Keith Swank might end his term early. This is the commission behind the decision
Thanks to the Pierce County Charter Review Commission, voters in the county will decide in November whether Pierce County Sheriff Keith Swank should keep his job in 2027.
Swank has been a controversial figure in the region, known for his brash comments on social media and public conflicts with other local leaders. The possibility of his removal prior to the end of his term appears to have struck a chord among Pierce County residents and readers of The News Tribune.
It also resulted in confusion from commenters online and in person at commission meetings, some of whom believed that the group had the authority to remove Swank from his position directly. Both members of the commission and the county charter itself confirmed that that’s not true – it’s Pierce County voters who will have the final say on the matter in the Nov. 3 general election.
So what is it that the commission can do?
The Washington state constitution dictates that counties can adopt their own governing procedures, in a document called a charter.
“It’s basically Pierce County’s constitution,” spokesperson Bryan Dominique told The News Tribune.
The commission is part of a charter-mandated process that takes place at least every 10 years to convene a 21-member, non-partisan body to review the document and determine “its adequacy and suitability.” It’s a group made up of unpaid elected officials who serve in office for no more than six months, according to the charter.
Crucial to the commission’s responsibilities is its charge to submit charter amendment proposals to the ballot. The commission is not responsible for making a final decision on whether to implement an amendment proposal – instead it is tasked with coming up with a list of amendment proposals and then asking Pierce County voters to decide.
“These are just regular folks taking time out of their lives to come in and do this charter-mandated process for us to make sure that our governing documents still meet the needs of the county,” Dominique said.
Pierce County Charter Review Commission vice chair Martha Lantz said the group accepted proposals from commissioners, county staff, elected officials and members of the public.
The Pierce County Charter Review process is slightly different from other similar processes that have happened in the region, she said. When the city of Tacoma’s charter review process took place in 2024, charter review commissioners sent their amendment proposals to the City Council. It was the council who was responsible for deciding what should end up on the ballot, not the commission.
“In the Pierce County charter, that ability to place directly on the ballot is given to this commission, but there they are proposals only,” Lantz told The News Tribune. “The ultimate decision as to whether to amend the charter to replace, repeal, add new language, of course, is done by a vote of the people in November.”
The commission spent over 90 hours in meetings over six months, Dominique said. It reviewed 57 amendment proposals, moved 20 to the final stage and advanced seven of those to the November ballot. The commission disbanded after June 30 – the end of its six-month lifespan, he said.
“I don’t think that was super clear to folks at the beginning, and I think it created a lot of anxiety around some of the stuff they were hearing,” Dominique said.
The Pierce County Council set aside $75,000 to cover the cost of the commission’s work, including listening sessions and in-district meetings with Pierce County residents, Dominique said. Though the county is tallying final costs, he estimated the total expenditures to come in between $60,000 to $65,000.
Lantz served on the commission during the last review effort in 2016. Her father was among the people who drafted the original Pierce County charter, she told The News Tribune.
Both Lantz and Dominique noted the high levels of community engagement in the charter review process this year, engagement levels that might have surpassed those in 2016. Public attention surrounding the process largely focused on the position of Pierce County sheriff. Swank called on his social media followers to show up to the meetings and speak in public comment.
Lantz said the 2016 process was a different time – attendees didn’t rely on the internet as much to get their information.
“I don’t think there was a marquee issue 10 years ago,” Lantz said.
