The Monologue: Seattle mayor Bruce Harrell ate pizza with King 5 reporters. The Interview: Tacoma PD union president Henry Betts explains why there's a sudden jump in youth violence (though, it's not sudden; it's just now being covered).The Monologue: Democrats are fighting against *white supremacy* with a new law. The Interview: Caleb Heimlich (WSRP chairman) says the party is suing to help save election security.LongForm: Minority Leader JT Wilcox breaks down whether or not a pursuit ban will be overturned, weighs in on the legislative privilege scam and Democrats' gun grab, and explains why egg prices are through the roof.Quick Hit: 'Rage applying' is the latest workplace trend. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
The Philadelphia Sixers are on a 16-4 stretch and you wouldn't know it. Instead, Doc Rivers is getting BOOd at home games as if this team is underachieving. I don't get it. #Sixers #76ers #NBA CALL OR TEXT THE 24/7 ANY TIME HOTLINE: (856) 442-9805 Support the channel: https://www.patreon.com/sportstalkwithbrodes SeatGeek Promo Code: BRODES This will save you $20 on your total purchase! Podcasts: Apple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/sports-talk-with-brodes/id1268899988 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/5yKG2JJe3bpoLiCL75d7Lt?si=5WrRXMiPRHKBvGSoTZVMVQ Google Podcast: https://play.google.com/music/m/I4ilhe3iu5enusddeqzboud3bcu?t=Sports_Talk_With_Brodes Anchor: https://anchor.fm/sportstalkwithbrodes GET A SHIRT! : https://www.teespring.com/brodesclothes Email: Brodes@BrodesMedia.com Twitter & Instagram: @Brodes81 and @BrodesMedia
Mike is back! James Harden's offense has been excellent since he's returned, and he saved the Sixers against Utah. We discuss Harden's offense, his defense, the Embiid/Harden two man game, whether trading Maxey can increase the Sixers title odds, Doc's obsession with Harrell and we return to the BBall Paul hoodie story. Also we've got a demand from Gregg Popovich. Get the new Coach Mike shirt here: https://cottonbureau.com/p/ZA5FDN/shirt/coach-mike Get the new I've Always Believed In Tobias Harris shirt here: https://cottonbureau.com/p/VJDNH7/shirt/ive-always-believed-in-tobias-harris The Rights To RIcky Sanchez is presented by Draft Kings Sportsbook Get your Big Barker dog bed at bigbarker.com/ricky Adam Ksebe is the official Realtor of The Process at 302-864-8643 LL Pavorsky Jewelers is where Rights To Ricky Sanchez listeners go and get engaged Get 25 % off Vans at Kinetic Skateboarding order with code RICKYVANS (through 1/15 only) --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/spike-eskin/message
Despite Miami Hurricanes verbal commit Cormani McClain trying to keep it a secret, he did in fact visit the Colorado Buffaloes over the weekend. It's been reported that McClain no-showed a visit from Miami coaches at Lakeland High School on Friday because he was on his way to Boulder to see Deion Sanders. If that report is true, has Miami already pulled his offer or moved on from McClain completely? Host Alex Donno shares the latest on the situation and explains how these situations have happened before, will happen again, and will become even more commonplace in the age of NIL. Miami has apparently pivoted to Georgia transfer CB Jaheim Singletary. Gaby Urrutia of Inside The U reported that Miami went over to Jacksonville after their stop in Lakeland in order to meet with Singletary in person in his hometown. The Hurricanes are expected to make an aggressive push for the former 5-star recruit. Meanwhile, Miami has hosted USC transfer WR Gary Bryant Jr. this weekend and we await feedback. Bryant is expected to take other visits and do his due diligence before making a final decision. Miami might have another WR target on the board, with South Florida native Tyler Harrell from Alabama hitting the portal. Harrell is a Columbus High School grad. Support Us By Supporting Our Sponsors! LinkedIn LinkedIn jobs helps you find the candidates you want to talk to, faster. Post your job for free at Linkedin.com/lockedoncollege Terms and conditions apply. Built Bar Built Bar is a protein bar that tastes like a candy bar. Go to builtbar.com and use promo code “LOCKEDON15,” and you'll get 15% off your next order. BetOnline BetOnline.net has you covered this season with more props, odds and lines than ever before. BetOnline – Where The Game Starts! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
The Sixers defeat the Pistons by a final score of 123-111. Today, we recap the game and break down everything important that you should take away from the game. The Sixers now sit at 24-15 on the season. Also, how serious is Joel Embiid's foot injury? #Sixers #joelembiid #jamesharden #tyresemaxey #docrivers #matissethybulle #montrezlharrell #tobiasharris #NBA #SixersNews #NBANews Philly Take with RB Merch Store: https://philly-take-with-rb.creator-spring.com/ Venmo: https://venmo.com/phillytakewithrb CashApp: https://cash.app/$phillytakewithrb Subscribe to Philly Take with RB on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZ6xo8_BSzZJVYfWEqEt1Gw INSTA: https://www.instagram.com/rbphillytake/ TWITTER: https://twitter.com/RBPhillyTake
1 hour and 51 minutes The Sponsors Thank you to Underground Printing for making this all possible. Rishi and Ryan have been our biggest supporters from the beginning. Check out their wide selection of officially licensed Michigan fan gear at their 3 store locations in Ann Arbor or learn about their custom apparel business at undergroundshirts.com. Our associate sponsors are: Peak Wealth Management, HomeSure Lending, Ann Arbor Elder Law, Michigan Law Grad, Human Element, The Phil Klein Insurance Group, Venue by 4M where we recorded this, TicketIQ! and The Nose Bleeds, which is the Sklars Bros' reboot of Cheap Seats on UFC Fight Pass. 1. TCU: Offense starts at 1:00 Michigan overly punished for mistakes, which drowns out the game: there were four events in this game worth more than a TD and they all happened to Michigan. Like 2010 Illinois but with stakes. Most unforgiveable thing was not making JJ's legs part of the offense. TCU's approach was so aggressive Michigan couldn't comprehend it, since they didn't back off after Michigan burned them with it. JJ had a great game except for his two worst throws of his career. TCU DE/DTs held up well, can't be too mad since they surged the 2nd half and should have scored 60 points (in 18 drives). OL got turned around—some of the running game explosives were there but had mistakes. Why would you play into their hands with inside zone? 2. TCU: Defense starts at 38:38 Probably could have gotten away with the Cover Zero if Turner just doesn't miss that tackle. Shallow screen for two TDs, one is a hat tip, the other a blitz tip. Defending their normal pass game was fine otherwise. Morris was not healthy, Smith had a bad game—devastating that he turned down the 3rd and 2 sack that was there for him because next play is Green blitzes and Quinten Johnson is not covering his guy. Why was Cam Goode in for that drive, which was two huge plays in a row. Defensive end discussion had—Morris barely played, McGregor is a true freshman from the waist down, Harrell had one of his worst games, Upshaw had his worst game, Okie had a bad game. Colson two excellent plays, several terrible plays, next year not so Mouton. 3. Hot Takes, Special Teams, Game Theory, Plus Harbaugh and NCAA "Violations" starts at 1:04:05 The Pax Specialistica has come to an end, but ends with a 59-yard field goal. Thanks to TCU for "freezing" him so he got a practice shot. Harbaugh's late timeouts? You should probably use them early because the most they're going to save is 40 seconds. Smart of TCU to take a PI call there instead of allowing the catch. Refs: Insane to overturn a clear touchdown, refs also put that drive two yards back because they forgot with 49-yard-line it happened on. Seth thinks the targeting call was correct. See: https://twitter.com/alex_kirshner/status/1610457604999741443 Harbaugh contract stuff: Everything is so obviously coming from the agent that you can read his quotes on Twitter. The NCAA stuff is so so weak. MSU fans lol. To OSU fans, nailing Tressel for lying about huge program things that would get him in trouble is not the same as forgetting a burger. More like the difference between nailing Capone for tax fraud versus the IRS finding you were $50 short on your estimated taxes. Seriously, anyone who is taking this seriously never has to be taken seriously ever again. 4. Hoops Takes After MSU starts at 1:35:23 Make your shots is now a refrain after several seasons in a row of not making them when they visit Breslin. What's the problem? For one Hunter Dickinson isn't as motivated this year—perhaps not having to prove himself to the NBA has taken it out of him, but Michigan needs more from their star. Freshmen a little off-kilter in their first true road game is understandable. Have to ride with what you have, but sick of new PGs every year. At least next year they should get Llewellyn back on a medical redshirt. MUSIC: "Watching Strangers Smile"—Parquet Courts "I Don't Wanna Be Famous"—NNAMDÏ "Rock Bottom"—Kevin Morby “Across 110th Street”
The Philadelphia Sixers have won 11 of their last 14 games, but it seems as if the fanbase isn't thrilled with anything they do. #Sixers #76ers #NBA CALL OR TEXT THE 24/7 ANY TIME HOTLINE: (856) 442-9805 Support the channel: https://www.patreon.com/sportstalkwithbrodes SeatGeek Promo Code: BRODES This will save you $20 on your total purchase! Podcasts: Apple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/sports-talk-with-brodes/id1268899988 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/5yKG2JJe3bpoLiCL75d7Lt?si=5WrRXMiPRHKBvGSoTZVMVQ Google Podcast: https://play.google.com/music/m/I4ilhe3iu5enusddeqzboud3bcu?t=Sports_Talk_With_Brodes Anchor: https://anchor.fm/sportstalkwithbrodes GET A SHIRT! : https://www.teespring.com/brodesclothes Email: Brodes@BrodesMedia.com Twitter & Instagram: @Brodes81 and @BrodesMedia
On this Hacks & Wonks Week in Review, political consultant and show host Crystal Fincher is joined by fellow political consultant and urban farmer, Heather Weiner, for an enthusiastic conversation looking ahead to the 2023 Washington state legislative session, reviewing key announcements from a party leader and a city councilmember who aren't running again, and discussing what makes for effective political mail. Crystal and Heather start the show looking at what's coming in the 2023 state legislative session. They highlight housing, drug possession laws, childcare, and education as key areas that our representatives will be working on in Olympia, and point out the mandate voters gave our leaders by electing for fighting for progressive reforms last November. This week, state Democratic Party Chair Tina Podlodowski announced she will not be running for state chair again. Crystal and Heather review Podlodowski's accomplishments as chair and compare her tenure to other state parties like New York. In more local news, Seattle City Councilmember Alex Pedersen announced he will also not be running for re-election this year, meaning that now three city council seats will not have an incumbent in their race. After a brief discussion about Seattle's I-135 Social Housing initiative, which will be decided on a February 14th ballot, Crystal and Heather have an in-depth conversation about what makes for effective political mail. It's an informative discussion from two highly-accomplished experts in the field that you won't want to miss! As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host Heather Weiner at @hlweiner. Heather Weiner Heather Weiner (she/her) is a political consultant with 30 years of experience on labor, environmental, LGBTQ, racial justice, and reproductive rights issues. She focuses on ballot initiatives, independent expenditures, legislative, union organizing and contract campaigns. She's a recovering lawyer. Resources Hacks & Wonks twitter - 2022 Stats “Inslee Rolls Out ‘Substantial and Audacious' Housing Agenda in Budget Proposal” by Ryan Packer from The Urbanist “Voters sent clear message to WA leaders for 2023 Legislative session” by Andy Billig from The Seattle Times “In 2023, WA lawmakers will decide the legal future of drug possession” by Joseph O'Sullivan from Crosscut “Missing Middle Housing Reform Returns for 2023 Legislative Session” by Doug Trumm, Stephen Fesler, & Natalie Bicknell Argerious from The Urbanist “What WA voters want to see from the 2023 legislative session” by Joseph O'Sullivan from Crosscut “WA Democratic Party Chair Tina Podlodowski stepping down” by Jim Brunner from The Seattle Times “Alex Pedersen Not Seeking Second Term on Seattle Council” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist “WA Supreme Court clears way for state to collect capital-gains tax” by Claire Withycombe from The Seattle Times House Our Neighbors website - I-135 Overview and Text “Catch Up on Seattle's Social Housing Ballot Measure at Our January Meetup with Tiffani McCoy” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington State through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. If you missed our Tuesday midweek show, we had an enlightening discussion with Senator Manka Dhingra, Chair of the Senate Law & Justice Committee in our State Legislature and our State Senate, where we talked about the tough issues of her committee, the tough issues her committee will take on this legislative session. Find it in the resources below or on our website, officialhacksandwonks.com. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available on our website and in our episode notes. Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host: political consultant and urban farmer, Heather Weiner. [00:01:15] Heather Weiner: Good morning, afternoon, whatever day it is for your listeners - time of day - Crystal Fincher. [00:01:20] Crystal Fincher: Hey, hey, hey. [00:01:22] Heather Weiner: So happy to be invited back. I really thought for a moment there that I had just completely bungled it and would never be invited back. So can't tell you how excited I am to be here in 2023. [00:01:34] Crystal Fincher: Now hush about you bungling stuff. You remain one of the most admired and in-demand political consultants - and wonderful mentors and friends to so many of us. [00:01:49] Heather Weiner: Oh, I love this part of every podcast, whether it's this one or anybody else's, where people just give each other big air kisses. So big air kiss to you, Crystal Fincher. [00:01:58] Crystal Fincher: Big air kiss to you. I love it, and I love that - yeah, we get to talk to great, awesome, incredible dynamic people and learn from your wisdom. And just get a chance to say Hi, because we get so busy sometimes that it becomes hard. So I - we're listening to each other's voices. But while we record, I can see your face - this gives me an excuse to see your face. [00:02:27] Heather Weiner: Well, good morning. Listen, I am so excited about today's conversation because - as you know - it is not quite Christmas Eve for all of us hacks and wonks. But it's pretty exciting - I would say maybe more like right before 4th of July - because the fireworks are going to start exploding on Monday when leg session comes in - in Olympia - and we're already seeing pre-filed bills, people are already starting to stake out their positions. [00:02:53] Crystal Fincher: They are. [00:02:54] Heather Weiner: Yeah, it's going to be very interesting - with the Democrats coming in just fired up to get some stuff done. [00:03:01] Crystal Fincher: Love it. Legislative Session Eve basically. Before we even get to that, I did just want to take a moment. We, the team here - Bryce Cannatelli, Shannon Cheng, and I - looked back at our 2022. And usually we don't do this publicly, but we thought - we actually did a lot of work this past year and we just did a little 2022 In Review. We actually did 97 total episodes in 2022, which is a lot - 71 total guests, 25 interviews with elected officials, 4 candidate forums. We did a lot of work, a lot of shows. And the podcast overall - I was just saying yesterday - it, for being just this completely niche, really wonky local government politics and policy podcast, which - I was like, Okay, maybe seven people will listen to when we started out, but I just think it's really important to talk about these issues. It's become bigger than I ever thought it would. And I just really appreciate all of the listeners and people who engage. We are really passionate about just engaging in our community, including our local government. This is how we shape who we are and tomorrow - I've said before - getting involved in local government is organizing. [00:04:33] Heather Weiner: And it's, and it's fun. [00:04:35] Crystal Fincher: It really is. And you can make a difference, you can change things - you have so much impact locally. And so I hope, as we talk about this, people see that and feel that - and get activated and involved. But anyway, just wanted to take a moment to say thank you to everyone. We do this podcast in the middle of all of the rest of our work - this is a side project and not what we do actually full-time - we're political consultants. And squeezing this in between everything is a lot of work - it takes a lot of time - but we feel it's important, and we enjoy it, and we enjoy interacting and speaking with all of you. So thank you once again. And on to a legislative preview. What can we look forward to this legislative session, Heather? [00:05:33] Heather Weiner: First, let's just say that the Democrats are coming in and saying that they are being given a mandate by the voters. I don't know if you read Andy Billig's op-ed in The Seattle Times where he laid out, Hey, we won big this year and we have a mandate to address racial equity, to address homelessness, housing, tax fairness, the environment - and we're ready to do it. To which Danny Westneat, ever playing the devil's advocate and a grumpy old man like Walter Matthau, suddenly wants to say - No, you didn't really get a mandate. You just lucked out because of Dobbs and Roe V. Wade. I think Danny is reading the room wrong. I think Andy Billig totally has it. The voters want more progressive policies, they want to see Washington become a better state to live in, and they want the super rich to pay for it. And I'm very excited to see what this legislative session comes up with. Top of the agenda, of course, is from Governor Inslee's budget, which he announced right at the end of the month in December - where he dropped a bombshell saying he wants to run a statewide referendum that raises money for housing. And I think that's an amazing, fantastic idea - and we're hearing a lot of support from Republicans actually - even Braun is out there talking about middle-income housing, which is fantastic. We need to make sure that we don't lose sight of what the real - the other big crisis that is in front of us every day, which is the lack of low-income housing. I'm really hoping that the Legislature is going to take that by the horns and run it through this year. What else are you seeing, Crystal? [00:07:19] Crystal Fincher: I am definitely seeing that. I think, in housing, it is really interesting to see the increase in momentum, support - even just from last legislative session - for taking action on middle housing, or the ability to build in more places to increase the housing supply in the longterm. Also remains to be seen if there is enough momentum to, as you just mentioned, address lower-income folks and their ability to afford housing, keeping people in their homes, renter protections, those types of things. We will see how that lands in this Legislature. I think - seeing momentum on some public health issues - they're going to have to address the Blake fix, or the legislation that was brought about from the Blake decision from our State Supreme Court addressing personal possession of drugs and substances. And in addressing that, they're going to be forced to take that on this session. And we actually had a great conversation with Senator Manka Dhingra in our midweek episode about that. I think one thing that people are wondering about is just in the issue of education - we saw so many strikes by public educators really standing up for their kids and especially bringing attention to how short-staffed and underfunded our special education system and resources are - [00:08:56] Heather Weiner: And childcare. [00:08:57] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And although there was some improvement made on that in the short term - really what was made plain - is that there needs to be some statewide fixes. We have to more fundamentally address education. And I don't know if that's going to be addressed this session, but I think that's another area where voters spoke loudly and clearly - from people who were really articulating the importance of that as candidates and also that we just saw in the support of teachers. It's always interesting when those strikes happen and people are trying to figure out - okay, is there going to be pushback against the strikes? Is there going to be support? And in district after district - doesn't, didn't matter whether it was in a metropolitan area, suburban, rural - those teachers had the support of the families and the parents in their district and a recognition that we have to do better. So I do hope that we see action taken on that. And I think they can expect to face questions if that doesn't look like that happens. [00:10:05] Heather Weiner: So let me pivot on that one and say - earlier this year, we heard from a lot of school districts that said they might have to do more levies in order to fund their needs - whether that's basic construction, repairing these aging schools, funding special ed programs, funding general programs. And what happens is when they pass a levy, that's through a property tax and that property tax means that the lowest income people are the ones who end up paying the greatest percentage of that. So I am very excited to see in the Governor's budget that he is already taking into account the capital gains tax, which is going to the Washington Supreme Court for a hearing on the 26th of this month. He's already assumed that will be upheld as constitutional and has incorporated that money into education, particularly preschool help for low-income families and expanding childcare opportunities for all families. I'm very happy to see that - I think that's pretty exciting. But did you read this Elway poll that Crosscut did? Yeah - talking, asking voters what their highest priority issues were. I thought that was also super interesting because I find the Elway polls skew pretty conservative - and sometimes they're worded a little conservative for me, sometimes I don't really buy them - but I actually got polled on this, so I was very excited to see where I was. And more than a majority of the voters do support the Governor's proposal - raise a $4 million bond for homelessness and housing. They support more funding for education. They want the Democrats to move forward on these progressive policies. I think the Republicans are going to be smart this year. I don't think they're going to pick fights on the dumb issues for them - I don't think they're going to pick fights on choice, I don't think they're going to pick fights on LGBTQ issues. I think they're going to pick a fight on taxes and I think they're going to pick a fight on decriminalization. I think that's where they think they can start to wedge people and start to pull some of the moderate conservative Democrats with them. What do you think? [00:12:10] Crystal Fincher: You know, that's such an interesting issue. Speaking of public polling, every time this is polled - and it has been several times - the public is ahead of where our legislature is and the public is clear about - on issues of legalization, that they want a public health approach. We can look around and see that the War on Drugs has failed, right? We've been trying this for 40, 50 years and has not worked, even though that it's taken a ton of resources. And so they do want a different approach and to stop doing the things that haven't worked. And so it's really interesting because the public is there. And when it's put in front of the public, they vote in that direction. But some of our legislators are behind where the public is, and we hear concerns from them that frankly we don't see. Even in King County, when vote after vote, we see people and candidates who have articulated a more evidence-based approach to these things - that takes into account where criminalization is counterproductive, and doesn't make people safer, and doesn't get us closer to where we need to be as a society. [00:13:30] Heather Weiner: And is a waste of taxpayer dollars, honestly, right - incarceration. [00:13:34] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it is really inefficient and expensive. And so that's going to be interesting - to see if people follow where evidence is and it's very clear, or if they don't - I don't know where the Legislature is going to land on that. [00:13:49] Heather Weiner: I feel like it has less to do with facts and it has more to do - I know this is going to