Oak Harbor approves $70,000 settlement in decade‑old Harborland lawsuit; agrees to sell two parcels

The Oak Harbor City Council voted Aug. 6 to approve a settlement and release of claims in litigation brought by Harborland Company et al against the city, resolving a case that dates to 2015.

City Deputy Administrator and Finance Director David Goldman summarized the proposed terms during the open meeting. "It'd be a $70,000 settlement amount that'll be shared equally between the city and our insurance company, $35,000 each," Goldman said. He told council the settlement also calls for the city to sell two city‑owned parcels to the plaintiffs and for the plaintiffs to construct and extend a public stormwater conveyance system at their own expense.

Why it matters: the lawsuit, filed in February 2015, alleged that a prior flooding event originating from a storm drain under Goldie Road and Colbert affected Harborland Company property. The settlement ends more than a decade of intermittent negotiations and, if implemented, would transfer property and place stormwater infrastructure obligations on the plaintiffs rather than the city.

Goldman presented additional terms in the council meeting packet and slide presentation. He said the two parcels would have a minimum assessed value "of about... $72,000" and that the city would sell at that minimum or up to approximately "$206,000 or the appraised value, whichever is lesser." He also said the parties would share the cost of an appraisal. Goldman told council that any future development on the plaintiff‑purchased parcels would have to comply with the city’s current land‑use and development requirements.

City attorney substitute Bob Zee and Kimberly Wellbaum, the city’s WCIA attorney, echoed staff’s view that reaching a settlement after long negotiations was desirable. Zee told council it was "always good to have litigation come to an end." Wellbaum thanked city engineers and staff for their work on the case.

Council action: Councilor Marrow moved to approve the settlement agreement and release of claims; Councilor Stuckey seconded. The motion passed unanimously.

What the council did not decide at the meeting: Goldman’s presentation included several numeric details about appraiser costs and parcel valuations that were presented verbally and in slides; some of those figures were not clearly stated on the record and are therefore recorded here only as presented during the meeting. The final settlement documents will reflect the exact amounts and any clarifications of appraisal cost‑sharing.

After the vote the council moved on to the remainder of the agenda, including a lengthy public hearing on marina funding and a proposed local business and occupation tax.

Ending: Council approval allows staff and the city attorney to finalize settlement paperwork and execute the agreement. The item had been discussed in executive session immediately before the public meeting; staff said the executive session discussion related to litigation or potential litigation.