Former U.S. Sen. Slade Gorton went to New York last fall with Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis and Seattle Center Director Robert Nellams to meet with NBA officials and lawyers for the Sonics. For that Oct. 15, 2007 meeting, Gorton -- who was working for the city in the lease lawsuit -- signed a confidentiality agreement that read, in part, "All communications of any kind made during the meeting, and all materials prepared for, introduced at, or created during the meeting, are confidential and protected from disclosure for any purpose..."

The day after the meeting, on Oct. 16, 2007, Gorton e-mailed Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, former Safeco head Mike McGavick and former Sonics President Wally Walker about -- the meeting in New York. (Ballmer led the investors group interested in buying the Sonics.)

After describing some of what was discussed and who asked what, Gorton wrote, "The next question is when and how we inform the league that a local potential owner is a possibility."

Judge Marsha Pechman asked today about the confidentiality agreement and subsequent e-mail.

Click here to see the confidentiality agreement and e-mails, including the Oct. 16 e-mail, from Gorton.

Here's an audio link to the press conference that Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis and attorney Paul Lawrence conducted after the conclusion of the trial. Click on the link to hear the mp3 file.

Paul Lawrence, lead attorney for the city of Seattle, and Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis answered questions after six days of testimony ended at the U.S. District Court. Here's what they said:

Tim Ceis: So I just want to start off by saying, I just want to express my appreciation for the great work Paul Lawrence over the course of this trial and also particularly, though, today in his closing. I think what Paul did today was clearly lay out the strength of the city's case to the judge, the strength of our claim for specific enforcement of the lease and why that is so important to the city of Seattle and not only the city of Seattle, but the people we represent.

I thought it was particularly telling that the judge asked about the issue of sentimentality and how is it that a city can represent that sentiment of its citizens and the fans of basketball, but that is the job of the city, the mayor. He is elected to represent those interests and the representation of those interests [don't] always manifest themselves in just concrete and parks and things like that. They sometimes manifest themselves in the will and desires of the people he represents. So that's something that's irreplaceable in terms of the Sonics if they should leave Seattle. So that I think was a very poignant point of this case today.

I also want to lay out to you today that our objective of the city remains the same and has been consistent throughout the point in time in which Mr. Bennett told us he wanted to break the lease, the point in time in which we filed litigation to prevent that and the point in time between then and now in trying this case and that was to keep the Sonics as a tenant in KeyArena. To try and solve the KeyArena renovation problem so that we can keep a team here long-term, and that's regardless of who the ownership is and who that team is. That remains the city's objective. And so today was a closure of this trial, I hope that we will take a step forward in meeting that objective for the city.

Paul, do you have anything you want to add to that?

Paul Lawrence: No.

Ceis: Any questions?

Q: Is the case decided on Washington state law or federal law?

Lawrence: It's a Washington contract and Washington law would apply.

Q: It seemed like to me anyway, it seemed like [Sonics lawyer Brad] Keller dropped a new little bit of evidence closing, which found Deputy Mayor Ceis at a meeting at K&L Gates, two days after the "Poisoned Well'" meeting. So what were you there for? What strategy were you talking about there?

Ceis: That is not a new piece of evidence. That was in my deposition that is part of the court record, and it was clear that on October 9 we were meeting to discuss the preparation of the presentation to the NBA of a renovated KeyArena plan. That's the whole purpose of that discussion that day.

Judge Marsha Pechman said she will post her ruling in the case Wednesday at 4 p.m.

"I'm not going to open my mouth and decide this case today," she said before court adjourned today. "I also understand that time is significant for everyone involved."

Then, she added, "So stay tuned."

In the rebuttal by Paul Lawrence, the city's lead attorney, to the closing argument by Sonics attorney Brad Keller, he said Keller made the statement that no Washington court has enforced specific performance of a lease. Lawrence cited a court case in which the lease was enforced -- a case that had the landlord making specific improvements at a tenant's request.

Lawrence emphasized Keller's closing didn't cite a lot of case law to discuss specific performance and the "unique object."

Sonics lawyer Brad Keller concluded his closing argument by pointing to the potential for continued disputes.

Keller cited everything from the marketing of suites to the selection of home dates. Keller said that if the city desired to maximize losses, it could give the Sonics less desirable dates for home games while assigning other dates to other tenants.

