This is a PBS election special, a debate featuring candidates for Spokane City Council.

Hello.

And thank you for joining us.

I'm Dana Haynes.

We are pleased to bring you this debate featuring the candidates running for Spokane City Council in District one.

District one covers northeast Spokane and much of downtown.

Let's go ahead and meet our candidates.

First, let's start with Jonathan Bingle.

Tell us a little bit about yourself, Jonathan.

Hey there.

I'm Jonathan Bingle, lifelong district one resident, Rogers graduate, business owner, and district one.

Husband to Christina, father to three beautiful children.

And I'm excited to be here.

I want to thank my opponent for being here.

I want to thank everybody for being here and giving us this opportunity.

But, you know, running for City council because I want Spokane to be the safest and cleanest city that it can be a place where we've got opportunity for our children and their children.

So thanks again for having us.

All right, Sarah, I'm Sarah Dixit, I'm running for Spokane City Council district one because I love Spokane, and I want to make sure my neighbors and community members can continue to afford to live here.

I'm a graduate of over at the university, which is where I learned the power of movements.

I have been an organizer and advocate in the region for reproductive rights for about ten years, and simultaneously fighting for rights for immigrants and lobbying at the city and state level for policies to protect our communities.

I am the chair of the city's equity subcommittee as well.

All right.

Thank you to both of you for this debate.

The candidates will answer questions from two Spokane journalists.

We've got Eliza Bellingham from the Spokane Public Radio and Canon Barnett from the Spokesman-Review.

Thanks for both of you for joining us.

Before we begin, though, here's a quick look at debate rules.

The panel can ask the same question to both candidates, or can direct a question to just one.

The panelists may request a follow up to an answer.

Candidates will have one minute for answers and are allowed two rebuttals for the entire debate.

Rebuttal length is limited to just 30s.

Let's begin.

Well, a coin flip determine that Jonathan will take the first question and that will come from cannon.

Yes.

So you guys are both markedly on opposite sides of the political spectrum.

Why should moderates vote for you.

Yeah.

No I appreciate the question.

So I think I do really well working across the aisle.

Literally every piece of legislation I've passed has been bipartisan and, you know, my my first legislative aid and I, Nicolette Tree, we actually met because I was at a protest on one side, she was counter protesting.

And, you know, she had posted a picture about me, you know, on, on social media and said, hey, this guy, you know, don't vote for him.

And I said, you know, I think I'm a pretty decent guy.

Let's go get some coffee.

And, we sat down and found out that we had a lot in common.

And I think that's what, you know, we need to remember oftentimes is that there are things we disagree about, but it they're they're very small in number.

The things that we disagree about.

And there's a lot of common ground.

And so working with folks who you might think are so much more different than you, you find out that there's a ton of common ground there.

And working off of that common ground, I think you can help establish long lasting policy that that will endure because it's not so Partizan.

And so, I think moderates should vote for me because I have a well documented history of being bipartisan.

I believe at the end of the day, we all want the same thing.

So whether that is community safety, whether that is a roof over our head, food to eat, clean air, clean water.

Those are all the same basic needs we all need.

And so I believe we just disagree on how to get there.

So the biggest thing for me is making sure we are collaborative and listening to one another because we all have our why.

And for me, a really great example was recently I participated in a town hall, and folks all across the political spectrum were there, and folks really express their, gratitude towards having an open forum like that where they can share their differences, share their struggles, and have someone sincerely listen and, just, like, approach them like a human being.

And I think I am someone who has been able to do that through organizing reproductive rights is not an easy thing to organize around.

And I've been able to bring people together to show why it's an issue that impacts all of us and not just some of us.

And I would love to bring that to council.

Jonathan, you're currently serving on City council.

And Sarah, you've been endorsed by setting members what would actually change in the city if you were elected or reelected?

Sarah.

Go ahead.

You first.

Perfect.

Yeah.

I think there is a misconception around, you know, the current makeup of city council and that I would just be, you know, one of many.

