Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Election Signatures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Charter commissioners debate signature thresholds; amendment to raise referendum threshold to 10% falls short of required votes
Summary
The Whatcom County Charter Review Commission debated changing signature thresholds for referendums and charter amendments; a proposal to switch the referendum signature reference to the last county executive election and to raise the required percentage from 8% to 10% received a roll-call vote of 9 yes, 4 no, 1 excused and 1 abstention and did not meet the commission’s stated 10-of-15 requirement.
The Whatcom County Charter Review Commission debated multiple proposed changes to signature requirements for referendums, initiatives and charter amendments, including whether to base signature thresholds on the last county executive election instead of the gubernatorial election and whether to adjust percentage thresholds.
A motion to change the referendum signature reference to the last county executive election and to increase the threshold from 8% to 10% was put to a roll-call vote. Commissioners recorded votes included Andrew Redding (yes), Jessica Ringstra (yes), Rod Stump (no), Andrew Wright (yes), David Hollis (yes) and Liz Darrow (yes). The tally reported in the transcript was 9 yes, 4 no, 1 excused, and 1 abstention. Commissioners noted the commission’s internal rule required 10 of 15 votes to pass that amendment; because the motion received nine affirmative votes it did not meet the stated 10-vote requirement.
Debate focused on the practical effect of each percentage. Commissioners and public commenters gave specific figures during discussion: under current practice tied to the gubernatorial race, an 8% referendum requirement equaled about 10,916 signatures; an initiative tied to that same reference was cited as roughly 6,004 signatures. Advocates for change said moving to a county-executive reference and 10% would reduce the raw signature requirement to about 7,990 — a level proponents argued was more attainable while still higher than the initiative threshold. Opponents cautioned the change could make it too easy to place a referendum on the ballot and pointed to historical signature-collection experience: the largest number of validated referendum signatures ever reported was 8,061.
Public commenters including Ashley Button — who described experience gathering almost 9,833 signatures for a recent petition — urged the commission to protect voters’ ability to bring measures forward while also considering guardrails to reduce frivolous or narrowly supported referendums. Commissioners debated whether to form a small committee to refine percentage proposals and whether to bifurcate the decisions (first choose the election reference, then set percentages) to avoid unintended outcomes.
Separately, commissioners discussed proposed amendment 13 (signature requirements for charter amendments). A motion to adopt the change of reference to the county executive was made so commissioners could later debate the precise percentage; no final vote on the percentage for charter amendments is recorded in the provided transcript.
What happened: the motion to change the referendum reference and raise the threshold to 10% recorded a vote of 9 yes, 4 no, 1 excused, and 1 abstention; because the commission indicated a 10-of-15 requirement for that amendment, the motion did not meet the required supermajority. Other related proposals (including final percentages for charter amendments) remained under discussion in the transcript and were not finally decided in the recorded excerpts.
