Reform-Minded O'Sullivan Sets Sights on City Attorney Position

In a wide-ranging interview on the Hacks & Wonks podcast, Seattle City Attorney candidate Rory O'Sullivan outlines his vision for transformative change in an office he believes has gone in the "wrong direction" under current City Attorney Ann Davison.

As always, a full text transcript of the show is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.

Follow us on Bluesky at @HacksAndWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Bluesky at @finchfrii and find Rory O’Sullivan at @electrory.

Episode Transcript

(00:13):
Welcome to Hacks & Wonks.
I’m your host, Crystal Fincher.
On this show we talk with policy wonksand political hacks to gather insight
into local politics and policy inWashington state through the lens of those
doing the work, with behind-the-scenesperspectives on what’s happening, why it’s
happening, and what you can do about it.
Today, we're speaking with RoryO'Sullivan, a candidate running for

(00:37):
Seattle City Attorney, a positionthat holds real everyday power
in shaping how the city respondsto harm, enforces its laws, and
treats people in the legal system.
City Attorney leads an officethat prosecutes misdemeanors
- offenses like shoplifting, simpleassault, DUI, and trespassing.
And represents the city in civil legalmatters - that includes defending the city

(01:00):
against lawsuits, advising departments andelected officials in shaping how policies
are enforced and whether they're enforced.
One important note - felony casesare handled by the King County
Prosecutor, not the City Attorney.
So while the City Attorney doesn'toversee the most serious violent crimes,
the office plays a critical role in howthe city handles lower-level offenses

(01:22):
and whether its approach prioritizespunishment, prevention, or support.
From public safety and policeaccountability, to tenant protections
and wage theft enforcement thedecisions made by this office affect
the daily lives of thousands of Seattleresidents and reflect our city's
values - or lack of them - in real time.
We'll be asking open-ended questionsshortly - but first, we're going to

(01:45):
start with our Hacks & Wonks LightningRound of quick yes-or-no questions
and a few one-word-answer questions.
And if you aren't able to provide oneof those answers quickly, we'll call it
a waffle and you can choose to addressit in more detail later if you wish.
These quick questions are designed to giveus - and you - a snapshot of where the
candidates stand on issues, what valuesshape their thinking, and set the table

(02:08):
for our upcoming questions about theirvision for their role as City Attorney.
Please keep the answers brief and direct,and we'll have plenty of time to get into
the details in the open-ended questions.
So to start, do you ownor rent your residence?
Own.
Are you a landlord?
Yes.
Have you ever been a member of a union?

(02:30):
Yes.
Have you ever walked on a picket line?
Yes.
Have you ever crossed a picket line?
No.
Is your campaign staff unionized?
No.
If your campaign staff wants tounionize, will you voluntarily
recognize their effort?
Absolutely.
What political party do you identify with?

(02:51):
I've been a Chair of the37th District Democrats, I've
been a Democrat all my life.
Have you used the Seattle PublicLibrary system in the past month?
Yes, through my phone - like, I getelectronic books through my phone.
As do I. Have you been to a City Councilmeeting in person in the past year?

(03:11):
Yes.
Have you or someone in your householdever relied on public assistance?
Yes.
Have you ever been stopped orquestioned by police in Seattle?
Yes.
Have you ever worked in retail or ajob where you had to rely on tips?
Yes.
Have you ever owned a business?

(03:32):
Yes.
Have you ever managed ateam of 10 people or more?
Yes.
100 people or more?
Yes.
Have you ever reported someone'smisconduct in your workplace?
Not that I can remember.
Have you ever fired someone?
No.
What's your favorite park in Seattle?

(03:53):
Seward Park.
What's your favorite restaurant?
I'm a pretty big fan of Island Soul.
Good one.
What was the last live performancethat you saw in Seattle?
Oh, the, I'm trying to - there was acomedy show in Belltown that I went to
with my wife, just a month or so ago.

(04:15):
It was, can't remember what itwas called - Rain City something.
Cool, gotcha.
Do you agree with the City Attorney'sdecision to end Seattle Community Court?
No.
Do you believe that SPD referrals for useand possession of controlled substances
are equitable throughout the city?
No.

(04:36):
Do you believe the City Attorney'sOffice, or CAO, filing decisions for use
and possession are being made equitably?
I haven't researched that in enoughdetail to answer that conclusively.
Do you support the SOAP and SODAlegislation passed by the council?
No.
Do you agree with the city's decisionto jail people arrested for misdemeanor

(04:59):
offenses in the South CorrectionalEntity, or SCORE, facility in Des Moines?
No.
Do you support the new safetyregulations for nightlife lounges
operating after 2 a.m. recentlypassed by the Seattle City Council
to address gun violence and disorder?
I support that specific legislation,but I definitely want to talk
about that in more detail.

(05:20):
Do you support increasingfunding in the City budget for
violence intervention programs?
Yes.
Do you believe it's inappropriateto subpoena media organizations
for their records on behalf of SPD?
I would need to know moreabout a specific instance.
Do you support the city's decisionto join a lawsuit that challenges the

(05:42):
Trump administration actions againstjurisdictions like Seattle that
have so-called "sanctuary" policies?
Yes, although we should have beenleading rather than following on that.
Do you believe that the CityAttorney's Office provides sufficient
data and transparency regardingtheir activity and outcomes?
No.
The CAO currently provides a quarterlyreport for the Criminal Division.

