Seattle, Washington

Seattle's partial encryption model

Dispatch stays open. Tactical goes encrypted. Here is how the model works and what it would take to replicate it.

Key facts

Dispatch Channels Remain Open
Tactical Channels Encrypted
Full Implementation Q2 2026
System PSERN

The Seattle approach: split encryption

Seattle Police Department draws a line between two categories of radio traffic rather than encrypting everything:

What stays open

  • Dispatch channels — where officers are sent and why
  • Incident information — what's happening and where
  • General patrol communications — routine traffic

The public can still hear when and where incidents are occurring in real time.

What gets encrypted

  • Tactical channels — SWAT operations, ongoing sensitive situations
  • Personal information — names, addresses, dates of birth
  • Undercover operations — situations where exposure risks safety

Sensitive information stays private while general awareness remains public.

Advertisement

How Seattle got here

Seattle's partial encryption policy grew out of informal practices that started during the 2020 protests and was eventually codified with the regional infrastructure upgrade.

2020

SPD begins selectively encrypting tactical channels during protests and high-profile incidents

2020-2025

Informal practice continues with tactical encryption used situationally

June 2025

SPD announces formal partial encryption policy as part of PSERN migration

Q2 2026

Full implementation of partial encryption under new PSERN system

The PSERN connection

Seattle's encryption changes were enabled by PSERN, the Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network, a $273 million replacement for King County's aging radio infrastructure.

What is PSERN

The Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network is a $273 million upgrade to the emergency communications infrastructure across King County. The new digital system provides:

  • Better coverage in buildings and tunnels
  • Improved interoperability between agencies
  • Modern encryption capabilities
  • More reliable communications during emergencies

The new system gives agencies the ability to encrypt—but each agency chooses whether and how to use that capability.

Regional coordination

Multiple King County agencies are implementing encryption policies as they migrate to PSERN. SPD's approach is being watched as a potential model:

  • Seattle Fire Department — Planning Q1 2026 encryption of dispatch channels, citing HIPAA patient privacy
  • Federal Way Fire — Expected to encrypt in 2026 as part of PSERN migration
  • Bothell Fire & Police — Similar partial encryption approach
  • Other agencies — Varying approaches across the county
Advertisement

SPD's stated rationale

The Seattle Police Department has been more transparent than many agencies about their reasoning. Their stated goals:

Officer safety

Preventing suspects from monitoring tactical operations in real time

Victim privacy

Protecting personal information of crime victims from public broadcast

Compliance

Meeting state and federal requirements for protecting certain data

Public awareness

Maintaining dispatch transparency so the public knows what's happening

"SPD's dispatch channels, which communicate when and where incidents are occurring, will remain open for the public to hear via radio scanners."
— Seattle Police Department announcement, June 2025

Pros and cons of the Seattle model

Partial encryption can be a genuine middle ground or a first step toward full blackout. Which one it becomes depends on how strictly the policy gets enforced and who is watching.

Potential benefits

  • Dispatch channels keep the community informed of incidents in real time
  • Media can still monitor breaking news and arrive at scenes
  • Victim information is protected from public broadcast
  • Partial encryption is better than a full blackout
  • The policy is publicly communicated — people know what is and isn't accessible

Concerns and risks

  • The definition of "tactical" could expand over time to cover more routine communications
  • Critical interactions may happen on encrypted channels with no public record
  • There is no independent process for determining what qualifies as tactical
  • No oversight mechanism exists to verify proper use
  • Partial encryption may normalize the practice as an acceptable default

How this compares to other approaches

Approach Dispatch Tactical Examples
Full Encryption Encrypted Encrypted Oakland, Minneapolis, NYPD (pre-Law 46)
Partial (Seattle Model) Open Encrypted Seattle, CHP, Palo Alto (post-reversal)
Delayed Access Delayed Encrypted Baltimore (15-min delay)
Press Access Press Only Encrypted NYC (under Local Law 46)
Fully Open Open Open Colorado (under HB21-1250), rural areas

What to watch for

Seattle's model only holds if people track how it's being applied. Watch for:

1

Definition creep

Does the definition of "tactical" expand over time to cover more routine communications?

2

Implementation consistency

Are the rules applied consistently, or does encryption expand during controversial incidents?

3

Incident documentation

When use-of-force incidents occur, is the communication on encrypted or open channels?

4

Public reporting

Does SPD provide regular reports on encryption usage and any changes to policy?

5

Regional spread

Do other King County agencies adopt similar policies, or move toward full encryption?

Is this a model for your city?

If your city is weighing encryption, the Seattle model is a defensible fallback. It beats a full blackout. But it isn't without risks.

When partial encryption might work

  • Your city is determined to encrypt something—better to limit it than allow full blackout
  • You can get clear, written policy defining exactly what "tactical" means
  • There's political will for oversight and accountability
  • The community accepts it as a genuine compromise, not a first step

When to push for more

  • Your city hasn't yet committed to any encryption—fight for full access first
  • There's no oversight mechanism for how "tactical" is defined
  • The policy is vague or subject to unilateral expansion
  • Recent incidents suggest accountability problems that require full transparency

Other approaches

Seattle's model is one of several ways cities have handled the encryption question. Here are two others worth knowing.

Sources

Take Action for Transparency

Your voice matters. Here are concrete ways to advocate for open police communications in your community.

📧

Contact Your Representatives

Use our templates to email your local officials about police radio encryption policies.

Get Started
📚

Read Case Studies

See how encryption has affected real communities - from Highland Park to Chicago.

View Cases
📢

Spread Awareness

Share evidence about police radio encryption with your network and community.

📊

See the Evidence

Review the facts, myths, and research on police radio encryption.

View Evidence
🎤

Public Testimony

Learn how to speak effectively at city council and public safety meetings.

Prepare to Speak
📥

Download Resources

Get FOIA templates, talking points, and materials for advocacy.

Access Toolkit