Just last month, Snohomish County and the city of Arlington were celebrating a long-awaited victory at the state Supreme Court over the city’s proposed annexation of Island Crossing, a roughly 110-acre area of mostly unused farmland at an I-5 interchange north of Smokey Point.
Now, it appears, they’ll be adversaries in court over the same thing. It’s the annexation fight that just won’t go away. Even a budget crisis that includes layoffs in the county Prosecutor’s Office won’t keep a majority of the Snohomish County Council from launching a time-consuming and potentially costly new legal battle.
By a 4-1 vote, with lone Republican John Koster dissenting, the County Council last week instructed the Prosecutor’s Office to pursue legal action against Arlington after the city followed through with the annexation it had sought for years, and thought it had finally accomplished.
The fight is over commercial development in the area. Dwayne Lane has been fighting for nearly 15 years to move his Arlington car dealership to Island Crossing, an area already partly developed and served by city utilities, including sewer. Opponents have argued that the state Growth Management Act prohibits urban development on the area’s farmland, and that it’s too prone to flooding.
Proponents, including other land owners in the area, say traffic makes the area unsuitable for farming, and that Arlington badly needs the tax revenue.
After years of back-and-forth rulings and appeals, it appeared the state Supreme Court had decided the issue once and for all on Oct. 9, ruling in favor of Lane, the county and the city. The county had joined with Lane and Arlington because in 2003 the County Council, then controlled by Republicans, had voted to put the area into Arlington’s urban growth area. But the current council, with its 4-1 Democratic majority, opposes Arlington’s annexation and development plans, hence the new legal action. The county apparently will argue that the County Council must vote again on expanding Arlington’s urban growth area to include Island Crossing. Arlington’s attorney, Steve Peiffle, disagrees.
So are we in for more years of suing, appealing, and appealing again? We could be. Great use of taxpayer dollars, especially in this economy.
Council Democrats shouldn’t commit to a protracted and expensive fight with one of their own cities. The state Supreme Court made a rational decision: Island Crossing can be developed, pending the usual environmental reviews.
Neither side has the resources to waste on more fighting.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
