>>> WELCOME TO THE MEETING. WE
WOULD LIKE TO CALL MEMBERS TO
ROLL.
>> COUNSEL?
>> NINE PRESENT.
>> WILL BE RECONVENING THIS
AFTERNOON. WILL SPEND THE REST
OF OUR TIMES TO THE AFTERNOON,
FOCUSED ON THE AGENDA ITEM
NUMBER 27. THIS IS BEFORE
PUTTING THE BASE BUDGET IN FRONT
OF US, CONSIDERING THE VARIOUS
MOVEMENTS OF THE BILL, THAT I'VE
BEEN LOOKING AT CONSENT GROUP A
AND B FOR THE BILL. I WANT TO
REMIND THE FOLKS INVOLVED OF ALL
THE WORK WE HAVE DONE FOR THE
LAST SIX TO EIGHT WEEKS. WE HAVE
PUT FORWARD A BUDGET THAT I
BELIEVE FOCUS IS THE 2024
INVESTMENTS OF EQUITY,
TRANSPARENCY, AND
SUSTAINABILITY. WE WILL CONTINUE
THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT
TRANSPARENCY AND EQUITY, EVEN
SUSTAINABILITY, TOMORROW. WE
WILL LOOK AT THE LONGER-TERM
BUDGET BILL. WE ARE ENSURING
RATER TRANSPARENCY AND
OPPORTUNITY FOR COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT. THIS IS BETWEEN
EXECUTIVES AND LEGISLATIVE
BRANCHES. WE ARE FOCUSING THE
CITY'S RESOURCES IN OTHER
DEPLORABLES. WE ARE ENSURING
THAT WE ARE MAKING GOOD ON THE
COMMITMENTS THAT WE HAVE PUT
FORWARD IN FRONT OF US. WE HAVE
CONTINUED THE INVESTMENTS INTO
THE COMMUNITY, TO ENSURE THAT
THESE PROGRAMS ARE DIRECTLY
PROVIDING SERVICES TO OUR
COMMUNITY. WE ARE RECOVERING IN
AN EXCELLENT, MORE EQUITABLE
WAY. THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE WILL
DISCUSS TODAY, OUR GROUP
TOGETHER. GROUP A, HAS THE
AMENDMENT THAT I BELIEVE ARE
COMPLEMENTARY, AND ARE IN
ALIGNMENT WITH THE VALUES AND
PRINCIPLES THAT I AM PUTTING
INTO THE BALANCING PACKET. I
BELIEVE THESE AMENDMENTS ARE
INTENDED TO MAINTAIN AND BUILD
UPON THE 2023-2024 BY ANNUAL
BUDGET. I BELIEVE THESE LIMITS
ARE PRIORITIZING KEEPING OUR
COMMUNITY HOUSES, WITH
RESILIENCE, CONNECTION, AND
HEALTH EQUITIES. AGAIN, I WANT
TO HIGHLIGHT THE SUMMARY
DOCUMENTS THAT INCLUDE ALL OF
YOUR INCREDIBLE WORK THAT I HAVE
PUT IN WE ARE INCLUDING
ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS. THIS IS
CONNECTED WITH RESILIENT
COMMUNITIES. COMMUNITY
INVESTMENTS, ARE UPSTANDING. I'M
TRYING TO HIGHLIGHT A FEW
AMENDMENTS THAT WE HAVE PUT
TOGETHER. WE ARE PROVIDING
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR
COMMUNITIES, AND WE ARE HELPING
TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE INVESTED
IN ROBUST WAYS TO HAVE A MORE
EQUITABLE ECONOMY. WE HAVE A
HEALTHY COMMUNITY, AND IT NEEDS
TO BE IN THE GREATER FACILITY.
THEY HAVE USED THESE STATUES, BY
RESTORING $20 MILLION IN GEMSTAR
PAYMENTS. THIS IS GOING TO
INCLUDE RESTORING $5 MILLION
BACK INTO AFFORDABLE HOUSING'S,
YIELDING HISTORIC INVESTMENTS.
THIS IS THE INVESTMENT OF $600
MILLION OF FINANCE FUNDS INTO
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE
RESTORATION OFFICE, INCLUDED $2
MILLION, THAT INCLUDED ECONOMIC
CIVILIANS, THAT HAD GENERAL
CATEGORIES THAT WERE ALL ABOUT
SUPPORTING SMALL BUSINESS. THIS
INCLUDES ART AND CULTURE.
COMMUNITY ACTIVATION AS WELL.
ECONOMIC RESILIENCE, BUILDS
THESE INVESTMENTS THAT WE HAVE
PUT TOGETHER IN THE PAST YEARS,
FROM WORKFORCE TRAINING, TO
CREATE OPPORTUNITY FOR ECONOMIC
STABILITIES AS WE SUPPORT OTHER
ACTIVATIONS. THIS IS ALL ABOUT
COMMUNITY COHESION. THE
INHERENCE MEANS THAT THE BUDGET
FOR 2024, NOW ALIGNS WITH THE
CODIFIED CATEGORIES AS CODIFIED
IN THE JUMPSTART PLAN. FOR
WAREHOUSING, NEW DEALS, AND
EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENTS. THIS WAS
ALSO MADE LARGELY POSSIBLE,
BECAUSE WE WERE ABLE TO BUILD A
FUNDING THAT THEN BECAME
AVAILABLE IN THE MID OCTOBER
REVENUE FORECAST PROJECTION. WE
HAVE CAPTURED ALL OF THOSE
JUMPSTART DOLLARS, AND HAVE GONE
DIRECTLY BACK INTO IT. WE ARE
SECURING ADDITIONAL FUNDING IN
SMALL AMOUNTS. WE HAVE
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE
JUMPSTART RESERVES AS WELL. THIS
PACKAGE INVESTS IN MILLIONS IN
THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND COMMUNITY
HEALTH ASPECT. EARLY
INTERVENTION, CREATES
DETERMINATION AND ECONOMIC
STABILITY. THEY ADDRESS THE
RISING TRAUMA. WE HAVE MUCH OF
THEM TALKING ABOUT IT IN OUR
MORNING SESSION. THIS IS AN
ECONOMIST WITH NEW INVESTMENTS.
THEY HAVE INCLUDED AMENDMENTS IN
THE BALANCE PACKETS TO HELP
ACCOMPLISH IT. FOR EXAMPLE,
COUNCILMEMBER ROSS AND I, WERE
HONORED TO BE PART REMEMBERED
WITH THEM FOR SUPPORTING THE
ACCOUNTING INVESTMENTS FOR OTHER
SUPPORT SYSTEMS FOR SEATTLE'S
ONLY ELECTED DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
ACTIONS FOR THIS DETERMINATION.
WE ARE LOOKING AT AFTERSCHOOL
PROGRAMMING. THIS IS NOT JUST
ABOUT EDUCATION, BUT COMMUNITY
AND FAMILY CONNECTEDNESS FROM
OTHER PROGRAM EXITS. DECREASED
ABILITY FOR THESE FAMILIES. THIS
IS ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH COUNSEL
PRESIDENTS. WE HAVE ONGOING
FUNDING FOR YOUTH PROGRAMMING.
THIS IS FROM OUR NATIVE YOUTH.
THEY HAD OTHER PREVENTION
WORKERS. THIS OTHER INVESTMENT,
WAS WITH THE PREFILING DIVERSION
PROGRAMS. COUNCILMEMBER LISA
HERBOLD, HAS LOOKED AT THIS
HARBOR FUGITIVE INTERRUPTION
STRATEGY, AND COUNCILMEMBER
TAMMY MORALES, LOOKING AT WAYS
THAT WE INVEST COMMUNITY HEALTH.
MEANS DIRECTLY CLEANING THE
COMMUNITY, AND NOT ONLY LOOKING
AT DOWNTOWN, BUT WITH THE
COUNCILMEMBER TAMMY MORALES
AMENDMENT, IS INVESTING IN
INTERNATIONAL ACTION. WE HAVE
RESTORED PROGRAMS FOR FUNDING
AND FOOD. AMENDMENTS ARE
SUPPORTING SENIOR MEALS, AND THE
EMERGENCY FOOD BANKS. THANK YOU
TO COUNCILMEMBER TAMMY MORALES
AND DAN STRAUSS. WE ARE TRYING
TO DEVELOP A CITYWIDE OUTREACH
AND EDUCATION STRATEGY THAT I AM
SUPPORTING FROM COUNCILMEMBER
ALEX PEDERSEN. WE HAVE IMPROVED
AND INCREASE THE MONITORING AND
REPORTING TO THE CITY'S UPDATED
SANCTION. THANKS TO
COUNCILMEMBER DAN STRAUSS AND
ALEX PEDERSEN. WE HAVE PUBLIC
ACTIVATION TO INCLUDE FUNDING
FOR PUBLIC BASED ACTIONS. THAT
INCLUDES CAPITAL MIKE HILL,
GREENER BEACH, AND MOUNT BIKER.
THIS INCLUDES COUNCILMEMBER
TAMMY MORALES. I'M EXCITED TO
HAVE JOINED IN THIS EFFORT AS
WELL, AS WE THINK ABOUT HOW WE
CREATE GREATER ACCESS. WE HAVE
SAFE AND HEALTHY SPACES. THEY
PRIMER SMALL BUSINESSES, AND
ENCOURAGE PEDESTRIANS IN THIS
AREA. I'M VERY EXCITED THAT WE
HAVE CONTINUED THIS ONGOING
COMMITMENT TO SEE HOW CAPITAL
MIKE HILL CAN BE ONE OF THOSE
AREAS TO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITY FOR
SOCIAL COHESION. GETTING OUT OF
CARS, INCREASING THE LOCAL,
SMALL, FAMILY-OWNED BUSINESSES.
THIS IS PART OF THE AREA.
HOPEFULLY, THE FINAL GETS US
PART OF THE FINISH LINE INTO
DEVELOPING THESE PLANES. I'M
VERY EXCITED THAT WE HAVE
ADVANCED FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO
ENABLE THESE CONCEPTS THEN MOVE
FORWARD IMPLEMENTATION. WE HAVE
LONG DESIRED INVESTMENTS. THIS
IS WITHIN THE INTERBAY AREA.
SUPPORTING BIPOC ARTIST, AND
FINDING STRATEGIES. THANKS TO
COUNCIL PRESIDENT DEBORAH
JUAREZ, FOR LOOKING AT THE NEW
STATIONS . WE ALSO HAVE MADE
SURE THAT WE ARE CREATING AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR CLOSING FUNDING
GAP STREAMS. WE ARE AVOIDING
SAFE STREETS AND INFRASTRUCTURE
PROJECTS. AS I MENTIONED
EARLIER, I WAS CLOSING THE $10
MILLION POTENTIAL HOLD IN
OCTOBER REVENUE FORECAST HEARD
THAT WOULD HAVE A DRAMATIC
IMPACT ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND
TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS. WE HAVE
FULLY CLOSE THAT GAP IN THE
BALANCING PACKAGE. THE MEMOS
THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF US
NOW, AND NEW AMENDMENTS IN GROUP
A, COMPLEMENT MANY OF THE
DISCUSSIONS THAT WE HAVE HAD
OVER THE LAST MONTH. I'M VERY
EXCITED THAT WE WILL HAVE
CONVERSATIONS HERE IN A MOMENT
ABOUT INCLUDING CULTURAL
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES. WE
WILL HAVE MORE CONVERSATIONS
ABOUT HOW TO SMART
COMMUNITY-BASED SURVIVAL
REPORTS. WE WILL HAVE ANOTHER
OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE
INVEST IN BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
SERVICES, AND OTHER OPERATING
COSTS, NECESSARY FOR OTHER
THINGS THAT WE WILL HAVE A
CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT. WE ARE
SUPPORTING OTHER MEALS PROGRAMS.
THIS IS GIVEN THE RISING COST OF
FOOD. WE HAVE RISING INFLATION,
AND ONGOING NEEDS THAT WE SEE.
THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE RELIEF
FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. WE
WILL HAVE MUCH MORE TO SAY ABOUT
THIS. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT
FOLKS KNOW THAT THIS IS A
TREMENDOUS OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO
LIFT UP THE COMMUNITY THAT HAS
BEEN CALLING FOR MANY OF THESE
INVESTMENTS, AS WE SUMMARIZE
WHAT HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN GROUP
A. A REMINDER, WE DO NOT HAVE TO
PULL OUT AT THE SPECIFIC
AMENDMENT IS GOING TO COMMENT ON
IT. I HOPE THAT WE HAVE A NUMBER
OF PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO
COMMENT ON THE HUMAN SERVICE
PROVIDER FROM THE WAGE
INCREASES. I WANT TO POINT TO
THE LETTER AND THE MEMO THAT HAS
BEEN INCLUDED FROM THE
ATTACHMENT ON TODAY'S AGENDA.
WHEN WE GET TO BOTH ITEMS, I
WANT TO LOOK AT THE
CLARIFICATION STATEMENTS THAT I
AM OFFERING UP. THIS WAS FOR
FUTURE REFERENCE. THIS IS
ANOTHER POINT OF HISTORICAL
REFERENCES AS WELL. HOPEFULLY,
YOU WILL CONTINUE TO POINT BACK
TO THIS AGENDA, AND TO TODAY'S
MEETING, FROM THE WAY IT
CLARIFIES THE UPLIFT OF THOSE
HUMAN SERVICE PROVIDERS. WE WILL
HAVE MORE ON THAT. AT THIS
POINT, MADAME CHAIR, I DON'T
THINK WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE IN
THE RECORD. CAN I TURN IT OVER
TO THE STAFF TO PROVIDE THE
OVERVIEW OF ITEM NUMBER 27
BEFORE I MOVED TO LEGISLATION?
>> PLEASE DO, MADAME CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM
CLERK.
>> WE HAVE THE LEGISLATION IN
FRONT OF US, AS I NOTED. WILL
HAVE GROUP A AND GROUP B. I'M
JUST GOING TO MOVE THE
LEGISLATION SO THAT IT IS IN
FRONT OF US FOR THIS DISCUSSION.
DOES THAT SOUND GOOD?
>> I CAN SEE. I'LL TAKE THAT AS
A YES. I'M OF THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDS THE PASSAGE 120 708
FOR THE PURPOSES OF THESE
DISCUSSIONS. IS THERE A MOTION
OR A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECOND.
I WILL WALK THEM OVER TO GO
THROUGH THE PROCESS. GROUP A HAS
108 ITEMS IN IT. I WILL LET THE
STAFF DESCRIBE IT BEFORE WE
CONSIDER MOVING FORWARD.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR TERESA
MOSQUEDA. BEFORE THE BREAK, WE
WILL TAKE THE AMENDMENTS TO ITEM
27 ON THE AGENDA. 2024 BUDGET
ADOPTION ORDINANCE INTO GROUPS A
AND B. IT HAS 108 ITEMS, AND
WILL BE VOTED ON AS A GROUP.
INDIVIDUAL ITEMS CAN BE PULLED
FOR CONSIDERABLE CONSIDERATION.
THE GROUPS WILL BE DISCUSSED ALL
INDIVIDUALLY. THE ORDER WILL GO
FIRST. WE WILL DESCRIBE GROUP A,
AFTER THESE COUNCILMEMBERS
REMOVE ITEMS. THEY WILL BE TAKEN
AFTER THE VOTE ON ALL THE ITEMS.
WE WILL TAKE UP GROUP B. WITH
THAT, I WILL BRIEFLY DESCRIBE
GROUP A. I WILL TURN IT BACK
OVER TO THE CHAIR. GROUP A HAS
108 ITEMS. COUNCILMEMBER TERESA
MOSQUEDA, HIGHLIGHTED SOME OF
THE NOTES. IT AFFECTS THE
BUDGETS OF 25 DEPARTMENT ACROSS
THE CITY. IT SHOWS THE DETAILED
WORK OF THE COUNCIL HAS ENGAGED
IN. THEY REALLY SCRUTINIZE THE
BUDGET PROPOSAL, AND IDENTIFIED
AREAS FOR THESE CHANGES. WE HAD
108 AMENDMENTS, HAVING BEEN
FIRST DESCRIBED IN THE BALANCING
PACKAGE ON OCTOBER 20th. THIS IS
AS WELL AS AMENDMENTS TO THAT
PACKAGE THAT WERE PRESENTED ON
THE 27th. ALSO, IT INCORPORATES
SOME TECHNICAL CHANGES, AS
IDENTIFIED BY STAFF. I BELIEVE
THEY HAVE OTHER ITEMS OF HIS
GROUPS ANSWERED BY ALL THE
COUNCILMEMBERS. LIKE I SAID,
AFFECTING 25 DEPARTMENTS. THEY
HAVE ABOUT 44 DEPARTMENT
CHAPTERS IN THE BUDGET BOOK.
CHANGE ACROSS THE CITY, AS PART
OF THE BUDGET. I WILL TURN IT
BACK TO THE CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. BEFORE WE
DECIDE REMOVING ANY ITEMS FROM
GROUP A, I JUST WANT TO REALIZE
THAT YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO SPEAK
TO THE GROUPS THAT ARE IN THERE.
THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR US
TO SPEND TIME WITH EACH COUNCIL
MEMBER. THEY WILL HAVE ANOTHER
CHANCE TO SUMMARIZE THE ITEM
THAT WE HAVE INCLUDED. THEY HAVE
AN ORIGINAL BALANCING PACKET.
ON OCTOBER 27, WE KNOW THAT ANY
ITEMS THAT WE FELT WERE
COMPLEMENT THROUGH TO THE
ORIGINAL ACTIONS THAT WERE
INCLUDED IN THE BASE BUDGET, WE
HAVE INCLUDED THOSE IN THE
PACKAGE. IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT
I'M GOING TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE
ITEMS IN GROUP B, BUT I WANTED
TO OFFER YOU THE CHANCE TO SPEAK
TO ALL OF THOSE. REMEMBER, THIS
RESULTS IN AN INITIAL BALANCING
PACKAGE, AND INCLUDES MANY OF
ITEMS THAT YOU HAVE BROUGHT
FORWARD FROM OCTOBER 27th. AT
THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO
ENCOURAGE YOU TO MAKE SOME
COMMENTS ON GROUP A. YOU ARE
WELCOME TO DO THAT. IF YOU ARE
INTERESTED IN REMOVING ANY ITEMS
FROM THE CONSENT PACKAGE, PLEASE
MAKE SURE TO NOTE THAT. I WILL
LOOK AT IT ON MY END. WHO WOULD
LIKE TO GO FIRST? COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, ANYTHING YOU WOULD
LIKE TO SAY?
>> I AM OFF OF MUTE. FOR ONCE, I
AM PAYING ATTENTION. I AM
EXCITED. READY TO DO THIS.
>> THAT SOUNDS LIKE A REZONING
ENDORSEMENT FOR GROUP A.
COUNCILMEMBER SARA NELSON?
>> THANK YOU. I WISH TO CALL
THAT. ITEMS 31 AND 34, THE FIRST
IS EASIER. WHAT ABOUT ITEM TWO?
>> ITEM NUMBER 31. 805 A 2.
>> ARE YOU ASKING ME?
>> ASK ANYBODY, IF THEY WOULD
LIKE TO WEIGH IN. IS BEFORE WE
START WITH THAT LAST QUESTION.
WE HAVE ANY OTHER COUNCIL
MEMBERS? OKAY. WE ARE MOVING ON
OVER TO COMMENT. IS THERE ANYONE
ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE
COMMENTS FOR GROUP A? THIS IS
NUMBER 31 AND NUMBER 34. SHY
BUNCH. I SUMMARIZED A LOT OF IT.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD
ANYTHING?
>> WE ARE SAVING COMMENTS TO
NEXT MONDAY.
>> WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US
ACTION. THE ITEM REMOVED WAS
NUMBER 31 AND 34. ITEMS 31 AND
34 HAVE BEEN REMOVED. THEY WILL
BE ADDRESSED SEPARATELY. THERE
FOR, I MOVED TO ADOPT AMENDMENT
GROUP A, EXCLUDING ITEMS 31 AND
34. IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECOND.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS FOR GROUP A? IS THAT A
NEW HAND? COUNCILMEMBER?
>> NO.
>> HEARING NO ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS, REMAINING ITEMS IN
GROUP A, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL
ROLE ON THE ADOPTION OF THE
AMENDMENT GROUP A PACKAGES,
EXCLUDING ITEMS 31 AND 34?
>> COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD?
>> YES. COUNCILMEMBER DEBORAH
JUAREZ?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER TAMMY MORALES?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SARA NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER DAN STRAUSS?
>> YES.
>> CHAIR TERESA MOSQUEDA?
>> AYE.
>> NONE OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU, THE MOTION
CARRIES. ITEM 31 AND 34, HAVE
BEEN ADOPTED THIS IS ITEM
NUMBER 31.
>> THANK YOU. CHAIR TERESA
MOSQUEDA, I WILL BRIEFLY
DESCRIBE THE AN AMENDMENT . I
HAVE OTHER ANALYST ON THE LINE.
THIS WOULD HAVE 360,000 GENERAL
FUNDS FOR THE SERVICES
DEPARTMENTS. 2% PROVIDER PAY
INCREASE. THIS IS FOR THE
CONTINUUM OF CARE CONTRACTS.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> I AM HAPPY TO OFFER SOME
COMMENTS AFTER I'M HEARING RIGHT
BACK HERE FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
WHO HAVE DIFFERENT QUESTIONS
ABOUT IT. COUNCILMEMBER SARA
NELSON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE
IT GROW?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IF YOU
HAVE BEEN LISTENING FOR THE PAST
COUPLE OF MEETINGS, THERE HAS
BEEN A THEME EMERGING. THIS IS A
CONCERN ABOUT OPERATING.
>> 0182, ADDING $360,000 GENERAL
FUNDS. WE ARE TRYING TO
CONTINUE THE CARE CONTRACTS, AND
PROPOSE MORE PROVIDERS. THIS
CREATES THE ONGOING OBLIGATION
TYPE TO A ONE-TIME FUNDING
SOURCE. IT IS MOSTLY BASED ON
BETTER-THAN-EXPECTED REVENUE
PROJECTIONS. WE CAN COUNT ON
THAT TO HAPPEN GOING FORWARD IN
2025. THE ACTUAL CBA HAS THE
SENTENCE. YOU HAVE THE ONE-TIME
TRANSFER FROM THE JUMPSTART
PAYROLL EXERCISE TAX FUND, TO
$663,000. MY QUESTION, WHAT
HAPPENS IN 2025? WHAT ABOUT THAT
TRANSFER? WILL IT HAVE EXPIRED?
THE QUESTION IS, WOULD WE STOP
PAYING IT OR NOT? I DON'T LIKE
THIS 2% INCREASE. IT WOULD BE
ONGOING. I'M PART OF THE COUNCIL
THAT IS FINDING OURSELVES IN
THE POSITION OF HAVING TO TALK
ABOUT THIS AGAIN, AND PERHAPS IT
IS AWKWARD TO SAY THE LEAST.
CREATING ONGOING EXPENSES, I
BELIEVE, IS THE KIND OF
DECISION-MAKING THAT HELPED GET
US TO THIS POINT. WE HAVE SUCH A
LARGE GAP GOING FORWARD. I'M
JUST TRYING TO NOT ADD TO IT.
