PRIMARY ELECTION 2019: Final results, and what’s next

checkbox.jpgTwo weeks after voting ended in the 2019 primary, the final results have been certified. In the three races that were local to our area:

Seattle City Council District 1 – 40.42% turnout – 27,528 voters out of 68,102 registered
Lisa Herbold – 13,405 – 50.62%
Phil Tavel – 8,558 – 32.32%
Brendan Kolding – 4,435 – 16.75%

King County Council District 8 – 35.86% turnout – 53,813 voters out of 150,071 registered
Joe McDermott – 41,743 – 83.89%
Michael Robert Neher – 5,487 – 11.03%
Goodspaceguy – 2,250 – 4.52%

Seattle School Board District 6 – 40.59% turnout – 27,228 voters of 67,088 registered
Leslie S. Harris – 12,580 – 54.56%
Molly E. Mitchell – 7,872 – 34.14%
Crystal S. Liston – 2,390 – 10.36%

The top two in each race advance to the general election, with voting ending on November 5th. The first candidate forum in West Seattle that we’ve heard of so far is for City Council District 1, Saturday, September 14th, 6:30 pm at the Duwamish Longhouse (4705 W. Marginal Way SW), presented by the D-1 Community Network. (Planning a forum or debate, or non-fundraiser candidate meet-and-greet? Please let us know ASAP – – thank you!)

45 Replies to "PRIMARY ELECTION 2019: Final results, and what's next"

  • Jort August 20, 2019 (7:31 pm)

    As summer slowly comes to a close, it’s always a sad feeling to have to fold up the FEMA-style tents for the season. Whomp whomp. Maybe Mr. Kolding can go apply for a job in the Trump administration? He certainly meets the primary job requirement of lying. I look forward to never hearing from him again. BYE.

    • The King August 20, 2019 (9:09 pm)

      Intermingling a twisted sense of humor with a homeless problem. Classy jort. 

  • M August 20, 2019 (8:39 pm)

    I look forward to another four years of blaming our drug crisis on lack of affordable housing and prioritizing the rights of criminals over tax paying families. 

  • TJ August 20, 2019 (9:14 pm)

    We deserve the mess the city is setting itself up for in the near future by electing these “grassroots” progressives who aren’t equipped to be in politics or run a city this size. I just wonder if people realize thst Herbold is a borderline socialist with all of her decisions. She is currently penning a plan to not allow landlords to charge tenants for damage done to their property during “domestic violence”, thus making the landlord incur the costs. Just a ludicrous idea, and while my rental property is in Spokane, this is just another jab at property owners here as these progressives hate people with multiple properties. I have given up and thrown in the towel on this city, and only hope I can keep my business at its current level for 3 more years. I will be in a position to watch and not care what becomes to this social bubble 

    • WSB August 20, 2019 (9:43 pm)

      That’s not what the legislation is about, as you can read here:

      So you’re in favor of forcing survivors of domestic violence (or other violence) to be penalized financially too as well as the other trauma they’ve been put through?

      Walk a mile in their shoes, dude/tte. I remember the night my mom’s drunken second husband hit her and then put his fist through the apartment wall. She bravely ordered him out (something many victims are too terrorized to do). Called the police. The landlady’s insurance eventually covered the damage …though the trauma suffered by my mom and us, different story. There may be a lot of reasons to criticize city leaders but trying to help domestic-violence survivors isn’t one of them. – TR

      • Melissa August 20, 2019 (10:20 pm)

        Thank you for the clarification, TR. And I’m sorry for what you and your mom went through. 

      • West Seattle Hipster August 21, 2019 (6:22 pm)

        This is one of those times when you know that you are reading a blog, and not a legitimate source of news.    

        • WSB August 21, 2019 (7:10 pm)

          Insult away, for whatever reason you’re upset, but sorry, you’re wrong, we’re as legitimate as it gets. Not just because we’ve been doing the work day in/day out/night in/night out (dating back 30 years pre-WSB too), but I could also direct you to our shelf full of recognition, from the regional Society of Professional Journalists to the national Online News Association. Not going to argue further as I have to get back to work. – TR

        • miws August 21, 2019 (7:51 pm)

          WTF, Hipster?! WTAF?!—Mike 

    • CAM August 20, 2019 (10:01 pm)

      Hey TJ – Help me out here, is “domestic violence” the same kind of concept as “rape”? Funny how we never see “robbery” or “assault” or “burglary”, etc. 

