KINGSTON — Three law firms are vying for the contract to serve as the Port of Kingston’s attorney.

Each made their pitch Dec. 12 to the Kingston Port Commission and Port Manager Jim Pivarnik. Making presentations were Kathleen Haggard of Porter Foster Rorick LLC, Carolyn Lake of Goodstein Law Group PLLC, and Frank Chmelik and Katherine Deets of Chmelik Sitkin & Davis.

One of the scenarios outlined by port commissioners was how their legal counsel might identify possible issues and advise regarding the port’s development of 3.1 acres of property, including a parking lot, residential space and a park. Possibilities for the property include the development of a residential community and the construction of a waterfront restaurant.

“I think there are three primary issues and the first one is making sure you’re staying within the confines of what ports are able to do in terms of economic development,” Haggard said.

(State law authorizes port districts to engage in “acquisition, construction, maintenance, operation, development and regulation within the district of harbor improvements, rail or motor vehicle transfer and terminal facilities, water transfer and terminal facilities, air transfer and terminal facilities, or any combination of such transfer and terminal facilities, and other commercial transportation, transfer, handling, storage and terminal facilities, and industrial improvements.”)

The second issue Haggard identified was the importance of transparency and open government. Haggard is the port’s public records attorney and has represented the port in two lawsuits related to failure to respond as required to public records requests. One lawsuit has been settled; another is in the penalty phase.

Regarding land development, “The Port of Vancouver got itself into big trouble recently with an economic development deal,” Haggard said. “They wanted to lease some of their waterfront to an oil train terminal and had a number of executive sessions where they discussed the lease.”

While discussing the lease, Haggard said, the Port of Vancouver went into detail on the terms of the lease, going beyond the discussion of the minimum price and, in doing so, violated the Open Public Meetings Act.

“You can have executive sessions to talk about the minimum price, but you have to be careful, very careful,” Haggard said. “So, your general counsel is going to make sure to advise you so that you stay on that path.”

The third issue identified by Haggard was the concern regarding land use and ensuring that the county comprehensive plan and codes allow for the port’s desired use for the areas which it is looking to develop.

Lake, whose firm currently provides legal services to the port district, responded to the scenario by employing what she referred to as “the four P’s.”Power: “Do you have the power to carry out the potential use that you want to do through the RCWs, et cetera?”

Permitting: “What are the relative timelines and challenges to any permitting involved in the various uses?”

Partnership: “What kind of uses would the community be involved with? [What] would they back you up on? Would they find a value?”

Practical: “What’s your rate of return? Does it make economic sense?”

“Those are the kinds of things to weigh back and forth: what the community would support and be behind, combined with the rate of return and your ability to do it; environmental constraints if there are any, especially on the shoreline, the waterfront property,” Lake said. “Are there going to be shoreline issues that you don’t anticipate or how can you best address those ahead of time as far as what the use is going to trigger.”

In order to determine what the port should do, Chmelik said it must first clearly understand why it wishes to develop the property. To help illustrate his point, he referred to a drawing he made of three concentric circles. Inside the circles, he wrote “what” on the outside ring, “how” on the middle ring and “why” in the center circle.

“[This is] not legal advice,” Chmelik prefaced the conversation. “The first thing I’d tell you is develop a ‘why?’ Why do you want to do this? The second thing I’d tell you is develop a due diligence checklist. Are there environmental issues that you might uncover? [Are] there zoning issues? [Are] there issues that you need to address?”

He added, “There’s park property in there, so now you’re going to have to coordinate with the county before you take park property off the table.”

Pivarnik responded that the property doesn’t actually belong to the county. “It’s really not park property, but people think it is,” Pivarnik said.

“Well, then you better identify your ‘why?’ because, trust me, it will be park property by the time you get there,” Chmelik joked. “It’ll be Yellowstone National Park by that time.”

A decision will not be made until the commissioners have an opportunity to discuss the candidates during a Dec. 20 special meeting. The meeting is scheduled for 1 p.m. in the Windermere Room at Village Green Community Center in Kingston.

— Nick Twietmeyer is a reporter for Kitsap News Group. Nick can be reached at ntwietmeyer@soundpublishing.com.