We want to change the way our City Council is elected to give better representation to neighborhoods and to give the voters, residents and businesses of Seattle a Councilmember that specifically represents them. Under this Charter Amendment voters will still get to vote for 5 of the 9 positions - their own district Councilmember and the 4 at-large positions. Currently there is nothing to preclude an election of all 9 Councilmembers who reside in the same neighborhood.
Seattle's current City Council structure was established in 1910 when our population was only 237,000. Today Seattle's population has more than doubled (roughly 583,000), our geographic boundaries have expanded and yet we are being served by the same archaic Council structure. 100 years is long enough; it is time for a system that better serves a city of our size.
Having 9 Councilmembers that only look at the 'big picture' doesn't allow them to see the 'actual picture'. Businesses are closing, vacant retail space can be found in what were the most successful business districts, thousands of housing units are vacant with still more being built while over 1,500 houses are in foreclosure. (See stories below.)
We are one of only 5 of the 52 most populated cities with an all at-large City Council (cities with a population of 350,000 or more). Detroit and Columbus have all at-large Councils which haven't been responsive enough to address their economic woes. (See Staring into the Abyss: http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13745782)
90% of the 52 cities have an all-district based City Council or a hybrid system which is a combination of districts and at-large positions. (See breakdown below.)
Some have expressed concern that districted Councilmembers would fight among themselves in support of their own districts. There is no need to fight when a Council is structured to ensure resources are allocated with equity. Additionally, the hybrid system of 5 districts and 4 at-large Councilmembers will provide a balanced perspective. The Seattle Community Council Federation and City Neighborhood Council do not pit one community or neighborhood against another. We expect our elected officials to do likewise, to cooperate and make decisions knowing that the City of Seattle is only as good as its most underserved community. If they do 'fight' over limited resources, do you prefer to have the Council fight over which community gets a park or have the Council cooperatively hand those limited resources to a developer who doesn't live in Seattle?
It has become so prohibitively expensive to run for City Council that many well-qualified community members hesitate to run for office because of the $250,000 plus price tag. Council positions almost exclusively go to the highest bidder, but is the highest bidder always the best candidate?
CITY COUNCIL STRUCTURE IN THE 52 MOST POPULATED U.S. CITIES
CITY Est. 2007 POPULATION STRUCTURE
New York City 8,310,212 51 districts
Los Angeles 3,834,340 15 districts
Chicago 2,836,658 50 districts
Houston 2,208,180 9 districts, 5 at-large
Phoenix 1,552,259 8 districts
Philadelphia 1,449,634 10 districts, 7at-large
San Antonio 1,328,984 10 districts
San Diego 1,266,731 8 districts
Dallas 1,266,372 14 districts
San Jose 939,899 10 districts
Detroit 916,952 9 at-large
Jacksonville 805,605 14 districts, 5 at-large
San Francisco 799,185 11 districts
Indianapolis 795,458 25 districts, 4 at-large
Columbus 747,755 7 at-large
Austin 743,074 6 at-large
Fort Worth 681,818 9 districts
Memphis 674,028 7 districts, 6 in 2 super districts
