Concerned about where the heck Seattle is heading?

Feel like local politics has devolved into ideological proxy battles and dysfunctional echo chambers?

Maybe the solution is you. Yes, you.

Consider this idea. We gather people together, get them in a room, present a series of loose questions on the thorniest issues of the day, and offer experts and whatever background materials they need to reach 70% consensus about the direction ahead. Their recommendations then go to the mayor and City Council.

And here’s the kicker: The two-dozen or so participants would be selected at random, like a jury, with special attention to make sure the final composition represents the entire city.

This is not a new idea. It’s called a people’s assembly. It’s been tried successfully around the world. And it may be just what Seattle needs.

By May 19, hopefuls running for Seattle City Council — including four open seats — must formally declare their candidacies. At press time, 30 people have thrown their hats into the ring, staking out one position or the other in hopes of at least getting through the August primary and onto the November election.

This is a good thing. We need people to run for public office, and everyone who does should be commended. But I can’t help but wonder if a group of average folks couldn’t lay out a path forward that is just as compelling and more likely to bring much-needed consensus to the city on our twin nemeses: public safety and housing.

Advertising

“Anybody living in any city in the world actually shares a common sense of frustration with how these decisions often end up getting taken and how people get put either into either NIMBY [Not In My Backyard] or YIMBY [Yes In My Backyard] camps,” said Claudia Chwalisz, founder and CEO of DemocracyNext, a Paris-based institute working on people’s assemblies.

“It’s impossible for everybody to be really 100% happy with whatever needs to be done. There’s a need to create the conditions to come together and say, OK, where can we find the most common ground?”

The concept of a people’s assembly goes back to ancient Greece. Unlike a town hall that is geared toward people expressing their often adversarial and entrenched views, these deliberative panels comprise randomly selected participants.

While they can be convened by any organization or institution, it’s best that a local or national government organize the event and pledge to follow the group’s recommendations, said Chwalisz.

Statistics from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, an intergovernmental organization with 38 member countries including the U.S., show 65% of people’s assemblies have been convened by local governments around the world. Urban planning is the most discussed topic.

Ireland’s national experience has so far gained the greatest attention.
In 2017, after meeting for five weekends of deliberations, an Irish people’s assembly came up with recommendations to legalize abortion, an obviously hot topic in this traditionally Catholic country. Later, 66% of Irish voters approved a referendum based on the recommendations, ending decades of contentious political debate.

Advertising

There is even a United Nation’s handbook on how to run people’s assemblies correctly. It notes that elected leaders face hard choices and a perilous environment to make good decisions: “We know ‘Government by Twitter’ is something everyone wants to avoid.”

Amen to that!

Of course, no political process is perfect, and there have been notable disappointments. In 2019, after facing “Yellow Vest” protests against climate regulations, French President Emmanuel Macron convened a people’s assembly to hammer out environmental policy. It produced far-reaching recommendations aimed at slashing the country’s emissions by 40%, but parliament debated a bill that only included half of the assembly’s proposals.

As far as I could tell, only one people’s assembly has been tried in the U.S. In Petaluma, California, 36 people were chosen at random last year to consider future uses for the local fairgrounds. In the end, political powers there seemingly disregarded the recommendations, leaving bad feelings about the whole endeavor.

Chwalisz said there are best practices that help facilitate good outcomes when local governments present the issues at hand. “It’s important that it’s framed as a question and that it’s not leading in any way and it’s not just framed in the binary sort of way, but that it actually leaves open the genuine complexity and trade-offs that need to be weighed.”

In Seattle, there’s plenty of things about which we can argue. With a diminished police department, how do we best protect families and businesses? How do we balance the rights of the unsheltered with community well-being? How can we get the most people housed and also prevent residents from laboring under increased taxes?

It’s sometimes tempting to throw up our hands and say: We’ll never come to any agreement that will satisfy 70% of the people — the best-practice threshold for a people’s assembly recommendation — so maybe the best we can do is let the most passionate and organized special interests run the debate.

Advertising

But in one measure of local public opinion, there is evidence that we agree on more than what our crabby politics suggests. The Index Poll commissioned by the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce asks baseline questions about what issues residents are prioritizing and what to do about them. Many gain consensus of 70% and higher.

“We’re trying to bring the voters voice into the policy conversation, not just the people who are the loudest or who are the most available to go to the meeting, or who have the (political) relationship,” said Rachel Smith, president and CEO of the Chamber. “There is more agreement on issues than we see from the polarized points, which tend to be the loudest.”

A people’s assembly is much different from a poll. It requires that people talk to each other, ask for more information and find common ground.

Let’s try it, Seattle.

Hey, 20-something renter who just moved here and wants to upend the status quo, meet the retired pipe fitter with whom you share this city. Small business owner, discuss some of your ideas with a community college student, and appreciate a new perspective.

Between all of you, maybe we can chart a better future for all of us.

The Future of Democracy

Claudia Chwalisz of DemocracyNext will discuss collective decision-making with South Seattle Emerald founder and Seattle Times columnist Marcus Harrison Green at 7:30 p.m. March 3 at Town Hall Seattle as part of its Civics series. More information here.