A Seattle City Council member is expressing significant concerns over a new directive for prosecuting public drug use cases in the city that emphasises treatment over filing charges.
The concerns follow the city attorney’s recent clarification on drug use enforcement after allegations from the police union suggested that the Seattle Police Department was directed to halt all arrests for drug use and possession.
Councillor Maritza Rivera expressed uncertainty about the implementation of this approach.
“So I just don’t know exactly how this is going to be implemented. So that’s why I’m saying that. I don’t want to go back to the old model. I am very glad to see the overdoses have gone down so significantly. We don’t want people dying on the streets,” Rivera said.
Rivera acknowledged the city’s progress in reducing overdoses and violent crimes over the past two years, emphasising the importance of not regressing.
“We want to continue the progress that we’ve made,” Rivera continued. “We want to put a focus on diversion. And where it’s not, where it fails, we want to have the ability to have, you know, to prosecute cases as the city has been doing.”
Rivera believes treatment can be suitable in some cases, focusing on helping those on the street and residents or business owners in affected neighbourhoods. She expressed hope for a continued close working relationship with the new city attorney administration and intends to monitor the situation closely.
The city attorney reiterated that the mandatory pre-filing review to assess if treatment is a viable alternative to jail is already part of city law passed by the council in 2023.
The police union’s allegations about being directed to halt all arrests created immediate controversy. If true, such a directive would represent a dramatic shift from current practice where officers arrest people for drug possession then prosecutors decide whether to charge them.
The city attorney’s emphasis on treatment over charges reflects ongoing debate about whether criminalising addiction helps or harms people struggling with substance use disorders. Proponents argue treatment addresses root causes whilst incarceration perpetuates cycles of addiction and homelessness.
Rivera’s uncertainty about implementation demonstrates the gap between policy announcements and operational reality. How will officers on the street respond to open drug use? What happens when treatment is offered and refused? These practical questions remain unanswered.
The reference to “the old model” likely means the period before Washington’s Supreme Court struck down the state’s felony drug possession law in 2021, creating a chaotic period where possessing drugs wasn’t clearly criminal until the legislature passed a new misdemeanour law.
Rivera’s satisfaction with overdose reductions over the past two years suggests Seattle has seen measurable progress. Whether that progress stems from enforcement, treatment expansion, changes in drug supply, or other factors remains debatable.
The mention of violent crime decreasing alongside overdoses indicates Rivera views drug enforcement as connected to broader public safety outcomes, not just addiction treatment.
Rivera’s desire to maintain “the ability to prosecute cases” when diversion fails reveals her pragmatic approach. She supports treatment-first but wants prosecution available as backup when people refuse help or reoffend repeatedly.
The focus on helping “those on the street and residents or business owners in affected neighbourhoods” acknowledges the competing interests. People using drugs need help, but neighbourhoods experiencing open drug markets demand relief.
The 2023 city law requiring pre-filing review of treatment alternatives means the city attorney’s directive isn’t creating new policy but rather clarifying how existing law should be implemented.
The timing of this controversy coinciding with Seattle’s new mayor Katie Wilson taking office creates questions about whether the city attorney’s directive represents continuity with previous policy or a shift aligned with Wilson’s progressive priorities.
