>>> WELCOME TO THE BUDGET
COMMITTEE.
WE ARE IN SECTION 2 OF THE
SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE
COMMITTING TODAY.
THE TIME IS 2:00 P.M.
THE BUDGET COMMITTEE IS BACK IN
ORDER.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> PRESENT.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT?
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> PRESENT
>> COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ?
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD?
>> HERE.
>> CHAIR MOSQUEDA?
>> I HOPE FOLKS GOT A CHANCE TO
GET A LITTLE BIT OF LUNCH.
WE WILL CONTINUE WITH ITEMS ON
THE AGENDA.
WE ARE IN SECTION D3 ON OUR
CALENDAR HERE ON THE CALENDAR
FOR TODAY.
THIS IS INCLUDING ITEMS IN
VOTING GROUP B. WE ARE WALKING
THROUGH ITEMS 126 THROUGH 160
ON YOUR AGENDA.
WE WILL CONTINUE WHERE WE LEFT
OFF AND THAT WAS ON ITEM 140.
THANKS AGAIN TO OUR TEAM FROM
CENTRAL STAFF AND I WILL TURN
IT BACK OVER TO YOU TO WALK
THROUGH THE ITEM VERY BRIEFLY
AND COUNCILMEMBERS SPONSORING
THE ITEM , YOU ARE WELCOME TO
ADD ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS IF
YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO SO.
YOU WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO
IDENTIFY ANY ITEMS COUNCIL
MEMBERS WISH TO REMOVE FROM
CONSIDERATION.
THANKS FOR BEARING WITH US AS
WE GET THROUGH THE REST OF THE
LIST HERE.
>>> TURNING BACK OVER, HELLO,
JEFF.
>> ITEM NUMBER 140.
THE TITLE IS ADDING $100,000
FROM THE GENERAL FUNDS TO
SUPPORT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD?
>> TRY AND TRY AGAIN AND
EVENTUALLY WILL GET THERE.
I REALLY APPRECIATE CHAIR
MEMBER MOSQUEDA FOR PUTTING
THIS IN THE PACKET.
I REALLY APPRECIATE THE SUCCESS
OF THAT EFFORT WITH YOUR
SUPPORT THIS YEAR.
STUDENTS WILL COMPLETE 25
COLLEGE CREDITS AND IN DOING
SO, THEY CAN EARN HOUSING AND
HOMELESSNESS SERVICE PROVIDER
ONE AND TWO CERTIFICATES.
THE PROGRAM BEGAN THIS YEAR IN
SEPTEMBER.
CURRENTLY HAS 21 STUDENTS
ENROLLED.
STUDENTS WERE RECRUITED AND
ENROLLED FROM EMPLOYMENT
HOUSING, CATHOLIC COMMUNITY
SERVICES, CHIEF SEATTLE CLUB,
MARY'S PLACE, RACIAL IDENTITY
OF THIS COHORT WHERE 13 LAKH
AND AFRICAN-AMERICAN FOLKS, ONE
NATIVE AMERICAN, AND SEVEN
WHITE PEOPLE.
THE MAJORITY OF THE STUDENTS
HAVE LIVED EXPERIENCES OF
HOMELESSNESS AND HOUSING
INSTABILITY AND AGAIN CREDITS
FROM THE PROGRAM ARE
TRANSFERABLE TO SEVERAL
COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO TWO AND
FOUR YEAR DEGREES.
WE ARE HELPING FOLKS THAT ARE
OUT DOING THE WORK WITH LIMITED
EXPERIENCES IN ADVANCING THEIR
CAREERS AND ADVANCING THEIR
LEADERSHIP IN THIS AREA.
THANKS AGAIN.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I WILL ALSO JUST ADD WE
CONTINUE TO HEAR STORIES OF
FOLKS THAT ARE PROVIDING
SERVICES ON THE FRONTLINE BOTH
AS HUMAN SERVICE PROVIDERS AND
WITHIN OUR HEALTH SYSTEM.
WE KNOW THERE IS QUITE A FEW
PEOPLE WHO ARE LEAVING DUE TO
THE STRESS AND VERY LOW PAY.
WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO ADDRESS
THIS OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS.
WE TOOK SOME OF THAT ON LAST
YEAR AND THE YEAR BEFORE WITH
OUR EFFORTS TO MAKE SURE THERE
WAS A COST-OF-LIVING INCREASE
FOR FOLKS THAT ARE CONTRACTED
WITH THE CITY HAD NOT RECEIVED
IN OVER 10 YEARS. I JUST WANT
TO LIFT THAT UP AS WE THINK
ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF NOT ONLY
INVESTING IN SERVICES BUT
MAKING SURE THOSE WERE
CONTRACTED OUT TO PROVIDE
SERVICES ALSO ARE ABLE TO HAVE
A LIVING WAGE AND ADDITIONAL
PROTECTIONS ESPECIALLY AS LIFE
IS SO STRESSFUL RIGHT NOW.
THANKS FOR ALL OF THE WORK THEY
DO.
WE WILL CONTINUE TO LIFT THOSE
WAGES AS WELL.
>>> MOVING ON.
>> ITEM 141 AND $800,000 FROM
THE GENERAL FUNDS TO HST TO
SUPPORT THE OPERATIONS OF
CABINETS.
THEY WOULD NOT UTILIZE
HOMELESSNESS SERVICES AGENCY
BUT INSTEAD WOULD FIND CREATIVE
WAYS TO WORK DIRECTLY WITH
GROUPS THAT ARE THE
COOPERATIVES OF ACTUAL
RESIDENTS OF THESE PENNY HOME
VILLAGES.
THIS WAS PROPOSED BY
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
WE ARE HAPPY TO SEE IT
INCLUDED.
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT, WOULD YOU
LIKE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL
CONTEXT?
>> JUST VERY QUICKLY TO SAY WE
HAVE SEEN DIFFERENT MODELS
WORKING REALLY EFFECTIVELY AND
THERE IS NO ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL.
WE HAVE THE MODEL WHERE EACH
ONE IS NOT SELF MANAGED AND
ANOTHER WHERE EACH ONE IS SELF
MANAGED.
WE HAVE SEEN SUCCESSFUL
EXAMPLES RUN BY ORGANIZATIONS
LIKE NICHOLASVILLE.
WE HAVE OVERWHELMING, POWERFUL
TESTIMONIALS FROM RESIDENTS OF
THESE VILLAGES OF HOW THAT
ACTUALLY WORKS WELL FOR THEM.
IT PROMOTES A REAL SENSE OF
FEELING THAT THIS IS OUR PLACE
AND WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR IT
WHICH I THINK CONTRIBUTE A LOT
TO THE MENTAL WELL-BEING OF
PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN THROUGH A
VERY HARD TIME.
BEING ON SHELTERED IS SO
DEVASTATING.
I THINK THIS IS APPROPRIATE AND
I APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA ADDING THIS INTO THE
MEETING.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FOR
CONTEXT?
SEEING NONE, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
LET'S KEEP GOING.
>>> ITEM 142 ON THE AGENDA ,
YES, 142. THIS WOULD ADD $8000
FROM THE GENERAL FUND JUST ONE
TIME TO HST FOR VEHICLE OUTREACH
PROJECTS SIMILAR TO WHAT THE
MITIGATION TEAM DOES AND WAS
CURRENTLY FUNDED IN THE 2020
BUDGET.
THIS IS PROPOSED BY
COUNCILMEMBERS SAWANT AND
MOSQUEDA.
>> THIS MEDICATION AND A
FLEXIBLE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
FOR VEHICLE RESIDENTS CAME TO
US FROM THE FOLKS AT APPARENTLY
PROVIDING CRITICAL SERVICES .
WE NOTE THERE HAS BEEN A 30%
INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF
PEOPLE LIVING IN THEIR CARS DUE
TO THE ECONOMIC CRISIS AND WE
WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE
PROVIDING FOLKS ARE LIVING ON
HOUSED AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE
ACCESS TO CRITICAL SERVICES.
THE PROGRAM CURRENTLY RELIES ON
VOLUNTEERS AND DONATIONS TO
ASSIST WITH THE INDIVIDUALS
WERE LIVING IN THEIR VEHICLES
TO HELP THEM AVOID TICKETS AND
BE IN SAFE PLACES TO PARK.
WE REALLY APPRECIATE THE
PARTNERSHIP THAT THIS PROGRAM
HAS WITH ENTITIES LIKE
UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS WHO I
UNDERSTAND IS INTEREST IN
WORKING WITH THEM TO MAKE SURE
THERE IS A PASS-THROUGH OF
FUNDING TO BE THERE. WE WANT TO
REWARD ALL OF THE IMPORTANT
WORK THEY ARE DOING, WHICH
REALLY DOES HELP PREVENT MORE
PEOPLE FROM BEING OUTSIDE IN
THE ELEMENTS AND MAKING SURE
PEOPLE HAVE THE SERVICES THAT
THEY NEED.
I AM VERY HAPPY TO SEE THIS
INCLUDED. THIS WOULD INCLUDE
OUTREACH STAFF, CASE
MANAGEMENT, AND OUTREACH
ASSISTANCE TO ENSURE ONGOING
SERVICES IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
SEEING NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
>>> THE NEXT ONE IS 143, LAW 2
LETTER A 1. RESEARCH AND
PREPARE DRAFT LEGISLATION FOR
ELECTIVE COMMUNITY OVERSIGHT
OVER POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY.
THIS IS SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> THANKS SO MUCH.
ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD,
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT?
>> I THINK THE NEED FOR THIS IS
PAINFULLY SELF-EVIDENT
UNFORTUNATELY.
WE KNOW POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY
IS SIMPLY NOT WORKING.
NONE OF THE OFFICERS INVOLVED
IN KILLING THE EIGHT PEOPLE
HAVE FACED ANY DISCIPLINE.
I UNDERSTAND THIS WOULD REQUIRE
SEVERAL LEGAL STEPS.
WE MIGHT EVEN NEED A CHARTER
AMENDMENT.
THIS REQUEST THE CITY ATTORNEY
TO PREPARE FOR COMMUNITY
OVERSIGHT OF THE POLICE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT . IT IS A
LITTLE HARD TO HEAR YOU BUT I
THINK WE GOT ALL OF THAT FOR
NEXT TIME.
I WANT TO APPRECIATE YOUR
OFFICE AND THE CENTRAL STAFF'S
OFFICE FOR WORKING TO FINESSE
THIS TO HELP ENSURE THIS WAS A
COMBINATION OF WORK THAT
CENTRAL STAFF WILL BE DOING TO
LOOK AT VARIOUS OPTIONS, SO
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>>> OKAY, LET'S MOVE ON.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU.
ITEM 44 IS A CPA SPONSORED BY
COUNCIL PRESIDENT GONZALEZ
WHICH WOULD ADD $200,000 TO THE
LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET
TO CORRECT PAY DISPARITIES FOR
EMPLOYEES PERFORMING THE SAME
OR SIMILAR DUTIES THAT HAVE
DISCREPANCIES IN PAY.
IT WOULD FILL A VACANT UNFUNDED
POSITION TO RELIEF CAPACITY
LIMIT CONSTRAINTS IN TERMS OF
POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY AND LABOR
STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS.
>> VERY IMPORTANT.
COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ, PLEASE
GO AHEAD.
>> I WILL BE REALLY BRIEF.
THANK YOU, LISA, FOR THAT
DESCRIPTION.
IT IS PRETTY INCLUSIVE.
IT IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO
HAVE A SMALL ADDITIONAL AMOUNT
OF DOLLARS TO ACCOMPLISH THE
THINGS DESCRIBED BY LISA IN
ORDER TO ENSURE WE CONTINUE TO
HAVE EFFICIENT OPERATIONS IN
THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT AND
CONTINUE TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE
BASIC SERVICES EXPECTED OF THE
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH. THIS IS A
MODEST INCREASE TO OUR
OPERATIONS TO ALLOW FOR US TO
DO THAT.
WE DID HAVE A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT
BUDGET REDUCTION BEFORE THIS,
SO THIS IS JUST SORT OF A MINOR
CORRECTION TO ALLOW FOR THE
DIVISION DIRECTORS THROUGH THE
COUNCIL PRESIDENT'S OFFICE TO DO
THE THREE THINGS THAT WERE
DESCRIBED BY LISA IN HER
OVERVIEW OF THIS ITEM.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT.
I AM PLEASED TO SUPPORT THIS
ITEM.
I THINK IT IS CRITICAL THAT WE
ARE ADDRESSING PAY DISPARITIES
AND I APPRECIATE YOU ADVANCING
THIS SO WE CAN ACT AS GOOD
EMPLOYERS.
OVERALL I THINK FOLKS ARE
SEEING THAT WE ARE TRYING TO
LEAD BY EXAMPLE AND MAKING SURE
THERE ARE NOT PAY DISPARITIES.
WE KNOW A LOT OF FOLKS ARE
WORKING FROM HOME SO WE WILL
KEEP ADDRESSING THAT AND I
THINK THIS IS A REFLECTION OF
THE BIAS WE ARE PUTTING FORWARD
TO MAKE SURE ISSUES LIKE THIS
ARE TAKEN CARE OF.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
LET'S MOVE ON.
>>> ALL RIGHT, ITEM NUMBER 145.
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS WOULD ADD $50,000 IN
GENERAL FUNDS TO OAD, OFFICE
OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. THIS
ADDITIONAL FUNDING WOULD FULLY
FUND THE SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM
LEAD THAT WAS ADDED BY THE
COUNCIL IN THE 2020 ADOPTED
BUDGET. I WOULD JUST NOTE THE
2021 PROPOSED BUDGET WOULD HAVE
SHIFTED $50,000 IN GENERAL
FUNDS FROM THE ELIMINATION OF
THE PROPOSED ELIMINATION OF THE
NIGHTLIFE BUSINESS POSITION TO
THIS POSITION, WHICH WAS
INTENDED TO BE SUPPORTED BY TAX
REVENUES BUT DUE TO THE STEEP
DECLINE IN OUR TAX REVENUES, A
PORTION OF THE COST IS NEEDED
TO BE SUPPORTED BY GENERAL FUND.
CW 184 WOULD PROVIDE ADDITIONAL
$50,000 IN GENERAL FUNDS FOR
THE SPECIAL EVENTS POSITION,
WHICH RESULTED IN THE POSITION
PARTIALLY BEING DEFUNDED.
IT IS RELATED TO SPECIAL EVENTS
AND OTHER LARGE-SCALE
ACTIVITIES.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS .
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR.
THIS FUNDING WILL RESTORE THE
SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM LEAD
POSITION AND DEVELOPMENT.
EARLIER IN THE BUDGET I
PROPOSED A POSITION IN OED TO
SERVE AS A COORDINATOR FOR
FARMERS MARKETS, SO THEY COULD
PRODUCE THE PRODUCT OF THE
STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT
ON HOW TO STREAMLINE BARRIERS
TO RECEIVE CITY SUPPORT THEY
NEED AS THEY ARE INDEPENDENT
ORGANIZATIONS THAT PROVIDE
FRESH FOOD FROM FARMERS TO
MARKETSHERE IN THE CITY.
WHILE I STILL BELIEVE WE SHOULD
EXPLORE ADDING THAT POSITION,
IT BECAME CLEAR TO ME THAT EVEN
MORE IMPORTANT IS TO MAINTAIN
THE EXISTING RESOURCES. IN
ADDITION TO THE POSITION'S
USUAL WORK, IT WILL BE TASKED
WITH COMPLETING THE WORK IN THE
LEGISLATIVE INTENT, THAT I JUST
MENTIONED.
FROM A CONVERSATION WITH THE
OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT,
IT DOES SEEM, ALONG WITH
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES'S
PROPOSAL, BY FUNDING THOSE TWO
POSITIONS, THE OFFICE OF
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HAS GIVEN
ME THEIR -- THEY HAVE COMMITTED
TO BEING ABLE TO PRODUCE A
STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE
INTENT, WHICH I JUST DISCUSSED.
THIS AMENDMENT INCLUDES WHICH
TO PRIORITIZE FARMERS MARKET
WORK.
THANK YOU, CHAIR AND THANK YOU,
YOLANDA.
>> I KNEW IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR
US TO ENSURE THE WORK ON
FARMERS MARKETS WOULD BE ABLE
TO HAPPEN SO I APPRECIATE YOU
GOT CLARIFICATION AND
CONFIRMATION FROM OED THAT WILL
MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PIECES
WITHIN OUR CONSENT AGENDA
AMENDMENT PACKAGE.
>>> OKAY, NEXT ITEM.
>> ITEM 146, 29 681 SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS WHICH
WOULD ADD A $50,000 TO THE
OFFICE OF ECONOMIC ELEMENT FOR
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
ACTIVITIES.
THIS WOULD FUND AN ORGANIZATION
THAT CONNECTS LOW INCOME
JOBSEEKERS WITH OPPORTUNITIES
IN THE BUILDING AND
CONSTRUCTION TRADES AND AT THE
SEATTLE AND TACOMA
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORTS.
THIS FUNDING WOULD BE
ELIMINATED IN THE 2021 PROPOSED
BUDGET.
>> EXCELLENT.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR AND THANK
YOU, YOLANDA.
THIS WOULD RESTORE THE CITY OF
SEATTLE'S CONTRIBUTION FOR
PROGRAMS.
FOR JOBS IS ONE OF THE ONLY
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS
PROVIDING IN PERSON SERVICES.
AIRPORT JOBS THE BEGINNING TO
COME BACK SLOWLY AND CREATE NEW
OPPORTUNITIES FOR MORE JOBS TO
CONNECT WITH CLIENTS.
IT IS AN IMPORTANT OPPORTUNITY
WE SHOULD INVEST IN. AT LEAST
20% OF FOR JOBS CUSTOMERS ARE
IN THE IMMIGRANT COMMUNITY.
SORRY, STAFF MEMBERS.
SEATTLE'S FUNDING IS ONLY ONE
PORTION OF THIS PROGRAM'S
FUNDING.
THIS IS OUR PORTION OF FUNDING
A LARGER PROGRAM FOR REGIONAL
SOLUTIONS.
THANK YOU, CHAIR AND THANK YOU,
YOLANDA.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
NEXT ONE?
>>> ITEM 147, 29 SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
THE DOCUMENT ATTACHED HAS THE
INCORRECT SPONSOR BUT WE WILL
CORRECT THAT IN THE FUTURE.
THIS WOULD CUT $14,000 ONE-TIME
GENERAL FUND FROM THE OFFICE OF
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR THE
CREATIVE INDUSTRY POLICY
ADVISOR POSITION.
THIS WOULD EFFECTIVELY DELAY
UNTIL FEBRUARY OF NEXT YEAR.
THIS POSITION WAS ADDED TO THE
2020 ADOPTED BUDGET TO ADVANCE
OED'S STRATEGY WITH
STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT AND
POLICY RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT.
JUST FOR REFERENCE, OED 908 ONE
WOULD HAVE CUT ALL $164,000 IN
GENERAL FUNDS FOR THIS
POSITION, DELAYING UNTIL 2022.
>> EXCELLENT.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES, IF THAT IS OKAY WITH
YOU.
THIS IS REALLY A ROUNDING ISSUE
WE WERE TRYING TO DEAL WITHIN
THE BUDGET.
KNOWING THE POSITION HAS NOT
BEEN HIRED , IT COULD BE A
DELAY, AS YOLANDA DESCRIBED.
IT COULD BE POSTING A SLIGHTLY
LOWER SALARY.
WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE
MAINTAINED THIS.
THAT IS WHY YOU SEE THE $14
MILLION DEDUCTION.
I WANTED TO UNDER SCORE THAT
BEFORE WE TURN THIS OVER.
THIS DOES RETAIN $150,000 AND
THAT IS THE BIG TAKEAWAY HERE,
SO COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, I
KNOW YOU ARE A CHAMPION OF
THIS.
I WILL TURN IT OVER TO YOU.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR AND
YOLANDA.
I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR WORK
IN HELPING US GET HERE.
IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE FUND
THIS POSITION. THE INTENTION
HERE IS FOR THIS POSITION TO
COORDINATE OED'S WORK FOR
ECONOMIC RECOVERY AND TO CREATE
PROGRAMMING AND SUPPORT POLICY
DEVELOPMENT PARTICULARLY AS IT
RELATES TO CREATIVE INDUSTRIES.
THIS IS IMPORTANT ESPECIALLY
OR RECOVERY BECAUSE THIS WAS A
GROWING SECTOR BEFORE COVID.
YOU KNOW, WE HAD A LOT OF MAJOR
EVENTS, MUSICAL PERFORMANCES,
OTHER PERFORMANCE VENUES THAT
WERE SHUTDOWN AND CONTINUE TO
BE SHUT DOWN AND BECAUSE THIS
IS A GROWING INDUSTRY AND ONE
THAT PROVIDES GOOD MIDDLEWEIGHT
JOBS, LOTS OF PEOPLE OF COLOR
ARE MOVING INTO THE WE THOUGHT
IT WAS IMPORTANT TO PRIORITIZE
THIS SO THAT AS WE MOVE INTO
RECOVERY, WE ARE NOT CAUGHT
FLAT FOOTED WITH THE POTENTIAL
GROUP OF THIS INDUSTRY.
I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR
WORK TO KEEP THIS POSITION
FUNDED AND I LOOK FORWARD TO
HAVING MY COLLEAGUES SUPPORT.
>> EXCELLENT, THANK YOU.
WONDERFUL.
LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM.
>> THANK YOU.
ITEM 148 OH-005-A-001 WOULD ADD
$150,000 FOR PREDEVELOPMENT
COSTS FOR PROPERTY IN THE
CENTRAL AREA.
THIS WAS ADOPTED IN GROUP A,
WHICH WOULD MAKE A TOTAL OF
$250,000 AVAILABLE FOR
PREDEVELOPMENT COSTS FOR THIS
PROJECT IN THE CENTRAL AREA.
THIS IS SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT, PLEASE
GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU FOR THIS
DESCRIPTION.
THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT IN OUR
VIEW.
EVEN THOUGH IT IS $250,000 FOR
PREDEVELOPMENT AND NOT THE
ENTIRE PROJECT ITSELF, WE THINK
THIS IS AN IMPORTANT STEP
FORWARD FOR WHAT WILL BE A FULL
SQUARE BLOCK OF AFFORDABLE
HOUSING.
THERE IS A VERY PRIME LOCATION,
WHICH IS ON YES ALERT STREET,
YES ALERT AVENUE WHERE WE USED
TO HAVE AN ASIAN AMERICAN
RETIREMENT COMMUNITY WHICH WAS
THEN DISMANTLED.
IT WAS BOUGHT BY A CORPORATE
DEVELOPER, DESPITE THE PROTESTS
THAT WERE CARRIED OUT BY
COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
YOU CAN SEE THE PROTESTS WERE
EFFECTIVE BECAUSE WE ARE HERE
NOW OR THE COUNCIL IS
CONSIDERING APPROVING THIS,
WHICH WILL REALLY APPRECIATE
EVERYONE'S SUPPORT AND EVERYONE
THAT IS ADVOCATING ON THE
PEOPLE'S BUDGET AND THE
SOLIDARITY BUDGET.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
THIS IS ADDITIVE TO THE OTHER
$100 MILLION -- THAT WOULD BE
NICE.
$100,000 THAT WOULD BE
AVAILABLE FOR THE
PREDEVELOPMENT COSTS.
THE TOTAL IS $250,000. AGAIN,
RECOGNIZING WHAT WE TALKED
ABOUT PREVIOUSLY, THERE IS
AROUND $13.8 MILLION AT THE
OFFICE OF HOUSING THAT THEY
HAVE INDICATED IS AVAILABLE FOR
THE USE OF THE AFRICA TOWN LAND
TRUST FOLKS AS THEY CREATE THIS
GREAT NEW SPACE FOR A SHELTER
AND MUCH-NEEDED SERVICES.
I AM REALLY EXCITED TO SEE
THAT.
I KNOW THERE IS AN APPLICATION
ABOUT WHAT WE ARE REALLY
EXCITED ABOUT THE ASSURANCES
THAT THERE IS THE CAPABILITY TO
MOVE FORWARD AND THAT IS WHAT
THE PREDEVELOPMENT COSTS ARE
REFLECTING HERE.
EXCELLENT.
THANKS AGAIN FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD.
>>> NEXT ITEM, 149 OH-006-B-001
WOULD INCREASE FUNDING FOR
CONVERTING HOMES FROM GAS OR
OIL HEATING TO ELECTRIC.
THIS IS SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMUNITY
HAS BEEN TO HAVE AT LEAST $1
MILLION ADDED FOR NEXT YEAR FOR
2022 WHERE THE TAXES HAVE
ALREADY WON.
THEY WILL BE FUNDING AND
INCREASING FUNDS TO ALLOW LOW
INCOME AND WORKING-CLASS
HOMEOWNERS TO MOVE FROM GAS OR
OIL HEATING TO ELECTRIC.
THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT THAT IS
INCLUDED HERE WILL ADDED
$200,000, BUT JUST AS
COUNCILMEMBERS ALREADY KNOW, I
HAVE AN UPCOMING AMENDMENT TO
AT $800,000.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
SAWANT.
TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL
CLARIFICATION ABOUT THE
$200,000 AMOUNT IN
CONVERSATIONS WITH FOLKS
INCLUDING MLK LABOR, SAGE,
CLIMATE SOLUTIONS, AND OTHERS,
WHAT WE HAVE HEARD IS THAT
THERE IS A DESIRE TO MAKE SURE
THERE IS THIS $20 MILLION THAT
WILL BECOME AVAILABLE, AS
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT NOTED,
FROM THE PAYROLL TAX FOR A
LARGE INVESTMENT IN CREATING
MORE SUSTAINABLE ENERGY SOURCES
. AS THE CITY GETS READY FOR
ELECTRICITY CONVERSIONS AND
WEATHERIZATION PROGRAMS THAT
WILL BEGIN IN 2022, IT DID
BECOME CLEAR THAT ABOUT $200,000
WAS DESIRE TO BE ABLE TO RAMP
THAT PROGRAM UP. I AM HAPPY TO
SEE THIS, AT LEAST THIS
COMPONENT ACCOMMODATE.
I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE
DISCUSSION. THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>>> NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM
150 OLS-001-A-001, SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES WHICH
WOULD ADD $50,000 TO THE OFFICE
OF LABOR STANDARDS TO IMPLEMENT
úRECOMMENDATIONS OF THE DOMESTI
WORKERS STANDARDS BOARD . THAT
WAS CREATED BY THE DOMESTIC
WORKERS ORDINANCE THAT WENT
INTO EFFECT ABOUT A YEAR AND A
HALF AGO.
THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING WOULD
SUPPORT ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING BOARD
RECOMMENDATIONS.
DEVELOP AND EXPANDING SERVICES
TO HELP WORKERS ACCESS THEIR
RIGHTS ESTABLISHED BY THE
ORDINANCE, TO COLLECT AND
ANALYZE DATA TO UNDERSTAND HOW
THE COMMUNITY IS RESPONDING TO
THE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS,
DEVELOPING ADDITIONAL OR NEW
ENFORCEMENT METHODS ESPECIALLY
TO ADDRESS THE REASONS THAT MAY
ACCOUNT OR DISCOURAGE WORKERS
FROM ACCESSING THEIR RIGHTS OR
RECORDING VIOLATIONS INCLUDING
úPOWER DIFFERENTIALS THAT CAN
EXIST BETWEEN WORKERS AND
HIRING ENTITIES, AND ALSO TO
DEVELOPMENT ONLINE PORTFOLIO
BENEFITS FOR ONLINE WORKERS.
JUST TO NOTE, THIS IS ADDITIVE
TO ANY FUNDS THAT THE OFFICE OF
LABOR STANDARDS HAVE ALREADY
DESIGNATED FOR DOMESTIC WORKER
IMPLEMENTATION, THAT WOULD
INCLUDE $50,000 THAT THEY HAVE
EARMARKED FOR OUTREACH TO
HIRING ENTITIES AND THE BROADER
WORKER OUTREACH FUND THAT IS
CALLED THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH
AND ENGAGEMENT FONT.
I DIDN'T INTRODUCE MYSELF, BUT
THIS IS KARINA FULLER WITH
CENTRAL STAFF.
WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER
TO COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, KARINA.
WE KNOW DOMESTIC WORKERS HAVE
BEEN ON THE FRONT LINES OF THIS
PANDEMIC , EXPOSING THEMSELVES
TO CONSIDERABLE RISK AS THEY
TAKE CARE OF CHILDREN, TEND TO
THE ELDERLY, AND CLEAN HOMES.
