Wash. Rev. Code » Title 54 · Chapter 54.16
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 54.16.200 (2026)

Joint exercise of powers and joint acquisition of properties

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Any two or more public utility districts organized under the provisions of the laws of this state shall have the power, by mutual agreement, to exercise jointly all powers granted to each individual district, and in the exercise of such powers shall have the right and power to acquire jointly all or any part of any electric utility properties which, at *the time of the passage of this act, constitutes an interconnected and physically integrated electric utility system, whether entirely within or partly within and partly without such districts: PROVIDED, That any two or more districts so acting jointly, by mutual agreement, shall not acquire any electric utility distribution properties in any other public utility district without the consent of such district, and shall not exercise jointly the power to condemn any privately owned utility property or any public utility owned by a municipality, to levy taxes or, to create subdistricts.
[ 1949 c 227 s 2; Rem. Supp. 1949 s 10459-15.]

Notes:

*Reviser's note: As to "the time of the passage of this act," the legislative history of chapter 227, Laws of 1949 is as follows: Passed the house March 8, 1949; passed the senate March 7, 1949; approved by the governor March 22, 1949.
Joint operating agency: RCW 43.52.360.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1953–1989 · leading case: Washington Pub. Util. Districts' Utils. Sys. v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1, 771 P.2d 701 (Wash. 1989).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Washington Pub. Util. Districts' Utils. Sys. v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1, 771 P.2d 701 (Wash. 1989). · cites it 2× “Public utility districts are expressly authorized by statute "to exercise jointly all powers granted to each individual district," RCW 54.16.200; to "sue in any court of competent jurisdiction," RCW 54.”
Chem. Bank v. Washington Pub. Power Supply Sys., 666 P.2d 329 (Wash. 1983). · cites it 2× “227, § 2 (now codified as RCW 54.16.200). Appellants alleged that the system was unreasonably large under Wylie and therefore exceeded the PUD's statutory authority.”
Roehl v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1, 261 P.2d 92 (Wash. 1953). · cites it 2× “Section 2 thereof (RCW 54.16.200 [ cf. Rem. Supp. 1949, § 10459-15]) provides the only statutory authority under which public utility districts may enter into joint arrangements of this general character.”
Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1 v. Taxpayers, 479 P.2d 61 (Wash. 1971). · cites it 2× “That case involved a joint agreement in conformance with RCW 54.16.200 among five public utility districts, which called for the joint planning and management of a system of power facilities.”
Port of Peninsula v. Bendiksen, 429 P.2d 859 (Wash. 1967). “No authorities are cited by either of the parties wherein this court has construed this statutory provision, nor has our own research revealed any.”
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.