THANK YOU AND GOOD AFTERNOON
EVERYONE.
WELCOME BACK TO THE BUDGET
COMMITTEE MEETING.
THE TIME IS 2:07 P.M.
THE DATE IS OCTOBER 15th.
2021.
I'M TERESA MOSQUEDA CHAIR OF
THE BUDGET COMMITTEE.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL?
[ ROLL CALLED ]
>> NINE PRESENT.
>> EXCELLENT.
WE HAVE EVERYONE IN ATTENDANCE
HERE TODAY.
JUST TO ORIENT US TO WHERE WE
ARE AT IN PRESENTATION.
WE ARE ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2
STILL.
WE ARE GOING TO CONCLUDE OUR
CONVERSATION ON AGENDA I TERM
NUMBER TWO BEFORE GOING TO ITEM
THREE THAT IS RELATED TO THE
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND
THE PROPOSED BUDGET.
ON THE ALTERNATIVE OF THE
CRIMINAL LEGAL SYSTEM AND I
WANT TO THANK THE STAFF PART OF
THIS PRESENTATION THIS MORNING
LEADING TO THE AFTERNOON.
AMY GORE AND LISA K AND JEFF
SIMMS AND OSHI.
I THINK WE ARE ON YOUR SLIDE
AND I SEE SLIDE 14 PULLED UP
HERE.
THANK YOU FOR WALKING US
THROUGH THIS FEES.
ARE WE READY TO MOVE ONTO THE
NEXT SLIDE.
>> YES.
I THINK WE ARE AT THE STAGE OF
TALKING ABOUT ISSUE NUMBER TWO
WHICH IS ELECTRONIC HOME
MONITORING SUBSIDY.
>> PERFECT.
OKAY.
LET'S GET STARTED ON SLIDE 15.
>> GREAT.
SO ELECTRONIC HOME MONITORING
FOR THE PUBLIC'S AWARENESS IS A
ALTERNATIVE TO INCARCERATION
AND IN WHICH A PERSON IS
MONITORED BY GPS DEVICE.
SO THERE CAN BE A RESTRICTION
ON WHERE THEY GO AND TIMES AT
WHICH THEY HAVE TO BE IN A
CERTAIN LOCATION SUCH AS
RETURNING HOME BY A PARTICULAR
TIME AND SO AS IT CURRENTLY
STANDS THE SEATTLE MUNICIPAL
COURT USES DHM INSTEAD OF
PRETRIAL INCARCERATION AND AS
ALTERNATIVE TO INCARCERATION
WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL HAS BEEN
SENTENCED TO A MANDATORY
MINIMUM JAIL TERM.
THERE IS CONCERNS RAISED ABOUT
THE USE OF PHM AS AN
ALTERNATIVE TO INCARCERATION
AND SOME IN THE TASK FORCE ON
THE LEGAL SYSTEM AND THE
RECOMMENDATIONS ARE NICE TO
REPLACE INCARCERATION WITH EHM
WITH ALTERNATIVE FORM OF
SURVEILLANCE.
AND SO THESE CONSIDERATIONS
PRIMARILY INFORM THE DECISIONS
THAT A JUDGE MAKES WHEN THAT
DECISION IS DISCRETIONARY.
AND SO IF A JUDGE HAS THE
OPTION TO ASSIGN EHM OR
INCARCERATION VERSUS RELEASING
SOMEBODY PRETRIAL WITHOUT
CONDITIONS THERE ARE CAUTIONS
ABOUT USING EHM AS A FORM OF
SURVEILLANCE.
HOWEVER, THERE ARE SOME
SITUATIONS IN WHICH THE JUDGE
DOES NOT HAVE A DISCRETION
BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT STATE
LAW IS SET UP.
SO PARTICULARLY IN CASES OF
DUIs THERE ARE STATE LAWS THAT
REQUIRE SOME LEVEL OF
SUPERVISION AND SO THAT CAN BE
EITHER IN THE FORM OF EHM OR IN
THE FORM OF INCARCERATION AND
SO IN THOSE SITUATIONS IF A
JUDGE WOULD PREFER NOT TO
INCARCERATE OR PUT SOMEBODY ON
EHM THEY DON'T HAVE THE
DISCRETION TO MAKE THAT
DECISION.
THEY ARE REQUIRED TO DO IT AND
EHM CAN CAN IN THOSE SITUATIONS
THE LESS RESTRICTIVE
ALTERNATIVE IN COMPARISON TO
INCARCERATING SOMEBODY.
IN THE 2022 PROPOSED BUDGET,
THERE IS AN ADDITION OF $88,000
THAT WOULD ADD TO AN EXISTING
$43,800 IN THE BASE BUDGET TO
PROVIDE SUBSIDIES FOR
ELECTRONIC HOME MONITORING.
REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE
DECISION OF THE JUDGE TO PUT
SOMEBODY ON EHM IS MANDATORY OR
DISCRETIONARY IT IS THE
DEFENDANTS THAT HAVE TO PAY THE
COSTS OF EHM.
SO IN CASES WHERE EHM OR
INCARCERATION IS MANDATORY
THERE CAN BE AN EQUITY ISSUE IN
TERMS OF WHETHER A DEFENDANT
CAN ACTUALLY PAY THE COSTS OF
THE EHM BECAUSE IF THEY CAN'T,
THEN THEY MAY END UP BEING
INCARCERATED INSTEAD.
FOR THE PURPOSES OF INCREASING
FUNDING FOR THE PURPOSE, THE
COURT HAS AND THE BUDGET
INCLUDES INCLUDED $88,000
DECISIONLY TO ITS BUDGET SO
THAT PEOPLE THAT CANNOT AFFORD
-- CANNOT AFFORD EHM,
DEFENDANTS THAT CAN'T AFFORD IT
ARE ABLE TO ACCESS IT BY USE OF
THIS SUBSIDY.
SO FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION THERE
ARE TWO SETS OF OPTIONS ON THIS
SLIDE AND IN THE ISSUE ID
PAPER.
THE FIRST IS ABOUT MANDATORY
SUPERVISION.
SO IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE A
JUDGE HAS THE DISCRETION TO
ASSIGN EHM TO A DEFENDANT.
BECAUSE OF THE CONCERNS
REFLECTED IN THE TASK FORCE
REPORT RELEASING PEOPLE WITHOUT
CONDITIONS WHATSOEVER.
AND SO IF THERE IS INTEREST
FROM THE COUNSEL SIDE IN
LIMITING THE USE OF THESE FUNDS
OVER TO WHERE SUPERVISION IS
MANDATORY, IN THE CASE OF DUIS
THERE IS A COUPLE OF OPTIONS.
OPTION AWOULD MAINTAIN THE
ALLOCATION IN THE BUDGET AND
PROVIDED THAT FUNDS REQUIRE
WHEN EHM IS MANDATED BY STATE
LAW AND B IS NOT TO PROVIDE
THOSE FUNDS BUT QUESTION
EVALUATION AND THAT EVALUATION
CAN BE ABOUT ANY NUMBER OF
THINGS.
IT COULD BE AT RACIAL
DISPROPORTION ALITY AND THE
ASSIGNMENT OF EHM AND WHETHER
THE SURVEILLANCE IS REPLACING
INCARCERATION AND EXPANDING THE
KIND OF SUPERVISION THAT THE
COURTS ARE USING.
WHETHER EHM BECAUSE IT IS BEING
USED IN PLACE OF INCARCERATION
IS ACTUALLY INCREASING THE
CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH SOMEBODY
IS UNDER AND THERE ARE A
VARIETY OF OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
THAT AN EVALUATION COULD SHED
LIGHT ON.
AND THEN AN OPTION AC WOULD BE
NOT TO PROVIDE THOSE FUNDS BUT
DEPENDING ON THE COUNCIL'S
VIEWS ON THE USE OF EHM AS A
MANDATORY FORM OF SUPERVISION
INCLUDE SOME PRIORITIES IN THE
CITY STATE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
TO GO TOWARDS THE STATE
CONSIDERING WHETHER MANDATORY
SUPERVISION SHOULD BE INCLUDED
AS PART OF DUIs.
OR IF THERE IS OPTION B THAT IS
TO TAKE NO ACT TO ALLOW THE
ALLOCATION TO MOVE FORWARD
WITHOUT ANY RESTRICTION.
AND THERE ARE OPTIONS HERE
REGARDING FUNDING SOURCE.
AND SO SIMILARLY THE DISCUSSION
WE HAD EARLIER IN TERMS OF
FILING FOR DIVERSION AND TRYING
TO FUND THE SORT OF ALLOCATION
USING EXISTING FUNDS FROM
WITHIN THE CRIMINAL LEGAL
SYSTEM.
EITHER FROM THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT AND THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICES AND CRIMINAL
DIVISION OR FROM THE SEATTLE
MUNICIPAL COURT ITSELF.
OR TO TAKE NO ACTION.
>> THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD AND THEN
LEWIS.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES AS
WELL.
>> JUST TO UNDERSTAND OPTION
A1, IF THE FUNDS WERE PROVIDED
SO THEY CAN BE USED EHM AS
MANDATED, THAT MEANS THE FUNDS
WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE WHEN EHM
IS DISCRETIONARY.
SO THE JUDGE IN THOSE CASES ARE
FOLKS THAT COULD NOT AFFORD THE
COST ASSOCIATED WITH EHM AND
THOSE DISCRETIONARY CASES, THE
ONLY OPTION WOULD BE JAIL FOR
THEM, RIGHT?
>> NOT NECESSARILY.
>> I GUESS I SHOULDN'T SAY THE
ONLY OPTION.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY INFLUENCE
OVER WHICH OPTION IS CHOSEN.
>> CORRECT.
>> AND THAT COULD BE AN OUTCOME
THAT HAVE DECISION.
BECAUSE WE DON'T GET TO CHOOSE
WHETHER OR NOT A JUDGE -- THE
SENTENCE THAT THE JUDGE CHOOSE.
>> YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
>> OKAY.
THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFYING
QUESTION.
COUPLE MEMBER LEWIS AND THEN
MORALES.
>> THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR
RELATED TO COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD'S CLARIFYING QUESTIONS,
YOU KNOW MY PREFERENCE WOULD
PROBABLY BE FOR A2, MOSTLY
BECAUSE I DO GET CONCERNS ABOUT
IF WE WERE TO USE PROVISOS
WHERE THINGS ARE MANDATED BY
STATE LAW I DON'T WANT US TO BE
IN A POSITION WHERE WE HAVE
INADVERTENTLY CREATED A
SCENARIO WHERE MORE PEOPLE ARE
SERVING JAIL TERMS BECAUSE DHM
HAS BEEN PREVENTED.
AND THIS IS JUST SORT OF ALIKE
A PRIVATISM THING.
I AM NOT NECESSARILY COMING
úHERE AND GIVING A BIG
ENDORSEMENT TO DHM THAT
SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS
GREAT.
BUT I AM MAKING A VERY CLEAR
VALUE JUDGMENT THAT EHM IS
SUPERIOR TO JAIL.
BETTER OUTCOMES.
MORE LIKE CHEAPER.
PEOPLE ARE NOT PUT IN AN
EXPERIENCE OF INCARCERATION
UNNECESSARILY.
AND I WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE ARE NOT -- I WANT TO
MAKE SURE WE ARE EVALUATING AND
ASSESSING THE EFFICACY OF DHM
AND DEVELOPING ALTERNATIVES
THAT CAN BE EVEN LESS
RESTRICTIVE THAN EHM BUT I
DON'T WANT TO BE IN A POSITION
THAT WE WOULD ACCIDENTALLY
CREATE INCENTIVES WHEN JUDGES
ARE FACED WITH A CHOICE BECAUSE
IT IS NOT JUST ABOUT WHEN
PEOPLE ARE SERVING A SENTENCE.
THIS IS ALTER A CRITICAL TOOL
FOR WHEN PEOPLE ARE PENDING
THEIR TRIAL.
AND AS ALTERNATIVE FOR SETTING
BAIL OR ALTERNATIVE FOR HOLDING
PEOPLE IN JAIL PRIOR TO HAVING
A TRIAL TO DETERMINE IF THEY
ARE GOING TO BE SENTENCED TO
ANYTHING.
A LOT OF THE DECISIONS ARE MADE
WITH VERY SMALL INFORMATION
FROM THE JUDGE.
THEY HAVE TO MAKE A RISK REWARD
ASSESS, AND THE RISK ASSESSMENT
IN DETERMINING WHAT LEVEL OF
RESTRICTION TO PUT SOMEONE
UNDER WHILE AWAITING TRIAL AND
I WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE WHEN
THEY ARE IN SITUATIONS LIKE
THAT, LIKE A PRETRIAL RELEASE
SCENARIO, WE ARE NOT REMOVING
THIS AS AN OPTION OR STYMIEING
THIS AS AN OPTION.
AND INADVERTENTLY CREATING A
SITUATION WHERE JUDGES ARE
INSTEAD AIRING TO SET BAIL IN
THE KING COUNTY JAIL.
I THINK I WOULD FAVOR NOT THE
FUNDS.
>> THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> GREAT MINDS THINK ALIKE.
THAT IS WHAT I THOUGHT OF.
IF WE CHOOSE OPTION A1 IT WOULD
INCREASE PRETRIAL DETENTION.
I AGREE WITH COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS ABOUT WHICH OF THESE
OPTIONS TO SELECT BUT I THINK
IT IS WORTH POINTING OUT THE
COMMENTS THAT ASHTRA INCLUDES
IN HER MEMO THAT A JUDGE CAN
RELEASE WITHOUT CONDITIONS
GIVEN THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT
MISDEMEANORS HERE AND I REALIZE
THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENT RISK
ASSESSMENTS AS COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS IS POINTING OUT BUT IF WE
ARE TRYING TO BEGIN APPROACHING
OUR WORK TO THE CRIMINAL LEGAL
SYSTEM WITH A GOAL TOWARDS HARM
REDUCTION I WOULD LIKE TO SEE
US -- IF WE CHOOSE THIS
EVALUATION ROUTE THAT I WOULD
BE INTERESTED TO SEE IN THE END
WHETHER THERE WAS SOME OPTIONS
THAT COULD LEAD US CLOSER TO
RELEASING WITHOUT CONDITIONS AT
ALL WHEN THIS IS POSSIBLE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH MORALES.
I SEE COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD'S
HANDS.
>> I JUST WANT TO ADD THAT I AM
INTERESTED IN THE FUNDING
SOURCE OPTION AS WELL.
OPTION A. AND RELATED TO MAKING
SURE THAT ANY FUNDING FOR EHM
SUBSIDIES IS COMING FROM THE
CRIMINAL LEGAL SYSTEM RATHER
THAN EXPANDING THE SIZE OF THE
FOOTPRINT OF THOSE BUDGETS.
THAT'S THE FUNDING SOURCE
OPTION A.
>> THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON FUNDING
SOURCE COMMENTS IDENTIFIED
HERE?
EXCELLENT.
THANK YOU FOR FLAGGING THESE
OPTIONS ASHTRA AND
COUNCILMEMBERS INDICATIONS OF
THE WAY YOU ARE LEADING.
SHALL WE CONTINUE TO PUBLIC
SAFETY INVESTMENTS?
MUTE.
SORRY, ASHTRA.
>> I'M SO SORRY.
THAT WRAPS UP THE LAST ISSUE
AND IF WE COULD MOVE TO THE
NEXT SLIDE I WILL PASS IT OVER
TO MY COLLEAGUE, AMY.
>> THANKS YOUR ALL OF YOUR WORK
ASHTRA.
HELLO, AMY.
>> THANK YOU, ASHSTRA.
THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBERS.
I AM FROM COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF
AND THE NEXT PORTION OF THE
PRESENTATION FOCUSES ON
COMMUNITY LAB PUBLIC SAFETY
PROGRAMS.
AND AS WE DISCUSSED YESTERDAY.
THERE IS A CONTINUUM OF
PROGRAMS WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO
COMMUNITY SAFETY INCLUDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND JOB
SKILLS AND TRAINING AND MENTAL
HEALTH TREATMENT AND MANY
OTHERS.
FOR THIS PAPER PRESENTATION WE
TRY TO FOCUS ON THOSE PROGRAMS
WITH THE NEXUS FOR THE CRIMINAL
LEGAL SYSTEM.
FIRST I WANT TO MENTION AND
BRIEFLY DESCRIBE SOME OF THE
PROGRAMS THAT ARE DISCUSSED IN
THE BEEPER.
AND PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
QUESTIONS AND THEN WE WILL
PRESENT THREE ISSUES THAT
CENTRAL STAFF IDENTIFIED FOR
COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION.
THE PROGRAMS HIGHLIGHTED IN THE
PAPER INCLUDE THE COMMUNITY
SAFETY CAPACITY BUILDING
PROGRAM THAT PROVIDES GROUPS
WORKING TOWARDS COMMUNITY
SOLUTIONS AND VIOLENCE TO
INCREASED SAFETY AND FOR PEOPLE
OF BLACK AND BROWN INDIGENOUS
PEOPLE IN COMMUNITIES.
I WILL DISCUSS THIS FURTHER.
I WANTED TO HIGHLY THE PEACE
KEEPER'S COLLECTIVE.
THE PILOT PROGRAM DESIGNED TO
REDUCE GUN VIOLENCE THROUGH A
PUBLIC HEALTH MODEL AND THEY
RUN THROUGH KING COUNTY PUBLIC
HEALTH.
AND INCLUDE ORGANIZATIONS AND
ACTIVITIES IN SOUTH SEATTLE AND
SOUTH KING COUNTY.
THE PROGRAM WAS FUNDED WITH
$500,000 AS PART OF THE 2021
MID YEAR SUPPLEMENTAL
LEGISLATION AND AT THAT TIME
THE EXPECTATION WAS THAT THERE
WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL 5
MILLION FOR 2022 THAT IS
INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET.
THE LEAD PROGRAM THAT STANDS
FOR LET EVERYONE ADVANCE WITH
DIGNITY FOR PEOPLE THAT COMMIT
LAW VIOLATIONS WITH HEALTH
ISSUES AND EXTREME POVERTY.
JEFF WILL COVER THIS PROGRAM
MORE.
AND REENTRY SERVICES SOMETIMES
CALLED RE-ROUTING SERVICES AND
SUPPORT PERMEATION THEY
TRANSITION OUT OF INCARCERATION
OR INSTITUTIONALIZATION.
THE PROGRAMS PROVIDE A VARIETY
OF SUPPORT SERVICES INCLUDING
EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES, JOB
TRAINING AND WORK FORCE
DEVELOPMENT WITH THE GOAL OF
HELPING INDIVIDUALS HEAL AND
GAIN MEANINGFUL EMPLOYMENT AND
REENTER THE COMMUNITY AND
REDUCE RECIDIVISM.
THE 2022 PROPOSED BUDGET
INCLUDES TWO NEW REENTRY
INVESTMENTS.
THE FIRST IS $75,000 AS PART OF
THE 1.2 MILLION FOR THE
SERVICES FOR THE AMERICAN
INDIAN AND ALASKA NATIVE
COMMUNITY.
THE SECOND IS 1.5 MILLION THAT
IS PART OF THE EQUITABLE
COMMUNITY'S INITIATIVE THAT AS
WE DISCUSSED YESTERDAY IS IN
ADDITION TO THE 1.5 MILLION FOR
THAT PURPOSE IN 2021 WHICH IS
NOT BEEN CONTRACTED OUT YET.
ALTHOUGH I SAW THAT RP WAS
RELEASED JUST TODAY.
LET'S SEE.
I WILL PAUSE BEFORE WE GO TO
ISSUE IDENTIFICATION AND IF
THERE ARE ANY GENERAL QUESTIONS
ABOUT THESE OR OTHER PROGRAMS
IN THE BUDGET.
>> THANK YOU, AMY.
I SEE COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ
THUMBS UP.
SHE LIKES IT.
ALL RIGHT.
GREAT.
I AM NOT AS FAMILIAR WITH THE
LEADS EXPANSION AND MANY
POSITIONS AND MORE SERVICE
EXTENSIONS THAT THEY ARE
FAMILIAR WITH.
CAN YOU REPLY ME THERE WAS A
RECENT REPORT THAT CAME BACK TO
EXPAND LEADS.
IS THAT PART OF WAYS FUNDED IN
THE BASELINE BUDGET.
>> I WILL LET JEFF SIMMS ANSWER
THAT QUESTION.
>> JEFF SIMMS CENTRAL STAFF.
NO, THE BASE OF THE 2022
PROPOSED BUDGET DOES NOT
PROVIDE A LEVEL OF FUNDING THAT
WOULD HAVE MET THE LEVEL
DISCUSSED IN THE RECENT
RESPONSE.
THAT WAS FOR ANALYSIS AND
BUDGET ESTIMATE AND ESTIMATE
CASE LOAD.
IF LEAD WAS ACCEPTING ALL
QUALIFIED REFERRALS CITYWIDE
AND THE 2022 PROPOSED BUDGET IS
ESSENTIALLY MAINTAINING THE
FUNDING LAST YEAR WITH THE
INFLATIONARY INCREASE AND AS I
WILL DISCUSS THAT IS BELOW THE
AMOUNT OF FUNDING THAT LEAD
WILL BE RECEIVING IN 2021.
>> THANK YOU.
I KNOW WE DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC
SET OF HANDS UP RIGHT NOW BUT
WE WILL TALK ABOUT LEAD HERE IN
A SECOND.
SO THANK YOU FOR THE REMINDER
ABOUT THAT.
OKAY.
LET'S KEEP GOING.
>> GREAT.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
PATTY.
SO THE FIRST ISSUE IDENTIFIED
FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION IS THE
COMMUNITY SAFETY CAPACITY
BUILDING PROGRAM.
AS I MENTIONED THIS WAS
ORIGINALLY FUNDED WITH $12
MILLION AND ONE TIME FUNDS IN
THE 2020 ADOPTED BUDGET.
1.6 MILLION OF THE FUNDING WAS
FOR ADMINISTRATION, COMMUNITY
HONOR YUMS AND COSTS AND THE
OTHER 10.4 MILLION WAS
DISTRIBUTED TO 33 ORGANIZATIONS
THROUGH AN RP PROCESS TO FUND
COMMUNITY SAFETY PROGRAMS.
BECAUSE THE FUNDS FOR 2021 WERE
CONTRACTED LATE IN THE YEAR THE
CONTRACTS ARE THROUGH DECEMBER
OF 2022.
AND IN ADDITION AS OF A FEW
WEEKS AGO THE 3 MILLION IN
ADDITIONAL FUNDING HAD NOT BEEN
CONTRACTED MEANING 7 TO 10
MILLION OF THE 2021 FUNDING
WILL LIKELY NOT BE SPENT IN
2021 AND AVAILABLE TO SUPPORT
THE PROGRAMS IN 2022.
AND I AM DOUBLE-CHECKING WITH
CBO TO TRY AND QUANTIFY THAT
NUMBER EXACTLY FOR YOU AS WE
MOVE THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
IN ADDITION TO THE REMAINING
2021 FUNDS, THE PROPOSED 2022
BUDGET INCLUDES ONGOING FUNDING
OF 10 MILLION PER YEAR FOR THIS
PROGRAM.
AND SIMILAR TO OUR DISCUSSION
OF PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING THIS
WILL LEAD TO SIGNIFICANT
INCREASE IN FUNDING IN 2022
WITH THE DROP IN 2023 WITHOUT
COUNCIL ACTION.
COUNCIL CAN CONSIDER REDUCING
FUND FOR 22 TO MAKE FUNDING FOR
OTHER PRIORITIES AND MINIMIZE
THE FUNDING CLIFF AT THE END OF
22 WHEN FUNDING REDUCES TO 10
MILLION OR THE COUNCIL COULD
CHOOSE TO TAKE NO ACTION.
>> QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON
THIS?
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU.
THIS IS NOW IDENTIFIED AS AN
ONGOING INVESTMENT, IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> YES.
>> SO THAT'S GOOD.
WE'LL JUST START THERE BECAUSE
I THINK WHEN WE ORIGINALLY MADE
IT, IT WAS CONSIDERED ONE TIME
FUNDING AND SO THIS PROPOSED
BUDGET ADDS ANOTHER TEN MILLION
AND THEN THERE IS THE CARRY
OVER FOR UNSPENT DOLLARS PLUS
THE OTHER THREE THAT WE PUT IN
JUST IN SEPTEMBER SO YOU ARE
SAYING THAT THERE IS 17 THERE.
