Ms.

Julie Wise
Director, King County Elections
919 Southwest Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057

Mr. Daniel Satterberg

King County Prosecuting Attorney
516 Third Avenue
Seattle, WA 98104

RE: Filing of Statement of the Charges in favor of the recall of Black Diamond City
Councilmember Patricia Pepper

Dear Ms. Wise and Mr. Satterberg:

This letter shall constitute the statement of the charges in support of the recall of Black
Diamond City Councilmember Patricia Pepper pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110 and Washington
Constitution, Article I, 33-34. Ms. Pepper has committed acts of malfeasance and/or
misfeasance, and violated her oath of office. This Statement of the Charges is verified under
oath, states the acts complained of in concise language, gives a detailed description including the
date, location and nature of each act complained of, and is signed by the person(s) bringing the
charge.

I. Introduction to Statement of Charges in Favor of the Recall of Patricia Pepper

The Petitioner for Recall is Ms. Robbin Taylor, who is a citizen of the City of Black
Diamond, Washington. The City of Black Diamond lies entirely within King County. Ms.
Patricia Pepper was elected to a position on the Black Diamond City Council in November 2015,
for a four-year term effective January 1, 2016. Ms. Pepper was sworn in on January 7, 2016.
The oath she took reads as follows:

I, Pat Pepper, having been duly elected to the office of City of Black
Diamond Council Position Five, do solemnly swear or affirm that I will
faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of this office as prescribed
by law and to the best of my ability and that I will support and maintain
the Constitution of the State of Washington and of the United States of
America.

The City of Black Diamond is an optional code municipal corporation having a

Mayor-Council form of government, organized under RCW 35A.12. Its Council consists of
five members. The powers and duties of both the mayor and councilmembers are as defined
in RCW 35A.12.100 and RCW 32A.11.020.

II. Executive Summary of the Charges

Statement of charges in favor of

Recall of Patricia Pepper
Pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110
1 of 14
 As set forth in detail below, during Ms. Peppers first year in office, she has (1)
knowingly violated the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA), both in meeting and conferring
with other council members outside of open public meetings, and in failing to provide proper
notices, agenda, and minutes when meetings were convened, (2) usurped the authority of the
mayor on multiple occasions, (3) conspired with other City councilmembers to defeat a quorum
and/or refuse to vote on necessary measures, (4) refused to enact Comprehensive Plan
amendments, Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan and Capital Improvement Plan as
mandated by state law, and (5) refused to enact a budget for 2017. Ms. Peppers actions and
inactions have ground the Council and the City to a halt, cost the City thousands of dollars and
jeopardized the continued provision of necessary City services.

III. Factual and Legal Sufficiency for Recall of Patricia Pepper

A. The Constitutional Right to Recall

The legal basis for recall is established in the Washington State Constitution Article 1,
Sections 33 and 34. Section 33 contains the substantive right to recall, providing that [e]very
elective public officer of the state of Washington is subject to recall and discharge by the legal
voters of the state. Section 34 directs the Legislature to enact laws necessary to carry out
section 33. Pursuant to that authority, the Legislature adopted chapter 29.82 RCW, now codified
as chapter 29A.56 RCW, to provide the substantive criteria and procedural framework for the
recall process. Matter of Pearsall-Stipek, 136 Wn.2d 255, 262-63, 961 P.2d 343 (1998).

Elected officials in Washington may be recalled for malfeasance, misfeasance, and

violation of the oath of office. Const. art. I, 33-34. Recall statutes are construed in favor of
the voter, not the elected official. In re Recall of Washam, 171 Wn.2d 503, 510, 257 P.3d 513
(2011).

B. Factual Sufficiency

The Superior Court does not examine the truthfulness of the stated grounds for recall; it
determines only whether, if true, the charges would constitute malfeasance, misfeasance or
violation of the oath of office. Courts act as a gateway to ensure that only charges that are
factually and legally sufficient are placed before the voters, but we do not evaluate the
truthfulness of those charges. RCW 29A.56.140. In re Recall of Washam, 171 Wn. 2d 503, 510,
257 P.3d 513 (2011); In re Recall of Cy Sun, 177 Wn.2d 251, 255, 299 P.3d 651 (2013).