Keller said he wasn't there to predict the city and franchise would be "mud wrestling" over all sorts of things, but that the potential for dispute exists

"The judicial concern is if they arise," Keller said. "If they arise, courts just don't want to be in the business of telling the operator how to run his business."

Paul Lawrence, attorney for the city, has 3 minutes left for a rebuttal.

Brad Keller, Sonics attorney, cited the loss of personnel and the dwindling opportunities for sponsorship at KeyArena and the general difficulty in marketing a team whose brand is being associated with "abandonment."

He then posed two rhetorical questions about why this relationship has reached this point.

"Why is it that there is not a single Washington court (that) has ever specifically enforced a lease?" Keller asked. "Why is it that courts refuse to enforce a marriage?"

Keller also pointed out that ending the city's association with the K&L Gates law firm doesn't solve all the problems in the city's relationship with the team. Keller also said Mayor Greg Nickels has expressed a desire to have local owners buy the team.

"You can get rid of the lawyers, but you can't get rid of the mayor," Keller said.

The closing statement by Brad Keller, the Sonics lead ttorney, resumed after an afternoon break. Keller discussed financial losses that have exceeded all expectations.

The implication, Keller said, is that those losses will only get worse if forced to stay at KeyArena.

"To what end?" Keller asked.

Is it because Mayor Greg Nickels' said he's an optimist, Keller said.

"That PBC (Sonics owners) will drown in red ink and forced to sell to the Griffin Gang?" Keller said.

The reality, he said, is that four separate times under three different ownership groups, the Sonics have lobbied the state Legislature to fund an arena upgrade.

"The city had five years of chances to fix the problem and we're here today because it couldn't," Keller said.

Sonics lawyer Brad Keller's closing argument included a diagram of the K&L Gates law firm two halves of one brain.

The city's lawyers were shown in green and located on the left side of the brain. The Griffin Group's (Seattle developer Matt Griffin is one of the investors interested in buying the Sonics) lawyers were in blue and on the right. Keller asked if it's really believable that those two sides of the brain were not communicating with each other as one side worked to represent the city in enforcing the lease with the Sonics while the other worked in a separate endeavor to preserve professional basketball in Seattle.

"That's contrary to logic and that's contrary to common sense and if there was even some fleck of plausibility, the law doesn't allow a principal to act as a horse with blinders on," Keller said.

Keller said the specific-performance is being used as a point of a sword to affect the sale of the Sonics. Well, actually, Keller called those two years remaining on the lease a bludgeon, as the city was seeking to force the tenant to sell.

Brad Keller, lead attorney for the Sonics, began his closing argument talking about the complexities of contract law and how it applies to a lease. He disputed the characterization of the Washington Supreme Court case by the city's attorney, Paul Lawrence, in his closing. Keller said that was a one-shot real-estate deal and this is a lease case.

Keller then turned his attention to the so-called "Poisoned Well" plan, and said it showed a level of scheming that embarrassed him.

"This is my town, too," Keller said. "But I felt shamed by those among us who live in power and privilege and have not learned that the end does not justify the means."

Keller's also pointed out that two days after the "Poisoned Well" Power Point presentation was made at the home of former Sonics President Wally Walker, that Walker's calendar indicated he had a meeting at K&L Gates that included former U.S. Sen. Slade Gorton and Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis.

The city's lead lawyer Paul Lawrence concluded his closing argument,and Judge Marsha Pechman asked about former U.S. Senator Slade Gorton's role working for the K&L Gates law firm, which represented the city and also was involved with an effort to preserve professional basketball in the area. Those twin roles were spelled in the letter in which the city retained K&L Gates.

Pechman brought up the fact that Gorton attended a meeting with the NBA where Clay Bennett was present to discuss the viability of a remodeled KeyArena. The parties were required to sign an agreement not to discuss the contents of that meeting.

Pechman referenced the fact that the next day Gorton sent an e-mail to members of Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer's investment group (which wanted to put up money to renovate KeyArena and buy the team) about what was discussed.

"I can not explain Mr. Gorton's actions," Lawrence said.

"But that's the city's action because that's Mr. Gorton," Pechman said, and Gorton signed the non-disclosure agreement while in the meeting to represent the city.

Lawrence said there was no evidence that the city directed Gorton to send that e-mail and also noted that the e-mail was not sent to anyone with city.

"There is no evidence that links Mr. Gorton's action with the city," Lawrence said.

Pechman then asked about the possibility of severing K&L Gates representation with the city in this matter, after the case. Lawrence said that is something that's entirely within the judge's discretion.

