Podcast appearances and mentions of Julie Anderson

This week, we're delighted to welcome Codie Wright and Julie Anderson to the show. Both are relatively new to the improv scene, but they're already brimming with enthusiasm and performing for live audiences. In this episode, you'll hear how they each found their way to LCI, following very different paths, and how their recent completion of the Level 3 Introduction to Improv course has shaped their journey so far. What does the future hold for these rising stars? It's another fascinating chat, full of variety—some improv-based, some not, but all thoroughly entertaining. So it's time to sit back, relax, grab a brew, and enjoy Codie and Julie's true story about making stuff up.

9-time gold medalist, Carl Lewis, joined the sibs to talk about the documentary profiling his life and impact on pop-culture, "I'm Carl Lewis," sharing insight into how family and learning failure were integral components of his unprecedented success. We're also joined by co-directors of the film, Julie Anderson and Chris Hay, who dig into how they earn the trust of their subjects and how they crafted the arc of this compelling doc. Don't miss this conversation with a living legend and the team that brought his story to the big screen. Sign up for the Friday Night Movie Newsletter for giveaways, curated episode playlists from the hosts and guests (including our mom), and at MOST one email per month (and probably fewer).  Closed captions for this episode are available via the player on the official Friday Night Movie homepage, the Podbean app and website, and YouTube.  The Friday Night Movie Family supports the following organizations: The Red Tent Fund | HIAS | Equal Justice Initiative | Asian American Journalists Association | The Entertainment Community Fund. Subscribe, rate and review us on your favorite podcast platform, including iTunes | Spotify | Stitcher | Google Play | Podbean | Overcast. Play along with Friday Night Movie at home! Read the FNM Glossary to learn the about our signature bits (e.g., Buy/Rent/Meh, I Told You Shows, Tradesies, etc). Email us at info@p4tmedia.com or tweet @FriNightMovie, @pancake4table, @chichiKgomez, and/or  @paperBKprincess.  Follow our creations and zany Instagram stories @frinightmovie, @FNMsisters, and @pancake4table. Follow us on Letterboxd (@pancake4table) where we're rating every movie we've EVER watched.  Subscribe to our quarterly newsletter for exclusive giveaways and news! Theme music by What Does It Eat.  Subscribe and leave a review on IOS or Android at frinightmovie.com.

In our first ever podcast based MLM Mini Dive, Julie Anderson is here to help us understand the new MLM Make Wellness and some of it's shadier history. If you've been haggled about "BioActive Precision Peptides" this is the episode for you, and while you're listening, go ahead and send it to 3 friends who need to hear it too. This episode also features audio from actual public videos posted by Make Wellness affiliates, plus an update on the "Scentsy Trip to Greece"! Show Notes Julie's Make Wellness Deep Dive My Make Wellness TikTok r/AntiMLM : Make Wellness Make Wellness PreLaunch is a Pyramid Scheme Make Wellness's Dr. Jen TikToks About Dr. Jen Out of MLM The BITE Model LAMLM Book Club MLM Dupes How can you help? MLM Change Report Fraud Truth in Advertising Report to your state Attorney General's office! Not in the U.S.? No Problem! Support the Podcast! Website | Patreon | Buy Me a Taco | TikTok | Instagram | Facebook | YouTube | Discord | Merch! Life After MLM is produced by Roberta Blevins. Audio editing is done by the lovely Kayla Craven, video editing by the indescribable RK Gold, and Michelle Carpenter is our Triple Emerald Princess of Robots. Life After MLM is owned by Roberta Blevins 2025. Music : Abstract World by Alexi Action *Some links may be affiliate links. When you purchase things from these links, I get a small commission that I use to buy us tacos. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Episode: 2279 In which medical people learn how to save babies on the boardwalk.  Today, our guest, medical historian Julie Anderson takes us to see premature babies at carnival sideshows.

Join us as psychiatrists Dr. Julie Anderson and Dr. Sean Stanley unravel the complexities of Bipolar Disorder. In the second and final part of our series on mood disorders, they discuss the diagnosis of Bipolar disorder, including the distinctions between Bipolar I and II,  as well as pharmacologic and psychosocial therapies for patients with bipolar disorder. This discussion of Bipolar disorder is ideal for medical learners, physicians, and anyone curious about the subject. We will be discussing manic, hypomanic, and major depressive episodes in our discussion of Bipolar Disorders. Full diagnostic criteria for those episodes can be found in Section 2 of the DSM-V under Bipolar and related disorders. References: 1. The Sydney Bipolar Screener 2. VVA/DOD Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Bipolar Disorder 3. National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health (UK). Bipolar Disorder: The NICE Guideline on the Assessment and Management of Bipolar Disorder in Adults, Children and Young People in Primary and Secondary Care. London: The British Psychological Society and The Royal College of Psychiatrists; 2014 Sep. PMID: 29718639. (2014, some updates 2023)  4. Yatham LN, Kennedy SH, Parikh SV, Schaffer A, Bond DJ, Frey BN, Sharma V, Goldstein BI, Rej S, Beaulieu S, Alda M, MacQueen G, Milev RV, Ravindran A, O'Donovan C, McIntosh D, Lam RW, Vazquez G, Kapczinski F, McIntyre RS, Kozicky J, Kanba S, Lafer B, Suppes T, Calabrese JR, Vieta E, Malhi G, Post RM, Berk M. Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) 2018 guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder. Bipolar Disord. 2018 Mar;20(2):97-170.

MEET OUR EPISODE GUESTS Julie Anderson is the Founder of Sydney James, an NYC-based brand with one focus: bringing people together through golf. https://www.instagram.com/sydneyjamesgolf/?hl=en Alexis Belton is an ATL-based champion long driver, golfer and athlete that uses sport to empower, equip and connect. https://www.instagram.com/alexisnicolebelton/?hl=en CHECK OUT MORE FROM FAIRGAME Download the Fairgame Golf App: https://www.fairgamegolf.com/the-app Fairgame Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHjuYRDjjPLbyedMooYs3Nw Fairgame Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/fairgamegolf/?hl=en

Elon Musk, Amy Rowe Klement, Peter Thiel, Julie Anderson, Max Levchin, Reid Hoffman.  What do these powerhouse entrepreneurs all have in common?  Hint: They all played a role in the meteoric rise of PayPal. Find out the intricate web behind one of the biggest startups in the world, as Alex chats with the author of "The Founders: The Story of PayPal and the Entrepreneurs Who Shaped Silicon Valley," Jimmy Soni. They dive into the history of PayPal and discuss the early days of the company, its vision, and the talented individuals who were part of its success. How did PayPal start as the result of a broken AC unit and a simple ploy to get free air conditioning from a college campus? How did Elon Musk's role in PayPal fundamentally shape his views on banking? Find out how some of today's most seminal minds collided and how things culminated into the height of Silicon Valley's fintech revolution. For a fascinating glimpse into one of history's most fundamentally impactful fintech companies, you don't want to miss this ep! Read “The Founders” here.   TruStage Payment Guard Insurance is a first-of-its-kind insurance solution built for digital lenders, designed to help you attract more borrowers, strengthen your loan portfolio and reduce time spent on collections — all with minimal tech lift needed to go live. To learn more about Payment Guard Insurance, visit https://www.trustage.com/payment-guard.   00:01:59 - Book on PayPal's Genius Team 00:09:02 - Paths Crossed: Silicon Valley Engineers 00:13:21 - Evolution of PayPal Founder's Ideas 00:19:21 - David Sacks: From Email to Product Officer 00:21:31 - Elon Musk's Early Banking Experience 00:24:03 - Elon Musk's Financial Services Interest 00:32:33 - eBay and X.com's Email Money Concept 00:39:13 - PayPal's Merger Against Elon's Will 00:44:32 - Shorting the Stock Market: Peter Thiel's Proposal 00:50:39 - PayPal's Evolution in Fintech Industry 00:52:24 - PayPal: From Startup to Modern Regulations 00:57:37 - Elon Musk's Vision for Efficiency   Sign up for Alex's Fintech Takes newsletter for the latest insightful analysis on fintech trends, along with a heaping pile of pop culture references and copious footnotes. Every Monday and Thursday: https://workweek.com/brand/fintech-takes/   And for more exclusive insider content, don't forget to check out my YouTube page.   Follow Jimmy:  Website: https://jimmysoni.com/books/the-founders/ Book: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1501197266 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jimmysoni/   Follow Alex:  YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJgfH47QEwbQmkQlz1V9rQA/videos LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexhjohnson Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/AlexH_Johnson

JULIE ANDERSON chats to Paul Burke about her latest thriller THE MIDNIGHT MAN, first in a new historical crime series, Whitehall machinations, the birth of the NHS, finding the post war history of Clapham community, the Clapham Literary Festival, The South London Women & Children's Hospital, the locked room mystery and old British movies. THE MIDNIGHT MAN: Winter 1946 - One cold dark night, as a devastated London shivers through the transition to post-war life, a young nurse goes missing from the South London Hospital for Women & Children. Her body is discovered hours later behind a locked door.Two women from the hospital join forces to investigate the case. Determined not to return to the futures laid out for them before the war, the unlikely sleuths must face their own demons and dilemmas as they pursue - The Midnight Man.BEWARE THE DARKNESS BENEATHJulie Anderson is the CWA Dagger listed author of three Whitehall thrillers and a short series of historical adventure stories for young adults. Before becoming a crime fiction writer, she was a senior civil servant, working across a variety of departments and agencies, including the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. Unlike her protagonists, however, she doesn't know where (all) the bodies are buried.She lives in south London where her latest crime fiction series is set, returning to her first love of writing historical fiction with The Midnight Man, to be published by Hobeck. She writes crime fiction reviews for Time and Leisure Magazine and is a co-founder and Trustee of the Clapham Book Festival. RecommendationsFilm - Green for Danger ​dir. Sydney GilliatNovels - Vine Street Dominic Nolan, Death Flight Sarah Sultoon, Back from the Dead Heide Amsinck and Bonjour Sophie Elizabeth Buchan.Paul Burke writes for Monocle Magazine, Crime Time, Crime Fiction Lover and the European Literature Network. He is also a CWA Historical Dagger Judge 2023. An Encyclopedia of  Spy Fiction will be out in 2025.Music courtesy of  Guy Hale KILLING ME SOFTLY - MIKE ZITO featuring Kid Anderson. GUY HALE Produced by Junkyard DogCrime TimeCrime Time FM is the official podcast ofGwyl Crime Cymru Festival 2023CrimeFest 2023CWA Daggers 2023& Newcastle Noir 20232024??

Julie Anderson, a former Playboy centerfold model, was an intimate companion of Adi Da Samraj from 1976 until 1992. During that time she was known as Kanya Samarpana Remembrance (also Swami Dama Kalottara Devi, and a number of other names). Her article, “The Real Practice of Guru-Devotion,” was published in the Free Daist Magazine in … Continue reading "Scandals at the Ashram with Julie Anderson"

Julie Anderson, a former Playboy centerfold model, was an intimate companion of Adi Da Samraj from 1976 until 1992. During that time she was known as Kanya Samarpana Remembrance (also Swami Dama Kalottara Devi, and a number of other names). Her article, “The Real Practice of Guru-Devotion,” was published in the Free Daist Magazine in … Continue reading "A Penetrating Spiritual Experience with Julie Anderson"

Episode: 2279 In which medical people learn how to save babies on the boardwalk.  Today, our guest, medical historian Julie Anderson takes us to see premature babies at carnival sideshows.

Julie Anderson, a former Playboy centerfold model, was an intimate companion of Adi Da Samraj from 1976 until 1992. During that time she was known as Kanya Samarpana Remembrance (also Swami Dama Kalottara Devi, and a number of other names). Her article, “The Real Practice of Guru-Devotion,” was published in the Free Daist Magazine in … Continue reading "Living with the Ruchira Avatar, Adi Da Samraj, with Julie Anderson"

Tag along as psychiatrists Dr. Julie Anderson and Dr. Sean Stanley unravel the complexities of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). In this first of two podcasts on mood disorders, they explain MDD's neurological basis, diagnosis, suicide risk assessment, and treatments ranging from medications to psychotherapy to lifestyle changes. A thoughtful discussion of MDD's multifaceted impacts ideal for medical learners, physicians, and interested minds alike. References: Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9 & PHQ-2) Collaborative Care Model Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) My Resilience in Adolescence (MYRIAD) Project   Barbui, C., Cipriani, A., & Geddes, J. R. (2008). Antidepressants and suicide symptoms: compelling new insights from the FDA's analysis of individual patient level data. BMJ Ment Health, 11(2), 34-35. Fournier, J. C., DeRubeis, R. J., Hollon, S. D., Dimidjian, S., Amsterdam, J. D., Shelton, R. C., & Fawcett, J. (2010). Antidepressant drug effects and depression severity: a patient-level meta-analysis. Jama, 303(1), 47-53.

Sliding Doors: Your Story is the new mini-series that delves into YOUR amazing Sliding Doors moments. On this week's episode of Sliding Doors: Your Story we chat to Julie Anderson. In this episode, Julie shares her 'reverse' Sliding Doors moment, when a solo trip to London led her to connect with a stranger BUT she missed an opportunity and in a true moment of 'what if', she wished she had done it differently......can you help change this twist of fate?Click here to apply to be on the next series of Sliding Doors: Your Story. @slidingdoorspod Hosted by: @jenbecks28 Guest: @justjulie424 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Nearly 1.4 million Canadians and almost 50 million Americans are involved in multi-level marketing. And that sheer volume of people makes it a near certainty that you've encountered MLMs in your life somehow.The promise of financial freedom can be an intoxicating lure. But MLMs, like so many other cultish enterprises, are about more than just money. They're about transcendence.And in their wake, they often leave behind ruined livelihoods and broken lives. Featured in this episode: Julie Anderson, Amanda Montell, Robert L. Fitzpatrick, Marco Moukhaiber To learn more:Ponzinomics: The Untold Story of Multi-Level Marketing by Robert L. Fitzpatrick“'They have you in a cultish grip': the women losing thousands to online beauty schemes” by Amelia Tate in The GuardianYouTube: @JulieAndersonvideosYouTube: @AlwaysMarcoCultish: The Language of Fanaticism by Amanda MontellCredits: Arshy Mann (Host and Producer), Jordan Cornish (Producer), Noor Azrieh (Producer), Aviva Lessard (Additional Production) Annette Ejiofor (Managing Editor), Karyn Pugliese (Editor-in-Chief) Additional music from Audio NetworkSponsors: Oxio, Athletic GreensIf you value this podcast, Support us! You'll get premium access to all our shows ad free, including early releases and bonus content. You'll also get our exclusive newsletter, discounts on merch, tickets to our live and virtual events, and more than anything, you'll be a part of the solution to Canada's journalism crisis, you'll be keeping our work free and accessible to everybody. You can listen ad-free on Amazon Music—included with Prime. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

American University's Kogod School of Business is laser-focused on sustainability, infusing it throughout its curricula, programming, and research. During this conversation with John Byrne, Kogod professors Julie Anderson and Danielle Vogel delve into the school's pioneering MS in Sustainability Management (MSSM) program.As companies and organizations place greater emphasis on environmental and social impact, Kogod's MSSM program provides students with the skills to tackle some of the most challenging issues companies face today. MSSM students learn from world-class faculty across disciplines whose experiences have taken them from the halls of Congress to the most prestigious boardrooms in the world. The school's location in Washington, DC—where some of the world's most influential government, media, and financial institutions are located—provides students with unparalleled opportunities to make an impact locally, nationally, and globally.With flexible course options in both residential and online modalities, the MSSM provides myriad options for students at every stage of their careers to learn, network, and grow at American University.Learn more about the MS in Sustainability Management on Kogod's website: kogod.biz/46a7C8D

Julie Anderson is an in-demand international public speaker, bestselling author, and Certified Brain Health Coach with over 27 years of experience in brain science. She provides solution-based training on business, programs for entrepreneurial success, and brain-based consulting for parents. Julie's passion is helping individuals to improve relationships through a better understanding of human nature and the neuroscience of personalities.   On this episode of Smart Parents Successful Students, you will hear:   What parents need to know to ensure optimal learning for their child Ways to build confidence in kids by understanding the way their brain works Tips for relating to kids that will help them in times of crisis Strategies for parents to facilitate their kids' learning style How to determine a child's brain personality   Julie invites you to arrange a discovery call at https://yourbestmindllc.com/parenting-success/.  She can also be reached at ChatWithBrainLadyJulie.com.   You can find Dynamis Learning on all the social media platforms: Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and LinkedIn. Helen can be reached at info@dynamislearningacademy.com.   To schedule a free consultation to discuss your child's needs including advocacy resources and/or obtain a tutor for your child, contact Helen Panos at 770-282-9931 or email her at the email address above.  

In this episode of the Alaskaland Podcast, Mayor Ward sits down with Julie Anderson, chief of Operations Branch for the U.S Army Corps of Engineers-Alaska District, to talk about the Moose Creek Dam and what the Corps does every day to prevent flooding in the Fairbanks North Star Borough. Julie is a lifelong Alaskan with a civil engineering degree, many years of experience, valuable historical knowledge, and a good sense of humor. Enjoy this conversation and make time to visit the Chena Flood Control Project visitors center.

In this episode Levi talks with Julie Anderson about her music album "A Time Of Singing Has Come". A compilation of six songs written between 1990 -2007. These are recordings performed by choirs including those at Manitoulin Youth Camp, Great Lakes Bible school and young people from BC and Australia. Levi asks Julie about her creative process in finding melodies to fit scripture such as "Hannah's Prayer" and " Lift Up Your Eyes". Julie shares the excitement of collaborating with her son Grant on "A Prayer Of Moses" for Manitoulin in 2007 and the heartbreaking experience of his car accident just prior to the Friday Night concert. Levi shares his memories of being at camp and hearing the choir performing this song, knowing Grant was in a coma. Julie and Levi discuss the healing power of music in helping Grant recover. Julie describes personal circumstances that inspired her to compose daily poems to encourage her son, Ethan. She expresses gratitude to God for being able to share her love of music. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/a-little-faith/message

In this episode of George Fox Talks, Dr. Jay Miller and Julie Anderson discuss George Fox University and how it was started by a Quaker named William Hobson. They discuss Hobson's journey to Newberg and how God called him there.Check out Julie's book: William Hobson (1820–1891) - Pioneer, Minister, and Founder of the Evangelical Friends Church (Quakers) in the Pacific Northwest Dr. Jay David Miller teaches English at George Fox University and serves as an associate editor for the journal Quaker Religious Thought.Julie Anderson is a congregational care pastor at Newberg Friends Church and an author on William Hobson (1820-1891).If you enjoy listening to the George Fox Talks podcast and would like to watch, too, check out our channel on YouTube! We also have a web page that features all of our podcasts, a sign-up for our weekly email update, and publications from the George Fox University community.

Tax season has arrived and a lot of Canadians are questioning the fairness of our system. Despite overwhelming support for reform amongst the electorate there seems to be little political will to enact a wealth tax. Erika Beauchesne, the communications coordinator at Canadians for Tax Fairness, a non-profit organization that advocates for fair taxation to reduce inequality and strengthen the economy, joins me to discuss. In the second interview today we focus on the attitude of gratitude and how to make it a daily part of your life with Dr. Maxine McClean. Dr. McClean has a new book out called Gratitude Keeper - No Water, No Rain that aims to help people live a more balanced life through journaling, meditation, and daily inspirational cards. Anne Brodie is in with new entertainment and this week we take a look at Juniper starring the mighty Charlotte Rampling, the uber creepy The Consultant on Prime that takes a dark look at the modern workplace, and the delightful Eugene Levy steps out of his comfort zone in the new AppleTV+ series The Reluctant Traveller. Are you new year's health resolutions a distant memory now? Before you beat yourself up, Jasmine Parent from I Am Worthy Wellness pops by to discuss her unique approach to wellness that starts with a healthy dose of self-compassion. Multi-level marketing is everywhere and you may be part of one yourself, but Julie Anderson wants you to think twice about your involvement as either a consumer or a direct seller. Julie joins me to discuss a little about her journey with a consumer cult. Finally Martina Bosede is a new Canadian and we're so happy to have her, as she brings her incredible talent as a international open format DJ with here. Martina has worked with singers such as Rihanna, 50 Cent and Kelis and joins me today to share her newest single called MOVE. Canadians For Tax Fairness Website: www.taxfairness.ca Twitter: https://twitter.com/FairTaxCanada Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/canadians4taxfairness/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/canadiansfortaxfairness TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@canadians4taxfairness Dr. Maxine McClean Website: maxinemclean.com Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/drmaxinemclean/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/drmaxinemclean LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drmaxinemclean/ Anne Brodie Twitter: https://twitter.com/annebrodie Website: whatshesaidtalk.com Jasmine Parent Website: https://iamworthywellness.com/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/jasminelosingit/ Julie Anderson Instagram: www.instagram.com/_julieanderson426/ Tiktok: www.tiktok.com/@julieanderson426?lang=en Martina Bosede Website: https://www.martinabosede.com/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/martinabosede Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/martinabosede/ Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/artist/0ucLPDdnibllSgHytzEz2Q?si=6r5AgNpCQnmTmWWjGPwQbw

Let's discuss Ray and Jessica Higdon. A couple of "Gurus" of the MLM world.  Find Julie's channel here https://www.youtube.com/@JulieAndersonvideos Julie's TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@julieanderson426 Mombie's blog https://mombie-antimlm.com/ Want to send me an email? antimlm@activist.com Podcast information, including the podcast's social media, can be found here:  https://linktr.ee/AntiMLMpodcast   My Socials:(Including my TikTok) https://linktr.ee/JessMUA  Do you see someone that's with an MLM making a false claim? Report here https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/#/ Or go to https://www.truthinadvertising.org. Not in the US?Information here https://www.ftc.gov/policy/international/competition-consumer-protection-authorities-worldwide   Disclaimer: Section 107 of the Copyright Act provides the statutory framework for determining whether something is fair use and identifies certain types of services—such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research—as examples of activities that may qualify as fair use. Everything in this recording my based on my research and is my opinion. Thanks for being a part of the AntiMLM Community. Anchor sponsored this episode. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/jessmua/message

Let's discuss Ray and Jessica Higdon. A couple of "Gurus" of the MLM world.  Find Julie's channel here https://www.youtube.com/@JulieAndersonvideos Julie's TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@julieanderson426 Mombie's blog https://mombie-antimlm.com/ Want to send me an email? antimlm@activist.com Podcast information, including the podcast's social media, can be found here:  https://linktr.ee/AntiMLMpodcast   My Socials:(Including my TikTok) https://linktr.ee/JessMUA  Do you see someone that's with an MLM making a false claim? Report here https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/#/ Or go to https://www.truthinadvertising.org. Not in the US?Information here https://www.ftc.gov/policy/international/competition-consumer-protection-authorities-worldwide   Disclaimer: Section 107 of the Copyright Act provides the statutory framework for determining whether something is fair use and identifies certain types of services—such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research—as examples of activities that may qualify as fair use. Everything in this recording my based on my research and is my opinion. Thanks for being a part of the AntiMLM Community. Anchor sponsored this episode. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/jessmua/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/jessmua/support

This week on Entrepreneur Conundrum I am joined by the Brain Lady Julie Anderson.Want to improve all aspects of your life, relationships, and businesses? Would you like to discover YOUR natural secret weapon? Do you want tips and tricks to access and maximize using this secret weapon? Then you will want hear everything that Julie is saying. Julie get a little giddy as she shares about all things related to maximizing the power of your brain and understanding of the brain personality connection and the mind/brain/body connection can improve your businesses, relationships, health and life. The field of neuroscience is revealing amazing things about the brain.  When this knowledge is applied you will become a more effective and understanding parent; thrive in your personal and professional relationships; and see an increase in your business growth and profitability!These are just a few things that Julie brings to the table and speaks about with us today!Key QuestionsVirginia 01:02Have you always been interested in how the brain works? Virginia 01:40So is that kind of where you started your entrepreneurial journey? Virginia 04:40So who's your ideal client? Virginia 05:12So does that help them with their whole squirrel syndrome?Virginia 07:41you kind of mentioned that there's kind of like a common trend with entrepreneurs, and let's say getting them to focus more on their strengths. Is it? Let's say as simple as taking like a little test to figure out where our strengths are? Virginia 11:22So how do you get in front of the entrepreneurial aspect for your clients?Virginia 15:28How would that affect your business?Virginia 16:39What do you feel is the biggest roadblock that's kind of there right now for that?Virginia 22:28So do you have like any tips or tricks how to get out of that little self sabotaging moment? To help us believe in ourselves or that positive self talk?Virginia 28:17What's some of the best advice that you have ever received?Virginia 30:08What's the best advice you've ever given?Virginia 34:17Is there anything that you'd like to share with us that we haven't touched on yet?Connect with Juliehttps://yourbestmindllc.com/https://www.linkedin.com/in/brainladyjuliehttps://twitter.com/BrainLadyhttps://www.facebook.com/YourBestMindOnlinehttps://www.instagram.com/brainladyjulie/https://www.youtube.com/user/YourBestMind Virginia PurnellFunnel & Visibility SpecialistDistinct Digital Marketing(833) 762-5336virginia@distinctdigitalmarketing.comwww.distinctdigitalmarketing.comBook a Free Call http://bit.ly/DDMBookACallEC

Happy New Year! On this episode, hosts Austin (South Salem Friends) and Jacob (Meridian Friends) met with Julie Anderson (Newberg Friends) to discuss a book that she wrote about William Hobson. Julie shares with us about Hobson and what we can all learn from his life as well as what the process of writing a book was like for her. You can purchase Julie's book online here: https://www.amazon.com/William-Hobson-1820-1891-Julie-Anderson/dp/1666713643

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.

JOIN THE SOULFUL HUMAN PATREON for BONUS deep dives, community and other extras!FIND JULIE!IG: @_julieanderson426TT: @JulieAnderson426NICOLE & The Soulful HumanThe Soulful Human was created by Nicole as a way to share stories on important and relevant topics to our world today, to give an opportunity for those to share their own journeys but also for those listening to connect and see they are not alone in the struggles and joys they face on their own journeys. It is a place of connection and community. More will be coming with opportunities to be in the business and organization directory, to sponsor/advertise and to share YOUR story on upcoming topic. You can support the show by subscribing and giving a review as well as visiting the etsy shop. This is to cover expenses and eventually to use a portion of the profits to donate to some great causes such as The Trevor Project, Everytown for Gun Safety, The Loveland Foundation, Girls Inc and Planned Parenthood along with more.https://www.etsy.com/shop/thesoulfulhumanFollow Nicole and The Soulful Humanhttps://www.instagram.com/thesoulfulhumanpod/TT: @thesoulfulhumanhttps://www.instagram.com/nicoleoneilphotography/

Julie Anderson joins us for an in-depth conversation about what her non-partisan bid for Washington Secretary of State should teach us about the two-party system. Plus: A study shows just how overtaxed citizens of Seattle truly are. Also: A TV show takes its political plot too far.

Fastest 15 // Student walk out // Lion King sign language interpreter fired for being white // Elon and the blue check craze // Julie Anderson with Brandi Kruse // Cost of Thanksgiving continues to grow // Pelosi claims she wants Biden to run in 2024See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This month we are teaming up with igotout.org, throughout the month of November, follow along with us as we share education, survivor stories and ways you can join in on the movement. Each episode this month will include stories of cult survival, including the abuses described in Dr Steven Hassan's BITE Model. This episode in particular deals with covert abuse, along with a variety of triggering subject matter. Please use discretion when listening. I had no idea how bad Rank Makers was until I spoke to Julie Anderson. That chat lead me down a path uncovering shocking behavior and even scarier experiences from even more people, including Jennifer Rajala. It wasn't until I put out a call to action asking for testimonials that Ray's victims poured forth. I had so many submissions, I decided to organize them by the BITE Model, juxtaposing them with Ray's own thoughts and opinions. Show Notes Play to Win Episode One - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JV2tHyjHjg&list=PLoGN-3IQ01C456usBAdcDhQuJmIc_ux7U Rank Makers University - https://www.rankmakers.com/rmu Cultish by Amanda Montell - https://amzn.to/3Q7owx9 Dr. Steven Hassan's BITE Model - https://freedomofmind.com/cult-mind-control/bite-model/ Ponzinomics by Robert L. FitzPatrick - https://amzn.to/3q16oJb How can you help? Report false income and health claims here: https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/ Or go to: https://www.truthinadvertising.org You can also report to your state Attorney General's office! https://www.naag.org/find-my-ag/ Not in the U.S.? Go here: https://www.ftc.gov/policy/international/competition-consumer-protection-authorities-worldwide Support the Podcast! Join the Patreon! - https://www.patreon.com/robertablevins Buy me a Taco and leave a note!

Hour 1 -- welcome to Standard Time everybody, a Constitutional scholar responds to the Democrats pre-election 'talking point' that "Democracy is on the ballot", a quick check list of Democrats NOT CONDEMNING political violence in Western WA, the political left has "no use" for the Constitution, candidate John Fetterman has another awkward campaign moment mangling his words about how he "celebrates the demise of Roe V. Wade", GUEST: Federal Way mayor and candidate for King Co. Pros., Jim Ferrell, joins the show, explains what will change if he's elected to succeed current prosecutor, Dan Satterberg, Ferrell asks if voters "feel safer now than you did "five, ten years ago". Hour 2 -- GUEST: WA State Democratic Party chair, Tina Podlodowski, says candidate Julie Anderson is getting "desperate", complains about write-in candidate Brad Klippert "very clear to us that Brad is gaining momeuntum" with his write-in campaign, Podlodowski's reaction when she learns that Carlson is endorsing Steve Hobbs, Podlodowski says voting turn-out has gone down every year in Pierce Co. that Anderson has been auditor; Lake Stevens most famous native son gets political in a southern California mayoral election, GUEST: ATR.org founder and president, Grover Norquist, previews tomorrow's election and why the New Hampshire U.S. Senate race might be the Republicans safest chance to pick up a seat there, the bizarre Whidbey Island political campaign in WA 10th Legislative District takes a sleazy turn in a new election mailer arriving in voters mailboxes. Hour 3 -- the "celebration of our country" over the weekend in Auburn WA, a KVI caller wants to argue about what happens when Republicans win majority control of the U.S. House in tomorrow's election, debating the Democrats' mantra that "democracy is on the ballot" in tomorrow's mid-term Congressional election, Biden Administration now facing another supply shortage of children's penicillin after this year's earlier crisis with a baby formula shortage, some voting advice posted on social media, Jonathan Turley response to "democracy is on the ballot" talking point by Democrats, KVI caller on Podlodowski interview, Biden tells heckler "no more (oil) drilling".

