(The Center Square) – A day after his peers decided to sue him, Councilmember Al Merkel sent a letter to the Spokane Valley City Council, stating his intent to seek full legal redress.
The letter follows a swath of drama and litigatory angst. The council continually warned that Merkel’s alleged violations of state law could cost taxpayers if someone brought a suit. However, council members were the ones who ultimately decided to sue, with one noting that it could cost $250,000.
While the lawsuit caught Merkel off guard on Tuesday, it wasn’t unexpected. One year into his first term, the official is regularly at odds with the rest of the dais. The litigation is supposed to make him comply with the Public Records Act. A hearing examiner recently found that Merkel “more likely than not” violated state law, but the defendant isn’t backing down.
“I am writing to formally document my repeated efforts to comply with the City’s ever-changing demands regarding my personal Nextdoor account,” Merkel wrote, regarding his activity on the social media platform, “as well as to express my firm belief that this entire matter is a politically motivated abuse of City resources and a clear violation of my civil rights.”
Mayor Pam Haley had city staff mute Merkel’s microphone on Tuesday after he failed to recuse himself from the discussion. Two Valley residents testified, one noting Merkel’s continued use of the social media platform Nextdoor despite the city stating he’s not in compliance with state law.
Resident Ben Lund said the refusal to comply is costing taxpayers. Like Haley, Lund called on Merkel’s supporters to donate to his defense, which the Valley won’t cover. The municipality’s insurance won’t cover it either, meaning the lawsuit will come at the taxpayer’s expense.
“It takes courage to do this; it takes courage to move forward,” Lund testified. “It’s going to take some money to do this, but we have to correct this behavior.”
Resident John Harding took a different stance, expressing his disappointment over the council’s decision to sue Merkel. He took issue with the city not informing residents beforehand since more supporters could have shown up had they done so.
“There has to be evidence of harm. You folks better think this through,” Harding testified. “You violated people’s civil rights here … I hope you have enjoyed this because it’s a shame.”
Merkel’s letter echoed Harding’s sentiment while also looping in City Manager John Hohman and City Attorney Kelly Konkright. He believes they violated his constitutional rights under the First and 14th amendments, for “selective enforcement and political discrimination.”
He has repeatedly claimed his peers want to silence him, but they deny it, citing his conduct. Still, Merkel argued that the examiner based the determination on no one testifying on his behalf, which he said was out of his control since he couldn’t subpoena witnesses.
Merkel said that, in his opinion, the council has threatened to sue him behind closed doors since he took office last year. Despite the hearing examiner’s conclusion, he called the lawsuit a political attack and continued to assert that his Nextdoor posts did not violate state law.
The defendant said he would seek full legal redress for attorney fees and damages resulting from the alleged civil rights violations and others “incurred due to this abuse of power.”
While Hohman and Konkright ran through a timeline showing Merkel’s alleged failure to comply with the city’s requests and state law, his letter paints a different picture. He maintained his innocence, but at this point, it’s now up to a judge to decide.
“The shifting demands, the City’s refusal to accept clear compliance at every turn, and the attempt to silence my speech all demonstrate that this is not about public records,” he wrote to the council and staff, “but about suppressing my voice. This is a waste of taxpayer dollars and a blatant abuse of City resources for political purposes.”