A recall hearing was held at 11 a.m. on Friday, April 4, in the Pacific County Superior Court, where Judge Marilyn K. Haan ruled that a recall effort against Pacific County Commissioner Lisa Olsen can proceed to the next stage.

The recall appears to be direct retaliation from citizens who are angry that commissioners separated the Pacific County Jail from the Pacific County Sheriff’s Office effective Jan. 1.

The formal 111-page recall was filed with the Pacific County Auditor’s Office on March 6 and handed to the Pacific County Prosecutor’s Office on March 7. The office prepared a complaint synopsis per state law and is now handing it over to a judge for a formal decision.

In Washington state, any elected official can be recalled if there are proven merits of either misfeasance or malfeasance in their official capacity.

The hearing was the first of a three-part recall process, which starts with a citizen submitting a formal complaint. If a judge finds the complaint meets a legal threshold, the process moves to a signature petition. If enough signatures are acquired, the recall is placed on an official voting ballot for citizens to decide.

 

Allegations

According to court records, the complaint alleges the county leaders held unlawful executive sessions on multiple occasions in 2024, allowed at least two administrators to attend executive sessions in violation of the OPMA, and illegally decided on the jail’s separation outside of public meetings.

The complaint states that the alleged illegal executive sessions violated state law because they were meant to discuss potential litigation and were conducted without any legal counsel present, which is required for them to be held outside of public view.

The petition also includes a copy of a training certificate Olsen received on May 10, 2021, after completing an online course regarding the OPMA. Within the course, it outlines that one of the requirements for a potential litigation executive session is the presence of legal counsel.

Chief Administrative Officer Paul Plakinger and Risk Manager Marie Guernsey attended all the executive sessions, and the complaint asserts OPMA laws for executive sessions only allow attendance by the “governing body” and “legal counsel.”

According to the Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC), the complaint about Plakinger and Guernsey is inaccurate. The MRSC’s website provides information about the OPMA, including a rundown of executive session rules

“Attendance at an executive session need not be limited to the members of the governing body. Persons other than elected members may attend the executive session at the invitation of the governing body. Those invited should have some relationship to the matter being addressed in the executive session, or they should be in attendance to otherwise provide assistance to the governing body,” the MRSC states.

As for the allegation that the commission decided before the Dec. 26, 2024, commission meeting, the complaint presented alleged proof — the commissioners’ statements at the meeting, which records show Commissioner David Tobin printed out his prepared statement at 7:57 a.m. on Dec. 26, 2024, and Olsen printed hers out at 6:07 p.m. on Dec. 25, 2024.

Legal presentation

A group that calls itself the Recall Rangers was represented at the hearing by Attorney Jackson W. Maynard Jr. of Maynard Law PLLC out of Olympia, who is a “government watchdog,” according to his Twitter page.

Olsen did not have legal representation.

Maynard honed in on the asserted violations outlined in the petition seeking the recall of Olsen.

“The implicit violations of the Open Public Meetings Act according and are documented in Exhibit-C of the petition,” Maynard stated. “Where we have a statement from [Commission] member Olsen, and she says, ‘When you become an elected official, one of the things you realize quickly is that there are many details of events that you become aware of and have to deal with and have to make decisions that are not for public consumption.”

“Another commissioner, as documented in the petition, indicated that ‘we’ve been talking about all of this for months.’ Although, I would note to the court that according to all the minutes that are included, that particular issue of the transfer of the jail matter does not appear explicitly on any of the minutes as a point of discussion until the December 26th meeting in which the statements were made,” Maynard added.

Leading up to the jails’ separation on Dec. 26, 2025, the topic was not previously brought up in any public meetings, and there is no documentation that shows it had been discussed.

“Setting aside the facts, and certainly commissioners are allowed to say whatever they want to say, but I think it reinforces the fact that the commission was having discussions out of the public eye, they weren’t following the proper procedures, and Commissioner Olsen in particular, in that they basically believe that this was because that these matters weren’t for public consumption.”

“And I would assert, your honor, that is exactly why we have the Open Public Meetings Act and why we require certain exemptions to be specifically documented even when asserted because the presumption is that matters are to be discussed in the public sphere and the public has a right to know what decisions are being made on their behalf,” Maynard added.

Court ruling

Haan reviewed the parameters a recall must meet to determine whether it can proceed, including adequate allegations of malfeasance, misfeasance, or a violation of the oath of office.

“As such and based on these standards, the court finds that the alleged facts of the violations by Commissioner Olsen of the Open Public Meetings Act does constitute the requirements showing of misfeasance, malfeasance or a violation of the oath of office,” Haan said.

“Therefore, there is sufficiency to the petition to support the recall petition,” Haan added.

The Recall Rangers group is beginning to collect signatures and will need 3,469 to get Olsen’s recall on a ballot later this year. The signatures have to be obtained within 180 days of the court’s ruling for the petition to move to a ballot.

It is anticipated the group will file recall petitions against Tobin and Doyle relatively soon.

About 8-10 individuals showed up for the Recall Rangers and about two dozen for Olsen.

Olsen declined to comment but her supporters vowed to defend her against the petition and if it makes it to a ballot. Olsen does have a chance to appeal the ruling.