Spokane7
65°
August 16, 2011 in City
City won’t add two ballot questions
They aim to taint voting, Envision argues
Voters will have to make a decision on a proposed citizens initiative without the observations of elected city leaders on the same ballot.
The Spokane City Council on Monday rejected a proposal to add two questions to the November ballot that City Councilwoman Nancy McLaughlin described as red flags about the initiative that also will be decided in the election.
The questions would have asked voters if they want to raise taxes or cut city services to cover the costs involved in Envision Spokane’s proposed Community Bill of Rights.
Envision Spokane leaders argued that the proposals were meant to taint the issue and say that they eliminated items from their proposal since it appeared on the ballot in 2009 to avoid concerns that it would cost money. They said there is no proof that taxes would need to be raised or services cut to deal with their initiative.
But supporters of the questions said that citizens could be led astray since the questions were on the ballot along with the earlier version of the Community Bill of Rights in 2009. Joel White, of the Spokane Home Builders Association, offered proof that if approved, Envision’s proposal will cost the city money:
“Our association will be filing a lawsuit,” he said.
Others argued that if approved it will cost money because businesses will move and tax revenue will be lost.
Brad Read, president of Envision’s board, noted that the council didn’t ask any advisory questions about its own charter amendments that appear on today’s ballot even though some of them, like a proposal to allow the mayor to hire outside attorneys without council approval, could cost taxpayer money.
“Let them decide up or down without any influence from you,” he said.
McLaughlin and council members Bob Apple and Steve Corker voted in favor of adding the questions. Council members Joe Shogan, Richard Rush, Jon Snyder and Amber Waldref were opposed.
The Community Bill of Rights would add extra requirements for the approval of certain kinds of development and create “the right to a healthy Spokane River and aquifer.” One portion declares that corporations would “not be deemed as ‘persons’ ” and could not interfere with the enforcement of the Community Bill of Rights. No member of the City Council has endorsed the proposal.
Closing Geiger: Wise or worrisome? 
jimvw2 on August 16 at 7:02 a.m.
Good. The Envision Spokane proposal is a citizen initiative that jumped through all the hoops it was required to in order to get on the ballot. It deserves an up or down vote without a minority of the Council distorting the issue right on the ballot.
I’m sure we’ll see plenty of hyperbole and hysterics from the ALEC-inspired SHBA between now and the election in newspapers, TV and radio ads that it’s members will pay for whether or not they the SHBA leadership position. It need not be projected onto the ballot itself.
I wonder if Nancy, Bob and Steve feel Tim Eymann’s Washington Policy Center (ALEC) tax limit initiatives, which have already demonstrated their negative fiscal consequences, should have included the same kind of cautionary footnotes on the ballot that they want to lay on Envision Spokane.
ChefGus/ John Olsen on August 16 at 7:02 a.m.
I am seriously disappointed in Mr Corker’s vote…. Mr apple continues to distinguish himself as a person not on the side of legal process and constitutional government… and Ms McLaughlin… well what can i say… she is afraid of the world….. the voters will take a look at this on their own and do NOT need to be protected by the subversion of the legal process of initiative by the citizens… we need to get some young blood on the council that will start to pay attention to the Constitution…john
Fetch on August 16 at 8:48 a.m.
I was at the meeting and I do agree with the councils position on not adding proposals to initiatives. The unfortunate thing is the council put them selves between the rock and a hard place.
The E-S people were very rabid almost psychotic.
I am surprised the CBR has been allowed to go this far. It is clearly Unconstitutional, that is, contrary to the US Constitution and should have been voided the first time in ‘09. It is appalling the the people of Spokane have to go through this again.
Dazzeetrader11 on August 16 at 10:41 a.m.
They’ll be crushed. By the time the voters vote, they’ll be exposed by hundreds of thousands of dollars from multiple segments against them.
Fetch is accurate. They are a very far left rabid group. They rarely make sense. I suppose this is nothing new. The voters will know the corruption of the far left by November.
I watched last night. Council was weak. The three leftists voted against the clarification and the swing was Shogan, who seems ot have deteriorated in all phases of his job, voted with them….for no reason really…just a whim. Shogan really doesn’t seem lucid anymore. He’ll be gone soon enough.
jimvw2 on August 16 at 1:17 p.m.
Hey Crazy Dazee. … If corporations can be people and enjoy Constitutional protections, why can’t birds and fish and rivers. It makes just a much sense, doesn’t it?
Hypocrite is the word I’m looking for…
Even if you don’t believe that anyone but a human being has Constitutional rights (I’m in that camp), the Dominionist amongst you, like Rick Perry and Michelle Bachmann, would have to acknowledge our responsibility to protect and preserve God’s creations.
So how does making a fothright commitment to do just that, even if it originates with “lefties,” conflict with God’s grand plan, or with the Constitutional duty to provide for the public welfare.
The trouble is, folks who have only a bumper sticker familiarity with the Constitution and absolutely no knowledge of the history or reasons for the creation of the commons, are completely incapable of describing the real world.
The theories of Hayek, Rand and Friedman simply don’t accommodate real world challenges. These discredited theories exist in a sort of theoretical ether. Which might explain the light-headedness of their acolytes. ;-)
person on August 16 at 4:49 p.m.
Fetch
I want some of what you were on at the city council meeting last night. I sat quietly and watched the whole thing unravel.
I witnessed the people for the amendments on the ballot; sing, threaten lawsuits against the city, argue the merits of Prop 1 the CBR, most of them did not have a grasp at all on the difference between a ballot, a proposition, an advisory proposition and an initiative. All of which are very different documents indeed.
Whereas the folks who spoke to oppose the proposed advisory propositions did not argue the content of the CBR- but rather the councils’ role as elected officials.
Whatever your thoughts on the content of this initiative— that debate had no place in a city council agenda last night.
Save it for the campaign.
And thank you council for stepping up above the ether that is government in this modern world.
Lulubelle on August 16 at 4:53 p.m.
Interestingly enough, the Homebuilder folks that cried about how much all the lawsuits will cost the city taxpayers are the first to declare they are suing.
What a bunch of self-serving business as usual hypocrites.
Fetch on August 16 at 9:19 p.m.
Person,
I sat next to Kai and the people behind him. The comments that were made by them were rabid, irrational.
I wrote that I agreed with the council on not including the two advisory propositions on the ballot.
I did not state, in my previous post, that the council nor did the city attorney, put themselves in this position through their ignorance of the Constitution, though I should have.
The threat of law suits that were flying back and forth are null and void because the agenda of E-S is unconstitutional and should have been thrown out. Only corrupt lawyers would pursue this.
Read,
The Washington State Constitution Article 2, states that the US Constitution IS the supreme law of the land.
The US Constitution,
Article. IV.
Section. 4.
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.
The entire emphasis of E-S is to promote a democracy, even the ancient Greeks knew the downfall of a democracy. It does not work.
Please, tell me I am wrong.
This is it, if you do not abide by the Constitution of the United States, then what kind of government do you think we should have?
Dazzeetrader11 on August 17 at 2:06 a.m.
http://www.facebook.com/#!/jimvw2
yellowcat on August 18 at 9:31 a.m.
Fetch,
You say “The E-S people were very rabid almost psychotic”.
Hmm…. That is blatantly not true. I was there. The Envision people were not rabid or psychotic. In fact they were quite calm and reasonable.
The anti-Community Bill of Rights people were the ones threatening lawsuits and singing to the city council.
Fetch on August 18 at 12:33 p.m.
Interesting. Very interesting.