The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About011 98 .~. ..... ¿ ~~ ~t"::t.~5ðY ).;t -3-7l >'-' p,. w' , ) . Fire- D.S'+' fFS STATE OF WASHINGTON County of Jefferson In the Matter of Re-annexation of Areas into Jefferson County Fire Protection District No.5 that were Previously Withdrawn Under RCW 52.04.056 RESOLUTION NO 11-98 WHEREAS, the boundaries of Jefferson County Fire Protection District No.5 were established on August 7, 1970; and, WHEREAS, portions of the west side of the Fire District in the original boundary were withdrawn from the District in March 1971 because they were forest- type areas that were provided fire protection services by the State Department of Natural Resources; and, WHEREAS, the Commissioners of Jefferson County Fire Protection District No.5 passed Resolution No. 02-97 on August 12, 1997 asking that those lands withdrawn from the Fire District in March of 1971 be re-annexed to the District because the Fire District is now responding to fires in this area and there are residences within this previously withdrawn area; and, WHEREAS, after review of the Fire District's request, State and County regulations, the following findings are made: 1) Fire District No.5 is called on to provide EMS and fire services in this area but there is currently no remuneration for these services to the Fire District. 2) This re-annexation is in the public interest in order to further the health, safety and welfare of the people who live, work and recreate in this area. 3) The greater accessibility to quality health and fire response is a benefit to the timber management activities of the forest-type lands in this area and is therefore in compliance with the provisions of Jefferson County Ordinance No. 01-0121-97. NOW; THEREFORE, BE IT'RESOLVED, by the Board of County Commissioners that the request of the Board of Commissioners of Jefferson County Fire Protection District No.5 for re-annexation of previously withdrawn areas on the west side of the District is approved. BE IT' FURTHER RESOLVED, the attached Exhibit A which includes the legal description of the area to be re-annexed and a new legal description of the resultant Fire District boundary are hereby adopted. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ~~ day of ~-.L ,199§ ~;~--", /' . '~'''''' . / .... . . . ,. , ':, . / ....~.'..,_';._'\~ J.ð~\ :i.. --', . ..." J ",.,j~! \ . '" \¿~j~~L.·· __.:! ·;\·4~. .' . . _ i.', ..' "-_.....~,--.) <. " ~ '''"- SEAL: A~T: " ~n~,CMC Clerk of the Board ,,' : VOL 24 rM:~ 70 ... ~. \II £xk¡ 1r+ It·' :'_'_-"::"_-:"",,,7 - JEFFERSON COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT #5 1998 ANNEXATION PORTIONS OF T28N, R2W, W.M. AND T29N, R2W, W.M. PRE-ANNEXATION DESCRIPTION OF FIRE DISTRICT #5: All of Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 29, 30, 31, and 32, all in Township 29 North, Range 1 West, W.M.; All of Sections 5, 6, 7, and 8, all in Township 28 North, Range 1 West, W.M.; All of Sections 34, 35, 36, and those portions of Sections 27, 28, and 33 lying southerly and easterly of the Jefferson County-Clallam County line, all in Township 30 North, Range 2 West, W.M.; All of Sections 1, 12, 13, 23, 24, 25, 26, 36, and the East 1/4 of Section 35, all in Township 29 North, Range 2 West, W.M.; Government Lots 2 and 3, the North 1/2 S£I/4 NW1/4, and those portions of Government Lot 4, the SWl/4 NW1/4, and the NW1/4 SWl/4, lying easterly of the Jefferson County-Clallam County line, all in Section 4, Township 29 North, Range 2 West, W.M.; All of Section 1 and the East 1/4 of Section 2, all in Township 28 North, Range 2 West, W.M.. AREA TO BE ANNEXED INTO FIRE DISTRICT #5: All of Sections 2, 3, 10, 11, 14, 15,22,27,34, those portions of Sections 9, 16, 21, 28, and 33 lying easterly of the Jefferson County-Clallam County line, and the West 3/4 of Section 35, all in Township 29 North, Range 2 West, W.M.; Government Lot 1, the South 1/2 NE1/4, the SE1/4, the South 1/2 SE1/4 NW1/4, the East 1/2 SWl/4, and that portion ofthe SWl/4 SWl/4lying easterly of the Jefferson County-Clallam County line, all in Section 4, Township 29 North, Range 2 West, W.M.; The West 3/4 of Section 2, all of Section 3, and that portion of Section 4 lying easterly of the Jefferson County-Clallam County line, all in Township 28 North, Range 2 West, W.M.. RESULTING NEW DESCRIPTION OF FIRE DISTRICT #5: All of Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19,20,29,30,31, and 32, all in Township 29 North, Range 1 West, W.M.; All of Sections 5, 6, 7, and 8, all in Township 28 North, Range 1 West, W.M.; All of Sections 34, 35, and 36, and those portions of Sections 27, 28, and 33 lying southerly and easterly of the Jefferson County-Clallam County line, all in Township 30 North, Range 2 West, W.M.; All of Sections 1,2, 3, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24,25, 26, 27, 34, 35, 36, and those portions of Sections 4, 9, 16, 21, 28, and 33 lying easterly of the Jefferson County-Clallam County line, all in Township 29 North, Range 2 West, W.M.; All of Sections 1, 2, 3, and that portion of Section 4 lying easterly of the Jefferson County- Clallam Countyline, all in Township 28 North, Range 2 West, W.M.. : VOI_ 24 s ~ r·~ I ¡-'\:~ -..., {.L ~ ê-U{{"--ë~\+- ' , . ~ " ''''''5::'1 ~L ,. Jt-.' " ': '. 'P;'('fcsed ~¡~:N-->/ ~'5 _ '~:'" PORT·T()" (l« AtJNt2:,(A-lLUt-J .¿'L {"""¡a, "l'1 ". t:-, ,l6i,j~) ,J I ~:t ....1 t¡,., ' , GJ.n . - '2 ¥71= ~ I ,~r zil. 'v , c:xoll;:.t , Ii. ..-- ' -I..;- JW ~ , r to ~'4.......".~.II""f"\,-\ , V- ...~' :-) \. \ J ).:7 '\. ' r:/ 1G ' ,~ \)~-t.1.~ B ~ D- PORT' f 1'~' ' , 4r~\Eiß f-,1"': I'~ 'romSEND i3'í\'~~ 2;~ \¡4f5~ 0 ~ ~EAY ~ '. ~ , _ ~-,-w~k. 11 /'"1" .., .~)( ¡. ì '-.' '" .. ..- ' ~~"~J. -jft2r1. 8 t..........., ~, ' .be ~3"O~¡' ~""~':" ""'" t:j?,P.::,,:, ,"\-2.' .,....~ ¿'4;' :f ~9 r:: - ~ -4: ... u, ~.. g H.J- _ "- ~~ c-" ~,)" -f; ~,\,'0....br=:< '~""'; \ ",' '\-..... " r ! ,~,r-r- ~ '""",:t.Þ.p ~ l{ .:I " J, ~'¡ "Ntrt 2j \ L:~ ,"''' ,-~ "':"" 'J-. 3,- iI;W¡¡¿2 ,')'~'~~_I~,r~i~~l~ 06 ;:531 L 33GJ.IDU~~~~-'; ~ ~ Itf ~ ~~"'"<,;. '\ ~ , t .~. .... ~' .. 2 . ~~~~ J- / 4- ;"" -'~,<, ,~~L~CX ~~'..~<~ ,__.... ' " ,',,' \,r~, , ", I 1 -r. 6 . -'"" .'~ Jf} ~- ' ; , ." " ~r ,~,"'- ¡ .9/ la, 12 '7 ~~;' '-"~ ) ,: -"\{0 \};~("'~ (~ 11 t>;,..;,,-,~ & ~ Wy { '1þiA e"u~~uy/ ~t ¡/~v & 16' ï 5', ) 1~, _ 13~ 18 Þ'/1 7\1: ~?:< ~ 15 1/:'_ ~-4' ' ~. 13 f', t1,' cb <; ._._~-';, ~__ a'/I, Á~ .J>-~ '\ \ ,-~_.. C~1 ~CT i; ~- 11 ]g:t¡. 23 ~~ !c:,¡p 20'1;(/22 ¡ _\3"\2~ 11r' .. ~ I I? _-< ,'»t I '- . \ ~II p-J_~ FIRE ' }... " Y' 'I v \.\.....'