The Times endorses
Be careful what you wish for; 'no' to districts

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive

Electing Seattle City Council members by geographical district would not improve the overall quality of council. That misconception has been peddled by promoters of a plan to switch from at-large elections to election in nine districts.

Seattleites who believe in one city working together, one city tackling problems with partners throughout the region, should vote down Charter Amendment 5.

Representation by districts would, by definition, compel council members to focus on the traffic circle down the street rather than a broader, regional transportation fix that could substantially improve the commute.

Election by districts would make council members weaker in comparison with a mayor elected citywide.

Voters would have fewer choices, fewer connections to the council. Seattleites who now select nine council members over two years would be shut out of eight races. They'd vote for just one council member every four years.

Certainly, the current council does not meet Seattle's high expectations. But most wrong-headed, wiggy policies came from newcomers making beginner mistakes at taxpayers' expense. District elections would bring more rookies — and more rookie mistakes.

Instead of going to districts, the surefire way to express disappointment is to vote out incumbents not properly representing the city.

The ballot measure does not ask if you like this particular group of council members. The question is about a system over time. One weak batch does not justify dumping a process that has served Seattle well for 93 years. Consider stellar, sometimes beloved past council members who ran citywide: Sam Smith, George Benson, Jim Street, Paul Kraabel, Jane Noland, Dolores Sibonga, Randy Revelle, John Miller, Phyllis Lamphere, Sue Donaldson, Jeanette Williams and Norm Rice, who became mayor.

They helped make this city the envy of the country. They tackled broad challenges of transportation, public safety, recycling and environmental stewardship.

Smith and Benson perfected constituent service. Street was a land-use whiz, Revelle a bona fide energy expert. Rice, as councilman and then mayor, boosted the link between city government and schools — not one school in one neighborhood, all schools citywide.

The message from San Francisco, which recently adopted district elections, is don't do it.

"District elections have helped balkanize the city into tiny fiefdoms where in a town of nearly 800,000 people, a political neophyte can sneak into office with just over 5,000 votes," the San Francisco Chronicle editorial page wrote recently. Lamenting supervisors who make backroom deals to subvert the voters' will, the paper called for an end to district elections.

After citywide elections were abandoned in San Francisco, seats held by minorities and women decreased. Seattle's impressive record of electing female and racially diverse council members also would falter.

Rice vehemently opposes district elections, because he figures he would not have won a council seat while another African American, the popular Smith, who was also a resident of Southeast Seattle, was in office.

Be careful what you wish for, Seattle. District elections will balkanize our city and diminish, not enhance, the caliber of future councils. Vote no on Charter Amendment 5.

Copyright © 2003 The Seattle Times Company