In an apparent move to grant C-TRAN permission to pay for operation and maintenance of light rail, members of the County Council voted to remove Michelle Belkot from the C-TRAN board of directors, a day after Belkot said she would be voting to ensure C-TRAN does not pay for light rail
Paul Valencia
ClarkCountyToday.com
Less than 24 hours after standing her ground, saying she had the right to vote her conscience, the Clark County Council has removed Michelle Belkot from the C-TRAN Board of Directors.
Belkot had proposed that C-TRAN revert to its older language in regard to light rail transit on the proposed new Interstate Bridge, stating that C-TRAN would not pay for operations and maintenance and other projects associated with TriMet’s rail system.
In November of 2024, C-TRAN board voted to say that C-TRAN may pay for operations and maintenance.
Belkot, noting she was representing her constituents, said she wanted to protect Clark County taxpayers from the costs to operate and maintain Oregon’s TriMet Light Rail.
“I’m to the point it looks like I’m going to have to get an attorney. This isn’t legal,” Belkot told Clark County Today on Wednesday night.
When it became clear that Belkot’s position would prevail if a vote were to be taken Tuesday night, the vote was tabled until a future C-TRAN meeting. Belkot’s vote would have been the deciding vote in favor of reverting to the older language.
On Wednesday, the Clark County Council removes Belkot from the C-TRAN board. The Clark County Council has two members who also serve on the C-TRAN Board of Directors.
“I’m feeling censored and censured right now,” Belkot said, adding she did nothing to deserve this rebuke.
“I wasn’t out of line. I was not unprofessional. I addressed my concerns,” Belkot said. “There is nothing in the bylaws that support what they did yesterday, or today.”
Belkot said Wil Fuentes made the motion to remove her from the C-TRAN board. Glen Yung seconded the motion. Matt Little also made a motion to revise the bylaws to say board members must vote collectively with the council. That will be determined at a later date.
Clark County Today was at Tuesday’s C-TRAN meeting and filed this report: https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/c-tran-board-tables-vote-on-language-regarding-the-funding-of-light-rail-maintenance-and-operations/
The council replaced Belkot with Fuentes. The presumption is that Fuentes will vote in favor of allowing C-TRAN to pay operation and maintenance costs, as well as potentially pay for park-and-ride structures. Fuentes was present at Tuesday’s meeting, sitting in the audience.
“I thought it was disturbing what they did today,” said Rob Anderson, leader of Reform Clark County, an organization with the mission to serve and protect people’s rights in all the various government institutions throughout Clark County.
“They’re not cancelling Michelle per say, they’re really cancelling her voters and the citizens who voted for her,” Anderson said. “It’s not a shock, but it’s still kind of hard to watch.”
Just before a vote was seemingly to take place Tuesday, Vancouver Mayor Anne McEnerny-Ogle, also a C-TRAN board member, asked each board member how they intended to vote and how the process to come up with that vote worked. For example, Camas’ representative, Tim Hein, said he was given direction from the Camas City Council that voted unanimously to support a new bridge but not to pay for light rail. So he was going to vote for the older language.
It became clear the vote was going to be close. Clark County councilors Sue Marshall and Belkot differed on how they should vote. Marshall implied that Belkot was supposed to vote how the County Council directed both of them to vote. Belkot said she checked with the legal team and she believed she was able to vote however she felt best for the citizens.
If a vote had taken place, it likely would have passed 5-4, with C-TRAN reverting back to the original language.
Marshall then asked to table the vote. McEnerny-Ogle seconded the motion. The motion would carry 6-3. Battle Ground’s Troy McCoy and Washougal’s Molly Coston had previously said they would vote for the old language but they also sided with McEnerny-Ogle and Marshall, agreeing to table the vote.
Belkot told Clark County Today that she reached out to a former Clark County councilor who also served on the C-TRAN board. They recalled that on a few action items, they disagreed, and did not vote as one block from the county.
