Judge rules recall petition against Seattle City Councilmember Kshama Sawant can move forward

King County Superior Judge Jim Rogers ruled Wednesday afternoon that a recall effort against Seattle City Councilmember Kshama Sawant can move forward.

Rogers made the decision after he heard arguments for a recall petition against Sawant on Wednesday morning. The judge allowed four of the six charges alleged in the petition to go forward, saying in his order that the petitioner had proved "knowledge of facts indicating that the Councilmember intended to commit an unlawful act."

The order can be appealed, but if that's struck down petitioners would then need to collect 10,000 signatures from residents of Sawant's District 3, which represents Capitol Hill and the Central District. It would then go to voters.

The recall charge, filed by petitioner Ernest Lou, alleged Sawant had "used her position in violation of the law or has recklessly undermined the safety of others" including giving protesters access to City Hall, leading a march to Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan's house and encouraging protesters to occupy the area near the Seattle Police Department's Precinct as part of the Capitol Hill Occupied Protest.

The ballot synopsis that was submitted to the court states:

Shall City of Seattle Councilmember Kshama Sawant be recalled from office for misfeasance, malfeasance, and violation of the oath of office based on charges that she violated the city charter, city code and state law when she:

(1) Delegated city employment decisions to a political organization outside city government.

(2) Used city resources to support a ballot initiative and failed to comply with public disclosure requirements related such support.

(3) Disregarded state orders related to COVID-19 and endangered the safety of city workers and other individuals by admitting hundreds of people into city hall on June 9, 2020, when it was closed to the public.

(4) Used her official position to encourage attendees at a June 28, 2020 rally to illegally occupy the Seattle Police Department East Precinct when the city was trying to de-escalate violence in the area.

(5) Led a protest march to Mayor Jenny Durkan’s private residence, the location of which Sawant knows is protected under state confidentiality laws.

(6) Encouraged protestors to occupy the Seattle Police Department East Precinct and helped create the Capitol Hill Occupation Protest (CHOP) Zone which turned into a violent criminal environment that negatively impacted local businesses and residents.

However, ahead of the hearing, SCC Insight reported Lou had dropped charges four and six relating to Sawant's participation in the Capitol Hill Occupied Protest. Those charges were not argued at the hearing and Rogers dismissed them in his order.

Lou, represented by attorney John McKay, brought up retweets of Sawant from members of the public that said she had allowed access to City Hall and argued that the demonstration violated bans on gatherings set by Gov. Jay Inslee and Durkan during the COVID-19 pandemic.

"The use of her passkey is clearly a violation of any authority that she had to allow people into City Hall when it was locked after hours," McKay argued. "If a member of a court were to use their passkey to open the front doors of the King County Courthouse on Third Avenue and allow protesters into a building that is secured by county officials, that would be clearly outside the scope of any judge's responsibility to do that and it is similarly true of Councilmember Sawant."

McKay also used a photo of Sawant giving a speech in front of the mayor's home in the Windermere neighborhood, saying she led protesters to the location, which was confidential for security purposes, violating the State Confidentiality Protection Act.

Durkan herself wrote a letter to the City Council in July asking them to investigate Sawant following the protest outside of her home.

While not mentioned in the synopsis, McKay also claimed Sawant used city resources to advance the Tax Amazon campaign, material violations that are still being investigated by the Seattle Elections and Ethics Commission.

In her defense, Sawant, represented by attorney Dmitri Iglitzin, argued the petition has failed to establish factual and legal sufficiency and was based on "amorphous political criticisms" of Sawant's actions as a council member.

"This is not a campaign event, this is not a process through which people who have political disagreements with council members who want to level a laundry list of complaints about her conduct," Iglitzin said. "You can't convert political disagreement into a recall."

Relating to the allegation that Sawant violated the law by allowing protesters into City Hall, Iglitzin argued the petitioner did not point to a specific rule or law that Sawant broke in the charge.

"What rule or law [is letting people into City Hall] supposed to violate?" Iglitzin argued. "[The petitioner's] disdain for the idea that Councilwoman Sawant's discretion to bring people into City Hall for purposes she deems appropriate, in this case obviously referring to a crisis facing the city, anytime she wants, has not purported to identify any rule, any regulation, any law that that act violates."

McKay responded to the defense that the violation was trespassing on public property, as City Hall was closed to the public by executive order due to the novel coronavirus.

In regard to the allegation that she led protesters to Durkan's home, Iglitzin emphasized again that it was a "political attack" and said that there was no evidence that Sawant led the march, or that she knew Durkan's residence.

"There's no reason why just the fact that she's a City Councilmember that anyone would have told her [Durkan's] residence," the defense argued.

On Tuesday, the Seattle City Council approved a bill to fund the legal defense for Sawant against the recall charge. Many council members said that it was standard practice for the council to provide legal defense to members, citing the past assistance provided to former Councilmember Richard Conlin in 2011.

"I want to be clear that I'm voting yes and in doing so not commenting on the merits of the recall's allegations and voting for the values of our democracy here in Seattle," Councilmember Andrew Lewis said. "It's a slippery slope if we start picking and choosing who does or doesn't receive this legal representation."

Durkan also faces a recall effort that could result in her being removed from office, and has appealed to the state's Supreme Court arguing that the recall push is based on policy disagreement, not violation of law.

This is an ongoing story that will be updated as more information becomes available.

RELATED:

• Coronavirus or wildfire smoke exposure? What your symptoms mean
• Video: Sizable piece of Pier 58 on Seattle waterfront collapses
• Here's the best chance for clean air in Seattle this week
• Seattle to put more than $19 million to housing assistance
• Report: Coronavirus cases continue to decline across Washington