There is the easy way. And then there is the Seattle way.
When it comes to setting up effective, efficient alternatives to traditional law enforcement, it ought to be no surprise Seattle government is experiencing its age-old bugaboos of confusion, turf wars and parochialism.
Here’s to hoping this mess gets sorted out, and quick.
The troubles became public during an extraordinary briefing before the Seattle City Council’s Public Safety Committee on Feb. 24.
Chair Bob Kettle called together chiefs of the three public safety departments to better understand what they do and how they work together: fire, police and Community Assisted Response & Engagement, a new civilian team that became operational in October 2023 under strict parameters about when unarmed responders could deploy on Seattle streets.
While fire officials touted Health One and police leaders touched on Community Service Officers among other services, Chief Amy Barden of CARE said the December collective bargaining agreement between the city and Seattle Police Officers Guild created so many restrictions that her department was left grossly underutilized.
Under a Memorandum of Understanding within the labor agreement that provided big raises for officers, CARE responders cannot be dispatched without police if the call involves a person inside a private business or car or an encampment with more than four tents. In addition, they cannot be “solo dispatched” if the 911 call involved someone who is aggressive or threatening, there is a weapon visible or a minor involved.
Barden told the committee that, just the night before, CARE was informed it could not respond to an incident in a QFC parking lot because it was on private property.
Of the 2,400 calls to the 911 center every day, Barden estimates only 10-20 would qualify for CARE solo dispatch under current restrictions. That is dramatically fewer than previous estimates.
When queried by council members concerned about Barden’s assessment, a representative from Mayor Katie Wilson’s office said the administration was talking about details of the CARE provisions in the SPD labor agreement with the city attorney’s office and will have next steps in the near future.
For his part, police Chief Shon Barnes affirmed that he supports CARE and is not concerned that officers’ jobs could be adversely affected by civilian responders. “There is enough work to go around for everyone. If the agreement or the MOU is changed by whatever process that may be, then our officers will abide by that.”
So what are the takeaways here?
First, protocols dictating when civilian crisis responders can respond to 911 calls should depend on safety conditions, not whether the incident is taking place on public or private property. To be effective, CARE needs greater latitude to resolve potentially confrontational, nonviolent behavior, within reasonable safety limits.
Second, residents have every justification to ask: Just how many alternative response teams does the city really need? Health One, Community Service Officers, CARE — all with similar missions and their own bureaucracies and support teams. No wonder everything in city government is so expensive.
Kettle said he called the public safety leaders together to spotlight problems. He is committed to making the alternative response system better. “We have to fix it and maximize it,” he told the editorial board.
On that point, there ought to be general agreement indeed.
