With court cases still pending regarding the removal of Michelle Belkot from the C-TRAN Board of Directors, the board voted to postpone the vote on language that specifies whether or not Clark County residents could be on the hook for Oregon’s light rail expansion O&M costs

Paul Valencia
Clark County Today

With legal action still pending on Michelle Belkot’s removal from the C-TRAN Board of Directors, the board on Tuesday opted to postpone the vote that will have major ramifications on who will pay for operations and maintenance costs associated with Oregon’s light rail expansion into Vancouver.

This ongoing saga that started last fall and then into the winter will now continue at least until late summer, if not early fall.

The C-TRAN board postponed the vote on reverting to older language in the Modified Locally Preferred Alternative for the Interstate Bridge Replacement until September. The hope is that court battles will be determined or heard by then, so board members will have a better idea of their standing.

One of the issues is whether or not Belkot will be reinstated as a C-TRAN board member. She has sued the other members of the Clark County Council, alleging her removal from the C-TRAN board was illegal. Belkot, a Clark County councilor, was removed by the county council from C-TRAN in March after it became clear she was going to vote to protect Clark County residents from paying for operations and maintenance costs for the proposed light rail expansion. The council argued Belkot was supposed to vote in concert with the council’s desires. Belkot said she believes there is no such rule, and she should be able to vote her conscience — to represent her constituents.

Belkot had asked the C-TRAN board to revert to older language on the MLPA that stated C-TRAN would not be responsible for any costs for operations and maintenance of light rail expanding to Vancouver. That had been in the MLPA since July 2022 until November of 2024 when the language was changed.

The new language now says C-TRAN “may participate in the funding” of operations and maintenance.

In April, the board opted to postpone that vote on the language until July, in hopes that the courts had ruled by then. A separate court case regarding the removal of Belkot was filed by Rob Anderson of Reform Clark County. That is still pending, as well. In fact, it has been delayed.

At Tuesday’s monthly C-TRAN meeting, Tim Hein, a board member representing the city of Camas, asked to postpone the vote until September. 

The board also received legal counsel, discussing whether the vote was tabled or postponed. It was determined that the issue was postponed in April and that it could be postponed again. 

Wil Fuentes, who replaced Belkot on the board, asked to postpone the vote on language another month, to October, in order to give the courts more time to respond.

“Considering we haven’t had much of an update on the current litigations, I would propose we extend it to three months instead of two,” Fuentes said.

There was a discussion on postponing the vote indefinitely. Legal advised against an indefinite postponement, but said that the board could always postpone again in the future.

Hein remained steadfast with his proposal.

“I would prefer to keep it at the September 9th meeting so it’s present of mind,” Hein said.

The board voted to postpone the vote until September, passing 6-3. Anne McEnerney-Ogle, Eric Paulsen, and Sue Marshall were the nay voters.

There has been no recent update on Belkot’s lawsuit, which moved to federal court. 

Anderson sent a message to Reform Clark County members this week detailing that his case is being delayed again because the judge recused himself.

“This is exactly the reason I filed in Skamania County,” Anderson wrote, referring to his original lawsuit filed after Belkot’s removal. That case was moved to Clark County. 

“Justice delayed is justice denied,” he wrote. “This case is not just about one Councilor or one issue — it’s about transparency, public trust, and protecting your right to be informed and involved in decisions that shape the future of Clark County.”

Earlier in Tuesday’s C-TRAN meeting, John Ley, state representative for District 18, position 2 and who is on the transportation committee, spoke during public comment.

“You know your C-TRAN buses are cheaper and offer better service than TriMet light rail for Clark County residents,” he said. “Just say no to light rail in Clark County.”

Lifelong Clark County resident Kirk VanGelder, in public comment, took issue with board members who are also also elected officials who he claims are defying their constituents with this infatuation with light rail.

“We’ve heard a lot of noise about the destruction of democracy in the news recently. I would like to propose that there isn’t much more destructive of democracy than elected officials going against the clear vote of the people and instead promoting the will of the developers,” he said. “If you do that, let it be known that you are the ones who are actually destroying democracy.”

There was not as much public comment at this meeting than in recent meetings regarding light rail funding. One resident did go to the microphone to voice his support for light rail.