A high-profile legal dispute over the validity of the Island County auditor’s decision to impose a mask mandate in the Elections Office has grown even more heated and potentially costly.

In the latest court filings in a civil case, Island County Prosecutor Greg Banks asked a judge to dismiss the complaint and to impose at least $20,000 in sanctions against the plaintiffs for filing an alleged frivolous action.

The attorney for the plaintiffs, Austin Hatcher, countered with a motion that includes political screenshots from Banks’ personal social media page. He described Banks’ posts criticizing Trump supporters and people who refuse to wear masks during the pandemic as “vitriolic” and “a necessary backdrop to the dispute at issue.”

The controversy arose last fall when two former Island County Republican Party leaders challenged the mask mandate during last year’s election, which resulted in felony charges against both of them as well as two civil cases and national media coverage.

Prosecutors charged North Whidbey resident Timothy Hazelo, the former chair of the county Republican Party, and Camano Island resident Tracy Abuhl, the former vice chair, with criminal counts that include interference with an elections office. The both pleaded not guilty.

Hazelo and Abuhl were elections observers but separately refused to wear masks when they entered the ballot counting room of the Elections Office, in defiance of Auditor Sheilah Crider’s mask mandate. They were removed by law enforcement.

Crider imposed the rule after several ballot counting volunteers, who are all elderly, came down with COVID during the primary election.

Hazelo, Abuhl and resident James Peterson filed an emergency injunction motion against the mask mandate on Election Day, but Island County Superior Court Judge Christon Skinner denied it. Banks argued that the plaintiffs should be sanctioned for filing a frivolous motion, but Skinner disagreed.

Last month, the Silent Majority Foundation, an Eastern Washington conservative organization, filed a similar complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief, with a request for an emergency injunction, against the county and members of the canvassing board on behalf of Hazelo, Abuhl and Peterson. The complaint argues that neither Crider nor the canvassing board has the authority to impose a health-related mandate. In addition to Crider, Banks and Island County Commissioner Jill Johnson are named in the lawsuit since they are members of the canvassing board.

Crider and Johnson are Republicans while Banks was elected as a “no party preference” candidate.

Snohomish County Superior Court Judge Joseph Wilson is hearing the criminal and civil cases because the Island County judges have recused themselves.

On Feb. 26, Hatcher filed a motion for preliminary injunctive relief in the civil case, asking the judge to prohibit the auditor and canvassing board from enforcing the mask rule. Hatcher writes that the mask rule is ultra vires, meaning that it is beyond the scope of the authority of the auditor and canvassing board.

“In spite of clear public policy in favor of full participation in, and the foundational importance of, the election process, the harms suffered by Plaintiffs is ongoing,” the attorney wrote. “These Plaintiffs were barred from fully participating in the electoral process and ensuring a free and fair election for all Island County residents.”

On March 13, Chief Civil Deputy Prosecutor Paul Brachvogel and Banks filed a motion to dismiss the civil case and to impose sanctions against the plaintiffs. The motion argues that the underlying purpose of the civil action is to improperly thwart the criminal cases against the two defendants.

“Plaintiffs request the Court to bully public officials under the weight of a judicial order which would prohibit them from serving the public,” the motions states.

The prosecutors argue that the plaintiffs lack standing, the auditor has the authority to manage her office and the plaintiffs have not shown a clear right that was violated.

“Plaintiffs do not have a right to disrupt ballot processing, which they claim to cherish, by intentionally causing a confrontation during that process,” Banks wrote. “They do not have a right to refuse reasonable rules of the Auditor or supplant their discretion for hers on an ad hoc basis while in the canvassing center that she manages.”

The motion asks the judge to dismiss the case, arguing that it was improper to file a second request for an injunction after the first case failed. The prosecutors argue that the judge should sanction the plaintiffs for no less than $20,000 for filing two meritless lawsuits for the purpose of thwarting criminal cases.

On March 19, Hatcher filed a reply in support of the motion for preliminary injunction. In a rare move, the motion includes screenshots of Banks’ personal social media posts, including a link to a Washington Post story about a crowd of unmasked people at a government meeting about masks at schools during the pandemic. Banks apparently wrote “FREEDUMB” with the post. Hatcher also references other posts in which Banks criticized Republicans and posted a cartoon that equates MAGA supporters with the Ku Klux Klan.

“As briefed ante in the introduction, this issue is a deeply emotional one for Defendant Banks,” Hatcher wrote. “His animosity and vitriol toward people who are opposed to masking, and those who support President Trump, is well established.”

Hatcher accuses the prosecutors of debasing the sanctions process and asks the judge to sanction them for making baseless accusations. In another filing, he included a March 13 email from Brachvogel that states that the office will seek sanctions of $42,000, which will likely be increased if prosecutors are forced to devote more time to a frivolous lawsuit.

In an email, Hazelo wrote that the only question that should be asked is in regard to what authority a politician has to make such decisions.

‘The craziness that Greg Banks is trying to pull is just to deflect from that question,” he wrote in an email. “There is no crime to press charges on Tracy and I, and the ridiculous motion from Banks is 100% nonsensical. All we want is for the courts to help us all, by making sure not just the office holders know their boundaries, but to ensure the people know too. Is that too much to ask? Apparently Banks thinks it is.”