1. What specific, measurable steps will you take in your first year in office to ensure crime victims are at the center of King County's safety and justice agenda? For example, will you issue an Executive Order, propose a dedicated funding mechanism, restructure advisory bodies, or set survivor-centered performance metrics? Please describe how you will ensure these actions move beyond symbolic commitments to tangible outcomes for survivors.

If I am elected King County Executive, in my first year I will focus on real progress that makes life better for survivors. My top priority will be to make King County’s system easier to navigate. Too many survivors have to call several numbers or tell their story multiple times just to get help. I will work toward creating a single, coordinated entry point that connects survivors to trusted partners like KCSARC, API Chaya, DAWN, LifeWire, Harborview, and the Prosecuting Attorney’s Victim Assistance team. This effort will build on the County’s existing human-services directory and hotlines, with the goal of making access simple without adding unnecessary bureaucracy.

I will also work toward expanding restoration and stabilization services for survivors and surviving families while they wait for justice in the court system. That includes seeking resources for counseling, housing stabilization, and ongoing support so people are not left alone during long court processes.

Fully staffing prosecutors, sheriff’s deputies, and victim advocates will be another priority. Through the criminal justice sales tax and other tools, I will continue working toward a system that moves cases efficiently and reduces the trauma caused by delays.

Finally, I will seek to strengthen survivor representation in the County’s public safety advisory structures. If current boards do not include survivor voices, I will work with the Council and community to restructure them. Every department will be asked to use survivor-centered performance metrics such as time to first contact after referral, time to connect a survivor to therapy, interpreter access, progress on firearm relinquishment, and timely processing of Crime Victims Compensation applications. My goal is for these measures to help keep us accountable to the people who matter most.

2.When public safety budgets are debated, victim services are often treated as optional add-ons rather than core infrastructure. How will you shift this culture so that funding for victim services is treated as non-negotiable, like police, prosecution, or detention? What tools will you use—budget directives, accountability measures for departments, or performance reporting—to ensure this change takes root across the County system?

Victim services should be treated as a core part of public safety, not an optional expense. As County Executive, I will work to make sure every public safety department demonstrates how its budget improves survivor outcomes. My goal is to make survivor services part of the County’s base budget over time rather than one-time or discretionary expenses.

I will encourage a culture where programs designed to help offenders also include a corresponding investment in restoration for victims. Justice must balance rehabilitation with care for those who were harmed. I will continue to prioritize staffing for prosecutors, deputies, and advocates to prevent backlogs and delays that cause further trauma.

I will also advocate that mental health and trauma recovery centers, along with peer-support programs, be treated as essential safety infrastructure. The County should tie every public safety dollar to measurable results that improve the well-being of survivors and their families.

3. Will you commit to establishing a baseline percentage of King County’s public safety budget that must go to victim services every year? If so, what percentage do you believe is appropriate, and how will you protect it from being eroded in future budget cycles? If not, please explain how you will otherwise guarantee stable, predictable funding for victim services despite competing budget pressures.

Stable and predictable funding is critical for survivor services. I will work toward establishing a clear and consistent baseline for survivor funding within the County’s public safety budget and protecting it from erosion. My goal is to create greater stability for providers and to make survivor support a permanent part of our budgeting structure.

I will pursue a reserve fund to help stabilize survivor services when federal funding fluctuates, particularly as VOCA dollars remain unpredictable. I will also work toward expanding multi-year contracts so advocacy and therapy providers can retain experienced staff and maintain continuity of care. Any new diversion or rehabilitation initiative should include a corresponding investment in survivor restoration and trauma recovery, with performance measures to track outcomes.

This approach will help move King County toward a system where funding for survivors is stable, transparent, and results-oriented.

4. Crime victims often report feeling invisible in county policy discussions. What specific policy or ordinance changes would you champion to elevate their voices—for example, requiring victim impact analysis in legislative proposals, mandating survivor representation on key boards, or embedding trauma-informed standards into county contracts?

Survivors deserve to be heard in policymaking. I will work toward establishing a survivor-centered policy framework for the County. My goal is for every major Executive proposal related to justice and safety to include a survivor impact statement describing how the action affects access, language support, and trauma recovery.

I will also advocate for survivor and survivor-led organization representation on key county boards, including those that govern violence prevention, firearm relinquishment, and human services funding. Trusted organizations such as KCSARC, API Chaya, DAWN, LifeWire, and Harborview have deep expertise that should guide decision-making.

