POPULARITY
10 episodes with ospi
12 episodes with ospi
5 episodes with ospi
6 episodes with ospi
4 episodes with ospi
5 episodes with ospi
5 episodes with ospi
2 episodes with ospi
6 episodes with ospi
URSULA'S TOP STORIES: Federal investigation launched into WA OSPI // GUEST: WA State Superintendent Chris Reykdal reacts to Trump administration investigation of OSPI // WE NEED TO TALK. . .
Federal agencies are investigating Washington's OSPI over gender identity policies and parental rights, including actions involving the La Center School District. Read more at https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/feds-launch-title-ix-investigation-into-wa-state-superintendents-office/ #TitleIX #studentprivacy #ClarkCountyWa #localnews #LaCenterSchools #genderpolicy #Washingtonstate #OSPI #FERPA #ChrisReykdal
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW. GUEST LAFD fire captain Erik Scott joins the show! Kap tells us a story about what happened last night to him on his date night. RADIO TINDER. GUEST Tara Kelley Head Caterer for restaurant Ospi joins the show! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Rep. Kevin Waters has two bipartisan bills headed into law—one to help breweries subcontract kitchens and another to give OSPI more flexibility on the timber board. Read the full story at https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/two-bipartisan-bills-from-rep-kevin-waters-signed-into-law-including-one-to-help-breweries-operate-their-kitchen-space/ #localnews #ClarkCountyWa #Washingtonbreweries #HB1602 #HB1609 #KevinWaters #Vancouver
Washington Parents Network has filed a Title VI complaint against State Superintendent Chris Reykdal, alleging his DEI programs violate civil rights laws. DOJ investigations into multiple education-related violations may soon follow. Read more at https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/washington-parents-network-files-title-vi-complaint-against-state-superintendent-reykdal/ #localnews #ClarkCountyWa #ChrisReykdal #WashingtonParentsNetwork #TitleVI #DEI #educationrights #civilrights #OSPI
The La Center School District is speaking out amid state-level controversy over gender policy. In a letter to families, the School Board and Superintendent Peter Rosenkranz reaffirm their commitment to legal compliance, student support, and keeping parents involved. They reject OSPI's discrimination claims and call for collaboration, not ultimatums. Read the full op-ed at https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/opinion/op-ed-la-center-schools-committed-to-families-and-their-children/ #localnews #ClarkCountyWa #LaCenterSchools #PeterRosenkranz #parentalrights #schoolboard #educationpolicy #genderpolicy #studentprivacy #FERPA
Discover the talented student artists recognized at the 2025 Southwest Washington Regional High School Art Show, hosted by ESD 112. This story highlights top Regional Award winners, state-level OSPI competitors, and student scholarship recipients from across Clark County and Southwest Washington. Read the full story at https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/youth/2025-southwest-washington-regional-high-school-art-show-winners-announced/ on www.ClarkCountyToday.com #Latest #studentartshow #2025artshow #SouthwestWashingtonRegionalHighSchoolArtShow #ESD112artawards #OSPIartshow #highschoolartists #Washingtonstudentartists #youthartcompetition #regionalartawards #artscholarships #CamasHighSchoolart #RidgefieldHighSchoolart #HockinsonHighSchoolart #FortVancouverHighSchoolart #KelsoHighSchoolart #LongviewSchoolDistrictart #EvergreenHighSchoolart #ClarkCounty #localnews #Vancouver #Camas #Hockinson #Ridgefield
The Mead School Board is challenging Washington's gender policy, arguing it conflicts with federal law and undermines parental rights. Read the full story at https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/school-board-in-eastern-washington-asks-feds-to-intervene-over-ospi-gender-policy-mandates/ #MeadSchoolBoard #genderpolicy #educationpolicy #TitleIX #transgenderathletes #parentalrights #studentathletics #schoolfunding #WashingtonEducation #ClarkCountyWa #localnews
It's time for this week's poll! Should schools require teachers to ask students for their preferred pronouns? The La Center School District is responding to an OSPI ruling on its pronoun policy, and the issue is stirring debate. Cast your vote now at https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/opinion/poll-do-you-think-schools-should-require-teachers-to-ask-students-for-their-preferred-pronouns/ www.ClarkCountyToday.com #WeeklyPoll #LaCenterSchoolDistrict #EducationPolicy #GenderPronouns #WashingtonStateSchools #ClarkCounty #LocalNews
This week's EYE ON NPI is a NAND in the HAND, it's ISSI Serial NAND Flash chips (https://www.digikey.com/en/product-highlight/i/issi/serial-nand-flash) available in a variety of sizes and footprints. These are great options for folks that need more data storage on their PCBs, but don't necessarily want an SD card. DigiKey has a selection of 1Gbit and 2Gbit chips, so you have tons of storage for data logs, images, recordings, or even filesystems. And the price is great, you'll pay much less per byte when buying NAND flash There's plenty of times you'll need to access non-volatile memory on your microcontroller: graphics or audio files for a user interface, maps or almanac data for telemetry, sensor or usage logs, interpreted code scripts, firmware updates, security certificates, etc. these files are too big to be stored in simple EEPROM chips (https://www.digikey.com/short/0rf9t7qb) that max out at a few kB. The next step up is to use NOR Flash (https://www.digikey.com/short/jfp3bvph) - you can get up to 256 Megabytes in size! (https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/issi-integrated-silicon-solution-inc/IS25LP02GJ-RHLE/24617385) Compared to EEPROM which comes in 1-Wire, I2C or SPI, you definitely have to use an SPI interface for NOR Flash. It's also possible on many chips to have 4-bit-at-a-time QSPI or even 8-bit OSPI interfacing for fast reads. And that's the thing that's really nice about NOR: instant reads of any byte anywhere in memory just like EEPROM. Unlike EEPROM you can't write just one byte at a time anywhere in the storage, you have to write 'page' and erase a 'sector' at a time - each page tends to be about 256 bytes, a sector is often 4KB. That means if you want to update a file, you'll need to read the whole 4K block into a memory cache, change the bytes you want to, then erase and re-write the block out. The good news though is once you write out a page, you can pretty much assume it will stay for many years: there's rarely corrupted data in NOR flash. And, although erasing and writing is a bit of a pain, the instant-access means NOR is great for 'XIP' or other dynamic memory access. If NOR is so great, why bother with NAND? One is cost: a 2MB NOR chip isn't too bad about 45 cents in quantity (https://www.digikey.com/short/zff49fb7) but once you get to the biggest 256 MB ones (https://www.digikey.com/short/vffmp583) the pricing gets high pretty quickly: $15 in tray quantities. Considering you can get a 64G SD card for that price, NOR isn't very cost effective. Second is sizing: if you want 1GB for large files, it just isn't available. For that kind of density you need NOR flash. NAND flash is the kind of flash you get when you buy a USB key or microSD card, although those have USB or SDIO interface chips (https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/2013/where-usb-memory-sticks-are-born/) that are wire bonded to the NAND flash chips. You get a lot more for the price: instead of $15 for 256MB NOR, its $3 (https://www.digikey.com/short/r77p0922). You also don't need more pins! We always thought that NAND flash required a lot of pins since it comes in 48-TSSOP (https://www.digikey.com/short/8zqbmw31) but turns out that you can get it in a QSPI 8-pin format. That makes it easy to integrate without needing an 8-bit wide memory controller. However, the architectural decisions that give ISSI NAND (https://www.digikey.com/short/jtp8ppdb) the massive size & low cost that we love also make it more complex to use than NOR flash. For one, you can no longer get random access to any byte you like. Instead, an entire page must be read at once into a 2176-byte cache, and then can be accessed. This is fine for most uses except we can't use XIP anymore and there are probably some memory access use cases that don't work nearly as nicely. Also that high density means that bits are more likely to go 'bad' and flip. While you can sorta-kinda get away with not doing error correction or wear leveling on NOR, you absolutely must do error correction and wear leveling on NAND! ISSI includes a simple multi-bit ECC system that can handle repairing up to 8 bits per 2176-byte page. And, every time there's ECC errors, you will need to 'refresh/rewrite' the data to clean it up. That refresh counts against the 60K or 100K write cycle - you are more likely to need wear-level management, even if you don't expect to write that often. Basically, check if your microcontroller SDK has a NAND controller library (https://github.com/D-Buckingham/NAND_flash) that can manage this all for you. So, if you need to level up your storage, with easy-to-use SPI or QSPI-interface, ISSI has many NAND (https://www.digikey.com/en/product-highlight/i/issi/serial-nand-flash) options to let you quickly and inexpensively add 1 or 2 gigabits of non-volatile memory with built in ECC support and block cache. DigiKey will be stocking them shortly, sign up (https://www.digikey.com/short/jtp8ppdb) to be notified when they drop into stock mid-next month!
La Center School District Superintendent Peter Rosenkranz responds to OSPI's recent ruling on the district's gender pronoun policy. He argues that OSPI's stance undermines parental authority and is not grounded in sound legal or educational principles. The district is now consulting legal counsel and considering legal challenges. Learn more about this developing issue at https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/la-center-school-district-superintendent-responds-to-ospi-ruling-on-gender-pronoun-policy-complaint/ on www.ClarkCountyToday.com.#LaCenter #WashingtonState #ClarkCountyWa #LocalNews #EducationPolicy #ParentalRights #SchoolBoard #GenderIdentity #CivilRights #StudentPronouns #LegalChallenge
On this episode of Legislative Review: a bill to help make schools safer and legislation regarding industrial workers' compensation. Plus a bill expanding youth diversion programs for juvenile offenders.
In week 7 of our Big 3 Briefing series, we provide updates on the legislative process for the Big 3 education funding priorities: special education, pupil transportation, and materials, supplies, and operating costs (MSOC).All of the Big 3 bills survived the policy cutoff, and some of them look on track to make it through the fiscal cutoff this Friday - the MSOC and special education bills are all scheduled for executive sessions on Thursday, February 27. However, transportation funding increases are at risk, as key bills have not yet been scheduled as of yet.We break down how fiscal committees work, including how legislators may attempt to dial down funding levels or make other changes through the amendment and substitution process in the executive session. We highlight concerns about special education funding, particularly the risk of reduced excess cost multipliers and the possible removal of funding for OSPI's inclusionary work.With a February 28 deadline approaching for fiscal committees, we encourage listeners to contact legislators—especially those on the Senate Ways & Means or House Appropriations Committees—to protect critical funding. Looking ahead, we preview the next hurdles: Rules Committee screenings and floor debates, leading up to the March 12 cutoff for bills to pass their house of origin.See our Show NotesSupport the showContact us at hello@rainydayrecess.org.Rainy Day Recess music by Lester Mayo, logo by Cheryl Jenrow.
This week on Inside Olympia....Austin Jenkins discusses the 5-year-old Career Connect Program with individuals from Partnership for Learning and the Chehalis School District.
Welcome to episode 100. We hosted a live show to celebrate at Little Joy Cocktails in Echo Park, and what you're about to hear is the recording of said live show. Father Sal and I were joined by Eater's Mona Holmes to run through the headlines of the day and to play a round of Chef's Kiss Big Miss. We debuted the first-ever LA Food Pod quiz - big thanks and sincere apologies to David Turkell of Turk's Pizza Party for participating. And, finally, we had a conversation with Jackson Kalb of Ospi, Jemma, and Top Chef fame, on running a restaurant in today's tricky economic environment, among other things. But first, Father Sal joins me for some slightly indulgent navel-gazing on what this podcast means to us, and we also quickly touch on some exciting events we attended this week, including a very insightful panel discussion on restaurant PR and marketing hosted by New School, and a comedy show presented by none other than former Top Chef host Padma Lakshmi. Helpful links: Mona Holmes https://www.instagram.com/monaeats/?hl=en Jackson Kalb https://www.instagram.com/jacksonkalb/?hl=en Ospi https://ospi.com/venice Jemma https://jemmarestaurants.com/ Little Joy https://littlejoy.la/ The LA Food Pod Live Show was produced by: Robert Haleblian https://www.instagram.com/robert_haleblian/?hl=en -- Go check out The Lonely Oyster in Echo Park! https://thelonelyoyster.com/ – Get 10% off at House of Macadamias using code "LAFOOD" https://www.houseofmacadamias.com/pages/la-foods --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thelafoodpodcast/support
Nancy Churchill of Dangerous Rhetoric shares her insights on the upcoming Washington general election, highlighting the races for Superintendent of Public Instruction and Commissioner of Public Lands. Read the full column at https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/opinion/opinion-election-prep-ospi-and-public-lands-races on www.ClarkCountyToday.com. #WAElection #EducationReform #PublicLands #DavidOlson #JaimeHerreraBeutler #GeneralElection #ForestManagement #OSPI #DNR #LocalNews #ClarkCountyWa #Election24
Host Austin Jenkins sits down with 2024 Washington Teacher of the Year Blaire Penry. Penry, from the Auburn School District, has been interviewed by Bill Gates, and has a lot to say about online learning, artificial intelligence in the classroom, equity and diversity in education, and more.
3pm: OSPI issues guidance on cellphone use in WA classrooms // Australian employees now have the right to ignore work emails, calls after hours // Motive still a mystery in Trump assassination attempt // Want to Pay These College Football Players? Click the QR Code on Their Helmets // Massachusetts Fumbles the Tax Ball // Man rents friend in Japan for $7
6pm: OSPI issues guidance on cellphone use in WA classrooms // Australian employees now have the right to ignore work emails, calls after hours // Motive still a mystery in Trump assassination attempt // Want to Pay These College Football Players? Click the QR Code on Their Helmets // Massachusetts Fumbles the Tax Ball // Man rents friend in Japan for $7
In this update, we delve into the heated debate over school choice as OSPI candidates weigh in on the impact of voucher programs. Liv Finne from the Washington Policy Center argues against a recent Seattle Times editorial, while current Superintendent Chris Reykdal and challenger David Olson offer contrasting views. Discover more about this ongoing discussion and its implications for public and private education by visiting https://tinyurl.com/24u2rwwz at ClarkCountyToday.com.
E240: The Marxist Mis-Education of Our Youth E240 Introduction Looking over the assessment for our students in public education, OSPI for this in the spring of 2023. 49% do not meet basic ELA standard....
Guest host Mike Lewis discusses the week's news with The Needling's Lex Vaughn, Republican strategist Randy Pepple, and Seattle Times columnist Claudia Rowe.
State funding was a hot topic at an election forum featuring candidates for the office of Washington Superintendent of Public Instruction. https://tinyurl.com/5az5vrrh #TheCenterSquareWashington #WashingtonSuperintendentOfPublicInstruction #Candidates #AugustPrimaryElection #StateFunds #WashingtonPublicSchools #ChrisReykdahl #ReidSaaris #DavidOlson #JohnPattersonBlair #VancouverWa #ClarkCountyWa #ClarkCountyNews #ClarkCountyToday
An exit interview with retiring State Senator Sam Hunt, plus a discussion on K-12 public schools with State Superintendent of Public Instruction Chris Reykdal.
Lors de cette émission, le Président d'Ospi nous explique son attrait pour le traitement de données dans le secteur hospitalier. Il évoque également la difficulté du groupe à recruter de nouveaux talents. De plus, Jean-Baptiste Angeloglou nous apprend que les contraintes juridiques sont extrêmement nombreuses lors du traitement des données personnelles dans le secteur médical. Enfin, il nous précise que son entreprise entretient une relation solide avec les investisseurs, qui sont à la fois un soutien à dimension humaine, mais aussi business et opérationnel.
Elected leaders need to be reminded who they work for. Washington State Democrats adopt resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. ‘unBelievable' deflection on death of three-week old baby. Bellevue teacher enters race for OSPI.
