The Seattle City Council approved a new permitting scheme designed to gradually prohibit RVs from parking for more than two hours inside city limits on a supermajority 6-3 vote yesterday. The program, sponsor Dan Strauss said, is designed to “center humans,” end the “inappropriate use of public space,” and provide “pathwaystohousingforpeopleinneed.
Under Strauss’ permitting proposal , the city will conduct a one-time count of people currently living in RVs in Seattle and provide temporary “licenses” to eligible RV residents. These licenses will allow RV owners to park in Seattle as long as they obey “all laws,” to participate in services, and eventually accept shelter and leave their RVs behind. Anyone who “turns down” six offers of “appropriate shelter”—an undefined term—will lose their permit, and their right to park in the city.
Separate legislation in Strauss’ five-bill package will allow the city to stand up short-term storage for unoccupied RVs; expand the city’s Unified Care Team to add eight more city outreach workers focused on RVs; and broaden the definition of “junk vehicle” to make it easier for the city to designate a vehicle as “junk” and tow it away.
Under the new permitting system, no one who moves into an RV or arrives in Seattle in an RV after the one-time “census” will be eligible for a license, and if they park in Seattle for more than two hours, their vehicles can be ticketed and towed.
The council approved the most substantive piece of the legislation—the RV permitting program— after hours of public testimony, much of it from RV residents and advocates for homeless people who called the proposal ill-conceived and inhumane.
Dee Powers, a former RV resident who became homeless in 2015, said it took seven years to find a shelter that would allow her to stay with her partner and pets. “I personallyknowhowbadlytheproposedbanwillbeforpeoplelivingintheirvehicles,” Powers said. “I would not survive in a tent. I would not survive in a passenger vehicle. A friend of mine ended up amputating a foot because he was living in a smaller car with no room to lay down. It’s inhumane to force people to live in even more substandard conditions for the sake of the city’s curb appeal.”
On Tuesday, the ACLU of Washington and Columbia Legal Services sent letters to the council opposing Strauss’ proposal. In the ACLU letter, the group’s Smart Justice Policy Program Director Jazmyn Clark said the plan relies on “punitive enforcement and impoundment practices that raise constitutional and civil liberties concerns and risk further destabilizing people living in vehicles.” Specifically, the civil-rights group wrote, enforcing the two-hour parking rule could subject people living in their RVs to “the loss of their home, shelter, possessions, and often their primary source of stability,” in possible violation of their constitutional protection against unlawful search and seizure.
Strauss characterized the package of legislation as the first real effort in many years to help people living in RVs get into safe, stable housing. “Thislegislationisaboutensuringpeoplewholiveintheirvehiclesarenotforgotten, butthattheyarecaredfor, andthattheyhaveaclearroadtoamorestablelife that we can provide them, so that they can come inside into housing or shter keephighertoengageinhousingorshelterthatisappropriateforthem,thatmeetstheirneeds,” Strauss said.
Councilmember Dionne Foster said the one-time nature of the “census” was a key reason for her vote against the permitting bill. Foster proposed an amendment at a committee meeting in September that would have made it possible to hold another count of RV residents in the future, but it failed.
“Withthatdoornotavailable,unfortunately,Ijusthavetoomanyconcernsaroundpeoplewhomaybecomehomelessinthefuture and couldbeleftoutofthispermanentprogram,” Foster said. “Homelessness,Iknow and Ithinkmanyofusknowthisisn’tastaticexperience.Wehavesuccessingettingpeoplehousedeveryyear … Butwestruggletoactuallymeetourgoals on solving homelessness,becausewealsohavemoreneighborswhobecomehomelesseveryyearforamyriadofreasons.Allofthosefolkswhobecomehomelesswillnotenduplivingintheirvehicles,butsomeofthemmay,andsomeofthemmayneedaccesstodifferentsupports.”
The council declined to pass an amendment from Maritza Rivera, which she called a “line in the sand,” that would have excluded people convicted of promoting loitering for purposes of prostitution (a misdemeanor), sex trafficking, or selling any amount of drugs from the registration program. City-funded diversion plans, like Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion, target people engaged in survival crimes, including those sell drugs to support their own addictions, for diversion rather than criminal prosecution, so excluding anyone who sells drugs from homeless services would have been a departure from the city’s current approach.
Originally, Strauss proposed using $3.5 million that Mayor Katie Wilson had earmarked for a new RV safe lot and shelter to pay for his RV licensing plan, which will include the new city outreach workers and additional police and parking enforcement hours to enforce the new law. Last week, Strauss accused Wilson of being “uncomfortable” addressing homelessness because she proposed a budget that conflicted with his own RV proposal. This week, however, he changed his tune, saying he would identify $5 million in the budget to pay for a new RV safe lot as well as his own RV permitting proposal.
It’s unclear where Strauss plans to find the money. Shortly after this post went to press, Strauss got back to me to say he is “not taking the shelter money,” which totals $37 million over two years, to fund his plan.
At a press conference where WIlson announced a new citywide, neighborhood-based outreach strategy for resolving homeless encampments, I asked her about Strauss’ RV proposal. “WedohavealotofRVsaroundourcity,andtherearesomerealchallengesassociatedwithnoise,withgarbage,with,insomecases,criminalactivityhappeninginandaroundthosevehicles,andsothisisarealproblem.” But, she added, “Idohavesomeveryseriousconcernsaboutanumberofaspectsofthelegislation,from thelegalrisktothechallengesofimplementingthisverycomplicatedpermitprogram,thecostofimplementingit …aboutthechallengesofactuallydoingthisinpractice. AndIalsohaveconcernsaboutthehumanimpacts.”
The ACLU and Columbia Legal Services also objected to the expansion of the definition of junk vehicles, which requires a vehicle to meet at least three criteria on a list. That list currently includes having a value of less than $500, being on a public street for more than 24 hours, having a broken window, and failing to have an up-to-date registration. Strauss’ junk vehicle legislation expands that list to make it easier for the city to declare a vehicle “junk”; now, if someone’s license or registration is missing or not fully visible, that will count toward the three criteria that the city can use to justify taking it. The new list also now includes vehicles that need repairs to “side or back windows, wheels, tires, lights, body panels, or seats”—items that can be expensive to repair.
