King County Elections says it has certified the nearly 11,000 signatures necessary and both sides in the District 3 political battle are now preparing for a December 7th yes/no vote on the recall of Seattle City Councilmember Kshama Sawant.
The single vote ballot will be mailed only to District 3 residents and is sure to be a talking point at Thanksgiving tables around the city. If the majority of D3 voters choose yes on the recall, the council will select a temporary replacement until the next general election in the city. The winner in that vote would finish Sawant’s current term through the end of 2023.
“The recall will be the only question in front of voters on the December 7 ballot and ballot itself will feature both the charges against Councilmember Sawant and her response to them. Voters will then be asked to vote YES or NO,” elections officials said in a statement.
The cost for the vote will be footed by the city. An election of this scale typically costs around $300,000.
“This holiday recall ballot will be the highest-stakes special election in Seattle history, and to overcome this unprecedented level of voter suppression, the Kshama Solidarity Campaign will be building a grassroots Get-Out-The-Vote effort the likes of which this city has never seen,” the campaign seeking to defeat the recall effort said in a statement sent out Friday morning.
Meanwhile, the Recall Sawant campaign that brought the charges against her is already seeing the effort pay dividends. “Recall effort proceeds against socialist Seattle councilwoman who participated in riots” reads the headline at the national conservative news outlet the Washington Examiner. The campaign also points out that recent polling from local Sinclair Broadcast Group affiliate KOMO shows only 23% of registered voters in the city view the longest seated member of the council as favorable.
PLEASE HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE!
Subscribe to CHS to help us pay writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for as little as $5 a month.
The December vote is the latest battle point in the now two-year recall fight. Earlier this month, CHS reported on the Recall Sawant campaign and campaign manager Henry Bridger turning in signatures collected to put the vote on the ballot past the deadline to include the vote on the upcoming November General Election ballot when turnout will be at its highest.
The Kshama Solidarity group says the delay for a winter election will suppress turnout, going so far as to help collect signatures in a failed effort to force a November vote. The group points out there has been “no precedent within the last 150 years” of an election held in Seattle in December.
“The Recall’s aim with their ballot timing was to construct the most undemocratic election possible, with the lowest voter turnout of working people and people of color,” the pro-Sawant campaign statement said. “However, our movement – which won the first $15 minimum wage in a major U.S. city as well as the first local tax on Amazon, and defeated $1.2 million of Amazon’s money to re-elect Kshama Sawant – has done the impossible before. The Kshama Solidarity Campaign will go all-out for a December 7th recall election, to defend our voice in City Hall, Kshama Sawant, and all the victories our movement has won.”
Bridger and the recall backers, meanwhile, say they were simply following the rules and requirements in meeting the deadline to submit the signatures. They also point to the Sawant group’s “desperate and failing legal campaign” to appeal the recall to the State Supreme Court. The court ruled in April that the effort could proceed ending months of appeals that began in October 2020 and, the recall campaign says, cost “Seattle taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars” to defend Sawant in court.
UPDATE: King County Elections has sent out a statement confirming the certification and plans for a December 7th vote:
Upon certification of the recall petition, state law mandates a recall election be held within 45 to 90 days. With November General election ballots sent to overseas and service voters on September 17 and the February Special election falling outside of the mandated date range, KCE has set an election date of Tuesday, December 7, 2021. Ballots will be mailed to Seattle City Council District 3 voters on November 17 and should begin to arrive in mailboxes in the days following.
“A number of factors influenced our decision to set the recall election on December 7,” Julie Wise, King County Director of Elections, said in the statement. “With both the November General and February Special elections being outside of the realm of possibility, we looked at dates that would reduce overlap between elections for our voters and sought to avoid the busy December holiday season as much as possible.”
“There’s no perfect date to schedule an election but our hope is that voters will show up, turn out, and use their voice in this election just like any other,” Wise said.
Organizers have outlined multiple acts they say warrant recall including using city resources to promote a Tax Amazon initiative, allowing demonstrators inside City Hall during a protest in June 2020, and marching to Mayor Jenny Durkan’s home address kept secret due to her past role as a federal prosecutor. A fourth charge of allowing Socialist Alternative to influence her office’s employment decisions was rejected by the state Supreme Court.
