You are here: Home Candidate Evaluations Previous Ratings 2011 Committee Rating Pages 2011 School Board Candidate Ratings - General Elections
Document Actions

2011 School Board Candidate Ratings - General Elections

An adaption of the League's full candidate ratings based on the results of the 2011 August Primary Elections

 

SEATTLE / BELLEVUE SCHOOL BOARD RATINGS

General Elections


      Position    
      
      Candidate      
    
      Rating       
      
        More Info    
         
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. 3  

Michelle Buetow

 
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 

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


For a complete listing of the Municipal League's Candidate Ratings, including candidates from the 2011 August Primary Election, please Click Here


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

 


Plone.org web by NPower Seattle