2024 Was A Very Busy & Fruitful Year

2024 began with a bang, bringing a series of legal battles that exposed underlying issues in Clark County.

In 2023, I was in court for the first time, appealing the dismissal of my HAVA complaints regarding the 2022 recounts. Little did I imagine that I would find myself battling in court FIVE times in 2024!

JANUARY

• The Clark County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office (led by Tony Golik) refused to follow the Home Rule Charter, attempting to block the Restore Election Confidence initiative from gathering signatures and reaching voters.
• A Writ of Mandamus filed in Skamania County forced the Prosecuting Attorney’s Office to reverse course and comply with the law.
• Against Auditor Kimsey's wishes, the PA’s office determined the Restor Election Confidence initiative was legal, paving the way for the Restore Election Confidence initiative effort to begin.
• Volunteers started collecting thousands of signatures, educating the public about needed reforms in election processes—issues that became even more evident in the months ahead.
• I filed a second ethics complaint, this time against the PA’s office, for failing to uphold the law.

MARCH

• Uncovered that illegitimate ballots were being mailed to voters who had canceled registrations or were being forwarded to people in other states or voting districts.

APRIL

• WinCo served me with a lawsuit for a volunteer gathering signatures at their Brush Prairie location.

MAY

• WinCo secured a preliminary injunction, but the judge limited its scope to the Brush Prairie store.
• The Restore Election Confidence initiative gathered over 8,000 signatures but fell short of the threshold to advance. Auditor Kimsey dismissed the initiative’s proposals, like adding cameras at county ballot boxes—a stance that later backfired.

JUNE

• In a shocking development, the Ethics Commission broke standing procedures and dismissed both complaints against Greg Kimsey and Tony Golik (but this fight may not be over yet:-)

JULY

• Filed an appeal of the Ethics Commission's decisions.

AUGUST

• A judge dismissed the ethics appeals for lack of jurisdiction but grilled the County Attorney for denying due process. It was clear from his comments that the current setup of the Ethics Commission is not Constitutional.
• While reviewing ballot language for proposed Charter amendments, I discovered that the submitted ballot titles were misleading and biased, violating state law. Though my appeal was dismissed on a technicality, the PA’s office made some changes. However, Charter Amendment 18 remained misleading, failing to disclose how it would increase the PA’s authority to screen initiatives. This story will most likely expand in 2025.

OCTOBER

• Following ballot box attacks, we intensified pressure on Kimsey for rejecting the need for cameras and was the first to obtain and release footage of the second attack.

NOVEMBER

• WinCo dropped its lawsuit, effectively conceding its case was weak and would most likely not advance out of preliminary challenges.
• Charter Amendment 18, which would have restricted future initiatives, was defeated.

DECEMBER

• Drafted “against” statements for Ridgefield School levies on the February ballot.

The Restore Election Confidence (REC) initiative was by far the most significant and impactful effort. Dozens of volunteers stepped up, collecting signatures and raising awareness about election system flaws. Though we fell short of the required signatures, we put Kimsey on notice and forced him to address these issues publicly—positions that ultimately came back to haunt him. Instead of improving election processes, he pushed Charter Amendment 18, aimed at stifling future REC-like initiatives. Thanks to our efforts and Kimsey’s missteps, election reform momentum is growing, and we may see big results in 2025.

The ethics complaints revealed misconduct by County officials and highlighted the Ethics Commission’s lack of impartiality. The Commission ignored the stated processes to dismiss my complaints and Angus Lee's (regarding ethics violations when handling the John Ley case). Left unchecked, this body risks becoming a tool for protecting political insiders while punishing dissenters.

We also faced corporate corruption, as several businesses prioritized profits over supporting the constitutional right to petition. While over 50+ local businesses supported our efforts, major retailers chose to harass and threaten volunteers.

WinCo’s lawsuit was a prime example of this. Their case was riddled with falsehoods about me and our initiative. Despite big threats and accusations, they ultimately withdrew, wasting significant resources. Although their efforts consumed my time and hindered other initiatives, we prevented them from securing a verdict that could have reshaped local policies and jeopardized future grassroots initiative efforts.

