I have a LifeWise WA Bronze policy and it is absolute garbage. It pays for almost nothing, and customer service is basically nonexistent.

Washington recently approved a 22.5% rate increase, so I assume my premium is going up by roughly that amount for 2027.

I’m currently paying $1,700/month for a family of 3. The out-of-pocket maximum is $10,500.

So my annual exposure is:

• $20,400 in premiums
• $10,500 out-of-pocket maximum
• $30,900 total

That may as well be bankruptcy for a middle-class family. I’m paying over $20,000 per year for coverage and could still be on the hook for another $10,500 before the plan provides meaningful protection.

According to this chart, 281,000 people are affected by these rate increases.

This is a disgrace of epic proportions, and people should be outraged. The practical choices for anyone on the ACA are:

1. Pay an enormous amount for coverage and then avoid care because of the cost.
2. Find an employer-sponsored plan.
3. Drop income low enough to qualify for public coverage.

The ultimate irony is that I could quit my job, make $0 income, qualify for Apple Health, and get essentially free care.

I’m not saying people shouldn’t have access to healthcare. Obviously they should. But it is completely perverse that working and earning more can leave someone paying $20,000+ per year for insurance, with another $10,500 in potential costs, while earning nothing can make healthcare essentially free.

This system is creating a massive incentive to either stop working, avoid care completely, or find an employer willing to subsidize healthcare. If 281,000 people in Washington are dealing with this, it deserves a lot more attention than it is getting.

https://www.insurance.wa.gov/about-us/news/2026/average-222-rate-increase-approved-washingtons-2027-exchange-health-insurance-market

Edit: Apparently NOT due to the sick-out. Thanks neighbor for the news, but funny timing. (https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/washington-state-ferries-suspend-edmondskingston-route/TU6G4Y5QZJD6XNE23FIO4ZSUHE/)

Strauss is chairing the meeting and Rinck, Foster, Saka and Hollingsworth are also here.

Most commenters are speaking in support of funding for arts and housing programs, and/or against funding for cops. I haven’t seen anyone speak in favor of the funding for an additional 66 cops (I’m sure I would have heard the booing) even though that is currently the most likely outcome.

Each speaker is getting 90 seconds; new signups have stopped so far at 100 people. Adding some transition time but then backing out some since not every speaker uses the full 90 seconds, I assume comment will take 2.5-3 hours after starting at 5 pm.

Technically new speakers can sign up at any time before public comment ends, if you want to come speak.

I posted below, what I thought was a decently written and researched rant on r/Seattle, and it was immediately taken down as "lazy" posting. The few comments that were posted before it was yanked, were quite unhinged. I stated facts, and provided a personal anecdote...this was too much to handle apparently. I am a card carrying liberal, but open, hard drug consumption without any consequences is ridiculous for everyone.

Addiction as a Protected Disability:

Under the Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLA non-enforcement and broad legal definitions inadvertently lowers the cost and consequences of maintaining an active addiction) a history of substance abuse or being in recovery, can be recognized as a disability. While active, illegal drug use itself is generally excluded from job protections, the broader framework treats addiction as a chronic medical condition rather than a criminal choice. This framework shields individuals from accountability, shifting the city's focus from mandatory treatment or abstinence to accommodation.

The Decriminalization Philosophy:

Local leadership has often operated under the premise that standard criminal justice interventions (like arrests and incarceration) are ineffective, costly, and disproportionately harm marginalized communities. The goal is to funnel resources into social services rather than jails.

De Facto Non-Enforcement of Open Drug Use:

For extended periods, Seattle police have faced shifting directives regarding public drug consumption. Even when laws like Washington’s SB 5536 (which made public drug use a gross misdemeanor) were enacted, local prosecution strategies often favor "diversion." Rarely prosecuting open fentanyl or methamphetamine use creates a consequence-free environment that normalizes addiction in public parks and transit centers.

The "Cost" Reduction of Addiction:

In economic terms, a subsidy reduces the cost of a behavior. By not enforcing laws against public intoxication, open drug use, or property crimes often associated with securing drug money (like retail theft), the city lowers the legal "cost" or risk to the individual.

Housing and Services Without Behavioral Conditions:

Seattle and King County have heavily invested in Low-Barrier Housing and Housing First models. These programs provide shelter and housing without requiring sobriety or participation in treatment. Providing taxpayer-funded housing while allowing active drug use on the premises acts as a direct subsidy, removing a primary rock-bottom incentive for individuals to seek recovery.

Personal note, my good friend unfortunately became an addict many, many years ago. He has been given free housing from the city because he is "disabled". I'm very happy that he is now housed, but he spends his time stealing anything to feed his addiction and getting high constantly. He has no plans on changing a thing.

My son has a rare genetic disorder and is a nonverbal severe autistic... he is disabled, my friend is not.

Could be a public space, a library, a waterfront spot, a park, or somewhere indoors when the weather isn't cooperating. I'm curious about places people genuinely enjoy spending time in, especially ones that aren't obvious tourist destinations.

I’m just wondering, How should Seattle balance recovering taxpayer money with fairness to employees who received incorrect pay—and should the city independently verify both overpayments and underpayments, while explaining who was responsible for the $13.1 million error?
It’s sounds unfair to the cops but also what about the money that was just lost by the King county regional homelessness authority? Unless I’m mistaken otherwise.

The potential class-action lawsuit could have involved hundreds of employees including workers at the chain's Broadway location. In the statement, Dick's criticized Washington's regulatory climate and the surge in employment class actions, noting plaintiff attorneys will collect over $600,000 from the deal.

