Did Seattle's new council overreact to recent protests at city hall?

[00:00:00] Hello and welcome to the latest edition of Seattle Nice, which 9 out of 10 political insiders tell me is their only must listen political podcast here in Seattle at this point. Are either of you hearing that? I don't know if I know 10 political insiders. That's more Sandeep's area.

[00:00:28] Yeah, I'm just very excited that we're Mexico's 110th most popular political podcast now. So that's pretty exciting stuff. We were way down at 137th a few weeks ago and now we're up to 110th and we are rising in Mexico like a bird.

[00:00:45] Rising, yeah. We went from one to two listeners, I think possibly. Today's topic, protested city hall, six protesters arrested. We will now go into a five minute recess. We're going to be getting into what really happened, sort of what the incident says about

[00:01:04] Seattle's new city council and where things are headed this year. But before we do, if you support what we're trying to do on this podcast, this is our spring membership drive. If you want to see more of it, more breaking news episodes, live events, Seattle Nice

[00:01:19] debates, please consider taking out your credit card heading over to patreon.com slash Seattle Nice and donating. All right, so let's get into this issue. Erica, you and I don't know if Sandeep was watching, we're watching this on the Seattle channel or were

[00:01:33] you there at city hall chambers when the ruckus occurred? I was not there. I watched it online like you did and got a pretty good impression I think from the tape. I mean, the protesters once they were locked outside and we'll

[00:01:47] talk about what happened. But I mean, it was audible. They're yelling from outside city council chambers when the cameras were recording inside city council chambers. So yeah, I mean, it was definitely a ruckus is the right way to put it and we can get into

[00:02:02] what they were protesting and why they were outside. Let's get into it. What was the protest all about? Yeah. So the protest was by advocates for immigrants and refugees who are in Tukwila right now with essentially nowhere to go very overcrowded accommodations there and they were asking

[00:02:20] the city council to do something to help fund housing for the folks that are streaming into to Tukwila right now and they showed up there were a few dozen of them and they wanted to speak in public comment and council rules prohibit speaking on items that aren't

[00:02:37] on the agenda. But generally, the council does not, you know, strictly stick to those rules because they have I think found that it is better to let people talk than not

[00:02:47] to in the past. But in this case, council president Sarah Nelson said she was going to cut comment off at 20 minutes. And then when people were not happy with that and continued to try to

[00:02:56] speak, there was, you know, a lot of yelling in council chambers. There's a lot of loud disruptive protest, which Seattle does have a tradition of as I pointed out in my piece and they cleared the council chambers security forced everybody out six people refused

[00:03:10] to leave and they were arrested. And the protest continued very audibly from outside council chambers, which were then locked against all the people who have been protesting inside a few minutes earlier. Sandy, were you watching or just

[00:03:24] I watched them. I did. I watched some of it and I've talked to several of the council members subsequently. So I think one thing I would point out, I think it's not 100% accurate to say that these people were solely focused on the plight of the migrants in

[00:03:39] Tukwila, right? I mean, they did bring a number of migrants with them, a small group of migrants. But they I think seem at least as focused on cutting the police budget and particularly focused on funding

[00:03:55] for a shot spotter, which they wanted to see that funding cut and repurposed to migrants. Money you are spending on such surveillance technologies could go toward asylum seekers. You are the opportunist, not us. You are allied with the police and the state, not us.

[00:04:15] There definitely seem to be a kind of abolitionist defund message that some of the loudest, most strident activists were pushing here. And I think that's what led council president Nelson at the outset of it to level the accusation

[00:04:31] against them that they were really defund abolition radical left activists who were using the migrants as a prop to push their anti-police. Which is not the place of the Seattle City Council, frankly. I mean, the Seattle City Council is not traditionally a forum for city council

[00:04:48] members to talk back to people who are trying to speak and tell them that they have the wrong political views. Yes, they were arguing against funding the police and they were saying if we don't find the police at these lavish

[00:04:59] levels, we can spend a little money on these migrants. And, you know, Sarah Nelson from the dais editorialized against them and said, here's my opinion of your political views. They're bad and you're exploiting migrants. And I think that's bad. And therefore I'm not going to let you