Belkot said she feels punished for supporting her constituents. She also said it is clear that Sue Marshall and Matt Little are not serving their constituents. During Council Time on Wednesday, Belkot read off the list of municipalities that do not support the current language, that do not support C-TRAN paying for light rail: Washougal. Camas, Battle Ground. La Center. Ridgefield. Yacolt.
“Chair,” Belkot said she told Marshall, “your district does not support this (current) language.”
Belkot said she knocked on 30,000 doors during her campaign.
“My district was very very clear when I campaigned. I talked to a lot of people,” Belkot said. “They don’t want light rail.”
Wednesday morning, Belkot said she had received several threatening emails from light-rail supporters. She forwarded many of the emails to the Prosecuting Attorney’s Office.
Belkot also said that she intends to be at the next C-TRAN meeting, April 15, even if she is no longer on the Board of Directors.
“All Michelle was doing was following up on her campaign promise,” Anderson said. “Clark County taxpayers don’t want to pay for Portland services. Unfortunately there are a handful of people who don’t mind doing Anne and Portland’s bidding. Michelle is not one of them.”
“I’ve been representing my constituents,” Belkot said. “I’m the only Clark County councilor that grew up in and is from Clark County. I have personally voted against (light rail) again, and again, and again.”
Also read:
- Opinion: TriMet Better Red cost allocation revealed
John Ley examines TriMet’s $204 million Better Red project, showing most of the spending wasn’t on vehicles or tracks—raising questions about cost transparency and regional funding. - Opinion: Neighbors for a Better Crossing calls for a current seismic study for $7.5 Billion Interstate Bridge project
Neighbors for a Better Crossing is urging a new seismic study before construction proceeds on the $7.5 billion IBR project, raising transparency concerns and proposing an immersed tube tunnel alternative. - Rep. John Ley supports C-TRAN Bus Rapid Transit to save Washington moneyRep. John Ley praised C-TRAN’s new BRT line as a faster, lower-cost alternative to light rail, urging support for transit options that save taxpayers money and improve service.
- C-TRAN, WSU Vancouver celebrates groundbreaking for The Vine on Highway 99C-TRAN and WSU Vancouver broke ground on the Vine’s Highway 99 route, a 9-mile bus rapid transit line connecting the university to downtown Vancouver and the Waterfront, set to open in 2027.
- C-TRAN board again postpones vote on light rail operations and maintenance costsThe C-TRAN board again postponed a vote on language regarding operations and maintenance costs tied to light rail expansion, with pending lawsuits involving Michelle Belkot continuing to impact board actions.
More people would be in favor of light rail if the cost was reasonable. Being expected to pay for TriMet’s “operations, maintenance and other projects”, and way too many light rail cars is over the top. Replacing Michelle Belkot and tabling the vote also seems shady. This does seem like it’s being forced down the throats of Clark County residents. We don’t need light rail now, we might need it in 10 or 15 years. It is simply not justified at this time.
If the bridge is finished in 10 years, then we should just include it now. This bridge will likely stand as long as the previous bridge. 100+ years. In even 25 years the area will be way different with more people and more needs. Some of us wont even be alive to enjoy the light rail when it is completed, we have to build it so we avoid adding more cars to the limited pavement in the area.
Are you serious??? “just include it now”…. but at what cost?!?! To buy into this TriMet boondoggle, at these projected costs, is financial suicide for Clark County.
Remember, it is widely known and documented that “projected costs” are always inaccurate with the “actual costs” being far greater. Again, financial suicide for Clark County should the current proposal be accepted.
