Thursday, October 1, 2026
In response to the pleas from the LGBTQIA+ community, the Olympia City Council is set to take steps to establish the city as a sanctuary for these individuals.
At a Dec. 10 meeting, Council member Jim Cooper proposed actions to create a sanctuary resolution specifically for LGBTQIA+ people while reviewing the implementation of existing sanctuary resolutions for immigrants, refugees and reproductive rights.
"We are under attack, and we are afraid," said Alice Rosewater, a trans woman, at the Dec. 10 City Council meeting during a public comment period.
She urged the City Council to take action and declare Olympia a sanctuary city for trans people.
Rosewater claimed that state-sanctioned violence and discrimination against the trans community is increasing across the country.
Over the past two years, she cited, a record number of anti-LGBTQIA+ and specifically anti-trans bills that have been introduced and passed in state legislatures nationwide.
Rosewater noted the Olympia City Council has previously acted to declare the city a sanctuary for migrants and those fleeing attacks on reproductive rights. She argued that it is now time to extend this designation to include trans and LGBTQIA+ people as well.
Transgender advocate Alexis Janson emphasized that the LGBTQIA+ community is one of the most politically persecuted groups in the county.
She claimed that more than $200 million was spent on ads targeting trans people during the recent election cycle.
"Anti-trans legislation and attacks are an intentional wedge. When they succeed, attacks on cis women always follow. Reproductive justice and trans healthcare are also inextricably linked," Janson said.
Several LGBTQIA+ members who spoke at the meeting provided suggestions for tangible policies that could be included in Olympia's declaration of itself as a sanctuary for trans and LGBTQIA+ individuals.
Miro Stoke proposed that a sanctuary city designation could instruct the police not to cooperate with the extradition of people seeking gender-affirming care in states where that becomes illegal. It could also involve the city lobbying for trans rights at the federal level.
Stoke further suggested the city could provide programming for the LGBTQIA+ community.
Jasper Marino said that declaring a sanctuary city should mean Olympia is actively fighting for the rights of trans people to exist authentically in public spaces, and ensuring access to critical services like health care, housing, education, and employment without fear of discrimination.
Cooper called for City Manager Jay Burney to prepare an implementation report assessing Olympia's existing sanctuary resolutions. He also requested recommendations for improving those policies and a path for the City Council to consider a sanctuary resolution specifically for LGBTQIA+ protections.
Council member Lisa Parshley said "yes" to supporting the declaration of a sanctuary city for the LGBTQIA+ community. She emphasized that they have to take this threat seriously.
"There are going to be a lot of things on the chopping block come Jan. 20, and there is an urgency," Parshley said.
Mayor Dontae Payne recognized the proposal to expand the sanctuary city status to include the LGBTQIA+ community.
He stated that by expanding Olympia's sanctuary city designation, the city would be taking a bold stand and refusing to be "bullied" into compromising its values, even in the face of potential targeting from the incoming federal administration.
"And just know that I personally in sitting with you and your angst, in your anxiety, your fear, your sadness, all of it, I feel it, and I want you to know that I would do everything that I can from this seat to protect all of our community members," Payne said.
4 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
OlyBlues
Ah, good to see Democrat fear mongering alive and well in Olympia. The city council should be more concerned with their million plus dollar debt and deficit spending, yet cannot help themselves to join this imaginary, righteous fight against the new administration. Zero evidence presented by any of these expert speakers of how they would actually be harmed, what exactly is being proposed that would harm them, but they are full of opinions and demands and the council could not help but take the bait. Where is the evidence this new sanctuary status is needed? Who has been harmed? How? How much will this cost taxpayers?
Thursday, December 19, 2024 Report this
Snevets
I applaud the progressive outlook of our local government.. looking out for their community.
@OlyBlues. Have you read Project2025? It is fact not fiction. The incoming administration wasn't quite successful the last go round (and I hope they fail this time)
You're entitled to your opinion and judging from all that you have regarding local government you should consider running for office.
Thursday, December 19, 2024 Report this
Southsoundguy
Yeah, under Project 2025 we will stop promoting and enabling mental disorders.
Thursday, December 19, 2024 Report this
RedskinPatriot
What is the difference between the "G" and "Q" isn't gay *****, and ***** gay? Or, is ***** a label for anyone or anything that feels oppressed?
Either way, it makes no sense! If government picks winners and losers "we" the people have lost because if "we" the people don't fit into a profile the government believes is oppressed or a victim... Then we the people automatically lose out on funds or programs established by the government.
Friday, December 20, 2024 Report this