Clark County Republican Women (CCRW) host event featuring local author and homeschool advocate Heidi St. John and 2024 OSPI candidate Brad Klippert, addressing education concerns and launching Firmly Planted Action. https://tinyurl.com/2p89b84r #ClarkCountyRepublicanWomen #DinnerMeeting #Education #KeynoteSpeakers #HeidiStJohn #BradLippert #JenniferHeineWithee #FirmlyPlantedHomeschoolResourceCenter #FirmlyPlantedAction #OfficeoftheSuperintendentofPublicInstruction #VancouverWa #ClarkCountyWa #ClarkCountyNews #ClarkCountyToday
On this week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Chair of Sierra Club Seattle, long time communications and political strategist, Robert Cruickshank! They discuss a poll showing that Seattle voters want a more progressive City Council, the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction overseeing more and more school districts in budget crisis, gubernatorial candidate Mark Mullet getting financially backed by charter school advocates, and Bruce Harrell's ethnic media roundtable not going very well. The conversation continues with the possibility of a $19 minimum wage for unincorporated King County, internal drama within top brass of the Seattle Police Department, and reflection on a consent decree ruling that ends most federal oversight of SPD. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Robert Cruickshank, at @cruickshank. Resources “Ending Youth Incarceration with Dr. Ben Danielson of AHSHAY Center” from Hacks & Wonks “Poll: Seattle voters want new direction on City Council” by Josh Cohen from Crosscut “State will keep fiscal tabs on three cash-starved Washington school districts” by Jerry Cornfield from Washington State Standard “WA Supreme Court sides with state in suit over school building costs” by Dahlia Bazzaz from The Seattle Times “Big checks for a pro-Mullet PAC” by Paul Queary from The Washington Observer “Harrell asks for better relations with ethnic media” by Mahlon Meyer from Northwest Asian Weekly “King County looks at $19 minimum wage in unincorporated areas” by David Gutman from The Seattle Times “King County Councilmembers propose $19 minimum wage for Skyway and White Center” by Guy Oron from Real Change “Seattle police chief's alleged relationship with employee prompts inquiries, roils department” by Ashley Hiruko & Isolde Raftery from KUOW “Judge ends most federal oversight of SPD, after 11 years and 3 chiefs” by Mike Carter from The Seattle Times Find stories that Crystal is reading here 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. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Tuesday topical show and our Friday week-in-review delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. If you missed our Tuesday topical show, I welcomed Dr. Ben Danielson, director of AHSHAY (Allies and Healthier Systems for Health and Abundance in Youth) Center for an important conversation about ending youth incarceration. Today, we're continuing our Friday week-in-review show where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host: Chair of Sierra Club Seattle, long-time communications and political strategist, Robert Cruickshank. [00:01:19] Robert Cruickshank: Thank you for having me back again, Crystal. It's always a pleasure to be here reviewing the week with you. [00:01:23] Crystal Fincher: Always a pleasure and I wanna start out talking about a poll that came out this week, sponsored by Crosscut - an Elway Poll - showing that voters seem to want a more progressive City Council. What did this poll reveal? [00:01:38] Robert Cruickshank: It's a really interesting poll. Crosscut's headline says - Seattle voters want a new direction on the City Council - but if you dig down with the poll itself, it's clear that there's strong support for a more progressive direction. One of the questions they ask is - Who are you more likely to vote for? A progressive candidate, a centrist candidate, or no opinion. The progressive candidate, 49%. Centrist candidate, 37%. And no opinion, 14%. That actually matches pretty closely some of the results we saw in key City Council primary elections last month. In District 1, for example, District 4, District 6 - you saw pretty similar numbers with a progressive candidate getting close to or around 50% and a more centrist candidate getting somewhere between the upper 30s and low 40s. We have a poll, we have the actual election results from the primary - now that doesn't guarantee anything for the general election. But evidence is starting to pile up that - yes, Seattle voters do want a new direction and it's very likely they want to be a more progressive direction. We've lived for the last three years - certain media pundits and media outlets, like KOMO or The Seattle Times, pushing really hard this narrative that Seattle wants a right-wing turn, Seattle's fed up with a progressive City Council, we're fed up with homelessness, we're fed up with crime - we want to turn to the right, darn it. The poll results and the election results last month just don't support that argument at all. Yes, voters are unhappy and voters are looking at what the progressive candidates are saying and thinking - Yeah, that's how we want to solve this. Yes, we want to solve homelessness by getting people into housing. Yes, we want to solve crime by having all sorts of solutions - including alternatives to policing, alternatives to armed response - to help address this problem. And I think that some of the media outlets and Chamber of Commerce and others, who keep pushing this Seattle-wants-to-turn-right narrative, are just trying to will a story into existence, try to will that reality into existence - but voters are making it clear they're not going along with that. [00:03:28] Crystal Fincher: It really does make some of the rhetoric that we hear over and over again sound like astroturfing, sound like a marketing project - because like you said, over and over again, these election results and these polls just repeatedly tell a different story. For example, we've talked on this show before about stopping with just - Hey, are you happy with the way things are going or are you dissatisfied? And if people say they're dissatisfied, there's been this assumption - that means that they want to get rid of progressive councilmembers and progressive policy. And that has never borne out in the data. One of the questions - On the issue of homelessness, if you had to choose, what approach should have the higher priority for city government resources? One option is: Moving the tents out of parks and public areas and moving their occupants into temporary shelters - which is a nice way to say sweeps - 41%. The other option: Developing permanent housing and mental health services for people experiencing homelessness - 55%. This is not controversial - we've been talking about this on this show for quite some time, lots of people have - these are serious policies backed by evidence and it just makes sense, right? And it makes you question how deeply invested are people in the narrative that Seattle is fed up and they want a really punitive law and order, harsh lock-'em-up approach to things - that just doesn't play out. What we're gonna see in this general election, as we've seen before - it looks like we're anticipating some of the same type of communication, same type of commercial, same type of mailers trying to use those same tired depictions of homelessness as if the people who are homeless are the problem and not the fact that they don't have homes to live in. And Seattle sees that. They see that over and over again. And what we see is there is this attempt, especially around public safety rhetoric, to make it just very flat. Either you want more cops and you support cops and Blue Lives Matter and all of that, or you hate safety and you love crime and you don't want anything. And just making it either you're defund or this Antifa radical, or you're wanting more law and order on the streets. It just doesn't turn out that way. People want serious solutions. We've been doing the same things over and over again. And the public is begging these people to keep listening, but it just doesn't work. Like you said, a plurality here prefer a progressive candidate - 12 points higher than a more moderate candidate, as they put it - conservative wasn't a choice in here. Centrist and progressive - as is the way in Seattle - the way things are usually discussed. Also, when they asked about priorities - How are they evaluating candidates for City Council? It's really interesting. The top answers were: Do they support creating a new department for non-police emergency response, Do they support city funding of substance abuse treatment for people in public housing - both of those at 72%. If you're in the 60s, that's automatic win territory. 72%, it's - how wild is it that this is not on the top of everybody's agenda? Then we move down to - looking at the lower end - the lowest, actually, was: Supporting a three-year moratorium on the Jumpstart tax - that actually made people more likely to vote against someone for voting against a moratorium on that tax, which we've seen the Chamber float and other allied business interests trying to siphon some of that money or reduce the tax that they're paying. And voters are clearly saying no. And people who advocate for that are going to be hurt by taking that position in this general election. So this is just really interesting. One of these questions: Support for Bruce Harrell's agenda. One, I want someone to define what that agenda is - great to ask that in a vague way - what does that mean? And I would love for people to talk - when they talk about the mayor's agenda, Bruce Harrell's agenda - define what that is. I think that's a tougher task than many people might assume at first glance. What else did you see here? [00:07:38] Robert Cruickshank: There are a couple of things that stood out. You talked about taxes. They asked - How should Seattle cover a budget shortfall? 63% want a new business tax, 60% are willing to tax themselves - this just bolsters the point you just made that, contrary to what the Chamber wants, there's no support out there for slashing business taxes. We want to tax the rich more. And so that's another reason why progressive candidates are going to do well. Something you said resonated about the astroturfing. And you see these efforts to try to create outrage about different public safety issues. We saw some of that this week, where Sara Nelson had a stunt press conference in Little Saigon - which is facing issues, and the community of Little Saigon deserves to be heard and deserves to have their needs addressed. That's not what Sara Nelson was there to do. She was there to have a press conference stunt where she could stand there with Tanya Woo and say - Where's Tammy Morales? Why isn't Tammy Morales here? The answer is, as Tammy Morales explained, Tammy wasn't invited because Tammy was also at the Transportation Committee hearing in City Hall doing her job and asked where's Sara Nelson? The answer is Sara Nelson's out grandstanding. She's also the same person who's floating things like moratorium on the JumpStart Tax, floating things like sweeps and crackdowns on visible drug use. Sara Nelson somehow snuck into office in 2021 and thinks somehow that the City is supporting her agenda - whatever that might be, whatever right-wing cause she has at the moment - that's not where the electorate is right now. And I think that's all they have - are stunts - because their actual agenda is unpopular. And I think you're going to start seeing - as a campaign heads into the heat of the general election, the same playbook we've often seen from more centrist candidates. And Jenny Durkan was an expert at this - of just bear-hugging progressive positions, making themselves sound more progressive than they truly are - to try to get elected because they know that's what the electorate in Seattle wants. And then once in office, the mask comes off and they turned out to be the Chamber candidate that they always were. So that's something that the actual progressive candidates are gonna have to watch out for. And voters are going to need to be very careful in discerning between these candidates. Who's just mouthing the rhetoric that they think is going to get them elected? And who's a genuine and proven commitment to these ideals? - Who's really fought hard for taxing the rich? Who's fought hard for affordable housing? Who's fought hard to get services and shelter to people who are unhoused? - rather than people who are just maybe grandstanding on it because they think that's how they're gonna win. [00:10:00] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and I think you bring up a really important point. It is that discernment. Some of the justification I've heard for people who are very invested in the "Seattle has taken a right turn" try and retcon the justification - well, voters wanted a conservative business owner and they really want that perspective on the Council. They want someone who's gonna knock heads and get tough. But people so easily forget - that's not at all how Sara Nelson ran. Sara Nelson ran as an environmentalist, as someone who wanted to reform the police department - those were her top-line messages in her communications. She wasn't talking about being a business owner, she was not talking about being tough on crime - she initially started that in the very beginning in the primary and that fell flat. And so they switched up real quick and all of the communication looked like it was coming from a progressive. They used the word "progressive" 72,000 times - Oh no, we're the real progressives here. And it didn't turn out that way. And as you said, once she was elected, the mask came off and we continue to see this over and over again. The moderate playbook, the conservative playbook is to mimic progressive. It's to use that same language. It's to talk about issues in a similar way. Leave yourself a little wiggle room to not commit, to not give a hard and fast answer to something so that when you are elected, you can say - Well, I didn't exactly say that - or - I didn't take a position on this. And we see this over and over again. I hope it doesn't happen again this time, but there's going to be a lot of money spent to try and do this again. And at some point we just have to say - We've seen this before and we've had enough, and we want people who are seriously engaging in how to solve the biggest problems that we face. Because Seattle voters are really frustrated - they are fed up, but fed up with not being listened to. I do congratulate this poll for going beyond just the - Are you happy and unhappy? - and asking the why - What direction do you want to go into? What policy solution do you prefer? And as I suspected, the answers are very enlightening and give you an eye into what voters are really thinking and considering. And I hope all of the candidates - and the electeds who aren't even on the ballot - take heed. I also want to talk about school districts - right now, just as school is starting over again - facing budget crises and just a world of hurt. What's happening here? [00:12:28] Robert Cruickshank: As schools are starting across Washington state this year, there are some schools where teachers have gone out on strike, mostly in Southwest Washington - places like Evergreen Schools in Vancouver, Camas in Clark County - and that's worth watching and we're supporting teachers. In addition, we're starting to see an even more ominous trend of districts needing the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, OSPI, to actually oversee their budgets. They need OSPI monitoring because they're in such deep financial straits, primarily because this Legislature continues to underfund our schools. The Legislature doesn't give schools enough money to cover their basic operations, especially in an era of inflation. And so you have at least three school districts that we know of so far, Marysville, La Conner, Mount Baker - these are all in Northwest Washington - are under OSPI oversight for budgets. It's the most, at any one time, in several years - since at least a great recession. OSPI is quoted as saying this is unprecedented. And they don't think it's gonna stop there. It's just the tip of the iceberg - as more and more districts face problems, as federal stimulus money goes away, as levy equalization dollars start to drop, as regionalization money - which is designed to help districts afford to pay teachers what it actually costs to live in their community - that starts to go away from the state. The state continues to underfund special education. And just this morning before we went on air, we saw the State Supreme Court ruled against the Wahkiakum School District in Southwest Washington, their case where they were trying to get the state to be held responsible for the cost of school construction. The Supreme Court said - No, the state and local governments, local districts are gonna have to share that - even though it takes 60% of voters to approve a school bond for construction, those often fail. And small communities like Wahkiakum, small logging community on the Columbia River, don't have the property tax base to keep their schools in good repair. So what we're seeing is the Legislature, and now the Supreme Court, continue to hand blow after blow to local school districts. And this is alarming, not just because it leads to cuts and even school closures - something they're considering in school districts like Seattle - that's bad enough. But when you start to see state oversight in management of districts, that's when I think red flags should really go up. There's things like appointing emergency fiscal managers - in the state of Michigan and other states where Republicans took over - that led to huge cuts to schools, where these emergency fiscal managers would come in and turn schools over to charter school operators, they tear up union contracts, they would make all sorts of cuts to libraries and music and other important services. Now, we're not seeing that in Washington state yet, but that architecture is now in place. And if the wrong person gets elected governor or the wrong party takes over the Legislature, all of a sudden these school districts could be losing local control over their basic dollars and spending to the state. So this is a unfolding crisis that the State Legislature and the Democratic majority there continue to ignore, continue to not take seriously - even though it remains in the Constitution, literally their paramount duty, to provide ample provision for funding, not just enough. The open dictionary says more than enough. No one can look at a public school district anywhere in Washington state and say schools are getting ample funding. They're just not. And this crisis is only going to grow worse. We're only going to see further cuts to schools, further closures, larger class sizes, teachers leaving - unless the State Legislature steps in. [00:16:00] Crystal Fincher: We do have to contend with the fact that this is happening with the Democratic majority, right? Even more frustrating where - this is another issue voters support in such huge numbers - adequately, amply funding education and raising the revenue because revenue is needed to amply fund education. It's really frustrating. And so I guess my question for you, because you do pay such close attention - I do recommend people follow Robert for a variety of things, but his insight on education policy is really valuable - how do we fix this? Is it all on the Legislature? Where is the fix here? [00:16:39] Robert Cruickshank: The fix is at the Legislature. Local school districts can only do so much. A 60% threshold has not been changed by the Legislature - they have the ability to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot to change that, that never happens. But even more, the Legislature has also capped a local operating levy. Seattle, which has a very pro-tax population, would happily tax ourselves a lot of money to have amazing public schools. We can't do that because we're prevented by the State Legislature. And the obvious reason, of course, is Seattle has such valuable property because we have Amazon, Vulcan, other large corporate property owners here who will ensure that the Legislature doesn't do that. So we have a State Legislature and a Democratic majority that is just unwilling to take on the big corporations and the wealthy to fund our public schools. They point to the capital gains tax. And yes, that was an important victory in 2021. And it's raising almost double what was expected. But of course, there's a caveat there. They cap the amount of money that goes to the Education Legacy Trust Fund - anything above that is supposed to go to school construction, which is great - we just talked about the Supreme Court decision and how local governments and local districts in rural Washington definitely need help funding schools. That's great. But what happens when you don't have the ability to pay the teachers to go into those buildings? When you don't have the ability to provide the books, materials, the music classes, the arts classes, the small class sizes that we voted for in 2014? The Legislature proposed a wealth tax last year - 20 out of 29 Senate Democrats, 43 out of 58 House Democrats supported it as co-sponsors. Surely there were many more who weren't sponsors who were on board. The bill never even made it out of committee in either chamber. At some point, we have to look at the State Legislature and the Democrats, even the progressives - even the Democrats we like and support strongly - haven't stuck their necks out for education, haven't stepped up to say we're gonna fix this. They aren't recognizing the crisis that's there and that's what we have to do. We have to point the finger at the Legislature and go to them at their town halls, to their offices, committee meetings in Olympia, testify virtually if that's possible again in January and make it crystal clear - this is a crisis, it is dire, and you have to fix it. And the only possible source of the fix is the Legislature. [00:19:02] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Thank you for your insight on that, and we do have to get involved. We have to make sure they hear our voices, demanding that this happens. And while they're at it - to provide free school lunches for all school kids. Also several other states - I think we're at 11 so far - are doing the same, putting us to shame. All states should have this and so we have a lot of work to do. Also wanna talk about a candidate for governor - Mark Mullet, current sitting senator out of the 5th legislative district, being backed by charter school money. What's happening here? [00:19:42] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, Mark Mullet, a very right-wing Democrat - he probably would have been a Republican if he didn't realize that being a Democrat would get him elected more easily out there in Issaquah. He's been hostile to teachers' unions for a long time, notoriously hostile to other unions - very nearly lost his reelection in 2020 to Ingrid Anderson, a progressive nurse. Mullet only prevailed by 58 votes, but continues to act as a very right-wing Democrat. And he's always been in love with charter schools - he's been a major obstacle to getting the Legislature to fully fund our public schools. He sits on the Senate Ways and Means Committee. He works with centrist Democrats, corporate Democrats, and Republicans to try to block bills that would fund our schools. And in return, he's now gotten at least $25,000 from a charter school PAC to help fund a super PAC in support of Mark Mullet's run for governor. Polls continue to show so far that Mullet is trailing pretty badly here in the governor's race - Ferguson still has the lead, but it's early. We're well over a year away from the general election for governor. But Mullet clearly is staking his claim as the right-wing Democratic candidate, and the candidate of now folks who wanna privatize our public schools and spread charters everywhere. And as we've seen in other states, charter schools are really problematic. They don't really meet student needs on the whole. Their outcomes aren't better for students. And they're often fly-by-night operations - they'll close in the middle of a school year and then leave students just high and dry. But it's really revealing that Mullet is taking, or at least getting supported by, so much money - that's not a direct donation to his campaign, but it's clear that they are running a super PAC explicitly in support of Mark Mullet. It's a real sign - that's where his bread is buttered - by big corporations and school privatizer money. So something that I think voters are gonna wanna pay pretty close attention to as the campaign for governor starts to heat up next year. [00:21:33] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and I do have to tell you, it is very concerning how unstable charter schools seem to be. How many - we see openings and then we see closings. And that just hardly ever happens with public schools. When it does, it's under financial duress and usually over the objections of all of the parents. But this has been something that we've seen with frequency with charter schools here in Washington. But yeah, definitely worth paying attention to that - and what that agenda is by the folks who have that super PAC and what other interests they're in-line with are really troubling. So we'll continue to pay attention to that. I also wanna talk about a story that came out - I actually think it was late last week, this is a short holiday week and so kind of trickled out - but it was a story about Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell's roundtable with some of our local ethnic media outlets. We have wonderful, rich ethnic media outlets here in Washington State - all throughout the state, definitely here in King County. And the mayor's office seemed troubled by the lack of positive stories coming out, and so invited a number of these journalists to - it looks like City Hall - to have a little roundtable conversation. How did that turn out? [00:22:56] Robert Cruickshank: Well, it's interesting. Many mayors have met with our local ethnic media - it's a good thing for them to do in and of itself - Mike McGinn did a great tour of them back when I worked with him in 2011. So it makes sense for Harrell to try to reach out, but it doesn't seem to have gone very well. And according to at least one of the reports that was there, the mayor wasn't happy about the meeting being recorded - said he could speak less freely. But I think when you're dealing with journalists, any public official should know that's how journalists like to operate - they wanna record everything. And it just seemed like the mayor wanted to make it very personal and wanted to get good coverage out of these outlets. And that's just not how you actually should be approaching these media outlets to begin with. These folks want respect, they wanna be treated as serious journalists - which they are. And I