. ¡' V~~ 2i"J~ \\~ \ \ ;" ""!~ 1m-;;t.:iDISTIUCTiZ ./2V "/:7-'2£ ~25 .'3Ð", 29 '/~?,.6þV·/26 2;~','30":!~ .........-í ~i '{..¡ ,~ I~~.....~Ç-J<; I.,'\.. ' ; . , ~ '.,""-,-.- ' 36 . ~,) 'I~ ~ '\\ - e bWnuCT i' " I 3,3 34 35·\ ~,\"\~, ~ : ~3 V3J1 35 _..:~_, 31 ',: ,,"."-, . -..' :""'"¡''' ¡J ' ''\: ¡r""LlV - .?" ~ .- CbW'nUëT'¥<'t:'":.: 3 _,:~~,¿=~ b,~5~4l j( 2 . '. ~~ C ~TIUCT " 1,"¿-"-'~;~-;¡L~2:sJ~!(J~!a'1 12-h 7 2 C~1 ~tuCT i'~ ,1 )5 ,J< ,; ~ ~F~í:~;P*( ~:-.- ~ )vl~ ~ ~ ~ 23 I\~I~ 1.9 : -$}f:J 21' 22 "i'03 I-\> ~,\';"'»W 2( \" ì.':\ I b?\f " f 1\" ~ 4 / ~ i zt (27 26 ~ 1/) 30' --\~( 28 ¡ 27 t ~ 'rzs-- I<"\'\$' :~ I ~\" ~ ' ' ~ : 3~1'\4, 35 ,\6"' -;;-' f2 33 34 35 36 31. .:~. ..::1..:.. ~ ~''''' h ~ . ~ ./ ~, ,\, \;\ ,"~'\, \.n/~ ~h _L/ ': '\ ':! 'kq I, , ., ./'t, '... /'.2 VJ ....., .. -,,-=..-- 4,- -" - ....7 j ~ tJ./.... 11 ' ...~~--=-~--'- -...-""/ i 3 .. i. <,[ ,If .......,''C ?/.." '001 '('~I 113 r---,~ I i \., \) t~ . / ~ ' ~ . ~ l VOL 2 4 ,v;~ t 2 t( ~ ~:~\"~~ S~) 1, I (fi 7 ~\ '/j 8 ~~~~Q , 10;#; _ 11 : 112 ~ 7 <:;;0 8 I ::---¡ e' . \\)' I -.... ( ./ ~~. . ,.. .. 'í\ QUlLC]}'¡E . _ 11. ~.." _:~_..I'" / ';;'~':'-.' ~/-"':.> / / ~ LEGEND - éU{("e v\-\-- . ,.' ,""A.:>L. . d o..Jd\"h~~7'~ . f{'O\~o s.e . i 5 ~ ' (Lr AtJN~-tLc~ »¿ / {... '. ,<:.. ' ..~ i=i'A'""f...) J ~ 't \ ' " ~::,.,.~~:..~~l;:'-J l.,' v"" ./' .~ :) ,\.). y r: ./ ./ I~ r\'\': ).:t~IL_/a ",I: 1. ,--1i,,~ / . " 'i\\\\' ~ .11 ¡~:'~ T~:'tND 13(.'(\'(' (. ~~ ~~4fßr¿ t+ ~ 'DAY ¡:' 9 .... ~, ~ 11 ... ¿ , ' . ~;" IT .J>\k.. t ! . {. l ~ -:P;""'~ ¡:¡·X","'.... ~J_ ~A j 2fi: ~ 8' ~. ..:~ u ' Þ ~ ~3~~<:: () I' µ.. ,,"-~~~ ~c \, -: . --::3 R,; ~ ~ \" , ,tv) ~ r, \ ...:N. ~ ~':",,¡¡;¡. "" Q~~ ~t{ ~ " " ~ ~' '. ¡,r ~ Z1 \ ,~(-:-'-- ,;¡;".,.~~ '" ,'.þ 31 ....1IL2 , ','!Z" ~~ l' !Jj,. , ß61 ;5 '1- .3~G~I~~.Ii~.r-, ~~~ì~. ~J. ~ !}' ""-0.; ~~'~-,:::~L \. ~~1 . . 11.." ~~L! , ~ - ¡¡ . ~,I-{A:pLOCK,i ~-<.. I. '(;!r,"é" 3- 2 " ~~\~' I 4' :;;J, J; ,i.tr~~. ,6' -'..... ..,__.__",,",,'" . ',' . ",.,,"" " 1 '" 6 .r. ~,N ~rs::. " ,.__"; "', . c " ò'ir )/ ' "I\. ':., ¡ - 10 12' ~r"'" ." '~~f:: ,: ~ ~ ~~ , 9/ "", \7 ~.' 3, i9 ( 1~ ,1 12 ~ ..7.-:-'1 ,; -:;;:) 1;' ',3'?iZ 'i'~"'''f¡~(',Il~j ~ ~~ ~~~~;;/ tK4,·'.~ '< ! .__"';'_. ;:;;::?i--- . '/ .<;.\:\,~ J>'" ~ ~ \ \ ..~~,. JFi~':ift FIRE' '... .... \ ~ IP" i _A ,,~)" \..'1; :' Lø~~.a DISTRICT ~1 ~: 2i,' '2?'j\ 2/1' /~ '''::'¿p 20,i'~:"1 /22 ¡ 3 ~} -:ftr\, .' "~ . 'Ç I i:Ç ..::./ l _'41, ~ I ' ¡.;o. I _, " ' '¡tit " _:c,~, C'j ~CT i' k V; "7:7' '2.-( :<ti:3< }9 I',' 1~1 <: 2],~~ / '1126 2~ :' . ," 3~ ..'~ /Í " ~" '{J.C\ v. ...a~ I .\" ' ~~2{ , _~ I~~ .&~~) ~~ I. \\ "t- CI !Z"TlUCT i' ,j 3~ 34 35 3~ 0/31 ~ , ~3 113/1"- 35 .:.~, 31 : ' C!Z"~:"Î~:" ~:~~.' ",;5 <>~ :.~~, br5"~:rq k' ; '~, ~'~ ~~I" .-..r¡ 1~ 1 V:li i~ 1'~?1v ¡:a 12- 77 J o !Z"TlUCT i5, / JI' I L~~~. ~id . 11 ~ - C~1 bill~CT i.~ 11 )5 1~ 1~' ~F;~~~t: ~:;-.- ';-;;V~)i ( ~ -s:: I 23 ¡~I'· 19 j ~ ) 21' 22 '~3 "~'\\;t>,b2( \ ,) (~~ I l0\f .' I \ ~ A 4 ¡' ~ 'j ".;; CJ/ ) , ~ T~' ~~;~ I 2~, 27 26 ( '?-5 · 30 'n 28' 27 ~'25- .~) ":'9 11 \.'" 'r {.. 30 ... . ~ ~."" 3S I~ 56"· .... 31 ~2 33: 34 ' 35 36 31 . . "t~ \)t ./ ,,~ ..... .. I <¿ . t,> /' ,:;;.G'<iï!t, \ \j ,~~. J{j.!! ¡:; _/ ( . \- ':'1 'ð¡,Q {, I " .f\,..w . . 7"2 {).j _ .- -..-=..... .(- -....-...r· j . tu, .....-...-.-"....-'---..-"'/, ~ ìI .......r( r'Y"" .... V'. m~ ' r-.-,~ .,' _VOL' 2A ~ ~ ~(" i \., \) t'.-> ,/¡~ ~ ~~;\ ~ ~ Lf ",C:, , !!~ '. g' ~ 1?'\1'''~ 11 tt D 7 ~\?j 8 ,~$~' 10;' 11 ? 7 !(, ~;~\ 1:'.' ,.\ ~Í\'\ l'" t 1.:;.... ~ 8 y' i1 1\ QUlL~~m . _ t I "r, ",',,,, ' _..) I __ ~_/ ,- ~ " .. .... " r-, .... " - LEGEND . ' -." I . .. -' " .. '. PORT " TO' ~ 3 ~-..;-. .. JEFFERSON COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT #5 2000 OLD GARDINER ROAD GARDINE~ WA 98382 August 22, 1997 '" ....-. Honorable Board of Jefferson County Commissioners Jefferson County Courthouse PO Box 1220 Port Townsend, Wa 98368 r, ;,~_ '- (,. '-. , . .. . . -, .. .' ... . I. .... . .. ;.,. ,~ .. -" .. '-.'~ .......!, : -,-, , , ~-,' - .... We, the undersigned, Commissioners of Jefferson County Fire Protection District No.5, hereby request that, in the interest of clarification and to better servc the -residents within the area to be protected, the boundaries of said l:;"ire DislIict No.5 be amended to ínclude certain lands íncluded origínally in establishment of the Distriet' s boundaries. We make this request under the authority granted byRCW 52.04.056 WITIIDRA WAL OR REANNEXATION OF AREAS, which reads, ín part, "1. As provided in this section, a fire protection district may withdraw areas ft0111 hs boundaries, or reannex areas ínto the fire proteL1:ion district that previously had been withdrawn :/Tom the fire protC(,1ion district under this section." Involved are the following documents, induding maps and approvals, in four 2~page attachments: I. Establishment and designated area of the District, August 7, 1970. II. Revision (reduction) o[the are-a, March 31, 1971. III. Revision of (I) above to re-include four east side half sections, climirutted by (II) above. IV, Revision Of (II) above to excludc all or portions of two (2) sections along SR 20, (colored green), May 13, 1991. Also, color coded in yellow is the new restored District outline, August 22, 1997. This request is triggered by the fact that there are now residences within the enlarged area. We at1aeh Jefferson County Fire Protection District No.5 Resolution 02-97, upon which this request is based. Jefferson County Commissioners; Approval Date Richard Wojt, Chairman ~ Glen Huntingford, Commissioner : VOI_ 24 f-,~ r·:- 7~: Robert Harpole, Commissioner "-'1'.. " . JEFFERSON COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT #5 200001 J) GAH.DTNER ROAD GARDINER, W A 98382 RESOLUTION 02-97 A RESOUJfION OF TI-IE BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS OF JEFFERSON COUN1Y FIDE PROTECTION DISTRICT #5, FOR RE-ANNEXATION OF FORMER DISTRICT BOUNDARIES AS DESIGNAIED BY ATTACHED 1-~. WI-ŒREAS: Jefferson County Fire District #5 has historically responded to fires in DNR areas which were previously included in its designated boundaries, NOW TITEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOARD OF HRE COMMTSSTONERS OF FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT #5, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF WASHINGTON, THAT CERTAIN PORTIONS OF ITS ORIGINALLY DESIGNATED AREA BE RE-ANNEXED. ADOPTED AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS OF JEFFERSON ~ FIRE ~ROTEC~ ¡STRICT #5. W ASIDNGTON STAlE. ON 12. AUGUST 1997. ~~~ e.