Washington State

Office of the Attorney General

Attorney General

Bob Ferguson

AGO 2002 NO. 2 >

While associations comprised of counties or local public officers are not “agencies” as defined in RCW 42.17.020, they could in certain circumstances be found to be “functional equivalents” of agencies for purposes of applying particular portions of the Public Disclosure Act; this would be greatly dependent on the facts of a particular case.

AGO 2001 NO. 3 >

1.  Public utility districts and port districts lack authority to sell “excess capacity” telecommunications services to “end users”.  2.  RCW 54.16.330 and RCW 53.08.370 preclude public utility districts and port districts, respectively, from offering telecommunications services or facilities to “end users” under any circumstances.  3.  The Interlocal Cooperation Act, RCW 39.34, does not authorize public utility districts or port districts, through interlocal agreement, to offer telecommunications services or facilities to other governmental units where the other unit is an “end user” of such services or facilities.

AGO 1994 NO. 3 >

Port districts are municipal corporations that have powers expressly granted by the Legislature, or necessarily or fairly in or incident to the powers expressly granted.  The Legislature has not expressly granted port districts the authority to provide pilotage services, and such authority cannot be necessarily or fairly implied from the express authority granted port districts.

AGO 1987 NO. 12 >

The provisions of chapter 262, Laws of 1986, do not allow the formation of a port district of less than county size where there is already a county-wide port district established and functional. There is no requirement that the question of port district formation be presented to the voters by the county legislative authority even if a proper petition is submitted to the county auditor and such petition is certified by the auditor to the legislative authority when the proposal is for a port district of less than county size where there is already a county-wide port district established and functional.

AGO 1983 NO. 17 >

Exercising the authority granted to it by RCW 39.84.040 a municipality, in creating a public corporation in connection with the issuance of industrial development revenue bonds under chapter 39.84 RCW, may provide in the ordinance establishing the corporation that one or more positions on its board of directors shall be filled by a member (or members) of its governing body serving ex officio; however, if the number of members of the governing body who are to serve, ex officio, on the board of directors of corporations is less than the total number of members of the governing body, the ordinance should also, itself, state the criteria for determining which members of the governing body are also to serve as directors of the corporation.

AGO 1992 NO. 18 >

1.  RCW 14.08.120(6) authorizes a port district to charge a fee to persons who use airport property.  However, this authority does not empower a port district to charge persons who do not use airport property, but who simply benefit from their proximity to airport property. 2.  RCW 14.08.120(6) provides that charges for the use of airport property shall be reasonable and uniform for the same class of service and established with due regard to the property and improvements used and the expense of operation to the municipality.  A charge based on a percentage of a user's gross receipts fails to meet these statutory requirements.

AGO 1953 NO. 28 >

Commissioners of a port district, in the exercise of their discretionary powers, may amend the district's comprehensive plan to include construction of a breakwater on waters and property owned by the United States and the State of Washington.  The port district may use its funds for such project.

AGO 1959 NO. 51 >

(1)  Port district is legally authorized to employ an attorney as legal adviser to port commission.  (2)  In counties of the 5th to 8th class the prosecuting attorney may be employed as the port district attorney. (3)  The auditor of a port district need not present the warrants of the district to the county auditor for registration.

AGLO 1976 NO. 54 >

Applicability of RCW 42.23.030 to the lease of moorage space from a port district by one of the members of the port commission; legal consequences of voting by a port commissioner upon a matter in which he is interested as a lessee of moorage space.

AGLO 1975 NO. 86 >

Criteria to be applied in determining maximum regular property tax levy which may be made by a port district not having levied taxes in the previous year under the 106% statutory limitation contained in RCW 84.55.010.