(06:04):
Should quarterly reports alsobe provided for the Civil
and Administrative Divisions?
Definitely.
Do you believe the CAO should make hiringdecisions that include consideration of
diversity, equity, and inclusion - or DEI?
Yes.
Do you believe the CAO should incorporateDEI considerations in the design
and evaluation of the effectivenessof programs and initiatives?

(06:27):
Yes.
Should the CAO report on all financialsettlements and staff costs related to
claims regarding city employee conduct?
Yes.
There's some legal considerations,but basically, yes.
Will you vigorously defend thecity against lawsuits opposing
funding or action by Seattle'ssocial housing developer?

(06:50):
Yes.
Do large corporations in Seattlepay their fair share of taxes?
No.
Do small businesses paytheir fair share of taxes?
Yes.
Do you plan to increase fundingand staffing for prosecutions
of labor violations like wagetheft and illegal union busting?
Yes.
Do you think facial recognitionshould be banned in city use?

(07:14):
No.
Did Seattle ever "defund the police"?
No.
Do you think every policeofficer in Seattle should be
required to live in the city?
I would like that.
I don't know that it'spractical to require that.
Have you ever been arrested?
Yes.
Have you ever served on a jury?

(07:35):
No.
Have you ever contested a traffic ticket?
Yes.
Have you taken transit in the past week?
Yes.
Have you ridden a bike in the past week?
Yes.
What's your favorite song?
"Sing, Sing, Sing" by Benny Goodman.
What's the last song that you listened to?
Ooh.

(07:57):
I think "Under
the Bridge" by Red Hot Chili Peppers.
What's the most recent book you read?
I'm currently reading a KenFollett book called Whiteout.
I'm not sure what thelast one was before that.
Gotcha.
I've been really excited to read EzraKlein's Abundance, but I haven't quite

(08:18):
gotten my hands on a copy of it yet.
Have you voted in every generalelection in the past four years?
Yes.
Have you voted in every primaryelection in the past four years?
Yes.
Have you made any politicalendorsements that you regret?
Not that I can remember, no.
Have you made any politicaldonations that you regret?

(08:41):
Not that I can think of.
In 2021, did you vote for Bruce Harrellor Lorena González for Seattle Mayor?
Lorena González.
In 2021, did you vote for AnnDavison or Nicole Thomas Kennedy
for Seattle City Attorney?
Nicole Thomas Kennedy.
Did you vote for Sara Nelson or NikkitaOliver for City Council in 2021?

(09:03):
Nikkita Oliver.
In 2022, did you vote for Leesa Manion orJim Ferrell for King County Prosecutor?
Leesa Manion.
That was an easy one.
In 2024, did you vote forAlexis Mercedes Rinck or Tanya
Woo for Seattle City Council?
Alexis Mercedes Rinck.
In 2024, did you vote for Nick Brownor Pete Serrano for Attorney General?

(09:26):
Nick Brown.
Did you vote for Donald Trumpor Kamala Harris for President?
Kamala Harris.
And did you vote for Bob Fergusonor Dave Reichert for Governor?
Bob Ferguson.
Will you be voting to approvethe Automated Fingerprint
Identification System, or AFIS,levy on the April 22nd ballot?
Yes.

(09:47):
This year, on Seattle's socialhousing initiative in February,
did you vote for Option 1A - whichpassed - 1B, or no to both?
1A.
Will you be voting for ClaudiaBalducci, John Wilson, or Girmay
Zahilay for County Executive?
Either Claudia Balducci or Girmay Zahilay- I'm still hearing from both of them.

(10:13):
Well, thank you for your responses- that concludes our Lightning Round.
That wasn't painful at all,I think it was enlightening.
Well, easy for me to say itwasn't painful, but hopefully
you didn't find it to be painful.
Now we're going to shift intothe heart of the conversation
with open-ended questions.
This is where we'll go deeper on yourvision for the Seattle City Attorney's
Office, how you would approach key issuesfacing Seattle, and how your values

(10:36):
would guide your decisions in this role.
So just to start, Why are yourunning to be Seattle City Attorney
and what are your priorities?
Yeah, thank you, Crystal.
So ever since our current City Attorneywas elected, I've seen decision after
decision come out of that office, whichmakes me worried that we're going in

(10:58):
the wrong direction - closing downCommunity Court, filing a blanket
affidavit against Judge Pooja Vaddadi,and really failing to prepare the
city for the Trump administration.
So all of those have been motivatingfactors for me in running for office, in
running for City Attorney specifically.

(11:19):
In my background, I've alwaystried to figure out where I can
have the most significant impact.
So during the foreclosure crisis, Ihelped the Northwest Justice Project put
together the Foreclosure Prevention Unit.
And most recently during the COVIDpandemic, I opened up a law firm to help
folks out with unemployment insurancebenefits when there were so many

(11:41):
people struggling with COVID benefits.
So
at this point, I think I have anopportunity to make an impact in the
City Attorney's Office, because I thinkwe need really significant change there.
So in my background - as anactivist - I helped create
the Democracy Voucher Program.
And I've seen situations in which Seattlevoters are saying over and over again

(12:06):
- They want to do some really big things.
They're willing to create a new socialhousing provider, they're willing to
do cutting-edge things when it comesto the way we fund our campaigns.
And I think it's time to make some prettybig changes in our City Attorney's Office
and how we think about public safety.

