>> GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE.
THANK YOU FOR JOINING.
THIS IS THE SELECT BUDGET
COMMITTEE.
TODAY IS JUNE 17, 2020.
IT IS 10:05 A.M.
THE MEETING OF THE SELECT
BUDGET COMMITTEE WILL BEGIN.
WILL THE CLERK CALL THE ROLE?
>> ALEX PEDERSEN?
>> HERE.
>> KSHAMA SAWANT?
>> HERE
>> ANDREW J. LEWIS?
>> HERE
>> TAMMY J. MORALES?
>> M. LORENA GONZCEZ ?
>> HERE
>> TERESA MOSQUEDA?
>> HERE
>> WE HAVE A LONG SET OF
READINGS IN FRONT OF US.
THIS IS THE FIRST OF TWO
MEETINGS.
WE HAVE RUSSIAN ONE AND TWO.
SESSION ONE BEGINS RIGHT NOW AT
10:00 A.M.
WE WILL START WITH PUBLIC
COMMENT AND HAVE AN OVERVIEW OF
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE PROPOSALS.
YOU WILL SEE FROM THE ATTACHED
DOCUMENTS, THERE IS A NUMBER OF
ATTACHMENTS INCLUDING THE
PREVIOUS GOALS WE HAVE TALKED
ABOUT FROM OUR COLLEAGUES.
COUNCILMEMBER TAMMY J. MORALES
AND KSHAMA SAWANT ARE INCLUDED.
WE WILL HERE FROM CENTRALS
DEATH, A WALK-THROUGH OF THE
PROPOSAL I SHARED WITH YOU
YESTERDAY.
WE DO HAVE A DISCUSSION ITEM
FOR TODAY.
I WANT TO THANK THE COUNCIL OF
COLLEAGUES WHO HAVE ASKED FOR
THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE AN
AMPLE AMOUNT OF TIME TO TALK
ABOUT PROPOSALS AND REALLY HAVE
A DISCUSSION TODAY.
THANK YOU TO CENTRAL STAFF FOR
WALKING THROUGH THOSE VARIOUS
PIECES AND PROVIDING US WITH A
ROBUST UNDERSTANDING.
WE WILL HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT
TODAY.
I WANT TO THANK ALL THE PEOPLE
%
WHO CALLED IN.
I KNOW THERE IS A NUMBER OF
PEOPLE WHO CALLED IN.
WE WILL TRY TO GET THROUGH AS
MUCH AS WE CAN.
AS A REMINDER, WE DO HAVE AN
AFTERNOON SESSION AS WELL.
THIS WILL BE SESSION 2. IT
DARTS AT 2:00 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THAT SESSION
OPENS UP AT NOON.
IF YOU HAVE NOT HAD THE CHANCE
TO SIGN UP FOR PUBLIC, THIS
AFTERNOON, YOU ARE WELCOME TO
DO SO.
AT 2:00 P.M., THE FOCUS IS
GOING TO BE ON THE BUDGET.
WE DO KNOW THAT THE MAYOR'S
OFFICE HAS NOT SUBMITTED THEIR
2020 REVISED BUDGET.
TODAY, WE CONTINUE OUR INQUEST
IN THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET AND
SPENDING.
WE WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
HEAR FROM FIVE OTHER CITIES AS
WELL. WE WILL LOOK INTO WHAT
OPPORTUNITIES EXIST AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL TO ADDRESS THE CALL
FOR ACTION FROM THE BLACK LIVES
MATTER MOVEMENT AND LOCAL
ACTIVIST.
SO, I WANTED TO PROVIDE YOU
WITH THAT UPDATE.
THIS AFTERNOON, IT WILL BE A
CONTINUATION OF THE
CONVERSATION WE BEGAN LAST
WEEK.
SPECIFICALLY, WE WILL HERE FROM
ELECTED MEMBERS ACROSS THE
COUNTRY.
AGAIN THAT IS IT TOO:00 P.M.
THIS AFTERNOON.
THE PORSCHE FOR THIS MORNING'S
AGENDA IS FOCUSED ON
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE.
WHILE IT IS FOCUSED ON REVENUE,
WE KNOW THAT PEOPLE PROBABLY
CALLED IN TO TALK ABOUT A HOST
OF THINGS INCLUDING THE BUDGET.
PERHAPS, THEY WANT TO TALK
ABOUT THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT BUDGET SPECIFICALLY.
WE WELCOME COMMENTS ON THAT.
COUNSEL COLLEAGUES, I WOULD
LIKE TO SEE IF THERE IS ANY
OBJECTION WITH THE AGENDA IN
FRONT OF US?
IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION, THE
AGENDA WILL BE ADOPTED.
ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS?
I AM HEARING THE OBJECTIONS.
THE AGENDA IS ADOPTED.
COUNSEL COLLEAGUES, IT IS 10:08
A.M.
AND I WILL TRY TO GET THERE AS
MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE WHO
HAVE SIGNED UP. THERE IS A LOT
OF INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED
UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT TODAY.
AS WE CONTINUE WITH WORKING
FROM HOME, GIVEN THE CURRENT
PANDEMIC, WE WANT TO THANK
FOLKS WERE BEING FLEXIBLE WITH
US AND NAVIGATING THROUGH THE
INEVITABLE GROWING PAINS THAT
WE HAVE ALL EXPERIENCED.
WE ARE CONTINUOUSLY LOOKING FOR
WAYS TO FINE-TUNE THE PROCESS
AND ADDING NEW FEATURES AND
ADDITIONAL MEANS OF
PARTICIPATING IN PUBLIC COUNCIL
MEETINGS.
IT IS OUR STRONG INTEREST TO BE
COMMITTED TO HAVING PUBLIC
COMMENT ON EACH AGENDA.
THAT INCLUDES AT THE VERY
BEGINNING SO PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE
TO WAIT ON HOLD.
WE ARE ALREADY ASKING YOU TO
COME EARLY TO YOUR COMPUTERS
AND LOGIN.
INTO TWO PARTS. RING DIVIDED
FOR THOSE WHO ARE NOT HAVING
THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, YOU
WILL BE ABLE TO REGISTER AT
NOON FOR A 2:00 P.M.
MEETING.
SPEAKERS WILL BE PROVIDED ONE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK EITHER AT
THE PUBLIC SESSION THIS ONE,
SESSION ONE OR TWO.
IDEALLY THEY WILL NOT SPEAK UP
BOTH SESSIONS.
WE WANT TO HEAR FROM AS MANY
PEOPLE AS WE CAN.
I AM GOING TO MODERATE A COUPLE
OF COMMENTS FOR THIS MORNING IN
THE FOLLOWING MANNER: THE
PUBLIC COMMENT IS GOING TO BE
UP FOR 20 MINUTES.
AT THAT TIME, THERE IS
ADDITIONAL FOLKS, I WILL
CONSIDER REAUTHORIZING FOR
ADDITIONAL TIME.
FOLKS WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE TO
SPEAK.
AT THE END OF YOUR ONE MINUTE,
PLEASE TRY TO WRAP UP YOUR
COMMENTS.
THE MICROPHONE WILL CUT OFF
SHORTLY THEREAFTER.
YOU WILL HEAR A CHIME WHEN YOU
HAVE ABOUT 10 SECONDS LEFT.
THAT WILL BE YOUR INDICATION
THAT IT IS TIME TO WRAP UP YOUR
COMMENTS.
PLEASE SAY YOUR NAME AND BEGIN
YOUR COMMENTS RIGHT AWAY.
YOU WILL HEAR THAT YOU HAVE
BEEN ON MUTED.
THAT WILL BE YOUR PROMPT TO GO
AHEAD AND START SPEAKING.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR
FLEXIBILITY, WE ARE TRYING TO
GET AS MANY PEOPLE TO COMMENT
ON THESE ROBUST ITEMS IS
POSSIBLE.
WHEN YOU HAVE COMPLETED YOUR
PUBLIC COMMENT, WE ASK THAT YOU
DISCONNECT FROM THE LINE.
IF YOU PLAN TO CONTINUE
FOLLOWING THE MEETING, PLEASE
DO THAT VIA THE SEATTLE CHANNEL
ON TV OR THROUGH THE OTHER
LISTENING OPTIONS THAT ARE
IDENTIFIED ON THE AGENDA
INCLUDING LIVE STREAMING AND
THE OPPORTUNITY TO LISTEN IN.
IF YOU DO NOT GET A CHANCE TO
COMMENT AND YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO
GET THROUGH, PLEASE DO KNOW
THAT YOU CAN EMAIL ALL OF US AT
COUNCIL.SEATTLE.GOV.
THOSE ITEMS ARE ALSO LISTED ON
THE AGENDA FOR TODAY.
SO WE HAVE A LOT OF FOLKS
SIGNED UP TO TESTIFY.
I WILL QUEUE UP PEOPLE IN THE
ORDER WE HAVE RECEIVED THEM.
AND WE GREATLY APPRECIATE YOU
ALL FOR BEING HERE.
WE THANK OUR I.T.
AND COMMUNICATION FOLKS WHO ARE
HELPING FROM HOME.
THANK YOU FOR MAKING SURE WE
CAN GET FOLKS SIGNED UP.
WE HAVE A LONG LIST.
OKAY.
THE PERIOD IS NOT OPEN.
I WILL CALL THE FIRST THREE
PEOPLE.
WE WILL LET YOU KNOW THAT YOU
HAVE BEEN ON MUTED.
THE FIRST THREE PEOPLE INCLUDE
ERIN HITE, GABE PELLEY, AND
ALANA PEREZ.
ERIN, WELCOME.
>> GOOD MORNING COUNSEL.
MY NAME IS ERIN REPRESENTING
THOUSANDS OF MEMBERS IN SCL YOU
.25.
WE WORK IN THE CITY OF SEATTLE.
I AM HERE IN SUPPORT OF
JUMPSTART SEATTLE.
AS I HAVE TESTIFIED BEFORE, A
TRIAL IS CRITICAL TO OUR
ECONOMY AND WILL BE ESSENTIAL
TO ECONOMIC RECOVERY.
WE WERE SHORT ON CHILDCARE AS
OF COVID-19 AND NOW IT IS
WORST.
148 LICENSED PROGRAMS HAVE
CLOSE REPRESENTING A LOSS OF
9000 SLOTS.
THAT IS A HUGE PERCENTAGE OF
LICENSED CARE.
ON TOP OF THAT SOME FAMILIES
HAVE BEEN KEEPING THEIR KIDS
HOME LEADING TO A 45% DROP IN
ENROLLMENT ACROSS FACILITIES.
THESE TWO ECONOMIC SHOCKS PLUS
THE FACT THAT CHILDCARE IS
OPERATED ON THE MARGIN FROM
COVID-19 MEETS A LOT OF THESE
SMALL BUSINESSES MAY NEVER
REOPEN.
THAT IS ONE REASON I AM HERE
KEEP UP WITH THE DEDICATED
RECOVERY MONEY FOR SMALL
CHILDCARE BUSINESSES SO THEY
CAN READ SMART, AND START
CARING FOR THE KIDS AGAIN.
THEY CAN GET THE PARENTS BACK
TO WORK.
LARGELY, WE HAVE SUPPORTED PAST
EFFORTS TO REFORM THE UPSIDE
DOWN TAX SYSTEM.
THE MEMBERS ARE THE PEOPLE
PAYING THE 17% OF THEIR INCOME.
>> THANK YOU, I AM SORRY YOU
ARE CUT OFF.
PLEASE SEND YOUR REMAINING
COMMENTS IF YOU CAN.
GAVE?
>> MY NAME IS GABE.
I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 4. I
SUPPORT DEFUNDING IS PD AND AND
AND SEND TAX OF 500 MILLION PER
YEAR INDEFINITELY.
I WOULD LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE
COUNCIL MEMBER FOR THE PANDEMIC
AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS,
WHY NOT SUPPORT THIS ONE
LEGISLATION?
THESE BILLS ARE BASED ON
FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT
STRATEGIES.
ONE IS BASED ON A GRASSROOTS
MOVEMENT OF THOUSANDS OF
WORKING PEOPLE.
THE OTHER IS BASED ON TRYING TO
WIN OVER THE VERY FEW WEALTHY
BUSINESS OWNERS THAT WILL BE
TAXED.
BIG BUSINESS WILL ALWAYS BE
HOSTILE TO TAXES.
THEY PLAY NICE TEMPORARILY AS
THEY ARE DOING NOW FACED WITH
THE STRENGTH OF OUR MOVEMENT.
THEY WILL SLIP AGAIN WHEN THEY
BEGAN THE UPPER HAND.
WE SAW THAT IN 2018 WHEN AN
INITIAL TAX OF 150 MILLION WAS
CUT TO 75 AND 47 THEN REPEALED
ALL IN AN EFFORT TO ACCOMMODATE
BIG BUSINESS.
WE HAVE INTRODUCED THE BALLOT
LEGISLATION THAT WE HAVE
GATHERED 15,000 SIGNATURES FOR.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
PLEASE DO SEND YOUR REMAINING
COMMENTS AS WELL.
ALINA?
THIS IS FOLLOWED BY MISHA,
PAUL, AND ELLEN.
>> HELLO, I AM WITH PUGET SOUND
STAGE.
I AM CALLING ON BEHALF OF OUR
COALITION SOUTH CT.
WE HAD SENT A LETTER ON MAY 4
IN SUPPORT OF PROGRESSIVE
REVENUE.
I WANT TO LIFT THAT UP. OUR
COMMUNITIES HAVE BEEN UNDER
THREAT FROM WIDESCALE
DISPLACEMENT.
THE PANDEMIC HAS SHOWN THE
IMPORTANCE OF COMMUNITY
RESILIENCE IN THE FACE OF A
PUBLIC HEALTH AND ECONOMIC
CRISIS.
OUR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS ARE
ON THE FRONT LINE OF KEEPING
PEOPLE HEALTHY, SAFE, AND
SECURE.
WE HAVE ADVOCATED FOR BUILDING
RESILIENCY THROUGH COMMUNITY
OWNERSHIP OF HOUSING, CULTURAL,
AND A SMALL BUSINESSES.
THE CITY HAS LAUNCHED PROGRAMS
SUCH AS THE EQUITABLE
DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE WHICH WE
ARE THANKFUL FOR, THEY HAVE NOT
MET THE NEED IN OUR COMMUNITY.
WE WANT TO THANK THE COUNCIL
MEMBER FOR LIFTING A
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE AND
CONTINUED LEADERSHIP.
WE WOULD LIKE TO THANK COUNCIL
MEMBERS TAMMY J. MORALES AND
KSHAMA SAWANT.
WE WANT YOU TO ADOPT A
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE THAT
PRIORITIZES COMMUNITIES.
>> THANK YOU.
WELCOME TO THE NEXT SPEAKER.
>> GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS MISHA.
I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
THE WASHINGTON STATE BUDGET AND
POLICY CENTER.
I AM CALLING IN TO SUPPORT THE
LEGISLATION FOR YOU.
OUR CITY IS FACING INTERLINKED
CRISES AS YOU KNOW WITH PUBLIC
HEALTH, ECONOMIC CRISIS, AND
INSTITUTIONAL RACISM.
THIS LEGISLATION A RESPONSE TO
THESE URGENT CRISES AND LAYS
THE GROUNDWORK FOR AN EQUITABLE
RECOVERY.
THREE REASONS THAT WE SUPPORT
THIS PROPOSAL, FIRST, IT BOOSTS
OUR ECONOMY BY GETTING MILLIONS
OF DOLLARS CIRCULATING IN OUR
CITY.
THIS IS AS WE GET PEOPLE BACK
TO WORK IN THE PHASED
REOPENING.
SECOND, IT FOCUSES RESOURCES ON
THOSE IMPACTED BY THE CRISIS.
IT IS IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES,
PEOPLE EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS, SMALL BUSINESS
OWNERS AND OTHERS.
IT HELPS BALANCE THE TAX COULD.
WE HAVE THE MOST REGRESSIVE TAX
CODE IN THE NATION.
THIS PROPOSAL, BY BEING PAID
FOR ON A TAX ON HIGHLY
COMPENSATED EMPLOYEES AT LARGER
COMPANIES HELPS MOVE US IN THE
DIRECTION OF A MORE EQUITABLE
TAX COULD.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
BEFORE WE GO ON, I WOULD LIKE
TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER DEBORA
JUAREZ.
THANK YOU CALLING IN DEBORA
JUAREZ.
>> OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS PAUL
CHAPMAN.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL MEMBERS.
IT HAS BEEN JUST OVER THREE
WEEKS SINCE THE DEATH OF GEORGE
FLOYD SPARKED A RECKONING ON
POLICE BRUTALITY.
IN SEATTLE WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED
AN APOLOGY OR ACKNOWLEDGMENT
FROM THE CHIEF AND MAYOR FOR
THE BRUTALITY POLICE
INEPTITUDE, GAS LIGHTING, AND
LIES DISSEMINATED BY THE
SEATTLE POLICE UP TO AND
INCLUDING THE CHIEF.
WE HAVE NOT HEARD REPENTANCE
AND RECONCILIATION.
WE HAVE HER DEFIANCE.
WE MUST HOLD THE PERPETRATORS
RESPONSIBLE.
WE MUST DEFUND THE SEATTLE
POLICE.
WE MUST REMOVE THE MAYOR FROM
OFFICE.
THERE IS NO REFORM WITHOUT
DEFUND.
THERE IS NO DEMILITARIZATION
WITHOUT DEFUND.
THERE IS NO JUSTICE WITHOUT
DEFUND.
THERE IS NEVER REPENTANCE AND
RECONCILIATION WITHOUT DEFUND.
NOW IS NOT A TIME FOR SEATTLE
PROCESS WHERE WE TALK A GOOD
TALK UNTIL THE RIGHT PLAN, THE
MORAL PLAN, THE JUST PLAN
WITHERS AND DIES AFTER YEARS OF
EXHAUSTION.
LAST NIGHT THE 44 DEMOCRATS
VOTED OVERWHELMINGLY TO SUPPORT
DEFUNDING THE SEATTLE POLICE
AND TO REMOVE THE MAYOR.
BE BOLD, DO THE RIGHT THING,
DEFUND THE POLICE, CLEAN HOUSE,
BE NATIONWIDE LEADERS, THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
JESSICA, WELCOME.
>> HELLO, MY NAME IS JESSICA.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY
TO BE HERE.
I LIVE IN DISTRICT 3. I WANT TO
ENCOURAGE THE COUNCIL TO DEFUND
THE SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT
BY 50%.
USE THAT MONEY TO FUND BLACK
AND BROWN COMMUNITY LED
RESTORATIVE JUSTICE PROGRAMS.
THERE ARE ALREADY MANY TO
CHOOSE FROM SUCH AS COMMUNITY
PASSAGEWAYS AND KING COUNTY
EQUITY NOW.
PEOPLE ARE DOING THIS WORK AND
HAVE BEEN DOING IT FOR YEARS.
THEY NEED FUNDING.
THIS IS SO WE DO NOT SPEND TIME
AND MONEY FIGURING OUT HOW TO
DO THIS.
OUR BUDGET REFLECTS OUR CITY'S
VALUES.
RIGHT NOW, WE ARE SEEING THE
VALUE ON SURVEILLANCE AND
CONTROL WHICH IS OFTEN VIOLENT.
THEY ARE PROTECTING WEALTHY
PROPERTY OWNERS.
LET'S MAKE THIS ABOUT
RESTORATION, EQUITY, AND
OPPORTUNITY.
IF WE WANT A CHANGE, WE NEED TO
STOP FUNDING THE SYSTEMS THAT
ARE PERPETUATING INEQUALITIES.
ALSO, I SUPPORT TAXING AMAZON.
WE NEED TO GET THAT GOING.
THANK YOU FOR THE TIME.
>> THANK YOU.
JASON?
>> MY NAME IS JASON FIELDS.
I LIVE IN DISTRICT 5. I
UNEQUIVOCALLY SUPPORT THE
FOLLOWING MEASURES: IMMEDIATELY
DEFUND THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT BY 50%.
DROP ANY PROCEEDING, CIVIL, OR
CRIMINAL PROTEST CHARGES
AGAINST PROTESTERS.
DECREASE, I MEAN INCREASE
AMAZON TAXES.
AMAZON MUST BE TAXED.
THEY ARE PROFITING DURING THE
PANDEMIC AND THE CEO'S PERSONAL
WEALTH IS INCREASING.
MOREOVER, THE RECENT VIOLENCE
AGAINST PROTESTERS HAS SHOWN
THAT THE POLICE ARE OUT OF
CONTROL.
I PERSONALLY WITNESSED
EXCESSIVE USES OF FORCE DURING
DEMONSTRATIONS.
IT IS CLEAR THAT THE POLICE'S
ROLE IS TO INTIMIDATE THE
PUBLIC.
WE MUST INCREASE PUBLIC SAFETY
BY DECRYING FUNDING THE POLICE
BY 50% AND INVEST IN ARE BLACK
AND BROWN COMMUNITIES.
THANK YOU, YIELD MY TIME.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THE NEXT THREE PEOPLE ARE GOING
TO BE, I AM SO SORRY, I DO NOT
KNOW THAT NAME.
WE ALSO HAVE LOGAN AND
GUADALUPE A.
>> I SPEAK AS A SEATTLE RESIDENT
. I SPEAK AS AN ECONOMIST.
I'M A PROFESSOR AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON.
I SPEAK IN A PERSONAL CAPACITY.
NOTHING I SAY REPRESENT THE
UNIVERSITY.
WE NOW FACE A CRISIS OF
SYSTEMIC POVERTY, HOMELESSNESS
IN THE CITY.
WE ALSO KNOW THAT THIS CANNOT
BE SOLVED BY GROWTH ALONE.
THIS HAS BECOME CLEAR WITH YEARS
OF DATA IN THE U.S. AND
ELSEWHERE.
WE KNOW THAT THE POLICIES WE
NEED TO ADDRESS THIS ARE GOING
TO REQUIRE LONG-TERM
COMPREHENSIVE INTERCONNECTED
POLICIES WHICH MEANS REVENUE.
I REALLY URGE THE CITY COUNCIL
TO CONSIDER USING AGGRESSIVE
TAXATION.
WE NEED A TAX BASE THAT IS BOTH
LARGE ENOUGH AND WHICH IS LONG
ENOUGH.
THIS IS WITHOUT A SUNSET
CLAUSE.
WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO FUND
THESE INITIATIVES.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
LOGAN SWAN?
>>
>> MY LIMB IS LOGAN SWAN.
I AM A UNION IRONWORKER.
I AM CALLING AND SUPPORT OF THE
TAMMY J. MORALES LEGISLATION
THAT WILL BUILD 10,000 PORTABLE
HOMES FOR THE COMMUNITY.
IT WILL CREATE JOBS PAID FOR
BY TAXING AMAZON AND BIG
BUSINESS, NOT WORKING FAMILIES.
IT IS DEEPLY UNFORTUNATE THAT A
COUNCILMEMBER HAS CHOSEN TO
EXCLUDE HERSELF FROM THE AMAZON
TAX MOVEMENTS WE HAVE HELD.
INSTEAD OF JOINING OUR
COMMUNITY AND DISCUSSING HOW WE
CAN FIGHT FOR OUR NEEDS, OUR
COUNCILMEMBER HAS BEEN ABSENT.
PROGRESSIVE TAXATION, TAXES ON
THE WEALTHIEST DO NOT NEED A
SUNSET CLAUSE.
THE CREATION OF AFFORDABLE
HOUSING AND GOOD UNION JOBS DO
NOT NEED A SUNSET CLAUSE.
THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT
SHOULD BE A CONSTANT IN OUR
CITY INSTEAD OF WHAT HAS BEEN A
CONSTANT WHICH IS TAXATION THAT
GOES ON THE SHOULDERS OF
WORKING-CLASS FAMILIES.
>> YOU STILL HAVE A FEW
SECONDS.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU LOGAN.
JORGE, WELCOME.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU
TODAY.
MY NAME IS JORGE.
I AM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
NORTHWEST IMMIGRANTS RIGHT
PROJECTS.
WE PROVIDE IMMIGRATION AND
LEGAL SERVICES TO PEOPLE IN
WASHINGTON AND MANY SEATTLE
RESIDENTS.
I AM SPEAKING TODAY IN SUPPORT
OF THE TAX PROPOSAL THAT TERESA
MOSQUEDA ANNOUNCED YESTERDAY.
WE BELIEVE THE PROPOSAL
REPRESENTS THE CITY SO THAT
THEY CAN ADDRESS THE IMPACT OF
THE CURRENT PUBLIC HEALTH
CRISIS.
THAT CRISIS HAS HAD A
DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT ON
CERTAIN COMMUNITIES INCLUDING
IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE
COMMUNITIES.
WE SUPPORT THE JUMPSTART
PROPOSAL BECAUSE IT WOULD HELP
ENSURE THE CITY WILL HAVE THE
RESOURCES TO ADDRESS THE FISCAL
CRISIS AND CONTINUE THE CITY'S
COMMITMENT TO SUPPORT ITS
RESIDENTS INCLUDING IMMUNITY
MEMBERS.
WE THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT
GIVEN THE MANY IMMIGRANT
FAMILIES THAT ARE EXCLUDED FROM
THE SAFETY NET PROGRAMS THAT
ARE PROTECTING THE REST OF THE
COMMUNITY LIKE UNEMPLOYMENT OR
THE RECENT STIMULUS TAX
PAYMENTS.
WE WANT YOU TO SUPPORT THIS
PROPOSAL.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
I APPRECIATE ALL YOU ARE DOING
RIGHT NOW DURING THIS CRISIS
FOR IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES.
THE NEXT THREE PEOPLE WILL
SPEAK NOW.
>> HELLO, CAN YOU HEAR ME?
HELLO, CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> YES.
>> HELLO.
I AM REPRESENTING THE COALITION
OF SEATTLE INDIAN AMERICANS
TODAY.
OUR COMMUNITY STRONGLY SUPPORTS
AND FOLLOWS THE LEAD OF THE
BLACK LIVES MATTER MOVEMENT.
WE ALSO SUPPORT THE TAX AMAZON
PROPOSAL.
THE REVEREND MARTIN LUTHER KING
SAID QUOTE YOU CANNOT TALK
ABOUT SOLVING THE ECONOMIC
PROBLEM OF THE BLACK PERSON
WITHOUT TALKING ABOUT BILLIONS
OF DOLLARS.
YOU REALLY ARE TAMPERING IN
GETTING ON DANGEROUS GROUND
BECAUSE YOU ARE MESSING WITH
CAPITALISM AND INDUSTRY.
WE ARE TREADING IN DIFFICULT
WATER BECAUSE WE ARE SAYING
THAT SOMETHING IS WRONG WITH
CAPITALISM.
IF THE CITY COUNCIL IS HONEST
ABOUT CARING ABOUT BLACK LIVES,
IT SHOULD HAVE THE COURAGE TO
TAKE ON THE CAPTAINS OF
INDUSTRY LIKE AMAZON.
SUPPORT THE TAX AMAZON BILL.
THE COUNCILMEMBER'S BILL HAS
SHOWN A LACK OF COMMITMENT TO
THE BLACK COMMUNITY.
DO NOT SETTLE FOR THIS
CAPITALIST IS FIG LEAF CALLED
JUMPSTART SEATTLE.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I AM REPRESENTING THE COALITION
OF SEATTLE TODAY.
WE FOLLOW THE LEAD OF THE BLACK
LIVES MATTER MOVEMENT.
WE ALSO SUPPORT THE MORALE US
AMAZON TAX PROPOSAL.
