-I will be on your ballot in November.
-Erika Evans is a former US Attorney and
Assistant City Attorney in Seattle,
and she says her 22-point win
in the August primary
over Incumbent City Attorney
Ann Davison shows voters want
a new top lawyer.
-I'm running because I know we can do so much better
on public safety and fighting back from the federal overreach
that we see, with urgency.
-In today's lawsuit --
-Davison, a Republican in this nonpartisan race,
has sued the Trump administration three times,
and says voters should focus on her success
in reducing misdemeanor crime, not party politics.
-Public safety here in this space needs the right policies.
And I don't really care what tag you want to put on it.
-Evans says her opponents stay out of drug areas rules
simply push problems around the city.
-That's not fair to the other neighborhood in Seattle.
-Davison says her fight against street disorder
is making a positive impact.
-I'm running for re-election because I've made a difference,
but I'm certainly not done.
-It's Ann Davison versus Erika Evans.
-Theft is down 11% since 2021,
and misdemeanor assault is down 15%.
-She closed community court
and dismissed thousands of uncharged cases.
-Next, on "City Inside Out".
♪♪
Welcome to "City Inside Out" on the Seattle Channel.
I'm your host, Brian Callanan.
In the race for Seattle City Attorney,
a wave of progressive pushback
this election season gave challenger Erika Evans
a 22-point win over incumbent Ann Davison
in the August primary.
Evans, a former US Attorney under President Biden,
says she's better equipped to resist the Trump administration,
and says her opponent's focus on low-level crime
has led to a backlog of DUI and domestic violence cases.
Davison, one of two Republicans in Seattle's
nonpartisan elections this year,
has filed three lawsuits against President Trump,
and says reduced crime in Seattle
is proof her approach to public safety is working.
Who's the best candidate to be Seattle's top lawyer?
Erika Evans and Ann Davison
are ready to make their case to voters.
-I'm running for re-election because I've made a difference,
but I'm certainly not done.
-The city is ready for change.
They're ready for folks with actual experience
to do a great job.
-Seattle City Attorney candidates Erika Evans
and Ann Davison bring different backgrounds, and politics,
to their race this fall.
-My name is Erika.
I'm running for Seattle City Attorney.
I'm going to be on --
-Evans is a former Assistant City Attorney for Seattle,
and a former US Attorney,
who left her federal job soon
after President Trump took office this year.
She says her work history makes her the most qualified
to push back on any overreach stemming from the White House.
-Coming from the federal government
and knowing what tools and levers to pull,
I think a time like this, we need an unprecedented leader
that has the actual experience from inside.
-Our programs and priorities are lawful.
-Davison is part of multiple lawsuits against Trump.
She's a Republican in this nonpartisan race,
but says voters who look past party politics
will see the work she's doing.
-I follow the rule of law
and anybody who's looking to exceed the bounds
of their authority, I will speak up against.
And so that's why I have sued the Trump administration
not once, not twice, but three times.
There it is.
-Davison earned 33.4% of the vote in the August primary,
and is endorsed by The Seattle Times.
She says her high-utilizer approach
to misdemeanors is successfully stopping crime
by taking repeat offenders off the streets.
-We have reduced crime by thousands of crimes
because we can show that those people are not,
we are not seeing those same people anymore.
-Evans earned 55.8% of the vote in the primary,
and is endorsed by The Stranger.
Her campaign says Davison's approach to public safety
has led to an increasing backlog of serious DUI
and domestic violence cases.
-And that's unacceptable
when it comes to survivors and victims of crimes in our city.
-Is Seattle going down the right legal path,
or is it time to head in a new direction?
Voters will have the final say in the race for City Attorney.
And we are here with both candidates
for Seattle City Attorney.
The incumbent is Ann Davison.
Thank you very much for being here.
-Thank you for having me, Brian.
-Also, her challenger is Erika Evans.
Good to see you too, Erika.
-Nice to see you.
-Absolutely.
We had a coin flip before the show,
and City Attorney Davison, you'll be speaking first.
If you could keep it to a minute,
tell us why you're running for this job
and for re-election here.
-Well, I first ran for this job
because I think it's really important
that everyone sees our laws matter,
and to bring back accountability
to our misdemeanor criminal justice system
in the City of Seattle.
I think I've delivered on that.
I've been improving that, and I want to continue to do that.
Our laws have to matter.
Our young children need to see that they matter.
