8 of 9 county charter amendments approved

Clark County voters said “yes” to eight of the nine proposed amendments placed on the Nov. 3 ballot by the county Charter Review Commission. Only amendment 26, which would have reduced the number of signatures needed for an initiative or mini-initiative to be placed on a ballot, failed to garner support. All but one of the charter amendments passed by voters will go into effect once the election results are certified. Amendment 19 Nearly 82 percent of voters on Nov. 3 approved this amendment that will allow county councilors to serve for three consecutive terms — a total of 12 years — before having to sit out a full term. Whether the amendment was needed has been debated as few, if any, councilors (or county commissioners prior to passage of the home rule charter) have served more than three consecutive terms. Seven of Washington’s 39 counties have a home rule charter, which includes Clark County, said Brandon Erickson, chair of the Charter Review Commission. Of the seven, four counties added provisions to their charters limiting term length for council members. One example is Pierce County, where councilors are limited to two consecutive terms. “The intent is that — if this passes — then next year we would look at a term limit amendment for the executive offices, which would be like auditor, clerk,” Erickson said. “It’s a two-step process. If the voters like term limits for the council, then the next step would be to pursue an amendment for the rest of the county offices.” Amendment 20 Sponsors for this amendment say moving up the county’s timeline to develop, present and adopt an annual budget will improve budget transparency. Preliminary election results show more than 70 percent of voters agree. In 2025, Clark County residents got their first look at the 2026 budget on Oct. 29 with final adoption by the county council on Dec. 2. The amendment moves the initial presentation of the budget from October to September and sets an earlier deadline for final adoption. “It doesn’t change the budgeting process. It just shifts the schedule to earlier in the year to allow for some of those more critical decision-making milestones to occur at a time when, hopefully, the public is able to pay more attention,” Erickson said. Amendment 21 Another amendment passing with nearly 70 percent of the voter is Amendment 21, which gives the county council co-authority with the county manager to nominate members to almost all of the county’s 30 volunteer advisory boards and commissions. Examples include the arts commission, bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee, commission on aging, clean water commission and parks board. However, the amendment would not apply to the county Ethics Review Commission. Currently, the council only nominates new or replacement members for the planning commission, historic preservation commission and Board of Equalization. Giving the council the additional authority will reduce staff workload and help ensure positions are kept filled, the amendment sponsors said. “The reality is that the current members of those boards and commissions are the ones who are really doing the interviewing and decision-making. Then they forward those recommendations to the county manager,” Erickson said. “This would not eliminate that process. It adds the ability of a county councilor to throw someone else’s name into the hat and let them be considered.” Amendment 22 Early results show more than 62 percent in favor of Amendment 22, which would allow nonpartisan county offices with only one or two candidates to be left off the primary ballot, just as other nonpartisan races are. Erickson said the same two candidates appearing on a primary and general election ballot can be confusing for voters, and Amendment 22 will help eliminate that confusion. He said the amendment will also mean some cost savings for the county for printing, postage and labor to process and count ballots during primary elections. Amendment 23 This amendment makes it mandatory for the county manager to deliver an annual report on the county’s overall fiscal and governmental health, and to make the report available to the public. The amendment has drawn widespread support from voters, with more than 86 percent voting in favor. Sponsors say the amendment creates clear requirements that strengthen government transparency and accountability and ensures residents can easily find this information. “Producing and publishing the report once per year requires a minimum level of oversight to our community without overburdening county employees,” co-sponsor Patrick Adigweme said. Adding it to the charter also ensures the reporting won’t depend on who is in office or on staff, he said. Amendment 24 Despite some vocal opposition, Amendment 24 still found support with nearly 65 percent of voters. The amendment requires an analysis of land supply and construction cost impacts before the county council adopts code changes. The amendment also requires all analysis work to be funded by the county’s general fund, rather than development-related charges, like permit, impact or mitigation fees. How the county will pay for this additional work presents a challenge as the county is already facing a budget deficit and increasing costs. In preparation for the 2027 budget process, County Manager Kathleen Otto included a 2.5 percent countywide cut to all departments funded by the general fund. “The intent was to put the council in a position to make a more informed vote,” Erickson said, adding that a similar amendment passed in Whatcom County last year. Amendment 25 Despite being one of the most contested amendments on the ballot, Amendment 25 still found support with just over 60 percent of voters. If passed, the county council will need a supermajority vote to create a new tax or approve a tax increase. While a supermajority vote requires a two-thirds or 66.67 percent vote of the council, the reality is that four of the five council members — 80 percent — will have to vote for the new tax or tax increase. Currently, a vote by three of the five county councilors, or 60 percent, is required to pass. “There is some discussion amongst some of the charter commissioners to look at expanding the council to seven (members). Should that happen, a supermajority then would be five out of seven,” Erickson said. If passed, Amendment 25 will go into effect on Jan. 1. Amendment 27 Another amendment with support from more than 60 percent of voters is Amendment 27, which allows the county council to conduct performance audits of the county’s programs and operations. It also requires the council to establish by ordinance the auditing process. Peter Silliman, who cosponsored the amendment, said performance audits ensure taxpayer funds are used in a responsible, transparent and efficient manner. He said this amendment doesn’t replace or duplicate the routine audits of county finances the auditor’s office already does; it adds to them.

Amendment 19

Related Stories