Podcast appearances and mentions of manuel ellis

March 3, 2020. Tacoma, Washington. On March 3, 2020, three months before George Floyd was killed, Manuel Ellis found himself in a similar situation at an intersection in Tacoma, WA. He was tased, on his stomach, handcuffed, and held down by a police officer kneeling on his back. Despite pleas that he couldn't breathe, Manny remained in that position until he suffocated to death. The officers claimed they used appropriate force to subdue a man who swung at them first. However, witness videos seemed to show a very different story...Get bonus content from Generation Why at: patreon.com/generationwhyListen ad free with Wondery+. Join Wondery+ for exclusives, binges, early access, and ad free listening. Available in the Wondery App. https://wondery.app.link/generationwhy.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Beaches are a place of relaxation, fun and, in some cases, strange laws. Some beaches around the United States have more specific laws for visitors to keep in mind. In the headlines on #TheUpdate this Thursday, the New York City Marathon organizers will soon have to pay a bridge toll, just like every other commuter, if New York transit officials have their way. The hotly contested issue of whether New York's $15 congestion toll should go forward is hitting a federal courtroom this week as New Jersey seeks to block the measure. And in the American west, a former Tacoma police officer who was hired as a sheriff's deputy in a neighboring county — despite his involvement in the violent fatal arrest of Manuel Ellis in 2020 — has resigned his new job after just two days.

On this week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Seattle political reporter, editor of PubliCola, and co-host of the Seattle Nice podcast, Erica Barnett! They discuss: Seattle Police Contract Raises Budget Concerns, Accountability Questions Thurston Sheriff's Hiring of Officer Involved in Manny Ellis' Killing Illuminates Broader Accountability Issues Burien Countersues King County Over Encampment Sweeps Unhoused Asylum Seekers at Garfield As always, a full text transcript of the show is available at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Erica Barnett, at @ericacbarnett. Resources “Tentative Police Contract Includes 23 Percent Retroactive Raise, Raising Cops' Base Salary to Six Figures” by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola   “City Council FINALLY Ratifies Coalition of City Unions Contract Despite Budget Deficit Concerns” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger   “Residents condemn Sheriff's hiring of former Tacoma officer involved in death of Manuel Ellis in Tacoma” by P. Jade Asumbrado from The Journal of Olympia, Lacey, and Tumwater   “Officer hired as sheriff's deputy despite involvement in fatal Manuel Ellis arrest resigns” by Gene Johnson from The Associated Press   About Certification Hearings | Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission   “Washington state creates process for public to seek police decertification” by Amy Radil from KUOW   “As Burien Countersues Over Homelessness Ban, Another Unsheltered Person Dies Downtown” by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola   “Will Seattle Respond to the Refugee Crisis with Housing or Handcuffs?” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger   “Anonymous donor offers $50,000 to get asylum-seekers shelter” by Anna Patrick from The Seattle Times   Find stories that Crystal is reading here   Listen on your favorite podcast app to all our episodes here

The officer acquitted in the death of Manuel Ellis was forced to resign his position with Thurston County due to death threats and public pressure. Victoria warns about mob rule and the heckler's veto taking precedent over court rulings. // A checking of the texting. // Minimum wage laws are already proving disastrous for CA. 

What’s Trending: Nearly 30 bullets were fired at an apartment biulding in Tacoma causing major flooding. The Singing Barber in Ballard had a 2nd break-in just in this past year. Redfin is including climate factors in its listings for home buyers. Netanyahu disagrees with Biden about not going into Rafah // Big Local: 2 people were stabbed in Tukwilla on Sunday. Former Tacoma cops who were aquitted in the Manuel Ellis' trial will not have thier legal fee's payed by the state. In Battle Ground, a 69 year old parade festival is struggling to continue // Biden's executive order is getting a lot of criticism for 'attempting to register' illiegal immigrants. 

It's a pivotal moment for policing in Tacoma, with the departure of three officers acquitted of criminal charges in the death of Manuel Ellis. Tacoma officials say they've negotiated a contract with the police union that gives the city important new powers when handling future misconduct allegations. But some community members say the new three-year contract has sidelined their goals for greater transparency by the Tacoma Police Department.

Johnathan Johnson, President, Tacoma WA NAACP comments his organization's priorities for 2024 and his analysis of the Manuel Ellis trial and verdictLyle Quasim, Chair, Tacoma Pierce County Black Collective will comment on the Manuel Ellis killing in Tacoma WA Reverend Dr. Gregory, Pastor, Shiloh Baptist Church in Tacoma is announcing his retirement Bob Armstead, President, National Association of Minority Contractors (NAMC)-Washington State Chapter Sarah Sense Wilson, Co Founder, Urban Native Education Alliance (UNEA) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Johnathan Johnson, President, Tacoma WA NAACP comments his organization's priorities for 2024 and his analysis of the Manuel Ellis trial and verdict Lyle Quasim, Chair, Tacoma Pierce County Black Collective will comment on the Manuel Ellis killing in Tacoma WA Reverend Dr. Gregory, Pastor, Shiloh Baptist Church in Tacoma is announcing his retirement Bob Armstead, President, National Association of Minority Contractors (NAMC)-Washington State Chapter Sarah Sense Wilson, Co Founder, Urban Native Education Alliance (UNEA)

Johnathan Johnson, President, Tacoma WA NAACP comments his organization's priorities for 2024 and his analysis of the Manuel Ellis trial and verdict Lyle Quasim, Chair, Tacoma Pierce County Black Collective will comment on the Manuel Ellis killing in Tacoma WA Reverend Dr. Gregory, Pastor, Shiloh Baptist Church in Tacoma is announcing his retirement Bob Armstead, President, National Association of Minority Contractors (NAMC)-Washington State Chapter Sarah Sense Wilson, Co Founder, Urban Native Education Alliance (UNEA)

On this week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Chair of Sierra Club Seattle, long time communications and political strategist, Robert Cruickshank! Crystal and Robert dive into the open machinations of the big corporate donors to appoint their preferred candidate to a Seattle City Council vacancy and how the messy process has leached its way into Seattle School Board politics. They then discuss the qualification of a right-wing initiative to dismantle the state's plan to take on the climate crisis. Robert gives a rare kudos to The Seattle Times for their presentation of a debate over homeless encampments, they both are dismayed at the depressing and infuriating news that the Tacoma officers in the Manuel Ellis case are getting paid $500k each to voluntarily leave the police department, and the show rounds out with analysis of some media's treatment of AG Ferguson's lawsuit to block a merger between Kroger and Albertsons. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Robert Cruickshank, at @cruickshank.   Resources RE-AIR: The Big Waterfront Bamboozle with Mike McGinn and Robert Cruickshank from Hacks & Wonks   “Harrell Administration Consultant Tim Ceis Urges Businesses to Back Tanya Woo for Open Council Seat” by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola   “Business, labor lobby for open seat on Seattle City Council” by David Kroman from The Seattle Times   “Seattle City Council candidate has residency conflict in School Board role” by Claire Bryan from The Seattle Times    “Initiative 2117 (repealing Washington's Climate Commitment Act) gets certified” by Andrew Villeneuve from The Cascadia Advocate   “‘Should Seattle remove encampments?' Advocates debate” by Greg Kim from The Seattle Times   “Tacoma cops acquitted in death of Manuel Ellis will get $500K each to resign, city says” by Peter Talbot from The News Tribune    “Kroger-Albertsons merger would hike grocery prices, create near monopolies in some Washington communities, AG says” by Helen Smith from KING 5   “WA suit to block Kroger-Albertsons merger gets cheers, raised eyebrows” by Paul Roberts from The Seattle Times   Find stories that Crystal is reading here   Listen on your favorite podcast app to all our episodes here   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy walks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get full versions of our Tuesday topical show and our Friday week-in-review delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we're continuing our Friday week-in-review shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show, one of our audience favorites, and today's co-host: Chair of Sierra Club Seattle, longtime communications and political strategist, Robert Cruickshank. [00:01:12] Robert Cruickshank: Hey - thanks for having me on again, Crystal. [00:01:14] Crystal Fincher: Hey, excited to have you on again - here in 2024. Well, we've got a lot to talk about - things are getting spicy in the City of Seattle, with regards to this upcoming Seattle City Council appointment to replace Teresa Mosqueda's seat. Because Teresa was elected to the King County Council, which created a vacancy - so now it needs to be filled. So what happened this week? [00:01:38] Robert Cruickshank: Well, I think a lot has happened with the machinations around this appointment process - and in fact, things we're learning about how the new regime at City Hall is conducting itself - and they come together. I think this is basically Tim Ceis - who is former deputy mayor to Greg Nickels back in the 2000s, corporate lobbyist, close to established power in Seattle - and Council President Sara Nelson, who, of course, just became council president after the new council with a bunch of her allies got sworn in at the beginning of the month. They seem to be conducting a purge of anyone progressive in the City Hall, in City staff, and are determined to consolidate power around what is actually, I think, a fairly radical agenda for the city that most voters didn't really actually select, especially when it comes to cutting taxes for big businesses and slashing public services. But in order to try to achieve that, they know that they need to try to push out and keep out anyone who might disagree, anyone who might even be remotely progressive on anything. I think it's a pretty significant misreading of the results of recent elections in Seattle - their candidates won often narrowly on questions of public safety, not on cutting taxes for big businesses. In fact, most of their candidates hedged on the questions of taxes when they were asked during the campaigns. But I think you see a real desire to consolidate power around a small group of loyalists, no dissent allowed. And this is a approach to governance that I don't think Seattleites expect or want. I mean, most people in Seattle assume and want a fairly technocratic, go-along-to-get-along government where everyone is sort of driven by data, gets along with each other, and try to do things in the public interest. Now, you and I, a lot of our listeners, know that's not really how the city operates. But what we're seeing now is, I think, a much more aggressive and - in some ways, unprecedented for Seattle - attempt to impose a radical agenda on the city from the right. [00:03:26] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, this isn't what voters thought they were signing up for. This isn't what anyone campaigned on. Voters are looking at what the candidates are saying, they're looking at the mail, the commercials - again, definitely talked about public safety, talked about homelessness. But what we saw in Sara Nelson's first statement was austerity - we're cutting taxes for business. But voters didn't weigh in on this at all. And I don't think people are going to have a great reaction to this. [00:03:55] Robert Cruickshank: When Seattle voters weigh in on questions of taxes, Seattleites pass almost every tax put in front of them. When it comes to state ballot initiatives to tax the rich - they might fail statewide as they did in 2010, but they pass with wide support in Seattle. When it comes to money in politics, Seattleites approved taxing themselves - raising their property taxes slightly - to create the Democracy Voucher program. This is a city that does not want corporate money in politics and yet, that is exactly what's happened here. The reason we're talking about all this right now is not just because there's a council appointment, but because Tim Ceis, this aforementioned corporate lobbyist, sent out an email at the beginning of the week urging all of the people - whether they're wealthy individuals or from big corporations - who donated to the independent expenditure campaigns to help get a lot of these councilmembers elected last year, telling them - Hey, we need you to mobilize right now to stop Vivian Song, who is currently on the Seattle School Board, who's seeking the appointment - Ceis says, We got to stop her. She held a fundraiser for Teresa Mosqueda. She endorsed Ron Davis. She's friendly to unions. And gosh, we can't have that on our council. And the way Ceis put it was to basically act as if these wealthy interests had bought the council. They now own the council - it is theirs, not ours. Not ours in the sense of "we the people." And they can do whatever they want with it. So Ceis' attitude - and I think Sara Nelson shares this - is that it's theirs now, nobody else can tell them what to do with the city council. They have the absolute right to pick whoever they want to and impose this agenda on the city. I think both that attitude and a policy agenda they want are not what the city wants at all, and they are going to run into a big backlash real fast. [00:05:30] Crystal Fincher: Real fast. And the brazenness with which he stated this was wild. This is from the email that Tim Ceis sent - "While it's been a great two weeks watching the outcome of our effort as the new City Council has taken office, the independent expenditure success earned you the right to let the Council know not to offer the left the consolation prize of this Council seat." Okay, they're just admitting that they bought this seat. They're just admitting that - Hey, yeah, it was our effort that got these people onto the council. And we spent a million dollars plus in this independent expenditure effort and that gives us the right - he said the "right" - to tell the council what to do, which I don't recall seeing something this overtly stated before. [00:06:17] Robert Cruickshank: There's an important contrast we can draw - both Bruce Harrell and Eric Adams, mayor of New York, were elected in 2021. And at the time, Eric Adams was hailed as some sort of future of the Democratic Party - center right, tough on crime, pushing back against progressives. Well, here we are at the beginning of 2024 - Eric Adams has a 28% approval rating in New York - highly unlikely to win a re-election at this point. There are a lot of reasons for that, but one of the primary reasons is cuts to public services - libraries, schools, parks, all sorts of things. And the public is just clearly rejecting that. Bruce Harrell is up for re-election next year. And I think Harrell's going to have to decide for himself - does he want to be the one to get all the blame for this? Or maybe he just thinks Sara Nelson takes all the blame. Who knows? Maybe there's a good cop, bad cop approach being planned here - with Sara Nelson being the bad cop pushing austerity and Harrell's try to be the good cop, try to bring everybody together. Who knows? But I think what you see in New York is what you're going to see in Seattle - a significant backlash. I also want to mention - you quoted Ceis' letter talking about giving a prize to the left. Vivian Song is not a leftist. This is the part that just blows my mind about all this. She's as mainstream a Seattle Democrat as it gets. If you read her application letter for the council appointment, she talks about hiring more cops, being careful with city spending. She's honestly probably a little bit to the right of most of the previous city council that just got voted out. But to Ceis and Nelson, she's unacceptable because she's friendly with unions, was friendly with some progressives - what that shows me is that they only want extremists like themselves or who will just do their own bidding. And I think they're setting themselves up for a significant backlash. [00:07:58] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and the final point - in looking at this, there were so many applicants to this - all across the spectrum, right? There weren't just progressive applicants for the seat. There were dozens and dozens of people from across the spectrum - and good choices - people who had experience, who have the right intentions from across the spectrum. This isn't about - Well, we just don't want an extreme leftist from these corporate interests. This is about - You're going to pick our person. Because there are several other choices on there - they're talking about Tanya Woo. Why aren't they talking about Phil Tavel, right? Why aren't they talking about anyone else that seems to align with their interests? They want loyalists - that's the bottom line. It goes beyond what the ideology is. It's - are you going to be loyal to me? Are you going to back me on what I'm doing? And without that assurance - We're not backing you. With that assurance, you're in and we're going to fight. And hey, we spent a million plus to get these other folks in. Now we're using our muscle to get you in too. And we're telling people - Hey, this was our show. We elected these people. It was our effort and that gives us the right to dictate what's going to happen. When you have the primary concern, the primary litmus test being loyalty and not is this going to help the residents of the city? Do they have experience? Can they credibly lead and do this? Wow, we get into a lot of trouble if it's just - Are you going to back me? Are you not going to question anything I'm doing? Are you going to rubber stamp this? So this appointment process is really going to be an opportunity to see where the loyalties lie. Are they serving their constituents or are they serving the business community? Because again, there are lots of picks if they wanted to go with a conservative person, right? I think they probably will. But the point is, it's got to be the one handpicked by business. This is going to tell us a lot about where the heads of these new councilmembers are at. Yeah, it [00:09:49] Robert Cruickshank: will. And I think it's also setting up 2024 - not just in terms of the policy discussions we'll see in City Hall, but the campaigns. This seat that gets filled in this appointment process later this month will be on the November 2024 ballot citywide. And I think Tanya Woo would likely run for that seat if she's appointed to it. If so, then she's going to have to go to voters - not as someone picked for her qualifications, at least in the way the public will see it. The public will see it as - she was picked by business because she's loyal to business. Vivian Song may want to run for that seat too - last night got endorsed by the King County Labor Council to hold that appointment. It sets up a very interesting - not just 10 days between now and when this appointment gets made, but 10 months between now and the November election, where I think you're going to see real contests over the future of the city. [00:10:35] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Another interesting dimension with this about Vivian Song is about her residency and her existing Seattle School Board position. What's going on here? [00:10:45] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, so we'll go back to 2021 - where there was an article that appeared in The Stranger when Vivian was running for the school board, questioning her residency - that she had changed residencies and changed voter registration - and questioning whether she was eligible to run for the District 4 seat for the school board. Now, the school board districts don't line up exactly with the city council districts, so listeners should keep that in mind - but Vivian won, won citywide. Because in school board, you are first elected out of the primary in just the district. Then the top two from that district go on to a citywide election in the school board. So Vivian won citywide in 2021. Last summer, it emerges that some of her critics and opponents on school board were questioning where she lives now - that she might not actually live in the district she technically represents. This is brought to the school board legal department, which looked at it and did not see a need to kick her off the school board, or declare her seat vacant and force an election. People move around for personal reasons, and they don't have to be told to tell those personal reasons in public. But Vivian is not someone who is manipulating the system for political gain - there are legitimate reasons she was moving. And yet this comes out in a Seattle Times article this week and gets mentioned at a board meeting last night - the only board meeting during this entire council appointment process. This has been under discussion behind the scenes at the school district for months. But why does it emerge now? I think it's the obvious reason why it emerges now - because some of Vivian's critics on the school board, whether they're working directly with Tim Ceis and Sara Nelson or not, are certainly helping Tim Ceis and Sara Nelson try to torpedo Vivian Song's candidacy. Now, from a progressive perspective, this doesn't necessarily mean that Vivian's the right pick for the appointment process. We should take a look at everybody. But I think the relentless efforts to destroy her, both in her position on the school board and to keep her out of the city council, suggest to me some real problems with the way both the city council and the school board are now being governed by small little cliques determined to hold on to their own power, to push austerity, unfriendly to labor, and hostile to public input. I think it's a really shocking and disturbing development that we're seeing in our city. Away from small-d democratic governance. I think everyone in the city should be really concerned about these developments. [00:13:05] Crystal Fincher: Completely agree. And statewide news - big news - it's going to impact our November 2024 ballot. The second right-wing initiative qualified for the 2024 ballot. What does this do and what does this mean? [00:13:21] Robert Cruickshank: So background here is that the far right chair of the state Republican Party, State Representative Jim Walsh - hardcore MAGA Trump guy - became State Party Chair last year and is working with a wealthy mega-donor, a guy named Brian Heywood, to try to repeal the main accomplishments of the Democratic majority in the legislature of the last few years. So we've got six initiatives so far that they've submitted to the state to qualify - two of them have made it to the ballot. One of them you just mentioned, which will be Initiative 2117 to try to destroy our state's climate action plan. They want to repeal the carbon pricing piece of it - sometimes known as cap and trade, cap and invest, whatever you want to call it. Their argument is - Oh, it's why gas prices are so high in Washington state. Well, no. One, we on the West Coast have always had higher gas prices than the rest of the country. And in fact, the reason Washington has high gas prices is because of King County. I did an analysis a few weeks ago that shows - if you cross the river from Portland to Vancouver, Washington, the average cost of gas is the same. If you are in Tacoma, you're paying less than you pay in Portland, Oregon. So if carbon pricing was causing gas prices to soar across Washington state, you'd see it everywhere - but you don't. What that suggests to me is you might actually be seeing oil companies gouging King County - that's worth investigation, which the oil companies don't want. But point being - Jim Walsh, who's a Trump guy, Brian Heywood, who's the wealthy funder, want to destroy our ability to tackle the climate crisis. They want to destroy our ability to fund the things that are needed to help people get off of fossil fuel. And so they're putting this on the ballot. They're going to put some other initiatives on the ballot to try to repeal our capital gains tax on the rich, that funds schools and early learning. And this is going to be one of the big battles that we're seeing this year - an effort to impose, again, a far-right agenda on the state of Washington. And I think that progressive organizations, the State Democratic Party are maybe a little slow to respond to this - I think they will engage, but now's the time to start letting people know what's happening here, what this attack is, how dangerous it could be, and the importance of stopping all six of these initiatives. [00:15:30] Crystal Fincher: We've seen Republicans have an increasingly hard time winning statewide and legislatively over the past few years - they've lost power, they tried the courts. The Supreme Court actually just rejected a case trying to come to the Supreme Court about the capital gains tax. So this is their only recourse now. And unfortunately, because of the way our political system is, money gets you really far. And so if you have these multi-hundred millionaires, these billionaires who come in and say - You know what, this is what I want - they're able to basically make us go through this whole charade. And so we have to fight against it. It's here. We have to do this. But it really is important to talk to people about - not to fall for these cheap lines that, Oh, this is another gas tax. It's the hidden gas tax, as they say. But we've had this price gouging conversation before - I think more people are seeing it, which is encouraging. But we're going to have to go through this whole campaign. [00:16:29] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, and I think that it's worth noting there are reasonable discussions to be had about how to do carbon pricing right and what it should fund. And there were very intense conversations and disagreements about that when this was passed in 2021. And I think it makes sense to take a look and say - Okay, how do we make sure we're doing this right? That's not what this initiative does. This initiative uses voter concern about gas prices to totally destroy our ability to tackle the climate crisis. This is coming from people who don't believe the climate crisis is real. Or if they do believe it's real, they don't really want to do anything to stop it because they think driving and keeping oil companies happy is more important. We see wild weather all across the region - we remember that super hot heat wave from the summer of 2021, we remember the long droughts of 2022 - this is not a time to mess around. If we want to look at how to address needs to ensure that carbon pricing works - great. If we want to take a look at what it's funding - great. But to totally destroy the system entirely because a bunch of right-wingers and wealthy donors want it, I think, is a disaster. [00:17:30] Crystal Fincher: Absolute disaster. I was certainly one of those people who had criticisms of the Climate Commitment Act. There are certainly tweaks that should be made. There are some better ways that we can go about some of these processes. But the option isn't - do nothing. That's unacceptable. It isn't just dismantle and repeal everything. Just like with Social Security, just like with Medicare - these big, important pieces of legislation - that do come with benefits. We're going to have to tweak them. We're going to have to get information back, get data back, and respond to that with some technical fixes, some tweaks to make sure that we steer it onto the best path that it can be. But wow, we cannot afford to do nothing. We can't afford to dismantle this at this point in time. This is one of the most hopeful opportunities we have - really in the country - to show how states can lead and come together to get this done. We can't dismantle this at this point in time. Also want to talk about a debate that we saw, on the pages of The Seattle Times, among homeless advocates that reflects a lot of the conversation going on in communities about how to handle encampments. What was talked about here and what's important to understand? [00:18:42] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, I want to do something I don't always do, which is give credit to The Seattle Times for hosting this discussion. I think it was a really good way to do it - between two people - Tim Harris, who used to be the executive editor of Real Change, and Tiffani McCoy, a leader in the Initiative 135 House Our Neighbors Now social housing effort here in Seattle. These are two progressive people who have long records of advocacy for housing and for the needs of the homeless. So they didn't do the usual thing that media will do - is pit a progressive against some crazy right winger. These are two people, who I think come at this with the right intentions and the right values. And they both made some pretty good points about how we handle this issue of sweeps and encampments. Sweeps - I believe they're awful. They're also popular. The public likes them. We saw the 2017 mayoral race, we saw in 2021 mayoral and city council races, city attorney race. We saw it last year in the city council races. Candidates who back sweeps almost always defeat candidates who oppose them - we're getting nowhere, and the people who are living in these encampments aren't getting help. Now, this doesn't mean we should embrace sweeps. And I thought that Tiffani McCoy did a really good job of laying out, again, the damage that sweeps do to not just the possessions of people who are living in tents, but to their own psychological state. And it often makes it harder for them to escape addiction, harder for them to find stability they need to get a home. I thought Tim Harris, though, made some good points about the problems that happen if you leave an encampment in place - how drug dealers eventually find it. And even the best managed encampments - it just takes one or two people with bad intentions to show up and the whole place kind of falls apart into violence. So leaving an encampment out there doesn't help the people who are living there, especially now we're in the extremely cold winter season. But what happens is, too often, this gets framed as a discussion between - do we sweep or do we leave encampments indefinitely? And when that's the terms of the discussion, sweeps will win every single time. And we've seen that for years now. And I think progressives need to realize that that's the case. We are not going to stop sweeps by trying to argue against sweeps alone, and to argue essentially for leaving encampments indefinitely. We have to get out of that binary that we're losing and the people in those encampments are losing. And I think the only way out is to go to the solution, right? We need to build housing for people immediately. Bruce Harrell took office on a promise to build 2,000 units of housing for folks - homes, shelter, tiny homes, whatever - to get people out. Did that happen? Where did that go? You know, there are some tiny home villages that are out there. They do a great job. But why aren't we massively expanding those? Where are the safe RV sites? Where are other forms of shelter? Where's the permanent supportive housing that we need? Where are the new SROs that we need? I think that's where progressive energy needs to focus - is on getting people out of tents now - into real housing with a roof, with a door that locks that they like, where they can bring all their possessions, including their dog and their partner. And I think that's where the emphasis needs to go. I think if we get stuck in this sweeps versus indefinite encampments, we're just going to keep losing. The people who need help aren't going to get it. And so I thought that this debate that The Times hosted did a good job of really laying out why we need to go in that direction. [00:21:59] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. I think this is another area where - just the classic communications issue - you can't just argue against something. You have to argue for the vision that you want - because it doesn't translate - what people do here is exactly what you said. Well, okay - if we aren't going to sweep, then they're going to just stay there and that's unacceptable too. And it's unacceptable to a lot of people for a lot of different reasons, right? Some people are those crazy right wingers who just, you know - Get them out of my sight type of thing. But there are people who are saying - We need to get these people into a better place. We have lethal cold in the winter. We have lethal heat in the summer. We have public safety concerns. People who are unhoused, who are in these encampments, are more likely to be victims of crime than just about anyone else. This is a hazard to their health, to everyone's health. This is a big challenge. We need to get them into housing. We need more shelter options. We can't have this conversation while we know there isn't the infrastructure to get everyone indoors. Until we have that infrastructure, what are we talking about? We have to build. We have to build more transitional housing. We have to build more single residence occupancy, or those SROs. We have to move forward with housing. And I do believe in a Housing First approach. There's also this preemptive kind of argument that we're hearing from right wingers - Oh, we already tried that. Oh, we so have not tried that. We've never come close to trying that - on more than a trial with 20 people basis - that has never been a policy that the city has pursued overall. We have pursued these encampment sweeps and you can see they aren't getting us anywhere. The problem has actually gotten worse while we're doing this. So we have to make sure that we're speaking with unity and articulating what we want to see, what we're pursuing, what needs to get done. [00:23:50] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, and I think there is another reason for urgency here. Sweeps, under rulings of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals - federal - in the case against the City of Boise, Idaho, and a similar case against the City of Grants Pass, Oregon. The appeals court ruled that you cannot sweep an encampment without offering shelter to the people living there. A lot of cities, including San Francisco and others, have wanted to get out of that. They appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in the last few days. The Supreme Court has said - Yes, we will take up those cases. It is highly likely then, perhaps by this summer, the U.S. Supreme Court will say - You can sweep whenever you want to. You can eliminate an encampment without having to offer shelter at all. And I think a lot of advocates will point out that those offers of shelter, you know, are maybe a fig leaf at best. That fig leaf is going to go away very soon. So I think that just creates even more urgency to push really hard to get the city and the state to step up and provide housing, whether it's, you know, buying more hotels to get people out of tents or put up more tiny home villages. Whatever it takes, we have to do it, and we have to do it now because there is now an actual ticking clock at the U.S. Supreme Court on this. [00:24:57] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And you know what? I do want to recognize what Dow Constantine has been doing with leaning on this issue - with the buying the hotels, working in concert with different cities in the county, offering - even in the Burien debacle, it was really the county who provided the light at the end of the tunnel and real tangible assistance to actually deal with the issue and get people into housing. So, you know, more of that - more of what we've seen from Dow Constantine, more of focusing on getting people housed. Absolutely want to see it. And just absolutely dejecting news - where I wasn't shocked, but certainly dismayed. The Tacoma cops from the Manuel Ellis case are getting $500,000 to voluntarily leave the department. What are your thoughts on this? [00:25:47] Robert Cruickshank: I mean, it's unsurprising and appalling that they're getting half a million dollars after killing Manuel Ellis and getting away with it. I mean, getting away with it was bad enough - the way that the jury ruled in that case a few weeks back. Now they're literally getting money in their pocket after this - being waved goodbye. And I'm sure that this does not come with any stipulations that would make it difficult for them to get a new job anywhere else. I remember when McGinn was mayor in the early 2010s, the Ian Birk case. Ian Birk, the Seattle officer who shot and killed Native American woodcarver John T. Williams. Birk was not really prosecuted. There was an inquest. But Birk left the department, got a job somewhere else. Well, one of the things McGinn did was pursue legal remedies to make it impossible for Birk to get another job as an officer. I do not see any such thing happening here in the Tacoma case. These officers are getting a payday and getting away with it. But I think what this shows, yet again, is the importance of having real teeth in police accountability. And I think it also shows that the criminal justice system is not a substitute for that. We can't assume that the criminal justice system alone is going to hold cops accountable, as we saw in this case - yet again, it didn't. We need reforms at the state level to remove officer accountability from bargaining. We need to make it easier for cities to hold cops accountable who break the law, who commit murder, things like that. And that's where this needs to go, because what has happened here is injustice upon injustice upon injustice. And if this doesn't spur us to act, then what's going to? [00:27:32] Crystal Fincher: There's currently a federal review going on by the U.S. attorney for Western Washington. The family of Manny Ellis is calling for a consent decree for the City of Tacoma's police department with this. So those levers are turning. This issue to me is really - my goodness, this is not a pro-cop or an anti-cop thing, right? How do we hold people accountable who violate the standards that we set for them, who violate the standards that are already in place? This reminds me of what happened in the City of Kent with the assistant chief who had Nazi memorabilia, Hitler mustache, Nazi signs at work - and then got paid a ton, got rich to leave voluntarily. What are we doing when there's no mechanism to fire a Nazi in the workplace? For people who are absolutely in favor of more police, why are you tolerating this? That's my question. Why are we allowing this to fall into the - Well, either you love cops or you hate cops and you're evil if you want to do anything attached to accountability. What are we even doing? I could go on about this for a long time, but this just falls into - What are we even doing? What is the point of anything if we have to pay people who violate our standard to leave? [00:28:53] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah. I mean, we've been told since the summer of 2020 - Oh, we can't defund the police. Okay, then what are we going to do? Because we can't allow this sort of behavior, whether it is Nazi memorabilia in the actual work office in Kent or killing Manuel Ellis on the streets of Tacoma to continue - which is what I fear is actually what critics of police accountability want. They just want cops to be able to do as they please without consequences because in their minds - and these are mostly white folks like me who are saying these things - they don't think they're ever going to have to face those consequences. They want to maintain their hierarchy, their place at the top as much as they can. They see police as part of that. It's really toxic. And I think that it just shows, once again, the urgency of fixing this - including at the state level, to get the legislature out of this idea that some legislators have that - Oh, somehow it undermines labor unions and labor rights if we take accountability out of police bargaining. Well, military soldiers can't bargain, they can't form a union. They have a strict uniform code of military justice. They're held, in many cases, to much higher standards than police officers. I think we could point out ways in which even the military needs to be held to higher standards, but at least there are some. They exist and they operate. Police - they are convinced that they have the right to do as they please and to get away with it - and to be paid well for it, even when they do horrific things. And that is what we have to reject. And I think at this point - cities, we need to hold them accountable and push them. But the state needs to step in and we need to see changes to state law to make it easier to have real accountability at the local level. [00:30:25] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. Final thing I want to talk about today is a lawsuit announced by Attorney General Bob Ferguson to stop the Kroger-Albertsons merger that they have announced their intention to do, saying that this is going to be bad for competition, creating grocery monopolies. Grocery prices are already sky high - this would make it worse. What do you think about this? [00:30:49] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, I think it's absolutely the right thing to do and well within Attorney General Ferguson's right to protect local business and to protect consumers. And people notice that Fred Meyer and QFC are owned by the Kroger company already, and there's not enough competition there - prices there are higher than they should be. You add in Albertsons to the mix, and that's even less competition. I think people understand that more competition helps bring prices down, it's good for consumers. More local ownership - good for consumers. And this is popular, right? I think the public likes it. What's interesting to me is the way this gets covered. There's an article in The Seattle Times today about Ferguson's lawsuit. And to read the body of the article, it makes it very clear that the public loves it, that there's a legitimate reason for Ferguson to sue to protect the particular needs of Washington businesses and Washington consumers - because our grocery market industry is not always the same as other states. And we need to have our attorney general in there fighting for our interests. People get that. The Federal Trade Commission under Lina Khan is doing a great job really finally reinvigorating antitrust law and taking on mergers like this. And she's fantastic. But the article opens with this weird frame, questioning whether this is all a political stunt and saying - Oh, well, Ferguson jumped out and filed a lawsuit before the FTC did. Maybe he's trying to undermine the FTC or going rogue. Maybe it's just a political stunt. Yet the rest of the article makes it super clear that that's not the case at all. The article shows that the FTC says - No, we can work with Washington. They don't seem to be worried about this. In fact, the FTC regularly works with attorneys general around the country in multi-state lawsuits, in partnership with the federal government. So it struck me as a case where the second two-thirds of that article was really useful, but the top of it seemed to be The Times going out of their way to try to spin this against Ferguson. And I think it's a real lesson to the State Democratic Party and to Ferguson's campaign that they cannot trust the media to give him a fair shake here in 2024. The media is going to be hostile. The media is going to try to take things that look potentially helpful for Ferguson and spin them against him. So they're going to have to be ahead of that game and prepare for that, as well as make sure they're doing their own comms, using social media really well to get the story out there. Because the public gets it - the public doesn't want to see Albertsons, Fred Meyer, QFC all owned by the same company. They know it's either going to raise higher prices, fewer staff in stores, or fewer stores outright. We've already seen some stores close across the region. You're going to get more of those bad outcomes. So thank you, Bob Ferguson, for stepping up. And Bob, watch your back, because the media is coming for you. [00:33:28] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. This is a positive thing. This is consumer protection. This is what we ask him to do as our attorney general. We have seen the direction that things go when there's consolidation. There's a lot of people who order delivery now. I don't know if many people have been in stores lately, but it is a miserable experience because they've reduced staff to untenable amounts where you have to wait for someone to unlock half the thing or stand in a special section and a special line. It's just - this is the wrong direction that we're going in. We've already seen this as a result of consolidation. We don't want to see any more. [00:34:03] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, and you can look at another act of consolidation that I wish someone had sued to stop, which is when Rite Aid bought Bartell Drugs in 2020. Everyone knows that's been a disaster. Bartell, locally owned store - you had great locally owned products for sale. You could go and get your prescription filled really quickly and easily. Once that merger happened, all of a sudden people's prescriptions got lost, lines got really long, took you hours to get your prescription filled. And then all of a sudden, stores started closing all over the place. Now Walgreens is closing stores because there's not a lot of competition. There's no incentive for them to keep these stores open. And now we're going to see the same things happen with grocery stores - those trends that are already kind of lurking, accelerating if this merger goes through. So kudos to Bob Ferguson, but he's got to watch out for the people who are coming for him, especially in the media. [00:34:52] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Well, thank you so much for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, January 19th, 2024. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Shannon Cheng. Our insightful co-host today is the Chair of Sierra Club Seattle, longtime communications and political strategist Robert Cruickshank. You can find Robert on Twitter, or X, @cruickshank. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter. You can find me on all platforms - BlueSky, Threads, anything - @finchfrii. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Friday week-in-review shows and our Tuesday topical show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