In addition, I will work to embed trauma-informed standards in County contracts. This includes interpreter access within 48 hours, warm handoffs between agencies, and clear corrective steps if standards are missed. These changes align with Washington’s victims’ rights laws and will help make our systems more supportive and compassionate.

Through my King County Delivers plan, I will also continue improving transparency, performance tracking, and financial accountability across County-funded safety programs. I plan to appoint a Public Safety Director who will coordinate this work across departments, with a clear focus on survivor outcomes.

5. What formal mechanisms will you put in place so survivors can hold the County accountable when services fall short? Would you support establishing an independent Victim Services Ombudsman, regular public scorecards on service delivery, or a countywide Survivor Advisory Council with real oversight power? Please detail how accountability would be enforced under your leadership.

Accountability begins with transparency and responsiveness. I will work toward creating a Victim Services Ombuds position within the County’s independent Office of the Ombuds to investigate complaints and publish findings twice a year. This office already operates independently, and adding this function would give survivors a trusted place to raise concerns and seek resolution.

I will also pursue a quarterly public reporting system that tracks survivor-focused metrics such as access to therapy, response times, and firearm relinquishment progress. When departments fall short, corrective actions should be developed and made public.

Finally, I will support the creation of a Survivor Advisory Council that includes representatives from different parts of King County, including rural areas and culturally specific organizations. This group would review the annual survivor-services spending plan and make recommendations directly to my office.

6. County Executives set the tone by how they personally engage. Beyond delegating to staff, how will you show leadership in ensuring victims are prioritized? For example, will you convene survivor roundtables, meet quarterly with survivor-led organizations, or appoint survivor leaders to high-level advisory positions with decision-making authority?

As Executive, I intend to stay personally engaged in this work. I will convene survivor roundtables, bringing together families of homicide victims, survivors of sexual assault and domestic violence, and leaders from immigrant, refugee, and rural communities to share their experiences and priorities.

I will meet with survivor-led organizations and the Ombuds to review our progress, identify barriers, and adjust our strategies. I also plan to appoint survivor leaders to high-level advisory roles so that their voices are present at the decision-making table. My goal is to lead through direct engagement and continuous listening, not delegation alone.

7. At the June 2025 Summit, crime survivors identified deep service gaps and called for greater accountability. What were your most important takeaways from the Summit, and how will you translate those lessons into immediate action in your first term? Which gaps—housing, culturally specific services, trauma-informed care, rural access—will you prioritize and why?

I was only able to attend the June 2025 Summit briefly, but I was deeply moved by the courage and honesty of the survivors and advocates who shared their stories. Many of them are people I’ve worked with, especially on gun violence prevention.

In my first term, I will champion the goals and priorities of those who attended. I will prioritize efforts to create a coordinated access hub for survivors, strengthen enforcement of firearm relinquishment across all courts, and stabilize funding for counseling and advocacy services. I look forward to returning to the next Summit to report on progress and continue learning from those whose lived experience guides this work.

8. Only 14% of a $63 million public safety budget currently goes to victim services. What is your analysis of why this percentage is so low, and what is your specific plan to increase it? Will you commit to a timeline for reaching parity with other safety investments, and how will you ensure that survivor funding is sustained year after year regardless of budget shortfalls?

It is unacceptable that only 14 percent of King County’s $63 million public safety budget goes to victim services. I will focus on directing dollars toward services that directly improve survivor outcomes such as therapy, housing stabilization, legal advocacy, and firearm relinquishment enforcement. I will also work toward more predictable funding through a volatility reserve and multi-year contracts so providers can retain staff and maintain continuity of care.

9. Survivors from underserved groups—immigrants, people of color, rural families, non-English speakers—often face the steepest barriers to services. What concrete policies will you push to guarantee these groups are prioritized? Please explain how you will measure whether these efforts succeed.

Survivors from immigrant communities, rural areas, and communities of color often face the highest barriers to care. I will work toward making equity a measurable part of how King County delivers services. I will prioritize funding for bilingual advocates, faster interpreter access, and stable contracts for culturally specific providers such as API Chaya, KCSARC, DAWN, LifeWire, and Harborview.

For rural areas, I will expand mobile and tele-advocacy so survivors in East and South King County receive timely and reliable support. I will also work to protect access to legal assistance for all survivors, regardless of immigration status, even if federal policies change.