Support Reform Clark County Efforts

Click Here To Support

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN 2024!

Your support helped with legal and other expenses needed in efforts to reform Clark County

2025 Is The Year Of The Charter Review Commission Elections

The Home Rule Charter: Our "County Constitution"

The Home Rule Charter is often referred to as our "County Constitution." While there are some advantages to having a Charter—Clark County being one of only seven counties in Washington State with one—there are also significant downsides, and ours has many.

Earlier this year, Greg Kimsey boasted about writing much of the Charter, which explains why it empowers many executive branch positions while stripping power from the people (the legislative branch). Unfortunately, the first Charter Review Commission served as a puppet for administrative elites and proposed several terrible amendments, including:

• A "woke" preamble (failed)
• Creating a DEI office (tried twice, failed twice)
• Allowing elected executive branch officials to appoint their successors, even if they committed a felony or were being removed from office (passed)
• Restricting initiative and referendum rights (two passed, one failed)
• Ranked Choice Voting (failed)
• Eliminating the Chair position (held by Eileen Quiring-O’Brien), which conveniently redistricted three Republican Councilors into the same district (passed)
• Adding phony non-partisan titles for County officials (passed) - Newsflash: This doesn’t magically remove politics from political positions. Instead, it gives voters less information and allows candidates to deceive voters.

What is the Charter Review Commission?

The Home Rule Charter requires review by a 15-member elected Charter Review Commission. Three members are elected from each of the five County Councilor districts. Under the Charter, the next election for commission members will take place in November 2025.

Here’s the relevant section from the Charter regarding the Commission:

Section 9.1: Charter Review Commission

1. Election and Period of Office
2. Five years after the adoption of this Charter and at least every five years thereafter, the council shall facilitate the election of a Charter Review Commission. The commission will consist of fifteen members, elected on a nonpartisan basis, with three representatives from each council district.

• Candidates shall file during the regular candidate filing period and pay a $25 filing fee.
• No primary will be held for this election. The election shall occur during the November general election.
• The member receiving the most votes shall convene the commission.
• The term of office for commission members shall be two years or until the commission concludes its work, whichever occurs sooner.
• Meetings may take place at appropriate times and locations within Clark County. Public notice of each meeting must be provided in a countywide newspaper and posted on the county’s website at least 14 days in advance.

1. Vacancies
2. Vacancies on the commission must be filled by the remaining members within 30 calendar days after the chair declares a vacancy. Notice must be provided to residents of the affected district within 10 days of the declaration. The selected replacement must reside in the district where the vacancy occurs and be approved by a simple majority vote of the commission.
3. Financial Support
4. Commission members shall serve without salary but will be reimbursed for reasonable out-of-pocket expenses. The County Council must provide the commission with necessary resources, facilities, and funding to fulfill its purpose effectively.

Interested in Becoming a Charter Commissioner?

If you’re interested in serving as a Charter Commissioner, please click the button below to send me an email with your name, address, and district. I’ll send you more information!

Click Here To Email Me You're Interested

Since there are no primaries for Charter Commissioners, it’s crucial to identify and support the three best candidates from each district. Coordination is essential to avoid splitting votes, as happened last time.

Quick Facts About the Charter Review Commission:

• Serious Responsibility: This is an opportunity to bring much-needed reforms to Clark County.
• Term of Office: Two years or until the commission’s work concludes, whichever comes first.
• Representation: Only three commissioners will be elected from each of the five County Council districts. [Click HERE to find your district.]
• Commitment: Be prepared for at least two meetings per month, with the potential for more during busy periods.
• Election Timing: Commissioners will be elected in the November 2025 general election (no primary election).

Support Reform Clark County Efforts

Click Here To Support

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN 2024!

ICYMI: WATCH VIDEO DESCRIBING THE LIFE AND DEATH OF CHARTER #18

Click HERE To Follow On X (Twitter)

Click HERE To Follow On Facebook

Or HERE To Follow On Instagram

www.reformclarkcounty.com

Reform Clark County only encourages lawful and respectful action that leads to meaningful constitutional reforms in Clark County