(openning music)
Good morning or afternoon,
whatever you're looking at, how you see it.
So we have, a lot to talk about this afternoon to start us off.
I will come back to the microphone after, to sort of lay the groundwork.
We're going to have our city attorney Ann Davison to lay the groundwork,
the foundation of what we're trying to do today. So,
Ann please take it away.
Thank you for coming today
and spending some time with us on this important topic.
It's important for people to understand what, what we're doing today.
We are here to make sure that the priorities and local control
for the city of Seattle and what we put as our priorities, remain
something that is available for our people to choose from.
In the first 100 days, the Trump administration issued 143
executive orders.
And we're here today because thankfully,
our legal system was created such that one person,
even if that person is president and even if that person is Trump,
does not enact federal law and decide its interpretation.
We're here today because federal overreach
attempts to coerce by threatening congressionally appropriated funds
and unilaterally claiming what is federal law does not make it so.
I have filed
two other lawsuits against the Trump administration for similar actions.
We've had some funds released in our most recent lawsuit
securing the city's for counterterrorism funds,
and we also have a court order to prevent unlawful application
of immigration provisions based on another presidential executive order.
In today's lawsuit, we are seeking to make,
declaratory injunctive relief, claiming that the executive orders
focusing on diversity and gender ideology are unconstitutional and unlawful.
They're based upon separation of powers, spending clause,
the Fifth Amendment, the 10th Amendment, and the Administrative Procedures Act.
At risk for the city of Seattle is about $370 million
in spending authority
that has been appropriated by Congress to the city of Seattle.
We should not have to forgo the use of that money
that has been appropriated by Congress, the one that has the authority
to control the purse, not the president.
We should not have to forgo our own local policies
in order to obtain that money that has already been provided to us,
nor should we have to contend with what is considered local control,
and having the federal government overreach
and try to dictate what the City of Seattle's priorities are.
That is for our decision makers to decide, and we will make sure the constraints
that are set for the authority for the president is enforced.
We are allowed to come and say that our programs and priorities are lawful.
They have not been found to be unconstitutional,
but they have been found to be something that we can pursue as a city.
And the overreach by one person, no matter what role they are in,
does not allow them to forgo the Constitution and the restrictions
and constraints
that the Constitution provides for the localities to control themselves
and not have to contend with someone from the outside, making sure that we
follow what they want.
Again, the relief that we've requested
is to make sure that these orders are found to be unlawful and to stop
the defendants from implementing them against the city of Seattle.
As we are a recipient of federal contracts and grants,
the relief we've requested is so that we can pursue our policies.
Our diversity, important priorities that we have, and our inclusion priorities
that we have, and that money should be able to come to us lawfully.
So that has been protected and appropriated by Congress.
I'm going to now turn it over to Mayor Harrell to introduce our next speaker.
Thank you.
City Attorney Davison.
I need to make it clear after that, I'm
not speaking as a lawyer.
I'm speaking as the mayor.
So don't ask me any legal questions about what we're doing,
but I'll try to bluff a few answers, if you do
ask me a question or two.
A few things.
First, I want to recognize, who's standing with us.
We're going to hear some from some community leaders,
but I want want to recognize Council President Sara Nelson, Council Member
Rob Saka, Bob kettle, Maritza Rivera. Am I missing anybody?
Okay.
I want to recognize those, leaders standing with us.
This really sort of embodies our one Seattle approach
and who we are trying to, what we're trying to do.
The legal action
that City Attorney Ann Davidson described
sort of,
talks about the what we're doing.
But I think is equally important as to why we're doing it.
And she described it, in very, in a very smart way.
But I want to put a little more, heart into it.
It's important that this country recognizes who Seattle is
and what our state is.
If you look at our history in 1973, we're actually one of the few cities
that actually openly barred discrimination in housing, employment, against
unlawful discrimination, discrimination against LGBTQ neighbors.
In the 1980s, the Washington state barred
discrimination as well in state employment.
2004 we became the first city in the country to have a municipal
initiative centered around social and and race and social justice,
which clearly embodies our fight for LGBTQ neighbors.
In 2006, RCW 49.60 was amended.