Baltimore County schools investigating alleged racial, antisemitic remarks by principal. Illinois cop uses taser on autistic 14-year-old in case of mistaken identity. Cops who killed Manuel Ellis get 500K and much more. Host: Dr. Rashad Richey (@IndisputableTYT) Guest Host: Rayyvana (@RayyvanaTTV) *** SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE: ☞ https://www.youtube.com/IndisputableTYT FACEBOOK: ☞ https://www.facebook.com/IndisputableTYT TWITTER: ☞ https://www.twitter.com/IndisputableTYT INSTAGRAM: ☞ https://www.instagram.com/IndisputableTYT Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Context of White Supremacy hosts The Context of White Supremacy hosts the weekly Compensatory Call-In. We encourage non-white listeners to dial in with their codified concepts, new terms, observations, research findings, workplace problems or triumphs, and/or suggestions on how best to Replace White Supremacy With Justice ASAP. This weekly broadcast examines current events from across the globe to learn what's happening in all areas of people activity. We cultivate Counter-Racist Media Literacy by scrutinizing journalists' word choices and using logic to deconstruct what is reported as "news." We'll use these sessions to hone our use of terms as tools to reveal truth, neutralize Racists/White people. #ANTIBLACKNESS Protests erupted just south of Gus in Tacoma, Washington after a jury acquitted all enforcement officers involved in the March 2020 police killing of privileged black male Manuel Ellis. Ellis died in police clutches singing the usual refrain: "I can't breathe." In Colorado, a pair of White paramedics were convicted of homicide for the 2019 death of privileged black male Elijah McClain, who died in police clutches. The 19-year-old McClain was reported to police for allegedly "acting strange." Also in Colorado, former President Donald J. Trump's name has been redacted from state presidential ballots because of his involvement in the January 6th insurrection. Other states may follow Colorado's lead for the coming presidential election. After numerous incidents of incorrect usage, the pharmacy giant Rite Aid has been banned from using facial recognition technology in their stores. It's unclear how many businesses are currently employing new-age surveillance or how the "correct" usage of this powerful technology will be enforced. #ChocolateForWhiteChristmas #JonMikeRone #TheCOWS14Years INVEST in The COWS – http://paypal.me/TheCOWS Cash App: https://cash.app/$TheCOWS CALL IN NUMBER: 605.313.5164 CODE: 564943#

12.22.2023 #RolandMartinUnfiltered: Wash. Cops Acquitted in Black Man's Death, Miss. Cop Returns to Work, Gospel Artist Bri Babineaux A Washington state jury acquitted three officers in the 2020 death of Manuel Ellis, a Black man who was shocked, beaten, and restrained face-down on a Tacoma sidewalk as he pleaded for breath.  The Ellis family attorney will be here to tell us how the family feels about this verdict. The Black Mississippi officer who shot an unarmed 11-year-old gets his job back after a grand jury found he did nothing wrong.  The Supreme Court is not going to interfere in Trump's immunity claims.  We'll discuss how the court is going to let the appeals play out before weighing in on the election interference case. A North Carolina Republican Senator is pushing a bill that will withhold federal funds from states like Colorado, which is utilizing the 14th Amendment to keep Trump off the ballot.  We'll also have Roland's interview with gospel artist Bri Babineaux, who will explain how her YouTube channel helped her get her first record deal.   Download the Black Star Network app at http://www.blackstarnetwork.com! We're on iOS, AppleTV, Android, AndroidTV, Roku, FireTV, XBox and SamsungTV. The #BlackStarNetwork is a news reporting platform covered under Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Officers Christopher Burbank, Matthew Collins, and Timothy Rankine faced charges of first-degree manslaughter. Burbank and Collins were also charged with second-degree murder. Each pleaded not guilty.

Sheley Secrest was in the courtroom when the verdict was read.

On the version of Hot off the Wire posted Dec. 22 at 6:15 a.m. CT: For most Americans dreaming of a white Christmas, this year's prospects aren't good. Although parts of the Rockies and Midwest already have snow or could get a fresh dusting by Monday, other parts of the country that are normally coated in white by this time of year are still sporting their drab, late-fall look. Among the areas more accustomed to snowy Decembers is the Northeast, where a powerful storm blew in this week and dumped heavy rain on the region's ski areas, wreaking havoc on the snowpack. So where should snow lovers turn? Alaska, where Anchorage could break its Christmas Day 1994 record of 30 inches, according to the National Weather Service. Holiday travel is expected to hit its peak right around now. Airlines are confident they can handle the crowds, but it could come down to the weather. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg says the government will be holding the airlines accountable to operate smoothly and treat passengers well if there are disruptions. Auto club AAA forecasts that 115 million people in the U.S. will go 50 miles or more from home between Saturday and New Year's Day. That's up 2% over last year. Most of those people will drive, and they will save a bit on gasoline, compared with a year ago. The United Nations says more than a half-million people are starving in Gaza because not enough food has entered the besieged territory as Israel keeps up its blistering campaign of airstrikes and ground operations. Palestinian officials said Friday that the death toll has now exceeded 20,000. That's around 1% of the territory's prewar population. PRAGUE (AP) — Authorities say three foreign nationals, two from the United Arab Emirates and one from the Netherlands, were among 25 wounded when a student opened fire at a university in Prague, killing 14 people. Thursday's mass shooting was the worst in Czech history. The city's police chief says a lone gunman opened fire in the philosophy department building of Charles University, where he was a student. Police said the gunman killed himself. The Czech government declared Saturday a national day of mourning to honor the victims, Prime Minister Petr Fiala said. MOSCOW (AP) — A Russian deputy foreign minister said talks with the United States on a potential prisoner exchange that would free Americans held in Russia are hampered by publicity and an alleged disparity in the U.S. negotiating stance. The U.S. State Department said last week that Russia rejected several proposals for freeing Paul Whelan, an American convicted of espionage, and Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich, who was detained in March and is facing espionage charges. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said in an interview with the Interfax news agency published Friday, “Here, as in many other areas, we observe the American traditional desire to get more for ourselves and give the minimum, as they say.” Over the past 24 hours six Ukrainian civilians have been killed during Russian attacks. TACOMA, Wash. (AP) — A jury has cleared three Washington state police officers of all criminal charges in the 2020 death of Manuel Ellis, a Black man who was shocked, beaten and restrained face down on a Tacoma sidewalk as he pleaded for breath. Two of the officers — Matthew Collins, 40, and Christopher Burbank, 38 — had been charged with second-degree murder and manslaughter, while Timothy Rankine, 34, was charged with manslaughter. The Pierce County medical examiner ruled Ellis' death a homicide caused by oxygen deprivation, but lawyers for the officers said a high level of methamphetamine in Ellis' system and a heart irregularity were to blame. A lawyer for Ellis' family says the verdict is devastating for the family and community. NEW YORK (AP) — Rudy Giuliani has filed for bankruptcy. The former New York City mayor is acknowledging severe financial strain that's grown as a result of his pursuit of Donald Trump's lies about the 2020 election and was made worse when jury last week required him to pay $148 million to two former Georgia election workers he defamed. In a bankruptcy filing Thursday in New York, Giuliani listed nearly $153 million in existing or potential debts. That includes almost $1 million in state and federal tax liabilities, as well as money he owes lawyers and many millions of dollars in potential judgments in lawsuits against him. He estimated he had assets worth $1 million to $10 million. NEW YORK (AP) — Honda Motor's American arm is recalling more than 2.5 million vehicles in the U.S. due to a fuel pump defect that can increase risks of engine failure or stalling while driving. According to documents published by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the fuel pump impeller used for a range of 2017-2020 Acura and Honda vehicles was improperly molded. This results in low-density impellers, which can deform the fuel pump body over time — leading to an inoperative fuel pump. Honda says it has not received any crash or injury reports related to this recall to date. The automaker added that it would replace fuel pumps for all vehicles impacted by the recall at no cost — but in a staggered approach, with owner notification letters not beginning until February. The Rams win a key game in the NFC playoff race, the Dodgers get standout Japanese pitcher Yoshinobu Yamamoto, the Pistons are on the threshold of the wrong kind of NBA history, the Lightning strike down the Stanley Cup champs and Kentucky beats its Bluegrass State rival. NEW YORK (AP) — Major League Baseball is widening the runner's lane approaching first base to include a portion of fair territory, changing a more than century-old rule that caused World Series controversy over possible interference calls. MLB also is shortening the pitcher's clock with runners on base by two seconds to 18 and further reducing mound visits in an effort to speed games. The sport's 11-man competition committee also requires a pitcher who warms up on the mound before a half inning to face at least one batter. NEW YORK (AP) — The owner of Pornhub, one of the world's largest adult content websites, has admitted to profiting from sex trafficking and agreed to make payments to women whose videos were posted without their consent. Federal prosecutors in New York announced Thursday that Aylo Holdings reached a deferred prosecution agreement to resolve a charge of engaging in unlawful monetary transactions involving sex trafficking proceeds. The deal calls for the Canadian company to pay the U.S. more than $1.8 million and make separate payments to the female victims. It also requires appointment of an independent monitor to oversee Aylo's operations for three years. —The Associated Press About this program Host Terry Lipshetz is managing editor of the national newsroom for Lee Enterprises. Besides producing the daily Hot off the Wire news podcast, Terry conducts periodic interviews for this Behind the Headlines program, co-hosts the Streamed & Screened movies and television program and is the former producer of Across the Sky, a podcast dedicated to weather and climate. Lee Enterprises produces many national, regional and sports podcasts. Learn more here.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Peter Talbot from The News Tribune has been covering the trial of the Tacoma Police Officers who murdered Manuel Ellis on March 3, 2020. We spoke with Peter in October as the state was making...

In this episode of the Black Robe Podcast, Our new cohost Queleah interviews IBJ ACES Isaiah and Faith for an update on the Manuel Ellis trial and observations on court etiquette in Pierce County. Navigating this trial as a community is difficult waiting for justice for Manny; It's even harder for his family. Please hold space for his family and support them in any way you can throughout this incredibly painful process. The team also gives an update on the election and @tacoma4all Initiative 1 Tenant Bill of Rights instituteforblackjustice.org/black-robe-podcast-1 Bookmark us linktr.ee/Instituteforblackjustice⁠ Go Fund Me- https://www.gofundme.com/f/in-honor-of-manuel-ellis Meal Train- https://www.mealtrain.com/trains/0e8eq3 Attend the Trial- https://www.piercecountywa.gov/7884/Trial-Information?fbclid=IwAR134EP_yft-GvmXxhwXCpU9McRerw9luGK-brEn88ZA03-f6_SO2qAbiCg#viewing Learn More about the Manny Ellis Case https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/trial-3-tacoma-officers-charged-killing-manny-ellis-starts-monday/D63DOMGSWVDB5EJNK7E4Z46MJY/

TODAY'S TOP STORIES // GUEST: Kate Stone on a Tacoma officer: 'Very clear' Manuel Ellis said he couldn't breathe // WE NEED TO TALK about the UK 'sugar tax'

For the last six weeks, jurors in Tacoma have listened to testimony in the trial against three Tacoma police officers charged in the death of 33 year-old Manuel Ellis. Soundside guest host Mike Davis caught up with Peter Talbot, a criminal justice reporter for The News Tribune in Tacoma about some key moments in the trial so far.

This episode covers the trial in Manny Ellis' death from 10/23-10/26. The week started off with the conclusion of Dr. Mitchell's testimony. The week ended with a brief return of Grant Fredericks. Listen to Manny's EpisodeConnect with Us

Manuel Ellis was murdered by Tacoma Police on March 3, 2020. The long-delayed trial of the police officers that killed him is underway and this week we're checking in with Peter Talbot from the News...

Manuel Ellis was a 33-year-old African-American Tacoma, Washington man killed by police on March 3, 2020. Those in Tacoma are very familiar with this case and have been waiting for justice for Manny and his family. In this episode, Morgan and Isaiah discuss what has happened since the trial began on Oct 3 and how you can support the Ellis family. instituteforblackjustice.org/black-robe-podcast-1 Bookmark us linktr.ee/Instituteforblackjustice⁠ Go Fund Me- https://www.gofundme.com/f/in-honor-of-manuel-ellis Meal Train- https://www.mealtrain.com/trains/0e8eq3 Learn More about the Manny Ellis Case https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/trial-3-tacoma-officers-charged-killing-manny-ellis-starts-monday/D63DOMGSWVDB5EJNK7E4Z46MJY/ Attend the Trial- https://www.piercecountywa.gov/7884/Trial-Information?fbclid=IwAR134EP_yft-GvmXxhwXCpU9McRerw9luGK-brEn88ZA03-f6_SO2qAbiCg#viewing Black The Vote- https://instituteforblackjustice.org/voter-toolkit

This episode covers week two of the trial, including the testimony of Manny's mom, Marcia, along with two of the state's most crucial lay witnesses, one of whom recorded one of the videos in the case. The Pierce County death investigator who responded to the scene on the night Manny died also testified along with a forensic pathologist who completed an independent, second autopsy in this case. Manny's EpisodeConnect with Us

This episode is part of our coverage in the trial of Manny Ellis' death. We cover opening statements along with the first week of the trial, including the testimony of Manny's sister, Monet. Manny's EpisodeConnect with Us

Autopsy expert testifies in the death of Manuel Ellis, Seattle's minimum wage nears a milestone amount, and candidates for Seattle's District 1 face off. These and more Seattle news stories from host Paige Browning.

This episode is part of our coverage of the trial of Manny Ellis' death. In our last episode, we previewed the trial. In this episode, we cover the last two weeks of jury selection, as the parties whittled 150 prospective jurors down to the final 12 jurors and 4 alternates. Opening statements are scheduled for 10/3.Manny's EpisodeTrial Preview_________________________Manuel Ellis | KNKX Public Radio