Everybody needs to be held accountable to the rule of law,
no matter who you are.
And that has been part of my focus,
my entire focus, into helping improve public safety.
In addition to that,
I have proposed legislation that Council has adopted.
I will continue to offer strategies
to supplement public safety,
whether that be civil litigation,
to be creative with how we can improve public safety
in addition to what I'm doing on the criminal side.
But they are things that are adding to the safety
and the livability of Seattle,
and I absolutely am dedicated to continue to do so.
-Okay, thank you very much.
Erika Evans, if you could tell us why you're running for this,
maybe some of your qualifications,
and please keep it to a minute.
-Absolutely. Thank you so much, Brian.
So, I'm running because Seattle deserves a leader
that fights for real public safety,
and that always stands up for our communities
with courage and urgency.
That's what I've done my entire career.
I've been a city prosecutor for the City of Seattle,
a defense lawyer for the City of Seattle,
a pro tem judge in multiple jurisdictions,
and most recently an Assistant United States Attorney.
A dream job that I left shortly after Trump took office
because it was clear
that the administration was rolling back basic human
and civil rights.
And frankly, for me,
Brian, the courage to always stand up
and fight back for our communities
comes from my grandparents, my grandfather,
who raised his fist in the 1968 Olympic Games
to protest the injustices in our country.
And here in Seattle,
we deserve to feel safe in our neighborhoods
and for everyone to thrive.
But that's not what we're seeing locally,
and that's not what we're experiencing
from the federal government at a national level.
And these unprecedented times require a leader
with actual boots on the ground experience doing this work.
And that's what I bring,
and I would be honored to serve as the next city attorney.
-Thank you very much for that.
I want to make sure I dive into a little bit
about these ideas of threats from the Trump administration
to cut federal funding due to city policies on immigration,
diversity, equity, inclusion, for example.
Erika, you think you would be better equipped
to handle issues of federal overreach.
Tell us why.
-Yes, thank you for that question.
I think it's important that when we are talking
about fighting back, we do so with urgency.
You know, the lawsuit that my Republican opponent filed
was right before primary election night,
and that's unacceptable.
And that's not fair to our communities that are waiting.
I think another big thing, you know,
in some of the forums we've been doing in the primary,
my opponent has called responding to Trump
an emotional response.
And that's not fair.
And that's not what our communities have been saying.
I think it is important, you know,
our current city attorney is someone
that joined the Republican Party three
and a half years after the first Trump administration,
and I think that's important for voters to know, you know,
where her policies and values lie.
And I think, you know, the coalition of folks behind us,
like our Washington State Attorney General
who has solely endorsed this campaign,
really speaks to the urgency and leadership
that is needed right now.
And that's what I'm bringing.
-Okay, thank you very much for that.
City Attorney Davison,
you have filed three lawsuits against the Trump administration
on behalf of the city.
You've defended Seattle's sanctuary city status.
How do you respond to what Erika is saying?
-Well, I'm going to speak to the facts,
which is really what I think the people of Seattle should hear.
I have fought for our city and will continue to do so
whenever the rule of law is not followed, whoever that is.
And that is why,
when the excess of authority is being attempted
by this president, I have sought litigation to stop that.
Because when things are in one person's seat of power,
we have checks and balances for that.
That's intended to be so. He has to follow the law.
He's not a lawmaker.
I need to follow the law, because I'm not a lawmaker.
My opponent says she won't follow the local law
of SODA and SOAP.
So, I think it's really important that people understand
when we're talking about emotional response,
it's because it's not that we do something knee-jerk.
It's we look at the rule of law,
and we look at is somebody going beyond the bounds
of the rule of law that we all must be confined to.
And if so, then that needs to be challenged,
which is what I've done.
-Got it.
You brought up something with regard to SODA and SOAP,
with regard to your opponent,
that I think we should get into.
This is something that your opponent supports, Erika.
SOAP, Stay Out of Areas of Prostitution.
SODA, Stay Out of Drug Areas.
These laws, I should say,
allow judges to ban people from being in specific parts
of the city if they are convicted of
or charged with drug offenses or prostitution-related crimes.
The city had these laws in the books for many years,
but the Council repealed them in 2020,
saying they were ineffective.
Then, upon your opponent's recommendation,
the City Council passed SODA and SOAP back into effect last year.
That's the background.
So, you were actually a prosecutor for the City
about a decade ago when these laws were originally being used.
