Ruling lets Spokane split from county court

The Washington Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously upheld the city of Spokane’s right to withdraw its municipal court operation from Spokane County District Court, a decision that city officials say will give them leverage to improve court services such as the creation of a new “drug jail.”

Spokane County District Court judges had argued that if the city left the system, the district court should maintain cases already filed and the city should have to pay the court to handle them. They also said that they should have a say in any separation agreement.

But the Supreme Court disagreed on both counts in a 9-0 vote.

“We are very pleased,” said Dorothy Webster, the city’s negotiator on updating services in municipal court, which handles misdemeanors and civil infractions such as speeding tickets.

However, the earliest the withdrawal could happen is in about four years, said city leaders.

Former Mayor Jim West had sought the withdrawal in part to save money on judges’ salaries, but also to implement a new night court and a range of cost-saving sentencing options such as electronic home monitoring, Webster said.

One idea is to hire a private company to run a drug treatment program in lieu of jail sentencing, a proposal that Councilman Bob Apple has called a “drug jail,” which would have an added advantage of reducing jail crowding.

Spokane City Council members in the past have said they do not necessarily favor withdrawing from District Court as proposed by West, but they want to explore options for future court services. The city and county courts have been combined since the early 1960s.

District Court Presiding Judge Sara Derr said judges will work with the city to make that happen if the city moves for a separation.

“You hate to see a system that’s been working well for so many years change, but again, it’s not our choice,” Derr said.

She said many of the sentencing options advocated by the city are possible within the current court system. Since Spokane expressed a desire to split, Derr said judges have met some of their requests. For instance, the city now has input on which judges hear city cases.

Court and city leaders will meet Monday to discuss the impact of the decision, Derr said.

Voters in 1999 rejected a measure to create a separate municipal court.

Apple said any change in municipal court is likely to occur in stages, in part because the city does not have the money to build and operate a completely independent municipal court.

Councilman Brad Stark said he is eager to look for cost savings in the criminal justice system, an opinion echoed by Mayor Dennis Hession.

“We’ve been studying this issue for a number of years. The time for action is now,” Stark said.

Hession said, “I think we need to initiate that conversation” on creating new municipal court services.

Thursday’s decision allows the city to start a new court on Jan. 1. But city leaders say they’ll need more time.

As a result, the withdrawal issue appears to be headed back to negotiations between the city council and county commissioners. State law requires the council members and county commissioners to reach an agreement prior to withdrawal, which can only occur on Jan. 1 following judicial elections. The city’s next opportunity to withdraw would be in 2011.

Derr expressed relief that the city does not plan to leave at the end of the year.

“A careful approach to the separation would benefit everybody,” Derr said.