That afternoon.
I know we got a report in that
and for a regular meeting of the election commission.
I don't care.
Victor Schirmer and President
in the meeting.
And then on the WebEx platform,
we have another robocall for any other
commissioners in attendance.
This is Commissioner Hogg stopping off on the phone.
Great.
So I think it's time for them.
I know we wanted to just introduce themselves.
And, Wayne, I'm not sure that know an appointment.
I expect he will be on the agenda this Thursday,
the not this Thursday, but in a week
for the committee meeting.
So, Yes.
And we're trying to find out
whether Commissioner Short's appointment or Commissioner
Short's replacement is ready to be confirmed as well.
Haven't gotten an answer back on that
yet. Okay.
And, Kai, are you on the line or not yet?
And so that we'll do
the formal introduction when
fully appointed and blindly,
on the agenda.
it should be allowed to attend day.
So I'm hoping we can wrap this up, you know, in about
half an hour.
Perhaps the first action item is a request for program
modification by Ray Rogers with Proposition eight.
I believe this is a request for a relief from signature
filing deadline, which they would like to say.
And I'm not sure we have four orders here.
We have Mr. Toledo. He's Mr.
Rogers is campaign manager, I believe. Yes.
So, yeah, if I can just clarify.
Rick Robbins is a cancer survivor.
In addition to other health issues that he's dealing with,
high blood pressure and
diabetes.
And he had his checkup scheduled for 3:00.
You thought he would be done with that by four,
but it looks like he may still be in his
meeting with his doctor.
So hopefully I can speak on his behalf
until he's able to join us.
That's fine.
you have a five minute anything you'd like to.
In addition,
we have the
the written request
that we receive the right person
in addition that you'd like us to consider.
Please go ahead.
Please.
Thank you.
In addition to the statement
and again, first, I just want to apologize.
Both he and I
were unaware of the deadline, and as I mentioned,
he had gone back and forth and it just seemed like
ordered signature was so daunting as
he stood in front of Safeway trying to collect those.
But the the the week of the 13th,
he met with several people.
He met with Bean and or Stone
and that consulting group.
He met with Kate Martin, who has a community group
and she's run previously and he met with Tonya Wu,
all his advisors and everybody
said, Hey, you've got to get on these these vouchers.
You got to do it.
So he decided that he would
try to get the democracy doctors,
but not
not one of the people that we met
with pointed out to us that the deadline was on the 13th.
And it's actually funny
because after
we got the email saying you missed the deadline,
we spoke to all three of those people
and then Stone, Kate and Tonya
and every one of them said, What?
There's a deadline.
So although we understand that there are rules
and that we should have read through the candidate
brochure more thoroughly,
I just I feel like maybe it was so buried,
so deep that it was easily overlooked.
And again,
the campaign staff at this time are up
till now has been just the bishop and myself.
Is the new candidate trying to juggle many different paths.
We did do the training.
We have been in communication with
the PDC and the ethics
committees and and although watch out, and
I don't doubt that during the training, all
is probably pointed out to us that there was a deadline.
I just think that it was so overwhelming that
we just didn't get it. But
we, you know, the heart's there.
There was no malice intended.
I think that this program, the democracy program,
was created for people like Bishop Rogers
of Community Leader that is not a professional
politician and doesn't have the staff to go through
all this, these sort of things and know every single role.
So we're just hoping that again,
because we didn't start the process,
we didn't do the training,
all we were missing was one signature.
And again, it came in
after the deadline,
but it was before
officers opened the following Tuesday.
And I think you guys began
processing of what had come in on Friday.
So just a lot of things that we're just hoping
that you will consider and give us a little grace
on this as we move forward.
I guess that's all at this point.
Thank you.
That you've got a couple people
in person here in the room, I think, for public comment.
And I just want to
check with them
if they're here to comment on this or something else.
Something else.
Something else. Okay. Something else.
Okay. All right.
Back to you. So.
So, you know,
we we receive written comments.
We we don't really have
anything on the agenda that I think would
merit public comment.
Is there's something on the agenda that that the
members of public might follow and honor,
that it's an entirely different matter.
So we want to finish up with Mr.
Rogers and well, Mr.
Toledo's here.
Yes. Yeah.
I think we must
revisit the public benefit that you get
when you have any information
or response
or concessions that we'll provide on this issue.
My only context is, while I understand Mr.
Rogers concern with the way this has played out,
unfortunately, there is no mechanism
in the law for getting an exemption from that deadline.
And actually just two years ago, in June of 2023,
the commission denied a request from John Lisbon,
who was a candidate
for one of the district seats for similar relief.
He had just missed the deadline
and asked the Commission for Relief.
And the commission cited them that while it was a
tragic story, they just didn't have the authority
to do anything.
So, yes, I don't believe you can grant Mr.
Rogers this relief.
And we didn't hear from him. By the way, on May 9th.
I know there was before
the end of
before he even
filed for office, but he did tell us
he was not interested in getting democracy vouchers
that.
Yeah.
And then I you know, reading the gentleman after that
and again, I remember the point 93, what,
at 2.04.30 to
provide any qualification,
the candidate shall file
on or after the first year before a meaningful election.