FOR THE LISTENING PUBLIC, THESE
ARE FUNDED CONTRACTS. THE DO NOT
HAVE THE PROVIDER PAY INCREASES,
FOR THE CONTINUED CARE GRANT
FUNDINGS. THIS WOULD INCREASE
THE FUNDING THROUGH THE
CONGRESSIONAL APPROPRIATIONS TO
DO SO, IF THEY WERE TO INCLUDE
CONTRACT ADJUSTMENTS. THAT IS
NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN COUNT
ON. THIS IS GOING TO BE SPREAD
ACROSS ALL 50 STATES. YOU DON'T
KNOW IF THAT WOULD END UP
TRICKLING DOWN. I'M JUST TRYING
TO PLAY IT SAFE. HE'S CONTRACTS
ARE NO LONGER ADMINISTERED, AND
WE SHOULD NOT BE ADDING TO THE
CONTRACT IF THEY HAD ESTABLISHED
IT, AS AN INDEPENDENT AGENCY, TO
DEAL WITH A REGIONAL PROGRAM. I
FEEL LIKE THAT IS GETTING INTO
THE RESPONSIBILITIES IN THE
JURISDICTIONS OF OTHERS. THIS IS
THE REASON I'M PUTTING THIS
FORWARD. THE CBA ENDS WITH THIS
SENTENCE, AS THE $360,000 IS
ADDED TO THE BASE CONTRACT
AMOUNT ON WHICH FUTURE
INFLATIONARY ADJUSTMENTS HAVE
BEEN REGULATED. THE CBA WORSENS
THE PROJECTED ONGOING DEFICITS
INTO THE GENERAL FUNDS,
BEGINNING IN 2026. THIS IS FOR
MORE THAN 360,000 IN 2025. IT
WOULD WORSEN THE DEFICIT BY
373,000 IN 2026. THAT IS
EXACTLY WHAT I AM TRYING TO
AVOID, BY HAVING THIS FROM THE
INDIVIDUALS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR ENTERTAINING THIS MOTION.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER SARA
NELSON. I WILL JUMP IN. I DON'T
SEE ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL HANDS
UP. MY RECOLLECTION STARTS
CORRECTLY. I BELIEVE THAT FOUR
OR FIVE OF THE COUNCILMEMBERS
THAT ARE PRESENT TODAY, HAD
COSPONSORS OF THE ORIGINAL
LEGISLATION, TO PROVIDE
POSSIBILITY INCREASES. THIS WAS
ALL ANOTHER TEST TO INCLUDE THE
CONTRACTS, THAT WILL BE HELD
DIFFERENTLY AT THE TIME. WITH
THAT FRAMEWORK, I'M HAPPY TO
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION
TO HELP US WITH THE LEGISLATIVE
INTENT, AND THE OVERALL
EFFICIENCY. I WILL CALL UPON
COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD, AND
HER REMARKS.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I
APPRECIATE MADAM CHAIR, AND THE
MEMO THAT YOU PROVIDED, AS IT
RELATES TO LEGISLATIVE INTENT.
I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ARE GOING
TO TALK ABOUT IT A LITTLE BIT.
THE POINT THAT I REALLY WANT TO
MAKE, IS LESS RELATED TO THE
LEGISLATIVE INTENT, COVERING ALL
OF THE CITY SERVICES. THIS IS
MORE ABOUT WHAT THE IMPACT OF
WHAT NOT ADDRESSING THIS MEET IS
TODAY. I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY
ARE DEVELOPING THESE AWKWARDNESS
SECTIONS NEXT YEAR. WE CONTINUED
THAT THROUGH NEXT YEAR. WE
TRUST THAT WE HAVE A NEW BUDGET
SEASON FROM NEXT YEAR. THOSE
CONVERSATIONS WILL PROVIDE
FRUITFUL OUTCOMES. FOR THOSE OF
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT YEAR, IF WE DO
NOT SUPPORT THIS BUDGET ACTION,
THE HARM WILL BE GREATER. THIS
IS A COMPOUNDING PROBLEM.
WITHOUT DECLINING WHAT SHOULD
HAPPEN NEXT YEAR, IF WE MAINTAIN
OUR RESOLVE TO ADDRESS THIS
ISSUE THIS YEAR, REGARDLESS OF
WHAT THE DECISION IS NEXT YEAR,
IT WILL BE LESS OF A HIT TO OUR
PROVIDERS. WE ALSO HAVE THE
FOLKS WHO ARE OUT. THEY HAVE
MISSIONS AND CRITICAL WORK. I
ALSO AM LOOKING AT THE FACT THAT
IT IS TRUE THAT THIS IS A
SYSTEMWIDE PROBLEM. WE HAVE LOTS
OF REPAIR CONTRACTS. I THINK THE
FACT THAT THIS IS A SYSTEMWIDE
PROBLEM, PROVIDES A GREAT
OPPORTUNITY FOR JURISDICTIONS
ACROSS THE COUNTRY. THEY ARE
TRYING TO WORK ON THIS ISSUE.
THEY ARE WORKING WITH OUR
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, BECAUSE
AGAIN, IT IS NOT JUST WORKERS IN
THE CITY OF SEATTLE THAT ARE
FALLING BEHIND YEAR AFTER YEAR,
BUT THIS IS WITHOUT INFLATION
BEING COVERED IN A RENEWAL OF
CONTRACTS. IT IS EVERY
JURISDICTION IN THE COUNTRY BUT
IS A CONTINUUM OF CARE. I THINK
THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A
LOT OF POLITICAL WILL, TO
ADDRESS US. I REALLY HOPE THAT
IN 2024, THE OFFICE OF
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS,
INCLUDES THIS ISSUE FOR FEDERAL
POLICY AGENDAS. THIS IS GOING TO
LOOK TO THE LEADERSHIP OF OUR
FEDERAL ALLEGATIONS. THIS
INCLUDES THE NATIONAL LEAGUE OF
CITIES, THE LOCAL PROGRESS FOR
THE CITIES EXTRA.
>> WE ARE GOING BACK TO YOU FOR
YOUR FINAL COMMENTS. ANY OTHER
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS YOU WOULD
LIKE TO MAKE? OKAY. I WANT TO
MAKE SOME COMMENTS. I WILL TURN
IT BACK OVER TO COUNCILMEMBER
SARA NELSON. THEY WILL HAVE THE
MOTION MAKER FOR REPLAYS. THANK
YOU, COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD
AND ANDREW LEWIS, FOR YOUR
LEADERSHIP ON THIS TOPIC. I
HAVE A STATEMENT ABOUT WHAT THE
ORIGINAL INTENT WAS. I'M LOOKING
AT THE LETTER. THE COUNCIL'S
ORIGINAL INTENT WAS HEART OF THE
BREAKING CONTRACTS. THANK YOU
FOR SHOWING THAT. I'M ON THE
SECOND TO LAST PARAGRAPH. THE
COUNCIL'S ORIGINAL INTENT, WAS
FOR THE CONTRACTS. THANK YOU.
THE COUNCIL'S ORIGINAL INTENT,
WAS LOOKING AT THE WAGE
INCREASES FROM THE CITY'S
ORDINANCES. THEY ARE CONSIDERING
THE CONTRACTS. THESE, WE ARE
PUTTING RIGHT OUT OF THESE
WAGES. IT IS JUST A MATTER OF
TIME. WITHOUT A SPECIFIC
LONG-TERM PLAN TO DISCUSS WAGE
INCREASES, WE WILL HAVE FUNDING
INEQUITIES AMONG THESE DIFFERENT
AGENCIES THAT ARE PROVIDING THE
OTHER SERVICES. WE ARE LOOKING
AT WHICH GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ARE
READY. THEY ALL FACE RISING
COSTS FROM THE FUTURE. WITHOUT
INFLATIONARY ADJUSTMENTS, EACH
OF THESE CONTRACTS FALL SHORT OF
COVERING THE COST OF PROVIDING
SERVICES. THIS IS ALL GOING TO
COVER INFLATION, AS THE
CUMULATIVE EFFECT IS IN THIS
SECTOR. BOTH ARE IN TERMS OF
WORKFORCE DUE TO HIGH VACANCY
AND STAFF POSITIONS. THEY HAVE A
SKILLED DIVERSE WORKFORCE. THEY
HAVE A JEWEL AND AGING
FACILITIES. THEY HAVE OTHER
TRANSFORMATION PROGRAMS, THAT
ARE PROBLEMATIC. THEY HAVE
SUPPORTED HOUSING PROVIDERS.
THEY ARE DISPROPORTIONATELY
LIKELY TO LOOK AT THESE OTHER
ABILITIES. THEY HAVE OTHER
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH DISORDERS.
THEY OPERATE 24/7 PROGRAM
MODELS. THIS IS WITH ANOTHER
EXPLANATION OF THE TYPE OF
SERVICES, AND ONGOING NEEDS THAT
THESE ENTITIES HAVE. THIS IS
NOT ANOTHER PUZZLE PIECE. THIS
IS A DIFFERENT CONTRACT. AS A
CONTINUUM OF CARE CONTRACTS
ENGAGEMENT. WE ARE OFFERING IT.
THIS IS THE BUDGET. IT IS NOT
OVERALL COMPOUNDING AND EXISTING
WITHIN THESE CRISIS ACTIONS.
QUIZZES WITH $47 MILLION. ON
AVERAGE EACH YEAR, FOR SIX
YEARS. THIS IS THE BIBLE IT AND
OTHER ACTIONS IN FRONT OF US. WE
HAVE NARROWED DOWN TO 221
MILLION. IT IS STILL
SIGNIFICANT. THIS IS INACCURATE
TO SAY. THIS IS ANOTHER COUNSEL
THAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR IT THEY
HAVE OTHER OPERATIONAL COSTS. WE
HAVE ANOTHER CONVERSATION
TOMORROW THAT WE WILL INITIATE
OVER THE NEXT THREE TO FOUR
WEEKS AGAIN. THIS IS ALL ABOUT
THE REVENUE. IT IS IMPORTANT FOR
US TO REMEMBER THAT THE GAP THAT
WAS HERE BETWEEN THESE OTHER
REVENUES, AND THE ONLY DUE TO
INCREASE POPULATION, BUT LOOKING
AT THE PERCENTAGES. WE HAVE
LARGE CITIES ACROSS THE NATION.
THIS IS ACCORDING TO THE SEATTLE
REPORTING ACTIONS FROM LAST
YEAR. WE HAVE AN INCREASE
POPULATION, AND INCREASE NEEDS
FROM THE PANDEMIC AND OTHER
ONGOING CRISIS ACTIONS. THIS IS
THE COVID DISASTER RATING. THIS
IS MANY OF US. THEY HAVE
CONTINUED TO TRY TO FIND
OPPORTUNITIES TO FUND ONGOING
SERVICES. WE HAVE ONGOING WAYS
TO SERVE VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES.
THIS IS DESPITE THE CRISIS WITH
THE REVENUE THAT IS RIGHT HERE.
THAT IS WHY WE BUILT AND SOME
ADDITIONAL SERVICE BUDGETS. WE
ARE LOOKING AT OTHER CHANCES. WE
ARE ASKING ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
WE HAVE STABLE LIVES WITHIN THIS
CONTRACT. IS NOT JUST MONEY
THAT GOES INTO ONE INDIVIDUAL.
WE HAVE PEAK MANAGEMENTS. THIS
IS GETTING INTO SHELTER. WE ARE
HELPING WITH DEFINING
MEDICATION. WE HAVE DIFFERENT
DOMESTIC FAMILY MEMBERS. I
APPRECIATE IT. THIS IS ALL
ABOUT THE AGENDA. WE KNOW THAT
THERE IS MORE WORK TO BE DONE.
WE HAVE LONG-TERM SOLUTIONS. I
WANT TO LOOK AT OTHER
APPRECIATIONS FOR THESE LINES TO
DO THE WORK HEARD THIS IS
WHETHER THEY ARE AT YOUTH CARE,
OR OTHER PLACES. WE HAVE MEMBERS
OF THE SEATTLE KING COUNTY
COALITION. YEAR-OVER-YEAR, WE
ARE LOOKING AT THE INABILITY OR
INSTABILITY. THIS IS THE
INABILITY TO SERVE THE CLIENTS.
THEY HAVE POURED THEIR HEARTS
OUT, HOPING TO MINISTER AND
ADMINISTER THE WAGE ABILITIES.
THIS IS THE BARE MINIMUM THAT WE
CAN DO WITH THE FUTURE COUNSEL.
THEY WILL CONTINUE TO SOLIDIFY
IT. THIS IS THE STRATEGY TO
ENSURE WAGE PARITY ACROSS CAN
YOU CLOSE US OUT?
>> THANK YOU. BOTH OF YOU BRING
UP REALLY GOOD POINTS. WE HAVE
THE IMPACTS OF HOMELESSNESS, AND
ALSO ADDING TO A BASE. WE ARE
ADDING TO THAT YEAR AFTER YEAR.
I RECOGNIZE THAT. I RECOGNIZE
YOUR POINT ABOUT WHAT THE
MAYOR'S BUDGETED. WE ARE
LOOKING AT THE 10 ADDITIONAL
CBA'S THAT ARE LOOKING AT THE
ONGOING AND OPERATING DEFICITS
GOING FORWARD. THIS COMES OUT TO
BE ABOUT $5.8 MILLION. I AM NOT
PULLING ALL OF THESE. I AM
PULLING TWO THAT HAVE TO DO WITH
CONTRACTS THAT THEY HAVE. THESE
TWO ITEMS, OR CONTRACTS THAT WE
NO LONGER ADMINISTER. THEY ARE
ANOTHER JURISDICTION THAT IS
COMPOUNDED FROM US. WHEN I'M
ASKING ABOUT THE QUESTION, WE
HAVE IT A FEW MEETINGS AGO. HAVE
WE SPOKEN TO ANY OTHER
ENGAGEMENTS AND WILLINGNESS
ACTIONS TO LOOK AT THESE? I
BELIEVE MAYBE WE WILL. WHATEVER.