shock you and all of your listeners - that politics and policy may not have anything to do with facts, and may have more to do with personal experience. And I think there are many legislators and many of us who have people in our lives who we love and care about who struggle with substance use disorder. And I think that those stories of people who we love and care about because - who are struggling with substance use disorder and face incarceration if they ask for help and so they refuse, they cannot ask for help because they are afraid of incarceration. I think that if some of those stories can come out, that if legislators have courage to share their personal stories with permission of the people involved, of course, I think that will be almost as persuasive - if not more persuasive - than the facts. Because it is the dehumanization of people who suffer from substance use disorder, which is a public health issue - it is a mental and public health issue - that people who suffer from that are demonized and dehumanized. And while we continue to allow that to happen, I don't think we're going to get very far. So let's use those personal stories. Let's have the courage to come out with our own personal stories about substance use disorder - for me, it's a lot of red wine - to get people to talk about it and take away the stigma and get some solutions on the table. [00:15:15] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. So it's going to be interesting to see. There certainly will be a lot that unfolds during the session and we will continue to pay attention to what happens, but certainly it's going to be, it's going to be an interesting session and I think beyond everything, you're absolutely right. There is a mandate to act and people are expecting action. Another piece of big news this week - seeing a series of big news where people announcing that they are not running for the seats that they hold. And I guess starting off is one that's not technically a public official, but is very visible in politics and policy in Washington - Tina Podlodowski, the State Chair of the Washington State Democrats, announced that she is stepping down from her position. What did you think about this? [00:16:07] Heather Weiner: Well, first - I am a big fan of Tina Podlodowski's. I think she has done an absolutely amazing job as Chair. She's raised more money. She has focused on Field instead of a lot of internal stuff. I think she's revolutionized, not revolutionized, but certainly taken the State Dems into a much better direction. And even just from going from caucus to primary system - all of it, I think, has been better for the State Dems in general. So I'm a big fan of Tina's. I think we need to remember what the State Chair does. So whoever is in that position is the face and voice for the State Party. They get to be the bad guy in a lot of ways. They get to be the attack dog, and that's the role that they have to play and sometimes it makes them unpopular. I think that they need to raise a lot of funds. They need to make a lot of friends and be close to the establishment - raising that money - while at the same time answering to the grassroots and more radical elements of the party who actually show up, knock doors, and do the hard work. It's a difficult position and I think whoever runs for it, and we'll know on January 28th who wins that position, has got to be prepared for walking that tightrope for the State Dems. I've seen that Shasti Conrad has already announced that she's running and has lined up a very impressive list of endorsers. So I know we both are Shasti fans and as the current Chair of the King County Democrats - or previous Chair of the King County Democrats - I think she's well positioned to take that role on. What do you think? [00:17:55] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, completely agree with you. And just - on Tina - that is a position that is really hard to get kudos for when you're doing things right. You're always making someone unhappy if you're doing things right. But what a contrast between the successes that we've had and built on in Washington state and the mess that we see in a state like New York. [00:18:18] Heather Weiner: Oh, right. [00:18:21] Crystal Fincher: That state party has just managed to really mess things up so severely that the entire country is paying for them - potentially just the composition of the House and the majority - looks like New York is responsible for messing that up. And just the calamity that is George Santos who - is that even his real name? Who has lied about everything under the sun? [00:18:53] Heather Weiner: Look - Tina is regarded by many of the state chairs around the country as one of the best in the country, because of what she's done with the State Party here. And I do want to say there's been a lot of criticism of her. I also am a woman who sometimes says things that piss people off. But I will say that, Look, if her name was Tim Podlodowski, she may have gotten a little bit less of the criticism for being the badass that she has been. Now, the next person who comes in is probably going to want to heal some of the intraparty wounds and build some bridges back. And I think that person has to be prepared to do some of that. But again, the State Party is often an unrecognized powerhouse behind many campaigns, Congressional campaigns, our recent campaign with Senator Murray. And the people who do that really hard work behind the scenes do deserve to be recognized - shout out to all of the State Dem staffers. [00:19:55] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. We also saw news of Alex Pedersen on the Seattle City Council announcing that he will not be running again. [00:20:04] Heather Weiner: Number three - we have three open seats in Seattle. [00:20:08] Crystal Fincher: So what is this landscape? What does this mean for the City of Seattle? [00:20:13] Heather Weiner: First, let me just say - to everybody who's been asking, I am not working on any candidate campaigns in Seattle because - [00:20:18] Crystal Fincher: Ditto. [00:20:19] Heather Weiner: I can't do it anymore. It's just too emotional. It just wrecks me too much emotionally. It's just not good for my mental health, and my wife will kill me if I work on another candidate campaign in Seattle. So this is super interesting because I think that Bruce Harrell is actually still pretty popular in the City. I think that he - if nothing changes wildly between now and August, I think that his anointed candidates will definitely come through primaries, if not win. So I think whoever's running right now has to be ready to not attack Harrell and to be in a position to talk about how they're going to improve things or work with the current mayor. The current mayor is not - I do not get the sense that people are ready to hold this current mayor accountable for anything. They still like what he's doing. They think he's a nice guy. There's not been a major snowstorm or police shooting. So as far as the general public is concerned, Harrell's all right. And I think Inslee is actually giving Harrell and a lot of other city leaders a great out by running - going back to this bond initiative - by running this massive bond initiative referendum to fund housing and homelessness, because that is the major issue in major cities around the state. And in this way, the city leaders will be able to point to that, talk about how that's going to be the solution, and are able to walk away from it. [00:21:41] Crystal Fincher: I don't know that I necessarily agree with that. [00:21:43] Heather Weiner: Please - I love it when you disagree. [00:21:45] Crystal Fincher: I think that it's up in the air - and this is so interesting because this is like the conversations that we have amongst ourselves elsewhere - so I think the City is in a very interesting place. I think the City is progressive and frustrated at not feeling like issues are getting better, and not seeing issues get better that have been talked about as the most important issues - the crises that we're facing, yet still not seeing substantive or tangible improvement. And I think also - just looking at these last November elections - we see, especially in areas like North Seattle that have been traditionally thought of as more moderate - definitely look like they're different, like they're significantly more progressive than they were. And it makes sense when you think about the increase in renters, that the pressures on people of even generous incomes being able to afford the increasing and astronomical rent, just being able to enter the housing market in Seattle close to services and the City or being displaced further out from that. And so I think that you see the foundation of a more progressive shift, which we have seen a trend towards more progressive policy over the past several years overall. Now, this is an odd year. We're not going to see the same level of turnout, which is why we talk about even- versus odd-year elections this year - and that is a headwind. So it's going to be really interesting to see. And I actually think the individual candidates are going to make a difference. How can they articulate a vision of what they can get done positively that's not based on - to your point actually - what they dislike or grievances that they have, and more of a vision for what they can accomplish. How can they work together with people to do that? But I do think that people are more on guard than they used to be for - I'm the adult in the room, and I'm the conciliator and the person who can bring everyone together to find a place where everyone agrees and we can move forward, because - [00:24:07] Heather Weiner: I'd vote for you. I vote for you - that is the speech. You're probably right. And let's remember that in this year, the seats that will be open or up for re-election are going to be the district seats. So in this case, people who are currently going to stay in - like Tammy Morales, Dan, or Kshama - are going to have to show what they have done for the district. And people who are running for those open seats are going to have to be super hyper local focused on their district. What are they going to do for West Seattle? What are they going to do for North Seattle? And talk about that rather than the City around - and I think it's going to be a lot of geographic discussions, a lot of very specific - here's what we're doing for this park, here's what we're doing for this intersection - neighborhood community talk rather than the citywide referendum. [00:24:57] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, yeah, I completely agree with that. [00:25:01] Heather Weiner: Yay, you agree! I was really looking forward to a smackdown though. One day, Crystal will just - it won't just be this chorus, and one day we'll have a fight about something and it will be really, really cool. I'll find something we disagree on - it's gonna be like mayonnaise versus mustard or something. [00:25:18] Crystal Fincher: Oh my goodness, there will be something someday. [00:25:22] Heather Weiner: So I just want to point out one more time for your listeners that there's two really big things happening the week of January 24th. One is this Washington Supreme Court hearing on the capital gains tax, which has enormous implications - not just for $500 million of funding a year for childcare and education that comes from the super super super rich, but also for our tax structure overall in the state. And the second is - much more micro - is the election of the new Washington State Party Chair two days later. So that's going to be a really interesting week. I can't wait to see who you have on that week to discuss what's happening there. [00:26:04] Crystal Fincher: It'll be interesting to see. We also have a couple of things. We have a special election coming up in many jurisdictions in the state, including the City of Vancouver, Washington. But particularly in the City of Seattle - on February 14th, there will be a special election. If you know me, you know that I am not a fan of these February, April special election dates just because they are notoriously low turnout, but there is going to be a vote on social housing. Speaking of the motivation to address homelessness and housing affordability in this crisis, this is going to be on the ballot. We actually have a show coming up about this topic, but this will give Seattle the opportunity to establish a public developer - that establish publicly-owned, permanently affordable, cross-class communities with resident leadership - and basically establishing a type of social housing where it takes away the privatization, capitalist profit motive basically, of housing that we've seen where people are looking to create increased profits and income from raising rents. And really take away the ability to raise it and use resident funds to fund just the maintenance and upkeep without the pressure in - that happens in conjunction with the private sector - to continue to raise rents and hopefully create more sustainable, affordable, publicly-owned social housing that can start to address this housing affordability crisis and put in place a new and different model that isn't as reliant on federal funding, on federal income guidelines - and just give the City more flexibility to address its own issues. So this is going to be a really interesting thing that we have coming up. Ballots will be mailed on January 27, so that's coming sooner than we think. How do you see this playing out? [00:28:20] Heather Weiner: Who is going to come out and oppose this? That's really what I want to know. I haven't heard that much from opposition right now, and I think it's really just going to be about how it's framed for the voters. I'm thinking a lot about ranked choice voting and how that kind of was the sneaker issue that came in. And at the last moment, they sent out really good mail - shout out to Moxie Media for some really good mail on that campaign - and won, not by a landslide - but won on a confusing campaign. So I wonder if this is maybe the sneaker issue also - that there isn't really a well organized opposition and it gets through. [00:29:00] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. And I think how this is explained to the masses is going to be the thing. I actually completely agree - [00:29:08] Heather Weiner: Again! [00:29:09] Crystal Fincher: - just in the shout out with - on an issue that on its face is confusing to explain to voters - in what we just saw with ranked choice voting beating out approval voting. I think that was a great example of looking at - just when you have to communicate this simply to the masses - man, the ranked choice voting mail was excellent. The way that was communicated to all of the people - there are the people who pay attention, which is not a big percentage of people. We're abnormal. If you're listening to this show, you are abnormal. [00:29:41] Heather Weiner: You're just now noticing that we're abnormal. You want to know how abnormal I am? Every piece of political mail that comes into our household - my wife knows to set aside for me because I keep it in a folder. I just keep all of the mail. I hoard it because I love to go back through it later and see what people did, what they didn't do. Look at you - you do the same thing - you have - Oh my gosh, you have Teresa Mosqueda - look at you with all that mail. [00:30:08] Crystal Fincher: That is me pulling up my - [00:30:10] Heather Weiner: That is sexy. That is - I'm coming over for a date. I'm gonna bring a bottle of wine, some candles, and we're going to go through your mail, your political mail - [00:30:18] Crystal Fincher: We're going to go through mail. [00:30:19] Heather Weiner: I always vote late, just so I can get the mail and I can see how people are doing it. And I like to play the guessing game of which firm did this mail - because there are certain firms that shall go unnamed that just do the same boilerplate, same design over and over and over again - and I can spot them a mile away. And then there's some people who just look like they did it with a Word doc and just threw it together - maybe on purpose, maybe not. And then there's sometimes just really highly polished, really engaging, creative stuff. So I love to hoard the mail. I've got a whole box over here, Crystal - come over, honey, put on something comfy, and we'll go sit on the couch and go through it together. [00:30:59] Crystal Fincher: Oh, we're going to do that. I will bring my accordion file full of stuff. [00:31:07] Heather Weiner: I'm not going to cheat on you - not cheating on you, honey. I also want to say a shout - a big warning to some folks out there who have sent out recent mail - it's called householding. When you do not send five pieces of mail to the same household - it's annoying to the household and it looks like a waste of money. It looks like your consultant's not doing a good job, so - to certain people who have sent out mail recently and not householded, you need to have a conversation with your people. That is a waste of postage. It's a waste of - it's a waste of postage when it really comes down to it. [00:31:41] Crystal Fincher: It's a waste of postage, it's a waste of - yeah, it's a waste. [00:31:45] Heather Weiner: It's called householding. [00:31:46] Crystal Fincher: It is. And every year someone wins the - I-spelled-our-candidate's-name-wrong-on-the-mail lottery. [00:31:53] Heather Weiner: Can we do an episode where all we do is just go through and make fun of ourselves and other people who make huge mistakes on mail - including me, by the way. I mean, that word "public" - it's often, loses the L. [00:32:05] Crystal Fincher: Oh my goodness. Oh my goodness. Yeah, there are, there are a lot - yeah, you would be, you would be surprised. [00:32:14] Heather Weiner: Also, I recently saw a piece of mail where "county" lost the O. [00:32:19] Crystal Fincher: Oh no. [00:32:23] Heather Weiner: Yeah. [00:32:25] Crystal Fincher: There are all sorts of things that go wrong with mail and it still has - mail still has some utility. Obviously - [00:32:37] Heather Weiner: Oh - mail still has some utility? I think mail has increased in utility over - since COVID. Tell me, tell me why you think it still has utility and then I'll give you the counterpoint. [00:32:46] Crystal Fincher: It absolutely still has utility - one, especially during COVID when Field was impacted - that's a challenge. But it's so hard. Basically I think that you have to do everything, that you have to try and get to people in every way - I have to show you the commercials that we did. [00:33:05] Heather Weiner: Oh, I'd like to see them. Oh, I've seen a couple. I've seen a couple. They were really good. [00:33:09] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. But it's just hard, and I think lots of people who don't do this don't realize how hard it is just to get people's attention. The hardest thing to do - for a candidate or an issue - is not necessarily to beat your opponent. It's just to let people know that you exist. It's to break through all of the noise - because people are sick and tired of political stuff anyway. And there's so much happening, especially like last year when we had competitive Congressional races in many districts and legislative races, and there are so many political messages flying, there are five different mailers landing in mailboxes every day. Everything is a commercial in the middle of everything and just everything is that - it's hard to break through. And so really trying to stand out and in ways that are - that get you in front of the eyeballs of people - even if it's just the few seconds between when they pick up their mail and walk to the recycle bin, or they're half paying attention to a commercial. Hopefully people are making it to the doors also, but that's hard to do in a citywide election, in a City of Seattle. And maybe you can get to 50,000 people, but what are you going to do for the other 150,000-200,000? [00:34:31] Heather Weiner: Look, mail is not - if you're down by 10 points, mail is not going to win, is not going to win it for you. But if you're down by 1 or you need to - you are tied - mail can definitely make the difference. And let me tell you why. Let me tell you why, Crystal. Number one, it gets - you definitely are getting into the household, right? It's not like digital, it's not like TV - you know that that voter - it's getting into that voter's household. Number two, you can micro-target the messaging to that household, unlike other ways. You can do that with digital somewhat - but really with mail, you can do an excellent job. And the third is voters want to make the right decision. They want information and to have that written information in front of them - that's comprehensive, that's just not a pretty picture and a whole bunch of endorsement logos, but actually has some - what am I saying? - some crunchy information in it. Voters want that and will keep it. And particularly people say, Oh, younger voters, they don't check their mail. Younger voters find mail to be - I don't know - quaint and interesting, and like to get letters and like to get things that are personally addressed to them because it makes them feel like - 'cause they're real people. So I am - I actually think mail is more effective and more important than ever right now. And I am not solely - I will do mail for campaigns, but I am not pitching my firm as a mail campaign. I'm just saying in general, do not discount it. And do not get yourself all, get your panties all in a twist about TV and cable and everything all the time - broadcast TV, God forbid - spend that money on getting to the people who vote. [00:36:05] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think so. And also, especially in a vote-by-mail state - we're a 100% vote-by-mail state - mail is in the same medium as the ballot and the information that they're getting. Mail absolutely matters and it is one of - still - the most efficient methods to get to people that you can't talk to personally. [00:36:27] Heather Weiner: Well, I just would like to invite you to come over one night and take a look at my mail. [00:36:31] Crystal Fincher: Mail - it's a very vulnerable thing. It's a very sensitive thing. People are very sensitive about their mail. There is actually a reason why we have not done a mail breakdown on-air because people are very sensitive. [00:36:46] Heather Weiner: There are people who will never come on your show about their mail [00:36:49] Crystal Fincher: About their mail - and all of us are - it's not like every piece of mail I do is excellent, or dynamic, or on purpose. [00:36:56] Heather Weiner: We could do noteworthy mail - how about that? I would love to do one - it'd be hard to do on a podcast 'cause people can't see it, but I would love to do - it's like one of those cooking shows where you can't taste what the people are talking about - but I would love to do one going through, like over the years, some really noteworthy mail. And I've got a couple that are just - there's one, there was a piece where it had a black hole cut out in it, and it was talking about how something was a waste of money and it was a black hole - that was by a consultant from the East Coast. There's another consultant who did a piece of mail - attack mail in a leg race that was real - oh no, it was in a city council race - that was horrible and awful, and I think won that election for that candidate. So I would love to go through that sometime - that'd be really fun. And also it would be really interesting to a niche audience of approximately 12 people, Crystal, so maybe not. [00:37:51] Crystal Fincher: Oh, I mean - we would have 32 people who were riveted in that conversation. I don't want to rip people live on-air. [00:38:04] Heather Weiner: Let's just only talk about noteworthy things. [00:38:06] Crystal Fincher: Yes. And my biggest note - usually my biggest thing - is just trying to overcommunicate on mail. There - you can, if you try and say too much, you actually end up saying nothing. 'Cause people do need to be able to get what your - pick up what you're putting down at a glance. And then give them some hooks for a little bit more stuff. But you make that hard to do when you bury stuff in text. But anyway, we can talk about mail forever. But we will wrap up today's show. And thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, January 6th, 2023. [00:38:45] Heather Weiner: Oh my goodness. [00:38:46] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's January 6th - a happy Insurrection Anniversary and Speaker Groundhog Day on the federal level. Hacks & Wonks is co-produced by Shannon Cheng and Bryce Cannatelli. Our insightful co-host today is political consultant and urban farmer, Heather Weiner. [00:39:03] Heather Weiner: Thanks for having me. [00:39:04] Crystal Fincher: You can find Heather on Twitter @hlweiner and that's H-L-W-E-I-N-E-R. You can find Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks and you can find me on Twitter @finchfrii, that's two I's at the end. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. Please leave us a review if you like us. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - we'll talk to you next time.
