The mayor of Langley had strong words about a South Whidbey resident who recently filed his sixth Public Records Act lawsuit against the city.

Mayor Kennedy Horstman wrote in an email to The Record that Eric Hood’s latest lawsuit is yet another “baseless claim.”

“As someone serving the public at significant personal sacrifice, I find the unnecessary waste of public resources offensive,” wrote Horstman, who earns just $12,000 a year and is doing city administrator work after deciding not to fill the position.

Acting as his own attorney, Hood filed a complaint against Langley in Island County Superior Court on Oct. 15. Hood claims that the city’s conduct in answering a public records request denied his right to timely records.

A little over a week before that, on Oct. 6, the state Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal that Eric Hood brought against the city in a 2019 Public Records Act, or PRA, case. The court concluded that the city property produced records that fell within Hood’s request for records related to the firing of a former police chief.

Hood has made a living filing PRA cases against jurisdictions large and small across the state. Yet he especially has had a bone to pick with Langley, filing half a dozen lawsuits and appealing superior court decisions multiple times. The PRA requires state and local government agencies to make public records available to the public, with certain specific exemptions.

Hood filed his first PRA lawsuit against the city in 2014; both sides agreed to dismiss it in 2015. In 2016, Hood filed another lawsuit and has been in various stages of litigation against the city since then. On March 5, the state Supreme Court terminated review of his appeal in the 2016 case — involving records of former Mayor Fred McCarthy — which finally put an end to the matter. But other cases remained unresolved.

Hood could not be reached for comment.

While Hood has maintained that he is an open government advocate, Horstman suggested that his motives may not really be about obtaining documents.

“During my time as mayor, I have only seen city staff work diligently and in good faith to respond to records requests,” she wrote. “For obvious reasons we are particularly careful with Mr. Hood’s requests. Given his failure to clear up his ‘confusion’ prior to bringing this lawsuit, it’s clear that Mr. Hood neither appreciates nor reciprocates that good faith effort.”

Hood has won settlements and judgments against other jurisdictions, but he has had limited success against Langley. He succeeded in one of several different arguments he raised and won $35,000 in a penalty and attorney’s fees in the 2016 case. He appealed the judgment, arguing that the award should be much higher, but lost.

Hood filed a lawsuit in 2019. He lost in superior court and appealed to the state Court of Appeals, which rejected his request. He can still appeal to the state Supreme Court.

Hood filed a lawsuit in 2021. A superior court judge dismissed the case, but Hood is seeking discretionary review with the state Supreme Court, according to the city. Hood filed a lawsuit in 2023 but has taken no further action.

In Hood’s newest lawsuit, he claims that the city provided conflicting instructions; failed to honor a court order he believed directed him to send requests to the city attorney; mischaracterized his request; and sent message to an email address that he claimed city officials knew he had trouble receiving messages on.

“As a result, Hood was denied timely access to records, incurred unnecessary expense and was compelled to violate a standing court order. Each of these failures constitutes a separate and cumulative violation of the PRA,” he wrote.

Hood and his attorney, William Crittenden, have railed in the past against the risk pool that insures many municipalities in the state for providing attorneys to fight PRA cases but then not covering the resulting penalties. They argued that the “unethical and tortious” behavior by Washington Cites Risk Management Service Agency resulted in attorneys being free to provide bad advice and claim frivolous defenses, but then municipalities were left with the tabs.

Their arguments have have succeeded as the risk pool no longer provides attorneys for PRA cases, according to the mayor. That means that the city must pay for legal defense directly.