This is groundbreaking law to include, as a protected class,
our LGBTQ friends and neighbors.
In 2009, I had the,
absolute,
privilege to introduce
legislation that affirmed our race and social justice work,
requiring and directing departments to use all the tools to assist and eliminate,
to assist the elimination of racial and social
disparities for all members of protected classes.
In 2011,
I was very again privileged to lead efforts
to remove transgender health care restrictions from the health, city's health
care policies and making Seattle the first municipality in the state
to provide comprehensive health care for transgender
employees.
In 2012,
members of the City Council
and I sponsored legislation
to become a human rights city.
And that becomes fundamentally important in who we are.
Under the articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it reads
and I'll just read one small portion, but a very powerful portion of it.
This upholds the recognition
of the inherent dignity and of the equal
and inalienable rights of all members of the human family.
That this is the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world,
that all human beings are born free
and equal in dignity and rights.
That's who we are.
That's our history.
We won't erase our history.
We won't let the federal government, as the city attorney described, erase
our values.
The attempts to dismantle DEI,
we know, are also seeing unprecedented
attacks against vulnerable communities
but resilient communities.
And when we look at what's happening to our LGBTQ+
community, and particularly our transgender and non-binary neighbors,
I've said in other speeches, they attack them,
they attack us, they attack who and what we stand for.
Every person, every human being, deserves a right to live freely
as their authentic selves without fear of harassment and discrimination.
That is our foundation,
that is our one Seattle model, that is who we are.
That is clearly our history, and that's why I lead with our history.
As a city
we will continue to advance legislative and legal actions to protect our residents
from Trump's unlawful actions and funding cuts.
As you may recall, earlier this year, we signed new legislation that strengthens
local protections for people seeking gender affirming and reproductive health
care to support our LGBTQIA+ community.
We're proud of this,
these values that we stand for.
You know, I'll close my remarks
on the why we're doing this by saying that
all of our policies, whether it's our housing policy, our Comp Plan policy,
our tax and B&O policy are designed to uplift communities.
We want people to thrive.
I'm not afraid to use words like love and unity,
and our one Seattle mantra. I'm standing with leaders here that,
I know they love what they do because they love this city.
And with that, I'm going to introduce someone that
I don't use the word love with, because he'll probably beat me up.
Monty Anderson.
He likes yelling at me more than loving me.
But Monty Anderson, as you know, is a champion.
One of the
outspoken champions for workforce development programs
and creating pathways to high wage careers in the construction industry,
is no stranger to the equity movement, the justice movement.
He's the executive secretary of the Seattle
Building and Construction Trades Council, which includes 19 affiliate unions
and more than 20,000 construction workers.
And I did say a lie that I do use the word with love when I talk about Monty,
so he won't beat me up when I say that I love him.
Monty, you got the floor, my brother.
Thank you so much.
- Monty, would you say and spell your name for us.
Please.
M o n t y A n d e r s o n
Was that a test?
All right.
All right. I've already got. I've already get nervous here.
All right, I'll just say. Well, good morning
everybody, as the mayor said my name is Monty Anderson,
and I represent about 20,000 construction workers here.
You know, we've been building Seattle
for over 100, my unions over 120 years old here in Seattle.
But, you know about ten years ago we all got together and realized
we're missing something here. They're, they're young people in Seattle
that are not getting opportunities to get into the building trade shops.
So what does that city do?
The city says we're going to reach out in these neighborhoods.
We're going to identify people, in incomes, distressed zones,
and we're going to get them jobs, along with our partnership with, with the city.
We've trained over a thousand apprentices that in the (inaudible)
and brought over $120 million of wages and benefits into the city,
$120 million
of, of money in people's pockets, spending it here in the city.
And why?
Because the city cares about apprenticeship.
The city cares about the quality of life here.
So, you know, this is not a partisan issue for me.
It is a basic function of apprenticeship and lifting up your neighbors and saying,
you know what?
If you can get your butt up in the morning and go to work,
you can make an honest day's living here and live in the city of Seattle.
So you, you know, a lot of the construction workers, I'd say
we're all over the spectrum
sometimes, we're a diverse group.
But one thing we always believe in is diversity.
We know that everybody, the workforce is changing
and college is not the way for everybody.
