Save Vancouver Streets has its day in court, waits on ruling

Organization is suing the city to get its initiative to the ballot box after the city took no action after Save Vancouver Streets gathered more than 6,000 signatures in its effort

Paul Valencia
Clark County Today

Save Vancouver Streets made its argument in court Friday, and the organization now is waiting on a ruling from a judge on whether its initiative can move forward, with the goal to make it to the ballot box.

The grassroots organization gathered more than 6,500 signatures in 2024, going through the city’s initiative process, in an effort to mandate that the city get voter approval any time the city wants to take away a current lane of traffic.

The city’s Complete Streets program has changed the landscape of several neighborhood thoroughfares in recent years. Save Vancouver Streets wants citizens to have more input in any future major change to current streets.

In January, though, the city council, on advice from the city attorney, refused to act on the initiative. 

Save Vancouver Streets argued Friday in Clark County Superior Court that the city had three options: Pass the initiative, pass an alternative and send the initiative to the ballot, or reject the initiative and send it to the ballot.

The city took no action at all, which Save Vancouver Streets says violated the city’s own charter.

“We are here because the city decided to jettison the process outlined in the city charter and invented a new process for handling local initiatives in which the city attorney gets to be the judge, jury, and executioner for local initiatives,” said Jackson Maynard, attorney for Save Vancouver Streets during an argument in front of Judge Derek Vanderwood. “This is contrary to the charter itself … and it is contrary to common sense.”

Sara Baynard-Cooke represented the city at Friday’s hearing. Among the city’s arguments was the term useless. Allowing the initiative to proceed would “require the city to do a useless thing,” she said. 

The city, she said, would not want to send an initiative to a vote that is legally invalid and cannot be implemented. 

“That would be a useless act,” Baynard-Cooke said.

Maynard noted, though, that the legality of a measure should be determined by the court, not by a city clerk, the city attorney, nor the city council.

“Ultimately the government works for the people, not the other way around,” Maynard said. “If the people decided to express their will through the initiative process, then they have the ability to do that. The city can’t stand in the way.”

Maynard said if the city council, on advice from the city attorney, can just dismiss an initiative, “it is the death of the initiative process because the city attorney acts as gatekeeper.”

Maynard noted that his clients chose to exercise their rights by using the initiative process. The city’s response did not follow its own charter’s process. 

Vanderwood had questions, and he complimented both arguments.

“I’m going to take a closer look at some of the case law. I’ll follow up with my decision in due course,” he said.

Justin Wood, one of the organizers of Save Our Streets, was present in the courtroom Friday.

“If the city can be the sole arbiter of what’s legal or not, what’s the point? They could just decide on every single initiative … If they don’t like it, they can toss it out every time,” Wood said.

He also appreciated that the organization had its day in court, and that there was no rush decision from Judge Vanderwood.

“I take a little solace from the fact that he didn’t issue a ruling today,” Wood said. “At least he has enough to think about. He wants to do more digging, more research. In my mind, that means it’s not as clear-cut as the city claims.”

The Save Vancouver Streets project has made considerable progress since its origins at the end of 2023 and early into 2024. Clark County Today was invited to a meeting in January 2024: https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/community-members-rally-in-hopes-of-saving-mcgillivray-boulevard/

In November of 2024, the group submitted the more than 6,500 signatures for its initiative.