~~ ~§~ SECRETARY ~ voL 24 rf-f,~ 75 RCW 52.04.056 Withdrawal or reannexation of areas. (1) As provided in this section, a fire protection district may withdraw areas from its boundaries, or reannex areas into the fire protection district that previously had been withdrawn from the fire protection district under this section. (2) The withdrawal of an area shall be authorized upon: (a) Adoption of a resolution by the board of fire commissioners requesting the withdrawal and finding that, in the opinion of the board, inclusion of this area within the fire protection district will result in a reduction of the district's tax levy rate under the provisions of RCW 84.52.010; and (b) adoption of a resolution by the city or town council approving the withdrawal, if the area is located within the city or town, or adoption of a resolution by the county legislative authority or authorities of the county or counties within which the area is located approving the withdrawal, if the area is located outside of a city or town. A withdrawal shall be effective at the end of the day on the thirty-first day of December in the year in which the resolutions are adopted, but for purposes of establishing boundaries for property tax purposes, the boundaries shall be established immediately upon the adoption of the second resolution. The authority of an area to be withdrawn from a fire protection district as provided under this section is in addition, and not subject, to the provisions of RCW 52.04.101. The withdrawal of an area from the boundaries of a fire protection district shall not exempt any property therein from taxation for the purpose of paying the costs of redeeming any indebtedness of the fire protection district existing at the time of the withdrawal. (3) An area that has been withdrawn from the boundaries of a fire protection district under this section may be reannexed into the fire protection district upon: (a) Adoption of a resolution by the board of fire commissioners proposing the reannexation; and (b) adoption of a resolution by the city or town council approving the reannexation, if the area is located within the city or town, or adoption of a resolution by the county legislative authority or authorities of the county or counties within which the area is located approving the reannexation, if the area is located outside of a city or town. The reannexation shall be effective at the end of the day on the thirty-first day of December in the year in which the adoption of the second resolution occurs, but for purposes of establishing boundaries for property tax purposes, the boundaries shall be established immediately upon the adoption of the second resolution. Referendum action on the proposed reannexation may be taken by the voters of the area proposed to be reannexed if a petition calling for a referendum is filed with the city or town council, or county legislative authority or authorities, within a thirty-day period after the adoption of the second resolution, which petition has been signed by registered voters of the area proposed to be reannexed equal in number to ten percent of the total number of the registered voters residing in that area. (c) 1995 Intermountain West Information Systems ~ YOI_ 24 ,. I rr r ¡-:,~): 76 If a valid petition signed by the requisite number of registered voters has been so filed, the effect of the resolutions shall be held in abeyance and a ballot proposition to authorize the reannexation shall be submitted to the voters of the area at the next special election date specified in *RCW 29.13.020 that occurs forty-five or more days after the petitions have been validated. Approval of the ballot proposition authorizing the reannexation by a simple majority vote shall authorize the reannexation. [1989 c 63 § IIi 1987 c 138 § 3.] NOTES: *Reviser's note: As enacted by 1987 c 138 § 3, this section contained an apparently erroneous reference to RCW 29.13.030, a section repealed in 1965. Pursuant to RCW 1.08.015, this reference has been changed to RCW 29.13.020, a later enactment of the section repealed. (c) 1995 Intermountain West Information Systems 'VOL 24 ~~r; !~\7~ 77 ..:. .'0;' '~."'j. ,,'I \ \",' '..i ."-'-'·~,'\..~I~"·:\ ," ..... -~ - .- David Skeen JEFFERSON COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY Courthouse - P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, Washington 98368 Telephone (360) 385-9180 FAX (360) 385-0073 Paul Mcilrath, Chief Deputy Prosecutor Richard Suryan, Deputy Prosecutor Juelanne Dalzell, Deputy Prosecutor Jill Landes, Deputy Prosecutor Scott Charlton, Deputy Prosecutor MEMORANDUM Jl£c~ Ç'IV ,,£ /) TO: Lorna Delaney, Clerk, Board of Commissioners Paul E. M~Ilrath ~~~ JEFFERSQ " ' W Gì,¿ \.i{¡¡{Tv", '1 "'Ù,SESsL¥? "- FROM: DATE: December 29, 1997 RE: Fire District No.5 Annexation I have calendered the January 5, 1998 hearing before the Board in the above referenced matter. The questions you posed in your earlier memorandum are ones which must be answered by the Assessor; and the latter question, regarding whether a fire district is considered a "special purpose" district, is one which I am unable to answer without more infonnation, such as how the tenn is used in the ordinance and the context of the question. I look forward to seeing you at the January 5, 1998 hearing. Thank you. : 1101_ 24 18 - , 'r,~G~ - 1820 Jefferson Street PO Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Daniel Harpole, District 1 Glen Huntingford, District 2 Richard Wojt, District 3 MEMO TO: David Skeen, Prosecuting Attorney and Paul McIlrath, Chief Deputy FROM: Lorna Delaney, Clerk of the Board DATE: December 17,1997 Subject: One more question about the request for re-annexation from Fire District NO.5 One more question came up on this request after discussions with Jack Westennan - Is a Fire District considered a "Special Purpose" district under County Ordinance No. 01-0121-97? The meeting with the Fire District Commissioners has been changed to January 5, 1998 from 2:00 to 3:00 p.m. Again, thanks you for your help on this. VOL 24 rM:: ~"g ,~ i Phone (360)385-9100 / 1-800-831-2678 Fax (360)385-9382 jeftbocC@;co.jefferson.wa.us !. "! 