>> RIGHT.
I AM WORKING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT
THAT EXACT NUMBER OF CARRY
FORWARD IS EXPECTED TO BE OR
WHAT IS AVAILABLE.
BUT RIGHT NOW I THINK IT WOULD
BE IN THAT RANGE.
>> AND SO WE REDUCE THE FUNDS
TO TEN MILLION, THAT WOULD
STILL CARRY US THROUGH THE END
OF THE CONTRACTS FOR THE END OF
2022 AND CONSIDERED ONGOING
ASSESSMENT AND THERE IS MONEY
PRESUMABLY AVAILABLE IN 2022.
>> YES.
>> THERE WILL BE AS LONG AS NO
CHANGES ARE MADE TEN MILLION
AVAILABLE IN 2023.
>> IS HELPFUL.
WHEN I DISCUSSED THIS WITH
DIRECTOR NOBEL, HE DID KIND OF
SUGGEST THAT THIS WAS BY DESIGN
IN AN EFFORT TO TRY TO ASSIST
US IN TURNING A ONE-TIME
INVESTMENT.
I THINK I UNDERSTAND HOW THAT
IS WORKING AND APPRECIATE THE
OPTIONS HERE.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD AND I THANK YOU, AMY
FOR LAYING THIS OUT.
I TOO KNOW THAT THIS CAME UP.
WE WERE TOLD THIS SUMMER WE
WERE TOLD MAYBE YOU MAYBE YOU
DON'T NEED TO CUT THAT THREE
MILLION THAT WAS NOT UTILIZED
BECAUSE OF OFFICERS NOT
UTILIZING THAT FUNDING.
WE SAID IT IS IMPORTANT TO USE
THE $3 MILLION AND THE
COMMUNITY WAS ASKING FOR 3
MILLION TO THE EXISTING 10
MILLION TO CONTRACTS COULD BE
EXPENDED AND HSD COULD IDENTIFY
ADDITIONAL ORGANIZATIONS TO BE
GRANT RECIPIENTS GIVEN THERE
WAS $40 MILLION AND REQUEST
THAT COME IN.
I THINK THAT IMPORTANT ELEMENTS
IN YOUR OPTIONS HERE IS SIMILAR
TO THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE
WERE HAVING BEEN THE EQUITABLE
COMMUNITY TASK FORCE AND THE
BUDGETING RECOMMENDATIONS
COMING FORWARD.
WE DON'T WANT THESE PROGRAMS TO
SORT OF HOW AN AMOUNT IN 2022
THAT IS NOT REFLECTIVE OF WHERE
THE FUNDING WILL BE IN TWO OR
THREE YEARS.
WE DON'T WANT THERE TO BE A
CLIFF FOR THOSE FUNDS TO BE
PULLED AWAY.
AND I AM INTERESTED IN WORKING
WITH YOU ALL AND WITH CENTRAL
STAFF.
AND WITH PUBLIC SAFETY AND
WEIGHING INTO MAKE SURE THAT WE
DO SEE THE CARRY FORWARD FOR
THE REFERENCE FOR 22 BUDGET TO
COMMIT TO 13 MILLION AS THE
COUNCIL HAD AUTHORIZED IN
MAKING SURE THE THREE MILLION
DOES CARRY OVER TO NEXT YEAR
ASSUMING AMY THAT YOUR RESEARCH
THAT YOU ARE DOING TO FIGURE
OUT HOW MUCH IS POTENTIALLY
AVAILABLE IS FOR 22.
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THOSE
DOLLARS CARRY FORWARD SO WE
HAVE MAINTAINED THE PROGRAM
THAT WE ARE ADDING ADDITIONAL
CONTRACTS TO IT.
I DO THINK THAT MEANS THAT WE
ARE CREATING A REASONABLE SORT
OF LEVEL EXPECTATION OF HOW
MUCH PEOPLE COULD RECEIVE
VERSUS AN INFLATED AMOUNT THAT
DROPS OFF WITHOUT THE ABILITY
FOR FUNDING IN THE FUTURE.
I WILL LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING
WITH YOU AND I AM LEANING
TOWARDS OPTION A AS WELL AND
WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE ARE
LOOKING AT OUT YEARS AND
SUSTAINABILITY.
>> ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
THANK YOU.
I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THE
SEATTLE SAFETY INITIATIVE
FUNDED WITH $4 MILLION IN ONE
TIME FUNDING IN 2020.
THE INITIATIVE FUNDS FOR
ORGANIZATIONS TO PROVIDE
COORDINATED SERVICES INCLUDING
CRISIS INTERCEPT RESPONSE AND
COMMUNITY SAFETY HUBS AND
NEIGHBORHOOD BASE SAFETY TEAMS
TO REDUCE VIOLENCE AND IMPROVE
COMMUNITY SAFETY.
THE ONE TIME FUNDING END AT THE
END OF 2021 AND THE 2022
PROPOSED BUDGET DOES NOT
INCLUDE FUNDING FOR THE
PROGRAM.
IF COUNCIL WANTS THIS TO PHONE
NUMBER IT COULD AMEND THE
PROPOSED BUDGET TO INCLUDE
FUNDING AND THAT FUNDING COULD
BE ONE TIME OR ONGOING.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
THANK YOU.
>> HIGH PRIORITY FOR ME AND
DEVELOPED OPTION ONE AND THANK
YOU TO THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE
SIGNED ON IN SUPPORT OF IT.
THIS IS AN IMPORTANT
GEOGRAPHICALLY BASED MODEL THAT
IS DOING REALLY AMAZING WORK IN
OUR COMMUNITIES.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD AND
APPRECIATE YOUR LEADERSHIP AND
FLAGGED AS AN AREA THAT DID NOT
GET INCLUDED AND THAT OTHERS
ARE INTERESTED IN.
>> LAST SLIDE, AMY.
>> THE LAST SLIDE WILL BE
DISCUSSED BY JEFF SIMMS.
SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU AMY, THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR BEING HERE.
>> WELCOME BACK, JEFF.
>> THE LAST PICTURE
IDENTIFICATION IS THE LEAD
PROGRAM THAT WE ALREADY STARTED
TOUCHING TO AS A REFRESHER FOR
THE 2021 BUDGET.
PROVIDED $6.1 MILLION.
AND OVER THE COURSE OF 2021.
THE COUNCIL ADDED ANOTHER $3
MILLION IN ORDINANCE 126 IS 48
FOR A TOTAL OF $9.2 MILLION
BEING SPENT UPON LEAD IN 2021.
IT IS TRANSPARENT THAT $3
MILLION IN SEPTEMBER HAD THE
ADDITIONAL 3 MILLION NOT
PROVIDED TO LEAD AND SO I DON'T
KNOW.
IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE COMPLETED
AND OBVIOUSLY THOSE FUNDS WERE
NOT PROVIDED EARLIER AND THERE
IS LIKELY SOME IMPACTS WHERE
THINGS CAN OCCUR.
THE 2022 PROPOSED BUDGET
MAINTAINS THE ADOPTED BUDGET
FROM LAST YEAR WITH
INFLATIONARY INCREASE AND DOES
NOT ADD THAT $3 MILLION THAT
THE COUNCIL APPROPRIATED IN THE
LAST SUMMER.
AS A RESULT THERE IS A FUNDING
DECREASE FOR LEAD RELATIVE TO
WHAT WAS PROVIDED AND THEN ALSO
TO MAKE SURE I HIGHLIGHT PER
YOUR QUESTION CHAIRMAN MOSQUEDA
THERE'S TWO OTHER OPTIONS THAT
GO BACK TO 2020 AND IN 2020
WHEN THE COUNCIL DOUBLED
FUNDING FOR THE LEAD PROGRAM IT
PASSED A RESOLUTION SEEKING TO
RESOLVE THESE TO ENSURE
APPROPRIATE FUNDING WOULD BE
AVAILABLE FOR ALL QUALIFIED
REFERRALS FOR 2023 AND THAT
RESOLUTION DID NOT TALK ABOUT
CITY OF SEATTLE EVERYWHERE
FUNDS BUT OTHER PATHWAYS AS
WELL AND THEN LAST YEAR IN THE
BUDGET, THE -- LAST YEAR AS WE
WERE GOING THROUGH THIS, SAME
PROCESS A SLIDE WAS PUT
TOGETHER AND LIKE HSD683 FOR
ANYONE LOOKING THAT UP AND IT
ASKED THE HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT TO ESTIMATE THE COST
OF DOING CITYWIDE -- THE LEAD
PROGRAM CITYWIDE AND ACCEPTING
ALL APPROPRIATE QUALIFYING
REFERRALS.
AND THAT WAS JUST DISCUSSED AT
A COUNCIL MEETING OR COMMITTEE
MEETING I SHOULD SAY BEFORE THE
BUDGET PROCESS BEGAN AND THE
ESTIMATE FOR THAT AMOUNT IS $21
MILLION AND SO THOSE OF THE
VARIOUS NUMBERS TO CONSIDER
HERE AND THE OPTIONS ARE TO ADD
MORE FUNDING FOR THE LEAD
PROGRAM OR TO GO WITH THE
BUDGET.
>> AND THE ADD FUNDING FOR THE
LEADS PROGRAM IS THE TOTAL OF
THE 3 MILLION.
>> THAT IS UP TO THE DISCRETION
OF THE COUNCIL.
IF YOU WANTED TO RESTORE TO THE
THREE MILLION THAT WASN'T --
THAT WAS ADDED OVER THE SUMMER
IT IS NOT INCLUDED AND THAT CAN
BE ONE LEVEL AND THE DESIRE TO
ACHIEVE SOME OF THE LEVELS
DISCUSSED EITHER IN THE SLIDE
RESPONSE OR THE RESOLUTION,
THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER ONE.
>> REMIND ME OF THAT TOTAL.
I WAS GETTING LOST IN THE
NUMBERS.
IS THAT THE 21.
>> YES.
>> 21 MILLION FOR THE FULL SLY
IMPLEMENTATION.
>> YES.
AND THEN ANOTHER POSSIBILITY
BECAUSE OF THE LATE DATE THAT
$3 MILLION WOULD BE PROVIDED IT
IS NOT CLEAR HOW MUCH OF THE
FUNDS WOULD BE EXPENDED THIS
YEAR.
AND IF GOT AWARDED ON DECEMBER
25th I DOUBT MANY WOULD BE USED
SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS
MAINTAINED RELATIVE TO WHAT WE
EXPAND TO ONCE WE RECEIVE THAT
$3 MILLION.
WE WOULD HAVE TO FIND OUT HAD
THE CONTRACT IS AWARDED AND
ENGAGE WITH HSD FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD.
PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> I JUST WANT FOLKS TO KNOW
THAT BECAUSE I FEEL REALLY
STRONGLY THAT WE PASSED THIS
RESOLUTION A COUPLE YEARS AGO
AND DID THE SLY REPORT AND
ASKED FOR THE STUDY AND THE
ANALYSTS AROUND WHAT IT WOULD
COST TO TAKE THE PROGRAM TO
SCALE I WOULD BLAKE TO START
THE CONVERSATION AROUND THAT
NUMBER BUT WITH A FULL
UNDERSTANDING WITH SO MANY
COMPETING NEEDS WE MAY NOT BE
ABLE TO GET THERE BUT I THINK
IT IS IMPORTANT TO START THE
CONVERSATION ABOUT FUNDING FOR
LEAD WITHIN A CONTEXT OF
FIDELITY AROUND THE MODEL AND
WHAT WE EXPECTED TO ACCOMPLISH
AND WHAT A PRIORITY REFERRAL IS
VERSUS WHAT IT SHOULD BE.
AND I THINK FROM MY
PARTICIPATION FROM THE LEADS
COORDINATING COUNCIL THE THING
THAT WE STRUGGLE WITH IS
WITHOUT FULL FUNDING IT CREATES
A CHALLENGE AROUND MAKING
DECISIONS AROUND WHO GETS
REFERRALS TO THE PROGRAM AND
NOT EVERYBODY WHO IS ELIGIBLE
IS ABLE TO BE REFERRED.
AND SO IF WE ARE NOT FUNDING
THE PROGRAM AT FULL SCALE I
THINK THERE IS ALSO AN
IMPORTANT POLICY CONVERSATION
ABOUT HOW LEADS SHOULD BE
PRIORITIZING THEIR REFERRALS.
>> GREAT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD FOR WORK
ON THAT AND JEFF THANK YOU FOR
THE REMINDERS OF THE DETAILS IN
THE SLIDE AND APPRECIATE SOME
OF THE IMPORTANCE OF FOLLOWING
THROUGH ON WHAT THAT SLIDE WAS
INITIALLY ASKING FOR WHAT IS
FULL UNIVERSE AND HOW TO TAKE
THIS TO SCALE COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD YOUR AUDIO IS A LITTLE
BIT DISTANT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A WAY
TO CHANGE THE SETTING TO
INDIVIDUAL.
I AM NOT THE TECH PERSON BUT AT
SOME POINT WE MAY WANT TO
DOUBLE-CHECK YOUR AUDIO.
GREAT.
THANK YOU.
SO JEFF, THANKS FOR GETTING US
THIS LAST SLIDE.
COLLEAGUES ARE THERE ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS IN THIS CATEGORY?
I AM NOT HEARING ANY.
THIS IS A GREAT PRIMER FOR THE
UPCOMING CONVERSATION HERE THAT
WE HAVE ON SPD FOR THE
REMAINDER OF THE AFTERNOON.
I WANT TO THANK AGAIN AMY GORE
AND LISA K AND ASHTRA AND, OF
COURSE, PATTY AND ALLY THAT ARE
WITH US AS WELL.
GREAT INFORMATION LEADING INTO
OUR CONVERSATION HERE.
ALSO MADE CAMEOS AND THANKS FOR
BEING WITH US.
MADAM CLERK CAN YOU PLEASE READ
ITEM 3 IN THE RECORD.
>> SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT
FOR BRIEFING AND DISCUSSION.
>> WONDERFUL.
THANK YOU AND WELCOME GREG.
I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD WILL BE A
LONG PRESENTATION.
DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY?
NOTHING.
WE WILL GET INTO IT.
THANKS FOR GETTING US GOING.
>> THANKS YOU.
LAST BUT NOT LEAST THE SEATTLE
POLICE DEPARTMENT IS GOING TO
TRY TO MOVE THROUGH IT AS
QUICKLY AS I CAN AND AS YOU
POSTED OUT IT IS LONGISH AND
DIVE IN PATTY.
THIS IS NOT EASY TO READ BUT I
WILL POINT OUT THERE IS NOT A
LOT OF INFORMATION THAT CAN BE
TAKEN AWAY HERE AT A VERY HIGH
LEVEL WHAT YOU ARE SEEING IS A
BUDGET THAT HAS NOT CHANGED A
LOT.
AT THE BOTTOM LINE A BUDGET
THAT HAS MOVED UP IN
APPROPRIATION OVER TWO-AND-A-
HALF MILLION AND THAT HAS GROWN
BY ONLY LESS THAN ONE PERCENT
AND IT IS THE CASE THAT FTES
HAVE GONE FROM 2020 TO 1769
LARGELY BECAUSE OF THE FTES
THAT HAVE MOVED OUT OF THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE
PARKING ENFORCEMENT UNIT AND
THE COMMUNICATIONS GROUP OVER
THE LAST YEAR.
I KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN SOME
QUESTION ABOUT THE FTES AND THE
NUMBER THAT WAS IN THE PRINTED
BUDGET, THE PROPOSED BUDGET
THAT THE MAYOR SENT DOWN AND I
CAN LET MEMBERS KNOW THAT 1769
NUMBER THAT IS SMALL THERE IN
THE 2022 PROPOSED COLUMN IS A
NUMBER THAT CPO HAS PUT FORWARD
TO ME AND IT IS THREE FT HIGHER
THAN THE ONE IN THE PRINTED
BUDGET SO SLIGHTLY OFF BUT
CERTAINLY NOT ANYTHING THAT IS
OF CONCERN.
THE PERCENTAGE CHANGE COLUMN IN
THE BSLS ARE LARGELY DO TO
MONEY MOVING AROUND AND HAVING
TO DO WITH SALARY SAVINGS THAT
ARE BEING PUT IN A PLACE THAT
HSD WOULD LIKE TO SPEND THEM
AND THAT WILL PRETTY MUCH BE
THE ENTIRE TOPIC OF OUR
CONVERSATION THIS AFTERNOON.
AND WITH THAT, IF IT IS OKAY I
WILL JUST MOVE ALONG.
AND SO I WOULDN'T NORMALLY
START WITH STAFFING I WOULD
NORMALLY GO TO THE MAYOR'S
PROPOSED BUDGET AD BUT IN THIS
PARTICULAR CASE STARTING WITH
STAFFING IS GOOD CONTEXT ONE
SUBJECT VERY MUCH TIES INTO THE
OTHERS.
HOPEFULLY THAT IS OKAY.
I WILL START WITH STAFFING AND
AS YOU'LL SEE HERE IN THE
STAFFING CHART OF COURSE THERE
IS THE HISTORY OF INVESTING IN
SPDS FUNDED FTES AND THAT
COLUMN THAT IS SECOND FROM THE
LEFT.
AND THE CITY HAS CONTINUALLY
PUT MORE MONEY INTO THE
DEPARTMENT IN THE LAST DECADE
AND MOVE THAT FUNDED FTE NUMBER
UP AND THAT CONTINUED UNTIL
LAST YEAR LAST SUMMER
SPECIFICALLY WHEN SPD REDUCED
ITS INTERNAL ALLOCATING FOR
FUNDED FTE FROM 1497 TO 1422.
AND AS YOU ALL KNOW THAT
HAPPENED AND IMMEDIATELY
FOLLOWING WAS A FIVE MONTH
HIRING FREEZE AND THIS HANDED
BECAUSE THERE WAS THE COVID
CRISIS AND ALSO THERE WAS A
NEED FOR SPD TO CAPTURE SAVINGS
BECAUSE OF EXPENDITURES MADE IN
THE OVERTIME CATEGORY TO
ADDRESS GEORGE FLOYD AND BLACK
LIVES MATTER DEMONSTRATIONS AND
SO FOR THOSE REASONS, SPD
LOWERED ITS OWN FUNDED FTE
COUNT TO CAPTURE SAVINGS.
AND THEN IN THE 2021 ADOPTED
BUDGET, THAT NEXT LINE DOWN YOU
CAN SEE THE COUNCIL FUNDED THE
FTE AT 1343 LARGELY TO REFLECT
WHAT THE TREND WAS AT THE TIME
OF UNPRECEDENTED NUMBER OF
OFFICER SEPARATIONS AND THE
COUNCIL WAS STARTING TO SEE IN
THE FALL AND EXPECTED TO
CONTINUE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.
AS THE LINE IS ENDING IN THE
NET ADS COLUMN NEGATIVE 78 IN
2021 AND NEGATIVE 35 IN 120
MEANS BY THE END OF 2021 THERE
IS A PROJECTED NET LOSS OF 215
OFFICERS.
FROM THE FORCE.
AND THE DEPARTMENT HAS
INDICATED THAT ABOUT A THIRD OF
THOSE OFFICERS HAD FEWER THAN
SEVEN YEARS OF SERVICE AND
ABOUT 25% WERE PEOPLE OF COLOR.
AND SO NOW JUMP INTO THE
MAYOR'S PROPOSED BUDGET.
, OH, IF YOU COULD FLIP BACK
ONE MORE I WASN'T DONE WITH
THAT.
THANKS, PATTY.
THE MAYOR'S PROPOSED BUDGET
WOULD INCREASE SWORN STAFFING
TO A LEVEL THAT WOULD SUPPORT
1357FTES AND THAT'S THE 2022
ROW.
THAT IS THERE ON THE VERIED END
OF THE TABLE.
AND OBVIOUSLY THIS IS INCREASE
FROM LAST YEAR AND EXECUTIVE
HAS SAID THAT THE REASON THAT
THEY ARE INCREASING THE SWORN
FTE IS FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS.
FIRST BECAUSE 1357 IS THE
NUMBER OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS
THAT THE DEFENDANT CURRENTLY
HAS AND THE COUNCIL LAST YEAR
CUT A NUMBER OF POSITIONS 97 I
BELIEVE.
AND CUT THE AUTHORIZED
POSITIONS DOWN TO 1357 AND ONE
REASON WHY THE EXECUTIVE HAS
PICKED THAT NUMBER AND FUNDING
UP TO THE AUTHORIZED LEVEL AND
THE SECOND IS THAT THE
EXECUTIVE BELIEVES THAT THE
COUNCIL TOOK THE ACTION OF
GOING DOWN TO 1343 ONLY TO
CAPTURE ATTRITION SAVINGS THAT
WAS EXPECTED IN THE FALL.
AND SINCE THEY BELIEVE THAT
ATTRITION WILL STOP THIS YEAR,
THEY HAVE MOVED THE FUNDING
LEVEL BACK UP TO 1357.
AND SO GOING TO THE SPECIFICS
WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IS THAT
THEIR STAFFING PLAN WOULD HIRE
125 NEW HIRES AND THEY WOULD
EXPECT 94 SEPARATIONS THAT IS A
DRASTIC DIFFERENCE SINCE THE
LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.
AND THE MAYOR'S PLAN HAS BEEN
PUBLICIZED AS HIRING A NET OF
35 SWORN OFFICERS AND I SHOULD
POINT OUT THAT SHE GETS THERE
BY NOT INCLUDING ACADEMY
SEPARATIONS.
WHEN A RECRUIT -- IT IS A
TECHNICAL THING, WHEN A RECRUIT
IS HIRED, THEIR CIVILIAN AND GO
THROUGH THE ACADEMY AS A
CIVILIAN AND NOT UNTIL THEY
GRADUATE FROM THE ACADEMY THAT
THEY TAKE THE SWORN OATH.
IF THEY DROP OUT FROM THE
ACADEMY THEY ARE DROPPING OU
AS CIVILIAN.
SHE IS NOT COUNTING FOR ACADEMY
DROP OUTS AS SWORN OFFICERS
SEPARATIONS.
AND BY DOING THAT, SHE IS
TAKING 125 LESS 90 AND INSTEAD
OF LESS 94 AND CALLING IT 35
SWORN ADS.
AND SO THAT IS HOW SHE HAS 35
SWORN ADS IN HER PROMOTIONAL
MATERIAL.
BUT ACTUALLY IF YOU JUST TAKE
THE TOTAL ADS LESS THE TOTAL
SEPARATIONS IT IS 31.
WHICH WOULD BE THE CASE OVER
TWO YEARS.
I WILL MAKE THAT DISTINCTION SO
THERE IS NO CONFUSION.
BUT SHE WOULD GET THROUGH THAT
THE 94 SEPARATIONS AND 125 ADS
AND THE 125 ADS WOULD CONSIST
OF 105 RECRUITS AND 20 LATERAL
HIRES AND I THINK IT IS EVIDENT
FROM THIS TABLE THAT IS NOT A
LEVEL THAT SPD HAS SEEN A WHOLE
LOT.
IT IS AN AGGRESSIVE STAFFING
PLAN.
AND IT ISN'T SOMETHING THAT IS
IN IT THAT COULDN'T BE ACHIEVED
BUT IT IS CERTAINLY AGGRESSIVE.
IT IS SOMETHING THAT THE
DEPARTMENT BELIEVES THAT THEY
CAN REACH BECAUSE OF A NUMBER
OF CHANGES THAT THEY HAVE MADE.
ONE OF THE CHANGES BEING THAT
THEY HAVE PUT THEIR TESTING
SYSTEM ONLINE AND MAKES IT
EASIER FOR FOLKS TO TAKE THE
TEST AND MORE SIGNIFICANT CLAIM
THEY HAVE CONTRACTED OUT FOR
THE BACKGROUND SERVICES AND
THERE USED TO BE BOTTLE NECK AS
FOLKS PASSED THE TEST AND MOVED
TO BACKGROUNDING IT WOULD TAKE
SEVERAL MONTHS FOR THE
BACKGROUND DETECTIVES TO GET
THEM THROUGH THE FULL
INVESTIGATION PROCESS.
NOW THAT THEY HAVE HELP DOING
THAT HOPEFULLY THEY CAN GET
THEM THROUGH QUICKER.
WITH THOSE TWO ASSUMPTIONS THEY
ARE THINK THAT THEY WILL GET
THROUGH 125 HIRES WITH 105
RECRUITS AND 20 LATERALS.
AGAIN AGGRESSIVE AS THEY HAVE
ACKNOWLEDGED.
AND THE LAST THING I WILL SAY
ABOUT THIS SLIDE BEFORE I TAKE
SOME QUESTIONS, I KNOW YOU WILL
HAVE SOME QUESTIONS IS THAT
IFNY ACHIEVE THIS PLAN THEY
WILL NEED FUNDING TO SUPPORT
THE FTES AND SO 1223FTES IS
QUITE A BIT LESS THAN WHAT THEY
ARE FUNDED AT.
THEY ARE FUNDED AT 1357.
SO IT IS A DIFFERENCE OF IS 34.
THEY WILL HAVE 134FTES THAT ARE
FUNDED AND VACANT AND CREATING
SALARY SAVINGS.
AND THAT SALARY SAVINGS WILL
ADD UP TO $19 MILLION.
AND THEN WHAT THEIR BUDGET IS
BASED ON IS TAKING THE $19
MILLION OF SALARY SAVINGS AND
THEN SPENDING IT ELSEWHERE.
I AM ABOUT TO IN A MINUTE WHEN
I GO TO YOUR QUESTIONS AND HOW
THEY SPEND THAT SALARY SAVINGS
AND A SPECIFIC PLAN TO SPEND
17.9 MILLION OF IT THAT WILL GO
TO A MINUTE.
AND I HAVE THROWN OUT AND
STOPPED AND I WILL TAKE A BREAK
FOR QUESTIONS.
>> GREG, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COLLEAGUES, ARE THERE QUESTIONS
AT THIS POINT.
I WILL JUGS ASK IF YOU ARE ABLE
TO GIVE US A SENSE OF HOW THIS
HIRING PLAN IS COMPARED TO LAST
YEAR WHEN WE RECEIVED A BUDGET
WITH AGGRESSIVE HIRING PLAN AND
ULTIMATELY WE UNDERSTOOD THAT
THERE WAS REALLY NOT A WAY TO
HIT THAT HIGHER AND WE MADE
APPROPRIATE CHANGES TO REFLECT
WHAT WAS ACHIEVABLE.
IS THERE ANY WAY TO COMPARE
THIS LEVEL OF AGGRESSIVE
HIREING TO WHAT WE SAW IN LAST
YEAR'S PROPOSED BUDGET?
>> YES.
IN LAST YEAR'S PROPOSED BUDGET
MADAM CHAIR, THEY HAD PROPOSED
114 HIRES.
AND I DON'T REMEMBER THE
SPECIFIC BREAK OUT OF RECRUITS
VERSUS LATERALS.
I THINK IT WAS I'M NOT GOING TO
SAY BECAUSE I DON'T REMEMBER.
BUT IT WAS LESS AGGRESSIVE.
114 VERSUS 125.
AND SO FAR THIS
THIS IS TRAINED OFFICERS IN
SERVICE AND FULLY TRAINED
OFFICERS ARE OFFICERS THAT HAVE
BEEN THROUGH -- THEY HAVE
OBVIOUSLY BEEN THROUGH THE
ACADEMY.
THEY HAVE BEEN THROUGH FIELD
TRAINING AND YOU CAN PUT THEM
IN A SQUAD CAR AND THEY WILL
RESPOND TO A 911 CALL.
AN OFFICER IN SERVICE IS
AVAILABLE AND SHOWING UP TO
WORK EVERY DAY.
THE OFFICER IN SERVICE NUMBER,
THE GRAY NUMBER THAT IS LOWER
ACCOUNTS FOR OFFICERS THAT ARE
OUT ON LONG TERM DISABILITY
LEAVE OR ON OTHER KINDS OF
LEAVE LIKE FAMILY LEAVE AND SO
YOU HAVE A HIGHER NUMBER OF
OFFICERS THAT YOU TAKE OUT OF
FOLKS THAT ARE ON LONG TERM
LEAVE AND YOU HAVE A LOWER
NUMBER OF OFFICERS AND IT IS
THE LOWER NUMBER THAT YOU CAN
ACTUALLY PUT OUT IN THE FIELD
EVERY DAY.
AND YOU WILL SEE THAT THERE IS
-- THAT AS YOU HAVE SEEN IN THE
PAST THOSE TWO NUMBERS TRACK
SOMEWHAT CLOSE TO EACH OTHER
AND THEN DURING THE SUMMER OF
2020 THEY DIVERGE QUITE A BIT
AND OVER THE INCOMES NEXT
COUPLE OF YEARS THEY WILL GO
BACK TO HISTORIC PATTERNS AND
FEWER FOLKS ON EXTENDED LEAVE.
TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF HOW THE
CONSECUTIVE ADS OF BACK TO BACK
31 NET NEW HIRES WILL LOOK OVER
TWO YEARS, IT WILL START TO
CHANGE THE CURVE A LITTLE BIT
BACK TOWARDS WHERE THE OFFICERS
WERE, NOT REGAINING TOO MUCH,
CERTAINLY NOT BACK UP TO THE
LEVELS BETWEEN 2017 AND ON STAF
I WILL SHOW YOU IS A PATROL
STAFFING CHANGES.
WHAT I WANT TO SHOW YOU HERE, I
KNOW THIS IS NOT A VERY EASY
ONE TO READ.
YOU SEE ON THE LEFT IS PATROL
STAFFING AS IT EXISTS TODAY, AND
DESCRIBING THIS PARTICULAR
TABLE, YOU SEE THE VARIOUS
KINDS OF PATROL STAFFING, THE
VERY TOP ROW IS THE 911
RESPONDERS.
THEN YOU HAVE OTHER KINDS OF
SPECIALTY PATROL STAFFING, THE
ANTICRIME TEAMS, BIKE AND FOOT
BEATS, THE COMMUNITY POLICE
TEAMS AND THEN SOME OTHER
SPECIALTY PATROL STAFF
POSITIONS.
THE SAME THING IN THE TABLE ON
THE RIGHT, THE TABLE ON THE
RIGHT IS FROM A YEAR AGO.
AND SO, WHAT YOU CAN SEE HERE
IS THAT THERE IS A DRASTIC
CHANGE OVER THE LAST YEAR AS
THE STAFFING HAS CHANGED AT SPD.
THE SPECIALTY STAFFING THAT WAS
PRIMARILY IN THE COMMUNITY
POLICE TEAM OR THE ANTICRIME
TEAM OR ON THE BEATS, THOSE
OFFICERS, AS OFFICERS, HAVE BEEN
PUSHED INTO PATROL.
AND THAT IS WHAT CHIEF DIAZ HAS
DONE OVER THE LAST YEAR, TO TRY
TO MAINTAIN RESPONSE TIMES AND
TO AVOID PRIORITY CALL RESPONSE
DAYS.
WHEN THEY MOVED INTO PATROL,
THEY DID NOT MOVE BACK INTO THE
PRECINCT, NORTH, SOUTH, EAST
AND WEST, DIRECTLY.
THEY MOVED INTO A SECTION THAT
WAS CALLED CITYWIDE RESPONSE.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE TABLE ON
THE LEFT, YOU WILL SEE A NEW
COLUMN CALLED CITYWIDE
RESPONSE, AND THAT IS ALL OF
THOSE OFFICERS THAT HAD BEEN
DOING THE SPECIALTY WORK, THAT
HAD NOT BEEN ANSWERING 911 CALLS
, NOW THEY ARE ANSWERING 911
CALLS AGAIN AND THEY ARE PART
OF THIS SPECIALTY UNIT CITYWIDE
RESPONSE THAT IS ASSISTING WITH
911 CALLS.
AND SO THE CITY IS HANDLING 911
CALLS VERY DIFFERENTLY.
BUT I THINK THE THING TO POINT
OUT IS THAT IF YOU TAKE THE
NUMBERS OF NINE ON ONE
RESPONDERS, THEY HAVE NOT
CHANGED, YOU ARE SEEING 564 911
RESPONDERS THIS YEAR AND 563
911 RESPONDERS LAST YEAR.
SO, THE RESPONDERS, THE
STAFFING, HAS NOT CHANGED.
WHAT IS DIFFERENT IS THE WAY
THEY ARE BEING MANAGED AND THE
WAY THEY ARE RESPONDING TO
CALLS, AND WHAT OF COURSE WE
ARE SEEING IS INCREASES IN 911
RESPONSE TIMES AND INCREASES IN
PRIORITY CALL RESPONSE DATES.
AND SO I ASKED THE DEPARTMENT,
I SAID HOW DO THOSE THINGS GO
TOGETHER?
AND WHAT THEY TOLD ME WAS THAT
SINCE THE REOPENING OF THE
CITY, SINCE FOLKS STARTED TO GO
BACK TO WORK AND EVEN STARTED
HAPPENING AGAIN, THERE HAS BEEN
MORE TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND
THAT HAS LED TO A DECREASE, OR
AN INCREASE, AND CALL RESPONSE
TIMES, AS WELL AS MORE OF AN
UPTICK IN CALL VOLUME.
AND THEN SECOND, THAT THERE IS
AN UPTICK IN SHOTS FIRED AND IN
EMERGENCY INCIDENTS, AND THAT
WHEN THERE ARE EMERGENCY
INCIDENTS, THAT CITYWIDE
RESPONSE TEAM AND PATROL FOLKS
GO TO THOSE EMERGENCY INCIDENTS
AND OF COURSE WHEN THAT HAPPENS
THEY BECOME UNAVAILABLE FOR
CALLS.
AND THEN LASTLY, THE STAFFING
SHORTAGE.
AND THAT IS THE PIECE THAT IS
STILL A BIT OF A DISCONNECT.
SO THAT IS SOMETHING I AM STILL
WORKING ON LEARNING MORE ABOUT.
>> WE APPRECIATE YOU DOING THIS
DIGGING.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBAL, PLEASE
GO AHEAD.
>> I WAS GOING TO UNDERSCORE
SOME OF WHAT GREG JUST COVERED
BUT HE DID SUCH A GREAT JOB, I
DON'T KNOW WHAT THERE IS LEFT
FOR ME TO SAY.
OTHER THAN JUST AGAIN, NOTING
THAT WE HAVE VIRTUALLY THE SAME
NUMBER OF 911 RESPONDERS IN
PATROL AND RESPONSE TIMES GOING
UP.
AND THE NARRATIVE THAT WE ARE
HEARING A LOT IS THE REASON WHY
RESPONSE TIMES GOING UP IS
BECAUSE OF STAFFING SHORTAGE.
SO, THERE IS SOMETHING MORE
GOING ON HERE.
I UNDERSTAND THAT SOME OF IT IS
ABOUT HOW FOLKS IN PATROL ARE
BEING MANAGED.
AS FAR AS IN THE CRU UNIT AS
OPPOSED TO BEING DISPATCHED OUT
OF PRECINCT, THERE ARE STILL
PRECINCT-BASED OFFICERS, BUT
THE CRU UNIT IS 100 OFFICERS,
SO THAT MEANS, AS I UNDERSTAND,
I THINK WHAT SPD IS SAYING AS
IT RELATES TO TRAFFIC AND
CONGESTION AND OPENING UP THE
CITY IS, WHEN THE CRU UNIT IS
DISPATCHED TO A PRIORITY ONE
CALL, THEY MIGHT BE TRAVELING A
FURTHER DISTANCE, AND SO
TRAFFIC IMPACTS ARE MORE LIKELY
TO SLOW THEM DOWN THAN IF THEY
ARE TRAVELING WITHIN A
PRECINCT.
TO ANOTHER LOCATION.
IN A PRECINCT.
BUT, YOU KNOW, IT IS VERY
INTERESTING TO SEE IT, YOU
KNOW, LAID OUT THIS WAY.
WE HAD, ABOUT A YEAR AGO, HAD A
SIMILAR CONVERSATION AROUND THE
NUMBERS OF PATROL STAFFING, SO
IT IS REALLY GOOD TO GET THIS
DATA HERE.
I THINK THE ONE THING I WOULD
ASK GREG IS, ABOUT THE, YOU
KNOW, THEY HAVE GIVEN A COUPLE
OF DIFFERENT REASONS FOR WHY IT
IS THAT RESPONSE TIMES ARE UP
FOR PRIORITY ONE CALLS, THAT IS
WHERE MY MIND IS FOCUSED, AT
LEAST.
IN ADDITION TO TRAFFIC AND
CONGESTION.
THEY REFERENCE INCREASED CALLS
AND INCREASED SHOTS FIRED.
ANECDOTALLY AND BY THE DATA, WE
KNOW THERE IS DEFINITELY AN
INCREASE IN SHOTS FIRED . I
WOULD BE INTERESTED TO KNOW
WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE CHECKING
THE INCREASE IN CALLS GENERALLY.
AND SPECIFICALLY FOR PRIORITY
ONE CALLS, SINCE WE DO HAVE A
METRIC THAT WE TRY TO MEET FOR
PRIORITY ONE CALLS,
>> I WILL CHECK ON THAT AND GET
BACK TO YOU.
TO YOUR POINT, COUNCILMEMBER, I
DID LEARN TODAY THAT THE
COMMUNITY RESPONSE GROUP IS,
THEY REPORT TO THE PRECINCT,
THEY DO ALSO DO CROSS BEAT
DISPATCHING, SO THERE IS SOME
OF THAT GOING ON.
SO THERE IS, YEAH, THERE IS
POTENTIALLY SOME TRAFFIC ISSUES
THERE AS THE DEPARTMENT HAS
SUGGESTED.
AND WE WILL LOOK INTO THE CALL
VOLUME ISSUE AS WELL.
>> THANK YOU, GREG.
>> GREG AND COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD , THANK YOU FOR HOPING
TO DRAW OUT THE CONCLUSION HERE
IN TERMS OF, AS YOU PUT IT,
THERE MUST BE SOMETHING ELSE
GOING ON.
AND I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN
HEARING MORE AT SOME POINT,
PERHAPS MAYBE OVER THE NEXT
WEEK OR TWO ABOUT WHAT THAT
MANAGEMENT ISSUE IS, IN
ADDITION TO THE TRAFFIC AND
DISTANCE YOU ALL MENTIONED AND
IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER THOUGHTS
ABOUT THAT AS WELL, I THINK IT
IS AN IMPORTANT TAKE AWAY FROM
THIS SLIDE AS YOU NOTED,
RELATIVELY THE SAME NUMBERS OF
CALLS, OBVIOUSLY DIFFERENT WAYS
IN WHICH PEOPLE ARE BEING
DEPLOYED, BUT NOT A STARK
DIFFERENCE ONCE YOU DO -- ONCE
YOU TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION HOW
MANY FOLKS ARE ON LEAVE AND
AVAILABLE AT THE TIME.
COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PETERSON,
PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> I COME I WANTED TO ASK ABOUT
THE CPT, IS THAT COMMUNITY
POLICING TEAM?
>> YES.
>> SO, WHEN WE LOOK AT LAST
YEAR HAVING 28 AND THEN THIS
YEAR HAVING ZERO, I KNOW THAT IN
OUR DISTRICT WE REALLY MISS OUR
COMMUNITY POLICING OFFICERS,
THEY WERE OUT THERE DURING THE
DAY TRYING TO LOOK AT THE DATA,
TRYING TO WORK WITH DETECTIVES
TO SOLVE CRIMES, TO WORK WITH
PATROL.
THEY KNOW THE COMMUNITY VERY
WELL.
SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE DAY
WHEN WE CAN RETURN THE
COMMUNITY POLICING OFFICERS TO
THEIR POSITIONS.
WHERE IS THE, SOMETHING LIKE
HARBOR PATROL?
ANOTHER HAS BEEN A CONCERN THAT
HARBOR PATROL IS NOT AS WELL
STAFFED BECAUSE SOME OF THEM
HAVE BEEN PULLED OVER TO
REGULAR PATROL.
IS HARBOR PATROL ON THIS LIST?
>> HARBOR PATROL IS NOT ON THIS
LIST, COUNCILMEMBER.
THERE ARE , IN THE APPENDICES
IN MY ISSUE PAPER, YOU WILL SEE
A GENERAL BREAKOUT OF
DEPARTMENT FUNCTIONS AND YOU
WILL SEE THAT THERE IS A
SPECIALTY UNIT FUNCTION OUTSIDE
OF PATROL. AND THAT WOULD BE
THE CATEGORY THAT HARBOR PATROL
WOULD FALL IN.
AND YOU WILL SEE THAT IS DOWN
QUITE A BIT.
I WOULD HAVE TO GO GRAB MY
ISSUE PAPER TO SEE HOW MUCH --
>> THAT IS OKAY.
THAT IS OKAY.
>> HARBOR PATROL, I BELIEVE IT
IS DOWN 40%.
FROM WHERE IT WAS.
FOR THE MOST PART, THE FOLKS
THAT WENT INTO PATROL WERE
COMING FROM -- WENT INTO 911
RESPONSE, WERE COMING FROM
PATROL.
THOSE ACT CPT, THOSE FOLKS.
THEY WERE NOT FROM HARBOR
PATROL, PER SE.
MOST OF THOSE SPECIALTY UNIT,
THE REASON MOST OF THEM ARE
DOWN ARE BECAUSE OF ATTRITION.
BECAUSE OF OFFICERS LEAVING.
THAT IS NOT ENTIRELY TRUE, SOME
OF THOSE FOLKS DID MOVE INTO
911 RESPONSE, BUT FOR THE MOST
PART, IT IS, THIS ERG IS MADE
UP OF THE NUMBERS YOU CAN SEE
THERE IN THE TABLE TO THE
RIGHT.
>> AND SO, WHEN WE ARE LOOKING
AT THE CHANGE IN THE NUMBERS
FROM THE GRAND TOTAL, 677,
DROPPING DOWN TO 579, WE ARE
SEEING COMMUNITY POLICING
OFFICERS BEING MOVED OVER TO
REACTIVE PATROL POSITION.
COULD YOU TALK ABOUT BEETS
ALREADY? AND WHAT THEIR ROLE IS
TYPICALLY AND THEY HAVE BEEN
ROLLED INTO PATROL NOW TOO?
>> I DID NOT TALK ABOUT IT TOO
MUCH, BUT THAT REPRESENTS THE
DOWNTOWN BIKE AND FOOT BEATS
AND THERE WERE SOME IN THE
NORTH PRECINCT.
AND OBVIOUSLY THEY HAVE GONE
DOWN QUITE A BIT.
I BELIEVE, AND THEY ARE ONLY IN
WEST AT THIS POINT.
>> AND THE LAST QUESTION HERE,
THERE ARE ALSO DETECTIVES THAT
I UNDERSTAND HAVE THE
DEPARTMENT WHO INVESTIGATE
MURDERS AND OTHER VIOLENT
CRIMES.
ARE THE DETECTIVES IN THIS
CHART OR ARE THEY IN A
DIFFERENT CHART?
>> THE DETECTIVES WOULD BE IN
THAT APPENDICES THAT I WAS KIND
OF MENTIONING.
LET ME JUMP ONLINE AND LOOK AT
IT HERE.
THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS
SECTION OF THE DEPARTMENT IS
DOWN BY -- INVESTIGATE OF UNITS
WENT FROM 16.2% OF THE NON-
PATROL PERSONNEL, DOWN TO 14.4%
IN 2021.
SPECIALTY UNITS WERE AT ABOUT
9% OF THE DEPARTMENT LAST YEAR,
AND THEY HAVE GONE DOWN TO 3%
OF THE DEPARTMENT THIS YEAR.
SO, I THINK THIS IS CONSISTENT
WITH WHAT WE KNOW OF HOW THE
CHIEF PRIORITIZES PATROLLING
911 OVER SPECIALTY UNITS.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THANKS A LOT, THANK YOU
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
I WANT TO GO BACK TO HARBOR
PATROL JUST FOR A SECOND, GREG.
SO, I THINK A LOT OF US ON THE
COUNCIL, YOU KNOW COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS HAS BEEN A REALLY BIG
LEADER AT LOOKING INTO WAYS WE
CAN POSSIBLY DO SOME OF THE
HARBOR PATROL FUNCTIONS
DIFFERENTLY.
I FEEL LIKE WE ARE GOING TO
CHRONICALLY BE IN A POSITION AS
THERE ARE STAFFING CRUNCHES AT
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, WHERE
HARBOR PATROL WILL CONTINUE TO
BE LESS OF A DEPLOYMENT
PRIORITY.
AND TO MY UNDERSTANDING, AS WE
HAVE LEARNED SEVERAL TIMES OVER
THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS, AND
OVER THE LAST YEAR, THESE
DEPLOYMENT DECISIONS ARE AT THE
DISCRETION OF THE CHIEF PER THE
CHARTER.
SO, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE THE
ABILITY TO SELECTIVELY STAFF
SOME OF THESE UNITS.
BECAUSE THERE IS A BIG NEED WITH
HARBOR PATROL AND BECAUSE
HARBOR PATROL HAS EXPERIENCED
SO MUCH ATTRITION, AND BECAUSE
MY UNDERSTANDING IS, THE
FUNCTIONS OF HARBOR PATROL ARE
VERY DIFFERENT FROM ALL OF THE
OTHER DUTIES OF THE DEPARTMENT,
IS THERE A POTENTIAL WAY TO
PURSUE FUNDING, RESTORATION,
AND ENHANCEMENT OF THE HARBOR
PATROL CAPACITY THROUGH SOME
ALTERNATIVE TYPE OF WORKER, SO
THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO BE IN A
POSITION WHERE THE CHIEF HAS TO
MAKE THOSE DECISIONS TO STAFF
UP THE HARBOR PATROL AT THE
EXPENSE OF SOME OF THESE OTHER
FUNCTIONS?
OR ARE WE KIND OF STUCK IN THIS
SPACE WHERE THAT IS GOING TO
HAVE TO BASICALLY STAY AS A
SWORN FUNCTION, AND ARE THERE
SOME CRITICAL COMPONENTS
REQUIRING IT TO BE A SWORN
FUNCTION THAT I AM NOT AWARE
OF?
JUST WANTED TO THROW THOSE OUT
THERE AT THIS EARLY STAGE.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER.
I THINK THERE ARE OBVIOUSLY
SOME ENFORCEMENT COMPONENTS THE
HARBOR PATROL HAS THAT WOULD
HAVE TO REMAIN UNDER THE
PURVIEW OF A SWORN OFFICER, SO
YOU OBVIOUSLY NEED TO HAVE A
SWORN OFFICER, GIVING SOMEBODY
A BOATING DUI OR SOMETHING THAT
IS INVOLVED WITH ANY SORT OF
CRIMINAL ASPECT.
WITH REGARD TO WHAT HARBOR
PATROL DOES ON THE CIVIL SIDE
OR JUST ON THE SAFETY SIDE, THE
CHALLENGE THERE GETS TO BE
LABOR.
AND IT HAS TO DO WITH A BODY OF
WORK THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING
DONE BY SWORN OFFICERS AS PART
OF THE SEATTLE POLICE OFFICERS
KILLED, AND IF THE SEATTLE
POLICE OFFICERS KILLED WANTED
TO GIVE UP THAT BOUNTY OF WORK
AND ALLOW FOR THAT BODY OF WORK
TO BE DONE BY CIVILIANS, THEN
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT COULD
HAPPEN, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING
THAT CURRENTLY IS DONE BY
HARBOR PATROL AND THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT THEY HAVE A
RIGHT TO RETAIN.
SO, IT IS SOMETHING THAT THE
CITY WOULD NEED TO NEGOTIATE,
TO HAVE CIVILIANS DO.
THAT IS PROBABLY NOT SOMETHING
THAT CAN HAPPEN IN THE SHORT
TERM, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT
THE CITY COULD PURSUE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR, AND THANK
YOU, GREG.
I JUST WANTED TO RE-SOMETHING
YOU HAD MENTIONED ABOUT
ATTRITION WITH HARBOR PATROL.
IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT
HARBOR PATROL HAS RETAINED ALL
OF THE FTEs PRE-2020 AS THEY DO
TODAY.
THE REASON THERE ARE FEWER
STAFF AT HARBOR PATROL TODAY IS
BECAUSE THE OFFICERS ON LONG-
TERM LEAVE, WHICH INDICATED ON
A FEW SLIDES PREVIOUS, ARE
BEING PLACED IN HARBOR PATROL,
MEANING THAT THERE ARE FEWER
DEPLOYABLE OFFICERS, YET THE
NUMBER OF TOTAL OFFICERS HAS
STILL BEEN RETAINED WITHIN
HARBOR PATROL.