The Sonics trial resumed at 1:30 p.m. with Paul Lawrence, lead attorney for the city, having 30 minutes left to conclude his case. Lawrence began the afternoon session by emphasizing the uniqueness of the Sonics as a tenant. Having an NBA team is something that just can't be replaced.

"It can't be replaced with money and cannot be replaced with another tenant, with Ice Capades or other events," Lawrence said.

Lawrence also presented a timeline showing that city officials twice said the city intended to enforce the lease, first in July 2006 after Clay Bennett's group purchased the team and again in May 2007 when Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels rejected a buyout offer.

Lawrence drew the comparison to land disputes. In those cases, he pointed out, damages can be assessed in terms of specific performance and not based on fair-market value. In essence, the courts have decided that the purchaser has a special relationship with the land being bought. The connection there is that the city has a special relationship with its basketball-team tenant. And that's a relationship that can't simply be dealt with in monetary damages.

"Simply being awarded a dollar amount is not going to make the city equal to whatever benefits it perceives are associated with the team," Lawrence said. "You can't put a number to it."

Judge Marsha Pechman's inquiry shifted to the sentimental importance of the franchise, and she asked the city's lead lawyer Paul Lawrence to explain whether that was a valid issue, given that the city is essentially a corporation. The term she used was "corporate tears," and that this was essentially a contract issue between a corporation (the city) and a business (the team).

Lawrence said the sentimental feelings of constituents represents a foundation for public policy argued in the Washington Supreme Court case from 1996 involving the baseball stadium. The court recognized that Safeco Field was a valid use of public funds because it did bring benefits to the city, and that the use of those public funds is at the discretion of the city leaders.

After a lunch break, Lawrence will continue his closing argument at 1:30 p.m.

The closing argument is being presented by Paul Lawrence, the city's lead attorney.

He said the city agreed to a public-private partnership to renovate the Coliseum in order to get all of the benefits that come with having a professional basketball team in town.

That goes beyond simply getting a share of the revenue.

"First, the city is not a developer," Lawrence told Judge Marsha Pechman. "The city is not like a standard landlord. KeyArena is not like a stripmall or a shopping mall. Finally, the Sonics are not like a Wal-Mart store."

The mall developer wants to make money. The city, however, is not motivated by that bottom line.

"Rather than earn a profit, the city seeks to provides benefits to its citizens," Lawrence said.

And the city agreed to help fund the renovation of the Coliseum into what is now KeyArena knowing it would keep the team through 2010 and get all the benefits that come with having that team.

Pechman interrupted Lawrence's argument to ask about the reciprocal component of that agreement -- that the Sonics bargained for the city to maintain the arena as a viable venue.

Lawrence responded that the issues related to maintenance are explicitly spelled out in the agreement and he argued against any notion that the maintenance requirement was to keep KeyArena as a state-of-the-art arena in the NBA.

"The notion that it would be renovated into a greater, bigger arena is not supported by anything in the record," Lawrence said. Rather, a gradual decline in the adequacy of the building is pretty standard.

"The fact that it's no longer state of the art is not surprising or unexpected," Lawrence said. "But there is nothing in the lease that says you get to leave because time ages the facility."

Lawrence said Sonics owner Clay Bennett was told by Mayor Greg Nickels, after the sale, that the lease would be enforced and that the Sonics ownership spelled out that it understood and assumed it would take on the liabilities and obligations of the previous ownership group led by Howard Schultz.

One concern Pechman voiced was that the parties would keep coming back to the court.

"What I'm worried about is, are we going to have ongoing obligations about the city undermining tenant by plotting to have someone else buy them out?" Pechman asked. "Going to the NBA, and undermining their business position or leaking their secrets. I'd like to know how I can be assured we're not going to be back here with those kinds of problems."

Lawrence had previously spelled out that arbitration is the means of settling operational disputes in all matters except those regarding hazardous waste. So suite sales and concessions are not a subjects eligible to be brought back to the court. Those types of issues would be settled by an arbitrator.

Lawrence responded to Pechman's question that these were two sides that were sophisticated and upstanding people who would move forward.

Pechman wasn't so certain about how well they'd work together, and she pointed out that in July 2007 the mayor wouldn't return Clay Bennett's call to set up a meeting to discuss an exit of the lease. Pechman pointed out that the mayor and Bennett haven't gotten together to talk about anything since the 2007 failure to find funding from the state Legislature.

