Cathcart proposes limiting Spokane City Council’s ability to draw its own districts

Pointing to concerns that last year’s process was improperly influenced by politics, Spokane City Councilman Michael Cathcart is proposing an amendment to the city’s charter that would limit the power of the council to determine how district boundaries are drawn.

“Having witnessed what went on in the fall, it’s clear, whether by accident or intention, the process is not working,” Cathcart said . “This is about instilling confidence in the election system.”

Among key provisions of the amendment is a requirement for the City Council to approve a map recommended by the volunteer redistricting advisory commission. If the council does not approve the map, the commission would be required to go back to the drawing board and present new maps until one had the support of a majority on council.

Specifically, council members would no longer be able to replace the advisory commission’s recommendation with their own map, as occurred last year when the City Council adopted a map drafted by Councilman Zack Zappone.

If a majority of the City Council agrees, the charter amendment would be put to the voters as a ballot proposition.

Current process, proposed changes

Every decade, Spokane redraws the boundaries of its three City Council districts to ensure each has roughly the same number of residents. In 2022, the city tasked three volunteers, appointed by the mayor and approved by the City Council, with drawing possible new maps.

Those three redistricting commission members – Rick Friedlander, Heather Beebe-Stevens and Jennifer Thomas – worked on maps through the summer and into the fall. Zappone and City Council President Breean Beggs served as nonvoting members.

The commission drafted more than a dozen maps, whittling them down until each had one they wanted to present to the public for additional feedback. The City Council had final say in what map to approve.

The city’s charter appears to state that only three maps would be presented, first to the public and later to the full City Council. However, questions have been raised about whether this rule applied, and a Spokane Superior Court judge recently called the charter unclear on this matter.

Zappone presented his own map, which brought the reliably left-leaning voters of Browne’s Addition into his district in exchange for a more politically mixed portion of the West Hills Neighborhood. Though the redistricting committee recommended a different map, which made the fewest changes to prior district boundaries, the City Council voted 4-2 in favor of Zappone’s map, drawing rebukes from conservatives and praise from liberals.

“It should not have happened that a council member had the ability to provide their own map, and that a majority of the council opted to adopt those changes instead of the commission’s recommendation,” Cathcart said.

Cathcart’s proposal has three key provisions. First, it would expand the redistricting commission from three members to seven, who would be nominated by the city Planning Commission. The mayor would appoint three members, one from each existing district, and the City Council would appoint three. Those six members would vote to appoint a nonvoting seventh member who would act as chairperson.

Second, the City Council could not replace the redistricting commission’s recommended map. If a council majority votes against the recommendation, it would be sent back to the commission, which would have to draft a new map. If no map could garner a majority support, the preexisting maps would be adopted automatically.

Finally, Cathcart’s charter amendment would create a process for local residents to request a redistricting process in the middle of the decennial. The City Council currently has the ability to call for redistricting in the middle of the decade, but has not exercised that power in the last two decades since the city charter was adopted.

Residents would be able to demand a redistricting process with a petition, which would require signatures from the equivalent of 1% of total voters in the last election.

Cathcart’s proposal will be first considered during a meeting of the City Council’s Finance and Administration Committee on Monday, and he hopes to put it before a vote of the council sometime in early May. It would take a majority vote of the City Council to put the amendment before voters.

In a brief Tuesday interview, Beggs expressed interest in the spirit of Cathcart’s proposal, though he questioned whether some of the particulars would pass legal muster. Particularly, Beggs pointed to the provision that, if the council didn’t agree to adopt new maps, old maps would be automatically readopted.

“I think under state law, that would be illegal,” he said.

In response, Cathcart said he had originally wanted the decision to go to the courts if the City Council could not come to an agreement, but was advised by city attorneys that was not possible.

“That was not my original intent, but city legal advised that would be our option,” he said.

Beggs also questioned whether Cathcart’s proposal would require a charter amendment.

Cathcart speculated that certain pieces could be adopted via city ordinance, but argued a charter amendment was necessary to holistically reform the redistricting process. It’s also a matter he would like to see voters weigh in on, he added.

“This is something that affects literally everyone living in the city, so for me, having that be something that the voters vote on adds a whole lot more weight to it,” he said.