And within two weeks
after filing a declaration of candidacy applied
to testing and and participate in that candidate
ballot finally file by file declaration,
the option is that the candidate himself
applied without campaign and the following.
So I don't read that as
allowing for any discretion by the Commission
to provide relief from the deadline
even or the fourth or the best of important.
And I know that, you know, there are various provisions
within both the we and for that
that frankly
provide for discretion
and relief from deadlines by the commission.
But the council did not provide that here.
So I continue to read the rule
to require strict compliance with the deadline.
You know, frankly, consistent with how election
deadlines work generally.
That's that's my view.
But, you know, other reasons may have made the
right
so this is commissioner follows
I remember the matter with Lisbon as well
and the analysis
there and I agree with the Commissioner
and Executive Director Barnett that the same analysis
of mind here
is certainly
sympathetic to the concerns raised by the candidate
and by the fact that the deadline was met.
And I hope that this won't discourage him
from participating
potentially as a candidate in a future election.
But I don't think we have any any leeway in this instance.
I I'll chime in.
No, I, I agree with everything that was previously stated
by the other commissioners and that
why not
bring unfortunately, there
exception. And
I would just I guess, you know, that
I haven't had a chance to
to validate this, but I'm not sure if there's
the time of day that's communicated or
the time that,
you know, two weeks that I'm not sure whose time
they went in.
50 9 p.m., for instance, here,
that wouldn't change anything in this particular matter.
You don't understand,
Mr. Rogers, that mine was
May 27th and did not return
the document required documents
until May 27.
However, I think just a
just and
an observation and something that I, I
unfortunately haven't had a chance to double check is
whether the time
of day is communicated to candidates in this.
And maybe there may be an opportunity for that
in the future.
Thank you.
And I just want to clarify, I believe he did file his
request for to participate on the 25th,
but I think the deadline was actually Friday, the 23rd,
receiving this case, even Thursday the 22nd.
So, yes, I just want to just make sure we don't run
into something where he said he found it on the 26th, 25th.
I recall that that was looking at the wrong time.
But no, it's fine,
thanks, just Ernie.
But I agree with what was said.
I didn't.
I guess I have a question for Wayne.
I mean, is this something,
you know, maybe some some do we need to take a vote on this
or is that how it was done? With the last request,
I can't recall if there was a vote or not.
I can check.
I don't think there was a vote place.
And it wasn't something it wasn't a request
that we had the authority to grant.
Okay, makes sense.
If that memory.
All right.
I mean,
if the modification request that
we would probably have properly disposed of that
with the motion for a vote on the modification request
and the reasoning, we are voting no,
you lack the authority to grant,
that seems to be the best way to do it.
Yeah, I guess this areas Gary Smith
with the city Attorney's office.
I also don't recall
whether there was a vote
in the last instance, but I agree with the chair
that there it probably would be best
for clarity and there's no harm in not
doing that and memorializing
the Commission's conclusion here.
In that case,
I think we should take a vote
and will result
in all each of the commissioners,
whether you vote to grant or deny
the modification request by toss up what's going on.
I'm in a meeting.
Somebody
I quote from up
Miss Mr.
David.
I'm not muted.
He muted.
He's made it now.
Zach.
I vote to deny
and Commissioner Hoff
I was denied
or excuse me for which
I voted in a motion
or back on I voted tonight.
I also denied the modification request denied
and that was referring to the issue of public comment.
So I see consent.
Three people would like to get public comment on it.
And something on the agenda.
Yes, on a yes or not on
yes, it is not on the agenda with item on the agenda.
It's the meeting notes from May 7th
of the
that's an unusual comment
on the matter of public record, but you believe it
needs to be made to the meeting, met
with these identifiable
Howard gal.
The issue with the meeting minutes
from May 7th concerns
The item was the public comment period,
which simply lists the public commentary
but does not memorialize what it is about,
or the fact that there was an unusual number of people
opposing the change in the ethics laws.
And I think this is
incredibly important because the way we got here,
the way we had this mess, was by denying
and excluding the public from this legislation.
So this is of paramount importance otherwise.
Sure.
Pack list you're leaving the public
with no way to comment or participate
until it's a done deal, which is exactly
what happened in May.
So my request
I did send in a letter which was not a public
comment.
I did send in a letter,
but I think that needs to be discussed
or else you were excluding the public,
which is how we got to this completely boneheaded idea
that people were going to lose
representation in their districts because of recusal.
We saw thousands of people come out and say,
I'm not losing representation.
I'm afraid of losing my rights as a tenant.
I'm afraid of losing my rights as a worker.
So the way we got to this point was by excluding
the public, I'm requesting some process whereby we can
partake in these discussions.
I have a lot
more to say, but I'll give you that.
Okay. Thank you.
I, I think wait normal one minute.
You summarily state that public comment occurred.
However, in this case,
I probably agree that it would be helpful
to identify the names of those who offer public comment.
And I remind the public that part
our meetings are recorded and are available
on the mission website.
So for those who want to obtain
more details about Commissioner
Scott or members of the public discussion,
there is a permanent record of that member of the
board meeting.
