City to Envision: Mayor can “initiate and control” lawsuits

The city of Spokane asserted the mayor’s right to “initiate and control litigation” in a court document today, a charge aimed at Envision Spokane, which yesterday argued that the mayor didn’t have the authority to block its Worker Bill of Rights from November’s ballot. In a 12-page response, the city argued that “time is of the essence” for the Spokane County Superior Court to act and strip Envision’s measure from the ballot. Spokane Mayor David Condon filed suit against the liberal group earlier this month, just a week after the Spokane City Council approved the measure for the ballot, albeit with two “advisory” questions. The questions, which were approved by a 4-3 vote, will basically ask voters if the city should raise taxes to pay for Envision’s measure or if other city services should be cut to pay for it. The latest measure put forth by Envision Spokane – the group’s fourth to qualify for the ballot – would amend the city charter to require large employers to pay workers a “family wage,” ensure equal pay and add protections against termination. The measure would make the rights of a corporation secondary to people’s rights. In April, the city’s hearing examiner reviewed the initiative, calling it “legally flawed.” The examiner’s written opinion called into question the measure’s fourth “right” regarding corporate powers, saying it exceeded “the jurisdictional limits of the initiative power.” The examiner’s argument is the basis of Condon’s suit. This week, Envision pushed back against Condon’s lawsuit, arguing that the mayor doesn’t have the authority to prevent the measure from reaching the ballot, and that only a supermajority of City Council members can block any initiative from appearing before voters. In the court document, the city re-asserted its argument against the ballot measure, but then expressed something close to disappointment. “The unfortunate thing about this case is that it could have easily been avoided,” the response reads. “Despite the knowledge that a less drastic corporate subordination provision had previously been declared to be outside the scope of the initiative process and being provided the opportunity to correct the deficiencies in the Initiative, for reasons unknown, the Envision Worker Rights Political Committee made the calculated choice to collect signatures and seek to put the Initiative on the November 3, 2015 ballot. Perhaps recognizing the error in that choice, Envision now throws up a series of arguments that avoid the basic questions presented in the case.” The city also asserted that the Spokane Municipal Code “clearly delineates” between the mayor’s and council’s ability to challenge initiatives. It also says that a decade-old decision by a state appellate court affirmed “the Mayor’s powers” to initiate and manage litigation. “This makes sense because, as the Court of Appeals recognized, ‘initiating and prosecuting litigation to determine specific rights, and responsibilities … are administrative decisions,’” the document reads. Finally, in response to Envision’s contention that the mayor’s suit threatens the city’s separation of powers, the mayor’s team stands firm it its rejection. “Envision is not the people of Spokane nor does it stand in the shoes of the City Council,” the city argues. “The sponsor of an initiative invokes the machinery of the electoral process whenever they submit an initiative for a public vote. A City Council member’s decision to propose a new ordinance does not. This is a critical difference Envision ignores. Envision’s argument that the City is somehow trying to prevent the people of Spokane from acting in a legislative capacity is false. Envision is not acting on behalf of the people of Spokane, it is acting on behalf of itself and its supporters. No matter what Envision says, the City has a larger responsibility to all the people (city’s emphasis) in Spokane and has filed this lawsuit to prevent a misuse of the initiative process.” Superior Court Judge Salvatore Cozza will hear the case tomorrow.