TODAY I SPEAK IN MEMORY OF MY
FATHER, A RETIRED ARMY GENERAL
WHO SPEND 25 YEARS LIVING IN A
VILLAGE TO BUILD A SCHOOL FOR
THE POOR.
HE PASSED AWAY A YEAR AGO AND
IT IS HIS BIRTHDAY.
WE SAY BLACK LIVES MATTER.
LET'S PUT OUR MONEY WHERE OUR
MUTH IS. WE KNOW THAT ECONOMIC
DISPARITY, ESPECIALLY NOW HAS A
RACIAL BIAS.
WE ALSO KNOW THAT THE TAX
AMAZON BILL WILL RAISE $500
MILLION PER YEAR TO FUND COVID-
19 RELIEF, PERMANENTLY
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND THE
GREEN NEW DEAL.
WE DO NOT NEED THE SUNSET
CLAUSE.
WE KNOW A COMP ANY WITH A $7
MILLION PAYROLL THRESHOLD WILL
PAY $91,000.
THIS DOES NOT HURT SMALL
BUSINESSES.
THANK YOU.
>> THE NEXT PERSON IS BRIAN.
>> MY NAME IS BRIAN.
I'M A DISTRICT 4 RESIDENT AND
EXECUTIVE AND TECHNOLOGY
COMPANY AND FOUNDER OF AN
ORGANIZATION CALLED TECH FOR
RECOVERY.
OUR MISSION IS TO INSIST ON THE
URGENCY OF TAXING TECH WORKERS
LIKE US.
I APPLAUD THE SPIRIT OF
JUMPSTART SEATTLE.
PUBLIC INVESTMENT WILL MEET
IMMEDIATE NEEDS AND ACCELERATE
RECOVERY FOR ALL.
I URGE THE COUNCIL TO SUPPORT
THIS PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX TIED
TO HIGH WAGE WORKERS LIKE ME,
PROPOSED BY COUNCILMEMBER
TERESA MOSQUEDA.
I URGE, CONSISTENT WITH THE
SUNSET PROVISION AND A
COMMITMENT TO PROGRESSIVE
REVENUE, TO TREAT THIS AS A
STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION
RATHER THAN A STEP IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION.
THIS WILL MAKE THE TAXES ACRE.
WE WILL NOT HAVE EQUITY OR TAX
JUSTICE UNTIL WE HAVE HIGHER
TAXES ON PEOPLE LIKE ME.
I URGE MY PEERS TO COMMIT
ORGANIZATIONS TO MAKING THIS
HAPPEN.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP
ON THIS ISSUE.
>> THANK YOU.
THE NEXT THREE PEOPLE ARE
KAREN, ROBERT, AND EMILY.
KAREN, WELCOME.
>> HELLO, CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> YES, THANK YOU.
GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU.
YES, I CAN HEAR YOU NOW.
I WAS ON MUTE.
MY NAME IS KAREN.
I AM THE GENERAL MANAGER OF
BLACK AND TAN HALL.
THIS IS IN SEATTLE DISTRICT 2.
I AM CALLING TO SUPPORT
AGGRESSIVE TAXATION.
I SUPPORT COMMUNITY RESILIENCE
THROUGH OWNERSHIP.
WHAT I LIKE VAL THE BILL IS THAT
IT LOOKS OUT FOR THE OFFICE OF
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE
OF WHICH BLACK AND TAN IS A
MEMBER OF THE COHORT.
WE HAVE SEEN THAT PARTICULAR
FUND WORK.
WE WANT TO SUPPORT THAT.
IF YOU BELIEVE IN BLACK LIVES
MATTER AS OTHER PEOPLE HAVE
SAID, THEN THIS BUDGET IS YOUR
MORAL DOCUMENT.
FROM WHAT I CAN SEE, FROM MY
OWN LENS, THE TAX AMAZON BILL
AND THE JUMPSTART BILL ARE NOT
IN OPPOSITION OF EACH OTHER.
I DO NOT SEE WHY BOTH OF THEM
CANNOT HAPPEN.
I WOULD LIKE TO ADOPT A BOTH
AND STRATEGY AND SUPPORT THE
JUMPSTART BILL.
I WOULD LIKE TO LEND MY VOICE
TO DEFUNDING THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH KAREN.
I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO
VISITING YOU SOON.
ROBERT?
WELCOME.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
MY NAME IS ROBERT.
I REPRESENT DISTRICT 5. LOOSEN
AND CLIMATE CHANGE AND OTHERS
HAVE MARGINALIZED BLACK AND
BROWN COMMUNITIES.
WE NEED ECONOMIC JUSTICE FOR
BLACK AND BROWN PEOPLE.
I WANT YOU TO COMMIT TO
CONTRIBUTE $5 MILLION.
DEFINED THE POLICE BY AT LEAST
HALF.
PUT IT TOWARDS BLACK AND BROWN
COMMUNITIES INSTEAD OF FUNDING
OPPRESSION.
WE NEED PERMANENT ACTION NEEDED
TO ADDRESS THE INTERSECTION OF
RACE AND POVERTY.
WE NEED COVID-19 RELIEF, A
GREEN NEW DEAL, JOBS, AND
AFFORDABLE HOUSING BEFORE 2022.
DEFINED DEPRESSION, TAX
PROFITEERS, THE FUTURE IS NOW.
BLACK LIVES MATTER AND I YIELD
MY TIME.
>> EMILY, WELCOME.
>> HI I AM IN DISTRICT 2. I
WOULD LOVE TO BELIEVE IN WHAT
THE SPEAKER SAID, THIS COULD BE
A YES AND STRATEGY.
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THEIR BE
$700 MILLION IN ANNUAL FUNDING
FOR COMMUNITY PROGRAMS.
I DO THINK IT IS THE JUMPSTART
PROPOSAL.
IT IS MEANT TO BE AND INSTEAD
AND A DISTRACTION.
I AM IS SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE
AMAZON TAX.
WE NEED $500 MILLION A YEAR.
I THINK THAT 200 MILLION IS
LESS THAN HALF AND LESS THAN
HALF CANNOT COVER MORE PROBE
HOMES.
ANY WORKING-CLASS FAMILY CAN
TELL YOU YOU CANNOT TAKE LESS
MONEY AND MAKE IT GO FURTHER.
I REJECT THE SUNSET CLAUSE.
WE NEED A SUNSET ON THE STATUS
QUO.
WE NEED THE SUNSET ON
HOMELESSNESS.
WE NEED THE SUNSET ON SYSTEMIC
INEQUALITY AND RACISM.
WE DO NOT NEED A BUSINESS TAX.
BUSINESS CAN PAY AND THEY
SHOULD INVEST IN OUR
COMMUNITIES NOW.
>> THANK YOU.
ARE YOU WITH US?
>>
>> YES, THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS KEIRA.
I AM A D3 RESIDENT AND A
VOLUNTEER WITH THE TAX AMAZON
COALITION.
I SPENT THE LAST TWO MONTHS
COLLECTING SIGNATURES FOR THE
BALLOT INITIATIVE REGARDING THE
TAMMY J. MORALES BILL.
TERESA MOSQUEDA, WHY ARE YOU
PROPOSING A BILL THAT RAISES
LESS THAN HALF THE REVENUE AND
HAS A SUNSET CLAUSE?
15,000 RESIDENTS HAVE INDICATED
THEIR SUPPORT FOR THE TAX
AMAZON.
THE BIGGEST QUESTION PEOPLE
HAVE ASKED ME WHILE I HAVE BEEN
GATHERING SIGNATURES IS WHY ARE
NOT WE PROPOSING A FIGURE TAX.
WHAT ARE YOU INVITING
EXECUTIVES FROM EXPEDIA AND BIG
BUSINESSES TO COME TO THE TABLE
WHEN SEATTLE DENOUNCED HOW
CORPORATIONS INFLUENCE CITY
POLITICS.
I URGED THE COUNCIL TO PASS THE
AMAZON TAX AS A START.
I ALSO UNEQUIVOCALLY SUPPORT
DEFUNDING THE SEATTLE POLICE BY
50%.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MARIAH, WELCOME.
>> I AM HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE
TAX AMAZON AND DEFUNDING THE
SEATTLE POLICE.
A 911 CALL GOES OUT AND IT IS
THE NORTH PRECINCT RESPONSE.
IN THE NORTH PRECINCT RESPONSE,
THEY GO TO A DOOR, KNOCK ON THE
DOOR, A PREGNANT WOMAN OPENS
THE DOOR WITH FOUR SMALL
CHILDREN BEHIND HER.
A SCUFFLE ENSURES THERE IS NO
BODY CAMERA.
THERE IS NO TEAR GAS.
THERE IS NO RUBBER BULLETS.
THERE IS NO TASER.
THERE IS NOTHING.
THERE IS AN AUTOMATIC WEAPON
THAT LOADS 5 TO 7 BULLETS INTO
HER CHEST AND LUCKILY NONE OF
THEM WENT THROUGH HER PREGNANT
BODY.
IT DID NOT HIT THE CHILDREN
BEHIND HER.
THE FOUR CHILDREN ARE GABBY,
QUAN, AND TWO OTHERS.
NOW THEY HAVE NO MOTHER.
THOSE TWO POLICE OFFICERS FROM
THE NORTH PRECINCT DO NOT GET
CHARGED WITH MURDER.
THEY ARE ACQUITTED OF ALL
CHARGES.
FOR THAT REASON ALONE, YOU
SHOULD DEFUND THE POLICE BY
100% OR HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE
FOR MURDER.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT
TESTIMONY AND FOR CONTINUING TO
LIFT UP THAT STORY, THAT
EXAMPLE OF WHY WE ARE WORKING
TO DEFUND THE POLICE, THANK YOU
SO MUCH.
JULIA.
>> HELLO, MY NAME IS JULIA.
I WOULD LIKE YOU TO SAY HER
NAME.
HER NAME IS SHIRLEY NOT LYLE.
I AM A LOCAL UNEMPLOYED
BARTENDER IN DISTRICT 6. I HAVE
BEN FOLLOWING THE MEETINGS AND
I AM DISAPPOINTED.
WHY LOOK AT OTHER CITIES WHEN
YOUR CITIZENS ARE CRYING OUT
FOR YOU?
YOU ALL ARE TONE DEAF.
THE BUDGET AND JUMPSTART
PROPOSALS IS NOT GOING TO SHOW
ANY MOVEMENT OUTSIDE OR CLEAR
YOU'RE IN BOXES OR VOICE
VIDEOS.
YOU ARE NOT DOING ENOUGH.
WE WANT YOU TO DEFUND THE
POLICE BY AT LEAST 50%, STOP
PRETENDING TO FUND AFFORDABLE
HOUSING, STOP GENTRIFYING THE
COMMUNITY.
STOP FOCUSING ON REDTAPE.
FUND ANTI-GENTRIFICATION AND
STOP PREDATORY LENDING.
THERE WILL BE BLOOD ON YOUR
HANDS.
I YIELD MY TIME.
>> WE HAVE GONE OVER 20
MINUTES.
I'M GOING TO EXTEND PUBLIC
COMMENT FOR ANOTHER 10 MINUTES
AND TRY TO GET AS MANY PEOPLE
IN AS WE CAN.
IS THERE ANY OBJECTION?
I HEAR NO OBJECTION.
WE WILL CONTINUE WITH PUBLIC
COMMENT.
THE NEXT THREE PEOPLE WILL
SPEAK.
>> HELLO.
I AM A MEMBER OF THE SEATTLE
LGBTQ COMMISSION AND THE PARK
DISTRICT OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE.
IAM SPEAKING FOR THE COALITION
OF SEATTLE INDIAN AMERICANS.
PLEASE VOTE FOR THE TAX AMAZON
PROPOSAL.
THIS WILL RAISE $500 MILLION
PER YEAR FROM BIG BUSINESSES.
THIS IS THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF
MONEY NEEDED TO PERMANENTLY
FUND AFFORDABLE HOUSING,
SERVICES AND LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES, COVID-19 RELIEF,
AND THE GREEN NEW DEAL.
A PROPOSAL THAT GENERATES LESS
REVENUE OR INCLUDES A SUNSET
CLAUSE IS INSUFFICIENT.
WILL BE WANT TO DEFUND THE
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT BY
$180 MILLION TO INVEST IN THE
BLACK COMMUNITY.
THESE SOURCES SHOULD PROVIDE
FOR A 500 MILLION ANTI-
GENTRIFICATION LAND FUND TO
HELP THE BLACK COMMUNITY
CQUIRE PROPERTY AND SUPPORT
BLACK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
IF YOU BELIEVE THAT BLACK LIVES
MATTER, PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE
YOUR MOUTH IS AND SUPPOSED KING
COUNTY EQUITY NOW AND TAX
AMAZON.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, HANNAH, ARE YOU
WITH US?
>> MY NAME IS HANNAH.
I AM ALSO CALLING INTO VOICE
SUPPORT FOR COUNSEL MEMBER'S
TAX AMAZON LEGISLATION.
IT SHOWS THE STRENGTH OF OUR
MOVEMENT THAT TERESA MOSQUEDA
WAS PRESSURED TO BRING FORWARD
HER OWN PROPOSAL.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE PROPOSAL IS
A DEAL STRUCK WITH BIG
BUSINESS.
IT FALLS SHORT OF WHAT WE NEED.
THE PUZZLE WOULD RAISE LESS
THAN HALF OF THE MONEY THAT THE
OTHER TAX AMAZON LEGISLATION
WOULD RAISE.
IT IS OUTRAGEOUS THAT THE BILL
HAS A SUNSET CLAUSE.
AS IF AFTER 10 YEARS ARE CRISIS
IS WOULD DISAPPEAR.
WE NEED TO DO BETTER THAN THAT.
WE CANNOT SETTLE FOR WATERED
DOWN TAKE BUSINESS TAX.
HY MAKE DEALS WITH
BUSINESS?
WHY DON'T YOU WORK WITH
ORDINARY PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING
TO ADDRESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING
CRISIS?
WE NEED TO RAISE AT LEAST 500
MILLION A YEAR THROUGH THE
AMAZON BILL.
WE NEED TO DEFUND THE POLICE BY
50%.
THANK YOU.
>> KATIE SIMPSON?
>> MY NAME IS KATE SIMPSON.
I'M A RESIDENT OF CAPITOL HILL.
I AM CALLING IN SUPPORT OF
DEFUNDING THE SPD BY AT LEAST
50% AND USING THE MONEY TO
INVEST IN COMMUNITY AND
RESTORATIVE JUSTICE.
THE POLICE PRESENCE IN MY
NEIGHBORHOOD DO NOT MAKE ME
FEEL SAFE AND RECLAIMING THE
EAST PRECINCT, MY AREA FEELS
SAFER.
THE EAST PRECINCT MUST BE
TURNED OVER TO BLACK AND BROWN
COMMUNITY LEADERS SO IT CAN
ACTUALLY HELP SEATTLE RESIDENCE.
FURTHERMORE, I DEMAND AN
INDEPENDENTLY ELECTED COMMUNITY
OVERSIGHT BOARD WITH FULL
POWERS OVER THE POLICE
INCLUDING HIRING AND FIRING.
THE PROTESTERS THAT HAVE BEEN
ARRESTED MUST ALSO BE FREED AND
ALL CHARGES AGAINST THEM
DROPPED.
I AM ALSO IN FAVOR OF TAX
AMAZON.
IT WOULD HELP REPAIR RACIST
GENTRIFICATION BY BUILDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND IT WOULD
ALSO PROVIDE GREEN JOBS.
THANK YOU, I YIELD MY TIME.
>> THANK YOU.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS BILLY
BALLARD.
THE MAC
>> HELLO, GOOD MORNING.
THANK YOU FOR TAKING MY
COMMENT.
I AM BILLY BALLARD.
I LIVE IN QUEEN ANNE.
I AM CALLING ABOUT AGENDA
ITEMS, THE ALTERNATIVE MODEL OF
PUBLIC SAFETY.
DISABLED INDIVIDUALS MAKE UP A
MAJORITY OF THOSE KILLED AND
USE OF FORCE CASES BY POLICE
OFFICERS.
WE ALSO KNOW THAT THE MAJORITY
OF THOSE KILLED AND USE OF
FORCE CASES ARE BLACK, DITCHES,
AND PEOPLE OF COLOR.
ADDRESSING ABEL'S OF IS KEY TO
DISMANTLING SYSTEMIC RACISM IN
AN INSTITUTION THAT HAS
TERMINATED LIVES.
FROM MANY PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN
HARMED BY THE POLICE,
INDIVIDUALS GET TIPPED OUT OF
THEIR WHEELCHAIRS BY THE POLICE
AND MANY PEOPLE HAVE MENTAL
ILLNESS.
I ASKED THE COUNCIL TO KEEP
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES,
ESPECIALLY, BLACK AND PEOPLE OF
COLOR FRONT AND CENTER WHEN
RESTRUCTURING THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT BUDGET.
PLEASE LOOK AT THE DATA FROM
2016 AND 2017.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WELCOME.
>> HELLO.
MY NAME IS ADDIE SMITH.
I AM A BLACK WOMAN, REGISTERED
VOTER AND A HATE CRIME
SURVIVOR.
I AM CALLING TO ASK THE COUNCIL
TO VOTE IN SUPPORT OF DEFUNDING
THE POLICE BY AT LEAST 50%.
THIS INCLUDES COMMUNITY
RESPONDERS FOR NONCRIMINAL
EMERGENCY CALLS.
AS WELL, THE COUNCIL SHOULD
SUPPORT THE MEASURE TO TAX
AMAZON TO ADDRESS RACIST
GENTRIFICATION AND FUND
HOUSING, JOBS, AND A GREEN NEW
DEAL.
I AM DEMANDING THAT THE
GOVERNOR ORDER AN INVESTIGATION
INTO HATE CRIMES COMMITTED
AGAINST BLACK WOMEN ON MERCER
ISLAND.
THEIR VOICES ARE BEING
SUPPRESSED BY THE MAYOR.
THEY ARE BEING SUPPRESSED BY A
MULTIMILLION DOLLAR COMPANY,
ATTORNEYS AND OTHERS.
BLACK WOMEN ARE NOT SAFE ON
MERCER ISLAND.
BLACK WOMEN ARE NOT SAFE IN
WASHINGTON STATE. I YIELD TO
THE REMAINDER OF MY TIME.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
PAGER WILL BE FOLLOWED BY
DANIEL AND SUSAN AND JEFFREY.
WELCOME PEDRO.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER.
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME THE
TIME TO SPEAK.
I AM A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE
CARPENTERS UNION.
I AM CALLING IN SUPPORT OF THE
REVENUE JUMPSTART SEATTLE.
I THINK IT IS A BILL THAT WOULD
REALLY TARGET NOT ONLY JUST
AMAZON BUT ALL CORPORATIONS THAT
ARE HERE PROFITING ON THE BACKS
OF PEOPLE.
ALSO, I AM IN SUPPORT THAT THE
BILL ALLOWS US TO GET WORK FOR
THE COMMUNITIES OF COLOR,
MINORITIES.
IT SHOULD BE COVERED FOR
IMMIGRANT PEOPLE AND IT SHOULD
PROVIDE JOBS THAT WILL PROMOTE
THE GROWTH OF COMMUNITIES OF
COLOR.
IT SHOULD INCLUDE INDIGENOUS
AND IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES.
BY ALLOWING THIS TO PAY
PREVAILING WAGES, THIS WOULD BE
HELPFUL.
I THANK THE BOARD FOR ALLOWING
ME TO TALK.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU FOR CALLING IN.
DANIEL?
THE MAC HELLO I AM A STUDENT IN
DISTRICT 4 AND A VOLUNTEER WITH
THE TAX AMAZON MOVEMENT.
IN THE WAKE OF THE RECESSION, I
CALLED THE DEFUND THE SEATTLE
POLICE BY 50%.
WE ARE GOING TO NEED A LOT MORE
MONEY THAN JUST HALF THE POLICE
BUDGET.
WE NEEDED EMERGENCY RELIEF AND
WE NEEDED TO FUND AFFORDABLE
HOUSING YESTERDAY.
I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT THERE IS A
JUMPSTART SEATTLE PROPOSAL.
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE IS WELCOME.
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE JUMPSTART
AND THE AMAZON TAX PASSED.
I CANNOT SUPPORT THE PROPOSAL
IF IT PLACES THE MORALE IS TAX.
IT HAS A SUNSET CLAUSE AND IT
IMPLIES THIS IS A RESPONSE TO A
TEMPORARY PROBLEM.
THE HOUSING CRISIS EXISTED LONG
BEFORE COVID-19. THESE WILL
CONTINUE TO PLAGUE THE PEOPLE
OF SEATTLE LONG AFTER COVID-19.
THIS IS IF A $200 MILLION TAX
AND A SUNSET CLAUSE IS ALL WE
CAN DO.
>> THANK YOU FOR CALLING IN.
SUSAN?
>> HELLO MY NAME IS SUSAN.
I'M A RESIDENT OF THE SIXTH
DIFFERENT.
I AM A MEMBER OF THE TAX AMAZON
CAMPAIGN.
I 100% SUPPORT THE PROPOSAL AS
WELL AS DEFUNDING THE POLICE.
D TERESA MOSQUEDA PROPOSAL IS
A CAPITALISTIC FIG LEAF.
IT IS A CYNICAL SHORT-TERM
MEASURE THAT WILL PLUG HOLES IN
THE BUDGET BUT DO NOTHING TO
ADDRESS THE HORRENDOUS HOUSING
EMERGENCY THAT WE HAVE.
IT WILL BUILD 91 UNITS OF LOW
INCOME HOUSING.
THE ORIGINAL TAX AMAZON
PROPOSAL WILL BUILD MORE THAN
10,000 UNITS OVER THE NEXT 10
YEARS.
THIS IS COMPLETELY INADEQUATE.
IT IS BACKWARDS DEALING WITH
CORPORATIONS.
I DO NOT KNOW WHY THE COUNCIL
WANTS TO DO THIS.
THE LAST ELECTIONS SHOWED THAT
SEATTLE VOTERS DID NOT WANT
AMAZON CORPORATE TOOLS.
PLEASE FUND, PLEASE VOTE FOR
THE TAX AMAZON PROPOSAL AND
DEFUND THE POLICE.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, JEFFREY STATER
FOLLOWED BY LAURA AND BARBARA.
THE LAST SPEAKER WILL BE
TRISTAN SPEARS.
I APOLOGIZE FOR FOLKS WHO MIGHT
HAVE SIGNED UP AND WAITED TO
TESTIFY.
WE HAVE TO CUT IT OFF AT THIS
POINT.
WE WILL HAVE TESTIMONY AGAIN
TODAY AT 2:00 P.M.
JEFFREY SNYDER?
WELCOME.
>> HELLO COUNCILMEMBER.
I WOULD LIKE TO CONGRATULATE
YOU ON THE BREATH OF THE
COALITION YOU PUT TOGETHER TO
SUPPORT YOUR NEW JUMPSTART
SEATTLE LEGISLATION.
IT REALLY DOES NOT GO FAR
ENOUGH.
SEATTLE IS FACING A BUDGET
SHORTFALL OF $300 MILLION.
COMPROMISING $300 MILLION AND
NOT EVEN GETTING CORPORATIONS
ON BOARD INDICATES THAT THE
COMPROMISE IS NOT GOING
FORWARD.
I WOULD LIKE TO DEFUND THE
POLICE BY 50% AND INVEST THAT
MONEY IN THE BLACK COMMUNITY.
I WOULD LIKE TO FREE ALL OF THE
PROTESTERS.
I DO NOT WANT RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT ARE NOT FOLLOWED.
EVERYTHING WILL GO BACK TO
NORMAL.
I DO NOT WHAT NORMAL.
NORMAL MEANS THE SPD KILLING
ARE BLACK AND PEOPLE OF COLOR.
IT MEANS CONSTANT HARASSMENT OF
THE HOMELESS.
IT IS A POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT
HAS DONE ALL BUT DECLARE WAR ON
THE CITIZENS.
PLEASE STOP PRETENDING YOU DO
NOT HAVE THE TIME OR THE TOOLS.
>> THANK YOU, WELCOME LAURA.
>>
>> HELLO, I AM CALLING ON
BEHALF OF SHARE THE CITY, A
SEATTLE-BASED ORGANIZING
COLLECTIVE.
WE SUPPORT THE JUMPSTART
SEATTLE PLAN.
THIS IS THE ABSOLUTE BARE
MINIMUM THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE
TO SUPPORT SEATTLE DURING THE
HEALTH AND ECONOMIC CRISIS.
THE TAX AMAZON LEGISLATION HAS
NOT RECEIVED UNANIMOUS SUPPORT
IN OUR GROUP.
THIS PLAN DOES.
ANYONE OPPOSING THE JUMPSTART
SEATTLE PLAN IS REVEALING A
DEEP LEVEL OF DISCONNECT THAT
THEY HAVE TOWARDS HER ECONOMIC
CRISIS AND PEOPLE SUFFERING.
THE MAYOR WILL NOT BE ABLE TO
VETO THE JUMPSTART SEATTLE
PLAN.
THE URGENCY OF THIS MOMENT IS
DIRECTLY TIED TO THE FACT THAT
WE WILL HAVE A HISTORIC
EVICTION CRISIS IN MARCH.
WITH THAT, WE WILL HAVE A RISE
IN HOMELESSNESS.
WE DO NOT HAVE THE SOLUTIONS TO
MEET OUR NEEDS DUE TO LACK OF
FUNDING.
THIS IS ALSO DUE TO ZONING AND
ECONOMIC INEQUALITY.
THIS IS JUST A DUMB START.
IT DOES NOT MEET THE NEEDS OF
THE CRISIS.
ALSO, PLEASE STOP THE TWEETS TO
FUND THE SPD AND MEET THE
DEMANDS OF KING COUNTY EQUITY
NOW.
THANK YOU.
>> BARBARA?
>> I AM BARBARA. I
AM A MEMBER OF A FTE, A
DELEGATE TO THE LABOR COUNSEL.
I AM A MEMBER OF THE 30-SECOND
LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT DEMOCRATS.
I WANT TO DEFUND THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT BY 50% AND I WANT TO
TAX AMAZON.
CHARLENA LILES WAS MURDERED IN
HER HOME IN FRONT OF HER
CHILDREN BY THE POLICE TWO
YEARS AGO TOMORROW.
SAY HER NAME.
DEFUND THE SEATTLE POLICE BY AT
LEAST 50% NOW.
PUT THAT FUNDING INTO BLACK AND
BROWN PEOPLE'S RESTORATIVE
FUNDING.
LAST NIGHT A NUMBER OF DEMOCRATS
JOINED OTHER DEMOCRATS IN
ENDORSING THE LEGISLATION TO
TAX BIG BUSINESS AND BUILD
MASSIVE SOCIAL HOUSING.
ALSO, WE ENDORSE INITIATIVE
131, TAX AMAZON AND SEATTLE BIG
BUSINESSES.
PROVIDE COVID-19 RELIEVE AND
BUILD SOCIAL HOUSING FUNDS AND
FUND THE GREEN NEW DEAL.
>> THANK YOU BARBARA.
>> OUR LAST SPEAKER TODAY IS
TRISTAN SPEARS.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE TIME.
I JUST HAVE TO SAY THAT THE
LAST TIME I SAT NEXT TO YOU, I
WAS RIGHT THERE BESIDE YOU A
YEAR AGO, STANDING UP FOR YOUR
STABILIZING SEATTLE WORKER'S
RIGHTS.
SINCE THEN YOU HAD YOUR KID,
CONGRATULATIONS.
