Any public rumblings in the Spokane community that have racial bias at their core—or the appearance of intolerance—stand to stymie efforts to recruit more jobs and visitors to the Spokane market. For that reason and others, an immigration-status initiative currently slated to appear on a 2017 ballot shouldn’t be put to public vote. 

If it does make it to that future ballot, voters should reject it.  

Before we talk about the reasons for voting no, let’s talk about reasons that it shouldn’t be considered in the first place. 

The initiative would remove from the city code language about bias-free policing that states officers and other city employees can’t inquire about immigration status unless required by law or court order. 

Spokane resident Jackie Murray, who filed the petition for the initiative, now says she feels like anti-immigration group Respect Washington and Spokane City Councilman Mike Fagan tricked her into filing the petition. She asked the Spokane City Council not to move forward with the measure. 

On the advice of legal counsel, the Council felt it had no choice but to put the measure on a future ballot. Council President Ben Stuckart says he expects legal challenges of the initiative in the future, which could prevent the initiative from appearing on a ballot, but nothing is likely to happen until 2017. 

We don’t know anything about Murray’s relationship with Respect Washington, but her account should hold weight when the matter gets its day in court. 

If the measure does appear on a ballot, we hope Spokane’s voters strongly renounce it. The current municipal code doesn’t shackle police officers when doing their jobs, and a change in wording does nothing to improve public safety. 

Stuckart points out that the rules prohibiting officers from inquiring about immigrations status had been part of internal police department policy for about a decade, and it only became an issue when the City Council formalized it in October 2014 by adding it to the municipal code. 

He adds that referring to Spokane with the term “sanctuary city,” as some proponents of the misguided initiative say, is a misnomer, since true sanctuary cities, such as San Francisco, have laws in place that reach far beyond prohibiting immigration-status inquiries.

While the initiative stands to have little effect on public safety, it could have lasting effects on the Spokane community’s reputation. The Inland Northwest has had to combat images of racism in the not-so-distant past due to the prevalence of the Aryan Nations white supremacy group, primarily in North Idaho. Businesspeople who remember when that group was getting national publicity know that a reputation for intolerance isn’t an easy one to shed. 

The immigration initiative itself might not breed hate, and we’re not suggesting that it’s akin to the Aryan Nations operating a compound nearby. But it would send the wrong message about Spokane’s proven respect for diversity. That’s a step in the wrong direction—and a risk our community can’t afford.