1820 Jefferson Street PO Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Dauiel Harpole, District 1 Gler¡. HuntirJ.gford, District 2 Richard Wojt, District 3 MEMO TO: David Skeen, Prosecuting Attorney and Paul McIlrath, Chief Deputy Jack Westennan, Assessor :ton Pr AI Scalf, Community Development DireCd ¿0AÁ- t::</ Lorna Delaney, Clerk of the Board FROM: DATE: December 11, 1997 Subject: Request for Re-annexation from Fire District No.5 The attached request for re-annexation of properties into Fire District NO.5 will be the topic of discussion at the Commissioners meeting on December 22, 1997 from 2 to 3 p.m. Members of the Fire District Fire Board of Commissioners asked for the appointment. I've also attached a copy of a Memo from Paul about this request for your review along with the map of the area to be re-annexed. The Board would appreciate any further infonnation you could provide on the following issues: Al-- 1) How much, if any, of the property to be re-annexed is designated commercial forest land under Ordinance No. 01-0121-97? Jack -- 2) How many of these tracts or parcels are required to pay forest fire protection assessments only (as required by 76.04.610) and how many tracts or parcels in this re-annexation area contain both forest-type lands and non-forest type lands or improvements? It would be appreciated if you can provide this infonnation for inclusion in the Board's packet for the 12/22 meeting (by 12/17/97 at 5 p.m.) or at least at the meeting. It would also be a great help if any or all of you could attend this meeting to answer questions from our Board and/or the Fire District Commissioners. Please give me a call if you have any questions about this request or what type ofinfonnation to provide. Thanks you for your help on this. ~ VOL 24 ;~~r,~ 80 Phone (360)385-9100/ 1-800-831-2678 Fax (360)385-9382 jeffbocC@co.jefferson.wa.us éU ,l\.... f;' ~\ -\- " ' i'rt\ .:> L. III lmf)I~ < I . ' to-d'-\:l~~I(t , ~ 'P.fÜ\.?üsed l'j ) 5 J.-- ~ «(.r At--! NgÆ'1'l b ('J · .M /' {""7rc;" V~' , , " 1t:-, ..~ ,~j -brf~J: : , ,,~:~(~.~~~t~'~~ v "- v_ ,~ ~n. \J}.L; r::Y ~ -' ~ 'f; "'\ ç; '1.tt'o~ ~ l/,; n r1. '~ . , ~ --=:: ~ ., .~ POm' / 2Y{' -:J \ ¿if> ~.ft~ :¡...r-;; ~ TornSEND ¡:13{í\1 t~~ / ~~~ ,b-#~)' 0 J2J. 12~ lUY 4- ' 9 , / __ ~.t'>J".... Ii L. . " \ -~',~ ~ . )- ,,' "" , .._ , ~J I. n. \ b~ ~" ~;. ~ n::R.t'~:~""'·~__, "'4c ~,1l J 29 1 ~ ~~ ~ ~ u ~,,30.t ,';; I") '_ r \ _-fi7'-t-~Ot~.þ '~r1 ::.',: " "'\,~" ~~: ~ ~ Z; '\',. ~. (~ ,....,,¡:;,.~~"',J.o 3ì~I:IW~2,~",.~,~-m;¡¡.;'\1~li\lJ.! (6 ;:!i31 .L '33G~nÞ.I1~~~~'\ ~. ~ W "'"'~.,-':~:~~, '\ S - _.' ...~-Irr ·3 . 2 . .~1 ~\ ). V 4 :~'~~~i~C1<~~~';f- , ~,,~\, ,,_...' ;~r ¿ ;'1\....<\ ' ¡ 9/ 10;; 12 ·:-.-7 ~~; '1 (' 1~ 10 ~~~~ I r(':;!;';l"Ô-::f;'~ ~~, ,.'-~ tkJ'io, ~ 0 (,H '1.1 A,~.W·~· ~ ; DV &, ,>. 16"--;1~Î:t 13~18 . ¡J1~ 1?~~ 15 })::~/13 ìi\ 1cb <;. ,,_~ ,;e ¡)J" ~. .C>"" ~ \ \ \ '"--' C~l ¡;w'TlUCT ;; ~-, ~ - ) 91 23 A~4'-;:;;fp 20' 1;(/22 í h 3 '- \.2\~ ii',· . . J I f? .<,'~ I" i \ ~I¡ C'J ~CT ¡¡. I-- ~ -V '-X ~~~'-3 ~ 29 I i ~? c ~B,(\)26 2\ \; 3~~!~ ........-í ~ ì µ '<'\ ~~ ....~:p; I .. '- : ¡,,~ , ~ '~"'--'" 36 . ";>lJ ."~ ~. \\ ~- C ~TR1CT I' 'v ; 3? 34 35 \9 ~~~1 ~ : ~31f-;X 35 ,~_I\ 31 ': ".-., , .. "..,,'¡-' ,j , -It'\)' V.--·L.l.f - - '?' ,~' ,- CJ~C'i'i'.l:~:.: ... 3. _:j~-6 b1þ5Wl ;( 2 :' 1 Jí\~ C n?TR1CT 15 ~I-"G-'''7'')ro~! i')'-s;~/1/ '1Tj 12-\77 J 'tl I / ~/I ¡íL~._........ .,.~.,,:~;: ~~""i~~C\' 11 , -- p<"FIRE '< 1~ \5 1~ 1~t~r7;~~-}~-;:-'-~\8¡l~ ~;~';l DlSTIUC'l' i8~ ?~ / '\ t ~ Þ'k-¡, ~\-., '0 ~ .~ i'\ ~ ~ ~:! 23 I~-I\ 1.9 ~{'¡ 21' 22 'h3 <\,~~,'þ1k 2( \ ,. (~~ I~· ,,:; I \ ~" I ~ -i ".j: ~v ) ,_I 1;' '- ~ r\~ ! 2~, (L7 26 ( '¡¡5. 30·";J I 28 i 27 ~ ~.25'- ~. ''29 ,~,\'ì ~ ,( 30 II' ~~ø~J 35 l~ ;6" '.....;-;-. '2 33, 34- 35 36 31'~) , II _ .... - 'i .. I--. -,...., 1 ~~ç "" ''Y/ .~, ' b ~'\. \.f/J~ ¡; _/ I '\ .:, \\i.Q (, ,,'1'\, ' ... r 2. {)J ...1 .. ·---"'"T <.- --" ,·.r: j . tu..~_..__.~.,: ---.-"'/ ,1 :.; ". ¡¡ I .it .~,..ff -r';/',," ...., \('.... he ,.----- ,r..... .. I ~VOL 24 pr;: B1i '" ))\~'l/i7li~ 'S }-\f d'''_ '. ; Vl,:,~ 1~,,": ",(~ 1. ~ ~ 7 }' '/.. 8 I,,~~:~ ' 1 O~. ' 11, , 1~ ~ 7 C( "í;:'d>}' Î l{ ~,:Iì i?:............ (' '/ J' ~ 8/ IT :\ QUlLg. <E . _ 11_ _ _.' :-t ik ' ~..;.~", ~ / --=-> T LEGEND .., PORT 'TO' . RCW 52.20.027 Lands subject to forest fire protection assessments exempt--Separation of forest-type lands for tax and assessment purposes. RCW 52.20.010, 52.20.020, and 52.20.025 shall not apply to any tracts or parcels of wholly forest--type lands within the district which are required to pay forest fire protection assessments, as required by RCW 76.04.610¡ however, both the tax levy or special assessments of the district and the forest fire protection assessment shall apply to the forest land portion of any tract or parcel which is in the district containing a combination of both forest-type lands and nonforest-type lands or improvements: PROVIDED, That an owner has the right to have forest-type lands of more than twenty acres in extent separated from land bearing improvements and from nonforest-type lands for taxation and assessment purposes upon furnishing to the assessor a written request containing the proper legal description. [1986 c 100 § 54¡ 1984 c 230 § 51¡ 1961 c 161 § 5.] (c) 1995 Intermountain West Information Systems ,WL 24 ~Ir~ r',q::: 82 STATE OF ,"VASHINGTON COUNTY OF JEFFERSON ll~ THE MATTER OF AN emergency Or dlOance esrabJ'shing interim land use controls, designating and conserving f?re~~ lands of long-term commercial slgnlfJcance, as required by Chapter 36. 70.A RCW } } } ) } } Ordinance No. 01-0121-97 Section 2.00 Policies: I~ is the goal. of Jefferson County.to conserve and encourage . existing and future timber production land uses on those lands that can be economicaJly and practically managed for such production as a viab!e land use and as a significant economic activity within the community; and protect forest lands of long-term commercial significance from encroachment and incompatible uses. These goals shall be accomplished through the following policies: .._------------,----y I " rlc~~I~;~:~~:$:~:~:P:s~:::~~i~~s~:·SS~:~it:1 ~~::,o~r ~~:~ct' ~nd docal improvement districts Land shall be disCl)Uraged when the servi ' d' b gfies on eSIgnated Commercial Forest " ces 0 not ene It forest management activities. ..