Valley City Not Quite Sure Thing But Incorporation Backers, Observers Think Chances Good

The leaders of an effort to form a city in the Spokane Valley can hardly contain their confidence these days.

They say the political stars have aligned so perfectly during this, their third attempt at incorporation, that victory is guaranteed.

“I think we’ll get 60 percent, anyway,” Howard Herman, attorney for Citizens for Valley Incorporation, said last week as the group kicked off its campaign aimed toward a May 16 election.

They need only 50 percent, plus one vote, for the city of Spokane Valley, population 65,000, to begin appearing on the maps.

Observers of local politics also think the group’s chances look good. Most say incorporation has its best chance ever this time.

“The advocates have every right to feel optimistic,” said Skip Chilberg, chairman of the board of county commissioners. The county stands to lose substantial revenue if the Valley becomes a city.

But incorporation is never a sure thing - as unsuccessful votes in 1990 and 1994 illustrate - and it remains to be seen whether supporters can use this window of opportunity to their advantage.

A May 16 election could be jeopardized by protracted public hearings, thus scuttling momentum incorporation backers gained after making substantial progress at the polls last April.

Approval of the city jumped from 34 percent in 1990 to 44 percent in the last election.

But incorporation backers feel they could pick up the necessary six percent even if they have to wait for a fall election.

The outcome of the November general election is one reason they are so confident. Republicans swept to victory in both federal and state elections in one of the biggest political upheavals in 40 years.

Incorporation supporters think that mandate for change will carry over to their proposal.

“Part of the mentality that went on during the November election was we want smaller government; we want more local control; we want more accountability,” Herman said. “You get absolute control and accountabil ity with your own city.” Joe McKinnon, co-chair of Citizens for Valley Incorporation, agreed.

“You can sum it up in two words,” McKinnon said. “Local control.”

Chilberg said he thinks the incorporation backers may be misreading the outcome. He said the message he heard was that voters want less government, not more smaller governments.

“I don’t think this provides economy of government,” he said.

Supporters say the Growth Management Act also is working to their advantage.

The act calls for local governments to work together to better prepare for population increases by having the necessary services in the place before growth occurs.

Many Valley business leaders and residents feel that the Valley is not being adequately represented in the growth management process and that the Valley will be left out of future growth areas if it doesn’t become a city.

If the Valley incorporates, the city will automatically gain a seat on the county Growth Management Steering Committee, where it has no specific seat now.

The Valley city also would be guaranteed an urban growth area, a place where future development would be allowed.

“We’re either in the game or we’re not,” McKinnon said. “The wake-up call has sounded.”

Currently, county commissioners represent the Valley and the rest of the county on the committee, which is charged with writing growth policies and creating urban growth boundaries.

All businesses have a vested interest in the Valley’s continued growth, Herman said.

“Unless the Valley becomes an urban growth area, there just won’t be any more urban development, no more customer growth,” he said. “Incorporation is the only certain way that will happen.”

Again, Chilberg disagreed.

Members of the steering committee have pledged to designate part of the Valley as an urban growth area, the commissioner said.

“There will be one,” he said.

But Chilberg and other critics can’t deny the fact that incorporation leaders have gotten smarter and more sophisticated in their tactics.

The two unsuccessful campaigns have taught incorporation supporters how to capitalize on their successes and minimize their failures.

They have cut out of their proposed borders those areas where support has been poor.

Gone is Liberty Lake, where an opposition movement sprouted during the 1990 election. Out are voting precincts in Otis Orchards and Ponderosa, where residents flatly rejected incorporation in last April’s election.

Also eliminated are Kaiser Aluminum’s Trentwood plant and the Spokane Industrial Park, both of which gave money and staff time to fight incorporation in 1994 because they feared the new city would mean higher taxes and more regulation.

“Without them, the rest of the opposition is going to be at a disadvantage,” said Kip Nedved, who was a member of the anti-incorporation group Concerned Citizens for the Valley last year.

That’s just the way incorporation backers like it.

“I think we have the heart of the Valley now. Therein lies the support,” McKinnon said. “You don’t do these things overnight. But I think we’ll be practicing self-determination in the Spokane Valley by the end of the year.”