Gerald Talks with Gary Harrell on #ItsEasySon!!! "Gary Harrell joined Jackson State in November of 2020, after serving as running backs coach for a season at Alabama State. In the Fall 2021, Santee Marshall and Peyton Pickett combined for nearly 1,000 yards and eight touchdowns. Prior to joining ASU, he served a two-year stint under Lane Kiffin at Florida Atlantic. He joined the Florida Atlantic staff in January of 2017. His attention was given to the wide receivers who rotated throughout the season seeing the quarterbacks utilize a total of nine receivers. Senior Kalib Woods was named the Conference USA Championship MVP, and Willie Wright, just a freshman, was the team's most consistent wideout and led the Owls with 56 catches and a total of six scores. Following the year, Wright earned a spot on the C-USA All-Freshman team. Prior to his stint at Florida Atlantic, his alma matter came knocking on his door and asked the Miami native to return to the program, but as the head coach in 2011. All told, Harrell served as Howard University's head coach for five seasons. During his Howard tenure student-athletes worked under the premise that athletics and academics were evaluated equally. In 2012 he was honored by the D.C. Touchdown Club as the Local College Coach of the Year at its inaugural awards dinner. During his time at Howard, he finished with a 20-36 overall record including a 7-4 mark in 2012. Before going to Howard, Harrell spent two seasons as the offensive coordinator for Bowie State, from 2009-10. Harrell began at Morgan State in 2008 where he remained through 2009 before seizing the opportunity to move from a position coach with the Rattlers to an offensive coordinator position at Bowie State. He was a part of a team that finished 6-6 in 2008 and 6-5 in 2009. While at Morgan State he also served as the wide receivers coach for Team Michigan, a member of the All-American Football League (Feb. 2008 - May 2008). Harrell got his start in coaching at his alma mater, focusing on Howard's wide receivers from 2002-04. Howard posted a 6-5 record in 2002, a 4-7 mark in 2003 and a 6-5 mark in 2004, including splitting two overtime games. He moved away from his alma mater to gain collegiate coaching experience in another environment. He served as a Texas Southern assistant coach, for wide receivers, from 2004-06.Harrell returned to the east coast as an assistant coach in 2006. His two-year stint was made easier due to his familiarity with the MEAC. Harrell, affectionately known as “The Flea,” played two NFL seasons, seeing action in four games in 1994 and '95, with the New York Giants. He also played one season (March 1996-June 1996) for the World League's Frankfurt Galaxy and two seasons in the Canadian Football League with the Montreal Alouettes (1996-97). He was a four-year letter winner as a wide receiver and punt return specialist. He started every game for Howard's undefeated 1993 team and was a member of the MEAC Championship team that same season. Harrell holds the Howard record for most receptions in a game (13) and in a career (184). He was inducted into the Howard University Hall of Fame in November 2005, and also received a proclamation from the City of Miami declaring it Gary “Flea” Harrell Day. Prior to attending Howard, he was a varsity athlete for Miami's Northwestern High School. A native of Miami (Fla.), Harrell earned his degree in Marketing from Howard in 1994. He and his wife (Tenika) have two children, a daughter – Jasmine – and son – Gary, Jr. – who is a member of the Howard football team." Courtesy of GoJSUTigers.com
What's Trending: Seattle lost 153 police officers last year, Bruce Harrell thinks Seattle is doing great and Marysville PD is arresting public drug users. // Kevin McCarthy still hasn't won the House Speaker election. // Amazon layoffs will affect more than anticipated.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
In this episode of The Gate 15 Interview, Andy Jabbour visits with Brian Harrell, Vice President and Chief Security Officer (CSO) at AVANGRID. Brian currently serves as the Vice President and Chief Security Officer (CSO) at AVANGRID, an energy company with assets and operations in 24 states. He is responsible for the company's cybersecurity, privacy, physical security, threat management, and business continuity. In 2018, Brian was appointed by the President of the United States to serve as the sixth Assistant Secretary for Infrastructure Protection at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. He was also the first Assistant Director for Infrastructure Security at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). He has spent time during his career in the US Marine Corps and various private sector agencies with the goal of protecting the United States from security threats. Brian is a Board Member and Strategic Advisor to many great companies. Brian on Twitter: @gridsecure In the discussion we address: Brian's background and path from law enforcement to infrastructure, CISA to AVANGRID Information Sharing Preparedness and Best Practices Evolving threats to energy and infrastructure, including hostile events, insider threats, cyberattacks and nation state threats, 3rd party risk and more We talk baseball, burgers, and boating, plus shoutouts to some valued friends and partners! A few references mentioned in or relevant to our discussion include: AVANGRID. “AVANGRID is a leading sustainable energy company transitioning America toward a clean and connected future headquartered in Orange, CT, and has a footprint in 24 states with $40 billion in assets. Our primary businesses are Avangrid Networks, which serves 3.3 million electric and natural gas customers in the Northeast, and Avangrid Renewables, the third-largest renewable energy company in the U.S. with a diverse onshore and offshore renewable energy portfolio.” WSJ Pro Research Survey: Preparedness Results, 29 Nov 2022 The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) release of the Resilient Power Best Practices for Critical Facilities and Sites. This document supports emergency and continuity managers with guidelines, analysis, background material, and references to increase the resilience of backup and emergency power systems during all durations of power outages. Improving power resilience can help the nation withstand and recover rapidly from deliberate attacks, accidents, natural disasters, as well as unconventional stresses, shocks, and threats to our economy and democratic system. The Electricity Information Sharing and Analysis Center (E-ISAC) GridEx VII – November 14-15, 2023 Space ISAC DHS CISA on Cyber-Physical Convergence Gate 15: Blended Threats (update 1.1): Understanding an Evolving Threat Environment (and numerous other blog posts, papers and exercises)
Podcast: The Gate 15 Podcast ChannelEpisode: The Gate 15 Interview EP30: Brian Harrell on Energy & Infrastructure Security, plus baseball, boating & burgers!Pub date: 2022-12-26In this episode of The Gate 15 Interview, Andy Jabbour visits with Brian Harrell, Vice President and Chief Security Officer (CSO) at AVANGRID. Brian currently serves as the Vice President and Chief Security Officer (CSO) at AVANGRID, an energy company with assets and operations in 24 states. He is responsible for the company's cybersecurity, privacy, physical security, threat management, and business continuity. In 2018, Brian was appointed by the President of the United States to serve as the sixth Assistant Secretary for Infrastructure Protection at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. He was also the first Assistant Director for Infrastructure Security at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). He has spent time during his career in the US Marine Corps and various private sector agencies with the goal of protecting the United States from security threats. Brian is a Board Member and Strategic Advisor to many great companies. Brian on Twitter: @gridsecure In the discussion we address: Brian's background and path from law enforcement to infrastructure, CISA to AVANGRID Information Sharing Preparedness and Best Practices Evolving threats to energy and infrastructure, including hostile events, insider threats, cyberattacks and nation state threats, 3rd party risk and more We talk baseball, burgers, and boating, plus shoutouts to some valued friends and partners! A few references mentioned in or relevant to our discussion include: AVANGRID. “AVANGRID is a leading sustainable energy company transitioning America toward a clean and connected future headquartered in Orange, CT, and has a footprint in 24 states with $40 billion in assets. Our primary businesses are Avangrid Networks, which serves 3.3 million electric and natural gas customers in the Northeast, and Avangrid Renewables, the third-largest renewable energy company in the U.S. with a diverse onshore and offshore renewable energy portfolio.” WSJ Pro Research Survey: Preparedness Results, 29 Nov 2022 The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) release of the Resilient Power Best Practices for Critical Facilities and Sites. This document supports emergency and continuity managers with guidelines, analysis, background material, and references to increase the resilience of backup and emergency power systems during all durations of power outages. Improving power resilience can help the nation withstand and recover rapidly from deliberate attacks, accidents, natural disasters, as well as unconventional stresses, shocks, and threats to our economy and democratic system. The Electricity Information Sharing and Analysis Center (E-ISAC) GridEx VII – November 14-15, 2023 Space ISAC DHS CISA on Cyber-Physical Convergence Gate 15: Blended Threats (update 1.1): Understanding an Evolving Threat Environment (and numerous other blog posts, papers and exercises)The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Gate 15, which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.
durée : 00:59:46 - Tous en scène - par : Aurélie Charon - Trajal Harrell met en scène "The Köln concert", nouvelle pièce à partir du concert de Cologne de Keith Jarrett, et des chansons de la canadienne Joni Mitchell. - invités : Trajal Harrell danseur chorégraphe de voguing
On this week's Got Your Eers On? West Virginia University Basketball celebrates Coach Huggins' induction to the Hall of Fame by beating Buffalo, Graham Harrell is taking his talents to West Lafayette, IN as the new Offensive Coordinator at Purdue, and it's time to hand out this season's Mountaineer Christmas gifts! Join us for all this and more on this week's episode of Got Your Eers On!
One year into his term as Seattle mayor, Bruce Harrell sits down with the Politicast to discuss the accomplishments and challenges he's faced. Topics include his relationship with the City Council, crime and homelessness, and his philosophy of governance. PLUS: Congress and the President move to protect same-sex marriage, but does the bill that passed truly protect gay rights? AND: Combatting an alarming rise in hate crimes against LGBTQ people. Guests include Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell, ABC's Andy Field, and Shane Harris of the Washington Post. The Northwest Politicast with Jeff Pohjola: From this Washington to that one, Jeff Pohjola will explore the issues and politics of the week. Frequent guests and top analysts break down the news to get to the heart of what matters most. Subscribe at nwnewsradio.com or on your favorite podcast app.
Our month-long interview series of Southern hunting culture continues today with Morgan Harrell from South Carolina. Morgan is a lifelong hunter with a rich history in the outdoors. She also volunteers time with Artemis Sportswomen. We discuss her upbringing, hunting style, yearly goals of hunting for wild meat and a Florida iguana hunt! Thank you for listening and Merry Christmas.
Today's Best of Features: (00:00-13:19) – Adam Rittenberg of ESPN joins Jimmy and Brendan after breaking the news of Graham Harrell being hired as the offensive coordinator for the Purdue Boilermakers, what kind of scheme Harrell will have for Purdue, and the direct impact Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker will make on the NCAA once he takes over as president for Mark Emmert. (13:19-36:18) – The Athletic's Alec Lewis joins Jimmy and Brendan from Minnesota to explain what Vikings fans are saying and thinking ahead of their game against the Colts tomorrow, what it's like watching Justin Jefferson weekly, and Kevin O'Connell is the reason why Kirk Cousins is having so much success this season. (36:18-52:45) – Jeff Rabjohns of Peegs.com joins Brendan and Jimmy ahead of IU's big road test tomorrow in Kansas to breakdown the matchup against the Jayhawks, how Jalen Hood-Schifino impacts this team so much as a freshman, and who needs to step up for the Hoosiers in order to come out of Allen Fieldhouse with a win if Trayce Jackson-Davis is neutralized. (52:45-1:21:31) – The final hour of today's show with Brendan King and Jimmy Cook begins with one half of Kevin & Query in Kevin Bowen breaking down the Colts road game tomorrow afternoon in Minnesota against the Vikings, what the Colts might do in order to contain Justin Jefferson, and if he believes that the Colts can get Jonathan Taylor going tomorrow afternoon.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
(00:00-24:41) – Jimmy Cook and Brendan King open Friday's show by going over some of the College Football Bowl games on today's slate, debate on why the Minnesota Vikings are only 3.5 point favorites, and how this Colts offense is missing Nyheim Hines. (24:41-38:47) – Adam Rittenberg of ESPN joins Jimmy and Brendan after breaking the news of Graham Harrell being hired as the offensive coordinator for the Purdue Boilermakers, what kind of scheme Harrell will have for Purdue, and the direct impact Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker will make on the NCAA once he takes over as president for Mark Emmert. (38:47-42:53) – Jimmy and Brendan close out the first hour of today's show by updating the listeners on what's going on in the Miami Ohio and UAB bowl game and recap their conversation with Adam Rittenberg on what he had to say regarding Notre Dame. (42:53-1:07:33) – The Athletic's Alec Lewis joins Jimmy and Brendan from Minnesota to explain what Vikings fans are saying and thinking ahead of their game against the Colts tomorrow, what it's like watching Justin Jefferson weekly, and Kevin O'Connell is the reason why Kirk Cousins is having so much success this season. (1:07:33-1:24:57) – Jeff Rabjohns of Peegs.com joins Brendan and Jimmy ahead of IU's big road test tomorrow in Kansas to breakdown the matchup against the Jayhawks, how Jalen Hood-Schifino impacts this team so much as a freshman, and who needs to step up for the Hoosiers in order to come out of Allen Fieldhouse with a win if Trayce Jackson-Davis is neutralized. (1:24:57-1:30:36) – Jimmy and Brendan close out the second hour of today's show by announcing who the Indianapolis Colts will be without on Saturday on Saturday against the Minnesota Vikings. (1:30:36-1:59:56) – The final hour of today's show with Brendan King and Jimmy Cook begins with one half of Kevin & Query in Kevin Bowen breaking down the Colts road game tomorrow afternoon in Minnesota against the Vikings, what the Colts might do in order to contain Justin Jefferson, and if he believes that the Colts can get Jonathan Taylor going tomorrow afternoon. (1:59:56-2:08:34) – Jimmy and Brendan come back from break and discuss the news of who won Mr. Football for the state of Indiana and take a quick dive into some of the story lines that they will be watching tonight in the Pacers/Cavaliers game. (2:08:34-2:14:24) – The final segment of today's show is spent with Brendan, Jimmy, and producer Eddie Garrison sharing their best bets on the night and for the weekend.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
In this episode of PowerTips Unscripted, Iris Harrell discusses the importance of having women in key positions within remodeling companies. They make up half of the US workforce, so there is a sizeable recruitment pool, and they also relate on a deeper level with female customers, who often drive decision-making. Women are multi-taskers, organizers, collaborators,... The post How To Double The Number Of Top Leaders In Your Remodeling Comapny: Hire And Train More Women, Featuring Iris Harrell – [PowerTips Unscripted] S4 E8 appeared first on PowerTips Unscripted.
EP. 125 - Recently retired NFL star Jason McCourty - twin brother of NFL New England Patriots star Devin McCourty - joined me along with his mother Phyllis Harrell to talk about Game Day and Holiday traditions that helped create their strong bond and wonderful family memories. They also discussed their love for football, and how a partnership with a special video shoot brought the entire family together and created even more family fun.* Please Subscribe and rate our show! *original air date: 2015.
Find the scary stuff in life that isn't a gun or a lion and move intentionally toward it. Eli Harrell, Co-Founder & Chief Strategy Officer for Valhalla.team accepts this challenge. Whether as an eldest child in a large, entrepreneurial family, a homeschooler in the 70s, working jobs such as flooring, a horse farm or network marketing, successfully founding a variety of companies, or moving unexpectedly to the Philippines, Eli has stepped into growth and change and found a strategic path to abundance. About the Guest: Eli Harrell is a social entrepreneur, leader, and consummate problem solver who, through the painful process of building business after business has become a mapmaker for founders and executive teams. In the early 2000's he built and sold two contracting businesses in Atlanta before moving his family to Asia in 2014 where he has founded and advised for business in a number of industries. He is also part-time faculty and mentor for the MBA program at Southwestern University in Cebu, Philippines. Eli is Co-founder and Chief Strategy Officer at Valhalla.team, a company dedicated to amplifying the impact of entrepreneurs who are solving meaningful human problems via high-performing teams building products with purpose. He's also the host of a podcast called "Products With Purpose" where he teases out the most valuable stories from people who are building products and businesses that are laser-focused on solving meaningful problems on this planet (or beyond). Links: https://www.eliharrell.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/eliharrell/ https://www.instagram.com/eqlearner/ About the Host: Dan McPherson, International Speaker, Business and Personal Development Coach, and CEO of Leaders Must Lead, is on a mission to help Creatives and Entrepreneurs create and grow profit and understand that Dreams ARE Real. With more than 25 years' experience in corporate roles leading teams of up to 2000 and responsible for more than $150M in revenue, Dan is a recognized expert in leadership, sales, and business strategy. Through his Leaders Must Learn Mastermind, Dreams ARE Real Podcast, Foundations of Success Training, and powerful 1-1 coaching, Dan helps hundreds of entrepreneurs around the world from musicians and artists to chiropractors, coaches, retailers, and beyond experience success and accomplish their goals. To learn more about Dan or to follow him on Social Media, you can find him on: Website: www.leadersmustlead.com Leaders Must Lead Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/leadersmustlead Free Coaching Assessment: https://leadersmustlead.com/free-coaching-assessment Dreams are Real Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/365493184118010/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/leadersmustlead/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/leadersmustlead YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZXypDeFKyZnpeQXcX-AsBQ Thanks for listening! Thanks so much for listening to my podcast! If you enjoyed this episode and think that others could benefit from listening, please share it using the social media buttons on this page. Do you have some feedback or questions about this episode? Leave a note in the comment section below! Subscribe to the podcast If you would like to get automatic updates of new podcast episodes, you can subscribe to the podcast on Apple Podcasts or Stitcher. You can also subscribe in your favorite podcast app. Leave us an Apple Podcasts review Ratings and reviews from our listeners are extremely valuable to me and greatly appreciated. They help my podcast rank higher on Apple Podcasts, which exposes the show to more awesome listeners like you. If you have a minute, please leave an honest review on Apple Podcasts.
