Too often, local governments avoid the media attention that state and national governments do. And, yet, many of the decisions made by school boards, city councils and county commissions are often the ones which affect our daily lives the most. With reduced scrutiny, some local governments make decisions on behalf of the public without the necessary input to make the right decision for the community, and may even lapse into excluding the public from participating at all.

Open Government

Open government is a basic American value. We own the government, and it acts in our name. We have a right to control its function and direct its goals. However, for some, the urge to hijack public institutions to put them to their own personal use can be overwhelming, and that is aided by shrouding their activities in secret. Over the years, the public has made strides in opening governments up to scrutiny, including sunshine laws and public disclosure for candidates. However, that does not mean that we can be complacent and hope that our officials take their duty to openness seriously.

In an age when communications around the world can be near instantaneous, and regular people can be the media, there is no reason why governments cannot embrace Web 2.0, and engage their citizens with blogs, video, audio, and neighborhood organizing through social/political networking. There should be no reason why meetings of the decision makers aren't streamed online and stored for future. There's no reason why regular folks can't have access to all the information that elected officials have access to.

However, there is still that urge to keep people out of the works.

Protect the Prairie Incident

A couple of years ago, there was an incident where Spokane County, Washington, was holding an open house. It was clearly a public forum where the county could inform the public about a public works project on Bigelow Gulch Road. There had been substantial public opposition to the project, so a resident of the area, Don Hamilton, decided to commit the meeting to video.

One by one, public employees working at the public event refused to be recorded. You can see the video on the Protect the Prairie web site (QuickTime required). There was clearly a coordinated effort to prevent the public from seeing what the county was doing.

(Indeed, it can be argued that the choice of holding an open house rather than a public hearing is another indication that they didn't want to hear the community's concerns, but, instead, merely to hear their own voices. It's easier to deny there's a problem when the discussions are he said/she said, rather than in an open fashion.)

I hold no ill will toward a group of employees who were obviously instructed to do this. In fact, one of the people refusing to be recorded is a friend of mine and is an advocate for progressive principles.

The blame must go to the top. And how do I know it came from the top? Two years later, the county still has no policy about recording devices at public meetings. In fact, they've delayed action so long, now they think they can deflect blame and say that it's election year politics which is causing the controversy (see above link).

Secret Raceway Meeting Incident

In a second and more blatant violation of the public trust, County Commissioners Mark Richard and Todd Mielke violated the Open Public Meetings Act by holding a public meeting without informing the press (and thereby denying the public access). In fact, they went so far as to prevent the third county commissioner from finding out the meeting was happening!

Every newly elected official is taught that whenever a majority of a legislative body meets, it must be held in public so the citizens of the county can observe. It must be noticed to the press ahead of time so that there is a reasonable opportunity for people to attend.

But, in this case, not only was this a failure for the commissioners to inform the public, but it was clearly intentional. After he was caught Mr. Richard showed his intent. This is from the Spokesman-Review, who has produced an entire series of stories to the issue:

Richard said he had no intention of inviting Mager, who has been a vocal opponent of the county's participation in the auction to acquire the land. He said Mager has used the issue to hurt his and Mielke's bids for re-election.

"My interests are to make sure (the raceway) is a success," Richard said. "Hers is to do anything she can to make sure I'm not in office anymore."

Again, Mr. Richard doesn't get it. He thinks this is about politics, not about the proper way to preserve the public trust.

And to add insult to injury, they blew off a scheduled meeting of the County Commission which was being held at the same time at the county courthouse.

My favorite quote, though, is from Mark Richard's campaign manager, Martin Burnette. As quoted from the Spokesman-Review:

"It wasn't a public meeting," Burnette said. "It was a private meeting of private individuals with a private corporation."

Well, if Mark Richard so much wants to be a private individual, I'm willing to accommodate him.

Mark Richard did not attend the North Greenacres Neighborhood association's candidate forum last week. Nevertheless, we got a preview of what the next few months will be like on the campaign trail, as Todd Mielke was questioned about his and Mark Richard's official land use and financial decisions.

They will be on defense.

Even (or perhaps especially) in some of the most conservative areas of the county, the people will require them to defend sprawl, land use decisions which threaten the future of both Fairchild Air Force Base and Spokane International Airport, and interfering with private enterprise by purchasing a race track, even while claiming poverty and the need for secretive meetings to make it work.

Communities such as Greenacres are suffering the result. They're experiencing the consequences of a decades-old policy of governmental subsidies for sprawl in which Mark Richard is unalterably invested. Their neighborhood is just the latest which is losing its identity as a result of poor land use decision making.

The commission's failure to properly assign or accept responsibility for the lack of public infrastructure in the communities where growth is occurring proves their insensitivity to the needs of neighborhoods, families and children while ill-preparing us for future growth.

There is a better way.

Having respect for the needs and aspirations of each neighborhood would have avoided the fateful decision threatening the base and airport.

Requiring impact fees for transportation, schools, parks and open spaces will properly assign responsibility for the cost of the new facilities and assist in their construction.

And having respect for capitalism and focusing on the proper, limited role of government would have ensured that the millions of dollars wastefully spent on the race track would, instead, be used to provide critical services such as public safety.

We need open, fiscally-responsible, community-oriented government. Anything else is indefensible.

Brian will be at a public forum during the Greenacres Neighborhood meeting on Thursday, June 12, at 6:30 pm at the Greenacres Christian Church, 18010 E Mission, Spokane Valley.

Key topics addressed by the forum will include impact fees, road maintenance, aquifer protection, public participation in land use decision making, and intergovernmental relations.

