by Kirby Lindsay, posted 21 October 2013
On election ballots arriving in the mail, Seattle voters will encounter City Charter Amendment 19. According to a recent King 5 news poll of 700 adults, conducted by Survey USA, 30% of respondents said they would vote yes on the amendment, 14% said no and 56% weren’t certain – and very likely don’t know what this grass-roots effort is all about.
Endorsed By Many, Supported By More
Funded by private citizens and led by community activists from all over the political spectrum, this campaign started as ‘Seattle Districts Now’. Fremocentrist.com featured the volunteer effort during its petition signature collection in an April 19, 2013 column.
Now a ballot measure, the campaign remains grassroots – with very little money to spend on education. Instead, volunteers spread lawn signs around and the campaign continues to gather endorsements from nearly every media outlet and elected official (outside of the Seattle City Council, and Fremont’s King County Councilmember Larry Phillips.)
If passed, Charter Amendment 19 would create a hybrid system for our City Council, with 7 seats elected from clearly defined districts of Seattle, and two elected from the city at-large. Those seven councilmembers would each represent an equal portion of the Seattle population – right now, each district contains approximately 90,000 people.
A big selling point of the Amendment is the realization that a popular, well-known or simply persistent candidate, no matter how rich or poor, could meet and share their vision with every one of their 90,000 neighbors during a campaign.
In an October 17th Seattle Times article, Lynn Thompson wrote about the pros and cons of the amendment. She wrote about David Bloom, a former deputy director of the Church Council of Greater Seattle, and his observations on the lack of response by the current City Council on the issue of homelessness, while giving developers tax breaks on housing projects that include few low-income units.
Thompson also noted that Bloom ran, unsuccessfully, for a council seat in 2009. Today, she wrote, a campaign for a Seattle City Council seat can cost $250,000. Bloom is quoted as saying, “we have very active neighborhood councils and democratic district organizations. If we elect council seats by district, I can see more people coming out of those organizations to run.” And without spending a quarter million dollars, I would note.
The Map, And Neighborhood Matters
Charter Amendment 19 includes a carefully drawn map, created by University of Washington geography professor emeritus Richard Morrill, as part of the measure. The map defines the districts (Fremont is in #6) as they would exist if the Amendment passes, and in 2015 when the entire Seattle City Council would stand for election. The Amendment requires a revision of the map every 10 years, to maintain an even distribution of population among the districts. Also, the Amendment requires candidates for those seven districted seats live in the district they want to represent – including district #6.
This may focus those councilmembers elected by district on neighborhood issues to the detriment of city-wide concerns. Two councilmembers, however, remain elected at-large – and just like now, the entire council of nine must discuss, debate and legislate, as a body, on all matters.
‘Being Closer To A Representative’
At the October Ballard District Council meeting, a debate took place between Cleve Stockmeyer for Districts Now and Margie Rhodes for ‘Choice, Not Districts.’ (Ballard also would sit in district #6.) According to an October 10th article written by Zachariah Bryan for The Ballard News-Tribune, Rhodes argued several points, including the idea that districts may lead to entrenched incumbents. I would argue that if a challenger cannot convince a majority of 90,000 of his neighbors to give him a chance, perhaps the incumbent should stay.
Rhodes also raised the point that, under the Amendment, Seattle voters will only be able to elect three of their nine councilmembers. “You don’t get more influence from having more people to vote for,” Stockmeyer said, according to Bryan, “You get more influence by being closer to a representative who represents you and who lives closer to you.”
When A Councilperson Will Listen
Currently, the Fremont Neighborhood Council (FNC) has issues with the City on the improvements of newly acquired park land, oversight on proposed large-scale developments, and transportation. The Fremont Chamber of Commerce has concerns regarding power outages and the future of the Special Events Committee. Fremocentrist.com has also brought forward Fremonster efforts to saving the Seattle houseboats and maintain ‘One Home Per Lot’. Currently, all of these groups must either convince all nine City Councilmembers, or change the mind of one Councilmember serving as Chair of a Committee, none of whom are required to be responsive to Fremont voters to maintain their seats.
“Downtown gets the largesse while some neighborhoods can’t even get a streetlight,” John Fox, an advocate for low-income housing, was quoted as saying by Thompson in the Seattle Times article.
An article in Real Change News, written by Charter Amendment 19 supporters Alice Woldt and (Fremonster) Toby Thaler, stated, “Today, we don’t have a system that allows us to hold individual councilmembers accountable and ensure city government treats our communities fairly.” It also observed, “Electing seven councilmembers by district means money allocation and bonding capacity will more likely reflect the priorities of all corners of this great city.”
In the voter’s pamphlet, the opposition to Amendment 19 wrote, “…city council members are under oath to represent the entire city, not just their neighborhood. For neighborhood politics you should go to your neighborhood councils. This is why we have neighborhood councils.” Unfortunately, anyone who has attempted to address the City through the FNC or Fremont Chamber knows, these bodies have no legislative authority. They can cause change by convincing a Councilperson to listen.
A Grassroots Campaign
Thanks to a large number of ordinary citizens who continue to campaign, give money and post lawn signs, Charter Amendment 19 could give grassroots candidates – and causes – more opportunities to grow and flourish in Seattle.
As someone who regularly observes community politics, I know some grass root efforts deserve to brown, bake and die. Yet, with #19, voters can give everyone a stronger voice – not just those who raise a quarter million dollars in campaign contributions, and favors, to repay.
Before mailing back your ballot, read your voter’s pamphlet and find out more about Charter Amendment 19, and make an informed decision.
Related Articles
- A Call for ‘Districts Now’
- by Kirby Lindsay, April 19, 2013
- Heritage, Homes & House Boats In Peril
- by Kirby Lindsay, August 21, 2013
- The Tower House Built Next Door: A Cautionary Tale
- by Kirby Lindsay, October 17, 2012
- FCC Highlight Reel: Talk About Power
- by Kirby Lindsay, September 4, 2013
- FNC Highlight Reel: Street Stuff
- by Kirby Lindsay, September 2, 2013
©2013 Kirby Lindsay. This column is protected by intellectual property laws, including U.S. copyright laws. Reproduction, adaptation or distribution without permission is prohibited.