Charges are factually sufficient if taken as a whole they ... state sufficient facts to
identify to the electors and to the official being recalled acts or failures to act which without
justification would constitute a prima facie showing of misfeasance, malfeasance, or violation
of oath of office. Chandler v. Otto, 103 Wn.2d 268, 274, 693 P.2d 71 (1984). Voters may draw
reasonable inferences from the facts; the fact that conclusions have been drawn by the petitioner

Statement of charges in favor of

Recall of Patricia Pepper
Pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110
2 of 14
is not fatal to the sufficiency of the allegations. In re Recall of West, 155 Wn.2d 659, 665, 121
P.3d 1190, 1194 (2005).

A charge is factually sufficient if the facts establish a prima facie case of misfeasance,
malfeasance or violation of the oath of office and are stated in concise language and provide a
detailed description in order to enable the electorate and a challenged official to make informed
decisions." In re Recall of Telford, 166 Wn.2d 148, 154, 206 P.3d 1248 (2009) (quoting In re
Recall of Wasson, 149 Wn.2d 787, 791, 72 P.3d 170 (2003)). In this context, "prima facie"
means that, accepting the allegations as true, the charge on its face supports the conclusion that
the official committed misfeasance, malfeasance, or a violation of the oath of office. In re Recall
of Wade, 115 Wn.2d 544, 548, 799 P.2d 1179, 1181 (1990).

RCW 29A.56.110 also requires that the person making the charge have knowledge
of the alleged facts upon which the stated grounds for recall are based. Knowledge need not
necessarily be firsthand. In re Recall of Cy Sun, 177 Wn.2d 251, 256, 299 P.3d 651 (2013).
When the charge is violation of law, the Supreme Court has stated that the petitioner must have
knowledge of facts indicating that the official intended to commit an unlawful act. Pearsall-
Stipek, 136 Wn.2d at 263.

The Court may use supplemental materials to determine whether there is a factual basis
for the charge. In re Recall of West, 155 Wn.2d 659, 665-66, 121 P.3d 1190, 1193-1194 (2005).
It may go outside the petition to determine whether there is a factual basis for the charge. In re
Recall of Anderson, 131 Wn.2d 92, 95, 929 P.2d 410, 412 (1997).

C. Legal Sufficiency

To be legally sufficient, the charges must specifically allege substantial conduct

amounting to misfeasance, malfeasance, or violation of the oath of office. Washam, 171 Wn.2d
at 514-15. The legal sufficiency requirement protects officials from being recalled for
appropriately exercising the discretion granted him or her by law. Chandler, 103 Wn.2d at 274.
Officials may not be recalled for their discretionary acts absent manifest abuse of discretion.
Washam, 171 Wn.2d at 515.

D. Grounds for Recall

RCW 29A.56.110 defines what constitutes misfeasance, malfeasance, and violation of the
oath of office:

For purposes of this chapter:

(1) Misfeasance or malfeasance in office means any wrongful conduct that
affects, interrupts, or interferes with the performance of official duty;
a. Additionally, misfeasance in office means the performance of a duty
in an improper manner; and

Statement of charges in favor of

Recall of Patricia Pepper
Pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110
3 of 14
 b. Additionally, malfeasance in office means the commission of an
unlawful act;
(2) Violation of the oath of office means the neglect or knowing failure by an
elective public officer to perform faithfully a duty imposed by law.

IV. Statutes Relevant to Recall Petition

A. Open Public Meeting Act (OPMA)

The Petition for Recall of Patricia Pepper alleges violation of the Open Public Meetings
Act. That law requires that meetings of a public agency be open to the public:
All meetings of the governing body of a public agency shall be open and public
and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the governing body of
a public agency, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.

RCW 42.30.030. The OPMA is remedial and liberally construed in favor of openness. RCW
42.30.910. Exceptions to the openness requirement must be narrowly construed. Miller v. City
of Tacoma, 138 Wn.2d 318, 324, 979 P.2d 429 (1999) (quoting Mead Sch. Dist. No. 354 v. Mead
Ed. Ass'n, 85 Wn.2d 140, 145, 530 P.2d 302 (1975)).

