Most people who attend big KC and WA Democratic meetings know me as one of those people who is always bringing up annoying, inconvenient issues. But I think I have good reason to bring those issues up. Sometimes, these issues are ones that other people have expressed to me, and I decide to be the one to stand up and get those issues noticed. It's not usually a fun experience, the audience is usually audibly annoyed, and I don't always get the issues addressed. But it's what I do, because I feel it needs doing.
To say that this past weekend's King County Democrats Reorganization meeting was no exception, would be an understatement. It may even be the red-letter example. Here's why.
The first thing we noticed was the theater style seating. There was no place to put any belongings – laptops, books, even coffee cups. For a hall the size of the IAM hall, the setup was tiny and bare. Past large KCDCC meetings have been set up classroom-style. Considering that the KCDCC chose the IAM hall instead of it's normal meeting place at Carpenter's Hall, it would be reasonable to assume that was so they could take advantage of the larger space. That would turn out to be an incorrect assumption.
Aside from the cramped quarters, people weren't being terribly considerate of people trying to hold seats for others. But a number of people were sitting on the other side of the (half-opened) divider, where the seating was banquet style. With more room, and tables to place belongings, and easier means to sit together as groups, they sat on that side – in the dark, until I turned on the lights – as did, eventually, our group.
After I had turned on the lights, and the 30th District sat at a table, along with about two dozen other people who had already done the same (and dozens more who would after us), the party leadership announced that only the one section had been reserved, and we were sitting in someone else's area, and would likely have to move at some point. The problem is that there weren't enough seats, and almost certainly not enough room, for everyone in that one reserved section. The official, reserved meeting space had been set up for only 95 people. Consider that by the time the meeting started, 170 PCOs had checked in. By Publicola's reporting, at least 200 ended up in attendance by the time of the chair election vote. Throw in a dozen or so party officers, staff, and guests, and that means that nearly 120 additional people would have had to cram in around the 95 chairs in that one space. There's no way that wouldn't have been a fire code violation, given that the one single divided section is about 25x80 feet. That's why Walt Brooks, the “furious elderly gentleman” as oh-inclusive and totally not-ageist Chiho Fox called him, called the fire department.
Consider also that there are over 800 elected Democratic PCOs in King County. What if they had all shown up, as they were entitled to? Where would Chiho Fox have put them? Standing on each other's shoulders? Crammed outside in the hallway, unable to participate in the meeting? It's easy to laugh at people who complain, especially when you don't actually think about it, or have any empathy for other human beings. Honestly, if that's your worldview, are you sure you're in the right party?
Another minor issue with the meeting was the lack of any sort of refreshments. Few organizations ask 200 attendees to sit in a nearly full-day meeting without so much as crackers and water. This being Seattle, it's the norm for events to have at least coffee – especially for a meeting that starts at 8:30 on a Saturday. Heck, the one-hour GOTV event in Auburn in November, attended by maybe 100 people, had coffee and donuts. Every monthly meeting of the 30th District Democrats has, at minimum, cookies and coffee (although I question the use of decaf, which I thought was long since outlawed in this county!). For the county organization to completely drop the ball on something as simple as coffee ought to raise a bit of a red flag. And they apologized for it multiple times. Eventually it sounds like they did manage to come up with some. Prior to that, the outgoing 30th District Outreach Chair pointed out that she had an urn and coffee in her trunk, and I encouraged her to get it out and set it up, with a nice little sign saying “Courtesy of the 30th District.” It would have been a nice thumb at the nose of the outgoing King County Democrats' leadership, which the 30th District has prominently been at odds with for the past two years.
I hesitate to even mention the lack of coffee (or anything else), except that the leadership itself apologized for it twice (while passing the blame away from itself), and the audience was audibly disappointed. And also for the fact that it should have been easy to solve, considering at least one attendee could have solved it for them right then and there. Also, this is Seattle. I mean, come on, we're synonymous with coffee.