think that for a mayor to come in the way it appears Mayor Harrell did, I don't think it's gonna serve his needs and certainly not the needs of those ethnic media outlets. [00:23:49] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, this was covered in Northwest Asian Weekly and it was really a jaw-dropping read because it does seem to start off - Bruce Harrell is a charismatic guy and there's nothing wrong with that, there's nothing wrong with wanting to open lines of communication, to air out any challenges - I think that's a positive thing. Where I think this took a bad turn was this assumption that they should put aside their professionalism, put aside the obligation they have to report - and to seek information and accountability - and just play along, go along with what he says. And the one thing that caught my eye, which maybe it didn't - well, a few things caught my eye - but one thing that I found troubling in here, which may not be an overt red flag and who knows what he actually meant by that, but there was an allusion to - Hey, there's Comcast money - anyone who works in the City of Seattle is aware of how much Comcast money there actually is in the City. But he said - Hey, the city might be able to facilitate ethnic media getting involved in Comcast channel 21, while also him saying that they were dying - which those ethnic media outlets directly challenged and he seemed to not accept or be willing to do. But dangling - Hey, there's more access, there's more information here for you if you play along. And that's the unspoken part of this. And even if that wasn't intended - I don't know what he intended - but as a public official, you have to be aware of when you're holding that much power, when you have that much control of resources and influence over people who are wielding those resources, and you have access to a bigger platform, and you're saying - Hey, I can help you out with this - there's the implication, if you aren't explicit and careful, saying - If you scratch my back too, if you ease up on the criticism, if you stop asking troubling questions. It seems like they heard that in this meeting and seemed to react - one, just mischaracterizing where they're at and they're not sitting here asking for handouts, they're not asking for anything unearned - they are professionals who put out great products, who many of us consume regularly and they're a part of our media ecosystem that too many people just leave out. And they're saying - No, we're not dying, we're here and we're thriving and we just want answers to our questions. We just want invitations to invites that other reporters are getting invites to. And there seem to be questions with that, as well as some offense taken to them asking just regular general questions. One reporter, a Black reporter from a Black media outlet, brought up - Hey, we're having a really hard time getting straight answers from your police department. Bruce Harrell is literally the executive to talk to for that - they answer to Bruce Harrell, he is in charge of the police department. And his response - You're the only one who's had that problem. I think everyone listening knows that they're not the only ones who have that problem. We've seen that across the ecosystem in various places, particularly to people who don't cover City Hall sympathetically, and that's just really troubling. You're there and you're not listening to the reporters who are reflecting their communities and trying to get information that is really important to the communities they serve. And the dismissiveness was just really troubling. [00:27:27] Robert Cruickshank: It really is. And I think it goes to the concerns that those media outlets have had for a long time. They wanna be taken seriously and deserve to be because they're serious journalists - doing serious journalism that is read and respected, not just in those communities they serve, but around the City. And yet they struggle to get invites to press conferences, they struggle to get responses from City departments, they struggle to get included in stories, they struggle to get their basic inquiries addressed. And they understand that a lot of the City's media relations folks, whether it's the mayor's office or City departments, don't always take them seriously. So to have the opportunity to sit down directly with the mayor is hugely important for these outlets - not only to show that they matter, but to get answers and to get things fixed that need to be fixed in the way the City is interacting with those media outlets. And yet for it to go this way, it just, in their minds, likely justifies a lot of concerns they had all along. It's not going to assuage them at all. And from the perspective of supporting local media outlets, it seems like this should have been handled better. Even from Bruce Harrell's own perspective, it could have been handled better. 'Cause now he's got a story that makes him look bad and raises questions about the way his office is responding to some of the most important media outlets in the City. I think it's - to insinuate that they might be dying goes right to the heart of the problem. These media outlets have been thriving for decades. And it's not easy for any media outlet to survive these days, large or small, no matter what community they serve. And the last thing they want is to be dismissed again - in this case, dismissed as potentially just on the brink of death. I mean, who knows how many of the TV stations are on the brink of death, right? Seattle Times - who knows how long the Blethen family is going to want to keep running it until the family decides to sell it out to Alden Global Capital, which will just gut everything for parts. It's important to treat these media outlets and their reporters with respect, no matter who it is in elected office or whatever City department you're in. And so I hope that the mayor's office puts that right. [00:29:29] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely agree. Also want to talk this week about a potential $19 minimum wage coming to unincorporated King County. What's being proposed? [00:29:42] Robert Cruickshank: King County Councilmember Girmay Zahilay is proposing a $19 an hour minimum wage for unincorporated King County - so that's outside of a incorporated city. So cities like Seattle, SeaTac have obviously raised minimum wage. Tukwila has raised it, Renton - which is on the ballot this year - likely to pass. But there are about a quarter million people in King County who are not in a city. They live in a community, sometimes, or maybe they don't live in a formal community, maybe they're out in more rural parts of the county - but they're part of King County. And what Girmay is recognizing is there's an opportunity to help them. So what he wants to do is raise the minimum wage for those parts of King County, for those 250,000 people - which is a substantial number of people - to make sure that they can also benefit from a higher minimum wage and raise it to $19. We all know how inflation is hitting people, especially the rise in cost of housing - and Girmay's done a great job trying to address housing as well in his role on the King County Council. But this is a great step forward for the King County Council to not just sit by and say the minimum wage is a city issue or it's a state issue. No, they have a quarter million people they can help right now. And to step forward and propose this, I think, is the right thing to do. I hope that all candidates for King County Council embrace it. I hope that the current councilmembers embrace it and pass it as quickly as they can, because I think this is an important step for folks living in those communities. [00:30:58] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And they shouldn't be left out of the progress that many of the people who've been able to live in cities have been benefiting from. And sometimes we think unincorporated King County and people just think - Oh, it's just a few people living out in the boonies. You talked about how many people there are, and these are places like Vashon Island, Skyway, White Center - where there are a lot of people - these are our neighbors. They just happen to be in an area that wasn't formally incorporated. And so I see this as definite progress. We have a ways to go to get wages to a place where they're really funding people's lives today. Rents are so high. The cost of living has increased so much. Rents, childcare, these massive costs that are so huge and that are preventing people from being able to fully participate in society, to be upwardly mobile, to live the life that they choose. We know we can do better. We know we owe this to the residents. And I think this starts for businesses that employ more than 500 people. This is [not] burdening small businesses. It just seems like this is really the logical thing to do. Medium-sized businesses with 16 to 499 employees would be given a four-year transition period, but it's really important to get this on the way. This is a very popular policy also, fortunately. And so I am optimistic that this will pass and hope it has the unanimous support of the council. [00:32:25] Robert Cruickshank: I hope so too. It should be unanimous. I'd like to see Dow Constantine come in strongly for it as well and help use his power and influence to get it done. It should be an issue in the council races - between Teresa Mosqueda and Sofia Aragon, for example. I think it's a really important contrast that can be drawn. [00:32:40] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. I wanna close out talking about a couple of stories revolving around the Seattle Police Department. The first is a story that broke - I think it was KUOW reported on it - but there have been rumors dogging Seattle Police Chief Diaz about an alleged affair or rumored affair. However, lots of people are really wondering whether to question this because it also may be rumors intended - falsely made up - intended to de-credit the chief and speed his way out. And people are trying to weigh which one of these this is. What happened here and what do you see going on? [00:33:26] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, this is a sadly typical situation that we've seen in SPD over the years - where different elements of the command staff start sniping at each other and trying to take each other down, rather than focus on their jobs. It's unclear and we don't know - and I don't really care - what Chief Diaz is doing his personal time. Obviously, if it's an employee, then you gotta make sure all rules and ethics are respected - but if people are also throwing around insinuations, that hurts the woman in question. You don't wanna make a woman who's working in SPD subject to these rumors - not just that makes Chief Diaz look bad, the department look bad - you're sullying someone's reputation here. It shouldn't be sullied. But the bigger question here is - what does it say about SPD and what does it say about how it's being run? We're in the middle of a wave of burglaries that people are complaining about, and complaining about slow SPD response time, people complaining about safety on our roads. And I will say just yesterday near my home in Northgate, I saw a driver go right through a red arrow, turning into an intersection - it wasn't like it turned red right as they were entering, it had been red for some time when they entered - in front of a police car. And the officer did nothing - just let it happen and no enforcement at all. People complain about the number of homicides that are happening. It's a real crisis out there, and concerns about is SPD really doing all it can do to investigate these? Is it doing all it can do to close burglary cases? And yet what do we see SPD doing? Their command staff are sniping at each other and spreading gossip and rumor, whether there's any truth to it or not. And I think it's just a sign of how dysfunctional SPD has become. I think it's also a sign that we need strong leadership to reform this department. We'll talk about, I know, about the consent decree in a moment, but it's clear that there are ongoing management problems. And it raises the question - do we need a external chief to come in, who isn't part of all these rivalries and gossip and jealousies, to come in and put a stop to a lot of this? But it's just a sign - that these rumors are reaching the media - that SPD's commanders are not focused on the job they say they're focused on. They're happy to blame the City Council, which has no operational control over SPD, which hasn't said a word about defunding the police since they - for a hot minute in the summer of 2020, very gingerly cut a piece of SPD's budget, ever since then they've been showering as much money as they can on the police department - trying to ply them with recruitment bonuses and making it very clear - Oh no, we're not gonna defund you anymore. Sorry, forget about that. The City Council is not the problem here. There's a real problem with how SPD is managed. There's a problem with the command staff. And Council doesn't run that department - as you said earlier, the mayor does. And so we need to see how Bruce Harrell's going to respond to this too, because it's becoming increasingly clear that SPD isn't getting its job done. [00:36:11] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and it's not getting its job done in any way - people are suffering - and the most cynical thing is there've, no surprise, been SPOG communications in various places literally touting - Detectives haven't been able to respond to this commercial burglary for two weeks and it's 'cause we were defunded. As you said, defunding did not happen. In fact, their funding has increased. They keep giving money to these people despite staffing shortages in other departments too. If that would help, that would be one thing. But even police officers are on record saying - Yeah, these hiring bonuses are not gonna get more people in the door, keep people. Retention bonuses aren't gonna keep people. That's actually not the problem. The problem is not financial anymore. But it's really troubling just that everyone's eye seems to be off of the ball. And everyone's eye seems to be in a different place than where Seattle residents can see they need to be. As we talked about earlier with those poll results, Seattle residents want a more comprehensive response. They want responsiveness from the police department and they want to shift out responsibilities, assets to manage things in a way that does ensure they can get the service level they expect from the police department - and get other community violence interventions, diversion programs, other community safety initiatives up and running. And they just seem to be focused on literally everything but that. And at a time where everyone is facing this challenge of trying to manage, whether it's crime or behavioral health crises or everything that we're dealing with, they need to do better. We need Bruce Harrell to get this under control - what dysfunction and what disarray - he needs to get a hold of this. [00:38:01] Robert Cruickshank: He really does. Again, the mayor runs the police department. The mayor has operational control. It's not the City Council. And I think we need to see that leadership from the top to really fix what's gone wrong at SPD. [00:38:12] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Now I wanna talk about big news that broke last night - that a judge just ended federal oversight of SPD after 11 years. Now you were in the administration that saw the consent decree established. What is the legacy of this consent decree, and where do we go now that federal oversight is largely ending? [00:38:34] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, the consent decree has its pros and cons. The upside is, and always was - and this is why many in the community demanded it and went to the DOJ in the first place in 2010 and 2011 - they felt they needed a federal judge, a federal monitor and the US Department of Justice to come in and force SPD to improve its use of force policies, to address concerns about biased policing, and ultimately also added in were - later in the process - concerns about how it manages demonstrations. So it's a pro - is that you get an outside body that is widely trusted, certainly when Obama ran the DOJ and now that Biden does, to come in and force the changes that SPD wasn't willing to make and the City wasn't able to make. The downside though is it's a federal legal process that is fairly limited in what it can cover. You're at the mercy of the federal judge, the federal monitor - who wound up stepping in the summer of 2020 to undermine some of the efforts that were taken to reform the department, including cutting SPD's funding. So its coming to an end doesn't mean that SPD has been fixed. What it means is that in the eyes of this judge, the specific conditions laid out in the 2013 consent decree, in his mind, have been achieved. And what does that mean for people here in Seattle? It doesn't necessarily mean that SPD is a clean bill of health and is now operating in a much better place than it had been before. And in fact, the federal judge did retain jurisdiction over use of force and of how discipline is managed. He cares a lot about the contract - having raised significant concerns about the previous SPOG contract that was done in 2018. But it goes back to something that I remember Mike McGinn saying a lot in 2012, 2013 during this whole negotiation process around the consent decree - pointing out correctly that lasting reform isn't gonna come from the federal government, it's gonna come from the community, and it's going to depend on the ability of City Hall to make change in SPD and make it stick. And he took a lot of heat for saying that. People thought he was trying to keep the DOJ out - he wasn't. He welcomed the DOJ, he was always honest about that, direct about that. But I think he was right. He was right then and right now that with the federal government largely stepping back - not completely, but largely stepping back - bringing an end to much of the consent decree, it's now up to us. It's up to us as a city, as a community, and especially our elected officials in City Hall to actually make sure that what we want done at SPD, what we want done with public safety more broadly happens. As we talked earlier in this podcast, there's a lot of support out there in the public for non-armed response to crime. People want it, it polls off the charts. We still haven't seen it. The mayor's office keeps promising and promising, keeps getting delayed and delayed. This mayor has been in office a year and a half now, and it's time to see it come to fruition - that's going to be another important piece of how we handle policing and public safety in the City - is to have armed officers doing less of it or focusing on the things they need to focus on and not the things where they don't need to be focused on. But we'll see what happens there because as we've seen all along, this is really up to the community to make these reforms stick. The DOJ had its role and we can ask how effective was it really - again, the ending of the consent decree doesn't mean SPD's fixed, it just means certain boxes got checked. But I think we have to see what happens out of City Council elections this year and what the mayor's going to do to address ongoing problems with the police. [00:41:59] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. All with the backdrop of negotiations happening now for the Seattle Police Officers Guild contract - and that will set the tone for so much moving forward. It's going to be interesting to see how this proceeds. [00:42:16] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, it really will. And I think that SPOG contract is going to be crucial - and who gets elected to the City Council this fall will play a really big role in how that negotiation winds up. [00:42:26] Crystal Fincher: It absolutely will. And with that, we'll conclude this week-in-review. Thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, September 8th, 2023. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Shannon Cheng. Our insightful cohost today was Chair of Sierra Club Seattle, long-time communications and political strategist, Robert Cruickshank. You can find Robert on Twitter - and multiple platforms, I think - @cruickshank. We're all around. You can find Hacks & Wonks on Twitter. You can find me on most platforms as @finchfrii. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Friday week-in-review shows and our Tuesday topical show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave 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 podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.
On this week-in-review, Crystal is joined by former Pierce County Council Chair Derek Young! They discuss the official end of the death penalty in Washington state, the abortion pill decision from the U.S. Supreme Court, Pierce County & rural students struggling emotionally and socially after covid, how Seattle's failure to act on housing is hurting other cities, and some interesting political races shaping up in Pierce County. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Derek Young at @DerekMYoung. Resources Climate Justice Work with 350 Seattle's Shemona Moreno from Hacks & Wonks “Washington Legislature votes to repeal death penalty” by Melissa Santos from Axios “Washington state officially abolishes death penalty” by Lisa Baumann from The Associated Press “Budget committee weighs Inslee's plan to stockpile abortion medicine” by Jim Camden from The Spokesman Review “Gov. Inslee buys 3-year supply of abortion pills in case of ban” by Joseph O'Sullivan from Crosscut “Pierce County students ‘absolutely in crisis' after COVID, say area superintendents” by Becca Most from The News Tribune “Four Vital Housing and Climate Bills Survive the Washington Legislature” by Ray Dubicki from The Urbanist “WA Senate passes bill allowing duplexes, fourplexes in single-family zones” by David Gutman from The Seattle Times “The Battle for the Seattle City Council, Part 1: The Incumbents” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist Find more stories that Crystal is reading here 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. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is to leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. If you missed our Tuesday midweek show, Executive Director of 350 Seattle, Shemona Moreno, shared with me how the organization approaches climate justice work through deep systems of change. Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host: former Pierce County Council Chair, Derek Young. Hey Derek. [00:01:15] Derek Young: Hey, thanks for having me back. [00:01:16] Crystal Fincher: Of course - always appreciate and enjoy having you on the show. There's a lot of news out of Olympia this week - I think we will start with talking about Washington officially abolishing the death penalty. How are you feeling about this? [00:01:32] Derek Young: If you'd asked me this question 15 years ago, I might've had a different answer, but I think it's pretty clear to me now that the system that we had was unjust and that it was not equitably applied. And that was ultimately the reason for that initial Supreme Court case - that said that you can't impose this penalty unless you can show that it's being basically ordered in all cases. And obviously, I think that the final straw for most people was Gary Ridgway - because if you're not gonna use it in that case, which is the worst imaginable, then how can you apply it in others? So we've been waiting for the law to actually be finally changed - because we had basically executive restraint, I would say, in imposing it - but now it's official. And I think it's not only from a moral sense - the good thing - but from a practical sense too. The more - at least I've come to understand - how often people are convicted that are innocent, or at least shouldn't have been found guilty because of defects in the case - you can always let someone out of jail or out of prison. And we see that happen more and more often, not necessarily in Washington - I haven't noticed many cases here - but the Innocence Project has done tremendous work around the country and proving that people were spending decades in prison. And while tragic in itself - if we had executed those folks, they would not have been able to reverse those decisions. [00:03:18] Crystal Fincher: Right - it is absolutely the correct moral thing to do and the fiscally responsible thing to do. As you said, we have not had an execution in Washington State in about 13 years, since 2010. You're right - we've been relying a lot on executive restraint - Inslee pledged to never sign a death warrant while he was in office. The Legislature, I believe in 2014, acted to put a moratorium on the death penalty - this officially abolishes it in the state. And I do think it is absolutely a moral issue. We should not be putting people to death. It's also more expensive, it's also impractical. We have a deeply, deeply flawed criminal legal system. To have death be a consequence that flows from a result, from a system that we know is deeply flawed, doesn't make any sense. For me personally, it doesn't make sense to put people to death from a state perspective anyway. And I hope more of this spreads to more places throughout the country. There are other states who have also outlawed the death penalty - hopefully more continue to do so. [00:04:22] Derek Young: Yeah, and I do think it's good to acknowledge why some people react really emotionally to this. There have been some really heinous crimes committed - certainly we've had our share here in Pierce County that I think really drove the conversation around that - just saying these crimes were so horrific, they deserve the ultimate punishment. And I certainly understand that. At the same time, the outcome is still the same if we ensure that those folks are never getting out, unless we can prove they're innocence. And if they can, then they should be let out. So there is a degree to which - I think we have to try to separate that desire for retribution for some rather horrific crimes, and weigh it with the moral and practical reality and financial realities of the death penalty - which is, it's hard to do, but I think it's important and the Legislature and the governor deserve credit for doing it. [00:05:25] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. In other important legal news this week, we are today - as we are recording this in the morning - waiting on an expected Supreme, United States Supreme Court decision today about whether to allow restrictions on mifepristone, an abortion pill, to go into effect while a lawsuit brought by anti-abortion groups targeting the pill proceeds. This is going to be a big deal and really goes to show how - even a movement that some people here in Washington, a state that has moved to protect reproductive rights - thinking, Supreme Court, different states are