By GARRET JAROS and QUINTON SMITH/Lincoln Chronicle
WALDPORT — Lincoln County’s presiding judge ruled Thursday that the Waldport city council had to reinstate Heide Lambert as mayor until there is time to decide whether her removal last month was legal.
The order by circuit judge Sheryl Bachart came one day after Lambert’s attorney asked the court to review the council’s unanimous vote April 3 to remove his client from office for actions it claimed violated the city’s charter.
Attorney Jesse Buss of Oregon City termed the April 3 decision to remove Lambert a “product of a slapdash local proceeding” that was “both substantively and procedurally improper.”
In a social media post Thursday night, Lambert hailed Bachart’s order and thanked her supporters for being “vigilant and dedicated to our Democracy.”
City manager Dann Cutter said he and city attorney Corey Blake were surprised by Bachart’s reinstatement order and that the city was not given the chance to argue against it before it was issued. Cutter said Thursday night that he will recommend the council seek an injunction to stop the order and ask for the case to be handled by a judge from outside Lincoln County or try to move the issue to federal court.
“We will endeavor to move this to federal court to get a unbiased review,” Cutter told the Lincoln Chronicle. “It’s too small a community to have this in a local court. But we’re happy it’s in court where we can present our evidence instead of it being played out on social media.”
In her order, Bachart gave the city until June 3 to turn over all records from the April 3 council meeting so she could make a decision on Lambert’s reinstatement request.
Thursday’s order came during a chaotic week at Waldport city hall.
On Tuesday, district attorney Jenna Wallace said there was insufficient evidence to prosecute a second-degree disorderly conduct charge against Lambert for refusing to leave an April 10 council meeting.
On Wednesday, the city council canceled its regular monthly meeting scheduled Thursday after learning than Lambert and her supporters and a new group of city supporters were both planning to attend the session.
“We have been informed by the district attorney that they will not be able to reliably prosecute charges brought by the local sheriff’s office against members of the public for disrupting the meeting, and as such, we feel that the safety and security of the meeting cannot be ensured,” the city said in its statement.
In her social media post, Lambert said her attorney would be working on details of her return.
But, Cutter said Thursday night he was unsure if the city council would meet again until Lambert’s status was determined in court. If the council decided to meet, however, he said it could also vote to take away Lambert’s ability to run the meeting – which is the Waldport mayor’s main duty.
In its statement Wednesday to cancel Thursday’s council meeting, the city said it was “a challenging time” for the council and opposing community groups.
“… you want your voices to be heard and the council does want to listen — what we saw were two citizen groups in diametric opposition coming to a meeting in which the LCSO Deputies were just told the DA would not back them up,” the city’s statement said. “The operating options we were given are not satisfactory. Safety is our top priority.”
The DA’s decision
In her memorandum Tuesday, Wallace cited insufficient evidence in her dismissal of Lambert’s disorderly conduct charge.
“A person commits the crime of disorderly conduct in the second degree if, with the intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, the person disturbs any lawful assembly of persons without lawful authority,” she wrote.
In reviewing Lambert’s conduct at the meeting, Wallace said she did not believe there is “sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury” that Lambert had the intent to do anything unlawful.
“It appears that Ms. Lambert believed that she had been unlawfully removed as mayor and was at the meeting acting in what she believed to be her official capacity,” Wallace wrote. “Given there is a question as to whether civilly the city of Waldport can lawfully remove an elected official by city council vote, it will be difficult to prove Ms. Lambert had the mental state required by law to commit the crime …”
Wallace added that she confirmed with Waldport officials that Lambert’s actions occurred prior to the start of the April 10 meeting and that “it is unclear whether Ms. Lambert’s conduct of sitting at the council table actually disrupted the meeting and prevented it from starting.”
Waldport’s reasoning
On Thursday, council president Greg Dunn told the Lincoln Chronicle that it was only after hours of discussion Wednesday between councilors, the sheriff’s office and an awareness that two opposing groups planned to attend the meeting that it made the decision to cancel.
Lambert and a group of her supporters planned to attend the meeting, according to an interview she gave to The Oregonian newspaper. Dunn said a newly formed group that supports the council and who is “tired of the other group” also planned to attend and protest.
