Obstacles to Asserting Rights
by: Envision Spokane Posted on: August 08, 2013
Editor’s Note: When citizens get together to elevate their rights above corporations’—there is a backlash. What this backlash looks like can be unpredictable. Spokane offers a case study. There, citizens are elevating their right to clean elections, constitutional rights in the workplace, neighborhood decision-making power, and the legal rights of the Spokane River and Aquifer above corporations’ rights.
“Simply put, not only have corporations been able to influence HOW we vote via their wealth and so-called people “rights,” but now they are attempting to decide WHAT we get to vote on.”
Blocking Public Participation
At the end of June, the corporate powerbrokers of Spokane sued Envision Spokane (Community Bill of Rights) and Spokane Move to Amend the Constitution (Voter Bill of Rights) in an attempt to knock the two duly qualified citizen initiatives from the November ballot.
In response to this interference with the right to initiative, Envision Spokane sued the corporate plaintiffs under Washington’s SLAPP law – Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.
What has happened here is that the corporate interests are attempting to use the courts, not to settle a legal manner, but to interfere with a public process, that is the peoples right to vote on two qualified initiatives. The SLAPP law is about protecting that right of the people.
Simply put, not only have corporations been able to influence HOW we vote via their wealth and so-called people “rights,” but now they are attempting to decide WHAT we get to vote on.
If the judge agrees with us she would be saying that the corporate plaintiffs were interfering with the right of the people to the political process. If the judgment goes the other way, then the legal fight continues – over the original lawsuit filed by the plaintiffs – with a decision on whether the initiatives will be on the ballot coming sometime at the end of August.
The city council is once again considering adding “advisory propositions” to the ballot preceding the vote on the Community Bill of Rights and the Voter Bill of Rights.
The questions insinuate that in order to implement either measure, Spokanites’ taxes will go up and their services cut.
In 2011 Councilman Snyder said placing such propositions on the ballot would be a “terrible misuse of the council’s power.”
Councilwoman Waldref said in 2011, “It seems really inappropriate for us [city council] to put anything on the ballot that would affect the outcome of a fair and open election, whether it be a citizen initiative, bond measure, or campaign by an individual.”
In addition to the advisory propositions, the City Council is considering changing the initiative process by adding an additional legal review by the city hearing examiner. This non-binding opinion would be issued at the front end of the petitioning process, and would be a review of the legal validity of proposed initiatives. The municipal code already allows for the city council to authorize the city attorney to create such an opinion.
If this addition is made initiative proponents may have to challenge two legal reviews from city government, all before the citizens of Spokane would be allowed to weigh in on the proposals via the petitioning process
This change is merely an additional layer of city hall interference in the initiative process.
The end result is that the only initiatives that will see the light of day are the ones rubber-stamped by city hall.
Opponents of Initiatives in Violation of Campaign Disclosure Laws
July 17, 2013 – Organizations opposing Envision Spokane’s Community Bill of Rights initiative and Spokane Moves to Amend the Constitution’s Fair and Clean Elections initiative have created an organization called the “Alliance for a Competitive Economy.”
Supporters for the Alliance are the very same corporate interests responsible for pulling in $500,000 – nearly all of it from outside corporate lobbyist organizations – to oppose the Community Bill of Rights in 2009 and 2011.
An official complaint has been filed with the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) by Envision Spokane on the following grounds:
- The Alliance for a Competitive Economy has failed to register as a political action committee.
- The Alliance for a Competitive Economy has failed to disclose who is funding the group and how it’s spending its money.
- The Alliance for a Competitive Economy has failed to disclose who founded the group.
The complaint was submitted to the PDC on Friday, July 12th.
The corporate fundraising against the Community Bill of Rights in 2009 and 2011 went mainly through three different political committees – Community Builders Trust, Jobs and Opportunity Benefiting Spokane, and Save Our Spokane.
Members of the Alliance for Competitive Economy are also plaintiffs in a pending legal challenge seeking to block the Community Bill of Rights and the Fair and Clean Elections ordinance from the November ballot. In 2011, the Community Bill of Rights received over 28,000 votes, a five hundred-vote swing from passage.
