The Seattle City Council recently confronted intense public scrutiny due to a proposal regarding the city’s ethics code that raised alarm about potential rollbacks in renter’s rights.
The pitch for the controversial update emerged from Councilmember Cathy Moore (District 5), who called for changes intended to boost political accountability and ensure representation for all districts in local governance.
However, this push raised red flags among activists and concerned citizens, particularly since two of the nine council members—Maritza Rivera (District 4) and Mark Solomon—are landlords.
As it stands, the current ethics code mandates that landlord council members must recuse themselves from discussions regarding renter’s rights to prevent bias.
Supporters of renter rights argue that the proposal may compromise these essential protections, leaving districts two and four without representative voices on significant renter-related issues.
The rhetoric became notably heated as former City Councilmember Kshama Sawant voiced her opposition to the ethics code update.
Sawant, a prominent advocate for renter’s rights during her tenure from 2014 to 2024 and the first member elected from the Socialist Alternative party, actively protested the ethics bill at public forums.
Under her influence, Seattle has seen a series of impactful renter’s rights measures, including caps on late fees, move-in fees, and security deposits, as well as bans on winter and school-year evictions.
M. Smith, a member of Sawant’s newly founded organization Workers Strike Back, remarked on the influence of big landlords backing several council members, indicating that their interests may jeopardize renters’ welfare.
“These are things the Democrats want to roll back,” Smith said.
He highlighted concerns regarding the financial connections between council members and major landlords, such as Greystar, the largest apartment owner in the country, known for its considerable influence in the U-District with student housing complexes like The M Seattle and The Accolade.
On May 27, a public comment session at a Seattle City Council meeting drew significant attention, with citizens voicing their apprehensions regarding the proposed bill.
Those in attendance emphasized the crucial role the existing ethics code plays in ensuring protections for renters in a rapidly changing housing landscape.
The council chamber filled with protestors aligned with Workers Strike Back, passionately articulating their fears about potential rollbacks to renter’s rights.
Despite the overwhelming public sentiment, council members’ reactions remained largely stoic, with many engrossed in their screens throughout the session.
Only Councilmember Alexis Mercedes Rinck (Position 8) vigorously defended current renter protections, stating, “Some of the things that have been discussed have been the roommate ordinance, the 10-dollar late fee, the winter eviction moratorium — these are all things that keep people housed.”
Rinck underscored the precarious position of many among the university’s student population, stating that repeal of these provisions could lead to dire outcomes for those living on the financial edge.
Nonetheless, frustrations boiled as public comment was abruptly cut off due to a 4-3 council vote, with members Nelson, Kettle, Rivera, and Saka favoring the closure.
Rinck criticized the council’s mentality, suggesting, “We could’ve, in the time we wasted with recess and the amount of council members going back into their offices, just heard from everybody.”
As public comment concluded, emotions ran high with many attendees feeling unheard and disillusioned.
Among those leaving were activists from Workers Strike Back and Sawant, who all expressed dissatisfaction with council proceedings.
With the session ending unproductively, most council members, except for Rinck and Strauss, retreated to their offices, opting for virtual meetings rather than addressing public discord face-to-face.
Just three days following this heated meeting, Councilmember Moore withdrew the proposed updates to the ethics code from consideration, declaring that more time was required to address the issues raised.
Subsequently, Moore announced her retirement, leading many to question whether the ethics code will remain a priority in the council moving forward.
The controversial ethics code update may have dissipated in the immediate aftermath of public outcry, but the frustration and engagement exhibited by community members illustrate a thriving democratic process.
In a broader context, the incident underscores the importance of civic engagement, particularly in a political climate often characterized by apathy and disengagement.
For students and community members alike, it is critical to advocate for their rights, as governmental decisions can significantly impact their safety and stability.
In conclusion, as civic engagement efforts continue, the council members’ reactions to public sentiment remind us that they are, ultimately, public servants accountable to their constituents—and they may not always welcome dissent.
To connect with writer Claire Farber, reach out via [email protected] or find her on social media platforms such as X and Bluesky.
image source from：https://www.dailyuw.com/opinion/the-power-of-political-peer-pressure/article_d4fc3e30-2ec7-4e3b-b466-00c820bd2f90.html
