2011 School Board Candidate Ratings
School Board Ratings
SEATTLE / BELLEVUE SCHOOL BOARD RATINGS
| Position |
Candidate |
Rating |
More Info |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Seattle District No 1
Director Dist. No. 1
|
John Cummings |
Adequate |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Seattle District No 1
Director Dist. No. 1
|
Peter Maier ~ |
Very Good |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Seattle District No 1
Director Dist. No. 1
|
Sharon Peaslee |
Good |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Seattle District No 1
Director Dist. No. 2
|
Sherry Carr ~ |
Very Good |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Seattle District No 1
Director Dist. No. 2
|
Kate Martin |
Good |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Seattle District No 1
Director Dist. No. 2
|
Mark Weber % |
Not Qualified |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Seattle District No 1
Director Dist. No. 2
|
Jack Whelan |
Adequate |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Seattle District No 1
Director Dist. No. 3
|
David Blomstrom % |
Not Qualified |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Seattle District No 1
Director Dist. No. 3
|
Michelle Buetow |
Very Good |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Seattle District No 1
Director Dist. No. 3
|
John Dunn |
Very Good |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Seattle District No 1
Director Dist. No. 3
|
Harium Martin-Morris ~ |
Very Good |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Seattle District No 1
Director Dist. No. 6
|
Joy Anderson + |
Insufficient Info |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Seattle District No 1
Director Dist. No. 6
|
Nick Esparza |
Not Qualified |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Seattle District No 1
Director Dist. No. 6
|
Martha McLaren |
Adequate |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Seattle District No 1
Director Dist. No. 6
|
Stephen Sundquist ~ |
Outstanding |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Bellevue District 405
Director Dist. No. 1
|
Betsy Johnson ~ |
Very Good |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Bellevue District 405
Director Dist. No. 1
|
Steven McConnell |
Very Good |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Bellevue District 405
Director Dist. No. 2
|
Chirstine Chew ~ |
Very Good |
Questionnaire ; Website |
|
Bellevue District 405
Director Dist. No. 4
|
Michael Murphy ~ |
Very Good |
Questionnaire ; Website |
About the Municipal League Ratings
The ratings are not endorsements. They assess each candidate's potential to be effective in office and ability to serve the community.
-
Outstanding – Has made numerous outstanding contributions requiring skills related to the office, is a path-finding and respected leader, brings knowledge and creativity to issues facing the office.
-
Very Good – Makes significant contributions, is a skilled builder of consensus, inspires confidence in the way he/she would serve, is thorough and attentive to issues.
-
Good – Has been active and effective in many roles, is capable of moving people to productive action, has strong record of participation in problem solving, shows satisfactory commitment to tackling issues.
-
Adequate – Has a record of participation and interest, is effective on specific issues, has provoked questions about suitability as an office holder, will need significant time/energy to fill gaps in knowledge.
-
Not Qualified – Doesn't appear engaged, has a record that casts doubt on ability to be productive, hasn't demonstrated ability to deal with responsibilities of office, has narrow focus, inflexible attitude or is otherwise troubling.
Symbol Key
~ Incumbent
# Declined to Interview
+ Unable to Interview
% Declined to Participate
^ Unable to Participate
* Unable to Contact
Outstanding – Has made numerous outstanding contributions requiring skills related to the office, is a path-finding and respected leader, brings knowledge and creativity to issues facing the office.
Very Good – Makes significant contributions, is a skilled builder of consensus, inspires confidence in the way he/she would serve, is thorough and attentive to issues.
Good – Has been active and effective in many roles, is capable of moving people to productive action, has strong record of participation in problem solving, shows satisfactory commitment to tackling issues.
Adequate – Has a record of participation and interest, is effective on specific issues, has provoked questions about suitability as an office holder, will need significant time/energy to fill gaps in knowledge.
Not Qualified – Doesn't appear engaged, has a record that casts doubt on ability to be productive, hasn't demonstrated ability to deal with responsibilities of office, has narrow focus, inflexible attitude or is otherwise troubling.
Symbol Key
# Declined to Interview
+ Unable to Interview
% Declined to Participate
^ Unable to Participate
* Unable to Contact

