TagCASE(191)

In January 1999, the King County Superior Court denied the Port of Seattle's motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by Citizens Against SeaTac Expansion, ruling that a potential injury from wetland filling near the airport could not be ruled out. The case centered on the Port's plan to fill wetlands in Auburn as part of its Master Plan Update, which included construction of a proposed third air carrier runway at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. The court stayed all further proceedings until the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued a final decision on the Port's wetland-filling permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

In January 1999, the Port of Seattle filed a legal memorandum in King County Superior Court supporting a proposed order to stay (pause) a lawsuit brought by Citizens Against SeaTac Expansion (CASE) regarding the expansion of Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. The central dispute concerned the construction of a proposed third runway and the filling of nearby wetlands, with the Port arguing that court proceedings should be paused until the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued a final decision on the Port's wetland-fill permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The two parties disagreed on the exact language defining how long the stay should last, with the Port seeking a clear end date tied to the Corps' permit decision and CASE proposing broader conditions related to Port environmental decisions.

In a December 1998 ruling, King County Superior Court Judge Peter D. Jarvis denied the Port of Seattle's motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Citizens Against SeaTac Expansion, finding that the group had legal standing to challenge the Port's environmental decision regarding replacement wetlands in Auburn. The court determined that this decision was interrelated to the broader Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Master Plan Update, including the proposed Third Runway. While rejecting dismissal, the court stayed all proceedings until the Port completed all required environmental reviews under SEPA and Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act.

In this 1998 court declaration, Lawrence Corvari, Co-President of Citizens Against SeaTac Expansion (CASE), challenges the Port of Seattle's Auburn Mitigation Plan and its environmental review determination. Corvari argues that building replacement wetlands in Auburn rather than near the affected Miller Creek or Des Moines Creek watersheds leaves adverse environmental impacts unmitigated, harming CASE members' ability to enjoy local wildlife and a healthy environment. The declaration also corrects what Corvari describes as misrepresentations of his deposition testimony by the Port's attorneys in their Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing.

Helen Kludt, a Normandy Park resident who has lived near Miller Creek since 1956, submitted this 1998 court declaration supporting a legal challenge against the Port of Seattle's plans to expand Sea-Tac Airport with a third runway. She argues that the Port's proposal to destroy wetlands in the Miller Creek Basin and offset environmental impacts through out-of-basin mitigation in Auburn is inadequate and violates the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Kludt contends the expansion will harm her property value, degrade local wildlife habitat, and worsen flooding along Miller Creek.

In October 1998, Lawrence Corvari, Co-President of Citizens Against Seatac Expansion (CASE), filed a declaration in King County Superior Court supporting a petition for a writ of review against the Port of Seattle. The declaration states that CASE directed its attorneys to appeal the Port's SEPA Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) related to the Auburn Mitigation Project, arguing that the Port's failure to comply with environmental review requirements harmed both the organization's members and the Miller Creek Basin environment.