On Monday night, the Spokane City Council decided the spirit of the law and its voters didn’t matter. By a vote of 6-1, it approved a new 4-year contract with the city prosecutors’ union – a contract that was negotiated by city leaders behind closed doors. 

Ordinarily, approval of a new contract wouldn’t make news. But this is the first contract agreed to since voters in the city of Spokane approved Proposition 1 with 77% support.

Proposition 1 requires collective bargaining negotiations in the city be transparent and open to public observation. The city charter amendment passed in every precinct of the city.

According to Spokane City Council staff, the city prosecutors’ union talks began the day after the election, November 6^th, and continued in meetings on November 25^th, December 18^th, January 8^th and January 15^th.

Proposition 1 took effect on November 26^th. Voters expected city leaders to follow their wishes and the city law. So far, only one city council member has been willing to do so.

“There is no exemption in the charter,” Spokane City Councilmember Michael Cathcart correctly said. “This process [the prosecutor’s contract] did not follow the law.”

In addition to requiring the process be open and transparent, the city charter holds elected officials responsible for violating it:

“Any elected official or an elected official's agent who is determined by the City Ethics Commission to have participated in any collective bargaining negotiation in violation of this charter amendment shall be referred to the City or County Prosecutors office for appropriate action.” – Spokane City Charter, Article 4, Section 40, E

Opening the doors to collective bargaining talks is not unique to Spokane. There are several examples of efforts for collective bargaining transparency that already exist at the local level in Washington state. Examples include government-union negotiations in Gig Harbor, Lincoln County, Kittitas County, Ferry County, Spokane County, the Pullman School District and the Kennewick School District. 

Explaining why the Pullman School District embraces collective bargaining transparency, the district’s finance manager Diane Hodge said, “We just think it’s fair for all of the members to know what’s being offered on both sides.”

Public service workers will now finally have the opportunity to observe how their own labor negotiators are working on their behalf. Everyone now has the opportunity to see the process for themselves if they so choose. It’s basic transparency.

The state’s Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) also calls for a transparent process: 

“The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.”

The Spokesman-Review editorial board recently noted:

“Like with most open government issues, there is a choice to be made. Nothing in the law ever compelled secret negotiations. Government and public-sector unions chose secrecy in the past. It’s time for them to choose sunshine and accountability instead.”

Unfortunately, this new transparency law in the city of Spokane is off to a troubling start thanks to the actions of some city leaders. 

Lawmakers must enforce the law. Furthermore, they must defend the will of voters in court if it is challenged.

Refusal to do either for upcoming contract talks is a disdainful message to voters and could land the city in court at a cost to taxpayers.

UPDATE 2/5/2020:

Spokane Mayor Nadine Woodward issued the following statement: “I supported passage of Proposition 1, as did a large majority of the community. The Administration is actively developing a roadmap that fairly and legally implements it for negotiations set to begin after the law’s effective date, while navigating the legal and contractual commitments made before the law’s passage.”