[00:05:14] speak. And I think that was an unforced error. And I don't know, just just a bad decision all around. And also, frankly, not appropriate for a council member. Erica, Erica, let me ask you to follow up. Is that really something that the council never does? The council

[00:05:27] does not respond to accusations from the dais? I don't think that they were accusing them of anything other than having the wrong spending priorities, which is a that is always the content of public comment protesting the city council. I mean, the city council

[00:05:42] signs off on the budget has spending priorities and the people were using their one minute there one minute that they each had to speak to say, I don't agree with your funding priorities. People have the

[00:05:53] right to do that. And I do think it is unusual for a city council member to, you know, sort of interrupt to speechify to spend, you know, I think five or seven minutes at the beginning of the meeting

[00:06:04] talking about preemptively about how the people who were about to speak were wrong. And yeah, I do think that's unusual. Yeah, it's unusual. This is the protesters came in to talk about topics that were not on the city council's agenda that day. Erica, as you

[00:06:20] said, like the rule is that your that public testimony is supposed to be directed at the issues actually before the council, you're right that that they that they typically allow people to go off topic or kind of weigh in on other stuff. But they did that in

[00:06:34] this case, too, they did do public testimony, something like 19 people testified only one of whom was was a migrant, as I understand it. And most of the testimony that that view that they should cut police funding and cut shop spotter was aired

[00:06:50] out by some of the activists. And I don't think if they had extended the comment period any longer, that there wouldn't have still been the sort of disruptive protesting that that happened subsequently, it seemed like some of those activists came

[00:07:06] there loaded for bear and want to make a point. Yeah, same activists have been showing up at King County Council or maybe not the exact same ones, but activists making similar arguments. And from my understanding, the King County Council members have allowed them to speak, have not

[00:07:20] cut them off, have not kicked them out using security and have not called for arrests and arrested them. Instead, what they have done is met with them. And I think that, you know, that time and time again, I mean, the the extremity of what

[00:07:34] happened in this case, I think bears out that, yeah, if you are going to shut people down, if you're going to cut them off at 20 minutes, which there was absolutely no reason to do except that Sarah Nelson made it clear that she and the

[00:07:47] rest of the council did not support their political views. If you're going to do all that, it does antagonize people when you even saw when Sandy, if you used to get really mad about Shamas and want bringing people in and they were much larger

[00:07:59] crowds who would protest who would not protest sorry, who would show up to give public testimony that you know that most of the council may have disagreed with or found irritating, but they let them speak and you didn't see

[00:08:10] closing down the entire council chambers and having a meeting in front of no one and you didn't see arrests and you didn't see people banging on the walls of the council chambers because they'd been locked out. You just never saw that this is

[00:08:23] highly unusual and it's coming I mean, we're in March, council hasn't really done any business. They're still doing one on ones and they're already arresting people. You want to sort of pin the blame here on Sarah Nelson and it's her fault because she expressed an opinion

[00:08:38] disagreeing with them and and then she only allowed 20 minutes of public testimony and she could have given them you know an infinite amount of time to like yell and scream at the council. There are only a few dozen people and they were each talking

[00:08:51] their one minute sign deep so that nobody's talking about an infinite amount of time and nobody's talking about yelling and screaming. People got one minute they spoke they should have all been allowed to speak it would not have taken a while.

[00:09:00] And what I was told by a council member was that there were 20 people signed for testimony and 19 of them got a chance to speak so but you know there was one person who didn't get a chance to speak and that's the

[00:09:11] provocations it justifies sort of the behavior that happened afterwards. I don't really think so and I guess the through line that I see how it justified it was that they got kicked out. Well they got kicked out because they were shouting

[00:09:23] and screaming at the council was trying to honor the legacy of a trailblazing African American legislator named George Fleming. So this resolution as the clerk mentioned is about naming a portion of the road in front of George Fleming place after Senator Fleming who was

