>>> TODAY IS AUGUST 10 AND THE
SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE WILL
COME TO ORDER.
THE TIME IS 10:36 AND I'M THE
CHAIR OF THE BUDGET COMMITTEE.
WHILE THE CLERK PLEASE CALL
ROLL?
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ.
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> HERE.
>> FIVE.
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA.
>> HERE.
>> SEVEN PRESENT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.
I DO EXPECT A FULL LIST OF
FOLKS JOINING US AND I DO
BELIEVE THAT COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ IS EXCUSES WEEK SO WE
APPRECIATE HER PARTICIPATION AT
THE ROBUST CONVERSATIONS WE
HAVE HAD FOR THE LAST TWO
MONTHS.
IF SHE IS ABLE TO JOIN US, I
WILL BE SURE TO ANNOUNCE HER.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES IS ALSO
HERE AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR
NOTE.
I SEE YOU NOTING YOUR PRESENCE.
WE DESCRIBED THE BUDGET
COMMITTEE AGENDA IN FULL
COUNCIL AND THIS IS WRAPPING UP
THE DISCUSSION AROUND THE
SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE.
BOTH THE 2020 REBALANCING
PACKAGE AND FINALIZING THE
CHANGES TO THE SPD BUDGET FOR
THE INTERIM SUMMER BUDGET
PROCESS.
IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION, THE
AGENDA WILL BE ADOPTED.
HEARING NO OBJECTION, THE
AGENDA IS ADOPTED.
WE DID COMMIT TO HAVING AT
LEAST 20 MINUTES OF PUBLIC
COMMENT TODAY SO I WILL GO
UNTIL 11 AM.
WE HAVE A NUMBER OF FOLKS THAT
SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
AND I WOULD ASK PEOPLE TO
PROVIDE YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT
WITHIN THE 45 SECOND WINDOW
THAT HAS BEEN OFFERED
PREVIOUSLY.
WE WANT TO GET AS MANY PEOPLE
AS POSSIBLE.
YOU WILL HEAR A 10 SECOND TIMER
AT THE END OF YOUR TIME TO
PUBLICLY SPEAK SO WE ASK YOU
CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENTS AND HANG
UP ON THE LINE AND DIAL INTO
THE LISTENING LINE AND HAVE THE
STREAMING OR VIEWING OPTIONS.
WE ARE GOING TO CALL THE FIRST
THREE SPEAKERS IN THE ORDER IN
WHICH THEY APPEAR ON TODAY'S
SIGN IN SHEET AND WE WILL GET
THERE IS A PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE.
IF YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO INCLUDE
YOUR COMMENT, PLEASE SEND YOUR
COMMENTS TO
COUNCIL@SEATTLE.GOV.
THANKS TO I.T.
FOR MAKING THIS POSSIBLE.
THE FIRST THREE SPEAKERS WILL BE
PETER SHLAVITO-- PETER, GOOD
MORNING.
LET'S MAKE SURE WE HAVE PETER.
IF WE COULD SET THE CLOCK AT 45
MINUTES.
IF YOU CAN HEAR ME, PLEASE GO
AHEAD AND GET STARTED.
OKAY, I WILL COME BACK TO PETER
SINCE I CANNOT HEAR HIM.
THE NEXT PERSON IS HANNAH.
GOOD MORNING, HANNAH.
PETER, I SEE YOU ARE ON.
>> GOOD MORNING.
SORRY FOR THE CONFUSION.
I'M ASSIGNED TO THE DISTRICT
FOR CALLING ABOUT THE SPD
BUDGET.
I WANT TO START WITH A REMINDER
THAT YOU PLEASE ARE FULLY
FUNDED AND HAVE BEEN ALL
SUMMER.
RECKLESS DECISIONS HAVE
SUPPRESSED THE FREE SPEECH AND
CORRODED PUBLIC TRUST.
WE CANNOT CONTINUE WITH THE
STATUS QUO.
FORTUNATELY, WE ALREADY HAVE A
PLAN FOR SOMETHING BETTER AND
WAS PRESENTED TO THIS BODY BY
COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN JULY AND
HAS BEEN EMBRACED AND FURTHER
DEVELOPED.
IF YOU ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH
IT, EDUCATE YOURSELVES.
JUSTICE, I CAN REALLY AND
PUBLIC SAFETY ARE EASIER WHEN
WE WERE TOGETHER.
THE FUND SPD BY 50% AND INVEST
IN BLACK AND BROWN COMMUNITIES.
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING.
>> THANK YOU.
HANNAH, GOOD MORNING.
DO WE HAVE HANNAH WITH US?
>> HANNAH IS ON THE LINE.
>> HANNAH, GOOD MORNING.
OKAY, I WILL READ THE NEXT
THREE SPEAKERS.
I'M SORRY FOR THE TECHNICAL
DIFFICULTIES WE ARE HAVING THIS
MORNING.
I DO WANT TO TRY TO GET THROUGH
AS MANY FOLKS AS POSSIBLE.
WE HAVE HANNAH AND THEN MADISON
AND ROBERT AND WALKER THOMAS.
HANNAH, CAN YOU HEAR US NOW?
MOVING ON, SIRI, CAN YOU HEAR
US?
OKAY, THIS IS SLIGHTLY UNUSUAL
BECAUSE WE USUALLY HAVE IT TEED
UP SO IS THERE ANYONE FROM I.T.
THAT HAS AN UPDATE FOR US?
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> GOOD MORNING.
I AM AN EDUCATOR AND STUDENT
AND SOCIAL WORKER CURRENTLY
LIVING IN DISTRICT FOR.
I AM URGING COUNCIL TO SUPPORT
DEFINING SPD BY AT LEAST 80%
AND I URGE ALL OF YOU AND
SPECIFICALLY COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN TASK THIS QUESTION
AND WHAT DOES THIS DO FOR LACK
OR BLACK LIBERATION.
YOUR WORK IS IN DIRECT
OPPOSITION TO BLACK INDIGENOUS
PEOPLE AND WILL ONLY MAINTAIN
THE STATUS QUO OF SYSTEMATIC
VIOLENCE AND OPPRESSION.
I URGE COUNCILMEMBERS TO
SUPPORT DECRIMINALIZING SEATTLE
AND HAVE A PLAN FOR COMMUNITY
REINVESTMENT OF THOSE FUNDS.
I YIELD THE REST OF MY TIME.
>> THANK YOU.
>> HANNAH, ARE YOU WITH US?
THE NEXT PERSON IS MADISON.
TO OKAY, THE NEXT PERSON IS
ROBERT.
>> IT APPEARS THAT THE PUBLIC
COMMENTERS NEED TO UNMUTE
THEMSELVES USING POUND 6. I
JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU A HEADS
UP ON WHAT IS GOING ON.
>> I WILL ASK FOLKS TO HIT á6
AND WE WILL START FROM THE
TOP.
HANNAH, ARE YOU WITH US?
MADISON, ARE YOU WITH US?
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> YES.
THANK YOU.
TENS OF GOOD MORNING, MY NAME
IS MADISON AND I'M IN DISTRICT
SENTIMENT.
I'M CALLING TO VOICE MY CONCERN
OF EVERYTHING THAT MAKES CUTS
TO THE LEASE DEPARTMENT AND
HAVE THAT REINVESTED INTO THE
COMMUNITY FOR PUBLIC HEALTH AND
SAFETY.
I WANT YOUR MIND THE COUNCIL
AND LISTENERS THAT THESE CUTS
DO NOT MEET THE DEMANDS OF
PROTESTERS.
SPD MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
THEY ARE INEFFECTIVE.
THE ONLY THING LEFT IS TO
DEFINE.
THE ROAD TO DEFEND WILL BE LONG
BUT I IMPLORE THEM TO STICK TO
IT.
I YIELD MY TIME.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
ROBERT, THE MORNING.
>> YES, I'M HERE.
MY NAME IS ROBERT AND I'M
HOMEOWNER LIVING IN GREENWOOD
IN DISTRICT 6. I URGE YOU TO
CONTINUE THE DEFUNDING WITH $3
MILLION FOR COMMUNITY RESEARCH
PURPOSES AND ENDING OVERTIME
PAY.
THIS IS ESSENTIAL BECAUSE WE
HAVE SEEN NO REMORSE OR
APOLOGY.
THEY NEVER APOLOGIZE TO ANYONE.
THEY NEVER APOLOGIZE FOR
BRUTALIZING PROTESTERS JUST
WITHIN THE LAST MONTH OR FOR
TERRORIZING A NEIGHBORHOOD WITH
WEAPONS OF WAR.
THEY MADE IT CLEAR THAT THEY
DON'T THINK THEY DID ANYTHING
WRONG AND THEY WILL DO IT
AGAIN.
CHIEF BEST NEVER APOLOGIZED FOR
ANYTHING LIKE THIS AND WE WERE
RIGHT TO CUT HER PAY AND SHOULD
NOT MAKE CHANGES TO THAT.
UNTIL SHE APOLOGIZES, IT'S TIME
TO PROCEED WITH THE FUNDING TO
PROTECT OUR COMMUNITIES AND
PUBLIC HEALTH AND BLACK WIVES.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
THE NEXT PERSON IS WALKER.
>> HELLO, HI.
MY NAME IS WALKER THOMAS AND I
LIVE IN DISTRICT 3. I AM
CALLING IN TO ADD MY VOICE
SAYING WE NEED TO DEFUND SPD BY
AT LEAST 50%.
I WORK IN A HOMELESS SHELTER
AND MY PARTNER IS A PUBLIC
SCHOOL TEACHER.
WE BOTH KNOW HOW TRULY
INEFFECTIVE AND USES THE
SEATTLE POLICE ARE AND WE KNOW
HOW MUCH WE NEED THIS MONEY TO
DO OTHER HELPFUL THINGS DURING
THE PANDEMIC.
THE COMMUNITY'S DEMANDS HAVE
NOT CHANGED.
50% IS ACTUALLY THE MINIMUM.
WE NEED TO DO IT.
DO THE RIGHT THING.
I YIELD THE REST OF MY TIME.
>> THE NEXT THREE SPEAKERS ARE
SOON ARMY AND KATIE SIMPSON.
GOOD MORNING.
SUE?
PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> HI, GOOD MORNING.
I AM A RENTER IN DISTRICT 4 AND
FOLLOWING EQUITY NOW AND
DECRIMINALIZING SEATTLE, I CALL
UPON THE COUNCIL TO DEFUND
THIS GROUP CALLED THE SEATTLE
POLICE DEPARTMENT.
THE PURPOSE OF THE PAST TWO
MONTHS HAVE SHOWN THAT THE CITY
ROUTINELY TERRORIZES THE PEOPLE
IT SHOULD PROTECT.
AT THIS POINT, WE ARE SEEING
EVERY COMMENT LIKE A BROKEN
RECORD.
WHAT ARE WE WAITING FOR?
DEFUND SPD BY 50% AND REDIRECT
THE MONEY TO COMMUNITY RUN
SAFETY AND HEALTH PROGRAMS AND
DROP ALL CHARGES.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
NEXT PERSON IS ASHEN.
>>
CAN YOU HEAR US?
IF WE COULD NINE OF THE NEXT
THREE SPEAKERS AND HAVE THEM
OFF OF MUTE SO WE ARE READY TO
GO.
WE HAVE ASHEN, EDDIE, KATE AND
JAMIE.
I WILL ASK YOU TO WAIT AND TO
THE PERSON BEFORE YOU FINISHES
SPEAKING.
ASHEN, GOOD MORNING.
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> YES.
>> HI, MY NAME IS ASHEN AND I
AM A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 7.
I'M CALLING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL DO MORE.
THE LAST BUDGET COMMITTEE I
TENDED WAS ROUGHLY 2% THIS YEAR
AND 40% NEXT YEAR.
THE SUM OF THOSE CUTS FAILED TO
HIT THE MARK.
THIS IS NOT ENOUGH.
I CALL ON THE COUNCIL TO DO
MORE AND I HOPE THE COUNCIL IS
PREPARED FOR AN END OF THE
YEAR BATTLE.
A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO, THERE
WERE AT LEAST 40 OFFICERS OF
THE PRECINCT AND HOW MANY WERE
ON OVERTIME SHIFTS AND ARE THEY
PLANNING ON SHOT HOLDING CITY
GOVERNMENT AT THE END OF THE
YEAR?
THAT'S ALL.
I YIELD MY TIME.
>> THANK YOU.
KATE, GOOD MORNING.
>> HELLO.
MY NAME IS KATE SIMPSON AND I
LIVE IN CAPITOL HILL.
I AM CALLING ON YOU TO DEFUND
SPD BY AT LEAST 50% AND
REALLOCATE THAT MONEY TO FUND
COMMUNITY-BASED PUBLIC SAFETY
AND RESTORATIVE JUSTICE AS MANY
OF YOU HAVE ALREADY PLEDGED TO
DO.
WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
REIMAGINE A PUBLIC SAFETY TO
PREVENT HARM INSTEAD OF JUST
RESPONDING TO IT.
I URGE YOU TO CALL HER THE PLAN
TO DEFUND THE POLICE AND
REINVEST IN HOUSING AND
EDUCATION.
THE PROTESTS HAVE MADE PLAYING
WHAT BLACK UNITIES HAVE KNOWN
FOR YEARS THAT THE POLICE NEVER
KEEP US SAFE NEITHER ARE THEY
HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
ONLY BY DEFINING THE BUDGET AND
WE BEGIN TO HEAL THE HARM THAT
THE POLICE HAVE CAUSED.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
NEXT PERSON IS JAMIE.
>> HI, CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> YES.
>> MY NAME IS JAMIE AND I'M IN
THE SIXTH DISTRICT.
I APPLAUD COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS
FOR ADDRESSING THE MALICIOUS
TREATMENT OF PROTESTERS AND I
HAVE IT WITH EVERYDAY MARCHERS
AND THEY ARE OVERWHELMINGLY
PEACEFUL.
THESE ARE THE LEADERS YOU
SHOULD BE LISTENING TO, NOT
CHIEF BEST THAT CONTINUES THIS.
I'M ALSO COMING IN SOLIDARITY
OF EQUITY NOW TO HAVE THE
BUDGET CUT.
ADDITIONALLY, I URGE YOU TO
UPHOLD THE DECISION TO CUT THE
SALARY OF THE TOP SPD
EXECUTIVES.
ONLY SEVEN OF YOU HAVE
COMMITTED BUT OVERALL THE
MAJORITY THAT CALL INTO PUBLIC
COMMENT HAVE ADDRESSED THIS
ISSUE AND I'VE BEEN IN FAVOR.
IF YOU DON'T VOTE FOR THIS
BUDGET, I DON'T KNOW WHO YOU
ARE REPRESENTING.
>> THANK YOU.
THE NEXT TWO PEOPLE ARE SUMMER
SIMPSON AND SHIRLEY HENDERSON
AND BRANDON.
SUMMER, GOOD MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING.
THIS IS SUMMER STINSON, ON THE
BOARD OF THE ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITY INSTITUTE.
HIRES THE COUNCIL TO MEET THE
DEMANDS OF OTHER ACTIVISTS TO
DEFUND SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT BY 50%.
MANY OF YOU HAVE COMMITTED TO
THIS REDUCTION AND EVEN BROUGHT
BUDGET PROPOSALS BUT IT IS NOT
ENOUGH.
IT IS SHORT OF THESE PROMISES.
AS AN EMPLOYMENT LAWYER, I
UNDERSTAND LAYOFFS MAY REQUIRE
NEGOTIATION BUT I ALSO URGE THE
COUNCIL TO REMAIN STRONG AND
REQUIRE THAT THE MAYOR AND
CHIEF BEST MUST FOLLOW THROUGH
ON THE BUDGET SO THAT THE
MILITARIZED POLICE DEPARTMENT
BE STOPPED AND NOT ALLOW SUCH
VIOLENCE TO CONTINUE TO OCCUR
TO ALL CITIZENS AND ESPECIALLY
TO OUR COMMUNITIES.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
THE NEXT PERSON IS SHIRLEY.
PLEASE GO AHEAD, SHIRLEY.
AFTER THAT IS BRANDON.
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> HI, SHIRLEY.
GO AHEAD.
>> HI, THANK YOU.
WHEN HE WAS SHIRLEY HENDERSON
AND I'M ONE OF THE OWNERS OF A
CAREER RUN COFFEE SHOP AND HAIR
SALON IN THE CENTRAL DISTRICT.
AS A COMMUNITY SHOP, WE STAND
IN SOLIDARITY WITH THE BUDGET
AMENDMENTS TO DEFUND SPD BUDGET
BY 50% AND INVEST THAT 85
MILLION IN OUR BLACK
COMMUNITIES NOW.
WE HAVE BEEN BRUTALIZED BY
POLICING AND WE ARE
DISAPPOINTED BY THE LACK OF
ACTION BY THE REST OF THE CITY
COUNCIL AND WE WANT TO KNOW WHY
YOU VOTED NO ON THE LEGISLATION
TO DEFUND SPD BY 50% AND INVEST
IN BLACK AND BROWN COMMUNITIES.
WE STAND WITH OUR COMMUNITY AND
WITH ALL THE PROTESTERS IN
EVERYDAY MARCH AND
COUNCILMEMBERS AND DEMANDING
THAT YOU STAND BY THE
COMMITMENT THAT YOU MADE TO
DEFUND THE POLICE.
>> BRANDING, GOOD MORNING.
DO WE HAVE BRANDON WITH US?
AFTER BRANDING, WE WILL HAVE
JESSICA AND MAXWELL GOLDMAN AND
THOMAS HUDSON.
ARE YOU THERE?
>> HE JUST NEEDS TO UNMUTE
HIMSELF BUT HE IS HERE.
>> AS A REMINDER, PLEASE PUSH
á6 .
>> I AM GOING TO VOICE MY
SUPPORT FOR DEFINING THE
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND
VOTING TO SUPPORT THE
AMENDMENTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
OFFICE AND THE BUDGET AMENDMENT
AS WELL IS TO SUPPORT THE
EVERYDAY MARCHERS DEMAND TO NOT
ONLY DEFUND SPD BUT INVEST A
CERTIFICATE MORE OF THAT TO
FREE ALL THE PROTESTERS.
SEVEN OF NINE OF YOU CLAIM TO
DEFUND 50% NOW YOU CLEARLY
VOTED AGAINST THAT AS OF LAST
WEEK.
WE DEMAND THAT YOU CONTINUE TO
DEFUND SPD AND TO ALSO AN
OVERTIME PAY WITH 911 CALLS.
>> THANK YOU.
JESSICA, GOOD MORNING.
>> HI, MY NAME IS JESSICA AND
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY
TO SPEAK.
I LIVE IN DISTRICT 3 AND I'M
CALLING BECAUSE I STILL WANT TO
ENCOURAGE YOU TO DEFUND SPD BY
AT LEAST 50% AND TRANSFER THAT
MONEY TO THE BLACK AND BROWN
COMMUNITY RESTORATIVE JUSTICE
PROGRAM AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
I SEE CLEARLY THAT IT WILL NOT
HAPPEN NOW SO I WANT TO HOLD
YOU TO YOUR COMMITMENT TO
DISMANTLE THE NAVIGATION TEAM
AND TAKE THE $420,000 FROM
EXECUTIVE PAY AND GIFT TO THE
COMMUNITY AND REQUIRE THAT THE
POLICE REPORT EXCESSIVE PAY AND
YOU WILL HAVE TO KEEP
ORGANIZING TO DEFUND SPD BY 50%
IN THE FUTURE SO THAT WE CAN
ACTUALLY BUILD SUSTAINABLE
COMMUNITIES.
THANK YOU FOR THE TIME.
>> THANK YOU.
MAXWELL GOLDMAN.
>> HELLO, I AM A SMALL
BUSINESS OWNER.
WE ARE LOOKING AT THE BIG
BUSINESSES AND BOARDS ARE
COMING OUT FOR SMALL BUSINESSES
AND DEBUNKING THE EVENING NEWS
NARRATIVE AND SEEING THE TRUTH
OF OUR BUSINESSES WITH OUR HOME
AND CHILDREN AND SAFETY.
MIKE CLARK HAS HAD TO BEEN
ARRESTED OR CHARGED.
DEFUND AND REALLOCATE TO BLACK
COMMUNITIES.
DO NOT CREATE EXCEPTIONS TO
PROTECT RACIST CORPORATE
POLICIES WITH FREEDOM AND
TAXPAYER DOLLARS.
>> THANK YOU.
THE NEXT PERSON IS THOMAS.
>> HELLO.
HEY, I'M CALLING TO LET CITY
COUNCIL KNOW THAT WE ARE ON THE
ROAD TO ABOLISHING THE POLICE.
WE NEED TO DEFUND THEM AS MUCH
AS PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE RIGHT
NOW TO GET THAT MONEY TO PLACES
WHERE IT WILL HELP US FOR THE
FUTURE AND RIGHT NOW, POLICE DO
NOT HELP US IN THE FUTURE OF
THE POLICE DO NOT HELP US SO WE
NEED TO FIND DIFFERENT
SOLUTIONS AND WE CAN DO THAT BY
REINVESTING OUR MONEY INTO
BLACK COMMUNITIES.
ALSO, AMNESTY FOR ALL
PROTESTERS.
THANK YOU, GOODBYE.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE LAST FOUR
FIGURES WILL BE ERICA,
BRITTANY, DANIEL AND CJ.
GOOD MORNING.