    • HappyCamper August 21, 2019 (12:01 am)

      No debate that domestic violence is horrible. The problem I see with this isn’t in the spirit of protecting victims of domestic violence.Its contract law and legal liabilities. If I buy a car with my wife, she lets insurance lap, gets drunk and hits someone else diving and totals it, we’re both on the hook. That’s how it works when you co-sign for something, it’s a gamble that the other party will handle their business correctly and they’re gambling on you. People get hosed on that every day. And a scenario like that can have huge negative impacts on the person who didn’t do it.In the case of the landlord that’s like telling Toyota or your credit union or whoever that they have to eat the car you totaled. That’s unfair and it’s not right.Domestic violence and legally binding business dealings are two different things. Totally sucky but it does seem like everything is getting pushed onto landlords who are already assuming a ton of risk.If we’re going to make more and more rules we need mandatory insurance carried by the renter to protect the structure not the renters property. People shouldn’t be able to move into a place with no deposit or last months rent, punch a bunch of holes in the walls and ruin the hardwoods or whatever and then just leave. A lot of landlords already can’t afford to sue to chase down damages.There has to be a better way to address an issue like this. 

      • WSB August 21, 2019 (12:30 am)

        “Domestic violence” doesn’t necessarily mean your partner/spouse with whom you share the abode. Could be your child. Your parent. Your grandparent. Meantime, buying a car with your spouse and them totaling it is not the same as your spouse (or whatever other family member/intimate partner) causing property damage in the course of attacking you. What they are trying to do here is prevent someone from being victimized twice. Certainly the landlord shouldn’t be victimized either but it sounds as if they are working on that component.

        • HappyCamper August 21, 2019 (7:35 am)

          Totally agree I just think (inherent risk aside) it’s wrong for a neutral third party to be forced by law to absorb losses that they are not responsible for. And it sucks because if the person responsible for the damage goes to jail, good luck seeking damages. But if the person doing the damage isn’t on the lease correct, that is a different animal. But it also shows again the risk taken by a landlord when they agree to lease their property. They can’t really police who comes and goes at their rental. Nor should they because it is the tenants home while they are there. And it just seems like the general overall tone is that landlords can readily absorb more and more risk and thus more and more losses.And I respectfully disagree about the car thing. Admittedly that is not the best example. However, in a case where two people have agreed to share financial responsibility on anything they have entered into a contract with one another and together with the other party. If two people sign a contract to pay $1000 a month for something, they share the responsibility. If they sign a contract for $500 a piece for a total of $1000 that’s different.I like the spirit of the idea. I just think this tone can make it really rough on small time landlords who arent making a ton of money like the owners of the Whittaker or something like that. And a lot of those people are the people that rent their place out below market which keeps a tenant in their long term as a win win.Hopefully they arrive at a spot where people are less likely to be victimized twice and there isn’t an unnecessary excessive burden passed on to landlords.

        • John August 21, 2019 (1:48 pm)

          Agreement all around of the profound and lasting trauma associated with domestic abuse.  TR’s personal account moved me.  Thank you.But, as this proposal is written, it places the responsibility and cost on a third unrelated party, the property owner, that had nothing to do with the damage.  Even employing the old saw of “the insurance pays for it” is a red herring because the innocent property owner must eat the deductible as well as a claim on the record which can lead to higher insurance rates or being dropped.I Lisa can modify the bill  someway that makes it conform to typical property rights and damage responsibilities established over centuries of legal decisions.  Please provide relief to survivors without extraordinary costs be foisted on innocent (as in not involved) bystanders.Also, I wonder why Councilperson Herbold goes at considerable length  to not specify who is required to be notified, although it reads like it would be SPD?  Curious?

      • Mo August 21, 2019 (2:19 am)

        Many years ago, my ex boyfriend forced his way into my apartment and beat the crap out of me then shot himself.  Several days later I had a few friends come over and we scrubbed the blood spatter off the walls, spackled and painted.  I was a victim, but I also didn’t want to lose my deposit.  Life’s hard, but it wasn’t my landlord’s responsibility and it would have never crossed my mind that they should have to cover the damage.