IS THAT -- MAY BE TO PUT IT
MORE SIMPLY, WE STILL HAVE THE
SAME NUMBER OF OFFICERS AT
HARBOR PATROL AS WE HAVE HAD
FOR THE LAST NUMBER OF YEARS.
THE DIFFERENCE TODAY AS
COMPARED TO BEFORE IS THAT
THOSE OFFICERS ARE ON LONG-TERM
LEAVE.
IS THAT A CORRECT UNDERSTANDING?
>> THERE WERE A NUMBER OF
OFFICERS, IT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING, THAT WERE IN THE
HARBOR PATROL THAT WENT OUT ON
LONG-TERM LEAVE.
IF YOU ARE SAYING THAT OFFICERS
IN OTHER AREAS OF THE
DEPARTMENT WENT OUT ON LONG-
TERM LEAVE AND THEN THOSE SLOTS
GOT ASSIGNED OR THOSE VACANCIES
GOT ASSIGNED TO HARBOR?
I DO NOT KNOW THAT THAT IS THE
CASE.
>> THE LATTER IS NOT WHAT I WAS
INDICATING.
THE FORMER IS -- THAT WE HAVE
NOT CHANGE THE FTE FUNDING FOR
HARBOR PATROL, IT IS THAT THOSE
OFFICERS ARE ON LONG-TERM LEAVE.
INTO COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS'
POINT, THERE IS NO WAY WE AS
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS CAN MANDATE
OFFICERS BEING IN HARBOR
PATROL, AS A PET COMPARED TO
ANOTHER BEAT.
THAT IS THE DISCRETION OF THE
CHIEF, IS THAT CORRECT?
BEE THAT IS CORRECT.
I THINK THOSE OFFICERS STARTED
OUT, A LOT OF THEM STARTED OUT
ON LONG-TERM LEAVE AND HAVE
SINCE SEPARATED.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT CURRENTLY
TODAY YOU WOULD SEE THAT A LOT
OF THEM ARE ON LONG-TERM LEAVE,
I THINK YOU WOULD SEE A LOT OF
VACANCY, ACTUAL VACANCIES, IF I
REMEMBER, WHEN I LAST LOOKED AT
THE DATA.
>> THANK YOU.
AND THEN TO KIND OF FRAME
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS' QUESTION A
LITTLE MORE, IN A MORE FOCUSED
WAY, I THINK THE QUESTION WAS,
IS THERE A WAY FOR US TO HAVE
NON-SWORN OFFICERS ON BOATS?
AND THE ANSWER THAT I HEARD,
SIMILAR TO A CLOSE COMMUNITY
SERVICE OFFICER, A CSO ON A
BOAT, AND FROM WHAT I HEAR IS I
CANNOT OCCUR WITHOUT SPOT
AGREEING TO IT, IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> I BELIEVE THAT IS THE CASE,
YOU WOULD WANT TO GET THE LAW
DEPARTMENT TO TELL YOU THAT
DEFINITIVELY.
AND THAT IS A QUESTION CENTRAL
STAFF IS PURSUING WITH THE LAW
DEPARTMENT AND WILL BRIEF YOU
ON, BUT THAT IS CERTAINLY
SOMETHING THAT CENTRAL STAFF
HAS WORKED WITH THE LAW
APARTMENT IN THE PAST AND THAT
IS WHAT WE HAVE HEARD.
>> THANK YOU.
AND, YOU KNOW, JUST THE
UNIQUENESS OF SEATTLE WITH ALL
OF OUR WATERWAYS, BOTH FOR
PLEASURE AND FOR ECONOMIC USES,
WHAT I HAVE NOTICED IN THIS
INVESTIGATION OF WHAT IS PROPER
STAFFING, WE DO NOT HAVE A
NATIONALLY CERTIFIED
ORGANIZATION TELLING US WHAT
THE PROPER STAFFING OF OUR
WATERWAYS IS AT THIS TIME, SO
COLLEAGUES, I WILL FLAG FOR
YOU, I WILL BE REQUESTING IN
THIS BUDGET, A THIRD-PARTY
STUDY.
WHETHER IT IS NICK JR. OR
ANOTHER NATIONALLY CERTIFIED
INSTITUTION, TO TELL US WHAT
THE PROPER STAFFING LEVEL IS
FOR OUR WATERWAYS, AND THAT IS
BOTH WITH POLICE AND NONPOLICE
RESPONSES.
SO THAT WILL INFORM OUR
DECISIONS MOVING FORWARD.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS, COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD, BEFORE YOU TURN IT
OVER TO YOU, A QUESTION ON
HARBOR PATROL OR ANOTHER
SUBJECT?
I WILL HOLD MY QUESTION AS WELL
AND I WILL LET YOU GO FIRST.
>> THANKS.
IN THIS QUESTION OF BODY OF
WORK, FOR HARBOR PATROL, I JUST
WANT TO HIGHLIGHT, PERHAPS AN
EASIER PATH, NOT SAYING THAT IT
WOULD NOT STILL NEED TO BE
BARGAINED, BUT PERHAPS AN
EASIER PATH MIGHT BE THE
EXISTING MO YOU WITH THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT, BECAUSE THERE IS AN
EXISTING MOU BETWEEN FIRE AND
SPD FOR THAT SHARED BODY OF
WORK.
SO RATHER THAN THE COMPLEXITY
OF ADDING A DIFFERENT -- A NEED
FOR NEGOTIATION WITH A
DIFFERENT WORKER, I HAVE BEEN
ENCOURAGING PEOPLE WHO HAVE
BEEN REACHING OUT TO ME ABOUT
THIS ISSUE, I HAVE BEEN SHARING
WITH FOLKS THE SLIDE REPORT THAT
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS SPONSORED
LAST YEAR, AND I HAVE BEEN
URGING FOLKS TO CONSIDER
CALLING FOR A REOPENING OF THAT
MOU.
ALL PARTIES HAVE TO AGREE, BUT
I FEEL LIKE THE FACT THAT THERE
IS AN EXISTING MOU, THERE IS
MORE POTENTIAL THERE TO GET
FIRE AND SPOKE TO AGREE TO
REVISIT THAT, BECAUSE AGAIN IT
IS AN EXISTING AGREEMENT RATHER
THAN HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH
A WHOLE OTHER TYPE OF WORKER
ABOUT THAT SAME BODY OF WORK,
AND THEN THE OTHER POINT I WANT
TO MAKE ABOUT THIS ISSUE
GENERALLY, AND OUR INTEREST IN
HAVING NON-SWORN OFFICERS DO
SOME OF THE FUNCTIONS THAT
HISTORICALLY SWORN OFFICERS
HAVE DONE, TOTALLY UNDERSTAND
THE LAW DEPARTMENT'S ADVICE TO
US, AND WE HAVE RECOGNIZED IT
IN OUR OWN LEGISLATION IN THE
PAST, WHEN WE HAVE MADE CHANGES
TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S
BUDGET, WE CALL OUT THE FACT
THAT WE RECOGNIZE SOMETHING
NEEDS TO BE BARGAINED.
MANY OF THE PRIORITIES IN LAST
YEAR'S BUDGET RECOGNIZED THAT
THE THINGS WE WANTED TO DO MAY
NEED TO BE BARGAINED.
I DO HAVE INTEREST IN EXPLORING
WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE IN A
DIFFERENT PLACE RIGHT NOW,
THOUGH.
BECAUSE OF THE STAFFING
REDUCTIONS.
AND WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE
EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES THAT
MANAGEMENT, BECAUSE OF OUR
OBLIGATION TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
DO HAVE OFFICERS WHO ARE
RESPONDING TO 911 CALLS AND
DOING THEIR BASIC LAW
ENFORCEMENT MISSION, WHETHER OR
NOT THAT MIGHT CREATE A
DIFFERENT LEGAL FRAMEWORK AS IT
RELATES TO OUR OBLIGATION TO
BARGAIN HAVING OTHER PEOPLE DO
THINGS THAT POLICE OFFICERS DO
NOT HAVE TO DO.
I FEEL LIKE WE ARE AGAIN, IN A
DIFFERENT PLACE AND THAT ISN'T
JUST AN ISSUE ABOUT BODY OF
WORK, THIS IS ABOUT OUR
INABILITY TO GET THE WORK DONE
WITHOUT THIS CONVERSATION.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
ACTUALLY, THAT WAS VERY MUCH IN
LINE WITH WHAT I WAS GOING TO
ASK ABOUT OR MENTION AS WELL,
SO I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING
WITH YOU AND HEARING MORE FROM
YOU, GREG, ABOUT THIS.
I KNOW WE NEED TO MOVE ON, WE
HAVE ABOUT EIGHT MORE SLIDES TO
GO AND WE HAVE ABOUT AN HOUR
AND A HALF BRACKETED FOR THE
REST OF THIS CONVERSATION.
I WILL NOTE FOR THE COMMUNITY,
THE CONVERSATIONS WE HAVE HAD
OVER THE CONVERSATIONS WITH
LABOR AND FOLKS ARE CONCERNED
ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY, MAKING
SURE THAT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY
OF THOSE WHO ARE ON OUR
WATERWAYS IS MAINTAINED AND
THAT WE HAVE EMERGENCY
RESPONSES FOR FOLKS WHO MIGHT
BE IN TROUBLE ON OUR WATERWAYS,
GIVEN THE HIGH NUMBER OF PEOPLE
THAT ARE MOVING HERE, THAT
MAYBE AREN'T AS FAMILIAR WITH
THE TEMPERATURES ON OUR WATER
AND HOW QUICKLY 70 CAN
EXPERIENCE HYPOTHERMIA, BOTH IN
THE SOUND AND IN THE LAKES.
I KNOW THIS HEALTH AND SAFETY
ELEMENT IS SOMETHING I'M VERY
INTERESTED IN AND AS
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD NOTED,
THERE IS AN INTERESTING NEXUS
WITH THE EXISTING MOU AT
SEATTLE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND THE
ABILITY FOR US TO MAINTAIN A
HEALTH AND SAFETY PRESENCE ON
THE WATERWAYS AND LOOK FORWARD
TO TALKING WITH YOU MORE, GREG,
ABOUT THE REQUIREMENTS WE KNOW
ALSO EXIST AT THE STATE LEVEL
REGARDING TO THE ISSUE OF THE
ABILITY TO ISSUE CITATIONS.
BUT JUST FLAGGING AN AREA OF
MORE CONVERSATIONS TO COME.
COUNCILMEMBER ALICE.
>> OUR OFFICE HAS BEEN WORKING
QUICKLY WITH CENTRAL STAFF,
WITH DNR AND WITH ALL OF OUR
DEPARTMENTS AROUND,
PARTICULARLY AROUND THE BAY BUT
ALSO WITH RESPECT TO WHAT WE
CAN DO TO ENSURE WATER SAFETY,
AND ALSO HAVE BEEN TALKING TO
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
THERE WILL BE MORE TO COME.
>> EXCELLENT.
OKAY, GREG, SHALL WE MOVE ON TO
SLIDE NUMBER FIVE?
ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS?
>> I WILL SAY, I WILL FOLLOW UP
WITH THE COUNCIL ON THIS.
I WILL GET IN TOUCH WITH THE
DEPARTMENT AND ASK FOR MORE
INFORMATION.
IT MAY BE AS SIMPLE AS SOMETHING
AS THERE ARE WITH THE STAFFING
PROBLEMS, PEOPLE CALLING IN
SICK AND THERE IS NOT ENOUGH
PEOPLE TO COVER.
ALTHOUGH THAT IS A SITUATION
THAT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ANY
DIFFERENT LAST YEAR.
SO, BECAUSE THEY GENERALLY USE
OVERTIME TO FILL THOSE SLOTS.
SO I WILL FOLLOW-UP.
IT IS INFORMATION THAT I WILL
GET TO YOU.
AND THEN, I AM READY TO MOVE ON.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, GREG.
>> OKAY, SO HOW ARE THEY GOING
TO USE ALL THE SALARY SAVINGS?
I HAVE PREPARED A TABLE THAT IS
THREE SLIDES LONG, IT IS A
TABLE THAT YOU HAVE SEEN
BEFORE.
AND IT IS A TABLE THAT CONTAINS
A NUMBER OF ITEMS YOU SAW AS
YOU ARE VIEWING THE MIDYEAR
SUPPLEMENTAL.
MANY OF THE ITEMS THE
DEPARTMENT SPENT ITS SALARY
SAVINGS ON IN THE MIDYEAR
SUPPLEMENTAL THIS YEAR ARE
ITEMS THAT ARE CONTINUING IN
2021 AND ARE ALSO DRAWING
SALARY SAVINGS.
I HAVE PUT THOSE ITEMS INTO
BUCKETS SO THAT THEY ARE MORE
EASILY DIGESTED AND WE CAN GO
OVER THEM A LITTLE QUICKER.
AND SO, WHAT YOU SEE BEFORE
YOU, THE FIRST TABLE SHOWS ONE
OF THE ITEMS AT THE TOP.
YOU SEE THE NICK JR. CONTRACT
YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THAT WE
HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT
EXTENSIVELY TODAY.
AND THE CSC, DISPATCH PROTOCOL
SYSTEM COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD
HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT, BOTH OF
THOSE WERE DISTINCT ONE-TIME
STUDIES THAT ARE FUNDED AND SO
THERE IS NO NEED FOR THEM IN
THE 2022 PROPOSED STUDY.
OR PROPOSED BUDGET.
THE SAME IS TRUE OF THE HST
COMMUNITY SAFETY CAPACITY
BUILDING AD THAT YOU TALKED
ABOUT, COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA,
JUST ABOUT AN HOUR AGO, THAT
WAS AND IS ONE-TIME CUT FROM
THE SPD IN THE 2021 BUDGET AND
THAT IS NOT A CUT THAT IS BEING
MADE IN THE MAYOR'S PROPOSED
BUDGET.
SO THAT WOULD MOVE US TO THE
NEXT BUCKET, WHICH IS THE
TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS, I AM
CALLING THEM TECHNICAL
ADJUSTMENTS.
YOU HAVE SEEN BEFORE THAT THERE
IS A NEED TO DEDICATE SOME
SALARY SAVINGS TO A SEPARATION
PAY AS MORE OFFICERS HAVE BEEN
LEAVING, THERE IS A NEED TO
FUND VACATION AND OTHER COSTS
THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH
OFFICERS LEAVING.
THAT IS AGAIN, FUNDED WITH
SALARY SAVINGS AS IT IS A
DEFERRED COMPENSATION SHORTFALL
THAT WE SAW IN 2021.
PAID PARENTAL LEAVE IS AN ITEM
THAT IS IN 2021, FUNDED IN TWO
WAYS, THERE IS A $1.8 MILLION
WITHHOLDING IN FINANCE GENERAL
THAT THE CITY BUDGET OFFICE
WILL ASK IF SPD CAN ACCEPT IN
THE YEAR AND SUPPLEMENTAL, AND
THEN SPD IS HOLDING AS PART OF
ITS SALARY SAVINGS, ANOTHER
200,000.
THOSE TWO ITEMS TOGETHER ADD UP
TO $2 MILLION.
TO MAKE THINGS SIMPLER, NEXT
YEAR, THE BUDGET OFFICE JUST
TOOK THAT $2 MILLION AND MOVED
IT INTO SPD'S FACE BUDGET.
SO THEY DID THAT BY MAKING YOU
SOME SALARY SAVINGS IN THE 2022
BASE BUDGET.
ONE OF THE THINGS IMPORTANT TO
KNOW ABOUT THIS AS WELL AS MANY
OF THE ITEMS YOU WILL SEE IN
THIS TABLE IS THAT WHAT IS
HAPPENING IS YOU ARE SEEING A
USE OF SALARY SAVINGS FOR
ONGOING ITEMS AS AS OFFICER
START TO RETURN TO THE
DEPARTMENT, AS IF THE
DEPARTMENT DOES INCREASE IN
SIZE, AND IF THE COUNCIL DOES
INVEST IN OFFICERS SAY UP TO
THE 1537 LEVEL, THEN IT WOULD
BE A SITUATION WHERE MONEY
WOULD EVENTUALLY NEED TO BE
ADDED BECAUSE THE MONEY THAT IS
RIGHT NOW IN SALARY SAVINGS IS
GOING TOWARD ONGOING ITEMS LIKE
PAID PARENTAL LEAVE.
THE EVENT OVERTIME ITEM THAT
WAS FUNDED IN THE 2021 MIDYEAR
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET IN THE
PROPOSED BUDGET IS ACTUALLY
FULLY RESTORED TO 6.4 MILLION.
PATTY, WOULD YOU GO AHEAD AND
FLIP TO THE NEXT SLIDE?
AND THEN, THESE NEXT ITEMS ARE
ITEMS THAT ARE AGAIN, WHAT I
WOULD CALL SORT OF ONGOING
ITEMS THAT ARE ITEMS THAT WERE
IN THE MIDYEAR BUDGET THAT ARE
CONTINUING, THE CIVILIAN
PERSONAL COST POSITIONS THAT
WERE ADDED IN THE 2021 BUDGET,
AND SOME POSITIONS THAT WERE IN
THE 2021 BUDGET THAT WERE NOT
FUNDED, DUE TO THE COVID
CRISIS, SPD IS USING THEIR
SALARY SAVINGS IN THIS YEAR TO
FUND AND NEXT YEAR WOULD AS
WELL.
SAME WITH THE MENTAL HEALTH
PROFESSIONAL CONTRACT BACKGROUND
SERVICES, WE TALKED A LITTLE
BIT ABOUT.
YOU HAVE HEARD TODAY ABOUT
REGIONAL COMMUNITY SAFETY PLAN
AND THE PEACEKEEPERS
COLLECTIVE, AND YOU HAVE ALSO
HEARD ABOUT TRIAGE ONE.
THESE ITEMS ARE CUTS TO THE SPD
BUDGET.
AND THEN SPD IS USING SALARY
SAVINGS TO BACKFILL THOSE CUTS.
SO THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE
SERVICES.
AS LONG AS THE FUNDING FOR
THESE PROGRAMS CONTINUES TO
COME FROM SPD CUTS AND AS LONG
AS SPD CONTINUES TO USE ITS
SALARY SAVINGS TO BACKFILL
THESE CUTS, THERE IS AN ONGOING
CALL ON THOSE FUNDS, AND SO
HERE AGAIN, IT IS A SITUATION
WHERE IN THE FUTURE, IF SPD IS
TO ADD OFFICERS, THEN THERE
WOULD NEED TO BE AN AMOUNT OF
MONEY.
THE WORK SCHEDULE TIMEKEEPING
PROJECT IS A $2 MILLION
PROJECT.
THE FIRST 500,000 CAME LAST YEAR
, THE 1.5 MILLION FOR THE REST
OF IT IS THIS YEAR.
THE POST BASIC LAW ENFORCEMENT
TRAINING POSITION IS ACTUALLY A
PRE-BASIC LAW ENFORCEMENT
TRAINING POSITION THAT WAS A
TYPO, AND I APOLOGIZE.
THIS IS A PROGRAM THAT IS
STARTING THIS YEAR WITH A
POSITION THAT THE COUNCIL FUNDED
AT THE CHIEF'S REQUEST, AND
THIS PROGRAM IS ONE WHERE THE
CHIEF IS TAKING RECRUITS AND
BRINGING THEM ON BOARD BEFORE
HE SENDS THEM TO THE ACADEMY,
AND EXPOSING THEM TO A
CURRICULA OF TRAUMA INFORMED
CARE AND SOCIAL EMOTIONAL
LEARNING.
AND THIS LEARNING WOULD OCCUR
OUTSIDE OF THE CLASSROOM AND IT
EXPOSES THEM TO COMMUNITY-BASED
AND PEER-BASED LEARNING.
I AM FOCUSING ON THIS BECAUSE
THE DEPARTMENT HAS INDICATED
THAT IF THEY HAD MORE FUNDING,
THAT THEY WOULD CONCENTRATE ON
THIS PROGRAM.
AND THAT THEY WOULD INVEST IT
IN THE DIRECT -- IN THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A CURRICULUM AND
IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
BASICALLY AN EVALUATION AND
OUTCOME MEASURE FOR THE PROGRAM
, AS IT IS FULLY UNLIMITED.
SO, WE WILL COME BACK TO THAT
LATER.
BUT WANT TO NOTE THAT THAT IS A
PRIORITY FOR THE DEPARTMENT.
THAT POSITION IS INCLUDED IN THE
CIVILIAN PERSONNEL COSTS IN THE
2.1 MILLION UNDERLYING A. AND
LASTLY IS THE EVIDENCE TO PASS
THE $500,000 ITEM THAT THE
COUNCIL ADDED IN THE MIDYEAR
SUPPLEMENTAL.
THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS
FUNDED, AGAIN, IN 2022.
IT INDICATES THAT FAS, WHERE
THE MONEY MOVED TO, IS NOT SURE
HOW THEY ARE GOING TO USE THE
FUNDING.
AND THAT IT IS MORE THAN LIKELY
THAT THEY WILL MOVE THAT
FUNDING THROUGH THE CARRY
FORWARD INTO 2022.
SO, I WILL STOP AND ASK IF
THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS ON WHAT
I HAVE PRESENTED SO FAR.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
SO JUST TO CLARIFY AGAIN FOR
FOLKS WHO ARE FOLLOWING AT
HOME, THESE ARE NOT NECESSARILY
ADDITIONS TO THE SPD BUDGET,
THEY WOULD BE CONTINUATION OF
USING THE OFFICERS SALARY
SAVINGS AS NOTED IN THE TITLE
HERE IN THE TABLE BOTTOM.
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> PATTY, THE SLIDE -- WELL --
>> GREG, DID YOU HAVE
ADDITIONAL FABRICATION BEFORE
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> NO.
>> OKAY, GREAT.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> GREG, I AM GOING TO SEE IF
I CAN ASK YOU TO EXPLAIN IT
AGAIN.
[ LAUGHTER ] OKAY.
LET'S SCOOT TO SLIDE FIVE,
PATTY, IF THAT IS OKAY.
AND I THINK I KNOW WHAT YOU ARE
SAYING, BUT I DO WANT TO JUST
ASK A FEW QUESTIONS.
SO, SLIDE FIVE, THERE IS A
REQUEST FOR 4.7 MILLION OF
SALARY SAVINGS TO PAY FOR
SEPARATION PAY COSTS IN 2022.
MI RIGHT ON THAT SO FAR?
SO WHAT I AM TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND IS WHY COSTS COME
OUT OF SALARY SAVINGS RELATED
TO OFFICERS SEPARATING IN 2022,
INSTEAD OF SALARY SAVINGS FROM
OFFICERS THAT SEPARATED IN 2021
, THAT WOULD PRESUMABLY STAY
EMPTY IN 2022.
>> THESE PARTICULAR OFFICERS --
THE $2 MILLION, THE SHORTFALL
IN ESTIMATED 2022 ARE FOR THE
OFFICERS THAT ARE LEAVING IN
2022, THE 94 SEPARATIONS OR SO
THAT ARE IN THE STAFFING PLAN
FOR 2022.
THERE IS NO -- THERE IS NO
SEPARATION PAY RESERVED FOR ANY
OFFICERS IN THE DEPARTMENT'S
BUDGET, SEPARATION PAY HAS
HISTORICALLY COME OUT OF SALARY
SAVINGS.
AND THE DEPARTMENT IS CONCERNED
THAT IF ALL OF THE SALARY
SAVINGS IS TAKEN, THEY WILL NOT
HAVE ANY MONEY TO PAY FOR
SEPARATION FOR ANY OF THEIR
OFFICERS.
AND SO THIS IS A HOLD ON SOME
OF THE SALARY SAVINGS TO BE
ABLE TO PAY FOR THOSE OFFICERS
THAT ARE SEPARATED.
>> AND THEN IF WE COULD --
THANK YOU -- IF WE COULD GO TO
SLIDE SIX, I AM HAVING TROUBLE
WITH REALLOCATING SALARY
SAVINGS TO THINGS.
SO, IF THE 700,000 WAS
TRANSFERRED OUT OF SPD TO FUND
TRIAGE ONE, THAT CAME FROM THE
SUPPLEMENT BUDGET.
