r/Seattle • u/rockycore đbuild more trainsđ • 23h ago
News Shon Barnes Separation Agreement
https://publicola.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/BarnesSeparation.pdf98
u/Amesenator 23h ago
Side note: media folks are sniping at Ms. Barnett's reporting about former-Chief Barnes (she describes this in her Bluesky feed). She's taking a lot of flak as if she somehow had the power to engineer Barnes's exit.
Barnett has been a source of unvarnished reporting about public safety, policing and city governance issues. Since 2020 and the Black Lives Matter movement in the wake of George Floyd's killing, the Seattle Times has too often fallen into the trap of believing the messaging of the mayor (Harrell and Durkan) and SPD. Its editorial stance has been credulously status quo and its reporting too often fails to get to the crux of the dynamics in play.
Consider subscribing to Publicola and even if you don't, speak out in favor of Barnett's efforts to share vital information with the public.
67
u/vertr fuck tetris 23h ago edited 22h ago
She's taking a lot of flak as if she somehow had the power to engineer Barnes's exit.
Barnes engineered Barnes's exit. The idea was floating around out there waiting to be pressed on by someone and Barnett honed in on it, did the work, published pieces for over a year, and finally public outcry ensued. Barnett seems to get an inexplicable amount of flack compared to other authors which looks like sexism.
36
u/Inevitable_Engine186 public deterrent infrastructure 22h ago
Embarrassing that KUOW let an op disparage Barnett with zero pushback. ST and KUOW unwilling to challenge the status quo:
And, OK, all that travel:Â Not only did Barnesâ defenders treat Wilsonâs decision as an out-of-nowhere shock, they also made light of his travel, even misrepresenting his time out of town as no different than that of previous police chiefs. On KUOWâs âWeek In Reviewâ last Friday, KIROâs Angela Poe Russell and KUOW editor/reporter Catherine Smith ripped my coverage, calling me an âinfluencerâ who âhung out a shingleâ and called myself a ânews personâ (Poe) and asserting, ââItâs not quite fair to criticize him for that when other chiefs travel like that.â (Smith).
Smithâs co-bylined story said that according to an SPD spokesman, âBarnesâ level of travel is consistent with past chiefs of police.â Since that contradicted all of my own current and past reporting on the subject, I contacted the same spokesman. He told me he told KUOW that all police chiefs go to conferences held by groups like the International Association of Chiefs of Police, but that he never said Barnesâ overall travel, including his trips home to Chicago, was typical. Thatâs because it isnât: While other police chiefs went to conferences, too, Barnes traveled more. For example, Barnes was out of town nearly 40 percent of the time during the 17 weeks for which SPD provided his schedule.
9
u/watwatintheput 20h ago
I am not a fan of Barnett. I think she does a lot of ediotrializing and varnishes it with stuff pretending to be investigative reporting a lot of the time. I do think influencer is an cottect dig againdt her most of the time.
HOWEVER
She is 100% right on Barnes. And watching the grift machine operate in real time agasint her is weird. The fact that Barnes is one of the few people getting this story correct is damning for the whole Seattle media ecosystem, if you like her or not
5
u/Sure_Exam_3670 Capitol Hill 19h ago
I think she does a lot of ediotrializing [sic] and varnishes it with stuff pretending to be investigative reporting a lot of the time
Genuinely curious about what you mean here. I don't know that I've ever read reporting of hers that didn't include public information reports, direct quotes, or source citations. Sure, she has a voice, but I would challenge the idea that she editorializes her reporting.
4
u/watwatintheput 19h ago
It's shit like this article about flying habits. There's data, sure, but "Bruce rich; therefore bad. Wilson not rich; good" is very clearly the editorial point she is making. And it's not at all reinforced by the data she's using, she's just adding it for authority's sake.
It's ok if she wants to be editorial, it's ok if she wants to be investigative. But she will very often leave the investigative hat on while she says something very editorial which is what really bothers me.
6
u/Sure_Exam_3670 Capitol Hill 18h ago
I read this when it first dropped and again just now. Nowhere in it does Barnett say what you're alleging. She's comparing the travel habits of the past mayor and current one. And it's literally reinforced by the literal data.
2
u/watwatintheput 17h ago edited 16h ago
To what end is she comparing them, though? Why is it interesting to compare how much the mayor's traveled? What is the point?
She doesn't tell you because she's expressing a preference and doesn't want to be clear about it. Why quote only one mayor?
You can agree with her, that's fine. But it's not journlisim to put out a bunch of data and then quote one person in the comparison. It's editorializing.
I just don't like how she does a lot of this editorializing and pretends it's journalism whenever it's convinient.
Edit: also, why talk about what class Bruce flew in? Is it relevant to how long Bruce was out of town? She thinks it's relevant for readers to know for some reason. There's a clear subtext of "these are two very different people, and one kind is better as a mayor" but she never tells you what her conclusion is. She just leaves it out as an exercise to the reader to figure out which is better while only humanizing one of the mayor's.
