Once Again, Words Have Meaning

 Update 1:

Two items.

One, the Seattle Times seems to be testing the pot-stirring waters with this article today, The Seattle School Board rule that nobody seems to want to enforce. They impart almost nothing new and the headline is a bit off - it's also a law which is more important. Problem is, WHO is the enforcer? 

King County Elections also deflected responsibility, saying the office’s role is limited to checking if a candidate is eligible to run when they file in May. That’s when staffers check voter registration records. After that, they are “not responsible for monitoring ongoing eligibility and don’t have any authority to get involved,” said Halei Watkins, the communications manager for the office.

Also in the article, 

So now it’s up to Song to decide what to do. On Friday, Song declined to comment.

My impression is Song is not going to do or say anything.

Seattle needs geographic requirements for its board members because it is a segregated city, Rankin said. “You don’t want a board with three people from Magnolia.”

Okay sure but also, it is not possible for all the directors to know every school and region well. Having members from all parts of the city allows directors to know their regions and impart that knowledge to the other directors as issues arise.

Second, I queried King County Elections about recalls. here's what they said;

Any recall is set in motion when a person files charges with our office. When the charging paperwork is complete, we forward the charges to the Prosecuting Attorney's Office for review. If the charges pass the Prosecuting Attorney's review, they are forwarded to King County Superior Court. That court schedules a hearing. At the hearing, a judge determines whether the recall charges meet necessary legal thresholds.

They went onto say that very few recall efforts make it through the preliminaries. But if they do, they have 180 days to get enough signatures. They didn't say but it is some percentage of vote totals in a previous school board election.

If there are sufficient signatures, then a recall election is held within 45-90 days. King County's election calendar includes February and April Special Elections, an August Primary, and the General Election in November, which means we're usually able to add a recall to an upcoming ballot. In the event things don't align, though, we're able to set a separate recall election date.

It's worth mentioning that jurisdictions occasionally have additional rules that affect the timing of which races appear on which ballot - for example, the Seattle City Charter has rules that will put their recently appointed city council position up this year. You'll have to confirm with the Seattle School Board whether they have any additional rules like that.

I do not believe I saw any other rules from the Board policies on timing for replacing members.

Given that it seems no government entity believes/wants to act on this anomaly, I think that the only movement on Song would have to come at the hands of voters, either in a recall or in the next election cycle which includes both the district she used to live in and the one she currently lives in (plus SE Seattle's seat). 

I am not suggesting anyone should do this; I'm just providing information. 

End of update

This is an important update as I believe I have found the nuance in Board policy that might allow Song to stay on. I will say it appears to contradict the RCW about director districts. It's quite the mess.

So what did I find?

In Seattle School Board policy 113, Board Member Residency, it says (in full):

A Director must remain a resident of the school district to be eligible to continue to serve as a Board member. If a Director’s residence changes to a place outside the district, the Director must resign and his/her eligibility to serve ends with the change of residence. 

If a Director is required to live within a specific director area of the district in order to be elected or appointed to the Board, and the Director’s residence changes to a place outside the director area, but within the district, the Director may continue to serve on the Board until the next regular school district election (the fall of odd numbered years), at which time an election will be held to fill the Board position for the director area the Director no longer resides in. If the change of residence occurs after the filing period for the regular school district election, but before the election, and the Director is in the first two years of his/her term, he/she may continue to serve from a residence outside the director area, but within the district, until the end of the term he/she was elected to. 

If a Director’s director area boundaries are redrawn during his/her term of office, the Director may serve out the term he/she was elected to. 

Now, as the Seattle Times says, it appears that Song's timeline does not match up to either this policy or the RCW. Song moved before the filing period for the regular school district election in Fall 2023 in which case she should have notified the district and served until that election.

BUT, see that last sentence in the Board policy? The phrasing there is key. Did Song's director area boundaries get redrawn during her time in office? They did. But that sentence does not say, director area boundaries were redrawn so that the director doesn't live in that district any longer.  

No, it just says that if the boundaries get redrawn during their time in office, they can stay until the end of their term.

However, the relevant RCW says:

(1) If, as a result of redrawing the director district boundaries, the director no longer resides in the director district, the director shall retain his or her position for the remainder of his or her term of office; and

See the difference? The RCW says if, as a result of redrawing the boundaries, the director no longer lives in their director district, they can stay while the Board policy just says "if boundaries are redrawn in the term of office." Nothing about the director's own district changing. 

While the Board policy seems to align with the RCW on the issue of timing, it does not on the issue of redrawing boundaries.  

You could say, "Well, you know what the Board meant - if the redrawing changes cause the director to no longer being in their district, then they might need to resign."

Kids, again I say, WORDS HAVE MEANING. 

I don't think that anyone truly has the time and legal expertise to sort this out. However there is still  the possibility of a recall election if enough citizens are unhappy about this situation.

I have a call into King County Elections to see if I can get clarity on a couple of points about elections. 

Stay tuned.