Updated Endorsements for Seattle School Board Races, 2023

 District 1 - Debbie Carlsen

Incumbent Liza Rankin is a die-hard Student Outcome Focused Governance fan (and apparently took some training to be a coach of it). That means that because of that support, she helped get rid of Board committees that provided needed oversight of staff/district activities and spending. She helped reduce oversight of district spending. She helped shorten the amount of discussion on any given item on the Board agenda.

Debbie Carlsen will push back on SOFG and is running for more transparency and accountability and community engagement. These are all things that Rankin has either, in word or deed, said no to except on her terms. 

Seattle needs a responsible director for District 1. 

District 2 - Lisa Rivera Smith or Christina Posten???

I am baffled by this race. Rivera Smith's website, even after the primary, remains a single page. That sure isn't telling voters much. Weird. And River Smith has been quite timid in pushing back against the Board majority. Is that going to continue into her next term?

As a former teacher and principal, Posten, who knows what running a school means  is not exactly setting the world on fire, either.  Here's her campaign website.

Her campaign website is as weak as Rivera Smith's. Neither has listed any endorsements. 

Both campaigns seem weak and lazy. This is so disappointing because the Board needs strong members.

District 3 - Ben Gitenstein

Gitenstein clearly brings more to the table in terms of a skillset than Briggs. It's just no contest there. 

He is also willing to speak out AS a candidate, not waiting until he gets elected. That takes courage.  

Also, I'd like to think that people might realize that a candidate endorsed by the outgoing and bullying incumbent, Chandra Hampson, is probably not someone who you want on the Board. Hampson wouldn't have been reelected and Briggs should not take her place.

 

District 6 - Gina Topp 

Topp is also has another candidate with a better skillset than her opponent, Maryanne Wood.  Her endorsement list is impressive. But her focus as a director is fairly bland. Equity? Check. Safe and welcoming environments? Check.  Community engagement? Check. I am intrigued at her 4th priority which is "empowering educators." It will be interesting to see how she might try to do that.

But  I can't praise Wood enough for standing up and speaking out on issues. 

However, given Topp's getting to the party late (meaning not being a parent of a K-12 student ever and not being a face in the district), it's hard to say what kind of director she will be AND who she might line up with in voting.

                                                                         *****

All these candidates, except Lisa Rivera Smith, are running on, among other things, "accountability, transparency and community engagement." (Rivera Smith doesn't say what she will do in a second term nor anything that she has done in her first term.)

Rankin says she's running on these three planks as well. However, she says this:

I’m committed to making and strengthening policy that directs the district’s community engagement and defines community engagement expectations and commitments of the board, and making sure that engagement is accessible through district-provided translation and interpretation so that all community members are able to participate.

During her term she has WEAKENED public engagement. Also, she wants to redefine, not "define" community engagement. Her language says that she wants to change the policy of community engagement AND the Board commitments to that effort. 

It's depressing to hear candidates running on the same issues that candidates have used for a very long time. Clearly, it's not working. SPS is NOT a transparent district and most of the community engagement is checklist perfunctory. And accountability? Please.

What is equally troubling is that despite Rankin and Rivera Smith being gung-ho on SOFG which they clearly believe is going to transform the district, neither has anything about it on their webpages. THEY should be the ones putting that out there; voters should NOT have to learn about it well after it has been enacted. 

                                                                       *****

Let's see where the primary election results landed.

In District 1, there were about 24,500 votes counted out of a possible vote total of nearly 70,000.  Rankin took 61.44% of those votes, with Carlsen getting 22.36%. The other two candidates' vote totals combined come to about 16%. Even if Carlsen got their votes, she would only be at just over 38%. 

Carlsen has a big hill to climb to win. 

 

In District 3, there were about 23,000 votes out of a total of about 60,500 registered voters.  Briggs came in first at 40.19% with Gitenstein at 31.31% and candidate Christie Robertson at 28.06%.

Who will get Robertson's votes? Hard to say for sure but Gitenstein and Robertson were much more aligned together in tone versus Briggs. If Gitenstein did receive Robertson's votes, he would be at almost 60%.

In District 6, there were about 27,000 votes counted with about 74,500 registered voters.  Gina Topp received nearly 80% of the vote with Maryanne Wood receiving 14.24% and the third candidate, Rosie McCarter, receiving 5.57%. Unless Topp is found to be kicking puppies, she's going to win that seat. 

                                                                     *****

But let's look at the current Board make-up in terms of voting patterns versus what might happen after the election. 

Currently you have board president Brandon Hersey, Rankin, Hampson and Director Michelle Sarju as a solid voting bloc. Director Vivian Song Maritz, Director Leslie Harris and Rivera Smith will sometimes oppose the majority vote, either together or singly. (I have no idea if any of the latter three try to convince one of the majority group to vote with them but it has almost never happened.)

The Board does - as it has historically - generally voted favor of the majority of items, 7-0. 

However, after the election here's what it could look like.

You have Hersey and Rankin and Sarju. If Briggs wins, there's your 4-person majority and nothing changes.

But if Gitenstein wins, he would likely join Song Maritz in voting. So you then have Hersey/Rankin/Saju, just three now.

Now if Rivera Smith wins, she may hold firm with Song Maritz and Gitenstein. Or, join the majority but only vote with them if she gets some concessions for other things that she wants.

Carlsen, if she manages an upset, would clearly vote with Song Martiz and Gitenstein. There's another three person group.

Posten, if she beats Rivera Smith, is clearly running as a change agent so I think she would be in the minority group.

Basically, though, you could end up having 3 directors on one side, 3 directors on the other side. 

So that's leaves Topp. She does not seem to be running as a change agent but she has also been in King County government and may be quite surprised at how the district runs once she gets on the inside. If it does come down to 3-3 in voting, Topp could be a deciding vote on many issues.

This could get quite interesting.