WHAT YOU ARE DOING TO MY
COMMUNITY BY TRYING TO PUT A
SUNSET ON WHAT WE NEED RIGHT
NOW AT THIS MOMENT FOR OUR
SUSTAINABILITY, OUR FOR OUR
FUTURE PRACTICE IS, TO HAVE OUR
COMMUNITY BE HEARD, IT IS LIKE
PUTTING THE SUNSET ON YOUR
CHILD'S FUTURE.
THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE TELLING MY
COMMUNITY BY TELLING OF THAT WE
DO NOT DESERVE WHAT WE NEED.
I HAD ACE BEACH WRITTEN BUT
THIS IS SOMETHING ON MY HEART.
MY GRANDMOTHER'S CHURCH, I WILL
NEVER BE ABLE TO GO THERE AGAIN
BECAUSE IT IS GONE.
MY COMMUNITY DOES NOT HAVE
NOTHING IN OUR CITY.
WE DEMAND TO HAVE SOMETHING.
BEFORE I GO BACK TO LEADING MY
MARCHES, I WANTED TO BE KNOWN
THAT BLACK LIVES MATTER.
WE ARE HERE AND WE ARE NOT
GOING TO BE SILENCED.
I HOPE THAT YOU HEAR MY
COMMUNITY.
I HOPE THAT YOU REMEMBER THE
PASSION I HAVE FOR IT AND THE
DRIVE BEHIND IT.
WE ARE NOT GOING TO DEAL WITH
THE SUNSET.
YOU CAN SUNSET YOUR CAREER
LATER IF YOU THINK WE ARE GOING
TO TAKE THIS.
>> OKAY, THERE IS ONE THING'S
AND THAT WE MISSED.
I PROMISED TO GET BACK TO THAT.
ALLISON EISENHOWER?
SHE IS NUMBER 21 FOR I.T.
STAFF.
IS SHE PRESENT?
I.T., LET ME KNOW IF YOU ARE
ABLE TO GET HER IN.
I AM JUST LOOKING AT THE LIST
HERE TO SEE IF WE MISSED
ANYBODY ELSE.
>> I DO NOT SEE ALLISON ON THE
CALL AT THE MOMENT.
>> OKAY.
ALL RIGHT, THAT AT THIS POINT,
COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR YOUR FLEXIBILITY HERE.
TO ALL THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE
CALLED IN, WE APPRECIATE IT.
I THINK THAT WE ARE STILL
DEALING WITH THE I.T.
SYSTEM HERE.
WE HAVE BEEN GETTING MESSAGES
ABOUT PEOPLE WHO WANT TO
TESTIFY.
THERE WILL BE AMPLE OPPORTUNITY
TO TESTIFY EACH DAY AT THE
BEGINNING OF THE MEETING.
WE WILL TRY TO PROVIDE AS MUCH
TIME AS POSSIBLE.
THIS IS SO THAT WE CAN GET AS
MANY PEOPLE IN AND YOU DO HAVE
MY COMMITMENT THAT WE ARE GOING
TO HAVE ROBUST PUBLIC TESTIMONY
IN EACH MEETING AT THE VERY
BEGINNING.
AT THIS TIME, I WANT TO THANK
EVERYBODY WHO DIALED IN.
PLEASE SEND US AN EMAIL OR A
CALL.
OR, DIAL INTO TESTIFY AGAIN.
DO THAT THIS AFTERNOON OR EVERY
WEDNESDAY AT 10:00 A.M.
AND 2:00 P.M.
THIS IS WHEN WE HAVE OUR
MEETINGS.
MOVING ON TO ITEMS OF BUSINESS,
ITEM NUMBER ONE, PLEASE CALL
THE ROLE.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE READ INTO
THE RECORD ITEM NUMBER ONE.
>> PROGRESSIVE REVENUE
STRATEGIES FOR DISCUSSION.
>> THANK YOU.
I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR
BEING HERE WITH US TODAY.
WE HAVE BEEN TALKING OVER THE
LAST WEEK OR SO ABOUT
REGENERATING OUR CONVERSATION
AROUND PROGRESSIVE REVENUE.
I HAD THE CHANCE TO CHECK IN
WITH THE SPONSORS OF THE
PROPOSALS THAT WE HAD HEARD
ABOUT A MONTH AGO.
LAST WEEK WE HEARD THEM AS
WELL.
THIS IS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE
SURE WE HAD A ROBUST DIALOGUE
ABOUT PROGRESSIVE REVENUE AS AN
ENTIRE CONCEPT.
WE INCLUDED BOTH ITEMS ON THE
AGENDA TODAY AS BACKGROUNDS
DOCUMENTS.
TODAY, WE WILL HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR FROM
CENTRAL STAFF WHO HAVE PROVIDED
US WITH SOME BRIEFING
MATERIALS.
PRESENTERS INCLUDE DAN, TOM,
ALEC, AND TRACY.
THEY WILL BE ABLE TO WALK
THROUGH WITH US THE PROPOSAL
THAT I SHARED WITH YOU
YESTERDAY, THE JUMPSTAR
SEATTLE PROPOSAL.
AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THIS IS
HOW I AM SHORT HANDING IT.
WE WILL MAKE SURE EVERYBODY HAS
A SOLID UNDERSTANDING OR
GROUNDING ON THAT PROPOSAL.
I WANT TO THANK VARIOUS COUNCIL
MEMBERS FOR PUTTING OUT THERE
PROPOSAL.
I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT THE
EARLIER PROPOSAL, BEFORE COVID-
19, WAS A REALLY HELPFUL
FOUNDATION FOR OUR CONVERSATION
AS WELL.
DURING THE LAST LEGISLATIVE
SESSION, WE ALSO HEARD A LOT OF
DISCUSSION ABOUT THE NEED TO
RAISE REVENUE THROUGH
LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS.
WE DID NOT MOVE OUT OF THE
LEGISLATIVE BODY.
THAT SAID, A LOT OF REALLY
IMPORTANT WORK WAS DONE TO LOOK
AT HIGH INCOME EARNERS AND THE
LARGEST CORPORATIONS.
I WANT TO THANK THE SENATOR WHO
HAD THAT BILL IN THE SENATE. IT
WILL POTENTIALLY COME BACK NEXT
YEAR.
THE CONVERSATION I THINK HAS
UNDERSCORED THAT WE NEED TO ACT
LOCALLY WHEN WE SEE THE STATE
NOT ABLE TO NECESSARILY PASS
REVENUE RIGHT NOW.
THIS IS NOT JUST THE HISTORIC
DRAMATIC DECREASE IN FUNDING
THAT WE NEEDED FOR COMMUNITIES
PRIOR TO COVID-19, BUT IT IS
THE CRISIS THAT IS COVID-19
THAT IS PRESENTING A STARK
REALITY. THIS IS EXPOSING HOW
MANY PEOPLE ARE BEING LEFT
BEHIND IN THE CURRENT ECONOMY.
WE HAVE A NEED TO INVEST IN OUR
COMMUNITY, SMALL BUSINESSES,
FOOD ASSISTANCE, HOUSING
ASSISTANCE, AND MAKING SURE WE
ARE PROVIDING SUPPORT FOR
IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES WHO
HAVE BEEN LEFT OUT OF FEDERAL
ASSISTANCE.
THIS MEANS WE NEED TO ACT NOW
WITH URGENCY.
THE LEGISLATURE MAY RECONVENE
SOON.
WE DO NOT HAVE A LOT OF
INDICATION THAT THEY WILL BE
TAKING UP PROGRESSIVE REVENUE
AT THIS POINT.
TO US FALLS THE RESPONSIBILITY
TO STEP UP AND MAKE SURE THAT
THERE IS SUFFICIENT REVENUE.
WE APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATIONS
THAT WE HAVE HAD WITH VARIOUS
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABOUT THEIR
BILL.
WE WILL CONTINUE TO KEEP THE
CONVERSATIONS OPEN FOR IT
TODAY.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT FOLKS
HAVE A GROUNDING OF WHAT IS
INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSAL THAT I
OUTLINED YESTERDAY.
IN THE SPIRIT OF DIALOGUE AND
DISCUSSION, I'M GOING TO TURN
IT OVER TO OUR CENTRAL STAFF TO
WALK US THROUGH PRESENTATIONS
THAT THEY HAVE PROVIDED FOR US.
WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO A
ROBUST DISCUSSION TODAY FROM
OUR COUNCIL COLLEAGUES.
NECK YOU SO MUCH.
DAN, TOM, ALLIE, AND TRACY, I
TURN IT OVER TO YOU.
I BELIEVE YOU HAVE MATERIALS TO
SHARE WITH US VIA ZOOM.
YOU HAVE PRESENTATIONS FOR THE
GENERAL VIEWING PUBLIC.
IF YOU WANT TO TAKE OVER THE
PRESENTATION AND SHARE THOSE
SCREENS, THAT WOULD BE WELCOME.
>> HELLO.
I AM DOING THAT PRESENTLY.
ALLIE, TRACY, AND TOM WILL TAKE
OVER THE PRESENTATION.
>> THANK YOU DAN.
WE ARE GETTING THE POWERPOINT
SET UP.
I WILL JUST BRIEFLY GO OVER
WHAT WE WILL WALK THROUGH
TODAY.
I WILL BEGIN THE DISCUSSION OF
THE PROPOSED SPENDING.
SO, GOOD MORNING COUNCIL
MEMBERS.
TODAY, WE WILL PROVIDE THE
OVERVIEW OF THE PAYROLL TAX
PACKAGE.
TRACY AND I WILL GO OVER THE
PROPOSED SPENDING IN 2020.
WE WILL TALK ABOUT THE SPENDING
PLAN FOR FUTURE YEARS.
WE WILL THEN TALK ABOUT THE
PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX.
NEXT SLIDE.
THE SPENDING PLAN WILL BE
REFLECTED IN TWO PIECES OF
LEGISLATION.
THE FIRST BILL AUTHORIZES
SPENDING IN PLACES AND GUIDES
THE USE OF FUNDS AND 2020.
THE SECOND LEGISLATION
ESTABLISHES A SPENDING PLAN FOR
THE NEW TAX STARTING IN 2021.
IT ESTABLISHES A PAYROLL TAX
OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE.
NEXT SLIDE.
THE FIRST PIECE OF LEGISLATION
WOULD AUTHORIZE SPENDING FROM
THE CITY'S EMERGENCY AND
RESERVE FUNDS IN 2020 TO
PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO LOW
INCOME INDIVIDUALS, WORKERS,
AND BUSNESSES IMPACTED BY THE
COVID-19 CRISIS.
THIS INCLUDES $18 MILLION TO
SUPPORT BUSINESSES AND FAMILY
CHILD CARE PROVIDERS, $36
MILLION FOR HOUSING SECURITY
AND SERVICES, $18 MILLION TO
SUPPORT IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE
COMMUNITIES, AND $16 MILLION
FOR FOOD SECURITY PROGRAMS.
THESE NEXT TWO SLIDES PROVIDE
MORE DETAILS IN EACH OF THE
AREAS WHERE SPENDING WOULD BE
AUTHORIZED.
FOR SMALL BUSINESS SUPPORT,
ABOUT 4% OR $3.6 MILLION WOULD
PROVIDE GRANTS TO ABOUT 340
FAMILY CHILD CARE PROVIDERS.
THAT IS GRANTS OF ABOUT $10,000
PER CHILD CARE PROVIDER.
THERE WOULD BE 60% OF FUNDS OR
14.1 MILLION.
THIS WOULD PROVIDE $10,000
GRANTS TO 1300 SMALL
BUSINESSES.
IT WOULD PROVIDE ABOUT $300,000
TO SUPPORT PROGRAMS THAT
PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
AND TRAINING FOR SMALL
BUSINESSES.
THIS SUPPORT FOR BUSINESSES IS
INTENDED TO HELP PROTECT JOBS
AND MODERATE THE IMPACT OF THE
LOCAL TAX REVENUE BY SUPPORTING
THE CONTINUED OPERATIONS OF
SMALL BUSINESSES, SUPPORTING
CHILDCARE FACILITIES SO WORKERS
AVE ACCESS TO CHILD CARE.
THIS WILL SUPPORT CHANGES AND
INVESTMENTS IN BUSINESSES THAT
NEED TO MODIFY THEIR PHYSICAL
LAYOUTS TO COMPLY WITH PUBLIC
HEALTH GUIDANCE OR OBTAIN
ADDITIONAL SUPPLIES.
THE $36 MILLION FOR INVESTMENT
IN HOUSING PROGRAMS WILL
PROVIDE ABOUT $19 MILLION FOR
RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS SUCH
AS THE UNITED WAY OF KING
COUNTY'S HOME-BASED PROGRAMS
AND HOMELESS PREVENTION
PROGRAMS.
THIS COULD PROVIDE THREE MONTHS
OF RENTAL ASSISTANCE TO ABOUT
3300 HOUSEHOLDS IF YOU ASSUME
THE AVERAGE RENT IS ABOUT $1900
PER MONTH.
$11 MILLION WOULD FUND SHELTER
EFFORTS AND SUPPORT EFFORTS IN
OTHER SHELTER OPTIONS.
THIS COULD INCLUDE LEASING
HOTEL ROOMS, EXPANDING OR
INCREASING SUPPORT FOR TINY
HOME VILLAGES AND HELPING
SHELTERS MODIFY THEIR BUSINESS
PRACTICES.
ONE MILLION DOLLARS WOULD ALSO
BE PROVIDED FOR FORECLOSURE
PREVENTION PROGRAMS.
THIS COULD SUPPORT PROGRAMS
THAT PROVIDE MORTGAGE
COUNSELING SERVICES AND PROVIDE
DIRECT MORTGAGE ASSISTANCE OF
ABOUT $30,000 PER HOUSEHOLD TO
UP TO 35 HOUSEHOLDS.
THAN $5 MILLION WOULD BE
PROVIDED TO SUPPORT THE ONGOING
SERVICE AND OPERATION COSTS FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVIDERS
AND SHELTER PROVIDERS WHO HAVE
SEEN THEIR COSTS INCREASE AS
THEY MODIFY THE PROVISION OF
SERVICES TO PUT REFLECT PUBLIC
HEALTH GUIDANCE.
ABOUT $1 MILLION WOULD BE USED
TO SUPPORT PROGRAMS THAT
PROVIDE LANGUAGE ACCESS TO
SUPPORT IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE
COMMUNITIES WHO NEED HELP
ACCESSING FEDERAL, STATE, AND
LOCAL ASSISTANCE.
$17 MILLION WOULD PROVIDE
ASSISTANCE TO INDIVIDUALS WHO
HAVE EXPERIENCED THE ECONOMIC
IMPACTS CAUSED BY COVID-19.
THIS COULD BE USED TO PROVIDE
$1000 PER HOUSEHOLD INDIRECT
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO ABOUT
16,000 IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE
WORKERS AND HOUSEHOLDS.
THIS FUNDING IS INTENDED TO
PRIORITIZE SUPPORT FOR WORKERS
AND HOUSEHOLDS WHO ARE
INELIGIBLE FOR OTHER FEDERAL OR
STATE EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE OR
MAY RECEIVE SUCH AS DISTANCE
BUT IT IS LIMITED OR THE DELAY
MAY NOT BE MEETING THEIR
CURRENT NEEDS.
FOR THOSE WHO HAVE HAD THEIR
OWN FAMILIES IMPACTED, BY THE
COVID-19 CRISIS, IT WILL HELP
THEM ADDRESS THE HEALTHCARE
NEEDS.
$14 MILLION WOULD BE USED TO
EXPAND THE EMERGENCY GROCERY
VOUCHER PROGRAM THAT THE CITY
LAUNCHED EARLY IN THE COVID-19
CRISIS.
THIS FUNDING COULD EXPAND OR
EXTEND THE PROGRAM TO PROVIDE
TWO MONTHS OF GROCERY VOUCHERS
TO ABOUT 16,000 HOUSEHOLDS,
ASSUMING A PER MONTH VOUCHER OF
$400.
SO MOVING ON, WE TALK ABOUT THE
SECOND PIECE OF LEGISLATION.
IT OUTLINES THE INTENDED
SPENDING IN 2021.
IT GOES FROM 2022 AND BEYOND.
I WILL DESCRIBE WHAT IS PLANNED
FOR 2021.
IN 2021, THE REVENUE ESTIMATE
FROM THE NEW PAYROLL TAXES
ABOUT $174 MILLION.
TOM ALL DESCRIBE THAT IN MORE
DETAIL LATER IN THE
PRESENTATION.
THE BILL FIRST OUTLINED THE
INTENDED USE OF THAT ESTIMATED
REVENUE FOR 2021.
IT WOULD FIRST SPEND ABOUT HALF
OF THE ESTIMATED REVENUE OR $86
MILLION TO REPLENISH THE
EMERGENCY AND RESERVE FUNDS
THAT WERE USED TO SUPPORT THE
INVESTMENTS IN 2022 ADDRESS THE
COVID-19 CRISIS.
OF THE REMAINING HALF, 75%
WOULD BE USED TO PROVIDE
CONTINUITY OF SERVICES AND
PROGRAMS ADMINISTERED, FOR
PROGRAMS AND SERVICES THAT ARE
SUPPORTED BY THE CITY THAT
PRIOR TO THE COVID-19 CRISIS,
THEY WERE ABSENT.
THERE COULD BE A REDUCTION IN
FUNDING.
THIS COULD INCLUDE FOR EXAMPLE,
A SHORT-TERM RENTAL REVENUE THAT
COMES IN BELOW WHAT WAS
ANTICIPATED, IT COULD FUND THE
ONGOING SERVICE AND OPERATION
COSTS FOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
IT COULD HAVE FUNDING TO
SUPPORT THE CITY'S EQUITABLE
DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE.
IF FUNDS DECREASE, FUNDING FOR
PROGRAMS AND SERVICES THAT THE
COUNCIL HAS ENSURED, THEY MAY
SEE REDUCTIONS OR BE ELIMINATED
IF REVENUES DECLINE.
THIS FUNDING COULD SUPPORT THE
ONGOING INVESTMENTS IN THOSE
PROGRAMS.
AND THEN 20% WOULD BE USED TO
SUPPORT SOME OF THE PROGRAMS
FUNDED IN 2022 ADDRESS THE
ONGOING ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF
COVID-19.
5% WOULD BE PROVIDED FOR THE
DEPARTMENTS AND COMMUNITY-BASED
ORGANIZATIONS TO ADMINISTER
THESE PROGRAMS.
THE COUNCIL WILL AUTHORIZE THE
SPECIFIC FUNDING PLAN AS PART
OF THE ANNUAL BUDGET ADOPTION
PROCESS THIS FALL.
WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER
TO TRACY WHO WILL WALK THROUGH
THE PROPOSAL FOR 2022 AND
BEYOND.
>> THANK YOU.
I AM MOVING TO SLIDE SEVEN.
THIS IS THE PROPOSED SPENDING
PLAN FOR 2022 AND BEYOND.
65% OF THE REVENUE WOULD BE
USED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OR
ACQUISITION OF AFFORDABLE
HOUSING SERVING HOUSEHOLDS WITH
INCOMES BETWEEN ZERO AND 50%.
IT WOULD COVER ONGOING
SERVICING COSTS FOR INDIVIDUALS
WHO ARE 30% OF AMI.
IT COULD COVER THE ASSOCIATED
INFRASTRUCTURE COST SUCH AS
ENERGY EFFICIENCY UPGRADES AND
APPLIANCES THAT MICHAEL ALONG
WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW
PROJECTS.
THIS FUNDING WILL BE
PRIORITIZED FOR HOUSING THAT
SERVES HOUSEHOLDS FROM 0 TO 30%
OF AMI.
10% OF THE REVENUE WILL SUPPORT
EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT
INITIATIVE PROJECTS INCLUDING
THE HOUSING AND NON-HOUSING
COMPONENTS.
20% OF THE REVENUE WILL SUPPORT
LOCAL BUSINESSES AND TOURISM TO
SPUR THE LOCAL ECONOMIC
RECOVERY AND TO PROVIDE
WORKFORCE STABILITY.
5% OF THE REVENUE WILL SUPPORT
STARTUP AND ADMINISTRATIVE COST
. AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
DEVELOPED BY THE EXECUTIVE IN
COOPERATION WITH THE COUNCIL
WILL INCLUDE MORE SPECIFICS ON
THE SPENDING FOR 2022 AND
BEYOND.
THE LEGISLATION DIRECTS THE
EXECUTIVE TO SUBMIT THIS PLAN
TO THE COUNCIL NO LATER THAN
JUNE 30, 2021.
A RACIAL EQUITY ANALYSIS IS TO
BE COMPLETED WITH SUPPORT FROM
THE OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS.
THIS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE
COUNCIL.
THE LEGISLATION ESTABLISHES A
NEWNINE-MEMBER PAYROLL TAX
OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE.
IT WILL BE APPOINTED BY THE
COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE COMMITTEE
WILL INCLUDE REPRESENTATIVES
FROM STAFF, LABOR,
ORGANIZATIONS, AND COMMUNITIES
THAT WILL BENEFIT FROM THE
SPENDING.
THE COMMITTEE WILL PROVIDE
OVERSIGHT ON SERVICES AND
PROGRAMS SUPPOTED BY THE
PAYROLL TAX AND THE IMPACT OF
THIS TAX ON THE NUMBER OF JOBS
AND BUSINESSES IN THE CITY.
THERE WILL BE OTHER DATA THAT
DIRECTLY RELATES TO THE IMPACT
OF MEASURING THE IMPACT OF THE
TAX.
THE COMMITTEE WILL PROVIDE AN
ANNUAL REPORT TO THE COUNCIL
AND THE MAYOR.
WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE
ABOUT THIS ISSUE.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
COUNCIL COLLEAGUES, I WOULD
LOVE TO HEAR YOUR FEEDBACK.
I AM TRYING TO SCROLL THROUGH.
IT IS A CHALLENGE TO SEE
EVERYBODY WITH THE SHARED
SCREEN.
I CAN SEE ALL OF YOU.
I WANT TO ALSO OFFER THAT THE
SPENDING PLAN HAS BEEN DISSECT
DATED IN TWO A NARRATIVE
DOCUMENT THAT I
HAVE ATTEMPTED TO DRAFT AND
SHARE WITH YOU.
WE WILL SHARE THAT MORE
PUBLICLY WHEN WE GET A CHANCE
TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THE
TYPOS ARE FIXED.
IN AN EFFORT TO PROVIDE A STORY
OR A NARRATIVE TO HOW
THESE DOLLARS COULD GET OUT THE
DOOR, YOU HAVE A DRAFT THAT I
SENT YOU THIS MORNING.
I WILL BE HAPPY TO SHARE THAT
WITH MEMBERS OF THE MEDIA AND
THE PUBLIC AS SOON AS WE GET
THIS TYPOS OUT THERE.
ONE THING TO NOTE IS WE DID
HAVE, I THINK A CALL TO ACTION.
I APPRECIATE THE COUNCIL
MEMBERS WHO HAVE DONE NOT FROM
WITHIN.
FROM WITHOUT, WE HAVE HAD A
CALL TO ACTION TO SUPPORT
PEOPLE LIKE IMMIGRANTS AND
REFUGEES.
WE RECOGNIZE THE FOOD
ASSISTANCE AND THE HOUSING
ASSISTANCE DID NOT GO FAR
ENOUGH.
THESE PROGRAMS WERE NOWHERE
NEAR MEETING THE NEED WE HAD.
WE RECOGNIZE THAT FOR SMALL
BUSINESSES, THE SUPPORT THAT
THE FEDS HAVE BEEN OFFERING
THROUGH PPP FIRST WAS NOT
EQUITABLY BEING DISTRIBUTED.
WE KNOW THAT NINE OUT OF 10
SMALL BUSINESSES WHO WERE BLACK
AND WERE DENIED ACCESS TO PPP
FOR THE LOANS, $20,000 AND
LESS.
THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE
INSTITUTIONALIZED RACISM THAT
CONTINUES TO PERPETUATE IN OUR
LENDING SYSTEM.
THERE IS A HUGE NEED FROM THE
SMALLEST BUSINESSES TO OUR
BRICK AND MORTAR WHO HAVE HAD
TO CLOSE THEIR DOORS AND BOARD
THEIR WINDOWS IN THE TIME OF
COVID-19, AS THEY WAITED TO
OPEN THEIR DOORS.
THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO
GENERATE PROFIT.
THEY HAVE BEEN IN A SITUATION
WHERE THEIR EMPLOYEES CANNOT
WORK FROM HOME.
WE DID REACH OUT TO BUSINESSES
AND ASK WHAT DOES THE SYSTEM
LOOK LIKE IN A POST-COVID-19
WORLD.
WE WANT TO GET A SENSE OF WHERE
WE CAN DRAW THE LINE.
THIS DOES BUILD ON SOME REALLY
GOOD WORK THAT HAS DONE AT THE
STATE AND AT THE CITY LEVEL.
IT APPLIES IN ANALYSIS OF
SAYING WHERE DO THOSE DOLLARS
GO IN A POST-COVID-19 WORD.
WE HEARD PEOPLE NEED FLEXIBLE
DOLLARS.
THERE IS NOT FLEXIBLE DOLLARS
FROM THE FEDS BECAUSE THE PPP
DOLLARS REQUIRE PEOPLE TO BRING
THEIR STAFF BACK AT FULL
CAPACITY.
THOSE SMALL BUSINESSES CANNOT
EVEN RESTAURANT OPEN
RESTAURANTS AT FULL CAPACITY.
SMALL BUSINESSES NEED FLEXIBLE
DOLLARS TO HIRE PEOPLE BUT THEY
ALSO NEED TO RENOVATE THEIR
SMALL ESTABLISHMENTS AND PUT IN
SAFETY PROTECTIONS LIKE
CLEANING EQUIPMENT ON A
PLEXIGLAS.
LASTLY WE HEARD OVERWHELMINGLY
AND I THINK THIS IS A SHARED
PRIORITY AMONG THE COUNT
THOUGH, AS SCHOOLS ARE CLOSED,
THEY THEMSELVES AS BUSINESS
OWNERS OR THE EMPLOYEES THAT
WANT TO GO BACK TO WORK IN A
SAFEWAY, THERE IS NO PLACE FOR
THEIR KIDS TO GO WITH SCHOOLS
CLOSE AND SUMMER PROGRAMS
CLOSED.
WE ARE WORKING WITH INDIVIDUALS
TO FIGURE OUT A CHILD CARE
SPECIFIC PROGRAMS FOR
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE SMALL-
BUSINESS WORKERS.
THAT IS A CONTEXT ON WHY THERE
IS SUCH A LONG LIST OF FOLKS
WHO ARE SUPPORTING THIS FROM
THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY.
I THINK IT WAS IMPORTANT TO ASK
WHAT DO THE SMALL BUSINESSES
NEED.
I THINK THEY ALL WANT
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE.
IN CONVERSATIONS WITH VARIOUS
COUNCIL MEMBERS, I THINK I HAVE
CONTINUED TO IDENTIFY THE THREE
PILLARS THAT REALLY UNITE US.
ONE IS HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS IN PROGRESSIVE REVENUE.
TWO IS MAKING SURE THE
ASSESSMENT IS TRULY PROGRESSIVE.
WE NEED TO ASSESS THOSE WHO ARE
DOING WELL IN A POST-COVID-19
WORLD AND BEING REALISTIC ABOUT
THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT WE BRING
IN IS IMPORTANT.
YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO INVEST IN
THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN LEFT
BEHIND.
THREE, WE ARE MAKING SURE THAT
THIS IS ACTIONABLE.
WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE
IS DOLLARS WE CAN BOOK RIGHT
NOW TO MAKE SURE THERE WAS
ASSISTANCE TO GET OUT THE DOOR.
