This morning's Sunday PI had endorsements for SB races. I wasn't expecting any surprises but they endorsed Darlene Flynn over Sherry Carr. Very odd given their reasoning. Here's their early reasoning:
"Flynn's impressive ability to think about the big picture is now augmented by four years of experience and realism about the challenges of making systematic changes."
I have never seen evidence of Darlene's "big picture" and I wish they would have elaborated. But yes, she now has seen what the job is like after four years. And, we have seen her after 4 years. She said at the candidate forum this week that she is busy and can't answer e-mails but she does the work. Great but what about listening to input/concerns from the people who elected her? Where does she get that big picture thinking?
Then they talk about how the Board cleanly selected a new superintendent, cleaned up the budget mess, etc. (all things that Sally Soriano can point to as well so that's puzzling).
Then they say:
"Voters have an impressive option in challenger Sherry Carr, a Boeing finance officer and former president of the Seattle Council PTSA." If she's so impressive, why not vote for her?
Here's what they said about Maier versus Soriano (which, if you didn't live here, would likely leave you scratching your head):
"For Director District 1, Peter Maier is a clear choice over the other incumbent on the ballot, Sally Soriano, who is sometimes unhelpfully at odds with board majorities. Maier has a broad understanding of the district and its challenges after helping lead successful levy and bond measure campaigns."
Many might say that "unhelpfully" was kind given how people feel about Sally. But, on the other hand, to say that Peter knows the district well because of his work on Schools First is not quite true. He likely knows where a lot of buildings are but that doesn't equate knowing the district. He also followed the staff line through every levy, not asking hard questions (I know this from an early discussion I had with him before he was running).
For District VI:
"For Director District 6, voters have excellent choices in Ramirez or Steve Sundquist, a former Russell Investment Co. leader. We like Ramirez, a public sector manager, for her understanding of such real-life challenges for high school students as holding part-time jobs and early school start times. She also has served on district advisory groups."
It sounded here, like the Flynn versus Carr race, that they barely give the edge to Ramirez over Sundquist. Interesting.
I just wish in this editorial they had been clearer on why they made their choices. It almost feels like you are supposed to read between the lines somehow.