The Clark County Council has suspended its proceedings for councillors accused of violating their code of ethics.
The six-month suspension, unanimously approved through the council on Wednesday, comes after 4 court cases were filed against 3 of this month’s five councillors. As the review procedure was completed in 2016, it was only introduced this month.
“We don’t seek not to do this job,” Councilwoman Julie Olson said. “But the way this is being implemented right now, we just don’t have the ability to do it, I think, in a transparent, fair and predictable process.”
The first complaint, filed on July 2, alleges that Board Chair, Eileen Quiring, violated the Board’s Code of Conduct and Ethical Procedure by commenting on systemic racism. As required by the code, the board appointed two councillors, Olson and Gary Medvigy, to an ad hoc committee for the complaint.
The councillors refused to investigate an upcoming complaint about Quiring’s service to the Clark County Law Library board after a legal review concluded it related to the board’s code of ethics.
On July 9, a complaint was filed against Councilman John Blom through Eric Temple. Temple, president of the Portland Vancouver Junction Railroad, is lately involved in several lawsuits with the county by the railroad, which is owned by the county and leased through Temple.
Temple also donated $1,000 to Karen Bowerman, who opposes Blom in the number one election on August 4 for the District 3 council post.
The complaint alleges that a representative of Blom contacted a representative of the temple. Blom’s representative reportedly threatened that if the railroad owner gave more to Blom’s opponents, he would “destroy” it.
Blom denied the charge at a meeting on July 15.
“These accusations are 100 percent false and invented through Mr. Temple as part of his efforts to influence the election in a few weeks,” Blom said. “It’s a general thing when you’re dealing with that person.”
After another legal review that concluded that the complaint does not apply to the Board’s business, the Board declined to open an investigation at the July 15 meeting. Instead, the councillors began to talk about the review procedure itself.
“I think we have a massive mess here now that it started. Now that we have this third complaint in front of us,” Medvigy said.
A few hours after the assembly, Temple filed another complaint, this time opposed to councillor Temple Lentz. The complaint alleged that Lentz had violated the code of ethics by lying the assembly and by asserting, although he had not reviewed the evidence, that the complaint against Blom was false.
The counselors held an argument at a board meeting on Wednesday. Olson and Medvigy stated that when they discussed Quiring’s subject, they had questions that the code had not answered.
Specifically, the code requires a county citizen to oversee the committee, but does not specify how councillors begin to find and choose that resident. It also does not specify how to handle the procedure when multiple counselors face complaints, or when they are recused.
“I think we see how this segment of our code, our code of conduct, can be co-opted for a specific explanation of why, politics or not,” Olson said. “He deviated from what I think was his original intention.
Temple told the counselors in an email that he agreed with his decision.