(12:28):
Now, I'm sure we'll get into yourdisagreements with current City Attorney
Ann Davison In a little bit, but isthere anything that you believe Ann
Davison has gotten right that youwould look to continue or build upon?
I mean, so it's hard to know.
I mean, there's - you know, I don't have- the folks that I've spoken with who worked

(12:53):
in that office under Pete Holmes, manyof them left after Ann Davison took over.
And so the impression that I'vegotten from what happened after she
took over was that it became a moredifficult place to work, and there
were questions coming up about howdifferent cases were being prosecuted.

(13:15):
So I have not seen a lotthat I'd want to continue.
Now, violent crime, includinggun violence, continues to harm
communities across Seattle.
Do you believe the current CityAttorney has taken the right steps to
address gun violence and violent crime?
And what specific actions wouldyou take to reduce violence and

(13:35):
support impacted communities?
Yeah, so there's some reallyamazing programs out there that
work with gang-involved youth andreally try to get at some of the
underlying issues of gun violence.
What I've seen from the City Attorney'sOffice is they've focused on things

(13:56):
like regulating hookah lounges,which is really a surface level
fix to a much, much deeper problem.
And so to - like the idea that regulatinga few businesses, primarily owned by
immigrants and people of color, isgoing to all of a sudden fix our gun
violence problem - I think, is wishfulthinking, and just not realistic.

(14:19):
I mean, I do think those businesses needto be - that there needs to be safety
protections for the folks who work thereand folks that attend those businesses.
But to think that that's goingto solve our gun violence
problem is just wishful thinking.
So we need to really be doingmuch deeper level work on that.

(14:42):
Now we've seen a rise in dangerousdriving across Seattle - from an
increase in pedestrians being injuredto high-profile cases and nuisances
like the so-called Belltown Hellcat.
What role do you see the City Attorney'sOffice playing in improving traffic safety
and addressing reckless or other dangerousdriving behaviors on our streets?

(15:02):
Yeah.
Well, so this sort of getsus to the broader issue of
law enforcement in Seattle.
And right now, our police departmentis pretty thin on resources.
And one of the reasons that they'rethin on resources is because the
Seattle Police Officers Guild won'tgive up any of their body of work.

(15:25):
So what I've seen, what people tellme across the city, and what even
moderates claim to be supportiveof - is ensuring that our CARE team
and other mental health serviceproviders can respond to certain calls.
So,
if you're Downtown and you come acrossan individual who's experiencing

(15:47):
a mental health crisis, you shouldbe able to call 911 and have
a response from the CARE team.
But currently, because of the memorandumof understanding that's been negotiated
between the Seattle Police OfficersGuild and the CARE team, the CARE team
cannot respond without a police officer.
And so our police department isstretched really thin, even though

(16:10):
we've created these other programs.
So I would like to see a public safetysystem in which different problems are
responded to by appropriate resources,which would allow, I think, the Seattle
Police Department to actually be enforcingsome of the traffic laws that they, I

(16:31):
think, have been less able to enforcebecause of resource considerations.
So, in your opinion - is it correct todeduce then - that you're looking at
that as a problem of lack of abilityto enforce laws on the streets, and
trying to create more of an ability toenforce from the police perspective?

(16:51):
Yeah, exactly.
I mean,
there's also other enforcementmechanisms that I think could be,
that we could be exploring there.
So we use traffic cameras in schoolzones, which I think is really important
to - as my son is walking to school, Isure want to make sure that the people

(17:16):
who are driving around him are safe.
And so, using - so particularlyfor enforcement that impacts our
kids, I think it's appropriate touse things like camera enforcement.
What role does the City Attorney'sOffice play in mitigating federal attacks

(17:39):
on civil rights, particularly thosetargeting trans people and immigrants?
Yeah, so this is one place whereour City Attorney's Office could be
having a much more significant role.
So we know that the federal EEOC [EqualEmployment Opportunity Commission] is
no longer litigating or helping folkswith cases involving discrimination

(18:02):
against our trans community.
But, the City can be the plaintiff ina Title VII civil rights action, which
means that if we see cases where there areentities that are discriminating against
folks in our trans community, the Cityof Seattle can help litigate those cases.

(18:23):
And that's something where we shouldbe stepping up - we should be ensuring
that the Seattle Office of Civil Rightsis looking for those cases, we should
be reviewing which cases the EEOC isdropping that are impacting our community.
And the City Attorney's office should bestepping up where the federal government
is obviously going in the wrong direction.

(18:44):
We're also seeing impacts fromICE and immigration enforcement
actions on our immigrant community.
Can the City Attorney's Officeplay a role in mitigating that or
helping immigrants in our city?
So one thing that our entire citygovernment should be doing is speaking

(19:04):
loudly and clearly and communicatingto our whole community - that
Seattle officials, law enforcementofficials, local officials do
not ask about immigration status.
And that if you're a victim of a crime, ifyou're a witness to a crime, you can come
and speak with a Seattle official withouthaving to worry about being deported.

