Seattle police contract leaves accountability gaps
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.

Illustration: Allie Carl/Axios
Editor's note: This is part one of a three-part deep dive into Seattle's contract with the Seattle Police Officers Guild. Go here to read part two, and here for part three.
Seattle's latest contract with its rank-and-file police union continues to block accountability measures the City Council approved nearly a decade ago.
The big picture: The new contract, which runs through 2027, awards big raises to officers, but doesn't implement several long-promised reforms intended to boost civilian oversight and ensure timely police discipline.
Catch up quick: Seattle passed an ordinance setting new police accountability standards in 2017.
- "That law addressed essential reforms that had long been needed — it was to be the floor, not the ceiling," Anne Levinson, a former judge and independent police accountability official who co-wrote the measure, told Axios.
- But many of the 2017 reforms aren't included in the latest contract with the Seattle Police Officers Guild, which was negotiated by former Mayor Bruce Harrell's administration and approved by the City Council in December.
Flashback: The deal came together last year amid a push by city leaders to add hundreds more police officers.
The Seattle Police Officers Guild didn't respond to multiple requests for comment.
Here are some of the most significant accountability provisions the new contract leaves out.
Statute of limitations
Under the contract, most types of officer misconduct can still go unpunished if a complaint isn't made within four years of an incident.
- The 2017 ordinance removed that deadline for cases involving dishonesty or excessive force, while setting a five-year limit for most other misconduct. But those changes were never incorporated into the contract.
- The new agreement lifts the four-year deadline only in limited circumstances, including if there are criminal allegations or if an officer personally conceals evidence.
- In most other cases, discipline can still be barred after four years — including if someone else hides evidence of an officer's misconduct.
Oversight limits
The contract limits civilian oversight in several ways the 2017 law sought to prevent.
- It caps the number of civilian investigators the Office of Police Accountability (OPA) can hire and bars civilians from serving as the sole lead investigators on serious police misconduct cases.
- It also prevents OPA from subpoenaing evidence not held by the city — such as private security videos, bank records and personal text messages — that could be critical in misconduct investigations.
- That subpoena authority is already available to other city agencies, including the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission and the Office of Human Rights.
OPA's limited subpoena power is the contract's "most glaring failure," Seattle City Councilmember Rob Saka said in a news release explaining his opposition to the deal.
- "Without this critical tool, misconduct investigations can't be completed, trust erodes, and institutions are shielded instead of people," Saka said.
Arbitrators can still overturn police discipline
The 2017 accountability law routed police disciplinary appeals to a public civil service commission. The law barred appeals to private arbitrators, which studies have found often overturn discipline imposed by police chiefs.
- Yet the current police contract "continues to rely heavily on arbitration to resolve disciplinary decisions," Jazmyn Clark of the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington told Axios.
- That means an officer can be fired for misconduct and later reinstated after a private arbitration proceeding — a process that can drag on for years.
- The system sends a message that "discipline is negotiable even for serious violations," Clark said.
Higher bar for proving serious misconduct
Before the 2017 law, Seattle's police contract made it harder to discipline officers for lying than for other types of misconduct.
- The 2017 ordinance eliminated that discrepancy, requiring the same burden of proof in all misconduct cases.
But that work was undone by the following year's police contract, which introduced what it called an "elevated standard of review" for cases that could end in an officer's firing.
- That higher standard — which the latest contract retains — makes serious misconduct harder to prove and discipline easier to overturn on appeal, Levinson said.
- "That ultimately feels like the largest barrier to accountability," Taryn Darling, policy director for Seattle's Community Police Commission, told Axios.
The other side: City Councilmember Bob Kettle, who chairs the council's Public Safety Committee, said the Seattle Police Department is "severely understaffed," making the contract's salary increases necessary to attract new recruits.
- He said the contract makes progress on some accountability issues, including clarifying misconduct investigation timelines, and also allows the city to expand its 911 alternative response program.
- "We will continue that march forward on accountability," Kettle said when urging a yes vote on the contract in December.
What's next: Because the city and the guild couldn't agree on changes to the disciplinary appeals process, that dispute will go to public interest arbitration for a binding ruling.