Washougal City Councilor Molly Coston voted for light rail in 2022, and public records show there was little or no discussion on the Washougal City Council, and no vote of the council on the issue prior to Coston casting her vote FOR light rail as a member of the C-tran board. This year, 2025, the Washougal City Council discussed the issue of light rail at 2 workshops and at least one council meeting. 5 Washougal city councilors voted against continuing to fund light rail, and voted FOR the original restrictions on NOT funding operations and maintenance of light rail . Washougal City Councilors Coston and Russell voted to keep funding light rail, and supported the November change to start using C-Tran funds on light rail. In the end, Coston voted for light rail again, as she did in 2022. Will the Washougal city council continue to support her as the C-Tran representative in spite of her multiple votes for light rail, and her failure to fully inform the council and solicit their input prior to castng her vote FOR light rail in 2022?
Clarification, at the March 11 meeting, Coston stated she was going to vote to go back to the original restrictions of 2022, that prohibited CTRAN spending on annual light Operations and Maintenance costs and other items. However, Coston and Battleground CTRAN rep Troy McCoy voted to table the motion to a future meeting, which may be the April 15 meeting. If Coston and McCoy had followed thru and cast their vote on March 11 in the manner they stated they would, the funding for the lobbyist to promote light-rail and other light rail expenditures on light rail planning and promotion from C-Tran funds would have been halted. To see the original restrictions of 2022, and the November changes, click on the last agenda item
Action Item: C-TRAN Memorandum Modified Locally Preferred Alternative (MLPA) for the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program
As it is, the lobbyist continues to promote light rail in the WA legislature, and perhaps WA DC and elsewhere as well. C-tran staff did not mention how many CTRAN $ have been spent promoting and planning for light rail since November, 2024 when the prohibition on spending CTRAN $ on light rail was lifted. No board member asked how much C-Tran has spent on light rail since November, 2024.
Good, we need this light rail!
Both this and the prior article on the subject have zero follow-up quotes or comments from anyone other than Michelle Belkot and her obvious supporter, Rob Anderson. It would be nice to see some attempt at more balanced reporting on these issues from Clark County Today.
That’s what the Columbian is for. They are so liberal that CCT is the balance.
There’s a pretty significant difference between, “they report things with what I think is a partisan bias” and “they literally only present one side.” I think if CCT is going to live up to its own Editor’s claims, it needs to do better. It’s hard to consider a story informative if it completely ignores half of the positions in question.
At some point it stops being news and just becomes yet another opinion site.
Maybe if TriMet came back with a more fair financial proposal… but not at the costs currently proposed.
I’m curious as to how we could establish that a proposal is “fair” or not in this context. I think that at least part of the issue is that the current proposed arrangement is being characterized as unfair or unbalanced, but we’re not being provided with any information about TriMet’s share of the expenses.
Is TriMet paying less than C-Tran? More? How much more or less would the costs need to be for it to be equitable?
I find it quite curious that the folks who are so vehemently opposed never seem to provide that critical contextual information. It’s always, “look how much Clark County will have to pay!”
I guess I’m not convinced that we should simply be taking the word of opponents of the deal that the current deal is unfair. Let’s have all the relevant information and make an measured and informed choice.
That last quote from Ms. Belkot is a bit concerning to me. Making a choice just because, “that’s what I’ve always done before” seems like a terrible way to make policy decisions.
County Council members were not required to vote as a block previously. It is not in the bylaws. But because this is ‘so special’ previous norms were bypassed.
I think the “previous norm” would be that, as a representative of the Council, you represent the views of the Council. The issue never came up because prior representatives were not clearly subverting the majority position of the Council they were chosen to represent by inserting their own particular views.
As I’ve said elsewhere, if you don’t agree, you can choose not to be the representative – attempting to disenfranchise the majority position of the body you are supposed to represent is not it.
Say it louder for the back!
This is the same playbook that the right is using everywhere right now. Go against the norms, do something outrageous, and then play the victim.
No, let TriMet keep their own problems.
Why do we have to be a part of Portland’s problems???
Because Portland has infiltrated Clark County with shills and carpetbaggers, as is pretty plain, so we in CC can be taxed into oblivion paying for Portland and the democrats failed “programs” with absolutely NO say where our stolen tax money will go…. hint: more money laundering to “non-profits” for campaign contributions to the self-anointed chosen ones.
