2012 Judicial – Candidate Ratings

YearRacePostionCandidateRatingIncumbentInterviewQuestionaireWebsiteParty
2012King County Superior CourtPosition 25Roger DavidheiserVery GoodNoYeshttp://www.Davidheiserforjudge.comNon - Partisan Race
2012King County Superior CourtPosition 25Eric SchmidtVery GoodNoYeshttp://www.ericschmidtforjudge.comNon - Partisan Race
2012King County Superior CourtPosition 25Elizabeth BernsOutstandingNoYeshttp://www.BernsforJudge.comNon - Partisan Race
2012King County Superior CourtPosition 29Sean O'DonnellOutstandingNoYeshttp://www.odonnell4judge.orgNon - Partisan Race
2012King County Superior CourtPosition 29Hong TranVery GoodNoYeshttp://www.hongtranforjudge.comNon - Partisan Race
2012King County Superior CourtPosition 30Kimberly AllenVery GoodNoYeshttp://www.kimallenforjudge.comNon - Partisan Race
2012King County Superior CourtPosition 30Douglass NorthOutstandingYesNoNo QuestionaireNon - Partisan Race
2012King County Superior CourtPosition 42Suzanne ParisienVery GoodNoYeshttp://www.sueforjudge.comNon - Partisan Race
2012King County Superior CourtPosition 42Marianne JonesAdequateNoYeshttp://www.jonesforjudge2012.comNon - Partisan Race
2012King County Superior CourtPosition 42David RuzumnaGoodNoYeshttp://www.RuzumnaForJudge.comNon - Partisan Race
2012King County Superior CourtPosition 42Christopher WashingtonVery GoodYesYeshttp://www.reelectwashington4judge.comNon - Partisan Race
2012King County Superior CourtPosition 46Judith RamseyerOutstandingNoYeshttp://www.judyramseyerforjudge.comNon - Partisan Race
2012King County Superior CourtPosition 46Gary ErnsdorffOutstandingNoYeshttp://www.ernsdorff4judge.comNon - Partisan Race

 

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.