Snohomish County voters face five charter amendments on Nov. 3 ballot

Snohomish County voters will decide on November 3 whether to adopt five amendments to the county charter.

The changes were drafted by a 15-member Charter Review Commission that operates on a ten-year cycle. The proposals address government services, budget reserves, election formats, financial data, and tax approval thresholds.

Key takeaways for voters include the following:

Proposition 1 requires the county to fund state-mandated services and key offices, such as the sheriff and prosecutor, before expanding discretionary programs. Proposition 2 mandates separate reserve funds for revenue fluctuations and emergencies, requiring four council votes to spend from them. Proposition 3 removes party designations from ballots for all elected county offices. Proposition 4 requires the county to provide searchable online data on contracts and expenditures. Proposition 5 raises the threshold for approving new councilmanic taxes from three votes to four, effective January 1, 2027.

The League of Women Voters of Snohomish County has asked voters to reject all five measures. The group argues the commission process lacked sufficient public input and that the new voting rules give minority factions veto power. Brenda Mann Harrison, the local League president, stated that public comment was limited to three minutes per speaker. She noted there was no mechanism for speakers to correct the record or engage with commissioners during deliberations.

The county’s Democratic Party also recommends a vote of no on all five propositions, though they cite different reasons than the League. In contrast, the county’s Republican Party supports a yes vote on every measure.

Commission Chair Mark James defended the process, stating the body held open meetings online and in person. He noted the deadline for submitting amendments was April 8, 2026. James said the rules mirrored those used by the County Council for public comment and hearings. The commission held three additional hearings in May and considered about 25 proposals. According to James, 11 of those submissions came from the public.

Four commissioners, Demi Chatters, Jennifer Gregerson, Amanda Dodd, and Robin McGee, issued a dissenting letter on May 27. They wrote that the public repeatedly sought meaningful opportunities to contribute but faced procedural barriers. The group argued that holding hearings did not equate to meaningful public consideration. James responded that disagreement within the commission did not indicate a flawed process. He said the commission transmitted only proposals that received required support, leaving the final decision to voters on November 3.

If voters approve an amendment, it generally takes effect 10 days after election results are certified. Cassie Fannin, a spokeswoman for the Snohomish County Council office, explained that the council has 180 days to enact any required implementation ordinances after that date. The council cannot edit the proposed amendments before placing them on the ballot. Fannin described the council’s role as administrative, involving the transmission of the proposals to the county auditor for the ballot rather than evaluating their merits.