Peters Tops Seattle Metropolitan Elections Assessments

That means she got a better score than ANY of the candidates including Blanford.

Peters is racking up in points and the endorsements.

To update, here is the link to 411, the online guide by the League of Women Voters.  Please note the LWV does NOT edit any replies so what you read is what the candidate themselves wrote.


Voting Peters said…

Estey continues to mislead the public by stating she served in an "advisory role" to the school board. Estey neglected to point out that she was a teenager and her school board experience was 25 years ago.
Future Ghost said…
Voting Peters has an interesting link and post.

We have enough people trying to mislead the public. Estey has proven herself to be untrustworthy and capable of misleading the public.

The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.

Estey can't be allowed onto the board.

Voting,it says this

"In high school, I served in an advisory role to the School Board and I've been involved in public education ever since."

Ms Estey does say it was in high school so I have no problem with that part of her statement.

Voting Peters said…
Thanks, Melissa.

I'm so glad that your blog is read my many and has the capacity to keep candidates honest. The above piece has been changed to reflect's Estey's High School involvement (over 2 decades ago).

I would also like to point out that Estey is supported by Jean Bryant. From the Seattle Times:

“Last time I wasn’t a voice as much as I should have been ... and it’s so critical,” said Jean Bryant, a Dale Estey supporter and former PTSA president of APP @ Lincoln, one of the district’s elementary programs for highly capable students."

Isn't Jean Bryant the individual that organized against Seattle's $700M Capital Levy?

Estey supports funding. Yet, she has people like Jean Bryant supporting her. Interesting.
Okay, well, I was against a levy once so I can understand the reasons people might rise up.

I have much more of a problem with Estey's acceptance of an endorsement from Peter Maier (when she won't from Steve Sundquist).
Anonymous said…
Regarding Estey aligning with Jean Bryant's anti-Levy efforts and the skewed Seattle Times advertorial...

Ms. Bryant is quoted as saying "Last time I wasn’t a voice as much as I should have been ... and it’s so critical.”

Anyone in the SPS community is free to lobby against passage of a Levy. Hopefully it's done thoughtfully and for valid reasons. But make no mistake it's not a "quiet" statement. Ms. Bryant in fact did blast emails and got press coverage. So for Ms. Bryant to somehow suggest that she has been too quiet in the past is absurd and disingenuous.

Equally curious is why Ms. Bryant doesn't fall into the "loud voices" category that Estey admonishes. The double standards, obfuscation of the facts, and political forces that seem to be aligning behind Ms. Estey are very disturbing.

For School Board I'm looking for a problem solver, not a political power broker or pawn (aka Estey).

I'm more convinced every day that Sue Peters is better suited to the job and has the interest of student as priority number one.

SPS Parent & Voter
Anonymous said…
I cannot see how Estey is not a female version of Sundquist. Go along to get along, and when necessary, ram that corporate agenda down their throats. She's making the same types of comments and general happy-speak that would've put her right in the center of the Gang-Of-Four.

Please tell me that voters memories are not that short. Please.

Just saying said…
Pettigrew sponsored charter legislation in 2012. Why would Estey accept support from Pettigrew, not Sundquist? They are birds of a feather.
Just sayin, Estey said she wouldn't accept Sundquist's endorsement because he supports charters. So does Pettigrew (and Maier) so I'm confused.
Eric B said…
Has Maier changed his tune on charters? Last I saw was at the Stranger election forum just before voters turned him out, and he said he opposed them then. So did Sundquist, of course, so support can certainly change.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I'd like to see this mailer. Can someone take a photo of it? Yes, unless something is factually untrue (or defames), they can pretty much say anything as long they ID who paid for it. Did her campaign or some other group? Because if it was her campaign, we may be seeing some unpleasant campaigning.

Estey has raised about $33k and spent about $25k. I expect much bigger numbers on both sides should she get to the General election.

Reprinting Anonymous' comment,

I just received a mailer that presents a comparison of Estey and Peters, in a supposedly unbiased manner, all the while mangling facts and presenting Estey as the superior candidate. No doubt this pro-Estey propaganda is intended to trick hurried folks who don't read very closely into believing its lies, calling Peters "More of the same."

Ick. Since when did SCHOOL BOARD races in our town play dirty ball? I guess the Estey team is using some of that 20K she has to spend on campaign tricks such as this.

Of course, it says that "no candidates authorized this ad" and that it was sent by The Great Seattle Schools/Civic Alliance for a Sound Economy. But any birdbrain knows that they are huge supporters of Estey.

It's nauseating, and has surely pushed me away from even considering Estey as a candidate. Is this legal? The flyer urges voters to "get the facts," all the while mangling the truth. For instance, in a side-buy-side comparison, they show Estey as having a Masters degree, fail to mention Sue Peters' masters degree (from Stanford! I saw on her site) and merely labels her a "blogger." Well, she has spent nine years involved in our schools, with Estey spending, what - one?
Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said…
I need to do more research on differences between PACs and super PACs and Federal elections vs local elections, so I deleted my last comments on the Chamber of Commerce's PAC ads for Estey.

