Spokane City Council rebukes mayor for dodging approval of city attorney

More than a year after Lynden Smithson was named Spokane’s interim city attorney, the Spokane City Council says he remains in that position on an interim basis in violation of city law.

On Monday, the Spokane City Council voted 5-2 to approve a resolution rebuking Mayor Nadine Woodward for not putting forward an applicant for permanent City Attorney and requesting the state Auditor to investigate whether payments to Smithson were illegal. Councilmen Jonathan Bingle and Michael Catchart voted in opposition.

Woodward argues that the City Council majority, led by outgoing Council President Breean Beggs, backed her into a corner, first by attempting to wrest control over the city attorney away from her last year with Proposition 1, then by telling her she did not have the votes to get Smithson confirmed for the position. She also claims that the genesis for the latest fight between the Council and her administration was a personal grudge Beggs held against Smithson.

“This really is a personal issue between Council President and our interim city attorney,” she said in a July 5 interview.

According to the city charter, Spokane’s mayor has the power to appoint and remove the city attorney, but the appointment must be confirmed by the City Council. When someone is appointed to that position in an interim position, a permanent appointment must be presented to the City Council for approval within 30 days, according to city code. In any case, interim appointments expire after 180 days, unless the City Council approves a further 180 days .

City law also makes it clear that, without City Council approval, an administrative head cannot perform their duties or receive compensation, according to the resolution passed by the Council Monday. In a Tuesday interview, Woodward noted that the City Council has continued to approve payroll, including Smithson’s salary.

In May 2022, Woodward tapped Smithson, a longtime member of the City Prosecutor’s Office, to serve as interim City Attorney to replace the retiring Mike Ormsby. In the year since, Smithson has not been put forward for approval by the City Council.

In a resolution originally set for a vote on a June 29 special meeting of the City Council, Smithson was the only city employee called out for overstaying his interim status. That item was pulled off the agenda the day before, with Beggs saying the resolution needed to be reworked.

The resolution voted on Monday also pointed to the interim Innovation Technology Director, Michael Sloon, who has been the acting head of that department since Nov. 23, 2021. Beggs has said this modification was made so that, rather than singling out Smithson, the resolution was instead broadly calling out the mayor’s unilateral decision to keep administrators in interim positions without Council authorization.

“This is essentially a constitutional crisis between the legislative branch and the executive branch,” Councilman Zack Zappone said Monday.

Bingle, who said he does “also love the constitutionality argument” and agreed with the resolution in principle, disputed that Monday’s vote was more than a deliberate attempt to target Smithson.

“I have a hard time believing that we are actually trying to bring the entire city into compliance, but it feels very targeted towards one individual,” he said. “It seems like a nasty resolution directed at one particular person, and for that reason, I can’t support it.”

Councilwoman Karen Stratton said it was “unbelievable” that Woodward would have put Smithson in this position, arguing that past administrations have negotiated with the City Council to ensure that department heads could be legally appointed.

“That’s what I have seen throughout my period here,” she said. “This mayor, as far as I know, has never walked across the hall to talk to us about some of these appointments, and that to me is the rub.”

Cathcart, often an ally of the mayor, agreed that the administration should have been more proactively engaged with the council to get permanent hires approved within the required timeframe. But he also said it was inappropriate to force the mayor’s hand with less than six months left in her first term, noting that Spokane has historically not favored its mayors with a second term and arguing that shaking up the city administration could cause chaos.

“I don’t disagree that the communication piece is huge. And that’s something that’s a big part of this, no doubt about it,” he said Monday. “But at the same time, counsel has had the opportunity and the ability to take action long before this, and we have such a small timeframe left that I think the impacts to the city are very negative.”

On Tuesday, Woodward said she had wanted to wait to seek Council approval of Smithson or another candidate until after voters decided on Proposition 1, which could have given City Council greater authority over the selection and dismissal of the city attorney. After that proposition narrowly failed, Woodward said she wanted to wait until after the holidays, when the Council is often not holding meetings.

Beggs wanted the mayor to conduct a candidate search for the job before anyone was advanced for Council approval, Woodward said. According to the mayor, only one candidate applied: Smithson.

But Beggs indicated that Smithson still wouldn’t have the votes if Woodward put him forward, he confirmed in a brief interview Monday night.

“I didn’t think that she had the votes,” he said. “But she needs to talk to each council member herself.”

On Monday, Beggs declined to comment on why he would not have supported Smithson’s appointment, saying only that he had shared them with the mayor. During the interview on July 5, Woodward said she did not know what Beggs’ concerns were, and that they had never been brought to her.

During a follow-up interview Tuesday, Woodward said she could not clearly recall Beggs’ concerns with Smithson, only that he believed Smithson had shared confidential information improperly.

“I think maybe in that moment, he lost some trust,” Woodward said. “But I think it’s time to have conversations with some of the other council members to see if indeed, as Council President has told us on numerous occasions, that there aren’t enough votes.”

But Beggs argued that the mayor had still not fulfilled her obligations under city law, and that she could have nominated or appointed someone else to the interim position to restart the clock.

“If your premise is that you don’t have enough votes to confirm, so you will never seek Council confirmation, that doesn’t work under the charter or the ordinance,” he said.