RIGHT?
>> YES.
>> SO THAT WAS NOT A TRUE CUT,
RIGHT?
>> SORRY ABOUT THAT.
WILL TURN THAT OFF.
SO, WAS THAT FROM SALARY
SAVINGS OR WAS THAT A CUT?
IT SEEMS LIKE IT CANNOT BE
BOTH.
>> IT WAS A CUT, IT WAS A CUT
OF MONEY THAT WAS NOT BEING
USED BECAUSE OFFICERS WERE NOT
MEETING TO BE PAID BECAUSE THEY
HAD LEFT, IT WAS SALARY
SAVINGS.
>> SO I GUESS, PART OF WHAT I'M
TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, THERE ARE
SEVERAL THINGS IN HERE WHERE IT
IS BACKFILL AND IT SEEMS TO ME
THAT IF FUNDING IS BEING REMOVED
TO DO THE WORK SOMEWHERE ELSE,
WHY SHOULD WE BACKFILL IF THAT
WORK ISN'T HAPPENING?
THAT IS ONE THING I'M TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT.
AND, WITH REGARDS TO TRIAGE ONE
OR COMMUNITY SAFETY OR ANY OF
THE OTHER WAYS IN WHICH WE ARE
TRYING TO BASICALLY REDUCE THE
FOOTPRINT OF THE DEPARTMENT,
THEN THE FUNDING THAT GOES WITH
THAT SHOULD NOT BE BACKFILLED
WITH SALARY SAVINGS.
THAT IS HOW MY BRAIN IS
THINKING ABOUT IT, ANYWAY.
>> IT MAY BE THAT I AM JUST
USING BUDGET SPEAK WHEN I SAY
THAT IT IS BEING BACKFILLED.
ANOTHER WAY TO SAY IT IS THAT
THE MONEY, THE SALARY SAVINGS,
ARE BEING CUT AND MOVED TO HSD.
THAT IS A MORE SIMPLE WAY TO
SAY IT.
>> MAYBE TRY ADDING IN HERE, I
THINK THAT PART OF THE
CHALLENGE IN TRYING TO EXPLAIN
THIS IS, THERE STAFFING PLAN IS
ASSUMING A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF
VACANCIES NEXT YEAR THAT THEY
WILL NOT FILL IN THERE STAFFING
MODEL, SO, BUT THEY ARE STILL
TECHNICALLY SORT OF FUNDED FOR
THOSE POSITIONS.
AND SO THEY ARE REPURPOSING
THOSE DOLLARS IN 2022 BUT THEY
ARE NOT ELIMINATING THE
POSITIONS.
AND SO THERE IS A ONE-TIME SORT
OF MOVEMENT OF THE MONEY OUT
FOR TRIAGE ONE, BUT NEXT YEAR IF
THERE STAFFING PLAN -- IF THOSE
POCKETS ARE RETAINED, AND THE
STAFFING PLAN SUGGESTS THEY CAN
FILL THEM, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE
AN ISSUE BECAUSE WE ARE GOING
TO NEED DIFFERENT FUNDING FOR
TRIAGE ONE BECAUSE THEY WILL
NEED THE MONEY THEY USE THIS
YEAR FOR TRIAGE ONE TO PAY
THOSE OFFICERS.
SO I THINK THAT IS WHERE IT IS
GETTING A LITTLE CONFUSION IS
THAT THESE ARE LIKE ONE-TIME
CUTS FOR ONGOING NEEDS FROM
SPD'S BUDGET.
>> THEY ARE ONGOING SO LONG AS
THEY KEEP THE BUDGET AUTHORITY
FOR THOSE POSITIOS.
>> CORRECT.
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> SO IF WE REMOVE THE
AUTHORITY FOR THOSE BUDGET
POSITIONS, THEY WILL NO LONGER
BE CONSIDERED ONGOING EXPENSES.
>> THAT'S RIGHT.
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU.
>> LET'S KEEP GOING.
>> OKAY, SO I THINK WE'RE GOING
TO GO TO SLIDE SEVEN?
OKAY, SO THIS IS THE LAST BUCKET
AND THIS BUCKET IS NEW
INITIATIVES.
AND THIS IS USING SALARY
SAVINGS FOR 3 SPECIFIC THINGS,
ALL THREE OF WHICH ARE IN MY
ISSUE IDENTIFICATION.
TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENTS, $5
MILLION, SOME OF WHICH ARE A
CONTINUATION OF ITEMS THAT WERE
FUNDED IN THE MIDYEAR
SUPPLEMENTAL.
HIRING INCENTIVES, I THINK
YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH, IT WAS AN
IDEA THAT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD
IN THE MIDYEAR SUPPLEMENTAL,
AND AN ADDITIONAL CSO UNIT,
ALSO AN IDEA THAT WAS BROUGHT
FORWARD MIDYEAR.
THE AMOUNT OF INVESTMENTS LAST
YEAR IN THE MIDYEAR
SUPPLEMENTAL, 15.4 MILLION, THE
AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT THAT THEY
WOULD MAKE WITH THE SALARY
SAVINGS THIS YEAR WOULD BE 17.8
MILLION.
SO THAT 17.8 MILLION IS NOT
QUITE -- DOES NOT QUITE TOTALLY
SALARY SAVINGS THAT I JUST
SPOKE ABOUT A MINUTE AGO, THE
SALARY SAVINGS I SPOKE ABOUT A
MINUTE AGO THAT IS AVAILABLE IS
19 MILLION.
AND SO WITH THAT AS A
TRANSITION, I WILL GO AHEAD AND
MOVE US INTO THE FIRST ISSUE,
SALARY SAVINGS.
IF YOU CAN FLIP THE SLIDE.
SO, THERE IS MUCH MORE
NARRATIVE HERE THAN THERE NEEDS
TO BE, I APOLOGIZE.
BUT BASICALLY OPTION A IS TO
TAKE THE DIFFERENCE WITH WHAT
IS AVAILABLE IN SALARY SAVINGS,
WHICH IS THE $19 MILLION, AND
WHAT THE DEPARTMENT PLANS TO
SPEND WITH ITS SALARY SAVINGS,
WHICH IS THE 17.8 MILLION THAT
I JUST SHOWED YOU.
AND TO CUT THE DIFFERENCE, 1.1
MILLION IN SALARY SAVINGS THAT
IS CURRENTLY UNPROGRAMMED.
AND WE HAVE ALREADY TALKED
ABOUT HOW THAT SALARY SAVINGS IS
ACCRUING.
IT IS ACCRUING FROM VACANT
POSITIONS THAT AS COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES NOTED, ARE VACANT , BUT
FUNDED AND THE SALARY IS BEING
USED FOR OTHER THINGS.
NUMBER TWO, OR OPTION B, WOULD
BE TO POTENTIALLY ASSUME A
DIFFERENT STAFFING PLAN.
AND THE COUNCIL DID THAT LAST
YEAR WITH CVA, SPD, 025B, 002,
THE EXECUTIVE HAD SUBMITTED A
STAFFING PLAN, IF I RECALL,
THAT HAD 90 SEPARATIONS AND IT
WAS APPEARING AT THE TIME THAT
THERE WERE GOING TO BE A LOT
MORE OFFICERS LEAVING AND SO
THE COUNCIL SAID, WELL, I THINK
THEY ARE GOING TO SEE MORE LIKE
114 LEAVE, AND SO THE
DIFFERENCE WAS CAPTURED IN CBA.
AND THAT CAN BE SOMETHING THAT
THE COUNCIL WOULD DO THIS YEAR,
IF THERE WAS, IN THE FALL, ANY
KIND OF A SIGN THAT OFFICERS
MAY BE LEAVING.
AND THREE WOULD BE NO ACTION
AND OF COURSE THERE ARE OTHER
OPTIONS THAT ARE AVAILABLE,
THAT IS JUST TWO THAT I PICKED
OUT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD AND THEN
PEDERSEN.
>> THANK YOU, AND SO JUST, EVEN
JUST LOOKING AT THE, I THINK
MODEST, CONSERVATIVE APPROACH OF
OPTION A, THAT IS A NUMBER THAT
, IF THERE WAS A PROPOSAL TO
CAPTURE $1.1 MILLION OF
UNPROGRAMMED SALARY SAVINGS,
AND THAT PROPOSAL WAS MADE
TODAY, IT WOULD BE 1.1 MILLION.
IF WE USE THAT SAME FRAMEWORK
AND REVISITED IT IN NOVEMBER,
IT MIGHT BE A DIFFERENT NUMBER.
IS THAT RIGHT, GREG?
BECAUSE THAT NUMBER IS BASED ON
A HIRING PLAN THAT IS BASED ON
THE NUMBER OF OFFICERS THAT THEY
HAVE NOW.
AND IF THERE IS A LOSS OF MORE
NUMBERS, MORE OFFICERS BETWEEN
NOW AND NOVEMBER, THE
ASSUMPTIONS THAT GO INTO OPTION
A WILL CHANGE.
>> IS, FUNDAMENTALLY CORRECT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> CAN I ASK A QUICK CLARIFYING
QUESTION?
I DON'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT YOU,
JUST A QUICK TAG ONTO THAT.
IS IT NOT JUST THE NUMBER OF
OFFICERS WHO WERE LEAVING, BUT
IT IS IS IT ALSO BE SLOWER THAN
EXPECTED HIRING RATE?
SO FOR 53 RECRUITS RIGHT NOW,
AND IT IS ANTICIPATED TO BE
THAT 85 OR SO NUMBER THAT YOU
PUT IN THE CHART?
IS IT ALSO A MATTER OF
CAPTURING THOSE POTENTIAL COSTS
SAVINGS?
>> YES, THE COUNCIL COULD
CERTAINLY ASSUME THE OTHER WAY
ON HIRING AND ASSUME THAT THE
DEPARTMENT WOULD NOT GET TO 125
HIRES.
AND THERE WOULD BE A POTENTIAL
TO TAKE FUNDING FOR THAT.
THAT GETS A LITTLE BIT TRICKIER
IN THE SENSE THAT I THINK THE
DEPARTMENT WOULD HAVE QUESTIONS
ABOUT WHETHER THE COUNCIL WOULD
BE IN THAT ACTION, RESTRICTING
THE HIRING PLAN FOR THE
DEPARTMENT.
SO, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING
THAT THE COUNCIL MIGHT WANT TO
CONSIDER AS THEY ARE TAKING
THAT ACTION.
>> OKAY, AND I GUESS I WAS
THINKING ABOUT LOOKING AT THE
ACTUAL HIRES IN 2021.
>> I THINK OF OPTION TWO AS THE
OPTION THAT IS QUESTIONING
THEIR ASSUMPTIONS.
THAT THEY GOT THE HIRING PLAN.
BUT OPTION ONE IS SORT OF
ACCEPTING THEIR ASSUMPTIONS BUT
ADJUSTING IT AS THE CONDITIONS
CHANGE.
GREG, IS THAT THE RIGHT WAY TO
THINK ABOUT THOSE OPTIONS?
>> I THINK THAT IS TRUE, BUT IN
OPTION B I AM ONLY TALKING ABOUT
THE EXITING SIDE OR THE
SEPARATION SIDE.
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA IS
RIGHT, YOU COULD CHALLENGE THE
HIRING SIDE, JUST AS I
MENTIONED, THEN THE DEPARTMENT
MIGHT HAVE QUESTIONS, THEY
MIGHT ASK, DO YOU WANT US -- IF
WE HIT 90, LET'S SAY THE
COUNCIL PICS 90, DO YOU WANT US
TO STOP?
>> AND REMIND ME, WHEN WE HAD A
SIMILAR CONVERSATION LAST YEAR,
WE DID NOT SAY, HEY, IF YOU
EXCEED OR MEET YOUR HIRING
GOALS THEN WE WANT YOU TO STOP,
WE JUST SAID, LET US KNOW IF
YOU ACTUALLY SEATED, IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> THE COUNCIL DID NOT CHANGE
THE HIRING SIDE OF THE EQUATION.
THE COUNCIL ONLY CHANGED THE
ASSUMPTIONS ON SEPARATIONS.
>> OKAY, THANKS, GREG.
SORRY, IT HAS BEEN A LONG 12
MONTHS.
THANKS FOR THE REMINDER.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, THANKS
FOR YOUR PATIENCE.
APOLOGIES FOR THE INTERRUPTION.
>> CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
ON THIS ITEM ABOUT CONSIDERING
OPTION A, 1.1, WE RECENTLY HAD
A DISCUSSION ON THIS
UNPROGRAMMED SALARY SAVINGS
THAT WAS FOR 2021, IT WAS A
SIMILAR AMOUNT OF MONEY AND I
HAD PUT FORWARD A PLAN TO TRY
TO RETAIN EXISTING OFFICERS, I
THINK WHEN WE WERE TALKING
EARLIER ABOUT AMBITIOUS HIRING
GOALS FROM THE DEPARTMENT AND
HOW DIFFICULT IT IS TO MEET
THOSE GOALS, I THINK TO ME AT
LEAST, IT POINTS TO THE NEED TO
DO MORE TO RETAIN THE OFFICERS
THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE.
AND SO I WOULD JUST WANT TO
ENCOURAGE COLLEAGUES TO
CONSIDER, IF THERE ARE SAVINGS
HERE, TO NOT NECESSARILY HAVE
SAVINGS TO TAKE, BUT TO TRY TO
RETAIN THE OFFICERS THAT WE
HAVE, TO CONSIDER ATTENTION.
I DID NOT SEE A LOT IN THE
BUDGET, AND THE PROPOSED BUDGET
UNFORTUNATELY, FOR RETENTION.
AND I THINK THIS COULD BE AN
OPPORTUNITY THAT WE ALL COULD
CONSIDER AS A COUNCIL TO
RETAIN THOSE, ESPECIALLY IF WE
ARE CONCERNED ABOUT SPD MEETING
THERE AMBITIOUS HIRING
SCHEDULE.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN.
OKAY, GREAT.
LET'S CONTINUE TO THE NEXT
SLIDE.
>> ALL RIGHT, THE NEXT ISSUE IS
RESTORATION OF REDUCTIONS THAT
WERE MADE IN THE 2021 BUDGET.
IN THE 2021 BUDGET, THERE WERE
THREE DIFFERENT KINDS OF CUTS
THAT WERE MADE.
I WILL ADDRESS THEM IN TURN
HERE, THE FIRST ONE IN THE
TABLE IS ON OVERTIME.
AND THIS CUT WAS A $6.4 MILLION
CUTS TO SP'S OVERTIME BUDGET,
IT CONSISTED OF TWO DISCRETE
ACTIONS.
THE FIRST ONE WAS A $2.7
MILLION CUT THAT WAS MADE IN
THE PROPOSED BUDGET BY THE
MAYOR, IT WAS BASED ON
FORECASTED DECREASE IN DEMAND
FOR SPECIAL EVENTS BECAUSE OF
COVID.
AND ALSO THE DISCONTINUATION OF
PATROLS. THE SECOND PART OF
THAT CUT WAS A $3.7 MILLION CUT
THAT THE COUNCIL MADE IN CBA SPD
010-8003, ALSO WITH THE
ASSUMPTION THAT SPECIAL EVENTS
AND OTHER OVERTIME FUNDED
ACTIVITIES, THINGS THAT WOULD
BE AFFECTED BY COVID SUCH AS
TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT OR MANY OF
THE OTHER DEPARTMENT FUNCTIONS,
THERE WOULD BE A DECREASE IN
DEMAND FOR THOSE AS WELL.
SO THOSE TWO THINGS TOGETHER
ADDED TO THE $6.4 MILLION
REDUCTION, AND THAT LEFT, OF
THE EVENTS BUDGET THAT SPD HAS,
3.7 MILLION FOR THEM IN 2021.
THERE WAS A COVID RELATED
TRAVEL AND TRAINING BUDGET ,
AND THE TRAVEL AND TRAINING
BUDGET I THINK, MOST FOLKS ARE
FAMILIAR, THAT IS ONE THAT IS
USED TO FUND CIVILIAN TRAINING,
MAKE SURE THAT IS NOT CONFUSED
WITH THE SWORN TRAINING, THAT
IS A DIFFERENT BUDGET
ALTOGETHER.
THIS IS MOSTLY ABOUT CIVILIANS
GETTING CONTINUING EDUCATION,
ATTENDING CONFERENCES, ETC.
AND CERTIFICATIONS.
THAT RECEIVES $175,000 CUTS IN
THE 2021 BUDGET, AND HERE
AGAIN, THAT CUT WAS AROUND THE
ASSUMPTION THAT THERE WOULD BE
FEWER OPPORTUNITIES FOR
TRAINING AS NATIONAL TRAINING
EVENTS WERE SHUT DOWN DUE TO
COVID.
AND THEN LASTLY, THE
DISCRETIONARY PURCHASES BUDGET,
I THINK MOST FOLKS ARE FAMILIAR
WITH THAT, THAT IS OPERATING
SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT, THAT ONE
HAS EVERYTHING IN IT FROM
AMMUNITION TO WATER THAT IS
CIRCULATED DURING EVENTS.
THAT ONE HAD A $300,000 CUT.
THAT ONE WAS NOT BASED ON THE
IDEA THAT COVID WOULD AFFECT
DEMAND, THAT WAS ONE THAT WAS
NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO
COVID AND DID NOT SPECIFY
COVID OR SUGGEST THAT THERE
WOULD BE ANY SORT OF COVID
DEMAND ISSUES AT ALL.
I WILL NOTE THAT THE DEPARTMENT
HAS, THE MAYOR, HAS RESTORED
ALL OF THESE REDUCTIONS IN THE
2022 PROPOSED BUDGET.
ALL OF THEM HAVE BEEN FULLY
RESTORED.
THE DEPARTMENT HAS SAID THAT
THE COVID RELATED OVERTIME
REDUCTION, THE 6.4 MILLION, IS
GOING TO NEED TO BE USED
BECAUSE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
EVENTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE
COMING BACK THIS YEAR.
OR NEXT YEAR, I AM SORRY, THAT
THIS YEAR, WE ARE GOING TO SEE
PROBABLY, WELL, THIS YEAR TO
DATE, THE DEPARTMENT HAS SEEN
144 EVENTS AND IF YOU LOOK BACK
TO 2019, THERE HAS BEEN 603
EVENTS, SO EVEN THOUGH WE ARE
COMPARING IN THOSE NUMBERS, AN
ENTIRE YEAR OF 2019 TO JUST A
PARTIAL YEAR OF 2021, THERE IS
AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE
DIFFERENCE THERE.
THEY ALSO NOTE THAT THERE ARE
SOME NEW EVENTS LIKE THE KRAKEN
GAMES IN CLIMATE PLEDGE ARENA.
THEY HAVE TALKED ABOUT A BACKLOG
OF CERTIFICATIONS THAT NEED TO
BE ADDRESSED AND THEN FINALLY,
THEY HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE NEED
TO RESTORE THE DISCRETIONARY
PURCHASES BUDGET BECAUSE THE
DISCRETIONARY PURCHASES BUDGET
LAST YEAR WHEN IT RECEIVED A
CUT WAS IMPLEMENTED WITH SOME
COVID FUNDING THAT WAS ONE
TIME AND WAS AVAILABLE TO THE
DEPARTMENT.
SO THEY ARE INDICATING THAT
THEY ARE MAKING IT THROUGH THIS
YEAR BY USING SOME COVID FUNDS
THAT WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE NEXT
YEAR.
AND SO, THAT WOULD BRING ME TO
PROVIDE SOME INFORMATION ABOUT
HOW THEY ARE DOING THIS YEAR ON
THESE BUDGETS, ON THE OVERTIME
BUDGET, THEY ARE ABOUT 71%
EXPENDED THROUGH SEPTEMBER.
THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE $2.6
MILLION THAT WAS PROVIDED BY
THE COUNCIL.
THAT IS, THE $2.6 MILLION THAT
WAS PROVIDED AS PART OF THE
MIDYEAR SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET WAS
PROVIDED TO HELP THEM, SPD,
MAKE IT THROUGH THE END OF THE
YEAR AND HANDLE THE EVENTS AT
THE STADIUMS.
THEY ARE 71% EXPENDED THROUGH
SEPTEMBER AND THEY HAVE NOT
RECEIVED THAT MONEY YET, SO
THAT IS SOME GOOD NEWS FOR
SPD'S BUDGET MANAGEMENT.
IN TERMS OF TRAVEL AND
TRAINING, IS MUCH LOWER, THEY
ARE ONLY I BELIEVE 30% OR SO
EXPENDED ON THAT PARTICULAR
MEASURE, AND THEN ON
DISCRETIONARY PURCHASES, THEY
ARE 81% EXPENDED, SO THAT ONE IS
HIGHER THAN PROBABLY IT SHOULD
BE FOR BEING THREE QUARTERS OF
THE WAY THROUGH THE YEAR.
BUT IT INCLUDES SOME
ENCUMBRANCES THAT THEY HAVE
COMMITTED TO FOR THE LAST PART
OF THE YEAR.
SO I WILL STOP AND, WELL, I
WILL SAY THAT THE OPTIONS HERE
ARE TO RESTORE SOME OR ALL OF
THE REDUCTIONS OR NO ACTION,
AND THEN I WILL ASK IF THERE
ARE ANY QUESTIONS.
>> WONDERFUL, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, GREG.
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
GREG, I AM GOING TO ASK YOU ONE
MORE TIME, BECAUSE I HAVE
FORGOTTEN THE ANSWER.
BUT I KNOW WE DID A LOT OF WORK
EARLY LAST YEAR, SPRING AND
FALL, TO TRY TO MOVE TOWARD NON-
SWORN OFFICERS FOR THINGS LIKE
TRAFFIC MITIGATION AROUND
SPECIAL EVENTS.
I KNOW THERE IS A STATE LAW
THAT IS ALSO DOVETAILING WITH
THE DESIRE TO MOVE AWAY FROM
ARMED OFFICERS AT THESE EVENTS.
CAN YOU REMIND ME, WHY DO WE
CAN SEND YOU SISSY OVERTIME
COSTS RELATED TO SWORN OFFICERS
AT THESE EVENTS WHEN THERE IS A
LARGE INTEREST IN MOVING TO
CIVILIAN TRAFFIC?
MITIGATION PERSONAL?
>> THERE IS CURRENTLY A SPLIT
OF THE SPECIAL EVENTS TRAFFIC
CONTROL WORK BETWEEN PEO'S AND
SWORN OFFICERS.
THERE PRIMARILY IS A SWORN
OFFICER AT LIGHTED
INTERSECTIONS, WHERE THEY ARE
OVERRIDDEN.
BUT PEO'S ALSO DO SOME TRAFFIC
DIRECTION AND BOTH KINDS OF
PERSONNEL WILL DO VARIOUS KINDS
OF TRAFFIC WORK.
IT IS A BODY OF WORK SPLIT THAT
WOULD, IF DRASTICALLY CHANGED,
SAY, ALL OF IT IS GIVEN TO
PEO'S, OR CIVILIAN RESPONDERS OR
ANY KIND OF A CIVILIAN FLAGGER,
COULD POTENTIALLY BE A UNION
ISSUE THAT WOULD NEED TO BE
NEGOTIATED.
IT IS SPLITS RIGHT NOW IN A WAY
THAT THE PEO UNION AND THE
OFFICERS GUILD ARE, FOR LACK OF
A BETTER WAY TO SAY, HAPPY WITH.
IF IT IS THE CASE THAT THE
OFFICERS GUILD LOST THAT BODY
OF WORK IN ITS ENTIRETY, TO A
CIVILIAN FLAGGER GROUP OR TO BE
PEO'S, THEY MIGHT NOT BE HAPPY
AND THEY MIGHT FILE A YOU LP.
>> OKAY, MORE TO COME ON THAT,
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON
THIS SLIDE?
COUNCIL PRESIDENT GONZALES.
>> JUST REALLY QUICKLY, GREG,
CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THE -- ANY
INFORMATION YOU MIGHT HAVE ABOUT
THE PRESSURES THAT CONTINUING TO
STAFF THE SPECIAL EVENTS IS
CREATING ON OFFICER TIME TO
RESPOND TO SERVICE CALLS?
DO YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION
RELATED TO THAT?
>> NO, I DON'T, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT.
I AM GOING TO WANT TO GET BACK
TO YOU ON THAT.
>> THAT WOULD BE GREAT BUT MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE IS
SOME SCUTTLEBUTT AROUND
REQUIRING OFFICERS TO HAVE
LONGER SHIFTS IN ORDER TO
PROVIDE THE HOURS NECESSARY FOR
DOING THIS BODY OF WORK WE ARE
DISCUSSING RIGHT NOW.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT
CAUSES SOME CONCERNS IN MY MIND.
AND REALLY, I THINK THE POLICY
QUESTION IS THAT I WOULD LIKE
YOUR HELP FIGURING OUT IF THERE
IS AN ANSWER TO, THE POLICY
QUESTION FOR ME IS, YOU KNOW,
IS IT APPROPRIATE IN THE
CONTEXT OF THE STAFFING LEVELS
AT THE DEPARTMENT, IS IT
APPROPRIATE FOR US TO CONTINUE
TO PROVIDE THIS -- IS IT
APPROPRIATE FOR US TO CONTINUE
TO UTILIZE LIMITED OFFICER
HOURS ON FOR-PROFIT, PRIVATE
SPECIAL EVENTS?
I MEAN, WE NEED THE TIME THAT
THESE OFFICERS HAVE TO ACTUALLY
DO PATROL, AND THE WORK THAT WE
EXPECT FROM THEM, WHILE WE
SCALE UP THESE ALTERNATIVES TO
LAW ENFORCEMENT, SO WHY ARE WE
CREATING ADDITIONAL PRESSURE ON
PATROL OFFICERS TO BOTH DO THE
OVERTIME RELATED TO SPECIAL
EVENTS AND, YOU KNOW, AND THEIR
ORDINARY PATROL DUTIES?
>> I WILL CHECK INTO IT. SORRY
I DO NOT HAVE AN ANSWER FOR YOU.
>> GREAT QUESTIONS, THANK YOU
COUNCIL PRESIDENT GONZALES.
AND I KNOW THAT IS PART OF THE
SOLUTION, AS YOU ARTICULATED,
TO MAKING SURE THAT OFFICERS
ARE FREED UP TO ACTUALLY
RESPOND TO HIGH-PURITY CALLS,
LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING MORE
ABOUT THAT.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD, PLEASE
GO AHEAD.
>> I JUST WANT TO REITERATE
THAT SAME LINE OF QUESTIONING
COUNCIL PRESIDENT GONZALES WAS
MAKING, AS IT RELATED TO THE
SHARED WORK OF SPD AND FIRE,
AROUND HARBOR PATROL, AND
WHETHER OR NOT AS MANAGEMENT,
WE COULD MAKE SHIFTS IN THAT,
BECAUSE OF EXTENUATING
CIRCUMSTANCES, ASSOCIATED WITH
STAFFING LEVELS, AND THE
PRIORITY WORK OF POLICE OFFICERS
AND WHAT THEY NEED TO MOST BE
DOING.
I REALLY THINK THAT WE SHOULD
BE CONSIDERING A DIFFERENT
ARGUMENT HERE, WHEN IT COMES TO
THESE FUNCTIONS AND OVERTIME IS
ANOTHER ONE OF THEM FOR SURE,
SO THANK YOU.
>> ABSOLUTELY, AND I THINK THAT
SORT OF IS WHAT I'M HOPING
CENTRAL STAFF CAN ANALYZE A
LITTLE BIT MORE THOROUGHLY, I
RECOGNIZE THAT IN SOME OF THESE
SITUATIONS, WE MIGHT HAVE
CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS OR HAVE
ALREADY MADE COMMITMENTS TO
PROVIDE THESE PUBLIC SAFETY
SERVICES, HOWEVER, WE MADE
THOSE COMMITMENTS TO PROVIDE
THOSE SERVICES CONTRACTUALLY OR
OTHERWISE, UNDER VERY DIFFERENT
CIRCUMSTANCES THAN WHAT EXISTS
TODAY, AND SO I DO THINK IT IS
APPROPRIATE FOR US TO CALL TO
QUESTION WHETHER WE SHOULD, IN
LIGHT OF THE EXTENUATING
CIRCUMSTANCES RELATED TO THE
SHORTAGE IN STAFFING, WHETHER
WE SHOULD STILL REQUIRE THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT TO MOVE
FORWARD AS THOUGH NOTHING HAS
CHANGED.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> THANK YOU.
THAT JUST RAISES A QUESTION FOR
ME THAT I DON'T NEED AN ANSWER
TO RIGHT NOW, BUT I WOULD LIKE
TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THESE
CONTRACTS AND THEIR TERMS AND
CONDITIONS AND WHAT ELSE WE
COULD DO ABOUT IT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
GREG.
I THINK WE WILL HAVE TO, WE ARE
AT THE END OF THIS SLIDE, I
HAVE TO ASK, SINCE WE HAVE
OVERTIME IN FRONT OF US,
LOOKING AT THIS YEAR'S BUDGET,
IS THERE ANY INDICATION AT THIS
POINT THAT THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT IS GOING TO STAY
WITHIN THE OVERTIME LINE ITEM
THE COUNCIL HAS AUTHORIZED IN
TERMS OF SPENDING FOR OVERTIME?
AS WE HAVE NOW PASSED I THINK
THREE TIMES.
>> I THINK THE GOOD NEWS IS,
YES.
I THINK SO.
WHEN I LOOKED AT THE FINANCIALS
A WEEK AGO, THEY WERE 15.5
MILLION IN SPENDING ON A BUDGET
THAT WAS 21.8 BILLION. THE
BUDGET THAT IS $21.8 MILLION AS
THE BUDGET THAT THEY STARTED
THE YEAR WITH.
YOU ALL ADDED TO THAT BUDGET,
THE 2.6 MILLION IN THE MIDYEAR
SUPPLEMENTAL.
SO THEY HAVE GOT THE REMAINING
BUDGET AND THEN SOME WIGGLE
ROOM.
GIVEN THE AD THAT YOU MADE.
SO, I THINK THAT IT IS LOOKING
GOOD.
>> DOES THAT ALSO INCLUDE THE
1.5 FROM THE UNDER SPEND BILL
THAT TOOK PLACE IN SEPTEMBER?
>> YEAH, IT DOES.
IT IS THE 1.5 MILLION THAT YOU
DIRECTLY MOVED INTO OVERTIME.
AND THEN THERE WAS A 1.1
REMAINING, I ADDED THOSE
TOGETHER, YES, IT DOES INCLUDE
THAT.
>> YOU WOULD THINK WE WOULDN'T
EVEN HAVE TO ASK THE QUESTION
IF THEY ARE GOING TO STAY
WITHIN THEIR BUDGET, BUT GIVEN
THAT THAT HAS BEEN SOMETHING
THAT HAS COME BACK TO COUNCIL
WHEN THEY OVERSPEND THE BUDGET,
I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE
REGULAR CHECK INS ON THAT.
I KNOW THAT PROBABLY IS AN
UNFORESEEN QUESTION IF YOU ARE
WORKING IN THE STATE
LEGISLATURE TO HAVE TO ASK YOU
DEPARTMENT IF THEY WERE
ACTUALLY STAYING WITHIN THEIR
BUDGET, BUT I'M GLAD TO HEAR
THAT IS ON TRACK AT THIS POINT.
THANKS, GREG.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT, ANYTHING
ELSE FROM YOU?
OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE
ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
>> OKAY, SO, NEXT SLIDE.
I HAD MENTIONED BEFORE THAT THE
COUNCIL, OR THAT THE DEPARTMENT
IS INTERESTED IN SPENDING 5
MILLION OF THEIR SALARY SAVINGS
ON TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENTS.
THE TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENTS, TWO
OF THEM, ARE CONTINUATIONS FROM
INVESTMENTS THAT WERE STARTED
THIS YEAR IN THE MIDYEAR
SUPPLEMENTAL, AND I AM GOING TO
GO THROUGH EACH OF THESE AND
TRY TO PUT THEM INTO AS
PLAINTIFF WORDS AND EXPLANATION
AS I POSSIBLY CAN.
THEY ARE NOT EASY.
AND I HAVE HAD TO HAVE THE
DEPARTMENT DUMB IT DOWN FOR ME.
[ LAUGHTER ] SO, THE DATA
ANALYTICS PLATFORM, THE VERY
FIRST ITEMS, $4 MILLION, THAT
ONE IS A LITTLE EASIER.
THAT IS WHEN YOU ARE FAMILIAR
WITH.
THAT IS ESSENTIALLY A DATA
WAREHOUSE THAT IS COLLECTING
AND SYNTHESIZING DATA FROM A
VARIETY OF DIFFERENT SOURCES AT
SPD.
IT PUTS IT, ALL THE DATA
TOGETHER, AND THEY USE IT FOR
REPORTING TO THE PUBLIC AND FOR
REPORTING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE, FOR THE CONSENT
DEGREE, FOR ALL OF THE ANALYSIS
THAT THEY DO, ANY TIME COUNCIL
ASK THEM A QUESTION ON
DISPARITY OR ANY KIND OF
OFFICER METRICS, MOST OF THE
THINGS I HAVE SHOWN YOU IN THIS
PRESENTATION ARE COMING OUT OF
THE GAP.
ANYTHING ON OFFICER TRAINING OR
PERFORMANCE, ALL THAT STUFF IS
KEPT THERE.
SO THIS $1 MILLION IS TO PAY
FOR FEES THAT WOULD BE
ASSOCIATED WITH LICENSING AND
THEN ALSO FOR CONSULTANTS TO
KEEP THE SYSTEM UP AND RUNNING.
I WILL FIRE THROUGH A BUNCH OF
THESE AND THEN STOP AT THE END
FOR QUESTIONS, BUT IF SOMETHING
DOES NOT MAKE SENSE, PLEASE
RAISE YOUR HAND AND I WILL STOP.
THE OFFICER ACCOUNTABILITY AND
TRUST HUB, WHICH IS CALLED
O.A.T.H., IS SOMETHING THAT
WAS STARTED IN THE MIDYEAR
SUPPLEMENTAL.
IT WAS FUNDED AT $350,000 THIS
YEAR.
AND WHAT THIS DOES, IT IS A
SOFTWARE PROGRAM THAT LOOKS AT
A NUMBER OF INPUTS THAT
OFFICERS ARE, AROUND AN
OFFICER'S WORK.
SO, THE NUMBER OF CALLS THEY
HAVE GONE ON, THE TYPE OF CALLS
THEY HAVE GONE ON, WHETHER OR
NOT THE CALLS ARE PARTICULARLY
TOUGH, WHETHER THEY ARE CRISIS
CALLS, HOW LONG THEY HAVE BEEN
ON THE CALLS.
AND IN THE SOFTWARE WILL
INDICATE WHETHER OR NOT THAT
EMPLOYEE MIGHT NEED SUPPORT.
AND THIS IS THE NEXT PART OF
THAT SYSTEM.
IT IS PART OF THE DEPARTMENT'S
WELLNESS STRATEGY, TO BE ABLE
TO IDENTIFY OFFICERS THAT COULD
USE MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELING.
THE NEXT ONE IS THE EQUITY,
ACCOUNTABILITY, EQUALITY FORUM
AND TRULEO SOFTWARE.
THIS ONE HAS MULTIPLE PARTS TO
IT.
THE FIRST PART IS A $260,000
úINVESTMENT FOR A CONTRACTOR
THAT WILL CREATE WHAT SPD
REFERS TO AS A HARM INDEX.
AND THAT HARM INDEX WILL BE
USED TO EVALUATE THE NICJR
STUDY ON ALTERNATIVE POLICE
RESPONSE.
SO WE HAVE TALKED A LITTLE TODAY
, THE COUNCIL HAS AN CENTRAL
STAFF, ABOUT THE 29 DIFFERENT
CALL TYPES THAT SPD AND NICJR
HAVE IDENTIFIED.
MOST OF WHICH ARE NOT, WELL, I
DON'T THINK REALLY ARE ANY
CRIMINAL, SOME ARE VIOLATIONS,
CITATION VIOLATIONS.
THOSE CALLS AS WELL AS, REALLY,
ALL OF THE CALLS IN , COULD BE
RUN AGAINST THIS HARM INDEX, TO
SEE IF THERE WOULD BE A RISK
TO A CIVILIAN IF YOU SENT AN
ALTERNATIVE POLICE RESPONSE.
AND SO THE $260,000 OF THAT 1
MILLION SOME, A QUARTER OF IT
WILL GO TO CREATE THE HARM
INDEX.
THE NEXT PIECE OF THAT ONE,
200,000, WOULD GO FOR TAKING
BODY-WORN VIDEO, THE AUDIO FROM
IT, AND TURNING IT INTO
TYPEWRITTEN, I SAY TYPEWRITTEN
BECAUSE I AM OLD, BUT
TRANSCRIPT DID -- TRANSCRIPTION.
AND THEN THAT TRANSCRIPT AND
AUDIO WOULD BE SUBJECT TO A
SOFTWARE PROGRAM THAT THEY
WOULD SPEND THE REST OF THE
MONEY ON, 540,000, AND THAT
SOFTWARE PROGRAM WOULD ANALYZE
THE WORDS THAT OFFICERS ARE
USING TO SEE IF THERE WAS A
PATTERN IN, OR A CHANGE IN
PATTERN, AROUND CIVILITY,
PROFESSIONALISM, OR DE-
ESCALATION.
AND THAT STUDY WOULD BE DONE IN
CONJUNCTION WITH THE INSPECTOR
GENERAL.
SO YOU HAVE THREE PARTS TO THAT
STUDY, OR THREE PARTS TO THAT
PARTICULAR PROJECT.
THE NEXT ONE IS FAIRLY EASY,
THE NEXT ONE IS REPLACEMENT OF
THE BLUE TEAM SYSTEM.
SINCE THE CONSENT DECREE WAS
PUT IN IN 2012, THE USE OF
FORCE INCIDENTS THAT THE
DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN TRACKING
HAS BEEN TRACKED THROUGH A
STANDALONE SYSTEM.
THE DEPARTMENT HAS INDICATED
THAT THE DATA FROM THAT SYSTEM
DOES NOT MARRY UP WELL WITH
OTHER SYSTEMS.
LIKE THE RMS SYSTEM, AND THEY
HAVE DATA VALIDATION ISSUES.
SO TO SOLVE THOSE ISSUES AND
POTENTIALLY MAKE IT EASIER FOR
FEDERAL REPORTING, THEY ARE
SUGGESTING THAT THEY JUST PUT
ALL OF THAT USE OF FORCE DATA
INTO THE RMS SYSTEM AND THIS
PROJECT WOULD INTEGRATE THAT
USE OF FORCE MODULE INTO THE
RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.
THE NEXT ONE IS THE ACTIVE
WELLNESS -- ACTIVE WORKFORCE
WELLNESS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.
THIS IS KIND OF AN INTERESTING
ONE.
SO THE DEPARTMENT IS CONSIDERING
A PILOTS OF WHAT THEY CALL
ACTIVE 911, WHICH IS WHERE
OFFICERS WOULD BE LISTENING IN
ROUTE TO A 911 CALL, THEY WOULD
BE LISTENING TO AUDIO OF THE
CALL TAKER AND DISPATCHER
TALKING TO THE PERSON MAKING
THE 911 CALL.
AND SO THE POSITIVE SIDE OF
THAT IS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE
SITUATIONAL AWARENESS OF THE
SCENE BEFORE THEY GOT TO IT.
THE POTENTIAL NEGATIVE SIDE OF
THAT IS THAT THEY COULD
POTENTIALLY BE TRIGGERING FIGHT
OR FLIGHT STRESS RESPONSES, AND
POTENTIALLY NEGATIVE OUTCOMES
ASSOCIATED WITH STRESS WHEN
THEY ARRIVE ON SCENE.
SO, WHAT SPD WOULD LIKE TO DO
IS TO RUN A PILOTS WHERE THEY
FIT OFFICERS WITH BIOMETRIC
SHIRTS THAT WOULD MEASURE THEIR
HEARTBEAT AND THEIR BREATHING
SO THAT AS THEY ARE LISTENING
TO THE 911 CALLS, THEY CAN
EVALUATE WHETHER THAT IS
GETTING THEM AMPED UP, SO TO
SPEAK.
AND WHETHER THAT IS CREATING ANY
POTENTIAL ADVERSE OUTCOMES WHEN
THEY ARRIVE ON SCENE.
AND SO THAT IS WHAT THAT
FUNDING IS FOR, IS PARTLY FOR
THE BIOMETRIC EQUIPMENT AND IT
IS PARTLY FOR THE PILOTING OF
THE ACTIVE 911.
I SEE SOME QUESTIONS.
>> SORRY, GREG.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU
GET THROUGH THE FULL LIST HERE.
>> LET ME GET THROUGH -- ONE
LEFT, LET ME GET THROUGH THE
LAST ONE.
THE LAST ONE IS RISK MANAGEMENT
DEMAND.
RISK MANAGEMENT DEMAND IS, THIS
IS A SOFTWARE THAT GOES HAND-IN-
HAND WITH THE -- THAT GOES HAND-
IN-HAND WITH THE HARM INDEX
THAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT.
THE HARM INDEX WOULD BE CREATED
TO EVALUATE WHETHER OR NOT A
CALL WOULD BE SAFE FOR A
CIVILIAN TO GO ON.
THE RISK MANAGEMENT DEMAND IS
THE ACTUAL SOFTWARE, AND I'M
TRYING TO PUT THIS VERY SIMPLY,
BUT IT IS THE ACTUAL SOFTWARE
AND EVALUATION SYSTEM THAT
WOULD TAKE THE HARM INDEX AND
PUT IT AGAINST THE NICJR STUDY.
SO YOU WOULD NEED BOTH
COMPONENTS, AS I UNDERSTAND IT,
FROM THE DEPARTMENT, TO BE ABLE
TO RUN THE EVALUATION ON THE
NICJR STUDY AND NO ACROSS ALL
OF THE CALL TYPES, NOT JUST THE
28 OR 29, BUT ALL OF THEM,
WHICH ONES WERE OKAY TO SEND A
CIVILIAN TO.
THE COUNCIL WOULD NEED TO
INVEST THE 260,000 IN THE EA Q
PROJECT AND ALSO THE 750,000 IN
THE R&D PROJECT.
AND NOW I AM DONE.
>> OKAY.
I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU,
I WILL PUT MYSELF IN THE QUEUE.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD,
MORALES, AND THEN I WILL GO.
>> REAL QUICKLY, ON THE OTHER
LIVE 911 PILOT, IS THAT BEING
DONE ANYWHERE ELSE?
>> I DON'T KNOW.
>> I MEAN, IT WOULD BE GOOD TO
KNOW WHAT OTHER JURISDICTIONS
MIGHT HAVE LEARNED ABOUT THEIR
OFFICERS.
FIGHT OR FLIGHT RESPONSE.
RATHER THAN HAVING TO FIT
OFFICERS WITH EQUIPMENT TO READ
THEIR BIOMETRICS BEFORE LOOKING
AT WHETHER OR NOT TO DO THIS.
IT SEEMS LIKE IF THERE ARE
OTHER POLICE DEPARTMENTS WHO
ARE DOING A LIVE, ACTIVE NINE
AND ONE SITUATIONAL AWARENESS
THING, THAT WE COULD LEARN FROM
THOSE DEPARTMENTS, RATHER THAN
GOING WITH THIS WAY OF
MEASURING, AGAIN, MEASURING THE
FIGHT OR FLIGHT RESPONSE OF
OFFICERS.
AND THEN MY OTHER QUESTION, AND
I AM SURE YOU SAID IT EXACTLY
PERFECTLY, BUT AS IT RELATES TO
THE NICJR REPORT , THERE ARE
TWO ITEMS IN THIS LIST THAT
RELATE TO IT.
THERE IS FUNDING IN THE EQUITY,
ACCOUNTABILITY AND QUALITY FOR
HIM ITEM, AND THEN THERE IS
FUNDING IN THE RISK MANAGE
DEMAND.
WHICH IS THE ONE WHICH IS SORT
OF THE ANALYSIS FOR HOW WE ARE
GOING TO CHANGE HOW WE DO
THINGS, AND WHICH IS THE PIECE
WHICH IS, NO, WE ARE GOING TO
RUN -- TO A RISK ANALYSIS ON
EVERY CALL IN REAL TIME TO MAKE
THAT DECISION?
>> BACKING UP TO YOUR FIRST
QUESTION, I REMEMBERED SOMETHING
THAT I WOULD THINK I WOULD HAVE
REMEMBERED RIGHT AWAY.
IT IS NOT BEING DONE AROUND THE
COUNTRY, THIS ACTIVE WORKFORCE
WELLNESS MANAGEMENT PILOT,
BECAUSE THAT DEPARTMENT IS
WORKING WITH THE SMART KIDS AT
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY, TO
COME UP WITH THE BIOMETRIC
STUDY SHIRTS.
AND I THINK WE ARE ON THE
CUTTING EDGE OF THAT.
BUT I WILL GET BACK.
>> OKAY, JUST BECAUSE WE ARE ON
THE CUTTING EDGE DOES NOT MEAN
NOBODY ELSE IS DOING WITH 911,
RIGHT?
>> YEAH, I JUST HAD TO PROMOTE
WSE THERE.
[ LAUGHTER ]
>> AGO.
[ LAUGHTER ]
>> YOU ARE CORRECT, THERE ARE
260,000 IN EA Q THAT IS
NECESSARY FOR THE NICJR STUDY,
AND THERE IS THE 750,000 IN
RISK MANAGEMENT DEMAND.
I AM TOLD THAT THE EA Q PIECE,
THE 260,000, IS COMING UP WITH
THAT HARM INDEX, AND SO THAT IS
WHERE YOU LOOK AT ALL THE CALLS
AND YOU FIGURE OUT WHERE THERE
WAS AN ADVERSE OUTCOME THAT
COULD HAVE CREATED HARM TO A
CIVILIAN.
I AM TOLD THE RISK MANAGEMENT
DEMAND IS THE PROGRAMMING AND
THE CREATING OF THE SOFTWARE
THAT ALLOWS YOU TO TAKE THAT
HARM INDEX AND RUN IT AGAINST
THE NICJR CALLS.
ONCE THE RISK MANAGEMENT
DEMANDS SOFTWARE IS -- ONCE THE
CODE IS CREATED AND THE
SOFTWARE IS CREATED, IN THE
FUTURE, IT CAN BE USED TO
ASSIST WITH LIVE DEPLOYMENTS.
SO, THE NEXT PHASE, NOT THIS
ONE, WOULD BE WHERE A CALL
TAKER OR A DISPATCHER IS
HEARING A CASE COME IN AND THE
FACTS OF THE CASE WOULD SOMEHOW
BE MEASURED AGAINST THE
SOFTWARE AND ULTIMATELY DINGED
BACK AGAINST THE HARM INDEX AND
THEY WOULD BE SOMEHOW TOLD
WHETHER OR NOT TO SEND A
CIVILIAN. THAT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING.
IT IS PRETTY RUDIMENTARY AND
HOPEFULLY IT IS WRITE.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD 10 . I HAVE TO ASK A
QUESTION ON THIS AS A QUICK
FOLLOW-UP.
TO THE CONCEPT OF HAVING A HARM
INDEX LOOK BACK AT AN
THAT A PERSON'S OWN FIGHT OR E
FLIGHT RESPONSE IS TRIGGERED,
AND THEY FOUGHT OR ENGAGED IN
MAY BE A DEFENSIVE WAY OR
RESPONDED BECAUSE OF THE FACT
THAT THERE WAS AN OFFICER AND
PERHAPS THAT WAS -- CAUSED THEM
ALARMED VERSUS HAVING A CASE
MANAGER OR A MENTAL HEALTH
COUNSELOR OR A HOUSING
CONNECTING PERCENT COMING UP,
IT WOULD BE CHALLENGING FOR ME
TO UNDERSTAND HOW A HARM INDEX
IS NOT ABLE -- I MEAN, IS
TAKING INTO ACCOUNT, THE
PERSON'S RESPONSE IN THAT
MOMENT, COULD HAVE BEEN ALSO
TRIGGERED BY THE FACT THEY WERE
CALLING OUT FOR HELP AND
INSTEAD OF GETTING A CASE
MANAGER OR MENTAL HEALTH
COUNSELOR, THEY WERE MET WITH
AN ARMED OFFICER.