I will research further.

But anyway, lying in political ads is certainly not illegal. It's protected by the first amendment.
mirmac1 said…
Estey's slandering someone. She'll make DeBell proud.
Disgusted said…
Poor Estey. The Chamber of Commerce is playing dirty tricks and there isn't a thing she can do. Poor, poor Estey. She is just a victim.
Anonymous said…
to the 4:29 re-copy by Melissa.

These kinds of ads are SO typical of the Estey / Sinderman crowd of ... progressives / whatever they call themselves, because, cheer cheer, they're not racists or bigots.

Estey is EXACTLY 'more of the same' - look at who has endorsed her!!! What does her crowd do - attack the opponent with a label Estey has earned and deserves !!!!

What is amazing about this back slapping inside-the-right-club crowd is that they'd rarely hardball against the Eymans or the Rodney Toms or the national crony charter bandits hoovering fat paychecks off of schools stuffed with underpaid Teach For Awhile wonders - but - they don't hesitate to hardball someone like Sue who isn't in their pocket and who isn't part of their club.

Let's see how fast Estey condemns this sleaze piece and condemns those who sent it ...

From the Chamber of Commerce website:

"Civic Alliance for a Sound Economy:

Supporting government officials and initiatives that foster economic prosperity is essential to the health and vitality of Seattle and the metropolitan area. Recognizing this need, more than 40 employers representing nearly every prominent business sector in the region created a new political action committee, the Civic Alliance for a Sound Economy (CASE).

Electing people who champion economic prosperity is essential for the health and vitality of the greater metropolitan Seattle area.

Specifically, CASE has four objectives:

-Educate voters about the importance of a robust economy
- Endorse and drive appropriate resources toward candidates who support job creation and economic growth
- Align aspirations and resources of other like-minded political organizations
- Track and report on voting records for elected officials"

CASE is a PAC. They have a members link but don't list their members. They are supporting Estey and Blanford. What's funny is if you hit the link for Estey, it takes you right to her donation page. Blanford, to his website.
Bwaa haaaa said…
The city's elite and powerful are going after Peters. Bwaa haaaa haaa!

I hope Estey is taking note. Estey will be the power broker's tool. If she doesn't do what the pooh baahhhs tell her to do..she will get the same treatment!! This isn't even the tip of the iceberg.
Angry Coalition said…
Do you remember when David Brewster publicly threatened Smith Blum? Here are his exact words:

"A similar potential for escalation exists in Seattle Schools, where the reform coalition is angry and embarrassed about being blindsided in the past election. One obvious way to fight back would be to make the next election, in 2013, a well-funded effort to retake the majority of the school board, putting a scare into Kay Smith-Blum, the hard-to-read new leader of the majority, and Betty Patu."

Now, the coalition is angry at Peters.

Smith-Blum's wasn't a puppet for big business and they got angry. It is no surprise that she is being unfairly treated by the media.

Does Estey really know what she is in for?

I have the mailer and will put it up tomorrow. If this is the primary, the general will not be pretty (but that's Estey's decision).
Griffin Arises said…
I received a mailer, too. Matt Griffin is one of the individuals that paid for a campaign against Peters.
Unknown said…
I see that Peter Maier has maxed out on his donations to the Estey campaign at $900. I see no contributions from Sundquist. That's probably why she has accepted Maier's endorsement.
Anonymous said…
I got one of those mailers too. At first glance, it doesn't appear partisan until you start to digest the language. Very smooth, subtle digs indeed. Lots of code words there, but hey, she's DeBell's. The lady got places to go and this school board race is a start to her political career. Estey knows what she's in for. Does Sue Peters?

Me too said…
I have also received a mailer. The mailer was paid for by Matt Griffin, Christopher Larson, Civic Alliance for a Sound Economy (CASE) and Great Seattle Schools (Suzanne Naughton)

Who is Great SEattle Schools and Suzanne Naughton?
Anonymous said…
Estey priorities (from pro Estey mailer):
"Support our teachers instead of blaming them for the challenges our schools face."

Peters priorities (from a pro Estey mailer):
"Get the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation out of public education."

According to this Estey mailer, this point gets reiterated again under the section on SCHOOL FUNDING where the difference between the two is Estey believes SPS needs partnerships with Seattle Chamber of Commerce and the Gates Foudation and Peters doesn't. Umm, did you know this? Chamber of Commerce and Gates fund schools.

The whole flier is odd and Seattle school kids don't even get a mention. (you read that right. zip, zilch, none of the "it's for the kids" slogan. Maybe that'll come later.

If she wins, will Gates donate a billion or two to SPS every year? Because that'll get my attention and maybe my vote. How does this inform the voter anything because according to this flier, it's voter information?

mirmac1 said…

For the disingenuous "its for the kids" sloganeering, go to Estey's Facebook page.
mirmac1 said…
Holy Crap! Nearly $3M for a school board race?! That should convince the skeptics that the Billionaires want to take over your neighborhood school.

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Seattle Public Schools and Their Principals

COVID Issues Heating up for Seattle Public Schools