Defeat Of Incorporations May Cripple Future Efforts

The failure of the proposed cities of Evergreen and Opportunity to attract at least 40 percent approval leaves a hole in incorporation attempts for the next three years.

According to state law, the area within the proposed cities is off limits to another incorporation bid until the year 2000 because more than 60 percent of the voters said no.

So is a long stretch of Sprague Avenue’s tax-rich commercial strip, the spine of the two proposals, as well as Sullivan Road’s booming commercial area and the Spokane Valley Mall. The Sullivan corridor and Spokane Valley Mall were included in Evergreen’s proposal.

Voters rejected both Evergreen (26 percent approval) and Opportunity (26.9 percent approval) on Tuesday.

“I’m very surprised,” said Vivienne Latimer, a leader in Evergreen’s effort. “I thought we had a good campaign. I thought we convinced a lot of people, but I guess we didn’t.”

Exclusion of the 14-square-mile area that stretches east from Argonne Road to Barker Road makes the possibility of a large incorporation attempt doubtful for three years.

It also kills a proposal to incorporate Lilac Valley, a city of 75,000 people that would have followed the boundaries of Fire District No. 1. Lilac Valley has been on hold for a year awaiting the vote on Evergreen and Opportunity.

Urban growth boundaries, which will be set by the time neighborhoods included in the Evergreen and Opportunity proposals are eligible for another run at incorporation, will likely exclude a large portion of the eastern Valley, further limiting a Valleywide effort.

“I’ll survive,” said Ed Meadows, Opportunity’s chief proponent. “It’s the young people that are going to suffer.”

History suggests a Valleywide run at incorporation would have trouble passing even with the tax-rich areas. Before dismissing Evergreen and Opportunity this week, voters had already rejected three Valleywide incorporation attempts since 1990.

Voters spurned Chief Joseph, a proposed city of 90,000, in 1990. Proposed cities of Spokane Valley also were defeated in 1994 and 1995.

Supporters of Evergreen and Opportunity abandoned the Valleywide approach because of those failures. However, leaders of both efforts had hoped to annex as many of the surrounding neighborhoods as possible if either of the cities was successful.

Both proposals drew criticism for residents who said the small cities divided the Valley. That image of division alienated at least one voter.

“I’m not against incorporation, but I am against how the boundaries have been drawn,” said Bob Dyche, who would have lived in Evergreen. “It’s not inclusive enough.”

Dyche added: “This area is rapidly becoming urban, so we are going to have to incorporate some time.”

Backers of the two cities had hoped to ride promises of increased representation and keeping tax money in the Valley to successful incorporation this time around.

Karen Grondel was one of the voters who was convinced.

“The closer you are to government, the better off you are,” Grondel said before casting her ballot at Opportunity Elementary School. “I look at Millwood and see how well they’ve done and I think smaller is better.”

The majority of voters didn’t agree.

“It puts us right back to the starting point,” said Meadows, who, like Latimer, said he won’t be involved in future incorporation attempts.

, DataTimes