1 hour and 53 minutes The Sponsors Thank you to Underground Printing for making this all possible. Rishi and Ryan have been our biggest supporters from the beginning. Check out their wide selection of officially licensed Michigan fan gear at their 3 store locations in Ann Arbor or learn about their custom apparel business at undergroundshirts.com. Our associate sponsors are: Peak Wealth Management, HomeSure Lending, Ann Arbor Elder Law, Michigan Law Grad, Human Element, The Phil Klein Insurance Group, Venue by 4M where we recorded this, TicketIQ! and The Nose Bleeds, which is the Sklars Bros' reboot of Cheap Seats on UFC Fight Pass. 1. Offense vs Purdue starts at 1:00 Blocking was there—Purdue kept delivering free hitters, but how do you grade it if the free hitter's a cornerback versus Edwards? Surprised that JJ only threw 17 passes—felt like he was slinging it. We can remember each one because they were all remarkable. Also remarkable was true freshman Colston Loveland, because that was so smooth. Don't bulk up—just be you! And then Donovan Edwards: star performance. Set up blocks, ran around guys. [The rest of the writeup and the player after THE JUMP] 2. Defense vs Purdue starts at 47:45 Purdue was moving the ball, part of that was Aidan O'Connell and Chuck Sizzle were balling. Part of it was Moten, who had at least four really bad breakdowns in one drive. Sometimes he was running into Michael Barrett, who also struggled that drive. How come our LBs don't chip? Harrell played well, spin-off sack vs the bad RT. Okie shoved a guy into O'Connell's legs. The DTs were making him uncomfortable. Will Johnson: Dude. This is what happens with the 5-star freshmen. 3. Hot Takes, Special Teams and Game Theory starts at 1:09:57 The fake punt: Welschof needs to come up on the edge. Sad field goals. Michigan tried a new style punt. Swinging gate 2PC was fun, win percentage doesn't change from 16 (99%) to 17 (99%) or 15 (99%) so whatever. Time management at the end of the half: go for it on 4th and 2? Maybe just don't give them a drive. Officials: If your review takes 4 minutes and 32 seconds you should be shot at midfield. Running into the kicker: wasn't—he touched the ball, should be a carve-out if the punter isn't a punter because he drops it or something. M got a ticky-tack illegal formation, they got away with a facemask horrible, Okie got away with terrible acting. 4. Hoops vs Kentucky & Virginia starts at 1:40:23 Sucks that they lost both games, also sucks that it looks like we're going to lose Llewellin for the season. Good that they were able to compete with two good teams. Losing Frankie is such a bummer, cold take. Turn Kobe Bufkin into the PG, run the offense out of Hunter, see if Barnes can be your two so you don't have too many limited defenders on the court at once. MUSIC: "New Day Tonight"—Michael Rault "The Lost World"—Babytron "Heartbreaker"—The Walkmen “Across 110th Street”
Erica and Sandeep paid close attention to Seattle's final budget negotiations so you could just relax, recover from Thanksgiving, watch the World Cup, or whatever - knowing Seattle Nice had you covered. This week they debate 11th hour council controversies and speculate about next year's city council races. Support the show
On this week's Hacks & Wonks, Crystal is joined by Executive Director of The Urbanist, Doug Trumm. Crystal and Doug quickly run through news items about progress on Washington state's capital gains tax, a discussion on the worsening traffic safety crisis, and labor stories about Amazon's questionable fulfillment of a court order and the federal government's blocking a railway workers strike ahead of the holidays. Public safety news out of Pierce County includes the start of embattled Sheriff Ed Troyer's criminal trial and troubling news about an officer charged in Manuel Ellis' death having been flagged for violent behavior during their academy training. Doug and Crystal then discuss the gulf between reality and rhetoric that has appeared in media reporting on crime and law enforcement and how it reaches into electeds' handling of issues like decriminalization of simple drug possession at the State Legislature, outcry over a miniscule portion of the Seattle Police Department budget not being funded in the City of Seattle budget process, and the campaign messaging of the King County Prosecuting Attorney's race. On a hopeful note, Leesa Manion's solid win in the King County Prosecutor's race and her strong performance - across the county, across cities, and across legislative districts - serves as a referendum for voters rejecting punitive measures and signifies an appetite for root cause-addressing, data-driven solutions that work. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Doug Trumm, on Twitter at @dmtrumm. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com. Resources “WA Supreme Court clears way for state to collect capital-gains tax” by Claire Withycombe from The Seattle Times "The Urbanist's Ryan Packer Discusses Worsening Traffic Safety Crisis on KUOW" by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist “Labor board blasts Amazon's "flagrant" attempt to flout court order“ by Emily Peck from Axios “Biden signs rail agreement into law, thwarting strike“ by Shawna Chen from Axios “Criminal trial begins in Sheriff Ed Troyer's false-reporting case” by Jim Brunner from The Seattle Times “Academy warned Tacoma of violent training episode by officer later charged in Manuel Ellis' death” Patrick Malone from The Seattle Times “Washington should be a leader in ending the War on Drugs” by Mark Cooke from ACLU-WA “Nelson, Pedersen, and Sawant Dissent Ahead of Final Vote on Seattle Budget” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist “Public Safety Politics and the Even Election Reckoning” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher - I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we are continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a cohost. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's cohost: Executive Director of The Urbanist, Doug Trumm. Welcome! [00:00:52] Doug Trumm: Hey, thanks for having me. It's such a busy news week - it's really going to be a slog to get through it all. [00:00:57] Crystal Fincher: Yeah we will make an attempt. I guess, starting off with some statewide news that isn't ultimately the news that everyone is waiting for, but kind of a pit stop along the way - the Washington Supreme Court clears the way for the state to start collecting capital gains tax. So what happened here? [00:01:16] Doug Trumm: It's still just an early - not a ruling, but just a decision on the Court's part - not to issue an injunction. But hey, that's a really good sign because if the Court was leaning towards invalidating the capital gains tax, they probably would have issued an injunction. But at the same time, you don't want to read too much into these tea leaves, but certainly the fact they can start collecting the tax makes this start to feel pretty real. [00:01:41] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I would agree - don't know what's going to happen yet. I think lots of people are hoping that we do get a favorable ruling for the capital gains tax, but there still is the big issue of whether this counts as, officially, an income tax, which would make it unconstitutional under our Constitution. Many interpretations show that it is not, but we are waiting for the ruling to definitively decide that from the Supreme Court, which I think we're anticipating getting early next year. Is that the case? [00:02:14] Doug Trumm: Yeah, that sounds about right. And there's a lot of ways they could rule. But yeah, certainly one of - the hope, I think, is that they would create a new category of - income actually being income, which in our state - oddly, it's not. So that's what creates this huge hurdle to doing progressive taxation - is that it counts as property, and property you have to tax flat. And progressives - we're not trying to argue for a flat income tax. We want a graduated progressive income tax. So if they get a really favorable ruling, that will open the door to that and suddenly there'll be a lot more options on the table and hopefully Democrats actually take them. [00:02:53] Crystal Fincher: I definitely hope so. Also in the news, one of The Urbanists' own, Ryan Packer, was on KUOW discussing what is really - our own crisis here locally, and a nationwide crisis in traffic safety. What is happening here? [00:03:13] Doug Trumm: Yeah, Washington state really echoes the national trend. And the national trend does not mirror the international trend, which - most industrial nations are getting much safer. They've used the pandemic, sort of as a catalyst in a way, to encourage people to take transit, or walk, or bike or - hey, the roads aren't as busy, let's do this project now and make the streets safer. That's really not the approach we've seen in the United States and in Washington state. We've kind of spun our wheels and we've let projects kind of get behind schedule because of the pandemic. And that's happening globally too in some cases, but usually the vision's only getting sharper. So this is reflected in the data and the New York Times had a piece about this this week - Emily Badger - and the US is up 5% during the pandemic in traffic fatalities. But almost every other major nation, it's going down significantly - so it's a bad case of American exceptionalism. We were so excited for our transportation reporter, Ryan Packer, to be on KUOW to talk about this - their reporting is really raising this issue locally a lot. And they really, at all these meetings where some of these decisions quietly get made, whether that's a transportation safety advisory commission or some obscure regional body. But mostly, there's little efforts here and there to improve safety, but we're not seeing the wholesale re-envisioning of streets or strategy that has really been effective in other countries and bringing down collisions and deadly crashes. [00:05:04] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think so. And we continue to see this tension here, in the United States and locally, between designs that are car-centric being more dangerous for everyone else on the road. And investments in transportation, in pedestrian mobility, bike and transit access and mobility - and it seems like the more we design roads and transportation through ways principally for, primarily for cars and prioritizing their needs above everyone else's, that we come out with these outcomes that are just less safe and too often fatal for all of the other kinds of users. [00:05:50] Doug Trumm: Yeah, exactly. And the American system doesn't even treat pedestrian safety as a category of car safety when they give out their gold, whatever-rated car safety awards. If - you can have a three-ton car that maims pedestrians, but if the person inside is fine - oh, that's safety rated - great. So there's certainly federal stuff, but Ryan and The Urbanist, in general, we've really focused on - what are these projects at the City level? Unfortunately, the clear epicenter of this crisis in Seattle is Southeast Seattle District 2, Tammy Morales' district - and she's been a champion. She's recently told me - hey, I didn't think I was going to become the traffic safety person when I first ran for office, but given my district, this is - I really am. And she didn't say this, but implicit in this is our Transportation Chair hasn't really been focused on that - Alex Pedersen - and we'll probably get into that some more when we talk about the budget, because that's - the investments we're making aren't completely safety-focused, as you alluded to. And we have projects queued up to make it safer to bike and walk in D2, but there was just a wave of delays - projects pushed back one year, two years from the original timeline. There's supposed to be a safe bike route through Beacon Hill, there's supposed to be a safe protected bike lane on MLK Way - but those projects are behind schedule. As far as we know, they're still happening, but if you were - if this area is responsible for over half of the - D2 is responsible for over half of the traffic fatalities in the whole city - the last thing we'd want to be doing is delaying those projects in that district. [00:07:39] Crystal Fincher: Seems so - it doesn't seem to make much sense - same with just connecting sidewalks and neighborhoods that people have been waiting for decades to happen and still hasn't. So long way to go there. Also this week, we had a number of events, news happen in the labor realm - couple of items that affect us locally. One - so Amazon just had a ruling from the National Labor Relations Board directing them to correct some of their action, which they still seem to be just not doing. What's going on at Amazon? [00:08:19] Doug Trumm: Yeah, they think they're kind of above the law when it comes to this. They were supposed to read out this ruling saying - hey, you can't be fired for union organizing, or even having discussions with union organizers, or being union-curious. But instead of just following the order to the letter of the law and reading that out to all their employees, they chose specifically the shift change and then just played a video. So the Labor Board was pretty upset about that because this was a court order, they were supposed to follow it - but they weaseled their way out of it in a very corporate lawyer-y kind of fashion where theoretically just maybe - if you squint your eyes, does this qualify for following the order? I don't know. Alexa, read order. I don't know how you could get - this ruling actually to get to the people, but they're figuring out a way not to do it. [00:09:16] Crystal Fincher: One of the interesting things here - employers are responsible for letting their employees know what their rights are. Amazon has bent over backwards not to do that. This is another example of it. We also see Starbucks bending over backwards to be hostile to the union and we continue to see those actions, and then being called out by the National Labor Relations Board also. And this week, of course, we saw - yesterday - Congress take action to avert the railroad strike by passing legislation that still denies railroad workers any kind of paid sick leave, which just should be the most basic thing that every employee everywhere is entitled to. And just beyond disappointing to me personally - to a ton of people - that we had particularly a Democratic president and right now a Democratic Congress who acted against workers and against unions and their ability to take sick pay. It's just bad all the way around, and it feels like they were thrown under the bus because of the threat of bad things happening if they strike - instead of that being the key that says, wow, these really are essential employees. And hey, there have been billions in stock buybacks recently and hundreds of millions of compensation over the past few years for executives. Maybe they can also spare a sick day and to pressure the companies to provide that very, very, very basic thing for employees. Just very disappointing for me personally. How did you feel about that? [00:11:01] Doug Trumm: Yeah, that was disappointing and Amtrak Joe really let us down. I think it's odd that employees are held hostage to how valuable their work are, right? Their work is, right? Because everyone's - we can't have rails shutting down right in the middle of the holiday crisis when all these companies are trying to make a ton of money for themselves and have a strong Q4 and really try to get some blood flowing in this economy. But instead of going - oh yeah, so I guess we should pay those workers well to make sure that happens, and give them the sick time they're asking for and the benefits - it's just force it through because we create a vision of a crisis if they are actually allowed to use their union rights. So it just goes back to 1880s again of the rail barons and the laws that they got passed - that they're able to compel the workers in this way and have Congress step in. But it certainly is not - hopefully not the end of the story. Hopefully they can actually get real sick pay, especially in a time of a lot of viral spread - both in the COVID realm and really bad flu season. This is upending their lives when they get sick and it doesn't have to be this way. So it's disappointing, and I saw Mayor Harrell decided to pile on with that and say it was great that they'd broke the strike, and work in that he still supports workers' rights and everything - I think you can't have it both ways in this case. You can't One Seattle your way out of this one - you're either with the workers or you're not. [00:12:46] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, pretty cut and dry there. And what I just think is so shortsighted is that this policy is partially a response to being short-staffed. They are already facing staffing shortages. We are already at the breaking point where if - right now, under the current staffing levels, if an employee is sick, if someone does miss a day, that can create chaos in the system because there aren't enough people to cover. And this just perpetuating a system that is hostile to workers, where workers can face discipline for any unplanned absence - and people get sick and families get sick, as we all know - this is an inevitability. That if you're subject to discipline for that, they're seeing more people just leave, instead of have their career of however many years or decades end with them being disciplined for taking care of their sick kid. So we are already setting ourselves up for massive disruptions by making this worker shortage worse. We see things like this happening in education, in healthcare, in transportation - across the board - with public transit systems and others. So we just need to really take a look at what we're doing here and - are we setting ourselves up for the same problems that we swear we have to take action like this to avoid, when really we're just making it more of an inevitability that it does eventually happen. I hope we all learn from this and do better and hold our public officials accountable for doing better. Also in the news this week, speaking of holding public officials accountable, the criminal trial for Pierce County Sheriff Ed Troyer just started. This is the trial about him making a call, that was allegedly a false report, accusing a newspaper delivery person - a Black man who was delivering newspapers - of being suspicious, acting nefariously. He said that his life was threatened by the newspaper carrier, which does not - at least through all the reporting initially, did not seem to be supported by other accounts in what happened. He ended up being charged and now the trial has began. They sat the jury. Opening statements happened. Testimony has begun. What has happened in this trial that's been notable so far? [00:15:22] Doug Trumm: They use the same strategies they always use, it seems like - it's pretty clear that this police officer clearly didn't act as you'd want someone to act. Now he's trying to get out of it claiming - okay, I did feel threatened or I did. And it's how it plays out every time and a lot of people were willing to go along - suddenly this violence incident that this Sheriff deputy caused - suddenly it's not his fault because something else, and it just seemed like hopefully we're finally learning from that. But we've seen a lot of other cases where it's enough for some people to exonerate someone. I don't know - it's frustrating that this is how it always goes, but maybe eventually this line will go stale. [00:16:13] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, we will see. This is one where it's interesting because - for the day job and for this podcast, following the news is useful. But for my own personal sanity, this is a situation where often I find my inclination is to disconnect from - definitely the daily news, the drumbeat of news about this - just because some of the early signals, decisions, indications from this trial feel really familiar to me. Meaning that - man, we've seen so many of these trials end and the police officer, sheriff ends up being found not guilty, gets off regardless of what looks to be very obvious evidence to many people in the public. And I just - this will be very disappointing once again, if that does happen, but we will see what happens with this trial and continue to follow it for you all. Also, there was news that came out about an officer that wound up being charged in Manuel Ellis's death, having a very violent episode previously, and that not being heeded after that was communicated to the Tacoma Police Department. And so tragic. Can you detail what we found out here? [00:17:44] Doug Trumm: Yeah, I really encourage everyone to read about this story because it really makes you question how these systems are working and how this can happen. Because this officer - Rankine, I think is his name - was in the police academy. They identified that he had an issue with violence and with - I forget what they called it, "code black" or something like that - basically just shutting down and going tunnel vision, not hearing the outside world once he's in that mode. And it's related to his combat service as a veteran - obviously, that's a complicated issue - we're very, very glad that people serve, but that doesn't necessarily mean we want to put them on the frontlines interacting with the public if they have these unaccounted-for issues that are identified by the police academy. The police academy trainer decided to write a note, his superiors after a couple of days forwarded it to the Tacoma Police Department who was sponsoring him to be in this police academy and said - hey, we're worried about this guy. He had this violent incident where he shot someone during a training simulation who was not someone - the training simulation was supposed to be how do you de-escalate the situation, how do you - and the person was not cooperating, to be clear - and it was a virtual simulation. But the trainer was - why did you do this? And he couldn't really explain it because he went blank or whatever, and thought he had done fine because, I guess in the military, that's what he was conditioned to do and had seen a lot of violent episodes - but hadn't really made the connection that now you're in a civilian setting and you're supposed to be de-escalating situations instead of fighting your way out of them. And what ended up happening, despite the police academy issuing this warning saying - hey, maybe don't