AdobeStock
The Seattle City Council is working to end the federal government’s surveillance of the police department by passing crowd control measures.
A new proposed bill would help the Seattle Police Department [SPD] be in full compliance with a preliminary injunction regarding the department’s crowd control measures.
This stems from a 2012 court order that was sought by the U.S. Department of Justice following an investigation into the police department’s policies and practices at the time.
Last year, a federal judge determined that SPD has significantly complied with directives governing use-of-force, investigative stops, and crisis-intervention decisions by officers over the past decade.
However, the judge did not completely resolve the court order, stating that SPD must still develop new crowd management policies that have to be approved by the court and an independent monitor.
The city council did attempt to address crowd control four years ago. In June 2020, the city council passed Ordinance 126102, which completely banned the use of all less lethal weapons. However, the U.S. District Court prohibited the ordinance from going into effect.
While the ordinance still remains in the Seattle municipal code, it has no legal enforceability.
The latest proposed Council Bill 120916 does not incorporate SPD’s current interim crowd management policy, which commanders use as guidance to determine when less lethal weapons can be used against violent individuals within a crowd or when they can be used to disperse a crowd itself.
Instead, it establishes restrictions on when available crowd-control technologies can be used. According to Seattle Deputy Mayor Tim Burgess, these restrictions are more substantial than what is required under state law.
The ordinance restricts the use of less-lethal tools in order to allow incident commanders to have the ability to respond to serious incidents.
Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell’s Office has stated a strong preference against codified bans of less lethal weapons or legislatively mandated use conditions.
One detail that alerted councilmembers was the proposed use of blast balls, which generates a loud noise and bright light.
In the case of a crowd escalating to a riot, reasonable force will be considered. Any use of blast balls at this stage for crowd dispersal would be thrown away from people in order to create a buffer between the crowd and police officers.
Seattle City Councilmember Cathy Moore spoke in opposition of the use of blast balls.
“Giving authority really under any circumstance to use blast balls is profoundly troubling to me,” Moore said during the Public Safety Committee meeting on Tuesday.
Moore added that a collection of reports from the State Attorney General’s Office and the Police Executive Research Forum all expressed serious concerns about the use of blast balls.
Fellow City Councilmember Rob Saka said blast balls should only be used as a last resort.
Seattle’s interim policy established that less lethal weapons are used only when circumstances are occurring that create an imminent risk of injury through violent actions. Only properly trained personnel can use less-lethal weapons to disperse crowds.
The Public Safety Committee did not take action on the proposed bill during its last meeting. Council members can add amendments to the bill before the committee votes on Jan. 14.
A full Seattle City Council vote on the crowd control bill could occur on Jan. 21.