Real Briefings
This pre-hearing conference for the Protect Mudbay Cliffs appeal of the Woods at Viewcrest project (SCP-2022-0013) established comprehensive procedural frameworks and scheduling for a consolidated SEPA appeal and permit hearing. The meeting addressed significant procedural disputes between parties and set ambitious deadlines for a complex multi-day hearing process. ### Major Decisions - **Hearing Format**: In-person hearing with hybrid participation options - **Hearing Schedule**: January 12-16, 2026, with permit hearing starting Wednesday evening - **Issue Clarification**: Appellants must provide concise issue statements by September 15, 2025 - **SEPA Record**: City to publish numbered exhibit record by September 15, 2025 - **Motion Practice**: Full dispositive motion schedule established (October 3-31, 2025) - **Pre-hearing Briefing**: Sequential briefing with appellants filing first, responses by December 23
Members only
Sign up free →
Members only
Sign up free →
Members only
Sign up free →
Members only
Sign up free →
null…
About 100% shown — sign up free to read the rest
Sign up free →
Members only
Sign up free →
## Meeting Overview
On September 2, 2025, City of Bellingham Hearing Examiner Sharon Rice convened a pre-hearing conference to organize the procedural framework for what promises to be one of the most substantial environmental appeals in recent city history. The case centers on Protect Mud Bay Cliffs' challenge to the city's July 25, 2025 determination of non-significance for the Woods at Viewcrest project—a proposed 38-lot subdivision on 38 acres in the Edgemore neighborhood, adjacent to and overlooking Chuckanut Creek Pocket Estuary.
The conference brought together a formidable array of legal representation: appellants Protect Mud Bay Cliffs represented by attorneys Claudia Newman and Michael Ray of Bricklin & Newman; applicants the Jones family (Betsy, Susan, and Rogan Jones) represented by Jon Sitkin and Tim Schmetzler of CSD Law; and the City of Bellingham represented by Deputy City Attorney James Erb, along with Planning Director Blake Lyon, SEPA Responsible Official Curtin Abbefeld, and senior planners Kathy Bell and Steve Sundin. The appellants' 590-page filing and the city's creation of a dedicated project website signal the complex environmental and procedural issues at stake.
What emerged from this 90-minute conference was both the careful choreography needed to manage such a substantial case and early glimpses of the fundamental disagreements that will drive the hearing itself—from the specificity of environmental impact allegations to the appropriate balance between thorough preparation and procedural efficiency.
## The Battle Over Issue Clarity
The most contentious discussion centered on the applicants' request for more concise issue statements from the appellants. Jon Sitkin argued that the 29-page appeal, while voluminous, contained "generic statement" and "boilerplate" language that left his clients unable to prepare adequate responses. "We were left with always, how? It's just this generic statement," Sitkin explained. "Where is the traffic impacted? How is the traffic impacted?" He pressed fo…
About 14% shown — sign up free to read the rest
Sign up free →
### Meeting Overview
The City of Bellingham Hearing Examiner held a pre-hearing conference on September 2, 2025, to organize the appeal process for the Woods at Viewcrest development. Protect Mud Bay Cliffs has appealed the city's July 25, 2025 determination of non-significance (DNS) for this proposed 38-lot subdivision on 38 acres in the Edgemore neighborhood.
### Key Terms and Concepts
**SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act):** Washington state law requiring environmental review of major projects before approval. A "determination of non-significance" (DNS) means the city found no significant environmental impacts.
**Consolidated Hearing:** When a SEPA appeal and permit hearing are combined into one proceeding, allowing all environmental and land use issues to be addressed together.
**Dispositive Motion:** A legal motion asking the examiner to dismiss all or part of an appeal before the full hearing, arguing there's insufficient evidence or legal basis to proceed.
**Open Record Hearing:** A proceeding where new evidence can be submitted during the hearing, not just evidence submitted beforehand.
**Issue Statement:** A concise description of the specific environmental errors alleged in an appeal, required to help focus the hearing on disputed matters.
**Pre-hearing Brief:** Written arguments submitted before the hearing outlining each party's legal position and planned evidence.
**Site Visit:** When the hearing examiner personally visits the project location to understand the physical context before making a decision.
### Key People at This Meeting
| Name | Role / Affiliation |
|---|---|
| Sharon Rice | City of Bellingham Hearing Examiner |
| Larry Horowitz | Protect Mud Bay Cliffs (appellant organization) |
| Claudia Newman | Attorney for appellants (Bricklin & Newman) |
| Michael Rea | Attorney for appellants (Bricklin & Newman) |
| Jon Sitkin | Attorney for applicants (CSD Law) |
| Tim Schmetzler | Attorney for applicants (CSD Law) |
| Betsy, Susan, and Rogan Jones | Property owners/applicants |
| Ali Taysi | Applicant's representative/consultant |
| James Erb | Deputy City Attorney |
| Blake Lyon | Planning Director |
| Christy Bowker | City Hearing Clerk |
### Background Context
The Woods at Viewcrest is a controversial 38-lot subdivision proposed on 38 acres in Bellingham's Edgemore neighborhood, adjacent to Chuckanut Creek Pocket…
About 49% shown — premium members only
Upgrade to premium →