With primary over, local candidates picking up financial support

1024
8

Narrowed to two candidates in the wake of the Aug. 6 primary, the race for Edmonds mayor has come down to a face-off between current City Councilmembers Mike Nelson and Neil Tibbott, who both continue to raise — and spend — campaign money.

As of Friday, Tibbott had $34,264 in contributions compared to $39,904 for Nelson.

While she didn’t advance, Kristiana Johnson’s mayoral campaign picked up significant last-minute financial support at the end of the primary election period — with a total of $13,652 raised. Candidate Brad Shipley, who also didn’t move on to the general election, reported raising $7,596.

On the Edmonds City Council side, Vivian Olson (Position 5) continues to out fundraise all the other candidates, with $16,442 in contributions as of Friday. Her opponent, Alicia Crank, has raised nearly $9,000 so far. Candidate Diana White, running for Position 6, has collected $11,000, compared to $6,300 for opponent Susan Paine.

The race for Edmonds School District Positions 3 and 5 were also narrowed in the Aug. 6 primary. Candidate Rory Graves so far has reported raising $2,826, while her opponent, incumbent Gary Noble, has reported no fundraising or spending. In the open Position 5 seat, Nancy Katims reported $8,453 in donations, while her opponent Lisa Hunnewell has no reported fundraising.

The accompanying charts were compiled from the latest data provided by the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission.  For a breakdown of sources for these contributions and how the money was spent, click the “more details” link in the accompanying charts.

Note that not all those declaring for office have filed with the state Public Disclosure Commission. Those running for office in jurisdictions with fewer than 5,000 voters or who expect to raise less than $5,000 still must file a person financial statement but are exempt from disclosing details of their campaign financing. These candidates will show zero in the various cells of the accompanying charts. For more information on this rule, check the New Candidates FAQ on the Public Disclosure Commission website:www.pdc.wa.gov/learn/new-candidates.

City of Edmonds campaign financials as of 08-30-2019
Name Office Raised Spent Debt Contributors, spending details, etc.
BUCKSHNIS, DIANE M. (I) CITY COUNCIL POS 4 $3326.56 $701.56 $0.00 Click for Details
CRANK, ALICIA CITY COUNCIL POS 5 $8989.78 $6300.73 $2337.21 Click for Details
*JOHNSON, KRISTIANA MAYOR $13,652.63 $2132.63 $12,170.76 Click for Details
JOHNSON, LAURA A. CITY COUNCIL POS 7 $7236.70 $9124.65 $35.00 Click for Details
MONROE, NATHAN C. CITY COUNCIL POS 7 $5488.00 $2991.28 $0.00 Click for Details
NAND, JENNA N. CITY COUNCIL POS 4 $4179.14 $3601.78 $0.00 Click for Details
NELSON, MICHAEL J. MAYOR $39,904.40 $32,818.07 $765.07 Click for Details
OLSON, VIVIAN A. CITY COUNCIL POS 5 $16,442.39 $10,174.85 $0.00 Click for Details
PAINE, SUSAN M. CITY COUNCIL POS 6 $6301.03 $9023.56 $553.17 Click for Details
*SHIPLEY, BRAD M. MAYOR $7596.29 $5793.48 $0.00 Click for Details
TIBBOTT, NEIL D. MAYOR $34,264.36 $24,650.67 $0.00 Click for Details
WHITE, DIANA K. CITY COUNCIL POS 6 $11,003.97 $6240.99 $0.00 Click for Details

Candidates who were eliminated in the Aug.6 primary are indicated by an asterisk.

 

Edmonds School Dist campaign financials as of 08-30-2019
Name Office Raised Spent Debt Contributors, spending details, etc.
CHASE, CARIN (I) DIRECTOR DIST 1 $1255.03 $1093.72 $0.00 Click for Details
GRAVES, RORY DIRECTOR DIST 3 $2826.82 $1321.27 $0.00 Click for Details
HUNNEWELL, LISA DIRECTOR DIST 5 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Click for Details
KATIMS, NANCY K. DIRECTOR DIST 5 $8453.52 $6431.47 $0.00 Click for Details
NOBLE, GARY DIRECTOR DIST 3 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Click for Details
RUTLEDGE, ALVIN JR. DIRECTOR DIST 1 Financials unavailable

 

Port of Edmonds campaign financials as of 08-30-2019
Name Office Raised Spent Debt Contributors, spending details, etc.
ORVIS, JAMES W. (I) COMMISSIONER POS 4 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Click for Details
PRESTON, DAVID E (I) COMMISSIONER POS 2 $2,270.00 $0.00 $0.00 Click for Details

 

