Podcast appearances and mentions of will casey

We're back in the Wonderful World of Disney this week, to check out Life-Size, the 2000 comedy starring Lindsay Lohan as a grieving little girl who uses a necromancy grimoire to try and resurrect her dead mother, and Tyra Banks as a doll who comes to life and tries to have sex with that little girl's father. Lohan plays Casey, a young girl who uses a mystical book to try and bring her mom back to life, but when some doll hair accidentally gets into her dark ritual she ends up with a life-sized doll named Eve (Banks), who is eager to experience everything the world has to offer, especially Casey's Dad (Jere Burns), and every other man at his law office. Will Casey be able to find the book containing the reversal spell and send Eve back to her home town of Sunnyvale? Will dad realise that his daughter is more important than making partner at his law firm? And why is this film a dark erotic thriller instead of a fun kids' film? Listen and find out! If you crave bonus episodes of Mom Can't Cook!, monthly livestream watchalongs, or a shoutout at the end of the show, remember to check out our Patreon at Patreon.com/extrahelpings. If you've watched Life-Size and have your own thoughts, email them to us at momcantcookpod@gmail.com for a chance to have them read out on the show. Next time on Mom Can't Cook! we'll be watching 2001's The Poof Point. See you then! This week's episode is sponsored by Zocdoc. If you're in the US, go to Zocdoc.com/mcc and download the Zocdoc app for FREE, then find a top rated doctor today. This episode is sponsored by NordVPN. Visit nordvpn.com/momcantcook and use code MOMCANTCOOK for four extra months on the two year plan, and to protect your internet connection and privacy online. Thanks also to sponsor HIMS! Try Hims' hair loss solutions by starting your free online visit today at hims.com/momcantcook. This episode is also sponsored by Incogni, the easy to use service that helps you reduce the volume of spam calls and emails you receive, lower your risk of identity theft, and make your personal details harder to find online. Use code MOMCANTCOOK at the incogni.com/momcantcook to get an exclusive 60% off an annual Incogni plan! Contact Multitude for Advertising Inquiries: multitude.productions/ads Check out the official Mom Can't Cook! store for sweet merch: momcantcookstore.com and check out Mom Can't Cook! Extra Helpings for bonus episodes!

Welcome back to season 2 of Love Island All Stars and welcome back to SGTC!In this episode, reality TV expert Maura is joined by hosts Logan and Stacy of the Scaredy Brats podcast to break down episodes 21-23 from the South African villa. They discuss the verde to fire levels of the islanders heart rate challenge performances, the lack (and plethora) of tears from islanders, and Ekin- Su's consistent work as a producer. Will Ronnie ever get his pants off?? Will Casey continue his love island career?? Tune in every Tuesday and Friday and let's find out together!!Join us on Instagram, TikTok, Twitter, Threads, Blue Sky and YouTube @shesgotthechat and LET'S CHAT!!!SOCIALShttps://www.instagram.com/shesgotthechat/https://www.tiktok.com/@shesgotthechathttps://twitter.com/shesgotthechathttps://youtube.com/@shesgotthechat?si=Y6XzieeKeSeMO8bJ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome back to season 2 of Love Island All Stars and welcome back to SGTC!In this episode, reality TV experts Maura and Ari break down episodes 14-16 from the South African villa. They discuss finding out your dad is social media famous, not wishing your ex well, and Luca's shockingly good taste in women.Is Luca winning most popular boy a conspiracy? Is Scott scared of commitment? Will Casey get a promotion for his career highlight night in the hideaway? Tune in every Tuesday and Friday and let's find out together!!Join us on Instagram, TikTok, Twitter, Threads, Blue Sky and YouTube @shesgotthechat and LET'S CHAT!!!SOCIALShttps://www.instagram.com/shesgotthechat/https://www.tiktok.com/@shesgotthechathttps://twitter.com/shesgotthechathttps://youtube.com/@shesgotthechat?si=Y6XzieeKeSeMO8bJ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Join Jim and Greg as they discuss President-Elect Trump's excellent early cabinet picks, Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey refusing to admit he lost, and a congressional Democrat excoriated by his own side for suggesting boys shouldn't be playing in girls' sports.First, they share their enthusiasm for almost all of Trump's initial picks, highlighting Chief of Staff Susie Wiles and National Security Adviser Michael Waltz as strong choices. Other notable names like Tom Homan, Elise Stefanik, Lee Zeldin, and Marco Rubio should also reassure conservatives, though they raise concerns about Gov. Kristi Noem's selection for Homeland Security.Next, Jim and Greg scrutinize Sen. Bob Casey, Jr.'s refusal to admit defeat to Republican challenger Dave McCormick, who leads by 35,000 votes. Casey's stubbornness  has even delayed McCormick's freshman orientation. Will Casey or the Democrats pay a price for refusing to accept election results?Finally, they react to progressives attacking Massachusetts Rep. Seth Moulton for saying his fellow Democrats aren't listening to voters on issues like transgender athletes. Moulton also said he didn't want his daughters getting run over by male athletes during competition. Will the left accept this reality check or just continue to demonize anyone who questions the woke agenda?Please visit our great sponsors:Lumenhttps://lumen.me/3MLVisit lumen.me/3ML for 15% off your purchase.  Moink Boxhttps://moinkbox.com/martiniSign up today and get free hot rolls in your first box only at moinkbox.com/martini 

In this episode, we talk to professional stuntman Will Casey! Will and I talk about what it's like to be a stuntman, what his first stunt was, animal wrangling, and we even talk about movies. Find Will Casey: - Will on Instragram: https://www.instagram.com/willkc3_stunts/ - Living Art BJJ: HTTP://livingartbjj.com ********************************************** Please feel free to send your recommendations via email at theflowrollpodcast@gmail.com. Follow Us > Edgar OtraVez on Instagram: https://instagram.com/edgarotravez/ > The Flow Roll on Instagram: https://instagram.com/theflowroll/ > The Flow Roll Website: https://TheFlowRollPodcast.com/ ********************************************** Music > "Rock Solid" by Mothers Madness can be found on Epidemic Sound ********************************************** Affiliate Links > Epidemic Sound: https://epidemicsound.theflowrollpodcast.com > Monday.com: https://mondaycom.TheFlowRollPodcast.com > Titan Fitness: https://titan-fitness.pxf.io/mg7Nj1

This time: it's personal! Casey has a bone to pick with Rascal Flatts for seducing* his mom (*seducing her into picking their song for the mother-son dance at Casey's wedding). Will Casey and Kevin say "I Do" to this wedding bait song, or will they divorce it?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This time: it's personal! Casey has a bone to pick with Rascal Flatts for seducing* his mom (*seducing her into picking their song for the mother-son dance at Casey's wedding). Will Casey and Kevin say "I Do" to this wedding bait song, or will they divorce it?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

William and Casey are together again! After having a huge blow out last week, they put all the hard feelings aside to reunite for the good of the podcast. While working through those differences, Grant made an executive decision to hire a new employee who's been rubbing the cast the wrong way. He even Punk'd Casey! But does Grant even care? We'll have to ask him when he gets back from parking his new sports car... The studio might be in shambles but this show will have you in stitches. Do they celebrate Turkey day in Turkey? Will Casey bring in that Pumpkin bread? Will they figure out the clues as to where the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade is held this year? PLUS we get a Casey AI bomb AND a caller speed round! All that and more on this weeks episode of The William Montgomery Show.  Support Our Sponsors:   MANSCAPED: Support the show and get 20% off and free shipping at https://www.manscaped.com when you use the code   WMS FACTOR: Get 50% off of Factor at https://www.factormeals.com/WMS50 and use code WMS50  Watch new episodes of The William Montgomery Show on YouTube every Wednesday at 8:30 PM Central: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQJ2SBnAMI8SSm5qpLXBRiw Follow William onInstagram: @william.f.montgomery1 https://williamfmontgomery.com Merch: https://william-montgomery-town.creator-spring.com For More William Montgomery, check out ‘Kill Tony' live every Monday at The Comedy Mother Ship in Austin TX and on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/KillTony Find more Casey Rocket on Instagram @caseyrocket and at https://www.patreon.com/caseyrocket Get your own Grimace shirthttps://rawpaw.ink/products/congress-is-furious-by-casey-rocket  Original cover art illustration by Ryan J. Ebelt: https://ryanjebelt.com Recorded in Austin Texas at Record ATX. Send William an email at: TheWilliamMontgomeryShow@gmail.com Leave William a voicemail at: (737) 471-1098 Send your letters & packages to:P.O. Box 40316 Austin, TX 78704 The William Montgomery Show is produced by William Montgomery & Brett Erickson A FannieCo production William F Montgomery is an American stand-up comedian.  A native of Memphis Tennessee, William now resides in Austin Texas.  Under the tutelage of a top young rising comedian, Tony Hinchcliffe, & Brian ‘The Podfather' Redban, William has become a fan favorite & the longest serving Kill Tony Regular. William has performed in front of comedy icons such as Joe Rogan, Whitney Cummings, Russell Peters, Tiffany Haddish, Doug Stanhope, Tim Dillon, Doug Benson, Donnell Rawlings, Jeff Ross, Dane Cook, Tom Segura, Bert Kreischer, Ron White, Ari Shaffir, Big Jay Oakerson, Luis J Gomez, Dan Soder, Jim Gaffigan, Andrew Santino, Dom Irrera, Steve Simone, Brian Holtzman, Sal Vulcano, Ian Edwards, Greg Fitzsimmons, Shane Gillis, Kyle Dunnigan, Ms. Pat, Josh Potter, Mark Normand, Ryan Sickler, Eddie Pepitone, Josh Wolf, Moshe Kasher, Bonnie McFarlane, Steve Lee, Adam Ray, Andrew Shultz, Pauly Shore, Bob Saget, Michael Rapaport & Don Barris. Montgomery has garnered many monikers over the years: The Big Red Machine, The Vanilla Gorilla, The Memphis Madman, The Tennessee Tickler, The Strawberry Twist & The Raisin-Bread Kid. William regularly opens for Joe Rogan in the Austin Area. Along with David Lucas, William has previously hosted ‘Brothers in Cursive' & ‘Are We Really Brothers'. William has appeared on podcast such as ‘Jeremiah Wonders with Jeremiah Watkins', ‘Unlicensed Therapy with Ari Mannis', ‘Dead Air with Brian Holtzman', ‘Shenk with Sara Weinshenk' & ‘The Fat Pessimist with David Lucas'.#WilliamMontgomery #KillTony #Comedy

Welcome to Episode 142!  It's the Season 4 Premiere!!  FINALLY!  The Boys are baaaaaaack and in rare form as they start a new season in style.  Seems a lot of trash has happened while they were away and Mark & Casey can't not comment on some topics (you knew they would)! So pour that winter style port vintage and let's get ready to Paint!After catching up on some of the events since the holidays the topic starts to turn politics and of course, Casey & Mark are discussing the pathetic and embarrassing stunt by the MAGA reps at keeping the government from working -- shocker! --- which inevitably turns to the freshmen Congressman who doesn't seem to have much of a relationship with the truth.  Mark & Casey are running down and ripping up the lies upon lies upon lies of the Congressman formerly known as Kitara Ravache; formerly known as George Devolder; formerly known Anthony Devolder; also known as George Santos -- wanted in Brazil for fraud.  Confused yet? Shocked? Will Casey & Mark have the tea.Then it's time for Trash Talk.  This week's topics include sex positivity, a trip to hell, and horrifying accident on New Year's Eve. Then in Recommendations (or wreck-o-mendations), Mark is giving us an "art film" and Casey has some easy watching, trash television.The Boys are excited to be back with you, kicking off their 4th season! It's a premiere worthy episode full of Painted Trash; so pour some of that port vintage, grab your easel, canvas, and colors -- it's time to Paint!=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-Let The Boys of Painted Trash know your thoughts on this week's topics and episode! What street festivals do you attend? Do you like street fests? What is your favorite festival??Have a topic idea or story you recommend for Trash Talk, be sure to send it in to our email or through the "contact us" on our website.Follow us on:Instagram: instragram.com/paintedtrashpodTwitter: twitter.com/paintedtrashpodFacebook: facebookcom/paintedtrashpodcastDon't forget to click Subscribe and/or Follow and leave us a review!email: paintedtrashpodcast@gmail.comweb: www.paintedtrashpodcast.com

THE BATTLE OF THE BARN. The Drum descends upon the Dress Barn. Will Casey, Mark, Theo, Kira and Anna be able to stand against the combined might of the Director and his minions? Maybe, if Captain Torres, Donovan, Dockers, The Sparks Brothers, Mark's Mom and all of Dawnbreak have anything to say about it! Content Warning: This episode contains mentions of child abuse and dissociative disorders. To learn more about Dissociative Identity Disorder visit the National Alliance on Mental Illness. ------- If you liked this episode, please leave a rating and review to help us spread the word and don't forget to share with your friends. We love friends! Support the Show: Follow us on social media, buy some merch or support us on Ko-fi, and check out our Wiki by heading to our DirectMe Profile. Join us on Discord! Come hang out with the cast on The Monster's Playbook Discord server where we can discuss the latest episodes, trade theories, answer questions, and get to know you, our listeners, a little better. This week we're also featuring a promo for another actual-play podcast, Power Word Fail. Be sure to check them out on their website, and wherever you listen to podcasts. ------- Cast: Jonny Grubb as the Keeper John Wander as Mark Clayton (The Divine) Lauren Johnson as Kira Ashwood (The Initiate) and Anna Ashwood (The Protector) Miah Detjen as Casey Davis (The Freelancer) and Theo Nessos (The Hex) Sarah Baker as Tiff Torres (The Hex) This episode was edited by Miah Detjen and Lauren Johnson. Theme song by Jonny Grubb. Cover art by Gabe Schmidt. Incidental music from Epidemic Sound.

On this Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, political consultant and host Crystal Fincher is joined by Associate Editor of The Stranger and noted poet, Rich Smith! They look at tragic traffic deaths in Seattle, track leg updates on free school meals and minimum wage for incarcerated workers, discuss the Washington Supreme Court's hearing on our capital gains tax, outline County Prosecutor Leesa Manion's changes to the office, update us on Seattle's social housing initiative, and react to candidates running for Seattle City Council.  Crystal and Rich start the show by covering this week's tragic traffic deaths, including the death of 23-year old grad student Jaahnavi Kandula, who was hit by a police vehicle. The number of these incidents is a horrific reminder that these fatalities aren't due to random chance, but are the result of numerous policy priorities and choices by elected officials and institutions.  Turning to the state legislature, our hosts give overviews on a bill to give free lunches to all public school students in Washington state and a bill that would provide minimum wage to incarcerated individuals for their labor. In state Supreme Court news, this week the court heard arguments for the suit over our state's capital gains tax that the legislature passed last year. We'll be keeping an eye out to see when we finally get a decision on this case.  King County's new Prosecuting Attorney, Leesa Manion, outlined her new approach to the office, including the creation of a gun violence prevention unit and a division focused on prosecuting gender-based violence. Rich also updates Crystal on the Stranger's Election Control Board's endorsement of Seattle's social housing initiative I-135, which will be on the ballot for the upcoming February 14th election. Finally, we end the show catching up on the newly announced candidates for this year's Seattle City Council elections, and ask why some candidates are announcing their campaigns without a clear vision of why they want the seat.  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 Rich Smith at @richsssmith.   Resources “Evaluating the Role of Incarceration in Public Safety with Criminologist Damon Petrich” - Hacks & Wonks    “Casual Friday with Crystal Fincher & Besa Gordon” by Patricia Murphy & Brandi Fullwood from KUOW    “Officer Responding to Overdose Call Killed Woman In Marked Intersection Where City Canceled Safety Project” by Erica C. Barnett from Publicola    “Three pedestrians taken to hospital after collision in South Seattle” by Amanda Zhou from The Seattle Times    Follow Ryan Packer twitter: @typewriteralley   “Prevent traffic deaths with proven solutions for Seattle streets” by Gordon Padelford from The Seattle Times    “WA bill would make school meals free for all students” by Ruby de Luna from KUOW   “WA lawmakers consider minimum wage requirement for incarcerated workers” by Libby Denkman & Sarah Leibovitz from KUOW   “Supreme Court Ruling Could Allow Washington to Tax the Rich” by Will Casey from The Stranger   “Public safety is focus of new prosecutorial units” by Christine Clarridge from Axios    “Vote Yes on Initiative 135” from The Stranger    “Who's running for Seattle City Council in 2023“ by Melissa Santos from Axios   “Formerly Unhoused, Andrew Ashiofu Wants to Fight for Housing Progress on City Council” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger   “Central District Resident Joy Hollingsworth Is Running for City Council” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger   “Urbanist Alex Hudson Enters Council Race to Replace Sawant” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger “Assistant Attorney General Sarah Reyneveld Is Running for King County Council” by Rich Smith from The Stranger   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I am 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 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, we re-aired our conversation with criminologist Damon Petrich, who led the most comprehensive analysis of incarceration and crime data to-date, which found that incarceration doesn't reduce the likelihood of reoffending. Damon and I talk about how to design and evaluate programs that do work to deliver greater public safety for everyone. Also today, I appeared on KUOW's Casual Friday podcast - we'll put a link to that in the show notes and on the website. Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show, today's co-host: Associate Editor of The Stranger and noted poet, Rich Smith. [00:01:30] Rich Smith: Thanks for having me again - so good to be back. [00:01:33] Crystal Fincher: Great to have you back. This is a week that was packed full of news. Starting off - some news that really sucked - really sad and tragic events happened this week when it came to pedestrians being hit by cars. One killed by an SPD officer driving a car on the way to a substance abuse call. And another - family, a parent and two kids, hit in a crosswalk. It has just been a horrible week. What happened and where do we stand on this? [00:02:15] Rich Smith: Yeah, it was on Monday - Fire was called to an OD [overdose] call, cops responded along with that. And a young woman, 23-year-old woman, named Jaahnavi was crossing the road - she's a grad student. And the cop hit her with her car. She died later of injuries later that evening. The cops slow rolled the information on this, at first saying that there had been a collision, putting the blame on the fire department. And then later on Tuesday, they finally confirmed that she died after being hit. And it's a tragedy, and it's one of those stories that show just how few choices we have - or how constrained our choices really are - by policy that we don't even see. We think we're out here making decisions - we think people are out here making decisions - but those decisions are circumscribed. And there are so many of those policies hidden in the background of this story. For instance, that intersection where she crossed was due for a while to get a revamp - a protected intersection - that would have prevented, or that may have prevented, this tragedy from occurring. We haven't seen the video - I don't know where she crossed in the crosswalk, I know she was in the crosswalk. But the design of this protected intersection may have prevented that from happening. The mayor took it out of his budget this year due to a giant $140 million hole that they had to work around and as a result of slowing real estate market, et cetera. The City Council didn't put that money back in and so - obviously, work wouldn't have started on that project before this incident happened - I don't want to get into butterfly effect stuff. But had we moved on that earlier, had we treated this Vision Zero - the city's plan to reduce all pedestrian deaths to zero - more seriously than we have been, if we'd been prioritizing that earlier, then tragedies like this could have been prevented. Also, there's the policy of having a police officer respond alongside a medic when they're doing an OD call. My understanding is that if the medic has to give the person who's suspected of having an OD Narcan, they want a cop there in case there's some kind of violent response to reversing the overdose with Narcan - and so they request this backup. The person who the medic checked on declined medical assistance at the time - it turns out it wasn't an emergency, but they were called. I'm not sure who called or why, but they were called because they thought someone was having an OD - and now it creates this emergency situation where if the cop threw on his lights, then they're racing to the scene. It's hard to really put the whole picture together because we haven't seen the video. We only know what the police are saying and what Fire is saying, but it does seem to be this confluence of questionable policy decisions that allowed for this tragedy to happen. [00:06:18] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And at least the information that we have now - as you said, the police have been slow to release information - but it appears that dispatch made the call to dispatch the police, that it wasn't actually requested by the fire department. But they were co-dispatched to the call along with Fire once they determined that was the case with the call, which is questionable - these are the things that we're talking about. So many times you talk about how all of these issues are related - how when we're talking about housing, we're talking about poverty. How we're talking about health, we're talking about equity - and so many of these failures came together. And just overall, even with the timing of this thing, this is a result of longstanding neglect. How long have we been talking about how unsafe this is? And this was just one pedestrian collision and injury this week. We also had a family mowed down in a crosswalk. [00:07:20] Rich Smith: Did you see that video? [00:07:21] Crystal Fincher: I unfortunately did see that video. We have to do better. I think a lot of people are wondering - we hear lip service being given to this year, after year, after year. Certainly there have been some electeds who have tried to propose money and others - Tammy Morales comes to mind - but overall between the council and the mayor, we have not gotten this to be a priority. And we have to do something different, we have to do something substantial. If we had the amount of poisoning deaths by some source that we do with pedestrian deaths and collisions, we would be doing something about it. If there were a Brown person walking around and beating up people to this magnitude, we would be doing something different. This is a crisis. And just because it's happening to people outside of cars doesn't mean that we just give thoughts and prayers and don't do anything. And it's feeling like the situation where we all know we need to do more to stop gun violence, yet so much action isn't taken. There's an excellent article that was written last year, I think, by Gordon Padelford at The Urbanist, which kind of goes through - Hey, this is what percentage of pedestrian deaths are caused by this type of issue, this is the recommendation or the ask to solve it - this is what can happen. There's short term stuff, there's long term stuff. I just hope to see some action here. And it appears that there are some things that don't require the building of new infrastructure, but some signal timings - we need to look at how we allow drivers to turn both right on red and left turns - and we can be doing those in a safer way. And just all of that. I hope we get real serious about this across the region real quick. We just talked last week about the alarming skyrocketing pedestrian deaths and injuries across South King County. And I follow Ryan Packer on Twitter and their Patreon, and they cover the majority of these pedestrian-involved collisions. And just watching the amount of those come down the timeline is sobering. [00:09:45] Rich Smith: That's another sort of system - just people being in their cars and having car brain and forgetting - the great lie of the car is that you're not a 2-ton steel cage traveling down the road at 70 mph or 40 mph that could just absolutely wreck the fragile human body. For some, the car - you don't feel like that when you're in the car and that - so we got to kill the car in our head. [00:10:16] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and the mind frame that comes with it - I drive, I have a car. I drive a lot less than I used to, but still drive. And I've had feelings before - of that feeling of inconvenience and wanting to get somewhere as fast as possible, but I really do think it takes a reframing to be like - Okay, I am in a 2-ton vehicle that can instantly kill or maim someone. It's okay if it takes me literally two minutes longer to get somewhere. When we talk about traffic calming, when we talk about signal timing, or not taking a right on red - yeah, it may delay you for 30 seconds - for 30 seconds, right? It may delay you for two minutes. But if the trade off of two minutes - that we can plan around, we can manage - is people not getting gruesomely killed, that's a trade off we can make. And we need to have more conversations that you don't just have free rein and cars aren't this - the ultimate priority above and beyond anything else. We have to also address - everything is culture now, but car culture - and how we teach people to drive, how we talk about driving, how we design around that. Until we reframe that it's okay if cars stop every now and then or go slow every now and then, we're going to continue to see this kind of stuff. [00:11:42] Rich Smith: Absolutely. And when I drive, I feel myself like I just turn - I'm like, when I'm a pedestrian, I'm like, are you kidding me? It's the - the roads are ours, I'm fragile, I could be destroyed by your machines. Stop, slow down - in the crosswalk, you monsters. But then when I'm in a car, I'm like - all of these pedestrians don't care about their lives at all. They're walking into the middle of the road. They're dressed the exact same color of the night. They need to get out of my way - blah, blah, blah. So I have to consciously remind myself - I'm in a climate-controlled environment. I'm listening to the music that I want to listen to, or the radio that I want to listen to, or the podcast I want to listen to - like Hacks & Wonks. And if I need to pause - to pay more careful attention to my surroundings - then I'm the one who should because I'm the one who's basically a weapon right now. It just, yeah - and it's - you'll get there, it's not going to take - even if you're 30 seconds later, two minutes late, you'll get there. People will welcome you - so just chill out, cars. [00:12:52] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. This week - more action in our legislative session that we have this week - there were two bills in particular that caught my eye. One to make all school lunches in Washington free, which I think is an excellent idea. And another to require that incarcerated workers at least make minimum wage, because right now they don't and it's basically slavery. What's your take on these bills? [00:13:24] Rich Smith: Yeah, it's weird to make anybody - they're kind of related - but it's weird to make children go to a place for - whatever, 7-8 hours, and then make them buy their food there if they want to not operate at a caloric deficit. And poverty is high. Child poverty is shockingly high. And it just shouldn't be an expense. As somebody who went to school and - I could have made my lunch before I went, but I always just tried to bum money from other people so that I could have the pizza or whatever at school. So I don't know, it was always embarrassing to bring lunch. And so I just always wanted to have the school lunch. I remember being - as a kid, school lunch was somehow prestige - even though in popular culture, school lunch is stereotypically lunch lady giving you neon food or whatever. In any event, it's just - I really would have benefited from this bill. I wouldn't have had to convince so many of my fellow students to give me dimes and quarters so that I could get bad pizza or whatever. But yeah, philosophically, kids shouldn't have to pay for food. Poor families shouldn't have to be scrounging up a couple of bucks just so that they can eat. And similarly, if we are forcibly incarcerating people and they are working, they should make the minimum wage and not, as Representative Tarra Simmons - who brought this bill to the Legislature - testifies, 42 cents an hour because of how much the jail can just dock from your pay for medicine, for this, for that, for this financial obligation, for this financial obligation. Basically, you're paying to incarcerate yourself. You're paying the state to make you less free, to take away your freedom. And you are effectively a slave. It's unconscionable. [00:15:33] Crystal Fincher: It is unconscionable. And when this is an exception in the constitutional amendment banning slavery - means it's literally slavery. These people are working and doing the same kind of work that everyone else is. Just because they're incarcerated does not mean that their labor has no value. And there is such a problem with making elements of our criminal legal system profitable for people - we have seen how corrupting and how corrosive that is. We should not be incentivizing people to lock people up and keep them locked up. We just re-aired our midweek show about how problematic carceral solutions are, and it just makes no sense. And also we spend so much time and energy, so much administrative resources on managing who gets lunch, who doesn't get lunch - just tracking and doing the - tracking who does qualify for free lunch, and who doesn't, and who's behind, and how to collect it. That all takes money too. We're requiring them to be there, just as you said. And the consequences - say a family is having trouble affording food, so their kid needs to be shamed and humiliated and can't eat or get something - how does that make any kind of sense? And also, we just got so much data from the unfortunately brief free school lunches that we provided nationwide and what kind of an impact that had on child poverty, on child hunger - was absolutely a positive and way more transformative than most people even anticipated. Really, why are we not doing this? It seems cruel not to. So I'm very excited to see both of those making their way through the Legislature. Also big news this week - on the wealth tax issue - the Supreme Court heard the capital gains tax case. How is that playing out? Where do we stand with that? [00:17:45] Rich Smith: Well, we'll see. They just heard - that is, the Supreme Court just heard - oral arguments on the case yesterday. It's difficult, really, to follow the arguments because Justice Steven González is so fine that I have trouble paying attention to what the lawyers are arguing about, the difference between the excise tax and income tax, etc. I'm joking - he's a good-looking man, but he didn't actually talk that much during the oral arguments. But he did ask a kind of prescient question, or a useful question, that was interesting to me. This is all to say that - yeah, we'll see - they presented their arguments yesterday. Backing up a second, the State Legislature - after a decade of arm twisting and back bending and watering down bill after bill after bill - finally decided to pass a capital gains tax on the richest 8,000 Washingtonians. That is a 7% tax whenever you realize capital gains, which is a financial asset over - $250 million is the threshold of the tax. If you cash out stocks for more than $250 million, then you're going to get hit with a 7% tax. A bunch of conservatives sued and said this isn't a excise tax or a sales tax - a transactional tax as the state is arguing - this is an income tax because that property, or that $250 million is property. According to the State of Washington's Constitution, that's income. State's taxing that money at 7%. Constitution says you can only tax property at 1%, so it's unconstitutional. Also, the fact that there's an exemption means it's not taxed uniformly, so that's unconstitutional. They also argue that it's a violation of - they have some kind of commerce clause argument that I didn't understand and that didn't seem to apply. It didn't seem particularly sophisticated - the justices didn't seem particularly bothered by it during oral arguments yesterday, but that's basically the gist. And it's up to these political figures - these justices after hearing the arguments - to determine whether or not we're going to allow the state to raise $500 million to pay for education. The state hoped that they're - or asked the court to give a decision before April 18th on the matter, so that the lawmakers who are busy writing the state budget can know if they can include this $500 million that we raised from the capital gains tax in their bottom lines or not. The Supreme Court didn't seem bothered by that, didn't seem like they were moved by that request and will release a decision on their own time - a little sort of cross-branch flexing back and forth there during the oral arguments. But we know that on some Thursday, sometime in the next few months, we'll get an answer to whether or not we can tax them. And there's also the possibility that the court could, in their decision, say - Actually, income tax - or income isn't property. Those court rulings that determine that, the court decisions that determined that in the '30s were wrong. And that would allow Washington State to pass income taxes for the first time in over 100 years, which would really give us the opportunity to rebalance the tax code that is right now balanced on the backs of the poor. Every recession we dig ourselves out of - we do it from sales tax, property taxes, taxes on gross receipts of small businesses and other businesses - and large businesses, frankly. And that's the most regressive way to do it. And we're the most regressive state - in terms of taxes - in the country. So there's a slim possibility that we could change the whole game, but I don't know if they'll do that. They don't seem hungry to do that. [00:22:35] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. And Will Casey had a great breakdown of this all in The Stranger, in a piece that we'll link in the show notes and in our social media threads on this show. But to your point, they can - they do actually have a few different choices. This isn't necessarily just a binary - it's allowed or not allowed. They could agree with the lower court that it's not allowed. They could also agree with the Attorney General's opinion, which doesn't take any view on overturning the prior case that said income is property, we can't have an income tax, and just say it's an excise tax. It doesn't even get into the other discussion. And then that third option, as you articulated, can have them overturn the ruling that made an income tax illegal. One of the most foremost Washington State constitutional scholars and professors that we have in the state - Hugh Spitzer and some others - thought that that isn't likely - just overturning the whole thing and finding that income tax is legal to do in the state is unlikely. That if something does happen, they predict it would be agreeing that it's an excise tax. But who knows? They can do anything. We will see what happens. [00:24:01] Rich Smith: Sorry, just one correction. We can have an income tax, but it just has to be uniform and it can't be more than 1% because that's - yeah. But yeah, just to clarify - we all know, and I know - I said it too. But it's just - it's like a shorthand - it's we can't do an income tax that makes sense - is what we mean when we say we can't do an income tax. [00:24:17] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. A graduated income tax. Thank you for that clarification. [00:24:21] Rich Smith: Yeah. Yeah, but I agree that - listening to oral arguments in any case, and especially in a case like this, just makes me go crazy because the arguments are never about the moral value of the question at hand. The judges aren't deciding whether or not it's - we should have a capital gains tax if the Legislature does it. It's based on previous case law triangulated over the course of many different years - is it technical - are these definitions, does this definition of capital gains and income and property align with the plain language of this law or not, and to what degree do we care that it does? It seems like it's all up to us to decide, right? You've got Noah Purcell, the Assistant Attorney General, arguing on behalf of the state saying stuff like, This is an excise tax because when we're taxing the capital gain, we're taxing it at the point of the transaction - not taxing the actual - we're taxing the transaction, not the money, but the ability to do the transaction, not the money that you get coming in. And the other side says like, In all 50 states, or in every other state in the country, they have capital gains taxes - but those taxes are called income taxes. And yet here we have a capital gains tax and suddenly it's not an income tax? And then the state says, Well, we're the only state in the country that defines income as property, right? So it just dwindled - the entire argument dwindles into definitions and it just makes you feel insane while you're watching it, because it has nothing to do with this. It has little to do with the substance of the policy matter. So we just make it up anyway and decide - the entire law is based on language, which is quicksand, it's soup, it changes constantly. The definitions are made from language and so their meanings change over time, and yet we've got these clerics in robes pretending like they're mystical beings seeing the true intent of the law or whatever and just argue. It's just, it's witchery. But anyway, I just really - if you want to feel that, if you want to feel insane, I recommend going to TVW and watching the oral arguments. [00:26:55] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, we will stay tuned to what happens and await the upcoming some Thursday where we eventually hear what the fate of the capital gains tax is. Also this week, we heard from our new King County Prosecutor, Leesa Manion, about some of her plans for the office - the establishment of some new units focusing on gun violence, sexual assault, economic crimes, and others. How did you view this? [00:27:27] Rich Smith: Rearranging the office chairs? I don't know, right? Creating these units and - on the one hand, making it someone's job to focus on certain crimes does matter, right? It changes the focus and the thrust of the work that gets done on a daily basis. But I don't know to what degree that's going to fix the problems in the office. You're not really dealing with - it's not like we're still concentrating on "repeat property crime" which seems to be, what, a euphemism for graffiti, which is one of the - or, broken windows - which is one of City Attorney Ann Davison's big areas of focus as well as the mayor's office. But I don't - I'm not quite sure, really, how this rearrangement will impact the scope and work of the office. They don't expect it to help knock down the 4,000-case backlog that developed over the course of the pandemic. They're not really - there's some stuff to like in there in terms of focusing on diversion, which would be better than if we had Jim Ferrell in there, who was the hard right - or a conservative Democrat, I should say - running against her in the November elections last year, but I'm not sure. What's your take on it? [00:29:17] Crystal Fincher: You know, I am reserving judgment. I'm willing to see how this turns out. It does actually matter - to create units where people are focusing, where they're able to share resources to investigate and - within our current system of both policing and among the prosecutor - investigation is an important thing. That's the meat of how we figure out who does stuff and especially if we want to stop playing whac-a-mole with people doing low-level crimes that are often the result of some other root cause. The ability to move further up the chain and address some of those systemic issues, or if they are actually targeting organized retail theft or domestic violence, intimate partner abuse - to really go after people who are doing that, or who are defrauding seniors, and going after wage theft - that requires focus and investigation and specialized resources and they're not going to get pulled away on to whatever the newfangled thing is that they're focusing on that week. And that's shown to have an impact and make a difference. I also recognize that this is one piece in the criminal legal system puzzle. And on that investigation issue, we still have issues with police who are doing the frontline work in this and not investigating many things. And having those who were in investigative roles moved out to patrol - because of their conversations on staffing and feeling that they need to do that. And then we wind up in situations where we aren't investigating sexual assault. And even when there's gun violence and a business owner has a bullet that they collected that went through their window, the police aren't showing up for days or weeks to pick that up and even process that. So it's like what can the prosecutor do if police are only focused on patrol, surveillance, low-level crime and not able to put the resources into investigation in order to address these issues. So it feels like everything's a mess systemically and they're trying to wade through that. But I do think that - we know that certain interventions with gun violence, we know that certain types of diversion, we know that focusing on crimes of abuse and manipulation and fraud make a difference. I was excited to actually see named - wage theft - which is one of the biggest crimes being perpetrated in the City, that so often doesn't get talked about because it is perpetrated by more wealthy people, business owners. But that also comes with a pause, because in the quote that I saw in the paper, it talked about, Hey, we - last year, we filed more charges against organized retail theft than any others before. The Stranger had done excellent reporting on what they call organized retail theft - sure does look the same as small-time petty theft. And so if we're laying out this big - saying we're focusing on wage theft and economic crimes and fraud and organized retail theft - but every focus, all the resources, and all of the energy is going towards this "organized retail theft" that looks like the same old theft that we've been dealing with that is not very organized. We'll have to see how this turns out. So willing to give the benefit of the doubt, see what happens, see what kind of an impact can be made, but I'm definitely waiting to see what the impact is. [00:33:23] Rich Smith: Yeah, could just - want to triple underline that. The categories look okay to me. It'll be, it'll just be telling to see where they put, or the prosecutors put, their emphasis. [00:33:34] Crystal Fincher: Okay. With that, also wanted to talk about Initiative 135 on the docket. There is an election coming up on Valentine's Day, February 14th, to decide whether Seattle is going to have social housing and The Stranger took a stance on it. What did you guys decide? [00:33:56] Rich Smith: The Stranger Election Control Board is Pro - we want you to vote Yes on Initiative 135 for social housing. It's not perfect, but it is good. And so it's worth, it's worth your time. It's worth your Yes vote. Certainly. [00:34:15] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely is. I was in a conversation yesterday - with Axios actually - and talking about what the prospects of this look like. But I also think this is an interesting time - with all of these tech layoffs that we're experiencing and talk of an economic recession, there've been some people who have been fortunate enough to be insulated from the worry and concern about being priced out of Seattle and feeling secure with income. And there are lots of conversations about the working class and whether different workers, or a different class of worker, not feeling the same kind of solidarity or vulnerability to some of the challenges that other people have been facing when it comes to trying to fight for their rights, for unionization, for recognizing that they could be a paycheck or two away from financial instability, poverty or homelessness. And there are a lot of new people contending with some of that insecurity. This is unfortunate wherever and however it happens - absolutely not rooting for anyone to lose their job - there's a lot of pain and struggle and uncertainty going on now. But I do think this is all part of this same conversation and crisis that we're facing - we have a whole new class of people wondering if they can afford to remain in Seattle. If they are upside down on their mortgages with the way things are right now, if they can afford rent - continue to afford rent if they lose their job and don't get another one very frequently - how we're going to weather this predicted recession that's coming. So it really does seem like the time for varied action, new action, different action, not letting perfect get in the way of the good, and do something here. And this seems like it has a track record elsewhere. The reasoning behind it is sound. And let's kick this off. And let's see if we can get this right. And if it needs fine tuning as we go along, let's do that. But it really seems like the time for some different decisive action is now. [00:36:39] Rich Smith: Yeah, one of the members in the SECB highlighted this initiative as optimistic. And it's something you can rally behind, it's something you can really organize around - not just to get it passed, but once it's implemented, and once they start going through the steps of actually creating the social housing - it is a site for organizing, a site for movement building. And that's just - there's so few exciting, actual things like that - having a public developer, which this initiative would create, to acquire and build housing for people between 0% and 120% of the area median income that the City would own and make affordable - that is lower than 30% of your income, if you're living in those buildings - forever, it's just exciting. And yeah, it's forward thinking. And as we argue in the endorsement, we suck at thinking for the future - Seattle does a horrible job of thinking ahead. And I think it's because a lot of people who are here don't want to. They have - a lot of people have their house, who have their little nautical village, like being in the corner of the country, have this identity of being away from it all and that's why we're out here in the first place - and just emotionally blocked out the 2010s, where people flooded into the city, into the area - because of how prosperous all the companies were, because of all these opportunities. And then just did nothing to build the infrastructure for it. And this has been a curse of this town going back decades. 1970 - we didn't get the trades, and so the trades went to Atlanta. In 1990, or '95, we settled for a much smaller light rail extension that we possibly could. We have made the mistake of not making room for people who want to move to this beautiful place time and time again. And it is the root cause of so much of the pain and struggle that we see outside. And this initiative comes along and says, Okay, let's have a 50-year plan. And let's start now. Let's add another tool to the housing toolbox that can - if we plant this seed, grow into thousands and thousands of affordable units built sustainably, with union labor, that can keep housing - a certain amount of housing stock - affordable forever. Not like affordable housing - government-subsidized housing - which can go back on the unaffordable market in 30 years most of the time. And not like the market rate housing, which nobody's been able to afford for as long as I've been alive. But permanently affordable housing. And, yeah, as we mentioned, and as the advocates for this initiative will mention, it's working in France, it's working in Vienna, Austria, it's working in Singapore, it's working all around the globe. And it can work here - granted, very different housing markets, very different tax structures - in those places. But we can do it here, and we should. Because as Representative Frank Chopp of all people, who has dedicated his public life to building affordable housing, said about the affordable housing system we have now - it doesn't work. We need to try something else. And this is that something else. So it's exciting, and people should vote for it. [00:40:36] Crystal Fincher: Also coming on a later ballot to you - in August, in the primary - will be a number of councilmembers vying for several open seats. We had several announcements so far, some new ones this week. Who's running for City Council? Who's not running for City Council? And what does it mean? [00:40:57] Rich Smith: Everybody is running for City Council, it seems like. Well, last week - was it? Kshama Sawant, who represents District 3, the central area of the City, announced her plans to leave. And this sort of spurred some people to announce, though others had done it around that time or a little before that time. But it's really motivating people to jump in. And so yeah, we've had a number of people jump in in that race, in that City Council race. Joy Hollingsworth - runs Hollingsworth Cannabis, Central District resident, comes from a lineage of civil rights organizers - and she's in, she announced on MLK Day. We've got Alex Hudson - just announced this week - who was the Executive Director of Transportation Choices and runs the neighborhood board over at First Hill. Andrew Ashiofu, the Co-Chair of the Seattle LGBTQ Commission, jumped in to the race. Hannah has got great profiles on all of these people - you should check them out at The Stranger. And just this morning, Sarah Reyneveld, who is a Assistant Attorney General - she's jumping into the King County race to replace Jeanne Kohl-Welles, who was on the King County Council in District 4, representing Ballard, Queen Anne, Belltown, South Lake Union, that kind of area, on the County Council. She was in that seat for two terms. So Reyneveld is trying to swoop in and keep her legacy going there. And yeah, we've got another ex-Amazon worker, who was legally fired, is jumping into the race to replace Lisa Herbold. She was not one of the ones reportedly recruited by Bruce Harrell - still waiting for that person, whoever he is, to jump in at some point. So yeah, a flurry of activity and many more to come, I'm sure, as the balance of the City Council is up for grabs this year. [00:43:21] Crystal Fincher: This is going to be interesting with so many open seats - Lisa Herbold, Kshama Sawant, Alex Pedersen are not running again. We're going to see a lot of turnover, the potential for a switch in the balance of power with the council. And as you said, there are great profiles in The Stranger about some of these candidates. I think Capitol Hill Seattle and The Urbanist also had a couple of profiles. We will continue to see what they say, but I will say - one, it's early. It's early - running for office is hard and people are starting to get this together. But I do hope to see overall a greater articulation of vision. And hearing what they actually want to do, what they want to accomplish for the City and for the residents of Seattle. I was struck - in a few different situations where - being asked about issues, policy, where do you stand on this, do you support social housing, do you support this or that? And - Well, I'm not sure. I'm interested in hearing more about it. I want to hear what the community has to say. I'm looking forward to bringing people together to discuss it. I support this, but don't know if I can commit to it before I hear more information. And this is a time where you are running and making the case that you are the person most qualified to make this change. And to bring about the change that a lot of people are frustrated that they haven't been seeing after hearing promises for so long. And so it really seems like a missed opportunity to not at least take a stand on some things, let people know where you're at - and that may be a differentiator for people in crowded primaries. If someone is willing to stand up with certainty on issues and others aren't, that's absolutely a differentiator. And this is across a variety of issues, a variety of candidates. This is not about one candidate - have seen this widespread. So I do hope we see a greater articulation and greater commitments on what they're going to be, because I do worry about people who are afraid of offending people this early in the game. Campaigns are hard - don't get me wrong - but they don't compare to governing and the type of pressure and accountability that's there. And so if you cannot commit here, what are we going to get when you're on the council? [00:46:02] Rich Smith: I'm trying to hold it in, Crystal - but yeah, I couldn't agree more. Why are you running for office? You decided to announce - you could control that decision. If you don't have definitive answers for where you're at on problems that have existed for years in this city, if you still need to learn more from the community, hear more from the community on hiking the JumpStart Tax to fill budget gaps, or where you're at on pedestrian improvements, or where you're at on this or that - then why did you decide to run? All you're telling me whenever you say that - when you say, I need to listen to the community more on this issue - is that you are running as a matter of course, because you want the power of the position, not that you have something that you want to do with that power. And saying, Ah, but how I will wield my power is to be a collaborator, or to listen, to bring the community together, bring everyone around the table - then you are saying that - that you suck. I don't know how to say it - that you're going to defer to whoever's interests seem to have the most sway over - I don't know. You don't have principles in that moment, right? You're just a funnel for other people to use. And as we've seen in the past, that means you're going to bend to big business, you're not going to stand up for stuff that you know is right. And that's, or at least that's what that signals, and it just boggles the mind. And then this little ouroboros of the community asked me to run - Okay, great. What are you going to do? I'm going to listen to community. Well, what did the community - why do they want you to run? Presumably they want you to run because they already agreed with you on stuff. And so just - trust your instincts, say what's right - and people will respond. I don't know why everyone's trying to not offend X. I know why - because they don't want to offend the money - because they need the money, and they need the endorsements, and they need the support in order to win. And so whatever - people aren't going to say what they actually believe. It's either that, or they actually don't believe anything and there's just a transparent grab for power on assumption that you've been working toward this, and so it is yours. It's disgusting to see, frankly. And I don't know - maybe I'm just getting over this, but I'm - it's, it's, I find - it sucks. It's offensive. [00:48:47] Crystal Fincher: I'm gonna choose to try and have a charitable interpretation of where they may be. It is early in the campaign. Maybe they haven't figured out the best way to articulate where they stand yet. But I do think they need to hurry up and get to it. Anyone - you don't have to be elected to bring people together and listen to community. The reason why you run for office is to have the power to make decisions. It's to make those decisions. We give you that authority through an election. And so we need to hear about what decisions you plan on making. We need to hear about the policy that you plan on crafting and passing in specificity. That is why you run. We are not trying to elect a convener here. We're not trying to elect a moderator for the community, someone to conduct listening sessions. We can do that any day of the week. We can pay other people for that. But only a few people can sit and make those decisions. And so hearing about those is really important. And to your point, Rich, we have heard that from people who have done nothing, from people who have gone back on their promises that they made while they were running, from people who did say - I'm different, money has no hold on me. But lo and behold, they wind up doing different things than they said when they were running. And it's exactly what their list of top donors wants. That's what we're used to seeing when we hear this. And so a red flag automatically pops up. Maybe that's not ultimately where these people are going to be coming from, maybe that's not their intent, maybe they're still working on that - I would encourage them to work on it quickly. [00:50:34] Rich Smith: Yeah. I agree. And that's - thinking of Sawant - that's part of what made her refreshing was - she was just like, she just tried to do what aligned with her principles. She had no power, so she ended up spending a lot of time just like dunking on her colleagues a lot in ways that were not particularly productive or whatever. But she was like, Okay, we want to protect abortion in Seattle. Let's pay for it all. Let's pay for all abortions. Here's a plan to pay for everybody's abortions every year. It costs $3.5 million. Sign it up. Oh, we got a $140 million budget hole. Let's raise the JumpStart Tax to fill it. Sure, we're going to have to fill it with something else in the meantime and then backfill with JumpStart, but let's do that. And so it's not hard to have a policy position and to try to do what you, try to hold onto that principle when you finally make it into office. And so I just wish people wouldn't hedge. And if you say something and then you change your mind later, you can just - you just do that. You could say I changed my mind for this reason or that reason. And then you won't have the - oh, broken promise mailer, or whatever that you're scared of. People just don't know how to be people on the campaign, and it's incredibly depressing. And it just takes so much time to parse. And I amplify your call and your hope that people will get better quickly on these issues. [00:52:04] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and I think it's going to be a competitive advantage for those - who do still have to hit all your campaign marks, do the things that get votes and connect with people. But the way to connect with people is to tell them concretely how you plan to improve their day-to-day life. And with that, we will wrap up today's Hacks & Wonks. Thank you so much for listening on this Friday, January 27th, 2023. I cannot believe the month of January just evaporated like that. How dare it. But we're almost to Black History Month. Anyway, Hacks & Wonks is co-produced by Shannon Cheng and Bryce Cannatelli. Our insightful co-host today was Associate Editor of The Stranger and noted poet Rich Smith. You can find Rich on Twitter @richsssmith, with three S's in the middle. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks and find me on Twitter @finchfrii, with two I's at the end. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, wherever 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 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 podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time. [00:53:31] Rich Smith: Thanks - bye.