When the meeting started, it was hard for some of those who were sitting in the non-crowded section (the space that, we had been told, we weren't supposed to be in) to hear the meeting. Many people at my table said they were having a hard time. So, being the advocate kinda guy I am, I got up, and got the Chair's attention. I pointed out that there were some of us having a hard time hearing, and could they do something about it. Someone from my right – I later got Ivan Weiss to confess it was him – interrupted me by shouting something like “Sit down and shut up, there's no problem.” I didn't take kindly to that, and yelled back in anger – and frankly, this isn't Mr. Weiss' first rodeo, he ought to know better than to interrupt someone who has the floor. But the bigger issue too is the complete lack of compassion for other people. Ivan could hear fine, and he was fifteen feet further than my table. Unfortunately, as I pointed out to him, not everyone can be as perfect as Ivan. Some people don't have his apparently excellent hearing. That shouldn't keep them from participating in and understanding the meeting fully. They eventually fixed it, because it was much easier to hear by the time the candidates got up to speak. In general, the attitude of the rest of the room was hostile and disrespectful. One woman, who passive-aggresively gave up her seat in the main area for a single person who couldn't hear, actually told one of our members to “shush,” and when he replied “Don't shut me up,” she said, without irony, “I didn't shut you up, I shushed you.” Really.
The final straw, though, came after candidate nominations for the Chair position. Karl de Jong, outgoing chair, had announced that after nominations, which came with brief speeches, there would be a question-and-answer period. When the question and answer period came, he quickly stated that they “would be submitted in written form.” As a few people at my table pointed out, nothing in the meeting rules indicated how questions were to be submitted. A number of people then got up (not just me, and not just the 30th District). Point of privilege, Mr. Chair – we weren't informed how to submit questions. We were flatly ruled out of order – illegally by rules of order, which state that such motions are never out of order. Meanwhile, a short stack of yellow slips appeared out of thin air, carried down the aisle to the chair – the aforesaid written questions for the candidates. Shocked, a handful of us attendees went outside to figure out where the questions had come from, and were faced with Mike Maddox, county endorsements chair, claiming that “ten minutes before the gavel came down” – in other words, not during the meeting – it was announced how to submit questions. Of course, this doesn't take into account the fact that not everyone could hear, nor does it take into account that not everyone was present – nor had to be present – at the time it was announced. There was not a concerted effort to make sure everyone who wanted to submit a question got to submit one – and even still, the unknown number of submitted questions were “condensed” into about 7 questions by arbitrary process (for all we know, it was by Mike picking out the ones he liked and ditching the ones he didn't). It's still not clear where the questions came from, but it is clear that a significant number of attendees didn't even get a chance to submit any.
So, in my disgust at: 1. the complete lack of adequate meeting preparation, 2. the complete lack of concern by both members and leadership for the ability of everyone to participate, 3. the violation of meeting rules to prevent members from asking inconvenient questions of the leadership, and 4. the sheer baldfaced (and successful) attempt to disenfranchise large portions of the membership from the candidate question and answer session, I returned to my table, tore up my credential, gathered my things, tore up my ballot, tossed the pieces behind me, and went home.
And got my own damned coffee.
---
[Notes: KC refers to King County, which is in Washington (State), and contains Seattle. KCDCC means King County Democratic Central Committee, the county-level arm of the Democratic Party. A "reorganization meeting" is a biennial meeting where the leaders of the party organization are elected. A PCO is a person elected to represent the party at the neighborhood level. These people are entitled to vote for those positions at such a meeting. Publicola is a Seattle politics web blog. Chiho Fox (apparently not his real name) was a declared candidate for Chair of the county party who did not end up running, but posted a jocular and dismissive critique of the meeting on his Facebook, which is not publicly accessible, but reposted by Publicola. Walt Brooks is a well known Democrat in my district. Ivan Weiss is a well known Democrat in another district. If there's any other confusing details for non-locals, please feel free to let me know in the comments!]