City of Sammamish Initiative and Referendum Advisory Question, Proposition 2 (April 2015)

Voting on elections and campaigns
Ballot measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Local Local voting laws Elections and campaigns Local term limits

An advisory question about the powers of initiative and referendum was on the ballot for Sammamish city voters in King County, Washington, on April 28, 2015. It was approved.

This measure was put on the ballot by the city council to ask voters if they wanted the power to establish new laws or put council-approved laws before voters for approval through signature petitions. Although this measure was a non-binding, advisory question only, it served as an indicator to city council about whether the voters wanted the powers of initiative and referendum. Since the question was approved, it urged the city council to draft legislation to establish this facet of direct democracy.

Aftermath

The city council scheduled a meeting for July 7, 2015, to review a draft of legislation designed to institute the powers of initiative and referendum. A following meeting for revisions and amendments was scheduled for July 14, 2015, with a final council vote on the resulting ordinance set for July 21, 2015.

Election results

Sammamish, Proposition 2
Result		Votes	Percentage
a Yes		3,830	55.46%
No		3,076	44.54%

Election results from King County Elections Office.

Text of measure

Ballot question

The question on the ballot:

“

The Sammamish City Council is calling for an advisory election whether to provide for the exercise of the powers of local initiative and referendum, to the extent provided by law. If provided, voters within the City would have the ability to initiate and enact certain types of legislation, and also to repeal or approve certain types of ordinances adopted by the City Council. Shall these powers of initiative and referendum be provided? For provision of powers of initiative and referendum Against provision of powers of initiative and referendum

”

Explanatory statement

The following explanatory statement was provided for Proposition 2:

“

Advisory Proposition No. 2 concerns the advisory ballot measure to provide to the registered voters of the City of Sammamish the powers of local initiative and referendum, to the extent provided by law. Under the power of local initiative, voters may directly initiate new legislation in Sammamish on certain topics through a petition process. New legislation on certain other topics is not subject to the power of local initiative. Under the power of local referendum, voters may approve or reject legislation previously adopted by the city council on certain topics through a petition process, before such legislation becomes effective. Legislation adopted by the city council on certain other topics is not subject to the power of local referendum. The results of Advisory Proposition No. 2 will inform the city council as to the desire of the voters regarding the powers of local initiative and referendum.

”

Full text

The full text of the resolution calling for Proposition 2 is available here.

Support

Citizens for Sammamish campaign image

Supporters

A group called Citizens for Sammamish pushed for the powers of initiative and referendum and for this advisory question allowing the voters to have a say on the issue.

The group started a Yes on Initiative/Referendum for Sammamish campaign to urge voters to approve Proposition 2. Harry Shedd, a member of Citizens for Sammamish, submitted the official argument in support of Proposition 2.

Arguments in favor

Shedd said, “About the only way we can express our interests is through these voting rights. It’s a matter of having it there. … We’d like it ready if we have a hot-button issue.”

Official arguments

Shedd submitted the following statement as the official argument in support of Proposition 2:

“	Washington State Constitution granted these voting rights to all citizens in 1912. This proposal would just extend these rights to city of Sammamish ordinances. Widespread voter participation results. 85% of King County citizens now have these voting rights, to include: Bellevue, Redmond, Issaquah, King County to our east. Used when Sammamish City Council either decides not to address an issue of great concern to Sammamish citizens or finds the matter way down on its agenda list. Also used to overturn pending legislation or existing legislation. Excellent methods for citizens to become involved in their city government. Often noted voter apathy is overcome by inclusion in the process. Exerts pressure on public officials to act in the best interest of Sammamish citizens. These rights show Direct Democracy at its best. Citizens should not be denied these Constitutional guarantees.	”
—Harry Shedd

Rebuttal to opposition

Shedd submitted the following statement as the official rebuttal to the argument against Proposition 2:

“	Same voters that elected the councilmembers would use these rights. Process is assisted not resisted. Not available in the past. Addition will clarify need in the future. What the citizens ask for they will pay for. Digital world affords instant information. Citizens are and will be well informed. 85% of King County citizens have these Constitutionally granted voting rights including Bellevue, Redmond, Issaquah, and east King County. Time to join with our neighbors.	”
—Harry Shedd

Editorials

• The Sammamish Review editorial board endorsed a "yes" vote on Proposition 2. An excerpt of the editorial is below:

“	This will give Sammamish citizens a right that has been in the state constitution since 1912. And it will allow them more of a voice in government than they have now. Vote yes on Advisory Proposition No. 2 — Powers of Local Initiative and Referendum.	”
—The 'Sammamish Review editorial board

Opposition

Opponents

Steve Teichler submitted the official argument against Proposition 2.