So the reason we get upset about this is it's our life force.
We cannot work with the city or the county or the state
to reach out to diverse communities and have them be part of our work process.
I'm sorry, but it's, it's going to suffer.
Everybody suffers in that.
And as we fight gentrification and, and these,
attacks against people that believe maybe differently than the president do,
the best thing you can do, like the mayor said, is dignity.
And what is better than dignity, than educating somebody and having a job?
That is the highest form of dignity you can do for your citizens.
And that's what the city has done here.
So we want to be here to support the Mayor, Ann Davison, Council Member
President Sarah Nelson and all the other council members here
to say we're standing together for the citizens of Seattle
and what we believe in and what we believe in is education in any form is the key.
And education is something you can't take away.
And that's what an apprenticeship is.
So once again, I want to thank the mayor and all their staff for standing strong
against this kind of attack, which is, in my view, just un-American.
So we hope that, in the future here, obviously things are going to change.
But now I'm glad that we're all standing together to, say what's right.
Thank you very much.
(applause)
Thank you Monty.
Our next speaker is Ollie Garrett.
The presidenc and CEO of Tabor 100, an association of entrepreneurs
and business advocates committed to economic power
and social equity in underserved communities, especially advocating
for opportunities for black businesses.
And we're proud to partner with Tabor 100 on a range of programs at the city
to empower black owned small businesses and women
owned businesses and underrepresented communities.
Ollie Garrett, you have the floor. Please. Thank you for being here.
(applause)
Good afternoon.
I want to extend my deepest appreciation
to Mayor Bruce Harrell and City Attorney Ann Davison for their courageous
and principled stand in defending Seattle values of equity,
inclusion and local authority.
By filing this lawsuit, they are sending a clear message
that our city will not be bullied into abandoning its commitment to fairness
and justice in order to secure federal funding.
Their stand makes it clear we will not be intimidated
into abandoning our commitment to equity and inclusion.
Let me be real, equity
is about fairness, not sameness.
It is not about giving everyone the exact same thing.
It's about giving people what they need to succeed.
That's how we improve lives and strengthen communities.
Seattle diversity is one of its greatest strength.
Our economy thrives because of small
business owners, workers and leaders from every background
black, indigenous, LGBTQ+, immigrants, and more.
These executive orders from the Trump administration are not just
unconstitutional, they are an attack on that very diversity
and on decades of progress.
Federal dollars support public safety,
housing, healthcare, and infrastructure.
Tying those funds to political ideology
is coercive and dangerous.
This lawsuit is about protecting people,
about ensuring that every resident, especially those historically pushed
aside, has a real chance to thrive.
At Tabor 100, we know that economic empowerment and social equity
cannot thrive when fear and coercions,
are used as a tool of governance.
Thank you, Mayor Harrell and City Attorney Davison
for defending our city's autonomy
and for standing for every Seattle light
who believes in a future where opportunity
is not dictated by ideology, but by fairness and facts.
At Tabor, we stand firmly behind all leaders
who fight for fairness, justice and opportunity.
We will not back down. Thank you.
(applause)
Thank you, Ollie.
Our last speaker will be Gabriel Neuman.
Gabriel is the policy, counsel and government relations
at the Greater Seattle Business Association, always known as GSBA
which is the largest LGBTQ+ and allied chamber of commerce in North America.
We're proud to work with GSBA to support Seattle's LGBTQ+ businesses,
to create a thriving small business environment and to stand up
for civil rights in our, in our city.
Gabriel, we're honored to have you here.
You have the mic.
(applause)
Thank you everyone.
Excited to be here.
My name is Gabriel Neuman.
I use he/him pronouns and I am proud to represent the over 1200
members of GSBA, Washington's LGBTQ and allied chamber of commerce.
I want to thank Mayor Harrell, City Attorney Ann Davison
and our city leaders for taking this bold and necessary action.
This is also personal to me
as a member of the transgender community, because this goes right to the heart of
why we're here and what we're fighting for.
Let's be clear what's at stake
President Trump's executive orders attacking diversity, equity, and inclusion,
and what they call gender ideology are not just political stunts.
