Latest news with #RobChase
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
New Washington law keeps identifying information of whistleblowers private following investigation into Spokane Valley councilman
May 18—OLYMPIA — Washington lawmakers amended public disclosure law this year to require identifying information of accusers, complainants and witnesses in workplace discrimination or harassment cases be kept private and their voices altered in audio recordings. The legislation, introduced by Rep. Rob Chase, R-Spokane Valley, and signed by Gov. Bob Ferguson on Thursday, was written in response to what some Spokane Valley employees describe as targeted retaliation by City Councilman Al Merkel. Merkel has been bogged in controversy since taking office last year, largely due to a failure to get along with fellow council members and city staffers. Testy arguments have become a mainstay of council meetings as Merkel has repeatedly butted heads with the board and department heads over construction projects, grant applications and the complaints and investigations related to him. Last May, an independent investigator found Merkel repeatedly disrespected city staff, often engaging in "intimidating behavior." In one instance, he reportedly asked Mayor Pam Haley to stay after a council meeting to speak, and then stood between her and the door as he got in Haley's face and yelled at her, according to a city staffer who witnessed the event. Merkel has maintained the report cleared him of all "legal wrongdoing," apparently based on the investigator's determination that his behavior was the same towards city employees of all genders, ages and other protected classes. He argued city staff members did not like his "loud and direct" approach, that claims of harassment were "trumped up," and that his Latino heritage may contribute to how those in City Hall perceive him. City and board leaders say Merkel has continued to be disrespectful to staff following the investigation's findings, even after his office was moved from the dedicated office space for the council to the first floor of City Hall and the completion of a more than $40,000 remodel to the building to implement more separation and safety measures between Merkel and city staff. Merkel himself testified against the proposal as it worked through the Legislature. "Let's be real, this bill exists mainly to keep government actors from being held accountable," Merkel said. Merkle added that the city was attempting to silence him "because of the criticisms that I've laid at the city of Spokane Valley over tax waste." Merkel did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the new law Friday afternoon. As he testified before the House Government committee in February, Chase said the bill was "prompted by an incident, a specific situation that happened in the city of Spokane Valley." "My goal is to protect employees who are investigating workplace harassment," Chase said. Speaking before the Senate Government Committee, Chase said the bill "protects whistleblowers." "We need to have whistleblowers who go out on a limb to protect the Republic," Chase said. As he signed the legislation Thursday, Ferguson said the bill "prevents victims of workplace harassment from being revictimized by an abuser who may figure out their identity through a public records request." Ferguson noted that Washington has one of the strongest public records laws in the country, though there must be a balance "to make sure that we're protecting folks who are facing real challenges." "And their information should not be shared," Ferguson said. The bill exempts the redaction of names and job titles of elected officials. While the public records act previously required the names of complainants, accusers, and witnesses to be redacted, several Spokane Valley employees said that disclosing their contact information and job title made them easily identifiable in documents. "This is happening right now within the city of Spokane Valley," Spokane Valley City Attorney Kelly Konkright told the House government committee in February. He said a council member had used the Public Records Act "to target and publicly criticize city employees who honestly reported what they believed and witnessed was harassing behavior. This is discouraging the city's employees from reporting future misconduct." Stressing that she believes in open and transparent government, another public records employee told members of the committee that the city had received "many public records requests" from Merkel for all records related to an investigation into his conduct. "The council member, after receiving them, then posted comments and quotes from those interviews on social media, along with heckling the participants in those interviews," the employee said, adding that Merkel also posted the records on his campaign website with the identity of those interviewed, along with a review of the investigations. "It felt a lot like retaliation to those of us who had participated in interview processes, when it was never a political intent for us to go after this council member." The incident, the employee said, has left many city employees saying they will no longer come forward to testify in future investigations. Another city employee told the committee that the postings resulted in "distrust and resentment" toward Merkel. Candice Bock, director of government relations for the Association of Washington Cities, told the committee that the intent of the bill is to "make sure that the Public Records Act is not being used as a tool for retaliation against our folks who participate in an investigation." "The Public Records Act is to make sure that the public has access to our records," Brock said. "When we use it as a tool for retaliation, that creates a chilling effect on our employees and on our process." The bill passed in the Senate 48 to 1 and passed the House 92 to 5. It takes effect July 26. Editor's note: This article has been updated to correctly identify Spokane Valley City Attorney Kelly Konkright