Support on both sides appears to be flagging after months and months of back and forth as financial contributions have slowed. Both sides, though, are well financed with more than $1.3 million raised across the two campaigns. The Kshama Solidarity group points out it has nearly twice as many D3 donors as its opposition — more than 3,000 compared to about 1,600 for Recall Sawant.
While Sawant’s supporters say they are preparing a massive get out the vote effort of a scale larger even than her successful campaigns for office, recall proponents say they, too, are preparing for an outreach fight. “The Recall Sawant will now lead a broadscale campaign to inform and mobilize the voters of District 3 around the opportunity of removing Sawant from office,” Bridger said in a statement.
The December vote will follow Seattle’s November election in which the city will get a new mayor, a new city attorney, and at least one new city councilmember. Last week, the 43rd District Democrats endorsed activist and lawyer Nikkita Oliver for that open citywide Position 9 seat. If Oliver wins, the December vote will determine if the Black Lives Matter activist will ever get a chance to work with the Socialist Alternative leader on the council.
The vote also follows a massively unsuccessful recall bid on the national stage after the effort to remove Gov. Gavin Newsom failed hugely in California even as worries have grown that the “populist tool” is an increasing assault on democracy.
PLEASE HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE!
Subscribe to CHS to help us pay writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for as little as $5 a month.
It’s beginning to look a lot like Christmas…
To who? Republicans?
Oh, honey, that’s Kshama-talk, and like everything that she says, it’s a dramatization. It’s a lot more than just Republicans that want her out.
Just to clarify, is the KOMO poll is about voters in the whole city, or the District 3 voters who will actually decide?
Also…the Washington Examiner, wow, now that’s an outlet with its finger on the pulse of District 3, great pickup there guys.
Can’t believe my tax money is getting wasted on this stupid recall, and that I have to vote yet again to retain the councilmember who me and the rest of the neighborhood elected and re-elected. Can’t believe this was allowed to go forward when the recall effort against Durkan (who allowed us to be gassed in our homes for a week) wasn’t. But you can believe that I will be voting no, and urge everyone else to do the same. I don’t want to have to revote every election because some people didn’t like how it turned out and want to purchase a different outcome, do you?
I believe the key difference between the Sawant recall, the mayor’s actions, and some of the recently rejected ballot initiatives boils down to the law: Sawant broke the law, so the recall is valid, regardless of opinions and outcome.
The Recall presented evidence to the Superior and Supreme Courts. Sawant presented her evidence. Both courts weighed the evidence and ruled, unanimously, the Sawant has to face her constituents of District 3 and let them vote to recall her. She finally wasn’t able to bully her way out of this.
Sorry but I totally disagree with you and will be voting to get her out. It’s time we tone down the divisive rhetoric and work on solutions where everyone can play a role. It also sets a terrible example when someone in power like her to act as if it’s “other” people who are the problem. Recalling her will send a message that ALL politicians, across the spectrum, must be accountable for their actions. Without checks and balances like recalls, power can corrupt anyone.
Also “unprecedented level of voter suppression” is just offensive to people who are actually being denied the right to vote.
To be clear: A ballot is sent to the home of every registered voter (who can register online) and can be returned by just putting in a mailbox.
Let’s not be obtuse. It was a purposeful move on behalf of the recall campaign knowing that there would be lower turn out for an off-cycle ballot. Thereby, suppressing the vote. They know that in a fair election, she’d win. So yeah, let’s waste tax payer $’s and subvert the will of a broader population of voters.
But why do less people vote? Someone choosing to not turn in a ballot is not voter suppression.
They’re purposefully decreasing the voter turn out. If they weren’t concerned, why the off-cycle ballot? There’s not a lot of mental gymnastics needed here.
UghWhy…do you want to bemoan this election…ask yourself how many Sawant supporters turned out, under her direction, to sign the very petition to vote her out of office. It makes me chuckle.
Bard is not the one being obtuse, UghWhy. The fact that fewer people vote in a special election is in no way suppression. D3 voters will get the same ballot in the mail, return it in the same way as always, and it will be counted in the same manner as in every other election. If fewer people choose to participate that’s entirely on the voters, not the recall campaign.
