Election season is in full swing. Candidates in all races, including Federal Way’s Municipal Court position one judge, are hard at work trying to convince voters they are the most qualified for their respective position.

But voters looking to learn more about candidates should not be afraid to probe deeper into the available information. Campaign chaos and voter naiveness can lead to the misinterpretation of information. Such is illustrated in incumbent Michael Morgan and contender Matthew York’s campaigns for Federal Way judge.

Voters guide

Many voters rely on the voters guide to learn more about contenders. The directory’s 150-word limit per applicant leaves little room for detailed description. Additionally, King County Elections holds no responsibility for verifying the information that is submitted by candidates that appears in the guide, spokeswoman Kim van Ekstrom said. Guidelines pertain to length only, she said.

Morgan’s self-submitted description has received criticism from York, among others, about his rating of “exceptionally well-qualified,” which appears in the voters guide. There is no mention of which body issued that rating.

The King County Bar Association is known to rate candidates and is specifically listed in judicial candidate Rebecca C. Robertson’s voters guide brief. The association rated Morgan “not qualified.” Morgan said his favorable rating was given by the King County Corrections Guild in 2000, then again in 2005. He was unable to meet with the guild before statements for the current voters guide were due, he said. A consultant with the guild, who asked to not be identified because he is not the guild’s official spokesman, said the organization is not offering ratings this year. He was unable to confirm Morgan’s previous ratings: “We have not interviewed or talked to him or anything this time around in 2009.”

“I was certainly not trying to imply that the King County bar rated me exceptionally well-qualified,” Morgan said. “I have not tried to mislead anyone for one second.”

Morgan did not mention which agency gave him the rating, and when it was given, because there was not room in the guide and most voters are not heavily influenced by a candidate’s ratings, he said.

“You have to be very economical in your choice of words,” Morgan said. “I don’t think the voters care that much about the rating system.”

Morgan chose not to participate in the King County Bar Association’s evaluation process because he does not agree with its tactics, he said. The association solicits comments and information from a variety of sources to present a rating. It does not disclose those sources to those vying for the position. Morgan participated in the bar’s 2000 process, but opted out in 2005.

“I understand that’s going to reflect poorly on the ratings, but I don’t believe in the process,” he said.

The bar association attempts to rate all King County judicial candidates running for appointment or election, according to its Web site. If a contender does not participate in the process, the association will seek information from a variety of sources that are familiar with the candidate and his or her work, according to the site. Based on this information, a rating is given.

Fellow candidate Williams Jarvis participated in the process but was also rated “not qualified.” The bar was unable to acquire enough information to evaluate candidate Mark Knapp, who also declined to participate in the judicial screening process.

Groups that also issue ratings for candidates include the Washington Women Lawyers, Loren Miller Bar Association, The GLBT Bar Association, Northwest Indian Bar Association, Latina/Latino Bar Association, Asian Bar Association of Washington, Korean-American Bar Association, Municipal League and Women’s Political Caucus.

Campaign Web sites

The Internet is another resource for voters looking to learn more about candidates. Campaign Web sites allow candidates to expand on their qualifications. They also permit them to remain vague about those qualifications. York’s site is an example.

York has continually listed his managerial experience and conflict-resolution training as a prime reason he is best for the judicial position. During a July 22 public forum where the judicial candidates each answered questions, York was specific in saying the court’s management needs to be overhauled. He said his managerial background would provide the insight needed to restructure the court. Again on York’s Web site (www.yesforyork.org), management experience is mentioned.

York is truthful in his claim that he has management experience. But his background in this area is vague on his campaign Web site. When called, York was happy to personally expand on his experience.

York served as an assistant manager at several Century Theatres, mostly in Nevada, from 1991 to 1993. Century Theatres is a multi-million dollar business, and York said he oversaw several daily operations and managed a staff of 60-100 employees.

After exiting the theater business, York operated as head general manager at a Port of Sub sandwich chain in Nevada until 1994. There, his staff included eight to 12 employees, he said. Though York’s claims are accurate, they call for voters to decide if his managerial background provides ample experience to manage a court.

Each of the candidates list contact information in the voters guide.