Yahoo
08-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Autonomous in Oregon: A new spin on rural-urban divide
Pronghorn antelope roam near Rome in eastern Oregon. (Photo by Laura Tesler/Oregon Capital Chronicle) The idea of Greater Idaho — splitting off most of eastern Oregon to join with the state of Idaho — isn't going to fly. It won't happen. So here's another idea: The Autonomous Area of Eastern Oregon. And Western too, for good measure. This concept was not invented in the deep recesses of a pundit's mind. It comes from a recently introduced piece of legislation by a Republican lawmaker in the state of Washington. Washington has a regional dynamic similar to Oregon. The bulk of its population is west of the Cascades and as a region votes clearly Democratic, while the geographically larger but less populated territory to the east votes Republican — with all the correlating social and economic considerations that implies. Washington's east side hasn't organized a highly visible join-Idaho effort the way Oregon's has, but the proposal has surfaced occasionally. A related but different idea emerged in this year's Washington legislative session. Rep. Rob Chase, R-Spokane Valley in House Bill 2085 proposed keeping Washington state intact, and its congressional representation unchanged, but splitting most governing within the state. The bill described it this way: 'The legislature intends to divide the state into two autonomous regions, the Puget Sound region and the Columbia region, by constitutional amendment. Each region would provide regional governors, regional legislators, and regional judges. The state of Washington will remain a single state for purposes of federal election, as proposed in New York Senate Bill 2023-S3093.' Presumably, that would mean splitting the key regional elections (both autonomous areas would have governors and legislatures, for example) while both vote under a common system for federal offices. Laws and regulations and finances would be affected as well. Chase said of this, 'We would have better representation that takes into account the ideals, principles, priorities, beliefs, and values found in the populace that it serves. Isn't this what our Founding Fathers envisioned when establishing our Democratic Republic?' This approach isn't something familiar to American government: There are no formal 'autonomous regions' in the United States. They're more common in other parts of the globe, however, including the Caucasus, China and even a slice of Finland. Greenland, famously, is an autonomous region: Largely self-governing but under the national umbrella of Denmark. On an American state level it's an ambitious idea, but it may be within the purview of the state legislature. It probably would require a state constitutional amendment, but — because states do have some leeway in setting up their own governments — it might not require federal approval. If the legislature and voters approved, it probably (we'd have to see what the courts would say) could happen. The bill didn't go anywhere in the Washington legislature this year, nor should we expect any voter action. Chase said he introduced it now mainly to get a head start for a future push. But the Greater Idaho folks have no doubt heard of it, and the idea of a similar bill introduction in Salem may be floated soon if it hasn't been already. The process might even be simpler in Oregon: While Washington requires constitutional amendments to come from the legislature, Oregon allows them via citizen initiatives. So how might this play out in Oregon? Imagine the Greater Idaho group or some other organization petitioning for a constitutional amendment to be approved, or not, by the voters. This would have a considerable advantage over the kind of long-term and probably hopeless slog to change state boundaries. If structured carefully, the issue might be resolved in a single election through a change in the state constitution. If it passed, it would happen through the approval of the voters, which would give the idea powerful legitimacy statewide. Getting most Oregonians to vote in favor, of course, would be difficult. You'll also notice the reference to 'structured carefully.' Plenty of tricky issues would have to be addressed. We might be talking about three governors in Oregon, one for the whole state and one each for the east and the west. How do they relate to each other, and to the federal government, and what relative powers would they have? You could ask similar questions about the Legislature. Would there still be a statewide legislature, and if so, what could it and could it not do? What might be the differences in tax and spending? What about federal money coming to the state of Oregon: How would it be divided? How would law enforcement and safety agencies coordinate? If criminal and other laws were different (which would seem to be part of the point of having an autonomous region), what about extradition? What would be the authority of whatever remained of a statewide Oregon government, because there would have to be one if only to deal with other states and the feds. The autonomous idea is more complex than it first sounds. If Greater Idaho is watching the action across the Columbia, they may want to pay attention to how legislator Chase started to field the questions that are sure to multiply. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