On this week-in-review, Crystal is joined by staff writer at The Stranger covering policing, incarceration and courts, Ashley Nerbovig! Ashley and Crystal discuss (and rant!) about continued and international outrage over Seattle Police Officers Guild (SPOG) leaders caught on body cam laughing about a fellow Seattle Police Department (SPD) officer running over and killing Jaahnavi Kandula - how the SPOG contract makes it near impossible to discipline or fire officers, Mayor Bruce Harrell's responsibility in creating the mess by voting for the contract as a City councilmember and in possibly getting us out of it by delivering a better one from the current negotiations, and how our recruiting problem is a culture problem in a competitive marketplace. The show then covers passage of the War on Drugs 2.0 bill by Seattle City Council, the start of the trial for three Tacoma officers accused of murdering Manny Ellis, and a rally held by Seattle City employees for fair pay. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Ashley Nerbovig, at @AshleyNerbovig. Resources “Tanya Woo, Candidate for Seattle City Council District 2” from Hacks & Wonks   “Tammy Morales, Candidate for Seattle City Council District 2” from Hacks & Wonks   “Seattle Police Officer Probably Won't Get Fired for Laughing about Jaahnavi Kandula's Death” by Ashley Nerbovig from The Stranger   “Police response time to Wing Luke Museum 911 calls raises questions about priorities” by Libby Denkmann and Sarah Leibovitz from KUOW   “Seattle Police Officer Hurls Racist Slur at Chinese-American Neighbor” by Ashley Nerbovig from The Stranger   “‘Feel safer yet?' Seattle police union's contempt keeps showing through” by Danny Westneat from The Seattle Times   “Amid SPD controversy, Mayor Harrell leads with empathy” from Seattle Times Editorial Board   “Seattle Launches Drug War 2.0” by Ashley Nerbovig from The Stranger   “Council Passes New Law Empowering City Attorney to Prosecute People Who Use Drugs in Public” by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola   @daeshikjr on Twitter: “BREAKING: Seattle City Councilmembers revived a recently voted down bill that many community activists are calling War on Drugs 2.0. We spoke with Sara on her campaign trail about her experience with drugs, mushrooms, and what she hoped to accomplish while in office. …”   “Trial begins for Tacoma officers charged with killing Manuel Ellis” by Jared Brown from KNKX   “Trial of 3 Tacoma police officers accused of killing Manuel Ellis in 2020 gets underway” by Peter Talbot from The News Tribune   “Historic trial begins for 3 officers charged in killing of Manny Ellis” by Patrick Malone from The Seattle Times   @tacoma_action on Twitter: “Here's how you can support the family of Manuel Ellis during the trial…”   Trial Information for State v. Burbank, Collins and Rankine | Pierce County Courts & Law    “City Workers Rally Their Asses Off” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger   Find stories that Crystal is reading here   Listen on your favorite podcast app to all our episodes here   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Tuesday topical show and our Friday week-in-review delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. If you missed this week's topical shows, we continued our series of Seattle City Council candidate interviews. All 14 candidates for 7 positions were invited and we had in-depth conversations with many of them. This week, we presented District 2 candidates, Tanya Woo and Tammy Morales. Have a listen to those and stay tuned over the coming weeks - we hope these interviews will help voters better understand who these candidates are and inform their choices for the November 7th general election. Today, we're continuing our Friday week-in-review shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome to the program for the first time, today's co-host: staff writer at The Stranger covering policing, incarceration and courts - and rocking that coverage - Ashley Nerbovig. Hello. [00:01:42] Ashley Nerbovig: Hey, Crystal - thanks. Hi. [00:01:43] Crystal Fincher: Glad to have you on the show. We have no shortage of things to talk about and particularly this week where everything public safety was exploding, imploding, just all over the place. I want to start off talking about a story that is now making international headlines - the release of the video of an SPD officer, a SPOG executive, mocking the death of Jaahnavi Kandula, who was killed by another policeman while she was just a pedestrian just walking and run over by a policeman who - it didn't seem like he had his lights and sirens on, going over 70 miles per hour. Just such a tragedy in the first place, and then outrage was the dominant feeling nationally, internationally when that video came out. What is going to happen or what does it look like is going to happen? You wrote a great piece this week about that. [00:02:42] Ashley Nerbovig: Yeah, he's not gonna get fired - for sure - unless something wildly out of the normal process happens. And even if that does, the arbitration process is such that they would look at the SPOG contract and be like - There was nothing in this that he did that's actually fireable. - and it's super frustrating to watch. And in that story, I break down how we've seen these cases before - that cops have said really outrageous stuff, or even done something pretty outrageous, or something that the public looks at as pretty outrageous - and the reaction has been either it's a written reprimand or it's unsustained findings. One of the examples I gave was that there was multiple officers in one car who - one of them said - they accelerate toward protesters, people can be heard to be laughing. And so one of them says - I effing hate these people - or something along those lines. And because they couldn't narrow it in and prove who said it, and none of the cops inside said who said it - it's frustrating, but it also makes sense when you read the SPOG contract - because they have to prove beyond a preponderance of evidence, which is more than 50%, which sounds like a pretty low standard to hop over. But actually, I think they did a review of a bunch of different cops' policies on what they have to prove to require discipline across the country and SPD is in a very small minority - the majority of people have something that's lower or at a preponderance of evidence, and our standard is right above it. You see all of this outrage, and then you see Andrew Lewis and Lisa Herbold and Mayor Harrell and SPOG all say, essentially - We want to watch the OPA process, we're excited to watch that investigation. - as if they don't know that anyone reading the SPOG contract, anyone who's read enough OPA cases knows that this is going to end in the cop continuing to be on the force. And to some extent, you can make the argument that if this was one isolated comment, maybe it wouldn't be a firing that was justified. But when you look at his entire career, and then when you also look at what the actual other punishments are, right? You can get suspended, but you don't have that suspension served consecutively - you can serve it throughout a year. So it means that - the whole point of having a suspension is that they don't get paid, and it hurts their bottom line, and it's something to avoid. If you're just serving out a 15-day suspension over a year, and then you're making it up with tons of overtime, what are the consequences for cops in this city? And the answer is that our police accountability systems do not have actual consequences for our officers right now. [00:05:28] Crystal Fincher: Not at all. And it's infuriating. And this has kicked off a conversation that we've had before - just talking about the SPOG contract and the importance of that - there are a lot of people who are new here who weren't paying attention several years ago. There was an attempt that the City of Seattle - the council in particular - attempted to do this. They passed police accountability legislation that tightened that up. But then the current SPOG contract that's in place - was approved by Mayor Harrell on the council, by the way, who voted for the current contract that is currently handcuffing him and preventing him from being able to do anything about this - that superseded many of the City ordinances that dealt with this. And one thing that a lot of people don't know is that contract can supersede City law. So the things that the City thinks is happening, the process that we have - our democratic, our initiative process, the council process - all falls by the wayside when this is approved. And at the time, this was approved on a narrow vote - this was not, the conversation leading up to the approval of this current contract was not like - Oh, this looks great, it's fine. Lorena González infamously toiled over the vote that she was going to do, and later said that she regretted voting to approving it. But they were warned that this was going to happen. They were warned that moving backwards on accountability was going to produce really unsavory results. And lo and behold, here we are. So once again, we're in a situation where everyone - almost everyone - agrees. Most members of the public, of the national community, international community agree this is egregious. This is unacceptable. And the City's handcuffed because of this current contract. And I just want people to be aware that the next contract is currently being negotiated. The mayor's office - the same mayor who approved this current contract - is currently negotiating this next contract. And is Bruce Harrell going to ensure that something like this can't happen again with no remedy, or recourse, or consequence? That's really going to be up to how this contract is negotiated and structured. I don't know what's going to happen with this officer in this incident - he has a long record himself of issues, complaints - and I don't know what's happening with that is going to go through this process. But the executive's office, the council who will ultimately have to approve this contract does have a say in whether or not something like this can happen again. And I think they owe the residents of the city assurances that this shouldn't happen. We're seeing so many of these examples. This isn't the first example of a death mocked - it's just the first one that we have on video that's public. There was a tombstone before, there's been social media posts before. And also the fact that this was, I believe, VP of the Seattle Police Officers Guild. When you have leaders doing this - similar to the assistant police chief in Kent who displayed literal Nazi memorabilia - that speaks to culture. These are leaders. These are people dictating what we have here. And tangentially, and this is going on while we're having a conversation about police being short-staffed, while we're having a conversation about how hard it is to recruit - after the city has thrown money and recruitment bonuses and retainment bonuses at people. And can we just acknowledge that someone looking at this, now that they have the choice to join any police department, basically, they want to - they're all hiring - why would they join Seattle? This is the recruiting problem here. It's this culture. It's this continued drumbeat of toxic, distasteful stuff. [00:09:06] Ashley Nerbovig: I think you're right about it being a culture problem. But I also think that the strength of our SPOG contract - you could make an argument that these are some of the most protected City employees. And it's across the board that people don't want to be cops. And it makes sense because even if you take away all of the controversies, local governments overall are struggling right now to recruit people for any job. And then on top of it, you're talking about a job that requires a lot of no work from home - we've had a complete culture shift in what we value about work. And I think when you look at what the job of being a cop is, it's you have to live in a certain location, basically, you can live - although Auderer lives in Olympia, I think, so you can live far away - but you have to be able to go to work in-person. And then on top of it, you're tied to all of this really negative associations that we have with cops, and this shift in how we've thought about cops. And you're competing in a really tight job market where there's a lot of really - yes, you get a lot of money being a Seattle police officer, but that requires a lot of overtime. You can make that same money just like having a normal 40-hour workweek if you work something tech, and it can also be more flexible and more remote. I just think that the problem is exactly that being a cop is not appealing, and we can't change that - no one wants these jobs. And so why are we not talking about what people do want to work and starting from that place of - people do want to help people. I think a lot of cops in those positions talk about reshifting budget priorities, and that would mean changing their jobs. But cops were the first people to tell me that they didn't want to be social workers, that they weren't trying to do social work - and that they felt like they didn't have the tools and they weren't the people to be doing mental health intervention, or drug abuse intervention. Or homelessness intervention. You can't help someone unsheltered when you're a cop. The only thing cops can do is jail. I thought something really interesting - I know this is something we're going to talk about in a bit - and I really want to say something that I thought about with the SPOG contract. One of the things that I can't remember if it was Teresa Mosqueda or Morales who said it, but one of them was like - If we aren't funding these treatment options - when they were talking about the drug vote - If we aren't funding these treatment options, and we aren't funding these diversion programs, the only thing cops are going to be able to do if they want to get someone off the street is put them in jail. And I think that people have this idea that cops have other options, but that's their tool. It's not a choice for them. The only solution for cops is to arrest - that is their main job activity. And just this idea that people don't want these jobs, they are not effective for the problems that we have, and yet we have this desperation - and Bruce Harrell has this desperation to cling to tough-on-crime policies. And it's dumb. And you don't see any solutions, but people like to pretend like they saw some improvement - when they just like the feeling of, oh - you don't see anything change when you put a tough-on-crime policy. There's this idea that all of our - anytime we do something that's like violence intervention or like a community-based approach - that we don't see the results very quickly. And it always is so funny to me, because I'm like, you don't see - no one in their day-to-day life, if we tomorrow said you can arrest - other than maybe someone who went downtown and all of the homeless people, we can't even put anyone in the King County Jail. So I don't know what they're talking about right now, but you don't actually see a marked improvement - you just get a shift in media narratives - that's all that changes, really, in my opinion. [00:12:49] Crystal Fincher: This is the same thing that we're doing - and your point is exactly correct - we're only funding one thing. And what you fund, what you put resources to, is what you're going to have. We are so desperately short of other support services, behavioral health support services. And there are entities in the process of addressing that, right? Absolutely frustrating that it's not here now, there is some work being done there. So progress is being made largely at the county level and regionally. But this is not going to work. This is the same old thing. The thing that I find troubling, particularly as a progressive political consultant, is that this makes passing progressive policy harder. Because if you dress something up like progressive policy - Oh, it's really important that we treat root causes. And yeah, we all believe it. - and they all say that until it's time to actually put their money where their mouth is, to actually do the thing, to implement it. And then what we get is this warmed-over piece of legislation that does one of the things - yes, we can arrest - and makes it harder than it was before to do the other things. And it was astronomically hard before. We know what's going to happen with this. So the real question is, so what are they going to blame for the failure of this next? What excuse is coming up next? I talk to a lot of people, lay people, some people - I just like hearing an unfiltered opinion of someone who's not an insidery insider and paying attention to all the policy and stuff. And you would be shocked by how many people who are - they don't consider themselves super leftist, probably general Democrats, but they don't really pay attention to much - who are under the impression that Seattle's progressive city council has run amok. And it's like, when it comes to public safety, they are not passing progressive policy. Unfortunately, the conservative council - that is the policy that we have and that we've continued. And when everybody rushes to put that label on it - we're going to see a lot of political communication coming up soon, where I'm sure everybody is going to call themselves a progressive, probably pragmatic progressive, responsible progressive - but like they cling to that word and they want to present their policy is that. But when it's not, all it does is hurt actual progressive policy. So it's important for people to stand up and be like - No, we see that, and we see that it's not what the community is demanding and asking for. It's just really frustrating. We should probably get back to some of this news a little bit. [00:15:02] Ashley Nerbovig: There's just one last thing I want to say about Danny Westneat - this is going back a couple topics, but it was something that you said about the SPOG contract and that this is the leadership of SPOG. And Danny had a - bless his heart, he tried, probably - I quote tweeted it when I read the first couple of graphs. And then I went back and read his whole column about Auderer - I can't even say his last name - but the SPOG VP's comments. And he said quite a few things that were just absolutely ridiculous, where he talks about how SPOG uses public safety as a bargaining chip and says essentially - Oh, it'd be a shame if something happened to this beautiful city of yours. And then he goes on to give them that bargaining chip and say that Seattle desperately needs more cops. And then he goes to talking about how - he names a city that basically did defund because they also broke up their cop union. And it's just such a wild series of thoughts. And he concludes it on - SPOG needs to clean house. And it's so frustrating - even if you're just thinking of it logically - if you are a member of SPOG, and your vice president has gotten out of this many OPA investigations with little to no punishment - you don't think they know who is leading them? That's who I want as my union vice president - I want someone who's gotten away with a bunch of stuff - that is how you stay safe and stay protected - and who's going to clean house - the leadership? The leadership is the problem. Anyway, I just wanted to fully round that out by giving Danny like a 2 out of 5 stars on that column. [00:16:35] Crystal Fincher: There are a lot of people who are like - Wow, okay, didn't think there was going to be a day where many of them agreed with Danny Westneat. He got some of the way there. I think one of the challenges with that is a tendency to view unions as separate from workers, and the union as separate from the cops. They are elected by their peers in the union - this is representative of the culture, this is the result of them saying these are the people we feel best represent us. And this is what it is. If that's not a red flag, I don't know what is - but here we are. And it's hard for me to separate SPOG versus police because SPOG is police. And it's just time we had a serious conversation about real accountability. And it's a tangible conversation - there is someone responsible for this, there is an intervention that can work here - we can negotiate this. It's up to the mayor, the people on negotiating committee, it's up to the council who's going to approve this. This doesn't just happen - they're permitted to happen by a contract that is in place. And if we're unhappy with it, and if City Hall can't see that the people are unhappy with a contract that enables this, the question is - particularly for Bruce Harrell, who is the boss of the police department - they literally report to him, police chief literally reports to him, direct report, his responsibility. What is he going to do now? Is he going to respond to this and say, I'm going to ensure this doesn't happen again? Because that's a buck-stops-here attitude that is normally expected of an executive. That's the job. What is he going to do to ensure this doesn't happen again? How is he going to live up to his word that he's going to improve the culture and improve public safety? We're waiting. And it seems like they're just permitting this. They're just - Oh, that's too bad. [00:18:20] Ashley Nerbovig: The Seattle editorial board said he's been leading with empathy. If anyone really wants to rage out, read that editorial. I don't know if Bruce called and said he was going to cancel the whole city's subscription to The Seattle Times, but it's just absolute garbage. Kandula was killed while Officer Kevin Dave was responding to a guy who had too much cocaine and wasn't even ODing. Rich, my editor, said this to me earlier this week, where he was like, we were talking about the drug vote, and he was saying - This is just another example of how cops shouldn't be the ones responding to people overdosing. EMTs can go to these things. [00:18:56] Crystal Fincher: And do in most other cities - without police, to be clear. [00:18:59] Ashley Nerbovig: And you mentioned earlier that it was unclear about his lights. And I don't know for sure what was going on there, because I know his in-car video wasn't working. But I've read another OPA case where someone had said that a cop was just turning on his lights and sirens to get through red lights - and the justification for that that they showed was that it was like - oh, he was tactically using his lights and sirens, which means that they only turn them on to get through lights and stuff, even though he's responding to a call. And when they do that, it means that their in-car video doesn't turn on. And that's allowed because - oh, it's a tactic. And super curious to see the end of this OPA report for Kevin Dave. EMTs are not worried about sneaking up on people - they just turn on their lights and go. But yeah, it's going to be really frustrating to watch. [00:19:45] Crystal Fincher: So now can you break down what this legislation does? Because I've seen it characterized in a number of different ways - Oh, it's making drugs illegal. It's like doing different things. What did this legislation actually change? [00:19:56] Ashley Nerbovig: This particular piece of legislation - to do my full roundup of this - everybody knows that in 2021, the Washington Supreme Court struck down our felony drug possession law. The Washington State Legislature scrambled to pass something - and they passed this idea of we're going to do two referrals to treatment before we arrest anyone, and we're only going to arrest on a misdemeanor, and that went across the state for people in possession of drugs. That went on for two years and it was unworkable - they didn't structure it, they didn't create a database for people to be marking referrals - it's called a stopgap measure. It was one of those things where it was a really half thought-out piece of what potentially could be progressive legislation, did more harm than just making it a misdemeanor and then trying to talk about decriminalization a little bit later - I think that might have actually ended up being strategically a better way to go, except you would have seen a bunch of people arrested in that time. The result is that they came back this session and they said - Okay, no. They had that big fight and they said - We're going to make it a gross misdemeanor, your first two offenses you're going to get a maximum sentence of 180 days, any offenses after that you're going to go up to 364 days. And they said - We prefer people defer to treatment, we prefer cops defer. - that was one thing that Herbold and Lewis both kept saying is - their City bill, that it was different from the state bill and that it starts the diversion out of the system process at the cop level before people even have a case started, whereas they kept describing the state bill as getting started. There are multiple places throughout the system that you can get diverted - you can get diverted before you get arrested so there's never anything on your record, you can get diverted after you've been arrested by the cops and now the prosecutors are in charge of your case and they defer any charges or defer any charges from getting actually convicted and then you're able to get it off of your record. So that's deferred prosecution. And then there's, you can get stuff - after you've been sentenced, you can get stuff wiped off your record. The argument that the City was making in how their bill was different from the state bill is they're saying - Oh, we really make it clear that our policy is not to arrest. The state bill does too. They say that it's their preference that people are diverted to treatment rather than be arrested. They also put a bunch of deferred prosecution stuff in there to divert people out of the system once they have charges against them. It's easier to talk about what this bill didn't do. It set a policy that said - This is our preference by the City of Seattle. So the state law was already in place. And now because it's a misdemeanor, state law passes - that starts in August, like everything gets implemented. So technically, cops could find people who were using drugs in public or possessing drugs in public and arrest them on a gross misdemeanor. And I think the using is such an interesting part of this, because there's nothing about possession as a charge that doesn't get at the same thing that public use does. When you make it all about public use and you add public use plus possession to this law, it is such a dog whistle towards people who are just mad at unhoused people. Morales said something really clear in the City Council vote, which was that this bill is not going to curb public use because the people who this bill is targeting have nowhere else to use. And so the state law passes, SPD cops can do this. But if SPD cops right now in Seattle - or right before this, because Harrell signed the bill yesterday - before this bill passed, if they arrested someone, their charges, because Seattle doesn't have its own ordinance, would have gone to Leesa Manion's office, the King County Prosecutor's, which would have made a ton of sense. King County Prosecutor's has a bunch of programs already in place for this - they've already been dealing with felony versions of this for a long time. But her office did a weird thing and got really like - We don't have the misdemeanor staff to handle this and these felony drug courts that we have wouldn't even apply to this. They did a bunch of workarounds - they really quashed the idea of these cases getting referred to them really early on, or at least they asked for money from us that apparently City Council just was unwilling to try to negotiate - or they were unwilling to negotiate trying to work out a contract. I never really understood what her motivations were with that or were slamming it down so hard. And so the City said - We're going to implement this ordinance and we're going to send these cases to our city attorney, Republican Ann Davison. So that's what this law does is that it doesn't - anyone who describes it - all that this law does is say that now Ann Davison can prosecute these cases, and also we would really like it if cops didn't arrest people on these charges. And it says - and I'll give them this - it adds a bunch of paperwork that cops now need to have when they do arrest someone on a drug possession charge. But I think Morales really summed it up really well where she said - This does not expand any diversion, it doesn't expand any treatment. - and this is probably a little bit more opinion-based, but - It doesn't improve public safety in any way. And I think that's so key is that we can ask - even if it's not, even if you aren't someone that believes in the nefarious, like that cops are all like Auderer and don't care about behavioral health and don't really look at people who are addicts on the street as someone that needs public health intervention - let's buy the premise that there are well-meaning cops out there who want to take these people to treatment. We do not have resources. And this idea that - in the City Council staff member, or the City Council Central Staff's memo, they said - Diversion requires social workers. These are actually much longer, much more resource-intensive cases. And cops are going to maybe divert the first or second time that they find someone, but then there's no resources to pick that person up - there's nothing to actually help them, maybe they're not ready to get treatment yet. And at some point, they're just going to arrest them and they're going to go through all of the charges. And maybe they're not going to go to jail because King County won't take them right now, but it's creating the structure for that. And they're still going to have to continue to show up at municipal court until they get something on their record that ends up putting them in jail. And we know how bad jail is - we know that it increases the chances of overdose. I think this bill kills people - I think that's the bottom line of what this bill does - is that it's going to kill a bunch of people, and make a bunch of people poorer, and do nothing to curb drug addiction, and fill our jails, and just continue the cycle of mass incarceration. [00:26:51] Crystal Fincher: The outcomes from this type of policy are clear. We have so much information about what happens when you do just fund, enable sending people to jail without doing anything to address the root causes for why they're there. Also, there are some people rejoicing over this - like it is going to help - I'll be curious to see their evaluation after a period of time, to see what their perception of what results. But it's just frustrating because we could choose to do what has shown to be effective elsewhere. Everybody is frustrated. I don't think anyone is happy. I don't want to be in a space where someone is using publicly, right? And perhaps inhaling secondhand something or whatever. But I also recognize that generally people who do use in public don't have another place to use. And if it is an issue of - addiction isn't logical, right? Addiction isn't reasonable. It's not - Oh, there are consequences for me going to jail now, so I'm just going to stop being addicted. The thing about addiction is that you can't decide to stop being addicted. It's not up to you. And that people fall into addiction for a variety of reasons. And being addicted is a reality that so many people face - to treat it as like they're less than human for struggling with that particular issue is ridiculous. But we do that from a public safety perspective. And as you said, this is going to largely wind up targeting the homeless - that's usually who this applies to - people. We can talk about the drug habits of executives and rich people, and the rates of drug use are not low across the board. I always find it so curious. We drug test minimum wage and low wage workers, but not high wage executives. I'm pretty confident what results we would see if we did that. There's an interesting video with Sara Nelson - yeah, speaking of politicians using drugs, and then voting on drug ordinances - but Sara Nelson has a place to use privately. That's the difference. [00:28:52] Ashley Nerbovig: Because we're going after public use, we're not going after possession. And the casual way she talks about it - you are aware that you are growing drugs, and you're telling people where to find drugs - and I can hear her argument against this, right? But the point of it is that drugs are not inherently dangerous, and it was incredibly frustrating to watch that video. And then think about the fact that when this was in front of the Public Safety Committee, Mosqueda came out and said - I want to make it very clear that lots of public health agencies at this point have said that breathing in secondhand fentanyl smoke is not dangerous to your health. I am someone who opens a window if someone blows vape smoke too close to me - I don't like it, I don't want that smell, I am not totally convinced that the smell will not linger. But it's like that, right - it's a smell, I'm not worried about getting a nicotine contact high. And the way that fentanyl gets demonized as the worst drug that we've ever seen, it's part of how we can dehumanize the people who are using it. And I think it's so interesting, because if you ask someone to class their own drugs, shrooms and weed and cocaine would be the bourgeoisie of drugs - they're allowed, it's fine - alcohol. All of those things are totally fine. And the people who use them are not degenerates or any way bad. Maybe cocaine. But for the most part, we are totally okay with those kinds of drugs, no matter how alcohol is still one of the most harmful substances in our society. Whenever I call the King County Medical Examiner's Board to get the overdose deaths, it's overdose deaths and deaths due to alcoholism. But they're longer term, right? So I'm not saying that - fentanyl is absolutely killing people - it's in everything. And it is a new, very scary problem because we don't have a ton of ways to treat it. But it doesn't change the fundamentals of what we're seeing, which is you had someone like Sara Nelson who struggled with her own story of addiction. But as soon as it becomes a drug that they view as dirty or not fun to scavenge for, you get this attitude of - We need to crack down on this. And that's how it's got to be a punishment-based system - it's not a conversation, it's not help, it's not treatment - we've got to really show these people the errors, the way to be, and improve their life. And it's just so condescending. [00:31:30] Crystal Fincher: This is the crack playbook at play. And again, to be clear, not at all saying that fentanyl is not very troublesome, problematic, and that we don't want people using that. Those are all true. But to say somehow a unique and unsolvable addiction issue as opposed to opioids, as opposed to all of the other things. The one thing that we know is that there are new drugs created all the time for a variety of things. There's going to be something more potent. Fentanyl is not the last, right? It's just the current. There is going to be a next. We've been playing this cat and mouse game with the War on Drugs, with all that we're doing - it's here. But hearing the language around that is the same tactic that happened with crack, right? And the justification to pass a ton of laws, super harsh penalties, mandating mandatory time, adding it as a strike for possessing crack, lower thresholds for dealing and all of that, as opposed to cocaine, which was used by a different demographic largely and fueled there. This is pretty transparent. And unfortunately, you hear a lot of the rhetoric in public meetings. You hear it from people - Oh man, this fentanyl, these people are like zombies, this is something completely new we haven't seen before. Those are all the same things that they said with crack. Those are all the same things that they say with the new drug that they want to use when they're in the mood to crack down and jail people - here is where we're at. Acting like fentanyl is just - oh, if you're addicted, you're lost, you're hopeless, is untrue. It is a dangerous drug. We need to address it. Public health approaches have a better record of doing that than punitive jail-based approaches. But it's a problem that we do need to get our arms around, but we make it harder to do that when we pursue policies to jail - which are very expensive to do in every single way. And then say - Sorry, we just don't have the resources to provide more treatment services, to provide more behavioral health services, to provide more housing, to provide detox for people. Those are all necessary for us to deal with this problem, and we just aren't doing it. I would like to do it. I would like to meaningfully address this - most people would - but this makes it much harder. I do want to talk about this week, a very important - and for our state historic - trial starting, of the three officers accused of murdering Manny Ellis. What is happening here? [00:33:58] Ashley Nerbovig: Yeah. So they're still in jury selection. It's going to be a long, drawn-out process. I think opening statements start October 2nd. And for people who don't know the case, Manny Ellis was an unarmed Black man who was in Tacoma - this was March before George Floyd's death, and there are so many parallels. Everything that is terrible about George Floyd is terrible in this case. Bob Ferguson comes in, says that he's going to investigate this case, does an investigation. Tacoma Police Department does not cooperate with Washington State Patrol. Washington State Patrol and AG Ferguson ends up creating this probable cause statement and now three officers, three men are all on trial this week. Or the trial is starting and jury selection is starting. And there's one guy who - I can't remember his name now - but he's live tweeting all of it. And there's been some really interesting tidbits. One of the jurors - the judge asked if there were any jurors who might have conflicts presiding over a case involving law enforcement, no one raised their hands, and then the judge looks at this guy and says - But didn't you say you have a brother in law enforcement? And there's no other details, but that's where it's starting right now. And it'll be a really interesting case - it's horrible to see these cases get to this point - and you wonder about, I don't know anything about the disciplinary records of these cops. But yeah, that's where it's starting. And that's the background on it. [00:35:14] Crystal Fincher: And certainly - it's a trial. And I generally try not to follow these things or get emotionally invested in these trials - for good reason - they often don't seem to wind up with justice, and even what is justice when your loved one, someone you care about, a human being is killed. And just also lifting up - we hear about all these cases around the country - we have more than enough here locally. There's another police officer from Auburn currently awaiting trial for killing Jesse Sarey in Auburn. It's really troubling. And we also have family and friends of Manny dealing with this and having to once again hear the horrific details of this killing. And they're continuing to call for the firing of the cops who've been on payroll this entire time, who are still on payroll. There's a GoFundMe for the family. And court is something that people can show up to and show support if they want to do that also. It's a tragedy. And I hope the family is able to find peace and healing and that this can assist with that. I have no idea where they stand on this, but certainly, I'm thinking of them as this trial continues to go on. Last thing I want to talk about today is Seattle City employees rallying for fair pay. Why did this rally happen? [00:36:38] Ashley Nerbovig: Shout out to Hannah Krieg - she got all the great quotes for this one. This rally happened because apparently, and I'm quoting directly from her story - Bruce Harrell is funny, he's a funny guy, and if this is true, I believe it - Mayor Harrell told them to rally their asses off. The City started their negotiations for a pay increase of 1% and has settled on a pay increase of 2%. And the City workers are saying that's an insane way to start negotiations in one of the most expensive cities in the country. She puts this really good stat in there - that's a pay cut as the cost of, a 1% cost of living adjustment or even a 2% cost of living adjustment is a pay cut as the cost of living rose 8.7% this year. It's really important to note that the SPOG contract guarantees at minimum like a 1.5%, I think - I did a little tweet about this - it's plus COLA or something. But effectively, regardless of what their contract says, they have never gone a year without at least a 3% increase. Lieutenants and higher up guilds just got like a 4% increase. Sometimes I'll get these emails from the mayor's office that's - I'm really like unhappy with how you've portrayed us as prioritizing police. We really prioritize like other things too. - and it's, you can see it, where their money is going. So the workers are contract, are striking because they're not getting, at minimum, just keeping up with inflation. And the City of Seattle seems to think this is just like across the board, boy to cut is in general services and for the city. And that's - I really encourage people to follow Hannah's coverage on this because she's really on top of it. [00:38:17] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's really challenging. We talked about police saying they have a shortage of officers and all of the action that has been taken to fix that including a retention bonus, healthy retention bonuses. And so we're talking about the shortages in the rest of the city, and it just doesn't seem like there is the interest in making sure the City is able to provide essential services and the level of service for everything that is currently happening and that people expect. There have been several council candidates who have said and agreed with - Yeah, we should be giving City workers the same kind of retention bonuses, investing in their retention, doing something tangible to actually address the shortage here. And we're going to be seeing Mayor Harrell's budget come out pretty soon. It's going to be interesting to see how he deals with that and what it is because a budget is a value statement - that's a document of values - where you're spending your money is what you value the most. And other things - you can talk about them and say they're great, but if you aren't funding them, clearly they were lower on the priority list in your estimation. And he may have his reasons to justify that. But it is disingenuous to say - Oh, I completely prioritize that, I value that, and I'm just not going to fund that while I'm going to fund this other thing. So it will be interesting to see. But it seems like the City has a lot of work to do to start to step up. And everyone on the campaign trail talks about their values and making sure people can live where they work, how important that is to our economy - and it absolutely is important - again, what tangibly is going to be done about that? What are we going to see in that budget? And if not, just what is really the tangible impact of that? So we'll continue to follow that. But certainly workers see some definite red flags there and are rallying to make sure people understand that this is a problem that has consequences for the entire city and beyond. And for all the plans that people say they have, they're going to rely on these employees to execute them. So we better make sure that there are people in place to deliver on the policy that we pass as a city. [00:40:34] Ashley Nerbovig: Yeah, I hope we get a strike. I think it would be good for people to feel what happens when they don't - I think that a lot of these services are invisible. And we already see that SPOG is doing all these sick-outs and they're not responding to calls - and a lot of them are blaming it on the staffing shortages. When you hear about sick-outs, you get a little bit curious about those call response times. I hope it turns into a strike because I think people do need to realize how essential these workers are. [00:41:00] Crystal Fincher: Certainly the public - some people definitely see that, some people definitely don't. But a strike will be a failure, right? We're having a rally because an initial offer was pretty insulting. It was not a serious offer. It's a pay cut. If you're starting saying - Okay, how big a pay cut are you going to take to people who are already short-staffed and overworked? Because really, let's talk about it. When we talk about short staffing, that means that the same amount of work is falling on fewer heads. And that's a hard position to be in - and many of these positions aren't like super high-paid positions anyway. People are struggling to just pay their bills and work is getting harder, and now you're going to ask them to take a pay cut. And being disrespectful when that happens - Okay, go rally your ass off. So I hope there is more respect in this process and that lines of communication open and are productive. Because strikes are disruptive, right? They're not fun, they create a lot of drama. It may come to that - and I absolutely support workers' rights to strike and sometime that's necessary to get the job done - but I hope it doesn't come to that. I hope they are able to talk. But it's going to take more respect from the City perspective, realistically - they just aren't starting in a serious place. [00:42:14] Ashley Nerbovig: Yeah, I like what you said there. It would be a failure. My chaotic evil side is - yeah, disrupt it, show people that you exist and stuff. But you're right. It would suck for these workers to have to go on strike because - the no pay and I'm sure they have a fund - you're 100% correct. What I would actually like to see is Mayor Harrell care about these people the way that he has been so consistently able to show care for our police department. [00:42:44] Crystal Fincher: I completely agree. And with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, September 22, 2023. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is the incredible Shannon Cheng. Our insightful co-host today was staff writer at The Stranger covering policing, incarceration and the courts, Ashley Nerbovig. You can find Ashley on Twitter at @AshleyNerbovig, A-S-H-L-E-Y N-E-R-B-O-V-I-G. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter at @HacksWonks. You can find me on just about every platform at @finchfrii, that's F-I-N-C-H F-R-I-I. You can catch Hacks & Wonks - wherever you want to listen to us, you can listen to us - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar of your favorite pod player. And be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Friday week-in-review shows and our Tuesday topical show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen - it really helps us out. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

As US President Joe Biden addresses the UN General Assembly, the threat of ending aid to Ukraine if Donald John is re-elected is highlighted and a look back at the police killing of Manuel Ellis.

Earlier in season 3, we covered the death of Manuel Ellis at the hands of 3 Tacoma Police officers. After a last minute motion to dismiss from the officers' defense teams failed, the trial of these officers is set to begin with jury selection on 9/18.As we get ready to cover the trial, I wanted to give you all a preview of what's to come. for a more comprehensive background of the case, please go back and listen to season 3, episode 4 where we cover Manny's life and death in more detail.Manny Ellis was a young Black man, doing his best to get by, just like the rest of us. He was a loving son, brother, and uncle. And he should still be alive today.Manny's Full Episode

I can't breathe. Those words have been heard around the world after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota. "I can't breathe" has become a rallying cry for African Americans across the country. I want to be perfectly clear from the outset: it doesn't matter whether someone has a criminal record or not; no one deserves to be deprived of the ability to breathe, in the street, with such callous disregard for human life. Black Lives Matter. But before George Floyd, in fact, just 3 months before the death of George Floyd, there was Manuel Ellis. His case hasn't received nearly the amount of national coverage - despite the fact that there's video and audio footage in his case. This case is one of the most difficult cases I've ever covered on this podcast. Manny's story will make you angry and it will make you sad. Manny should be here today, watching Seahawks games with his nephew, and cracking jokes with his family. This episode is dedicated Manny Ellis.https://linktr.ee/truecrimecatlawyer_________________Sources:The Walk Home PodcastSeattle Times CoverageDistrust of police: Black parents, children have 'the talk'Police and Use of Deadly Force - City of TacomaA conversation with Manuel Ellis' sister, one year after his death'I speak of him in present tense': Tacoma marks two years without Manuel Ellis as officers await trial Tacoma fights release of internal police records related to officers charged in death of Manuel EllisProbable Cause AffidavitWho was Manny Ellis? Family and friends saw a man searching for peace and redemptionWith charges filed against 3 officers, what are next steps in Mannie Ellis' murder case? Trial of Tacoma police charged in Ellis killing delayedTwo...

Part 2: “Mental Condition Black”Last week I told you about just a few of the incidents of officer-involved shootings so far this year. The first United States Climate Activist to be killed by authorities, Tyre Nichols, whose death and the subsequent charges to stem from it are being looked at as a blueprint for change. And the three men, Oscar Sanchez, Keenan Anderson, and Takar Smith, who were killed in Los Angeles within 48 hours of each other. Today, I'll be focusing on one case, that of Manuel Ellis of Tacoma. His beating and restraint-induced death was horrific, but hope remains that the responsible parties will face justice. For photos and sources for today's episode, check out the Murder in the Rain Episode Blog. Episode Host: Alisha HollandIf you'd like more episodes of Murder in the rain, Patreon members at the $5/mo+ level, gain access to exclusive episodes, ad-free episodes, bonus content, and more.Follow us on:Instagram https://www.instagram.com/murderintherain/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/mintherain/Twitter https://twitter.com/murderintherainTikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@em_murderintherainWebsite https://www.murderintherain.com/Email murderintherain@gmail.comOur Sponsors:* Check out Factor 75 and use my code rain50 for a great deal: https://www.factor75.com/Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/murder-in-the-rain/exclusive-contentAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brands

In 2020, the murder of George Floyd brought national attention to the use of deadly force by police throughout the country. In Washington state's legislature, the killing of Manuel Ellis by Tacoma Police helped propel a police reform package of more than a dozen bills. One of those bills created The Office of Independent Investigations, or OII. This is the first office of its kind in the nation, and it plans to train civilian investigators to watchdog the use of deadly force by police throughout the state.