With Election Day looming and ballots due in a few days, this week's show is a Ballot-In-Review! Crystal is joined by perennial favorite Mike McGinn along with the rest of the Hacks & Wonks team - Bryce Cannatelli and Shannon Cheng - to discuss the recent political climate, break down the context of down-ballot races and why your vote matters. Listen in as the crew opens their ballots and thinks their way through the important choices in front of them. 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 ballot party attendees: Mike McGinn at @mayormcginn, Bryce Cannatelli at @inascenttweets, and Shannon Cheng at @drbestturtle. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Time Stamps Washington State Advisory Votes - 05:57 King County Charter Amendment 1 and Proposition 1 -  08:25 Federal Races - 16:54 Washington Congressional Races - 18:00 Secretary of State - 32:00 Washington State Legislature Races - 33:13 LD26 - 33:27 LD47 - 35:30 LD42 - 36:57 LD30 - 38:09 LD44 - 38:22 LD46 - 38:55 LD36 - 39:45 LD37 - 39:56 LD34 - 41:05 King County Prosecuting Attorney - 41:32 City of Seattle Municipal Court - 52:40  City of Seattle Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B - 1:01:48   Reminders Don't forget to vote! Visit votewa.gov for voting resources.   Institute for a Democratic Future 2023 applications are live! The initial deadline is November 2nd, and the final deadline is November 13th.   Learn more about how to get involved in Seattle's budget season at this link and about King County's budget timeline here.   Student debt relief sign-ups are live! Visit this link to enroll.   Resources  Washington State Advisory Votes:  “Tim Eyman's legacy of advisory votes on taxes hits WA ballots again” by David Kroman from The Seattle Times King County Charter Amendment 1 and Proposition 1: “King County considers moving most elections to even years” by Joseph O'Sullivan from Crosscut   King County Proposition No. 1 - Conservation Futures Levy Washington Congressional Races: “Congressional candidate Joe Kent wants to rewrite history of Jan. 6 attack” by Jim Brunner from The Seattle Times   Straight Talk bonus round: Marie Gluesenkamp Perez and Joe Kent from KGW News   “Rep. Schrier, challenger Matt Larkin clash in debate over who's extreme” by Jim Brunner from The Seattle Times Secretary of State: Hacks & Wonks Interview - Julie Anderson, Candidate for Washington Secretary of State   Hacks & Wonks Interview - Steve Hobbs, Candidate for Washington Secretary of State   Hacks & Wonks - Secretary of State audiograms - Addressing Democratic criticism of Julie Anderson   Hacks & Wonks - Secretary of State audiograms - Thoughts on Ranked Choice Voting   Hacks & Wonks - Secretary of State audiograms - Experience to manage the broad portfolio of the SoS office Washington State Legislature Races: LD26 - “New ad highlights Washington candidate's past behavior against staffers” by Shauna Sowersby from The News Tribune   Sign up to volunteer for Emily Randall's campaign here on her website.   LD47 - Hacks & Wonks Interview - Claudia Kauffman, Candidate for 47th LD State Senator   “Boyce, Kauffman vie for WA senate in swing district with Kent, Auburn” by Daniel Beekman from The Seattle Times   LD42 - “Sefzik-Shewmake forum highlights abortion, health care” by Ralph Schwartz from Cascadia Daily News   LD44 - Hacks & Wonks Interview - April Berg, Candidate for 44th LD State Representative   LD46 - Hacks & Wonks Interview - Darya Farivar, Candidate for 46th LD State Representative   LD36 - Hacks & Wonks Interview - Jeff Manson, Candidate for 36th LD State Representative   Hacks & Wonks Interview - Julia Reed, Candidate for 36th LD State Representative   LD37 - Hacks & Wonks Interview - Emijah Smith, Candidate for 37th LD State Representative   Hacks & Wonks Interview - Chipalo Street, Candidate for 37th LD State Representative   South Seattle Emerald 37th LD Candidate Forum   LD34 - Hacks & Wonks Interview - Emily Alvarado, Candidate for 34th LD State Representative   Hacks & Wonks Interview - Leah Griffin, Candidate for 34th LD State Representative   Hacks & Wonks Elections 2022 Resource Page King County Prosecuting Attorney: "PubliCola Questions: King County Prosecuting Attorney Candidate Leesa Manion" by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola   "PubiCola Questions: King County Prosecuting Attorney Candidate Jim Ferrell" by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola   "Leesa Manion, Jim Ferrell tied in the 2022 contest for King County Prosecuting Attorney" by Andrew Villeneuve from The Cascadia Advocate   "Leesa Manion Holds Razor-Thin Lead in King County Prosecutor Race, NPI Poll Finds" by Douglas Trumm from The Urbanist Washington Supreme Court: Hacks & Wonks Interview - Washington Supreme Court Justice Mary Yu   Hacks & Wonks Interview - Washington Supreme Court Justice G. Helen Whitener City of Seattle Municipal Court: Hacks & Wonks City of Seattle Municipal Court Judge Candidate Forum   "Defense Attorneys Say Harsh Sentencing Decision Reveals Judge's Bias" by Will Casey from The Stranger City of Seattle Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B: City of Seattle - Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B   Ranked Choice Voting vs. Approval Voting from FairVote   The Stranger - City of Seattle Propositions Nos. 1A and 1B   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I am Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant - a busy one - 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 are continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host - and we're adding a little twist. So first, we want to welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host: activist, community leader, former mayor of Seattle, and Executive Director of America Walks, the popular Mike McGinn. Welcome back. [00:01:03] Mike McGinn: Not quite popular enough - Crystal - you have to acknowledge that, but I think we need to go to the other guests on the show today. [00:01:12] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, so we're coming with you with a full Hacks & Wonks crew today. We have the incredible Bryce Cannatelli, who coordinates everything with the show and holds it down. Pleased to have her with us today. Hey, Bryce. [00:01:29] Bryce Cannatelli: Hey, Crystal. [00:01:30] Crystal Fincher: And we have Dr. Shannon Cheng, who is here to enlighten us also with her wisdom and insight, along with Bryce. Hey, Shannon. [00:01:39] Shannon Cheng: Hey, Crystal - super excited to be here. [00:01:42] Crystal Fincher: You could probably hear the sarcasm in that - but this is going to be fun. We are having a Hacks & Wonks little ballot party - we thought it may be helpful - because we talk about several things on the ballot, we talk about several races. But a lot of times we open up the ballot and there are things on there that we haven't seen, haven't heard of, and are trying to figure out. So we thought we would all just open up the ballots, go through them together - some of us in this call are later-voting people because we like receiving all of the voter communication until the last minute, so we haven't turned them in - but we encourage everyone to turn in their ballots as soon as possible. As we go through this ballot, we will add timestamps and let you know when we discuss the different areas of the ballot. So if you have a particular question about a particular area, you can just go to that portion in the show and figure out that, because we actually have taken some time to discuss what is in this ballot and on this ballot. So good luck. Make sure you get your ballot in. If you can't find it, if something happens to it, if you have questions, votewa.gov, V-O-T-E-W-A.gov is a resource. Or hey, just @ the show @HacksWonks to reply to us and we will try and chase down any answers to questions that you have. So vote, make sure everyone you know votes. This is really important and a lot is at stake locally and nationally. And what we do locally is going to dictate what happens nationally. And with that, I will give a few reminders today. And yeah, number one is vote. Don't forget to vote. The election - Election Day is Tuesday, November 8th. You can go to votewa.gov, that's V-O-T-E-W-A.gov to get all of the information about voting. If something has gone haywire, if you can't find your ballot, if you're not sure what you need to do, if you need information about accessible voting, or if you need to figure out about how to register to vote - which you still can do in person if you haven't registered to vote or changed your address or anything like that - go to votewa.gov and you can get all that figured out. Also, the Institute for a Democratic Future is accepting applications for this coming year's new class. The deadline is November 13th and so make sure to get those in there. I've talked about this before on the show, the Institute for a Democratic Future is great for people who lean left and who want to learn about making a difference in their community, who want to learn about politics and policy, or potentially even having a career - it's responsible for my career in politics. So if you want to learn more about that, feel free to hit me up or visit the website, which we'll link in the show notes. Also, it is budget season around the state - and including in Seattle - and so we're going to include resources for the Seattle budget process as well as King County in our show notes, so stay tuned with that and make sure that you get involved in making your priorities and needs known to your elected officials who are allocating money for the next year or two there. Student debt relief - signing up is happening now. Don't forget to do that. Don't wait to do that. We'll put a link to that in the show notes. And Daylight Savings Time ends this Sunday at 2 a.m. We're falling an hour back. We're moving into darkness in dismay and it's a very sad time for some of us here at Hacks & Wonks who like the extra sunshine in the evening. So here we go into the dark months of winter. [00:05:31] Mike McGinn: But Hacks & Wonks will be on every week to bring some sunshine into your life. [00:05:37] Crystal Fincher: We will try. We will try. [00:05:40] Mike McGinn: Stay tuned in on a regular basis. Yeah. [00:05:43] Crystal Fincher: So let's open up our ballots, crew. Let's see what we have here and start to talk through - for those of you who still have to vote - some things that may be useful, helpful. So the first things we see on this ballot that we've opened up are Advisory Votes. Man, these Advisory Votes on every freaking ballot. We have two Advisory Votes here. How did we get into this Advisory Vote situation, Mike? What is this going on? [00:06:15] Mike McGinn: This was part of the Tim Eyman Full Employment Act where he was trying to find yet another ballot measure to put in front of the people. So what this one does - it is passed by the people - and basically they have the opportunity to have a second opinion on every tax that's passed by the Legislature. So that's why you always have all these Advisory Votes at the top. But everybody approves to-date, the public approves the votes that are passed by the Legislature. It's why we elect people, send them to the Legislature. It's really just turned into extra space on the ballot, which costs money and makes the ballot a little longer. And so we could all save a little space on the ballot if the Legislature changed this. In the meantime, don't upset that budget that your Legislature worked to craft - just vote to approve. [00:07:08] Crystal Fincher: I completely agree with that. I cannot wait until we get to the time where we get the opportunity to repeal this. It makes our ballot longer. It confuses people. This is just anytime there is basically revenue passed, it has to appear as an Advisory Vote, which does not have any force of law. It doesn't actually do anything. It is basically a poll about something that has already happened. So yes, vote to approve. But also I would really like a movement to vote to eliminate these Advisory Votes. One thing it does is it makes the ballot longer, which is not pleasant for a lot of people. What do you think, Bryce? [00:07:49] Bryce Cannatelli: Yeah, I wanted to hop in just to say that the choices are Repealed and Maintained. And so the suggestions to vote to approve them are to Maintain them as the maintain option. But yeah, no, I definitely agree. We've talked about it in past shows. We talk about it off the air. Getting people to vote down-ballot is always a challenge. And these Advisory Votes just get in the way of that. I think we'll have more to talk about when we get to the Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B question on the back of the ballot about what length might do to people answering those questions. [00:08:25] Crystal Fincher: All right. So we are here in King County. We all have King County ballots. The next thing I see on my ballot - I think you probably see the next thing on yours - as we travel down from the Advisory Votes, is actually King County, a County Charter Amendment. Charter Amendment No. 1 - even-numbered election years for certain county offices. Question: Shall the King County Charter be amended to move elections for the county offices of Executive, Assessor, Director of Elections, and Councilmembers from odd-numbered years to even-numbered years? Why is it important to move from odd-numbered to even-numbered years according to the advocates for this charter amendment, Mike? [00:09:10] Mike McGinn: The single most important thing you can do to improve voter turnout. When you look at election results in the state of Washington, Oregon, anywhere else around the country, so many more people turn out in an even year because you also have congressional elections or presidential elections. It's just a more momentous ballot than the odd year elections. And so if you think people should vote more, if you think democracy is a good thing, moving it to an even year is great. The county has the option to do that. Cities can't just do it on their own - they need a change in state law. Representative Mia Gregerson has been pushing for that and others have pushed for it. In addition to getting more people to vote, it also really improves the demographics of the ballot. We're getting more young people, more people of color, more immigrant refugees - who are here and can legally vote. We're just getting so many more people voting that we're getting a more representative ballot. So I've been a big proponent of this. You just get a different electorate. You get a better, more representative electorate. And if what you care about, and I do, is more affordable housing - if you get an older, more conservative electorate, they're going to oppose new housing and they're going to oppose new taxes for affordable housing. They're going to be more likely to say, keep the car lane and don't make it easier to walk or bike or use transit. So we need to get an electorate and get elections in even years where we have an electorate that more reflects where we need to go. And hearing from more people, if you believe in democracy, it's great. So big kudos to King County Council for - and Girmay Zahilay, in particular - for championing this. And hopefully we can move all the elections to even years. By the way, we'll save some money too. We'll have fewer elections that the elections offices have to step up for. [00:11:15] Crystal Fincher: I'd love to see it. What do you think about it, Dr. Cheng? [00:11:18] Shannon Cheng: I'm really excited. We talk a lot about - on this show - about how local elections really matter and that local government is really where you feel the actual changes and impacts in people's day-to-day lives. And so having some of more of our local elections in a year where more people are going to be paying attention to it, I think it will be super helpful. I know I talked to somebody recently who felt like they were in Washington state and so their vote didn't matter. And, we're going to get to these other races. And I was trying to tell them, no, we have things on our ballot that really do matter, like the King County Prosecutor and judges and all that. And I think just combining it in a way where people are going to be paying more attention to these things that really matter in their lives will be super helpful. [00:12:03] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Well said - I agree. Next up on the ballot for King County is Proposition No. 1, the Conservation Futures Levy. So the King County Council passed Ordinance 19-458 concerning funding to protect open space lands in King County. The proposition would provide funding to pay, finance, or refinance acquisition and preservation of urban green spaces, natural areas, wildlife, and some salmon habitat, trails, river corridors, farmlands, and forests. And would reauthorize restoration of the county's Conservation Futures property tax to levy a rate that will be assessed for collection in 2023 and use the dollar amount from 2023 for the purpose of computing subsequent levy collections. So should this be approved or rejected? There are some really compelling statements about this, but this is really important for protecting open space lands in King County. There have been lots of conversations just about the preservation of land, the preservation of open and undeveloped land, and how important that is. These are conversations related to sprawl, related to just air quality, related to just people having the opportunity to recreate near where they live and not selling or developing all available land and the consequences that potentially come from that. So it is important, I think, widely acknowledged as important from people all across the aisle. It's important to maintain all of this. I see a statement submitted by Sally Jewell, who I believe is a former CEO of REI and served in a presidential administration, and De'Sean Quinn, who is a Tukwila City Council member, as well as Dow Constantine. And really, we have to take this action to protect climate change, to protect these last best places throughout King County. So far, this program has safeguarded over 100,000 acres of land, including Cougar Mountain, the Duwamish Waterway Park, and Sammamish River Trail. And they can accelerate that with this proposition. Statement in opposition to it really basically says that, hey, parks are having challenges being maintained, and we've already done enough. I don't know that there's a lot of people here in King County feeling that we've done enough to address climate change or that we've done enough to protect local land. Protecting farms and fresh water, and open space seems like a priority to so many people in this area - and what makes this area so desirable to the people living here and those who visit and eventually come here. What do you think about this, Mike? [00:15:08] Mike McGinn: It's a parks levy. I'm for parks levies, generally. I actually got to run one once, and it was just great. And there's so much more in it than you might think. And if we talk about community - that to me is ultimately what this is about. There's clearly the environmental protection, but that's the quality of life and the community gathering places as well. So yeah, and it's a renewal. It's an expansion and a renewal of an existing levy. And I think every time you get to go to a great county facility, you just have to remember that the money came from somewhere, and this is where it comes from. They really have to pass these levies to make it work, given the way finances work for county and municipal governments. [00:15:54] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. And so this will cost the average homeowner about $2 more per month. There is relief available to qualified low-income seniors and other households. And the funding recommendations are made by an independent advisory committee and subject to external audit. So it's not just, hey, willy-nilly stuff happening here. There is accountability and oversight - looks like it is endorsed by the Nature Conservancy, Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust for Public Land, the Wilderness Society, Seattle Parks Foundation, REI, Dow Constantine and council members - just a lot of support there. I find those arguments to be particularly convincing. But this is an important one that's flown under the radar for a number of people, I think. I've gotten a lot of questions from people saying, whoa, what should I do with these county amendments and this proposition? And so just wanted to make sure that we went through that. Next on my ballot are the federal races, which have gotten a ton of coverage. I think if you listen to the show, odds are you probably know if you're going to be voting for Senator Patty Murray or her challenger, Tiffany Smiley, but that is at the top of the ballot right now. Do any of you have anything to chime in with about this race? [00:17:22] Mike McGinn: It's really fascinating to watch how this race is starting to become part of a national narrative about whether or not there's a red wave - going to hit the federal elections. And then there's some counterarguments. And we could pundit all afternoon on this one. And I'm sure a lot of you, if you're politically oriented, have really been watching the national news about what will happen in Congress. Will the Senate remain Democratic or will it turn Republican? Is the House going to flip? Most pundits say it will flip to Republican control, but there are still some folks out there holding hope that it might not. So I think the real message just is - if you cared about the national scene, you have an opportunity to play locally too. There's a Senate election in the state of Washington as well. [00:18:15] Crystal Fincher: All right. And next up on people's ballots - is going to vary based on where we live. It's going to be the congressional races. So I actually live in the Ninth Congressional District. We have a very competitive Eighth Congressional District race between Kim Schrier and Matt Larkin. Kim Schrier, the Democrat, Matt Larkin, the Republican. We have other races. Who's on your ballots? What congressional districts are you in? [00:18:43] Mike McGinn: I've got Seven, which is Pramila Jayapal and Cliff Moon. [00:18:46] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think all three of you are in Seven there. Those races are a bit less competitive. I think two of the most competitive races here are going to be Kim Schrier versus Matt Larkin. And then down in southwest Washington, actually - in the Third Congressional District - between Marie Gluesenkamp Perez and extremist Republican, MAGA Republican Joe Kent, who is just... It's hard to do justice to him by describing him because I've tried to do it and then I've been like, okay, I can't do this. Here, watch this clip of him and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez in this sit-down with a reporter, just answering questions. And it is wild. He does not think January 6th happened in the way we all saw it happened with our eyes. He thinks that it was a CIA false flag operation. He doesn't think that police officers were killed as a result of that. He's deep into conspiracy theories, deep into the election denial of the 2020 election. Just deep into so many things - eager to cut social security, eager to cut so many things, eager to defund Ukraine between Ukraine and Russia, eager to do all sorts of things at the border. This is someone who eagerly and has multiple times appeared on Tucker Carlson. This is not Jaime Herrera Beutler. This is not the type of Republican that people are used to seeing in this district, or even as people think about Republicans in this country now - even the more extreme version that people are getting familiar with. This is the tip of the spear of the most extreme. He models himself after Marjorie Taylor Greene, says he looks up to her and wants to do that, does not want to work across the aisle, doesn't see a point to it. Rarely does media outside of the conservative bubble, does not want to debate Marie Gluesenkamp Perez. This is a race where a lot is at stake. Jim Brunner just wrote an article about it this morning in The Seattle Times. Actually, he shared it - I'm not sure if he wrote it. But this is an important one for people to get engaged in. We've talked about the importance of - even if you don't live in a district, hey, why don't you adopt a district, make some phone calls, do some phone banking, get down there and canvass - do what you can. Don't let this slip away without doing everything possible. The Third Congressional District is traditionally a Republican district, but it's traditionally a Republican district that has elected Republicans like Jaime Herrera Beutler, who were nowhere near as extreme as Joe Kent. This is a closer race than we've seen there in quite some time. If enough people get involved and if enough people get engaged, who knows what could happen? Democrats seem energized down there. This is one where - don't let it go by without everyone pitching in and doing what they can to engage in that race. Any thoughts that you have on that one? [00:22:10] Mike McGinn: This race, yeah, it does highlight just where the Republican Party has been going. I think you see some of this in the Murray-Smiley race as well. I've been really impressed by the campaigning of the Democrat in the race and the way in which she's approaching the race. This is a district that is - it's a swing district, but it's a lean-R swing district, if that makes sense. It has the Portland suburbs, but it also has more rural areas as well. Yeah, maybe this - if this were on the East Coast, people would be looking at this as a bellwether of which way the trend is going in national politics. Who knows? Maybe we'll be able to tell a little bit from the East Coast about how this race might work out by the time they start announcing results from this coast. But really, I think the D in this race - she's run a really solid race, speaking directly to people's economic concerns as a small business owner as well. And there's this thing where reporters want to talk about partisanship or polarized politics or divisiveness. And yeah, I would say the electorate is polarized - there are a hell of a lot of folks nationwide who are going to pull the lever for candidates because they want to see Republicans have charge of the chamber, regardless of the shortcomings of the local candidate. It's a really fascinating phenomenon that's going on. But I'm going to make an argument that it's - the Democrats look a lot like candidates I've seen in the past running. And the Republicans don't, in my mind, in terms of the extremism that we start to see on whether or not the election was stolen. The number of election deniers that are out there for the last election - there's just no credible evidence that there was any voter fraud. It went in front of numerous, numerous courts. It went in front of judges appointed by Republicans and Democrats. There's just no evidence for this. And I don't know that the media knows how to handle this - that when you have one side that just denies reality and the other side is still operating mostly within the frame of U.S. politics, as I've seen it in the years I've been involved in U.S. politics, but they both-sides it so much. And I think this raises a great illustration of that. The Democrat is really a right down the middle-of-the-road type of politician, and the Republican here is espousing things that just aren't so, and it's one hell of a tight race down there, according to all the polls. And portraying this as Americans are divided or the politicians are polarizing doesn't capture what's going on. [00:25:19] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think that is a good point. What do you think, Bryce? [00:25:23] Bryce Cannatelli: Yeah, I just wanted to weave back in something that Shannon mentioned earlier, which is that there are still people who live here and who vote here, who think that they live in Washington - they live in Western Washington - they're pretty safe from things. And I think this race is an important reminder that there are people running with these extreme views. There are these people running here in the state with really far-right priorities and goals. And this is a federal race, so it's gotten a lot of media attention, but it just highlights how important it is to pay attention to local races as well - races that for the State House and for State Senate and other positions - and just pay attention to what people are running on and making sure when we see people coming with extreme and dangerous views, that that's called out, that we let people know. Election Day is still in a few days. There's still opportunities to inform voters in this district about the candidates. There are still opportunities for voters who are really worried about rhetoric like this and candidates like this to get out there and talk to voters and inform them about this race. [00:26:32] Crystal Fincher: This conversation reminds me of one other thing, and actually was having a conversation about this as we were punditing on Kiro the other day. And there are some Republicans who are going - well, they're calling everybody extreme. Yeah, they're calling Joe Kent extreme, but they're also calling Tiffany Smiley extreme. And they're not the same extreme, but they're painting them with the same brush - you're hearing that for everybody, all the Republicans. If you say it about everybody, it's meaningless. And the challenge is, and the thing that the Republican Party has set up, is that they do have these extremists who are out further than a lot of the other Republicans that are elected, at least outwardly, right? And saying things that have been openly covered as white nationalism, Christian nationalism, that have been anti-Semitic, that have been racist, that have been homophobic, anti-trans, anti-gay - just very openly blatant right? And that is absolutely extreme. And no, not every Republican is outwardly openly saying that. They leave that to the Joe Kents and the Marjorie Taylor Greenes. But what is striking to me is how they have not been reined in by the people who have previously been considered as moderate and have previously been considered as the adults in the room. Those adults in the room are doing nothing to contain that extremist element in the party, and in fact, have given them more power, more visibility. The Republican Party, all of their caucuses have pumped money into these campaigns. Their allied PACs and supporters have pumped money into these campaigns and have been apologists for them. So if you will not rebuke when you hear those things said, if you will not stand up and say, you know what, I'm standing for these principles, and that person is not doing that, and we're both carrying the same label - I don't want to carry the same label as a person who is saying that - that is not what I stand for. We're not standing shoulder to shoulder. We're hearing none of that. We're hearing silence. And there are some people who want to interpret that silence as, well, clearly they don't agree. And when I talk to them, they sound perfectly reasonable, and they've been moderate in the past. We're hearing some of the most troubling things that we have in a while. Just the open anti-Semitism, the open racism, the open homophobia and transphobia that we're seeing is alarming. They're passing laws against it. This is not theoretical language. And we're seeing political violence as a direct result. That, of course, was predicted, right? When we hear speech like that, it incites violence. We have talked about it inciting violence, and it incited violence in multiple places, in multiple ways. And we've seen that just in the past couple of weeks - from January 6th to Nancy Pelosi to the Michigan governor - we're seeing this all over the place, right? And so silence is enabling violence. Silence is not moderation. It's enabling this extremism and violence. So yes, when you hear them all being painted with the same broad brush, it's because they're doing nothing to stop this rapid descent into this cesspool that we're on the precipice of, and that some states have already fallen to, right? It's important to vocally stand up against this, against hate, whenever we see it. And that's not a partisan statement. And if a party is trying to say that when you say that you need to call out violence, that you need to call out political violence, that you need to stand up and talk against anti-Semitism and call it what it is, and somehow they're putting a partisan label on that, be very wary of a party that says that speaking against those things is speaking against their party. They're telling you what the party is about if those things they're labeling as a partisan attack. I think that's very important to be said. This is so far beyond a Democratic and Republican issue, and we have to be aware that these Republicans are caucusing together, right? They're voting together for a national agenda, and we've heard this national agenda articulated. We've heard the things that they're queuing up. We've seen the types of policies that they're passing in places like Florida and Texas. We have the preview of what's coming there, and it is ugly, right? And ugly to people who used to consider themselves Republican. So to me, this is beyond the conversation of just Democrat and Republican. This is a conversation that we have to have before we even get to issues, because if we're leading with that hateful rhetoric and we're leading with that extremism, it really doesn't matter what someone is saying about issues, because the things that they are saying about people in their community is already excluding people and already doing that. I think that's extremely important to say, that we can't say that enough, and that trying to dismiss this extremism, and dismiss criticisms of it, and dismiss the refusal to call it out for what it is - is extremism itself. All right. So next on our ballot, we have the state races, starting with Secretary of State, which is a lively race. Now, we have talked a bunch about the Secretary of State race, and have also been posting a lot about it on the Hacks & Wonks Twitter account this week. So for that, between Democrat Steve Hobbs and Non-partisan Julie Anderson, we're going to refer you to those other shows. We'll put links in the show notes. We'll put links to the little audiograms and snippets that we have of the candidates' takes on different things. Steve Hobbs was a longtime Democratic senator known as a moderate for quite some time - and Julie Anderson actually just released a new ad that talks about that and him as a moderate. And then Julie Anderson has been the Pierce County auditor in Pierce County for 12 years, I believe now, and has built relationships around that area. So that's an interesting race to follow. We'll put those links in there, but that's the next one on the ballot. And then we get into the legislative races, which are going to be different depending on which legislative district that you're in. I just wanted to mention a few of the battleground districts here in the state. So one of them is in the 26th Legislative District Senate race - very important - between Emily Randall, Senator Emily Randall, and current Representative Jesse Young, who's running for that Senate seat. Emily's a Democrat with a strong record and has been representing that community and been in the community for quite some time. Jesse Young is one of the more extreme Republicans in our legislature, has - in the mold of the Matt Sheas, who made a lot of news for his activity in domestic terrorism. And if you think that sounds like a euphemism or like a stretch of the truth, I mean literal domestic terrorism like running a camp training people for war and putting tracking devices on law enforcement vehicles, and making threats to political opponents - extremism - and advancing bills to outlaw abortion in Washington state under threat of putting doctors in prison - that kind of extremism. And Jesse Young, as we talked about last week with Pierce County Council Chair Derek Young, has actually been suspended from working with legislative staff because of his past behavior and harassment or abuse. He is no longer permitted to have legislative staff, which is certainly hobbling in one's ability to get their job done. They lean very heavily on those staff. And so not being allowed to have one and having to do or not get done all of the administrative work, preparation work, ability to meet with constituents, ability to review and prepare legislation and represent the community is absolutely hobbled by that. But that is actually a really close race. Another one where it makes sense if you can adopt a race, that 26th Legislative District is a really important one where people can get involved with and make their voices heard. Also, the 47th Legislative District is a hotbed of activity - a competitive Senate race there - open seat left by the exiting Senator Mona Das and is being competed for by former State Senator, Democrat Claudia Kauffman and Republican Bill Boyce. This has been a purple district, a swing district, has elected both Democrats and Republicans. This district has a history of extremely close races. And so we have a race here where we're seeing some of the dynamics that we see in Democrat versus Republican races. Choice is a huge issue here. Bill Boyce - being bankrolled by far-right Republicans - has been giving really mushy responses about what he thinks about a woman's right to choose. And so that is certainly on the ballot, as well as just the history of corporate giveaways, tax - as was quoted in the paper - tax breaks and sweetheart deals given to rich developers and donors. And so certainly looking at the donor rolls there, you get a different story of who those legislators would be based on the activity there. So another very important partisan race. 42nd Legislative District, a very competitive race between Sharon Shewmake and Simon Sefzik - another Democrat versus Republican race - very important here for the Senate and just a variety of things. And again, we're seeing just greater space between the two parties. Here in the state, we, I think, have seen Republicans who have considered themselves moderate and who have been less eager to engage in some of the social wedge issue rhetoric that sometimes we see on a national basis. There have been Republicans who wore it as a badge of honor previously to say, no, that's not me. I'm focused on these other issues, but stand up. And whether it's being pro-choice, whether it is standing up for marriage equality. There have been some before here who have done that, some who haven't, but some who have. We are not seeing that now. Things are following the direction of some of the national races. And so we have that there. 30th Legislative District with Claire Wilson and Linda Kochmar, as well as the race between Jamila Taylor and Casey Jones are close - and so engaging in those is important. And then the 44th Legislative District with John Lovick, the Democrat who was previously a representative, currently a representative, now running to be a Senator, against Republican Jeb Brewer. Republican Mark Hamsworth for the House seat versus Brandy Donaghy, who was appointed to that seat and is running to fill the term, this new term. And then April Berg versus her Republican opponent. So pay attention to those races. Please make sure that you're engaging in these battlegrounds. And then we also have just Seattle races and - that we've covered. So in the 46th Legislative District, we have a classic Seattle moderate versus progressive race. Even though those, when you get into it, the labels might be a little bit simplistic, but certainly someone who seems more resistant to taxation, more resistant to change in Lelach Rave versus Darya Faravar, who wants to take more of an active approach in addressing issues like homelessness, housing affordability, and public safety - and move more in the direction of things that we've seen with the history of working versus those that have not. So that's a choice that we have there. We also have previously interviewed Darya, and so we'll link that in the show notes for your information. The 36th Legislative District features a race between Democrats Julia Reed and Jeff Manson. We've also interviewed both in that race. And we'll link that in the show notes. The 37th Legislative District is one where we did a primary candidate forum, have interviewed both of those candidates there - Democrat Chipalo Street and Democrat Emijah Smith. And we also did a debate in partnership with the South Seattle Emerald and others - hosted by the South Seattle Emerald - an in-person debate, actually. And we will link those there. I think that there are some interesting issues in that race, notable differences. We will also share kind of the lightning round stuff. But also, hey let's make sure that we're recognizing the full humanity of people and that we are not treating people who are in the LGBTQ community any differently than others. And that is an issue of difference in that race. So I encourage you all to do your homework about that and make sure that any candidate that you're voting for fully stands up for the rights of all people in our community. And that you communicate with the candidates about that and make sure all of your candidates know how important that is to you. And then we have the 34th Legislative District with Democrats Leah Griffin and Emily Alvarado. We've interviewed both of them. We'll link both of those shows in the show notes. So there are contested races throughout Seattle. Encourage you to vote in those races and make your choice. If you need help, refer to our show notes or to officialhacksandwonks.com. We have an Election 2022 page there and we'll put all of the resources on there. Next, we go to the County Prosecuting Attorney's race here in King County, that is between Jim Ferrell, who is the mayor of Federal Way, and Leesa Manion, who's the current Chief of Staff in the Prosecuting Attorney's Office. Jim Ferrell has been endorsed by folks like the King County Republican Party, some mayors, King County Council member Pete von Reichbauer, like the Covington and Algona mayor. Leesa Manion has been endorsed by the King County Democratic party, former governor Gary Locke, local labor unions. So there's a little bit of a difference in the profile of their supporters that kind of indicates the approach that they're looking to take. One, being more in line with some of the data that we're seeing in the most effective approaches to addressing crime and accountability - that has yielded some results in what we've seen, especially with youth crime and youth intervention, which seems to be particularly effective with Leesa Manion and her managing this office and hundreds of staff and attorney, which is certainly in line with what the County Prosecuting Attorney needs to do. Jim Ferrell, coming from the mayor of Federal Way, has talked about more of a punitive approach to this and is talking about cracking down on some of the things that we have been seeing as successful. It's interesting in how this race is shaping up and what the candidates are talking about and what they aren't talking about with them. Certainly Leesa has been leaning into her experience, the type of coalition that she's building, whether it's people who are in support of more common sense gun reform and making sure guns don't proliferate on the streets, to those who are looking to maintain accountability but make sure that we're doing the things that give folks the best chance of reducing recidivism, or people returning, or revictimizing people who are committing further crimes. Jim Ferrell seems very focused on trying to apply longer sentences, lengthier sentences, talking about a more, again, punitive approach, prosecuting more, longer sentences - that type of stuff. So with that, what do you think? What is your take on this race, Shannon? [00:44:01] Shannon Cheng: So this race is between Leesa Manion, who's the current Chief of Staff for the outgoing King County Prosecutor, Dan Satterberg - she's been in that position for quite a time. And her opponent is Jim Ferrell, who is the current mayor of Federal Way. So when I look at this race, I see - with Leesa Manion who - it's a continuation of what King County has been doing, which I would characterize as incremental reform of the criminal legal system to be more fair and equitable. I think this can be embodied in initiatives they aspire to, such as declaring racism as a public health crisis or the goal of Zero Youth Detention. So I think with Manion, you will get a continuation of the slow work that the county is doing to try to make our criminal legal system more equitable and fair. Whereas with Ferrell, I see this as a candidate who's trying to throw us back to punitive tactics that have been proven to be ineffective. He wants to be more tough-on-crime and is riding this wave of Republicans pointing to crime as being the reason not to support the Democratic candidate. I think that Ferrell has specifically spoken about being against and wanting to roll back some of the diversion programs that King County has started to try to use, especially for youth. And I also - even if you don't - if you agree on this punitive approach, I think it's also worth considering that right now the legal system is kind of at capacity. So what Ferrell is suggesting is going to put even more strain on it. The courts are already - have backlogs coming from the pandemic and the jails are full and not functioning well and not providing people humane conditions to be in there. So I just fear that that will lead to a lot more suffering for many people across our county. And I think this is a really important race to look at and think about. [00:46:12] Crystal Fincher: So Mike, what's your take on this? [00:46:14] Mike McGinn: It's interesting to see the contrast here. It's a local version of this national debate that we have now seen - that the proper response to crime is to crack down harder. And we're seeing this here as well. I worked with Dan Satterberg and he was a really interesting elected official. And honestly, to me, I may not have agreed with him on every decision - I know I didn't agree with him on every decision he made. But he was a civil servant first and foremost. He was trying to figure out what was the right path forward. He was engaged in the discussion. He led on things like Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion, people returning to the community from jail - getting their records cleared and restoration of rights. So he was really, and it's interesting, he was elected as a Republican, moved the race to a nonpartisan race and then was elected as a Democrat. So he clearly was somebody who was willing to go where the evidence led and not go based on ideology. So that's the experience we've had from that office, which is, I think, what you want in a prosecutor's office. It's a pretty important position. The effect it has on people's lives is immense. I think that really says something that we see someone looking to continue that tradition. And then we see someone coming in with - if only we punished people more. How's that been working? Really? We have some information on that, which is it doesn't really work. It takes a combination of the judicial system and community systems to really try to deal with root causes of crime, to deal with recidivism, to deal with the issues here. And I think that this is a little bit of a bellwether here. Are we going to try to be a progressive place, a progressive county that adopts and looks at new approaches? Or are we going to go to a more regressive approach to this? Because, yeah, that's worked so well in solving crime over the decades. [00:48:34] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think so. What's your take, Bryce? [00:48:37] Bryce Cannatelli: Yeah, I don't know how much more I have to add to this other than just the importance of this race and the importance of making sure we have somebody who's really thinking about the - not just people's emotional concerns about crime, but the actions and the strategies and the programs that have been proven to address the things that actually lower crime. We've talked on a number of different episodes throughout this year about programs that have successfully reduced recidivism. And those are programs that often get criticized by people who claim to be tough on crime. And I just think that's something to interrogate our candidates about for this position, because the county prosecutor has a lot of influence in terms of how the county addresses crime in a way that's going to impact real people in big ways. [00:49:29] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I agree. I will chime in and say that we just got a new public poll here that was just reported on, I think yesterday, showing that this race is basically statistically tied. So turnout is going to be really important. Lots of people talk about - they look at the federal races - they wonder if their vote matters. They're going, okay millions of people are voting. Why does mine make a difference? Really what makes a difference are these down-ballot races, are these local races. If you care about the issues of homelessness, justice, equity, affordability, what our community looks like, who it serves - our criminal legal system is an essential part of that equation. And we're talking about, in so many of these conversations, how we intervene and address victims. And most people who have perpetrated crimes have been victims of them. And how we intervene when people are victims, especially early, and especially when they're young, dictates how their future goes and whether they end up on the path to criminalization and poverty or a better path. So the way we intervene in that makes a difference. The way we treat and handle these cases that come through and how we address accountability depends on whether our streets are made safer, whether our tax dollars are used in a way that makes it less likely that people are going to commit crime and less likely that people are victimized or more, right? And we're seeing the impacts of the status quo of a more punitive approach. And either we choose to keep doing the same thing, and polls keep showing that no one is satisfied with the condition of things today. And so we do need to consider that when we are making these choices. And I hope you take a long, hard look at that. And most of all, get engaged and vote, make sure other people vote. And talk about these races, talk about the county attorney races, talk about the judicial races that we're going to talk about in just a moment, right? These are very important. Turnout is not where we would love it to be. It's lagging behind some previous years here locally, especially among younger people. And I know that is concerning to some. So the more that people can do to make sure that everyone can - and the most impactful thing you can do is just text those close to you, call those close to you, talk to them. Hey, coworker - hey, did you get that ballot in? What are you doing for this race? Remember, this is important. Hey, cousin, hey, brother, sister, mom - it's those connections close to you and those personal contacts that actually make it more likely for those people to vote. External organizations can try and do all the voter mobilization that they can and that work is valuable and good and should happen. But hearing from someone who you care about and who cares about you saying, hey, make sure you do this, you have any questions, you need help - is one of the best things you can do to make sure that people actually turn out to vote. So with that, we can talk about a couple of these judicial races, which are next on the ballot. Now we see the state Supreme Court races and we see Justice Mary Yu, who - you probably hear affection and admiration in my voice because I have affection and admiration for Justice Mary Yu. We also have a great interview with her from a few months back that we will post in the episode notes. Justice Barbara Madsen, also wonderful. Justice Helen Whitener, who is just - look, I'm going to just go ahead and get personal. Justice Helen Whitener is everything. I just need everyone to know that Justice Whitener is everything from - just everything. Her experience - vast, broad experience - in so many elements and areas of the law. The thoughtfulness, the lived experience, the outreach into the community - just a beautiful human being and an effective and intelligent justice. I am a fan of Justice Helen Whitener and we've done a couple interviews with Justice Whitener. And fortunately this time she isn't being challenged by anyone mediocre like she was last time, so this is an uncontested race. And when I say mediocre - I mean just got his license to practice law in order to run against someone with a resume as vast and deep as Justice Whitener's. And so now we'll talk about the contested municipal judge races in the City of Seattle between Damon Shadid, who is the incumbent in that one seat - has been endorsed by a number of Democratic organizations, received Exceptionally Well Qualified by a number of organizations, and is standing on his record. And a new challenger from the City Attorney's Office, Nyjat Rose-Akins, who is endorsed by the King County Republican Party and Jenny Durkan, and is wanting to make changes to some things and talking about the record of Community Court and changes that she wants to make there. In the other race, we have judge Adam Eisenberg, who has been rated Exceptionally Well Qualified by a number of the local and ethnic bar associations, but also has received a high number of negative feedback and surveys from the King County Bar Association and concerns about management and whether women are treated fairly under his management. And then Pooja Vaddadi, who is a newcomer and a new challenger, who has been - received a number of Democratic endorsements, but also has not received any ratings from local judicial bar associations because she has chosen not to stand in front of them for ratings. Bryce, how would you characterize those races? [00:55:42] Bryce Cannatelli: Like Crystal said, we got to hear from all of these candidates in a forum. I'll start with the Damon Shadid and Nyjat Rose-Akins portion of it - they're running for Position 7. Damon Shadid has been a judge in this position for quite a while. And the main point of difference between the two is Nyjat Rose-Akins often talked about during the forum criticisms of Community Court and her interest in making a lot of changes to the Community Court system, whereas Judge Shadid has defended what that court has been able to do and hopes to see it continue in its current direction. As far as Pooja Vaddadi and Judge Eisenberg, that's another kind of longtime incumbent in the position - I can't remember how long he's been in that role - and a newcomer. And Pooja Vaddadi brought up concerns about the way that Judge Eisenberg has handled himself in the courtroom. You can hear her talk about that in our forum specifically at the end - is something that her campaign has been highlighting as of late, but also just the need that she claims there is in the municipal court for some changes. [00:56:52] Crystal Fincher: What's your take on those races, Shannon? [00:56:55] Shannon Cheng: So I think - so for the Judge Eisenberg and Pooja Vaddadi race - Pooja Vaddadi is a practicing public defender. And I think her experience in being in the court with somebody such as Judge Eisenberg presiding - it was a maybe not great experience for her. And so she saw a lot of injustice there and felt called to try to step up and bear witness and call out what was happening and how she has a different vision for how that court could be run. I personally appreciate that because I think judicial races are just very low information. It's really hard - as Crystal just went through, there was a long list of uncontested judges on the ballot - and I often look at those names and I have no idea who those people are. And so it has been interesting in this race to get a window into how courts work. And I know for me, it's been very educational. And I continue to aspire to learn more about how courts are run and what matters. And yeah, so for the Damon Shadid and Nyjat Rose-Akins - as Bryce said, I think it comes down to the vision of how Community Court will be run in the future in Seattle. Whether you want somebody from the City Attorney's Office driving the vision of how to handle low-level offenses in the city versus the path that we had been on to to try to support people in need and not further entangle them in a system that kind of - a system that can snowball on people's lives. [00:58:41] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think that's right on. And I think in these races, we are seeing a little bit of a difference. There has been a lot called out by Pooja Vaddadi's campaign. But in fairness, I think you referred to Pooja talking about how she was partly moved to run for this position based on some of the injustices she saw. But one of the issues in this race that has been brought up is that Judge Eisenberg was the recipient of the highest number of - basically highest amount of negative feedback. King County Bar Association does an anonymous poll of its member attorneys for judges and the highest percentage of attorneys returned negative responses for Judge Eisenberg - higher than all of the other judges and gave that feedback. Judge Eisenberg didn't seem to feel that that had any validity. And he talked about how he had been rated Exceptionally Well Qualified, which is the highest rating given by a number of different bar associations. And it being pretty standard that judges go before different bar associations and get interviewed and they evaluate their fitness for judicial office and provide a rating from Exceptionally Well Qualified, I think Very Well Qualified, just on there. And so he had a number of highest ratings. And Pooja Vaddadi decided not to sit in front of those. And she said it was because she felt that it was biased or tilted or they would automatically give high ratings to incumbents, but not give high ratings to people who weren't incumbents. So she didn't feel the need to sit before them, which is a bit different. A lot of first-time candidates do go before those bodies and are evaluated and come out with decent ratings. I'm trying to think if I recall first-time candidates getting Exceptionally Well Qualified - I think I recall a couple, but also some who haven't. So I don't know, there very well may be a role that incumbency plays in that, but that was an element in that race that came through. As well as prior coverage about whether Judge Eisenberg potentially gave someone a harsher sentence for exercising their right to a jury trial instead of accepting a plea deal. And that being a wrong thing - that is a right that people have to exercise. And whether someone pleads guilty to a charge on a deal or is found guilty on that charge, penalizing someone simply for choosing to go to trial is not something that should happen and is certainly frowned upon. And so there was some coverage in question about that. We can also link that in the show notes. So those are certainly interesting races. And I think Shannon summed up really well just what's at stake moving forward in the Damon Shadid and Nyjat Rose-Akins race. So now let's get into the meat of a Seattle big-time initiative - Propositions 1A and 1B, which are on the City of Seattle ballot. They are not on my ballot, but we've got ballots waving with Shannon and Bryce and Mike over here talking about this question. [01:02:10] Mike McGinn: Do you want me to take a shot at it? [01:02:11] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, go ahead. Take a shot at it, Mike McGinn. [01:02:16] Mike McGinn: Okay. We all know how ballots work - you get a choice between - in the primary, you normally get a whole lot of candidates to vote for and you pick one. And what this is proposing is that in the City of Seattle, whether you want a different way to vote that will give you more choices. So the first question is, and let me tell you what the two choices are. One is called approval voting. So you'd look at your ballot and you'd have multiple people on the ballot and anyone that you approved of, you'd vote for. So you could vote for one, two, three, four, to approve as many as you want. And the idea there is that you don't want to have to restrict your vote to one candidate. And I have to say there have been times when I've had multiple friends on the ballot - I just want to be able to say I voted for all of them. But there are other good reasons to want to maybe approve multiple candidates. The other style is something called ranked choice voting. So in that case, you'd rank the candidates - one, two, three, four, five. And they'd add up the votes, and whoever the lowest vote getter was would get dropped off. And so let's say - I'm standing here with Bryce and Shannon and Crystal - let's say I had ranked them Crystal first, and then Bryce, and then Shannon. If Crystal was the lowest vote getter, she'd be off the list. And my vote would now go to Bryce - my second vote would be counted. And you do this by a process of eliminating the lowest-ranked candidate until you get to a winner. And we'll probably get more into why - what are the differences between the two systems and why they're better. And there's a whole world of election nerddom, which is substantial - what is the best way to represent what the voters really want, but you're going to get to choose here. So the real question is, do you want to keep the existing system - and that's the first question on the ballot - or do you want a new system? And if you vote Yes, I want a new system, you'll also be asked - well, actually, no matter how you vote on whether you want a new system - you're then asked, which one do you like more, approval voting or ranked choice voting? So yeah, it is pretty dense and complicated. You probably want to sit down and look at this. But if I could break it down for you - if you think you want more ways to have your vote count and have more discretion in how to award it to people, you'll want to vote Yes on the initial question. And then you'll get to weigh in and decide which one of those two - approval or ranked choice voting - you like more. And that'll tee it up for people to offer their opinions on what they like more on the rest of the podcast. How was that? Did I do okay, guys, in getting the description out? [01:05:13] Crystal Fincher: You did! You did, in fact, do okay of getting the description out. And I think also just the - functionally on the ballot - what you said was really important and I just want to reiterate. So this - we're talking about - okay, there are two choices there, approval voting and ranked choice voting. But when you get your ballot, you're going to see that it is constructed in a way that's not just that simple choice. There really is an initial question and then a secondary question. The initial question - why don't you just read what's on the ballot? [01:05:47] Bryce Cannatelli: Yeah, I could do that. I can also hold it up to you, so you can see the wall of text that happens beforehand. Shannon is shaking her head on the video feed, because - Seattle voters will know it if they've opened their ballots - there's a lot of text that goes before you can actually answer the question. So please read your ballot from top to bottom to make sure that you vote for everything. But the way that it's formatted is we get an explanation of both of the individual propositions. So it says Proposition 1A, submitted by initiative petition number 134, and Proposition 1B, alternative proposed by the city council and mayor, concern allowing voters to select multiple candidates in city primary elections. Proposition 1A would allow voters in primary elections for mayor, city attorney and city council to select on the ballot as many candidates as they approve of for each office. The two candidates receiving the most votes for each office would advance to the general election consistent with state law. The city would consult with King County to include instructions on the primary ballot, such as vote for as many as you approve of for each office. As an alternative, the city council and mayor have proposed Proposition 1B, which would allow primary election voters for mayor, city attorney and

This week, Crystal is joined by Pierce County Council Chair, Derek Young! Looking at Washington's Secretary of State race between Democratic incumbent Steve Hobbs and nonpartisan challenger Julie Anderson, Derek talks about his views on Anderson, who's tenure as Pierce County's County Auditor has given him insight into her values and priorities. Anderson's been taking criticisms from some Democrats while others Dems have stood up to defend her and her record. Hobbs has been running on his experience in the role since assuming the position last year, and has stayed out of the mud-slinging in this race. He has his own previous reputation as a moderate Dem that is coloring some voters' opinions of him.  26th LD Representative Jesse Young's behavior and extreme political views have become the subject of news again as his race against State Senator Emily Randall for the State Senate seat continues. Young has a history of aggression against staffers, to the point that he has been banned from having legislative staff, has co-sponored legislation to limit abortion rights, and has supported local Republicans who have been involved in domestic terrorism.  In other troubling news out of this race, a PAC, Concerned Taxpayers of Washington State, sent a mailer that made a derogatory reference to Emily Randall's sexual identity. It's another disturbing example of anti-LGBTQIA rhetoric and sentiment  in mainstream political circles.  Derek recommends Pierce County listeners pay attention to the race between Robyn Denson and Paula Lonergan, who are running for Derek's seat on the City Council now that he's hit his term limit. He also points to the race between Councilmember Marty Campbell and challenger Nancy Slotnick. Finally, a Pierce County project to build a homeless housing project has hit a major road bump in the form of zoning conflicts. Derek provides insight into the specifics of the project, its goals, and what its future looks like after this setback. 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, Derek Young, on Twitter at @DerekMYoung. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources Don't forget to vote! Visit votewa.gov for voting resources.   Institute for a Democratic Future 2023 applications are live! The initial deadline is November 2nd, and the final deadline is November 13th.   Learn more about how to get involved in Seattle's budget season at this link.   Student debt relief sign-ups are live! Visit this link to enroll.   “Democrats split over nonpartisan secretary of state candidate” by Melissa Santos from Axios   Hacks & Wonks' Interview with Secretary of State candidate Julie Anderson   Hacks & Wonks' Interview with Secretary of State candidate Steve Hobbs   “New ad highlights Washington candidate's past behavior against staffers” by Shauna Sowersby from The News Tribune   Emily Randall's response to the homophobic mailer against her - watch on TikTok here   Sign up to volunteer for Emily Randall's campaign here on her website.    Hacks & Wonks' Interview with Robyn Denson.    “Pierce County prefers this site for a big homeless housing project. Why it might not work” by Shea Johnson from The News Tribune   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 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 co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show, today's co-host: Pierce County Council Chair, Derek Young. Welcome. [00:00:52] Councilmember Derek Young: Thank you for having me. [00:00:53] Crystal Fincher: Excited to have you here again, especially - to get to focus on Pierce County and talk about Pierce County. There's a lot going on. I guess starting off - we're in election season, ballots are in people's hands - remember to get those ballots turned in. Vote by November 8th, but even better, just vote as soon as possible - get that in and done. There are some close and exciting races in Pierce County and with some Pierce County angles. I think we'll start off talking about the Secretary of State's race, which is a statewide race, but with current Secretary of State Steve Hobbs, who was a former State Senator and then after Kim Wyman moved to Washington [D.C.] and left the job, Steve Hobbs was appointed by Governor Inslee, and a challenger, Julie Anderson, who is a county auditor and now running for the statewide Secretary of State race. What have you seen in this race lately? [00:01:56] Councilmember Derek Young: I will say this. The race has not gone as I assumed it would, which would be more a debate between Anderson and Hobbs that was about the office and the ideas. And has now evolved into something where we have this strange situation where we have a lot of Pierce County Democrats, like myself, who are defending Julie from attacks from our State Party Chair. And that's been strange - I think it's particularly difficult for those of us that have been around and know Julie well to see the attacks turn into "she's some sort of secret MAGA Trump Republican that" - she's been around a long time and so with those of us that know her, that's a very strange experience to have. So rather than focusing on the office, we found ourselves in a defense mode trying to say - Hey, that's not the Julie that we know, support Steve all you want - that's all fine, I get it. He's running as a Democrat and she's running as a Nonpartisan, which makes things way more difficult. The race has turned into something - the election itself is almost a sideshow of the controversy that has developed around it. [00:03:30] Crystal Fincher: Some controversy, definitely. I wonder how visible it is to the general public. Certainly people - politicos, the hacks and wonks who are around - are very caught up in this just because it's a different dynamic than we normally have. This has been a partisan office. It's been the only statewide office that Republicans held recently. It was previously held by Republican Kim Wyman - has been a partisan office -when she left and this race came up, people generally assumed - okay, there's going to be a Democrat and a Republican. A Democrat, a Republican, and a Nonpartisan ended up running and Julie Anderson ended up edging out the Republican candidate in the primary, so this is a general election that a lot of people did not anticipate. And the dynamic between a Democrat and a Nonpartisan - and Julie has said that she prefers the term Nonpartisan instead of Independent - is certainly different than - a lot of people - hey, you're familiar with who a Democrat is, you're familiar with who a Republican is. And that has a lot to do with how you view those - that's a significant lens to view a candidate through, and most people see that as a significant driver of a decision and are more aligned with one party and/or tend to vote for the candidate of that party. In this situation with Julie Anderson being Nonpartisan, there has been a lot of questions. And from the Democratic Party and some opponents - have basically said, Hey, she's aligned with Republicans, she looks like she may be an undercover Republican. I should mention that Hacks & Wonks did interviews with both Steve Hobbs and with Julie Anderson. We actually talked very directly about this issue. Julie and Steve both offered their opinions and explanations on all of this, and so you can find those shows and we'll link those in the show notes. But it's that attack on Julie Anderson that has been controversial - that we saw an Axios article from Melissa Santos about this week, lots of online posting and opinions and takes about this, but hey, is it actually accurate that Julie Anderson is basically a closet Republican or has she worked well with all people, sincerely views herself as a Nonpartisan? Are her views consistent now after getting some Republican support than they were before? It appears that they are, and she has stood up afterwards and say - Hey, I still believe our elections are secure, and believe in how they've been, and for voter amendments and those kinds of things. But then other people are saying - hey, especially at a time when we have these battles between Republicans and Democrats, we can't risk having a Nonpartisan in there. We need to have a Democrat in this office. How do you weigh that decision and how do you think voters can view their decision in this race? [00:06:42] Councilmember Derek Young: Yeah, it's a fair question and I'll be honest - it would have been so much easier if she was running as a Democrat because you have the backing of the Party and all the resources that brings with it. Obviously, in this case, that wouldn't have been the way it went down because we have an incumbent who was appointed last year. But - what's the saying about Ginger Rogers and having to do all the things that Fred Astaire did, but backwards and in heels? That's the kind of obstacles that Julie, by choosing this, put in her way. I don't know how voters are going to react as a result. The one thing I do note is that she believes this in her bones. This is a genuine conviction that the position of auditor at the local level and Secretary of State at the state level should be Nonpartisan because you can't assume that everyone will look at election and have faith in it if they view the person administering it as aligned with one of the teams. I actually think I agree with that sentiment, particularly in these times, and I kind of understand where people are coming from when - at a time when so many Republicans are calling into question the veracity of our elections, can we have someone that's on the sidelines, so to speak, that isn't actively pushing back on that from the Democratic point of view? I tend to agree with Julie more in that the way you build trust and faith in the system is by having someone who is fulfilling a more ministerial role and calling balls and strikes not aligned with one of the parties. And I've seen how that works firsthand in Pierce County. One of my jobs as Chair of the Council is I sit on the Canvassing Board and so each election, there's a group of folks who are election observers from each party and independents that come in - and every time, these very partisan folks have nothing but praise for Julie and her team and the transparent and accountable system that she's built. This is also a woman who literally tried to get rid of her office. She proposed to me, and I agreed, that the role of auditor should be an appointed position because it is administrative and ministerial. Electing the position is actually not a great idea - similar for the offices of sheriff and assessor. So I had charter amendments to propose for each of those. But being Julie, she wrote an editorial saying - you should get rid of the job I just completed. And I just have nothing but admiration for someone who's not only learned the role, but determined that - if she designed the ideal world, this position would not even be elected. But if you're going to have an elected person in it, you should have someone that is not beholden to one of the parties. The last thing I'll just say is that prior to her time as auditor in the county, she was on the Tacoma City Council. While city council races are also nonpartisan, you get a sense for people's values. Julie Anderson is a very progressive person. And I think there's - so for those of us that are from Pierce County, this has been this just very strange experience to watch. And how that plays out in the rest of state, I just don't know. But I have to imagine that the tension drawn to it by the Party has probably actually been good for her to get that message out there. I don't know that the rest of the non-very-online, very-hooked-in crowd is paying that much attention to the race, so we'll see how it goes. [00:11:14] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, we'll see how it goes - this seems to be a race, I think I commented earlier, I know other people have - where this is not a race that seems to be attracting much attention. People are kind of looking at those party cues. Hey, if I'm a Democrat, I see a Democrat, I'm voting for the Democrat. And that seems to be how things are going with people who don't really pay attention to local party politics, all of the stories, the ins and outs of the campaigns to the degree that people who work in politics or policy or heavily involved in advocacy do. But for those who are, this has been one of the toughest decisions and have been some of the toughest conversations that people have had in a bit - because there is this tension. And I think another dimension of this is that we're talking about Senator Steve Hobbs, who has been known as a moderate and has certainly provoked a lot of emotion over the years. He has taken different stances than a lot of other people in the Party on transportation policy and different things. And so I think for people who have been involved in politics for a long time, they have this view of him in their head as a moderate. And that's a positive thing for some people - some people may feel that that's pragmatic. For others, they feel that that's obstruction. But for people who do have an impression of Steve Hobbs, whether positive or negative, I think that colors how they're coming into the opinions of this race and that conversation. And also just the recognition that that's a very small slice of people who are paying attention to that degree. So I don't know how much this makes it out into the world of people who take the time to vote and who care about it, but who don't really follow politics closely. It'll be interesting to see how this continues to play out and how the information continues to flow over the next two weeks. [00:13:19] Councilmember Derek Young: Steve has also - to his credit - is not behind a lot of the nastiness that has come up in this race. In fact, I have not heard anything bad about the way he's conducted himself in the office. And so my feelings - and they're personal feelings in the race, I think for a lot of others - it's actually less about Steve Hobbs and more about our feelings for Julie. I will also say, for those of us from South Sound, there's a little bit of folks from other parts of the state telling us what we should think about this. And so you have a little bit of good old-fashioned Tacoma getting its back up about one of our own. And I think there's some of that going on as well. So I just wanted to be clear that I think the candidates themselves are conducting an admirable race. [00:14:15] Crystal Fincher: I think that's fair. There's another race where I don't think one of the candidates is conducting an admirable race, and that's an extremely partisan race in your neck of the woods - in the 26th Legislative District - between Democrat Emily Randall and very extreme Republican Jesse Young. Now you have been down there and observing the ins and outs of Jesse Young, who's now running for State Senate, but was a State Representative, is a State Representative before this. Man, this man has issues - and this week there was a news story that that talked about his very problematic treatment and harassment of staff. What did he do? [00:15:02] Councilmember Derek Young: There's a pattern of abusive behavior to not only staff, but other legislators. For example, his Republican seatmate, Michelle Caldier - they're not supposed to be in the same room together without at least one other person because they got in an argument that was so loud that security had to show up. So this is someone from his own party and his seatmate in his district. And I will just say that it fits a pattern for him. And he would not be the first politician that has had difficulties with staff, but when he was found to have done these things and was instructed to go to some anger management counseling, he refused to do so. And so as a result, to this day, he's not allowed to have legislative staff. And some of the reports were pretty awful - calling a woman by a particularly vulgar name and screaming fits - and to the point where at one point the staffer referred to their weekly meetings as "the weekly beatings." So his behavior is obviously a problem and makes him particularly ineffective because how someone does the job of legislator without staff is kind of beyond me. All that said, it's not just his behavior that's problematic. He has rather extreme political positions. This was a man who was close allies with and stuck by Matt Shea - many of your listeners will remember as the radical Eastern Washington Republican who literally organized the militia takeover of the Malheur. [00:17:02] Crystal Fincher: Yeah - he was involved in domestic terrorism. [00:17:04] Councilmember Derek Young: Yeah, he put tracking devices on sheriff vehicles to monitor people, he planned insurrection, runs a training camp for militia activities. And this is someone who - when he was under fire for these behaviors and Republicans were trying to figure out what to do - leadership in their caucus removed him immediately from the caucus. Well, maybe not immediately, but got to it pretty quickly. He stood by him the entire time and organized opposition to Minority Leader J.T. Wilcox's actions that removed him from the caucus and expedited his eventual departure from the Legislature. So, his positions on abortion are for criminalization. Just really strange out of the mainstream type of behavior, and I'll leave you with this one other more recent anecdote that I am more personally knowledgeable of. During the aftermath of George Floyd's death, some teenagers in Gig Harbor decided that they were going to organize protests and showed up at this one corner that's particularly - I don't know, for whatever reason, it's become our protest area - I think it's because it's got a lot of traffic. And so hundreds of kids and some adults showed up there to protest and demand reforms for law enforcement. And Jesse showed up with a group of men carrying long guns because they claimed that these were Antifa and they were going to burn the shopping mall next to it to the ground. He stuck by this ridiculous story for so long, he even claimed that the local police chief, who happens to be a friend, had covered up the story and that he witnessed the chief grabbing gas cans that were planted ahead of time to burn the strip mall down. When in reality, what the police chief had seen was a gas can that had fallen on the roadway from someone with a landscaping truck and he was just picking it up to get it out of the road. He continued to lie about this on conservative talk radio for weeks. And this is our police chief - he's a known, trusted person that's been on our force and lived in our community for decades. And Jesse's out there lying about him because he wanted to justify his appearance there with a group of men and long guns to a protest organized by teens. [00:19:54] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and that was a scary time. This was in 2020 - we were working with organizers on the ground, canvassers on the ground in the district at the time in another effort. And it was a really scary thing even detached from it - hearing, hey, there are reports with men driving around with guns, men arriving at this place with guns, some of these assault rifles, right? And just not knowing what's going to happen, hearing the extremist rhetoric, knowing the history of some of those - especially in the context of his palling around with domestic terrorists, Matt Shea - did not know what direction this was going to go in, but he clearly felt really entitled to do that and to intimidate everyone in that area, everyone in those neighborhoods. And that's just really fundamentally not okay. The treatment of staff is just really fundamentally not okay. And there are some people who sometimes view these things as partisan attacks. And Republicans certainly have their own record on what they've permitted within the ranks of their party. But I think in this state, especially among Democrats - we had a conversation, had many conversations about Insurance Commissioner, Mike Kreidler - that treatment - so many people have called on him to resign and continue to, finding that's not acceptable. He's not going to find support when he - it would be really unwise to choose to run for re-election - but if he would, he's not going to find support there. There have been other people whose resignations have been called for in the wake of treatment like this. This is something that is not partisan. This is something that Democrats have been not hesitant to call out people in their own ranks. And this also applies to Republicans. He has not had a legislative assistant since, what was it, 2016? [00:21:59] Councilmember Derek Young: Something like that, yeah. [00:22:00] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, for quite some time. And as you said, how do you get any work done? The people in the 26th have had hobbled representation. And if people found any fault with what's happening, you kind of have to ask - how is Jesse Young able to show up and do his job? Other legislators have beyond full schedules - needing a legislative assistant to juggle all of that, juggle all their communications, schedule meetings, coordinate with their constituents. And so that's just not possible to do and to fully do your job. And to have the reason for that being that you can't be trusted to be around subordinates is really just an indictment on the fitness for office. And there's a clear choice in terms of the issue of abortion rights in this race. You have Emily Randall, who is a staunch supporter of personal freedom and privacy and reproductive choice. You have Jesse Young, who has taken really extreme stands on abortion - and hey, it shouldn't just be a ban, there should be criminal penalties involved in this - just really troubling. And the election conspiracy denial - he went to Arizona, with the denialists in Arizona, to a Cyber Ninja audit that they called it. And it was just really a gathering of these conspiracy theorists. Why are we entertaining a conversation of electing a guy who is doing this kind of stuff? This is just beyond me and really beyond the conversations of how do we even get to policy? How do we even get to what you're going to do in the job when you're doing things that prevent your ability to even do the job? How are we debating about issues when he can't adequately legislate? He can't adequately hear from, meet with, represent constituents. He can't adequately conduct himself in public and not intimidate people with guns - teenagers - with guns in public. We can't even get to the conversation of legislating. This guy is just fundamentally unfit. It's a challenge. And I imagine you're sitting there looking at this race and going - oh my goodness, I wish more people really knew who this guy was and what's at stake. [00:24:34] Councilmember Derek Young: It is hard because it is my community. We are the - 26th district for those that aren't familiar - it's basically the Kitsap Peninsula, so half of it's in Pierce County in the Key Peninsula and Gig Harbor area and then Kitsap going up to Bremerton. And it's a swing district. Even calling it a swing district might be generous to the Democratic side. They've been pretty successful here for the last decade or so. And things didn't change that much with redistricting. But yeah, even setting that aside, I get that at least half of our district prefers the Republican side and that's fine. But in this case, you have someone who is so clearly a great representative for us, or a senator for us, and is very effective - almost shockingly so. As a first-term Senator, Emily Randall really was a standout amongst that group in terms of being effective, being thoughtful, doing the hard work. I know within my association, because I've been for a number of years leading our legislative efforts, very often bringing her up as someone to champion things that we're working on because we know her as a worker and fair-minded and well-respected. And then you have the opposite of that challenging her and really just having some basic integrity challenges in addition to his volatility, so I don't get it. This shouldn't be close. I understand why some of the other races are the way they are - we actually had a surprise with Adison Richards doing exceptionally well in the primary of one of the House seats, against a fine candidate on the Republican side who I know pretty well - Spencer Hutchins, who was formerly on the Gig Harbor Council. So those are the races where I understand everyone's got a choice and it's harder to understand why the Senate race is this close. [00:27:00] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's worrisome, but this is definitely a race. We've talked before about - there's a lot of people in the Seattle area who listen to this race and a lot of the races that they're going to be considering are Democrat versus Democrat legislative races, some of them are uncontested at all. And so it presents an opportunity to say, okay, we know your seat is going to be in Democratic hands and certainly stay active and involved where you're at, but make a point to adopt a race somewhere externally, whether it's a district like the 26th Legislative District down in South Sound, whether it's the 47th Legislative District down in the Kent, Auburn, Covington area. Or up north in the 10th or 47th or 42nd districts. Pick one of these districts where we know that races there are consistently close and competitive, that it's always within a hair of which candidate wins, and help put the Democratic candidate in this situation, but help put the candidates that align with your values over the top. [00:28:19] Councilmember Derek Young: And do it - if for no other reason - to help out me personally. We're two guys from Gig Harbor named Young and working in politics, so lots of people confuse it. And I think in particular, my dad takes exception because people think his son is Jesse. [00:28:36] Crystal Fincher: Oh, yikes. Yikes and yikes. Yeah, I do not envy you as being another Young in politics there, but hopefully this is something that won't be an issue for you that much longer. So as if all of the other stuff wasn't enough, there was a mailer that arrived this week that was really troubling and obviously intentional. The background here is that Emily Randall is a queer woman - has been open about that, wonderful about that. And a mailer arrived and you talked about this, so I'll let you describe it. [00:29:22] Councilmember Derek Young: Basically - and I hadn't noticed the mailer, I don't know that I was the target audience - but Emily posted a video where she shared it because she received it. And the message says, Let's set the record straight. Now, that term is one we're all familiar with in political context and journalism and such. The problem was that they put a special emphasis - underlined and red-bolded the "straight" part. That is a winking notation of her sexual identity and a pretty ugly one, I think. It's a - we are in a divided district, so we know that there is some people who will be uncomfortable with LGBTQ rights and Emily's never hidden from it. But the IE that ran this - I think there's no question they knew exactly what they were doing, and it's really worthy of calling out. And I'm glad that Emily did herself, because she's her own best advocate and I think that's important. But I think it's also important for all of us to say - We know what you were doing. And this isn't some PAC that just popped up for a single purpose to hide identities. This is a - what is it - Concerned Taxpayers? I forget their exact name, but it's a mainstream PAC that's very active in a lot of races. Their major donors are Master Builders and Realtors. And so this is a group that should know better and did something - [00:31:17] Crystal Fincher: That does know better and decided not to do it. That is - this isn't a fringe group - this is a major mainstream regular supporter of the party, closely aligned interests of the party. They're allies of the party and they're consistently there for those interests. And it clearly was intentional. I mean, as - you have worked on political communications certainly, as have I. And I think sometimes political operatives do the thing where we know exactly what we do. And I'm saying, I do not do this and try very hard not to do this - but I've seen Republicans and I've sometimes seen Democrats do this - but rely on the public not realizing what our work actually is and how we actually do it, to just excuse it. And what you see in political communications, what you see on mail is very intentional. The words are poured over. There are several levels of approval, certainly on - if you're working with a good team, as you are anywhere, you want to make sure that you're conveying the message that you want to and that you are not conveying any message that you don't want to. So anything that can be borderline - I don't really want to say that - then you don't say, then you change something to make sure that it doesn't give that impression, that it doesn't say something - especially something that is harmful or offensive. And at a time when we have a very conservative Supreme Court who is tearing down rights, who has basically put the right of marriage equality on notice. And the Dobbs decision - it didn't just strike down Roe vs Wade - it also laid the path that a number of them want to take moving forward, which is striking down protections for contraception, privacy, marriage equality - type thing. So we know this is on deck. We've heard several Republicans in the state and across the country say that they believe that - just marriage between only a man and a woman should be legally valid, others should be illegal again - who want to roll back the rights that were won. And this was an ad targeted at a conservative audience. It is not a secret that when you have "straight" in big, bold, red letters that are then underlined - and that's the only word on the page that it's treated like that - you're sending a message. And it's unacceptable. And I am glad she called it out. And to your point, I'm very glad that everyone has the opportunity to say - No, this is unacceptable, and this is a preview of the type of harmful hate that is coming if we allow more of this. I mean, it just is another one of those - before we get into conversations about policy, we're dealing with some really fundamental human decency - really ability to adequately and peacefully participate in society and allow other people to participate in that same society to the same degree. It is just egregious, received news coverage for being egregious. And it's just what we're contending with. It is not at all rare to see these dirty hits come out during this time where ballots are out and mailers are flying. And I don't know what else they have planned, but if this is what they're doing early, I shudder to think what they think they can say when they feel that there isn't the type of penalty or time for scrutiny attached to it. So it's just - get involved in this race, get involved in this race. [00:35:27] Councilmember Derek Young: And I think it's worth saying that - it's not just gross from a political standpoint. Given the trajectory of rhetoric around LGBTQ rights and life in this country, it's dangerous in the literal sense. That's why, I think it's important to - often there's this, especially amongst Democrats, this tendency to worry about should we call attention to an attack or is that making something more visible to the public. And I think there are these cases where - whether it's around election validity, people's basic rights, and just decency - we have to have some ground truth, some shared reality that we all exist on that's beneath where the politics of the situation is going. Let's get back to the point where we can have these fierce debates over policy. But right now we have to have some common cause for just existing in the same society, I think. And saying that these things are out of bounds and there will be a price that you pay for doing it, I think is important. [00:37:02] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I completely agree. And that hesitance to - should we bring it up, should we talk about it? Yeah, we have to, because the other side is. How many times in the past week have we heard hateful comments about the trans community, hateful anti-Semitic comments, hateful white supremacist comments. And I'm just thinking about this week, right? This is unfortunately creeping into mainstream society. These are not limited to rarely visited corners of the internet that hardly anyone visits. These are some of the biggest celebrities, some of the richest people, and some of the most powerful party members. These are - we're hearing this from elected officials now and party leadership. We have to take a stand and say this is unacceptable because the silence is enabling this. It is going to take an effort of everyone confronting this when they're seeing it and rejecting it - rejecting it in their communities and their conversations with friends - and yes, family - and on the ballot. I mean, rejecting it on the ballot is the easy part - that should be an automatic. We have more work to do to confront this in our everyday lives, in our societies, and the people who we interact with. So I again, just urge people to get involved and to call this stuff out whenever and wherever you see it. That is the most powerful thing that we can do, especially when it's with people you know - it makes a difference. Certainly encourage everyone listening - we'll put information in the show notes - do a phone bank, do a canvass session. If you absolutely can't do those things, donate, but sometimes we talk about money in these races and money certainly helps buy resources and the things to make those happen. But really the time that you can spend - to put in to talk to other voters in that district and to help educate those voters and tell them why you're supportive and why you're taking your time to do this - is really impactful to a lot of people and encourage people to get involved that way. So thank you for that. Are there any other races in Pierce County that you think people should be tuned into, thinking about, looking at? [00:39:34] Councilmember Derek Young: Yeah, we have a couple of council races that are - I think headed in the right direction - but important to keeping the council majority that we managed to get in Democratic hands. One being replacement for me, as I'm term limited and leaving office at the end of the year. And her name is Robyn Denson. Her opponent is a Republican named Paula Lonergan - for folks in Pierce County that name may sound familiar because her husband is the Assessor-Treasurer and used to be a Tacoma City Council member. But that race - things are going fairly well - she's running a pretty traditional Republican campaign. And Robyn is - in fact, you may - I believe you actually did have her on. [00:40:21] Crystal Fincher: Yep, we interviewed her. We'll also link that in the show notes. [00:40:24] Councilmember Derek Young: And she certainly fits the model of wonk. She's a former nonpartisan policy staff down in Olympia, specializing in housing in particular, which is obviously something that's super critical throughout our region, but especially right here in Pierce County. And is just a really thoughtful person. She's currently on the Gig Harbor City Council, and I think the world of her and really recruited her hard to run for my seat, to make sure we kept this in Democratic hands. Because until I ran, we hadn't won this seat really before, so it was important to me to find a suitable replacement. The other is Marty Campbell, who's an incumbent council member. His opponent, Nancy Slotnick, is a Republican. And while that race hasn't been as hot - I think it's flying a little bit under the radar - and Marty's district changed the most out of the council districts during redistricting. And so he's had to introduce himself to a large group of voters who may not be as familiar with him, and so that's presented some challenges, I think. And unfortunately, his partner also has some health issues at the moment that they've been public about - I'm not sharing any inside information - so he's juggling a lot right now trying to be my Vice Chair, which is a challenge even in itself. So we're hoping to push Marty over the line as well. [00:42:00] Crystal Fincher: All right. Sounds good. We will be paying attention to those and seeing how those turn out. In non-political news this week, there was some news in Pierce County about zoning restrictions getting in the way of a planned homeless housing project. This is something that is definitely needed, but it looks like it may have run into a snag. What's happening? [00:42:25] Councilmember Derek Young: Yeah. So this was - I will say, even though it wasn't my fault - as someone in Pierce County government, it's embarrassing. So we have this concept that we are essentially stealing from Austin that - they have a wildly successful program called Community First! Village that's for folks that are unhoused and chronically unhoused. This is the population of homeless folks that have the most barriers - typically will have some disabilities or been homeless for a very long time, may have some behavioral health challenges, you name it - there's something in their way that's keeping them from becoming housed and so they're living on the streets. This model starts with the physical infrastructure - it's essentially micro homes or tiny houses, however you want to refer to it. Their units tend to be very nice by comparison to - sometimes when we talk about tiny houses, we think of some of the garden sheds basically that you see popping up in some communities. These - it looks more like a trailer park - is the way I would describe it. But the secret sauce in this is not just getting people housed - that's the big barrier. The second is that they deliver really intentional services to these folks that are all onsite. They even have volunteers that live onsite. And there's a strong effort to build community, which is something that I think is missed from a lot of permanent supportive housing models you see elsewhere. And I was skeptical at first, but when it clicked - I was talking with someone who has worked in homelessness for a long time. And he said, we typically buy an apartment complex or maybe a hotel and turn that into permanent supportive housing. But think about - because he knew I lived in an apartment - how many of your neighbors do you know? And embarrassingly, I know probably half my neighbors - I know their names and their families. But otherwise, once you get home, you're closing the door and you're not really interacting with them that much. This is the opposite - it's intended to help rebuild those social connections. There's onsite work that can be done. They actually do pay rent - it's heavily subsidized. But the idea is to rebuild those social skills. For some people, they will always live there, and that's fine. But for others, they can then take those steps to getting back to a life that maybe doesn't require as much support. So we're all very excited about this model, and we think it's going to be a hit. One of the first questions I had last year was - okay, we'll appropriate this money, but why don't you tell us if you can find any properties that are available that will have suitable zoning? Somehow that didn't happen. And so the site that they got under contract before approaching the council, it turned out that the zoning, because it's surrounded by wetlands, is Residential Resource, which doesn't allow for this much density. So we were set to approve and they wanted to close on the property by the end of the year - that's just not going to happen. What this looks like going forward, I don't know. But the trick here is that this is a new idea - not only for us, but really for the region. And as a result, we cannot fail. This has to work. Because if we're going to replicate it elsewhere in Pierce County and around the region, we have to get it right. If we fail, people will look at it and go - well, that didn't work - and that's not something we want to have happen. So like I said, it's embarrassing, but it is what it is and we have to figure out a solution. [00:46:46] Crystal Fincher: What's on deck for solutions? [00:46:48] Councilmember Derek Young: I don't know yet, because we just found out. And so the executive still believes that we can go through with this property and just do a rezone. I will say that just doing a rezone is never a simple thing, particularly when what you have planned for the site is now very public. The other possibility is start looking for other locations. The problem is that - this was always my concern - is that the sites that are affordable for a project like this are also going to be challenged. In this development environment, if it's zoned for density, it's going to be pretty valuable. The other challenge that we had with this site was that it doesn't have sewer adjacent to it. This is kind of on the outskirts of our urban growth area, so while there's urban development around it - and it's right off what was going to be the Cross-Base Highway - it still lacks some basic infrastructure. So all that's why we were getting it for a song and why other developers had looked at it for housing projects and couldn't make it work. But I think we're back to square one in terms of site selection, and we need to start looking around. But it's possible we'll have a proposal here that's fairly straightforward. The most annoying part about this is that we literally had - because this concept is so new - we didn't really have a use allowed for this in our zoning code. So we actually passed a bill two months ago to change zoning code in order to allow for this. We still somehow came up with a site that it doesn't work for. [00:48:37] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's a challenge. And this is new, so I'm asking you questions - I understand you may not have the answer yet. This was reported in The News Tribune day before yesterday, I think, on October 26th. And there did seem to be a little bit of - I don't know if I'd call it tension - but difference in opinion on moving forward about the ease or feasibility of that zoning change option. The Pierce County Executive did make it seem like it's something that is definitely doable, even if it's not - hey, we'll take care of it next meeting - in the near future, certainly had the impression that it could be resolved with that. What challenges would prevent that from - from being able to pass a zoning change soon? [00:49:28] Councilmember Derek Young: Yeah, I'm unclear what he's referring to because there was a quote in the newspaper and I called him about this after seeing it that said that we think this may be a 15 or 30-day delay. I don't know what he's talking about. This would require not only a zoning map change, but we believe a comprehensive plan change. So for those that aren't aware of local land use policy, it's - a comp plan change - you're only allowed to touch your comp plan once per year. We've already started our process and so we couldn't add it to this. The next time you could do something is literally over a year from now because you can only make adjustments once per year. If it's just a zoning change, that's what's referred to as an Official Control under our planning rules. And so we have to notify the Department of Commerce with a 60-day comment period. That's just the minimum - maybe nothing comes up and they don't care - but it's still a 60-day period. And then after that, you need to be going to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission has their own process. And then it finally comes to the council. Our charter requires at least three weeks just to run a bill and that's under ideal conditions. So yeah, I'm not sure what he's talking about there, but this is not a simple change by any means. All that said, I don't think there would necessarily be opposition coming from the council. We were certainly comfortable with the idea before finding the problem, so it's just a matter of the rules that we all have to follow. And what was kind of frustrating about it is hearing him trying to figure out ways around them when he vetoed an emergency ordinance that we passed for Safe Parking a few months ago. And one of the reasons he vetoed it, even though the emergency ordinance is temporary and involves no construction - if you decide you're not going to do it there, you can move the cars - so there's no permanent problem. And yet he used that as one of the objections to the emergency bill. And in this case, we're literally going to spend millions and millions of dollars building a permanent housing development. And we're going to skip the process? I don't see that working. So the council's of one mind on this - the sponsors all pulled their signatures so that we didn't have to - we didn't want to vote to turn it down, that just is a bad look. So everyone's on the same page on the council that this has to be done right. [00:52:27] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. Well, that little nugget sounds encouraging - that you decided to move forward with it, and so it is rules that have to be followed. So could it be potentially - no, this is not a three-week endeavor, but it may be a few months of diligent work and following through the steps and the ability to accommodate the necessary changes then. If it does take a few months or however long that that takes, does that impact the project? Does that impact the cost or anything with that? [00:53:01] Councilmember Derek Young: It will have some impact. It's hard to quantify because everything in the economy is so weird these days, so we will see. But so one thing we had to do, for example, is at the end of the year, our proviso expires, allowing the appropriation that we budgeted for - it's supposed to go back to other homeless services - because at the time we were pretty skeptical that this could work. I see no objection from my colleagues to changing that proviso so that we will stay committed to this. And again, we know we have a problem, like everyone. So we've got this innovative solution. It seems to work really well. The performance in Austin is exceptional compared to other programs. So, the more I've learned about it, the more eager I become. I just think in this instance, it's possible the executive and his staff were a little too eager and didn't do some kind of basic homework. [00:54:09] Crystal Fincher: Well, hopefully you will be there to help him finish that assignment. [00:54:15] Councilmember Derek Young: Unfortunately, I think my successor may need to finish this up for me, but - [00:54:22] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. So it doesn't look like there's a chance by the end of the year, I guess. I guess that looks unlikely. But hopefully the newly composed council is as dedicated to this as the other one was. And with bipartisan support - this was not something that was necessarily squeaked through. [00:54:39] Councilmember Derek Young: No, in fact - it's noteworthy that this was really coming from the Republicans. This was their conception. And so I think that's really good - because to have bipartisan comity on an issue like homelessness is not - it's not common. So I think it's important for us to try to stick together on an issue like this. [00:55:07] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and to your point - to get going with a model that could be an example for other cities to follow - I think that's a very important thing. And especially for local government - one of the things that I really like about local government and policy - is that everyone has to live in these conditions, everyone has to see. There's more pressure to get away from rhetoric and to actually do something that's addressing the issues that people are seeing with their own eyes and that you're seeing with your own eyes. So there is more of, I think, a motivation to act, especially outside of - sometimes big city politics can get super politicized, but other entities don't always get bogged down by the spectacle of it all. And you're working towards some solution and there's - Hey, there's evidence that this model is working elsewhere, let's give it a go. We certainly need to figure out something that works, other things haven't like they've needed to. So sometimes challenges happen, and sounds like there's cause for optimism that this can be worked through, even if it's with the newly composed council and hopefully we get this up and running. If you work through all this - who knows if it alters the timeline - what was the original timeline for this being built and operational? [00:56:43] Councilmember Derek Young: Yeah, I think the schedule was construction next year and have the first units available at the beginning of 2024, if I'm not mistaken. I may have that a little bit wrong, but by the time you do site development - depending on the season, it can get tough. But that was the hope - is that it would be - the first phase of the project would be fairly soon. And that it is a phased project. So eventually would house 257 units, give or take. Obviously, there may be some site development challenges. And the hope is that everyone sees that this works and then we'll want to throw money at this as an - because that's what's happened in Harris County, Texas, where Austin is. They essentially have the private sector throwing money at them to do more. And they've got a couple thousand of these units that are housing people, and their success rate in terms of rehousing folks in traditional housing is in the 60% - I mean, that's just unheard of in this space. [00:57:59] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. Well, I hope - I hope that we still see this coming online in 2024. Seems like that could be doable, but we'll stay tuned and keep people updated on what's happening. And with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this friday, October 28th, 2022. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler. Our assistant producer is Shannon Cheng, and our Production Coordinator is Bryce Cannatelli. Our insightful co-host today is Pierce County Council Chair Derek Young. You can find Derek on Twitter - and he's a good Twitter follow - @DerekMYoung. That's D-E-R-E-K-M Young. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks and you can find me on Twitter @finchfrii - it's two I's at the end. You can catch Hacks & Wonks wherever you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of all of our shows and our Friday almost-live show to your feed. If you like us, please leave a review wherever you can. And you can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at OfficialHacksandWonks.com and in our episode notes. Thanks for tuning in and we will talk to you next time.

On this midweek show, Crystal chats with Julie Anderson about her campaign for Washington Secretary of State - why she decided to run, how partisanship affects the office, and the experience she brings to manage the Secretary of State's broad portfolio. With regard to managing elections, they discuss her plans to increase voter turnout, her stance and approach to local jurisdictions potentially adopting alternative systems such as ranked choice voting, and how to handle misinformation that creates mistrust in our elections. Crystal then gives Julie an opportunity to respond to the many attacks from her detractors before switching gears to dig into her thoughts on managing the state archives - both preserving historical records and ensuring that the Public Records Act is administered efficiently and effectively. 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 Julie Anderson at @nonpartisansos.   Resources Campaign Website - Julie Anderson   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 transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Well, I am very excited to be welcoming to the show - Julie Anderson, who is a candidate for Secretary of State, which is one of the most important and consequential offices in the state and going to be up for election on your November ballot. Welcome, Julie. [00:00:55] Julie Anderson: Thank you, Crystal - and thanks for acknowledging that the Secretary of State's office is really important. It's nice to meet somebody who's excited about picking leadership for the important office. That's - thank you. [00:01:07] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. So what made you decide to run for Secretary of State? [00:01:12] Julie Anderson: Well, I certainly wasn't expecting to do this in 2022 - but definitely the importance of the office. I'm one of the end users of the office - the Secretary of State is my authorizing agency and leader for elections on the county level and also for document recording - so it's an important office to me and I know it's important to the other 38 counties as well. So when Kim picked up and left, I jumped right in. And I was also inspired to do it because I wanted, I saw this as an opportunity to make a shift in the office and run as a Nonpartisan and to hopefully create a little bit of an air bubble in the office and normalize the idea of hiring professional election administrators who aren't associated with the political party. So that's why I'm running. [00:02:10] Crystal Fincher: And that has been a difference this cycle that we've seen - just that people are not familiar with. This office has been held by a Republican for several years, the only statewide office that was previously held by a Republican. With the appointment of former Senator Hobbs to now being Secretary Hobbs, which - a lot of people were advocating for your appointment in that seat, citing your experience for that - but he is there and a Democrat. But you have decided to run as an Independent. Why do you think being Independent is so important to the office? And do you think that we've suffered from having it be a partisan office in the past? [00:02:53] Julie Anderson: One quick thing - I'm making a real point of calling myself Nonpartisan rather than Independent - because as you've noticed in Chris Vance's race, he calls himself an Independent and he has designs on creating an independent third party. I have no designs on creating a group or a party and - I don't have a group - so I am literally nonpartisan. Have we suffered by having partisans in that office before? I think that we've been really lucky with Sam Reed and Kim Wyman taking the job very seriously and performing the job in a nonpartisan fashion. I do think, however, that their party affiliation dragged some unnecessary drama into the office and made their work more difficult. It is a political office and so the opposing team is always looking for a way to knock you off at the end of your term, and is always positioning to put their best candidate forward doing that. So there's always a little jockeying around depriving the incumbent of oxygen and victories so that they're less credible whenever they run for re-election. And then in the electorate, there is also skepticism because we live in an increasingly hyper-polarized political environment, people are just naturally suspicious of somebody that holds a political party that they don't belong to. So those are two reasons why I think that partisanship in this job does not help or add value to the work. And I don't think that having a party affiliation does add value to the policy work or the operations of the office. [00:04:38] Crystal Fincher: Now you have talked a lot about the experience that you bring to this office should you be elected. Can you talk about what your experience has been as Pierce County Auditor and how you feel it's going to be beneficial as Secretary of State? [00:04:51] Julie Anderson: Sure. So for over 12 years - 13 in November - I've been the nonpartisan county auditor for Pierce County, which is our state's second largest county. Which means I've conducted hundreds of elections in Washington State and have also presided over a recording document program - making recording documents, preserving them, and making them accessible to the public - and then also business registry and licensing. So with that experience, I'm familiar from the bottom up with Washington State's votewa.gov election management system because my team was part of, really, building it along with other lead counties and obviously the Secretary of State's office. I sat on the Executive Steering Committee while that was under development and when it launched and went live in 2019. So having that background, I think helps, puts me in a position to better help the county auditors and the election administrators using that system. It also helps me to design and implement policy proposals for the Legislature to consider since I know how the system works. And it also puts me in a position for visioning how to modernize the office, what the needs are to go the next step, and where the gaps are. And when we're talking about elections - where the gaps are specifically - we don't have a lot of residual gains left to make in Washington State, but the ones that we do need to make are going to be the most difficult and challenging. And I think that's where experience matters. [00:06:33] Crystal Fincher: It absolutely matters - and it matters for more than just the elections too. The elections are certainly the most visible part of what the Secretary of State does, but it has such a broad portfolio of responsibilities. And just recapping those briefly for people who may be unfamiliar. In addition to supervising local elections, filing and verifying initiatives and referenda, and distributing the Voters' Pamphlets - also responsible for registering private corporations, limited partnerships and trademarks; registering individuals and organizations, and commercial fundraisers involved in charitable solicitations; administering the state's Address Confidentiality program, which is critically important for survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking - so very important too, public safety really - collecting and preserving the historical records of the state and making those records available for research; coordinating implementation of the state's records management laws, which are constantly in the news for one reason or another; affixing the state's seal; regulating use of the seal; filing and attesting to official acts of the governor; certifying what the Legislature does; and sometimes even called upon to represent the state in international trade and cultural missions and greeting dignitaries. There's so much under that umbrella, each of which seems like it could potentially be its own office really, but so broad. How has your experience as an auditor helped to prepare you for the full portfolio of what you're going to be managing if you're elected to be Secretary of State? [00:08:07] Julie Anderson: I would say it's auditor plus my whole professional portfolio. So I come with public and nonprofit leadership experience in human services, criminal justice, and economic development. I was notably the Executive Director of the YWCA in Tacoma-Pierce County, so that speaks to the sensitivity and understanding of the Address Confidentiality Program, and I can tell you how I would apply that to expand that program. And then in economic development, I was a Senior Policy Advisor for the State Department of Commerce, where my portfolio included workforce development and developing a green economy and also innovation zones. But that body of work in the public and nonprofit sector means that I'm really tuned into the importance of community, and the unique conditions in community, and understanding that I have to have a partnership in community to do any of those things well. A top-down management model or staying isolated in that executive position is not going to make the organization better or better connected with the citizens and residents of Washington. And we don't just serve citizens, we serve the residents of Washington State. So I think that my community connections and my work on the 2020 census, for example, I have some great ideas about how to engage community in each of those programs, whether it's talking about voter turnout, access for people living with disabilities, or how we are talking about curating the heritage and history of Washington State to make sure that we don't disappear people and cultures and make sure that we're doing culturally relevant screening of our collection and portfolio and working in partnership with community to do that. [00:10:04] Crystal Fincher: So now you mentioned voter engagement and turnout - you've talked on a few occasions about efforts to increase voter registration, and increasing voter registration is not necessarily consistent with increasing voter turnout. What do you propose to do to increase voter turnout, to increase the amount of people who are participating in our government and democracy, making their voices heard? And how are you going to go about that? [00:10:32] Julie Anderson: Well, it's my belief that election administrators are facilitators, not catalysts. And looping back to community, I'm going to leverage community a lot. For example, I think you have to pay attention, first of all, to data and trends. We know that the four-year election cycle has really unique peaks and valleys that are pretty darn predictable. In a presidential election cycle, we probably don't need a lot of help with getting the word out. But in these off-year elections and in local elections, we need a tremendous amount of help because that's when voter turnout is the lowest. One of the things that I would propose doing is partnering with local government and with schools to focus on municipal elections and pooling resources and having - the Secretary of State can certainly provide materials and infrastructure, but the execution of how that gets delivered in a community is going to be unique in every community. But I can see municipalities all focusing their energy on a one-week period where we're getting voters prepared to vote, getting them to develop a plan, and helping them if they need reminding about what their local government does for them and with them. And then partnering with schools in that same one-week period where you're doing some education in schools about local government and then challenging kids to go home and talk to their parents about the election, so they can have a dinner table, a kitchen table conversation about it. So there's concentrated energy in just one week, it's hyper-localized - because strategies that are going to work in Asotin County is going to be completely different than King County - and locals know best. So I see myself as being a facilitator and having local communities tell the Secretary of State how I can help. But at least laying out a plan and applying some leadership to get everybody pulling in one direction, concentrating on one week, I think would be helpful. You have probably visited my website and you also know that I plan a VOICE Program, which is Voter Outreach and Innovative Civic Engagement, where I'd be replicating some really successful strategies from the 2020 Census, pooling philanthropic dollars with government dollars, and then having a very low-barrier granting program where communities can propose their own voter outreach and engagement programs. And again, I can't wait to see how creative people are, and it's going to get very - we're going to get some very niche products, but yeah. So those are a couple of ideas, but I would say that the first thing is really paying attention to the data, not just the trends that I talked about - which elections have low turnout and don't - but also geography. One of the great things about the Washington State Voting Rights Act that has been proposed - we already have a Voting Rights Act, but what I think of as Phase 2 that's been proposed - is it came with money and authority for the University of Washington to hold data and they're going to be getting electoral inputs, like candidate filing, rates of voter registration, rates of ballot return, and combining that with demographic data. And doing basically heat mapping and analysis so that we can also look at geographic areas and populations that have low voter turnout or low levels of engagement. So let's pay attention to the trends, let's pay attention to what that Washington State Voting Rights Act data tells us, and start developing strategies in response to that. [00:14:28] Crystal Fincher: That makes sense, and the ideas that you have - especially that one week, I'd love to see that implemented - that would be exciting. There are also efforts to increase turnout through some structural changes to the ways that we vote, and there are changes that are on the ballot in several jurisdictions right now in our state, including ranked choice voting, approval voting, a number of different things. Are you in favor of ranked choice voting, approval voting, some of these changes? Do you support those? [00:14:55] Julie Anderson: I support the local option bill for ranked choice voting that has been kicking around in the Legislature for about six years now, and I look forward to supporting local jurisdictions that want to adopt ranked choice voting. I think it is head and shoulders the leader in electoral reform proposals, and it seems to be particularly popular among young voters - and Gen Xers and Millennials are going to be the biggest share of the voting population by 2028 - if we're talking about increasing voter turnout, we've also got to look at youth and really change the way we talk with youth - not talk at them, and not using government channels. I look forward to harnessing some of that young adult leadership and having them tell us the best ways to engage with young voters, and one of the things that they're saying is ranked choice voting. There's a lot of disenchantment with our primary system, and I think that they're really looking for alternatives and wanting untraditional candidates and maybe minority party candidates to have a fighting chance in the primary. So I think they're excited about that, and if your community decides to take it on, I'm ready to support. There's a load of work to be done to make ranked choice voting successful, and there's a lot of rulemaking that falls on the Secretary of State, so one of the first things I'm going to do is gather together a cohort of communities that are seriously talking about this and start working on the rulemaking so that we have a chance of having some standardization as this rolls out. [00:16:32] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely, and one component of that that I think is particularly important - I'm wondering what your perspective is on it - is the voter education component. Whenever there is a change - we struggle with our existing system to make sure everyone understands how to make sure that everyone understands how to vote, and even something like - hey, remember to sign the ballot - still slips through the cracks for a lot of people. Several things can seem very intuitive, but maybe not actually be for everyone for a lot of different reasons. When we're making a major change, the importance of education is that much greater. How do you propose, when there are changes, to make sure that we do have an adequate amount of voter education in all of our communities across the state so that people aren't intimidated or disenfranchised by the change? [00:17:23] Julie Anderson: First, taking a clue with other states that have been doing this a while - I've been through several webinars and in-person visits with jurisdictions that do it. But instead of just copying what somebody else does, I want to do usability testing. Assume nothing. Let's get that cohort together, let's get stakeholders and end users together. Do mock ballots, do mock voter instructions. And actually test it through scientific usability testing and find out where the errors are going to be made and what we can do to change it. And that includes - ranked choice voting ballots that may need to be translated for people that don't speak English well, or different types of ranked choice voting - that's the other thing that's not well understood is - the local option doesn't force you to combine a primary and a general election and just have one election. It's an option. It also leaves open the opportunity for applying a ranked choice voting ballot and using proportional representation elections. There's all sorts of different ways that a ranked choice voting ballot can be applied depending on what the jurisdiction is trying to achieve. We need to do usability testing in all of those forms. [00:18:44] Crystal Fincher: Looking at that and the coordination that's necessary for that, your opponent has talked about - hey, there's a lot of misinformation and disinformation out in the current environment. Now's not the time to make changes, we're experiencing enough of a crisis with trust from some people in our current systems - it's going to require a lot of education, may disenfranchise people. Do you think that's reason enough to not move forward with things that could potentially increase turnout or help better represent communities? [00:19:17] Julie Anderson: Name a reform that didn't have opposition. Name a reform that didn't have barriers and reasons not to do it. Reform is hard in the beginning, and I think we need to have more confidence than that. We need to approach it carefully. We need to do that usability testing. We need to do lots of voter education. Tactically, one of the things that I would like to do - you've noticed on my website, one of the things I propose with transparency is - I want to find a secure way to have voted ballots and cast vote records visible to the public. Other states do it. There is a way to do it. We may need legislation - because paramount is preserving voter privacy, right? That goes without saying. We absolutely can't do it if we can't guarantee voter privacy. But if there is a way that we can, and I believe that there is, and if we can get rules made by the Secretary or legislative fixes, then making those available is really going to help demystify people who don't trust a ranked choice voting ballot and the algorithm that gets used to reallocate votes. If we can make cast vote records public, there is open source software available where they can run the records themselves and retest the vote allocation if they want to. So, I want to look at things like that not only because there is a lot of public interest in auditing elections, but because it also is an enabling feature to making ranked choice voting more understandable and independently auditable. And there is some really neat communication tools that other jurisdictions have used in terms of color coding the reallocation of votes between each round, and they've gotten good results. [00:21:13] Crystal Fincher: And the issue of trust overall is one that you will have to contend with. [00:21:17] Julie Anderson: Always. [00:21:17] Crystal Fincher: We are dealing with an environment where there is certainly disinformation and people who are just spreading information that is false, whether it's denial of the 2020 election federally, or in our state and local elections, who question the security of vote by mail, of ballot dropboxes, of a variety of things that we have implemented successfully. And what they cite about them is false. That's a bad faith effort. But because of that bad faith effort, there are a lot of people who genuinely believe that there are problems - from all sorts of backgrounds, for all sorts of reasons. So how, in this environment where there is disinformation, do you help increase trust in our voting systems and our electoral system with people who frankly just don't have faith in it currently? [00:22:13] Julie Anderson: First of all, not acting defensively, and not acting aggressively, and having a nonpartisan message. The best thing that we can do to maintain and increase confidence is to keep doing what we're doing, which is running error-free elections that are auditable and serve the people. We can do some minor things that I've suggested on my website for transparency. We can do additional risk-limiting audits. Doing a statewide risk-limiting audit, I think, is a good idea. We currently have audits in counties that are called by the political parties, but they're not statistically valid batches of ballots that are being hand counted, and every county is counting a different race. To the Loren Culps of the world, who are just mystified by how the top-of-the-ticket candidate could lose, while the down-ballot candidates prevail, a statewide risk-limiting audit would be really helpful. And by the way, I would be proposing this as a best practice, even if we weren't currently getting pushback from candidates and parties. But to loop back to your question about confidence. Crystal, this is where I think that the nonpartisanship really helps. There's a good study out there that shows that you can, by double digits, move - and this is a phrase I do not like to use, but for shorthand's sake, let's say an election denier, somebody that really believes that the 2020 election was stolen. Even among that group, you can move them by double digits into the confidence tally by simply talking about the due process and the ability to challenge an election. Instead of acting aggressively and defensively about the accusation that it's stolen, just calmly educate them and inform them how elections can be challenged, the due process, how they can challenge individual voter registrations, and repeat how interested we are in any evidence that they have, and that we don't even need them to go to court for them to present us with evidence. I'm still waiting in Pierce County to get some of that canvassing work that the communities say - the door-to-door stuff that they're doing. They're not doing it in Pierce County, but I'm waiting for that because we can sit down and walk through the data with them. And almost always, it's a misconception of - either they're missing pieces that they don't know, or they're misinterpreting the data - and we can walk through it. And occasionally, I would expect to find a correct case. Occasionally, I would expect them to find, among 4.7 million voters and voter registrations, an error in a voter registration record - and we want to know about it and need help fixing it. [00:25:30] Crystal Fincher: Now, you talk about it - that seems reasonable, that is encouraging data and research, and there's certainly a lot that we can talk to people about with that. And it does seem like not being a partisan may be helpful in explaining that - the trust and faith that people have there. But you've been under attack from the Chair of the Democratic Party over this past week. It looks like saying that - oh, no, no, no, Julie Anderson is a partisan, she is a Republican, has a - I will read it and allow you to respond. I see - testified against bills expanding voter accessibility, against election officials promoting voter outreach and education, office sent flawed ballots, takes no position on campaign finance laws, accountable to no one, have talked about having a consultant and campaign staff or consultants who are Republicans and have supported Republicans. Now, I will say - there are quite a few Democrats that I saw question this and say - especially from Pierce County - saying, well, we've regularly seen Julie Anderson in Democratic events also. But some people countered with - well, now we're looking at her with JT Wilcox. I guess starting with the partisanship, and now you're actually associated with Republicans - and I think Rob McKenna has notably talked about endorsing and supporting you - you have been at those events. Can people credibly see you as a Nonpartisan when they see these associations and these endorsements? [00:27:16] Julie Anderson: Sure. I'm a Nonpartisan because I don't belong to any political party, which is different than not talking to anybody. I am not soliciting or accepting any endorsements from any political party, and I'm also not soliciting or accepting any money. But I regularly ask to be introduced. I try to break into legislative meetings and PCO meetings of both parties. Sometimes they'll let me in to introduce myself, sometimes they won't. I asked JT Wilcox if I could crash his salmon bake because I wanted to meet Republicans, and he said yes. And I'm sure that he got a rash of - from his supporters - for having me there. But just not belonging to a party doesn't mean that I don't talk with people, and I think that's important for the Secretary of State to do. One of the critiques is that I'm accountable to no one - I'm accountable to voters, and I've been re-elected overwhelmingly three times as an election administrator in Pierce County, so I have earned the trust and the votes of the residents of Pierce County who have seen me in action. I think it says something that the political parties don't run opponents against me. Presumably if I'm bad and bad for their party's interests, they're going to run somebody against me. The people who are working on my campaign - it was very difficult to find any consultancy that would take me on as a client because there were both credible Republicans and credible Democrats running in the race, and here comes this Nonpartisan lady wanting a contract with them. That's a business model and a relationship they didn't want to ruin, and so it was very hard to find somebody. I ended up getting a referral from Mary Robnett, who's the Pierce County Prosecutor who ran as a Nonpartisan, and I said, who were your consultants? And she introduced me to Josh Amato, and he has been associated as a Republican, I don't even know if he's still a Republican - I'm imagining that he is - and he has worked on Republican campaigns and Nonpartisan campaigns. This is an income-constrained campaign. I do not have a lot of money. I have been having to run this campaign the way I'll run the Secretary of State's office, which is modestly and judiciously. So I had to wait until the general election to hire a staff person, and when I did, I chose a young gentleman who came from the Derek Kilmer campaign, and had worked on Emily Randall's campaign, and worked with the Alliance for Gun Responsibility. It is true that I contracted with an independent vendor for PR in the primary, and she had Republican roots. But my detractors are cherry-picking - they also failed to notice that I hired a fundraiser who is very progressive and comes from the non-profit community, so I think I'm pretty balanced in who vendors, what kind of vendors are helping me. But most importantly, the vendors don't boss the candidate around. I'm the one that's responsible for every single policy position that you hear me talk about. Do you think the Republican consultant was happy about me saying I support ranked choice voting in the Washington State Voting Rights Act? No, he thought that that was a crazy thing to do - but I'm the boss, not him. I've lost track of the attacks. What other attacks do we want to look at? [00:31:07] Crystal Fincher: Well, I think one worth addressing is testifying against bills expanding voter accessibility - and I think that one, maybe for voters, is probably a concern. If looking at Republicans - hearing the attacks on seemingly democracy, partisanship - hey, we want to stop same-day registration, we don't like vote by mail, we need to reduce the amount of drop boxes, and the types of reforms that we have embraced here in Washington State - and is that going to impact where you stand on those issues and how much of a leader you are there? [00:31:47] Julie Anderson: So, in testifying, I had a leadership role in the statewide Association of County Auditors. So, I was either the Legislative Co-chair on the Legislative Committee or the President. And 39 counties come to a consensus on what their position on bills is - and because of proximity or leadership position, I was often asked to represent the association on those bills. Crystal, name for me a legislative proposal that is perfect on the first day that it's introduced. [00:32:18] Crystal Fincher: Well, I can't do that. I can't do that. [00:32:20] Julie Anderson: Not many. Many of them need to, in the legislative process - through testimony, stakeholder engagement, and the amendment process - needs to be changed. And often county auditors, who are the ones that have to operationalize good ideas and bad ideas, have feedback and have concerns. Most of that testimony was done at a time when the state wasn't paying for state elections, and it was all falling back on county general funds. It wasn't until 2020 that the state passed a bill to start funding their share of state elections, and it didn't take effect until 2021, which does us no good - it's really going to make an impact this year. So, a lot of the testimony was driven by our concerns about resources, time, money, and staffing to get done some complicated things. In other cases, it was technology. So, same-day registration only became viable when we had VoteWA up and running so that we had real-time visibility on registration and balloting transactions around the state. And I will say - again, cherry-picking, my detractors are - in as early as 2015, I was personally advocating for the Washington State Voting Rights Act well before it got passed, even though the association either had a neutral stance or they had constructive feedback and testimony. So, I am a strong supporter of vote-by-mail, strong supporter of same-day registration, strong supporter of just about every electoral reform that's taken place since 2016. And the expansion of ballot dropboxes - I know that one piece of feedback that's been fluttering around is my opposition to dropboxes on college campuses - again, in my role as, in the Association of County Auditors. And - like in Pierce County, at that time, I was really struggling for expanding dropboxes, period, in my community. And I knew, using that geographical and demographic data and that voter turnout data that I used to make decisions, I knew that there were pockets in my community that really could have benefited from a ballot dropbox - as opposed to the University of Washington of Tacoma, which is a commuter school, not a residential school with young people far-flung from all over the United States that might be confused about how to get a ballot or how to register. It's a commuter school. And having a ballot dropbox on that campus, where people are driving to and from their homes to classes, and not being able to install a box at the Housing Authority or at Manitou, which - anyway, you don't know my neighborhoods. [00:35:35] Crystal Fincher: I know a little bit. [00:35:37] Julie Anderson: Okay. All right, all right. So that didn't make a lot of sense to me, and I stand by that. I really think that the control of where ballot dropboxes go should be local, using local intelligence and local needs. I completely support the threshold, like population standards. And by the way, all of this wraps around to why I support the Washington State Voting Rights Act, and the expanded version that's going to come up in session again this year. Right now, we have a Voting Rights Act that is really specifically tailored or focused on vote dilution and that helped us get through redistricting safely. But we are now talking about vote denial and vote abridgment. And I support it strongly for this very reason. If you're going to give local election administrators control over where to place ballot dropboxes, we need to make sure it's not at the detriment of protected populations and that it's doing the most good. And I like that kind of structure. [00:36:47] Crystal Fincher: And I hear you there. I guess the questions that pop up for me personally when I hear that are - one, for me, ideally, shouldn't we be able to find a way to place them in more places, period? And should being a commuter location or a commuter school, given that we aren't limited to returning ballots in a jurisdiction where we're registered, where we vote - a lot of people do commute there, which means a lot of people are there. It's a convenient place to be able to vote. It's an enfranchising thing, even though it may not be for the particular precinct that that ballot dropbox is located in, or neighborhood. Do you factor those things in to making your decisions there? [00:37:34] Julie Anderson: Oh, yeah - I'm making a rookie mistake getting into an argument with the host. So it made perfect sense when I was able to place it at the transit station on the street of Pacific Avenue, just outside of UWT, as opposed to inside a pedestrian plaza not accessible by an automobile and not visible to the general public. And also, by the way, very hard to geolocate on Google Maps for people that are searching for a place to drop their ballot. I do think that the number of ballot dropboxes is increasing - the number is worth looking at, especially because we don't know what's going to happen with the United States Postal Service. By the way, I would work hard as Secretary of State to work with letter carriers to preserve door-to-door delivery. But if that doesn't happen and Congress continues to privatize that service, we need to be prepared and with more dropboxes. And you know something - the Voting Rights Act and UW's data collection that they're going to be doing is going to be very informative about whether we have enough ballot dropboxes and if we have them in the right place. So I'm completely open to it - I just don't like the Legislature deciding where they go. I want to be holistic, data-driven with local intelligence. [00:39:05] Crystal Fincher: That absolutely makes sense. The other one I just want to get to - just talking about accuracy - we've actually seen errors in a number of jurisdictions in a number of ways - from misprinted Voters' Pamphlets, ballots that have to be reprinted. There was talk you provided voters false information and lost 100 cast ballots. What happened there? [00:39:30] Julie Anderson: Okay, two separate incidents, and you're right - errors happen all over the state and all over the country - reminding us all that elections is a human process. We leverage technology a lot, but it requires expertise and a lot of proofreading and sometimes things slip through the crack. In one case, the vendor that Pierce County - well actually, the vendor that is used by over 60% of the electorate in Washington State, K&H - made an error when we mailed out ballots to our military voters and 88 voters out of 550,000 were impacted. What happened was they shuffled the return envelope with the mailer so that 88 people got a ballot packet on time, but the return ballot had somebody else's name on it. When we found out about that, we immediately contacted the voters, reissued the ballots, and immediately sent out a press release. That's what you can count on from me - is tattling on myself, telling people, taking corrective action, and doing whatever we can to make sure it doesn't happen again. In that case, I amended the contract with the provider that said next time you have a machine stoppage and you've got a set of quality control procedures that you use - this is like using your Xerox in your office or your home where you have a paper jam, and then by the time you finish ripping everything out, you've got to figure - do I reprint the whole document or do I figure out what page I left out on? The quality control at that plant is to reprint the whole darn thing, and somebody on the line decided that would be wasteful and they didn't do it. And so I amended the contract to say there's going to be consequences if you deviate from your own quality control. In the infamous case in 2016 where Pierce County urged voters to, if they were going to use the United States Postal Service, to do so - let's see, I think it was 5 days before the election - but if they were going to use a drop and to please use a dropbox otherwise. The allegation says that we were sued - we were not sued. There was a threat of a lawsuit and at the end of the day - what the Democratic Party wanted was for me to mail out a postcard to voters saying that's advice not a requirement, and they wanted me to make that clear on our website. And so that's what we did. And at the end of the day, the attorneys agreed we did nothing illegal. And we haven't done it again since because it created such a stir and so much upset. So we don't even give people advice anymore about - if they're using the Postal Service to do it early, but you should. [00:42:45] Crystal Fincher: Well and yeah - that's the complicated thing. And as someone who is interested in making sure people not only vote, but that their votes get counted and they arrive on time, we are experiencing more challenges with the United States Post Office. There is some uncertainty and certainly at the time, during the 2016 election, there's lots of conversation about potentially challenges with mailing things. So I do generally advise people to mail as early as you can if you're going to do that, but yeah - so I am glad we have gotten some clarity on a number of these issues, but also want to ask about some other things. I guess one of them is talking about preserving the historical records of the State and making them readily available to the public. What are your plans there and how can you make those more accessible and available to researchers, to the public, to everyone? [00:43:41] Julie Anderson: A couple of things. One, the Secretary of State's office, I think, is behind in terms of digitizing paper records and getting them indexed and available. I do believe that my opponent has invested in additional scanning equipment, so that's a good thing. I don't know if they have sufficient FTEs to do that - I'll have to look at that when I get there. But my big concern is looking towards the future government - so our state archives hold all of the records that are produced by local and state government that have permanent retention value all the way from territorial days to right this minute. And in the last 10 years, government has been producing a heck of a lot of digital native, digital born documents that never were a piece of paper. And in my experience, our state archives still has a paper mindset because they're used to working with precious ephemera and paper documents. But we've been producing tons of native, digital born documents that are complex and interactive. Is the Secretary of State's office ready to ingest a high volume of digital records that are interactive and richly indexed, and turn them around and make them accessible to the public? I don't think so, and that's a project that I want to tackle right away. If you think about everything that just happened with redistricting - with all of those maps that were generated, so many different versions - and if you tracked it, you know that that was highly interactive data, right? You could move lines around. That is a record. Is it being preserved in that state, that interactive state, or are the maps being preserved? So those are the questions I'm interested in and want us to be forward thinking about. I am a certified public records officer, so I am very passionate about public access to public information and one of the things that the Secretary of State's office needs to do - there's two things - is provide more training to local records officers and maybe even a camp for requesters. I think that would be a good idea. [00:46:05] Crystal Fincher: No, I think that's excellent and was leading into - the next thing I wanted to talk about was document retention and how closely linked it is with records requests. And we're seeing challenges in that area in jurisdictions across the state - one, in properly retaining the correct records. But the purpose of that retention is so that they can be accessed and provided to people who are entitled to see them, including the public. And we are seeing and hearing reports from a number of reporters and people making requests in jurisdictions across the state who are receiving increased wait times, increased estimates of wait times - sometimes comically long, decades long wait times - for some of those requests potentially. Hearing that localities are short staffed - it's challenging to respond to these kinds of things. And even getting into accusations of bad faith use of the public disclosure request system and records request system - some people trying to do that. Or on the flip side, people just being unhappy about receiving a request and having something looked into and calling things a bad faith attack and looking to delay the process, maybe unnecessarily, in those. How can you help make that process more consistent, help localities handle those in a more consistent way so that people can request and receive public documents when they're entitled to them? [00:47:46] Julie Anderson: Two things - I'm going to be the Secretary of State that's known as a "Clean your closet, kid" Secretary of State. Government is producing more records than ever and they don't know what to do with them. If you don't know how to store them, then you can't find them. So record retention is about record management. The Secretary of State's office used to have a pretty good training program for records officers about that. That needs to be rebooted and redoubled and it needs to have a modernized context. I cannot tell you how many emails are generated hourly by government. We don't know which of those are important or not until you have a sorting and classification system that you maintain constantly that marries emails with the associated documents, right? So that's something that we did in Pierce County. I want to take that passion with me to the Secretary of State's office and hire somebody that's an expert at this to help train local government. And I'll also be an advocate for resources for local government. There are some jurisdictions that are literally drowning and they're also having turnover issues. So I do want them to have resources, but first of all they got to know how to clean their room. [00:49:10] Crystal Fincher: So as we close and as people are trying to figure out how to make this decision - they hear from you, they hear from your opponent, lots of outside groups, and a lot of noise. When you are talking to someone who is considering making this choice between you and your opponent, does not know which direction they're going to go, what do you tell them to help make that decision? [00:49:32] Julie Anderson: That like them, I love Washington State's election laws - want to preserve them, make them even better. And for the first time in history, they have a choice of hiring somebody that's a professional administrator with expertise in these subjects without party strings attached. [00:49:52] Crystal Fincher: Thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us today, join us today, and letting the voters just get more familiar with you. Much appreciated. [00:50:01] Julie Anderson: Thank you. Thank you for the questions. And I love that you're a fan of the Public Records Act. [00:50:06] Crystal Fincher: I'm such a fan of it - and if it's follow up and organizations being accountable to adhering to it. But yes, thank you so much. [00:50:16] Julie Anderson: You're welcome - bye bye. [00:50:18] Crystal Fincher: Thank you all for listening to Hacks & Wonks. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler. Our assistant producer is Shannon Cheng, and our Post-Production Assistant is Bryce Cannatelli. You can find Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks, and you can follow me @finchfrii, spelled F-I-N-C-H-F-R-I-I. 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 our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered right to your podcast feed. If you like us, 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.

