Jonathan Toledo was done waiting. He was going to schedule that sit-down with new Council President Joy Hollingsworth, and he was going to do it now—even if “now” was in the middle of Tuesday’s raucous protest at the city council meeting.
“I can’t wait until [the next meeting],” Toledo, who leads the Seattle Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression (SAARPR), called out to Hollingsworth after the public comment period ended. “Every day, ICE locks up more people.”
The night before, SAARPR sent a letter to each councilmember with three demands: investigate and hold ICE accountable, end cooperation between Seattle and ICE, and defend Seattle’s status as a sanctuary city.
They demanded each councilmember sign the statement in less than 18 hours or they’d protest at the meeting. Besides Councilmember Alexis Mercedes Rinck and Dionne Foster’s chief of staff—who responded a minute before and a few minutes after the meeting began, respectively—no one else responded, and none signed. They couldn’t, really—in a text to The Stranger, Rinck says they were restricted by the Open Public Meetings Act, which they would’ve violated if more than five councilmembers took action outside of a meeting.
So, Tuesday afternoon, Toledo and about two dozen demonstrators were in the council chambers holding a banner that read “ABOLISH I.C.E.” They had each given public comment, calling for protections against ICE, actions over platitudes. Some asked them to stop collaborating with ICE.
“I will connect with you one-on-one,” Council President Hollingsworth told Toledo from the dais. “I will stand side-by-side with you and hear what you are saying every single time.”
“ARE YOU GOING TO VOTE TODAY TO END ICE COLLABORATION?” someone shouted.
“No, we are not. It’s not on the calendar, but I’m willing to talk about it,” Hollingsworth said, the chamber erupting with objections.
It was the first time this new council dealt with public dissent. It was an opportunity to take a new tact. When former City Council President Sara Nelson took control of a newly-elected conservative council in 2023, they promised to bring “decorum” to council chambers, which translated to shutting down public comment early and arresting protesters—a bad look that didn’t turn out well for her in the end.
Last week, Hollingsworth at least implied she was ready for a new chapter. “Everyone who walks through these doors will be treated with respect and kindness—no matter how they show up in their spirit, their attitude or words,” she said in a speech after being appointed council president last week.
As if to test this, Kshama Sawant—who just happens to be campaigning for Adam Smith’s Senate seat—arrived like the ghost of City Council’s past. Sawant’s campaign team waved signs with her face on them, and she took to the mic to promote herself as the socialist alternative candidate, briefly condemning ICE terror.
For about an hour, SAARPR and Sawant’s campaign got their say, but neither got the in-the-moment, short-notice action they wanted. Again, it’s a matter of government procedure—the OPMA bars councils from taking or even deliberating on policy without an agenda posted with adequate notice to the public.
While council can hear anything anyone wants to say during public comment, they can’t just add items to an agenda with less than 24 hours notice, especially ones as complex as SAARPR demanded.
That’s not to say they couldn’t address SAARPR’s demands and set a new policy. Like, perhaps, getting rid of those police cameras.
In October 2024, Nelson’s council voted to put up a network of real-time crime fightin’ CCTV cameras downtown, in the Chinatown-International District and on Aurora Avenue. Then, in September, they voted to expand that network to Capitol Hill, SoDo and Garfield High School, against the objections of more than 100 public commenters and organizations like the ACLU of Washington and the city’s Office of Civil Rights, who said the federal government could use that data to track immigrants.
Councilmembers Hollingsworth, Bob Kettle, Sara Nelson, Maritza Rivera, Debora Juarez, Rob Saka, and Mark Solomon voted for. Councilmembers Rinck and Dan Strauss voted against.
Speaking to The Stranger yesterday, Rinck—who’s been staunchly against SPD’s CCTV program—said removing the cameras would require a longer legislative process. Last year, she and Kettle co-sponsored an amendment that would shut down all CCTV for 60 days if the feds subpoena for immigration data, and council would then vote on whether or not to continue the program. The problem is that the city would have to send some footage to ICE before the program was actually shut down, when we could just not have a surveillance program.
The cameras council voted for in September haven’t been installed. The ball’s in Mayor Katie Wilson’s court to stop those from going up, Rinck says. During the campaign, Wilson aligned herself with Rinck’s position, saying in a statement that “turning on more cameras won’t magically make our neighborhoods safer. But it will certainly make our neighbors more vulnerable.”
Meanwhile, SAARPR’s call to enforce the city’s “sanctuary status,” is a call for an empty promise. Sanctuary designations don’t protect anyone from ICE. Just look at Chicago and Minneapolis.
“The language of Sanctuary City gives a sense of false protections that just don’t exist, which is why there’s been kind of a movement shift to Welcoming City and really clarifying what are things within the city’s power,” Rinck says.
The state has some protective measures like the Keep Washington Working Act, which restricts state and local governments from cooperating with the feds, but ultimately, as Rinck puts it, “federal law reigns supreme.”
Council recessed and left the chamber. After 10 minutes of speeches and chants, the protesters left. Council then returned to the scheduled agenda.
SAARPR tells The Stranger they’ll continue organizing in the community, but still want city council to read and sign their demands.
In an email to The Stranger, Hollingsworth says she’s grateful for those who came forward at the meeting, and reaffirmed council’s responsibility to listen and engage.
“We are committed to contributing to dialogue not division,” she writes. “Our community has my commitment that, no matter how you show up in chambers, I will always respect you and your voice.”