“For people with limited financial resources, these conditions may reflect an inability to afford registration, repairs, or other costs, not abandonment of a vehicle,” the ACLU’s Clark wrote. “When that vehicle is also someone’s home, the consequences of an expanded definition are particularly severe.”
The legislation gives the city until July 2027 to come up a plan to implement the legislation, which could include changes to the underlying program—although the 6-3 supermajority that supported the proposal as written suggests there won’t be the kind of fundamental changes opponents have asked for, like allowing amnesty for unregistered RV residents to participate in the program after the one-time cutoff in the legislation.
This year, voters in North Seattle will be choosing a councilmember to replace former District 5 councilmember Cathy Moore, who quit a year and a half into her four-year term. The district has lacked an elected councilmember for an unusually long time thanks to the timing of Moore’s resignation, which came just a few days too late for the city to schedule a special election for the district. As a result, former councilmember Debora Juarez has served as Moore’s city council-appointed replacement since mid-2024.
North Seattle’s choices in this long-awaited election are FairVote Washington political director Nilu Jenks, a second-time candidate for this position, and longtime university educator Julie Kang. Seattle Nice, the podcast co-hosted by me, political consultant Sandeep Kaushik, and longtime radio journalist David Hyde, will be hosting a live debate between the two candidates at the not-quite-in-D5 National Nordic Museum at 6:00 tomorrow, October 21; if you can’t make it, we’ll be publishing the whole debate on our podcast the following day. Election Day is November 3, but please vote early if you vote by mail, or drop your last-minute ballot in your nearest drop box before 8pm on November 3!
This is Nilu Jenks’ third attempt at winning the District 5 city council election: She ran and lost in the primary in 2023, and unsuccessfully sought the appointment when Moore quit the following year. Jenks, like her opponent Julie Kang, is a first-generation immigrant; her parents fled Iran for the US when she was a toddler.
A longtime climate and pedestrian advocate, Jenks now works on elections and democracy as the political and partnerships Director at FairVote Washington, which advocates for ranked-choice voting—a system in which voters rank the candidates they prefer rather than choosing just one. Jenks said she’s hopeful that ranked-choice votingwill lead to a council that’s more representative when Seattle voters start using it in to elect the seven district-based councilmembers next year.
“Seattle, I think, can be a place where we can show that democracy works‚ and you know, 20 to 30 percent of the country doesn’t think that anymore,” Jenks said. “Blue cities should have to show they can govern.”
Jenks has been endorsed by the Stranger, Progressive Voters Guide, and the Urbanist, as well as four City Councilmembers: Joy Hollingsworth, Alexis Mercedes Rinck, Eddie Lin, and Dionne Foster.
We met last week at Kaffeeklatsch Seattle, a German bakery and coffee shop on Lake City Way. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
PubliCola (ECB): You’ve said that you want to expand the city’s CARE Team. And you’ve mentioned that it takes a long time to get responses to Priority 3 calls.
NJ: Yeah, 160 minutes on average.
ECB: Right. And the CARE Team is restrained in what they can do by the police union contract. They can respond to certain kinds of calls, but not others, for instance. Given the constraints, what role do you see for an expanded CARE Team in D5?
NJ: Well, they’re in a labor dispute, and I hope that gets resolved to expand where they can respond. And also, I want to see a new chief of police who supports the CARE Team, so they can actually redirect some of those calls. I went on a ridealong with the CARE Team. There was a young man who called. He was in distress, and they gave him some food, some clothes, and let him know that he’d actually missed his court date. And he had lost his phone somewhere living on the streets, and they let him call his caseworker. And they had actually helped him a couple weeks before. He called specifically asking for the CARE Team. A lot of people just don’t want to call the police.
I don’t know if you listened to the debate last week. They asked, “What does Lake City need?” [Kang said] “Clorox.” I’m like, cool. Yeah. I love that perception of Lake City. I feel like we’re okay.
I went to the interagency high school and sat in a sobriety circle. I was very touched that the kids were as open as they were. I like teenagers. I like kids. Well, they all said they would love to be able to call CARE. They’re like, when my guidance counselor isn’t available, it’s 9pm, I want to call. They expressly all said they wish they could call the CARE Team. It was fascinating that they knew about it.
ECB: What are some of your top criteria for the next police chief?
NJ: I think the police chief sets a lot of the tone. I want a tone of, “I love Seattleites. I love Seattle. I want to be here. This is my city.” Someone that likes our alternate response team and sees it as part of their toolkit to help achieve their goals, rather than like a territorial thing. Someone that has the goal of reducing the 911 response times in a holistic way. And also, our homicide clearance rate could be better.
I’m not sure Seattle is as dangerous as some people think. We’re here in Lake City. People consider this a place that needs Clorox. We can’t let that be the perception of this area.
Why are a lot of people pushing this narrative of Seattle being this place where you should be terrified? I would love to have a police chief that is like, “This is a great city—a great city that I love that is actually pretty safe. We will, of course, work on making it safer.” People have told me they’ve had an officer come and tell them that LEAD’s a joke, CoLEAD’s a joke, the CARE Team’s a joke. I know that’s not the official department stance. I get that that’s a personal opinion the officer is giving, but that personal opinion is harmful to the perception of public safety, and I would love for that to not be okay.
ECB: Is your opponent stirring up that fear? That seems to be what you’re suggesting.
NJ: Well, I think she’s afraid. I’m like, have you ever walked down that Lake City at night? I’m not afraid. I would walk home from here (on Lake City Way). I don’t know if she means to, or that’s what she’s hearing. But that’s clearly the perception she had of Lake City.
ECB: Do you think the surveillance cameras and other strategies that the city is currently using on Aurora, like the Stay Out of Areas of Prostitution (SOAP) zone, are working?
NJ: We know SOAP and SODA [Stay Out of Drug Areas] aren’t working because you’re asking me about it, and this is the second time we’ve implemented them. I think they also require pretty intensive police staffing, and we hear a lot about our lack of staffing.