On this midweek show, Crystal chats with current Secretary of State Steve Hobbs about his campaign for Washington Secretary of State - why he decided to run for re-election, the threat of misinformation campaigns and cyber attacks on Washington's elections, how partisanship affects the office, and whether partisan attacks on his opponent are warranted. On the topic of elections, they discuss how he builds trust in the system in an environment of disinformation, addressing issues with disproportionate rates of signature rejection across the electorate, his plans to increase voter turnout, and his stance and approach to local jurisdictions potentially adopting alternative systems such as ranked choice voting. The conversation continues with the experience Secretary Hobbs brings to manage other components that fall under the Secretary of State's large umbrella and his vision to create greater accessibility for experiencing the state archives' historical records, resources for corporate and charity filings, and requesting governmental documents via public disclosure requests. 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 Secretary Steve Hobbs at @electhobbs.   Resources Campaign Website - Steve Hobbs   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 transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes.   Today, I'm thrilled to be welcoming a candidate and the current officeholder for one of the most important roles that we have in our state - Secretary of State. Welcome, Secretary of State Steve Hobbs. [00:00:51] Secretary Hobbs: Thank you. And thank you for saying it's very important. Thank you - I appreciate that. [00:00:56] Crystal Fincher: It is extremely important. And I think a lot of people are recognizing just how important it is now perhaps. Many more people are recognizing that than they have before because of how much talk we've had over the past couple of years about how important elections and election integrity are. But also, in addition to elections, all of the other things that the Secretary of State is responsible for like archives and records management and all those different things. And we're seeing an increasing amount of news stories and coverage in issues and challenges in those areas. So with all of that, what made you decide that - one, you wanted to take this on in the first place, and two, that you want to run for a new term? [00:01:41] Secretary Hobbs: Well, first of all, I've always dedicated myself to public service - starting at the age of 17 when I enlisted in the Army Reserves - then, and then going on to active duty shortly after that. So this was a nice transition from serving in the State Senate, which I did for 15 years, into this role because it's a nice little Venn diagram - you know how you have the two circles there? So one is defending democracy in my role in the military and the other is serving in the State Senate. And this is a great overlap because right now, as and your listeners would know, our elections have been under attack. Our democracy has been under attack. [00:02:30] Crystal Fincher: Sure has. [00:02:31] Secretary Hobbs: And so having that background that I have in the military - serving in the National Security Agency, being a Public Affairs Officer - having been in that role and defending elections in both Kosovo and Iraq, this is a great fit for me. And I enjoy it, I love it - but it of course has its challenges, which we have had several this year with three misinformation campaigns and a cyber threat that has occurred already just this year alone. [00:03:04] Crystal Fincher: So how do you defend against those? And what is the plan to combat all of this misinformation and the targeted attacks? [00:03:12] Secretary Hobbs: Well, it first started when I got into the office and there was an outbriefing by former Secretary Kim Wyman, who is now working for the Biden administration. And in that outbrief, she had told me there were several thousand - thousands - of attacks, cyber attacks, on elections and 180 instances of misinformation and disinformation. We all know about what happened in January 6 in our nation's capital, but some of you may not know or remember - there was an attack on our own State capital. We had to deploy the National Guard there. In fact, several of my soldiers had to go on that mission to defend our capital. And so I started by looking at the budget that was submitted by Kim Wyman and pulled it back and resubmitted it. And what I did was expanded the cyber security team. So we had a cyber team of four, now we've gone to eight. We're strengthening our relationships with the Air National Guard that we call upon for cyber security when we are overwhelmed. We are looking into doing exercises - one step up from a tabletop exercise, but actually a full-blown exercise in 2023, where we'll be having folks who are trying to penetrate our system through cyber and through misinformation, disinformation - a closed system there where we can react to it. We have created a team that would combat misinformation and do voter outreach and education, because some of the vulnerabilities that we have of people not having trust in our elections is because they simply don't know how we do elections here in Washington State. So we've got to do a little more education of that. And then creating a team of outreach to our disenfranchised and underserved and underrepresented communities that we're doing. Sorry, I went on, but there's a lot to do. And there's a lot that we have done so far in trying to push back on some of the misinformation campaigns that happen and the cyber threat that happened this year. [00:05:23] Crystal Fincher: Well, and it's really important - there is a lot going on. And I guess one of the more fundamental questions that people are asking themselves is - with the nature of the office and because this is a little bit different this year in that you're running against someone who identifies as an Independent, not as a Democrat or a Republican, what is the role of partisanship in this office? Is this an office that should be a partisan office? Is there any advantage or disadvantage to being a partisan in this office? How do you view that? [00:05:53] Secretary Hobbs: Well, in my personal view, I can operate in this office if the Legislature deems that it should be a nonpartisan office. Now, in order for that to happen, you have to pass a bill to do that. I doubt that will make it out of the Legislature since the Legislature is controlled by Republicans and Democrats and I don't see that happening any time soon. I think what you have to do is look at the individual who's occupying this office. How do I say this? Well, I go back to a motto - when I'm serving an infantry battalion, all infantry battalions have mottos and mine was, or ours was - "Deeds, not words." So look at what I've done, not what I say. And you'll see that I'm a person that works across the aisle. You'll see that I'm a person that can get things done. And you look at the list of endorsements that I have - I have Republican endorsements, Democratic endorsements. I have the endorsement of the Association of Washington Business and the Washington State Labor Council. And having a label on there - it doesn't do anything if you're going to be a bad person. So the last three Secretaries of State were partisan - Sam Reed, Kim Wyman, and Ralph Munro - and they were trusted with the public and they got the job done. I will say - in this day and age, though, people tend to trust Democrats running the elections, because they know where they're coming from. And I'm not going to back away from the fact that I am a Democrat. I'm proud that I'm pro-choice. I'm proud that I'm pro-labor. I'm proud that I support the environment. I don't think those are bad things at all. Whatever the Legislature decides - if they want to make this a partisan office - or nonpartisan office - that's fine. But I can operate in any environment. And I don't think it really matters anyway, at this particular time, but I'm not going to back away who I am. I'm a Democrat. [00:08:05] Crystal Fincher: That makes sense. No secret here. I think the values that you listed are very good. And that the people, in this day and age - given the harboring of anti, disproven, disinformation about elections and campaigns that they see coming from the Republican Party are comfortable - more comfortable - with the Democratic Party in this position. But with that said, there have been - I don't know that any of this has come directly from your campaign. But the State Party and the leader of the State Party has attacked the other candidate, your opponent Julie Anderson, for her associations with some Republicans, or the Republican Party. Given that - you just talked about, hey, it's about who you are, it's about what you do - do you think those attacks are warranted or fair? [00:08:57] Secretary Hobbs: Crystal, you did bring up a couple of points that have been brought up recently in this campaign. And all I can say is - to the listeners out there, look into it, right? So she did show up at the fundraiser of the minority party in the House who wants to take control of the House - that's JT Wilcox, Representative Wilcox. If you're calling yourself nonpartisan, I'm not sure why you would go to that fundraiser, representing a party and some folks out there that want to put these elections back to poll voting and eliminate vote by mail. And the same group of folks that fan the flames of misinformation and disinformation. She does have a political consultant that's Republican, and a communications team that's Republican, and a treasurer that's Republican. But I'm not here to bash on her. I'm just saying to the listeners out there - do your own research on it. But yeah, that's true that there are, she's - has some ties there. [00:10:07] Crystal Fincher: You mentioned your willingness to work across the aisle. Could that just be her attempting to do the same types of things that you were talking about in reaching out? To that, it does look like she has also, in the past - I don't know if she has in this general election - but met with Democrats and Democratic organizations. Do you put that under the same umbrella? Or is that different than just trying to work in a bipartisan manner? [00:10:33] Secretary Hobbs: I think it's an attempt to look at this race and go - okay, well, Steve's got the Democrats, so maybe I'll go get the Republicans. Because there are Republicans out there that simply just don't want a Democrat in office - and doesn't matter if that person's a good Democrat or not - they just can't stand the fact that there's a Democrat occupying that office. And so - she's going to reach out to those folks, it's just a campaign strategy. But again, I stress to the listeners - look at the backgrounds and see the deeds of the person and see what they can bring to the office. Again, I've been in the office so far for almost a year. And you got to ask yourself - is anything wrong with what's going on? And if not, why change horses at this particular moment in time? Crystal, I mentioned the three misinformation campaigns and the cyber threat - these are real things. These are real threats to democracy - I would say that you'd want someone who understands how to counter those threats. There was a story in NPR All Things Considered about a recent misinformation campaign that we pushed back on. And that happened in February - and it had to deal with one of the cybersecurity devices known as an Albert sensor that Homeland Security asks every government agency to have on their system network so that they can be warned when there's a suspicious IP address that data is coming from and to - because that's what an Albert sensor does - it tells you where the data is coming from and to. And you're not going to believe this, but the misinformation campaign directed at the Albert sensors was trying to tie the Albert sensor to George Soros. I'm not making this up. [00:12:30] Crystal Fincher: Well, unfortunately, I do believe it, but it is wild. That is - the attempt to tie everything - my goodness. [00:12:39] Secretary Hobbs: Yeah, yeah. [00:12:40] Crystal Fincher: I'm sure lots of people are shocked to hear that what they've been working on is somehow masterminded by that person. But yeah, there have been wild and malicious attacks and just an outright denial of what has happened in elections. And I actually think you raise an excellent point that we don't talk about a lot - in that you brought up even - we see this stuff happening on the national level and even January 6th on a national level. But that we did experience that in our own state at that time - both in-person and the attacks on our voting system. And so I guess one of the questions I have is given that we're in this environment of not just misinformation, but malicious disinformation, and people with an agenda to erode and degrade trust - how do you build trust in our electoral system? Because although there are absolutely people who are intentionally misleading people, there's a lot of people who sincerely believe we have issues within our system - and for a variety of different reasons and from different perspectives - this is not just Republicans, it can be a variety of people. In an environment where there is so much disinformation, how do you build trust and credibility with voters in this state? [00:13:58] Secretary Hobbs: Oh, it's a long-term campaign that you have to start right away and not only be aggressive on, but consistent on. So for example, the misinformation campaign on the Albert sensor, you have to - we brought together all the county auditors and we brought, we invited county commissioners, and we brought in Kim Wyman, Homeland Security and FBI to inform the county auditors - hey, don't believe this misinformation. It's not true. The Albert sensor is simply a device that protects you, not a George Soros machine. Unfortunately, one county removed that system and now we're still working with that. But we are right now launching a major voter information campaign called "Vote with Confidence" - we launched it yesterday. It'll be out on TV and probably when you're pumping gas - sometimes you see those video screens that are up that's showing commercials - and on social media platforms. And basically we're going to do more than just remind people to vote because we've done a great job of reminding people to vote. Myself and the county auditors have have all done that, but what we haven't done a good job of is letting you all know what happens to your vote and how it is secure, transparent, and accessible. You may know this here, Crystal, because you're familiar with politics - that you can go to your county auditor and witness the process. You can see these ballots come in, you can see them get counted, you can see every signature being checked. But the average person doesn't know that and that's what we need to start doing. We need to start telling people - even things that are somewhat technical - that this state is part of the ERIC system, the Elections Registration Information Center, where our state is connected to other states and different databases so that if you were to move to another state and register there and fail to cancel your registration here - guess what? We're going to know about it. Don't try to vote multiple times in the same election by trying to register in different counties because guess what? We're going to catch you and we have caught people doing that. This whole myth about dead people voting - that's just not true and when it does happen on very rare occasions, it's because a spouse votes for a recently deceased loved one and maybe that spouse, before they died, said who they were going to vote for and they voted for them and they signed their ballot and guess what? We catch that. We find that out, but we have to do more though - we have to let people know what happens with their ballot and we haven't been doing that. [00:16:49] Crystal Fincher: Well, and one question I have - we have seen, and there have been reported on, inconsistencies in how rigorous people are in either checking signatures or even potentially malfeasance in checking signatures. And we saw in a report on a county in our state where people with Latino surnames had signatures that were rejected at a much higher rate than those with other names, even though it appears they were valid voters, that everything else was in order - but they seemed to be disqualified visually with the commonality that they did have a Latino surname. And questions about whether racism was at play and bias within our electoral system - what role can you as the Secretary of State play to make sure that we're implementing process and executing processes across the state, throughout all of the counties, in a consistent way? And how do you hold counties accountable to that? [00:17:48] Secretary Hobbs: Yeah, thank you for that. That was a study that came out of the State Auditor. And she had - it's very shocking - Blacks were four times as much rejected, Hispanics three times as much, Asians twice as much. Young men were actually rejected at a slightly higher rate. And our role on that one is we're taking action on it. So already we're working with the Legislature. Now we know about this data, now we got to find out why that is - and so we're doing another study with the Evans School at the University of Washington. But we're not going to stand idly by and wait for the study. There's some actions that we can take already to try to mitigate that. And one of the things that we are doing, though it won't come online for probably another - probably not 'til next year - and that is text messaging the voter the moment their ballot is rejected. Because the main reason why ballots are rejected - it actually has to do with not signing the ballot. A lot of folks just fail to sign it because they - maybe they didn't see the signature block. Or, especially those where English is not their first language, they just didn't read it because it was in English. And so you have ballot rejections happening because people fail to sign. And right now the current system is we send you mail, which - not very efficient. Counties might call you. But what we're thinking about doing and what we'd like to do is - hey, send a text message out to them right away so that they know their ballot is rejected and so they can do something about it before, and sometimes even before the Election Day. Because right now most people get their ballots cured - and the term cured is used when your signatures don't match, or you failed to sign your signature - is there's a close election and a bunch of people go into a particular Legislative District or jurisdiction and they're curing ballots because there's a campaign - the campaign is trying to get their candidate across the finish line. [00:20:12] Crystal Fincher: So now - with that, and you're trying to get voters there, you're trying to make sure every vote counts. Do you also see one of your core roles as getting more people to vote - increasing turnout and participation? And if that is, how do you plan to do that? [00:20:30] Secretary Hobbs: Oh, absolutely. I think it's very important. I think we have to constantly try to do that. It's a struggle because sometimes voters just - oh, this election is not important, so I'm not going to vote. Well, we have to constantly remind folks that, hey, elections are important, it's part of the democratic process. That's why I'm happy that the Legislature gave me the funding to not only do this voter information campaign letting people know how their ballots process, but also reminding them again - hey, don't forget you got to vote, there's an election coming up. One thing that we are trying to do to increase voter turnout and increasing the amount of people getting registered - because there's a lot of people out there who are eligible to be voters but haven't done it yet - is getting at young people before they even turn a voting age. And so we're looking at, and this is theoretical this moment, but we're going to try to really push it in the next - if given the opportunity to serve out the rest of the term - a mobile gaming app targeted at young people. Maybe it is where they vote in a fantasy setting, they vote for imaginary folks - we throw on some civics questions, and maybe they get points, and they level up - to get them jazzed up, if you will, about voting and participating in our democracy. And looking at our curriculum, because we do provide curriculum to the elementary, middle school, and high school about elections - and so maybe there's a way we can make that more exciting, maybe we team up with our local tabletop game companies here in the State of Washington and send out - in a form of a game. The other thing we need to do is reach out to our underserved communities out there. And so taking a great idea from King County, the trusted messenger program - hiring folks that come from a particular community - knowing the language, knowing the community, knowing the culture. They go out there and do the outreach necessary to get people registered to vote, and teaching them and informing them about the process of voting. I can't hire enough people to do that, so we're already looking at - well, maybe we also contract out to different organizations that do that already. I was talking to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce a couple weeks ago - maybe that's an opportunity there out in the Tri-Cities - I'm going to go visit them again on the 18th of October. But we just have to do more. I was very excited - we started because COVID is slowly getting manageable - we were able to go to the July 4th naturalization ceremony in Seattle and we registered about 300 new citizens. And that is exciting - we're going to be at those events as well. [00:23:41] Crystal Fincher: So in a debate early in this race, you shared your view that we shouldn't change our electoral process to ranked choice voting, which is on the ballot in a handful of jurisdictions in our state, or approval voting - because you had concerns that some people already have issues with trust in our system and making changes might make that problem even worse. Is not making changes because of a fear of misinformation a valid reason not to explore changes? Or should we be investing in things that help make the process more clear to people, especially if it's going to update them on a voting system that should increase turnout? How did you come to that decision? [00:24:19] Secretary Hobbs: Well, Crystal, it basically - it comes to the fact that I've been in this job for a while, I've seen the amount of disinformation that's going out there. There's a King 5 poll that showed 35% of Washingtonians didn't trust the 2020 election - that's Washingtonians. And looking at the voter turnout - right now our system is pretty easy - you vote for the person that you like and it's one vote. Under ranked choice voting, you have an algorithm, you rank people. And at this particular moment in time, when you have this amount of disinformation going on and you have the situation in our own - US capital and or state capital - really now is not the time to do something like that. But one thing that I get very concerned about, and this is my own personal connection to this, is that you're asking people to vote in a foreign way, something completely different. And that we have a huge population of people where English is not their first language. And so now you are going to disenfranchise a group of people. And that's something we certainly do not want to happen. I think about my own mother who naturalized to this country - English is not her first language - and I can't imagine if you go back in time and all of a sudden you said - hey, vote ranked choice voting, and you didn't have a voter's guide or any explanation to her in her language, it'd be very difficult. I also think about my son. I have a - my middle son, Truman, who's got a cognitive disability. It's very easy for him to vote because I show him the ballot and I show him the voter's guide and I go - hey, Truman, all you do is you color in the bubble to the person that you like. And for Truman, a lot of it's visual - he's going to look at the picture, he's not going to do a lot of reading. And by the way, he has every right to vote. If you have a disability, that shouldn't prevent you from voting. [00:26:29] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. [00:26:30] Secretary Hobbs: He is going to have a hard time doing ranked choice voting. It's just not possible for him. And so I know the advocates out there pushing the ranked choice voting, but let's not disenfranchise a whole group of people out there. They may not be the majority, but they're out there and we shouldn't disenfranchise them. Also, I don't know what this is solving. I really don't. We have the most diverse legislative body right now under the current system of voting, a very diverse city council if you live in the City of Seattle. I'm not quite sure what this is trying to solve. But I will say this because I know that there has been - people say, oh, well, he's not going to help us out when we do ranked choice voting. That's not true. My job as Secretary of State is to support the elections in the state and local municipalities. And that is exactly what I'll do if a municipality or county chooses to do ranked choice voting. But I am telling you and I am asking the citizens, please pause and think about it before you choose ranked choice voting, because there are other people out there that may not get it. It may be difficult to understand. Let's not leave them out in the cold and let's think about our democracy right now with the amount of misinformation that's out there. [00:27:59] Crystal Fincher: Well, and I guess I should ask a clarifying question because ranked choice voting is certainly one reform or change that is on the ballot. There's also another change currently on the ballot in a jurisdiction this year - approval voting. We see different methods of voting - one, just in our neighbor to the south in Portland - there they have a different type of voting on the ballot for their city this year. We're seeing a number of different types. So is your opposition strictly to ranked choice voting or to any of the kinds of changes, whether it's ranked choice or approval voting or any kind of change that would be made? [00:28:36] Secretary Hobbs: It's right now - this particular moment in time - is any kind of change, unless you can find a way where you're going to get the word out to those individuals where English is not their first language, where they've got cognitive disabilities, and the fact - hey, is this vulnerable to a misinformation? Because right now, if there's a close election, you just count out the votes and whoever has the most votes wins. That's how it's done, right - in close races. But let's say it's ranked choice voting or preferred voting - it gets slightly complicated. In ranked choice voting, you're basing it upon an algorithm. And so now, what's going to happen? Well, what's going to happen is you're going to have a group of individuals who didn't get their way, and they're going to say, oh, this algorithm got hacked, which is not true. This algorithm, written by George Soros, and again, not true. But that's what's going to happen. [00:29:36] Crystal Fincher: Well, I don't know that I would call it an algorithm, but a different method of tabulation and rounds of tabulation. [00:29:42] Secretary Hobbs: Well, that's what we call it - it doesn't make it a bad thing. It just - that's what it is. There's nothing wrong with it. I'm just saying to you that you just leave yourself vulnerable to misinformation that could attack it. [00:29:59] Crystal Fincher: I got you - but I think the underlying, as you pointed out, related concern is they are on the ballot and those changes may be made in places. And so the role of - again, in the implementation of these things - certainly there can be a lot of challenges that are introduced with implementation - how well just the system itself is implemented, and how well residents are trained and informed and educated before it happens. Do you plan on playing a role in that and being an advocate for voting and participating in the system should one of those be implemented? [00:30:41] Secretary Hobbs: Well, we have to - that's the role. I can't not do that as Secretary of State. I have to make sure that these - if a local jurisdiction chooses this form of election, then of course, we're going to be there to support it. [00:30:59] Crystal Fincher: And so I do want to talk about - we've talked about elections - and that's, to most people, the most visible thing that you're involved with as Secretary of State. But my goodness, you have a lot more responsibilities than that - just going down the list, aside from dealing with elections and initiatives and referendums - producing and distributing the Voters' Pamphlet and any legal advertising; registering private corporations, limited partnerships and trademarks; registering individuals, organizations and commercial fundraisers involved in charitable solicitations; administering the State's address confidentiality program, which is really important for survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking; collecting and preserving the historical records of the state and making those records available for research; coordinating implementation of the State's records management laws; affixing the State seal and attesting to commissions, pardons and other documents to which the signature of the governor is required; regulating use of the State seal, which came in handy in another state - there was a whole thing about - that is an important and relevant thing. Filing and attesting to official acts of the Legislature or governor and certifying to the Legislature all matters legally required to be certified. You're also frequently called upon to represent the State of Washington in international trade and cultural missions, and greet and confer with dignitaries and delegations visiting the State of Washington from other countries. This is a big, big job and my goodness, you have your hands full with just elections, but there are so many other things underneath the umbrella of your responsibility. How do you both focus on elections and all of the other stuff? And how has this gone so far? [00:32:47] Secretary Hobbs: Well, I've got a great staff and I got great people who manage these different divisions. Thank you for mentioning those other things because sometimes my employees that are in libraries and corporations and nonprofits and legacy - which is history of Washington State - not to mention our CFD, our Combined Fund Drive - sometimes they feel neglected. My Secretary of State's office is about nearly 300 people and 22 people occupy Elections. There's a lot more that we do than just elections and I love it. I actually love the other side. It's very therapeutic to me because there's not the controversy that's involved in those other aspects. Libraries are near and dear to my heart. In fact, we have libraries in every state institution - our state prisons and our state hospital. I'm proud to announce that we're actually going into our state juvenile detention facilities, which we haven't done, and I'm glad we're doing that. It's about time - they should be in there. What I'm going to do and what I'm starting to do is use our state libraries as a place for rehabilitation - getting folks who are incarcerated, giving them the skills necessary when they leave the prison. We really haven't done that in the past and I'm looking forward to doing that. I get it's not going to be a lot of people, but you know what? Let's not let that space go to waste. I'm also excited using libraries as a place where we can provide therapy for the incarcerated. I'm working with, or talking with, some of the tabletop gaming companies - the use of RPGs and gaming as a form of therapy is an opportunity for us - to have that in our state libraries, so I'm looking at that. We team up with rural libraries and community libraries out there in Washington State - we're looking at doing more of that - creating game libraries out in the rural communities. They do it in Vancouver and in Spokane - they actually have game libraries where you can go and play games and it's an opportunity to create a safe space for young people out there in rural communities where a library is the only place where they can go to. And of course, corporations, charities - you had mentioned that. We are on the verge of creating satellite offices so that you don't have to drive all the way to Olympia if you have a problem with your corporate filings and your nonprofit filings, so I'm looking forward to that. People shouldn't have to drive to Olympia if they're having major problems. And there's a lot of people out there just - it's hard for them to navigate the internet, especially those who are older. So we're doing a lot out there with the other agencies of my office, so thank you for bringing it up. [00:35:53] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And so there are a few things - so many things we could talk about - these are all things that have areas, they're crucially important, they require deep expertise. You are there, and as in many departments and in many areas, there are very professional, dedicated, experienced staff who keep this running between and across administrations who are crucial to the work. But there are conversations about how important having a leader with experience in these types of work is. And that's been one of the areas that your opponent, Julie Anderson, has talked about as an advantage that she has in this race - as an auditor who, in addition to dealing with elections, also deals with a broad portfolio of responsibilities - that she has experience with many of these things, in addition to elections. And decades of experience she talks about, and that it's important to have that kind of experience in elections and in these other areas in the office, and saying you don't have it. How do you respond to that? [00:37:06] Secretary Hobbs: Well, I would say that clearly she doesn't know my background. And again, I offer anyone to look at my background, but I've been in the military for 33 years. And I've had varying levels of experience in the military leadership - commanded recently a 750 joint task force dealing with COVID support operations in Western Washington. That is far more employees than I even have now as Secretary of State, far more than what Julie Anderson has in her office doing multiple tasks. And that's just not just one thing - commanding companies and commanding battalion-level units - multiple people in a unit. Also, the the fact that I'm doing it right now. I've been running the Secretary of State's office for almost a year, and no complaints - I really haven't heard any major complaints from anybody. And it's been a blast doing it, using my skills - not just in the military - but having a Master's in Public Administration, my service in the State Senate. It's not easy being Chair of Transportation and managing that very large budget and navigating legislation. So I have more than enough skill, right now, in this office. Again, I just invite you to look at the backgrounds of each of us. [00:38:41] Crystal Fincher: Which makes sense. And so within those, what are you doing to preserve historical records, which is one of the things within the state - especially as we see in some areas, there are people who are much less interested in the preservation of historical records. And sometimes challenging that and attacking that at the federal level, bleeding down to other levels. And how do you make those records more readily available to the public than they are today? [00:39:09] Secretary Hobbs: Ah, yes. Well, so one of the things that we're doing - and it's challenging, because we just have so much paper records right now - digitizing all those records. So we're trying to provide more, hiring more people to do that, hiring better equipment. Just as I got into office, I traveled all - most, pretty much all the state archives buildings, except for one - talking to rank and file there. When I went to Bellingham, I talked to the archives folks there. And they were telling me, Hey, we need a large scanner to be more efficient, because right now we got to take - so you got to scan sometimes larger maps and stuff, you got to send it all the way to Olympia. It's well, let's see if we can purchase and get you a scanner so that you can do it there to make things more efficient. So those are the things I've been looking at. And of course, being able to have access to that online is very important to me. And digitizing our records is just one small part in keeping our records, but also telling the story about our state. As the state archives, I have the - we have the State Constitution, we have these old documents, and they shouldn't be behind a vault, a dark vault. People should see this, so I'm again, this is theoretical, and hopefully I have to get the Legislature's funding approval on this. But I'd like to bring these artifacts out, this history out, and travel the state and show people, show young people - visit, maybe, the high schools and elementary schools - hey, this is the history of our state. We're building a new library, and we're going to put a lot of info - not just our archives in there and books, but the state's history and the state's culture - let's tell the story about, especially in my community - I'm an Asian American, there's the Japanese that were put into camps. Let's talk about that story. Let's talk about Native, our Native peoples in this state - how we took their land and how they were struggling, and now they've become a political power in this state and how great that is, and how they have educated us on the environment - saving salmon. We need to tell these stories, and I've been looking at using our archives and our libraries to develop - not competition with you, of course - but doing a podcast. [00:41:35] Crystal Fincher: I'm all for it. I'm all for it. [00:41:38] Secretary Hobbs: Yeah, and talk and do it in the style of YouTube and Twitch, so there's interaction there at the same time. And I'm going to go on a bit of a tangent here, because I forgot to mention this, but - the listeners out there, if you're really into podcasts, there's one called Ear Hustle, which is a podcast ran by those incarcerated in the California penal system. And I want to do that here in the State of Washington. I want the prisoners to do their own podcasts to talk about how they got there, and how is life behind bars, and how they're changing themselves for the better. No, I really want to bring to life, light, what is going on in Washington State. [00:42:26] Crystal Fincher: So is it fair to say that you would want to - we have our physical libraries, we have our archives across and around the state - that you want to also create a digital library that is accessible to researchers, to the public - to see these artifacts. I was on a different site reading treaties, actually, that are incredibly interesting - to see what was promised and agreed to, and what actually wound up being delivered - which are in most cases, two very different things. But is that what you're looking to do - to be able to have people access, have access to these things - to view, to see - virtually as well as in-person? [00:43:08] Secretary Hobbs: Oh, yes, absolutely. You can do some of that already. But man, we have so much - so much archives. I was up in, again, the Bellingham one, and I pulled out this old, dusty, large leatherbound book. And I opened it up - a lot of the pages were empty. I just kept on turning the page, turning the page, and finally a page came up, and there was this story. It was very funny - it was nice handwriting - it basically said something like, Laura Smith marries David Hamilton, and two chickens, a cow, and some land was exchanged, or something like that. That, I don't know, I geek out over that. I think that's totally cool. It was a story of, obviously, a wedding, because we counties always record marriages, and that was recorded before the days of statehood in our territorial days. So all that needs to be preserved, that needs to be digitized, and we all need to see it. I think that's fantastic. [00:44:09] Crystal Fincher: All right - so we have heard from several municipalities, several reporters in municipalities about challenges with record management. And this is another part of your portfolio - records management across the state, which is also really related to the ability to deliver on public records requests, public disclosure requests - the ability to do that. And how many challenges there are within the system - hearing from municipalities and from reporters across the state that wait times for documents, for discovering whether something exists or doesn't exist, for records that should have been retained that have been deleted - creating lots of challenges for - really the goal of retaining a record is so you can be able to access the information. And so people who are entitled to that information, including the public, can access their information. We are seeing so many challenges with that right now - in the length of time it takes to fulfill requests, in the consistency of how records are retained and managed. What can you do to improve that? [00:45:15] Secretary Hobbs: Well, just like I said last time, I just got to get more people to do the digitization of our records and better equipment - especially the older documents - to have that scanned in. But the other thing that we've been noticing, Crystal, and maybe your listeners out there might know this - is the weaponization of the public records requests, where you have somebody making an outrageous request of a government agency to simply overwhelm them. And we have seen the rise of that as well, which is unfortunate, because that is not what the public records laws were meant to do. It was meant for transparency, not to overwhelm a local government with a frivolous request. Which is unfortunate - local governments and our own state government are struggling to try to keep up, but we have to be transparent, and that's what we constantly are trying to do. [00:46:19] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and even that area is a big challenge. For the person making the request, it's always interesting, but I think there have been some instances - certainly that I can recall - where someone who disagrees with the nature of the request, or maybe it's from some political - people who disagree with decisions that they've made before, or reporters who are simply investigating what is going on - being characterized as malicious, but seemingly making some standard requests. Now, there are certainly bad actors out there, but that is not the entirety of the issue. And so for - looking at implementing records management processes across the state, assisting municipalities with that - is there anything that can be done? Is it a situation where truly - sure, we have these retention policies, we have to save this, but if we don't have the staff, then that's just it. And ultimately, then the public does not get access to information that they're entitled to. Are we really relying on allocations of funding from the Legislature and from other levels of government to be able to deliver upon this really basic entitlement that the public has? [00:47:32] Secretary Hobbs: Well, there's certainly attempts and technology changes to make this easier, but it does come down sometimes to people. And so that is a struggle. But we've done a really good job of meeting the public records requests ourselves in our own - we're a separately elected agency - but some of these small towns and cities are, they're having some challenges out there. [00:48:02] Crystal Fincher: Well, as we get close to wrapping up our time here, as voters are considering who they're going to choose in this election and trying to weigh - okay, I'm hearing arguments on one side, I'm hearing arguments from the opponent. Why should I choose you, and what am I going to see that's different, or what will I not see that's different - if they vote for you? What do you say to voters who are undecided as they consider this decision? [00:48:33] Secretary Hobbs: What I would say to them is the Office of Secretary of State has changed. It has changed across the United States and those offices as well. It's not one that it just simply works with the counties to manage, oversee, and support elections. It is now one where you have to protect democracy, you have to protect elections from threats of misinformation and cyber threats. And I am the only candidate that has the background to do that - with my background in the military, having served in the NSA, with my background of being a Public Affairs Officer, being a graduate of Department of Defense Information School, knowing how to combat misinformation and combat cyber threats. Also, the fact that I can work across the aisle and have done so in my 15 years in the State Senate - it's the one of the reasons why I have Republican endorsements and why I've been endorsed by organizations that typically oppose each other, like the Association of Washington Business and the Washington State Labor Council. Also, we need to have somebody that understands and can speak for those communities that are underserved and underrepresented. I'm a son of an Asian immigrant. I am the first API member that's ever been Secretary of State, and I'm the only statewide official who's a person of color. We need to have somebody that represents them as well. And lastly, I ask you this - because in all these elections, when you're trying to get rid of someone, is that person just not working for you? Are they not doing a good job? I've been in this office for almost a year. Are there any complaints? If the horse is getting you to the place where you need to go to, and the horse is a good horse and strong and improving, why change horses? We've done, like I said, we've handled three fairly large misinformation campaigns that - reported in NPR and NBC News. We've had two special elections in a statewide primary, and those have gone smoothly. And then you've heard in this episode here about what I want to do with other aspects of the office, such as libraries and corporations and legacy. So if you're happy with those things, there's really no need to change. And so I'm hoping that you will give me a chance to do the full term. And just to think of the improvements that I can do in the next two years. And of course, I'm always going to be there to defend democracy, defend elections, because I did it for real in Kosovo and Iraq, and I'm doing it now as your Secretary of State. [00:51:34] Crystal Fincher: Well, thank you so much for joining us today, for having this conversation, and for letting the voters get to know you a little bit more. Much appreciated. Thank you so much. [00:51:42] Secretary Hobbs: Thank you. [00:51:43] Crystal Fincher: Thank you all for listening to Hacks & Wonks. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler. Our assistant producer is Shannon Cheng, and our post-production assistant is Bryce Cannatelli. You can find Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks, and you can follow me @finchfrii, spelled F-I-N-C-H-F-R-I-I. 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 our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered right to your podcast feed. If you like us, 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.

KVI's John Carlson interviews candidate for WA Secretary of State, Julie Anderson.

Hour 1 -- US Sen. Patty Murray "scientifically illiterate" with new claims about election opponent Tiffany Smiley and the current WA wildfires, an apology from a Seattle City Councilman for conducting a constituent meeting on public safety where he told people not to record the discussion, NY Times digs into mental health background of a prominent Republican candidate but seems to ignore the current medical status of a similarly placed Democratic Party candidate, a Seattle small business owner is shot to death in front of his store at closing time and the suspect arrested is being investigated for another murder, the puzzling platitudes about the business owner's murder by Seattle's mayor, the pressure must be building on Oregon Democrat Tina Kotek because now she's claiming she's always been supportive of law enforcement and Portland police officers aren't buying it. Hour 2 -- GUEST: Pierce Co. Auditor, Julie Anderson, is running for WA Secretary of State in the November general election, she talks to John Carlson about her campaign, how to keep elections secure, do people ever go to jail for voter fraud in WA?, why Anderson thinks that allowing ballot harvesting should remain legal in WA, US Supreme Court justice has some compelling things to say about her fellow justice Clarence Thomas, more background on the unique life of Clarence Thomas, Snohomish County likely to become more of a magnet for homeless drug addicts with latest County Council decision, GUEST: Sharyl Attkisson FBI previews her new story about an FBI whistle blower interview with new revelations about the January 6th suspect investigation(s). Hour 3 -- Seattle small businessman murdered in shooting outside his store, the write-in candidate for WA Secretary of State is a Republican state lawmaker but he won't win, WA Democrats election night watch party next month will require proof of vaccination to attend, Seattle climate activist claims people are moving out of Puget Sound to northeast US because of smoke and wildfires, what is Seattle's mayor doing in Argentina this week?, GUEST: GUEST: National Review columnist, John Fund, explains the abrupt resignation of Britain's brand new Prime Minister after just 44 days, GUEST: current WA Secretary of State, Steve Hobbs, talks to KVI about his candidacy for the November general election after he was appointed to the post by Gov. Jay Inslee two years ago.