What's your position on SOAP and SODA?
-Yeah, you know, it was really sold as a tool
to clean up the city from my Republican opponent.
And we know that banishing people does not work.
Prosecuting someone's presence is not effective.
And it was repealed in 2020,
as you mentioned, Brian, because it did not stop the behavior.
It just moves it around the city.
And that's not fair for other neighborhoods
that are experiencing what's happening,
pushing it to different parts of our city.
And we also got data back
that it disproportionately affects people of color.
When we're asking officers to, you know,
target people that they think are not supposed
to be in certain areas,
you know, experts testified and opposed this.
MLK Labor opposed this, we are already low on police resources,
and it doesn't provide treatment.
And since its implementation,
the current city attorney has only made two criminal cases
for a SODA violation, because no one's, it doesn't work.
Banishment zones does not, do not work.
And as your next city attorney,
what we're going to be focusing on are upstream efforts,
going after traffickers
who are pumping fentanyl into our streets
and unlawful firearms, work I've done, boots on the ground,
as a federal prosecutor.
And folks that are dealing with addiction,
they need to be in LEAD.
They need to be in treatment.
And that's how we're going to address
this complicated issue effectively.
-LEAD, Law Enforcement-Assisted Diversion.
-You got it. -Let Everyone Achieve Dignity.
It's an important group in our town here.
I wanted to make sure we talked about SODA and SOAP.
Your opponent has made some claims here
about what you've been doing.
What's your position on this?
Why were you really pushing
to get SODA and SOAP passed through?
-Well, please understand.
the days of the past,
which is what my opponent is associated with,
my predecessor of the 12 years
that got us to this place of bad policies with that,
those ones covered 40% of the 83 square miles of our city.
The SODA areas all combined, those zones,
create, only encompass less than one-half
of 1% of the 83 square miles of our city.
So, we are not looking to banish people.
The legislative intent of the underlying drug use
and possession law was to get people into treatment.
The legislative intent of the SODA and SOAP
law is to protect public spaces,
because they need to be safe and accessible for everybody.
That means people that have disabilities
that need to be using the sidewalk.
It is for everybody to go safely in those locations.
And so it is not the tool to be the end-all, be-all,
but it is a gateway where we say, This is not acceptable.
This is now against the law.
We need to get people into treatment.
That's not the space.
And talking about traffickers,
that's not what this job does, either.
So that's really taking people on the sideways tangent
with what she's saying.
The SOAP and SODA law are effective.
We have 150 SODA orders that are there.
That means people are staying out
of the entrenched open-air drug market.
We're trying to disrupt them
so it's harder for dealers to come and prey on people
who are addicted.
We have 35 SOAP orders in the North End
because it disproportionately targets women and girls
being trafficked by people who want to profit off of them.
-My Republican opponent talked about accountability,
and we really need to look at, you know,
her track record of what she's been doing in office.
She got into office with a backlog,
and dismissed thousands of cases.
And that is unacceptable. She closed community court
and dismissed thousands of uncharged cases.
That is unacceptable. That is not public safety.
And we're also, you know,
looking at her track record of someone that's been,
in her time in office, sued by the ACLU,
someone that's currently fighting right now
to keep their law license because
a judicial officer has filed a Bar complaint against you.
And that is unnecessary controversy
that our voters don't need.
We need to be focusing on public safety,
not just dismissing cases because it's too much.
I think it really comes down to experience.
Having someone in this role that's done this work,
that knows how to effectively move cases forward,
and not just dumping them.
That is not public safety, and that is absolutely unacceptable.
-How do you want to respond to that?
-Yeah, let's be clear.
Instead of just using the word "unacceptable",
there's really no vision about what to do.
And so it is correct.
I walked into a 5,000 criminal case backlog
where there was no decision. Decline, divert, or charge.
There was no decision.
I instilled a close-in-time filing policy,
which is a self-imposed rule.
We're going to make it sometimes, we're going to not.
But at least I brought the data transparency
that was not there beforehand,
so the public can be educated and to help hold me accountable.
Because I want to be accountable as well.
Right now we're at eight filing days.
So we are under the, we are over the time,
which is five business days is our goal, we're at eight.
But I will say that we are much better in our production
because we can take track of what our work is,
whereas before there was no look into that.
-Domestic violence cases are taking twice as long to file
and charge under the current Republican City Attorney
as they did before she was in office.
And that is not public safety. DUI is the same thing.
