EVERETT — The Edmonds and Lynnwood city councils approved resolutions this week opposing two state initiatives on the general election ballot.
Since July, nearly 20 cities have passed resolutions opposing IL26-001 and IL26-638, including Bothell and Mountlake Terrace.
The first initiative, IL26-001, would repeal part of the state’s parental rights law that was rewritten in 2025 to remove parental access to some school records, including school counseling and social work documents.
IL26-638 would ban transgender girls from competing in girls’ sports at K-12 schools across the state. Under the proposed language, children’s healthcare providers would have to confirm each child’s sex assigned at birth based on either their reproductive anatomy, genetic makeup or testosterone levels. Medical professionals have said that the verification process would go beyond what’s currently required for sports physicals.
Signature campaigns to put the two initiatives on the ballot were organized by Let’s Go Washington, a conservative political action committee founded by hedge fund manager Brian Heywood.
Under state law, local governments are allowed to pass resolutions supporting or opposing ballot measures as long as the public is given equal opportunity to provide an opposing view, such as during public comment or a public hearing.
On Tuesday in Edmonds, about 70 people filled the council chamber in anticipation of the public hearings. Nearly 30 community members spoke at the hearings, which lasted about 90 minutes. Most speakers were in favor of the resolutions to oppose the initiatives.
“There are over 8,000 students currently enrolled in schools within the city limits of Edmonds,” said Gabriella Lutz, a Snohomish County resident and field organizer for No Hate in Washington state. “This means that there are over 8,000 residents of your city that do not have the option to vote on ballot initiatives that will directly impact their lives. … It is absolutely city business to show the residents of your city that you stand with them in the face of harm.”
The push for Edmonds to oppose the initiatives began Oct. 6, when more than a dozen community members urged the council at a meeting to place a discussion on the agenda.
At the meeting, three council members voted in favor placing a discussion on the agenda. Four voted against, citing procedural reasons as the council had already approved the agenda earlier in the meeting.
“I want to emphasize the responsibility of the council,” Edmonds resident Leslie Brown said Tuesday. “Protecting our safety, our dignity, our privacy and our equal treatment of everyone in our community — you routinely address these things in everything you do. We are simply asking for your resolution and commitment as a united group representing our community.”
A few speakers Tuesday either supported the initiatives or said the city should not use its resources to take a position.
“It is inappropriate for the Edmonds City Council to assume authority over issues for which it has no accountability,” Edmonds resident David Barber said. “We, the citizens of Edmonds, have had ample opportunity to review these initiatives and are thoroughly capable of coming to our own positions.”
On Tuesday, the council voted 4-0 to pass both resolutions, with three council members abstaining. Council President Pro Tem Jenna Nand and council members Will Chen, Chris Eck and Susan Paine voted for the resolutions.
“If we claim that safety in our community is a high priority, if keeping our community members as safe as possible is a high priority, that means everyone,” Eck said. “We don’t get to pick and choose. If we have already vulnerable community members and those that love them coming to us, saying that this is something that will make them incredibly unsafe, as their city representatives, in my view, we have a responsibility to take a stand,” Eck said.
Council President Michelle Dotsch and council members Erika Barnett and Vivian Olson said they didn’t believe the city should be taking a stance on state issues without a set city policy. Dotsch had previously proposed that the city remain neutral on IL26-001 and IL26-638 until it created a policy regarding when to pass resolutions on state initiatives.
“This neutral position is the same standard taken by most of Washington state’s 281 cities and towns,” she said. “This is about declining to convert the city’s official voice into a campaign voice until a fully vetted and formal local guidance policy can be put in place.”
On Monday, the Lynnwood City Council voted unanimously to pass a resolution opposing both initiatives. About 10 community members spoke during public comment, most supporting the resolution.
“When members of an underrepresented community look to their local government and hear silence when their rights and identities are being publicly debated, that silence has an effect right here,” Lynnwood resident Charlette LeFevre said.
In September, council member Isabel Mata had tried to put a resolution on a future meeting agenda, but failed to get the required council support. On Oct. 12, she tried again, and two council members supported bringing a discussion to a meeting.
On Monday, some council members explained their reasoning for not supporting a discussion item. They said it didn’t have to do with the substance of the initiatives themselves. Council member Robert Leutwyler said he originally wasn’t sure if the city should involve itself in a resolution as it faces a significant budget deficit, and that he spent his own time opposing the initiatives.
“(The state initiatives are) such a waste of time,” he said. “We have the state pushing unfunded mandates on all cities, they’ve capped our ability to keep up with expenditures, every state is moving in the same direction of not being able to pay the bills. We want to let the kids play. We don’t have the money to keep up the parks. That’s where I think we should be spending our time, not trying to demonize and erase trans people.”
Jenna Peterson: 425-339-3486; jenna.peterson@heraldnet.com; X: @jennarpetersonn.
