Home rule process ends, freeholder election nullified

EPHRATA — Grant County's Proposition 1 failed in Tuesday's general election by a margin of more than two-to-one.

The proposition asked voters whether a group of 21 freeholders should convene to draft a Home Rule Charter for Grant County. Any charter drafted by freeholders would've been subject to a future public vote.

Election officials counted 14,998 ballots through Wednesday evening.

Tallies showed 9,111 people voted "no" to the proposition. Nearly one-third of voters, 4,459, said "yes." As many as three thousand ballots remain to be counted, but election officials don't expect the proposition's fate to change.

With a majority of "no" votes, the home rule charter process ends, rendering the freeholder election invalid. Seventy-one candidates vied for the 21 freeholder slots.

Ralph Kincaid, a spokesman for the citizen committee encouraging voters to say "yes" to the proposition, said he's not surprised by the defeat. He's not surprised by the wide margin, either.

"It's about what we expected," Kincaid said.

His committee was dubbed "A Citizen Review of County Government."

The voter education process was too difficult, he said, so the committee didn't expect the proposition to pass.

"Even the freeholders didn't understand (the charter process)," Kincaid said Wednesday.

"I heard one freeholder last night say, 'gosh I really believe we ought to increase the number of commissioners,' but he's against Prop. 1," Kincaid said. The only way to change the number of county commissioners, Kincaid pointed out, is through the Home Rule Charter process.

If the freeholders don't understand, he added, "How would the average voter understand?"

The Republican and Democratic parties opposed the initiative, he said, along with many incumbent county officials.

Kincaid, a Moses Lake real estate agent, predicted there'd be another attempt to review county government in the future.

A group dubbed "Voters for Council-Manager Form of Grant County Government," also lead by Kincaid, gathered the minimum number of petition signatures in August to ensure the freeholder election was placed on this year's ballot.

Glenn Chamberlain, spokesman for the committee opposing the proposition, said voters rejected the ballot measure because changes to county government would be expensive.

"It wasn't a proposition to review county government, like the proponents claimed, it was a proposition to change county government," Chamberlain said.

Chamberlain's committee, "Securing A Voice in Elections," or SAVE, was formed by Republican and Democratic party faithful in order to educate voters about the proposition.

In addition to cost drawbacks, Chamberlain said, the Home Rule Charter government introduces the initiative process to the county, similar to the state's government.

"Many of the counties that have (home rule) are just plagued with initiatives every election," Chamberlain said.

Six Washington counties adopted home rule, including: King, in 1968; Clallam, in 1976; Whatcom, in 1978; Pierce, in 1980; Snohomish, in 1980; and San Juan, in 2005. Home rule efforts were rejected by voters in the counties of Spokane, in 1997; Skamania, in 2001; and Clark, in 2002.