They are direct assaults on our communities and on the systems
that protect people from discrimination and allow them to thrive.
These federal directives seek to erase LGBTQ+ identities,
silenced conversations
about systemic racism and punish cities that believe in equity.
As they do so, by putting a price tag on our values,
threatening critical federal funding that supports public safety, health care,
small business recovery, education, and workforce development.
Seattle has never back down from standing up for what's right
not when it's unpopular and not when it's inconvenient.
We know that our strength comes from our diversity.
We know that equity is not a side project.
It's the foundation of a thriving economy and a safe, healthy community.
In the LGBTQ+ business community,
we've seen firsthand how inclusive policies lead to stronger workplaces,
more resilient businesses, and better outcomes for everyone.
When DEI is under attack,
it's not just a culture war.
It's an economic issue, a workforce issue, and a human rights issue.
This lawsuit
is not just about partizanship, it's about partnership.
It's about protecting our city's ability to serve everyone.
It's about ensuring that workers of every background are welcomed and respected.
And it's about defending our right to speak
honestly about race, gender, identity, and history
without fear of retaliation or funding cuts.
We thank the city of Seattle for taking a stand
not just for our community, but for every city, every nonprofit,
and every worker who refuses to be bullied into silence.
Together, we're saying discrimination has no place in our policies,
in our contracts, or in our funding priorities, or in our city.
Thank you.
(applause)
Thank you, Gabriel.
Powerful words Ollie and Monty, thank you for speaking as well.
And City Attorney Davison.
And with that, we will, entertain a few questions if you have. Yes.
I got a question for Miss Garrett, if that's okay.
I want to see if he could speak to the specific impact
impacts and risks to the small Women-owned and other businesses that are part of
your association.
Tabor 100 is a business organization
that consists of minority, women owned businesses.
They're seeking contracting opportunities and work within city and government.
This will help.
And how it would attack us is, right now
and as I stated, equity is about fairness,
not of sameness, not sameness.
And what it does is, it protects programs and things that we've been working on
for years
to increase contracting opportunities for women and minority owned businesses.
As I stated in all of my messages, when our business is grow,
when our businesses succeed and sustain, we hire within our community.
So it also increased workforce in the minority community.
That's why we are standing for this today.
Thank you, Ollie.
Yes, Dave.
Can you speak to the timing here?
Because the executive orders came out in January, seven months later,
not to be cynical but we’re 4 day ahead of a primary.
Why not file this lawsuit earlier?
Is there a political,
tie here?
Yeah, I'll answer it from my vantage point.
Filing a lawsuit against the
federal government is not an easy thing to do.
I have to repeat that.
This is major litigation here.
And rather than do it on a piecemeal approach, when we're looking at over 140
executive orders coming from the Trump administration,
we want to gather all of our facts
and make sure that we have what we think are a solid legal footing.
The fight for social justice is not a political move.
If that's the insinuation.
The fight is for what we believe in and who we are.
So, again, working with our city attorney, she could talk more about the timing.
But again, we can't.
Downplay
the concept of suing your federal government.
That's not something you do willy nilly.
The federal government should have a sacred pact with cities.
They should protect us, give us public safety
dollars, give us cancer research dollars, give us dollars to house us.
So this is not something done politically,
lightly, but, City Attorney Davison maybe you could talk about the timing
a little more.
Thank you, Mayor.
I understand where your questions coming from, David.
And it's important to note,
some people choose to take a position that they should do things.
The first, and that that is a statement.
And I think that's a wrong move
when it comes to this person in particular,
because what we see is a lot of action, which is why I
read the number of executive orders and, if I were to make decisions
based upon reflex, we would be, exhausted at this point.
So it is very strategic and, and very,
thought out as to the timing and the rightness of what we're doing.
What is at stake is when we apply for grants
and these new terms and conditions are added into those, we are faced
with looking at what we would be subjected to a false claims act.
This is a timing issue.
This is a making sure we were ready, that my clients were ready,
from a standpoint, as the mayor said, to approach the serious litigation,
not just to be first to do so, because that's to me, absolutely.
For performance and show, this is about the substance
and making sure we have a strategic approach that really can and,
will succeed.
