The first condemnation lawsuit Idaho Power Company filed against a Baker County property owner for the Boardman to Hemingway power line has been settled, and the jury trial scheduled to start Tuesday, Feb. 4, in Baker County Circuit Court has been canceled.

Drew Martin, the Baker City attorney who represents the defendants, Scott and Kylie Gressley of Baker City, said on Monday, Feb. 3, that the suit, which Idaho Power filed in September 2023, has been settled.

Martin did not give any details of the settlement.

Ontario attorneys Tim J. Helfrich and Zach Olson of Yturri Rose LLP filed the suit on behalf of Idaho Power.

Since then Idaho Power has filed more than 15 similar suits, all under the legal concept of condemnation (also known as eminent domain), seeking easements across private property for the 293-mile long transmission line the company wants to finish by 2027.

On Feb. 28, 2024, Judge Matt Shirtcliff gave Idaho Power permission to enter the Gressleys’ nearly 2,000-acre property, which is along Interstate 84 about 5 miles southeast of Baker City.

Shirtcliff ordered Idaho Power to pay the Gressleys $83,960 for the easement.

The company had offered $18,960.

The Gressleys had asked for $392,542.50, arguing that they should be compensated for the long-term loss of value for the property, which they use for cattle grazing.

Although the judge gave Idaho Power access to the Gressleys’ property, the continued for nearly a year.

Eminent domain is a legal process in which a judge or jury orders a property owner to sell land, or an easement, to make possible a particular project, and decides the price.

Recently attorneys for both Idaho Power and the Gressleys filed motions in circuit court, which are moot now that the suit has been settled.

In a Jan. 21 motion, Helfrich and Olson, representing Idaho Power, asked for a pretrial ruling excluding several items and topics from being used as evidence in a trial. The list includes:

• Testimony or documents from appraisers.

• Speculative uses of the property.

• Temporary inconvenience during construction.

• Evidence or testimony regarding the condemnationl process.

• Golden rule argument. The motion defines this as the argument “which asks the jury to put themselves in the position of a party.” Helfrich and Olson argue that allowing this argument in the trial would be “prejudicial and improper.”

• Value of the project to Idaho Power.

• Sentimental or emotional value of the property.

• Remote or speculative damage.

• Aesthetic offensiveness of power poles.

• Business losses.

• Construction delays.

In a response to the motion, which he filed Jan. 23, Andrew Martin of Baker City, who represents the Gressleys, wrote that Idaho Power’s “novel theory to exclude all of Defendants’ expert witnesses and testimony is an invitation to this court to commit reversible error.”

Martin was referring to property appraisers, who according to his motion would “respond and address the ‘written appraisal’ upon which Plaintiff relies in this case.”

Also on Jan. 23, Martin filed a motion asking the court, prior to the trial, to prohibit Idaho Power or its witnesses from testifying about values of the Gressleys’ property that are “inconsistent” with the written appraisal the company gave the couple.

That appraisal pegged the property’s value at $1,494,330, or $750 per acre. The Gressleys accept that as their property’s value before the “taking” associated with the power line, Martin wrote in his motion.

He wrote that the Gressleys “recently entered into a sale agreement to sell the property for $840,000.00 which $421 per acre. The sale of the property at price dramatically reduced is evidence of the damages to the remainder of the Gressley Property because the pending sale was negotiated and will occur after the taking.”

Martin is asking the court to prohibit Idaho Power or its witnesses from arguing at trial that the Gressleys’ property is worth less than the $1.494 million listed in the appraisal.