“With that we were like ‘Okay, now we have two opposing groups, tensions are really going to get heated’ …,” Dunn said. “So mainly, that’s what the reason was. We had two opposing sides that were going to be coming to city council and we didn’t want even higher tensions.”
According to Dunn, Sheriff Adam Shanks informed the city that law enforcement’s hands were pretty much tied and “that they are trying to walk through this muddy water without stepping on anyone’s toes.”
But Dunn said if Lambert again sat in the mayor’s chair and spoke after the meeting started and persisted after being told to stop, she could then be arrested, as could the people who interrupted the meeting if they continued to speak after the 20-minute public comment period had ended.
The April meeting
The disorderly conduct charge against Lambert came on the heels of her dismissal one week earlier during a public hearing when the city council voted 6-0 to remove her for violating the city’s charter by trying to direct city employees in their duties.
On April 10, Lambert was accompanied by a large and vocal contingent of supporters when she arrived at a scheduled council meeting, where she made a brief statement before sitting in the chair normally reserved for the city’s top elected official.
“I am the elected mayor and have done nothing wrong,” Lambert said, and then accused the council of not providing her due process, overstepping its authority and claiming the section of the city charter that allowed her removal is unconstitutional. “I have every right to be here in the capacity as the mayor. The people elected me. Only the people who elected me can remove me.”
Supporters cheered Lambert’s statement and several began yelling questions and insults at council and Cutter.
After several minutes of the crowd yelling, Shanks and Deputy Abby Dorsey, who were attending the meeting on a separate matter, approached Lambert and persuaded her to leave the seat and step outside where she was cited. Lambert was allowed to return to the council chambers where she sat quietly in the back row.
The council was only able to conduct business when Shanks returned and asked the crowd to quiet down.
Pending legal action
Lambert was elected last November in a two-way race and took office in January. She had served two years on the Waldport council before taking a job as Yachats’ city manager in 2022, but left after 15 months because of a change in the mayor and council there and turmoil with city staff.
Lambert’s arrest was the first of a former public official in a public meeting that anyone can remember and highlighted the months-long, increasingly bitter and social-media fueled dispute between Waldport Beachcomber Days officers, its supporters and the city.
Buss filed paperwork Wednesday asking Bachart to review Lambert’s removal, saying it exceeded the council’s jurisdiction, failed to follow its procedures, made a finding not supported by “substantial evidence,” misconstrued applicable law, or made a decision “that is unconstitutional.”
Lambert did not respond to phone calls or messages from the Lincoln Chronicle on Wednesday or Thursday, but told The Oregonian newspaper she planned to attend Thursday’s meeting, remain in the audience and make a short public statement about how she believes she is still mayor. But Lambert told The Oregonian if the council shut off public comments like it did last time, she might have to take the mayor’s seat at the front of the room again to read her statement.
In her memo, Wallace went beyond Lambert’s disorderly conduct arrest to also weigh in on her removal from office.
“Although the city charter appears to allow the removal of the elected mayor through a city council vote, it is unclear whether this provision in the city charter is constitutional,” the district attorney wrote.
The April 10 meeting did not begin immediately after Lambert’s removal, Wallace continued, and no one else in attendance was arrested or cited for preventing the meeting from beginning or disrupting the meeting in the time before her return.
“Given this, it will be difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Ms. Lambert’s conduct did in fact prevent the meeting from starting or disrupted the meeting,” Wallace wrote. “For these reasons, I am declining to pursue charges at this time.”
- Garret Jaros covers the communities of Yachats, Waldport, south Lincoln County and natural resources issues for the Lincoln Chronicle, formerly YachatsNews, and can be reached at GJaros@YachatsNews.com
-
To read Lincoln County District Attorney Jenna Wallace’s memo, go here
-
To read the writ of review filed in Lincoln County circuit court by Heide Lambert’s attorney, go here
Sigh! Lincoln County’s courthouse cabal is at it again. The judge and the DA — quite the pair. Pretty damn bizarre for the judge to reinstate Lambert without even hearing the city’s side of the story. Wish the State Bar would come in and clean up the mess.