The cameras are not working. We just had that shooting at the gas station [at Denny Way and Broad Street]. The CCTV cameras were right there. Didn’t seem to make a difference. There were over 40 shots fired right there, and I do worry. Because I work on democracy, I’m like, governments change, your leaders change. Okay, you like this mayor’s opinion on the cameras. What’s the next mayor’s opinion?
I don’t think there’s not a lot of data that shows that cameras particularly prevent crime. I think the goal is addressing the root causes. But if we’re going to have them, we should have a lot more data privacy provisions over them and check who’s asking for the [footage]. And I feel like our federal situation doesn’t give confidence. Why would we do this right now?
ECB: If you are elected, there will be a five-four progressive majority on some issue. I know you said whether to have and expand the camera program is up to the mayor, but it’s also up to the council, and councils change, too
NJ: I’ve been surprised, because it’s not actually that popular at the doors. I think that people are afraid and just want things to work, and they’re being told that this tool will work. We live a city without community violence interrupters funded at the level they should be. We don’t have them on the north end, and s people are latching on to tools, hoping they’ll work. And I think the cameras may become less popular as people are like, “Well, they didn’t work.” And I think what we need is to say, here are the tools that work. This is what worked in Baltimore. This is what worked in Boston. Instead of just shortcuts.
ECB: What is your strategy for improving public safety Aurora, if it’s not SOAP zones and cameras? I’ve heard you mentino the difference between street design on Aurora in Shoreline versus Seattle.
NJ: We haven’t had a briefing on Aurora in the [council] transportation committee, despite having $50 million from the state legislature. Meanwhile, Shoreline is up there saying “the number one thing we did is environmental design.” That money has to be spent by 2029. If they’re struggling to spend that money or need more help or more money or whatever it is, why don’t they ask the [state legislative] delegation for that help? And so, you have Aurora Reimagined Coalition that has done quite a lot of work, has developed a lot of relationships. They’re asking for all this help, and it’s like, how many walks are you going to go with this group and not initiate anything? Especially when Shoreline says that’s the number one thing they did that improved things there.
ECB: What are community violence interrupters doing in the south end that you think they could be doing here?
JK: They’re in the schools. They’re going to the hospital bedside, and saying “don’t retaliate.” I don’t know how effective they’re being on the south end. I think we don’t fund them consistently enough that you can get data. This is also a thing in Seattle: “Here you go. You got your year. Now what?” That’s not how this works. This is not a one year at a time, one chunk at a time thing. It needs robust investment.
I have two teenagers myself. This age group needs help. They went through this pandemic and now you can print ghost guns, and it’s a lot of young people doing the shooting. Drugs are available on social media. It’s a different world.
ECB: The city has largely focused on what’s happening on Aurora as criminal activity and addressing it with police-oriented approaches, but there’s never much funding for women and girls in the sex trade who are victims of violence, exploitation, and trafficking.
NJ: I’ve talked to a number of sex workers in the last few weeks, and their big ask is making sure that there’s housing available for people, especially domestic violence victims. I think the other part is there’s no safe exit, especially for children—a place where you can take somebody being trafficked as a child to give them the help and resources they need, and also job training or whatever they need to exit. For the women, it’s not that different. It’s just that they have more agency. I don’t think there are 12- and 14-year-olds that you know are choosing this as work. So for me, making sure that we get a shelter for minors is a top priority, and also funding people who are working [with women] on the street itself, who have those relationships
And then one very explicit ask was a shelter that’s 24/7. They’re like, if something happens Friday at 11 p.m. there’s nowhere to go until, like, 9 am on Monday morning. Also, a lot of shelters won’t often take in someone if they think they’re a sex worker.
And then decriminalization is pretty important. That’s come up over and over again, so that if they do want to call the police, they feel safe. They said there are police officers taking advantage of that power dynamic. They’re the ones that are like standing there on the street, often in the direct line of fire, that could give provide [police] a lot of information, and they’re like, “I don’t feel safe doing that because I can’t talk about my job.”
One thing I have found and have been really kind of impressed by is that Aurora neighbors are pretty understanding of the situation. Part of what’s traumatizing them is seeing, like, 15-year-old girls running into their yards.People soliciting children on their way to school is unacceptable. That is a thing that is happening, and that is disgusting. And also for drugs. And so the safe passages that they have on the south end, I’d love that on the north end, around Robert Eagle Staff [Middle School] and Ingraham [High School].
ECB: Let’s switch gears a bit and talk about upzoning and Pinehurst Station. Do you support the proposed upzone, or do you want it to go further? And what should the city going to do about Jackson Park Golf Course [which takes up 160 acres adjacent to the new light rail station]?
NJ: Yes, I support the upzone. We need a lot of housing around a light rail station. Transit-oriented development is really important, and there’s a lot of speculation around that area, which is why a publicly owned golf course is maybe not the best use of land. It’s a nine- and an 18-hole, and we should have a community conversation around, what is the best use of this land. Should it be just one nine-hole golf course?
PubliCola is supported entirely by readers like you. CLICK BELOW to become a one-time or monthly contributor.
ECB: You’ve also mentioned the idea of creating a new business improvement area—a taxing district to pay for business assistance. How would that work?
NJ: The University District has a very big employer. Downtown has very big employers. But how do we make it such that smaller areas that are struggling can also be supported? Is there a progressive revenue tax that the entire business community, instead of just big business, can support small businesses so that like Lake City or any other small communities across the city can be supported too?. Because we have a new business group, the Lake City Business Alliance, here, and they’ve struggled. They’ve tried for a very long time to create a BIA. There’s no reason that we shouldn’t be supported too.
ECB: What kind of support do smaller business areas like Lake City need?
NJ: Maybe technical assistance, or help with permits. Ambassadors just helping clean the street up. I don’t know that a volunteer should be watering our flower baskets. It could be a grant that an area can apply for. What Lake City needs as support is different from what Aurora needs as support. It’s different from what Maple Leaf needs as support. It’s different from what businesses just down the street at 35th and 95th need for support. Just some way to do a small business support system that doesn’t require you to have the university or Amazon as your [anchor] employer.
We had Seattle Restored [the storefront business investment program] come here. We had a salsa place open and then move to Ravenna. We had the romance bookstore open and then move away. How do we make it so that they actually stay here? Because it doesn’t feel good, as someone that lives a 15-20 minute walk from here, that we get to do this little pilot and then it leaves and helps another area thrive.