The forum will include questions asked by the audience, so come on out and show your support for open, fiscally-responsible and community-oriented government for Spokane County and hold Mark Richard accountable for shirking his responsibility to our neighborhoods!

This afternoon, the Spokane County Democratic Party unanimously nominated Brian A. Sayrs for the office of Spokane County Commissioner for District Two.

Spokane County Commissioners have a duty to represent communities throughout Spokane County, but the top two candidates in the primary election from each commissioner district advance to the general election in November. District Two in generally south of the Spokane River, and east of Perry, Hatch and Highway 195. All registered Spokane County residents are eligible to vote for Sayrs in the general election.

With this nomination, Sayrs is the only candidate authorized by the Democratic Party to carry the "Democratic" affiliation on the ballot for Spokane County Commissioner District Two.

With an honest reading of an article in today's Spokesman-Review, it is clear that Mark Richard participated in an illegal meeting with Todd Mielke on Wednesday.

The Open Public Meetings Act is a fairly simple law to follow, provided you take the purpose of the law to heart. One of its most basic principles is that a majority of a council or commission cannot meet unless it informs the public and allows the public to participate.

According to the Spokesman-Review, "[the] meeting was neither publicized to give taxpayers an opportunity to attend, nor mentioned to the Spokane County Commission's chairwoman." The only way anyone knows that the meeting occurred is that Commissioner Mager was "tipped off." Richard had "no intention of inviting Mager."

Mr. Richard was literally attempting to have a secret meeting.

The voters of Spokane County elected Comnmissioner Mager. Apparently Mr. Richard doesn't believe that means that she's worthy of his respect. Unfortunately, he also doesn't seem to understand that her election was a mandate from the voters to work with her. It's simply disrespectful of the people of this county.

This incident also points to Mr. Richard's habit of shirking his duty to the people of Spokane County. While he was out having his intentionally secret meeting, he was skipping a county commissioners meeting that was advertised to the public. The meeting he skipped addressed strategic planning for Spokane County's future. Apparently, that's not a topic which greatly concerns Mr. Richard.

The quotation that I'm most amazed by, though, is by Mr. Richard's campaign manager:

"It wasn't a public meeting," Burnette said. "It was a private meeting of private individuals with a private corporation."

Despite Richard's pleas to the contrary, this is the typical back room politics that Mark Richard engages in. This is the record upon which Mr. Richard wishes to be judged.

I was invited to a meeting of ROOTS, an organization dedicated to protecting the rural nature of Otis Orchards. They staged a debate amongst the four spokane County Commissioner candidates (Thorburn v Mielke and Sayrs v Richard).

During the debate, I was clear that I supported community-oriented government, just as I have as a city councilmember in Liberty Lake. Liberty Lake organized in 2000 to protect its lifestyle, I am glad that Otis Orchards is also organizing themselves.

Unfortunately, Spokane County doesn't officially recognize the existence of neighborhoods. Otis Orchards depends on having county commissioners who understand the importance of building community.

Mr. Richard tried to say that he supports open public meetings, but I find that hard to believe. He was in office a full two years having public meetings in a small office in the bowels of the courthouse making it difficult, if not impossible, for the public to attend. It was only upon the election of Commissioner Mager, who campaigned on the importance of open government, when the commissioners began having their briefings in a publicly-accessible area.

Many of the questions were about the Growth Management Act (GMA). The GMA is by no means perfect, and as a member of the Association of Washington Cities Land Use and Environmental Stewardship Committee, I have proposed changes and worked for its improvement. Mr. Richard took the opportunity to complain about the GMA. Well, of course he complains about it. The GMA requires that developers and elected officials be responsible for their decisions. But Mr. Richard's objection is to being called to task when he shirks his responsibility. He simply cannot be trusted with the job.

A couple years ago, Mr. Richard and I sparred over the projected population change for Spokane County. The cities had each calculated how many people they could absorb over the next 20 years and found that we could accomodate all of the projected growth within the current urban growth boundaries.

Despite this good news, Mr. Richard arbitrarily inflated the population estimates by more than 10 percent so that the county could increase sprawl. I spoke to several audience members afterwards, and they were unanimous in saying that Richard and Mielke's explanation for this irrational move was nonsensical.

Mielke and Richard also tried to defend their decision to violate the GMA in a decision made on Five Mile Prairie. They claimed that they didn't get any advice from staff, nor from their attorney. Really, Mr. Richard? You blame it on your staff? The buck stops where?

Whatever happened to asking for and heeding good advice? We know that's not his style, because while he failed to ask for advice from staff or from the attorney, he reversed the ruling of the planning commission from whom he did receive good advice.

Mr. Richard and I did agree emphatically about one thing: don't believe a word he says. Look into his record, then look at mine. Judge with your own eyes. The Otis Orchards debate was a clear win for communities because it laid bare his willingness to shirk his responsibility with regards to planning for the orderly growth of our county. I look forward to more debates, so the public can judge for themselves.

Amongst all the Sturm und Drang surrounding the purchase of Spokane Raceway Park by Spokane County, one question seems to be missing:

What did it achieve?

Mr. Richard said that he was trying to be "visionary."

Mr. Richard has increased the public debt, so he can certainly claim that as part of his legacy.

Mr. Richard has shaken the public trust in our elected officials, so "mission accomplished" on that.

It's clear that there were plenty of bidders for the property, and that at least one person who was repeatedly outbid by Spokane County wanted to operate it as a race track. So, Mr. Richard can't claim that as an achievement because it would have happened anyway.

So, the total achievement is that people don't trust Spokane County and we're deeper in debt. Apparently, that's Mr. Richard's vision for us.