As used in the OPMA, Governing Body means the multimember board, commission,
committee, council, or other policy or rule-making body of a public agency, or any committee
thereof when the committee acts on behalf of the governing body, conducts hearings, or takes
testimony or public comment. RCW 42.30.020(2). A meeting of a governing body occurs
when a majority of its members gathers with the collective intent of transacting the governing
body's business. Citizens All. for Prop. Rights Legal Fund v. San Juan Cty., 184 Wn.2d 428,
444, 359 P.3d 753 (2015).

A public agencys governing bodies are required to convene their meetings at regularly
scheduled dates, times, and places, and may not occur in secret. RCW 42.30.060. All meetings
must have an agenda, which the agency must publish at least 24 hours in advance. RCW
42.30.077.

A governing body may hold special meetings, but only upon 24-hour notice to the public,
via the media and the agencys website. RCW 42.30.080. No business may be conducted except
that for which notice of the special meeting was given. Id.

B. Requirement of Regular Meetings

Statement of charges in favor of

Recall of Patricia Pepper
Pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110
4 of 14
 RCW 35A.12.100 requires that the city council and mayor shall meet regularly The
Black Diamond Municipal Code sets the time and place of regular council meetings and study
meetings. BDMC 2.04.010.

C. Authority of the Mayor

RCW 35A.12.100 describes the authority of the Mayor in the City of Black Diamond
with its Mayor-Council form of government. It is the duty of the Mayor to appoint, remove, and
supervise employees. RCW 35A.12.100. It is also the duty of the Mayor to see that all contracts
and agreements made with the city or for its use and benefit are faithfully kept and performed.
Id. The Mayor presides over all city council meetings, although she may only vote in case of a
tie. Id.; RCW 32A.12.110. The duties and powers imposed upon the Mayor may not be
amended by or delegated to the City council. Roehl v. Public Utility Dist. No. 1 of Chelan Cnty.,
43 Wn.2d 214, 241, 261 P.2d 92 (1953); Bothell v. Woody, 90 Wash. 501, 504, 156 P. 534 (1916).

D. Requirements of Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Improvement Plan,

Capital Improvement Plan, Budget, Planning Commission and Civil Service
Commission.

Code Cities such as Black Diamond are required to prepare and adopt budgets for a full
fiscal year. RCW 35A.33.075. The Growth Management Act requires the City to adopt a
Comprehensive Plan, which includes a Capital Improvement Plan. RCW 36.70A.070(3). The
City is also required to enact a Six-Year Street plan. RCW 35.77.010.

Having established a Planning Commission under RCW 35.63, the City is required to fill
seats on that Commission. RCW 35.63.020. Commission members are appointed by the Mayor
and confirmed by the Council. Id. Leaving seats unfilled causes planning to default to the City
Council.

Having a police department, the City is required to have a Civil Service Commission.
RCW 41.12.010; BDMC 2.64.020. The Civil Service Commission is governed by State law if
the City does not elect to enact its own rules. RCW 41.12.020.

V. Acts and Omissions constituting the Statement of the Charges

The acts for which this Statement of the Charges is brought are divided into the following
general factual categories. Together, the charges amount to an indictment against Ms. Pepper
that she has conducted herself, while in office, in a manner that constitutes misfeasance,
malfeasance and/or violation of her oath of office.

A. Patricia Pepper has intentionally violated the OPMA by privately agreeing

with other councilmembers upon a course of action for the City Council.

Statement of charges in favor of

Recall of Patricia Pepper
Pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110
5 of 14
 B. Patricia Pepper has intentionally violated the OPMA by conducting
Committee meetings that are not properly noticed or open to the public.
C. Patricia Pepper has intentionally acted to usurp the authority of the Mayor of
Black Diamond.
D. Patricia Pepper disregarded her duties as a Council member, thereby impeding
the regular functioning of the City.