And when we look at actual cases that have been dismissed,
and this will be on our website, on average,
over 60% of all cases
that this current city attorney has filed in 2024,
60% last year were dismissed.
And that is the light blue area in the chart.
-I understand.
-That is not public safety
when we're dismissing that many cases.
-A response to that, please.
-I'm going to say my DV filing rate right now is at 45.
The best one of my predecessor, from 2017 to 2021,
the best quarter mean average for that was 139 days.
Most of them were close to 200 days.
So, I'm going to say that really, again, using facts,
I bring the data to the public so people can understand.
I'm trying to build a mirror reflection of the system
that is there to function for our criminal justice system.
And I think that the data is there
if you go to the sources... -Yes.
-...instead of looking at other alternatives.
-Thank you.
-The data is there that even
though she's dismissed thousands of cases,
there is now a new backlog of 1,400 cases
that have not even been charged yet.
That is, comes from inexperience
and not knowing how to use it correctly.
-I'm going to have one more response and I want to move on.
Is there anything you want to say to that?
-My criminal chief and a prosecutor for 30 years.
So this is really just something that is a sideshow.
So again, people that really can look at the system as a whole
and have a vision of where we can go with accountability,
and putting that back for our city is really the way forward.
Someone who can be a leader, an executive leader,
and understand what the job is. -Thank you.
I want to talk about who's supporting your campaign.
City Attorney Davison, you won 33.4% of the vote
in the August primary.
Your campaign has raised just over $291,000 as
of the end of September.
Tell us about your top endorsements here,
top three endorsements,
if you would, and what they should say to voters.
-Well, I'm honored to have two former governors,
Gregoire and Locke,
who have supported me.
They did in 2021, and they do again now.
I'm also proud to have the Seattle Times endorsement.
I had that in 2021, I have that again now.
To me, those show, again, I did what I said I was going to do.
I came in and said what my plan was.
I had a plan, and I've done that.
And I will continue to do that and stay committed to that.
I'm also very honored to be supported
by our first responders,
our Seattle firefighters and police officers,
because they want me to be their prosecutor and their lawyer.
And that is where the system is functioning.
We need to have public safety partners across jurisdictions
and across areas of the system, because we are system holders
and we now need it to function in a way
that is growing accountability
and using appropriate services when it's necessary.
-Thank you.
Erika, you won 55.8 % of the vote in the August primary.
Your campaign has raised about $350,000 as
of the end of September.
Tell us about the top three endorsers of your campaign
and what voters should draw from that, please.
-Yes, thank you, Brian.
We are absolutely leading in endorsements
because folks trust us.
And I would say it's hard to narrow down three,
but I think of our Washington State Attorney General,
Nick Brown,
who's leading the fight
and charge against what's happening
from the federal administration.
Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal, MLK Labor,
and the 106,000 voters that voted for this campaign.
The momentum is behind us.
Folks know it's time for new ideas and new changes.
One thing I do want to address, Brian,
my Republican opponent talked about, you know,
the executive experience.
You know, I have worked as a federal prosecutor
and leading teams of FBI agents in DEI
on cases getting hundreds of thousands,
close to a million fentanyl pills off our streets.
-DEA, yep.
-DEA, thank you.
-Yep.
-And unlawful firearms and going after folks
that are trafficking humans. You know,
our cases range to these high-level trafficking cases
to going after and even holding accountable insurrectionists
that committed insurrection on January 6th,
kind of like the one
that my Republican City Attorney went on a podcast with.
-Okay.
-I think this is important for voters to know --
-Okay.
-kind of where your heart's at,
where your judgment is, and where your values are.
-It looks like this is a direct broadside here.
How do you want to respond to that?
-I think, again,
I'm going to focus on local issues for the City of Seattle.
And I think it's a sad day when someone thinks
that they can mock our laws by bringing props.
like a bottle of soda and a bar of soap.
People are dying of overdose,
women and girls are being trafficked,
and people who say they don't want to enforce the law
and they make it a mockery, this is a serious job.
It is misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor.
It's not any of those things that she just talked about.
It is the need for a leader with a vision,
wanting to bring accountability,
and knowing the role of the job,
and what you can do in your place in the system,
and how you work with others.
-Just to clarify for everybody.
More serious felony crimes, murder, et cetera,
handled by the King County Prosecutor.
This was a big part of your platform
when you ran four years ago.
What have you delivered?
