The recent 13th annual Asian and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (A&NH/PI) Primary Election Candidate Forum saw an overflow of attendees at the Wing Luke Museum’s Ford Foundation Community Hall on July 23, as candidates for Seattle City Council tackled key issues like public safety, housing, and social equity.
With only about 100 seats available in the Community Hall, the demand led to the establishment of a nearby area specifically for Cantonese speakers, a sign of the region’s linguistic richness and the importance of the upcoming 2025 election for the community.
Sam Prudente, who served as the emcee and is a case manager at Asian Counseling and Referral Service (ACRS), emphasized the need for candidates to speak slowly, as he highlighted the multilingual and multicultural makeup of the audience.
The lively forum was organized by a coalition of organizations including Refugee Women’s Alliance, ACRS, InterIm Community Development Association, Chinese Information and Service Center, United Territories of Pacific Islanders Alliance Washington, and the Wing Luke Museum, featuring candidates for City Council positions 8, 9, and District 2.
Candidates for Position 8 included Jesse A. James, Alexis Mercedes Rinck, Rachael Savage, and an empty seat for absent Ray A. Rogers, while Position 9 had Dionne Foster, Mia Jacobson, Sara Nelson, and Connor Nash. For District 2, candidates included Jeanie Chunn, Adonis Ducksworth, Jamie Fackler, and Eddie Lin.
During opening statements, candidates identified their top priorities, which resonated with some of Seattle’s most pressing concerns.
Affordable housing and the high cost of living were highlighted as significant issues, with rising rents in Seattle remaining among the highest in U.S. cities. Foster and Nelson emphasized the need for “affordability” and workforce housing, while Rinck shared her experience as a renter struggling to find affordable options.
Public safety was another critical concern, as candidates addressed the rise in gun violence and anti-Asian hate crimes. This was particularly relevant for communities in the Chinatown-International District (CID), which has experienced several high-profile incidents over recent years. Candidates proposed a variety of approaches, from expanding alternative response teams to enhancing traditional law enforcement measures.
Representation was a focal point for Nash, who underscored the importance of solutions driven by those most affected by these issues, particularly in the CID.
The forum’s first key issue centered on the anxieties surrounding immigration and the implications of recent U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) actions. Candidates presented differing philosophies on how to address these concerns. Rinck advocated for a “welcoming city ordinance” and support for legal defenses for immigrant families, while Foster stressed the importance of investing in the Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs for better community partnerships. Nash called for accountability regarding the role of local law enforcement in federal deportation activities, in line with Seattle’s “sanctuary city” policies.
From a law-and-order perspective, Savage argued that strong law enforcement ensures a safer environment for everyone, including immigrants.
The candidates also addressed the city’s projected $250 million budget deficit, with differing views on fiscal priorities. Many candidates favored implementing progressive revenue strategies, which involve taxing high earners and large corporations. Rinck and Foster expressed support for the “Seattle Shield” initiative, aimed at balancing tax rates to benefit small businesses while increasing taxes on larger corporations to secure essential city services. However, Nelson cautioned that new taxes alone would not suffice to cover the deficit and that there would likely be reductions in other areas, with a focus on protecting basic services.
Washington’s constitutional limitations on new city taxes were also raised by James, drawing attention to the state’s reliance on regressive tax structures.
When discussing homelessness, the candidates responded to recent legal judgments that permit local criminalization of outdoor sleeping, which sparked a local debate on encampment “sweeps.” The majority of candidates expressed opposition to such measures in Seattle, advocating for housing-first strategies rather than punitive actions. Savage, however, supported the implementation of bans, citing concerns around public safety, while most candidates leaned toward enhanced treatment services and increased housing options instead.
Ethics and accountability dominated the conversation surrounding police powers, with a notable consensus among candidates against allowing council members to vote on issues with potential financial conflicts of interest. This highlights the growing demand for stricter ethics regulations.
Drug addiction, anti-Asian incidents, pedestrian safety, and gun violence emerged as urgent challenges highlighted by many candidates. Nelson connected the fentanyl crisis to broader issues regarding homelessness and public safety, proposing the expansion of drug treatment plans and funding for outreach programs in areas that require more support.
The discussion later transitioned to the second half of the forum, featuring District 2 candidates, Chunn, Ducksworth, Fackler, and Lin, who laid out their visions centered around historical inclusion, affordability, and combatting displacement in Seattle’s most diverse district, which has a working-class and immigrant legacy.
Chunn, who is the daughter of Chinese immigrants and has worked as a restaurant employee for many years, expressed her deep concern for affordable housing as a top priority, reflecting on how difficult it has become for workers to provide for their families in the current economic climate, marked by soaring housing costs.
“I can hardly believe how different it is now compared to my own experiences,” said Chunn.
Echoing her sentiment, Lin described his own experiences as the son of a Taiwanese immigrant, tying his policy priorities to his background in the Office of Housing. “My top priority is to effectively address our housing crises and ensure that people have access to drug and mental health treatment,” he said, advocating for taxing wealthy corporations to meet essential community needs. He emphasized the effectiveness of permanent supportive housing as a solution to homelessness.
Fackler, who serves as a union shop steward and is also a building inspector for the city, elaborated on the government’s historic failures to include communities like the CID in substantial decision-making processes, criticizing a legacy of top-down development that has alienated these neighborhoods.
Ducksworth, with strong family connections in Beacon Hill, stressed the necessity for accountable police forces and outreach workers who can build relationships rather than create community mistrust.
“I believe that officers must be representative of the communities they serve and work towards building relationships; otherwise, they should not hold a position within the Seattle police,” he expressed.
All four District 2 candidates agreed that addressing housing affordability was the primary challenge facing their constituents, underscoring the alarming trend of working-class families being pushed out of neighborhoods rich with immigrant and minority histories. With rents soaring more than 80% since 2010 and home prices doubling over the last 15 years, homeownership seems unattainable for many residents.
On the subject of encampment sweeps, Prudente prompted a straightforward yes or no question to the candidates, all of whom voiced their opposition against such actions. Lin proposed a “comprehensive approach” driven by solutions that integrate permanent housing with supportive responses like Seattle Fire Department’s Health One and the city’s Community Assisted Response and Engagement (CARE) program. The candidates collectively acknowledged the need for better staffing within the CARE team and agreed that crisis responses should ideally come from trained non-police professionals.
Addressing ethics, all four candidates stood united against any proposed changes allowing council members in conflict of interest situations to vote, provided they disclose their conflicts publicly.
With Seattle anticipating a $250 million budget shortfall in 2026, the urgency for new revenue sources was underscored by all candidates. They all expressed endorsement for the “Seattle Shield” initiative to tackle the pressing financial challenges facing the city.
Amidst elevated federal immigration enforcement concerns, candidates reiterated their solidarity with immigrant communities. Lin and Chunn specifically called for increased support for organizations such as the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, while expressing the necessity of providing financial resources to workers, particularly those in the hospitality industry who are often undocumented. The personal impacts of deportation highlighted by Fackler contributed to a call for maintaining Seattle’s sanctity as a sanctuary city, prohibiting cooperation with ICE and advocating for ongoing support of legal resources for immigrants and refugees.
Moreover, the risks of displacement and the need for equitable development were prevalent themes in their discussions. Lin advocated for an uptick in funding for the city’s Equitable Development Initiative, which supports anti-displacement and community health projects in the southern parts of Seattle. He condemned claims suggesting funds were not being utilized quickly enough, explaining the long timelines associated with such projects.
All candidates agreed that anti-displacement protections, recently eliminated from the city’s development plans, must be reinstated to safeguard cultural gains and communities within the CID and Rainier Valley.
As the forum came to a close, attendees were urged to engage in voter registration and reminded of the critical implications the upcoming election holds for Seattle’s rapidly evolving neighborhoods.
image source from：nwasianweekly
