Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey
Washington Referendum 27, State Timber Resources Board Measure (1946)
| Washington Referendum 27 | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
| Election date |
|
| Topic Administration of government and Forestry and timber |
|
| Status |
|
| Type Veto referendum |
Origin |
Washington Referendum 27 was on the ballot as a veto referendum in Washington on November 5, 1946. It was defeated.
A “yes” vote supported creating a State Timber Resource Board regulating timber harvesting from all state forest lands. |
A “no” vote opposed creating a State Timber Resource Board regulating timber harvesting from all state forest lands. |
Election results
|
Washington Referendum 27 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 107,731 | 20.34% | ||
|
|
422,026 | 79.66% | ||
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Referendum 27 was as follows:
| “ | An Act creating a State Timber Resources Board; making all sales of state timber and state grant forest lands subject to final approval by such Board; fixing qualifications of the Supervisor of Forestry; requiring him to exercise the powers, functions and duties relative to sales of state timber, reforestation, forestry policy, management and practice now exercised by the Board of State Land Commissioners, State Capitol Committee, State Forest Board, Commissioner of Public Lands and State Parks Committee; all of the purpose of centralizing state timber sales and management. | ” |
Full Text
The full text of this measure is available here.
Path to the ballot
In Washington, proponents needed to collect a number of signatures for a veto referendum.
See also
External links
Footnotes
 |
State of Washington Olympia (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