But I think district one is really unique and currently doesn't have someone like me representing it, nor do we have anyone on council who, you know, has my experience, has my background, myself being a young child of immigrants, making sure our youth is represented, and also someone who really deeply believes in this community and really loves it.

So for me, it would be more so how do I represent district one really well and making sure that our folks aren't getting left behind?

Because what we've heard at the doors is that people feel like there are things happening without their input or without their know.

And when I'm going door to door, it's really important to me to listen to folks and be able to share information with them about resources that the city has, but also ways that we can address the needs that they have that aren't being represented.

So I really just want to be that voice for people in my community.

Jonathan, same question.

With me on the council, there's obviously a differing, you know, worldview than the council majority.

And, what would be different if I were on theirs that we'd continue to have that strong advocacy for district one, obviously, being born and raised there, I understand the district better than than most.

And I know that I can I can elevate those, those voices in that space now with my candidate, you know, what would change it would it would really be nothing.

You would have a lot more of the same.

She's endorsed by the entire city council, endorsed by the current mayor.

And on top of that, you know, almost 60% of her money has come from, you know, outside of Spokane County.

And so if you're looking for somebody who is, rooted and invested in the area, and representing the area, then I'm going to be that guy.

And I think we need that differing viewpoint.

We need that diversity of thought on the council.

And I think it's really important that that counterpoint be brought forward.

And that's what I do.

Rebuttal.

Yeah.

Please.

I think it's a misconception around if you have lived here your whole life to be the best representative for the area, I chose Spokane to be my home, and I chose district one to be my home.

And I think that choice is really important for me.

It's a huge thing to be a part of this community, going to your neighborhood councils, going to community events, going to the Creative Arts District in Hilliard and being able to talk to people.

And the overwhelming majority of folks described that they don't know their current council members very well and they don't see them around.

So for me, that access and the accessibility is really what's important to me.

All right.

Moving to our third question from canon.

Yeah.

So downtown is often talked about as being dangerous.

But Northeast Spokane, which is a part of district one, has the deadliest gun violence in the city.

How will you address safety issues in your entire district?

Jonathan.

Yeah, I mean, safety throughout the district is incredibly important, right?

You know, I tried to, lobby the state, after one of, we had a young, teenage boy shot and killed, in my district, just about a year ago.

His nickname is goose.

There was the justice for goose campaign that I very much, supported.

And the problem is, is that the person who shot and killed that young man had already done a drive by at that same house, not but a few years earlier.

And for whatever reason, that person who already shot at the same house was on the streets.

That's the kind of stuff that has to stop.

If you want gun violence to go down, you put people committing gun violence away and you put them away for a long time.

That's not the kind of stuff where you should be able to be eligible for parole early.

When you're committing violent acts with dangerous, tools, with guns, you need to be put away and you need to be put away for a while.

The state unfortunately rejected that legislation that I co championed, with state representative, Jenny Graham and I hope that they take it up this year because it's a really important deal.

same to you Sarah solutely gun violence is a epidemic.

And it's a public health crisis that we're seeing throughout our nation, including our district one, and in downtown and in the northeast.

So for me, looking at the data, it's really important to implement measures that work.

So we know common sense gun laws are effective.

And I was supportive when council passed, regulations on having guns in public spaces like libraries and public transit.

So wanting to make sure we are aware of what the crisis is so that we could properly address it.

And I don't believe having more guns is going to make people safer.

I believe community safety is really around how we come together as a community.

So whether that's lighting and different traffic calming measures and other things that might contribute to people's safety and the feeling of safety, I think it has to be a robust response because there's no one size fits all solution to gun violence and to the issues that our communities are facing.

And safety is a huge concern.

I'm hearing at the doors.

So wanting to be intentional with how we respond so that some people aren't feeling left behind, but better lighting is not going to stop a drive by shooting.

It's just not okay.

The folks who are dying on the streets are dying at the hands of criminals who should be put away and put away for a long time.

Lighting doesn't help.

That better streets doesn't help that actually enforcing the law, actually making sure that people who commit criminal acts are held accountable, that will actually help.

Goose would be alive today.

Okay, if not for the fact that that person was let out when they never should have been let out.

