During five years on the Clark County Council and three as county chair, Eileen Quiring O’Brien often has embraced fringe positions that derail efficient government. Her resignation, effective March 1, provides the council with an opportunity to be defined by thoughtful leadership rather than dogma.
Council action Tuesday — the evening before Quiring O’Brien announced her impending resignation — proved an appropriate coda to her time as chair. The council rejected a mini-initiative to ban “discriminatory” mandates such as masking and vaccination rules related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Quiring O’Brien, a Republican, was the only council member to vote in favor of the ordinance. Other members who have expressed frustration with mandates were able to put aside their personal preferences and recognize that the mini-initiative would be damaging to Clark County. It almost certainly would lead to lengthy and costly legal action, and it could result in the loss of federal and state funding for the county.
Legal counsel advised that the ordinance would be in conflict with state law, but Quiring O’Brien still found reason to support it. That is a frequent theme of her leadership style; too often, she has allowed her actions to be dictated by how she imagines the county to be, rather than the reality of a given situation.
For example, Quiring O’Brien recently challenged public health experts and said the county should promote therapeutic treatments for COVID-19. Continuing her oft-expressed doubts about vaccines, she complained that officials were “pounding and pounding we need to have vaccines when in reality therapeutics work, too.”
Indeed, care for coronavirus patients is essential, but Quiring O’Brien’s persistent doubts about vaccines have held back the public’s response to the pandemic. Health officials should be questioned by council members, but the conclusions of those council members should be rooted in fact.
In 2020, Quiring O’Brien said during a council meeting: “I do not agree that we have systemic racism in our county. Period.” This statement is easily proven false, and The Columbian wrote editorially at the time: “The United States should be beyond the point of denying that these prejudices exist. Alas, comments such as Quiring’s reinforce a trope that has prevented this nation from recognizing its flaws and working to eradicate them.”
Quiring O’Brien’s views often have left her on the fringe of policy discussions, even with a 4-1 Republican majority on the council.
She often has given voice to a segment of the population that typically is ignored. That is admirable; Quiring O’Brien was elected chair in a countywide vote, and she worked in what she believed were the best interests of her constituents. But her extreme positions have led the council to waste time on infighting rather than governing, and that has been detrimental for those constituents.
Moving forward, the council should focus on consensus-building that has been undermined by Quiring O’Brien. Consensus does not mean unanimity; disagreements will persist, and a conservative majority will be maintained — as is the will of the voters.
But as the county continues to adjust to a charter that was passed in 2014, it is essential for the council chair to recognize that he or she is a facilitator as much as an advocate. Marc Boldt, who preceded Quiring O’Brien as chair, once said of the position, “I believe you need to be as nonpolitical as you can be.”
A failure to recognize that duty limited Quiring O’Brien’s effectiveness as county chair.