AS KARINA MENTIONED, THE
FUNDING FOR THIS IS TO HELP
IMPLEMENT MORE RECOMMENDATIONS,
TO INCREASE EDUCATION AND
OUTREACH ABOUT THE ORDINANCE.
OLS HAS DONE A REALLY GREAT JOB
AT THE OUTREACH AND EDUCATION
FOR EMPLOYERS AND FOR THEIR
RESPONSIBILITIES.
WE HAVE, I THINK THE ESTIMATES
ARE OVER 33,000 DOMESTIC
WORKERS IN SEATTLE, SO REALLY
THERE WILL BE MORE WORK TO DO.
I ALSO DO WANT TO ADDRESS SOME
OF THE CONFUSION THAT AN
EARLIER CALLER SEEMED TO HAVE.
THE DOMESTIC WORKER ORDINANCE
WILL NOT BE IMPACTED BY THIS.
THAT IS IN EFFECT. THEY HAVE
THE STAFF TO IMPLEMENT FUNDING
úFOR THIS WORK.
THEY HAVE A POLICY ANALYST.
THAT WORK IS HAPPENING.
THEY ARE, AS CITY WORKERS
ACROSS THE CITY ARE STRETCHED
PARTICULARLY IN DEALING WITH
SOME OF THE ISSUES WE HAVE
AROUND COVID, I JUST WANT TO BE
CLEAR THE $50,000 HERE IS IN
ADDITION TO THE $1.8 MILLION
FOR WORKER OUTREACH AND FOR THE
BUSINESS OUTREACH THAT IS MORE
OR LESS ALREADY DOING.
THIS IS ABOUT SUPPORTING THE
STANDARDS BOARD AND MAKING SURE
THAT WORK IS DONE FOR COMMUNITY
OUTREACH AND FOR IMPLEMENTATION
AND FINALLY AS KARINA
MENTIONED, TRYING TO CREATE
PORTABLE BENEFITS PACKAGE SO
THEY CAN ALSO ACCESS THINGS
LIKE PAID TIME OFF THAT MANY OF
THE REST OF US GET TO ENJOY.
THAT IS THE PROPOSAL HERE AND I
HOPE TO HAVE MY COLLEAGUES'
SUPPORT.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT, PLEASE GO
AHEAD.
>> I JUST WANTED TO REALLY
APPRECIATE THE ADVOCATES FOR
THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT TO GET
THESE ADDITIONAL DOLLARS. IT
WAS A PLEASURE FOR MY STAFF AND
I TO HELP THEM NAVIGATE THIS
ADVOCACY AND SENDING THE
LETTERS TO THE MEMBERS THAT WE
SHOULD BE DOING THIS.
I AM GLAD IT IS HERE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WELL, HAVING WORKED ON THIS
PIECE OF POLICY LAST YEAR, I
THINK WE ARE ALL VERY
SUPPORTIVE OF THIS EFFORT AND I
APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES AND KARINA BOTH HAVE
LOOKED UP THIS IS ADDITIVE. I
WILL ALSO NOTE THAT NO OTHER
BOARD THIS YEAR RECEIVED DIRECT
ADDITIONAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
OR CODE THEIR EFFORTS AND I
THINK THAT IS A TESTAMENT TO US
WANTING TO MAKE SURE THESE
PRIORITIES CONTINUE TO GET
FILTERED OUT TO THE COMMUNITY
SO BOTH WORKERS AND THOSE PRIOR
ENTITIES KNOW THEIR
RESPONSIBILITIES.
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS ONE
UP.
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
SEE NONE, LET'S MOVE FORWARD.
>>> MOVING ON TO ITEM 151 OPCD
004-A-001 , A REPORT SPONSORED
BY COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN FROM
THE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND
INSPECTIONS ON THREE THINGS.
OPTIONS FOR ADDRESSING THE
DISPLACEMENT MONITORING DATA
COLLECTION FOR A NATURALLY
OCCURRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THAT GAP IS IDENTIFIED IN THE
REPORT WHICH INFORMS THE
DISPLACEMENT MONITORING
PROGRAM.
THE STATUS AND OUTCOMES FOR
INTERNAL REPORTING AND SHORT
SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM
MITIGATION STRATEGIES. IT IS
ALSO RECOMMENDED BY BERKELEY.
TO RECOMMEND ADDITIONAL
STRATEGIES TO MITIGATE ECONOMIC
DISPLACEMENT.
THE REPORT WOULD BE DEVELOPED
IN CONSULTATION WITH THE
EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY
BOARD, WHICH THE COUNCIL
FORMALLY CREATED IN SEPTEMBER.
>> THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN ?
>> THIS IS A STATE OF
LEGISLATIVE INTENT ASKING FOR
REPORT IN JUNE OF NEXT YEAR.
GETTING THIS INFORMATION WILL
PROVIDE A CONFERENCE OF PICTURE
OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SO WE
COULD DO MORE TO PREVENT
ECONOMIC DISPLACEMENT.
THE REPORTING REQUIRED WILL
HELP IMPLEMENT RESOLUTION
31870, AN EXECUTIVE ORDER
SPECIFICALLY THE GAP IN DATA
FOR AN ACTUALLY OCCURRING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THIS GAP WAS RECOGNIZED BY THE
WEEKLY DISPLACEMENT REPORT.
WE HAVE THE OFFICE OF PLANNING
WORKING WITH OFFICE HOUSING AND
SEE HOW THE BOARD CAN SO THAT
GAP.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN.
SEEING NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS,
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
LET'S MOVE TO THE NEXT ONE.
>>> NEXT ITEM IS ITEM 152 OSE
005-C-001 SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS TO ADD
$1.3 MILLION GENERAL FUND IT TO
THE OSD FOR THE FRESH BOX
PROGRAM.
THIS MAY BE USED TO PROGRAM
FUNDS FOR FARMERS MARKETS AND
FRESH FRUIT AND PRODUCE.
THIS WOULD HAVE ADDED $1.8
MILLION FOR THIS PURPOSE, WHICH
WAS EQUAL TO 3600 VOUCHERS.
THIS AMOUNT WAS COMPRISED OF
1.3 MILLION GENERAL FUND AND
$500,000 IN FOOD AND BEVERAGE
TAX PROCEEDS THAT WOULD HAVE
BEEN TRANSFERRED FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOODS
HEALTHY FOOD FUND.
THIS OPTION BEFORE YOU ONLY
MOVES FORWARD WITH THE GENERAL
FUND PORTION THAT WAS INCLUDED
IN THAT OPTION.
IT DOES NOT SHIFT ANY SWEETENED
BEVERAGE TAX FUNDING.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS ?
>> AS YOLANDA MENTIONED, THIS
WILL CLEAR 2600 PEOPLE OUT OF
THE WAITLIST OF 3664 TO JOIN THE
FRESH BUCKS PROGRAM.
THE PREVIOUS PROPOSAL RELIED ON
THAT $500,000 FROM THE
SWEETENED BEVERAGE TAX REVENUE
AND HEARING FROM SPD ADVISORY
BOARD, WE ARE REDUCING THIS
AMOUNT TO THE 1.3 MILLION SPD
CAN USE THAT 500,000 TO GET THE
HEALTHY FOOD FUND RAMPED UP
FASTER.
THAT $500,000 IS STILL BEING
USED TO INCREASE ACCESS TO
FRESH FOOD DURING THIS TIME AND
THIS FUNDING WILL COMPLEMENT
THE OTHER AMENDMENTS SO THAT WE
HAVE MANY DIFFERENT WAYS THAT
PEOPLE CAN HAVE ACCESS TO FRESH
FOOD THAT THEY NEED. I REALLY
CAN'T THANK YOU ENOUGH, CHAIR,
FOR PUTTING THIS FORWARD IN THE
PACKAGE AND I REALLY APPRECIATE
EVERYONE'S WORK.
TO HAVE ACCESS TO FRESH FOOD IS
SO IMPORTANT HERE IN THE CITY.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS.
I APPRECIATE YOUR WORK ON THIS.
YES, THANK YOU FOR THE
CLARIFICATION ON HOW WE WILL BE
USING THE DOLLARS . INITIALLY
YOU SAW FROM THE SUMMARY, THERE
WAS ABOUT $500,000 THAT WAS NOT
GOING TO BE USED UNTIL LATER IN
THE YEAR AND IN AN EFFORT TO
TRY TO GET AS MUCH FRESH FOOD
AVAILABLE OUT TO THE COMMUNITY
AS POSSIBLE, WE FELT WE COULD
FRONTLOAD THAT TO THE FRESH
BUCKS PROGRAM.
IT IS GOOD TO HEAR THE
SWEETENED BEVERAGE TAX HAS
PLANS THAT TO ACTUALLY
FRONTLOAD THOSE DOLLARS AND USE
IT ALL IN 2021 AND START
GETTING FOOD OUT THROUGH
CULTURALLY COMPETENT FOOD
PARTNERS TO A MORE DIVERSE
COMMUNITY. WE ARE HONORING
THAT WORK AS COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS SAID AND WERE MAKING
SURE WE ARE TAKING CARE OF THE
BACKLOG WORK OF THE FRESH
BUCKS PROGRAM.
THE COMBINATION OF THOSE TWO
PROGRAMS EQUAL THE SAME AMOUNT
OF MONEY AND THERE IS A
SLIGHTLY MORE EMPHASIS ON THE
HEALTHY FOOD FUND.
GREAT PARTNERSHIP. THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>>> ADDITIONAL ITEMS , LET'S
KEEP GOING.
>> 153 SDCI-012-B-001 ,
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER
SAWANT BUT AT $145,000 TO AS
DCI FOR LEGAL DEFENSE.
THE COUNCIL APPROVED SDCI .
WITH THIS ACTION WE WILL
APPROVE THE TOTAL LEGAL
DEFENSE.
IT WOULD BE $605,000.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. AWANT?
THIS IS ADDITIVE TO $605,000.
I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT EVERY
DOLLAR THAT THE COUNCIL
APPROVES IS GOING TO BE PUT TO
SOCIAL AND BENEFICIAL USE.
ON THE 10th OF THIS MONTH IN AN
ARTICLE WRITTEN BY ERICA
BARNETT, WE HAVE SEEN EVICTIONS
ARE STILL HAPPENING.
DATA SHOWS THAT IN THE MONTH OF
OCTOBER, NEARLY 40 PEOPLE WERE
EVICTED IN KING COUNTY, WHICH
WAS UP FROM JUST 8 IN APRIL, SO
IT IS CLEAR THEY CAN START
TARGETING AND EXPLOITING
RENTERS ONCE AGAIN.
ON TOP OF THAT, OBVIOUSLY THIS
SHOWS WE NEED AS MUCH FUNDING
AS POSSIBLEFOR EVICTION
DEFENSE TO BE PROVIDED.
WE KNOW FROM OVERWHELMING
TESTIMONIALS THAT HAVING A
TRAINED ATTORNEY TO HELP YOU
MAKES ALL THE DIFFERENCE IN
WHETHER OR NOT AN EVICTION ENDS
UP ON YOUR RECORD.
IT MAKES A HUGE DIFFERENCE.
ANY RENT HER, ANYBODY WHO HAS
RENTED FOR ANY LENGTH OF TIME
WOULD KNOW EXACTLY WHAT ALL OF
THAT MEANS, BUT IN ADDITION TO
ALL OF THAT, WE ARE NOW SEEING,
AND THIS IS AN ARTICLE THAT IS
REALLY IMPORTANT, RICH TALKS
ABOUT HOW THE LOBBY IS STARTING
TO PRESSURE THE STATE
GOVERNMENT AND THE GOVERNOR TO
RELATE WATER DOWN THE
MORATORIUM BECAUSE THE
MORATORIUM HAS TO BE UPDATED.
WE DON'T THINK THE PANDEMIC
WILL END ANYTIME SOON.
WE HAVE JUST SEEN A NEW SPIKE
HERE.
NOW WE ARE SEEING A PUSH FROM
LANDLORD LOBBY TO SAY THERE
WILL BE ALL KINDS OF CONDITIONS
TO PROVE WHY YOU CAN'T PAY RENT
AND WE SEE FROM ALL KINDS OF
DATA GOING BACK DECADES THAT
ACTUALLY THERE IS VERY LITTLE
SUBSTANCE TO THIS.
ORDINARY PEOPLE, POOR PEOPLE,
CASH-STRAPPED AND WORKING-CLASS
PEOPLE END UP ABUSING THE
SERVICES OR BENEFITS.
ACTUALLY THERE IS VERY LITTLE
DATA TO SHOW THAT.
IN ADDITION TO THE DATA WE HAVE
FROM DECADES TOGETHER, WE ALSO
HAVE TESTIMONIALS FROM
ADVOCATES WHO ARE VERY CLEAR
FROM ALL THE ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE
THEY ARE SEEING THAT WILLFUL
NONPAYMENT IS NOT A PROBLEM AND
THEY ARE CONVINCED, AS AM I AND
AS THE PEOPLE'S BUDGET IS THAT
REQUIRING PROOF OF HARDSHIP
CANNOT BE ADMINISTERED EASILY
WHETHER IT IS A MUNICIPAL OR
STATE GOVERNMENT AND IT COULD
CREATE MASSIVE PROBLEMS AND A
LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO
CORRECT.
WE ARE HEADING INTO A VERY
DIFFICULT SITUATION.
EVEN MORE DIFFICULT THEN THIS
YEAR WILL BE NEXT YEAR.
ALL OF THE RESOURCES WE HAVE
FOR EVICTION DEFENSE WILL COME
INTO GOOD USE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER. I AM SEEING NO
ADDITIONAL HANDS.
THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENTS
ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL MONEY THAT
IS IN THE BUDGET. WE HAVE
DOUBLED THE PROGRAM IN THE
FIRST BUDGET AND WE ARE ADDING
AN ADDITIONAL POSITION HERE AS
WELL.
WE ARE GOING FROM TWO TO FIVE
POSITIONS.
I AM VERY EXCITED ABOUT THAT.
>>> LET'S KEEP GOING.
>> ALL RIGHT, GOOD AFTERNOON.
I AM HERE TO TALK ABOUT ITEM
154, SPD-015-C-001 . THIS
PARTICULAR ITEM WILL TRANSFER
$450,000 GENERAL FUND FROM THE
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO
THE HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT
TO FIND AN EXISTING A CONTRACT
FOR MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS
THAT ARE CURRENTLY PAIRED UP
WITH SPD OFFICERS AS PART OF
THE CRISIS RESPONSE TEAM.
THE ACTION WOULD ONLY TRANSFER
THE CONTRACT AND WOULD ALSO, IN
A SEPARATE ACTION, WOULD ADD $1
MILLION TO SUPPORT OTHER
DIFFERENT KINDS OF CONTRACT
MENTAL HEALTH WORKERS. THIS IS
AN ACTION THAT THE COMMITTEE
HAS SEEN BEFORE, THE MOVEMENT
OF THE MENTAL HEALTH PROVIDERS
THAT ARE ON SPD'S CRISIS
RESPONSE TEAM, ACTUALLY NOT THE
PROVIDERS THEMSELVES BUT JUST
THE CONTRACT TO HST, THE CHANGE
IN THIS ITEM IS THAT THE $1
MILLION BEFORE HAD BEEN GOING
TO THE RT BUT IN THIS
PARTICULAR VERSION, IT WILL GO
TO SUPPORT THE CREATION OR
EXPANSION OF NEIGHBORHOOD-BAS ED
TEAMS OF MENTAL HEALTH AND
SUBSTANCE ABUSE DISORDER
PROFESSIONALS.
THESE PROFESSIONALS WOULD
RESPOND TO INDIVIDUALS
EXPERIENCING BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
ISSUES, PARTICULARLY THOSE
EXPERIENCING ON SHELTERED
HOMELESSNESS AND THEY WOULD BE
OFFERED THE SERVICES THROUGH A
PROGRAM THAT IS SIMILAR TO THE
HOMELESS OUTREACH STABILIZATION
AND TRANSITION TEAM.
THERE ARE TO PROVISOS.
$500,000 MAY NOT BE SPENT OF
THE SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S
BUDGET UNTIL SPD PROVIDES A
REPORT THAT CONTAINS ANALYSIS
AND RECOMMENDATION ON A PROCESS
THAT WILL ALLOW MENTAL HEALTH
PROVIDERS TO RESPOND WITHOUT
OFFICERS TO 911 CALLS THAT
IDENTIFY PERSONS IN CRISIS OR
SUFFERING FROM MENTAL HEALTH
RELATED ISSUES.'S THE OTHER
PROVISO IS ONE THAT RESTRICTS
THE $450,000 THAT WOULD BE
SPENT FOR THE MENTAL HEALTH
PROVIDER CONTRACT FOR SPD SO
THAT IT MAY ONLY BE USED FOR
THE CRISIS RESPONSE UNIT.
IT IS SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS.
>> THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS , PLEASE
GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR.
THIS AMENDMENT DOES NOT CHANGE
THE CURRENT STAFFING LEVEL OF
THE CRISIS RESPONSE TEAM AND
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
WHEN I DISCUSSED THIS WITH ALL
OF YOU COLLEAGUES EARLIER IN
THE BUDGET PROCESS, WE LOOKED
AT EXPANDING THE CRISIS
RESPONSE TEAM.
WHAT WE HEARD FROM MANY, MANY
DIFFERENT TYPES OF PEOPLE IS
THAT INVESTING THESE MENTAL
HEALTH PROFESSIONAL DOLLARS
UPSTREAM WILL BE MORE IMPORTANT
THAN BEING RESPONSIVE TO 911.
THIS AMENDMENT KEEPS THE CRISIS
RESPONSE TEAM WHOLE.
ADDS $1 MILLION TO SUPPORT
MENTAL HEALTH OUTREACH RESPONSE
PROGRAMS SUCH AS THE HOST TEAM
THAT GREG DISCUSSED.
THE HOST TEAM'S EXPANSION WILL
ALLOW FOR MENTAL HEALTH
OUTREACH WORKERS TO BE ABLE TO
RESPOND IN REAL-TIME TO CRISIS
SITUATIONS THAT DO NOT REQUIRE
LAW ENFORCEMENT, AS WELL AS
THEY WILL BE ABLE TO RESPOND
WITHOUT 911 TO PEOPLE WITHIN
OUR COMMUNITIES.
IN INVESTING MENTAL HEALTH
RESOURCES UPSTREAM, IT WILL
DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF 911
BEHAVIORAL CALLS PLACED.
THESE WILL BE GEOGRAPHICALLY
DISTRIBUTED TO ENSURE ALL
DISTRICTS IN THE CITY HAVE
THESE IMPORTANT MENTAL HEALTH
PROFESSIONALS IN THEIR
NEIGHBORHOOD.
SCALING UP MENTAL HEALTH
APPROACHES TO RESPONDING TO
INDIVIDUALS IN CRISIS IS AN
IMPORTANT PART OF ENSURING
PUBLIC SAFETY FOR ALL OF OUR
COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
>> EXCELLENT.
THANK YOU.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?
I KNOW WE HAVE HEARD FROM A
HANDFUL OF FOLKS WHO WORK IN
THE SERVICE PROVIDER WORLD.
>>> NEXT ITEM?
>> NEXT ITEM, 155 SPD-016-B-001
. THIS WILL PUT A PROVISION ON
SPD REGARDING THE HARBOR PATROL
FUNCTIONS THAT MIGHT BE
TRANSFERRED TO THE SEATTLE FIRE
DEPARTMENT.
BY WAY OF BACKGROUND,
RESOLUTION 31962 WAS PASSED BY
THE COUNCIL LAST SUMMER AND
THERE WAS A REQUEST FOR REPORT
ON WHAT KIND OF NONLAW
ENFORCEMENT FUNCTIONS MIGHT BE
TRANSFERRED FROM SPD TO SFD.
THIS PARTICULAR ACTION IS ONE
THAT THE COUNCIL HAS SEEN BEFORE
. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE WITH THIS
OPTION IS THAT THERE ARE SOME
SPECIFIC REQUESTS AROUND THIS
REPORT THAT OUR NEW, BUT THEY
REALLY JUST GO TO A LEVEL OF
DETAIL THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH
THE ORIGINAL REQUEST.
WITH THAT, AS I SAID, IT IS
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS.
>> EXCELLENT.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, PLEASE
GO AHEAD.
>> AS WE HEARD EARLIER THIS
YEAR, WE PASSED 3196 WHICH
INCLUDED AN ANALYSIS OF HOW
THAT COULD BE TRANSFERRED FROM
SPD AND INTO THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT.
I KNOW THAT WITH SO MANY
DIFFERENT THINGS GOING ON, I
HAD REQUESTED AND MAYBE I
DIDN'T COMMUNICATE CLEARLY
ENOUGH THAT I WOULD LIKE THIS
PROVISO TO ALSO LOOK AT IF
THESE FUNCTIONS CAN BE
TRANSFERRED INTO THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT OR INTO THE
COMMUNITY SAFETY DEPARTMENT.
I KNOW THAT MY TEAM HAS WORKED
WITH ALLIED TO UNDERSTAND THAT
CHANGE COULD HAPPEN IN JANUARY
WHEN WE OFFICIALLY ADOPT THIS.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THIS
CORRECTION IS MADE DURING THIS
BUDGET PROCESS TO AVOID ANY
CONFUSION.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, THANK
YOU FOR FILING THAT.
WE WILL POLL THIS ITEM AND IF
YOU HAVE A VERBAL AMENDMEN
THAT IS EASY TO UNDERSTAND, WE
WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT IN
WRITING AS WELL.
IF YOUR TEAM ALREADY HAS
SOMETHING IN WRITING, MAKE SURE
TO SHARE THAT WITH THE CREW SO
WE CAN HAVE SOMETHING THAT WE
CAN ADDITIONALLY SHOW FOLKS,
BUT YOU CAN MAKE A VERBAL
AMENDMENT.
MY PREFERENCE IS THAT VERBAL
AMENDMENT IS ALSO REFLECTED IN
WRITING.
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY BECAUSE
I DID SAY YOU COULD WAIT UNTIL
THE COUNCIL ADOPTS THIS AT THE
BEGINNING OF THE YEAR BECAUSE I
THOUGHT IT WAS A SLIDE.
THAT WAS MY BAD ADVICE.
IT IS ACTUALLY A PROVISO.
PROCESS WISE, THAT WOULD BE
CORRECT.
YOU CAN MAKE A VERBAL AMENDMENT
AND I WILL WORK WITH YOUR TEAM
TO GET THAT FIGURED OUT.
>> GREAT.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD, YOU ARE
OFF OF MUTE .
>> THANK YOU.
>> I WILL JUST FINISH UP MY
COMMENTS HERE, IF THAT IS ALL
RIGHT, CHAIR.
WHILE THE RESOLUTION DEADLINE
WAS IN OCTOBER, SPD INDICATED
IT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO RESPOND
IN THAT TIME SO INSTEAD, WE
WILL INCLUDE THIS CONVERSATION
AS PART OF THAT IN OUR
DEVELOPMENTAL TEAM PROCESS.
THIS PROVIDES OR RESTRICTS
$550,000 IN THE 21 BUDGET,
WHICH IS ABOUT EIGHT MONTH OF
OPERATING DOLLARS PENDING THE
RECEIPT BY MAY 24th, 2021. IT
ENSURES THERE IS FLEXIBILITY.
THIS SHOULD ENSURE WE DON'T
DELETE GET INFORMATION, WHICH
IS VALUABLE AND IMPORTANT FOR
FUTURE POLICY CHOICES.
I WAS GLAD TO WORK WITH
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD ON THIS
AS SHE HELPED INCLUDED SEVERAL
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE
PROVISO ACT WHEN THESE WERE
SUBMITTED.
THAT IS WHY THIS IS LISTED IN
THIS SECTION.
AGAIN, JUST FOR THE GENERAL
POPULATION WHO ARE WATCHING
RIGHT NOW, IT IS AN IMPORTANT
FUNCTION IN OUR WATER-BASED
CITY AND THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
DIFFERENT FUNCTIONS THAT ARE
MEMORIALIZED THROUGH
UNDERSTANDING RATHER THAN
THROUGH CODE AND IT IS
IMPORTANT FOR US TO UNDERSTAND
WHICH FUNCTIONS OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF THAT HARBOR
PATROL ARE STRICTLY LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND WHICH ARE
CIVILIAN BASED.
THANK YOU, CHAIR.
THANK YOU, GREG. THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS , LET'S
MOVE ONTO THE NEXT ITEM.
>>> 156 SPD-021-A-001 ,
SPONSORED BY YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
IT IS A STATEMENT OF
LEGISLATIVE INTENT THAT WOULD
REQUIRE SPD SUBMIT TO THE
COUNCIL A REPORT THAT PROVIDES
RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE
MILITARIZING THE POLICE FORCE.
THE REPORT SHOULD FOCUS ON
ENACTING NEW POLICIES THAT
WOULD INCLUDE A LIMITATION OF
PURCHASING OF ASSAULT RIFLES,
HIGH-CALIBER MUNITIONS, ARMORED
VEHICLES, AND ARMORED VEHICLES
THAT WOULD BE USED BY TACTICAL
UNITS.
ASSESSING THE USE, STYLE, AND
DISPLAY OF TACTICAL BODY ARMOR
DURING DEMONSTRATIONS, TRAINING
PROGRAMS THAT WOULD FOCUS
OFFICER MINDSET ON CITIZENS
SERVICE AND PROTECTION,
ASSESSING ADDITIONAL UNIFORM
OPTIONS FOR MINIMIZING THE
VISIBILITY OF WEAPONS AND
EQUIPMENT WHILE RECOGNIZING
EMPLOYEE WELL-BEING AND SAFETY,
AND PRIORITIZING CITIZEN SAFETY
AND WELL-BEING OVER PROTECTION
OF PROPERTY.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, GREG.
COLLEAGUES, THIS IS SOMETHING
WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT FOR A
NUMBER OF YEARS.
WE HAVE HEARD ANECDOTALLY
STORIES OF INDIVIDUAL OFFICERS
WHO HAVE BEEN SHOWING UP AT
RECENT PROTESTS, ESPECIALLY
SHOWING UP TO PROTEST IN
SUPPORT OF BLACK LIVES WHO THEY
THEMSELVES HAVE SAID, YOU KNOW,
WHY AM I SHOWING UP IN
OTHERWISE MILITARY OUTFITS?
WHY IS THERE A RESPONSE THAT
WOULD INDICATE THERE READY TO
GO TO BATTLE INSTEAD OF SHOWING
UP IN, YOU KNOW, THEIR BIKE
UNIFORM OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT?
THAT IS A LITTLE LESS
INTIMIDATING.
ALSO, WE HAVE HEARD DIRECTLY
FROM THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AND
THE OFFICE OF POLICE
ACCOUNTABILITY THAT OFTEN THE
SITUATIONS HAVE BEEN ESCALATED
BY THE PRESENCE OF POLICE AND
THE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT THAT THEY
HAVE.
I THINK THIS CAN ALSO ESCALATE
THE SITUATION AND WHAT WOULD
WANT TO DO IS DE-ESCALATE.
I HAVE ALSO HEADED CONVERSATION
DIRECTLY WITH THE CHIEF ABOUT
THIS AND I THINK THERE IS
POTENTIALLY STRONG SHARED
INTEREST IN EVALUATING THE TYPE
OF EQUIPMENT THAT IS CURRENTLY
BEING PURCHASED.
I WOULD VERY MUCH LIKE TO LIMIT
THE SUPPLY LINE ITEMS FROM
BEING ABLE TO BE USED FOR ITEMS
LIKE THIS.
WE ARE CURRENTLY UNDERGOING A
REVIEW PROCESS OF HOW WE USE
AND PURCHASE OUR CROWD CONTROL
WEAPONS. I THINK UNTIL THAT
HAPPENS, THIS IS A STEP TO MAKE
SURE WE ARE LOOKING ACROSS THE
BOARD ABOUT HOW WE CAN CREATE A
MORE APPROACHABLE FORCE THAT IS
NOT MILITARIZED, IS NOT
SPENDING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON
THINGS LIKE TANKS AND OTHER
EQUIPMENT.
I APPRECIATE THERE IS SOME
SHARED INTEREST THERE BOTH IN
TERMS OF THE FRONT-LINE
OFFICERS AND POTENTIALLY WITHIN
THE DEPARTMENT AS WELL AS
WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.
WITH THAT, I WOULD ENCOURAGE US
ALL TO THINK ABOUT THE WAYS IN
WHICH THIS TYPE OF REPORT COULD
BE HELPFUL IN FUTURE EFFORTS AS
WELL.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD, ANYTHING
TO ADD TO THAT?
>> SURE.
I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR
IDENTIFYING THIS ISSUE AND
SHARING THAT THERE IS SOME
ALIGNMENT FROM THE POLICE CHIEF
ON OUR GOALS HERE.