I AM HOPEFUL THAT THESE THREE
PILLARS THAT UNITE US ALL
CONTINUE TO GET LIFTED UP.
I DO THINK THAT THERE IS A LOT
OF COMMONALITY IN WHY A
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE PROPOSAL IS
BEING PUT FORWARD FROM FOLKS
HERE.
THERE IS URGENCY TO MAKE SURE
THAT SOMETHING HAPPENS.
WITH THAT I WOULD LIKE TO THANK
FOLKS FROM CENTRAL'S DESK FOR
PROVIDING THIS LEVEL OF DETAIL
FOR US.
PLEASE DO KNOW THAT THERE IS
MORE DETAIL BEHIND EACH OF
THESE SLIDES INCLUDING IN THE
NARRATIVE DOCUMENT THAT I SENT
YOU AND EVEN MORE BEHIND THAT
IN THE EXCEL DOCUMENT.
LET'S GET TO SOME QUESTIONS ON
THE SPEND PLAN BEFORE WE GET TO
THE TAX SIDE.
YES, COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR.
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD FOR THE CONSIDERATION
OF THE COUNSEL.
YOU KNOW, I DO HAVE SOME
QUESTIONS BASED ON THE CENTRAL
STUFF VISITATION.
I WILL LEAVE IT OPEN TO WHO ON
THE PANEL WANTS TO RESPOND.
I FIRST WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO
THE SERVICES SPENT.
THIS IS PARTICULARLY CONCERNING
THE CHILDCARE FOOD ACCESS AND
RENT SUBSIDY.
AM I CORRECT THAT ALL OF THAT
WOULD BE NEW AND ADDITIONAL
SPENDING TO ME THE INCREASED
DEMAND THAT WE ARE SEEING DUE
TO COVID-19, THAT IS NOT TO
SORT OF LOG EXISTING SERVICES
BUT RATHER TO EXPAND.
WE KNOW THAT THOSE ARE
CURRENTLY BEING STRETCHED TO
THEIR CAPACITY.
IS THAT A CORRECT READ OF THAT?
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, YES.
THAT IS A CORRECT READ.
IN MOST CASES, THESE ARE EITHER
NEW OR EXPANDING EXISTING
PROGRAMS THAT PROVIDE
ASSISTANCE TO YOU KNOW, FOOD
PROGRAMS AND THAT SORT OF
THING.
I WOULD SAY THE ONE PLACE WHERE
IT MAY BE SORT OF SUPPORTING
EXISTING SERVICES IS IN THE ONE
LINE ITEM THAT PROVIDES A
SERVICE AND OPERATION COSTS AND
AFFORDABLE SHELTER PROVIDERS.
THAT MAY BE SUPPORTING
PROVIDERS THAT THE CITY HAS
ALREADY FUNDED BUT WOULD
ACTUALLY SUPPORT THEIR
INCREASED COST THAT THEY HAVE
INCURRED BECAUSE OF COVID-19.
IS NEW UNANTICIPATED SPENDING
FROM WHEN THE COUNCIL ADOPTED
THE BUDGET, IT IS EXISTING
SERVICES, YEAH.
>> THANK YOU.
ON THE HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION
PROGRAMS, THE 19 MILLION THAT
IS THERE, DO WE HAVE ANY
INDICATION ON THE NUMBER OF
INCREASED PLACEMENTS THAT COULD
POSSIBLY LEAD TO BEYOND WHAT WE
CURRENTLY HAVE NOW, BE IT HOTEL
ROOMS, BE A TINY HOUSE
VILLAGES.
ADDITIONAL PLACEMENTS IN THE
SHORT TERM, CAN THEY HELP
PROVIDE SAFE PLACES TO GET
FOLKS OFF THE STREETS AND GET
THEM INSIDE?
THEY NEED TO BE IN A PLACE
WHERE THEY CAN SOCIALLY
DISTANCE.
>> SURE, IT IS A LITTLE
DIFFICULT TO PROVIDE A CONCRETE
NUMBER.
IT WILL DEPEND ON SPECIFICALLY
LIKE A HOTEL ROOM, THIS IS
REALLY DIFFERENT THAN A TINY
HOME AND THAT SORT OF THING.
IF ALL OF THE $11 MILLION WAS
USED TO CREATE TINY HOMES, NEW
TINY HOME VILLAGES, IT COULD
SUPPORT POTENTIALLY ABOUT 5-7
NEW VILAGES WITH ABOUT 40 TINY
HOMES PER VILLAGE.
THAT IS A ROUGH ESTIMATE.
THE SPECIFIC DOLLARS DEPEND ON
THE CONTEXT.
THIS COULD PROVIDE US VARIETY
OF SERVICES.
IT IS HARD TO SAY IT WILL
PROVIDE HOUSING OR SHELTER
OPTIONS TO X NUMBER OF
INDIVIDUALS.
>> BASED ON THE ESTIMATE YOU
JUST GAVE, WOULD IT BE ACCURATE
TO SAY WE ARE TALKING ABOUT
LIKE HUNDREDS OF NEW UNITS?
POTENTIALLY?
>> YES, IF YOU ASSUMED FOUR NEW
VILLAGES, TO BE CONSERVATIVE AS
I WOULD PREFER TO BE, THERE
WOULD BE 40 TINY HOMES EACH.
YES, THAT WOULD BE A COUPLE
HUNDRED POTENTIALLY.
IT MAY ALSO SUPPORT, IF SHELTER
PROVIDERS HAVE BEEN USING HOTEL
ROOMS FOR EXAMPLE, THIS COULD BE
USED TO ADDRESS SHELTER
EFFORTS, THIS COULD BE
PROVIDING ONGOING FUNDING FOR
PEOPLE WHO ARE CURRENTLY LIVING
IN HOTEL ROOMS.
IT MIGHT HELP BOTH EXPAND THE
NUMBER OF ROOMS FOR LACK OF A
BETTER WORD AVAILABLE TO PEOPLE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS AND
OR HELP ADDRESS NOT HAVING TO
DISPLACES PEOPLE IN TWO MONTHS
BECAUSE FUNDING HAS RUN OUT.
>> SO MOVING TO THE NEXT
QUESTION THAT I HAVE HERE, THE
1 MILLION IN MORTGAGE
COUNSELING AND FORECLOSURE
PREVENTION THAT IS PENCILED IN
HERE AT 1 MILLION.
WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE
PROGRAMMATICALLY?
THAT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING I
HAVE BEEN HEARING A LOT OF
CONCERN FROM CONSTITUENTS
ABOUT.
IT SEEMS LIKE YOU KNOW, YEAH, I
HAVE NOT REALLY NOTICED WHAT THE
LEVERS ARE FOR US TO GET MORE
INVOLVED IN THAT.
I AM JUST CURIOUS YOU KNOW, HOW
THAT WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED.
>> WE HAVE MORTGAGE COUNSELING
AND A PREVENTION PROGRAM.
WE STARTED IT WITH THE 2016
LEVY.
WE DID NOT SEE MUCH USE UNTIL
THE LAST FEW MONTHS.
WE ACTUALLY HAVE A PROGRAM THAT
EXISTS WITH GUIDELINES.
WE MODELED THE NUMBER OF
POTENTIAL HOUSEHOLDS THAT WE
COULD SERVE BASED ON THE MODEL.
THAT MODEL MIGHT BE TWEAKED A
LITTLE BIT BECAUSE WHAT WE ARE
HEARING IS THAT THE FOLKS MAY
BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE WITH THEIR
LENDERS, A MODIFIED MORTGAGE
AMOUNT.
WHAT THEY REALLY NEED IS THE
PEOPLE WHO CAN HELP THEM TO THE
NEGOTIATION.
WE MIGHT BE LOOKING AT PUTTING
A LITTLE BIT MORE MONEY INTO
COUNSELING SERVICES VERSUS WHAT
THIS COULD ALSO FUND IS THE
ACTUAL LOANS THAT FOLKS MIGHT
NEED, MORTGAGE ASSISTANCE,
TEMPORARY MORTGAGE PAYMENTS
THAT THEY MIGHT NEED.
THAT WILL ALL GET SORTED OUT IN
THE COMING MONTHS IN TERMS OF
WHAT THAT PROGRAM STRUCTURE
MIGHT LOOK LIKE. THOSE ARE A
COUPLE THINGS THAT WE HAVE
HEARD ABOUT HOW THE MONEY COULD
BE USED.
IT IS NOT DISSIMILAR TO THE
PROGRAM THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE.
INDISCERNIBLE ] THIS WOULD BE
HAD OVER ANOTHER BALANCING
STRATEGY.
INSTEAD OF SPENDING DOWN THE
RESERVES AND THEN HAVING TO
REPLENISH IT LATER THROUGH
SOMETHING, I WOULD IMAGINE OVER
TIME THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND,
THAT IS ANOTHER THING THAT YOU
COULD CORRECT ME ON.
THAT MONEY, BEING IMMEDIATELY
REPLENISHED THROUGH THE
JUMPSTART PROGRAM WOULD HELP TO
SAFEGUARD THAT FUND IN CASE WE
SHOULD HAVE CAUSE FOR
RESPONDING TO ANOTHER EMERGENCY
OR REVENUE STABILIZATION
SITUATION.
WOULD THAT BE AN ADVANTAGE OVER
A BALANCING STRATEGY WHERE
INSTEAD, WE WOULD SPEND THE
ACCOUNT DOWN WITH THE
ASSUMPTION THAT OVER THE NEXT
DECADE WE WOULD REPLENISH IT
THROUGH A GENERAL FUND.
>> I WILL GIVE IT A SHOT.
MAY BE DAN OR MY COLLEAGUE
WOULD LIKE TO WEIGH IN.
I THINK THAT IN A GENERAL
SENSE, YES, HAVING A PLAN FOR A
NEW REVENUE SOURCE TO
IMMEDIATELY REPLENISH THE FUNDS
JUST PROVIDES A LITTLE BIT MORE
SECURITY TO THE CITY IF THERE
IS OTHER EMERGENCIES AND OR YOU
KNOW, IT IS QUITE POSSIBLE THAT
THESE ECONOMIC IMPACTS WILL
PERSIST IN THE REVENUE
SHORTFALLS.
THEY WILL PERSIST 220 21 AND
BEYOND.
MAYBE NEXT YEAR, THE COUNCIL
WILL DECIDE THAT YOU ARE GOING
TO REPLENISH HALF OF IT.
YOU ARE GOING TO NEED TO
CONTINUE TO PROVIDE SOME
EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE.
YES, HAVING A NEW REVENUE
SOURCE TO REPLENISH THOSE FUNDS
VERSUS ASSUMING THAT REVENUES
WILL INCREASE OVER THE YEARS
AND WE WILL SLOWLY REBUILD
THOSE FUNDS IS YOU KNOW, IT
PROVIDES MORE CERTAINTY.
>> SO, IN THE EVENT THAT OUR
SPENDING PLAN CAME IN UNDER,
LIKE IF JUMPSTART RAISED LESS
MONEY, THERE IS LESS RISK FROM
THIS APPROACH.
WE ARE ALREADY ATTENDING TO
SPEND DOWN OUR RAINY DAY
ACCOUNTS TO MEET THE CURRENT
NEEDS.
SO, WE WOULD NOT BE PUTTING
OTHER POTENTIAL FUNDS AT RISK.
WE WOULD JUST BE DOING WHAT WE
WOULD BE DOING ANYWAY, WE WOULD
BE REPLENISHING THE FUNDS
THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND.
IS THAT ONE WAY TO UNDERSTAND
IT?
AM I MAKING IT TOO COMPLICATED?
>> WELL, I DO NOT KNOW IF I
TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE
QUESTION.
IF REVENUES COME IN LESS THAN
THE ESTIMATE, IT WOULD BE
SIMILAR TO WHAT WE ARE ABOUT TO
UNDERTAKE WHEN THE MAYOR
TRANSMITS THE REBOUNDS AND
PACKAGED.
APPROPRIATION DECISIONS WOULD
HAVE TO BE MODIFIED.
WHERE YOU ARE AUTHORIZING
SPENDING WOULD HAVE TO BE
MODIFIED.
COUNSEL WOULD HAVE THE CHOICE
OF POTENTIALLY REDUCING HOW
MUCH YOU ARE PUTTING BACK INTO
THOSE EMERGENCYAND RAINY DAY
FUNDS.
THIS IS VERSUS DIRECT SPENDING
IN 2021.
IT LOOKS LIKE MAYBE DAN HAS
SOMETHING TO ADD HERE.
>> YES, THE ONLY OTHER THOUGHT
THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY IS
THAT THIS AMOUNTS TO A PLAN THAT
DOES NOT ITSELF EFFECTUATE THE
FUNDING OR REFUNDING OF THE
EMERGENCY RESERVES.
THAT DECISION WOULD BE MADE
MORE SPECIFICALLY IN THE FALL
BUDGET PROCESS WHEN THE COUNCIL
HAS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT
THE NEEDS OF THE CITY AS A
WHOLE.
IT DEALS WITH THE REVENUE
PICTURE LOOKING FORWARD AND CAN
BALANCE COMPETING PRIORITIES.
THIS IS A PLAN THAT WOULD
CERTAINLY INFORM AND WOULD BE
USED AS A GUIDE FOR THOSE
FUTURE DECISIONS.
THE DECISION ITSELF IS NOT
BEING MADE IN THE LEGISLATION
SO MUCH AS IN AND OUT MEANT
THAT THIS IS WHAT THE COUNCIL
CURRENTLY THINKS IT'S DECISION
WILL BE WHEN THE BUDGET COMES.
>> YES.
>> MAYBE WE COULD PUT A FINER
POINT ON THAT.
AS AN EXAMPLE, THE PLANNING
SAYS THAT ABOUT $65 MILLION
WOULD BE SPENT TO SUPPORT THE
ONGOING PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
THAT MIGHT OTHERWISE SEE A COPY
FOR THE PRODUCED REVENUES.
IF DURING THE FALL BUDGET
PROCESS, THE COUNCIL FINDS THAT
THERE IS A MUCH BIGGER GAP IN
ORDER TO MAINTAIN PROGRAMS THAT
ARE ESSENTIAL AND I PRIORITY
FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS, YOU MIGHT
DECIDE TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT
MORE, YOU KNOW, 80% OF THE
MONEY FOR CONTINUITY OF
SERVICES.
YOU COULD AT $75 BACK INTO THE
EMERGENCY FUND.
THERE WILL BE SOME BALANCING
BUT YOU WILL ACTUALLY AUTHORIZE
THE SPENDING DURING THE PROCESS.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS.
WE ARE HAPPY TO CIRCLE BACK TO
YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS ACROSS A
COUPLE DIFFERENT SLIDES.
STAY ON THIS SLIDE FOR NOW.
THIS IS GOOD.
IT LOOKS LIKE SINCE WE ARE
USING THE REVENUE STABILIZATION
FUND AND THE EMERGENCY SUB FUND,
WE WILL NOT NEED TO DO AN
INTERFUND LOAN.
WE WILL NOT LOAN OURSELVES
FUNDS FROM THE VARIOUS VOTER
APPROVED LEVIES, THE HOUSING
LEVY, THE PARK LEVY, THE
TRANSPORTATION LEVY THAT HAD
BEEN ORIGINALLY CONSIDERED.
THIS ALLOWS AS I UNDERSTAND IT,
THAT ALLOWS FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO
, IN THE REBALANCING PACKAGE, TO
USE SOME OF THOSE FUNDS AS WE
HAVE HEARD FROM THE BUDGET
DIRECTOR DR. BEN NOBLE THAT
THEY INTENDED TO DO THAT.
THEY INTENDED TO USE SOME
REVENUE ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE
LEVIES FOR THE REBALANCING
PACKAGE.
AS I UNDERSTAND THIS PROPOSAL,
WE ARE NOT DIPPING INTO THOSE
DOLLARS.
THAT ALLOWS THE EXECUTIVE TO
USE THEM IN THE REBALANCING
PACKAGE.
AND THEN, MY SECOND POINT, I
WANT THAT UNDERSTANDING
CONFIRMED.
AND THEN THERE IS MY SECOND
POINT AROUND THAT PARTICULAR
ISSUE, I HAVE OTHERS AS WELL.
THIS RELATES SPECIFICALLY TO
THE NUMBER OF DOLLARS THAT THIS
PROPOSAL USES FROM THE RAINY
DAY FUND AND THE REVENUE
STABILIZATION ACCOUNT.
IT LOOKS LIKE WE ARE USING 67
MILLION, OH, NO, IT LOOKS LIKE
WE ARE LEAVING A BALANCE OF 67
MILLION AND 61 MILLION IN BOTH
OF THOSE EMERGENCY ACCOUNTS.
HAVE WE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH
THE EXECUTIVE AGAIN ABOUT THEIR
REBALANCING PACKAGE?
AGAIN, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE
REBALANCING PACKAGE DEPENDS ON
THOSE REVENUES AS WELL.
SO, WE ARE TRYING TO GET A SENSE
, THEY ARE GOING TO MAKE A
REBALANCING PACKAGE PROPOSAL TO
US.
I AM JUST TRYING TO GET A SENSE
OF WHETHER OR NOT LEAVING
67,000,060 1 MILLION
RESPECTFULLY IN THOSE TWO
ACCOUNT, DOES THIS ALLOW THEM
TO PROPOSE A REBALANCING
PACKAGE ALONG THE LINES THAT
THEY WERE CONSIDERING?
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO FLAG THAT
I HAVE HEARD FROM DIRECTOR
NOBLE SEVERAL TIMES THAT HE
DOES NOT WANT TO DEPLETE THOSE
FUNDS.
HE DOES NOT WANT TO DEPLETE
THOSE IN 2020 BECAUSE HE WANTS
ACCESS TO THEM WHEN THEIR NEEDS
BECOME GREATER IN 2021.
>> OKAY, I AM GOING TO TRY TO
WALK THROUGH THOSE QUESTIONS.
JUMP IN IF I AM MISSING
SOMETHING.
AS A STARTING POINT, THERE IS
ABOUT $67 MILLION IN THE
EMERGENCY FUND AND ABOUT 60
úMILLION IN THE REVENUE
STABILIZATION FUND.
THAT IS BASED ON DIRECTOR
NOBLE'S PRESENTATION AND THE
CURRENT STATE OF THINGS.
THIS PROPOSAL WOULD SPEND DOWN
THE BULK OF THE EMERGENCY FUND
AND A PORTION OF THE REVENUE
STABILIZATION FUND.
>> IT ZEROS THEM OUT.
THANK YOU FOR THE
CLARIFICATION.
I WAS THINKING THAT AFTER THIS
PROPOSAL, THIS IS THE BALANCE
THAT IS LEFT OVER.
THIS PROPOSAL ZEROS THOSE FUNDS
OUT.
>> I WANT TO LIVE IN THAT WORLD
YOU JUST DESCRIBED.
YES, THIS PROPOSAL, WOULD IT
ZERO OUT BOTH FUNDS?
IT WOULD ZERO OUT THE EMERGENCY
FUND AND IT WOULD SPEND ABOUT
$20 MILLION FROM THE REVENUE
STABILIZATION FUND.
THE DRAFT LEGISLATION THAT WAS
ATTACHED TO THIS AGENDA, WE ARE
IS WORKING OUT THE DETAILS OF
EXACTLY WHICH APPROPRIATION
COMES OUT OF WHICH FUND.
IT IS ESSENTIALLY SPENDING WHAT
WE UNDERSTAND TO BE THE BALANCE
IN THE EMERGENCY FUND AND ABOUT
20 MILLION OR A $60 MILLION
BALANCE IN THE REVENUE
STABILIZATION FUND.
THE LEGISLATION PRESERVES
OPTIONS FOR THE COUNCIL TO
CONSIDER WHERE TO GET THIS $86
MILLION.
IT CAN BE FROM THE EMERGENCY
FUND.
IT CAN BE FROM THE REVENUE
STABILIZATION FUND.
IT CAN BE FROM THE GENERAL
FUND, INCLUDING SOME OF THE
OTHER DOLLARS THAT THE CITY MAY
RECEIVE TO SUPPORT THE COVID-19
RESPONSE.
WE HAD HOPED TO BENEFIT FROM
HAVING THE MAYOR'S PROPOSED
REBALANCING PACKAGE TO
UNDERSTAND WHAT THE BEST MIX IS.
ABSENT HAVING THAT INFORMATION
SOLIDIFIED, THIS PUTS OUT A
PROPOSAL BASED ON WHAT WE
UNDERSTAND TO BE THOSE
BALANCES.
DIRECTOR NOBLE ALSO MENTIONED
AN UNANTICIPATED BALANCE FROM
2019 OF ABOUT 18 1/2 MILLION
DOLLARS.
WE ARE ASSUMING THAT WILL BE AN
OBVIOUS PIECE OF THE
REBALANCING EFFORTS.
UNTIL WE SEE IT, IT IS
DIFFICULT TO SAY EXACTLY WHAT
THE RATE SPLIT IS.
THERE WILL BE CHOICES FOR THE
COUNCIL TO MAKE BASED ON WHAT
THE MAYOR PROPOSES BOTH TO
REBALANCE AND CONTINUE TO PAY
FOR SERVICES AND PROGRAMS THAT
WERE FUNDED IN THE ADOPTED
BUDGET AS WELL AS COVID-19
RESPONSE.
WE WILL WORK WITH THE SPONSOR
AND ALSO THE BUDGET CHAIR TO
FINE-TUNE IT.
THE WAY THE LEGISLATION IS, IT
WILL PRESERVE OPTIONS.
>> THANK YOU.
I JUST WANT TO FLAG THAT THE
MORE WE SPEND OF THOSE TWO
EMERGENCY FUNDS IN 2020, THE
MORE QUICKLY, AS I UNDERSTAND
FROM MY CONVERSATIONS WITH THE
DIRECTOR, THE MORE QUICKLY WE
MAY NEED TO CONSIDER CITY
SERVICE OR CITY STAFF LAYOFFS
AND FURLOUGHS.
THE INTENT OF THE BUDGET
DIRECTOR IN NOT WANTING TO
SPEND THOSE DOLLARS DOWN IS TO
PRESERVE THE ABILITY TO MAINTAIN
CITY JOBS IN 2021.
IF WE COULD MOVE ON TO SLIDE
FOUR, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT
THE DIRECT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
TO BUSINESSES.
WE CONSISTENTLY HAVE THE BARRIER
OF PROVIDING DIRECT ASSISTANCE
TO BUSINESSES IN THE
PROHIBITION OF THE PUBLIC GIFT
OF FUNDS.
THE CURRENT BUSINESS
STABILIZATION PROGRAM, THE
COVID-19 PROGRAM, AND THE ONE
FOR THAT, THE PILOT THAT WAS
FOCUSED ON ADDRESSING
CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS TO
BUSINESSES OR SHORT-TERM
IMPACTS TO BUSINESSES
ASSOCIATED WITH UNANTICIPATED
EVENTS STRUCTURES THAT PROGRAM.
IT ONLY CAN HELP PEOPLE WHO HAVE
, WHO BASICALLY, AS BUSINESS
OWNERS, THEY MEET AN INCOME
THRESHOLD AND ARE A PARTICULAR
SIZE OF BUSINESS, A RELATIVELY
SMALL SIZE OF BUSINESS.
I THINK SOME OF THAT HAD TO DO
WITH THE FACT THAT SOME OF
THOSE FUNDS WERE CBD CHIEF
FUNDS.
THEY ARE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT.
I AM WONDERING IF YOU CAN SPEAK
AS IT RELATES ON SLIDE FOUR TO
WHAT THE CONSTRAINTS WILL BE
UNDER THIS PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE
DIRECT ASSISTANCE TO BUSINESSES
BOTH SMALL BUSINESSES,
CHILDCARE, AND NONPROFITS.
AND THEN, YES, I THINK THAT IS
THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE ON
THAT SLIDE.
I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION ON
ANOTHER SLIDE.'S EMAC OKAY, IF
I COULD TAKE THE LIBERTY TO
JUST FIRST RESPOND TO ONE OF
YOUR LAST POINTS RELATED TO THE
USE OF THE EMERGENCY FUNDS AND
WHETHER OR NOT THAT MIGHT
IMPACT CITY EMPLOYMENT LAYOFFS
AND FURLOUGHS.
MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE INTENT
HERE IS TO USE THOSE FUNDS THAT
ARE AVAILABLE NOW IMMEDIATELY
IN 2021 TO PRESERVE USE OF
FUNDS TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACTS
OF CITY EMPLOYMENT.
>> THAT IS 75% FOR 2021,
CORRECT?
>> SO, THERE IS ABOUT $174
MILLION FOR 2021.
THE REVENUE ESTIMATE IS ABOUT
174 MILLION.
HALF WOULD GO BACK.
IT WOULD PUT THE EMERGENCY
FUNDS BACK.
HALF WOULD BE CONTINUITY OF
SERVICES.
THE COMBINATION OF THOSE THINGS
WOULD ALLOW, IT WOULD ALLOW THE
CITY TO CONTINUE TO HAVE ACCESS
TO THOSE FUNDS TO TRY TO
MINIMIZE IMPACT ON CITY
EMPLOYMENT.
AGAIN, MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE
INTENT IS TO WHEN WE SEE THE
MAYOR'S REBALANCING PACKAGE,
TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THEY ARE
PROPOSING TO USE IN TERMS OF
THE EMERGENCY FUNDS AND BALANCE
THAT WITH THIS PROPOSAL AND
OTHER PROPOSED SPENDING FOR
COVID-19 RELIEF.
I DO NOT THINK IT IS ACCURATE
TO SAY THAT USING THESE FUNDS
NOW, THIS NECESSARILY MEANS
INCREASED CITY LAYOFFS ARE
FURLOUGHS.
IT IS TRYING TO KEEP THAT MONEY
AVAILABLE FOR SPENDING IN 2021
IN A VARIETY OF WAYS.
>> PERFECT.
THANK YOU.
>> AND THEN IN TERMS OF YOUR
QUESTIONS ABOUT PROVIDING
ASSISTANCE TO SMALL BUSINESSES.
THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A
CHALLENGING AREA WITH THE
STATES GIFTED PUBLIC FUND
RESTRICTIONS AND THOSE TYPES OF
THINGS.
MY UNDERSTANDING FOR THE
CURRENT BUSINESS STABILIZATION
FUNDS, THAT CRITERIA WAS
DEVELOPED BASED ON YOU KNOW,
RESTRICTIONS.
THEY ALSO WANT TO TRY TO GET
THE MONEY TO THE BUSINESSES WHO
NEED IT MOST.
THIS LEGISLATION DEFINES THE
SMALL BUSINESS SIMILARLY AS A
BUSINESS HAVING FIVE OR FEWER
EMPLOYEES.
THERE HAS BEEN INTERPRETATION OR
AN ISSUE BY THE STATE AG OFFICE.
THIS COULD PROVIDE SOME
ADDITIONAL THINKING AROUND
GIFTED PUBLIC FUNDS AND
SUPPORTING BUSINESSES IN THIS
MOMENT AND IN THIS CRISIS.
IT WILL BE IMPORTANT THAT THE
PROGRAM IS SUPPORTING
BUSINESSES THAT EITHER THE
BUSINESS OWNER IS LOW INCOME
AND OR THE ASSISTANCE WILL HELP
ADDRESS THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS
THAT THE CITY IS FACING.
AND SO, IT IS A BENEFIT TO THE
PUBLIC IF THIS ASSISTANCE HELPS
MAINTAIN JOBS AND IT MAINTAINS
OUR TAX BASE SO THAT WE CAN
CONTINUE TO PROVIDE ALL OF THE
OTHER PROGRAMS AND SERVICES.