I AM SAYING THAT WE HAVE TO DRAW
THE LINE SOMEWHERE. THE ONE
PLACE TO DRAW IT, AS THE
$360,000 CONTRACT ADJUSTMENT,
SPREAD OVER THE ADJUSTMENT. THIS
IS A CONTINUUM OF CARE FROM
THESE ORGANIZATIONS, THAT WILL
NOT BE FELT VERY MUCH FROM THE
INDIVIDUAL WORKERS. I THINK THAT
IS IT IS IMPORTANT TO SIGNAL
THAT WE ARE PAYING ATTENTION TO
WHAT WE ARE DOING TO OUTGOING
BUDGETS. THAT IS IT.
>> ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? NOT
SEEING ANY, THANKS TO
COUNCILMEMBER ANDREW LEWIS AND
LISA HERBOLD, FOR YOUR
ADDITIONAL SERVICE OVER THE
YEARS. THIS IS ANOTHER CALL FOR
AN ADDITIONAL WORKPLACE. MADAME
CLERK, I'M GOING TO NOW ASK YOU
TO CALL THE ROLE.
>> I THINK YOU NEED TO MOVE THE
ITEM.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE ITEM
NUMBER 31. HSP 001A.
>> SECOND.
>> THE COUNCIL IS ADOPTING H
E001 AMENDMENT ITEM 31. DO WE
HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
HEARING ON, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL ON THE ADDITIONAL
OPTION OF ITEM NUMBER 31 001A?
>> COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD?
COUNCIL PRESIDENT DEBORAH
JUAREZ? COUNCILMEMBER ANDREW
LEWIS?
>> YES. COUNCILMEMBER SARA
NELSON? COUNCILMEMBER SARA
NELSON? COUNCILMEMBER ALEX
PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER SARA
NELSON. COUNCILMEMBER ALEX
PEDERSEN?
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KSHAMA SAWANT?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> CHAIR TERESA MOSQUEDA?
>> AYE.
>> EIGHT ABSTAIN, ONE IN FAVOR.
>> EVERYONE ACCOUNTED FOR WHAT
THEY WANTED? THANK YOU, MADAME
CLERK. HE DID FAVOR, ONE HERE.
THE MOTION CARRIES. AMENDMENT
NUMBER 31 IS ADOPTED. MOVE ON TO
AMENDMENT NUMBER 34.
>> ITEM 34. THIS IS GROUP A. WE
HAVE A GENERAL FUND FROM THE
HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT. THESE
CARE CONTRACTS, THEY ARE
SPONSORED BY CHAIR TERESA
MOSQUEDA, AND COUNCILMEMBER LISA
HERBOLD.
>> I'M GOING TO MOVE IN FRONT OF
US. ITEM AGENDA 34. 805A.
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, WOULD YOU
LIKE TO GO TO THIS AMENDMENT?
>> CBA. THEY ARE MAKING ONGOING
PERCENTAGES. WE HAVE
INFLATIONARY ADJUSTMENTS. WE
HAVE ANOTHER MANNER. WE HAVE 7.5
INFLATIONARY ADJUSTMENTS.WILL
GET LOOKED INTO THE BASE, WHICH
WILL HANG THE 4% GOING FORWARD.
WE NO LONGER HAVE THE
OBLIGATION TO PLAY WITH THESE
INFLATIONARY ADJUSTMENTS. WE ARE
JUST BRINGING IT TO HIS PEOPLE'S
ADJUSTMENTS. I UNDERSTAND THAT
IT IS THE DESIRE. AGAIN, WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT ANOTHER AGENCY.
THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR HOW THEY
RUN THEIR BOOKS. THEY HAVE
OTHER PRELIMINARY EMPLOYEES.
THERE WILL BE ANOTHER TASK FOR
NEXT YEAR AS WELL. THIS IS BASED
ON BETTER-THAN-EXPECTED REVENUE
PROJECTIONS. WE CAN'T COUNT ON
THAT TO HAPPEN IN 2025. THIS IS
BASED ON WHAT WE CURRENTLY KNOW.
WE ARE PAYING FOR THIS IN 2025.
$1.9 MILLION IS BEING ADDED TO
THE BASE CONTRACT AMOUNT. WE
HAVE THE INFLATIONARY
ADJUSTMENTS. THEY HAVE THE
ONGOING DEFICITS. 2025-2026
BIANNUAL JUDGMENT BUDGET. CAN
WE NOT DO THAT?
>> ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON
THIS ONE? DO WE HAVE THE
COMMENTS FROM BEFORE? I'M GOING
TO ADD THAT FROM THE HUMAN
SERVICE PROVIDER CONTRACTS.
HAVE YOU MADE A CHOICE FROM LONG
TIME AGO TO OUTSOURCE THIS ONE?
COUNCIL PRESIDENT, HAVE YOU
NOTED THIS FROM YESTERDAY? MANY
OF THEM ARE TRYING TO LOOK AT
WOMEN OF COLOR. THEY HAVE SOME
OF THE MOST VULNERABLE
ACQUIREMENTS ACROSS THE
VULNERABILITY SECTIONS. WE HAVE
A LOT OF TURNOVER IN THIS AREA.
WE HAVE THE NATURE OF THIS WORK.
THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE
COLLISIONS. THIS IS THE CLINICAL
AND CORRECT WAY FOR US TO ASSESS
THE WORKFORCE. WE ARE NOT
SOURCING IT IN MANY WAYS TO
THESE ORGANIZATIONS WHO LARGELY
HAD NONPROFITS. THEY DO THIS
WORK OUT OF THE GOOD OF OUR
HEARTS. THEY DO THIS ON A 24/7
BUSINESS. IN MANY WAYS, THEY ARE
DOING THE PUBLIC A SERVICE THAT
IS REQUIRED. THEY HAVE A LOT OF
THESE READY TO GO. KING COUNTY
ORIGINAL HOMELESS AUTHORITY, DO
NOT HAVE THE REVENUES READY.
THEY HAVE THE LARGEST
CONTRIBUTOR TO THAT ACCESS. THIS
IS THE INTENT. WE ARE ENSURING
THAT WE HAVE CIVILITY OFFERS,
AND THE INTENT WAS TO ENSURE
THAT IT WAS MAINTAINED, NO
MATTER WHO HELD THE CONTRACT. I
USED TO THINK THAT IT WAS TO AND
COMMENT ON THE CITY OF SEATTLE.
UNTIL ONE DAY, WE HAVE THE
ORIGINAL HOMES. THEY ARE
GENERATING IT. WE ARE LOOKING
AT ANOTHER RESPONSE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SARA NELSON? DO
YOU HAVE FINAL COMMENT?
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS THE
IMPORTANT WORK. PEOPLE THAT ARE
DOING THIS WORK, DESERVE TO BE
PAID WELL. I DON'T LIKE THIS
BEING FRAMED AS A PRO OR CON.
THIS HAS BEEN DONE BY THE PEOPLE
THAT ARE DOING IT. IT IS
ANOTHER ISSUE. THEY WILL NOT
HAVE ANOTHER REVENUE-GENERATING
ITSELF. OTHER CITIES CAN ALSO
TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE
CONTRACTS UNDER THE
ADMINISTRATIONS. THAT IS WHY I
AM FOCUSING OR PICKING ON THESE
CONTRACTS. IT IS NO LONGER
SOMETHING THAT IS DIRECTLY UNDER
OUR CONTROL. AT SOME POINT, WE
HAVE DIRECTED IS THAT AGENCY.
THANKS.
>> THE LAST THING I WILL
MENTION, THANK YOU TO THE
MAYOR'S OFFICES. WE HAVE THE
INITIAL RESULTS FROM A HUMAN
SERVICES REPORTS. I BELIEVE THAT
HAS BEEN RELATED TO THE FLOOR.
JUST DOUBLE CHECKING WITH MY
COLLEAGUES. WE WILL ALSO BE
HAPPY TO MAKE THEM AVAILABLE AS
A REFERENCE POINT ON THE
MINUTES, AND WE ARE HAPPY TO
APPLY IT TO THE AGENDA
TOMORROW. THIS IS FOR A POINT OF
REFERENCE. THANK YOU TO THE
HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT FOR
EXPEDITING THESE TAKEAWAYS. WE
ARE STILL WORKING ON IT. I
GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT. FROM
THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, I WANTED TO
WORK TO INCLUDE THE INFLATIONARY
ADJUSTMENTS FROM THE PROPOSED
BUDGETS. IT WAS ONLY A MATTER OF
NOT HAVING THE MORE FULL PICTURE
THAT WE WERE THEN HAVING TO DO
ALTOGETHER. THIS IS ANOTHER
ASSESSMENT WEEK, AFTER RECEIVING
THE INITIAL BUDGET. WE HAVE
OTHER COMPONENTS AND CONTRACTS.
WE HAVE AVENUES THAT WERE NOT
FULLY COVERED BY THE
INFLATIONARY ADJUSTMENTS. THEY
HAD UNIFIED INTENT ACTIONS, TO
LOOK AT THE LEGALITY OF THE
EXECUTIVE BRANCH. THANKS TO THE
HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT FOR
PROVIDING THAT, AND EXPEDITING
THE PROCESS. I THINK IT ALREADY
UNDERSCORES WHAT WE HAVE SEEN,
WHICH THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
HAVING THE REST OF THAT FOR THE
HUMAN SERVICE WORKERS, AND THE
INFLATIONARY ADJUSTMENTS THAT
ARE HELPING TO LOOK AT ACROSS
THE BOARD. THERE ENSURING THAT
THERE IS FUNDING ACROSS THE
BOARD. THIS IS PART OF
DOING BUSINESS. ALSO, WE ARE
ADDRESSING SALARIES AND WAGES.
WE ARE ENSURING THAT THERE IS
STABILITY IN THAT SECTOR. THAT
IS WHAT DELIVERS WHAT THEY
NEED. THAT IS HOW WE ENSURE
THAT PEOPLE GET CONNECTED WITH
THE HEALTH SERVICES THAT WE ALL
NEED. IF WE WANT TO HOLD
OURSELVES ACCOUNTABLE AS A
RESULT, WE HAVE TO ENSURE THAT
THERE IS A STABLE COUNSEL.
THANK YOU FOR SENDING OUT THAT
SHORT REPORT. HUMAN SERVICE
PROVIDERS HAVE TESTIFIED FROM
LAST MONTH'S WORK SESSION ON
THE EFFECTIVENESS EFFICACY, AND
INVESTING IN THE OTHER WASTE
ABILITIES. MY HOPE IS THAT IT
WILL BE A YES VOTE TODAY, WHICH
IS GOING TO BE BASED ON THIS
LEGISLATION. BETANCOURT?
PLEASE CALL ROLE ON THE
ADOPTION OF ITEM NUMBER 34.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LISA HERBOLD?
>> YES. COUNCILMEMBER
COUNCILMEMBER ANDREW LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER TAMMY MORALES?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SARA NELSON?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PEDERSEN?
>> ABSTAINED.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KSHAMA SAWANT?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> CHAIR TERESA MOSQUEDA?
>> AYE.
>> SEVEN POST, ONE IN FAVOR,
ONE ABSTENTION.
>> ITEM CARRIES. ITEM 34 H005
A, IS ADOPTED. I BELIEVE THAT
GETS US THROUGH THE DAY. ALL
RIGHT. WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON
OVER TO GROUP B. I DON'T
BELIEVE THERE IS A FINAL ACTION
. AS A REMINDER, WE ARE GOING
TO VOTE ON ALL THESE ITEMS,
THEN WE ARE GOING TO HOLD UNTIL
MONDAY FOR ANY TECHNICAL
STINGS. THAT IS GOING TO MOVE
HIS RIGHT OVER TO IT. GOING TO
TURN OVER TO CENTRAL STAFF TO
GET ANY OF THE ADDITIONAL
FRAMINGS, AS WE GET INTO GROUP
B. I WILL REMIND THE
COUNCILMEMBERS THAT YOU ARE A
PRIME SPONSOR. I WILL TRY TO
MAKE THEM TOWARDS THE MOVE.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR TERESA
MOSQUEDA. I DON'T HAVE ANY
OTHER COMMENTS, EXCEPT TO SAY
THAT WHEN WE GET TO CERTAIN
ITEMS, THEY MAY NO LONGER BE IN
CONSIDERATION, BECAUSE OF THE
OTHER INFORMATION ACTIONS DONE
PREVIOUSLY. WE HAVE OTHER FOLD
OPTIONS. THEY MAY NOT PERCEIVE
IT. ANOTHER CLARIFIED
QUESTION, DO YOU WANT ME TO
DESCRIBE THE CLARIFIED QUESTION
BEFORE YOU ASK THE SPONSOR TO
MOVE IT? DO YOU WANT TO MAKE
THAT MOVEMENT FIRST?
>> LOOK AT THAT DISCRETION.
THEY HAVE TWO SECOND SOMETHING.
THEY HAVE THE CONTEXT. WE WILL
HAVE CENTRAL STAFF DESCRIBE THE
ITEM.
>> THE FIRST ITEM IN GROUP B,
ITEM NUMBER 109 IN THE PACKET.
THIS IS SPONSORED FROM MY
SCREEN. TOO MANY WINDOWS OPEN.
THIS IS SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER ALEX PEDERSEN.
COUNCILMEMBER ANDREW LEWIS AND
SARA NELSON. THIS IS THE CITY
AUDITOR. TRYING TO INCREASE
AUDITING CAPACITIES. $760,000
OF GENERAL FUND, IMPLEMENTING
THAT INTIMATE FOR THE ACTION
PLAN. 250,000 GENERAL FUNDS.
THIS IS THE COMMUNITY SAFETY
INITIATIVES. ANOTHER $250,000
ADDED TO THE HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT TO SUPPORT FOOD
BANKS. THIS IS BALANCED BY
REDUCING THE PROPOSED FUNDING
FOR CENTRAL SERVICE ALLOCATIONS
IN THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE.
THIS IS PART OF THE INITIATIVE
SERVICES, AND THE TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
ALEX PEDERSEN, HAS SPONSORED
THE AMENDMENT. WOULD YOU LIKE
TO MOVE IT?
>> WE ARE MOVING IT.
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECOND. COUNCILMEMBER ALEX
PEDERSEN, YOU'RE WELCOME TO
SPEAK TO YOUR AMENDMENT.
>> THERE ARE MORE ELOQUENT.
THEY ARE GOING TO TRY TO SPEAK
TO THIS COUNCIL BUDGET ACTION.
I REALLY WANT TO THANK MORE
THAN 250 CONSTITUENTS, AND
EMAILS FROM THE CITY COUNCILS.
THIS IS THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS
IN SUPPORT OF THIS AMENDMENT.
LAST NIGHT'S PUBLIC HEARING, I
DON'T RECALL ANYONE SPEAKING
AGAINST THIS AMENDMENT. THIS
IS NOT EASY TO DO. THEY'RE
TRYING TO GET THEIR ARMS AROUND
THIS COMPLICATED CALCULATION,
INCLUDING WHAT WE CALL SOCIAL
SERVICES AND COSTS. THEY HAVE
HALF $1 BILLION. BIG PICTURE
FROM THIS AMENDMENT. $2
MILLION. THEY ARE INCREASING
ACCOUNTABILITY AND DIGITAL
EQUITY. DIGITAL SAFETY AND
SECURITY. STILL GRANTING MOST
OF THE INCREASES, REQUESTED BY
THE EXECUTIVES FOR THEIR
ESTIMATES FROM THE CITY
GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES COSTS. THEY ARE
BREAKING THIS DOWN. THEY
FINALLY INCREASE THE BANDWIDTH
OF OUR LEGISLATIVE BRANCHES. AS
WE KNOW, THE CITY AUDITOR'S
OFFICE PRODUCES RECOMMENDATIONS
. THEY HAVE OTHER IMPROVEMENTS
FROM CITY GOVERNMENTS. THE CITY
AUDITOR NEEDS MORE AUDITORS TO
FULFILL THE CITY COUNCILS MANY
REQUESTS, AS WE LOOK AT THE
CITY BUDGETS, AND THE OTHER
INCREASES. THEY WILL INCREASE
ACCOUNTABILITY, EFFICIENCY, AND
EFFECTIVENESS. WE ARE MAKING
PROGRESS FROM THE OFFICIAL
POLICY DEBRIEFS, TO DIVIDE. WE
ARE ULTIMATELY ENABLING SEATTLE
ACCESS TABS, FOR RELIABLE
INTERNET SERVICES, AS DIRECTED
BY OUR RESOLUTION. 31956. HE
INCREASE HIS SAFETY WITH
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR
EFFECTIVE COMMUNITY-BASED CRIME
PREVENTION PROGRAMS. THEY ARE
LOOKING AT THE CAPITAL CAMPAIGN
OF THE FOOD BANK FACILITY. THE
RAINIER VALLEY FOOD PINK IS ONE
OF THE BUSIEST IN SEATTLE. THIS
AMENDMENT IS FUNDED BY
PROVIDING US MORE THAN
REQUESTED INCREASE. LESS THAN A
YEAR AGO, THE CITY COUNCIL
ENDORSED EVERYTHING. THEY ARE
LOOKING AT A $17 MILLION
INCREASE ON TOP OF THAT. YOU
HAVE LARGER ESTIMATES FROM THIS
SERVICE COST. THEY HAVE
INITIAL BUDGET PAYOUTS. THEY
ARE STILL GRANTING MAJORITY
FROM INCREASES. THIS IS
PERTAINED TO $2 MILLION TO
INVEST IN THESE ACTIONS FROM
EARLIER. HOPEFULLY, THEY WILL
SPEAK WELL INTO THIS. I
ENCOURAGE THEM ON ALL OF THIS.
THIS IS GOING TO ALSO REINFORCE
THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. ANY OTHER
COMMENTS THAT COUNCILMEMBERS
WOULD LIKE TO MAKE? I WILL
OFFER UP A COMMENT. IF THERE
ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS, THANK
YOU TO COUNCILMEMBER ALEX
PEDERSEN, FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD. I WANT TO SEPARATE THE
COMMENTS ABOUT THE INVESTMENTS.
THIS IS WHERE THE FUNDING COMES
FROM. I THINK THE ITEMS THAT
YOU HAVE ARTICULATED, FOR WERE
FUNDING SHOULD GO, ARE CLEAR
ACROSS THE CITIES. WE HAVE
JOINT INTEREST IN INCREASING
THE FUNDING AND GO PAST THE
ACTIONS. THE AUDITOR DID SEND A
REQUEST. THIS IS ONGOING. I
WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT
THERE IS A SEPARATION FOR THE
OTHER INVESTMENTS THAT YOU HAVE
NOTED WITH. BOTH WITH COMMUNITY
SAFETY, AND FUNDING FOR THINGS
LIKE INTERNET, FOR ALL THINGS
THAT I ABSOLUTELY SUPPORTED IN
THE PAST. THIS IS SPECIFICALLY
FROM FOOD IN HIS BUDGET AS
WELL. HOWEVER, I WANT TO
ENSURE THAT I AM LIFTING UP
SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE
HAVE RECEIVED ABOUT WHERE THE
FUNDING COMES FROM. I'M VERY
CONCERNED ABOUT THE PROPOSED
REDUCTIONS. THIS IS THE ABILITY
TO OFFER THE SERVICES. THE
COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE GOING TO
LOOK AT THE DEPARTMENTS. WE ARE
LOOKING AT THE INCREASES. IT IS
NOT CREATE GREATER EFFICIENCY
WITHIN OUR OWN DEPARTMENT,
BECAUSE OF THE LAYUPS FROM THE
GAPS AND SERVICES FROM WHAT
THEY HAVE TO BE REDUCED FROM.
AS WE HEARD FROM CENTRAL STAFF,
THEY DON'T HAVE A CLEAR
DEFINITION OF THE IMPACTS OF
THE AMENDMENT FROM YESTERDAY.
AT THE END OF YESTERDAY, WE
RECEIVED THIS BACK FROM THE
AMENDMENT OFFICE. THIS IS THE
LETTER THAT WE ALL RECEIVED
FROM THE MAYOR'S OFFICE. IT
TALKS ABOUT THE IMPACT, THE
CITYWIDE IMPACT ON THE
ESSENTIAL COSTS ARE GOING TO
RESULT IN LAYOFFS DUE TO
CONSTRAINT ON HOW TO LOOK AT
THESE ACTIONS. BECAUSE OF THE
MAJORITY OF THE ADDITIONAL
COSTS IN THE 2024 CENTER COST
MANUAL, IT IS DUE TO INCREASE
COSTS, FROM THE JUDGMENT
CLAIMS. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO
MITIGATE THE IMPACTS OF THIS
POSTPRODUCTION, BUT THEY WERE
FINALLY MITIGATING SOME ACTIONS
AGAIN. WE HAD OUR RESOURCES
THAT WERE SUPPORTING
ASSUMPTIONS AROUND THE
ORTHOPEDIC CONTRACTS. THEY WERE
UNDER THE BRIDGE. THE MAYOR'S
OFFICE REITERATED THE CONCERNS
THAT THEY WOULD HAVE ABOUT THE
ABILITY TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE
LABOR CONTRACTS THAT WERE
CURRENTLY UNDERWAY. THE
PROPOSED PRODUCTIONS WERE
LARGELY GOING TO BE TAKEN FROM
SERVICE PRODUCTIONS. THEY HAVE
OTHER COMBINATIONS. PRODUCTIONS
ARE CONCENTRATED ON SERVICE
PRODUCTIONS. WE HAD REDUCTIONS
AND CUSTOMER SERVICE CENTERS.
THIS IS PART OF THE DOWNTOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD. PRODUCTIONS
INCLUDED THE SHELTER, AND THE
MAINTENANCE SERVICES. THEY WERE
CITY-OWNED
IF REDUCTIONS WERE
CONCENTRATED ON STAFFING, IT
WOULD MEAN AN ESTIMATED 18
FTES. THESE ARE JUST EXAMPLES
OF THE IMPACTS OF REDUCTIONS
AND CENTRAL STAFF, EXCUSE ME,
THE EXECUTIVE WENT ON TO TALK
ABOUT HOW THERE WOULD BE
ADDITIONAL REDUCTIONS THAT
THEY WILL HAVE TO ASSESS. IT
STEMS FROM A FUNDAMENTAL
MISUNDERSTANDING OF CITYWIDE
COSTS. THESE ARE COSTS TO
OPERATE INCLUDING HR. THE
MAJORITY OF THE ADDITIONAL
COSTS WERE DUE TO INCREASE
COSTS. IT GOES ON TO TALK
ABOUT HOW IT IS TO HAVE A
DETRIMENTAL IMPACT ON
ADDITIONAL SERVICES ALL OF THES
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, I WILL
COME BACK TO YOU TO CLOSE US
OUT, BUT I WILL DO
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS NEXT.
>> THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
AMENDMENT FORWARD. IT IS ALSO
FOR THE BASIC GOVERNMENT
SERVICES IN WHICH THIS WAS
ORIGINALLY TO SUPPORT. WHETHER
IT IS SUPPORTING THE ANIMAL
SHELTER OR MAKING SURE OUR
FLEET HAS GAS AND ELECTRICITY
IN BATTERIES OR TANKS. I LOVE
WHAT YOU ARE DOING HERE, WITH
WHAT WE ARE FUNDING.
UNFORTUNATELY I WON'T BE ABLE
TO SUPPORT IT TODAY DUE TO
WHERE THE FUNDING SOURCES ARE
COMING FROM. SO, THANK YOU FOR
PUTTING THIS FORWARD.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS. COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD.