I APPRECIATE KNOWING THAT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
LET'S MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM.'S
FOUR 157 SPL-001-B-001 , IT IS
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS AND IT REQUESTS THE
LIBRARY OPEN CURBSIDE PICKUP
AT ALL BRANCHES OR DO IN BRANCH
SERVICE AT 25% CAPACITY.
>> I AM VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS.
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH . WE HAVE
TALKED ABOUT THIS A COUPLE OF
TIMES ALREADY DURING THE
DELIBERATIONS OVER THE BUDGET.
SINCE LAST TIME WE HAVE
DISCUSSED IT, WE HAVE RECEIVED
FEEDBACK FROM THE LIBRARY AS
WELL AS FEEDBACK FROM THE UNION
TO REPRESENT EMPLOYEES IN THE
LIBRARY TO MAKE SURE WE ARE
BEING COGNIZANT OF HOW TO DO
THIS IN A WAY THAT IS SAFE AND
RECOGNIZING THE LIMITATIONS OF
COVID AND THE GOVERNOR'S ORDERS
NOW MORE THAN EVER AS WE ARE
FACING ANOTHER WAVE OF THOSE
ORDERS.
I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT IN
TIMES OF REALLY STRONG
ADVERSITY, LIKE THIS, WHERE
FOLKS ARE NEEDING TO SEQUESTER
AT HOME TO HAVE AT THEIR ACCESS
THE FULL RESOURCES OF THE
SEATTLE LIBRARY SYSTEM, AND
PARTICULARLY FOR PEOPLE WHO
HAVE DIFFICULTY ACCESSING
PURELY DIGITAL OR PURELY REMOTE
CONNECTIONS. I THINK THERE IS A
WAY TO GO EVEN FURTHER AND
BEYOND WHAT WE HAVE DONE, WHICH
IS COMMENDABLE IN TERMS OF
ALLOWING SOME BRANCHES TO HAVE
CURBSIDE PICKUP, BUT I THINK AS
WE CONFRONT THIS, WE SHOULD
FOLLOW THE LEAD OF SOME OTHER
REGIONAL LIBRARY SYSTEMS,
INCLUDING KING COUNTY, WHICH
HAS HAD A VERY ROBUST PROCESS
AT ALLOWING MORE ACCESS TO
THEIR PHYSICAL COLLECTIONS AND
ALLOWING IT IN MORE BRANCHES.
SO, THAT IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT
THIS IS REQUESTING AND I LOOK
FORWARD TO IT BEING
INCORPORATED INTO THE BUDGET.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THIS
FORWARD.
>>> OKAY, LET'S KEEP GOING.
>> I AM DAN EDER. ITEM 158 SPR-
600-A-001 . IT IS SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, WHICH
WOULD ADD APPROXIMATELY $2.4
MILLION OF A ONE-TIME GENERAL
FUND TO THE 2021 BUDGET FOR THE
PURPOSE OF IMPLEMENTING A CLEAN
CITIES INITIATIVE.
THIS ACTION WOULD ADD FUNDING
TO THE BUDGETS OF SEATTLE PARKS
AND RECREATION, THE SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,
SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES, AND
THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT FOR A FOUR MONTH
SURGE IN A VARIETY OF CLEANUP
AND RELATED ACTIVITIES.
A SEPARATE BUDGET ACTION,
BLG2B3, THAT SEPARATE BUDGET
ACTION WOULD AMEND THE THIRD
QUARTER SUPPLEMENTAL TO ADD
$720,000 FOR THE SAME PURPOSE
IN 2020.
THE CUMULATIVE FUNDING IN THE
TWO RELATED COUNCIL BUDGET
ACTIONS TOTALS $3.1 MILLION
ACROSS THE TWO YEARS, 2020 AND
2021.
CENTRAL STAFF ANALYST AND I ARE
STANDING BY IF THERE ARE
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE TYPES OF
ACTIVITIES AND LEVEL OF FUNDING
THAT THIS WOULD PROVIDE IN EACH
OF THE AFFECTED DEPARTMENTS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS . I WILL
TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, MADAM
CHAIR.
IF THERE ARE TECHNICAL
QUESTIONS, I WILL REFER TO DAN
BUT I HAVE A SPREADSHEET AND MY
DISPOSAL OF THE THE SPECIFIC
BREAKDOWN.
AS I GO OUT AND DO A LOT OF
THESE WALK-THROUGHS OF
UNSANCTIONED ENCAMPMENTS, AND I
KNOW THIS HAS BEEN ECHOED BY
OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL
HERE AS WELL, COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES IN PARTICULAR, ONE
THING IS THE DESIRE FOR A MORE
REGULAR AND EFFICIENT REMOVAL
OF GARBAGE AND TRASH FROM A LOT
OF THESE ENCAMPMENT SITES.
I KNOW THAT IS AN AREA OF
MUTUAL INTEREST WITH BUSINESSES
THAT ARE NEAR UNSANCTIONED
ENCAMPMENTS AS WELL AS
RESIDENTS OF NEARBY BUILDINGS
WHO ARE LIVING HOUSED.
THIS GOES A LONG WAY TOWARD
DEMONSTRATING HOW WE CAN RESPOND
AND EFFECTIVELY REMOVE THE
GARBAGE AND WASTE ASSOCIATED
WITH REALLY HOW ANY HUMAN BEING
LIVES, BUT WHAT WE TAKE FOR
GRANTED BY HAVING THE
DEPENDABLE SERVICE THAT WE GET
BY BEING HOUSED AND HAVING A
REGULAR GARBAGE PICKUP. THIS
INCORPORATES SOME THINGS THAT
AVE BEEN DISCUSSED EXTENSIVELY
AND OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE
LED ON, PARTICULARLY
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES AND THE
EXPANSION OF THE PURPLE BAG
PROGRAM, WHICH IS INCORPORATED
INTO THIS.
I THINK IT REALLY DOES REPRESENT
A GOOD EFFORT TO COME TOGETHER
ON THIS ISSUE TO MITIGATE THE
IMPACT WE ARE SEEING FROM A LOT
OF UNSANCTIONED ENCAMPMENTS AND
PROVIDE THE SERVICE THAT A LOT
OF US TAKE FOR GRANTED AND WE
SHOULD BE EXTENDING TO
EVERYBODY IN THE STATE.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM?
>> YES, MADAM CHAIR.
>> YES, GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ.
>> I HAD RAISED QUESTIONS AND
WANTED TO PURSUE THE CLEAN
CITIES INITIATIVE.
I KNOW THEY WERE ORIGINALLY
ASKING FOR 5.6.
I THINK THIS IS A GOOD PLACE TO
LAND AND A GOOD BEGINNING
BECAUSE, AGAIN, I WANT TO
STRESS THAT INCREASING THE
TRASH PICKUP TO PROACTIVELY
INCREASE CLEANING IN PARKS AND
OPEN SPACES, TO HELP MANAGE
ISSUES OF TRASH WHILE WORKING
TO PRESERVE LIVELIHOODS IS VERY
IMPORTANT.
I THINK I SHARED THIS SENTIMENT
LAST WEEK AS WELL THAT I
BELIEVE THAT TWO SIDES OF THE
EQUATION ARE REACHING OUT TO
PEOPLE ON THE GROUND, PROVIDING
SERVICES AND DIRECTING PEOPLE
AND NAVIGATING THEM TO SHELTER,
AND THE OTHER SIDE OF THE
EQUATION IS PICKING UP THE
PILES AND PILES OF TRASH AND
ALL OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT WE
SEE IN OUR PARKS AND GREEN
SPACES.
ALSO, I HAD AN OPPORTUNITY,
WHICH I'M SURE YOU ALL DID AS
WELL, TO LOOK AT THE CLEAN CITY
ROUTE ANALYSIS IN THE
NEIGHBORHOODS THAT THEY WILL
FIRST BE LOOKING AT.
THIS IS IN SOUTH SEATTLE,
GEORGETOWN, LITTLE SAIGON,
CAPITOL HILL, BALLARD,
UNIVERSITY DISTRICT, AURORA,
AND LAKE CITY.
I THINK THIS IS A REALLY GOOD
START, LOOKING AT THE HEAT MAP
WHERE WE NEED IT MOST AND I
REALLY WANT TO COMMEND
SUPERINTENDENT AND STAFF. IN
LIGHT OF COVID, I DON'T BELIEVE
THEY HAVE HAD TO LAY OFF ONE
PERSON.
IN FACT, THEIR STAFF HAS BEEN
SO FLEXIBLE AND SO GOOD TO BE
ON THE FRONTLINES OF TAKING
THEIR REGULAR JOB AND BEING
DEPLOYED TO DO OTHER JOBS,
MAINLY LASER FOCUSED ON
CLEANING UP THE TRASH AND
BEYOND HANDWASHING STATIONS, I
AM TALKING, YOU KNOW, COUCHES,
TVs, GRILLS, MATTRESSES, TENTS,
NEEDLES. I AM REALLY THANKFUL
AND I WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
I THINK THIS IS REALLY NEEDED
AND I HOPE WE CAN MOVE FORWARD
ON THIS AND THIS IS A STARTING
POINT.
HOPEFULLY WE CAN MOVE HAND IN
HAND WITH WHAT WE HAVE PASSED
EARLIER IN GETTING OUR NORTH
AND NAVIGATORS AND SOUTH END
NAVIGATORS ON THE GROUND TO
WORK HAND IN HAND WITH PARKS AND
CLEANING UP ALL OF THESE OPEN
SPACES, PUBLIC SPACES, GREEN
SPACES, AND PARKS.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, PLEASE
GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU.
I AM EXCITED WE WILL BE SEEING
MORE TRASH PICKUP.
AS EVERYBODY KNOWS, THAT IS
CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICTS
CAN BENEFIT FROM, OUR
RESIDENTIAL AREAS CAN BENEFIT
FROM, SO I AM GLAD TO SEE THAT
HAPPENING.
I JUST WANT TO STATE FOR THE
RECORD THAT OUR OFFICE WILL BE
PLAYING A ROLE IN WATCHING HOW
THIS PLAYS OUT.
WE HAVE NAVIGATION TEAM MEMBERS
ALREADY DOING SOME OF THE WORKS
IN THE PARKS. THESE FOLKS WERE
RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING
WHETHER SOMETHING QUALIFIED OR,
YOU KNOW, OBSTRUCTED A SIGHTING
SO A SWEEP COULD HAVE BEEN.
ON ONE HAND, I AM HAPPY THIS IS
MOVING FORWARD BECAUSE
EVERYBODY CAN SEE CLEARLY THAT
WE NEED ADDITIONAL TRASH PICKUP
THROUGHOUT THE CITY. I WANT TO
SAY THAT WE WILL BE VERY
INTERESTED TO SEE HOW THIS
UNFOLDS AND MY HOPE IS THAT
THIS IS A GOOD FAITH EFFORT ON
EVERYONE'S PART TO ENSURE THAT
OUR HOMELESS NEIGHBORS DON'T
GET CAUGHT UP IN SOME OF THE
ACTIVITY THAT USED TO BE
HAPPENING THROUGH THIS WORK.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WELL SAID.
A GOOD REMINDER THAT THIS IS
ADDITIVE.
THIS IS A SURGE CAPACITY,
ESPECIALLY IN THE WINTER MONTHS
AS WE ARE SEEING MORE FOLKS
FACING HOMELESSNESS AND HOUSING
INSTABILITY.
THIS WILL BE ADDITIVE TO THAT
PROGRAM THAT YOU MENTIONED.
I APPRECIATE THE MAYOR'S OFFICE
úWORKING WITH COUNCILMEMBERS,
ESPECIALLY COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
I UNDERSTAND THAT , YES, THE
ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS NORTH OF
$5 MILLION BUT THEY SCALED IT
DOWN TO $3.12 MILLION, SO WE
ARE REALLY MEETING THEM AT THAT
FIGURE HERE AND HOPING, AS THE
COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE NOTED, WE
CONTINUE TO SEE HOLISTIC
SERVICES OFFERED IN ADDITION TO
THAT PLAN THAT WE KNOW IS SO
CRITICAL.
>>> AND LASTLY, THANK YOU ALL.
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ MENTIONED
THIS EARLIER LAST WEEK AND
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES HAD A
LOT TO SAY ON THIS.
I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT WE ARE
PROVIDING PUBLIC HEALTH
SERVICES TO OUR COMMUNITY AT
LARGE.
>>> ITEM 159 SPU-004-C-001
PROVIDES $100,000 IN GENERAL
FUND TO SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES
TO IMPLEMENT AND ACCESSIBLE
SINK PROGRAM.
THE DESCRIPTION REFERENCES THAT
THE SINK PROGRAM SHOULD BE
BASED UPON THE MODEL DEVELOPED
BY THE CLEAN HANDS COLLECTIVE
AND IT SPECIFIES THAT UP TO 5%
OF FUNDS MAY BE USED FOR A
SURVEY TO IDENTIFY HIGH AREA
NEEDS FOR SINK PLACEMENT.
THIS WAS SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, BRIAN .
THIS IS MODELED HERE BY CLEAN
HANDS COLLECTIVE.
THESE ARE CURRENTLY DEPLOYED
NEAR HOMELESS SERVICES NEAR THE
NORTH END.
THESE ARE A.D.A.
COMPLIANT SINKS THAT CAN HOOK
UP TO CITY WATER AND THEY
FILTER INTO A GARDEN.
RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE 15
HANDWASHING STATEMENTS ACROSS
THE ENTIRE CITY. WITH THIS
ADDITIONAL FUNDING, WE WILL BE
ABLE TO CREATE A NETWORK OF
SINKS AND BE ABLE TO PROVIDE
PUBLIC HANDWASHING STATIONS
THROUGHOUT THE CITY WITH A
TOTAL OF ABOUT 78 SINKS CITYWIDE
. I AM REALLY EXCITED TO BE
ABLE TO DO THIS AND WANT TO
THANK CLEAN HANDS COLLECTIVE,
REAL CHANGE, AND ALL THE FOLKS
THAT HAVE BEEN ADVOCATING FOR
EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE
BETTER HYGIENE OPPORTUNITIES
FOR OUR FOLKS THROUGHOUT THE
CITY.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
I AM GLAD THE CLARIFICATION
WAS ABLE TO GET INCLUDED IN
THIS ITEM.
I LOOK FORWARD TO THOSE
CREATIVE SOLUTIONS ACROSS OUR
CITY.
>>> LAST ITEM.
>> OKAY, BLG-002-B-003 IS
SPONSORED BY THE BUDGET
COMMITTEE.
IT WOULD SPONSOR $100,000 FOR
THE SAFETY AND WORKGROUP.
THEY WOULD CUT THE REMAINING
$400,000 FOR 2020, HOWEVER
ADDITIONAL FUNDING WOULD BE
AVAILABLE IN 2021 FROM THE $30
MILLION THAT IS APPROPRIATED
FROM THE EQUITABLE COMMISSION.
THE SECOND CHANGE WOULD BE TO
CUT $4.1 MILLION FROM FAS AND
ONE TIME SAVINGS FROM THE
CITY'S CONTRACTS THROUGH KING
COUNTY.
THAT WOULD PROVIDE GREATER
ADDITIONAL FUND BALANCE TO
SUPPORT THE COUNCIL'S
PRIORITIES IN THE 2021 BUDGET.
FINALLY THE THIRD CHANGE WOULD
ADD $720,000 TO THE FOUR
DEPARTMENTS MENTIONED IN THE
PREVIOUS ITEMS TO START
IMPLEMENTING THE PROPOSED CLEAN
CITIES INITIATIVE.
RELATIVE TO ITEMS 157 AND 158,
AS YOU HEARD BEFORE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
FOLKS THAT MIGHT NOT HAVE
NOTICED, THIS IS ITS OWN
ENDEAVOR AS WE CONTINUE TO WORK
ON THE CALENDAR YEAR FOR 2021.
THANK YOU, LISA, FOR ALL OF
THAT WORK.
OKAY, COLLEAGUES.
WE HAVE ONE MORE ITEM LIST ON
YOUR AGENDA.
THIS SPONSOR IS INTERESTED IN
PULLING ITEM 161.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO COMMENT ON THAT?
I AM HAPPY TO HAVE CENTRAL
STAFF COMMENT ON THAT AS WELL
IF YOU WOULD LIKE.
>> HERE I THOUGHT MY CAMERA HAD
BEEN ON THE ENTIRE TIME BUT A
MUST HAVE TURNED IT OFF.
I AM HAPPY TO PULL THIS BACK .
IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THEY
HAVE FOUND COST SAVINGS FROM
OTHER ASPECTS OF THEIR
PORTFOLIO TO BE ABLE TO FULLY
FUND OUR DUES WITHOUT PAYING
DUES IN FULL. WE DON'T HAVE A
SEAT AT THE TABLE FOR EITHER
ASSOCIATION, WASHINGTON CITY OR
THE NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES.
THIS IS AN IMPORTANT $57,000
AND I AM GRATEFUL THAT OIR HAS
BEEN ABLE TO FIND THIS
ELSEWHERE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
I AM CONFIRMING WHAT YOU
ALREADY SAID, THE ADDITIONAL
CAPACITY THEY HAVE FOUND WILL
NOT IMPACT PROGRAMS OR
SERVICES.
IT WILL NOT IMPACT OUR EFFORTS
TO BE REPRESENTED NATIONALLY.
I UNDERSTAND THAT IS COMING
FROM THE POSITION THEY'RE ABLE
TO CARRY FORWARD.
THANK YOU FOR ALL OF YOUR WORK
ON THAT AND WE WILL REMOVE ITEM
161 FROM OUR PACKAGE OF THE
CONSENT AMENDMENT ITEMS.
COLLEAGUES, THAT IS THE
SUMMARY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO ALL OF
YOU FOR PUTTING THESE ITEMS
FORWARD AND TO CENTRAL STAFF
FOR WALKING US THROUGH THIS.
>>> AT THIS POINT, I WILL
REMIND US OF THE PROCESS.
WE ARE ABLE TO PULL IN ANY
INDIVIDUAL ITEM THAT YOU THINK
REQUIRES ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION
OR DEBATE TO BE VOTED ON
INDIVIDUALLY.
ONCE WE HAVE PULLED THOSE
ITEMS, WE WILL THEN GO BACK AND
CONSIDER THE GROUP AS A WHOLE
PACKAGE.
AS A REMINDER, YOU DO NOT KNOW
NEEDED TO PULL AN ENTIRE ITEM.
WE WILL GO AHEAD AND ALLOW
COUNCILMEMBERS TO IDENTIFY ANY
ITEM THEY WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST
BE PULLED OUT FOR A SEPARATE
VOTE ON THE CONSENT ITEM
PACKAGE.
I WILL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE.
ITEM 136 WAS AN ITEM WE PUT
FORWARD. IT WAS AN ERROR ON OUR
PART.
IT WAS ACCIDENTALLY UPLOADED
FROM THE WRONG FORM.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE
LANGUAGE WE HAVE BEEN TALKING
WITH STAKEHOLDERS ABOUT IS
REFLECTED IN THE FINAL DOCUMENT
HERE.
IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE SURE WE
ARE INCLUDING THE DOCUMENT WE
TALKED WITH ABOUT TO
STAKEHOLDERS ABOUT THE PROCESS
AND THE TASK FORCE BEING
ALIGNED AND NOT DUPLICATE OF
OTHER EFFORTS SUCH AS THE BUDGET
AND MAKING SURE WE ARE
CONSISTENT WITH THOSE
STAKEHOLDERS, I WANT TO MAKE
SURE WE GET THAT RIGHT DOCUMENT
UPLOADED THERE BUT IT WILL NOT
CHANGE THE DOLLARS AMOUNT.
LISA SPOKE TO THAT AS WELL, AS
I DID EARLIER.
WE WILL HAVE UP TO $500,000
AVAILABLE FOR CONTRACTING TO
HELP. ANY ADDITIONAL ITEMS
FOLKS WOULD LIKE TO PULL?
COUNCIL PRESIDENT, PLEASE GO
AHEAD.
>>> I MOVE THAT ITEM 127 BE
REMOVED FOR AN INDIVIDUAL LOOK.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT IS MOVING
ITEM 127 FOR INDIVIDUAL VOTE.
IS THERE ANOTHER ITEM ANYBODY
WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE?
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD?
>>> THANK YOU.
I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT
AGENDA ITEM 143, STATEMENT OF
LEGISLATIVE INTENT. I WOULD
LIKE THAT TO BE REMOVED FOR AN
INDIVIDUAL VOTE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD IS MOVING
143 FOR INDIVIDUAL VOTE.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
I'M SORRY, ADDITIONAL HANDS?
I SEE COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>>> YES, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE
155 SPD-016-B-001 FOR AN
INDIVIDUAL VOTE.
THANK YOU.
>> THAT SOUNDS GREAT.
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS . 155 SPD-016-B-001 ,
AND ALSO WITH YOUR VERBAL
AMENDMENT, IF YOU HAVE
SOMETHING TO READ, PLEASE SHARE
IT WITH MYSELF AND ALLIE AS
THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ADDITIONAL ITEMS?
>>> AS I MENTIONED PREMATURELY
EARLIER, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE
TO HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL VOTE ON
ITEM 141.
>> LET ME MAKE SURE I HAVE THAT
CRACKED.
ITEM NUMBER 141, HOM-021-A-001
. I FEEL LIKE I AM IN AN
AUCTION.
ANYTHING ELSE?
I AM NOTHING ANY ADDITIONAL
HANDS AT THIS POINT SO I WILL
SUMMARIZE THE ITEMS THAT I SEE
AND CONCUR WITH OUR TEAM FROM
CENTRAL STAFF THAT WE HAVE THIS
CORRECT.
NUMBER 127, NUMBER 136, 143,
155, AND 141.
I WILL READ THOSE EITHER
COUNCIL BUDGET NUMBERS JUST
FOR THE RECORD HERE SO PEOPLE
HAVE BOTH THE ITEM NUMBER AND
THE CORRECT ASSOCIATION IN OUR
DRAFT BUDGET HERE.
ITEMS 127, 136, 141, ITEM 143,
AND LASTLY ITEM 155. ARE THERE
ANY ADDITIONAL COUNCILMEMBERS
THAT WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE ANY
ADDITIONAL ITEM ON TODAY'S GROUP
B AMENDMENT PACKAGE?
ALL RIGHT, FOLKS.
THIS SEEMS DOABLE.
LET'S BEGIN.
>>> ALLIE, IF YOU COULD INTO
NUMERICAL ORDER HERE, WE WILL
READ AGAIN A SUMMARY OF THE
TITLE HERE.
WE DON'T HAVE TO GO TOO MUCH IN
DEPTH.
I WILL TURN IT OVER TO THE
QUESTION OF THE ITEM.
WE WILL GO TO THE SPONSOR OF
THE ITEM AND WE WILL TAKE A
VOTE TO CONSIDER ITS INCLUSION
IN OUR CONSENT PACKAGE.
>> SO THE FIRST ITEM THAT WAS
REMOVED FROM -- LET'S SEE HERE.
I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY WITH THE
CHAIR BEFORE WE MOVED TO THE
INDIVIDUAL ITEMS, I THINK YOU
WANT TO MOVE THE PACKAGE AS
AMENDED AND VOTE ON THAT
PACKAGE.
>> THAT SOUNDS GREAT.
I AM SEEING SUMS UP FROM OUR
COLLEAGUES.
LET ME DO THAT.
BEFORE WE GET TO ITEM D3A ON
THE AGENDA, I WILL GO AHEAD AND
MOVE D3 . IS THERE ANY
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON THE
CONSENT PACKAGE?
SEEING NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS,
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLE?
>> LEWIS?
>> AYE.
>> MORALES?
>> AYE.
>> SAWANT?
>> YES.
>> PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> TREND FOR JUAREZ?
>> YES.
>> HERBOLD?
>> YES.
>> GONZALEZ?
>> YES.
>> NINE IN FAVOR, NONE A POST.
>> WITH THE REMOVAL OF THE ITEMS
, THE MOTION DOES CARRY AND THE
AMENDED CONSENT PACKAGE IS
APPROVED.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>>> NOTES GO AHEAD AND MOVE
INTO ITEMS D3-A. WE WILL
CONSIDER THESE ITEMS AGAIN IN
ORDER.
WE WILL BE REMINDED IF THERE IS
A SUBSTITUTE, ALLIE AND THE
CENTRAL STAFF TEAM WILL HELP US
REMEMBER AT.
IF THERE ARE CERTAIN SCRIPTS WE
NEED TO CONSCRIPT TO.
I WILL RECOGNIZE THE CENTRAL
STAFF TO WALK US THROUGH BOTH
THE SUBSTITUTE ITEM AND THE
AGENDA BEING SUBSTITUTED AND
THEN I WILL RECOGNIZE THE
SPONSOR TO ADDRESS IT.
I WILL ALSO RECOGNIZE THE
INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS PULLED IT IN
CASE THEY HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS TO ADD BEFORE WE TURN
IT OVER TO THE SPONSORS.
OKAY.
WONDERFUL.
CENTRAL STAFF, THANK YOU SO
MUCH, ALLIE.
LET'S GO TO THE FIRST ITEM ON
THE REMOVED PACKAGE FROM VOTING
GROUP B.
>>> THE FIRST ONE REMOVED IS
127 . THIS WOULD PASS COUNCIL
BILL 119 951 TO IMPLEMENT A
$20 INCREASE TO THE VEHICLE
LICENSE FEE AND ADD $3.6
MILLION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION FOR MAINTENANCE
PROGRAMS.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT GONZALEZ MADE
THE MOTION TO REMOVE THIS ITEM.
IT IS SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT GONZALEZ,
PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH . I PULLED
THIS ITEM, 127, IN ORDER TO
PLACE A SUBSTITUTE BILL BEFORE
THE CITY COUNCIL FOR
CONSIDERATION, AGAIN, AS A
SUBSTITUTE TO THE ORIGINALLY
PROPOSED COUNCIL POSIT ACTION .
I AM HAPPY TO MOVE THAT
SUBSTITUTE, IF THAT IS THE
APPROPRIATE THING TO DO NOW BUT
I THINK I CAN'T MOVE THE
SUBSTITUTE UNTIL THERE HAS BEEN
AN ACTUAL MOTION TO CONSIDER
THE UNDERLYING CDA, AND THEN A
CALL FOR COMMENTS AND I CAN
DISCUSS MY SUBSTITUTE.
I AM HAPPY TO SORT OF TALK
ABOUT WHY I AM MAKING THE
SUBSTITUTE FIRST, BUT I THINK
PROCEDURALLY ALLIE WILL
PROBABLY TELL US I CAN'T EVEN
TALK ABOUT THE SUBSTITUTE
WITHOUT HAVING THE PROCEDURAL
STUFF OUT OF THE WAY.
>> I THINK IF THIS IS CORRECT,
LET ME KNOW.
>> GO AHEAD, ALLIE.
>> I THINK YOU WOULD LIKE TO
MOVE THE ITEM ON THE AGENDA,
MOVE THE APPROVAL OVER TO 8001,
AND THEN AFTER THAT IS
SECONDED, COUNCIL PRESIDENT
GONZALEZ CAN MOVE HER
SUBSTITUTE.
YOU CAN ASK CENTRAL STAFF TO
EXPLAIN THE ORIGINAL ITEM AND
THE SUBSTITUTE VERSION HAS SOME
DISCUSSION BEFORE TAKING A VOTE
ON THE MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE.
IF YOU VOTE YES, YOU ARE TAKING
OUT THE ORIGINAL ITEM FOR
CONSIDERATION.
>> GREAT.
I MOVE FOR APPROVAL AS INCLUDED
IN VOTING GROUP B CONSENT
PACKAGE.
IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECOND
AND . ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS?
COUNCIL PRESIDENT GONZALEZ?
>> WE WILL GET THEIRS THROUGH
THESE PROCEDURES, I PROMISE.
I MOVE TO SUBSTITUTE IN PLACE
OF BLG 042-A-001. SECOND?
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. BEFORE WE TAKE A
VOTE, IS THERE ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS?
COUNCIL PRESIDENT, WOULD YOU
LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION?
>> I THINK I WILL LET ALLIE OR
WHOMEVER ELSE FROM CENTRAL STAFF
EXPLAINED THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL AND THE
SUBSTITUTE, AND THEN I AM HAPPY
TO MAKE COMMENTS ABOUT MY
SUBSTITUTE VERSION.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I WILL ASK MY COLLEAGUE,
CALVIN, TO DESCRIBE THE TWO
AMENDMENT AND HE MAY PROVIDE A
CONTEXT FOR THE PROPOSAL.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON,
COUNCILMEMBERS . THE ORIGINAL
UNDERLYING PROPOSAL, BLG 042-A
-001 INCREASES THE $20 VEHICLE
LICENSE FEE TO A $40 VEHICLE
LICENSE FEE.
