## Facts

- The City of Everett operated a sewage treatment plant on Smith Island under a state permit.
- The EPA found the City had violated its permit by allowing sewage sludge to accumulate, reducing treatment capacity, and directed the City to submit a removal and disposal plan.
- The City proposed transporting sludge to a 952-acre disposal/utilization site on Ebey Island, located outside the City in unincorporated Snohomish County.
- The City sought a sludge utilization permit from the Snohomish Health District; the District conditioned issuance on obtaining a county conditional use permit under county zoning.
- A county hearing examiner denied the conditional use permit based on findings including high heavy-metal levels in sludge, site conditions (low soil pH, flooding, high water table), and incompatibility with surrounding agricultural uses; the County Council upheld the denial.
- The City sued, asserting statutory authority to manage sludge and solid waste and eminent domain power allowed it to proceed without complying with county zoning.
- The superior court granted summary judgment to the City; the County appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether a city locating a sewage sludge/solid waste disposal facility in unincorporated county territory is immune from the county’s zoning regulations.
2. Whether statutes authorizing municipal waste disposal and eminent domain show legislative intent to exempt the city from host-jurisdiction zoning.

## Decision

- The Washington Supreme Court reversed the summary judgment for the City.
- The court held the City was not immune from Snohomish County’s zoning regulations and had to comply with the county zoning code for the Ebey Island project.
- The court rejected categorical intergovernmental zoning tests (e.g., “governmental vs. proprietary” and “superior sovereignty”) as controlling and resolved the dispute based on legislative intent.
- The court concluded the relevant statutes contained no express exemption allowing the City to override county zoning.

## Legal Principles

- In intergovernmental land-use conflicts, whether a local government must comply with another local government’s zoning turns on legislative intent as expressed in the statutory scheme.
- Authority to construct and operate waste facilities and to acquire property, including by eminent domain, does not itself imply immunity from a host jurisdiction’s zoning regulations.
- Absent a clear legislative directive granting exemption, a local government acting within another jurisdiction remains subject to that jurisdiction’s duly adopted land-use controls.

## Conclusion

The court required the City to follow Snohomish County’s zoning process for siting a sludge disposal facility in unincorporated county land because the Legislature had not clearly authorized the City to disregard county zoning.


City of Everett v. Snohomish County, 112 Wn.2d 433, 772 P.2d 992 (Wash. 1989)