Patricia Pepper has engaged in the following actions, each of which constitutes misfeasance,
malfeasance and/or violation of her oath of office, and each of which supports a finding of
factual and legal sufficiency for her recall from office.

The Petitioner for Recall is Ms. Robbin Taylor, who is a citizen of the City of Black
Diamond, Washington. Ms. Taylor makes a concerted effort to attend all meetings of the Black
Diamond City Council, and is thus intimately familiar with the happenings of the City Council
and its members. Additionally, many of the acts charged are well-documented, as evidenced by
the attached exhibits.

A. Malfeasance or Misfeasance in Office, or Violation of the Oath of Office,

Through Intentional Violation of the Open Public Meetings Act in Agreement
With Others Constituting a Majority of the Council, and with its Standing
Committees comprised of a majority of the council (11 Counts)

The Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA), RCW 42.30 requires the governing body of a
City to convene its meetings on a published, regularly scheduled time, at a regular place, and to
publish an agenda of the meeting. Ms. Patricia Pepper convened meetings with a majority of the
members of the City Council without complying with the public notice and agenda requirements
of the OPMA. Many of these meetings were conducted privately over email. During these
meetings, the majority of the City Council resolved to and did make decisions purportedly on
behalf of the City, all without public notice or input.

Almost immediately after starting her term as a Council member, Ms. Pepper
employed in-person meetings, email communications, telephone calls, and communications
through third parties to effect off-the-record meetings of a majority of governing bodies and to
make decisions of the City Council without compliance with the OPMA, on at least the
following occasions:

January 7, 2016. Ms. Pepper emailed with Council members Erika Morgan and
Brian Weber about changing Council rules, and attempted to introduce a 40
page document without notice to the public.1

1 Ex. 14.

Statement of charges in favor of

Recall of Patricia Pepper
Pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110
6 of 14
 January 8, 2016. Ms. Pepper signed a letter with Council members Morgan and
Weber, addressed to the City Clerk, directing cancellation of a regular meeting
and scheduling a special meeting.2

January 8-12, 2016. Ms. Pepper exchanged over 30 emails among a majority of
the City Council (members Morgan and Weber) about proposed new rules of
Council procedure.3

January 8-12, 2016. Ms. Pepper entered an agreement among a majority of the
Council to prevent Council Member Edelman from becoming the chair of any
standing committee.4

During the period between March 1-17, 2016, Ms. Pepper privately agreed with
a majority of the Council to adopt a substitute council meeting agenda.5

During April, 2016, as part of a majority of the Council, Ms. Pepper discussed
special meetings, committee meetings, agenda, minutes, and proposed
legislation, and prepared a script for making collective decisions and plans as
council members. The script also included plans for a majority to walk out of
executive sessions of the council.6

During the period between January 1 and April 7, 2016, Ms. Pepper privately
agreed with a majority of the council to produce Resolution 16-1089 firing the
City Attorney after disagreeing with her advice.7

During the period of April 1 to April 21, 2016, Ms. Pepper privately agreed with
a majority of the council to prepare a resolution hiring the law firm of Talmadge
Fitzpatrick Tribe.8

2 Exs. 1-2.

3 Exs. 13-14.

4 Exs. 3, 13-14.

5 Ex. 8.

6 Ex. 8. This exhibit, entitled A Plan was obtained by the undersigned through a Public Records Request, made at
the conclusion of a City Council meeting on May 5, 2016. Ms. Pepper unsuccessfully attempted to hide this
document to keep it from being disclosed. Attorney Ward details this incident in her memorandum produced as
Exhibit 13 hereto.

