Wednesday, August 10, 2011

Revenge of Prop. 4

The Community Bill of Rights is back - shorter, sleeker but still the same.

Daniel Walters
Kai Huschke: "It’s never fun to have something you believe in go down in flames." [Photo: Young Kwak]
Kai Huschke: "It’s never fun to have something you believe in go down in flames." [Photo: Young Kwak]
Kai Huschke: "It’s never fun to have something you believe in go down in flames." [Photo: Young Kwak]

In 2009, Envision Spokane asked voters to pass Proposition 4, a massive collection of nine amendments to the city charter called the “Community Bill of Rights.” The 1,400-word text promised affordable health care, a locally based economy, affordable housing, cheap renewable energy, environmental protection, prevailing wages for construction workers, a right to unionize and considerably increased neighborhood powers.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars were raised to stop it, mainly by business groups.

The result in November? Almost 80 percent of Spokane residents voted against the initiative.

Now, two years later, the Community Bill of Rights has risen from the ashes to land on the city ballot once again — leaner, shorter, but still ambitious. Supporters say they’ve learned from their mistakes. Opponents don’t seem too worried.

"It's never fun to have something you believe in go down in flames,” says Kai Huschke, the goateed campaign manager for Envision Spokane, drinking a can of C20 coconut water at the Main Market Co-Op.

The January after Proposition 4 was defeated, Envision Spokane supporters met to figure out what happened. One conclusion was that they just tried to sell too much stuff to the voters at one time.

“It was so cumbersome to talk about the whole initiative,” Huschke says.

But this time, the initiative’s text is only a quarter the length of the old one, and it only contains four amendments, instead of nine. The sections on health care, energy, prevailing wage and a locally based economy were eliminated.

Yet, in fewer words, the new proposition still proposes large-scale changes.

The first amendment would give neighborhoods the ability to prevent zoning changes that allow large developments to move in. (Low-income developments would not be subject to this rule.) The second would give Spokane’s rivers and aquifer “inalienable rights,” granting every Spokane resident the ability to sue to defend the waterways. The third would guarantee unionized workers collective bargaining rights. The fourth would stipulate that corporations in Spokane do not have the same rights as people.

“We have something that people can wrap their heads around this time,” Huschke says.

But Brad Read, a teacher at Shadle Park High School and a leader of Envision Spokane, says the group may have stood a better tactical chance if it only took on one issue at a time.

“But this is about structural change,” Read says, defending the approach. “We don’t go to structural change trying to change one thing at a time.”

Envision Spokane lost two years ago for more than just strategic reasons, Huschke says. The playing field wasn’t level. He complains about how the City Council attached two propositions to the ballot asking how the voters would like to pay for the initiative — even though the initiative had no defined cost. (The Council may do the same thing this year. Councilwoman Nancy McLaughlin has already proposed such a measure.)

Last time, corporations, the Spokane Home Builders Association and Greater Spokane Inc. helped raise close to $300,000 to defeat the proposition, according to the state’s Public Disclosure Commission, far outstripping Envision’s meager funds of less than $80,000.

This year, after Envision turned in more than 4,500 signatures to get on the ballot, their opponents got the old gang back together.

“Maybe if we tell them 85 percent ‘no,’ they’ll go away this time,” says Kate McCaslin, president of the Associated Builders and Contractors and a former county commissioner. “Same bad idea, just a smaller version.”

The JOBS coalition — the big fundraiser last go-around — hasn’t yet raised any money this year, but it still exists as a continuing political action committee.

“I don’t think we’ll be spending nearly the dollars we did,” says Joel White, the executive officer of the Spokane Home Builders Association. “The community soundly defeated the previous proposal.”

Last time, Center for Justice founder Jim Sheehan donated $55,000 to support Envision Spokane’s efforts. Sheehan is still supportive of the measure, but he has given no indication of how much support he’ll provide this time.

Though Huschke says the initiative has a much better chance this year, he notes that the fight is a large, difficult, systemic one. If the initiative fails again, Envision Spokane will try again, Huschke says. And, if necessary, again after that.