[00:09:40] Washington's first African American state senator. He was elected in 1971 and represented the 37th district of Southeast Seattle and the Rainier Valley. The boss and mentor of my former boss Ron Sims a King County executive. And so I vividly remember the reverential way that Ron

[00:09:57] would always talk about quote unquote Senator Fleming is what he always called him. And you know Senator Fleming's widows there. It's two daughters another family member and they're trying and they're being shouted down you know and can't can't go forward to the point that they had

[00:10:11] to call a recess several recesses right. Well you say had to call that was a choice. Well because they're shouting down the proceedings. Sunday I think when when when the common denominator here is that there are protests at city council

[00:10:25] and there are people who are going to show up and be disrupted that has been the case for a very very very long time. So that is our common denominator. What has changed is that the city council is new.

[00:10:35] And so I think instead of looking at oh my god the people yelling and shouting and I understand that you have reverence for Senator Fleming but I haven't seen you get mad about other proclamations and resolutions that have been disrupted by other protests.

[00:10:50] I think that the thing that has changed here is that this city council reacted in the way that they did by calling repeated recesses by shutting down the city council chambers and forcing everyone outside and calling for arrests and frankly after the six council members were arrested

[00:11:06] Kathy Moore escalated things further by saying that everybody outside should be arrested just for yelling. And for and there are a couple of people banging on the walls and she said she felt threatened. Now I'm just going to say this if you are signing up

[00:11:20] for the job of city council like and you have never and you are unaware that they're going to be protesters and people mad at you then that's that's not the right job for you perhaps. So people definitely have the right to protest in Seattle

[00:11:35] which has a long history and tradition of it. And it seems like the debate here though is it about whether or not people have a right to protest or when and where that protest ought to occur. Right. If you're trying to conduct a city council meeting

[00:11:53] like if we had people yelling right now we're trying to do the podcast or whatever. It would just be kind of disruptive. Now should they have allowed them to speak longer? We weren't elected. The 21st person to speak? Absolutely. We should have allowed the 21st person to speak.

[00:12:09] That was a mistake. But but beyond that Erica what's the issue with you know basically saying hey we need to start conducting business that means people have to be quiet at some point. You know help me understand that part of it

[00:12:22] because I because I agree with you there is a right to protest. But at what point do you cut it off? Where would you draw the line? Well OK first of all we're not city council members we weren't elected so I sort of reject that analogy.

[00:12:35] But I also obviously we're not city council members. No analogies are perfect so don't give me a hard time. It's a perfectly fine analogy. I think that in this case they Sandeep I don't know what city council member you're talking to.

[00:12:49] I'd have to fact check you on that. But I think in this case you know the the amount of protest and the amount of yelling did not go on for nearly as long as in previous councils who tolerated. You know that wasn't my question.

[00:13:04] My question was what's your standard. What's your say like at what point would you at some point want to cut it off and how would you do it if you were on council. What would you think that's such a disingenuous question David.

[00:13:16] I was just ingenious because you're asking me how I would act if I was on council and I'm telling you here is how here here is the precedent that we have seen always up until now. It seems like a really simple question. I think it's a gotcha question.

[00:13:30] I think I think whenever you ask a question about what would you do if you were in a job that you don't have. I think it is. I think that that is a gotcha question. It's not meant to be.

[00:13:38] It's a sincere question about like if we're being critical if we're being critical of how they conducted business then what's our standard. What's the basic answer. But I want to tell you why I think it's a disingenuous question. I would not run for city council.

[00:13:53] I don't like listening to people yelling at me. I this is a red herring. No, it's a red herring. Why? I mean, because it's a simple question. Like what is your standard? What's our standard here? Well, I think in this case what they should have done is let

[00:14:08] everybody speak. And at that point, I mean, I just I think that everything they did was the opposite of the right decision. I think they should have left the council chambers open. I think they should have let everybody speak.

[00:14:20] I think they should have asked people to be quiet and have some decorum for them to get through this item. This resolution that they were passing. But the reason I keep talking about precedent is, you know, in the past when that policy, that procedure has been

[00:14:36] followed, when they've let people speak, when they've let everybody make their point, council has been able to continue and conduct its business. We haven't had situations in which the council has, you know, had to have these multiple recesses has, you know, kicked people out, has called the police.

[00:14:54] And so I think that if they had followed the previous procedure of councils before them and allowed people to speak, then they wouldn't have had this problem. And I think there's this counterfactual that you and Sadeep are putting forward where they are allowed to scream

[00:15:08] for an infinite amount of time and nothing ever gets done. And the thing is that's a counterfactual because it didn't happen and it's never happened. You don't have a right to disrupt proceedings of government. And I've heard all the stuff on the left about the

[00:15:23] right to the right to the right. And I've heard all the stuff on Twitter or wherever in the stranger arguing that this was somehow anti-democratic to, to shut down the protest or expect that they would stop or to clear the chambers.

[00:15:36] And if anything from kind of standard principles of free speech, what we were seeing happen in those chambers was something akin to what's called the heckler's veto, right? It is when you shout down people you disagree with and you shut them up. That is not free speech.

[00:15:54] That's the antithesis of free speech. And that's what the protesters were doing. That is what the protesters were doing. They were exercising a heckler's veto. And after a while, the council said we can't continue the operations of our government. Look, let me give you some analogies here.

[00:16:10] When you see around in other places around the country. I'm so curious why you think this changed then, Sadeep. Well, I think the culture has it's changing. We can get to the broader implications of the cultural change at the council.

[00:16:19] I think there's a it is indicative of a significant cultural shift. I think you're right about that. I agree with you, but I think it's a shift. I think it's a shift for the better because there's been a strain of personally directed venom and toxicity

[00:16:32] and anger that's run through Seattle politics over the last few years. These protesters in this room were singling out at various points, Tanya Wu, one of the council members and shouting directly at her. And I've talked to several of the council members who

[00:16:47] felt like there was stuff there. I'm sure you have, Sadeep. But there's a reason why five there's a reason why Lisa Herbald, why Theresa Moskeda left the council, right? Why Lisa Herbald didn't run again. Part of it may have been, you know, some political

[00:17:01] caucus, but part of it is that why Deborah Warr is still so angry about what happened at her house in 2020. Or when you look at the stuff that was spray painted in front of Jenny Durkin's house, the kind of homophobic, threatening stuff about we're watching

[00:17:14] you and that kind of shit. And you can't run a government when you have a level of vitriol and hatred that's routinely directed at elected officials to the point that they are fearful that somebody's going to show up their house and frighten their kids.

[00:17:30] City Hall is a public space. And if you're going to say you shouldn't be able to protest there, I think that you are actually arguing that you shouldn't be able to protest anywhere because I mean, I'm not actually aware that they're allowed to speak and they

[00:17:43] can protest. But I'm saying where should we push them to January 6. OK, was it like was that just that's a that's a that's a that's an that is an it's not a different thing on scale and important. But the principle is the same. It's not in the silly.

[00:17:58] They were fucking shutting down the processes of government because they weren't getting their fucking way. Right. That's what was happening. Kathy Moore said, Zandeep, our physical safety is being threatened by the actions of the demonstrators outside banging on the windows, which could easily get broken.

[00:18:12] And we will have a mob scene. So she was at that moment sort of evoking. She's sounding like Pramila Jayapal on January 6. But I have to agree with Erica there. I mean, maybe she did feel that way. I don't know. But do you really feel like

[00:18:26] their physical safety was somehow being threatened in that moment? I find it hard to believe, I guess. I talked to another council member who said, you know, intellectually, I didn't feel like, you know, that I was actually physically going to be attacked.

[00:18:40] I mean, but several of the council members that I talked to said they really did. It was the banging on the windows was so extreme. They really did feel like the glass was going to break. There was apparently some scuffling with security

[00:18:52] as people tried to kind of get back into the chambers after they had been evicted. And and the scene and feel in that room, I think for the council members was that it was sort of on the verge of spinning out of control.

[00:19:04] You know, the situation again, we need to look to precedent and reality. And the reality not people's feelings is that this is not that is that protesters at City Hall, where they have a right to be, have not come in as a mob and violently attacked anyone ever.