outlawing abortion, but that's them, doesn't really affect us in other states. And if you want to get away from that, just move to another state - this is a states rights issue, and you can move to a different state if you don't like it. Moving to a different state does not necessarily mean that you will not be impacted, and this is a perfect example. How are you seeing this? [00:06:22] Derek Young: Yeah, I guess I should not have been surprised because it had been rumored that there were, there was some judge shopping going on to bring this case. And in fact, from my understanding, is that the organization that brought it literally just invented itself and opened up an office in one particular court district in order to bring this case - so they must've done their homework. But I thought, even more interesting, was that the attorney general and governor appeared to have been prepared for this both legally and practically - the governor had ordered the stockpiling so that we would protect some supply of mifepristone. But also the attorney general, within - I believe it was a day - had a case in front of the Eastern District in Washington and got essentially a counter case in order to try to stop things. I don't think that we can count on a positive outcome 'cause when you have conflicts, eventually these things tend to end up in the Supreme Court. And we know how that Court has been ruling and been behaving lately. But to me, it's just shocking that there would be a judge asserting their own judgment over the FDA in a case like this. And from what I understand from legal experts, it was a wacky case and decision - that there were a lot of assertions that simply aren't true, got way outside the law and into the efficacy and the safety of the drugs - that that's certainly not a judge's expertise. So I don't know - on the one hand, I wanna be shocked, but I don't think we can be at this point. [00:08:09] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And the heart of this is really about whether the FDA is the ultimate authority on this or not. And this is essentially overruling the FDA, which has years of data and studies and experts who deal with this, or a judge who was put in place to handle rulings largely like this in a way that conservatives were confident would be friendly to them and their position. So it's an interesting place. I absolutely applaud Governor Inslee's decision to buy what's anticipated to be a three-year stockpile of mifepristone and think that's an excellent use of our state funds to make sure that we protect women's and people's reproductive rights here in Washington State. It's going to be interesting to see what the result and outcome of whatever this decision is - certainly hope that reason and justice prevails. But as you said, reason and justice has not been prevailing with this Supreme Court, as currently constituted. So I generally do not hold much hope that their rulings are going to reflect what most legal authorities consider to be sound jurisprudence and reasoning. So we're eagerly awaiting. If we happen to get it while we're recording, we will let you know. Odds are it's going to happen later in the day, but we will see. [00:09:33] Derek Young: The thing that gives me a little bit of hope here is that the initial stay by Justice Thomas was extended - that suggests to me that maybe there is some behind-the-scenes dissent, I guess is the right word, that maybe this might even be a bridge too far for some of the core conservatives. I'm hoping that that's the case. But what's unusual about it is that typically the Supreme Court doesn't - when they issue stays, they don't put deadlines necessarily on them - it's when they want to come back to them, they will. This seemed to be tipping his hand that he wanted to rush this and couldn't quite get it together. So I'm hoping that says there's maybe - out of that block - one or two justices that are getting cold feet and maybe realizing that overruling administrators is a bridge too far. If you've ever complained about judicial activism, this is the ultimate judicial activism. [00:10:40] Crystal Fincher: It absolutely is. And not even a borderline attempt - this is wholesale. I know the law says one thing, I know precedent says one thing - but we're doing something different 'cause I feel like it time. Conservatives seem to have no problem with that when it goes their direction. Not what you would call small government, not what you would call a personal freedom and liberty, but here we are. [00:11:03] Derek Young: And it's not like the FDA is known for rushing through things. [00:11:06] Crystal Fincher: Not at all. [00:11:07] Derek Young: My biggest complaint with them is that they tend to be feet dragging and overly cautious. So this is long established - good science behind it. We understand its safety and efficacy. In fact, in nearly all cases, this would be the most, the best method for women to seek out. So I really don't understand the objection. [00:11:34] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. This is just about the safest way to have an abortion. If you fit within the timeframes that this is supposed to be taken in, has the least amount of complications out of all of the methods here. It's been in use for decades. Not controversial at all, except for when a moral panic spins this up and here we are. We'll continue to follow this. And again, if we get this decision while we're recording, we'll let you know. Otherwise, you know to be on the lookout for it. This week, we also saw an article in The News Tribune talking about how Pierce County students are struggling after the pandemic. What were your takeaways from this article? [00:12:19] Derek Young: Yeah, it's one of those things that's unfortunately not surprising, but something that we really need to address. And it's obviously not just Pierce County - this is kids all over the country and frankly, the world. The impact to them during the pandemic was significant in terms of their social emotional wellbeing, and it's causing a crisis. And it's not just in our schools - we see it definitely in how they're doing academically - but in their lives in general. And certainly we've seen it unfortunately manifest itself on our streets with kids, at alarming rates, getting into violent situations. And so I think it's good to recognize and it's good to see our superintendents are on top of this. Social emotional learning is something that we worked a lot on even before the pandemic in public health, but the resources are thin. And so that's something that has to be addressed, likely by the Legislature. If we leave this up to local governments to sort out, it's gonna be tough to come up with the kind of resources we're talking about, but it needs to be dealt with because - I think everyone assumes that the problem was just being out of school and going hybrid for that time period. And that's a part of it - for sure - but kids suffered a lot of trauma. I don't think people realize - how many people lost caregivers, or how many of their caregivers lost income - and so their lives were thrown into turmoil at an important time in their lives. And so it's something that we have to hit head on, and I'm glad to see people taking it seriously. I also think it's worth noting the disparity between districts and how some of the rural districts would struggle to handle this on their own. And so it's something that I'd like to see our health departments, with the support of the state, take up and try to ensure that we have resources distributed equitably. I know Councilmember Hitchen, who has been - in her previous life before she joined the County Council with me, was a teacher in a rural high school - and is super aware of the impacts to the kids that she was there to educate. And so she seems to be taking this on, in particular, as Chair of the Human Services Committee and also a member of the Board of Health - I think the Vice-Chair now. So I'm glad to see that folks - after I left - are working hard on this. [00:15:18] Crystal Fincher: Yeah and this is a big issue, as you said, for rural districts. This is a big issue and they're really these - there were administrators from the Franklin Pierce School District, White River, Peninsula, Carbonado and Bethel school districts who got together - those superintendents got together and addressed Pierce County Council's Human Services meeting on Tuesday. They talked about lessons that they learned from the pandemic. Obviously the pandemic was a new experience for everyone at every level, so things didn't happen perfectly. A lot of people learned lessons. One of the things that they talked about was the confusion of navigating through a time where they were getting different guidance from the CDC, state authorities, health departments, and other leadership - whether it's the OSPI or the State - just all these levels of government who were trying to figure things out, but saying different things, giving conflicting information. And really superintendents in schools having to ultimately make sense of and implement that in a very uncertain time - was a challenge. And then they went on to talk about the impacts that the students are feeling that you articulated so well. And that yes, definitely impacts to the academics - reading, writing, math - but the most striking challenges that they're seeing are not academic. They're, as you said, social and emotional. They're dealing with the complications that everyone felt during this pandemic. This pandemic took quite a toll on the community. We talk about huge numbers - over a million people died, tens of millions of people potentially disabled with long COVID and not able to live life in the same way that they were able to before, or work in the same way that they were able to before. And when those are caregivers, when those are people who are responsible for the finances and the income in the family, that is incredibly destabilizing. And so we have these kids who just went through years of destabilization. Some of them were not able to stay in the same place, not able to keep doing the things that they've been used to doing. And it's just a big challenge. And they're seeing the impacts of that and how they deal with each other and how they're not able to emotionally regulate as effectively as they did before the pandemic - understandably. But this now creates a situation where we need to double down on the resources, on the help. This is not a time to be cutting resources in schools as unfortunately, a lack of state funding is forcing a lot of schools to do. But losing counselors, losing school nurses, losing resources, losing places where kids could congregate and teens had things to do - lots of those things were decimated throughout the pandemic, suspended, taken away, have not returned in the way that they did before. And so you have kids who are just floating away and being lost and compounded with challenges in rural areas, like a lack of stable and reliable internet access for many people in the district just creates all of these problems that are manifest. They manifest in our criminal justice system. They manifest in abuse - substance use and abuse. If we don't address this head on, if we don't pour resources and time into trying to solidify the future for these kids, I don't know what's gonna happen but it doesn't seem like it's gonna be good. [00:19:06] Derek Young: No. And I think the thing that is - you touched on something there that I think is really important. The districts were - I will say, as someone who was there at the time - they were doing their best to sort through it. And in this sort of chaotic environment where you're learning something new every day and trying to adjust on the fly, trying to adjust to conditions on the ground - they were doing their best. But I can also understand why they would have some frustration coming out of that. This is a good example of the sort of things - I am annoyed that we are not doing a better job of having some lessons learned coming out of this because there will be another pandemic at some point. If we don't figure out - here's the things that went well and here's went wrong - shame on us. And I had pushed - and Senator Murray to her credit had done so on the Congressional side - to create a joint task force at all layers of government to do an after-action report. For whatever reason, that didn't get into the final bill as something that we were going to push. I thought that it was gonna pass, but apparently there were some objections. And I just think that's a shame because we need some sort of trusted bipartisan report-out to tell us what we got wrong and what we got right. And just to your point on the - all of the experiences that kids had - it doesn't look like the same, it's not the same for everyone, right? You mentioned that we have people with long COVID and such. We also know that this disease causes neurological problems, and that's becoming something that we're more aware of now. I always point to it as - everyone's acting weird, right? We know that people's behavior changed during the pandemic and that's gonna come out in ways that are unexpected - and not only for the kids themselves, but also if your parents have changed in their behavior, that's gonna affect them as well. So it just feels like we need to address this as directly as possible, like you said, because if it's not - we know what happens when young people don't get their needs met. And that tends to be really bad outcomes later in life. So you're better off - financially - investing in the types of resources that will help support them, whether it's social services, some sort of social emotional learning programs, whether it's extra help in schools. I don't really care what that looks like, but it needs to be really well thought out. And it's no different than the impacts of what happens to a person when they lose housing. We know that that trauma lives with them for a very long time, if not forever. And so if you take a step back and say - What if we kept them in housing? Almost always, you're going to save a huge amount of money down the road. So these are kids - they're depending on us to fight for them - let's do it. [00:22:48] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And again, we all have a role to play in this, different levels of government have a role to play in this. This is not something that the districts can solve themselves. The White River School District Superintendent talked about how they suffer from a lack of programming and resources, saying that there are resource deserts that lack stable internet access, programming geared towards youth, pharmacies, grocery stores, and public transportation. The Bethel School District Superintendent said there were only three parks in his entire school district - no Boys and Girls Club, no YMCA - with over 20,000 students. No pool for kids to go to in the summer - just they lack resources in the entire community. And of course that's going to impact them. So we'll link this article by Becca Most in the resources in the show notes so you can read it. It's just something that we have to get our hands around. We know that bad outcomes are happening when we don't address this. And if we allow kids to go through this system, we're really cheating them. We're not giving them what we should be, what they're due. We're not living up to our paramount duty, as our State Constitution said, to provide a quality education. And we certainly aren't setting these kids up for success. We can and should invest in this. This article also talks about the increasing needs for special education students. And at a time where our Legislature is still debating about special education funding and whether there should be a cap and maybe not, we do have more kids who need this. This is not just frivolous over-identification - these are kids in need. And of course there's a greater need. So why we're capping that need - I don't know at all - but the need has certainly increased and we shouldn't be punishing, ultimately, districts and kids for presenting with those needs. [00:24:45] Derek Young: Yeah, absolutely. [00:24:46] Crystal Fincher: Also want to talk about the progress that we've made in housing. We talked a bit about this last week, but we have now seen more housing bills passed - four major housing bills have passed. Definitely HB 1110, the missing middle housing bill, passing was big. Also we saw HB 1293, which streamlined some development regulations, which has been cited as something slowing down the ability to build the capacity in housing that we need. Accessory Dwelling Units being allowed under HB 1337, as well as some transit-oriented development. When you think about these housing bills and the progress made on housing, what does this mean to you? Where are we, and what lesson should we take from this? [00:25:36] Derek Young: Yeah, first of all - my thanks to the legislators who worked hard on this, because it was one of the more difficult fights that I've seen in the Legislature. It's taken a couple of years to get these ideas through, not in this exact form, but certainly in something looking like it. And I'll start by saying housing is at the center of almost all of our social problems. And just to take a step back to the example we just used - Bethel School District, for those of your listeners that aren't familiar with it, it's basically that southeast corner of Pierce County. It starts in the urban area, but goes into the very rural areas, like Graham-Kapowsin area. And you could characterize it as - that's sprawl policy that Pierce County had for a number of years - the lack of infrastructure that you spoke about is a direct result of those land use policies. And it pushed more and more people away, but in a pattern of development that's not sustainable for basic services. And so what you end up with is people who are isolated, who don't have access to public transportation, good public services - like you said, parks. And it's really a tragedy. But if you also want to see us reduce vehicle miles traveled - because that's our number one source of climate pollution - if you want to reduce the amount of pollutants going into our waters, if you want to see reduction in housing costs, because it's the number one increased cost in the last 20, 30 years in our region. If you want to complain about inflation, that's the worst part of inflation. All of those things come back to whether or not we're providing enough housing in our urban areas. And frankly, we have a collective action problem. And the reason it's an issue is that you can basically say, each community can say - Well, that's all well and good, but I don't want it near me. And I understand why people have a fear about that - it's fear of change, and I guess that's reasonable. But I will just say that if you think that having someone live next to you with shared walls, like I have, is more of a problem than all of those other issues that I just listed out - I don't think many people would agree with you. But again, we have this collective action problem where at the local level, we're making these decisions, but having this regional problem. So it's really important that this get passed. And I don't think this is going to be - you're not gonna see skyscrapers in Mercer Island next year as a result of this. It's a pretty modest approach and really just allows fourplexes and sixplexes in a lot of areas with access to good transit. And so the advantage here is that we distribute the burden of growth - because I recognize there can be some impacts - but we do so in a manner that makes sense. And also just note that - people may wonder why the guy from Gig Harbor is always talking about urban development. And first of all, I live in a part of the city that actually had a lot of growth, and one of the denser neighborhoods you'll find anywhere. But the more important thing is that if we don't locate the housing for all this job growth that we've had in the region - particularly in King County, by the way - then that will push the market out further and further, and it will destroy more farmland, it will destroy more rural areas, and take up more of our natural lands. So we all have a part to play in protecting what makes this place so special. And that, ultimately, I think is why this passed with pretty tremendous bipartisan support, I will say. And that took a tremendous amount of work. That was - I don't think there was even a majority support in the Democratic caucus for a long time, in either Democratic caucus. So getting to the point where it passed pretty overwhelmingly - it took - to the credit of the principal sponsors. [00:30:32] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely, it makes perfect sense. I will also add that the GMA climate bill HB 1181 passed, which is important to ensure the planning takes place in the way that it should to enable this growth further in the future and trying to sow the seeds for making sure we do make climate-conscious decisions in all of the planning decisions that we make. This is a big deal. I hope Seattle does get its act together because everyone is relying on Seattle getting its act together. As you said, we're all impacted by what happens in the big city. Unfortunately, the big city is lagging behind. Hopefully this legislation from the state will assist Seattle in doing so. Also want to talk about just what you see in Pierce County - lay of the land - what's happening in election land, what districts, councils, positions are interesting, where is control at stake? What are you seeing that's noteworthy out there? [00:31:33] Derek Young: So as you know, this is a municipal election year. So all of the cities, school districts, special taxing districts have their races in this year. In Pierce County - our County Council, like the other partisan offices, are in the on-year election so those will take place next year. So I think you're starting to see these shape up - sometimes the municipal races don't start quite as early as a legislative race. So you may see people pop up during filing week. In fact, I've always thought it was funny that there's sort of a trend of everyone watching and refreshing their filing page - watching to see who jumps in and what race. So sometimes we have to wait 'til filing week. A couple trends that I think it's important to keep an eye on are school district races that used to be, frankly, pretty sleepy and sometimes it was difficult to recruit people to run. It's a volunteer job - thankless in the best of times - suddenly turned very political in recent years. And you've seen around the country how some of this has been weaponized by pretty extreme folks on the right, and questions about what should be taught in our classrooms about our history, about equity. And then frankly, the echoes of the pandemic - about policies that we had to protect students and staff. All of that has really worn on the districts themselves. But I don't think that - I think especially in the kind of more rural and suburban districts, we may see that trend continue where there's candidate recruitment happening to try to install board members who will do things like ban books. I don't know specific races where that is something that we should be keeping an eye out for, but given what we experienced here - like in my school district, in Peninsula, and thankfully was unsuccessful. But they've had more success in other places - I think it's important to keep an eye on that. [00:34:10] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I agree it's important to keep an eye on that. What do you see in terms of Tacoma and the city council? [00:34:16] Derek Young: So one of the most interesting races - and this is often the case where Tacoma, like Pierce County, has a two-term limit on office. So very often you'll see re-election races not even get an opponent or maybe not a very serious one, but the open seats tend to be where there is a lot of interest. And so the district - I'm blanking on the district number, but the Hilltop District, Hilltop-Downtown-Central Tacoma District - Councilmember Keith Blocker is leaving and he's, I think, done a tremendous job for his community. And there are at least three candidates that I know of now that have shown interest or announced. And each kind of brings their own unique take to how they would approach the office. It's not one I'm engaged in personally, so I don't wanna tout anyone in particular, but that one I think is gonna be the most competitive that I can tell outside or looking in. I know in some of the other city council races, growth concerns are an issue and tend to be what drive city politics - which getting back to that state bill is also why sometimes you have to set some minimum standards so that they don't get in the way of good policy. But I know in my own community in Gig Harbor, but Lakewood, Puyallup, some of the larger core cities outside of Tacoma - they may see similar type races because there've been growth concerns there as well. And this is what kind of creates these conflicts - is that there's a lot of political incentives to try to push back. And so that is always interesting in how it plays out. [00:36:19] Crystal Fincher: It is. We will continue to keep an eye on how those unfold, as you said. During this recording, I've checked to see if anyone new has filed at the PDC - definitely a refresh-a-thon will be going on until the very end of filing week, in May. I think it's May 19th, isn't it? Is that the last day of filing week? [00:36:40] Derek Young: I know it's that week, yeah. [00:36:43] Crystal Fincher: It's that week in May. Yeah, it is, it is. Filing week is May 15th through 19th. So we will follow and see who hops in these races. Also, for a Seattle-centric review, Doug Trumm has started a great series, The Battle for Seattle City Council, with its first part looking at Districts 2, 6, and 7, which each have incumbents in the races. So we'll also include a link to that article in the show notes. And with that, I thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday - every time I say this date, it just is wild how fast time flies. It flies when you get as old as I am, let me tell you. Anyway, thanks for listening on this Friday, April 21st, 2023. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Shannon Cheng. Our insightful co-host today is the former Pierce County Council Chair, Derek Young. You can find Derek on Twitter - if Twitter is still there - @DerekMYoung, that's D-E-R-E-K. You can find Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can find me on Twitter @finchfrii, that's two I's at the end. You can catch Hacks & Wonks wherever you get your podcasts - I like Overcast as an app, but you can choose whatever you want - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the podcast, be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek topical show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, please leave 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 podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.