take this guy actually - the Tacoma Police Department still took him, didn't really make any accommodations, or - it's not clear that they warned his - the rest of the people he'd be working with, basically just treated him like one of the guys. They did put him on desk duty initially, but I think that's just what rookies kind of do. Then they put him on patrol with another rookie and it was not even a couple months - it was less than a year - and he had already, this happened. It was clearly a tragic incident waiting to happen and it did happen. It leaves us with a lot of questions like - is the police academy - is a little note in your file enough, or should he fail out of the academy? That's one odd thing about this case - they didn't fail him. The other odd thing is that even with this big warning, this huge red flag, Tacoma PD didn't do anything and now they're stonewalling the reporters from The Seattle Times and all the other newspapers that are knocking on the door, and they're just kind of clammed up about it, but it's clear they messed up in a big, big way. [00:21:03] Crystal Fincher: It's just one of those things that makes you want to once again ask - what are we doing here? If there is behavior that is so violent that you feel that you need to warn someone else not to hire him, why are you passing him? To the question that you just asked, why does that person pass the academy in the first place? Why was that not heeded when they were hired? Okay, they were hired and brought onto the academy. Why was no corrective action taken, no additional guidance? And yes, this wound up very predictably. The warning was given because it could be foreseen that this would wind up in unjustified violence to a member of the public - which it did, resulting in that person's death. This is a person, right? And it's just - if we can't weed out someone who even before they get in the system are demonstrating unacceptable violence - violence that you have to tell someone to look out for - what is the point of anything? There is this characterization by people, who I believe are acting in bad faith largely - that any kind of talk of accountability is antithetical to safety, it makes us less safe, it's hostile to police officers, and is not worth pursuing. And if we do, we're making life harder for them. If they're saying this is what belongs in their ranks, if they're saying that this is acceptable for passing and getting in, and then hiring without anything - then this is unacceptable. They're saying - they've said that their own policies were violated - this is seemingly saying that the warning came from them not meeting their own standards. If they can't hold themselves to their own standards and weed people out who don't fit that, then someone else has to. And evidently those aren't really their standards if they can't adhere to them. So someone has to, otherwise we're just letting - in this situation - basically killing machines out onto the street. And we have to do better. And it just makes no sense that we are entertaining people who say that this is bad for police officers. Acting against policy should not be bad for them. If so, we should have discussions about the policy, but this doesn't make any sense. And if their job truly is to protect and serve, and someone is acting completely against that, then acting more in concert with that and making sure that happens should be a welcome development. And over and over again, the public continues to vote for real accountability and reject those kinds of disingenuous arguments that - hey, you got to "back the blue" or nothing else. People can be happy to have a police officer there, that they're happy to have a police officer when they call 911 and show up, and still believe that there should be guidelines for their conduct and behavior that guide them and that they should be held accountable to - just like everyone else with every other job in this society. It just is so infuriating that - hey, this is predictable, it's foreseeable. And just with a shrug. [00:24:50] Doug Trumm: Yeah, and it wasn't his first time - [00:24:52] Crystal Fincher: Right. [00:24:53] Doug Trumm: - using basically a chokehold-type thing. And he had another I-can't-breathe incident and they just were like - oh well, it happens. And if he says - oh this person was threatening or violent - they kind of just, even though after the whole George Floyd thing - there's one thing that I thought was kind of the lowest hanging fruit - okay, we probably shouldn't use chokeholds anymore or knee on people's back, but this is exactly what this guy was doing. And he suffered no consequence for it until he killed someone. [00:25:27] Crystal Fincher: Acting against policy. And as we have seen with so many of these incidences, that there have been several occasions where officers who wind up killing someone - use violence unjustifiably, use violence against policy in situations before the killing occurs - which there is no discipline for. It is time for them to be held accountable to the job that the public believes they were hired to do. Just like all of us. That's not hostile. That's just common sense. So we'll see how that continues. It is just another infuriating, devastating, tragic element of Manny Ellis's death that is just - it's tragic. [00:26:21] Doug Trumm: Hopefully we learn from it. And I think it relates to how we get so breathless and just completely operate on fear and desperation - we have to hire, we have to reach some sort of set number of cops and then we'll feel safe. But when you get that desperate and you just want to add ranks so you can put out your press release to claim victory on that - you're hiring the bottom of the barrel. If we were serious about safety, we wouldn't worry so much about that number as flunking people out of the academy who are killing machines. You have to put accountability ahead of "let's just hit a number," "here's the right response time," "here's the right number of officers" - those are important things, but you can't get so blinded to them that you're taking terrible cops. [00:27:13] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and that makes the community less safe. The academy warned that - Hey, putting this officer on the street may make the community less safe, this is acting against public safety, we don't want people to be victimized unjustly by violence - and that was the warning that came with this officer - and look. We'll continue to see how this happens. Also kind of teeing up this week were some articles just talking about the War on Drugs - how much of a failure it has been - which is very timely because in this upcoming legislative session, which we're starting to see a flurry of activity with. And our new legislators now down in Olympia - and getting set and oriented and all of that to start the session next month - is that the Blake decision, which a couple years ago the Supreme Court basically decriminalized or invalidated the law that criminalized simple possession of any substances. Our Legislature subsequently acted to bring a uniform policy across the state and kind of instituted a new method of criminalization - some of it was lighter criminal penalties, but still criminal penalties for substance use and possession - in the face of a ton of evidence and data that shows that - Hey, criminalization is actually not an effective intervention. We've seen the entire War on Drugs. We've seen what has happened there. If we actually treat this as a public health problem and not as a criminal justice problem, we are much better off. There was a survey of Washington state voters - a poll taken - and in that poll, 85% of likely voters - the poll was in June 2022 of this year - 85% of voters believe that drug use should be treated as a public health issue and not a criminal justice issue. And this really sets the tone and provides a mandate for our Legislature, which has to take up the Blake decision and the Blake legislation again this year - because there was a sunset provision in it that is now up this year - to actually make good on this policy. How did you read this? [00:29:45] Doug Trumm: It seems like the public's at a different place than some of the very serious, centrist, establishment Democratic leaders on this who are - the likes of Chris Gregoire, who are saying - Oh, we really need to get - go back to our old policy where - it was drug possession was fully criminalized and it was just one strike and they could, people could be locked up for simple possession. And I think they portray that it's really important to dealing with downtown disorder, or crime, or whatever. But that's not really where the people are at, and this three-strike provision probably does make it, if you're only listening to cops, annoying - 'cause they feel like these warnings are letting people off the hook. But with jails being pretty full right now, you start running into this problem of where are are we putting people? We've done this drug war thing a long time, it hasn't really worked, the people are ready for a public health approach instead of a punitive lock-them-up approach. We just saw that with the election of Leesa Manion for King County Prosecutor that - the people went with the person who was willing to do diversionary programs that try to get people help and not load them up with jail time and fees, but instead give them an opportunity to get back on their feet and better themselves and think about rehabilitation instead of just ruining someone's life. I think the people are ready to take a different approach - I don't know how far folks, both in terms of the State Legislature and the public, if they're - maybe not ready for a Portugal-style solution, but I really think they're ready to have that conversation rather than just go back to the old way of doing things. I think the - maybe one of the things will come up is fentanyl - it really is a scary drug in terms of what it can do to a person and how likely it is to overdose - I'm sure they'll try to use that and maybe fentanyl is treated a little bit differently than other drugs, but it seems like a lot of substances doesn't - I don't know why you immediately lock someone up for having possession of a set quantity. It's sort of like - we got to get this person help, but jail isn't help. [00:32:11] Crystal Fincher: And jail doesn't help, and it actually does more harm than good in this situation. It makes our streets less safe. People are less stable, more prone to commit crime, when they get out - and more prone to continue to use. We've seen all of this and again, this is just about possession. This doesn't impact any laws on selling, or distributing, or anything like that - those still remain and that's not part of this discussion. But it would be good for them to act in alignment with where the evidence and data show - we are made more safe, and people are made more healthy and less likely to use and abuse drugs and other harmful substances. So we will continue to follow this throughout the legislative session and see what happens. Also big news this week - the Seattle City Council passed their budget. What did we get? What are the highlights and lowlights of this budget? [00:33:19] Doug Trumm: Yeah, it was a marathon day to wrap up the amendments and do all the speeches on Monday and Tuesday - I guess the really marathon day was the Budget Committee last week. It always is a slog at the end and it's tough to know everything that's happening, but ultimately the budget is - there's a lot of different takes on it, there's a lot of perspectives. But ultimately what happened is largely - Mayor Harrell's budget is reflected in the Council's balancing package. They did make some significant changes, but nothing enormous. And the issue that they're dealing with is that there is a large budget shortfall. It started out at $141 million at the beginning. And then they got the news that the projections had gotten a lot worse late in the game - so that any hope of Council just adding a bunch of new investments in evaporated, once they got that forecast that Real Estate Excise Tax was going to be way down - that was the main thing that took a bite out of the budget. And we use that REET money to fund a lot of our infrastructure investments in this city. So from a transportation focus, I was pretty disappointed to not see more investments in street safety. They did make some. Councilmember Tammy Morales really fought for her district - as we mentioned earlier - epicenter of the safety crisis. So she got a proviso to make sure that they improve the bike lanes in Southeast Seattle to have harder infrastructure, so you can't just run over those flex posts and injure someone on the bike lane or the sidewalk. That's one positive add, but it was just a proviso, so hopefully SDOT does the right thing and implements it rather than kind of wiggling out of it. But by and large, transportation didn't get a ton of adds and Mayor Harrell's budget didn't make a ton of new initiatives or pushes there, so that's one thing that fell victim to that shortfall. But a lot of the action was around public safety and that's where we saw a lot of the grandiose takes on - especially on the centrist side of - Oh, this was a disaster. End of the day, the Council funded 99% of the mayor's SPD budget. They're making a really big deal about this 1% - and within that 1% that the Council did do cuts was the ShotSpotter gunfire detection surveillance system, which has a really - it has a track record - it's been implemented in a lot of cities and that track record is not very good. It doesn't really, there's no correlation to it decreasing crime, leads to a lot of false calls - those false calls can then cause over-policing of communities of colors where they're implemented. And it has in, in instances, led to violent altercations between cops who are like - Oh, the gunfire thing said there was a gunshot here. And sometimes it's slamming a car door, or firework, or something - could set something off - or backfiring car, I guess. So what are we doing here? This is not evidence-based practice - Council made the budget safer, but if you listen to Councilmember Sara Nelson or Councilmember Alex Pedersen, who voted against the budget, and then some of the press releases that were fired off shortly after - the Chamber actually sent the press release before the final vote, but right after the Council briefing. They said - this is, these are public safety cuts. And the other big thing that happened was - there's 80 positions that were unfilled of actually 240 total unfilled positions at SPD, because they're having a hard time recruiting faster than they're losing officers, which relates to a national trend of a lot of attrition and police officers and not as much new people entering the profession. But they eliminated 80 positions off the books - because when they leave those 240 empty positions, that means that those, that money goes into SPD's budget every cycle. And it throws out the balance of the whole thing because you're - basically all the extra money goes to SPD instead of just being in the General Fund for them to debate and figure out where to go. It can go back into public safety investments and that's what happened this time, even with the eliminating the budgets. But basically a lot of people tried to turn that into - they were cutting officers - but they fully funded the mayor's hiring plan, which - they're going to hire 125 officers, which they hope - that's then 30 new, net new officers. But that wasn't good enough for those two councilmembers and for the Seattle Chamber of Commerce. So they both kind of opposed this budget. And that seemed to be pretty upsetting to Budget Chair Teresa Mosqueda, because she had worked with both of those Councilmembers Nelson and Pedersen and had put their amendments into the budget - some of them. And she thought that spirit of compromise would lead them to vote for it, but they did not. And so it almost - this budget almost failed because it needed six votes. It only got six votes because of those two defections, plus Councilmember Sawant makes it her tradition and has always voted against the budget. And she's coming at it from the opposite direction of - Hey, let's invest more in social services, and let's tax the rich, and increase the JumpStart payroll tax - is her argument, the last few years. And she specifically said - I'm not chucked in with Pedersen and Nelson. So yeah, it ended up being kind of a mess messaging-wise, but largely this budget was reflecting Harrell's priorities, plus a few of the Council's. And it made the most of a really downward trend in revenue - and that was by virtue of JumpStart payroll tax kind of papering over some of the holes, and also then letting them make a record investment in housing. So housing definitely did well. There were some Green New Deal priorities. And it's a really big budget, so I'm kind of - broad strokes here - but if I'm missing anything, Crystal, let me know. But yeah, it felt bizarre to me that the the debate about it was so far from the reality. And I guess these few million dollars in the police budget are enough to cause these votes against, and the Chamber to be really upset, and saying this is public safety cuts. But it largely seemed like much more collaboration and kumbaya between the mayor and most of the council, with Budget Chair Mosqueda and Mayor Harrell complimenting each other about how well they work together. [00:40:35] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. I think what we're seeing is reflective of some of the reality versus rhetoric that we see on a national level, that we see with conservative Republicans, even the MAGA Republicans, where the rhetoric just doesn't match reality. But the rhetoric is a tactic to eventually shift people's perception of what reality is. It doesn't matter what happened if you just keep saying something else happened - Oh my gosh, this is, you know, horrible. We didn't get anything we're asking for. We need to move in this completely different direction - people start to absorb that and pick that up. As we saw this week with the New York Times - basically admitting without participating, pointing the finger at themselves - saying, Yeah, rhetoric about public safety was really disjointed from the actual facts. There are tons of stories, but when you look at the actual crime rates, they weren't actually high. Media did this. And they very conveniently left out that they were at the top of the list of media doing that. But it felt like that's similar to this conversation. This rhetoric is completely detached from what happened in the budget and from what's happening on the ground - yeah, majority of what Harrell asked for was in there. One notable exception was the ShotSpotter technology as you covered, which actually didn't have a big, a huge price tag compared to some other things. But it's still money that, especially in a shortfall, can be better spent to make people safe. And I think that's where a lot of people are at right now. It's just - lots of people are worried about safety, but where they continue to vote, and how people on the ground continue to vote in elections is - yes, we do want our communities to be safer, but we recognize that the public safety equation is bigger than just policing. We have to talk about interventions that are appropriate for the crises that we're facing. Just sweeping and moving around and criminalizing people who are unhoused is not making that problem any better, it's making it worse. So instead of investing money continually in sweeps and in criminalization and carceral solutions - Hey, what if we actually use that money to put people in houses - that actually is a solution to that problem. Other cities are doing that with success. We could be doing that. Hey, if people are having behavioral health crises, what if there was actually treatment available for them and a way for them to get the issues that they have addressed? Jail is not that. Arresting them is not that. And we still have, and prior to some of the heel digging-in that police unions have done over the past few years, there were tons of officers and unions who admitted that freely - hey, we go into a situation where someone's called us and someone is having mental health issue - jail isn't going to do anything for that. If anything, it may destabilize that situation more and put them further away from help and make that situation worse. We actually need interventions that are appropriate for the challenges that we're facing. We have to deal with extreme poverty. We have to deal with people who are in crisis. We really do not need to deal with it like New York is signaling they're going to deal with it - in mandatorily incarcerating people. We see that we have problems here in our state and a lawsuit that's currently being filed with people with behavioral health problems struggling in our current jail system and not getting their needs met, and their whole process is being delayed sometimes with no foreseeable end because we don't have enough resources in that direction. So people want that, but they don't want this continual one note - Hey, it's either police or it's nothing. And we'll see where it's going - as we hear a siren in the background here, appropriate - but yeah, it's just the rhetoric doesn't match the reality. The saddest thing is that the public sees it and our leaders are behind where the public is at - and they keep asking and they keep voting for something different. And we have leaders that are just stuck on the same thing, and I think that frustration and tension is growing. And it feels like they're ratcheting this up for the 2023 City elections coming, and they're going to try and make this a flashpoint for those conversations. But I think that's not a very wise strategy, because the public has not been going for it. We just had an election where it's pretty clear they did not go for that argument in many different ways at many different levels. This is not just a Seattle thing. This is a King County-wide thing, a State of Washington thing. And it's time that they take heed instead of pushing on, just kind of - despite all reason and evidence to do this. [00:46:15] Doug Trumm: Yeah. It's pretty clear they're telegraphing this is their signal when you have your press release fired up before the budget's even officially passed. And in the case of the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, that these are public safety cuts. Nelson - and Pedersen is the one who's up for re-election - they really