(19:26):
And I've seen that from otherofficials - I've seen that from
the Tukwila Chief of Police.
I haven't heard our City Attorneyspeaking out about this issue, but this
is something that we absolutely need to becommunicating and making sure that folks
feel comfortable coming forward - withcity officials, with law enforcement
officials, with folks in our community.

(19:48):
Seattle has expanded its use ofsurveillance technologies, like CCTV
systems and Real-Time Crime Centersoftware, particularly in neighborhoods
like the Chinatown-InternationalDistrict and Aurora Avenue.
Civil rights organizations, includingthe ACLU of Washington, have raised
concerns that these technologiesmay disproportionately impact Black

(20:08):
and Brown communities, and could beleveraged by federal agencies like
ICE to target immigrants and refugees.
Given the Trump administration'sintensified immigration enforcement
efforts, how would you, as City Attorney,work to ensure that surveillance tools
are not used to exacerbate racialdisparities or facilitate federal
targeting of vulnerable populations?

(20:31):
Yeah, I mean, so I think aboutthis - about where I live.
So I live pretty close todowntown Columbia City.
And so, you know, I think about this- would I want a bunch of CCTV cameras
being used around the stores that Ifrequent, where my kid and my family go?
And that's really worrisome to me.

(20:53):
So
I think we need to be really carefulabout deploying that technology.
And I do worry about how it's goingto impact our immigrant community.
No matter what steps we take to try to
keep the federal government fromobtaining that information - I

(21:14):
think that's a huge risk.
Are there any specific measuresyou would implement to promote
transparency, accountability, andcommunity oversight in the deployment
of surveillance technologies?
I don't have any specific ideas onthat right now, but obviously getting
input from the entire community,from all the stakeholders would be

(21:34):
a really important piece of that.
In light of Seattle's recent $10 millionsettlement with protesters who alleged
excessive force by police during the 2020demonstrations, and considering ongoing
concerns about treatment of protesters,how would you, as City Attorney, ensure
the protection of First Amendmentrights during public demonstrations?

(21:56):
So that raises for me the issue of theaccountability measures that we have
for the Seattle Police Department.
This is another area thatI've been frustrated by what
our leaders have been doing.
Over and over again, our voterssay that they want common sense
accountability measures forour Seattle Police Department.

(22:18):
And yet our city leaders keep on signingcontract after contract that do not
include the accountability measures thatare typically part of other contracts.
So as City Attorney, I would beprepared to take the Seattle Police
Officers Guild - the next contract- to arbitration if they don't agree
to those accountability measures.

(22:39):
So I think when we have betteraccountability, then we're going
to have fewer lawsuits against theSeattle Police Department, right?
So if we're able to ensure that officerswho are violating these policies are
held accountable, then that's actuallygoing to benefit the taxpayers of the

(22:59):
City of Seattle - because we won'thave these kinds of lawsuits impacting
protesters and members of the public.
Ann Davison, Seattle's current CityAttorney, ended Seattle's Community
Court, a program designed to divertpeople facing low-level charges
into services instead of jail.
Critics argue that this decisionrolled back a key alternative to

(23:20):
prosecution and disconnected peoplefrom the help that they need.
What's your view of that decision,and what changes, if any, would
you make to how the City Attorney'sOffice approaches diversion programs?
So I've had an opportunity tospeak with both Pete Holmes and the
municipal court judges who workedon developing Community Court.

(23:42):
And when Ann Davison came into office, sheinitially raised a couple concerns about
Community Court, which - the individualswho were in charge of Community Court
started developing programs and proceduresand ideas to respond to those concerns.
But rather than continue thatconversation, she unilaterally

(24:05):
ended Community Court.
So she had raised what I thoughtwere some legitimate concerns, and
those concerns were being addressed.
And so for her to then - despite theproposed changes and really without giving
that program enough time to adjust- for her to unilaterally close it

(24:26):
was, I think, a really bad decision.
And
just another example of burning bridges.
She's burning bridges byaffidaviting Judge Pooja Vaddadi.
She's burning bridges by not workingwith the partners that she needs to
be working with in Community Court.
And it's just one more thing thatI've been really frustrated with

(24:50):
the current City Attorney on.
So what changes would you maketo how the City Attorney's Office
approaches diversion programs?
So with this specific program, oneof the problems that they were having
was the percentage of people whowere failing to appear for subsequent
hearings for Community Court.
And that they were actually developing- so often, folks who are in Community

(25:13):
Court are, you know, houseless and oftendon't have the resources, don't have
some of the support that they need inorder to, or even the transportation
necessary to make it to a return hearing.
So the folks who ran Community Courtwere actually in the process of obtaining

(25:33):
funding to ensure that transportationand case management services were
going to be provided so that theycould increase the number of folks
who attended those return hearings.
That's the kind of work - I mean,that's the kind of practical,
on-the-ground work that we need todo to make these programs successful.
Ann Davison talked about that decisionbeing a result of her coming to the

(25:56):
conclusion that pre-filing diversion wasmore effective than post-filing diversion.
Do you share that view?
And are there any more pre- orpost-filing diversion programs that you
would support enacting or expanding?
So I mean, I've had conversationswith Lisa Daugaard as well.
So

(26:17):
my guess is what she's talking aboutwith pre-filing diversion is primarily
through LEAD - which is great.
So when someone - instead of havingcharges filed against them - when
somebody can receive the servicesthat they need to avoid even having
that, that's a great opportunity.
But that's not goingto work for everybody.

