Lakewood staff present technical revisions to initiative and referendum code; council pushes for clarity on voter lists and signature checks

City attorneys presented a set of technical, non‑policy revisions to Lakewood’s initiative and referendum code at the City Council study session on June 1, saying the draft reorganizes and clarifies Chapter 2.52 while leaving substantive rules unchanged. Allison McKinney Brown of the city attorney’s office said the edits aim to "align the existing policies between the codes and correct legal errors." The presentation opened with a section‑by‑section walkthrough by Senior Assistant City Attorney Gus Schanke.

The staff presentation described standardized edits: capitalizing "City" when referring to Lakewood, removing the phrase "submission clause" where it does not apply, requiring a summary on petition forms, clarifying circulator affidavit requirements (including an age affirmation and a statement that circulators have read applicable law), and consolidating sufficiency, protest and final determination provisions to reduce confusion. "These revisions help streamline the section and make the process clearer for everyone," Schanke said.

Councilors pressed staff on a handful of policy points they want clarified before final action. Mayor Pro Tem asked whether the phrase "registered voters" in section 2.52.070 should explicitly include both active and inactive registered voters; Schanke replied that the city reads the current language to cover both but that adding explicit wording could reduce future confusion. "While it may not be necessary," Schanke said, "if the Council desires additional clarity, that's certainly something that could be placed in there." Several councilors agreed staff should codify current practice.

Councilors also raised questions about signature verification. Councilor Lowe and others said neighboring jurisdictions have performed signature verification that resulted in large numbers of invalidated petition signatures and asked whether Lakewood should add a verification step. Staff explained the city verifies signatures administratively, but municipal officials typically do not have routine access to the Secretary of State’s SCORE signature database outside of being the designated election official for an election. Schanke said, "If we went into that level of detail for signature verification, it would cause an issue, because it would be a requirement from our City Council but you would need to amend state statute to allow municipalities to have access to SCORE for petitions." He recommended the Council consider policy direction for whether to pursue changes that would allow SCORE-based verification or to adopt alternative local procedures.

The discussion also touched on ballot title procedures, petition filing timelines, and where warnings and affidavits must appear on petition pages, all of which staff said were reorganized for clarity and to match state law references in Title 31. Council members asked staff to provide a list of the outstanding policy questions raised at the session.

Next steps: Council gave staff direction to bring the revised ordinance to first reading in July and asked that staff circulate a compilation of the specific policy issues—such as explicit wording for "registered voters" and options for signature verification—so the council can consider them before first reading. The session included no formal vote on the ordinance draft.

The City Council adjourned at 8:27 p.m.; the matter is scheduled to return for first reading consideration in July.