I THINK ABOUT CHARLENA LILES
AND I WAS NOT IN THE ROOM AND I
DO NOT KNOW ALL OF THE
STATISTICS BUT IF A PERSON IS
HAVING A MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS
AND THEY PULL OUT A BUTTER
KNIFE, IF IN THAT SITUATION A
HARM INDEX AS IT WOULD HAVE NOT
BEEN A GOOD IDEA TO SEND A
MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELOR, I HAVE
A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT HOW
THAT KIND LOOK BACK TECHNOLOGY
IS GOING TO HELP US REMOVE
OFFICERS FROM BEING IN
SITUATIONS WHERE THEY SHOULD
NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO SHOW UP
IN THE FIRST PLACE.
THAT IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF WHERE
OFFICERS THEMSELVES HAVE SAID
WE DO NOT WANT TO SHOW UP WHEN
CASE MANAGERS ARE NEEDED.
I DO HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS
ABOUT THE CONCEPT YOU JUST
OUTLINED OR THAT WE HAVE
RECEIVED FROM THE DEPARTMENT.
I ALSO THINK 260,000 +750,000
TO DO AN ANALYSIS OF A REPORT
WE RECEIVED FROM NICJR THAT HAS
ALREADY HAD A THIRD-PARTY
ANALYSIS ON THIS MAKES ME
QUESTION WHY WE ARE DOING YET
ANOTHER LEVEL OF ANALYSIS WHEN
THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT
VERSIONS.
MAYBE THAT WAS MORE OF A
STATEMENT.
HAPPY TO RETURN IT OVER TO
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> THANK YOU.
I HAVE TO SAY, I SHARE
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA'S
CONCERN ABOUT USING TECHNOLOGY
TO LOOK BACK ON SOMETHING THAT
SHOULD HAVE PROBABLY BEEN
ADDRESSED IN A DIFFERENT WAY IN
THE FIRST PLACE, BUT THIS TO ME
JUST FEELS LIKE A LOT OF MONEY
ON TECHNOLOGY TO TELL US THAT
POLICE ARE IN HIGH STRESS, HIGH
RISK JOBS.
WE KNOW THAT ALREADY.
AND IF THIS IS ABOUT OFFICER
WELLNESS, I TOTALLY SUPPORT
THAT.
I KNOW THAT THEY PROBABLY NEED
THEIR OWN COUNSELING AND
SUPPORT, GIVEN THE KINDS OF
TRAUMA THAT THEY EXPERIENCE AND
OBSERVE.
AND IF THAT IS THE POINT OF
THIS, THEN I THINK WE COULD
SPEND OUR MONEY MUCH MORE
WISELY BY CREATING, YOU KNOW,
OFFICER MENTAL HEALTH
COUNSELORS OR HIRING A COUPLE
PSYCHIATRISTS TO WORK FOR THE
DEPARTMENT.
I JUST THINK ONCE WE START
GOING DOWN THIS TECHNOLOGY
SLIPPERY SLOPE THEN WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT UPGRADES AND
STAFFING AND DATA ANALYSTS AND
I DO NOT REALLY NEED TO KNOW IF
AN OFFICER GETS AMPED UP
BECAUSE OF A CALL HE IS
GETTING, OR SHE.
I EXPECT THAT THAT IS WHAT
HAPPENS IF THEY ARE CALLED TO
SOMETHING THAT IS AN EMERGENCY.
WHAT WE DO ABOUT IT AFTERWARD
IS WHAT IS IMPORTANT AND I
WOULD TOTALLY SUPPORT PROVIDING
GREATER COUNSELING AND MENTAL
HEALTH SERVICES FOR THE
DEPARTMENT, BUT THIS FEELS LIKE
A REALLY SLIPPERY SLOPE TO ME.
AND AS COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA
SAYS, I AM NOT SURE THAT IT
ACTUALLY SERVES OUR COMMUNITY
VERY WELL.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT
GONZALES.
>> THANK YOU.
I JUST WANTED TO LET FOLKS KNOW
THAT MY OFFICE IS INTERESTED IN
ADVANCING A PROVISO IN THIS
AREA.
TO ALLOW FOR THERE TO BE
GREATER TRANSPARENCY AND
UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THESE
VARIOUS TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENTS
ARE AND WHAT THEY ARE NOT.
I THINK AS WE CAN TELL FROM THE
CONVERSATION IN THE DEBATE
OCCURRING RIGHT NOW, IT IS
STILL VERY OPAQUE AS TO EXACTLY
WHAT WE ARE APPROVING OR BEING
ASKED TO APPROVE, BY VIRTUE OF
THIS ADDITIONAL $5 MILLION
INVESTMENT, AND I THINK IT IS
APPROPRIATE FOR US TO ENCUMBER
THESE DOLLARS AND PREVENT THE
EXPENDITURE AND ACQUISITION OF
-- THE EXPENDITURE FOR THE
ACQUISITION OF THESE TECHNOLOGY
INVESTMENTS, UNTIL WE KNOW A
LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHAT THE
CITY IS GETTING IN RETURN FOR
THESE TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENTS.
AND AGAIN, PARTICULARLY AS IT
RELATES TO OFFICER WELLNESS, IT
IS STILL VERY UNCLEAR TO ME
WHAT THE OPERATIONAL IMPACT IS
OF THIS KIND OF A PROGRAM AND I
ALSO DO NOT HAVE A CLEAR
UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THAT
INFORMATION WILL BE STORED OR
RETAINED FOR INSTANCES, FOR
EXAMPLE, IF THERE WAS A USE OF
EXCESSIVE FORCE OR DEADLY
FORCE, SORT OF HOW IS THIS
INFORMATION GOING TO BE
UTILIZED MOVING FORWARD?
I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF
QUESTIONS HERE AND ENOUGH
QUESTIONS TO, AGAIN, REQUIRE
THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, AT
LEAST ON SOME OF THESE
TECHNOLOGIES, TO REQUIRE THAT
THEY PROVIDE THE COUNCIL WITH
SOME ADDITIONAL GRANULAR DETAIL
ABOUT WHAT THESE TECHNOLOGIES
ARE AND WHAT THE BENEFITS CAN BE
OR WHAT THE RISKS ARE OF HAVING
THESE TECHNOLOGIES AVAILABLE AT
THE CITY TO OFFICERS.
>> GOOD, THANK YOU FOR FLAGGING
MAT.
AND I DO WANT TO ALSO UNDERSCORE
THE IMPORTANCE OF MAKING SURE
OUR FIRST RESPONDERS HAVE
ACCESS TO MENTAL HEALTH
COUNSELING, WE HAVE MADE SURE
THERE ARE TWO MENTAL HEALTH
COUNSELORS FOR EXAMPLE AT OUR
SEATTLE FIRE DEPARTMENT, AND
MAYBE YOU CAN CONFIRM IF I HAVE
THIS WRONG, MIGHT BE IN A
DIFFERENT CENTRAL STAFF BUCKET
BUT I THINK THE TWO MENTAL
HEALTH PROVIDERS HAVE BEEN
INCLUDED IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET
AS WELL AS TRANSMITTED FROM THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE, FROM THE
SEATTLE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
I THOUGHT WE ADDED ATTENTIONAL
MENTAL HEALTH PROVIDERS FOR OUR
FRONT-LINE OFFICERS WHO ARE
FROM SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT
AND I SEE YOU NODDING, IF YOU
CAN CONFIRM FOR ME WHAT WE
ADDED AND IF IT IS THE IN THE
BUDGET AS WELL THAT WOULD BE
GREAT.
ACCESS TO MENTAL HEALTH
COUNSELING IS SOMETHING I HAVE
PRIORITIZED AND WILL CONTINUE
TO DO FOR OUR FIRST RESPONDERS
AND LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING
OTHER WAYS IN WHICH WE CAN
SUPPORT MENTAL HEALTH AND
TRAUMA INFORMED CARE FOR THOSE
ON THE FRONT LINE BUT JUST
WANTED TO REMIND THE COUNCIL
THAT WE DID ADD MENTAL HEALTH
COUNSELORS BEFORE AND IF YOU
CAN CONFIRM FOR ME WHERE THAT
IS AT IN THIS BUDGET.
>> I THINK PROBABLY MY COLLEAGUE
IS GREAT TO SPEAK ABOUT THAT
BUT I CAN CONFIRM FOR YOU THERE
IS 150,000 IN THAT TABLE THAT
WE LOOKED AT FOR MENTAL HEALTH
PROVIDERS FOR SPD AND THEN
THERE IS ALSO A GRANT THAT SPD
IS GOING TO PUT FORWARD THAT
WILL HAVE ADDITIONAL MENTAL
HEALTH SERVICES IN IT.
IT IS HERE AND SHE CAN TELL YOU
ABOUT FIRE, I SEE YOUR HAND IS
UP.
>> THERE IS 150,000 ON AN
ONGOING BASIS IN THE BUDGET,
THE 2022 PROPOSED BUDGET.
>> THANK YOU BOTH VERY MUCH.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT, PLEASE GO
AHEAD.
>> SORRY, THAT WAS A LEFTOVER.
>> THANK YOU.
GREG, I DO HAVE ONE LAST
QUESTION, RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY
INVESTMENTS.
WE HAD A PRETTY LENGTHY
CONVERSATION LATE THIS SUMMER
AS IT RELATED TO THE SEATTLE
POLICE DEPARTMENTS UNDER SPEND
AND THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDING
FOR I.T.
, AT THAT TIME WE LEARNED THERE
IS A TECHNOLOGY REQUEST THAT
WAS BEING PUT BEFORE COUNCIL
BUT THE CONTRACT HAD ALREADY
BEEN SIGNED , ON I ANY OF THESE
ITEMS HERE, DO YOU HAVE ANY
INDICATION THE DEPARTMENT HEAD
HAS ALREADY MOVED FORWARD WITH
SIGNING OR WORKING ON
INTERPRETING ANY OF THESE, OR
IS IT THAT COUNCIL GETS TO MAKE
THE APPROPRIATION AND THEN A
CONTRACT WOULD BE SIGNED?
>> THE FORMER IS TRUE.
THEY HAVE COMMITTED TO $50,000
IN THE RISK-MANAGEMENT DEMAND
BUCKET DOWN ON THE LAST ROW,
AND THEY HAVE COMMITTED TO THE
260,000 FOR THE EA Q STUDY THAT
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD HAS
REFERENCED FOR THE HARM INDEX.
AND THAT IS WHAT I AM
REMEMBERING RIGHT NOW.
>> SO COUNCIL, GIVEN ALL OF THE
PARTIES WE DO HAVE TO WIN FOR
THIS BUDGET, IF COUNCIL SOMEHOW
DID NOT INCLUDE THE FULL AMOUNT
ON THIS FLIGHT, WHAT WOULD BE
THE RESPONSE TO, IF YOU KNOW,
FROM THE DEPARTMENT GIVEN THE
COMMITMENTS ALREADY MADE AND
THE PAYMENTS ALREADY SENT?
>> I DON'T THINK THE PAYMENT IS
SENT PER SE ON EITHER OF THOSE
TWO I JUST MENTIONED, BUT IT
WILL HAVE TO BE SPENT IF THERE
IS A CONTRACT, IT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING THERE IS A
COMMITMENT.
SO I WOULD ASSUME IT WOULD MEAN
THERE WOULD BE A HOLE IN THE
BUDGET, THEY WOULD HAVE TO PAY
FOR IT AND IF YOU REMOVE THE
SALARY SAVINGS THAT THEY INTEND
TO USE TO PAY FOR IT, THEY
WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR IT IN
SOME OTHER WAY.
AND IT WOULD BE LIKE A CUT.
>> ALLEY, I SEE YOU ON THE
SCREEN, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING
ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD AT
THIS POINT?
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SORT OF
MAYBE STATE THE OBVIOUS HERE
BUT THIS IS ONE OF THE, I THINK
CHALLENGES AND FRUSTRATIONS I
HAVE HEARD FROM THIS COMMITTEE
OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST
YEAR, WHERE THERE ARE
COMMITMENTS BEING MADE BEFORE
THE AUTHORITY HAS BEEN PROVIDED
FROM THE COUNCIL TO SPEND THE
DOLLARS. IN GENERAL, THEY DO
NOT HAVE -- THIS IS A PROPOSAL
FOR ANYTHING FOR NEXT YEAR,
THERE IS NO GUARANTEE OF THE
FUNDING SO IDEALLY THEY WOULD
NOT HAVE SIGNED CONTRACTS THAT
COMMIT THEM TO FOLLOWING
THROUGH WITH THAT.
HOWEVER I AM NOT SURE, GREG, IF
YOU WERE SPEAKING TO THE 20 $21?
VERSUS THE 2022.
BUT TYPICALLY IT WOULD BE
SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
AUTHORITY, WE CAN DOUBLE CHECK
THOSE CONTRACTS BUT ULTIMATELY
THEY HAVE NOT BEEN AUTHORIZED
FOR ANY OF THE DOLLARS IN THEIR
BUDGET FOR 2022 YET.
>> YEAH, WHEN I SAY THAT, I
MEAN THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS
TOLD ME THEY HAVE MADE A
COMMITMENT.
I DO NOT KNOW HOW THAT HAS BEEN
ACTUALIZED, IF THEY HAVE SIGNED
A CONTRACT.
TYPICALLY IF THEY SIGN A
CONTRACT THERE IS A SUBJECT TO
APPROPRIATION CLAUSE IN IT, SO
THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO DEFAULT
ON THAT CONTRACT.
BUT IF THEY DID NOT DEFAULT ON
THAT CONTRACT, THEN IT WOULD BE
A COMMITMENT THEY HAVE MADE ON
FUTURE BUDGET AUTHORITY THAT
THEY HAVE NOT BEEN PROVIDED
YET.
SO IT WOULD BE NOT GETTING THE
AUTHORITY WOULD MEAN THEY WOULD
BE GETTING A CUT.
>> THANK YOU.
FOR OUR I.T.
FOLKS, IF YOU COULD LOOK TO SEE
IF THERE IS ANY OF OUR
COUNCILMEMBERS IN THE WAITING
ROOM, I THINK ONE OR TWO OF
THEM JUST GOT AUNT.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, PLEASE
GO AHEAD.
>> TO THAT VOID THE CONTRACT
THEN, IF THEY DON'T ACTUALLY
HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY FOR IT?
BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT BEEN
GIVEN THAT AUTHORITY?
>> THAT GETS LEGALLY
COMPLICATED.
THAT IS SOMETHING I WOULD HAVE
TO TAP THE LAW DEPARTMENT
BECAUSE THEY HAVE OTHER
PREPARATION AUTHORITY AND I
DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CONTRACTOR
MIGHT ARGUE.
I WOULD HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU
ON THAT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF
COMMITMENT THEY HAVE MADE, I
HAVE JUST BEEN TOLD THEY HAVE
COMMITTED TO THOSE FUNDS.
TO PAY THOSE MONIES IN 2022 AND
IT WOULD HAVE TO BE PAID OUT OF
OUT OF APPROPRIATION AUTHORITY
THAT THEY ARE REQUESTING HERE,
I GUESS NOT REALLY REQUESTING,
THEY ARE SAYING THEY ARE GOING
TO, SO IF YOU CUT IT THEY WOULD
HAVE TO TAKE IT FROM SOMEWHERE
ELSE.
>> THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE YOUR
ANSWER AND THAT YOU WILL BE
FOLLOWING UP TO SEE IF WE CAN
GET ADDITIONAL CONTEXT ON THE
CONTRACTS.
I THINK AT THE MACRO LEVEL,
THANKS FOR POPPING IN, ALY
PENNUCCI, I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN
AN ISSUE THAT COUNCIL STAFF HAS
BEEN WORKING WITH A HOLE ON A
NUMBER OF DIFFERENT AREAS BUT
SPECIFICALLY WITH SEATTLE
POLICE DEPARTMENT AND SPENDING
MONEY BEFORE AUTHORIZATION HAS
OCCURRED.
WE HAVE TWO SEPARATE BRANCHES
OF GOVERNMENT INTENTIONALLY, I
THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT
REMINDER FOR THE WAY IN WHICH
WE EXPECT TO BE ABLE TO ADHERE
TO THE STATE'S RCW WHICH
REQUIRES DEPARTMENTS TO STAY
WITHIN THEIR SPENDING AUTHORITY.
IF WE HAVE NOW RECEIVED A
NUMBER OF INCIDENCES WITHIN
JUST THE LAST TWO YEARS THAT I
HAVE BEEN BUDGET CHAIR WHERE
COMMITMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE
PRIOR TO AUTHORIZATION BEING
GIVEN, IT CONTINUES TO RAISE
FOR ME, QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT
ROLE THE EXECUTIVE NEEDS TO
HAVE AND WHAT ROLE THE COUNCIL
ACTUALLY HAS, TO MAINTAIN OUR
COMMITMENTS TO TWO SEPARATE
BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.
AS BEING THE ONES WHO
AUTHORIZES SPENDING.
SO I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE WE
CONTINUE TO RESPECT THOSE ROLES
AND OBVIOUSLY THERE IS A LOT WE
WOULD LIKE TO DO ON THE
IMPLEMENTATION SIDE WE DO NOT
GET TO DO BECAUSE WE HAVE
PASSED LEGISLATION RELATED TO
BUDGET AND LONG-TERM POLICY AND
THE MAYOR'S EXECUTIVE ROLE IS
ON IMPLEMENTATION.
IT GETS FRUSTRATING TO BE IN A
POSITION WHERE COMMITMENTS HAVE
BEEN MADE ON FUTURE FUNDING
BEFORE AUTHORIZATION HAS BEEN
GIVEN, I DO LOOK FORWARD TO
HEARING MORE ABOUT THE SPECIFIC
CONTRACTS ON THE MACRO LEVEL, I
LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH
YOU ALL TO CONTINUE TO ADDRESS
THIS ISSUE THAT HAS COME BEFORE
US NOW, AT LEAST THREE TIMES.
WITH THAT I THINK WE PROBABLY
HAVE EXHAUSTED OUR COMMENTS ON
THIS SLIDE.
WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT ONE.
>> I WILL GO TO THE NEXT ONE.
AS WE ARE TRANSITIONING, I WILL
ADD A LITTLE BIT TO WHAT YOU
ARE SAYING IN JUST SAYING THAT
THIS SPD BUDGET IS DIFFERENT
THAN ANY I HAVE SEEN, IN THE
SENSE THAT IT IS NOT CUTTING OUT
SALARY SAVINGS THAT THE
DEPARTMENT CANNOT USE, PUTTING
IT BACK IN THE GENERAL FUND,
AND THEN REQUESTING FROM THE
COUNCIL SPECIFIC NEW ADS.
IT INSTEAD LEAVES A SALARY
SAVINGS IN THE DEPARTMENT, SAYS
THESE ARE FUNDS THAT SPD IS
GOING TO REPURPOSE FOR OTHER
THINGS AND DOES NOT MAKE
SPECIFIC REQUESTS OF THE
COUNCIL.
SO IT IS A DIFFERENT WAY OF
BUDGETING, AND THAT IS
SOMETHING YOU ARE POINTING OUT
THAT I THINK IS NOT
INSIGNIFICANT.
I WILL MOVE ALONG.
ISSUE NUMBER FOUR.
COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS.
THE DEPARTMENT WOULD USE 1.3
MILLION OF ITS SALARY SAVINGS
AND WOULD ADD SIX POINT ZERO FTE
FOR COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS,
THE LAST TIME THAT THIS PROGRAM
WAS EXPANDED WAS IN 2020, WHEN
THE PROGRAM WAS EXPANDED TO 18
COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS.
THAT CONSISTED OF 15 CSO'S AND
THREE CSO SUPERVISORS.
JUST BY WAY OF BACKGROUND, I
THINK THE COUNCIL IS FAMILIAR.
THE CSO'S ARE CIVILIAN
PERSONNEL THAT ARE LIAISONS
BETWEEN SPD AND THE COMMUNITY,
THEY DO NOT CARRY WEAPONS AND
ARE NOT SWORN OFFICERS.
THEY ARE THERE TO BRIDGE THE
SERVICE GAP ON NONCRIMINAL
CALLS AND PERFORM PUBLIC SAFETY
RELATED SERVICES.
DUE TO THE COVID RELATED
REVENUE CRISIS IN 2020, THERE
WAS A HIRING FREEZE PUT ON ALL
CIVILIAN POSITIONS IN SPD, THAT
FREES CAME JUST ABOUT THE TIME
THAT SPD HAD THAT PROGRAM
PRETTY WELL STAFFED UP.
AND AS CSO'S STARTED LEAVING
THE DEPARTMENT, THEY WERE NOT
ABLE TO FILL THOSE POSITIONS AND
CONSEQUENTLY THEY NOW HAVE 10
VACANCIES.
THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT THE
DEPARTMENT HAS IN BACK
GROUNDING, ENOUGH CANDIDATES TO
FILL ALL 10 OF THOSE VACANCIES.
THEY ALSO HAVE LEFT OPEN THE
JOB ADVERTISEMENT THAT THEY USED
TO RECRUIT FOLKS TO GET INTO
THOSE BACK ROUNDED SLOTS,
I THINK I SAID IN WHAT THEIR DU
ARE.
AND I GOT BACK A BREAKOUT, 100%
BREAKOUT, AND WHAT I WAS TOLD
WAS THAT 40% OF THEIR TIME WAS
SPENT ON COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND
ENGAGEMENT.
AND THAT WAS THINGS LIKE
ATTENDING COMMUNITY MEETINGS,
ADVISORY COUNCIL MEETINGS,
PUBLIC SAFETY FORUMS.
AND THINGS LIKE COMMUNITY
EVENTS OR AFFAIRS.
THINGS LIKE NATIONAL NIGHT OUT
OR THE DUWAMISH RIVER FESTIVAL.
THAN 10% OF THEIR TIME WAS
SPENT ON YOUTH OUTREACH AND
ENGAGEMENT, THINGS LIKE MAKING
INTRODUCTION AT COMMUNITY
CENTERS, DAY SHELTERS,
ATTENDING LATE-NIGHT COMMUNITY
BASKETBALL CENTER OR THE
DUWAMISH USE COALITION CLEANUP.
THAN A QUARTER OF THEIR TIME,
25%, WAS OFFICER REQUESTED 911,
OFFICER REQUESTED CALLS.
AND THERE THEY WERE DOING A
VARIETY OF DIFFERENT
ACTIVITIES, THEY WERE PROVIDING
DB SUPPORT, MEDIATION
ASSUMPTION IS ASSISTANCE.
THEY WERE PROVIDING OUTREACH
SUPPLIES, FOOD, SNACKS,
BLANKETS, CLOTHING, IN THE
SUMMER, THEY WERE PROVIDING HOT
WEATHER, COOLING SHELTER, THEY
WERE PROVIDING ARCING
ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS WHEN THEY
WERE APPROACHING RV OWNERS,
THEY WERE PROVIDING THEM WITH
HOUSING -- ASSISTING SPD
PARKING ENFORCEMENT WITH
OFFERING HOUSING AND OTHER
RESOURCES TO INDIVIDUALS LIVING
IN VEHICLES.
THEY WERE GIVING PET SUPPLIES
TO PET OWNERS EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS, AND THEN THE LAST
CATEGORY, RESOURCE GUIDANCE,
THEY INDICATE THIS IS THROUGH
EMAIL OR PHONE REQUESTS, SO I
THINK THIS IS ANSWERING EMAIL
AND PHONE REQUESTS, IT IS ABOUT
A QUARTER OF THEIR TIME, AND
THERE THEY ARE PROVIDING
REFERRALS TO CRIME PREVENTION
COORDINATORS, BIAS DETECTIVES
EMMA OR MEDIATION ASSISTANCE.
SO, THAT IS HOW THEY ARE
SPENDING THEIR TIME.
I ASKED IF THEY HAD ANY DATA
FROM THEIR CAD SYSTEM ABOUT THE
SPECIFIC ACTIVITIES AND WAS
TOLD THAT OF THE VARIOUS CALLS
THAT HAD BEEN LOGGED, 700 SOME,
THAT THEY WERE NOT DOWN TO THE
GRANULAR LEVEL.
SO THEY DID NOT HAVE THE KIND
OF DETAIL THAT I BELIEVE
COUNCILMEMBER GONZALES WAS
LOOKING FOR ON THE SPECIFIC
ACTIVITIES.
AND YOU CAN FIND THOSE
ACTIVITIES IN APPENDIX F OF MY
ISSUE PAPER.