>> HI, CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> YES.
>> ONE.
MY NICKNAME IS ERICA JACOBSON
AND I'M A RENTER IN DISTRICT 2.
WE ARE DEMANDING THAT YOU
DEFUND THE PLACE BY 30% AND
REINVEST THAT INTO THE
COMMUNITY.
WE ARE DEMANDING RESOURCES FOR
THE HOUSE AS NEIGHBORS AND
EMERGENCY MENTAL HEALTH
SERVICES.
WE ARE DEMANDING FOR EMERGENCY
RESPONSE FOR OUR CITY AND THE
NEEDS OF THE CITY AND RENT AND
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE IN THE
MIDDLE OF A PANDEMIC.
THE SPD BUDGET IS NOT HELPING
OUR CITY.
THAT'S WHAT HE HAS PROVEN THAT.
ALL COUNCIL IS A PUBLICLY
COMMITTED TO DEFUND SPD WENT
BACK ON YOUR WORD . DO AS YOU
PROMISE AND UPHOLD BLACK VOICES
OF LEADERSHIP AND RESPECT THE
DEMANDS.
>> THANK YOU.
BRITTANY, GOOD MORNING.
>> HI, GOOD MORNING CHAIR AND
COUNCIL.
MY NAME IS BRITTANY AND I'M THE
CHAIR OF THE SEATTLE GROUP.
I'M CALLING BECAUSE WE SUPPORT
DEFINING AS A LOCAL ISSUE AND
NATIONAL OR.
WE WANT TO CREATE A WORLD THAT
IS SAFE AND HEALTHY FOR ALL BUT
OUR CITY IS NOT SAFE FOR
EVERYONE UNTIL IT IS SAFE FOR
OUR BLACK FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS
AND IT IS NOT SAFE UNTIL WE AND
VIOLENT POLICING.
WE FOLLOW THE LEAD OF
ORGANIZATIONS IN THE CITY OF
SEATTLE CALLING FOR A 50%
DEFUNDING AND REINVESTMENT OF
MONEY FOR HEALTH AND SAFETY
STRATEGIES.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
DANIEL, GOOD MORNING.
DANIEL, ARE YOU WITH US?
>> HI, I AM DAN.
I AM A RENTER AND I JUST WANT
TO SAY IT IS TOTALLY
UNACCEPTABLE THAT THE
COUNCILMEMBERS ARE WALKING
BACK THERE PROMISED TO DEFUND
BY 50% AND THAT THEY WOULD
PROPOSE A RIDICULOUS 4%
DEFUNDING PLAN.
I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT THEY
ARE NOT SUPPORTING -- THE
COUNCIL MEMBERS DO NOT WANT TO
DEFUND EITHER.
THEY ARE JUST BUYING THEIR TIME
AND MAKING EXCUSES AND I WANT
TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT
FOR STANDING WITH THE MOVEMENT
AND URGE COUNCILMEMBERS TO
VOTE TO UPHOLD THE CUTS TO THE
BLOATED SEATTLE POLICE
EXECUTIVE BUDGET WHERE SOME
POLICE OFFICERS ARE MAKING
200,000 OR MORE A YEAR.
I THINK IT IS RIDICULOUS.
WE ARE NOT PAYING TEACHERS THAT
MUCH AND IT IS ABSOLUTELY
UNACCEPTABLE.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE LAST
PERSON IS CJ WILLIAMSON.
GOOD MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS CJ AND I AM A RENTER
IN DISTRICT 6. THIS WEEKEND, I
GOT A CALL FROM MY UNCLE FROM
NORTH CAROLINA SAYING THAT HIM
AND HIS FRIENDS SIGNED A
PETITION ON FOX NEWS AND PEOPLE
ARE TRYING TO INFLUENCE OUR
CITY OF POLICIES.
WE WANT TO URGE THAT YOU DON'T
LET OUTSIDERS INFLUENCE YOUR
DECISION.
WE HAVE BEEN SHOWING UP FOR A
LONG TIME AND WE NEED TO LISTEN
TO THAT.
SOME OF THE OFFICERS ARE MAKING
UPWARDS OF 300 GRAND A YEAR AND
FACING NO PUNISHMENTS FOR
MISCONDUCT.
WE DON'T WANT THOSE PEOPLE
PROTECTING US.
THE CALL TO DEFUND THE PLACE IS
CLEARLY HERE TO STAY.
THANK YOU.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
FOR ALL FOLKS AT COLDEN, THANK
YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
WE HAVE REACHED THE 11:00 TIME
PERIOD AND WE WILL HAVE FULL
COUNCIL THIS AFTERNOON AT 2 PM
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE
PUBLIC COMMENTS, THAT BEGINS AT
12 NOON.
WITH THAT, THAT BEGINS FOR THIS
MORNING AND WE WILL GET TO THE
ORDERS OF BUSINESS IN FRONT OF
US AND GIVEN THAT THIS IS A
CONTINUATION OF THE
CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD OVER
THE LAST FEW MONTHS.
WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THE
BUDGET PROCESS NOW FOR OVER TWO
MONTHS AND I WANT TO THANK OUR
INCREDIBLE TEAM AND CENTRAL
STAFF.
I KNOW I WAS ON THE PHONE ALL
OVER THE WEEKEND TRYING TO
PREPARE ADDITIONAL LAST-MINUTE
IDEAS AND MAKING SURE THAT ALL
OF THE TEES WERE CROSSED AND
EYES WERE DOTTED.
THANK YOU TO ALL OF YOU FOR
YOUR WORK.
THIS IS NOT A PROCESS THAT WE
ENGAGED IN LIGHTLY AND OR DID
WE ENGAGE IN A MANNER THAT WAS
RUSHED.
THIS WAS A THOUGHTFUL PROCESS
TO ADDRESS THE CRISIS THAT IS
PRESENTING ITSELF BECAUSE OF
COVID WITH THE DECREASED
REVENUE AND IMPACT ON THE
HEALTH AND ECONOMIC VIABILITY
OF OUR COMMUNITY.
I DID JUST WANT TO SAY THANK
YOU FOR ALL OF YOUR WORK.
THIS IS SLATED TO BE THE LAST
COMMITTEE MEETING AND THEN WE
HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE
FULL COUNCIL.
I DID WANT TO TAKE A QUICK
SECOND TO ADDRESS THE LETTER
THAT WE RECEIVED LAST NIGHT AT
ABOUT 10 PM, I HAD THE CHANCE
TO TALK TO THE DIRECTOR AND 12
HOURS LATER AT 9 AM, THE
MAYOR'S AND THE INFORMATION AND
EMAIL THAT THE MAYOR SENT
RAISES SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE
JUMPSTART SEATTLE REVENUE
PROPOSAL 20 MINUTES BEFORE THE
COUNCIL BRIEFING WAS SLATED TO
START SO I APPRECIATE TRENCHES
QUESTIONS AND I THINK THE
INTENT IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
HAVE A ROBUST DISCUSSION ON
WEDNESDAY AS SLATED REGARDING
THE USE OF EMERGENCY FUNDS BOTH
WITH THE RAINY DAY FUNDS AND
EMERGENCY FUNDS THOUGH THERE IS
A CONVERSATION TO BE HAD ABOUT
THE RESERVES AND HOW WE CAN
IDENTIFY HOW TO GET THAT OUT
THE DOOR TO ADDRESS THE
PRESSING ISSUES IN OUR CITY.
I WILL NOT BE ENGAGING IN A
CONVERSATION THAT PUTS CITY
SERVICES AGAINST THOSE THAT ARE
IN DESPERATE NEED OF THE COVID
DOLLARS AND THOSE THAT ARE
SEEKING CHILD CARE AND RENTAL
ASSISTANCE AND FOOD ASSISTANCE
AND FOLKS THAT NEED TO OPEN
THEIR SMALL BUSINESSES AND ARE
LOOKING FOR FLEXIBLE FUNDS.
THE CHILD CAN THAT 70 BUSINESS
OWNERS AND SEATTLEITES ACROSS
SEATTLE HAVE SAID THAT THEY
NEED TO HAVE ACCESS SO THE
DOORS CAN GO INTO CHILDCARE AND
SUBMIT THOSE SERVICES TO STAY
OPEN.
WE'VE HEARD FROM 9 TO 5 THAT
THERE ARE SO MANY SMALL
BUSINESSES AND 30% OF WHICH ARE
SLATED TO STAY CLOSED UNLESS
THEY RECEIVE IMMEDIATE
ASSISTANCE RIGHT NOW.
I KNOW FOR EXAMPLE THAT MY
SISTER WHO HAS MY YOUNG NEPHEWS,
HER KID THAT WAS SLATED TO GO
TO SECOND GRADE IS NOW AT THIS
POINT PLANNING TO GO TO A
CHILDCARE THAT IS ADAPTING SO
MORE KIDDOS CAN HAVE A PLACE
WHERE THEY CAN BE DURING THE
DAY AND LEARN AND THEY CAN BE
SAFE WHILE SCHOOLS ARE CLOSED.
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE OFFER
THAT SUPPORT AND NOT JUST TO
FAMILIES BUT TO SMALL
BUSINESSES AND CHILDCARE ACROSS
THE CITY AND THAT IS WHAT THIS
IS SLATED TO DO.
WE WILL HAVE A ROBUST
CONVERSATION ABOUT THE
JUMPSTART COVID RELIEF BILL ON
WEDNESDAY AND I THINK THERE
WILL BE AMPLE TIME WITH THE
INFLATION WE HAVE RECEIVED
ABOUT THE SHORTFALL IN THE
REVENUE.
IT'S NO SECRET THAT WE
ANTICIPATED A QUICK RECOVERY
AND SLOW RECOVERY.
THERE IS A V SHAPED RECOVERY
AND U SHAPED AND AS YOU CAN
IMAGINE, WE ARE IN THE SLOWER
YOU SHAPED RECOVERY BECAUSE
FOLKS HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GO
BACK TO SCHOOL AND HAVE NOT
BEEN ABLE TO OPEN SCHOOL
BUSINESSES OR RESUME BUSINESS
AS USUAL BECAUSE IT IS
IMPERATIVE THAT WE PROTECT
THEIR HEALTH AND SAFETY I
MAINTAINING AND CONTINUING STAY
HOME STAY HEALTHY ORDERS.
IT'S NO SURPRISE THAT THERE IS
A SLOWER RECOVERY AND IT IS
TRACKING ALONG WITH THE SLOW
RECOVERY STRATEGY THAT WAS
OUTLINED IN JUNE.
WHAT IS THE SURPRISE IS TO
RECEIVE A LETTER 30 MINUTES
BEFORE A COUNCIL BRIEFING.
I THINK THIS SPEAKS TO OUR NEED
FOR ROBUST ENGAGEMENT AND WHAT
THE BUDGETING PRACTICES COULD
BE IN THE CITY.
I KNOW THERE WILL BE ONGOING
CONVERSATIONS LATER TODAY IN
THE BUDGET COMMITTEE SETTING
OUT GUIDELINES OR PRINCIPLES OF
WAYS WE WOULD LIKE TO ENGAGE
MORE COLLABORATIVELY AND
TRANSPARENTLY WITH THE PUBLIC
BY HAVING INFORMATION PRESENTED
FROM THE CITY BUDGETS OFFICE TO
CITY COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC IN
A TRANSPARENT WAY AND I WOULD
EVEN SUGGEST THAT INCLUDES
REGULARLY TIMED REVENUE SO THAT
WE ARE NOT RECEIVING
INFORMATION 12 HOURS BEFORE A
SLATED VOTE.
LIKE IT OR NOT, WE ARE OUR OLD
FULL RANGE OF GOVERNMENT AND
OUR JOB IS TO APPROPRIATE MONEY
AND DO SO TRANSPARENTLY AND
THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE BEEN
ENGAGED IN DOING.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
FOLKS IN THE COMMUNITY KNOW
THAT WE ARE ENGAGED IN THE
CONVERSATION AND IDEALLY
ANTICIPATE HAVING A ROBUST
DISCUSSION ON WEDNESDAY ABOUT
THE RELIEF FUNDS.
WE WILL AS WE ALWAYS HAVE,
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE MAYOR
TO IDENTIFIED SOLUTIONS AND WE
WILL DO THAT THIS WEEK AND INTO
THE FALL.
WE HAVE A FULL BUDGET PROCESS
IN FRONT OF US THAT BEGINS JUST
IN SEPTEMBER AND WE WILL BE
LOOKING FOR WAYS TO MAKE SURE
WE CLOSE ANY OF THESE.
COUNCILMEMBERS, I WANTED TO
IDENTIFY THAT WHAT IS MOST
IMPORTANT FOR THE NEXT TWO
HOURS IS TO INCLUDE THIS
CONVERSATION ABOUT THE BUDGET
AND WE WILL HAVE ADDITIONAL
CONVERSATIONS BUT WE HAVE A
NUMBER OF AMENDMENTS THAT ARE
IN FRONT OF US AND WE ARE VERY
CLOSE TO THE FINISH LINE WITH
GETTING THESE WRAPPED UP AND AS
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD NOTED,
THERE ARE ONGOING
CONVERSATIONS TO BE HAD
REGARDING THE EMERGENCY RELIEF
DOLLARS BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT
BILL TEED UP TO DISCUSS COVID
RELIEF.
WITH THAT, I WOULD ENCOURAGE US
TO MAKE THE TOUGH DECISIONS
THAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US.
WE HAVE COME A LONG WAY AS A
COHORT AND WE HAVE AN
INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT
HAS BEEN PUT INTO IDENTIFYING
THE 2020 REBALANCING PACKAGE
THANKS TO THE INCREDIBLE TEAMS
WITHIN OUR INDIVIDUAL OFFICES.
WE HAVE SOUGHT PROFESSIONAL
WORK THAT HAS GUIDED OUR BUDGET
TO DATE AND WITH THE NEW
INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE
RECEIVED, WE WILL CONTINUE TO
ENGAGE WITH THE EXECUTIVE'S
OFFICE ABOUT HOW TO CLOSE THE
GAP.
AS OUR BUDGET DIRECTOR NOTED
THREE WEEKS AGO OR SO, GIVEN
THE SLOWER ANTICIPATED RECOVER,
WE HAD IDENTIFIED AN $11
MILLION GAP SO WE WILL CONTINUE
TO SEE A SLOW RECOVERY BUT IT
IS IMPERATIVE FOR US TO
CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH
THIS LIGHT BUDGET COMMITTEE TO
WRAP UP OUR DISCUSSIONS ON THE
PROPOSED PACKAGE.
NONE OF THIS IS EASY AND WE ARE
ALL MOVING AS FAST AS WE CAN.
I KNOW THE CITY IS NOT IN A
UNIQUE POSITION AS WE GRAPPLE
WITH THE IMPACT ON RESERVES AND
REVENUE AS WELL AS THE PRESSING
NEED IN OUR COMMUNITY WITH WHAT
IS UNIQUE IN THE CITY AND IT IS
THE EXTREMELY AGGRESSIVE NATURE
AND THAT IS WHY WE PASSED THE
PAYROLL TAX TO HELP REPLENISH
IN FULL OUR EMERGENCY RESERVES
BEGINNING NEXT YEAR WITH THE
AMOUNTS THAT WILL BE ALLOCATED
OR COLLECTED AT THE END OF 2021
AND REPLENISHED IN 2022.
IT IS A TWO-PART PROCESS BUT
TRYING TO BE PROACTIVE ABOUT
THE REGRESSIVE NATURE AND THAT
IS WHY WE PASSED THE JUMPSTART
PACKAGE.
I WOULD LOVE FOR US TO JUMP
INTO THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE
MEMBERS IN FRONT OF US AND THEN
FINISH THE CONVERSATION IN A
ROBUST FASHION ABOUT WHAT TO
ANTICIPATE THROUGHOUT THE REST
OF THE WEEK LATER IN OUR
CONVERSATIONS TODAY.
WITH THAT, MADAME CLERK, WILL
YOU PLEASE READ INTO THE RECORD
ITEM NUMBER ONE.
>> ARE YOU ON HOLD?
I'M SORRY, ARE YOU ON MUTE?
>> THERE WE GO, EXCUSE ME.
AGENDA ITEM 1, REVIEW OF THE
POTENTIAL A DECISION RELATED TO
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR
BRIEFING AND DISCUSSION.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COLLEAGUES, WE HAVE IN FRONT OF
US THE REVIEW OF POTENTIAL A
DECISION RELATED TO THE SPD
BUDGET AND I WILL TURN IT OVER
TO ALLIE THAT I BELIEVE HAS A
CHART TO SHOW US AND THEN WE
WILL LOOK AT LEGISLATION IN
FRONT OF US.
>> GOOD MORNING,
COUNCILMEMBERS.
MY COLLEAGUE, PATTY IS POSTING
A LIST OF FOUR PIECES OF
LEGISLATION THAT ARE ON THE
INTRODUCTION AND REFERRAL THAT
ARE NEEDED TO IMPLEMENT SOME OF
THE CHANGES PROPOSED TODAY AND
DISCUSSED IN THIS COMMITTEE AS
WELL AS THE RESOLUTION THAT I
WILL DISCUSS ONCE I BRIEFLY
DESCRIBED THOSE FOUR PIECES OF
WOOD DECISION.
WE FIRST HAVE A .89861 WHICH
WOULD AGGREGATE THE SEATTLE
POLICE DEPARTMENT'S CONTROL
OPERATIONS SO THAT
APPROPRIATIONS FOR EACH
PRECINCT ARE CONTROLLED
SEPARATELY.
COUNCILWOMAN 9860 WOULD AMEND
THE JUMPSTART RELIEF BILL TO
REDUCE THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF
SPENDING BY THE MILLION
DOLLARS.
COUNCILWOMAN 19862 WOULD
APPROPRIATE THAT $3 MILLION TO
THE ALLEGED DEPARTMENT TO ENTER
INTO CONTACT THE RESEARCH
PROCESSES THAT WILL PROMOTE
PUBLIC SAFETY BY COMMUNITY
NEEDS AND COUNCIL BILL 119863
AUTHORIZES A LOAN TO SUPPORT
THE INVESTMENTS IN THE COUNCILS
WORK REIMAGINED ACCURATELY
SAFETY AND THE INVESTMENTS THAT
WERE APPROVED THROUGH
AMENDMENTS TO COUNCILWOMAN 9825
LAST WEEK TO PROVIDE FUNDING IN
THE HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT
FOR THIS COMMUNITY LED WORK.
AS I NOTED, THESE BILLS WERE
DISCUSSED LAST WEEK AND IN
PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS.
IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE
BUDGET CHANGES REQUIRED NEW
LEGISLATIONS SO THEY WILL BE
INTRODUCED THIS AFTERNOON AND
CONSIDERED AT THE SPECIAL
COUNCIL MEETING ON WEDNESDAY
AFTERNOON.
UNLESS THERE ARE QUESTIONS
ABOUT THOSE BILLS, I WILL MOVE
TO THE RESOLUTION.
>> ANY COUNSELORS THAT WOULD
LIKE TO SPEAK TO ANY OF THESE
BILLS THAT ARE IN FRONT OF US?
OKAY, SEEING NONE, PLEASE GO
AHEAD.
>> SO, THE FIT PIECE ON THIS
LIST IS RESOLUTION THE 1962
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBERS
LEWIS, COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD
AND COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
THAT WILL BE AT THE COUNSELING
THIS AFTERNOON AND THIS
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHES THE
INTENT TO CREATE A CIVILIAN LED
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SAFETY
AND VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND
WHAT IS EXCITED TO OCCUR IN
2021.
I COLLEAGUE IS AVAILABLE IF
COUNSELORS HAVE SPECIFIC
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CONTENT OF
THE RESOLUTION BUT FOR NOW I
WILL TURN IT BACK TO THE CHAIR
AND SPONSORS FOR FURTHER
DISCUSSION.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS AND COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD, I BELIEVE THEY ARE THE
SPONSORS ON THIS.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS
DOCUMENT AND WHAT YOU HAVE
OUTLINED IN TERMS OF THE
RESOLUTION THAT ADDRESSES 2020
AND FUTURE WORK?
I THINK THIS IS A REALLY
IMPORTANT ELEMENT OF THE WORK
WE ARE DOING TODAY.
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, TAKE IT
AWAY.
>> THANK YOU.
I WILL BE BRIEF BECAUSE I DID
DISCUSS THIS AND OUR GOING
COUNCIL BRIEFING BUT JUST OF A
MATTER FACT, WE ARE ENGAGED IN
A DEDUCTIVE PROCESS IN TALKING
ABOUT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
THERE IS AN ADDED OPPONENT OF
WHAT WE ARE DISCUSSING AS A
COMMUNITY AND HOW WE MAKE SURE
THERE IS SOMEONE ON THE OTHER
END OF THE 911 RESPONSE WHEN
PEOPLE CALL 911 REQUEST AND
SOME KIND OF ASSISTANCE.
WE HAVE SEEN FROM THE
DELIBERATIONS WITH THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT AND THE DATA THAT
HAS BEEN SHARED THAT 56% OF THE
911 CALLS, SPD IS CURRENTLY
RESPONDING TO OUR NONCRIMINAL
CALLS.
THOSE CALLS REPRESENT A VARIETY
OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND LOW LEVEL
KINDS OF ACTIVITY THAT COULD BE
ADDRESSED BY A DIFFERENT TYPE
OF FIRST RESPONDER.