I WILL DISTRIBUTE THAT MEMO TO
COUNCIL MEMBERS.
>> THANK YOU.
AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION IS
GOING TO SLIDE SEVEN.
I APOLOGIZE, YOU MAY HAVE
ALREADY COVERED THIS.
I DEFINITELY MISSED IT.
CAN YOU TALK ABOUT WHETHER OR
NOT THERE ARE TARGETS BUILT
INTO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
INVESTMENTS?
FOR INSTANCE, NUMBERS OF UNITS,
THEY COULD BECOME AVAILABLE TO
HOUSEHOLD AT THE TARGETED AMI
LEVELS.
>> SO, THE SPONSOR DID NOT WANT
TO GO TO THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL.
THIS IS BECAUSE WE ARE, YOU
KNOW, WE ARE SEVERAL YEARS OUT
FROM THAT.
THERE WAS A DESIRE TO GIVE A
LITTLE BIT MORE THOUGHT,
ESPECIALLY TO GET A LITTLE BIT
CLOSER TO THAT.
THIS POOL OF MONEY WILL BE
SUBJECT TO THE IMPLEMENTATION
PLAN THAT WE ARE GOING TO ASK
THE EXECUTIVE TO DEVELOP ALONG
WITH THE COMMUNITY AND COUNSEL.
úTHEY WILL MAKE SOME OF THOSE
DETERMINATION ABOUT THE TYPES
OF PROGRAMS AND THE TYPES OF
TARGETING THAT MIGHT HAPPEN.
THIS COULD DEAL WITH THE INCOME
LEVEL THAT COULD BEST BE
SERVED.
WHAT TYPE OF MIX WOULD WORK?
THIS COULD DEAL WITH
ACQUISITION VERSUS NEW
CONSTRUCTION.
SOME OF THOSE DECISIONS WILL BE
MADE AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT
OF THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.
WE WILL GET INTO IT IN JUNE OF
2021.
>> THANK YOU.
I HAVE A QUICK ADDITION TO THAT
ANSWER.
THEN I WOULD LIKE FOLKS TO
RAISE THEIR HAND.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK,
RAISE YOUR HAND.
JUST A SMALL ADDITION TO WHAT
TRACY SAID AND A SLIGHT
CLARIFICATION.
I WOULD LIKE NUMBERS.
I THINK IT IS REALLY HARD FOR
US TO PUT NUMBERS ON SPECIFIC
UNITS IF WE DO NOT HAVE A SENSE
OF HOW MUCH IS GOING INTO
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
VERSUS OTHER TYPES OF UNITS.
I SEE YOU NODDING, IF THAT IS
CORRECT.
WHAT I WOULD LIKE US TO DO IS
TO SAY THAT WITH THE UNIVERSE
OF DOLLARS THAT WE HAVE IN
2022, WE COULD DO A DISSECTION
TO SAY THAT WITHIN THIS
UNIVERSE, IF WE WERE TO DO X
AMOUNT TO HOUSING, WE COULD
GIVE A SCENARIO OR WE COULD
GIVE A FEW SCENARIOS FOR HOW
THOSE DOLLARS COULD BE USED IF
THEY WERE COUPLED WITH YOU
KNOW, ADDITIONAL DOLLARS TO DO
THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
SIDE.
TRACY, DO YOU WANT TO WORK WITH
US AS WE THINK ABOUT THAT?
>> WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO DO THAT
KIND OF SCENARIO.
WE WOULD NEED TO GET DIRECTION
FROM YOU AS TO WHAT NUMBERS YOU
WANT TO ATTACH TO THE GENERAL
UNITS, THE NUMBER TO THE 0-50.
WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO DO A
COUPLE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS TO
SHOW WHAT THE POTENTIAL UNIT
PRODUCTION MIGHT BE WITH THOSE
DIFFERENT SCENARIOS.
WE NEED TO DO THAT AT THE COST
ESTIMATE THAT WE CAN PLUG INTO
THE EXCEL SPREADSHEET TO CREATE
THOSE FOR YOU.
>> I BELIEVE ONE OF THE
ATTACHMENTS, THE AGENDA THAT
WAS PUT OUT BY YOUR OFFICE
PROVIDES A ROUGH ESTIMATE OF
úPER UNIT COST IS IF PEOPLE JUS
WANT TO DO SOME DIVISION, THE
PER UNIT COST ASSUMPTIONS ARE
GOOD AND THAT DOCUMENT.
THAT IS WHAT WE WOULD INFORM,
MODELING SOME SCENARIOS FOR
YOU.
>> DO YOU MIND, COULD YOU
REFERENCE THOSE COSTS?
TRACY, YOU PROBABLY HAVE THEM
MEMORIZED.
THEY WERE IN THAT ONE PAGE THAT
TURNED INTO A THREE PAGER.
I SENT IT ON TUESDAY.
IF YOU HAVE THAT, JUST DO QUICK
MATH FOR COUNCILMEMBER LISA
HERBOLD AND MYSELF.
>> WE SHOULD INCLUDE THOSE
SCENARIOS WHILE DEFERRING TO A
FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.
THIS IS PART OF THIS PACKAGE.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE VERY
USEFUL FOR FOLKS IN THE
COMMUNITY WHO TYPICALLY WANT TO
KNOW WHAT THE PLAN IS.
THANK YOU.
>> I DO NOT HAVE THAT TABLE IN
FRONT OF ME.
>> I DO.
>> SO BASED ON THE INFORMATION,
THE MOST RECENT INFORMATION WE
HAVE ON HOUSING, WE BALLPARK TO
THE TOTAL COST PER UNIT AT
ABOUT $320,000.
THAT IS THE TOTAL DEVELOPMENT
COST.
WHAT THE CITY PAYS OR
CONTRIBUTES DEPENDS ON WHETHER
IT IS FROM A SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
PROJECT OR JUST YOUR ZERO TO
50% OF UNITS.
YOU WILL SEE IN THE NARRATIVE
DOCUMENT, YOU WILL SEEP FOR
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING,
WE ASSUME THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE
THE LEVY AND OTHER SOURCES, THE
LEVY BEING THE PRIMARY SOURCE,
WE WILL TAP OUT OF THE CITY'S
CONTRIBUTION.
WE PRESUME THAT IT WILL BE THE
ENTIRE $320,000.
WE HAVE TAKEN A SLIGHTLY MORE
POSITIVE BENT ON THE UNITS THAT
WOULD SERVE UP TO 50%.
THEY DEVELOPMENT COST WOULD BE
$320,000.
WE THINK WE MAY BE ABLE TO TAX
THE CITY'S DOLLARS AND BRING
THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS
THOSE UNITS DOWN TO ABOUT
$170,000 PER UNIT.
ON THE OPERATING AND SERVICES
SIZE, I THINK YOU ALL KNOW THAT
WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS A
LOT.
THE COST PER UNIT FOR THOSE
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
UNITS IS ABOUT $20,000 A YEAR
PER UNIT.
SO THAT WOULD BE THE
CALCULATION THAT WE WOULD USE
FOR THE OPERATING SERVICES
DOLLARS FOR THE PERMANENT
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING UNITS.
>> ARE YOU SAYING THAT NO OTHER
FUNDING IS AVAILABLE FOR
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
OTHER THAN HOUSING LEVY
DOLLARS?
>> WELL, NOT AFTER YOU ASSUME
THAT OUR DOLLARS WILL IN FACT
BASICALLY TAKE ALL OF THE 9%
TAX CREDIT THAT ARE AVAILABLE.
WE ARE ACTUALLY DOING THAT
ALREADY.
WE GET A CAPPED LIMIT OF 9% TAX
CREDITS, THIS IS THE MOST
BENEFICIAL TAX CREDIT.
WE SHARE WITH THE COUNTY.
WE HAVE A NEGOTIATION THAT WE
HAVE TO DO ABOUT WHO WAS GOING
TO GET HOW MUCH OF THE 9% TAX
CUTS.
WE HAVE BEEN TAPPED OUT EVERY
YAR.
THIS IS BECAUSE THERE IS A
LIMITED AMOUNT THAT WE HAVE TO
SHARE WITH THE COUNTY.
>> I THINK THE WHOLE REASON
THAT WE COMBINE [ INDISCERNIBLE
] IS BECAUSE THERE ARE COUNTY
FUNDS AND STATE FUNDS AND
FEDERAL FUNDS AVAILABLE BEYOND
THE TAX CREDITS.
THIS IS FOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
ATYPICAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IS
A BLEND OF FUND SOURCES FROM
MULTIPLE JURISDICTIONS.
>> YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
THERE IS THE CAPITAL SIDE OF
THE EQUATION.
THERE ARE SOME LIMITED DOLLARS
THAT COME FROM THE STATE.
IT COMES FROM THE HOUSING TRUST
FUND.
WE GET SOME OF THOSE.
THOSE ARE COMPETITIVE DOLLARS.
THE COUNTY REALLY DOES NOT
ACTUALLY HAVE A LOT OF CAPITAL
DOLLARS THAT THEY CONTRIBUTE.
MOSTLY WHAT THEY CONTRIBUTE
WHICH IS NOT TO MINIMIZE THE
CONTRIBUTION, IS ON THE
SERVICES SIDE.
BUT THOSE DOLLARS ARE LIMITED
AS WELL.
IT IS JUST A RECOGNITION THAT
THE PIE OF THOSE ARE FURTHER
LEVERAGING SOURCES IS NOT
GROWING AND WILL NOT GROW AS WE
EXPONENTIALLY INCREASE OUR
AMOUNT OF DOLLARS TO PUT INTO
THE REDUCTION OF THESE UNITS.
THIS IS UNLESS WE CAN GET THE
FEDERAL AND STATE GOVERNMENT TO
GIVE US MORE RESOURCES.
THAT IS THE REALITY WE HAVE
TALKED ABOUT.
WE TALKED ABOUT THESE EXPANDED
RESOURCES THAT WE MIGHT BRING
TO THE TABLE.
IT'S NOT NECESSARILY EXPAND THE
RESOURCES FROM OUR OTHER
LEVERAGING PARTNERS.
IT IS THE REALITY FOR RIGHT
NOW.
WE CAN HOPE THAT THAT MIGHT
CHANGE.
IT IS A REALITY WE HAVE TO DEAL
WITH.
>> THANK YOU TRACY.
>> YOU ARE WELCOME.
>> THANK YOU CENTRAL STAFF.
THANK YOU FOR DOING AN ADDENDUM
FOR US, A ONE PAGER ON ALL OF
THE INFORMATION THAT YOU JUST
CHAIR SHARED.
WE INCLUDED IT IN THE SMALL
DOCUMENT THAT WE SENT AROUND.
HAVING THAT SCENARIO OR A
SERIES OF SCENARIOS WOULD BE
VERY HELPFUL TO BREAK AWAY FROM
ALL OF THAT SOUP THAT SOMETIMES
WE SWIM IN WHEN WE TALK ABOUT
HOUSING, AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
COUNCILMEMBER KSHAMA SAWANT, I
SAW YOUR HAND GO UP.
I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR OUR
CONVERSATIONS AND ALSO FOR ALL
OF YOUR WORK ON PROGRESSIVE
REVENUE.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT FOLKS
KNOW ALL OF THESE CONVERSATIONS
ARE IN THE SPIRIT OF ADVANCING
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE.
HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
ARE AT STAKE.
WE APPRECIATE YOUR ONGOING WORK
AS TRACY JUST SAID.
THIS IS FOR US AS A CITY TO A
AND THE RESOURCE OUT WE AS A
CITY CAN BRING TO THE TABLE.
WE NEED STATE AND FEDERAL AND
LOCAL DOLLARS.
THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER, YOUR
TURN.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER.
I APPRECIATE ALL THE
CONVERSATIONS WE HAVE HAD AS
WELL, AND I APPRECIATE THE
DISCUSSIONS.
ALSO, I APPRECIATE THAT YOU
HAVE SAID REPEATEDLY THAT YOU
AGREE WITH ME IN THE GOAL OF
RAISING HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS OF PROGRESSIVE REVENUES
BASICALLY BY TAXING BIG
BUSINESS.
WE ARE HOPING TO FIND
AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
I WELCOME THIS CONVERSATION.
I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE
THOUSANDS OF ORDINARY PEOPLE,
COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO HAVE BEEN
FIGHTING FOR THE AMAZON TAX,
NOT JUST THIS YEAR, THIS YEAR
HAS BEEN RAMPED UP IN THE WAKE
OF THE TREMENDOUS HISTORICAL
ELECTION RESULTS THAT WE HAD
LAST YEAR WERE AMAZON AND OTHER
CORPORATIZATION'S WERE PUSHED
BACK.
OTHERS HAVE BEEN FIGHTING SINCE
2018.
YOU KNOW, WE DO NOT WANT TO EAT
THE DISASTER SCENARIO WE HAD IN
2018.
THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL
ENDED UP BETRAYING ORDINARY
PEOPLE AND REPEALING THE AMAZON
TAX WHICH WAS ACTUALLY MUCH
LOWER THAN WHAT THEY ARE
TALKING ABOUT NOW.
AT THAT TIME, WE VOTED AGAINST
THE APPEAL.
I THINK THAT IS THE SAME KIND
OF SPIRIT WE NEED.
WE ABSOLUTELY HOLD THE LINE
AGAINST BIG BUSINESS TRYING TO
PUT THE BURDEN OF THIS
RECESSION ON ORDINARY PEOPLE.
I JUST WANTED TO GO SOMEBODY
WHO SPOKE IN PUBLIC COMMENTS.
WE HAVE TO DO BY OUR
COMMUNITIES WHAT WE WOULD DO
BYRON FAMILIES.
I THINK THAT IF THAT IS NOT THE
BOTTOM LINE, IF THAT IS NOT THE
GUIDING SPIRIT, I DO NOT KNOW
WHAT CAN BE ANY HONEST WAY.
IN THAT SPIRIT, I WELCOME THIS
CONVERSATION.
I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE
THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE
BEEN FIGHTING THIS YEAR.
LOOK AT THE CONVERSATION WE ARE
HAVING.
IT IS COMPLETELY ON A DIFFERENT
MAGNITUDE OF REVENUES THAN THE
ONE THAT GOT REPEALED IN 2018.
THIS SHOWS THE PRESSURE ON BIG
BUSINESS.
THIS PROPOSAL THAT HAS COME
FORWARD ALSO, IN ITS SELF SHOWS
THE PRESSURE ON BIG BUSINESS.
OBVIOUSLY, I AM FIGHTING FOR
$500 MILLION AND NO SUNSET
CLAUSE.
THE FACT THAT THIS PROPOSAL
EXISTS SHOWS THAT BIG BUSINESS
UNDERSTANDS THAT THEY ARE NOT
GOING TO GET AWAY, YET AGAIN,
SLAMMING WORKING PEOPLE.
WORKING PEOPLE ARE FIGHTING
BACK.
I WANT TO MAKE SOME GENERAL
POINTS LATER.
ON THE QUESTIONS FOR CENTRAL
STAFF, SOME DISCUSSION HAS
HAPPENED ALREADY.
I WOULD LIKE TO HONE IN ON
THAT.
CENTRAL STAFF ARE ESTIMATING
THAT THE LEGISLATION WILL BRING
ABOUT $174 MILLION.
THAT IS WHAT WE KNOW.
THIS IS NOT THE PROMISE BUT IT
IS WHAT ACTUALLY IS.
THIS IS ABOUT 35% OF WHAT
COUNCILMEMBER TERESA MOSQUEDA
AND I HAVE PROPOSED IN THE TAX
AMAZON LEGISLATION.
WE WANT $500 MILLION A YEAR.
AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF PEOPLE
WHO ARE STRUGGLING FOR HOUSING,
I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT, THAT
IS A BIG DIFFERENCE.
GVEN THE SCOPE OF THE HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY CRISIS, I JUST DO
NOT UNDERSTAND WHY WE SHOULD
ACCEPT THIS MUCH LOWER NUMBER
OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT THIS
IS THE ONLY THING BIG IS THIS
IS WILLING TO GIVE.
I THINK IT IS MY DUTY TO ECHO
THE PEOPLE WHO SPOKE IN PUBLIC
TESTIMONY THAT THERE IS AN
ENTIRE MOVEMENT FIGHTING FOR
SOMETHING MUCH LARGER.
WE HAVE TO FOCUS ON THAT, WHY
NOT THAT MUCH LARGER AMOUNT OF
FUNDS.
RELATED TO THAT IS THE QUESTION
ABOUT HOW MUCH HOUSING, HOW
MANY AFFORDABLE HOMES WOULD BE
BUILT IN THE AMAZON TAX.
THIS IS VERSUS THE PROPOSAL
THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING TODAY.
OBVIOUSLY, AS ALLIE AND TRACY
SAID, THIS IS NOT A
STRAIGHTFORWARD THING.
WE HAVE TO PICK A SCENARIO OF
WHAT KIND OF HOMES, WHAT INCOME
QUINTILE ARE WE DIRECTING IT
TOWARDS?
WE NEED TO DECIDE HOW MANY
HOMES ARE IN EACH QUINTILE.
THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO DECIDE
HOW MANY HOMES ARE IN THEIR
OVERALL.
I AGREE WE NEED TO DO THAT.
I DO NOT THINK IT IS GOOD
ENOUGH FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO
SAY WE DO NOT KNOW BECAUSE WE
DO NOT KNOW WHICH HOMES IN
WHICH CATEGORY.
PICK A CATEGORY, PICK A
SCENARIO, AND DO IT.
WHAT WE DID THROUGH OUR OFFICE
IS, YOU KNOW, RIGHT OFF THE
BAT, WE HAD ALLIE.
SHE DID TREMENDOUS WORK ON
THIS.
YOU KNOW, SHE DID A BIG WORKUP
OF DIFFERENT SCENARIOS.
THIS WAS ASSUMING A WIDE
DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSING ACROSS
THE SPECTRUM OF INCOME
DISTRIBUTION.
YOU MAKE SOME CERTAIN
ASSUMPTIONS AND YOU COME UP
WITH THOSE NUMBERS.
BY THOSE SCENARIOS, WE HAD AN
ESTIMATE THAT OUR TAX, THE 500
MILLION AMAZON TAX WOULD BUILD
ROUGHLY 10,000 AFFORDABLE HOMES
IN A TEN-YEAR PERIOD.
THIS IS HUGE.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WILL
ACTUALLY START PUTTING A DENT
IN THE MASSIVE AFFORDABILITY
IT IS ROUGHLY 1000 HOMES A
YEAR.
I WONDER, THIS IS VERY SIMPLE.
SHOULD NOT BE COMPLICATED.
JUST MAKE AN APPLES TO APPLES
COMPARISON.
USE THE SAME ASSUMPTIONS AND
SEE WHAT THE DIFFERENCES.
I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT.
I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND IF STAFF
CANNOT HAVE THAT TODAY.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THE
PUBLIC WILL NEED TO REVIEW.
I HOPE AND I AM SURE THAT
COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL AGREE WITH
ME THAT IT WILL BE A NECESSARY
EXERCISE, TO GO THROUGH
PROPOSALS TO SEE HOW MUCH WE
ARE LOSING IF WE DO NOT HAVE A
$500 MILLION TAX.
MATHEMATICALLY SPEAKING, PLEASE
MAKE THE SAME ASSUMPTIONS
ACROSS BOTH PROPOSALS AND LET'S
FIND OUT HOW MANY HOMES WE CAN
BUILD PER YEAR.
WE HAVE AN ESTIMATE OF 10,000
HOMES FOR A TEN-YEAR PERIOD.
I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT, JUST
TWO OTHER POINTS.
THIS IS FOR THE INTEREST OF THE
PUBLIC.
ONE IS THAT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT
HOW MUCH AFFORDABLE HOUSING B
WOULD GET OUT OF ONE PROPOSAL
VERSUS THE OTHER, OBVIOUSLY THE
POINTS I JUST MADE ARE
IMPORTANT.
THIS IS HOW MUCH WE WILL GET
EACH YEAR.
THIS IS WITH THE TWO DIFFERENT
AMOUNTS, ONE IS MUCH LESS THAN
THE 500.
THERE IS ANOTHER COMPONENT TO
HOW MUCH HOUSING WILL BE BUILT.
THIS IS WHETHER THE TAX WILL BE
PERMANENT OR IT WILL HAVE A
SUNSET CLAUSE.
I REALLY AGREE WITH THE PEOPLE
WHO SAID IN PUBLIC COMMENT THAT
WE DO NOT WANT A SUNSET CLAUSE
ON PROGRESSIVE REVENUE.
WE WANT A SUNSET CLAUSE ON
REGRESSIVE REVENUES.
THIS IMPLIES THAT WE WANT THE
TAX ON BIG BUSINESS TO BE
PERMANENT.
THIS IS NOT JUST A TALKING
POINT IT IS IN REALITY WHAT
CONSEQUENCES PEOPLE GO THROUGH
AND HOW MUCH WE CAN MAKE A DENT
IN RACIST GENTRIFICATION IN OUR
CITY.
THIS IS GOING TO BE DETERMINED
BY HOW MANY DOLLARS WE PUT ON
THE TABLE.
LIKE THE BACK COMMUNITY HAS AND
SING, YOU PAY THE FEE FOR THE
HARM YOU HAVE CAUSED.
THE FEE COMES WITH TONS OF
DOLLARS ON THE TABLE.
IF WE TAKE AWAY THE DOLLARS ON
THE TABLE WHICH ARE LOWER TO
BEGIN WITH THAN THE MOVEMENT IS
FIGHTING FOR.
THEN WE SAT ON TOP OF THAT, WE
ARE GOING TO TAKE AWAY THOSE
DOLLARS AFTER 10 YEARS.
THE REAL CONSEQUENCES ARE HOW
MUCH HOUSING WE BUILT AFTER
THAT TEN-YEAR PERIOD.
WE ARE PROPOSING A PERMANENT
TAX OF $500 MILLION.
THAT WOULD THAT MUCH THOUSAND
HOMES EVERY YEAR, NOT JUST FOR
THE FIRST 10 YEARS.
I WANTED TO INCLUDE THAT AS
WELL.
ALSO, THIS IS AN OBVIOUS POINT
BUT I STILL NEED TO ADDRESS THAT
. THIS IS THAT THERE IS NO
QUESTION IN MY MIND, I STRONGLY
SUPPORT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE
PROGRAMS THAT WILL BE FUNDED
THROUGH THE PROPOSAL FROM
COUNCILMEMBER TERESA MOSQUEDA.
I HAVE A SIX YEAR TRACK RECORD
OF HAVING SUPPORTED ALL
PROGRESSIVE CAUSES.
ULTIMATELY, THIS IS A QUESTION
OF ARITHMETIC. I DO NOT THINK
WORKING PEOPLE, I THINK WORKING
PEOPLE UNDERSTAND ARITHMETIC.
IF YOU HAVE $500 MILLION TAX
VERSUS A TAX THAT IS ROUGHLY
35% OF THE TECH WHICH IS LESS
THAN HALF, THEN OBVIOUS, WHAT
YOU GET OUT OF IT IS ALSO LESS
THAN HALF.
AS GOOD AS ALL OF THE PROGRAMS
ARE, IT IS GOING TO BE MUCH
LESS THAN WHAT WE WOULD GET
WITH MORE MONEY.
THAT IS SIMPLE.
THIS IS A SIMPLE THING.
THAT IS WHY RICHER HOUSEHOLDS
DO BETTER.
THIS IS BECAUSE THEY HAVE MORE
MONEY.
POORER HOUSEHOLDS SUFFER
BECAUSE THEY HAVE VERY LITTLE
RESOURCES.
JUST ONE OTHER THING ON THE
SUNSET CLAUSES. THE POLITICAL
LOGIC OF THE SUNSET CLAUSE HAS
BEEN THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE A
REGIONAL APPROACH.
I STRONGLY APPROACH A REGIONAL
APPROACH BUT THE REGIONAL
APPROACH HAS NOT HAPPENED.
WHETHER YOU TALK ABOUT CITYWIDE
TAXES OR REGIONAL TAXES OR
STATE TAXES, WE ARE COMING UP
AGAINST THE SAME BARRIERS WHICH
IS BIG BUSINESS AND THE WEALTHY
DO NOT WANT US TO HAVE
PROGRESSIVE REVENUES.
THEY WILL BE TAXED.
THIS WILL BE AT ANY LEVEL.
THIS IS THE SAME FLIGHT AT
EVERY LEVEL.
I WANT THE CITY COUNCIL TO SAY
THAT WE ARE FIGHTING THE
MAXIMUM POSSIBLE HERE TODAY.
WE WILL NOT PUT OUR TRUST IN AN
APPROACH THAT HAS NOT WORK.
I WOULD BE DISHONEST TO THE
PEOPLE I REPRESENT IF I SAW
ALLUSIONS IN A REGIONAL
APPROACH WHEN I HAVE SEEN IT
FAILING OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
THIS WAS ONE TABLE THAT WAS
GOING TO BE THE SOLUTION.
THIS DID NOT PASS EARLIER THIS
YEAR.
IT WAS NOT BECAUSE IT WAS NOT A
GOOD TAX.
THE REASON IT DID NOT PASS WAS
BECAUSE THE BUSINESS WANTED A
BAN ON SEATTLE TAXES ON BIG
BUSINESS.
THEY REFUSED TO SUPPORT THE
STATEWIDE BILL WITHOUT THAT
BAND.
ORDINARY PEOPLE AND THE TAX
AMAZON MOVEMENT PUSHED BACK
AGAINST THE IDEA OF A BAND.
WE SUCCESSFULLY DEFEATED THE
ATTEMPT AT SUCH A BAND.
THAT IS WHY BIG BUSINESS REFUSED
TO SUPPORT THE BILL.
THAT DID NOT PASS.
I THINK IT IS A QUESTION OF
JUST BEING HONEST FOR PEOPLE
AND SEEING WHAT WORK AND WHAT
DOES NOT WORK. I DO NOT THINK
THAT WORKS.
THIS IS NOT BECAUSE IT IS
REGIONAL VERSUS CITYWIDE,
PUTTING YOUR FAITH IN BIG
BUSINESS DOES NOT WORK.
THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE HERE.
WE HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS AND I
WILL STOP SO OTHER
COUNCILMEMBERS CAN SPEAK.
I WANTED TO SAY THAT LET'S MAKE
SURE THAT AT THE NEXT MEETING,
WE HAVE A COMPARISON OF
HOUSING, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
I DO NOT MEAN TO SPEAK OVER, I
WANT TO REMIND FOLKS THAT WHEN
WE SPEAK OVER EACH OTHER IN
ZOOM.
I KNOW ALLIE YOU WERE ABOUT TO
SAY SOMETHING.
WE HAVE COUNCILMEMBER MORALES
IN THE QUEUE.
THEN WE NEED TO GET TO THE
REVENUE-GENERATING BILL, THE
TAX BILL AS WELL.
I WILL ALSO SAY THAT I PUSHED
REALLY HARD TO GET THE NUMBER
OF UNITS CREATED.
BECAUSE OF THE COMPLEXITIES
THAT TRACY AND ALLIE OUTLINED,
WE WERE INFORMED THAT IT WOULD
BE HARD TO DO THAT WITHOUT
HAVING THOSE ADDITIONAL DOLLARS
TO COMPLEMENT OPERATION
MAINTENANCE.
I THINK IT IS A FAIR QUESTION
THAT COUNCILMEMBER SWAN HAS
ASKED.
I THINK IF WE JUST LOOK AT THE
NUMBER OF UNITS, IF WE JUST
ASSUME THE NUMBER OF UNIT, WE
CAN DO THAT FLIES.
