Soap Lake settles free speech lawsuit with councilmember

SOAP LAKE — Soap Lake has settled a lawsuit with councilmember Robert Brown regarding a city policy he believed violated his First Amendment right to free speech.

Soap Lake has agreed to pay Brown $1 in nominal fees, pay Brown’s attorney fees incurred over the course of the lawsuit to the tune of $7,667.87 and revise a city policy Brown claimed violates the First Amendment and the Washington Constitution, according to a stipulated consent decree provided to the Columbia Basin Herald by Brown’s attorney, George Ahrend.

Brown’s civil suit, which was initially filed in Grant County Superior Court and transferred to U.S. District Court in July, sought a declaratory judgment over a perceived violation of his right to free speech, claiming a city policy adopted in June 2014 violated his civil liberties.

Soap Lake City Council Rule of Procedure 2.7 details inter-councilmember communication and lays out a specific code of conduct regarding relations between the mayor and councilmembers.

“The relationship between the mayor and city council honors the fact that the mayor is the chief executive of the city. The council’s dealings with the mayor, whether in public or private, should respect the authority of the mayor in administrative matters,” reads the policy. “Disagreements should be expressed in policy terms, rather than in terms that question satisfaction with or support of the mayor.”

The policy states that any councilmember found to be in violation of the rules of council conduct will receive an admonition for a first violation of a particular rule, a reprimand for a second or third violation of the same rule, and removal from office via two-thirds majority council vote for a fourth violation of the same rule.

The policy was put into action in October 2015, after Brown and former councilmember Maynard Hagan sent a letter to Soap Lake residents on Oct. 13 urging them to vote out Mayor Raymond Gravelle, who was up for re-election in the November 2015 general election. The letter detailed grievances the two men had with some of Gravelle’s decision making.

Three days after the letter was sent, the council called an emergency council meeting and refuted the points Brown and Hagan made in their letter. Gravelle was present at the beginning of the meeting, but recused himself and left city hall before the agenda items were discussed, per the recommendation of legal counsel.

The council voted to censure Brown on the grounds of, “breaking public trust and abuse of council position and not abiding by Council Rules of Procedure 2.7,” reads the decree.

Gravelle was re-elected as mayor on Nov. 3, 2015 and a day later, during a regularly scheduled council meeting presided over by Gravelle, the council voted to rescind Brown’s reprimand. The council did not repeal or amend Rule 2.7.

“Mr. Brown contends that Rule 2.7 limits his freedom to act as a member of the city council and as a private citizen,” reads the decree. “Mr. Brown contends that he filed this lawsuit because he believed that he had no other way to address the constitutionality of Rule 2.7. He never sued his fellow city councilmember individually, nor has he ever sought damages against the city other than nominal damages in the amount of one dollar.”

The decree states the city, through councilmembers, will revise Rule 2.7 at the first council meeting in December and the council will not enforce or attempt to enforce Rule 2.7 until it has been revised.