Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance Cameras topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters urge Seattle leaders to uninstall Axon cameras and redirect $8.8 million in annual spending
Summary
Multiple public commenters at the July 7 Seattle City Council meeting urged the mayor and council to remove Axon surveillance cameras, arguing they do not prevent crime, pose privacy risks, cost $8.8 million annually, and enable harmful uses by police and other agencies.
Dozens of public commenters on July 7 pressed Seattle leaders to uninstall surveillance cameras supplied by Axon and to reallocate program funds to mental-health, housing and non-police crisis response.
Multiple speakers told the council the cameras are not effective crime deterrents and instead create surveillance harms. Naomi told the council the Axon system costs the city "$8,800,000 a year" and urged councilors to "move as a council to uninstall them." Ken Bridal and other speakers framed the cameras as tools of a surveillance state; Bridal asked individual council members whether they would commit to physically removing cameras. Phil Masek, a longtime technologist, warned the council that Axon functions as an "information broker," centralizing data from 911 calls to evidence systems and creating privacy and AI-training risks.
Several commenters connected the camera debate to police accountability and recent violent incidents. Ivana Yovanovitch, Mantei and others raised the case of Christopher Leahy and the stabbing of a young transgender person (a matter the speakers said had resulted in a finding of unfitness to stand trial), arguing that the ruling and other criminal-justice outcomes show systemic failures and that the city must better protect trans and disabled residents.
Council members did not debate policy changes on the floor during public comment; the meeting’s formal legislative action later addressed Business Improvement Area guidance. Speakers asked the council to consider budget trade-offs — specifically to reallocate Axon program funds to care teams, housing and mental-health interventions — and to pursue permanent uninstallation rather than temporary shutdowns. Several commenters praised Mayor Katie Wilson for turning stadium-district cameras off earlier that day but urged full removal and contract changes.
Why it matters: Public commenters tied surveillance policy to civic priorities including privacy, police accountability, racialized harms and budget choices. The presence of multiple organized groups (Non-Drivers Alliance, National Federation of the Blind, advocacy coalitions) and a cited $8.8 million annual program cost frames the discussion as both fiscal and civil-rights-centered.
Caveats: Several factual claims in public comment (for example, statements about individual criminal cases, the court ruling for Christopher Leahy, and program totals) were assertions by speakers in the public-comment period and were not adjudicated or confirmed during the meeting; where possible the article attributes those claims to the speakers.