WE HAVE ALSO SEEN A
CONSIDERABLE NUMBER OF
FUNCTIONS WITHIN SPD THAT THE
COMMITTEE HAS EXPRESSED AN
INTEREST IN MAINTAINING THE
SERVICE BUT WE ARE MOVING IT
FROM THE CHAIN OF COMMAND AND A
GOOD EXAMPLE OF THAT IS A 911
DISPATCH.
GIVEN THE CONFLUENCE OF
PROVIDING NEW COMMUNITY-BASED
FORUMS AND FIRST RESPONSE AND
TRANSFERRING CERTAIN FUNCTIONS
OUT OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT,
IT MAKES SENSE TO FOLLOW THE
LEAD OF WHAT OTHER
JURISDICTIONS AND CITIES ARE
DOING TO PUT THE NEW FUNCTIONS
AND RESPONSIBILITIES INTO A
CIVILIAN PUBLIC DEPARTMENT THAT
IS SEPARATE FROM A SWORN AND
ARMED POLICE DEPARTMENT AND
THIS IS A PRACTICE THAT
MINNEAPOLIS IS CURRENTLY
LOOKING AT AND DENVER ALREADY
HAS ONE.
ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO IS
LOOKING AT A SIMILAR PRACTICE.
OTHER CITIES HAVE DONE SIMILAR
WORK TO RECONSTITUTE ENTIRE
LEVELS OF HOW THEY DO LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND THE CHARTER
AMENDMENT CREATED A NEW TYPE OF
PUBLIC SERVICE OFFICER WITH
SIMILAR CONCEPTS WITH LOW-LEVEL
ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES.
THIS RESOLUTION IS THE FIRST
STEP IN SETTING UP THE PROCESS
TO CREATE THIS DEPARTMENT WHICH
WILL BE COMPREHENSIVE AND WILL
INVOLVE WORKING WITH COMMUNITY
AND WORKING WITH A BROAD RANGE
OF STAKEHOLDERS AND POSSIBLY
EVEN INVOLVING A CHARTER
AMENDMENT IN NOVEMBER OF THAT
2012 ABOUT WHERE THE PEOPLE OF
SEATTLE WOULD HAVE THE FINAL
SAY AT THE BALLOT BOX OVER
ADOPTING THIS KIND OF APPROACH.
WITH THAT, I DON'T HAVE
ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD EXCEPT TO
THANK YOU FOR BEING EXTREMELY
DILIGENT IN PUTTING THIS
TOGETHER ON A TIGHT TIMELINE
AND WORKING WITH A VARIETY OF
COUNCIL OFFICES AND PROVIDING
FEEDBACK.
I SURELY WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD AND
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ AS WELL AS
STAFF IN BOTH OF THEIR OFFICES
AND MY OFFICE FOR SHEPHERDING
THIS THROUGH AND I LOOK FORWARD
TO CONSIDERING THIS.
THIS HAS TO BE PART OF THE
PROCESS OF OUR DEFINING
CONVERSATION.
THIS IS NOT JUST A DEDUCTIVE
CONVERSATION BUT WHAT WILL
CONTINUE TO PROVIDE SERVICES
AND NUMBER ONE RESPONSE AND
ENHANCE PUBLIC SAFETY IN THE
CITY RATHER THAN DIMINISH IT AS
HAS BEEN THE NARRATIVE AND THAT
IS COMPLETELY NOT THE TENSION
OF THIS COUNCIL.
THERE ARE BETTER WAYS FORWARD
AND TO DELIVER SOME OF THE
SERVICES IF WE WILL HAVE A
COMMUNITY CONVERSATION ABOUT IT
THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THIS
YEAR SO WITH THAT, I HAVE NO
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO ADD TO THIS?
>> SURE, BUT REALLY BRIEFLY, IN
ADDITION TO THE POINTS THAT
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS MADE ABOUT
THE INTENTIONS TO CREATE A NEW
CIVILIAN LED DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY SAFETY AND
PREVENTION, I WANT TO LIFT UP
THE OTHER COMMITMENTS THAT THE
LEGISLATION MAKES FOR OUR
CONVERSATIONS IN 2020 MOVING
INTO 2021 AS IT RELATES TO THE
DEPARTMENT TRANSFERS OF SEVERAL
FUNCTIONS OF THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT INTO OTHER
DEPARTMENTS AND SOME OF THESE
TRANSFERS ARE TRANSFERS THAT
THE MAYOR AND THE CHIEF HAVE
IDENTIFIED AS PRIORITIES AND
PARTICULARLY THE AGREEMENT
AROUND THE SHARED INTEREST TO
TRANSFER 911 AND THE COMMITMENT
OF THE MAYOR TO DELIVER
LEGISLATION TO THE COUNCIL AND
TO DO SO BEFORE THE END OF THE
YEAR.
THE RESOLUTION ALSO OUTLINES
WHAT OUR GOALS ARE FOR THE
COMMUNITY LED RESEARCH WITH THE
BUDGETING EFFORTS AND ALSO
IDENTIFIES WHAT THE COUNCILS
PRIORITIES ARE FOR SPD RESPONSE
2911 CALLS.
ALSO, IT IDENTIFIES THE
COUNCILS INTEREST TO FURTHER DE-
PRIORITIZE OR CONTINUE
PROSECUTION OF CERTAIN TYPES OF
MISDEMEANORS THAT LEAD TO BIAS
POLICING AND THESE ARE
CONVERSATIONS THAT WE ARE GOING
TO HAVE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE
GOAL OF REDUCING THE IMPACTS OF
POLICING ON BLACK AND BROWN
COMMUNITIES.
IMPACTS THAT HAVE A LONG
HISTORY OF DESPERATE IMPACTS
AND THAT PERPETUATE INJUSTICE
IN OUR CITY.
THE LEGISLATION AND RESOLUTION
ALSO IDENTIFIES THE COUNCILS
PRIORITIES FOR OUT OF ORDER
LAYOFF REQUEST ASKING THE CHIEF
TO MAKE SUCH A REQUEST TO THE
PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICE
COMMISSION DIRECTOR AND STOP
THE COMMUNITY'S DESIRE THAT THE
CHIEF WOULD MAKE THESE REQUESTS
TO THE COMMISSION DIRECTOR
FOCUSED FIRST ON OFFICERS WITH
MULTIPLE SUSTAINED COMPLAINTS.
WE WILL HAVE CONTINUED
CONVERSATIONS WITH LABOR
RELATIONS ON THE MAYOR'S OFFICE
AND THE CHIEF TO IDENTIFY OTHER
POSSIBLE HIGHER PRIORITY
REDUCTIONS IN PATROL STAFF.
ALSO, THE RESOLUTION SPEAKS TO
THE COUNCILS COMMITMENT TO HAVE
COMPLIANCE WITH OUR CITIES
CHARTER OBLIGATION AND
EXPECTATION THAT THE CHIEF
WOULD COMPLY TO MAINTAIN
ADEQUATE STAFFING IN EVERY
DISTRICT OF THE CITY.
AS WELL AS OUR EXPECTATION THAT
THE BUDGET ACTIONS ARE UNDER
THE SUPERVISION AND REVIEW OF
THE COURT AS IT RELATES TO OUR
OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE CONSENT
DECREE AND LASTLY, I WANT TO
ECHO COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS THANKS
TO THE INCLUSION FROM
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ AND
SPECIFICALLY CALL OUT A
DESCRIPTION OF WHAT THAT
INCLUSION IS AND THAT IS THE
COUNCILS PRIORITY TO WORK TO
CREATE A POLICE MISCONDUCT
REGISTRY THAT IS ACCESSIBLE TO
THE PUBLIC AND THIS MODEL'S
EFFORTS THAT ARE BEING
UNDERTAKEN IN FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT AND I THANK
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ FOR
BRINGING THIS IDEA FORWARD.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I WILL ALSO APPRECIATE
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
I WANT TO CLARIFY SOMETHING
THAT I SAID EARLIER.
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ HAS BEEN
OFFICIALLY EXCUSED AND SHE DID
ASK FOR AN EXCUSE FOR TODAY'S
MEETINGS I WANT TO MAKE THAT
CLEAR FOR THE RECORD.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS ON THE RESOLUTION IN
FRONT OF US?
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT AND THEN
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> I WILL BE VOTING YES ON
THIS RESOLUTION STATING THE
COUNCILS HOPE TO DEFUND THE
POLICE IN THE FUTURE.
HOWEVER, MY MESSAGE TO THE
MOVEMENT IS THAT WE HAVE TO BE
CLEAR THAT A NONBINDING
RESOLUTION STATING THE INTENT
TO STUDY DEFINING THE POLICE IN
THE FUTURE, LET ME STATE THAT
AGAIN, THE INTENT TO HOPE TO
STUDY DEFINING THE POLICE IN
THE FUTURE IS SIMPLY NOT A
SUBSTITUTE FOR ACTUALLY
DEFUNDING THE POLICE.
THE CITY COUNCIL CAN PASS
RESOLUTIONS ALL YEAR LONG SO
WHY IS IT TODAY WHEN VOTING ON
THE ACTUAL
FUNDING OF THE POLICE, WHY IS
IT NOW THE TIME FOR THE
MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL TO HAVE
A VOTE OR RESOLUTION STATING
THESE INTENTIONS?
OUR MOVEMENT IS CLEARLY
EXPECTED TO ACCEPT THE NICE
WORDS ABOUT THE FUTURE
INTENTIONS AS A FACT THAT
UNFORTUNATE, I BELIEVE THAT
WOULD BE A SERIOUS MISTAKE
BECAUSE WE HAVE SEEN WHAT
HAPPENS AND IN MINNEAPOLIS, THE
CITY COUNCIL PROMISED TO CHANGE
THE CITY CHARTER TO TOTALLY
REORGANIZE THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT AND AS SOCIALISTS IN
MINNESOTA HAVE PREDICTED,
RATHER THAN TAKING ANY ACTION
WITH THE CITY'S HIGHEST STATE
OF BODY, THE CITY COUNCIL HAVE
THE CHARTER COMMISSION AND
UNFORTUNATELY, THE CHARTER
COMMISSION HAS SAID THIS IS NOT
POSSIBLE.
THAT HAPPENED WEDNESDAY LAST
WEEK.
AFTER ALL THE POMP AND
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEFUNDING
PROMISES, THE MINNEAPOLIS
DEMOCRATS ARE NOT DEFUNDING THE
POLICE.
YET, IN SEATTLE, AFTER MY
OFFICE HAVE PUBLICLY PLEDGED TO
FIGHT FOR AND STAND FOR THE
MOVEMENT TO DEMAND DEFUNDING OF
THE POLICE BY AT LEAST 50%, SIX
OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS, ALL
DEMOCRATS PROMISED A DEFUND BUT
ARE NOW IN THE PROCESS OF
VOTING AND IS HAPPENED LAST
WEEK, VOTED AGAINST REDUCTION
OF THE POLICE BUDGET BY 50% AS
MY OFFICE HAD BROUGHT FORWARD
AN AMENDMENT WHICH NO OTHER
COUNCILMEMBERS VOTED YES ON ON
WEDNESDAY SO THE DEMOCRATS ARE
VOTING TO REDUCE THE POLICE
BUDGET BY LESS THAN 3 MILLION
AND ARE ADDING 3 MILLION TO THE
POLICE BUDGET FOR THE
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET WHICH HAS
NOT COME UP YET BUT I WILL BE
SPEAKING TO THAT ALSO.
LAST WEDNESDAY AS I SAID, I
PROPOSE DEFUNDING THE POLICE OF
50% NOW AND EVERY OTHER
COUNCILMEMBERS VOTED NO SAYING
THE CUTS CANNOT BE DONE IN
NOVEMBER EVEN THOUGH THESE
REASONS THAT ARE STATED ARE NOT
BASED IN FACT.
IN RESPONSE TO THE IDEA THAT
THIS CANNOT BE DONE UNTIL
NOVEMBER WHICH I DON'T ACCEPT
BUT EVEN HYPOTHETICALLY,
ACCEPTING THAT, I ALSO BROUGHT
FORWARD AN AMENDMENT OF
DEFUNDING THE POLICE STARTING
IN NOVEMBER THAT IS STARTING ON
NOVEMBER 1 AND NO COUNCIL
MEMBER EVEN AMENDEDTHAT
PROPOSAL.
TO BE CLEAR, DEFUNDING THE
POLICE IS NOT AN ACCOUNTING
TRICK.
MOVING ENFORCEMENT BEEKEEPING
OPERATIONS CHANGED IS NOT WHAT
THE MOVEMENT MEANT BY DEFUNDING
THE POLICE.
BY DEFINING THE POLICE, WE MEAN
ENDING THE REPRESSION OF OUR
COMMUNITIES AND WE DO NOT MEAN
BUDGET CUTS BUT THE OPPOSITE OF
THAT, WE MAY TAKE MONEY AWAY
FROM WHERE HARM IS BEING DONE
AND PUT IT IN THE COMMUNITIES.
I WILL BE VOTING YES AS I SAID
ON THIS RESOLUTION BECAUSE I
SUPPORT THE RESOLUTION BUT AT
THE END OF THE DAY, DEFUNDING
THE POLICE AND END OF POLICE
VIOLENCE WILL REQUIRE A
SUSTAINED AND INDEPENDENTLY
ORGANIZED MOVEMENT WHERE WE
HOLD OUR LEADERS ACCOUNTABLE
AND WHERE WE DON'T BUILD
ALLIANCES TO THOSE THAT DO NOT
STAND TRUE TO ITS PROMISES.
>> THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, I SAW
YOUR HANDS.
ALSO JUST NOTE THAT THE
RESOLUTION IN FRONT OF US WAS
AS A DRAFT LAST MONTH ON FRIDAY
IN JULY SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT WAS ALSO NOTED.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, PLEASE
GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
THIS IS REGARDING THIS
RESOLUTION AND I WANT TO THANK
THE SPONSORS OF THIS
RESOLUTION FOR FOR WRITING IT
FOR US AT THE END OF JULY.
FOR THEN UPDATING IT TODAY AND
PARTICULARLY INTERESTED IN
SECTION 5 WHICH ASKS FOR
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ASKING
FOR A REPORT ON HOW THE
PROPOSED LAYOFFS WHAT EFFECT
GENERAL REDEPLOYMENT AND
RESPONSE TIMES AND THAT'S VERY
IMPORTANT TO HAVE THIS DATA
WELL HOW THINGS WOULD CHANGE
AND I'VE HEARD THE STATISTIC A
LOT ABOUT HALF OF THE 911 CALLS
THAT ARE NONCRIMINAL.
I FOUND ANOTHER GOOD METRIC TO
LOOK AT RATHER THAN THE WRONG
NUMBER OF CALLS IS THE AMOUNT
OF SERVICE TIME SPENT AND
PRIORITY ONE AND TWO CALLS TAKE
LONGER.
IT'S POSING A THREAT TO LIFE
AND PRIORITY TO SUCH AS IN
PROGRESS PROPERTY CRIMES
TOTALING 71% OF SERVICE TIME.
THAT MEANS ONLY 29% ARE LOWER
PRIORITY THAN ONE OR TWO SO I
WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT METRIC
AS WELL.
HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE
SPONSORS, COULD YOU ELABORATE
ON A POTENTIAL SCENARIO FOR
WHAT HAPPENS TO THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT IN THE
ORGANIZATIONAL CHART ON CITY
GOVERNMENT?
FOR EXAMPLE, AS A POLICE
DEPARTMENT, THE REVISION WOULD
BE HOUSED WITHIN THE NEW
COMMUNITY SAFETY DEPARTMENT OR
MULTIPLE SCENARIOS THAT COULD
OCCUR.
>> FROM MY PERSPECTIVE , TO
YOUR LETTER SUGGESTION, THERE
ARE MULTIPLE SCENARIOS THAT
COULD OCCUR.
I AM NOT CONSIDERING A SCENARIO
WHERE WE DO NOT REQUIRE
POLICING FOR CLARIFICATION'S
SAKE BUT WHETHER OR NOT THE
POLICING FUNCTION WOULD
CONTINUE TO BE UNDER
TRADITIONAL POLICE DEPARTMENTS
AND ALL OF THE OTHER NON-
POLICING ENTITIES WOULD BE
UNDER THE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY SAFETY AND VIOLENCE
PREVENTION.
THAT IS ONE MODEL AND THE OTHER
MODEL COULD INCLUDE THE SMALLER
AND MORE FOCUSED POLICING AGENCY
TO BE UNDER THAT UMBRELLA AS
WELL.
I THINK THESE ARE ALL GOOD
QUESTIONS AND I'M SORRY THAT IN
MY OVERVIEW OF THE RESOLUTION,
I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT LIFTING UP
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN'S
CONTRIBUTION TO THE RESOLUTION
AND THAT WAS MY FAULT.
I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR
INCLUSION OF REQUESTING THE DATA
FOR THE IMPACTS OF REDUCED
PATROL STAFFING ON POLICE
RESPONSE TIMES.
I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT AND A
NUMBER OF CALLS MAY NOT BE AS
MEANINGFUL AS TIME TO RESPOND
TO CALLS.
>> I COULD ADD BRIEFLY TO
THAT, COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN,
THERE ARE A LOT OF DIFFERENT
EXAMPLES AROUND THE COUNTRY OF
ARRANGEMENTS LIKE THIS AND IN
MINNEAPOLIS THAT IS CURRENTLY
WORKING ON SOMETHING WHERE THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT WOULD BE A
BUREAU WITHIN THE AGENCY AND
DENVER, COLORADO HAS A SYSTEM
LIKE THAT OR THEY HAVE A
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND
POLICE ARE LIKE A BUREAU WITHIN
IT.
STILL, WITH THE CHIEF THAT RUNS
THAT BUREAU BUT ANSWERS TO A
CIVILIAN DIRECTOR BETWEEN THEM
AND THE MAYOR.
IT COULD ALSO BE THAT WE
DEVELOPED THE SYSTEM AND HAVING
TWO PUBLIC SAFETY CHIEFS UNDER
FIRE AND A POLICE CHIEF.
THERE WOULD NOW BE A THIRD
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND
THAT WOULD BE THE THREE PUBLIC
SAFETY TOP OFFICIALS WITH THE
INDEPENDENT DEPARTMENTS TO THE
MAYOR AND I THINK THE IMPORTANT
THING IS TO NOT BE TOO
DESCRIPTIVE BECAUSE WE DO WANT
TO HAVE AN OPEN PROCESS WHERE
WE LOOK AT BEST PRACTICES AND
HELP WITH COMMUNITY EXPERTS TO
COME UP WITH WHAT WILL BE THE
BEST ADDITION BUT THERE ARE
MULTIPLE MODELS AND ALL THEM
INVOLVE STILL HAVING THE
ABILITY TO HAVE ARMED POLICE
THAT CAN RESPOND BUT JUST IN A
MORE SPECIFIC ROLE WHERE THERE
ARE OTHER SERVICES I CAN TAKE
THE ROLE OF THINGS THAT POLICE
RESPOND TO AND THEY CURRENTLY
SHOULD NOT BE RESPONDING TO.
I HOPE THAT PROVIDES
DEFECATION.
>> ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS AND THIS WILL BE UP
FOR DISCUSSION AND A VOTE IN
FULL COUNCIL . OKAY, I JUST
WANT TO THANK THE SPONSORS AS
WELL AND OFFER DOCUMENT I HAVE
AS WE THINK ABOUT THE NEXT
ITERATIONS HERE.
I WANT TO APPRECIATE THE
SPONSORS FOR BRINGING THIS
RESOLUTION AND PATTY IF YOU
WOULD LIKE TO BRING UP THE
DOCUMENT, I THINK THIS IS A
COMPETENT ENTRY PIECE THAT GOES
ALONG WITH THE RESOLUTION TO
MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THERE ARE
ACTIONS BEING TAKEN THAT WILL
BE ABLE TO BE ANALYZED AS WE
BEGIN DISCUSSIONS IN A FEW
WEEKS AND THERE ARE
SIGNIFICANCES THAT WE ARE
TAKING IN THIS BUDGET AND IF
CONTINUED, THIS WILL RESULT IN
BOTH REDUCTIONS AND
OPPORTUNITIES FOR US TO INVEST
IN THE COMMUNITY AND THIS IS
THE OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW THAT
CHART HAVE PROVIDED FOR LAST
MONTH AND TO SHOW IT IS
POSSIBLE.
IF YOU SCROLL TO THE TOP, WE
HAVE SEEN THAT THE REBALANCING
PACKAGE IS GOING VERY FAR AND
AS FAR AS WE CAN BUT NOT AS FAR
AS WE KNOW THAT THE COMMUNITY
IS ASKING US TO.
THE TEAMS HAVE A WORKING AROUND-
THE-CLOCK TO IDENTIFY ALL THE
PLACES TO REDUCE THE FOOTPRINT
AND THERE ARE STRATEGIES THAT
WE PUT INTO PLACE THAT CAN HELP
US IN THAT CYCLE TO ELABORATE
AND ANALYZE THESE COSTS.
WE KNEW WE HAD TO MAKE
INVESTMENTS NOW SO THAT
SOLUTIONS HAVE THE TIME TO
SCALE UP AND TO TAKE LARGER
VOLUMES FOR THE FUTURE.
TODAY IS ONE STEP IN THIS
PROCESS.
