A debate over how to fight crime in several Seattle neighborhoods spilled into a fierce clash at City Hall, as council members split over whether to keep paying for surveillance cameras or spend the money on people instead. The dispute centers on the Central District, First Hill and Capitol Hill neighborhoods, and it pits an expansion of the city's CCTV camera network against a push to hire community violence interrupters. At the heart of the fight is a single line in the budget and the larger question of what actually keeps residents safe.
The immediate trigger was a vote in the Finance, Native Communities and Tribal Governments Committee, which approved reallocating 250,000 dollars that had been budgeted to expand the CCTV camera program. Under the amendment, that money would instead fund community violence interruption ambassadors. The committee tally was three in favor, one opposed and one abstention, with Council member Kettle voting no, Council President Hollingsworth voting yes and Council member Saka abstaining.
The fund shifting was proposed by Council President Joy Hollingsworth, who argued that the city cannot afford to wait. She said something has to be done to get eyes on the street and to protect children who are constantly victimized by shootings. Hollingsworth also pointed to Mayor Katie Wilson's delay in expanding the camera program while independent reviews examine privacy concerns, civil liberties and whether the cameras are effective, with findings from an NYU study expected in September.
Other council members warned that moving the money would break a promise to residents. Council member Maritza Rivera said the shift puts council members in a precarious situation with residents who were promised those cameras and want the city to follow through, and one member said publicly that they wanted the mayor to place the CCTV cameras. Public Safety Chair Bob Kettle pushed back hard, warning that if the amendment passed he would vote no on the mid-year supplemental both in committee and again the following Tuesday.
The mayor, meanwhile, is under pressure from another direction. Wilson said she received a letter from major event organizers urging her to activate 22 stadium district cameras and to invest in additional cameras after a mass shooting at the Seattle Center. At the same time, nearly two dozen cameras are currently switched off and others have yet to be installed, as she waits for audits and reviews before moving ahead.
In a statement, Wilson defended her cautious approach, saying different people in different communities experience the cameras differently. It is important, she said, to base the decision on more than feelings, and to ground the city's actions in a thorough understanding of how the cameras are being used, of the public benefits they are providing, and of any harm they are causing or could cause. Her stance drew a sharp rebuke, with one council member calling the mayor's handling of the program unconscionable because it had already been vetted.
The disagreement extends well beyond City Hall, with community members themselves divided over the cameras. A Fox 13 poll found that 86% of community members favored keeping the cameras on, with supporters noting that cities around the world already rely on them as another investigative tool and arguing that, if they are used, there should be strict rules over who can access the footage and how long it is kept. The proposal now heads to a full council vote next week.