On 4th vote, 34th District Democrats endorse Bob Hasegawa, Jessyn Farrell for mayor

By Tracy Record
West Seattle Blog editor

It took more than an hour and four rounds of voting tonight for the 34th District Democrats to decide who they are supporting for mayor.

The result: A dual endorsement for Bob Hasegawa and Jessyn Farrell. Hasegawa got the most votes in each round, but never the required supermajority.

At the start of the endorsement consideration, four candidates were nominated for consideration – besides Hasegawa and Farrell, members stood up to nominate Jenny Durkan and Cary Moon. The four nominees were in turn from a total of 8 eligible (declared Democrats, though the position is nonpartisan) – the other four, not nominated by anyone, were Michael Harris, Mike McGinn, James Norton, and Jason Roberts.

Here’s how it unfolded (followed by what else happened at tonight’s meeting at The Hall at Fauntleroy):

Before the first vote, speaking in favor of Durkan was County Council Chair Joe McDermott, who talked about her standing up against Pres. Trump’s travel ban, among other things. No one spoke against the nomination. Speaking in favor of Hasegawa was Marlene Allbright, who called him “the most experienced candidate running for mayor” and noted that he was one of two senators who voted against the “Boeing bailout.” Chris Porter spoke against the nomination, saying it was nothing against Hasegawa but it’s important to consider the “strong female candidates” since Seattle hasn’t had a woman mayor since 1926. Rebutting that, former 34th Dems chair Ivan Weiss pointed out that Hasegawa would be the city’s first Asian-American mayor, and that he always has strongly supported women’s rights.

Speaking on behalf of the Farrell nomination, Grace Stiller said the candidate has a strong record, especially on issues such as transportation and land use. No one spoke against the nomination. Finally, on behalf of Moon’s nomination, supporter Joe mentioned her proposal to “implement a speculators’ tax” as well as her “proven track record on progressive issues.” No one spoke against her nomination.

The first round ended with no winner (60 percent is required) – Hasegawa received 43, Farrell and Durkan 23 each, Moon 4. Usually the top two would go on to the runoff, but because of the Farrell/Durkan tie, it was a three-candidate race on the second ballot. That ballot didn’t produce a clear winner, either – Hasegawa had 41 votes, Farrell 27, Durkan 26, so it went to a Hasegawa/Farrell third vote. That ended with 53 for Hasegawa and 42 for Farrell – and it was on to a fourth vote, dual endorsement vs. no endorsement. Farrell gave a pitch first (Hasegawa had spoken earlier in the meeting, though it was more about what was going on in the Legislature than about his campaign).

Dual endorsement won, 76-18.

In case you are wondering, tonight’s endorsement voting was not preceded by a forum, because the 34th Dems had one last month (WSB coverage here) – the “showdown” format had Farrell finishing as the winner, though the group decided not to make any endorsement that night.

Meantime, you will be able to vote soon since King County Elections put ballots in the mail today; you can mail yours back or use a dropbox (no stamp needed) starting tomorrow – here’s the map (in West Seattle, the High Point Library has one, SW Raymond/35th SW).

If you still haven’t made up your mind and want to see and hear the candidates in person, two chances are coming up in West Seattle – the Sustainable West Seattle-presented forum that we are moderating at Summer Fest on Saturday (July 15th) at 2 pm, in Junction Plaza Park, with 16 of the 21 candidates RSVP’d so far, and the West Seattle Chamber of Commerce forum on business/transportation issues with 6 candidates at 6:30 pm July 20th at Youngstown Cultural Arts Center.

Here’s what else happened at the 34th District Democrats’ meeting, starting with another endorsement vote:

INITIATIVE 940: The group heard a brief presentation on behalf of De-escalate Washington, which is seeking to get this new police-training/-tactics-related measure on the ballot (read the text here). The 34th DDs subsequently went on the record as endorsing the signature-gathering campaign.

And regarding another potential ballot measure:

VETERANS AND SENIORS LEVY: County Council Chair McDermott said the proposed levy renewal/expansion for the November ballot was trimmed from 12 cents per $1,000 of property valuation to 10 cents by the Regional Policy Committee, and that one third would go to veterans, one third for human services, one third for seniors. Next, the full council will consider that on Monday – McDermott said he believes 12 cents is the right number and encouraged people to contact other county councilmembers to urge them to support it. (Here’s what we originally published about the measure back in May.)