On this week's Hacks & Wonks, Crystal is joined by Executive Director of The Urbanist, Doug Trumm. Crystal and Doug quickly run through news items about progress on Washington state's capital gains tax, a discussion on the worsening traffic safety crisis, and labor stories about Amazon's questionable fulfillment of a court order and the federal government's blocking a railway workers strike ahead of the holidays. Public safety news out of Pierce County includes the start of embattled Sheriff Ed Troyer's criminal trial and troubling news about an officer charged in Manuel Ellis' death having been flagged for violent behavior during their academy training. Doug and Crystal then discuss the gulf between reality and rhetoric that has appeared in media reporting on crime and law enforcement and how it reaches into electeds' handling of issues like decriminalization of simple drug possession at the State Legislature, outcry over a miniscule portion of the Seattle Police Department budget not being funded in the City of Seattle budget process, and the campaign messaging of the King County Prosecuting Attorney's race. On a hopeful note, Leesa Manion's solid win in the King County Prosecutor's race and her strong performance - across the county, across cities, and across legislative districts - serves as a referendum for voters rejecting punitive measures and signifies an appetite for root cause-addressing, data-driven solutions that work. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Doug Trumm, on Twitter at @dmtrumm. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources “WA Supreme Court clears way for state to collect capital-gains tax” by Claire Withycombe from The Seattle Times    "The Urbanist's Ryan Packer Discusses Worsening Traffic Safety Crisis on KUOW" by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist   “Labor board blasts Amazon's "flagrant" attempt to flout court order“ by Emily Peck from Axios    “Biden signs rail agreement into law, thwarting strike“ by Shawna Chen from Axios   “Criminal trial begins in Sheriff Ed Troyer's false-reporting case” by Jim Brunner from The Seattle Times   “Academy warned Tacoma of violent training episode by officer later charged in Manuel Ellis' death” Patrick Malone from The Seattle Times   “Washington should be a leader in ending the War on Drugs” by Mark Cooke from ACLU-WA   “Nelson, Pedersen, and Sawant Dissent Ahead of Final Vote on Seattle Budget” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist   “Public Safety Politics and the Even Election Reckoning” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher - I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we are continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a cohost. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's cohost: Executive Director of The Urbanist, Doug Trumm. Welcome! [00:00:52] Doug Trumm: Hey, thanks for having me. It's such a busy news week - it's really going to be a slog to get through it all. [00:00:57] Crystal Fincher: Yeah we will make an attempt. I guess, starting off with some statewide news that isn't ultimately the news that everyone is waiting for, but kind of a pit stop along the way - the Washington Supreme Court clears the way for the state to start collecting capital gains tax. So what happened here? [00:01:16] Doug Trumm: It's still just an early - not a ruling, but just a decision on the Court's part - not to issue an injunction. But hey, that's a really good sign because if the Court was leaning towards invalidating the capital gains tax, they probably would have issued an injunction. But at the same time, you don't want to read too much into these tea leaves, but certainly the fact they can start collecting the tax makes this start to feel pretty real. [00:01:41] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I would agree - don't know what's going to happen yet. I think lots of people are hoping that we do get a favorable ruling for the capital gains tax, but there still is the big issue of whether this counts as, officially, an income tax, which would make it unconstitutional under our Constitution. Many interpretations show that it is not, but we are waiting for the ruling to definitively decide that from the Supreme Court, which I think we're anticipating getting early next year. Is that the case? [00:02:14] Doug Trumm: Yeah, that sounds about right. And there's a lot of ways they could rule. But yeah, certainly one of - the hope, I think, is that they would create a new category of - income actually being income, which in our state - oddly, it's not. So that's what creates this huge hurdle to doing progressive taxation - is that it counts as property, and property you have to tax flat. And progressives - we're not trying to argue for a flat income tax. We want a graduated progressive income tax. So if they get a really favorable ruling, that will open the door to that and suddenly there'll be a lot more options on the table and hopefully Democrats actually take them. [00:02:53] Crystal Fincher: I definitely hope so. Also in the news, one of The Urbanists' own, Ryan Packer, was on KUOW discussing what is really - our own crisis here locally, and a nationwide crisis in traffic safety. What is happening here? [00:03:13] Doug Trumm: Yeah, Washington state really echoes the national trend. And the national trend does not mirror the international trend, which - most industrial nations are getting much safer. They've used the pandemic, sort of as a catalyst in a way, to encourage people to take transit, or walk, or bike or - hey, the roads aren't as busy, let's do this project now and make the streets safer. That's really not the approach we've seen in the United States and in Washington state. We've kind of spun our wheels and we've let projects kind of get behind schedule because of the pandemic. And that's happening globally too in some cases, but usually the vision's only getting sharper. So this is reflected in the data and the New York Times had a piece about this this week - Emily Badger - and the US is up 5% during the pandemic in traffic fatalities. But almost every other major nation, it's going down significantly - so it's a bad case of American exceptionalism. We were so excited for our transportation reporter, Ryan Packer, to be on KUOW to talk about this - their reporting is really raising this issue locally a lot. And they really, at all these meetings where some of these decisions quietly get made, whether that's a transportation safety advisory commission or some obscure regional body. But mostly, there's little efforts here and there to improve safety, but we're not seeing the wholesale re-envisioning of streets or strategy that has really been effective in other countries and bringing down collisions and deadly crashes. [00:05:04] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think so. And we continue to see this tension here, in the United States and locally, between designs that are car-centric being more dangerous for everyone else on the road. And investments in transportation, in pedestrian mobility, bike and transit access and mobility - and it seems like the more we design roads and transportation through ways principally for, primarily for cars and prioritizing their needs above everyone else's, that we come out with these outcomes that are just less safe and too often fatal for all of the other kinds of users. [00:05:50] Doug Trumm: Yeah, exactly. And the American system doesn't even treat pedestrian safety as a category of car safety when they give out their gold, whatever-rated car safety awards. If - you can have a three-ton car that maims pedestrians, but if the person inside is fine - oh, that's safety rated - great. So there's certainly federal stuff, but Ryan and The Urbanist, in general, we've really focused on - what are these projects at the City level? Unfortunately, the clear epicenter of this crisis in Seattle is Southeast Seattle District 2, Tammy Morales' district - and she's been a champion. She's recently told me - hey, I didn't think I was going to become the traffic safety person when I first ran for office, but given my district, this is - I really am. And she didn't say this, but implicit in this is our Transportation Chair hasn't really been focused on that - Alex Pedersen - and we'll probably get into that some more when we talk about the budget, because that's - the investments we're making aren't completely safety-focused, as you alluded to. And we have projects queued up to make it safer to bike and walk in D2, but there was just a wave of delays - projects pushed back one year, two years from the original timeline. There's supposed to be a safe bike route through Beacon Hill, there's supposed to be a safe protected bike lane on MLK Way - but those projects are behind schedule. As far as we know, they're still happening, but if you were - if this area is responsible for over half of the - D2 is responsible for over half of the traffic fatalities in the whole city - the last thing we'd want to be doing is delaying those projects in that district. [00:07:39] Crystal Fincher: Seems so - it doesn't seem to make much sense - same with just connecting sidewalks and neighborhoods that people have been waiting for decades to happen and still hasn't. So long way to go there. Also this week, we had a number of events, news happen in the labor realm - couple of items that affect us locally. One - so Amazon just had a ruling from the National Labor Relations Board directing them to correct some of their action, which they still seem to be just not doing. What's going on at Amazon? [00:08:19] Doug Trumm: Yeah, they think they're kind of above the law when it comes to this. They were supposed to read out this ruling saying - hey, you can't be fired for union organizing, or even having discussions with union organizers, or being union-curious. But instead of just following the order to the letter of the law and reading that out to all their employees, they chose specifically the shift change and then just played a video. So the Labor Board was pretty upset about that because this was a court order, they were supposed to follow it - but they weaseled their way out of it in a very corporate lawyer-y kind of fashion where theoretically just maybe - if you squint your eyes, does this qualify for following the order? I don't know. Alexa, read order. I don't know how you could get - this ruling actually to get to the people, but they're figuring out a way not to do it. [00:09:16] Crystal Fincher: One of the interesting things here - employers are responsible for letting their employees know what their rights are. Amazon has bent over backwards not to do that. This is another example of it. We also see Starbucks bending over backwards to be hostile to the union and we continue to see those actions, and then being called out by the National Labor Relations Board also. And this week, of course, we saw - yesterday - Congress take action to avert the railroad strike by passing legislation that still denies railroad workers any kind of paid sick leave, which just should be the most basic thing that every employee everywhere is entitled to. And just beyond disappointing to me personally - to a ton of people - that we had particularly a Democratic president and right now a Democratic Congress who acted against workers and against unions and their ability to take sick pay. It's just bad all the way around, and it feels like they were thrown under the bus because of the threat of bad things happening if they strike - instead of that being the key that says, wow, these really are essential employees. And hey, there have been billions in stock buybacks recently and hundreds of millions of compensation over the past few years for executives. Maybe they can also spare a sick day and to pressure the companies to provide that very, very, very basic thing for employees. Just very disappointing for me personally. How did you feel about that? [00:11:01] Doug Trumm: Yeah, that was disappointing and Amtrak Joe really let us down. I think it's odd that employees are held hostage to how valuable their work are, right? Their work is, right? Because everyone's - we can't have rails shutting down right in the middle of the holiday crisis when all these companies are trying to make a ton of money for themselves and have a strong Q4 and really try to get some blood flowing in this economy. But instead of going - oh yeah, so I guess we should pay those workers well to make sure that happens, and give them the sick time they're asking for and the benefits - it's just force it through because we create a vision of a crisis if they are actually allowed to use their union rights. So it just goes back to 1880s again of the rail barons and the laws that they got passed - that they're able to compel the workers in this way and have Congress step in. But it certainly is not - hopefully not the end of the story. Hopefully they can actually get real sick pay, especially in a time of a lot of viral spread - both in the COVID realm and really bad flu season. This is upending their lives when they get sick and it doesn't have to be this way. So it's disappointing, and I saw Mayor Harrell decided to pile on with that and say it was great that they'd broke the strike, and work in that he still supports workers' rights and everything - I think you can't have it both ways in this case. You can't One Seattle your way out of this one - you're either with the workers or you're not. [00:12:46] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, pretty cut and dry there. And what I just think is so shortsighted is that this policy is partially a response to being short-staffed. They are already facing staffing shortages. We are already at the breaking point where if - right now, under the current staffing levels, if an employee is sick, if someone does miss a day, that can create chaos in the system because there aren't enough people to cover. And this just perpetuating a system that is hostile to workers, where workers can face discipline for any unplanned absence - and people get sick and families get sick, as we all know - this is an inevitability. That if you're subject to discipline for that, they're seeing more people just leave, instead of have their career of however many years or decades end with them being disciplined for taking care of their sick kid. So we are already setting ourselves up for massive disruptions by making this worker shortage worse. We see things like this happening in education, in healthcare, in transportation - across the board - with public transit systems and others. So we just need to really take a look at what we're doing here and - are we setting ourselves up for the same problems that we swear we have to take action like this to avoid, when really we're just making it more of an inevitability that it does eventually happen. I hope we all learn from this and do better and hold our public officials accountable for doing better. Also in the news this week, speaking of holding public officials accountable, the criminal trial for Pierce County Sheriff Ed Troyer just started. This is the trial about him making a call, that was allegedly a false report, accusing a newspaper delivery person - a Black man who was delivering newspapers - of being suspicious, acting nefariously. He said that his life was threatened by the newspaper carrier, which does not - at least through all the reporting initially, did not seem to be supported by other accounts in what happened. He ended up being charged and now the trial has began. They sat the jury. Opening statements happened. Testimony has begun. What has happened in this trial that's been notable so far? [00:15:22] Doug Trumm: They use the same strategies they always use, it seems like - it's pretty clear that this police officer clearly didn't act as you'd want someone to act. Now he's trying to get out of it claiming - okay, I did feel threatened or I did. And it's how it plays out every time and a lot of people were willing to go along - suddenly this violence incident that this Sheriff deputy caused - suddenly it's not his fault because something else, and it just seemed like hopefully we're finally learning from that. But we've seen a lot of other cases where it's enough for some people to exonerate someone. I don't know - it's frustrating that this is how it always goes, but maybe eventually this line will go stale. [00:16:13] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, we will see. This is one where it's interesting because - for the day job and for this podcast, following the news is useful. But for my own personal sanity, this is a situation where often I find my inclination is to disconnect from - definitely the daily news, the drumbeat of news about this - just because some of the early signals, decisions, indications from this trial feel really familiar to me. Meaning that - man, we've seen so many of these trials end and the police officer, sheriff ends up being found not guilty, gets off regardless of what looks to be very obvious evidence to many people in the public. And I just - this will be very disappointing once again, if that does happen, but we will see what happens with this trial and continue to follow it for you all. Also, there was news that came out about an officer that wound up being charged in Manuel Ellis's death, having a very violent episode previously, and that not being heeded after that was communicated to the Tacoma Police Department. And so tragic. Can you detail what we found out here? [00:17:44] Doug Trumm: Yeah, I really encourage everyone to read about this story because it really makes you question how these systems are working and how this can happen. Because this officer - Rankine, I think is his name - was in the police academy. They identified that he had an issue with violence and with - I forget what they called it, "code black" or something like that - basically just shutting down and going tunnel vision, not hearing the outside world once he's in that mode. And it's related to his combat service as a veteran - obviously, that's a complicated issue - we're very, very glad that people serve, but that doesn't necessarily mean we want to put them on the frontlines interacting with the public if they have these unaccounted-for issues that are identified by the police academy. The police academy trainer decided to write a note, his superiors after a couple of days forwarded it to the Tacoma Police Department who was sponsoring him to be in this police academy and said - hey, we're worried about this guy. He had this violent incident where he shot someone during a training simulation who was not someone - the training simulation was supposed to be how do you de-escalate the situation, how do you - and the person was not cooperating, to be clear - and it was a virtual simulation. But the trainer was - why did you do this? And he couldn't really explain it because he went blank or whatever, and thought he had done fine because, I guess in the military, that's what he was conditioned to do and had seen a lot of violent episodes - but hadn't really made the connection that now you're in a civilian setting and you're supposed to be de-escalating situations instead of fighting your way out of them. And what ended up happening, despite the police academy issuing this warning saying - hey, maybe don't take this guy actually - the Tacoma Police Department still took him, didn't really make any accommodations, or - it's not clear that they warned his - the rest of the people he'd be working with, basically just treated him like one of the guys. They did put him on desk duty initially, but I think that's just what rookies kind of do. Then they put him on patrol with another rookie and it was not even a couple months - it was less than a year - and he had already, this happened. It was clearly a tragic incident waiting to happen and it did happen. It leaves us with a lot of questions like - is the police academy - is a little note in your file enough, or should he fail out of the academy? That's one odd thing about this case - they didn't fail him. The other odd thing is that even with this big warning, this huge red flag, Tacoma PD didn't do anything and now they're stonewalling the reporters from The Seattle Times and all the other newspapers that are knocking on the door, and they're just kind of clammed up about it, but it's clear they messed up in a big, big way. [00:21:03] Crystal Fincher: It's just one of those things that makes you want to once again ask - what are we doing here? If there is behavior that is so violent that you feel that you need to warn someone else not to hire him, why are you passing him? To the question that you just asked, why does that person pass the academy in the first place? Why was that not heeded when they were hired? Okay, they were hired and brought onto the academy. Why was no corrective action taken, no additional guidance? And yes, this wound up very predictably. The warning was given because it could be foreseen that this would wind up in unjustified violence to a member of the public - which it did, resulting in that person's death. This is a person, right? And it's just - if we can't weed out someone who even before they get in the system are demonstrating unacceptable violence - violence that you have to tell someone to look out for - what is the point of anything? There is this characterization by people, who I believe are acting in bad faith largely - that any kind of talk of accountability is antithetical to safety, it makes us less safe, it's hostile to police officers, and is not worth pursuing. And if we do, we're making life harder for them. If they're saying this is what belongs in their ranks, if they're saying that this is acceptable for passing and getting in, and then hiring without anything - then this is unacceptable. They're saying - they've said that their own policies were violated - this is seemingly saying that the warning came from them not meeting their own standards. If they can't hold themselves to their own standards and weed people out who don't fit that, then someone else has to. And evidently those aren't really their standards if they can't adhere to them. So someone has to, otherwise we're just letting - in this situation - basically killing machines out onto the street. And we have to do better. And it just makes no sense that we are entertaining people who say that this is bad for police officers. Acting against policy should not be bad for them. If so, we should have discussions about the policy, but this doesn't make any sense. And if their job truly is to protect and serve, and someone is acting completely against that, then acting more in concert with that and making sure that happens should be a welcome development. And over and over again, the public continues to vote for real accountability and reject those kinds of disingenuous arguments that - hey, you got to "back the blue" or nothing else. People can be happy to have a police officer there, that they're happy to have a police officer when they call 911 and show up, and still believe that there should be guidelines for their conduct and behavior that guide them and that they should be held accountable to - just like everyone else with every other job in this society. It just is so infuriating that - hey, this is predictable, it's foreseeable. And just with a shrug. [00:24:50] Doug Trumm: Yeah, and it wasn't his first time - [00:24:52] Crystal Fincher: Right. [00:24:53] Doug Trumm: - using basically a chokehold-type thing. And he had another I-can't-breathe incident and they just were like - oh well, it happens. And if he says - oh this person was threatening or violent - they kind of just, even though after the whole George Floyd thing - there's one thing that I thought was kind of the lowest hanging fruit - okay, we probably shouldn't use chokeholds anymore or knee on people's back, but this is exactly what this guy was doing. And he suffered no consequence for it until he killed someone. [00:25:27] Crystal Fincher: Acting against policy. And as we have seen with so many of these incidences, that there have been several occasions where officers who wind up killing someone - use violence unjustifiably, use violence against policy in situations before the killing occurs - which there is no discipline for. It is time for them to be held accountable to the job that the public believes they were hired to do. Just like all of us. That's not hostile. That's just common sense. So we'll see how that continues. It is just another infuriating, devastating, tragic element of Manny Ellis's death that is just - it's tragic. [00:26:21] Doug Trumm: Hopefully we learn from it. And I think it relates to how we get so breathless and just completely operate on fear and desperation - we have to hire, we have to reach some sort of set number of cops and then we'll feel safe. But when you get that desperate and you just want to add ranks so you can put out your press release to claim victory on that - you're hiring the bottom of the barrel. If we were serious about safety, we wouldn't worry so much about that number as flunking people out of the academy who are killing machines. You have to put accountability ahead of "let's just hit a number," "here's the right response time," "here's the right number of officers" - those are important things, but you can't get so blinded to them that you're taking terrible cops. [00:27:13] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and that makes the community less safe. The academy warned that - Hey, putting this officer on the street may make the community less safe, this is acting against public safety, we don't want people to be victimized unjustly by violence - and that was the warning that came with this officer - and look. We'll continue to see how this happens. Also kind of teeing up this week were some articles just talking about the War on Drugs - how much of a failure it has been - which is very timely because in this upcoming legislative session, which we're starting to see a flurry of activity with. And our new legislators now down in Olympia - and getting set and oriented and all of that to start the session next month - is that the Blake decision, which a couple years ago the Supreme Court basically decriminalized or invalidated the law that criminalized simple possession of any substances. Our Legislature subsequently acted to bring a uniform policy across the state and kind of instituted a new method of criminalization - some of it was lighter criminal penalties, but still criminal penalties for substance use and possession - in the face of a ton of evidence and data that shows that - Hey, criminalization is actually not an effective intervention. We've seen the entire War on Drugs. We've seen what has happened there. If we actually treat this as a public health problem and not as a criminal justice problem, we are much better off. There was a survey of Washington state voters - a poll taken - and in that poll, 85% of likely voters - the poll was in June 2022 of this year - 85% of voters believe that drug use should be treated as a public health issue and not a criminal justice issue. And this really sets the tone and provides a mandate for our Legislature, which has to take up the Blake decision and the Blake legislation again this year - because there was a sunset provision in it that is now up this year - to actually make good on this policy. How did you read this? [00:29:45] Doug Trumm: It seems like the public's at a different place than some of the very serious, centrist, establishment Democratic leaders on this who are - the likes of Chris Gregoire, who are saying - Oh, we really need to get - go back to our old policy where - it was drug possession was fully criminalized and it was just one strike and they could, people could be locked up for simple possession. And I think they portray that it's really important to dealing with downtown disorder, or crime, or whatever. But that's not really where the people are at, and this three-strike provision probably does make it, if you're only listening to cops, annoying - 'cause they feel like these warnings are letting people off the hook. But with jails being pretty full right now, you start running into this problem of where are are we putting people? We've done this drug war thing a long time, it hasn't really worked, the people are ready for a public health approach instead of a punitive lock-them-up approach. We just saw that with the election of Leesa Manion for King County Prosecutor that - the people went with the person who was willing to do diversionary programs that try to get people help and not load them up with jail time and fees, but instead give them an opportunity to get back on their feet and better themselves and think about rehabilitation instead of just ruining someone's life. I think the people are ready to take a different approach - I don't know how far folks, both in terms of the State Legislature and the public, if they're - maybe not ready for a Portugal-style solution, but I really think they're ready to have that conversation rather than just go back to the old way of doing things. I think the - maybe one of the things will come up is fentanyl - it really is a scary drug in terms of what it can do to a person and how likely it is to overdose - I'm sure they'll try to use that and maybe fentanyl is treated a little bit differently than other drugs, but it seems like a lot of substances doesn't - I don't know why you immediately lock someone up for having possession of a set quantity. It's sort of like - we got to get this person help, but jail isn't help. [00:32:11] Crystal Fincher: And jail doesn't help, and it actually does more harm than good in this situation. It makes our streets less safe. People are less stable, more prone to commit crime, when they get out - and more prone to continue to use. We've seen all of this and again, this is just about possession. This doesn't impact any laws on selling, or distributing, or anything like that - those still remain and that's not part of this discussion. But it would be good for them to act in alignment with where the evidence and data show - we are made more safe, and people are made more healthy and less likely to use and abuse drugs and other harmful substances. So we will continue to follow this throughout the legislative session and see what happens. Also big news this week - the Seattle City Council passed their budget. What did we get? What are the highlights and lowlights of this budget? [00:33:19] Doug Trumm: Yeah, it was a marathon day to wrap up the amendments and do all the speeches on Monday and Tuesday - I guess the really marathon day was the Budget Committee last week. It always is a slog at the end and it's tough to know everything that's happening, but ultimately the budget is - there's a lot of different takes on it, there's a lot of perspectives. But ultimately what happened is largely - Mayor Harrell's budget is reflected in the Council's balancing package. They did make some significant changes, but nothing enormous. And the issue that they're dealing with is that there is a large budget shortfall. It started out at $141 million at the beginning. And then they got the news that the projections had gotten a lot worse late in the game - so that any hope of Council just adding a bunch of new investments in evaporated, once they got that forecast that Real Estate Excise Tax was going to be way down - that was the main thing that took a bite out of the budget. And we use that REET money to fund a lot of our infrastructure investments in this city. So from a transportation focus, I was pretty disappointed to not see more investments in street safety. They did make some. Councilmember Tammy Morales really fought for her district - as we mentioned earlier - epicenter of the safety crisis. So she got a proviso to make sure that they improve the bike lanes in Southeast Seattle to have harder infrastructure, so you can't just run over those flex posts and injure someone on the bike lane or the sidewalk. That's one positive add, but it was just a proviso, so hopefully SDOT does the right thing and implements it rather than kind of wiggling out of it. But by and large, transportation didn't get a ton of adds and Mayor Harrell's budget didn't make a ton of new initiatives or pushes there, so that's one thing that fell victim to that shortfall. But a lot of the action was around public safety and that's where we saw a lot of the grandiose takes on - especially on the centrist side of - Oh, this was a disaster. End of the day, the Council funded 99% of the mayor's SPD budget. They're making a really big deal about this 1% - and within that 1% that the Council did do cuts was the ShotSpotter gunfire detection surveillance system, which has a really - it has a track record - it's been implemented in a lot of cities and that track record is not very good. It doesn't really, there's no correlation to it decreasing crime, leads to a lot of false calls - those false calls can then cause over-policing of communities of colors where they're implemented. And it has in, in instances, led to violent altercations between cops who are like - Oh, the gunfire thing said there was a gunshot here. And sometimes it's slamming a car door, or firework, or something - could set something off - or backfiring car, I guess. So what are we doing here? This is not evidence-based practice - Council made the budget safer, but if you listen to Councilmember Sara Nelson or Councilmember Alex Pedersen, who voted against the budget, and then some of the press releases that were fired off shortly after - the Chamber actually sent the press release before the final vote, but right after the Council briefing. They said - this is, these are public safety cuts. And the other big thing that happened was - there's 80 positions that were unfilled of actually 240 total unfilled positions at SPD, because they're having a hard time recruiting faster than they're losing officers, which relates to a national trend of a lot of attrition and police officers and not as much new people entering the profession. But they eliminated 80 positions off the books - because when they leave those 240 empty positions, that means that those, that money goes into SPD's budget every cycle. And it throws out the balance of the whole thing because you're - basically all the extra money goes to SPD instead of just being in the General Fund for them to debate and figure out where to go. It can go back into public safety investments and that's what happened this time, even with the eliminating the budgets. But basically a lot of people tried to turn that into - they were cutting officers - but they fully funded the mayor's hiring plan, which - they're going to hire 125 officers, which they hope - that's then 30 new, net new officers. But that wasn't good enough for those two councilmembers and for the Seattle Chamber of Commerce. So they both kind of opposed this budget. And that seemed to be pretty upsetting to Budget Chair Teresa Mosqueda, because she had worked with both of those Councilmembers Nelson and Pedersen and had put their amendments into the budget - some of them. And she thought that spirit of compromise would lead them to vote for it, but they did not. And so it almost - this budget almost failed because it needed six votes. It only got six votes because of those two defections, plus Councilmember Sawant makes it her tradition and has always voted against the budget. And she's coming at it from the opposite direction of - Hey, let's invest more in social services, and let's tax the rich, and increase the JumpStart payroll tax - is her argument, the last few years. And she specifically said - I'm not chucked in with Pedersen and Nelson. So yeah, it ended up being kind of a mess messaging-wise, but largely this budget was reflecting Harrell's priorities, plus a few of the Council's. And it made the most of a really downward trend in revenue - and that was by virtue of JumpStart payroll tax kind of papering over some of the holes, and also then letting them make a record investment in housing. So housing definitely did well. There were some Green New Deal priorities. And it's a really big budget, so I'm kind of - broad strokes here - but if I'm missing anything, Crystal, let me know. But yeah, it felt bizarre to me that the the debate about it was so far from the reality. And I guess these few million dollars in the police budget are enough to cause these votes against, and the Chamber to be really upset, and saying this is public safety cuts. But it largely seemed like much more collaboration and kumbaya between the mayor and most of the council, with Budget Chair Mosqueda and Mayor Harrell complimenting each other about how well they work together. [00:40:35] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. I think what we're seeing is reflective of some of the reality versus rhetoric that we see on a national level, that we see with conservative Republicans, even the MAGA Republicans, where the rhetoric just doesn't match reality. But the rhetoric is a tactic to eventually shift people's perception of what reality is. It doesn't matter what happened if you just keep saying something else happened - Oh my gosh, this is, you know, horrible. We didn't get anything we're asking for. We need to move in this completely different direction - people start to absorb that and pick that up. As we saw this week with the New York Times - basically admitting without participating, pointing the finger at themselves - saying, Yeah, rhetoric about public safety was really disjointed from the actual facts. There are tons of stories, but when you look at the actual crime rates, they weren't actually high. Media did this. And they very conveniently left out that they were at the top of the list of media doing that. But it felt like that's similar to this conversation. This rhetoric is completely detached from what happened in the budget and from what's happening on the ground - yeah, majority of what Harrell asked for was in there. One notable exception was the ShotSpotter technology as you covered, which actually didn't have a big, a huge price tag compared to some other things. But it's still money that, especially in a shortfall, can be better spent to make people safe. And I think that's where a lot of people are at right now. It's just - lots of people are worried about safety, but where they continue to vote, and how people on the ground continue to vote in elections is - yes, we do want our communities to be safer, but we recognize that the public safety equation is bigger than just policing. We have to talk about interventions that are appropriate for the crises that we're facing. Just sweeping and moving around and criminalizing people who are unhoused is not making that problem any better, it's making it worse. So instead of investing money continually in sweeps and in criminalization and carceral solutions - Hey, what if we actually use that money to put people in houses - that actually is a solution to that problem. Other cities are doing that with success. We could be doing that. Hey, if people are having behavioral health crises, what if there was actually treatment available for them and a way for them to get the issues that they have addressed? Jail is not that. Arresting them is not that. And we still have, and prior to some of the heel digging-in that police unions have done over the past few years, there were tons of officers and unions who admitted that freely - hey, we go into a situation where someone's called us and someone is having mental health issue - jail isn't going to do anything for that. If anything, it may destabilize that situation more and put them further away from help and make that situation worse. We actually need interventions that are appropriate for the challenges that we're facing. We have to deal with extreme poverty. We have to deal with people who are in crisis. We really do not need to deal with it like New York is signaling they're going to deal with it - in mandatorily incarcerating people. We see that we have problems here in our state and a lawsuit that's currently being filed with people with behavioral health problems struggling in our current jail system and not getting their needs met, and their whole process is being delayed sometimes with no foreseeable end because we don't have enough resources in that direction. So people want that, but they don't want this continual one note - Hey, it's either police or it's nothing. And we'll see where it's going - as we hear a siren in the background here, appropriate - but yeah, it's just the rhetoric doesn't match the reality. The saddest thing is that the public sees it and our leaders are behind where the public is at - and they keep asking and they keep voting for something different. And we have leaders that are just stuck on the same thing, and I think that frustration and tension is growing. And it feels like they're ratcheting this up for the 2023 City elections coming, and they're going to try and make this a flashpoint for those conversations. But I think that's not a very wise strategy, because the public has not been going for it. We just had an election where it's pretty clear they did not go for that argument in many different ways at many different levels. This is not just a Seattle thing. This is a King County-wide thing, a State of Washington thing. And it's time that they take heed instead of pushing on, just kind of - despite all reason and evidence to do this. [00:46:15] Doug Trumm: Yeah. It's pretty clear they're telegraphing this is their signal when you have your press release fired up before the budget's even officially passed. And in the case of the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, that these are public safety cuts. Nelson - and Pedersen is the one who's up for re-election - they really complimented the way he voted on that as far as voting down this budget over this tiny, tiny bit of disagreement over the police budget that they blew out of proportion. Apparently deleting these 80 out of 240 unfilled positions - you know, sending the wrong signal and is - people, the public trust has been damaged now. And it's just - get me to the fainting couch - they can add back these positions anytime. No other department in the whole city would ever have this many, anywhere near this - 240 empty positions - you just keep the money. And they get to - SPD gets to put it wherever they want in their department, basically, because of the way they don't eliminate those positions, and just Council and the mayor - tell them which parts they wanted - who would run an organization this way? If you don't have, if you're not paying for something - why are you still paying for it? It just, it - I dunno - it drives me nuts. It goes back to that sort of frenzy and the sort of fear mongering around crime - where if we don't just heap gobs of money at the police department - we're not talking about Defund, we're not talking about reducing the amount of - the headcount at SPD. We're just saying - how are you spending this money? Can we spend this money wiser? If we have less officers, we need to be spending the money wiser. We can't just have it be a slush fund, like we saw in - I think it was 2018 or 2019, right after they passed the budget - the average police compensation went up to like $157,000 per officer. This one officer made over $400,000 because they were just letting the overtime fly like hotcakes. And an officer working 80-hour weeks - is that making us safer? It doesn't really seem like the way to do it. You kind of put yourself in between a rock and a hard place because they also fight the alternatives - they say they're for a mental health professional showing up for those crisis calls, but then they block the program to actually set up an alternative emergency response. And that's what SPD has been up to the past few years. As Councilmember Lewis and Mosqueda and others have fought to set up - like Denver has - a alternative response, and they make up excuse after excuse. They say maybe the police actually have to be there. They dispute their own study that showed that most of these calls could be done without an armed officer there. But yeah, it just - there's nothing evidence-based or strategic about this kind of election-based fearmongering, just kind of opportunistic way of dealing with this problem. People wonder why this problem is festering - there has been a troubling trend over the last nine years - of corporate mayors that the Chamber and all these other centrist forces and Seattle Times have endorsed. They're not making the problem better, but they keep running on it like they are. So it really is - it's created a weird thing. And I wrote about how this sort of relates to us holding our mayoral and council elections in odd years when the electorate is smaller and they can kind of dominate the debate among this crowded, smaller electorate - tends to be more homeowners, tends to be wealthier and whiter than the population at-large. So it works in the odd year. But as we saw with voters passing even-year election reform - they're not asking for these elections to be in odd years, they'd rather them be in even years. And the County is going to make that move for Executive and Council races, and a few others like County Assessor - county-level races. But we actually need state permission to do that for the municipal level. So hopefully we get that because if we're going to solve this problem, it makes sense to have the broader segment of the electorate actually weigh in on that rather than purposely choosing a low turnout election to make all these decisions. So that's one thing I hope happens out of this, but don't hold your breath because I think they like it that way. [00:50:54] Crystal Fincher: They absolutely do seem to like it that way. And you did write a real good article breaking this phenomenon down. It's just frustrating to see voters - they are frustrated about public safety. They do know that we could be doing better, while seeing people continue to make decisions in the opposite direction. And when they are given a voice, it's definitive in one direction. And we just - the King County Prosecutor race that we just had was really a referendum on this entire argument. And mirrors what we saw in 2020, with the King County Charter Amendments. This is not just a Seattle thing. This is a countywide thing. One of the things I think people try and dismissively do i - oh, this is just, it's only a thing in super liberal Seattle, progressive Seattle, and no one else wants this. And we continue to have voters say - no, no, actually this is what we want - all over the county. And places where their electeds really are under the impression that - hey, the public, maybe they do just want more police officers, or I'm afraid to say anything different because they may not accept it. Public's already there, as we continue to see. And my goodness, in these Council elections coming up, there could not be a more clear mandate of movement in one direction in literally every district in the City. To enormous degrees - Leesa Manion's victory was large throughout the county. Yes, in Seattle - it was decisive and humongous. And in each of the council districts, it was - it was just really - it's just really something. I'm sitting here working in elections and you try and understand where voters are, understand where policy is - what's effective, where things need to move - and they're actually in alignment. And the barrier is - there seem to be some in media who are very stuck on not wanting this to happen, and a number of elected officials who believe them. And it's just continuing to be frustrating. But we see, in so many cities and so many districts - whether it's City Council districts, County Council districts, cities, precincts - across the board, they prefer a balanced, comprehensive approach to public safety and outright reject what we heard from Jim Ferrell - the more punitive - Hey, we need to crack down on things, make crime illegal again - understanding that punishment doesn't equal safety. And we would all rather be safe. We've tried punishment for decades and it has not resulted in a safer community for all of us. It has actually hurt it. And people want to be safe. They want to do the things that make us safe, and they understand - more than where a lot of leaders do - what the evidence says about that. So it's just really interesting. Was there anything noteworthy or unique that you saw in election results about that? [00:54:20] Doug Trumm: Yeah. I think it bears underscoring that the - very, very much the same coalition that was behind Republican now-City Attorney Ann Davison was the people behind Jim Ferrell, who was also a former Republican. Now, they both claim that they're Democrats now, but very much still act like Republicans. And there was a lot of Democrats - Sara Nelson endorsed Jim Ferrell and it didn't seem to help him very much in Seattle because, or her in Seattle - it helped her opponent, I guess, his opponent in Seattle. Leesa Manion cleaned up in Seattle - and that was part of her victory, but she won by 18 points. So it wasn't just Seattle, although Seattle was her strongest base of support. So it really seems like what an odd-year electorate does - electing a Republican in Ann Davison to be their City Attorney. And it's odd that we elect city attorneys - it doesn't really need to be that way. But they worked people up about crime and they did support Ann Davison, but in a much larger electorate just one year later they overwhelmingly supported Leesa Manion who's very much - let's stay the course, let's keep these diversionary programs. So whatever mandate Ann Davison thinks she had is absolutely gone. And all these people who are calculating - oh, maybe we can, maybe this whole region is just going to go tough on crime. It's just not happening. And the even-year election helps - we had reasonably good turnout. But the numbers are such that I wouldn't want to be Ann Davison going up for re-election, but hopefully we can get some of that turnout bump into the council elections because that's really what's at play here is - we've seen what an even-year electorate wants, and can we make that also what an odd-year electorate wants? But yeah, these crime narratives aren't connecting in the even year. Leesa Manion just did surprisingly well, considering - the way the race looked beforehand. One poll showed them tied right before the election, but clearly - A) their polls might've been a little bit overestimating support - and some of that goes into people didn't think that young people would turn out. And young people did turn out in relatively high numbers in this election. And hopefully that's a sign of things to come as well. It's just - that's what happens in odd years - why they're so much more conservative - is a lot of that younger vote kind of fades and a lot of communities of color and renters also fade. So you're left with the rest, which is the more conservative side of things. But it doesn't - people can - if we make clear what the stakes are, we hopefully can sustain some of that even-year turnout, but it also just - election year reform also would make this a lot simpler. So I can't underscore that enough. It drives - yeah, it's sort of odd that we are stuck in this predicament of - it's clear what people want, but because of odd years, we have to fight twice as hard. So yeah, I think these results really are - suggest potentially that 2021 - in Seattle's case - where we saw a lot of centrists come into power, might've been a bit of an outlier. It doesn't necessarily mean all these people are weak in their re-election hopes, but all the talks about Seattle's now drifting conservative - I don't see it. [00:58:02] Crystal Fincher: And there was a backlash and - I feel like I've been on a small island, with just a few others, who have said the entire time that that race was an outlier. One, Seattle is different than a lot of other areas. If there really was a wholesale pushback on that, we would have also seen that in suburbs, we would have seen that in different areas. We actually saw the opposite happen in suburbs, where they elected - a number of suburbs elected more progressive officials than they ever had before - who were speaking strongly about making the community more safe with comprehensive public safety policies and really rejecting the punitive policies. The race in Seattle was an odd race - you had an incumbent who lost in the primary, you had two really unknown people who both - didn't really consider themselves to be Democrats, so there were unalignments. You had massively different levels of spending and different levels of voter communication. And, from a political consulting point of view, you have to talk to all of the voters who are voting in the election. It's wonderful - and canvassing and doorbelling is great - but you just cannot canvass a city as big as the City of Seattle in one election cycle. And that's what we saw happen. There was a lot of canvassing, but a lot less direct voter communication. You may make it to 50,000 people with that canvassing, but you got to talk to the other 200,000 - and that happens with direct voter communications. And they were just massively, massively outspent. And the spending that did happen was really late for the progressive candidates, so if you aren't known, and if your opponent can define who you are - and spends half a million dollars doing so - that's going to carry the day and it did. But that is a unique kind of nuts-and-bolts-of-campaigns thing that was apparent to a lot of people before the election results. So that's not just hindsight is 20/20 things - those were, as that was shaping up - that was concerning to a lot of folks who were looking at and participating in those elections. And so we had before that, the 20 - well, we did see a direct public safety vote in the King County Charter Amendment votes, which wound up largely like these wound up. And just looking at these 2022 King County Prosecutor results - again, people try and characterize this as a Seattle thing - but Renton, Newcastle, Mercer Island, Sammamish, Issaquah, Bellevue, Bothell, Kenmore. Those cities are not what I think a lot of people would group into the Seattle progressive bucket, and were firmly in the side of Leesa Manion and rejecting punitive public safety policies. As we look at the Blake decision and people, looking at - well, people are scared, it's really worrisome to look at that. We're talking about - the 45th, the 48th, the 41st, the 11th, the 33rd LDs, right - these are not Seattle-based LDs. These are North and Eastside, Vashon Island, like these - everywhere around the county, voters are very decisively saying - we want to move in a direction that evidence points will make us more safe. And I just really hope that our elected officials stop listening to some of the detached rhetoric and start looking at the evidence and what their constituents are saying - because those who aren't are going to pay a price. And it's really important to take a look at what results actually are, and tether ourselves to reality here, and call out the reporting and the characterizations that are not tethered to reality. That's going to be an important thing. [01:02:33] Doug Trumm: Hey, there was this Seattle Times editorial this morning that was mad at Bruce Harrell for not being louder about the huge public safety cuts to his budget - the 1% that we mentioned earlier. Why isn't he getting in the arena? That's what Blethen and his buddies said, and it's - okay, that's crazy - first. But also, maybe this is saying that some of the politicians see the writing on the wall that - okay, this isn't like a home run issue for them like they maybe thought. They have to kind of actually try to moderate and have compromise and have a truly, comprehensive public safety plan instead of putting lip service to the alternatives and just being all police all the time. I don't know if that's what went into the thought of Harrell not getting into the arena, like the Seattle Times Editorial Board asked him to, but yeah - it certainly is unhinged. And it - Fox News always has a ton of crime coverage right before elections, and then it drops in half - there's been a study on this and after the midterm. So suddenly it's not prime all the time when you turn on Fox News - there's a reason for that. It's calculated, it's manipulation, it's election manipulation. And a lot of these other papers, including The Seattle Times, do that as well. I haven't seen the studies see that it's dropped in half, but that's part of the whole game and it's part of why the playing field isn't even. But I think, eventually, you have to have actual truth to what you're saying, or it starts just not connecting where we're at then. [01:04:17] Crystal Fincher: Well said. And with that, we thank you all for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, December 2nd, 2022. Hacks & Wonks is co-produced by Shannon Cheng and Bryce Cannatelli. Our insightful co-host today was Executive Director of The Urbanist, Doug Trumm. You can find Doug on Twitter @dmtrumm - that's two Ms at the end. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can find me @finchfrii. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you soon.