Let's expand on this a little bit,
when it comes to misdemeanors and gross misdemeanors.
-I have doubled retail theft prosecution,
which has been important because we hear that on the daily,
that small business and large retail business
was inundated with theft.
That's because things were automatically routed
to community court,
whether or not somebody had 40 referrals or 1.
That has stopped because I want to make sure
that we are holding people accountable.
That's why I started the High-Utilizer Initiative,
and we can see a reduction of a forecast of 3,000 less referrals
because of that approach.
I have doubled my diversion programs
so that when people are early in their criminal activity,
we send them to different programs to make sure
that that is a different trajectory for them.
So those are really the spectrum
that I've built out for accountability,
so that's appropriate response.
For my non-domestic violence and non-traffic,
my decline rate is 38%. So I am charging more overall.
It is significant because theft is down 11% since 2021,
and misdemeanor assault is down 15% since 2021.
These are because my efforts on focusing
on accountability have worked.
I don't do it alone. I'll never claim to do it alone.
No one should say that they can do it alone.
That is why having a vision
and being able to communicate it with others
and have them work with you is the way forward.
And that's what I've proven I've done and will continue to do so.
-Erika,
your opponent's talking about crime numbers going down.
It would appear she's doing a good job there.
What's your response to what your opponent's saying?
-Yeah, it's very clear from the data
that she has just dismissed,
she has dismissed thousands of cases.
She has a high average of dismissal rates
after cases are already set for trial.
You know, right now there is huge turnover
in her criminal division because it's a toxic work environment.
We know that the defense bar sets
just about every single case for trial
because they know they have a 60% chance
of their case getting dismissed,
because it's ineffectiveness that's happening.
How domestic violence cases, the data is clear.
They are taking twice as long to file and charge
than they used to before she was in office.
And that puts people's lives at risk.
I've done domestic violence trials.
People can die when you do not quickly enforce these cases.
And that is not, no, let me finish.
-It's not being doubled. -Briefly, if you could.
-Yes, 58 days is double of 25 days.
It's actually more than double. That's not public safety.
And it really comes with the lack of experience
ever doing this case.
My opponent is a -- -Hang on. Hang on.
-No, let me finish.
My opponent is someone that has ran for office
multiple times in different positions.
They are desperate to be in any type of elected office.
-Okay, all right. -No prosecutorial experience.
And it shows in your numbers of dismissals,
your numbers of cases that get dumped.
And you're in effecting this to lead a criminal --
-Thank you for that.
I want to make sure you respond to
wherever you want to go there.
-The data is available for the public.
Again, 45 days is my last quarter average for DV.
And again, my predecessor from 2017 to 2021,
the best quarter was 139.
So I don't know where the figures are that she's getting.
I have an investigator for the first time in the office,
a domestic violence investigator we got through a grant
that we applied for.
There's never been one in the office.
So, there is absolutely a trauma-informed approach.
We are absolutely making sure we're holding
people accountable.
That is the place to disrupt, is within domestic violence.
If minors are witnesses even to domestic violence,
it is more likely that they will either be an aggressor
or a victim later in life.
That is absolutely the space to disrupt criminal activity,
absolutely root cause.
So, I'm fully committed, again,
to accountability across the board.
This is where we make sure the accuracy is there.
The results show,
that's why I have the backing of the people
that I do in my re-election campaign.
-Thank you.
I want to make sure I dive into this issue of community court.
It's been brought up a few times here.
It's a program you pulled your office out of in 2023.
Community court allows people accused of
certain low-level misdemeanors
to access services without pleading guilty to a crime,
diverts them away from the criminal justice system.
I know some of your critics, including your opponent,
have pushed back on this decision,
so I want to make sure we hear it.
Why did you choose to effectively end community court?
-Well, we requested for a community service to be back,
put back into it after COVID, and that was denied to do so.
We also used data.
We collected what was happening within community court.
And sadly, again,
because things were auto-routed with the promise
from my predecessor to not look at criminal history,
that just because it was a specific type
of criminal activity,
it was automatically routed to a community court,
whether or not somebody had 20, 30, 40 referrals or it was 1.
And really, so it actually showed it was encouraging
people to commit crime. It was increasing recidivism.
And so to me, that's a dilution of that resource.
It's better to take that offline,
to double the pre-filing diversion programs,
which for the everyday person that means prior to a charge.