Join us for the rest of the court proceedings on this tragic case. Will Casey be convicted? Should she have been convicted? Let us know your thoughts.Case suggestions/Story Time suggestions or you have your own story to tell?: tcstpod@gmail.com "story time" or "true crime" in the heading.Check out our socials : https://linktr.ee/TCSTpodcastSources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Caylee_Anthony#cite_note-38https://www.biography.com/crime-figure/casey-anthony

For this Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, political consultant and host Crystal Fincher is joined by metro news columnist and opinion editor for The News Tribune in Tacoma, Matt Driscoll!  They start the show reviewing the criminal trial of elected Pierce County Sheriff Ed Troyer. Troyer is charged with false reporting and one count of making a false or misleading statement to a public servant in relation to his alleged harassment of Black newspaper carrier Sedrick Altheimer. This week, the trial revealed discrepancies in Troyer's account of the incident compared to the police report. This case hinges on whether the state can prove Troyer's actions were criminal, and it's anticipated that the trial will be sent to the jury next week.  Next, Crystal and Matt recap a new investigative report from ProPublica and The Seattle Times that reveals how deeply the state's schools are failing students with complex disabilities, sending many of them to for-profit entities with little oversight, leading to instances of mistreatment and abuse. In housing news, the Pierce County Council will vote next Tuesday on an affordable housing sales tax. The county needs more funding for affordable housing, and even though a sales tax is a regressive tax, it's the best available option the council has to generate additional revenue for affordable housing projects. The tax will require five votes to pass from the Council that includes four Democrats and three Republicans. In other Pierce County Council news, Crystal and Matt discuss the retirement of Council Chair Derek Young. They explore his political career, talk about his impact, and share their appreciation for how he handled the responsibility of being an elected leader. The trend of dangerous, sometimes violent protests against drag shows and drag story time events came to Renton this week, which saw a local brewery get shot at before their Drag Queen Story Hour event on Thursday. It's part of an increase of anti-LGBT and antisemitic hatred and violence happening across the country. The incident in Renton comes alongside  concerning reporting from KUOW revealing that the electrical grid in Oregon and Western Washington has been attacked six times since mid-November, with at least two of the attacks resembling the incident in North Carolina last Saturday. It's a foreboding sign of the rise of domestic terrorism in this country fueled by right-wing hate. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Matt Driscoll, at @mattsdriscoll. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources “TPD officer testifies that Troyer reported no death threat to him. Next, defense's turn.” by Jared Brown from The News Tribune   “WA's schools are failing students with complex disabilities. It's happening in Tacoma too.” by Matt Driscoll from The News Tribune   “‘Kids Seem to Be a Paycheck': How a Billion-Dollar Corporation Exploits Washington's Special Education System” by Lulu Ramadan, Mike Reicher and Taylor Blatchford from ProPublica    “At Washington special education schools, years of abuse complaints and lack of academics” by Mike Reicher & Lulu Ramadan from The Seattle Times   “Pierce County needs an affordable housing sales tax. Will it get one next week?” by Matt Driscoll from The News Tribune   “Pierce County Council Member Derek Young Retires from Politics for Unknown Future” by Sara Thompson from Key Peninsula News   “Renton Brewery Shot Up before Drag Queen Story Hour” by Will Casey from The Stranger    “String of electrical grid attacks in Pacific Northwest are unsolved” by Conrad Wilson & John Ryan from KUOW   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full text transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we are 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 cohost: metro news columnist and opinion editor for The News Tribune in Tacoma, Matt Driscoll. [00:00:56] Matt Driscoll: Hello, thanks for having me - it's good to be back. [00:00:59] Crystal Fincher: It's great to have you back - enjoyed your commentary and insight last time, excited for it today. Well, there's a lot of news that we need to get to this week. I think the first thing that we will start off with a recap of is the trial of Pierce County Sheriff Ed Troyer. What is he on trial for and what has happened so far? [00:01:23] Matt Driscoll: Yeah. Well, first just a shout out to my colleague, Jared Brown, who's been in court covering this thing, following it on Twitter, and writing daily recaps - they've just been doing an incredible job in the courthouse. But yeah, our sheriff down here in Pierce County, Ed Troyer, he's on trial for two misdemeanor counts - one of false reporting and another of making a false or misleading statement. The reality of this - in general terms, if this was anyone else is - if convicted, he's facing maybe a little bit of community service and maybe a fine of some sort. It's not a big deal, in the sense of he was just an average person. But of course, it is a very big deal because he's our sheriff down here in Pierce County and there are a lot of complicated aspects of this case. Just to - if folks aren't following the case or haven't heard, which I kind of doubt at this point, but basically this all stems from an interaction he had with a newspaper delivery carrier. It's been so long now - I don't even remember exactly when that was, but I guess it was January - looking it up now - of 2021. A Black newspaper carrier in his neighborhood - Troyer basically saw him, thought he looked suspicious, started following him around. Confrontation ensued, Troyer ended up summoning a police response saying he had been threatened. It sparked a massive response, which was quickly kind of downgraded to a smaller response. But still, the bottom line was you had a huge police response, guns-drawn situation with a Black newspaper carrier who felt in danger for his life. And so that story, thanks to the reporting of folks at The Seattle Times and then at The News Tribune, got a lot of attention and led to the governor calling for an investigation into it. And eventually it led from charges from the state AG's office. So there's no charges down here locally, but Bob Ferguson jumped in and filed these misdemeanor charges. And that was a long time ago, and we're finally at the trial now. So we've been following it here for a couple of weeks - jury selection took a while, and now we're into actual testimony. And actually, Ed Troyer was on the trial, or on the stand, yesterday. So that was the latest interesting event in an interesting case, that's probably the most high-profile misdemeanor trial I can recall. [00:04:01] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. So Ed Troyer is an elected sheriff, not an appointed sheriff, like currently exists in King County - also makes just the issue of accountability more challenging. It's not a situation where - in the midst of this, there were inconsistencies that were revealed between Ed Troyer's initial account and what actually seems to have taken place, or what ended up in the police report about this. And in those situations, often - I won't say oftentimes - but in other situations, sometimes that could lead to accountability or discipline locally. That's a whole different issue when you have an elected public official and not someone who is subject to interdepartmental discipline or anything like that. So this trial is basically the accountability lever and - to the point of independent oversight - had to be initiated externally, because it wasn't happening just from the agencies in the jurisdiction. The prosecution presented their case and rested. The defense is now presenting their case. There were questions about whether Ed Troyer would take the stand in his defense. He has done so. And up until this point, where we're recording on Friday morning, the defense questioned him and now he is getting ready to face questioning from the prosecution. So we will see how this turns out, we will continue to follow this along. I don't think the trial is expected to last more than a few more days before it goes to the jury. Is that correct? [00:05:45] Matt Driscoll: It's been slow going - I think that's the expectation. They don't - there are no trials on Friday, no trial on Friday - so the next action will be Monday. You'll have the state cross-examining Troyer. And I should mention - that was a shoddy recap, I guess - because I've been living it down here in Pierce County for so long, it just feels like coming up. But the crux of this case basically is - when Troyer summoned police response, he said that his life had been threatened. And then when cops arrived, he told them that wasn't the case. So that's the crux of it - is whether he made a false statement, a false report that summoned this huge police response. It's almost like a swatting, mini-swatting situation. So it kind of hinges on that. At the end of the day, I think, there's going to be a big burden on the state to prove that this was more than - and I guess I'm a columnist, I can share these sorts of opinions - whether this was more than Ed Troyer being stupid, right? Like I think it's established that - what he, at least in my mind - his actions on that morning were not the smartest thing to do and were not what he should have done. But is that criminal or not? I think that's going to be that's kind of the crux of it. And I think it's going to be interesting to see what the jury decides there. My gut tells me it's going to be difficult, just given the nature of things to get all jurors to agree one way or the other, but we'll see. And that's why we follow it. [00:07:20] Crystal Fincher: It is why we follow it. Certainly I'm sitting here as a Black woman, who has seen these situations unfold, and feels that this newsletter, newspaper carrier was fortunate to escape this situation with his life. The kind of call and the kind of accusation made initially in the call is the kind of pretext to death and shootings - shootings called justified because they felt that they were threatened, particularly from Black men. So this call was - if this indeed happened the way it's alleged to or appear to have happened, was a risk to this Black man's life. And by just doing his job - to have someone who felt uncomfortable with this Black person in their neighborhood - followed them, basically stalked them down the street, and then initiated a confrontation - is just beyond the pale. And one, for anyone in that situation - he could have been any other resident on the street calling and saying their life was threatened by this person, and it would invite a massive police response - certainly for the sheriff of the entire jurisdiction. And is this behavior that we want to see, that we are comfortable with from the head of all law enforcement in that jurisdiction - even in the most charitable interpretation of this possible, which you kind of recap, where he's just being ignorant and ridiculous. Do we want this ignorance leading this agency? Is this the head that we want? Regardless of the outcome of this trial, I think those are important questions to examine and ask - for us to ask ourself - where is the bar that we hold elected officials and public safety officials to? And I personally feel that Pierce County deserves better, but we'll see how this trial turns out and we'll continue to follow it throughout. Also want to talk about a story that you talked about - that came from ProPublica, The Seattle Times also wrote about it - but about Washington schools failing students with complex disabilities. What's happening here and what have you seen in Tacoma? [00:09:52] Matt Driscoll: Yeah. I mean, this is just an incredible story. And first and foremost - I guess I did this last time too - but credit where credit's due - the reporting team there on Seattle Times and ProPublica on this story. It's just a jaw-dropping story. This is one of those stories where my wife and I were sitting - because they'd hit on Saturdays - and we're sitting around in the living room and she's actually reading the excerpts from the story because we're in such disbelief of what's transpiring. But the long and short of it is basically the state is obligated to provide basic education to students with complex disabilities. They're required to require basic education to all students, but including those with disabilities. And in certain cases, you've got children, students with disabilities that make it really difficult, if not impossible, to do that in a standard classroom or a standard school building. Districts across the state have done a lot of work to try to integrate students with disabilities as much as possible into regular classrooms. As a parent of a child with disabilities, I know the system well. But in some cases, when you're talking about - sometimes severe behavior stuff, sometimes it's medical, feeding tubes - any number of things that can require a situation where - what the state needs to provide can't be done in a classroom. So, long story short, districts don't have a lot of money. We don't fund education anywhere near as much as we should, and they have this obligation to serve these students. So what has transpired basically is a system that we've created in the state where these students are often - that work is outsourced to other schools. Many times they're for-profit schools - they're publicly-funded private schools, so private entities that then receive state funding to do this work. Districts send their challenging students there, the students that need this there. But with the story, the ProPublica-Seattle Times piece really revealed is just the incredible lack of oversight that happens there. It's basically on the districts to monitor each of their students, and the oversight from the state as a whole is really lax. Maybe districts know what's going on with their individual kids. Maybe they've got a couple in these situations, but the full picture is really hard to see. And that's what this investigation revealed. And what it revealed, shockingly enough, is that when you welcome in for-profit entities to serve our most vulnerable children, bad stuff happens sometimes. And there's some really bad stuff in this story. Some allegations of abuse and mistreatment, just some anecdotes that I won't - you should read the story, but some of the situations painted specifically in one of these schools, the Northwest, the acronym is SOIL - I'm going to of course forget what it stands for at the moment - but it's the largest one of these in the states. It's got three campuses, including one in Tacoma. Long story short, Tacoma has relied heavily on this school in particular over the years, going back to 2015. It has sent basically more funding to this Northwest SOIL school than any district in the state by a wide margin. And the unsatisfying answer here is - when talking to district officials, it's essentially - this is the system we have. It's not great. We would like to see it better, but we don't have the means to serve these students and we're reliant upon it. And so that's a really unsatisfying answer. It's an unsatisfying answer to parents, I'm sure, but I think the bigger picture is until we reimagine them and blow up this system we've created in this state, where we're essentially outsourcing this work to for-profit corporations and publicly-funded private schools where - we basically welcome situations like this, in my opinion. So that was a lot of rambling, but this story, it pissed me off. It makes me really, really mad. [00:14:10] Crystal Fincher: It's a shame. And the state unquestionably has a responsibility to provide an appropriate education, in the least restrictive means possible, to all students - including those with disabilities and complex disabilities. Funding has been a continual conversation in this. And the fact is these programs don't currently exist in public schools to the degree they need to serve all the entire population of students, including those with complex disabilities, because they don't have the funding to implement and support those. And as we see too often in these situations, if you ask me, for-profit companies then are there to fill that gap, they say. But what we see is that when profit is a main driver and not an outcome from a student is the main driver - predictably, obviously - we're going to see profit prioritized ahead of these students. And we're seeing them in these situations with shocking and abhorrent and abusive and harmful consequences. And are we comfortable? In the column that you wrote, you asked a very appropriate question. Are we comfortable abdicating our responsibility as the state to for-profit entities who already have a record that is troubling? Are we comfortable with this? Because this is the system that we have and there are reasons, multiple reasons, to be uncomfortable. Are we prepared to confront the questions about funding that are related to this? Are we prepared to meet the responsibility as the state ourselves, or continue to check a box saying - oh, we handed the student over to the Northwest SOIL School, which seems like an appropriate acronym at this point in time. [00:16:12] Matt Driscoll: School of Innovative Learning, that's what it is. [00:16:16] Crystal Fincher: Yes, and so it's just really troubling. Right now, there are no other options - so families are faced with the prospect of their kids not getting their constitutionally mandated education, or sending them someplace where they're at risk - that's the plain truth - where they're at risk. They're certainly at greater risk than in the school setting and other settings for abuse. But if they're in another setting, they're at risk of not getting an appropriate education. That is a choice that no family should have or should face, and we have a responsibility to do better. We have to talk about revenue. We have to talk about funding as part of that. And I hope the Legislature takes this seriously and meaningfully addresses this deficit and these challenges, because it's going to take action there to help solve this. But man, this is troubling. I'm happy you wrote about it. I'm happy that ProPublica and The Seattle Times did this piece, with so much investigation and legwork that it took - just really troubling. We owe our kids, all of our kids, a better education than this. We can do better. [00:17:34] Matt Driscoll: No, you're exactly right. And I think your prescription for what needs to happen is exactly right too - that's one of the frustrating things - talking to the local district. I felt obligated to call Tacoma and basically be like - you read this story, WTF. But you do that, right? And it's not a problem that they can solve by themselves - they can't, given the current structure, provide the services that they need to because they don't have the money and they don't have the staffing and they don't have the resources to do it. So Tacoma can't solve it alone. The Seattle schools can't solve it alone. It really does require a state response and really a complete rethinking of the way we serve these students - and most of all, bags and bags of money. And you would hope that reading something like this would inspire us to have those difficult conversations and would inspire that change. But the political realities of it make me fear that we're going to take half measures, we're going to increase our oversight of these - when what I really think we need to do is blow it up and work on the thing. Because the only option is not just for-profit. There are schools that do this work that are not for-profit. There are other ways to do this. So there's a school in Puyallup - I think it's the Olympic Academy or Olympic something or other, and this is really wonky stuff - but basically there are education regions and they can band together and they can create these schools - and it's not a for-profit thing, there's more oversight, there's more involvement, there's more district involvement. So it's not an unsolvable problem - what it takes is political will and a lot of money. [00:19:25] Crystal Fincher: That is true. And once again to reinforce, they're constitutionally mandated to provide this. If our constitution means anything, then that should motivate working to fix this problem. Also want to cover an issue that you also wrote about - Pierce County needs an affordable housing tax. It is going to be up for a vote in front of the Pierce County Council next week. What will this do? And is it going to pass? [00:19:57] Matt Driscoll: No, I don't think so. But first I want to just get your - as a King County person, are you shocked by the fact Pierce County does not have this tax? Because most people, many counties do. This is not like some rare thing. Is it mind-boggling to you to hear that we're still fighting in Pierce County about whether or not we should build affordable housing? [00:20:20] Crystal Fincher: Well, I may be a bit more familiar with Pierce County than a lot of people, so I find it not surprising at all in any kind of way. I think Pierce County is moving closer to there. Are they at the point where they're ready to pass this now? Questionable. But this problem is just getting so much worse for everybody that it's getting undeniable. And we are seeing, more and more, that voters are voting for people who are saying that they're going to take action. And seeing pressure even from entities who traditionally rail against any kind of taxes - no matter what kind of benefits they have, especially if people with money need to pay more taxes - that they're feeling pressure to at least come up with rhetoric saying that they want to address this problem. Because before, several years ago, I think people were comfortable not addressing this at all, or maybe not characterizing this as a problem for everyone. That's not possible anymore. This is a problem for everyone. And so now it's just the question, what are they going to do about it? And is this something that they feel moved to do? But just backing up a little bit - [00:21:34] Matt Driscoll: Let me answer your original question - I apologize. But yeah, so basically, it's a one-tenth of 1% sales tax in Pierce County, which would raise about $20 million a year - estimated - cost the average Pierce County resident about $16 a year, that then that money could be used for affordable housing or related services. Tacoma already has this tax, so we already do it here in Tacoma. A number of cities and counties across the state already do it - conservative and liberal - I don't know the exact numbers off the top of my head, but I know Wenatchee has it. Ellensburg has it. Spokane has it. Snohomish has it. Thurston has it. As you pointed out, I think we've passed the point of this being a problem that elected leaders feel comfortable ignoring. I think they know they can't ignore it. So in Pierce County, to pass this tax, what it's going to take is a supermajority on the Pierce County Council. So current makeup on the council is four Democrats, three Republicans. In my opinion, as a columnist, the reason that you've seen Pierce County move closer, as you alluded to, is because we do have a Democratic majority on the Pierce County Council now. So I think that's sped up some of these talks, some of this action. We do have a Republican Executive in Bruce Dammeier. But regardless, it's going to take five votes, by our charter, to get a tax passed - so they're going to need a Republican to side with the Democrats to pass this tax. It was passed out of committee last Tuesday. It'll be voted on on the 13th if it all goes as scheduled. And I anticipate a split vote - I think this is going to be a 4-3 vote. I think this is going to be very similar, for those who follow it - in Pierce County, our long trod towards enacting a behavioral health sales tax, which is very similar. It was a very similar situation. Counties, cities across the state already had it. It's money that goes to behavioral health services, mental health and addiction services. Pierce County drug our feet for years. We literally debated it for years and years and years. And we finally were able to get that fifth vote on the council to make it happen in 2021. So it took a very long time. I anticipate this is going to be a very similar thing. I think what's going to happen is, Democrats are going to make the case next week. It's going to be a rock solid case because anyone who looks around, I think, can see where home prices are, where housing prices are, our lack of affordable housing. I think the estimate by the county's own plan to address housing is they need something like 50,000 units affordable to those at 50% of area median income or below by 2044 just to meet the need, which doesn't even consider the housing that's needed to meet those above 50% of area median income, which is very low. I don't know Pierce County area median income off the top of my head, but it's it's usually around $50,000-60,000 depending on whether you're looking at individuals or families. This is not a wealthy county. This is hitting us hard. This is hitting us in Tacoma. This is hitting us in rural places. It's clear we need some sort of answer from the county - both to build the housing itself, and to help get federal money to address the problem. But no, I don't think it's going to pass yet. I think it's going to take a long time. I think the Republicans are going to express the things they're uneasy about, and they're going to go through the process of trying to answer those questions. I also anticipate it becoming more of a political football. If you follow Pierce County - listeners - clearly, you're very familiar with Pierce County, so I don't mean to suggest you're not - but for listeners, I know sometimes it seems like a weird, far off place. There's a micro home village for the chronically homeless that Republican County Executive Bruce Dammeier and his team very much wants to build. There are some questions about what the funding would look like for that. The current plan, as it's been described as basically a one-time investment of ARPA funds and then hands it over to private folks and donations. I think one thing that's going to - that you might see - is Democrats saying, if you want to build this, we need the tax. I wouldn't be surprised to see that. I also think it's just going to be one of those long bureaucratic processes where the Republicans need to prove to their base that they're not gung ho for a new tax, and they need to be won over, and they need all these guardrails that we talk about to ensure that the money is spent wisely and yada, yada, yada. I think eventually we'll get there, but I don't anticipate it Tuesday. So it was a long answer, but I think that's where things stand. [00:26:21] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think that's a decent read of the situation. What I would say - [00:26:25] Matt Driscoll: Decent, decent! [00:26:26] Crystal Fincher: I think it's a great, accurate read of the situation. I was about to say - I think you nailed it with its parallel to the behavioral health tax issue and debate, and how lengthy that was. And I think that's also instructive - for those who do want to see this implemented - on how to get that passed. As you talked about in your column, the pressure from the public was instrumental in getting that tax passed. And I think it will be instrumental in addressing this issue. And so for those who are listening, for the public out there - it is really important to contact your County councilmembers, to contact your elected leaders - even if you feel they're not inclined to vote for this, or if they are, to let them know what your situation and circumstance are, to let them hear your story. Anecdotes actually go a far way, a long way in addressing issues like this. A lot of times people don't understand the specific pain that is being felt by people put in these situations - how it impacts seniors on fixed incomes, veterans, those who are dealing with families with complex needs, the disabled community. People who are among the most vulnerable and in need of protection, who are some of the people who are least likely to be able to just meet an increase with a raise at work - if they're not working, if they're retired, if they're in different industries that are not keeping up with this kind of thing. A sales tax, I think across the board, you will find it's no one's favorite tax to implement. To be clear, it is a regressive tax. It is also the only lever that the county is afforded in this situation to be able to solve this. And until there are different avenues opened up at the state level, this is what the county is left with to be able to address this problem. And I think my read of the situation - a lot of people's read - is that this is the time to do everything possible at all levels to address this crisis, because it is a crisis. So it'll be interesting to see how this unfolds. It'll be interesting to hear, particularly what the Republican members of the council do say, as they deliberate this and discuss this in their meeting and in the public - and how they answer the concerns that their residents have. So we'll continue to follow this story also. [00:29:02] Matt Driscoll: Yeah, I agree. And just one quick point on that process - this is Hacks & Wonks. I was talking to some folks about the - why now, why we're doing it. And I think there is an importance, even if the tax isn't - even if it's not going to pass this time, I think it's helpful from a political standpoint to get the folks on that council on the record to say what their position is and why they're either supporting it or in some cases not supporting it, because that's exactly what we saw with the behavioral health sales tax is - once you publicly have that conversation and say what you would need to - because again, no one can deny the problem. Say what you would need to get there to support something like this - that kind of gets the ball rolling and you can start answering some of those questions. So I think it's, even if it doesn't pass next week, I think it's a starting point and it's a good first step. [00:29:56] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely agree. Another item I want to talk about today is with someone who the listeners of Hacks & Wonks are probably familiar with, because he has been a prior guest - is Pierce County Council Chair Derek Young is about to complete his final term on the Pierce County Council. He is being term-limited out and is stepping down and away from public life. And so I just wanted to just take a moment and see what your reflections on Derek and his term have been. How did you find his time in office to be? [00:30:37] Matt Driscoll: Yeah, it's an interesting discussion for me, in comparison for me, because he's been on the council for eight years now. So basically he arrived at his position about the same time that I arrived as a metro news columnist at The News Tribune. I'd been working at The Seattle Weekly previous to that, still lived down here - but so basically our tenure overlaps. So I basically covered him the whole eight years of his time on the council. And for Derek, for those who don't know - maybe it's been mentioned on the show - but he was essentially like the Parks and Rec's boy mayor of Gig Harbor on the council. I forget how young he was when he was first elected to the Gig Harbor City Council, but he was quite young. He did that and then later he ran for Pierce County Council and he's been there for eight years. So listen, from a journalism perspective, from a news perspective, I think we like to keep sources at an arm's length. We need to maintain skepticism, right? We can't become best friends with the people we cover. And certainly, Derek and I are not best friends by any means - but I will say - you interact with a lot of people in this job and you talk to a lot of people and you talk to a lot of politicians. And a lot of times they are, you can tell they're just feeding you soundbites, feeding you hot air, feeding you what the research says they should say. And Derek, I have just always found to be - one, he's really sharp on the policy stuff. He's one of those people that - I think it takes a special kind of person to get really into the mechanics of governments and just be really into it - excited about the procedures and the policy, but he's one of those people. He's really smart at that stuff and I just think he's really reasonable and really sensible, and those are things I appreciate in a leader. One thing about Derek is - there was a time when he was a Republican. And then he has since become a Democrat - now he's been a Democrat for many years now - but Pierce County is an interesting place, right? We've got Tacoma, which is this urban, progressive hub, and then you've got the rest of the county. And the bottom line with the rest of the county is it is either very moderate or red. And Derek is one of these people that can walk the line, that can get progressive things done in a county like Pierce County. And I think there's something to be said for that. I think we talked about the behavioral health tax already. I think Derek's a key reason that we got that. I think we're bringing up the affordable housing tax now, in part, because Derek's ending his term and they want to get a vote with him, even though his predecessor will likely - or the person who, I don't know, I always get those words mixed up - but the person who's filling his seat will likely vote the same way. I think it's as an honor to him - just the work he's done - they want to get a vote in before he leaves. So I think he's accomplished a lot. I think a lot of what he's accomplished has been behind closed doors in that kind of wonky way, that government work. I don't know how long we have to talk about this, but I was talking to Derek just last week about - I had an issue with a vote he took back in 2015 that would have allowed big box retailers up in Fredrickson. And I was all ready to rip him up on it because I was writing about Canyon Road and the way that has sprawl that's created. And I called him up and he was like - well, actually two years later we reversed that. It didn't get a lot of promotion because I didn't want to spike the football, but we were able to reverse that through just basic government maneuvering, the kind of stuff that most people don't see. And he's really good at that kind of stuff. So I think it's been a successful tenure and it'll be interesting to see what he does from here. [00:34:50] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And from my perspective, especially looking at the politics of things, I think Derek is one of the forces most responsible for the Democratic representation and the increase in Democratic representation that we've seen in Pierce County, certainly on the Pierce County Council. He has always prioritized developing leaders, recruiting leaders, and supporting other leaders. Like you said, a lot of his work has been done behind the scenes, which is absolutely true. And I don't think people really understand how much work he has done, both to build Democratic leadership in Pierce County and just on the nuts and bolts of building better communities. One of the cities doing the best job in the state, actually, in meeting their comprehensive plan goals to accept density is Gig Harbor. It's not an accident that that comes in the wake of the work that Derek Young did in Gig Harbor. And just understanding the nuts and bolts of building community, of understanding how you have to adequately plan for growth - or else there are lots of consequences - how regional planning is important to local outcomes and results in feeling that responsibility. Absolutely, I don't think the behavioral health tax would have passed without him. And doing meaningful stuff - he has taken his responsibility as a steward of public health for the county seriously. And has had to fight against a lot of opposition and weird forces, including through the pandemic, to maintain the capacity and ability to deliver on that responsibility. So I just appreciate his thoughtfulness. We don't agree on everything, but the one thing that I always find is that he's coming with a great understanding after a lot of conversations with folks in and throughout the community, that he is not making decisions simply based on emotion or rhetoric or what's popular, that he's really thoughtful and processes information and community needs in a really serious way, and really focused on outcomes and accountability - and I think that has shown. And so as I see him leaving, it certainly leaves a legacy that I think he can be proud of and that others are building upon. I think Gig Harbor and Pierce County are better off for Derek Young having served. So I just wanted to take a moment to talk about that and say I personally appreciate what he has done, and see him as an example for others to follow as they look at being an elected official in public leadership. [00:38:02] Matt Driscoll: Well said. I'm not going to gush about the guy on record - I just think that I'd lose street cred as a journalist if I just, if I just gushed. But yeah, he's very thoughtful and I've enjoyed covering it. It's been - it's funny to see - eight years of the overlap that we've had, but I've enjoyed talking to him. He's been a good source. You can always call him and he'll explain something to you, which I always appreciate because I do the Columbo thing, right - where it's - oh, walk me through this. And he'll always walk you through it. And those land use things, he's really sharp on those sorts of things. So yeah, I agree 100%. [00:38:36] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. And he's younger than a lot of people who wind up long political careers, because he did start at 21 in Gig Harbor. So excited to see what is next for him. Now, a troubling story this week. One of a few troubling stories, frankly, but there was a Renton brewery that was shot up before a drag queen story hour. This is a story that we're seeing unfold across the country, and we're not immune from it here in Washington state. There are a number of drag queen story hours. This one in Renton was one that caught people's attention, that actually had a lot of chatter online about it from right-wing sources railing against this. There's been a lot of unfortunate, inaccurate characterization of people who are just existing as trans people in the drag community - and characterizing them and people who patronize, support, associate with them - as "groomers" or "pedophiles," or somehow degenerate, morally unfit - blah, blah, blah, blah. This being used as a political tool by many people - attracting a lot of hate speech, threats of violence, dehumanizing speech - which we all know incites violence. And predictably, this has incited violence. Now there's no absolute clear tie. We don't know who did fire this shot into this brewery, but we are seeing a familiar pattern of hateful rhetoric, violent rhetoric - followed by violent action. We've seen it at hospitals that treat the trans community and trans children. We've seen it at other drag story, drag queen story hours, and now we're seeing it here. To be clear, these stories - it is literally a story hour - it's just a drag queen reading some stories. There is this assertion by right-wing forces that basically just existing as a drag queen - and they also say for the trans community and it's extending to the entire gay community really - that just existing in drag is inherently sexual and immoral, which is not the case. That's like saying just existing in a heterosexual existence and in particular type of clothing is inherently sexual. It is not, but that is the assertion here and it's being used to pass laws in different states to basically keep people from being able to fully participate in society and to ostracize them. This is part of a coordinated effort and goal that we are seeing, and it looks like violence and really this is terrorism. This is politically motivated violence, is part of the overall strategies and tactics that are being used by right-wing forces to fight against this. This happened in Renton. This attracted a lot of sympathy and support obviously from the community coming together to say this is unacceptable. We support you. There's a talk about a rally to support that in the community. There's no question that the broader community finds this unacceptable and abhorrent. The question is - how diligent are we going to be as a society and are investigative and law enforcement entities going to be in combating this? I think that's the question before us right now as a community - how intense are we going to be in standing against this? But it's unacceptable. I am not shocked certainly, but dismayed to see this happen locally in Renton, as it's happening across the country. And I'm dismayed at the acceptance of blatant hate and dehumanization of certain groups, whether it's the drag community, folks within the LGBTQ community - principally the trans community at this point in time. I think this is absolutely related to the rise in anti-Semitic talk that we see openly, and accepted, and that's being platformed around this country. Openly racist talk - we are seeing a renaissance of hate, and it is really dismaying. And it's going to take people not tolerating this in all of the spaces that they are in. If someone's making a joke as you're at the gym, if you're talking with your friends, if you're at work - wherever you're at, we can't tolerate jokes. We can't tolerate casual statements of hate. We can't tolerate dehumanization and othering and we have to make it absolutely clear that it's unacceptable to say that in our presence. People who espouse hate should be more uncomfortable doing that than they currently are, and we all have a role to play in that happening. Wondering what your take is on this, Matt? [00:44:18] Matt Driscoll: Well, just a hard pro sign I guess on everything you just said. I think you summed it up really well. I guess I feel obligated to note that I've read the story about this. I don't know everything about this specific instance, but I think broadly speaking - the picture you paint is 100% accurate. You see hate, I think you see it fomenting online. I think you see the way that that turns into real action and real harm and real danger and real terrorism. I do think that this constitutes as terrorism when things like this happen. And going back to a conversation we had before we started recording - obviously, you alluded to other places across the country where you've seen laws passed and those sorts of things and certainly those things are happening, but I think a big part of this is - you called it a renaissance of hate and I think these are desperate actions by people who are losing. I mean I think they're losing, and I think they know it and they feel it - and I think that this leads to - and this doesn't excuse any of it, just in case that's not incredibly clear - but I think they're desperate and it generates hate speech. And when you add in the internet where people are able to silo themselves off and the stuff just grows and grows and grows and grows, it eventually - and none of us should be shocked by this - it eventually jumps off the screen and moves into real life. And people get hurt, and people get killed, and lives are altered, and lives are taken. So yeah, I agree with you. I think the general level of acceptance of this sort of stuff in our society, and the way we talk about it, and the way we report on it, and the way we discuss it, and the way we think about it - needs to be more clear just how unacceptable it is. [00:46:27] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely agree. And to the point you were just discussing and we discussed earlier - they are losing. They are absolutely losing. I think one thing that we do need to recognize is that when it comes to marginalized populations gaining rights in this country - and there are another number of countries where this precedent has been set, but we don't need to look any further than this country - terrorism has been employed as a response to that. Okay, we can't do it at the ballot box, we're losing - so we're just going to enact violence to attempt to fulfill our needs. I mean there was a statement made in North Carolina that these acts of violence and terrorism will continue to happen as long as drag queen story hours exist - it's a pretty clear statement of motivation and intent. And we need to not be surprised by this, but be prepared for it. And to effectively fight against it at all levels - to hold our elected officials accountable for fighting against it, to hold our institutions accountable for fighting against it, and to hold ourselves accountable for fighting against it - in all of the spaces that we inhabit, all the places that we are, and the people who we associate with in any way. That this is unacceptable in all of its forms because we're not done with this. It's predictable that it was going to happen. We know that rhetoric like this results in violence and it's escalating. And either we're gonna take steps to counteract it or we're in for a lot more. We have to address this. And related to that - seemingly, are stories about attacks on our electrical grid here in the Pacific Northwest as we saw back East. We have had attacks on our electrical grid here in the Pacific Northwest. What has happened with these attacks? [00:48:35] Matt Driscoll: Yeah. Certainly I've just been - I think this is one of the - I know as a news person you get this weird kind of callous nature where you're like - oh man, this is a really interesting story - when it's actually a terrifying story, a really alarming story. But yeah, this story is all of those things, and I've just followed it like anyone - but basically, what we're seeing is what appear to be at least somewhat coordinated attacks on power grids across the country. I forget - where was the, was it Carolinas that - yeah. So and then we've had some up in this area as well - I think it was - KUOW did a really good kind of look into what's happening. And again - similar - going back to your point, I've just read the stories everyone else read, but certainly what seems to be happening - at least to some extent - is extremist online groups being involved with encouraging and instructing folks how to do this. And the people who follow online extremist groups then going out and doing it. And I want to be careful - because I, again, I've just read this item - we don't have an exact answer to what's going on yet, so I don't want to jump to conclusions. But I do think we can say that you know there does seem to be some online extremist group involvement with this to - helping to perpetuate it - and people are doing it across the country. And it's terrifying, not just because of the prospect of losing power and what that could do - and when we talk about losing power, we're talking about a whole lot more than just your lights going off. There's a lot of fairly obvious reasons why electricity is very - it's crucial to a lot of folks, including in medical situations and what have you, but it's again - it's just terrifying for the way you see just belligerent hate, the kind of hate that if you encountered it in-person, it would be like one person ranting lunacy on a corner. But online, the way people can self-select and can group, it becomes incredibly, incredibly dangerous. So yeah, I think there are similarities between this story and the one we just talked about in the way that online extremism seems to be playing a role in it. [00:51:08] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And it was in North Carolina - after gunfire attacks on two electrical substations - resulted in tens of thousands of people being out of power for days. This was not a brief interruption - schools were closed, traffic lights were dark, people who relied on refrigerated medication had it spoil. It is a horribly disruptive situation - our society runs on power at this point in time, and this was an attack on that. Here locally, there were six separate attacks in Washington and Oregon - the Bonneville Power Administration, Puget Sound Energy, Cowlitz County Public Utility have reported different attacks involving cutting through fences into these facilities, attacking infrastructure with gunfire, setting fires - really seems to be employing a number of the same tactics that we saw in North Carolina. And across these six different attacks here in Washington and Oregon - employing similar tactics across those attacks - so this seems to be a coordinated effort that we're seeing. Some of these resulted in more disruptive power losses than others. This doesn't seem to be some super sophisticated entity doing sophisticated things to disrupt this - these are people crudely breaking in, shooting up these facilities. It does invite questions about what can be done to harden the security of these facilities, where else may we be vulnerable - there are lots of conversations about just our infrastructure in our community for basic services and what can be done to better protect those, because evidently there are groups that are seeing those as principal and primary targets, no matter how many people it impacts. And it does seem like this tactic has now shifted to - we're targeting specific communities, but we're willing to make sure everyone feels pain in order to try and help achieve our goals. And it's causing pain, and we're - this is the tip of the iceberg, it seems. And either we do something to intervene right now, or we see this get a lot worse. The FBI has declined to comment on whether or not they're investigating these, but it's an issue and we've had several attacks here locally and it's just troubling. [00:54:08] Matt Driscoll: It's, yeah - troubling is the word for it, I would say. It's just, it's so fascinating on a lot of levels because as you mentioned, sometimes you see terrorism and it has a really specific target - and kind of the purpose of it can - you see it. With this, it's almost just chaos. It's almost just like the unraveling of society around us. I think you're right - the sole purpose of it is to inflict just damage, just widespread damage and it's almost - it's not specific, it's just trying to disrupt and harm people and create havoc and chaos for - from a small, small minority of people - assuming what we have is accurate with the ties that - again, feel desperate and are led to do desperate things. So yeah, the year 2022 - the year we had to start guarding our electric grids. [00:55:17] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. [00:55:18] Matt Driscoll: If you had that on your bingo card, I guess, you win. [00:55:22] Crystal Fincher: I hope we don't have it on the 2023 bingo card - I will tell you that much - I would love to nip this in the bud and get real clear that this is unacceptable everywhere. And with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, December 9th, 2022. Hacks & Wonks is co-produced by Shannon Cheng and Bryce Cannatelli. Our insightful co-host today is metro news columnist and opinion editor for The News Tribune in Tacoma, Matt Driscoll. You can find Matt on Twitter at @mattsdriscoll - that's two L's at the end. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter at @HacksWonks, and you can find me at @finchfrii, with two I's at the end. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. 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 - talk to you next time.