ECB: It feels like progressive taxation is not very popular right now.
NJ: Yeah, which makes no sense when our taxes are the 49th most regressive [in the nation]. One thing I’ve talked about is an AI token tax. You talk to anybody that works in this industry, and they’re like, “I had 10 agents fighting 10 agents for me at work and I ran out of tokens today.” I’m sitting listening to conversations, and they all know how many tokens they use. It’s a literally a line item for them. And the climate impact of you having 10 agents fighting 10 agents using up all your tokens today—I want you to think about it. And maybe it should pay for a BIA like I’m describing, or a community violence interruption fund. Something that a lot of people would like and think it’s worth the investment.
ECB: The problem seems to be that it just gets turned into a slush fund—like JumpStart.
NJ: That’s what we don’t want, and honestly, that is an erosion of democracy, and that is an erosion of public trust, and that can’t happen. It makes people say, I was promised one thing, and you made it [pay for] something else. That is a violation of public trust. That has got to stop.
ECB: We’ve talked about a lot of things, but is there anything you wanted to discuss that I didn’t ask you about?
NJ: I feel like District 5 just has been left behind. Like even—no offense—the reporting. It just feels like we’re just a forgotten land up here. [Former city councilmember] Sara Nelson came here and said, “I didn’t even know your Fred Meyer was closing.” ReWA up here is the most diverse preschool, I believe, in the whole city now. We speak some of the most languages in the whole city up here. It makes me very angry that an election season starts, and that’s when all of a sudden, Lake City and Aurora are now these places that matter. I’m like, I don’t think you actually care. I do not think any of you care. You do not come here and spend your money.
It’s not easy to get here. Even our 911 response times are slower. We have a third of the affordable housing in District Five now, and we’re not getting a third of the funding. And then they’re like, “How come you’re struggling?” I don’t need Clorox. I need funding. I need support. I need to address crime and poverty, We’re treated like this forgotten land that people don’t come to spend money or support, and then say, “What went wrong there?” What went wrong was your lack of investment. That’s what went wrong, and don’t blame us for that.
This year, voters in North Seattle will be choosing a councilmember to replace former District 5 councilmember Cathy Moore, who quit a year and a half into her four-year term. The district has lacked an elected councilmember for an unusually long time thanks to the timing of Moore’s resignation, which came just a few days too late for the city to schedule a special election for the district. As a result, former councilmember Debora Juarez has served as Moore’s city council-appointed replacement since mid-2024.
North Seattle’s choices in this long-awaited election are FairVote Washington political director Nilu Jenks, a second-time candidate for this position, and longtime university educator Julie Kang. Seattle Nice, the podcast co-hosted by me, political consultant Sandeep Kaushik, and longtime radio journalist David Hyde, will be hosting a live debate between the two candidates at the not-quite-in-D5 National Nordic Museum at 6:00 tomorrow, October 21; if you can’t make it, we’ll be publishing the whole debate on our podcast the following day. Election Day is November 3, but please vote early if you vote by mail, or drop your last-minute ballot in your nearest drop box before 8pm on November 3!
Julie Kang is a first-generation immigrant who grew up in Los Angeles, came to Seattle as a PhD student at the University of Washington, and has worked for UW, Seattle University, and Seattle Public Schools as a teacher and administrator overseeing professional development for decades.
Kang also co-founded a bank serving Korean American clients, Pacific International Bank, in 2001, to make it easier for immigrants rejected by traditional banks to access capital. The bank merged with a larger institution in 2013 after a series of headline-grabbing financial controversies.
“A lotoftheboardmemberswithdeeppockets didnotwanttocontributemore,andthatwasoneofthereasons” for the financial crisis at the bank, Kang said. “Andso,bydefault,astheonlywoman andtheonlybilingualboardmember,they said, youfigureoutasolution.” Kang said her mother used BBCN Bank in California, “and I know they were interested in coming up” to Seattle, so she managed the merger. Kang is no long affiliated with the bank.
Kang has lived in North Seattle for about 30 years; she’s endorsed by the Seattle Times, former councilmember Sara Nelson, and current Councilmembers Bob Kettle and Maritza Rivera and Council President Joy Hollingsworth.
Our interview, conducted last week at Pilgrim Coffee just off Aurora, has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
PubliCola (ECB): The mayor just put out a budget that you have said was pretty fiscally responsible.
Julie Kang (JK): Yes—the fact that we have not only closed [the deficit] but also anticipating that we’re not going to keep asking for these one-time things.
I believe that we need to have right amount of first responders to respond in a timely manner. So the fact that [Wilson] decided to add 66 [officers through 2027], I was like, okay, that could be the number. But I also want to make sure everybody understands that even though North Seattle’s District Five is made up of about 100,000 people, the reality is we have 250,000 people during the day. So when we have first responder calls, we need to account for that. At our Northwest Hospital, we have beds and facilities for 70 emergency visitors a day, and now they’re getting more than 130—that’s almost double. We need to think about that. When we have so many of the permanent and supportive housing [buildings], that requires 1.4 times more firefighters. This allocation of first responders based on the number of residents may not be the right approach.
ECB: Let’s talk about Aurora. Both you and your opponent, I think, believe that public spaces around Aurora need to be safer, particularly when it comes to sex trafficking and gun violence. Beyond more police or surveillance cameras, what’s your public safety plan for Aurora?
JK: We really can’t afford to have more police for everything, right? The CARE Team, when there’s behavioral wellness checks, I think they should be able to go and do those things. That’s what they’re supposed to do. And I know that there’s all of the contract issues—that sometimes because there is a possibility of a weapon or you know they’re armed, officers have to go first. But I think we need clear rules and responsibility. We got to get them to the table and have that conversation.