        • HappyCamper August 21, 2019 (9:35 am)

          Mo, so sorry you had to go through that, TR you as well. I haven’t went through that but sat on a jury for a DV assault 2 case. It’s was pretty bad with a repeat offender and the victim protecting him. Very eye opening to see it upfront and not just hear about it.Terrible things that no one should have to go through. 

  • Concerned citizen August 20, 2019 (10:07 pm)

    Herbold is such a disgrace. Baffling to me how such an arrogant failure is likely going to win reelection

    • West Seattle Hipster August 21, 2019 (9:29 am)

      Unfortunately it’s a reflection of misinformed voters and media who are afraid to hold certain politicians accountable.  

      • Peter August 21, 2019 (11:20 am)

        It is not valid to simply dismiss people who voted differently than you did as misinformed. Believe it or not,  people who disagree with you are no less informed than you are. You’ve just latched onto the most convenient way to dismiss everyone who disagrees with you without having to rationally articulate your position. Same thing with attacking the media.

      • KM August 21, 2019 (11:58 am)

        “misinformed” yikes

    • Peter August 21, 2019 (10:10 am)

      No matter how bad a team is, it’s easy to win when one’s opponents are far, far worse in every way.

    • East Coast Cynic August 21, 2019 (1:17 pm)

      Better competition needed other than NIMBY’S like Tavel and Kolding who posture themselves as agents of change, but offer little in substance to deal with the broader structural problems of housing, transportation, etc.

  • TJ August 20, 2019 (10:39 pm)

    I just don’t see how Herbold can make that the landlords responsibility. Weird, being that if they own a house and it is damaged through domestic violence, they would be responsible for it? But because there is someone else who can pay that’s ok according to Herbold. There is a noble effort to me in helping domestic violence victims, but Herbold is joining the other council members in attaching “social justice” to anything and telling others they are responsible and need to pay (“Seattle Green New Deal” is a prime example to anyone who pays attention). And Cam, your analogy is so profoundly dumb I don’t know how to take it.

    • CAM August 21, 2019 (1:53 am)

      TJ just look at both of your comments and exclusively look at the words you chose to put in quotes. Your attempt to minimize the concept of domestic violence or suggest it was a “social justice” issue on par with the “green new deal” was quite obvious without any need for in depth interpretation. It’d be a lot easier to engage in a reasonable conversation with you about this topic if you didn’t denigrate the entire concept by insulting victims right off the bat. That was the purpose of my earlier comment which apparently was either missed or doesn’t matter to you, so then why respond?

    • AMD August 21, 2019 (11:25 pm)

      I really don’t get what the fuss is about.  If a burglar breaks a window, it’s the landlord who pays to replace it (or the insurance deductible), not the renter.  Same if their property experiences arson.  Or vandalism from a third party.  It’s normal for landlords to be the ones to pay when they or their tenants are the victims of a crime that damages the property.  Renters are only responsible for damage caused by criminal acts if they are the ones engaging in the criminal act.  This exempts the one type of criminal act that one tenant may be responsible for but the remaining tenant is a victim of.  Removing all social implications from the conversation, it is sorting out a grey area where the tenants are both the victims and the perpetrator.  There are a litany of other ways unrelated third parties absorb losses they had no part in creating.  It’s baffling that so many people think there is no precedent for this.  It’s really not a big deal. 

  • Janet August 20, 2019 (11:08 pm)

    Interesting to note the other 49.38% of the vote was against the incumbent. I’m ready for change on Seattle City Council instead of these idealized policies the current Councilmembers put forth that are already illegal on the state or federal level costing our city more money through lawsuits. Vote for Phil. Vote for change. Vote for some sensibility ! 

    • Mark Schletty August 21, 2019 (7:22 am)

      Janet— another way to look at the numbers is that Herbold only got 50% of 40% of the eligible voters.  That means she only got support from 20% of eligible voters. If we get a good general election turnout, Kolding voters vote for Tavel, and Tavel does his job of getting out voters, there is a good chance we can still get rid of Herbold. Voter turnout is the key. Vote!

    • AMD August 21, 2019 (7:40 am)

      Four incumbents are not running for re-election.  You’re going to get change on the council no matter who wins D1.  

