Snohomish Police Urge Residents to Stop 911 Over Petitioners

In a recent directive, the Snohomish Police Department asked residents not to dial 911 to report legal initiative petitioners gathering signatures outside stores like Fred Meyer and Safeway. Instead, the department emphasized that such activities often fall under First Amendment protections and may not warrant police intervention unless actual criminal behavior is involved.

The notice follows dozens of 911 calls with complaints ranging from allegations of trespassing to objections to the content of the initiatives themselves. One caller told dispatchers, “I don’t have patience for people who spout hate,” while another claimed signature gatherers were “collecting signatures without a permit” and obstructing sidewalks. However, officers inspecting the scene reported no violations of trespassing or traffic rules.

Snohomish PD records obtained by The Center Square show that the police, following guidance from the county prosecutor’s office, frequently decline to have petitioners removed from public areas unless their presence is disruptive or unlawful. In one case, an officer told a manager that signature gathering is a “constitutionally protected First Amendment right” and that petitioners could only be trespassed with a court order.

Prosecutor’s Office officials confirm that signature gathering is protected under both the Washington State Constitution and the federal First Amendment. While private businesses may limit soliciting on their property under certain conditions, police said such determinations are often best made by courts—not law enforcement.

Even incidents involving hostility have been handled with restraint. In one scene outside a Safeway location, a petitioner’s table was alleged to be overturned during an argument. When police arrived, the petitioner declined to press charges or solicit further enforcement.

As local elections and contentious policy issues drive increased public petition efforts, authorities highlight that law enforcement resources should be focused on genuine emergencies—not speech protected by constitutional law.

MORE STORIES