>> THANK YOU. THIS IS A
QUESTION I HOPE TO ADDRESS TO
COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF. AS I
UNDERSTAND, THE INFORMATION
THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE
EXECUTIVE, THEY ARE TALKING
ABOUT WHAT THE IMPACT MIGHT BE
IF THIS $2 MILLION IN FUNDING
WAS TAKEN FROM THE INCREASE
OVER THE AMOUNT ADOPTED OR
ENDORSED BY THE COUNCIL FOR
2024 LAST YEAR, BUT DO WE KNOW
-- WHY I AM STRUGGLING WITH
THAT, I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT TO
ME IN DOLLARS, THAT MIGHT HAVE
A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, BUT I AM
THINKING ABOUT THIS IN TERMS OF
$2 MILLION OF $500 MILLION. TO
ME THAT IS A HAIRCUT AND I AM
WONDERING WHETHER OR NOT
COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF CAN
SPEAK TO THAT. I KNOW WE DON'T
KNOW A LOT ABOUT HOW THIS HALF
$1 BILLION IS SPENT, AS PART
OF THE CENTRAL SERVICES BUDGET
FOR ALL DEPARTMENTS. BUT I AM
JUST WONDERING IF THERE IS
ANYTHING THAT WILL BE OF
ASSISTANCE TO US IN MAKING OUR
DECISION TODAY THAT YOU CAN
SHARE ABOUT THE IMPACT OF A $2
MILLION CUT TO A $500 MILLION
EXPENDITURE MIGHT BE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD I
WILL TAKE A FIRST SHOT AT THAT
AND THEN OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE
ANYTHING TO ADD THEY WILL CHIME
IN. GENERALLY THE INFORMATION
WE RECEIVED FROM THE EXECUTIVE
PRIOR TO THE EMAIL FROM
YESTERDAY AND YESTERDAY, IT IS
REFERRING TO BOTH THINGS. IT IS
TALKING ABOUT THE INCREASES
AND THE OVERALL BASE OF THE
FULL COSTS. I THINK THIS
HIGHLIGHTS WHAT CENTRAL STAFF
HAS BEEN TRYING TO SAY
THROUGHOUT THIS BUDGET
PROCESS. THERE IS A LACK OF
VISIBILITY AND, FRANKLY,
TRANSPARENCY FROM THE
EXECUTIVE ABOUT HOW THESE RATES
ARE DEVELOPED, WHERE THEY ARE
BEING PROGRAMMED, WHERE THERE
MIGHT BE EFFICIENCIES AND THAT
SORT OF THING. I THINK THERE
ARE A LOT OF ASSERTIONS BEING
MADE ABOUT WHAT THE IMPACTS
WILL OR WON'T BE AND I THINK
FRANKLY, WE DON'T KNOW. I CAN'T
REALLY SAY. IT DOES SEEM
REASONABLE TO SAY $2 MILLION
OF A $500 MILLION BUDGET COULD
BE ABSORBED WITHOUT
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, BUT I DON'T
HAVE ENOUGH VISIBILITY INTO
THOSE BUDGETS TO REALLY STATE
THAT FOR SURE AND BECAUSE THIS
IS NOT A TARGETED CUT, LIKE WE
ARE SAYING REDUCED SPENDING IN
THIS AREA OF SPENDING THAT
CENTRAL RATES COME OUT OF, IT
WILL BE UP TO THE EXECUTIVE TO
DETERMINE HOW IT IS IMPLEMENTED
AND SO THE IMPACTS ARE SORT OF
IN THEIR CONTROL A BIT. SO,
WHILE I DON'T THINK IT WILL
IMPACT -- THE EXECUTIVE IS
HIGHLIGHTING AREAS THEY MIGHT
LOOK TO TO IMPLEMENT THESE
REDUCTIONS AND I WILL OFFER
SOME EXAMPLES OF WHERE I THINK
SOME OF IT IS OVERSTATED. THE
ANIMAL SHELTER IS NOT
PRIMARILY FUNDED BY CENTRAL
RATES. SO, THE WAY IT IS
CRAFTED ASSUMES AN UNDERSPEND
IN THOSE BUDGETS, SO THE
EXECUTIVE COULD IMPLEMENT IT BY
REDUCING GENERAL FUND SPENDING
IN THE ANIMAL SHELTER AND NOT
IMPACT THINGS THAT ARE DIRECTLY
FUNDED BY CENTRAL RATES, BUT
THAT IS NOT THE INTENT OF THE
SPONSOR. I THINK THEY ARE JUST
HIGHLIGHTING WHERE THOSE
REDUCTIONS COULD COME FROM,
BUT I'M AFRAID WE CAN'T REALLY
OFFER CERTAINTY ABOUT WHAT
THOSE IMPACTS WOULD BE, BECAUSE
IT IS COMPLICATED. I WOULD
JUST POINT TO THE LAST PART OF
THE EMAIL FROM THE EXECUTIVE.
I DO THINK THAT THIS IS AN AREA
WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT
IN 2025, FOR SURE, AND ADD
MORE VISIBILITY INTO IT FOR THE
NEXT COUNCIL, BUT RIGHT NOW WE
DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION
TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPLICATIONS
OF DOING NEW THINGS OR JUST
PROVIDING SAVINGS.
>> AND ME I HAVE A QUICK
FOLLOW-UP? WOULD IT BE TRUE TO
SAY THAT THIS IS AN AREA THAT
HAS NOT SOUGHT ADDITIONAL
TRANSPARENCY?
>> WE SOUGHT TO ATTEND
SOMETIMES HAVE NOT RECEIVED IT.
>> I WOULD SAY THIS IS ONE OF
MANY AREAS WHERE WE TALKED
ABOUT TRANSPARENCY. I THINK
THE BUDGET DIRECTOR WOULD
CONFIRM, I DON'T KNOW IF IN
THIS CURRENT ADMINISTRATION
THEY HAVE BEEN ASKED DIRECTLY
TO BRIEF ON CENTRAL RATES AND
PROVIDE THOSE DETAILS. I THINK
FOR THE PUBLIC AND THE COUNCIL
THAT TRANSPARENCY SHOULD BE
THERE WITHOUT HAVING TO BE
REQUESTED GENERALLY, BUT THAT
IS WHY CENTRAL STAFF LIFTED IT
UP. IN ISSUE IDENTIFICATION
THIS IS AN AREA WHERE THE
COUNCIL MAY WANT TO PROVIDE
OVERSIGHT. I THINK THEY HAVE
INDICATED THEY ARE UNWILLING TO
PROVIDE THAT BRIEFING AND THAT
IS WHY WE TEED IT UP FOR
DISCUSSION AND A POTENTIAL AREA
OF INQUIRY FOR FUTURE COUNCIL
DISCUSSIONS, GIVEN THE ONGOING
DISCUSSIONS WITH THE BUDGET
OFFICE. THEY WOULD BE WILLING
TO BRIEF THE COUNCIL WITH MORE
DETAILS ON THE CENTRAL RATES IN
THE FUTURE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES.
>> THANK YOU. SO, I AGREE WITH
THE CHAIR AND RESPECT TO THE
ANALYSIS AROUND SEPARATING
SUPPORT OF CRITICAL SERVICES
AND TRANSPARENCY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY AND GOOD
GOVERNANCE. I THINK ALY IS
RIGHT, WE DO NEED A BETTER
UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THIS
WORKS. SO I WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN FOR HIS
LEADERSHIP, BECAUSE I DO THINK
A KEY PART OF THIS IS TRYING TO
GET MORE TRANSPARENCY INTO OUR
CITIES BUDGETARY DECISIONS. YOU
KNOW, IN LESS THAN A YEAR,
CENTRAL COSTS BALLOONED TO AN
ADDITIONAL $17 MILLION AND THE
FUNDING FOR OUR INFRASTRUCTURE
IS IMPORTANT TO MAINTAIN
SERVICES. WE HAVE A GROWING
OUTWARD DEFICIT WE ARE ALL
LOOKING AT AND IT REALLY CALLS
FOR US TO EXAMINE EVERY PART
OF HOW OUR BUDGET IS WORKING,
BECAUSE IT WILL IMPACT OUR
POLICY DECISIONS. SO YOU KNOW,
WE ARE STILL STRUGGLING TO
ADDRESS THAT UNCERTAINTY. THAT
IS GOING TO BE A HUGE
CONVERSATION FOR NEXT YEAR, BUT
I APPRECIATE ALY'S COMMENTS
ABOUT THE NEED FOR GREATER
TRANSPARENCY AND THE NEED TO
HAVE A MUCH CLEARER
UNDERSTANDING, AND MUCH SOONER,
WHEN THIS SORT OF DRAMATIC
SHIFT IS HAPPENING IN THE CITY.
SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THIS
AMENDMENT IS REALLY BROUGHT
WITH THE SPIRIT OF
COLLABORATION ACROSS OFFICES
AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, ACROSS
BRANCHES TO ENCOURAGE THE
EXECUTIVE TO REALLY ENGAGE WITH
US IN BETTER TRANSPARENCY ABOUT
OUR CITIES BUDGET IMPACTS AND
I WILL CONTINUE TO SPONSOR
THIS AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU AND WITH THAT I
THINK I WILL TURN IT OVER TO
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN FOR LAST
COMMENTS. I WILL ALSO SAY ON
THAT COMMON GROUND WE TALKED
ABOUT EARLIER, THERE IS A LOT
OF COMMON GROUND AND WANTING
TO HELP REDUCE THOSE CENTRAL
COSTS AND I WILL OFFER UP
PERHAPS FOR THE FUTURE COUNCIL
THE ABILITY TO RECONVENE THE
MANAGEMENT LEADERSHIP
COMMITTEE. IN THE INITIAL YEARS
WHEN I FIRST CAME ON BOARD WAS
TRYING TO CONVENE TO IDENTIFY
WAYS TO REDUCE COSTS, INCREASE
EFFICIENCY, BECOME A MORE
ATTRACTIVE PLACE TO BRING
EMPLOYEES AS WELL. MANY OF THE
FRONT-LINE EMPLOYEES HAD
RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT COSTS AND
POLICIES TIED TO THE CENTRAL
PROCESS THAT WAS RELATIVELY NEW
WHEN I CAME IN. THAT SAID, I
THINK THERE IS PROBABLY MORE
WORK TO BE DONE TO ASK THE
FRONT-LINE WORKERS FOR WAYS TO
REDUCE COSTS. WAYS WITHIN OUR
OWN CITY GOVERNMENT WE CAN BE
MORE EFFICIENT. I KNOW THAT
MANY OF THE FRONT-LINE WORKERS
HAVE IDEAS FOR HOW TO DO THAT
AND I THINK THIS DOVETAILS
NICELY WITH THE CONVERSATION WE
WILL HAVE TOMORROW ABOUT THE
TRANSPARENCY LEGISLATION. SO
AGAIN, COMMON GROUND THERE AND
WANTING MORE INFORMATION
EARLIER AND CLEARER. THIS IS
A GOOD TIE INTO THAT AND
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, JUST
NOTING THE UNKNOWNS WITH THE
WAY THIS WOULD BE APPLIED AS A
CONCERN. I THINK THROUGH THIS
CONVERSATION THERE IS A
KERNEL OF COMMON GROUND IN
REDUCING THOSE CONSTAND --
THOSE COSTS AND EFFICIENT
PROCESSES. I WILL TURN TO
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN TO CLOSE
THIS OUT.
>> THANK YOU AND THANKS
EVERYBODY FOR THE COMMENTS. I
WANT TO LIFT UP THAT IF WE
DON'T VOTE FOR THE COUNCIL
BUDGET ACTION, THERE ARE THESE
REALLY GOOD INVESTMENTS THAT
WILL NOT BE GETTING THESE
RESOURCES, SO I AM HOPING THAT
WE CAN GET SUFFICIENT SUPPORT
NOW SO WE CAN INVEST IN THESE.
ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS WE
LEARNED IS THE CENTRAL
SERVICES COSTS, THEY ARE JUST
ESTIMATES OF WHAT THEY WILL BE
OVER THE NEXT 12 MONTHS. SO,
HISTORICALLY, THE CENTRAL
SERVICE OFFICES ARE GIVING
MONEY BACK. REFUNDING MONEY AT
THE END OF THE YEAR, SO IT IS
SOMETHING THAT CAN BE
CALIBRATED MID YEAR OR NEXT
YEAR IF NECESSARY, BUT AGAIN,
WE ARE GOING OFF OF THE
ESTIMATES OF THE BASE OF HALF
A MILLION DOLLARS AND THE
REQUEST THAT CAME IN FOR $17
MILLION MORE. WE ARE STILL
GOING TO GRANT THE MAJORITY OF
THAT REQUEST AND MAKE THESE
OTHER INVESTMENTS AND
ACCOUNTABILITY, SAFETY, FOOD
SECURITY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN. MADAM
CLERK, WE ARE ON AMENDMENT
109, CBO-001-B-1.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> NO.
>> CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
>> NO.