In 2020, the police-involved killings of Manuel Ellis in Tacoma and George Floyd in Minneapolis were two cases among many incidents across the nation which led to the recent establishment of the Office of Independent Investigations (OII) earlier this summer in Olympia. Signed into law by Governor Inslee, the OII is a civilian-led agency that conducts investigations into police-involved incidents of serious harm or death. The agency's creation offers an opportunity to improve public faith in police accountability.   In June 2022, Roger Rogoff became director of the new OII. Rogoff's career in the criminal justice system spans 27 years, including roles as judge in King County Superior Court as well as in the juvenile courts, and as both prosecuting and criminal defense attorney. In addition to serving as assistant U.S. attorney, Rogoff most recently served as legal counsel for Microsoft on matters of data privacy and public safety. As Gov. Inslee stated, “Roger's experiences make him exceptionally suited to lead an agency, independent of law enforcement or the governor's office, to investigate cases.”  In this episode, Rogoff details how the OII is working thoughtfully and efficiently to fulfill its mission. He explains the office's priorities for its first six months, law enforcement's response to the agency's creation, the way the OII will work with other parties, employment prospects, and how OII roles like family liaisons and community liaisons address the need for transparency around investigations of police use of force. 

Pierce County will pay roughly $4 million to settle a civil rights lawsuit over the killing of Manuel Ellis by police in 2020.

The top headlines from The News Tribune in Tacoma Washington, for March 22, 2022, including possible settlement in the Manuel Ellis case, troubling new flood maps and a new park.

On this rebroadcast, Melissa Santos from Crosscut joins Crystal to talk about her deep dive into Washington State's Brady List, which is a list maintained by prosecutors of cops with credibility issues which may compromise their testimony in court. In her research she found that nearly 200 cops in our state have such credibility issues. They also get in to how recent laws may affect police accountability in Washington State, what happens when a police officer's account of an incident differs from other accounts, and how the media could more responsibly report on official police accounts of an incident.  As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's guest, Melissa Santos, at @MelissaSantos1. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources Crosscut resources on Brady list investigation: https://crosscut.com/brady-list-investigation   “Nearly 200 cops with credibility issues still working in Washington state” by Melissa Santos: https://crosscut.com/news/2021/04/nearly-200-cops-credibility-issues-still-working-washington-state   “How fired cops win their jobs back: arbitration” by Melissa Santos: https://crosscut.com/news/2021/04/how-fired-cops-win-their-jobs-back-arbitration   “How public records gave us a window into WA police misconduct” by Melissa Santos: https://crosscut.com/inside-crosscut/2021/04/how-public-records-gave-us-window-wa-police-misconduct   “3 WA families on how new police laws could have helped their loved ones” by Melissa Santos: https://crosscut.com/politics/2021/05/3-wa-families-how-new-police-laws-could-have-helped-their-loved-ones   “Recapping the 2021 Legislative Session and Uncovering Washington Police Credibility Issues: A Double Episode – Melissa Santos – Crosscut - #127” from the Nerd Farmer Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/recapping-2021-legislative-session-uncovering-washington/id1223805236?i=1000519554971   “Full investigation of Manuel Ellis' death casts new doubts on Tacoma officers' stories” by Patrick Malone: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/times-watchdog/full-investigation-of-manuel-ellis-death-casts-new-doubts-on-tacoma-officers-stories/   “Tommy Le May Have Been Shot While Facedown on the Roadway, May Not Have Even Had a Pen, Documents Show” by Carolyn Bick: https://southseattleemerald.com/2020/10/09/tommy-le-may-have-been-shot-while-facedown-on-roadway-may-not-have-even-had-a-pen-documents-show/   “Opinion: Remember Tommy Le” by Senator Joe Nguyen: https://southseattleemerald.com/2021/06/14/opinion-remembering-tommy-le/   “Newspaper carrier who was confronted by Sheriff Ed Troyer files $5 million legal claim against Pierce County” by Jim Brunner: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/newspaper-carrier-who-was-confronted-by-sheriff-ed-troyer-files-5-million-legal-claim-against-pierce-county/   “How Headlines Change the Way We Think” by Maria Konnikova: https://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/headlines-change-way-think   Transcript [00:00:00] Lisl Stadler: Hi, I'm Lisl, the producer of Hacks & Wonks. Last summer Crystal interviewed Melissa Santos, an exceptional journalist from Crosscut, about her investigative reporting regarding what's called a Brady list - a list that prosecutors keep of law enforcement officers who may have legal credibility issues. Since Melissa started writing about this, several counties around Washington state have changed the way in which they treat reports of officers who have had shaky relationships with the truth, but others have not. As we are currently in Legislative Session again, we thought that this would be an interesting episode and issue to revisit. You can find out more about this investigation at crosscut.com/brady-list-investigation. Additionally, there you can submit information about an officer experience you've had, or ask questions that you'd like answered about policing in our city and state. Thanks for listening and enjoy the show. [00:01:11] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks, I'm Crystal Fincher and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at OfficialHacksAndWonks.com and in our episode notes. Well, I'm really excited to have you join us today because lots of people are familiar with your reporting. You are known for doing very in-depth, long form reports and really diving into the details of issues - reporting thoroughly. And you really outdid yourself this time by doing a long-term investigative series on officers on the Brady list in the State of Washington. What motivated you to even do this story? [00:02:08] Melissa Santos: Well,, I had known about these lists, where essentially these are lists prosecutors have of officers that have some sort of issue - an issue that often deals with their veracity, whether they tell the truth, not always, but sometimes. And especially after George Floyd's death, and we were seeing, sometimes, the initial narrative surrounding what happens during police uses of force especially isn't later found to be exactly what happened or some details are different. And sometimes we've been hearing a long time also - families of police shooting victims saying that they don't think the official story is right. So I just figured, if we have known officers who may have issues with truth, to the point that prosecutors keep lists of them and have to tell defense attorneys about this past issue, then it's worth finding out who those folks are, why they still have jobs, what the issue was. And so that's why I started on it last summer. [00:03:16] Crystal Fincher: Right, and so as you covered, the Brady list is a list of officers who for some reason, their truthfulness has been called into question. What types of issues, or is it just lying that lands you on the Brady list? Are there other types of behaviors or activities that put you on there? [00:03:34] Melissa Santos: Lying is the most common, or some sort of dishonesty. There also though, I mean, if you demonstrate racial bias and there's some documented incidents of that, you can get on the Brady list. I'm not sure that every officer that is suspected of having some bias is on this list - there's only some that are on there. But also, uses of force get some folks on there as well. If there was deemed to be some sort of questionable or excessive use of force, they could be on the Brady list. The other things that get you on there are - maybe they don't really think you lied - exactly, intentionally - but somehow your official report really doesn't match the other evidence. Especially if it's dash cam video - if your reports do not match official dash cam video, and there's some discrepancy that seems like it could potentially affect the outcome of a case. That's something that has to be disclosed - that will put you on the list. And I mean, prosecutors will say this list is just an administrative tool by which we kind of keep track of officers for whom we have to send out notices to defense saying, "Hey, you should know about this past thing." Because it's a due process issue - they should have all the evidence that might indicate a cop's credibility is in question. And that can relate to future cases if the cop, maybe has been less than truthful in the past or there's suspicion that they were. [00:05:04] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And it is important to really consider and talk about why the honesty and integrity of officers is really important and why this list is necessary. You just talked about it being a due process issue - and certainly in a trial, if there is reason to doubt the testimony of an officer, oftentimes that can be the determining factor on whether someone is viewed to be guilty or innocent. An officer's word is taken as truth universally. And that, in issues of guilt and innocence, you can dramatically impact and infringe upon someone's civil rights, their constitutional rights if you don't tell the truth, and that can result in them going to jail. It can be a lot, to some people, simpler. It could be, hey, maybe they didn't take a report of a crime seriously, and it depends on whether insurance is going to cover something, or their employer covers something, or whether or not they eventually wind up arrested. They have so much control and influence over people's lives and what happens to them that they should be, and theoretically, are held to a higher standard when it comes to their conduct and their honesty. And so this list is saying, hey, these officers have not met standard of high conduct, and we need to consider that - that we can't automatically take their word as being truthful and honest, which has also been an issue in reporting overall. And I know you've had conversations, there was a great conversation you've had on the Nerd Farmer Podcast about this, talking about how reporters take officer's words as fact. And how after incidences, it can be an officer, an "officer-involved shooting", when an officer shoots and often kill someone. Or they do something and they come out with their statement about what happened - that has, as a default, been reported as fact. Is that practice changing - is that practice, do you think, worthy of being changed, and have you seen that talked about in reaction to your piece that you did? [00:07:27] Melissa Santos: I think in the last couple of years, especially, I feel like there has been a broader discussion in the media about how to use police statements. But I do think there's pressure, especially for daily media outlets and newspapers, to get a story out quickly, immediately. And the police statement really is all you have at first, most of the time. And so I just think that that needs to be presented in the proper context. And not just kind of - I think that we've kind of been a little flip with being, like, "We said, 'Police said.' That it was the police who said it." Yeah. But I think that we might need to be more explicit and say, "This is the police's side of the story. We don't have other witnesses to tell their side of the story right now. So this is only..." I think we might just need to call that out a little more clearly, rather than just a small attribution and assuming readers can follow that. And certainly readers can follow - they're smart - but people read things quickly. So, I just think that you need to stop readers and say, "Hey, this is all the information we have. We're working to get more. This is what the police say. There was some..." Especially now since we have the internet, there's usually some sort of, not all the time, but sometimes there's conflicting reports from the scene from social media. And I think maybe that can be acknowledged too. And I just think that it does need to be considered. Because I think the original press release from George Floyd's killing was like - it was not saying that Derek Chauvin stood on his, put a knee on his neck for nine minutes, right? It was like, "Oh, he died of natural causes after an altercation." It was something like that, right? Or he died of respiratory failure, or something like that. It wasn't like, "Respiratory failure because our person was constricting his airway with his knee for nine minutes." That was not what it said, right? So I think we're all learning we need to be more cognizant that the police story is not the correct story, but all the time. However, there's been people saying this for a very long time. So I think media is a little slow to catch up on that. Sometimes that first statement may be accurate. I mean, it's not always inaccurate necessarily, but certainly there's enough instances where it has not been an accurate depiction of what happened during a use of force incident that there's reason to question whether you should just run with that narrative in the very beginning. [00:09:51] Crystal Fincher: Oh, absolutely. I mean, we've seen that here locally recently. We saw it with Manuel Ellis, we saw it with Tommy Le. We saw it with Pierce County Sheriff Ed Troyer, where their account of events does not match up with that. I think your point of putting it in context and the need for media to independently work on verifying that narrative - that is one reported perspective, that should not be the only reported perspective. It should be noted that if that hasn't been able to be independently verified or verified through reporting by other means, that that is called out and explicitly said. I think that's helpful. [00:10:45] Melissa Santos: I think we also need to be mindful of updates to stories, because that's a lot of times sort of how the industry has worked - well, we do a new story and we fix things. I mean, it wasn't inaccurate, that was what police said. That's what we said that was what police said. So that story is still somewhere in the ether. Again, the internet lives forever, basically for the most part. So those older stories can still cloud the truth of the actual matter if they remain up and aren't clear about what actually happened. So I think that there needs to be more deliberate going back and saying - and sometimes you still see this - we have a new version, we have more updates to this story that we've put here. Maybe for integrity's sake you may not want to delete the original story, right? That's not something we generally do. But something at the top saying - We've gotten more information. The updated information is here. You should go there. So people don't find some old story in a vacuum that doesn't have all that important context. And that's something we need to look at as well. [00:11:38] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. And certainly, also underscoring the importance of headlines - people can discern information, but it is also a reality that a lot of people don't read full articles or they may not have time to read through every article - so rely on headlines sometimes, and may get back to the information to get more detail or may not. So I hope that there is widespread thoughtfulness and consideration being given to putting that reporting in more context and not just treating that as a factual account that just gets passed through and kind of transcribed without it being verified, or at least explicitly noted that it hasn't been, that that is a perspective. Back to, I guess the issue of the Brady list overall, do all officers - how comprehensive is the list? We have a list of around, is it around 200 officers right now? [00:12:44] Melissa Santos: Right. About 200. A little under 200 right now - statewide. [00:12:48] Crystal Fincher: Do they feel like that covers the number of officers there? Are there still glaring holes? Or how hard is it, or how easy is it for an officer to wind up on that list? [00:12:58] Melissa Santos: So I do think it varies a little by jurisdiction. But I will say in general, most officers don't get on the list for nothing - just for some casual, maybe they did something, maybe they didn't. I do not think that it is easy in the sense that you have to have some sort of concrete evidence usually. I don't think that prosecutors will put officers on this list of cops that may have issues, issues that have to be disclosed to the defense, without some sort of evidence that something went wrong or that there was some sort of fishy activity. So getting that evidence that a cop lied, for instance, that doesn't always come forth. So it's not always clear that a cop lied, so it's rare to actually have something really specific, like we saw proof that what they said did not match what actually happened. So that's somewhat rare, so that influences who goes on the list and who does not go on the list. It also is dependent a lot on what police agencies report upward to the prosecutor's office. I mean, most of this is based on police officer disciplinary procedures. And if the police agencies do not have a sustained finding of misconduct, of dishonesty, then often that does not end up putting an officer on a prosecutor's Brady list, even if maybe there is some evidence that someone might think, well, wait, wait, wait, wait. I think that that actually was kind of messed up and maybe that investigation didn't actually turn up what it should have. So you're depending on the police officer disciplinary process, which in some cases I think some people would argue does not always kind of identify officer misconduct as reliably as it should, since it's the department investigating its own officers. So that's one issue. And defense attorneys just say that, no, there's all of these officers we kind of know have issues that are not on this list. And so it's an undercount in that respect. And I should add that the 200 or so officers that I identified are ones that are currently working. There was a lot more that were on the list, but maybe have left law enforcement and things like that. So we actually kind of took a look to say, who is still around? Because theoretically if there's officers who have lied or have used force and they've been fired, you're like, okay, well maybe that's an appropriate response. But they still end up on prosecutor's lists in case they get another job in law enforcement or the prosecutors don't keep up with all the personnel stuff sometimes. So, yeah. So we actually narrowed it down, but there are almost 200 still working in the state. [00:15:41] Crystal Fincher: So is it fair to say that usually officers wind up on the list when their own departments have found that there has been some kind of dishonesty or misconduct? [00:15:51] Melissa Santos: Yes. The vast majority of the time that's what I found. In fact, I think that King County even has a system by which they have a pending list, a pending sort of, well, we're seeing how the outcome of this investigation plays out. And if the allegation is not sustained, that they won't end up even necessarily end up on the permanent list. So there certainly is some due process in that respect for officers. I've definitely have gotten some emails saying, oh, people can get put on this for anything. I don't think that's necessarily true. At the same time, there are cases in which a defense attorney brings something forward, being like, I looked at this guy's personnel file and this seems to be like you should've told me about this. And that sometimes will cause a prosecutor to say, yeah, that should actually be something that puts you on our list, even if the police agency did not deem it a problem. I think one example of that is someone I actually used in my story - is a deputy in Whatcom County, who had used a really racist - he just said something really racist on Facebook about Native Americans. It was kind of joking about genocide. It was very bad. So his department didn't discipline him for that. I actually have inquired and I got an answer after my story ran that there was no discipline involved. And that came from a defense attorney who said, "I found this on my phone just looking, when I was looking up the key witness against my client, and you should know about this." And then so the prosecutor said, "Yeah, it does seem like it meets the legal requirements of something we need to disclose, so we are putting him on our list. But I really trust his testimony and I'm going to continue to call on him as a witness." They often say, this technically meets the criteria for something I need to turn over, but I have not had any issue with this cop and I trust that person. [00:17:46] Crystal Fincher: Oh, the old, "I never had a problem with them, so they're not a problem for anyone" excuse, which we've all seen work out so wonderfully. I guess another question I have is, I've certainly heard reports and seen reports before that there can be misconduct that happens or a finding of some misconduct or lying, and that doesn't always make it or stay on an officer's record or in their personnel file. How does that affect or impact who winds up on the Brady list? Can there be actions or findings of misconduct that don't make it to the file, or that are erased from the file, and then that can prevent them from being on the list? [00:18:34] Melissa Santos: In general, it depends on the county. But for instance, I'll use King County as an example. That's one case in which they told me they would not remove someone for their list. If it was something like, "Oh, an arbitrator said, 'We think this punishment was wrong, and we think you should not have disciplined this person.'" But finding the fact didn't change? And everyone agrees this happened, but it wasn't worthy of discipline or something like that. This is one reason why I actually did this story, because I realized the prosecutors have a repository of records on cops that sometimes their own departments may not even have anymore. Especially because in some cases, the police agencies, completely independent of the police contracts, an officer may have left pretty recently, but those disciplinary records are destroyed after usually six years. So even if it was at this point, 2014, 2015, something someone did in their last jurisdiction, that jurisdiction doesn't have those records anymore in a lot of cases, I found. But the prosecutor's office did. So that's one reason I wanted to look at these records, because police disciplinary records are not very well-maintained. I think that's changing with the new law that just passed, it's supposed to hopefully change. But yeah, that was one reason. The prosecutors actually were better about keeping these records than the agencies themselves in some cases. [00:19:58] Crystal Fincher: There seem to be so many loopholes, and we seem to be relying on people and agencies self-investigating and self-reporting, and there don't seem to be many exceptions to that. Looking forward, how are people - what has been the response to your story? How are people looking at the utility of the Brady List? And is there any responses that you've heard about how to make this list better, more comprehensive and more reliable? [00:20:33] Melissa Santos: So I'm waiting to see if this - there is a new law they passed. I wouldn't say it was in response to my story, it was well in the works at the time I wrote. But there was a law that passed that said that police agencies have to send any findings of misconduct to the prosecutor's office within 10 days of their discovery of those incidents. So that's something the prosecutors say, "Okay, that would help us, because right now we don't feel like we're always getting them in a timely manner." Because even though the cops are supposed to turn that stuff over under the case law - that really should happen. They were saying, "Well sometimes it's like, they might turn them over once every six months, or maybe they send over a batch yearly or something." The prosecutors think that could get them in trouble, because they're assumed to know everything that the cops do. Because again, they're all part of the prosecuting law enforcement team. So that new law, maybe it will help. I still think that it's dependent on the disciplinary - I guess we'll see. I think there is a little bit of wiggle room for how, whether the agencies think it's reportable misconduct or not - that law tries to clarify that - like, "You need to report stuff like this, lying, or if an investigation starts, you need to send it over." I'm interested to see how it's implemented on the ground, that's all. And I'm not sure it solves the issue of - something else I'm looking into right now is whether prosecutors always do their job. That was a little too much to get into in my first story, but do they always turn over what they're supposed to to the defense, even for people on their list? Some defense attorneys tell me no, that they don't. They think it's very relevant that this cop lied sometime ago, but they didn't get a notification like they were supposed to from the prosecutor's office, is what some have told me. And I'm going to look at trying to find out how often that happens, that's a little hard to pin down. But there's a lot of ways in which it can still break down, I think, even with this new law potentially. [00:22:47] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I'm glad you're looking at doing that story. Certainly just from attorney friends that I have, have heard stories of that happening. And you alluded to earlier, the very close relationship between police and prosecutors, and those prosecutors relying on the testimony of police to make their cases in sometimes. Sometimes it is the police making their case, and so there seems to be an incentive to present that cop in the best light possible, and to cover up anything that could jeopardize their case - which would be misconduct or lying from an officer. So I'm excited to hear that. Looking at, from what you've reported, as you're looking at the process, what do you see could be put into place to make it more reliable or strengthened? What are the biggest loopholes, or areas of opportunity for improvement? [00:23:49] Melissa Santos: I understand the prosecutors have a workload. I don't think they're just mostly sitting around on their butts not doing anything. I'm not sure how this would exactly necessarily work, but I have a defense attorney who said she just looked at the guy's public Facebook page and found this, and the prosecutor had not had that in their file or anything on this cop. Maybe the prosecuting office does need to take a bigger role in saying, "Maybe we need to do a little more looking at our witnesses ourselves." Because it is a constitutional obligation for them to turn over exculpatory evidence, stuff that could clear someone or affect the outcome of someone's case. They have to do that. I think the prosecutors take that seriously, in general, but I'm not sure how much they're taking it upon themselves to look for stuff that should be disclosed. I've kind of been told, "We can't do our own disciplinary investigations. How are we going to do that? We have to rely on the cops for that." But maybe there's at least some cursory work that needs to be done, or someone in each office that just looks up every witness and finds more stuff on the prosecutor's end. I'm not sure - if that's not feasible, but it does seem like that's where things go missing sometimes in this process. And still could, even with this new law. So that's happened. And then there's also this element of - I'm just really unclear how determinations are made that someone's bias or use of force merits them putting on the Brady List. Because I think that there's plenty of people in our community that would argue that there are more than half a dozen officers who have demonstrated bias in a way that maybe should be mentioned in future cases that they're a witness on. But I only found maybe six or eight cases that were people on the Brady List currently for bias. So that seems like it could be low potentially. That determination is a little fuzzy, I think to me, how is that determination made? I don't know though that there's that many formal determinations of sustained finding that you were racist in the police world right now. And also, uses of force - there's not that many officers on the list for use of force, even though theoretically they should be. And I suspect there's a few more cases that maybe didn't make the list, where officers might have used force in a way that defense attorneys would want to know about in their past. [00:26:22] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, you make some really good points. And even to your point, it does seem like most people involved in the legal system, prosecutors included, are largely acting in good faith. But the institution sometimes present some obstacles, and it seems like the job of a prosecutor, and investigating, and how they interact with police - 30 years ago, looking up their social media history was not a thing. Seeing if dash cam video or body cameras matched up to their account was not a thing. And so there's just a lot more to look into and they just may not have also expanded their practices and have the daily resources, given their workload, that accounts for being able to look into all of that. But maybe that should be happening, maybe they do need to really explore how to make sure that they're looking at all available evidence to help account for that. [00:27:26] Melissa Santos: I actually thought of something else. In fact, there's a couple of people who got added to the Brady list apparently because of my going around asking everyone for their list, basically. That sort of indicated to me that there was some lag time, I guess, in people being added to the list. That's even on the prosecutor's end, apparently, I think. Or maybe they were like, "Oh, we really should get an update on this guy. Whatever happened with this?" Yeah, I think that there's some potential for wiggle room there. I will say there's some instances when prosecutors were really concerned about a cop and the prosecutor saying, "This is a problem. We need to put that person on our list," happened independently of officers. But that was not the majority of cases. It was only a handful that I saw and had records on. [00:28:17] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. It also seems like there is a problem with, okay, we only keep records for six years, or however long that is. If an officer changes jurisdictions, we just may not know that they had some egregious things on their record from 2013. Seems like we do that for folks on the other side of the criminal justice system, and if there is something on their record from 2010 or, really anytime, that that counts against them in terms of what they're charged with, how they're sentenced. And if it seems like that should be a factor taken into consideration for people who are defendants, certainly other people involved in that - that should be consistent. And, wow, 2014 just does not seem that long ago to be discounting what people are doing. [00:29:12] Melissa Santos: Right. I was talking - early 2010s, there are some records I don't have. There was a guy who was police chief in one small town that oversaw some really, really bad management of stuff - evidence was just lying around the squad room. Actually, mishandling of evidence could get you on the list too. This was really rampant, bad. An auditor came in, he ended up leaving the department - but that works in another department now. And this, this changeover, he left that department in 2012 or something. There's records I can't get anymore from some of that. Yeah, it doesn't seem like that long ago, really. But I will say there's this new bill. I was asking how much will this really help? This bill that deals with officer decertification, making it so it's easier for the state to pull an officer's license does kind of set new rules for union contracts to not allow them to destroy or remove files from people's personnel records because this actually happens as well. Sometimes officers can request after two years or something - sometimes it's as low as two or three years to have something removed from their personnel file. And all that might be in there then is a letter saying, "This officer asked for this to be - some disciplinary action to be removed." And I think that in some cases you can still get those records by asking a different department somehow, but it obscures the process at the very minimum, even if those records in some cases may be attainable somehow else. And so that's something that will change apparently with this bill. You won't be able to have contracts that let officers remove stuff from their files as often, at least. [00:30:51] Crystal Fincher: I thank you all for listening to Hacks & Wonks on KVRU 105.7 FM. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler with assistance from Shannon Cheng. You can find me on Twitter at @finchfrii, spelled F-I-N-C-H F-R-I-I. And now you can follow Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts. Just type in "Hacks & Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get our Friday almost-live shows and our mid-week show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in. Talk to you next time.

Thursday, December 23 on Urban Forum Northwest - guest for the hour are: *Congressman Emanuel Cleaver II (D) Kansas City MO-5 comments on his message to the lobbying firms on K Street in Washington DC about their lack of diversity in their front offices. *Attorney James Bible represents the Manuel Ellis family. He will explain why the Tacoma Police Chief exonerated two police officers in the death of Mr. Ellis. *Will Hausa, Chair, Washington State Commission on African American Affairs who represents the Tacoma Pierce County Black Collective in the Tacoma Police-Manuel Ellis deliberations. *Shaude' Moore, Chair, Seattle King County Martin Luther King Jr. Organizing Coalition comments on the activities for the January 17, 2022 Observance at Seattle's Garfield High School and the Reverend Dr. Samuel B. McKinney Center for Community and Economic Development (formerly SVI and SOCIC). *Attorney Robert (Bobby) Alexander talks about the MLK Rally at Garfield on MLK Day. He will outline the program to date and comment on any changes due to the omicron variant. Urban Forum Northwest streams live at www.1150kknw.com. Visit us at www.urbanforumnw.com for archived programs and relevant information. Like us on Facebook. Twitter@Eddie_Rye. This program will air on Saturday, Christmas Day 7:00-8:00 am (PST).

Thursday, December 23 on Urban Forum Northwest - guest for the hour are: *Congressman Emanuel Cleaver II (D) Kansas City MO-5 comments on his message to the lobbying firms on K Street in Washington DC about their lack of diversity in their front offices. *Attorney James Bible represents the Manuel Ellis family. He will explain why the Tacoma Police Chief exonerated two police officers in the death of Mr. Ellis. *Will Hausa, Chair, Washington State Commission on African American Affairs who represents the Tacoma Pierce County Black Collective in the Tacoma Police-Manuel Ellis deliberations. *Shaude' Moore, Chair, Seattle King County Martin Luther King Jr. Organizing Coalition comments on the activities for the January 17, 2022 Observance at Seattle's Garfield High School and the Reverend Dr. Samuel B. McKinney Center for Community and Economic Development (formerly SVI and SOCIC). *Attorney Robert (Bobby) Alexander talks about the MLK Rally at Garfield on MLK Day. He will outline the program to date and comment on any changes due to the omicron variant. Urban Forum Northwest streams live at www.1150kknw.com. Visit us at www.urbanforumnw.com for archived programs and relevant information. Like us on Facebook. Twitter@Eddie_Rye. This program will air on Saturday, Christmas Day 7:00-8:00 am (PST).

The top headlines from The News Tribune in Tacoma Washington, for Dec. 22, 2021, including the latest on the Manuel Ellis case, a fatal toddler shooting, and a COVID warning from health officials.

TODAY'S TOP STORIES // Guest: Attorney James Bible on the Manuel Ellis case // WE NEED TO TALK about holiday plans See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Daunte Wright, black, killed for a traffic violation. Andre Hill, black, killed for holding his cellphone. Manuel Ellis, black, killed walking home. George Floyd, black, killed over a $20 bill. Breonna Taylor, black, killed while sleeping. Stephon Clark, black, killed in his grandmother's backyard. **Insert numerous more black individuals killed by police** Julies Jones, black, spends his life on death row for a crime he didn't commit. Kyle Rittenhouse, white, drives across state borders with a military grade semi automatic, kills two people, police walk past him, he goes to trial, declared innocent of all charges, offered multiple internships by politicians. Now, you tell me why black people in America are angry? If you can't see the difference, you're either ignorant, or choosing to see past the injustice. My thoughts, and more. Thank you for watching. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/agenttalkpodcast/support

The top headlines from The News Tribune in Tacoma, Washington, for September 13, 2021, including cleaning up Tacoma, the Manuel Ellis death investigation and the Seattle Seahawks.