Other matters brought up during the meeting, while the endorsement votes were being counted:

SCHOOL BUDGET: School Board member Leslie Harris said you need to know that the district still has a budget deficit and school capacity crisis. Funding is short for special ed, English language learners, and schools are “bursting at the seams” – so the Legislature “holding the capital budget hostage … (is) not so cool, not cool at all.” SPS projects have come in “under budget and on time,” meantime, she said, adding that the board “has been pushing back,” including recently passing a testing policy that she is “damn proud of.” She noted that the board also pushed back against the district administration regarding the waitlists controversy. “There are people who would suggest that we are micromanagers, and they would be wrong. It is our job” to watch over what they’re dealing with. And, she reminded everyone, there is an achievement gap between children of color and white children “that is inexcusable … and we are working every day to close that gap with our hands cuffed behind our back and no money to do it.” She is having a community meeting at Southwest Library, 3 pm this Saturday (July 15th – it’s in the WSB West Seattle Event Calendar too), “with lasagna,” she promised. Among other topics, she said, is it OK for PTSA’s to raise money to “buy staff” when many schools can’t afford it? “How is that considered equitable? It’s just not.” So they’re going to explore a policy that says “you don’t get to buy staff with your extra dough.”

SPEAKING OF SCHOOLS – HIGHLAND PARK READING TUTORS UPDATE: Dina Johnson, a Reading Partners volunteer at Highland Park Elementary, updated the 34th Dems on the crowdfunding campaign to try to save the program there. It has just three more days – or else, if it falls short, donations will be refunded. Here’s our most-recent story; you can donate by going here.

UPCOMING EVENTS: The 34th Dems will be in the West Seattle Grand Parade on July 22nd and the White Center Jubilee Days parade on July 23rd, chair David Ginsberg announced, and will have a booth at the Vashon Island Strawberry Festival that same weekend. … The group’s annual summer fundraising party is on August 11th at Dakota Place Park, billed as a carnival and barbecue, with tickets on sale now.

MEMBERSHIP: The group added 22 new members last month and is now up to 560. … 70 members have signed up for volunteer opportunities and there’s room for more.

The 34th District Democrats meet most months on second Wednesdays, 7 pm, at The Hall at Fauntleroy. Watch 34dems.org for updates between meetings.

Double Dub Resident July 13, 2017 (4:59 am)

These candidates are like 50 shades of Murray with everyone trying to out “progress” everyone else. It would be nice to get some kind of moderate for mayor.

Never thought I’d say that Seattle needs to take some lessons from Tacoma

Ivan Weiss July 13, 2017 (11:17 am)

Comparing Seattle to Tacoma is like apples to oranges. Tacoma has a different form of government altogether. They have a city manager, and the mayor has far fewer powers. Plus Tacoma has term limits for mayor and council.

Besides that, Tacoma’s mayor is a charter school and LNG terminal supporter. The overwhelming majority of Seattle voters would reject both positions.
- Double Dub Resident July 13, 2017 (11:47 am)
  
  I was referring to their stance on illegal immigration and the homeless situation
JanS July 13, 2017 (4:04 pm)

or..I suppose those who are so enamored with Tacoma, and how it’s run could…well….live there..of course, I’d only say that on Facebook…. ;-)

I can only read about the candidates…due to disability, commitments, etc., I cannot make these meetings with them…could the folks here who are so aghast at Bob Hasegawa please enumerate…what is your hassle with him? Same with Ms. Farrell…oh, and could you also include whether you are in anyway involved in any candidate’s campaign, or just a regular guy commenting on here. Thanks :D I’m not super familiar with any of them, except maybe our ex-mayor…

Jort July 13, 2017 (10:44 am)

For the life of me I can not understand why the Dems would endorse a mayoral candidate who has actively attempted to hinder and dismantle the ST3 program.

Bob Hasegawa will make it his life’s mission as a mayor to eliminate the ST3 taxes, and light rail will never come to the junction. But maybe that’s something the 34th Dems want?

EXTREMELY disappointing, and further proof that Democrats are needlessly and unnecessarily trying to thread the needle of political centrism in the midst of unprecedented social change in our region and nation.