I believe in securing
these funds that the city is appropriately owed and appropriated by Congress.
- And to follow up on that. Has the city actually lost money
as a result of these two
executive orders?
And which goes to the sort of rightness of it, are we,
on the other side of the spectrum. Are we too early to this?
Because as far as I know, these have not yet led to a direct loss of funds.
- What we're faced with is looking at do we need to, comply
with the new interpretation of federal law?
Which is why what I said in the opening, one person does not decide
what is the body of federal law, as noted by the mayor,
the civil Rights Act of 1964 has 60 years of case precedent.
So we follow laws and we follow case precedent.
US Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit and the interpretation of that law,
that is the body of federal law that we comply with.
So then for one person to come and say, I view this as a totally different way,
that's not what we go by. We go by the courts,
and what Congress has enacted in that law. And what we have is lawful, which is why
we think we are owed these things. But they're adding terms,
we need to decide can we actually apply.
Can we receive these, the money from these funds, will they withhold?
Are we able to go forward or will we be subjected to a false Claims Act?
Because of what we are doing is lawful, we believe.
But will they come back and say that, no,
you should have known it was not.
Where are we supposed to decide that?
So we're coming and saying these executive orders as they stand
are unconstitutional and unlawful, because, again, our system is set up
such that one person cannot dictate what is the body of federal law.
And this is what we believe, our programs are lawful and allowed to be held.
So that's why we're bringing this, at this time,
because it's the appropriate time for us to do so.
- Can you explain? There have been other lawsuits, filed about these orders,
so can you explain how this goes beyond lawsuits
that have already filed? Is it the false claims element?
What is the legal difference between this lawsuit and others?
For me, this is specifically focused on the executive orders.
So, there's one that is somewhat similar on some of these terms
from the King County lawsuit, that has about 60 litigants.
And again, that was a very quick to take action.
And that's what those parties chose to do.
I chose to make sure we're focused on the executive orders themselves,
not individual department action, because I think that going to the root
of where the abuse of,
outside the scope of authority is at the executive order aspect.
Again, because that is not where federal law is made.
You can't write it in a two page memo and create it to be federal law.
So for us, that was the important part to handle that.
- I'm trying to understand,
how soon these, impacts might be felt. Is $370 million,
sounds like it's enmeshed in programs
throughout city government.
And so if it is ultimately withheld,
how soon would opportunities be lost that these programs provide?
Or can't Seattle find a way to go
it alone for the short term while this lawsuit plays out?
I might defer to, Mayor Harrell or, Director Emery of, head of SDOT
because a lot of that is SDOT related, which is why we're focusing on this.
The, the part that the president is taking issue with
is unrelated to the grants that we're particularly using.
A lot of it is SDOT funding for infrastructure.
So it's nothing to do with the policy, that they're taking issue at.
And so I might, contend to one of them.
Joel, I'll answer it this way.
Not literally, not a week goes by where we don't look
at the north of $370 million, whether it's for public safety, homelessness,
transportation, infrastructure, our health strategies
where we realize we have exposure.
And to David's point, we're being... Got him to look up.
We're being proactive because we don't want to see the shortage of funds.
And then what happened? We have people that need to be housed.
And so again, I applaud the city attorney for taking this proactive step.
But not a week goes by where we're not looking at contingency plans.
And that's why I'm very proud
that the city council here and Council President Nelson is here,
because we're working with them to say, what if our transportation funds
are missing and we're relying on these grants?
And so that's our strategy.
And it's very good that the court system has actually worked for us.
And, you know, I've had many meetings with Nick Brown on this issue.
Thank God for the court system.
And this is, again, a means to use the,
the judicial remedies to, to protect the residents of Seattle.
- Mayor, speaking of homelessness,
the president also signed an executive order on homelessness.
How do you plan on being proactive in response to that?
And would you consider litigation or a lawsuit against the Trump administration
there as well?
Yeah, thanks for the question, Jonathan.
So from a policy standpoint, we don't think
what first of all, a lot of his terms are vague and general.
We don't think that's a winning strategy.
We think we have some of the smartest homelessness
advocates working with us to make the right investments.
So we think that our local approach on, everything that we're doing, realizing
this is a crisis throughout our country, that this works.