[00:19:23] And so if people felt that way, you know, first of all, I think that the council created the conditions for people to feel like they were being locked out of the process of government and locked out of access to their public officials because they were literally locked out.

[00:19:38] And so they create that condition. And then I think it is their responsibility to consider whether like whether their feelings are the thing that should dictate people being arrested, thrown in jail and, you know, and held overnight on on a thousand dollars

[00:19:55] bail as the protesters arrested earlier were. Kathy Moore said arrest those individuals, meaning the crowd outside. That is an overreach that you can throw around emotional references to January 6th that I think are completely facile and really irresponsible. But the fact is nobody outside ended up getting arrested,

[00:20:15] in part because Sarah Nelson stepped in and said as council president and said, well, you know, I think that actually it would be kind of, you know, difficult to arrest everybody. And like let's be reasonable here and let's just continue with our business.

[00:20:30] And Meritsever Vera agreed and they moved on. And it did not result in arrest. Kathy Moore was demanding the arrest of dozens of people. And again, we are in March. They are barely doing any business yet. What's going to happen when they start debating the budget

[00:20:46] and people disagree? Are they going to kick people out every single time they start yelling? Because I just I think this that's a really dangerous precedent of shutting down free speech. And I think that you're sort of standard of free speech if it's disruptive.

[00:20:59] It's not free speech anymore. It's a mob action. Alla January 6 is the hecklers veto is not free speech. I don't think it is. I don't think it is a hecklers veto when after 20 minutes you eject everyone from city council. I think that what has happened in the past

[00:21:17] is they haven't ejected people. They let them say their piece. They've let them the council meetings sometimes go long for that reason. And everything has ultimately gotten done. They've managed to conduct their business. You calling it a hecklers veto is under conditions where they were no longer heckling.

[00:21:35] They were being kicked out and they were no longer protesting because they were not allowed to. They were forced out of the council chambers and that condition is very different than it's been in the past. And so I just think that for you to fail to acknowledge that

[00:21:47] and suggest that they are just, you know, infinitely shouting down the council is absurd. That is not what happened. They had to call multiple recesses because they couldn't proceed with anything because the people in the room were shouting. And then when they asked to clear the room,

[00:22:02] most people all the migrants left. Like none of the actual migrants who supposedly this was about were doing anything disruptive. And as I said, one migrant testified made their case. And absolutely there's a real underlying issue

[00:22:16] about what are we going to do to help the migrants in in Takwila? And that issue got totally lost because you had a bunch of performative radical protesters who wanted to hijack the proceedings and not let the basic processes of government continue

[00:22:34] because they weren't going to get their way on fucking shot spotter, right? That's what was really, you know, what they were really wound up about, right? So- But why does that bother you so much? Well, I just think like I said, I think there's been a-

[00:22:48] It's a legitimate thing to be wound up about. Personally directed kind of venom, mostly coming from the far fringes of the left in Seattle politics in recent years that's been really toxic and destructive. And that's driven a lot of, you know, people off the council.

[00:23:06] And I will say, I shouldn't say it's just a left because it's come from the right too. Because I will say after 2020, whether you're a council member on the left lane or the middle lane, all of them privately felt like psychologically battered by the experience

[00:23:23] they lived through and the kind of, you know, vitriol that got directed at them. So I don't want to say it's coming from one side here. That's not actually accurate. Like there was plenty of abuse that was hurled at like Teresa Mosqueda, say, right? Or Lisa Herbal.

[00:23:35] So I don't want to minimize that at all. But it's not right in any circumstance. It's really destructive of the ability for people to govern and function, you know? Or to get people to run for office. Good people to run for office. People are like, why the fuck

[00:23:50] would I subject myself to that? Well, I think you're fetishizing civility to an extent that, you know, that is not necessary. I mean, like I agree with you that, you know, personal attacks and people showing up at people's houses, you know, those are among the reasons

[00:24:06] that people decided not to run for city council again. It's not a great job in that respect, you know? You have to deal with the public and sometimes the public are assholes. But I don't think that this was an example of that.

