Gilliam County Court pauses action on resolution to begin dissolution of Port of Arlington, will consult legal counsel

Gilliam County Court members on Sept. 1 heard public comment and legal arguments about whether to adopt Resolution R2025-13 to initiate dissolution proceedings for the Port of Arlington and decided not to adopt the resolution at the meeting, directing staff to consult the county’s legal counsel and revisit the matter at a later session.

The matter drew multiple speakers who told the court the port is actively working to correct lapses in municipal audit filings and is operating ongoing projects. Catherine Greiner, a Port of Arlington commissioner, told the court the port has “taken full responsibility for the error” and asked the county to focus on helping the port complete audits rather than move straight to dissolution.

Why it matters: The county’s process for determining whether a special district must be dissolved is governed by Oregon statute and the Secretary of State’s office; the outcome could affect ongoing industrial and recreational activities the port oversees and any assets or liabilities tied to the district.

Port representatives said they have submitted a corrective action plan and are cooperating with auditors and the Secretary of State’s office. Jed Crowther (commenter) said the port’s auditors have agreed to have the first outstanding audit completed “by the end of this month,” and urged the court to wait for those reports before taking further action.

Anna Cavallari, an attorney representing the Port of Arlington, asked the court to revise the proposed resolution if it proceeds. Cavallari said the Secretary of State’s Aug. 26 letter “does not require adoption of a county resolution” and that the proposed language in the packet misstates the office’s direction. She told the court she had provided the port’s Aug. 29 corrective action plan and other communications for the record and said the port’s auditors had agreed to a schedule that would produce the 2022 audit by Oct. 31, 2025.

County discussion focused on procedure. Court members and public commenters repeatedly cited the statute’s mechanics for initiating dissolution — the preparation and filing of a financial statement, public notice and a hearing — and whether adopting a separate county resolution was necessary or could misrepresent the statute’s requirements. The court noted that filing the financial statement with the county clerk and holding a hearing are the statutory triggers for the process and that if the district files required reports the hearing may be continued or the order terminated under statute.

No motion to adopt Resolution R2025-13 was made during the meeting. Instead, the court agreed to consult its legal counsel, take into account the written corrective action plan and the materials recently filed by the port, and consider the resolution at a future meeting. The court’s action was recorded as no formal adoption of the resolution at this session.

Members of the public who spoke emphasized that the Port of Arlington operates active facilities — including subdivisions, industrial buildings, a marina and other local projects — and urged the county to allow the administrative process to run while the port completes audits and comes into compliance. The port’s attorney said she was available to speak with county legal counsel directly to clarify statutory steps and to ensure any county action accurately reflects the Secretary of State’s guidance.

The court said it will consult legal counsel and bring the item back for consideration at its next meeting, taking public comment and the port’s submitted materials into account.