ADDITIONALLY, WHAT LIES IN
FRONT OF US IS THE OPPORTUNITY
TO VOTE ON THE RESEARCH PROCESS
THAT WILL BEGIN LATER THIS YEAR
TO MAKE SURE THAT DECISIONS ARE
ROOTED IN EQUITY AND REDUCING
FUNDING BUT MAKING SURE WE ARE
INVESTING IN COMMUNITY LED
SOLUTIONS AND WE ARE DRESSING
THINGS IN THE CRIMINAL LEGAL
SYSTEM AND CALLING FOR CHANGE
THERE.
WE HAVE TO BE INTENTIONAL AS WE
MOVE FORWARD.
THIS IS A DOCUMENT THAT IS
INTENDED TO BE ASPIRATIONAL AND
INTENDED TO BE A POINT IN TIME
ANALYSIS FOR WHERE THERE COULD
BE FURTHER THE PRIORITIZATION
AND THAT WILL BE BAKED INTO THE
CONVERSATIONS AND DISCUSSION IN
THE FALL CYCLE.
AGAIN, NOT TO BE TOO
PRESCRIPTIVE BUT TO SHOW HOW
SERIOUS CONSIDERATIONS ARE
BEING PENCILED OUT FOR US TO
CONSIDER FOR THE FULL COUNCIL
IN THE BUDGET DELIBERATIONS
THIS FALL.
INC.
YOU VERY MUCH, PATTY.
THIS GOES TO THE FULL
RESOLUTION IN FRONT OF US JUST
TO SHOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN A
LOT OF WORK AND RESEARCH DONE
TO THINK ABOUT HOW WE CAN MOVE
FORWARD WITH THE 20-21
VISUALIZATION OF A COLUMBUS IN
SOME PRIORITIES THAT ARE
OUTLINED.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD?
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
IS THERE A WAY FOR STAFF TO
SHOW BOTH SIDES OF THE DOCUMENT
ON THE SCREEN TOGETHER?
>> I THINK THAT CAN BE
ACCOMPLISHED OR WE CAN SHRINK
IT IF THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
>> I THINK FOR THE VIEWING
PUBLIC, I WOULD LIKE TO
EMPHASIZE ONE OF THE POINTS
THAT YOU HAVE MADE, CHAIR
MOSQUEDA.
I THINK SUB TOTALING OR ADDING
THE TWO FIRST SUBTOTAL
CATEGORIES IS REALLY IMPORTANT
TO UNDERSTAND THE VALUE -- THAT
WILL WORK.
SUB TOTALING THE 10.5 MILLION
PLUS ABOUT 53 MILLION AND THOSE
TWO CATEGORIES ARE PRETTY
ACCURATE QUANTIFICATION OF THE
VALUE, PERFECT, THANK YOU.
A VALUE OVER THE COURSE OF THE
YEAR OF THE VOTES THAT WE ARE
TAKING NOW FOR THE LAST 4 1/2
MONTHS OF THE YEAR.
THANK YOU CHAIR MOSQUEDA FOR
PUTTING TOGETHER THIS DOCUMENT.
I REALLY APOLOGIZE BECAUSE I
KNOW WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT IT A
LOT.
IT IS OCCURRING TO ME THAT WE
ARE ALSO VOTING TO TAKE THE
PROPOSED DEMONSTRATOR
REDUCTIONS IN THE MAYOR'S
POLICE BUDGET AND WE ARE VOTING
TO MAKE THEM REQUIRED
REDUCTIONS AND ARE THEY ON THIS
DOCUMENT?
>> YOU ARE CORRECT AND THEY ARE
CURRENTLY LISTED UNDER THE
FIRST ITEM UNDER ADDITIONAL
CUTS FOR CONSIDERATION.
I THINK I KNOW WHERE YOU ARE
HEADED WITH THAT AND GIVEN THIS
IS A POINT IN TIME DRAFT TO
PULL THAT UP, WE CAN DEFINITELY
DO THAT AND CIRCULATE THAT TO
FOLKS.
ALSO, HAPPY TO INCLUDE ANY
ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK BUT THIS IS
THE PURPOSE FOR US TO HAVE A
MENU IN FRONT OF US AND WE DID
WANT TO IDENTIFY THE CASES
WHERE WE ARE VOTING TODAY
THROUGH OUR ACTIONS AND
IDENTIFYING THOSE COMMITMENTS
THAT ARE BEING PUT IN THE
RESOLUTION SO YOUR POINT IS
VERY WELL TAKEN.
>> I THINK THE THINGS THAT I
AM THINKING ABOUT AS THE
STARTING POINT FOR THE
SEPTEMBER BUDGET DISCUSSIONS
ARE ALL OF THE THINGS UNDER
REDUCTIONS AND TRANSFERS AND
THOSE THINGS SHOULD NOT BE IN
THE PROPOSED BUDGET COMING OUT
OF THE MAYOR'S OFFICE BECAUSE
WE HAVE ALREADY MADE THESE
DECISIONS.
SO, I THINK CONCEPTUALLY, AND
THINKING OF THIS AS THE
STARTING POINT AS A REDUCED 20-
21 BUDGET OF ABOUT $75 MILLION.
I THINK THAT IS MY ROUGH MATH
OF THAT.
>> PERFECT, THAT IS RIGHT.
THANK YOU FOR THE FEEDBACK AND
AGAIN, JUST A POINT IN TIME
REFERENCE TO SOME OF THE ITEMS
THAT WE ARE ACTUALIZING AND
ITEMS THAT COULD BE ANNUALIZED
NEXT YEAR INTO THE FALL BUDGET
AND ITEMS FOR FUTURE
CONVERSATION AND DISCUSSION
THAT WOULD ALSO YIELD
ADDITIONAL REDUCTIONS TO FREE
UP SOLUTIONS FOR COMMUNITY LED
PROCESSES.
THANKS AGAIN, PATTY.
SEEING NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
OR QUESTIONS ON THE RESOLUTION
IN FRONT OF US, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU.
I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND THE
ATTACHMENT.
THAT WAS NOT CIRCULATED EARLIER
AND I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND
THE MEANING OF THAT.
THERE ARE LOTS OF THINGS THAT I
LIKE ABOUT RESOLUTION 31962 AND
THE ENUMERATION OR LIST OF
ASPIRATIONAL REDUCTIONS, THAT
IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK WOULD
REQUIRE MORE TIME TO GET
COMFORTABLE WITH SO I WANTED TO
BE CLEAR THAT A SON VOTES IN
FAVOR OF RESOLUTION THE 1962
THAT THEY ARE NOT NECESSARILY
VOTING IN FAVOR OF THOSE
REDUCTIONS.
>> I IS CORRECT.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD, DID YOU
HAVE ANY DATA BACK?
>> NO, JUST THAT WE HAVE THIS
CONVERSATION ABOUT WHETHER OR
NOT IT WOULD BE PART OF THE
RESOLUTION AND CAME TO THE
CONCLUSION THAT IT IS A GOOD
VISIONING DOCUMENT THAT SHOULD
NOT BE PART OF THE RESOLUTION.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT
CLARIFICATION.
COLLEAGUES, I THINK THAT GETS
US TO THE FIRST PART OF OUR
AGENDA TODAY.
THANK YOU FOR THE DISCUSSION.
ALLIE, LET'S GO TO ITEM NUMBER
TWO AND MADAME CLAIRE, COULD
YOU PLEASE READ ITEM NUMBER TWO
INTO THE RECORD.
>> AGENDA AND TO , 119825, AN
ORDINANCE RELATED TO THE CITY
RESPONSE TO THE 2020 .
>> THERE ARE SEVEN AMENDMENTS
AND A FEW OPTIONS FOR THREE OF
THE AMENDMENTS SO I WILL DO MY
BEST TO HELP WALK US THROUGH
THESE AND HIGHLIGHT WHERE THERE
IS ONLY ONE CHOICE.
THE FIRST AMENDMENT MAKES
TECHNICAL AND CLARIFYING
AMENDMENTS AND THIS INCLUDES
CORRECTING REDUCTION IN THE
CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT WAS
DOUBLE COUNTED AND ADDING IN
THE NUMBER FOR RESOLUTION THE
1962 WHERE IT IS REFERENCED IN
SEVERAL AND TO REMAIN IN
ALIGNMENT WITH THE CONSENT
DECREE AND MODIFY THE WORDING
IN SECTION 24 THAT INCLUDES
WHAT WAS PROPOSED ON COMMAND
STAFF SALARIES AS LAST WEEK.
THIS WOULD BE ON A SPECIFIC
AMOUNT OF BODY RATHER THAN THE
ENTIRE POLICE DEPARTMENT
BUDGET.
THAT IS AMENDMENT B HAS POSTED
TO THE AGENDA.
AND THIS WAS AMENDMENT E-1 AND
B-2. I WILL DESCRIBE THEM AND
NOTICED THAT ONLY ONE OF THE
OPTIONS CAN PASS.
THE FIRST OPTION, AMENDMENT B-1
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS HAS THE LIMITS OF B WHAT
WOULD STRIKE ANYWHERE SECTIONS
ON COMMAND SALARIES IN 2020 AND
NUMBER TWO, SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ,
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD AND
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS HAS THE
TECHNICAL CLARIFYING
CORRECTIONS TO THE CAPITAL
PROJECTS AND THE RESOLUTION
NUMBER AND AMEND THE LANGUAGE
IN SECTION 24 TO MODIFY HOW THE
CHIEF SALARY WOULD BE
RESTRICTED AND DECREASES THE
TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE SPD BUDGET
THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO
REFLECT UPDATED INFORMATION
THAT STAFF UNCOVERED RELATED TO
SALARIES.
THE MAIN DIFFERENCE IS
AMENDMENTS B AND B-CAT 2 WOULD
REMOVE SECTION 24 ENTIRELY.
I WILL PASS IT BACK TO THE
CHAIR AND THE SPONSORS FOR
DISCUSSION.
>> OKAY, COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS,
I SEE YOU ARE THE SPONSOR OF
AMENDMENT BE HAVING 1 AND I WAS
A SPONSOR OF AMERICAN B WHICH I
WILL NOT GO INTO DETAIL BECAUSE
OF THE NATURE.
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, WOULD YOU
LIKE TO START WITH AN OVERVIEW
OF ANY OF THE ITEMS IN THE
REMOVAL OF SECTION 24 AS YOU
ARE PROPOSING IN AMENDMENT BE-
1?
>> PROCEDURALLY, SHOULD I
MOTION TO MOVE THIS AMENDMENT ?
>> DO YOU MIND IF YOU JUST DO
IT OVERVIEW AND I WOULD LIKE TO
HEAR FROM THE SPONSORS .
>> IT'S PRETTY SIMPLE.
IT WOULD JUST HAVE THE PAY
REDUCTIONS ON THE EXECUTIVE
LEADERSHIP TEAM IN THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD,
WOULD YOU LIKE TO DESCRIBE BE-
2?
>> IN ADDITION TO MAKING THE
TECHNICAL CHANGES AND IT WOULD
PROHIBIT SPENDING $345,000 WITH
BSL UNLESS PAYMENT FOR
EMPLOYEES WITH THE REMAINDER OF
THE YEAR AND THE REDUCTION WITH
THE PAYMENT FOR THE POLICE
CHIEF POSITION WHICH IS REDUCED
AND THAT IS APPROXIMATELY
$235,000 A YEAR.
TO THE PAYMENT OF THE OTHER
COMMAND STAFF IS REDUCED TO THE
LOWEST HOURLY WAGE IN EACH OF
CLASSIFICATION.
IF THE DEPARTMENT CHOOSES TO DO
NEITHER OR ONLY ONE OF THESE
THINGS, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT
IS REQUIRED IN THE POLICE
DEPARTENT'S BUDGET.
I THINK I WILL LEAVE THE
SPEAKING POINTS AND I THINK
CHAIR MOSQUEDA, YOU JUST WANTED
DESCRIPTION RIGHT NOW SO I WILL
NOT MAKE ANY ARGUMENT RIGHT NOW
FOR THIS PARTICULAR POSITION.
>> OKAY, RECOGNIZING THAT ONE
CANNOT GO WITH THE OTHER ,
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, DID YOU
STILL WANT TO MOVE AMENDMENT
BE-1 BECAUSE I FOR ONE COULD
USE MORE OF A DISCUSSION ABOUT
THESE AND COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD
AND COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS, I WANT
TO CONFIRM THAT YOU HAVE SENT
THESE TO CENTRAL STAFF WAS
SUFFICIENT TIME TO GET THEM
REVIEWED BY LAW, IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> I BELIEVE SO.
>> YES, I CAN CONFIRM THAT
CENTRAL STAFF HAS SHARED THIS
VERSION WILL FALL AND THAT IS
ALWAYS THE CASE BECAUSE OF THAT
WORK WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT.
WE HAVE A DIFFERENT VERSION OF
THE AMENDMENT BEFORE US.
>> I SEE KARINA NODDING ALONG.
CAN WE DO MORE DISCUSSION ABOUT
THESE TWO IF THAT SOUNDS OKAY
TO THE SPONSORS?
>> SURE, DO YOU WANT US TO
DISCUSS THEM OF FORMALLY
MOVING THEM?
>> YEAH.
IF YOU CAN DO THAT, THAT ALLOWS
US TO HAVE A DISCUSSION AND IF
THERE IS AN INDICATION THAT WE
ARE GETTING CLARITY ON HOW
THESE TWO ALIGN.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING WOULD BE
AND MAYBE CENTRAL STAFF TO
CLARIFY AND I'M HAPPY TO HAVE A
DISCUSSION WITH THE OTHER ONE
OF THEM.
IF BE-1 PASSED, IT WOULD MAKE
ANY OTHER AMENDING OF SECTION
24 IRRELEVANT BECAUSE IT WOULD
BE COMPLETELY GONE.
IT MAKES SENSE TO VOTE ON BE-1
FIRST BECAUSE IT WOULD MAKE BE-
2 MOVED THAT IN ANY EVENT, I
GUESS I'M HAPPY TO SPEAK TO
SECTION 24 AFTER MOVING IT IN
ANTICIPATION THAT WE MIGHT MOVE
TO VOTE BUT I GUESS IT JUST
SEEMS LIKE TYPICALLY WE QUEUE
UP THE CONVERSATION WHEN WE
PROCEDURALLY MOVE AN AMENDMENT
FOR CONSIDERATION.
>> SINCE THEY ARE BOTH IN
CONFLICT, I ALSO WANTED TO GIVE
A CHANCE FOR FOLKS TO HAVE A
DISCUSSION SINCE THIS IS THE
FIRST TIME WE ARE HAVING IT.
>> OKAY, I'M HAPPY TO DO IT
THAT WAY.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY BUT I
AM TOTALLY HAPPY TO DO IT THAT
WAY.
I GUESS I WILL SPEAK TO SECTION
24 ON THE MERITS RATHER THAN
JUST BACKGROUND NOW.
SO, YOU KNOW, BRINGING THIS
AMENDMENT TODAY IS PARTLY AND
OBVIOUSLY I WANT IT TO PASS BUT
IT IS ALSO IN THE SPIRIT OF
HAVING A BIT MORE OF A
DISCUSSION.
I DID NOT SPEAK ON THE
AMENDMENT LAST WEEK.
IT WAS SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT TO LOWER
THE PAY OF THE EXECUTIVE
LEADERSHIP TEAM IN THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT AND ALL THE WAY
DOWN.
YOU KNOW, IT'S ON THE LOSING
SIDE OF THAT VOTE SO I WANTED
TO BRING IT BACK TO HAVE MORE
OF A DISCUSSION.
IT'S NOT EASY TO BRING IT BACK
BECAUSE I HAVE HAD A
CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF PUBLIC
DISAGREEMENTS WITH CHIEF BEST
AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE POLICE
LEADERSHIP TEAM BUT I DO THINK
IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT AS A
MATTER OF GOOD PUBLIC POLICY TO
HAVE AN APPROACH TO EXECUTIVE
PAY AS WE ARE PUTTING A BUDGET
TOGETHER.
I THINK THE EXECUTIVE PAY NEEDS
TO BE REEVALUATED AND
ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF THE
BUDGET SHORTFALLS THAT WE JUST
GOT AND IT WILL BE A REALLY
DIFFICULT YEAR BUDGET WISE.
I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT
MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE AN
EXECUTIVE PAY STRUCTURE THAT IS
NOT EXCESSIVE IN THE CITY OF
SEATTLE.
I THINK IT HAS TO BE
COMPREHENSIVE.
I DON'T KNOW RIGHT NOW, BRING
MORE ANALYSIS FROM CENTRAL
STAFF WHETHER OR NOT THE
EXECUTIVE PAY OF THE POLICE
LEADERSHIP TEAM IS EXCESSIVE AS
COMPARED TO PARENTS CITIES.
I DON'T KNOW HOW WE STACK UP
RELATIVE TO SAN FRANCISCO OR
DENVER WHERE OTHER CITIES OF A
SIMILAR SIZE.
I ALSO THINK IT SENDS A STRANGE
PRECEDENT TO JUST PICK THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR REDUCING
THE TOP EXECUTIVE BAN WHEN WE
DO HAVE OTHER DEPARTMENTS WITH
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION AND I
WANT TO GIVE CREDIT TO
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT FOR BEING
CONSISTENT AND WANTING TO APPLY
THE SAME APPROACH ACROSS ALL
THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS.
SHE DID BRING AMENDMENTS TO DO
EXACTLY THAT BASED ON HER
ANALYSIS AND HER POLICY
PREFERENCES.
I HAVE RESPECT FOR THAT
CONSISTENCY BUT SINCE I WASN'T
PREPARED TO DO THIS TO EVERY
DEPARTMENT IN THE CITY TO LOWER
IT, I DON'T SEE HOW I COULD IN
GOOD CONSCIENCE APPLY IT JUST
TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
DESPITE HAVING MASSIVE
DISAGREEMENTS RIGHT NOW WITH
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT I
PERSONALLY HAVE.
I DON'T THINK THAT IS
CONSISTENT POLICY AND I THINK
THERE IS A LOT OF COLLATERAL
DAMAGE TO THAT.
IT'S NOT JUST THE CHIEF OR THE
SWORN TOP COMMAND STAFF BUT
ALSO CIVILIAN STAFF THAT HAVE
BEEN EXTREMELY HELPFUL TO THIS
COUNCIL IN DEVELOPING ARE VERY
INTENTIONAL AND DETAILED PLANS
ABOUT HOW WE WILL RESTRUCTURE
PUBLIC SAFETY IN THE CITY.
AND SO SO SHE HAS PROVIDED US
ALL OF THE INFORMATION THE
COUNCIL HAS REQUESTED AND DR.
CHRIS FISCHER WHO IS PRESENTED
AT THIS COUNCIL WITH THE NUMBER
ONE ANALYSIS AND ALL THE
DETAILS WE HAVE REQUESTED AS
TO THE BUDGET, THEIR PAY IS
GETTING CUT BY THIS AMENDMENT
AND I CAN'T SAY THAT I HAVE
SEEN ANYTHING DELINQUENT IN
THEIR PERFORMANCE IN RESPONDING
TO OUR REQUEST WITH CANDOR AND
A QUICK AND DELIBERATE WAY.
I DON'T SEE WHY THE BUDGET
DIRECTOR OF SPD SHOULD BE
TREATED DIFFERENTLY THAN THE
BUDGET DIRECTORS OF SEATTLE
CITY LIGHT OR SPU OR OTHER
PLACES THAT WE ARE DETERMINED
TO BE EXCESSIVE.
IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A
CONSISTENT POLICY AND I DON'T
SEE WHY THEY SHOULD WANT
REDUCTIONS IN THEIR PAY WHEN I
DON'T KNOW IF IT IS EXCESSIVE
OR NOT A POLICY BEING
CONSISTENTLY APPLIED.
I THINK WE SHOULD BE EXPLORING
IN ADDITION TO THE PAY, EVEN
MORE WAYS TO HOLD EXECUTIVE
OFFICIALS ACCOUNTABLE.
THE CHIEF DOES NOT COME UP FOR
RECONFIRMATION SO WE SHOULD
MAYBE EXPLORE HAVING THE CHIEF
OF POLICE COME BEFORE THE
COUNCIL FOR RECONFIRMATION LIKE
OTHER DEPARTMENT HEADS DO.
THERE SHOULD POTENTIAL BE
CONFIRMATION FOR DEPUTY AND
ASSISTANT CHIEF LEVEL
OFFICIALS.
TO BE ABLE TO BETTER HOLD
ACCOUNTABLE FOLKS THAT ARE IN
THOSE POSITIONS WITH
CONSIDERABLE EXECUTIVE
AUTHORITY.
IN MANY CASES, DEPUTY DIRECTORS
BECOME INTERIM DIRECTORS FOR A
LONG PERIOD OF TIME SO I THINK
IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO EXPAND
THE NUMBER OF OFFICIALS THAT
COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL FOR
THAT CONSIDERATION.
AS IT STANDS, I DON'T THINK
THIS IS AN APPLICATION OF
CONSISTENT POLICY AND WHAT I
WOULD LIKE TO SEE US DO IS TAKE
ON EXECUTIVE PAY BROADLY AS A
PROJECT IN THE BUDGET COMMITTEE
IN THE FALL AND LOOK INTO HOW
TO BUILD A CONSISTENT POLICY
THROUGH ALL EXECUTIVE
DEPARTMENTS THAT THOSE CUTS AND
REDUCTIONS BE PHASED IN OUT OF
CONSIDERATION AND IN FAIRNESS
FOR SOME OF THESE FOLKS, THEY
WERE OFFERED THIS POSITION AND
PRESUMABLY HAD OTHER POSITIONS
THEY COULD'VE ACCEPTED AND TO
QUICKLY REDUCE THE PAY OF ONE
LEADERSHIP TEAM IN THE CITY
DOES NOT SEEM LIKE A CONSISTENT
POLICY.