[00:24:20] I think this was an example of people being disruptive in a protest environment at City Hall. And, you know, I mean, it seems to me that you are objecting to the fact that they were disruptive. And I think that is just like the kind of, you know,

[00:24:36] civility, pearl clutching argument that I just, I can't get behind because I think that, you know, people have a right to show up at City Hall and fucking protest. I'm just gonna take it back there. I'm gonna take it back there just to wrap it up.

[00:24:50] So this was another fantastic episode of Seattle Nice. If I can summarize, it sounds like what Erica's saying is if in the next incident like this, Sarah Nelson allows everybody to have their one minute of speech, when that's done, if people are still shouting over them,

[00:25:10] we should fund housing and not police or whatever it is. At that point, I think Erica's like calling the, calling the, because... That is so ridiculous, David. You can't end the podcast with a summary on your bullshit. Then just clarify, then just clarify.

[00:25:25] At that point, the next incident, when it happens, if she allows everybody to speak so that it will have been done the way it's always been done, which is how things should always be done, then... And people are shouting over the council or whatever.

[00:25:40] I'm seriously like, I think about it. I try to put myself in their shoes and think, okay, what would I do if I was on council? It's a hypothetical philosophical exercise that's perfectly valid. And I understand we're not on council, but our standards on Seattle Nice,

[00:25:54] that if the decorum is followed and people are allowed to speak, at that point they can clear chambers. Like what can they do at that point? What should they do? I said that in the past what's happened, and I'm not saying everything in the past

[00:26:09] has always been perfect, but in the past what's happened is people speak and sometimes they continue to yell. And somehow, contrary to what Sandeep is saying, the business of government has continued to be conducted. I think that when you provoke people

[00:26:23] by doing things like clearing the room, especially... I got that, but you're saying in the future let the yelling continue, just go about your business. If you're talking over... Well, I mean, I just, I don't deal, I'm a reporter, David, I don't deal in this world of hypotheticals

[00:26:37] where like, oh, if it's totally different in the future, how would you react? I'm saying always in the past, and particularly in recent years when disruptive protests have been more common, business of government has gotten done. So I'm not interested in speculating

[00:26:50] about what if everything is different in the future, because I just, I don't deal with that. I deal with facts. And like... No, you deal with opinion and you have a strong opinion that you don't... I do deal with opinion too, but I don't deal with speculation.

[00:27:00] That you don't think that they acted correctly and you're saying you won't answer a question about what correctly would look like in the future, which just seems like, okay, if you don't answer it. No, because you're painting a hypothetical scenario where people yell infinitely forever

[00:27:13] at the top of their lungs. And I'm saying, I haven't seen that happen. So these are the... I knew you said that. What you said about it. I said, at what point would you act and how would you act? That was all, that's it.

[00:27:23] Look, I do think to broaden it out, I do think there is a cultural shift, right? I think with previous councils, when the red shirts, the Siwan people filled the room and they were shouting obscenities at the council members and calling them corporate stooges

[00:27:39] and whatever, even the ones on the left I still think a lot of those council members and I do think this is a shift here. A lot of those council members still in some sense saw those red shirts as somehow my people, right?

[00:27:54] And if anything, like that kind of like, in your face accusatory protest kind of work. I mean, just last year, Andrew Lewis flipping on the dias on the drug law in June. And like after he told everybody who's gonna vote for it

[00:28:10] because people were like, kind of Raukes in the chambers, he flipped on the dias. There are other, not just Andrew, there have been other examples, I can point to examples of that kind of, in your face protest with- To be clear, Andrew pointed to specific testimony,

[00:28:25] not because people are yelling, but he pointed to a specific testimony. I mean, I think he was swayed, I don't think that you should probably be that easily swayed if you're on the city council, you should have opinions. But to say that he was just like

[00:28:39] shouted down and he was convinced that he was screaming at him is not correct. I don't wanna overstate it. Yeah, that's a fair point to me. And I don't wanna single out Andrew because I've seen other examples of it too