Unpacking this year's midterm results with our all-star panel: - Will Casey, writer for The Stranger and former communications director for the Washington State Democrats - Shasti Conrad, Chair of the King County Democrats Keep The Stranger going! https://www.thestranger.com/contribute?utm_source=publication&utm_medium=article_footer&utm_campaign=footer_ask

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

Thursday night nap time is interrupted by our Week 8 preview. Will Breen buckle to Divitto? Will Casey's superbowl run start at 1-6? Will Mike recover from being Wally Pipp-ed?! Find out the answers to those questions and more tonight on Entering Milford! --- Watch on YouTube: https://youtu.be/0LuYdmV0Z0E — Follow on Twitter: @EnteringMilford --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/enteringmilford/support

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

On this Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, Crystal Fincher is joined by Seattle political reporter, editor of Publicla, co-host of the Seattle Nice podcast, and author of Quitter: A Memoir of Drinking, Relapse, and Recovery, Erica C. Barnett! They start the show discussing the teachers strikes happening across the state. Schools all over Washington are facing unreasonable class sizes and under-resourced necessary programs like special education and mental health assistance. Despite claims from districts that teachers are just fighting for better pay, educator's priorities for these strikes are securing the resources to lower class sizes and improve special ed resources. In a victory for teachers, Kent Educators successfully negotiated with the Kent School District after district negotiators were forced to come to the table when two Kent School Board members prevented an injunction from the district against the striking teachers - Lelsie Hamada and Joseph Bento voted against the injunction, while Awale Farah and Tim Clark voted for it. In other school news, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Chris Ryekdal, is submitting a proposal for the state to provide free lunch to all students. The proposal would cst the legislature $86 million a year, and would feed the over 300,000 students that don't currently qualify for free or reduced-priced lunches. Since we know that kids' education suffers if they don't get sufficient nutrition, this is an impactful proposal that we will be keeping an eye on. For elections, Erica breaks down the election reform and status quo campaigns in this year's general election. This November, voters will have the option to choose if they would like to change the way we vote, and whether we should adopt Ranked Choice Voting or Approval Voting for local primary elections. Recently, a campaign to maintain the status-quo is starting to take shape, funded primarily by local business leaders. Meanwhile, Ranked Choice Voting's formal campaign is just starting to raise money, while the Approval campaign has raised over $400,000.  While there will be a lot of different talking points shared around this vote, it's essential that the media frame this issue around what will help most people get involved and make their voices heard, and which system will help communities be accurately represented. We also need to ensure that there is a proper voter education rollout if our elections change. We saw in Pierce County the danger of what happens when you ask people to use a voting system hasn't been properly explained to them.  Catching up with Mayor Harrell's data dashboard, it's clear the data is incomplete, and the mayor's promise of an effective approach to homelessness is not being met. Sweeps have increased since the pandemic, we do not have the 1,000 pieces of "emergency shelter" that Harrell promised to build, and a surprisingly low number of people are being referred to shelter. And despite early vows to not play the blame game, he continues to point to past administrations, the King County Regional Homeless Authority, and the City Council as reasons he hasn't achieved his goals.  We've seen examples of cities and districts applying legitimate housing- and services-first models and finding measurable success, yet Harrell's administration continues to focus on sweeps as the answer to our homelessness crisis. Harrell's current approach runs against his promises during the election to prioritize housing and treatment, and aren't proving effective at actually reducing homelessness.  We wrap up the show looking at a recent press conference from Seattle-area law enforcement leaders, which, while advertised as an announcement of a crisis in the city's police force, was really an endorsement announcement for King County Prosecutor Candidate Jim Ferrell. While he's running as a Democrat, Ferrell's embracing an endorsement from SPOG and Mike Sloan, which represents a real divide between Ferrell's approach to police and public safety versus most Democrats' views. It's the latest in a line of moves and positions from Ferrell that run counter to his self-given Democrat label. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Erica C. Barnett, at @ericacbarnett. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources “Kent teachers strike ends as union ratifies contract; students head to class” by Daisy Zavala Magaña and Christine Clarridge from The Seattle Times:  https://www.seattletimes.com/education-lab/kent-teachers-strike-could-end-soon-as-union-reaches-tentative-deal/   “Seattle Teachers Strike” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger:  https://www.thestranger.com/news/2022/09/07/78442506/seattle-teachers-strike   “WA teachers strikes highlight school funding, staffing woes” by Venice Buhain from Crosscut:  https://crosscut.com/news/2022/09/wa-teachers-strikes-highlight-school-funding-staffing-woes   “Reykdal calls for WA Legislature to fund free school meals for all” by Jeanie Lindsay from The Seattle Times:  https://www.seattletimes.com/education-lab/reykdal-calls-for-wa-legislature-to-fund-free-school-meals-for-all/   “Anti-Election Reform Campaign Emerges” by Erica C. Barnett from Publicola:  https://publicola.com/2022/09/06/anti-election-reform-campaign-emerges-next-years-election-starts-shaping-up-new-sdot-director-says-hell-take-vision-zero-down-to-the-studs/   City of Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission - 2022 Campaigns:  http://web6.seattle.gov/ethics/elections/campaigns.aspx?cycle=2022&type=contest&IDNum=201&leftmenu=expanded   “Harrell's Homelessness ‘Data Dashboard' Shows Plenty of Sweeps But Little Progress on Shelter, Housing” by Erica C. Barnett from Publicola:  https://publicola.com/2022/08/30/harrells-homelessness-data-dashboard-shows-plenty-of-sweeps-but-little-progress-on-shelter-housing/   "How would mayoral candidates Bruce Harrell and M. Lorena González tackle homelessness in Seattle?" by Scott Greenstone from The Seattle Times:  https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/how-would-mayoral-candidates-bruce-harrell-and-m-lorena-gonzalez-tackle-homelessness-in-seattle/   "Seattle Might Soon Defund a Promising Police Alternative" by Will Casey from The Stranger:  https://www.thestranger.com/news/2022/06/23/75477450/seattle-might-soon-defund-a-promising-police-alternative   “Seattle-area law enforcement union chiefs push for Jim Ferrell in prosecutor race” by Mike Carter from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/law-justice/seattle-area-law-enforcement-union-chiefs-push-for-jim-ferrell-in-prosecutor-race/   “Slog AM: Mayor Announces SPD Chief Finalists, ‘Doomsday Glacier' Melting, Trum in More Trouble” by Will Casey from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/slog-am/2022/09/09/78452663/slog-am-mayor-announces-spd-chief-finalists-doomsday-glacier-melting-trump-in-more-trouble   "Misdemeanor Prosecution" by Amanda Y. Agan, Jennifer L. Doleac, & Anna Harvey from The National Bureau of Economic Research: https://www.nber.org/papers/w28600   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 were always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host, Seattle political reporter, editor of Publicola, co-host of the Seattle Nice podcast, and author of Quitter, A Memoir of Drinking, Relapse, and Recovery, Erica Barnett. [00:00:58] Erica C. Barnett: It's great to be here, Crystal. [00:00:59] Crystal Fincher: Great to have you back, lots to talk about this week. And I think we will start off talking about teachers striking, really across the state, and one strike that just ended in Kent. What is going on in the world of teacher strikes? [00:01:15] Erica C. Barnett: I'm gonna defer to you a little bit on the Kent strike, but this is, you mentioned, this is a statewide situation - it's really a national situation. Schools are having trouble keeping up enrollment across the country. People are moving away. People have enrolled, wealthier people have enrolled, their kids in private schools. And so that's creating, a financial crunch for a lot of school districts. And frankly teachers and parent educators and other school staff across the country are saying, "look, we're being asked to do more. We're not being compensated commensurate with inflation." Or the or cops, frankly, and we can talk more about that. But yeah, it's happening across the country and across the state. In Kent, you mentioned before we came on mic, Eatonville, seattle, lots and lots of places, we're seeing these school strikes. If you live in Seattle and you're reading the newspaper and you think that Seattle's the only district where this is happening, that is very much not the case. [00:02:29] Crystal Fincher: Very much not the case. And we are in a pretty precarious situation, to your point, nationwide. And education, a lot of districts are dealing with staffing issues, problems, and challenges, and sometimes the issue, like there is in Kent, where some schools have seen declines in enrollment where other schools, like here in Kent, Kent-Meridian is actually seeing a pretty dramatic increase. And what do you do with that? Having to shift staff? That's an issue that Seattle has had to deal with before. And just shortages across the board, especially in programs like special education, which seems to be an issue across the board. This is an issue that's under discussion in every strike that is happening, or that has been authorized in the state, where it seems like there has just been staffing losses, or increased need, a combination of the two in special education classes. And these classes are far beyond the staffing ratios originally intended for these. And that's on the list of things that teachers are striking for: to bring these classes back within the recommended ranges that they're supposed to be. In Seattle, one parent was talking about, they were looking at a class size of 30 to 40 kids for their special education student, which is far beyond what it should be. Another thing that was a big issue in Kent and also across the state and the country are mental health resources, school counselors. In Kent, it was an issue where the staffing ratio recommended pre pandemic was one counselor for every 250 students. As was frequently discussed throughout the pandemic, the needs that students have in terms of support have only grown since then. Yet, the current staffing ratios that were presented were one for every 500 students. I don't even know how that's manageable. Certainly doesn't meet the need, if anything, we needed to be moving towards even lower ratios than what was recommended before. So these are resources for students. These are the conditions for learning. These do dictate the types of outcomes that kids are going to be receiving through school, which dictates the rest of their life, really. You know, how someone performs in school does have a predictive measure on how things look for the rest of their life. Not absolutely determinative, but certainly influences it. So these are really serious discussions. This has to do with, the future. These are future residents and neighbors and employees and everything that we need to make our society work. We are planting these seeds right now in these classrooms. And if we make sure that they have what they need to succeed, we're all better off. [00:05:31] Erica C. Barnett: Yeah, I think, to, to your point about counselors, that is also an issue in Seattle. I think that there are, I'm not a parent, I don't have public school kids or anything like that, but but I believe I read that some schools don't have full-time counselors. And to your point about special education, that, is one of the major sticking points in the strike in Seattle. The teachers and the employees that are striking, want to have set staffing ratios for special education. And the district is essentially saying, "we'll deal with that later and trust us." And I think that there, there is not a lot of trust there between the district and educators. On that point, just because class sizes have grown so substantially, so you know, those are all really important issues. A lot of times people look at a strike and think, "they just want more money." And look at the the amount that teachers are making, which is still quite low compared to what a lot of other public servants make such as police. And in Seattle, it's low compared to some surrounding districts. And teachers can't afford to live in the city. And so those are all really important considerations, but there are also, real considerations that affect the education that kids are getting. If you're in a class with 30 or 40 students, you are not getting the kind of individualized attention that a lot of parents I think would hope their kids would have. So there's a lot of different issues at play in all of these strikes. And we're recording this on Friday morning. I don't know how long the strike is gonna go on, but but there's still quite a lot to be hammered out beyond just the issue of wages and benefits. [00:07:23] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And the issue of the negotiation, the bargaining is a big one, and whether or not the districts and the representatives are bargaining in good faith. There has been a lot of consternation in Seattle because the district's negotiators there have just not shown up on some days. And even in their announcement that was sent out to parents yesterday, heard a number of parents saying, "they're saying that if an agreement is not reached tomorrow, we'll get an update by Monday," which seems to indicate that they don't plan on meeting over the weekend, which the union negotiators are willing to do, were willing to do last weekend. And it just seems like the district negotiators are dragging their feet are hoping that some public pressure coalesces and maybe externally gets the teachers back. But I think negotiating in good faith is the best way to do that. But I think we just saw that in Kent, who just settled their strike - kids are back in classes now - where they actually considered suing the teacher's union to seek an injunction, to force them back to work, and it failed on a split vote in the council with, surprisingly, the former chair of the 33rd Democrats, who is now a school board member. Tim Clark voted in favor of suing the teacher's union as did Awale Farah, who had a lot of progressive endorsements. So certainly surprising to see those anti-union votes from those two people. But it did appear that, that the negotiators were dragging their feet saying, "maybe we won't have to do anything. We'll wait for the lawsuit to take place." But as soon as that was shot down, an agreement was reached pretty quickly thereafter. What the teachers are asking for wasn't out of bounds, it wasn't too much, it wasn't unreasonable. And once they started negotiating seriously, they reached an agreement pretty soon. I hope the Seattle district follows suit and really does start negotiating in good faith to end this because this is a hardship on parents and families. It is not easy to take care of kids when you weren't counting on that, when you have a job, when you have different things you need to do. So I hope they get this over with, get this done, settle with the teachers as quickly as possible. [00:09:48] Erica C. Barnett: Absolutely. [00:09:49] Crystal Fincher: With that, we will move on to another item that came out yesterday: the Superintendent of Public Instruction for the state, Chris Ryekdal, is calling for free school meals for everyone. What did he propose? [00:10:04] Erica C. Barnett: I think you said it. He's saying that the legislature needs to pass legislation to fund free school meals for the remaining, I believe it was 330,000, students who don't qualify. And I think my number may be off, I'm going for memory, but I think it was about $86 million a year to to pay for all these meals for kids. And I imagine, this was just announced. I imagine there will probably be some reaction from the right to this proposal, from the Republican saying that it is unnecessary or that we shouldn't be doing these giveaways to children or parents or whatever. But man, it just, it seems a no brainer in a lot of ways to make food available to all kids, particularly with rising food costs right now. If you've been to the grocery store lately, it is shocking. So yeah, this seems like a very timely announcement and a timely proposal to me. [00:11:16] Crystal Fincher: It does. And we would join a few other states like California, Vermont, and Massachusetts who are doing this. To your point right now, about half the school- half the kids in the school, are covered by free lunch. But like those requirements sometimes are- not everybody who qualifies actually seeks it and gets it. There is absolutely the issue of child hunger. It's getting worse. This is a plan that is interesting. Again, we know that kids not being hungry in school makes their ability to learn better that when they're not facing issues like hunger that they, their educational outcomes do improve. So we want to do everything to make that a possibility, and this seems like a good idea and interesting to see where it goes. He's asking for an appropriation from the legislature, so this would be something that would have to be taken up during the legislative session, and we'll see what the response to it is. [00:12:16] Erica C. Barnett: One thing that doesn't get talked about when all the time in these discussions about school, about school lunches and it's free food at schools is there is there's a real stigma, still, to being a kid who has a free lunch as opposed to kids who are able to purchase their lunches. And I think this will also even the playing field for parents and kids, too, if it's just universally, you go to school, you get a lunch. That's again, to me, that seems like a no brainer. I realize there is a cost associated with it, ultimately it's not millions of kids. It's hundreds of thousands of kids. And I do think that, anything that can reduce stigma for for lower income kids in school is also good for their education. [00:13:02] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. Great point. Completely agree. I also wanna talk about a story you wrote this week about the election reform campaigns that are starting to develop. What's taken place? [00:13:15] Erica C. Barnett: So there is gonna be a measure on the ballot in November. It's a three part measure. It's one of those kind of confusing proposals where you can choose Yes or No on, "do you want to change the way that we elect local officials?" And whether you say Yes or No, you can then choose between two different options. One is Ranked Choice Voting where you, list you essentially rank, each person that you like in order of preference. And you don't have to rank everybody. If there's 20 people on the ballot, you can rank however many you want. And the second is Approval Voting, where you fill in the bubble for everybody that you approve of, and they're essentially ranked equally. And so these are both election reforms that their advocates say will, result in more representative people being on the city council. And they're just for primary elections - the general election would go on as it currently does. So yeah, so campaigns are shaping up. There's a Ranked Choice Voting campaign that does not have a lot of money yet that just formed. There is an Approval Voting campaign that has hundreds of thousands of dollars coming in from advocates for for that voting system, which is little tested and well funded. And then there is also, now, and this is what I reported this week, an emerging campaign against all of the above, "let's stick with the status quo." And that is funded by a bunch of local and quasi-local business interests. And I say quasi-local, because a lot of the folks who are funding it are from out of town, around Seattle, Issaquah, Bellevue, et cetera. So it's gonna be, I think, this is gonna be an incredibly heated campaign for something that is, essentially, a very nerdy debate over what kind of elections are most representative and are we getting the best candidates we can? Are we getting the best elected officials we can? And would changing the system change the results? [00:15:30] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's really interesting to see, especially this 'vote no on everything campaign.' From the political perspective, it's interesting. It will be interesting to see how this plays out, because when there's a choice between no change and some change, and you have choices on what kind of change, oftentimes just saying, "okay, just all those options are confusing. You have to learn about them. Just say no, and don't change anything," sometimes is the easiest. Not saying that it's right, but sometimes it's the easiest, argument to make and to have carry. And so it's interesting to see this take shape. To your point, you were talking about a number of local business leaders: the CEO of HomeStreet Bank, the Costco co-founder and former CEO, Mariners co-owner John Stanton, developers who are involved with that, starbucks president, a former Starbucks president. So it's a lot of entrenched interests who are lining up in funding this no campaign, which looks like it will have, based on the people involved with it, kind of bottomless resources and able to go up against the pretty formidable resources of the Approval Voting Campaign, which is new to our area. I have no idea how this is gonna play out, what's gonna happen, and how it's going to interface with the Rank Choice Voting campaign, which has a much longer grassroots history in our state, and has had a lot of advocates on the ground. It's actually on the ballot in Clark county and in San Juan County, I wanna say, this November. And so there've been lots of conversations about it. Lots of advocates who have been in favor of it over the past several years and more momentum growing, and we've seen examples of it across the country being implemented. But that the formal campaign for the city of Seattle ballot question is just forming and we'll see what shape that takes and what kind of resources they wind up with. [00:17:43] Erica C. Barnett: Yeah. I think Ranked Choice Voting has happened all across the country, and we saw, in Alaska, helped defeat Sara Palin. I will say one difference here is that we already have an election reform, or what other places consider an election reform, in place, which is the top-two primary. And this would be Ranked Choice Voting or Approval Voting plus a top-two primary, which is a little confusing. Usually Ranked Choice Voting, it's essentially, like instant- it's also called instant runoff voting. And it's supposed to result in one winner. And here, we would be doing it in a weird, and I don't know if it's unprecedented, but highly unusual way of using it for the primary, and then the top two go through and we vote on them three months later in the normal way. So anyway, it'll it'll be interesting, if we do adopt it, to see how it works and in what ways it is compatible and incompatible with the way that we already do our elections, which have, been reformed pretty recently with the top-two primary. [00:18:48] Crystal Fincher: I hope, as we continue these discussions, that we really do focus on voter turnout and what gets more people involved and not necessarily what is going to achieve the desired result, but what gets more people engaged and able to vote, engaged in voting, and having a voice in shaping their own community and in choosing their own leaders. That to me should be the goal, and so I hope that we focus on that, as well as making sure that no matter what is implemented - regardless of this vote, I think it is pretty apparent that we're gonna see voting reforms implemented with more frequency across this state and country - that we do invest the appropriate resources in educating the public about what's gonna happen. We saw in Pierce County the failure to do that had bad consequences and lead to a backlash. If people aren't prepared for this change, then it's going to disenfranchise people. It's gonna confuse people. When people are confused, they frequently don't vote. They get really cranky. And sometimes I see dismissive statements, especially online, with this may be hard for people to understand and being like, "no, it's really easy to understand. You just rank the people." And that is, is such an oversight and really dismissive. Lots of people do have challenge. Look at the amount of people who have, who don't realize that they need to sign their ballot right now with our current system. So just even changes that seems simple and obvious to some just are not to everyone. And we need to do reaching out in person. We need to do reaching out in all of the languages that people vote in, in all areas of community, different income levels, whether people are online or offline, really make a concerted effort to do that. So that's, if you know me and we have talked about this, you have heard this from me before. I'm most interested in making sure people have the information they need to vote and that we do what makes it easiest for them to do that and don't risk disenfranchising people. So we'll see how this plays out. We'll link, but you can see the filings and how these continue to shape up on the Seattle Ethics and Elections website. I think some people may not realize, who are used to now, got used to looking up on the PDC for a lot of other races across the country: in Seattle races, there is- Seattle has its own regulations, its own authority, and so you can look up all of the Seattle election information on Seattle's Ethics and Election website. You can see all of the disclosures filings, all of that, there. So very useful. We'll link that and continue to follow along with those races. Also this week, you did some great reporting on the state of mayor Harrell's homelessness data dashboard. What's up with it? [00:21:56] Erica C. Barnett: Yeah, the mayor has, three months ago, he announced with a lot of fanfare, that he was gonna be tracking data on homelessness, and specifically on homeless encampments in a more or less live fashion on this data dashboard. And the dashboard has not been updated for three months. I think they're gonna be, I think realistically, they have said it's gonna be every three months. If you look at the the dashboard itself, it's not really a dashboard. It's really more of a static website that has a couple of elements that change a little bit, including a map that's intended to show, essentially progress on closing encampments. And, Harrell has said, and for some reason he's adopted this as a motto, he said, "we don't do sweeps. We treat and we house." And that is, that statement, is false in a lot of different respects. The city has really ramped up sweeps even from, previous mayor, Jenny Durkan. And and they're happening nonstop across the city. Both planned sweeps and and unplanned sweeps. Both sweeps where people are engaged and connected to shelter, and those that are done at the last minute because the city decides there's an obstruction or a danger. And so, that's false. We're also not providing treatment to anybody. The city doesn't do that. And the city also doesn't house people directly from encampments except in exceptional circumstances. So this dashboard is also very incomplete, doesn't really provide a lot of information, but if you look at it without, if you squint your eyes and don't look at the data, you can see a lot of dots on the map that make it look like the city's really doing a lot to address unsheltered homelessness, which, frankly, it is not. We don't have more money for that, the city has relinquished a lot of control to the King County Regional Homelessness Authority which also doesn't have a lot of money for that. And so we're at the same point that we were at any point during the homelessness crisis except that sweeps have ramped up since the pandemic emergency ended and since Harrell came into office. [00:24:32] Crystal Fincher: Yeah it's really interesting, and it looks like they really tried to make it look like they were doing stuff but as you broke down the numbers the city said they counted 814 tents and 426 RVs citywide, made a total of 191 offers of shelter in June out of 616 in the second quarter in 2022. And so based on how it looks like the numbers are calculated, estimating that 30% of shelter offers during the same period resulted in a person enrolling in a shelter for at least one night - we could have a long conversation about how one night of shelter after removing the place where they were leaving is insufficient - but really what that means is that about only 72 people from those 814 tents and 426 RVs spent any time at all in a shelter bed. And what just such an insufficient number and completely opposite to what he said. It just- we just don't appear to be making progress, and even making progress according to the goals that Mayor Harrell set for himself and what he said he was gonna do. And so measuring by his own stick, he's failing and he's not taking the action that he said he would be doing. Which is really interesting because he seems to be saying, "none of this is my fault and I have no nothing to do with any of this. And, I'd rather change the council than, acknowledge that there's anything that I have control of to do in this situation." [00:26:21] Erica C. Barnett: Yeah. There are caveats to to all of these numbers and I do think that the the baseline number of tents and RVs is probably very much underestimated. The number of people who went to shelter may also be slightly underestimated just because of how they calculate and how they gather information. But I think that Harrell, and maybe this is a successful tactic because people don't dig into the numbers and they pay attention to the top lines, to use poll speak, but, I mean, his insistence, his mantra, that we treat and we house, it just, it drives me a little bonkers. I don't think that Bruce Harrell is an uncompassionate person, but I also think that, when you say that we are giving people treatment and we are giving people housing and it is not true, it's incumbent on people like, like me and you, Crystal, to, to point out this is not true. This is not what's happening. What's happening is they're offering people shelter when tiny house villages become available. They're offering people those. Mostly they're saying here, you can go across town, and relinquish all your stuff, give up your spot, give up the people that you know, and stay in a mass shelter. It may not be a quote unquote mat on the floor, but these are still mass shelters and that is your choice. And people don't stay in those shelters for very long because they don't offer hope for housing and they're crowded and you don't have a lot of privacy or rights. I just think we need to hammer home that this shelter, this we house and we treat stuff, is that's not what's happening. [00:28:10] Crystal Fincher: It's not what's happening, and it flies in the face of what evidence does show works, which is giving people support and housing. Sweeping people moves people from one location to another. It doesn't solve the issue of homelessness. And really it doesn't even solve the issue of visible homelessness, which some people view as being the problem. Not that people are outside, but "I have to look at people who are outside and that makes me uncomfortable without engaging with how uncomfortable it is to be living without shelter." And there's been a lot of local reporting even on, "hey, people swept from one location, wind up at another location. And hey, we've tracked people from this sweep location, then they move over here, and then they move over there." And so we're just playing this really twisted and dark game of musical chairs and expecting some kind of result. And he seems to just be doubling down on what's happening, especially when considering his leaked comments in the SPD roll call meeting. It seems like there's no consideration of anything different. And we see in Houston that, hey, people are making more progress when they take a housing-first issue. Yesterday, Mike Bonin, who is from the city of LA, just announced in his district they made the most progress in the city, and he is someone who has taken big heat for really going all-in on a housing-first model, focusing on services and housing. The one thing that everyone who is homeless has an in common is that they don't have shelter. Housing is a necessary component to solving homelessness. You can't only focus on, hey, treatment. Lots of people wanna think about "people did something to deserve being outside. They made bad decisions and they are dealing with addiction. And so we don't need to help them or they need to figure out how to get it together before they're worthy of help." And that's just not how it works and it's expensive and inhumane to expect that to work and to continue to force that on people. When we allow people to stabilize in secure housing, the rest of the stuff becomes much more easy to do, and not easy, but easier, to deal with. And to help people get into a place where they can find permanent housing and really get off the streets for good. You have to do that work. And it seems like there's just a lot of cosmetic and really shallow sweeping going on and we're waiting for a real plan to address homelessness. We're still waiting for this plan. And man, do we need it. [00:31:06] Erica C. Barnett: Absolutely. [00:31:07] Crystal Fincher: This is an issue that is a source of frustration for me if you can't tell. Like my- [00:31:13] Erica C. Barnett: Oh, me too. Me too. It's, you know... [00:31:15] Crystal Fincher: We are spending so much money doing these sweeps. And if we put this money in a different direction, we could be making more progress than we are making. And all of us wanna see it. [00:31:25] Erica C. Barnett: And yeah, not just doing the sweeps, but also staffing the sweeps with police officers, who have become a really dominant presence at sweeps again for a while. Before before this mayor, they were part of a navigation team, which meant that they act actively, did sweeps along with workers from the city. And now, they faded into the background for a while, and now they are a very active presence at the larger removals. Actually at every removal. But I was reading in a records request last night that I filed on a different subject, that there were, there was something like, or they were, the SPD requested something like 50 police officers to be at the the Woodland Park removal earlier this year. And that was not all of Woodland Park, it was a small part of Woodland park, and there were, maybe 30 people left by the time they they actually showed up to remove the last people. So it's just just a tremendous amount of resources go into moving people around and around the city and occasionally doing it a better way and actually getting people into shelter that they want to be in like tiny houses. [00:32:42] Crystal Fincher: And again, just to point out, Bruce set this bar. Sometimes I get frustrated because there seems to be, just, collective amnesia about what Bruce Harrell said as he was running for election and what he said early in office. And these aren't external expectations being placed on him. Voters voted for him based on what he said and how he was gonna handle it. And he previously said that he didn't want police on the outreach teams that go into encampments, but he would staff it with more social workers and behavioral health clinicians. When he was running for office and when he first took office talked about this. He did talk about housing and services and leaning in hard to that. And he is doing the opposite of what he said he would do. People are not getting what they bargained for here and he seems to be doubling down on it. And I would just like, at least- And it's not like people never, ever change their mind either, but then explain it. Then explain how you decided, "you know what? We are not gonna take an approach where we involve clinicians and support staff and people who can help with services. We are going to staff it with police." Be publicly accountable for the choices that you make and how you're leading the city, and say, "I decided not to do that for this reason." He should have to explain that. Especially with a lack of progress being made. It seems like if he were to stick with his original plan, we would be making more progress. So why did he change it and why is he sticking with that direction? I would love to hear him answer those questions. I would love to hear people ask him why he is deviating from the plan that voters voted for. That to me is an important question. [00:34:33] Erica C. Barnett: Yeah. I think Harrell would, I think a lot of people who voted for Harrell, frankly, voted for him on the assumption that he would be sweeping encampments and that he is doing exactly what he said he would do. But I agree with you that he certainly paid lip service to a more compassionate approach. And I do think, in fairness, there are things that are happening, like JustCARE is actively working - it's a program from the Public Defender Association - is actively working to put people in, in hotels and and get them into housing. Good things are happening. It's not all sweeps, but the problem is that sweeps have ramped up to such an extent that it is making hard for the good things to happen, because it's hard to find people because people are traumatized because they don't trust the city to act in their best interest. And it's all it's very counterproductive to do a little bit of the social work, healthcare-oriented, housing-oriented stuff and then do a whole lot of, the sort of compassionless, cruel sweep. Because there, it's not just mixed messages, it's mixed practices that make- the bad stuff makes the good stuff harder to do. [00:35:50] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And I do think you're absolutely right. There have been excellent programs, especially through JustCARE, about helping people through that. And even in the realm of public safety. The challenge is some of those programs have been defunded by Mayor Harrell and he's indicated, and his deputy mayor for public safety has indicated, that more of that should be expected. And as they, perhaps, stand up their internal department, public safety department, and internal supports, but it is just- it just seems like we're moving in this opposite direction. I would love to see more programs like that funded, them accelerate and ex and expand that. There's lots of evidence that we have from that program to show that it is effective, and I would love to see an expansion of that rather than an expansion of these sweeps. We will continue to keep our eyes on how this turns out. You've, for years and years, have done an excellent job reporting on this and have had some of the best information available in the city, which lots of other reporters rely on for their work also, so appreciate your continued coverage of this. And as we wrap up, I just wanted to also talk about public safety and law enforcement lining up and expressing their support in another race for the county prosecutor. What happened this week? [00:37:16] Erica C. Barnett: It will not surprise you to hear that I was not invited to this press conference. But the TV news and The Seattle Times reported on a press conference by the Seattle Police Officers Guild, which is headed up by an incredibly controversial figure, Mike Solan. And the press conference was apparently billed as, "we're gonna have a major announcement of some sort. We're gonna inform you of this dire situation that's going on." And, in fact, what it appears to have been was a fullthroated endorsement of Jim Ferrell for King County Prosecuting Attorney. I suspect that it's not so much that there was a nefarious bait and switch or anything like that, I just think that SPOG is not great at media relations, and why blame- when incompetence will do, why look for other motivations? But in any case, Ferrell accepted their endorsement, and I think this is really interesting because Jim Ferrell has been torn in two directions. Earlier this year, the state Democrat's leader, Tina Paul Ladowski, said that he was not a Democrat. He has been very insistent that he is. If you go to endorsement meetings by Democrats and progressive groups, the first thing he says is, "I'm know a lifelong Democrat." But, in aligning himself with SPOG, he is sending a very different message. SPOG has been associated with defending cops who participated in the January 6th riots. Mike Solan has made some incredibly controversial statements, let's say, in the past. [00:39:02] Crystal Fincher: And straight up false. [00:39:03] Erica C. Barnett: What's that? [00:39:04] Crystal Fincher: I said, "and straight up false." [00:39:06] Erica C. Barnett: Yeah. And false, sure. [00:39:07] Crystal Fincher: He's bit of source of misinformation also. [00:39:09] Erica C. Barnett: Of course, of course. He's not universally popular among cops because he is so far to the right. This is a real statement, I think, by Jim Ferrell, that these are his people and he's he's gonna try to take down Dan Satterberg, the current prosecutor's Chief of Staff, Lisl Mann, who is running for this position as well, by coming at her from the right and painting her as some kind of radical wildlife leftist, which she is not. [00:39:41] Crystal Fincher: She definitely is not. This is a really interesting race and you're absolutely right. This does send a message accepting this endorsement from the Seattle Police Officers Guild. There are other candidates who will accept endorsements from guilds sometimes excepting the Seattle Police Officers Guild, because they have been, and their leader has been so extreme, and, to your point, even controversial within police circles and with the rank and file because they've attracted negative attention and maybe you're not completely aligned with what they feel is the core of what they're trying to do. But Jim Ferrell has insisted he's a Democrat, but the reason why Tina pad Ladowski was like, "yeah, but you're not," is because local Republicans are also touting him and appearing at events for them and, being someone who was aligned with their values which they posted about, they publicly did so. And frankly, you can say you are whatever you want in our state, but there have been- lots of people have not necessarily viewed Jim Ferrell as a Democrat for several years. He self-identifies as whatever he wants. But I think in looking at the substance of who is supporting him, who his donors are, who his endorsements are, a lot of them align with Republican candidates. And, he even tried to use his consultant before, as, "I even have a democratic consultant," and the most recent thing that democratic consultant did was elect Republican City Attorney, Ann Davison. So it's an interesting thing to see, and, when party resources are at stake. And you have to prove yourself to be a Democrat, it does take more than just saying it yourself. You do have to show receipts and his are lacking. [00:41:45] Erica C. Barnett: Yeah. And he's, I, that's interesting about- I didn't actually know that about his consultant, but I was gonna say he's running a very Ann Davison-style campaign. He's claiming that Satterberg and, by association, Manion, left this huge backlog of felony cases on the table, which is exactly what Ann Davison accused her predecessor, Pete Holmes, of doing. And I think that in the case of Davison and Holmes, she had more of a case to make that Holmes had let a lot of stuff fall by the wayside. With Satterberg, I don't think that it's gonna work quite as effectively because Satterberg has receipts and is not, could not, be accused of being lazy. He is, he used to be, a Republican himself, and there's a time when you could say you're Republican and that's just a difference of opinion, but since Trump, you are aligning yourself with with Republicans or Republican consultants is a very different thing than it was when Berg was first elected, and of course he changed parties to the Democrats, in part because of what the Republican party means now. [00:42:50] Crystal Fincher: You know, you certainly cannot, in any kind of good faith or with any kind of credibility, paint Lisa Manion, as this super leftist, super abolitionist. She is continuing in, basically, the style of Dan Satterberg, endorsed by Dan Satterberg, is not taking the hardcore, purely punitive, fill up the jails approach as Jim Ferrell is. But there's also- that approach has failed. That approach is not working, and all of the available data from criminologists and people who study this and who have all of the evidence say that is actually harmful and not the way to go and that does not decrease crime and more likely increases it. So we will see how this race shapes out. We'll see how much of a voice these endorsements carry and how he continues to proceed. But, one thing that I do notice is that Republicans, overall in the primary, Republican candidates for the legislature tried to hit Democrats hard on some of these same issues and saying, "public safety is a real problem and it's Democrat's fault, and these policies are not working." And voters seem to pretty soundly reject that. Those did not land and produced worse results than Republicans were bargaining for. And so it'll be interesting to see if this continues in that vein or not, but this'll be an interesting one to continue to pay attention to. And with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks and Wonks on this Friday, September 9th, 2022. The Producer of Hacks and Wonks is Lisl Stadler. Our Assistant Producer is Shannon Cheng and our Post-Production assistant is Bryce Cannatelli. Our insightful co-host today with Seattle political reporter, editor of Publicola, co-host of the Seattle Nice podcast, and author of Quitter: A Memoir of Drinking, Relapse, and Recovery, Erica Barnett. You can find Erica on Twitter at @ericacbarnett, that's Erica with a C also, and on publicola.com. And you can buy her book, Quitter: A Memoir of Drinking, Relapse, and Recovery. You can find me on Twitter at @finchfrii, and you can follow Hacks and Wonks on Twitter at @HacksWonks. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or anywhere where you get your podcasts. Just type Hacks & Wonks into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe, to get our full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave us a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. You can also get a full text transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the episode notes. Thanks for tuning in. Talk to you next time.