complimented the way he voted on that as far as voting down this budget over this tiny, tiny bit of disagreement over the police budget that they blew out of proportion. Apparently deleting these 80 out of 240 unfilled positions - you know, sending the wrong signal and is - people, the public trust has been damaged now. And it's just - get me to the fainting couch - they can add back these positions anytime. No other department in the whole city would ever have this many, anywhere near this - 240 empty positions - you just keep the money. And they get to - SPD gets to put it wherever they want in their department, basically, because of the way they don't eliminate those positions, and just Council and the mayor - tell them which parts they wanted - who would run an organization this way? If you don't have, if you're not paying for something - why are you still paying for it? It just, it - I dunno - it drives me nuts. It goes back to that sort of frenzy and the sort of fear mongering around crime - where if we don't just heap gobs of money at the police department - we're not talking about Defund, we're not talking about reducing the amount of - the headcount at SPD. We're just saying - how are you spending this money? Can we spend this money wiser? If we have less officers, we need to be spending the money wiser. We can't just have it be a slush fund, like we saw in - I think it was 2018 or 2019, right after they passed the budget - the average police compensation went up to like $157,000 per officer. This one officer made over $400,000 because they were just letting the overtime fly like hotcakes. And an officer working 80-hour weeks - is that making us safer? It doesn't really seem like the way to do it. You kind of put yourself in between a rock and a hard place because they also fight the alternatives - they say they're for a mental health professional showing up for those crisis calls, but then they block the program to actually set up an alternative emergency response. And that's what SPD has been up to the past few years. As Councilmember Lewis and Mosqueda and others have fought to set up - like Denver has - a alternative response, and they make up excuse after excuse. They say maybe the police actually have to be there. They dispute their own study that showed that most of these calls could be done without an armed officer there. But yeah, it just - there's nothing evidence-based or strategic about this kind of election-based fearmongering, just kind of opportunistic way of dealing with this problem. People wonder why this problem is festering - there has been a troubling trend over the last nine years - of corporate mayors that the Chamber and all these other centrist forces and Seattle Times have endorsed. They're not making the problem better, but they keep running on it like they are. So it really is - it's created a weird thing. And I wrote about how this sort of relates to us holding our mayoral and council elections in odd years when the electorate is smaller and they can kind of dominate the debate among this crowded, smaller electorate - tends to be more homeowners, tends to be wealthier and whiter than the population at-large. So it works in the odd year. But as we saw with voters passing even-year election reform - they're not asking for these elections to be in odd years, they'd rather them be in even years. And the County is going to make that move for Executive and Council races, and a few others like County Assessor - county-level races. But we actually need state permission to do that for the municipal level. So hopefully we get that because if we're going to solve this problem, it makes sense to have the broader segment of the electorate actually weigh in on that rather than purposely choosing a low turnout election to make all these decisions. So that's one thing I hope happens out of this, but don't hold your breath because I think they like it that way. [00:50:54] Crystal Fincher: They absolutely do seem to like it that way. And you did write a real good article breaking this phenomenon down. It's just frustrating to see voters - they are frustrated about public safety. They do know that we could be doing better, while seeing people continue to make decisions in the opposite direction. And when they are given a voice, it's definitive in one direction. And we just - the King County Prosecutor race that we just had was really a referendum on this entire argument. And mirrors what we saw in 2020, with the King County Charter Amendments. This is not just a Seattle thing. This is a countywide thing. One of the things I think people try and dismissively do i - oh, this is just, it's only a thing in super liberal Seattle, progressive Seattle, and no one else wants this. And we continue to have voters say - no, no, actually this is what we want - all over the county. And places where their electeds really are under the impression that - hey, the public, maybe they do just want more police officers, or I'm afraid to say anything different because they may not accept it. Public's already there, as we continue to see. And my goodness, in these Council elections coming up, there could not be a more clear mandate of movement in one direction in literally every district in the City. To enormous degrees - Leesa Manion's victory was large throughout the county. Yes, in Seattle - it was decisive and humongous. And in each of the council districts, it was - it was just really - it's just really something. I'm sitting here working in elections and you try and understand where voters are, understand where policy is - what's effective, where things need to move - and they're actually in alignment. And the barrier is - there seem to be some in media who are very stuck on not wanting this to happen, and a number of elected officials who believe them. And it's just continuing to be frustrating. But we see, in so many cities and so many districts - whether it's City Council districts, County Council districts, cities, precincts - across the board, they prefer a balanced, comprehensive approach to public safety and outright reject what we heard from Jim Ferrell - the more punitive - Hey, we need to crack down on things, make crime illegal again - understanding that punishment doesn't equal safety. And we would all rather be safe. We've tried punishment for decades and it has not resulted in a safer community for all of us. It has actually hurt it. And people want to be safe. They want to do the things that make us safe, and they understand - more than where a lot of leaders do - what the evidence says about that. So it's just really interesting. Was there anything noteworthy or unique that you saw in election results about that? [00:54:20] Doug Trumm: Yeah. I think it bears underscoring that the - very, very much the same coalition that was behind Republican now-City Attorney Ann Davison was the people behind Jim Ferrell, who was also a former Republican. Now, they both claim that they're Democrats now, but very much still act like Republicans. And there was a lot of Democrats - Sara Nelson endorsed Jim Ferrell and it didn't seem to help him very much in Seattle because, or her in Seattle - it helped her opponent, I guess, his opponent in Seattle. Leesa Manion cleaned up in Seattle - and that was part of her victory, but she won by 18 points. So it wasn't just Seattle, although Seattle was her strongest base of support. So it really seems like what an odd-year electorate does - electing a Republican in Ann Davison to be their City Attorney. And it's odd that we elect city attorneys - it doesn't really need to be that way. But they worked people up about crime and they did support Ann Davison, but in a much larger electorate just one year later they overwhelmingly supported Leesa Manion who's very much - let's stay the course, let's keep these diversionary programs. So whatever mandate Ann Davison thinks she had is absolutely gone. And all these people who are calculating - oh, maybe we can, maybe this whole region is just going to go tough on crime. It's just not happening. And the even-year election helps - we had reasonably good turnout. But the numbers are such that I wouldn't want to be Ann Davison going up for re-election, but hopefully we can get some of that turnout bump into the council elections because that's really what's at play here is - we've seen what an even-year electorate wants, and can we make that also what an odd-year electorate wants? But yeah, these crime narratives aren't connecting in the even year. Leesa Manion just did surprisingly well, considering - the way the race looked beforehand. One poll showed them tied right before the election, but clearly - A) their polls might've been a little bit overestimating support - and some of that goes into people didn't think that young people would turn out. And young people did turn out in relatively high numbers in this election. And hopefully that's a sign of things to come as well. It's just - that's what happens in odd years - why they're so much more conservative - is a lot of that younger vote kind of fades and a lot of communities of color and renters also fade. So you're left with the rest, which is the more conservative side of things. But it doesn't - people can - if we make clear what the stakes are, we hopefully can sustain some of that even-year turnout, but it also just - election year reform also would make this a lot simpler. So I can't underscore that enough. It drives - yeah, it's sort of odd that we are stuck in this predicament of - it's clear what people want, but because of odd years, we have to fight twice as hard. So yeah, I think these results really are - suggest potentially that 2021 - in Seattle's case - where we saw a lot of centrists come into power, might've been a bit of an outlier. It doesn't necessarily mean all these people are weak in their re-election hopes, but all the talks about Seattle's now drifting conservative - I don't see it. [00:58:02] Crystal Fincher: And there was a backlash and - I feel like I've been on a small island, with just a few others, who have said the entire time that that race was an outlier. One, Seattle is different than a lot of other areas. If there really was a wholesale pushback on that, we would have also seen that in suburbs, we would have seen that in different areas. We actually saw the opposite happen in suburbs, where they elected - a number of suburbs elected more progressive officials than they ever had before - who were speaking strongly about making the community more safe with comprehensive public safety policies and really rejecting the punitive policies. The race in Seattle was an odd race - you had an incumbent who lost in the primary, you had two really unknown people who both - didn't really consider themselves to be Democrats, so there were unalignments. You had massively different levels of spending and different levels of voter communication. And, from a political consulting point of view, you have to talk to all of the voters who are voting in the election. It's wonderful - and canvassing and doorbelling is great - but you just cannot canvass a city as big as the City of Seattle in one election cycle. And that's what we saw happen. There was a lot of canvassing, but a lot less direct voter communication. You may make it to 50,000 people with that canvassing, but you got to talk to the other 200,000 - and that happens with direct voter communications. And they were just massively, massively outspent. And the spending that did happen was really late for the progressive candidates, so if you aren't known, and if your opponent can define who you are - and spends half a million dollars doing so - that's going to carry the day and it did. But that is a unique kind of nuts-and-bolts-of-campaigns thing that was apparent to a lot of people before the election results. So that's not just hindsight is 20/20 things - those were, as that was shaping up - that was concerning to a lot of folks who were looking at and participating in those elections. And so we had before that, the 20 - well, we did see a direct public safety vote in the King County Charter Amendment votes, which wound up largely like these wound up. And just looking at these 2022 King County Prosecutor results - again, people try and characterize this as a Seattle thing - but Renton, Newcastle, Mercer Island, Sammamish, Issaquah, Bellevue, Bothell, Kenmore. Those cities are not what I think a lot of people would group into the Seattle progressive bucket, and were firmly in the side of Leesa Manion and rejecting punitive public safety policies. As we look at the Blake decision and people, looking at - well, people are scared, it's really worrisome to look at that. We're talking about - the 45th, the 48th, the 41st, the 11th, the 33rd LDs, right - these are not Seattle-based LDs. These are North and Eastside, Vashon Island, like these - everywhere around the county, voters are very decisively saying - we want to move in a direction that evidence points will make us more safe. And I just really hope that our elected officials stop listening to some of the detached rhetoric and start looking at the evidence and what their constituents are saying - because those who aren't are going to pay a price. And it's really important to take a look at what results actually are, and tether ourselves to reality here, and call out the reporting and the characterizations that are not tethered to reality. That's going to be an important thing. [01:02:33] Doug Trumm: Hey, there was this Seattle Times editorial this morning that was mad at Bruce Harrell for not being louder about the huge public safety cuts to his budget - the 1% that we mentioned earlier. Why isn't he getting in the arena? That's what Blethen and his buddies said, and it's - okay, that's crazy - first. But also, maybe this is saying that some of the politicians see the writing on the wall that - okay, this isn't like a home run issue for them like they maybe thought. They have to kind of actually try to moderate and have compromise and have a truly, comprehensive public safety plan instead of putting lip service to the alternatives and just being all police all the time. I don't know if that's what went into the thought of Harrell not getting into the arena, like the Seattle Times Editorial Board asked him to, but yeah - it certainly is unhinged. And it - Fox News always has a ton of crime coverage right before elections, and then it drops in half - there's been a study on this and after the midterm. So suddenly it's not prime all the time when you turn on Fox News - there's a reason for that. It's calculated, it's manipulation, it's election manipulation. And a lot of these other papers, including The Seattle Times, do that as well. I haven't seen the studies see that it's dropped in half, but that's part of the whole game and it's part of why the playing field isn't even. But I think, eventually, you have to have actual truth to what you're saying, or it starts just not connecting where we're at then. [01:04:17] Crystal Fincher: Well said. And with that, we thank you all for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, December 2nd, 2022. Hacks & Wonks is co-produced by Shannon Cheng and Bryce Cannatelli. Our insightful co-host today was Executive Director of The Urbanist, Doug Trumm. You can find Doug on Twitter @dmtrumm - that's two Ms at the end. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can find me @finchfrii. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you soon.
The Sponsors Thank you to Underground Printing for making this all possible. Check them out at ugpmichiganapparel.com, or check out our selection of shirts on the MGoBlogStore.com! And let's not forget our associate sponsors: Peak Wealth Management, HomeSure Lending, Ann Arbor Elder Law, Michigan Law Grad, Human Element, The Phil Klein Insurance Group, Venue by 4M, and we are recording this on SignalWire. Featured Musician: Tres Crow The Video: [After THE JUMP: What we said] --------------------- 1. Purdue Preview starts at the top Meh. O'Connell isn't talented but he can fill the role of Air Raid QB and get the ball to Charlie Jones, who's been their most effective weapon. Next is the tight end. Defense is a bunch of guys playing Ron English ball. The Cover 2 breaks down, not great at tackling, heavy up front except they're down a DT. 2. The Game After Review: Offense vs OSU starts at 28:46 This is what they wanted. The advanced stats can't account for this style of play because if you give up 10 touchdown opportunities and the opponent hits seven you get blown out. Michigan missed some of their shots early, blocking was the same it is usually. McCarthy's legs led to explosives. Was it the block of the year? 2. The Game After Review: Defense vs OSU starts at 50:01 This is what we wanted. Ohio State was expecting more pressure, Michigan sat back and played games with the defensive backs. Sainristil had a DAY. Jenkins stood out, Harrell had a good game for him. Strategy was to get Day to give up the run, which he would do at the first provocation. 4. Hoops vs Virginia, Kentucky Preview, World Cup if we get to it starts at 1:06:47 That was their shot. Worried about the defensive ceiling Dickinson and Williams because they went small and we couldn't stop them from driving. Need one vs Kentucky or UNC now. USA got out of their group, definitely getting tired after 60 minutes of their heavy press. Pulisic should be okay, probably not going 90. What's a win this year? About the Featured Musician Tres Crow (Spotify) is my best friend. Originally from Grand Haven, he was in a few bands there, then came to Michigan where we met and jammed around. Junior year he formed the band Oblivion, who became our core lifelong friend group. After college he had a short solo career, punctuated by some success in a group called Greenland and again with a breakaway called Noble Three. That landed him in Nashville and then he got married and that was it for the solo career. But his music's still out there, and it's high time you listen to it. I'm the friend in the 3rd song who "grew wider than tall." Shadow Box Second Head Shipwrecked Also because Across 110th Street will get our Youtubes taken down, the opener and outro: “The Employee is Not Afraid”—Bear vs. Shark “Ruska Vodka”—Motorboat
Part two of our interview with the super-talented Daryn Harrell and Ricky Harris. Join us as we chop it up about singing in church and their roles in our upcoming film, "We Woke". Yes!
Listen in to this chat with Melissa Harrell. When life gave Melissa Harrell lemons used her counseling skills to make lemonade. Effective, informative, and inspiring, Common Threads illuminates the influence of stress and mental illness on the affected parties and their families as they struggle to heal. From an early age, Melissa Harrell was familiar with the implications of mental illness on a family, particularly youngsters. Although she knew her parents loved her, she was forced into the role of caregiver during her childhood due to her age, and she responded by turning to dance, faith, and a strong inner core as a basis for healing. Melissa eventually began a successful career in counseling as well as health. But she encountered another series of traumatic episodes. From her moving, first-person narrative, she provides her resilience and strength and a positive approach to everyday life. This book contributes to helping professionals and those contending with trauma. Her website https://rccforyou.com/ Unearth hope https://unearthhope.org/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/melissacollinsharrellauthor/ Grab Elizabeth and Stella Meet ZOE https://amzn.to/3EQKgtO Grab Common Threads https://amzn.to/3XmgmF7 --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/chatsfromtheblogcabin/message
If you've wondered about Fastest Known Times (FKTs) - how they work, how you identify one, how you train for one - then you'll really enjoy segment one. Race Director and Running Coach Becca Jones will enlighten you and make you laugh with her FKT crewing stories. And Hayden Harrell joins us in the Big Ass Runner Studio to share what mistakes he learned from while attempting his very first trail race. Whether you're a first-timer or veteran racer, you'll learn a little something.Episode 121 line-up:Intro: Dustin FanzoPre Show: NoneSegment One: Demystifying FKTs (feat. Becca Jones)Shoutout & Kudos: Path Project Wheeler PantSegment Two: First Trail Race Mistakes (feat. Hayden Harrell) BigAssRunner.comMore content on IG @big_ass_runnerWe recommend Trail Running apparel at Path ProjectsWe recommend Trail Shorts Liners and Socks from XOSkin, discount code "BAR" for 10% offWe recommend Trail Running jackets and vests at Vander JacketWe recommend Myaderm for you CBD needs, discount code "big run" for 20% offWe recommend Chafing Cream at Salty Britches, discount code "bigassrunner" for 20% offWe recommend Nutrition Guidance with NutriworksStarting a podcast? We recommend Buzzsprout for hosting.Audio Engineer: Steve "Santa's Helper" Saunders#trailrunning#trailrunningpodcast#runningpodcast
Elias and Fuad are back for another edition of 3 in the Key! The fellas discuss the beef between Giannis and a ladder. KD's comments about the Nets' starting lineup. Will the Warriors finally get a road win?
Episode 178 - Interviews and performances with the best of Austin's hard-working musicians being interviewed by local comedians. Sometimes strange, sometimes serious, but always sincere. Brought to you by Music Firsthand. Hosts BeckiJo Neill and Kim Stacy connected with Jason Harrell for the Comedian's Interviewing Musicians' Season 12. They chat about hammock reading time, running, recording an album during quarantine, Andy Macintyre, poop emojis, HEB cricket snacks and Jason's kids perspective on his music. They also played a game called the "National Grab Some Nuts Day Quiz"... Plus... great live performances featured throughout! Check out the full video on YouTube and remember to support the artist by giving it a like! Enjoy y'all! Recorded live Aug 3, 2021. This show is made possible because of generous patrons! Become a patron for as little as $1 and get access to rewards, bonus content and exclusive features. Join the club: Comedians Interviewing Musicians Vodcast Podcast Hosts: BeckiJo Neill and Kim Stacy Check out the live video and subscribe to our YouTube channel. Hire a local band with our live music booking app that matches you based on lifestyle and brand. Request the app here: Music Firsthand. Keep up with the Austin music news for free with the Austin Music Firsthand Magazine on Flipboard.