But I would ask our staff to revise the
meeting minutes
from the main meeting
to reflect the names of all the public commenters.
However, a substantive description
of the public comment would be confirmed that memorialized.
And with that I think we can
confirm approval of the meeting
and told everybody that at the July meeting will consider
both the June minute and the moment.
And I understand there are two other other from Mr.
Promote and Pardon or
they're here in person.
Okay.
My comment is less.
Hi, I'm
Valerie Schiller at my comment is less than 2 minutes long
and I'm actually I probably won't even read it.
You know, the ethics and the ethics,
the change in the ethics legislation
regarding council members recusal in the case where they
have substantial financial conflict of interest,
that legislation is not dead.
It's merely shelved for the moment.
And it is going to come back as the zombie legislation
that council is not going to let die.
So in the light of the fact that we had
the police do it, that's really an item on the day.
I think it's going to relate to the executive
directors report, and I think it also relates
to discussion of written public comment
because this is the same
subject as the written public comment.
But you and I are now spending
40 seconds talking
when I could have just given the comment,
which is also my comment from last month.
It's memorialized in the meeting minutes.
I understand that you think that one might downplay
the relationship to the agenda quite any way that
in this instance I will allow you to
continue in your heart, but you try to have a germane role
where we're not just kind of like flinging open the door
you any public comment on any issue under the sun,
but we may proceed to their full comment.
We welcome you here.
Thank you very much.
This is actually a very pertinent comment
because in the situation that this legislation
was introduced in and will be introduced
in, is historic levels of inequality in Seattle
a real struggle for workers and renters to take, but
to keep a toehold in the city where they work.
For example, in my instance raised.
So I hope that the Commission
will actually include the public in
in a broader discussion of this
proposed legislation change when it comes up.
Again, thanks very much.
Thank you.
And the upcoming hearings.
Elizabeth Austin, welcome.
And I have been so respectful
of what the
election commission does and how they manage our elections.
But I am really startled and really
I guess the question I have is what problem
you thought you were solving when you take away
the current act's basic rules.
I mean, my problem or you solve it.
And and the other thing is
that at the hearing
and the public turned out in mass
to protest this and there
and they were articulate and well behaved.
I mean I think at the end of that
there was a group came in
that was a bit disruptive,
but people had really thought about this.
And I think also that we have so much
corruption and interference in elections
across the country that we really have to
we have to really stand up
for integrity and ethics and how we do things.
And I cannot I just can't conceive that
that it is right to take this and
this this rule out.
And I'm wondering if there is an effort to solve
a problem that we're not talking about
because,
okay, let's say there is a problem
with ethics on whether the council members
then who decides and says that that's so
and who decides that it
that it's
a conflict of interest
when that issue comes up under our current rules?
That's a question I have is maybe there's a
better solution to how that solved it.
That's creating a problem for somebody.
So I will leave it at that.
Thank you.
Thank you. Grandview.
any comment on the public comment?
Okay. 99.
next item on the agenda item
Democracy program report from Rene,
which we have even earlier today.
Great report.
Yeah. Rene was unable to join us today.
She's suffering a family emergency right now,
but she asked me to answer any question
you might have about
the document you received in the mail or an email today.
As you can see, we have 80% of the candidates
are participating in the voucher program.
Again, 100% of the mayoral candidates,
100% of the city attorney
candidates, and 100% of city council position.
Two candidates are participating, participating.
Council position nine until last.
That's only one of the four and council position eight.
It's 25.
So a little a little troubling for the for those races.
But for the most part,
we're still seeing a major amount of candidates
choosing to participate in the program. So
yeah, but it's the report.
I think it's pretty good one, it's out there.
So if you have any questions
on it, please let me know or ask them.
And Rene obviously apologizes
for her inability to be herself. So. Yes.
And as for my report, I'm very clear about it.
Yes. Anyone?
What about the democracy voucher program?
I think
we can move right to your executive director,
just that
Kay Smith is supposed to go before the council
next week on the 12th.
I'm hoping that
the council president
will have her nominee before the committee that same week,
but I've not
gotten an answer
from her staffer about whether or not
that's going to have to be it or not.
Yeah,
that's it.
It's obviously been an emotional and exhausting
couple of weeks here and I'm very sorry for that.
But, you know,
is what it is,
Nothing to apologize for
any other further matters
that any commissioner would like to take up.
And when you want to say that we will pass in
July meeting based
on what the current agenda is looking like as of right now,
I don't see a reason that we definitely need to.
And although Cliff is giving me the Saturday,
so perhaps I'm missing something.
Obviously if we don't need a meeting, we will cancel it.
But if we need it, we'll have it. So.
Yeah, yeah, you might want to read it and roll it
after what it would normally be that I'm on the back end.
that's right. Yes.
Yeah. Yeah.
I'll, I'll,
I'll pull you all out in your availability just in case
there is a meeting when you'd like it.
Because obviously meeting two days before the holidays is
not the best time to get.
Probably not ideal.
Yeah.
All right, well, with that, thank you very much.
And hopefully we'll have another commissioner.
in a month.
Yes, Thank.
All right. Take care. Bye.