"Well that's not real sophisticated when they both go to their corners," Pechman said.

Lawrence said a ruling in terms of the lease would settle the dispute between the city and the team, and both sides would move forward once that dispute is decided.

"That's the fundamental dispute," Lawrence said. "That will end based on what your honor decides, and then the parties will move forward on a rational basis."

Lawrence is continuing his closing argument.

Neither side was upset with the ruling that Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis won't testify.

Paul Taylor, an attorney for the Sonics, argued that to allow Ceis to testify now, on the final day of the trial, about communications with the law firm retained by the city, it deprived the Sonics of its opportunity for discovery.

Paul Lawrence, the city's lead attorney, argued that attorney-client privilege had not been asserted with respect to the things Ceis would be testifying about.

Judge Marsha Pechman said she was not going to allow Ceis to testify because there was no evidence the attorney-client privilege had been waived in the record.

"You can not use the privilege as a shield and then turn around and use it as a sword," Pechman said. "You have to decide early on if you’re going to keep matters privileged or offer them up. In this instance, the city never designated the scope of the privilege they wish to waive or decline."

Lawrence, the city's attorney, said he was satisfied with the decision because Pechman accepted the stipulation from Ceis' sworn April 2008 deposition in which he said he had never seen the "Poisoned Well" PowerPoint (distributed at former Sonics President Wally Walker's home in October 2007) until the deposition.

Also entered into evidence was the letter in which the city retained the services of the K&L Gates law firm in September 2007. The letter stated explicitly that former U.S. Sen. Slade Gorton and Gerry Johnson were engaged in a separate effort to retain professional basketball in Seattle. Lawrence termed this a "carve out," which showed the firm was involved in a separate effort that related to the team -- one that did not involve the city at all.

Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis won't testify in the final day of the Sonics trial.

Judge Marsha Pechman noted that Ceis' April 28 deposition has been admitted, in which he said he had not seen the so-called "Poisoned Well" PowerPoint presentation.

Seattle City Councilmember Nick Licata just finished answering questions from Sonics lead attorney Brad Keller. Licata was the final witness called by the Sonics.

Keller began by asking Licata about Initiative 91, and emphasizing that under that initiative, the computing of the fair-market value of a civic sports arena specifically excludes, "goodwill, cultural or general economic benefits to the City." Keller entered as an exhibit the explanation of I-91 written out by the City Attorney's Office displayed in the court. He also asked Licata if I-91 passed by a substantial margin, which it did.

In spring 2007, while the Sonics owners were lobbying for public funding in Olympia to help pay for a new arena in Renton, Licata was voicing his opinion that excessive public subsidies for sports arenas were against the public interest. Licata said other city officials in Olympia were taking the opposite opinion. Keller expressed surprise that there were city officials in Olympia voicing support for a new arena. Licata then said he assumed there were, but he didn't know that.

"You were just guessing a moment ago, weren't you?" Keller said.

Keller pointed out Licata's role in a study of potential uses for KeyArena should the Sonics leave. The center could become a center for music, film and technology. Licata characterized this as a worst-case scenario, should the Sonics leave. It's a plan, Licata said, to make sure KeyArena would remain viable with the Sonics absent. Keller then had footage from a City Council committee meeting in which Licata was discussing the plan, calling these focuses of film, music and technology as reflective of the area. After it concluded, Licata offered a joke.

"Great speech," Licata said.

Keller responded that indeed it was.

"Certainly not someone with his head down talking about worst-case scenarios," Keller said.

The final thrust of Keller's examination focused on Licata's quotes in a Sports Illustrated story in 2006, in which Licata told a reporter that the economic impact -- if the Sonics left town -- would be near zero. He also said on the impact of their departure, on a cultural basis, would be close to zero.

Licata was shown a copy of the magazine.

"Given all the publicity, I'm surprised I'm not on the front cover," Licata said.

The judge chimed in. "That might be reserved for me," Pechman said.

Keller's questions focused on the disregard Licata expressed for the team in the Sports Illustrated article.

Greg Narver cross-examined Licata for the city. He pointed out comments in a newsletter from Licata in which the councilmember said his quotes in Sports Illustrated were a "glib, foolish remark." He characterized them as "smug and wrong."

The cross examination concluded with Licata's opinion that the Sonics should be held to the term of the lease over an objection by the defense.

Licata was the last witness called by the Sonics attorneys. They introduced two exhibits and have rested their case.