Crystal shares that the Friday, almost-live Week in Review show will be back next week, as we take time off to enjoy the long weekend, and we are airing a show with Melissa Santos talking about her excellent reporting on Washington's Brady List.  Crystal also is very thankful for the support and amplification by Hacks & Wonks listeners online, and wants to reinforce that this show is a team effort, and the quality of this show is a result of the work and talent of Lisl Stadler and Shannon Cheng, and was happy to be able to talk about how phenomenal they both are. ❤️ On today's show, Melissa Santos from Crosscut joins Crystal to talk about her deep dive into Washington State's Brady List, which is a list maintained by prosecutors of cops with credibility issues which may compromise their testimony in court. In her research she found that nearly 200 cops in our state have such credibility issues. They also get in to how recent laws may affect police accountability in Washington State, what happens when a police officer's account of an incident differs from other accounts, and how the media could more responsibly report on official police accounts of an incident.  As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's guest, Melissa Santos, at @MelissaSantos1. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources “Nearly 200 cops with credibility issues still working in Washington state” by Melissa Santos: https://crosscut.com/news/2021/04/nearly-200-cops-credibility-issues-still-working-washington-state “How fired cops win their jobs back: arbitration” by Melissa Santos: https://crosscut.com/news/2021/04/how-fired-cops-win-their-jobs-back-arbitration “How public records gave us a window into WA police misconduct” by Melissa Santos: https://crosscut.com/inside-crosscut/2021/04/how-public-records-gave-us-window-wa-police-misconduct “3 WA families on how new police laws could have helped their loved ones” by Melissa Santos: https://crosscut.com/politics/2021/05/3-wa-families-how-new-police-laws-could-have-helped-their-loved-ones “Recapping the 2021 Legislative Session and Uncovering Washington Police Credibility Issues: A Double Episode – Melissa Santos – Crosscut - #127” from the Nerd Farmer Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/recapping-2021-legislative-session-uncovering-washington/id1223805236?i=1000519554971 “Full investigation of Manuel Ellis' death casts new doubts on Tacoma officers' stories” by Patrick Malone: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/times-watchdog/full-investigation-of-manuel-ellis-death-casts-new-doubts-on-tacoma-officers-stories/ “Tommy Le May Have Been Shot While Facedown on the Roadway, May Not Have Even Had a Pen, Documents Show” by Carolyn Bick:https://southseattleemerald.com/2020/10/09/tommy-le-may-have-been-shot-while-facedown-on-roadway-may-not-have-even-had-a-pen-documents-show/ “Opinion: Remember Tommy Le” by Senator Joe Nguyen: https://southseattleemerald.com/2021/06/14/opinion-remembering-tommy-le/ “Newspaper carrier who was confronted by Sheriff Ed Troyer files $5 million legal claim against Pierce County” by Jim Brunner: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/newspaper-carrier-who-was-confronted-by-sheriff-ed-troyer-files-5-million-legal-claim-against-pierce-county/ “How Headlines Change the Way We Think” by Maria Konnikova: https://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/headlines-change-way-think   Transcript Crystal Fincher: [00:00:00] Hey, this is Crystal Fincher, host of Hacks & Wonks. Today is Friday, July 2nd, and normally we would be doing a week-in-review with a guest co-host. This week, we are not doing that as it is a long holiday weekend, and we are taking time off to enjoy it. So I hope you're able to do the same. I also wanted to take a moment and thank all of you for all of the compliments and just how gracious and kind you've been and reaching out to me and posting online. Just compliments about the podcast. I sincerely appreciate that. It means a lot to me when people say that they feel better informed about candidates and issues. I am passionate about helping us all understand the power that we have to shape our own communities and that starts at the local level. And so people saying that they feel better about that really makes my day and week and month. So thank you all for that.  I also wanted to point out because so many people have been like specifically complimenting me and just to stress that this is not a one-woman operation at all and this show is an absolute team effort. We spend 10 to 15 hours a week, probably a strong 15. Sometimes it gets over that, but just on everything that has to do with putting together this show, there's a number of us. I could not do this by myself. I actually have a consulting firm. By day, I'm a political consultant that is more than a full-time job and a variety of projects and clients that we work on and work with. And so being able to fit this in would not be possible without Lisl Stadler, my producer, Shannon Chang who works with me at Fincher Consulting, and just is a dynamic human being. Maurice Jones Jr. who from the very beginning when I had zero experience talking into a mic regularly like this on the radio who completely just helped me and shepherded me. So I just wanted to take a moment to let you know how incredible they are. Lisl is my producer extraordinaire. She edits the audio beautifully makes me sound much better. And, oh my goodness, if you listen to unedited audio followed by edited audio, then you get so annoyed by mouth sounds and breathing noises and all of that. She is just so good, in addition to being full of ideas. We meet, a couple of times weekly from preparing show notes to the guests that we have to just the composition of shows special events that we do. She's also been instrumental in the forums that I've moderated and that we've put together. Lisl is incredible. And if you ever need to have an excellent conversation about Lord of the Rings or Eurovision or Drag Race, Lisl is your woman. Shannon, Dr. Shannon Cheng. She has a PhD from MIT is... to say she's the wind beneath my wings sounds really corny, but she is so competent in so many different ways and just such a quality human being that she makes everything that I do better. Her involvement in this podcast has absolutely made it better. She's also the chair of ACLU's People Power, and has been doing work on police accountability for years, and the quality of this podcast is directly tied to and has been tangibly improved by my conversations with her and her teaching me enlightening me, helping me understand all the intricacies of just at the different layers of government within contracts and practices and from soup to nuts, she has improved me, improved my understanding, just everything from this podcast and beyond. So I just wanted to take a special moment to thank Shannon. You're incredible and amazing. To thank Lisl, also incredible and amazing. And to just let everyone know that this is a group effort and they are as responsible for the success of the show. I say success, we've gained some traction lately. Things have been going okay. But the extent of it going okay is directly the result of the effort that they have both put in and them walking this path with me. And you may not hear their voices all the time but they do as much work on this show as I do. So thanks so much, enjoy the show, and this audio may sound interesting cause I'm sneaking this on the front. Lisl is not editing this, so hopefully it comes out sounding okay. Talk to you all later. Welcome to Hacks & Wonks, I'm your host Crystal Fincher. On this show, we talk to political hacks and policy wonks to gather insight in the local politics and policy through the lens of those doing the work. And provide behind the scenes perspectives on politics in our state. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available OfficialHacksAndWonks.com and in our episode notes. Well, today we are thrilled to have, joining us again, Crosscut reporter, excellent reporter, one of the best in the state, Melissa Santos. Melissa Santos: [00:05:35] Hi Crystal. Crystal Fincher: [00:05:36] Hello. Well, I'm really excited to have you join us today because lots of people are familiar with your reporting. You are known for doing very in-depth, long form reports and really diving into the details of issues reporting thoroughly. And you really outdid yourself this time by doing a long-term investigative series on officers on the Brady list in the State of Washington. What motivated you to even do this story? Melissa Santos: [00:06:11] Well, I had known about these lists where essentially these are lists prosecutors have of officers that have some sort of issue. An issue that often deals with their veracity, whether they tell the truth, not always, but sometimes. And especially after George Floyd's death. And we were seeing, sometimes the initial narrative surrounding what happens during police uses of force, especially isn't later found to be exactly what happened or some details are different. And sometimes we've been hearing a long time also families of police shooting victims saying that they don't think the official story is right. So I just figured, if we have known officers who may have issues with truth, to the point that prosecutors keep lists of them and have to tell defense attorneys about this past issue, then it's worth finding out who those folks are, why they still have jobs, what the issue was. And so that's why I started on it last summer. Crystal Fincher: [00:07:19] Right. And so, as you covered, the Brady list is a list of officers who for some reason, their truthfulness has been called into question. What types of issues, or is it just lying that lands you on the Brady list? Are there other types of behaviors or activities that put you on there? Melissa Santos: [00:07:37] Lying is the most common or some sort of dishonesty. There also though, I mean, if you demonstrate racial bias and there's some documented incidents of that, you can get on the Brady list. I'm not sure that every officer that is suspected of having some bias is on this list. There's only some that are on there, but also uses of force, get some folks on there as well. If there was deemed to be some sort of questionable or excessive use of force, they could be on the Brady list. The other things that get you on there, or maybe they don't really think you lied, exactly, intentionally, but somehow your official report really doesn't match the other evidence. Especially if it's dash cam video, if your reports do not match official dash cam video. And there's some discrepancy that seems like it could potentially affect the outcome of a case. That's something that has to be disclosed that will put you on the list. And I mean, prosecutors will say this list is just an administrative tool by which we kind of keep track of officers for whom we have to send out notices to defense saying, "Hey, you should know about this past thing." Because it's a due process issue. They should have all the evidence that might indicate a cop's credibility is in question. And that can relate to future cases if the cop, maybe has been less than truthful in the past or there's suspicion that they were. Crystal Fincher: [00:09:06] Yeah, absolutely. And it is important to really consider and talk about why the honesty and integrity of officers is really important and why this list is necessary. You just talked about it being a due process issue, and certainly in a trial, if there is reason to doubt the testimony of an officer, oftentimes that can be the determining factor on whether someone is viewed to be guilty or innocent. An officer's word is taken as truth universally. And that in issues of guilt and innocence, you can dramatically impact and infringe upon someone's civil rights, their constitutional rights. If you don't tell the truth, and that can result in them going to jail. It can be a lot to some people simpler. It could be, hey, maybe they didn't take a report of a crime seriously. And it depends on whether insurance is going to cover something, or their employer covers something, or whether or not they eventually wind up arrested. They have so much control and influence over people's lives and what happens to them that they should be, and theoretically are held to a higher standard when it comes to their conduct and their honesty. And so this list is saying, hey, these officers have not met standard of high conduct. And we need to consider that, that we can't automatically take their word as being truthful and honest, which has also been an issue in reporting overall. And I know you've had conversations, there was a great conversation you've had on the Nerd Farmer Podcast about this, talking about how reporters take officer's words as fact. And how after incidences, it can be an officer and quote-unquote officer-involved shooting, when an officer shoots and often kill someone or they do something and they come out with their statement about what happened that has as a default been reported as fact. Is that practice changing. Is that practice, do you think worthy of being changed, and have you seen that talked about in reaction to your piece that you did? Melissa Santos: [00:11:31] I think in the last couple of years, especially, I feel like there has been a broader discussion in the media about how to use police statements. But I do think there's pressure, especially for daily media outlets and newspapers to get a story out quickly, immediately. And the police statement really is all you have at first, most of the time. And so I just think that, that needs to be presented in the proper context, and not just kind of... I think that we've kind of been a little flipped with being, like, "We said, police said. That it was the police who said it." Yeah. But I think that we might need to be more explicit and say, "This is the police's side of the story. We don't have other witnesses just tell their side of the story right now. So this is only..." I think we might just need to call that out a little more clearly, rather than just a small attribution and assuming readers can follow that. And certainly readers can follow, they're smart, but people read things quickly. So, I just think that you need to stop readers and say, "Hey, this is all the information we have. We're working to get more. This is what the police say. There was some..." Especially now since we have the internet, there's usually some sort of, not all the time, but sometimes there's conflicting reports from the scene from social media. And I think maybe that can be acknowledged too. And I just think that it does need to be considered. Because I think the original press release from George Floyd's killing was like... It was not saying that Derek Chauvin stood on his neck for nine minutes, right? It was like, "Oh, he died of natural causes after an altercation." It was something like that, right? Or he died of respiratory failure or something like that. It wasn't like, "Respiratory failure because our person was constricting his airway with his knee for nine minutes." That was not what it said, right? So I think we're all learning we need to be more cognizant that the police story is not the correct story, but all the time. However, there's been people saying this for a very long time. So I think media is a little slow to catch up on that. ... saying this for a very long time. So I think media is a little slow to catch up on that. Sometimes that first statement may be accurate. I mean, it's not always an accurate necessarily, but certainly there's enough instances where it has not been an accurate depiction of what happened during a use of force incident that there's reason to question whether you should just run with that narrative in the very beginning. Crystal Fincher: [00:13:54] Oh, absolutely. I mean, we've seen that here locally recently. We saw it with Manuel Ellis. So we saw it with Tommy Le. We saw it with Pierce County Sheriff, Ed Troyer, where their account of events does not match up with that. I think your point of putting it in context and the need for media to independently work on verifying that narrative, that is one reported perspective that should not be the only reported perspective. It should be noted that if that hasn't been able to be independently verified or verified through reporting by other means, that is called out and explicitly said. I think that's helpful. Melissa Santos: [00:14:47] I think we also need to be mindful of updates to stories, because that's a lot of times sort of how the industry has worked. When we do a new story and we fix things. I mean, it wasn't inaccurate, that was what police said. That's what we said that was what police said. So that story is still somewhere in the ether. Again, the internet lives forever, basically for the most part. So those older stories can still cloud the truth of the actual matter if they remain up and aren't clear about what actually happened. So I think that there needs to be more deliberate going back and saying. And sometimes you still see this, we have a new version, we have more updates to this story that we've put here. Maybe for integrity sake you may not want to delete the original story. That's not something we generally do. But something at the top saying, we've gotten more information. The updated information is here. You should go there. So people don't find some old story in a vacuum that doesn't have all that important context. And that's something we need to look at as well. Crystal Fincher: [00:15:41] Yeah. And certainly, also underscoring the importance of headlines, people can discern information, but it is also a reality that a lot of people don't read full articles or they may not have time to read through every article. So rely on headlines sometimes and may get back to the information to get more detail or may not. So I hope that there is widespread thoughtfulness and consideration being given to putting that reporting in more context and not just treating that as a factual account that just gets passed through and kind of transcribed without it being verified, or at least explicitly noted that it hasn't been, that that is a perspective. Back to, I guess the issue of the Brady list overall, do all officers, how comprehensive is the list? We have a list of around, is it around 200 officers right now? Melissa Santos: [00:16:47] Right. About 200. A little under 200 right now. Statewide. Crystal Fincher: [00:16:50] Do they feel like that covers the number of officers there? Are there still glaring holes? Or how hard is it or how easy is it for an officer to wind up on that list? Melissa Santos: [00:17:00] So I do think it varies a little by jurisdiction. But I will say in general, most officers don't get on the list for nothing, just for some casual, maybe they did something, maybe they didn't. I do not think that it is easy in the sense that you have to have some sort of concrete evidence usually. I don't think that prosecutors will put officers on this list of cops that may have issues, issues that have to be disclosed to the defense, without some sort of evidence that something went wrong or that there was some sort of fishy activity. So getting that evidence that a cop lied, for instance, that doesn't always come forth. So it's not always clear that a cop lied, so it's rare to actually have something really specific, like we saw proof that what they said did not match what actually happened. So that's somewhat rare, so that influences who goes on the list and who does not go on the list. It also is dependent a lot on what police agencies report upward to the prosecutor's office. I mean, most of this is based on police officer disciplinary procedures. And if the police agencies do not have a sustained finding of misconduct, of dishonesty, then often that does not end up putting an officer on a prosecutor's Brady list, even if maybe there is some evidence that someone might think, well, wait, wait, wait, wait. I think that that actually was kind of messed up and maybe that investigation didn't actually turn up what it should have. So you're depending on the police officer disciplinary process, which in some cases I think some people would argue does not always kind of identify officer misconduct as reliably as it should, since it's the department investigating its own officers. So that's one issue. And defense attorneys just say that, no, there's all of these officers we kind of know have issues that are not on this list. And so it's an under count in that respect. And I should add that the 200 or so officers that I identified are ones that are currently working. There was a lot more that were on the list, but maybe have left law enforcement and things like that. So we actually kind of took a look to say, who is still around? Because theoretically if there's officers who applied or abused force and they've been fired, you're like, okay, well maybe that's an appropriate response. But they still end up on prosecutor's lists in case they get another job in law enforcement or the prosecutors don't keep up with all the personnel stuff sometimes. So, yeah. So we actually narrowed it down, but there are almost 200 still working in the state- Crystal Fincher: [00:19:43] So is it fair to say that usually officers wind up on the list when their own departments have found that there has been some kind of dishonesty or misconduct? Melissa Santos: [00:19:53] Yes. The vast majority of the time that's what I found. In fact, I think that King County even has a system by which they have a pending list, a pending sort of, well, we're seeing how the outcome of this investigation plays out. And if the allegation is not sustained, that they won't end up even necessarily end up on the permanent list. So there certainly is some due process in that respect for officers. I've definitely have gotten some emails saying, oh, people can get put on this for anything. I don't think that's necessarily true. At the same time, there are cases in which a defense attorney brings something forward, being like, I looked at this guy's personnel file and this seems to be like, you should've told me about this. And that sometimes will cause a prosecutor to say, yeah, that should actually be something that puts you on our list, even if the police agency did not deem it a problem. I think one example of that is someone I actually used in my story as a deputy in Whatcom County, who had used a really racist ... He just said something really racist on Facebook about Native Americans. It was kind of joking about genocide. It was very bad. So his department didn't discipline him for that. I actually have inquired and I got an answer after my story ran that there was no discipline involved. And that came from a defense attorney who said, "I found this on my phone just looking, when I was looking up the key witness against my client, and you should know about this." And then so the prosecutor said, "yeah, it does seem like it meets the legal requirements of something we need to disclose, so we are putting him on our list. But I really trust his testimony and I'm going to continue to call on him as a witness." So that's also something that was interesting, that even at times when people are on the list, the prosecutors who are, they're part of the same team as the cops in general, really, they often say, this technically meets the criteria for something I need to turn over, but I have not had any issue with this cop and I trust that person. So that's also part of the discussion. Crystal Fincher: [00:22:04] Oh, the old, I'd never had a problem with them, so they're not a problem for anyone, excuse, which we've all seen workout so wonderfully. I guess another question I have is, I've certainly heard reports and seen reports before that there can be misconduct that happens or a finding of some misconduct or lying, and that doesn't always make it or stay on an officer's record or in their personnel file, how does that affect or impact who winds up on the Brady list? Can there be actions or findings of misconduct that don't make it to the file, or that are erased from the file, and then that can prevent them from being on the list? Melissa Santos: [00:22:52] Well in general, it depends on the county. But for instance, I'll use King County as an example. That's one case in which they told me they would not remove someone for their list. If it was something like, "Oh, an arbitrator said, 'we think this punishment was wrong, and we think you should not have disciplined this person.'" But finding the fact didn't change? And everyone agrees this happened, but it wasn't worthy of discipline or something like that. They told me that would keep someone on the list, and certainly I did see examples of this discipline was overturned, but through some sort of settlement, but that person is still on the King County prosecutor's list. So actually that's one thing I thought was... This is one reason why I actually did this story, because I realized the prosecutors have a repository of records on cops that sometimes their own departments may not even have anymore. Especially because in some cases, the police agencies completely independent of the police contracts, an officer may have left pretty recently, but those disciplinary records are destroyed after usually six years. So even if it was at this point, 2014, 2015, something someone did in their last jurisdiction, that jurisdiction doesn't have those records anymore, a lot of cases I found. But the prosecutor's office did. So that's one reason I wanted to look at these records, because police disciplinary records are not very well-maintained. I think that's changing with the new law that just passed, it's supposed to hopefully change. But yeah, that was one reason. The prosecutors actually were better about keeping these records than the agencies themselves in some cases. Crystal Fincher: [00:24:34] There seem to be so many loopholes, and we seem to be relying on people and agencies self-investigating and self-reporting, and there don't seem to be many exceptions to that. Looking forward, how are people... What has been the response to your story? How are people looking at the utility of the Brady List? And is there any responses that you've heard about how to make this list better, more comprehensive and more reliable? Melissa Santos: [00:25:10] So I'm waiting to see if this... There is a new law they passed. I wouldn't say it was in response to my story, it was well in the works at the time I wrote. But there was a law that passed that said that police agencies have to send any findings of misconduct to the prosecutor's office within 10 days of their discovery of those incidents. So that's something the prosecutors say, "Okay, that would help us, because right now we don't feel like we're always getting them in a timely manner." Because even though the cops are supposed to turn that stuff over under the case law, that really should happen. They were saying, "Well sometimes it's like, they might turn them over once every six months, or maybe they send over a batch yearly or something." The prosecutors think that could get them in trouble, because they're assumed to know everything that the cops do. Because again, they're all part of the prosecuting law enforcement teams. So that new law, maybe it will help. I still think that it's dependent on the disciplinary... I guess we'll see. I think there is a little bit of wiggle room for how, whether the agencies think it's reportable misconduct or not, that law tries to clarify that. Like, "You need to report stuff like this, lying." Or, "if an investigation starts, you need to send it over." I'm interested to see how it's implemented on the ground, that's all. And I'm not sure it solves the issue of... Something else I'm looking into right now is whether prosecutors always do their job. That was a little too much to get into in my first story, but do they always turn over what they're supposed to to the defense, even for people on their list? Some defense attorneys tell me no, that they don't. They think it's very relevant that this cop lied sometime ago, but they didn't get a notification like they were supposed to do from the prosecutor's office, is what some have told me. And I'm going to looking at trying to find out how often that happens, that's a little hard to pin down. But there's a lot of ways in which it can still break down I think, even with this new law potentially. Crystal Fincher: [00:27:23] Yeah, I'm glad you're looking at doing that story. Certainly just from attorney friends that I have, have heard stories of that happening. And you alluded to earlier, the very close relationship between police and prosecutors, and those prosecutors relying on the testimony of police to make their cases in sometimes. Sometimes it is the police making their case, and so there seems to be an incentive to present that cop in the best light possible, and to cover up anything that could jeopardize their case. Which would be misconduct, or lying from an officer. So I'm excited to hear that. Looking at from what you've reported as you're looking at the process, what do you see could be put into place to make it more reliable or strengthened? What are the biggest loopholes, or areas of opportunity for improvement? Melissa Santos: [00:28:27] I understand the prosecutors have a workload. I don't think they're just mostly sitting around on their butts not doing anything. I'm not sure how this would exactly necessarily work, but I have a defense attorney who said, she just looked at the guy's public Facebook page and found this, and the prosecutor had not had that in their file or anything on this cop. Maybe the prosecuting office does need to take a bigger role in saying, "Maybe we need to do a little more looking at our witnesses ourselves." Because it is a constitutional obligation for them to turn over exculpatory evidence, stuff that could clear someone or affect the outcome of someone's case. They have to do that. I think the prosecutors take that seriously in general, but I'm not sure how much they're taking it upon themselves to look for stuff that should be disclosed. I've kind of been told, "We can't do our own disciplinary investigations. How are we going to do that? We have to rely on the cops for that." But maybe there's at least some cursory work that needs to be done, or someone in each office that just looks up every witness and finds more stuff on the prosecutor's end. I'm not sure if that's not feasible, but it does seem like that's where things go missing sometimes in this process. And still could, even with this new law. So that's happened. And then there's also this element of... I'm just really unclear how determinations are made that someone's bias or use of force merits them putting on the Brady List. Because I think that there's plenty of people in our community that would argue that there are more than half a dozen officers who have demonstrated bias in a way that maybe should be mentioned in future cases that they're a witness on. But I only found maybe six or eight cases that were people on the Brady List currently for bias. So that seems like it could be low potentially. That determination is a little fuzzy, I think to me, how is that determination made? I don't know though that there's that many formal determinations of sustained finding that you were racist in the police world right now. So yeah. And also, uses of force. There's not that many officers on the list for use of force, even though theoretically they should be. And I suspect there's a few more cases that maybe didn't make the list, where officers might have used force in a way that defense attorneys would want to know about in their past. Crystal Fincher: [00:31:02] Yeah, you make some really good points. And even to your point, it does seem like most people involved in the legal system, prosecutors included, are largely acting in good faith. But the institution sometimes present some obstacles, and it seems like the job of a prosecutor and investigating and how they interact with police... 30 years ago, looking up their social media history was not a thing. Seeing if dash cam video or body cameras matched up to their account was not a thing , and so there's just a lot more to look into and they just may not have also expanded their practices and have the daily resources, given their workload, that accounts for being able to look into all of that. But maybe that should be happening; maybe they do need to really explore how to make sure that they're looking at all available evidence to help account for that. Melissa Santos: [00:32:06] I actually thought of something else. In fact, there's a couple of people who got added to the Brady list apparently because of my going around asking everyone for their list, basically. That sort of indicated to me that there was some lag time, I guess, in people being added to the list. That's even on the prosecutor's end, apparently, I think. Or maybe they were like, "Oh, we really should get an update on this guy. Whatever happened with this?" Yeah, I think that there's some potential for wiggle room there. I will say there's some instances when prosecutors we're really concerned about a cop and the prosecutor saying, "This is a problem. We need to put that person on our list," happened independently of officers. But that was not the majority of cases. It was only a handful that I saw and had records on. Crystal Fincher: [00:32:57] Yeah. It also seems like there is a problem with, okay, we only keep records for six years, or however long that is. If an officer changes jurisdictions, we just may not know that they had some egregious things on their record from 2013. Seems like we do that for folks on the other side of the criminal justice system, and if there is something on their record from 2010 or, really anytime, that that counts against them in terms of what they're charged with, how they're sentenced. And if it seems like that should be a factor taken into consideration for people who are defendants, certainly other people involved in that, that should be consistent. And, wow, 2014 just does not seem that long ago to be discounting what people are doing. Melissa Santos: [00:33:50] Right. I was talking early 2010s, there are some records I don't have. There was a guy who was police chief in one small town that oversaw some really, really bad management of stuff. Evidence was just lying around the squad room. Actually, mishandling of evidence could get you on the list too. This was really rampant, bad. An auditor came in, he ended up leaving the department but that works in another department now. And this, this changeover, he left that department in 2012 or something. There's records I can't get anymore from some of that. Yeah, it doesn't seem like that long ago, really. But I will say there's this new bill. I was asking how much will this really help? This bill that deals with officer decertification, making it so it's easier for the state to pull an officer's license does kind of set new rules for union contracts to not allow them to destroy or remove files from people's personnel records because this actually happens as well. Sometimes officers can request after two years or something... Sometimes it's as low as two or three years to have something removed from their personnel file. And all that might be in there then as a letter saying, "This officer asked for this to be... some disciplinary action to be removed." And I think that in some cases you can still get those records by asking a different department somehow, but it obscures the process at the very minimum, even if those records in some cases may be attainable somehow else. And so that's something that will change apparently with this bill. You won't be able to have contracts that let officers remove stuff from their files as often, at least. Crystal Fincher: [00:35:32] Well thank you so much for taking the time today to talk to us. An amazing series that you reported. If people want to find this story and your reporting, how can they find you? Melissa Santos: [00:35:43] Well, this is a good question. We actually have a page where we have kept all of our stories on the Brady list, and we hope to report more on this with followups as well, but right now... I'm actually looking up the URL to make sure. Right now, it's just that crosscut.com/brady-list-investigation. That's where you can find all the stories. And you can also find a form there where if you want to tell us something about a cop, you can let us know. I am looking into a couple of things that people have sent to me. And you also can always direct message me on Twitter. If you're concerned about anonymity, I can give you my signal number or something as well. People can get in touch with me and read the stories that way. Crystal Fincher: [00:36:30] Okay, sounds good. We will also include all of that in our show notes so you can access it there. We appreciate your reporting. You do an excellent job. This is really important reporting; directly impacts the safety of people and the integrity of our process so thank you so much for spending the time and we'll talk to you soon. Melissa Santos: [00:36:52] Thank you. Crystal Fincher: [00:36:54] Thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks. Our chief audio engineer at KVRU is Maurice Jones, Jr. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler. You can find me on Twitter at @finchfrii, spelled F-I-N-C-H F-R-I-I. And now you can follow Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts. Just type in Hacks & Wonks into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get our Friday almost-live shows and our mid-week show delivered to your podcast feed. You can also get a full text transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced during the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in. Talk to you next time.

Sakara Remmu, Chief Strategist for the Washington Black Lives Matter Alliance, brings background, knowledge, intel and receipts on the Manuel Ellis murder conviction update AND Pierce County Sherrif, Ed Troyer's journey to accountability for his...

On this episode, I open with multiple police shootings and deaths of blacks in the United States. I talk about Breonna Taylor, Johhny Lorenzo Bolton, Manuel Ellis, Lindani Myeni, Ahmad Arbery, and George Floyd. I also discuss the history of the police department and its deep racist roots. After that, I report on the damage left by Tropical Storm Claudette, tornadoes, and the record-breaking heatwave in the U.S. Experts warn the heat may get worse soon. Lastly, as the U.S returns to normal from the coronavirus pandemic, there is new concern over the Delta variant. Breonna Taylor Mural Vandalized- https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/06/17/breonna-taylor-mural-louisville-vandalized-video/7727719002/ Lindani Myeni: Doorbell Footage- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzbVyROvDNo Doorbell Footage and Bodycam Footage- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzbVyROvDNo&bpctr=1624309713 911 Call- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ5kUlyX33E _______________________________________________________ Check Out My Other Podcast: DISGRACE- anchor.fm/disgrace U.S Presidents- anchor.fm/uspresidents --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/thejeremiahpattersonshow/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/thejeremiahpattersonshow/support

On the evening of March 3, 2020, Manuel Ellis, a thirty three year-old Black man, was murdered by police in South Tacoma. For the last year, local police via the media and official statements have...

Host Carol Mitchell shares excerpts from the Washington Attorney General's charging documents filed against three Tacoma police officers involved in the death of Manuel Ellis.

Manuel Ellis, a father of two, was killed by police in March 2020. His sister, Monet Carter-Mixon, set out on a mission to expose the cops who killed her brother. She found a video that contradicted the official story and the officers involved were about to be cleared. The evidence came to light during a protest for George Floyd in her town, where she was trying to raise awareness of her brother's death, which happened there, not in another state. The police claim that Ellis randomly attacked two cops and was killed while doing so. #ManuelEllis . . . . . . . https://www.policebrutalityworldwidechannel.com/2021/06/i-cant-breathe-say-cops-accused-of-murdering-an-innocent-father-as-he-walked-home/ --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/king-emjay/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/king-emjay/support

The top headlines from The News Tribune in Tacoma, Washington, for June 1, 2021, including charges in the police custody death of Manuel Ellis, covid-19 and road tolls.

Jacks Recap look at the biggest story's of the day including how a Judge sets bail at $100,000 for three officers charged in death of Manuel Ellis. // TikTok Star Demands Everyone find Obese People attractive. // Good News! See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

America's first big test since the beginning of the pandemic as an estimated 37 million people hit the roads or the skies for the holiday weekend. The powerful weather system packing thunderstorms, heavy rain and wind along the northeast. Senate Republicans block the creation of a bipartisan commission to investigate the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol. New developments on the deadly shooting at a transit facility in San Jose with authorities finding a massive stockpile of weapons inside the suspect's home. And three police officers plead not guilty in the death of Manuel Ellis.

3PM - Hanna Scott: Tacoma police officers plead not guilty in killing of Manuel Ellis // A hundred bucks or a chance at $1 million: What’s the better vaccine incentive? // 22-year-old becomes first person to win $1 million in Ohio's vaccine lottery // I’m a Cicada Who’s Been Underground for 17 Years See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Stacy Jo and Jack discuss the Manuel Ellis case as well as what does it means to be an effective listener. // Jack talks about a Teacher at a Seattle school near encampment is fighting for ‘safety of our students. // What's on your mind?  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jack is joined by his buddy Dr. William Zinnanti MD, PhD to discuss how the CDC is looking into possible link between heart problem and Covid-19 vaccines in young people. // The Liberal Menace Billy Sunshine is in to discuss the situation surrounding the Manuel Ellis case. // Famous neighbors who never spoke to one and other out of respect get reviled after many years. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jacks Recap has the biggest stories of today including how the Washington State Attorney General charges three officers for death of Manuel Ellis. // Rachel Belle is in to explain what is ethically sourced food? // Good News! See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The craven GOP Senate will try to block a Jan. 6th commission. The Tokyo Olympics haven't been canceled even though Japan is suffering a huge coronavirus surge. Memorial Day air travel will break records. Chile loosened travel restrictions for its vaccinated citizens. Australia has locked down during another virus outbreak. Three Washington cops were hit with charges related to the death of Manuel Ellis. This episode of CrabDiving was cut short because of Cox Cable outages.  

Washington State's Attorney General has taken the unprecedented step of filing murder and manslaughter charges against three police officers, over the death of Manuel Ellis. But champions for Ellis' case were far from celebratory.

