State of new city a blend of hope, fear

Democracy has been likened to society being on a raft, each citizen having his own pole.

Movement is slow.

The direction uncertain.

In 1835, de Tocqueville was sent to America to observe and report back to the French government on what was going on in America. De Tocqueville wrote four volumes on Democracy in America. He wrote that his purpose was to learn what we have to fear or to hope for from democracy.

The democratic process brought a city to the Spokane Valley and now, true to de Tocqueville's approach, we must learn what we have to fear and what we have to hope for.

It seems only fair for me to reveal that I was part of the 49 percent who voted to remain unincorporated. I thought we had it pretty good. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, seemed to me to apply.

Could things be improved upon? You bet. Will things be any better? That remains to be seen.

What is clear is that 51 percent of my neighbors who voted felt that life would be better if we were our own city.

While I am tempted to call Sally Jackson and tell her that I will join in her crusade to disincorporate, I think that instead I will watch and, if a vote of the people is called for, I will vote, as I did when the issue was whether or not to incorporate.

Despite Shakespeare's classic observation that "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet," the name of our new city is, to me, very important.

I have lived in the Spokane Valley for approximately 50 years. I don't want to live in Opportunity. I don't want to live in Mirabeau. I don't want to live in Dishman. I want to live in Spokane Valley, even if it is a city rather than simply a place.

So that is issue No. 1, and that is how I would vote if a question about the city's name was on a ballot.

I have read in the newspaper that most of the members of our new Spokane Valley City Council favor contracting with the Spokane County Sheriff's Office to provide police protection. I agree. And of course we should stick with Spokane Valley Fire District.

Such questions and such answers make it a little difficult for a dissenter, such as me, to understand why the majority of voters said yes to a city in the Valley, but such are the ways of democracy.

One area of government in which I do hope that we adopt our own plan and establish our own policies is zoning, planning and building.

It is a difficult area in which neither Spokane County nor our neighboring city of Spokane have excelled. Hopefully, we can learn from their mistakes and pursue a program that allows for growth, that makes reasonable, lawful decisions and sticks to them and makes the hoops through which builders must jump a little larger and closer to the ground.

And finally there is the matter of money, which may be why many people voted for cityhood. It is my understanding that the Valley provided a substantial tax subsidy to the rest of the county. And it has always been thus.

Affluent people pay most of the taxes while poor people pay little and get much help from the government.

But no more will Spokane Valley support the poorer areas of the county. And while I will not object if my taxes go down (to my great surprise, if it happens) I am troubled that Spokane Valley, an area of relative affluence, will no longer help the rest of the county by paying for more services than it receives.

By becoming a city we may have lowered our cost of government services, but at the expense of our rural neighbors.

I hope that they are able to cope with the new situation that was thrust upon them, as I hope that we are able to cope with ours.

So, as we head into 2003, democracy in the Spokane Valley remains, as it was in the fledgling United States in 1835, a learning process, a blend of hope and fear.

Copyright 2003 Cowles Publishing Company
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved.