The “30 by 30” pledge, SPD’s commitment to having a police recruit class that’s 30 percent women by 2030, is “unachievable in current market conditions,” Barnes said.

By Erica C. Barnett

The Seattle City Council’s public safety committee held its first official hearing for Interim Seattle Police Chief Shon Barnes’ confirmation on Tuesday, setting Barnes up with mostly friendly questions like “Can you talk about what transformational relationships looks like to you?” (Joy Hollingsworth) and expressions of gratitude, like” I just wanted to say thank you so much for everything that you’ve done so far.” (Cathy Moore.)

Barnes nomination is a gimme, so it wasn’t surprising that a council dominated by SPD cheerleaders spent most of their time lavishing fulsome praise on Barnes. (Moore also praised Barnes for his “homespun wisdom,” which she said must be because he’s from North Carolina.)

Not to pick on Barnes, who’s been in the position for just over three months, but the council probably should have had more questions about how he will actually change the culture of the department, which is currently being sued for, among other things, racial and gender discrimination, and which has already faced criticism under Barnes’ leadership, for harassing sunbathers at a longtime LGBTQ-friendly nude beach and arresting dozens of people who protested two anti-trans rallies by a far-right Christian group.

Many of Barnes’ remarks on Tuesday, along with the written responses he submitted to council questions earlier this month, suggest that his  policies, which are similar in name and content to programs he implemented as police chief in Madison, WI, will be less than transformative.

Barnes’ marquee proposal, called “Seattle-Centric policing,” sounds similar to the “Madison-Centric policing” model the Madison Police Department adopted in 2023.

According to Barnes’  lengthy written responses to councilmember questions, “Seattle-Centric Policing is a comprehensive plan focused on reducing harm and crime while enhancing the quality of life for Seattle residents” that involves “fostering integrated partnerships” with existing community and business groups to “create a safer and more vibrant city.”

Many of the specific strategies, like opening up storefront-style police offices in neighborhoods across the city, have been tried before and abandoned for various reasons; many others, like putting police officers in schools, are also controversial and not up to SPD alone. And one policy Barnes proposed, expanding the Find It/Fix it app to include a category for “general open air drug use and general disorder,” is already basically in effect, in that many people already use it for this purpose.

During Tuesday’s meeting, the only slightly spiky questions came from progressive councilmember Alexis Mercedes Rinck, who asked how Barnes planned to deal with protesters against federal immigration policy, given “the lengths SPD will go to protect the free speech rights of anti-trans, anti-queer, anti-abortion, Christian nationalists calling for the ousting of Mayor Harrell,” a references to SPD’s actions during two protests against a far-right Christian group last month.

In response, Barnes said SPD is “neutral in all matters of protest” and added that “at some point I will probably go to jail and be in prison, because we have an administration that has threatened to jail politicians.” While this offhand remark garnered significant coverage in the Seattle Times and local TV stations, Barnes’ claim that SPD doesn’t pick sides during protests probably rang hollow to those who protested against the anti-trans events, given that SPD effectively served as security guards for the right-wing group that organized both events.

In his written response to a similar question, Barnes said SPD should work with protest leaders to establish lines of communication, but said that given that SPD was operating with a “paper-thin margin in staffing” during last month’s counterprotests he believes that “by and large, officers appropriately met their responsibility of facilitating the First Amendment rights of all involved.”

PubliCola is supported entirely by readers like you.
CLICK BELOW to become a one-time or monthly contributor.

Support PubliCola

A large chunk of Barnes’ response to questions about how SPD should handle protests in the future was taken directly from a Sentinel Event Review of the 2020 protests in Madison, produced by an outside firm called the Quattrone Center, with the word “departments” substituted for “MPD.”

At Tuesday’s meeting, Rinck pressed on, asking Barnes how SPD is verifying the identities of ICE officers in Seattle, given that many people who say they’re ICE officers are wearing masks and obscuring their identities. “Every law enforcement officer should have a badge of some type, and they should have an identification of some type, and it’s not unreasonable to ask, ‘May I see your identification please?'” Barnes said. “If they do not have [ID], then certainly they can call the police and try to verify.”

(Editorial aside: This comment reminded me of Bob Kettle’s admonition, earlier in the same meeting, that protesters for immigrants’ rights should behave “responsibly” to avoid giving the Trump Administration an excuse to send troops to Seattle. It sounds like a transmission from a different reality than the one we’re currently experiencing—one where people can simply reason politely with officers sent in to facilitate deportations, and where being well-behaved will protect Seattle from federal crackdowns on civil rights.) Barnes did not know whether ICE was required to notify SPD if they are doing raids in the city, but said no one from the Department of Homeland Security had called his office.

Barnes defended SPD’s record on police accountability, arguing that the city’s accountability system is one of the best in the nation; even when the US Department of Justice placed SPD under a federal consent decree in 2011, Barnes wrote, they “found that Seattle’s accountability processes were ‘sound and that the investigations of police misconduct complaints are generally thorough, well-organized, well-documented, and thoughtful,’ [and] the work Seattle has done since has only strengthened this system.” 

The interim chief also pushed back on Rinck’s question about the department’s use of monitored CCTV cameras along Aurora Ave. N., in downtown Seattle, and in the Chinatown/International District, disagreeing with her premise that CCTV surveillance is not an effective crime-fighting tool.

As a counterpoint, Barnes pointed to a recent triple homicide in which SPD used private camera footage after the fact to help arrest and identify suspects—and said SPD’s 34 cameras have helped the department “materially assist” in more than 50 incidents since May 20.

Barnes also disputed Rinck’s claim that CCTV doesn’t address violent crimes, writing that “there is evidence that CCTV cameras reduce violent crime, as events that lead to continued violence may be interrupted.” The study he cited, however, is most often used to illustrate the opposite—cameras don’t deter violent crime, but they can be useful in solving car thefts after the fact. The study also found that private cameras are more effective at helping police solve property crimes than those operated by police.

Finally, Barnes acknowledged that many women in the department say SPD is a toxic work environment, and that this perception is one reason the department has historically found it hard to recruit and retain female officers. (As of the end of April, SPD had hired just five women this year.) But, he continued, the problem isn’t unique to SPD. Nationally, women make up just 13 to 15 percent of police recruit classes—in part, Barnes wrote, because younger women are doing better than men academically and have more types of professional opportunities than they once did.

Seattle, like many cities, signed the “30×30” pledge, a commitment to having a police recruit class that’s 30 percent women by 2030. In his written comments, Barnes said this goal was probably “unachievable in current market conditions,” particularly in “large urban markets” like Seattle, “which despite offering unique opportunities also come with unique risks and cost of living challenges that may render them less attractive to younger officers.”

Instead of a specific number, Barnes concluded, the “30×30″ commitment is really about “making law enforcement a profession where qualified women who are drawn to it feel welcomed and supported while ensuring agencies address their unique needs and foster their success.”

Barnes will appear at one more committee meeting before the council votes on his appointment; you can read his to written questions here.