Welcome to Majority.FM's AM QUICKIE! Brought to you by justcoffee.coop TODAY'S HEADLINES: The Biden administration will today unveil its biggest and sure to be most controversial proposal yet – for a $6 trillion federal budget. And from child care to electric vehicles, there's a lot in there for Republicans to cry over. Meanwhile, the United Nations is launching an unprecedented, open-ended inquiry into the root causes of the latest violence in Gaza. War crimes may be found on both sides, but Israel has made clear it does not welcome the scrutiny. And lastly, hard-working college athletes could finally get what's due to them. Senators Bernie Sanders and Chris Murphy want to give them the right to form unions and bargain collectively with colleges. THESE ARE THE STORIES YOU NEED TO KNOW: Why can't we have nice things? Politico reports that President Joe Biden continues to negotiate with Republicans on his big-ticket spending plans. But yesterday, when he left Washington for Ohio, he mocked them for voting against the coronavirus recovery package and then turning around and promoting the bill. In a speech at Cuyahoga Community College, Biden said his trillions of dollars in proposals are already igniting economic recovery and creating millions of jobs following the coronavirus pandemic. Back in Washington, Senate Republicans sent Biden their latest proposal, but the $928 billion infrastructure plan is still hundreds of billions less than the White House's last offer of $1.7 trillion. And there's an even bigger budget fight brewing. The New York Times reports Biden will propose a $6 trillion budget today that would take the United States to its highest levels of federal spending since World War Two. Biden is looking to fund a sweeping economic agenda that includes new investments in education, transportation and fighting climate change. The budget request includes money for roads, water pipes, broadband internet, electric vehicle charging stations and advanced manufacturing research. It also envisions funding for affordable child care, universal prekindergarten and a national paid leave program. Spending on national defense would also grow, though it would decline as a share of the economy. Biden plans to fund his agenda by raising taxes on corporations and high earners. The documents show budget deficits shrinking in the 2030s. So maybe we can have nice things after all. UN Opens Gaza Inquiry his diplomatic dispatch comes from the Guardian. The UN's main human rights body will launch an investigation into systematic discrimination and repression in Israel and Palestine, with the aim of identifying the root causes of recent Gaza bloodshed. The proposal, called at the request of Muslim states, was passed by the forty seven-member United Nations human rights council yesterday. Opening the session in Geneva, the UN rights chief, Michelle Bachelet (Ba-chuh-let), said Israel's attacks on Gaza this month could constitute war crimes if they were found to be disproportionate. She also accused Hamas of firing indiscriminate rockets on Israel. Bachelet, a former president of Chile, called the death and injury of children in the conflict "a source of shame for all." According to the Guardian, Bachelet said the Gaza violence was directly linked to protests in Jerusalem that began weeks beforehand, which she said were met with a heavy response from Israeli security forces. She said two factors led to the escalation – the imminent eviction of Palestinians under forced displacement in the neighbourhood of Sheikh Jarrah; and Israel's use of excessive force against Palestinian protesters, including at the al-Aqsa mosque. Yesterday's resolution received twenty four votes in favour, nine against and fourteen abstentions. The US didn't vote because it is not a member of the council. Israel and its allies, including the US, have accused the UN of anti-Israel bias. Criticize away, but is anyone better suited than UN investigators to establish the facts of the situation? Sanders Rallies For College Athletes College sports break! The Washington Post reports that a new bill from Congressional Democrats would allow college athletes to unionize, making it possible for students from across universities to band together to form unions within athletic conferences. The bill from Senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Chris Murphy of Connecticut would rewrite federal labor law to define all college athletes receiving scholarships and other pay as employees of both public and private universities. It would be a significant reimagining of the college sports landscape. And it would open a door to athletes receiving additional compensation from colleges by bargaining over wages, working conditions, revenue sharing agreements, and other rights afforded to employees. The Post says the bill, called the College Athlete Right to Organize Act, is unlikely to pass in the current Congress. A companion bill introduced by three House Democrats has also not found any Republican co-sponsors. But it has created substantial momentum in Congress to pass legislation that would set a single standard for how athletes can earn income, rather than a patchwork of conflicting state laws. In a statement yesterday, Sanders linked the right of athletes to form a union to the fight to earn money through their personal brands. He said, "College athletes are workers. ... We cannot wait for the NCAA to share its billions with the workers who create it.". The NCAA put out a statement condemning the bill. But of course they did – they don't want to share the wealth! AND NOW FOR SOME QUICKER QUICKIES: The Associated Press reports that Senate Republicans are poised to deploy the filibuster to block a commission on the January 6th insurrection. The GOP maneuver may shatter chances for a bipartisan probe of the deadly assault on the US Capitol and revive pressure to do away with the procedural tactic. Indeed, why give the Republicans a veto? According to the Washington Post, Amazon and other retailers are opposing a bipartisan measure in Congress that would require online sellers to clearly state where their products are made. Current laws don't force online retailers to include this information. Sounds like a fine loophole if you sell tons of cheap junk made god-knows-where! The Seattle Times reports that three Tacoma, Washington police officers will face criminal charges in the March 2020 killing of Manuel Ellis, a thirty three-year-old Black man whose death sparked widespread calls for justice. State Attorney General Bob Ferguson said yesterday he will charge officers Christopher Burbank and Matthew Collins with second- degree murder, and Timothy Rankine with first-degree manslaughter. More consequences for violent cops – let's get it trending! The New York Times reports that the New York City Council voted overwhelmingly yesterday to expand a subsidy program that could make apartments affordable to tens of thousands of people who are homeless or threatened with eviction. The council voted to sharply increase the value of housing vouchers provided by the city. The value of the new vouchers would be in line with fair market rent. So they're actually useful? Imagine that. MAY 28, 2021 - AM QUICKIE HOSTS - Sam Seder & Lucie Steiner WRITER - Corey Pein PRODUCER - Dorsey Shaw EXECUTIVE PRODUCER - Brendan Finn

Morning Update Show | May 27, 2021 Councilmember Zahilay | LIVE Chief Diaz demotes "Pink Umbrella" Commander Black Live Matter Seattle/KC has its day in court AG to make Manuel Ellis decision today Converge Returns to Capitol Hill next week

3PM - Hanna Scott: Three Tacoma officers charged in death of Manuel Ellis See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Congressional Republicans have countered President Biden’s nearly $2 trillion infrastructure proposal with their own plan and a lower price tag: $928 billion. It came as Biden is expected to unveil a $6 trillion budget on Friday, too. We breakdown what’s in the GOP version of the infrastructure bill, and where this puts negotiations. The filibuster is coming into play as Senate Republicans vow to block the creation of a bipartisan commission that would’ve investigated the January 6th Capitol insurrection. And in headlines: three Tacoma, Washington, police officers charged for the killing of 33-year-old Black man Manuel Ellis, Super Smash Bros becomes a high school varsity sport, and Usher announces a sequel to “Confessions.” For a transcript of this episode, please visit crooked.com/whataday. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The top headlines from The News Tribune in Tacoma, Washington, for May 28, 2021, including charges in the police custody death of Manuel Ellis, a roomier Sea-Tac and a swimming hole that’s just too popular.

On April 23, 2021, Derek Chauvin, the police officer that murdered George Floyd, was convicted in a Minnesota court. Two months prior to Floyd’s killing, in March of 2020, another Black man named Manuel Ellis...

Thursday, April 22 on Urban Forum Northwest on 1150 AM KKNW/www.1150kknw.com 2:00-3:00 pm (PDT) Hayward Evans and my scheduled guest for the hour are: *Attorney Jesse Wineberry, Sr. returns *Carolyn Riley Payne, President, Seattle-Martin Luther King Jr. County NAACP comments on the Derek Chauvin verdict and updates the progress of the organizations initiatives *Johnathan Johnson, President, Tacoma WA NAACP comments on the Derek Chauvin verdict, the Manuel Ellis case in Tacoma, and the Pierce County Sheriff's false claims that a Black Newspaper delivery man threatened his life. *Ed Prince, Executive Director, Washington State Commission on African American Affairs comments on the Derek Chauvin verdict and provide an update on the Commission's accomplishments during the current legislative session. Urban Forum Northwest streams live at www.1150kknw.com. Visit us at www.urbanforumnw.com for archived programs and relevant information. Like us on facebook. Twitter@Eddie_Rye. This program will also air on Saturday 7:00-8:00 am (PDT).

Thursday, April 22 on Urban Forum Northwest on 1150 AM KKNW/www.1150kknw.com 2:00-3:00 pm (PDT) Hayward Evans and my scheduled guest for the hour are: *Attorney Jesse Wineberry, Sr. returns *Carolyn Riley Payne, President, Seattle-Martin Luther King Jr. County NAACP comments on the Derek Chauvin verdict and updates the progress of the organizations initiatives *Johnathan Johnson, President, Tacoma WA NAACP comments on the Derek Chauvin verdict, the Manuel Ellis case in Tacoma, and the Pierce County Sheriff's false claims that a Black Newspaper delivery man threatened his life. *Ed Prince, Executive Director, Washington State Commission on African American Affairs comments on the Derek Chauvin verdict and provide an update on the Commission's accomplishments during the current legislative session. Urban Forum Northwest streams live at www.1150kknw.com. Visit us at www.urbanforumnw.com for archived programs and relevant information. Like us on facebook. Twitter@Eddie_Rye. This program will also air on Saturday 7:00-8:00 am (PDT).

Melissa Santos joins Crystal this week to get in to policing legislation and its potential outcomes, whether or not we'll see a wealth tax come to fruition in Washington this year, and the appointment of accused rapist Joe Fain to the redistricting commission. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher on Twitter at @finchfrii. Find today's guest, Melissa Santos, @MelissaSantos1. More information is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources Read about how the Washington legislature is seeking to deal with police use of excessive force here: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/washington-legislature-takes-up-excessive-force-by-law-enforcement/  See what's policing bills are still before the legislature here: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/washington-state-lawmakers-pass-bills-to-ban-police-use-of-chokeholds-and-neck-restraints-collect-use-of-force-data/  Learn about the flawed investigation into the killing of Manuel Ellis of Tacoma by the police here: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/times-watchdog/contradictions-conflicts-of-interest-cloud-probe-of-manuel-ellis-killing-by-tacoma-police/  Get to know about how police officers are de-certificed here: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/times-watchdog/fired-but-still-a-cop-how-the-state-decertification-process-leaves-troubled-officers-with-their-guns/  Follow Washington's potential plans to tax the wealthy of our state (with today's guest, Melissa Santos) here: https://crosscut.com/politics/2021/02/tracking-plans-tax-rich-2021-washington-legislature  Read about Washington State's regressive tax system here: https://www.kuow.org/stories/why-washington-ranks-as-the-worst-state-for-poor-residents  Learn about the objections to Joe Fain's appointment to the redistricting commission here: https://crosscut.com/politics/2021/02/groups-denounce-selection-joe-fain-redistricting-commission  Follow everything going on in the legislature, learn about how to contact your legislature, and watch and participate in committee hearings at https://leg.wa.gov/   Transcript: Crystal Fincher: [00:00:00] Welcome to Hacks and Wonks. I'm your host Crystal Fincher. On this show, we talk to political hacks and policy wonks to gather insight into local politics and policy through the lens of those doing the work and provide behind-the-scenes perspectives on politics in our state. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Thank you for joining us today on Hacks and Wonks. Today I'm very pleased to be joined by Melissa Santos who's Crosscut's staff reporter covering state politics and the Legislature. Thank you so much for joining us today, Melissa. Melissa Santos: [00:01:05] Thanks for having me. Crystal Fincher: [00:01:06] Well, you have definitely been covering lots of events in the Legislature, so I guess just starting off, I wanted to get an idea for where the public safety and policing reform bills stand. Lots of fanfare going in - talking about a number of reforms that they were talking about implementing, the need to move forward on demands that community were making and to keep communities safe in function and not just name - with a lot of ideas that turned into a lot of bills. And so what is currently still alive in the Legislature in terms of public safety and policing reform and where do they stand? Melissa Santos: [00:01:51] I think most of the bills, in some fashion, that were introduced early this year to deal with sort of different police reforms are still alive, in some fashion. They always change in the process, but we saw the state Senate pass out a bill to try and reform arbitration as a process by which sometimes discipline that's imposed on cops gets overturned through this arbitration process after they're either suspended or fired. And there's been concerns that that makes it hard to actually discipline cops effectively. So there's some reforms moving forward to deal with that. I think the Governor and some of the advocates' insistence that there needs to be an independent investigatory body to investigate police uses of force - I would be shocked if the Legislature didn't pass something to do that and create that independent agency. So that's moving ahead. We also, I think it was just today - this week, we saw a bill that would create a more clear duty for cops to intervene when they see wrongdoing or misconduct. That's moving as well. And some of the bills that I thought might be more difficult actually have cleared some of the early deadlines to stay alive. One of those is a bill dealing with qualified immunity that would create a way for people to sue at the state level when they feel their rights have been violated - in a way that people feel they have not been able to do federally because of how the law is structured at this time. So we're seeing a lot of stuff to do there. And I think the biggest bill that probably people are focused on are some of the ones to limit what police can do. I mean - tactics kind of bills that would set limits on what kind of holds they can use, what kind of circumstances they can use police dogs on people. And so those are things that are kind of really changing, I think, and kind of being modified over time. But that there's definitely, I think, going to be some new restrictions on police tactics passed. It's just what shape they will take it's still kind of being decided. Crystal Fincher: [00:04:05] So yeah, you bring up a good point. It depends on what shape they will take and any modifications, amendments - which happen through this process. Legislation can change, things can be added or taken out. So from what it looks like, does it look like the policy is going to make it through as intended? Are there changes being talked about or being made to pieces of legislation? Or does it look like they're going to be able to deliver on the original intent of the bills as originally written? Melissa Santos: [00:04:44] I feel like we're still a little bit early in the session to say for sure, but I definitely think there's some concern that the tactics bill, in particular, might be getting watered down. I need to take a little closer look at some of those concerns, but that one was a really wide-ranging bill, right? I mean, it had limits on the use of military equipment, the use on, maybe that was a different bill. There's a lot of police bills - but the whole idea was making it so they're less militaristic. A lot of sort of limits on that - banning certain neck restraints and such. And I think the fear is that they might end up with a bill that just says we won't use choke holds anymore or something. And that that's not going to be substantive enough. And I don't know that, right now - I talked to the ACLU of Washington, who's working on some of those bills now and they still feel - they were telling me that they're fairly substantive. I'm not sure they're going to tell me they think they're terrible right now or something if they're working to kind of keep them whole, but it's just something that - we're not even halfway through the session at this point, so there's just a lot of opportunity for those bills to change. And I think that's something people are watching really closely. I'm not sure how they'll ultimately end up and if they'll stay the way advocates and the community members hoped they would be. It's still kind of to be determined, in my view, at this point. Crystal Fincher: [00:06:08] And you bring up a really good point - we are still fairly early in the session. But there's this weird dynamic that a lot of people who are tuning in, for the first time for a lot of people, to the day-to-day happenings of the Legislature - because so much more is online and you can engage with committees online, is hearing the big rush of deadlines that recently passed and are passing for bills to get out of committee, for bills to get heard, for bills to pass deadlines to move forward, which do happen fairly early in session. So I guess what happens - we're very early and stuff makes it past cutoff - between cutoff and then we still have another month or two of session, what occurs during that time? Is that all the horse trading and the modifications and figuring that out? Melissa Santos: [00:07:03] Yeah. I mean, I think that that's one reason on these bills they've just been ... House Democrats and Democrats right now - they do control everything in Olympia. So, I mean, they've really indicated that these are priority bills - to really enact new police accountability measures, right? And it's always a point of tension because police unions, in general, don't like further regulation. They don't want their arbitration rights to be taken away, right? So there's a lot of pushback, and I think there's a lot of internal discussions that go on at these times that aren't even happening in the public arena. But we've seen this before - on police reform a couple of years ago. Some of the bills to - let me remember - to basically make it easier to charge police for abusive force, what was Initiative 940. That was sent to the Legislature, for them to review, and it looked like maybe nothing was going to happen. And at the end, this compromise measure comes through, that everyone says is great. And so I just think that even if bills look like they're dead - they didn't clear a committee deadline - I'm not comfortable writing a story that says, "Oh yeah, this bill, it's gone this year." Because I just think that there's all these conversations happening, especially after we saw last year, where I think that - I wouldn't be surprised if some of these proposals get merged as some giant bill at the end of the year, the end of the legislative session I should say. That is even different than what we're seeing now. Crystal Fincher: [00:08:49] Yeah. That's fair and definitely possible, and we've seen that happen before. In terms of support and opposition, I think a lot of people anticipated, Hey, there's a Democratic majority. If Democrats talk about wanting to do it on the front end leading into the session and introduce bills, then it should automatically be able to happen. Have we been seeing unified Democratic support, or are there some legislators who have on the Democratic side been more resistant? And on the flip side, are there any Republican legislators who have been more receptive? Melissa Santos: [00:09:27] I do think there has been, on police reform, some at least surface agreement. You've been seeing from the Republican side saying, "Yeah, we need to do stuff." I think that the Manny Ellis case in Tacoma, where the independent investigation wasn't really turning out to be so independent and that kind of blowing up as a huge problem in the past year - I think that has indicated to people across parties that there's an issue with actually even enforcing the laws we have on the books on right now, like to have independent investigations, which was something that was approved by voters with 940. So I do think - I'll have to look at the votes on some of these - but yeah I think there'll be Republican votes for some of these bills, so I don't think it will be a strict party line thing. But yeah, I mean, you have a lot of, in general, I'm going to speak generally, because I haven't looked at the vote count on every bill that closely, but you definitely have Democrats who are conscious of maintaining police support and are worried about public safety and people in their communities saying - there is a sense that we can't dismantle the police too much among some people in certain communities, especially some suburban communities. That's something people are worried about - that some of their constituents will not like that. And even in some of those same communities there's maybe people that are feeling the opposite. So I think that there's pressure to not defund the police. There is no measure to defund the police that the Legislature is considering right now, I should clarify, but I think some of this is getting grouped in there a little bit. I mean, these are kind of pretty straightforward bills that would not take funding away from the police. The State can't even really do that too much because it's all locally, for the most part, funded. But, actually, the bill I didn't mention that I think is one of the more significant ones would make this decertification process that our state has right now actually, theoretically, I guess, work. Because right now - I was just talking to someone today who's a police chief who said that he doesn't feel like if he checks a box saying, "I think this person needs to be looked at for decertification." He doesn't feel like he has any guarantee that that will happen, even if he thinks it's important for it to happen as an individual police chief who fired this person. So that's kind of an issue that we have where cops sometimes do bounce between departments, even if they are let go from one department or maybe allowed to retire in lieu of being fired or something like that. And right now, that's the whole idea, is that if you have a process by which you can say, "Okay, you are no longer certified to work as a police officer in Washington State." That could kind of end that ability to go between departments. But I mean, it's all in the details about what's the standard by which, the universal standard by which, hey, this person no longer will have a certification anymore. And I think that that gets really complicated when dealing with unions, because I mean, there certainly are a lot of things - there's a lot of reasons why unions generally started a long time ago to try and protect workers' rights. But I think there's that conflict within the labor community right now about how police unions fit into that entire picture. And so that's a whole thing that I think is really going to mess with it - is actually the fear that messing with police unions is going to lead to some dismantling of union protections more broadly. And I think that's a huge issue right now for some Democrats who think that that's - the concern, for instance, with the arbitration proposals. If you make it harder for police to review their discipline through arbitration, are we saying it's okay for other unions to no longer have the power to review and have objection to some disciplinary measures opposed against teachers, against other people, and all sorts of things. So that's going to be a kind of more complex one, politically complex, in that respect, I think. And yeah, that's why it's not just like a Democratic rubber stamp on any proposal that has emerged at this point. Crystal Fincher: [00:14:21] Certainly. I would agree with that. I appreciate your clarification and care to which you took to point out that there is no bill to defund the police. Legislation can be very complex and there's so much that goes into it, that the details become really important. And certainly with a number of these bills, frankly, the police and unions and their interests have become very good at just using tiny little details and technicalities to really remove the teeth from a lot of bills or to make things so subjective and conditional that they actually don't apply to many situations that were originally targeted with the bill. You're listening to Hacks and Wonks with your host Crystal Fincher on KVRU 105.7 FM. And for people's information - you can actually just go onto leg.wa.gov, and you can see all of the documents from hearings. You can look at videos from hearings to see what people are saying, or just read a bill digest, which gives you a synopsis of the bill. You can see who testifies in favor of and in opposition to bills - sometimes that's very illuminating. And then you can also see vote tallies on how they're voting - which legislators are voting in favor of legislation moving out of committee or on further, versus those voting against. So that can give you a lot of useful information about what your legislators are doing and what different organizations throughout the community are doing and what they're actually advocating for. I also wanted to talk about revenue proposals and there certainly are a lot on the table. What is still in play and where do those stand? Melissa Santos: [00:16:23] It's funny, I was having this conversation with someone yesterday where - I just don't think any of these deadlines matter for any tax bill at all. Crystal Fincher: [00:16:32] Yeah. Melissa Santos: [00:16:32] Because basically, every single year, there's new revenue tax measures that emerge when the legislators release their budget proposals. And then there's sometimes new ones that pop up once they reach a budget agreement at the very end of the session where you're like, "Well, what's that? I don't even know what that is." So what I ended up doing, just because that ends up being what usually happens, is I'm trying to keep track of all of them in one story that I just update throughout the session at this point. So at this point, everything's alive, I should say. I do think that the idea of taxing capital gains, which has been around in our state for a while - this would be profits from selling stocks, bonds, and some other assets, possibly commercial real estate, but there's some differences in different proposals. That proposal -  I think it has more potential to actually pass this year than it ever has had before. And that's kind of a big one that the Governor has proposed, a capital gains tax. The Senate budget committee actually passed out a capital gains tax last week, or very recently. And it's usually the Senate where this measure, I can't say it goes to die, because the House doesn't actually vote on it in general. But generally the perception is the House has the support to pass this measure to tax capital gains, but the Senate has not in the past, even with a slim Democratic majority. There seems to be some thought that has changed with just even having one or two fewer moderate Democratic senators who were reticent about the proposal. So we're going to have to see if they actually are going to take that vote, but there seems to be more of a consensus that, Yeah, taxing people who have huge sales of stocks that nets them a large profit - that's something we might be willing to do this year. And so that's one of the ones that's in play. There's a new thing that the House Finance Committee Chairwoman Noel Frame proposed, which is a wealth tax, and that's interesting proposal. It would just be a flat 1% tax, but then everyone who has under a billion dollars is exempt from it. Crystal Fincher: [00:18:47] And that was billion with a B. Melissa Santos: [00:18:50] Yeah. A billion with a B. So that doesn't apply to that many people. I think the State Department of Revenue estimates less than 100 taxpayers would pay that, yet it would raise like $2 billion a year, which is a lot. The state budget is probably going to be $55-56 billion this year, so two billion a year is not an insignificant amount of money. Yeah. But the issue with that, and actually really kind of with the capital gains proposal too, is they don't think they would be able to collect that money - sorry, they do not think they would be able to connect that .. I'm really having trouble speaking, okay. Crystal Fincher: [00:19:26] You're fine. Melissa Santos: [00:19:28] With a wealth tax or a capital gains tax, there's not going to be an immediate you can collect this money and spend it on stuff. I mean, it takes a while to even build up money from tax collections anyway. But there will be lawsuits over these proposals if they passed - particularly the wealth tax, I think. There would be arguments - that is an income tax that is against our state constitution. Actually, they would happen for capital gains tax too. So that's always lurking in the background that - are these taxes even legal? The Republicans argue they are not. So those are there. Those are happening and are actively being considered. There's actually - one of the proposals I suspect might just like pop up at the very end of the session, because I know it's being worked on but it hasn't been introduced, is a payroll tax that's similar to what Seattle passed, I guess it would be last year. Time is very strange lately. Crystal Fincher: [00:20:25] Yes. Melissa Santos: [00:20:25] But I guess that would have been 2020. And this is again trying to tax people or companies really that have a lot of people who make a lot of money, that employ people and where they pay pretty high salaries. So it's a business tax. It is not something that aims to target actual employee income but saying, "For every person you pay over $150,000", I think that's the current thought at least for the threshold, "We're going to charge you a certain percentage on their salary." And that is something that there are lawmakers working on. There's always these discussions behind the scenes, but there hasn't been a bill introduced. And so that's something they're talking about. There's some estate tax proposals to kind of make that more progressive as well. And I haven't heard as much buzz about those, but it's one of those things that it's possible they could do something like that. Where saying, "Hey, when people die and pass on their big, big, big amounts of money, we're going to say, 'Okay, we're not even going to apply the tax to people who have smaller estates, but we're going to raise the tax on people who have really big one.'" That sort of thing. So yeah, those are some of the ones that are in play right now. I'm a 100% confident there will be different tax proposals though, that are introduced, soon. Crystal Fincher: [00:21:40] Well, we'll certainly have to follow that. There's a feeling that we were already paying more than our fair share as people who are not billionaires. We are known for being one of the most regressive states in terms of a tax burden, meaning that people at the bottom are paying the highest percentage in terms of taxes of a variety of types. And we don't have an income tax in the state, but we certainly have a variety of sales and use taxes and other taxes and that's even before we get to the fees conversation. And that all adds up to more than what most income taxes would be for moderate income individuals anyway. And certainly on the very high end, they're just reaping these benefits without paying back into the public coffers. I wanted to also touch on a hearing that happened actually this past Sunday of the Redistricting Commission. And this was not a normal hearing, and the composition of this Redistricting Commission isn't as it's been before. Do you want to talk about that a little bit? Melissa Santos: [00:22:50] Yeah. Well, we have a redistricting process in Washington State that - a lot of people say that compared to some states, ours is pretty good. I mean, this is the body that is assigned to redraw boundaries of all the Congressional districts, all the legislative districts. So that actually really matters. I do not explain this to you, Crystal. I'm probably explaining it to the listeners, because Crystal knows way more about this than I do, but it really matters for - who can get elected where, who's represented in what areas, which communities are kind of split down the middle so that maybe their ability to be represented or influence their lawmakers is diluted. So that that's all kind of at play with this commission. So we do have a bi-partisan redistricting commission, which is, I think most scholars think that's preferable to having just the party who controls the legislature being able to decide everything, redraw the boundaries to make their party have an advantage. But it still has partisan politics in play, right? So anyway, each of the political caucuses of the legislature appoint someone. So two Republicans, two Democrats. In this case one of the people appointed was a former state Senator named Joe Fain, who represented the 47th Legislative District until, through the end of 2018. He's from Auburn, but it also, it includes part of- Crystal Fincher: [00:24:16] Maple Valley, Covington. Melissa Santos: [00:24:17] Thank you. Crystal Fincher: [00:24:18] Yeah. Melissa Santos: [00:24:19] And actually, it's one of those districts, I think kind of splits communities down the middle in some ways. Crystal Fincher: [00:24:23] It is. Melissa Santos: [00:24:25] So it's a kind of a strange district. Well, he got appointed, but the thing about Joe Fain is he lost his race two years ago shortly after being accused of rape. And so that was a bit of a controversial appointment for the Senate Republicans to make of their former colleague. And that we heard about that on Sunday. This is maybe the third or fourth meeting of this redistricting commission. Yeah, I think it's the third one, because this was just kind of finalized - the membership in mid-January. And so there was a letter written in the last few days, I guess, so a week ago now. So maybe two weeks before your listeners will hear this saying, "This was inappropriate." This was the National Women's Political Caucus saying, "This person should not have been appointed. Someone who had a rape accusation that was never disproven, was never really fully investigated, should not be serving on this important commission that decides so much of our political future for a decade." And there were a lot of groups that signed onto that as well. There were some groups representing sexual assault advocacy groups. There were individuals who signed on in their personal capacity as well. And this was the first commission meeting since that letter came out. So we did hear from several people who expressed their disappointment that the commission includes someone who was accused of rape and sort of that accusation still lingers because it never was investigated. And there was actually an effort to investigate it in the State Senate that then was dismantled and got shut down. So it just kind of sitting out there and that was something people expressed disappointment with. I think everyone who spoke, maybe there were - might have been a dozen people, maybe a little fewer, so not some huge, huge crowd, but it's a Sunday morning at 9:00 AM. But all of them except one mentioned this - this was the topic of conversation. The people who commented from the community about the commission, that "We think this sends a terrible message to sexual assault survivors that their experiences do not matter to have a person accused of rape on this commission." And so that's going to be interesting, I suppose. The thing that has become clear is you really can't do anything once you appoint someone to a commission, like the redistricting commission. I don't think there's any power of anyone to actually take someone off unless they resign. I'm not sure if there's anything written, is what I've been hearing, that there's anything that can be done at this point, unless someone decides, "Hey, I'm going to step down." And there's no indication Joe Fain intends to do that at this point. Crystal Fincher: [00:26:58] And disappointing and confounding - and certainly the Republican response has ranged from - this was solely a political attack, and not a credible accusation, which flies in the face of what I think most people and what the general consensus is - is that that absolutely was a credible accusation and deserved to be investigated, certainly, and the facts determined. And the fact that it just went away and then Joe Fain was appointed, hired as the head of the Bellevue Chamber of Commerce, which we could talk about a variety of reasons for why that happened. But then pops up as the choice of the Republican Party statewide, for just one of two spots. Out of everyone they could have chosen, this is the direction they chose to go - was really disappointing and infuriating to a lot of people. But it certainly also seems like Joe Fain is almost hiding from the public and he has been hesitant to appear on camera, has been hesitant to fully participate in these meetings, has been hard to schedule and them finding time to come together. So even now, the productivity of the commission is being called into question. So we'll just continue to keep an eye on it. So with that, I think we are actually at the time today. Thank you so much for joining us, and thank you to everyone listening to Hacks and Wonks today. So again, appreciate our guest Melissa Santos who's Crosscut's staff reporter covering state politics and the Legislature. You can find her on Twitter @MelissaSantos1, and she just does excellent work. You can read her on Crosscut, certainly helps to stay on top of what's happening in the Legislature and across the state. So thank you and have a wonderful day. Thank you for listening to Hacks and Wonks. Our chief audio engineer at KVRU is Maurice Jones Jr. The producer of Hacks and Wonks is Lisl Stadler. You can find me on Twitter @finchfrii, spelled F-I-N-C-H-F-R-I-I, and now you can follow Hacks and Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts, just type in "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get our Friday almost-live shows and our mid-week show delivered to your podcast feed. You can also get a full text transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced during the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in. Talk to you next time.

Hosts Anzhane Slaughter and Carol Mitchell discuss new developments in the Manuel Ellis case, including the discovery that two additional officers were present on the scene and involved in Manny's death.

