Public outrage on the Clark County Council for ousting Councilor Michelle Belkot from C-Tran’s board of administrators has made its option to the courts. Ridgefield resident Rob Anderson filed a movement Tuesday in Skamania County Superior Court docket in search of an injunction to reverse the council’s determination.
Anderson is suing the council as an entire, in addition to councilors Sue Marshall, Glen Yung, Wil Fuentes and Matt Little individually. His swimsuit alleges the council “intentionally and willfully” eliminated Belkot from the C-Tran board regardless of not offering the required public discover.
The council voted to take away Belkot from the board March 12 after Marshall, who can also be on the C-Tran board, raised the problem in the course of the council studies part of the assembly. Marshall mentioned Belkot voted in opposition to the council’s majority opinion to assist mild rail funding throughout a C-Tran board assembly the day earlier than. In February, the council voted 4-1 in assist of the funding, with Belkot the lone dissenting vote.
“I don’t feel like the direction that was given by the council was actually followed by both of us,” Marshall mentioned in the course of the March 12 assembly.
Marshall additionally claimed Belkot misinterpreted the aim of the C-Tran vote.
“The vote was on whether or not to have permissive language related to (operations and maintenance). It was not to provide (operations and maintenance) funding. It was to allow C-Tran to be in a better negotiating position,” Marshall mentioned.
Belkot mentioned she was underneath no obligation to vote consistent with the remainder of the council and voted to assist the residents of her district.
“I think it’s pretty dangerous if you’re not able to represent your constituents in your districts,” Belkot mentioned in the course of the March 12 assembly, including that earlier council members have voted opposite to the bulk opinion, and it has by no means been a problem earlier than.
County legal professional Chris Prepare dinner, from the prosecuting legal professional’s workplace, mentioned the council bylaws don’t require councilors to vote consistent with the complete council.
Belkot mentioned most residents in her district are clearly against mild rail.
“My particular district is not interested in footing the bill for an Oregon transportation system that’s having extreme financial difficulties,” she mentioned.
Anderson’s swimsuit claims the council’s determination to switch Belkot with Fuentes additionally violated the state’s open conferences act.
“Both votes and final actions taken therefore violated (state law) and should be rendered null and void,” the swimsuit states.
By eradicating Belkot from the C-Tran board with out first offering public discover or permitting public remark, the county council not solely violated the state’s open conferences legal guidelines but additionally undermined public oversight of C-Tran’s governance, Anderson’s swimsuit alleges.
Anderson additionally filed a criticism with the county’s Ethics Evaluate Fee on Wednesday. Within the criticism, Anderson mentioned the council’s actions violated the county’s moral and authorized requirements.
“These premeditated and retaliatory acts, coupled with evidence of conspiracy and disregard for the county prosecuting attorney’s pre-vote clarification that Belkot’s C-Tran vote was not mandated by rules and procedures, breaches Clark County’s ethical framework,” the criticism mentioned.
Listening to dates for Anderson’s ethics criticism and movement for an injunction haven’t been scheduled but.