<'1 ... . VOL 24 ~~r:: 8;1 I '"'I~J~ L; David Skeen JEFFERSON COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY Courthouse - P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, Washington 98368 Telephone (360) 385-9180 FAX (360) 385-0073 Paul McIlrath, Chief Deputy Prosecutor Richard Suryan, Deputy Prosecutor Juelanne Dalzell, Deputy Prosecutor Jill Landes, Deputy Prosecutor Scott Charlton, Deputy Prosecutor MEMORANDUM (f;') P ~' !'::J 1JJ- II., 'I..i ¡ 0." ~ j £ _ 1'7; I ¡}/{ . j"-'... "[1\ cS G I~ fl ¡h rt: '[j;~ L \. -'- '-' 1,' i""j! /2 ,,}. -, d OCT 0 J 1997:::Y TO: Lorna Delaney, CI~the Board Paul E. McIlrath ~/ October 2, 1997 JEFF~R-'ì'" ....,-. BOA'"' - ")UIV i UU~r"\.J h'IÌO-" J ,..IT '-' /- (.,OM^~¡~SfO ·¡Y. oJ NERS FROM: DATE: RE: Fire District No.5 Re-Annexation Thank you for further clarifying your question regarding Fire District No. 5's intention to re-annex portions of its former territory which had previously been removed. You are correct in asserting that RCW 52.04.056 is the guiding statutory authority in this regard; specifically, subsection (1) which provides that a fire protection district could reannex areas into the district that previously had been withdrawn. The following paragraphs layout the process for withdrawal, followed by the process for reannexation. These processes are self-explanatory and I would direct your attention to their provisions. Your next question raises a concern about assessing the tax levy to support the district, when the property is currently being assessed a fee for "Fire Patrol" services. An argument could be made that such duplication of assessments will result in "double taxation"; but the analysis of such a claim's merits cannot be made without an understanding of the details behind the "fire patrol" fees. However, I would suggest that an inter-local agreement be crafted between the district and the agency currently providing "fire patrol" duties to insure that only one agency collect the fee and provide the service. 1 , VOL 24 f~~L: 84 Finally, you asked for our opinion regarding item No. 16 of Ordinance No. 01-0121-97, which articulates a policy of discouraging expansion of districts in areas designated as Commercial Forest Land, when such assessment could result in the imposition of additional rates or charges. What is currently proposed would violate the provisions of this ordinance; thus, I would suggest that consideration be given to whether the district could not arrange its boundaries so that no commercial forest resource land is included in the annexation. I hope that this further clarification is helpful to you in resolving this matter. Please do not hesitate to call upon me at your convenience. 2 ~ VOL 24 r J,rr r/'...u~ 85 1820 Jefferson Street PO Box 1:2:20 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Daniel Harpole, District 1 Glen Huntingford, District 2 Richard Wojt, District 3 Memo To: Paul MCIlrath, 0 A ¡yl[l./ Lorna Delan~v' From: Subject: Another Question on Fire District #5 Re-annexation Request Date: September 24, 1997 Thank you for your prompt response to my last question about the Fire District #5 re-annexation request. A new map was submitted to clarify exactly what area is being requested for re- annexation. The area in pink (see attached) is the area to be re-annexed. This area borders the Clallam County line and is not currently in another Fire District. It is considered a "DNR" area (see Fire District Resolution) and may be subject to Forest Fire Protection Assessments. There are only a few residences, located in one specific portion of one section of this area, and the balance of it is designated forest lands. Please advise on the following: I) Is this a re-annexation, under the provisions ofRCW 52.04.056? The Fire District took action to reduce the boundary of the District in 1971? (See information I submitted with my last memo.) 2) If the designated forest land in the area to be re-annexed is now being assessed for Fire Patrol, could the' Fire District apply it's levy rate for fire services and for the Emergency Medical services, if the re-annexation is approved? 3) How does Section 2, item 16 of Ordinance No. 01-0121-97 effect this request from the Fire District? Thanks for all you help on this. : VOL 24 r-J1~r~ 88 Phone (360)385-9100 / 1-800-831-2678 Fax (360)385-9382 jeffbocC@Co.jefferson.wa.us 0c.: ?L.¡P.t.2./-I-D.fA. r-,¿,:;._r-¡7 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF JEFFERSON IN THE MATTER OF AN emergency } ordinance establishing interim land use } controls, designating and conserving } forest lands of long-term commercial } significance, as required by } Chapter 36. 70.A RCW } O d" N 01-0121-97 r mance o. Section 1.00 Purpose: The intent of this Ordinance is to designate and conserve forest lands of long-term commercial significance. Landsdassified as forest lands but not designated as long- term commercially significant, are not required or encouraged to convert to other uses. On the contrary, forestry is encouraged on all these lands. Specific purposes include: 1. To sustain and enhance forest resource operations oflong-term commercial significance by protecting from incompatible development forest resource lands that can be economically and practically managed for forest resource production. 2. To encourage the continued diversity of forestry in Jefferson County through designating two classes of long-term commercially significant forest land that will allow the continued existence of a range of approaches to forest management. 3. To alleviate the pressure experienced by forest resource land owners to convert their land to more intense uses. 4_ To alert potential purchasers as to the location of forest resource lands, and the nature ofland uses and activities to be expected within such areas. 1.10 Findings: The Jefferson County Board of Commissioners enter the f()llowing findings: 1. The Washington State Legislature adopted the Growth Management Act, Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2929, now codified as Chapter 36,70A RCW, which, in part, requires local governments to classify, designate, and regulate to conserve resource lands_ 2. In accordance with RCW 36.70A.050, the (then) Washington State Department of Community Development established Minimum Guidelines to classify and designate ~ resource lands, codified as Chapter 3 65-190 WAC :; 1 C Q.!Y ~ J /:jÝ 1& ." VOI~ 2 A ~\r'''- 817 ~ Lf ~,~ ~) ~ . 3. In March of 1994, the Washington State Legislature adopted Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 6228, which amended the definitions of agricultural land and forest land contained in RCW 36.70A.030. 4. Following an exhaustive policy creation and public review process, the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) adopted an interim ordinance to conserve forest lands of long- term commercial significance (Ordinance No_ 07-0705-94) on July 5, 1994_ 5. On September 8 and ~ 1994, the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board received petitions for review of the interim forest and mineral land ordinances from the Olympic Environmental Council, the Washington Environmental Council and the Washington State Department of Natural Resources. 