And so we will
if we think we need to challenge it, we certainly are prepared to do that.
But we, certainly take exception to, the executive order in that
is inconsistent with the best practices that we believe we're putting in place.
- If you do sued and are unsuccessful with Trump's executive order on homelessness,
some of the nonprofit providers believe that the city could offset
some of that federal funding loss.
Would you be able to do that?
Well, that's a tough question.
Is sort of a what if?
What if we lose and what if the providers don't have enough money?
I'll just answer it this way, that if you look under our administration,
we've put over a billion dollars into housing strategies. Our current budget
we put in about $343 million in housing strategies.
The voters are gracious enough to to pass a $970 million housing investment.
So we will keep doing what we need to do to protect
all residents, to make sure we are preventing homelessness.
We will use the court system if necessary.
We're always prepared.
And, quite frankly, I'm glad that I have a good team around me
and I'm glad some members of these teams are lawyers, by the way,
because that's what it's going to take.
And again, I want to bring attention to that.
We have some very,
significant department heads standing here as well from all over.
They know who they are.
So our entire city
family of departments are ready to fight for our vulnerable residents,
which today we're talking about LGBTQ and particularly transgender,
neighbors and friends, but also those that are unhoused.
Okay.
Erica.
- Unrelated question.
Today, or earlier this week, I believe you were dropped from, former
Chief Diaz's lawsuit against the city, alleging discrimination and other things.
Do you have any reaction to his decision to drop you from his lawsuit?
No reaction, no comment
David.
- Yesterday in committee, the city council is considering
a business and occupation tax proposal. Added a few exemptions.
You know, cancer center,
Fred Hutch, children's and stevedores.
That would probably shave off around $10 million from that proposal.
Can you speak to that at all?
Does that make your, what does that mean for your budget?
And then, the Trump proofing aspect of that, (inaudible).
Sure, and I welcome any council members that are, contemplating that to speak,
if you like.
I'll just tell you, the mayor's position, our administration's position.
We're we're we're just listening. We're talking.
We understand, organizations like the Fred Hutch are phenomenal employers.
I have,
unfortunately, have, many friends, family, family and friends
use that employers
an example that have been beneficiaries of the great research that they're doing.
So we understand their conversations, but we're not,
they will say, I haven't called any of them on this issue yet.
So we hope that their conversations end up at a good place.
And, I'm confident in this council that they will.
Did any of you want to say anything on that. They’re chicken, see.
You want, Councilmember?
Thanks for the question, David.
And this was well, I'm a bit shorter than the mayor.
I brought forward the amendments because Fred Hutch is a comprehensive cancer
care, research and care center, as you know, and Children's Hospital provides
phenomenal pediatric care across the board to kids.
And so in the context of they're also getting attacked
from the feds with research dollars and of course, severe Medicare cuts.
And so, in the context of all that, it felt important to
try to provide a credit for the more that is being increased,
by this, legislation that we passed yesterday, the B&O tax.
So it was really to address and support kids
and cancer patients, in the context of the federal cuts
that these nonprofits are also experiencing.
Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you for those powerful words, Council member.
And I, of course, will remind the the council that
we did think we tended a pretty smart, well crafted,
B&O policy to them and any decisions they make.
Certainly we don't want to worsen the $240 million challenge we're dealing with.
But they're very thoughtful and they're very deliberate, and they are values led.
So I have faith that the process will work.
Okay.
I don't see any other hands going up.
So I'm going to close us out.
And I'll close this out by saying a very,
sharing a very simple thought.
We all have jobs to do.
I don't think anyone knew,
maybe five years ago we were going to be having this discussion in Seattle.
I think many of us are students of history,
we've gone through some tough times politically before,
but I think largely what we're seeing is unprecedented.
So we have to wake up a little earlier, go to bed a little later.
The fight is on.
And this is where we show who we are, our values.
This is where we are tested on our values.
And so I stand proudly with you
as your friend, colleague and as your mayor.
I'm proud, proud of the team that we've developed.
So with this city attorney Davison, we're going to ask you
to do your thing, and we'll see you on the other side of this litigation.
Thank you, everyone, for being here. Thank you very much.
(applause)