I THINK WE NEED TO BE QUICK
BEFORE WE TURN IT OVER TO
COUNCILMEMBER MORALE IS.
AS A REMINDER FOR FOLKS, IF WE
WANT TO GET INTO THE COMPARISON
WHICH I THINK THERE IS VALUE IN
THE CONVERSATION, IN THE SPIRIT
OF PUSHING FORWARD A
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE AS A BODY,
WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE AMI
LEVELS THAT WE ARE TALKING
ABOUT IN BOTH BILLS.
CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT?
>> THANK YOU.
I DID JUST WANT TO, I DO NOT
HAVE THOSE NUMBERS.
WE CAN DO SOME MODELING.
I WANT TO SET SOME
EXPECTATIONS.
ONE IS THAT IT WILL BE
DIFFICULT TO DO.
WE CAN COMPARE NUMBERS BUT IT
WILL NEVER BE A PURE APPLES TO
APPLES COMPARISON.
THE PROPOSAL FROM THE
COUNCILMEMBER WOULD PROVIDE
HOUSES UP TO ZERO AND 50% OF
AMI.
EXCUSE ME, THIS IS AREA MEDIAN
INCOME.
THE OTHER PROPOSAL WOULD FUND
HOUSING SERVING HOUSEHOLD AS
INTRODUCED TO HOUSEHOLDS UP TO
100% OF AMI.
THERE ARE DIFFERENT ASSUMPTIONS.
THEY REQUIRE SOME ADDITIONAL
REBUILDING.
THIS APPLIES BASED ON THE
PROPOSAL AS THEY CURRENTLY
STAND.
WE WILL DO OUR BEST TO
HIGHLIGHT THOSE DIFFERENCES AND
PROVIDE SOME ABILITY TO
COMPARE.
I WILL JUST NOTE THAT FOCUSING
ON HOUSING, SURVEYING,
PARTICULARLY PEOPLE AT OR BELOW
30% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME, IT
REQUIRES A DIFFERENT INVESTMENT
IN HOUSING SERVICES.
THOSE HOUSING AND SERVICE COST
ARE BUILT IN TO THE PROPOSAL.
WE TOOK OUT THE SERVICE
DOLLARS, THE NUMBER OF UNITS
ESTIMATED IN THEIR PLAN WOULD
INCREASE.
I JUST WANT TO SET
EXPECTATIONS.
WE WILL DO OUR BEST TO SHOW
WHERE THE ASSUMPTIONS ARE
DIFFERENT OR THE SAME.
>> I THINK THAT IS GREAT.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR WORKING
THAT MAGIC.
I WILL TURN IT OVER TO
COUNCILMEMBER TAMMY J. MORALES.
>> THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR.
GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY.
JUST TO RESPOND QUICKLY TO THE
LAST POINT, WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN
TO THE AMENDMENTS THAT I
PROPOSED ON OUR OWN BILL.
ONE OF THEM IS TO CHANGE THE
ALLOCATION TO SURVEYING
HOUSEHOLDS OR PRODUCTION FOR
60% OR LOWER.
ALLEY, THERE MIGHT BE SOMETHING
THAT YOU CAN USE THAT IS
ALREADY CLOSE TO BEING CRAFTED
FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE
COMPARISON.
I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER THAT.
THIS WOULD SHRINK YOUR WORKLOAD
A LITTLE BIT.
I DO WANT TO JUST ADDRESS THE
BROADER ISSUE HERE ABOUT HAVING
THE TWO DIFFERENT PROPOSALS.
I SAYING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO
THANK COUNCILMEMBER TERESA
MOSQUEDA ABOUT HAVING
CONVERSATIONS WITH US OVER THE
LAST COUPLE MONTHS.
I APPRECIATE THAT THIS PROPOSAL
SPELLED OUT SOME OF THE COVERT
RELIEF IDEAS THAT WE TALKED
ABOUT. IT GIVES AN EXAMPLE AND
PROVIDES A MODEL FOR WHAT THAT
COULD LOOK LIKE.
I ALSO HAVE A REAL ISSUE WITH
THIS SUNSETTING.
WE HAVE HUGE NEEDS IN THIS
CITY.
I DO NOT ANTICIPATE, WE HAVE
BIT WHEN WAITING A LONG TIME
FOR THE STATE LEGISLATOR TO
ADDRESS THE REGRESSIVE TAX
SYSTEM.
I DO NOT ANTICIPATE ANYTHING IS
GOING TO CHANGE.
THAT IS A CONVERSATION THAT WE
SHOULD DEFINITELY CONTINUE AND
DIG IN TO WHAT THAT MEANS AND
WHY IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO
NOT CONCEDE THAT GROUND, NOT AT
THE BEGINNING OF THE
CONVERSATION.
I WANT TO TURN TO THE EQUITABLE
DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE.
AGAIN, I HAD AN AMENDMENT
DRAFTED FOR OUR PROPOSAL THAT
WAS SET ASIDE 10% OF ANY
REVENUE GENERATED FOR THE
EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT
INITIATIVE.
OUR PROPOSAL SEEKS TO RAISE
$500 MILLION. THAT WOULD BE $50
MILLION FOR EDI.
YOU KNOW, THIS IS REALLY ABOUT
COMMUNITY LED DEVELOPMENT.
THAT IS THE KEY TO ADDRESSING
RACIAL EQUITY.
WE HEARD FROM SOME SOUTH CORE
MEMBERS EARLIER THIS MORNING.
SOUTH CORE, FOR THOSE WHO DO
NOT KNOW STAND FOR SOUTH
COMMUNITIES ORGANIZING FOR
RACIAL EQUITY.
THIS IS A RACIAL EQUITY TASK
FORCE.
IT HAS BEEN ADVOCATING FOR
BUILDING RESILIENCY THROUGH
COMMUNITY OWNERSHIP OF HOUSING,
LAND, OF SMALL BUSINESS BASE
AND THE COALITION ITSELF IS
MADE UP OF ABOUT 24
ORGANIZATIONS BY AND FOR PEOPLE
OF COLOR.
20 OF THOSE ORGANIZATIONS ARE
IN MY DISTRICT.
AND SO, THIS IS A GROUP OF
FOLKS I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH
FOR A LONG TIME.
THEY WERE IN YOUR MENTAL IN
CRAFTING, ADVOCATING FOR AND
PASSING WHAT CREATED THE
EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT
INITIATIVE.
THESE ARE REALLY IMPORTANT
PROJECTS.
YOU KNOW, THEY ARE COMMUNITY
LED PROJECTS.
THEY OFTEN NEED FIVE OR $6
MILLION TO GET SITE CONTROL, TO
GET ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY.
YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS
THAT I HAVE ON THE WAY THIS IS
DESCRIBED RIGHT NOW ANYWAY IS
THAT IT IS FOR HOUSING AND NON-
HOUSING PROJECTS.
BUT, THESE ORGANIZATIONS THAT
ARE APPLYING FOR THIS MONEY
ALSO NEEDS SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW,
A COUPLE HUNDRED DOLLARS A YEAR
OVER A PERIOD OF TIME TO BUILD
THEIR OWN CAPACITY.
THIS IS TO BE ABLE TO DRIVE THE
PROJECTS THAT THEY WANT TO SEE.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, THAT IS WHY
IT IS REALLY HARD TO HEAR ABOUT
THE INITIATIVE THAT THE STAFF
WORK PLAN HAS CHANGED DURING
COVID-19. I
DID ASK THE DIRECTOR OF OPC D
HOW THEIR WORK PLAN WAS GOING
TO CHANGE AS A RESULT OF COVID-
19.
SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HE
RESPONDED, THEY ARE DELAYING
PROJECTS SO THEY CAN RE-UP
STAFF.
THEY ARE WEARING WAYS TO
MITIGATE ANTICIPATED REVENUE
SHORTFALLS BY REDUCING OR
ELIMINATING WORK.
YOU KNOW, THEY ARE TRYING TO
SUPPORT ORGANIZATIONS.
THIS IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM FOR
THE COMMUNITIES, THE KIND OF
COMMUNITY PROJECTS THAT THIS
ISSUE WAS INTENDED TO SERVE.
SO THAT IS WHY I DRAFTED THE
AMENDMENT CALLING FOR 10% OF
REVENUE TO BE DEDICATED TO EDI.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS
COMMUNITY LED DEVELOPMENT IS
NOT JEOPARDIZED.
WE HAVE TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN
TO AVOID DISASTER
GENTRIFICATION.
ESPECIALLY RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW,
THE NEED FOR THIS IS PERMANENT.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO CENTER
BLACK AND BROWN VOICES AS WE
ARE TALKING ABOUT HOW TO
ALLOCATE EXISTING RESOURCES OR
ALLOCATE NEW RESOURCES.
WHETHER WE ARE TALKING ABOUT
WHAT HAPPENS TO FUNDING WHEN WE
DEFUND THE POLICE ARE WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT NEW PROGRESSIVE
REVENUE OR WE ARE TALKING ABOUT
REBALANCING.
WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
CONTINUE AND REALLY RAMP UP OUR
INVESTMENT IN BLACK AND BROWN
COMMUNITIES AND IN COMMUNITY
LED DEVELOPMENT.
AND SO, I APPRECIATE
COUNCILMEMBER TERESA MOSQUEDA
ADDING EDI FUNDING TO HER
PROPOSAL.
OBVIOUSLY, I WOULD PREFER TO
SEE MORE REVENUE GENERATED SO
WE CAN INCREASE FUNDING IN
THOSE PROJECTS.
AT ANY RATE, I THINK AS WE HAVE
THIS CONVERSATION OVER THE NEXT
FEW WEEKS, IT IS REALLY
IMPORTANT, INCUMBENT UPON US TO
COMMIT TO THESE INVESTMENTS.
I THINK THAT WE CAN ALL AGREE,
ESPECIALLY AFTER THE
CONVERSATIONS WE HAVE BEEN
HAVING IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS
THAT WE OWE OUR BLACK
NEIGHBORS, AT LEAST 400 YEARS
WORTH OF INVESTMENT.
IT IS TIME FOR US TO START
MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION.
>> THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR ALL OF YOUR WORK
ON YOUR LEGISLATION.
I WOULD LOVE FOR US TO TALK
ABOUT THE REVENUE BILL.
I THINK THAT AS WE DO, I WANT
TO TRANSITION WITH THE NOTES
THAT YOU LEFT US.
I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND FOLKS
THAT NOT ONLY HAVE BLACK,
BROWN, AND INDIGENOUS
COMMUNITIES LEFT BEHIND IN OUR
CURRENT ECONOMIC SITUATION,
THIS IS PRIOR TO COVID-19.
úBECAUSE OF COVID-19, WE ALSO
KNOW THAT COMMUNITIES OF COLOR,
BLACK, BROWN, INDIGENOUS FOLKS,
ARE BEING HIT WITH HIGHER RATES
OF HOSPITALIZATIONS AND WITH
HIGH RATES OF DEATH DUE TO
COVID-19.
ESPECIALLY AS WE THINK ABOUT
MINORITY OWNED BUSINESSES,
TRYING TO OPEN BACK UP, THERE
IS A TRIPLE WHAMMY OF AN
EXISTING CRISIS. THE ECONOMY IS
AN EQUITABLE.
COVID-19 IS HITTING COMMUNITIES
OF COLOR HARDEST AND THE
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR ARE BEING
LEFT BEHIND IN THE RELIEF
PACKAGES.
I APPRECIATE YOU LOOKING THAT
UP.
WITH THAT, LET'S TRANSITION TO
THE CONVERSATION OVER THE
REVENUE GENERATING BILL.
DAN AND TOM ARE GOING TO WALK
US THROUGH THIS.
THANK YOU FOR WALKING US
THROUGH THAT OUTLINE.
FOLKS HAVE ALREADY NOTED, THIS
IS THE BEGINNING OF A ROBUST
CONVERSATION.
TOM AND DAN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR
WORK.
WALK US THROUGH THE SLIDES.
>> LET ME CHECK YOUR AUDIO REAL
QUICK.
>> THIS IS DAN.
I AM GOING TO TURN THIS
STRAIGHT OVER TO TOM FOR HIM TO
WALK YOU THROUGH HIS SLIDES.'S
EMAC THANK YOU GUYS.
>> GOOD MORNING MADAM CHAIR,
CAN YOU HEAR ME?
TERRIFIC.
GOOD MORNING MEMBERS OF THE
BUDGET COMMITTEE.
THIS MORNING, I AM GOING TO
REVIEW THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX
AND PROVIDE A DETAILED OVERVIEW
TO A NUMBER OF SLIDES.
>> WE ARE GOING TO RUN INTO THE
SAME SITUATION THAT WE HAD WITH
YOU A MONTH AGO OR SO.
I APOLOGIZE ON THIS.
I THINK IT IS A GOOD REMINDER
FOR WHY WE NEED UNIVERSAL
BROADBAND AS A PUBLIC UTILITY
AVAILABLE TO EVERYONE SO
EVERYONE HAS HIGH SPEED
INTERNET ACCESS.
I KNOW TOM IS ON HIS WAY TO
CALL IN RIGHT NOW SO THAT WE
CAN HAVE BETTER AUDIO.
WE DID HAVE THIS SITUATION IN
THE PAST.
BEAR WITH US FOR ONE SECOND.
WE WILL GET TO TOM ON THE IDEO
I.T..
FOLKS SHOULD BE TRYING TO GET
HIM LOADED UP. WE WILL HAVE TOM
WALK US THROUGH THE
PRESENTATION.
WE WILL SEE WHAT HE SAYS.
HE WILL PROBABLY BE ON MUTE ON
HIS COMPUTER.
HE WILL SPEAK INTO THE PHONE IF
THAT IS CORRECT.
LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE FOLKS FROM
I.T.
LETTING HIM IN, THAT WOULD BE
GREAT.
>> HELLO, I AM ACTUALLY ONLINE.
>> YOURSELF ON MUTE ON YOUR
COMPUTER PLEASE.
PERFECT.
WE ARE READY TO GO WHEN YOU
ARE.
YOU CAN PUT YOURSELF, IF YOU
ARE COMFORTABLE HOLDING YOUR
HAND LIKE THAT, WE CAN HEAR YOU
GREAT.
WE WILL WALK THROUGH THE SLIDES
WITH YOU.
>> OKAY, THIS WILL BE GREAT.
SO, THE NEXT FEW SLIDES THAT WE
WILL COVER THIS MORNING WILL
DISCUSS THE ANNUAL REVENUE
AMOUNT FROM THE PROPOSED TAX.
WE WILL TALK ABOUT THE
THRESHOLD THAT DETERMINES THE
ELIGIBILITY FOR BUSINESS
SITUATIONS.
I WILL ADDRESS THE CONCEPT OF
ASSIGNED PAYROLL AND HOW THAT
MATTERS FOR THE APPLICATION OF
THIS PAYROLL TAX.
ALSO, I WILL GO INTO THE RATE
STRUCTURE AS THE TAX HAS A
DIFFERENT TIER LEVEL BASED ON
THE TYPE OF BUSINESS AS WELL AS
SIZE OF EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION.
WE WILL COVER THE EXEMPTIONS
THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE BILL.
I WILL TURN TO THE DATES THE TAX
BECOMES EFFECTIVE.
THERE WILL BE A DUE DATE FOR
INITIAL COLLECTIONS.
FINALLY, I WILL WRAP UP WITH A
DISCUSSION OF THE SUNSET
PROVISIONS IN THE BILL.
FROM A HIGH LEVEL, THE ANNUAL
REVENUE AMOUNTS THAT STAFF
ESTIMATES FOR THIS TAX
STRUCTURE IS APPROXIMATELY $174
MILLION PER YEAR.
AS I MENTIONED, AT THE FRONT
END, WE WILL GO INTO MORE
DETAIL IN THE NEXT FEW SLIDES;
THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT SIDES OF
HIS NOSE CONSIDERATIONS THAT
ARE INCLUDED.
THERE IS A $7 MILLION-$1
BILLION.
THE $1 BILLION AND HIGHER IS ON
THE BUSINESS SIDE.
THE DATA THAT STAFF USED FOR
THE ESTIMATE WAS PROVIDED BY
THESE DATE EMPLOYMENT SECURITY
DEPARTMENT.
IT IS FOR 2019 DATA INFLATED
USE RING CPUS WAGE AND SALARY
DISBURSEMENT, REGIONAL FORECAST.
THE DATA THAT WAS REQUESTED WAS
PROVIDED BY ESD DESCRIBED THE
DIFFERENT PAYROLL TEARS FOR THE
SIZE OF COMPENSATION LEVEL. IT
DID NOT PROVIDE SUFFICIENT
DETAIL OR ANY DETAIL FOR
DESCRIBING BUSINESSES ABOVE $1
BILLION.
IN THAT CASE, THE STAFF DOES
NOT INCLUDE ANY ESTIMATE FOR
THE DATA FOR INCREMENTAL TAXES
FOR BUSINESSES OF $1 BILLION OR
HIGHER.
SO, TURNING TO THE TAX
THRESHOLD, THIS IS A PRIOR
SLIDE.
IF WE LOOK AT WHEN THE TAX
BECOMES EFFECTIVE FOR DIFFERENT
DISNEY SITUATIONS, IT IS
ESSENTIALLY AT A STARTING
THRESHOLD OF $7 MILLION OF
SEATTLE PAYROLL OR HIGHER.
THAT AMOUNT IS INDEXED
INFLATION IN 2022.
OKAY, NEXT SLIDE.
WHEN DETERMINING THE PAYROLL,
THERE IS ESSENTIALLY A THREE-
PART TEST THAT IS USED BY TAX
ADMINISTRATION STAFF.
ONE IS WHETHER OR NOT THE
EMPLOYEE PRIMARILY WORKS IN THE
CITY OF SEATTLE.
NOTICE THAT THIS IS THE FULL
AMOUNT OF PAYROLL.
IT IS PART OF CASTING AGAINST
THE $7 MILLION THRESHOLD.
IF THAT IS NOT THE CASE, IF THE
EMPLOYEE WORKS IN MULTIPLE
LOCATIONS, THE TEST IS WHETHER
OR NOT IT'S 50% OR MORE.
IF THEY WORK 50% OR MORE IN
SEATTLE, THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF
THE PAYROLL WILL BE ASSIGNED TO
SEATTLE FOR DETERMINING WHETHER
OR NOT THE PAYROLL IS PART OF
THE THRESHOLD TEST OR NOT.
AND THEN, FINALLY, THE THIRD
TEST IS IN THE EVENT WHERE THE
EMPLOYEE DOES NOT WORK 50% OF
THEIR TIME IN ANY ONE LOCATION,
THE EMPLOYEE RESIDES IN SEATTLE.
THE PAYROLL FOR THE EMPLOYEE
WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE TAX
BASE.
NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
OKAY SO WITH REGARD TO THE RATE
STRUCTURE, THIS DESCRIBES THE
DIFFERENT RATES THAT ARE
APPLIED IN THE BILL.
THERE ARE FOUR INDIVIDUAL RATES
THAT ARE DETERMINED BY THE SIZE
OF THE BUSINESS PAYROLL.
THIS IS AS WELL AS THE SIZE OF
THE INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEE
COMPENSATION THAT IS INCLUDED.
I WILL TOUCH A LITTLE BIT MORE
ON THE APPLICATION OF THIS
INDIVIDUAL CASE.
THIS WILL BE ON THE NEXT SLIDE.
IN GENERAL TERMS, FOR A
BUSINESS THAT IS FROM $7
MILLION TO 1 BILLION IN
PAYROLL, THIS IS THE TOTAL
PAYROLL FOR THE YEAR.
THE TAX WOULD BE .7% ON THE
ENTIRE EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION
FOR ALL EMPLOYEES EARNING FROM
$150,000-$499,900.
SO, ESSENTIALLY, IN THIS CASE,
THERE IS NO TAX ON ANY EMPLOYEE
COMPENSATION IN ANY OF THESE
TIERS THAT IS BELOW $150,000.
THE NEXT TIER FOR BEGINNING
WITH $500,000 AND ABOVE IS A
TAX FOR THE BUSINESSES FROM $7
MILLION FROM $1 BILLION.
THIS WOULD BE 1.4% OF THE TOTAL
EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION FOR THOSE
EMPLOYEES AT THOSE COMPENSATION
LEVELS.
AT $1 BILLION OF TOTAL BUSINESS
PAYROLL SIDE, THE TAX WOULD BE
1.4%.
THE TOTAL EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION
FOR ANY EMPLOYEES EARNING FROM
$150,000-$499,000 AND EIGHT
2.1% TAX ON THE TOTAL EMPLOYEE
COMPENSATION FOR THOSE
EMPLOYEES EARNING 500,000 AND
ABOVE IS RELEVANT.
AND SO THIS IS JUST BY WAY OF
PROVIDING AN EXAMPLE.
SO, THIS WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE
COMPANY WITH A TOTAL OF $10
MILLION ANNUAL PAYROLL.
JUST A FEW DIFFERENT INDIVIDUAL
CASES, THIS WILL DEMONSTRATE
HOW THE TAX WOULD FLY IN SOME
EDUCATED SERVE CIRCUMSTANCES
AROUND THE MARGINS.
FIRST WITH REGARD TO PAYCHECK
A, THIS WOULD BE AN INDIVIDUAL
THAT EARNS $149,000 PER YEAR.
THERE WOULD BE ZERO TAX, AS THE
TAX KICKS IN, STARTING WITH THE
COMPENSATION OF $150,000 PER
YEAR.
PAYCHECK B WOULD BE AN
INDIVIDUAL EARNING $151,000 PER
YEAR AT THIS $10 MILLION SIDE
PAYROLL COMPANY.
IN THIS CASE, THE TAX WOULD BE
.7% TIMES THE TOTAL OF $151,000
FOR A TAX OF $1057.
THE THIRD EXAMPLE IS PAYCHECK
C. THIS WOULD BE AN EMPLOYEE AT
THIS COMPANY RECEIVING
COMPENSATION OF $499,000.
IN THIS CASE, THE TAX WOULD BE
AGAIN, .7% TIMES THAT TOTAL,
499,000 FOUR A TAX PAYMENT OF
$3493.
AND THEN FINALLY, THERE WOULD
BE PAYCHECK B. THIS WOULD BE AN
INDIVIDUAL'S PAYCHECK A
$501,000.
THISWOULD PUT THAT PAYCHECK
WITHIN THE NEXT TIER OF THIS 7
MILLION TO 1 BILLION SIZE
COMPANY.
THIS WOULD BE 1.4% TIMES THE
ENTIRE $501,000 FOR A PAY TAX
OF AROUND $7000.
WITH REGARDS AND TO THE SIZE OF
THE INITIALS $7 MILLION CUTOFF
AND THE $150,000 PAYROLL CUT
OFF, THERE ARE ADDITIONAL
EXEMPTIONS FOR ALL EMPLOYMENT
SITUATIONS.
IT IS FOR ALL PAYCHECK SIZES
AND BUSINESS SIZES.
THESE INCLUDE GROCERY STORES,
AND ENTITIES THAT THE CITY DOES
NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO TAX
INCLUDING FEDERAL, STATE, AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
THIS DEALS WITH INSURANCE
BUSINESSES, BUSINESSES THAT
SELL, MANUFACTURE, OR
DISTRIBUTE MOTOR FULL OR
BUSINESSES THAT SELL AND
DISTRIBUTE LIQUOR.
>> TO UNDERSCORE THAT POINT,
THIS WAS NOT A POLICY DECISION
TO EXCLUDE THOSE FOLKS.
THIS IS A CATEGORY OF PEOPLE
THAT WE DO NOT HAVE THE
AUTHORITY TO TAX.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I
UNDERSCORED WHAT TOM HAD
ALREADY SAID.
>> NEXT WITH REGARDS TO THE
EFFECTIVE DUE DATES.
AS DRAFTED, THE TAX WOULD GO
INTO EFFECT ON JANUARY 1 OF
2021.
THE FIRST PAYMENT FROM ANY
TAXPAYER WITH LIABILITY WITH
THE FINAL QUARTERLY REPAYMENT
OF 2021 WOULD BE INEFFECTIVE
SEPARATE 2022.
AND THEN, COUNTING ACCRUALS
WOULD BRING THE TAX RECEIPTS
FORWARD INTO 2021 FISCAL YEAR.
I WILL WRAP UP DISCUSSING THE
SUNSET PROVISION.
AS HAS BEEN DESCRIBED
PREVIOUSLY IN TODAY'S MEETING,
IF THIS TAX HAS A 10 YEAR
HORIZON AND IT EXPIRES ON
DECEMBER 31 OF 2030, PLEASE
CONSIDER THAT.
THERE IS A CODIFIED PROVISION
WHICH IS A STATEMENT OF
LEGISLATIVE INTENT TO MONITOR
THE TAX PROPOSALS THAT OVERLAP
IN JURISDICTIONS.
FOR EXAMPLE, THIS INCLUDES THE
STATE AND THE COUNTY.
THIS IS FOR PROGRESSIVE REVENUE
PLANS THAT ARE IN THE WORKS OR
THAT HAVE BEEN PASSED.
THEY WOULD OVERLAP WITH THIS
PROPOSAL WITH THE INTENT TO
EXPLORE AMENDMENTS TO THIS
PROPOSAL IF THOSE CASES ARISE.
AND I BELIEVE THAT IS MY FINAL
SLIDE.
I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS.
>> TOM AND LEANNE, THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS
LEGISLATION.
TOM, THANK YOU FOR BEING
FLEXIBLE WITH US AS WE ADAPT TO
GETTING CENTRAL STAFF TESTIMONY
AND OVERVIEW BY TELEPHONE.
I AM LOOKING AT MY COLLEAGUES
HERE.
PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU
HAVE QUESTIONS.
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS WILL BE
FIRST.
ANYBODY ELSE?
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR.
TOM, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUICK
QUESTIONS.
IT ACTUALLY PERTAINS TO THE
LAST THING THAT YOU MENTIONED
AROUND THE POSSIBLE EARLY
SUNSET IF THERE WAS SOME KIND
OF STATE, REGIONAL TAX THAT
CAME ON THE SCENE.
IS THAT, WITH THAT ESSENTIALLY
REQUIRE US TO COME BACK AND
TRIGGER ANOTHER DISCUSSION
WHERE WE DECIDE TO REPEAL IT?
WOULD THAT HAPPEN
AUTOMATICALLY?
IF THAT IS THE CASE, WHAT LEVEL
OF REGIONAL WOULD BE SUITABLE
TO ESSENTIALLY REMOVE THIS TASK.
WOULD IT HAVE TO SET SIMILAR
RATES AND BE A FORMULA THAT
WOULD LEAD TO A SIMILAR LEVEL
OF REVENUE?
I AM THINKING IN TERMS OF THE
SPENDING PLAN THAT WE DISCUSSED
EARLIER.
I WOULD NOT WANT US TO BE IN A
POSITION WHERE YOU KNOW, THERE
IS A NEW REGIONAL TAX.
THAT DOES NOT FACTOR IN TO THE
COMMITMENTS THAT WE HAVE
ALREADY MADE TO THE PUBLIC.
IT DOES NOT DEAL WITH THE
SERVICES WE WANT TO PROVIDE.
HOW WOULD THAT PROCESS WORK?
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, THANK
YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
AS CURRENTLY DRAFTED, THE
CODIFIED PROVISION WOULD
EXPRESS THE INTENT FOR ANY
PROGRESSIVE TAX DISCUSSION AT A
REGIONAL OR OVERLAPPING
JURISDICTION OF STATE OR COUNTY.