  • Onion August 21, 2019 (7:19 am)

    A number of people in my neighborhood (Admiral) still have Kolding yard signs. Those could come down now.And it appears Phil has some work to do to overtake Lisa. Go Phil.

    • Floating_by_in_the Sky August 22, 2019 (12:23 am)

      Wilful ignorance. West Seattle voters! Google that charlatan Kolding! He was fired for lying to internal affairs at SPD! Take down your signs and get behind Tavel in the general. We need to elect change this November and oust Lisa. She’s a trainwreck, Kolding was a proven LIAR. That leaves us with one option: Tavel….

    • Nolan August 22, 2019 (9:55 am)

      To paraphrase Maya Angelou, it’s nice that the Kolding sign owners told us who they were the first time.

  • Jon Wright August 21, 2019 (7:56 am)

    I am enjoying the schadenfreude of watching the comments from the angry mob with pitchforks morph from “can’t wait to dance on the incumbent’s grave” to “I can’t believe she’s going to get re-elected!” and all of the associated sour grapes.

  • Toni Reineke August 21, 2019 (8:30 am)

     Isn’t there a “rule” that anyone garnering 50% of the vote can go uncontested into the general election? Or does that not pertain to Seattle elections?

    • Peter August 21, 2019 (10:14 am)

      No, there is not such “rule.”

  • MJ August 21, 2019 (8:57 am)

    Mo thank you taking responsibility and fixing damages.  It’s frustrating the Lisa and her cohorts on the SCC want to foist costs on a non responsible third party.  

  • Lola August 21, 2019 (9:22 am)

    We need to get these new young people who come to live in our fair city to VOTE.  I know a lot of them do not care right now when they are renting, but one day they may want to own a home or even become a landlord themselves one day.  They need to care as all of these taxes comes out of their pockets one way or another.  I can’t believe the numbers that Herbold has and I know the VOTE in November is the one that counts.  Please, Please, Please if you have any commen sense VOTE her out of office.  See what the next person can do, maybe it will be a refreshing change. 

    • Peter August 21, 2019 (11:29 am)

      Lola, the claims that renters do not care and do not vote are completely false and defamatory. As a homeowner who was a renter for decades, I find homeowner elitists like you who think you’re the only ones who know anything to be insufferable snobs.

    • East Coast Cynic August 21, 2019 (1:27 pm)

      You know what, in the last few years, from anecdotal perspective of riding the bus to and from West Seattle for work, I’ve noticed a vastly growing young professional class in our midst.  They may well have been a big factor in Herbold’s victory.  A demographic that probably found more common cause in her “progressive” views than the likes of Tavel and Kolding, who appeared to represent wanting to go back to the past.I suspect the youth did vote, but not the way you wanted.

  • Joe Z August 21, 2019 (10:43 am)

    If anything I wish Herbold was more progressive. Disappointed with several of her recent positions including watering down the upzoning and being against the CCC. 

    • Peter August 21, 2019 (11:41 am)

      I agree on both points, that’s why I just can’t bring myself to vote for her. There were no candidates I was willing to vote for in the primary, and there are no candidates I’m willing to vote for in the general. 

    • West Seattle Hipster August 21, 2019 (5:41 pm)

      More progressive?  Yikes……..

    • TreeHouse August 21, 2019 (10:38 pm)

      I 100% agree. I really wanted someone more progressive. Her flyer she sent out about “SAVE THE PARKING” really annoyed me. I’ll still vote her though and *gasp* I’m not a renter!!!She also knocked on my door the Sunday before the primaries and it was nice to meet her in person.  

  • TJ August 21, 2019 (1:52 pm)

    Lots of renters aren’t as aware to the jumps in property taxes on rent because it isn’t a monthly line item on anything they get. But Sawant’s next big crusade is rent control, and she will want to not have landlords pass property tax increases on to tenants. That is when the discussion on renters not having skin in the game with property tax increases will be had. Socialists don’t like private property, and hate anyone who owns multiple properties. We will see Herbold’s position, but we all know she will side with Sawant. 

  • shawn August 21, 2019 (8:31 pm)

    Herbold was the worst choice, except for all the other ones.  STB couldn’t even bring themselves to endorse anyone for the race.

  • Marx August 22, 2019 (11:32 pm)

    Workers of the world, unite!

Sorry, comment time is over.