I feel like there needs to be some sort of serious reality check here.
Portland is the 27th largest city in the entire country and has an annual budget of around $8 billion.
So you’re arguing that Portland has somehow embarked on a secret plan to move a massive number of people into Clark County, to live here long enough to get involved in politics and vote, just so that they can steal about $25 million dollars.
Aside from the fact that the whole plan reads like something out of a bad “B” movie action thriller, that amount of money isn’t even half of one percent of their annual budget.
Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t say no if you wanted to give me $25 million. But if you want to try and say it’s going to be enough motivation to secretly recruit a veritable army of carpetbaggers to long-term settle in a neighboring city to nefariously steal such a relatively paltry amount of money?
0/5 stars, very unrealistic plot, needs better special effects.
for a reality check please see the portlandia carpetbagger “representing” district 5 that has voted to raise our taxes already and wants to do it again to enhance the coffers of the people really running portlandia disguised as “light rail”. Does the old term “being railroaded” come to mind?
You mean the person who got elected is the person representing the district?
Yeah, that’s how elections work. People get to choose who they want to represent them.
Here’s a reality check: Marshall won her election by a larger margin than Belkot won hers. Maybe support for your particular views aren’t quite so strong as you imagine them to be.
Removing Councilor Belkot from C-Tran Board is “political manipulation” of a dissenting vote for light rail/tolling. We have written several times to Michelle Belkot – we live in CCD#2, voicing our strenuous objections to both light rail and tolling for IBR. We have voted three times saying no to both. Obviously by the Council’s removal of Belkot from C-Tran Board, they do not agree with us (my wife and me). Mayor Anne McEnerny-Ogle has tried to push the IBR through with all its issues, including the No Votesl. She is up for re-election. If I lived in Vancouver I would vote her out – she does not listen to voters. The mayor was concerned when Trump was elected – because Trump’s Secretary of Transportation would probably stop the federal funds, necessary for this project and would include light rail. That is what happened when SOT Sean Duffy looked at the issues with this project. Elected officials MUST listen to “we the people” or vote them out. We are a Representative Republic. Belkot should be back on the C-Tran Board, a voice of reason. C-Tran runs mostly empty busses. The smaller ones serve the public better. But C-Tran does its own thing, that’s bad as they are tax funded. I am forced to pay for an inefficient bus system that needs DOGE review.
I strongly disagree with your assessment that Councilor Belkot’s removal is “political manipulation.”
There are five members on the Clark County Council and only seats for two representatives from the county on the C-Tran board. If those seats are supposed to “represent” the Council, and the Council supports the change at 4-1, it seems disingenuous for Ms. Belkot to effectively disenfranchise the majority.
That’s not how democracy is supposed to work. At least in my understanding of it, majority is supposed to rule. If Ms. Belkot does not feel that she can support the position, I think she’s well within her rights to voice that protest. That said, it feels inappropriate for her to misrepresent the majority determination of the Council in her specific role as a representative of it.
Definitely sounds like a politically motivated move on the part of the C-Tran board and it is wrong in every possible way.
“We the people” seems to be a fading concept in the Country. Belkot being voted off the CTRAN Board because she voted against Clark County paying TriMets operational charges in favor of the originally voted “NO,” on the issue is another instance where democracy is in peril. Whether I agree about these expenses or not is not relevant. (Although I agree with the original vote to not pay (As yet undisclosed and probably massively under estimated) operational expenses. Why should we pay for Clark County’s growing “bedroom” community from Portland; with little tangible benefit for our residents, other than picking up the tab.)
A logical reaction to the Vancouver mayor’s reversal of vote (and, I might add, our own Washougal City Council members reversal on the issue) should give everyone pause. I for one, am suspicious. Is Trump’s MO setting the standard here too?