Wait ... Venus? is she running, since she was found INNOCENT?

I'm sure these posts take a lot of work and politicians like them, but how about comparing candidates on issues or background instead? I have no clue who a lot of these people are. It's really cynical to just report on the money-raising horserace, and I'm slightly cynical myself.

lizzie has a point.

After all, all but one city council member voted to force the Billionaire's Tunnel (SR-99 Viaduct replacement) and Mercer Millionaire's Mess on Seattle taxpayers (which includes renters) even though we citizens strongly said we didn't want either.

What? What? All that City money the Council gave to all those consultants and they show no love?

@3, @4, et al.: ECB has never shown any inclination whatsoever to actually report on the issues in the City Council races. It's horse-race all the way! Next series of posts: who hired/fired which campaign consultant. Bet on it.

"carpet-bombing voters' mailboxes with slick mailers -- very effective, and very expensive."

Really? I consider myself to be at least minimally engaged in civic life, but those are the FIRST things I toss in the recycle bin.

And, while I agree wholeheartedly with you on the need for districts, you won't get much movement on that issue here. Part of the religion of this area is that Income Tax is communism and that districts would make us just like Chicago. (Never mind that Chicago is a far superior city to Seattle)

As a first-time candidate I can attest to this year's difficulty in raising money. Many people who looked at the numbers above would use them to make their decision on who is and is not a viable candidate. While numbers tell a lot about a candidate's connections and fund-raising abilities, the problem with that is you miss out on the heart and soul of each of the candidates running: what they are passionate about and how they would serve the community. As a first year candidate I made the choice to focus the beginning of my campaign on the issues that each and every one of us are feeling in the city by spending face-to-face time with voters.

Ultimately, are you wanting to choose to vote for me based off my ability to raise money or is it my honest concern for this city and the way I prioritize listening to people on the ground over chasing dollars? I have and will continue to run a strong grassroots campaign that is supported by the families who live in our neighborhoods that are hurting--not just because of the economy, but from property taxes that are too high and a local government that they feel isn't listening to them. They may not have large amount of money they can donate at one time, but they do have the time and energy that they are investing in this campaign that has been invaluable to me. That is what we are missing out on when we focus on fundraising and not on the issues.

@Dorsol: You got my BF's vote. He adores you.

I like Jessie Israel, but hey, the race is still early. I agree with the other comments that we need to get to know the people running on the issues.

So hey Erica, can we do a live blog with each of the candidates each week? Like we ask questions, moderated, and they have to respond? Or maybe have set questions that are submitted and have them respond, then open the live blog to comments or further questions? That would be AWESOME.

It is a fallacy to simply assume campaigns will cost less if we elect Council members by district. State legislative district campaigns are now as expensive as City Council races, yet they cover less territory.

Candidates will raise and spend as much as they can. Donors will give to candidates whether or not there are districts. Donors give because they seek to curry favor from an elected, because they agree politically with the candidate, or because they are a friend or associate of the candidate.

Honestly, I think this may even out races more and not less. People were raising close to $200k last election. I've never seen a progressive City Council candidate who wasn't an incumbent raise more than about $75k.