Snohomish County Charter Vote: Five Measures Split Party Committees

Snohomish County voters will decide on Nov. 3 whether to amend the county charter through five separate measures, a package of proposals that has drawn conflicting recommendations from local party committees and the League of Women Voters of Snohomish County.

The amendments were drafted by a 15-member Charter Review Commission that convenes once a decade to review the county's governing document. Proposition 1 would require the county to fund state-mandated services and designated offices, including the sheriff, prosecutor, courts, auditor and treasurer, before expanding discretionary programs.

Proposition 2 would establish separate reserve funds for revenue fluctuations and catastrophic emergencies, requiring at least four council votes to draw from either fund along with replenishment requirements and public reporting. Proposition 3 would strip party designations from ballots for county offices including County Council, County Executive and Prosecuting Attorney.

Proposition 4 would require the county, where reasonably practicable, to publish searchable and downloadable online information about county-funded contracts, grants, expenditures and recipients. Proposition 5 would raise the threshold for new councilmanic taxes, those the council can impose without a public vote, to four of five council votes beginning Jan. 1, 2027, up from a simple majority of three; existing taxes and renewals that do not raise the rate are excluded.

The county's Republican Party has recommended a yes vote on all five measures. The county's Democratic Party has recommended voting no on all five, citing different grounds than the League of Women Voters, which has also urged rejection of the full set.

League president Brenda Mann Harrison pointed to limits on public comment during the commission's proceedings. "Public comment was limited to three minutes per speaker before deliberations began. There was no mechanism to respond to commissioners' questions, correct the record, or engage with what commissioners were actually debating," Harrison said. The League's recommendation also cited what it called antidemocratic requirements in Propositions 2 and 5 that would give a minority of council members veto power.

Commission Chair Mark James said the body held open meetings online and in person and followed procedures similar to those used by the County Council. "The deadline for submitting or suggesting amendments was April 8, 2026. This process and the rules we followed mirrored the County Council rules related to public comment, hearings, and remote meetings," James said. He said the commission held three additional public hearings in May and reviewed about 25 proposals from commissioners, elected officials and members of the public, including 11 submissions from the public.

Four commissioners, Demi Chatters, Jennifer Gregerson, Amanda Dodd and Robin McGee, issued a dissenting letter on May 27 addressing the handling of public participation. "Throughout the review period, members of the public repeatedly sought meaningful opportunities to contribute to the development of charter amendments. However, these efforts were too often met with procedural barriers, limited consideration, or outright dismissal," the letter stated. James said disagreement within the 15-member commission did not mean the process was flawed.

The County Council did not evaluate the proposals before they reached the ballot. "The council's role was administrative: transmitting the proposed amendments to the county auditor for the ballot, not evaluating their merits or impacts," said Cassie Fannin, spokeswoman for the Snohomish County Council office. If voters approve an amendment, it generally takes effect 10 days after results are certified; where an implementation ordinance is required, the council has 180 days after the effective date to enact it.

The deadline for submitting or suggesting amendments was April 8, 2026.