Clark County Council, Belkot, and the Ongoing C-TRAN Controversy

This opinion column was written by Ken Vance, editor at ClarkCountyToday.com.

Clark County Counselor Michelle Belkott's case against her fellow county counselors came

to an unsatisfying end for many of us last week when a United States District Court judge

denied Belkott's motion for summary judgment against her colleagues.

It doesn't matter if you violate OPMA, Belkott told Clark County today reporter Paul Valencia

this week, referring to the Open Public Meetings Act.

Why does it even exist if you can come along and violate it and a federal judge says no

big deal?

You likely remember that last year, the other four Clark County counselors, Sue Marshall,

Will Fuentes, Glenn Young and Matt Little, voted to remove Belkott from the C-Tran board

of directors after she had vowed to protect Clark County taxpayers from paying for operations

and maintenance costs associated with trimets 1.83 mile light rail extension as part of

the proposed 205 bridge replacement project.

The four counselors replaced Belkott on the C-Tran board with Fuentes.

Belkott filed suit claiming among other things that the council violated OPMA by withholding

information to the public before voting her off the C-Tran board.

I will admit I may have some bias in my perspective in this case.

I absolutely abhor the notion that a council of elected officials are bound to vote as

one, which is the premise of what led to the whole Belkott fiasco.

Her fellow counselors believed that because the current members of the council were four

to one, in favor of C-Tran being on the hook for a portion of the O&M costs for the light

rail extension, Belkott was bound to vote with that majority in her role on the C-Tran

board of directors.

Members of the Vancouver City Council are bound to do that by that council's bylaws,

but Belkott accurately pointed out that the Clark County Council had no such bylaw and

that she was free to vote her conscience, which she believed was the collective voice

of her constituents.

I'm also against the light rail extension being included as part of the 205 bridge replacement

project.

On three occasions, Clark County voters have rejected light rail, yet our elected officials

and transportation officials continue to shove it down our throats because they obviously

know better than we do about how tax money should be spent.

I prefer we remove the light rail extension from the project, and it's more than two billion

dollar price tag, in favor of an extension of C-Tran's bus rapid transit, which could

be done for a fraction of the cost.

Even if we get past the light rail argument, why should C-Tran pay even a portion of the

light rail M&O costs when it's an extension of Trimett's yellow line?

Let Trimett pay for the O&M costs.

It's not our responsibility to subsidize Trimett, an agency that is mired in a complete financial

nightmare of its own making.

Getting back to Belkott's case, there is no question in my mind that her fellow councillors

violated the Open Meetings Act.

There is absolute collusion in this case.

The councillors have proven that themselves by covering their tracks, and since attempting

to change the county council's rules and procedures, as if that's not enough proof

to you that they knew what they did was wrong, consider the fact that Clark County today

previously revealed that Vancouver Mayor Anne McInerney Ogle orchestrated the entire removal

of Belkott from the C-Tran board when she set the trap for Belkott.

Her Mayor Pro Tem Eric Paulson was caught on tape bragging about the mayor's strategy

at a labor-round table.

The fix was obviously in, and it even extends far beyond just the members of the Vancouver

City Council and Clark County Council.

Scomania County Deputies Report

In November, 2025, a Scomania County Sheriff's Office investigation.

Scomania County Sheriff's Office investigation concluded that the four members of the Clark

County Council violated the county charter and the rules of procedures, as well as the

Open Public Meetings Act.

Plus, the county manager could be charged with official misconduct.

The report said that Councillor Fuentes should be removed from the C-Tran board of directors

immediately, and that Councillor Belkott should be reinstated to the C-Tran board.

Neither of those things happened.

The report was submitted to Clark County prosecuting attorney Tony Golick for possible charges.

As of the obvious conflict, Golick submitted it to the State Attorney General's Office

and the City of Vancouver attorney for review, both declined the request to review the report

or make a recommendation on charges.

Golick has refused to respond to questions about his handling of the Scomania County report,

but Clark County today learned this week that Golick later submitted it to the Thurston

County prosecuting attorney for review.

That office also declined to review the report or make a recommendation on charges.

After shopping the Scomania Sheriff's report to various Democratic prosecutors, including

A.G. Nick Brown, despite his clear Pacifica law group conflicts, Mr. Golick ultimately went

to Thurston County prosecuting attorney John Tunheim, a lifelong Democrat, said Rob Anderson,

founder of Reform Clark County.

Mr. Tunheim's response was predictable.

Rather than protecting the public from what appears to be serious corruption, his memo

dismissed every criminal charge, characterizing the matter as a civil or political dispute.

This appears to be a complete whitewash with a splash of retaliation.

Given how many times I've exposed unlawful conduct within the Clark County prosecuting

attorney's office, this outcome is not a surprise.

We live to fight another day.

I understand those of you who disagree with my perspective on this case may point out

that not only did a United States District Court judge deny Belcott's motion, but three

other agencies refused to review the Scomania County report for possible criminal charges.

You will likely say that Belcott had her day in court and more and she lost.

You are correct.

She and those of us who have supported her throughout this process need to concede defeat and live

to fight another day.

The Vancouver Mayor, the four county counselors, the Clark County prosecuting attorney at all,

they won this round.

But just because they got away with it doesn't mean they weren't wrong.

The deck has been stacked against us conservatives in this state for too long.

One only needs to look back on the recently completed legislative session as further evidence

of that.

In addition to being in control of the governor's office for more than 40 years, the state

legislature, progressive Democrats now also control the Vancouver City Council, Clark

County Council, and the Clark County prosecuting attorney's office.

I know that's not breaking news to you all, but it's a reminder that we conservatives

need to find a way to stop playing against a stacked deck.