Seattle City Attorney Launches New Community Court and Repeat Offender Programme Amid Public Defender Concerns

Seattle City Attorney Erika Evans has announced two new programmes reshaping the handling of misdemeanour cases in the city: a community court called Connection Court and a repeat offender system known as the High-Priority Repeat Offenses (HiPRO) programme. Both initiatives were launched in early October, despite concerns expressed by the King County Department of Public Defense (DPD).

Connection Court restores a non-carceral pathway that had been closed by Evans’ predecessor, former City Attorney Ann Davison, who unilaterally shut down the previous community court programme in 2020. Evans, who defeated Davison in a decisive election earlier this year, campaigned on a promise to revive such a programme. However, the new version includes stricter eligibility rules and a longer monitoring period than its predecessor, drawing criticism from public defenders.

The HiPRO programme, meanwhile, is a more punitive system targeting individuals with repeat misdemeanour offences. The DPD said it was not informed about HiPRO until the day Connection Court opened, and had not received written protocols by the time of reporting.

Key facts
| Element | Detail |
|—|—|
| New programmes | Connection Court (community court) and HiPRO (repeat offender system) |
| Launch date | Early October 2026 |
| Lead official | Seattle City Attorney Erika Evans |
| Main critic | King County Department of Public Defense (DPD) |
| Key changes from predecessor | 90-day monitoring period, two-service engagement requirement, prior criminal history restrictions |

Connection Court: a new model with tighter rules

Connection Court is designed for people charged with low-level, nonviolent misdemeanours who do not have a pattern of repeated criminal misconduct. Participants receive an assessment with a court counsellor to determine appropriate services, which may include medication-assisted substance use disorder treatment, help applying for health insurance, prescription delivery, mental health treatment, food, and ORCA transit cards. There is also an opportunity to apply for jobs as downtown ambassadors with the Metropolitan Improvement District.

Evans described the programme as “an opportunity to provide meaningful services to participants in the program so they get what they need to be okay, and then after 90 days, their case gets dismissed.” She emphasised that the programme is run at no additional cost to the city and that pre-file and post-file diversion options remain robust.

However, the programme has several key differences from the previous community court run under former City Attorney Pete Holmes. Participants must now avoid arrest for a 90-day jurisdiction period, regardless of how long their programme engagements take. They must also prove they have engaged with at least two different services. Failure to meet either requirement could result in the case being sent back to mainstream court for prosecution.

Evans argued that a longer period is necessary to ensure genuine engagement. “We have to have a longer period to make sure we’re actually engaging with participants,” she said. “I want to make sure that this is something that’s going to be successful, and I know from us doing these cases, that’s not in one day.”

The DPD, however, believes cases should be dismissed when a participant successfully completes their engagement, not after a fixed 90-day period. The department also opposes stricter eligibility rules based on prior criminal history, and the exclusion of people held in custody for another offence, often because they cannot afford bail.

HiPRO: a punitive repeat offender system

The HiPRO programme is a separate initiative targeting individuals with a high number of repeat misdemeanour offences. While details remain sparse, the DPD said it was not consulted on the programme and had not seen written protocols. The department’s Special Counsel for Criminal Policy and Practice, Katie Hurley, expressed disappointment: “I would say that we are disappointed by the HiPRO initiative and by the restrictions on who’s eligible for Connection Court.”

The DPD has a history of criticising the City Attorney’s Office. It opposed Davison’s High Utilizers Initiative, her Stay Out of Drug Area (SODA) and Stay Out of Areas of Prostitution (SOAP) exclusion orders, and her enforcement of Seattle’s 2023 drug ordinance, which had a disproportionate impact on Black people based on city data.

Evans has been in conversation with the Mayor’s Office about setting aside tiny homes or other shelter spots for Connection Court participants. She is also exploring expanding the programme to a local library and providing pet fostering for people entering substance use treatment.

Context and controversy

The launch of these programmes comes amid ongoing debate about how Seattle handles lower-level criminal cases. The City Attorney’s Office only handles misdemeanours and gross misdemeanours, while felonies are handled by the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office. In practice, many referrals from the Seattle Police Department involve crimes of poverty, often with a nexus of behavioural health conditions, although the office also handles domestic violence and driving-under-the-influence cases.

Seattle Councilmember Bob Kettle, chair of the public safety committee, welcomed the new programmes. “Connection Court is a much-welcomed successor to its failed predecessors for importantly it centers on the participants and their needs but also accountability,” he said. “I thank City Attorney Evans for furthering a more functional criminal justice system, which is crucial in creating a safer Seattle.”

But the DPD’s concerns highlight a divide between the city’s public safety approach and the needs of defendants. The department had hoped for greater cooperation under Evans, given her campaign promises to undo the harms of the Davison era. The lack of consultation on HiPRO has strained that relationship.

What this means for Seattle’s urban policy

For London Urbanism Desk readers, the Seattle story offers a case study in how cities balance restorative justice with public safety demands. Community courts are not unique to Seattle; similar models exist in cities including London, where the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime has piloted community-based approaches to low-level crime. The key questions are similar: who is eligible, what services are offered, and how are outcomes measured?

In Seattle, the tension between Evans’ office and the DPD reflects broader debates about the role of prosecution in addressing poverty and behavioural health. The success of Connection Court will depend on whether participants can access the services they need, whether the 90-day monitoring period is effective, and whether the programme reduces recidivism without disproportionately excluding vulnerable people.

The HiPRO programme, meanwhile, raises questions about how cities define and target repeat offenders, and whether such systems can be implemented fairly without adequate consultation.

Source: The Urbanist, “Relaunched Community Court Gets Paired With Punitive Repeat Offender System,” https://www.theurbanist.org/relaunched-community-court-gets-paired-with-punitive-repeat-offender-system/

Datos clave