Racismo estrutural é o termo usado para reforçar o fato de que há sociedades estruturadas com base na discriminação que privilegia algumas raças em detrimento de outras. No Brasil, nos outros países americanos e nos europeus, essa distinção favorece os brancos e desfavorece negros e indígenas.... Essa é uma das definições que encontramos sobre racismo estrutural, porém, para muitos estudiosos do tema e para os pretos e pardos com lugar de fala no Brasil, o racismo estrutural se apresenta de forma muito mais cruel. Principalmente entre os mais pobres que compõem a grande maioria da população brasileira. Para entendermos o que vivemos é fundamental conhecer a origem. No caso do racismo no nosso país essa origem está na barbárie da escravidão e do tráfico de pessoas que durou mais de 300 anos. O podcast “Por uma vida menos ordinária” abre sua segunda temporada com este tema que tanto movimentou a imprensa mundial e nacional nos últimos meses de 2020, depois dos assassinatos de George Floyd e Manuel Ellis nos Estados Unidos, e de João Alberto Silveira e das 12 crianças negras mortas pela polícia do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. O racismo estrutural será debatido pelos titulares da mesa: Vanderlei Vieira, Cristiano Pierobon e Juliano Chagas e conosco está o historiador Marcos Perale Garcia. Sugestões do episódio: Documentário - A 13ª Emenda: https://bityli.com/UtUKB Série - Olhos que Condenam: https://bityli.com/rClZQ Série - Cara Gente Branca: https://bityli.com/xtexk Podcast - Rádio Escafandro: https://bityli.com/xYDeb Livro - Poemas de Recordação: https://bityli.com/bmQMj Livro - O povo contra a democracia: Por que nossa liberdade corre perigo e como salvá-la: https://bityli.com/cEdme

Today Crystal is joined by political consultant and friend of the show, Heather Weiner, to discuss the news of the week, including:  Jay Inslee's new capital gains tax proposal and its prospects this legislative session. Deb Haaland, the first indigenous person to be appointed to run the Department of the Interior. Jenny Durkan's renewed focus on clearing out homeless encampments, against public health advice. A full text transcript of the show is available below, and on the Hacks & Wonks blog at https://www.officialhacksandwonks.com/post/week-in-review-december-18-2020. Find the host, Crystal Fincher on Twitter at @finchfrii and Heather Weiner at @hlweiner. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com. Articles Referenced: Inslee unveils Washington budget proposal with taxes on capital gains and health insurers to fund COVID-19 recovery by Joseph O'Sullivan, The Seattle Times https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/inslee-unveils-washington-budget-proposal-with-taxes-on-capital-gains-and-health-insurers-to-fund-covid-19-recovery/ History Walks With Deb Haaland to the Department of the Interior by Charles P. Pierce, Esquire https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a35013654/deb-haaland-interior-department-joe-biden/ Interim Guidance on People Experiencing Unsheltered Homelessness from the Center for Disease Control https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/homeless-shelters/unsheltered-homelessness.html Full Transcript: Crystal Fincher: [00:00:00] Welcome to Hacks and Wonks. I'm your host, Crystal Fincher. On this show, we talk with Policy Wonks and Political Hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy through the lens of those doing the work, with behind-the-scenes perspectives on politics in our state. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes.  Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows, where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program friend of the show and today's co-host: local political consultant extraordinaire Heather Weiner.  Heather Weiner: [00:00:46] Hi Crystal! So nice to be here.  Crystal Fincher: [00:00:49] So excited to have you back on! And we have a lot to dive into and we will start with Governor Inslee's budget - and he is proposing new revenue - he's ready to tax the rich. Is everyone else ready? What are your thoughts on this development?  Heather Weiner: [00:01:06] Oh boy, I have so many thoughts on this development. So first of all, Governor Inslee is now in his third term. It does not look like he is going to be leaving to join the Biden administration, which some had been speculating on. The positions - and we'll talk about that a little bit more - about who is being picked for some key spots. So Jay is here, and Jay is the Honey Badger of Governors right now. He is out there - he just rolled out a four days - exhausting everyone, including the press - as he, without any apparent fatigue, started just rolling out his plan for racial equity, his plans to combat climate change, his plans to help small business owners, and his plans to pay for it by taxing the rich ... finally. Crystal, you know - I don't know if your listeners do - that Washington is the worst in the country. We are #51, including DC. We are the worst in the country when it comes to taxing the poor and not taxing the rich. In other words, if you are a low-income person, 17% of your income likely goes to taxes. If you're a high-income person - and by high-income, I mean millionaire - likely somewhere around 3% of your income goes to state taxes. It's time we fix that. And Jay Inslee has proposed something that will help take us from worst to best.  Crystal Fincher: [00:02:29] Literally it will bring us to the best.  Heather Weiner: [00:02:35] Well, not single-handedly, but it's a plan to get there.  Crystal Fincher: [00:02:38] Gotcha. So what is he proposing?  Heather Weiner: [00:02:42] So Jay - I'm sorry, we're not on a first name basis - he doesn't ever call me up and say, Heather! So let me just say ... I wish he would though - call me anytime, Jay! So Governor Inslee has proposed something he's proposed in previous budgets - and that is to tax capital gains. Capital gains from the sales - large sales, windfalls - from the sales of stocks, bonds, other intangible type passive wealth - wealth that people make off of doing nothing other than just letting their money continue to sit there. This is not a tax on the sale of your house, the sale of your small business, anything like that - it doesn't apply to retirement funds. Just if you were a gazillionaire, like, I'm not going to name names, Jeff Bezos, and you are making millions and millions of dollars every day. You will then have to pay about 9% of your profit to the state to help pay for small business support, helping struggling families, and public health. And I think that's a great first step.  Crystal Fincher: [00:03:47] It seems like an excellent first step and something that, as you said, had been proposed before, but didn't progress through the session or have much of a strong push. This seems like the case is different this year. Do you think there's a chance in the legislature? Heather Weiner: [00:04:04] Yeah, I do. I do. I think there's a big chance. And I'm going to tell you - I'm going to tell you why Crystal. Number one - we are in a huge economic hole right now in the state of Washington. You know, we still have a quarter of a million people laid off without work, small businesses - we've had 2,000 restaurants alone - just restaurants - close permanently here in Washington state. We're in tough shape right now and it doesn't look like it's going to get better in 2021, honestly, even with the vaccine. So we've got to do something and we've got to do something now. And so I think the pandemic is really lighting a fire underneath the shoes of our legislators. The second thing that's happened is the elections. Although the makeup of the House and Senate haven't changed dramatically in Olympia, we are seeing a lot of new people coming in - freshmen who very much support progressive revenue - T'wina Nobles, one of your former clients, to name one - who are going to be out there advocating for it and a lot of the older legislators who've retired were still kind of stuck in the nineties. So I'm hopeful that that will work. This is - listen, capital gains is the very least that we can do - it is passive wealth. It only applies to the very, very wealthiest people here in Washington state. It is the least that we can do. There's a whole bunch of other things we can do - taxes on big corporations that have been making so many big profits off of, and during the pandemic, not to name any names, Amazon - and all different kinds of loopholes that we have been overlooking for the rich and the very wealthy for years at the expense of the health of our state. I'm psyched. I'm ready. I'm like, Go Jay, go.  Crystal Fincher: [00:05:49] I am ready also, especially on the heels of, as you referenced, so many loopholes and tax giveaways to some of the wealthiest corporations in the state with absolutely no accountability tied to it. We saw a record-breaking hundreds of billions of dollars given to Boeing with no jobs guarantee attached, and they just started laying people off and then announced that they're leaving town. If we can have no problems shoveling money to those with resources, how in this pandemic and emergency that we have, do we not show ourselves as eager to make sure that we're taking care of people - by taxing and just asking people to pay their fair share as they do to a greater degree in every other state. It just seems fairly basic, particularly in light of the fact that we're hearing that the congressional stimulus relief package is really disappointing, lackluster - probably does not include any bailout or help to local and state governments. So help that people even thought was coming in the midst of this emergency is not, and it really is up to us to provide for our own residents. And the only way we can do that is if everyone pays their fair share, and we don't continue asking those with the least to bear the greatest burden. So I'm excited. The House is saying that they believe they have the votes to pass this, which is really exciting. There's a number of new members in the House - I think they have a lot of new energy. I think that a lot of the new members on Finance are excited to push this through. And so it really looks like it's going to be a question about, is there the political will to do this in the Senate? I know a lot of people have that will - is it going to be enough? And I think that paying attention to where all of our Senators stand is going to be really important.  Heather Weiner: [00:08:02] Yeah. Agreed. For example, let's talk - well, last time I was here, we talked about Senator Mark Mullet and he is once again, a key vote out in Issaquah. This is the guy who last time has held up all kinds of things by sitting on these Senate committees and voting with Republicans. So I am hopeful that Senator Mullet is going to be changing his tune a little bit, or that the rest of the Senate Democratic leadership is going to be willing to override him and move forward. We'll see what happens. Again, this is a great first step I think Jay is doing - I'm sorry, Governor Inslee - is doing the right thing. Now it's up to the legislature to really find a progressive revenue package that again, takes Washington state from being worst in the nation to eventually - I think we should be the best. We've been the best on minimum wage, we've been the best on LGBTQ rights. We should be the best when it comes to revenue. Crystal Fincher: [00:08:56] We should be the best and on so many other issues in other areas, we're leading the country in terms of policy and we're setting the standard with, as you said, minimum wage, with paid sick leave, with so many different things - and to be this behind on the revenue that funds everything else and makes those things more possible for more people, I would think that we would be more excited to get this going. So hopefully this is the year and hopefully people look around at the need, which is only going to increase in 2021, and they get on board. And I guess, kicking this off, obviously session is going to be starting in January - on January 11th. Is there anything else that you're keeping your eye on that looks like it's going to be a topic and going to have legislation moving forward in this session?  Heather Weiner: [00:09:49] So it's super interesting because the legislature is going to be doing a lot of their deliberation by Zoom online. I think the whole apple cart is going to be turned over. The first thing we're going to see is a lot of legislators wanting to do a lot more grandstanding because there's going to be a lot more people watching them, a lot more constituents who have the time and the access online to comment and to see what they're doing. At the same time, leaders have said that they want to limit their legislative work to focus on the pandemic and dealing with our budget crisis. So I think there's going to be some really interesting things happening. We see a little bit about police reform, a lot about racial equity work, a lot about the environment, moving forward. I don't know - I think a lot of those small bills, the little gifts to lobbyists that we often see, may not get through this year. So I don't know - we'll see what happens. I'm really excited, though, about the access for the public to watch the sausage being made and to hold their legislators accountable. And I think our legislators who are more social media savvy, like Joe Nguyen, for example, are just gonna, mmm, they are just gonna rock it. I think it's going to be a real fun time to watch. And since I'm not as excited about the Seahawks this year, unfortunately, this is my new sport that I'm going to be just yelling at the TV about.  Crystal Fincher: [00:11:08] Well, I will out myself as a 49ers fan - I'm a huge 49ers fan. I have been a 49ers fan for my entire life. So, you know, that's just too bad. We'll see what happens with the Seahawks - Russ looks a little challenged right now. I don't know what's going on with that, but I also will not talk about what's going on with the 49ers.  Heather Weiner: [00:11:30] Right, all right, right, right, right, I know. Someday Crystal, we're going to have a long podcast where we're just going to talk about women's basketball. Someday I'm going to suck you away from the NBA and into the WNBA where the basketball is just amazing. But we'll talk about that some other time.  Crystal Fincher: [00:11:44] I am on board. We can talk about that another time - I'm down to talk about the Storm - anytime, anywhere we go. But you know, I share your enthusiasm and excitement about this session, and the possibility for the public to engage to a greater degree than they have before, to participate without a lot of the barriers that we've seen before - because of the pandemic - the opportunity to be able to offer testimony remotely and to really standardize having all of this available, not just on TVW when you have to happen to tune in, but available via Zoom where the public can participate - where the legislators can see how many people are paying attention, and who is paying attention, and they know that eyes are on them in a way that they were not able to see or feel before. And I think, especially in light of the protests that started in the wake of George Floyd, and here locally, Manuel Ellis, and that have continued to now and continue still, there is a greater degree of interest and attention still being paid that I think is going to be fairly unprecedented. And that excites me. Heather Weiner: [00:13:03] Yeah, it's fantastic - and as I've said to a couple of legislators, I hope that you keep the Zoom and public testimony, electronic public testimony, available. It certainly increases democracy and we've seen that with the Seattle City Council this year, where so many more people are able to testify when they weren't able to physically come down, both for income issues, work issues, and physical ability. So this is - I think it really improves democracy, I think it's great. Of course, I say that 'cause I usually agree with the people who are testifying - if it was a whole bunch of people that I disagreed with, I would say shut it down. Crystal Fincher: [00:13:41] Well, I think what we see is - most of the public is representative of the people who don't set aside time and have the privilege and ability to do nothing but pay attention to those meetings and attend those meetings. And usually the people who do - have more resources, are members of majority populations and communities, and certainly do not face some of the same barriers and challenges that people who have been marginalized and who don't have the resources that they do. So that is most of us. And so when more of us - just regular people - and, you know, obviously I work in politics, I'm not really that regular, I'm a little weird - but for just the average person, they're more represented when we expand access. And that's really what we need to continue to do - I think being forced to do this through the pandemic has just really brought on so many accommodations and changes in process that should have happened a long time ago, and that we need to continue to explore - how we can expand this access and make it even more accessible to people. With that, we can look at the Biden administration planning, and they're in the process of their transition. Certainly, Trump is still trying his little - literally coup - to defy the will of the people, and despite losing over 30 court battles, being turned away from courts at every level and the Supreme Court - thoroughly, handily, completely, he has lost the election and the electors have now voted. Biden is the President-elect. So he's moving forward, despite all the noise from everyone else. And he's moving forward with some particular picks for his cabinet that have a lot of people excited. You want to talk about that?  Heather Weiner: [00:15:53] Yeah - I'm so excited about the Department of Interior pick, which is Deb Haaland. Deb is a Native American woman from New Mexico. She was just elected in 2018, first Native American woman from that district to come in, and she has already just hit historic levels by being tapped to be the new Secretary of Interior.  Now I used to be a lobbyist in Washington, D.C. for 10 years. My job was to lobby the Department of Interior specifically on environmental issues. And it always shocked me that they had a very large bureau that went almost unmonitored, called the Bureau of Indian Affairs. And the Bureau of Indian Affairs has wreaked havoc on Native American families and tribal governments for over a century. And here, finally, is a badass Native American woman, who is coming in to take over not just the Bureau of Indian Affairs, but the entire Department of Interior - and that includes Bureau of Land Management, US Fish and Wildlife Service - it's just going to be - and the National Park Service. It's just going to be an amazing shift, both in representation and leadership, but also in the policy and direction for the Department of Interior. Go Deb Haaland - what an amazing feat - and kudos to Joe Biden for picking her. We had heard that Governor Jay Inslee - my beau, my boo - was considered for that appointment. Of course I was a little bit disappointed that he wasn't picked, but Deb Haaland, I'm going to give it 10 - 10 stars on that one. Great, great pick.  Crystal Fincher: [00:17:38] Great pick. And Biden is being universally lauded for that pick - a number of people have been lobbying for Haaland's appointment to that position for quite some time. And across the spectrum of Democratic leanings, she has been extraordinarily qualified. She has already set the course - one of her tweets on Thursday was, Hey, in four years, Trump failed Indian country and only broke more promises. It was exacerbated by the administration's failure to take this pandemic seriously - looking forward to turning the page on this dark chapter. So we are going to see a radical change from certainly this past administration, but also our past period. And hopefully this can start to right some of the wrongs, mend some of the broken trust, and really get to work on really moving forward - considering everybody's needs, and living up to the promises and the potential that we have when we all respect each other and move forward together. Heather Weiner: [00:18:46] And, you know, when people say that elections don't matter, this is a great example of where elections do matter. That by having President-elect Biden in leadership - he is able to pick amazing people like Deb Haaland to dramatically change the on-the-ground daily lives of other human beings. And I think that that right there makes it worth, makes it worth the votes. You know, I'm not as thrilled with some of the other picks or I'm a little befuddled, shall we say, by some of the other picks, but this one's pretty good.  Crystal Fincher: [00:19:22] That one's pretty good. Also, another pick - Biden's pick to head the EPA, Michael Regan - from North Carolina, African-American man, who comes with a long history of accomplishments. But certainly, in terms of the environmental movement and policy and priorities, this pick has been involved in environmental justice movement, has been involved in the EPA for over a decade - really understands that this isn't just a niche concern as it had been viewed by some in the past, but this really impacts us all. Climate change is not affecting us in the future - our environmental priorities - air pollution, water pollution - is something that is impacting communities today. And that, especially, is impacting communities of color, low-income communities, to a greater degree than others. And understanding that that is as much a health issue, as it is a racial equity issue and a social justice issue, is something that he certainly understands and a lot of people are excited about that pick. Again, similarly, some thought that this could be a place where Jay Inslee could fit into this administration and were considering that. But if the pick isn't Governor Jay Inslee, then this certainly is a great alternative.  Heather Weiner: [00:20:54] And I do have to say that as much as you and I would have loved a little bit of the drama that would have come from Jay leaving, because then, of course, we would have the cascade of - then Bob Ferguson runs for Governor and then who runs for AG, and so on. Despite the fact that we're not going to have that tea to drink, we are going to, at least, have some stability and really focused leadership out of our executive branch. So I'm very excited about that.  Crystal Fincher: [00:21:21] Very excited about that too. And he's putting forward a budget that here, on the state level, I am digging, and I want to see passed and want to see him continue to push this forward. And he certainly has been a strong and steady hand in leading throughout the pandemic. You know, from the very beginning - and charting the course and putting Washington on more stable footing than most other states in the country, so we're still happy to have Jay here, and look forward to his leadership throughout this pandemic and meeting the needs of the people who need it most. So speaking of leaders, that brings us to Mayor Durkan, who isn't viewed quite as magnanimously or positively as Governor Inslee. And so this week - we know that last week, Mayor Durkan announced that she will not be seeking re-election. And I don't know if she feels like that frees her up to do more of what she was trying to do before with no apologies. But this week she decided to proceed with evicting people who have no homes from Cal Anderson Park, even though there are no homes for them to go to. What do you think about that, Heather?  Heather Weiner: [00:22:46] I am heartbroken this morning - 10 people have been arrested already today - protesting the eviction of people who were living in tents in Cal Anderson. Look, I agree with everybody - it's not the thing I want to see in the middle of my park - is people - I don't like to see human suffering. I like to turn away and not look. But as human beings, we have to witness that this is what has happened with our massive wealth, inequality and housing crisis in Seattle. And here we have actual human beings who are living out in the cold, in the rain. They have nowhere to put their trash. They have nowhere to cook and they have chosen a safe place, which is a park in the middle of a very busy district next to a community college, next to Seattle U, next to a lot of businesses. So businesses started complaining about there being people living in the park there and today , SPU and then the Seattle Police Department went in and started clearing people out. And they were met with protesters, and the protesters were doing their thing and 10 of them have been arrested so far. Look, I mean, City Councilmember Teresa Mosqueda pointed out in an email today, and a statement today, that there is no housing - safe, COVID-safe housing available. No COVID-safe shelters, even - not even just talking about housing, but just daily shelters. There's no COVID-safe daily shelters available. Where are people supposed to go? And so they're just going to continue moving their stuff from place to place and in misery - why are we doing this? Why are we spending taxpayer money doing this? It boggles my mind and also boggles my mind that Durkan's not being held accountable for this. The story that the news media are talking about right now are blaming the protestors and blaming the people living in tents, instead of blaming this administration for not coming up with a solution - that means renting hotel rooms, opening up unused City buildings to make sure that there are places where people can safely get out of the rain and the cold.  Crystal Fincher: [00:24:59] It is infuriating. It's infuriating for a number of reasons. First and foremost, we need to acknowledge and understand that these sweeps are specifically recommended against by the CDC and by public health authorities, including King County Public Health, because in a pandemic, this increases the chance and exposure of people to COVID-19. And this is a population that is also specifically vulnerable, more vulnerable than average. They're an at-risk population for COVID-19 and now you're increasing the likelihood of them being exposed, and everyone involved in this effort - it is so deeply irresponsible from a public health perspective and flies in the face of guidance. So at a time when she's saying she wants people to do what's necessary to keep each other safe, it would be nice if she did that herself, and didn't defy the CDC in order to push out people from a place where, at least they have a stable place that they can call their own and they can sleep right now in the pandemic, and not push them out because some people get their feelings hurt and get riled up by having to see them, as if that is the offense and not that someone doesn't have a home - when, as you said, there are many, so many hotel rooms available. There are so many vacant spaces available. And in a time when we have the hospitality industry, in particular, asking us to help them because they're struggling - rooms aren't being rented - wow, this does seem like it makes sense - that this can meet a number of needs if we were to partner or procure those rooms for people who did not have a place to live. And this is also happening in the face of State Supreme Court ruling that says that you can't kick someone, you can't remove someone who does not have a home, from public property if there is nowhere for them to go. And that's what we're talking about here and what infuriates me about Durkan - one of the things that infuriates me about Durkan - is that her and her administration seemed to put so much effort into acting like they were solving the problem, and a public relations effort with a Navigation Team who wasn't obligated to offer real services, and who was actually working in tandem with police officers to sweep instead of spending that money and effort and time on actually just providing people with housing. And it's so frustrating and it's so upsetting and angering, that the focus is on people who are upset by visible poverty - as if just the threat to their idyllic vision that other people - "those people" - shouldn't be around here and I shouldn't be subjected to them is just maddening and against everything that we should be standing for. It's offensive - protestors were out there for the same reason - they're out there for other items that are unjust. This was an unjust, unwise, and unhealthy action, and I hope we see the end of these when Durkan leaves.  Heather Weiner: [00:28:40] Yeah. Well, let's see if people are gonna run, if somebody's gonna run on fixing homelessness, like she ran on in 2017 - that was her major issue. And in fact, I remember the Chamber of Commerce ads in support of her, specifically showed tents in parks and said if her opponent, Cary Moon, was going to win, there would be more tents in parks. Guess what? Durkan won. We see tents in every single park - and it's not because she's not being tough enough. It's because there is nowhere else for people to go. And when you tell people to go get a job, to get themselves "cleaned up", to deal with substance use disorder or other mental health issues - suddenly, we are in a chicken and egg scenario because there is no way for someone to get a job or to deal with mental health or substance use issues when they are just trying to survive in a cold wet tent. Crystal Fincher: [00:29:41] Absolutely. So I - we will certainly be hearing more about this. There is certainly a lot of resistance to this effort and obviously, one of the reasons why Durkan is choosing not to run again is it looks unlikely that she would have been elected again, because she and her leadership and policies are unpopular with the majority of Seattle residents. So we'll continue to stay tuned.  I thank you for tuning in to Hacks and Wonks on KVRU 105.7 FM this Friday, December 18th, 2020. Our chief audio engineer at KVRU is Maurice Jones, Jr. The producer of Hacks and Wonks is Lisl Stadler. And our wonderful co-host today was Seattle political consultant, Heather Weiner. Thanks for joining us, Heather.  Heather Weiner: [00:30:30] Oh, so nice to chat with you and I'm happy to come back on again soon.  Crystal Fincher: [00:30:35] Thank you. You can find Heather on Twitter at @hlweiner. And you can find me on Twitter at @finchfrii. And now you can follow Hacks and Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, and wherever else you get your podcasts - just type Hacks and Wonks into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe, to get our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in. We'll talk to you next time.

We welcome Joseph Evans to discuss his role organizing protests of the investigation of Manuel Ellis’ death at the hands of Tacoma Police and remember attending Sonics games with us, then welcome back local pro sports with Reign FC kicking off … Continue reading →

For more coverage of the Manuel Ellis story follow :South Seattle Emerald // https://southseattleemerald.com/Life on the Margins Podcast // https://lifeonthemarginspodcast.com/____________________________________________________________Marcus Harrison Green  is the publisher and co-founder of the South Seattle Emerald, current columnist for Crosscut, a former reporter with the Seattle Times, a former Reporting Fellow with YES! Magazine, a past board member of the Western Washington Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists and a recipient of Crosscut's Courage Award for Culture. Growing up in South Seattle, he experienced first-hand the neglect of news coverage in the area by local media, which taught him the value of narratives. After an unfulfilling stint working in the investment world in his twenties, Marcus returned to his community determined to tell its true story, which led him to start the South Seattle Emerald.  He was named one of Seattle's most influential people by Seattle Magazine in 2016.Enrique Cerna  is a veteran journalist who has worked in Seattle media for 45 years.  Cerna worked for 23 years at Cascade Public Media's KCTS 9 and retired in February 2018 from his role as senior correspondent. He anchored current affairs programs, moderated statewide political debates, interviewed major newsmakers, produced and reported stories throughout Washington State and for national PBS programs. Cerna has earned nine regional Emmy awards and numerous other journalistic honors.  He is a member of the National Association of Television Arts and Sciences Northwest Chapter Silver Circle for his work as a television professional. Cerna is active in the community. He has served on numerous non-profit boards over the years. In March, he was appointed by Governor Jay Inslee to the Washington State University Board of Regents. ____________________________________________________________Produced In Partnership With :Town Hall Seattle  (https://townhallseattle.org/)The South Seattle Emerald  (https://southseattleemerald.com/)_____________________________________________________________Executive Producer + Host  // Marcus Harrison GreenExecutive Producer + Host // Enrique CernaExecutive Producer + Host // Jini PalmerAdditional Production Support Provided By // Hans Anderson & JEFFSCOTTSHAWMusic Provided By // Draze "The Hood Ain't The Same" // http://www.thedrazeexperience.com/about-draze/

A source says 57 officers have resigned in Buffalo after two were suspended over the pushing of a 75 year old man. Georgia NAACP President calls for the resignation of Atlanta police chief over use of force by officers responding to protests. New video appears to show police striking Manuel Ellis before he died in their custody. Trump says “this is a great day for” George Floyd during a WH event on the economy. U.S. Park Police acknowledge protesters were tear-gassed after Trump and White House denied it. Trump attacks DC mayor calling her incompetent after she asked him to “withdraw all extraordinary” law enforcement and guard troops from the city. Former White House chief of staff John Kelly says he agrees with former defense secretary’s stinging criticism of Trump. Videos surface showing disturbing confrontations with police. Protests in multiple cities around the U.S.. Details emerge about Barr’s role in crackdown on DC protests. Incidents involving NYPD officers & protesters under investigation. Governor Andrew Cuomo is pushing New York to pass a new police reform bill. California governor calls for end to police being trained in type of chokehold. Coronavirus cases on the rise. U.S. Coronavirus death toll nearing 109,000.To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

0:16 - Episode Introduction1:02 - Hosts Checking In 13:07 - Conversation with Dr. Ben Danielson27:49 - The Story of Manuel Ellis 38:51 - Matt Chan's Commentary40:52 - Host Recap____________________________________________________________Dr. Ben Danielson  was born in Boston, was placed in and then, in his words, rescued from foster care and raised by his single mom in Washington, D.C., and rural Montana. He went on to attend Harvard University and then UW to study medicine. He completed his residency at Seattle Children's before assuming responsibility for the Odessa Brown Children's Clinic in 1999.  Danielson runs the Odessa Brown Children's Clinic, a pediatric care center based in the heart of Seattle's Central District and sits on the boards of a number of organizations, including the Group Health Community Foundation, Equal Start Community Coalition, Health Coalition for Children and Youth, Children's Alliance Public Policy Council, United Way of King County, The Washington State Health Exchange Board, and others.Matt Chan  knows that storytelling begins with the audience – an idea that has driven his 45 years of award winning success in the television industry. Chan has worked in every facet of the industry, from operating television stations to running national television series. In 1998 he started his last business Screaming Flea Productions and over 14 years grew it to national prominence. His work created hits like A&E's HOARDERS, and landed him a spot as one of the very few people of color on the Hollywood Reporter's Top 50 Reality Power Producers list. His newest passion is to give back to the community, training and educating new generations of citizen journalists and storytellers for the new world of media..   ____________________________________________________________Produced In Partnership With :Town Hall Seattle  (https://townhallseattle.org/)The South Seattle Emerald  (https://southseattleemerald.com/)_____________________________________________________________Executive Producer + Host  // Marcus Harrison GreenExecutive Producer + Host // Enrique CernaExecutive Producer + Host // Jini PalmerAdditional Production Support Provided By // Hans Anderson & JEFFSCOTTSHAWMusic Provided By // Draze "The Hood Ain't The Same" // http://www.thedrazeexperience.com/about-draze/

It's Friday: that means it's panel time!US President Donald Trump spoke about both George Floyd's death and the latest American employment data during Friday remarks in the White House's Rose Garden. "We all saw what happened last week. We can't let that happen," Trump said. "Hopefully, George is looking down right now and saying, 'This is a great thing that's happening for our country.' It's a great day for him. It's a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality. It's what our Constitution requires, and it's what our country is all about." Meanwhile, Washington, DC, residents have been besieged by "a number of heavily armed law enforcement officers who share an unexpected characteristic: Neither their affiliation nor their personal identities are discernible," the Washington Post reported Thursday. How concerned should we be, and what does this indicate?Another black man who said "I can't breathe" died in police custody, and an official autopsy has ruled his death a homicide. Manuel Ellis, 33, who called out “I can't breathe” before dying in police custody in Tacoma, Washington, "was killed as a result of oxygen deprivation and the physical restraint that was used on him, according to details of a medical examiner's report released on Wednesday," the New York Times reported Wednesday. “Mr. Ellis was physically restrained as he continued to be combative,” the Tacoma Police Department said in a Wednesday statement on the matter. The police officers were not wearing body cameras."A week ago in Minneapolis, for all the world to see, a black man, George Floyd, was murdered by a policeman, Derek Chauvin," Dr. Jack Rasmus wrote in a Wednesday piece published on his personal website and at CounterPunch. "Murders of black men by police in America are not new. They are endemic. ... What angers those who observed the murder most is the lack of mercy shown by Chauvin and his three complicit partner officers. What they showed was clearly an intention to kill. Chauvin appeared almost to take pleasure in keeping his knee on Floyd's neck for three minutes more after he lay motionless. That made it a particularly sadistic murder. It suggested to observers of the video, especially to black folks, that the police in 2020 will show you no mercy.""The job market unexpectedly reversed its free fall in May as employers brought back millions of workers after pandemic-induced layoffs and the unemployment rate declined," the New York Times reported Friday. "Tens of millions remain out of work, and the unemployment rate, which fell to 13.3 percent from 14.7 percent in April, remains higher than in any previous post war recession. But employers added 2.5 million jobs in May, the Labor Department said Friday, defying economists' expectations of further losses and offering hope that the rebound from the pandemic-induced economic crisis could be faster than forecast."Democratic Virginia Governor Ralph Northam has announced that the state will remove a monument to Confederate General Robert E. Lee from the capital of Richmond. "The 60-foot monument that has towered over Richmond for 130 years will topple into history as soon the state can line up contractors and make space in a warehouse, Northam announced Thursday, the seventh straight day of mass protests over police violence against African Americans," the Washington Post reported Thursday.GUESTS:Caleb Maupin — Journalist and political analyst who focuses his coverage on US foreign policy.Dr. Jack Rasmus — Professor of economics at Saint Mary's College of California and author of "Central Bankers at the End of Their Ropes: Monetary Policy and the Coming Depression." Dr. Linwood Tauheed — Associate professor of economics at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. Jim Kavanagh — Political analyst and commentator and editor of The Polemicist.

* Help the family of George Floyd: https://www.gofundme.com/f/georgefloyd * Fight for Breonna Taylor: https://justiceforbreonna.org/ * Help the family of Ahmaud Arbery: https://www.gofundme.com/f/i-run-with-maud Donate to one or more community bail funds: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/bail_funds_george_floyd Visit Movement For Black Lives for additional ways you can help the cause: https://m4bl.org/ Petitions to sign, organizations to support, and more: https://blacklivesmatters.carrd.co/ Want to learn more? Anti-racism resources: * https://www.npr.org/local/309/2019/10/30/774704183/historian-ibram-x-kendi-on-how-to-be-an-antiracist * https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/29/books/review/antiracist-reading-list-ibram-x-kendi.html * https://www.npr.org/2020/05/29/865261916/a-decade-of-watching-black-people-die * bit.ly/ANTIRACISMRESOURCES * http://bit.ly/teachingantiracism * https://padlet.com/nicolethelibrarian/nbasekqoazt336co * https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/being-antiracist * bit.ly/BlackLivesAction * http://antiracismforbeginners.com/ * https://www.honeybook.com/risingtide/antiracist-resources-for-small-businesses * https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PrAq4iBNb4nVIcTsLcNlW8zjaQXBLkWayL8EaPlh0bc/ * https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0Bz011IF2Pu9TUWIxVWxybGJ1Ync * https://www.charisbooksandmore.com/books-teach-white-children-and-teens-how-undo-racism-and-white-supremacy * https://www.charisbooksandmore.com/understanding-and-dismantling-racism-booklist-white-readers * https://zora.medium.com/100-best-books-by-black-women-authors-zora-canon-46b3492bdded SAY THEIR NAMES: ERIC GARNER, JOHN CRAWFORD III, MICHAEL BROWN, EZELL FORD, DANTE PARKER, MICHELLE CUSSEAUX, LAQUAN MCDONALD, GEORGEMANN, TANISHA ANDERSON, AKAI GURLEY, TAMIR RICE, RUMAIN BRISBON, JERAME REID, MATTHEW AJI, FRANK SMART, NATASHA MCKENNA, TONY ROBINSON, ANTHONY HILL, MYA HALL, PHILLIP WHITE, ERIC HARRIS, WALTER SCOTT, WILLIAM CHAPMAN II, ALEXIA CHRISTIAN, -BRENDON GLENN, VICTOR MANUEL LAROSA, JONATHAN SANDERS, FREDDIE BLUE, JOSEPH MANN, SALVADO ELLSWOOD, SANDRA BLAND, ALBERT JOSEPH DAVIS, DARRIUS STEWART, - BILLY RAY DAVIS, SAMUEL DUBOSE, MICHAEL SABBIE, BRIAN KEITH DAY, CHRISTIAN TAYLOR, TROY ROBINSON, ASSHAMS PHAROAH MANLEY, FELIX KUMI, KEITH HARRISON MCLEOD, JUNIOR PROSPER, LAMONTEZ JONES, PATERSON BROWN, DOMINIC HUTCHINSON, ANTHONY ASHFORD, ALONZO SMITH, TYREE CRAWFORD, INDIA KAGER, LA'VANTE BIGGS, MICHAEL LEE MARSHALL, JAMAR CLARK, RICHARD PERKINS, NATHANIEL HARRIS PICKETT, BENNI LEE TIGNOR, MIGUEL ESPINAL, MICHAEL NOEL, KEVIN MATTHEWS, BETTIE JONES, QUINTONIO LEGRIER, KEITH CHILDRESS JR., JANET WILSON, RANDY NELSON, ANTRONIE SCOTT, WENDELL CELESTINE, DAVID JOSEPH, CALIN ROQUEMORE, DYZHAWN PERKINS, CHRISTOPHER DAVIS, MARCO LOUD, PETER GAINES, TORREY ROBINSON,DARIUS ROBINSON, KEVIN HICKS, MARY TRUXILLO, DEMARCUS SEMER, WILLIE TILLMAN, TERRILL THOMAS, SYLVILLE SMITH, ALTON STERLING, PHILANDO CASTILE, TERENCE CRUTCHER, PAUL O'NEAL, ALTERIA WOODS, JORDAN EDWARDS, AARON BAILEY, RONELL FOSTER, STEPHON CLARK, ANTWON ROSE II, BOTHAM JEAN, PAMELA TURNER, DOMINIQUE CLAYTON, ATATIANA JEFFERSON, CHRISTOPHER WHITFIELD, CHRISTOPHER MCCORVEY, ERIC REASON, MICHAEL LORENZO DEAN, BREONNA TAYLOR, MANUEL ELLIS, GEORGE FLOYD. "The rate at which black Americans are killed by police is more than twice as high as the rate for white Americans. This is a non-comprehensive list of deaths at the hands of police in the U.S. since Eric Garner's death in July 2014." - from LA Johnson/NPR