You just can’t argue with law and politics…everyone playing the game is playing by the same rules…this recall is fair and the results will be valid…wherever the chips may fall.
right…I got into a big argument with a Sawant supporter over this issue. This is not voter suppression! The people who care on each side will get the ballot in.
Yes, Sawant’s people should ask Stacey Abrams what she thinks of their characterization of Washington’s super-convenient, user-friendly system as “voter suppression.” Of course I can’t speak for her, but I suspect they wouldn’t like the answer. One can criticize the recall campaign’s gaming of the calendar in pursuit of a marginal advantage (which, let’s face it, most similarly-situated campaigns would do) without equating it to the systemic purging of hundreds of thousands of honest, law-abiding voters that we are seeing in red states.
As I’ve said before, I oppose the recall because I think it’s a process that generally should be reserved for felons (or instances of extreme moral turpitude, like someone who’s revealed to be, say, a secret Klan leader) and the charges against Sawant all strike me as trivialities, even if they are technically sufficient. My vote will be no. But the Sawant team really, really needs to work on their messaging if they hope to win this. Voters here are smart and “right-wing voter suppression” hysterics are just going to insult them.
Referring to a semantic argument as “hysterics” is the kind of histrionic behavior that’s just going to insult commentators on this post.
This is the exact thing that some supporters of the recall claimed wouldn’t happen…
That the recall wouldn’t cost the city money (fact: $300K just for the ballot, plus city monies Sawant is entitled to spend in her defense)…
and that it *wouldn’t* be a one question ballot, but rather go on a “regularly scheduled” ballot in February (fact: shocker… a single question ballot!)
If the recall is successful on a ballot where there is 25%-50% of normal General Election turn-out, then it will be a clear assault on democracy.
When the right wing is able to overturn regular elections with low turn-out special elections, they will repeat the pattern again and again.
So you think the “right wing” of capitol hill is going to overturn democracy?
Sorry, but the election laws allow all of this. They were not required to turn in signatures with enough time to make the “normal” Election Day ballot, and they have a strategy they think is more advantageous to their side.
If you don’t like this, change the election laws.
The election laws do need to be changed. California is grappling with this right now, after the “Recall Gavin Newsom” debacle. The only way Republicans can win the Governorship in California is by recalling whatever Democrat wins in the General Election, and using goofy rules to get a GOP “recall alternative” over the line.
What would prevent this would be a rule that for a Recall to succeed, the number of people voting “Yes” should exceed the number of winning votes when they were elected… Or at least a number more than 50% +1 of the General Election where they were elected.
Because you are 100% correct: The current election laws allow minorities to overturn the will of majorities through special election shenanigans.
I seem to recall many school levies being decided in special elections. Why aren’t they customarily placed in general elections?
Honestly, I think School Levies should be held in General Elections too. If I had to guess why they aren’t, I would say that perhaps the School Board calendar is aligned with the school year or something. But that is pure speculation.
You’re missing the point of recall elections. They are a referendum on the behavior of an elected official after they have taken office. They are in no way a re-do of a standard election. They are only permitted when an official has credibly been accused of “malfeasance, misfeasance, or violation of the oath of office.” No violation, no recall.
If the Recall Sawant had needed 21,479 votes for the recall to succeed, you can be damn sure that the signatures would have been turned in in time for the November General Election.
Apathy is not voter suppression…. If people cannot be moved to fill in a single bubble, sign and lick an envelope and put it into their mailbox (they don’t even have to buy a stamp…) the only thing that is clear is that they don’t give a flying ****….
You sound just like Republicans did when they were whining about impeaching Trump – if you do this then everyone will be submitting articles of impeachment all of the time and all the legislature will do is hold impeachment hearings!!!!! (yeah, that’s happening – not…) It’s actually hard to impeach an elected official in Washington… some places you can do it if you simply don’t like them, but here they have to be credibly accused of something that is either illegal or breaks their oath of office.
