Here's my idea to jerk this bunch back to reality: An initiative to the voters to roll back City Council pay and perks to 1995 levels. That's the last time their pay reflected pretty much what the rest of the city's wage earners took home. (The median 2011 Seattle income dropped to $49,000.)
These clowns pull down $117,000 a year, plus perks and parking privileges. (No $4 an hour meters for them.) "Representatives" whose incomes are more than double that of the people they purportedly represent cannot possibly have a clue what their constituents' economic realities are like, let alone in the worst depression in 80 years. If they had to live on what the rest of us do, they might change their tune. Or better yet, leave public service. Remember...it's called public SERVICE, not public trough-feeding or public gouging.
According to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Cit…
"The Seattle City Council is the second highest paid in the country. As of September 28, 2010, council members Bagshaw, Conlin, Licata and O'Brien earn $117,533.52; council members Godden, Harrell, Burgess, Clark and Rasmussen earn $113,587.20. These figures represent increases from $94,000 in November 2005, and $104,000 for members elected November 8, 2005. In 1995, all council members were paid $71,000.
"The current top rate represents a 65.5% pay increase over 1995. Among the nation's 40 largest cities, only Los Angeles pays its council more (Seattle Times). Seattle ranks 23rd in population, according to the Census Bureau."
So you tell me...has your income gone up 65% since 1995? Or even 25% since 2005? Are you better off now than your City Council member has become in the last six years? Do you really think any of these bums are worth what we're paying them?