A: Yes, by over $75,000 per seat. .University of Washington Masters Candidate Jason Malinkowski did a survey of election costs comparing cities with districts and cities without districts. After controlling for multiple factors, the data show bringing district elections to Seattle should cut costs by over $75,000 per seat.
Q: Will Charter Amendment 19 cost more money?
A: No. It's important to understand Charter Amendment 19 also does not raise taxes. A different measure on the November ballot raises taxes to generate campaign funds. Charter Amendment 19 does not conflict with this other measure.
Q: Some people say electing from districts will take the focus on what's good for all of Seattle. Is this true?
A:Seattle voters have a long history of electing representatives to district-based County, State, and Federal office who are very capable of doing right by their district while keeping their eye on what's right for the county, state, and/or nation. The only way this claim is true is if you assume Seattle voters won't do this when electing city councilmembers.
Like 21 other top-50 cities in America, this proposal elects two "at-large" councilmembers to make sure citywide issues and views are part of Council's day-to-day conversations. This is called a "hybrid" district system and it was chosen to specifically address this issue. We have confidence in this system and especially Seattle voters.
Q: Why is there only one minority-majority district?
A: Given current household demographics, it is impossible to create more than one minority-majority district in a 7-2 system without creating boundaries that violate state law. If Seattle's demographics change, the proposal's system of revisiting district boundaries every 10 years based on US Census data will allow the necessary changes.
Q: Some people criticize the boundaries. Are they permanent?
A: No, they are not permanent. A broad-based committee is charged with adjusting district boundaries every 10 years based on census data -- similar to what we do for our state and federal legislative boundaries. There will be only 4 elections under this map (and only 2 for the district candiates) before the committee makes adjustments. The committee process is public and you're encouraged to participate.
Q: Why not do all districts?
A: In prior elections, all-district proposals were defeated. The voters were clear they preferred a hybrid system.
Q: Why did hybrid systems previously fail?
A: Because they didn't have a map. Voters clearly said they wanted to see the map first.
Q: The dense, urban areas are in separate districts. Why?
A: If you look at this map of urban villages and urban centers, you'll see they are scattered throughout all 7 districts. Those making this claim perhaps forget all the districts have to have equal population under state law. Placing multiple densely-populated urban areas into the same district would have distorted the map, ignoring natural boundaries like the Ship Canal and major highways.
Q: A few people argue this proposal disenfranchises minority voters. How do you respond?
A: This simply isn't true. As noted above, the map was drawn to geographic boundries and to be population equal. There is one minority-majority district, which is one more than there is now. This argument is also more than a little insulting to Seattle voters because it ignores the fact Seattle was instrumental in electing the nation's first Asian-American governor. Minorities have been elected to County Council from Seattle districts and the City Council in the old at large system. Seattle voters are good people and elect the best person for the job, regardless of his/her personal characteristics. This won't change under district election. In fact, districts will make it easier for younger and minority candidates to run and be elected because it makes the hard job of reaching out and impressing individual voters with their knowledge of the issues much, much easier.
Q: Who opposes this?
A: There is no organized opposition. In general, however, we expect opposition from powerful groups who use paid staff and/or lobbyists to influence city politics. Since they believe they currently have power, they are afraid of any change. This is a common theme in every city that has changed from at large to district elections. Fortunately, regular voters typically understand this and agree district elections are better for all of the city and not just those who receive paychecks to influence City Hall.
Q: Will this conflict with city-funded elections?
A: Absolutely not.. District elections will reduce the cost of running for office without any other measures. But if Seattle voters wish to use property tax dollars to fund elections, there is no conflict between the proposals.
To read the full text of Charter Amendment 19, click here.
 |
||||||
Paid for By Seattle Districts Now, Sponsored by Faye Garneau
Top 5 sponsors: Faye Garneau, Susie Burke, Ellen Taft, James Bush, James Coombes 300 Queen Anne Ave N #380, Seattle, WA 98109-4599 -- 206-526-1366 |
||||||
Download our public campaign reports at the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission |
||||||
 |
Follow @SeaDistrictsNow | |||||