Council should investigate West

On May 22, Spokane City Attorney Mike Connelly appointed four men to a special panel charged with investigating allegations of misconduct by Mayor Jim West. On June 6, attorney Nancy Isserlis was added to the group. On July 11, she was the only one left; the rest had resigned.

So, more than two months after the West scandal rocked Spokane, the city is still in need of an investigation into mayoral misconduct. True, the FBI is looking into abuse-of-office allegations, but that probe is focused on criminal wrongdoing. The city still needs to determine whether the mayor violated its policies on ethics, sexual harassment, use of city equipment and more.

Referring to the resignations of the four would-be investigators, Spokane City Councilman Bob Apple asked, “Is there any reason for this board of one to continue?”

The reason remains, but the panel itself should be dissolved. Its creation was dicey from the outset, because Connelly works for the mayor. That’s not to say that Connelly’s intentions weren’t noble, but even the appearance of a conflict of interest would’ve shadowed the panel’s work. Another complication was the lawsuit filed by former Councilman Steve Eugster, which challenged the legality of the panel. That’s a distraction the city can do without.

Connelly should disband the panel and let City Council take over the job. It’s important that an investigation be removed from the power and influence of its subject.

It would be nice if partisanship could be removed from the equation, but that’s not realistic. Like it or not, the scandal has moved into a political phase. Because of that, it makes sense that those responsible for the probe be accountable to the voters.

If Congress can impeach the president, a city council should be able to pursue an investigation of its chief executive. If the council does take charge, we hope that two developments remain in place.

First, anyone involved in the investigation needs to be indemnified. The city must protect against intimidation by lawsuits.

Second, the investigation should be conducted in public. Connelly’s panel had decided that its proceedings would be open to citizens. Such transparency is vital to credibility.

The City Council is already pursuing charter changes that would give it powers to remove a strong mayor for official misconduct, so it recognizes the current imbalance in the strong-mayor system. But the city needs action now. The citizen recall being pursued by Shannon Sullivan is laudatory, but it could easily get bogged down. Plus, that effort won’t unearth any new details.

The council should take charge and begin an immediate investigation. The public has waited long enough.