Dispute fueled avoidable upheaval over city’s courts
A power struggle between Spokane County’s district court judges and the late Spokane Mayor Jim West over control of the city’s municipal courts set the stage for a recent appeals court decision that has put the very authority of the city’s courts under a legal cloud.
The long dispute involves dueling legal briefs, a Washington Supreme Court ruling siding with the city, and a controversial effort by then-presiding Spokane County District Court Judge Mike Padden, a former state legislator, to directly intervene – prompting an accusation of judicial misconduct.
The battle over the municipal court, documented since 2004 in court papers and City Hall records obtained by the newspaper in an Open Public Records Act request, is not over.
It erupted into page-one headlines Nov. 9, after the Washington Court of Appeals Division III tossed out the DUI convictions of two Spokane men, saying the municipal judge who convicted them was not elected solely by city voters as the Legislature intended – violating the voting rights of city residents.
Because the ruling has the potential to invalidate every city DUI and domestic violence conviction, and all contested speeding and parking tickets issued between 1995 and Jan. 1, the legal system went into crisis mode:
“ The city public defender’s office – which had warned city officials in several cases of the potential for such a ruling – immediately drew up a list of 116 inmates held on warrants exercised before last Dec. 31. The office will argue on Friday and Dec. 5 for the immediate release of about three dozen of those inmates.
“ The city attorney’s office obtained an emergency stay of the appeals court ruling Nov. 14 – and will petition the court for reconsideration on Monday.
“ The county’s district court judges reviewed all city cases between Jan. 1, 1995, and Dec. 31, 2006, to determine their legal status.“ Breean Beggs, the Center for Justice lawyer who argued the appeal of the DUI case, said the crisis could have been prevented if the city had been willing and able to fix the court system over the last year to allow direct election of municipal judges.
West sought change
Shortly after he was elected, Mayor West moved to change the court system. West thought a city of Spokane’s size should have an independent municipal court – not a “3.46 court,” the RCW that establishes a municipal department within the county District Court system.
On Nov. 12, 2004, West formally notified county commissioners of his intent to end the current system and establish an alternative municipal court under another law, RCW 3.50, on Jan. 1, 2007. State law provides for a two-year notice for such a change.
To have a fully independent court in operation by 2007, the City Council would have to pass an ordinance establishing the court by Dec. 31, 2006, according to a May 2004 confidential memo to West from then-City Attorney Mike Connelly.
Presiding Judge Padden – appointed to the bench in 1995 and now retired – strongly opposed the proposal from the outset, city records show. While West thought the new court would save the city money, Padden said a combined county court system was more efficient.
Padden “fought us tooth and nail,” said city general administration director Dorothy Webster, a member of the committee West formed to make the change. “It was a control issue and an entrenched mentality,” Webster said.
Padden did not return a call seeking comment.
At one of its first meetings on Feb. 3, 2005, City Prosecutor Howard Delaney told the committee that “municipal court judges must be elected by the citizens of Spokane,” according to the group’s meeting notes.
At the March meeting, Padden replied that “the Court disagrees with this belief,” citing research by Jim Emacio, the county’s chief civil deputy prosecutor.
As the two sides dug in, the committee’s frustrations mounted. An unsigned memo written by a city staff member for a meeting with West said the committee had met for several months and decided that a new, independent court was the best option – “But we are being out-PR’d by the judges.”
“We need direction from you,” the memo tells West.
On April 19, 2005, West took the battle to the courts. The city sued the county, Padden and Spokane County District Court, seeking a declaratory judgment in its quest for an independent municipal court. West’s committee disbanded.
Nine days later, City Public Defender Kathy Knox sought a writ of review in Spokane County Superior Court on behalf of Nannette M. Peterson, a city resident cited with a misdemeanor for providing false evidence of insurance. Peterson pleaded not guilty; the case was assigned to District Court Judge Patricia Connolly Walker, who had been elected countywide.
Peterson’s case was dismissed. Knox then sought a ruling in Superior Court to invalidate Walker’s authority because the judge hadn’t been elected solely by city voters. Knox also challenged Padden’s authority to hear city cases.