REDIRECTS RESOURCES TO BRIDGE
MAINTENANCE PROGRAMS.
THE PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE, BLG
042-BE WOULD NOT DIRECT WHERE
THOSE RESOURCES WOULD GO AT
THIS TIME.
THERE IS A SPENDING PLAN BEING
DEVELOPED FOR A FUTURE BUDGET
ACTION.
IF IT IS USEFUL, I HAVE A
GRAPHIC PREPARED TO TRY TO
HIGHLIGHT HOW THIS IS DIFFERENT
FROM THE TRANSIT FUNDING
DOLLARS.
THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE USEFUL
TO YOU, BUT I DID PREPARE THAT
IN CASE THAT HELPS PUT THIS
INTO SOME CONTEXT.
>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE FINE,
CALVIN.
>> COULD YOU PUT UP THAT
GRAPHIC, PLEASE?
OR IF NOT, I CAN. GREAT.
THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBERS, THIS GRAPHIC IN
FRONT OF YOU SHOWS THE
DIFFERENT REVENUE OPTIONS THAT
ARE AVAILABE TO TRANSPORTATION
BENEFIT DISTRICTS.
I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT WHAT
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS IN
ITEM H HERE. YOU CAN SEE THERE
ARE SOME REVENUE OPTIONS THAT
COUNCIL CAN TAKE WITH
TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT
DISTRICTS AND WE HAVE HAD IN
PLACE SINCE 2010 A $20 VEHICLE
LICENSE FEE, THAT IS SHOWN IN
ITEM G. THAT FUNDS BASIC
TRANSPORTATION MAINTENANCE
SINCE 2010.
STATE LAW ALLOWS US TO INCREASE
THAT TO $40 TOTAL, AS LONG AS
THAT ADDITIONAL FEE HAS BEEN IN
PLACE FOR 24 MONTHS.
SINCE WE HAVE HAD THAT FOR 10
YEARS, WE COULD INCREASE THAT
TO $40.
THAT IS A PROPOSAL IN FRONT OF
US WITH BLG 042.
SEPARATELY THERE ARE IMPACT
FEES THAT THE DISTRICT COULD
CONSIDER AS AN OPTION, BUT ALL
OF THE OTHER REVENUE OPTIONS
ARE VOTER APPROVED.
YOU WILL SEE ITEMS A AND B WERE
THE TRANSIT MEASURE . ITEM 26
IS THE NEW SALES TAX AND THERE
ARE ADDITIONAL VOTER APPROVED
OPTIONS.
I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US
TO UNDERSTAND THERE ARE TWO
DISTINCT FUNDING SOURCES WITH
AUTHORITIES BEHIND THEM.
THE ONE FOR BLG 042-A-001 IS
COUNCIL MADDOCK . IT WOULD
ESSENTIALLY BE CHANGING THE $20
TO $40.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, CALVIN.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I WILL TURN
IT BACK OVER TO YOU FOR
COMMENTS AND I WILL TURN IT
BACK OVER TO THE ORIGINAL
SPONSOR ON THIS ITEM FOR
CONTINUED DISCUSSION.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT?
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT HANDY
GRAPH.
I REALLY, REALLY APPRECIATE
THAT.
IT GIVES A LOT OF CLARITY TO
SOMETHING THAT IS RATHER
CLUNKY, IF YOU WILL, IN TERMS
OF HOW THE REVENUE SERVICES
WORK.
COLLEAGUES, AT THE PRESENT
TIME, AS YOU JUST HEARD CALVIN
SAY, THE DISTRICT IS FUNDED VIA
A $20 VEHICLE LICENSE FEE.
THAT HAS BEEN OPPOSED
LEGISLATIVELY SINCE 2010.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE IS A
VOTER APPROVED $60 ADDITIVE FEE
IN ADDITION TO A .1% SALES TAX.
BEGINNING IN JANUARY, 2021, THE
CITY WILL NO LONGER COLLECT THE
$60 VEHICLE LICENSING FEE.
FOLLOWING THE VOTERS
OVERWHELMINGLY APPROVAL, IN
LIEU OF AN INCREASED SALES TAX
TO 1.5%.
UNDER RCW 36.73, THE CITY HAS
THE AUTHORITY TO IMMEDIATELY
AND LEGISLATIVELY IMPOSE A
VEHICLE LICENSING FEE OF UP TO
A TOTAL MAXIMUM OF $40.
I SUPPORT A TWEETED OUT
INCREASE TO THE VEHICLE
LICENSING FEE BECAUSE I BELIEVE
IT IS NECESSARY TO SUPPORT THE
ONGOING OPERATIONS OF OUR
CITY'S TRANSIT SERVICES AND THE
MAINTENANCE OF OUR
TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE
AND NETWORKS.
BECAUSE OF THE EXPIRATION OF
THE PREVIOUS MEASURE, SEATTLE'S
VEHICLE OWNERS WILL ACTUALLY
SEE A $60 DECREASE TO THEIR
VEHICLE LICENSING FEE FOR ALL
CARS THAT HAVE RENEWALS AFTER
JANUARY 1st, 2021 AND DESPITE
INCREASED SALES TAX, THE CITY
STANDS TO COLLECT OVER $10
MILLION LESS ANNUALLY THAN
UNDER THE PREVIOUS 2014 BALLOT
MEASURE.
IF APPROVED, THIS COUNCIL
BUDGET ACTION WILL STILL RESULT
IN SEATTLE RESIDENTS
EXPERIENCING A $40 DECREASE TO
THEIR TOTAL ANNUAL VEHICLE
LICENSING PIECE PAYMENTS.
IF APPROVED, THIS ACTION WILL
STILL RESULT IN HAVING LESS
REVENUE TO EXPAND NATIONALLY
FROM 2021 TO 2026 UNDER THE
PREVIOUS MEASURE.
I APPRECIATE DEEPLY THE WORK
AND COMMITMENT OF 27 PEDERSEN,
HERBOLD, AND LEWIS.
I DO NOT OPPOSE THEIR POLICY
OBJECTIONS.
THERE IS CERTAINLY NO NEED FOR
REDUCING HOURS AND BRIDGE
MAINTENANCE.
I DO FEEL, HOWEVER, THAT MORE
WORK AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
MUST BE DONE BEFORE WE CAN
DECIDE HOW TO APPROPRIATE THIS
ADDITIONAL REVENUE.
THE SUBSTITUTE BUDGET ACTION
PROPOSES THE ANTICIPATED $3.6
MILLION IN 2021 REVENUE BE HELD
UNDER A PROVISO UNTIL THE CITY
LED BY S.CANON FORM A SPENDING
PLAN TO PRIORITIZE THESE FUNDS.
THIS REQUIRES THE $3.6 MILLION
COLLECTED IN 2021, WHICH IS THE
TOTAL AMOUNT THAT CAN BE
COLLECTED IN 2021, BE SPENT
ONLY ON BRIDGE MAINTENANCE.
AND ADDITIONALLY WOULD REQUIRE
WITHIN THE OUTWARD YEARS, THE
CITY OF SEATTLE SPENT THE FULLY
COLLECTED $7.2 MILLION PER YEAR
ON ONLY BRIDGE MAINTENANCE.
IN CONTRAST, MY SUBSTITUTE
BUDGET ACTION IS NOT
PRESCRIPTIVE.
IN OTHER WORDS, IF ADOPTED BY
THE COUNCIL, BY BUDGET ACTION
DOES NOT PROHIBIT THE USE OF
ANY OF THIS REVENUE FOR BRIDGE
MAINTENANCE, RATHER MY
SUBSTITUTE BUDGET ACTION PARKS
THIS REVENUE AND FINANCE
GENERAL AND REQUIRES THE CITY
OF SEATTLE ENGAGE IN A
MEANINGFUL STAKEHOLDER PROCESS
THAT WILL GUIDE THE FUTURE
EXPENDITURES WITHIN THE LAWFUL
BOUNDARIES OF THE EXISTING CITY
AND STATE LAW.
SOME SAY THEY'RE NOT
COMFORTABLE IMPOSING A TAX
WITHOUT A DEFINED SPENDING PLAN
IN PLACE.
I HAVE TWO RESPONSES TO THAT
ARGUMENT OR CONCERN.
FIRST, WHILE OPPONENTS HAVE
USED THAT REASONING TO TRY TO
DEFEAT TAX PROPOSALS IN THE
PAST, THIS IS NOT A NEW TAX.
THE EXISTING $20 VEHICLE
LICENSING FEE IS A WELL-
ESTABLISHED FEE THAT IS GUIDED
BY STATE AND CITY STATUTES THAT
LIMIT AND DIRECT HOW THIS
REVENUE MAY BE SPENT.
IT AUTHORIZES TRANSPORTATION
BENEFIT DISTRICTS AND SETS
PARAMETERS FOR HOW THESE
REVENUES CAN BE SPENT AND
DICTATES THEY MUST BE DEDICATED
TO TRANSPORTATION USES WHILE
GIVING LOCAL JURISDICTIONS
DISCRETION OVER HOW TO BEST
PRIORITIZE SPENDING.
I BELIEVE THAT THOSE STATUTORY
PARAMETERS PREDEFINED THE
CONTOURS OF OUR SPENDING PLAN
AND WHAT IS AT ISSUE HERE IS
HOW TO PRIORITIZE THE SPENDING
OF THESE DOLLARS WITHIN THOSE
LAWFUL BOUNDARIES.
I BELIEVE IT IS CRITICAL WE GET
VALUED STAKEHOLDERS AND
COMMUNITY MEMBERS THE
OPPORTUNITY TO ADVISE THE CITY
ON HOW TO PRIORITIZE THE USE OF
THESE DOLLARS AND THE CONTEXT
OF OUR BROADER INVESTMENTS IN
THE SEATTLE TRANSPORTATION
BENEFIT DISTRICT, TRANSIT
SERVICES, AND OUR
TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE.
SECOND, IF COUNCILMEMBERS
SHARE THE CONCERN IT WILL BE
PRUDENT TO PASS THE LICENSING
FEE WITHOUT A SPENDING PLAN IN
PLACE NOW, THE ANSWER IS NOT TO
JAM THIS THE IN THE LAST PHASE
OF OUR BUDGET PROCESS.
RATHER I BELIEVE THE PRUDENT
AND REASONABLE SOLUTION TO THAT
CONCERN WOULD BE TO PULL THIS
PROPOSED COUNCIL BILL ACTION
ALTOGETHER AND INSTEAD
ESTABLISHED A STAKEHOLDER
PROCESS, CONDUCT THE
ENGAGEMENT, RECEIVE
RECOMMENDATIONS AND
DELIBERATELY SPENDING PLAN AND
FEE AT THE SAME TIME WITH THE
BENEFIT OF STAKEHOLDER AND
TAXPAYER AND PUT ON HOW THESE
DOLLARS WILL BE AUTHORIZED
INCLUDING BRIDGE MAINTENANCE.
AGAIN, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN MY PROPOSAL AND THE
PROPOSAL MADE BY COUNCILMEMBERS
PEDERSEN, HERBOLD, AND LEWIS
IS RELATED TO THE STAKEHOLDER
ENGAGEMENT PROCESS AND WHAT IT
SHOULD LOOK LIKE IN TERMS OF
HOW IT SHOULD GUIDE OUR
DECISION-MAKING AND THE
DEPARTMENT'S DECISION-MAKING
AROUND HOW THESE DOLLARS SHOULD
BE EXPENDED. IT IS ABSOLUTELY
POSSIBLE THAT ENGAGEMENT
PROCESS WILL CONCLUDE THAT A
PORTION OF THE DOLLARS COLLECTED
>> MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO
PASS THE LEGISLATION NOW TO
ALLOW THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS
TO OCCUR, I DID HAVE A
CONVERSATION WITH DIRECTOR,
SAMSON BOB WADE THIS MORNING
VIA EMAIL, HE DID INDICATE THAT
HE WOULD WANT TO SEE PERHAPS A
SHORTER STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
PROCESS FOR THE DEPARTMENTS OF
GREATER CERTAINTY AROUND
OPERATIONALIZING ANY SORT OF
SPENDING PLAN AND SO MY HOPE IS
THAT BEFORE MONDAY, IF THERE I
AN AMENDMENT TO BE MADE, WE
WILL BE ABLE TO WORK WITH
COUNSEL STAFF AND THE
DEPARTMENT TO IDENTIFY THAT
SMALL TECHNICAL CHANGE TO A
TIMELINE RELATED TO THE
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
AND THE OUTSIDE DATE OF WHEN
COUNSEL WOULD CONSIDER ADOPTION
OF A SPENDING PLAN.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, I APPRECIATE YOU
WALKING US THROUGH THAT
EXPLANATION, AND I WILL TURN IT
OVER TO COUNCILMEMBER ALEX
PEDERSEN AS THE ORIGINAL
SPONSOR OF THIS ITEM, AND IF
THERE'S OTHERS, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
PLEASE GO AHEAD.>> THANK YOU
CHAIR TERESA MOSQUEDA, THAT WAS
A VERY WELL SAID RESPONSE TO
THIS ISSUE AND TO YOUR
SUBSTITUTE AND I WANT TO SAY
THANK YOU TO COUNCILMEMBER
ANDREW LEWIS AS WELL FOR
TEAMING UP ON THIS, SEATTLE IS
DEFINED BY ITS WATERWAYS AND
RAVINES, SO WE RELY ON THE
BRIDGES TO CONNECT US AND KEEP
THE ECONOMY MOVING BY SAFELY
CARRYING MULTIPLE MODES OF
TRAVEL.
WHEN THERE'S NO BRIDGE, THERE'S
NO TRANSPORTATION CHOICES.
I TOOK A TOUR OF THE BRIDGE
YESTERDAY, I WAS INSIDE THE
BRIDGE, THE MAINTENANCE NEEDS
ARE TREMENDOUS THERE, IT WAS A
REALLY EYE-OPENING EXPERIENCE
WHEN WE CONSIDER ALL OF THE
OTHER BRIDGES THAT CONNECT OUR
CITY. MAINTAINING THE BRIDGES
TAKES MONEY AND EXPERTS, NOT
MORE PROCESS OR LOBBYING AT
CITY HALL.
WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING FOR
MONTHS THE NEED FOR MORE BRIDGE
MAINTENANCE THROUGHOUT THE CITY
EVER SINCE THE WEST SEATTLE
HIGH BRIDGE CRACKED AND CLOSED.
THE CITY AUDITOR STARTED WORK
ON A CITYWIDE BRIDGE ASSESSMENT
WHICH RECEIVED SEVERAL WEEKS AGO
, SHOWING THE BRIDGES
THROUGHOUT THE CITY ARE AGING
AND IN DISREPAIR, THEY NEED
MORE MAINTENANCE DOLLARS NOW.
WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING FOR
MONTHS THE NEED TO OVERTURN I
976 BECAUSE THE VEHICLE
LICENSES ARE VITAL TO
TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS AND
PROGRAMS AS AUTHORIZED BY STATE
LAW.
AND AS COUNCIL PRESIDENT
POINTED OUT, IT WILL DROP TO
$20 NOW, SO THIS UNDERLYING
LEGISLATION WOULD TAKE IT TO
$40, SO WE CAN DO ALL WE CAN
FOR TRANSPORTATION NEXT YEAR
AND AS CALVIN POINTED OUT, WE
ARE GOING TO DO THIS ON OUR
OWN, WE ALL SUPPORT TRANSIT
BRIDGES, AS WE AWAIT A VACCINE
FOR COVID AND TRANSIT RIDERSHIP
TO RECOVER AFTER PLUMMETING
SHARPLY THIS YEAR AFTER THE
PANDEMIC.
THE BRIDGE AUDIT THAT WE HAVE
RECEIVED CONCLUDES WE HAVE AN
URGENT NEED TODAY TO INCREASE
MAINTENANCE OF OUR BRIDGE
INFRASTRUCTURE, SO THE BUDGET
FORM C ENABLES US TO MAKE A
LARGER DOWN PAYMENT TO THIS
PRIORITY AND FOCUS IT ON OUR
FREQUENT TRANSIT NETWORK, AND
THIS IS JUST FOR 2021, SO IT'S
NOT PRESCRIPTIVE BEYOND 2021.
DESPITE THE SHARP LOSS IN
TRANSIT RIDERSHIP INCLUDING BUS
RIDERSHIP THIS YEAR DUE TO THE
PANDEMIC, THAT IS SPIKING
AGAIN, I KNOW WE ARE OPTIMISTIC
ABOUT THE FUTURE, WE WANT TO
MAKE SURE OUR ECONOMY RECOVERS
AND TRANSIT RIDERSHIP ALONG
WITH IT.
SO THIS BILL IS JUST ABOUT $3.6
MILLION FOR BRIDGE MAINTENANCE,
JUST FOR NEXT YEAR.
THERE ARE MANY MORE DOLLARS
AVAILABLE FOR TRANSIT SERVICE
HOURS IN 2021 DUE TO IT BEING
OVER A $23 MILLION RESERVE LEFT
OVER FROM THE EXPIRING SPD.
WE ARE TRYING TO ADD TO BRIDGE
MAINTENANCE.
THAT IS IN ADDITION TO THE
DOLLARS OVERWHELMINGLY APPROVED
BY VOTERS THIS PAST NOVEMBER.
SO, AS PART OF FUTURE MEETINGS
OF OUR TRANSPORTATION AND
UTILITIES COMMITTEE, WORKING
WITH THE STAFF, TRANSIT
ADVISORY BOARD, THE LEVY
OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE, THE
WORKGROUP, LABOR UNIONS, OTHER
STAKEHOLDERS WHO ARE PLANNING
OUT A PROCESS FOR THESE MUCH
LARGER SUMS OF MONEY, THE
AMOUNT FOR BRIDGE MAINTENANCE
AND BALANCING PACKAGES IS
WELCOME BUT FALLS SHORT.
APPROVING THE DOLLARS FOR
BRIDGE MAINTENANCE NOW IS
IMPORTANT TO ENABLE SDOT TO
RECRUIT ADDITIONAL INSPECTORS
AND ENGINEERS NOW.
I DON'T BELIEVE WE MET MANY
MORE MONTHS TO DETERMINE
WHETHER THE BRIDGES ARE
BREAKING ORDER TO DETERMINE HOW
TO SPEND $3.6 MILLION WHEN WE
ARE LITERALLY HATCHING A $6.5
MILLION BUDGET THIS MONDAY.
SO I WOULD URGE MY COLLEAGUES
TO SUPPORT THE ORIGINAL FORM C,
FOR 2021, WE CAN HAVE THIS
ADDITIONAL INCREMENT FOR BRIDGE
MAINTENANCE.
IN SHORT, BUSES NEED BRIDGES,
TOO.
OUR MEASURE FOCUS IS ON THESE
DOLLARS IN THE FREQUENT TRANSIT
NETWORK, WE CANNOT IGNORE THE
AUDIT AND TRANSIT FUNDING WILL
INCREASE AS TRANSIT DEMAND
INCREASES.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNSEL
MEMBER TAMMY MORALES, YOU ARE
NEXT.
>> THANK YOU, FIRST I WANT TO
SAY THANK YOU TO OUR FRIENDS AT
THE TRANSPORTATION CHOICES
COALITION, AND THE EIGHT OTHER
SIGNATORIES AND THE LETTER THEY
SENT TO COUNSEL NOVEMBER 17
WHICH WAS YESTERDAY, AND I WANT
TO SAY THANK YOU TO
COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PEDERSEN AND
HIS TIMELY RESPONSE TO THE
CONCERNS RAISED BY TCC AND THE
OTHER EIGHT AS I SAID
SIGNATORIES.
COUNCILMEMBER, ALEX PEDERSEN
RAISED EIGHT IMPORTANT POINTS
TO RESPOND TO THE COMMUNITY
CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED AND
WITHOUT GOING INTO DETAIL
BECAUSE HE CAN SPEAK FOR
HIMSELF, BUT FORM WHAT I HAVE
READ, THIS IS 3.6 MILLION FOR
THE YEAR OF 2021.
I DO HAVE FAITH IN THE BRIDGE
AUDIT.
AND I JUST WANTED TO SHARE TWO
OTHER MAJOR POINTS, FIRST THAT
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE
THAT THE PLF CAN BE USED FOR A
VARIETY OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECTS INCLUDING INFRA
STRUCTURE MAINTENANCE AND
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, BUT
BEFORE I GET THERE, I WANT TO
SAY SOMETHING TO GENERAL, I AM
A MEMBER OF THE PUGET SOUND
REGIONAL COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION
COMMITTEE, AND ALSO A MEMBER OF
SOUND TRANSIT AND I WANT TO
SHARE MY MEETING WITH MR. JERRY
WHITE, THE NEW GM AT METRO.
STARTING WITH THE PUGET SOUND
REGIONAL COUNCIL, THEY ARE
WORKING ON THE REGIONAL EQUITY
STRATEGY, A LOT OF STAKEHOLDER
INVOLVEMENT IN MEETINGS ABOUT
TCC, AND THEY WERE ABLE TO
PROVIDE COMMENTS AS WELL.
THE PROGRESS REPORT ON THE WORK
TO SUPPORT OTHER MARGINALIZED
COMMUNITIES, LOOKING AT
OPPORTUNITY MAPS, MORTGAGE
LENDING, ALL OF THESE
PRACTICES, THESE
INSTITUTIONALIZED PRACTICES
THAT PREVENT AN EXCLUDED
TARGETED COMMUNITIES FROM
TRANSPORTATION, WEALTH, EQUITY
AND ACCESS.
IN OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH ESTHER
WHITE, THE NEWBIE GM AT METRO,
THEY ARE ALSO DOING AN EQUITY
ANALYSIS, SO THEY ARE DOING
EQUITY STRATEGY, METRO IS DOING
THEIR ANALYSIS, AGAIN WITH
STAKEHOLDER GROUPS, MOBILITY
FRAMEWORK, WITH THE EQUITY
CABINET OF 23 MEMBERS, MANY OF
WHICH ARE PART OF TCC AND THESE
OTHER GROUPS THAT HAVE SIGNED
ON TO THE LETTER.
NOT ONLY DISCUSSING ABOUT BUS
ROUTES AND REALIGNMENT IN BUS
ROUTES AND EMPHASIS IN SOUTH
SEATTLE, BUT HOW WE LOOK AT
TRANSPORTATION AND SHIFTING
RESOURCES TO THE SOUTH END.
AS A MEMBER OF SOUND TRANSIT, I
WILL TELL YOU MY MAIN CONCERN.
THAT EVERY MEETING, WHETHER IT
IS THE BOARD MEETING OR THE
SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS, THE
TOPIC ALL THE TIME IS THE
BRIDGES, PARTICULARLY WEST
SEATTLE AND BALLARD IN LIGHT OF
THE FACT THAT WE ARE HOPING WE
GET LIGHT RAIL TO WEST SEATTLE
IN 2030 AND WE GET LIGHT RAIL
TO BALLARD IN 2035.
I REALLY APPRECIATE WHAT COUNSEL
PRESIDENT GONZALES SAID, BUT I
THINK THE TIMES ARE LITTLE BIT
DIFFERENT ABOUT HAVING A SIX
MONTH TIME FOR STAKEHOLDER WHEN
WE KNOW THE EMERGENT FACTOR NOW
IS WE HAVE A BRIDGE THAT IS NOT
WORKING.
AND MY CONCERN IS THIS, AND I
LEARNED THIS FROM METRO, THANK
YOU, I TOLD HIM I WOULD USE
THIS BECAUSE I THINK IT SUMS IT
UP FOR ME, LOOKING AT THESE
EQUITY STRATEGIES, THESE EQUITY
PLANS, EQUITY ANALYSIS, I THINK
WE ALREADY KIND OF KNOW WE HAVE
A BRIDGE AND OTHERS THAT WE
NEED TO LOOK AT, THAT WE HAVE
TO BE VALUE DRIVEN AND DATA
INFORMED.
SO, METRO PSR C, THE
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE AND
SOUND TRANSIT ARE DISCUSSING
AND IMPLEMENTING MOBILITY
PLANS, BUS SERVICE, MAKING SURE
THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT THOSE
AREAS THAT NEED IT THE MOST AND
A PRIMARY EMPHASIS ON EQUITY.
SO ALL THOSE VOICES ARE BEING
HEARD IN THESE THREE DIFFERENT
AREAS, REGIONALLY AND CITYWIDE
FOR BUS SERVICES, ROUTES AND
ARE MANY OF THE ISSUES THAT TCC
SHARED IN THEIR LETTER.
I'M NOT INCLINED TO SUPPORT
COUNCIL PRESIDENT SUBSTITUTE,
HOWEVER, I THINK SHE OFFERED AN
EXCELLENT SOLUTION, IF IT IS IN
SIX MONTHS, PERHAPS THREE
MONTHS.
THAT I'M MORE INCLINED TO
SUPPORT, TO SUBSTITUTE WITH A
SHORTER TIMELINE IN LIGHT OF
THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF BASICALLY
ONE OF OUR MAIN BRIDGES, WEST
SEATTLE BRIDGE BEING DOWN AND
THE OTHER FOUR BRIDGES THAT THE
AUDIT LOOKED AT.
FOR ME, I CAN'T SUPPORT THE
SUBSTITUTE IN ITS CURRENT FORM
AND I'M CERTAINLY OPEN TO
SUPPORTING THE SUBSTITUTE IF WE
WENT FROM 6 TO 3 MONTHS BECAUSE
AGAIN, WE HAVE TO EMPHASIZE,
THIS IS 3.6 MILLION FOR 2021,
DURING COVID THE WEST SEATTLE
BRIDGE DOWN, THAT IS THE REASON
WHY WE HAD THE AUDIT DONE AND
ALSO LOOKING AT THE BALLARD
BRIDGE AS WELL.
I WILL LEAVE IT AT THAT, THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER, KSHAMA SAWANT .
>> THANK YOU, I WILL BE
SUPPORTING THE SUBSTITUTION
PRESENTED BY GONZALES,
COMMITTEE ORGANIZATIONS LIKE
THE TRANSIT RIDERS UNION HAVE
ADVOCATED FOR THE OPPORTUNITY
TO WEIGH IN ON HOW THIS FUNDING
WILL BE USED AND THE
SUBSTITUTION WILL GIVE THEM THE
TIME TO DO SO.
I WILL MENTION AFTER THIS VOTE,
I INTEND TO MOVE A SECOND
SUBSTITUTION WHICH MY OFFICE
SENT TO YOU ALL OVER EMAIL LAST
NIGHT TO CHANGE THE REVENUE OF
FUNDING.
I WOULD ONLY CHANGE THE FUNDING
SOURCE, INCREASING BIG BUSINESS
TAXES RATHER THAN INCREASING,
SO AGAIN, I WOULD VOTE YES FOR
THE SUBSTITUTION AND I WILL
MAKE THIS VOTE AND MOTION AFTER
THIS IS DECIDED.
>> THANK YOU, ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS?
COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD?
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, JUST
SPEAKING TO THE SUBSTITUTE
HERE, FOR US, REALLY APPRECIATE
COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PEDERSEN
FOR HIS LEADERSHIP AND HAVING
THIS DISCUSSION FORWARD, I DO
FEEL A GREAT DEAL OF URGENCY
ASSOCIATED WITH ACTING ON THE
CITY AUDITORS RECOMMENDATION.
WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF OPTIONS
TO ADDRESS MAINTENANCE.
JUST A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ON
OUR FUNDING SOURCES FOR SDOT,
SOME FOLKS MIGHT RECALL THAT
THE 2015 LEVY WAS SET UP
DIFFERENTLY THAN THE PREVIOUS
BRIDGING THE GAP LEVY, THE
PREVIOUS LEVY DEDICATED A
HIGHER PROPORTION OF FUNDS TO
MAINTAINING OUR CRITICAL
TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE,
THEN THE CURRENT MOVE LEVY
DOES.
AND I THINK THAT IS PART OF WHY
WE ARE IN THE POSITION THAT WE
ARE IN RIGHT NOW.
THE MOVE LEVY GOES ALL THE WAY
THROUGH 2024.
SO THAT MEANS THE COUNCIL WILL
NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
ADDRESS LEVY FUNDING AND
INCREASING TRANSPORTATION
INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE, A
MAJOR FUNDING SOURCE FOR THAT
UNTIL 2024 AND OTHER OPTIONS
FOR DEDICATED TRANSPORTATION
FUNDING ARE LIMITED.