Follow us on our new Twitter account at @HacksWonks! Today on the show, Crystal is joined by political consultants Dujie Tahat and Kelsey Hamlin, from DTC Consulting and The Poet Salon Podcast! They start off the show discussing the King County Prosecutor race, looking at the candidates' views on the Youth Diversion Program, and breaking down the candidates' views and approaches to public safety. They also discuss how party affiliations get blurred in prosecutorial races, with some candidates filing as democratic candidates while not holding democratic views on key issues. Then the three look at how social justice, public health, and police reform are framed in political conversations, often to make progressive views look illegitimate when in reality they're popular and supported by research. Next, our hosts look at the upsetting news that the city of Seattle is using the creation of protected bike lanes as an excuse to remove and prevent homeless encampments, and how this represents a trend of homeless-hostile property owners adopting climate-friendly language to implement inhumane policies. The three discuss how the assertion that we have to choose between supporting the homeless and solving our climate crisis is false, and explain how the climate crisis and homelessness need to be solved together. Our hosts next talk about how progressive policies like Rep. Bateman's middle housing bill are wildly popular, even in places like North Seattle, and implore Democratic leaders to assert the popularity of these ideas. They wrap up with a look at the Kent teachers' strike, breaking down the issues teachers are facing with resources and staffing and the challenges their students are facing, especially after the disruptions from the COVID pandemic, as well as how the pandemic highlighted all the services schools provide outside of education that need proper funding.   As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-hosts, Dujie Tahat at @DujieTahat and Kelsey Hamlin at @ItsKelseyHamlin. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources “Jim Ferrell Turns Youth Diversion Program into a Political Football” by Will Casey from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/news/2022/08/19/78033079/jim-ferrell-turns-youth-diversion-program-into-a-political-football “Progressives Unite Behind Manion for King County Prosecutor” by Will Casey from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/elections-2022/2022/08/25/78248649/progressives-unite-behind-manion-for-king-county-prosecutor  “Illegal concrete blocks removed, bike lanes to be built in Delridge” by Amanda Zhou from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/illegal-concrete-blocks-removed-bike-lanes-to-be-built-in-delridge/  "Slog PM: No Gas-Powered Cars by 2035, Bike Lanes Weaponized Against the Homeless, Trump Basically Tried to Make Mar-a-Lago the Capital of the US" by Charles Mudede from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/slog-pm/2022/08/25/78249246/slog-pm-no-gas-powered-cars-by-2035-bike-lanes-weaponized-against-the-homeless-trump-basically-tried-to-make-mar-a-lago-the-capital-of-the "Bike Board Member Asks for Encampment Ban Near Bike Lanes, Poll Tests Streetcar Popularity; Council Clarifies "Z-Disposition" for 911 Calls" by Erica C. Barnett from Publicola: https://publicola.com/2022/06/28/bike-board-member-asks-for-encampment-ban-near-bike-lanes-poll-tests-streetcar-popularity-council-clarifies-z-disposition-for-911-calls/ “Seattle Council Approves Police Hiring Bonuses Topping Out at $30,000.” by Natalie Bicknell Argerious from The Urbanist: https://www.theurbanist.org/2022/08/18/seattle-council-approves-police-hiring-bonuses-topping-out-at-30000/ “Kent teachers strike on the first day of school” by Monica Velez from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/education/kent-teachers-strike-on-the-first-day-of-school/ “How student loan forgiveness affects Washington” by Melissa Santos from Axios: https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2022/08/25/student-loan-forgiveness-washington  “WA will ban new gas-powered cars by 2035, following CA's lead” by David Kroman from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/wa-will-ban-new-gas-powered-cars-by-2035-following-cas-lead/   “West Coast states band together to fight methane pipeline expansion” by Kim Malcolm & KUOW Staff from KUOW: https://kuow.org/stories/west-coast-states-band-together-to-fight-methane-pipeline-expansion    "King County sheriff's office investigating missing texts of Durkan, Best." by Lewis Kamb from Axios: https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2022/08/19/sheriffs-office-missing-texts-durkan-best   Transcript Transcript coming soon

On this week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Axios reporter Melissa Santos. They start off looking at the larger trends from this last week's primary, including why the predicted ‘red wave' didn't materialize. Next, they talk about Olgy Diaz's appointment to the Tacoma City council, discussing her impressive credentials and watershed status as the first Latina to serve on the Council. In Seattle City Council news, Crystal and Melissa look at the two recent abortion- and trans-related protections the council passed this week. For updates on public health, our hosts look at how Washington state is lifting most of its COVID emergency orders, where the state is at with its COVID response, and what our outlook is for MPV and its vaccine. After that, the two discuss the redistricting plans for the Seattle City Council, and different neighborhoods' responses to the proposed new district lines and close the show by looking at the state of behavioral health crisis response in our neighborhoods, discussing the county's plans for an emergency walk-in centers, the county's plans to improve its behavioral health response, and our lack of crisis response staff.  As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Melissa Santos, at @MelissaSantos1. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources “Our blue legislature bucks GOP trend” by Melissa Santos from Axios: https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2022/08/12/washington-state-blue-legislature-gop-trend    “Tacoma City Council selects its newest member. She's the first Latina to serve” by Liz Moomey from The News Tribune: https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/article264330356.html?taid=62f470bf1a1c2c0001b63754&utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter    “Seattle passes protections for abortion and gender affirming care” by KUOW Staff from KUOW: https://kuow.org/stories/seattle-passes-protections-for-abortion-and-gender-affirming-care   “MPV cases doubling nearly every week in WA, as U.S. declares public health emergency” by Elise Takahama from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/health/monkeypox-cases-doubling-nearly-every-week-in-wa-as-us-set-to-declare-public-health-emergency/   "US will stretch monkeypox vaccine supply with smaller doses" by Matthew Perrone from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/health/us-will-stretch-monkeypox-vaccine-supply-with-smaller-doses/   Washington state says goodbye to most COVID emergency orders” by Melissa Santos from Axios: https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2022/08/09/washington-end-most-covid-emergency-orders   "New map would redraw Seattle's City Council districts, with changes for Georgetown, Magnolia" by Daniel Beekman from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/new-map-would-redraw-seattles-city-council-districts-with-changes-for-georgetown-magnolia/   “Racial Equity Advocates Like Seattle's Newly Proposed Political Boundaries. Magnolia Residents Do Not.” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/news/2022/08/04/77339585/racial-equity-advocates-like-seattles-newly-proposed-political-boundaries-magnolia-residents-do-not   “County Plans Emergency Walk-In Centers for Behavioral Health Crises” by Erica C. Barnett from Publicola: https://publicola.com/2022/08/11/county-plans-emergency-walk-in-centers-for-behavioral-health-crises/    "Local Leaders Announce New Coalition to Address Behavioral Health Crisis" by Will Casey from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/news/2022/08/11/77680008/local-leaders-announce-new-coalition-to-address-behavioral-health-crisis   “Designated crisis responders, a ‘last resort' in mental health care, face overwhelming demand” by Esmy Jimenez from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/designated-crisis-responders-a-last-resort-in-mental-health-care-face-overwhelming-demand/   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. 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 us a review because it helps a lot. Today, we are continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a cohost. Welcome back to the program today's cohost: Seattle Axios reporter, Melissa Santos. [00:01:00] Melissa Santos: Hello, thanks for having me. [00:01:01] Crystal Fincher: Hey, thanks for being back. We always enjoy having you. So there were a number of things that happened this week. I think we'll start off just talking about the elections real quick. We got more results this week. Things are looking more conclusive - a couple of late-straggling races have been decided, including one of the congressional - two, really of the congressional district races. It looks like in the 47th Legislative District race that Republican Bill Boyce will be facing Democratic candidate Senator - former Senator - Claudia Kauffman. And that in the 47th House seat, that Democrat Shukri Olow and Democrat Chris Stearns will both be getting through and Republicans will actually not be making it in that seat, despite that race including three different Republicans - one the pick of the GOP that raised over $200,000, Carmen Goers, who actually finished in last place. So a number of things got settled, but overall, as you look at these elections, what are your takeaways, Melissa? [00:02:16] Melissa Santos: On the legislative side, really things look mostly similar to what they looked like on primary night, in the sense that a lot of the races that Republicans had hoped to pick up, I think Democrats still look really strong in. And that's in a lot of those swing districts in the suburbs - in Island County, the Democrats have pretty strong performances in some House races that I think Republicans have been eyeing for a pickup in the 10th District. The 28th Legislative District looks pretty much like the incumbent Democrats are in really good shape there - that's around Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Lakewood, University Place. And I think that the Republicans not having someone in that 47th District open seat is maybe not what people would've predicted when talking about a red wave coming this year, and that Democrats have been saying - we're just trying to defend what we have, we're not really planning to add seats here. But they look like they're in a pretty good position to defend the seats. The only place where things look like it'll be rough for Democrats are seats up in the 47th - sorry, the 42nd Legislative District in Whatcom County, I think, have some disappointing results for Democrats when it comes to trying to get the former - the State Senate seat formerly held by Republican Doug Ericksen. That's gonna be a tough race where it looks like the State House Democratic Rep who's running for it might have a really tough race to fight in November. She wants to pick up that seat for the Democrats. But again, Democrats were trying to just defend mostly this year. So I think they look like they're in a pretty good position to do that. One thing that's a little bit interesting is a lot of the fringier types in the Republican legislative caucus in the House are actually not going to be returning to the legislature next year. And some of that's just because they ran for Congress in some cases, like Brad Klippert. [00:04:15] Crystal Fincher: And Vicki Kraft. [00:04:16] Melissa Santos: Yes, and Vicki Kraft. So I'm interested to see how that plays out. There are some races where legislative candidates who are being accused of being RINOs [Republicans In Name Only] actually have advanced through the primary. And I am wondering if some Republicans - are they more moderate or just hoping that they beat the more Trumpy Republicans essentially. So that's something I'm watching actually going forward is - while we certainly have situations across the nation where Trump-endorsed Republicans are getting through - we see this in the 3rd Congressional District race, here in our state, where Jaime Herrera Beutler who voted to impeach Trump will not be getting through to the general - that was finalized this week. But locally in legislative races, I'm not sure that the more far-right candidates will win out in all these races in November. So I'm watching that - how does our state picture, when it comes to the Republican party, compare to what we're seeing nationally. And it's always interesting to see how Washington does 'cause we're a little bit different sometimes as a state in how we vote versus the rest of the country. [00:05:25] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And that sets up an interesting dynamic for Republicans, I think, in that it is really helpful when - just from a campaign perspective - when everyone is consistent with the message that's being delivered for the party, what priorities are in terms of values. And so there have been - legislatively - some more moderate Republicans making it through. There are certainly some real extremists. And again, "moderate" is an interesting word for Republicans 'cause - when it is gonna come to some of these caucus votes, I think moderation is gonna effectively fly out of the window. Or being afraid to speak out on certain things that challenge some of the more extreme elements in the party, which essentially in my opinion, enables that element of the party. But with Joe Kent higher on the ticket and being so visible, being a frequent guest on Hannity, Trump-endorsed, and really vocal about a number of things like opposing aid to Ukraine, about wanting Jim Jordan - who is extremely problematic and has been accused of ignoring sexual assault allegations on his watch under his responsibility - wanting him to replace Kevin McCarthy as the leader of the party, certainly moving in a much more extreme direction. A number of those things are gonna be inconsistent, I think, with what some of the other Republicans, I think legislatively under JT Wilcox certainly, Republicans are gonna wanna be talking about. So there may be just a bit of a mismatched message there and it will be interesting to see how the party navigates that, but especially coming from a place where the extremism - you look at the primaries - certainly did not land. And some of, even the criticisms just legislatively, of Republicans who were on the message that they wanted to be on, did not turn out to be very effective at all - that presents a challenge for them in the general. [00:07:40] Melissa Santos: I think that was interesting in the Federal Way area. I think everyone, including Democrats, were saying - yeah, there's a lot of voters concerned about public safety there. I think everyone thought maybe the Democrats might be a little bit more vulnerable from attacks from Republicans in that area in South King County around Federal Way, with Republicans say - Hey, Democrats passed all these bills that hamstring police, so they can't keep you safe. I think everyone thought that line of argument might work better in some of those areas in South King County than it did. And so I'm wondering if Republicans will change their approach or not, or if they're just gonna stick with hammering Democrats on public safety. I think that maybe we'll see just more talk about economy and inflation and maybe a little less of the public safety attacks - possibly - based on those results. [00:08:29] Crystal Fincher: And they certainly hit hard on both of those. It is interesting to see - particularly - so you have Jamila Taylor, who is the incumbent representative there, there's another open House seat, and then Claire Wilson in the Senate seat. Jamila Taylor, who's the head of the Legislative Black Caucus, did play a leading role in passing a lot of, number of the police accountability reforms that police, a number of police unions, and people who are saying "Back the Blue" and these were problematic. She actually has a police officer running against her in that district. And also, the mayor of Federal Way, Jim Ferrell, is running for King County Prosecutor on a hard line, lock 'em up kind of message. They've been working overtime to blame legislators, primarily Jamila Taylor, for some of the crime that they've seen. And holding community meetings - really trying to ratchet up sentiment against Jamila Taylor - helping out both her challenger and Jim Ferrell was the plan. And again, that seemed to fall flat. Jamila Taylor finished with 54% in that race and the most votes out of any Democrat. You saw Democrats across the board, both Claire Wilson and Jamila Taylor, get 54% and 55% of the vote. In a primary, that is certainly where you would want to be and that's really a hard number to beat in the general. And then in the other open seat, you had two Democratic candidates combine for, I think, 55% of the vote. So it is - where they attempted to make that argument the hardest, it seemed to fall almost the flattest. And it goes to - we talked about this on the Post-Primary Recap a little bit - I think it goes to show that the conversation publicly - certainly the political conversation about public safety - I think is too flat and does not account for where the public actually is. I think people are absolutely concerned about crime and rightfully so - we have to attack gun violence, we have to attack property crime and violent crime. We have to do better than we're doing now. But I think people are recognizing that the things that we have been doing have not been successful. And we have been trying to lock people up and people see that there's a need for behavioral health interventions, for housing, for substance use treatment and that those things are absent. And that you can send a policeman to do that, but they don't have the tools to address that even if they were the appropriate responder. And there's a lot of people saying they aren't even the appropriate response for a number of these things. So I just think regular voters - regular people - just have a more nuanced and realistic view of what needs to happen. [00:11:42] Melissa Santos: I also think that message - we could talk about those races forever, probably - but I think that message might land especially flat in communities like South King County that are predominantly people of color in many of these communities. They want to address - well, okay, I should not group everyone together, let me back up here - but I think a lot of people see the effects of crime on their communities and their family members and want support, not just a crackdown. And I don't know if that - I don't know - I'm generalizing here and I shouldn't, but I think that maybe that - [00:12:09] Crystal Fincher: I think it's across the board. I feel like - we saw polling in Seattle where, even if you break it down by Seattle City Council district, whether it's North Seattle or West Seattle which are predominantly white areas, in addition to other areas with higher percentage of people of color - they're saying near universally - when given, asked the question - where would you allocate more of your tax dollars in the realm of public safety to make a difference? They start off by saying behavioral health treatment, substance use disorder treatment, treating root causes. And then "more officers" trails those things. So it's - and even before more officers, they're saying better training for officers so they do a better job of responding when they are called. So I just think that across the board, there's - Republicans have gotten far and have done a lot by talking about the problem. And I think what the primary showed is that you're gonna have to do a better job of articulating a logical and reasonable solution to the problem. 'Cause people have heard talk about the problem for a long time, this isn't new. They're ready for someone to do something about it and they want to hear something that sounds credible, with some evidence behind it, that'll make a difference. And I don't think Republicans articulated that at all. And I think Democrats are talking about things more in line with where voters are at. But certainly, we could talk about those election results forever, but we will move on to other news. Speaking of newly elected people, we have a new appointment of a person on the Tacoma City Council - Olgy Diaz was just unanimously appointed as the first Latina member of the Tacoma City Council last Tuesday night. She was one of 43 applicants to apply, ended up making the shortlist, and then was officially appointed on Tuesday night. What did you take away from this? You previously covered - based in Tacoma, covered Tacoma previously, worked at The News Tribune. What does Olgy bring to the Council? [00:14:41] Melissa Santos: Olgy is really experienced in politics, I want to say. For way back when - I think I started talking to Olgy years and years ago - she was, definitely in her role with leading One America, she's done a lot of policy work at the state level for a long time. She worked in the Legislature, so I talked to her in that capacity. And she brings a lot of experience to the table - I think more than a lot of people who apply for vacancies on city councils, for sure. But I honestly was also just - I was blown away to read - I didn't realize the Tacoma City Council has never had a Latina member before and that really blew my mind, given the diversity of Tacoma and given that that's a community where you have people who just weren't represented for such a long time. I worked in Tacoma for eight years at the paper and I didn't - I guess I didn't realize that was the case. So Olgy - separately - brings just a ton of experience. She leads the National Women's Political Caucus of Washington now as president and I talked to her for stories in that capacity, and she's always very knowledgeable and really thoughtful. But yeah, that's just - in terms of representation, she brings a lot to the Council that apparently it hasn't had - in terms of experience and lived experience as well. I didn't watch the whole appointment process every step of the way, but it seems like that is a very solid choice, given that you have someone coming in possibly that has way more, broader political knowledge than a lot of the sitting councilmembers in some cases. And that's not a knock on the sitting councilmembers, but you just have someone really, really versed in politics and policy in Washington State coming onto that city council. [00:16:26] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and an unusual amount of experience. I think, to your point, not a knock on anyone else. Olgy just has an unusual amount of experience on both the policy and political side. She's the Government Affairs Director for Forterra, she's president of the National Women's Political Caucus as you said, on the Washington Wildlife and Recreation Coalition and Institute for a Democratic Future board. She's previously been on the city's Human Rights Commission. She just has so many, so much experience from within, working within the legislature and elsewhere. And if - full disclosure - Olgy Diaz is not just a friend, but also worked for Olgy as her consultant and love the woman. But just completely dynamic and if you know Olgy, you know she reps South Tacoma harder than anyone else just about that you've ever met. She deeply, deeply loves the city, particularly South Tacoma, and has been an advocate for the city in every role that she's had. So just really excited to see her appointed. In other local news - this week, Seattle, the Seattle City Council stood up and passed protections for abortion and gender affirming care. What did they do? [00:17:52] Melissa Santos: They passed something that makes it a misdemeanor for someone to interfere, intimidate, or try and threaten someone who is seeking an abortion and they also have some civil rights protections that they passed. Those are especially - you might not think that's necessarily an issue in Seattle all the time, but I think that - certainly the misdemeanors for trying to interfere for someone getting treatment or getting abortion care, I think that is something that could actually be used and called upon sometime in Seattle with certain individual cases. And I do think it's - not necessarily in a bad way - but a messaging bill on both of them - in a way saying - care is protected here. Even though in Washington State we do have some state law protections for abortion - better than in most states - I think it's partly about sending a message to people that your care will not be interfered with here. And maybe even a message to people in other states - that they can come - actually that is part of it - is that you can come to Seattle and get care and you will not, we will support you. And so that's part of why they're doing it - both on a practical level, but also sending a message that we will not tolerate people trying to dissuade, to discourage people who decided to get an abortion from getting the care that they are seeking. [00:19:18] Crystal Fincher: And I know Councilmember Tammy Morales has also said that she plans to introduce further legislation to prevent crisis pregnancy centers from misrepresenting the facts, misleading people - which has happened in other situations with pregnancy crisis centers, which sometimes bill themselves as abortion care providers. A person seeking an abortion finds them, goes, and unexpectedly is - in some situations - heavily pressured not to have an abortion. And there's been situations where they have been found to have been coerced into not having an abortion. And so that would just seek to make sure that everybody correctly represents themselves, and who they are, and what they are attempting to do. Lots of people do, to your point, look at Seattle and say - okay, but this - things were safe here anyway. I do think the first one - we see a lot of counter-protestors - of people making points in Seattle, going to Seattle to protest different things, because it has a reputation for being progressive, where progressive policy is. So it attacks people who really dislike those policies and moving in that direction. I think this is helpful for that. And it serves as model legislation. There are some very red areas here in the state. There are other localities - we may have neighboring states that - the right to abortion is coming to an end. And so having legislation like this that has passed in the region, that has passed nearby, that is in place, that survives legal challenges against them makes it easier for other localities to pass the same. And so I think that it is a very positive thing for Seattle to take the lead passing model legislation. Certainly aren't the first to pass, but having it in the region is very, very helpful. So glad to see that. Also this week - some challenging news. One - monkeypox, now referred to as MPV, cases have been doubling nearly every week in Washington and has been declared a public health emergency. Where do we stand here? [00:21:37] Melissa Santos: I think that right now, we have about 220 cases - and that's what I think I saw on the CDC website just earlier today. And last week, it was 70 fewer than that, at least - we have been seeing, especially early on, every week or so the cases were doubling in our state. And we remember how COVID started in a way - it was small at first and things just can really expand quickly. This isn't spread the same way COVID is - and I'm not saying it is - but we do definitely have a vaccine shortage here for this and that's a huge concern. I asked the State Department of Health - actually, I have not put this in the story yet, but I was like - how many people do you feel like you need to treat that are at high risk? And they said it's almost 80,000. And took me a long time to get that number, but I think we only have - we only are gonna have something like 20-something thousand vaccines doses coming in, maybe 25,000, through at least early September. So there's a lot of potential for this to spread before we get vaccines to treat the people who are most at risk. That's a big concern. And so I haven't checked in our state yet - this sort of decision that we can stretch these doses further by divvying them up and doing, making each dose into maybe five doses - that could really help here. So I need to check whether in our state we're going forward with that and if that meets the need or not. But we still need a second dose for everybody, even beyond that. So it looks like the math just doesn't work and we're still gonna be short. And in that time, how far will it spread? Because it's not just - it's not a sexually transmitted disease that only is going to spread among LGBT individuals - other people are getting it and will get it. So that is - and also that community needs as much support as they can get anyway, regardless. But this is not something that just affects someone else, for instance, if you're not a member of that community. It's something that can affect everybody, and it's - everyone's afraid of another situation like we had with COVID - could it spread before we get a handle on it? And I think it's still an unknown question right now. [00:23:57] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, big unknown question. And to your point, it was - the CDC just announced that the vaccine supply can be stretched by giving one-fifth of the normal dose, so stretched five times what we thought we previously had. But that was just announced, so our local plans for that are probably in progress and process and hopefully we'll hear more about that soon. But haven't yet as that information was just announced - I want to say yesterday, if not day before. With that, to your point, it is - some people are under the mistaken impression that this is a sexually transmitted infection. It is not. It can spread by just skin-to-skin contact. If two people are wearing shorts and at a concert, or have short-sleeve shirts and are rubbing against each other, it can be spread just by touching especially infected lesions, by surfaces if there's a high enough amount on a surface. It is pretty hardy - lasts a long time on a number of surfaces or clothes or different things like that. Certainly a lot of concern with kids going back into school, kids in daycare that we may see an increase particularly among children - just because they are around each other and touching each other and playing as they do and that is how this virus can spread. So certainly getting as many people, starting with the highest risk people, vaccinated is important. We are short - there are just no two ways about that and running behind. Testing capacity has also been a challenge. So hopefully with these emergency declarations that we've seen locally and nationally that we fast forward the response to that and get prepared pretty quickly, but we will say that. Also this week, most COVID emergency orders have been ended. What happened here? [00:26:08] Melissa Santos: Some of them are still getting phased out, but the governor just very recently announced in our state that he's going to be - he's ending 12 COVID emergency orders. And so I went - wait, how many are left then, 'cause I don't think we have that many. And the governor's office - there's only 10 - once these mostly healthcare, procedure-related orders are phased out, will only be 10 COVID emergency orders left. And honestly, some of those have even been scaled back from what they were. They're - one of the orders relates to practicing some safe distancing measures or certain precautions in schools - that's really a step back from having schools be completely closed, like we had at one point. So even those 10 aren't necessarily as stringent as the orders we were seeing earlier in the pandemic. What does that really signify? I think that the governor has said - because we have good treatment options available, it doesn't mean that COVID is no longer a threat, but we have better ways of dealing with it essentially. It's not like early in the pandemic when nobody was vaccinated. We have a fairly high vaccination rate in our state compared to some others. And we have some treatment options that are better. And at least right now - well, I say this - our hospitals aren't pushed completely beyond capacity. Although, however - this week Harborview actually is over capacity, so that's still a potential problem going forward. But we just have better ways of dealing with the virus than we did. It doesn't mean it's not a threat, it doesn't mean that people aren't still getting hospitalized and even dying - because they are. But we're moving to a different stage of this pandemic where we're just not going to have as many restrictions and we're going to approach the virus in a different way. [00:27:51] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. Yeah, that pretty much covers it there. [00:27:56] Melissa Santos: The thing - I do think for public - I've asked the governor a couple times - what is your standard for lifting the underlying emergency order? 'Cause we still are in a state of emergency over COVID and that does give the governor, if something comes up, quick power to ban some activity or something. And if there's a public health risk, he could order, for instance, indoor mask wearing again if he wanted. He has not indicated he plans to, but it gives him a little more power. Republicans are still mad about that, but in effect, there aren't that many orders actually in place anymore. We're just not living under as many restrictions as we once were. [00:28:34] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. So the protections are going away - there are lots of people who are very concerned about this. This does not seem tethered to - earlier in the pandemic - in some situations when cases were spreading at a lower amount than they were in some areas then than they are today - they tied it to certain metrics and to hospital capacity and different things. So there seemed like there was an underlying data-based justification that would dictate what the appropriate health response was. This seems untethered from all of that. And I think a lot of people's criticisms of this are - the actions that are taken, or realistically the actions that are no longer being taken, the justification behind that seems to be driven by convenience or by a desire just to get back to normal or fatigue. And instead of what health precautions dictate would be wise. I think at the very minimum we would be a lot better off if - we were very late in, from the CDCs perspective, in acknowledging that this is an airborne virus. And so air quality, air purification, air turnover in indoor spaces is extremely important, especially given how helpful that is for wildfire air mitigation. We're having a higher, more low-quality air days than we have before. Focusing on indoor air purification - I wish there were more of a push for that, more awareness for that, more assistance for that. Because it just seems like - given this and monkeypox, which has evidence that it is spread also via airborne - [00:30:37] Melissa Santos: Or at least droplets in close - yeah, at least like close breathy, breathing-ey stuff. [00:30:44] Crystal Fincher: Yes - that air purification is important. And so I wish we would make a greater push because still - that's not really aggressively talked about by most of our public health entities. And there's just not an awareness because of that, by a lot of people who are not necessarily being, saying - no, I don't want to do that - but just don't understand the importance of that. And many businesses that could take steps, but just don't know that that's what they should be doing. Sometimes it's still here - well, we're sanitizing all of these surfaces, which is going to come in handy for monkeypox certainly, but is not really an effective mitigation for COVID when - hey, let's talk about air purification instead of you wiping down surfaces. Just interesting and this may ramp up again, depending on what happens with MPV infections and spread. So we'll see how that continues. [00:31:47] Melissa Santos: But this time we have a vaccine at least - there is a vaccine that exists. Remember the beginning of COVID - of course, everyone remembers - there was no vaccine. So this feels like - theoretically, we should be able to address it faster because we have a vaccine, but there's just a shortage nationwide of the vaccine. So that's, I think, an extra frustrating layer of the monkeypox problem - is that we have a tool, but we just don't have enough of it. In COVID, we just were all completely in the dark for months and months and months and months - and anyway. [00:32:17] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and unfortunately the effect on the ground of not having enough is the same as not having any. [00:32:23] Melissa Santos: Right. Yeah. [00:32:24] Crystal Fincher: And so people are left with greater exposure to the virus and to spreading the virus than there would be otherwise, because we don't have the adequate supply of it. Which they say they're working on, but of course those things - unless you are prepared beforehand and making an effort to be prepared beforehand, it takes a while to get that ramped up. I think they're saying the earliest we could anticipate additional supply would be in the September timeframe, and oftentimes that's when it starts to trickle. And so it could be October before we see a meaningful amount of additional supply or longer. Just stay on top of information, be aware out there, and we will see. Very important thing happening within the City of Seattle - is Seattle City Council district redistricting, and what's happening. There have been some good articles written recently - both in The Seattle Times, especially in The Stranger by Hannah Krieg - about racial equity advocates actually being happy about the newly proposed political boundaries for council districts. But some residents of Magnolia, the expensive and exclusive Magnolia community, who have been known to advocate against any type of growth, or development, or any change to their community, other people getting greater access to their community and the political power that comes with who they've been and their ability to have an outsized voice, realistically, in local politics. They're not that happy. What's happening here? [00:34:16] Melissa Santos: The proposal that at least is moving forward at this point would split Magnolia, right? So this is something that communities of color have argued as being - Hey, in other areas, our communities are split and that dilutes our voice. And now it's interesting that Magnolia, which is not historically an area where - that has been predominantly people of color - every district in Seattle is changing - safe to say that it's been a whiter area. They're saying - Hey, wait, whoa, whoa, whoa - wait, we're gonna get split, that's gonna dilute our voice. So it's an interesting dynamic there. And what's also interesting - and it makes sense because the same organizations have been working on city redistricting and state redistricting, to some degree - we're seeing this movement to really unite and ensure communities in South Seattle are not divided. So in this - this was something that they really were trying to do with congressional districts - is make sure that South Seattle communities of color have a coalition and aren't split. And especially having the - well, let's see, and at least in state redistricting - making sure the International District is connected in some way to other parts of South Seattle and Beacon Hill. That was a priority in one of the congressional district redistricting for some of these groups that are now working on Seattle redistricting. One of the things that it would do is put South Park and Georgetown in the same district, which is interesting because I think those two communities work together on a lot of issues that affect the Duwamish and affect - again, a lot of people of color that live in those districts - there are issues that really would affect both of them. And so putting them in the same district, I could see why that would make sense. And you also have - I want to make sure I have this right, but I think - making sure Beacon Hill and it is connected to South Seattle as well. I'm gonna check here - is it also the International District here we're talking as well? Oh, Yesler Terrace - that's right. [00:36:12] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, so CID and Yesler Terrace will be in District 2 - kept them both in District 2 - that those were some really, really important considerations. And large percentages of those communities have talked about how important that is. You just talked about Georgetown and South Park being in that district. Looking at Lake City, Northgate, and Broadview in District 5. Also keeping growing renter populations together in South Lake Union and Downtown together there has been making a difference. Both communities of color and, as we talk in the larger redistricting conversation, communities of interest - and now with more than half of the City being renters - renters have been largely overlooked in terms of redistricting and City policy until now. And really what a number of these organizations are saying is - we've been overlooked, we have not been absent, but we've been ignored in this and communities and voices from places like Magnolia have been overrepresented and have been catered to this time. And there's a saying - when you're used to privilege, equity looks like oppression. And so Magnolia is saying - we're losing our voice - and kind of collectively, interests from the rest of the City are saying - no, what you're doing is losing the ability to speak over our voices. But now that we're all at the table and all have a voice, it's time for us to also be recognized as valid and important and worthy of preservation and continuity and representation and not have it broken up in favor of predominantly wealthy homeowners who are saying - well, we're a historically important community. Well, are you historically important and the change that the rest of the City has seen hasn't come to your district because you have fought so vehemently against it. And then turn around and say - and that's why you should cater to us and keep us together because we continue to fight against any kind of change. And realistically saying - hey, other districts have changed and boundaries need to change in those other areas to accommodate that. And so this does - certainly not all that advocates have asked for, but some meaningful progress and some promising boundaries, I think, for a lot of people in the City, for a lot of people who are not wealthy, for people who are renters no matter what the income is - because of the challenges that just the rental population is facing. And to your point, neighborhoods who have worked together and who share interests, who now have the opportunity to have that represented politically within the City? I think that's very helpful and I definitely hope people stay engaged. In this redistricting process. And as the voices from some of those communities who have had greater access to an ability to participate in these redistricting and City processes, and who've had the inside track and who have been listened to to a greater degree than others, that you add your voice to the conversation to make sure that it isn't drowned out by anyone else. Looking at a recent announcement - and kind of announcement is a better word than a new policy or a plan - because it is just announced and announced the intention to take action, but we have yet to see. There was a press conference yesterday about emergency walk-in centers for behavioral health cases, addressing our regional behavioral health crisis here. What was announced and what is the deal? [00:40:32] Melissa Santos: What exactly is going to happen remains a little bit unclear to me exactly, but basically King County Executive Dow Constantine announced a plan to just expand services for people who are experiencing a behavioral health crisis. And it's going to be part of his 2023 budget proposal, which isn't coming out 'til next month. So the idea is having more short- and long-term treatment - so more walk-in treatment that's available and more places to send people who have acute mental health needs. He was talking about how the County's lost a third of its residential behavioral healthcare beds - Erica Barnett at PubliCola reported on this pretty extensively - and there's just a concern there just won't be enough. I was surprised by the stat that there's only one crisis stabilization unit in the County that's 16 beds - that's not very much, especially when we know people suffer mental health crises more frequently than that small number of beds might indicate. So what's interesting is we want to put more money in somewhere so people aren't getting treated in jails, that they have a better place to go, but we're not quite - we don't know exactly the scope of this, or how much money exactly we're talking about to put toward more beds. I guess there's some plans to do so - is what I got from the executive. [00:42:06] Crystal Fincher: Certainly from a regional perspective, we saw representation from the mayor's office for the City of Seattle, county executive certainly, county council, regional leaders in behavioral health treatment and homelessness - all saying that - Hey, we intend to take action to address this. Like you said, Dow said that he will be speaking more substantively to this in terms of details with his budget announcement and what he plans to do with that. Universal acknowledgement that this is a crisis, that they lack funding and resources in this area, and say that they intend to do better with a focus, like you said, on walk-in treatment and the ability to provide that. But we just don't know the details yet. We'll be excited to see that. And you covered this week, just the tall task ahead of them, because we've spoken about before and lots of people have talked about even in this press conference, a problem that we almost require that people - the only access that people can get to treatment sometimes is if they've been arrested, which is just a wildly inefficient way to address this, especially when it plays a role in creating some of the problems with crime and other things. But even with the newly rolled-out intervention system with an attempt to - if someone who previously would've called 911 now can call a dedicated kind of other crisis line to try and get an alternative response - but even that is severely underfunded. What's happening with that? [00:44:00] Melissa Santos: So with 988 - this is the three-digit number people can call when they have a mental health crisis and they'll be connected to a counselor who can help talk them through it. The idea is ultimately for that system to also be able to send trained crisis responders - largely instead of police in many, many cases - meet people in-person, not just talk to them on the phone. But we just don't have enough of these mobile crisis response teams. There's money in the state budget to add more over the next couple of years, especially in rural areas that just don't have the coverage right now. They just don't have enough teams to be able to get to people when they need it. That's something they want to expand so there's more of a response than - that isn't a police officer showing up at your door. So that's the ultimate vision for this new line you call - 988 - but it's not fully implemented right now. You still will get some support. And if you call, I'm not trying to say people should not call the line, but they don't necessarily have all the resources they want to be able to efficiently deploy people - I shouldn't say deploy, it sounds very military - but deploy civilian trained helpers to people who are experiencing a crisis. So that's where they want it to go and The Seattle Times had an article just about how some of those designated crisis responders right now are just stretched so thin and that's just not gonna change immediately, even with some new state money coming in to add more people to do those sorts of things. And designated crisis responders have other duties - they deal with actually to getting people to treatment - some involuntarily in certain cases. Again, it's different than a police response and right now there's just not enough of those folks. [00:45:55] Crystal Fincher: Which jeopardizes the willingness of people to continue to call. Certainly the possibility that a police response can ultimately happen from someone who was requesting a behavioral health or another type of intervention response. And that is still a possibility which some people find challenging or - hey, they expected to avoid that or have something different if they call this and that might not always be the case. But it's certainly a challenge and I think one of the things that was talked about yesterday, which kind of wraps this under a whole umbrella, is there needs to be a lot more done in terms of infrastructure and capacity from - with there being someone to call, someone appropriate to call for whatever the challenge is, an appropriate response. If that is a behavioral health trained person, a crisis intervener, someone like that - and places to take people. Someone does respond and then can connect that person to services that exist. We have problems in a number of areas saying - yeah, we offered services or services are available and they aren't, or they aren't appropriate for the crisis that's there. They don't meet the needs of the person and their situation. So certainly a lot to build out. I think it is a positive step that we're hearing acknowledgement of this and a unified plan to take action, but still need to see what actually results 'cause sometimes we hear big fanfare to start and don't get much substantive on the back end. Certainly I hope with a number of the people involved in this that we do get some substantive progress and I hope to see that, I would expect to see that - but I'm looking forward to it. With that, I think that wraps up this show today. Thank you so much for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, August 12th, 2022. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler, assistant producer is Shannon Cheng with assistance from Bryce Cannatelli - we have an incredible team here at Hacks & Wonks - just want to continue to say that it is not just me, it is completely our team and not possible without this full team. Our wonderful co-host today is Seattle Axios reporter Melissa Santos. You can find Melissa on Twitter @MelissaSantos1. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on the new Twitter account @HacksWonks, 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 deliver 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 and Election 2022 resources at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