Okay, we need to hold criminals accountable and that will help.

All right.

Moving on, Eliza.

Sarah, we'll start with you.

How would you close the multi-million dollar budget gap the city is facing?

Absolutely.

So what we're seeing right now with the $30 million budget deficit is a big improvement from the $25 million deficit we saw that we inherited from Mayor Woodward's administration, who supports my opponent.

And I think we need to be smarter with the dollars we have and making sure we are backing our spending with evidence based and data driven solutions.

So it's also important to not continually raise sales tax, because that is on the backs of working class spoken nights and people who simply cannot afford just another percent increase.

So we need to look at other options that the city has, whether that is a payroll tax, which is one of the levers we're allowed to use.

Property tax is also going to hit our communities hard.

So I wouldn't suggest that.

But ultimately we have to come up with a better solution with our state and advocate for progressive revenue options, because this is only going to get worse than it already is, worse than our state level.

So we have to act, because right now we have the most regressive tax code in the nation, one of the most.

And we have to do something that's actually a solution instead of, pinching pennies.

Jonathan, to you.

Yeah.

So our budget deficit is actually much worse than $13.5 million.

That's been said.

You know, we're going to have to stand up our own animal control soon.

We have our own, dispatch that we're going to have to set up soon.

There's a lot of relationships right now that are breaking down, and, I didn't hear a single cut that my my opponent has proposed.

We did a forum the other day, and her solution to it was to raise taxes.

And when you talk about an affordable Spokane, more taxes does not make things more affordable.

As a matter of fact, it makes it less affordable.

So what we need to be doing is taking a thorough look at the budget.

I have found $13.5 million in the budget.

Most of it comes from we spend a lot of money out of our general fund on homelessness services.

Houston is often looked at as like, this is the group to follow when it comes to addressing homelessness.

Houston spends $0 out of their general fund on homelessness, and they've been very successful in addressing that issue.

There's $5 million right there that we could, remove from the budget deficit.

And keep in mind, a sales tax was supported by, and championed by the person who's endorsed her, Mayor Brown.

And she says it's the most regressive.

We added $8 million in revenue last year on that alone.

Rebuttal.

Yes.

I think being honest and providing actual information is important.

So I haven't said I would support raising the tax like I just mentioned, I believe that we need to have evidence based solutions.

So when we're talking about removing, you know, the homeless budget from the general fund, our general fund is very different than Texas and Houston.

So we can't compare ourselves to a model that is vastly different than our own.

And so we need to make sure we are aware of that so that we're not comparing things that can actually help us.

All right.

And just a reminder, that was your last rebuttal for the debate.

All right.

Cannon has the next question.

So what purpose do local ordinances like safe and welcome in Spokane serve immigration policy is set by the federal government.

I think this is such a good question, and it's one of the reasons why I voted against Safe and welcome is because this is an area that is regulated almost solely by the federal government.

The city of Spokane does not have the ability to say, Ice, you can't come here.

Ice is going to do whatever they need to do, in their purview to keep the people safe.

So rather than passing, ordinances that give people a false sense of security, which is exactly what our police chief said at the time, police chief were appointed by Mayor Brown and this current council majority.

Chief Hall said that it is not going to protect anybody.

It's going to provide a false sense of security.

And so unfortunately, with the safe and welcome acted, is it actually provided again, a space where people might think that they're safe and they're actually not.

If we truly want Spokane to be safe and welcome, what we should be doing is, again, cracking down on drug use, making sure criminals are held accountable.

And then it's not just for a a segment of the population, but for the entire population that we can actually be safe and welcome.

Then maybe we start seeing our tourists wanting to go downtown again.

Then maybe our families want to start going downtown again and enjoying the beautiful parks.

The district one, has to offer, like Riverfront Park and like our river.

Absolutely.

I think it's really important to listen when immigrants are sharing that they're scared.

And so I think safe and welcome was a compromise type ordinance because we couldn't do quite a robust thing because we know that there's a different supremacy when it comes to your federal government and our state government and our local one.

