Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Reproductive Health And Lgbtq Protections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves ordinance to codify protections for reproductive and gender-affirming care; amends subpoena provision
Summary
The Governance, Accountability and Economic Development Committee on Thursday approved Council Bill 120,950 to codify protections for reproductive health care and gender-affirming treatment in city law, and amended the bill to remove a municipal subpoena-quash provision pending alignment with state court rules.
Get email alerts on the Reproductive Health And Lgbtq Protections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Governance, Accountability and Economic Development Committee on Thursday approved Council Bill 120,950, an ordinance the mayor transmitted to reaffirm Seattle as a welcoming city and to codify protections for reproductive health care and gender-affirming treatment. The committee adopted one amendment that removes a city-level subpoena-quash section and instead refers requesters to existing state procedural rules.
Deputy Mayor Greg Wong, introducing the mayor's transmittal, said the measure is part of a broader city response to federal actions the administration views as hostile to reproductive and LGBTQ rights. "We are activating on multiple fronts to ensure we as a city have strategies, and actions to stand up for our people, our policies, and our laws," Wong said.
The ordinance, drafted with input from the city’s LGBTQ Commission and departments, has four main components: reaffirmation of city values; a declaration of public policy supporting access to protected health care services (defined to include reproductive health care services and gender-affirming treatment); limits on city employee cooperation with out-of-state investigations and enforcement related to protected services; and legal remedies, including a city cause of action for interference and authority for the City Attorney to seek injunctive relief.
City building plans examiner Jessica McKeag, speaking as a city employee who requested the legislation, said the protections are "life saving" and described personal concerns about access to care and safety under recent federal actions. "Health care is a basic human right and should be available to everyone," McKeag said.
Ashley Ford, co-chair of the city’s volunteer LGBTQ Commission, told the committee the ordinance is urgently needed because "the basic rights and dignities of the LGBTQ community are under attack," and urged the council to pass the bill as a statement of public policy and legal protection.
Tomasso Johnson of Council Central Staff explained that much of the proposed ordinance mirrors existing Washington state shield law, but that the municipal code additions would clarify city employee responsibilities, particularly for municipal court employees, and that the ordinance appears to be the first municipal code language to include the "Two-Spirit" designation in Seattle’s code. He also noted Senate Bill 5632 pending in Olympia, which would add technical clarifications to the state shield law and could require later adjustments to city code if enacted.
Amendment 1, presented by council staff, struck the ordinance’s standalone municipal subpoena-quash section. The amendment left in place the statute-aligned protections and added recitals directing subpoena challenges to the Washington Rules of Civil Procedure to ensure motions are filed in a court of competent jurisdiction. The amendment passed 4-0 on a roll call.
After discussion, Council President Sarah Nelson moved passage of the bill as amended; the motion was seconded and then passed on a roll call vote of 4-0 (Councilmembers Rivera, Solomon, Kettle and Chair Nelson voting "aye"). Nelson said the ordinance will be transmitted to full Council for consideration on March 25, 2025, and that the administration and council staff are prepared to continue refining language as related state action evolves.
Councilmembers asked several legal questions during the discussion, including whether municipal courts are the appropriate venue for particular motions and how the ordinance would interact with constitutional full faith and credit obligations. Deputy Mayor Wong and central staff said the legislation had been coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office and that additional technical conversations with municipal court and legal staff would continue.
The committee recorded the vote as 4 in favor, none opposed. The committee recommended forwarding Council Bill 120,950 as amended to the full Council for final action at the March 25, 2025 meeting.