I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK INTO
THIS ACROSS ALL DEPARTMENTS AND
I'M BRINGING THIS FORWARD
BECAUSE I WANTED TO SAY MY
PIECE ON THIS AND IF THIS
AMENDMENT IS NOT SUCCESSFUL, I
THINK THE MODIFICATION OF
SECTION 24 THAT I COSPONSORED
WITH COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD AND
COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ
ACCOMPLISHES SOME SIMILAR
POLICY GOALS BUT I WORRY ABOUT
THE PRECEDENT THAT WE ARE
SETTING AND I JUST BROUGHT THIS
FORWARD SO WE CAN HAVE THIS
CONVERSATION.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO SPEAK AGAIN?
>> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE A
POINT OF ORDER.
>> WHAT IS YOUR POINT OF ORDER?
>> I WOULD JUST LIKE THE CLERK
TO ADVISE US BECAUSE I'M NOT
SURE THAT IF A COUNCILMEMBER
VOTED NO AND THE NO SIDE LOST
IN COMMITTEE BEFORE, I'M NOT
SURE IF COUNCILMEMBERS COULD
ALLOW THOSE NO VOTES.
WE PASSED THIS AMENDMENT 6-3 ON
THE BUDGET COMMITTEE LAST WEEK
AND COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS WAS ONE
OF THE NO VOTES.
I QUESTION TO THE CLERK IS, IS
THE COUNSELOR WERE ALLOWED TO
BRING IT BACK IN THE BUDGET
COMMITTEE?
I THINK IT CAN BE RAISED IN THE
FULL CITY COUNCIL THIS
AFTERNOON BUT IN MY
UNDERSTANDING THAT IT CANNOT
COME AGAIN, I MIGHT BE WRONG
ABOUT THAT.
THANK YOU.
>> MADAME CLERK, DO YOU HAVE A
QUICK ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION
SEVEN INITIALLY A QUICK ANSWER
BECAUSE I'M NOT COMPLETELY FILE
WITH THE POLICY LANGUAGE AND
WHETHER OR NOT IT HAS ALREADY
BEEN VOTED ON.
I WILL HAVE TO VERIFY THAT BUT
IF THE MEMBER WAS ALREADY
CONSIDERED AND IT PASSED, THE
ONLY WAY YOU COULD RECONSIDER
IT IS IF SOMEONE MOVED TO
RECONSIDER THAT IF IT DID
PREVAIL AT THE MEETING.
AT THIS POINT, IF SOMEONE DID
WANT TO RECONSIDER THE
AMENDMENT, YOU HAVE
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS CEMENTED
BEFORE YOU AND THAT WOULD BE
THE NEXT STEP THAT WOULD NEED
TO HAPPEN.
>> ALLIE, I SAW YOU TAKE
YOURSELF OFF MUTE AND THAT I
WANT TO RETURN TO COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD.
>> THE LANGUAGE IN AMENDMENT B
AND SECTION 24 WAS CONSIDERED
BY THIS COMMITTEE LAST WEEK AND
IT WAS THE PROPOSAL TO STRIKE
THE AMENDMENT.
IF I AM FOLLOWING AND MILLIONS
OF EYES PROPERLY, I THINK WHAT
WOULD NEED TO HAPPEN IS IF ANY
COUNCILMEMBER THAT VOTED YES
FOR THE AMENDMENT THAT ADDED
SECTION 24 LAST WEEK WOULD LIKE
TO CEMENTED TO BE RECONSIDERED,
YOU NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO
RECONSIDER AND THEN YOU COULD
MOVE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
IS THAT CORRECT, AMELIA?
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> WE WILL LET COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD SPEAK BECAUSE I THINK
IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE THIS
DISCUSSION ABOUT THE TWO
OPTIONS IN FRONT OF US AND IF
THEY WERE TO BE SOMEONE THAT
WANTED TO SEE AMENDMENT BE-1
ADVANCE, IT WOULD NEED TO BE SO
THAT WAS VOTING ON THE
PREVAILING SIDE LAST TIME AND
THAT WOULD BE SO IN THE VOTED
FOR THE LANGUAGE IN SECTION 24.
JUST TO HAVE A ROBUST ROUND
OUT, COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD,
WOULD YOU LIKE TO PROVIDE THE
INFORMATION IN THE-2.
>> THANK YOU.
I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
ADDRESS THIS AMENDMENT AND TO
SAY FOR MYSELF THAT SOMEONE WHO
WAS ON THE PREVAILING SIDE OF
THE VOTE ON THE CERAMIC, I FEEL
IN RETROSPECT THAT I MADE AN
ERROR AND I DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH
INFORMATION ABOUT THE IMPACT OF
THIS VOTE AS IT RELATES TO THE
POLICE CHIEF SALARY.
I APPRECIATE THAT WE ARE ALL
TRYING TO DO A LOT TO ADDRESS
MANY NEEDS WAS VERY COMPRESSED
TIME TO MAKE DECISIONS AND
COLLECT INFORMATION TO MAKE
SURE THAT OUR DECISIONS REFLECT
A FULL UNDERSTANDING OF THAT
INFORMATION.
I FOR COMMAND PAY CAB WITHOUT
UNDERSTANDING THAT IN DOING SO
WOULD RESULT IN THIS COUNCIL
SAYING THAT THE CHIEF OF POLICE
SHOULD BE THE SECOND LOWEST
COMPENSATED DEPARTMENT
DIRECTOR IN THE CITY DESPITE
HAVING THE LARGEST STAFF OF ANY
DEPARTMENT IN THE CITY.
I LEARNED THAT BECAUSE AFTER
VOTING ON THE AMENDMENT LAST
WEEK, I REQUESTED INFORMATION
THAT SHOWED THE HOURLY RATE OF
EVERY DEPARTMENT AND DIRECTOR
IN THE CITY AND WHAT THE HOURLY
RATE TRANSLATED TO ANY SALARY.
I VOTED FOR SALARY CUTS TO
REDUCE SALARIES IN THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT.
JUST ONE OF SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS
WITH OUTSIDE SALARIES AS
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS REMINDS US.
AND, COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT HAS
CONSISTENTLY REMINDED US.
I ALSO VOTED FOR THE SALARY
CUTS TO SUPPORT THE EFFORTS TO
SPECIFICALLY REDUCE THE SIZE OF
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BUT ALSO
TO CONVEY MINE AND THE PUBLIC'S
DEEP DISSATISFACTION WITH
POLICING LEADERSHIP OF THE LAST
TWO MONTHS.
AS COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS
MENTIONED, WE HAVE VERY LITTLE
ACCOUNTABILITY OVER THE POLICE
CHIEF AND THIS POSITION IS ONE
OF FEW THAT DOES NOT FACE
RECONFIRMATION.
THERE WAS A PRIOR ATTEMPT
AROUND 2008 TO PROPOSE A
CHARTER AMENDMENT TO CORRECT
THAT AND PROPOSED BY NICK AND
REQUIRED THE POLICE CHIEF TO
COME UP FOR RECONFIRMATION.
I FEEL LIKE OUR VOTE IS TO CUT
THE CHIEF SALARY BY 40% OR MORE
THAN 40% AND THAT PUTS THE
BLACK WOMAN THAT HAD TO FIGHT
THROUGHOUT HER CAREER INCLUDING
DURING THE PERIOD OF TIME WHEN
SHE WAS NOT SELECTED BY THE
MAYOR'S CHIEF SELECTION TEAM.
SHE HAS HAD DISCRETION
THROUGHOUT HER CAREER AND OUR
ACTION AGAIN WOULD PAY HER AT A
LOWER LEVEL THAN ALMOST ALL
OTHER DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS, ALL
EXCEPT FOR ONE.
I DON'T WANT THIS COUNCIL TO
COMPOUND THAT PAST REALITY BY
ALLOCATING WAGES AWAY THAT
RESULTS IN A MASSIVE CUT IN A
NONTRADITIONAL SECTOR.
THIS WOULD REDUCE THE CHIEF
SALARY TO $275,000 A YEAR
INSTEAD OF HOW WE VOTED LAST
NIGHT WHICH IS $180,000 A YEAR.
AND CURRENTLY HAS A SOLID OF
$290,000 A YEAR.
IT'S CURRENTLY THE THIRD
HIGHEST APARTMENT IN THE CITY
BUT MOVING HER TO THE LOWEST
WOULD MEAN THAT THE SECOND
LOWEST PAID DEPARTMENT HEAD
DESPITE MANAGING NEARLY 2200
FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES AS COMPARED
TO 65 FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES IN
THE DEPARTMENT OF
NEIGHBORHOODS.
NOT ONLY DOES THE CHIEF MANAGE
THE LARGEST DEPARTMENT IN TERMS
OF FTE, AGAIN, IT IS IMPORTANT
TO GET THE BACKGROUND AROUND
THE NATIONAL SEARCH BEING
PASSED OVER BY THE MAYOR
SELECTION TEAM AND THE FACT
THAT THE COMMUNITY RALLIED TO
HER CAUSE.
>> OKAY.
>> JUST A COUPLE MORE THINGS
AND I WANT TO SAY TO THE FOLKS
THAT MIGHT SAY THAT IT WAS OUR
SUPPORT THAT HELPED MAKE HER
BECOME THE POLICE CHIEF, WE
DON'T CARE WITH LAST WEEK'S
VOTE, THIS MAY BE AN ACT OF
DISRESPECT TO THE BLACK WOMAN
LEADER AND THE REASON THOSE
FOLKS MIGHT NOT CARE IS BECAUSE
THEY FEEL AND NOT ONLY DO THEY
FEEL THEY HAVE BEEN RESPECTED
OR DISRESPECTED THEMSELVES WITH
MISPLACING INNER-CITY BUT I'M
SAYING I'M PROPOSING IS NOT
ONLY OUT OF MY SENSE OF
FAIRNESS THAT I UNDERSTAND YOU
HAVE NOT EXPERIENCED AT THE
HANDS OF POLICE BUT ALSO FROM A
CONCERN AND I WANT THE FACT
THAT THE CITY COUNCIL VOTED TO
REDUCE THE CHIEFS SALARY TO THE
SALARY OF THE DEPARTMENT WITH
FAR FEWER STAFF TO BECOME THE
HEADLINE.
A HEADLINE THAT WILL BE
CONVOLUTED AND MIXED UP WITH
THE MOVEMENT TO DEFUND POLICING
AND SEATTLE AND DISTRACT US
FROM FOLLOWING THROUGH ON
TRANSFORMING POLICING AND
SUPPORTING COMMUNITY BASED
ALTERNATIVES TO PUBLIC SAFETY.
>> I DO WANT TO MOVE US ALONG
AND HAVING VOTED ON THE
PREVAILING SIDE, ORGANIZING
THESE ISSUES ARE IMPORTANT AND
I THINK IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT
TO TALK ABOUT THE INSTITUTION
IN FRONT OF US AND JUST TO MOVE
THE CONVERSATIONS ALONG, I MOVE
THAT WE MOVE BE-2. IS THERE A
SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
DISCUSSION.
>> I JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE
THAT I TOTALLY RESPECT THE
RULES ON THE ABLE TO MOVE BE-1
AND I APPRECIATE BEING ABLE TO
SAY MY PIECE ON THIS AND I
CERTAINLY SUPPORT THE PASSAGE
OF THE-2.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
I SEE THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> I JUST WANT TO STRONGLY
SIGNAL MY COMMITMENT TO DOING
THE WORK THAT COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS DESCRIBED IN HIS ARGUMENT
FOR A MOMENT BE-1 WHICH IS NOT
BEING MOVED CURRENTLY.
I DO THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR
US IN DUE HASTE OVER THE FALL
BUDGET SESSION THAT WOULD YOU
TAKE A LOOK MORE GLOBALLY AT
SALARIES ACROSS THE BOARD.
WE ARE HEADED TOWARDS EVEN MORE
DIFFICULT THAN WE THOUGHT
ECONOMIC TIMES AND IT DOES MAKE
SENSE FOR US TO DO AN
EVALUATION OF THAT ASPECT.
I DO APPRECIATE THE
CONVERSATION AND I CERTAINLY
APPRECIATE THE HIGHLIGHTING TO
DO THIS IN A MORE HOLISTIC WAY
AND I WANT TO SIGNAL MY
INTEREST AND SUPPORT IN MAKING
SURE THAT THE COUNCIL DOES NOT
LOSE SIGHT OF THAT PENDING BODY
OF WORK.
I WILL BE SUPPORTING BE-2 AS
ONE OF THE SPONSORS AND I LOOK
FORWARD TO FIGURING OUT HOW TO
CHART A PATH FORWARD AS
DESCRIBED BY COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS ON THE BROADER ISSUES
THAT HE IDENTIFIED IN HIS
ARGUMENT.
>> THANK YOU.
I'M SORRY, DAN, DID YOU HAVE
SOMETHING YOU NEEDED TO SPEAK
ON?
>> I THINK WHAT YOU WILL WANT
TO DO IS HAVE B MOVED AND THAT
WOULD INTRODUCE A SERIES OF
TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS AND THEN
CONSIDER THE-2 OR BE-1,
WHICHEVER ONE YOU WOULD WANT TO
CONSIDER AS AN AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU.
WE WILL GET TO THAT PROCESS IN
JUST A SECOND.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT BE-
2 IS INCLUSIVE OF AMENDMENT B.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO MOVE
AMENDMENT B AND THEN AMENDMENT
BE-2 BUT PERHAPS ALLIE IS THE
ONE THAT MAY HAVE DRAFTED THIS
OR PERHAPS IT WAS KARINA.
IF YOU COULD CONFIRM THAT BE-2
IS INCLUSIVE OF AMENDMENT B,
THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL AND MAYBE
WE CAN GET THAT PROCEDURE.
>> THAT IS CORRECT, AMENDMENT
BE-2 INCLUDES THE SAME
INFORMATION AS AMENDMENT B BUT
FURTHER MODIFIES SECTION 24.
>> ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD?
>> CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT WE CAN
CONSIDER THAT WE DO NOT HAVE
TO MOVE AMENDMENT B AND CAN
JUST MOVE BE-2 SINCE IT IS
INCLUSIVE?
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
ONLY AMENDMENT BE-2 NEEDS TO BE
CONSIDERED.
>> EXI.
WE ARE ON TRACK.
BE-2 HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED AND WE HAD ROBUST
CONVERSATION.
WE HAVE COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT
AND COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN
NEXT.
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT?
>> THANK YOU, JUST TO CLARIFY
FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, I
JUST WANT TO LET EVERYONE KNOW
THAT THIS AMENDMENT, BE-2 IS A
DIFFERENT AMENDMENT THEN BE-1
SO THEY COULD BE ON EITHER SIDE
ON ONE SAY AND INCIDENTALLY IT
HAS BEEN MOVED BY THE COUNCIL
MEMBER ON THE PREVAILING SIDE
SO JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT
EVERYONE KNOWS WE ARE BEING
CONSISTENT.
OUR PEOPLE'S BUDGET MOVEMENT
AND MY OFFICE'S PROPOSAL TO
REDUCE THE PAY OF THE COMMAND
STAFF IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT
WOULD SAVE $375,000 WHICH COULD
BE DIRECTED TO URGENT COMMUNITY
NEEDS ESPECIALLY THE WORKING-
CLASS COMMUNITIES AND I AM
OPPOSES THE MEMO BECAUSE IT
REDUCES THE PAY LIMITATION THAT
NEEDS TO BE DONE FOR THE PAY OF
ONE OF THOSE 13 COMMAND STAFF
AND THE POLICE CHIEF.
OUR PROPOSAL TO CUT PAY IS
NOTHING PERSONAL AGAINST ANY OF
THE STAFF INCLUDING CHIEF BEST.
WHAT WE OBJECT TO IS THE PAY OF
THESE EXECUTIVES.
NINE OF THEM ARE PAID MORE THAN
ALL OF THE 50 STATE GOVERNORS
IN THE UNITED STATES.
A RECENT NATIONAL SURVEY OF
MAJOR CITY POLICE CHIEF
SALARIES PUT CHIEF BEST PAY AT
45% ABOVE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE
OF MAJOR CITY POLICE CHIEF
SALARIES.
A REPORT SHOWED THAT THE
AVERAGE MAJOR CITY POLICE CHIEF
WAS PAID A TOTAL OF $203,000 IN
TOTAL COMPENSATION.
THE PROPOSED REDUCTION WOULD
LEAVE -- AT THIS MOMENT PASSES,
IT WOULD LEAVE THE SALARY AT
$235,000 A YEAR FOR THE
REMAINDER OF THE YEAR AND WELL
ABOVE THE AVERAGE FOR MAJOR
CITY POLICE CHIEFS.
THIS IS SIMPLY A MATTER OF
TAKING THE MOMENT THAT WE
BROUGHT FORWARD THAT SIX
COUNSELORS WITH YOUR SON AND A
MATTER OF TAKING RESOURCES OF
WHERE THEY ARE NOT BEING USED
EFFECTIVELY AND ARE BEING
WASTED BECAUSE ON BALANCE AND
TAKING IT AWAY FROM THOSE
PROBLEMATIC FUNCTIONS TO FUND
URGENT COMMUNITY NEEDS.
AND IT IS SHOCKING THAT WHILE
WORKING PEOPLE ARE STRUGGLING
TO PAY RENT AND TO PUT FOOD ON
THE TABLE AND KEEPS IT, THE
COUNCIL SPENT TIME DEBATING
WHETHER OR NOT IT IS RIGHT TO
REVIEW SOME OF THE SALARIES.
NOT THAT IT IS NOT ACCURATE TO
SAY THAT SHE BEST WOULD BE PAID
LOWER THAN OTHER DEPARTMENT
HEADS.
THE MOMENT THAT PASSED FOR THE
LAST FOUR MONTHS OF 2020, IT
WOULD MOVE HER PAIN FROM
$294,000 TO $258,000.
THEN, ON JANUARY 1, THE ANNUAL
PAY WOULD SNAP BACK TO THE
ORIGINAL EXTREMELY HIGH LEVEL
IN THE ABSENCE OF THE
I find it unfortunate that they
are using consistency as a
reason to have brought these
amendments forward.
Be one is not be considered
right now because if you want
to be consistent then I will be
willing to bring the amendment
voted no on which is -- you
said he would not support which
is to reduce the salaries of all
executives and that way you
could be consistent.
I don't believe allowing the
voter salary to be consistent.
I also find it unfortunate that
councilmembers are using
identity to justify limiting
chief bested voted salary.
It is black community members
who are the most impacted by
police violence and not holding
police officers accountable and
having a police budget when the
most urgent needs of our
community are being
underfunded.
We have chronic underfunding of
social needs the people who are
negatively impacted our black
and brown community members.
On the basis of identity we
cannot be justified in
perpetuating police violence
against protesters and black
and brown community members.
Cannot be absolved with former
councilmember Harold his
actions in allowing police
violence to continue and voting
yes on a racist police contract
two years ago and he was in
office cannot be absolved.
We have to hold our actions to
what benefits the vast majority
of the black community.
That's the best way to stand
and only way to stand in
solidarity with black and brown
community members.
I would remind members of the
public in response to the black
communities urging, I voted yes
on chief [Indiscernible]'s
appointment.
I was not expecting she would
be able to bring any change to
policing in terms of the
violence, excessive use of
force, killings that are
happening at our communities of
color at the hands of police.
I said it's not the fault of
any one person and would not
hold her alone responsible.
I did say for her to use her
position to bring about a
change in the status quote
would require her to fight
against the entire
establishment and from personal
experience I know what that
takes.
If she's willing to do it I
will be fighting on her side.
Along side her but I wasn't
expecting it.
Here we are and unfortunately
the words I said at that time
have been proved
[Indiscernible].
I don't want it that way but it
is.
I will say it is important the
Council take a different
position than voting yes on
those amendments.
I would ask, what has changed
since Wednesday when six of the
nine counsel voted to cap a
speedy executive pay.
All paid for than most vast
majority of other workers in
this city.
They have lost the trust of the
public and the public is
demanding something be done.
This is the same counsel that
has refused to the fund the
police and now if you go back
this by allowing the chief
salary not to be limited in the
way it is to be limited then
the people will know which side
the Council is on.
The police department has
gasped the people of Seattle.
Executives do not need to be
paid $200,000 or $300,000 to
tear as people on the street
and light about it.
>> We need to continue with our
conversation and the other
amendments.
Councilman Peterson to
Representative this up.
>> I'm ready to vote.
>> Sink no additional comments
Madame clerk, please call the
role on amendment B 2. [Roll
call]
>> Five in favor, two of them
post, one abstain.
>> The motion carries.
We have a handful of other
amendments. I will ask you to
be brief in your descriptions
of those amendments so we can
get through this.
We've had robust conversations
but we have a handful of
amendments including a few that
was walk on this one.
Let's get to the next amendment.
Receipt we have amendment 52
but there's also version 3
brick is it your intent to have
version 3 discussed instead of
the 52 as it stands alone?
>> Yes.
>> Let's have Allie read the
summary of amendment 52 version
3 and then turn it to you to
move.
