Elected leaders of Spokane County and the city of Spokane Valley have been feuding over everything from snow removal to law enforcement to sewage treatment, but now say there are signs their relationship is improving.

The spat hit a fevered pitch earlier this month when Spokane County Commissioner Mark Richard penned a guest column in the Spokane Valley News Herald, where he lambasted the Valley on several fronts. Spokane Valley Mayor Rich Munson minimizes the feud, saying the county is under a lot of budget pressures and needs to reorganize.

Contacted earlier this week, Richard says, "The community dialogue has not been healthy. It needs to be more positive and less critical."

Richard contends that the Spokane Valley City Council has been approaching its relationship with the county with "almost a sense of entitlement," and dealing with the county with a "chip on the shoulder."

He says he's also sensitive to "shots" some Valley leaders have taken at the county in the media.

For his part, Munson says, "Our ability to talk to each other has improved. There are a lot of good things happening."

Munson says the county's budget problems are likely the basis for some of the contention between the two sides.

"I think they are doing as good of a job as you can do," Munson says, adding that the city definitely is sympathetic to the county's difficulties, and acknowledges "they are working hard to resolve them."

Munson adds, "We carried county government for a long time, before we incorporated. But the tax dollars raised in the Valley weren't staying in the Valley. That's not the commissioners' fault. That's just the way it is."

Still, he says, the county hasn't been blameless. "We have been working hard to mend these fences since the snow removal contract was ended," Munson says. "I'm not real sure the county has done the same thing."

The mayor asserts that the county canceled its snow removal contract with the city "out of the blue."

Says Munson, "There's a right way and a wrong way to do things." He says the county did it the wrong way, by not working with the city to help provide a transition. The contract was called off in December and officially ends in October, and Munson says the city will be prepared to provide the service itself next winter.

Richard says the city violated the county's conditions for providing that service, including lowering service levels, and not fully reimbursing the county for the work done. "We're not looking for anything more than cost recovery," he says.

Still, Munson says he doesn't see a big relationship problem between the two governments.

"We just need to be aware there are differences and work them out," he says.

Richard, though, says the Valley City Council and senior staff need to develop a "better appreciation of the (type of) relationship" that Richard believes is appropriate between a city and a county. He says the city approaches the relationship between the two bodies expecting "special and separate treatment" because it is a large city.

"There are a number of issues where we have a disagreement," Richard says, adding that the city has the wrong "mindset."

"They are looking at it from a different perspective," he says.

One recent action by the Valley City Council—involving the new wastewater treatment plant the county is having built at the former stockyards in east Spokane—"is nothing short of mind blowing to me," the commissioner says.

Earlier this month, with construction on the plant under way, Spokane Valley was courting the city of Spokane seeking sewer service at a lower cost, Richard says. The problem is, Spokane Valley long had been expected to be the facility's biggest user of the plant, by far, he says.

"They wanted to make sure there was a quote-unquote 'backup plan,'" he says, but suggests the city really was "going after it because they wanted lower rates."

Taking such an action, at this point, puts the entire county, including the citizens of Spokane Valley, at financial risk, Richard says. And that action, taking place after the county took the political and financial risk to start the plant, was really surprising, he says.

"We carried a lot of weight on our shoulders for the city's benefit," he adds.

Last week, however, Valley leaders signaled a change in course, Richard says.

The City Council approved an interlocal agreement within which it agreed not to compete against the county's wastewater treatment plant.

Munson says the city agreed that as long as there were bonds issued to pay for the plant, it would not enter into use of any alternative to the plant, ensuring that money to pay off the bonds would flow.

The county will sell bonds to finance the facility. The interest rates on those bonds will be lower if the city supports the financing, design, construction, and operation of the facility, Munson says.

"Everybody wants to do the same thing," he says. "There were just a few relatively minor things we needed to iron out, as far as language (in the agreement). There's no major controversy here."

He says the city was looking at alternatives because it wanted to be ready in the event the county's new plant wasn't able to serve Spokane Valley.

"We're not trying to not support the plant," he says. "We're trying to protect our citizens."

The city was concerned the county wouldn't be able to secure the necessary permits to discharge treated wastewater into the Spokane River, Munson says, but says it now looks likely the county will get the permits it needs.

Richard says he's been disappointed by Spokane Valley's approach to other issues affecting both the city and county governments, including law-enforcement services and snow removal.

Since 2008, Richard says, Spokane Valley hasn't paid the billed amount for law-enforcement services the county has provided the city.

"They just simply began to withhold payment," he says.

The county billed the amount necessary to cover the costs, which have gone up, and began losing money when the city paid at the 2007 rate. The county only wants to recoup its costs on law-enforcement services, Richard says. The city believes it's not being billed correctly.

Says Munson, "The money had become an emotional issue."

The Valley City Council this month decided to pay up the amount billed by the county, to get that issue off the table, so discussions about how much the city should pay for law-enforcement services in the future can begin.

Munson believes the dispute will get resolved. "Both sides want to reorganize," he says. And the city is getting along well with the sheriff, he says.

Despite the rancor, Richard says communication between the city and the county has improved.

"We are very pleased to see they signed the interlocal agreement" on the wastewater treatment plant, Richard says. "That's a huge positive step. Things are improving slightly. My hope is they'll continue to improve. I hope they are seeing things a little differently."