On this Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, political consultant and host Crystal Fincher is joined by elite advocate, member of The Urbanist Election Committee, and Political Manager at the Washington Bus, specializing in legislative advocacy and electoral organizing with young people, Jazmine Smith! They catch up on legislative updates from Olympia, including free school meals and other education bills, housing and transportation, public safety, voter rights and name change legislation. They also discuss the legislature's desire to exempt themselves from many public disclosure requirements that other elected officials are subject to. They also discuss the state's first auction of carbon pollution allowances after the passage of the Climate Commitment Act and what that might mean for green investment and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, several school districts planning school closures and layoffs because of funding shortfalls that require legislative funding to solve, the impact of SNAP food assistance benefit reductions for families. Crystal and Jazmine conclude with a discussion of speed camera traffic safety enforcement in response to the need to improve safety on our streets and the impacts of police increased surveillance within BIPOC and lower-income communities, as well as some proposed mitigations to those issues. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Jazmine Smith at @jazzyspraxis. Jazmine Smith Jazmine Smith is the Political Manager at the Washington Bus, specializing in legislative advocacy and electoral organizing with young people. She also is an urbanism organizer, serving on The Urbanist's Election committee, with the Queen Anne Community Council as the Transportation Committee co-chair, the Uptown Alliance's Land Use Review Committee and is a WSDCC Rep for the 36th LD. Resources “Marc Dones and the State of King County's Homelessness Crisis Response” from Hacks & Wonks “Announcing our 2023 Legislative Priorities!” | The Washington Bus “WA legislators scrap plan for free school lunch for all students” by David Gutman from The Seattle Times “Washington's Middle Housing Bill Is Still Alive with Further Amendments” by Stephen Fesler from The Urbanist “As Density Bills Move Forward, It's Statewide Housing Goals vs. "Local Control"” by Ryan Packer from PubliCola “This WA bill could make it easier and safer to change your name” by Taija PerryCook from Crosscut “New Drug Possession Bill Emphasizes Coercive Treatment” by Andrew Engelson from PubliCola “Member of WA's ‘Sunshine Committee' quits, cites lawmakers' inaction” by Claire Withycombe from The Seattle Times “WA's government transparency committee is ready to call it quits” by Joseph O'Sullivan from Crosscut “WA enters new era of putting a price on greenhouse-gas pollution” by Hal Bernton from The Seattle Times “Cap-and-trade takes Washington businesses, ratepayers into the unknown” by Don Jenkins from Capital Press “First auction held for ‘licenses to pollute' in Washington” by Bellamy Pailthorp from KNKX “Seattle Schools notifying employees of possible layoffs” by Monica Velez from The Seattle Times “Local school district estimates $12 million deficit without staffing, program changes” by Aspen Shumpert from The News Tribune “Everett schools may slash 140 jobs to deal with $28M deficit” by Jerry Cornfield from The Everett Herald “Additional pandemic-era SNAP benefits to end March 1” by Bridget Chavez from KIRO 7 News “Seattle has ignored concerns over SPD use of surveillance technologies, community members say” by Guy Oron from Real Change News “What's Next for Traffic Cameras in Seattle?” | Whose Streets? Our Streets! “OPINION | Seattle's Automated Traffic Cameras Disproportionately Target Neighborhoods of Color” by Ethan C. Campbell and Nura Ahmed for The South Seattle Emerald 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. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is leave a review wherever you listen. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. If you missed our Tuesday midweek show, Marc Dones, CEO of the King County Regional Homelessness Authority, returned to catch up on how the response to the homelessness crisis is faring since our conversation last year. Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a cohost. Welcome to the program for the first time today's cohost: member of The Urbanist Election Committee, one of my favorite follows on social media, and Political Manager at the Washington Bus, specializing in legislative advocacy and electoral organizing with young people, Jazmine Smith. Hey! [00:01:18] Jazmine Smith: Hi, thank you so much for having me. I'm really excited. [00:01:22] Crystal Fincher: Excited to have you, excited to welcome you for the first time and so serious when I say that you're one of my favorite follows on social media all across social media, whether it's Twitter or TikTok or whatever. But there's a lot happening this week, starting with what's going on in the Legislature, which you are involved with a lot there and following closely. So what are we excited about? What are we sad about? We just passed another cutoff, meaning that if bills didn't make it through the hoops that they needed to that some people have issues with calling them dead, but at least dormant until next session at minimum. So what is still alive and what's not? What's caught your eye? [00:02:07] Jazmine Smith: Yeah, the ones that I've been mostly following are the ones that we cover for work because we have a whole lot of different issues that we're covering four main buckets and so I've been really focused on those. One of the big ones being the wealth tax and guaranteed basic income that's the tax the rich, fund the people stuff. The free school meals, which had a floor vote yesterday and we'll talk more about. But a whole host of democracy access bills as well, and just making sure that we improve our system every way. So there's a lot going on and it's been wild trying to keep track of all of them. [00:02:46] Crystal Fincher: It is. Let's talk about the school meals because this is a bill that I was extremely excited about. We have tons of data, even got more through the pandemic and some of the extra provisions that were provided that show providing meals and assistance to kids helps reduce hunger. And hunger is an impediment to learning. So this should be something that is uncontroversial yes, we're requiring kids to be in school, we should feed them while we're there. This is uncontroversial and sailed through to passage, right? [00:03:21] Jazmine Smith: Right? You would think. I remember back when - I was teaching before this, I was working in elementary school - and during COVID and that shift back to in-person that happened in that spring, it was so nice having kids just be able to grab their lunches - we were doing half days and whatnot - and breakfast and not have to worry about checking in, and getting the codes in, do they have money for this? And then there were a number of students that I talked to that don't normally pick up lunches, but really appreciated the opportunity to have some extra food and whatnot. It was really great to see and I was really excited to hear in the fall that this was a priority for not just OSPI, but from the Legislature. And so that's why when fiscal cutoff hit last week - and it was really surprising to see that it had been reduced down. [00:04:15] Crystal Fincher: So when you say reduced down, what has happened to the bill? [00:04:19] Jazmine Smith: So it went from free school meals for all, breakfast and lunch, to being specifically targeted at K-4 schools and with specific percentages of free and reduced lunch qualified students. So it's no longer a universal for all - which is what was promised - what we were doing during the pandemic, and what I think the starting point and ending point should be. [00:04:46] Crystal Fincher: And there's a big conversation tangential to this about means testing and how that adds an additional layer of bureaucracy at quite a significant expense. And as we talk about school funding later, that absolutely contributes and makes a difference in how that cuts a lot of people who are still in need and even some who may qualify - that is a barrier to access. And means testing, being one of those - I don't want to say neoliberal - but one of those ideas that came with justifications like - we can't allow people who are just rich, who can pay for it to do it. But why not - why is it wrong to feed kids who are hungry, no matter what their background is? And again, if we're requiring them to be there, why don't we just do that? But throwing means testing back into this and paring it down so much is certainly not what we wanted to see - better than nothing, definitely - but let's push and do all we can. There are Democratic majorities in the House and Senate and we have a Democratic governor, so this was something that I was hoping could get through. When it comes to school funding, there are also challenges across the board that several school districts are paying attention to when it comes to special education funding and different things like that. Where do we stand in terms of education policy in this legislative session? [00:06:17] Jazmine Smith: We have a lot of catching up to do with funding for schools - that's where issues with the wealth tax will come in - and just how dramatically underfunded our schools are, both in the general, but also in special ed programmings. And so was, again, really excited to see special education funding remove a cap - we should be supporting all of our students, but then that gets switched back. And so we have a lot of catching up to do and we need to fund our schools and I'm not seeing that happen to the level that it needs to. [00:06:53] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. What is happening in terms of housing and transportation? [00:06:58] Jazmine Smith: Housing - we have a lot of bills coming through where we're attacking all issues. We've got transit-oriented development, TOD - wanted to, thinking about transit on demand, like I wish - transit-oriented development. And then the missing middle bill being back - watching for that - it passed through the House and wanting Senate to keep it going through the - we've been hearing a lot of conversations. And so with the city council meetings that I've been popping in on, watching - we're hearing a lot from different governments being nervous about 1110, the missing middle bill, and a lot of conversations about local control and whatnot. But this is beyond a local control problem. This is a problem where we need all the housing everywhere and we need to be doing everything we can. And it's been shown that local control hasn't been working. And when each individual city and town says - We're not against housing, we just don't want housing here - who are we excluding and where are we passing the buck to? And where are people allowed to live? And then it's just a rehash of the 1923 problem where zoning restricted all of these places where people could live and created the problem where we're standing now with the Comp Plan - comprehensive plan process. [00:08:35] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and so middle housing is still alive - increasing development near transit centers and in more dense areas are still alive. But we've talked before about a lot of cities talking about the issue of local control saying - Hey, yeah, there may be a problem, but one-size-fits-all policy from the state is not how we feel comfortable addressing this. That if we could make our own requirements that fit our own city - what works for Seattle is not necessarily what works in Spokane or Cle Elum or Gig Harbor and different things. And so we all need to do this differently. The challenge in what a lot of people are saying and what has grown the coalition in support of this legislation has been - Well, you've been saying that for years. And we've been waiting for you, while you've been saying that for years, to take the action that you feel is appropriate for your city. And what has happened in most cities is that no action has been taken, while housing prices continue to skyrocket. A lot of times we hear about these pricing issues, predominantly in Seattle - is the highest-priced region, area in the state - but this is impacting Spokane, it's impacting Southwest Washington, Pierce County. It's a statewide issue. And since cities have not taken appropriate action to address the massive housing shortage driving an increase in long-term prices across the board, it's now time for the state to step in and take action, which is how a lot of these things work. But that has resulted, as these conversations happen, in - some might call it negotiation, others might call it watering down or compromise in these bills. And so when they talk about the requirement of cities going from - Hey, any city with 6,000 residents or, and now that's moved to 25,000 residents. Okay - bigger, larger-size cities we're exempting, smaller cities we're exempting the types of areas that this would apply to. If they're in a watershed or different types of areas of development, they're exempting them. So these are the conversations going on in these negotiations. It looks like certainly these bills will pass. The question is how will they be amended and what compromises will occur in order to get them to pass both houses. So they continue to move through the process, but this is an area where staying engaged is definitely helpful. Now there's another bill that I think is really important to talk about - in addition to rolling back police pursuits, which we've talked about before - and now they're asking to expand, once again, the conditions under which they can pursue vehicles. They can pursue vehicles now. Sometimes in the conversation, it sounds confusing - and some people talk about it as if they're prohibited from pursuing anyone now, but they certainly can. But there's another piece of legislation which would make it more efficient, easier, more streamlined to change someone's name. And this is very impactful for the trans community, for people who've experienced intimate partner violence, for refugees who - having an old name and some of the requirements like advertising publicly that you intend to change your name - we don't require that for a lot of other things. These are unnecessary hoops to jump through. They also cost money. We have to have people to administer these things and especially with all of the attacks on the trans community, particularly, but also in terms of intimate partner violence - if someone has a stalker, advertising publicly, Hey, I'm changing my name, just flies in the face of the safety that people are seeking from changing their name. If someone can just easily find out that they're changing their name, that doesn't address any issue there. So excited to see that moving through the process and hope it does. Any other legislation that you have your eye on right now? [00:12:39] Jazmine Smith: We've got a couple of democracy-related bills that we've been following - updating the online voter registration system is going to make it more accessible. Currently, if you have a driver's license, that's the only way - or Washington state ID - that's the only way to utilize the online voter registration system, which leaves out a lot of folks who are recently moved, don't have that specific form of documentation - and that's disproportionately impacting of poor folks, folks who are experiencing homelessness that might've lost their ID, young people who are not interested in driving. I know I've heard that there's a huge bump in young people that just aren't interested in being drivers at this point, and so they don't have a driver's license and there's barriers to that. So that has passed. It has a hearing in the House side now. And then also updating the automatic voter registration so that it - the way it currently sits, folks are asked when they're updating their driver's license or going and registering for the first time - and it can put people who aren't actually eligible to vote in a position where they might accidentally register, not realizing. 'Cause different countries have different rules on who can and can't vote and whatnot. And just in a quick transaction, then, that could put someone's future citizenship at risk because they accidentally registered - so making that both more streamlined and safer for everyone involved. And then also moving city and town elections to even years. So we did that in King County this last election and there are other jurisdictions, say Seattle, that want the opportunity to be able to have their elections when the most people are voting - when they have a full electorate of young people, Black and Brown people, the people who don't have water views, being fully represented and having that turnout that we want in any election. Any representative should be representing their whole community of constituents. And so allowing other towns to join in - will be really exciting to see that move. [00:15:00] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And then when it comes to some of the public safety bills - unfortunately, the bill banning solitary confinement has died again this year. They're still working on the legislation in response to the Blake decision from our State Supreme Court, which - that decision made personal possession of substances - just decriminalized them, legalized them across the board. Our Legislature stepped in a couple of years ago and set some uniform standards that did recriminalize them across the state, albeit lesser penalties. And it looks like they're staying on that path with that legislation this year. The reason why they have to take it up is that there was a sunset provision in the prior legislation for this year. So they have to do something new and it looks like they're not substantively changing, necessarily, their approach to that. They're not looking at decriminalization further, it appears, but we will see. And the deadline for bills to make it out of their house of origin is March 8th, which will be coming up next week. So we will certainly see then what has survived and what has not. Also in news this week - just looking at some legislative transparency problems. While they're doing all this legislating and having all these conversations - there's a lot of information, a lot of deliberation, a lot of communication and testimony that happens. And they talk about their actions and their reasoning. And typically this is available to the public via public disclosure. Lots of times we see in the paper - investigations or information that is found via requests for this information, because these are public servants being paid for with public dollars. The theory is, and how it has worked largely, is that their work is subject to public disclosure and accountability. And the Legislature holds themselves to some different standards, and it has been continuing to raise eyebrows. What is happening here? [00:17:07] Jazmine Smith: That's what I really wanna know, and that's the heart of the question - is what is happening. And with legislative privilege - finding that line between working on the bills and the issues and all of the different nuances - but we do have a right to know what's going on - why did this bill die? What happened behind the scenes? And not all of that is in the public record. A lot of that is conversations that you're having with a person face-to-face or whatnot. But been seeing in the courts with a lawsuit regarding legislative privilege, and also some things that came up last year that were subject to a public disclosure request. And now we're starting to get bits and pieces through someone who used to work at the Legislature, Jamie Nixon, and what they've been able to release. Their Twitter has been keeping a lot of information up-to-date, but then also different reports from other folks following the Legislature. So it will definitely be interesting to see - what is going on, how does legislative privilege hide what's happened, and what is that line? We're still actively working on an issue, but everyone deserves to know - why aren't things getting passed? Why did this happen? What is the background on all of these issues? [00:18:30] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and essentially to your point, what they're doing is claiming legislative privilege for things that - if they were discussed or happened in other areas of government, if it was a city council or a mayor or county council, school board, that they would be subject to disclosure - but we're receiving heavily redacted documents in response to public disclosure requests and them saying - No, we don't have to turn this over. And over time, they continue to implement exceptions and loopholes for different situations or circumstances where they don't have to disclose public documents. And this has raised the ire of certainly several journalists, of the Washington Coalition for Open Government. This is not really a partisan issue - this applies to both parties. There was a hearing where there was a Republican member defending these exceptions, and we've had plenty of Democrats do that, but it does raise questions about - if we don't know what's going into these deliberations, if there is no lever of accountability, what is really happening behind closed doors - and does that foster more productive, ethical, legal conversation? Or even just - there may be plenty of things that don't have anything to do with legality, not saying that people are doing things wrong, but the public should be able to see how decisions are made, how these discussions are going, and there is significant resistance to doing that to the degree that has become the standard for everyone else in the Legislature. I hope that there are more people there that see the light. There is basically a committee that has been tasked with doing this that is basically throwing their hands up. A lot of people are throwing their hands up - they've had some resignations 'cause they're going - What is the point at this point in time? They seem to be fighting back, not taking our recommendations as they once did, and moving in the opposite direction. So we'll continue to follow that and see how that pans out, but it certainly is a challenge. And we see the importance of public records in so many different things, whether it was understanding how dysfunctional our redistricting process was and what happened with that, whether it was issues like deleted texts that we've seen in the City of Seattle and elsewhere - a lot of investigations and accountability work and making sure that people are just doing what they're supposed to be doing is brought to light as a result of these public disclosure requests. So hopefully we see progress on there. Another thing that happened this week that's pretty significant is a big new step as a result of the Climate Commitment Act, which was a huge monumental piece of legislation meant to address climate change - to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by establishing a price for carbon and essentially setting up a market where there is a cap - saying, Hey, we say that this level of pollution that's currently going on, we're gonna cap it at this level. If you wanna pollute above that level, then you have to buy these credits - or essentially get a permit to pollute above and beyond the established cap. And over time, that cap is supposed to ratchet down - impacting the price that organizations, companies, particularly ones that pollute, and reduce and emit a lot of greenhouse gases can emit. And so whether they are called pollution coupons or credits or that, we just had our very first auction in the state where organizations bought those credits to be able to essentially pollute. Now, a criticism of this system is that - can you really bank on reducing emissions if all someone has to do is pay to continue polluting. And the number of credits you make available - does that negate the cap, if you just continue to allow people to buy pollution credits basically and continue to do that - which in other areas where this has been implemented, most notably in California, hasn't gone well in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. So we'll see how that works in our state. But one thing that's undeniable is that this raises a ton of money. This is supposed to raise hundreds of millions just with this first quarterly auction. Over the first couple of years, it's supposed to raise over a billion dollars. And this money raised is supposed to go into investments that help transition to a green economy, to things that reduce greenhouse gas emissions - whether that's electrification, whether that's different initiatives that reduce commuting, whether that's transit, or helping transition companies that are heavy polluters and workers of those companies who are being impacted by the change in their industry to different sectors, investing in solar, the green economy, just a bunch of things. So it'll be interesting to see what these - to get the final tally on what was raised from this auction this time and follow the process to see how those are going to be invested. And to see if the promise of listening to impacted communities - the communities that are hardest hit by greenhouse gas emissions, by climate change and pollution - are we focusing investments in the areas where they're needed most? Are we helping rural areas transition in this area? So a big opportunity, certainly, and look forward to following through this process to see how that turns out. What do you think about it? [00:24:22] Jazmine Smith: I think that any way that we can bring in more money for the state is great. We have a lot of different areas that we need to address the revenue deficit. If we can't fund schools, then where are we going to - where's the line? Everything, so looking specifically at cap and trade and whatnot, agree that I'm skeptical about anything stopping pollution, especially when you're giving these licenses to pollute, but at the very least, we should be able to have the revenue available to start doing that transition. And I know that with the gas tax and all of those things, then we can only use them on specifically cars and whatnot. So being able to have that freedom and different areas to invest in more green areas and having a green economy would be very great. [00:25:24] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. In other statewide news, there is - education is so integral in everything that we do in our economy, in terms of public safety, just in the future for our kids. And several school districts around the state are really struggling right now, because despite it being enshrined in our Washington State Constitution as a paramount duty to fully fund the public education, we are not doing that in a number of school districts, including Seattle, Everett, the Peninsula School District, and others are saying - Hey, we've been saying we're at a funding crisis. We've been raising this alarm and now we are at the point where we're going to have to lay off employees, we're going to have to make cuts in really significant ways. Several districts are talking about school closures and consolidating things, which is just extremely disruptive to kids and to communities. And this is really a result of a shortage of funding there and over-reliance on local levies and bonds that - in the absence of state funding, they have to pass property taxes and increases in property taxes in order to fund the areas of public education that are necessary that are not being funded by the state. And everything from special education to librarians to school nurses to different arts and cultural programming, just what is required for an education that fully prepares people to be successful in life, however they define that, are on the chopping block. How do you view this and what's the way out? [00:27:07] Jazmine Smith: Yeah, as someone that came from an elementary school up in Ballard - so there was a lot of PTA funding that supported the school, nice-sized auctions and whatnot. It was still funding staff members - the counselor at the school was partially funded by PTA funding, folks at the front desk that are absolutely crucial to making sure that everything runs smoothly in the school - these are the folks that are gonna be first on the chopping block. And those staff members that are those connection points with students who are struggling, who might be the ones that are organizing backpacks of food to go home over the weekend, and the counselor that you talk to about what's going on. These are the people that are facing layoffs because we are not funding our schools, because there's massive deficits and that we're over relying on, as you said, those levies. And it just hit this breaking point. And I know that we had the McCleary decision a while back and there was some influx of funding that happened that did help raise wages - wages are still too low for what is appropriate for education professionals and whatnot. And here we are with Seattle with $100 million deficit, Peninsula Schools, Everett - millions of dollars that are leading to 70 here being laid off. And it's just heartbreaking for the children, for the community, for what happens when neighborhood schools close and consolidate, and the disruption that has, the additional barriers that that poses on families. I remember when we had to move to a temporary school and it was on - still in North Seattle, but on the other side - so all of those families that had to commute for multiple school years outside of their district - and so to, or not outside of their district, but outside of their attendance area and whatnot. And so really frustrating to see - when it's entirely preventable - again, we have a trifecta, we have a Democratic governor and Legislature - we can fund schools. It's our duty to fund schools and we're not doing that. And it's hurting a lot of our communities. [00:29:36] Crystal Fincher: It absolutely is. It is once again, not lost on me that when it comes to our public education system, even within the same district, it is predominantly the schools that are attended by a larger percentage of lower income students or BIPOC students who are being disproportionately impacted - whether it's from school closures or cuts that are going to impact them - they always seem to be on the chopping block first there. And this is not an exception, whether it's the conversations happening right now about