Proposed Charter Contains Some Questionable Clauses

Freeholders were advised before they drafted a proposed city-county charter that a provision allowing residents to form towns probably wouldn’t stand up in court.

They included the provision anyway to satisfy freeholders who felt the charter wouldn’t be fair without it.

“There are six or 10 (of the 25 freeholders) who were serious about it. There were others who wanted to appease those six or 10 and get on to other business,” said freeholder Mike Senske. “Maybe we were being too sensitive to each other in allowing that paragraph to remain on the document.”

Noting that the charter is only a draft, Senske said he voted for the provision only because he assumed it contradicted state law and would be eliminated later. Otherwise, he said, he’ll fight to have it removed or applied only to rural areas.

Freeholders last week unveiled their charter to consolidate Spokane city and county governments while leaving Cheney, Millwood and other small towns intact.

The questionable provision would allow residents to incorporate new cities as long as they’re no larger than 10 percent of the county’s population (no larger than about 40,000 people). It undoubtedly would win support for the charter among some Valley residents.

“If we’re going to allow small towns to remain, shouldn’t all citizens have that same right (to live in towns)?” asked freeholder Sue Kaun, who supported the provision.

Bob Dellwo calls the issue “repugnant.” If allowing the small towns to remain intact is unfair, then the charter should call for the dissolution of all towns, not the creation of new ones, he said.

“There’s not the slightest question to me that it’s illegal,” said Dellwo, a freeholder, attorney and former Spokane city councilman. Garald Gesinger, the county attorney appointed to the freeholders, told the group he thought the state would consider the consolidated government a municipality. Cities can’t form within existing municipalities.

“I have not given them anything in writing,” Gesinger said.

Freeholder critic Steve Eugster doesn’t think the provision is illegal. He just thinks it’s a bad idea.

With the city of Spokane dissolved, wealthy neighborhoods on the South Hill might form their own cities to keep their taxes from being spent elsewhere, said Eugster, an attorney.

“It really does start to thwart the whole idea of unification,” said Allan Wallis, consolidation expert at Denver’s National Civic League.

At least one other charter provision - calling for an appointed attorney to advise government officials - is questionable under state law. Those duties now are handled by the county prosecutor, one of the few elected positions whose job can’t be changed by freeholders.

Freeholders stress the charter released Aug. 3 is only a draft. They plan to have it reviewed for legal problems by a committee of volunteer attorneys. At the same time, they plan a series of community meetings in September to hear public response to the charter.

The document probably will change after the attorneys and the public are done with it. New sections may be added, and some existing ones may be eliminated.

“This is why a draft charter is so great,” said Kaun. “We have a chance to sit back, see what the public thinks of it and take a longer look at it ourselves.”