Court victory, empty pockets for group trying to preserve 2 newspapers

In a span of just nine days, the committee that says it speaks for the public in Seattle's long-running newspaper war:

• Won what was probably the biggest courtroom victory in its three-year history.

• Lost the support of the union that both spawned it and provided 80 percent of its money.

So what does the Committee for a Two-Newspaper Town do now?

King County Superior Court Judge Greg Canova opened the door last month for the group to pursue the claims it filed in 2003 against The Seattle Times Co. and The Hearst Corp., owner of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, in a campaign to keep the P-I open.

But without the backing of the Pacific Northwest Newspaper Guild, will the committee have the resources or the will?

Co-chairwoman Anne Bremner, a high-profile Seattle attorney, says the committee will solicit contributions from the community and press on in court with the struggle she characterizes as "David vs. Goliath — and Goliath."

There's been a new outpouring of support over the past week, she adds.

But former state Supreme Court Justice Phil Talmadge, Bremner's committee co-chairman until his resignation in November, says the upcoming court fight — if it happens — will cost the group much more than it has raised and spent so far.

The question the committee's leaders must answer now, he says, is this: "Do we have the wherewithal to perform significantly [in court], or is it something we should scale back?"

If money isn't forthcoming, Talmadge says, the citizens committee should consider a different strategy, centering not on the courtroom — its sole focus for most of its existence — but on mobilizing the public.

The Committee for a Two-Newspaper Town sprouted from a task force the Newspaper Guild established in late 2002, when rumors first began to circulate that The Times Co. was looking for a way out of its joint-operating agreement (JOA) with Hearst.

For the Guild, which represents news, advertising, circulation, marketing and composing workers at the two papers, those rumors raised fears of lost jobs.

Under the JOA, the P-I and The Times maintain separate news and editorial operations, but The Times handles business and production functions for both. It gets 60 percent, Hearst 40 percent of what remains after the non-news expenses of producing both papers are paid.

Rumors become reality

The Times made good on the rumors in April 2003, moving to trigger an escape clause in the contract that could lead to termination of the JOA, closure of the P-I or both.

The Times said it was losing money under the agreement, and that the expense of producing the smaller P-I had become a financial burden that threatened The Times' future.

Hearst, which maintains the P-I can't survive outside the JOA, filed suit against The Times Co., challenging the loss claims.

The Guild's JOA task force looked for a way for the union to get involved, have a voice, "put us in a position where we could actually do something," recalls P-I reporter Kery Murakami, who was the Guild's vice president and president around that time.

The task force's recommendation: Seek allies. Find others concerned about the possible loss of one of the papers.

Inspiration

That recommendation became the Committee for a Two-Newspaper Town. Its formation was inspired by a similar, union-backed citizens committee in Honolulu that played a part in 1999 and 2000 in saving the smaller of two papers there.

"It was a group that was concerned about losing one of the newspapers," Bremner says. "We need both of them."

Murakami took a one-month leave from the P-I in 2003 to help the two-newspaper committee get started. He says he filed the incorporation papers, wrote the bylaws, opened the bank account, raised money and recruited supporters.

The committee announced itself to the world at a news conference July 1, 2003, proclaiming the benefits to the community of editorial diversity and competition between the two newspapers.

Its list of supporters ultimately grew to a dozen organizations and more than 175 individuals. Among the best-represented constituencies: current and former journalists, neighborhood leaders, union officials and Democratic politicians, including U.S. Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Seattle, and former Gov. Mike Lowry.

"It really was a grass-roots beginning," Bremner says.

Talmadge says the committee unsuccessfully attempted to persuade then-Attorney General Christine Gregoire and the U.S. Justice Department to step into the Hearst-Times legal fight. Only when they declined, he says, did the committee decide to intervene itself.

Dmitri Iglitzin, who represents the Guild and other unions, acted as the committee's lawyer. It filed a breach-of-contract claim against The Times Co. that mirrored Hearst's.

It also filed a restraint-of-trade claim against both companies, challenging the constitutionality of a 1999 JOA amendment that, among other things, allows one paper to close but still receive a percentage of the survivor's profits until 2083.

Iglitzin had threatened, but never filed, a suit challenging that provision in 1999, when he represented the Teamsters, another union at the paper.

The committee's claims remained on hold while The Times and Hearst litigated one piece of their complex legal dispute all the way to the state Supreme Court. The justices ruled for The Times last June; during that long fight, the committee generally sided with Hearst.

Since the initial flurry of activity in 2003, the committee's activities have consisted mostly of filing legal briefs and presenting oral arguments to judges.

Talmadge says the small board met every 60 days or so, in person or by conference call, until last year, when legal proceedings entered a lull.

The committee has done little fundraising or public-involvement work over the past two years. Several people on its list of supporters say that, while they still back the committee's goals, they haven't been involved or heard much from it since the months after the kickoff.

"There might be a lot of activity," Lowry said earlier this month, "but I don't know of it."

Ref Lindmark, treasurer of the Green Lake Community Council, says his last contact with the committee was an e-mail about 18 months ago.

William Andersen, a University of Washington law professor who Bremner has said is on the committee's board, says he's had almost no contact with it since 2003.

"Dmitri pops into my office once a year and tells me what's up," Andersen says.

Bremner says the committee hasn't rallied the troops or asked for money because it hasn't needed to. "We've become active when it's been necessary," she says.

That need arose again in late March, when Hearst and The Times announced they had agreed to settle their remaining differences through binding arbitration, with no appeal. They asked Canova to put all legal proceedings on hold.

They also said they didn't want the committee involved in the closed-door arbitration, and threatened to back out of their agreement if Canova didn't give them what they wanted.

The committee fought back. Waiting to litigate its claims until the arbitration was done would be "a classic example of 'justice delayed is justice denied,' " Iglitzin argued.

On April 27, Canova agreed.

"We kind of feel like the mouse that roared," Bremner said.

She and Iglitzin said the committee would actively pursue its claims once it raised more money. Treasurer Liz Brown, the Guild's administrative officer, reported the committee had just $4,000 in the bank.

But Canova's ruling touched off a backlash against the committee among some Guild members at The Times, where some had questioned their union's involvement from the start. Some argued the committee's strategy could force The Times' local owners to sell to New York-based Hearst.

On May 6, the union voted to cut ties with the committee it had given birth to. The biggest impact was financial: More than 80 percent of the $37,000 the committee has raised has come from the Guild and its parent national union.

Iglitzin's continued involvement also is in question. He has said he now must decide whether he can represent both the committee and the Guild.

On Thursday, Hearst and The Times announced the arbitration would proceed even if the committee presses its case in court at the same time. Neither would discuss whether they plan to take any action in court to address the committee's claims.

"I think they want to see if we're going to have the resources to continue," Bremner says.

Task more difficult

She said before the Guild vote that a major fundraising push would be needed, even with Guild support. Raising enough now will be more difficult, she admits.

But since the Guild vote, Bremner says, people who signed up three years ago have called to restate support. Some have offered to host fundraising events or benefit concerts, she adds: "That's been very heartening. ... They [the two papers] think we're going to go away, but we're not."

A fundraising drive for the two-newspaper committee already has begun at the P-I, where many employees still support it.

"I think we still need to seek leverage to affect things," says Murakami, the former Guild president. But money is key, he adds: "That's going to drive a lot of these decisions."

Eric Pryne: 206-464-2231 or epryne@seattletimes.com