On today's Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Associate Editor of The Stranger, Rich Smith. They start this week discussing the heatwave currently affecting western Washington, and how despite the real risks to some of our most vulnerable neighbors, the city moved forward with a sweep of a homeless encampment. Rich points out that there's not actually adequate housing for all of those hurt by the sweep, and discusses how legal action might be the necessary catalyst to get the city to change its behavior when it comes to handling our homelessnes crisis. In specific races, Crystal and Rich discuss the Congressional race in Washington's 8th Congressional District, where three Republicans are vying for the chance to take Kim Schrier's seat. They next follow-up on the horrifying pattern of Black electeds, candidates, and campaign staff being harassed, threatened, and attacked, and the lack of resources and support from the HDCC to protect candidates of color. Next, they look at the 47th legislative district's Senate and House races, both of which have very competitive D-on-D races happening during the primary. Rich explains the Stranger's Editorial Control Board's struggle to pick who to endorse in the 34th's State Rep. position 1 race. Crystal and Rich talk about the disproportionate amount of money going to D-on-D races in districts that are safely Democrat, and what needs to be done to make sure campaign finance needs are less of a barrier for candidates. After that, they go over close-looking races between Democrats and Republicans across the state. Finally, they remind you to VOTE! Ballots are due August 2nd. Make your voice heard!  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, Rich Smith, at @richsssmith.  More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   WA Voting Resources Ballot and replacement ballot information: https://voter.votewa.gov/WhereToVote.aspx    Ballot Box and voting center locations: https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/research/drop-box-and-voting-center-locations.aspx    If you're an eligible voter with previous felony convictions, you CAN vote as long as you're no longer confined. For more information, see here: https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/voters/felons-and-voting-rights.aspx    Resources   “Seattle removes homeless encampment in Sodo during heat wave” by Greg Kim from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/seattle-removes-homeless-encampment-in-sodo-during-heat-wave/    “A new push to combat harassment of Black candidates and staff” by Melissa Santos from Axios: https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2022/07/25/black-candidates-washington-harassment   “Republicans vie for swing-district shot at defeating WA Rep. Kim Schrier” by Jim Brunner from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/republicans-vie-for-swing-district-shot-at-defeating-democrat-rep-kim-schrier/   “Northeast Seattle House race features 5 Democratic candidates and big money” by David Gutman from The Seattle Times:  https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/northeast-seattle-house-race-features-5-democratic-candidates-and-big-money/   “Seattle voters have a slew of choices in Legislative races” by Joseph O'Sullivan from Crosscut: https://crosscut.com/politics/2022/07/seattle-voters-have-slew-choices-legislative-races    Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks and 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, as well as our recent forums, are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week. Welcome back to the program today's co-host: Associate Editor of The Stranger and - never forget - noted poet, Rich Smith. [00:00:55] Rich Smith: Hi. [00:00:55] Crystal Fincher: Hey, so it's been a hot week. We're in the middle of another heat event, climate change is unrelenting, and we're feeling the effects of it. It's been a challenge. [00:01:09] Rich Smith: Yeah, I'm against it. I don't think it should be happening. Seattle really is dying, as is the rest of the globe, is my understanding. [00:01:19] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. We just saw Europe go through this right before we did. And I'm sure we're all going to be going through it with increasing frequency, which makes one thing that happened this week, just particularly - not just unfortunate, but really infuriating to a lot of people - and plainly harmful. It's that the City of Seattle decided to move forward with sweeps of encampments for the unhoused in the middle of this heat wave. What went on here? [00:01:50] Rich Smith: Yeah, they - Bruce Harrell has made a point to deal with visible homelessness by employing a tactic that has not worked, which is sweeping people around the City, and in the middle of a heat wave, he swept a city, or a spot a little bit south of downtown. I wasn't - I'm not quite sure on the address. I think there was about 30 people there. And first thing in the morning - sun was heating up, these people had to put all their belongings on their back, and move across town, or find a cooling shelter or - in the heat. And it was just cruel and unfortunately, not unusual. And I can't even blog in this heat, let alone move all of my earthly possessions across town, just because somebody doesn't want to see me there. So that's what happened. [00:02:53] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and it is - a lot of people understand that this really makes no sense to do - it's harmful, it's against public health guidance. We're still in a pandemic - even though people want to be done with it, it's not done with us. We have more challenges in that direction coming our way, which we might touch on a little bit later. But even with this, there were a lot of community members who reached out to the mayor's office when they heard about this and heard that it was upcoming. This is on the heels of last summer - the heat dome event being the most deadly weather event that Washington has ever experienced. We know how lethal extreme heat is. And so for people who don't have any kind of shelter to be put through this at this particular time, and as a lot of activists talked about and actually Councilmember Tammy Morales called out before, since and after - there's not enough shelter space, there's not enough housing space to get all of these people in shelter. To which Bruce Harrell and his administration replied - well, there's space at cooling centers and we can get them vouchers to go there. But those aren't 24/7 - that's a very, very temporary solution. So you know that you're throwing people out, certainly at night, and tomorrow when there's extreme heat again - 90+ degree temperatures - where do they go then? And they have even less to work with in order to do that. It's just - as you said in the very beginning - it's ineffective, this doesn't get people in housing. Some people talk about homelessness being primarily a problem of addiction or of mental health resources - that's not the case for everybody, but the one thing that everyone who is - does not have a home - has in common is not having a home. Housing is the one thing that will, that we can't do without to solve homelessness. We have to start there. And so to act as if this is doing anything different, when over and over again, we see when they sweep a location, the people who were there just move to different locations in the City. We don't get people housed, we're doing nothing but making this problem worse while wasting so much money in the process of doing so. It's just infuriating and I really hope it stops. There's not really a reason to believe so, based on the track record in this area of this administration, but it's wrong and there's really no two ways about that. [00:05:25] Rich Smith: Yeah, and just to hop on that Tammy Morales point and the reporting that The Times did on the ground, there's this - the administration thinks that they're offering everybody shelter, they say that they're offering everybody shelter. And then reporters go there and ask around and people say - nobody offered me anything. A couple people said - I'm gonna take this tent down the road, I'm not gonna get to that shelter. And so I just think that the City needs to start getting sued for this stuff. I just - if a referral system is clearly adequately not functional, and we're not supposed to - under Martin v. Boise - sweep people unless we have adequate shelter to put them in. And if we haven't created a system that gets people into adequate shelter that meets their needs, then how is it legal? is my question. And I don't think that this is gonna stop until there starts to be legal consequences for the City. [00:06:29] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and like you said, there is precedent - that's a fairly recent decision, that we seem to be acting - in Seattle and in other cities - in direct defiance of, so I hope along with you that it is challenged in court. It's a big problem that continues. We're doing nothing to solve this issue that everyone recognizes is a crisis, and it's time we start doing things that actually work to make the problem better instead of wasting money on things that just perpetuate the issues that we're having. So this week, we're - Friday, July 29th - we are just days before this August 2nd primary on Tuesday, which means if you have your ballots, you better fill them out and get them in. Have any questions - feel free to reach out to us here at officialhacksandwonks.com, us on Twitter. You can go to MyVote.wa.gov if you are having issues with your ballot - I know there're places like Ferndale in the state that're experiencing extreme post office delays and some people still haven't received their ballots up there. But any issues that you're having can probably be addressed by starting out at MyVote.wa.gov, but do not pass up this opportunity to make your voice heard. There is so much at stake. As frustrated as sometimes we can be with how things are happening federally, whether it's the Supreme Court or seeming inaction in Congress - although we may have gotten some encouraging week this past week, encouraging news this past week - it is really important to act locally. Especially with things being in disarray at the federal level, the state and local level is where we protect the rights that we count on. It's where we shape what our communities look like. And the fact that they can look as different as Forks and Sequim and Seattle and Bellevue and all the rest just is a testament to how much power communities have to shape what they look like. So get engaged, be involved and - just starting out, we've seen just a slew of activity. We'll start the conversation around the Congressional districts, the Congressional races. What is happening in the 8th Congressional District where Kim Schrier is the current incumbent? [00:08:46] Rich Smith: This is - yeah - the front of the national red wave in Washington, to the extent that it crashes down here or gets held, it'll be in the 8th, which is east King County District now. It got changed around a little bit with redistricting - picking up some pieces of Snohomish County, but also some rural areas that it didn't have before. And Schrier faces a challenge from three Republicans minimum - there's a bunch of other people who aren't viable, but the major ones are Reagan Dunn, a King County Councilmember who's also a Republican and whose mom represented the district - I think in the 90s and early '00s - so a little bit of a legacy candidate there for Dunn. He has, as a brief aside, been also awarded by me just now the trophy of using his personal or his professional press release apparatus through the County Council in the most abusive way I've ever seen. This man sends out a press release about some kind of Republican red meat he's doing on the council, literally every eight hours, and it has been for the last year. If this is what he thinks doing his job on council means, then he hasn't been doing it since before this year. But anyway, Reagan Dunn is one of them. And Matt Larkin, a failed Attorney General candidate, who's going for the red meat Trump vote more openly than the other two are at least is is also running. He's got a bunch of his own money in - I wanna say north of $500,000, but maybe it's just $300,000. And and then we've got Jesse Jensen who ran last time. He's a veteran and a tech manager and he almost - he lost to Schrier in 2020 by four points. And so the Republicans are bickering amongst themselves with Jensen spending some, or a PAC on behalf of Jensen spending some money bringing up Dunn's - his struggles with alcoholism, and his divorce, and a bunch of drama related to that. And Dunn pushing back against that and calling it cheap blows. And Matt Larkin just trying to pick up any pieces that fall from that spat and capitalize on it. Schrier will, I suspect, will get through and it'll just be - which of these icky guys is gonna challenge her. [00:11:31] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's really interesting to see. And the theme of our congressional primaries and many of these races is - yeah, Republicans are fighting amongst each other in some really interesting, sometimes entertaining, but also vicious ways among each other. And so in this race it's been interesting to see, I think particularly just as people who live in King County and who have seen Reagan Dunn operate for a while - for a while he used to kind of court and relish his - the impression of him being a more moderate Republican, or Republican who can be elected in King County and touted that for a while. But now the base is different than it used to be when it comes to Republicans - they are not in the mood for a - someone who's moderate enough to be elected in King County and his votes, his rhetoric, the way he operates has completely reflected that. Including voting against women's reproductive rights, against abortion rights and access - really is, as you just talked about, trying to appeal to the Trump-loving red meat base and prove that he is conservative enough to do that. And just speaking a lot differently than he did before. But I think this is just reflective of - there are no - really, there is no such thing as a Republican moderate. Because everyone who has called themselves a moderate on issues of any kind of importance - at most - is silent. They won't oppose their party on things that they know are blatantly wrong, whether it's the lie of the 2020 election and the conspiracies surrounding that or vaccine issues - all this kind of stuff. Or you've seen them go the direction of Dunn and we recently saw, in a vote against same-sex marriage in Congress with Jaime Herrera Beutler, that they're voting against those things. And it's absolutely in opposition to a majority of Washington residents by every public poll that has been done. And so it's just interesting to see how that dynamic has played out throughout that. Again, it should be Schrier and we'll see who her opponent is gonna be, but that's gonna be a race to continue to pay attention to throughout the general election. So there's - you talk about a lot dealing with the 9th CD - there's a lot of legislative districts in the 9th CD - some of them very big battleground districts. And before we get into talking just a little bit about the legislative candidates, I did want to talk about an issue that The Stranger covered, that Axios covered this past week - and it has been the escalating incidences of harassment and violence against Black candidates, some of which are in the most competitive races in the state that we've been seeing lately. There have been lots of incidences that have been reported on that we know of throughout the state of Black candidates having their signs and property defaced - that's happened to a number of them, having their staffs harassed, followed, threatened from people in the community - and we saw that happen last week, one week before last now. And then that same week a candidate in the 30th Legislative District, which is Federal Way, Algona area, was shot twice with a BB gun. And when you're getting shot by BB gun, you don't actually know necessarily that it's a BB gun - and so you just know that you're getting shot at. Very scary situation and with those, certainly, I know that candidate Pastor Carey Anderson feels like that seems like a down payment on more violence, that seems like a type of harassment and targeting that's like - we are coming after you, we're harassing you. It's just very, very scary. And so throughout this process - and again, we saw these instances in 2020, we're now in 2022 seeing them - these campaigns have had to make considerations adjust their field plans and their canvassing plans in ways that soak up more resources, soak up more money and time, and it's just worrisome to be doing this. And realistically, this has been - continues to be a systemic problem. And so as I shared before, a number of people have - the parties should have an impact in fixing this. And specifically, I don't know if you're - I know you are - but people that are listening - the campaign apparatus when it comes to a state party - there's a state party. They do the Coordinated Campaign, which is the volunteer arm for a lot of the candidates in the state, they do a lot of supportive canvassing, phone calls, especially for - from the top of the ticket in the state on down. So Patty Murray being at the top of the ticket this year to candidates, especially in battleground areas. But the entities that are most responsible for dealing with campaigns are the House Democratic Caucus and the Washington Senate Democratic Caucus - that the House caucus and the Senate caucus are actually very frequently in contact with campaigns. They exist solely to support the political campaigns of their members. And so they provide information, guidance, infrastructure for the most competitive races against the opposing party. They're actively involved in these races and they basically act like co-consultants and adjunct staff for these. So there is a very close relationship and those are the two entities - House caucus for House candidates, Senate caucus for the Senate candidates - who are already doing that work in general. And so it has not escaped a lot of people's notice that this has been, as I was quoted saying, a glaring omission in what they've talked about. And it's not the first time the party has heard about this or confronted it. There have been conversations about this before. They've not resulted in action up until now. And so that article was particularly troubling to me. And this situation is particularly troubling to me because although everybody was asleep before then, we've seen the State Party basically say - yeah, we do have a responsibility to handle this and to try and work on a solution. We've seen the Senate caucus say - yeah, we do and we're working on a solution. And we have not seen that from House caucus leadership. And it was - we don't see this often for anything in any issue, but you had three candidates, two of them members in some of the most competitive races in the state saying - Hey, this happened. April Berg - this happened to me earlier this year and I asked the House caucus for help, I didn't get any - and now we're sitting here asking again and we're waiting. And Jamila Taylor, the head of the Legislative Black Caucus, saying essentially the same thing - we're waiting for help, we're asking, we're waiting. And then Pastor Carey Anderson, candidate in the 30th, saying we asked and we haven't - and these candidates are feeling like they're left alone and being left high and dry. And their campaigns are wondering - is it safe to be out there - and to not even have the caucus back them up like that is really something. And if Black lives do matter in this state, then we gotta do a better job of showing it, starting with these candidates. And this is - attacks on these candidates are really foundational - saying, we don't think you deserve a voice in this society, in our democracy, we're gonna try and intimidate and harass you out of it. And really, no one's really doing that much to stop it, so let's keep going. And not having support going through that is a really challenging thing. Will Casey for The Stranger also did an article on it this week. So I guess as you're looking at it, what does it look like from your vantage point? [00:20:11] Rich Smith: Yeah - well, in their defense the HCCC - or whatever, I don't know what they call it - just found out about structural racism this year, so they're hopping on it. They're also just figuring out racism as well. We might give 'em a chance to catch up. No, I was - the Rep Berg, whose canvasser was one of the people who got yelled at by a white guy who slammed his bike to the ground and did the "get off my lawn" racism up in Mill Creek, I wanna say, I can't remember where it was. But anyway, she and Rep Taylor pointed out that this - if you want to expand the number of people into your party, you want to have a big umbrella, if you want to diversify your party, which has been white for a very long time - then you're gonna want to provide some protection for people. You're gonna at least want to get a phone tree - set up some kind of protocol so that the party knows when this stuff happens and can act accordingly. The fact that we didn't have one means that we didn't prioritize it. And the fact that they didn't prioritize it means that there's not enough people in high places who are thinking about this stuff. And the fact that this has to come from the candidates who are not, who are running to be part of the party, is inexcusable because we've known that this has been happening for a long time. So yeah. It hurts recruitment for that party and it's inexcusable that they haven't done anything - they haven't done anything about it until now. [00:22:05] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and even then until now - we're waiting, we're waiting. [00:22:09] Rich Smith: Yeah. [00:22:09] Crystal Fincher: We're waiting to see - [00:22:10] Rich Smith: Did the Senate put out some recommendations, but the House hasn't? [00:22:13] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. [00:22:14] Rich Smith: Okay, I see. [00:22:16] Crystal Fincher: And as well as the State Party - they've worked in conjunction. So it'll - we're waiting to see - I hope that we see more action, but it has certainly been disconcerting, worrisome. Frankly, infuriating - [00:22:31] Rich Smith: Pramila's getting yelled at. [00:22:32] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and beyond yelled at - life threatened by dude outside of her house with a gun - telling her to go back where she came from and threatening to kill her. It's - and we saw an organizer this past week with a continued campaign of harassment from someone who already has a restraining order against them for this. It's just a worrisome time and it's gonna take everybody engaging, especially white people, to get this to stop. Relying on the victims of harassment and the victims of assault and the victims of stalking to be able to engage and solve their whole problem, when a lot of their energy is spent just trying to keep themselves safe, is not realistic and not what we can count on in order for it to change. But also, in other news - so south King County has got a lot of races. There haven't been many that have been covered. The Stranger has covered them and even engaged in a recent endorsement in one of the most competitive legislative districts in the state, which is the 47th Legislative District. And so there is one incumbent in the House seat running - Debra Entenman in that seat. And then there is a competitive Senate race and a competitive House race, both of which have open seats. And interestingly, both are D vs R races, where we're in a pretty competitive D primary, not so competitive R primaries. Well-funded Republican opponents - both of those Republican opponents are also Black, against a number of Black candidates running. So you have Shukri Olow and Chris Stearns running for one seat. You have Satwinder Kaur, who's a Kent City Councilmember currently, running against a former State Senator, Claudia Kaufman, in the other seat - running against another current Kent City Councilmember, Bill Boyce, who's a Republican. And then Carmen Goers for that other seat, who's also a Republican. So how did you - just going through that race - you made endorsements and recommendations. In that, what did you come out with? [00:24:52] Rich Smith: Yeah. In those races - yeah, first of all, the 47th is huge. It's a bellwether district. Everyone's gonna be looking at it and analyzing it on election night to figure out what it means for the general election and whether or not the Democrats are gonna be able to hold their majority in the State House and - or break even in the Senate, with Mullet as the swing - lord help us. But yeah, in the race - starting from the Senate race - that's the one that is Kaur and Kauffman vs probably Boyce - or yeah, Bill Boyce - [00:25:33] Crystal Fincher: Bill Boyce - yeah. [00:25:33] Rich Smith: Kent City Councilman. Yeah, we came down on Kauffman there, mostly because Kaur had lied to us, basically, in the course of the endorsement process. She said that - we asked about whether or not she wanted to put cops in schools and Kent, they recently - Kent School District and City Council approved recently - put cops back in the school so that they could handcuff mostly kids of color when they get out of line, and or when they say they get out of line. [00:26:13] Crystal Fincher: And a long history of that happening in the district. [00:26:15] Rich Smith: Yes, and Kaur's initial response to that was - that wasn't my, our jurisdiction, that was a decision that the school made, the school district made, yada, yada. Kauffman stepped in and said - excuse me, you voted on that. And then we were like, what? And then she's like - yeah, the City Council approved the budget that put the cops back into the schools in Kent and also, you all deliberated about it. There's a meeting - you talked about this. It was not only within your jurisdiction, but you joined a unanimous vote to put cops back in the schools. And then she's like okay - yeah, that happened. I was like - well, why did you say it didn't happen? Or why did you suggest that it was out of your jurisdiction? And so you didn't have anything to say about it? So that kind of - that didn't - that wasn't cool. We didn't like that. And we also didn't like that the vote to put the cops back in schools because, and when we questioned her on that, she said she had mixed feelings about it personally, but she voted for it because this was something the community asked for. But scratch the surface a little bit, and the community also asked for the school not to put the cops back in the schools. And so it was - she was representing people in the community, some people in the community, and dismissing - or not really dismissing - but pretending as if other people in the community didn't exist. She wanted to represent the interest of those people and not those people, so that was - otherwise they were pretty, pretty close on the issues, but her handling of that situation initially and the substance of it, I think, was what pushed us toward Kaur. We recognize that it's a moderate district, or a purple district, in a lot of ways and maybe that comes back to to haunt Kauffman, but Kaufman also just had a really forthright, blunt, straightforward way of talking. She held her ground, said what she said. And we were like - that's, there we go. There was just less triangulation, it felt like, happening. And so those were the things that pushed us there. Olow and Stearns was also really tough for us - because love Stearns' work on Treatment First Washington and his history with - him foregrounding treatment and wanting to get in - we really, would be great to have a champion in there, someone to join Rep Lauren Davis on her crusade to try to squeeze something out of that body to build a treatment infrastructure in the first place and a recovery infrastructure at the state level. I'm sure Stearns would've done that. [00:29:07] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, full disclosure - I was also part of that coalition - appreciate his work on that, definitely believed in that. [00:29:14] Rich Smith: Well, and he had been elected to Auburn City Council. And so he has a constituency he can tap - he's familiar. Olow though - we endorsed her against Upthegrove when she ran for County Council and she aligned with everything that Stearns was saying, or agreed with everything that Stearns was saying, and just has a lot of expertise in youth development and education and that's something where we need as many of those champions in the Legislature as humanly possible. And she had just had a - it looked like at the time when we were making the endorsement - just a better campaign infrastructure and so probably would've done, we thought would've done the best, will do the best against the Republican challenger. [00:30:11] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, really well-funded Republican challenger. Yeah. [00:30:15] Rich Smith: So that's what went into our thinking in those races. [00:30:18] Crystal Fincher: Yeah - no, made sense. Shukri has been doing work for the Best Starts for Kids program, which is very big in the district. Got her doctorate in education after starting out as a girl in public housing in the district. Has just - she really is someone who knows the district really well - grew up there, has certainly given back a lot, and so - know them both, appreciate them both. And just know that in both of those races, it's gonna be really tough for the Democrat vs the Republican. So whichever way that goes through, I hope listeners continue to pay attention and engage in those 'cause it's going to take help from folks who don't live there to make sure that the Democrat does get across the finish line. 'Cause, man - lots of these - Republicans are trying extra hard to put a moderate face on themselves, whether it's the 5th District talking about their bipartisan support and they're moderate and they're socially progressive and fiscally responsible - is how they're trying to present it. Whether it's in Emily Randall's district, or in the 5th district against Lisa Callan in that area. And it's just - we've got a lot at stake on this ballot. And so I really - and it's not inconceivable that Democrats could lose the majority here. With hard work, hopefully not, but it is within the realm of possibility and Republicans are looking to move backwards a lot of policy and are saying some really alarming things on the campaign trail with every - and it's not rhetoric. They're intending to move forward with repealing all of the rights that are in danger at the national level, and really being in alignment with what's happening there. And so things could go the other direction really fast. [00:32:17] Rich Smith: It's scary. It's also - is it within the 9th Congressional District as well? [00:32:21] Crystal Fincher: Yep. I think it's split between the 8th and the 9th, actually. I need to double check that post-redistricting, which is another thing - when you talk about just the 47th district, everything about everything in that race is just nonstandard. We don't know how this district, as this is the first time that we're gonna be voting within these new boundaries - so how it actually performs. You've got an interesting composition of people who - some have been on ballots plenty of times there, some haven't, some have but have been unopposed so people don't really pay attention to it. You've got two Black Republicans who are leading and the standard bearers - they're trying to portray themselves as - one of them, Bill Boyce, sent out this mailer of him and Martin Luther King. And there's nothing Republicans love more than throwing out a Martin Luther King quote that he would've thrown back in their face. But anyway, talking about that - which was, I know a lot of Black people in the Kent community looked, gave a side eye to that one really hard. But it'll be really interesting to see. And then there's a chunk of races in Seattle that are these D vs D races that are not gonna be key to the composition of the caucus and the majority, but that may help define what the agenda is in the Legislature and what's able to pass, especially when we talk about issues like progressive revenue and some very basic things that people are trying to tick off - in the healthcare realm, in the climate action realm, whole transportation package, what that kind of would look like. And so just a variety of races across the City that people will be voting on. Make sure to get that ballot in by Tuesday, either in the drop box or in the mail - you don't have to use a stamp on the envelope. But I guess as you're looking there, I see a lot of people - there's been a lot of coverage of the 46th, which full disclosure - I am working with Melissa Taylor on. In the 36th, a crowded race. There's an open seat in the 34th which hasn't quite gotten as much attention, I don't think, as the other two races. What do you see in that race? [00:34:52] Rich Smith: In the 34th? Great sadness and because it was - they're both really good. If you're - you're talking about the Leah Griffin and the Emily Alvarado - [00:35:03] Crystal Fincher: Yes. [00:35:03] Rich Smith: Yeah - what are you, what am I, how - we were all, we talked about this for 45 minutes, an hour. Okay, so our choices in this are somebody who is - we're in a housing crisis and Emily Alvarado ran Office of Housing, is - clearly knows what she's talking about. That's exactly what she wants to do when she gets to the State Legislature, and exactly how to do it, and exactly the coalition she wants to build - Latina and is - voted for Bernie Sanders - and is also impressive candidate who knows her sh*t. Speaking of, Leah Griffin - tremendous - tremendously overcame personal tragedy and didn't just keep that to herself, but used it in part as a catalyst to make real change to help everybody, contacted everybody in the Legislature and Congress - even Patty Murray - and got some responses and helped push an idea that eventually became legislation that got slipped into the Violence Against Women Act that would increase access to more sexual assault kits. So this is a person who has done tremendous work from her couch in Seattle, as she'll say. And so yeah - the choice there is between somebody who is gonna be a strong - and she's up on the news about criminal justice and is in the intersection there between how do we - what's the best way to get fewer rapes - to stop people from rape. She's a really good person who knows the answer to that question and can push for that kind of change in the 34th. And yeah, the question facing voters is - do you want somebody who's an expert on housing and is gonna do all the right things on housing and lead there and join a housing coalition in the House, which we desperately need. Or do you want somebody who is going to lead on the intersection of criminal justice and protecting survivors in the House, which we also desperately need, which is also - it's an impossible decision. I don't - we came down, the group came down at the end on Emily because of the housing crisis, but that's how I feel about that. We were all - could have gone either way. [00:37:46] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it is - it's rough. And there's a lot of rough choices actually in Seattle - these are two great candidates. It's been tougher than prior years in some, where there were more clear choices in a lot of them. In City races, there's more differentiation between, at least among all the candidates a lot of times. And there just are some really hard choices and people across the board that - even if they don't make it through, you really, really, really hope that they continue to be involved and they step up to lead in different areas and really consider continuing to seek leadership. Because both people in this race, people in a number of races - there are some really, really exciting people who are running. You can only choose one. And so we'll see what continues to go through. And we can only choose one, we're gonna run a general election - ultimately there will be one who prevails, but yeah, it, this - I could definitely see that being a hard choice. [00:38:54] Rich Smith: If anybody wants to start some GoFundMe to help move some of these candidates around, would love somebody to move up to Shoreline and challenge Salomon, Jesse Salomon, up there - be a Senator. And could - someone could have jumped into the 46th Senate race too - would've been nice. A guy, Matt Gross, did - got a housing focus, that's great. Didn't do it for us even though - just 'cause his ideas were half baked - would've been nice to have a challenge up, a serious challenger to Javier Valdez too. Valdez is a nice guy, but there's a lot of room for improvement up there. Yeah, there was a lot of races where - would've been cool to see stronger challengers, progressive challengers. And then there were a lot of other races, and then the rest of the races were - oh, look, these people are great. Four great people running for one open seat. What are we gonna do here? So yeah, that - it was tough. [00:39:57] Crystal Fincher: Yeah - and with that, obviously, there's a ton of people who live in Seattle. And so there's going to be more people competing for what wind up being fewer positions. And you see a lot more engagement and attention being paid and candidates for those open seats. And it's - we are still contending with the disparity in resources between those in kind of safe D - Democrats are going to be elected in all of these positions. And seeing a stark difference in spending and donations for other races in the state that could go either way. And it's challenging. Again, I generally don't work with candidates. I'm working with one this year and it's a high - there are three of the top fundraisers in the state. I literally think the top three on the Democratic side non-incumbents in that race - there's a lot of money there. There doesn't need to be that much money in there, but given the composition - just like with Congress, right - especially the representatives basically have to spend all of their time fundraising. And while we desperately need more campaign finance reform, it should not take that. And a system that requires that is a broken system and you're making people make a lot of tough choices. The barrier for people being able to get in these races is challenging, 'cause you have to have enough time to devote to the fundraising and to talking to voters and the other stuff. And it's really hard to do without resources. And even if you don't have the most, you still have to have a substantial amount no matter how you look at it. So I do think there is a glaring need for some really foundational statewide campaign finance reform - also at the federal level - but Democracy Vouchers, does it solve every single problem related to everything? No. But I think it does make things more accessible, forces people to talk to more residents to get the - even if it's just in search of vouchers - hey, it's putting you in contact with more people that you have to directly deal with, which I think is always a good thing for candidates. But it's a problem, it's a challenge. And so many resources are dedicated to Seattle in the political sphere when there are so many needs for lesser-known races throughout the state. How do you see that? [00:42:39] Rich Smith: I agree. I don't know if - I don't know about Democracy Vouchers as a solution, but campaign finance reform for statewide races is great. Yeah - Melissa Taylor's raised what - $200,000 or something almost in that race - like the top, some of the top - [00:42:55] Crystal Fincher: Well, and she's the number two - [00:42:56] Rich Smith: She's the number two. [00:42:58] Crystal Fincher: - behind Lelach. And then, Nancy Connolly is also - there's a lot - now, Melissa doesn't accept corporate donations or anything, but still that's a lot of work, it's a lot of time. And not everybody has the ability to do that and that should not be a requirement of running for office. [00:43:23] Rich Smith: No. Yeah, I agree. And yeah, that's - it's as much as Stephanie Gallardo has raised against - for one House seat. Yeah, than for one US House seat, but yeah - it's crazy, it's a huge high barrier to entry, and we should do something to change it. [00:43:43] Crystal Fincher: We should. So I guess if you are - lots of resources, will link all of this in the comments of the show. As we do that - for just races across the state that may not be on people's radar, the Congressional races - is there anything that you would throw out there for people to consider that's not getting much attention right now? [00:44:05] Rich Smith: Yeah. You wanna do something over the weekend? You might try knocking doors for Emily Randall up in Kitsap - in Bremerton, Gig Harbor area - she's facing off against the Legislature's biggest brat, as Will Casey called him in a piece on the 26th Legislative District there. That's another one of those important races - Randall won by 108 votes or something last time she ran. So it's gonna be a close one. It would be great to have a pro-choice Democrat rather than a Trumpian weirdo in the Senate up there. [00:44:37] Crystal Fincher: Super Trumpian - he is one of the most extreme Republicans in the state, currently a House member running for the Senate seat to challenge her. They tried to put what they felt was one of their best, most resourced people on their side against her and she needs everybody's help. That is absolutely a race for people in Seattle to adopt and do something to help emily win. [00:45:03] Rich Smith: Yeah. If you wanna - if you're closer to the South End, you might try going down to the 30th LD - helping out Jamila Taylor with her race, figuring out what to do with, or helping Claire Wilson in her race. She'll - maybe save those for the general 'cause they'll probably get through. There's some sh*t going down in the 30th as well - is that also the one where Chris Vance is taking on Phil Fortunato - [00:45:29] Crystal Fincher: That's the 31st. [00:45:30] Rich Smith: 31st - that's right. That's just outside - [00:45:32] Crystal Fincher: So like Enumclaw, just to the east. Yep. [00:45:35] Rich Smith: Yeah, just outside. Yeah - so that's gonna be funny - I don't know, it'll be interesting. Phil Fortunato is a freak and a climate arsonist and a genuine weirdo. And I don't know if we're placing him with a centrist Republican, I guess, if Chris Vance is - will be much of an improvement, but it will be interesting to see the extent to which Trump base is being activated in these races in Washington, or whether there's some kind of independent, high Republican sh*t movement going on in the suburbs that really wants to moderate the Trumpers. So that'll be one area where I'm looking looking at that and yeah, but those would be two races that I would highly - [00:46:33] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, no, that absolutely makes sense. Thank you so much for your time today. Thank you everyone for listening - this is Friday, July 29th, 2022. Thanks for listening to Hacks & Wonks - the producer is Lisl Stadler and assistant producer is Shannon Cheng with assistance from Bryce Cannatelli. Our wonderful co-host today is the Associate Editor of The Stranger, Rich Smith. You can find Rich on Twitter at @richsssmith. You can find me on Twitter at @finchfrii. Now you can follow Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Our revamped website has access to all the shows - all of the transcripts to everything is all included, and the forums that we did in the 36th and 37th are also included there. While you're there, if you like - hop on and can leave us a review on something, please do. It helps us out. You can also just get everything and we'll include all the resources and articles we talked about today in the show notes. So thanks for talking with us today. Thanks for tuning in - we'll talk to you next time.