7 Ex. 19.

8 Ex. 8.

Statement of charges in favor of

Recall of Patricia Pepper
Pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110
7 of 14
 March 17-June 16, 2016. Ms. Pepper privately discussed and revised, along
with Council members Morgan and Weber, a resolution for business inspection
services for committee action.9

August 25-October 6. Ms. Pepper drafted and privately agreed with Council
members Morgan and Weber to adopt Resolutions 16-1122, 16-1123, 16-1124,
16-1125, and 16-1126, revising contracts for vendors serving the Citys Master
Development Review Team. Per their prior agreement to act together on all
issues, Council members Pepper, Morgan, and Weber enacted the resolutions on
October 6, 2016.10

November 3November 29, 2016. As part of the Standing Committee on

Government Operations, Ms. Pepper discussed Committee actions on franchise
agreements numbered AB 16-063 and AB 16-064 with other committee
members without compliance with the OPMA. At the City Council, the matter
was referred to the Government Operations committee for a meeting on
November 7. The public was excluded from the November 7 meeting, but the
Committee took action, sending a recommendation on the resolutions to the
Council for its November 29 meeting.11

Ms. Peppers repeated violations of the OPMA have resulted in a lawsuit being filed
against the City.12 In the three months since the suit was filed, the City has already spent $45,522
on its own behalf, and has been ordered by the Court to conditionally pay for Ms. Peppers
defense.13 Willful OPMA violations are not covered by the Citys risk pool policy, thus leaving
the entire cost of the suit to the taxpayers. 14 Ms. Pepper was advised on at least two occasions by
the Citys insurance carrier that her actions may be deemed to be illegal and would not be
covered by City insurance.15 Ms. Peppers actions will have cost the City, and its taxpayers,
hundreds of thousands of dollars and may ultimately result in the City having to declare
bankruptcy.

9 Ex. 11.

10 Ex. 19; http://www.ci.blackdiamond.wa.us/Depts/Clerk/Audio/Council/2016/Council_20161006-

Combined.mp3.

11 Ex. 19.

12 Id.

13 Exs. 21-22.

14 Ex. 5.

15 Exs. 5, 18.

Statement of charges in favor of

Recall of Patricia Pepper
Pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110
8 of 14
 B. Malfeasance or Misfeasance in Office, of Violation of the Oath of Office, by
Conducting Meetings in Violation of the Open Public Meetings Act (18 Counts)

Together with Council members Morgan and Weber, Ms. Pepper enacted Council
Resolution 16-1069 revising Council procedure to require that every meeting of a standing
committee of the City Council include three members of the five-member council. 16 Because
three members of a committee also constitute a majority of the Council, every meeting of a
standing committee also constitutes the meeting of a governing body, and requires the committee
to conform to the notice, scheduling, and agenda requirements for the meeting of a governing
body under the OPMA.

Ms. Pepper was advised by no less than five (5) attorneys that committee meetings as
called for in Resolution 16-1069 must comply with the OPMA. 17 Ms. Pepper, along with the
other Council members, was also advised by the Citys insurance carrier that the continuance of
committee meetings was contrary to appropriate risk management practices. 18

However, knowingly acting against legal advice, Ms. Pepper participated in meetings of
standing committees that were not announced in advance, not opened to the public, for which no
agenda was prepared, at which no recording of the meeting was made, and/or for which no
minutes were compiled or approved. The City Noticed committee meetings until Interim City
attorney Ward advised against doing so on June 2, 2016. Committee meetings continued after
June 2, 2016 but were not published by the City.

Ms. Pepper served as chair and participated in meetings of the Standing Committee
on Growth Management, Land Use, and Community Services, but for which no proper
announcement of a public meeting was made, no agenda publicly available, and/or no recording
or minutes compiled, on at least the following dates:19

July 20, 2016

August 29, 2016
September 12, 2016
October 3, 2016
December 12, 2016
January 17, 2017
January 30, 2017

16 Ex. 6.

17 Exs. 4, 7, 10, 13, 14, 17.

18 Exs. 5, 18.

19 Exs. 19, 23. All listed committee meetings took place either at the Library or the local coffee shop.

Statement of charges in favor of

Recall of Patricia Pepper
Pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110
9 of 14
 March 13, 2017
March 30, 2017

Ms. Pepper also served on the Government Operations Committee and participated in the
meetings of that Standing Committee, for which no proper announcement of a public meeting
was made, no agenda prepared, and no recording or minutes maintained, on at least the following
dates:20

August 1, 2016
August 27, 2016
September 10, 2016
October 25, 2017
November 7, 201621
January 17, 2017
January 25, 2017
January 28, 2017