Lee,
The Mayor’s attorney filed a Writ of Review. I’ll email the pleadings to you—all proper.
The Writ asks the judge to return the situation to the status quo (reinstate Mayor Lambert). The judge reviewed the evidence and the law, temporarily reinstated the Mayor, and gave the City a deadline to provide further information.
The law the Lincoln County judge relied on is a January 2025 decision by Federal District Court Judge Aiken that held a similar expulsion provision in the Corvallis City Charter was facially (”on its face”) unconstitutional because it allowed elected officials to fire each other. “Facially” means that it was unconstitutional regardless of the facts, assuming the Council voted to fire the mayor. The fact that the Council voted to fire the Mayor was not disputed.
Judge Aiken’s opinion was 13 pages long because she also discussed whether the firing was retaliatory, which she determined it was. As I recall, the Mayor’s Writ of Review made no allegations of retaliation. It simply sought reinstatement.
Thank you Monica. Nice explanation.
The US constitution gives congress the right to expell a member; the Oregon constitution gives the legislature the right to expell a member and the Waldport city charter gives the city council the right to expell a member. Lambert had a hearing and the council voted unanimously to expel, so where is the constitutinal issue?
Neither the federal nor state congresses can expel or impeach for minor procedural issues or disagreements over policy. Only an intentional and extreme violation can lead to this result.
The issue is we elected the mayor and city council doesn’t have the right to fire someone the citizens elected. The entire city council needs to go.
Oh? And how do you propose that? Since they were elected too.
Violates Oregon law. See the Secretary of State’s website. The process for removal is listed.
Sure. You all get right on that. I’m sure you’ll have loads of support
“We will endeavor to move this to federal court to get a unbiased review,” Cutter told the Lincoln Chronicle. “It’s too small a community to have this in a local court. But we’re happy it’s in court where we can present our evidence instead of it being played out on social media.”
Federal District Court Judge Ann Aiken recently ruled that Corvallis’ Charter provision permitting elected officials to dismiss one another is incompatible with both Oregon and the U.S. Constitution. This decision emphasizes the importance of fair and non-retaliatory practices among elected officials.
In Waldport, there is a growing concern regarding the conduct of the City Manager, who appears to prioritize personal power, and the City Council, which has often supported his recommendations without thorough consideration.
It is crucial for the City Council to reflect on their role and responsibilities. They have the opportunity to ensure accountability and transparency by addressing several issues: (1) maintaining respect for the independence of the DA and local judges, (2) fostering a healthy dialogue with constituents, (3) ensuring that local law enforcement serves the community rather than acting as a private security force, (4) supporting public Council meetings, (5) encouraging public comment, and (6) creating an open channel for communication that is free from blame.
Ultimately, only the Waldport City Council has the authority to take the necessary steps to foster a more constructive and collaborative environment within the community.
We’re not getting enough soap with the opera.
The fine folks at Beachcombers were given adequate time and warning to clean up their game.
The Council jumped the gun in acting to remove the elected mayor and should have sought other remedy to the situation.
Time for some detergent and resolution.
I wonder how much is all of this costing the taxpayers of Waldport? It sounds to me like there are possibly issues on both sides of this mess that we need to be concerned about. First, Beachcomber’s a perfectly great event run through the mud, and then the Wednesday market and now this. Perhaps all of us should remember this next time there is a election.
And I thought Yachats politics was entertaining! Coming from a metropolitan area of 7 million people I find small town politics great fun to watch.
In my view, the Lincoln County DA has prosecutorial discretion to decline to prosecute the disorderly conduct charge against Heidi Lambert. Lambert notably was allowed back into the April 10 Waldport City Council meeting and did not further disrupt it. But contrary to the DA’s suggestion in her memo, Lambert’s argument that the City Charter provision giving the City Council the power to remove the mayor is unconstitutional does not logically bear on whether her conduct on April 10 was disorderly. The legality of the City Council‘s action on April 3 in removing Lambert from office can be resolved only in the course of court litigation, under the rule of law.
I can’t see there is any logic to calling the conduct disorderly outside its relation to the constitutionality of the removal given the only “conduct” was taking the mayor’s seat,