potential school closures in the Bellevue School District or what we've seen continuing to happen in Seattle, different districts - it really is a big challenge. And really more districts are sounding the alarm and saying - Hey, we see a number of districts struggling with this now. This may not be us today, but hey, State of Washington and Legislature, if you don't take action this year, this is gonna be us next year. This is something that is a structural problem with education funding throughout the state. And although school boards can certainly impact and school leadership can certainly impact the conditions around that, everyone is starting from behind square one because of these structural deficits and inefficiencies that can only be addressed by our State Legislature. And again, the mandate was clear from this past election - even in battleground districts - lots of Democrats ran on the importance of fully funding public education. This is not controversial. This is supported by the public by and large. There were a number of teacher strikes that were trying to avert issues like this earlier in the year. And so I really hope our Legislature, particularly Democrats who are in power in the Legislature right now, step up to help address this significantly. Also, a challenge that a lot of people are facing this week - especially as so many more people are struggling with the rising costs of housing and food and everything - is a cut to SNAP benefits or Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Programming benefits for people, whether it's EBT, food stamps, however you wanna call it. Hunger is a problem and we have no excuse in this country to have people being hungry. We have no excuse in this state. But we are seeing, as of March 1st, a reduction in the pandemic-era increase to SNAP benefits. So people, as of March 1st, who are receiving food assistance are going to be receiving about $90 less per month, which is very significant. We saw that additional investment reduce child hunger and reduce child poverty by significant substantial amounts, and allowing this to expire and go away is disappointing. But it really has an impact on a lot of people and a lot of news reports are saying - Hey, food banks around the area are expecting a real big influx of people relying on them to feed their families, because not only is this cut happening - and it would be painful at any time - there are so many more increases in food costs overall. Food is just more expensive than it was a year ago, two years ago. And so I hope for everyone listening, you do donate to your local food bank. If you can, help people who are hungry - donate to your local mutual aid organizations - because we're about to see more people fall into hunger and be exposed to poverty now with that. How do you feel about this? [00:33:16] Jazmine Smith: It's really frustrating. I think when we first lost the child tax credit that was expanded, then that was something that - it was not only like losing something that really helped a lot of people during the pandemic, which is still going on. So the first level of everything is that we are still in a pandemic and still living with all of the inflation and all of the issues that are still around with the pandemic - increased health costs and whatnot. So it's still happening even if we've declared that the state of emergency is over. And so first thing when the state of emergency was pulled, both at the state and federal level, is that all of these things that have been helping people - having access to certain levels of healthcare, being able to take a COVID test and get free COVID tests without having to worry - that writing on the wall of everything falling. And now to lose SNAP benefits, or have that drastic reduction, is not only devastating and frustrating from that aspect of people are still needing it and more so right now. But also just - for what reason, why would we do this? And there's - we can't pretend that people aren't still struggling with the pandemic, that it's gone, and that everything's all right, and everything can go back to normal - it can't. We need to continue to be supporting all of our communities through everything. [00:34:46] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. In other news, we certainly have talked over and over again about our street and traffic safety crisis that we're facing across the board when it comes to cars speeding, acting irrationally, hitting pedestrians and people on bikes - this is happening so frequently. We are seeing so many challenges. Just a couple miles away from me, a few nights ago, there was a fatal hit and run from someone who hit a pedestrian on a street. We've seen several other vehicle collisions in the region this week that have resulted in major injury or death of pedestrians - certainly talked a lot about this on the show. And one potential fix that has been talked about is automated traffic enforcement - speed cameras, basically. And hey, this is something that we don't rely on traffic stops, just sees if you're speeding or not. This has been implemented in some school zones. They're talking about implementing it in others, and potentially expanding to other areas in the city and areas where there are a higher amount of vehicle-pedestrian collisions. And lots of people going - Hey, these speed cameras do show that they reduce speeding, they reduce collisions and injuries. While also - the fact of the matter is that the communities impacted the worst, the people who were being hurt and the communities where these deaths are occurring are predominantly lower income and BIPOC communities because of the historic lack of infrastructure investment and safety investments that occur in other areas. So these accidents, because of the way these communities have been built and designed, are more likely to happen in these areas. But if we do focus solely in these areas, not only does that potentially have the benefit of addressing these traffic collisions and making the area safer, it submits these communities to increased surveillance. And there are talks about expanding the use of cameras or the availability of data and information from these cameras for uses beyond traffic. So this is in the realm of possibility. And if we're saying - Hey, if we're talking about in the south end on Rainier Avenue, and hey, if you're down there - everyone who drives by, everyone who walks by is gonna be on a camera, they're gonna have their license plate scanned, they're gonna do that - that can potentially be used for any kind of situation. We have seen this repeatedly result in increased interactions with police, increased scrutiny in these areas that doesn't occur in other areas. That doesn't mean that these problems are not occurring in other areas. It just means that we're not looking for them to the degree that we are in lower income and BIPOC communities. And there is a very valid conversation to be had about - do we allow the expansion and the proliferation of surveillance of communities of color, basically. And we have to talk about this. This is an impact that should not be ignored. And someone who cares deeply about pedestrian safety and mobility and absolutely wants action to be taken on this, I also do not want to subject these communities to continually expanding surveillance, and the consequences and harm that results from that. So this is something that is a conversation that's talked about. Guy Oron had an excellent article about this - I believe the South Seattle Emerald, had a great piece on this. But as this conversation evolves and adds this tension between - hey, this is something that can increase safety, and also this is something that can increase harm - are things that we have to continue to grapple with and that the community needs to be involved with working through this. How do you feel about this? [00:38:37] Jazmine Smith: It's definitely complicated because that gut instinct is that if it is proven to change driver behavior and whatnot, then in that sense, then it works where it's at or where it's put in place. And so it should be everywhere - or to a certain extent - it certainly shouldn't be concentrated on communities of color, which is where there currently are a lot of focus points. And so it is that balance between wanting people to be alive, not wanting people to have to risk crossing Rainier and worry about their family all being hit in one interaction with a vehicle. But at the same time, I guess I hadn't realized that there was - I just assumed that all of the cameras everywhere are always watching - I'm just so numb to this current state of the surveillance state. There's cameras on top of the sign across the street from me and whatnot. I remember asking my landlord - You think that they can see into my apartment and whatnot? There's so much surveillance going on. And I guess part of my question is - How much is already happening just universally, but at the same time not wanting to expand it, expand that harm. And I think a bigger emphasis needs to be put on designing safe streets from the get-go. Putting that design - and I know we've already built out a lot - and so it's patching up as things come up and whatnot, as buildings get built and whatnot. We can't just reinvent the whole city in one snap. But yeah, that first investment should be in designing streets and fixing streets to be safer for everyone as we walk by, while not focusing on that punitive element. And finding ways to address driver behavior that isn't in that punitive way, but really just encourages safe behavior. So it's really complicated in that - well, what works and what has been working, versus what is best for communities and what is most equitable across the board. [00:40:56] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And the point you raised about it needing to be everywhere are some points that people say - Okay, if we are gonna do this, we should be mitigating the potential harm. We should be making sure we're doing this in as equitable a way as we can. Certainly to your point, the road design impacts more than enforcement will, certainly. This is a conversation that we've been having, especially with the recent release of the Seattle Department of Transportation's Vision Zero review, which lots of people noticed did not seemingly adequately address the impact of road design or plans to impact design to address this. But when it comes to cameras, one of the suggestions was - Okay, so make sure they are distributed equitably throughout the city. Make sure they're not just concentrated in certain areas. We have an interest in people not speeding or driving dangerously in all areas of the city. So let's not just concentrate it there. Let's do it in all areas. And suddenly when you talk about implementing something in Laurelhurst, people get more concerned about what the potential ancillary impacts could be. And so that's a positive thing. And we're not only doing that. Another suggestion that was brought up was - currently right now, the revenue from traffic cameras goes into the Seattle General Fund. And in many cities, it goes into general funds because - certainly this is not just a Seattle-only problem, several cities have traffic cameras and are contending with this across the state - and it largely goes into general funds. And if this becomes a revenue driver, if the goal isn't simply making the streets safer, and the goal becomes - in declining revenues and things you want to fund, this is another area of revenue. It is not, personally, what I think - is not a productive, is not a good place to be to rely on enforcement for revenue. That is a bad incentive and incentivizes them to continue to find things that go wrong - in fact, to not address some of the structural design issues because - Hey, we're getting revenue from the way things are happening now. So restricting that - instead of going to the general fund, restricting it to investments in traffic safety and road safety, maybe dedicating it to being able to implement some of the design changes that would make things safer. But if we restrict that and only allow reinvestment in areas that increase safety, that seems like that's - one, more aligned with what this revenue is really targeted for and supposed to do and reduces the incentive for ticket's sake. Because when it comes to cameras, they do ticket a lot more than officers just standing in different spots will, which is one of the reasons why it's more effective. It's always there, and it targets everyone. But it does then create this as a revenue line item. So lots of people, as we've seen in many different areas, will do toxic things, whether it's seizing property or giving speeding tickets to raise revenue, and that is not a positive thing. So we'll continue to follow this conversation. We will continue to follow along and see how this goes. The Seattle Department of Transportation, certainly - and I'm sure many others across the state - are interested in community feedback about this as they try and navigate through this issue. Automated enforcement is one thing that a lot of cities across the state are looking at to address pedestrian safety. So this is something that lots of people need to engage with and need to make sure that we just don't implement this willy-nilly and have unintended consequences, which sometimes may not be as unintended if people see this as a potential for revenue. So to reduce the harm done on the other side - because harm is harm, and increased targeting, increased stops and contacts that are concentrated in one community does lead to a lot of the problems that we've seen in trying to reduce that. So we'll continue to follow along with that. That is our time today. So we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, March 3, 2023. Hacks & Wonks is co-produced by Shannon Cheng and Bryce Cannatelli. Our insightful co-host today is a member of The Urbanist Election Committee, one of my favorite follows on social media, and someone who is doing the work every day as the Political Manager at The Washington Bus, as a volunteer for so many other issues, and specializing in legislative advocacy and electoral organizing with young people, Jazmine Smith. You can find Jazmine on Twitter @jazzyspraxis. You can find Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can find me @finchfrii, 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 podcast to hear the full versions of our Friday almost-live show and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave 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. Thank you, Jazmine, for joining us, and we will talk to you next time.
This week Austin Jenkins talks public schools with WA State Superintendent Chris Reykdal.
GUEST: Washington Superintendent of Public Instruction, Chris Reykdal, joins KVI's John Carlson to discuss his support for a bill in the state Legislature that would provide free lunch to all K-12 public school students. House Bill 1238 and Senate Bill 5339 are called the "Washington Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act." Reykdal and Carlson diverge on the ethos that free meals in school should be means tested based on income qualification. Reykdal pitches his plan as a way to give middle and upper class families a break on costs to feed their kids at school, the burning question remains: will all kids actually want to eat the free school lunch meal or will most kids still bring their own food to eat rather than scarf down what the school offers.
A report notes that OSPI has not yet established a process to measure outcomes of ESSER spending and there is insufficient state-level detail to identify how much money is being spent. https://bit.ly/3X1o2Mx #TheCenterSquareWashington #OSPI #WashingtonStateSuperintendentOfPublicInstruction #ChrisReykdal #TrackingOfFederalAid #WashingtonStateLegislature #K12Education #JointLegislativeAuditAndReviewCommittee #FederalElementaryAndSecondarySchoolEmergencyReliefFunds #VancouverWa #ClarkCountyWa #ClarkCountyNews #ClarkCountyToday
Today our guest is Kim Reykdal. We talk to Kim about the importance of having a whole child approach as we work to serve students and families. She talks about what she sees is missing from education, academic, career, and social emotional development, and how we can use data to help us close the gaps in those areas. Kim shares practical ways that we can better support all students, and gives ways that we can honor students as they take the next steps in their journeys after high school. Kim Reykdal, M.Ed. is the Director of Graduation and Pathway Preparation at Washington's Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI). In her current role she co-leads a statewide team to execute a recent policy change requiring every district to implement a comprehensive K-12 school counseling program aligned to the ASCA National Model. In collaboration with Hatching Results, the Washington School Counselor Association (WSCA), Association of Wa School Principals (AWSP) and other state- and regional-level partners, Kim is helping facilitate systemic shifts to improve student support systems across Washington. In addition to previously supporting dual credit and secondary school counseling at OSPI, Kim's 25+ years in education have also included serving as a high school teacher, high school counselor and career counselor, Reach Higher WA Steering Committee Member, Military Academy Selection Committee Board Member, School Board Director, and Chair of the WSCA Government Relations and Advocacy Committee. Through these roles, Kim has tirelessly advocated for students, school counseling and public education at the building, district, and state levels. Consequently, WSCA named Kim their 2014 Career Counselor of the Year and ASCA recognized her as a 2016 Finalist for National School Counselor of the Year. Kim is passionate about working collaboratively with district, regional and state-level partners to scale up standards- and evidence-based practices for school counseling.
Hour 1 -- 15 days to election day, polling says public interest in this election is the highest ever for a mid-term, MSNBC host says inflation is a myth, WA Senator's 1st remark after last night's televised debate, WA Sec. of State candidate really doesn't like "ranked choice voting", "Democrats bet heavy" that abortion would be the primary election issue but the economy is still dominating most headlines, Pres. Biden claims his student loan debt forgiveness 'passed by a vote or two' when it was his executive order. Hour 2 -- Tiffany Smiley "prepared, defiant and at times understandably emotional" during last night's big debate, Murray "even keeled with a low tone" during debate, Carlson examines the key moments and the key words in last night's debate, "Patty Murray is today's Washington D.C.", how both candidates handled the abortion issue in last night's debate, gun control moments in last night's Murray/Smiley debate, "something seriously wrong here" with virtually all election positions for judge in King County having no challenger. Hour 3 -- Sen. Patty Murray says "public education system is the backbone of our economy" sets our antennae buzzing, WA hydro-electric dams becoming a problem spot for Democrats as they preach climate change but want to demolish dams, Democrats feuding between Tacoma and 'Seattle/Olympia', GUEST: KVI's Ari Hoffman on the continuing saga of CRT public school curriculum writer, Tracy Castro Gill; Hoffman notes Gill was so 'extreme, so divisive' that she was fired by the Seattle School District, now she's lecturing at UW and hired as a consultant on curriculum via the OSPI, Gill sells curricula across the nation and now OSPI is buying them; a WA Secretary of State candidate is hesitant to support any law on ballot harvesting.
On this midweek show, Crystal chats with Emijah Smith about her campaign for State Representative in the 37th Legislative District - why she decided to run and her thoughts on addressing issues such as community representation, housing affordability and zoning, homelessness, public safety, mismatch between passed policy and subsequent implementation, education funding, and climate change. 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 guest, Emijah Smith, at @ElectEmijah. Resources Campaign Website - Emijah Smith: https://www.electemijah.com/ South Seattle Emerald's 37th LD Representative Position 2 Debate (October 4, 2022) - Moderated by Crystal Fincher: https://www.officialhacksandwonks.com/sse-37th-ld-debate-2022 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 very excited to have a guest joining us from the 37th Legislative District who's a candidate for State Representative. Thank you so much for joining us today, Emijah Smith. [00:00:49] Emijah Smith: Thank you - I'm happy to be here. [00:00:51] Crystal Fincher: Happy to have you here. I guess just starting out - I would love if you could just share what experience you're bringing to this race and why you decided to run for office? [00:01:03] Emijah Smith: As you know, I'm a mother, I'm a grandmother. I'm raised and rooted, been living in the 37th my whole entire life basically. I have historical context of the community, as well as current context. I chose to step into this role because I've been in Olympia for over 10 years - locked arms with families, bringing our youth forward - to really advocate for meaningful change that we want to see in our community. Advocating for universal preschool, advocating for stable and affordable housing, food security, the broken tax system, racial justice - you name it - the things that are important to really ensure that our families are healthy and our communities are healthy. So I've been doing the work and I want to - I'm here to be a bridge builder, really - to say, I'm in Olympia, this is your space. I'm told when I'm out here canvassing all the time that we really - the 37th wants to transform status quo. So people are like - I'm a great champion for the voiceless, they know I have the credibility and the consistency of doing the work. So having that current real lived experience of the lives of the 37th, having demonstrated experience in Olympia, and really having some really powerful relationships with families and our children in the 37th is the reason why I step into this opportunity. [00:02:29] Crystal Fincher: And it is a unique opportunity and you bring up something important - which you talk about - the context of how the community used to be versus how it is today, which is different. The district has grown, it has changed, the composition of people who are there are different. As you look at how the 37th Legislative District has changed, what do you think is the most important thing you as a representative can do to connect with the community today, while not displacing any further the community that has been left out and preserving the culture and heritage and history of the district? [00:03:10] Emijah Smith: Thank you for asking that question. I am from the historic Black community of the Central District - raised there, grandparents there, parents there - and really seen firsthand, really, the love and the investment in our community. Although it started out with redlining, that's how the community came to be. It's been a very joyful childhood experience that I had there - it felt safe - until that failed War on Drugs came into the community. And I believe those policies - steeped in racism, the over-policing, the criminalization of addiction, and the lack of resources - just as a young person, I was committed and committed myself to say, I'm going to go to college, I'm going to do any and everything I can to bring resources to the community, bring healing to the community, as well as restoration. So in that process of those policies, I believe that's really key to what started the displacement and the gentrification - because of those poor policies that were just really targeting a community that I believe was vulnerable at the time. And so being - having the privilege to stay in my community, I have not been pushed outside of Seattle - doing all that I can to ensure that me and my children can stay in place with regard to the taxes and things. I have really seen and built relationships with the new faces in community - so through my, as a PTSA president at my children's elementary school as well as my kids' school currently, really seeing the families that are coming in, having the opportunity to learn some of the issues that they care about. But in addition to that, along the way - again, since as a youth - been advocating for community building and development and making sure that folks can stay in place. So fighting for or advocating that taxes can be reduced for low-income communities - a Black community's average income in Seattle is around $50,000, probably a little bit less. How can one - how can anyone - survive and live in Seattle with the rents and the cost of living? It's impossible. And so our elders and our seniors are just holding on. But I will say - going to Olympia, really, with King County Equity Now and other organizations in our ecosystem - really holding the Washington Finance and Housing Commission accountable to ensure that our dollars were coming back to community so that we can get the developments like the Africatown Plaza, Ethiopian Village, Elizabeth Thomas Homes, Petah Village - these are all community investments that are in the 37th. And so to be on the frontline doing that work is what we have to do, is what I do. This is a people's campaign, this is about people-powered policy. And I have found along the way, although I have a Master's in Public Administration - seen on the professional side of the academic side of how to move policy - I have found the most meaningful policy has always come from community voice and community's power. [00:06:09] Crystal Fincher: I would agree with that. And you talk a lot about the need to make sure people can afford to stay in there. You just talked about the average income of Black families being around $50,000, which is half - less than half now - of what the median income is in the entire City of Seattle. So there is a huge gap, with historical reasons behind that, and that absolutely needs to be addressed. When it does come to housing and just the ability for people to continue to live where they've been living, to stay in the housing that they currently have, to age in place - what are the most impactful things you can do to help to keep housing affordable? [00:06:52] Emijah Smith: Again, it's - there's a few things. I currently sit on state-level housing justice coalitions and Housing Trust Fund coalition - really speaking to those policy teams in Olympia designated by the governor to look at housing, really speaking - so this is a statewide collective, but we speak directly to the barriers that are at hand. We speak to the historical racial injustice and marginalization as well as policy that has created such barriers and marginalization. We bring the real lived experience of folks of - this is the barrier to even applying for housing, these are the reasons people are denied housing. But your system, through the Department of Commerce, also has these barriers because it's set up for organizations that oftentimes don't look like the most marginalized to get the funding because they've had the decades of opportunities to build the capital or had the experience. And right now, in order to develop housing from communities that are marginalized, they have to - in order to apply, you have needed to have already built some housing. Well, how does one do that if the resources are barred, or I won't say that they're scarce, but they're limited. So we're trying to talk to the Department of Commerce and really advocating there - those are the things that I'm doing. Also looking at taxes, right? Too many seniors have reached out - just trying to stay in place, they're on limited incomes - either retirement, social security - and they just cannot afford the taxes that keep going up in prime areas, particularly like the Central District. But I would love to say that all of the Seattle proper, the taxes keep rising because property values keep rising. I'm even speaking with families who are new, who are the new faces who've come in and bought a home and they're like - they're concerned if they can even keep the current home that they've had maybe for the past five years because the taxes just keep rising. And when taxes rise and you're a property owner, of course you're going to pass that on - most do - to the renters. So property taxes are definitely to be in place, we need to look at incomes - provide a level of income of how much your property taxes need to be, some things need to be exempt - particularly for our seniors. The cost of living is already so high - people are having to choose between prescriptions, food, or rent, or mortgage, or paying those huge taxes. So those are the things that I'm looking into. My value is that everyone should have a home. No one should be unhoused. And I know people are making choices due to other reasons to choose if they should be housed or not. But nevertheless, housing should be available. I'm heartbroken to even share, but just two weeks ago I came across a family - a mother, two children, 4 and 10, living in tents just - not too far, maybe a couple miles from my home - and not for me seeing the child being rejected to going to the bathroom maybe to wash up. I was like, Can I speak to your mom? The mom was willing to share the story and I immediately reached out to some people I know who professionally work sheltering families and luckily they answered the phone, then they called someone else and that person answered the phone, and we were able to get the family into at least some emergency shelter. But I'm telling you, a 4-year old and a 10-year old out in the woods in tents - that is unexcusable and that was in the 37th. And I'm willing to do any and everything that I can to ensure that that's not happening to anyone else. But the reality is I know that it is. [00:10:41] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and there are a lot - there are a lot of things that need to be done to address this issue. Legislatively, in your capacity as a legislator, certainly legislation that is in process that could potentially help a lot of other things that are needed. I guess one of the things that will be coming up in this upcoming session, should you be elected, is the missing middle housing bill, sponsored by Representative Jessica Bateman, to address the shortage of housing supply which experts say is a necessary component of addressing this, not necessarily the only component, but one of the necessary components. Do you support that missing middle housing bill? [00:11:20] Emijah Smith: I do support missing middle housing. I also support some level of rent control. We have to create a pause - again, I'm meeting single people who are afraid of - what can I do? So yeah, I do support that. I think that those things are happening. I've also talked to families just in general throughout my years of engaging in community - where there's low-income housing - there's not enough low-income housing, first and foremost, so people can even apply for that. But there's a lot of low-income working class families in the 37th who need to stay in place. Then there's also affordable housing and if you need to make $80,000 or more just to try to get into that one-bedroom, things are impossible. So middle housing is definitely needed. Whenever I look at legislation, I have to look at the racial equity impact of that legislation. I don't like to jump on anything without understanding the unintentional harm, 'cause we don't want to create more inequities. We don't want to increase the disproportionality on anyone. So that - one thing about me as a leader, as a legislator, in that role representing community will definitely be looking at the fuller impacts, not just quick looks, let's just move and make a quick decision. 