“It’s not surprising that the corporate powerbrokers in this community would ignore the rules,” says Kai Huschke, campaign manager for Envision Spokane. “They’ve owned this town for over 100 years and have no interest in allowing the people of this community more say on issues like their neighborhood, the river, or their workplace. They will use the courts and deep pockets to keep control, even if it’s not on the up and up.”
The Community Bill of Rights would empower neighborhood residents as decision-makers for certain major development proposals, provide greater legal protections for the Spokane River & aquifer, recognize constitutional rights for workers, and subordinate so-called “rights” claimed by corporations to community rights when they come into conflict.
Photo: “Spokane Falls” by Tracy Hunter
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Articles On Community Rights
- May 19 Part 2: Jordan Cove LNG Backers Spend Huge Money to Sway Tiny Oregon County Election
- May 2 Part 1: Oregon County Faces Gas Industry Funding, Lobbyists in Battle to Halt Jordan Cove LNG Project
- Jan 12 For Teachers and Citizens: How to Respond to Federal Immigration Raids
- Jan 5 How To Respond When Your (Local) Government Gets Sued By A Corporation
- May 25 Interview: The Working Class Movement Fighting for Local Authority
- Apr 29 Interview: Challenging Corporations’ ‘Right’ To Grow GMOs in Rural Oregon
- Nov 3 Cancer Clusters Spark Historic Pesticide Vote in Oregon
- Dec 8 The Devil In The Details of Local Law
- Dec 8 Don’t Tread On Us-A Message from Colorado
- Dec 8 Making Sense of Recent Legal History
- Dec 8 Where Push Is Coming To Shove, USA
- Nov 8 The First Big Win for the $15 Movement
- Nov 8 A Legal Definition for ‘Unsustainable Energy’?
- Oct 8 When The State Pushes Back
- Oct 8 This Crow Won’t Fly
- Oct 8 A New County Constitution
- Sep 8 Homeless Bills of Rights-New Narratives
- Sep 8 Colorado Anti-fracking Movement Heating Up!
- Sep 8 Local Initiative Process Gutted
- Aug 8 Obstacles to Asserting Rights
- Aug 8 Benton County, OR Moves Forward with Nation’s Potential First Food Bill of Rights
- Jul 8 Spokane Continues to Fight for the Right to Vote
- Jul 8 Foster Youth Bill of Rights, New Narratives
- Jul 8 Santa Monica Passes West Coast’s First Rights of Nature Ordinance
- Jun 8 Housing Justice: Fighting for Rights
- Jun 8 A Community Rights Ordinance For South Puget Sound
- Jun 8 County Government Writes History, Hydrocarbon Ban is First of its Kind
- Jun 8 Food Bills of Rights and Monsanto-Speech
- Jun 6 GM Wheat Discovered in Oregon, Benton County Continues Work on Food Bill of Rights
- May 8 Does Food Sovereignty Exist in the United States? Food and the Community Rights Movement
- May 8 Washington Community Action Network Talks Rights
- Apr 7 Under the Radar: How a Multinational Corporation Quietly Bought a County-Wide Election
- Apr 2 Day One of the Occupation of Detroit
- Mar 25 Crude Oil Trains Proposed for Grays Harbor, WA: Citizens Challenge Permitting Process
- Mar 18 Middle School Elevates its Rights above Corporations’
- Mar 12 What a Difference a Degree Makes
- Mar 2 The Story of Broadview Heights, Ohio
- Feb 17 Democracy Denied in Small Town, USA
- Feb 4 The View from Plymouth, NH
- Jan 27 Benton County’s Fight to Protect Our Seed Heritage: A Food Bill of Rights
- Jan 16 Fighting for the Right to a Sustainable Food System: Benton County, Oregon
- Jan 6 Rivers and Natural Ecosystems as Rights Bearing Subjects
- Dec 31 Case Study: The Community Right to Sustainable Energy
- Dec 24 Barnstead, NH: Establishing the Community Right to Water and Self-Governance
- Dec 19 New Section: Community Rights
- Sep 23 Changing ‘Fundemental Law’, a Case Study: Bellingham
- Mar 29 The Right to Self-Govern