Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 54.04.030 (2026)

Restrictions on invading other municipalities

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Chapter 1, Laws of 1931, shall not be deemed or construed to repeal or affect any existing act, or any part thereof, relating to the construction, operation and maintenance of public utilities by irrigation or water-sewer districts or other municipal corporations, but shall be supplemental thereto and concurrent therewith. No public utility district created hereunder shall include therein any municipal corporation, or any part thereof, where such municipal corporation already owns or operates all the utilities herein authorized: PROVIDED, that in case it does not own or operate all such utilities it may be included within such public utility district for the purpose of establishing or operating therein such utilities as it does not own or operate: PROVIDED, FURTHER, That no property situated within any irrigation or water-sewer districts or other municipal corporations shall ever be taxed or assessed to pay for any utility, or part thereof, of like character to any utility, owned or operated by such irrigation or water districts or other municipal corporations.

[ 1999 c 153 s 64; 1931 c 1 s 12; RRS s 11616.]

Notes:

Part headings not law—1999 c 153: See note following RCW 57.04.050.

Irrigation districts: Title 87 RCW.

Municipal utilities: RCW 80.04.500, 81.04.490 and chapter 35.92 RCW.

Water-sewer districts: Title 57 RCW.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1972–2012 · leading case: Shoulberg v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1, 280 P.3d 491 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Shoulberg v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1, 280 P.3d 491 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 12× “The Owners argue that the expenditures the District made constitute “provision of a water utility” and, therefore, duplicate the city of Port Townsend’s (City) water utility operations, in violation of RCW 54.04.030. The District contends it may levy taxes on city residents to…”

Roza Irrigation Dist. v. State, 497 P.2d 166 (Wash. 1972). · cites it 2× “and most significantly here, RCW 54.04.030, This act shall not be deemed or construed to repeal or affect any existing act, or any part thereof, relating to the construction, operation and maintenance of public utilities by irrigation or water districts or other municipal…”

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.