Port District Resources
This page, created for the Washington Public Ports Association (WPPA), provides resources for port district commissioners and staff in Washington State, including sample documents and information about budgeting, procurement, promotional hosting, comprehensive schemes, and more.
Have a question? Ask MRSC! Most port districts in Washington State are eligible for our free one-on-one consultation service, Ask MRSC. Get an answer quickly from one of our trusted attorneys, policy consultants, or finance experts!
Eligible port districts must be members of Enduris or must have opted in to receive MRSC’s services through WPPA.
- Title 53 RCW – Port Districts
Stay up-to-date with the latest news and analysis from MRSC. We distribute a quarterly port district e-newsletter, plus other newsletters on relevant local government topics including new legislation and court decisions, emerging issues, policy guidance, and management tips.
Learn more and sign up at our MRSC E-Newsletters page.
There are currently 75 port districts in Washington State, with the most recent district formed in 1988. There have been a few more recent attempts to form port districts, but they have been rejected by voters.
- List of Port Districts (Excel spreadsheet) – Includes counties, year formed, and number of commissioners, as well as separate tab for inactive/dissolved districts
WPPA has published two helpful guides for commissioners:
- Port Commissioner Resource Guide (2010) – Provides information about the role of port commissioners and the association
- Knowing the Waters (2007) – Basic legal guidelines for port district officials
In addition, MRSC has two publications that may be of interest to port commissioners or prospective commissioners:
- Getting Into Office – Discusses the qualifications and processes required to seek office
- Knowing the Territory – Describes the nature, powers, and duties of municipal officials for "keeping out of trouble," including discussions of open government, conflicts of interest, and other laws
Some districts have adopted their own codes of ethics, so make sure you know what your local policies are.
Each port district must adopt rules governing the transaction of port commission business (RCW 53.12.245). Below are a few examples:
- Port of Columbia Rules of Procedure (2018) – Brief, two-page rules
- Port of Grapeview Bylaws (2013)
- Port of Longview Rules of Procedure (2017) – Includes section on remote attendance
- Port of Olympia Rules of Procedure (2017) – Includes section on remote attendance
- Port of Port Townsend Rules of Procedure (2018)
For general information about public works contracting, purchases, and service contracts, see our series on Purchasing and Contracting.
To see your specific statutory bid limits and competitive bidding requirements for any kind of project, use our Find Your Contracting Requirements tool. Select your project type, then select “port district.” Note: This tool only shows your statutory requirements. Your district may have adopted its own more stringent policies, so always consult your local policies and legal counsel.
Personal Services Contracting
In 2008, the state legislature adopted legislation establishing requirements for personal services contracting by port districts (chapter 53.19 RCW). The legislation also required MRSC, in cooperation with WPPA, to develop guidelines for the effective management of personal services contracts.
- MRSC/WPPA Personal Services Contracting Manual for Ports (2009) – Also see additional appendices/examples on our website
Small Public Works Rosters
Port districts are authorized to use a small works roster process for smaller public works contracts. For more information, see our page on Small Public Works Rosters or download our Small Works Roster publication.
MRSC provides its own roster service for local governments across Washington, connecting hundreds of local governments – including many port districts – to thousands of businesses for public works, consulting services, and purchases. To sign up or learn more, visit MRSC Rosters.
Unit-Priced Public Works Contracts
Port districts are authorized to use unit priced ("on call") public works contracts. A unit priced contract means a competitively bid contract in which public works are anticipated on a recurring basis, under which the contractor agrees to a fixed period indefinite quantity delivery or work, at a defined unit price, for each category of work. For more information, see our page on Unit Priced (On Call) Public Works Contracts.
All port districts are required to adopt an annual calendar year budget under chapter 53.35 RCW, with the following deadlines:
- *September 15: Preliminary budget filed (RCW 53.35.010)
- Between September 15 and the adoption of the budget: Districts that collect regular property taxes (almost all port districts) must hold public hearings on revenue sources for the upcoming year's budget (RCW 84.55.120).
- *Between September 15 and the first Tuesday following the first Monday in October: Public hearing on final budget, with public notice once per week for two consecutive weeks beginning nine to 20 days before the hearing; budget adoption (RCW 53.35.020-.030)
- *First Wednesday following first Monday in October: Final budget filed with county commissioners, stating amount of property taxes to be raised (RCW 53.35.040)
- November 30: Deadline to certify next year's levy rates to the county (RCW 84.52.070, see below)
However, RCW 53.35.045 allows port districts to adopt alternate dates for some of these steps, marked with asterisks above, culminating with final budget filing by the first Monday in December.
All port districts must certify the amount of property taxes to be levied upon the property within their jurisdiction for the coming fiscal year to the county assessor no later than November 30 (RCW 84.52.070). This deadline may not be altered. If your jurisdiction misses the November 30 deadline, you may not increase the levy amount above the prior year’s level.
In addition, any port commission may adopt one or more supplemental budgets (budget amendments) during the fiscal year. A public hearing is required, with a single public notice required five to 15 days before the hearing (RCW 53.35.050).
- Port of Bremerton Budget Planning Calendar (2018) – Alternate budget dates, beginning with distribution of budget worksheets in July
- Port of Camas-Washougal Resolution No. 2-17 (2017) – Alternate budget dates
- Port of Edmonds Budget Schedule (2017) – Alternate budget dates
- Port of Port Townsend Operating and Capital Budget Development Schedule (2018) – Alternate budget dates with option for two public hearings
Port districts are allowed to spend a limited amount of money on “promotional hosting” to boost industrial development or trade within the district (RCW 53.36.120-.150). Promotional hosting covers customary meals, refreshments, lodging, transportation, or any combination of those items in connection with business meetings, social gatherings, or honoring ceremonies. These events must be related to authorized business promotional activities of the port. Hosting may also include reasonable, customary, and incidental entertainment, and souvenirs of nominal value.