But what I have committed to is I want to be physically present. I want to sit at my district office. And when people think about a district office, is it fancy? Is it expensive? No. We have so many storefronts. I’m already [upstairs at] the Lake City Library at least once a week. I just need to be present because District Five hasn’t seen their council members, haven’t had the emails or phone calls returned. And how do I know? Because I’m the one who’s been the squeaky wheel, emailing behalf of my elderly neighbor, or the young, busy people who don’t have the time to always use the [Find It Fix It] app, right? So I think that establishing trust in the government, it’s important. And for me, that’s showing up. That’s the first step. So I want to set up my district office. And people have said [mimicking fear] “Oh, Aurora,” and I remind them, I lived here for 10 years. I have faith, and I know that I’ve come this far. I am gonna be fine. I grew up crossing through MacArthur Park [in LA] every day to get to the library,
ECB: Do you think they’re working to reduce gun violence?
JK: No, they’re not working. Well, it’s quieted down a little bit, but if you walk two blocks over, it has shifted. And if you go in the morning, you can see the foils, the condom wrappers, the needles. Those are not things that our children should be seeing. We’re normalizing this behavior. So I think a lot of my advocacy work comes from the seven-year-old, 10-year-old Julie, who did not have a choice but to go through MacArthur Park to get to the library at the end. You know, as a latchkey kid, there was no other options. But we’re in 2026, and we are still fighting, and our daughter, 22 years old now, born and raised in North Seattle—we had to have those discussions. Why can’t we enforce the laws that we have? As soon as you get over to 145th to Shoreline, why is it that their streets are clean and people understand that there are rules and we’re not going to be permissive about violent crimes?
ECB:. My understanding is that they invested quite a bit of money in improving the street design to make it safer, and Seattle has not done something similar.
JK: Even in speaking with [King County Prosector] Leesa Manion extensively, she always reminds me she’s the same King County prosecuting attorney for other places where things are working. So again, if you were here 24/7, you would understand the urgency. Aurora is in a state of emergency, and we have put a few Band-Aids here and there, but we haven’t gotten to the root of the issue.
We want to protect the victims and we want to be able to provide the mental care or the housing and all of the services that we need, right? But we should go after the johns and the pimps. I know [City Attorney Erica Evans has continued to point out that there’s over 5,000 cases [backlogged]. But I also know that there’s a little bit of disconnect between the King County and the city.
So when I changed my position on [surveillance] cameras, it’s because as a naturalized U.S. citizen, and I am also serving on the King County Immigration Commission, and we didn’t know how that information was used. Of course, surveillance—you know, I don’t want it either. But I talked to a lot of the people, including the 50 blocks of neighbors and Councilmember Kettle, and spoke with the North [SPD] Precinct and did a ridealong. And I know that nothing is 100 percent safe, but at least there are safeguards and some things that we’re doing about retention that are in place. I’m not saying it’s perfect. I thought, well, if the community most impacted wants it, let’s use it, but we can’t just use that. [alone] It’s only a tool, right?
ECB: Have you seen evidence that the cameras are working?
JK: Well, this morning when they talked about the shooting last night, at least there was a little bit of the footage from the shooting, [Editor’s note: The footage was from business surveillance cameras, not city-operated CCTV.] And again, you can have all the footage you want, but it’s what you do with it. But if you don’t have the footage, my understanding is that you can’t even open up a case. So we need evidence. And it’s interesting that we’re relying on neighbors and other people to have evidence. And I recently heard somebody says, “Oh, you can plug in your business camera to the police camera [system]. And I just thought, “Wow, we are now asking our business owners to take on that responsibility.”
ECB: A big concern for surveillance opponents is the possibility that ICE could get access. They just need to file a subpoena. And there’s a lot of faith being put in this into Axon, the company that provides Seattle’s surveillance cameras, to do the right thing and not share this footage with bad actors. I think those are legitimate concerns.
JK: That’s true, and that’s the risk. That’s why when I spoke with people who are against cameras and I proposed, what if we built our own system, they said, actually, they could live with that. So again, let’s not continue to have this fear get in the way of what our neighbors, our constituents are feeling. And if we already have the cameras on, and we’re able to maintain the terms of the contract that say long the footage can be on our servers, by the time you get a subpoena, you know, maybe [the footage will] be gone. And my understanding is we don’t keep anything unless it’s in an active investigation.
How long have we had it since all of the ICE stuff? I’ve been going to Common Power to create whistle kids since last November. It’s been over a year, right? And we also know that that’s not working perfectly because our neighbors continue to get taken at Home Depot, Lowe’s, and in our neighborhoods.
ECB: Going back to Aurora for a sec: The city hasn’t funded a lot of resources for women wanting to leave the sex trade or escape trafficking. Do you have a plan to help the women and girls working in parking lots on Aurora?
JK: We have Aurora Commons, which is one of the few resources up in North Seattle. And Liz [Vivien], the ED, you know, told me yes, they’re able to provide the OB/GYN care with the UW hospital. But if we happen to have somebody who steps up and say, “I want to get out of this business,” she doesn’t have shelters she can refer them to. We should be able to say, Julie came in for service. She needs housing. She needs the mental health [services]. She needs X, Y, and Z. And our case managers should be able to make sure that we are following through and delivering services. And I’m doing to make sure that when we advocate for funding, I want us to be connected to the outcomes and the return on investment. I think we have been compassionate, but if we’re compassionate without accountability, we’re just investing more and more. And I think that’s where the fatigue comes.
ECB: I hear “we need more accountability for spending” from candidates every year, and I often wonder what that is supposed to look like. Because we do have audits, we do have staff that review the budget, we have an entire budget office that looks at how money is being spent. What additional accountability are you looking for?
JK: But Erica, you also know that a lot of audits have been incomplete and are still pending. For me, that’s not acceptable. And again, going back to my university budget experience, being a project manager is when we develop a program, we review it on a quarterly basis, and we also measure that against the outcomes, the deliverables. I think on the council we also need somebody with that level of expertise. So, if we have that oversight and accountability, I don’t think we’re going to lose money or have some of the challenges that we’ve had.
ECB: Your opponent has said that District 5 needs to have community violence interrupters like the ones working in South Seattle, and also that the city should invest more in putting CARE Team members up here. How do you think your approach differs from hers when it comes to, not just Aurora, but public safety in North Seattle generally?
JK: In terms of prevention, there’s so much that could be done, even with our two high schools and two middle schools. And not only as a mother but as a teacher, I’m already working with the principals on safe routes to schools. I’m asking, how did a 15-year-old [at Ingraham] get access to a gun? Where did that come from? And did that student have at least one person that they could confide in? So I want to make sure we focus on a lot of the interventions in schools and in community centers. I think that’s, again, where me showing up and having the years of experience mentoring students, and mostly students of color, is going to be a benefit.
We’ve also heard from the community meeting that happened on Aurora Commons when the mom said, “My daughters are being approached with lots of cash.” The community leaders are already trying to do so much, but most of these meetings—actually all of the meetings that I’ve gone to, the people who are the decision makers, the elected officials, they are not there. There’s so much that could be accomplished by attending, listening, and activating the leaders who already come with a lot of the lived experience and solutions based on those experiences.
PubliCola is supported entirely by readers like you. CLICK BELOW to become a one-time or monthly contributor.
ECB: Speaking of students, are you supporting or opposing the two statewide initiatives—the one banning trans girls from girls’ sports and the one that allows parents to see their kids’ school counseling notes?
JK: As teachers, we think it’s important for all children to be welcome and included, and any act of harm or hate is unacceptable. That said, I think parents have made some comments, and the students also have voiced their comments. So, for me, again, it’s listening to the constituents and the people,
ECB: But do you support the initiatives or oppose them?
JK: So, at this time, as much as I respect everybody’s identity, I just want kids to play sports. I don’t know if we need to go and do biological testing to see where they stand.
ECB: The other initiative would essentially give parents the right to see any notes that were taken about confidential conversations they had with adults at school.
JK: Right now, there’s already that protection for the kids after 13. [Editor’s note: Kids 13 and over have the right to obtain confidential mental health care in Washington state, but this does not apply to school counseling.] I understand there’s some arguments about if every kid is able to make those decisions. But I’m gonna go with supporting the kids. [Editor’s note: After our conversation, Kang reached out to clarify that she opposes both initiatives].
ECB: Do you support the proposed comprehensive plan rezone around the new Pinehurst light rail station, which has been delayed by appeals, and would you change it in any way?
JK: Right now, neighbors are in limbo about what is happening with their housing. We expect 90 percent of riders to get there using other modes of transportation. But the reality is, they’re saying, “My front yard is becoming a parking lot.”
I definitely support that we should do density. But before we get there, you also know that we lost power multiple times, right? So we know our electric grids, our sewer systems, all of the infrastructure is also outdated. I want to make sure we take care of those infrastructures before we keep building more units, because losing power is something that the people who are already there and have been neighbors for a long time are negatively impacted by. People are losing their precious groceries. It’s $100, $150 to fill up your grocery cart, if that. So I want to make sure that we grow the community with the infrastructure and make sure that we are taking care of the sidewalks, because walkability is huge if you’re going walk to the station. And right now we have some areas that are very disconnected.
ECB: Do you support Mandatory Housing Affordability, which encourages growth in some former single-family areas?
JK: I’m actually happy with Councilmember Foster’s plan to give some relief, because what I have learned is we are missing so much revenue that was generated through the permits, creating workforce jobs for builders and plumbers. When I think about quick permitting, it’s not that we lessen the requirements, but right now that sequential model, I just don’t understand. So I think we have to look at the whole system and break it into chunks where we can have predictability. Because anytime they’re waiting for a permit, that’s lost opportunities.
ECB: The city plans to revamp the whole MHA system in the next couple of years. What do you think needs to change about the program?
JK: Well, right now I think we have to incentivize builders to build and build the right kind of housing. It doesn’t make sense if you have one lot, and you want to build eight different million-dollar tiny homes, because I think then we are going to compromise some of those mature trees that I also love. So maybe we can be creative about creating a fourplex. Everybody wants to not have their shared walls, but I also think being able to look into your neighbor’s living room with those small spaces—I’m not sure if that’s the right thing. And in LA, we had a lot of fourplexes, triplexes, and that’s how we were able to even afford our first home, because we could live in one and rent out the others and make the mortgage. So I think we have to be more creative in working with you architects who are thinking about protecting the green space and being able to build in a way that meets our neighbors’ needs.
I mean, we are number four in terms of the city rankings, and when I talk to people, it’s because of the beautiful green space, and I think that makes Seattle Seattle. And if we are going to continue to build and get rid of these 100-year-old mature trees that are healthy, I think we are not thinking about our next generation. I mean, we think about climate change. We think about all of the positive things from trees. And yet when we keep saying we’re going to just build, build, build, I don’t think that is the right answer for the next generation.
During last week’s city council budget hearings, Ballard council member Dan Strauss channelled a business owner in his district to give a speech criticizing Mayor Wilson. There’s an encampment in front of the business, Strauss said, leading to this dais grandstand: “Wehaveseeninthislastyear,sincelastOctober,acompletechangeinthecityandhoweffectivelythecityisaddressinghomelessness.”
He continued: “I have a business in downtown Ballard that had an encampment in front of their business last October and .. it wasn’t moved until, I believe, March. And that person reported to me that they have had an encampment on one of the four blocks around their business—and it’s a small block—270 days out of the last 365 days.” This demonstrated, Strauss said, that “just the ability to interact with and work with people has changed from a three-week cycle to a three-plus-month cycle”.
What Strauss’ (and his constituent’s) sidewalk tent example actually shows is not that we need more sweeps, but the opposite: Sweeps don’t work. They simply push homeless people around the city. Logically enough, in the context of an ongoing, active sweeps campaign, an encampment has now landed on this particular doorstep. Sweeping the people living in that encampment to another part of Ballard just means that a different business will eventually end up in Strauss’ ear.
Consider: Wilson is actually doing more sweeps than her tough-love predecessor, Bruce Harrell. According to the UCT’s own records, they’ve done more than 150 full encampment removals this year, compared to 112 by this point in Harrell’s term. According to the UCT’s “site journals,” the team rarely connects encampment residents to shelter.
Complaining about a homeless encampment in front of a business as an argument for more sweeps—when the people at that encampment were likely swept there in the first place—reminds me of the illogical days when neighbors argued against upzones on the grounds that they would make housing more expensive even as housing prices were skyrocketing under the strict Seattle zoning that prevented building more housing.
Seattle Home Listings Increase > Home Listings Increase in All Other Metro Areas
This brings me to the post-single-family-zoning-only Seattle housing market. According to Zillow data for September 2026, Seattle has the biggest percentage increase in home listings for US metro areas. Seattle’s current 14,877 listing represented a 20.3% increase from September 2025.
With housing prices dropping 1.1% month over month and 2.2% year over year, Seattle is a buyer’s market right now.
Rents, by the way, dropped .2% in September and ticked up only minimally, and far below inflation, at 1.8% year over year with typical rent at $2,250.
PubliCola is supported entirely by readers like you. CLICK BELOW to become a one-time or monthly contributor.
As I’ve noted before in this column, I’m frustrated with Mayor Wilson’s approach to reviving Seattle’s business climate. Following the recommendations of a report her Office of Economic Development commissioned, the mayor seems focused on prompting more tech-adjacent startups as opposed to girding existing small businesses. The thinking goes that tech businesses have a disproportionately positive impact on jobs and the local economy. But my thinking is that indie businesses, just like childcare and affordable housing, are prerequisites for economic growth. Indie small businesses, for example, bring the crowds and lines that make cities vibrant. Lines around the block at clubs are a public policy win for a city.
I’ve been asking managers at bars and shops lately what the city could do for them right now. One thing I’m consistently hearing has to do with the costs of repairs and infrastructure upgrades—how those costs, often related to city inspections, can be debilitating. One manager, who recently oversaw the closure of a longtime North Seattle business (and still manages a couple more across the city), gave a specific example about graffiti, reporting that the cost of repeatedly cleaning up the graffiti —as the city requires—became onerous for the neighborhood bar that closed.
I’m not convinced graffiti cleanup could sink a healthy business, nor do I think the city’s fixation on graffiti —particularly under Mayor Harrell, who actually funded anti-graffiti education for kids—is discerning policy. But I took this bar manager’s request for city support in earnest—and, lo and behold, it turns out Wilson’s budget cuts $950,000 for a program that helps private business owners clean up graffiti on their buildings.
As a council Central Staff memo put it, “The proposed budget would not continue funding for these services and [Seattle Parks & Recreation’s] ability to offer private property owners graffiti abatement services would be significantly impacted.”
I tend to filter the business-lens on local politics with skepticism, but as a Wilson fan I must say, when the bad-mood example from a bar manager tracks so succinctly with Wilson’s new budget, the mayor’s got a problem. I’m not saying reinstating a graffiti cleanup contract is the answer. I’m saying Wilson’s angle on what’s ailing Seattle’s economy has the wrong emphasis.
First things first: We’re hosting a City Council debate! Come to the National Nordic Museum (2655 NW Market St.) to hear from the candidates for City Council in North Seattle’s District 5, Julie Kang and Nilu Jenks. (PubliCola will be running interviews with both candidates, conducted last week, before the debate). The outcome of this election will impact the balance of votes on the council, so it matters to the entire city. Hope to see you there!
Danny Westneat’s latest column for the Seattle Times condemned a proposed sales tax increase of of 0.01 percent, claiming the (maximum) $10 million it could bring in annually amounted to a “blank check” for the county to fritter away on… whatever, we guess. In fact, the county will adopt a spending plan for the money as part of its budget process, and has identified half-dozen specific youth and family homelessness programs to receive the money. That’s not the only thing Westneat got wrong in his column, as we learned from doing some basic reporting.
In this week’s column, Josh Feit considers what it will mean if progressive Nilu Jenks wins the D5 council election, praises SDOT’s decision to (finally) charge for parking in one West Seattle neighborhood, and has praise for Metro’s workhorse Route 7, which King County is planning to eliminate and replace with a RapidRide with far fewer stops.
Councilmembers who opposed Katie Wilson’s election as mayor can’t help themselves, it seems: They’re claiming her proposed budget defunds (or as Bob Kettle puts it, “unfunds”) the police department, encampment sweeps team, and graffiti removal efforts. They also seemed caught off guard by budget problems plaguing SDOT, despite their own adoption of a budget last year that included a large and growing deficit at the department.
Turning Point, the consultant hired to reconcile the King County Regional Homelessness Authority’s budget after a forensic audit found widespread irregularities earlier this year, discovered a nearly $17 million net deficit in the agency’s accounts, the result of excessive administrative spending on staff and the implementation of SalesForce to manage homeless services grants. The money (which includes growing interest on the KCRHA’s massive negative bank balance) will have to be paid, somehow, by the city and county, the agency’s primary funders.
A week of all-day budget meetings included more convoluted Wilson-bashing, as Rob Saka came out against Wilson’s proposal to add more of the same kind of public restrooms Saka added funding for last year, and Dan Strauss accused the mayor of being “uncomfortable” addressing homelessness after she proposed moving the city’s encampment response team back to the Human Services Department, rather than keeping it under her direct control.
And, earlier in the week, Councilmember Alexis Mercedes Rinck proposed adding $8 million to the budget for organizations that help survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and trafficking. HR1, Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” drastically cuts funding for these services.
Former Councilmember Nelson’s new group, Seafor, promises to keep its donors’ identities “private,” funneling money to elections through political action committees that will only show Seafor as the donor. They’re doing a “test run” with Julie Kang, funding a PAC that is spending $30,000 on her behalf. Except—oops—you aren’t actually allowed to conceal the source of campaign funding in this way. A progressive group has filed two complaints against Seafor and its affiliated “news” website, CivicTide.
Seattle police lieutenant Matthew Didier, who was caught on tape encouraging officers to go hard on people protesting a far-right anti-trans rally at Cal Anderson Park, will get a slap-on-the-wrist written reprimand for his actions. Interim police chief Andre Sayles said a critical review of the incident earlier this year “made clear that our department did not understand the depth of concern within the LGBTQ+ community before this event.”
Also this week: I was a guest on CityCast Seattle, where we discussed Rinck’s “Seattle Stands With Survivors” budget proposal, a recent lawsuit filed by a woman who said the University of Washington failed to protect her from the frat member who raped her, Saka’s bizarre 180 on public restroom funding, and our favorite pizza places in Seattle (shout out to Dantini!)
Matthew Didier, the Seattle police lieutenant who was caught on body camera footage encouraging his fellow officers to “fuck people up” at a counterprotest during the far-right “Mayday USA” rally in Cal Anderson Park last year, has received a written reprimand for his actions that day. Didier’s statements to his fellow officers, who he said would be “going in with guns blazing” and were “here to fuck people up now,” have made him a symbol of police intolerance to the city’s LGBTQ+ community, which turned out to protest the anti-trans event held, provocatively, in the middle of Seattle’s historic LGBTQ+ neighborhood.
PubliCola broke the story about on the light disciplinary decision, made by interim Police Chief Andre Sayles, on Bluesky Friday afternoon.
The video of Didier’s directives went viral earlier this year.
“We are about to do some fucking work, but we’re going in this time with guns blazing and all our pieces in place. We we we are past talking to people. We’re here to fuck people up now,” Didier can be heard saying in the footage. “We’re done with these guys doing this shit. They’ve pushed the envelope, and now they’re going to get the full fucking deal.”
Officers responded violently to the counterprotests. During the event, police used pepper spray and other “less lethal” weapons against demonstrators, throwing many to the ground and arresting 23 people. SPD officers also used bike rack-style barricades to prevent protesters from entering the rally area and arrested people for pushing against or knocking over barricades that had been linked together and placed at the top of a hill.
On Friday night, Interim police chief Andre Sayles issued a statement saying he followed SPD’s principle of “progressive discipline” in issuing a written reprimand to Didier. Sayles noted that Didier had only “minor prior disciplinary history” and that his decision fell “within the range” of what the Office of Police Accountability recommended.
In Seattle, complaints about police officers, except the police chief, go through OPA, a semi-independent body (it’s housed in the police department) that reviews each complaint. If OPA decides a complaint is warranted, it will sustain the complaint and recommend discipline to the chief, who ultimately makes the call.
According to the closed case summary for thje investigation, OPA found that Didier had acted in an “unprofessional, escalatory, and disrespectful” manner.
Didier’s “statement appeared to reflect an intent to use impermissible force against the counter protesters. Such a viewpoint undermines public trust in [Didier] and SPD because it erodes the legitimacy of SPD’s objective to uphold every individual’s constitutional rights and created an impression that [Didier] viewed the purpose of officers being ‘here’ was to “fuck people up.”
The OPA recommended light discipline for Didier, ranging from an oral reprimand to two days’ suspension.
DivestSPD reported that there had been sustained findings in the case last month.
In a statement to PubliCola, SPD cited mitigating factors for the decision to give Didier a slap on the wrist, noting that he “voluntarily participated in the Sentinel Event Review. The employee was forthcoming and engaged with community panelists. The employee accepted responsibility and willingness to learn from their actions,” an SPD spokesperson said.
PubliCola is supported entirely by readers like you. CLICK BELOW to become a one-time or monthly contributor.
However, the investigation shows that Didier made many excuses for his behavior and statements, including short staffing at SPD, the fact that officers were called to police the counterprotest on short notice, and a supposed incident from 2020 when, according to OPA’s summary of Didier’s explanation for his actions, “officers had to stand in line, observe crimes, and take no action.”
In his statement, Sayles said the sentinel review “made clear that our department did not understand the depth of concern within the LGBTQ+ community before this event, and that our actions that day damaged trust. I accept that finding.”
“We have already begun this work, and we will continue it. That includes acting on the OIG’s recommendations, strengthening our crowd management practices, expanding the work of our LGBTQ+ liaison and advisory council, and engaging directly with community organizations before — not after — events that affect them.”
Last December, Sayles filed a sweeping OPA complaint against a longtime officer who spoke, with SPD’s permission, at a rally against two anti-LGBTQ initiatives. In the complaint, Sayles said he believed the officer was spreading “inaccurate and untrue things” about the initiatives. (The first initiative would ban trans girls from playing children’s sports; the second would give parents access to all notes about conversations their kids had with trusted adults at school.) The source of Sayles’ information, it would turn out, was right-wing podcaster Brandi Kruse, who ran an online campaign to get the officer fired. Kruse volunteers and raises money for the campaign behind the two initiatives.
The OPA dismissed two other complaints against Didier—one alleging he and other officers failed to use de-escalation tactics, and one saying he targeted a protester because of their political views or perceived LGBTQ+ status. “SPD officers, including [Didier], were on site to support everyone’s rights to free speech and peaceably assemble, enforce the law, preserve order, protect people, and preserve property,” the OPA report says.
A “Sentinel Review” of SPD’s response to the counterprotest, conducted by the city’s independent Office of the Inspector General, concluded that SPD officers demonstrated a bias against counter-protesters who showed up to demonstrate against the right-wing event, referring to protesters as “transtifa” and assuming “that the rally organizers represented no real threat, while assuming that “‘black bloc’ and ‘antifa’ are established, hierarchical organizations intent on inciting disorder and criminal activity.”
Mayor Katie Wilson said in a statement: “Like many people in Seattle, I was disturbed to see what occurred at the protests at Cal Anderson in 2025. I’ve spoken with Interim Chief Sayles to understand the disciplinary measures taken in this incident. It is the role of the Seattle Police Department to serve and protect the people of Seattle, and to do so with respect, dignity, care, and consideration— especially for our most vulnerable community members. I will continue to work with the leadership of SPD to ensure that the culture of the department fully reflects and upholds my expectations and this commitment.”
Donate to The C Is for Crank's Laptop Retirement Fund
My computer is the single most important piece of equipment I own, and for much of the last five years, I’ve relied on my trusty 2015 MacBook Pro to write and edit posts, tweet up a storm from public meetings, file public records requests, edit transcripts and photos, and generally keep The C Is for Crank in operation. Now it’s time to retire my old machine and trade it in for a newer model.
I’d really appreciate any help my readers are willing to provide to help me defray the cost of this critical piece of office equipment. A new, faster machine (not to mention one without—ahem—an ever-so-slightly cracked screen) will make it easier to bring The C Is for Crank to you every day. My back will also be grateful as I rush from candidate debate to city council meeting to coffee shop back to City Hall. I accept contributions via Venmo (Erica-Barnett-7), Paypal, and by check at the address on my Support page. Thank you so much for your support!
