PHOTOS BY OLIVER HAMLIN FOR WEST SEATTLE BLOG

Hundreds of people spent Sunday admiring and photographing the 12 gardens spotlighted on this year’s West Seattle Garden Tour. Among them was WSB contributing photojournalist Oliver Hamlin, who presents a scene from each garden (including some of the gardeners. First, at Garden A, “A Show of Northwest Natives“:

Charles Anthony, who created Garden B, “Salish Sea Sanctuary,” posed with his Japanese Maple:

Garden C, “Heron Cove,” has its namesake standing sentinel:

Below are Debra Montgomery and Lee Kelly; she bought the “Heron Cove” house 7 years ago and inherited Lee, who has been the gardener for 40 years. She said the previous homeowners sought out a buyer who wouldn’t tear down the house and would keep caring for the garden, which she and Lee both now do.

Garden D was described as “Small Spaces, Big Moments”:

Below (L-R) are the gardeners behind Garden D, Laird Applegate and Brian Pelzel:

Garden E was “From a Sprawling Lawn and One Tree to …”

Blackberries are often the bane of a gardener’s existence, but in Garden F, “Transformation,” they were beautiful:

Garden F’s (L-R) Diane Elie and Raquel Gonzalez store water in 60-gallon rainbarrels and told Oliver that it fills most of their irrigation needs:

At Garden G, “Hidden Gem,” Julie Robinson-Jasper and Maple the dog are seen through a mirror surrounded by star jasmine at Garden G, “Hidden Gem”:

Another scene from Garden G:

Garden H, “Behind the Fences,” sported an arch of bittersweet nightshade:

A clawfoot bathtub graced Garden I, “A Fresh Look for A Once-Beloved Garden“:

Garden J, “Garden of Many Rooms,” was conducive to wandering:

Garden K offered onlookers “Plants from Around the World“:

And Garden L, “Conifer Corner,” featured a 75-year-old wisteria:

(Read details of each garden here.) The West Seattle Garden Tour is organized by a nonprofit that uses the proceeds to support other nonprofits – here are this year’s grant recipients; see how to apply for one of next year’s grants by going here (July 15 is the deadline).

The battle of the Dan Sullivans is on. 

The Alaska Supreme Court ruled Monday that a man with the same name as Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan can challenge the sitting lawmaker in the state’s GOP Senate primary in August. The high court upheld a ruling from a lower court judge that cleared the way for Daniel J. Sullivan to appear on the primary ballot, reversing a decision by state officials earlier this month that he was ineligible because he was allegedly trying to confuse voters.

The state Supreme Court directed Alaska’s Division of Elections to decide how Daniel J. Sullivan should be listed on the ballot “within the confines of existing Alaska ballot design law.”

The conflict is taking place in one of the country’s most closely watched Senate elections. The sitting Sen. Sullivan is running for a third term, but former Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola is vying to challenge him, setting up what could be an unusually competitive race in a deep-red state that hasn’t elected a Democrat to the Senate in almost 20 years.

The senator has called his same-name competitor a “sham candidate” and accused him of trying to trick voters and help Democrats flip the seat. Daniel J. Sullivan — a retired teacher and former U.S. Forest Service employee from Petersburg, Alaska — has denied those allegations and insisted he is both qualified and genuinely interested in running for Senate.

About two weeks ago, the Alaska Division of Elections determined that the challenger Sullivan could not appear on the ballot, arguing his paperwork “was not filed in order to declare an actual good-faith candidacy, but was instead filed with a purpose to confuse or mislead.”

In a letter to the candidate, Director Carol Beecher pointed to the fact that Daniel J. Sullivan had initially requested to appear on the ballot as “Dan Sullivan,” the same name format as the senator. She also wrote that he hadn’t previously been affiliated with the state Republican Party, had a website design that “appears to be deliberate[ly]” similar to the senator’s campaign site and had worked with a political consultant with links to Democratic candidates.

Daniel J. Sullivan asked a state court to reverse the decision. On Friday, Judge Thomas Matthews ruled in his favor, finding the non-senator Sullivan met the requirements to run for U.S. Senate and the state didn’t have the authority to exclude him based on “good faith.”

“The court does not minimize the Division’s concern that voters should not be misled,” the judge wrote. But he added that “Alaska election law gives the Division tools to address that concern,” including regulating how candidates appear on the ballot.

With ballots set to be printed this week, the issue was appealed to the Alaska Supreme Court on an expedited basis, with both sides filing court papers over the weekend.

The state Division of Elections asked the high court to overturn Matthews’ ruling, arguing it would “leave Alaska constitutionally required to permit bad-faith ballot access.” The agency said it reached its conclusion about Daniel J. Sullivan after it received a complaint from the National Republican Senatorial Committee “credibly alleging” he was seeking to “cause voter confusion” and made a “bewildering” request to appear on the ballot with the senator’s middle initial. 