AND, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST HAVING
A HARD TIME WITH THE
RECOMMENDATION THAT WE TURN
OVER TO A CITYWIDE
TRANSPORTATION STAKEHOLDER GROUP
, THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT
WE USE THESE FUNDS TO ADDRESS
THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF OUR CITY
AUDITOR, THE CITY COUNCIL I
THINK IS CHARGED WITH MAKING
THE TOUGH DECISIONS ABOUT HOW TO
ADDRESS RECOMMENDATIONS FROM
THE CITY AUDITOR. IT'S UP TO
THE COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR TO
MAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AND
SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE 3.40
POINT 050 READS, UNDER THE
SECTION CALLED AUDIT REPORTS,
FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED, IT SAYS IT
IS CITY POLICY TO FOLLOW-UP ON
AUDIT REPORTS BY THE CITY
AUDITOR. I'M CONCERNED THAT
THIS CREATES A TROUBLING
PRECEDENT THAT UNDERMINES THIS
POLICY AND UNDERMINES THE
SERIOUSNESS THAT WE ARE
SUPPOSED TO, WITH WHICH WE ARE
SUPPOSED TO CONSIDER THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CITY
AUDITOR AND ACT ON IT.
AND AGAIN, I JUST DON'T THINK
WE SHOULD BE TURNING OVER THE
QUESTION OF HOW TO IDENTIFY THE
FUNDING TO ADDRESS THESE
RECOMMENDATIONS TO A CITYWIDE
STAKEHOLDER GROUP.
I THINK THERE HAS BEEN SOME
CONVERSATION ABOUT FUNDS THAT
ARE UNSPENT AND ARE AVAILABLE
TO ADD TRANSIT CAPACITY, WE
KNOW THAT THERE IS ABOUT A $20
MILLION RESERVES FROM UNSPENT
FUNDS FROM THE TRANSPORTATION
BENEFIT DISTRICT THAT COULD BE
AVAILABLE IN 2021 FOR ADDING
ADDITIONAL TRANSIT SERVICES IF
IT IS NEEDED.
WE DO KNOW THAT THERE IS A 60%
REDUCTION IN TRANSIT RIGHT NOW
BECAUSE OF COVID-19. AND THE
SDOT TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT
DISTRICT PLAN ITSELF PARKS $8
MILLION THAT WE THOUGHT WE
WOULD BE USING FOR TRANSIT AND
TESTING 21, AGAIN BECAUSE OF
THIS CONCERN THAT WE SHOULD NOT
BE MOVING FORWARD IN COMMITTING
SPEND DOLLARS FOR CAPACITY
UNTIL WE KNOW THAT WE ACTUALLY
NEED IT.
THE MOMENT I HEARD THAT ONE OF
SDOT'S CONCERNS ABOUT PURSUING
A $47 MILLION REPAIR FOR THE
WEST SEATTLE BRIDGE WAS IN
LARGE PART DUE TO THE $500,000
ANNUAL MAINTENANCE COST, WHICH
IS TWICE THE MAINTENANCE COST
ESTIMATE FOR A NEW BRIDGE, THAT
IS WHEN I ASK MYSELF, WHY WOULD
WE BUILD A NEW BRIDGE AT NEARLY
10 TIMES THE COST TO PRIMARILY
AVOID THE HIGHER COST OF
MAINTAINING THE BRIDGE THAT WE
HAVE, ESPECIALLY IF THE EXPERTS
TELL US THAT WE CAN GET ANOTHER
30 TO 40 YEARS OUT OF THE
BRIDGE THAT WE HAVE.
AND THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION
IS BECAUSE SDOT IS NOT
CONFIDENT THAT WE ARE GOING TO
FULFILL OUR OBLIGATION TO
ADEQUATELY FUND MAINTENANCE.
LEARNING THIS, REALLY FELT LIKE
A CHALLENGE TO ME TO DO MY PART
TO BE A BETTER STEWARD OF OUR
PUBLIC ASSETS.
I THINK COUNCILMEMBER ALEX
PEDERSEN HANDLE THE ISSUE OF
WHETHER OR NOT BRIDGES ARE CAR
CENTRIC.
I REJECT THAT NOTION. WE ARE
PROPOSING TO FOCUS FUNDING ON
BRIDGES THAT ARE A PART OF OUR
FREQUENT TRANSIT NETWORK IN THE
EXAMPLE OF THE WEST SEATTLE
BRIDGE, JUST AN EXAMPLE OF ONE
BRIDGE AND HOW IT FUNCTIONS
LIKE MANY OTHERS DO IN THE
FREQUENT TRANSIT NETWORK.
THE WEST SEATTLE BRIDGE CARRIED
13 DIFFERENT BUS LINES, 17
THOUSAND PEOPLE, AND 900
DIFFERENT TRIPS EVERY DAY.
THAT BRIDGE IS A TRANSIT
WORKHORSE AND TO SUGGEST THAT
OUR BRIDGE INFRASTRUCTURE
PRIMARILY SERVES CARS AND
SINGLE OCCUPANCY VEHICLES, I
THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE
NEED TO REALLY STRUGGLE WITH
THAT DEFINITION IF WE ARE EVER
GOING TO DO A BETTER JOB OF
MAINTAINING THESE FAILING
PUBLIC ASSETS.
SO, WITH THAT, I'M NOT GOING TO
BE SUPPORTING THE SUBSTITUTE,
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I WILL CHIME IN HERE VERY
BRIEFLY BEFORE TURNING IT BACK
OVER TO ANDREW LEWIS, I WANT TO
SAY THANK YOU TO COUNCILMEMBER
ALEX PEDERSEN AND LOUIS, FOR
BRINGING FORWARD THE INITIAL
PIECE OF LEGISLATION AND ALSO
THE CDA INCLUDED IN THIS
CONSENT PACKAGE, THAT'S WHY IT
WAS IN THE INITIAL PROPOSAL
HERE FOR US TO HAVE IT A PART
OF THE CONSENT PACKAGE, BUT I'M
EVEN MORE SUPPORTIVE OF THE
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE
COUNCIL PRESIDENT HERE TODAY.
I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT THERE
IS A HUGE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL
TRANSPORTATION FUNDING FROM
TRANSIT SERVICES TO SERVICES
FOR ESSENTIAL WORKERS, TO SAVE
IF A STRUCTURE, FOR PEOPLE WHO
ARE WALKING AND BIKING.
TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE
BRIDGE MAINTENANCE NECESSARY TO
MAKE SURE THE LONG-TERM
VIABILITY OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE
AND I WANT TO CORRECT MY
EARLIER STATEMENT, I DO NOT
THINK IT SHOULD GO UNSAID THAT
WE KNOW THAT FOLKS WHO USE
TRANSIT, OR USING OUR BUSES,
THEY NEED THE BRIDGES TO
FUNCTION.
I KNOW HAVING WALKED OVER THE
LOWER BRIDGE, THAT BRIDGE HAS
TO FUNCTION FOR PEDESTRIANS AND
BIKERS AS WELL, SO I WANT TO
MAKE SURE TO CORRECT MY EARLIER
STATEMENT, I DON'T WANT TO PUT
INFRASTRUCTURE AGAINST OTHER
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS IN
OUR CITY, SO I THINK THAT IS AN
IMPORTANT CLARIFICATION, AND I
THINK LISA HERBOLD ALLUDED TO
IT, AND I WANTED TO CALL OUT
DIRECTLY, THOSE WHO ARE USING
BIKES AND WALKING, RUNNING IN
TRANSIT, THEY ALSO USE THE
BRIDGES AND IT CONNECTS THE
CITY.
SO IT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT.
BUT TRANSPARENCY AND INCLUSION,
AS WE MAKE THESE DECISIONS
ABOUT TAX DOLLARS IS ALSO
IMPORTANT ABOUT ME TO COMMENT
ON.
I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE EFFORT TO
MAKE SURE WE ARE PULLING
TOGETHER A TABLE TO MAKE SURE
THERE IS AN INCLUSIVE
CONVERSATION ABOUT IDENTIFYING
STRATEGIES OR INVESTING IN KEY
INFRA STRUCTURE AND THAT
INCLUDES RICH MAINTENANCE, THE
CONVERSATION WILL INCLUDE
ADDITIONAL STATE AND FEDERAL
SOURCES THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT
TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS A
ROBUST PLAN FOR HOW WE BEST
LEVERAGE THESE VEHICLE LICENSE
FEES AND I SUPPORT THE COUNCIL
PRESIDENT AMENDMENT BECAUSE I
THINK THAT IT HELPS LIFT UP THE
IMPORTANCE OF HAVING FOLKS WHO
ARE ABLE TO COME TO THE TABLE
VERY QUICKLY IN EARLY 2021 AND
HAVE US NOT TO MISS A BEAT.
THE ABILITY TO PUT TOGETHER A
TASK FORCE IS NOT GOING TO
DELAY US BECAUSE WE SEE ALREADY
THAT THE ESTIMATED TIMELINE, IF
WE PASS THE VEHICLE LICENSING
TOAY, IT WOULD TAKE SIX MONTHS
TO BEGIN COLLECTING THE PLF
REVENUE FOR VITAL
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES AND
INFRASTRUCTURE.
SO I'M SUPPORTIVE OF PASSING
THE PACKAGE TODAY WHILE WE ALSO
INITIATE THIS INCLUSIVE
CONVERSATION AND SPECIFIED HERE,
WITH LABOR, TRANSPORTATION
EQUITY GROUPS, WITH
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARDS
AND COMMISSIONS TO CREATE AS
PLANNED A SPENDING PLAN FOR THE
COUNCIL TO ENGAGE IN A PUBLIC
AND DELIBERATIVE PROCESS.
AGAIN, THERE IS INCREDIBLE
CROSSOVER AMONG VARIOUS
STAKEHOLDERS WHO HAVE ALREADY
EXPRESSED REPORT FOR THE
PROCESS OUTLINED IN THE COUNCIL
PRESIDENT PROPOSAL HERE IN
ADDITION TO HEARING FROM THE
FOLKS FROM THE MASS, I HAVE
SPOKEN TO LEADERS AND I THINK
THEY ARE ALSO INTERESTED IN
MAKING SURE THAT WE GET
INVESTMENTS IN BRIDGES, THEY
HAVE BEEN VERY CLEAR ABOUT
THAT.
AND OTHER INFRA STRUCTURE IS
IMPORTANT AS WELL AND THEY
WOULD LIKE TO SIT AT THE TABLE
AND HAVE THESE DISCUSSIONS
BECAUSE THEY SEE THAT THE DATA
IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO COME
UP, WE ARE GOING TO LOOK AT THE
DATA AND MAKE DATA INFORMED
DECISIONS THROUGH A
COLLABORATIVE PROCESS WITH THE
STAKEHOLDER TABLE.
IF THERE IS A REDUCTION IN THE
TITLE AND NOT AN EXPANSION, I
WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE ABOUT THAT
AS WELL, BECAUSE WE HAVE A SIX
MONTH PROCESS, AS LONG AS WE
ARE TAKING THOSE
RECOMMENDATIONS EARLIER, GREAT.
BUT I THINK THAT BECAUSE OF THE
BROAD STAKEHOLDER SUPPORT,
INCLUDING THE PLF FUNDING TODAY
AND ALSO CREATING A STAKEHOLDER
TASK FORCE, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE
THIS AS A REPLACEMENT TO THE
ITEM THAT WAS ORIGINALLY
CONSIDERED IN THE CONSENT
PACKAGE AND AGAIN, I THINK THIS
CONVERSATION HAS BEEN SPURRED
BY THE FOLKS THAT BROUGHT THIS
FORWARD SO THANK YOU
COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD,
ALEX PEDERSEN, AND ANDREW LEWIS
FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
AND DOING SOME ADDITIONAL
RESEARCH AND CONVERSATIONS WITH
STAKEHOLDERS AS WELL.
REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE DO
THIS, GET THOSE DOLLARS INTO
THE COMMUNITY AND INVEST IN THE
INFRASTRUCTURE, THAT IS SO
VITALLY NEEDED AND I WOULD LOVE
TO DO THAT IN A WAY THAT IS
MORE INCLUSIVE THROUGH THE
STAKEHOLDER PROCESS AS
IDENTIFIED IN THE AMENDMENT.
COUNCILMEMBER ANDREW LEWIS, I
BELIEVE YOU ARE NEXT.
>> THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR, AND
ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF GOING
ALMOST LAST, A LOT OF MY POINTS
HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE FROM
COUNCILMEMBERS ALEX PEDERSEN
AND LISA HERBOLD.
I WANT TO BRIEFLY SAY THAT
GENERALLY , I'M VERY SUPPORTIVE
IN A LOT OF THE POLICIES THAT I
HAVE BEEN PROMOTING OVER THE
LAST YEAR TO DEVELOP
STAKEHOLDER PROCESSES THAT
INVOLVE A BROAD ARRAY OF
ADVOCATES AND PEOPLE, WHOSE
INTEREST IS GOING TO BE
AFFECTED BY CITY POLICY.
THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT FOR
ME TODAY BECAUSE OF THE WAY I
SEE IT AND COUNCILMEMBER LISA
HERBOLD ALLUDED TO THIS, WE ARE
ACTING ON A RECOMMENDATION FROM
THE AUDITOR TO REACH A GOAL
THAT HAS BEEN LAID OUT WITH A
SENSE OF URGENCY THAT HAS BEEN
MADE VERY STARK AND APPARENT BY
THE FAILURE OF THE WEST SEATTLE
BRIDGE. ONE POINT THAT I WANT
TO MAKE FROM REVIEWING THAT
AUDIT IS WHILE ONLY FIVE
BRIDGES ARE LISTED IN POOR
CONDITION, AND NO CITY SHOULD
TOLERATE HAVING FIVE BRIDGES IN
POOR CONDITION, THERE ARE 50
BRIDGES LISTED AS FAIR.
IT SHOULD BE NOTED THE WEST
SEATTLE BRIDGE WAS NOT
HISTORICALLY CONSIDERED A
BRIDGE IN POOR CONDITION, AND
THAT THESE 50 FAIR BRIDGES
TODAY ARE THE POOR BRIDGES OF
TOMORROW UNLESS WE TAKE
ASSERTIVE ACTION TO MAINTAIN
THEM ADEQUATELY.
AND REALLY, I THINK THE AUDIT
UNDERSCORES THAT THERE IS AN
INFRASTRUCTURE TIMEBOMB THAT
THE CITY IS FACING AND WE HAVE
CHRONICALLY UNDER INVESTED IN.
THE MINIMUM THAT THE AUDIT
IDENTIFIED WAS $34 MILLION,
THIS PROPOSAL OF THE DEAL AS
COMBINED WITH SOME OF THE OTHER
RESOURCES THE COUNCIL IS
INVESTING WILL GET US TO 18
MILLION I BELIEVE WHICH IS
STILL FAR SHORT OF THAT MINIMUM
RECOMMENDATION FROM THE
AUDITOR.
SO, I THINK IT'S REALLY
IMPORTANT, I THINK IT'S
SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD MOVE ON
NOW TO MAKE THIS INVESTMENT
WITH CERTAINTY, CERTAINTY THAT
THE DEPARTMENT, THE
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT NEEDS
TO BE ABLE TO REALLY SCALE UP
AND MAINTAIN THIS VITAL AND
IMPORTANT INFRASTRUCTURE AND WE
HAVE SEEN THE IMPACTS OF
HISTORICALLY UNDER INVESTING IN
THESE BRIDGES, MANIFESTING THIS
YEAR WITH THE WEST SEATTLE
BRIDGE 20 YEARS AGO AFTER THE
EARTHQUAKE, IT WAS THE MAGNOLIA
BREAK THAT HAD A LONG-TERM
SHUTDOWN.
THERE'S A NUMBER OF OTHER
BRIDGES THAT HAVE BEEN
EXPERIENCING PROBLEMS, THE
BALLARD BRIDGE HAS BEEN STUCK
IN THE UP POSITION SEVERAL
TIMES IN RECENT MONTHS, THE
UNIVERSITY BRIDGES ON THE POOR
LIST AND SIMILARLY, A
DRAWBRIDGE HAD SIMILAR
PROBLEMS.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE ARE NOT PUTTING OURSELVES IN
A POSITION WHEREBY REFUSING TO
PAY TODAY, WE WILL PAY A BIGGER
PRICE WITH UNPLANNED CLOSURES
DOWN THE ROAD IF WE DON'T START
MAKING MORE STRATEGIC
INVESTMENTS IN THIS REALLY
CRITICAL AREA.
I ALSO WANT TO NOTE THAT WE DO
STILL HAVE MORE AUTHORITY THAT
COULD BE VOTER APPROVED AS
INDICATED ON THE TRANSPORTATION
BENEFIT DISTRICT SHEET.
I KNOW THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF
TALK ABOUT POTENTIALLY DOING IT
COUNTYWIDE, TO BACKFILL THE
FAIR SUBSIDY LOSS THAT WE HAVE
EXPERIENCED FROM NOT HAVING THE
LUXURY OF BEING ABLE TO DO THAT
RENEWAL BECAUSE OF PENDING
LITIGATION. I WOULD BE
INTERESTED IN PURSUING A
COUNTYWIDE MEASURE WIDE, AND IF
THAT IS NOT POSSIBLE, PURSUING
A CITYWIDE MEASURE, I THINK
THAT IS ONE MORE TOOL IN
ADDITION TO THE TOOLS THAT WE
SAID EARLIER, THAT COULD BE
PURSUED FOR FAIR SUBSIDY AND
OTHER CRITICAL TRANSPORTATION
INVESTMENTS.
BUT IN THE MEANTIME, I THINK
THIS IS A MORE MODEST
INVESTMENT, IT WOULD BE WELL-
SUITED TO GIVE THE DEPARTMENT
TRANSPORTATION AND CONTINUING
TO MAKE IS REALLY IMPORTANT
INVESTMENTS AND BRIDGES ALL
OVER THE CITY AND IN ALL OF THE
DISTRICTS.
SO WITH THAT, I DON'T HAVE
ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD AND I
APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION.
>> EXCELLENT, THANK YOU,
COUNCIL PRESIDENT WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSEOUT DISCUSSION?
>> I WOULD, THANK YOU, JUST A
QUICK REBUTTAL TO SOME OF THE
ARGUMENTS THAT WERE RAISED BY
THOSE WHO SPOKE THIS AFTERNOON,
I GUESS LATE AFTERNOON NOW,
IT'S ALMOST 4:00.
OKAY, REALLY QUICKLY, I THINK
THE SPONSORS AND SUPPORTERS OF
THE ORIGINAL COUNCIL BUDGET
ACTION ALL WENT THROUGH A LONG
LIST OF BRIDGE MAINTENANCE
NEEDS AT THE CITY, AND I THINK
SOMEHOW I DON'T BELIEVE THAT
THERE IS A NEED TO MAINTAIN OUR
BRIDGES IN THE CITY OF SEATTLE
AND I JUST WANT TO SAY FOR THE
RECORD THAT THAT IS NOT AN
ACCURATE CHARACTERIZATION OF MY
POSITION.
THERE IS NO QUESTION IN MY MIND
THAT BRIDGE MAINTENANCE IS A
NEED THROUGHOUT THE CITY, THAT
WAS BOLSTERED BY THE RECENT
CITY AUDITOR FINDINGS THAT
CONCLUDED THERE IS APPROXIMATELY
$100 MILLION WORTH OF BRIDGE
MAINTENANCE THAT NEEDS TO OCCUR
THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
SO, MY SUBSTITUTE, WHICH
ENDEAVORS TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT
BRIDGE MAINTENANCE IS NEEDED,
BUT ALSO WANTS TO SEE A
STAKEHOLDER PROCESS BE
UNDERTAKEN, IS BEING READ AS A
DENIAL OF THE NEED FOR BRIDGE
MAINTENANCE, I WANT TO
ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES, I WANT
TO COMMUNICATE MY COLLEAGUES
THAT IT IS NOT THE CASE, I
AGREE THERE IS A NEED FOR
BRIDGE MAINTENANCE, WHEN
COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON SAID WE
DON'T NEED A STAKEHOLDER
PROCESS TO DETERMINE THE
BRIDGES ARE BREAKING, THAT IS
NOT THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS IS
DESIGNED TO DO AS I'M PROPOSING
IT.
THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS I
BELIEVE IS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO
GUIDE CITY COUNCIL'S DECISION-
MAKING AROUND WHAT THE BEST USE
OF THIS ADDITIONAL VEHICLE
LICENSE FEE WOULD BE.
IT IS THE CASE THAT THE
STAKEHOLDERS COULD DETERMINE
THAT BRIDGE MAINTENANCE IS ONE
OF THOSE THINGS THAT SHOULD BE
PRIORITIZED.
AND IT WOULD BE MY HOPE THAT
THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD
ALSO INCLUDE LEVELS OF
APPROPRIATE APPROPRIATION OF
HOW TO SPEND THOSE ADDITIONAL
DOLLARS ON BRIDGE MAINTENANCE,
GIVEN THE NEED IDENTIFIED BY
THE CITY AUDITOR OFFICE.
I WILL NOTE FOR THE RECORD, AND
FOR CONSIDERATION BY
COUNCILMEMBERS WHO MAY BE
UNDECIDED ON THIS ISSUE, THAT
WHEN THE VEHICLE LICENSE FEE
WAS FIRST INSTITUTED IN 2011,
THERE WAS A COMMUNITY AND
STAKEHOLDER PROCESS THAT WAS
UNDERTAKEN IN ORDER TO DEVISE
AND COME UP WITH A SPENDING
PLAN.
AND THAT WAS DONE BEFORE THE
CITY COUNCIL INDUCTED THE
SPENDING PLAN.
SO I THINK WE ARE OUT OF STEP
BY NOT DOING THAT IN THIS
INSTANCE AND INSTEAD,
IDENTIFYING COUNCILMEMBER,
INDIVIDUAL COUNCILMEMBER
PRIORITIES FOR PURPOSES OF
CAPTURING THESE DOLLARS AND
USING THESE DOLLARS FOR ONLY
BRIDGES.
I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THAT
IS A HISTORICAL PIECE OF
INFORMATION THAT ARE RECEIVED
FROM SDOT RELATED TO DEVELOPING
THE SPENDING PLAN FOR THE BLS.
THAT IS ONE POINT I WANTED TO
MAKE IN TERMS OF THE NEED.
THERE'S ALSO AN ARGUMENT MADE
THAT IT WOULD BE A DERELICTION
OF OUR DUTY TO DELEGATE THIS TO
A STAKEHOLDER PROCESS WHEN WE
HAVE A CITY AUDITOR REPORT,
TELLING US THAT IT IS AN ISSUE,
WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO
ADDRESS IT.
I AGREE THAT WE HAVE AN
OBLIGATION TO ADDRESS THE
ISSUES IDENTIFIED BY THE CITY
AUDITOR'S, OR AT LEAST TO
BRIDGE MAINTENANCE, BUT I
SUPPOSE I HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF
OPINION ON WHETHER OR NOT
HAVING A STAKEHOLDER PROCESS AS
PART OF OUR RESPONSIBILITY AND
RESPONSE TO ADDRESSING THE
CONCERNS AND AS BEING A
DERELICTION OF DUTY.
I BELIEVE THAT THE CITY
AUDITOR'S REPORT DID NOT SAY
THAT BRIDGE MAINTENANCE IS
PARAMOUNT AND THE MOST
IMPORTANT THING AS COMPARED TO
OTHER THINGS, I THINK THERE'S
STILL SORT OF AN OPPORTUNITY OF
FLEXIBILITY EVEN IN LIGHT OF
THE CITY AUDITOR'S FINDINGS
THAT ALLOW THE CITY COUNCIL TO
EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION AND
DETERMINE HOW TO ALLOCATE AND
WHETHER TO ALLOCATE CERTAIN
TYPES OF REVENUE SOURCES TO
CERTAIN TYPES OF NEEDS IN THE
INSTANCE OF THE CITY AUDIT
REPORT, AND THE NEEDS OF BRIDGE
MAINTENANCE.
I WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT REALLY
QUICKLY.
THIRD, I HEARD COUNCILMEMBER
ALEX PEDERSEN MENTIONED THAT
THIS BUDGET ACTION IS ONLY
ABOUT $3.6 MILLION AND IT'S JUST
FOR 2021.
I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT THAT IS
NOT ACTUALLY WHAT THIS BILL
DOES, THIS IS $3.6 MILLION NOT
JUST FOR 2021 BUT FOR EVERY
YEAR AFTER THAT, IT WOULD
ALLOCATE $3.6 MILLION AT A
MINIMUM FOR EVERY YEAR AFTER
THE PASSAGE OF THIS BILL.
IN ADDITION, IT'S MY BELIEF AND
UNDERSTANDING THAT THE SPONSORS
INTENDED TO CAPTURE NOT JUST
THE $3.6 MILLION, BUT THE FULL
$7.2 MILLION AND THAT BELIEF IS
BASED ON THE FOLLOWING QUOTE
THAT COMES FROM THE PRESS
RELEASE THAT WAS ISSUED BY THE
SPONSORS.
WHICH READS, "THE LEGISLATION
WOULD READ AN ADDITIONAL $3.6
MILLION IN 2021 AND AN
ADDITIONAL $7.2 MILLION IN
SUBSEQUENT YEARS, THE
COUNCILMEMBERS PROPOSE TO
DIRECT THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING
TO BRIDGES WITH HIGH-FREQUENCY
PUBLIC TRANSIT."
SO IT IS MY BELIEF THAT THE
INTENT BEHIND THIS BILL IS TO
CAPTURE EVERY DOLLAR GENERATED
FROM THE VEHICLE LICENSE FEE IN
BOTH 2021 AND IN THE YEARS FOR
BRIDGE MAINTENANCE, AND I HAVE
THE INTENT IN BLACK AND WHITE
RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME.
SO THAT IS THE THIRD POINT I
WANTED TO MAKE.
THE FOURTH ISSUE I WANTED TO
ADDRESS IS THE ISSUE THAT
BRIDGES ARE ONLY FOR SINGLE
OCCUPANCY VEHICLES, I OF COURSE
DON'T BELIEVE THAT IS A TRUE
PRINCIPAL. WE ARE A CITY THAT
IS SURROUNDED BY WATER AND IT
HAS WATER DISPERSED THROUGHOUT
OUR CITY AND I MYSELF,
PERSONALLY UNDERSTAND THE
IMPACT OF THE WEST SEATTLE
BRIDGE IN PARTICULAR AS A HUGE
NEED FOR MAINTENANCE AND FOR
REPAIR AND POTENTIAL
REPLACEMENT.
SO, I DON'T WANT IT TO GO
UNSAID JET THAT SOMEHOW I
BELIEVE THAT BRIDGES ARE ONLY
FOR SINGLE OCCUPANCY VEHICLE,
THAT IS NOT TRUE AT ALL.
SO I AGREE WITH THE PROPONENTS
OF THE ORIGINAL COUNSEL BILL,
WHO FEEL STRONGLY THAT BRIDGES
ARE IN FACT PART OF OUR
TRANSPORTATION NETWORK.
LASTLY, CHAIR, I WILL END WITH
THE QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE
LENGTH OF THE STAKEHOLDER
PROCESS AS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED
IN MY SUBSTITUTE BILL, IT IS A
SIX MONTH, TECHNICALLY A FIVE-
MONTH STAKEHOLDER PROCESS WITH
A SIX MONTH PASSAGE OF A
SPENDING PLAN.
I AM HAPPY TO MAKE A VERBAL
AMENDMENT NOW TO MODIFY THAT
STICKER PROCESS TO THREE
MONTHS.
LIKEWISE, IF THAT IS NOT
CONSISTENT WITH THE PROCEDURE
SET OUT BY THE CHAIR AND WITH
COUNSEL CENTRAL STAFF
EXPECTATIONS AND PREFERENCES, I
WOULD GIVE MY WORD TO THE
COUNCILMEMBERS AND STAY HERE
PUBLICLY THAT I WOULD INTEND TO
BRING AN AMENDMENT FORWARD FOR
CONSIDERATION ON MONDAY TO
AMEND THE SUBSTITUTE TO HAVE A
THREE MONTH STAKEHOLDER PROCESS
RATHER THAN A FIVE-MONTH
STAKEHOLDER PROCESS.
I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT IN ANY WAY
THAT YOU ALL FEEL WOULD BE
PROCEDURALLY APPROPRIATE.
>> THANK YOU FOR SUGGESTING
THAT, NOW IS A PERFECT TIME TO
MAKE A VERBAL AMENDMENT, SO WE
CAN MOVE ONTO THE NEXT ONE, IF
THAT IS YOUR INTENT.
I WOULD LOVE TO DO THAT NOW.