[00:28:51] when you have, you know, to fill the room and they're really like, you know, famously Lorena Gonzalez flipping on the, on the street vacation vote for the arena right years ago, like that was another one where, you know, it happened there on the dias

[00:29:07] because of the vibe in the room and the protests, you know. Well, that's the point. On what was being expressed. But right, but I do think this council has this new council like has a different notion of what, you know, governance is

[00:29:23] and where the lines are drawn about decorum and the functionality of governance then the preceding council. And I do think that's true and I think they're gonna be less tolerant of this kind of behavior going forward. And, you know, it's gonna be interesting

[00:29:41] to see whether it continues or not or whether the fact that there were some consequences for it this time might, you know, chill some of the more egregious, you know, elements. Can I ask you a David Hyde style medical? Yeah, please do.

[00:29:54] So after they, so they were, in your view they were right to hold a recess and right to kick folks out of council chambers so they could finish this resolution and other business and they were right. And Kathy Moore was right to call for all the people

[00:30:08] outside to be arrested. I didn't say that last part. I did not say that last part. Okay, so at what point do you start disagreeing with what anybody said? You know, I think the way the people outside ended up getting handled which is that

[00:30:23] that they were, I think either security or the two were there went to the people who were banging on the window outside and told them to stop and then they did and there was no arrest that took place. I think that was handled appropriately.

[00:30:37] Like, you know, I mean, but when you have a, in order to clear the room. I mean, Kathy Moore was demanding arrests. She was saying she felt personally threatened. You disagree with that. She said arrest those individuals. And other council members and Ziya said,

[00:30:51] well, wait a minute, let's, you know, chill out here. But I'm saying, do you disagree with what council member Moore said? I, yes, I think I do. I think I do at that point but I also have some empathy for the fact that it was,

[00:31:07] you know, it's pretty freaky in that room and they're like smashing on the glass and like it looks like it's gonna break and they're gonna store him in there. I get why people are reacting kind of emotionally in the moment. So yeah, I don't think that those people

[00:31:21] should have been arrested. I think there was an intervention before that that happened where they were told to stop and they did, but you know, if they didn't stop if they had smashed the glass, like at that point, yeah, you know, but that's not what happened. Right?

[00:31:35] Like so again, they were, the people in the room were told to clear the chambers because the protests weren't stopping. The vast majority of people left the chambers, right? Six people didn't refuse to leave. What was supposed to happen with them?

[00:31:49] I think it was appropriate that they get arrested there. You know, even from the perspective of civil disobedience civil disobedience, okay, you're gonna it's an act of civil disobedience. You're not gonna leave whether consequences to civil disobedience. I also think that there's a difference

[00:32:03] between detaining people and removing them from a space and arresting them and booking them into jail. I think that was in itself a pretty extreme act because I mean, the issue that the council identified is we want these people out of the room and they won't leave.

[00:32:19] So call in the police, the police come, they take them away. Why did they have to be booked into jail? Why did they each have to pay $1,000 bail? Why were they trapped there overnight? Is that an appropriate use of the jail?

[00:32:29] I mean, I think there's a lot of questions that this action raises that down the line that I think the council is gonna have to figure out how to deal with similar things in the future because it's not gonna stop happening.

[00:32:40] And if this is their response every time that is a dramatic escalation and how they have responded to protests in the past. And I think a really troubling escalation. Let's end there with Erica with the last word but last question just cause I didn't ask it

[00:32:54] yes or no, should the city council cut funding for ShotSpotter to pay for refugee housing in Tuckwilla, Erica C Barnett? They should cut ShotSpotter to pay for other city priorities. Sandeep Kaushik? No, no, not, no, they shouldn't just just cause like some wacko protest show up

[00:33:14] and demand you cut this to fund that. No. Not that, should they do it? It's not, okay. Well, I mean that was their demand right? Cut ShotSpotter to fund the refugees. No, if that's the demand I'm saying no. All right. That's it for another edition of Seattle Nice.

[00:33:29] He's Sandeep Kaushik, she's Erica C Barnett. I'm David Hyde, our editor is Quinn Waller and to everybody thank you so much for listening.