Keep in mind that good sized turnout in a non-presidential general election in this area is usually less than 1/2 of registered voters, so you are suggesting that turnout might be as low as 9,000 voters…. which seems ridiculous, given that it is actually only a little more than 1/2 of the people who signed the recall petition, people who I would expect will be quite likely to be sure to also return the ballot…. in fact if no one but those who signed the petition actually returned the ballot (which isn’t going to happen) then it would already be more than 1/2 of D3’s registered voters 🤔…
I will give you that I did not expect the single issue ballot – I was under the distinct impression that it is not legal under WA state election law to put recall on a ballot that was not already scheduled, so I expected to see it on the Jan. ballot, but if Dec. is what the law allows fine with me. Let’s get this drama over with.
42,956 total ballots were counted in the 2019 general election that elected Kshama to her 3rd term. I don’t have the time or inclination figure out which precincts are in CD3, so I won’t be crunching numbers from the 2020 general election in CD3. But as I said: the 16,000 signatures turned in for the recall petition are less than the 20,488 votes that losing candidate Egan Orion got in 2019.
So I don’t know where you are getting your 16K > 1/2 of registered CD3 voters from, but it is clearly wrong. I am guessing that there are around 60,000 registered voters in CD3.
No…. Try reading it again…. 16K voters is almost 2x more than 25% of the typical voter turnout in D3. Which is what your own dire prediction for turnout on the recall says….
“If the recall is successful on a ballot where there is 25%-50% of normal General Election turn-out, then it will be a clear assault on democracy.”
The math isn’t all that hard… the number of registered voters in D3 is around 74,177 – give or take the number of people who have moved or the newly registered in the district.
Typical voter turnout in non-presidential general elections is around 48%
48% of 74,177 is 35,604
25% of 35,604 (a typical turnout) is 8,901
so in order for your worst prediction to be true voter turnout would have to be truly dismal – probably less than 1/2 of the people who even signed the recall – unless you think absolutely no Sawant supporters will bother to return their ballots…
Even if we go with your higher number of 50% of a typical turnout that would still mean that only around 18,000 people will vote – only 2,000 more than signed the recall petition.
Are you seriously suggesting that people who took the time to sign the recall won’t bother to then vote? And that almost no one who actually supports Sawant will either…
Your scenario is simply ridiculous. I predict that turnout will either be around the same as normal or maybe even over 48% as this is an issue that people on both sides have some strong feelings over.
25% – 50% of 74177 is 18544 – 37088. Those numbers are significantly more than 9000, and even still, a “winning tally” by the Recall side will probably be achieved by fewer votes than the 22263 votes Kshama received when she was last elected.
If we can assume that the election that Kshama won was typical, that was a turn-out of 42956 (not 35.6K), a quarter of which is 10739 (and probably the number of signatures the Recall camp needed). King County Elections validated a little north of 14K. And neither 14K or 16K is twice 10.7K and in fact both tallies would have lost the 2019 election.
I understand you think my math is wrong, but where you err is what you apparently think “typical turn-out in a non-presidential year” is for CD3. My number comes from the 2019 election. Where do your numbers come from?
No……reread your own statement… You didn’t say 25-50% of registered voters. You said “25%-50% of normal General Election turn-out”
My stats come from King Co, because they are the only ones who keep them regularly. Yes, locally they may vary a bit, but they aren’t published anywhere else and even if D3 turnouts vary by a few percentage points it still doesn’t change my point.
And it can be a stat that might just turn around and bite you… You want to see a pretty dismal turnout? In 2015 the turnout for the November general election was 40% – that’s pretty sad, just how many people chose to not participate in their own government. That was also the year Sawant was first elected. Was that then an “assault on democracy”? I wouldn’t actually say that.. choosing to not participate is still a choice.
Also “Apathy” is what Republican accuse Black voters of having in places like Georgia and Texas, where they have to stand in hours long lines (without water in GA) to vote.
The point is that if people can’t be persuaded to drop a piece of paper in a mailbox (for free) in the month of December, then maybe Sawant doesn’t have as much support in the district as she claims to have.
Sigh… this isn’t Georgia or Texas… It’s Washington, you know, the state rated as 2nd easiest to vote in after only Oregon…
It’s been 17 years since anyone has had to stand in any lines to vote here – you don’t even have to buy a stamp or go to the post office.