On this week's Hacks & Wonks, Crystal is joined by friend of the show, defense attorney, abolitionist and activist, Nicole Thomas-Kennedy! They start catching up with the Seattle City Budget. The City Council revealed their proposed budget earlier this week, and in general it proposes putting back funding for programs that were originally given fewer resources under Mayor Harrell's proposal - most notably restoring the raises for frontline homeless service workers, which were cut in Harrell's budget. The Council's proposal also uses JumpStart funds as originally intended, cuts ghost cop positions, and eliminates funding for the controversial ShotSpotter program. After the horrific incident last week that involved a shooting at Seattle's Ingraham High School, students staged a walkout and protest on Monday to ask city leaders for resources to help prevent gun violence. The students are asking for anti-racism and de-escalation training for school security, assault weapon bans, and more school counselors and mental health resources. What they have made clear they don't want is more cops in schools, but despite that Mayor Harrell and some of his advisory boards are advocating for an increased police presence in schools. Housing updates this week start with positive news: Mayor Harrell is asking for affordable housing to be exempt from the much maligned design review process. Allowing affordable housing to skip design review will encourage developers to build affordable housing, and will help us battle our housing shortage faster than we could otherwise. In frustrating housing news, KING5 released some upsetting reporting outlining some overt racial housing discrimination against Black families in Seattle, including one story about family who received a significantly higher appraisal when they dressed their home to look like it was owned by a white family. Carolyn Bick from the South Seattle Emerald reported on potential City and State records laws violations by the Office of Police Accountability. The OPA has been manually deleting emails, or allowing them to automatically be deleted, before the two-year mark prescribed by City and State laws. It's another example of a city office failing to hold itself accountable to basic records standards. The Seattle Department of Transportation seemed to once again be more responsive to concerns about administrative liability than community concerns about pedestrian safety amid rising fatalities. When locals painted an unauthorized crosswalk at the intersection of E Olive Way and Harvard, SDOT workers removed the crosswalk within 24 hours. This is happening while many people and business owners, most notably Councilmember Sara Nelson, have been placing illegal “eco blocks” without removals or consequences. Finally, the Chair of Washington State Democrats is being criticized for threats to withhold resources against Washington House candidates if they showed support for nonpartisan Secretary of State candidate Julie Anderson. This is a high-profile extension of a question that party groups–big and small–are dealing with: how do we handle Democrats' support of nonpartisan or third party candidates? As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Nicole Thomas-Kennedy, on Twitter at @NTKallday. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com. Resources “City Council's ‘anti-austerity' budget package: Aiming JumpStart back where it belongs, preserving parking enforcement's move out of SPD, nuking ShotSpotter, and giving mayor his ‘Unified Care Team'” by jseattle from Capitol Hill Seattle Blog “Morales Hopes to Resurrect Social Housing Amendment That Didn't Make Balancing Package Cut” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist Learn more about how to get involved in Seattle's budget season at this link. “Care, Not Cops” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger “Seattle proposal would free affordable projects from design review — and give all developers path to skip public meetings” by CHS from Capitol Hill Seattle Blog “After a low appraisal, Black Seattle family 'whitewashes' home, gets higher price” by PJ Randhawa from KING5 “Why housing discrimination is worse today than it was in the 1960s” by PJ Randhawa from KING5 “OPA May Have Broken City and State Records Laws By Not Retaining Emails” by Carolyn Bick from The South Seattle Emerald “SDOT Decries Tactical Urbanism While Allowing Eco-Blocks All Over the City” by Erica C. Barnett from Publicola “Rent a Capitol Hill apartment from one of these companies? You ‘may have rights under antitrust laws to compensation' as lawsuit alleges price-fixing violations in Seattle” by jseattle from Capitol Hill Seattle Blog “Scoop: State Democratic Party chair under fire for alleged threats” by Melissa Santos from Axios Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full text transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a cohost. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show, today's cohost: defense attorney, abolitionist and activist, Nicole Thomas-Kennedy. Hey. [00:00:54] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Hey - thanks so much for having me. It's great to be here. [00:00:57] Crystal Fincher: Welcome back. Great to have you back. So we have a few things going on this week. We will start with the Seattle budget. The mayor introduced his budget a few weeks back - this is now the Council, and the President of the Council, being able to introduce their own budget and their take on things. What did you see here that was notable? [00:01:21] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: I think the things that were really notable were that JumpStart was headed back to where it was originally planned. That tax was created for affordable housing and things like that, and the mayor tried to take it a different direction that I don't think addresses the City's needs at all - so it was good to see that. Keeping - not giving SPD the money for those ghost cops - the officers that don't actually work there, that haven't actually worked there for a while - their salaries, SPD was allowed to keep for a long time, and so taking that away. And I think really most importantly - to me, given what I do - is taking out the money for ShotSpotter, which is something that the mayor has pushed really hard for, but has shown to not work and actually be detrimental to marginalized communities in other cities. And that was a million dollars, so it was great to see that taken out. [00:02:27] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, that was definitely an improvement, I think, in a lot of people's minds. That was something that did seem to be oddly championed by the mayor and very few other people, regardless of what their political orientation or leaning is. It is just something that - a decade ago, people were wondering if it had some potential, and then it was implemented in a number of cities with a number of very well-documented problems. One thing that it does not seem to be able to accomplish is to reduce gun violence, which is its ultimate goal. But it did introduce a lot of other problems. It was expensive. It seemed to increase surveillance and harassment, particularly of Black and Brown communities, without intervening or interrupting any kind of violence. And that is just an inexpensive and ineffective use of funds. Given a budget shortfall, it seems like we should not be wasting money on things that have proven not to work and not to make anyone safer. I think another notable difference in this budget, between the mayor's budget, was he had proposed a reduction in salary for some of the frontline workers for homelessness services and outreach services there. Those are critical positions and crucial to being able to address homelessness, reduce homelessness. A lot has been covered over the years across the country about how important having comfortable, well-paid frontline workers is so that they're not living in poverty, they aren't in unstable positions - creating a lot of turnover and uncertainty with the workers on the frontline - so that they do have the capacity and ability to do that kind of frontline outreach work and getting people into services that meet their needs. And so there was definitely a repudiation of the idea of reducing their pay and making sure that their pay will continue to rise with the cost of living and the Consumer Price Index. So that was nice to see. A few other things, like you talked about, just making sure that the JumpStart funds, which it seems now everybody is acknowledging, have been very helpful. And even people who previously opposed it are now backing its use to backfill their own plans. But really just making sure that it is spent in a way consistent with its original charter, basically. And so more of a right-sizing and being more consistent with the spending that Seattle voters have backed, that these candidates were elected and reelected with mandates to go forward with - that we're seeing that there. Moving forward here, there was just an opportunity for public comment earlier this year. There is one more opportunity for councilmembers to introduce amendments to this budget before it's going to be ultimately passed. So I encourage everyone, if you have thoughts about the budget, we'll include some links just explaining it. There was a really good Capitol Hill Seattle story just breaking down the budget and what's happening there to make sure we go there. But a few notable other investments from there include $20 million each year for equitable development initiative projects that advance economic opportunity and prevent displacement. $20 million Green New Deal investments each year, including $4 million to create community climate resilience labs. $4.6 million for indigenous-led sustainability projects and $1.8 million for community-led environmental justice projects. $9 million for school-based health centers, which is a really big deal, including a new $3 million across the biennium for mental health services in response to the demand for more health providers from teachers and students - we'll talk a little bit more about the student walkout and strike and their demands later in the show. Also created a combined total of $1.5 million for abortion care in 2023, to ensure access to reproductive care for uninsured people in Seattle. And a $253 million investment into the Office of Housing for affordable housing - and that's over $50 million more than the last budget for building rental housing, more supportive services, first-time ownership opportunities. I know a lot of people are also hoping that Councilmember Tammy Morales' proviso makes it back into the budget to support social housing and securing City-owned property for rental housing that has a much better shot of being able to be affordable for regular people working in the City, especially those who don't have six-figure incomes and can't afford a million dollar home. This is going to be crucial to making sure that we have dedicated land and space and capacity to build permanent affordable housing. [00:07:54] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Yeah, and I hope that makes it back in very - I really hope that makes it back in. The thing that I see with the Council's - what they're proposing to put back in, or the changes they're making from Harrell's budget - is most all of them address things that would enhance public safety. And when I hear about things like old technology that's been shown not to work, that gives more or giving more money to police or things like that, I think people think that that's about public safety, but it's not. Those are reactionary things, those are things that have been shown not to address the problems, we really do need to be looking at those upstream things like housing, helping marginalized communities, mental health - all of these things are things that are actually going to result in more safety for everyone. And so I'm happy to see that their proposals are addressing those things. And I hope that they make it into the final budget. [00:08:52] Crystal Fincher: I agree. And I also think that we saw - with just these past election results that we received - that residents of Seattle, really across the county, but especially in Seattle, once again, show through their votes for candidates who are talking about addressing root causes, the rejection of candidates for the Legislature for King County Prosecuting Attorney who were talking about punitive punishment-based approaches, lock-em-up approaches, which the city and the county continually have rejected. And I think voters are just at the point where they're saying, no, please listen - you have already increased funding for police, but we have these big gaps in all of these other areas that we need you to address and fill, and it's - just talking about police is doing the overall public safety conversation a disservice because it takes so many other things to make sure that we are building communities that are safer, and where fewer people get victimized, and where we are not creating conditions that cause disorder. And so I hope that they are listening. And I hope that that gives both the Budget Chair and councilmembers faith and strength and motivation to move forward with these kinds of investments in community - that center community and that center addressing the root causes of crime, preventing crime - which is the most important thing that we can do. I don't think anyone is looking around and saying - things are great, things are fine - but I think people are fed up with the inaction or bad action and ineffective action taken. So we will stay tuned and continue to report on that. [00:10:47] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Very helpful. [00:10:47] Crystal Fincher: We just alluded to, but talked about this week - following last week's shooting of an Ingraham High School student by another student - extremely extremely tragic situation - that student wound up dying. This is a traumatic thing for the school community to go through, for the entire community to go through. And we saw students walk out to cause awareness and with a list of demands. What were they demanding? [00:11:19] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: I'm not going to get it perfectly off the top of my head, but they want more resources for students. They want more mental health care. They want access to those things. They want things that are preventative. They're not asking for punitive retribution or more metal detectors or cops in schools or something like that. They're asking for things that are actually going to be preventative, that are going to encourage the wellbeing of all students. And they know that that's what's going to keep them safe. And from what I've seen from SPS - they seem responsive to those demands in some way. It remains to see what will be actually followed through on. But the response I've seen so far from SPS, just being the parent of an SPS student, is that they are listening to what these kids are actually saying and what the data actually shows will make these kids safer. So I find that to be hopeful. I hope you can verbalize what their list of demands were more succinctly than that, because I don't want to misrepresent what they're saying at all. But when I read through what they were asking for and saw what they were asking for, it was all stuff that was aimed at prevention - because that's what - they don't want to be shot. And that's very valid. And they shouldn't have to worry about those things. And the things that have been implemented for years, like more police in school, those lockdown drills and things like that - it's not working. It's just like we were talking about with the budget stuff, we need to get to those root causes. [00:13:04] Crystal Fincher: You're exactly right. And what these students want really does, to your point, cover the gamut of preventative measures. So there are a few different things. One, they want the district to increase anti-racist and de-escalation training for any security at Seattle Public Schools. They also demand that the state update safe storage laws and ban assault rifles. Students asked the Council to reroute $9 million from SPD to pay for counselors. They want one counselor - to be paid a living wage - but at least at a ratio of 1 for every 200 students. Right now, the district is averaging about 1 for every 350 students, so that is a significant increase in counselors. But I don't think there is anyone here who does not acknowledge the need for more mental health resources for students. And this is especially pronounced in the middle schools across the district. So that is a pretty substantial one. They did say that they don't want cops in schools. They don't want the introduction of more guns, more people with guns in schools - but they want the things that will prevent them. They want mental health resources and community-based resources, therapy resources, and intentional de-escalation and communication training, DBT therapy training - really for students there, so they can figure out how to use words to disarm and de-escalate conflicts instead of getting physically violent, encouraging gun violence, that type of thing. They really want to - they understand that there's a gap with many kids that they're trying to navigate through and this is a normal thing for students anyway. We need to equip them with the tools to work through conflict, to work through their emotions, even when they're very big. They recognize that and they're calling for that. So these are all things that are backed by data and evidence, that have shown to reduce conflict, to reduce violence of all kinds, definitely gun violence. And that are evidence-based, have worked in other areas - pretty reasonable. And so there are a few areas where this could come from. They're certainly asking the Legislature for action, but also with the City and the mental health money. I think Teresa Mosqueda said that she was allocating $2 million and saying that's a down payment on what the students are asking for. Another source that was talked about by some people online was the Families & Education Levy in the City of Seattle, which is tailor-made for things like this. And so that, I think, should be part of this conversation going forward. But we absolutely do need more mental health resources in the schools. And we heard that post - as students were returning back to school after schools were closed due to COVID, and as they were returning, there were certainly a lot of parents who wanted to reopen schools, get their students back in there, but also talked about the challenges that students were dealing with - with anxiety and a range of mental health needs. They seemed to acknowledge that students, in connection with violent events happening and needing to deal with that - we need to figure out a way to get this done. I think the student demands are entirely reasonable and the entire community needs to listen. Now, one dimension of the story that we have seen, there was a story - and I forget at this point who came out with it - but it was like the district is exploring basically putting armed police officers back in school. Upon reading the story, it was like no, actually the district, no one in the district was considering that. The students specifically said they didn't want that. School board members said that they were not currently examining that. But it does seem like the mayor and some of his advisory boards are advocating for armed police officers to return to schools. It seems like the people directly impacted are saying, no, please no, again, not anymore. But the mayor has a different viewpoint here. How do you see that? [00:17:57] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: First of all - yes, the student demands are very reasonable and it's, I don't know, I'm constantly impressed by youth - just how informed they are, the way they present their ideas, and just - they're deeply rooted in this. They are the ones that are impacted. We didn't have to deal with this growing up. I didn't have to deal with this growing up. I didn't have to deal with COVID. I didn't have to deal with the Internet. I didn't have to deal with guns in schools. This is new territory for these kids and they are the ones that are able to tell us what they need and they do so so well. And it is backed by data and research. And I think the mayor has suggested or wants to do this cops-back-in-school thing, but kids know this isn't what has made us safe. We have seen very, very good - horrible, tragic examples of how school resource officers fail to keep kids safe. And I think a lot of people's eyes have been open to that. And while I see the suggestion, I acknowledge the suggestion, I don't think it's serious. I don't think you can keep talking about more cops, more cops - putting more cops here - and be serious about safety. We know that doesn't work. And I think that there's enough kids, there's enough parents, there's enough people, there's enough people on the Council that know these things that - if he wants to push forward that kind of agenda, I think the pushback is going to be really big. And we can't keep pretending that that's the solution - I think that a lot of people are ready to stop doing that and to be able to push back. And I love this walkout. I think it's so encouraging that these kids are really pushing for what they know to be true. And they're not just sitting there saying, there's nothing we can do about it. They know that there's something they can do about it. So I think that's very encouraging. And I would expect that any sort of really serious pushing forward of that idea of more cops in school, I would expect there to be really very large community and student backlash to those ideas. [00:20:15] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think there would be pretty ferocious backlash to that. We will see how that proceeds and continue to keep you up to date on that. Now, something that Bruce Harrell announced this week, that actually seems like it's going to have a positive reception and that can move things in a positive direction - he's looking to exempt affordable housing from design review - from the much-maligned design review process. What's he proposing to do here? [00:20:47] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: He's proposing sort of a moratorium on affordable housing projects having to go through design review. So if people don't know - design review is a lengthy process where there's - I'm doing air quotes - "community input" on housing design, and it really drags out housing projects for so long. If you see an empty lot and there's a billboard up that says that they're going to build a nine-story building with mixed use - there'll be commercial space on the bottom - and then nothing happens for years and years and years. There's a lot of reasons for that, but one of the primary ones is that really long design review process, which is shown not to be actually that democratic when it comes to the community. So exempting affordable housing from that is such a huge and awesome idea that I think someone said, why didn't we do this before when there was a homelessness crisis declared? Ed Murray could have done this when he declared that crisis, but instead that there's all these projects that are languishing and really upping the price for developers to even build these things. So I think there's - not only is it going to get affordable housing built more quickly if this is actually implemented, which I hope it is, but it's also going to make building affordable housing more attractive to developers because just having that land sit there and having those plans sit there for years and years - it makes it very expensive for developers to undertake projects. And when they do, they're going to want to get as much return on their investment as possible. And so you have to make up for those lost years of the land just sitting there. And so allowing this to go forward is going to provide more housing for the community, which we desperately, desperately need, but it's also going to encourage developers to build affordable housing over other types of housing. So I think this is fantastic and I really hope it goes through. [00:22:55] Crystal Fincher: I think it is fantastic. I think this is a good example of listening to the community. This is a win all the way across for developers who are trying to build projects more economically and more quickly, for just the community who is waiting for housing prices to be more affordable - and not just because interest rates are changing the equation for a lot of people, but to get more supply online quickly. And so this was done with Mayor Bruce Harrell and with Councilmembers Dan Strauss and Teresa Mosqueda. And it would begin a one-year interim period exempting affordable housing projects from design review and then use that trial year to conduct what Harrell says will be a full State Environmental Policy Act review of legislation to try and make this exemption permanent. And so it would permanently exempt, or they're hoping to permanently exempt, housing projects from design review - exempting housing projects that use the mandatory housing affordability program to produce their units on site for a two-year pilot and also allow other housing projects to choose whether to participate in full design review or administrative design review as a two-year pilot. So this is something that hopefully does get more affordable housing units online quickly, cut through the bureaucracy - so a positive development here and excited to see it. What I was not excited to see was a story on KING5 about one of the elements that is part of the wealth disparity, the wealth gap that we see. We've seen stories, sometimes from across the country, talking about whitewashing homes and homes owned by Black people getting lower appraisals than other homes for no other reason, seemingly, than that they're Black. And this happened with a Black family in Seattle who got an initial home appraisal - they had their family pictures in there, they had some African art up. The home was visibly owned by Black people. So with this, this family got an appraisal that was initially $670,000 - under the median home price in Seattle. They thought - well, that seems low, that seems out-of-spec for what we've seen others in this area. So they decided to take down their personal pictures. They put up pictures from a white family. They had a white friend stand in the house presented now as if it was owned by a white family. And instead of the $670,000 appraisal, they got a $929,000 appraisal. The only difference was that it was a home owned by a white person, that appeared to be owned by a white person, versus one that is owned by a Black person - right here in Seattle. What did you think of this? [00:26:09] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Personally, I was not surprised. I saw that this had happened in other areas. I think there was a famous example from a couple of years ago where the difference was half a million dollars. But I think that there's an idea that - in Seattle, we're so progressive, we're so liberal that this kind of thing doesn't happen here. And it does. And I think it's dangerous to think that it doesn't. I think that the Black community gets gaslighted a lot about these things when this is a really clear, very obvious example. But how many other times has this happened? Probably quite a bit. And it's really contributing to the wealth gap. And this is something that Black people have been saying for years has been happening. And it's just now starting to catch on. People are starting to catch on that this is a thing. And when I say people, I mean people who are not Black because they already know about this. But it's really starting to be something that's obvious, that's happening here, that's happening everywhere. And there's all of these little things that happen to maintain that wealth gap - because it's the appraisal value, it's also Black homeowners being targeted for mortgage takeovers by banks, by realty companies. This is not something that a lot of white homeowners deal with - I think in one of the articles, a parent had died. And so then they kept getting calls from different groups asking to buy the home for cash and asking to do some sort of weird backhand reverse mortgage and things like - there's a lot of predatory things out there aimed at Black people and Black homeowners that white homeowners don't deal with. And I'm glad to see KING5 do this story. It's awful that it's happening, but