OTHELLO — A public hearing on a request to annex 658 acres into the city of Othello will be continued to October. Mayor Shawn Logan said people who either oppose or support the annexation of property along Bench Road will have one additional opportunity to testify. 

“We’re going to continue this public hearing until Oct. 13 during the regular council meeting,” said Mayor Shawn Logan. 

City attorney Hilary Evans said rescheduling a new public hearing would mean any existing testimony would be eliminated from the record. After some discussion, council members decided to continue the hearing and allow people who had already testified, but who wanted to testify again, to do so.  

“I think that’s best, since otherwise we have to start all over again,” Logan said.  

Anne Henning, Othello community development director, said Tuesday that the proponents asked for the continuance because they will be working in the potato harvest.  

In addition, signatures on any annexation petition must have been submitted within the last six months, and the signatures on the petition from Skone & Connors Partners are older than that, Henning said. A new petition must be submitted as a result, she said, and as of Tuesday, that had not been received. 

A public hearing is designed to gather public comment, and so far, a lot of people have commented, either in writing or at the two council meetings. About 30 people had submitted written testimony by June 23, all of them opposed. Five people testified in person during the July 14 council meeting, all of them either opposed or asking the city to pause consideration of the request. Five of the six people testifying June 23 were against the proposal. 

City officials did receive a letter from an attorney representing Skone & Connors, asking that two council members who were part of the discussion at the June 23 meeting recuse themselves from voting. 

Mark Fickes of Halverson Northwest Law Group wrote that Angel Garza and John Lallas have conflicts of interest, in the opinion of the petitioners.  

“Garza is a residential home building developing competing property and our client reasonably believes is or would be evaluating the Bench Road annexation petition through an anticompetitive lens,” Fickes said.  

Council members did approve a petition to annex a different section of property, known as the Hampton development. Fickes said the petitioners believe Lallas has what he called “family affiliations that are supporting the Hampton development petition.” 

As a result, he should recuse himself, Fickes said. 

“Based on early comments in the June 23 council meeting, it was apparent that Councilman Lallas was biased from the beginning,” Fickes said.  

He said council members may have talked with other people in the community about the proposed annexation.  

“Before the hearing even started, many council members seemed to use the city’s attorney’s request for answers to conflict questions to provide their opinion on annexation issues and why they may oppose the Bench Road annexation,” he said. “Council members should not be changing their mind based on ex parte contacts or public opposition, much of which was from parties located outside the city limits and annexation area.”