We get somebody into a program
where it can be responsive to root cause needs,
and that actually shows it reduces recidivism
and it costs less.
And so that's been the approach that I've taken on that
because it's been important to show
that we are holding people accountable when need be,
and we're offering a different pathway
for early criminal activity.
-I think you have a different position here.
-Absolutely.
When you close community court
and then just dismiss thousands of cases,
how is that accountability?
How is that fair to victims?
How is that fair to survivors
that you just dismiss those cases?
That's not normal and that's not accountability.
As your next city attorney,
I'm going to bring a new, reimagined community court.
I've gone across our state
and looking at models that are working,
models that have low recidivism,
models that actually provide the services
people need so they're not back out on the streets.
If Bellevue can do it, Brian, so can we in Seattle.
And I do want to point out that City Attorney Davison,
right before filing week,
propped up a new drug community court, which is frankly a joke.
I've looked at the requirements in this new drug alternative.
There's no requirements for treatment.
Someone gets arrested for smoking fentanyl
and all they have to do, Brian,
is just get an assessment that tells them
whether they have fentanyl addiction or not.
That is not smart. That is not providing treatment.
And then their case gets dismissed.
That is ridiculous. That's not public safety.
As your next city attorney,
we will be offering solutions that work
and actually address underlying root cause
and not do things for political convenience.
-Thank you.
It's time for a closing statement.
If you'd like to respond to that,
wherever you want to go, please do.
But I can give you a minute.
-It's important to really understand that the data
that is being made available is
because I brought unprecedented data transparencies
to the office, because there was none before.
And my opponent really is associated
with the days of the past and policies of the past,
things that we have, that have gotten us here,
where we're trying to undo things.
We're trying to put back accountability.
That's what is important to people
on the streets of Seattle.
They want to see that things are getting done,
and they want to know
that they don't have to worry about their public safety,
that it is being handled by the appropriate people.
I have shown that. I've shown my work.
People that don't want to show their work are hiding something.
So, that's why people should really look at,
Why am I providing so much data?
It's so that we can make the best decisions.
And people who only want to use it to critique,
and again, bring props to mock our laws,
and even dolls to represent people,
to villainize people,
to demonize people,
to objectify people instead of letting them be humans
and talk about the policies is really not somebody
who should be a chief legal officer of a city
when we're talking about fairness and rule
of law applies to everyone.
-Thank you.
I can give you a minute to wrap up.
-Thank you so much.
So as your next city attorney, this is what we're going to do.
We're going to partner with our attorney general
to fight back and stand up for our communities
with urgency and courage.
We're not going to dismiss so many cases
because we're going to charge
and prosecute them appropriately.
We're going to prioritize domestic violence and DUI cases.
We're going to expand more LEAD and pre-file diversion options.
We are going to be good partners
with the Office of Labor Standards
to protect our workers here in Seattle.
There's going to be no more blanket affidavit on judges,
and we're going to bring back a reimagined community court.
You know, my Republican opponent came into this office
and dismissed thousands and thousands of uncharged cases.
Frankly, it's much easier to dismiss a case
than it is to litigate it, and that comes with experience.
I think even after she has dismissed thousands of cases,
having a 1,400 case backlog is unacceptable.
And when we are talking about days from the past,
it is important.
You know, and these are called demonstrative evidence.
When you have things to prove your point in trial,
it's something that's important to do as a litigator.
But I know you don't have that background,
and I think it is important we talk about
City Attorney Davison's priorities.
She put on July 4th, 2020,
that this is the perfect time to join the Republican Party.
-Okay.
-I think that speaks to someone's values and judgment,
not the type of leader we need at this time in our office.
And the voters have spoken that they are ready for new ideas...
-Thank you. -...and a new change.
Thank you so much, Brian.
-Thank you. I appreciate that. And we will be right back.
What are people saying online about the race
for Seattle City Attorney? One person writes,
"Erika Evans is a former Assistant US Attorney
and the only candidate who's worked in both the civil
and criminal divisions of the Seattle City Attorney's Office.
She's the most qualified." Another says,
"Ann Davison is rational, sane,
and has been highly effective in keeping Seattle safe and civil.
Amazing that Seattle elected her in the first place,
but I hope we do so again."
We'd like to know what you think.
Send us an email at contact@seattlechannel.org,
or find us on social media. Good to get those comments.
Thanks to both of our candidates, too.
I'm Brian Callanan.
See you next time on "City Inside Out".
♪♪