Attached is a copy of an original action in quo warranto and an affidavit in support that were filed today with the Second District Court of Appeals relating to the appointment of Wilburt Shanklin to the VSC, by Anne Jagielski,, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, Montgomery County Prosecutor’s Office. Shanklin Quo Warranto [1]
Quo Warranto means: A legal proceeding during which an individual’s right to hold an office or governmental privilege is challenged.
From the filing:
21. The DAV Chapter 9 believes the nomination of Mr. Shankin was improper because he was not nominated and voted on by the members of DAV Chapter 9. Instead the DAV Chapter 9 believe they were compelled by the Court to submit a nomination for someone they did not and do not want representing them on the VSC. But for feeling forced by the Court, Mr. Weeks would not have submitted Mr. Shanklin’s name for nomination. Therefore, Mr. Shanklin’s name should never have been considered by the Court for a seat on the VSC.
You read about this story here first: Politics interfering with the Montgomery County Veterans Service Commission
and then here: Judges break law with Shanklin appointment to Veterans Service Commission
I requested help from State Representatives Jim Butler and Rick Perales on this issue, both being veterans and local. The original claim out of the prosecutors office was that the other board that Shanklin sat on, wasn’t a county board, but a state board, so it didn’t disqualify him, even though he was appointed by the very same judges. This issue wasn’t mentioned in the filing.
We will have to wait for a ruling from the Second District Court for final disposition. Shanklin was supposed to begin his term on January 15th. 2017.
Clear Leadership on you and your party. Thank you for having the courage of your convictions.
If the various veterans groups are required by law to submit three names to the court for consideration of appointment, then the court has discretion on whom to appoint. Therefore, if the veterans post submits 3 names and 2 are unwilling or unable to serve, the court does not really have three names to pick from. This game has been played out by the veterans posts for many years. It effectively takes any choice away from the judges. The problems with commissioners and management at the VSC are not new. They go back many years.