6. On October 28, 1994, the County adopted an emergency ordinance, Ordinance No. 16- 1028-94, which committed the County to adopting new interim forest and mineral land ordinances by November 30, 1994 and reopened the public process for the submission of comment on potential designation. 7. Following advertisement in the Port Townsend/Jefferson County Leader for the submission of further information from interested parties, the completion of preliminary analysis on the economic viability of forestry in eastern Jefferson County, and review by the Board of Commissioners on November 21, 1994, the County adopted an emergency ordinance, Ordinance No. 17-1128-94, on November 28,1994, which extended the deadline for adoption of new interim forest and mineral land ordinances to December 14, 1994. 8. On December 12, 1994, the County adopted Ordinance No. 18-1212-94, an emergency ordinance, extending the timeline for completion of replacement interim resource land ordinances to February 13, 1995. This ordinance provided for expanded analysis and public review processes, these being deemed necessary by the Board of Commissioners for any replacement ordinances to properly comply with the designation, conservation and public process requirements of the Act. 9_ On December 23, 1994, the Jefferson County Planning Commission commenced reviewing maps, together with their associated designation criteria, of alternative forest land designations prepared by planning staffusing the analysis procedure contained in 'Exhibit B' of Ordinance No_ 18-1212-94. 10. On December 28, 1994 the Planning Commission met to continue its work on forest land designation. At this meeting, a draft forest lands ordinance (identified as Draft #3) was released by legal counsel for Planning Commission review. 2 VOL 24 r,H;~ 88 11. The Planning Commission continued its deliberations on forest land designation through January, February, March and April of 1995, holding a total of eleven meetings (the meeting held on January 23, 1995 being continued from January 17, 1995). 12. The Planning Commission meeting of February 17, 1995 featured the presentation of testimony from representatives of the Washington State Department of Natural Resources, MRGC Inc" and Pope Resources Inc., on the value, productivity and profitability offorest lands in eastern Jefferson County. 13 _ All the Planning Commission Meetings held over this period were properly advertised and open to members of the public. Opportunity for public comment was frequently provided and sign-in sheets listing people in attendance were maintained by Planning staff 14. On January 11, 1995, the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board held a public hearing on the merits of the appeals filed by the Olympic Environmental Council, the Washington Environmental Council, and the Washington State Department of Natural Resources on the County's existing interim forest and mineral resource land ordinances. 15. On February 16, 1995, the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board issued its final decision and order (Case No, 94-2-0017) on the appeals of the County's interim forest and mineral resource land ordinances. 16. In finding Ordinance 07-0705-94 out of compliance with the requirements of the Growth Management Act, the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board ordered the County to adopt an ordinance which designates and conserves forest lands of long-term commercial significance consistent with the goals and requirements of the Act within 60 days. 17. Following receipt of the final decision and order for Case No_ 94-2-0017 from the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board, Jefferson County Planning Department staff commenced drafting an ordinance designed to address the issues raised in the decision and return the County to compliance with this portion of the Growth Management Act_ 18. This ordinance was drafted through reference to the previously released draft #4 of the forest lands ordinance, the full deliberations of the Jefferson County Planning Commission over the period December 23, 1994 to February 24, 1995, and the Final Decision and Order for Case No_ 94-2-0017 issued by the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board. 3 .VOL 24 'H, r,. "- 89 !. ,. ", David Skeen JEFFERSON COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY Courthouse - P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, Washington 98368 Telephone (360) 385-9180 FAX (360) 385-0073 Paul McIlrath, Chief Deputy Prosecutor Richard Suryan, Deputy Prosecutor Juelanne Dalzell, Deputy Prosecutor Jill Landes, Deputy Prosecutor Scott Charlton, Deputy Prosecutor j~EI\SON COUNTY SEAT ~ PO~T TOWNSOID, WASI-ØIGTON MEMORANDUM TO: Lorna Delaney, c~)e Board of Commissioners Paul E. McIlratV September 8, 1997 FROM: DATE: RE: Re-Annexation Request from JC Fire Protection District No.5 You have presented for our review a proposed Resolution amending the boundaries of Fire District No.5 to re-annex territory which had earlier been legislatively transferred to Fire District No.1. One concern you have raised is whether the district losing the territory needs to consent to the action. This question was addressed 42 years ago by the Attorney General, whose opinion is enclosed for your review. The statutes referenced in the opinion were recodified in 1984 as RCW 52.06 et seq., and amended in 1989. You are correct in raising a concern about the need for notice to the district losing the territory (the "merging" district). RCW 52.06.090 lays out a process by which the board of commissioners for the district seeking the territory (the "merger"district) can petition the merging district's commissioners for their approval. If either district objects, the Board of County Commissioners has the authority to approve of the merger, ifit first detennines that the area to be merged can be better served by the merger. Thus, as a threshold matter Fire District No.5 must present to Fire District No.1 a petition signed by a majority of the commissioners of Fire District No.5 approving the merger. If District No.1 approves, the next step is an election in the : VOL 24 ::~.