Anacortes staff present SEPA appeals ordinance; council debates removing local appeal for legislative actions

City planning and legal staff presented a first reading of Ordinance 4096 on Aug. 18 to change how appeals of State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determinations are handled for non‑project actions such as ordinances, plans and development regulations.

Planner and city attorney staff framed the issue: "SEPA is the State Environmental Policy Act codified at RCW chapter 43.21," staff attorney Swetnam told council, and current Anacortes Municipal Code does not differentiate between project and non‑project threshold determinations. Under the existing code, a threshold determination on a non‑project action is processed as a Type 2 administrative decision and can be appealed to the hearing examiner, which can delay council consideration of the legislative action.

The proposed ordinance would distinguish project actions from non‑project actions and place appeals of non‑project threshold determinations either before council at the time the underlying legislative action is considered or remove the local appeal option entirely. Staff said appeals of project actions would continue to go to the hearing examiner under current procedures.

Council debate focused on process and public access. Councilmember Walters and others questioned whether the local appeal is needed at all given the legislative public‑comment process, arguing that commenters already have the opportunity to raise SEPA adequacy concerns when the ordinance is before council. Walters said removing or changing the local appeal could prevent the use of appeal procedure to delay adoption of ordinances that the city needs to implement.

Councilmember Fantini sought clarification about whether the draft ordinance would speed up processing; staff replied that routing appeals to council (or removing the local appeal) would reduce the chance that threshold‑determination appeals create external delays, especially in cases where the city currently lacks an under‑contract hearing examiner. Councilmember Cleland McGrath asked staff to confirm that handling legislative non‑project appeals through council would not convert the matter into a quasi‑judicial proceeding; staff responded the appearance‑of‑fairness rules that apply to quasi‑judicial project hearings would not apply to legislative actions.

Public comment: Courtney Orrock of Anacortes asked when the ordinance would take effect. Staff replied an adopted ordinance would take effect five days after adoption and publication and would not apply to the currently pending appeal.

Next steps: Staff will return with a flowchart showing current and proposed process flows, a SEPA checklist for reference and two ordinance drafts—one that retains a local appeal routed to council and one that removes the local appeal—so council can choose between the options.

Ending: The matter remains at first reading. No vote was taken on Ordinance 4096 on Aug. 18.