>> Amendment 52 sponsored by
the councilmember imposes on
the Seattle Police Department
to prohibit spending any funds
to prosecute individuals for
actions taken during the
justice for George Floyd
protest.
This applies to any protest
that began after May 25, 2020.
I would reiterate that you want
to move this version and
discuss.
>> Return to you councilmember.
>> I move to amend -- adopt the
new amendment number 52 which
is 52 version 3 which was
circulated to cuts members
prior to the meeting today.
It's only different from the
published amendment is the
addition of a date.
None of the money appropriated
in the 2020 budget for the
Seattle Police Department may
be used directly or through
contract to support the
prosecution of individuals or
actions taken while
participating in justice for
George Floyd protest.
>> Is been moved. Is there a
second?
Here no second.
Thank you.
Let's move onto the next
amendment.
Amendment 56.
We have two potential
amendments as well.
I will ask that alley he
provides a summary of what's in
the base of amendment 56 and
intentionally it looks like
competing amendments on version
2 and 50 6A.
>> I will describe 56.
This is 56 A is additive.
Is not in competition.
I will suggest I will describe
it, you move version 2 of
amendment 56 and Councilman
Peterson his the sponsor of 50
6A can move amend and add what
I will describe.
Amendment 56 is posted to the
agenda.
It would add sections
requesting reports from the
executive.
These reports were included in
three separate revises is
adopted by the community.
What was posted to the agenda
did not include the striking of
those revises.
Version 2 that was distributed
this morning except technical
correction to first strike the
provisos and add the new
sections were questing there's
three reports.
Version 56 H sponsored by
Councilman Peterson retains all
of that and as a fourth report
requesting information on the
impacts of these budget
reflections that are reflected
in counsel Bill 119 E25 so
counsel has additional
information in informing the 20
-- 21 budget.
>> Can you put the chart on the
screen so we can see those
numbers.
Not in conflict but added.
Would you like to move 56
version 2?
>> I move amendment 56 version
2. I want to note that
councilmember Strauss is the
prime sponsor I'm happy to move
it but I prefer he speaks to
it.
>> Is there a second?
>> Second.
>> Now let's discuss this.
>> These are the two provisos
we discussed last week. Senior
text about moving a. Thank you
for that note.
Went to speak to two these
provisos which has the plan for
civilizing or removing certain
functions from the SPD there's
South Police Department that
could be better executed out of
the chain of command or in a
different city department.
These reports must include
staffing analysis with regard
to what is funded and funding
is needed to support these
functions for the remainder
2020 and 2021.
The deadline for this report --
first report coincides when the
mayor would support her budget
proposal to city Council and
ensures her office appropriate
thought to revision community
safety concurrent with their
offices budget deliberations.
My office has laid out those
areas of SPD's operations which
should be considered for full
civilianization and or removal
to in different independent
department by Bureau and
specific unit.
To move a more effective and
efficient model community
safety, we must have
deliberation and justification
with regard to rightsizing SPD.
This first report is an
important starting point.
It's not the end point for a
community based long-term
approach.
I am hearing some feedback noise
.
>> I can hear you well.
I hear some clicking but I can
hear you.
>> I'm wondering if that may be
coming from one of the clerks.
I will speak to the other
reporting requirements held
within this proviso.
It is to foster greater real-
time accountability of spending
in the city's largest
department the mental budget.
I am here in clicking from one
of the clerks or IT.
Wanting to note.
>> Please meet.
>> The clerks to amazing work
keeping is fully functional.
I want to thank the clerks.
THE SECOND REPORTING ASPECT OF
THIS PROVISO GIVES -- HELPS THE
CITY IDENTIFY FISCAL SHORTFALLS
WITHIN THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT.
POTENTIAL ISSUES WITH THE
SPENDING YEAR TO DATE.
WE UNDERSTAND THEY RAN THROUGH
THEIR OVERTIME BUDGET AT THE
BEGINNING OF JUNE AND HAVE USED
MANY OVERTIME HOURS SINCE THEN
SO THIS IS ONE WAY TO ENSURE WE
DON'T RUN INTO THOSE SIMILAR
PROBLEMS FOR THE REST OF THE
YEAR.
THIS WILL REQUIRE THE EXECUTIVE
TO REPORT EVERY OTHER WEEK
REGARDING ONGOING 2020
EXPENDITURES AND KEY AREAS OF
INTEREST SUCH AS GRANTS,
CONTRACTS, PERSONNEL CONTRACTS,
TRAINING AND TRAVEL AND
OVERTIME.
THIS REGULAR SNAPSHOT EVERY
OTHER WEEK FROM SPD SPENDING
WILL INFORM COUNSEL'S DECISION
WITH REGARD TO NEXT YEAR'S
BUDGET AND HOW TO TRANSITION
CERTAIN FUNCTIONS OUTSIDE OF
SPD.
THE REPORT SHOULD INCLUDE YEAR-
TO-DATE TOTALS AND PERCENTAGES
AND AFTER THE REPORT CHANGES
FROM PRIOR TO REPORT THE TOTALS
AND PERCENTAGES AS WELL.
IT ALLOWS US TO GAUGE THE
AMOUNTS OF 2020 SPENDING.
IT WILL FLAG THE PUBLIC AND
COUNSEL WHICH AREAS MAY BE IN
DANGER OF BEING OVERSPENT
BEFORE SPENDING TAKES PLACE.
THIS COMPELS THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT TO REPORT ANNUAL
EXPENDITURES SINCE 2010.
THESE OF THE PARTS THAT
COUNCILMEMBER WAS HELPFUL WITH.
OUTSIDE LEGAL REPRESENTATION,
FOR OFFICERS.
ALSO INFORMATION THE TYPES OF
CLAIMS WHETHER THERE'S A
PATTERN OF CLAIMS MADE AGAINST
THE SAME OFFICER AND THE
CLAIMANT FOR EACH ACTION
BROUGHT AGAINST THE CITY.
WE CAN CHART A COURSE OF BIAS
POLICING IF WE TAKE STOCK HOW
THE SPD HAS PERFORMED IN THE
PAST AND THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY
PRESIDENT TO GET THEIR
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AGAINST
THE CITY.
SPD WILL BE REQUIRED TO DETAIL
ITS EXPENDITURES IN 2020 THUS
FAR ON WEAPONS.
THE SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT
WILL BE REQUIRED TO DISCLOSE
DESCRIPTIONS, AMOUNTS OF ALL
FEDERAL GRANTS RECEIVED TWO
PRESENT.
THESE REPORTS ARE SO IMPORTANT
BECAUSE THEY PROVIDE FURTHER
TRANSPARENCY REGARDING THE
PRIORITIES AND SPENDING OF THE
DEPARTMENT AND HELP US CHART A
COURSE INTO 2021 THAT'S BASED
ON REAL-TIME AND ACCURATE
INFORMATION.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
WE HAVE A LIMITED TIME FOR US
TODAY.
AND OTHER ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
OR QUESTIONS?
PLEASE GO AHEAD?
.
>> I WANT TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT
TO THE HISTORY OF THIS ITEM AS
ORIGINALLY PROPOSED.
THIS WAS A SPECIFIC REQUEST FOR
THESE PARTICULAR RECORDING
REQUIREMENTS FROM DECRIMINALIZE
SEATTLE AND [INDISCERNIBLE]
NOW.
I HAD REQUESTED THESE REPORTING
REQUESTS BE INCLUDED IN THE
RESOLUTION THAT MYSELF AND
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS WERE
SPONSORING. CRIMINALIZED
SEATTLE AND -- ASK FOR MORE
TEETH THAN A RESOLUTION.
WE COLLABORATED TO INCLUDE THEM
WITHIN A PROPOSAL HE WAS
DEVELOPING FOR PROVISO THAT
WOULD REQUIRE MONTHLY REPORTING
ON A SUBSET OF THESE DATA
POINTS.
MY INTEREST IN TRANSPARENCY HERE
IS TO HIGHLIGHT THAT THERE ARE
A LOT OF STRUCTURAL IMPEDIMENTS
TO DOING THE THINGS THAT
COMMUNITY WANTS US TO DO.
WE MOVED TOWARD A PROVISO THAT
WHAT REQUIRE MONTHLY REPORTING
AND WE THROUGH CONVERSATIONS
WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT AND OUR
COLLEAGUES FOUND THAT A PROVISO
ON THE ENTIRE DIPPER IT'S BUDGET
THROUGH THE END OF THE YEAR IN
EXCHANGE MONTHLY REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS WAS NOT SOMETHING
THAT WAS LAMENTABLE.
WE ARE BACK TO MAKING A
STATEMENT ABOUT THE INFORMATION
THAT WE WANT TO RECEIVE.
I APPRECIATE THAT WE ARE TYING
IT TO THE MAYOR'S PROPOSED 2020/
2021 BUDGET.
THE MEMBERS OF THE VIEWING
PUBLIC WHO THOUGHT WE WANT A
DIFFERENT DIRECTION I WANTED TO
EXPLAIN WHY THAT IS.
>> THANK YOU.
WE HAVE AMENDMENT 56 VERSION 2
THAT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
DISCUSSED.
WE HAVE AND AMENDMENT TO THAT.
COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, I WILL
ASK YOU TO MOVE YOUR AMENDMENT
TO MAKE SURE WE GET THAT PIECE
INCLUDED BEFORE ANY FUTURE
DISCUSSION.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE TO
REPLACE AMENDMENT 56 WITH
AMENDMENT 56 A. THAT WOULD ADD
A FOURTH REPORT TO WHAT WE ARE
EXPECTING THE EXECUTIVE TO
REPORT BACK TO US ON.
>> YOU WANT TO AMEND 56 VERSION
2 WITH 56 A, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> CORRECT.
>> IS BEEN MOVED.
IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> HANSELMAN PETERSON WOULD YOU
LIKE TO AMENDMENT 56 VERSION 2.
>> 56 K IS EVERYTHING THAT WAS
IN THE PREVIOUS AMENDMENT AND
ADDS A REPORT THAT WE WOULD
LIKE TO SEE.
AS I MENTIONED LAST WEDNESDAY
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD HAVE OUR
POLICE CHIEF SENT AN ADDITIONAL
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL HOW OUR
BUDGET REDUCTIONS WILL IMPACT
POLICE DEPLOYMENT AND RESPONSE
TIMES.
IN ADDITION TO CIVILIANIZATION,
EXPENDITURES AND SALARIES IT
WOULD BE ABOUT REDEPLOYMENT.
THAT WILL PROVIDE A FULLER
PICTURE TO THE PUBLIC.
THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONCERN
EXPRESSED IN THE PUBLIC IF WE
ARE GOING TO REALLOCATE
SUBSTANTIAL DOLLARS IF THERE IS
GOING TO BE A CHANGE IN THE
NUMBER OF OFFICERS, WHAT MADE
THAT IMPACT LOOK LIKE ON THE
GROUND?
THIS WOULD REQUIRE A REPORT ON
THAT. I BELIEVE THAT
ADJUSTMENTS CAN BE MADE IN THIS
ROUND.
ADJUSTMENTS CAN BE MADE SO
RESPONSE TIMES DO NOT GET WORSE
IF WE ARE SENDING OFFICERS
MAINLY TO THE PRIORITY 1 AND 2
CALLS.
THIS AMENDMENT -- COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS HAD SOME IDEAS GETTING
MORE DETAILED. WITH HOPING OUR
HEADSTONE EXPLAINED ON
PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE THE IDEA
IS THAT I WOULD ADD A PHRASE TO
THIS AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL DETAIL.
SPECIFICALLY HOW THE PROPOSED
LAYOFFS WOULD AFFECT GENERALLY
REDEPLOYMENT AND RESPONSE TIMES
RIGHT PRECINCT AND ADD WITH
DETAILS INCLUDING PRIORITY LEVEL
, CRIMINAL VERSUS NONCRIMINAL
INCLUSION OF RATES. FLESHING OUT
THE TYPE OF REPORT WE WOULD
LIKE TO SEE FROM THE EXECUTIVE
ON REDEPLOYMENT AND RESPONSE
TIMES.
>> WE HAVE TWO OPTIONS.
YOU CAN PULL UP THE LANGUAGE.
TELL PATTY WHERE WE CAN PULL
THE LANGUAGE UP TO SEE IT WANT
TO CHECK WITH CENTRAL STAFF. IS
THE LANGUAGE WE HAVE INCLUSIVE
OF THAT AND IS LEGISLATIVE
INTENT BEING EXPRESSED VIA THIS
CALL AND SUFFICIENT IF WE WERE
NOT TO MAKE THAT AMENDMENT IN
WRITING TODAY?
ALLIE?
>> I'M NOT SURE I FOLLOWED THE
QUESTION.
DID COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON
DESCRIBE AN AMENDMENT TO HIS
AMENDMENT?
>> YES.
>> I THINK WE CAN REFLECT --
LIKE VERBALLY AND WE WILL MAKE
SURE IT'S REFLECTED CORRECTLY
THIS AFTERNOON. AMELIA, DO YOU
WANT TO CHIME IN ON ANY MOTIONS
THAT NEED TO BE MADE TO REFLECT
ADDITIONAL CHANGES TO AMENDMENT
56 K THAT WOULD BE MODIFIED AS
DESCRIBED BY COUNCILMEMBER
PETERSON.
>> YOU HAVE YOUR NAME -- HAND UP
.
>> I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS WHAT
YOU'RE GETTING.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS
LANGUAGE IS BEING OFFERED AS AN
AMENDMENT BECAUSE THE SPONSOR
DID NOT GET CONFIRMATION OR WAS
UNAWARE OF THE CONFIRMATION THE
SAME LANGUAGE WAS INCLUDED IN
THE RESOLUTION THAT WE
ADDRESSED EARLIER.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING WE MOVE
FORWARD WITH THIS AMENDMENT.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT -- I CAN
CONFIRM MY STAFF DID SHARE THAT
LANGUAGE WITH COUNCILMAN PETERS
-- PETERSON'S STAFF.
I FEEL THIS IS THE PURGATIVE TO
LANGUAGE THAT MYSELF AND
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS HAVE
VOLUNTARY INCLUDED IN THE
RESOLUTION THAT INCLUDES A LOT
OF REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION.
>> MY HOPE WAS IF THE LANGUAGE
THAT'S INCLUDED IN 56 AND NOW
50 6A, WE HAVE CLARIFIED TO THE
STATEMENTS WE ARE MAKING TO
THIS CAL THIS TYPE OF REQUEST
IS BEING REQUESTED AND IN THE
RESOLUTION WE DO NOT HAVE TO DO
THIS AMENDMENT ON THE DAIS IF
THAT'S ACCEPTABLE TO
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS AND
PETERSON.
JUST TO MAKE SURE WE ARE CLEAR
AS A BODY BUT IT'S BEEN
AFFECTED.
>> THE REASON IT'S WARRANTED IN
BOTH PLACES IS THAT WHAT WE ARE
DOING HERE IS A PROVISO TO A
COUNCIL BILL WHICH HAS AN
IMMEDIACY TO IT AND STRENGTH TO
IT THAT I WOULD PREFER TO HAVE
IT IN BOTH PLACES.
THE MAJORITY OF CONCERNS I'VE
RECEIVED FROM RESIDENTS, IF THE
COUNCIL WILL GO AHEAD WITH
THESE REDUCTIONS, WHAT IS THE
PLAN AND HOW WILL THAT LOOK LIKE
-- HOW WILL THINGS LOOK LIKE ON
THE GROUND?
THIS IS MAKING SURE WE'VE GOT
COUNCILMAN AND RESOLUTION AND
WERE GOING TO GET A BIT FOR ON
WHAT THE IMPACT WILL BE.
>> CAN YOU VERBALLY SUMMARIZE
YOUR AMENDMENT AGAIN?
>> 56 A WHICH IS IN FRONT OF
YOU WOULD BE ADDING A PHRASE TO
PROVIDE MORE DETAIL. WHERE IT
TALKS ABOUT HOW IT WOULD AFFECT
GENERAL REDEPLOYMENT AND
RESPONSE TIME BITE PRECINCT ADS
WITH DETAILS INCLUDING PRIORITY
LEVEL, CRIMINAL VERSUS
NONCRIMINAL INCLUSION RATES.
>> DOES ANYONE ON CENTRAL STAFF
HAVE THAT LANGUAGE IN FRONT OF
THEM?
>> I DO NOT HAVE THAT LANGUAGE
IN FRONT OF ME.
I'M THE DIRECTOR OF THE
AMENDMENT.
I'M TAKING NOTES.
REPEATING IT ONE MORE TIME IS
HELPFUL.
>> I WILL SEND IT TO YOU AS
WELL.
>> I WANT TO MAKE A QUICK NOTE.
I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE HEADS UP
WHEN THIS CAN BE AMENDMENTS
MADE IN COMMITTEE AND THE
CENTRAL STAFF NEEDS TO HAVE THE
INFORMATION IN FRONT OF THEM SO
WE CAN SHOW IT ON THE SCREEN.
THE LACK OF BEING IN PERSON
THIS WOULD BE SENT IN PERSON.
PLEASE REPEAT THE LANGUAGE AND
YOU CAN REPEAT IT BACK TO US.
WE HAVE A HANDFUL OF AMENDMENTS
WE HAVE TO GET THROUGH THIS IS
NOT CONTROVERSIAL AND TRIED TO
FIGURE OUT IF THERE'S A FASTER
WAY TO ACCOMPLISH THIS.
READ THE LANGUAGE YOU WANT TO
ADD WITH DETAILS.
>> ADDING TO 56 A WHICH IS
ALREADY BEFORE US IS ADDITIONAL
DETAIL THAT ANOTHER
COUNCILMEMBER WAS INTERESTED IN
HAVING WHICH I SUPPORT.
>> BEGIN WITH DETAILS.
>> WITH DETAILS INCLUDING
PRIORITY LEVEL, CRIMINAL VERSUS
NONCRIMINAL AND CLOSURE RATES.
>> DID YOU CAPTURE THAT?
>> ONE MOMENT.
>> IF I MAY.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE THE LANGUAGE
FOM COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON FROM
AN EMAIL.
JUST TO BE VERY PRECISE,
INVERSION 56 A THAT WAS
DISTRIBUTED THIS MORNING,
STARTING ON PAGE -- THIS WOULD
BE THE BUDGET REDUCTION IN THE
HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW IT WOULD
BE WHAT'S BEING ADDED TO VERSION
56 A VERBALLY AND WE REFLECT
IT THIS AFTERNOON.
>> THERE IS ALSO THE ADDITION
OF REGARDING THE HARBOR PATROL
THAT IT WOULD SAY TO THE
SEATTLE FIRE DEPARTMENT OR
OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED WE ADD THIS
LANGUAGE TO 56 A. I WILL SECOND
IT.
IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECOND.
ANY ADDITIONAL DEBATE?
COUNCIL PRESIDENT?
>> HAD TO FIGURE HOW TO TOGGLE
BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT SCREENS
RIGHT NOW.
I THINK IN GENERAL UNDERSTAND
WHAT THE SPONSORS INTENT HERE.
I WILL FLAG THAT I AM CONCERNED
ABOUT THE MEETING NATURE OF THE
QUESTION. TO ME SEEMS TO IMPLY
THAT COUNCILS BUDGET ACTIONS
WILL HAVE NEGATIVE RAMIFICATIONS
AND SEEMS TO BE -- THE LANGUAGE
SEEMS TO BE AN INVITATION THERE
COULD BE A PUBLICIZED REPORT TO
THE CITY COUNCIL RELATED TO
QUESTIONS HERE.
I'M FLAGGING I HAVE A CONCERN
ABOUT A QUESTION THAT'S FRAMES.
I MAY BE TO FOCUSED ON THAT.
MY PREFERENCE WOULD HAVE BEEN
THE QUESTION BE MORE FAIRLY
POSED. SIMILAR TO OTHER
QUESTIONS INCLUDING THINGS LIKE
-- FOR EXAMPLE INSTEAD OF
SAYING HOW IT WOULD THE LAYOFFS
AFFECT, INSTEAD DOING IT AS HOW
DOES THE DEPARTMENT INTENT TO
DEPLOY THESE PERSONNEL
MODIFICATIONS AND OR PRIOR TOYS
SIZING -- PRIORITIZING CALLS TO
MAINTAIN RESPONSIVENESS.
I'M FLAGGING I HAVE A CONCERN
RELATED TO THAT FRAMING OF THE
REPORTS. AND MY ANXIETY ABOUT
INVITING A CONCLUSION BEFORE
EVALUATION IS DONE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STROSS?
>> THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
UP.
I WILL ADMIT TO MY COLLEAGUES I
WAS THE ONE GOING BACK AND
FORTH WITH COUNCILMAN PETERSON.
I HAVE EMAILED BACK AGAIN. I'M
WONDERING COUNCILMAN PETERSON
WOULD YOU HAVE INTEREST IN
HOLDING THIS ADDITION AND
REQUIRING A DIFFERENT REPORT
THROUGH THE AUDITOR OR SOMEWHERE
? I KNOW I EMAILED YOU BACK
WITH ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND
MOVING IN A GENERAL DIRECTION
WITH THIS INFORMATION CALLED
OUT IN OTHER PLACES.
I WANTED TO FLOOD THAT QUESTION
FOR YOU.
>> THIS AMENDMENT IS IMPORTANT
FOR ME TO SUPPORT THE COUNCIL
BILL. I WILL STATE FOR THE
RECORD THAT THE INTENT OF THIS
IS NOT TO INVITE ANY REPORT
THAT'S IN BALANCE BUT TO GET AT
THE COURT INFORMATION.