>> FOUR IN FAVOR, FOR OPPOSED
AND ONE ABSTENTION.
>> HAVING FAILED TO RECEIVE A
MAJORITY OF THE VOTE, THE
AMENDMENT FAILS AND ITEM 109
DOES NOT PASS. MOVING ON TO
ITEM 110.
>> ITEM 110 IS DEEL-001-A-2.
THIS WOULD ADD $20 MILLION OF
JUMPSTART FUNDS TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION IN
EARLY LEARNING FOR K-12
EDUCATIONAL SUPPORT,
PRIORITIZING SERVICES. THIS
IS SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER
SAWANT, JOINED BY COUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA AND COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD. I WILL NOTE THAT
PREVIOUSLY IN THE MORNING
SESSION, THE COUNCIL PASSED
THE LEGISLATION NECESSARY TO
INCREASE THE PAYROLL TAX RATE
IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THIS
EXPENDITURE.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU. I MOVED TO AMEND
COUNCIL BILL 12078 AS
PRESENTED ON DEEL-001-A-2.
>> IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
SPEAK TO YOUR AMENDMENT?
>> YES, THIS AMENDMENT FUNDS
MENTAL HEALTH WORKERS FOR
SEATTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, USING
THE $20 MILLION THAT WAS AGREED
TO BY THE MAJORITY OF THE
COUNCIL UTILIZING THE AMAZON
TAX THAT WAS VOTED FOR THIS
MORNING. I HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN
TO THE ISSUE AND I THINK
COUNCILMEMBER SUE VOTED YES ON
THIS AND THE BUDGET AMENDMENT
TO MAKE THE FUNDING AVAILABLE.
I REMAIN AVAILABLE FOR ANY
QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER.
ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? NOT
SEEING ANY, I THINK WE ARE
READY TO VOTE. THIS ALLOWS FOR
THE FUNDING TO BE DEPLOYED AS
DIRECTED IN THE EARLIER
DISCUSSION. $20 MILLION FOR
EDUCATION AND EARLY LEARNING,
PRIORITIZING MENTAL HEALTH.
MADAM CLERK, COULD YOU PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL ON THE ADOPTION
OF AMENDMENT NUMBER 110,
DEEL-001-A-2?
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> ABSTAIN.
>> CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
>> AYE.
>> SEVEN IN FAVOR, TO
ABSTENTIONS.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES AND WILL
BE ADOPTED. WE ARE GOING TO
SKIP AMENDMENT 111, WHICH IS
FG-501-A-2. THAT DID NOT
RECEIVE SUFFICIENT VOTES TO
ADVANCE AND THERE IS NO FUND
SOURCE FOR THAT ITEM. WE WILL
MOVE ON TO NUMBER 112.
>> WAIT, ITEM 112 IS
HST-004-A-2. THIS WOULD ADD
$1.5 MILLION FOR BEHAVIORAL
HEALTH SERVICES, CASE
MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL COST
THAT EXISTING NON-CONGREGATE
SHELTERS AND REDUCES FUNDING
BY $1.5 MILLION FOR THE CRIME
PREVENTION PILOT PROGRAM IN
THE SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT --
>> THANKS SO MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT, DO YOU
WANT TO MOVE YOUR AMENDMENT?
>> YES, THANK YOU. I MOVED TO
AMEND THE COUNCIL BILL AS
PRESENTED --
>> IS THERE A SECOND? IT HAS
BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
>> THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT WOULD
MOVE THE $1.5 MILLION FOR
SHOTSPOTTER WHICH THE DATA
SHOWS IS ESSENTIALLY A SNAKE
OIL PRODUCT AND INSTEAD USE
THAT FUNDING TO BACKFILL THE
MAJORITY OF THE BEHAVIORAL
HEALTH SERVICES TO SUPPORT
RESIDENTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
THE CITY PROVIDED $2.5 MILLION
FOR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES
THIS YEAR. SORRY. IT WAS ONE
TIME FUNDING, EVEN THOUGH
THERE IS NOTHING ONE TIME, AS
WE KNOW, ABOUT THE NEED FOR
THESE SERVICES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER DO YOU WANT TO
TAKE A BREAK? I AM HAPPY TO
OFFER YOU A WATER BREAK IF YOU
NEED TO.
>> YES THAT WOULD BE
APPRECIATED --
>> NO PROBLEM. WE WILL COME
BACK TO YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
SAWANT, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
COUNCIL MEMBERS, AS WE TAKE A
PAUSE HERE, ARE THERE
ADDITIONAL COUNCILMEMBERS WOULD
LIKE TO OFFER SOME COMMENTS?
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> THANK YOU. THERE HAS BEEN A
LOT SAID ABOUT THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF THIS
TECHNOLOGY AND THERE HAS BEEN A
LOT SAID ABOUT THE CIVIL
LIBERTIES IMPACTS ASSOCIATED
WITH INCREASED SURVEILLANCE.
THERE HAS BEEN A LOT SAID
ABOUT THE HARM THAT HAS BEEN
DONE, IN SOME CASES A DEATH,
FROM FALSE POSITIVES. I REALLY
WANT TO FOCUS -- THAT IS ALL
VERY IMPORTANT -- BUT I WANT
TO FOCUS ON THE FACT THAT MORE
AND MORE MEMBERS IN THE
PROFESSION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
ARE COMING OUT IN OPPOSITION
TO THE USE OF SHOTSPOTTER IN
THEIR CITY. FOR INSTANCE, THE
POLICE CHIEF OF SAN ANTONIO
WAS THE PERSON WHO LED THE
CHARGE IN THE CITY'S CONTRACT
WITH SHOTSPOTTER. HE REFERRED
TO THEIR EFFORTS AS A GOOD
EFFORT TRYING TO MAKE IT WORK.
THERE IS A POLICE CHIEF IN
MASSACHUSETTS WHO ALSO ENDED
THE CONTRACT WITH SHOTSPOTTER.
HE REFERRED TO IT AS A COSTLY
SYSTEM THAT ISN'T WORKING. THE
EFFECTIVENESS THAT WE NEED TO
JUSTIFY THE COST. PORTLAND,
ATLANTA. HAVE DECIDED TO NOT
MOVE FORWARD WITH THE
CONTRACT. NEW ORLEANS. DAYTON.
CHARLOTTE. TRENTON. THEY ENDED
THEIR SHOTSPOTTER CONTRACTS.
AND CHICAGO'S MAYOR HAS
RECENTLY PROMISED TO GET RID
OF SHOTSPOTTER IN THE CITY
DURING THE CAMPAIGN. THAT
CONTRACT IS UP IN FEBRUARY.
WHY IS IT THAT LAW-ENFORCEMENT
EXPERTS ARE TAKING THIS
POSITION? IT IS REALLY BECAUSE
OF THIS ISSUE WITH FALSE
POSITIVES. IT IS NOT JUST THAT
IT IS INEFFECTIVE, IT IS THAT
IT DRAWS POLICE OFFICERS TO A
LOCATION WHERE THEY ARE NOT
NEEDED. SO, JUST IN CHICAGO
ALONE, THEY FOUND THAT 90% OF
SHOTSPOTTER ALERTS WERE FALSE
POSITIVES. AND BECAUSE OF
THAT, BECAUSE OF OFFICERS
BEING DRAWN TO A LOCATION WHERE
THERE WERE NO ACTUAL GUNSHOTS,
OFFICERS RESPONDED 40,000
TIMES WERE NO GUN VIOLENCE HAD
TAKEN PLACE. I THINK SOMETHING
THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO
THINK ABOUT IN SEATTLE WHEN WE
HAVE STAFFING CHALLENGES IN
OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT AND
RECRUITMENT CHALLENGES THAT
MANY CITIES ARE ALSO FACING. I
THINK THAT WE REALLY NEED TO
THINK ABOUT WHAT IT MEANS FOR
POLICE OFFICERS TO BE SENT TO
LOCATIONS TIME AND TIME AND
TIME AGAIN WHEN THERE IS NOT
AN ACTUAL NEED FOR THEM TO BE
GOING THERE. WHEN THEY ARE
GOING THERE, THAT MEANS THEY
ARE NOT GOING SOMEWHERE ELSE
WHERE THEY NEED TO GO. I KNOW
WE HAVE TALKED A LOT ABOUT
PRIORITY RESPONSE TIMES AND OUR
DESIRE TO MAKE SURE THOSE
RESPONSE TIMES ARE AT SEVEN
MINUTES FOR A PRIORITY ONE
RESPONSE TIME. SOME PRECINCTS
WE ARE SEEING RESPONSE TIMES
FOR PRIORITY ONE HIGHER THAN
THAT. I THINK WE NEED TO THINK
ABOUT WHAT THIS MEANS FOR
PUBLIC SAFETY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
SAWANT, DID YOU WANT TO JUMP IN
AT THIS POINT OR DO YOU WANT ME
TO CIRCLE BACK TO YOU?
>> I WILL TRY TO JUMP IN. THANK
YOU, COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD,
FOR SHARING VERY IMPORTANT
STATISTICAL INFORMATION AND
REALLY DEVASTATING STATISTICAL
INFORMATION. DEVASTATING AND
DECISIVE. THIS IS DEVASTATING
INFORMATION. STATISTICAL
ANALYSIS THAT THIS SIMPLY DOES
NOT WORK. AS COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD SAID, A STUDY
CONDUCTED TWO YEARS AGO,
SHOTSPOTTER GENERATED 40,000
DEAD-END POLICE DEPLOYMENTS IN
CHICAGO. THIS IS DECISIVE.
THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR
USING THIS. ANYONE WHO THINKS
THEY ARE TRYING SOMETHING NEW
ARE EITHER COMPLETELY IGNORANT
OF THIS DEADLY INFORMATION --
STATISTICAL INFORMATION -- OR
THEY HAVE A VESTED INTEREST. I
HEARD SEVERAL INDIVIDUALS AND
LET'S BE CLEAR, THERE WERE
LOTS OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
THEM AND MANY OF THE RANK AND
FILE BLACK COMMUNITY MEMBERS
MARCHING IN THE BLACK LIVES
MATTERS PROTESTS. I THINK ONE
OF THE POINTS THAT THEY WERE
MAKING WAS LET'S TRY SOMETHING
NEW. I BELIEVE THAT WAS SAID
LAST NIGHT IN PUBLIC COMMENT.
THAT IS WHAT I WANT TO POINT
OUT, THAT THIS IS NOT TRYING
SOMETHING NEW. IF THIS COUNCIL
FUNDED SHOTSPOTTER, IT WOULD BE
TRYING SOMETHING THAT HAS
ALREADY BEEN TRIED AND
COMPLETELY BEEN REJECTED. JUST
THE FOOLHARDINESS OF THIS IS
JUST NOT CREDIBLE. THE ONLY
REASON TO PUT THIS FORWARD
WOULD BE BECAUSE THERE ARE
VESTED INTERESTS AT PLAY, WHICH
I WILL COME TO IN A SECOND. BUT
I ALSO WANTED TO SHARE THAT
THAT STUDY WAS ALSO THE BASIS
OF AN AMICUS BRIEF THAT WAS
FILED IN SUPPORT OF A MOTION
BY THE COOK COUNTY PUBLIC
DEFENDER IN CHICAGO. IN THE
CHICAGO AREA, THAT CHALLENGES
THE VALIDITY OF THE SHOTSPOTTER
GUNFIRE REPORTS. THAT AMICUS
BRIEF WAS SUBMITTED ON BEHALF
OF A COALITION OF
COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS
IN THE CHICAGO REGION, WHERE
THEY ARE EXTREMELY CONCERNED
ABOUT THE IMPACT OF SHOTSPOTTER
ON OVER POLICED AND UNDER
RESOURCED COMMUNITIES OF COLOR
ON THE SOUTH AND WEST SIDES.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL,
PARSONS LAB, AND ORGANIZED
COMMUNITIES AGAINST
DEPORTATION. THESE ARE
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS
SERVING SOME OF THE MOST
VULNERABLE, MARGINALIZED
COMMUNITIES, THAT ARE IN
DANGER FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT
AUTHORITIES. AND JUST TO QUOTE
THE MEMBERSHIP COORDINATOR OF
THE LAST ORGANIZATION I
MENTIONED, ORGANIZED
COMMUNITIES AGAINST
DEPORTATION, MIGUEL LOPEZ,
KNOWING VERY WELL THAT POLICE
OFFICERS TEND TO ESCALATE ALL
TYPES OF SITUATIONS AND ARE
KNOWN TO USE EXCESSIVE FORCE.