“right wing”
hahaha…
Lol yes, the D3 republican power cabal 😂😂😂
I’m not a fan of Sawant’s tactics, but if I’m weighing her actions with my fair representation in City Council then I’m voting against the recall. This entire process has been so completely petty and, quite frankly, embarrassing. There are too many interests outside of D3 that are trying to influence it and I refuse to let conservatives or even moderates for that matter play games like this in my district. Why not wait until the next election when D3 voters have the opportunity to at least choose between her and other candidates? Her actions, although unethical, do not reach a level of urgency for a recall, in my opinion. I’m not letting the Council pick my representative. And I’m certainly not going to let conservatives or moderates think it’s okay to use any technicalities they can find to run more recall campaigns in the future.
“This entire process has been so completely petty and, quite frankly, embarrassing. There are too many interests outside of D3 that are trying to influence it and I refuse to let conservatives or even moderates for that matter play games like this in my district.”
Have you informed Sawant that you refuse to let her accept contributions from anyone outside D3? Or are you, “quite frankly,” embarrassed that you haven’t?
At least you acknowledge that her actions were unethical, I can respect that.
Voter suppression is total nonsense. To vote requires a pen to fill in the ballot and a wet tongue to lick the post-paid envelope. Stop insulting a group of people to suggest they won’t vote. I bet that there will be an equal number of votes in this election. If Sawant loses and the votes are the same or more, I look forward to her response. If she wins and the votes are lower, do those for recall get to claim voter suppression?
The Sawant campaign is insulting working people and people of color by suggesting that they cannot figure out how to find the time open the mail that comes to their own mailbox, fill out a single bubble, sign it and put the envelope back into their own mail box.
Either that or they haven’t figured out that it’s been *17 years* since we actually had to take time to go to the polls here in Washington…. Seriously – there very, very few barriers to voting here.
Figure it out guys – if voter turnout is low it’s because *you* haven’t been able to make people actually give a crap… not because it’s difficult or time consuming to vote in Washington. Voting could hardly be easier. We get our ballots hand delivered to us and usually have a couple of weeks to find the time to fill them out. As of a few years ago now we don’t even need to put a stamp on them…
In fact, Washington ranks #2, behind Oregon as easiest state to vote in… Voters just are not oppressed here and the continual insistence that they are is just embarrassing for you…. It makes you sound like you don’t even know how voting happens here.
And the Sawant campaigns do an unbelievable job gathering and submitting votes from her supporters, which explains the tremendous late bump she enjoys in every election. I give them credit for organization and determination even if I loathe the outcomes. That said, apathy is an equal opportunity affliction. Those who care will vote while the casual voter may overlook this special election. That isn’t voter suppression. As for stated concerns from the editor regarding the anti-democratic nature of recalls such as this one, the hoops the recall supporters had to jump through, including multiple levels of court review to WA Supreme Court, ensure that these types of recalls will not become commonplace. They are a costly, cumbersome, and unpredictable way to remove an elected representative which requires a legal justification, extensive signature gathering AND a successful election result. Not the type of thing that most will undertake.
So Sawant supporters who entered apartment buildinf the day of and before the election searching for people who hadn’t voted and begged for their ballots, this is only part of the many reasons i will vote to recall, lying, manipulating and our problems only get worse
Oh please. Save it. This is the biggest projection post I’ve seen on here in some time.
Meh – I think that turnout will be higher than the typical 48% of registered voters, because people on both sides feel strongly about this and it’s been in the news non-stop…
I think the Sawant campaign is just pre-priming the excuse pump in the case that she actually loses the recall, by ridiculously insisting that the election is voter suppression, when Washington is one of the most voter friendly states in the states… Only Oregon ranks higher. I don’t think they actually intend to demean the voters they are going after – but it’s exactly what they are doing.
When I was going thru public school in WA I remember how proud my social studies teachers were that WA is one of the few states to have both a referendum & a recall process for voters to choose to use.
We’re super privileged to have these rights as WA voters. Even though not everyone agrees when, how or if they should be used, it’s not the processes that are wrong.
I’m pretty tired of the Sawan’t campaign’s shady, dishonest tactics around this election date triviality.
The position of the Recall campaign has been consistent from the beginning. They said they would turn in their petitions once they had enough verified petitions to feel confident they wouldn’t get thrown out.
