In my opinion municipal and county elections should be nonpartisan to avoid state and local parties meddling in local affairs. Governance should occur at the lowest level by those most knowledgeable of issues and the impact of potential solutions. Seattle's seven council districts should be consolidated and the nine council members should be elected via RCV proportional single transferrable voting. If the council members serve four year terms then four should be elected one year and five elected two years later. This would result in fair representation of the city residents no matter where in the city they live.
Thanks for taking a moment to opine on our local elections! I would like to clear up a few things and invite you to reach out, I'd love to meet in person (or on zoom) and discuss in detail some of the issues you raise. You (or anyone else who is interested), can reach us at info (at) seattleapproves.org. The team and I read and respond to every email we get.
One of the central approaches we took at Seattle Approves is that we looked for voting reforms that make our elections better AND are legal today. As you correctly point out, there are a lot of really interesting, but more sweeping reforms that could really be transformative, like proportional representation. The challenge is that they aren't legal under State Law and reading the political tea leaves, likely won't be legal for at least the next decade.
We focused on finding a reform that makes our elections as representative as possible within the current law and are implementable immediately. Approval Voting in the primary fits that bill. It is one of the most representative systems in use in America (even more representative than RCV/IRV under most circumstances), can be implemented in time for the 2023 elections, and is compatible with future reform efforts (i.e. we can switch to Proportional Approval Voting if we ever get multi-member districts). Portland, OR is doing interesting things, but also operating under different State laws. They have options available to them that we do not.
Lastly, I think it's important to note that in the 26 or so years that folks have been advocating for a ranked ballot option of some kind in Seattle, never has the proposal the City Council chose to place on the ballot ever been proposed or considered before. The Council deliberated in secret and passed their proposal in just 48-hours with little to no public scrutiny, and zero consultation with experts in the field of voting reform. It's important we're honest with why it's the case that their method is completely untested and previously unused, and the tradeoffs it entails.
I am particularly concerned about the "false choice" issue it exposes: frequently elevating a candidate to the general election who cannot possibly win. In the worst case, it will promote a candidate with only 33% support that is destined to be crushed by a candidate with 67%.
I sincerely hope you will take me up on the offer to meet, and I look forward to chatting more!
In my opinion municipal and county elections should be nonpartisan to avoid state and local parties meddling in local affairs. Governance should occur at the lowest level by those most knowledgeable of issues and the impact of potential solutions. Seattle's seven council districts should be consolidated and the nine council members should be elected via RCV proportional single transferrable voting. If the council members serve four year terms then four should be elected one year and five elected two years later. This would result in fair representation of the city residents no matter where in the city they live.
Hi Krist,
Thanks for taking a moment to opine on our local elections! I would like to clear up a few things and invite you to reach out, I'd love to meet in person (or on zoom) and discuss in detail some of the issues you raise. You (or anyone else who is interested), can reach us at info (at) seattleapproves.org. The team and I read and respond to every email we get.
One of the central approaches we took at Seattle Approves is that we looked for voting reforms that make our elections better AND are legal today. As you correctly point out, there are a lot of really interesting, but more sweeping reforms that could really be transformative, like proportional representation. The challenge is that they aren't legal under State Law and reading the political tea leaves, likely won't be legal for at least the next decade.
We focused on finding a reform that makes our elections as representative as possible within the current law and are implementable immediately. Approval Voting in the primary fits that bill. It is one of the most representative systems in use in America (even more representative than RCV/IRV under most circumstances), can be implemented in time for the 2023 elections, and is compatible with future reform efforts (i.e. we can switch to Proportional Approval Voting if we ever get multi-member districts). Portland, OR is doing interesting things, but also operating under different State laws. They have options available to them that we do not.
Lastly, I think it's important to note that in the 26 or so years that folks have been advocating for a ranked ballot option of some kind in Seattle, never has the proposal the City Council chose to place on the ballot ever been proposed or considered before. The Council deliberated in secret and passed their proposal in just 48-hours with little to no public scrutiny, and zero consultation with experts in the field of voting reform. It's important we're honest with why it's the case that their method is completely untested and previously unused, and the tradeoffs it entails.
I am particularly concerned about the "false choice" issue it exposes: frequently elevating a candidate to the general election who cannot possibly win. In the worst case, it will promote a candidate with only 33% support that is destined to be crushed by a candidate with 67%.
I sincerely hope you will take me up on the offer to meet, and I look forward to chatting more!