So I think for me, it was really important for myself as a child of immigrants to advocate for safe and welcome.

And I testified on behalf of it asking, because we have seen a huge impact for our immigrant communities and seeing our neighbors disappeared when they're following the law.

And so whether it was Nueces rises with their tacos and tequila event downtown, which brings a ton of revenue to our city, them having to shut that down because they didn't feel safe.

That's important to pay attention to.

And we can't just assume that we can't do anything because we have to do something right.

And what the safe and welcome did is allow our law enforcement to also know to protect our people, right?

And be able to record if something like that is happening and be able to intervene if something unsafe is happening.

All Can I rebuttal last year?

Absolutely.

So I don't necessarily disagree that we have to do something, but the Safe and Welcome ordinance did nothing.

It is not going to help things that are going to help.

I wrote a letter to President Trump on behalf of the folks in my district who came here legally to say President Trump with you on the illegal immigration.

I'm glad that you're shutting that down.

But I have a lot of people in my district who came here legally and are struggling to work through the system to stay here legally.

Can we have some grace?

Is there a separate path that we can have for folks who are here legally and maybe overstayed their visa?

What can we do there?

Those are the kinds of things and advocacy that I bring that will be effective.

All right, Eliza, I believe you have the next question.

I do, and it's specifically for Sarah.

But Jonathan, you will get a chance to respond afterwards.

But Sarah, your opponent has criticized you for speaking publicly at a library event organized by, in part by the Communist Party of Eastern Washington.

What does Spokane have to learn, if anything, from communism?

Absolutely.

I don't think the event itself was about communism, so I'd want to correct that.

First and foremost, the event with a town hall hosted by members of our community, including the Communist Party, but also Democratic Socialists of America and Spokane Gonzaga's mutual aid club, the mass organization that's just that large in our community.

So it's more than just one political party or one organization.

And I think it's really important for me to show up to those things, because those are district one residents, and there are people who want to talk to me and want to know what my thoughts are about these issues that are pressing all of our communities, regardless of political party.

So for me, when I'm asked by community members to do a public forum that is open to everyone at our public library, I'm going to say yes.

So that is within my values.

And I'm glad I did it because we had people who are big proponents of my opponent, people who really support my platform.

Everyone was there, and I was able to have conversations with people in a really open and respectful manner, and that's what we need in this time of division.

Would you like to respond?

Yeah.

I don't think she answered.

What, you know, we can learn from communism.

So I'll I'll see what we can learn from communism.

I think what we can learn from communism is that, you can really quickly take away people's freedoms.

You can really take away quickly, take away people's futures.

You can really quickly take away people's livelihoods and their lives.

Communism is by far the most destructive ideology the world has ever known.

And for us to be associating ourselves with that sort of ideology is not representative of our district or of the United States.

And it is a problem for me that's a potential representative of our district.

Could be somebody who has a good relationship with the Communist Party.

I don't think it's good.

I don't think it's representative of the district, and I don't think we should be doing that.

right, cannon, you've got the next question.

Yes.

And this one is specifically for you, Jonathan.

So you are a son to missionary parents, and you've spent years as a Christian pastor.

And now you're a politician.

Separately, the U.S is seeing a rise in Christian nationalism.

How, if at all, should Christian beliefs inform spoken ordinances?

Yeah, it's a great question.

I think that, you know, my religion cannot be disqualified from the public square anymore than my opponents or anybody else's.

And, you know, obviously, the values that I bring come, you know, from a deeply tied respect that I have, for my God and for my religion and there are laws that are specific to Christians that are not for everybody.

And those are the things that that's where we draw the line.

You know, for example, we go to church every Sunday, okay?

We ties to our church.

We give to the poor.

Those are not things that should be mandated to the rest of the community because those are specific, you know, mandates to Christians, right?

We go out, we do missionary work.

We're not going to force everybody to do that because that's specific to us.

But don't murder.

Yeah, that's one that applies to everybody.

Don't steal.

Yes, that applies to everybody.

So when it comes to my religion, there are things that don't apply to everybody, but there are plenty that do apply to everybody.

