Saturday, July 16, 2016
The King County Municipal League has given incumbent 32nd District Democratic State Rep. Ruth Kagi its highest rating, “Outstanding” among legislative candidates in the 2016 elections.
In ratings released Monday, the Municipal League gave both incumbent Democratic 32nd District State Rep. Cindy Ryu and incumbent Democratic 46th District State Rep. Gerry Pollet its second highest rating, “Very Good”
Democrat Wes Irwin, a Democrat who is challenging Kagi, and Keith Smith, an independent who is challenging Ryu, both had the League’s third highest rating, “Good.”
Running against Kagi and Irwin in the August 2 primary election are Republican David Schirle, who got the Muni League’s fourth highest rating “Adequate” and Libertarian Alex Hart, who got the League’s lowest rating, “Not Qualified.”
Running against Ryu and Smith is Republican Alvin Rutledge, who got a “Not Qualified” rating.
Pollet has one opponent, Republican Stephanie Heart Viskovich, who had an “Adequate” rating.
The Municipal League did not rate incumbent 46th District Democrat Jessyn Farrell, who is running unopposed.
The 32nd Legislative District includes the city of Shoreline, part of northwest Seattle, Woodway and nearby unincorporated areas of southwest Snohomish County, south Edmonds, the city of Lynnwood and part of Mountlake Terrace.
The 46th District includes Lake Forest Park, Kenmore and northeast Seattle.
The League says that its ratings are not endorsements but are evaluations of each candidate’s ability to be effective in office, and not on political affiliations or standing on public issues. They say that the ratings seek to provide voters with unbiased, citizen-driven information to inform electoral decision-making, to promote the continued practice of good and open government, to improve the caliber of public officials and to improve the quality of public policy.
League members say that to determine ratings, volunteers throughout King County review candidate questionnaires, study the public record, speak with references and conduct in-person interviews with candidates. They assess each candidate according to four criteria: involvement, effectiveness, character and knowledge, and that candidates can get any of six ratings: outstanding, very good, good, adequate, not qualified, and insufficient information.