By The Herald Editorial Board
Not all constitutional framers wear powdered wigs.
Assume that the attire will be mix of business attire and casual dress as members of Snohomish County Charter Review Commission begin meeting next year to review the county’s home-rule charter — the form of government used by Snohomish and six other counties in Washington state — and suggest amendments to that document.
The state constitution provides as a default a commission form of county government, but allows counties to adopt the “home rule” form if approved by voters. Snohomish County voters established such a government in 1980 and have periodically elected commissions to review that charter and consider and propose changes to be placed before voters for adoption.
For Snohomish County, the charter review commission convenes every 10 years and includes eight elected and appointed county officials and 15 elected members, three from each of the five county council districts.
Along with city council, county council, school board and other races, voters will be able to select up to three members from the list of several candidates for their county council district. Many of those running are past or current public officials, past or current candidates for local office and others active in their communities.
The editorial board is not endorsing candidates for the commission, but advises voters to consult the county voter’s pamphlet to be mailed along with ballots next week but also available online now at tinyurl.com/SnoCoVotersGuide2025.
Most candidates have outlined their relevant experience, why they are seeking to serve on the charter review commission, their overall priorities and even some charter amendment suggestions they’d like to see proposed.
But what’s the function of a charter review commission and the charter itself?
“The charter is actually the Snohomish County constitution, if you will,” said Karen Crowley, president of the League of Women Voters of Snohomish County, during an online discussion this week regarding the panel’s work. “And that charter describes how the county is to be governed and organized.”
But that constitution also allows for amendments that meet the county’s current needs and preferences. The county’s constitution, Crowley noted, isn’t meant to be static and is open to review and improvements.
In the last review in 2016, that commission proposed seven amendments to the voters, covering issues such as officially enshrining a human rights commission in the charter, a public ombuds position, a county nondiscrimination policy, requirements for more county meetings and hearings, revisions to how the county executive makes appointments and revisions to how council district boundaries are drawn; all of which voters adopted. Only one amendment — which would have removed the county council from its role in reviewing some hearing examiner decisions in favor of sending such matters to the county Superior Court — was defeated by voters.
Carin Chase, who serves on the Edmonds School Board, also served on the charter review commission 10 years ago and noted that its work of review and proposal of amendments was left to the commission members to determine and not a rubber-stamp of previously drafted proposals.
“In 2016 we set up a multi-step tiered process for reviewing items, decided how we wanted to advance them for further analysis, and then how to finally turn them into proposals,” she said. “The new commission that’s going to be coming in January can decide their own process, depending on what seems right for them to adopt at the time.”
There also was a commitment to a public process as well as collaboration among commission members.
“We had a lot of different viewpoints and people coming from different spaces, but we made a real effort to be collaborative and respectful. And it was intentional on every person in that commission to do that and be really representative of what they were bringing forward from their community,” Chase said.
Not every proposal made it before voters. Originally, Chase said, the commission considered some 42 proposed amendments before whittling them down to the seven that were placed before voters; amendments had to have support from at least eight members to move forward.
The amendments varied from basic housekeeping suggestions, such as moving the responsibility of animal control to the sheriff’s office, to more fundamental ideas, such as lowing the age for serving in county office from 21 to 18 and expanding the size of the county council to seven members from five.
One suggestion that is likely to be considered by the commission next year is a move to ranked-choice voting for at least some county offices. Ranked-choice allows voters to select more than one candidate, ranking their preferences among those listed on the ballot. Seattle voters approved a ballot measure in 2022 that uses ranked-choice voting in its primary elections for city offices, including mayor, city council and city attorney.
While the commission terms are for one year, much of the charter review commission’s work is compressed into the first half of the year, with proposed amendments due to the auditor’s office prior to the August primary election, said County Auditor Garth Fell, who participated in the league forum.
“If they’re going to try to hit that year for ballot measures, really the work has to be done in those first six to seven months,” he said.
While the commission’s members will determine what measures are placed before voters, the real persuasion remains with county residents, who are able through their participation in the commission’s meetings to set the agenda, Chase said.
The amendments that appeared on the ballot in 2016, Chase said, had substantial public support, including the county’s human rights commission, which already existed but would have been sunsetted without the support to place it on the ballot.
“Enshrining it in the charter made it part of the governance of Snohomish County. So that was one thing that we’re actually really proud of,” she said.
Likewise, the changes to the county’s redistricting process passed with 75 percent support of voters. And amendments seeking additional meetings and changes to the county executive’s appointment process were adopted with 81 percent approval.
“Paying attention to what people are paying attention to, and showing the interest in these, I think, demonstrates that the commission was responsive to what the public was asking,” Chase said.
That responsiveness starts this election with voters’ choices for the charter review commission.
LWV Forum
To watch the forum on the Snohomish County Charter Review Commission, hosted by the League of Women Voters of Snohomish County, go to tinyurl.com/LWVSC-CharterReview. The site also offers forums for other races on the ballot.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