IT WOULD NOT MANDATE, THIS
EXPRESSES THE INTENT OF THE
COUNCIL TO, AS YOU SAY, ENGAGE
IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS.
THIS IS GIVEN THAT OCCURRENCE
OF A PROGRESSIVE TAX PROPOSAL
THAT IS IN DISCUSSION SOMEWHERE
ELSE.
SO, IT IS NOT MANDATORY.
IT IS A STATEMENT OF INTENT.
>> SO, TO PUT A FINE POINT ON IT
THEN, THERE WOULD NOT BE AN
AUTOMATIC REPEAL.
IT WOULDJUST SORT OF EXPRESS
THAT WHILE WE ARE INTERESTED IN
A REGIONAL SOLUTION AND WHILE
WE CONTINUE TO WAIT FOR A
REGIONAL SOLUTION, WE JUST
CANNOT WAIT ANY LONGER GIVEN
THE SCOPE AND SCALE OF OUR
NEED.
BUT, IF THAT REGIONAL TAX
MATERIALIZED, WE ARE TOTALLY
WILLING TO TALK ABOUT IT AND
REVISIT HOW THIS IS STRUCTURED.
IT WOULD REQUIRE US TO BRING,
TO PROPOSE SOME KIND OF
ADDITIONAL MANAGER IN THE
PASSING.
>> CORRECT. THERE IS NO
AUTOMATIC COURSE OF ACTION.
IT IS JUST AN INTENT AS YOU
DESCRIBE.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM
YOU?
>> NOT CURRENTLY, THANK YOU.
>> THE NEXT PERSON I HAVE IN
THE QUEUE IS COUNCILMEMBER LISA
HERBOLD.
>> THANK YOU.
SO, FIRST FOR SLIDE 11, AROUND
ELIGIBILITY.
COULD YOU LET ME KNOW WHETHER
OR NOT NONPROFITS FEEDING THE
ANNUAL TAX THRESHOLD WOULD BE
TAXED?
COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD,
THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
A NONPROFIT THAT IS IN EXCESS
OF THE INITIAL $7 MILLION
BUSINESS SIDE WOULD BE SUBJECT
TO THE TAX TO THE EXTENT THAT
THE NONPROFIT HAS INDIVIDUAL
PAYCHECKS THAT ARE ABOVE
$150,000 PER YEAR.
>> THANK YOU.
AND THEN, HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION
AS IT RELATES TO THAT.
IT RELATES TO ELIGIBILITY.
I WANT TO CONFIRM MY
UNDERSTANDING THAT THE
BUSINESSES THAT MEET THE
THRESHOLD FOR THE TAX YEAR,
THEY ARE BASED ON PAYROLL.
BUSINESSES MEET THE TAX
THRESHOLD FOR THE YEAR, EACH
YEAR BASED ON PAYROLL EXPENSE
IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR.
SO, BUSINESSES IN 2021 WOULD
MEET THE THRESHOLD FOR TAX
BASES IN 2020, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> WE ARE ALWAYS LOOKING BACK
TO THE PRIOR YEAR.
>> SIMILARLY, SINCE I BELIEVE
THAT THIS TAX STRUCTURE ALSO
CREATES ELIGIBILITY FOR 2020,
BUSINESSES IN 2020 WOULD NEED
THRESHOLD ON TAX BASE AND THEIR
PAYROLL EXPENSE IN 2019, IS
THAT CORRECT?
>> THE TAX GOES INTO EFFECT
JANUARY 1 OF 2021.
THERE WOULD BE NO 2020 TAX
LIABILITY.
THE FIRST TASK WOULD BE
DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY FOR THE
TAX IN 20 20.
>> SO, THIS DIFFERENT STRUCTURE
ADDRESSES THE CONCERN THAT I
HAD RAISED LAST WEEK ABOUT THE
KSHAMA SAWANT , TAMMY J.
MORALES PROPOSAL.
THIS WOULD MAKE, THIS WOULD
START CHARGING IN 2020, EVEN
THOUGH HE IS GOING TO BE
COLLECTED IN 2021, BASED ON
2018 REVENUES.
MY CONCERN IS THAT 2019
REVENUES WOULD NOT BE
NECESSARILY ILLUSTRATIVE ON THE
HEALTH OF THE BUSINESS OR THE
REVENUES COLLECTED BY BUSINESS
IN 2020.
>> THIS IS DAN.
CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG.
I THINK I HAVE IT RIGHT.
THE MEASURE OF THE TAX IS
DIFFERENT THAN THE ELIGIBILITY
THRESHOLD IN TERMS OF WHICH --
>> I AM TALKING SPECIFICALLY
ABOUT ELIGIBILITY THRESHOLD,
THANK YOU.
>> VERY GOOD.
>> TO PIVOT BACK TO THE
QUESTION, YES, TO THE EXTENT
THAT THE PROPOSAL WE WERE
DISCUSSING LAST WEEK WAS
ESTABLISHING A TAX EFFECTIVE IN
2020, IT WAS LOOKING BACK AT
2019.
THIS WAS ESTABLISHING THE TAX
STARTING IN 2021.
IT IS LOOKING BACK TO 2020.
>> THANK YOU.
AND THEN, MY LAST SET OF
QUESTIONS RELATE TO SLIDE 13.
I AM JUST WONDERING WHETHER OR
NOT YOU HAVE FIRST ESTIMATES OF
NUMBERS OF BUSINESSES THAT MIGHT
MEECH EACH THRESHOLD, A PAYROLL
OF 7 MILLION OR ONE BILLION.
DO YOU HAVE THE ESTIMATES OR OF
THE NUMBER OR SPREAD OF
SALARIES OVER THE THRESHOLD?
I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE
REVENUE ESTIMATE OF 173 MILLION
IN 2021 IS BASED ON.
>> OKAY.
SO WITH REGARDS TO THE NUMBER
OF BUSINESSES, THERE IS SOME
OVERLAP AS YOU COULD IMAGINE.
THIS IS BECAUSE A BUSINESS THAT
ANTICIPATES AT THE 150,000 TO
499,000 PAYROLL LEVEL HAS
EMPLOYEES THAT ARE WITHIN THAT
BRACKET.
NOT ALL CIRCUMSTANCES WILL HAVE
EMPLOYEES AT THE $500,000 AND
HIGHER LEVEL.
SO, BASED ON A ROUGH VIEW OF
THE NUMBERS AND THE BUSINESSES
THAT WERE IN THE HUNDRED
$50,000, AT LEAST $150,000 AND
HIGHER, IT WAS APPROXIMATELY
2.7% OF THE TOTAL ACCOUNTS THAT
WERE INCLUDED IN THE EMPLOYMENT
SECURITY DEPARTMENT DATA.
THIS IS ON THE ORDER OF 722
BUSINESSES.
AGAIN, THAT IS, THERE MAY BE,
THERE MAY BE A CASE WHERE THERE
IS A BUSINESS WHO HAS
INDIVIDUALS AND HAS AN EMPLOYEE
THAT SHOWS IN THE 500,000+
BRACKET.
THERE COULD BE EMPLOYEES AND
THE 150,000 AND LOWER BRACKET.
THEY WOULD NOT BE PICKED UP IN
THAT NUMBER.
IT IS LIKELY FEW IF ANY.
WITH REGARDS TO THE ESTIMATES
OF THE DIFFERENT PAYROLL BASES,
SO THE 2021 ESTIMATES, THIS IS
USING THE ESP STARTING POINT
AND THEN SLATING THAT USING
CBO, WAGE, AND SALARY GROWTHS
ESTIMATES FROM THE PESSIMISTIC
FORECAST, THE NUMBERS SUPPORT 14
$.3 BILLION IN THE 150,000 TO
499,000 TEAR OF COMPENSATION.
AND $5.2 BILLION IS FOR THE
500,000+ TEAR OF EMPLOYEE
COMPENSATION.
AGAIN, AS I TALKED ABOUT ON THE
FIRST SLIDE, THIS IS ONLY
DESCRIBING THE INFORMATION THAT
WAS AVAILABLE FROM THE OF
DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT
SECURITY.
IT IS NOT ATTEMPT TO DESCRIBE
ANY ESTIMATES ABOVE THE $1
BILLION PAYROLL FOR THE
INCREMENTAL TAX BRACKET.
>> SO, IF WE FIND OUT THAT
THERE ARE MORE BUSINESSES IN THE
PAYROLL ABOVE 1 BILLION, WE
CONCEIVABLY COULD BE GENERATING
MORE REVENUE THAN ANTICIPATED.
>> I WOULD USE THAT AND SAY,
THE BASE REVENUE ESTIMATE
INCLUDES THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF
REVENUE THAT ANY SIZE OF
BUSINESS OVER $7 MILLION OR
GREATER WOULD BE PAYING TO THE
EXTENT THAT THEY HAVE EMPLOYEES
OVER $150,000.
THIS IS THAT THE .7 AND 1.4%.
THESE ARE THE TAX RATES.
WHAT IS NOT INCLUDED, AND WHAT
MAY BE THE WAY OF ADDITIONAL
REVENUE IS THAT IF THE DATA WAS
AVAILABLE, THE AMOUNT THAT
WOULD BE GENERATED FROM A
BUSINESS THAT IS $1 BILLION OR
HIGHER THAT HAS EMPLOYEES OVER
$150,000 OF ANNUAL COMPENSATION
FOR THE ADDITIONAL .7% RATE THAT
IS IN BOTH COMPENSATION TEARS.
>> THANK YOU.
AND, I JUST WANT TO CLOSE OUT
WITH A STATEMENT ABOUT A COUPLE
DIFFERENT THINGS.
ONE, AS IT RELATES TO THE
SUNSET, COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS
TALKED ABOUT THE LEGISLATIVE
INTENT ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE
STATE MY FIX OUR BROKEN TAX
CODE.
THEY COULD MAKE IT MORE
PROGRESSIVE.
THAT IS LEGISLATIVE INTENT OF
SOMETHING THAT MIGHT HAPPEN
HOPEFULLY IN VERY NEAR TERMS.
THERE IS A SUNSET CLAUSE IN THE
BILL FOR 10 YEARS FROM NOW.
I DO NOT BELIEVE IN 10 YEARS, A
CITY COUNCIL WILL DETERMINE
THAT WE DO NOT NEED PROGRESSIVE
REVENUE ANYMORE.
IF THE STATE WERE TO ACT, I
THINK THIS IS POTENTIALLY A
USEFUL TOOL TO INCENTIVIZE.
THIS COULD INCENTIVIZE THE
STATE TO ACT AND TO INCENTIVIZE
A CLEANER, NON-PATCHWORK TYPE
TAX CODE.
I AM NOT TERRIBLY DISTURBED BY
THE SUNSET.
IF THE STATE FAILS TO ACT OVER
THE NEXT 10 YEARS TO CORRECT
OUR UPSIDE DOWN TAX CODE, THE
CITY COUNCIL WOULD VERY LIKELY
ACT TO BLOCK THE TAX CODE.
WE WILL STILL HAVE THE SAME
CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE NOW.
WE WILL HAVE FUNDING FOR A LOT
OF REALLY IMPORTANT PROGRAMS
THAT HELP OUR COMMUNITIES.
IT WILL BE BAKED INTO THE
BUDGET.
ONE OTHER POINT I WOULD LIKE TO
MAKE IS, ALTHOUGH, AS IT
RELATES TO SPECIFICALLY THE
PROPOSAL THAT COUNCILMEMBER
KSHAMA SAWANT AND TAMMY J.
MORALES MADE, I HAVE EXPRESSED
MY CONCERN THAT THE PROPOSAL
MAKES BUSINESSES ELIGIBLE OR
REQUIRED TO PAY TAXES AND 2020
BASED ON THEIR ELIGIBILITY IN
2019.
WITH THIS PARTICULAR MODEL, I
WOULD BE LESS CONCERNED ABOUT
THIS TAX KICKING IN IN 2020
BASED ON 2019 ELIGIBILITY.
THIS IS BECAUSE THE SITUATION I
AM CONCERNED ABOUT WITH THE
MODEL PROPOSED BY COUNCIL
MEMBERS KSHAMA SAWANT AND TAMMY
J. MORALES IS THAT IN THIS VERY
UNCERTAIN BUSINESS CLIMATES,
YOU KNOW, FOR INSTANCE, A
BUSINESS OF 200 EMPLOYEES, ALL
MAKING MINIMUM WAGE WOULD MEET
THAT THRESHOLD.
AND THAT PARTICULAR BUSINESS IN
2020 MAY NOT BE DOING AS WELL
AS THEY WERE DOING IN 2019.
SINCE THIS PARTICULAR MODEL IS
REALLY FOCUSED AND ZEROS IN ON
HIGHER SALARIES, FROM MY
PERSPECTIVE, IF YOU AS A
BUSINESS STILL HAVE A
SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES
THAT ARE MAKING THESE HIGHER
SALARIES, IN 2020, I AM LESS
CONCERNED ABOUT HAVING THE
REQUIREMENT KICKING IN 2020
BASED ON 2019 PAYROLL AMOUNTS.
I AM JUST THROWING THAT OUT
THERE TO TEST THE WATERS.
THAT MIGHT BE ONE WAY OF
GROWING THE SIZE OF THE REVENUE
GENERATED BY THIS TAX.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH
COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD.
I HAVE TWO FOLKS IN THE QUEUE.
FIRST IS COUNCILMEMBER TAMMY J.
MORALES AND THEN WE HAVE
COUNCILMEMBER KSHAMA SAWANT .
IF THERE IS ANYBODY ELSE,
PLEASE PING ME.
CAN I JUST DOUBLE CHECK BEFORE
WE GO ON, DAN AND TOM, WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT ASSESSING 2021
PAYROLL, CORRECT?
IN 2022, THE PAYMENTS, WE ARE
LOOKING AT 2021, IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU.
I THINK COUNCILMEMBER LISA
HERBOLD, THERE ARE COMPANIES
THAT HAVE SALARIES WITH THE
BILLION DOLLARS IN PAYROLL.
DID THEY WERE POST COVID-19 AT
PRESENT.
>> THANK YOU, BEFORE YOU MOVE
ONTO ANOTHER COUNCILMEMBER.
I DO NOT WANT TO LOSE MY
OPPORTUNITY TO SAY HOW MUCH I
SUPPORT THIS PROPOSAL AND I AM
REALLY EXCITED THAT YOU BROUGHT
IT FORWARD AND I AM HAPPY TO
HAVE IT FOCUSED ON THE NEEDS OF
OUR COMMUNITY.
WHEREAS, THIS IS A START.
THE NEEDS ARE GREAT.
THIS IS NOT GOING TO ADDRESS
ALL OF THEM.
I THINK THAT THIS IS MORE OF A
SCALPEL APPROACH.
IT IS BETTER GIVEN THE
UNCERTAINTY OF SO MANY
BUSINESSES IN OUR COMMUNITY.
THIS IS BALANCED WITH THE
UNCERTAINTY OF PEOPLE'S LIVES
WHO NEED THESE SERVICES.
AND, REALLY, THIS IS SOMETHING
I BELIEVE IN.
I BELIEVE IN THE IDEALS OF A
PROGRESSIVE TAX STRUCTURE.
THIS IS MUCH MORE FOCUSED IN
PROGRESSIVE THAN THE OTHER
VERSION.
THE MODEL THAT I HAVE MYSELF
BEEN SUPPORTIVE OF IN THE PAST
IS THIS.
I WANT TO INDICATE MY SUPPORT
FOR YOUR LEGISLATION.
I WOULD LIKE TO INDICATE MY
INTEREST IN COSPONSORING THE
LEGISLATION IF YOU WOULD HAVE
ME.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER LISA
HERBOLD.
I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE ANY
COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO WOULD LIKE
TO SIGN ON.
I WANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE ARE
VERY EARLY IN THE CONVERSATION,
THERE WILL BE MUCH MORE TO BE
DECIDED AND HAMMERED OUT WITH
REGARDS TO PROGRESSIVE
REVENUE.
THANK YOU FOR THAT EARLY
INDICATION OF SUPPORT.
I AM HAPPY TO HAVE YOU SIGN ON.
WE HAVE THREE FOLKS THAT ARE
LINED UP.
I WILL TURN IT OVER TO
COUNCILMEMBER TAMMY J. MORALES.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> I REALLY JUST HAVE A
CLARIFICATION.
I AM SORRY.
I HAVE A QUESTION OF
CLARIFICATION.
AS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE
ISSUE OF, IT IS LISTED IN THE
BILL AS MAINTAINING A LEVEL
PLAYING FIELD.
I AM READING THIS AS TWO
SEPARATE THINGS.
THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE WOULD
SUNSET IF ANOTHER JURISDICTION
PASSES PROGRESSIVE REVENUE.
WHAT THAT MEANS IS TO BE
DETERMINED.
IF NOT, WE WOULD SUNSET IN 10
YEARS.
CAN I GET CLARIFICATION THAT
THOSE TWO THINGS ARE NOT TIED
TOGETHER.
EITHER OR, WHICHEVER COMES
FIRST WOULD TRIGGER THE SUNSET.
ANYONE?
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
THEY ARE SEPARATE.
>> SO, IT IS NOT THE CASE THAT
THEY HAVE TO, THAT THEY WOULD
HAVE TO BE TIED TOGETHER?
I WAS LOSING THE THREAD THERE.
FORGIVE ME IF THE COUNCILMEMBER
WAS ASKING THE QUESTION.
EITHER ONE OF THOSE WOULD
TRIGGER THE SUNSET AND IN THE
FIRST CASE, IF ANOTHER
JURISDICTION PAST PROGRESSIVE
REVENUE, THE COUNCIL WOULD HAVE
TO ACT.
IN THE SECOND CASE, IF THE
TENURE IS EXPIRED, IT WOULD
JUST EXPIRE.
>> YOU HAVE GOT THAT CORRECT.
>> OKAY.
>> CAN I ADD ONE MORE PEACE?
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS
BASICALLY THE INTENT FOR THE
FUTURE COUNCILS TO CONSIDER
WHETHER OR NOT THEY WOULD WANT
TO PICK SOMETHING UP.
THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO
COUNCILMEMBER TAMMY J. MORALES,
THIS IS IT SOMETHING PASSED AT
THE STATE LEVEL.
THE WAY THAT IT IS WRITTEN IS
ABOUT INTENT.
>> IT DOES NOT DESIGNATE WHAT
IS CONSIDERED SIGNIFICANT.
I GUESS MY INTEREST WOULD BE IN
IF WE ARE GOING TO KEEP A
SUNSET, THIS WOULD ONLY BE IF
SOME OTHER JURISDICTION PAST
SIGNIFICANT REVENUE.
THAT WOULD MEET OR EXCEED WHAT
WE ARE TRYING TO CAPTURE HERE.
I GUESS THAT IS WHAT I AM
REALLY GETTING UP.
IF WE ARE GOING TO KEEP THAT,
KEEP THE SUNSET, SHOULD NOT BE
IN 10 YEARS, IT SHOULD ONLY BE
IF THIS REVENUES ABLE TO GET
GENERATED IN SOME OTHER WAY.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
TAMMY J. MORALES.
ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?
OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
IT LOOKS LIKE TOM IS TRYING TO
CALL BACK IN.
FOR THE I.T.
FOLKS, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE HAVE TOM ON THE LINE IN CASE
THERE'S QUESTIONS FOR HIM.
COUNCILMEMBER KSHAMA SAWANT AND
THEN WE HAVE COUNCILMEMBER M.
LORENA GONZCEZ AND ALEX
PEDERSEN.
>> THANK YOU.
I WANTED TO MAKE SOME POINT
WHERE I ALSO FELT THAT THERE
WERE MANY MISLEADING REMARKS IN
THE LAST FEW MINUTES.
I NEED TO CLARIFY THAT FOR
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO ARE
WATCHING.
THIS IS FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE
FIGHTING FOR THE AMAZON TAX AND
THEY ARE WATCHING.
THE BILL DOES NOT, THE BILL
THAT IS UNDER CONSIDERATION
RIGHT NOW DOES NOT TAKE EFFECT
UNTIL JANUARY 2021.
IT CHARGES NO TAX FOR 2020.
WE HAVE TO NOTE THAT IN THE
MIDDLE OF A PANDEMIC RECESSION,
THAT IS HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS OF LOST REVENUE.
I THINK THE BILL, JUST A SIDE
POINT BUT AN IMPORTANT ONE, IT
PAYS OFF THE LOANS BY SPENDING
ALMOST NOTHING IN 2021.
IN THE AMAZON TAX BILL, WE HAVE
THE FULL 2021 REVENUE BECAUSE
THE LOANS ARE PAID OFF BY THE
EVENTUAL 2020 TAXES.
THE MAIN POINT I WANT TO FOCUS
ON IS THE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS
OF DOLLARS OF REVENUE THAT WILL
BE LOST BY NOT CHARGING TAXES
FOR 2020.
I OBJECT TO THE WAY
COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD HAS
CHARACTERIZED THE PROCESS OF
TAX COLLECTION.
IT IS SLEIGHT-OF-HAND.
THERE WAS ALSO A MISLEADING
REMARK.
THE SLEIGHT-OF-HAND IS BUILDING
THIS BOGEYMAN OF HOW THE POOR
BUSINESSES THAT ARE STRUGGLING,
HOW WILL THEY PAY TAXES IF THEY
HAVE STRUGGLED AND SO ON?
LET'S BE VERY CLEAR.
IF A COMPANY HAS GONE BELLY UP,
THEY WILL NOT PAY TAXES.
IT IS A QUESTION.
IT IS A RECURSIVE QUESTION.
THE WAY THAT EVERYBODY PAYS
TAXES IS YOU PAY TAXES THIS
YEAR ON THE INCOME THAT YOU HAD
MADE LAST YEAR.
THAT IS THE SAME FOR
CORPORATIONS, THAT IS THE SAME
FOR HOUSEHOLDS.
SO, FOR ALL OF THE TEARS THAT
ARE BEING SPILLED FOR THE
LARGEST BUSINESSES, LET'S KEEP
IN MIND, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT
THE LARGEST, AS FAR AS THE
AMAZON TAX GOES, THIS IS THE
LARGEST 2% OF BUSINESSES THAT
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.
THESE ARE THE BUSINESS OWNERS,
MANY OF THEM ARE BILLIONAIRES,
MULTI-BILLIONAIRES.
I WANT TO COME TO THAT SECOND.
THESE ARE VERY MISLEADING
POINTS THAT ARE BEING MADE.
WHETHER INTENTIONALLY OR NOT,
THAT IS A DIFFERENT QUESTION.
I AM NOT GOING THERE.
THIS IS JUST AS A MATTER OF
ACCURACY.
WE NEED TO KEEP THAT IN MIND.
BUT THE SLIGHT OF HAND IS IN
SORT OF THIS PRETENSE THAT
SOMEHOW THIS TAXATION, THE
RECURSIVE TAXATION APPROACH IS
SOMEHOW UNIQUE TO BUSINESS AND
NOT TO PEOPLE.
KNOW.
THAT IS THE SIMPLE MECHANISM OF
TAX PAYMENT.
YOU PAY TAXES THIS YEAR ON THE
INCOME THAT YOU MADE LAST YEAR.
I FIND IT OUTRAGEOUS THAT THIS
WHOLE IMPRESSION IS BEING GIVEN
THAT SOMEHOW THERE IS SOMETHING
UNIQUE FOR BUSINESSES IF YOU'RE
SO CONCERNED ABOUT BUSINESSES
THAT ARE GOING TO BE
STRUGGLING, WHAT ABOUT WORKING
PEOPLE.
45 MILLION AMERICAN WORKERS
HAVE SAID THAT THEY HAVE LOST
THEIR JOBS AND THEY ARE FILING
FOR UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE.
THIS IS A CRISIS THAT IS IN
SOME ASKED X GOING TO BE WORSE
THAN THE GREAT DEPRESSION.
ANY HOUSEHOLD, AGAIN, ANY
HOUSEHOLD THAT LOST A JOB THIS
YEAR, THEY HAVE TO PAY TAXES ON
THE INCOME THAT THEY HAD LAST
YEAR.
SO UNLESS YOU ARE PRETENDING
THAT THE MECHANISM IS DIFFERENT
FOR HOUSEHOLDS VERSUS
BUSINESSES, THIS POINT HAS
ABSOLUTELY NO MERIT WHATSOEVER.
FURTHERMORE, AS ONE OF THE
PUBLIC COMMENTERS STATED, THE
TAX OBLIGATION OF SUCH A LARGE
CORPORATION WITH $7 MILLION OF
PAYROLL IS SO MINIMAL COMPARED
TO THE TAX OBLIGATION THAT
ORDINARY PEOPLE HAVE.
AND THEN, LOOK AT THE
COMPOUNDED SITUATION THAT THEY
ARE FACING WITH HAVING THE MOST
REGRESSIVE TAX SYSTEM ON TOP OF
THAT, HAVING MAJOR DIFFICULTIES
IN THEIR LIVES BECAUSE OF THE
PANDEMIC RECESSION.
I DO NOT AGREE WITH
COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD,
WHAT ABOUT THE 2019 HEALTH OF
ORDINARY PEOPLE?
THEY ARE STILL GOING TO BE
PAYING TAXES . THE TAX DATE HAS
JUST BEEN DEFERRED.
THEY HAVE TO PAY TAXES.
THIS IS UNLESS THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT SAYS NO TAXES ARE
OWED.
THEY SHOULD DO THIS.
THIS IS AN OBLIGATION THAT
WORKERS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO
HAVE.
NOBODY IS COMING AND SAVING
THEM.
NOBODY IS TELLING THEM THAT WE
ARE GOING TO WRITE LEGISLATION
THAT TAKES CARE OF YOU.
I HAVE NEVER HEARD ANY
POLITICIAN TALK ABOUT ORDINARY
PEOPLE'S TAX OBLIGATIONS.
WE HAVE THE MOST REGRESSIVE TAX
SYSTEM.
WHERE IS THE BALANCE OF YOUR
COMMENTARY?
HOW MUCH COMMENTARY DO YOU HAVE
FOR BIG BUSINESSES AND HOW
LITTLE ON WHAT ACTUAL WORKING
PEOPLE ARE GOING TO FACE!
AND THEN THE THING THAT WAS
ABSOLUTELY MISLEADING IS THIS
IDEA THAT BUSINESSES THAT UNDER
THE AMAZON TAX FRAMEWORK,
DISMISSES THAT LOST INCOME THIS
YEAR WILL BE CHARGED UNDER OUR
BILL.
THAT IS NOT ACCURATE AT ALL.
THAT IS MISLEADING.
I WANTED TO MOVE TO ANOTHER
POINT.
I WONDER IF TOM CAN PULL UP THE
SLIDE THAT SAYS PAYCHECK ABC. I
DO NOT HAVE QUESTIONS ON THAT
SLIDE.
I JUST WANT THAT SLIDE, I WANT
THE PUBLIC TO SEE.
I AM TRYING TO MAKE A POINT
ABOUT HOW THIS SLIDE IS BEING
MADE.
I ALSO WANT TO ENSURE CENTRAL
STAFF THAT THIS IS NOT A
COMMENT DIRECTED AT CENTRAL
STAFF FOR THEIR WORK.
THIS IS JUST DEALING WITH THE
APPROACH THAT IS BEING USED BY
THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO
ARE ADVOCATING FOR THIS.
THIS IS THAT, THIS TYPE OF
PRESENTING IT IN THIS TYPE OF
WAY, WHERE YOU ARE SAYING THAT
YOU ARE ATTACHING THE TAX
OBLIGATIONS TO THE SALARIES OF
PARTICULAR EMPLOYEES, THAT IS
VERY MISLEADING.