JUST AS WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO
DO THAT BETWEEN ALLIE AND
CALVIN, I WOULD ALSO NOTE ON
THE FOURTH ITEM THAT YOU
MENTIONED GUARDING BRIDGES BEING
CROSS CENTRIC, I BELIEVE THAT
WAS A REFERENCE SOMETHING I HAD
SAID IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS, SO
I JUST OWNED IT AND I CORRECTED
MY STATEMENT AS I WANT TO MAKE
SURE FOLKS KNOW WE UNDERSTAND
TRANSIT, PEDESTRIAN, BIKES, ALL
SORTS OF MULTIMODAL OPTIONS
RELY ON BRIDGES AS WELL.
THANK YOU FOR CALLING THAT OUT
AND I'M HAPPY TO HAVE MY
STATEMENT CORRECTED.
JUST BEFORE WE GO ON TO
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, I WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT ALLIE AND CALVIN
HAVE WHAT THEY NEED TO RECEIVE
A VERBAL AMENDMENT TO CHANGE 6
TO 3.
>> I BELIEVE SO, IT WOULD BE TO
CHANGE SDOT'S AGREEMENT TO
PEOPLE FIRST, AND HAVE A COUNSEL
APPROVE THIS SPENDING PLAN A
MONTH LATER, IS THAT CORRECT?>>
YES.
>> YES, I THINK THAT WOULD BE
CORRECT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> BEFORE WE TAKE THAT MOTION
OFFICIALLY, COUNCILMEMBER LISA
HERBOLD, I SEE YOUR HAND UP.
>> I WANT TO SAY SOMETHING FOR
THE RECORD, ONE MY CORRECTION
FOR THE RECORD REGARDING
WHETHER OR NOT BRIDGES ARE
CROSS CENTRIC, WE ARE NOT
DIRECTED TO EITHER COUNCIL
CHAIR TERESA MOSQUEDA NOR
COUNSEL PRESIDENT M. LORENA
GONZALEZ, IT WAS IN RESPONSE TO
THINGS I HEARD IN PUBLIC
COMMENT TODAY AND I WANT TO
CLARIFY, THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT
IN THE BILL, COUNSEL BILL
ITSELF, IT DOES NOT ALLOCATE
FUNDING TO BRIDGES IN
PERPETUITY.
THE ACTION AS IT RELATES
SPECIFICALLY TO THE COUNCIL
BUDGET ACTION, IT RELATES TO
2021 AND THAT IS THE ACTION, AS
I UNDERSTAND IT, AND PLEASE
CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT
IS THE ACTION THAT EXPRESSES
OUR INTENT FOR ONE YEAR.
BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN SAYING I'M
WILLING TO REVISIT THE ISSUE OF
THE OTHER 3.6 MILLION IN FUTURE
YEARS.>> JUST SPEAK INTO THE
LEGISLATION ITSELF, THE
LEGISLATION AUTHORIZES THE
EXPENDITURE FOR ANY ELIGIBLE
TRANSPORTATION PURPOSE, SO THE
REVENUE STREAM IS NOT OBLIGED,
THE COUNCIL BUDGET ACTION WOULD
DIRECT 2021 REVENUES TOWARD
BRIDGE MAINTENANCE, AND IT DOES
NOT SPEAK TO FUTURE YEARS.>>
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, WE HAVE
IN FRONT OF US YOUR SUBSTITUTE
BLG 042 B 001.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION
FOR A VERBAL AMENDMENT TO THE
DATE?
>> I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO
MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THE
DATES FOR THE STAKEHOLDER
PROCESS, TO REQUIRE THAT THE
STAKEHOLDER PROCESS CONCLUDE ON
OR BEFORE APRIL 1 OF 2021 AND
THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE COUNCIL
TAKE FINAL ACTION ON THE
SPENDING PLAN ON OR BEFORE MAY 1
, 2021.
>> THE SECOND AMENDMENT HAS
BEEN MOVED AND ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS ON THE VERBAL AMENDMENT
TO COUNSEL BILL SUBSTITUTE BLG
042 B 001?
>> FOR THE RECORD, I DID
SECOND BUT I WANT TO ADD THAT
COUNCIL PRESIDENT GONZALES,
EVERYBODY KNOWS YOU CARE ABOUT
RIDGE MAINTENANCE.>> THANK YOU.
BECAUSE I NEED A BRIDGE TO GET
INTO TOWN.
>> I KNOW YOU DO, THAT'S WHY
I'M LAUGHING, I KNOW YOU WANT
THAT BRIDGE.>> I DO, TOO.
COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PEDERSEN,
DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT?
>> YES, I JUST WANTED, THE
AMENDMENT AS I UNDERSTAND, IT
IS ON OR BEFORE, SO A FASTER
PROCESS COULD TAKE PLACE?
OKAY.
BECAUSE THAT IS I THINK FIVE
MONTHS FROM TODAY.
THAT'S WHEN IT WOULD BE ENACTED.
SO IF SOMETHING HAPPENED
FASTER, IT IS ON OR BEFORE, SO
THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING.
>> EXCELLENT, ANY ADDITIONAL
CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS?
OKAY, COUNCILMEMBER LISA
HERBOLD?
>> DO WE HAVE A MOTION AND
SECOND ALREADY?
>> YES, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> I WANT TO SAY, MY CONCERN IS
NOT ABOUT THE LENGTH OF THE
PROCESS, MY CONCERN IS ABOUT
OPENING UP THIS REVENUE SOURCE
TO OTHER USES OTHER THAN BRIDGE
MAINTENANCE, I THINK ONE WAY
FOR US ALL TO SHOW HOW MUCH WE
CARE ABOUT RIDGE MAINTENANCE IS
NOT INTRODUCING THE PROCESS
THAT MIGHT, CONCEIVABLY COULD
RESULT IN NO MONEY FOR BRIDGE
MAINTENANCE.
SO THANK YOU.
>> SO, THE ITEM IS MOVED TO
AMEND THE PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE,
AND THAT WAY WE WILL HAVE THE
ACCURATE REFLECTED SUBSTITUTE
IN FRONT OF US AND THEN
COLLEAGUES, I'M GOING TO CALL
THROUGH THE OR NOT YOU WANT TO
INCLUDE THIS SUBSTITUTE AND WE
WOULD VOTE ON A SUBSTITUTE, SO
THERE'S THREE VOTES.
AND I'M SEEING NODS FROM
CENTRAL STAFF, THAT'S ALWAYS
HELPFUL.
SO RIGHT NOW, WE ARE AMENDING
THE PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE TO
INCLUDE ON OR BEFORE APRIL 1,
WHICH SHORTENS THE TIMELINE FOR
THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS.
THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO 04 2 B,
001.
THESE CALL THE ROLL ON THE
AMENDMENT 042 B 001.
>> ANDREW LEWIS?
TAMMY MORALES?
KSHAMA SAWANT?
ALEX PEDERSEN?
DAN STRAUSS?
LISA HERBOLD?
M. LORENA GONZALEZ?
CHAIR TERESA MOSQUEDA?
NONE OPPOSED.
>> THANK
>> THANK YOU, THE MOTION
CARRIES AND BLG 042 B 001 AS
AMENDMENT IS NOW BEFORE US, ARE
THERE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
BEFORE FINAL VOTE ON THIS ITEM?
COUNCILMEMBER KSHAMA SAWANT,
PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> I MOVED TO SUBSTITUTE 42 C
1, IN PLACE OF 42 B 1.
>> THANK YOU, IT HAS BEEN
MOVED, IS THERE A SECOND?
OKAY, IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED.
COUNCILMEMBER KSHAMA SAWANT,
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED TO DESCRIBE
YOUR AMENDMENT TO THE
AMENDMENT SUBSTITUTE.
>> THANK YOU, AS I MENTIONED
EARLIER, THIS SUBSTITUTION DOES
NOT CHANGE THE SPENDING PLANS
AND PROCEDURES IN ANY WAY, AND
TO BE CLEAR, THAT MEANS THAT I
WOULD ALSO ACCEPT THE SAME
VERBAL AMENDMENT TO MAKE THE
STAKEHOLDER PROCESS THREE
MONTHS INSTEAD OF FIVE MONTHS,
AS JUST ADOPTED IN 42 B 1, BUT
IT CHANGES IN THIS AMENDMENT,
WHERE THE MONEY COMES FROM,
INCREASING TAXES ON BUSINESS
INSTEAD OF TAXES ON WORKING
PEOPLE.
SEATTLE IN PARTICULAR HAS HAD
ONE OF THE MOST PROGRESSIVE TAX
SYSTEMS IN THE NATION, WITH
POOR AND WORKING-CLASS PEOPLE
PAYING A HIGHER PORTION OF
THEIR PAYCHECK THAN THE RICH,
COUNCIL MEMBERS OFTEN AMEND THE
TAXES BUT IT TOOK A GRASSROOTS
MASS MOVEMENT, MOVEMENT
LEADERSHIP INDEPENDENT OF THE
ESTABLISHMENT AND 30,000
SIGNATURES FOR THE THREAT OF A
VIABLE BALLOT INITIATIVE TO
ULTIMATELY FORCE BIG BUSINESS
AND THE POLITICAL ESTABLISHMENT
TO CONCEDE ON THE TAX.
IN THIS CASE, THE CITY COUNCIL
HAS A VERY CLEAR CHOICE BETWEEN
A PROGRESSIVE OR PROGRESSIVE
TAX AND I URGE COUNCIL MEMBERS
TO VOTE YES ON THIS
SUBSTITUTION FOR THE
PROGRESSIVE OPTION.
THE VEHICLE LICENSE FEE
COMMONLY KNOWN AS CAR TAB'S IS
ONE OF THE MOST DEEPLY AND
AGGRESSIVE AND PUNISHING TAXES
ON WORKING PEOPLE AND BECAUSE
IT IS SO DEEPLY PROGRESSIVE,
PRECISELY BECAUSE IT IS HATED,
CORRECTLY SO BY ORDINARY PEOPLE
, RIGHT-WING FIGURES END UP
BEING ABLE TO TAP INTO THAT
ANGER, THE GENUINE ANGER TO
ADAPT THE ESSENTIAL TRANSIT
FUNDING.
WHEN I SAY CAR TAB'S ARE
PUNISHING, I MEAN THAT
LITERALLY.
POOR PEOPLE GO TO JAIL FOR THIS
BECAUSE OF UNPAID CAR TAB'S.
IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD IT, YOU
CAN GET A VERY EXPENSIVE
TICKET, EVEN IF YOUR CAR IS
JUST PARKED ON THE STREET AND
SINCE PEOPLE WHO HAVE TROUBLE
AFFORDING CARTABS ALSO DO NOT
HAVE PRIVATE DRIVEWAYS, THAT
HAPPENS A LOT.
THEN THEY WILL REVOKE YOUR
DRIVERS LICENSE, IF YOU NEED TO
DRIVE TO WORK WITHOUT A LICENSE
ANYWAY BECAUSE YOU VERY LIKELY
TO BECAUSE YOU HAVE ALSO NOW
BEEN PUSHED FURTHER AND FURTHER
AWAY, YOU ARE NOW DRIVING
WITHOUT A LICENSE WHICH IS A
MISDEMEANOR.
I WANTED TO RELAY, ONE OF THE
STAFF MEMBERS IN MY OFFICE WHO
HAD TO GO TO COURT FOR TIMES
WHEN HE WAS CHARGED WITH A
MISDEMEANOR BECAUSE OF CAR
TAB'S, EVENTUALLY HIS CHARGE WAS
REDUCED TO A TRAFFIC INFRACTION
AFTER THE FOURTH COURT DATE,
BUT IF YOU COULD IMAGINE WHAT A
BURDEN THIS PLACE IS ON
ORDINARY PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY
WHEN MANY OF THEM ARE HOLDING
TWO JOBS, NOW MANY OF THEM
FACING UNEMPLOYMENT.
IN 2015, WHEN I WAS ARRESTED
ALONG SOME OTHER ACTIVIST FOR
THIS $15 MINIMUM WAGE STRUGGLE,
WHILE ENGAGING IN NONVIOLENT
ACTION IN SEATAC TO DEMAND
AIRLINES ABIDE BY THE $15
MINIMUM WAGE LAW, IN MY JAIL
CELL, VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE 8 TO
10 WOMEN IN MY CELL WERE IN
JAIL BECAUSE OF TRAFFIC
VIOLATIONS AND EXPIRED CARTABS
AS THE ORIGINAL REASON WAS A
COMMON THEME.
THIS IS ANECDOTAL BUT WE HAVE
OVERWHELMING STATISTICAL
EVIDENCE OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF
TAXES ON WORKING AND POOR
PEOPLE AND ON OUR SOCIETY AS A
WHOLE.
YES, WE NEED REVENUES FOR BUSES
AND BRIDGES BUT THERE IS
ABSOLUTELY NO REASON FOR THE
CITY COUNCIL TO KEEP APPROVING
TAXES LIKE CARTABS, WE ALREADY
HAVE THE AMAZON TAX, THE
COUNCIL APPROVED THIS SUMMER.
AMAZON IS REPORTING RECORD
PROFITS, THEY ARE NOT THE ONLY
COMPANY REPORTING THESE
PROFITS, THERE ARE MANY OTHERS
AND WE COULD EASILY INCREASE
TAXES ON THEM INSTEAD.
FINALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO EXPLAIN
HOW THIS SUBSTITUTE AMENDMENT
WORKS BECAUSE MY OFFICE HAS
ALSO SUBMITTED THREE OTHER
BUDGET AMENDMENTS USING A
SIMILAR APPROACH, WHICH IS
USING THE AMAZON TAX,
INCREASING THE AMAZON TAX TO
ACHIEVE THE FUNDING GOAL.
THE AMAZON TAX TECHNICALLY
CALLED A PAYROLL TAX THAT OUR
MOVEMENT WON THIS PAST SUMMER,
TAXES BIG BUSINESS IN SIX
DIFFERENT TIERS DEPENDING ON
THE SIZE OF THE BUSINESS AND
DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THE
SALARY OF THE HIGHEST PAID
EMPLOYEES.
THOSE SIX TEARS HAVE A TAX
RATE, THIS ABUTMENT BUDGET
AMENDMENT WILL ADD IN THE
PROPOSED WAY, EACH OF THOSE SIX
TEARS.
THEY CAN EACH BE CONSIDERED
SEPARATELY AND SUPPORT FOR ONE
OF THOSE AMENDMENTS, AND OTHER
REQUIRING SUPPORT FOR, NOR
CONFLICTS WITH ANY OF THE OTHER
AMENDMENTS TO INCREASE THE TAX
RATE, EACH AMENDMENT STANDS
ALONE.
FOR THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT, NOT
SURPRISINGLY, MATHEMATICALLY,
THIS INCREASES TO THE BIG
BUSINESS TAX RATES, IT IS
EXTREMELY SMALL.
WE NEED TO ADD SMALLER PLACES
BECAUSE OTHERWISE THE INCREASES
WERE ROUNDING OUT TO ZERO.
THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT WOULD ADD
THE FOLLOWING TO THE BIG
BUSINESS TAX RATES.
FOR BUSINESSES WHOSE TOTAL
PAYROLL IS FROM 7 MILLION UP TO
$100 MILLION, SALARIES OF THE
EMPLOYEES FROM $150,000, UP TO
$200,000 ANNUALLY, THAT TAX
INCREASE WOULD BE 0.012%.
FOR SALARIES OVER $400,000
ANNUALLY, IT WOULD BE 0.029%.
FOR BUSINESSES WITH A TOTAL
PAYROLL OF 100 MILLION, UP TO
$1 BILLION, FROM 150 UP TO
400,000, THE INCREASE WOULD BE
0.012%, SALARIES OVER 400,000,
0.032%.
NOW FOR THE PAYROLL COMPANIES
THAT EXCEED, FOR COMPANIES FOR
WHOM THE PAYROLL EXCEEDS $1
BILLION, THE SALARIES FROM 150
UP TO 400, THE INCREASE WOULD
BE 0.024%.
AND SALARIES OVER 400,000 WOULD
BE 0.04%, AS COUNCILMEMBERS CAN
SEE, THESE ARE ABSOLUTELY
MINUSCULE TAX RATES FOR
CORPORATIONS ESPECIALLY THAT
HAVE BEEN REPORTING
UNPRECEDENTED PROFITS SINCE
APRIL.
SO I REALLY HOPE THAT
COUNCILMEMBERS WILL SUPPORT
THIS AND REALLY JUST BREAK AWAY
FROM THE PROGRESSIVE TAX
MEASURES ONCE AND FOR ALL AND I
HAVE HEARD COUNCILMEMBERS
SAYING THAT THIS IS NOTHING NEW
, JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING WAS
DONE IN THE PAST DOESN'T MAKE
IT RIGHT, PROGRESSIVE TAXES AND
CARTABS HAVE ALSO BEEN THE MOST
FUN MEN, AND WE NEED TO
INCREASE THE TAX RATE.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, IT HAS BEEN MOVED
TO CONSIDER YOUR AMENDMENT,
YOUR SUBSTITUTE, BLG 042 C
001, IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS?
OKAY.
SEEING NONE.
WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
ON THEOLOGY 042 C 001.
>> ANDREW LEWIS?
>> NO.
>> TAMMY MORALES?
>> NO.
>> KSHAMA SAWANT?
>> YES.
>> ALEX PEDERSEN?
>> NO.
>> DAN STRAUSS?
>> NO.
>> LISA HERBOLD?
>> NO.
>> GONZALEZ?
>> NO.
>> CHAIR TERESA MOSQUEDA?
>> NO.
>> ONE IN FAVOR.
>> THE MOTION FAILS, NOT
APPROVED, THAT LEAVES US WITH
BLG 0042 B 001 AS VERBALLY
AMENDED IN FRONT OF US.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS ON THE MOTION FOR
FINAL PASSAGE, AGAIN, THIS IS
RELATED TO THE LICENSE FEES AND
THE COMMITTEE THAT HAS BEEN SET
P IN A SHORTE R TIME FRA
PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS
INCLUDING BRIDGES AND OTHER
INFRASTRUCTURE.
>> OKAY, I'M SEEING NO
ADDITIONAL HANDS.
WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
ON THE APPROVAL OF BLG 042 B
001 AS AMENDMENT?
>> ANDREW LEWIS?
TAMMY MORALES?
>> YES.
>> KSHAMA SAWANT?
>> YES.
>> ALEX PEDERSEN?
>> OUTSTANDING.
>> WAREZ?
>> YES.>> DAN STRAUSS?
>> YES.
>> GONZALEZ?
>> AYE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH MADAME
CLERK, THE MOTION CARRIES. AND
BLG 042 B 001 AS AMENDED IS
APPROVED AND IT'LL BE PART OF
THE AMENDMENT CONSENT PACKAGE.
LET'S GO AHEAD TO THE NEXT ITEM
. I'M HOPING THIS WILL BE
RELATIVELY QUICK AND WE CAN GET
THROUGH A FEW MORE HERE TONIGHT.
MADAME ALLIE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
READ ITEM 136 G 006 B 001 ?
>> THIS IS FOR ITEM 136 ON THE
AGENDA, WHICH WOULD IMPOSE ON
$29.9 MILLION IN FINANCE
GENERAL FOR THE EQUITABLE
COMMUNITIES INITIATIVE, I
BELIEVE THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED
FROM THE PACKAGE AND THERE IS A
SUBSTITUTE TO MAKE A CORRECTION
BECAUSE THE WRONG VERSION OF
THIS AMENDMENT WAS POSTED TO
THE AGENDA AND THERE ARE SOME
CORRECTIONS TO THE PROVISO, SO
ONCE YOU MOVE THIS ITEM, BEFORE
THE COMMITTEE, I WILL ASK MY
COLLEAGUE TO JUST DESCRIBE,
ONCE YOU MOVE THE ITEM AND MAKE
THE MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE, LAST
NIGHT ALSO DESCRIBE THE
SPECIFIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
THE ORIGINAL ITEM IN THE
SUBSTITUTE VERSION.>> THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, I MOVE THAT COUNSEL
BILL, COUNSEL BUDGET ACTION, FG
003 B 001 B MOVE FOR AN
INITIAL VOTE, I ALREADY DID
THAT, LET ME MOVE ONTO THE NEXT
PART OF MY SCRIPT HERE.
I MOVED TO SUBSTITUTE COUNSEL
BILL FG 003 B 002, AND PUT THIS
-- LET ME TRY THIS AGAIN, I
WOULD LIKE TO INSERT SUBSTITUTE
FG 003 B 002 IN PLACE OF FG
003 B 001.
>> MADAM CHAIR, I THINK, MAYBE
I MISSED IT, I THINK YOU FIRST
NEED TO MOVE APPROVAL OF FG 003
B 001, AND THEN YOU MOVE TO
SUBSTITUTE.
>> OKAY.
I BELIEVE YOU ARE RIGHT, JUST
FOR THE SAKE OF CLARITY, LET'S
MOVE THE ORIGINAL VERSION 1st,
AND THEN MOVE THE SUBSTITUTE.
THANK YOU.>> GOT IT, OKAY.
LET'S TRY THIS AGAIN FOLKS,
IT'S GETTING TO THAT POINT OF
THE DAY WHERE I'M MAKING THINGS
MORE COMPLICATED.
I REMOVED THE COUNSEL BUDGET
ACTION FG 003 B 001 REMOVED,
FOR ORIGINAL VOTE, THIS DOES
NOT REQUIRE A SECOND VOTE,
ALLOWS IT TO BE IN FRONT OF US.
>> I'M SORRY, CHAIR, THE MOTION
WOULD BE TO ADOPT A MOTION TO
VOTE TO CONSIDER THE ITEMS, AND
MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE.
>> SORRY FOLKS, BEAR WITH ME
HERE.
I MOVED TO SUBSTITUTE?
DOES THAT SOUND RIGHT?
>> I'M HAPPY TO MAKE THE MOTION.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> ADOPTION OF FG 003 B 001.
>> OKAY, IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. BEFORE WE MOVE ON
WITH DISCUSSION, I WOULD LIKE
TO MOVE TO SUBSTITUTE FG 003 B
002 IN PLACE OF FG 003 B 001.
>> OKAY.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED, THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR YOUR SUPPORT, COLLEAGUES.
WE NOW HAVE FG 003 B 002 IN
FRONT OF US, INADVERTENTLY HAD
NORMAL THE WRONG ITEM MOVED, I
APOLOGIZE FOR THAT, I WILL TURN
IT OVER TO ALLIE AND PROVIDE A
LITTLE BIT OF EXPLANATION.>>
THANK YOU, MY COLLEAGUE ON THE
LINE, CAN YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE
WHAT IS THE CHANGES BETWEEN
VERSION 1 AND VERSION 2 THAT IS
THE SUBSTITUTE?
>> IN VERSION 1, IN THE FIRST
PROVISO THAT IS LISTED, PATTY
IF YOU COULD SCROLL DOWN JUST
TO THE SECOND PAGE, THE FIRST
VERSION HAD INDICATED THAT IN
THAT PROVISO FOR THE $29.5
MILLION, THAT THE AUTHORITY
WOULDN'T BE GRANTED INTO THE
EXECUTIVE IS CHRIS -- SUBMITTED
FOR THE PLAN, THAT DESCRIBES
HOW THE ALLOCATIONS WERE
PERFORMED BY AN REFLECTED
ALIGNMENT BETWEEN THE TASK
FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE
BUDGETING PROCESSES
RECOMMENDATIONS.
THE NEW VERSION THAT IS
INTENDED FOR PASSAGE ONLY ASKS
THAT THE PLAN BE SUBMITTED THAT
DESCRIBES HOW THE ALLOCATIONS
WERE INFORMED AND EXPECTS THAT
THERE WOULD BE ALIGNMENT
BETWEEN THE PARTICIPATORY
BUDGET AND PROCESS AND THE TASK
FORCE PROCESS, SO THE
DIFFERENCE IS JUST IN THE NEW
VERSION, IT IS EXPECTING THE
ALIGNMENT AROUND THE PROCESSES
RATHER THAN EXPECTING ALIGNMENT
AROUND THE RECOMMENDATIONS. >> I
THINK THAT IS A LITTLE BIT MORE
CAVEAT THERE, THE MOST
IMPORTANT TAKE AWAY HERE IS
THAT THE COUNCIL GETS THE FINAL
SAY AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS WE
ARE EXPECTING THERE TO BE
ALIGNMENT WITH THE
CONVERSATIONS HAPPENING AT THE
PARTICIPATORY PROCESS, THIS IS
THE LANGUAGE WE HAVE TALKED TO
VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS ABOUT AND
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE
IN ALIGNMENT, NOT ONLY WITH THE
PROCESS BUT ALSO MAKING SURE
THAT WE AS THE COUNSEL HAVE THE
CHANCE TO LOOK AT ALIGNMENT
WITH RECOMMENDATIONS OF HOW THE
CONVERSATIONS ARE GOING.
I ALSO WANT TO REITERATE THAT
THERE IS NOT TIMELINES
ASSOCIATED WITH EITHER PROCESS
SO THE COUNSEL WAS TO BE ABLE
TO KEEP A PULSE ON HOW THESE
DISCUSSIONS ARE GOING WITHIN A
MORE ROBUST PARTICIPATORY
BUDGET AND PROCESS.
AND MAKE SURE IT IS NOT
DUPLICATIVE AND CONSISTENT WITH
CONVERSATIONS.
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
LET'S SEE IF WE CAN DO THIS.
COUNCILMEMBERS, I DON'T SEE ANY
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, COULD THE
CLERK --
>> I APOLOGIZE, THERE WAS A
COMMENT.
COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD.
>> I'M SORRY, I HAD MY CAMERA
OFF, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY
WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AS IT
RELATES TO AN ALIGNMENT, THERE
WAS AN INITIATIVE PROCEEDING
YESTERDAY, AND I FEEL LIKE I
GAVE SOME INFORMATION ABOUT
WHAT THE COUNSEL'S EXPECTATIONS
WERE, AND SAID THAT OUR PROVISO
COULD HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT
EXPECTATIONS AND THAT ASIDE
FROM A REPORT BACK TO US, WE
WEREN'T FINDING THE EQUITABLE
COMMUNITIES INITIATIVE TO
COLLABORATE OR GO THROUGH THE
PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING
PROCESS.
SO I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT THIS
LANGUAGE, THAT THE EXPECTATION
THAT THERE WILL BE ALIGNMENT
BETWEEN THE TASK FORCE AND
PARTICIPATORY BUDGET PROCESS, I
FEEL I'M JUST A LITTLE BIT
CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT MESSAGE WE
ARE SENDING WITH THIS LANGUAGE.
ARE WE TALKING ABOUT ALIGNMENT
OF TIMETABLES OR THE ALIGNMENT
OF PROCESSES?
>> I BELIEVE IT'S THE ALIGNMENT
OF PROCESSES, I'M SORRY,
ALIGNMENT OF TIMETABLES, TO
MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS SYNERGY
, THEY ARE NOT DIRECTING
ANYTHING THAT FEEDS INTO
PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING AND TO
ALLEVIATE THAT CONCERN AS WELL,
WE HAVE CHECKED IN WITH THE
EXECUTIVE'S OFFICE AND MAKE
SURE THIS DOESN'T CROSS WITH
THOSE CONVERSATIONS WE HAD
PREVIOUSLY AND CONFIRMED THIS
AFTERNOON AND INADVERTENTLY
HAVING THEIR OWN VERSION
UPLOADED, THAT WE ARE ON THE
SAME PAGE STILL.
THERE, SO THANK YOU FOR
CLARIFYING.
>> AND GIVEN MY COMMENTS ABOUT
MY CONCERN, I DON'T WANT TO
SUGGEST THAT THERE ISN'T
INTEREST IN ALIGNMENT AROUND
PROCESSES BUT I THINK WHETHER
OR NOT THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN
OR NOT IS DEPENDENT ON PENDING
CONVERSATIONS THAT HAVEN'T
HAPPENED YET. AND I JUST DON'T
WANT TO TIE THESE INVESTMENTS
TO THE OUTCOMES OF
CONVERSATIONS THAT HAVEN'T
HAPPENED.
>> I PUT IT AS AN INVITATION
BUT THERE'S NO DIRECTIVE.
THANK YOU FOR THAT ADDITIONAL
CONTEXT.>> OKAY, SO WE HAVE FG
003 B 002 IN FRONT OF US, IS
THERE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
COULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
ON THIS?
>> ANDREW LEWIS?
TAMMY MORALES?
>> AYE.
>> YES.
>> KSHAMA SAWANT?
>> YES.
>> ALEX PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> DAN STRAUSS?
>> YES.
>> LISA HERBOLD?
>> YES.
>> GONZALEZ?
>> YES.
>> NINE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, THAT
WAS THE MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE,
APPRECIATE YOU PUTTING THAT
ITEM IN FRONT OF US NOW.
