Former planning chief files suit
SANDPOINT — Bonner County's ousted top land-use planner is filing suit against the county for wrongful termination.
Clare Marley's suit in 1st District Court seeks unspecified damages and reinstatement to the Planning Department. The 12-page civil complaint was filed in 1st District Court on Wednesday.
Marley's counsel, Spokane attorney Mischelle Fulgham, contends her client was targeted for termination for refusing to disregard state and local code requirements and standing up for a senior land-use planner who had been fired by county commissioners.
Marley was hired by the Planning Department in 1989 and was appointed director in 2002. Marley reportedly stepped down from the post last fall and into the position of Dan Carlson, who had recently been fired.
Carlson, who is also suing the county for wrongful termination, maintains that he was sacked in retaliation for filing a grievance against Commissioner Todd Sudick, who allegedly upbraided Carlson for declining to skirt a building location requirement on a communications tower proposal.
County commissioners said Marley's change in title was not a punitive action, although Marley's suit alleges she was demoted because she had failed to produce reductions in the land use regulatory burden borne by landowners. Commissioners also accused her of trying to thwart their efforts in easing the regulatory burden.
The suit alleges that those efforts included directives to change aspects of the land use code without public review, which is contrary to Idaho and Bonner County Revised codes. Marley also alleges Sudick gave her directives which were contrary to the directives of the board as a whole.
Marley's counsel said her client's troubles stretched back to last August, when she was directed to draft revisions to an ordinance governing appeals of land use decisions by the county Planning & Zoning Commission. Marley alleges Sudick advised her the code changes didn't need to go before P&Z, but Marley countered that state and local laws required P&Z review.
“Defendant Sudick disagreed, stating that the Planning & Zoning Commission wasn't needed at all,” Fulgham said in the suit.
That same month, Carlson contends Sudick aggressively berated him after Carlson refused to waive a permit requirement because it would have been contrary to county code. Sudick is accused in the suit of bullying and intimidation in the confrontation, which left other planning department personnel “shaken, anxious and fearful.”
Carlson filed a grievance against Sudick for his conduct, prompting commissioners to conduct interviews of employees who witnessed the incident.
Two of Marley's subordinates asked that she be present during the interviews due to their discomfort with the situation and Marley was allegedly threatened with discipline if she offered assistance to coworkers, the suit alleges.
Marley herself was interviewed in the presence of Sudick, which Fulgham argues was to underscore that Marley's job was in jeopardy. Marley said Sudick had repeatedly come to the department to voice disagreements he had with codes and zoning regulation.
“Plaintiff stated that violent interactions happened all the time and, on at least one occasion, left her emotionally distraught,” Fulgham said in the suit.
Marley also took issue with the board's intention in September to fire Carlson, saying the action was unwarranted due to Carlson's unblemished employment record with the county.
Marley said she was demoted in October and directed to amend county code despite raising concerns that the code changes required public notice and review. Marley, the suit said, reiterated those concerns on December, which resulted in commission Chairman Cary Kelly berating and attacking her for questioning the board. Marley was subsequently fired in January.
Fulgham argues Marley's dismissal violated the Idaho Protection of Public Employees Act, which makes it unlawful for an employer to take adverse action against an employee who objects or refuses to carry out a directive that violates the law.
Commissioners ultimately adopted the appeals code change, which eliminated the criteria that triggered an appeal of a land use decision. The former Chairman of P&Z, Steven Temple, is challenging the legality of the code change in 1st District Court.