(26:38):
There are going to be some peoplewho are going to be involved in the
criminal legal system and we need tosupport those individuals as well.
So it's not an either-or.
We need all of these programs to be ableto really respond to the public safety

(26:58):
issues that folks in Seattle face.
Now, Seattle has reinstated the StayOut of Drug Areas and Stay Out of
Areas of Prostitution - also knownas SODA and SOAP laws - which allow
judges to ban individuals accused,not necessarily convicted, of certain
offenses from designated areas.
While proponents argue that these measuresaim to disrupt open-air drug markets

(27:21):
and reduce sex trafficking, evidencesuggests that these measures may not
effectively reduce drug use or humantrafficking and could disproportionately
impact marginalized communities.
As City Attorney, how would you assessthe effectiveness of these laws?
And what approach would you take toensure that enforcement strategies
are both effective and equitable?

(27:43):
Yeah.
So there are so many problems with this.
So,
first of all - and I think there'sbeen some reporting on this - there's
only been like one or two of thoseorders that have actually been entered.
So
Ann Davison spent a lot of timeon reinstituting these provisions

(28:05):
from 30 years ago - that didn'twork 30 years ago either.
So
we took some time from the SeattleCity Council and from her office
drafting up this legislation.
It got passed last year andit's not actually being used.
Now, on top of that,
as we've discussed already, weknow that the Seattle Police

(28:26):
Department is stretched thin.
So, the idea that Seattle police officersare going to take time out of their
day to figure out which individualsare subject to an order and then
enforce - like, it's just mind boggling.
This is just another example of aperformative attempt to claim that you're

(28:47):
doing something when you're not actuallyaddressing the underlying problem.
So would you plan on prosecutingviolations of these laws?
Would you just propose not enforcing them?
What will you do as City Attorneywith these laws and actions?
Right.
So, I mean, I'm going to be interestedin seeing - between now and when I

(29:09):
take office - whether there's anydata to show any effectiveness.
And one thing that I can say conclusivelyis that I would ensure that these orders
would not be sought against individualswho could potentially be harmed.

(29:29):
And what I mean by that is
- you would need to do an individualizedassessment - does the person who
this order is being sought against,do they have family members or
treatment services within the areathat you're trying to ban them from?
So, you know - before ever attemptingto seek one of these orders, I

(29:51):
think there'd be a pretty extensiveanalysis that would be needed.
And,
you know, in reality, my officeprobably would not seek these orders.
But, you know, I would needto see what the data is on it.
So much of our public conversationaround crime focuses on punishing
offenders, very little attention ispaid to rehabilitation and prevention.

(30:17):
That conversation often claims to speakfor victims, but studies, including
a major one just released, show thatmost victims of violent crime actually
want more investment in rehabilitationand prevention than in punishment.
Do you agree that we shouldfocus more on keeping people from
becoming victims in the first place?
And if so, how would you use the powersof the City Attorney's Office to do that?

(30:38):
Yeah, I think that this is areally important component here.
So, you know, one thing - so one of thethings that Ann Davison has done since
she came into office was she negotiatedwith the King County Jail so that there
were more beds that are available, right?
So that we can process more peoplethrough this cycle of putting them in
jail for 30 days, letting them out.

(31:00):
Then, you know, something elsehappens and they're back in jail.
So we now have more beds.
What I would like to see, what I woulddo as City Attorney is instead of just
negotiating for more beds in the KingCounty Jail, I would negotiate a contract
that ensures appropriate conditions thatfolks could - to know that inmates are

(31:21):
receiving the medication that they need,to know that there is re-entry planning,
to know that there are rehabilitationservices that are provided in the jail.
So, you know, unfortunately, KingCounty Jail is currently a disaster.
And it's one of these things thatwe, that, you know, there's not a big
constituency out there for taking,spending the time and resources

(31:43):
that are necessary to improve that.
But that is something that's going tobe vitally important if - again, if
we want to break the cycle of crime,we need to ensure that when folks are
in custody, that they're receivingappropriate medication, that they're
receiving services, that there's adequatere-entry planning to help ensure that on

(32:06):
release, they're not going to be in a muchworse situation than they were before.
Now, there's a chunk of our populationthat believes that hearing things like
that - we need to improve services,the conditions are bad - who think,
Well, yeah, the conditions are bad.
That's the point.
We want jail to be a bad place.

(32:26):
We don't want to coddle people.
What are these services?
These people need toexperience punishment.
It needs to be horrible and painful,so they don't want to come back
and we deter people from wantingto go in there because it's so bad.
And that will help improve crime.
Crime exists because thereisn't that right now - we're
treating people too leniently.
We need to crack down andthrow these people in jail and

(32:49):
teach them some consequences.
Why is that not your approach?
And does that make the community safer?
Yeah.
So fortunately, there'sdata on this issue.
So if you look at - there's some reallygood programs, and in fact, the Washington
State Department of Corrections hasbeen starting to send staff members to

(33:11):
jails and prisons in northern Europethat have a much different model.
They have a model where individualswho are incarcerated have privacy,
have normalcy, have services - andthe recidivism rate is so much lower.