'Cause what we don't want to do is invest a lot of time and a lot of money and still causing more harm in community. [00:12:41] Crystal Fincher: And then in terms of addressing housing, we need to get people sheltered - first and foremost - no matter what people are dealing with. I think you have expressed several times that people do deserve housing, period - even if they're dealing with an addiction, dealing with behavioral health issues. Not only do they deserve that, but that's helpful in stabilizing or getting to the point where they can stabilize the issues that they're dealing with. We do have challenges with availability of services to help people - whether it's behavioral health services, substance use disorder treatment - we do wait for people to fall through all the cracks and maybe even become involved in the criminal legal system before they have access to any kind of intervention and then it's much harder to address that problem by that time. How do you plan to address the availability of those services? [00:13:39] Emijah Smith: Wraparound services are definitely necessary. I have family members with behavioral health issues and recovering from addiction. And what I have found to be successful is that people can have stable housing, have stability at least for a year, have something stable to be able to address some of the other issues. I've spoken with firefighters who are concerned that they're going to the housing that is being developed for folks with the multiple issues that have disability, mental illness, whatever - there's different issues - but they're being called for something that's not oftentimes a fire or a heart attack or a health issue, and so there's these reservations. Clearly it's showing that we need more investments - we need more investments in our mental health across the board. And we definitely need more wraparound services for those who need it. And I also would include those who are re-entering from the carceral system - they're given $40 of gate money. If they are not - have a strong support family or community network that could provide housing, oftentimes those folks are really right out in the streets and they're unhoused - and that doesn't support success, that supports recidivism. So the things that I'm looking at is how do we increase vouchers for those who are coming out - it was increased from 3 months to 6 months - but I am a believer in a year's time for stability because I've seen firsthand what it did for family members and community members to stay stable and in place. I also think about our children. When COVID first happened, there was a lot of children who were even in these tiny homes - they might be sheltered, but how can one learn in such a small space in our weather? So as you know, that just really touches my heart. So we have to utilize the revenue, we have to address our backwards and broken tax system to create the dollars and bring them there. I love Washington State - I'm not someone who wants to leave and go to another state and live. It is vibrant here and I want to do everything I can do to invest - not only in Washington, but in the 37th - we have the revenue, we have the marijuana dollars. So I was advocate last session that provided that $400 million to come to our communities, to go to organizations that can also continue to keep investing in community. So we have the revenue, we have a broken tax system that if corrected, or repaired or fixed - whatever you want to use - we can make some serious change. And if we center that revenue on our basic needs - housing, healthcare, education - our families can be healthy, our communities can be healthy. So that's my mindset. These are some complex issues because of who holds the purse strings, but also who's in place to make those decisions. But my value is where I share with you before - everybody deserves housing, healthcare, education, and I do any and everything I can do to champion and support to ensure that happens. We also have to look at the policy language, though - that becomes the issue. These big values and these big systems - who's going to disagree? No one would disagree. But oftentimes our institutions are working in silos instead of working together. So a quick decision can come from housing, but you didn't look into Department of Corrections to see - can that really work. And so again, there's unintentional harms that are created and then we have to go back and it takes a long time to keep going back. So we have to be better at talking with each other and looking at the language that's going to make sense for our state and for those people who are most marginalized. And the way that you do that - to save us some time and save us some money - is you talk to the people with that lived experience, 'cause those who are closest to the problems are the best ones with the solutions. [00:17:30] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely agree - and that feels relevant to some of the challenges that our legislature is having in terms of passing legislation, but sometimes not quite landing the implementation of that legislation in a way that can delay funds getting to the people who it was designed to help, the building of infrastructure to deliver that - where certainly good intentions were there and the policy itself may be sound, but the actual implementation - the how do we deliver this help to the people - has some missing elements that make some complications. How do you think your experience can help address that issue? [00:18:12] Emijah Smith: I'm a - not to be a pause - to me, the first step is always making space and allowing space for people to be at the table, co-designing with community. I do agree with implementation 'cause once the law is happened and it's going to be sent down to the next group to try to figure that out. We should be having conversation to whoever's going to be sent down to. I think about some of the housing projects that are in the 37th and when they started to change - think it was HOPE VI or HOPE IV - and that started to change. The things that weren't considered at the time is like credit history - when you push people out of where they're staying right now, where are they actually supposed to go? There was housing vouchers that were provided, but the new system of how the people will get the housing wasn't taken into account - first and last month deposit. If you have those type of conversations from start to finish, where can we - that's implementation - so what are some of the the barriers or some of the the snags that we can work out along the process? We would've saved ourselves some hardship, and I think that although with the best of intentions of creating and designing these spaces and building community, we also created a lot of unhoused people. We also pushed people into the carceral system because we weren't talking with each other. So the way that happens and another example, I believe, is the LFOs - these are called legal financial obligations. There was a lot of advocacy on the state level to ensure that those who were coming out - the big fines - to reduce some of the interest there. Because if someone still has interest and their legal financial obligations were not complete, they could still almost be put right back into jail - and not almost - some people can go back and be jailed for not making payment. Well, how can you make payment if you're just trying to enter? You already can't - might be limited on the job that you can receive, the housing you can receive, you can't even get stable because of that. The implementation once the law changed was that you have to understand how to ask for that when you were being sentenced. And a lot of people did not know - that's part of the implementation. It has to be addressed at sentencing, not after the fact. 'Cause if you try to appeal it, then you can be denied of those legal obligations being removed. Legal obligation interest has somewhat, has been changed - it's being improved as we're moving along, but what does that look like for the people on the ground - that's a whole 'nother story. So that's - those are the examples that I want to share around implementation. I also think about implementation for our education dollars. There might be some dollars that were sent out to some districts, but if that money is not specified to that department and really restricted to say - family engagement - then the district can use it any way it likes. So the language in the bill has to be very clear and legislators who are representing their communities have to really fight for that language versus families like me - in Seattle Public Schools, we were fighting for family engagement dollars, but the district had put it into other places where there was a priority and a need, but there was a miscommunication, clearly, or implementation issue because we're saying, You have this money you can invest here - where they're like, Well, actually it wasn't restricted - we were able to do what we wanted to do with it. [00:21:29] Crystal Fincher: That makes a lot of sense. And you also bring up a good point about the district and public schools, which certainly have their own issues, but the State - the Legislature - plays a big role in how education is ultimately delivered because they're funding it. And even though there are some issues with how that funding is allocated, part of the problem is that there is too little funding - and so choices are being forced in some situations that shouldn't be choices at all. And usually it's the kids with the least, the kids in areas where they don't have parents with a lot of generational wealth and excess income that are donating to their kids' schools, and education can look a lot different in different areas of the district and even things like turnover of teachers and administrators is unequal in different parts of the district. And especially in the 37th, those schools are paying for it. In your capacity as a legislator, if you're elected, what can you do to increase funding for schools? And where is that in terms of a priority for you? [00:22:43] Emijah Smith: Oh, it's a top priority. It's a top priority. It's top three, top four priority. Education has always been a huge issue - because when I was that teenager in school watching my community, the devastation from that failed War on Drugs - when I committed myself to advocacy, I committed myself to making sure that people had an opportunity in education because I believe that education is an opportunity to change your circumstances. But I also understood that education - the system that I saw - can also track you into the prison pipeline. So I did everything that I could to educate myself about the education system - so as an undergrad, as well as getting my master's in Public Administration. I studied Seattle Public Schools - how money funnels down, what those disparities look like for the new teachers versus senior teachers, what the budget looks like, how budgets are created. And really engaged myself in Seattle Public Schools, to be honest, as a parent, because it became really apparent once I had my own children what it looks like to navigate that and what money followed your child. If your child is special education, then there's certain dollars that come from the federal government that's supposed to provide you more resources, but actually it goes into a fuller budget of a school's budget, as well as a district's budget. So when I think about those things, I think about central offices that tend to carry a larger portion of the budget. How can we try to balance that out? How do we support our teachers to make sure that they're properly trained and well-equipped and want to be in "Title I" schools, which tend to be in the 37th, because those are schools that tend to have higher free reduced lunch. With the population changing, less schools are Title I, but nevertheless you still see this pattern of teachers coming in and leaving and then going back maybe to a North Seattle school, a school that seems to have less diversity, maybe learning styles, what have you. And that's an issue - and to me, I look back at the systems - that is a design system, and we have to work to see how we can make things more equitable. And the PTA right now are looking at how they can share funds, right? My PTA Mercer - I'm the president of the Mercer PTSA - and we're sitting there, we're talking about what schools - do we want to apply to join with these schools to put on certain events and then they split the money. So that those schools who have less revenue with regard to PTSA can have more of an opportunity to support the families that are there. So I first wanted to say that - from a parent perspective, I've been advocating on the special education taskforce at Seattle Public Schools, which helped bring the recommendations forward - what they're negotiating with the SEA in Seattle Public Schools. I've been on the OSPI, which is a state-level education department around bringing in ethnic studies for our students. I'm a strong proponent with regard to apprenticeship opportunities for those families who may not want to jump right into college, can't afford college but want to invest in having livable wage employment for their student. Education is a serious issue. In every way that I can be involved, I am. I also was a catalyst for the current strategic plan at Seattle Public Schools to really look at equity, ensuring that our students furthest from opportunity are being supported. Also with the McCleary Act - to make sure we're fully funding our education - we have a long ways to go and particularly the gap is with special education students and services. So I'm a strong proponent there. I think if we can properly fund our schools, we won't have the same disproportionality that's going on with retaining teachers and retaining good administrators and staff and making sure our children are doing well. A big issue that comes up on the state level, like you said, is the general fund. If you take money here, where you're going to get it from? 'Cause it might come away from our mental health services, it may come away from our health services, it may be something you want to look at for food - and hungry kids can't learn. If kids aren't getting the services, they can't learn. So we as leaders in the state capital - and I say we, because families are leaders and our voice is strong and because of our voice, we have made some meaningful changes. I particularly think about the pre-K and getting working more access to childcare - that has come from really fierce families that say, We need this, we have a ways to go, but we're making progress. Community has to continue to keep advocating for the needs and say, Don't take away our healthcare, don't take away our nurses in school, don't take away our counselors. COVID has allowed this to be a much bigger issue across racial backgrounds, I would say. Before someone might think of it, Oh, it's just more marginalized communities. No, it's all of us, it's all the families. And I love that my leadership and my advocacy has such a strong background of diverse bodies - from, I would say, from white families to Asian American families, Black families, you name it. What I love about my leadership though, is I'm going to make sure we're going to bring forward that Black and Indigenous nuance that oftentimes is ignored and neglected. But from immigrant, refugee, English language learners - I'm an advocate for all of us, not just for my job, but for all of our children, because it's our children who are our future now. 'Cause me - that high schooler whose passion and commitment has me here today. So there's a lot more stories, there's a lot more I can say - it is a complex issue, but at the end of the day, we must fund and invest strongly in our public education to ensure that our children have an opportunity and have a chance to thrive. [00:28:47] Crystal Fincher: I'm also looking at - we have the conversation about climate change. It really is a conversation about equity injustice, because no matter what element we're talking about, it is BIPOC communities, low-income communities, those who are most marginalized, who are experiencing most of the impacts right now and will continue to be without intervention. And this is - we're seeing this happen right now - it's not something to come. These are consequences that are happening right now, whether it's exposure to extreme heat or cold, whether it's exposure to pollution and particulates that contribute to asthma and heart disease and lung disease. We have life expectancies that are years shorter in some areas of the city - some of those in the 37th Legislative District - than there are in other areas of the city. So reducing pollution, greenhouse gas emissions are critical to everyone, but in particular BIPOC communities being able to thrive and live a healthy and productive life. How do you plan to address greenhouse gas emissions, climate change, and pollution? [00:30:05] Emijah Smith: Definitely a supporter and value climate change and environmental justice. I truly understand that it's really steeped and centered around - it's a racial justice issue. It's been an issue and we've had guidance - I feel like, from forever - from our Indigenous brothers and sisters and community members around this issue telling us and warning us about the importance of what's going to happen in our lives if we do not take care of the land. So I just want to first give honor and recognition there. I, myself, and my children - I was diagnosed with asthma at the age of two months. I live - what I designate as South Seattle - if you're not, if you haven't been here a long time, it's really - it's not quite Rainier Beach, it's a little bit past Franklin High School. Just really aware of the air quality here. The soil quality is poor. Today the smoke is ridiculous - I just think something's burning wherever we are. I'm needing to have to stay inside and keep the door closed, and still the air quality is an issue. I'm a neighbor and a community member that's fighting to keep our trees - Beacon Hill - the more that we build, because density, keeping housing and keeping people in place is important. But if it's at a cost of tearing down the trees which are helping a habitat, which is helping clean our air - that's an issue. Senator Saldaña, who's a sole endorser for me, is leading on the HEAL Act. I would support that. There's legislators out there doing that, there's organizations - I've been endorsed by SAGE Leaders also, I take leadership from Got Green, South Seattle Climate Advocates - they have a network - really listening to those who've been really leading this charge. But I will say that I'm not one to get in the way. I do see that a lot of things that are coming up oftentimes are saying, Fine, fine, fine the big companies that are causing a lot of the pollution and the problems. But we have to be thoughtful about some of the other ways because the more that they make the money and pay the fine and keep doing the thing, it doesn't stop the harm that's being caused. Most of the issues are complex because we talk about 'em as issues and oftentimes we don't talk about 'em as a racial justice issue. We don't talk about it from a place of normalized anti-Blackness or the steeped racism of how this country was even started. We don't talk about that sometimes, we kind of leave it to the side - so we have to be willing to talk about the issue, be willing to fund the issue, be willing to bring in more green jobs because we're doing a lot of repair. So we need to do the repair of these issues, but at the same time, we need to be creating policies and implementation in a way that is equitable, that is going to change the dynamic that's happening in this country. So for me, this stuff is strongly intersected, but yeah, I'm not one that's going to be in the way. I'm here to support the crew for the cruise ships, the airplanes - there's a lot of issues that have been targeted in the 37th, and why? Because it's been historically a traditional place where people have been pushed to go there because they - we've been othered. 'Cause before it was Black folks, there was Jewish folks here. But people who were being pushed here were othered. And othered meant you had less value, so then you can come here too. Oh, you're an immigrant, you're a refugee - we're going to push you over here into these housing projects. Instead of looking at - this is a great place to be. I love the diversity, the power, the vibrancy of it all, but it comes with a lot of detriment that we have to constantly keep fighting. And for some reason they want to just keep neglecting and ignoring what the community is calling for. And really, we're calling for health. We're calling for - we want our communities healthy, we want our families healthy, we want to be safe. So I'm just sharing with you my values around it. I'm sharing with you that there's work. I'm in the community petitioning with my neighbors now to sign something to say, Let's not - if you're going to build this 5-story, market rate building over here in our community, why would you do it in the 37th anyways? Doesn't seem equitable. But if you're going to do it, don't cut down our trees. If you're going to do it, let's make sure we're implementing something here to make sure our streets are safe. Engage with us, understand that we're powerful, understand that we are deserving - and we don't have to beg you to be deserving, but we need to - but the way this is set up, you make us force and demand for you to pay attention. So I'm locking arms with Puget Sound Sage, I'm locking arms with the other environmental justice organizations that also center racial justice in these issues, and utilizing the power of my vote and the leadership representing the 37th District to move us forward. [00:34:52] Crystal Fincher: Now as we wrap up today, there are a lot of people who are struggling to make a decision in this race, who are looking at you and your opponent and saying, Okay, what are the differences? Why should I make the choice for one over the other? What is your message to those voters as they're trying to decide who they should vote for in who's going to represent them in the 37th? [00:35:21] Emijah Smith: I would say to the voters that there is a clear distinction. There's a distinction of a people's campaign versus a status quo campaign. I've been engaged, vetted, incredible in the 37th. I've been here my whole life and I'm currently demonstrating the work that it takes to do legislative advocacy - not only do I lock arms and go to Olympia with families and community members, I also provide the training to help families and community members understand the process there - how a bill becomes a law, how do you effectively talk with your legislators? Like I'm arming, we're gearing each other up. I'm also a parent and a grandparent who's lived the lives of our community, who understands sacrifices that are being made to make sure our community's thriving. To me, that's what's really clear - I'm here at a campaign to really transform status quo. The 37th, across all the backgrounds - our community has said we don't want status quo. So I'm here to represent not status quo. My campaign is based on people-powered policy. It's to have a bridge to make sure that those who feel voiceless have a voice, for those who want true representation of our lived experience understand that that is myself. So I can provide you with the education, the demonstrated experience - but I also have the relationship that's important across our bases. So that's what I would share. I would also want to share with y'all that I have sole endorsements from current 37th leaders - our Senator Rebecca Saldaña, King County Councilmember Girmay Zahilay, our City Councilmember Tammy Morales. Kim-Khánh Van, who's a Renton City Councilmember, 'cause the 37th does have a sliver of Renton. I have sole endorsements - One America Votes, the Washington State Labor Council, Pro-Choice Washington. These are coming because of the work that has been demonstrated by me, because of the consistency, because of the commitment around us as community. And you can check out my website at ElectEmijah.com to see more of the leaders and endorsers that I have. I do want to also add the Honorable Larry Gossett - he's a sole endorser. And I have others - Dr. Ben Danielson. There are others, but I just wanted to share that people are putting their name behind me because they see the work that's done and they understand that status quo has to change in order for us to really advance to a place where we're really tapping in and seeing the humanity for each other and really caring about each other and caring about our community. It'll be an honor to have your vote - thank you. [00:38:17] Crystal Fincher: Thank you - we will include the link to your website for people who want to learn more information in the episode notes. And thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us today. [00:38:28] Emijah Smith: Thank you - it was an honor, again, for the invitation. Thank you and have a wonderful day. [00:38:32] 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.
Doug Kaplicky is honored to serve as Adams Elementary Principal (Yakima WA) and Consulting Owner of the Positive Focus Group. After 12 years in school administration and teaching at the college level, Doug was named the 2017 Washington State Principal of the Year. This recognition was a direct reflection of an amazing, certified and classified middle school staff, who valued students' individual needs, teamed with parents, celebrated peers, while collaborating on a district vision. The staff put themselves on the map in July of 2014, when our team was given 42 days to create a school that had sat empty, with limited resources and employees coming from eight different locations. Surprisingly, twenty months later in 2016 this talented staff was named a Top Innovation School by OSPI. Check out the article that launched Doug's speaking career: https://awsp.org/docs/default-source/informed-principal-documents/spring_summer_17_full_issue.pdf?sfvrsn=2 (The Cards You're Dealt) on pp 16-17 ROAD TO AWESOME COURSES ARE NOW LIVE (https://roadtoawesome.net/uup-on-the-rta (here's the link)) https://roadtoawesome.net/contact-us (Book Darrin) to speak at your school or conference or email him here Check out Darrin's https://darrinpeppard.edublogs.org/ (blog) for great leadership tips and ideas Sign up for the Road to Awesome https://roadtoawesome.net/ (email list and newsletter) Professional learning for leaders doesn't have to be a mystery. As leaders there are times when learning alongside your staff is very important. You have to know what is expected of them and what strategies and processes should be evident in the classroom. However, we often overlook professional learning specifically for leaders designed to help them be…BETTER LEADERS. This is what we do at Road to Awesome. Working with leadership teams to be their most effective and efficient, one on one coaching for leaders, collaborative leader cohorts, or specific and job-embedded supports each have their own specific processes. I want to work with you to support YOU, your TEAM, or your district on growing leaders to their peak level of performance. Check out the Teach Better Conference here: https://teachbetterconference.com/ (https://teachbetterconference.com/ )use the Code: RTATB2022 for $50 off your registration
I found this really funny how the state tries to spin things instead of being transparent. ◈https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/WAOSPI/bulletins/32c1dfc ◈https://crosscut.com/news/2022/02/how-many-students-did-wa-public-schools-lose-during-pandemic
12pm - The Big Lead @ Noon // Teachers continue to strike despite the kids // OSPI wants free food for all school students in WA // GUEST: Cliff Mass, UW prof of atmospheric sciences on why he believes the float plane when down this weekend // Sec Granholm says Cali is a model we should all follow - WH, no commentSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Washington Policy Center Communications Director David Boze addresses accusations made by the state Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction. https://bit.ly/3pzSRZs #Opinion #Columns #Commentary #WashingtonPolicyCenter #CommunicationsDirector #DavidBoze #StateOfficeOfTheSuperintendentOfPublicInstruction #EducationDirectorLivFinne #SuperintendentChrisReykdal #AssessmentOfStudentLearning #VancouverWa #ClarkCountyWa #ClarkCountyNews #ClarkCountyToday
Big Lead @ Noon Monkey Pox vs CovidLIHI fancy conference // GUEST: Listener Steve says his family is moving to Tennessee because he believes the Governor, OSPI and the Seattle Swim League has let his kids downhttps://omny.fm/shows/the-dori-monson-show/seattle-dad-moving-his-family-after-seattle-swim-l // Cont.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
We discuss the state of the state's K-12 public schools with State Superintendent of Public Instruction Chris Reykdal. Plus, the view from inside the classroom with Pamella Johnson, an academic and behavioral intervention specialist at Rochester High School.