THE MOTION CARRIES AND
SUBSTITUTE FG 003 B 002 IS IN
FRONT OF US FOR A FINAL VOTE,
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS?
SEEING NONE.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL ON THE FINAL VOTE OF FG
003 B 002?>> ANDREW LEWIS?
>> AYE.
>> TAMMY MORALES?
>> AYE.
>> ALEX PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> TAMMY MORALES?
>> YES.
>> LISA HERBOLD?
>> YES.
>> GONZALEZ?
>> AYE.
>> NINE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU, THE MOTION
CARRIES.
AND IT IS APPROVED.
LET'S SEE IF WE CAN GET AT
LEAST ONE MORE ITEM IN TO THE
AGENDA FOR TODAY.
MOVING ON TO ITEM 141.
>> ITEM 141, THAT WAS REMOVED
BY COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PEDERSEN ,
21 A ONE WOULD ADD $1000 TO THE
MUNICIPAL DEPARTMENT FOR
OPERATIONS OF SELF MANAGED
ENCAMPMENTS.
THIS ITEM WAS SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER KSHAMA SAWANT.
>> EXCELLENT, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER
TO COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PEDERSEN
FOR DISCUSSION ABOUT THE
REMOVAL AND I WILL TURN IT
OVER TO COUNCILMEMBER KSHAMA
SAWANT, JUST REMIND ME, THERE
IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE ON THIS ONE
, IS THERE?
THIS IS FOR THE PURPOSE OF
DISCUSSION?>> CORRECT.>> GREAT,
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I
HAD MY SCRIPT READY, GIVEN THAT
I WAS FUMBLING THROUGH THAT
LAST ONE.
FOR GREATER CLARITY KITCHEN, WE
WOULD LOVE TO HEAR MORE, FROM
COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PEDERSEN, IF
YOU WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT
THE ITEMS BEFORE WE TURN IT
OVER TO THE SPONSOR.
>> JUST TO CLARIFY THE PROCESS
AT THIS POINT, ON THESE ITEMS,
THESE ITEMS THAT WERE PULLED
FROM THE GROUP B CONSENT
PACKAGE , SO IN THIS CASE, I
WANTED TO PULL IT, BECAUSE I
WILL BE VOTING NO ON IT BUT I
WANTED TO SUPPORT THE REST OF
THE CONSENT PACKAGE.
I'M HOPING I CAN JUST SEND MY
THOUGHTS HERE.
>> YES, THANK YOU.
>> OKAY, I KNOW WE WANT TO
REDUCE HOMELESSNESS IN SEATTLE,
AND WE'VE GOT DIFFERENT
APPROACHES AND PERSPECTIVES ON
THIS AND WE HAVE READ DIFFERENT
STUDIES AND WE HAVE SEEN
DIFFERENT THINGS IN OUR OWN
DISTRICTS, AND I WORKED AT THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT SO HAVE SEEN THINGS
FOR COMPETITIVE GRANT PROPOSALS
TO REDUCE HOMELESSNESS AND I
JUST HAVE A PARTICULAR FOCUS ON
INVESTING ON WHAT IS PROVEN TO
WORK BEST AND THERE ARE SOME
EMERGING IDEAS AND CERTAINLY
FOR ME, IT WAS AN EVOLVING
POSITION ON VILLAGES AND I'VE
GOT A DIFFERENT, VERY SPECIFIC
PERSPECTIVE ON THAT, IN TERMS
OF WANTING ROBUST CASE
MANAGEMENT, WANTING TO BE
FOCUSED ON PERMANENT HOUSING
THAT IS AFFORDABLE.
WE WOULD BE PUTTING A TINY HOME
VILLAGE IN THE UNIVERSITY
DISTRICT, WELCOMING OF THE TINY
HOME VILLAGE, THAT WAS THERE
FOR OVER THE PAST 2 YEARS. I
THINK THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS
TO DO TINY HOME VILLAGES.
MY CONCERN WITH THIS PROPOSAL
IS IN READING THE BUDGET ACTION
DESCRIPTION THAT IT IS
POTENTIALLY GOING TO
ORGANIZATIONS THAT MAY NOT HAVE
INFRASTRUCTURE TO RECEIVE AND
MANAGE THE FUNDING FROM THE
SERVICES DEPARTMENT, SO IT'S
ASKING TO IDENTIFY
NONTRADITIONAL WAYS OF AWARDING
THESE FUNDS AND I FEEL LIKE
THERE ARE ENOUGH PROVEN
STRATEGIES THAT COULD USE THE
FUNDING IN TERMS OF AN ENHANCED
SHELTER MODEL OR SOMETHING WITH
ROBUST CASE MANAGEMENT OR
TRACKING THE OUTCOMES.
SO, JUST A DIFFERENT
ORIENTATION THAT I HAVE ON IT,
SO I WILL BE VOTING NO ON THIS
PARTICULAR PROPOSAL.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, BEFORE
I TURN IT OVER TO THE SPONSOR,
LET'S GET IT IN FRONT OF US
OFFICIALLY, COUNCIL MEMBERS, I
MOVE APPROVAL OF HOM 021A001 TO
BE INCLUDED.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED, THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
FREE EXPLANATION, I'M GOING TO
TURN IT BACK OVER TO
COUNCILMEMBER KSHAMA SAWANT FOR
FURTHER DISCUSSION AND
COMMENTS.
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON THAT
ITEM?
>> I HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN AT
LENGTH ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF
TINY HOUSE VILLAGES AS A WHOLE,
BUT EARLIER TODAY I ALSO TALKED
ABOUT HOW THERE IS NOT ANY ONE
MODEL, THERE ARE SEVERAL MODELS
AND MODELS THAT AREN'T MODELED
ALONG THOSE LINES, AND WE HAVE
A LOT OF TESTIMONIALS FROM
RESIDENTS, AND IN OUR OPINION,
WE HAVE PRACTICED IN THE SAFETY
OF OUR HOMES, BUT THIS IS
OVERWHELMING TESTIMONY OF THE
RESIDENCE AND THE PAST
RESIDENCE OF THE VILLAGES AND
HOW THE SELF MANAGED COMPONENT
IS WHAT SUITED THEM BETTER, AND
THAT IT HELPED THEM OVERCOME
THE CRUSHING ISOLATION OF
LIVING ON THE STREETS.
COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PEDERSEN
MENTIONED THE TINY HOUSE
VILLAGE IN ONE QUOTE I BELIEVE,
IT IS AN EXAMPLE THAT WOULD BE
FUNDED. MY OFFICE HAS TALKED TO
AUTHORIZE VILLAGES THAT, THESE
VILLAGES ARE AUTHORIZED
VILLAGES BUT THEY HAVE RECEIVED
NO SUPPORT FROM THE CITY AND
THOSE VILLAGES, IF WE GIVE THEM
FINANCIAL SUPPORT, WOULD BE
REALLY TRANSFORMED BY
ELECTRICITY, TINY HOUSES,
GARBAGE SERVICES, AND HYGIENE
TRAILERS.
SO THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT IS
ABOUT PROVIDING FUNDS TO
CONCRETELY IMPROVE PEOPLE'S
LIVES AND THE CITY CAN GET
ELECTRICITY, SANITATION, GET A
HYGIENE TRAILER WITH LAUNDRY
AND SHOWERS.
THESE ARE THE COMPONENTS WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT.
IT IS STILL AN IMPORTANT
COMMUNITY FOR THE RESIDENCE AND
IN FACT, ESPECIALLY IN THE TIME
OF COVID, I THINK WE SHOULD BE
DOING EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER
TO ENABLE THE DIFFERENT MODELS
THAT HAVE A PROVEN TRACK RECORD
OF SUCCESS BECAUSE WHAT IS EVEN
MORE IMPORTANT RIGHT NOW IS
THAT THE TINY HOUSE VILLAGES
ARE HELPING PEOPLE KEEP COVID
INFECTIONS AT BAY.
THIS IS SO IMPORTANT AS OUR
CITY AND REGION HAS ENTERED INTO
AN EXTREMELY TROUBLING SPIKE IN
THE INFECTION RATES.
AS FAR AS THE QUESTION OF ANY
DISCOMFORT WITH INFORMAL
ALLEGIANCE, I WOULD SAY THAT
THE FACT THAT THE CITY HAS
MAINTAINED UTILITIES IS AN
EXAMPLE OF THE CREATIVE
SOLUTIONS THEY HAVE BEEN
ADVOCATING FOR.
SO IT PALES IN COMPARISON WITH
THE SUFFERING OF THE RESIDENCE
IF THEY WERE TO LOSE THEIR
UTILITIES.
AND AS FAR AS CASE MANAGEMENT
IS CONCERNED, THIS BUDGET
AMENDMENT DOES NOT REMOVE CASE
MANAGEMENT FROM EACH OTHER,
THESE FUNDS SUPPORT MORE HUMANE
CONDITIONS IN ALREADY
AUTHORIZED AND COMMENCE WE DO
NOT TAKE FUNDING AWAY FROM
MANAGEMENT, IN FACT WE WOULD
SUPPORT AND MY OFFICE HAS
CONSISTENTLY SUPPORTED ADDING
CASE MANAGEMENT SERVICES
WHENEVER IS POSSIBLE.
THANK YOU.
>> EXCELLENT, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD?
>> I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS.
IS THE INTENTION TO MAKE A
DISTINCTION BETWEEN ENCAMPMENTS
AND TINY HOUSE VILLAGES HERE,
IS THAT A PART OF THE INTENT?
>> NO, THERE WAS NO INTENTION,
WE JUST WANT BOTH MODELS TO BE
SUPPORTED.>> ENCAMPMENTS
INCLUDES TINY HOUSE VILLAGES?>>
YES.
>> I'M NOT OPPOSED, I HAVE A
QUESTION ABOUT THE FUND SOURCE,
BUT I WANT TO CLARIFY, EVEN
TINY HOUSE VILLAGES THAT DON'T
HAVE AS THEIR FISCAL AGENT,
MULTIMILLION DOLLAR
ORGANIZATIONS, AND INCLUDING
THOSE THAT DO, THEY ALL
CONSIDER THEMSELVES SELF MANAGED
, SO MY TINY HOUSE VILLAGE HERE
IN DISTRICT 1, IS LEHIGH BUT
THEY DEFINITELY CONSIDER
THEMSELVES MANAGED.
SO IF YOU ARE INTENDING THIS TO
GO TO SOMETHING OTHER THAN A
LEHIGH SPONSORED ENCAMPMENT, I
THINK THE LANGUAGE NEEDS TO BE
DIFFERENT. THE TINY HOUSE CAMPS
HERE IN WEST SEATTLE, THEY HAVE
THEIR OWN RULES AND THEY HAVE A
PROCESS FOR ENFORCING THOSE
RULES. AND I THINK THERE IS A
DIFFERENCE OF OPINION OF SORT
OF SCALES OF SELF-MANAGEMENT
THAT WE HAVE SEEN AMONG
DIFFERENT HOSTS OF TINY HOUSE
VILLAGES AND TENT ENCAMPMENTS.
THE INTENT IS TO NOT GO TO A
SELF-MANAGEMENT TINY HOUSE
VILLAGE THAT AN ORGANIZATION
LIKE LEHIGH IS THE FISCAL
SPONSOR FOR, THEN I THINK THE
LANGUAGE NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING
DIFFERENT.
I AGREE WITH YOU, I THINK SELF-
MANAGEMENT IS WHY WE HAVE SUCH
AN EVOLVED AND SOPHISTICATED
MODEL THAT IS WORKING RIGHT NOW
BECAUSE OF THE HISTORY OF CITY
SUPPORT FOR SANCTIONS
ENCAMPMENT, IT IS ALLOWED FOR
THIS EVOLUTION OF A MODEL THAT
IS PROVIDING OUTCOMES. MY
QUESTION RELATED TO THE FUND
SOURCE IS, I SEE THAT THE FUNDS
FOR THIS ACTION COME FROM
SPECIFICALLY THE FUNDS
ASSOCIATED WITH ONE OF THE ITEMS
IN THE CONSENT PACKAGE AND THAT
IS 139 5 E1, AND INCLUDES
SPECIFIC FUNDING IN ORDER TO
BOTH RELOCATE 425 ADDITIONAL
PEOPLE FROM UNSAFE CONDITIONS
INTO SAFE LODGING WITH EITHER
TEMPORARY HOTELS AND ENHANCED
SHELTERS, AND SPECIFICALLY
IDENTIFYING THE 125 ENHANCED
SHELTER BUILDS AS ONE
ADDITIONAL STRATEGY
COMPLEMENTING THE SHELTERING.
THE HOTEL STRATEGY.
SO, WE ADOPTED THIS ITEM EARLIER
, THE CONSENT PACKAGE, IT IS A
VERY CAREFULLY NEGOTIATED
DOLLARS IN ORDER TO RESULT IN A
PARTICULAR OUTCOME AND IT HAS
BEEN NEGOTIATED WITH
STAKEHOLDERS AS WELL AS THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE, WE ARE TRYING
TO MOVE FORWARD TOGETHER AND
REALLY TRYING TO SET OUT ON A
NEW APPROACH, RATHER THAN
HAVING A LOT OF CONFLICT
ASSOCIATED WITH HOW WE ADDRESS
UNSANCTIONED ENCAMPMENTS.
I'M CONCERNED IF WE ARE GOING
TO BE TAKING MONEY AWAY FROM
THIS ALREADY NEGOTIATED
INTEGRATED UPON AMOUNT, THAT
THERE'S GOING TO BE TROUBLE
AHEAD.
>> YES, LET'S GET CLARIFICATION
ON THAT BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT IS
ADDITIVE, THIS IS NOT AMONG
THOSE DOLLARS, LET'S JUST
DOUBLE CHECK, I SEE YOU BOTH
ONLINE.>> I'M GOING TO ASK JEFF
TO ANSWER THE QUESTION.
EXCELLENT, THANK YOU.>> TO THE
FIRST QUESTION, MY
UNDERSTANDING IS CORRECT, THAT
ALL OF THE SANCTIONED
ENCAMPMENTS WHICH WE ALSO CALL
TINY HOME VILLAGES ARE SELF
MANAGED, AND THERE'S DEGREES TO
WHICH THAT MIGHT BE THE CASE,
THAT'S WHY THE LANGUAGE SAYS A
SELF MANAGED IN COMMITMENT, AND
THIS IS WHERE IT DEPARTS FROM
THE MODEL TYPICALLY UTILIZED BY
LEHIGH, THAT ARE NOT OPERATED BY
HOMELESS AGENCIES, I BELIEVE WE
WOULD CATEGORIZE GROUPS LIKE
SHARE AS SERVICES AGENCIES
RATHER THAN MAYBE A MORE
COLLABORATIVE CONCEPT OF SELF
ORGANIZATION.
SO THAT IS THE INTENTION BETWEEN
THE CBA TO NOT TALK ABOUT
AGENCIES THAT ARE FUNDED,
ESPECIALLY LEHIGH. AND TO YOUR
SECOND QUESTION, YOU ARE
CORRECT, THE HOM5B1 OR 2 AT
THIS POINT, THAT REFERS TO THIS
FRAMEWORK ABOUT OUTREACH AND
TROUBLED POPULATIONS AND
WRITING SERVICES TO THEM AND
MOVING FORWARD.
THAT MOVES FORWARD TO 125 BEDS,
THAT INCLUDES THE 300 PROPOSED
BY THE MAYOR USING YESTERDAY
FUNDS AND HOTELS, AND ALSO THE
125 BED ENHANCED SHELTER.
THE $250,000 THAT IS LEVERAGED
HERE, JUST RESULTED FROM SIMPLE
MATH.
IT COST A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN
$20,000 FOR AN ENHANCED SHELTER
BED TO BE OPERATING FOR AN
ENTIRE YEAR.
$20,000, AND MULTIPLY IT BY 125,
IT IS JUST A LITTLE BIT LESS
THAN $2.5 MILLION, YET THE
MAYOR'S PROPOSED BUDGET
PROVIDED $2.75 MILLION. SO
THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME PADDING
IN THERE, WITH THE ABSENCE OF A
LOCATION OR OTHER REASONS TO
BELIEVE, THAT COULD BE REDUCED
WITH OUT HAVING AN IMPACT ON
THE OPERATION OF 825 BED
SHELTERS.
>> JEFF, DID YOU ALREADY
COMMENT?
THE FUNDING IS ADDITIVE,
CORRECT?
IT'S NOT A SLICE OF THE OTHER
TWO HOMELESSNESS EFFORTS WE
HAVE TALKED ABOUT BEING IN
TANDEM JUST BEFORE WE WENT TO
RECESS, THE LUNCH BREAK.>> IF
YOU MEAN THIS IS IN ADDITION TO
THE OTHER PIECES THAT ARE BEING
FUNDED, SO YES, ALL OF THESE
ARE OPERATING SEPARATELY. THIS
IS NOT TAKING $250,000 FROM
EITHER OF THOSE TWO CBA'S.
FROM A DIFFERENT BUDGET, THEY
INTERSECT BECAUSE OF TOPICS.
>> OKAY, GREAT.
COUNCILMEMBER TAMMY MORALES,
YOU ARE OFF MUTE AND I'M SURE
YOU'RE EXCITED FOR THE VOTE
HERE SOON, BUT I JUST WANT TO
LET YOU KNOW, IS THERE ANY
ADDITIONAL CLARIFYING
QUESTIONS?
úOR COMMENTS, DO YOU HAVE
ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE TO
ADD FOR CLARIFICATION?
>> NOT AT THIS TIME.
>> OKAY, ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS?
OKAY, LISA HERBOLD, THEN
KSHAMA SAWANT.
>> I'M SORRY, WE HAVE BEEN
FUNDING FOR MANY YEARS UNDER
OUR HOMELESSNESS INVESTMENTS AND
I'M PRETTY SURE THEY ARE
CONSIDERED A HOMELESSNESS
PROVIDER AGENCY. MAYBE THAT'S
SOMETHING WE CAN LOOK AT LATER.
>> THANK YOU. JEFF, DID YOU
HAVE A RESPONSE?
>> IT ACTS AS A SPONSOR BECAUSE
THEY DON'T HAVE THE CAPABILITY
OF MANAGING A CITY CONTRACT,
THEY DON'T MEET ALL THE
QUALIFICATIONS AND
REQUIREMENTS, SO WE WOULDN'T
TECHNICALLY CALL IT AN AGENCY
AS MUCH AS A SUBCONTRACTOR OR
SOMEBODY IN PARTNERSHIP WITH
THE ACTUAL AGENCY.
>> THANK YOU.
>> EXCELLENT, COUNCILMEMBER
KSHAMA SAWANT, WOULD YOU LIKE
TO CLOSE US OUT ON THIS ITEM?
>> YES, THANK YOU FOR THE
QUESTIONS AND I REALLY
APPRECIATE JEFF'S THOROUGH
ANSWERS AND I BELIEVE IT'S
GREAT, JUST TO ADD TO WHAT HE
SAID, IN TERMS OF THE QUESTION
ABOUT SELF-MANAGEMENT, I DEGREE
AGREE THERE ARE DIFFERENT
DEGREES OF SELF-MANAGEMENT.
THE QUESTION IS NOT SO MUCH
ABOUT THAT, THE LANGUAGE IN THE
AMENDMENT IS NOT THE DECIDING
FACTOR, THE INTENT IS FOR LESS
VILLAGES, SO BASICALLY COVERING
BOTH THE VILLAGES AND THEY
ENCAMPMENTS, CURRENTLY NOT
FUNDED BECAUSE THEY DID NOT
CHECK ALL OF THE BALLOT BOXES.
SO, THAT IS THE DECIDING FACTOR
IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE
AMENDMENT, THE ACTION WOULD
SUPPORT THE OPERATIONS OF TWO
SELF-MANAGEMENT CABINETS THAT
ARE NOT OPERATED BY
HOMELESSNESS SERVICES, AND
POTENTIAL INVESTMENT AND MOVING
EXPENSES AND SO ON.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AGAIN,
THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE ON THIS
ITEM, THIS WAS PULLED FOR THE
PURPOSES OF DISCUSSION.
THE ITEM IS IN FRONT OF US,
COUNSEL BUDGET ACTION HOM021A001
, NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK
THE CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL ON
THIS ITEM FOR REVISION AND
CONSENT PACKAGE.
>> ANDREW LEWIS?
>> AYE.
>> TAMMY MORALES?
>> AYE.
>> KSHAMA SAWANT?
>> YES.
>> ALEX PEDERSEN?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER WARREZ?
>> I THINK THAT IS MY FAULT, WE
WILL COME BACK IN A SECOND
BEFORE WE WRAP UP.>>
COUNCILMEMBER DAN STRAUSS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER, GONZALES?
>> AYE.
>> CHAIR TERESA MOSQUEDA?
>> AYE.
>> I SEE IT ACCIDENTALLY WENT ON
MUTE AGAIN.
WAIT ONE MORE SECOND.
>> SURE, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
IT IS OKAY IF THE COUNCILMEMBER
IS NOT VOTING, WE ARE IN
COMMITTEE.
THERE YOU ARE, I SEE YOU, I
KNEW YOU WERE TRYING.
>> AYE.
>> EIGHT IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH
COLLEAGUES AND MADAME CLERK.
THE ITEM CARRIES AND THERE IS
APPROVAL OF COUNSEL VOTE
HOM021A001 AS PART OF THE
CONSENT PACKAGE.
ONE MINUTE IS FOR THE PURPOSE
OF DISCUSSION AND ONE IS FOR
THE TECHNICAL CHANGE THE
COUNCILMEMBER WANTED TO SEE.
LET'S SEE WHAT WE CAN DO.
COUNCILMEMBER KSHAMA SAWANT AS
00 2 A001, I MOVED APPROVAL OF
LA 002A001, IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO APPROVE THE CB A,
I'M GOING TO MOVE IT OVER TO
COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PEDERSEN,
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS?
>> I BELIEVE IT IS COUNCILMEMBER
LISA HERBOLD?
>> I APOLOGIZE.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, AND I
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR
DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE.
I JUST WANT TO RAISE THE FACT
THAT FIRST OF ALL, AS REQUIRED
BY THE COUNCIL ACCOUNTABILITY
ORDINANCE PASSED IN 2017, IT
READS IN CONSULTATION THE OPA,
THE CPC AND THE CHAIR OF THE
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE, THEY
WILL WORK TO THE OFFICE OF THE
INSPECTOR GENERAL WILL SOLICIT
WORKPLAN SUGGESTIONS.
JUST RECENTLY, THE OIG HAS
WRITTEN TO SOLICIT WORKPLAN'S
SUGGESTIONS FROM EACH CPC AND
MYSELF, THE PROCESS OF LOOKING
AT CHANGES TO THE
ACCOUNTABILITY STRUCTURE
AUTHORITY AND PROCESS TO MAKE
IMPROVEMENTS IS CHARGED TO THE
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
. SO, IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE
TO REQUEST THE OFFICE OF THE
INSPECTOR GENERAL TO RESEARCH
THIS ISSUE.
I WOULD BE HAPPY TO SUBMIT THIS
WORKPLAN SUGGESTION ON BEHALF
OF COUNCILMEMBER KSHAMA SAWANT
FOR OIG CONSIDERATION AND
INCLUSION OF THIS ISSUE ON HER
2021 WORKPLAN.
AS IT RELATES TO THE STATEMENT
OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT AS
DRAFTED, IT COMMITS CENTRAL
STAFF TO WORKING ON A BILL, WE
ALL HAVE 2021 AND 2022
PRIORITIES, LEGISLATIVE
PRIORITIES THAT CENTRAL STAFF
HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO DEDICATE
TIME TO DURING 2020 BECAUSE OF
COVID.
SUMMER BUDGET, THIS BUDGET, AND
I'M CONCERNED THAT THIS BUDGET
PROPOSAL WOULD ASSUME
PRIORITIZATION OF COUNSEL STAFF
DEVELOPMENT OF THIS LEGISLATION
WITHOUT ANY ANALYSIS AT ALL
FIRST WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS
POLICY THAT IS POSSIBLE.
I WOULD NOT BE ADVERSE TO
COUNSEL ASKING LAW TO RESEARCH
THE ISSUE.
I DO NOT SUPPORT HAVING CENTRAL
STAFF WORK ON THE ISSUE.
SECONDLY, AS IT RELATES TO THE
COMMENT AND CONCERN THAT THIS
PROPOSAL ASSUMES THAT THE CPC
IS NOT FULFILLING ITS CHARGE AS
PASSED BY THE COUNCIL IN 2017,
WHEN IN FACT THE FULFILLMENT OF
ITS CHARGE HAS BEEN BLOCKED
BECAUSE OF MANY OF ITS
PROPOSALS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN
IMPLEMENTED.
SOME OF THOSE PROPOSALS BEND
DEPEND ON BARGAINING AND THAT
ALSO GOES FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
FROM THE OPA AND THE OIG.
ONE EXAMPLE OF WHEN THE CPC WAS
FAR AHEAD OF POLICYMAKERS, IN
THE PUBLIC, RELATES TO
RECOMMENDATIONS IT MADE IN
YEARS PRIOR SPECIFICALLY
RELATED TO PROTEST MANAGEMENT.
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT MADE
CHANGES AS A RELATES TO CROWD
CONTROL, BUT NOT FOCUSED ON
PROTEST MANAGEMENT AND ENACTING
MANY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT
THE CPC MADE.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE CPC
BEING AHEAD OF THE GENERAL
PUBLIC AND AHEAD OF POLICYMAKERS
RELATES TO THE NEED TO HAVE THE
EXPERTISE OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS,
EXPERTISE OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS
WITH LIVED EXPERIENCES
INTERACTING WITH THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT THAT WE SHOULD HAVE
THEM AVAILABLE AS ADVISORS TO
US ON THE LRPC AND THEY SHOULD
BE AVAILABLE FOR CONSULTATION
WITH THE LABOR RELATIONS
NEGOTIATING TEAM.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE
NOW ENACTED IN CONSULTATION WITH
THE EXECUTIVE. ABOUT THIS IS AN
EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING THAT THE
CPC HAS BEEN ASKING FOR FOR
YEARS AND I FEEL VERY STRONGLY
THAT THEIR EFFECTIVENESS SHOULD
NOT BE MEASURED BY WHETHER OR
NOT THERE RECOMMENDATIONS HAVE
BEEN IMPLEMENTED.
SECONDLY, I JUST WANT TO
HIGHLIGHT THAT THE COUNCIL IN
JANUARY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 31930
, REGARDING THE NEGOTIATIONS
WITH THE POLICE OFFICER SKILLED
, THE RESOLUTION INCLUDED
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE
COMMUNITY POLICE COMMISSION,
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL IN THE
OFFICE OF POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY
AND THOSE RECOMMENDATION ARE
GUIDING US ON THE LABOR
RELATIONS POLICY COMMITTEE IN
DEVELOPING OUR BARGAINING
AGENDA.
I'M CONCERNED THAT AS DRAFTED,
THERE'S THE POTENTIAL THAT IT
WOULD ALLOW ANYONE TO RUN FOR
ELECTION INCLUDING OPPONENTS OF
POLICE REFORM AND I'M CONCERNED
THAT IF WE APPROVE THIS TODAY,
THIS COULD IMPLY THAT COUNSEL
SUPPORT THIS, AND IN ANY CASE,
GO THROUGH THE CONSENT PROCESS,
WHICH WOULD NEED NECESSARY
APPROVAL OF THE THREE
ACCOUNTABILITY BODIES THAT
COULD BE A BARRIER OF GOING
THROUGH THE CONSENT PROCESS.
AND WE CANNOT UNDERESTIMATE, IT
SOUNDS LIKE THIS IS A SMALL
THING BUT IT IS NOT A SMALL
THING, IT WOULD COMPLETELY
REINVENT POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY
IN SEATTLE AND AGAIN, WE HAVE
ACCOUNTABILITIES THAT ARE ABOUT
TO PARTICIPATE IN A FORMAL ROLE
IN NEGOTIATES WITH POLICE
MANAGEMENT, ASSOCIATIONS IN THE
POLICE OFFICER SKILLED.
I'M CONCERNED THAT RESEARCHING
THIS ISSUE AT THIS TIME AND
WORKING TO DEVELOP LEGISLATION
WOULD REALLY UNDERCUT THEM AND
UNDERCUT THEIR ABILITY TO BE
PARTNERS TO US IN THESE
NEGOTIATIONS.