Today's episode is a recording of a live debate between 37th LD Representative Position 2 candidates, Emijah Smith and Chipalo Street. The debate was hosted by the South Seattle Emerald on October 4, 2022 at the Rainier Arts Center. Hacks & Wonks' very own Crystal Fincher moderated the debate. Resources For links to the YouTube video, summary of lightning round answers and more, visit the debate's page on our website.   Campaign Website - Emijah Smith   Campaign Website - Chipalo Street   Register to vote, update your registration, see what's on your ballot and more - click here.   Past felony conviction? Information on re-registering to vote - Washington Voting Rights Restoration Coalition.     Transcript [00:00:00] Bryce Cannatelli: Hi everyone – this is Bryce Cannatelli from the Hacks & Wonks team. Today's episode of the show is a recording of a live debate between 37th LD State Representative candidates Emijah Smith and Chipalo Street. The debate was held on October 4, 2022 and was hosted by the South Seattle Emerald and was moderated by Hacks & Wonks' very own Crystal Fincher. We hope you find it informative and thank you for listening. [00:00:41] Crystal Fincher: Welcome! Welcome everyone to the South Seattle Emerald's 2022 General Election Candidate Debate. My name is Crystal Fincher. I'm a political consultant and the host of the Hacks & Wonks radio show and podcast, and I'm honored to welcome you all to tonight's debate. I'm also excited to hear from our guests running for State Representative Position 2 in the 37th Legislative District. Before we begin tonight, I'd like to do a Land Acknowledgement. I would like to acknowledge that we are on the traditional land of the first people of Seattle, the Coast-Salish Peoples, specifically the Duwamish peoples, past and present. I would like to honor with gratitude the land itself and the Duwamish tribe. We'd like to thank all of our partners here this evening, including the League of Women Voters of Seattle & King County for their support as well. Tonight's in-person show is following numerous COVID precautions. All in-person audience members, volunteers, staff, and candidates have either provided proof of vaccination or a negative COVID test upon entry, and all audience members in attendance are wearing masks. We're excited to be able to live stream this event on Facebook and YouTube. The debate also features questions from our audience members and voters like you. If you're watching the livestream online, you can submit audience questions by going to seattleemerald.com/debate. If you're in-person, you can write audience questions down on the note cards that have been handed out to you - or will soon be handed out to you - that will be picked up partway through the show. Volunteers will collect written questions at 8:00pm, right after the lightning round, and again at 8:30pm. Please keep questions to one question per card. A few reminders before we jump into the debate: I want to remind you all to vote. Ballots will be mailed to your mailbox starting Wednesday, October 19th, and you can vote anytime until election day on Tuesday, November 8th. You can register to vote, update your registration, and see what will be on your ballot at VoteWA.gov - that's VoteWA.gov. I also want to remind you that if you've had a previous felony conviction, your right to vote is now automatically restored after you serve your prison term, even while on community supervision. You do have to re-register to vote, but your right to vote exists. Go to freethevotewa.org for more details, and help spread the word. The candidates running for the 37th Legislative District State Representative Position 2 with us tonight are Emijah Smith and Chipalo Street - and we'll welcome them up to the stage right now as I explain the rules. So tonight's debate will begin with candidate introductions. Each candidate will have one minute to tell us about themselves. After introductions, we will enter a lightning round of yes/no questions, which candidates will answer silently by using paddles that indicate their answer. Just double-checking that you both have your paddles. Excellent, it's going to be a robust lightning round. Following the lightning round - at the end of the lightning round, each candidate will be allowed 90 seconds to explain anything you want to about what your answers were. Following the lightning round, we'll enter into the open answer portion of the debate. Each candidate will have 90 seconds to answer each question. Candidates may be engaged with rebuttal or follow up questions and will have 30 seconds to respond. Times will be indicated by a volunteer holding a sign in the front of the stage - right here. When a candidate has 30 seconds remaining, you will see the yellow "30-second" sign - right there. When a candidate has 10 seconds remaining, you'll see the orange "10-second" sign. And when time is up, the volunteer will hold up the red "STOP" sign, and I will silence the candidate. So now, we'll turn to the candidates who will each have one minute to introduce themselves, starting with Emijah Smith and then Chipalo Street. Emijah? [00:04:51] Emijah Smith: Welcome everyone. Thank you for being here. Thank you to all who are watching through the YouTube streaming. My name is Emijah Smith, please call me 'Mijah. I am raised and rooted in the 37th. I am a mother, I'm a grandmother, and a daughter of this district. Ever since I was a teen, I've been doing advocacy and community organizing - really seeing firsthand in real time that failed War on Drugs that is still continuing now, really seeing the devastation in my community. It was at that time that I said I want to bring healing, restoration, and resources back to the community. So my vision is healthy families and healthy communities, and in doing so, we have to look at multiple issues - prioritizing housing, fully funding education, pre-K, health equity, and really centering racial justice. I just want to highlight very briefly some sole endorsers within the 37th - Senator Saldaña, Girmay Zahilay - our King County Councilmember, Tammy Morales, Andrew Lewis, Kim-Khánh - thank you so much. [00:05:58] Crystal Fincher: Thank you so much. Chipalo Street. [00:06:01] Chipalo Street: Good evening. I'm an innovative problem solver, and I've been giving back to the South Seattle community for 15 years. We have some really pressing issues facing us, and we need to send a proven leader to Olympia to solve them. Housing prices are out of control, and it's displacing generational families and making renters pay more of their paycheck to skyrocketing rents. People are struggling to make ends meet, and the pandemic has only made this worse. The recovery, or so-called recovery from the pandemic, hasn't been felt evenly by all of us, and we need to protect working people so that we all come out of the pandemic better than we went into it. The pandemic's also made our schools worse and exacerbated existing issues. Just recently, Black and Brown kids tested three and a half levels behind their counterparts, and I want to make sure that all kids have a great public education system like the one that I went through. So I'm glad to be here tonight, and I'm honored to discuss how we move this district forward. [00:07:01] Crystal Fincher: Thank you so much. Also, it's a useful reminder that while you do have 90 seconds to answer, you aren't obligated to always take 90 seconds. Feel free to take it if you want to, but you will not be penalized for finishing early if you desire. So now, we will move on to the lightning round - making sure you both have your paddles in hand and ready. All right, we've got a number of questions to go through. So we will start talking about homelessness and housing. First question, are there any instances where you would support sweeps of homeless encampments? Yes or No? Looks like Emijah is waffling there, or landed on No. And we have Chipalo with No. Next question, will you vote to end single-family zoning to address housing affordability? Chipalo says Yes. Emijah says No. Would you vote to end the statewide ban on rent control and let localities decide whether they want to implement it? Emijah says Yes, as does Chipalo. Will you vote in favor of Seattle's social housing initiative, I-135? Both Emijah and Chipalo say Yes. Do you favor putting 400 additional units of housing and services for the unhoused in the CID? We've got a waffle with Emijah and a No with Chipalo. Do you rent your residence? [00:08:52] Chipalo Street: Sorry - as in, do I - am I a renter? [00:08:55] Crystal Fincher: Yes, are you renters? Both say No. Do you own your residence? Mortgage or outright. Chipalo and Emijah both say Yes. Are you a landlord? Emijah says No. Chipalo says Yes. In public safety, would you vote for a law ending long-term solitary confinement? Both say Yes. Would you vote for a law prohibiting traffic stops by armed law enforcement officers for low-level non-moving violations such as vehicle registrations and equipment failure? Both say Yes. Do you support establishing an independent prosecutor for cases of criminal conduct arising from police-involved deaths? Both say Yes. Do you support investments in the ShotSpotter police surveillance tool? Yep, it is in Mayor Harrell's budget that he just announced - so both say Yes. Do you think police should be in schools? Both say No. Would you vote to provide universal health care to every Washington resident? Both say Yes. The Legislature just passed a law that will cap insulin costs at $35 per month. Would you vote to expand price caps to other commonly used drugs? Both say Yes. Will you vote to ensure that trans and non-binary students are allowed to play on the sports teams that fit with their gender identities? Emijah waffled and Chipalo says Yes. [00:10:58] Emijah Smith: I waffle but I say Yes. [00:10:59] Crystal Fincher: Emijah waffles but she says Yes. For people wishing to change their name to match their gender, do you support removing the cost and need to see a judge for legal processing, name changes, and gender marker changes? Both say Yes. Will you vote in favor of an anti-extradition law that protects queer people, including children and their families, who flee to Washington from states where their gender-affirming care is punishable by law? Both candidates say Yes. Will you vote to increase funding for charter schools? Both Emijah and Chipalo say No. Will you vote for continued investments in anti-racism training for staff and students in Washington schools? Both candidates say Yes. Washington is facing a school staffing crisis and a funding crisis, especially with special education. Will you vote to increase funding in both of these areas? Both say Yes. Will you vote to enact a universal basic income in Washington? Both candidates say Yes. Our state has one of the most regressive tax codes in the country, meaning lower-income people pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than the ultra-wealthy. In addition to the capital gains tax, will you vote for a wealth tax? Both candidates say Yes. Will you vote for any bill that increases highway expansion? Chipalo says Yes and Emijah is waffling. Would you vote to allocate state dollars to help accelerate the delivery of Sound Transit and other regional rail projects? Would you vote to allocate state dollars to help accelerate the delivery of Sound Transit and other regional rail projects? Both candidates say Yes. Will you vote to enact state investments and updating homes with more environmentally friendly utilities? Both say Yes. Have you taken transit in the past week? Chipalo says Yes. Emijah says no. Have you taken transit in the past month? Chipalo says Yes. Emijah says her family has, but not her personally, so that's a No. Elections. Potential changes in the way people vote for elections in the City of Seattle will be on the November ballot. Will you vote in favor of changing the system in Seattle elections? Both candidates say Yes. Will you vote in favor of ranked choice voting for Seattle elections? Both candidates say Yes. Will you vote in favor of approval voting for Seattle elections? You can only vote for one. So both candidates say No. Will you vote to move local elections from odd years to even years to significantly increase voter turnout? Chipalo and Emijah say Yes. In 2021, did you vote for Bruce Harrell? Emijah says Yes. Chipalo says No. In 2021, did you vote for Lorena González? Emijah says No. Chipalo says Yes. Did you vote in the general election in 2021? Emijah says Yes. Chipalo says Yes. In 2021, did you vote for Nicole Thomas-Kennedy for Seattle City Attorney? Emijah and Chipalo say Yes. Will you be voting for Julie Anderson for Secretary of State? Correct - she's running against Steve Hobbs. That is correct. Both candidates say No. Will you be voting for Steve Hobbs for Secretary of State? Both candidates say Yes. Will you be voting for Leesa Manion for King County Prosecutor? Both candidates say Yes. And that means that you will be voting No - you will not be voting Yes for Jim Ferrell. Correct - both candidates will not be voting for Jim Ferrell. Have you ever been a member of a union? Both candidates say Yes. Will you vote to increase funding and staffing for investigations into labor violations like wage theft and illegal union busting? Chipalo and Emijah both say Yes. Have you ever walked on a picket line? Both say Yes. Have you ever crossed a picket line? Both candidates say No. Is your campaign unionized? Both candidates say No. If your campaign staff wants to unionize, will you voluntarily recognize their effort? Both candidates say Yes. That concludes our lightning round. Thank you very much for that - helps to level set for the open-ended questions, but before we get to those, each candidate will have 90 seconds to explain anything you want about any of your answers. We will start with Chipalo. [00:16:40] Chipalo Street: Sure. I think the only one that I would like to explain is expansion of highways. The reason I answered Yes to that is the qualifier of is there any reason that I would do that. In general, no, I do not support the expansion of highways. However, if it is to help freight mobility that helps our unions, then that would be something that I would consider. If it comes back to our economy and helping union jobs, then we should definitely consider that. But in general, no, I would not vote to expand highways. [00:17:10] Crystal Fincher: And Emijah? [00:17:11] Emijah Smith: So I think there was a couple of questions there that I waffled on. And for me, when it comes - because I center racial justice - I'm an anti-racist organizer, I have to always look at what are the unintentional consequences of any decisions that's made. So there's this yes or no - we have to bring context into the conversation. So if it unintentionally or intentionally causes more inequities and more harm to people of color and those marginalized, I have to look more deeply into that before I could just say a quick, simple yes or no. So I just want to share why there might have been a waffle there. And also, if I don't fully understand something and I need to learn a little bit more and lean into community organizations and lean into the community - we talked about the ID - that's a very diverse community, they're not a monolith. So if there's an issue that's happening in the ID, I need to lean and learn from that community before I just make a decision as a legislator to do so. So I definitely - my style, my servant leadership is definitely to listen from community, learn from community, and be accountable to community. So I don't just do yes or no. Thank you. [00:18:13] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. So now we'll start the open answers portion. Our candidates will get 90 seconds to answer each question and they may be engaged with rebuttal or follow up questions and will have 30 seconds to respond. So starting out - in the Dobbs decision that obliterated the right to abortion - in Justice Thomas's concurring opinion, he identified decisions he felt should be re-evaluated after their ruling in Dobbs, cases that established our right to same-sex marriage, rights to contraception, and rights to sexual privacy. What can our State Legislature do to proactively protect these rights? Emijah? [00:18:55] Emijah Smith: Thank you for the question. And I definitely do not agree with the decision that was made. I think as state legislators and state leaders that we have to go directly and correct our Constitution to prevent these type of things from happening. Washington does a lot of talk. I think that our community, particularly in the 37th, is really intentional about our racial equity and about equity overall and fairness and all the great words. But we have to be actionable about that. And so putting something in the written language in our Constitution, we have to move in that direction. And I believe that our legislature for this 2023 session will be centering and very active around the Roe v. Wade and the Dobbs decision. [00:19:36] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. Chipalo? [00:19:38] Chipalo Street: Yeah, what I found interesting about Justice Thomas's dissent or concurrence was that he did not also include same or biracial marriage into his writing, even though that is based on the same logic of the other cases. Ironically, he is in a multiracial marriage. So the hypocrisy there, I don't think is lost on anyone. And I'm a product of a multiracial marriage - and so making sure that these rights are protected is deeply important to me. In terms of gay marriage, I am glad that we have a strong legislature and that passed marriage equality. In terms of Roe, I think we should fund clinics to take care of the increased traffic that we'll see in our state from the states that have - around us - that have banned abortion. I have background in technology. I would love to make sure that our data isn't used to go after people searching abortions or providing abortions. There's plenty of providers who provide telehealth. And if they are consulting with someone across state lines into a state that has banned abortion, I would be super scared about whether I could be sued, whether my data could be subpoenaed, if I could lose my license. And so making sure that we protect our data and protect our providers, I think, is paramount. Also making sure that we have security around our clinics - just as we'll have more traffic from people looking for abortions, we'll have more traffic from people protesting abortions. So those are some of the things that I would do to protect gay rights and the women's reproductive rights. [00:21:12] Crystal Fincher: And I just want to circle back to one thing for both of you in a 30-second rebuttal. Specifically when it comes to contraception, is there anything that strikes either of you - we'll start with Emijah - that you think the Legislature could do to help ensure and guarantee access and availability? [00:21:31] Emijah Smith: Well, definitely education. I definitely think that we need to ensure and continue to make sure that we're educating our youth in schools and making - contraception needs to be available. It needs to be available to all birthing parents, but we also need to make sure that we are including and not fighting to have education for our youth to understand sex education. And so that's been a big deal before the Roe V Wade issue had came up, so I'm a supporter of making sure our families are talking to each other, because this is a family issue. It's not just a woman's issue. It's not just anyone's issue. It's an issue about our bodies and our rights of what we want to do. [00:22:06] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. Thank you very much. And Chipalo? [00:22:08] Chipalo Street: Yeah, I agree. Education is a big part of this. Funding is also another part. Making sure that contraception is available to anyone who wants it. Making sure that preventative medications like PrEP is available to anyone who wants it as well - that goes a little bit past reproductive rights and into sexual rights for our folks, but making sure that it's just available to everyone, I think, is very important. [00:22:31] Crystal Fincher: Thank you very much. Next question. What will you do when you're - [00:22:35] Emijah Smith: We need some call and response in here - this is, you know - [00:22:40] Crystal Fincher: What'd you say? [00:22:40] Emijah Smith: I need some call and response. We in the 37th, we are very diverse - this is how we move, so I'm just - go ahead, sorry. [00:22:48] Crystal Fincher: What will you do in your capacity as a state legislator to help small local businesses? Chipalo? [00:22:55] Chipalo Street: So, I'm a small business owner myself and I understand the problems of balancing books, the stress that the pandemic has put on different small business owners. And so - number one, making sure that when we look around at other types of businesses - like we have incubators for tech businesses, we have incubators in high-tech businesses. Why don't we have incubators for smaller businesses, for communities of color? Access to capital is one of the issues that holds businesses back - where I think we saw in the video - the guy who founded WeWork completely did a scam and then got another $350 million to go start Lord knows what. So making sure that we have access to capital in community is really important. Working with organizations like Tabor 100, who provide incubation-type services is really important. And then working to make sure that our communities foster businesses - so for example, businesses that are in walkable and bikeable areas get more traffic. Not only will that increase business to those businesses, it will also get us towards a greener climate future if we have an environment and community that encourages us to get out of single-occupancy vehicles. [00:24:11] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. Emijah? [00:24:11] Emijah Smith: Thank you. I am a member of Tabor 100. And one thing I've learned - I've been a member for a number of years - is oftentimes the resources only go to a couple of places, right? So a lot of our small businesses are pop-ups. So a lot of, even through COVID, the money that's coming from the federal government or from our local government agencies are not making it to the small businesses. Similar to what Chipalo was saying, you need capital to even get a loan, but also the money that was coming to support the businesses, it wasn't reaching those businesses. It seems like the same million dollar companies, people who always were getting the money kept getting the money. And also, when I think about the displacement that's happening in our community, I would like to see some restrictions or some policy that is not targeting our small businesses in neighborhoods or communities that have been historically gentrified and displaced. Similarly like the Central District, but all throughout the 37th - all the constant building could be harming - it has harmed our communities, most marginalized, but it also, in some ways, makes it harder for them to start up and rebuild. So there's education and awareness. Sometimes small businesses do not find out about the funding until it's too late. And so I'm hearing from business owners all the time about they're seeing, they feel like it's a scam. They feel like even though they've had some opportunity to try to start something up in cOVID, that it's gonna go away. It's gonna be the same old, same old people getting it all the time, the same status quo. So we gotta figure something out. We have some small business owners here in the neighborhood. Even in my campaign, I learned, the small businesses cannot unionize because it costs so much money. We should be figuring out a way to make sure our small businesses can get themselves the access in the door. [00:25:49] Crystal Fincher: And that is time. [00:25:50] Emijah Smith: You said we can keep going. It wasn't a penalty, correct? [00:25:53] Crystal Fincher: No, the red is stop. [00:25:55] Emijah Smith: Okay. [00:25:56] Crystal Fincher: You get a 10-second sign. That 10-second sign is like, okay, we gotta wrap up. [00:26:00] Emijah Smith: Well, thank you very much. That's call and response. I just want to say that I definitely value our small businesses. I stay aware and I try to stay connected as much as possible. And I would do any and everything I could in my role as a legislator to make sure that those investments are being made in our small business community, particularly the 37th and people of color. Thank you. [00:26:18] Crystal Fincher: Okay. Chipalo. [00:26:21] Chipalo Street: Oh, sorry. Do we - I think we took a fair amount of time. [00:26:24] Crystal Fincher: Oh, yeah, we just did. Sorry. [00:26:25] Chipalo Street: I didn't necessarily have a rebuttal there. [00:26:26] Crystal Fincher: Okay. Next question. Washington State has seen an explosion of traffic violence in the last two years with an extraordinarily disparate impact on those who live in our districts - the 37th district. For example, there are major Sound Transit investments coming online in the district at Judkins Park that are surrounded by unsafe freeway entrances on Rainier Avenue. It's not if, but when that folks in the 37th will be injured or killed by cars at that station entrance. And I should clarify, this is an audience question submitted before. What will you do as a member of the legislature to ensure that our streets are safe for pedestrians and cyclists? Emijah? [00:27:07] Emijah Smith: I appreciate that question. Living here in the 37th, living here near MLK where the light rail has been placed on top, when the community organized to have that light rail put underground. And the community won that fight, but with promises of housing and business investments and all the things that did not happen from Sound Transit, we have it on top. And so there's been - I see, oftentimes, those accidents. I see those fatalities. My heart goes out to the family of the mother who was killed at the Mount Baker station. I knew her before she was a mother. So these things are near and dear to my heart. When I think about traffic safety, I think that we have the data - Sound Transit does. They have the data that we should be - as things are being built and created, they should be co-designed with community, and then we should be making decisions while we're implementing these light rail stations, these new highways, whatever, it's not a highway, but these new ramps. All that should be taken into consideration in the beginning because the lives that are being lost mainly are BIPOC lives, Black and Indigenous people. And so our lives are being sacrificed for something that we never even asked for here in South Seattle. But I also want to think about traffic safety. I think about when our young Black men, who are the most targeted to even get on Sound Transit, being harassed because they're looking for ID or for payment - that to me is a safety issue. That's why oftentimes you may see me driving or driving my children somewhere because it's a safety issue because they may be harassed by the police, as well as those who tend to cycle. [00:28:41] Crystal Fincher: That is time. [00:28:42] Emijah Smith: Thank you. [00:28:43] Crystal Fincher: I just want to double check just to be clear. So we got that yellow 30-second sign, the orange one - okay. [00:28:50] Emijah Smith: Thank you. [00:28:51] Crystal Fincher: Cool. Chipalo. [00:28:53] Chipalo Street: So bike and pedestrian safety is something that I lived on a daily basis. Before the pandemic, I tried to bike to work from the CD all the way to Microsoft two times a week. And that exposed me to some very nice bike trails, but also some very dangerous streets. And so if I'm elected into the legislature, I would want to make sure that we have a comprehensive network of connectivity. So regardless of what type of transportation network it is, it needs to be connected. We built a monorail from downtown to the stadium - like Climate Pledge - that doesn't do much. For a long time, our two streetcar networks weren't interconnected, which means people didn't want to use it. So we need to make sure that all of our infrastructure is connected. We need to invest in bike transit and infrastructure. And this is particularly important to the 37th, because we have two of the most dangerous streets in Rainier Ave and MLK Way, 40% of the injuries there are pedestrian. And I think this is a place where we can, I mentioned before, find a win-win with business, because businesses that are in bikeable and pedestrian-friendly areas get more business. So I believe this is a way that we can build a coalition around fixing the problem of safe streets in the 37th. And it's also an issue for our kids, because we have 10 or 11 schools that are on both of those two most dangerous streets. So we can make sure that our kids are safer today as well. [00:30:22] Crystal Fincher: Thank you very much. Next question. One of the biggest things we can do publicly to fight the spread of all airborne illnesses, including COVID and the cold and flu, as well as protect against poor air quality days because of wildfires - which we've seen over the past few weeks - is to improve ventilation and filtration in public buildings. What will you do to ensure that public buildings, including schools in the 37th district, meet recommended air circulation and filtration standards for good health? Chipalo? [00:30:57] Chipalo Street: To me, that sounds like a question - if I could be appointed to the Capital Budget, where we have the power to change our physical infrastructure. I would love to set aside money for that. When I look at committee assignments, we can start all the great programs that we want, but if we don't fund them correctly, they will not have the desired outcome. So making sure that whoever comes from this district gets put on Appropriations or gets put on Capital Budget is really important so that we can bring the money back to the district to make sure that it is used in community to make us better. [00:31:30] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. Emijah? [00:31:32] Emijah Smith: Thank you. In my experience being in Olympia, we can make the decision. So Senator Saldaña, of course, is leading the HEAL Act - that's an environmental justice issue, but it's about implementation. So it's easy - it's one thing to put in a law, then you do have to fund the law, but you also have to implement it. So when it comes down to the other municipalities locally, sometimes they're stuck. So we have to make sure we're following the legislation all the way down to the community or to the district that you want and make sure that it's being implemented in a way, in a timely fashion as well - not three years, four years, five years down the line, but immediately. That should be part of the planning. So of course we have to fund it, but if we're not able to implement it, it's just words. So I would like, in my leadership role, is to make sure that there's language in the bill that makes it more accessible to our municipalities so that they can actually do something about it. If you put in the bill and it can't be ambiguous, it needs to be really focused and maybe restricted funding to air quality in the schools, rather than just saying, Here's some money to your school for air quality. Because they'll use that money any way that they choose to use it if the legislature does not direct them with restricted funding. So I would target it. Thank you. [00:32:48] Chipalo Street: Can I provide an example of how we would do that? [00:32:51] Crystal Fincher: I will give you both 30 seconds to rebut. Go ahead, Chipalo. [00:32:53] Chipalo Street: So a good example of how we can do that and how that has been built into some of the laws that have been passed is - recently, we passed the cap and trade bill. And one of the things I liked about that bill is that it built equity into it, so 30% of the funds that are created from the cap and trade go back to investment in BIPOC communities and an additional 10% go into investment in our Native nations. So that is a source of revenue that we could use to improve air quality in our schools and I think aligns to the point of that funding. [00:33:26] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. Emijah? [00:33:28] Emijah Smith: Yeah, my follow-up with that would be - I just want to also say I'm solely endorsed by the Washington Conservation Voters. So they're looking at this issue across - and so I would definitely, again, lean into the organizations and to the leaders to help direct being a servant leader into doing this work. But nevertheless, what I have found in my experience - when there's a law passed - it takes the community to still apply the pressure on the entities and organizations to make something happen. So I have that experience, that organizing experience, and building those partnerships on the ground level to make sure it's being implemented. Because once they move it from the state, the state lets their hands go. So they need more guidance and direction, and that direction needs to come from community. Thank you. [00:34:09] Crystal Fincher: Thank you very much. Next question. How will people tangibly feel your impact as their legislator? What is one concrete thing that people will be able to see is different by the end of your term should you be elected? Emijah? [00:34:28] Emijah Smith: So are you asking what has been done already or what you plan to do going forward? [00:34:31] Crystal Fincher: No - if you are elected, what will people see is different by the end of your term than it is right now? [00:34:38] Emijah Smith: I think people will continue to see - at least for me - they'll see a continuation of the work. It's not something I'll start to do, it's something I will continue to do. So first and foremost, I think, doing racially justice-centered justice reform work - and that's all interconnected. So when I think about our healthcare and the doulas, the doulas have been seen as a medical profession led by Kirsten Harris-Talley, but we need to put money in the budget to make sure that they're being reimbursed for their services. I think in these two years - that you will see that that definitely happens. My granddaughter was born during COVID. My daughter almost lost her life during that birth. It is a well-known fact that Black women are three times as likely to lose their life during childbirth. So having a doula, having somebody there with culturally relevant care will make sure that the lives are not being lost. In addition to that, I am a board member of the Tubman Health Center - this is another place - making sure that we have capital investments to make sure that we create a clinic that is going to center Black and Indigenous community and bring culturally relevant care, and that will also serve our LGBTQ community. That's something that you will see, I believe, and I strongly believe within the next two years as a representative, if I am honored to earn your vote. Thank you. [00:36:00] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. Chipalo? [00:36:03] Chipalo Street: So technology has been changing our lives from the way we communicate, to the way we move about the city, to how we get health care, or even go about banking. And I'm excited to bring my expertise in the tech industry to make sure that technology opens doors for all of us, but also prevent technology from rolling back the rights that we have. So I mentioned earlier that one of the first things I would do is work to make sure that our data is protected so that it can't be used to go for people looking for abortions or providing abortions - that is something I would start with. And then continue to do the work that I have done in the tech space. When I got out to Seattle, I volunteer taught computer science at a school in South Seattle. We started with a Intro to Computer Science program and then over six years built it up to an Advanced Placement program. So I would make sure that we distribute the wealth of tech to make sure that everyone in this community can take part in the industry that's been changing our region. The 37th has also been a strong supporter of kinship care, and so I would build on the work that Eric Pettigrew has done to make sure that kinship care and kinship providers are funded at the same rate as a foster care parent. [00:37:12] Emijah Smith: May I follow up? [00:37:13] Crystal Fincher: You may. I'll give you both 30 seconds to follow up. [00:37:16] Emijah Smith: Thank you. I, first and foremost, want to say that I would love to learn the school that you served, 'cause I think that's a wonderful thing that you've done. But just being a resident in the 37th and living in South Seattle for a number of years, it's important for me to know what school you're mentioning. Also with regard to kinship care, I've held relationships throughout the years with our grandmothers for taking care of their kids every single day. And so there has been a gap of care and service for our kinship care program once Representative, our former representative, Eric Pettigrew had stepped back. [00:37:50] Crystal Fincher: And that is time. [00:37:50] Emijah Smith: So I've been in relationship with the community and I am definitely going to continue to serve that community. Thank you. [00:37:56] Crystal Fincher: Chipalo? [00:37:57] Chipalo Street: So the school is Technology Access Foundation - it was started by Trish. When I was working there, it started on Rainier Ave - right on Rainier and Genesee - and now they have bought a building down a little farther south in South Seattle. So it is a very well-known technology - [00:38:14] Emijah Smith: It's not a school. [00:38:14] Chipalo Street: Excuse me? [00:38:15] Emijah Smith: It's not a school. [00:38:16] Chipalo Street: Technology Access Foundation is a school. Technology Access Academy is the school. [00:38:21] Emijah Smith: Yeah, it's not in South Seattle. And actually they started right up here. [00:38:24] Chipalo Street: It started on Rainier Ave. [00:38:26] Emijah Smith: But - [00:38:26] Crystal Fincher: Let's allow Chipalo to complete his answer. [00:38:28] Emijah Smith: Okay. [00:38:29] Chipalo Street: So, okay - [00:38:29] Emijah Smith: I just wanted - [00:38:29] Chipalo Street: Technology Access Foundation is the foundation that started Technology Access foundation Academy, which is a school that started on Rainier Ave - which is in the 37th - and then was moved down farther south, which is still South Seattle, and serves people who have been displaced in the 37th. So it is still serving our community. I served there for six years, which is a long time, to go from a start of an Intro to Computer Science to an Advanced Placement Computer Science program. [00:38:58] Emijah Smith: I just want to - [00:38:58] Crystal Fincher: And we'll call that at time, and that is the rebuttal time that is there - [00:39:00] Emijah Smith: Okay, but they're not a school though and my daughter went to TAF Academy -. [00:39:03] Crystal Fincher: Emijah, please respect the time limits. [00:39:06] Emijah Smith: We're going to center time, or we're going to center the issues that are really in the 37th. I live in the 37th. I raised my daughter here next door. [00:39:13] Crystal Fincher: I have a question from a resident in the 37th that I'm going to ask. [00:39:16] Emijah Smith: Okay, I'll be respectful, but I also want us to bring - let's bring the real issues forward. [00:39:21] Crystal Fincher: So how would you help address the affordable housing crisis? Starting with Chipalo. [00:39:27] Chipalo Street: So when I think about housing, I think about three buckets of issues. This is something that we hear at every door when we go out and canvass. We were just talking to an elderly gentleman who is part of - he was a state employee, and so he has one of the oldest pensions, but we have not funded that pension so that he cannot keep up with the rising housing prices. So when I think of housing, I think of how do we stop harm, how do we get more units on the market, and how do we tide ourselves to the way there. So stopping harm looks like anti-displacement measures, so making sure that seniors can afford the rising taxes, making sure that - right now what we have is we allow seniors to defer taxes, but once they die, then they have to pay all of those back taxes, which essentially forces a family to sell the house, unless you have $10,000, $15,000, $20,000 lying around. We also need to increase renter protections - landlords can do some crazy things. Even though I'm a landlord myself, I live that business through progressive values, so we can't allow felons to be disqualified from having housing. I have a tenant who's a felon, he's one of my best tenants. We should lift the ban on rental control, we should - rent control statewide. We should limit the types of fees that a landlord can charge their tenants. In terms of long-term measures, we need to invest in low-income housing through the Housing Trust Fund. We need to figure out something about workforce housing because even two teachers who are underpaid already - if they're living together, they can't afford housing in the district - and we need to invest in mass transit to increase density around it to get us towards a greener climate future and have more houses. [00:41:04] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. Emijah? [00:41:05] Emijah Smith: Thank you. So what I've been doing and currently been doing is really - with community members, locked arms, going to Olympia, going to our state-level Washington Housing and Finance Commission - and demanding that they release the funds in our community. So what I have done with community, because it's a team effort, is to release the funds to make sure Africatown Plaza has been funded. Community development for us by us - the Elizabeth Thomas Homes of Rainier Beach, the Ethiopian Village here in South Seattle - these are all housing developments - low-income, stable housing opportunities in the 37th. That's one thing. The second thing is - I agree - lift the ban on rent control on the state level. Number two is definitely providing increasing - no, lowering the income level for seniors to qualify for these tax deferments. I've talked to multiple seniors who are living on Social Security and who cannot qualify for King County's tax exemptions or deferments, and so that's a hardship on our seniors. In addition to that, I do agree with middle housing, but what I want to see is that we're not continuing to displace community as we're bringing more density in. We need to be more equitable and look at the houses in the communities on the north side of the Montlake Bridge - let them carry some of the weight of some of the housing developments, because what we don't want to do is continue to keep displacing folks. But I've been doing the real work - I sit on coalitions that are looking to remove the barriers for felons or any person who's just trying to rent. But rent should not be our goal - home ownership is the goal in order to create generational wealth. Thank you. [00:42:41] Crystal Fincher: Thank you very much. Next question - from the audience. What is the State Legislature's role and responsibility on digital equity and addressing the digital divide? Emijah? [00:42:54] Emijah Smith: This is a multi-pronged question or answer and solution, because it's around making sure that our kids' education is fully funded. Because in order to close the digital divide, which I have done and supported as a co-convener of the Black Community Impact Alliance. We have just recently did our open house in the William Grose Center - that is a hub to make sure that we have a think tank and provide opportunities for our youth for the tech world. But that took community building, going to the City's office to get the land transferred - that took organizing. It also means you have to make sure that our children are prepared for kindergarten and making sure their reading and their math is on par at third grade. Making sure our freshmen are finishing their freshman year. So really being an advocate in Seattle Public Schools, making sure the strategic plan and the resources are going to those furthest from educational justice. That's what I do in real time. But the William Grose Center is what the community locked arms and myself as a leadership on co-convening the Black Community Impact Alliance - that's what we've done for the digital divide. And my children have benefited from the opportunities from coding, from change makers, from all the different things that our public schools do not offer. And our school system needs to be fully funded, particularly making sure those who are receiving special education services get a real opportunity - because you can't close the divide if you're dropping out of school or they're sending our kids to prison. You can't get the opportunity if you're not graduating. So that's my goal - is to make sure that we're fully funding our education and utilizing our education system and doing community building at the same time to make sure we're closing this. Thank you. [00:44:32] Crystal Fincher: Thank you very much. Chipalo? [00:44:35] Chipalo Street: Yeah, I agree. There's a ton that we can do for education. I'll speak specifically about what we can do to close the digital divide. It's crazy to think that more than 50% of our students aren't competent in math and sciences - that is just plain scary. And we have to change that. And that's in high school. And so we have to make sure that we improve our STEM education. We have to make sure that we do public-private partnerships to bring tech education into our junior highs and high schools. It's an embarrassment that we have so many resources here in this area, but yet our tech education lags behind many other places in the country and the world. When we also look at STEM and tech, we can't only afford to have people getting a good job out of tech. We need multiple ways for people to get good jobs. So to me, that looks like creating pipelines to the trades. For too long, we've sort of said, Oh, you went into the trades because you can't hack college. No, you went into the trades maybe because you like to work with your hands, or you want a job that can't get offshored, or you want dependable hours - two of my best friends went through four-year college, got jobs, hated them, came back, became journeymen electricians, get paid more than those jobs that they had going to college. One's about to start a business. And so making sure that the trades are a respected option for our kids is important, just like it should be an option to go into technology. And then we should also fund free two-year college. Free four-year college is great - we should definitely get there. However, we need to start with free two-year college, just like the Seattle Promise, because 50% of Seattle graduating seniors applied for that, and 1,000 took part in it. [00:46:09] Crystal Fincher: Thank you very much. [00:46:10] Emijah Smith: Can I follow-up? [00:46:11] Crystal Fincher: I'll give you 30 seconds each for a rebuttal - go ahead. [00:46:13] Emijah Smith: Thank you. I just wanted to also add - on the state level - that determines the college-bound scholarship money, right? And right now, it's saying you need to have at least a 2.7 GPA - it keeps going up every year. But also is saying that a young person cannot have a felony on their record. And so I really, truly want to get that removed, because how are we going to expect our youth to graduate and get to these opportunities, but we're already setting them back because they made a mistake? And we understand the brain science and the development there is that their brains are not fully matured. So we're kind of setting them up for failure, so that's another place I would like to work on. [00:46:49] Crystal Fincher: Thank you - Chipalo? [00:46:50] Chipalo Street: She's right. And it shouldn't only be our youth, it should be our brothers and sisters getting out of jail. We should not be limiting the professional licenses that people getting out of jail can attain. And then we should also make sure that University of Washington is funded with the Allen School. We have great resources there - or teachers and staff - but we don't have the resources to scale it out the way we would like to. [00:47:13] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. Another audience question. Crime has been increasing across the state, and people are concerned about their safety and whether the right things are being done to address current levels of property and violent crime. Given that the Legislature has already voted to increase public safety funding, largely devoted to policing and prisons, do you feel that we need to invest more in that area, or would you also take a different approach? And we are starting with Chipalo. [00:47:45] Chipalo Street: So I think we need to think about public safety comprehensively as more than just police. This is something that is near and dear to my heart. When I was at Brown, we had an open campus - me and my best friend were walking around campus onto a public street and Brown police came and asked me and my friend for our IDs. I didn't do anything wrong, so I continued to walk. My friend stopped, told him who I was, showed him his ID, but that didn't stop Brown police from calling out for backup. Providence police got that call, caught up with me and beat me so badly that they had to take me to the hospital before they took me to jail. Despite that experience, I still think police are part of public safety, but we have to be able to hold the police force accountable, or we're not going to have trust with the police force. I want to work with them to make sure that we set them up for success, so that we are sending a mental health counselor out to mental health crises - because they are trained to deal with these situations - and the person receiving a service will get a better service than sending three or four cops. We don't need cops in schools, we need counselors in schools. And so I think if we think more comprehensively about public safety, then we'll get better outcomes for the community and a better relationship with the police force. We should also fund like violence preventer programs. We should get guns off the streets - one of the sad things about gun violence prevention is that there are very, very common sense gun laws that 60, 70, 80 percent of people agree on. However, federal legislators can't get their act together, so we need to make sure that those laws pass here in our state. [00:49:14] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. Emijah? [00:49:16] Emijah Smith: Thank you. When I think about public safety, I think about community safety - it's not just a conversation just about what the police are doing in community. It's also about how does the community feel safe - with the police. So there has to be an accountability conversation. So on the King County Community Safety Violence Prevention Task Force that I've served on, really it came down - of all their research and all their conversations and co-design - it really came down to families needing their basic needs met. Housing, education, food security, the basic needs - they believe that that's what it's gonna take to really bring prevention. So our state has already been working at some things with regard to guns and taking, looking at how many bullets, a clip - I don't know, got so many words coming - reducing how many bullets that you can have. I think that we need to make sure that every person who gets a gun needs to have a class - similar, if you want to get your driver's license, you need to learn how to drive - we need to learn how to use a firearm. You also need to make sure that it is locked up. Again, I am solely endorsed by the Alliance for Gun Responsibility. So community safety, also - we need to look at the funding that's coming from the State Department - so there's federal money that was brought down to the state, they've started a new division. We need to work with that division to make sure that it's meaningful in the 37th, because the 37th has different issues. We're not looking at machine guns and going into the schools in that way. What we're looking at is handguns that we gotta get removed and get them off the street. Thank you. [00:50:53] Crystal Fincher: Thank you very much. Next question - from the audience. Washington State funds only about half of what Seattle Public Schools spends on special education and only about one-third of what Seattle Public Schools spends on multilingual education. What is your commitment to fully fund public schools, particularly special education and multilingual education, and how would you get that done? Starting with Emijah. [00:51:20] Emijah Smith: We gotta get out, we gotta go on the state level, we have to be loud and proud, and we have to make sure that the funding is fully funded. Of course, special education is not being resourced. Our special education students tend to be the main students that are getting pushed into the prison pipeline. So I am definitely gonna be loud and proud up there to make sure that that occurs, because we can't waver there. But Seattle Public Schools is also advocating to our state legislators right now, because the issue is that there was a tweak in the formula - that Seattle Public Schools is not getting as much money that it needs, but we also want to make sure our teachers are getting livable wages. And so it's coming to a point that if something's not addressed and more funding doesn't come into the education system, then maybe the public education here at Seattle Public Schools may falter. They're not sure what to do, teachers may go onto a strike. So we will have to figure it out, and we're gonna have to figure it out without taking away our children's basic needs - we should not be taking healthcare out of our schools, we should not be taking our social workers and mental health counselors away from our students. We have to do all the things, and we just have to figure it out and get creative. There are some great leaders there around education, but I'm a fierce advocate as well, and I don't think we should leave any student behind, especially those who are receiving special education services. Thank you. [00:52:34] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. Chipalo? [00:52:35] Chipalo Street: So currently there's a funding cap on how much Seattle Public Schools gets reimbursed for special education funding, and if we were to remove that, Seattle Public Schools would get another $100 million that it would be able to put towards that. That is just a start. We - McCleary got us closer to funding education, but we do not fully fund it, and this becomes a revenue issue. Washington State has the most regressive tax code in the whole country, despite how progressive and liberal that we claim we are. We need to make sure that every corporation and person pays their fair share - so that looks like closing corporate tax loopholes, making sure that we keep our capital gains tax, which is - the revenue from that is used to fund early education, which is a necessary part of the education system - and then also implementing a wealth tax. Personally, I would prefer an income tax because an income tax is - you can withhold that. It's been tried before, we know how to implement that - however, there are constitutional issues with that. So in lieu of an income tax, we should be able to try a billionaire tax. And the thing that gives me hope is while things get stymied on the federal level, we've seen localities and states try out new things, and so maybe this is something that we can pilot here in the state, and at the end of the day, a billionaire tax and an income tax aren't mutually exclusive. We can still work towards an income tax, even if we have a billionaire tax. [00:53:58] Emijah Smith: May I follow-up? [00:53:59] Crystal Fincher: Yep. You each can have 30 seconds. [00:54:02] Emijah Smith: Thank you. What I want to share is that our community - I agree - Washington has the worst tax setup and structure. And we have been, in Washington State, been trying to bring forth initiatives multiple times to the state to address this issue so that we can make our wealth more equitable. And our community members and residents and citizens have been voting it down. So I'm thinking with this inflation, with the impact of COVID - but now it could be a really great time that more of our citizens and our residents will see that this is really necessary and will vote in their best interest instead of voting it away. Thank you. As well as our legislators making a move in our best interest. [00:54:43] Crystal Fincher: Chipalo? [00:54:45] Chipalo Street: I'm good. [00:54:46] Crystal Fincher: Thank you very much. Next question. What is your connection to unincorporated Skyway? If elected, how will you support the development and investment in this neighborhood? Starting with Chipalo. [00:55:00] Chipalo Street: So if I was to be elected for this State Rep position, I would basically be one of three elected representatives for Skyway. So Skyway is unincorporated - that means it does not have a city council person to whom they can go for local issues. That basically means that myself, Representative Santos, Senator Saldaña and Councilman Zahilay would be the elected representatives for that area. So I would love to work with them in partnership to understand what development needs they would like to see. It was great to see that we went through a community budgeting process where folks were able to actually vote on how money was spent. And so supporting community involvement in how money is spent, making sure that we can advocate to get money set aside for Skyway because we know that it is not going to come through the City of Seattle, it's not going to come through the City of Renton. Those would be the ways that I would partner with the community to make sure that we develop it in a way that the community members see fit. [00:56:00] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. [00:56:01] Emijah Smith: Thank you. I love that question - yeah. So I'm connected with Skyway for the simple fact that I shop at Grocery Outlet, I get my taxes done over there, I patron the restaurants over there. My mom has recently moved, but had lived there for about 15 years - family's there, people use the post office there, banking there, utilizing the library there - Skyway is my community. And so that's my relationship. Second part to that question is - again, part of being Chief of Staff with King County Equity Now and just having relationships in that community - making sure that we got money from the state level to support Petah Village - early learning development, and also just the new outside - door - preschool, right? There's leadership there, there's expertise there, there's churches there, there's a nail shop - there's all the things that are near and dear to my heart, to be honest. That community is mine - not mine, but it's shared. I was on the Community Investment Budget Committee for King County's participatory budgeting to make sure that money was stored in a way that was definitely led by community members and getting the input from community members to see how they want to move that and looking to make sure that King County does it again in the future. So that was $10 million. We had a celebration about a few weeks ago, naming the projects that were funded. So yeah, this is near and dear to my heart - has been neglected, Skyway has been ignored. I'm thankful to King County Councilmember Girmay Zahilay, another sole endorser, for the leadership that he's had there, as well as Senator Saldaña, KHT - Kirsten Harris - I gotta stop, but all the legislators who have been pouring into that district. And let me shout out to Cynthia Green Home there - Center. [00:57:45] Crystal Fincher: Thank you very much. Another audience question. Will you use your position at elected office to uplift more progressive voices in the office? And that question goes to Emijah. [00:58:01] Emijah Smith: Will you repeat that please? [00:58:03] Crystal Fincher: Will you use your position in elected office to uplift more voices into office, and how will you do that? [00:58:09] Emijah Smith: Yes, most definitely. I see this opportunity as being a bridge builder, right? If I'm in Olympia, you'll have a space in Olympia. The work that I've done over the years has definitely been providing workshops, not only in my professional capacity but in my personal capacity, to make sure that our everyday people understand how a bill becomes a law, right? Also the nuances - how to effectively communicate with your legislators - how do I go into those spaces and really center racial justice, knowing that I am a descendant of stolen ones in this country? I can't go into those spaces and just talk A, B. I have to go in there and really give them the nuances, the impact of what it means to be a Black mother in this community and navigating these systems. So I share that expertise and I share that knowledge with others, as well as being a pTSA president - always constantly talking to families about how they can strengthen their partnerships with their teachers, strengthen their partnerships with their principals. That's just the natural work that I do. So in order to be successful in this role, I need the community to come along with me. I need y'all to be the wind behind my back and be in locked arms. That space is our space. That's my plan - if I'm there, they comin'. [00:59:18] Crystal Fincher: Thank you very much. [00:59:19] Emijah Smith: Thank you. [00:59:19] Crystal Fincher: Chipalo? [00:59:21] Chipalo Street: For sure. Building a pipeline of people to come after is something that I've always done in everything that I've done. So for example, when I got to Brown, I noticed that the pre-med students had a great support group to help other students of color get through pre-med, but we did not have that in the engineering. So I restarted our chapter of the National Society of Black Engineers so that we had a community to not only get us through, but also pull in the next class of freshmen and sophomores to get them through. I've continued to do that in Seattle. I serve on the board of a program called Institute for a Democratic Future where the goal is to increase the Democratic Party across the state. I loved that program when I went through it, but one of the reasons I joined the board was to make sure that we had more equity in the fellows and the board members. And in my six years, we have dramatically changed what the class makeup looks like, both racially but also geographically, so that we have a stronger Democratic Party across the state so that we can win in every district. And then on the board itself, we have drastically increased the number of people of color and women of color on the board. And we actually now have our first woman of color who is the Board Chair. So this is something that I've been doing in all aspects of my life - even at Microsoft, equity was a huge thing for me. I required that we interview a person of color or underrepresented minority for every opening on the team that I led, and we ended with a team of 40% people of color or underrepresented minorities. So yes, I would continue to do that in Olympia. [01:00:55] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. [01:00:55] Emijah Smith: Follow up, please. [01:00:57] Crystal Fincher: You can have 30 seconds - yes. [01:00:58] Emijah Smith: Yes - I also wanted to just include that - in my organizing and advocacy work, it's definitely bringing the youth along. My children have been in Olympia with me since they were in preschool - up there advocating for better school lunches - really understanding that process and understanding that they too, at one point, will be there in a leadership role. So I wanted to also include - it's not just - families include the children and includes the elders in that space. Thank you. [01:01:25] Crystal Fincher: Thank you. Next question. What is the most important climate legislation that should be passed by Washington in the legislature? And what climate organizations will you partner with to make that happen? Starting with Chipalo. [01:01:43] Chipalo Street: So I am glad that we have passed cap and trade. I think the next hurdle there is to implement cap and trade, especially the equity measures around the money that is brought in through the tax on carbon. So making sure that we implement that holistically - and groups that I'd work with are folks like Washington Conservation Voters, Sierra Club, the Environmental Climate Caucus - those are all groups that understand what's going on and can provide guidance and have been working to move this legislation through Olympia for multiple years. I'm also glad to see that the HEAL Act passed - and one of the things I loved about the HEAL Act is that it specifically called out that we need to gather data. As a scientist, I have a background in using data to address problems and for too long we've just sort of waved o