~{;~ 90 A..' area to be merged. However, if either board does not approve the petition, the county legislative authority is authorized to approve the merger. Again, an affirmative decision will require an election in the area to be merged. In conclusion, it appears that certain preliminary steps must be taken prior to the proposed legislative action being presented for the Board of County Commissioner's consideration. I am not able to confirm what agreement Fire District No.5 has entered into with District No.1, but I hope that the above discussion will assist you in formulating an appropriate response to the fire districts involved. Thank you for providing me an opportunity to review this matter. PEM/mm Enclosure VOL 2 4 r:~:ç 91 AGO 55-57 No. 180 FIRE DISTRICTS -- POWERS -- AIRPORTS -- MUN1CIPAL CORPORATIONS -- FIRE DISTRICTS. A portion of a fire district may withdraw from the district and join an adjoining district, regardless of the consent of the commissioners of the district in which it is presently located, provided statutory procedure is complied with; a fire district may contract with another fire district to furnish fire protection to an area wholly within another district; and a fire district has the duty to furnish fire protection to the transportation operations of an airport operated by a port district within the fire district boundaries. - - - - - - - - - - - - - December 28, 1955 Honorable Andy Hess State Representative, 31 st District Burien, Washington Cite as: AGO 55-57 No. 180 Dear Sir: You have requested an opinion from this office on the following questions: 1. Maya portion of a fire district withdraw from the district and join an adjoining district without the consent of the commissioners of the district in which they are presently located? 2. Maya fire district contract to furnish fire protection to an area wholly within the confines of another fire district? 3. Where an airport's operation is conducted by a port district within the boundaries of a fire district, which district has the duty to furnish fire protection to the transportation operations of the airport? We answer your questions as follows: VOL 24 fAr,' 92 1. Yes, provided the procedure established in RCW 52.24.090 is followed. [[Orig. Op. Page 2]] 2. Yes, provided that the contract is made between the two fire districts involved. 3. The fire district has the duty to furnish fire protection to the transportation operations of the airport. ANAL YSIS 1. The procedure by which a portion of a fire protection district may withdraw from the district and join an adjacent district is set forth in 0 5, chapter 176, Laws of 1953, codified as RCW 52.24.090. This statute provides that a part of a district may be transferred and merged with an adjoining district through a process initiated either by the commissioners of the fonner district or by fifteen percent of the electors resident in the area seeking to be merged. If the commissioners do not wish the transfer to take place, the statute clearly indicates that the electors of the area may proceed without their sanction. 2. Section 6, chapter 254, Laws of 1947, codified as RCW 52.08.030, gives fire protection districts the power "* * * To contract with another County Fire-Protection District, or with any town, city or municipal corporation or governmental agency or private person or persons to consolidate or cooperate for mutual fire fighting protection and prevention purposes; * * *" This language allows fire protection districts wide latitude in contracting to give fire protection service beyond their boundaries. However, we are of the opinion that this statute does not give fITe protection districts the right to contract to serve such towns, municipal corporations, governmental agencies or persons as are already within and being served by an established fire protection district, unless the contract is Inade with the district itself. A fire protection district has the statutory duty to serve the areas within its boundaries. When the voters established the district, they intended that it should VOL 24 í-Af,~ 93 serve these areas, and it cannot be ousted save by the voters themselves, [[Orig. Op. Page 3]] acting in accordance with statutory procedure. For part of a district to contract independently for service from an outside district would be to violate the general rule that there cannot be two municipal corporations at the same time within the same territory exercising the same powers. See Royer v. Public Utility District No.1, 186 Wash. 142 at 148. 3. It is apparent that in the absence of other law to the contrary, a fire protection district would have the duty to furnish fire protection to the transportation operations of an airport located within its boundaries. RCW 52.04.060 provides, in connection with the petition which is the first step in the creation of such a district: "* * * No land within the boundaries described in the petition, except that which the commissioners find will receive no benefit from the proposed district, shall be excluded from the district." The problem arises in the construction of chapter 14.08 RCW, the so-called Revised Airports Act. Does this law give airports the duty of furnishing their own fire protection, independently of the fire districts in which they are located? That it was the intent of the legislature to make municipal airports created under this act as independent as possible from the jurisdiction of municipalities in which they might be located, would seem to be implicit from the following language ofRCW 14.08.330: "Every airport and other air navigation facility controlled and operated by any municipality, or jointly controlled and operated, shall, subject to federal and state laws, rules, and regulations, be under the exclusive jurisdiction and control of the municipality or municipalities controlling and operating it and no other municipality in which such airport or air navigation facility is located shall have any police jurisdiction thereof or any authority to charge or exact any license fees or occupation taxes for the operations thereon. * * *" [[Orig. Op. Page 4]] However, this statute was strictly construed by the supreme court in the case of King County v. Port of Seattle, 37 Wn. (2d) 338. There it was urged that the quoted language completely removed the territory comprising the Seattle-Tacoma airport from the jurisdiction of King County, because the port is thereby given VOL 24 rAC~ 94 ....... "exclusive jurisdiction and control" of the area. In refutation of this argument, the court said, at page 348: "We are of the opinion that Rem. Supp. 1945, 0272244, does not, nor does it attempt to, remove this territory from King County. The effect of this section, when read in the light of the entire revised airports act, is merely to preclude appellant from interfering with respect to the operation of the Seattle-Tacoma