Category: News

New Speaking Engagement

Tom has accepted a CLE speaking engagement at The Seminar Group’s 16th Annual Washington Water Code seminar, which will be held on November 14 and 15, 2023 in Tacoma, Washington and on-line. Stay tuned for final details on Tom’s topic and the specific date and time for his presentation.

New Speaking Engagement: 14th Annual Washington Water Code: Law, Policy and Planning

Tom will be speaking on the subject of Public Policy Updates on a panel with David Christensen, Program Development Manager for the Department of Ecology, and Adam Gravley, attorney for the Washington Water Utility Council. The 2-day seminar starts on November 3rd and Tom’s panel will be at 1:30 p.m. on November 4th. For more information and registration, contact The…

New Speaking Engagement – November 14-15, 2019 Growth Management Act Seminar

Tom will be speaking on the subject of “GMA and Water” on a panel with Sharon Haensly, attorney for the Squaxin Island Tribe, at 9:00 a.m. on Friday, November 15, 2019. The 2-day seminar starts on November 14th at the Seattle Hilton Hotel. Tom’s specific topic will include an update on ESSB 6091 remedies to the Hirst and Foster decisions and…

Tom Pors will Co-Chair LSI’s 28th Annual Water Law Conference in Seattle on June 27 & 28, 2019

This will be the third time that Tom co-chairs this major water law seminar, which is popular with attorneys, environmental and land use professionals, local government and Tribal representatives, planners, landowners, water users and other stakeholders.  This year’s program on June 27 and 28, 2019 will mark the completion of the 40-year Acquavella case, the Yakima River Basin Adjudication, and…

Bassett Case Set for Oral Argument

I have the honor of representing the appellants in a legal challenge to the Washington State Department of Ecology’s Dungeness River Basin instream flow rule, Magdalena Bassett, et al., v. Washington State Department of Ecology, Case # 51221-1-II.  After a wait of over a year, the case is finally set for oral argument in Division II of the Washington Court…

New Speaking Engagement at LSI Water Law Conference in Seattle on June 14, 2018

Tom has accepted a law seminar teaching assignment at Law Seminars International’s June 14-15, 2018 “Water Law in Washington” conference in Seattle, Washington.   Tom will be on a panel discussing “Mitigation under the Foster Legislative Task Force and Pilot Projects,” at 1:30 p.m. on Thursday, June 14th.  On-line registration for this seminar is open at www.lawseminars.com. Tom represents two of…

ESSB 6091 – Part 3: The Potential for Mitigation Flexibility in Water Rights Permitting After Foster v. Yelm

On October 8, 2005, the Washington Supreme Court reversed a water right permit issued by the Department of Ecology (Ecology) to the City of Yelm.1 The decision dramatically impacted the State’s water rights permitting program by denying authority to Ecology to allow any type of mitigation for potential impacts to adopted minimum instream flows (MIFs) other than 100% in-kind, in-time,…

Legislature Passes Hirst and Foster Fix, Authorizes $300 Million for Streamflow Restoration

After last year’s legislative deadlock that failed to adopt either a fix to rural water availability or a capital budget, the Washington State Legislature made quick work of a compromise bill, ESSB 6091,[1] which was the first bill signed into law in the 2018 session. The bill has many features, including: It requires updates to several watershed plans and new…

Tom Pors will be Speaking at the WSBA ELUL Section Mid-Year on May 11

Tom has been invited by the Washington State Bar Association’s Environmental & Land Use Law Section to speak at its mid-year meeting about the newly passed Hirst fix and streamflow enhancement bill, ESSB 6091.  He will be on a panel with Yakama Indian Nation tribal attorneys Shona Voelchers and Kate Marckworth.  The title for this one-hour seminar is “ESSB 6091: Hirst…

The Place for Ethics in the Resolution of Hirst and Other Water Conflicts in Washington State

This year’s legislative efforts to restore groundwater availability after the Washington Supreme Court’s decision in Whatcom County v. Hirst resulted in a partisan deadlock that also side-lined the state’s $4 billion capital budget.  Economic impacts of the deadlock are now estimated to run to $11 billion and cause a $37 billion decrease in the value of undeveloped land,[1] which will…

UNDERSTANDING THE HIRST AND FOSTER DECISIONS – WHY DO THEY NEED TO BE FIXED?

The Supreme Court’s Hirst decision, the subject of legislative reform efforts and an impasse over the capital budget, is a very controversial barrier to water availability in rural areas. The Court’s 2015 decision in Foster v. Yelm is another controversial ruling that eliminated water right flexibility for mitigation banking and water availability for growing urban areas.  Both of the Court’s…

Agenda is Set for July 25, 2017 LSI Water Law in Washington Seminar

I was proud to co-chair the leading annual water law seminar in Washington State the last two years.  This year, I will be moderating a panel of distinguished speakers at LSI’s Water Law in Washington seminar on July 25, 2017 in Seattle. The panel topic is, “Local Water Resource Planning after the Hirst Decision.”  There is a lot to talk about, because the…

Bassett Case Appealed to Supreme Court

On January 3, 2017, I filed a notice of appeal in the Bassett v. Ecology case on behalf of plaintiffs Magdalena and Denman Bassett, Judy Stirton, and Olympic Resource Protection Council. This sends their challenge of the Dungeness River Instream Flow Rule to the Washington Supreme Court. The next step is filing a Statement of Grounds for Direct Review by the…

Whatcom County v. Hirst Decision Expands Instream Flow Protection to Counties under GMA

The Washington Supreme Court’s decision in Whatcom County v. Hirst,[1] will significantly impact rural water availability by requiring Washington counties to ignore exceptions for permit-exempt wells in many of the state’s instream flow protection rules, causing considerable and unwarranted hardship to rural property owners.  The decision expands the Court’s already extreme protection of regulatory instream flows by requiring counties to…