Wash. Rev. Code » Title 52 · Chapter 52.02
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 52.02.020 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Fire protection districts for the provision of fire prevention services, fire suppression services, emergency medical services, and for the protection of life and property are authorized to be established as provided in this title.
(2) In addition to other services authorized under this section, fire protection districts that share a common border with Canada and are surrounded on three sides by water or are bounded on the north by Bremerton, on the west by Mason county, on the south by Pierce county, and on the east by the Puget Sound or are in Pierce county and surrounded by Case Inlet, Drayton Passage, Pitt Passage, and Carr Inlet, may also establish or participate in the provision of health clinic services.
(3) Fire protection districts may provide training, expend resources, and enter into interlocal agreements to mitigate the injuries and reduce the level of harm and occurrence in calls they respond to. Examples of trainings are those that may directly or indirectly address worker and workplace safety, teach first aid, prevent injuries, and reduce industrial-related accidents.
[ 2021 c 19 s 1; 2020 c 94 s 1; 2010 c 136 s 1; 2005 c 281 s 1; 2003 c 309 s 1; 1991 c 360 s 10; 1984 c 230 s 1; 1979 ex.s. c 179 s 5; 1959 c 237 s 1; 1947 c 254 s 1; 1945 c 162 s 1; 1943 c 121 s 1; 1941 c 70 s 1; 1939 c 34 s 1; Rem. Supp. 5654-101. Formerly RCW 52.04.020.]

Notes:

Construction—Severability—1939 c 34: "The provisions of this act and proceedings thereunder shall be liberally construed with a view to effect their objects. If any section or provision of this act shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the act as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional." [ 1939 c 34 s 51.]
Validating—Saving—1939 c 34: "Any petition heretofore drawn, signed and filed with the county auditor in compliance with the provisions of section 1 to section 6, inclusive, of the Laws of 1933, Extraordinary Session, shall be valid and the various steps required by this act for the creation of a fire-protection district may be continued, if the further steps to be taken are begun within ninety (90) days after the taking effect of this act [March 1, 1939], and it shall not be necessary to prepare, sign and file with the county auditor a new petition, and any district so created shall not be invalid by reason of the failure to draw, sign and file a new petition under the provisions of this act." [ 1939 c 34 s 49.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2000–2011 · leading case: Babcock v. Mason Cnty. Fire Dist. No. 6, 30 P.3d 1261 (Wash. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Babcock v. Mason Cnty. Fire Dist. No. 6, 30 P.3d 1261 (Wash. 2001). “" RCW 52.02.020. I agree with the Court of Appeals that the affidavits demonstrate that the fire fighters acted consistent with District No.”
Babcock v. Mason Cnty. Fire Dist. No. 6, 144 Wash. 2d 774 (Wash. 2001). “” RCW 52.02.020. I agree with the Court of Appeals that the affidavits demonstrate that the fire fighters acted consistently with District No.”
Babcock v. Mason Cnty. Fire Dist. No. 6, 101 Wash. App. 677 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 4× “On the contrary, the Babcocks complain that the Chiefs warning about the fire danger prevented them from salvaging personal property from the garage and from saving the tent trailer.”
Johnson v. State, 265 P.3d 199 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “We relied on former RCW 52.02.020 (1991), which stated in pertinent part that fire protection districts must provide fire prevention, fire suppression, and emergency medical services “for the protection of life and property.”
Babcock v. Mason Cnty. Fire Dist. No. 6, 5 P.3d 750 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 4× “On the contrary, the Babcocks complain that the Chief's warning about the fire danger prevented them from salvaging personal property from the garage and from saving the tent trailer.”
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.