Clark County Councilor Michelle Belkot claims she was removed from the C-TRAN Board of Directors after she intended to vote to protect taxpayers
Clark County Councilor Michelle Belkot filed a lawsuit in Skamania County Superior Court against Clark County on Friday, citing violations of the Civil Rights Act, Open Public Meetings Act, and Quo Warranto claims.
The lawsuit challenges her fellow Clark County councilors’ decision to remove her from the C-TRAN Board of Directors, in retaliation for her intended vote on a transportation funding matter.
Belkot alleges that her removal was an unconstitutional act of political coercion, violating her First and 14th Amendment rights. The lawsuit contends that the four other council members imposed a new and improper requirement — after the fact — that C-TRAN board appointees vote in alignment with the majority of the Clark County Council. This action, Belkot asserts, was taken solely in response to her position on a funding issue that could cost county taxpayers millions of dollars.
For a refresher on that action on March 12, go to: https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/michelle-belkot-speaks-out-after-clark-county-council-kicks-her-off-c-tran-board/
“The actions taken by the majority of the Clark County Council sets a dangerous precedent,” effectively punishing elected representatives for independent decision making,” Belkot said. “This is not just about my seat on the C-TRAN board. This is about ensuring that the democratic process is protected and that no government body can silence an elected official for representing their constituents.”
The lawsuit argues that the Clark County Council violated OPMA by failing to disclose the planned removal on the official meeting agenda, not allowing public comment on the matter, and proceeding with a decision that may have been premeditated outside of public view.
Additionally, the lawsuit includes a Quo Warranto claim against Will Fuentes, whom the council appointed to replace Belkot on the C-TRAN board. The legal action challenges the legitimacy of his appointment, arguing that the Clark County Council overstepped its authority by removing Belkot without a lawful cause.
Belkot is seeking declaratory relief to overturn her removal, as well as damages for the violation of her civil rights. She is represented by the law firm Stephens and Klinge LLP. The filed complaint can be viewed here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BwJZG30aAnMg8Qo8ZqMmCpreNHceUGMQ/view
Supporters of Belkot have also opened an online fundraiser for her legal battle. To donate, or for more information, go here: https://www.givesendgo.com/GF5UC?utm_source=sendfox&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=press-release-clark-county-councilor-michelle-belkot-files-lawsuit-alleging-civil-rights-violations-and-open-public-meetings-act-opma-breaches
Also read:
- Vancouver mayor pro tem acknowledges the mayor ‘set the trap’ for Michelle Belkot
Audio reveals Vancouver mayor pro tem described mayor’s plan to provoke Belkot at C-TRAN meeting, sparking removal and lawsuits. - Opinion: An unacceptable tax burdenNancy Churchill outlines new tax proposals in Washington state, warning of growing burdens on working families amid budget shortfalls and government overspending.
- POLL: Is it time for new leadership at Vancouver City Hall?A new weekly poll asks whether Vancouver voters should prioritize replacing the mayor and city council in the 2025 election.
- Opinion: How will the majority party’s new budget and tax proposals affect you?Rep. John Ley critiques the state’s proposed 2025-27 budgets, warning of record-breaking tax hikes and economic impacts.
- 18th District lawmakers ensure vital funding for projects in SW Washington are included in proposed 2025-27 House capital budgetLawmakers in the 18th District secured over $5.6 million in proposed funding for projects in Vancouver and Battle Ground under the 2025-27 House capital budget.
Marshall, Fuentes, Yung and Little were given ample opportunities to reverse their actions, make right by rescinding their unlawful act. A packeted chamber of citizens urged them to do so. Instead, they acted to change the bylaws after the fact to try to give themselves cover for what they knew now, was not a lawful act. The legal defense fund set up by supporters is justified. The Prosecuting Attorney is required by law to defend the Councilors, even if they are guilty.
Brave elected representative willing to stand tall and challenge this. She deserves our support, so please click on that link above and donate whatever you can to her legal fund.
Its a terrible thing to see, when citizens are forced to raise enough money to challenge clearly illegal moves by their own government in court. East Vancouver residents who live on and around McGillivray Blvd are waiting for their day in court right now. We had to raise over $30K to challenge Mayor Annie and her minions over their wildly unpopular lane removal plans.
On that note, I would urge Team Belkot to request discovery of Mayor Annie’s involvement in this move. It has her fingerprints all over it, even though she has no say in what the Council does.
It was Vancouver Mayor Anne Ogle as Chair of the C-Tran Board in 2024 who prompted the CTRAN board to consider removal of the 2022 prohibitions against using CTRAN funds for light rail Operations and Maintenance.
At the Dec.10, 2024 C-Tran meeting, a bus ridership report showed that ridership on Express buses and Regional busses that cross the Columbia River on both I-5 and I-205 was significantly lower than it was in 2019. Vancouver Mayor Ogle noted that if the FTA were to look at the Express Bus ridership numbers in 2024, they would not be happy.
CVTV ~1:35:36
https://www.cvtv.org/vid_link/36971?startStreamAt=0&stopStreamAt=8404
At the Feb. 26 County Council AM presentation by TriMet – IBR, it was revealed in the verbal presentation that light rail would replace Regional Bus Route #60 over I-5 Bridge. Not included in the IBR/TriMet presentation was the CTRAN ridership for Route #60, in years 2023 and 2024, only about 900 per weekday on average over a 19 hour period per day, which includes southbound and northbound trips across I-5 Bridge.
So few riders does not seem to justify vastly more expensive light rail at all.
IBR states that the Express Bus Routes will continue on Shoulder. Hopefully the FTA will look at the numbers, very soon.
At December CTRAN meeting, Councilors Michelle Belkot, Tim Hein-Camas, and Bart Hansen-Vancouver all expressed alarm at the high annual Operation and Maintenance Costs for Light Rail presented, compared to the lower cost of Express Bus service. This is in addition to the currently estimated $2 Billion cost to build the light rail system, tracks below, electric wires above, 19 light rail trains, and improvements to the TriMet light rail maintenance center in Gresham, OR area.
• TriMet Light Rail Operations &Maintenance escalated cost = $20,238,570
• C-TRAN Express O&M escalated cost = $1,551,920
Costs are escalated to Opening Day FY2033 dollars average inflation rate of 4.5%
At Dec.2024 CTRAN meetingTriMet cut off 25% of the O& M cost in subsequent slide by claiming a 25% Fare recovery rate, which C-Tran staff questioned as overly optimistic.
Per Feb. 26 County Council IBR Program Update
– presentation
TRIMET Fare recovery is just 10 %, and was not shown for light rail only.
− 2024 – 10%
*Fixed route refers to all services that operate on a predetermined route with set schedules and designated stops, such as bus and light rail
What is the current TRIMET fare recovery for Light rail only? asked a county councilor.
Although citizens were informed that they would not be able to comment on non-agenda items for the Feb. 26 Council Time, and the agenda did not state that there would be discussion on the March 11 CTRAN funding of light rail question, Vancouver Mayor Anne Ogle was present, and was invited by County Council Chair Sue Marshall to explain her strong support for expensive light rail. A U-Tube link is posted at the county website for Feb. 26 Council Time. https://clark.wa.gov/councilors/clark-county-council-meetings
PS. The IBR Program update was in the AM, separate from the Council Time meeting.