U.S. District Judge Marsha Pechman will rule later this morning whether Seattle Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis will be allowed to testify. She'll make that decision after City Councilmember Nick Licata's testimony concludes.

Lawyers for the city of Seattle want to call Ceis to testify regarding any prior knowledge of what has been termed the "Poisoned Well" plan. Sonics attorneys filed a motion earlier this week to block Ceis' testimony, saying he had refused to answer questions when he was deposed in April.

This is the trial's final day. First up: Sonics lawyers will try to keep Seattle Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis from taking the stand. The city's attorneys want Ceis to testify that he had no prior knowledge of the so-called "Poisoned Well" plan to financially bleed Sonics owner Clay Bennett into selling the team.

After that, the lawyers will make their closing arguments about whether the team should be allowed to get out of the KeyArena lease before 2010.

It is not known when U.S. District Judge Marsha Pechman will rule.

In preparation for closing arguments Thursday, attorneys for Sonics and the city of Seattle summed up their cases in these court filings:

- Seattle's proposed findings (PDF)
- Sonics' proposed findings (PDF)

Seattle Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis and Seattle attorney Paul Lawrence met with the media after Friday's trial adjourned. Here's the complete Q&A from the press conference.

Tim Ceis: Good afternoon. I want to start off by saying from the city's perspective we're very pleased about how the case has been going. We were hopeful we would wrap up the testimony today, but we have to come back on Thursday so we'll be here. And I believe Thursday is closing arguments. But we're very, very pleased with how the case has gone as of today. And we're looking forward a good conclusion. So with that, Paul and I will take any questions about what went on today.

Question: Do you agree with Sen. (Slade) Gorton's assessment that failing to win a KeyArena renovation undercuts your specific performance argument?

Paul Lawrence: No. Absolutely not. Our position is that the specific performance case is decided based on the terms of the contract. Whether the Seattle Sonics are a unique tenant and whether they bring benefits to the city over and beyond the rent that are hard to measure. That’s the specific performance case and it has nothing to do with what Sen. Gorton said.

Q: Do you know what Sen. Gorton based that assessment on in his e-mail?

Lawrence: You’ll have to ask Sen. Gorton.

Q: Does the city have unclean hands in bringing this lawsuit to try and enforce specific performance?
Lawrence: Absolutely not. I think what you saw in the testimony today was testimony from Wally Walker, who was a member of the ’79 championship team, a longtime Seattle resident (who) is active in the community and with the basketball team. He as a citizen wanted to keep the Sonics here and worked toward that effort. I think there’s been a lot of argument by the council trying to put two and three together to make four, but it doesn’t add up because there’s simply no evidence of any sort of plan as they look at it. I think if you look at the document that they point to so often, you’ll see that it clearly does not involve the city. It anticipates the city being a participant later on in an effort to keep the Sonics in Seattle, but there’s nothing to suggest that plan involved the city at it’s inception. And of course, this all happened after Clay Bennett announced very clearly his intent to leave Seattle for Oklahoma City.

Q: But didn’t it happen after the city hired Slade Gorton as its attorney?

Lawrence: No. It didn’t happen. As it came up today in the testimony, it dates back to July 2006, which is before K&L Gates was approached. Sen. Gorton prior to being retained by the city, was independently looking to find a solution. And as you heard today, what he was working on originally was a Bellevue arena, which was not in the interest of the City of Seattle as a solution for the Sonics.

Q: If you had a do-over and you were giving advice, would you advise them not to use the “Poison Well” quote on the cover of their PowerPoint?

Lawrence: I think that if Mr. McGavick who wrote that (he) would have to address that to his own attorneys. Again, the city had nothing to do with that, so it’s not our place to say what he should or shouldn’t have said.

Q: What would you have done?

Lawrence: I don’t give advice to him. He never asked me for advice. And again, we were not engaged in that effort to try to convince a prospective owner to come to Seattle and act to provide an alternative to the team leaving.

Q: When was it that Sen. Gorton was retained by the city?

Lawrence: K&L Gates was retained I believe the day that the arbitration – a couple of days after the arbitration was filed. I remember being called in on a Friday and working all weekend to get a complaint filed on Monday. And the arbitration date was the 19th, which I believe was a Wednesday.

Q: What is Gates' history with the City of Seattle as far as representing various other litigations?

Ceis: We don’t have an ongoing retainer with them on litigation issues. They act for us on various capacities on counsels, and in some cases on legal matters. But it’s on a case by case basis.

Q: You said K&L Gates was retained shortly after the arbitration was filed. In that meeting at Mr. Walker’s house that involved Mr. Ballmer and Mr. Gorton was in October. So who was Gorton representing when he was at Mr. Walker’s house talking about the PowerPoint presentation?

Lawrence: Mr. Gorton represented himself. When we were retained, we indicated to the city that prior to that date Sen. Gorton and Gerry Johnson had been working to find a perspective ownership and alternative solutions to losing the team. That was disclosed to the city and it was reflected in the retention agreement with K&L Gates that there was this work being done Sen. Gorton and Gerry Johnson ongoing at the time we were retained on the litigation.

Q. Johnson is working on this case, right?

Lawrence: No you’re not familiar. There are two Johnsons. The attorney Jeff Johnson is a litigation attorney who is working on this case. Attorney Gerry Johnson does not do litigation.

Q. In hindsight, knowing that Mr. Gorton was trying to keep long-term basketball here, was he the best choice for counsel?

A. Ceis: As Paul said the representation agreement, they disclosed the work that Sen. Gorton and Gerry Johnson were doing and the city didn't see any conflict in that work. They were pursuing long-term tenants for the KeyArena, basketball, that was what they were working on. That was our interest, too, is to have short-term and long-term tenancy of the National Basketball Association in KeyArena. So there were no conflicts there.

And given Sen. Gorton's long history in professional sports in this city going back to the Pilots and bringing Major League Baseball back to Seattle, helping to save the Seahawks in Seattle, it was an obvious choice to have for us to have him on board.

Q. Didn't Mr. Griffin acknowledge on the stand that the only one able to inflict bleeding or the pain on the owners that would cause them to call would be the city?

Lawrence: What Mr. Griffin stated that in terms of legal action, that they city would be the entity enforcing its lease, which is it’s legal right to do. It says in the lease that either party, in this case it’s the city, has the right to specifically enforce the lease. The city has made that clear going back to July of 2006, well before anything that was discussed in the courtroom today, that they would specially enforce this lease against Clay Bennett or any other owner because that's what their bargained for and the city wants the full benefit of its bargain. The city's decision to enforce this lease was announced to Mr. Bennett Day One when he purchased the team in July 2006, long before any events you heard about today.

Q. Wally Walker kept saying he was not a consultant with the city until January or February. 2008 yet Bennett's lawyer kept referring to and the judge accepted a letter where he acknowledged that in Sept. 19, 2007 he was a consultant. That never got resolved in today’s trial.

Lawrence: I think that's a pretty simple explanation. He signed the letter at the end of January or February, but the letter reflected that he had been providing advice as he testified with respect to the economics and the NBA process with respect to the approval of a renovated KeyArena going back to September.

Q. To follow up, you said there was no conflict in hiring Slade Gorton because he wanted a long-term team and you guys wanted to take care of the current problem, but doesn't that cut directly to their case that there is conflict. The only way he saw to get a long-term team was to bring the city’s pressure to (them). So it’s a direct conflict it seems like.

Ceis: They disclosed they were doing that work. They didn't give us any details about it. We were not engaged in that work. All we were engaged with in K&L Gates was on the litigation. The work that Sen. Gorton was going in terms of talking to (prospective) owners was something we were not involved in.

Q. Were you worried about a perception of there being a conflict of interest?

Ceis: Again our interest was ensuring that we had a tenant in KeyArena and we wanted basketball as a tenant. So again, we saw no conflict.

Q. (Inaudible)

Lawrence: The people who worked on the litigation for the city for K&L Gates had nothing to do and were not aware of the PowerPoint. I think as it came out today Sen. Gorton and Gerry Johnson in connection with the matters they told the city about that they were acting on separately were the K&L Gates people involved with the PowerPoint.

Q. When did the K&L Gates people aware of PowerPoint presentation?

Lawrence:. Mr. Gorton and Mr. Johnson were aware of it at some point around the meeting time.

Q. And when were you made aware of it?

Lawrence: I can't remember when it came out in terms of a discovery request from the… it came out in the discovery request direct either Mr. Griffin or Mr. Walker or Mr. Stanton, I can't remember.

Q. Can you explain how a bulk of Wally Walker e-mails arrived on Monday?

Lawrence: You'll have to probably address that to Mr. Walker's attorney. As best as I understand it, Mr. Walker in response to his attorney's request, went back and checked and apparently he had not checked his "sent" mail files until a couple of days ago. So Mr. Walker's attorney, trying to make sure the production was complete, went back asked Mr. Walker if he had checked X, Y, Z files and apparently the "sent" mail file had not been checked.

Q. Paul you say you’ve shown that apparently no link between the city and this group’s effort to harm Bennett’s group at all. What is the need for Mr. Ceis’ testimony Thursday?

Lawrence: To make the point that he made here and I was talking about, that at the time of the retention of K&L Gates by the city that it was disclosed to the city that Sen. Gorton and Gerry Johnson had previously and were on a ongoing basis had a continuing effort to try to find a prospective owner. And to establish that Mr. Ceis and no one at the city had an awareness of the PowerPoint presentation.

Q. The last substantive talks you had with Clay Bennett was the settlement offer that they presented to you February?

Ceis: The last discussions I had with Mr. Bennett's representatives were in New York City in October.

Q: Could there be any talks between now and Thursday?

Ceis: The last conversation I had with Mr. Bennett’s representatives were in October in New York. So right now we’re in trial.

Q. What was the outcome of that meeting and what type of information you took back from the NBA.

Ceis: We went back to see the NBA about KeyArena. To discuss the renovation of KeyArena with them. We showed them the design and cost estimates for it. So it was to put KeyArena back on the table as a venue for basketball, to keep basketball in Seattle.

Q. Did they reach any conclusions about your presentation and was it viable?

Ceis: Well as you can tell we are in a continuing process right now on that. So you can reach your own conclusion on the outcome of that meeting.

Q. Mr. Ceis your testimony to Judge Pechman will be the city has clean hands?

Ceis: I’ll leave that to my counsel.

Lawrence: I think saying anything more, you'll have to come back for part, whatever it is, VI on Thursday morning to hear.

Q. Mr. Lawrence can you address the situation in the morning session. You were talking to Wally Walker and the word "appeal" caused a great stir.

Lawrence: I think it only caused a stir because with all due respect to you guys, you probably haven't covered too many trials. From Day One, in front of Judge (Marsha) Pechman she recognized that this case very likely could go up on appeal. For each party to preserve their rights on appeal, there’s some very technical things you need to do in terms to objections to evidence that if you don't make (them) you waive your rights. And not simply because a judge has ruled once on a piece of evidence, if you don't have continuing objection or make the objection on a continuing basis to that line of evidence, then you may lose your rights to appeal. My job, among other things, is to make sure the record is complete and in the case that there is an appeal, whether it’s the PBC appealing or the Sonics appealing or both sides appealing. Part of my job to do it right is to make sure the record is correct.

Q. Deputy Mayor Ceis, did you have dinner with Clay Bennett and call KeyArena one of the finest basketball arenas in the country?

Ceis: Yes I remember that comment to Mr. Bennett. Yes. I was referring to a fan survey that was done in about 1998 where the fans around the NBA said KeyArena was the best place to watch basketball in the country.

Q. So there’s no basis whatsoever for Sen. Gorton suggest that the failure to win the renovation … (hurts the city's case)?

Lawrence: We don't believe that it has anything to do with the case. You have heard PBC make the argument "why bother? there's no point." And I don't like to speculate as to what Sen. Gorton was thinking about. But that argument is being made by PBC and if there had been a funding proposal approved, PBC wouldn't be making that argument. Regardless, we don't think that's relevant, but we've heard PBC make that argument during the trial.

Q. Over the next five days, what will you do?

Lawrence: Catching up on my sleep. But principally there are two things we are going to be focused on. One we have to prepare for the court, proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, which is essentially looking through the evidence that's been presented and putting them in a form of finding that are facts that have been supported by the testimony to date. Setting forth our legal arguments in the form of conclusions of law that we hope the court will adopt and probably more than that, focusing on drafting our closing argument for Thursday before the judge.

Before court adjourned at 4:06 p.m., Seattle attorney Paul Lawrence said the city will call Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis as a rebuttal witness on Thursday. His testimony will take about 15-20 minutes and Sonics attorney Brad Keller said he expects to cross examine

Judge Marsha Pechman said both attorneys should review exhibits and make sure they are in proper order during the five-day break.

When the trial resumes Thursday, City Councilmember Nick Licata will be on the stand.

The trial will conclude after testimony from Licata, Ceis and each side gives a closing argument.