In a May 19 meeting, the Battle Ground City Council voted 4-3 to eliminate a rule that allowed a one-third minority of council members to block mayoral proclamations — a rule used nearly a year ago to strike down Mayor Troy McCoy’s Pride Month recognition.
The decision came amid renewed public outcry and followed comments from residents, many urging the council to repair what they described as a broken and discriminatory process.
At the center of the controversy is a June 3, 2024, meeting, when council members Eric Overholser, Victoria Ferrer and Tricia Davis used the now-defunct rule to remove a Pride Month proclamation authored by local activist Jessica Cole. The proclamation was supported by a majority of the council — four of seven members — but was blocked under the governance manual’s clause that allowed removal with just three votes.
This year, Overholser reopened the conversation. During an April 21 meeting, he urged the council to revisit proclamations in May, ultimately proposing to eliminate them altogether. That motion triggered concerns from residents and activists, including Cole, who warned against erasing a long-standing avenue for community recognition.
“Saying we don’t want them anymore without addressing why that is doesn’t reflect transparency,” she said. “Proclamations didn’t just fall out of use. They stopped after a protected class was denied recognition.”
Before public comment began, McCoy, who had pledged not to issue any proclamations following last year’s Pride Month dispute, read proclamations for Police Week and National Public Works Week. These marked the first proclamations read since June 2024, the same meeting in which Overholser proposed to have them removed.
“The mayor halted all proclamations to avoid legal and ethical risks. To now frame this simply as a procedural cleanup is misleading,” Cole added.
City resident David Terry urged the council to fix what he called a “broken” system.
“I’m kind of ashamed of our council for what we did on the Pride proclamation last year,” he said. “I hope we’ll reconsider the process ... so that people can be proud of themselves no matter who they are.”
After public comment, Overholser reiterated his position during council discussion, expressing frustration that no proclamations had been issued in the last 11 months.
“This is the first time that we’ve done a proclamation in this city for almost 11 months,” Overholser said. “I wanted to point out … the importance of a proclamation and why I feel it was important to be entertaining these throughout the last year.”
He argued that halting all proclamations, including for events such as Americans with Disabilities Awareness and Women’s History Month, unfairly denied recognition to multiple groups.
“If we’re not going to do them, why would we have that option to do them?” he said.
Bowman responded by clarifying that proclamations are the mayor’s responsibility, not the council’s, and said problems began when council began interfering.
“There are very few things that the mayor gets to do — one of them being proclamations — and we as a council want to take that away because it doesn’t feel right to us for certain ones,” Bowman said. “We’re picking winners and losers.”
A portion of the now-removed rule read “Proclamations should not be considered that are potentially controversial, political, or religious in nature unless approved by the 2/3 majority of Councilmembers.” Mayor McCoy affirmed the term “controversial” in the manual had become a cover for discrimination.
“I think the whole controversial thing is a red herring,” McCoy said. “Controversial is often a screen for bigotry, racism, sexism — you name it. To have ‘controversial’ in this governance manual is an affront to every single citizen.”
City Attorney Kenneth Harper affirmed the legal risk, warning that inconsistency or bias in proclamation decisions could open the city to litigation, even if the underlying law remains in the city’s favor.
“You can be right on the law, but if your decision-making process is cumbersome... you have some jeopardy,” Harper said.
Councilmember Ferrer defended the existing manual, arguing that giving councilmembers input ensures broader representation. That led to a heated exchange with Bowman over whether a minority vote should have such power.
“I want to make sure that you guys are on the record saying that you approve a minority vote outruling a majority vote because that’s what this is,” Bowman said.
He added that the policy was a reactionary change made two years prior, not standard practice.
“Shame on us. Shame on me, because I think I voted for it too,” McCoy said. “I think the whole thing should be stricken.”
After the discussion, the council voted on two motions. The first, introduced by Overholser to eliminate proclamations entirely, failed in a 3-4 vote, with himself, Davis and Ferrer in favor.
The second motion — introduced by McCoy — removed the clause allowing a one-third minority to veto proclamations. That motion passed 4-3, with McCoy, Bowman, DesRoachers and Kuypers voting in favor.
