Standing for Nature has intervened in the lawsuit filed by the Master Builders Association and other developer interests against Everett Initiative 24-03, taking on the primary role of defending this groundbreaking law in court. As the legal battle intensifies, we are preparing our response to the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

The developers are challenging the landmark measure that grants legal standing to the Snohomish River Watershed and gives the community the ability to protect the health of their local ecosystem directly through the courts.

DONATE Now to Support Our Work

Standing for Nature successfully intervened in this case to ensure that the citizens’ interests have a strong voice in defending the initiative. We’ve already filed a Motion to Dismiss, arguing that the developers lack standing to challenge a law that creates no immediate harm to their interests.

While our Motion to Dismiss was denied, we continue to believe that the developers’ challenge is fundamentally flawed. The ordinance doesn’t create new regulations or restrict development—it simply provides a legal mechanism for community members to seek redress if the watershed is harmed.

Preparing for Summary Judgment

Now, the plaintiffs have escalated their challenge with a Motion for Summary Judgment. We are preparing a robust response that will:

• Reaffirm the ordinance’s compliance with state and federal law, and
• Underscore the ordinance’s narrow scope and legal soundness.

Our legal team is confident that when the court examines the actual text and operation of the initiative, rather than the developers’ mischaracterizations, it will find that Initiative 24-03 is a valid exercise of municipal authority that creates meaningful protection for the Snohomish River Watershed.

The Stakes

This case represents more than just a local ordinance—it’s about whether communities can take proactive steps to protect their natural resources through innovative legal approaches. The outcome will have implications for natural law and community rights far beyond Everett.

We’re committed to mounting the strongest possible defense of this voter-approved initiative and the democratic will of Everett residents who chose to give their watershed legal protection.

---

COMPLETE LEGAL PLEADINGS IN CASE

For attorneys and interested parties who want to read the full legal record, here are the pleadings in order of filing. If you have any legal suggestions on how to respond to the Motion for Summary Judgment, please CONTACT US!

Initial Filings

• Complaint (Filed by Master Builders Association, et al.) – Jan 28, 2025
• City’s Answer – Feb 25, 2025

Standing for Nature’s Intervention

• Standing for Nature’s Motion to Intervene – March 5, 2025
• Order Granting Motion to Intervene – March 21, 2025

Motion to Dismiss Phase

• Standing for Nature’s Motion to Dismiss – March 26, 2025
• Plaintiffs’ Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss – April 2, 2025
• City’s Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss – April 2, 2025
• Standing for Nature’s Reply to Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss – April 3, 2025
• Order Denying Motion to Dismiss – May 1, 2025

Current Phase – Declaratory/Summary Judgment

• Standing for Nature’s Answer to the Complaint – May 11, 2025
• Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment – Aug 14, 2025
  • Declaration of Maguire – Plaintiffs’ Attorney
  • Declaration of Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties
  • Declaration of Building Industry Association of Washington
  • Declaration of Washington Aggregate and Concrete Association
  • Declaration of Greencity Development, LLC via Vitaliy Gutsalo
  • Declaration of Osprey Logistics, LLC
  • Declaration of Martin Robinett (Robinett Brothers Construction, LLC; Robinett Investment Company, LLC)
• City’s Response to the Motion for Summary Judgment – Sept 8, 2025
  • Declaration of Heather Griffin – Surface Water Manager for Public Works
  • Declaration of Jeff Marrs – Assistant Director for Public Works
  • Declaration of Yorik Stevens-Wajda – Director for Public Works
• Standing for Nature’s Opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment – Oct 3, 2025
  • Declaration of Kurtz-McAlaine – Standing for Nature’s Attorney
• Plaintiffs’ Reply Brief in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment – Oct 17, 2025
• Order Granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment – Nov 19, 2025