On this Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, Crystal is joined by former Seattle mayor and current Executive Director of America Walks, Mike McGinn. Mike starts off discussing what he looks for in candidates. Then Mike and Crystal spend time talking about the Seattle City Council putting ranked choice voting on the ballot, how that impacts the conflicting approval voting initiative, and the differences between both systems. Next, they break down reporting on how the lack of housing is actually the leading cause of homelessness, and what it will take to properly make an impact on our state's homelessness crisis. Finally, Crystal and Mike ask why elected leaders continue to politicize, ignore and defund public safety programs that have proven to be effective.   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, Mike McGinn, at @mayormcginn. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources Vote by August 2nd! Need to register to vote or update your registration? Go here: https://vote.wa.gov   “People Power Washington's 2022 Policing and Public Safety Voter Guide” https://www.wethepeoplepower.org/wa-state-legislature-2022   Available now for State Legislature primary races! https://www.wethepeoplepower.org/washington-state-legislature-candidates-2022 -------------------------- “Seattle City Council puts ranked-choice voting on the ballot” by Melissa Santos from Axios: https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2022/07/15/seattle-city-council-ranked-choice-voting-ballot    “Cause of homelessness? It's not drugs or mental illness, researchers say” by Gary Warth from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/cause-of-homelessness-its-not-drugs-or-mental-illness-researchers-say/    “Homelessness is a Housing Problem,” by Gregg Colburn & Clayton Page Aldern   “Mayor Harrell Wants to Give Cops an Extra $30,000 to Work in Seattle” by Hanna Krieg from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/news/2022/07/13/76404101/mayor-harrell-wants-to-give-cops-an-extra-30000-to-work-in-seattle    “King County Expands Public Health Approach In Response to Rising Gun Violence” by Natalie Bicknell Argerious from The Urbanist: https://www.theurbanist.org/2022/07/14/king-county-expands-public-health-approach-in-response-to-rising-gun-violence/    “Seattle Might Soon Defund a Promising Police Alternative” by Will Casey from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/news/2022/06/23/75477450/seattle-might-soon-defund-a-promising-police-alternative    Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington State through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today we are continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a cohost. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show - one of our favorites - activist, community leader, former Mayor of Seattle and Executive Director of America Walks: the popular Mike McGinn. [00:00:57] Mike McGinn: I think we need to add a little more to that intro - I think we need more, I think we need more. Glad to be here, thank you so much. [00:01:05] Crystal Fincher: Glad to have you here. This past week, we actually hosted a couple of candidate forums - one in the 37th legislative district, another in the 36th legislative district - because ballots are arriving, you should probably have your ballot, or get it tomorrow if you don't have it yet because the election on August 2nd is upon us. In one of those forums, one candidate that you had endorsed got emotional talking about your endorsement meaning a lot to them, so certainly popular with a number of people - largely, just because of the work that you have done. So appropriate that we're here talking to someone who has gone through many campaigns himself, right as we have so many people going through that same process, and everyone is receiving their ballots so they can vote. What's your take on ballots dropping? What are you looking out for? What are your thoughts? [00:02:08] Mike McGinn: Yeah, it's so I - number one, I'm appreciative and maybe I shouldn't advertise this, but when people call me and ask me about running for office, I almost always speak with them. I guess - call me before you announce is my one thing - as I tell people, there's only two times when you're pretty much guaranteed coverage in a race - when you announce you're in it and when they announce the election results. So you really wanna get out the gate well, and I think a lot of people tend to think - well, I just need to get in the race, I need to start telling my friends, and I need to start raising my money - they haven't really thought through what it is they're doing and why they're running. And that's the thing I look for the most in a candidate - is there values - and I think we have a tendency, and sometimes Democrats in particular have this tendency, to look for the policy positions and someone's depth of knowledge on policy issues. And I think that's important, but to me, the policy positions are usually important because they're gonna reveal something about the underlying values of the person - what really matters to them, what do they choose to highlight, and how do they choose to approach it? So I don't expect, particularly first-time candidates for office, to have depth of knowledge on a wide variety of issues. I think that's unrealistic, and I think you're just rewarding the facile mind or the person who reads the - the policy wonk type who reads everything all the time. I'd be looking for who's the person who really has been engaged and has put their values into action, shown where their heart lies by what they've chosen to work on and how they've chosen to work on it. And you might be able to forgive a little policy difference here or there if you feel like their heart's really in the right place, 'cause people can tell you the right thing when they're running 'cause they know what'll ring the bell, but what will happen when it gets hard? What will happen when the pressure hits? Will they stick with that, or will they move somewhere else? And so that also leads to one of my favorite questions for a candidate - tell me a time you did something hard, even if it might have been unpopular. Tell me, and what was, it? And that's another thing I look for. So it matters to me what people have chosen to work on over the years and where they come from, and that's what I tend to base my endorsements on. Are they gonna be able to do something hard when the pressure of office gets in there? 'Cause if you don't do something hard before you get elected, you're probably not gonna do it after you get elected - the pressure's too much. [00:04:48] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, you will not do it after you get elected. And we've talked about this a bit before, but absolutely that, and a lot of times people look at running as - oh, this is really hard, once I just win this election, then I can to the work of governing and - but no, it gets harder, it gets much harder. The work begins once you finish your campaign, which is a scary thought for people going through all of the ups and downs and work of - it's certainly a lot - but it does not get easier, the scrutiny and the accountability only grows from there. And so I'm similar - after all of the time that I've spent just paying attention and watching candidates up close and seeing how they operate before they run, during the campaign - translates to how they govern. 'Cause a lot of the things that you do when you're actually running for office don't translate to the job of governing and meeting the needs of your constituents. And it really is this issue that I think we're facing all over the place - how can we have Democratic majorities, Democratic governor, leadership House and Senate, Congressional majorities, yet be stuck on what we need to pass, even on things just like - hey, we need to act to codify women's right to abortion services, people's right to privacy in law - and we don't have the votes to do that in Congress. And even calling a special session here, within a Democratic majority, and so a big question is not just - Hey, are you progressive? Are you a Democrat? Do you know what the right policy is? - 'cause every single one of those people running and people we see running in the state do know the right answers, right? The answers that will make people nod their heads and agree with them and - okay, they like it. But when Congressional leadership and House leadership is saying - Hey, we're close to passing this bill, we just need - this isn't gonna fly - so-and-so member over here doesn't want this provision that is key to serving people in your community who you know need it, we just need you on the Yes vote, don't hold this up, don't be difficult, don't do that, you're not playing that kind of stuff. Are you going to say - No, this is important and I'm a No without that, or I'm going to need this in, or how do we work this in, we can continue to talk but this needs to be in and we need to figure out how to get there - where those things are not going to be compromised away. Because we've done a lot of the easy stuff - a lot of the problems that continue to get worse, like housing affordability, we're seeing rights recede, we're seeing income inequality continue to get worse. And the action needed to solve those problems, the action needed to solve homelessness, the action needed to solve to make our streets safer - that's the hard stuff. That's the stuff where there is not uniform agreement among Democrats or progressives. That's the stuff where there is not agreement from leadership in these bodies to say - okay, let's do that. That's the controversial stuff. And we need people who will stand up and say - We have compromised that away before - we've taken action on all that other stuff, it's time to move on this stuff that we know is critical to making our future better and not just perpetuating these same things. That's my feeling. [00:08:38] Mike McGinn: Well, we've got this - you're previewing an issue that we're gonna talk about - housing and homelessness - I almost wanted to jump right in there with that, but I'm also really intrigued by what has happened with, as folks may know, there was signatures collected to put approval voting on the ballot this year. Meaning a change in the system by which candidates are elected in Seattle would be put into the City Charter and apply in future elections. And the basic concept of approval voting was that in the primary you could select every candidate that you approved of. And that has a certain appeal when you have, as we do here in legislative races or City Council races coming up next year, you'll have seven or eight candidates and you don't wanna waste your vote on someone that doesn't stand a chance of winning. And so that was the appeal. And as background, there's a sizable contingent of folks who've been proponents of ranked-choice voting and who've opposed approval voting. But they have spoken to the City Council, and the City Council is now - City Council has a choice when something collects enough signatures to go on the ballot - the City Council can either just put it into law, they can send it to the ballot, or they can send it to the ballot with an alternative. And the City Council has approved an alternative, which is to use ranked-choice voting, to select your top two. So you get to select, I don't know how many ranks they're gonna put in, but you'll be able to rank the candidates in the race. And the lowest-ranked candidate - they count multiple times - so everybody goes like 1-5 for their candidates, or whatever the number is here. And once they tally the first round of votes, the lowest-ranked candidate gets knocked out and everybody who voted first for that person, you look to their second-choice votes and add them in. And you keep doing that until somebody - until in this case - until you reach top two for the primary. So in one case you just - everybody I like. In the other case, you go - here are the people I like in the order I like 'em, and that will end up picking our top two. And it's just - I'm sorry, I know I'm doing a lot of explaining here - but the other part of it that's fascinating is the way the ballot is is - Do you think we should do something different? is the first question. Should we consider an alternative? And if you say yes, then they will ask - Which one do you like? Do you like the approval voting or do you like the ranked-choice voting? So we're gonna have a great discussion here about - 'cause let me tell you something - ranked-choice voting advocates and approval voting advocates both really, really care about why their system is better than the other. So we're gonna hear a ton of that, but I think there's a fundamental question, which is - Why change what we have? Because that's the first vote. And so - [00:11:44] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, that is the first vote. [00:11:45] Mike McGinn: That's the first vote. And I don't know - I'll put my cards on the table - I'm definitely voting Yes, that let's change what we have. We can talk about why. And I don't know - I wanna hear all the arguments about which is better than the other as this debate progresses, because I do think - I personally think both would be better - that's my take. [00:12:07] Crystal Fincher: I have a different take. We talked about this a little bit before in the program - I do have a different take. We have been discussing ranked-choice voting, there's been a movement for ranked-choice voting for quite some time in our state from a lot of community advocates in a lot of areas across the state. This is something that has had support on the ground from within different communities and different counties across the state. I will tell you that I do like ranked-choice voting and if the vote were up to me, I would choose to do that. But I will also say that we've tried ranked-choice voting in Pierce County before and it didn't go very well. And not because there was a flaw with ranked-choice voting, but because we need to invest in the voter education that it takes to do that. It's one thing for very online people - people who live and breathe politics and policy who are going through and know what the ballot question is gonna look like from the Council, and we got the update on the Council decision. Most people do not have the time, or even know where to begin to look, or have the inclination to figure all that out, right? And they're dealing with elections pretty much when they see their ballot arrive in their mailbox. And there are lots of people in different situations - there are lots of people who do not have home internet access - the majority of my neighbors do not have home internet access where I live. They're looking at stuff on their phones, they're doing different things, but it's not like they're getting a lot of information online. And for people who are not plugged in online and getting all of the alerts from government - there actually isn't great outreach person-to-person, through the mailbox, people - hey, this is gonna change. And if someone gets a ballot and they don't know what to do with it, the decision that they most often make is not to vote. And that confusion is just a bad feeling for people who do want to vote. And that causes a - hey, what what do I even do with this, I don't know. And so I think ranked-choice voting is excellent. And I think that we have to make sure that there is a planned investment and strategy to make it work, to outreach to every community, to reach out to people in language, to work through community centers, to work through churches, to work through everywhere - to make sure that the community understands that this change is coming and this is how to work through it. And not just a - hey, we're gonna have some news coverage as ballots drop and that kind of thing. But months and months beforehand to do that - that is what it takes to really enfranchise people. Or else we're gonna see really low-turnout elections and a lot of frustration and a lot of pushback that reflects on the system, when really it's a reflection on the implementation. And that would be the case for either one of these initiatives, really - that's not just tied to ranked-choice voting. I think that was a lesson that we learned that would apply to any kind of change. So I personally would just implore anyone working on this to have a plan that isn't reliant on the news getting the word out, that isn't reliant on people learning online what to do - that you are going out and educating the people about the change because in order to empower the people and to enfranchise the people who are most frequently left out, that step is critical. [00:15:45] Mike McGinn: I think that's absolutely right. And a few different thoughts - one is that there is that threshold question of why change. And one of my fears in this process is that the proponents of either approach will focus on the - why is my - what's the difference? And it's natural in campaigns for - just campaigns don't like gray, they like black and white. And so the opportunity here for the proponents of one to say that the other one would in fact be an unmitigated disaster, if approved, is gonna be really strong. But that leads to a really interesting point because - what is the goal of the proponents of each? Is it to get a change, or is it to actually - or would they prefer that the voters not approve the threshold question? And I don't know, I'm not trying to - I'm not, this isn't coming from any place of knowledge, of motivations of anybody - on my part. But that could be a concern - is that the voters could say - we're just gonna vote No to the change at all. And that would put the idea of change further in the rear-view mirror, or further off in the horizon to actually get a different system in the future. I do think the advantage of both - just to go to the threshold question - is just in fields where you have five or six candidates who feel like there are gradations of difference, or maybe there's a couple in that camp and a few in that camp - the ability to say these are the people in my camp that I would be happy with. And again, under the system, you can just bullet vote approval voting - I'm just gonna vote for one, I'm not gonna vote for anyone else 'cause I don't wanna - this is the one I really want and I don't wanna help anyone else. Or you could say three or four are acceptable - I suppose in ranked-choice voting you could do the same - I'm just gonna vote for 1, 2, 3. [00:17:50] Crystal Fincher: You can choose to not rank. [00:17:50] Mike McGinn: Yeah. Or you can choose - I'm just gonna vote for one, I'm just gonna bullet vote for one 'cause I really don't wanna help anyone else. But that's less likely 'cause you probably wanna show who you're saying your choices are - yeah. And so I think that gives - I think that puts more power in the hands of the voters. It is a little discouraging that it's in August of an odd-year - so it's a small number of voters expressing their preference, as opposed to a general election or at least an even-year election where you've got a big turnout for Governor or President or Senator or Congress and the like, compared to the odd-year. [00:18:31] Crystal Fincher: Well, I think the approval voting forced that hand because I do think that, and I think lots of people and the Council made the case when they approved this yesterday - that the people, especially for the length of time that people have been advocating for ranked-choice voting here in this area, that people do deserve a choice. And we were at the point with approval voting that they may not have had a choice about the kind of change that they wanted. So hey, if we're gonna vote on a change, let's actually have a conversation about the change. And I do think that the approval voting making it on the ballot helped that. You talk about, you mentioned - what is the motivation, do people actually want the change, do people not? I think that's a multi-layered and very interesting question. And I think, as we've talked about with candidates lots of times, and I think applies here is - well, who supports it? Where is the support coming from? Who is launching these initiatives? Do they have a history in this community? Is it external? Are these big-money interests who have a history of donating to causes and you can see their alignment with you or not? I think a lot of people are questioning, I know a lot of people are questioning that with the approval voting initiative. And the question about - do we want change? I think a lot of people are questioning, given some of the really big-money interests involved, is that - are they enacting change now to prevent further change? Is really one of the big questions, saying - Hey, we see the polling about where age groups are, where the increase of renters, where increasing number of people are not just getting more progressive, they're like, okay we gotta flip this system, and we need to fundamentally transform a lot of these systems that we're seeing. That is not a negligible percentage in Seattle and it's on the precipice - they can win City Council seats. We have a Socialist winning City Council seats, we have other very strong progressives winning City Council seats, and they're getting closer and closer to being able to win Mayor once again. And so I think that everyone sees that coming, and we're seeing a national movement in the same way that they see demographic shifts happening that makes it less likely that the Republican Party would maintain control without enacting legislation that limits things that expand the numbers of people who are enfranchised to vote. I think this is similar in that we see this change coming and it's unnatural - Let's make a change and make it sound progressive and do that - that's certainly what a lot of people are talking about. [00:21:25] Mike McGinn: I hear that, I hear that - but sometimes what people think they're doing and what they're actually doing aren't the same thing. And I would think about district elections in the City of Seattle. Do you remember who brought us district elections - turned out to be, it was Faye Garneau and it was Eugene Wasserman and - [00:21:46] Crystal Fincher: Wasserman - that's right. And another Ballard - [00:21:50] Mike McGinn: Yeah, and these were - they were business-aligned people who - I knew all of them, of course, 'cause they were really active in their communities and in ways that were positive, even if I didn't agree with - [00:22:10] Crystal Fincher: Positive and negative - I agreed with them on some stuff, disagreed on others. [00:22:12] Mike McGinn: Disagreed on others, but yeah - Eugene Wasserman didn't didn't like the bike lane on Nickerson - he represented the North Seattle Industrial Association. But he did appreciate - he was trying to, he was working to protect businesses in Ballard and that was his motivation and it was a fine motivation. But I think that - the reason I bring this up and I really do appreciate that those individuals - is that they were in some degree responding to the fact that the downtown business community had so much influences compared to the local, the business districts and business people outside of downtown. And it had that effect, but it also had the effect then of reducing the influence of the Chamber of Commerce, even though they're spending tons of money still - in fact, the reason they're spending more is 'cause they have to spend more to deal with the fact that somebody can get elected in a City Council race by knocking on a lot of doors and having a better grassroots effort and it costs less money. So I think that while they were hopeful it would lead in one direction, it actually led in a somewhat different direction. So I tend to look more closely at what would happen under approval voting than what might be the motivation. And I almost regret bringing up motivation because I think it puts people in a hard spot - I think what I was trying to get at earlier was, if you're campaigning for ranked-choice voting, are you okay with nothing getting through and we'll come back with ranked-choice voting later, or do you really want to get a Yes on the first vote and get it through. And I think the same thing is true of the approval voting advocates - are you okay with getting the Yes vote on the threshold question of, Should we change?, even if it means that ranked-choice voting comes in as opposed to what you prefer. And I think that that might change how either side approaches that threshold question in the case they make. Will they be more interested in saying what's wrong with the other guy's approach or the other person's approach, as opposed to really laying the groundwork for why we need a better system and why we should be looking at the two of them? [00:24:27] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think that's interesting. I also think - and I don't know how that's gonna turn out, I think it's gonna be fascinating to see what the goal is. I do think it's telling, looking at the strategy, that certainly approval voting felt more comfortable on the primary ballot than in the general just to get it over the finish line in a lower turnout election. I do, even on that one, I do think there's - I don't think the business community is a monolith. I absolutely think there's value in not letting our mega-corporations that happen to reside here dictate policy, because that does contradict what a lot of neighborhood business associations, local business associations, what small business wants, which - there are lots of small business organizations and Seattle Chamber organizations that support the JumpStart Tax - it has a ton of help in there for small businesses. However, Amazon has a different take on it. And so those interests are not often aligned. And while looking at the amount of businesses that are facing lease increases and citing that as a reason that they're going outta business, there is an income inequality conversation in the business community that is very similar to the one in the personal community. And I do think we should talk a lot more about that, just in general, 'cause those interests are not - they're not aligned and small businesses are increasingly saying we're being harmed by the practices and impacts of big corporations and what they're doing and the effects that their practices are having within the community. That said, we'll continue to follow this - I think it is gonna be a lively conversation and I do appreciate the points that you raise about it. And it is true - sometimes people think they're doing something and it turns out a little bit differently. So it'll be interesting to see. And I think - [00:26:35] Mike McGinn: I think it's a worthwhile debate too. I think this is a good debate to be had really between the two systems and I've heard points from both sides that are worthy - everybody's worthy of taking consideration of. I have to just say - I guess I'm just, as a pure primary voter in Seattle myself, I like the idea of being able to pick more than one person in a race or rank them in a race. I just like having a little more agency in this selection process than picking one outta seven or eight candidates and hoping that I made a good, hoping I made a strategic vote as opposed to being able to vote a little more with my heart. [00:27:16] Crystal Fincher: I also like the idea of having more agency. If I could choose between nothing, approval voting, or ranked-choice voting, I would choose ranked-choice voting. You mentioned politics likes black and white, but reality is in shades of gray. And to me that's another difference between approval voting and ranked-choice voting. And it allows you to know everybody - generally people don't like everyone equally, and you might have - oh, there's a couple who I really like and a number of others that aren't there, or a situation where the person who I like does not look viable and I do actually want progressive policy to pass. And that can be a different situation. But in just a binary approval - binary voting - like, Hey one Yes - you're only voting for one person and that's it. You do have to make additional considerations to say - my vote - I may be able to get maybe not my first choice, but my second choice across the finish line - they, I think, can win. But if I vote for this other person I'm really taking away a vote from the person who can win. With ranked-choice voting, you could say - I know my first choice may not be the person who is on top of the polls right now, but this is who I prefer, this is who my heart says to vote for, they're my number one. And my number two, if they don't make it, I can at least know that my vote wasn't wasted and not going towards a candidate who could take down the moderate-industrial complex. And my interests and where that would be, it would be - I can still have a number two and I know that my vote will still count and not go towards not getting a more aligned interest across the finish line. So I like - I have a ranking, I wanna reflect that ranking. It's my thing. [00:29:23] Mike McGinn: Okay. Where to next? [00:29:25] Crystal Fincher: Well, let's talk about this article that was written this week in The Seattle Times by Gary Warth - the cause of homelessness - it's not drugs, it's not mental illnesses. Researchers say it's the lack of homes, which probably if you're listening to this podcast, probably if you've been involved in this kind of policy for a while, you're going - okay, we knew this. But if you look at the general conversation of the public and what we see on the evening news and what we see in headlines in our local papers and the recall elections for progressive district attorneys going on, there certainly is a strong narrative countering that - oh, it's addiction. It's people who are just lawless and who can't follow the norms of society. It's people who are beyond help. It's a choice that people are making. And no, not everybody who is homeless is in that situation. The one thing that everyone who is homeless lacks is a home - that's the biggest issue. It seems obvious, but there are so many things that seem obvious that unfortunately are not believed by some powerful and big-money interests who can control a lot of narratives and characterizations. And so I think the more we talk about this, the better. [00:30:52] Mike McGinn: It's a - first of all, the authors of the book just deserve a lot of credit because they really dug into the data and what the data showed them. And it's one of those things that you really dig into the data and then you get to the finish line and it then sounds obvious. But the work matters when you do this, which is that - it turns out that there's not dramatic differences in mental illness or substance abuse rates amongst different cities. So the single most explanatory factor was housing prices. Detroit has extremely low housing prices because it's lost jobs and it's been a - people have been leaving town. Now this is a place where you'd think that addiction and mental health issues would be serious, right? People are struggling, people are dealing with hard things - but they don't have the homelessness issue because whatever means of support are out there for people are sufficient for them to afford housing in a way that's not true in Seattle. We have people in Seattle who are working and can't - and are living in their car, they can't cobble something together to get shelter. And I think we also forget the way in which it works in the opposite direction. That if you don't have housing, if you don't have stability in your life - to escape for a little while into alcohol or drugs - geez, those of us with housing and with an income don't mind having a glass of wine in the evening and forgetting everything and just enjoying the moment. What must it be like for somebody who's struggling on a day-to-day basis? And so it's - I think it's just this - we do this thing as humans where when we see misfortune fall upon another, we wanna try to figure out why it's occurring to them and not to us and so we look to some type of personal behavior factor. Well, that's happening to them because of something they did. And I'll - I won't do those things and it won't happen to me. And it blinds us, I think, to the larger systemic factors that - so I grew up in the New York area, I'm a little older, and I just remember people in New York explaining why they didn't get mugged. Because they had a unique set of walking in the city skills, in terms of being alert and looking around and exuding confidence and fearlessness. It's just, they're just making stuff up, right? They're just making stuff up - it is something that could happen to them if - in certain circumstances. I think we tend to do that - attribute our good fortune to our behavior and other people's bad fortune to their behavior, and in so doing blind ourselves to the systemic factors at play. So again, real kudos to the researchers here for saying - look, we've looked at the data, multiple cities - looked at all the potential causes. And the one thing that really has a high degree of correlation is housing prices between - correlation between homelessness rates and housing prices. And it also then becomes an excuse for us to not allow more housing, right? [00:34:11] Crystal Fincher: Yeah - to not act, to do anything to fix it. [00:34:14] Mike McGinn: Right. It also enables us to say - well, we don't have to fix this, we don't have to allow an apartment building or backyard cottages or mother-in-laws. We don't have to allow, we don't really - for some people, in this case, this would be more the well-off corporations in town - we don't have to pay more for affordable housing for people who live in a nice neighborhood. There'd be like - well, this is just a problem of individual behavior and my opposition to new housing in my neighborhood has nothing to do with this. And so it's just a way to blame the victims and avoid accountability and responsibility for the systems we've built. And again, real kudos to these researchers for laying it out and I hope more people can be moved by that and have the logic of that overcome, I think, what is just our human nature. I just hope we can rise above that. [00:35:13] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and we will link this book in the show notes - it's "Homelessness is a Housing Problem" with co-authors Clayton Page Aldern and Gregg Colburn, who've done a great job. And your point about - we love making excuses for why the things that we see with our eyes that are horrible problems that should not happen are things that we don't have a responsibility to help to fix, because someone did something wrong to wind up in that position. And it really reminds me, as we talk about COVID, as we're still in this pandemic - well, you didn't do this and you didn't do that. And someone's choosing to do this and either - well, this person can just choose to do something different. I don't need to take a precaution because I'm gonna be fine and if you don't feel like you're gonna be fine, you can choose to stay home. So that's a choice that you have and we don't have to take any other action in order to fix that. Or even with sexual assault - so frequently focuses on the actions of the woman. Well, what were you wearing? Why were you even in his hotel room or around him at that time? Did you lead him on? Well, you were out on the - why did you start to do anything with them? And it has nothing to do with the person who has been sexually assaulted - so the cause of rape is rapists. It's not anything that the woman is doing. It's the person who is perpetrating that sexual assault and our focus is so often in the wrong direction. Or victims of domestic violence - well, did you make him mad? Did you - what did you do? We're always looking for what someone did to wind up in that situation to basically justify why they deserve to be there, why they are not worthy as a person of anything better. And often that then goes to tying it - so since you are an unworthy person, since we have deemed you somehow immoral or undeserving, then you need to do these menial works and jump through all these hoops to prove to us - to basically purify and cleanse yourself back into worthiness again. And then - which is how we get means testing, it's how we get all of these programs that - well, you can't be in the condition that you are now, you're gonna have to clean up and take these classes and go to church service if you are going to be worthy of a spot in housing for us. Otherwise you're just kinda stuck out on the street. So it's - we have to get beyond blaming individuals for what research repeatedly shows are systemic problems. And this is a problem with homelessness, this is a problem with public safety, this is a problem with our public safety net, and issues like that. So I just - I'm happy this came out, I'm happy this is being exposed to more people. Lots of people when they encounter this are just immediately - obviously, this is the case. Or no, it's not - these people are choosing to be blah, blah, blah, blah, all the stuff. But there are people who are just like - okay well, I see that it's wrong. And if there is something that we can do to fix it, why wouldn't we do that? It's to all of our benefits. [00:38:37] Mike McGinn: And I think one of the things that deserves to be mentioned in here too is that stable housing turns out to be an extraordinarily great treatment for people with mental health or substance addiction issues. 'Cause I think another piece of just the throwing up of the hands - what can you do with somebody who has mental health issues who doesn't want housing? What can you do with somebody who's fallen into addictive patterns? We all know how hard it can be to change that behavior for an individual, whether it's a personal experience with people closer to us. Well, stable housing does a hell of a lot to help with that and that's - the data shows that as well - that that alone, without any other supportive services, can be extremely helpful to changing somebody's trajectory and how they deal with the world. [00:39:30] Crystal Fincher: You're absolutely right. You're absolutely right. [00:39:32] Mike McGinn: And lot more cost effective than the systems we have. [00:39:35] Crystal Fincher: Well, absolutely. The city of Houston in Texas - we know that Texas is dealing with a lot and their leadership has a lot of challenges. But Houston, Texas housed 25,000 unhomed people with a Housing First policy with exactly that - they know that housing is a stabilizer, they know that if we can get people into housing, it actually increases the likelihood that they can successfully address any other co-occurring complicating issue. Getting 25,000 people off the street in Houston, Texas - you're telling me Texas can do this and Seattle can't? Washington can't? We see these examples of success all around us and we're really willing to throw up our hands and say - Ugh, it is happening elsewhere but not here, but let's enact this sweep and invest all of this money into doing that when we know these people just wind up at another park, in another encampment, and further destabilized from this. It just doesn't make any sense and these things do need solutions, but we need to stop doing things that we know don't work and start moving towards where the mountains of evidence point to success. It is possible to do this. It is possible. [00:40:57] Mike McGinn: Well, it seems to me, you've segued into our third topic here. [00:41:00] Crystal Fincher: We have definitely segued into our third topic and it is - in the realm of public safety, as we were just talking about, this week news came out that Mayor Harrell wants to give cops an extra $30,000 to work in Seattle - an article in The Stranger written by Hannah Krieg talking about further investments in trying to address the shortage of police that Seattle is saying it has and trying to do this. And in this - one, there's lots of conversation about - is this even an effective intervention for the police hiring problem? Even if it was, this is - we can't hire cops and have them on the street for at least a year. This is a solution - even if this were to work to make people safer, even if - hey, this is what we need to do - this isn't a solution until late 2023, 2024. And we have gun violence escalating, we have all sorts of crimes and people being victimized, and people rightly justifiably saying - We need action taken now to make our streets safer, to make - to keep people's property from being broken into, to keep people from being victimized. And we keep talking about things like hiring police that have nothing to do with improving public safety today. And on top of that, this is coming on the heels of news that gun violence is extremely high - there was an article this week by Natalie Bicknell Argerious in The Urbanist. And also on news that Seattle is actually defunding an alternative response to public safety that actually was working and making people safer. The JustCare We Deliver Care program resulted in a 39% reduction in 911 calls - people on the ground are seeing things improve, there's less things happening that need intervention. This - if the police department was achieving these numbers, we would get that touted in every news release in the world, right? If any program was doing this. There was something that was working and it's being defunded. Why are we defunding public safety that works? I do not understand that - to then invest more in things that don't even have a chance to work for a year at best. It just is - I don't understand why we continue to invest in this. And the people in Seattle - we've seen that poll where when asked where - public safety is on the top of people's minds. And they're saying - what do you want done about it? If you could invest your money, where would it be? They're saying in behavioral health and addiction treatment services - treating the root cause of these issues. The people understand what is really needed and they understand the deficits, but it seems like we have this administration and several of them, frankly, that are just refusing to acknowledge or respond to that. [00:44:21] Mike McGinn: I would love to see the City Council hold hearings on and bring in experts on what are the most effective ways to reduce shootings and look at this from multiple perspectives. 'Cause what you see is when shootings go up or when crime goes up, it's just the pounding the fist on the table of we need more police. And we spend so much on police and we see where we're at. Let's try, let's really try the spending on the other things. I was looking at the statistics on this - the number of young people that are showing up in emergency rooms with gunshot wounds has just skyrocketed in King County. And what happened to the youth violence prevention initiatives that were started under Greg Nickels, expanded under - during my administration. We've had a lot of reporting on the number of police officers, or 911 response times, or why the police are unhappy and disgruntled, and whose fault it is that the police feel underappreciated? Is that the fault of the public for protesting or the fault of the City Council for suggesting that things should be defunded? Just 10% of that ink was spilled on what works to reduce shootings - okay, I'll ask for 50% of the ink be spilled on that. What really works? What are the proven programs? What's not working? And putting some of that pressure on the elected officials to show progress on this. And I think that the debate of number of police officers, and again, I believe personally that you do want an officer to respond in a timely way to a crisis, but that's not the only function of policing and it's certainly not the only thing of public safety. We also see - not surprising during a pandemic where people's lives were turned upside down, where people were stuck at home - we've seen a rise in domestic violence. So what are the strategies here? What would effective interventions look like? And I don't have an answer to that off the top of my head, but I tell you - if I were in this position, whether City Council or Mayor, that's what I'd be calling people in. Not debating the size of the bonus, right? And the amount of time we've spent in hearings on this question - 'cause it plays, I get it, it plays. But really calling folks in. And I think I'm repeating myself here, but this is a great place for Mayor Harrell to call a summit across the spectrum. What will it take to do this and call in the people in the City who are on the frontlines of working with youth, working with those in distress, working with domestic violence victims - and really just let's get all of the strategies on the table and let's start putting price tags to those. Tell me the programs that you think are working, tell me the programs that you think we don't have, tell me the programs you think that are not as effective as they could be, right? Or just tell me your needs and we'll invent a program for that need. This is the time really and it's - when there's a crisis like this and it is a crisis - the number of shootings in the City is a crisis. When you have this many gunshots, when you have this many people being wounded, there's a lot of pressure on elected officials to have the answer, to come forward - I've got something for you. But the danger of that is, is if you come forward and you say - I have an answer and we're gonna do this thing - it may work in the moment with the media or with the voters - Oh okay, well he's acting on it or she's acting on it. But if it doesn't actually change the trajectory of the issue, then it's just gonna come back around and get you as an elected official a couple of years later. And that's - and will also the effect the issues of trust in government and right track/wrong track. And we already have a lack of trust in institutions - the right track/wrong track numbers nationwide are horrible, last mayoral election they were terrible in this City. I don't see anything that's turned that around. And so this is a place where if you're gonna build trust and start moving those, start moving more people - those right track/wrong track numbers to a better place - this is really - this is not the time for - I've got the answer that plays well today in the media. This is the time for - I've got an answer that's gonna work over a longer term. So, public safety summit - pull everybody in and make it real, not for the cameras, make it real, make it multiple sessions and really come out with a series of initiatives around that - would be my recommendation to the mayor. And the City Council can jumpstart that by holding in-depth hearings on these topics - topic at a time, bring in the experts, really start building the pressure for looking at this. [00:49:49] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think that's really important. And I think your point about - look, this is not for the cameras. This is not the time to score political points. You can take it completely out of the political realm. It doesn't have to be where the mayor's at versus where the council is at. We happen to have a wonderful university smack dab in the middle of Seattle - more than one. And the University of Washington is a tremendous research university with criminologists who study this, whose job it is to look at the data. And as we talk, and as Mayor Harrell talks about how important it is to examine the data about what works - public safety is broader than just policing, it's broader than just community response. It involves a lot and to have people and to always include the voice of people who are truly experts on public safety and everything that encompasses - that's not an interview with the police actually, in the same way it's not the interview with a councilmember or an interview with the mayor. That's an interview with experts in crime and what reduces crime. And experts in safety and what increases that. So why do we not see criminologists quoted more frequently in The Times or interviewed by our evening news? Why are we not seeing that happen more frequently - that to your point - we have hearings and interviews and advisory groups and summits with people who are truly experts who understand and can share what is working across the country. What is working globally? What has worked locally and what is not working? What kinds of results, what kind of investment, what kind of return are we getting financially and in terms of safety and benefit to the community? I get frustrated that we keep this conversation so small and so limited and just this tiny focus in and repeated focus, unfortunately, right now on - well hiring, just hiring and there's so much more to it than that. Even if that is an ingredient, there's so much more to it that we just are ignoring while people are dying, while people are being victimized, while there's problems getting worse. And it's time someone actually steps up - just take this out of the political realm, talk to the experts and act. [00:52:21] Mike McGinn: I would include - when I say experts, I would include the community members who are - I think this is really important. [00:52:29] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. [00:52:29] Mike McGinn: I think this is something we have to remember - that police are not the only guardians of the community. There are lots of people in communities who are acting as guardians - not in the sense of walking around with a gun and the opportunity and the monopoly on the use of force. No, in the sense of we care about the people here, we're trying to figure out how to help young people mature and get good jobs, in terms of we're trying to make sure that our neighbors are fed, that we're welcoming new immigrants into the community and helping set them on their feet and move forward. There are all of these people who really dedicated themselves to the idea that their community should be a better and stronger place. And they are - they have a lot of knowledge. They have a lot of knowledge and are experts as well in this regard. And bringing them in - and I think that's something we forget - is that public safety is a partnership between all of the guardians of the community. And when we're in this situation right now where - and this is one of the reasons why excessive use of force by police, or biased policing, or let's be really clear - or the public calling for biased policing, right? There are elements of the public that are calling for - we need to move the homeless out of downtown. Or I see somebody in my neighborhood who doesn't look like he belongs, which often means that they might be a Black person walking through a white neighborhood. All of these things where the public calls upon the police to do these things - that breaks down trust between community and police. And I think that's another piece of that - of restoring the partnership - it's why the police department needs to be different than how it is. And it's critical to success. And I think this reliance on policing as the guardians of the community is just destined to failure because it's just not how the world works. We don't - policing alone does not keep community safe. It cannot keep community safe by itself, yet that's the discussion we have when public safety comes up and we don't have a meaningful discussion about all the other elements. [00:54:55] Crystal Fincher: I completely agree. So we will continue to keep an eye on what's happening at the City. I hope the conversation does expand. I do completely agree with your call for a summit - bring in experts from within communities in Seattle, make use of the experts at the University of Washington, and get down to what actually does make people more safe. And goodness, don't defund things that we have wonderful evidence are doing the exact kinds of things that people are calling for to happen that make people more safe. And that frankly reduce the workload for SPD. We talk about a 39% reduction in 911 calls at a time when 911 calls are being cited for a reason that police, that Seattle police, are not investigating sexual assaults, they're not processing rape kits. This is a crisis. Why in the world would we defund something that is helping and making that more possible? It just seems like we are determined to run in the wrong direction to placate people's sense of retribution through punitive solutions that really are just backfiring in a way that won't be good politically. This is not the kind of record you wanna run on - what's going right now - you wanna have something that you can say - we did invest in the things that were working and it's paying off. And so it'll just be interesting to see how this conversation evolves. [00:56:35] Mike McGinn: And one of the articles you referenced at the beginning here, which is the police alternative program called We Deliver Care - that's exactly what we're talking about. These are people acting as guardians of the community, who aren't police officers but through their relationship with people who are experiencing homelessness or that are in distress - yeah, they've reduced 911 calls because they are able to deal with it through the services they directly provide. Yeah, this is - let's just put aside whether you're compassionate or not compassionate, whether you think one approach, where your ideology starts about what you think is the right thing or not. If this is delivering better results for less money, let's - maybe that'll move you, right? If this is delivering results, then let's do this. And that's I think what the We Deliver Care folks have been showing 'cause it's expensive to respond to 911 calls. It's expensive and if we can free up those officers for other work - solving crimes, getting through the backlog of cases that they need to investigate, breaking up burglary rings, breaking up theft rings - there's work that police can do that they're better suited for. And for people who are dealing with folks that are homeless - that are in distress and need help - let's get the right people for the job for that too. [00:58:08] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, July 15th, 2022. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler with assistant producers Shannon Cheng and Bryce Cannatelli. Today, we are thankful that our cohost Mike McGinn, who is an activist community leader, former mayor of Seattle and current Director of America Walks - you should totally follow America Walks, great work happening - he's here. We're thankful that he was here with us today. You can find Mike on Twitter @mayormcginn. You can find me on Twitter @finchfrii, and now you can follow Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever podcasts are - we are there. Just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar, be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of our midweek show and our Friday almost-live shows delivered to your podcast feed. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

