During a recent Seattle City Council meeting, significant concerns were raised regarding the Seattle Police Department's new policy on alarm response and the proposed funding for surveillance technology and police bonuses.

Ashley Barber, representing Washington Alarm, urged the council to reconsider the policy implemented by interim police chief Sue Rahr, which requires visual or audio confirmation before police respond to alarm calls. Barber highlighted that many residents and businesses lack the necessary systems to comply, potentially leaving them vulnerable to crime. This sentiment was echoed by several residents, including Bethany Burton, who expressed fears for her child's safety under the new policy, and Scott Dezel, who criticized the policy for disproportionately affecting communities already facing challenges.

Public commenters voiced strong opposition to the proposed $5.5 million funding for surveillance technologies, including CCTV and Real-Time Crime Centers (RTCC). Critics argued that such measures do not effectively reduce crime and divert funds from essential social services. Peter Condit, a local resident, emphasized that community-based responses could handle a significant portion of police calls, advocating for investment in programs that address root causes of crime, such as food access and housing support.

Supporters of the surveillance measures, however, argued that they are necessary to combat rising crime rates. Gary Lee, co-chair of the CID Public Safety Council, presented a petition with 750 signatures from community members in favor of the CCTV project, citing safety concerns in their neighborhoods.

In addition to the discussions on policing and surveillance, the council also addressed the proposed amendments to Seattle's energy code. Multiple speakers, including Deepa Sivarajan and Carrie Mead, advocated for the adoption of a stronger energy code, emphasizing its importance for sustainability and economic benefits for residents.

As the council deliberates on these pressing issues, the divide between those advocating for increased police funding and surveillance versus those calling for a focus on community services and safety remains a central theme in Seattle's ongoing public safety discourse.