South SnoCo Fire candidate financials as of 08-30-2019
Name Office Raised Spent Debt Contributors, spending details, etc.
HIKEL, TED COMMISSIONER DIST 1 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Click for Details
TEOFILAK, CHRIS COMMISSIONER DIST 1 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Click for Details
GULLICKSON, NICHOLAS COMMISSIONER DIST 2 $5420.00 $160.00 $768.95 Click for Details
URBAN, GREG COMMISSIONER DIST 2 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Click for Details
ENGELHARD, ANDREW C. COMMISSIONER DIST 3 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Click for Details
LAURENCE, MARK COMMISSIONER DIST 3 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Click for Details
CHAN, DAVID F. (I) COMMISSIONER DIST 4 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Click for Details
CHIAFALO, BRET COMMISSIONER DIST 4 $515.04 $183.93 $0.00 Click for Details
DONAGHY, BRANDY COMMISSIONER DIST 5 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Click for Details
KENNY, JIM (I) COMMISSIONER DIST 5 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Click for Details

 

8 Replies to “With primary over, local candidates picking up financial support”

  1. Hey folks – the primary is over. Will you please remove your signs from the street borders.
    Can those of you who are going on to the the November election please wait until October to put your signs back up?

    Ignored

    1. That’s campaign suicide. Signs almost directly translate to votes in this town. I agree they are an eyesore.

      Ignored

  2. The mayor race is a bit softball/t-ball. There’s a lot of room for cross-analysis of each candidate, but there is no prudent negative campaigning happening – there’s actually an exercise by MEN and some citizen letter writers to *not* inform the electorate about any negative information. This race defaults down to whomever has more name recognition (yard signs) and what the voter is able to divine about the mayor’s party affiliation from mailers and the voter pamphlet. Mike wins by a >10-point spread. I don’t think Neil will [be able to] challenge Mike’s record in a way that will inform the lay voter, and I can’t imagine that his voter pamphlet statement will fool enough democrats to vote for him. Democrat wins here 60-40%. Ed Murray could move to Edmonds, run against any Republican here and win 60%. Murray could probably beat Mike, even with no yard signs, provided no critical evaluation of the whole candidate is afforded. If Neil can close that gap to less than 10 points, then that’s amazing. Running here as someone who advocates Traditional Marriage is quite a handicap. On this course, it’s practically worth conceding. If in god’s hands (I’m not saying this as a religious person), Mike could lose if the Snohomish County Supreme Court rules against the Edmonds Safe Storage Law before November, as Edmonds would become a bit of a national embarrassment which would dull the Get Out the Vote activity for his campaign.

    Ignored

  3. My read on this election is that it comes down to whether you want more of what we’ve had the past 20 years, or maybe a little change from what we’ve had. Looking at who is supporting whom, I’d say Neil is more in the comfort zone of the old guard in town who just love to market Edmonds as the greatest place on earth instead of keeping it more our little secret. Mike is more in the zone of folks who would like to see a lot less of hyping Edmonds and a lot more of just managing the town, mainly in the interest of those who live and pay taxes here now.

    I’m not sure what the meaning of “prudent negative campaigning” is but I assume it is about finding something or anything to bad mouth and accuse your opponent about. It’s always difficult to know the veracity of any sort of negative campaigning, “prudent” or otherwise. It’s often even difficult to determine the true source(s) of negative information.

    Personally, I plan to look at who is supporting whom and what the candidates have actually done in the past, rather than anything much they have said in the past. What people do and what they say are often very different things in the political arena or anything that smacks of the ideological (i.e religion). I don’t really care what political party they affiliate with, as I think both parties are pretty much a joke in terms of serving the people and getting things done.

    Ignored

  4. I agree with Mr. Williams to a certain great extent but not totally. Negative campaigning only works on people who are low information voters to begin with and ideologically oriented in their perceptions of virtually everything. Negative campaigning and character assassination almost always play on already established fears and stereotyping. Sadly, it often does work, so it’s not going to go away anytime soon. Nazi Germany was founded in a free and democratic election on just this method. Thus, this is something we need to be ever aware of and thoughtful about in our own elections at all levels. Freedom is a very fragile commodity.

    Ignored

    1. I think Neil will lose by more than 10 points. I considered writing some mailers for the purpose of informing voters. I asked myself, “why isn’t Neil informing voters”? I’ve been too critical of MEN for bias and being softball. Really, Neil was afforded several opportunities to challenge Mike on his record, but Kristiana took the only initiative during the debates. It would be neat to see her articulate it all in a letter-to-the-editor and give voters a lay of the land.

      The reason why candidates aren’t adversarial, other than Kristiana’s fantastic debate performance, is that the loser will end up working under/tangent to the winner. The City Council Members will need to work with the mayor, and if all the candidates are City Council Members, then there’s a bit of an implicit agreement among them. We could call it a swamp, but DC is already characterized that way. We could call it the Edmonds Marsh. #DrainTheMarsh

      Ignored

  5. Looking at recent actions (related solely to Edmonds) taken by these two gentlemen I see a big difference. I see one man who, engaged with the current Mayor, sent a letter of disagreement with the City Council to a state agency about a Council decision. He apologized later but the fact is he did it. I saw the other man change his stance on the Connector well before the public outcry and march on city hall. In other words, he was well in tune with what the majority of citizens wanted in regards to that project. I saw one man change his vote on the Connector only after it became obvious it would be political suicide not to do so. These actions tell me all I need to know about who will better consider my needs and wants as a citizen of Edmonds.

    Ignored

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *