By Erica C. Barnett
New Councilmember Cathy Moore demonstrated an alarming intolerance for Seattle’s long tradition of noisy protest by demanding that police arrest a group of demonstrators for being too loud and making her “feel threatened” at a council meeting Tuesday afternoon.
The demonstrators showed up to demand that the council cut police department spending to pay for housing for immigrants and refugees living in Tukwila, where the need for shelter and housing has been (literally) overwhelming.
Council president Sara Nelson started the meeting on a sour note by suggesting that the demonstrators were “exploiting vulnerable people for their own political ends”—suggesting, in so many words, that they were only pretending to care about homeless refugees because it helped them advance an unrelated anti-police, anti-sweeps agenda. (Those who were allowed to speak noted that in their view, these issues are all related). Compounding the insult, Nelson limited public comment to 20 minutes, telling the group they ought to be taking their grievances to King County and the state, which play a more direct role in responding to the refugee crisis.
Council rules limit public comment to topics on the agenda and issues within the purview of a council committee, so Nelson was technically within her right to cut off comments. In recent years, however, the council has generally not enforced this rule, tacitly acknowledging that it’s better to let people say what they have to say than shut down speech.
PubliCola is supported entirely by readers like you.
CLICK BELOW to become a one-time or monthly contributor.
Nelson’s unforced error set the tone for the rest of the afternoon. After pulling the council into recess twice, she had security clear the room; when six people refused to leave, police arrested them for trespassing and booked them into the downtown jail. Legal? Almost certainly. Ill-advised? 100 percent. Seattle has a history of protest and civil disobedience that stretches back decades; if an elected official’s first reaction when people shout and disrupt a meeting is to kick them out and call the police, that says a lot about what they think of that culture and history.
“It is not appropriate” for protesters to be disruptive, Moore, a former King County Superior Court judge, continued. “We need to make sure that this does not happen going forward. We are shutting down the operations of a democracy because of a mob action. It is not to be tolerated.”
Which brings us back to Moore.
With the chamber emptied, the council reconvened to discuss a resolution honoring the state’s first Black senator, George Fleming. From outside the locked council chambers, demonstrators continued to yell, and several banged on the glass chamber walls, prompting Moore to interrupt the proceedings to say she felt “physically threatened” by the protesters outside.
Invoking the image of a “mob” storming the room and physically attacking the council, Moore said, “Our physical safety is being threatened by the actions of the demonstrators outside, banging on the windows, which could easily get broken and we will have a mob scene. I’m asking for police presence to arrest those individuals.”
When Nelson, belatedly trying to deescalate the situation, pointed out that arresting people for protesting would require “several steps”—”I appreciate that it’s very loud”—Moore interrupted, insisting, “It’s more than loud. It is a physical threat to the safety of each of us on this council and it is a threat to the operation of the civic institution.”
“It is not appropriate” for protesters to be disruptive, Moore, a former King County Superior Court judge, continued. “We need to make sure that this does not happen going forward. We are shutting down the operations of a democracy because of a mob action. It is not to be tolerated.”
This is a misunderstanding of how the city council operates. Unlike a court hearing, a council meeting is a place for comment and dissent, up to and including protests that may interfere with scheduled business. The best approach is generally to let people speak their mind, and to listen to what they’re saying—not to declare disruptions “intolerable” or refer to demonstrators as a violent “mob.” If council members aren’t willing to tolerate noisy dissent, they probably should have looked more closely at the job description before applying.
alexforamerica.com
alexforamerica.com
concil 100% demnazigestapo fascist junta!i hav 17 ttrasspas for 1500 day!NOBADY IN WA STATE OR AMERICA HAV THET!they a total criminal dismic Ferst amendment en free spich! constitutien crime –life taim in jeel!go tu ALEXFORAMERICA.COM an riad ”Ligal guide to handling desruptive piopel in public meeting”! may 2017
concil
Oh look, the aristocrats are telling us they are doing democracy. But since Tim Ceis had told us what democracy means to this crowd (even before they appointed the only candidate of their bosses who didn’t win): democracy means serving the interests of business.
It’s truly black humor they’re serving us. Sure! The business interests in town raise millions of dollars and use their cash as a lever to install their hand-picked candidates. That’s what democracy looks like to oligarchs.
Everything they touch will turn to garbage. No amount of disruption is enough for these corrupt fools.
alexforamerica.com
“ Seattle has a history of protest and civil disobedience that stretches back decades; if an elected official’s first reaction when people shout and disrupt a meeting is to kick them out and call the police, that says a lot about what they think of that culture and history.”
I am very grateful for Cathy Moore and her sane grounding in common sense and civility. Yes, we have had a history of protest and civil disobedience. In the last 25 years, what exactly has that gotten for our city? What exactly did the George Floyd and anti-police/anti-capitalism “protests” that went on for years do for us? What has been achieved by Sawant’s minions disrupting public meeting after meeting with shouting, bullying and monopoly of the microphone?
Cathy Moore, objecting to a crowd banging on glass and shouting for making her feel unsafe is being portrayed as being fragile, autocratic and unreasonable, yet in this city when someone uses the wrong pronoun or says they believe equality of opportunity is justice and mandating equality of outcome is racist it is considered “violence.” The guarantee of free speech becomes justification for suppression of speech and for mob rule (see recent violence at Berkeley this week).
The effective protests and civil disobedience in Seattle’s history have been silent and strategic, skillful guerilla theater or peaceful marches. if you approve of this crowd and their behavior at the city council, you should have no problem with a repeat of January 6.
> “It is not appropriate” for protesters to be disruptive, Moore, a former King County Superior Court judge, continued.
“Please protest at home. You’re making me sad.”
Where the “what’s up, bootlickers?” dude when we need him?
Context: https://youtu.be/ocig3BfyYRk?si=5-dmcePB09-BGkug&t=137
If Moore and Nelson can’t stand the heat they should simply resign.
Or the screamers could decide to allow others to share their opinions too instead of trying to stop them from talking.
How does this policy – limited public comment time for topics on the agenda – compare to other jurisdictions? Is it legal? Do new Councilmembers have the discretion to change up old standards? Interesting times, indeed.
It’s totally legal and is done in many if not most jurisdictions – Google it yourself.
And that aside, you don’t get to shout people down and/or pound on windows pretty much anywhere.
First, this was not a ‘topic on the agenda.’ Second, limiting discussion is nearly universal for the practical matter that while ‘time is infinite’ in a philosophical sense, it’s very limited in a practical sense – another committee may have the room scheduled later, there are only so many hours in the work day, staff are only compensated to work a set amount of hours, etc.
Committee hearings at the Legislature are typically 2 hours, with multiple agenda item, and public testimony limited to 2 minutes per person.
If you’re trying to make a cogent argument, that’s plenty; if you’re trying to hijack the agenda or establish yourself as a performance artist….
It doesn’t get much better than this, does it.
A threat is not part of free speech. Threat is in the ear of the beholder. In addition, if the demonstrators prevented the Council from doing its work, that isn’t free speech either. For some reason, many demonstrators today have forgotten that the arch-example of demonstrators, those in the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960’s, fully expected to be arrested.
I can only assume that for you this was TL;DR.
Agree
These protesters and that Zimmerman guy are scumbags. Ruining a tribute to a person who actually contributed to Seattle. Grow up already.
Just…..gross. So much for public servants.
Burgess must have told them that the public serves them.
More like Burgess told them to dissolve the people and elect another.
Why is it gross to limit the time for talking or requiring that discussion is on the topic at hand? Why is it gross to require allowing everyone a turn to talk instead of yelling loudly over others speaking?
What you said – and I guarantee you that if a bunch of forced birth jagoffs from Mabton showed up and started shouting people down all of the people whining about this reasonable restoration of order would be crying blue bloody murder in a Noo Yawk minute.