Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Election Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission rejects proposal to expand voters'‑pamphlet statements for charter candidates
Summary
The commission debated and then rejected a proposal to give charter review candidates the same statement length as other local candidates; the measure failed on roll call after discussion about cost, ballot crowding and whether the auditor can set the limit by administrative rule.
The Charter Review Commission considered and rejected a proposal to increase the word limit for county charter‑review candidates in the local voters’ pamphlet so they would have the same number of words as candidates for other local offices.
Commissioner John Muschler moved to send an amendment to the voters that would permit the same number of words for charter candidates as other candidates; Commissioner Joel Fitz Jordan seconded. Muschler said offering more space "elevates the significance and importance of what we do" and would let new candidates explain their background and priorities to voters.
Whatcom County Auditor Stacy Hindhorn told the commission the office could implement a higher word count administratively but that printing more pages has a cost. Hindhorn said the additional printing cost associated with tripling the charter candidate space would be about $14,500 every 10 years and that those costs are allocated to participating jurisdictions.
Opponents argued a larger local pamphlet could crowd voters and that the auditor already has statutory or administrative authority to set publication rules. Commissioners stated competing concerns: fairness for candidates, ballot clarity, taxpayer costs and the number of charter amendments the commission may present to voters. One commissioner said the county had tried a 100‑word limit in a prior cycle and found it restrictive; others argued concision helps voters.
After extended discussion, the commission voted by roll call and the motion failed. The clerk announced: "That motion fails, with 8 no's, 2 excused, and 4 yes's, 1 abstention." No subsequent motion to place a different wording limit on the charter itself passed at the meeting.
Next steps: The auditor indicated she could change local voters’ pamphlet administrative rules to increase candidate limits without a charter amendment. Commissioners who opposed placing the change on the ballot cited cost, ballot length and voter fatigue as reasons to leave the administrative rule in place rather than amend the charter.
