Washington Administrative Code Title 330 - Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle
Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Title 330: Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (Metro)
Background: What is the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle?
The Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, or Metro, was a regional government agency established in the 1950s to provide regional planning and services in King County, Washington, especially focused on:
Sewer and wastewater treatment
Public transportation (bus services)
Regional parks and open spaces
Environmental and health programs
Metro was a unique form of local government created by state law to address issues that crossed city and county boundaries in the Seattle metropolitan area.
Note: Metro was eventually dissolved in 1992, with many functions transferred to King County and other agencies. However, WAC Title 330 contains rules and procedures that were established for Metro during its existence, especially concerning operations, governance, and contracting.
Overview of WAC Title 330
WAC Title 330 includes rules related to the administration and operation of Metro, such as:
Organization and governance of Metro
Procedures for procurement and contracting
Personnel policies
Financial administration
Service standards and operational guidelines
Key Provisions of WAC Title 330
1. Governance and Organization (WAC 330-10)
Defines the structure of Metro’s governing body, the Metro Council, which consisted of representatives from King County and member cities.
Establishes the roles and responsibilities of elected officials and appointed officers.
Provides rules for public meetings, records, and transparency in governance.
2. Procurement and Contracting (WAC 330-20)
Specifies rules for competitive bidding for goods and services.
Establishes thresholds for small purchases vs. formal bidding.
Sets procedures for contract award, renewal, and termination.
Requires compliance with state procurement laws and Metro’s internal controls.
3. Personnel Policies (WAC 330-30)
Governs hiring, classification, compensation, and discipline of Metro employees.
Ensures compliance with state civil service laws where applicable.
Details employee rights, grievance procedures, and workplace standards.
4. Financial Management (WAC 330-40)
Defines budgeting and accounting procedures.
Establishes audit and reporting requirements.
Governs the use of public funds and assets under Metro’s control.
Statutory and Legal Background
Metro was created under RCW Chapter 35.58 and related statutes, providing it with broad powers to address metropolitan-wide concerns.
The WAC rules supplemented the statute by laying out administrative procedures and standards to ensure efficient, transparent, and lawful operation of Metro.
Important Case Law Related to Metro and WAC Title 330
Although Metro no longer exists as an entity, several Washington court cases during its operational years provide insights into how courts interpreted Metro’s authority, governance, and administrative rules.
1. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle v. Seattle Audubon Society, 90 Wn.2d 59 (1978)
Issue: Did Metro have authority to regulate and protect regional environmental resources, specifically wetlands, under its charter and enabling statutes?
Holding: The Washington Supreme Court held Metro had broad authority to regulate land use and environmental resources as part of its regional mandate.
Significance: Affirmed Metro’s regional powers beyond traditional municipal boundaries and supported its ability to impose regulations for environmental protection.
2. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle v. King County, 27 Wn.App. 755 (1980)
Issue: The dispute centered on the division of responsibilities and taxation authority between Metro and King County.
Holding: The Court ruled that Metro had independent taxing authority within its jurisdiction and could levy taxes for regional services.
Significance: Confirmed Metro’s fiscal autonomy and ability to fund its operations through taxes separate from King County.
3. Metropolitan Municipality of Seattle v. Weyerhaeuser, 45 Wn. App. 681 (1986)
Issue: Whether Metro had the authority to enter into certain contracts related to regional waste management.
Holding: The Court upheld Metro’s contracting authority, emphasizing that WAC Title 330’s procurement rules ensured fair and lawful contracting.
Significance: Supported the validity of Metro’s internal administrative rules for procurement as consistent with state law.
4. Seattle v. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, 98 Wn.2d 541 (1983)
Issue: Whether Metro could enforce certain public transportation regulations and zoning restrictions within Seattle city limits.
Holding: The Supreme Court confirmed Metro’s authority to implement regional transit policies that applied within member cities, even if they conflicted with local ordinances.
Significance: Reinforced Metro’s regional regulatory authority under its statutory mandate.
How WAC Title 330 Reflects These Legal Principles
Broad regional powers: WAC Title 330 codified Metro’s authority to govern regional issues, including transit, environmental management, and public services.
Governance structure: The rules formalized the composition and procedures of the Metro Council, ensuring representation of constituent cities and King County.
Procurement and contracts: WAC 330 established detailed procedures to ensure transparency, fairness, and compliance with legal standards, as affirmed by the Weyerhaeuser case.
Fiscal authority: Procedures for budgeting and taxation reflected Metro’s independent taxing powers confirmed by courts.
Intergovernmental relations: Rules recognized the primacy of Metro’s regional policies even when overlapping with municipal regulations, consistent with Seattle v. Metro.
Practical Impact of WAC Title 330 (While Metro Existed)
Metro officials followed clear guidelines for conducting business, ensuring transparency and legal compliance.
Vendors and contractors engaged with Metro under competitive and fair procurement procedures.
Employees worked under defined personnel policies promoting fairness and accountability.
Residents and member governments had input into regional governance through Metro Council representation.
Environmental and transportation programs were administered with statutory and administrative authority backing their scope.
Summary Table
| Aspect | WAC 330 Provisions | Case Law Example |
|---|---|---|
| Regional Authority | Environmental protection, land use rules | Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle v. Seattle Audubon (1978) |
| Taxing Authority | Independent taxation for Metro services | Metro v. King County (1980) |
| Procurement Rules | Competitive bidding, contract procedures | Metro v. Weyerhaeuser (1986) |
| Transit Regulation | Enforcement of regional transit policies | Seattle v. Metro (1983) |
| Governance | Metro Council composition and meetings | N/A (Statutory and administrative framework) |
RELATED Blog
0 comments