A recent Spokane Valley budget meeting escalated into a significant governance debate as City Manager John Hohman criticized “council behaviors” linked to Councilmember Al Merkel’s alleged misconduct, while pointedly refusing to take questions from the dais, signaling deeper issues in local administration and the financial impact of ongoing internal disputes.
During a pivotal budget presentation for Spokane Valley’s 2026 fiscal year, City Manager John Hohman sparked a new wave of controversy by refusing to entertain questions from the council following a critical segment on “council behaviors.” This incident, reported by The Center Square, underscores a growing internal conflict that has plagued the city’s governance for the past two years, raising serious concerns about transparency, accountability, and the efficient use of public funds.
The presentation, which marked the fourth discussion on the upcoming budget, aimed to address a significant $2.5 million general fund deficit. While the finance team proposed adjustments to achieve a small surplus of $121,547, the city manager highlighted various challenges impacting the budget, from plateauing tax revenue to state policies and issues concerning street funding and homelessness. However, it was his focus on “council behavior” that commanded attention and revealed the depth of the internal strife.
Unpacking the “Council Behavior” Challenge
Hohman explicitly referred to “council behavior” as a “really big challenge,” detailing concerns such as “protecting city staff from hostile behavior,” “lack of compliance with city policies, state laws and the oath of office,” “disinformation,” and “distractions.” These criticisms were primarily directed at Councilmember Al Merkel, whose conduct has been a focal point of contention since his election in November 2023.
Prior to Merkel officially taking office, city staff had already labeled him a “volatile internal threat,” setting a precedent for the ongoing disputes. The core of the current conflict revolves around Merkel’s alleged violation of the state Public Records Act. He is accused of using personal social media accounts to discuss city business without archiving those posts, a critical requirement for public transparency.
The council took a drastic step earlier this year, voting to sue Councilmember Merkel after a probe found he “more likely than not” violated the Public Records Act. Hohman maintains that Merkel has refused to comply by handing over all his posts or using a page freezer. Conversely, Merkel argues that the city manager and his legal team continually “move the goalposts,” making compliance difficult.
The Escalating Financial and Operational Costs
The internal conflicts have tangible financial consequences for Spokane Valley taxpayers. In 2024 alone, the city reportedly spent an estimated $235,000 on Merkel-related issues, with the majority attributed to investigations into his social media use and conduct with staff. The financial commitment is set to continue, with the council amending the 2025 budget to allocate $350,000 for suing Merkel, and an additional $200,000 proposed for the 2026 budget.
Beyond the direct legal costs, Hohman also highlighted the significant staff time diverted to correcting “misinformation” circulating about council projects. This operational drain impacts productivity and shifts focus away from core city services. Hohman’s pointed suggestion to the dais—”If you want to cut out something in this budget, cut out the behaviors”—underscores the severity of the situation and its impact on the city’s financial health.
The Governance Implications of Refused Questions
The city manager’s refusal to answer questions during a public budget discussion immediately raised eyebrows and fueled the ongoing debate about transparency. While Hohman stated that council members would have future opportunities to ask questions, the immediate closure of discussion, confirmed by Mayor Pam Haley, prompted Councilmember Merkel to question the decision. Merkel referenced a prior understanding that he would be allowed to ask questions, a claim Councilmember Rod Higgins denied recalling.
This dynamic creates a chilling effect on public discourse and oversight, particularly when critical budget items are being reviewed. Merkel expressed concern that his ability to criticize budget items is being curtailed, especially with some council members facing reelection. He pointed out the substantial $40 million in city reserves, questioning why these funds aren’t being prioritized for new police hires and other public services, particularly after taxes were raised for such purposes.
The city’s own Spokane Valley Governance Manual states that a discussion can be ended if it “has become repetitive or repetitive of either past discussions or materials provided to Council and the public in advance” or “does not otherwise facilitate productive discussion.” While this policy exists, its application in such a high-stakes budget discussion, especially amidst allegations of misconduct, raises questions about its appropriate use and potential for stifling legitimate inquiry.
Broader Context: Transparency and Accountability in Local Government
The situation in Spokane Valley is not an isolated incident but reflects broader challenges faced by local governments concerning transparency, public records, and the conduct of elected officials. Internal disputes, especially those involving compliance with public records laws, can erode public trust and divert essential resources from community needs to legal battles. For citizens, these conflicts often translate into higher taxes, delayed services, and a sense of disenfranchisement.
Effective local governance relies on open communication, mutual respect among council members, and a steadfast commitment to public accountability. When these principles are undermined by “hostile behavior” or by the refusal to engage in open dialogue, the democratic process itself suffers. The ongoing saga in Spokane Valley serves as a stark reminder of the critical importance of clear ethical guidelines and robust mechanisms for resolving disputes within governmental bodies, ensuring that the focus remains on serving the community rather than internal power struggles.
As Spokane Valley moves towards its next public hearings on October 21 and November 25, leading up to the December budget adoption, the community will be watching closely to see how these deep-seated issues of governance, transparency, and fiscal responsibility are ultimately addressed.
