Consolidation Is Latest In Series Of Proposals To ‘Fix’ Government

Valley residents are Spokane County’s experts on local government reform.

They went through the 1990 incorporation campaign, when some of their neighbors wanted to form a city called Chief Joseph.

They went through the 1994 incorporation campaign, when the name was changed to Spokane Valley.

They went through last spring’s vote, when incorporation looked like a sure thing, but failed again.

Next month, they’ll vote again, on a proposal to consolidate Spokane city and county governments. This time, they’ll be joined by voters from throughout the county.

The repeated votes leave some Valley residents frustrated.

“Is it so bad now that we in the Valley need to do all these things that people are proposing, like consolidating or forming a separate government?” was the message one weary caller left on The Spokesman-Review’s answering machine.

Incorporation leaders said a city would give the Valley better political representation because voters would elect a city council to decide how tax money is spent.

Consolidation boosters also make a case for representation.

The charter written by freeholders would divide the county into 13 districts, each with its own council member. There would be neighborhood councils to serve as a sounding board for the council.

The city of Spokane would disappear, ending turf wars between the city and the county.

And city and county agencies would merge.

It would be a better government, say the proponents.

Not better, say opponents. Just bigger and more unwieldy. Tax increases are likely, if the city-county government is going to improve services in the Valley.

There would be no more opportunities to form a Valley city.

On Sunday, The Spokesman-Review will examine city-county consolidation from a Valley resident’s point of view. It’s part of a series of stories about the affect of consolidation on people in the suburbs, rural areas, small towns and the city of Spokane.

As with incorporation, there’s no way to answer every question or predict every turn.

And if Valley residents are looking for a document that will please everyone, the charter won’t do it.

A Valley Chamber of Commerce committee, for instance, both praised and criticized the charter for earmarking 8 percent of government’s budget for parks, for making the sheriff an appointed position and for giving the elected executive veto power.

We can’t settle the differences, but we can help sort out the arguments.

, DataTimes