HAPPY TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE
AND SAY HOW IT MAY AFFECT
GENERAL REDEPLOYMENT IF THAT
WOULD HELP.
I WANTED TO STATE PUBLICLY IS
NOT THE INTENT TO ENCOURAGE ANY
REPORTING THAT'S NOT ACCURATE
BUT TO GET TO THE HEART OF
CONCERNS THAT OTHERS MAY HAVE
IN A COMMUNITY THAT CHANGES MAY
IMPACT THINGS.
WE WANT TO HEAR FROM THE CHIEF
MORE.
WE WANT TO HEAR THESE DETAILS
HOW THINGS WILL BE REDEPLOYED
AS WE TRY TO FIND THESE AND
IMPLEMENT THESE REDUCTIONS.
>> IT HAS BEEN AND SECOND AND
IT'S IN FRONT OF US. LET'S GO
AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH
THIS LANGUAGE.
ANY ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION?
COUNCILMAN STRAUSS?
>> THIS IS A QUESTION FOR YOU
CHAIR OR THE CLERKS.
ARE WE MOVING THE LANGUAGE THAT
I HAD IN 56 VERSION 2 OR HAS
THE AT BEEN SUPPLEMENTED --
SUPPLANTED BY 56 A ? COUNCILMAN
PETERSON SPOKE TO CHANGES TO
HIS LANGUAGE.
HOW DOES THAT WORK?
>> IF YOU CAN PULL UP THE
LANGUAGE IN FRONT OF US
REGARDING THE AMENDMENT, THE
MOTION IN FRONT OF US IS MAKING
THIS VERBAL AMENDMENT TO 56 A.
THEN WE WOULD BOAT ON 56 A --
VOTE ON 56 A AS THE SPONSORS
HAVE INDICATED THAT THERE IS
ALIGNMENT WITH THE LANGUAGE
EXCEPT WILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT 56
A. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THIS
LANGUAGE WILL BE ADOPTED FIRST
BEFORE WE CONSIDER THE
UNDERLYING LANGUAGE THAT WAS
DESCRIBED INVERSION 3 WITH THE
ADDITION OF REQUEST.
IS THAT CLEAR?
>> WILL BOAT ON THIS LANGUAGE
FIRST THEN VOTE ON AMENDMENT 56.
>> THE MOTION BEFORE YOU IS TO
AMEND THE VERSION TWO OF 56.
IT WOULD BE AMENDED AS
DESCRIBED IN 56 A ALONG WITH
THIS ADDITIONAL BREACH.
THE FIRST QUESTION IS, DO YOU
WANT TO AMEND THE AMENDMENT
THAT IF THAT PASSES YOU WOULD
VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT AS
AMENDED.
IF IT FAILS YOU WOULD VOTE ON
THE ORIGINAL VERSION 2 OF THE
AMENDMENT THAT WAS MOVED AND
SECOND.
>> CAN YOU PUT THE LANGUAGE ON
THE SCREEN THAT HAS DESCRIBED
AMENDMENT LANGUAGE?
>> THIS IS TO 56 A . AMENDMENT
LANGUAGE, CORRECT?
>> IN THE INTEREST OF US MOVING
ALONG, I WANT TO SPEAK TO THE
FACT THAT I WILL BE SUPPORTING
THIS LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT IS
VERY IMPORTANT TO COUNCILMAN
PETERSON AND IT'S IMPORTANT FOR
US TO MOVE FORWARD TOGETHER AND
I'VE ALREADY AGREED TO
INCLUDING THIS LANGUAGE IN THE
RESOLUTION THAT COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS AND I DISCUSSED EARLIER
IN TODAY'S MEETING.
I STILL BELIEVE IT IS
DUPLICATIVE AND THE EXPLANATION
FOR WHY THE SPONSOR THINKS IT'S
NOT DUPLICATIVE SEEMS TO RELATE
TO A BELIEF THAT 56 IS A
PROVISO.
IT IS NOT A PROVISO.
THAT'S WHAT I SPOKE TO EARLIER
WHEN I EXPLAINED WE COULD NOT
DO A PROVISO ON THE REST OF THE
YEAR'S BUDGET.
IN THE INTEREST OF MOVING US
FORWARD, THIS IS THE SAME THING
WHICH INCLUDED IN THE
RESOLUTION.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO COUNCILMAN
PETERSON AND I WILL BE
SUPPORTING ITS.
>> WITH THAT, MADAME CLERK,
CALLED THE ROLE ON THE AMENDMENT
TO 56 A AS PRESENTED ON THE
SCREEN AND HIGHLIGHTED IN
YELLOW.
[ROLL CALL]
>> SIX IN FAVOR TWO ABSTAIN.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES AND THE
AMENDMENT TO 56 A IS ADOPTED.
NOT IN FRONT OF IT IS 56 A
AMENDMENT AS AMENDED.
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
SING NONE, MADAME CLERK CALLED
THE ROLE ON 56 A AS AMENDED.
>> [ROLL CALL]
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, THREE
ABSTAIN.
>> THANK YOU ADAM CLERK.
THE MOTION CARRIES AND THE
AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED.
56 A IS INCLUDED.
I SEE WE HAVE ABOUT 15 MINUTES
LEFT.
THAT GIVES US ABOUT 3 TO 4
MINUTES FOR EACH ITEM.
I BELIEVE WE CAN GET THROUGH
THIS IF WE CAN DO THIS WITH
EXPEDIENCY.
AFTER THESE AMENDMENTS THE
OTHER ITEMS ARE VERY
UNCONTROVERSIAL.
WITH HAD LITTLE DEBATE -- I'M
SORRY DISAGREEMENT ON THESE.
LET'S GET TO THESE NEXT FEW
AMENDMENTS.
GO AHEAD ALLEY.
>> AMENDMENT 57 SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER STROSS ADDING TO
MAKE NEW POSITIONS IN THE 911
CENTER AND REQUEST THE MAYOR
INCLUDES FUNDING FOR THESE
POSITIONS IN THE 2021 BUDGET.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STROSS, YOU
WANT TO MOVE THIS AMENDMENT?
>> I MOVED AMENDMENT 57 TWO THE
COUNCIL BILL.
>> IS THERE A SECOND?
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECOND.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR
AMENDMENT?
>> I WILL MAKE THIS BRIEF.
WHEN COMMUNICATION CENTER
PROGRAM POSITIONS APPROXIMATELY
FIVE YEARS AGO THE SEATTLE
POLICE DEPARTMENT HIRED AN
OUTSIDE CONSULTANT TO EVALUATE
AND MAKE CONSULTING ON THE 911
CENTER.
ONE WAS ADOPTED BY THE SEATTLE
POLICE DPARTMENT WHICH WAS THE
CIVILIANIZATION OF THE ENTIRE
CHAIN OF COMMAND OF THE 911
CENTER.
DURING PART TO THE FACT THAT
EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS HAVE
BECOME A TECHNICAL AND SOFTWARE
DRIVEN FIELD, IT IS NOT
REALISTIC TO EXPECT CAPTAINS,
LIEUTENANTS AND SERGEANT WHO
ROTATE EVERY FEW YEARS TO TRULY
MANAGE SUCH A COMPLEX
OPERATION.
THE FIRST STEP TOWARD FULL
CIVILIZATION TOOK LACE IN 2018
WITH THREE CIVILIAN MANAGERS
WERE HIRED TO TAKE OVER THE DAY-
TO-DAY MANAGEMENT OF THE
COMMUNICATION CENTER.
THIS HAS ALREADY GREATLY
ENHANCE THE FUNCTIONING OF
STAFF AND OPERATIONS.
THE ONLY TWO REMAINING
POSITIONS WHICH ARE SWORN
OFFICERS AND WHICH THE
CONSULTANTS RECOMMENDED TO BE
CIVILIAN ICED AND AGREES TO
SEVERE HIS EYES ARE THE CAPTAIN
AND THE TENANT ASSIGNED TO THE
911 CENTER.
THIS AMENDMET SIGNAL CITIES
COUNSEL'S INTENT TO CREATE THE
POSITION OF DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY
DIRECTOR OF THE 911
COMMUNICATION CENTER AS
RECOMMENDED BY THE INDEPENDENT
CONSULTANT AND AGREED TO BY SPD
AND CALL FOR THE MAYOR TO HAVE
IT IN THE BUDGET WHICH WILL
TAKE UP IN SEPTEMBER.
AS WE REMOVE THAT AND WILL ONE
FROM THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT FULL CIVILIZATION IS
BOTH PRUDENT AND TIMELY.
>> THANK YOU FOR SUMMARIZING
THAT.
I WILL NOTE COUNCILMEMBER'S ONE
THAT YOU ARE INTERESTED IN
BRINGING BACK THE OVERALL
QUESTION OF THE 911 IN THE FALL.
THANK YOU FOR THIS COMMENTS AND
APPRECIATE THAT DISCUSSION
WHICH WE WILL BE BRINGING UP IN
A FEW WEEKS.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS?
COUNCILMEMBER SWAN.
>> ONE OF THE DEMANDS FOR
GEORGE FLOYD MOVEMENT IS TO
TAKE THE 911 CALL CENTER OF THE
CONTROL AND CHAIN OF COMMAND OF
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT
UNFORTUNATELY THIS BUDGET
AMENDMENT IS THE OPPOSITE.
IT REINFORCES THE BUREAUCRACY
OVER THE 911 CALL OPERATIONS
WITHIN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT
BECAUSE THE DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY
DIRECTOR POSITIONS ARE BEING
CREATED WITHIN THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT NOT IN ANOTHER
DEPARTMENT.
WE NEED TO BE CLEAR THAT
CIVILIZATION DOES NOT EQUAL
MOVING IT FROM POLICE CONTROL.
THE FACT THESE POSITIONS ARE
CIVILIAN IS MEANINGLESS.
WHO CARE IF THE MANAGERS OF THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT ARE SWORN
OFFICERS OR NOT.
IT'S A QUESTION OF WHAT
DIFFERENCE IT MAKES.
FOR ALL PURPOSES FOR THIS SET
UP THOSE TWO POSITIONS WILL
STILL BE PART OF THE POLICE
CHAIN OF COMMAND.
I WOULD BE SUPPORTING THIS IF
IT WERE CONCURRENT WITH
TRANSFERRING A 911 OF THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT BUT IT IS NOT.
I WILL BE VOTING NO.
>> THANK YOU.
LOOKING FORWARD TO THE
CONVERSATION IN THE FALL AS
THIS ISSUE COMES BACK.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS?
>> THOSE POINTS WERE WELL
TAKEN.
IF THERE'S ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE
YOU LIKE TO SEE ADDED TO ENSURE
IT IS CLEAR THE INTENT IS TO
MOVE THIS ENTIRE DEPARTMENT OUT
OF THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT, I WELCOME THAT.
I AM COMMITTED ALONG WITH MANY
COLLEAGUES HERE AT COUNSEL TO
MOVING THE 911 COMMUNICATIONS
OPERATION CENTER OUT OF THE
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT. IT
IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT'S
IMPORTANT FOR US TO TAKE QUICK
STEPS TO IMPROVE AND IMPLEMENT
THIS TRANSITION AS QUICKLY AS
POSSIBLE. IF WE HAVE SWORN
OFFICERS IN THAT DEPARTMENT,
THOUGH SWORN OFFICERS WON'T
NECESSARILY MOVE AS THE ENTIRE
911 CENTER IS MOVED OUT OF THE
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
IF WE ARE ABLE TO MAKE THE
TRANSITION TO HAVING THE
CIVILIAN CONTROL AND COMMAND OF
THE 911 CENTER TODAY AND THIS
YEAR, WE WILL BE ABLE TO
TRANSFER THAT MORE HOLISTICALLY
. MY APOLOGIES IF THIS CAME OFF
AS ME TRYING TO SLOW DOWN, I'M
DOING THE OPPOSITE MOVE AS
QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE TO TRANSFER
THAT 911 CENTER OUT OF THE
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
>> I'M NOT SURE THIS WILL WRAP
IT UP.
I APPRECIATE THE INTENTION OF
THIS AMENDMENT AS PROPOSED BY
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. I
STRONGLY AGREE WITH THE
OBSERVATION MADE BY
COUNCILMEMBER SWAN THAT WE ARE
ASSUMING WITH PASSAGE OF THIS
AMENDMENT AS WRITTEN THAT THE
911 CENTER WILL BE STAYING IN
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
UNDERSTANDING CHAIR YOUR EARLIER
EXPRESSION FOR NOT WANTING
AMENDMENTS ON-THE-FLY.
I WANTED TO SEE WHAT IT WOULD
BE FOR STRIKING OUT THE WORDS
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT SO WE
CAN MOVE FORWARD ON THIS
AMENDMENT.
>> I SEE A THUMBS UP.
DO YOU WANNA MAKE IT A MOTION?
>> TO WE HAVE -- THIS IS A NEW
SECTION 2 COUNCIL BILL.
I MOVED TO AMEND THE PROPOSED
NEW SECTION TWO COUNCIL BILL
1198 25 TO STRIKE THE WORDS,
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED. IS THERE A
SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION ON
THE VERBAL AMENDMENT TO
AMENDMENT NUMBER 57?
COUNCILMEMBER SWAN.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR ALLEY.
I SUPPORT NOT CREATING THESE
POSITIONS INSIDE THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT BUT ALSO NOT CLEAR
HOW YOU CAN CREATE POSITIONS
BUT NOT ASSIGN A DEPARTMENT
HOME FOR THOSE POSITIONS.
I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT WOULD
WORK.
COULD ALLEY RESPOND TO THAT?
>> I BELIEVE MY COLLEAGUE MAY BE
ON THE LINE. HE MAY HAVE MORE
TO ADD.
IN GENERAL THIS IS CREATING NEW
POSITIONS.
I WOULD SUGGEST WHAT WOULD NEED
TO HAPPEN IS WE ARE CREATING
THE POSITIONS IN THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT RIGHT NOW IN 2020
AND SHOULD BE ADDING LANGUAGE
TO SAY SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES
THAT COUNSEL EXPECTS WITH THE
TRANSFER OF 911 THE 911 UNIT TO
ANOTHER DEPARTMENT THAT SHOULD
INCLUDE THESE NEW CIVILIAN
POSITIONS.
I MAY SUGGEST WE -- YOU
COUNCILMEMBERS HOLD THIS
AMENDMENT AND GIVE US HALF AN
HOUR TO FIGURE IT OUT AND TAKE
IT UP IN A SHORT HOUR AND FIVE
MINUTES BECAUSE I'M NOT SAYING
WITH CONFIDENCE IT'S REFLECT THE
-- IS DOING WHAT OTHER
COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE INTENDED
AND NEED TO CONFIRM THAT.
>> AS SOON AS THAT YOUR THUMBS
UP.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO PULL THIS
AMENDMENT?
>> WOULD BE HAPPY TO MY
COLLEAGUES WOULD PREFER THAT.
>> I WANT TO FLAG THE AMOUNT OF
PRESSURE AND WORK WE ARE
CREATING FOR OUR COUNSEL
CENTRAL STAFF AND LEGISLATIVE
DEPARTMENT BY GOING DOWN THIS
PATH.
THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND
SECOND. WE NEED TO CALL THANKS
TO A VOTE AND DECIDE ISSUES
BEFORE WE ADJOURN TODAY. FEEL
STRONGLY ABOUT THIS.
IT'S 12:50 6 PM.
WE MAKE COMMITMENTS TO SOUTH-
CENTRAL SOUTH AND WE WOULD END
BY 1:00 TO PACKAGE AND
REPACKAGE THINGS AND PEOPLE
NEED BRAKES.
I'M FRUSTRATED WITH THE
DIRECTION OF CONVERSATION IS
GOING.
IT WILL EFFECTIVELY RESULT IN
COUNSEL CENTRAL STAFF HAVING TO
WORK OVER THE ONLY BREAK THEY
WILL GET TODAY.
I THINK WE NEED TO CALL IT TO A
VOTE AND SEE WHERE IT LANDS.
IN TERMS OF UNDERLYING MOTION.
>> HUSBAND MOVED AND SECONDLY
STRIKE SPD.
I THINK THAT ISSUES ABOUT
IMPLEMENTATION ARE IMPORTANT.
THE QUESTION IS NOT ABOUT
WHETHER OR NOT COUNSEL IS
COMMITTED TO MAKING THIS MOVE
IN THE FALL.
IT IS.
I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO VOTE ON
THE MOTION, THE VERBAL
AMENDMENT AND VOTE ON THE
UNDERLYING AMENDMENT HAS
COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAS
ENCOURAGED US TO DO TO GET US
THROUGH THIS.
WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO CALL
FOR A VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT AS
VERBALLY DESCRIBED AND
COUNCILMEMBER HER BOLT CAN YOU
TELL US THE FEW WORDS YOU ARE
STRIKING IN YOUR VERBAL
AMENDMENT.
>> I MOVED TO AMEND THE
PROPOSED NEW SECTION COUNCIL
BILL 11 80 TO 85 TO STRIKE THE
WORDS, SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENTS.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECOND.
IT'S BEEN DESCRIBED.
MADAM CLERK CALLED THE ROLL ON
REMOVING THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT IS A VERBAL
AMENDMENT FROM THIS AMENDMENT
57.
[ROLL CALL]
>> SIX IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED,
ONE ABSTAINED.
>> THANK YOU.
THE MISSION CARES AND AMENDMENT
257 IS ADOPTED.
AMENDMENT 57 AS AMENDED IS IN
FRONT OF US.
ANY ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION?
SEEING NONE -- COUNCILMEMBER
SWAN.
>> I WANT TO CLARIFY I WILL BE
VOTING NO BECAUSE I'M NOT
CONFIDENT THAT CHAIN -- CHANGE
WOULD REMOVE THE SPD.
I WILL BE VOTING KNOW BUT I
SUPPORTED MOVING THE WORDS,
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STROSS?
I BELIEVE THAT COUNCILMEMBER
PETERSON IS FIRST IN THE
ROLLCALL.
I WANT TO CONFIRM THAT.
IT DOES NOT SEEM THERE'S
ADDITIONAL COMMENT.
MADAM CLERK, CALLED THE ROLE ON
AMENDMENT 57 AS ADOPTED.
[ROLL CALL]
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED,
TWO ABSTAINED.
>> THE MOTION HAS CARRIED AND
THE AMENDMENT IS A TOP DID.
ALLEY, REMIND US WHERE WE ARE
AT ON THE LIST OF AMENDMENTS.
>> WE ARE ON AMENDMENT 58
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER HER
BOLT AND THE CHAIR.
THIS WOULD POSE A PROVISO ON
FUNDING FOR THE COMMUNITY
SERVICE OFFICERS AND THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET TO ENSURE
IMPLEMENTATION OF ANY BUDGET
REDUCTIONS DO NOT IMPACT THESE
POSITIONS.
THIS IS NOT CHANGING ANY
FUNDING FOR THESE POSITIONS.
>> I MOVE AMENDMENT 58 RELATED
TO THE CSO OFFICES AND PROVISO
ON THEIR BUDGET.
>> SECOND.
>> AS ALLIE EXPLAINED IT
IMPOSES A PROVISO TO RESTRICT
THE PURPOSES FOR WHICH SOME OF
THE POLICE DEPARTMENTS BUDGET
MAY BE SPENT SPECIFICALLY THE
REMAINING BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS
FOR THE COMMUNITY SERVICE
OFFICER AND COLLABORATIVE
POLICING BUDGET.
BUDGET SUMMARY LEVEL CAN BE USED
FOR THAT INTENDED PURPOSE.
IT CANNOT BE TAKEN IN BE SPENT
ON OTHER PURPOSES OR PLUG OTHER
BUDGET HOLES.
THESE ARE CIVILIAN POSITIONS
FOR WHICH THE COUNCIL HAS
WORKED OVER MANY YEARS TO
IMPLEMENT IN ORDER TO TAKE
STAFFING PRESSURES OFF OF SWORN
OFFICERS.
THESE UNSWORN OFFICERS ARE ABLE
TO WERE TIES NOT EMERGENCY
SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH LAW
ENFORCEMENT BEST FREE A POLICE
OFFICERS TO BETTER RESPOND TO
911 CALLS CSO'S ASSIST WITH
REMEDIATING DISPUTE, FOLLOWING
UP ON CALLS FOR NONEMERGENCY
SERVICES HELP RESIDENTS
NAVIGATE SERVICES PROGRAMMING
FOR AT RISK YOUTH, ATTEND
SCHOOL AND COMMUNITY HOSTED
EVENTS.
SOME OF THE WORK INCLUDES
STAYING -- ACCESS PROGRAM
VERSION OPPORTUNITIES, HOUSING
AND BEHAVIORAL PROGRAMS.
CSO IS BRIDGING THE SERVICE GAP
A NON-CRIMINAL CALLS ON SERVICE
AND PROVIDE IMPORTAN PUBLIC
SAFETY COMMUNITY SERVICE AND
OUTREACH WORK THAT DOES NOT
REQUIRE THE ENFORCEMENT
AUTHORITY OF A SWORN POLICE
OFFICER.
THE CSO PROGRAM EXISTED FOR 33
YEARS UNTIL 2004.
IT WAS GRADUALLY REDUCED UNTIL
IT WAS ELIMINATED DUE TO BUDGET
COST -- COSTS.