Should the top elections official in Washington state officially be a nonpartisan? That's one difference between the top two finalists running for Washington Secretary of State. Nonpartisan challenger Julie Anderson wants to make the job independent from political party affiliations. Her opponent, Democratic incumbent Steve Hobbs says it's an unnecessary change. County auditors and sheriffs associations are also chewing over party labels and what those labels convey about the leanings of their offices.

Pierce County Auditor Julie Anderson joins the Citizen Tacoma podcast to talk about her run to be Washington Secretary of State. We discuss election administration, the challenges of election disinformation, ranked choice voting, and the other duties of the office. Give it a listen! Links Elect Julie Anderson Channel 253 membership

GUEST: Julie Anderson, candidate for WA Secretary of State // GEE AND URSULA AGREE, TO DISAGREE // WE HEAR YOU! and WORDS TO LIVE BYSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This episode is sponsored by EveryPlate. Enjoy meals starting at $1.49 a plate using code MLM149 at checkout! Happy October! All month long we will be sharing MLM Horror stories, from creepy cults to literal murder. Join us every Sunday with bonus episodes on Wednesday! *Trigger Warning : This episode deals with mental health, covert abuse and thoughts of suicide. Please use discretion when listening.* As a GenX content creator, Julie Anderson tells it like it is. Yet somehow she spent the better part of 5 years neck deep in 2 different commercial cults, the shampoo we love to hate and a business coaching scam that turned her into a person she didn't even recognize. Julie missed almost all of the red flags, until some honest conversations lead to her watching the golden shine of her flashy business mentor flake away to reveal his true deceptive intentions. Show Notes Julie on TikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@julieanderson426?lang=en Julie on IG - https://www.instagram.com/_julieanderson426/ *TW Please use discretion when watching* Play to Win S1E1 - https://www.facebook.com/rayhigdonpage/videos/883545428687674/ Freedom of Mind - https://amzn.to/3SoEh3X Combating Mind Control -https://amzn.to/3fwSywD Cultish by Amanda Montell - https://amzn.to/3Q7owx9 Dr. Steven Hassan's BITE Model - https://freedomofmind.com/cult-mind-control/bite-model/ Ponzinomics by Robert L. FitzPatrick - https://amzn.to/3q16oJb How can you help? Report false income and health claims here: https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/ Or go to: https://www.truthinadvertising.org You can also report to your state Attorney General's office! https://www.naag.org/find-my-ag/ Not in the U.S.? Go here: https://www.ftc.gov/policy/international/competition-consumer-protection-authorities-worldwide Support the Podcast! Join the Patreon! - https://www.patreon.com/robertablevins Buy me a Taco and leave a note!

On this Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Hacks & Wonks' very own Production Coordinator, Bryce Cannatelli!  The show starts with some new polling from Crosscut/Elway looking at November's upcoming general election. Current Senator Patty Murray is maintaining a fair lead against challenger Tiffany Smiley, who released a new ad this week that sees her pushing a “Seattle is Dying” narrative, filmed in front of the closed Starbucks along E Olive Way.  In police news, mayor Bruce Harrell has chosen his SPD Chief, and it's the same interim chief we've had for a while: Adrian Diaz. Diaz represents a status-quo pick from Harrell, and the decision seems to promise more of the same emphasis on police hiring and department budgets that we've been seeing from the administration.  The upcoming Seattle Police Officers Guild (SPOG) contract negotiation is a real test for Harrell and Diaz's commitments to police reform and accountability. People Power Washington put out recommendations for what they would like to see in the contract, including numerous oversight and discipline requirements already present in the Seattle Police Management Association (SPMA) contract. We'll be paying close attention to the final contract to see which reform measures the Harrell administration will push for.  Next Tuesday, September 27th, Mayor Harrell will announce his budget proposal for the city, and we all have a chance to have our voices heard! From September 28 to November 22nd, the public can provide feedback on the budget. You can submit your comments on the budget to the City Council via their email, Council@Seattle.gov, and public comment will be accepted at all meetings of the Council's Budget Committee.  In other interesting police-related decisions from Mayor Harrell, Notes from the Emerald City reports that, during an August 17th Community Police Commission meeting, the mayor spoke of working to get officers back into schools, without mentioning the potential to worsen the school to prison pipeline or risk the health and safety of students. The Mayor is also vouching for a parks budget that would pay for 26 additional rangers in the city's parks. Seattle's Solidarity Budget coalition is criticizing this move as paying for “soft-cops” to enforce harmful policies on homeless and marginalized people using the parks.  In some positive news this week, we look at the Green New Deal Proposals from Mayor Harrell, which promise to take some necessary steps to both lessen emissions from city buildings and prepare for the consequences of climate change through the creation of resilience hubs.  We also have some exciting, and much needed, financial relief programs for immigrants in the county. The Department of Community and Human Services (DCHS) announced the launch of two new programs: one that will help immigrants pay fees associated with applying for legal status, and another that will provide financial assistance to immigrants disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic but are ineligible for federal assistance because of their immigration status. Please look at the links below for more information, and share this information as much as you can to get the word out.  Finally, a reminder that Crystal will be moderating a debate between 37th LD State Representative Pos. 2 candidates Emijah Smith and Chipalo Street on October 4th at the Rainier Arts Center at 7:00pm. See the links below for information on how to RSVP and how to ask questions ahead of the show.  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, Bryce Cannatelli, at @inascenttweets. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com. Resources “Poll Watch: Elway finds solid lead for Murray; Steve Hobbs barely ahead of Julie Anderson” by Andrew Villeneuve from The Cascadia Advocate:  https://www.nwprogressive.org/weblog/2022/09/poll-watch-elway-finds-solid-lead-for-murray-steve-hobbs-barely-ahead-of-julie-anderson.html    “‘So much crime that you can't even get a cup of coffee from the hometown shop on Capitol Hill' — Republican Senate candidate takes on Murray over E Olive Way Starbucks closure” by jseattle from Capital Hill Seattle Blog:  https://www.capitolhillseattle.com/2022/09/so-much-crime-that-you-cant-even-get-a-cup-of-coffee-from-the-hometown-shop-on-capitol-hill-republican-senate-candidate-takes-on-murray-over-e-olive-way-starbucks-closure/  “New SPD Chief, Same as the Old Chief” by Will Casey from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/cops/2022/09/20/78504249/new-spd-chief-same-as-the-old-chief   “Harrell Picks Diaz for Police Chief” by Erica C. Barnett from Publicola: https://publicola.com/2022/09/21/harrell-picks-diaz-for-police-chief-as-expected-council-park-district-alternative-would-keep-park-rangers-raise-tax/  People Power Washington's 2022 Seattle Police Officers Guild Contract Recommendations: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RIpYL98qo2mEeB5yAZN9Y53sbm3i2Jomv0sVrj10tWY/view   “City of Seattle's Fall Budget Cycle Is Nearly Upon Us: Your Participation Is Needed!” by Vee Hua from the South Seattle Emerald:  https://southseattleemerald.com/2022/09/19/news-gleams-det-cookie-chess-park-reopening-council-passes-6-5m-for-seattle-green-new-deal/#City-of-Seattles-Fall-Budget-Cycle-Is-Nearly-Upon-Us    “Mayor Asks for CPC's Assistance in Bringing Cops Back into Seattle Schools”  by Amy Sundberg from Notes from The Emerald City”:  https://www.getrevue.co/profile/amysundberg/issues/mayor-asks-for-cpc-s-assistance-in-bringing-cops-back-into-seattle-schools-1359958  Seattle Community Police Commission (CPC) August 17, 2022 Meeting:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5D-JtHPKuQQ   “Seattle Solidarity Budget coalition opposes funds for what it calls 'soft cops'” by Amy Radil from KUOW:  https://kuow.org/stories/seattle-solidarity-budget-coalition-opposes-funds-for-what-it-calls-soft-cops  “Det. Cookie Chess Park Reopening, Council Passes $6.5M for Seattle Green New Deal” by Vee Hua from The South Seattle Emerald: https://southseattleemerald.com/2022/09/19/news-gleams-det-cookie-chess-park-reopening-council-passes-6-5m-for-seattle-green-new-deal/  “King County launches new programs to support immigrants” from Northwest Asian Weekly:  http://nwasianweekly.com/2022/09/king-county-launches-new-programs-to-support-immigrants/     Call for support: 1-844-724-3737 (Monday to Friday from 9 a.m.–6 p.m.) Contact Aimee Zhu at 206-393-2110 or aimeez@cisc-seattle.org  “$340M WA immigrant relief fund plagued by monthslong delays” by Melissa Santos from Crosscut:  https://crosscut.com/politics/2022/03/340m-wa-immigrant-relief-fund-plagued-monthslong-delays  “Delayed immigrant relief fund now accepting applications” by Melissa Santos from Axios:  https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2022/09/20/delayed-immigrant-relief-applications-washington  Apply through: immigrantreliefwa.org.  The application portal went live Monday and will remain open through Nov. 14. People will be notified as soon as December whether their application was accepted. Checks or pre-paid cards are expected to be mailed by January 2023.  37th LD State Rep. Pos. 2 Debate - Tuesday, October 4th at the Rainier Arts Center: officialhacksandwonks.com/blog/37th-ld-debate-state-representative-october-4-2022  RSVP here: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/south-seattle-emerald-2022-electoral-debate-tickets-412293840977   Submit audience questions before the show here: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdQlF7kRixWh_GnFInZ7UxDdKXK59LONGKAsQ1WBXgm3lysRA/viewform 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 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. Talk about talking to people who do the work - today, we are welcoming for the first time our co-host: my colleague, Bryce Cannatelli, who is the Production Coordinator for the show also. Welcome Bryce. [00:01:00] Bryce Cannatelli: Hey, Crystal - thanks for having me. [00:01:02] Crystal Fincher: Excited for you to be on - you are in the trenches with me every day in the work that we do - our day jobs - this podcast is like the side hustle. But you are brilliant and intelligent and always helpful and insightful and savvy and wise, so I'm excited to have you on the show today. [00:01:27] Bryce Cannatelli: Oh, thank you so much. That's very kind of you. [00:01:31] Crystal Fincher: Okay, so we should start off talking about - hey, some new polling dropped. We are in the midst of a general election with a lot of races on the ballot, including a senatorial race at the top of the ballot. And so what did these poll findings conclude? [00:01:52] Bryce Cannatelli: Yeah, so this new Crosscut/Elway poll, that was published yesterday, was a statewide poll and confirmed one of the things that we took away from the primary election earlier this year, which is that the red wave that was much talked about is not happening the way that a lot of people anticipated. Looking at the statewide races from this poll, we see that US Senator Patty Murray is still leading against Tiffany Smiley 50% to 37% with 12% undecided, which is a comfortable lead for Murray. And maybe more interesting from the polling - looking at the Secretary of State's race between Steve Hobbs, who was appointed to the position last year, and independent challenger Julie Anderson, where Hobbs received 31% in the poll, Anderson got 29%, and 40% of the voters were Undecided. And maybe even more surprising than that was Hobbs only getting 42% in his home county of Snohomish County, which shows that there is definitely a pathway for Julie Anderson here to become an independent Secretary of State, which would be a first for Washington in a very long time. [00:03:04] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it would be. And the Cascadia Advocate, which is a publication of the Northwest Progressive Institute, had a nice analysis and breakdown of this. I think this is consistent with what we have seen with prior polling for Patty Murray and Tiffany Smiley - it looks like Murray has a comfortable lead. Smiley is definitely trying to throw out all the stops - we've seen Smiley go hard about her being pro-life in the primary, try and scrub reference to that and revise her messaging in the general - that doesn't quite seem to be landing. Recently shot a "Seattle Is Dying" style - and that's a reference to previous hyperbolic documentary-style programs that have largely mischaracterized the state of homelessness and public safety in Seattle, conflated different reasons and root causes. And is really just viewed comically by people in Seattle, but unfortunately often taken seriously by people outside of Seattle - both in our suburbs here in the state and nationally. And so it's a narrative that doesn't land inside the City, but we'll see if maybe they think they can make some inroads using that kind of tactic. Capitol Hill Seattle had some coverage of that earlier this week, but I was not surprised to see anything about that. It looks like the Secretary of State's race is a race. It does look like it is a competitive race. I know that there are some people who - Hey, this thing is done. We will see. And, it may turn out not being as close as current polling reflects. Obviously we are sitting here in late September - most of the communication that campaigns are going to do is yet to come. And so there's still some defining of the candidates - their name IDs aren't very high statewide for either of them. So that may change some minds. There's a chunk of undecided people who still have to get familiar with them and get to know who they are. So it's an interesting dynamic because this is a position that has been held by Republicans for a long time. With Steve Hobbs' appointment, he's the first Democrat to be in that position in several years, but being challenged by an independent. And so - in campaigns, who you are aligned with can also influence how much money and resources you have access to. Steve Hobbs, you would think, is going to be supported by some Democratic organizations and independent expenditures by Democrats. It remains to be seen whether Julie Anderson gets that kind of independent support and other organizations communicating on her behalf to see what that race is gonna be like. So stay tuned, but that certainly looks to be a competitive race. Certainly more competitive than what currently looks to be the case for Patty Murray or Tiffany Smiley. But that is not to say that that should be taken for granted certainly. Voting is important, getting involved is important. And so we will continue to follow what the polls continue to say and what the campaigns continue to do. Also this week, we had a big announcement from Mayor Bruce Harrell, mayor of Seattle. Bruce Harrell naming that he selected his interim police chief as his permanent police chief. So basically person's doing the same job and their title changed, but it looks like we are going to be in for more of what we have gotten - very much a status quo pick. How did you see this, Bryce? [00:07:04] Bryce Cannatelli: Yeah, I definitely see it as a status quo pick as well. It seemed like there was a preference for Diaz early in Harrell's administration, but Harrell was required to do a national search for a new police chief. The three finalists that were highlighted were Adrian Diaz, SPD Assistant Chief Eric Greening - two people who have been working with and in the SPD for a long time. And the third pick was the assistant police chief out of Tucson, Kevin Hall. And the pick for Diaz really does highlight this commitment to the status quo, to the same strategies that we've been having when it comes to public safety and the role of police in public safety. Now, all three finalists did at least speak to some elements of reform, to some elements of alternative response, or evaluating the role of police in public safety and how to improve the relationships between police and communities. But it was really Kevin Hall out of Tucson who spoke the most in that regard, who talked about programs that he had been a part of in Tucson to try to circumvent people going directly to jail, who pointed out issues with the intense hiring focus strategy that the Harrell administration has been leading - pointing out that there is a nationwide shortage, or at least a long time, hiring troubles for police. And that in Seattle, specifically, we have bottlenecks within our police training system that make it such that hiring a police officer today means they won't be on the street for about a year. It is not a quick fix. And the Harrell administration ultimately choosing Diaz runs a little counter to Harrell's own talks about really rolling up his sleeves and figuring out how to change the culture of the SPD, how to add a little accountability - seems like we're really just strapping in for more years of the same approaches we've been seeing, which as you pointed out, the "Seattle is Dying" narratives that people like Tiffany Smiley like to use to try to rile people up outside of the City are overblown, but public safety is still an issue here. And our police-focused, or police hiring focus, strategies just have not been helping that. [00:09:40] Crystal Fincher: This is an interesting choice. As you just said, public safety is a concern. Rising violence is a concern. Any violence is a concern. And there is a problem within the City. I don't think anyone is disputing that some types and categories of crime have decreased, others have increased. But I think we all have an interest in making sure that fewer people are victimized, that we reduce violence. And there's just about no one who is satisfied with the direction things have been going in support of that effort. People may have different reasons for being dissatisfied, but pretty much there's universal agreement that the status quo has not been working. So this being a status quo pick is a curious choice in that regard. And to your point, it does seem to run counter to some things that Bruce Harrell has said, and even just lip service to how he views accountability. They talked about - Hey, they're gonna prioritize addressing violent crimes, the staffing shortage, and improving the culture within the department. Well really - they're gonna focus on addressing violent crimes? This is the same person who decided to stop investigating sexual assaults of adults - without telling many people evidently - but what is worth investigating if that isn't worth investigating? That actually often comes with more evidence unfortunately than a lot of other types of crimes. And to just wholesale make a decision that you're stopping doing that - seemingly just to deploy more people on patrol - doesn't seem in line with this. Bruce is this police chief's boss and if he is holding people accountable for their decisions, what was the outcome of that? Was it just - oh, please don't do that again. Why didn't I know about this? It seems like there is an endorsement of the things that have happened with this decision, and I question a number of the things that have happened and whether they are consistent with this goal of reducing violent crime and how we're measuring that. And so it'll be interesting to see how this plays out, but just - I don't know that - it seemed like there was a big effort in the press conference to sell this as - Hey, we're turning a corner, this is a new day. We're gonna start focusing on these things. And really it's the same people focusing on the same things, making the same kinds of decisions. And I just - in terms of reactions, whether someone is progressive or conservative, it just seemed to have fallen flat. Whether that squarely lands on the head of Diaz or Harrell is - can be questioned, but certainly from an outside perspective and just at a glance, it's - okay, we're continuing to do the same thing, and it seems like there's universal agreement - same thing isn't working. So would be very eager to see some differences in approach and in decision making to give people confidence that there is going to be something done to address violence. And also to your point, something done to address it today, this year - because hiring isn't that. Even with the money that has already been approved, and additional money that has been approved, to hire, to retain people, to search across the country - despite officers continuing to say that they don't think that's the most effective use of money and won't be effective in keeping people on the force. That can't result in any additional officers until next year at the earliest, because it does take a long time for someone to go through the hiring pipeline, then to go through the training pipeline, then to land on the street. So if that's what you're counting on, that won't start to make a difference until next year. And we have a public safety problem right now. We have people getting victimized right now. And so would love to see the plan for what are you going to do right now. With that - influential in that, and also talking about - just still in the realm of public safety, especially accountability. A lot of that goes beyond the chief or the mayor, and is largely dictated by the Seattle Police Officers Guild, or SPOG, contract. And what did we see happen this week? [00:14:26] Bryce Cannatelli: This week we saw an open letter of contract negotiations from People Power Washington, talking about what they would like to see happen with this year's SPOG contract. And this SPOG contract really represents a major test for what we've been talking about for how serious Harrell and Diaz are about adjusting the culture, introducing accountability, improving relationships between police officers and the City. What People Power Washington are asking for here is establishing greater methods of accountability, of making sure that the disciplinary review process mirrors what happens in the Seattle Police Management Association contract, making sure that there are methods of actually holding police officers accountable for problematic and illegal behavior. They want to see restrictions so that SPOG doesn't allow in-uniform off-duty work for police officers, which is definitely a problematic occurrence. They want to see that any contract with SPOG provides alternatives for, or provides alternative community-based emergency response programs. And a lot of other requests that are, quite honestly, things that we've seen in other cities in other areas really make a difference in community public safety. And especially programs like alternative community response - when City leaders are really hounding us again and again on the lack of police - you brought up sexual assault cases not being investigated. It is a very reasonable request. And it seems like in everybody's best interest to try to figure out some of these alternative community response programs. [00:16:26] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, definitely that. And these are - I think it's worth going through these things, 'cause a lot of times people are just like - okay, we need reforms, but what are those reforms? And yes, this contract is important but what are the things that we need to make sure that are in here? Sometimes it's not the most accessible information. And so I do think it's important to talk about - and not just things that have made a difference in other jurisdictions, but with the baseline set by the Seattle Police Management Association contract from earlier this year, making sure those types of provisions are included in here. So I'm gonna go through some of these things, especially what was in the Seattle Police Management Association contract - at minimum, the things that were included in there that should be included in the Seattle Police Officers Guild contract - providing subpoena power to both the Office of Police Accountability and the Office of the Inspector General so that they can get all information relevant to their investigations and to complaints to make their findings. Establishing the standard of proof as a preponderance of evidence for all disciplinary action, requiring OPA records to be retained for the length of employment plus six years regardless about whether the findings are sustained or unsustained - because we've had problems with records disappearing, officers unfortunately repeating that conduct, but no paper trail to be able to better root out who is creating problems. Defining dishonesty as providing false information which the officer knows to be false or providing incomplete responses to specific questions regarding material facts. Right now that definition is not that robust - pretty common sense, but it's not. Including layoff language in the management rights section of the CBA - allowing the city to decide the necessity for layoff without having to bargain. Requiring public disciplinary review meetings, phase out additional pay for the use of body worn cameras, establish a disciplinary review process mirroring the one defined in the recent 2022 SPMA contract. Allow for the 180-day clock to be stopped whenever a criminal investigation is conducted, regardless of where the alleged criminal activity occurred or what agency is conducting the investigation. And place the burden to establish any reason to deny an extension of the clock based on a good use, a good cause on the union. Empower the OPA to make assignments based on the skills and abilities of the investigator, rather than whether they are a civilian or a uniformed sergeant. And allow the OPA to communicate with the criminal investigators and prosecutors from any agency about the status and progress of a criminal investigation. These are really common sense things, things that are not out of bounds. These are already in a Seattle Police Management Association contract. They should absolutely at minimum be included in the SPOG contract. Also, wanting to remove barriers to civilianize certain public safety functions and provide alternative community-based response as you talked about - it shouldn't include any guaranteed minimum of staffing that might impede efforts to civilianize or limit the possibilities for reenvisioning public safety in Seattle. The mayor, the police chief, the council - all of our leaders in Seattle - have made commitments in this direction and tying their hands preemptively limits what they're able to do and what voters voted for and expect. Requiring SPOG - the contract should not allow in-uniform off-duty work for police officers, nor should it require the City to pay any part of the Seattle Police Officer Guild President's salary. It's pretty unprecedented. And in a time where we're heading into budget shortfalls, where other departments in the City are also dealing with this, that's not an arrangement that we see with other unions within the City. So let's bring that in line with other unions. And broader changes to the accountability system that'll close loopholes and remove barriers to accountability. Specifically, discipline should not be required to be foreclosed within a certain timeline - in other words, 180 days. The OPA should have the ability to refer criminal investigations to the agency of their choice and be able to oversee those criminal investigations. Requirements should be instituted for the OPA to retain records permanently for investigations related to excessive force, dishonesty, criminal conduct, or where underlying allegations were concealed. Limitations should be removed as to how many of OPA investigators must be sworn versus civilian, so we can progress towards civilianizing OPA and stop the practice of officers investigating other officers which is an inherent conflict of interest. There shouldn't be any language barring the ability of complainants to appeal disciplinary decisions, a process that should be developed by the CPC as a top priority. And there should also be no language preventing the transparency of and ability to adapt standards of discipline so the public can evaluate these standards and participate in changing them as expectations around public safety change. I wanted to go through those just because it is important for us all to know what we should be looking for in this contract, what is at stake, and what desperately needs to change. And so I appreciate People Power Washington engaging in this, so many community organizations engaging in this, and look forward to seeing what comes of this and what the mayor is comfortable with in this contract, as well as the city council. Other big upcoming element - and this is all wonky stuff, but it's wonky stuff that material impacts the day-to-day lives of people in these cities. So the budget process for the City of Seattle is coming up and that is going to determine a lot of what is - everything in the City - every service that the City provides, every function that the City has - is addressed in the upcoming budget. I just want to review the timeline real quick, so people know what to be on the lookout for. Coming up next week, the mayor's going to deliver the proposed budget on September 27th. The mayor's gonna outline his priorities, what anticipated spending levels on different things are. The council is going to review the mayor's proposal starting on September 28th throughout October. The public will be able to provide feedback on the budget between September 28th and November 22nd. Councilmembers will propose changes in October, the Budget Chair presents a balancing package - basically a response to the mayor's proposed budget on November 8th. Councilmembers may propose further revisions up to November 21st, and the council will vote to adopt the budget on November 22nd. So the months of October, really in the month of October, there's going to be a lot of work being done, and that's the time to engage with your councilmembers, to engage with the mayor, make your voice heard on what this budget is going to bring. And there are a couple elements that kind of preview a couple things that are on deck. One being - looks like the mayor is going to ask for the Community Police Commission, or CPC's, assistance in bringing cops back into Seattle schools. What is happening here? [00:24:26] Bryce Cannatelli: Yeah, so this was pretty interesting. During an August 17th meeting between Mayor Harrell and the Community Police Commission, Community Police commissioner and Officer Mark Mullens pointed to defunding as overstepping. And removing resource officers from schools - people don't have the visual, but I put quotes over defunding - and Mayor Harrell did respond, saying that resource officers and police officers needed to earn the trust and right to get back into schools. But also said that he's working with Superintendent Dr. Jones and Chairman Brandon Hersey to rebuild these relationships and is working to get officers back into school - suggesting that the Community Police Commission could be an invaluable asset in this space. It's interesting because in all of this, no mention was made about how this would affect - or could affect - students detrimentally, how it could contribute to the school-to-prison pipeline, how it would affect students' health and safety, which again just calls into question or at least runs counter to these spoken commitments to trying to find a more up-to-date view of police's role in public safety. In the same meeting, he also suggested that the CPC help recruit new officers for the Seattle Police Department. [00:25:57] Crystal Fincher: I don't think that's in their given roles, is it? [00:25:59] Bryce Cannatelli: Yeah, no, not at all. It's definitely not. So it was a really interesting meeting and it seems to go against what a lot of communities are concerned about when it comes to the role of police officers in school, especially how it affects students of color and other marginalized students. [00:26:19] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I'm curious to see what the Seattle Public School Superintendent has to say about this, what Seattle Public School's board members have to say about this. And what their intentions would be and what they find acceptable in this area - is this something that they are looking to incorporate, or is this something that the mayor is suggesting that does not align with what they want? I'm very curious to hear what their takes would be on that. Also, another thing that was - that will be - that Bruce Harrell previously announced will be something that he's looking to include in the budget is a new park ranger, basically expanded park ranger hiring, and maybe some expanded duties. What are the details there? [00:27:04] Bryce Cannatelli: Yeah. Harrell proposed to pay for 26 additional rangers in Seattle's parks. And during the announcement did stipulate some - tried to preemptively defend this by defining the differences between these park rangers and police - they're not supposed to be involved in sweeps. But this decision has still gotten a lot of pushback. The Solidarity Budget - the Seattle Solidarity Budget coalition is leading the effort here in criticizing this - calling the park rangers "soft cops" because park rangers can still issue trespass citations and can still end up funneling people into jail and into other areas of the criminal justice system, even if they're not armed, even if they don't fulfill the same exact roles as police officers. [00:28:16] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and so this is gonna be interesting to follow. Bruce Harrell is rolling this out, seemingly, as a public safety initiative, which immediately invited questions. Okay - what public safety role do these play and which talks, basically brings it into the "soft cop" conversation - they can issue citations, they can introduce people into the criminal legal system or reintroduce them into it. And so that being a concern - the council is looking at taking this up and potentially narrowing the scope of what they can do. The council looking at, as you said, preventing them from engaging with sweeps or anything like that. It'll be interesting to see where this lands, but again, make sure you make your voice heard. There was an article in KUOW this week that we will link discussing the Seattle Solidarity Budget coalition and what they have talked about and what they're also proposing. And they certainly are talking about - it would be more effective, according to evidence and data, to invest more in addressing core needs, things that are more closely tied to the root causes of crime to prevent it - instead of operating around the edges perhaps. So we will see where that lands and continue to follow that. We talk about Seattle a lot. We talk about Mayor Harrell a lot and certainly have some bones to pick with a number of things that are happening within the City. But one positive thing, I think, that was just announced by Mayor Harrell was the City unanimously passing a $6.5 million Green New Deal. Last week, the Seattle City Council unanimously passed legislation requested by Bruce Harrell, I believe, for setting up a Seattle Green New Deal Opportunity Fund. And this is something that Bruce Harrell talked about on the campaign trail, this is something that is desperately needed in Seattle and beyond. We have to address greenhouse gas emissions, we have to address pollution in all of its forms, and mitigating the effects on all of our communities, particularly those hit worst and the hardest, which are usually BIPOC, low-income communities that are dealing with the brunt of this. So what are the specifics of what's going to be happening, Bryce? [00:30:47] Bryce Cannatelli: Like you said, this is exciting and definitely points towards the City, both looking at how can we reduce emissions, but also how can we battle the impacts that climate change has on people who are really vulnerable. So looking at the breakdown, which we'll link in the show notes - the South Seattle Emerald did a really great breakdown of it. These funds are going to new resilience hubs to help during climate emergencies like extreme heat or other weather-related events like wildfire smoke and flooding. We're gonna see $1.78 million go to upgrading community facilities to foster resilience. Another, a little over a million dollars, for centers in the Duwamish valley to provide cooling, air filtration, other programming. And almost half a million for a citywide resilience hub strategy, focusing on communities that are impacted, as they say, first and worst by climate injustice. We're also going to see some upgrades to municipal buildings for electrification, cooling, heating, and air quality upgrades to Seattle's 650 owned buildings, including its 27 public libraries. We're gonna see over $2 million going to accelerating Seattle's transition of City-owned buildings off of fossil fuels by 2035. Providing heating, cooling, clean air to some library branches and over half a million for building electrification. We're also going to see, and this is pretty exciting as well, investments in fossil fuel free affordable housing - affordable housing for low income residents, which will give about $2 million to supporting affordable housing projects that are underway to be free of fossil fuels and avoid really inefficient and costly upgrades that we would have to do later just to make them more climate friendly and energy efficient. They're also funding a climate and community health indicator project, which hopes to get accurate local and reliable data for addressing climate change. Developing a carbon pollution and community health indicators to inform how we plan around climate change. Money to go to supporting community and public health partnerships to look at cumulative health impacts of climate change. Trying to acquire new transportation energy data to figure out where electrification needs to happen first. And there's also a hundred thousand dollars going to supporting community engagement to inform the climate element of the One Seattle Comprehensive Plan, which is hoping to develop Seattle's climate resilience and environmental justice goals over the next 20 years. This money is going in a lot of different directions - some of it proactive, some of it reactive - but it is really encouraging to see the City really taking this seriously and putting funds that came from the JumpStart program actually into making the City a place where people are safer and healthier. Especially if they're already in a part of a town or in a community that's especially vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. [00:34:25] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. So good work. Keep it up. Also wanted to make mention this week - King County is launching new programs to support immigrants, which is a big deal. There is now, which was just announced, this launch of two new programs that started earlier this month to provide financial support, including a King County immigration fee support program to help immigrants pay eligible fees associated with applying for legal status - including fees with US Citizenship and Immigration Services and Executive Office for immigrant review. And also immigrant applications costs vary from a couple hundred to thousands of dollars per applicant. So if you are living, working, going to school in King County, or currently detained in ICE facilities, but previously living, working, or going to school in King County - you are eligible for support. And that's up to $3,000 per individual and $6,000 per household, depending on the fees incurred or expected in 2022. So we will link that - in the system, oftentimes people are listening who may not be in that situation, but maybe you know folks who are. It's also common to know folks who are, but not know that they're in that situation - 'cause there is, often people are not excited to disclose that they may not have all of their papers in perfect order. So just the more people can do to spread this word throughout all of our communities in every area, in person and online - the more we can make sure people are connected to resources that are going to be helpful. So I was very encouraged to see that as well as there's another related piece of welcome news this week - in that some long overdue relief looks like it is finally going to get out. What is happening here? [00:36:23] Bryce Cannatelli: Washington's Legislature approved of $340 million in aid for undocumented immigrants last April and there have been a lot of delays on this program, this money not reaching its intended recipients. But this week we did get some good news. Applications are now open for a fund that are gonna provide financial aid to undocumented immigrants in the state. People who need the support can apply to receive a check or a prepaid debit card through the website immigrantreliefwa.org - we'll put that link in the show notes and it'll be on our Twitter as well. This application portal went live on Monday. It's gonna be open until November 14th. So just like the other story that we just talked about, this is gonna be really good to share as much as you can. The Department of Social and Health Services says that each eligible person will get a minimum - a minimum - of $1,000 with the total award to each person depending on the size of the applicant pool and other factors. If you qualify - you have to be over 18 years of age and you must be ineligible for unemployment benefits or federal stimulus payments due to immigration status. [00:37:44] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and this if we recall, back then was necessary because although there was a wide variety of relief made available to the majority of residents living here, there were some very notable carveouts for immigrants. And that - immigrants are part of our communities, they're working in jobs just along with the rest of us and in need of support. And so this was meant to fill the gap. Obviously would've been great to get the money out earlier as intended, but it is now available, so please spread the word. The online application is available currently in Spanish, English, Chinese, Korean, and Tagalog. Make sure you spread the word - support and help is available. And we are fairly sure that there are definitely a lot of people who need it, so making those connections is a very helpful thing. And as a reminder, I'm going to be moderating a 37th Legislative District candidate debate on Tuesday, October 4th, from 7:00 to 9:00 PM. Doors are gonna open at 6:30. This is an in-person event that will also be streamed online. It's gonna be at the Rainier Arts Center. So the programming starts at 7, doors open at 6:30. They are going to be checking vaccination cards, masking is required, they will also offer rapid testing for those who are not vaccinated. Again, all will be required to wear masks, but hope that you come down, make your voice heard. You can also submit questions. We'll put a link in the show notes that you can use to ask questions. You can also @ me on Twitter if you wanna do that, shoot me what you're thinking, we'll try and incorporate that in there. This is being put on by media partners, including Hacks & Wonks, KNKX, KVRU, and Real Change with support from King County Elections, the Seattle Foundation and League of Women Voters. So excited about that. Excited about hearing from both of those candidates. It's gonna be an important choice that residents of that district are going to make. So look forward to seeing you there. And with that, I think that is our show for today. Thank you so much for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, September 23rd, 2022. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler, assistant producer is Shannon Cheng, and our Production Coordinator is my co-host today - Bryce Cannatelli. [00:40:21] Bryce Cannatelli: Thank you so much again, Crystal. It's a lot of fun. [00:40:24] Crystal Fincher: And so thanks to Bryce for being our insightful cohost today. You can find Bryce on Twitter @inascenttweets, spelled I-N-A-S-C-E-N-T-T-W-E-E-T-S. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks, and you can find me on Twitter @finchfrii, as you do. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or anywhere you can get 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, please leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. You can also get a full text 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.  

