A judge has cleared the way for the recall of three Port of Benton commissioners but ruled several of the charges filed against them weren’t legally or factually sufficient to proceed. 

Of the 13 original charges against each commissioner, one was withdrawn, two were found legally and factually sufficient to proceed, and one additional charge was found sufficient for the recall of Commissioner Scott Keller.

The court considered only whether the charges were legally adequate, not whether they were true.

The decision comes after a March 25 hearing in Benton County Superior Court on petitions prompted by Richland Airport utility disputes and alleged retaliation against the port’s executive director, who has been suspended on paid leave since Jan. 7, and chief financial officer and auditor, who was fired Feb. 7.

Judge Diana Ruff issued her decision five days later that the recall could proceed.

Port commissioners have already filed an appeal with the state Supreme Court to contest the charges.

Citizens’ petition

The recall was initiated by retired Benton County District Court Judge Eugene Pratt and his daughter Ashley Garza, a land surveyor who worked as a contractor for the port from 2022-26.

Garza discovered discrepancies while mapping the port’s airport infrastructure that she said uncovered years of unresolved problems and eventually prompted her to pursue the recall. Problems ranged from unpermitted uses and infrastructure to unmetered or incorrectly billed utilities, missing easements, unassessed structures and encroachments on port property.

She and her father formed a political action committee, Citizens for a Better Port, to tackle the effort. Both attended the March 25 court hearing on the recall petition.

Three citizens living in each of the port districts joined the effort in February and filed recall petitions with the Benton County Auditor to remove Keller, Commission President Bill O’Neil and Commissioner Lori Stevens.

The charges

Several charges related to Keller’s actions while a port employee, rather than actions taken as a commissioner. He worked for the port for 30 years, including 18 as executive director. 

The actions listed in the charges, including alleged gifting deals and ongoing utility issues at airport hangars, were also at the center of a recent investigation on Keller.

Ruff ruled that actions predating Keller’s commissioner role were insufficient to form the basis of a recall.

One charge alleging a violation of the Open Public Meetings Act was withdrawn by the petitioners. 

The judge upheld a charge that Keller failed to report his ownership of The Axe LLC, which leases a hangar at Richland Airport, to the Public Disclosure Commission.

She also upheld a charge that alleged that the commissioners suspended Executive Director Diahann Howard to conceal Keller’s wrongdoing.

Ruff wrote that retaliating against a whistleblower is misfeasance or malfeasance, noting that Howard’s suspension occurred two weeks after she reported Keller’s alleged wrongdoing to the port commission.

Ruff also wrote that the retaliation negatively affected the commissioners’ ability to perform their duties.

Ruff’s decision stated that the action also violated the commissioners’ oath of office, finding no legitimate reason for Howard’s suspension other than “as petitioner has stated: to conceal wrongdoing of Mr. Keller.”

A second upheld charge involved the firing of port auditor Alicia Myers, which petitioners claimed was also retaliation to conceal Keller’s alleged wrongdoing. Ruff wrote that removing the auditor interfered with the port’s operations and reduced fiscal and operational security for the port and public.

Port’s response

Keller read a statement from the commissioners regarding the recall at an April 8 commission meeting. 

“We are grateful the court has resolved the majority of the allegations raised in the recall petition in our favor, and dismissed the most sensational claims,” the statement read. “While this has been a challenging process, we have always believed in allowing the judicial process to run its course.”

The statement also said: “Throughout this process, we have been mindful of the responsibility entrusted to us as commissioners, and deeply appreciative of the patience and support shown by so many.”

The statement indicated the commissioners had no further comments and will continue to focus their attention on the port’s mission. 

Next steps

The commissioners have appealed Ruff’s decision and said they “remain confident that the remaining counts will likewise be dismissed on appeal,” according to the port statement.

The appeal, filed with the state Supreme Court on April 13, argues that the remaining recall charges are legally and factually insufficient.

Once through the appeal process, petitioners will have 180 days to collect signatures, needing support equal to 35% of total votes cast for each commission seat.

The port is divided into three districts, and voters can only sign the petition to recall their district’s commissioner.

After collecting signatures, the county auditor will verify them, and if there are enough, a date will be set for a special election.

Editor’s note (4/16/26): This story was updated to include information about the commissioners filing their appeal with the state Supreme Court.