THE COUNCIL WORKED FOR MANY
YEARS TO PUT THE MONEY IN THE
BUDGET TO RESTART THE PROGRAM
AND PUT IT IN THE BUDGET AGAIN
WHEN IT WASN'T IMPLEMENTED BY
THE EXECUTIVE AND IT'S TAKEN
SEVERAL YEARS TO GET IT UP AND
RUNNING AND WE WANT TO MAKE
SURE WE CONTINUE LIVING IN THAT
DIRECTION.
>> THANK YOU.
IT'S BEEN AND SECOND AND
DISCUSSED.
THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT.
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO
COSPONSOR THIS IN PARTNERSHIP
WITH OUR PARTNERS AT TEAMSTERS
117. ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
SEEING NONE.
MADAM CLERK, CALLED THE ROLE ON
AMENDMENT 58.
>> [ROLL CALL].
8 IN FAVOR AND NOT OPPOSE.
>> UNANIMOUS.
THE AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED DID.
ALLEY, BUT THAT CHART UP ONE
MORE TIME.
I BELIEVE WE ARE ALMOST AT THE
END OF THE LIST.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES I
UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE AN
ANNOUNCEMENT ON THE LAST TWO
ITEMS.
>> COLLEAGUES AS I MENTIONED
THIS MORNING WE SHOULD SHORTLY
HAVE PROVISOS NUMBER 59 AND 60
BACK FROM LAW.
WE WILL BE WALKING IT ON AND
DISTRIBUTE THEM TO YOU AS
QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
WE WILL TALK ABOUT THOSE BEFORE
COUNSEL.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES.
I UNDERSTANDING YOUR PULLING 59
AND 60 FOR NOW.
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL MEMBERS I WANT TO
HONOR WHAT COUNCIL PRESIDENT
HAS ASKED FOR.
WE HAVE FOR MARK MORE ITEMS AND
I BELIEVE THESE ARE
NONCONTROVERSIAL. I WILL NOTE
THAT WE HAVE A REAL URGENCY TO
GET THAT WITH THIS MEETING.
I WILL ASK COUNCIL MEMBERS TO
BE BRIEF.
WE'VE GOT TWO MINUTES ON EACH
ONE AND WE WILL BE DONE AT 1:15
. THAT'S THE DESIRE.
ITEM NUMBER 3. READ THE ITEM.
>> I BELIEVE YOU NEED TO MOVE
THE BILL AS AMENDED AND VOTED
OUT OF COMMITTEE.
>> LET'S GET THIS PUPPY OUT OF
HERE.
I'M SO SORRY.
COUNSEL COLLEAGUES WE HAVE
REACHED THE END OF THESE
AMENDMENTS ON THE FIRST ITEM.
I WILL MOVE THAT COUNCIL BILL
119 825 AS AMENDED, BE MOVED
OUT OF THE COMMITTEE AND INTO
FULL COUNSEL FOR CONSIDERATION.
IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT'S BEEN AND SECOND.
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
WILL THE CLERK CALLED THE ROLE
ON THE RECOMMENDATION THE BILL
--
>> I HAVE A COMMENT.
THIS VOTE TO MAKE SURE ALL THE
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO ARE
WATCHING THIS KNOW WHAT WE ARE
DOING.
THIS VOTE ADOPTS THE NEW 2020
BUDGET WHICH ENACTS THE MAYOR'S
BUDGET THAT DID NOT MEET THE
NEEDS FOR WORKING PEOPLE.
THE HUNDREDS IF NOT THOUSANDS OF
BLACK LIVES MATTER ACTIVISTS
HAVE FOUGHT FOR THE VICTORIES
THAT WE HAVE WON AS AMENDMENTS
TO THIS AMENDMENT.
ON BALANCE THIS BUDGET CUTS
STANDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
ACROSS DEPARTMENTS LIKE PARKS,
ROADS AND LIBRARIES RATHER THAN
INCREASE TO ELIMINATE THE NEED
FOR -- WHICH IS POSSIBLE BUT
REQUIRES CLINICAL WILL THAT IS
ABSENT ON THE COUNCIL.
ON BALANCE THIS BUDGET SPENDS
MORE THE CITIES DISCRETIONARY
FUNDS ON POLICE THAN OTHER
DEPARTMENTS AND FOR THOSE
REASONS I WILL BE VOTING KNOW
ON THIS BUDGET.
>> ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS?
SEEING NONE WE WILL HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT THIS
BILL IN MORE DETAIL AT FULL
COUNSEL.
THING NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS,
WILL THE CLERK CALLED THE ROLE
ON THE RECOMMENDATION THE BILL
PASS AS AMENDED.
>> [ROLL CALL].
>> SEVEN IN FAVOR AND ONE
OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU.
THE MISSION CARES AND THE
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION THE
BILL PASS AS AMENDED WILL BE
SENT TO THE FULL COUNSEL FOR
CONSIDERATION.
CAN YOU READ INTO THE RECORD
ITEM NUMBER 2.
>> I'M SORRY ITEM NUMBER 3.
>> MADAM CLERK, YOU MAY BE ON
MUTE'S.
CAN YOU READ ITEM NUMBER 3 INTO
THE RECORD.
>> RELATING TO THE CITY'S
RESPONSE TO THE 2020 COVID 19
CRISIS FOR DISCUSSION ON
POSSIBLE VOTE.
>> ALLEY, THANK YOU FOR WALKING
US THROUGH WHAT'S IN FRONT OF
US AND THIS ITEM NUMBER 3.
>> IT WOULD ACCEPT THE FEDERAL
CORONAVIRUS RELIEF FUND
RESOURCES AND APPROPRIATE TO
THAT FUNDING.
THERE'S ONE AMENDMENT TO THIS
BILL AND IT'S A TECHNICAL
AMENDMENT SPONSORED BY THE
CHAIR THAT CORRECTS AN
APPROPRIATION LINE RELATED TO
TRANSFER FUNDS FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF DEPARTMENT FINANCE
TO THE HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS A TECHNICAL CORRECTION.
>> I MOVE THE COMMITTEE CONSIDER
AMEND CUSTOM-BUILT 119824. IS
THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECOND.
I WANT TO MOVE THIS TECHNICAL
AMENDMENT.
I MOVED TO ADOPT ME EMBER 5 IS
PRESENTED ON THE AGENDA
DESCRIBED BY ALLEY.
IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECOND.
ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ON
ITEM NUMBER 3? SEEING NONE,
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ALLIE FOR WALKING US
THROUGH THE TECHNICAL
AMENDMENT.
WILL THE CLERK CALLED THE ROLE
ON THE ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT 5.
[ROLL CALL]
>> 8 IN FAVOR AND NOT OPPOSE.
>> THE MISSION CARRIES.
THE AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON
THE BILL AS AMENDED?
SEEING NONE, MADAM CLERK COULD
YOU CALL THE ROLE OF THE
RECOMMENDATION THE BILL PASS AS
AMENDED.
[ROLL CALL].
>> 8 IN FAVOR AND NONE OPPOSE.
>> MISSION CARRIES AND THE
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION THE
BILL PASS AS AMENDED WILL BE
SENT TO THE SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL
FULL COMMITTEE FOR FINAL
CONSIDERATION.
MADAM CLERK, WE HAVE NUMBER
ITEM 4 READ INTO THE RECORD.
>> I'M HAVING A HARD TIME WITH
THE CONNECTION.
AND ORDINANCE WHICH ADOPTED THE
2020 BUDGET FOR PRECINCT AND
POSSIBLE VOTE.
>> THANK YOU.
CUSTOM-BUILT 11 NINE A -- AND
IS NOW IN FRONT OF IT.
CAN YOU DESCRIBE THE AMENDMENT
THAT IS TECHNICAL IN NATURE.
>> THERE IS ONE AMENDMENT
POSTED TO THE AGENDA.
AMENDMENT 9 THAT MADE IT
TECHNICAL CORRECTION TO THE
SECTION OF THE BILL THAT WOULD
TRANSFER THE VICTIM ADVOCACY
UNIT FROM THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT TO THE HUMAN
SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
IN YOU OPTION DISTRIBUTED THIS
MORNING AMENDMENT 9 A INCLUDES
THIS DIRECTION PERMITS THE
TRANSFER CONTINGENT UPON THE
VICTIM ADVOCATES TO ACCESS THE
INFORMATION WITHIN THE HUMAN
SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND THE
SYSTEMS THEY NEED TO DO THEIR
JOBS.
I WOULD DESCRIBE THIS AS
TECHNICAL IN NATURE.
IT CONTINUES TO IMPLEMENTED THE
COUNCIL'S PROPOSAL TO TRANSFER
THAT UNIT THAT ENSURES THEY
HAVE THE SYSTEMS IN PLACE IN
ORDER TO OPERATE -- OPERATE
THAT FULLY.
NIGHT A IS SPONSOR MEMBER BY
COUNCILMEMBER HER BOWL.
>> A MOTION TO ADOPT AMENDMENT
NINE A. THE BILL IS IN FRONT OF
US.
THE AMENDMENT IS IN FRONT OF
US.
>> IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, I
AM GOING TO SAY I THINK ALLIE
DID A FINE JOB OF EXPLAINING
THAT TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU.
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS?
I'M NOT SEEING ANY.
IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECOND TO
ADOPT 9 CAPITAL A. PLEASE CALL
THE ROLE.
[ROLL CALL]
>> 8 IN FAVOR AND NONE OPPOSE.
>> THE MISSION CARES AND
AMENDMENT 9 IS ADOPTED.
ANY FURTHER COMMENTS ON THE
BILL AS AMENDED?
>> AS FOR AGENDA ITEM 2 THIS
VOTE REFLECTS THE BUDGET AS A
WHOLE WHICH OVERALL FAILS TO
MEET THE NEEDS OF WORKING
PEOPLE.
I WILL BE VOTING KNOW AND SAY
MORE ABOUT THIS LATER IN THE
FULL COUNCIL MEETING.
ú>> THANK YOU.
MADAM CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLE.
[ROLL CALL]
>> 7 IN FAVOR AND 1 OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU.
THE MISSION CARRIES.
THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THE BILL PASS AS AMENDED WILL
BE SENT TO SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL
FOR COUNSEL FOR CONSIDERATION.
WE ARE ALMOST THERE IN TERMS OF
TECHNICAL.
WE HAVE A FEW LAST ITEMS.
MADAM CLERK READ INTO THE RECORD
ITEM NUMBER 5.
>> AUTHORIZING 2020 ACCEPTANCE
OF FUNDING FROM NON-CITY
SOURCES FOR DISCUSSION.
>> I WILL MOVE THIS BILL SO
IT'S IN FRONT OF US.
I MOVED THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDS THE PASSAGE OF THE
BILL.
IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IS BEEN MOVED AND SECOND.
ALLIE TO YOU FOR ANY WALK-
THROUGH ON THIS ITEM.
>> IN THE INTEREST OF TIME FOR
ITEMS 5, 6 AND 7 I DON'T HAVE
ANY COMMENTS UNLESS
COUNCILMEMBERS WOULD LIKE FOR
ME TO DESCRIBE THE BILLS.
THESE ARE PART OF THE
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET PACKAGE AND
THERE ARE NO AMENDMENTS TO THEM.
THEY ARE NECESSARY TO FULLY
IMPLEMENT THE PROPOSALS IN
COUNSEL BILL --
>> SAINT NO ADDITIONAL HANDS
I'M TAKING ALL THE QUESTIONS
HAVE BEEN ANSWERED.
MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE
ROLE ON THE PASSAGE OF THE BILL.
>>
[ROLL CALL]
>> 8 IN FAVOR AND NONE OPPOSE.
>> MISSION CARRIES.
THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THE
BILL PASS AND THIS
RECOMMENDATION WILL BE SENT TO
THE SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL FOR
FINAL CONSIDERATION.
THE CLERK READ INTO THE RECORD
ITEM NUMBER 6.
>> I MOVE THE COMMITTEE TO
COMMENCE PASSAGE OF THE BILL.
IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECOND.
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
SEEING NONE. ALLIE WALKED US
THROUGH THIS.
MADAM CLERK, CALL THE ROLE ON
COUNSEL BILL 11 9820.
>> [ROLL CALL]
8 IN FAVOR AND NONE OPPOSE.
>> THE MISSION CARES AND THE
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT
THE BILL PASS WILL BE SENT TO
THE AUGUST 10 SEATTLE CITY
COUNCIL FOR FINAL
CONSIDERATION.
ITEM NUMBER 7 INTO THE RECORD
NOW.
>> I MOVE WE PASS THIS BILL.
SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> CASINO QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS.
MADAM CLERK, CALLED THE ROLE ON
THIS BILL.
>> [ROLL CALL].
8 IN FAVOR AND NONE OPPOSE.
>> MISSION CARRIES.
THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THE BILL PASS WILL BE SENT TO
THE SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL FOR
FINAL CONSIDERATION.
PLEASE READ NUMBER 8 INTO THE
RECORD.
>> I MOVED THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDS ADOPTION OF
RESOLUTION 31954, IS THERE A
SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECOND.
ANY ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION OR
COMMENTS?
>> IS THIS THE RUBBLE SOLUTION
RELATED TO THE BUDGET PROCESS?
>> ALLIE HAD HER HAND UP AND
WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE A QUICK
OVERVIEW.
>> I HAD THE IMPRESSION YOU HAD
AN AMENDMENT.
I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT
COMMITTING TO A ONE YEAR BUDGET
PROCESS MOVING FORWARD.
I HAVE A NUMBER OF SPEAKING
POINTS TO MY CONCERN BUT I WAS
GOING TO NOT GO INTO THEM
BECAUSE I WAS UNDER THE
IMPRESSION YOU HAVE AN AMENDMENT
THAT MAY ADDRESS THE CONCERNS I
HAD.
>> I DO.
THANK YOU.
ALLIE WOULD YOU LIKE TO WALK TO
THE AMENDMENT?
>> RESOLUTION 31954 WOULD
REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT THE CITY
CONSIDERS A BUDGET AND -- AND
EVEN CALENDAR YEARS.
SIGNALS THE COUNCIL INTENT TO
HAVE FUTURE LEGISLATION TO
CONSIDER BY ANNUAL BUDGETING IN
FUTURE YEARS.
TRADITIONAL PRACTICE HAS BEEN
TO PROVIDE A BIANNUAL BUDGET ON
EVEN CALENDAR YEARS WHICH THE
FIRST YEAR'S BUDGET IS ADOPTED
IN THE SECOND YEARS BUDGET IS
ENDORSED.
AS TRANSMITTED BY THE EXECUTIVE
THIS WOULD REMOVE THAT
REQUIREMENT INDEFINITELY UNTIL
COUNSEL TAKES ADDITIONAL
ACTION.
AMENDMENT WENT IT'S SPONSORED
BY THE CHAIRMAN THAT WAS
DISTRIBUTED THIS MORNING WOULD
ALLOW THE MAYOR TO PROPOSE A
ONE YEAR BUDGET FOR COUNSEL OR
2021 RECOGNIZING THE UNUSUAL
CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WE ARE IN.
IT ADDS A REQUEST FOR NUMBER OF
ACTIONS TO ACHIEVE FULL FISCAL
TRANSPARENCY BETWEEN THE
EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE
BRANCH INCLUDING THE REPORT
FROM THE BUDGET OFFICE AND
CONSULTATION OF COUNSEL CENTRAL
STAFF OUTLINING A PLAN FOR NON-
MODIFIED TROOP DANIEL BUDGET
PROCESS AND A REPORT OUTLINING
A PLAN FOR UPGRADING THE CITY'S
DATA SHARING FORM TO MINIMIZE
FOR OBTAINING DATA FOR THE
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH AND PUBLIC.
>> THANK YOU FOR PROMPTING THAT
QUESTION ABOUT WHAT WAS IN THE
AMENDMENT.
I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT
MOVING WAY BY A BIANNUAL
PROCESS.
THIS HAS NOT BEEN DISCUSSED AND
REQUIRES DIALOGUE.
MORE IMPORTANTLY IT NEEDS TO
MOVE IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION.
THE LANGUAGE YOU SEE FROM US IN
THE AMENDMENT SETS US UP FOR A
TRANSPARENT AND ACCOUNTABLE
CONVERSATION BOTH WITH THE
PUBLIC BY MAKING SURE THE
INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE TO THE
PUBLIC AND LEGISLATIVE
DEPARTMENT IN ROUTINE FASHION.
TAKING WHAT A ROBUST PROCESS
SHOULD BE AS CRITICAL AS WE ARE
SEEING FORECAST IN SOME WAYS BE
POLITICIZED AND USED AS A TOOL
TO TRY TO INTERRUPT PROCESSES.
WE NEED TO HAVE A CLEAR AND
TRANSPARENT WAY FOR US TO SHARE
INFORMATION BACK AND FORTH ON
THE EXECUTIVE'S OFFICE WITH THE
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH.
IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US THAT WE
SET THIS PROCESS UP GOING
FORWARD SO WE NOT ONLY STICK TO
A BIENNIAL BUDGET BUT WE HAVE
FORECASTING TO HELP US BE MORE
TRANSPARENT GOING FORWARD.
I APPRECIATE ALLIE AND THE
SUMMER SHE'S PROVIDED IN THE
LANGUAGE WE HAVE IN THE
AMENDMENT IN FRONT OF US TO SET
US ON THAT COURSE FOR GREATER
STABILITY, TRANSPARENCY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY BOTH BETWEEN
BRANCHES AND THE PUBLIC.
ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD?
>> THANKS TO YOU FOR PUTTING
FORWARD THIS AMENDMENT.
I HAD NOT HAD THE ABILITY TO
THINK HOW TO MAKE THIS
RESOLUTION I WAS ON THE VERGE
OF VOTING AGAINST MORE PALATABLE
AND I APPRECIATE YOUR FORWARD
THINKING TO DO SO.
>> THERE ARE GREAT EXAMPLES WE
CAN PULL AS WE THINK ABOUT
OTHER STRATEGIES.
THE KING COUNTY AND STATE.
THESE ARE STRATEGIES AS WELL AS
MANY YEARS OUT.
THAT CAN HELP US IN THE LONG
TERM REGARDLESS WHETHER OR NOT
WE HAVE THE DOWNTURN.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS?
SEEING NONE. WE HAVE AMENDMENT
1 IN FRONT OF US.
I MOVED TO ADOPT AMENDMENT 1
DISTRIBUTED AND DESCRIBED BY
CENTRAL STAFF.
IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECOND
THAT AMENDMENT 1 BE CONSIDERED
AND ADOPTED.
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS?
SEEING NONE.
MADAM CLERK, CALL THE ROLE ON
AMENDMENT 1.
>> [ROLL CALL].
8 IN FAVOR AND NONE OPPOSED.
>> AMENDMENT 1 IS ADOPTED.
WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US ITEM
NUMBER 8 AS AMENDED.
IS THAT CORRECT?
WONDERFUL.
MADAM CLERK, COULD YOU CALL THE
ROLE. THE LAST THING ANY
ADDITIONAL HANDS. IT'S AS
AMENDED.
>> [ROLL CALL].
8 IN FAVOR AND NONE OPPOSE.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES.
THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THE RESOLUTION THE ADOPTED AS
AMENDED WILL BE SENT TO THE
SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL
CONSIDERATION. IF THERE ARE NO
OBJECTIONS COUNSEL RELATING TO
LEGISLATION FROM A COMMITTEE
MEETING TO THAT MEETING AFTER
THURSDAY AT 12 NOON WILL BE
SUSPENDED TO WITH THE AGENDA
ITEMS TO DIG THROUGH 8 TO THE
CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL
CONSIDERATION.
HEARING NO OBJECTION, THE
COUNSEL IS SUSPENDED THE AGENDA
ITEMS TO DIG THROUGH 8 WILL BE
CONSIDERED AT TODAY'S SITTING
COUNCIL MEETING FOR FINAL
CONSIDERATION OR AT THE
PRESIDENTS DIRECTION.
WE HAVE RECEIVED THE END OF OUR
AGENDA.
THANK YOU.
I SAW ALLIE TAKE A SIGH OF
RELIEF.
A BIG APPRECIATION.
WE DID NOT DO IT BY 1:15 IS A
PROMISE I WILL SUMMARIZE AND
WRAP IT UP BY SAYING, THANK YOU.
WE DO NOT HAVE ANY OTHER ITEMS
FOR FULL CONSIDERATION SO THANK
YOU.
ARE THERE ANY ITEMS FOR US
BEFORE WE ADJOURN WORKS COUNCIL
PRESIDENT.
>> THANK YOU.
PRETTY QUICKLY FOR MADAM CLERK,
CAN YOU ADVISE WHETHER THE FULL
COUNCIL MEETING CAN BEGIN AT
2:30 PM AS OPPOSED TO 2 PM?
>> THE RECOMMENDATION TO DO
THAT WITH START AT 2:00 AND
RECESS OR WE CAN BE DELAYED BY
FIVE OR 10 MINUTES TO THE
BEGINNING OF THAT MEETING.
I RECOMMEND WE RESET -- EXCUSE
ME WE CAN BEING THAN PRESET.
-- I RECOMMEND WE CONVENE THEN
RESET.
>> THANK YOU CENTRAL STAFF AND
OUR TEAMS.
WE WILL HAVE MORE THANK YOUS TO
COME.
WOULD THAT, WE ARE ADJOURNED.