airport and forbids appellant's exacting any license fees since the legislature has declared its policy to be that the responsibility of providing adequate and satisfactory transportation and other public services shall belong to the Port. No territory is stricken from King County. The legislature by general law has taken away from appellant its power to exact license fees within the airport. This was its prerogative. " Nowhere in the Revised Airports Act did the legislature specifically authorize airports to provide their own fire protection, as it did for example, with respect to towns. See RCW 35.27.370. Therefore it would seem unwarranted to assume that it was the legislative intent to remove this duty from the fire districts in which such airports might be located. This does not mean that a port district is precluded from establishing such fire protection measures as it may feel are specially necessary for the proper operation of an airport under its control. This would seem to be clearly implied from the language ofRCW 14.08.120 which reads in part as follows: "In addition to the general powers herein conferred, and without limitation thereof, a municipality which has established or may hereafter establish airports, [[Orig. Op. Page 5]] restricted landing areas, or other air navigation facilities, or which has acquired or set apart or may hereafter acquire or set apart real property for such purpose or purposes may: "( 1) V est authority for the construction, enlargement, improvement, maintenance, equipment, operation, and regulation thereof in an officer, board, or body of such municipality by ordinance or resolution which shall prescribe the powers and duties of such officer, board or body. The expense of such construction, enlargement, improvement, maintenance, equipment, operation, and regulation, shall be a responsibility of the municipality. "(2) Adopt and amend all needful rules, regulations, and ordinances for the VOL 2 4 r,~C~ 95 "., .~ management, government, and use of any properties under its control, whether within or without its territorial limits; appoint airport guards or police, with full police powers; * * * "It may also adopt rules, regulations, and ordinances designed to safeguard the public upon or beyond the limits of private airports or landing strips within such municipality or its police jurisdiction against the perils and hazards of instrumentalities used in aerial navigation." Nevertheless the primary authority and responsibility with respect to fire protection of the transportation operations of the airport must remain with the fire district, and any such measures must be adopted with this in mind. We hope the foregoing analysis will prove helpful. Very truly yours, DON EASTVOLD Attorney General JOHN S. ROBINSON Assistant Attorney General ANDY G. ENGEBRETSEN Assistant Attorney General VOL 24 rA:,é 96 i;L.~._ Memo To: David Skeen, Prosecuting Attorney From: Lorna Delaney, Clerk of the Board Subject: Reannexation Request from JC Fire Protection District No.5 Date: August 27, 1997 Attached is a letter trom the Commissioners of Jefferson County Fire Protection District No.5 asking the Board to proceed with the steps necessary to amend the District boundaries by a "reannexation" of property that was originally included in the District. They cite the provisions ofRCW 52.04.056 as the basis for this request. In looking through their backup documentation it appears that part of the property they are asking to "reannex" was added to the FD#1 boundary because FD#5 did not have good access (see letter from Fire District No, 5 dated 3/31/71,) and the other part was "de-annexed" by FD#5 and merged to FD# 1, under the provisions ofRCW 52.06.090 and .100 (see letter from the Commissioners of FD #1 dated 11/8/71; and a subsequent Resolution of FD #1 dated 5/13/91.) There is no correspondence from FD#l to indicate that they have even been advised of the request, or agree to it. Since this would change the current boundary of their Fire District (and their tax base), shouldn't there be some type of notification and concurrence? Will you please review this request and advise what procedure the Board is required to follow. I would appreciate your response before the end of September. I've written to FD#5 to let them know the Board has received their request and is in the process of reviewing it with their legal counsel. Please call if you have any questions, or if! can help you find or provide any additional information. Thanks for your help. YOL 24 í·,~~,: 97 cf--' ',f JEFFERSON COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT #5 2000 OLD GARDINER ROAD GARDINER., WA 98382 August 22, 1997 :.r.~.... . ,-- .- .. !; ~ '-1 :-! r~;j I; ..><.......".. . .:~ ¿ : " : Honorable Board of Jefferson County Commissioners Jefferson County Courthouse PO Box 1220 Port Townsend, Wa 98368 (.I.UC:. 2 ~ 1997 ,- ~ -_.- ',., -. ; . ' .. , ,.. _:: - ~:.) ~ L);',; :.:;'; u We, the undersigned, Commissioners of Jefferson COtUlty Fire Protection District No.5, hereby request that, in the interest of clarification and to better serve the residents within the area to be protected, the boundaries of said Fire District No.5 be amended to include certain lands included originally in establishment of the District's boundaries. We make this request under the authority granted by RCW 52.04.056 \VlTIIDRA W AI. OR REANNEXATION OF AREAS, which reads, in part, "1. As provided in this section, a fire protection district may withdraw areas fi'om its botUldaries, or reannex areas into the fire protection district that previously had been withdrawn fi'om the fire protection district under this set..'"tÌon." Involved are the following documents, including maps and approvals, in four 2~page attachments; I. Establishment and designated area of the District, August 7, 1970. n. Revision (reduction) of the area, March 31, 1971. III. Revision of (1) above to re-include four east side half sections, eliminated by (11) above. IV. Revision Of (II) above to exclude all or portions of two (2) sections along SR 20, (colored green), May l3, 1991. Also, color coded in yellow is the new restored District outline, August 22, 1997. This request is triggered by the fuct that there are now residences within me enlarged area. We attach Jefferson County Fire Protection District No.5 Resolution 02~97, upon which this request is based. Jefferson County Commissioners; Approval Date Richard W ojt, ChaL."TIlan ~ Glen Huntingford, Commissioner Robert Harpole, Commissioner lVOL 24 ;_,~r,~ O(Q . < ~, ~ ...#