FAQs
General
GENERAL
What is Proposition 1?
Proposition 1 is a ballot initiative that will appear on the November, 2011 ballot for voters within the City of Spokane. It is a “Community Bill of Rights” that, if approved, will become part of the Spokane City Home Rule Charter. Over 4,500 registered voters within the City of Spokane signed petitions to place the initiative onto the ballot.
What’s in Proposition 1?
Proposition 1 would require developers to obtain neighborhood approval for zoning changes involving significant development; provide the highest level of protection for the Spokane River and the aquifer; and secure constitutional rights for employees in the workplace. It would then elevate the rights of the neighborhoods, river, and workers above the rights of corporations within the City. A full version of the initiative can be found here.
Why do we need a Community Bill of Rights for Spokane?
Currently, neighborhoods have no legal rights against developers; the river and aquifer have no legal rights against those polluting the river; and employees lack constitutional rights in the workplace. This initiative would recognize certain rights for neighborhoods, the river, and employees, and guarantee that the rights of people and communities are elevated above the rights of corporations within the City.
I didn’t support a larger version of this in 2009, why would I support it now?
The 2009 version of the Community Bill of Rights (known as Prop 4) contained ten provisions on issues ranging from housing to healthcare. After its defeat, proponents of a Community Bill of Rights reviewed voter input, removed close to 60% of the original Bill of Rights, and condensed the initiative down to four short planks. The initiative now focuses on the core elements that voters wanted in 2009 – neighborhoods, the river, workplace rights, and limiting corporate power. Individuals and groups hesitant to support the 2009 initiative are now coming forward to endorse the current one.
Why not address one issue at a time rather than all at once through a Community Bill of Rights?
Creating a Spokane that represents the sustainable and democratic vision of a majority of Spokane residents requires addressing all of those factors that impact quality of life and decisionmaking. Fragmentation of those issues does not allow for an overhaul of the existing system, which is unsustainable and which reserves decisionmaking to a few powerbrokers within the City.
Won’t the Community Bill of Rights create more layers of government and more bureaucracy?
No. The Community Bill of Rights provides for rights that can be enforced by individuals and neighborhoods. It does not require the City of Spokane to enforce those rights on behalf of those individuals and neighborhoods. Unlike the 2009 version of the Community Bill of Rights, the current initiative does not require the City to take any actions or expend any monies.
Where are the responsibilities that go with these rights?
The ballot initiative declares that residents of the City of Spokane have a responsibility to be informed and to participate in City government. As the Community Bill of Rights is structured, responsibility for enforcement of the rights rests entirely on the shoulders of residents and neighborhoods.
Have other communities adopted a Bill of Rights?
Yes. Over 100 communities in the United States have passed similar laws to protect and advocate for residents, neighborhoods, and the environment. Recently, both Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Buffalo, New York passed Bills of Rights recognizing nature's rights, local self-government, and limiting corporate power to override community health and welfare.
What is Envision Spokane?
Envision Spokane is a nonprofit organization created in 2007 to bring the leaders of Spokane's neighborhood councils, nonprofit community organizations, and labor union locals together to discuss ways to improve the quality of life within Spokane. Over a period of almost two years - and over one hundred and fifty meetings - those leaders produced a Community Bill of Rights - a declaration of the rights that must be secured to residents, workers, neighborhoods, and the natural environment within Spokane to achieve a high quality of life. That initiative was then placed onto the November, 2009 election ballot, but failed at the ballot box.
Following that election, a reconstituted Envision Spokane began work to create a new initiative that incorporated all of the concerns that were raised by elected officials and organizations to the first initiative.
Wouldn’t This Create 27 Separate Governments in the City of Spokane?
No. Although there are twenty-seven recognized neighborhoods within the City of Spokane, this provision does not create blanket lawmaking authority at the neighborhood level. The initiative deals with proposals involving significant commercial, industrial, or residential development requiring a zoning change. It shall be the responsibility of the proposer of the zoning change to acquire the approval of the neighborhood majority for that development. The provision also creates a petitioning process to enable neighborhood residents to stop proposed development that would be incompatible with the City’s Comprehensive Plan or the Spokane City Charter.
What is considered “significant” development?
