County Port Authority accused of more secret business dealings

A former Libby businessman who recently sued the Lincoln County for its alleged failure to follow state law on public notices and meetings is now seeking a restraining order to prevent further actions by the entity in an alleged attempt to sell more land in the Port Authority.

Daniel Torgison, through his attorney, Amy Guth, filed the application April 10 seeking a restraining order and an order for the defendants to appear before District Judge John Larson. He also filed an affidavit for a preliminary injunction.

The defendants include the Port Authority, Lincoln County Commissioners Brent Teske, Jim Hammons and Noel Duram and John Does 1-15.

In a April 14 order from District Judge John Larson, he found that Lincoln County and the Lincoln County Port Authority must appear before the Court and explain why a Temporary Injunctive Order should not be issued restraining Lincoln County and the Lincoln County Port Authority from acting on matters taken in violation of the Montana open meeting law statutes. 

The hearing will be held at 3 p.m. Monday, June 2. Judge Larson will appear by video conference.

Torgison’s application asserts that the Port Authority is contemplating selling property to Thompson Contracting, Inc., a Libby-based company. That came from the January 2025 minutes of the Port Authority, which were posted on its website around the same time the lawsuit was filed in early April. 

The January 2025 minutes read the following under Property Sales/Easement Requests: “Jerry noted that Levi Thompson from TCI is still waiting to receive the official survey of the property. The port is currently waiting on a Brownsfields evaluation and appraisal for the north property. Further movement on the easement will take place after these two things are completed.”

Torgison asserts in the affidavit that, “it appears from this entry that the Lincoln County Port Authority is attempting to sell public property to TCI, Thompson Contracting, Inc., a private entity.

In the court filing, it cites a number of provisions in Montana law, specifically Montana Code Annotated 2-3-103, that are intended to ensure the public has an opportunity to participate.

They include participation in decisions that are of significant interest to the public and that procedures must ensure adequate notice and assist public participation before a final agency action is taken.

It also says an agency shall publish a meeting agenda in a newspaper of general circulation in the county, posting a link of an agenda on the agency’s primary website or on the agency’s social media site.

In MCA 2-3-212, which deals with meeting minutes - public inspection, appropriate minutes of all meetings are required by 2-3-203 to be open must be kept and be available to the public.

The application alleges the Port Authority failed to post its meeting agendas until a few days ago. It also says the Authority posted agendas for meetings that took place in January and February 2025. The January 2025 meeting minutes indicate the Port Authority is considering selling property to Thompson Contracting. The court filing alleges the agenda for the meeting was not properly posted and the meeting minutes were only made public very recently.

According to Montana law, the sale of public property must be done in a public auction following an appraisal. According to the document, nothing in the minutes indicate the sale will be by public auction.

In his affidavit seeking a preliminary injunction to halt any efforts to sell Port Authority land, Torgison said he attempted to acquire public records about Port Authority activities. Those efforts included a careful review of the county website.

Following his review, Torgison reported that it appeared the minutes of the Port were sporadically posted under the department of the Lincoln County Commissioners until May of 2022. Torgison alleged that the county stopped posting information about the Port Authority Board on its website other than the time of its meetings and the wrong meeting location.

Torgison also said he reviewed social media, including Facebook, and it appeared to him that a site was created in 2015 but contained no information and appeared to be abandoned.

Torgison then learned the information he sought may be stored at the county Clerk and Recorder’s office in the courthouse. 

He went there to review the agendas and minutes and found that the Clerk and Recorder’s office was locked. Torgison asked to see the agendas and minutes for the Port Authority and he was directed to a computer located inside the locked office. A clerk gave Torgison a code and said it was difficult to access.

The Port Authority recently posted a “Special Meeting Agenda” on its website for a meeting at 3:30 p.m. Monday, April 14. It was to be held at what was described an alternate location in the Lincoln County Port Authority conference room at 60 Port Boulevard on the top floor.

The new Port Authority website (https://lincolncountyportauthority.net/) says meetings are held on the third Monday of each month at 3:30 p.m. at 216 West 9th St., Libby.

The agenda included an item about temporary commercial space and public comment.

In the lawsuit filed April 2 by Torgison, he accused the Lincoln County Commissioners, Port Authority and John Does 1-15, of hiding its business dealings with Noble Investment Properties, Inc., specifically the sale of 185 acres, owned by county taxpayers, from the Port Authority to Noble in 2023.

The suit alleges that Torgison became aware last month the Port Authority entered into transactions with Noble Investment Properties that may not have been fiscally sound, didn’t include public participation and competing businesses expressed a concern of favoritism.

Following a request by Torgison, Lincoln County Attorney Marcia Boris produced documents related to Noble Investment Properties, LLC. The documents indicate that between 2022 and 2023, the Port Authority received an offer from Noble Investment Properties to buy Port Authority’s real property.

In 2023, the Port Authority sold 185 acres of taxpayer owned real estate to Noble Investment Properties.

Following credits for property cleanup, Noble agreed to build a county road on the property to be purchased and with a reimbursement from a county grant, Noble Investments paid about $3,600 per acre to buy prime highway frontage real property owned by the county taxpayers.

It is believed that the market value of similar property is $50,000 per acre, the suit alleges.