Djibril Diop, Director of Government Relations at the Washington Education Association, joins Crystal for a conversation about WEA's advocacy work to support educators statewide. They dig into how protecting the interests of their members leads to better education, thereby benefiting all students and the future of Washington state. As the pandemic has shown us, schools have an enormous impact on our daily lives and we need to equip them with resources and create sustainable pathways for the dedicated folks who choose teaching as a profession. The two wrap up with what criteria to use when evaluating candidates' education stances. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal on Twitter at @finchfrii and find more about WEA at @WashingtonEA and at @WEAAdvocacy. Resources WEA - Washington Education Association: https://www.washingtonea.org/ WEA - 2022 Legislative Priorities: https://www.washingtonea.org/advocacy/2022-legislative-priorities/ “Making huge strides forward for our students” from WEA Advocacy Blog: https://www.washingtonea.org/advocacy/ourvoice/post/making-huge-strides-forward-for-our-students/ WEA-PAC - 2022 Election Endorsements: https://www.washingtonea.org/advocacy/2022-election-endorsements/ 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. So today, I am so excited to have Djibril Diop with us, who is the Director of Government Relations at the Washington Education Association. And just - he is bringing so much experience and capability and political will and passion to this position - I was just thrilled to have the opportunity to speak with him on the show and to make sure all of us are familiar with who he is and what WEA is doing. So thank you so much for joining us, Djibril. [00:01:11] Djibril Diop: Thank you, Crystal. [00:01:12] Crystal Fincher: So I wanted to start out just helping people understand who you are, how - what your path was to land where you're at now with the WEA, and then talk about what the priorities of the WEA are and what you're doing. [00:01:28] Djibril Diop: I feel like my past was a succession of accidents, but I feel like I stumbled my way to Washington in a good place and at a good time. I didn't have any prior relationship to Washington State before coming here - spent over a decade working in the California State Senate - various jobs there. And again, the same way I've landed in Washington by virtue of a series of accidents, I feel like I've landed in politics by virtue of a series of accidents. It's been a pretty good path and I'll get into it in a bit - as being someone that wasn't born in America and so familiar with US politics and culture - to be immersed in the line of work that I'm in now, so - [00:02:16] Crystal Fincher: Okay, so you just were so incredibly modest in your description of your path then, but it really is underselling what you were doing when you said that you worked in the California legislature. You were a Chief of Staff in the California Senate - what was that like? And how did that propel you here? [00:02:39] Djibril Diop: Well, yeah - there's always that conversation about California being the fifth or sixth economy in the world, and certainly while working in the legislature, we sounded that off quite often - from establishing what was the California economy all about, what did we want to market out? And this is when you kind of see the scope of what is it to be an executive and one of the largest stakeholder in the global economy, certainly. And for me, serving as the Chief of Staff was something that I like to say was - could have been offered to someone who is a former basketball player, an immigrant, and someone that you didn't have potentially the greatest interest into walking into politics - that pathway was offered to me in California. It gave me a lot of life lessons and I've met quite a bit of interesting folks, but I think that one of the things that I took away was - yes, this being a people business - people business for people by the people. And that was the part of the trade that attracted me the most about staying in this line of work. My colleagues at the time were a lot of folks that had graduated from the Ivy league institutions and they were gunning their whole life to serve as a Senate aide or California Assembly aide. But my path was quite different - I ended up, after graduating from college, I ended up working for AFSCME, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, under the leadership of one of the very few African-American leaders. He distilled in me a lot of the optimism that I have now about what is politics all about, and what is my place within it? What are the possible outcomes as a result of working in the political circles - a chance to work with him and one of my greatest mentors, Willie Pelote. And then, my first job in the Legislature was working for an extremely strong woman, Carole Migden - back then she was the State Senator out of San Francisco who taught me how to dream in reality. She was part of the cohort of queer legislators on the journey to get through marriage equality. And I thought that was - to me, to see - she was a petite Jewish lady from New York who was highly aggressive and she was extremely strong and - learned so much from her, in her passion for getting to marriage equality. [00:05:34] Crystal Fincher: Well, that makes sense. 'Cause one of the things that I've definitely noticed about you is the sense of optimism that you bring - coming from a place of hope more than cynicism - and really pushing for what is right and what is possible. And also your strength in forging relationships. You're the Director of Government Relations at WEA. What does that entail? [00:05:58] Djibril Diop: First off, I want to say how much of an honor it is to me to having stepped into that position. I know there's a lot of talented people in the state - coming here at WEA, you get a sense of how established this organization is - both in terms of the staff that is around me, that is very talented, but also the leadership. So I feel like I'm stepping into a good place - I'm stepping into a structure that is well organized and has had some success in the past. So that provides a certain level of comfort for me realizing I can come in within WEA. One of my responsibilities is to lead the GR department, which - we have a team of lobbyists. Also, we have a team of political organizers that work and administrative staff. But the real goal is to work with our Board to make sure that we have direction, goals that are consistent with our values, to make sure that we step in with the ability to be culturally sensitive - as judicious as we could in terms of advancing the equity discussion in the state of Washington. So that was a very attractive position for me, which is to work with the largest - one of the largest stakeholders in the state of Washington - and be able to formulate and foster an environment where we can be helpful in this state to be a more equitable setting going forward. So, my role at WEA has been to work with the Board, make sure that my team is well managed - so those are two key components. [00:07:38] Crystal Fincher: You talk about how important it has been for you to also have talented staff, and I just want to call out Samantha Casne and Emily Hansen - as just two incredibly dynamic and talented leaders in their own rights, who also do excellent work over there at WEA, and certainly are a testament to the entire team. So I guess in terms of just policy and the types of candidates that you want to see elected, the type of policy that you want to see them pass - what are the priorities that you're looking at? [00:08:13] Djibril Diop: That's a great question. I'm pretty proud of the work that my members were able to do this year, along with the team obviously, in securing some benefit for our membership this year. Certainly, inflation is everybody's problem - the fact that us educators, who have a big portion of the state funding and we are very appreciative of that, but I think that people have to realize that - I work for a union - our union is centering around protecting the interests of our members. But we know, and very well understand, that our union wouldn't exist without the students. We are here to serve the students - making sure that we have policies that are beneficial to our members, for the benefit of teaching the students in the best way possible - because we understand how critical the role of education is not just for this state, but for this country going forward. That's what we're not bashful about - pushing legislators to continue to invest in our educational system. We believe that this is not only a civil right, but a strategic investment that needs to be continued year after year. And so I think that this year, when we're looking at all the questions that educators have faced, we - this has been a tough two years for us - we had to change the modalities of instruction, tool suites. Our members were not prepared or trained for that purpose - bear in mind, we're not higher education. And I worked with faculty members before and online education is lot more present in higher ed - is doing a lot of technical changes, a lot of additional burden for the membership. And I felt that the members reacted the best that they could. I feel like we have a pretty patient membership. We are in every corner of the state and we have very strong, diverse opinions within the membership. And that also creates additional pressure at this time where we know that COVID created culture wars, community created culture wars, and then politics created culture wars - that ended up blending in the education lab. Discussions that were started in political offices end up being debated in school board meetings. We can go out to this politicization of our education, but I feel like that I'm very proud of the work that our members have done this year. My union has been strong in making sure that we are not censoring our education curriculum, that we are not whitewashing our history - because that's important, especially for someone like me to be in the position that I am - to be honest about the conversation that we are having - whether or not we should continue to defend education at what level. I don't understand how that is a question - question as to whether we should censor part of our education to make part of our electorate more comfortable? That is just not - that is out of question - that's not going to happen under my leadership. I'm a parent, and I have three kids in school. I want the best for them. And I do think that - me being in this position now, as you said - allowed me to work for an organization that values the same values that I have, where group of members are well-intended, and to be completely real for a huge body of work to be tackling. [00:11:44] Crystal Fincher: So many of the issues and challenges for society are so present in the classroom in so many ways - how do you negotiate all of that with the members? And when you listen to them and hear from them and talk about their priorities, how does that drive what you're pushing for? What are the biggest things on the agenda right now? [00:12:07] Djibril Diop: My members are everyday people. They're working families and some of them are seniors. We have some very young members coming in. And I think that for the vast majority of them, they have been put in a situation where we need to help them stay in the profession. One of the main concern that I have is making sure that we continue to shore up educators within the profession - that we provide some incentive for folks to want to join our ranks. This is not an easy pathway - for folks to want to be educators in the long run. And I think that, as you mentioned before, my members have to do a lot of - a range of services - folks were maybe not understanding what is entailed to be an educator in the classroom. You're going to have to deal with a lot more than just telling kids what they should do. You have to understand them, you're going to have to cajole them, you have to reassure them, you're going to have to help them brush their teeth sometime. And I think that that's a representation of how much time we as parents have. How much can we allocate for our children? And I think that when you're looking at that, then you realize that schools have a much greater impact on your daily life than you could ever assume. We are trying to focus going forward - as I mentioned, having a student-centric approach - because my members, my Board understand very well that putting our best foot forward to make sure that the children have the best experience will allow us to have the best working condition, will allow us to do our job in the best way possible. We've invested quite a bit of energy this year in supporting a great investment in mental health supports for our children - that was a big part of our agenda this year. We're going to continue to push for that going forward because we realized that this is not just a post-COVID situation - this is about creating the level of wraparound services around our kids that will give them the tools to be successful. The ability to communicate well with parents through the ability to serve the students with the type of services that they need - we feel will equip our schools for the 21st century. I see personally our schools as being community leaders, but they need to continue to work for - work hard to make sure that we create those community alliances and that we maximize our members' work by making sure that they have the tools needed for them to be successful. We started the pandemic without computers and without broadband, so it was not where we needed to be. [00:14:57] Crystal Fincher: So you talked about making sure that it's a student-centered environment that educators understand and have support to do their job well. And that we need to retain teachers and make sure that we keep the professionals who are currently in those positions in them - and that they don't leave the profession - that it is a supportive and rewarding environment. What kinds of things can we do moving forward to help with that? [00:15:25] Djibril Diop: Well, thank you for the question. I think that there should be - an educator - there is a certain pathway that you take. And so . Part of that pathway, we felt was not needed - or creating, or preventing access. We feel that there is some need for increasing access for BIPOC groups within the profession. And I think that there's a host of assistance that can be provided - as you know, to become an educator, you have to have some level of residency, which is costly for folks to be able to do without getting paid. So just like what we are doing, like apprenticeship for certain trade job, the thing that you can point to is that we create an easier pathway for folks to join the profession. And provide some financial assistance so they can, in fact, look at the possibility of becoming an educator when you have very little means. WEA is working with OSPI right now to try to figure out ways to accentuate the number of subs through the certification process. We hope that we can be part of this effort to help train more educators and certify them so they can be in the classroom. I need to give them time, but I think that it's more for societal discussion - post-COVID, what do you want to invest your tax dollars for? Our discussion is that certainly you do not want to give tax cuts to the rich - we want to make sure that we have a tax system that is progressive and I think that the state will come out in a better light - just saying that it's about using that same progressive strategy to make sure that we are in fact investing in places where we are helping people. And we feel that schools - when you're looking at the relationship between the worker, their kids, and what the kids are learning in the school, there is a multiplier of benefits there. And we also, from a competitive advantage standpoint, we know that a well-educated population will lead to better economic results. In it all, I've heard a lot of discussion about - especially in my time in higher education - about when I was younger, I used to work two or three jobs and be able to make ends meet while being a student. This is not the same conversation that you're having in 2022 - you have to work like 12 jobs to be able to make ends meet at our current level of tuition. And I think that looking at that, you realize that there's a lack of empathy for the students that are going through these very expensive, higher education process that we have now. And when you're looking at K-12 - it's the same thing - we have to find empathy for the students that are going to our schools today. When we talk about empathy, we're saying that - invest in the resources that are needed so those kids can be successful. This is - there's no greater investment than making sure that those kids get a chance. My members have chosen to work in that profession - bear in mind that this is not the most rewarding profession from the monetary standpoint - in a society that doesn't really value making a professional direction that is not - where you cannot capitalize as well. You have to understand that my members want to be there. So I do find sometime that WEA, as a union, is one of the few organizations actually advocating for your kids. [00:18:55] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and that they're so closely tied. And sometimes there are - there are groups, certainly, some extremist and anti-tax and anti-public education groups who try and call that into question - and whether advocating for teachers is advocating for students - and how you separate those. There is no real rational justification for that. There was just a new study that came out, earlier this week, showing that higher paid teachers - districts with higher paid teachers - produce better results than those that don't. And it's really, really similar to the conversation that we're having in a lot of other areas where - people do better - they're healthier, they're more enthusiastic in their jobs, they perform better - when they don't have to struggle in their own lives. And we are asking so much of educators, and we're relying on them to do so much for our kids - they really are such a significant part of the foundation of our kids' lives and their future - that we have to invest in them and we have to be vocal and definitive about - teaching is a profession. These are professionals, these are highly experienced and capable and educated folks who are teaching our kids. And that's not something anyone can do. One thing that was really striking to me, especially throughout the pandemic was when schools were closed, just the call to open them, oftentimes without full regard for the health and safety of the teachers and kids in the classroom. And as teachers were not able to come because they were sick with COVID and that was spreading throughout classes and lots of students were having challenges - just the call for parents to cover classrooms and then sometimes police to cover classrooms - and they're not educators. And certainly a lot of feedback from that - that that is not an ideal situation. We certainly are not serving our kids by throwing anyone else there, and not doing their education any favors by having people who are unfamiliar with educating to do that. But I think it's so important to recognize that it's a profession and that there is an organized opposition who is extremely well-funded to try and paint the picture in the opposite direction. And so the question I have for you moving forward is - one, in that environment where there is so much toxicity coming from extremists - a lot of times, Republican corners - in regards to education and teachers, trying to have conversations about privatization and lots of proposals to move money out of the public system and into other systems, and the need to - as you say, support our teachers. Lots of times we're only discussing this - sometimes in the well - Republicans versus Democrats, we believe in and support public education versus people who don't. And certainly, I think it's really fair to say most Democrats believe in and support public education, but there are so many issues within that - whether it's charter schools - and there's a robust conversation to be had about charter schools. But I do think it's fair to say that whether or not you are a proponent of those, I think we can still agree that the primary concern and responsibility is to make sure public education, a free education, is accessible to everyone and prepares them to thrive in their lives. So with that in mind and looking at not just the - is a public education good or bad? And do we say we support teachers - yes or no? What are the issues where, even if we're talking about just among Democrats, where we need to make sure people are pushing? Or as we talk with and evaluate candidates for the Legislature and a lot of positions this year, what should we be looking to hear from people, even in those Democratic versus Democrat races, to say - you know what, this is the direction that people need to be moving on education. It's not just good enough to say that you support teachers. What should voters and people in the community and parents be looking at in terms of candidates to say - you know what, they're on the right track? What are those issues? [00:23:48] Djibril Diop: Well, thank you, Crystal - this is a great question. And I think that for us, we've - this is not a new thing for folks to - to try to beat on the teacher, right? This is a national sport in this country for quite some time, and I'm providing historical reference about how educators were viewed in your history of this country. It was pledges that educators had to sign during the Cold War to make sure they were not Communist. There was always a question of what level of legitimacy can an educator have while providing education to my kid, right? And I'm saying that this is kind of like the things that we see nowadays, which is the resurgence of not trusting your local educator, and I think that you've seen that from multiple angles - from conservative parents or progressive urban parents might not see - might have concerns about how education is dispensed. I think that for us, when we're looking at a candidate, we try to understand a little bit better what are their perspective on equity, what are their perspective on being pro-labor, what are some of the ideas that they have regarding education going forward? 'Cause for us, it's not about being public against charter school - it's about making sure that we foster in an environment that created public common for everyone - that fostered that asset that - the asset that the state of Washington has - that serve all in the best possible way possible. And I think that we don't want to deviate from that - we don't want to, we want to work with legislators, upcoming legislators, that seize the ability of making sure that we protect and defend, as opposed to escape or diverge from one of the few and most important public common that we have here, which is our educational system. So when you start from that standpoint, you are saying that there might be some differences of opinion regarding how - what would you do specifically, Legislator A, regarding our education? We're not saying that we know all the answers, but we are trained to - my team and I, and along with our local council to do this - to make sure we identify folks that have a respect, that have an understanding about what takes place in the classroom, and that do not see the schools only from an individual standpoint. This is - schools help us as a collectivity - when I drop my kids to school, I get a chance to say hi to one of the parents, and I get a chance to see the teacher there, and I get a chance to see the bus driver - it's a little village, in fact. And so if you have no issue, don't think this is valuable, then it will be difficult for us to work with you. I think that all Democrats and the vast majority of Republicans say that they are supportive of education, which - when you peel the onions, it's not quite there, you understand? I think that many folks would want to utilize public education dollars for many of their pet projects. And then therefore, I go back to the foundation of the discussion which is - how do you value public education? Because really, like we said, during COVID there's not that much that happens without that. So I think for us, it's about making sure that we have an equitable way of looking at things, that we are reflective of the community in the environment, and that we are able to serve the kids - all kids - in the best way possible. We feel that if we do those three things, we are achieving our mandate - we are helping this state in the best way that we could. [00:28:24] Crystal Fincher: Well, that certainly makes sense. I appreciate you taking the time to speak with us today. We will be paying attention to candidates and these issues as we continue throughout this campaign season and beyond. But this is so critically important, and so just thank you so much for joining us today. I thank you all for listening to Hacks & Wonks on KVRU 105.7 FM. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler with assistance from Shannon Cheng. You can find me on Twitter @finchfrii, spelled F-I-N-C-H-F-R-I-I. Now you can follow 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 to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the episode notes. Thanks for tuning in. We'll talk to you next time.
In this episode, we break down the basics of what is being taught through OSPI mandated Sex Education and the dangers of it. This is what is being taught in Washington State schools. This should be very helpful in order to get a basic understanding of what CSE is and how it is being taught. Here are some links for greater research: www.3rs.org Video clip of Ben Shapiro reviewing early education sex education: https://youtu.be/4CCCF7bgLgM https://advocatesforyouth.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/PLSSE-FINAL.pdf (2018) --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app
Join The 3 Ships Podcast to listen to OSPI Superintendent Chris Reykdal! --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
