No decision on legal fight over port meetings

A Clark County Superior Court judge on Thursday heard arguments over how far three environmental groups should be able to push in seeking information to support their allegations that the Port of Vancouver illegally excluded the public from discussions of a proposed oil terminal lease.

Judge David Gregerson said he would give further consideration to the matter before making any decisions. He said he’s concerned that some questions asked of the port fall outside certain boundaries.

And he indicated that a retired judge could be made available to referee sessions during which attorneys question the port as part of the case’s pretrial discovery phase.

Arguing before Gregerson, Elizabeth Zultoski, a Seattle attorney for Columbia Riverkeeper, Sierra Club and Northwest Environmental Defense Center, said the port’s attorneys were trying to “cut off” the plaintiffs’ ability “to gain all of the evidence (they) need to prove (their) claims.”

David Markowitz, a Portland attorney for the port and commissioners Nancy Baker, Jerry Oliver and Brian Wolfe, countered that any questions should be limited to the port’s past use of closed-door meetings about the oil terminal lease. Instead, he contended, some questions veered into current or future considerations, including whether the port should cancel the lease.

Thursday’s legal skirmish is part of a larger court battle: In an expanded lawsuit, the environmental groups allege the port, Baker, Oliver and Wolfe used not just one but multiple illegal executive sessions in 2013 to discuss things about the potential lease that should have been taken up in public.

It’s unclear what, if any, impact the suit may have on the lease that was unanimously approved by commissioners. The port’s contract is with Tesoro Corp. and Savage Companies. The companies propose building an oil-by-rail transfer facility that would receive an average of 360,000 barrels of crude per day.

In written pleadings filed ahead of Thursday’s hearing, attorneys argued over the scope of the pretrial questioning of the port. Court documents show Oliver, Wolfe and Baker gave depositions on Dec. 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Citing those depositions, attorneys for the environmental groups wrote that commissioners “discuss virtually anything” related to real estate during executive sessions despite the law’s requirement that they stick to only the minimum price at which real estate will be offered.

Also citing the depositions, the port’s attorneys wrote that plaintiffs “repeatedly asked irrelevant, harassing questions of the commissioners.”