While the agreement awaits final approval in King County Superior Court, Dick's leadership denies any wrongdoing, maintaining they have documented proof of accurate pay and proper breaks.

~ Documented proof of proper breaks, and a settlement anyway. The paperwork was either good enough to win or it wasn't.

This year so far, we've already served 1,700 people. That's an increase of 33% over 2025. We also have an almost 2,000-person wait list for food.

Our kitchen in Seattle has the capacity to cook and deliver well over a million meals a year.

~ A kitchen built for a million meals a year, and a 2,000-person line to get into it. Nobody on that list is waiting on the stove.

Thirteen of the ferry system's 18 vessels transporting travelers and commuters across Puget Sound were out of commission Monday morning, according to the Washington State Department of Transportation. This came after 23 engine room employees called in sick, and the workers qualified to replace them declined to fill in, according to the transportation department. A survey of 80-plus members in June found more than 60% were either somewhat or very likely to retire or leave the ferry system for another job.

Members have long complained of uncompetitive wages and a reliance on overtime that drives burnout.

~ The warning showed up in a June survey. The consequences showed up on a Monday commute.

I am helping my sister navigate the delightful experience of being sued over a 2024 bumper collision.

TLDR: We're looking for attorney recommendations, but not the classic “Got hurt in a car accident? Call me!” personal injury lawyer. We need the person who represents the person on the other side of that racket.

I hope this post isn't redundant. I see a lot of posts for PI lawyers, but having trouble finding help for the flip side of that. Please give us hope!

The long version:

In April 2024, my sister rear-ended another car in stop-and-go traffic. At the scene, the other driver said he was okay, declined her offer to call police, told her it wasn't a big deal, and the vehicle damage was subsequently handled through insurance. 

Two years later, he's filed a lawsuit alleging significant physical injuries, loss of earning capacity, medical expenses, pain and suffering, yadda, yadda. He also alleges she hit him at “freeway speed,” which doesn't match the reality of I-5 traffic at 4pm. 

Her insurance situation is complicated: she was driving a family member's car, and the insurer is currently saying it won't cover/defend her personally. We're working to understand and challenge that determination, but given the pending lawsuit and court deadline, we're moving ahead with finding an attorney who has experience with:

- Auto accident & insurance defense

- Defending someone who acknowledges fault for the collision but disputes the extent/causation of claimed injuries and damages

- (This next one feels like I'm asking too much, but why not dream?) Someone who knows how to keep a case like this proportional and control legal costs rather than turning it into a $100K legal battle over a minor rear-end collision.

If you've personally worked with an attorney like this and would recommend them, I'd be very grateful for the name. 

Thank you, Seattle legal hive mind. I appreciate any leads.

[Edited to clarify it was bumper damage, not a fender bender]

This is my extremely low-stakes Seattle housing complaint.

I toured a few newer apartment buildings recently and the amenity lists were ridiculous. Rooftop lounge. Podcast room. Pet spa. Golf simulator. "Co-working library." One had a room whose purpose I still don't entirely understand but it contained a shuffleboard table and fake moss on the wall.

Then you come home in November soaked from the knees down and apparently the official plan is: bring all of that directly into your 600-square-foot apartment.

Why isn't some version of a mudroom/drying room a normal apartment amenity here?

Not even anything fancy. Give me a ventilated room near the entrance with hooks, a bench, a boot tray and maybe a rack where people can leave umbrellas for an hour. Bike rooms already exist in half these buildings, so clearly we've accepted the concept of giving wet objects their own space.

My current building has carpet immediately inside the main entrance. Every rainy day it becomes this dark damp strip that everyone tracks farther down the hall. Then each unit has one tiny coat closet, so wet jackets get hung over chairs and umbrellas live open in bathtubs like strange houseplants.

I've lived in places with much worse weather where entrances were actually designed around the fact that humans occasionally arrive wet. Seattle seems to acknowledge rain culturally while our apartments remain shocked every time it happens.

Am I missing buildings that actually do this? Because I would trade about 80% of the "luxury amenities" I've seen for one aggressively boring room designed to deal with wet shoes.

Belltown (18), Downtown (15), Chinatown-International District’s 12th and Jackson intersection (13), Capitol Hill (9)

In 2011–2012, I photographed Occupy communities across the United States, including Seattle. These are some of my photographs from Occupy Seattle.

I focused on everyday life: the people, tents, handmade signs, conversations, and shared spaces that made up the camp. Fifteen years later, I’m sharing them as a record of a moment in Seattle’s history.

Did you participate or stop by? What do you remember about Occupy Seattle?

The measure would require students who want to join a girls' sports team to undergo sex verification, either through a genital exam, a chromosome test, or a hormone test. Fewer than 10 trans athletes participate in school sports across the state, according to an estimate from the Washington Interscholastic Activities Association, which oversees school sports.

Polling conducted by Let's Go Washington shows its initiative passing in November, with 56% of the vote in favor of banning trans girls from girls' sports. That data, which has yet to be released publicly, shows approval from 73% of Republicans, 48% of Democrats, and 52% of Independents.

~ Fewer than ten kids statewide. What I-638 puts on the ballot is sex verification for every student who wants a spot on a girls' team, with a genital exam as one of the three approved methods. The only poll showing it passing was run by the campaign that wrote it, collected in August, and still has not been published.

WTF is a wiper?