They needed around 11,000 to make it on the ballot. In the end, they had about 14,600 and 3,500 got thrown out in the courts. So they only barely made the verification bar. Of course they’ve had a team of lawyers manually verifying all of these before they turned them in so this wasn’t a surprise to them. But they’ve known all along that if they turned it in too soon, they risked the entire operation.
Meanwhile, Sawant has been demanding that they turn in the signatures ever since they reached 11,000 unverified petitions. Had they obeyed Sawant’s demand, thousands of those 11,000 would have been thrown out, leaving them short of making the ballot. Of course they’re not stupid enough to actually do this.
The Sawant campaign, and many of her minions commenting in online spaces, have been trying to gaslight everyone into believing the Recall campaign promised to turn in the petitions when they reached 11,000 unverified. It’s simply a lie, which is all the Sawant campaign has. The Recall campaign said they’d turn them in once they were sure they’d make the ballot — which is exactly what they did.
Journalists have done a major disservice to D3 residents with shoddy, incomplete reporting on the situation. In many cases they’ve uncritically repeated Sawant’s lies as fact, or taken a “both sides” approach. The simple truth is that the Recall campaign has been consistent and truthful this entire time, while the Sawant campaign has taken advantage of people’s lack of understanding of the recall petition process to try and manipulate folks with lies.
Finally, it’s really beating a dead horse at this point, but I must point out that CHS once again has reported on this issue in a way that’s extremely favorable to Sawant. In general I think this website does a good job but you always seem to lose any sense of journalistic objectivity when Sawant is involved. I get that you like her, but you shouldn’t let that color your reporting. You do a disservice to your readers.
Uh huh. And you are taking the Recall campaigns word on this. By their own numbers, They were on pace to have enough pre-verified signatures well before the Nov-2 cut-off *plus* more than enough headroom. They were under no *legal* obligation to turn the signatures in, so they didn’t. Full Stop.
You are claiming “Sawant Demanded” that they turn in signatures as soon as they reached 11,000 unverified signatures. Please provide evidence that this occurred. Because otherwise, to be kind, it is an “untruth”.
Literally the only reason we’re having this conversation is because Sawant made that demand, the Recall campaign ignored her, and then she started crying that they were cheating because they didn’t obey her demands, and all her minions followed suit. That’s what started all of this. Go look back at CHS articles from early August.
How do you know the Recall campaign was on pace to have enough pre-verified signatures? Are you on their legal team? Were you in their counting room? You accuse me of “taking the Recall campaign’s word” and then you just completely make stuff up in service of taking Sawant at her word.
The Recall campaign was begging for signatures and sending out volunteers to gather them up until about two weeks ago. The last time they called me was on September 6. If they already had enough signatures, you’d think they’d stop trying to gather more. As it turns out, they didn’t have enough, and only now have they (just barely) reached the threshold. I think it’s clear they’re telling the truth.
Sawant will buy votes with her promise for rent control which is actually a good thing for property owners if they’d stop to think about it. Renters become captives to their rent control apartments and can’t afford to leave because new apartment rent will rise significantly to cover the building’s expenses. Property owners also won’t need to put as much into maintenance, improvements or policing their buildings because tenants won’t have the rent money to cover a new apartment and so they will have to accept deteriorating conditions and lack of service. This has been the case in other cities so why would Seattle be different?
Start talking about voting irregularities before the election even begins, like the Newsom recall people. Smart!
Re the cost of the recall election – Remind us how much the city has paid on outside law firms to defend Sawant for her various outbursts? And regardless in both cases, such is the cost of Democracy and profoundly less tha a rounding error compared to the cost of the chaos and the expenses flowing from them that Sawant and her supporters enthusiastically embrace and foment. If her recall along with a return to sanity by electing more centrists leaders is accomplished in the coming months, every dollar spent will be returned to the people in large multiples of safety, dignity for those suffering, and overall quality of life for the people at large.
Amen. The annual cost of simply having Sawant on the council far exceeds the cost of the Recall election. She constantly does illegal things and then forces the city taxpayers to pay to defend her in court — including in this very election, where you are paying the millions of dollars of legal fees she’s incurred, while simultaneously complaining about a few hundred thousand dollars in election costs.