C. Malfeasance or Misfeasance in Office, or Violation of the Oath of Office by

Usurping the Authority of the Mayor, Thereby Disrupting the Order of the City
(Four Counts)

Ms. Pepper usurped or attempted to usurp the statutory authority of the Mayor on the
following occasions:

On January 8, 2016, Ms. Pepper, acting with the concurrence of council members
Morgan and Weber, directed City Clerk Brenda Martinez to cancel the regularly
scheduled meeting of the Black Diamond City Council.22

During the period between January 1 and April 7, 2016, Ms. Pepper agreed in
private meetings with a majority of the Council to produce Resolution 16-1089
firing the City Attorney.23

During the period of April 1 to April 21, Ms. Pepper agreed in private meetings
with a majority of the council to hire the law firm of Talmadge Fitzpatrick Tribe.24

20 Exs. 19, 23.

21 The public was specifically excluded from this meeting.

22 Ex. 2.

23 Ex. 19.

Statement of charges in favor of

Recall of Patricia Pepper
Pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110
10 of 14
 Ms. Pepper has, on multiple occasions, attempted to preside over Council
meetings while the Mayor is present.25

Additionally, the Council rules adopted by Resolution 16-1069 usurp the authority of the Mayor
to prepare meeting agendas, preside over Council meetings, and direct actions of staff. Ms.
Pepper was advised of this by two attorneys.26

Ms. Peppers attempts to direct the actions of City staff and to fire and hire City attorneys
have impeded the functioning of the City and hindered the Citys ability to receive legal advice.
The Teamsters union has already filed multiple grievances against the Council for interfering
with the duties of staff.27 Moreover, Ms. Pepper hired Talmadge Fitzpatrick Tribe to provide
legal advice directly to her, which advice may have been contrary to the Citys interests. 28 Her
approval the self-serving contract constitutes a conflict of interest, in violation of RCW chapter
42.23, and wrongfully exposes the City to her attorneys bill.

D. Malfeasance or Misfeasance in Office, or Violation of the Oath of Office through

Dereliction of Duties of a Member of the City Council (22 Counts)

Ms. Pepper and others constituting a majority of the City Council privately agreed not to
attend regularly scheduled meetings of the City Council without excuse, or to leave regularly
scheduled meetings before they were adjourned, in order to cause the meetings to fail for lack of
a quorum. This occurred on the following meeting dates:29

January 12, 2016

March 3, 201630
May 19, 2016
May 25, 2016
June 2, 2016
November 17, 2016.

24 Ex. 8.

25 Ex. 25.

26 Exs. 4, 13-14.

27 Ex. 12.

28 Ex. 10.

29 Exs. 12, 23. The undersigned also attended all of these meetings and personally witnessed the failure of a
quorum.

30 This meeting was cancelled and had to be rescheduled.

Statement of charges in favor of

Recall of Patricia Pepper
Pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110
11 of 14
At the City Council meeting on June 2, 2016, Ms. Pepper was publicly censured for violating her
duty to the public by failing to attend the May 19 meeting. 31 In response, Ms. Pepper and two
other council members left at the beginning of a recess in a coordinated manner, causing a
quorum to fail the same conduct she had been censured for.32

Ms. Pepper and others constituting a majority of the City Council, without excuse, agreed
not to attend regularly scheduled work sessions of the City Council on at least the following
dates:33
January 14, 2016
February 11, 2016
March 10, 2016
April 14, 2016
May 12, 2016.

Ms. Pepper and others constituting a majority of the City Council, without excuse,
refused to attend executive sessions of the City Council meetings on at least the following dates:

August 18, 2016

September 1, 2016
September 15, 2016

Ms. Pepper, with others constituting a majority of the City Council, failed to approve
minutes for 45 of the 63 meetings of the Council or the standing committees upon which she
served.34 This is a violation of State law, and deprives the public of an official record of all City
meetings.