JUST TO BE CLEAR, AT THE
OUTSET, I ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT
TAXING THOSE WHO ARE MAKING
OUTRAGEOUS AMOUNTS OF INCOME
LIKE $500,000 OR MORE, HALF $1
MILLION OR MORE.
THESE ARE SALARIES THAT ARE
GETTING OUT OF CONTROL.
I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THAT.
WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL
ABOUT THE WAY THIS INFORMATION
IS BEING PRESENTED.
THIS IS MISLEADING.
IT IS CONFUSING TWO DIFFERENT
TYPES OF TAX MECHANISMS AND
PRESENTING THEM AS ONE. THAT
PLAYS RIGHT INTO THE RIGHT WING
TALKING POINTS.
PRESENTING THE INFORMATION THIS
WAY SUGGESTS THAT THE TAXES,
THE CORPORATE PAYROLL TAX IS ON
WORKER'S SALARIES.
THAT IS NOT ACCURATE.
THIS IS A TAX ON BIG
BUSINESSES, THIS IS NOT A TAX
ON INCOMES OF HIGH INCOME
HOUSEHOLDS.
THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT TAX
REGIMENS ALTOGETHER.
CONFUSING THE TWO, I THINK IT
IS BEING DONE IN A WAY AS TO
PLAY INTO THIS IDEA THAT THE
AMAZON TAX BASE AS PROPOSED BY
OUR MOVEMENT, IT IS NOT AS
PROGRESSIVE OR EVEN PROGRESSIVE
COMPARED TO THIS PROPOSAL.
THIS PROPOSAL PUTS TAXES ON
THOSE WHO ARE EARNING HIGH
INCOMES.
WE SEE HOW MISLEADING THIS IS.
WE SAW PUBLIC TRAUMA FROM A
VERY WELL-MEANING TECH PERSON
WHO SAID TAX ME.
I AM ALL FOR TAXING HIGH
INCOMES.
I SUPPORT THAT.
I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE HIGH
INCOME WORKERS WHO SAY TAX ME.
THIS IS REGRESSIVE.
WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT TAXES
ON INCOMES OF PEOPLE, OF
WORKERS, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT
CORPORATE PAYROLL TAX.
TO BE CLEAR, THE MECHANISM OF
CORPORATE PAYROLL IS THE SAME
ACROSS THE PROPOSAL AND THE
AMAZON TAX PROPOSAL.
THIS APPLIES TO BOTH.
THIS IS QUITE PROBLEMATIC
PRESENTING AT THIS WAY.
IT PLAYS RIGHT INTO THE RIGHT
WING TALKING POINTS THAT
SUGGESTS THAT SOMEHOW, THE
TAXES ARE ON WORKERS.
THE TAXES ARE NOT ON WORKERS.
THE TAXES ARE NOT ON SMALL
BUSINESSES.
THE TAXES ARE NOT ON MEDIUM-
SIZE BUSINESSES.
THE TAXES ARE ON THE BIG
CORPORATIONS.
AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED, WE
NEED TO BE CLEAR THAT THIS WAS
A MISLEADING POINT FROM
COUNCLMEMBER LISA HERBOLD THAT
SOMEHOW, A BUSINESS WITH 200
EMPLOYEES ALL MAKING MINIMUM
WAGE IS SO SAD IF THEY WERE
TAXED.
NO, THIS IS A TAX ON THE
CORPORATION THAT IS PROFITING
OFF OF EXPLOITING ITS WORKERS.
THINK ABOUT ALL OF THE
CONTRACTORS ON AMAZON.
I DO NOT KNOW IF THEY ARE
REGISTERED IN SEATTLE.
I'M USING THEM AS AN EXAMPLE.
THOSE CONTRACTORS, YOU KNOW,
THE DELIVERY DRIVERS, THE CARGO
HANDLERS AND SO ON, THEY
DELIVER AMAZON PACKAGES.
THOSE CORPORATIONS, THE PEOPLE
WHO THOSE CORPORATIONS, THE
MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS, THEY MAKE
MASSIVE PROFITS BECAUSE THEY
GROSSLY UNDERPAY THEIR
EMPLOYEES.
THOSE EMPLOYEES ARE EXPLOITED.
SO, NOT TAXING THAT CORPORATION
IS NOT HELPING THE WORKERS IN
ANY WAY.
YOU ARE JUST LETTING THE OWNERS
OF THE CORPORATION GO SCOT-FREE.
AGAIN, I KNOW I AM LAYING A
POINT ON THIS BUT THIS IS
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT NOT TO BE
MISLEADING.
I WANTED TO SAY ALSO THAT, THIS
KIND OF CONFUSION, THIS IS NOT
THE FIRST DAY THAT THIS
CONFUSION HAS COME IN.
UNFORTUNATELY, IT WAS EVEN AT
THE PRESS CONFERENCE THAT
COUNCILMEMBER TERESA MOSQUEDA
HELD.
I STRONGLY SUPPORT ANY AND
EVERY PROGRESSIVE REVENUE
PROPOSAL.
IN THAT SPIRIT, AS I HAVE SAID
BEFORE AND I WILL UNDERLINE IT
AGAIN, I HAVE WORKED WITH
COUNCILMEMBER TERESA MOSQUEDA.
I AM HAPPY TO AND I WANT TO
CONTINUE TO DO THAT.
HOWEVER, I WOULD BE FEELING IN
MY DUTY TO WORKING PEOPLE IF I
DID NOT POINT OUT GLARING
PROBLEMS.
I MEAN, THE PRESS CONFERENCE
YESTERDAY, STEVE HARPER WHO IS
THE PRESIDENT OF ETHAN STILLER
RESTAURANT SAID THAT OUR
LEGISLATION IS QUOTE UNQUOTE
MASSIVELY REGRESSIVE TO MIDSIZE
BUSINESSES AND LOW-WAGE
WORKERS.
THIS IS NOT TRUE.
ALL OF THE POINTS WE HAVE HEARD
TODAY PLAY INTO THAT IDEA THAT
THIS CORPORATE PAYROLL TAX IS A
TAX ON EITHER SMALL BUSINESSES
OR ON WORKERS.
IT IS NOT.
IT IS A TAX ON THE LARGEST
CORPORATIONS AND SOME OF THE
LARGEST CORPORATIONS, NOT ALL
BUT SOME OF THEM MAKE A LOT OF
MONEY PRECISELY BECAUSE THEY
UNDERPAY THEIR EMPLOYEES.
I WOULD REALLY URGE THE
COUNCIL, REGARDLESS OF WHICH
PROPOSAL YOU SUPPORT AND I HOPE
YOU SUPPORT AT LEAST ONE OF
THESE PROPOSALS, REGARDLESS OF
WHICH PROPOSAL YOU SUPPORT, I
HOPE THAT WE CAN AT LEAST HAVE
BASIC CLARITY AND HONESTY IN
HOW WE ARE PRESENTING SOME OF
THESE POINTS SO THAT WE ARE NOT
BEING MISLEADING TOWARDS
ORDINARY PEOPLE WHO DO NOT HAVE
THE TIME TO ENGAGE IN
EVERYTHING IN DETAIL, THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
KSHAMA SAWANT . I APPRECIATE
YOU OFFERING THE CLARIFICATION
ABOUT WHO PAYS IN EITHER
SCENARIO.
SPEAKING OF CLARIFICATION, I
THINK COUNCILMEMBER LISA
HERBOLD HAD A CLARIFICATION SHE
WANTED TO OFFER.
THEN I WILL MOVE ON TO
COUNCILMEMBER M. LORENA
GONZCEZ.
>> I JUST WANT TO REITERATE.
MY POINT, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER
OR NOT WE HAVE A DISAGREEMENT
OF WHETHER OR NOT
COUNCILMEMBER, TERESA MOSQUEDA,
YOUR PROPOSAL INTERJECTS MORE
PROGRESSIVE THAT HE, I DO NOT
THINK THAT THE KSHAMA SAWANT,
ALEX PEDERSEN LACKS
PROGRESSIVITY.
IT DOES HAVE PROGRESSIVITY.
BUT, YOURS IS I BELIEVE MORE
FINELY TUNED ON THOSE
BUSINESSES.
NOBODY IS SAYING THAT EMPLOYERS
OR EMPLOYEES ARE PAYING THIS
TAX.
THE BUSINESSES ARE PAYING THE
TAX.
THIS PROPOSAL IS FOCUSED ON THE
BUSINESSES THAT HAVE A LOT OF
HIGH WAGE EMPLOYEES.
THIS BACK AND FORTH, I THINK IT
OBSCURES THE FACT THAT IN
COUNCILMEMBER KSHAMA SAWANT'S
EFFORTS TO REFUTE MY COMMENTS
OR TO SUGGEST THAT I AM BEING
MISLEADING THE PUBLIC ABOUT WHO
PAYS THE TAX, I WANT TO
UNDERSCORE THE FACT THAT WHAT I
JUST SUGGESTED IS THAT WE AMEND
THE BILL TO START THE TAX IN
2020 JUST LIKE HER AND
COUNCILMEMBER TAMMY J.
MORALES'S BILL THOSE.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE
CLARIFICATION.
KSHAMA SAWANT VERY BRIEFLY.
>> YES, I MEAN, I APPRECIATE
THIS VERY MUCH LISA HERBOLD.
OF COURSE, I WANT TO ABSOLUTELY
YOU KNOW, I WILL FIGHT FOR ANY
POSSIBLE PROGRESSIVE
LEGISLATION.
I HAVE SHOWN THAT THROUGH MY
ENTIRE TRACK RECORD.
BUT, THE BOTTOM LINE I THINK
THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE OF COURSE
IN TERMS OF WHAT IS MORE
PROGRESSIVE AND WHAT IS LESS
PROGRESSIVE, I MEAN IF YOU
AGREE TECHNICALLY SPEAKING THAT
THIS TAX IS ON THE BUSINESS,
NOT ON THE EMPLOYEES, THEN YOU
CANNOT THEN SAY THAT THIS IS
MORE PROGRESSIVE.
THE ONLY UNIVERSE IN WHICH THE
IDEA, THE CLAIM THAT THE TERESA
MOSQUEDA IS MORE PROGRESSIVE
THAN THE AMAZON TAX, THE ONLY
UNIVERSE IN WHICH THAT HOLDS
ANY ACCURACY IS IF YOU ACCEPT
THE RIGHT WING POINT THAT
SOMEHOW THIS IS A TAX ON
WORKERS.
THIS IS NOT A TAX ON WORKERS.
THIS IS A TAX ON CORPORATIONS.
JUST KEEPING IT VERY SIMPLE,
WHAT IS MORE PROGRESSIVE, A TAX
THAT RAISES FAR MORE REVENUES
FROM THE ENTITIES THAT HAVE
ENJOYED A TAX HAVEN FOR
DECADES?
THAT IS THE AMAZON TAX.
THIS IS A TAX THAT CONTINUES TO
PERPETUATE IN PERPETUITY.
THIS IS THE AMAZON TAX.
THERE IS A TAX THAT HAS A
HIGHER TAX ON PROFITEEING
BUSINESSES.
THIS IS THE AMAZON TAX.
IF THE TERESA MOSQUEDA
PROPOSAL, THE TAX RATE WAS
INCREASED TO 1.3%, JUST ABOUT
ALONE, THAT COULD BE OUR OWN
CALCULATION, THAT WILL LOAN
WOULD RAISE SOMETHING LIKE
$80.7 MILLION ADDITIONAL.
SO LET'S JUST KEEP FOCUSED ON
WHAT ACTUALLY IS PROGRESSIVE,
THANK YOU.
>> COUNCIL MEMBERS, I
APPRECIATE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.
I THINK THAT CLARIFICATION IS
HELPFUL AND I AM GOING TO MOVE
US ON.
I DO APPRECIATE THAT WE ARE NOT
IN PERSON.
IT IS HARD TO HAVE THESE
DISCUSSIONS.
I WANT TO THANK LISA HERBOLD
FOR YOUR CLARIFICATION AND I
WOULD LIKE TO THANK KSHAMA
SAWANT FOR HERS AS WELL.
LET'S MOVE ON TO COUNCIL
PRESIDENT M. LORENA GONZCEZ
FOLLOWED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALEX
PEDERSEN.
>> HELLO, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
JUST MAKE A FEW BRIEF COMMENTS.
I JUST WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE
THAT I THINK THIS IS A REALLY
IMPORTANT CONVERSATION FOR US.
OBVIOUSLY, THE DIRE STATE OF
OUR BUDGET IS ONE THAT WE NEED
TO TAKE VERY SERIOUSLY.
AND, AND, I JUST WANTED TO
AGAIN SIGNAL MY SUPPORT FOR
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE THROUGH
THESE VARIOUS PROPOSALS.
I WOULD AGREE WITH COUNCILMEMBER
KSHAMA SAWANT . I THINK AT THE
END OF THE DAY, THIS COUNSEL
HAS TO TAKE A VERY STRONG
POSITION ON PROGRESSIVE REVENUE
MODELS THAT MIGHT BE AVAILABLE
TO US.
I APPRECIATE THE SPIRIT IN
WHICH I BELIEVE COUNCILMEMBER
TERESA MOSQUEDA HAS PRESENTED
THIS PROPOSAL.
IT IS LET'S PUT ALL AVAILABLE
PROPOSALS ON THE TABLE FOR
CONSIDERATION AND DISCUSSION
AND DEBATE.
AND, ULTIMATELY, WE WILL HAVE
AN OPPORTUNITY AS A COUNCIL TO
CONSIDER THESE PROGRESSIVE
REVENUE PROPOSALS.
I THINK AGAIN, SETTING ASIDE
THE QUESTION OF DEGREES OF
PROGRESSIVITY AS INDICATED BY
COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD, I
THINK IT IS FAIR TO SAY THAT WE
HAVE TWO PUZZLES ON THE TABLE
RIGHT NOW.
THEY ARE BOTH PROGRESSIVE.
THEY ARE BOTH PROGRESSIVE IN
NATURE.
I THINK IT IS GOING TO BE
IMPORTANT FOR US TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE HAVE A YOU KNOW, WHOLE
VETTING OF BOTH OF THE
PROPOSALS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
AS COUNCILMEMBERS FEEL LIKE WE
ARE COMFORTABLE CHOOSING ONE
OVER THE OTHER.
I AM GOING TO BE SUPPORTIVE OF
ALL OF THE PROGRESSIVE
PROPOSALS.
THIS IS BECAUSE I THINK WE JUST
NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE
STAYING COMMITTED TO
IDENTIFYING REVENUE SOURCES
THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE ON THE
BACKS OF WORKING FAMILIES IN
OUR CITY WHO ARE JUST BEARING
THE BRUNT OF TAXATION IN OUR
CITY AND STATE.
I REALLY WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBERS KSHAMA SAWANT
AND TAMMY J. MORALES AND TERESA
MOSQUEDA FOR YOUR THOUGHTFUL
APPROACH IN PROPOSING SOMETHING
THAT WE CAN ALL CONSIDER.
I DO WANT TO SIGNAL THAT AT
THIS POINT, YOU KNOW, I WOULD
PREFER TERESA MOSQUEDA'S
PROPOSAL . IN A LARGE PART,
THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE SPENDING
PLAN RELATED TO IMMIGRANTS AND
REFUGEES IN PARTICULAR.
THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT I FOUND
WAS MISSING IN THE PRIOR
PROPOSAL.
I UNDERSTAND THAT WE COULD
AMEND THINGS ACCORDINGLY.
I AM INTERESTED IN MAKING SURE
THAT WE ARE MEETING THE NEEDS
OF IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES WHO
HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY LEFT OUT OF
PRIOR RELIEF FUNDS AND I
APPRECIATE THE INTEGRATION. I
LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING TO
DIG INTO THE DETAILS AND TO
LEARNING MORE AND CONTINUING TO
ENGAGE OUR CONSTITUENCIES.
WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT WE
CONTINUE TO ADVANCE A PLAN THAT
IS GOING TO MEET THE
SIGNIFICANT NEEDS OF OUR
COMMUNITIES AS WE BEGIN TO
RECOVER AND THINK ABOUT HOW TO
RECOVER FROM THIS ACADEMIC
CRISIS.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR WORDS.
I CAUGHT A LITTLE BIT AT THE
END.
IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT I
MISSED, I WILL FOLLOW UP WITH
YOU.
I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS.
>> I AM SORRY ABOUT THAT.
I GOT COMPLETELY DISCONNECTED.
I AM SO SORRY ABOUT THAT.
>> THAT IS OKAY.
>> COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PEDERSEN,
THANK YOU FOR WAITING.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER.
I REALLY APPRECIATE
COUNCILMEMBER TERESA MOSQUEDA
PUTTING FORWARD ANOTHER OPTION
ON THE TABLE FOR CONSIDERATION.
I KNOW THAT YOUR TEAM DID A LOT
OF HARD WORK ON THIS.
I WANT TO THANK THE CITY
COUNCIL STAFF WHO HAS BEEN
WORKING EXTREMELY HARD OVER
NUMEROUS PROPOSALS.
ALSO, I APPRECIATE THE OUTREACH
THAT YOU DID COUNCILMEMBER
TERESA MOSQUEDA ON THIS.
THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT, THE
OUTREACH THAT YOU DID TO
VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS.
TO BE FRANK, I MEAN, I AM STILL
REVIEWING THE THREE ORDINANCES.
THEY WERE PROVIDED YESTERDAY.
I KNOW THAT IS PART OF THE
DISCUSSION DURING THE BUDGET
REBALANCING.
I AM INTERESTED IN SEEING HOW
THE MAYOR IS PROPOSING TO
REBALANCE THE 2020 BUDGET.
THIS IS SO THAT WE HAVE ALL THE
INFORMATION AT THE SAME TIME.
I WILL BE ABLE TO HAVE
COMPREHENSIVE INFORMATION.
I WANT TO THANK YOU AND ALL OF
THE STAFF FOR PUTTING
EVERYTHING TOGETHER.
A COUPLE OF STARTING QUESTIONS
FOR ME ARE THE REVENUE
ESTIMATE.
ARE THEY BASED ON PRE-COVID-19
ECONOMIC NUMBERS?
I HEARD THEY WERE FROM 2019.
DOES THAT MEAN THAT WE REALLY
DO NOT HAVE THE BENEFIT OF
SEEING HOW MUCH REVENUE WE CAN
WAGE AT THIS PARTICULAR TAX
RATE AT THIS TIME?
THIS IS JUST THE BEST GUESS
FROM 2019 FIGURES?
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, I WILL
EXPLAIN HOW THE ESTIMATE WAS
GENERATED.
THE STARTING POINT WAS THE 2019
EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPARTMENT
PAYROLL DATA.
THEN, THE NEXT STEP WAS TO
INFLATE OR IN THIS CASE,
DEFLATED THOSE FIGURES TO A
2021 NUMBER.
I DID THAT USING THE CITY
BUDGET OFFICE REGIONAL ECONOMIC
FORECAST FOR WAGE AND SALARY
DISPERSED.
THIS INDICATED A 15% DECLINE
FROM 19 TO 20 AND A 3% DECLINE
FROM 20-21.
THAT WAS THE MECHANISM USED IN
THIS ESTIMATE. I AM STILL
REVIEWING THESE BILLS, I
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
DIG DEEPER, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS
FROM FOLKS?
I SEE COUNCILMEMBER DAN
STRAUSS.
>> THANK YOU.
I HAD COMMENTS AND WITH TIME
BEING LIMITED, I WANTED TO MAKE
SURE WE DID NOT RUN OVERTIME
BECAUSE I KNOW THAT WE HAVE A
LOT OF OPPORTUNITY FOR FURTHER
DISCUSSION.
WHAT I KNOW FROM BOTH THE
MEETING THAT YOU HELD LAST
MONTH AS WELL AS LOOKING AT AND
ANALYZING PAST RECESSIONS,
AUSTERITY MEASURES DO NOT WORK.
WE NEED TO HAVE A HEALTHY
MIDDLE CLASS IF WE ARE GOING TO
HAVE A HEALTHY ECONOMY.
I APPRECIATE YOUR FOCUS ON
CHILDCARE AND YOUR PHONE IS ON
REQUEST THAT WE HAVE HEARD FROM
PEOPLE IN SEATTLE ACROSS HER
THAT HE.
THIS IS ABOUT CHILDCARE THAT IS
ALSO ABOUT RENTAL ASSISTANCE SO
THAT WE ENSURE THAT THE BURDEN
OF NOT BEING ABLE TO MEET RENTS
DOES NOT LAND ON AN INDIVIDUAL.
WE AS A CITY NEED TO BE HERE TO
SUPPORT INDIVIDUALS AND SMALL
BUSINESSES.
I ALSO REALLY APPRECIATE WHEN
YOU FOCUS ON IMMIGRANT AND
REFUGEE AFFAIRS.
WE KNOW THAT OTHER LEVELS OF
GOVERNMENT ARE NOT PROVIDING
THESE IMPORTANT RESOURCES.
THE ABILITY TO REPORT SMALL
BUSINESSES WHO HAVE SMALL
MARCHES, THE SMALL BUSINESSES
MAKE THE FABRIC OF OUR CITY
UNIQUE AND VIBRANT.
AND SO, THE SPENDING PLAN I
BELIEVE IS VERY CLEAR.
I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.
LOOKING AT THE TAXING SECTION,
IT IS CLEAR AND EASY TO
UNDERSTAND.
NOT HAVING TO FOCUS ON GROSS
RECEIPTS ENSURES THAT WE ARE
NOT TAXING COMPANIES THAT HAVE
SLIM MARGINS.
WE ARE REALLY FOCUSING ON OUR
OWN PAYROLL TAXES.
WHEN I LOOK AT OUR OWN FATE
PAYROLL TAXES FROM THE FEDERAL,
STATE, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT,
THIS ALLOWS US TO BE FOCUSED
AND NUANCED WITH HOW WE ARE
APPLYING TAXES.
I REALLY DO APPRECIATE YOUR
CALL OUT FOR HIGHER LEVELS OF
GOVERNMENT TO PASS TAXES.
THIS DEALS WITH OUR ABILITY TO,
ALMOST AS IF IT IS A REVERSE
PREEMPTION.
WE REALLY NEED THE STATE TO
ACT.
IT WOULD BE GREAT FOR THE
COUNTY TO ACT.
IF THEY ARE NOT GOING TO ACT,
WE STILL CANNOT CREATE AN
AUSTERITY BUDGET IN THIS MOMENT
IN HISTORY.
WHAT I HAD SEEN IS MANY PIECES
OF LEGISLATION HAS SUNSET
CLAUSES.
THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO BE
ABLE TO REVAMP OR RETOOL THE
PIECES OF LEGISLATION THAT ARE
BEFORE US.
I THINK THAT BOTH OF THESE
ASPECTS REALLY DO HELP PUT THE
PRESSURE ON THE STATE
GOVERNMENT.
THE STATE GOVERNMENT REALLY
NEEDS TO ACT.
THEY HAVE FUMBLED FOR YEARS.
WE CANNOT WAIT FOR THEM TO
CONTINUE FUMBLING, ESPECIALLY
IN THIS MOMENT IN HISTORY.
THIS BILL ALSO ALLOWS OUR
BUSINESSES AND COMMUNITY
MEMBERS TO STABILIZE WE ALL
NEED TO BE ABLE TO TAKE THESE
PIECES OF LEGISLATION INTO
CONSIDERATION WHEN MAKING
DECISIONS.
I APPRECIATE THE FIND TWO
NATURE OF THIS BILL.
I DO HAVE TO SAY I HAD A LOT OF
QUESTIONS TODAY.
THANK YOU TO MY COUNCIL
COLLECTS FOR ASKING THOSE
QUESTIONS.
SPECIFICALLY, THANK YOU FOR
COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD.
YOU ASKED REALLY GREAT
QUESTIONS.
I HAVE A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS.
I WILL FOLLOW UP WITH TOM AFTER
THIS MEETING.
>> YES, ABSOLUTELY.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS
FROM FOLKS?
I AM NOT SEEING ANY HANDS.
I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT
COUNCILMEMBER M. LORENA
GONZCEZ AS SHE WAS GETTING OFF
THE TELEPHONE, SHE LET ME KNOW
THAT SHE DOES WANT TO SIGN ON
AS A COSPONSOR.
SHE WAS BREAKING UP A LITTLE
BIT AT THE END.
I WANT TO SAY THAT FOR FOLKS
KNOWLEDGE.
I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S
CONTRIBUTION.
THIS IS THE BEGINNING.
WE ARE THINKING ABOUT HOW WE
IDENTIFY WHERE WE SLICE THAT IN
A POST-COVID-19 WORLD TO HELP
úSMALL BUSINESSES, IMMIGRANTS,
AND REFUGEES, LOW-WAGE WORKERS
AND THE HOMELESS AND ON HOUSED.
THIS IS SO PEOPLE CANNOT ONLY
SURVIVE COVID-19 IN THE
ECONOMIC CRISIS BUT THIS IS SO
WE CAN RE-BUILD A LOCAL
ECONOMY.
THIS IS A REALLY HELPFUL
CONVERSATION.
IT IS ALMOST 2:00 P.M.
I WANT TO DOUBLE CHECK THAT
THERE IS NO OTHER HANDS GOING
UP.
SEEING NONE, I WANT TO THANK
FOLKS.
I THINK THE SLIDE THAT YOU DID
REALLY HELPS BUSINESSES
UNDERSTAND WHO PAYS THE TAX.
I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT
THIS IS ABOUT WHICH BUSINESSES
AND HOW LARGE THOSE BUSINESSES
ARE AND WHAT SLICE WITHIN THOSE
LARGE CORPORATIONS ARE GOING TO
BE PAYING THE TAX.
I APPRECIATE THE MATH THAT YOU
DID.
ALL OF THE PRESENTATIONS YOU
PUT TOGETHER WERE HELPFUL.
YOUR TIME IS APPRECIATING.
WE KNOW YOU GUYS ARE WORKING
AROUND THE CLOCK.
THAT IS NOT FAIR TO YOU.
I WILL DO A BETTER JOB OF
MAKING SURE THAT WE BOTH
APPRECIATE YOU AND ALSO
CONSTANTLY THINK ABOUT HOW MUCH
WORK WE ARE REQUIRING OF OUR
TEAM ON THIS DATA.
THANK YOU TO THE COMMUNICATION
STAFF AND OUR TEAM WITHIN MY
OFFICE FOR ALL OF THE WORK THAT
THEY DID, ESPECIALLY FOR
HELPING SHEPHERD US THROUGH
MULTIPLE CONVERSATIONS AND THE
ENTIRE TEAM.
THANK YOU FOR THE PROPOSAL THAT
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TODAY.
WE WILL ADJOURN AT THIS POINT.
WE WILL PUT A STAY ON OUR
CALENDAR. WE WILL RECONVENE AT
2:00 P.M.
THIS WILL BE THE CONTINUATION
OF THE SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE
TO FOCUS ON OUR BUDGETARY
ITEMS.
WE DO NOT HAVE THE DRAFT
PROPOSED BUDGET FROM THE
MAYOR'S OBVIOUS FOR THE 2020
REBALANCING BUDGET.
WE WILL HAVE A CONVERSATION
THAT CONTINUES AROUND OUR
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT,
INQUEST, AND HEARING FROM OTHER
CITY ACTIONS THEY ARE
CONSIDERING OR HAVE TAKEN.
WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER AS
WE AS LOCAL ELECTIVES RESPOND
TO THE CRY FOR ACTION, URGENT
ACTION TO DEFUND, TO
REPRIORITIZE, AND TO REINVEST.