Thank you.

And sir, do you have anything to to say to that.

Yeah, absolutely.

So I think it's a misconception that, my opponent doesn't have any extreme beliefs or that his ties to political parties are, not a big deal.

So I would say, you know, his connection with representative, former representative Matt Shea is a big deal.

And that was one in which, you know, he was removed and, was being investigated for being a violent Christian nationalist and having a biblical manifesto.

And I think that's really dangerous to our country right now.

And, you know, when I first met Jonathan, actually was when he was protesting outside of the clinic.

I worked at Planned Parenthood, and it was wildly unsafe.

And multiple patients, providers, staff members felt unsafe and we needed to be escorted to our cars.

And I believe that when your convictions are impeding on someone else's right to access health care or to be who you are or, just like be a person, that is a big problem to me.

And that is an issue that we are seeing in the nation All right.

Eliza, great.

The city is currently trying to rewrite its anti-camping laws.

How would you combat unlawful camping and ensure people are getting connected to services?

Sarah, we'll start with you.

Absolutely.

So we know that camping is illegal throughout our city.

So that is something that is already law.

So I don't think we need to continue doing redundant laws.

I think what we do need to do is enforcement, but what that enforcement needs to do is bring people to services.

So I am a proponent of the navigation center, making sure we are connecting people with the services that exist in a central location.

I'm not a proponent of, you know, people being incarcerated for being homeless because that is wildly ineffective and way more expensive, especially when our jail is already too full.

So if we are going to build a new jail, that's a huge tax on our members and that's simply not responsible fiscally.

And so I believe enforcement can look like the code deployment that we are seeing with social workers.

Having service teams go out to the people where they are, our scanner site model, all of those things are things that work and they're backed by data.

So I would support those things.

Jonathan, either I appreciate my opponent saying she's pro enforcement.

That's the first time I've heard her on the campaign trail say that she's pro enforcement.

But one of the things that's important to know is that you can only enforce if you have the laws that are able to be enforced.

So she says that currently camping is illegal.

We have had the home ordinance for the last couple months right now, and it was such a dismal failure that the mayor and the council majority decided, we better get on this before the election.

And we've had 120 contacts on the Home ordinance, with folks who were, in, who are homeless.

And of the 120 we had, literally this is not an exaggeration, literally zero except help and go to services.

We also had zero, arrests.

So if you're going to have engagement, you must also have enforcement, but you can't have zero of both.

That's why we absolutely must have new laws.

Council Member Cathcart has a proposal that's coming forward soon.

It's a very good, proposal.

It will be a bipartisan effort that comes forward.

We absolutely must have it.

Because what is working outside is clearly not working.

And anybody with eyes can see it.

All right, cannon, you have the next question.

Yes.

So, Jonathan, to you first, how do you think that Spokane should ease the strain on jail capacity?

And address how much money the city is spending on jail beds?

Yeah.

I mean, that's a really good question.

So, one of the struggles that we're dealing with at the jail right now is staffing.

And that's outside of the city's control.

We do need to partner with the county, in whatever ways possible, to ensure that we have proper levels of staffing, because if you look at what we have at the downtown and at Guyger, we do have a fair amount of jail beds right now.

We just don't have, the staff to, to be able to support it.

So we need to do everything we can to partner with our, our, our governmental partners to ensure that folks, when they are committing a criminal act, we do have a place to take them, because the question that we must always answer is, where will they go?

Right.

And, there must be a place for them to go now.

Spokane's jail was built before I was born, and, it was small then.

We absolutely do need a new jail.

And I would support a new jail measure.

And I know that that's what the safe, task force is working out right now.

So I look forward to their conclusions, because we absolutely do need to do something, to update the jail, make it better, and have spaces where folks who are in crisis.

Maybe there's, a space for them to go as well, instead of getting arrested.

Thank you.

And, Sarah, the same question to you.

Absolutely.

I believe that our jail does need to be renovated because right now it is inhumane the way we are treating people in our community and by you know, an example that comes to mind where my friends and community members that a lot of people know when they were arrested on June 11th for protesting and using their freedom of speech, they were booked into that jail and they had to sleep on the floor.