AT THE MEETING THIS MORNING,
THE COCHAIR WALDEN NOTED THAT
THE POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY
ORDINANCE HAS NOT BEEN FULLY
MPLEMENTED, THIS IS AN
ORDINANCE THAT WAS SPONSORED BY
COUNCIL PRESIDENT GONZALES
UNDER HER LEADERSHIP AND IN
PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CPC AND
REVEREND WALDEN NOTED THAT THE
COURT HAS ORDERED THE CITY TO
BRING A METHODOLOGY FOR POLICE
ACCOUNTABILITY AND THAT HAS NOT
YET BEEN COMPLETED.
SHE ALSO REFERENCED SOME OF THE
POINTS I MADE AS A RELATES TO
THE CONSENT DECREE AND
POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON THE CPC'S
ROLE IN NEGOTIATIONS.
SO AGAIN, I WOULD BE OPEN TO A
STATEMENT OF LEGISLATION INTENT
THAT ONLY ASKS THE PERMIT TO
RESEARCH THIS ISSUE, OR SHOULD
THE STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE
INTENT NOT BE PASSED TODAY, I
WOULD ALSO BE HAPPY TO SUBMIT
ON BEHALF OF A REQUEST TO THE
OIG FOR HER CONSIDERATION AND
DETERMINATION WHETHER OR NOT IT
IS AN APPROPRIATE ITEM FOR THE
2021 WORK LINE.>> THANK YOU.
>> I HAVE COUNCILMEMBER KSHAMA
SAWANT, ANY COMMENTS?
>> SEVERAL POINTS, BUT ALSO I
HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, NOT CLEAR
ON SOME OF THE THINGS, BUT JUST
ON THE LAST POINT, THAT
COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD, I
WANTED TO MAKE SURE I
UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY, DID YOU
SAY THAT THE AMENDMENT WAS
AMENDMENT TO JUST THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WAS ASKED TO
DO THIS RESEARCH, STAFF WOULD
NOT BE USED, YOU WOULD BE OKAY
WITH THAT?
>> I WOULD BE OPEN TO
CONSIDERING IT, IT IS NOT
SOMETHING I WOULD BE WILLING TO
VOTE ON TODAY.
>> OKAY.
SO JUST TO CLARIFY ON THAT ONE
POINT, THAT IS WHERE MY OFFICE
STARTED, WE HAD JUST BEEN IN
THE PROCESS OF DRAFTING IT
ALONGSIDE CENTRAL STAFF.
WE SUGGESTED THAT WE SHOULD
HAVE CENTRAL STAFF, AND I'M
OKAY WITH IT.
EITHER WAY, BUT I ALSO WANTED
TO BE CLEAR THAT IN THIS
AMENDMENT, WE ARE NOT JUST
TALKING ABOUT RESEARCH, WE WANT
THE OFFICE TO DRAFT THE
LEGISLATION FOR IT. IT DOES NOT
SEEM LIKE A SMALL THING AT ALL,
IT IS NOT A SMALL THING, IT IS
COMPLETELY REINVENTING POLICE
ACCOUNTABILITY AND IT IS HIGH
TIME THE CITY COUNCIL DID
SOMETHING ABOUT THIS.
I HAVE SPENT YEARS TALKING
ABOUT BLACK LIVES MATTER AND
POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY AND
REIMAGINING EVERYTHING, TO
ACTUALLY DELIVER ON SOMETHING
AND THIS IS WHAT THIS
AMENDMENT, THIS IS WHAT THE
INTENT IS ABOUT, IT'S NOT ABOUT
MEASURING THE COMMUNITY POLICE
COMMISSION, IT IS NOT A
JUDGMENT ON THEIR ROLE, IT IS
REALLY THE PEOPLE'S BUDGET
MOVEMENT AND MY OFFICE TRYING
TO DO SOMETHING ON POLICE
ACCOUNTABILITY.
AND THIS BODY THAT IS BEING
PROPOSED FOR THE RESEARCH AND
THE LEGISLATION DEVELOPMENT, IT
WOULD REPLACE THE OFFICE OF
ACCOUNTABILITY, SO THERE IS NO
CONFLICT THERE.
AND SIMILARLY, I AGREE THAT THE
EFFECTIVENESS SHOULD NOT BE
WHETHER OR NOT THE
RECOMMENDATIONS HAVE BEEN
ADOPTED BUT THAT IS PRECISELY
WHY WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT
THE RESEARCH AND THE
LEGISLATION DEVELOPMENT HAS
BEEN IN RELATION TO THE ELECTED
COMMUNITY OVERSIGHT BOARD
BECAUSE IN TERMS OF THOSE
ELECTED MEMBERS, HAVING TO HAVE
A REELECTION, AND RIGHT NOW,
ALL THE AGENCIES ARE REPORTING
TO THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, THE CITY
COUNCIL AND THE POLICE, IN
OTHER WORDS, THE INTENT IS FOR
THIS FUTURE OFFICE OR BOARD TO
BE A DEFENDANT OF THE MAYOR'S
OFFICE, THE CITY COUNCIL IN THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT AND MAKING
THAT AN ELECTED BOARD THAT IS
EMPOWERED TO HOLD POLICE
ACCOUNTABLE AND THEY NEED TO BE
EMPOWERED TO HAVE FULL
OVERSIGHT OVER THE POLICE TO
INVESTIGATE, TO DISCIPLINE, TO
FIRE OR HIGHER, ALL OF THAT,
THEY NEED TO HAVE THE POWER, TO
WHICH RIGHT NOW THIS IS A
REALLY MURKY PROCESS BECAUSE THE
BUCK IS BEING PASSED FROM ONE
OFFICE TO ANOTHER.
THE CITY HAS NOT DELIVERED ON
ITS PROMISES, 2 YEARS AGO A
POLICE CONTRACT WAS ADOPTED BY
ALL CITY COUNCILMEMBERS EXCEPT
FOR MY NOBLE, AND THERE ARE
MANY INSTANCES WHERE THE
COMMUNITY'S VOICE HAS BEEN
úIGNORED.
SO I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT HAVING
AN ELECTED POLICY IS THE
POLICY, BECAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN,
NOT JUST OF THE CITY BUT CITY
AFTER CITY WHERE PROMISES WERE
MADE FOR A MOVEMENT AND THE
PROMISES WERE BETRAYED, I DON'T
BELIEVE THAT. BUT WHAT I DO
THINK IS THAT BEING AN ELECTED
BOARD FOR THE EXCLUSIVE PURPOSE
AND MANDATE OF BRINGING ABOUT
POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY WILL MEAN
THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE
ANSWERABLE TO ORDERS, THEY
THEMSELVES WILL BE UNDER
PRESSURE AND ONE ISSUE, NOT
WHERE THEY DO SOMEWHAT
PROGRESSIVE THINGS AND RUN ON
THOSE ISSUES WHILE ACTUALLY
LETTING PEOPLE DOWN ON CRITICAL
ISSUES LIKE POLICE
ACCOUNTABILITY, LIKE ALL THE
PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN KILLED BY
POLICE AND NOT ONE POLICE
OFFICER BEING BROUGHT TO
JUSTICE.
I THINK THAT IS A SUBSTANTIVE
COMPONENT OF THIS.
AND THE OFFICE OF PROFESSIONAL
ACCOUNTABILITY OVERSIGHT, THEY
ARE NOT LED BY SWORN OFFICERS,
BUT THE REALITY IS THEY ARE
EXTENSIVELY TIED TO THE
STRUCTURES WHERE THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT, AND THEY ARE
CERTAINLY NOT INDEPENDENT OF
THE POLITICAL ESTABLISHMENT.
AND THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR
THIS DISCUSSION, WHICH IS THAT
WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE THE
FIRST CITY TO TAKE SOME OF
THESE MEASURES. ONE OF THE
FEATURES OF THIS PAST ELECTION,
NOVEMBER ELECTION HAS BEEN THE
REMARKABLE NUMBER OF CITIES
THAT HAD BALLOT MEASURES
RELATED TO POLICE
ACCOUNTABILITY, I DON'T BELIEVE
ANY OF THEM SAYS ELECTED, BUT
THE ONE THING THAT ALL OF THOSE
BALLOT MEASURES TRY TO GET TO
WAS THE QUESTION OF ACTUALLY
DELIVERING ACCOUNTABILITY AND
THEY ARE ACCOMPLISH IN THEM.
FIRST, THE MEASURES WILL BE
TESTED IN ACTUAL TIME, IN TERMS
OF WHETHER THEY DELIVER OR NOT.
SO I DON'T HAVE A CRYSTAL BALL
ON THAT, BUT IT IS A QUESTION OF
WHAT THE BALLOT MEASURE SAYS
AND JUST TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE
, IN SAN DIEGO, MEASURE B
CHANGES, THEY HAD A CIVILIAN
OVERSIGHT FROM THE ADVISORY
BOARD AND POLICE ACTRESSES AND
COMMISSIONS ON POLICE
PRACTICES, THEY HAVE THE POWER
TO SUBPOENA WITNESSES AND
CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS INTO
POLICE OFFICER MISCONDUCT.
IT'S NOT ELECTED, BUT IT IS
MANDATED WITH POWER BY THIS
BALLOT MEASURE, BY THE VOTER
INTENT. AND THEY ARE GOING TO
REVIEW COMPLAINTS AGAINST
OFFICERS AND INVESTIGATE ALL
INTERACTIONS, IT WOULD BE
INDEPENDENT OF THE MAYOR AND
CITY'S POLICE DEPARTMENT, THAT
IS ONE EXAMPLE.
THERE ARE MANY OTHER MEASURES
THAT ARE BEING PASSED, IN
OAKLAND, AND SAN FRANCISCO AND
OTHER CITIES THAT I DON'T HAVE
TIME TO GET INTO. THE POINT
BEING, YES, THIS IS ABSOLUTELY
NECESSARY FOR US TO DO THIS, DO
SOMETHING, THE CURRENT MODEL IS
NOT WORKING. I REALLY DON'T
THINK ANYBODY CAN MAKE ANY
HONEST CLAIM, IT'S SIMPLY NOT
WORKING.
AND AGAIN, I'M OPEN TO
AMENDMENTS WHICH WILL BRING IN,
I'M OPEN TO SAYING INDEPENDENT
OF THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, CITY
COUNCIL AND THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT, THAT'S FINE, I'M
OKAY WITH HAVING THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S LOOK AT IT, THE
OFFICE LOOK AT IT.
I'M OKAY WITH THOSE CHANGES IF
THE COUNCIL NUMBERS ARE OPEN.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU, I'M GOING
TO TURN IT OVER TO COUNCIL
PRESIDENT WHO IS NEXT, AND I
APPRECIATE YOU STICKING IN
THERE, THANK YOU.
>> SORRY, I WILL MAKE THIS
QUICK BECAUSE WE ARE 11 MINUTES
PAST OUR DESIGNATED HOUR FOR
ADJOURNMENT. BUT I JUST WANTED
TO COME AS COUNCIL MEMBER WHO
HAS BEEN THE PUBLIC SAFETY
CHAIR FOR THE LAST 4 YEARS, AND
WHO WAS A PRIME SPONSOR OF THE
2017 POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY
ORDINANCE, WANTED TO JUST
SIGNAL MY SUPPORT FOR
COUNCILMEMBER VERBLE'S ARGUMENT
IN OPPOSITION TO THIS
PARTICULAR ITEM AS INCLUDED IN
THE CONSENT PACKAGE, AND I
REALLY WANT TO ENCOURAGE MY
COLLEAGUES TO VOTE NO ON THIS
PARTICULAR ITEM, FOR ALL OF THE
REASONS ARTICULATED BY
COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD.
I THINK THERE IS A LEGITIMATE
QUESTION AND CONVERSATION THAT
NEEDS TO OCCUR ABOUT WHETHER OR
NOT THE 2017 VERSION OF THE
ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM THAT WE
PASSED IS STILL RELEVANT TODAY,
I THINK THAT IS A LEGITIMATE
QUESTION TO ASK.
WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS
THAT IT PRESUPPOSES WHAT THE
ANSWER SHOULD BE.
SO I'M FINE AS SUPPORTING ANY
EFFORTS FROM POLICY PERSPECTIVE
AND I DON'T THINK A SLIDE IS
REQUIRED IN ORDER TO HAVE A
BODY OF WORK, SHE CAN DO IT
WITH OR WITHOUT THE SLIDE BUT,
I DO THINK THAT THE QUESTION
SHOULD BE BROAD FROM THE POLICY
PERSPECTIVE OF SAYING, IS THE
POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM
THAT WE DESIGNED AND DEVELOPED
AND ADOPTED AS A COUNSEL
UNANIMOUSLY IN PARTNERSHIP WITH
COMMUNITY, IS THAT SYSTEM STILL
RELEVANT IN 2020?
AND THAT IS A DIFFERENT
QUESTION THAN WHAT IS BROKEN,
FIXED, OR NEEDS FIXING, BUT MY
BIGGEST CONCERN IS THAT IT
PRESUPPOSES THAT THE ANSWER TO
THAT QUESTION IS THAT YES IT IS
BROKEN AND IT IS NO LONGER
RELEVANT, AND THE ANSWER AS
DEVISED BY ME IS TO HAVE THIS
OTHER RADICALLY DIFFERENT
APPROACH AND SYSTEM IN PLACE.
SO, MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO
ENGAGE IN TRUE COMMUNITY
OUTREACH WITH THE COMMUNITY
PARTNERS, TO COMPLY WITH OUR
CONSENT DECREE OBLIGATIONS AND
TO NOT SHY AWAY FROM THE
OVERARCHING 30,000 FOOT
QUESTION, AS I JUST DESCRIBED
IT, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE
PREMATURE TO HAVE THIS COUNCIL
AS A WHOLE SIGNAL IT'S SUPPORT
FOR THE PARTICULAR APPROACH,
DESCRIBED IN AND BEING
ADVOCATED FOR IN THIS PARTICULAR
BUDGET ACTION.
SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING
THIS PARTICULAR ITEM AS PART OF
THE CONSENT PACKAGE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, THANK YOU
COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD AS
WELL FOR YOUR DESCRIPTION OF
THE CONCERNS HERE, AND KSHAMA
SAWANT FOR YOUR EXPLANATION.
I THINK THIS WAS A MORE ROBUST
CONVERSATION THAN I
ANTICIPATED, WE ARE 15 MINUTES
OVER, I'M GOING TO MOTION TO
RECESS BECAUSE THIS IS A TWO
DAY MEETING AND I THINK THIS
REQUIRES A LITTLE BIT WRAPPING
UP, MAKE SURE WE GET DONE WITH
THIS AND COUNCILMEMBER TRENT
EIGHTS ITEM.
WE ARE GOING TO GO AHEAD -- >>
DO WE HAVE A MOTION IN FRONT OF
US?>> WE DO, I BELIEVE WE CAN
STILL ADJOURN.
>> IF IT IS OF ANY CONSEQUENCE,
I PREFER THAT WE VOTE ON THIS
ITEM.
>> OKAY, LET'S DO THIS.
>> I DO WANT TO RESPOND.
I APPRECIATE YOU ALL WANTING TO
DO THIS QUICKLY BUT I WILL SAY,
I HAVE TAKEN VERY LITTLE TIME
OFF IN THIS MEETING, AND I
DON'T APPRECIATE CONSTANTLY
BEING TOLD TO DO THAT QUICKLY.
I'M DOING IT AS QUICKLY AS
POSSIBLE.
COUNCILMEMBER GONZALES SAID THAT
THIS AMENDMENT PRESUPPOSES THAT
THE CURRENT SYSTEM IS BROKEN,
YES, IT ABSOLUTELY IS PREMISED
ON THE OVERWHELMING FACT THAT
THE CURRENT SYSTEM IS
ABSOLUTELY BROKEN.
AND THAT IS NOT MY PERSONAL
OPINION AS A SOCIALIST, THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT IS BEING WIDELY
RECOGNIZED BY A VAST MAJORITY
OF PEOPLE.
MY OBSERVATION FROM HAVING
TALKED TO HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE
ABOUT THE DEMAND TO DEFUND THE
POLICE IS THAT MANY PEOPLE WHO
DON'T AGREE WITH DEFUNDING THE
POLICE ACTUALLY STRONGLY AGREE
THAT YES, THEY NEED TO BE
STRONG ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM
AND THE CURRENT SYSTEM IS
SIMPLY NOT WORKING.
THAT IS THE REALITY THAT THIS
AMENDMENT IS PREMISED ON.
AND THE LANGUAGE IN THE
AMENDMENT IS AS I EXPLAINED, IN
GREAT DETAIL, ALONG THE LINES
OF MANY BALLOT MEASURES AND I
ALSO SAID I'M OPEN TO
ADJUSTMENTS IN THAT LANGUAGE IF
YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE IT IS
MORE CONSISTENT WITH SOME OF
THE BALLOT MEASURES THAT ARE
ALREADY BEING PASSED BY OTHER
CITIES.
AGAIN, THIS IS NOT MY OPINION,
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS BEING
REIMAGINED BY TENS OF THOUSANDS
OF PEOPLE.
THIS IS MY OPINION IN MY PLAN,
AND IT'LL BE SO TERRIBLE IF THE
COUNCIL VOTES ON THIS, IF YOUR
OPINION IS THAT THE CURRENT
SYSTEM IS SOMEHOW WORKING THEN
THAT IS YOUR OPINION AND THEY
WILL REFLECT THAT, BUT I WANT
TO MAKE CLEAR THAT THIS
AMENDMENT IS IN NO SHAPE OR
FORM BASED ON ANY PERSONAL
OPINIONS OR BIASES THAT MY
OFFICE HAS, IT IS ABSOLUTELY
BASED ON THE FACT ON THE GROUND
THAT THE CURRENT SYSTEM IS
BROKEN AND WE NEED SOMETHING
BETTER AND IF COUNCIL MEMBERS
DON'T AGREE WITH THIS AND THIS
AMENDMENT LOSES THE VOTE
TONIGHT, I WOULD WELCOME OTHER
COUNCILMEMBERS TO GIVE THEIR
ALTERNATIVES TO HOW THEY WOULD
REIMAGINE AND ACTUALLY
ACCOMPLISH POLICE
ACCOUNTABILITY.
THANK YOU.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU SO MUCH,
CLARIFICATION IS WARRANTED,
NUMBER ONE, I WAS NOT LIMITING
ANYBODY'S TIME, THE FACT THAT I
WAS WILLING TO SUSPEND THIS
TOMORROW OFFERED ADDITIONAL
TIME FOR DISCUSSION.
NUMBER TWO, IT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING THAT I BELIEVE
THAT THIS ITEM WAS GOING TO BE
A REQUEST TO LAW TO WORK ON
THAT DRAFTING THE RESEARCH
QUESTION AND I THINK THAT THE
QUESTION ABOUT HOW WE MAKE THIS
IN TANDEM WITH THE CENTRAL
STOPS WORK, WANTING TO
RECOGNIZE THAT CENTRAL STAFF
WOULD BE INVOLVED WAS PART OF
WHAT I SUGGESTED SO I HOPE I
DID NOT COMPLICATE THINGS IN
THAT WAY.
I THINK THE INTENT TO MAKE SURE
THAT LAW HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO
RESEARCH THIS AS ANY OTHER
COUNSEL OFFICE WOULD PUT AS
PART OF THEIR WORK PLAN, IT
JUST WAS LIFTING UP THIS ITEM
TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THIS WAS
SOMETHING THAT WAS GOING TO BE
DONE, THAT WE WERE EXPLICIT
ABOUT THE INTENT TO MAKE SURE
THIS WAS DONE IN A WAY THAT WAS
VERY TRANSPARENT AND IN
PARTNERSHIP WITH LAW AND
CENTRAL STAFF AND I'M
SUPPORTIVE OF IT.
IT DOES SOUND LIKE IT NEEDS
ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS AND IF IT
DOES NOT PASS TODAY, I THINK
THAT WOULD LET SPONSORS WORK ON
THIS HOPEFULLY TO MAKE SURE
THAT THIS IS A CONVERSATION
THAT HAPPENS AT LAW, IT DOES
NOT SIGNAL THAT AT LEAST FROM
MY PERSPECTIVE THAT THIS IS NOT
GOING TO HAPPEN.
I THINK IT'S A MATTER OF THE
RIGHT PLACEMENT FOR THIS AND A
WORKPLAN AND AMONG OUR
PARTNERSHIP WITH LAW.
I DON'T SEE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS.
THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE.
IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL ON WALL 002 A001.
>> TAMMY MORALES?
>> NO.
>> KSHAMA SAWANT?
>> YES.
>> ALEX PEDERSEN?
>> NO.
>> DAN STRAUSS?
>> NO.
>> LISA HERBOLD?
>> NO.
>> GONZALES?
>> NO.
>> CHAIR TERESA MOSQUEDA?
>> NO.
>> ONE IN FAVOR, EIGHT OPPOSED.
>> THE MOTION DOES NOT CARRY
AND WE WILL MOVE ON, WE HAVE
ONE LAST TECHNICAL ITEM AND I
THINK FOLKS ARE ANXIOUS TO GET
THIS WRAPPED UP TO THE LAST
ITEM HERE. I'M GOING TO MOVE
THIS IN FRONT OF US, I MOVE
APPROVAL OF COUNSEL BILL SPD
016 B 001, INCLUDING IN
CONSENT PACKAGE IS THERE A
SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IS THERE ANY COMMENTS OR
AMENDMENTS?
>> THANK YOU, AFTER THE SECOND,
YES, HERE WE GO.
I MOVED TO AMEND SPD 016 KSHAMA
SAWANT 0012 ADD THE FOLLOWING
TO THE END OF THE FIRST
DESCRIPTION, IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU.>> YOU'RE WELCOME,
PLEASE CONTINUE IF THERE IS ANY
ADDITIONAL CLEAR LOCATION THAT
IS NEEDED.>> JUST THAT THE
COMMUNITY SAFETY AND
COMMUNICATION CENTER MAY BE THE
RIGHT PLACE TO MOVE SOME OF
THESE DUTIES OF THE HARBOR
PATROL, RATHER THAN THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT, I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO ANALYZE BOTH
DEPARTMENTS FOR INSTANCE IN
SANTA MONICA, THE HARBOR UNIT
IS A CIVILITY UNIT IS POSSIBLE
FOR ALL PUBLIC SAFETY IN SANTA
MONICA PIER.
IT'S STAFFED 24 HOURS A DAY AND
THEY RESPOND TO A VARIETY OF
BEACH RELATED CALLS INCLUDING
LIFEGUARDS, SCUBA DIVING, EMT
RESCUE BOAT OPERATIONS AND JUST
REALIZING THAT WE HAVE SERVICE
OFFICERS IN THE CITY, THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT MIGHT NOT BE
THE RIGHT PLACE, DEPARTMENT OF
NEIGHBORHOODS IS NOT THE RIGHT
PLACE TO MANAGE THE
COMMUNICATION CENTER SO I JUST
WANTED TO HAVE BOTH OF THOSE
DEPARTMENTS ANALYZED.
>> GREAT, ANY ADDITIONAL CLEVER
KITCHEN BEFORE WE OPEN IT UP
FOR ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AND
QUESTIONS ON THIS SUBSTITUTE?
>> I DON'T HAVE ANY, ARE WE
LOOKING AT THE SUM OF ALL THE
CHANGES HERE THEN?>> YES.
>> OKAY, NONE.
>> THANK YOU, ADDITIONAL
COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO WOULD LIKE
TO OFFER COMMENTS?>> THANK YOU
COUNCILMEMBER DAN STRAUSS FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD, HARBOR
PTROL IS MAINLY LOCATED IN
DISTRICT 4 BUT IT SERVES ALL OF
LAKE UNION, LAKE WASHINGTON AND
BEYOND. I'M JUST SIGNALING MY
STRONG SUPPORT FOR HARBOR
PATROL, I WENT ON A RIDE ALONG
WITH THEM AND SURVEYING A LOT
OF OUR DISTRICTS FROM THE
WATERWAYS AND THEY DO IMPORTANT
WORK THAT I BELIEVE THAT THIS
REPORT MAY SHOW THAT IT'S
DIFFICULT TO REALLOCATE SOME OF
THESE RESPONSIBILITIES.
SO I WILL BE CURIOUS AS TO WHAT
THE RESULTS ARE BUT I'M ALWAYS
IN FAVOR OF GETTING THE DATA.
SO THANK YOU.
>> EXCELLENT, ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS?
>> I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU
TO COUNCILMEMBER DAN STRAUSS
FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND
DIGGING INTO THIS PARTICULAR
ELEMENT OF OUR REIMAGINING
PUBLIC SAFETY EFFORTS HERE, I
APPRECIATE THE EXPERTISE THAT
HE IS WORKING ON DEVELOPING
RELATED TO HARBOR PATROL AND IT
IS A REALLY GREAT EXAMPLE OF HOW
WE ARE ALL WORKING TOGETHER AS
A COUNSEL TO REALLY FIGURE OUT
POLICE DEPARTMENT, POLICING IS
A BIG THING FOR THE CITY AND
THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR MOVING
POLICY REFORM IN THAT AREA
DOESN'T SIT WITH ONE
COUNCILMEMBER WHO HAPPENS TO BE
THE CHAIR OF THAT COMMITTEE.
SO I REALLY ENJOY THE
PARTNERSHIP THAT WE HAVE ALL
EXPERIENCED ON THIS BODY OF
WORK SINCE JUNE.
THANK YOU.>> THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER DAN STRAUSS?
>> ONE THING I HAVE HEARD LOUD
AND CLEAR ABOUT HARBOR PATROL
THAT I BENEFIT FROM AS WELL IS
THAT THEY DO PROACTIVE
PATROLLING RATHER THAN BEING
SIMPLY REACTIVE, SO THAT IS ONE
OF THE MOST IMPORTANT ITEMS
FROM ME TO SEE AS WE PROVIDE A
CONSISTENT AND/OR EXPANDED
LEVEL OF SERVICE ON THE FRESH
WATERWAYS IN THE CITY.
>> EXCELLENT, THANK YOU AGAIN
ON OFFERING THAT CLARIFYING
AMENDMENTS.
THIS IS THE LAST THING WE ARE
GOING TO DO TODAY, WE HAVE
BEFORE US, THIS SUBSTITUTE AND
IF YOU CAN SCROLL UP JUST A
TINY BIT FOR ME, BEFORE I
REQUEST THE CLERK TO CALL THE
ROLE, I WANT TO REMIND COUNCIL
MEMBERS THAT A YES OR AYE IS
AN EXCEPTION OF THE DESIRE TO
INCLUDE THIS SUBSTITUTE, AND NO
VOTE IS A REJECTION OF THE
SUBSTITUTE AND THE DESIRE TO
RETAIN THE VERSION ON THE
AGENDA FOR CONSIDERATION.
AGAIN, WE ARE VOTING ON THE
MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE.
WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
TO SUBSTITUTE.>> ANDREW LEWIS?
TAMMY MORALES?
>> YES.
>> KSHAMA SAWANT?
>> YES.
>> ALEX PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> DAN STRAUSS?
>> YES.
>> GONZALES?
>> YES.
>> CHAIR TERESA MOSQUEDA?
>> YES.
>> NONE OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU, THE MOTION CARRIES
, ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS?
I'M NOT SEEING ANY, MADAM
CLERK, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL ON THE APPROVAL?
>> ANDREW LEWIS?
>> AYE.
>> TAMMY MORALES?
>> YES.
>> KSHAMA SAWANT?
>> YES.
>> ALEX PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> DAN STRAUSS?
>> YES.
GONZALES?
>> YES.>> CHAIR TERESA
MOSQUEDA?
>> IS.
>> NONE OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, THE
MOTION PARRIES CARIES.
THE MOTION IS APPROVED, OKAY,
THAT GOT US THROUGH ALL OF THE
ITEMS THAT WERE PULLED FROM OUR
GROUP B DISCUSSIONS, I
APPRECIATE THE DIALOGUE, I HAVE
LEARNED QUITE A BIT FROM OUR
BACK-AND-FORTH TODAY, SO THANK
YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING
AVAILABLE, WE ARE GOING TO
CONTINUE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA
TOMORROW.
THE CONTINUATION WILL CONSIDER
ITEMS PENDING ON TODAY'S
AGENDA, WE WILL TAKE UP AGAIN
OUR DISCUSSION AT 9:30 TOMORROW
MORNING WITH ITEMS IN GROUP C.
EXCELLENT, A HUGE ROUND OF
APPRECIATION, A ROUND OF
APPLAUSE AND APPRECIATION FOR
EVERYBODY WHO STUCK IT OUT WITH
US FOR THIS LONG MEETING,
APOLOGIES FOR GOING OVER ABOUT
A HALF AN HOUR, THERE ARE NO
OTHER QUESTIONS.
TODAY'S MEETING IS ADJOURNED,
SEE YOU TOMORROW AT 9:30.