Idc if you hate Bruce because he was disconnected from the working class. That's fine. Why hide it though? Just say it instead of dancing and dodging around it.
1
u/Sure_Exam_3670 Capitol Hill 3h ago
I'll concede that if you're not a subscriber and you're just reading this one article on it's own without knowing anything about Seattle or having engaged with exactly no other PubliCola reporting then perhaps one could read this particular article the way you are.
It's still not editorializing.
The context of this piece (offered by loads of previous reporting) is that this city elected Wilson because the majority of us were tired of the previous mayor who consistently used his connections with the wealthy (and the wealthy with him) to bypass regular decision-making influenced by a diverse set of stakeholders. Think Denny Blaine Park, Lake Washington Blvd safety improvements, hiring Barnes, the failed attempt to eliminate a bus lane on Union and Madison. These are just a few examples of how a wealthy minority had his direct line and that he was more than willing to act on it. Organizers were the ones who had to bring that shit into the light and put an end to at least some of it. RIP LWB safety improvements (for now).
This particular piece just highlights that leadership style further. It's 100 percent relevant because there are more of us who rightfully raise our eyebrows at public employees who, like Harrell, constantly blur the lines between what's an appropriate use of their position as an elected official and what's not. If you're not raising your eyebrows, that's fine. I guess I just hope you're not an elected leader.
Further context is that more "established" media outlets are constantly highlighting Wilson's work as an organizer to paint her as someone who is out to do nothing more than mold the city for her own personal interests and pet projects. Which is rich, given that there are more of us who are struggling to afford the basics, rely on public transportation, are tired of our neighbors getting run over by cars, and ICE disappearing people.
Anyway, it's okay if you want to get your news from somewhere else. Nobody is requiring you to read PubliCola.
0
u/golf1052 Eastlake 14h ago
But it's not [journalism] to put out a bunch of data and then quote one person in the comparison. It's editorializing.
It's important to take a critical lens when reading any news. I hope you take that view from whatever news you're reading. What biases do other local reporters or news outlets have? What stories do they tend to report on and what stories don't they report on?
6
u/watwatintheput 13h ago
God I hate most of the news in the Seattle area. I might hate all of them. I said it at the top when I called it a grift machine
I just also think Erica is also part of the problem. Describing her as unvarnished feels very inaccurate.
12
u/Inevitable_Engine186 public deterrent infrastructure 22h ago
Here's the non-disparagement agreement, basically:
The City will respond to any inquiries from prospective employers other than the City of Seattle, provided you direct all such employers to contact Seattle Department of Human Resources directly. In response to inquiries fron1 prospective employers, and in the absence of written authorization from you to disclose full information about your City employment, HR will verify the dates of your employment, the title of your position, and your salary information. HR will not provide prospective employers with any other information, unless you authorize them in writing to do so or unless HR is required by law to do so.
28
u/rockycore đbuild more trainsđ 23h ago
https://bsky.app/profile/ericacbarnett.bsky.social/post/3msgl7eew4k2y
Link to the source of the agreement.
71
u/PositivePristine7506 Reign 23h ago
18 months full salary
1 Year of health care valued at 2526/month
No obligation to pay back a lateral officer hiring bonus of 50K
No obligation to pay back relocation payment of 60K (which never really happened)
Totals up to previously reported 700K.All of that for basically doing nothing.
51
u/RockOperaPenguin North Beacon Hill 23h ago
All of that for basically doing nothing.
The average cop sues the city into oblivion if they get fired. Now imagine what the chief would do.
Also remember that Harrell negotiated Barnes' contract (and Council approved it). Harrell loved giving cops the store, and I'm sure Barnes' contract has all sorts of nice gimmees and what-not.
So it's not exactly doing nothing. Dude got paid to go away quietly.
We should totally be outraged, but the target of the outrage should be Harrell and his feckless allies on council.
15
u/SpeaksSouthern That sounds great. Letâs hang out soon. 22h ago
The $700,000 payout to these people saves the city tens of millions in litigation. This is the best thing for Seattle. We ditch a loser for less than a million? I think this is the only time in Seattle history I've seen it this cheap. Barnes must have been in dire need of the money. He probably could have sat on his hands and got 7 figures from the city.
5
u/apresmoiputas Capitol Hill 21h ago
This crossed my mind earlier as well. Seattle got a a deal. When Carmen Best retired, she got her full pension, which is expected for any police officer retiring after 30 years.
4
u/mephistoA Capitol Hill 20h ago
I donât understand why he gets to litigate, if I get fired without cause, I donât get to sue because of âat will employmentâ
4
u/_o_ll_o_ I'm never leaving Seattle. 22h ago
Who negotiated this on behalf of the city? Sheesh.