And there were three people, two rooms, even more people, two rooms.

And all of them we're able to describe that and are, you know, currently dealing with the trauma of that.

So I don't believe that we have enough beds because clearly we don't.

And to increase capacity we have to look at who is being incarcerated currently.

So a lot of people are awaiting trial, people who shouldn't be incarcerated right now.

So how do we make sure that the people who are in our jail system are actually violent offenders or unsafe to the public?

And we know that currently the jail is extra, astronomically more expensive than it used to be.

All right.

This next question is going to be our last question.

And candidates, we just want to let you know that on this, because of time constraints, you'll have 30s to answer, with this last question.

Eliza.

Sarah, we'll start with you.

What do you see as the future of public transportation in the city?

I love our public transportation system here in Spokane, and I believe our star, progress is going really well with the city line working on the division bus rapid transit.

I love the city line.

I live near one, and I take it all the time.

I'm endorsed by Transportation and Washington Bike, so I definitely believe in multimodal transit.

So I believe we can, you know, I am supportive of the pounds, plan for reduced fare for people with low income.

And I believe we can even go a step further of making it faster, more reliable.

Jonathan.

Yeah, it's a great question.

I literally just came from riding with CEO Carl Ostrom and looking throughout the city and, and, the service that we're getting in in district one, district one has the highest need and the highest ridership.

Now, all the busses, all the systems that we have right now are just fine.

But there are portions of the district where busses can't go because either there's no roads or not enough ridership.

What we need is we need that last mile service.

We need some sort of ability to get to the folks who need to use it.

And so for that reason, I support more shuttles, maybe more on demand calls, maybe more, sharable, transportation.

Those are going to be the things that serve my district.

All right, well, time now for closing statements.

And, Jonathan, you will go first.

You have one minute.

Wonderful.

Well, again, I want to thank my opponent, Sarah.

I want to thank everybody for being here today.

You know, it is exciting to be able to participate in this process.

And again, I'm running because Spokane has some real challenges facing it, right?

When it comes to homelessness, drug use, crime, things like that throughout the city.

Those are reasons why I'm running, because I want my wife to feel comfortable going downtown without me.

I want her to want to take our children to our beautiful parks without having to worry about needles or foils or pipes or, you know, illicit activity that's happening in the bathrooms.

There's just so much to be done when it comes to public safety.

And, those are the things that I feel like I can really bring to the table.

I'm proud to be endorsed by our police officers, by our police guild.

I'm proud to be endorsed by our firefighters union, local 29.

I'm proud to be endorsed by the workers who are on the streets doing the work.

Local 270 asked me, I have had a great relationship with a lot of these folks.

I intend to build those relationships even further, to build a better, safer and more livable Spokane.

So thank you again, all for being here and for having me.

Sarah, now to your closing statement.

Absolutely.

I'm running for Spokane City Council because district one deserves progress.

Over the last four years, the incumbent has been ineffective and has not reflected our values.

He spent months campaigning for higher office and missing council and committee meetings, and has failed to bring meaningful policy wins to our district.

He has voted against renter protections, against immigrants and against queer folks and against workers in the trades.

He wants to replace our public transit system, actually with Uber.

I've spent a decade organizing in this community.

I know what it takes to enact policy wins that actually work and help people who need it most.

I'm committed to making Spokane a safe and affordable place to live.

I will be accountable and accessible.

I will prioritize community safety.

I will support making public transit more reliable.

I will be responsible with our tax dollars, prioritizing data driven strategies to improve on homelessness and substance use disorder.

I know that together we can build a brighter future for all, and I would be honored to have your vote.

All right.

Thank you Sarah.

Well, that will do it for this debate for Spokane City Council.

Our thanks to the district one candidates, Jonathan Bingle and Sarah Dixit, as well as our journalists Eliza Billingham and Canon Barnett.

Thank you for being here.

This and other CCP's debates are available for viewing any time@ksp.org.

From all of us here at CCP's PBS.

Thank you for watching.