Commentary: Council districts might not represent Everett well

Published 1:30 am Sunday, January 22, 2017

By Tye Ferrell

Should Everett follow Seattle’s lead away from citywide, at-large city council elections?

Advocates of district elections in Everett say we should adopt Seattle’s “mixed” system, in which two of our seven councilmembers would continue to be elected at-large, and the rest from new city districts. They claim that district elections will increase diversity on the council, cure political apathy, increase voter turnout, give citizens more voice in City Hall, and even improve our quality of life.

These claims, however, do not hold up under scrutiny, and proponents have glossed over the risks. There are more effective ways to tackle these issues.

A city council that represents the diversity of its residents is important, but districting will not guarantee this. Demographic minorities are more likely to be elected in districts where a single group exceeds 50 percent of the population. There is no such conceivable district in Everett today. In any case, any time districts are drawn based on population, some group is likely to feel shortchanged.

Proponents argue that districting will make it easier to run for city council, because with fewer votes required, candidates will be able to knock on every voter’s door and will need to raise less money. However, making it easier to run increases the likelihood that someone unqualified, extreme or inept could be elected. Also, once in office, district incumbents have a competitive advantage and tend to stay in office longer. Finally, in Seattle, district candidates are raising as much or more money as at-large candidates.

Districting proponents argue that citizens will have one identifiable councilmember who represents their district and will be more attentive to their concerns. But districting will reduce the number of representatives for communities from seven to, at most, three. If their district representative turns out to be a dud or does not align with them on key issues, they will end up having much less voice on the council, not more.

Districts will also shift even more of the balance of municipal power to the mayor’s office, which will be able to trade the interests of one district against another. Meanwhile, district councilmembers will have less power, because they will represent only one-fifth of the city.

That said, districting proponents raise important issues. How can we increase diversity on Everett’s City Council while encouraging high quality candidates? How can we ensure that south Everett is adequately represented? How can the council better involve citizens in decision-making? How can we increase voter engagement and turnout? Here are some ideas to get the ball rolling:

For starters, Everett’s at-large council could organize itself to be more accessible and responsive. Councilmembers could serve as neighborhood leads, attending neighborhood meetings and serving as the community’s first point of contact for the council. Council meetings could be held in neighborhoods around the city. The council could also better communicate to the public who works on what, so that when citizens have questions or concerns about public safety, parks, parking, transportation, etc., it will be clear who to contact.

Increasing political diversity has largely been the role of political parties and nonprofits that recruit and train future political leaders. But the city can also take steps to encourage diversity in future leadership. Its recent move to diversify boards and commissions was a positive step in that direction. The city could also create a youth council reflecting Everett’s diversity. Or support neighborhood leadership training programs around the city.

To increase citizen engagement and decrease voter apathy, Everett could adopt a voucher system like Seattle’s. Each voter receives four $25 vouchers they can use to donate to the campaigns of up to four local candidates of their choice. Every Everett citizen would have a greater stake in the future of their city and candidates would have an incentive to reach out to more citizens.

Everett City Council’s positions are part-time jobs with full-time expectations, and almost no dedicated staff support. Reducing the number of councilmembers from seven and making them full time would increase the power of the council vis-à-vis the mayor, giving citizens more voice. Less-well-off candidates would then be better able to justify the considerable effort of running for and serving on council.

Providing the city council with dedicated legislative staff would also increase the council’s leverage, capability and power. They currently have one administrative person for all councilmembers.

To ensure representation south of 41st Street, two or three at-large council seats could be set aside for south Everett.

What are your ideas for more representative city government? How can we become more engaged and informed as citizens?

Tye Ferrell lives in Everett and is principal for the consulting firm Resilience Collaborative NW.