Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 897239.pdf

Citation: Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 897239.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/897239.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,722 chars

would have to conclude that the legislature intended the Revised Airports Act, chapter

14.08 RCW, to deprive the city of SeaTac of all its police powers at the airport, even

though the Port of Seattle lacks the authority to fill this regulatory gap through its

normal rule-making authority. We decline to interpret the Revised Airports Act so

broadly.

Although the language ofRCW 14.08.330 plainly denies the city of SeaTac

some authority, the overall statutory scheme and the purposes underlying the Revised

Airports Act suggest that RCW 14.08.330 denies the city of SeaTac authority over

airport operations and the subject of aeronautics, as opposed to "any matters

occurring at [the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport]." Br. of Resp 't Port of Seattle

at 9 (emphasis added).

The legislature expressly instructed that the purpose of the statutory scheme is

to ensure uniformity in the laws regarding aeronautics. RCW 14.08.340.

Additionally, the law detailing the specific powers of municipalities operating

airports, RCW 14.08.120(1), provides that a municipality may establish a board

responsible for "the construction, enlargement, improvement, maintenance,

equipment, operation, and regulation [of the airport or other air navigation facility]."

These aspects of the statutory scheme lead us to conclude that the legislature intended

to vest authority for the operation of the airport exclusively with the Port of Seattle,

15
             
Fila Foods, LLC v. City of SeaTac
89723-9

but not to prohibit a local municipality like the city of SeaTac from regulating for the

general welfare in a manner unrelated to airport operations.