Thursday, October 1, 2026
An effort to oust Thurston County Commissioner Emily Clouse from office ended after the Washington Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling to dismiss a recall petition against her.
The high court found that the recall petition failed to satisfy the legal sufficiency requirement of state law that addresses the issue. The high court issued its ruling on Feb. 26.
“Recall charges ‘must be specific enough to give the elected official meaningful notice of the particular conduct challenged and why it is grounds for recall.’ Boldt, 187 Wn.2d at 549. None of the charges meet that standard,” wrote the high court in its conclusion that referenced a case related to the issue.
“Charges three, four, and five lack the requisite specificity and are factually insufficient. While charges one and two are factually sufficient, they are legally insufficient because they fail to identify how Clouse’s actions rise to the level of misfeasance, malfeasance, or a violation of the oath of office, necessary to support a recall action. Therefore, we affirm the trial court’s dismissal of the petition.”
The finding comes more than a year after Visiting Judge Jennifer A. Forbes of Kitsap County Superior Court issued a ruling on Jan. 13 that dismissed the petition for recall from Arthur West of Olympia.
The order pointed out a number of shortcomings in the petition, including several of the charges were not factually sufficient.
“They fail to include any specific acts, dates or times and cannot be reasonably corrected from the materials to correct these deficiencies,” the order states. “The failure of specificity is not merely ‘technical’ and renders the charges deficient.”
The lower court order was issued three days after a remote hearing was broadcast from Thurston County Superior Court on Jan. 10. West represented himself at the 90-minute hearing, while Clouse was represented by attorney Blair Russ. Forbes, West and Russ all participated in the hearing via Zoom.
The five charges referenced in the high court’s ruling stemmed from a relationship Clouse had with an employee whom she selected for employment and worked for her as a subordinate, the recall petition states.
The now former employee later sued the county alleging sexual harassment and other actions against him by Clouse. The lawsuit was subsequently settled for $300,000.
The charges can be traced to a heavily redacted Nov. 26, 2024, report and an executive report with respect to an independent investigation by Robin L. Nielsen, a Seattle-based workplace investigator hired by the county to look into Clouse’s actions with the former aide.
While the report dismissed claims of harassment and retaliation, it found Clouse’s actions violated ethics policies, disrupted county operations and breached public trust. She was subsequently censured by the Thurston County Board of County Commissioners.
West said he was not surprised by the high court’s ruling given it is virtually impossible to recall an elected official regardless of their actions because of state law that governs such issues. He also said the ruling demonstrates why the recall process needs to be reformed.
“I’m very happy for all of the lonely public servants who now will be able to hire their husbands, sweethearts and wives to keep them company,” said West after the high court’s ruling was published.
9 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
RitaRose
Where did you get your comments from Arthur West? Did you interview him after the Supreme Court ruling?
Tuesday, March 3 Report this
Boatyarddog
Yeah, So Phtttt to the Conservative wannabe Bullshitters that tried to lie their way to a Bogis win. GO EAT SAND
Tuesday, March 3 Report this
Chappellg
I’m glad to get this issue behind us. Since the investigation determined that no sexual harassment nor retaliation rose to the level of actionable malfeasance, I think the censure was a sufficient consequence.
However, Mr. West felt justified in tying up an out of county judge, appellate court & finally the state Supreme Court in his personal vendetta. His snarky remarks about the final decision was puerile, but at least it wasn’t as unreasonably damning as the POTUS’ response to SCOTUS ruling against him.
Tuesday, March 3 Report this
anothername
Wow, that was West's response? That response could be from a petulant teenager.
Tuesday, March 3 Report this
ClownPenis88
WA needs to work with ICE and get rid of this WASTE ,Abuse,Fraud from these undocumented criminals need out before more harm to our citizens and taxpayers are done
Tuesday, March 3 Report this
Boatyarddog
ClownPenis88 So its All About taxpayer monies spent on issues YOU don't like!
Awwe to bad your not the only resident Of T.County.
Grow Up!
Tuesday, March 3 Report this
Boatyarddog
And Supreme Court rulings aren't your cup of Tea.
You certainly cannot Judge S***
Tuesday, March 3 Report this
SecondOtter
What a waste of the State Supreme Court's time...and a waste of our taxes. ONE person feeling so justified that he'll take his axe all the way to the SC hoping that SOMEONE will grind it for him-if that isn't a inflated ego, I don't know what is. I wonder who the next target will be. The guy holding a "Any thing helps god bless' on the corner of Trosper and Capitol?
What a pathetic loser.
Tuesday, March 3 Report this
BevBassett
Like a jailhouse lawyer who was never incarcerated, Arthur West has been around for much too long filing his legal stuff from his nice house with a view that his legal shenanigans bought him decades ago. Apparently it's profitable enough that he has the means to go after the Thurston County Commissioner with the most integrity and highest ethical standards of them all. Interesting to see that West targets the most ethical... Wonder why that is?
Wednesday, March 4 Report this