Growth Panel Meeting Ends In Disarray Mccaslin, City Official Clash, And Confusion Ensues After Vote Related To Sewer Policy

What began as a discussion of land-use planning policies ended in chaos Friday, with a top Spokane city official storming out of the meeting after a county commissioner told him to keep quiet.

At the center of the dispute: septic tanks and whether county government should allow more of them in the Spokane Valley.

The exchange between city planner Chris Hugo and County Commissioner Kate McCaslin, and the events leading up to it, left members of the Spokane County Growth Management Steering Committee confused about what transpired during their two-hour meeting and anxious about what their next session holds.

Hugo later accused McCaslin of abusing her power in order to get a “county special interest ramrodded through the regional planning process.”

“There was confusion, no doubt,” said City Councilman Rob Higgins, who filled in for a colleague Friday as one of the city of Spokane’s representatives on the committee.

The steering committee, which is made up of elected officials from Spokane County, the city of Spokane and the small towns within the county borders, meets occasionally to discuss regional issues such as comprehensive planning and sewage treatment.

The group’s meetings are generally staid, and Friday’s meeting began innocuously enough with City Councilman Steve Eugster, the committee’s vice chairman, presiding over discussions of various planning issues. The panel’s chairman, County Commissioner Phil Harris, was absent Friday.

Things turned testy, however, when county Utilities Director Bruce Rawls brought forward a proposal to change a countywide planning policy that regulates sewer connections.

Rawls said county officials want to change the policy so some new developments built inside the county’s urban growth area would be allowed to treat their wastewater on an interim basis with community septic systems instead of connecting to the sanitary sewer.

The current countywide policy calls for new developments inside the urban growth area - where future high-density projects will be funneled - to connect to the sewer system upon construction.

The proposed rule change would allow some people who own small tracts of land, usually less than five acres, to develop their property without the tremendous expense of extending sewer lines right away, Rawls said.

Even with the change, those new subdivisions would be required to hook onto the sanitary sewer within six years, Rawls said.

“My thought is how do we balance protection of the Rathdrum Prairie/ Spokane Valley aquifer with growth management policies with people’s rights to reasonable use of their property,” Rawls said later. “Should we try to strike some kind of middle ground balance?”

County commissioners have discussed the proposal among themselves in the past and have expressed reserved support for it.

Steering committee members were debating the merits of the idea Friday, with McCaslin championing the cause and Eugster arguing against it, when Eugster had to leave for an appointment.

Before going, he turned control of the meeting over to McCaslin, a past chairwoman of the committee.

“The gavel was passed halfway through the issue,” said City Planning Director John Mercer, who also attended the meeting.

Higgins then suggested tabling the issue until Rawls could provide the committee with more information, like how many projects were likely to use such a loophole and what effect it would have on the underground drinking water supply in the Spokane Valley.

McCaslin interjected that tabling the item was inappropriate. The correct action would be for the committee to vote to “reconsider the planning policy” at its next meeting in January, she said.

Confusion ensued, with committee members questioning whether that was the proper thing to do, and what the ramifications of such an action might be.

Reopening a countywide planning policy for possible amendment is a big deal, said Paul Jensen, a long-range planner for the county.

“The rules were written in a way to make them hard to amend,” Jensen said later. “You need nine votes to even get a proposed amendment on the table.”

If the steering committee does open up a planning policy for possible amendment, the proposal eventually makes its way before county commissioners, who have the final say in such matters, Jensen said.

Hugo said later that’s exactly what he fears will happen with the sewer policy.

“Even if the steering committee rejected it on a 0-12 vote, it still goes on to the County Commission, where it can still be approved by a 2-1 vote,” Hugo said.

After Eugster left Friday’s meeting, there were only nine committee members remaining at the table.

McCaslin eventually called for the vote on whether the panel should reconsider the sewer policy. She first asked for the “yeas,” then the “nays.”

It wasn’t clear who voted yes, but Spokane City Councilwoman Cherie Rodgers raised her hand when it was time for the “no” vote, and Higgins said after the meeting he voted “no” as well.

“I thought she saw us,” Rodgers said later.

But McCaslin announced the vote as 9-0 to pass the motion and tried to move on to the next agenda item.

“When I called for the vote, I heard only yeses. I heard no nays, and I ruled,” she said after the meeting. “There was no call for a roll call vote, no call for anything else.”

As soon as the vote was announced, Hugo, who was seated in the audience, went off. He challenged McCaslin’s ruling, asking “Didn’t you see these two `no’ votes?”

McCaslin responded by telling him he was out of order.

When Hugo persisted with his argument, McCaslin wheeled toward him. “Mr. Hugo, you are out of order,” she said again. “You are not an elected member of this body, so you should be quiet or leave.”

With that Hugo, clearly angry, grabbed his belongings. “You are doing this community a disservice, and I’d be happy to leave,” he said before stalking out.

Hugo explained later that he thinks Rawls’ proposal will threaten the region’s drinking water supply by putting more septic tanks over the aquifer.

If the county isn’t prepared to extend sewers throughout its urban growth area, it shouldn’t allow development there, he said.

Rodgers agreed.

“First of all, I thought Kate was way out of place in the way she treated Chris,” Rodgers said. “Secondly, this issue is a big concern to me because of the sewage problem.”

Rawls contends that the rule change wouldn’t have much of an effect on the aquifer because the county is pushing an aggressive sewering plan that is expected to eliminate all septic tanks in the county’s urbanized area in 20 years.

“We’re taking off 2,000 septic tanks per year,” he said. “So what if we add a few interim systems?”

McCaslin said later she wasn’t trying to circumvent the steering committee with her action and was unsure if Friday’s vote made the planning policy in question formally open for amendment.

“From my perspective, all I thought we did was say we were going to discuss it in January with a formal proposal,” she said.

Others who attended, including Mercer, Jensen, Rodgers and Higgins, also were confused about what actually took place.

McCaslin said she wasn’t worried one way or the other. “I always take the view that anything can be undone if that’s what the committee chooses to do,” she said.

Mercer, the city’s planning director, said he hopes that’s the case.

“It’s an important issue, and the issue is whether development on septic tanks is allowed to continue over the aquifer,” he said.