Arguments against

Official argument

Teichler submitted the following statement as the official argument in opposition to Proposition 2:

“	What problem are we trying to solve? Sammamish is the best-run city in the state. With the best finances, and a pay-as-you-go approach to building roads and parks. We’re building our Community and Aquatic Center with cash, not new taxes. City taxes have not gone up in five years, and won’t for at least another two years. We aren’t charged utility taxes. Sammamish has been named one of the best, safest, friendliest cities in America! We have a great representative democracy, with elections every two years. The pro side claims that most cities have initiative and referendum. That’s wrong. Big cities do. But 74% of the 191 “code” cities in our state, like Sammamish, including our neighbors Kirkland, Auburn and Snoqualmie, do not. The pro side argues that big outside special interest groups won’t care about Sammamish. Not true. Tim Eyman funded an initiative in Redmond. Outside money recently funded initiatives in Issaquah, Sequim, Blaine, Chelan, Shelton, and Mukilteo. They all failed; but local citizens were stuck with election and legal costs. Special interest groups? Big outside money? Misleading advertising? Poorly drafted laws? Unintended consequences? Unfunded mandates? We don’t need any of it. It’s not worth it. Vote no.	”
—Steve Teichler

Rebuttal to support

Teichler submitted the following statement as the official rebuttal to the argument in support of Proposition 2:

“	What problem are we trying to solve? Sammamish is the best-run city in the state. The pro side claims that most cities have initiative. 74% of “code” cities do not. The pro side argues that outside interests won’t care about Sammamish. Not true. Tim Eyman and outside interests funded initiatives in seven cities. All failed, but taxpayers paid legal costs. We have great representative democracy. It’s not worth it. We don’t need it. Vote no.	”
—Steve Teichler

Background

See: Laws governing local ballot measures in Washington

In Washington, First class charter cities have a mandated initiative process for charter amendments. A first class charter city may adopt initiative for ordinances, and all ten have done so.

Second class cities and towns do not have authority to adopt initiative.

Code cities, such as Sammamish, have authority to permit initiative. If a code city exercises that authority, the initiative process is set by state statute. As of February 2014, 46 code cities had elected to allow initiative.

The following code cities permitted initiative as of February 2014:

• Battle Ground
• Bellevue
• Blaine
• Bonney Lake
• Bothell
• Brier
• Burien
• Camas
• Chelan
• Cheney
• Clarkston
• Des Moines
• Edgewood
• Edmonds
• Ellensburg
• Federal Way
• Ferndale
• Goldendale
• Issaquah
• Kelso
• Kent
• Lake Forest Park
• Longview
• Lynnwood
• Mercer Island
• Mill Creek
• Monroe
• Mountlake Terrace
• Mukilteo
• North Bend
• Ocean Shores
• Olympia
• Rainier
• Raymond
• Redmond
• Renton
• Ridgefield
• SeaTac
• Sequim
• Shoreline
• Shelton
• Tukwila
• Tumwater
• Walla Walla
• Wenatchee
• Woodinville

Articles

• Ballot Law Update: Preemptive tampering and increased signature requirements fail
• The Tuesday Count: Local celebrities rumored to be involved in OH marijuana farms

See also

• Laws governing local ballot measures in Washington
• Local elections and campaigns on the ballot
• King County, Washington ballot measures
• April 28, 2015 ballot measures in Washington

External links

Suggest a link

• King County Elections Office website
• Citizens for Sammammish website and Yes for Initiative/Referendum Facebook page