See the State Auditor’s Office Bulletin Number 404 (1986) for specific guidelines on hosting various types of organizations and individuals.
Article 8, section 8 of the state constitution specifically states that such expenses do not constitute a gift of public funds; port districts are the only local government agency with such authority. (However, aside from promotional hosting, port districts are still subject to the gift of public funds doctrine, which generally prohibits local governments from conveying gifts or financial benefits upon private parties. For more information, see our page Gift of Public Funds.)
The statutory limits on promotional hosting expenditures (RCW 53.36.130) depend on the port district’s gross operating revenues:
|Gross Operating Revenues
|Promotional Hosting Expenditure Limit
|$250,000 or less
|$250,000 to $2.5 million
|1% of gross operating revenues
|$2.5 million to $5 million
|$25,000 plus 0.5% of operating revenues in excess of $2.5 million
|Over $5 million
|$37,500 plus 0.25% of operating revenues in excess of $5 million
Promotional hosting funds may only be spent from gross operating revenues, and expenditures must be included as specific budget items in the annual budget.
Port districts must adopt written rules and regulations governing promotional hosting expenditures. Such rules should state who is authorized to make such expenditures and what the objectives are. Port commissioners may not personally make such expenditures or seek reimbursement for such expenditures unless specific authorization has been approved by the entire port commission.
- Port of Bellingham Expense Documentation Form (2012) – Covers promotional hosting and business/meeting expenses
- Port of Everett Promotional Hosting Policy (2017) – Designates port commission, executive director, attorney, chiefs, marine terminals director, and marina director to make expenditures
- Port of Kingston Promotional Hosting Policy (2016) – $2,500 limit; executive director may approve expenditures up to $250
- Port of Olympia Promotional Hosting Calculation (2018) – Calculation for coming year based on previous year’s audited revenues, showing breakdown of first $2.5 million, second $2.5 million, and excess over $5 million, as well as budgeted expenses by department
- Port of Port Angeles Promotional Hosting Policy (2014) – Designates port commission, executive director, department directors, managers, and others as re-delegated to make expenditures
Before creating any harbor improvements, port districts are required to adopt a comprehensive scheme under chapter 53.20 RCW. These documents are also known as “comprehensive plans,” but they differ significantly from the comprehensive plans of cities and counties.
While port districts are not directly required to create comprehensive plans under the Growth Management Act (GMA), many port districts have been involved in the development of city/comprehensive plans under the GMA. Port comprehensive plan elements are mandatory for cities that include within their jurisdiction marine container ports with annual operating revenues over $60 million, and optional for cities that include marine container ports with annual revenues between $20 million and $60 million (RCW 36.70A.085).
For more information, see WPPA’s Comprehensive Plan Guideline for Washington’s Public Ports (updated 2009).
Port districts adopt rules governing the transaction of their business by resolution. For information on drafting and adopting resolutions, download our Local Ordinances publication. While this document focuses on ordinances for cities and counties, the contents are still useful for port district resolutions.
The Washington Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) requires that all meetings of governing bodies of public agencies, including port districts, be open to the public.
The OPMA contains specific provisions regarding regular and special meetings, executive sessions, the types of notice that must be given for meetings, the conduct of meetings, and the penalties and remedies for violations.
All port commissioners must complete OPMA training within 90 days of taking the oath of office or assuming duties. A refresher OPMA training is also required every four years.
The Public Records Act (PRA) requires that all public records maintained by state and local agencies, including port districts, be made available to all members of the public, with very narrow statutory exemptions.
All port commissioners and public records officers must complete PRA training within 90 days of taking the oath of office or assuming duties. A refresher PRA training is also required every four years.
Effective financial policies are essential to a local government’s fiscal health. They provide stability and continuity over the years as staff and elected officials turn over by establishing what actions are acceptable and unacceptable, identifying who is responsible for taking certain actions, and providing standards to measure your jurisdiction’s performance.
They are also used during state audits to assess compliance, by credit ratings agencies to help determine your jurisdiction’s fiscal stability, and by other financial professionals as a basis for providing services.
For help crafting your financial policies and procedures, see our Financial Policies Tool Kit, which provides detailed guidance and key questions to consider on a number of financial topics, as well as links to best practices and sample documents from other jurisdictions.
RCW 39.34.040 provides an alternative to filing an interlocal agreement with the county auditor; a public agency may list the agreement on its website or other electronically retrievable public source. For more information, see our page on Intergovernmental Cooperation in Public Works.
Below are examples:
- Ports of Chelan County and Douglas County Functional Consolidation Interlocal Agreement (2019) – Forming a regional port authority under RCW 39.34.030 and RCW 53.08.240; includes articles of incorporation, bylaws, initial consolidated budget, and inventory of assets, real property, and debt
- Port of Everett Interlocal Agreements
- Port of Ilwaco Interlocal Agreements
- Port of Longview Contracts Database and Interlocal Agreements
- Port of Port Angeles Interlocal and Intergovernmental Agreements
Cybersecurity is critical for port districts, which must protect vital infrastructure in addition to personal employee information and other important documents. For a list of helpful resources, see our Cybersecurity Resources for Local Governments.
- Washington Public Ports Association (WPPA) – In particular, see "For Members" section with publications, events, and other helpful resources