(33:32):
Not only that, but right now, oneof the choke points for the King
County Jail is they're having areally hard time hiring staff.
And the reason for that isit's a horrible place to work.
The conditions - not only for inmates,but for staff members - are not good.

(33:54):
These facilities in northern Europe haveinmates and guards who can converse with
each other like normal people, and so it'sactually a much better work environment.
So it's not just that we need to treatpeople humanely, it's that we actually

(34:15):
have better outcomes - lower recidivismand less crime - when we do that.
So it's not just about coddling people,it's about creating a safer city.
How do you respond to people who thensay - Well, that takes a lot of money,
and now you're choosing to spendmoney on criminals instead of the
wonderful other residents of the city,who - in their view - deserve it more?

(34:42):
Yeah.
I mean, so I think there are a lot ofterrific programs out there that we need
to ensure receive sufficient funding.
And I will be happy to work with thecouncil on developing, working up
progressive revenue sources to ensurethat we have the ability to fund programs.

(35:05):
But
this is one of those thingsthat - this is not about the inmates
who are in jail, this is about us.
How do we treat the folks who are
in the most difficult position, right?

(35:25):
So this is a reflectionon us as a community.
If we decide that it's okay to have peoplelive in inhumane conditions, then that
says something really negative about us.
And that's - I don't think that'swhat most Seattle voters want.

(35:46):
Now, many crime victims reportnot receiving the help they need
in the aftermath of what they'veexperienced - whether it's trauma
recovery, housing support, financialsupport to recover from property
loss, or simply being kept informedabout what's happening in their case.
As City Attorney, how would youwork to ensure that victims and

(36:06):
survivors are better supported andcentered in the legal process, not
just used to justify punishment?
Yeah.
Well, so I'll just note thatas a legal aid attorney, I have
experience representing survivorsof domestic violence, and I've seen
those - yeah, I've worked with folkswho have exactly those complaints.

(36:27):
And unfortunately, the way ourcriminal legal system works right
now, it is often very exclusiveof the most impacted people.
And that's one of the reasons that
programs, you know, restorative justiceprograms, can create an opportunity

(36:51):
for victims and survivors to havemuch more significant input, right?
So if, and, you know, restorative justicedoesn't work and isn't necessarily
appropriate in every single instance,but in many cases, restorative justice
framework can allow victims andsurvivors to have much more significant

(37:13):
input into the entire process.
So the whole community comes togetherso that the offender has to face
the people who have been impacted,and they have an opportunity to
restore the harm that they've caused.
And so I think, and fortunately, wehave some really good restorative

(37:36):
justice model programs that havebeen in operation in King County.
And I would want to build and expand onthose, so that we can ensure that victims
and survivors are a more integral part ofthe process and that their voice is heard.
Now, wage theft remains a significantissue in Seattle, with cases like those

(37:59):
involving Baja Concrete and NewwayForming highlighting the challenges
workers face in recovering stolen wagesand trying to avoid retaliation if
they are seeking those stolen wages.
Given that the City Attorney's Officeplays a crucial role in prosecuting
wage theft cases referred by theOffice of Labor Standards, how do you
plan to enhance enforcement effortsand ensure timely and effective

(38:23):
justice for affected workers?
Yeah, so I wrote an op-ed about this.
And I'll just note that theSeattle Attorney's Office was an
important part of that enforcement.
So, in between 2019 and 2021, the SeattleCity Attorney's Office filed 11 cases

(38:45):
against businesses that were engaging inviolations of Seattle's labor standards.
In the more than three years sinceAnn Davison was sworn in as City
Attorney, there have only beentwo cases that have been filed in
front of the hearing examiner toenforce Seattle's labor standards.

(39:08):
So, and I've heard, again, from folkswho worked in that part of the City
Attorney's Office - that the cases thathad been filed under Pete Holmes and were
on appeal, that her office was questioningthe arguments that they were making.
This is not the way to supportour Office of Labor Standards.

(39:32):
I would be much more aggressive inensuring that we're providing the Office
of Labor Standards the support it needs.
And in cases of really bad actors - incases like Baja Concrete - there may be
an opportunity to file a nuisance lawsuit.
When you have businesses that arerepeatedly violating city law,

(40:00):
you can take proactive steps tostop that from happening rather than
getting bogged down in litigation.
Absolutely.
Now, The Washington Attorney Generalrecently filed a lawsuit against RealPage
and several landlords, alleging that theyused algorithmic software to coordinate
rent increases, affecting approximately800,000 leases in Washington state.