The following month, Padden wrote to Connelly, saying the city public defender’s challenge posed conflicts of interest for the city because Connelly’s office had previously taken the position that the makeup of the municipal court was lawful, court documents say.
In October, the District Court asked to intervene in the Peterson case “to properly respond to the attack that has been made by the Public Defender’s office that the District Court is acting illegally.” In a separate action in 2005 stemming from West’s lawsuit against the county, the city also asked the court to determine whether case files pending on Jan. 1, 2007, should be transferred to the new municipal court or to District Court.
The District Court countersued. Padden cited Rule 29 – which says that the presiding judge is solely responsible for management and administration of the court. The municipal department of the city is “inextricably intertwined with the district court” and cannot be a freestanding court, Padden said in his reply.
The city argued Padden’s claim was flawed – that only the Legislature can determine the form of the municipal court.
The city lost before visiting Judge Rebecca Baker in Spokane Superior Court in August 2005. It then sought direct review by the Washington Supreme Court.
On Nov. 16, 2006, the Supreme Court unanimously overturned Baker’s ruling.
The justices also ruled that all ordinance violations would be heard in the new municipal court – upholding the city’s position.
Echoing court fight
Meanwhile, the DUI case of Lawrence J. Rothwell was echoing some of the same jurisdictional themes as it wound through the courts.
Knox, the public defender, again argued that Walker, the judge who convicted Rothwell, had no authority because she was never “elected or selected” as a municipal court judge. Walker declined to recuse herself and denied Rothwell’s motion to dismiss, saying she had won the countywide election with the support of 58.98 percent of city voters and concluded she was “duly elected” to Position 4 on District Court.
Padden, in his capacity as presiding judge, tried to intervene in the case, again citing his administrative role and the threat to the authority of the court.
Knox opposed Padden’s motion, saying it “demonstrates a profound misapprehension of the law and possibly violates the canons of judicial conduct,” which bar judges from commenting in matters that might be expected to influence the outcome of a case.
In her memorandum opposing Padden’s motion, Knox said Padden also had an ex parte meeting with then-City Attorney Connelly to discuss how Connelly’s office would respond to the “jurisdictional challenges” filed by the public defender’s office.
On Dec. 22, 2005, visiting Judge Baker denied Padden’s motion to intervene, saying the “systematic integrity” of the court would be called into question if trial courts were allowed to become parties in cases affecting themselves.
West was recalled from office in December 2005 by voters as a result of a sex scandal and Dennis Hession, the former City Council president, became mayor. Hession hired a new city attorney, Jim Craven. The Center for Justice, a public interest law firm, took over the Rothwell appeal from the public defender’s office in June 2006.
City didn’t follow through
Even though the city got a green light to create an independent court by winning its appeal to the Supreme Court in November 2006, it didn’t follow through on West’s initiative.
The state Supreme Court in that decision, also said the creation of a municipal court is a legislative function, so the change had to be made by the City Council and not solely by Hession.
The city couldn’t make the Dec. 31, 2006, deadline to pass an ordinance establishing an alternative municipal court, as anticipated in West’s original plan, in part because it had no space rented for separate municipal courtrooms. It made a “pragmatic decision” to continue to contract with the county while discussing an independent municipal court, Craven said.
Tracy Staab, a federal public defender who sat on West’s court restructuring committee when she was a city public defender, said it’s discouraging to see the city come so far – and then step back.
“The second-largest city in the state has now given up one-third of its government. The judges now have all the power and none of the accountability,” Staab said.
The city’s plan is to form a new court that would allow city voters to elect judges by municipal judicial districts; discussions were under way on that model when the Rothwell decision came down, Craven said.
Rothwell is a “breakthrough case” that begs for clarification, Craven said. “That’s why we filed the motions” to stay the case and seek reconsideration.
The city’s so-called “fix” may not hold up, said attorney Beggs, who won the Rockwell case before the Court of Appeals.
“They slapped a new name on it – an Interlocal Agreement Court. Everything else appears to be the same. They still don’t have a system where the people of the city elect the judges who decide city laws. They’ve taken another route that isn’t a safe harbor,” Beggs said.