On this Friday show, we present Part 2 of the Hacks & Wonks 2022 Post-Primary Election Recap which was live-streamed on August 9, 2022 with special guests EJ Juárez and Doug Trumm. In Part 2, the panel breaks down primary election results for State Legislature seats in the battleground district of the 47th LD and in Seattle-area Democrat vs Democrat races in the 36th, 37th, and 46th LDs, The historical importance of The Stranger endorsement in the progressive path out of the primary is discussed as well as Doug and EJ's thoughts on other races in the 42nd LD and for Secretary of State. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-hosts, EJ Juárez at @EliseoJJuarez and Doug Trumm at @dmtrumm. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources Hacks & Wonks 2022 Primary Election Recap Livestream | August 9th, 2022: https://www.officialhacksandwonks.com/august-2022-postprimary-recap   Transcript [00:00:00] Bryce Cannatelli: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Bryce from the Hacks & Wonks production team. 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. You're listening to part 2 of our 2022 Post-Primary Election Recap, with special guests EJ Juárez and Doug Trumm, that we live-streamed on August 9th, 2022. If you missed part 1, you can find it as the previous episode of your podcast feed, or you can find the audio and transcript for the full recap on our website, officialhacksandwonks.com. Thank you for listening! [00:00:59] Crystal Fincher: Another very interesting district is the 47th Legislative District, which is half of Kent, Covington, Maple Valley, parts of Auburn - again, a very purple district - one that sees two open seats - an incumbent remaining in Representative Debra Entenman, but an open Senate seat after Mona Das announced that she was leaving and an open House seat after Pat Sullivan retired. And so we had competitive Democratic and Republican primaries going on here with open seats, just a lot of questions about what is going to happen here in the 47th - very hard to predict. But we saw some really interesting results. Again, this is one of the districts that Republicans said was one of their top targets - definitely in the top two or three targets that they felt were there for pickups and turning these seats that were held by Republican [Democratic] incumbents and two of them now open seats into Republican pickups. And what we saw was in the one seat with Debra Entenman, she finished comfortably with 55% against a Republican candidate, Kyle Lyebyedyev. There was another Republican contesting in the race, but Debra made it through fairly comfortably. We had a Senate race with Satwinder Kaur and Claudia Kauffman as Democrats against Bill Boyce, the Republican. Bill Boyce, who is a City Councilmember in the City of Kent, a Republican, also a Black Republican that's running here is - has 45.58%. And then a very, very, very close race between Claudia Kauffman and Satwinder Kaur. Currently, Claudia Kauffman is leading with 27.23% over Satwinder with 27.02%. This is a race that is under a hundred votes separating the two and it looks like Claudia Kauffman is going to squeeze and squeak through here. This is a really interesting race. And again, you look at the combined percentage of the Democratic vote - they're above, they're like 54% there. That's a great result that we see on the Democratic side, but wow, what a really closely contested race. And then in the other seat, we saw two Democrats - Chris Stearns with 33.4% against Shukri Olow, another Democrat, who is making it through - both Democrats making it through the primary - Shukri with 19.6% against three Republicans. One of - again, a party pick for the Republicans - Carmen Goers raised $200,000 in the primary, spent the bulk of it. She actually finished in last place. This was another Black Republican here with two other Republican white male opponents who finished with 15.1% and 17.4%, respectively, with Ted Cooke and Barry Knowles. Very interesting result. I don't know that many people - I certainly did not call that there was gonna be a Democratic shutout in one of these seats in this purple district, or that the other results looked so strong in favor of the other ones. What do you see when you see this 47th Legislative District race, Doug? [00:04:37] Doug Trumm: Yeah. You can't get any bigger with them not even making it to the primary. So having two Democrats in that Position 2 seat - that is going to be an exciting race, but not for the Republicans. But we'll circle back to that, 'cause I do want to talk about that race more, but I suppose we should talk about the other races more a little bit too. Mona Das retiring - I think that certainly led to some nervousness that we're not gonna have the incumbent advantage and that didn't seem to be an issue with the result. And it does look like it'll be Claudia Kauffman, so again - an established name - but someone I think who seemed to do a good job, so someone I'm actually glad to see coming back. I'm not always thrilled when you get people who keep going back for many decades, but I think that one is an exception. But yeah, and going back to the 30th as well - on the Democratic side, I guess over all those years of not having that many Black - and apologies for my cat making all that noise - not having that many Black candidates, I guess assumption was they would do worse than the white candidates that people were putting forward, or just maybe wasn't even a thought. But it's pretty clear that those Black candidates are doing just as good as any of the white candidates, if not better, because we see these results in the 30th and in the 47th and all across really the metro area where we're seeing voters really resonating with these folks. If anything, it appears to be an asset. And yeah, it just clearly is a district that is slipping away from Republicans and they don't seem to be doing very much to fix that. And as you mentioned, Carmen Goers finishing fifth when she had the support of the party at, I think, all levels. And then additionally, she had The Seattle Times endorsement, which didn't appear to be worth the paper it was written on - which I don't know if that's true of every race, but in the 47th that's a really embarrassing finish for the Seattle Times. And as EJ alluded to - a Viking funeral for $200,000 worth of cash - that's gotta be one of the only times that's happened in Washington history - that a candidate has raised $200,000 in a primary and then finished fifth, at least at the state legislator level. [00:07:14] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. What did you see here, EJ? [00:07:19] EJ Juárez: I saw - I think one of the most exciting things for me is that this actually might be the first time where we have two Native people representing the same district in the House in Washington State. And I think that is incredible - the opportunity and the history making moment of those candidates' ascension if they are the victors in November. I really think that is the underreported takeaway of this cycle in that these are two candidates, although one has - both of them are previously elected in other offices - that's a big deal, right? On the other end of that spectrum, it is wildly confusing to me the uneven field game that has occurred in the 47th. We have some candidates who were deeply knocking on doors every weekend, huge volunteer turnout. And then we have some candidates who really focused on media and focused on really traditional electronic - I don't even know if that's the way to put it, "traditional electronic" - they weren't at the doors, they weren't making a ton of phone calls, and they were pretty open about it. So I think there's a lot of questions to be answered in terms of how people got through and the vote share. So when you're looking at Rep Position 2 with Shukri and Chris, Shukri outraised Chris and really produced not very many votes for that. And when you look at the per dollar spend on per vote, it doesn't really - the math doesn't quite work out the way you would expect. Now, a D-on-D race in that is going to be pretty - there will be fireworks, right? Because you have to make up a considerable amount of points and the clock is reset for both of those candidates. So I'm watching them really closely. I'm excited. I think they're both great candidates. I think they're both folks who, as they move towards the general, are going to start to distinguish themselves to voters. I think when you look at that Senate race, I cannot help but think if I was a Republican strategist and fundraiser, I would've wanted to pour a lot more money into that race supporting a Black Republican versus some of the white Republicans, which received much higher proportions of spend from caucus accounts and from PACs associated with Republicans. There's probably some obvious reasons for that on that side that don't need to go too much into depth on, but it is shocking that in a three-way race, the Republican still only musters 45%. [00:10:06] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think that's all valid. And I even think - actually in this district in the 47th, it has been an interesting one. This is actually - I live near the border of the 47th - the 47th and the 33rd District border. And in the 47th, actually, we've traditionally seen Black candidates, visibly non-Christian candidates - whether it's someone with a hijab or a turban - underperform compared to spend a number of times here. And so it's interesting to see these results come through. I don't know what role that played on the Republican side also, but that's just another dynamic in this race that has been interesting. I do think that this sets up - just for the candidates that are there, that are gonna be in the general - really interesting matchups and comparisons. And I do think that Democrats - all of the Democrats in these races - do need to be out on the doors, do need to work through the general. Certainly a favorable result in the primary, but another one where they can't rest at all and need to continue to push forward. But one where I think - this was an area where people were wondering - Hey, where's the public safety conversation gonna be? And are Republicans gonna be able to land some hits here and are people hyper-worried about inflation? I think, yet again in this district, I think people saw that the conversation on public safety on the ground is a lot more nuanced than it is in the media - I think is safe to say. So many times we hear the conversation between more cops and "Back the Blue" and - hey, we're - no candidates are actually running on this, FYI - but like "Defund Everything." There's not actually a candidate saying that right now, but the perception is out there - that that has been there. And people aren't there - even people who favor more police, who are not bothered by more police - are saying - but what we really need are behavioral health services, are substance use disorder, addiction treatment services, are housing for people. We have to address these root causes. If there's an issue with someone who is going through a crisis, police just don't have the tools to solve that. I think that's pretty universally acknowledged and not a controversial statement. And when polling goes beyond just some very basic questions and probes into those, we repeatedly see the public saying - yeah, of course we need those things. And so it was very interesting to see some of these attacks - whether it's in the 30th, or throughout the state, in the 47th - on those issues and they just fell flat. And even on the inflation issue, people are worried and people are absolutely squeezed, but looking at - okay, so what are you gonna do about it? And I think Democrats told a better story about - okay, here's the plan. This is what we plan to invest in and this is how we plan to help. I think working people felt that Democrats had a plan that was more tailored to their needs from Democrats. So just an interesting result that we saw there. We will pivot a bit to the Seattle races, which are different than all of these battleground races that we've been talking about. And these are in the City of Seattle - Democrat versus Democrat races. We saw a number of open seat races that have happened here. And so we can start with the 36th District, which had a pretty stark and conclusive result, I think, in the open seat race that was there, where there was a contested primary that had five Democratic candidates there - different shades of there, from more progressive to probably on the most moderate end with Waylan Robert. But we saw Julia Reed, who received The Seattle Times and The Stranger endorsement take 55% of the vote, followed by Jeff Manson who is making it through the primary with 13.5% of the vote. And then followed by Nicole Gomez, Waylon Robert, and Elizabeth Tyler Crone. Looks like that is a race that is Julia's for the taking, I think realistically, just looking there. And certainly benefited from both The Times and The Stranger endorsement. There's another race in the 37th in South Seattle where Chipalo Street got both The Stranger and The Times endorsement, but that was a much closer race where we saw Chipalo with 41% of the vote - 41.53% - and Emijah Smith making it through the primary with 35.37% of the vote - a much closer race. We saw in the 46th Legislative District - Darya Farivar make it through in first place, the progressive candidate in the race - she currently has 31.61% of the vote and Lelach Rave finishing in second, making it through the primary at 28.06% of the vote. And then we saw in the 34th Legislative District, in that open seat there, Emily Alvarado with 54% of the vote to Leah Griffin's 31.2%. I'll kick this off, as we discuss these Seattle races at-large. It's been talked about so many times before - how in Seattle, how consequential the Seattle Times and The Stranger endorsements are. On a previous post-primary recap, Michael Charles put it very succinctly - saying there are two political parties in Seattle - The Seattle Times and The Seattle Stranger. And actually went back and looked at the numbers - and for races in the City of Seattle, for legislative districts in Seattle, for candidates on the ballot, for the past decade - candidates endorsed by The Stranger have made it through to the primary a 100% of the time. It actually seems like, particularly for progressive candidates, the path requires going through The Stranger - requires that endorsement to make it on to the general. How consequential is that, and what do you think we saw overall in general in these races, Doug? [00:16:50] Doug Trumm: Yeah, I think that Stranger endorsement - it's really huge, particularly in a primary in Seattle - I think the 46th is where we really saw the test of that. In Seattle the Urbanist Elections Committee, which I'm a member of, is lucky enough to talk to most of the candidates. And when people skip - usually it's a sign that they're either running in that centrist lane, or they just got the race together so late that they didn't really have time or put it together enough to respond. But we agreed with The Stranger and The Seattle Times with Julia Reed - I think there's a unique case where there's just a candidate that was so - just polished - and any other candidates had some promise, but there just weren't really compelling case to say - but why not, Julia Reed. And I think that's a testament to running a really good race and being a good candidate. And hopefully everyone's right about that, 'cause I don't think you see all three of us agree very often. In the 46th, on the other hand, we did end up endorsing Melissa Taylor and really liked what she brought to the table in housing. But we were also - really thought that Darya Farivar was a fantastic candidate as well. And particularly around the issues of transportation - being Policy Director at Disability Rights Washington, which is a great partner of us and a great leader on all these climate and climate justice issues at the state level and the local level. So we were happy with both candidates and great to see Darya go through and being several points ahead of Lelach where - we didn't get a chance to talk to her. And I think she's more in the Sara Nelson lane of the party who endorsed her, if you will. How that race shakes out will have, I think, pretty big bearing on just what is possible on some issues like housing, where it seems like someone like Rave is staking out a very moderate position there and not really being upfront about - Hey, we need to do something about exclusionary zoning, we need to make our zoning more inclusive and be able to fit more people into parts of the city - where Northeast Seattle is so wealthy, so much opportunity, so many good schools and good parks and everything, and it's a part of the city that's pulled up the drawbridge a little bit. Maybe she will change her tune on that position a little bit, but I think - although Darya didn't talk about housing a lot, she's someone who on the questionnaire was pretty clear - she's on that same page around ending exclusionary zoning and promoting missing middle. It's an issue that we track really closely - polling shows that Washington voters are increasingly focused on that. And I think it's because people are smart and you get that the whole world's experiencing inflation - you can't really blame one party for that. You maybe can blame Putin for that a little bit, but no one can control Putin. But what are you gonna do to help people control their costs? And one - the hugest thing is housing. It's just - it's a massive cost in our region. And if you don't have a solution that both gets at promoting affordable housing through investment and also dealing with our zoning and policies that just make it really restrictive to create more housing, you're not really tackling that problem. And I think for some voters that's really starting to hit home, which could give a candidate like Darya the edge. And I will let EJ break down some of the other races, as I've gone on long enough. But it definitely was a reassuring result in that sense. [00:20:45] EJ Juárez: Yeah, so I - one, I appreciate being on a show with Doug because Doug is so smart about so many things. And as he is talking, I'm writing down things - oh, I need to look into some of that. For me, back to the question around endorsements and the power of The Stranger. I think Michael Charles was absolutely right around the two-party system now. I also feel like it is incredibly disingenuous for anybody who works in politics to be surprised if the candidate who gets The Stranger endorsement gets through. I think it shows a lack of context around just how much that means to people, both as a key part of many people's own political maturity within the city, right? The Stranger serves as this thing that people learn about Seattle from, learn how Seattle operates - and discounting the weight of that endorsement is done at one's own peril. I think how we get, how we've gotten to this place - and many of these endorsements and many of the races bear this out - is that there are a couple of things at play. Media consolidation has removed many of the other endorsing organizations that had typically seen - excuse me, typically been seen as nonpartisan, right? We no longer have The Seattle PI, we no longer have many of the regional or neighborhood papers that were also doing this for many years. The lanes of engagement have also changed for people who are coming into elected office. The salaries that we pay people to do public service no longer match the cost of living in many of our cities. So therefore, you are narrowing the field more and more and more as this goes. I think the two remaining factors that I think of when you think about just the power of these - of The Times and The Stranger's endorsements - are the policy hegemony, right? The lane in which we talk about policies is so locked in and narrow in the full spectrum of possibility. So the process of differentiating - if we're looking at the 36th - 7 candidates, is it 2, 4, or 6 candidates who have minor policy differences and may only sell that difference with enthusiasm or gusto differently, but are 99% aligned - is more and more difficult for voters to actually judge on policy versus performance. And I think that gets to the last piece here of - the opposition that is understood in Seattle politics has become more and more clear around - there is the folks that are trying to do good and the folks that are trying to do bad. And the folks that are trying to do bad - when I started working in politics here, that was - you could name 50 different organizations, 50 different people off the top of your head. And now it feels like every campaign has really locked in on - the bad guys are Amazon, the bad guys are the tech bros, the bad guys are X, Y, and Z, but it's really focused on small pockets of opposition. And for many reasons, some of those groups earn that label - I will say that - but in many ways it limits the amount of discourse that happens. And I'm going on a little bit long, but I think it can't be overstated that many of these factors inform how we got to a place where two newspapers informed so much of our political success in the City. [00:24:25] Crystal Fincher: Yeah - to your point - the reason why Hacks & Wonks exists is because of the frustration with how narrow and shallow some of those conversations can be, with so much consolidation and with the thinning of just the amount of people covering these races, the amount of visibility that races and policy have, the lack of accountability that we see with so many of our leaders - not just federally, but in the City of Seattle - we're still wondering what happened to texts that disappeared at a really pivotal time in the City. So it is challenging to work through that and deal with that. And I just think that this is a time where I hope lots of community organizations lean in and engage and try to connect their own memberships, their own spheres of influence to the process. One thing that I found really exciting about these results that I haven't really seen talked about was - there's a lot of public polling available, but the primary is a spectacular, actual public poll. And when we talk about inclusive zoning and making progress on affordable housing, the vast majority of voters in every single district - from the 46th to the 37th - voted in favor of the candidates who said we're taking on exclusive zoning, we're going to make it more inclusive, we're going to vote for that missing middle housing bill, and that spoke strongly in favor of it. That they voted overwhelmingly for candidates who talked about strengthening the social safety net, who talked about addressing behavioral health services, substance use disorder services, supportive housing and wraparound services - and not just focusing on the - well, we just need to lock people up and do what we've been doing that has landed us here today. They're really talking about addressing a lot of these root causes and taking substantive - not incremental, but pretty dynamic - change in many of these areas. And voters were right there, so I think that that was encouraging to see. And I would just wonder and hope that we're going to see that reflected and responded to throughout the general election. Full disclosure - I worked for Melissa Taylor, I've paid close attention to the 46th and a number of these races - and am excited to see a strong progressive get through in that race - and Darya Farivar, especially with a lot of the work that she's done in disability justice, which is critical. And so it's just gonna be really interesting to see as these general election races go by, and I think the 37th Legislative District looks like a very competitive race that could go either way right now, that it's gonna be really interesting to hear in these opportunities where it's not quite a Democrat versus Republican conversation that does get flattened a lot, but hopefully we can get into some of the meatiness of issues. There's a lot of policy space in the Democratic arena, in the progressive arena to really talk through - what are your plans for fixing the issues that are challenging people? How do you plan to make people's lives easier and simpler and what are you going to stand up for? Where are your red lines? What are you gonna lead on? Are really interesting and exciting things to see, that I see there. So I think that the entire media ecosystem from The Urbanist playing a crucial role, the South Seattle Emerald, Real Change - just a lot of community media. Community organizations have a lot of power just because there just aren't many people covering or talking about this - and this is an opportunity for them to talk about what's important to them, their members, people they serve, their community. And we need it now more than ever - as we finish thinking about these Seattle races and just other races across the state, is there anything that you think is flying under the radar that's notable or things that we haven't discussed tonight that you feel we should be paying attention to? And I will start with Doug. [00:29:05] Doug Trumm: Oh, so many things - I think, just to add another thought about the Seattle races is - again, I think what was another case with Chipalo Street, where we endorsed him as well and I think that's another race where Seattle Times and Stranger - we agreed. And I think that may have partially been just an advantage of him having his game plan set when he announced and it seemed like Emijah Smith was a little bit more still trying to catch up - announcing a little bit later, I think. And we didn't get a chance to talk to her, so that was part of our decision - she didn't return a questionnaire. But he was someone who was really good at talking about housing. So again, I think that fits the theme and Emily Alvarado doing better than Leah Griffin, who we endorsed - but we like both candidates, we were very clear that you have two great options there - again, someone with housing chops was doing a little better. I don't know - I might be stretching this theme a little bit much, but it definitely seems like credibility on that issue is a huge asset. And that should be good news. Unfortunately we're gonna have people like Gerry Pollet getting re-elected, but they might look at this and go - maybe I've been doing this a little bit wrong if I really want to continue getting re-elected. But I guess one race we didn't talk a lot about - but we shouldn't shy away from the bad news, which is the 42nd did not go well for Democrats. You had hope of a Senate pickup there and it's still not completely impossible, but Sharon Shewmake, who is an incumbent House representative, getting 47% in that district - that's not a great result against two Republicans. And one of 'em did have kind of that name ID - Simon Sefzik, or however you say that - so that might have helped him, but does look like he'll be the one through. So she'll continue to face that in the primary. And then we have actually - two of those seats are Democratic held, so the people lower on the ticket did a little bit better. But these could be the two seats we lose, but I do think we make that up maybe in LD10 where Greg Gilday, the Republican incumbent, isn't doing well at all - is down like four points. And also in the 26th, as we've talked about a little bit, with having Adison Richards potentially being a pickup there - it might end up coming out in the wash. But I don't know what's going on in the 42nd - I thought that district was drifting a little bit blue, but - and the redistricting is really odd because it's such a huge district - all the changes happened within the sort of Bellingham scope. And I guess they must have just carved out a little bit of Bellingham that was keeping that district where Shewmake was winning. And it's also - I guess, maybe Shewmake wasn't as strong of a candidate as maybe some of - her seatmate Alicia Rule doing a point and change better. I don't know if that's just the money in that race or what, or if it really should have been flip-flopped who tried to grab that Senate seat, but it might have been for naught if that district is just now a +3 or something Republican - you really have to run a really good race maybe to win that. And with Republicans pouring money in there, it's not as favorable terrain - which kind of brings us back to redistricting - it's a weirdly drawn district and I guess we left it that way, but why? Maybe I'll leave it at that for now and let others jump in. [00:32:44] Crystal Fincher: Go ahead, EJ. [00:32:45] EJ Juárez: I think I'll start with the 42nd. I think this is a district that is an opportunity for Democrats to begin with, right? If it were not for the death of conspiracy theorist, COVID-denying Doug Ericksen, who loved to work for dictators - I think we wouldn't even be in this situation. Any Democrat who is putting up numbers right now - it was an uphill battle - and I think that the points are valid around just how hard that was going to be for just about anybody, given the challenges of where the lines are gonna be and all these things. I think in terms of other stuff that is top of mind for me is the real tragedy of Julie Anderson's run for Secretary of State - incredible underperformance, not even carrying her own county of Pierce County, running as an independent against the incumbent Steve Hobbs - is something that I can't, I keep coming back to where I'm like - all right, that does not make sense in my head yet. Given everybody's enthusiasm of keeping Steve Hobbs as far away as possible from actually legislating - that part does. But the lack of challenge to his ascension into the Secretary of State's office seems a bit odd. It is almost certain that the Democrat will hold that seat for the first time in 60 years, and I think that is something that is to celebrate. I think that is a good thing for Washington, even as oddly as we have arrived at that fact. Some of the other quick things on my list is - as long as you're asking for that grab bag - I'll go back to the complete lack of strategy on the Republican side, in terms of how they are planning on taking and building a majority in this state. Still top of mind for me - it is the bright, shiny object of - are they going to produce a strategy at any point in the next decade? I don't know. And then lastly, where Democrats have made long-term investments, they are starting to yield the results and the rewards of that - whether that's Federal Way, whether that's in the 26th out in Gig Harbor - Democrats are getting those rewards for decisions and investments that they made 8-10 years ago. And the multiple cycle layering of those massive multimillion dollar investments in voter turnout, in improving the data on who lives in those areas, and making the case to those voters is making their job easier. And when you look at places that have not enjoyed that investment that are continually looked at as opportunities and pickups, especially when you're looking at the kind of "demographics as destiny" argument that gets made, we don't see perennial investments in places where there are large populations of color that are ascendant to majorities. We haven't seen the multi-layered approach in Yakima. We haven't seen that multi-layered approach in the Tri-Cities. And frankly, the results show - Democrats are not moving forward in many of those primaries and the lack of investment from the party shows. But where they have done it, it has been an incredible reward for them. [00:36:03] Crystal Fincher: Completely agree. And with that, this recap comes to a close. I want to thank our panelists - EJ Juárez, Doug Trumm - for their insight and making this an engaging and informative event. To those watching online, thanks so much for tuning in and for sending in questions. If you missed any of the discussion tonight, you can catch up on the Hacks & Wonks Facebook page or Twitter, where we're @HacksWonks. Special thanks to essential members of the Hacks & Wonks team and coordinators for this evening, Shannon Cheng and Bryce Cannatelli. If you missed voting in the primary, you still have time to make your voice heard in the general elections coming up on November 8th. If you need to register to vote, update your registration, or find information, you can go to MyVote.wa.gov. And as a reminder, even if you've been previously incarcerated, your right to vote is restored and you can re-register to vote immediately upon your release, even if you are still under community supervision - so that's new this year. You can vote if you are not currently incarcerated - you just need to re-register at MyVote.wa.gov. Be sure to tune into Hacks & Wonks on your favorite podcast app for our midweek interviews and our Friday week in review shows or at officialhacksandwonks.com. I've been your host, Crystal Fincher - see you next time. [00:37:27] Bryce Cannatelli: Thank you for listening to part 2 of our Hacks & Wonks 2022 Post-Primary Election Recap. If you missed part 1, you can find both parts of the livestream in our podcast feed or you can find the video and text transcript for the full recap on our website at officialhacksandwonks.com. Thank you for tuning in - talk to you next time.

Follow us on our new Twitter account at @HacksWonks! Today on the show, Seattle Times politics and communities reporter Daniel Beekman joins Crystal to talk through results from this week's primary election! They discuss how the often-predicted “red wave” failed to materialize and the various possible factors that might have caused that, as well as results in several legislative districts that were anticipated to be competitive battlegrounds that could potentially flip from Democrats to Republicans.  They discuss the race for U.S. Representative in the 3rd Congressional District, where Democrat Marie Gluesenkamp Perez finished in first place, while Republican incumbent Jamie Herrera Beutler and Trump-endorsed Republican Joe Kent are in a close battle to determine which one will advance to face Gluesenkamp Perez in the general election. They review the Secretary of State race, where Republicans might end up being absent during the general election this November thanks to nonpartisan candidate Julie Anderson.  They spend some time looking at the 8th Congressional District race, then Dan discusses where he's seen a lot of independent money getting spent this election.  They end the discussion by going over ballot initiatives that voters may get a chance to vote on this November.  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, Daniel Beekman, at @DBeekman. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources “Larkin to face Schrier in WA congressional race, as Dunn concedes; Kent closes in on Herrera Beutler” by Jim Brunner from the Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/larkin-will-face-schrier-in-wa-house-race-as-dunn-concedes/    “How WA's ‘jungle' primary may have saved Herrera Beutler” by David Gutman from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/how-was-jungle-primary-may-have-saved-herrera-beutler/    “Republicans could get shut out of secretary of state race” by Melissa Santos from Axios: https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2022/08/03/democrat-steve-hobbs-washington-secretary-state    “No red wave in sight after early returns in key legislative race” by Joseph O'Sullivan from Crosscut: https://crosscut.com/politics/2022/08/no-red-wave-sight-after-early-returns-key-legislative-race    “Red wave or blue wall in WA? InSeattle suburbs, this race could be ‘real bellwether'” by Daniel Beekman from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/red-wave-or-blue-wall-in-wa-in-seattle-suburbs-this-race-could-be-real-bellwether/   “These are the issues that matter most to Washington state voters, new poll indicates” by Daniel Beekman from The Seattle Times:  https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/these-are-the-issues-that-matter-most-to-washington-state-voters-new-poll-indicates/   “Larkin advances, Dunn concedes in 8th Congressional District” by David Hyde from KUOW: https://kuow.org/stories/larkin-advances-dunn-concedes-in-8th-congressional-district    “Key results from WA primaries as control of the Legislature hangs in the balance” by David Kroman from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/wa-legislative-election-results-key-outcomes-for-the-2022-primary/    “This is where big money is flowing and ads are attacking in the battle for control of WA's Legislature” by Daniel Beekman from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/this-is-where-big-money-is-flowing-and-ads-are-attacking-in-the-battle-for-control-of-was-legislature/   “Democrats declare ‘no red wave' in legislative swing districts” by Melissa Santos from Axios: https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2022/08/03/washington-democrats-red-wave-legislative-districts    “With November Ballot in Question, Seattle's Social Housing Campaign Soldiers On” by Ben Adlin from South Seattle Emerald: https://southseattleemerald.com/2022/08/02/with-november-ballot-in-question-seattles-social-housing-campaign-soldiers-on/    “Seattle City Council Puts Ranked Choice Voting on the Ballot” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/news/2022/07/15/76479670/seattle-city-council-puts-ranked-choice-voting-on-ballot    Transcript Transcript will be uploaded as soon as possible.

In Washington's race for Secretary of State, the top two finishers after the initial vote count were Democrat Steve Hobbs and independent Julie Anderson. Hobbs, who currently holds the office, had about 41 percent of the vote. Anderson, who's the Pierce County Auditor, had nearly 13 percent. But Republican Bob Hagglund was trailing a close third.

Content warning for suicidal thoughts and self harm behaviors. Also swearing. We also discuss extremely manipulative behavior that may be disturbing to some listeners. This episode in based on opinions and personal experiences. Julie's Tiktiok: @julieanderson426 How to contact me: Antimlm IG: @from_huns_to_humans Tiktok: @fromhunstohuman podcast email: fromhunstohumans@gmail.com Amazon Affiliate Link ( I make a small commission off of purchases made through this link, prices are not changed for shopping through amazon affiliate links): https://amzn.to/36e0U86 Resources: How to leave an MLM: http://mlmtruth.org/2017/11/11/how-to-leave-an-mlm/ National Suicide Hotline: 800-273-8255 Crisis Text Line: 741741 Physician Support Line: http://www.physiciansupportline.com/ Emotional PPE: https://emotionalppe.org/ How can you help? Report false income and health claims here: https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/ Or go to: https://www.truthinadvertising.org You can also report to your state Attorney General's office! https://www.naag.org/find-my-ag/ Not in the U.S.? Go here: https://www.ftc.gov/policy/international/competition-consumer-protection-authorities-worldwide --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/danielle6575/support

The World's #1 Personal Development Book Podcast! In this episode, I have the pleasure to interview author Jimmy Soni. Jimmy's last book, A Mind at Play: How Claude Shannon Invented the Information Age, won multiple awards. Our conversation today is all about Peter's new book, titled The Founders: The Story of Paypal and the Entrepreneurs Who Shaped Silicon Valley. This book details the stories of some amazing people, including Elon Musk, Amy Rowe Klement, Peter Thiel, Julie Anderson, Max Levchin, Reid Hoffman, and many others whose stories have never been shared. Please enjoy this amazing conversation with Jimmy Soni. Today's episode is sponsored by Audible. Try Audible for free: www.bookthinkers.com/audibletrial. The purpose of this podcast is to connect you, the listener, with new books, new mentors, and new resources that will help you achieve more and live better. Each and every episode will feature one of the world's top authors so that you know each and every time you tune-in, there is something valuable to learn. If you have any recommendations for guests, please DM them to us on Instagram. (www.instagram.com/bookthinkers) If you enjoyed this show, please consider leaving a review. It takes less than 60-seconds of your time, and really makes a difference when I am trying to land new guests. For more BookThinkers content, check out our Instagram or our website. Thank you for your time!