On the surface this proposition may sound like a reasonable and democratic idea. But this concept has been floated in some of the smaller cities before, including Lynnwood where I live. Usually, the interest comes from those who want to run for city council but don't have the support outside of their own neighborhood. Finding qualified people who advocate for the city's greater good seems more important than a representative from a neighborhood who advocates for the neighborhood first and then secondarily for the city as a whole. The article suggests that the CC should have paid the money and put it on the ballot but isn't it more fair for those who feel strongly about it to pony up rather than the public? If they get the signatures, raise the funds, then yes it should go on the ballot. But otherwise I think cities are better served and less politicized when council members serve as the whole. It just doesn't seem right to penalize council members because of where they choose to live.