On today's week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Executive Director of The Urbanist, Doug Trumm. They start by looking at research that shows Seattle is continuing to grow faster than the suburbs around it. Next, they discuss the future of a Tukwila ballot initiative to raise the city's minimum wage. In policing news, Crystal and Doug examine the troubling future of funding for non-police public safety and crime prevention programs in Seattle, and how despite the documented success of those programs, the city seems to dismiss their impact. After that, Doug explains what the city's Comprehensive Plan is, covers why it's important, and breaks down the various proposals for the plan. Finally, they end the show discussing the State Rep. Position 1 race in Seattle's 46th LD and how it reflects current debates we're having across the state.  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, Doug Trumm, at @dmtrumm. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources “Outpacing Suburbs, Seattle Grows 20,100 in One Year in Latest Population Estimate” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist: https://www.theurbanist.org/2022/06/30/outpacing-suburbs-seattle-grows-20100-in-one-year/  “Initiative for higher minimum wage in Tukwila qualifies for November ballot” by Daniel Beekman from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/initiative-for-higher-minimum-wage-in-tukwila-qualifies-for-november-ballot/    Raise the Wage Tukwila: ​​https://www.raisethewagetukwila.org/   “Seattle Might Soon Defund a Promising Police Alternative” by Will Casey from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/news/2022/06/23/75477450/seattle-might-soon-defund-a-promising-police-alternative    “When Will Seattle Get Police Alternatives?” by Will Casey from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/news/2022/06/28/75720496/when-will-seattle-get-police-alternatives   “Seattle Reveals Rezoning Concepts and Invites Scoping Comments for Big 2024 Update” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist: https://www.theurbanist.org/2022/06/23/seattle-reveals-rezoning-concepts-and-invites-scoping-comments-for-big-2024-update/    “Far-Right Freaks Could Force Washington to Act Fast to Protect Abortion” by Will Casey from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/news/2022/06/30/75818300/far-right-freaks-could-force-washington-to-act-fast-to-protect-abortion    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 our 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 on the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a cohost. Welcome back to the program today's co-host, Executive Director of The Urbanist, Doug Trumm. [00:00:49] Doug Trumm: Hi Crystal. Thanks for having me - I'm really excited - there's so much happening right now to talk about. [00:00:53] Crystal Fincher: I know - we've got a full slate of things to talk about. Starting from the top is news that you covered in The Urbanist this week - in that Seattle's growing a lot faster than its suburbs once again. What's going on here? [00:01:10] Doug Trumm: Yeah, the Office of Financial Management at the State released their April estimates and Seattle was up a little over 20,000 residents, which was by far and away the biggest gain across the state. All of King County was up about 30,000. So Seattle is again back to taking the lion's share of the county's growth and was also growing faster than Pierce and Snohomish County, so it just dispels that notion that Seattle is in decline, or is dying, or that the suburbs are certainly the place to be. [00:01:47] Crystal Fincher: That's always so interesting - we've talked about that narrative a lot on this program and candidates who've run talking about "Seattle is Dying" - that whole thing - have never caught on. They've usually topped out at about 15% of the vote in Seattle elections, but there's been a lot of effort put into that narrative and one of the things about a narrative - if someone can walk outside and see that that's not the case, it doesn't quite gain the traction that people would hope. So people in Seattle basically have mocked that the entire time. However, that narrative has caught hold in the suburbs for people who actually don't live in Seattle, visit Seattle, know many people in Seattle - they just take that on faith - it's what they see, have seen on TV, or have heard people mention, or as they're browsing Facebook with all the other stuff on there. They see that and - oh, it's a chaos city, it's burning to the ground, my goodness. And couldn't be further from the truth. Obviously people there keep saying that, and the numbers of people attracted to the City continue to steadily grow. It's just one of those really interesting things where there is a very intentional political narrative that's laughable inside the City, but because it's just been so pervasive and the people have been persistent talking about it, it takes hold outside of it. [00:03:21] Doug Trumm: Yeah, and sometimes the narrative can be destiny, but that doesn't seem to be the case here, where you'd think this produced narrative of Seattle just being chaotic would eventually lead to people moving to the suburbs. But that's not in the numbers - Bellevue posted like 1,300 population gain compared to Seattle's 20,000. And there are a couple standouts, like Shoreline and Redmond are growing at a relatively fast rate, but most of the suburbs are just growing very slowly. So all this talk of people wanting to ride out the pandemic out in bucolic setting or in a suburb is maybe starting to reverse, and I think some of the numbers obviously is also reflecting the fact that students are back on campus. So places like Bellingham saw a big jump as well. [00:04:11] Crystal Fincher: Also another - exciting news this week - the initiative for a higher minimum wage in Tukwila, Raise the Wage Tukwila, qualified for the November ballot. This is really exciting. Have you been following this? [00:04:25] Doug Trumm: Yeah, this has been really cool - Southcenter being in Tukwila - that's a lot of jobs, it's huge job center for south King County - and they qualified with a really healthy cushion. So it looks pretty certain that that's going on the ballot and, I think, in our state, once something like that is on the ballot, usually it passes. So hopeful sign, hopefully good - will be a solid raise for workers if it passes and with the mall being the driving employment center in the area, there are a lot low-wage workers. [00:05:01] Crystal Fincher: Lot of retail, lots of service - yeah, definitely a lot of lower wage workers. And one of the issues there is surrounding cities have raised their wage - starting with SeaTac, which was the first in the country to go for a $15 minimum wage. And other surrounding cities have also raised the minimum wage. And one of the biggest, as you talk about, job centers in that entire area has been left behind. So even though Tukwila has to adhere to the state's minimum wage, which is currently $14.49/hour, they're comparing with minimum wage at $17.54/hour in SeaTac, Seattle is $17.27/hour for most workers. So just the geography is the differentiation here, and especially with the higher percentage of those low-wage workers, this is really meaningful. These initiatives have won, but they've won with a lot of work in the campaign and door-knocking and calls with neighbors. So this is one where it's absolutely winnable, but it's gonna take people getting involved, volunteering - this has largely been a volunteer effort - the Transit Riders Union has been a big part of this and in conjunction with people, business owners, community leaders from within Tukwila. So very exciting, but definitely a point to get engaged in this issue - if this is something that's interesting to you, we are linking the information in our episode notes. This was also covered this week by Daniel Beekman in The Times - just always exciting to see a community-led effort successfully gather enough signatures to get on the ballot. So very, very good - congratulations for the qualification and looking forward to seeing how that initiative proceeds throughout this campaign. [00:07:02] Doug Trumm: Yeah, great work to Transit Riders Union - I'm a member over there, but the leadership team there is just really great - Katie Wilson and all the organizers over there. [00:07:10] Crystal Fincher: Really, really great. In less great news, I would say, Will Casey from The Stranger, who's been writing some great articles for The Stranger, wrote this week that Seattle might - the defund and movement in Seattle is going along just fine, except it's not the one that everybody keeps trying to complain about. It looks like the City might actually be defunding a really promising alternative response to armed police. What's the deal here? [00:07:43] Doug Trumm: Yeah, this one's a head scratcher to me - just having tried to cover police as well for the past few years - whenever you're talking about police alternatives, everyone brings up JustCARE - it's almost like a rule. So you would think with everyone name-dropping JustCARE, that they would be ready to fund JustCARE. But it doesn't really seem like that's necessarily the case. And then, the successful program that JustCARE has helped stand up - that offers a police alternative so that when some of these motels and hotels that have been converted to serve homeless folks if there's an incident - canceling this program would just force more calls to the police, more emergency room visits, more things that are really expensive. If we're looking at brass tacks to the City - so if you do a broader accounting, and a lot of folks who do this kind of work say, you really should be looking holistically at this - you're gonna save this $10 million maybe initially, but you're going to end up paying for it through other ways. So it just seems like someone's - we just have to figure out a way to keep these police alternatives going because $10 million for this program could really go a long way - and the budget is very large for the City and Seattle Police Department's spending far more than that. So if we're serious about funding public safety, I think this is one place to really invest. [00:09:12] Crystal Fincher: Completely agree. And if we're serious about public safety, we start by acknowledging that public safety is bigger than policing. With - crime has increased - there are things that are happening in our community that are scary, that are worrisome - the rates of gun violence. Just the things that we're hearing about gun violence, assault and there are some crazy things going on. And if we are actually serious about solving that problem and reducing crime, we can't just focus on the responses after crimes have been committed, the response after people have been victimized. The most powerful way to keep people safe is to keep them from being victimized in the first place - certainly I've talked about this before, we've talked about - lots of people have talked about this before. And we talk about alternatives to policing or really just - hey, we're working on preventing problems and victimization and intervening in things before it gets to the point where it's hurting anyone else. So JustCARE and a local public safety firm called We Deliver Care has been protecting outreach workers who serve people experiencing homelessness - so as they're doing outreach, they're also involved in that. They've been providing de-escalation services for people in crisis, and they've been doing it without the involvement of a uniformed cop. And this is what so many people are talking about - hey, police don't have the tools to, and were never intended to be people who respond to someone in crisis - mental health crisis - and are actually able to do something about that crisis and get that person into a situation where they need help. JustCARE and We Deliver Care are doing that. And we had a conversation with Senior Deputy Mayor Monisha Harrell on this program where they talked about - hey, we're doing a review and analysis of our partner organizations who are doing alternative responses. And we just wanna make sure that they're effective, we wanna make sure that we're getting the results of the money that we're investing. I did make the comment that - I would love to use that kind of analysis across the board, including with the police department and all of our public safety stuff. But the University of Washington actually conducted a study of JustCARE that included findings about the work that We Deliver Care does - their analysis showed a 39% reduction in 911 calls in the neighborhoods where they operate, a 12% reduction in 911 calls from the hotels where the programs provide shelter. The police department would be celebrating and calling a press conference, I'm sure Mayor Harrell would be celebrating and praising these numbers. So one, this is absolutely a success. If there was a small pilot program - that where they are operating, they're getting these kinds of concerns - a nearly 40% reduction in 911 calls where they are, meaningful reductions in crime and people being victimized and people being worried and anxious and concerned, and unsafe being able to handle crisis situations. This is what we need. This is keeping people safe. We have data showing this is keeping people safe, and this is gonna wind up on the chopping block, while we're increasing funding in other areas that certainly are not getting these kinds of results. It's just, it's really confusing. And it just seems if you're making this move, are you actually serious about keeping people safe, or are you invested in a particular method of, or a strategy - that maybe there's investment or a payoff in continuing that strategy, but it's not anything related to actual public safety. Just really confusing. [00:13:14] Doug Trumm: Yeah, and are we only going to put our data on public safety through the prism of SPD? Because it doesn't seem like they're really, truly open to looking at these alternatives. [00:13:26] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I know they're talking about establishing a Department of Public Safety - certainly did seem like some of the defunding effort of these community prevention and intervention programs may - that funding may disappear in order to stand up this Department of Public Safety. But whether internally or externally, it seems like the point is - do what it takes to keep people safe, do what it takes to make people safer, do what it takes to reduce the calls we - they keep talking about cops are overloaded and not able to respond to 911 calls - well, what would a 40% reduction in them do? This is what this program is accomplishing - seems like that might right-size things according to their calculations and help balance things, so maybe they could stop ignoring sexual assaults and actually start investigating them again. Just it is - this seems to fly in the face of everything that the public is demanding, everything that they say that they are standing for, and it's just not coming. How do you stop a program that's getting those kinds of results, and then move the money to somewhere that is not? Either we care about keeping people safe or we don't. People are scared and anxious and they want solutions - hiring more police officers is not even something that will - those police officers won't land on the ground until later this year, or next year - that's not a plan for keeping people safe today, and people are demanding a plan to make their streets safer right now. I just don't understand what they're doing. [00:15:02] Doug Trumm: Yeah, and one thing I'll say really quickly is - as a policy nerd, one really cool thing about the program design is the fact that We Deliver Care is hiring largely from folks who are formerly incarcerated or formerly homeless - you're creating a virtuous cycle there where people get meaningful and gainful employment and it interrupts that cycle of poverty. So it just seems like a really, just a really solid program that we shouldn't be pulling the plug on so abruptly. [00:15:30] Crystal Fincher: That's a really good point - and really those are subject matter experts. Few people are better poised to be able to understand, connect with, and really help - with appropriate and meaningful help, and not something that people who've never been in that situation feel is best for that community or that group of people - but people who have been through it, who understand a lot of the challenges and ways that other folks don't. And so they can be more effective a lot of times in identifying and connecting people to help. I hope we see an increase and a further investment in that program and not a decreased one. And if you feel the same, it would certainly be very, very good to talk to your City Council people and to let, most of all, Mayor Harrell and his office know that we want to be investing in things that work and not defunding them. Also this week, scoping for the Comp Plan update is underway - you've been covering this in The Urbanist - what's going on? [00:16:38] Doug Trumm: Oh, so much - a lot of different advocates and organizations are really spinning their wheels right now trying to get geared up for this, because it's a month long - currently announced as a month-long - scoping period to determine what are the options, what's on the menu for our big Comprehensive Plan update in 2024, which is - [00:17:02] Crystal Fincher: I'm gonna jump in and pause right here, just to ask you - a lot of people are not familiar with - okay, Comprehensive Plan? What's its purpose? Why does comprehensive planning happen and what does it accomplish? [00:17:14] Doug Trumm: Yeah, the Comprehensive Plan - it's both kind of opaque and esoteric, but also it's sort of like the Super Bowl of planning. And you certainly can do things between the major Comp Plan updates, but this is when the big zoning changes, the big land use changes, and also the big changes in the related plans - like the Transportation plans and even Parks plans, everything - they try to line everything and get everything, hopefully in harmony, more or less. And there's a lot of debate about - that's really the case - but this happens. Now with the recent reform at the state level, every 10 years - you have to do a major update to your Comp Plan. And every 5 years, there's a minor update. Now if you really get a fire under someone, you can do major zoning changes in between them - and sometimes it's like a station area plan - if you're getting a new bus rapid transit or a new light rail station. So you can do stuff in between, but it's rare and you have to have the staff time to dedicate to it. So really there's a lot of pressure on this 2024 Comp Plan update to be ambitious, to really try to do as much as we can because worst case scenario, we're not gonna get another opportunity to do something really big until the next major update, which is a full decade later. And this has really gotten the attention of climate advocates, which we would include us at The Urbanist as those, that - okay, well, the IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is saying, okay, we need to do a lot of concerted climate action now because if you don't do anything by 2030, our options just get considerably less. If we're not lowering emissions immediately, our pathways just get worse and worse. So land use is the forgotten aspect of climate change for many policy makers, 'cause it's a hard thing to deal with, but it really is crucial to actually decarbonizing our economy and our society. So not to put a ton of pressure on this, but it is a huge moment and a good chance to do climate action through land use, and also through - to connect the Transportation Plan. [00:19:42] Crystal Fincher: So as they're talking about this plan, they're looking at some different - conceptual alternatives. They've laid out some - and some look more promising than others - what's on the lineup? [00:19:55] Doug Trumm: So, there's five alternatives currently. And one of them by default is no change alternative - they use as a baseline. So that's Alternative 1. Then there's also an alternative, that is called the focus alternative. I think that's alternative to - apologies if I get this order a little bit off - and the focus alternative uses the concept of urban nodes, so it's sort of like urban villages, but they'd be adding these nodes in between urban villages and other business districts, or existing grandfathered-in areas of multi-family and some commercial. And they'd be adding these sort of urban village-esque aspects - and urban village is just the City's term of art for - it's an urban neighborhood, but because it's Seattle, we have to throw in village to make it feel a little neighborhoody and quaint. But it's basically continued the urban village idea and then, I guess, the implication then is we wouldn't be doing a lot outside of those nodes. So it'd sort of be a truce on single-family zoning outside of those. [00:21:03] Crystal Fincher: So basically any growth will be happening in these concentrated areas, any absorption of density, increase of density is limited to these new nodes. But most areas outside of that are still going to be high-cost detached homes. [00:21:20] Doug Trumm: Exactly, and I think you would basically be going along roughly the same in the existing urban villages, potentially with some expansions, which would be nice in some areas where some of the urban villages are very skinny and gerrymandered. And then there's Alternative 3, which is sort of the opposite approach - which is taking these Neighborhood Residentials, which the city's calling single-family zones now - it's taking these Neighborhood Residential zones and it's adding some missing middle types. And so far the types that OPCD, the Office of Planning and Community Development - it's the City agency tasked with this plan - so far, the types that they're listing are triplexes and fourplexes and that type of - it's on the low end. And so one thing advocates can do, who are looking for more than that - in the State bill, they contemplate sixplexes - is asking for sixplexes, maybe rowhouses, stack flats - more of those denser but still missing middle types that fit it very well into single-family neighborhoods or Neighborhood Residential, if you will. And so that's Alternative 3 - it's looking primarily outside of the urban villages, not necessarily only focus - it would be broad sections of single-family zoning, or you could just redefine single-family zoning to be that fourplex or sixplex zoning, or something like that. Because this is a scoping phase, none of that's really decided - it's just setting the menu, like how much would OPCD actually study - because what they actually put into the draft is what we then can actually order. You can't order something that hasn't had some of that underlying work, like the environmental impact analysis, because then you get sued and you'll lose. And you will get sued probably anyways. But we can move on to Alternative 4 now, which is called - I think a corridor approach, or transit corridors, I forget their shorthand name - but it would do more just along transit corridors and they didn't exactly say how wide of a band. So that would be one thing to give feedback on is - if we were to only focus on transit corridors and there's some arguments against that, which we could get into later, but that would be where you focus zoning change. Are we going a quarter mile from the stops, are we going a half mile, are we going only less than that? And if you're going only in a very narrow band, that's when those criticisms really creep in - because many of our transit quarters in this City are along busy, polluted, congested arterials, where you're not really gonna want your kid to be playing outside, you're not really gonna necessarily be breathing that air if you face out into that street. So, I think one concept that advocates are really bringing into this study is we need to be putting housing where people wanna live and it can't only be in the space leftover that single-family homeowners don't want. It also has to be places that are livable. [00:24:49] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it has to be everywhere - otherwise we're just redlining by another name, really. It's really interesting - and this is, this is wonky, totally wonky - but as a former planning commissioner myself, it really is the skeleton of a community. This is the thing that the determines the composition of how the community can grow, can evolve, can look, who's going to be there, who's not going to be there, who we're gonna include, how we can be responsive and resilient against climate change. It's - everything about how a city develops is really dictated by this footprint that's established that says - this is what is allowed here, this is what can go here, this is what we wanna encourage in these areas and what we don't, this is what is included and straight up outlawed. This is how we're going to enable this community to become walkable - that this can build that 15-minute city where everything is within walking distance - everyone's basic needs. So this is basically determining what Seattle's gonna look like in - 20 years from now - is based on the decisions that we make today. And if you think about what Seattle - I'm old, so I remember what Seattle was like 20 years ago - maybe people listening here may have moved here, maybe a lot younger, but it looks a lot different now than it did 20 years ago. And the planning process is what basically started the ball rolling on all of this. So if we think about the conversations that we're having today and what we're looking at in the City right now and saying - this is what we like and this is what we don't like, and this is what we wanna see, or don't see - then engage in this process because this is what will determine Seattle in 2042, and the Seattle that our kids and grandkids live in, or not able to live in - the decisions now determine that. [00:27:06] Doug Trumm: And it has a big impact on affordability and what housing options and prices are out there. And we did save the best of the bunch proposed so far for last - the concept, Alternative 5 is the combined approach. So basically it sounds like you would stack those three approaches, just described, on top of each other - which makes sense, because like you said, some of these Neighborhood Residential zones - they're attractive places to live, but good luck if you don't have a million dollars sitting around. So it would add more housing options there, which helps folks age in place, while also still doing that stuff around the nodes and around the transit corridors - to focus even more potentially multi-family development or just more options in those areas where they're well served by services and transit. So, of the ones proposed, 5 looks promising, it looks like it would be a huge upgrade. And there's also some talk of there being an Alternative 6 that advocates are - do we need an alternative that sort of even goes beyond the concepts proposed so far? And I haven't seen exactly what Alternative 6 would be, but obviously if it's something even better, then that's definitely something worthy of discussion. [00:28:28] Crystal Fincher: Well, we will keep an eye on that - certainly we hope you will keep an eye on that and engage, and at least conceptually make your voice known that - I think my perspective, a lot of people's perspective is - yeah, we don't want to constrain where people have the choice to live. People should be able to live in desirable, healthy, attractive, enticing neighborhoods. And we shouldn't reserve that for the most wealthy residents who can buy into them - those should be accessible to all of us. Another thing this week, I guess leading into that, it is lots of conversations about the City we wanna see - as we were just talking about - and a race in Seattle for the Legislature that really is talking a lot about the kind of Seattle we wanna see. And that's the one between Gerry Pollet and Hadeel Jeanne in the 46th legislative district. What have you seen in this race? [00:29:29] Doug Trumm: Yeah, this has been a really interesting race - so far this year, there haven't - well, and the deadlines passed, so we see what the field is - there haven't been a lot of progressive challenges of incumbents, like we saw two years ago with a lot of incumbents having to defend the record, which is I think a healthy thing for democracy rather than people just going unopposed for decades at a time. But the exception to this is this Gerry Pollet race where he's been there a good amount of time - he's also has a very important chair, which he's Chair of the House Government Committee - Local Government Committee - which is where many of these zoning bills have to go through. And he disputes this sometimes, but I think the record speaks for itself - we just haven't been able to get a zoning bill through his committee and he always has massive changes to bills, it seems like - rewriting bills like he did to Jessica Bateman's bill which was the big missing middle reform that we've covered in previous shows, I'm sure, and on The Urbanist. That was going to have that fourplex zoning, potentially sixplex zoning in an earlier draft, before - relatedly - Gerry Pollet voted to amend that. So in other words, he's been an obstacle to that kind of reform. And he represents, now, North Seattle - he used to have Lake Forest Park and kinda more in farther north. But now it's just North Seattle and Northeast Seattle. And I think he's a bit outta step with his district because these are places where people are really concerned about housing affordability, where the idea of a fourplex isn't that scary necessarily - and it's something that he hasn't furthered in his time as a legislator. So he's getting a challenge from someone who's specifically saying - this is a reason why I'm running. We got a chance to interview Hadeel and she's clearly passionate about this issue, she clearly knows a lot about this issue, she's clearly approaching this race from a - much more of a sense of urgency around both climate and housing affordability, and not just doing the things the way we've always done 'em. The Urbanist's Election Committee is still yet to vote and issue its endorsements, but I would say that it's looking promising for Hadeel and that's just a testament to someone having the bravery and the gumption to run against a long-time incumbent with sort of this institutional backing. [00:32:12] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it really is gonna be interesting to continue to follow these races. I am working in a 46th legislative district race with Melissa Taylor - that's the only candidate race I'm working on, but that does make it really interesting to watch what's happening in these other seats in Seattle and beyond. And housing affordability, which this conversation is directly tied to, is a huge concern in the district. The stories that I hear from the doors from Melissa, who's out there every day, are harrowing. So many people are struggling in so many different ways - even people who - you drive down to see - North Seattle street, right? You see the homes now - the average home price, it's pretty high in Seattle - and people may look comfortable from the outside, but a lot of them are struggling. A lot of people have had to bring in roommates and extra people to live in their homes. Some of them can't fit any more people in and are at the point where if rent goes any higher, if mortgages go any higher, if costs go any higher, they're not going to be able to stay in their home and stay in Seattle. There's so many people dealing with this - even in single-family neighborhoods - where they're saying something has got to give, we're being squeezed to the point where we have nothing left to give - and it's really displacing people from neighborhoods. This is a conversation about who do we want to be able to live in neighborhoods - do we want these neighborhoods to be exclusive places where no one ever is able to move in again, unless you are effectively making half a million dollars a year or more? Or places where young families starting out, people graduating from college, the kids of the people in these homes - are they going to be able to move into this neighborhood and build the kind of life that other people have seen, or not? So it's just really interesting to see the different levels of urgency, as you just talked about, 'cause some people are - we're at this point with a number of things - you talked about with climate, the IPCC report saying - look, we get this right and we start making meaningful, tangible progress by 2030, or we're in for a world of pain and consequences. And we get this housing thing right, and this comprehensive planning process right now, or we're in for a Seattle that just does not reflect anything that we've seen before and that's really a playground for the rich, a very exclusive place. The only accessible places are ones that come with harm attached - with pollution and a lot of the consequences of poorly managed growth. And it's just - this is a time where the urgency is now - we need people to act and not continue to kick the can down the road. [00:35:15] Doug Trumm: Yeah, exactly. And it really speaks to - there's so many legislators who are homeowners and who - many of them are wealthy, and there are not many tenants. And Hadeel would be someone who's bringing a younger tenant perspective to the Legislature at a time when it's really needed. And you would think that legislators who have had that luck - to have bought into the housing market, now have a home that's worth over a million dollars, like Representative Pollet - you would think they would have some sort of empathy or sympathy for folks who are not buying in at the opportune time, who are buying in when the prices of admission is a million dollars. You'd think that they would policy make to try to correct that problem, but it doesn't appear there's that sense of duty or urgency there. [00:36:10] Crystal Fincher: Yeah - different experiences, different things - and when you look at polling, it's really interesting. And one of the things a lot of people have talked about - yeah, young people are feeling different, and younger people are - they have different voting patterns. But "young" is doing really heavy lifting in that sentence because when you look, the dividing line is 45 or 50 years old. This is not young as in college. This is young as in not senior. Everybody is being squeezed and that line keeps on moving up and up and up, which is why we are seeing different people being elected, different challengers gaining strength and momentum, different kinds of policies that weren't in mainstream conversation even five years ago now moving with urgency. 'Cause when you talk about just the community under 50 - that's parents, that's grandparents, that's a whole big swath of people who are feeling this pain and who understand that we can't continue the way we're going, that we're going to have to substantially change something if we want these results that we're seeing to change. Another thing I wanted to talk about this week was another article from Will Casey. And it was about - hey, given these continuing Supreme Court decisions - first and foremost, the Dobbs decision overturning the right to abortion from Roe vs Wade - hey, is anyone gonna call for a special session in Washington to address this? What's in this article? [00:38:02] Doug Trumm: Yeah, that - Will Casey made a really good point there. We've had special sessions for a lot less. The most recent example is, that comes to mind, is the 2013 special session to make a special tax break for Boeing - that was hoping to keep, entice them to keep their jobs in Washington State. And they ended up still moving their corporate campus to Chicago and they've moved also some of their production to the South and other locations in the country. So, we did it for that. But we're not doing it for fundamental rights that speak to the - both the physical and economic security of our population and people who really are scared right now because the Supreme Court really upended what we thought was sort of settled. And obviously we saw this coming for many years, and even if Democratic establishment sort of buried their head in the sand about this. But yeah, it seems like we could call a special session about this. There's a ton of Supreme Court mischief right now of overturning precedents and there are laws that we could pass to lessen the risk there. And really just - it's also important to remind people that maybe if not the federal level of government, but the state and local levels of government can still work how they should. It's a lot harder without the federal government, but I think at a certain point, you also just have to restore faith in our system. [00:39:43] Crystal Fincher: That's such a great point and it's absolutely true. Lots of people are, myself included, frustrated by federal government, which is why I have a podcast talking about state and local government 'cause I do think we need to talk about that more and so much is possible, still, at these levels. But it's such a challenge when talking about this - so there is - Democratic leadership is all saying that we do need to pass legislation. And they're saying we need to carefully craft this legislation, we're working on it, we'll have it ready for when the January session starts. The risk to that is we have an election before the January session and people are working hard, but it's possible that Democrats lose seats this Legislative Session - to the point where it's possible to lose a chamber in our State Legislature. There are many competitive races here in our state in battleground districts, so it is not a given that we walk into 2023 with the same composition in our Legislature that - and given the current composition, they should be able to pass legislation that does codify abortion protections. I should note we should absolutely be going beyond that because we know that they're going to be attacking contraception, marriage equality, basic privacy rights - we know that's on deck, so we shouldn't wait for that either and that should be ready. But it's possible that we lose the seats necessary to pass this before that time. Hopefully that doesn't happen, but there's a chance of it. And the one thing that we should never do with basic human rights is leave them up to chance. As you said, we called a special session for Boeing. We've called special sessions for transportation packages. We can do that with such basic, fundamental, necessary protections for Roe - protections for abortion access and the others, as we should say. I will tell you - so what is not talked about upfront - the problem is when you call a special session, it basically forces people to stop campaigning. We cannot campaign while a session, or fundraise, while a session is happening. So leading up to a session, during the session - you basically have to suspend campaigning activity, you have to suspend fundraising - which unfortunately is a necessary part of winning campaigns in our existing political system - would love to change that, but that's part of the existing system. And so, I'm sure there's calculations going - my goodness, we've got these more competitive races than we've seen in quite some time. We do have - we're fighting to defend seats on the Democratic and progressive side, with vigorous challenges by Republicans in several of them. The last thing that people wanna do is to take some time off the campaign trail to do this. We can do it in January. And my response to that would be - one, it's the right thing to do and you don't leave rights up to chance. So one - morally, ethically, logically, it's the right thing to do. We can do it now, you do it now. You might not be able to do it later, so you do it now. On top of that, there's an opportunity to, as you said, show the State that one, government can work as it's intended. The majority of people in this state, as we've covered in polling and talked about over and over again - want, believe in, are passionate about these protections. You have the opportunity to have all eyes on you as you take action and deliver the protections that people in this state are currently protesting in the streets for. You have the opportunity to have a ton of earned media show that you're responding to the needs of the state. And only one party is willing to do that - you have the media shining a light on who truly is pro-woman, pro-family - pro-life in terms of being able to live, have opportunity, have rights and not be subjugated or treated like a second-class citizen. That's the opportunity ahead of us. And then you can roll after talking about - yeah, we just did take extra steps and take the action necessary to make sure you are protected. You can run on that. People will see that, people believe in that, they're asking for that. This is a humongous opportunity for the Democratic party to demonstrate, in the most clear and present way, that they are serving and protecting the interests of the residents in the state right now. So I think there's absolutely a case for doing it - I understand that it's not the best thing, but I truly believe that if they were to do that - coming off the other end, they would have a lot of thankful, happy people who are ready to roll in to 2022, to continue to defend the threats that are being brought about by this extremist, far-right Supreme Court, the extremist Republican Party that's looking to gain seats in our federal legislature. The pressing need to defend against Republicans is not going away, so let's not leave any rights at risk and let's put ourselves in the best position to be able to continue defending and then moving forward to pass policies that we know people in the state want. [00:45:24] Doug Trumm: Yeah, I couldn't agree with you more. And it goes to that fundamental critique of our politics, especially as the Democratic establishment party politics, where - issue polling, you can't be scared of your own shadow. You have to design the situation that you want to see, both as a policymaker and as a campaigner. If they're looking at polling and saying - oh no, maybe this won't be that popular in this swing seat or something like that. At a certain point, I think you have to just - A) take a moral stand, like you were saying. But also, have a little faith that people can change their mind, that you can campaign on something and change people's minds, that maybe this poll isn't really reflecting what would be salient in a race or that we'll see - oh, the Democrats took concerted action and that will have, and passed something and did something brave - that might have a bigger impact than whatever they fear for blowback by not apparently calling this sooner and just go charging ahead with this. Because I think people really need a shot in the arm - just this, I think people are a little dejected right now, and they have a right to be, because we've seen this organized, concerted campaign from conservatives for decades to take over the court system and undo all this legislative work. And in the meantime, we didn't even codify it at the federal level. And now we have a chance to codify at the state level - and eventually, you have to treat this like it truly is - which is an all problem, and conservatives are coming for many of these basic rights. And they're coming for the climate, as we saw with the recent decision announced, I think yesterday, with the Clean Power law. This Supreme Court is on the march, it's corrupt, it has no regard for precedent and they make up their own. And if we're not all hands on deck right now, when are we going to be? [00:47:39] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely - that's a question a number of people are asking. This is not a drill, we are here and it's time to act. We have to, we may not get this chance to act later on in the future, so now is the time. With that, thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks this Friday, July 1st, 2022. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler with assistant producer Shannon Cheng, with assistance from Bryce Cannatelli. And our wonderful co-host today was Executive Director of The Urbanist, Doug Trumm. You can find Doug on Twitter @dmtrumm, that's two M's at the end. You can find me on Twitter @finchfrii. 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 us 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 soon.

On today's week-in-review, Crystal is joined by staff writer covering Law and Justice at The Stranger, Will Casey. After another difficult news week across the nation and locally, Crystal and Will wade through the latest controversies facing Washington's police departments. They break down the revelation that SPD has not been investigating adult sexual assault cases, and why this is more of an issue of priorities rather than staffing. They also question Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell's accountability for the actions of the department, which he leads. Next they look into Pierce County Council candidate Josh Harris's shooting of a man Harris alleges stole from him and ask why Auburn's police department put the image of an officer accused of multiple murders on their recruitment banner. For housing news, Crystal and Will question the usefulness of Bruce Harrell's new Homelessness Data Dashboard and ask why landlords are enraged over the Seattle City Council's proposal to ask them to report the rents they're charging renters. Finally, the show wraps up with a check-in on controversy surrounding former Mayor Jenny Durkan's missing text messages, and how it's one example of why Washington's Public Records Act needs to be updated to meet our modern era.  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, Will Casey, at @willjcasey. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources “Seattle police stopped investigating new adult sexual assaults this year, memo shows” by Sydney Brownstone and Ashley Hiruko from The Seattle Times and KUOW: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/times-watchdog/seattle-police-halted-investigating-adult-sexual-assaults-this-year-internal-memo-shows/   “Auburn officer charged with murder featured on department's recruiting banner” by Mike Carter from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/law-justice/auburn-officer-charged-with-murder-featured-on-departments-recruiting-banner/   “This Auburn cop killed 3 and injured others. His department didn't stop him — outsiders did” by Ashley Hiruko and Liz Brazile from KUOW:https://www.kuow.org/stories/this-auburn-cop-killed-3-and-injured-others-it-took-outsiders-to-stop-him   “Pierce County candidate with pro-law enforcement platform shoots at suspected car thief”  by Patrick Malone from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/pierce-county-candidate-with-pro-law-enforcement-platform-shoots-at-suspected-car-thief/    “Seattle greenlights minimum wages for app-based delivery drivers” by MyNorthwest Staff from MYNorthwest: https://mynorthwest.com/3499857/seattle-city-council-passes-payup-legislation/    “Harrell's New Homelessness Data Dashboard Invites More Questions Than It Answers” by ​​Natalie Bicknell Argerious from The Urbanist: https://www.theurbanist.org/2022/06/02/the-urbanist-podcast-harrells-new-homelessness-data-dashboard-invites-more-questions-than-it-answers/    “How Many Dashboards Does it Take to Build a House?” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2022/05/31/74506931/how-many-dashboards-does-it-take-to-build-a-house   “Pedersen Pisses Off Seattle Landlords: Is the rent too high? The City wants to know, but landlords don't want to say” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/news/2022/06/01/74545296/pedersen-pisses-off-seattle-landlords “Did Our Last Mayor Commit a Felony? Washington's Public Records Act Needs An Overhaul” by Will Casey from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/news/2022/06/02/74581748/did-our-last-mayor-commit-a-felony   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 during 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 on the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we are continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a cohost. Welcome to the program for the first time today, today's co-host: staff writer covering Law and Justice at The Stranger, Will Casey. [00:00:55] Will Casey: Thanks for having me, Crystal - excited to be here. [00:00:57] Crystal Fincher: Hey, excited for you to be here - excited that you're at The Stranger covering Law and Justice. We all need great coverage of law and justice and wow, there is no shortage of law and justice news this week. So want to start by discussing a revelation that made my jaw drop, and made me gasp, and made me absolutely infuriated and perplexed - the news that Seattle police stopped investigating new adult sexual assault cases this year. What is going on? [00:01:34] Will Casey: Well, the mayor would like you to believe that a staffing shortage at the Seattle Police Department is responsible for their inability to process these new allegations of sexual assaults. To be specific, they are still investigating cases that involve children, but these are for new allegations of assault against an adult. And unfortunately, the mayor's not really telling the whole story there because other police departments in our area and nationally are also dealing with the labor shortage, but they have not made the same decisions in terms of how they allocate their existing staff out of the unit that's supposed to be handling these kinds of cases. [00:02:19] Crystal Fincher: That's right. And even within our department, every type of department has not seen decreases. They have moved people out of these investigative positions into other roles. What does that look like in the police department? [00:02:37] Will Casey: Well, so you probably heard a lot last year, during the mayoral campaign, about 911 response times. This is the frequent calling card of the more-law-and-order folks who want to conjure this image of - this resident's in distress, trying to get help and not having it come, while they're presumably being made the victim of a crime. Well, here we have actual victims of real crimes who are trying to ask for help from the Seattle Police Department and getting basically silenced. So, while they've shifted deputies and investigators out of this unit, they're moving people into things like these hotspot policing efforts or other just general patrol duties in attempts to presumably reduce those 911 response times. [00:03:24] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, definitely. And operation support has seen an increase, actually, in the amount of personnel allocated to that in the past couple years, despite the shortage - as they're calling it and dealing with it - the shortage of police that we have here. And just what is the rationale behind saying these other things are priorities more than investigating violent sexual assault? [00:04:00] Will Casey: Honestly, I can't personally vouch for the rationale that's backing this up. The only comment that our City leaders have offered on the record to The Seattle Times here is just that the mayor finds this situation "unacceptable." They noted that they tried to interview several other City councilmembers about the issue - they all ducked from being interviewed on the record. Chief Diaz says that - if we don't have an officer to respond to the sexual assault, then we're never going to be able to have the follow-up to investigate it. And so that's - and at least from him - why they seem to be maintaining the patrolling staffing levels rather than this investigative situation. But that doesn't really seem to be offering much comfort to the advocates for survivors of sexual assault who are bringing these criticisms to the public's attention. [00:04:54] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And beyond that, it continues to be perplexing to me how the mayor is finding himself becoming aware of this right now. As the executive of the City, he is in charge of this department - the police chief reports to him. Lots of people - I hear talking about the Council - the Council can pass policy, they can fund things. But operationally, administratively - all of that falls under the control of the mayor's office. So how - one, either how does the mayor not know this is happening, or are they doing this despite different direction - which we've seen examples of that happening before - where is the disengagement? How is it okay that policy like this is being enacted and the mayor doesn't know? Are there any steps taken to get answers about that, to address that? How are they saying they plan to increase monitoring of what's going on within the police department if stuff like this is happening without him being notified of it? [00:05:58] Will Casey: It's hard to say, honestly. And I think that there's some other details here in The Seattle Times report that really call into question the mayor's surprise - that at least that he's expressed - about this issue. Because it seems as though he doesn't have any difficulty getting SPD to allocate resources when he does have a policy interest in something - so notably the department's alternative response team, which is the unit that responds to homeless encampment removals. Monisha Harrell on the show a couple of weeks ago - that unit is now staffed by twice the number of officers on the sexual assault unit, after an additional seven patrol officers were added to that unit. And then you also have twelve detectives, compared to the four in the sexual assault investigation units, devoted to property crimes. So that's three times the number of detectives we have - looking at things like catalytic converter thefts, as opposed to sexual violence. So I don't know, maybe the mayor has an explanation for that, but it's not one that's been heard by the public thus far, at least. [00:07:07] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and it's perplexing, especially as we're hearing plans from the City Attorney for people who would previously be eligible for Drug Court or other court - that they're cracking down harder on them. How is it that we are finding ways to invest more, change policy, apply resources in different directions when they have an initiative, when they have an idea - but stuff like this has to be uncovered by reporters outside of the City to even begin to get answers or to see what's happening. It's just really, really perplexing and outrageous, especially given so much work done legislatively to make sure that all of the things downstream, especially when it comes to sexual assault, are being investigated, are they taking rape kits and processing those in a timely fashion. And I don't think anyone anticipated that the next problem we were going to be encountering is just police deciding not to investigate sexual assault at all. And if you're trying to project a safer image for the City and that you're taking action to make people safer, which is absolutely necessary, it seems like this would be a critical component of that. So it just feels very disjointed, very disappointing, and really infuriating that these decisions can be made that are so at odds with public safety. Another thing at odds, seemingly, with public safety that we saw this week was with Pierce County Council candidate, Josh Harris, who's running on a pro-law enforcement platform. People may be familiar with his name from a while back when he bailed out the police who had killed Manny Ellis - very, very problematic. Well, just recently he decided to go into an encampment where he felt some things had been stolen and engaged in an altercation with someone. The altercation escalated, police were - the story's murky - police were there, told him to stand back and stand by, somehow the person who they were engaging with got into a car. They're saying that the car went in the direction of Josh Harris and potentially charged at him. Josh Harris, then in front of police, fired into this car - does not seem like police fired into that car - really confusing what happened. And then somehow this person was not stopped, wound up back in the encampment - where Harris and a partner went in and took some things they said were stolen. They didn't say they were stolen from them, they didn't say how they knew that there were stolen, they were just a variety of things that evidently they're characterizing as stolen and we're not questioning this yet. But it just seems like we have seen more incidences of people feeling like they can go into encampments and communities where people are living, who don't have other shelter, and just assume that they're places of crime - to have no problem victimizing people, don't seem to have to substantiate whether or not something was indeed stolen, and hey - if something's stolen, someone should be able to get it back. We have processes for that that people should follow. But seeing this escalate to violence, seeing people go into these encampments armed with guns is just asking for a violent situation to happen. It's asking for people to get shot and killed. There have been several examples of this happening and why is this person running for office - who seems to have some kind of a complex that he needs to go and do this macho thing - it just seems really problematic. This is someone running for office in Pierce County right now, and I hope more people start talking about this and examining this and really getting to the details of this situation and his prior situations. 'Cause there seems to be a history of problematic or questionable activity here. Just really concerning. [00:11:37] Will Casey: Yeah, and the only thing I have to add to that is - this is not an isolated trend, data point here, right? We're seeing across the country, in contested Republican primary after primary, this is just becoming part of - this vigilantism is becoming part of their mainstream rhetoric. And I think that that's - frankly, very deeply troubling for our ability to continue to maintain our democracy and yeah, not the kind of moral leadership you'd like. But the sad fact is I doubt there are very many of his base voters who are going to have a problem with this behavior. [00:12:16] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and that's the challenge. And I just hope that, as these things that happen are covered, that they're covered critically and that facts are verified and that accounts are verified because the framing of this sometimes seems really problematic. And it's just also worth mentioning the fact that although we have some real troubling characterizations and narratives about unhoused people and crime, the fact is that there are few people in society who are more frequently victims of crime than the unhoused population. It's a very, very vulnerable place to be - there was talk this week about potentially - Reagan Dunn, actually, introduced the idea of basically mapping where every unhoused person is and stays. And there's just a ton of concern by a lot of people about that. Because one, as we just said, unhoused people are already extremely vulnerable, are frequently victims of crime, are much more vulnerable than most of the rest of us. And we have seen, from reporters who have been very inappropriate in the way that they have tracked down and covered and photographed and videotaped folks in these encampments, and people feeling like they are entitled - if they know where one of them is - to walk in, to harass them, to assault people there. We've seen this happen several times. And so anytime you target a group and just point a big red arrow at them and say there they are, while simultaneously dehumanizing them with rhetoric and talking about how much of a problem they are - we know that's a recipe for violence, and we know that's a recipe for targeting. So no, we don't want to do that and that's a bad thing, Reagan Dunn - among the number of variety of bad things that Reagan Dunn seems like he's doubling down on doing. But aside from that, also - Auburn, City of Auburn, featured a police officer - who is currently charged with murder - who is featured on the department's recruiting banner. They were at an event, banner sitting here - big picture, officer's smiling - well, it's an officer who's charged for murder. What is the deal here, Will? [00:14:43] Will Casey: When you literally have a poster boy for your department being someone who's currently facing an accusation of murder and has a history of killing several other civilians while on duty, that's a problem. And I think, especially in this atmosphere of new-found focus not just on big city police departments, like Seattle's, but also how these same dynamics are playing out frequently with far less oversight in these smaller towns and cities throughout the state. And I think - what this shows is that there's a culture issue here in Auburn, at least in their police departments, with not being concerned, apparently, with the image that they're projecting into the community. And this is not someone who, at least from my perspective, it seems like you'd want to be holding out as a representative of the kinds of officers you're looking to hire, if you're really interested in changing the culture of the police department. KUOW has done a fantastic investigative series documenting all of the various moments throughout this officer's lengthy career - where he's been involved in violence repeatedly, has not found not been held accountable for any kind of discipline. And frankly, you shouldn't have to look at anything other than his own hands to tell you that he's someone you should be worried about. He's got tattoos that show - frankly, very common slogan - I guess, is the right word, motif - among the more extreme police officers that refer to being judged by 12 - meaning 12 jurors in a courtroom, presumably for reviewing some sort of act of violence that they engaged in, rather than carried by 6, which is - or 8 sometimes - referred to pallbearers bearing a coffin. And this is kind of warrior mentality where you're always under threat, the people who you're supposed to be protecting and serving are a constant possible source of danger to you, and if you "fear for your life" - that really does need to shift. This particular officer also has a combat veteran background, and there have been reports from within the department of people trying to get the Auburn PD to take some practice steps, get him some specialized counseling that may be necessary for someone adjusting to a civilian, law enforcement position. And it's just apparently never stuck. So, we have a lot more work to do in following the story and keeping everyone's attention trained on it - that pending murder charge will next be at issue in the public, possibly this September, because the judge overseeing that case just had to issue a continuance in the scheduled trial date for June. [00:17:56] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and just the family dealing with this - it's really hard. The family is very disappointed, very dismayed that - one, this officer did have a history, it was not addressed before. Unfortunately, he killed their family member and egregious enough - we all know how high the bar is for a police officer to get charged - he is charged. He's just waiting to go on trial, and unfortunately this trial keeps being delayed, which is very painful for the family. And just - there are people attached to this, these are real stakes and real people who are being impacted by this. And it just makes it that much more insulting that all of this is there - that we talk about wanting to keep people safe and healthy and whole, and treating people with dignity and respect - and wow, how this is not happening in the operations. And I just cannot - I cannot imagine being a family member of this person and then reading that he's literally the poster boy for the department. Just very, very disappointing. The department did say - well, hey, this is an old poster, this was before this happened and before he was charged with murder. It didn't happen before he killed other people - he has killed two other people, injured others aside from that. And so, they are putting that kind of behavior and history and record up on display. And so the question is, so who are you actually looking to recruit with this? What message are you sending? What does it say about the culture of the department? And I just hope that we begin to grapple with those questions as a community because it's absolutely necessary. In some better news this week, Seattle City Council passed PayUp legislation. What does this do? [00:19:56] Will Casey: Effectively, this is going to give a whole slew of app-based gig workers - finally - a minimum wage, which is a huge, huge deal. There's a little bit of back and forth in the final version of the law that got passed - Councilmember Alex Pedersen introduced a late amendment that did exclude a certain category of workers from the legislation, which was strange because he was the original sponsor of the bill. So it's not often you see - [00:20:26] Crystal Fincher: Andrew Lewis! [00:20:27] Will Casey: Oh, I'm sorry - did I say - yes, yes, yes - sorry, I made the frequent mistake of confusing him with the two other squishy progressives from the Council - my apologies to Andrew. But yeah, so anyway, he did undermine his own bill here in a relatively strange move that he said was to "take down the temperature on the issue." But that didn't really seem to happen because advocates for the workers are very upset that that exemption was inserted last minute into the legislation. But the large takeaway here is - this is still a significant step forward for a large class of employees who - Uber and Lyft, and these similar-style companies have been fighting tooth and nail in every state that tries to do this - to keep these people from getting a fair wage. So, let's not look a gift horse in the mouth here, I guess. [00:21:21] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. This is a step forward - it does meaningfully help a lot of drivers in the City, so this is a good thing, this is helpful. It would have been nice if it could be good for more people - we talked about that a lot last week. Councilmember Tammy Morales did offer an amendment that was passed that says they will take up legislation for the people left out of this bill - the marketplace workers who were excluded from this bill in that amendment that you just spoke about - that they will take that up by August of 2023. So there is now a date attached to it. One of the issues last week was - yeah, we'll get to it. But there was nothing concrete following that, there was no - well, when are you going to get to it, when are you going to address it if it's not here. And so now we do have a date, so hopefully app-based, or marketplace app-based workers, will also be included. But that's a very positive thing, very helpful. A number of these app-based service companies were very much in opposition to this, certainly were pushing for the amendment that Councilmember Lewis eventually passed for this bill. But it is a step forward, and I do not think it is too much to say that everyone deserves to make the minimum wage. And that just because you have figured out some technological loopholes does not absolve you with the responsibility for paying people who you're profiting from - to be clear, who you're profiting very handsomely from - a minimum wage. It's the least that should be done. So this week also, in City of Seattle news, Mayor Harrell introduced a new homelessness dashboard. What happened here? [00:23:09] Will Casey: Well, we've got a bunch of the data we already have now being aggregated into one place with some data visualization that made a tech worker friend of mine send me a long string of Twitter DMs talking about how terribly organized and poorly visualized the data is. And so - and his criticism is not the only one. My colleague at The Stranger, Hannah Krieg, had an excellent piece talking to some of the folks at Tech 4 Housing, who are experts in this field, and included an excellent breakdown of - that basically this dashboard presents the point of view that homelessness is a problem for the people seeing it, rather than for those who are experiencing the lack of shelter. And for me personally, I think this is going to be - a little bit of background here - part of the reason that the City is so concerned with visualizing this data and proving that they have the shelter capacity is that there's a federal lawsuit out of the Ninth Circuit, which is where Seattle resides, that effectively makes it illegal to do the encampments sweeps that the administration has been engaging in, unless there's adequate shelter available for everyone who's being forced to move. And so that's why you'll hear City officials so focused on this idea of referrals and saying that they had available capacity, without really ever getting into the details of - are you actually getting these people housing? Just - it was available, technically. And so we can't be punished by the courts for sweeping the problem to some other part of the city. [00:24:50] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it is - it is a challenge. And we've certainly talked about before, talked about even last week, the issue with that shelter - just because we're hearing shelter is available, an offer of services was made, does actually not mean that those services were applicable to the person who they were made to. Someone may have a job that requires them to work hours later than the shelter will accept people. Well, the offer was made - that person couldn't accept them - and you're making someone choose between having a job and spending a night somewhere. And to be clear, many of these shelters, it is a night. This is not housing. This is oftentimes a bed. If we're talking about congregate shelter, those for a variety of reasons can - not be safe places, not be places that help people become more stable. And oftentimes in these shelters, you have to leave early in the morning with all of your possessions - it's not an easy thing to do. Anyone suggesting that people who are unhoused are somehow getting by in the system, or doing this because it's easy, or because they're lazy - does not understand what being out on the street is actually like. It's a dangerous place, it's a scary place, it's a very destabilizing place. And to help people get back to the point where they can find stability for housing requires stabilizing so many things in their lives that are made worse by the trauma and experience of being on the street. So it is actually important - if we're going to solve this issue, there has to be housing for people, not a shelter bed. I am pretty fed up with just talking about shelter bed capacity. Is it better than nothing? Sometimes, actually not all the time. And we actually need, we do need to have capacity to get people out of extreme heat or extreme cold, those situations, but we are doing nothing to address the problem. And in fact, making it worse if we just force people to start over and over and over again, get the little bit of their lives and stability that they've gotten, and the bit of community that they've built to help them try and - one, just stay alive and two, get things together enough where they can just get a little bit more and get more stable - to just keep sweeping and moving and sweeping and moving. And it just is not working, and for as much money as we're spending on all of this sweeping, on all of the resources going into this - we could be spending that on housing, we could be spending that on services. We are throwing a ton of money at this in ways that are only moving people around and not getting anyone actually off the street, or very few people off the street, while more people are falling into homelessness. So it's - if you listen to this show, you know how frequently frustrated this is. But I - yes, this is a dashboard. Yes, we are tracking this. I want it to be more than checking off a box to justify sweeps. And I think that's the bottom line. And I am hoping to see some evidence that this is coming online. There has been hopeful talk. There has been talk about providing services - there've been too many sweeps that have not had them at all. And so when is it going to start? I would like to see that more than a dashboard in terms of this. But we will continue to follow how this progresses - it has just been frustrating to continue to watch us relocate people and not do that. Also want to cover - this week, an interesting situation with talk about requiring landlords to disclose the rent that they're paying. What is happening here? [00:28:49] Will Casey: Well, it seems like Alex Pedersen - I'm getting my white male councilmembers correct now - might've pissed off a few members of his base in pushing forward this legislation. It actually caused a relatively interesting 5-4 split among the Seattle City Council. It wasn't your traditional divide between conservatives and progressive factions. On the conservative side, you had Sara Nelson and Debora Juarez voting No - each of them had their own reasons. Dan Strauss and Teresa Mosqueda also voted No - Mosqueda mostly due to the budget concerns with implementing this bill. But he did get support from Andrew Lewis, Lisa Herbold, Tammy Morales, and Kshama Sawant - who are all in favor because in their perspective, if you're already doing the paperwork to advertise the units and pay taxes on the income that you're gathering from these investments - passively I might add - it shouldn't be that much more of an effort to collect some of that data and report it to the City on a regular basis so that we actually have an idea of what it costs to live here. It'd be very, very helpful for a lot of things the City's trying to do. [00:30:10] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. A number of cities across the country are moving in this direction - Seattle is not unique in doing this. And originally I misspoke - I said the rent that landlords are paying, I meant to say the rent that they're charging - but this is good and useful information. And absolutely will help inform policy and determine what is appropriate, what is not appropriate, and what action could or should be taken to help address this affordability crisis which we are absolutely in the middle of. And so having this happen is - having landlords at the table is perfectly fine, but we need all of the information. If they're giving us input on how this might be onerous or how this is affecting their ability to do this or that, then let's see the data for that. We ask that for so many other people and so many other ways - hey, to get rent assistance, we make people divulge lots of things about their income and living situation and personal life - and the hoops that they have to jump through just to do that. They're asking for a ton of information from renters about their qualifications, they're running background checks. We're only asking for them to divulge the rent that supposedly they're advertising what they're charging - they may be unhappy for people to see if they raise the rent in exorbitant amounts. I know a number of people who've had their rent raised by over 30%. Someone close to me had their rent raised by over 45% - it's egregious, and so this is an issue that I'm sure that they may not want lots of visibility on, but - hey, everyone else is required to put in a whole lot of information, to divulge a lot of information - we're in a crisis. This is the least they could do. And to the point that Hannah Krieg covered, and that you mentioned, they're already doing it. We're just organizing it in the same place - for a dashboard - we know how much the City loves the dashboard. Let's get a dashboard together. But I think this is a good situation, I commend Alex Pedersen for stepping up to address this crisis, for talking about this very common sense, really low-effort step that can be taken to help get more information on how we can solve this. And understanding that his constituents are his residents and people who are afraid of being priced out of the places where they're at. The City has - about half of its residents are renters. This is a pressing issue for so many people, so commend him and the rest of the councilmembers who did vote to support this. It's really important. And people really are expecting action to be taken. And so I'm happy that they're heeding that call. Another issue this week that we've talked about before and that you covered was - hey, what's going on with those texts that were deleted? Was that a felon - like it wasn't supposed to happen. They're saying it's a crime, a serious crime - a felony in fact - for things like that to happen. And so the question has been, are you going to refer this for investigation? Who can do this? Why isn't it done? What is going on? [00:33:34] Will Casey: Well, this was a very wonderful deep dive into a realm of a lot of people not wanting to admit anything was their fault, which is a lovely place to be. And as - I cannot believe I'm about to say this, but this is the cost of not having an effective opposition party - because if King County had a Republican Party that was remotely capable of winning any elections, we'd have a partisan incentive for someone to dig into the truth of what's going on here. And we'd actually benefit from a little bit of competition, but currently everyone who's involved. [00:34:14] Crystal Fincher: Well, the Republican Party has resources that make them effective as an opposition party, but there could be other opposition parties that were stood up - technically it wouldn't have to be a Republican Party, although they are more integrated statutorily into our system. But anyway - keep going. [00:34:29] Will Casey: Yes, yes, yes - trust me, I'm the last person who's going to wish for success for any Republican candidates. But my point being that this is a situation where - normally, this is where the political realities of government tend to work towards the interests of people actually finding out what's going on. Instead - here, we have a bunch of political allies - Bob Ferguson at the Attorney General's office, Governor Inslee, Dan Satterberg - all kind of just doing the Spiderman meme of pointing at each other and saying - it's your responsibility to kick this off. But actually, in reporting this out this week, what I learned is that the real culprit here, I think, is just a lack of stewardship at the Legislature in how this law is written. So the Public Records Act has been updated several times, it's something that voters put onto the books through initiatives at various points in Washington State's history - that part of the law is very well tended to. However, it only really includes civil penalties for agencies who fail to produce a given record on the required timeline, or if there is some other - hey, they're being overly aggressive about the redactions that they're making in providing these sorts of records. So there's a specific grant of civil action authority for any private person to sue a government agency and say - hey, you were supposed to get me this record by X date. It's now Y date. Where's the paper? The problem is there's also a separate law on the books in a different part of the RCWs that makes the willful destruction of a public record a felony. And that's what the publicly available information suggests Mayor Durkan and/or former Chief of Seattle Police Department Carmen Best may have done with their messages. That law was last substantively amended in 1909. And in speaking with legislative staff, they agreed with my guess - which is that this was something that's a relic of back in the pioneer days - when one small town would lead a raid onto somebody else's records office and burn all of the deeds so that they could just take over their farms or mining stakes or whatever. So what needs to happen, in the next legislative session, is for the Legislature to specifically grant the authority of - either to the County Prosecutor or the Attorney General - but basically make it very clear that if we ever encounter a situation like this again, there's a very specific person whose job it is to investigate. And so we don't end up with this farcical game of hot potato that's going on right now. [00:37:15] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and it is farcical - to be clear. And even - you touched on in the article that you wrote, which we will be including in the show notes, along with the other articles that we've discussed - was that - just incentives for accountability aren't there, they're actually pointing in the other direction. And so if there is no expectation that - hey, if I do something that I shouldn't do here, or if there's no record of other people being held accountable for those same things. And - hey, it would be easy for me to do this thing that I'm not supposed to do, and then just cover up that I did the thing that I'm not supposed to do - because the penalties of doing what I'm not supposed to do are greater than just covering it up and all that kind of stuff. And this is what we see. And especially that it was not just one person, it was multiple people involved in these incidences, and so it seems like - hey, we are trying to get rid of a record of what happened. And so many troubling things that happened - this is around the time when the precinct was abandoned. And again another issue of just - we find out that either there is no control or negligence or a refusal to own decisions that were made from the Mayor's office - but very troubling things that are happening that the public is owed - is literally owed - and just no accountability for that. So there needs to be, this should not be a my-team-versus-your-team type of thing. As we've seen in so many different instances, if we let this go now and even if - hey, well, that's my buddy, that's my team, that's my party, whatever it is - someone else is going to get a hold of it that you don't like and do worse. We have seen so many different examples of this. These are just good governance things that should not only apply to people who you are in opposition to politically - they're best when they apply to everyone, and they serve everyone better when they do apply to everyone, and we should find out what happened with these and there should be accountability attached to that. And I just wish we would take that more seriously. It would do a lot to create more trust in people in institutions. We're at a time right now where there is a crisis of confidence in all of our institutions, and only bad things happen in society when people lose trust in the institutions that are supposed to provide an orderly way of resolving disputes, find out information, talking about who has power and how they're able to wield it - all of those things. If we don't trust, if the public doesn't trust how that happens, then people start to take things into their own hands and use their own means - and that never turns out well, it never ends peacefully. [00:40:22] Will Casey: Yeah, and I think that there are some people who I think are looking at this as - oh, there's just a couple of people who've got it out for Mayor Durkan and they just don't want to let this go or move on - and we need to unify and heal after the 2020 protests. And I cannot disagree with that strongly enough - because in criminal law, we talk all the time about how we have to have these harsh sentences as a deterrent for criminal behavior, as if someone who has no other way to put food on the table except for stealing that food is going to think about the consequences of like - oh, well, down the line, this is going to mean X, Y, or Z for me. But here - these are sophisticated actors, right? These are people with power and leverage and public office who have the ability to make a cold, calculated decision about whether or not - how likely it is - they're going to get caught. And if they are, how bad are the consequences going to be, really? And we've already seen this trend continue in a disturbing way. This didn't make it into the piece that I wrote this week, but it's been reported elsewhere. We've seen similar issues with deleting texts at the Washington Redistricting Commission when they just blew past their midnight deadline. And voted without actually having maps in front of them. And so I think that this is a live issue, this is a real problem for people's faith in government, as you pointed out. And it's frankly, not that hard to fix - one-line amendment to say it shall be the responsibility of the Attorney General's office to investigate whenever there has been a destroyed public record - would solve this entire problem. [00:42:03] Crystal Fincher: It would, and it certainly needs solving and we certainly should have some accountability to this. I'm sure we'll be talking more about this subject more in the future as developments unfold, but it's just a challenge. There's lots that's been challenging this week, lately. We don't even get into the national stuff here - that's enough. And then just to see these types of events and headlines on a local level is challenging, but it is possible to create positive change. There are some good things happening and ways that we can all engage to make this better. And part of what we want to do in talking about this is to - like we say - understand what's happening, and why it's happening, and what we can do about it. And we see what's happening, and got further insight into the why this week and the levers that we can use to fix it. And so certainly is something that people need to do - is to advocate with their legislators that - hey, this is something that is an easy fix, a quick fix, and that should be fixed, and that we're expecting to be fixed. So hopefully that does happen. And with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks today, this Friday, June 3rd, 2022. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler with assistant producer Shannon Cheng and help with Bryce Cannatelli. Our wonderful co-host today is staff writer covering law and justice - and if it wasn't clear to people, who is also a lawyer who is a reporter, which is helpful when reporting on law and justice and it shows - Will Casey. You can find Will on Twitter @willjcasey - that's C-A-S-E-Y. You can find me on Twitter @finchfrii. Now you can follow Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks & 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 - talk to you next time.

