Everybody Wins (Except for Voters and Parents)
A quick follow-up on the story about Director Vivian Song's apparent violation of the RCW about school directors, their districts and elections.
To be clear, I'm no lawyer but I DID consult one who said, "The RCW is pretty clear." It would appear that legally, Song should have announced her move from one district area to another district area and then the district would have added that region to the November 2023 election. After the election, she would have then stepped down.
I also think that it was unethical for Song to not tell the parents and voters of Seattle about her move. It was no crime to move but her not telling people stinks.
I will add that I like Director Song and think she's clearly the smartest person on the Board.
Also, when Song first ran, the districts were configured differently. Due to population changes, the director districts were redrawn about a year ago. Ballard was part of D4 at the time Song ran. (This article in the Times has the old districts; here's what they look like now via SPS website.)
But pondering this situation, here's what I see.
- When Song first ran, it's unclear where she lived but it appears she may have had a choice of which district to run out of, given her housing options. Why didn't she want to run against Michelle Sarju whose region covers Capitol Hill? That's not clear. Also, did she wait to file until both regions had at least one challenger?
- What this means in the district she ran out of - D4 - is that the candidates in that race with her may have been cheated out the position themselves. That would be Laura Marie Rivera and Erin Dury. (When Eden Mack, former director in D4, stepped down, Dury filled her position until the next election. Dury did not win.)
- To the best of my knowledge, Song has issued no public statement. And that may be a good tactic in light of her throwing her hat into the ring for the open City Council seat.
Last night the Council had a meeting where the eight Council candidates were asked various questions about city issues. I read the account of the Q&A on Twitter (via The Stranger) and it seems Song acquitted herself well. Interestingly, candidate Tanya Woo had her own sticky wicket as it appears she never voted in a local election until 2021 as she had not registered to vote until she was 37.
But Song's issue didn't fit into any question and so did not come up.
- If Song is picked for the City Council, she will take it and no, won't serve on both.
Given that there is a huge pull for her by Labor to get the Council seat and huge powers that be trying to not see that happen, it's anybody's guess what will happen. I do feel for the other candidates because it seems like that battle is taking the focus off of the other six contenders.
If Song is picked, well, I'm sure the whole "where does she live and how long has she lived there" question will die on the vine.
- That would leave an open seat on the Board that the Board will fill. Are the majority of people on the Board going to cry if she leaves? Nope.
I think that secretly, some of them are ecstatic because they will now be able to have THEIR choice for her seat. Song is now a bit of a nail in their hooves because she does her homework and asks staff hard questions. No matter how much Board leadership tries to dismiss her ideas, they are still out there in the ether. (There's the reason this blog still exists - to document what is said because the Board minutes sure aren't except for director questions/staff responses in the Board meeting agendas.)
- As I threw out earlier, I'm sure their first choice would be former director Chandra Hampson if she lived in that district. She's a tough cookie AND knows all the players AND all about SOFG (Student Outcome Focused Governance). But it seems like Hampson is going to be a behind-the-scenes player for now. (Part of me is surprised that SHE didn't apply for the Council seat. But she's damaged goods now.)
They could try to install Erin Dury again but I'm not sure how that will look given that Dury ran as an incumbent last time and didn't even clear the primary. She would not be a "will of the people" choice for the Board.
And, as I stated above, the director regions have been redrawn so you'd get a somewhat different pool of people who might apply.
- What if she is not picked for Council? It's going to be a long, painful time for Song on the School Board as she has two more years on her term.
- D4 seems to have a revolving door of directors; it's hard to say why that is. The last really good D4 rep was Sue Peters.
Comments
Democratic Norms
We Democrat Seattleites call out this kind of corruption and cronyism when it happens in other places. How about we follow the rule of law here?
SP
You make a very good point about directors not representing their districts. At this point, it appears the board majority is focused on representing the SCPTSA,
I won't make excuses for Song, but she does hold community meetings which hasn't been the case for her colleagues. As well, she weighs in with District 4 and those working within District 4 before making big decisions. I was happy to see that Gina Topp will be holding community meetings.
There is an RCW on these elections and it appears that she may have violated that law. A law. The minute we have electeds not caring or following the law (see Orange Guy), we have lost.
She DID do something sneaky - she told the Board and SPS leadership about her move and no one else. Ethically, she should have told Seattle voters, especially those in her own district. She didn't.
I agree with Unknown.
Pot Kettle
Her husband is a builder so all along, her eye has been on the prize: a seat on City Council. You can’t see this?
Transparency please
My take is still that it is not a big deal. I think everyone knew she didn't really live in the rental apartment, that she just rented it to be able to run legally. I understand if this bothers some people, and I could understand it as a reason for not voting for her. I voted for her fully understanding that she didn't meaningfully live in my district and not caring. Since her election I've been happy with her work. I'll leave the legal discussion to the legal field. I'm just saying as someone who voted for her, I'm happy with the results and not particularly bothered by these latest developments. I'm fine with others disagreeing, but yes I read the coverage and don't find it troubling.
If you don’t think that someone lived where they were registered to vote, are you OK with them voting in other people’s elections?
Publicly available voter information at the WA Secretary of State website shows that VS voted in the 11/08/2022 general election. (Which completely aligns with her reported City Club debate statements that she has a nearly perfect voting record, that it’s so easy to vote with mail-in ballots, that she helped a relative learn to vote, etc.)
The 11/08/22 election included every seat in the state House of Representatives. The ST article says that she says she moved to Capitol Hill in 2022, though she does not say when. (And many folks like Amanda F say they believe she never actually lived in Ballard, that she just rented a place there in order to run.) VS also says she did not update her voter registration until March 2023, which would presumably mean she was registered at the Ballard address on 11/08/22.
I’m wondering if her supporters would also say they’re OK with her voting for Ballard’s state legislators if she should have been voting for Capitol Hill’s legislators. For whom is it OK to do that, and for whom is it not OK?
I guess I’m curious how far the pass that people seem willing to give her goes. I’ve noticed that on Twitter some people who are Tweeting support of her are literally the same people who accused SPOG President Mike Solan of voter fraud because he registered at his work address in SE Seattle. What is the difference? Amanda, do you think it’s a nothingburger for anyone to register to vote anywhere they want? To me, that road would seem to lead to a very dark place.
Questions
If we're more loyal to people than the law, them democracy is already dead, and the Democrats can give it a rest.
SP
It's about trust.