Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883

Spokane Wants Valley To Start Farther East

The Spokane City Council is laying claim to “a lucrative area” inside a proposed city in the Spokane Valley, a move that could delay the incorporation vote and fan resentment toward Spokane among Valley residents.

It is the first time the city has intervened in Valley residents’ attempts to form their own city. The move signifies that city officials are taking the current incorporation drive more seriously than the previous two.

“We’ve always … shied away from making any statements about Valley incorporation because people were concerned that, ‘Well, if you say anything, it might encourage the incorporation,”’ Mayor Jack Geraghty said during a recent briefing.

“I don’t think what the city does is probably going to matter (this time) because incorporation is probably going to pass.”

The boundaries for the proposed city butt up against Spokane’s eastern limit, at Havana Street. City officials want it moved two miles to the east, to Park Road.

The industrial area between Havana and Park, known as Yardley, includes the Spokane Interstate Fairgrounds, several gravel pits, railroad yards and other industrial property.

Irv Reed, city director of engineering services, described it during last week’s briefing as “a lucrative area” in terms of property taxes.

Because Yardley is unincorporated, those taxes go to Spokane County, the Valley Fire District and the county library district. If the Valley incorporates using the proposed boundaries, the new city would get those taxes, and probably would pay the library and fire districts to provide services.

But if the boundaries are amended, Spokane could try to annex Yardley and claim the taxes for itself, its libraries and its fire department.

“It would cripple the fire district and the library district,” said Joe McKinnon, co-chairman of the incorporation drive.

Incorporation backers hope to put their proposal on the May 16 ballot. The issue first must be reviewed by the Spokane County Boundary Review Board, which can make minor changes in the proposed boundaries.

Proponents have set such a tight schedule that any delay in the review board’s process likely would mean a vote in September, at the earliest.

The City Council’s request will go to the review board, which could slow its work, said board clerk Susan Winchell.

The board is likely to look favorably on Spokane’s request because the city already provides water and sewer services to much of Yardley.

“Having our utilities inside another jurisdiction causes real problems for us,” said Reed.

Some Yardley landowners, including officials from Central Pre-Mix Concrete Co. and Shea Construction Inc., told Boundary Review Board officials they’d rather be part of Spokane than the Spokane Valley. Many others agreed not to fight annexation to Spokane in order to get city utilities.

Valley voters have rejected incorporation twice in the past. In 1990, they voted 2-1 against a proposal to form the city of Chief Joseph. A smaller proposed city, called Spokane Valley, received 44 percent support last April.

This time, proponents have reduced the boundaries even more, removing precincts where support was the weakest.

Election watchers say a spring ballot could favor incorporation because proponents are more likely to show up for single-issue elections. But McKinnon said Spokane’s move to shrink the boundaries may help his cause more than a delayed election would hurt it.

Incorporation backers have warned for years that Spokane coveted tax-rich areas. Now, the City Council has proven them correct, McKinnon said.

“This certainly will fuel the fire of unrest in the Valley,” he said.