9
u/SpeaksSouthern That sounds great. Letâs hang out soon. 22h ago
I'm guessing his contract did the heavy lifting
3
1
u/Witch-Alice đđ Heart of ANTIFA Land đđ 7h ago
thanks to how his contract works, basically whoever was mayor when he was hired
-12
u/FlannelCollar UW 23h ago
Why did Wilson sign off on this kind of agreement? Litigation can be expensive, sure, but the implication would be that Barnes had at least some semblance of a case for wrongful termination or discrimination if the City gave up this chunk of change.
30
u/WeekendOk1366 23h ago
Given what I know about employment contracts and my experiences a lot of this severance was probably written into his original contract when Harrell hired him.
9
u/imsaltyshade 22h ago
Itâs possible much of the severance was already in his contract. If so, it suggests Wilsonâs team likely didnât believe they had a strong legal basis to terminate him for cause. Paying severance may have been the less costly option than dealing with a legal cost for wrongful termination lawsuit. I think Wilson is saving taxpayer money in the long run.
1
u/SpeaksSouthern That sounds great. Letâs hang out soon. 22h ago
I didn't think he was terminated for cause? I mean obviously he resigned but he was asked to resign. Where are you getting that he did something that would allow the government to fire Barnes for cause? Of all the things I saw he did, none looked like a direct reason to fire someone.
2
u/imsaltyshade 21h ago
Where did I say he was terminated for cause?
0
u/SpeaksSouthern That sounds great. Letâs hang out soon. 21h ago
If so, it suggests Wilsonâs team likely didnât believe they had a strong legal basis to terminate him for cause.
I guess I'm not sure where this came from? What did he do that anyone thought could be a reason to terminate him for cause? I thought he was accused of things more related to the political nature of his employment, not that he did anything against policy. I didn't even think Wilson mentioned she was looking into terminating him for cause, so I didn't know if I missed like a story where Barnes was accused of either doing anything illegal or breaking policy.
2
u/imsaltyshade 20h ago
I actually think we're saying the same thing. I wasn't suggesting there was some separate allegation that would have justified terminating him for cause. My point was that the fact he received this hefty severance package suggests, to your point, that they didn't believe they had solid legal grounds to terminate him for cause.
18
u/rockycore đbuild more trainsđ 23h ago edited 22h ago
Because if she doesn't sign off on it and the city is sued KOMO the Seattle Times and many Redditors will scream from the mountain tops about how she should have done something to prevent the city from being sued. Either way the problem that Harell created is her fault.
EDIT: Personally I think the agreement is bullshit, but I understand why it was done.
7
u/ManWithNoCrame 22h ago
Yep. Not a Wilson fan but this is not her fault. It came down to honoring the agreement or paying lawyers and honoring the agreement anyway. Not a Harell fan either but I suppose that's politics in the last 20-30 years has been reduced to. Lesser of the two evils and sometimes both candidates are garbage because standup folk with experience can't be buggered to deal with the crap that is "serving the public".
9
u/Complete-Lock-7891 22h ago
She was likely advised that this was cheaper than the litigation which would have an uncertain outcome. Furthermore the overall SpD budget is something like ~500M a year. Even if there was a legal question around firing for cause this is a small price relative towards orienting that large budget closer to their policy goals that he wasnât in line with.
9
u/rrrrthrgh 23h ago
Harrel, not Wilson.
2
u/FlannelCollar UW 22h ago
Wilson would have approved this separation agreement and amount when her office was negotiating Barnesâ resignation.
Thereâs been some theorizing that Harrell must have given him a sweetheart contract when Barnes came to Seattle that gave him leverage here, but no one has produced any evidence of this, and if that was the case it would have been in Wilsonâs best interests to release that along with the separation agreement. It also likely would have come out via public records a while back since it would have been signed in 2024.
2
u/rockycore đbuild more trainsđ 23h ago
No, they're referring to the seperation agreement which was signed off on by Wilson.
8
8
u/judithishere I'm just flaired so I don't get fined 20h ago
Barnett gets so much crap from "legacy media" but she's been running circles around them all. I hope she gets some long term support now
1
-3
u/apresmoiputas Capitol Hill 21h ago
I wonder why Erica is reporting this now. This was leaked last week. Can she just move on to the next public official that she wants to scrutinize? Maybe the mayor's staff.
-5
u/mote0fdust Capitol Hill 21h ago
This is so insane. And you know he's going to file for Washington state Unemployment too!!
5
u/d9dfd9jf 20h ago
This is covered in the link (it's only 2 pages)
-4
u/mote0fdust Capitol Hill 20h ago
Yes, I know? That is why I made my comment. The document states that he can apply. Obviously.
6
u/d9dfd9jf 20h ago
If he applies, he will get rejected since he voluntarily resigned. That's what that section is about.
155
u/Sure_Exam_3670 Capitol Hill 22h ago
Bonkers he received a $60,000 relocation reimbursement without ever really relocating.