Ms. Pepper, with others constituting a majority of the City Council, failed to complete the
Comprehensive Plan of the City, required by the State Growth Management Act. This act
disqualified the City for a grant from the Puget Sound Regional Council, which it otherwise
would likely have been eligible for. The failure to enact a comprehensive plan has also placed
the City at risk for work stoppage, and is likely to cost the City money it does not have.35

31 Ex. 16.

32 Ex. 15.

33 Ex. 23.

34 Id.

35 Ex. 26.

Statement of charges in favor of

Recall of Patricia Pepper
Pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110
12 of 14
 Ms. Pepper, and others constituting a majority of the City Council, failed to enact the six-
year Transportation Improvement Plan, and the six-year Capital Improvement Plan required by
State law.

Ms. Pepper, and others constituting a majority of the Standing Committee that Ms.
Pepper chairs, and constituting a majority of the Council, despite having developed their own
resolution for contracting for building inspection services, failed to provide for such services.36
Among the consequences of Ms. Peppers inaction, the City of Black Diamond had to refund the
cost of building inspection services to the Enumclaw School District and may cause a delay of
occupancy of a public school in the City, to the detriment of its citizens.37

Ms. Pepper has refused to call a vote on multiple items, causing necessary and important
legislation to fail or linger in committees. Ms. Pepper failed to vote in the following instances:

Ms. Pepper, with the agreement of others constituting a majority of the

Standing Committees that she chairs, which committee is comprised of a
majority of the Council, continually voted down all applicants for
vacancies on the Planning Commission, an entity that the City has
established under State law. As a result, the Planning Commission has not
been able to function at its normal capacity.

Ms. Pepper, with the agreement of others constituting a majority of the

Standing Committees that she chairs, which committee is comprised of a
majority of the Council, failed to vote on filling the vacancy on the Civil
Service Commission of the City. As a result, the Civil Service
Commission has been without a tie-breaking ability for over a year.

Ms. Pepper and others constituting a majority of the City Council failed to enact a yearly
budget for the year 2017, in violation of State law. Instead, they enacted a temporary budget that
expires on April 1, 2017. The Citys working under a temporary budget impaired its ability to
attract and retain employees to serve the City and posed the imminent termination of services
supplied by the City, including delivery of domestic water and police services, fire and sewer
services for which it contracts, and all other City services, imperiling the peace, health, and
safety of its citizens. Further, the temporary budget contained multiple illegal provisions, which
exposes the City to the risk of a lawsuit or State sanction.38

36 Ex. 11.

37 Ex. 24.

38 Ex. 20.

Statement of charges in favor of

Recall of Patricia Pepper
Pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110
13 of 14
 Ms. Pepper, along with Council members Morgan and Weber, conspired to replace
members of the Master Development Review Team (MDRT). 39 Members of the MDRT are set
by contract with CCD Black Diamond Partners (Oakpointe). 40 Oakpointe threatened the City
with suit for breach of contract if the Councils plan to reconstitute the MDRT went forward.
The Council agreed to mediate with Oakpointe over this issue.41 However, Pepper refused to
attend the agreed-upon mediation, which has forced the matter into the more expensive
arbitration process.

VI. Conclusion

Based upon Ms. Peppers malfeasance, misfeasance, and violation of the oath of office
within the meaning of the legal standards shown above, the County should prepare a ballot
summary and forward a copy of this letter and all exhibits hereto, with the subjoined declaration
of Robbin Taylor, to the Superior Court for further proceedings.

39 Ex. 25.

40 Id.

41 http://www.ci.blackdiamond.wa.us/Depts/Clerk/Audio/Council/2017/Council_20170302-
1900_Combined_01d2938734ebc3a0.mp3

Statement of charges in favor of

Recall of Patricia Pepper
Pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110
14 of 14
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington, that the foregoing is
true and correct to the best of my knowledge, and that I have sufficient knowledge of the alleged
facts upon which the stated grounds for recall are based.

Dated this __ day of April, 2017.

________________________
Robbin Taylor
32110 Botts Dr.
Black Diamond, WA 98010

Statement of charges in favor of

Recall of Patricia Pepper
Pursuant to RCW 29A.56.110
15 of 14