(40:24):
This practice is believed tohave significantly contributed
to rising rents in Seattle.
As City Attorney, what steps wouldyou take to address the harm caused
by those practices and to preventsimilar issues in the future?
Yeah.
So, I mean, there's a bunch of things.
One is that I think there'san opportunity, potentially,
for the Seattle City Council

(40:47):
to take proactive steps toprohibit this kind of activity.
Also, I mean,
as Seattle City Attorney, Iwould have wanted to work with
Nick Brown on that lawsuit.
You know, this is something that, asyou noted, impacts Seattle renters.
And so it's been - again, it'sbeen frustrating to see the

(41:08):
City Attorney's Office fail toengage in these kinds of issues.
So would you support the creationof a publicly accessible database
of corporate-owned real estate inSeattle to enhance transparency and
accountability in our housing market?
Absolutely.
And we've taken the first step.
So the Seattle City Council,about 10 years ago, passed a

(41:31):
rental registration ordinance.
So we have a process where rentalunits have to be registered.
And so I think we can take thenext step to gather the information
to ensure that this doesn'tnegatively impact Seattle renters.
I think that would be areally good step to take.

(41:51):
So the Seattle Municipal Courthas faced significant backlogs
in cases in recent years.
As City Attorney, how would you addressthose backlogs to ensure timely justice?
Yeah, well, one is lifting theaffidavit against Judge Pooja Vaddadi.
When you have seven elected judges and theSeattle City Attorney's Office basically

(42:13):
says - We're not going to let one of thosejudges hear any cases - you're going to,
that's going to create a backlog, right?
I mean, so that's, I mean,that's one important thing.
Another piece of that is Community Court.
So Community Court was actually apretty efficient way of handling

(42:37):
a relatively large caseload.
So when Ann Davison shut downCommunity Court, each and every one
of those cases had to be processedthrough the traditional criminal legal
system - which took more time andhas created unfortunate, and I think,

(42:57):
backlogs that have really negativelyimpacted our public safety.
Now, you just referred to Ann Davison'soffice filing a blanket affidavit of
prejudice to disqualify Judge PoojaVaddadi from all criminal cases, with her
office citing a pattern of biased rulings.
Now, the substantiation of thoseclaims of biased rulings was

(43:19):
questioned, and the move sparkedsignificant debate about prosecutorial
discretion and judicial independence.
We've heard that you don't viewthat action as appropriate.
Are there any circumstances where youwould consider using such authority
to disqualify a judge from cases?
So, as an attorney, I appear in front ofa large number of judges, and there are

(43:43):
absolutely cases where I don't think anindividual client is able to get a fair
hearing in front of a specific judge.
So, I personally have filed affidavitsof prejudice in specific cases.
But it is absolutely not appropriateto file a blanket affidavit of
prejudice with respect to allcriminal cases against one of our

(44:07):
seven elected municipal court judges.
So, yes, there are certain limitedinstances in which an affidavit
of prejudice in a specific caseis appropriate, but the kind of
blanket affidavit of prejudice thatour current City Attorney issued
is absolutely not appropriate.
Now, we also asked each candidate in thisrace to ask a question of their opponents.

(44:30):
The first question we have isfrom your opponent, Erika Evans.

The question is (44:35):
You've spoken about being a voice for vulnerable,
underserved, and diverse communities.
Given that there is a Black woman inthe race who has both extensive and
relevant experience as a U.S. Attorneyand in the City Attorney's Office, and
lived experience that reflects concernsheld by many of those communities,
how do you reconcile your decision tostay in the race instead of stepping

(44:58):
aside to support her candidacy?
So, yeah, I appreciate that question.
And I've had a number of - I think, I hope- productive conversations with Erika.
I think she's an amazing candidate.
I've been in - everybody that I've spokenwith about her has been impressed by her.
And I mean, she's been afederal prosecutor, which is a

(45:19):
pretty high profile position.
And so I'll
just start out by saying - Ireally respect her, and
I think she would make a far better CityAttorney than our current City Attorney.
That being said, I think Ibring experience to this office

(45:43):
that is needed at this time.
So what I'm seeing is that we needreally big, transformative change
and I have the experience doing that.
So I helped develop theDemocracy Voucher Program.
I have defended some of our cuttingedge tenant protections in the
Washington State Supreme Court.

(46:04):
And I have experience working withlawmakers in the city and at the
state level that I think is going tobe really valuable for this office.
So I'm running because I want tobring some big, transformative
changes to this office.
But I really appreciate - and I'llalso note - one of the reasons that

(46:28):
I helped create the Democracy VoucherProgram, one of the reasons that I
helped pass Ranked Choice Voting inSeattle, is so that Seattle voters
would have a lot of really good choices.
So I am super excitedthat Erika's in the race.
And I'm really glad that Seattle voterswill have an opportunity to choose
from a number of qualified candidates.
And a number of candidates who will be,I think, far superior to the incumbent.

(46:53):
And I leave it up to the voters ofSeattle to determine who's going
to make the best City Attorney.
Now, the next question is fromNathan Rouse, who asks: Our last
two city attorneys also did nothave criminal trial experience.
How are you better equipped tocome in and handle criminal cases?

(47:13):
Yeah, so a couple of things.
So I have representeddefendants in Seattle Municipal
Court in a criminal case.
So I used to be the Managing, or I usedto be the Director of Student Legal
Services at the University of Washington.
And so we did handle criminal casesagainst University of Washington students.
I've also been a pro tem judgeat Seattle Municipal Court.