I think the public needs to know that this is something that's happening and that in progressive Seattle, we are not - by any stretch of the imagination - immune to things like this happening on a regular basis. [00:28:23] Crystal Fincher: We are not at all immune. It impacts us in so many ways. Just where we still deal with the legacy of redlining and where Black people in Black communities have been. And then as there is this new displacement happening - that kind of difference in home valuation can very much determine whether that family can afford to buy again in Seattle or be forced out of Seattle. This is just such a major problem and just another manifestation of it here. So yeah, unfortunately not something that I found surprising, but just still really infuriating all the same. And I just hope more people wake up to see what's happening and engage in how they can help make this community more inclusive and do the work that needs to be done because there is work that needs to be done. [00:29:15] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Absolutely. [00:29:17] Crystal Fincher: Other news this week - the Office of Police Accountability may have broken records laws in what - how they've been operating. What happened here? [00:29:29] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: So in this case, I believe Carolyn Bick from the Emerald had put in a public disclosure request for some emails. And what she got back from OPA was that they didn't retain it because they followed SPD's policy of record retention, which is different than the City's policy of record retention, which - they say they're part of SPD or they initially said they were a part of SPD, but they're not. They're not a law enforcement agency. They're a City agency. But I would like to point out one thing too - that the City's record retention policy is wild compared to other bigger entities. If you're a City employee, you're required to archive emails or communications that could be of public interest. So instead of automatically retaining everything and then deleting spam or needing this manual deletion, you have to manually save it. But what's in the public interest is huge. So there should be a default to be saving these things all the time. And of course, we've seen with other communications, like the mayor's texts or Carmen Best's texts, that absolutely those things should have been saved and they set them to delete instead. I think the argument here is about what is the record retention policy for OPA and it's just - it's just interesting that this is the Office of Police Accountability, but yet they're not accountable for their own record keeping. And then the City Attorney's Office said, we can't give you an answer to the question about, do they have SPD's retention policy or the City's retention policy? They said that calls for a legal opinion, so we can't give you one - which to me is just like, what do you do then? Isn't that your job - to make those determinations? So just another way that the Office of Police Accountability is - it's just an HR department for SPD. They just whitewash everything and put righteous complaints through a long bureaucratic process that they tell people to trust in, that ends at being a big old nothing - that even that process - that they can't keep correct records for. So it's shocking really just how much it is all the time that we're hearing about this stuff. [00:32:11] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think that's what is notable to me. It's just yet another thing from a body that is supposed to hold other entities accountable - and seems to have challenges doing that - just seeming to skirt accountability itself and being a hub of so much controversy. Just really makes you evaluate - what is the purpose, what is happening, what is going on? Are we doing more harm than good here? And it just seems like we don't ever receive answers, that there are very alarming things that happen. And the answers are to - well, we'll reshuffle some staff and we won't really address the substance of what happened. We'll just call it a day, wrap it up, put a stamp on it, and close it out. We just won't talk about it anymore. It's just - what is happening, why are we doing this? And jeez, if this is just going to be a farce, can we just save the money and do something else? Why are we investing in something that continues to break rules, and to seemingly break accountability processes? Just really confusing there. [00:33:30] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Yeah, very much so. [00:33:32] Crystal Fincher: Also really confusing this week - SDOT once again very quickly erased a crosswalk - a crossswalk that a community put up at a dangerous intersection, that is clearly an intersection where people are designed to cross - indicated by the curb cut and the ADA-compliant rumble strip. But it was a dangerous place to cross. It was a place where community had brought up concerns that had seemingly not been listened to or addressed. They decided, as has happened before in the City, to put up their own crosswalk to increase the safety of people who need to cross the street. And there are people who need to cross the street more safely. But once again, seemingly - within 24 hours, I think - SDOT appeared and took action, not based off of calls for increased safety and taking action to make this intersection more safe, but came and removed the paint creating the crosswalk, saying for reasons of safety and liability, they can't stand by and let the community paint a crosswalk, even if it is painted to standards. But they immediately removed it. And the new head of SDOT said, hey, we are trying to move in a new direction, but we can't. We'll never be comfortable with people painting their own crosswalks for liability reasons. And then receiving pushback from the community saying, we ask you to take action to make this more safe. You don't. People get killed on the street. People get run into and hurt. Our street designs are nearly exclusively car-centric in most of the City. So hey, neighbors took action to make the road safer for their neighbors, for kids who need to cross the street, for elderly people, disabled people who need to cross the street. And it just seems that the action comes when people take their own actions - [00:35:50] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Sometimes [00:35:51] Crystal Fincher: - to make the street safer. That will get resources out to remove it, but we don't seem to be wanting to deploy the resources necessary to make these intersections safer. How did you see this? [00:36:05] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Yeah, I applaud the effort of the community to make those streets safer. And I thought that the reasoning given - safety and liability - was thin. There's nothing about not having a crosswalk that makes it safer, obviously - that's what the community has been complaining about. And in terms of liability, it's always interesting to me that the liability that they're talking about is liability for a crosswalk that, "shouldn't be there," that they didn't sanction. But apparently there's no liability for people who are continually injured or killed in a place where the community has asked repeatedly for a crosswalk. And I think that it seems disingenuous to me. And yes, and it doesn't really mesh with the other things that they're talking about. So they can have someone come out and pressure wash off something that's supposed to be for community safety - like you said, for kids, for elders, for disabled people, for everyone - because we all walk if we're able. But the streets belong to everybody. But then they'll have someone come out and pressure wash this crosswalk off overnight. But at the same time, we have seen, for over a year, these ecoblocks, the big concrete blocks - that I think the most famous example of them is Councilmember Sara Nelson putting them around her business - so RVs, or people who are unfortunately having to live in their car, can't park near her business. Those are popping up all over the City now. And SDOT says, we're unwilling to pull people off safety projects to move those. But yet, they'll get someone out there overnight to erase something that's making public safety, but they won't do anything about these ecoblocks. And I think that's really another disingenuous argument, because there is more that they could be doing about that. There's ticketing. There's not just going and every day removing whatever's put there. There's a lot of things - there's fines, there's ticketing - that they could do to discourage this, and they're just not doing it. And to me, I think back to 2020 - when SPD built that ecoblock fort around the East Precinct and the West Precinct too. They built a little fort out of these City-owned ecoblocks around their precinct. And when there was things that ecoblocks were needed for, the City said, we don't have any more ecoblocks right now because they're being used for SPD's fort. And so now it seems like we have a glut of ecoblocks in the city - they're just everywhere. So I don't really understand where they're coming from. If they're not coming from SDOT, where are they coming from? And if they're not coming from SDOT and these are people buying ecoblocks and putting them there - on city streets - seems like it would be fairly advantageous for SDOT to go and pick them up. They're on public property. We didn't have enough of them before. Why not just collect them then? Or like I said, especially when they're on a private business, there's so much more the City could be doing about it. And obviously there's someone on the Council that does it. It's never been addressed. And it shakes, I think, people's faith and trust in City government and City agencies when they so clearly don't - their actions don't match up with what they're saying that they want to do. And so I expect more of these sort of crosswalks to pop up. And the community has been having these conversations with SDOT forever and nothing has happened. If this is what's moving the conversation forward, if this is what's creating safety - to me, that's the most important thing. People shouldn't be dying on the street. That's the most important thing. So whatever creates safety, whatever moves that conversation forward to protect people's lives, I think that's great that the community is doing that. I hope it pushes the conversation forward and really creates this infrastructure that we so desperately need. [00:40:45] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I agree. I think those ecoblocks - some people I've seen refer to them now as Nelson blocks since Councilmember Sara Nelson, despite seeming acknowledgement that they are illegal, continues to use and deploy them and exclude others from public space that they are entitled to be in. And that just does not seem to be a priority, like some other things in this community that seemingly have lower costs or impacts. But just, yeah, that the responses don't seem to make sense. The interventions don't seem to be consistent. And I would really like to hear a coherent and consistent approach to safety in Seattle. Or at least start by understanding and acknowledging that what is happening is unacceptable. And instead of running to defend - and I understand that there are concerns about liability, that is a fact - but we do need to expand the conversation to - let's be not just concerned about getting sued, let's be concerned about one of the residents in the City, that we're responsible for, being killed. Because that is happening. And what are we doing to mitigate against that risk? - is really the bottom-line question I think people want some better answers to. [00:42:12] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Yeah, and they deserve them. [00:42:14] Crystal Fincher: They do. Another activity that maybe deserves - some Capitol Hill tenants are suing some landlords. What's happening here? [00:42:22] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: So they are suing - there's, I don't know if people know this, but there are a few corporations, big housing corporations that own a lot of the housing in Capitol Hill and all around Seattle. And so many of them have started using an algorithm, through a company called RealPage, that collects all the information about whatever the company-owned property is, but then also all of the surrounding properties - to raise rents. So to tell landlords the maximum asking price that they can have for rent, based on what's going on around the city, around the neighborhood, from all this data from other places. And it's caused a lot of - and it's something that these big companies can hide behind for rental hikes too - they say, oh, a computer algorithm sets our rental prices and this is what it's set as. And RealPage CEOs have been very open about saying this is more than most landlords could ask for - I wouldn't feel comfortable as a human being asking for this rent, but it's set by a computer, so I can't do anything about it. And it's really caused rents around Seattle and Capitol Hill to skyrocket. There's many factors that go into skyrocketing rents, but this is absolutely one of them. And so the lawsuit is alleging illegal price fixing by these tenants, or by these landlords. And they're not the small mom-and-pop landlords that we're talking about. We're talking about the big housing conglomerates that own so much of our rental housing here in Seattle. And it alleges that it's basically illegal price fixing by having all of these groups that just continuously raise the rent - at the same time, along the same lines - and it's driving up prices everywhere. And I'm very happy to see this lawsuit personally. Rents are out of control in Seattle, and some of that is tied to supply, obviously. Obviously, there's no doubt about that. But what we don't need is businesses taking advantage of data aggregation to make rents go higher and higher and higher. And what I hear sometimes is - the market supports this. And I think that's a really misguided argument. People need housing. It's very, very dangerous to live on the street. Nobody's living on the street because that's a good time. No one's having an urban camping vacation out there in the middle of November. People don't want to live on the street. Housing - like food, like water - is something that we all need. So just because the market supports it doesn't mean it's affordable or good for the rest of the city. When people are paying 50% or 60% of their income to rent, that hurts everyone. That makes it - as food prices go up, as rent goes up, we have people that have to lean on social services. They have to go without things that are - really, it's a detriment to our entire community. So I'm very happy to see this lawsuit. Anything we can do to bring rents down and rebalance the - there's never going to be a full balance between landlord and tenant, obviously, but there needs to be some sort of rebalancing that's going on to make it so people can actually afford to live in this city. [00:46:01] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. We still have areas in the state where people's rent can double. We still have areas just - where we are displacing people in the name of profit. And this is an essential need. This is something that people need to survive. We are seeing an explosion in homelessness because people cannot afford a place to live. Fundamental causes of homelessness are the inability to afford rent. People try and blame - people dealing with substance use disorder or people with mental illnesses - and those are issues and often become worse issues after someone is out on the streets because that is such a rough environment. But the biggest contributor is the inability to pay rent. And that's why we see other areas that have higher instances of people dealing with substance abuse, higher instances of people dealing with those issues - that don't have the degree of homelessness that we do in areas like Seattle, where things are just simply so unaffordable for so many. So we absolutely need to do that. To your point, we need more supply and action - to get more supply is great, but we aren't going to fully address this issue until we bring this landlord and renter situation into greater balance, until there are more rent controls, renter protections in place. That is also a necessary piece of this scenario. And taking this action is necessary - what we've seen has been predatory and has contributed to homelessness. And if we don't get a handle on this, we're not going to get more people housed anywhere around here. So I think this is a justified action. I think that - no, we actually need to stand up and say, you are not entitled to ever-escalating and increasing profits on the backs of people who are providing valuable services and who are valuable people in our communities. We just can't allow that to happen. It's not that - no one can make a profit, right? It's not that we're outlawing being able to be a landlord. But there are responsibilities that should come with that. This is not just a great area for profit and speculation. You're dealing with people in their housing, you're dealing with families in their housing. And there should be a greater amount of care and responsibility that we demand from that. So I am also happy to see this happening. [00:48:55] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Yeah. I also think it's important to realize that when there are so many housing - when there are so many landlords and companies raising these rents - like you said, they are also causing homelessness. These rising prices cause homelessness. So what is actually happening is they are externalizing the cost of homelessness to the community while they make ever greater profits. And as I really like to point out - that this is to the detriment of everyone. So it is the community that is paying for them to make ever greater profits. And that's what we're really talking about. It's not just, people should be able to make money - of course they should be able to make money - but this is something that you can't ignore. This is not like an expensive handbag. People need shelter. And so when we are talking about those things, there will be a community cost if those things aren't brought back in line. And it's important to recognize that the market can't fix all of this. There has to be something else when it comes to things that people - that are basic human needs. And I like the idea that housing is a human right. We need it. We can't live without it. And I think that more and more people are getting behind the idea of that - that housing is a human right, that we all deserve the dignity of living in a home. But I also hope people realize that it is these profiteering landlords that are externalizing the cost of their profits to the community. So yeah, I welcome this too. It's hopeful. [00:50:45] Crystal Fincher: It is. And the last thing we'll cover today - there was a story by Melissa Santos in Axios talking about the State Democratic Party Chair under fire for being a staunch defender of Democrats Steve Hobbs, and really discouraging and going after folks who endorsed non-partisan Julie Anderson and her race against Democrat Steve Hobbs for Secretary of State. You have Joe Fitzgibbon, who chairs the House Democrats Campaign Committee, saying that Tina made threats about withholding resources from Washington House candidates because Democratic House Speaker Laurie Jinkins supported the non-partisan candidate instead of the Democrat. And then you have folks - Tina Podlodowski, certainly, but also others saying that - hey, this is what happens in the Democratic Party. Either you back Democrats or you're not. You're free to support who you want, but not within the Democratic Party. How did you see this? [00:51:58] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: I thought this was a kind of a nothing, really. She's the Chair of the Democratic Party. Think whatever you want about Democrats - the job of the chair of the Democratic Party - there's many things to it, but pushing forward Democrat candidates, Democratic candidates, and a Democratic agenda is what she does. And I was really surprised - the headline of the article, which I know is not written by the journalist, said something about "alleged threats," which makes it sound so much more intense than it was - I think that it's - we really need to get serious about politics and about what we're doing. Republicans are on board with just voting for whoever has an R by their name, and that's something that Democrats haven't necessarily been doing. They've been trying to do that, but they haven't necessarily done it. But to think that the Chair of the Democratic Party is not going to try to push hard for Democratic candidates - I just thought was ridiculous, really. It just seemed like an absurd story. I have a limited - I had a limited experience with politics, but from what I experienced - this was nothing. This was really not much compared to what actually goes on in politics. To me, this just seems like she's trying to get Democratic candidates in there, which is what she's doing, that's what she's supposed to be doing. So I thought it was a kind of a weird story - the way it was framed, the choice of using the word "threat" without really talking about, until much later in the story, about what those "threats" really were - which were not direct, and which were about using Democratic Party funds and resources. And those are things that she's responsible for. I just really thought it was a kind of a nothing of a story, really. [00:54:09] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think what made it a story was that you had a House leader making these accusations directly, and that's something that we don't really see that often. And I think just the - I think it is largely to be expected that a Democratic Party Chair is not going to be happy with the endorsement of a Democrat. I think what caused more of the question is not just saying, hey, Joe Fitzgibbon or Laurie Jinkins, you took this action, and therefore I'm not happy with this - with you - and maybe not supporting you, but the extension to Democratic candidates overall across the state, potentially, because of that. Which Tina Podlodowski and her team said wasn't serious and was par for the course, after being confronted with the existence of them, after I think initially saying that nothing was said. But then, I think this is interesting - not necessarily for this instance - although I do think there's a healthy conversation to be had about is holding the support of unrelated candidates fair play or not. But also just because it does talk about - in this instance, we're talking about a nonpartisan - some of these issues become very simple if we're talking about Republicans. They become a little more complicated when we talk about nonpartisans, when we talk about - especially in the Seattle area - folks from the DSA or People's Party, who may not label themselves as Democrats, but may be aligned on values. And so, is the Democratic Party a party of a label where just the - vote blue, no matter who - if they have a D by their name, great. Or is it a party of principles underneath that label, and you're more searching for someone who adheres to those principles, which may be someone who doesn't necessarily identify as a Democrat. I think that this conversation has been happening within local party organizations for a while, and different LPOs [Local Party Organizations] have come up with different stances themselves. Some are fine with endorsing folks outside of the party if they align on values, and others are very not fine with that. I think we see where Tina Podlodowski and the State Party is on that. But it is, it's not a straightforward equation. Because you do have these resources for the - it is the Democratic Party - doesn't prevent anyone from aligning with another party in doing that. Although that's a flip remark - if you're a Democrat or if you're a Republican, that alignment comes with significant resources that are available or not available with that. So I think, especially with those resources at stake, especially with candidates who may not be affiliated, I understand where people paused and said, wait, what is going on here? But I do think there's a bigger conversation to be had just within the party about - is it about a label? Is it not? Usually that's a much simpler equation when you get to a general election in a partisan race, but we had a situation with a nonpartisan running. And in Seattle - in city council races and other local races, we have situations where non-Democrats run, who are in the same place or further to the left of Democrats. So it just really depends here. But I think there is further exploration and conversation that needs to happen about this, even on the local level. [00:58:21] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Yeah, I think that's - those are all really good points. And I guess, when I was running, I saw people in the LDs going hard for Nikkita Oliver, who didn't identify as a Democrat. And a lot of non-endorsements of Sara Nelson, for instance, who was a Democrat. And to me, it seemed like there was robust conversation in the LDs and they did not all agree. And they did not all do the same thing. And I - yeah, I think there is room for conversation about that. To me, it just - I get a little bit - it seems very - what am I trying to think of? What am I trying to think of when something's pot-kettle-type thing - like the right does this stuff constantly. And there's a total double standard when it comes to liberals, Democrats, progressives, the left. And I ran in a race where my opponent was not nonpartisan, but presented themselves that way. And it's hard to know, as a voter, what you're truly looking at. And so I wish - yeah, I think there - I definitely agree there needs to be a more robust conversation. At the same time, I think the Chair of the Democratic Party should probably be - whoever the Democratic Party has endorsed would be like someone that they would be pushing forward. But yeah, it does get really murky. And you're right, it comes with a lot of resources and access to voter databases and things like that - that has been shared with some groups and not others. There is - it isn't a straightforward situation, like it is with the right, where it's just - he's the nominee, so that's who we vote for - which is also breaking down on the right, it seems like, because they seem like they maybe took that too far. But there's a lot of nuanced conversation that needs to take place. [01:00:28] Crystal Fincher: And with that, I thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, November 18, 2022. Hacks & Wonks is co-produced by Shannon Cheng and Bryce Cannatelli. Our insightful co host today is defense attorney, abolitionist and activist Nicole Thomas-Kennedy. You can find Nicole on Twitter @NTKallday - that's NTK-A-L-L-D-A-Y. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. Please leave us a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time. [01:01:19] Nicole Thomas-Kennedy: Thanks for having me - this was great.
Leslie Day-Harrell, Jackson Healthcare (North Fulton Business Radio, Episode 576) Leslie Day-Harrell, Executive Vice President of Associate Experience with Jackson Healthcare, was the guest on this edition of North Fulton Business Radio, She and host John Ray discussed Jackson Healthcare being named one of the "Best Workplaces in Health Care" by Fortune for a fifth […] The post Leslie Day-Harrell, Jackson Healthcare appeared first on Business RadioX ®.
Host Puja Agarwal PT, DPT, MHA is joined by Dr. Regan Harrell, PT, DPT, NCS, a current PhD student in Rehabilitation Sciences at the University of Pittsburg to discuss Vestibular Agnosia. Dr. Harrell's research interests include the use of technology to improve the diagnosis and treatment of vestibular disorders and dizziness, and balance disorder manifestations in the traumatic brain injury population. Her recent work investigates the effect of Vestibular Agnosia on the reporting of BPPV symptoms in patients post TBI. The Vestibular Special Interest Group is apart of the Academy of Neurologic Physical Therapy. neuropt.org.
Sarah sits down with Jeff Harrell, Director of Content Marketing at Tyler Technologies. Jeff discusses the development of his young marketing team, and the importance of using storytelling tools in order to communicate the complex software solutions they offer to governments, courts, school systems and more.