If Daniel J. Sullivan is permitted to remain on the ballot, the state asked the Alaska Supreme Court to allow it to print his full name and list his party affiliation as “nonpartisan” to “ensure voters are not forced to guess between two nearly identical names.”

The Alaska Republican Party and several GOP-led states filed amicus briefs siding with Alaska.

Daniel J. Sullivan’s lawyers, meanwhile, argued the state “lacked any basis in Alaska law to exclude Mr. Sullivan from the ballot” and didn’t have the power to look into his “private motivations.” They wrote that state law doesn’t give officials the power to keep qualified candidates off the ballot due to potential confusion.

“[All] that Mr. Sullivan asks here is to be listed on the ballot, and the Division is obviously empowered to do so in a non-confusing manner,” his lawyers wrote.

Following oral arguments, the high court sided with Daniel J. Sullivan in a two-page order late Monday, and said it would issue a fuller opinion at a later date.

Jeffrey Robinson, an attorney for Daniel J. Sullivan, told CBS News his legal team is “grateful” for the Alaska Supreme Court’s decision to “affirm Judge Matthews’ well-reasoned, thorough order vacating the Division’s unlawful decision to exclude Mr. Sullivan as a candidate.”

“We expect that the Division will act in full compliance with existing Alaska ballot design law in its preparation of the ballots,” Robinson said in an email.

The senator’s campaign spokesperson, Nate Adams, said: “We’re disappointed in the court’s decision because as the sham candidate Dan J. Sullivan’s lawyers made clear in their legal arguments, the only reason he is running is to deceive voters and manipulate Alaska’s election system.”

“However, we are encouraged by the fact that the Director of the Division of Elections will be able to use her expertise to differentiate between the Petersburg fraud and the incumbent — Senator Dan Sullivan — to the benefit of Alaska voters,” Adams said.

Not a day goes by without staff at the Valle del Sol health clinic in Phoenix strategizing about the looming date of Jan. 1, 2027, and what it will mean for their low income patients’ health coverage.

“We will absolutely see a spike in uninsured people. My biggest concern is that people who are eligible will be cut because of the administrative burden,” said Mike Renaud, the CEO of Via del Sol, a federally qualified community health center that sees roughly 15,000 patients per year, half of whom are covered by Medicaid, which in Arizona is called the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System or AHCCCS, pronounced “access.”

“Medicaid is the largest health insurance program for low income people in the United States. It is the largest payor of mental health services in the U.S.”

Jan. 1, 2027 — six months away — is the deadline for Medicaid programs in 43 states across the country, including Arizona, to implement major policy changes that include work requirements and twice-yearly renewals (up from once yearly) for certain enrollees.

In Arizona, the new rules will mark the largest operational change in the history of the AHCCCS program, said Meaghan Kramer, health policy adviser to Gov. Katie Hobbs.

“This is the fastest they’ve ever had to do something that is operationally complex. And this is the most operationally complex thing they’ve ever had to do,” Kramer said. “We’re straining existing systems that are already old and overburdened on the IT side. And we will need much, much more work on the eligibility side than we have now.”

The changes are a result of HR1, the budget reconciliation bill also known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which President Donald Trump signed into law on July 4, 2025.

The law significantly changes both eligibility and financing of Medicaid, which is a government health insurance program primarily for low-income people that has been in place since 1965. Arizona has had a Medicaid program since 1982.

Having only 18 months to prepare for HR1 is an extremely heavy technological lift for states, including Arizona. Arizona’s aggressive implementation of HR1 changes to SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program once known as food stamps, resulted in the highest rate of loss of SNAP recipients in the country, with about 450,000 dropping from the program from February 2025 to mid-2026.

Recipients and would-be recipients have told The Arizona Republic SNAP benefits are harder to get than ever, with long hold times on the phone and at satellite offices, a dysfunctional website and fewer DES employees to help them.

The new state budget that was recently signed includes a little more than $10 million that will go to technology and to employees who will be handling the increased workload, Kramer said.

Hopefully state officials have learned from the experience with SNAP and “don’t make the same mistake again,” said Will Humble, executive director of the Arizona Public Health Association.

“The computer system needs to improve and the staff needs to be trained,” Humble said. “I’m convinced the majority of people who lose coverage will lose it because of administrative reasons.”

Further complicating the implementation is that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services recently released a 387-page interim final rule with strict new guidelines about Medicaid work requirements. The new guidelines, for example, do not automatically exempt people with cancer and end-stage renal disease, among other conditions, from the work requirements.

“It is written in a way that makes it clear this is going to be a much more challenging task than any state anticipated,” Kramer said of the guidelines. “States are really struggling with what this new guidance means…The new guidance is going to be much more burdensome on the member, the applicant and the Medicaid agency long-term.”