Proposed commercial or industrial development shall be deemed significant if it exceeds ten thousand square feet, and proposed residential development shall be deemed significant if it exceeds twenty units.
What is the Recourse if a Proposed Development is Rejected by the Neighborhood?
The developer would have the option of redesigning the project to meet the neighborhood’s objections, and then seeking neighborhood majority approval of the proposed development. Essentially, the provision would require the developer to develop projects consistent with the neighborhood’s planning vision, and would give the neighborhood authority to force compliance with that vision.
Why do We Need This if we Have Zoning Ordinances?
The provisions of the zoning ordinance are controlled by the City Council, and not neighborhoods. Even if special use exceptions or variances are required under the zoning ordinance, there are various ways in which those with financial resources of a developer may overcome any requirements placed within zoning provisions. Even if a project meets the current zoning, the Charter provisions would enable a neighborhood to reject the project if it fails to comply with the City’s Comprehensive Plan or the Spokane City Charter.
Wouldn’t this Affect How Property Can be Developed?
Yes. This provision would write into law the definition of “sustainable development,” which means that the only development that could occur is one which does not damage the Spokane River, its tributaries, and the Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer.
What About Activities Outside of Spokane That Pollute Us?
By establishing that certain rights vest for the Spokane River within the City of Spokane, violations of those rights committed by entities outside of the City can be remedied through these provisions. For example, if a polluter pollutes the Spokane River outside of the City limits, to the extent that it affects the right of the river to exist and flourish within Spokane, an individual, group, or the City could sue that entity to protect the rights of the river within the City of Spokane.
Don’t Existing State and Federal Laws Already Protect the River and Aquifer?
Existing state and federal laws are not based on the rights of nature, but establish permitting systems, which allow certain amounts of pollution to enter ecosystems like rivers. It is therefore not surprising that the natural environment is more polluted now than it was forty years ago, even after the passage of the major environmental laws. In addition, state and federal law severely limits the individuals or groups that can take steps to protect the natural environment. Generally, under a legal doctrine called “standing” – which requires financial or other injury as a pre-requisite to filing a lawsuit – many groups or individuals are unable to file lawsuits to stop damage to the natural environment. In addition, almost all environmental laws do not commit the payment of fines to the repair of the ecosystem that was impacted. Thus, monies paid under those laws are rarely applied to the restoration of the impaired ecosystem.
Don’t We Already Have Constitutional Rights in the Workplace?
No, at least not in private workplaces. In those workplaces, you are stripped of your constitutional Bill of Rights protections when you cross the threshold into work. It’s why employers may force you to attend non-work related meetings (called “captive audience” meetings) and why they can interfere with efforts to unionize the workplace. This part of the initiative would restore constitutional protections to workers in the workplace along with protecting union’s right to collective bargaining.
How Can Communities Pass Such a Law?
Spokane’s efforts to achieve constitutional rights for workers in the workplace is part of an effort across the United States to expand local rights for people, communities, and nature. Those efforts represent an assertion of local governing authority to provide the highest protections for residents of a community.
Who would be able to Enforce these Charter Rights?
Any resident or neighborhood whose rights have been violated could file a lawsuit to enforce their rights. In addition, because these rights would become part of the City Charter, the City of Spokane could also enforce these rights.
Why are Corporations and Business Entities Singled Out for Enforcement?
Rights within the Bill of Rights can be enforced against any entity violating those rights, including corporations and business entities. Under the current system of law, however, corporations and business entities are protected by certain constitutionally-based legal rights, which enable those entities to routinely violate the rights of people and communities. Among other rights that have been obtained by corporations is the right to be recognized as a “person” under the federal Bill of Rights. That means that a corporation can avoid enforcement of local laws that seek to hold them responsible for their actions. This Charter provision mandates that when corporate rights conflict with the rights of communities and people, that corporate rights will always be subordinated to the Community Bill of Rights.
Doesn’t Federal Law Control What Rights Corporations Have?
Under current federal law, corporations have been bestowed rights by the federal courts that routinely enable those corporations to override community lawmaking. The status of current federal law is that corporations possess that ability. This provision constitutes an open challenge to that federal law, and with its passage, Spokane would join other municipalities in seeking to change that law.