The discussion centered on how the passage or failure of the mayor’s tax increase could affect public safety around the city. Much of the conversation touched on the legitimacy of the proposal’s safeguards, determining when collection will stop and where the money will go. 

Last month, Brown proposed a sunset clause that would halt the tax collection within 10 years and a dedicated fund to ensure the revenue is used for community safety. The measures are legally binding but allow the city council to override the voter’s decision by repealing the safeguards.

“The ultimate guardrails here is that every other year, you get to elect new council members,” Brown said, “and you also get to be the ones that make the decision on this measure.”

Bingle attempted to add a sunset clause before sending the measure to the ballot, which would’ve removed the council’s ability to repeal it. However, the clause would also create a trigger that would’ve halted collection in the event of a successful jail measure. 

His solution to addressing crime downtown centers on increasing capacity at local detention facilities. Bingle supported a tax measure last November, which would’ve funded new detention facilities among other things, but it didn’t pass. 

Brown didn’t endorse the jail tax before taking office in January, and neither did former Mayor Nadine Woodward. Brown raised concerns about the need for behavioral health services in the plan and around the city’s ongoing financial commitment.

“It’s one thing to build new facilities, and we need them,” she said, “but it’s another thing to have an operating plan so the city knows how much it’s going to be paying for those jail beds, and we need the comprehensive mental and behavioral health support.”

The city would’ve received a portion of the jail measure’s revenue, more than it would generate through Brown’s proposed tax increase. Still, Brown noted a lack of safeguards ensuring that the county wouldn’t consider that revenue as the city’s contribution to operating the facilities.  

Bingle disagreed with her interpretation. He said if it had passed, Spokane would have already been receiving revenue it could use to hire dozens of officers over the next few years, build new police precincts and fire stations, and add more court commissioners and another judge, among other investments.  

“My plan as a council member does include a ballot measure going out to the public,” Bingle said. “Just this one right here will procedurally block us from being able to do so.”

State law allows counties and cities to adopt sales taxes not exceeding three-tenths of 1%. The county already collects one-tenth, and Brown wants to take another slice; if she’s successful, it means the county can’t push for a two-tenths of 1% jail tax without the city’s support. 

Brown reaffirmed that her sunset clause provides this legal reassurance, but Bingle questioned its legitimacy, considering the council’s majority could repeal it. He questioned how voters could trust these assurances when the council majority had already shot down the initial binding provisions.  

“Do you trust the people in charge of the money to do what they say they’re going to do with it?” Bingle asked voters. “Look at this council; we have a majority who have either signed pledges or openly talked about the need to defund the police, and now they’re telling you suddenly, oh no, we’re very pro-police, we’re very pro-public safety. I have my doubts.”