On this Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, Crystal talks with Seattle political consultant Heather Weiner. They start by reviewing the news from filing week. Crystal and Heather discuss one campaign in particular, Jim Ferrell's bid for King Co. Prosecutor, that just lost access to the Democratic voter database. They then give an impassioned plea for listeners to file to run for Precinct Committee Officer. Crystal and Heather transition to discussing news from a Seattle high school that a principal has been demoted and reassigned after revealing plans to reduce contact tracing after the district asked her to keep quiet about it, because she was concerned about the health of her students and their families. The two close the show by discussing a Crosscut/Elway poll revealing that over 80% of Seattle voters said that lack of mental health and addiction services is the number one contributor to crime, and they want to prioritize directing their tax dollars towards those services over all else, if given the choice. 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 Heather at @hlweiner.   Resources File for Precinct Committee Officer: https://kingcounty.gov/depts/elections/for-candidates/online-pco-filing.aspx    Tweet by Will Casey about Jim Ferrell: https://twitter.com/willjcasey/status/1527449561685323777?s=20&t=Vj09ki0vJAnUaGix-bRkOA    “Seattle Schools demotes Cleveland principal after she told families district would limit contact tracing, attorney says” by Dahlia Bazzaz from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/education/seattle-schools-demotes-cleveland-principal-after-she-told-families-district-would-limit-contact-tracing-attorney-says/   Cleveland High School students plan walkout to protest new principal by Monica Velez from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/education-lab/cleveland-high-school-students-plan-walkout-to-protest-appointment-of-new-principal/    “How does Seattle feel about crime? It's complicated” by Josh Cohen from Crosscut: https://crosscut.com/politics/2022/05/how-does-seattle-feel-about-crime-its-complicated   Crosscut/Elway Poll: https://crosscut.com/sites/default/files/files/crosscut-elway-poll.pdf   Commit to Change WA: https://www.committochangewa.org    Transcript Transcript will be uploaded as soon as possible

On this Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, Metro News Columnist and Opinion Editor for The News Tribune, Matt Driscoll, co-hosts with Crystal. They begin by diving into the impact of the leaked draft of the Supreme Court opinion to overturn Roe v. Wade, frustration with the response from many elected leaders, more rights that are on the chopping block, and–now more than ever–the importance of local government. The impact of Roe v. Wade being overturned on the LGBTQ+ community sparks a discussion on Pierce County Executive Bruce Dammeier's actions to block pride flags from flying across the county. Crystal and Matt wrap up the show by discussing the harm that the War on Drugs has inflicted for decades and how I-1922, an initiative to replace the failed War on Drugs with proven approaches that address substance use disorder through prevention, outreach, and recovery services, would reduce that harm. 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, Matt Driscoll, at @mattsdriscoll. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources “Think tossing Roe doesn't affect WA? Try again. State must protect abortion, other rights” by Matt Driscoll from The News Tribune: https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/matt-driscoll/article261030217.html#storylink=cpy     “What the overturning of Roe v. Wade could mean for same-sex marriage rights” by Christine Pae from KING5: https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/roe-v-wade-same-sex-marriage-rights-united-states/281-38d7431a-b267-4b90-957e-5e6a4512da4c?ref=exit-recirc    “Democrats Want Your Vote, Socialists Want Your Feet on the Street” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2022/05/04/72555229/democrats-want-your-vote-socialists-want-your-feet-on-the-street    “Slog AM: Seattle Public Schools Changes Sexual Harassment Policies, King County to "Explore Proposals" to Fund Abortion, and How to Vaccinate a Tiger” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2022/05/05/72596019/slog-am-seattle-public-schools-changes-sexual-harassment-policies-king-county-to-explore-proposals-to-fund-abortion-and-how-to-vaccinate     “Why Justice Alito's Draft Opinion to Overturn Roe Makes No Fucking Sense”  by Will Casey from The Stranger:  https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2022/05/03/72401871/why-justice-alitos-draft-opinion-to-overturn-roe-makes-no-fucking-sense    “End of Roe v. Wade looms large in Idaho, where women are likely to seek abortions in Washington” by Jim Brunner from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/end-of-roe-v-wade-looms-large-in-idaho-where-women-are-likely-to-seek-abortions-in-washington/     “Will Pierce County buildings ever fly the Pride flag? Not at this rate, and it's shameful” by The News Tribune Editorial Board from The News Tribune: https://www.thenewstribune.com/opinion/article260828227.html#storylink=cpy    “Legalize drug possession in WA? Initiative should be a no-brainer, but expect a fight” by Matt Driscoll from The News Tribune: https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/matt-driscoll/article261098197.html#storylink=cpy    “New Poll Suggests Most of Washington Wants to End the War on Drugs” by Rich Smith from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2022/05/02/72070084/we-want-to-end-the-war-on-drugs    “Could WA be the next state to decriminalize drugs? Voters might get to decide in November” by Shauna Sowersby from The Olympian: https://www.theolympian.com/news/state/washington/article260900057.html#storylink=cpy    “WA introduces ballot measure to decriminalize drug possession” by MyNorthwest Staff from MyNorthwest: https://mynorthwest.com/3460600/wa-ballot-measure-legalize-drug-possession/    “Measure to decriminalize all drugs rolls out in Washington state” by Paige Browning from KUOW: https://www.kuow.org/stories/measure-to-decriminalize-all-drugs-rolls-out-in-washington-state    “WA Ballot Measure to Decriminalize Drugs Has Early Poll Lead” by Ben Adlin from Filter: https://filtermag.org/washington-drug-decriminalization-polls/ Transcript Transcript will be uploaded as soon as possible.

On today's Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Associate Editor of The Stranger, Rich Smith. They kick off the episode with news of a driver involved in a pedestrian collision and road rage incident at Pike Place Market and an increase in police patrols in south King County with the stated purpose of keeping pedestrians safe, which sparks a broader discussion on pedestrian safety and why increased policing isn't the answer. They then discuss Patty Murray's advocacy to allow pot shops to use banks, City Attorney Ann Davison's decision to dismiss 40% of cases, and the apparent “cultural issue” around Seattle cops swerving masking laws. Crystal and Rich wrap up by celebrating the union victory at the Seattle Starbucks Roastery and discussing the state of the King County Prosecutor race without a progressive candidate. 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, Rich Smith, at @richsssmith.  More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources “Pedestrian Injury in Road Rage Brawl Underscores Need for Car-Free Pike Place” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist: https://www.theurbanist.org/2022/04/19/pedestrian-injury-in-road-rage-brawl-underscores-need-for-car-free-pike-place/     “South King County Cities Increase Police Patrols in Name of Pedestrian Safety” by Ryan Packer from The Urbanist:  https://www.theurbanist.org/2022/04/20/south-king-county-cities-increase-police-patrols-in-name-of-pedestrian-safety/    “Sen. Patty Murray Sees a Path to Finally Letting Pot Shops Use Banks” by Rich Smith from The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2022/04/20/71280602/sen-patty-murray-sees-a-path-to-finally-letting-pot-shops-use-banks    “City Attorney's Office Will Decline to Prosecute Nearly 2,000 Cases to Help Clear Pandemic-Related Backlog” by Rich Smith from The Stranger:  https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2022/04/19/71145166/city-attorneys-office-will-decline-to-prosecute-nearly-2000-cases-to-help-clear-pandemic-related-backlog   “Report: Police Accountability Office Dismissed Widespread Mask Violations as “Cultural Issue”' by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola: https://publicola.com/2022/04/21/report-police-accountability-office-dismissed-widespread-mask-violations-as-cultural-issue/   “Seattle Starbucks Reserve Roastery workers vote to unionize” by Brady Wakayama and KING 5 Staff from KING 5: https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/seattle/seattle-starbucks-reserve-roastery-count-union-votes/281-43c97cd2-43a1-4a8b-bd2a-acbfe1e69bad   “Slog PM: Seattle Starbucks Roastery Votes to Unionize, City Sweeps 13 People Ahead of Biden's Visit, WA's County Councils Are 99% White” by Rich Smith from The Stranger:  https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2022/04/21/71372295/slog-pm-seattle-starbucks-roastery-votes-to-unionize-city-sweeps-13-people-ahead-of-bidens-visit-was-county-councils-are-99-white   “Progressive Lane Wide Open in King County Prosecutor Race”  by Will Casey from The Stranger:  https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2022/04/15/70845236/progressive-lane-wide-open-in-king-county-prosecutor-race    “WA prosecutors who withhold evidence rarely face discipline” by Melissa Santos from Crosscut:  https://crosscut.com/news/2022/04/wa-prosecutors-who-withhold-evidence-rarely-face-discipline Transcript Transcript will be uploaded as soon as possible

Jackson Gatlin (@JTGatlin) is joined by Andy Kamenetzsky (@Locked On Lakers) to discuss the Los Angeles Lakers post-All-Star break performance, Russell Westbrook's polarizing play, LeBron James passing Karl Malone and becoming No. 2 on the NBA All-Time scoring list. Can the Lakers still make a deep playoff push with Russ at his best? Should other playoff teams be afraid of the Lakers in a seven-game series? What's the latest timetable on Anthony Davis' return? Will LeBron catch Kareem in scoring next?Then, Ku Khahil (@Locked On Pistons) stops in to discuss Sadiq Bey's monster night, Cade Cunningham making a push for Rookie of the Year, Jerami Grant's future in Detroit, Dwane Casey's role in the Pistons' rebuild and more. What does Cade need to do to sway ROTY voters during this final stretch of the season? Does Grant have a long-term fit in Detroit? Will Casey still be around past the beginning of the Pistons rebuild? Who should the Pistons take if they get the No. 1 pick again?Lastly, Shawn Coleman (@Locked On Grizzlies) to discuss Ja Morant's leap this season, what's led to the Memphis Grizzlies success this season, unsung heroes on the roster, biggest weakness facing this Grizzlies team and current playoff outlook. Should Ja Morant be an MVP finalist? How impactful has Steven Adams been? Can the Grizzlies rebounding and defense hide their biggest weakness? Who is a bigger threat in the first round of the playoffs, the Minnesota Timberwolves or the LA Clippers?#Lakers #Pistons #GrizzliesSubscribe to the Locked On NBA YouTube Channel: Locked On NBAFollow/Subscribe/Listen Anywhere: linktr.ee/LockedOnNBASupport Us By Supporting Our Sponsors! | Offers: lockedonpodcasts.com/offersBuilt Bar – Built Bar is a protein bar that tastes like a candy bar. Go to built.com and use promo code “LOCKED15” and you'll get 15% off your next order. PrizePicks – Don't hesitate, check out PrizePicks.com and use promo code: “NBA” or go to your app store and download the app today. PrizePicks is daily fantasy made easy! BetOnline – BetOnline..net has you covered this season with more props, odds and lines than ever before. BetOnline – Where The Game Starts! Rock Auto – Amazing selection. Reliably low prices. All the parts your car will ever need. Visit RockAuto.com and tell them Locked On sent you. Athletic Greens – Athletic Greens is going to give you a FREE 1 year supply of immune-supporting Vitamin D AND 5 FREE travel packs with your first purchase. All you have to do is visit athleticgreens.com/NBANETWORK. TrueBill – Don't fall for subscription scams. Start cancelling today at Truebill.com/LOCKEDONNBA. NBA TopShot – NBA Top Shot's the officially licensed NFT of the NBA. Connect with a community of hundreds of thousands of NBA fans as a natural progression of fantasy sports, a way to upgrade your experience as an NBA fan. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Jackson Gatlin (@JTGatlin) is joined by Andy Kamenetzsky (@Locked On Lakers) to discuss the Los Angeles Lakers post-All-Star break performance, Russell Westbrook's polarizing play, LeBron James passing Karl Malone and becoming No. 2 on the NBA All-Time scoring list. Can the Lakers still make a deep playoff push with Russ at his best? Should other playoff teams be afraid of the Lakers in a seven-game series? What's the latest timetable on Anthony Davis' return? Will LeBron catch Kareem in scoring next? Then, Ku Khahil (@Locked On Pistons) stops in to discuss Sadiq Bey's monster night, Cade Cunningham making a push for Rookie of the Year, Jerami Grant's future in Detroit, Dwane Casey's role in the Pistons' rebuild and more. What does Cade need to do to sway ROTY voters during this final stretch of the season? Does Grant have a long-term fit in Detroit? Will Casey still be around past the beginning of the Pistons rebuild? Who should the Pistons take if they get the No. 1 pick again? Lastly, Shawn Coleman (@Locked On Grizzlies) to discuss Ja Morant's leap this season, what's led to the Memphis Grizzlies success this season, unsung heroes on the roster, biggest weakness facing this Grizzlies team and current playoff outlook. Should Ja Morant be an MVP finalist? How impactful has Steven Adams been? Can the Grizzlies rebounding and defense hide their biggest weakness? Who is a bigger threat in the first round of the playoffs, the Minnesota Timberwolves or the LA Clippers? #Lakers #Pistons #Grizzlies Subscribe to the Locked On NBA YouTube Channel: Locked On NBA Follow/Subscribe/Listen Anywhere: linktr.ee/LockedOnNBA Support Us By Supporting Our Sponsors! | Offers: lockedonpodcasts.com/offers Built Bar – Built Bar is a protein bar that tastes like a candy bar. Go to built.com and use promo code “LOCKED15” and you'll get 15% off your next order.   PrizePicks – Don't hesitate, check out PrizePicks.com and use promo code: “NBA” or go to your app store and download the app today. PrizePicks is daily fantasy made easy!   BetOnline – BetOnline..net has you covered this season with more props, odds and lines than ever before. BetOnline – Where The Game Starts!   Rock Auto – Amazing selection. Reliably low prices. All the parts your car will ever need. Visit RockAuto.com and tell them Locked On sent you.   Athletic Greens – Athletic Greens is going to give you a FREE 1 year supply of immune-supporting Vitamin D AND 5 FREE travel packs with your first purchase. All you have to do is visit athleticgreens.com/NBANETWORK.   TrueBill – Don't fall for subscription scams. Start cancelling today at Truebill.com/LOCKEDONNBA.   NBA TopShot – NBA Top Shot's the officially licensed NFT of the NBA. Connect with a community of hundreds of thousands of NBA fans as a natural progression of fantasy sports, a way to upgrade your experience as an NBA fan. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

For our last episode celebrating our one-year anniversary, we invited our first special guest on the show. We had so much fun that we've got another friend joining us to discuss the upcoming Oscars. A couple of genre-adjacent films are up for Best Picture, and we discuss what we thought about them, their chances for award recognition, and what their inclusion means for genre films. Join us as we explore two remakes and novel adaptations: NIGHTMARE ALLEY and DUNE. Will Casey complain (again!) that Marvel wasn't better represented? Will he (again!) sh*t on high art? Unlike this year's Oscar nominations, there may not be any surprises there. But what does our guest think? Is he Team Lover or Team Fighter? Tune in to find out!

Guest host Shasti Conrad (Chair of the King County Democrats) joins us for a discussion on the year that was--the good, the bad, and the really bad--with media consultant Will Casey, and Chair of the King County Young Democrats, Yuan Tao.

While Stephan is on hiatus through the end of the year, a series of guest hosts will be filling in, starting with Chair of the King County Democrats, Shasti Conrad. She speaks first with political communications consultant Will Casey about their impressions of the various races in Seattle. Then, Shasti talks with both Toshiko Hasegawa and Hamdi Mohammed, both of whom look certain to be elected to the Seattle Port Commission. Finally, a discussion with Burien City Council Candidate Hugo Garcia and Renton City Council Candidate Carmen Rivera, both of whom also look certain to be elected.

This week the explosive storyline between characters Will Casey and Cristiano San Martin on Fair City comes to a head as Will stands trial for abusing his partner. Actor Maclean Burke who plays Damien in the long running soap had the lowdown on what to expect as the drama unfolds in tonight's episode. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Tonight in Fair City the trial of Will Casey starts and it's a storyline that has been building for months. John Cronin who plays Will and Amy Kirwan who plays Mairead tell us more.

This week is filing week, which, in the words of King County Democrats Chair Shasti Conrad, is like our Super Bowl. Along with Left Wing Digital's Will Casey, we talk all about the specifics of filing for office, and how enthusiasm for running is way up this year's odd-year election*. *Also, it's not "off-year," because, as the title declares, there are no off-years! In the second half, Shasti chats with Bothell City Councilmember Mason Thompson about his incredibly close race, and how that has implications for how turnout and grassroots work make all the difference. Theme music from filmmusic.io "Pure Joy" by Otis Galloway License: CC BY (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

The ARP is already benefiting tens of millions of Americans, with checks arriving in mailboxes and bank accounts. Stephan Cox, Will Casey, and Shasti Conrad talk about how the Democrats can and must take credit for it. Also, Shasti speaks about Tuesday's killings in Atlanta of six Asian-American women with 34th LD state senator Joe Nguyễn, and Toshiko Hasegawa, candidate for the Port of Seattle position 4 and current Executive Director of Washington State's Commission on Asian Pacific American Affairs. Show Notes: Getting involved... Stop AAPI Hate
 (https://stopaapihate.org/) Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Atlanta
 (https://www.advancingjustice-atlanta.org/) The Asian Pacific American Institute for Congressional Studies (https://apaics.org/) 
For further learning… Anti-Asian Violence Resources (https://anti-asianviolenceresources.carrd.co/) Bystander Intervention to Stop Anti-Asian/American Harassment and Xenophobia Workshop
 (https://www.ihollaback.org/bystanderintervention/) Donate to the victims' families through a fund set up by Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Atlanta (https://actionnetwork.org/.../support-georgias-asian.../)

Join PJ and Casey as they explore some of the best moments in Abridged Anime! Will Casey grow to love these comedic parodies or see them as cheap rip offs that lessen the impact of the originals? There's only one way to find out! Link to the playlist shown to Casey in this episode: http://bit.ly/3iNjHZR Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, and Instagram: @KawaiiDesuPod Join our Facebook group: The Official Kawaii Desuppointment Group Intro/Outro is Dub Hub by Jimmy Fontanez Break Music is You Know Why by Loyalty Freak Music Find out more at https://kawaii-desuppointment.pinecast.co This podcast is powered by Pinecast.

Today, two of our state's top Democrats join us to discuss, well, everything that's happened since the beginning of year. Shasti Conrad, Chair of the King County Democrats, and Will Casey, Communications Director for the Washington State Democrats, weigh in on the inauguration, President Biden's first day in office, and what we can be pushing for as progressives. We also talk about the Jan. 6th insurrection, how it connects to hate groups here at home, and about what it's going to take to disempower and delegitimize these forces going forward. Sign up for Leah & Ezra's town hall on the new Indivisible Guide here: https://www.facebook.com/events/3814357108639918/

Casey and Manny talk week 7 gambling bets. Will Casey overcome his week 6 disaster? Spoiler he will. Make sure you click the link below and download the action network app to keep up with Manny and Casey’s picks! https://action.onelink.me/qhpb/cd2e6743

In this fun filled episode James and Beth review The Faculty. An updated (for its time) Alien takeover movie that has an outstanding cast. Will Casey and crew be able to find out who the Queen is in time? You will have to tune in to find out!Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/TheNostalgiaGroup)

It's another Convince Me episode! Matt has a hot take on the 2001 animated movie Atlantis the Lost Empire. Will Casey be convinced?

A battle for the ages. The ultimate grudge match. A geek-time throw-down! Last year, Shannon triumphed and took home the title of NerDebate Champion. Can she hold onto her title as Todd and her fellow 5-timer Chuck come back for revenge? Will Casey be able to keep things civil? What happens when another contender appears? It’s NerDebate 2: The Reckoning! Join us in watching this as our first ever video episode: https://youtu.be/EZcLTDGU1ho

Critics are saying it's "the wager of the century," "must-listen drama," and "I can't believe they're making this a thing, this is so dumb." That's right, it's the thrilling reveal of the #VoyagerWager! Will Casey like The Chronicles of Narnia: Voyage of the Dawn Treader? Will the antics of Reepicheep and Eustace warm Casey's curmudgeonly heart? Or will Morgan be ordering the next round of takeout? All the chips are down. The stakes for steaks have never been higher. Who wins, who loses ... find out on this episode of (Re)Read! Keep in touch with us: fb.me/ReReadPodcast wearereread.tumblr.com Twitter: @ReReadPodcast wearereread@gmail.com . . . #reread #childrensbooks #childhood #ruiningchildhood #nostalgia #cslewis #voyageofthedawntreader #chroniclesofnarnia #christianity #aslan #fantasy #clive #pevensies #reepicheep #eustaceisbae #caspianisstillboring #jrr #tolkien --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/wearereread/support

With Washington's state primary upon us, we convene our panel to discuss it. Communications for the Washington State Democrats, Will Casey, and head and founder of Indivisible Washington's 8th District, Chris Petzold, join us to talk about why this election matters, and what Democrats stand to gain in Olympia. We also break down some key races to keep your eye on at the state and legislative level. Plus, a virtual GOTV effort you can join. Links: WA Dems GOTV Tour: http://facebook.com/washdems/events Theme music from filmmusic.io "Pure Joy" by Otis Galloway License: CC BY (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

In the face of the coronavirus pandemic, national and state Democratic organizations have had to significantly alter their game plans for the 2020 election. We are joined by communications director for the Washington State Democrats, Will Casey, to talk about the shift in strategy, and to outline the many ways you can get involved, even as you shelter in place at home. Links: Sign up to volunteer with the Washington Democrats here: https://www.wa-democrats.org/digital-organizing/ Get in touch with a field director to help train volunteers: RFDS@wa-democrats.org Work on the Digital Disinformation Task Force: digitalmedia@wa-democrats.org Theme music from filmmusic.io "Pure Joy" by Otis Galloway License: CC BY (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

This week, we break down the results of Washington's first primary—about how it fits together with the emerging national picture, and about how both state Democrats and Indivisible members view the path to November. Joining us are communications director for the Washington State Democrats, Will Casey, and Indivisible Washington's 8th District Founder Chris Petzold. We also have a special ask to help out our friends at "Seattle's Only Newspaper," The Stranger. Links: Donate to help The Stranger: https://www.thestranger.com/contribute Information about COVID/coronavirus: https://www.doh.wa.gov/Emergencies/Coronavirus https://kingcounty.gov/depts/health/communicable-diseases/disease-control/novel-coronavirus.aspx Theme music from https://filmmusic.io "Pure Joy" by Otis Galloway License: CC BY (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Will Casey, WA Democrats Communications Director, on changes to this year's primary // Hanna Scott rounding up local coronavirus news // Dose of Kindness -- a pizza order, with a side of hugs // Gee Scott on postponing the Olympics over the the coronavirus // David Fahrenthold live on the federal coronavirus response/ Super Tuesday // Chris Sullivan's Chokepoint -- Issaquah-Fall City Rd closure // Rachel Belle on searching for senior citizen Bachelor contestants

As we all collectively gear up for 2020, we get a preview of some of the strategies and work that lies ahead to retake the Senate, keep the House, and win back the White House. We check in with our friends Chris Petzold, founder and head of Indivisible Washington's 8th District, and Will Casey, communications director for the Washington State Democrats, for a robust discussion about the congressional races here in the state, and also about the presidential race, as well as the impeachment process and what it might mean for the election. Link: Find an Impeachment Eve rally near you: http://bit.ly/impeachmenteve

This week, how Democrats can craft a winning message in 2020. We talk with two prominent Washington state Democrats—state Democratic Party communications director Will Casey and chair of the King County Democrats, Shasti Conrad—about how we in the grassroots community can best communicate to voters what Democrats stand for, and about how we strike the ideal balance in talking about—and not talking about—Trump. Then, we are joined again by Jennifer Young. She is a therapist who specializes in trauma. She's also an Indivisible leader, and she's here to answer your questions about how activists can best cope with overwhelm, outrage, and anxiety.

All good things must come to an end, like high school. The gang graduates and it is way more emotional than season 1, don't fight me on that. We find out what everyone got for graduation gifts which is the most important thing. Will Casey and Alex M make up? Will Kristin gain the freshman 15? Things are just starting to really heat up in Laguna though, and by in Laguna I mean between LC and Jason. Will he change for her? On another note, I talk about the Backstreet Boys concert, Trisha and Aaron, Jamie Foxx and Katie Holmes, and answer the question about Kaylor (well kind of). Make sure you rate, subscribe and follow Laguna_Biotch on Instagram! --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/lagunabiotch/support

Show Notes: Today's episode focuses on a big ole' round up of education in the news including: Finland’s digital-based curriculum impedes learning, researcher finds * Is #EdTech as glorious a solution as it has been promoted? What are the downsides to technology in the classroom? The Students Suing for a Constitutional Right to Education * Should we enshrine public education into the US Constitution? What do current federal court cases say about where this is headed? * Will Casey be the new director of social studies education for the state of Rhode Island? (**Hint: No). Louisiana School Made Headlines for Sending Black Kids to Elite Colleges. Here’s the Reality * To what extent does this story of abusive school practices call into question the legitimacy and governance of charter schools? * What does this say about the governance of our public schools?

In the thrilling conclusion to From Across The Bloodstone Marshes, listen in to see how this adventure ends. Will our heroes save the Fort? Will Condacia fall to darkness? Will Ladrian heroically sacrifice himself for the greater good, to restore his reputation? Will Casey get courtmarshalled? Apple Podcasts: https://itunes.apple.com/au/podcast/professor-jimbles-dicebag/id1080181132?mt=2 SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/professorjimblesdicebag/from-across-the-bloodstone-marshes-finale Jimbles on Twitter: twitter.com/Prof_Jimbles Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ProfessorJimblesDiceBag/ Professor Jimbles' Dice Bag is a hobbyist podcast - We create episodes for fun! Please rate and subscribe on iTunes in your favourite app, and tweet your favourite parts to @Prof_Jimbles on Twitter. If you think anyone would enjoy listening to us, send them a link! If you think we're idiots, tell us so with a 5-star review in iTunes, I promise I'll read them and be sad. Finally, you can always contact Jimbles and the crew on the facebook page: www.facebook.com/ProfessorJimblesDiceBag/ or at ProfessorJimblesDiceBag@gmail.com

Hugh is joined by Fiach Kelly and Harry McGee for a bonus Friday episode of Inside Politics. On the agenda: - It was another terrible week for Housing Minister Eoghan Murphy, with a well-attended protest outside the Dail followed by a harrowing RTE radio report featuring a teenage girl in emergency accommodation. It was the sort of interview that breaks through the noise and forces everyone to sit up and pay attention. - Housing is also likely to dominate next Tuesday's budget. What else can we expect from Paschal Donohoe? - Alone among presidential challengers, Peter Casey is dropping the motivational speaker approach and going straight for the jugular - Michael D's jugular, that is. Will Casey's pugilistic politics pay dividends?

On Episode 14 of the show, Clint and Casey will shoot the bull about last week's Conclave and will also preview this upcoming Sunday extravaganza! Will Casey give details on his extra linger longer?? Stay Tuned!!!

HOW TO TAKE BACK YOUR GOVERNMENT! ft. @syropco on impeachment / (the history of) violent revolution / reform + ideological revolution: get private money out of public places, elections, gerrymandering, voter suppression, the media scam, the power of community + conversation / Will Casey from the Alliance Democrats w/ways to get rid of shadiness in the sunshine state: https://secure.ngpvan.com/7kD-nwDBCk-7Fxm56fUt-Q2 / THIS is what democracy looks like / (outro music cred “America” by Logic)

It's episode 78... and we are what we believe we are... Split (2017) tells the story of Casey. A young girl who is kidnapped along with her two friends by a man calling himself Dennis. It turns out Dennis is one of twenty-three personalities living inside the body of one man, and there could be an even more menacing twenty-fourth personality on the way... Will Casey and her friends escape before it's too late? We talk about the key principles of controlling a conversation; the benefits of excessive violence against the extremely vulnerable; and (as ever) the importance of sticking to your principles. All of which leads to one big question:  How would you survive? Whatever happens, one thing's for sure...  Weren't there those two guys on a podcast a while ago... what were their names? Another classic film solved by the best movie podcast in the world.

On a brand-new episode of See You Next Wednesday, we're talking about the hotly anticipated meta-superhero film Deadpool. Will Casey and Greg fall for the juvenile jokester that is Ryan Reynolds in the titular role, or will they be turned off by a potentially barrel-scraping premise? Find out, this week! Then, gasp in horror as Dan sits through the most disgusting family movie The Adventures of Food Boy! Those with an aversion to mustard need not apply. Finally, the losers have to endure and discuss Nick Lachey's album for Fischer Price, A Father's Lullaby. But first, we've got plenty of movies to catch up with and trailer-teasers to discuss - including Ghostbusters, Star Wars, Stay Tuned, Sex & The City 2, Signs, Carnage, Narrow Margin, Dead-Bang and so much more! Show Notes: • Star Wars 8 & Ghostbusters Teaser Trailers (1:58) • Greg & Athena Watched Signs (5:16) • Casey Watched Tons o' Comedy Specials! (11:25) • Dan Double Featured Hyams' Narrow Margin & Stay Tuned (19:16) • Greg Reviews Montage of... See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.