OLYMPIA — A formal court date for the Washington State Supreme Court to decide the fate of an effort to remove Pacific County Commissioner Lisa Olsen from office has been set for Sept. 4, culminating months of back-and-forth briefs.

In effect, this timing pauses any effort to obtain the 3,400 voter signatures required to place the matter on the ballot, making it difficult to do so this year.

Olsen is the first commissioner in Pacific County to be the subject of a formal recall effort. The push is being led by the Pacific County Recall Rangers, a small group of citizens aligned with Sheriff Daniel Garcia and his objections to removing the county jail from his office’s supervision.

The first recall claim accuses Olsen and fellow commissioners of violating the Open Public Meetings Act by not having legal counsel at the commission’s executive sessions where potential litigation was discussed on June 11, June 25, Oct. 8, Oct. 22 and Oct. 31, 2024.

Another claim alleges that Olsen and her two colleagues deliberately and purposely concealed issues to avoid public input on the jail decision.

Bogus claims?

However, Olsen’s legal team from Carney Badley Spellman P.S. argue that the recall group’s assertions are bogus and “contain multiple factual inaccuracies.” Attorneys Mark C. Lamb and Isacc C. Prevost say Olsen and the other commissioners adhered to laws governing executive sessions.

With the recall now moved from Pacific County Superior Court to the state Supreme Court, recall advocate Irv Edersheim, through his attorney, Jackson W. Maynard, asked for a speedy decision.

“Not granting accelerated review of this matter would unfairly render this Petition for Recall moot by significantly limiting the time available for Respondent to collect signatures in support of the recall petition, effectively overturning the Superior Court’s decision by delay rather than on merit,” Maynard argued.

The appeal process delays the recall effort’s signature gathering until after the Supreme Court rules on the appeal, which puts the group at risk of not getting the matter on this fall’s general election ballot.

Under state law, the group has 180 days to obtain the just over 3,400 signatures required, based on the requirement being 35% of the overall votes cast in the 2024 general election in the contest for Olsen’s seat. Once the signatures are certified, the matter has to get on a ballot no sooner than 45 days and no later than 90 days from the certification.

However, a special ballot cannot be commenced between the primary and general elections, leaving a small window for the group to acquire the signatures in time. The timeline of the appeal process could mean the matter would go to voters at the earliest possibility in 2026.

Deadlines stick

Olsen’s legal team responded that “accelerated review” isn’t appropriate.

According to court documents, the court accepted the recommended deadlines for the accelerated process and upheld a pause on signature gathering. Olsen’s legal team also asked for more time to file an opening brief with the Supreme Court, moving the deadline 14 days out to June 11.

“At the direction of the assignment justice, the motion for extension of time to file the Appellant’s opening brief is granted,” the Supreme Court stated in a May 19 letter to both parties.

The deadline for Olsen’s opening brief to be served and filed is June 11, while all other dates remain the same. This includes formal arguments in Olympia in September.

If the Supreme Court eventually rules that the recall can proceed, taxpayers will pay to place the measure on the ballot.

Washington law “states that the special election for the recall will be conducted in the same manner as any other special election,” according to the Washington Secretary of State. “This would include the cost borne by the district that has contents on the ballot. In this case, the county would be responsible for its proportionate share of the costs, if the recall election is held in conjunction with other elections.”