Reform Clark County’s leader is pursuing legal action against Clark County councilors after submitting multiple complaints regarding the removal of Clark County Councilor Michelle Belkot from the C-Tran Board.
Rob Anderson, founder of Reform Clark County, started a series of legal actions against Clark County Councilors Sue Marshall, Glen Yung, Wil Fuentes and Matt Little for alleged ethical violations, criminal misconduct and Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) violations related to the removal of Belkot from the C-Tran Board on Tuesday, March 26, a news release from Reform Clark County stated.
Reform Clark County is a platform with over 3,000 subscribers that works to reform government in Clark County.
On March 12, Marshall, Yung, Fuentes and Little voted 4-1 to remove Belkot from the Regional Transportation Committee, the C-Tran Board, without legal authority and in violation of the OPMA, which prevented public input on the decisions, the release stated.
Fuentes read a prepared statement and Marshall raised the issue, demonstrating premeditation, Anderson’s ethics complaint state.
“Separate audio evidence suggests that Marshall conspired with Vancouver Mayor Anne McEnerny-Ogle to ‘trap’ Councilor Belkot, potentially in relation to light rail disputes,” the ethics complaint summary states. “Before the vote, Councilor Little asked the county prosecuting attorney (PA) whether the Rules & Procedures compelled Belkot’s C-Tran vote, and the PA confirmed that no such restrictions existed, thereby undermining any legal basis for her removal and showing their actions to be retaliatory in nature.”
Marshall, the county council chair, joined the C-Tran Board in January as her council position automatically includes a seat on the board. Marshall’s first meeting on the board was after the price for participating in light rail funding was revealed, leading to a majority of the board voting to reconsider C-Tran’s language regarding participating in the funding of operations and maintenance and take the topic back to their respective councils, Marshall said in an interview with The Reflector. She added that two new people on the county council needed time to get up to speed about the issues in order to make an informed decision.
“The C-Tran Board agreed so it wouldn’t come back to the C-Tran Board for reconsideration till March,” she said. “So in the meantime, we, the county council, had a work session in January with C-Tran, and I think we spent a couple of hours going through all of the funding and where things stood with the (Interstate Bridge Project). And then we had another work session in February with the IBR folks and TriMet and again that was close to a couple of hours, and at the council time is when the council deliberated on all of this information that we had received and decided that a majority of us was supportive of retaining the permissive language.”
The county council voted 4-1 to keep the permissive language, with Belkot being the “no” vote. Then, at the March 11 C-Tran Board of Directors meeting, Belkot’s presumptive “yes” vote to revert the language back to C-Tran not participating in light rail funding would have landed at 5-4, reverting the language and breaking ranks from the previous county council decision.
Anderson has also filed a civil lawsuit in Skamania County Superior Court against Clark County and the four councilors seeking declaratory and injunctive relief as well as civil penalties.
The legal action follows the councilors’ March 12 votes to remove Belkot from the C-Tran Board and appoint Wil Fuentes as her replacement. Anderson claims the move violated ethical policies. The complaint alleges that these actions were taken without proper legal authority, violated ethical standards, violated OPMA laws and disregarded the county prosecuting attorney’s pre-vote clarification that Belkot’s prior C-Tran vote was not bound by council rules and procedures, a news release by Reform Clark County states.
“Anderson asserts that the councilors' conduct violated Clark County’s ethical framework, HR Policy 13, and state law,” the release stated.
Anderson submitted the ethics complaint to the Clark County Ethics Review Commission.
In addition to the ethics complaint, Anderson also submitted a criminal complaint to Clark County Prosecuting Attorney Tony Golik and Sheriff John Horch. The complaint calls for an independent investigation into potential misconduct by the councilors under RCW 42.20.100 (willful misconduct) and RCW 42.30 (OPMA violations), the release states. Given that the prosecuting attorney’s office and sheriff’s office receive funding from the county council, Anderson has requested that a special prosecutor from a neighboring county be appointed to ensure impartiality and prevent conflicts of interest, the release added.
The lawsuit through Skamania County Superior Court alleges multiple OPMA violations stemming from the council’s Feb. 26 and March 12 meetings, where significant policy decisions were made without proper public notice or opportunity for input, the release states. Anderson argues that these violations denied the public their statutory rights to participate in decisions impacting regional transportation, the release added.
"These four Councilors not only acted willfully outside their authority but also deliberately shut the public out of critical decisions affecting our community," Anderson stated in the release. "Because of this, many in the county have learned the hard way that the 'non-partisan' label these councilors use is just a smokescreen. It is now very clear they are running roughshod over the law to push through their political agenda to stick taxpayers with light rail — whether they like it or not."