Jon Wright July 13, 2017 (11:28 am)

I was disappointed to see all the support for Bob Hasegawa, too. Somewhat mitigated by the Jessyn Farrell co-endorsement; she is my first choice.
Lagartija Nick July 13, 2017 (1:49 pm)

I couldn’t agree more, Jort! It is simply mind boggling they would choose to support him, let alone endorse him.
Ivan Weiss July 13, 2017 (3:16 pm)

Responding to “Jort” and Peter:

“Actively attempted to hinder and dismantle the ST program” is a pretty gross misrepresentation of Bob’s position, and only my respect for West Seattle Blog prevents me from saying what else I think it is.

Bob wants to make the governance of ST3 more directly responsible to the voters, which is neither unreasonable, nor is it necessarily a minority position.

Bob has voted for every transit measure that has ever been on his ballot, and has supported all of them in his role as a legislator. Even a cursory check of his votes in the Legislature will confirm what I have said.

Bob is a union guy. Transit jobs are unionized family-wage jobs. Transit contracts have strong worker protections, which Bob has been fighting for all his life. Why would he be “anti-transit” in light of that? It would go against everything he has always stood for.

A small clique of self-appointed transit bloggers and self-imagined policy experts are spreading the “Bob is anti-transit” canard, and you appear to have swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. Bob is pro-transit right down the line, but he is not, and will not be, a rubber stamp for the ST3 bureaucracy, as they, and apparently you, would have him be. Bob believes in oversight, and you should be damned glad he does.

That is a feature of his candidacy, and hardly a bug. and thankfully, the membership of the 34th has seen through this deliberate campaign of disinformation, even if you and a few others haven’t.
- Mickymse July 13, 2017 (4:46 pm)
  
  Yes, we all know that Ivan is a big supporter for Hasegawa — and many of us “self appointed transit bloggers and self-imagined policy experts — honor much of the work that Bob has done. In fact, many of us enthusiastically support his calls for a publicly-owned bank, which would do wonders for financing public infrastructure projects like transit.
  
  HOWEVER, it is an inconvenient fact that Bob has repeatedly accused Sound Transit of lying to voters and of misleading the public with last year’s passage of Sound Transit 3. And his statements lend support to the ongoing campaign by Republicans legislators to lower the car tab taxes — which could delay or prevent the expansion of light rail to West Seattle. We have repeatedly offered him the opportunity to clarify or retract his public statements, and none of us have heard him admit that he was wrong when he accused the agency of “lying” or “misleading” voters.
  
  Bob may be an amazing and hard-working community leader who is usually on the right side of an issue, but if you want to see light rail come to West Seattle by 2030 or sooner then he simply is not the candidate you should be supporting for Mayor.
  - Ivan Weiss July 13, 2017 (5:17 pm)
    
    So let me get this straight, Michael. You’re saying, then, that this agency is above criticism, and above scrutiny, and that nothing they say is even to be questioned, let alone challenged, and that anyone who questions a word that comes out of their mouths, or how they decide to spend even a nickel, is in league with Tim Eyman, and that only a mayor who vows a blood oath to be a rubber stamp for ST is acceptable to you?
    
    If that’s what you’re saying, and it sure sounds like it, I hope you know you’re in a small minority. Most voters I know want a mayor who will challenge any bureaucracy on behalf of the taxpayers.
    
    And it’s quite a bit overwrought to claim that Bob’s questioning of Sound Transit will stop light rail from coming to West Seattle by 2030. That’s just silly Chicken Little stuff, and way beneath you to promote such unwarranted scare tactics.
- Jon Wright July 13, 2017 (4:55 pm)
  
  I had a one-on-one conversation with Bob Hasegawa about ST3 and I found his support equivocal at best. If Bob’s support of unions tips the scale his way in your evaluation, that’s fine. Transportation is the most important issue to me and there are plenty of other candidates on the ballot who are better in that regard than Bob.
- Jort July 13, 2017 (9:59 pm)
  
  Ivan,
  
  If Bob Hasegawa is so pro-transit, then how come he adopts the Republican line on Sound Transit? Why does he fight so hard to undermine its governance? Why does he insist on overturning the will of the voters?
  
  Sound Transit is accountable to the people: by proxy of the locally-elected officials who appoint members to its board. Elected officials like the Mayor of Seattle. I will be doing my part to ensure that Bob Hasegawa will never, ever appoint even one person to that board.
  
  Bob Hasegawa may like to call himself a “Democrat,” but when it comes to Sound Transit, he adopts the Republican party line. Or should I say, “hook, line and sinker?”
  - Ivan Weiss July 14, 2017 (7:09 am)
    
    @Jort:
    
    That position is extreme, and that comment is extremist. The governance of Sound Transit might meet YOUR standards for accountability, but it isn’t perfect. To insist that it is, and to attack, as I said above, anyone who even questions it, much less challenges it, as “anti-transit,” is an extremist rhetorical device, one that most informed voters will see right through.
    
    Suppose you tell me why, when Sound Transit plans its stations, even though it owns the air rights above them, it will not permit development on top of them, even for retail or office space, much less the workforce housing that everyone agrees that we suffer a shortage of? Is it OK somehow to promote “transit oriented development,” the holy grail of the urbanist clique, on everybody else’s property, but not their own?
    
    When the Roosevelt station was being planned, members of the community raised this question, and ST stonewalled it altogether, as if it wasn’t even legitimate to ask it. Is this something you defend? If so, would you like to explain further?
    
    Bob Hasegawa is concerned with the disparate impact of ST on low income communities of color in Seattle. Maybe that means nothing to you. Maybe low income communities of color mean nothing to you. Maybe you deny that there even IS a disparate effect. Unlike you, Bob represents people and not bureaucracies, and I see no reason for him to apologize for putting people first.
    
    My personal position is that I have voted for, and campaigned for, every transit measure that has been on the ballot in the 50+ years I have lived in King County, that I am perfectly happy to pay for transit through my car tabs, and that people who complain about car tab fee increases are probably spending their discretionary income on far more useless things already.
    
    That doesn’t mean I have to give Sound Transit, or any other public agency, a blank check, and hold them above question or criticism. I’d bet you’re also just fine with your elected officials being vigilant watchdogs over other public agencies. Just not the one, apparently, that promotes your pet issue. I understand.
- CAM July 14, 2017 (4:28 am)
  
  Sorry, Ivan. I attended a forum specifically addressing transit issues and Hasegawa responded to more than a few questions by saying that prioritising the movement of single driver cars and freight was more important than the movement of public transportation. I also find his statements that he wants to reempower community groups which have already been determined to be non-representative of the whole community to be problematic. He’s got integrity for saying things that I believe are probably quite unpopular but he’s wrong on those issues in my opinion and I don’t think he’s the right progressive choice. And I’ll note that I determined all of this based on his own statements before I even started digging in to his background.
  - Ivan Weiss July 14, 2017 (7:14 am)
    
    “community groups which have already been determined to be non-representative of the whole community “
    
    —
    
    Determined by whom? Sightline, maybe, or “The Urbanist,” or some other developer-funded sock puppet group? You’ll have to do better than that. But I doubt that you can.
    - CAM July 14, 2017 (9:21 am)
      
      I don’t really enjoy being belittled so I don’t know why I’m responding but I’ll just say that, again, my opinion is based on my own experience. I was suspicious of the move to disband the groups when I first heard about it. Then I attended a couple meetings because there were topics on the agenda of interest to me. My experience was that I was sitting in a room full of homeowners and listening to them talk about how irresponsible and non-civically engaged locally renters are.
      
      I’d also point out to you that insulting someone when trying to defend your chosen candidate does a real disservice to that candidate. I’ve walked away from voting for people before because their supporters were too aggressive. If I were an undecided voter right now I’d be very turned off from Hasegawa based on the way you are talking to people who don’t agree with you.

DB Coop July 13, 2017 (12:19 pm)

Farrell is just a female version of Murray and McGinn. Two terms of giving our city away to developers is enough! In fact I haven’t been impressed with the 34th Dems choices anyway so either one of these two should be thrown out.

Jon Wright July 13, 2017 (3:10 pm)

…they should be thrown out in favor of whom?

Mark Schletty July 13, 2017 (1:07 pm)

Just my two cents worth, and I am not connected to his campaign. Harley Lever’s positions on his website have been impressive to me. I know Jort won’t like him, but those of you who would like someone with a more balanced pragmatic, but still basically progressive approach to what is happening in our city might find him refreshing.

WSB July 13, 2017 (1:12 pm)

He had RSVP’d to the Admiral Neighborhood Association meeting, which we covered on Tuesday night, but did not appear. I am told that he is on the RSVP list for the Saturday afternoon forum we’re moderating.

Peter July 13, 2017 (1:14 pm)

Bob Hasegawa?? Have they lost their minds?

Farrell is much better than the other mayoral candidates.

JanS July 13, 2017 (4:07 pm)

yes, Peter, please elucidate about Bob Hasegawa…I don’t want to lose my mind. Thanks. What are your reasons for disliking him so much?
- Peter July 13, 2017 (5:37 pm)
  
  First, Hasegawa is a liar. He has claimed, without presenting a single shred of evidence, that the ST3 vote was rigged. That’s Trump level idiocy and lying, and it shows he can’t be trusted and will just make stuff up when he has an axe to grind.
  
  Second, his answer to almost every issue is to form a municipal bank, showing he’s not putting any more thought into the issues aside from the one magic bullet to solve everything. He’s about as thoughtful as Republicans who present tax cuts as a solution to everything. When someone has one solution to every problem, it means that thing itself is the actual goal, not actually addressing individual issues.
  
  Not acceptable in any way.

TJ July 13, 2017 (6:31 pm)

How dare anyone question ST3! I like Hasegawa already. The car tabs need to be reset at a cars value and not their ridiculous inflated calculation now. And Tim Eyman’s new $30 car tab initiative actually has the language to get around the states continued rebuttal of the people’s will in voting them in the past. At least Sound Transit has shot themselves in the foot for any future projects with the ST3 boondoggle. A candidate that understands cars are and will continue to be the mode of transportation for the vast majority of commuters in the future, and choose to respect that and focus on streets, will get a ton of votes right now. Enough dedicated bus and bike lanes, and focus on moving cars, starting with fixing crumbling streets (which we have voted new taxes for to fill potholes yet the streets get worse). While a republican is out of the question, a centrist democrat is what the city needs, not the ultra progressive “crusaders” that have infested politics here and who make the democrats here in the 80’s look like moderate republicans.

Ivan Weiss July 13, 2017 (7:11 pm)

TJ:

If you expect Bob to support Eyman’s latest flimflam, I fear you’ll be sorely disappointed.
Jort July 13, 2017 (10:01 pm)

No elected official in the history of human civilization has ever solved congestion and traffic issues by building more and more infrastructure for private vehicles.

Bob Hasegawa won’t be the first.

TJ July 13, 2017 (7:50 pm)

Oh Ivan, I have no belief that Bob will support Eyman’s initiative. I wouldn’t expect any candidate around here to support it, even though statewide it is going to pass. It’s just nice to see someone locally question ST3, and I’m surprised no one else is in light of the backlash on the boondoggle and crumbling support of Sound Transit and any future requests for money

Jon Wright July 13, 2017 (9:47 pm)

Apologies to all for my part in dragging this discussion off topic, but TJ, where are you coming up with this notion that there is “crumbling support for ST3”? The Seattle Times online comments?
- Double Dub Resident July 14, 2017 (4:56 am)
  
  I know quite a few people who have “buyer’s remorse” for voting for it. Maybe if people actually read about what they’re voting for, rather than voting yes because it makes them feel warm and fuzzy, TS3 might not have passed.
  
  I sure as heck didn’t vote for it. Not after that monorail debacle, of government stupidity, pushing local businesses out with imminent domain, wasting money only for nothing to come of it.

TJ July 13, 2017 (10:35 pm)

Jon, The portion of Pierce County that is part of Sound Transit voted decidedly against ST3, and now there is a major push there to get out of it all together. There has been talk of putting it up to a re-vote, and I have heard transportation advocates even admit it would probably fail. Unfortunately I know that won’t happen. While there is no doubt in Seattle the majority still support it, even here there are a lot of people who have been turned off by it. My in-laws are a example. They have voted for every tax increase/levy for transportation that has come up thru the years, and reluctantly voted for ST3 ( didn’t like the 50 billion price tag and time line but like so many said “we need to do something”). They are so upset about the car tab part of it they swear they are done with any other transportation tax proposals in the future.