On January 11, a video of an ICE officer detaining an individual near Redmond Center surfaced, causing many to raise concerns for anonymous officer guidelines.
The video showed Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers restraining an individual in an alleyway, only visible through a pedestrian pathway. One of the officers notices he is being filmed and pulls up his neck gaiter before loading the individual into their vehicle and driving away.
This video alarmed many individuals who were put off by the anonymity granted to these federal enforcement officers. Woodinville City Councilmember Michelle Evans acknowledges that identity concealment only fuels the mistrust and fear communities have surrounding ICE. Evans stated, “It really made me start taking a look and say, OK, what can we do?” The No Secret Police Act was a result of these events. This new act advocated for stricter regulation than what is currently being debated by legislators in Olympia. Specifically, requiring enforcement officers to clearly identify themselves, their agency and vehicles.
This is where Senate Bill 5855 comes in. This bill prohibits local, state and federal law enforcement officers from wearing masks while interacting with the public, with certain exceptions. These exceptions include transparent face guards, N95 medical masks that protect the wearer from disease and helmets used to protect wearers during transportation on a vehicle.
It further allows a person detained by an unlawfully masked local or state officer to sue that officer in their official capacity. Senator Javier Valdez stated, “Senate Bill 5855 is about building trust and transparency.”
On the opposite end of the spectrum, Senator Jeff Holy explained, “My personal opinion is that this bill is pure optics.” He went on to recognize safety concerns for law enforcement agents. On the 15th, the bill was favorably voted on to move it forward in the legislative process.
Aside from Bill SB 5855, SB 5973 and HB 2210 focused on protecting the integrity of the state initiative and referendum process and protecting local representation, respectively.
Senate Bill 5973 tackles the legislative gap where state resources are spent on issuing titles to frivolous proposals; this provision requires the proponents to first demonstrate a threshold of support. Furthermore, the bill “disallows paying a worker whose task it is to secure on the basis of the number of signatures.”
House Bill 2210 introduces the idea of proportional and ranked choice voting. This legislature intends to “authorize local governments, for a period of six years, to choose to adopt ranked choice voting, proportional representation, or other approved election methods.” Ranked choice voting allows voters to rank candidates instead of simply choosing one. This way, if their first choice has no chance of winning, their vote has a chance of giving a meaningful contribution to their next best choice. Proportional representation elects multiple party representatives to each district in proportion to the votes. If half of the voters vote for a specific party, that party now holds half the seats.
Both these bills are currently scheduled for executive session in the Senate Committee on State Government, Tribal Affairs & Elections on January 23. There, members will discuss and vote on amendments and potentially move the bill forward.
Whatever our legislators decide, these bills show that Washington state intends to be at the forefront of progress and change—even if it resists against patterns in our current political climate.
