EVERETT — Election officials in Snohomish County are getting ready to send out November ballots amid uncertainty over possible new federal rules regarding mail-in voting that, while currently in limbo, could go into effect on short notice.

A new proposal, that remains temporarily blocked as of Friday while the Supreme Court considers its legality, would require states to adopt new design standards for ballot envelopes and send lists of information about voters who will receive mail in ballots to the United State Postal Service.

Under the proposal, the Postal Service would scan individualized bar codes on the ballot envelopes through a screening process. If the exterior of a ballot didn’t match the information included in the new Postal Service lists — the names and addresses of voters getting ballots — the United States Postal Service would not deliver the ballot.

A Congressional report states that the new rules could increase operational costs for both the United States Postal Service and for local election officials, as the Postal Service would need to review the ballots and create the portal for local election officials to upload voter date. Counties and states may also have to redesign ballot envelopes and comply with the new postal procedures, the report states.

The new rules also don’t include procedures for individuals to appeal their exclusion from the list, if that occurs. And because access to the Postal Service lists will be limited to government officials, voters may not even be aware they’re excluded from the list until they don’t receive a ballot, the Congressional report states.

Ballots are set to be sent to Snohomish County voters starting Oct. 9.

Garth Fell, the Snohomish County Auditor who oversees the county’s elections, said local officials are watching developments in the case closely — the proposed rules have been halted multiple times by different courts in recent months — but remain focused on making sure the upcoming November election runs smoothly.

“I think our strategy and our posture is just to continue with business as usual until the rules change,” Fell said in an interview Thursday. “But it certainly does create a level of anxiety, trying to anticipate what that additional workload might look like if these rules were implemented. It could be somewhat of a distraction, but our team is doing a good job remaining focused on just executing the election based on the rules we have today.”

The new rules were proposed due to an executive order filed by President Donald Trump in March that called for the changes, like creating the voter lists and including bar codes on ballot envelopes, with the order stating that the rules would be “reducing the risk of fraud and protecting the integrity of Federal elections.”

There is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in the United States, and individual cases of fraud are exceedingly rare. In 2021, the Associated Press reviewed every potential case of voter fraud in six battleground states during the November 2020 election. The number of possible, not confirmed, cases of voter fraud amounted to fewer than 475, according to the AP’s report, out of the more than 25 million votes cast in those states during that election.

The Washington State Standard reported earlier this month that according to Secretary of State Steve Hobbs, Washington has only seen a total of five documented cases of voter fraud between 2008 and 2025, a period of time in which 90 million votes were cast. That’s a rate of about one in every 18 million votes. (The odds of winning a jackpot in the Washington lottery are about one in 7 million).

“We all want to make sure we have a perfect election,” Fell said Thursday. “I think working on coordinated solutions that are tested to actually address issues is the critical part here.”

Election fraud — like someone voting more than once, registering under two different names or making false declaration as to their qualifications to vote — is already a crime under state law. County auditors and prosecutors who see possible fraudulent voter registrations or vote tampering can file charges; in most cases, election fraud is a felony. And the Postal Service’s new rules are clear in stating that they will not try to alter the eligibility of anybody to vote under state or federal law, as the states will remain responsible for managing their voter rolls.

The question arises: how will adding bar codes on envelopes or creating a list of voters who receive mail-in ballots actually address voter fraud, uncommon as it is?

“I think that’s a great question for the Post Office and for the federal administration,” Fell said.

In a Sept. 4 statement, the Postal Service’s postmaster general, David Steiner, wrote that the list of individuals who are receiving mail-in ballots will be used by the USPS to verify its mailings, making sure that mailed ballots correspond to the lists provided by the states.

In a Postal Service document summarizing the rules and their effects, the agency wrote that the list of names “is in effect a manifest, and is primarily intended to assist election officials and law enforcement to understand who may have been mailed a ballot, in order to identify potentially anomalous incidents that may merit further investigation.”

To prepare for the possibility of the rule changes going into place, Snohomish County has already ordered envelopes that comply with the new requirements. They’re different from previous ballot envelope designs only in that they now include a unique bar code that the Postal Service would require. (The cost of printing the new ballots was within the range of other incidental costs that might come up in typical election years, Fell said).

“We anticipate that we will be able to use any back-stock of past ballot return envelopes for future state and local elections,” Fell wrote in an email Friday. “I suspect not all counties are in a similar situation and due to budget restrictions or envelope production timelines, may have a challenge getting compliant envelopes in time for the November 3 election, if required.”

Fell said that the role of county auditors is to implement the laws that are in effect at both the federal and state level. But he said that the uncertainty around some of the proposals — and how soon the government may ask states to implement them — causes concern.

“I think there’s some uncertainty just in who’s going to be responsible for the various steps, and then what happens if there is a mail piece that does not match with the list that’s been uploaded. Does that stop all the mail pieces from moving forward?” Fell said. “So I think some of the procedures and process around the implementation are a big concern.”

He’s not alone in having some worries over the proposed changes. In a press release, the Washington Secretary of State’s office, which has sued the federal administration over the new rules, wrote that the requirements would impose expensive costs on local election officials and require additional time for processing ballots.

“The rule is clearly designed to discourage and burden vote by mail,” the release read.

The Postal Service argues otherwise, stating that the rule would “strengthen public confidence while avoiding unnecessary obstacles” to delivering election mail reliably.

“Regardless of political party or perspective, we share a common goal: ensuring that Americans can have confidence that their election mail will be handled securely and delivered reliably should their election officials choose to use the mail for ballot delivery,” Steiner wrote.

Snohomish County is encouraging voters in the upcoming election to act early, Fell said. To make sure your vote gets counted, use one of the county’s 38 ballot drop boxes or put it in the mail with plenty of time in advance. If it’s within one week of the election, the county strongly recommends going to a post office and getting the ballot postmarked for free; that will ensure it’s eventually counted.

Will Geschke: 425-339-3443; william.geschke@heraldnet.com; X: @willgeschke.