Public commenters raise issues from protest safety to DoorDash lobbying and 1 Seattle plan amendments

The Seattle City Council opened the Feb. 18 meeting with a hybrid public comment period in which speakers addressed protest safety, proposed amendments to the 1 Seattle plan, concerns about policing and housing policy, and lobbying tied to DoorDash.

Skyler Ferris, an in-person commenter, said, "The ability for the public to protest safely is essential for a free and democratic system." Ferris spoke at the start of the in-person comment queue.

An unnamed resident requested an opportunity to present a brief slideshow to the council about a short list of proposed amendments to the 1 Seattle plan. The commenter said the packet of six proposed amendments had been emailed to councilmembers "two or three times" and offered to bring subject-matter experts to answer questions at a future date.

Remote commenter David Haines criticized the council’s prior approaches to public safety and housing. Haines argued the council was elected to "right the wrongs of the past councils" and asserted that prior reforms had undermined policing and public-safety outcomes; he said the council’s spending priorities favored what he called political goals over community safety. These comments reflected Haines’s individual perspective; no policy action on his remarks was taken during the meeting.

Another remote commenter, Alberto Alvarez, noted a recent lawsuit against DoorDash alleging anticompetitive practices. Alvarez said a DoorDash lobbyist, Piro Pfeiffer, visited the council in December and January and urged councilmembers to consider the potential market power of the delivery company when reviewing lobbyist contacts.

The public comment period included two in-person and two remote speakers; each was allotted two minutes. The council did not act on items raised during public comment during the Feb. 18 meeting; speakers asked for consideration or further engagement.