Also in News

Calling for Help

A frantic 911 call lands Christopher Parker in a jail cell instead of a hospital, and leads to his death

Jacob Jones |
Wednesday, May 22,2013

Let 'Em Vote

Spokane City Council won’t sue to keep initiatives off of the fall ballot; plus, a new UW-WSU rivalry

Heidi Groover, Deanna Pan, Daniel Walters |
Wednesday, May 22,2013

Reefer Rules

Washington state takes a first pass at marijuana market regulations

Heidi Groover, Lisa Waananen |
Wednesday, May 22,2013

Disorderly Conduct

Three Spokane law enforcement officers are placed on leave over misconduct investigations

Jacob Jones |
Wednesday, May 22,2013

Uneven Cuts

Most elements of health care were shielded from the sequester — but not the Indian Health Service

Daniel Walters |
Wednesday, May 22,2013

Also By Daniel Walters

Calculating the Future

Innovation hasn’t always thrived in the Inland Northwest. That may be beginning to change.

Daniel Walters |
Tuesday, November 27,2012

Commitment Issues

The city and county take one step toward collaboration - and two steps back.

Daniel Walters |
Wednesday, August 31,2011
Remote Possibilities

The Ricky Gervais Show

Laughing at how weird dudes talk: It’s the Ricky Gervais Freak Show!

Daniel Walters |
Thursday, February 25,2010

Dishing Out Deals

Daniel Walters |
Thursday, June 26,2008

Heal Thyself

What happens when an addict owns a prescription pad?

Daniel Walters |
Wednesday, May 15,2013


Kill it with fire...... Aug 10, 2011 | Reply to this comment

 

What are you afraid of shanus? seriously.

I see peasants with pitchforks & sticks on fire voting yes for involvement in the future of their community & neighborhoods.
People have been left out of the loop in this town for too long- the council cares not about zoning set by communities and they favor developers over their constituents. Bring it.

Aug 10, 2011 | Reply to this comment

 

Ug, this neighborhood control over zoning is such a massively bad idea. Zoning should be considered holistically not in a piecemeal. We elect representatives to voice our opinions and to evaluate those opinions in the scope of the City as a whole.

BTW, Prop 4 was not defeated because of business interests it was defeated because the majority of people saw it for the bad idea it truly was. Aug 11, 2011 | Reply to this comment

 

The Community Bill of Rights wouldn´t give neighborhood control over zoning. It would give neighborhood residents the right to approve re-zonings for specific significant developments.

I agree with the previous post that zoning should be considered holistically and in a piecemeal. The Community Bill of Rights does not change that. Rather, what it does is when a developer wants to re-zone an area for a development (Which is what I think we both mean when we say "piecemeal") the residents of the neighborhood - the people who are affected by that piecemeal change - get to have a say.

Please read the proposed charter amendment, available at
www.envisionspokane.org/communitybillofrights.html

If you support holistic development, then I suggest voting for the Community Bill of Rights. Aug 11, 2011

 

This is ridiculous!
We already have a representative government in place; we don´t need to create a micro-managed level of control to satisfy some fairy tale idea about how to allegedly best run our city and it´s neighborhoods.
People in this country are always on the move: new places of residence within a city, from city to city, or state to state. What one neighborhood may want at any given period of time could be exactly the opposite of what people moving into that same neighborhood want. It could only take a very small number of people to change the desired direction of each neighborhood. Can decisions made by certain people in a specific time period be as easily reversed by a different group of people from the neighborhood at a future date? Not likely.
There´s also too much ambiguity in this ballot measure. You can bet your last dollar that when a group of people are given authority they´re not familiar with, they´ll make serious mistakes and stretch that authority too far.
Nope, dumb idea by a bunch of unrealistic dreamers trying to create their own utopia. Aug 15, 2011 | Reply to this comment

 

Just some people with an agenda like most. They will be killed off by the voters. I suppose this fringe group of communists (communal thinkers) will continue to stir the pots of Spokane. We already have a concil tha tis responive to the neighborhoods.

What´s curious is that this group purports to represent the neighborhoods. It´s goood to remember that the neighborhoods voted down 24-4 to support Envision. So how is it possible they (EV) believe they should represent anyone when they have been convincingly sent packing by the neighborhhods and the voters 2 years ago ( 80-20 loss)?

Nothing is new...just left out some of the other drivel. They represent nobody but themselves. Aug 16, 2011 | Reply to this comment

 

 
 
Close
Close
Close