AND SO, I THINK YOU HAVE HEARD
TODAY THAT THROUGH THE
PRESENTATION ON ALTERNATIVES TO
POLICE RESPONSE, THAT THERE IS
CERTAINLY A POTENTIAL NEED FOR
ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSE, A LOT
OF WHICH MAY OVERLAP WITH CSO'S
IN THEIR DUTIES AND THAT THERE
ARE POTENTIALLY OUTREACH
FUNCTIONS THAT CSO'S DO THAT
COULD ALSO FALL INTO THAT
BUCKET.
SO THE ISSUE PAPER TOUCHES A
BIT ON THAT AND WITH THAT AS AN
OVERVIEW TO CSO'S, I WOULD JUST
SAY THAT THE OPTION IS NOT
MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE FOR THE
COUNCILS ASKED CONSIDERATION OR
ADDING THE NEW SQUAD AND THEN
POTENTIALLY CONSIDERING MOVING
THAT SQUAD TO THE CS EC OR
IDENTIFYING THAT SQUAD OR THAT
THE CSO'S THEMSELVES WOULD BE
POTENTIALLY ADMINISTRATIVE
RESPONDERS AT SOME LEVEL AT
SOME FORM IN THE FUTURE.
OKAY, AND NOW I AM DONE.
>> OKAY, THAT IS GREAT.
THANKS.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD, PLEASE
GO AHEAD.
>> I'M SORRY, I AM OFF-CAMERA,
I AM USING MY PHONE NOW.
TECH SCHOOL DIFFICULTIES.
IT WOULD BE REALLY INTERESTING
TO COMPARE THE THE ASSESSMENT
OF THEIR CURRENT ACTUAL DUTIES
OR THEIR DAY-TO-DAY ACTIONS,
WITH WHAT WAS CONCEIVED OF AT
THE BEGINNING OF THE PROGRAM
IMPLEMENTATION.
I KNOW THERE WAS AN SPD REPORT
ON THE CSO PROGRAM
IMPLEMENTATION BACK IN 2020.
I THINK EVEN PRIOR TO THAT,
THAT WAS MORE ON INTO
MENTATION, I THINK EVEN PRIOR
TO THEIR THERE WAS A REALLY
MEATY REPORT ON THE SORT OF
ENGAGEMENT THAT SPD DID AROUND
THE VISION FOR THE POSITION
ITSELF.
SO LIKE I SAID, IT WOULD BE
INTERESTING TO LOOK AT WHAT WE
IMAGINED WE WERE CREATING, WHEN
WE DID SO, AND WHAT IT HAS
EVOLVED INTO NOW, AS IT RELATES
SPECIFICALLY TO THE QUESTION OF
WHERE THE CSO'S ARE LOCATED AND
REALLY WHAT THE VISION IS FOR
THE CSO UNIT MOVING FORWARD.
I FEEL REALLY SOFTLY THAT I
WOULD LIKE TO FIND A WAY TO
SUPPORT A WORKER DRIVEN VISION
FOR BOTH OF THOSE ISSUES, BOTH
THE ISSUE OF WHICH DEPARTMENT
THEY ARE A PART OF AS PART OF
THE LONG-TERM SCOPE OF THEIR
WORK LOOKS LIKE.
SO, JUST FLAGGING THAT AND THEN
ONE SUPER QUICK AND EASY
QUESTION, GREG.
FOR THE -- NOT TO -- NOT THE
QUESTION OF HIRING FOR THE
VACANT POSITIONS, BUT FOR THE
NEW SQUAD THAT IS IN THIS YOUR
MONTHLY BUDGET, YOU MENTIONED
THAT IT WOULD TAKE A FEW MONTHS
TO HIRE THEM.
CAN YOU LET US KNOW, IS THIS
PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET AS A
FULL YEAR'S POSITION FOR THE
SQUAD OF SIX?
>> YES IT IS.
>> OKAY, SO THERE ARE SOME
STANDINGS THERE.
>> YEAH, IF YOU ASSUMED THE
TIMELINE FOR HIRE THAT SPD
RESPONDED TO THE COUNCIL
QUESTION, THE COUNCIL ASKED,
HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO HIRE
CSO'S?
IN SPD RESPONDED TO THAT BY
SAYING 4 TO 5 MONTHS.
IF YOU ASSUME THAT TIMELINE AND
YOU ASSUME THAT THEY WOULD NOT
START HIRING THE CSO'S UNTIL
THEY GOT AUTHORIZATION FROM THE
COUNCIL, THEN YES, THERE IS
SAVINGS THERE.
>> THANK YOU, GREG.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD, YOU'RE
COMING IN LOUD AND CLEAR, THANK
YOU FOR JOINING US WITH YOUR
PHONE, APPRECIATE THAT.
WE HAVE TWO MORE SLIDES ,
RIGHT, GREG?
>> I THINK JUST ONE.
>> ALL RIGHT.
>> ALL RIGHT, SO, HAIR
INCENTIVES.
THE 2022 PROPOSED BUDGET WOULD
USE $1 MILLION OF SALARY
SAVINGS FOR HIRING INCENTIVES,
THIS IS SOMETHING YOU SAW IN
THE MIDYEAR SUPPLEMENTAL
PROPOSAL.
7500 FOR RECRUITS AND 15,000
FOR COLLATERALS.
AND I AM SORRY, BUDGET CHAIR,
YOU ARE RIGHT, THE NEXT SLIDE
IS ON THE BUDGET LEGISLATION
BUT IT IS ONE ISSUE.
TALKING A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS,
YOU SAW THIS PROPOSAL EARLIER
BY WAY OF BACKGROUND, ORDINANCE
12 5784 AUTHORIZED A SIMILAR
ONE-TIME HEARING BONUS WHICH
EXISTED FOR ONE YEAR BEFORE
JUNE 13th 2020.
ON SEPTEMBER 16, TODAY 19, SPD
ISSUED A PRELIMINARY REPORT ON
THAT BONUS PROGRAM, THE
EVALUATION ONLY LOOKED AT ONE
TESTING CLASS AND SO IT WAS
VERY PRELIMINARY.
WHAT IT FOUND WAS THAT 18% OF
SPD APPLICANTS CITED THE
INCENTIVE AS AN IMPORTANT
FACTOR IN THEIR DECISION TO
APPLY FOR THE JOB.
UNFORTUNATELY THE MORE THOROUGH
ANALYSIS OF THAT PROGRAM THAT
WAS SCHEDULED FOR APRIL, 2020
DID NOT HAPPEN BECAUSE OF THE
COVID EMERGENCY BEING
DECLARED.
IN TERMS OF LOOKING AT THE DATA,
THE HIRING DOWNTURN THAT HAD
STARTED IN 17, 2017, AND
OCCURRED THROUGH 2018, HAD
ALREADY STARTED TO TURN AROUND
A BIT IN 2019, BEFORE THE
HIRING BONUS TOOK EFFECT.
IN THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF
2019, SPD HAD ALREADY STARTED
HIRING MORE RECRUITS AND HAD
HIRED 32 IN TOTAL RECRUIT AND
FOR LATERAL HIRES, HOWEVER IN
THE NEXT YEAR, WHEN THE BONUS
WAS IN EFFECT, THEY HIRED 107
RECRUITS AND 12 LATERALS.
SO, THAT WAS MORE IN LINE WITH
SOME OF THEIR BETTER HIRING
YEARS.
CENTRAL STAFF ASK FOR DATA ON
LOCAL AGENCIES THAT ARE
CURRENTLY OFFERING HIRING
BONUSES, AND YOU CAN SEE THERE
IN TABLE 8, THE DATA FROM SOME
OF THE COMPETITOR AGENCIES THAT
ARE OFFERING BONUSES, THAT IS
IMPORTANT BECAUSE THERE WAS, IN
2019, A RECRUITMENT AND
RETENTION REPORT THAT SAID IT
IS IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER THESE
KINDS OF BONUSES BECAUSE IT
APPEALS TO PROSPECTIVE
CANDIDATES BY OFFERING
COMPETITIVE WAGES, INCENTIVES
AND HIRING BONUSES ARE
IMPORTANT.
AND SO THAT IS SOME CONTEXT
THAT IS PROBABLY GOOD AS THE
COUNCIL IS THINKING OF WHETHER
OR NOT TO PURSUE THESE
INCENTIVES.
WITH THAT, I WOULD STOP AND ASK
FOR QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU, GREG.
WE WILL GO COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD AND THEN MORALES.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> I AM SORRY, I DID NOT MEAN
TO HAVE MY HAND UP.
BUT SINCE YOU RECOGNIZED ME, I
JUST WANT TO VERY QUICKLY
MENTION, AS I HAVE BEFORE, WE
HAVE VACANCIES AND DEPARTMENTS
ALL ACROSS THE CITY AND IN ALL
OF THE CITY 'S DEPARTMENT, MANY
OF THE CITIES DEPARTMENTS, MANY
THAT ARE FOCUSED ON FRONT-LINE
SERVICES, THAT PEOPLE IN THE
CITY DEPEND ON AND I BELIEVE WE
NEED TO LOOK AT RECRUITMENT
ACROSS ALL DEPARTMENTS, AS WE
KNOW THAT IN THE LAST YEAR,
MANY PEOPLE HAVE LEFT THEIR
JOBS, SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE,
WHETHER OR NOT YOU WORK FOR THE
CITY OR YOU WORK IN PRIVATE
INDUSTRY OR NONPROFITS, THERE
IS A LOT OF EMPLOYMENT SHIFTS
PEOPLE ARE MAKING, AND IT IS
CREATING ISSUES, FOR US AT THE
CITY, AS IT RELATES TO THE
DELIVERY OF CITY SERVICES.
AND SO I AM ACTUALLY GOING TO
PROPOSE THAT WE PARK THESE FUNDS
IN FINANCE GENERAL AND ASK FOR
A CITYWIDE REVIEW OF VACANCIES
AND A RECOMMENDATION FOR A
CITYWIDE POLICY FOCUSING ON ANY
RECRUITMENT INCENTIVES ON THE
AREAS WHERE SERVICE DELIVERY IS
SUFFERING, USING RACIAL EQUITY
TOOLKIT ANALYSIS.
THANKS.
>> THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> WELL, I HAVE SORT OF A
RELATED QUESTION, WHICH IS ,
GREG, IF YOU HAVE ANY
INFORMATION ABOUT THE CITY,
WHETHER WE HAVE HIRING BONUSES
IN ANY OTHER DEPARTMENTS, OR
FOR ANY OTHER FRONT-LINE
WORKERS RIGHT NOW?
>> I AM AWARE OF NONE,
COUNCILMEMBER.
I HAVE PULLED MY CENTRAL STAFF
COLLEAGUES AND HAVE NOT HEARD
OF ANY.
BUT I AM NOT -- I WILL DO A
MORE THOROUGH SEARCH.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES.
AND COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD TAKE,
TODAY ALSO SEE COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS?
I DID NOT WANT TO MISS YOU.
OKAY.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD, GO
AHEAD.
>> I AM GOOD, THANKS.
>> ALL RIGHT, GREAT.
THANK YOU, I AM NOT SEEING ANY
ADDITIONAL HANDS ON THIS PIECE,
GREG, AND WE HAVE 10 MORE
MINUTES.
AND ONE MORE SLIDE.
SO I THINK WE CAN GET THROUGH
IT.
JUST APPRECIATE THE EARLY FLAGS
MANY OF YOU HAVE JUST NOTED AND
LOOK FORWARD TO TALKING WITH
YOU MORE ABOUT THIS POLICY
CONCEPT.
GREG, LET'S GET INTO POLICY AND
THE LEGISLATION YOU HAVE
FLAGGED FOR US HERE IN YOUR MEMO
AND THE SLIDES.
>> RIGHT, THEY SHOULD BE FAIRLY
EASY . THIS IS A BUDGET
LEGISLATION THAT WOULD MAKE THE
HIRING BONUSES POSSIBLE.
AGAIN, 7500 FOR LATERAL HIRES
AND, FOR RECRUITS, AND 15,000
FOR COLLATERALS.
ONE THING TO NOTE WITH THIS
LEGISLATION, AS IT WAS
TRANSMITTED BY THE EXECUTIVE,
IS THAT IT WOULD MAKE THE
PROGRAM ONGOING, AS OPPOSED TO
THE LEGISLATION THAT THE
COUNCIL PASSED A COUPLE YEARS
AGO THAT HAD A SUNSET DATE. SO
THAT IS DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS ONE
, AND THEN THE OTHER THING THAT
IS DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS ONE IS
THAT IT DOES NOT RECOGNIZE THE
NECESSITY TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE
UNIONS AND SO THAT MIGHT BE
SOMETHING THAT THE COUNCIL MAY
WANT TO ADD, AND I SHOULD NOT
SAY NECESSITY, BUT THE COURTESY
OF NEGOTIATING IT WITH THE
UNIONS, TAT IS SOMETHING THAT
THE COUNCIL MAY WANT TO ADD IN
THERE.
BUT CERTAINLY THE ONGOING
PRAYER IS DIFFERENT.
AND THAT IS IT.
>> COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ON
THIS LEGISLATION?
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, PLEASE
GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
I LIKE THE IDEA OF FINDING OUT
WHAT OTHER DEPARTMENTS MAY BE
EXPERIENCING, SUBSTANTIAL
ATTRITION, I WOULD BE SURPRISED
IF OTHER DEPARTMENTS WERE
EXPERIENCING IT AT THE SAME
RATE AS SPD AND I WAS WONDERING
IF THAT IS SOMETHING WE COULD
ACTUALLY FIND OUT JUST DURING
THIS BUDGET PROCESS, RATHER THAN
, YOU KNOW, HAVING TO PART WITH
MONEY AND WAGE, IF THE HUMAN
RESOURCES DEPARTMENT COULD -- I
WOULD THINK THEY WOULD BE ABLE
TO RUN A REPORT ON THAT
RELATIVELY QUICKLY IN TERMS OF
SEPARATIONS AND COMPARING IT TO
THE PERCENTAGE OF EMPLOYEES IN
THOSE DEPARTMENTS.
AND GREG, IF WE NEED TO SUBMIT
THAT QUESTION OFFICIALLY TO ASKS
HUMAN RESOURCES, OR IS IT
SOMETHING YOU COULD JUST ASK
BASED ON THIS DISCUSSION TODAY?
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, IF I
COULD TRY TO ANSWER THAT IN
PART.
ONE, WE CAN -- QUESTIONS ARE
ASKED AND NOT ANSWERED DURING
COMMITTEE, WE POST TO GET
RESPONSES, SO NO NEED TO SUBMIT
THEM AGAIN AND OUR COLLEAGUES
ARE HELPING US TRACK THOSE AS
WE MOVE ALONG.
I WILL JUST NOTE THAT THE CITY
'S INFORMATION OR DATA
AVAILABLE ON VACANCIES IS
WOEFULLY UNSATISFYING, AND IT
IS SOMETHING CENTRAL STAFF HAS
BEEN TRYING TO WORK ON FOR
SEVERAL YEARS, WITH THE CITY
BUDGET OFFICE.
BUT I THINK THAT IN GENERAL
WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THE VACANCY
INFORMATION WE CAN GET IS NOT
VERY INFORMATIVE AND IT DOES
NOT REALLY TELL THE STORY, IT
IS A SNAPSHOT IN TIME.
AND ALSO DOES NOT TELL US IF
THOSE POSITIONS ARE VACANT AND
UNFUNDED OR VACANT AND FUNDED
AND THEY ARE HAVING A CHALLENGE
FILLING THEM.
WE CAN CERTAINLY ASK THE
QUESTION OF SDH ARE BUT I WOULD
ALSO LIKE TO SAY I WOULD LOVE
TO WORK WITH COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD I THINK IS WHO TALKED
ABOUT SUBMITTING A SLIDE TO
MAKE A MORE -- A LARGER REQUEST
TO ENHANCE THE CITY 'S ABILITY
TO TRACK OUR POSITIONS,
WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE FUNDED
OR NOT, AND PROVIDING VACANCY
DATA AS IT IS AN ONGOING
QUESTION THAT COUNCILMEMBERS
ARE RAISING AND INFORMATION WE
HAVE BEEN UNSUCCESSFUL IN
GETTING A REAL HANDLE ON.
>> IT DOES ALSO REMIND ME THAT
PRIOR TO COVID, NUMBERS OF THE
LATER MANAGEMENT LEADERSHIP
COMMITTEE, IF YOU REMEMBER THAT
BODY WHE IT EXISTED ONCE,
WHICH INCLUDES, IT STILL EXISTS
IN STATUTE, WHICH INCLUDES
MEMBERS OF THE COALITION OF
CITY UNIONS, THE EXECUTIVE AND
THE LEGISLATIVE BRANDS, WE HAVE
THE MEETING ON ABOUT A
QUARTERLY BASIS TO ADDRESS
ISSUES OF RETENTION AND
RECRUITMENT, SOMETHING THAT
MANY OF THE CITY UNION MEMBERS
HAVE BEEN CALLING FOR FOR A
LONG TIME.
I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF
INTEREST WHEN I FIRST CAME ON
BOARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL, TO
RESTART THAT BODY, WHICH WE
DID, AND THEN COVID HIT . BUT
MUCH OF WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN
TALKING ABOUT AS WELL, IS WHAT
ARE THE LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
FOR RETRAINING COSTS SEATTLE,
GIVING OUR SOMEWHAT AGING
WORKFORCE AND THE DESIRE TO
MAKE SURE WE ARE BRINGING IN
NEW WORKERS TO OUR CITY.
SO IT MAY DOVETAIL NICELY WITH
SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAD
COME FROM THE INITIAL REPORTS
FROM THE LM LC, AND I THINK IT
MIGHT HELP IF WE DIG SOME OF
THAT UP AS WELL TO LOOK AT THE
STRATEGIES FOR RETENTION ACROSS
THE BOARD.
AGAIN, PERHAPS TOO BIG OF A
POLICY ISSUE TO ADDRESS
SPECIFICALLY DURING BUDGET, BUT
I WANTED TO FLAG ONGOING
CONVERSATIONS WITH IN OTHER
DEPARTMENTS ABOUT THE NEED FOR
RETENTION AND RECRUITMENT ALSO.
>> OKAY, THANKS FOR YOUR
OVERVIEW, GREG.
WE HAVE EXHAUSTED OUR TIME, BUT
YOU HAVE KEPT US VERY WELL
INFORMED AND I KNOW THAT THERE
WILL PROBABLY BE ADDITIONAL
QUESTIONS FOLKS HAVE FOR
CENTRAL STAFF, SPECIFIC TO THIS
ISSUE ITEM.
WE ALSO KNOW THIS, THE LAST
THREE DAYS, HAVE BEEN AN
OPPORTUNITY TO SCRATCH THE
SURFACE ON SOME OF THE
QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, SO
AGAIN IF YOU DO HAVE QUESTIONS
YOU WOULD LIKE TO FIELD FOR
CENTRAL STAFF PRIOR TO OUR NOON
DEADLINE ON MONDAY, OF COURSE
LET THEM KNOW.
BUT WANTED TO MAKE SURE FOLKS
HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT
SOME OF THE OPPORTUNITIES ARE
WITH THE DEADLINE FOR MONDAY AT
NOON FOR AMENDMENTS.
THIS HAS BEEN OUR OPPORTUNITY
TO WALK THROUGH, SOME OF THE
HIGH-LEVEL ISSUES THAT CENTRAL
STAFF HAS IDENTIFIED ON A
HANDFUL OF DEPARTMENTS.
BUT AS YOU THINK ABOUT POSSIBLE
AMENDMENTS TO BE SUBMITTED,
REMEMBER IT IS CONCEPTS ONLY,
IT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DETAILED
OR A FULLY FLESHED OUT PLAN,
CENTRAL STAFF WILL WORK WITH
YOU THROUGHOUT THE NEXT WEEK TO
FINALIZE THOSE IDEAS.
WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE ANY OF
THE IDEAS THAT ARE ABSOLUTELY
PARTIES FOR YOU TO BE SUBMITTED
BY NOON NEXT MONDAY.
CENTRAL STAFF WILL THEN MAKE
SURE THAT WE REFINE THOSE IDEAS
, I SAID WE, BUT THEY WILL
REFINE THOSE IDEAS, IF YOU
WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THEM IN
CONFIDENCE, ABSOLUTELY THEY
WILL DO THAT.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE
YOU ARE ABLE TO SHARE THOSE
IDEAS WITH OTHER OFFICES, IF
THEY ARE SIMILAR IDEAS SO THAT
WE CAN COMPARE AND POTENTIALLY
MERGE IDEAS THAT MAY BE IN A
SIMILAR VEIN, WOULD LOVE TO BE
ABLE TO DO THAT AS WELL.
WE WILL THEN HAVE A
CONVERSATION ABOUT AMENDMENTS,
OCTOBER 26, 27th AND 28th . AS
A REMINDER, THE LEAD STAFF FROM
CENTRAL STAFF ON THAT POLICY
ITEM WILL SHARE A DRAFT OF YOUR
AMENDMENT WITH THE SPONSOR TO
CONFIRM THAT THE AMENDMENT IS
CONSISTENT WITH YOUR INTENT
PRIOR TO ITS PUBLICATION.
THAT IS WHY WE HAVE A DEADLINE
OF MONDAY, SO THAT ALL OF THOSE
IDEAS CAN BE SUBMITTED AND THEY
CAN WORK WITH YOU BACK AND
FORTH TO FINALIZE LANGUAGE.
PLEASE NOTE THE AMENDMENT
DOCUMENT IS A CENTRAL STAFF
WORK DOCUMENT, THOUGH.
THIS IS NOT A MESSAGING
DOCUMENT NECESSARILY, THERE
WILL BE TALKING POINTS THAT
CORRESPOND WITH EACH OF THESE
AMENDMENTS, SO THERE CENTRAL
STAFF WORK PRODUCT WILL BE THE
FINAL LANGUAGE THAT IS HONING
IN ON THE POLICY CHANGE OR THE
DOLLAR AMOUNT CHANGE AND
TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF WHY THAT
IS BEING MADE AND THE IMPACT OF
IT, THE EFFECT OF IT.
I WANT TO THANK CENTRAL STAFF
FOR ALL THE WORK THEY HAVE DONE
SO FAR INTO THE WORK COMING UP,
WITH ALL OF THE AMENDMENTS YOU
ALL ARE CONSIDERING RIGHT NOW.
AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING
WITH YOU OVER THE NEXT WEEK TO
FINALIZE THOSE AMENDMENTS.
AGAIN, THIS IS A CRITICAL
COMPONENT OF HOW WE DO BUDGET
DELIBERATIONS DURING THAT LAST
WEEK OF OCTOBER, SO THAT IT
WILL INFORM OUR CHAIRS DRAFT
BUDGET THAT THE COUNCIL WILL
CONSIDER AS OUR BASE BUDGET FOR
YOUR POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS AND
CONSIDERATION AS WE GET TOWARD
THE END OF NOVEMBER.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR
GRACE, YOUR TIME, YOUR PATIENCE
OVER THE LAST THREE DAYS, WE
DID PACK FRIDAY AND APPRECIATE
YOU ENDING YOUR WEEK WITH US.
THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES, I SEE YOU SO HAPPY
UNTIL THE END OF THIS MEETING,
APPRECIATE ALL OF THE
COUNCILMEMBERS FOR BEING WITH
US, WE ARE GOING TO GO AHEAD
AND ADJOURN TODAY'S MEETING.
WITH A REMINDER THAT WE HAVE
PUBLIC COMMENT AGAIN TUESDAY,
OCTOBER 26th, EXCUSE ME, WE
WILL BE MEETING, TUESDAY,
OCTOBER 26, AT 9:30 A.M.
FOR OUR COMMITTEE MEETING IN
THE NEXT PUBLIC COMMENT
OPPORTUNITY FOR THE LARGE
PUBLIC HEARING IS NOVEMBER 10th
AT 5:30 P.M.
HAVE NO FEAR, WE WILL HAVE
PUBLIC COMMENT AT THE TOP OF
EVERY MEETING AGAIN.
SEE YOU ON OCTOBER 26th.
WITH THAT, THANK YOU ALL.
>> I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR
EVERYBODY AGAIN.
I REALLY WANT TO THANK
EVERYBODY.
>> WE HAVE TWO MEMBERS,
COUNCILMEMBER.
>> HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND!
>> BYE.