Arguments were made Friday in Clark County Superior Court regarding potential violation of the Open Public Meetings Act, and after a flaw in the case was revealed, the judge asked Rob Anderson to withdraw his complaint
Paul Valencia
Clark County Today
Reform Clark County’s Rob Anderson withdrew his complaint against members of the Clark County Council on Friday after he learned he made unintentional flaws in regard to documents he filed with the court.
“Obviously I’m disappointed with what happened today, but it’s not a terrible surprise being a pro se, non lawyer,” Anderson said. “It is challenging to move these more complicated cases — and it is a complicated case — forward. There were some mistakes made. As a result, it turned out to be better to withdraw.”
Anderson filed a civil complaint against Clark County council members Sue Marshall, Glen Yung, Wil Fuentes, and Matt Little back in April, accusing them of violating the Open Public Meetings Act. This was soon after the council voted to remove colleague Michelle Belkot from the C-TRAN Board of Directors and replace her with Fuentes.
Anderson said the council made these actions without giving notice to the public, so the public was denied the opportunity to give public comment.
Anderson first filed his complaint in Skamania County. It was moved to Clark County. Then the case was delayed once, and again when a judge recused himself.
Clark County Superior Court Judge Camara Banfield heard arguments Friday morning.
Anderson said that the Clark County Council failed to list on its agenda actions regarding a vote on light rail operations and maintenance costs in a February meeting. Then, in early March, failed to put on the agenda that they would be discussing the removal of Belkot from the C-TRAN board and the Fuentes appointment to that board.
“This omission, combined with restricting public comment to agenda items only, denied me and the public input on these actions,” Anderson said.
Later in the hearing, Banfield heard from the defense that some of the cases that Anderson filed for his argument might not not exist. Banfield wondered if AI was used in Anderson’s prep.
“You did great with your arguments,” Banfield told Anderson. “It’s bad that this had to happen.”
She then suggested that Anderson withdraw his case.
Anderson, while disappointed, appreciated the judge’s words.
“I finally got my day in court,” said Anderson, the founder of Reform Clark County, an organization with the mission to serve as a catalyst for restoring constitutional republic principles in Clark County.
He also said that while his fight is over, the battle for Belkot continues. Belkot has her own case — a federal case — that is still to be heard. Belkot’s case, Anderson said, will also tackle the subject of whether the council violated the Open Public Meetings Act. Belkot is represented by an attorney.
Also read:
- Signatures filed for initiatives on parental rights, blocking trans athletes from girls’ sports
Supporters of two initiatives on parental rights and transgender participation in girls’ sports filed signatures Friday, moving the measures closer to consideration by Washington lawmakers. - These new laws and taxes take effect in Washington state on Jan. 1
Several new laws and tax increases passed in 2025 take effect Jan. 1 in Washington, impacting unemployment benefits, business taxes, transportation fees, consumer costs and regulatory requirements. - Opinion: Justice for none – Court hands down a mandate without a dime to fund it
Nancy Churchill argues that a Washington Supreme Court ruling on public defense imposes costly mandates on local governments without providing funding to implement them. - Deportations, tariffs, court clashes, record shutdown mark a historic year in Washington, D.C.
A year marked by deportations, tariffs, court battles, and a record federal shutdown reshaped Washington, D.C., during President Donald Trump’s return to office. - Opinion: The progressive attack on Washington’s sheriffs
Nancy Churchill argues that proposed legislation would shift power over county sheriffs away from voters and concentrate control within state government.