(47:37):
I've also, I also served as a clerk toJudge Ed Shea in the Eastern District of
Washington - so in federal court, hearingcriminal cases and being part of criminal
trials, as a clerk to a federal judge.
So I do come into this position

(47:58):
with criminal law experience.
But I think - again, I think thething that is going to be important
to Seattle voters is that the CityAttorney is able to bring about the
change that's necessary to a reallycurrently dysfunctional public safety

(48:21):
system - and to the system in general,including how it's impacting wage theft,
tenant protections, and many other waysthat it impacts the people of Seattle.
Now, Seattle voters are beingfaced with a decision here.

(48:41):
There's an incumbent who'srunning for re-election and,
to-date, three challengers.
And voters are trying to make senseof - if they want to stay the course
with the incumbent or make a change.
But they have a number of choicesif they do want to make a change.
How do you differentiate yourself?
And what do you tell voters about whatthe difference is between you and the

(49:04):
other three challengers to Ann Davison,and why they should vote for you?
Well, so, I mean, this is sortof similar to what the last
two questions were getting at.
But, you know, I've spent 20
years in local politics figuringout what are the sort of systemic

(49:25):
changes we need to make Seattle aplace that really reflects our values.
And
that's what I bring to this office- is that experience working with
policymakers, that experience - soI've argued cases in front of the Ninth
Circuit, I've argued cases in frontof the Washington State Supreme Court.

(49:49):
I've handled, you know, I've representedhomeowners facing foreclosure, survivors
of domestic violence, folks trying to gettheir benefits with unemployment insurance
with the Employment Security Department.
And I think those are the types ofexperiences that are going to inform
what we're going to need in order tomove forward and to really bring our

(50:14):
city in - what I've seen is that ourcity is not really living its values.
Well, you know, as we've touchedon in this conversation, we
have a King County Jail that hasseen a number of inmates die.
We have,

(50:36):
you know, we've closed downCommunity Court, we've closed down
opportunities to help folks disengagefrom the criminal legal system.
And that's just negativelyimpacting public safety.
So, you know, what - I think I havethe experience to bring the kind
of transformative change that weneed to live our values as a city.

(50:59):
And as we close, one of the major thingsthat doesn't get talked about as much
as we talk about policy sometimes is thejob of managing that office - managing
the staff in the office, workingin conjunction with other partners
and law enforcement in the criminallegal system and with stakeholders
and impacted people in the community.

(51:20):
What is your experience, and why shouldthe community have the confidence in
your ability to manage this office in away that will enable you to accomplish
the goals that you're talking about?
Yeah.
So I've - first of all,I've run large programs.
So I've - I was the Managing Attorneyof the Housing Justice Project, as

(51:42):
the Director of Student Legal Servicesat the University of Washington.
And I've created my own law firm - soI currently own and operate Washington
Employment Benefits Advocates.
So
I've
done everything from the marketingfor the law firm, to hiring,

(52:05):
to making sure that we're incompliance with all the different
state laws and local regulationsthat impact a small business.
And so I've just - I've gota lot of experience running a
large operation, which obviouslythe City Attorney's office is.

(52:27):
So the City Attorney's Office employsover 200 people, including 135 attorneys.
And I have significant experiencehiring and managing attorneys,
which I think is going to bereally important for this office.
I also have experience building coalitionsto create policy that Seattle voters want.

(52:49):
So when I helped to write the DemocracyVoucher program in 2015, we had to bring
together a large coalition of volunteersand supporters and organizations and
endorsers to make that program successful.
Similarly, in 2022, when I was chairof Fair Vote Washington and we passed

(53:12):
the Ranked Choice Voting ballot measurein the City of Seattle, that took a
significant amount of coalition building.
So I have the experience puttingtogether coalitions and partners and
engaging the community to ensure thatwe can move these big projects forward.
Well, thank you so much for sharingyour priorities, your platform, and

(53:37):
helping us understand who you are andwhat your vision is for the office.
Very much appreciate that - and believethat accountability to the voters
is key to democracy, which we reallyneed as much as possible at this time.
As we've heard today, this officeplays a powerful role in shaping how
Seattle handles safety, accountability,justice, and civil rights - and the

(53:58):
decisions made here will have realimpacts on people's lives every day.
So thank you so much for yourtime and your willingness to speak
directly to the people of Seattle.
Well, and Crystal - thank youso much for all the work that
you do with Hacks & Wonks.
This is such an important program.
And there's, you know - with thestate of journalism today, it's just

(54:19):
wonderful to have folks like you who arereally digging into these issues when
a lot of media organizations are not.
So thank you for your work.
Thank you very, very much.
Thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks,which is produced by Shannon Cheng.
You can follow Hacks & Wonkson Bluesky @HacksAndWonks.
You can find me on Bluesky at@finchfrii - that's F-I-N-C-H-F-R-I-I.

(54:44):
You can catch Hacks & Wonks on everypodcast service and app - just type
"Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar.
Be sure to subscribe to get the fullversions of our Friday week-in-review
shows and our Tuesday topical showdelivered to your podcast feed.
If you like us, leave areview wherever you listen.
You can also get a full transcriptof this episode and links to the
resources referenced in the showat officialhacksandwonks.com.

(55:07):
Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next
time.