductions for health care benefit plans: RCW 41.04.235.
State health care authority: Chapter 41.05 RCW.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1968–2007 · leading case: Heinsma v. City of Vancouver, 29 P.3d 709 (Wash. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Heinsma v. City of Vancouver, 29 P.3d 709 (Wash. 2001). · cites it 11× “The appellant, Roni Heinsma (Heinsma), argues that the city abused its discretion under RCW 41.04.180 by expanding the definition of "dependents" to include domestic partners.”
Heinsma v. City of Vancouver, 144 Wash. 2d 556 (Wash. 2001). · cites it 10× “The appellant, Roni Heinsma, argues that the city abused its discretion under RCW 41.04.180 by expanding the definition of “dependents” to include domestic partners.”
Washington Optometric Ass'n v. Cnty. of Pierce, 438 P.2d 861 (Wash. 1968). · cites it 3× “During January 1966, the city of Tacoma and Pierce County (hereinafter referred to as “city” and “county”), pursuant to the provisions of RCW 41.04.180, individually entered into health-care service contracts with the Pierce County Medical Bureau (hereinafter referred to as…”
Leskovar v. Nickels, 166 P.3d 1251 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “*1255 RCW 41.04.180 gives the city authority to provide benefits to employees and their dependents.”
Leskovar v. Nickels, 140 Wash. App. 770 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “RCW 41.04.180 gives the city authority to provide benefits to employees and their dependents.”
Dep't of Transp. v. Seib, 645 P.2d 1076 (Wash. 1982). “75, § 1 (codified as RCW 41.04.180) was enacted providing specifically that: such limitation shall not apply to employees employed under chapter 47.”
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.