THE SHOTSPOTTER TECHNOLOGY
CREATES AN ADDITIONAL LAYER OF
VIOLENCE AND HARM FOR POLICE
OFFICERS AS THEY RUSH
AGGRESSIVELY TO POOR, BLACK
AND BROWN NEIGHBORHOODS,
EXPECTING TO BE MET WITH
GUNFIRE. IF THE CITY WAS
SERIOUS ABOUT STOPPING THE GUN
VIOLENCE, THEY WOULD LISTEN TO
THE COMMUNITY AND USE THOSE
DOLLARS TO INVEST IN THOSE
COMMUNITIES IN ORDER TO CREATE
A SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT WHERE
YOUNG PEOPLE WOULD HAVE THE
TRANSFORMATIVE TOOLS TO DEAL
WITH CONFLICT. I THINK THIS
QUOTE FROM THE PERSON REALLY
ENCAPSULATES THE PROBLEM AND
ALSO THE SOLUTION AND THAT IS
THIS AMENDMENT IS EXACTLY IN
THAT SPIRIT. I JUST WANTED TO
SAY THAT IN THE FACE OF SUCH
CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE, THE
QUESTION NEEDS TO BE ASKED, WHY
DOES THIS KEEP COMING UP OVER
AND OVER AGAIN? I DON'T THINK
WE SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT
THIS. I DON'T CLAIM TO READ
ANYBODY'S MINDS, AND I AM NOT
SPECULATING ABOUT ANYONE'S
INTENTIONS, BUT LET'S LOOK AT
THE FACTS. THE FACTS ARE THAT
SHOTSPOTTER EXECUTIVES HAVE
DONATED TO MAYOR HARRELL'S
CAMPAIGNS AND THIS WAS
SUPPORTED IN A SOUTH SEATTLE
EMERALD ARTICLE LAST YEAR.
TAKE IT FOR WHAT IT TELLS YOU,
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY THE
EVIDENCE IS ABSOLUTELY
HISTORICALLY CLEAR. THIS $1.5
MILLION WOULD BE FARCE --
WOULD BE FAR BETTER SPENT ON
SERVICES AND PROVEN TECHNOLOGY
AND I URGE ALL MEMBERS TO
VOTE YES.
>> THANK YOU. ARE THERE OTHER
COUNCILMEMBERS THAT WOULD LIKE
TO OFFER COMMENT? I AM NOT
SEEING ANY. I WOULD OFFER SOME
COMMENTS OF MY OWN. I WANT TO
AGAIN UNDERSCORE THE
IMPORTANCE OF BOTH THE
INVESTMENTS HERE AND THE FUND
SOURCE. THE INVESTMENTS WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT ARE REALLY
CRITICAL. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
MAKING SURE WE CAN APPLY
FUNDING TO GROWING COMMUNITY
NEEDS AND ENSURING OUR MOST
VULNERABLE HAVE THE RESOURCES
NECESSARY TO HAVE DIRECT CARE.
SHELTER FOR OUR MOST
VULNERABLE COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
A CRITICAL INVESTMENT THAT IF
WE HAD ADDITIONAL FUNDING IN
THE BUDGET WE WOULD BE ABLE TO
MAKE AN IMMEDIATE AND DIRECT
IMPACT. THAT IS WHERE THE
FUNDS GO AND THERE IS A LOT OF
INTEREST IN DOING THAT ACROSS
THIS COUNCIL. I WOULD PREFER
THAT AREA IN THE BUDGET WHERE
THERE IS NEW OR UNTESTED PILOT
ACTIVITIES, ANY OPPORTUNITIES
THAT WE CAN DO IN THIS BIENNIAL
BUDGET, IN THE SECOND PART, TO
MOVE MONEY INTO NO NEEDS
INSTEAD OF UNTESTED TECHNOLOGY
IS A CRITICAL NEED. AND AN
INVESTMENT STRATEGY AND WHERE
THE DOLLARS CAN GO AND THE LENS
OF NOT WANTING TO APPLY A NEW,
MORE THAN $1 MILLION OF
INVESTMENTS INTO SOMETHING
THAT IS A PILOT, WHEN WE HAVE
ONGOING PRESSING NEEDS, UNMET
NEEDS, SEEMS TO MAKE A LOT OF
SENSE. THERE ARE THREE OTHER
THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT
ON. NUMBER ONE, I WOULD LIKE TO
UNDERSCORE THE IMPORTANCE --
NUMBER TWO, I WOULD LIKE TO
FOLLOW UP ON THE COMMENTS THAT
WERE MADE ABOUT THE IMPACT ON
STAFFING AND THE RESPONSE WHEN
SHOTSPOTTER IS USED. A NUMBER
THREE, UNTESTED TECHNOLOGY AND
THE IMPLICATIONS THAT HAS FOR
OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS. ON THE
FIRST COMPONENT WITH OTHER
CITIES, SHOTSPOTTER HAS BEEN
SHOWN TO BE INEFFECTIVE AT
PREVENTING OR INVESTIGATING GUN
VIOLENCE BASED ON A STUDY OF 68
LARGE METROPOLITAN CITIES
ACROSS THE UNITED STATES. ONE
OF THE REASONS THIS WAS BROUGHT
FORWARD TO US AS DESCRIBED IN
THE BRIEFING WAS TO USE THIS AS
A GUN PREVENTION TECHNOLOGY
TOOL. IN THOSE 68 OTHER CITIES
THAT HAVE NOT SEEN THIS
TECHNOLOGY BE AN EFFECTIVE TOOL
TO PREVENTING OR INVESTIGATING
GUN USE. IN A RECENT STUDY IN
CHICAGO, SOME OF US TALKED
ABOUT THIS ALREADY, SHOTSPOTTER
HAS A 90% FALSE POSITIVE RATE.
IT LED TO POLICE BEING SENT
INTO NEIGHBORHOODS OVER 40,000
TIMES WHEN NO GUN RELATED
VIOLENCE TOOK PLACE. IN ST.
LOUIS, A CITY THAT HAS ONE OF
OUR HIGHEST GUN VIOLENCE RATES
ACROSS THE ENTIRE COUNTRY,
ACOUSTIC GUNSHOT DETECTION WAS
SHOWN TO HAVE NO SIGNIFICANT
ABILITY TO REDUCE VIOLENT
CRIME LEVELS. AND NUMBER THREE,
WHEN WE LOOK AT
CLOSED-CAPTIONED TELEVISION,
VIDEO SURVEILLANCE, WITH
SHOTSPOTTER, THERE WAS A
CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW THIS
COULD IMPROVE THE TECHNOLOGY.
WE HAVE EVIDENCE FROM
PHILADELPHIA. PHILADELPHIA
DEPLOYED BOTH TECHNOLOGIES AND
THEY FOUND THAT THERE WAS NOT
A DECREASE IN CRIME IN
PHILADELPHIA. A 2018 STUDY
EXAMINED THE EFFICACY OF
COMBINING AUDIO GUNSHOT
DETECTION SYSTEMS WITH CLOSED
CAPTION TELEVISION AND IT DID
NOT SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECT THE
NUMBER OF SHOOTINGS, BUT DID
INCREASE THE WORKLOAD OF
POLICE IN WHICH NO EVIDENCE OF
SHOOTING WAS FOUND. THAT MEANS
MORE POLICING -- THE POINT I
BELIEVE COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD
WAS UNDERSCORING AROUND ALREADY
STRETCHED STAFF AND
OVERREACTION WHEN STAFF ARE
DEPLOYED. COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT
ALSO NOTED IT. SHOTSPOTTER HAS
FALSE ALARM RATES CAUSING
CHIPS INTO THE COMMUNITY ON
HIGH ALERT -- GUNS DRAWN AND
DANGEROUS SITUATIONS. IN
CHICAGO ALONE, OFFICERS WERE
DEPLOYED MORE THAN 60 TIMES A
DAY. INDEED, THE INSPECTOR
GENERAL ANALYSIS OF POLICE DATA
FOUND THAT THE PERCEIVED
FREQUENCY OF SHOTS IN SOME
NEIGHBORHOODS LED OFFICERS TO
ENGAGE IN MORE STOPS. FINALLY,
THE PLACEMENT OF SENSORS AND
SOME NEIGHBORHOODS BUT NOT IN
OTHERS MEAN THAT CAN DISTORT
GUNSHOT SPECIFICS AND CREATE A
CIRCULAR JUSTIFICATION FOR
OVER POLICING AND COMMUNITIES,
ESPECIALLY COMMUNITIES OF
COLOR. SO THE ESCALATION OF
POLICE PRESENCE AND BEHAVIOR
BASED ON FAULTY GUNSHOT
DETECTION TECHNOLOGY HAS
CONSEQUENCES AND IT IS
IMPORTANT TO UNDERSCORE THAT IN
ONE EXAMPLE, THERE WAS A
YOUNG, 13-YEAR-OLD, MEXICAN
AMERICAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
STUDENT WHO WAS SHOT AND KILLED
AFTER POLICE RESPONDED TO
SHOTSPOTTER. FINALLY ON THE
TECHNOLOGY NOT BEING TESTED,
NOT PEER-REVIEWED. THE
TECHNOLOGY HAS LED TO WRONGFUL
ARRESTS AND WRONGFUL
CONVICTIONS, INACCURATE DATA
AND COLLECTION BETWEEN
SHOTSPOTTER AND POLICE
DEPARTMENTS. IN CHICAGO POLICE
CHARGED A MAN BASED ON FAULTY
SHOTSPOTTER DATA THAT WAS
MANUALLY ALTERED TO SUPPORT
CRIMINAL CHARGES, CAUSING HIM
TO SPEND 11 MONTHS IN JAIL
BEFORE THE CASE WAS EVENTUALLY
DISMISSED. PROSECUTORS HAVE
ATTEMPTED TO INTRODUCE AUDIO
AND VOICES RECORDED THROUGH
THESE TECHNOLOGIES AS EVIDENCE
IN AT LEAST TWO TRIALS AND MOST
RECENTLY IN HOUSTON, MORE THAN
80% OF SHOTSPOTTER ALERTS DID
NOT RESULT IN AN INCIDENT
REPORT, AROUND HALF OF THE RATE
OF A 911 CALL. MEANWHILE THE
RESPONSE TIME WAS SLOWER THAN
IT HAS BEEN IN NEARLY 30 YEARS.
SOME WORRY THAT SHOTSPOTTER IS
DIVERTING OFFICERS AWAY FROM
THE EMERGENCY AND STRETCHING
THE POLICE FORCE EVEN THINNER.
I WANTED TO UNDERSCORE THOSE
THREE COMPONENTS. COLLEAGUES,
WAS THERE ANY FINAL COMMENTS?
OKAY, HEARING NONE, MADAM CLERK
WOULD YOU PLEASE -- I WANT TO
DOUBLE CHECK, ANY FINAL
COMMENTS? MADAM CLERK, WOULD
YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE
ADOPTION OF ITEM 112,
HSD-004-A-2?
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> NO.
>> CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
>> NO. OH, EXCUSE ME. I CHANGE
MY VOTE. AYE.
>> FOUR IN FAVOR, FIVE
OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE
MOTION FAILED AND AMENDMENT
NUMBER 112 DOES NOT ADVANCE.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 113.
>> 113 WOULD IMPOSE A
PROVISO ON THE $1.5 MILLION IN
THE SPD BUDGET FOR THE CRIME
PREVENTION PILOT PROGRAM. THIS
IS SPONSORED BY CHAIR
MOSQUEDA.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I WILL GO
AHEAD AND MOVE THAT ITEM. I
MOVE THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE
ITEM 113, SPD-900-A-2. IS THERE
A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU, IT HAS BEEN
MOVED AND SECONDED. COLLEAGUES,
WE SPENT QUITE A BIT OF TIME
TALKING ABOUT SHOTSPOTTER
ALREADY, SO LET ME TALK ABOUT
SOME OF WHAT WE PUT IN THIS
LEGISLATION IN FRONT OF US. THE
INTENT HERE IS TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE HAVE PUT INTO PLACE THE
ABILITY FOR A PROVISO SO THERE
IS A RACIAL EQUITY TOOLKIT AND
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
TIED TO THE CONVERSATION THAT
WE ARE EXPECTING TO HAPPEN IN
QUARTER ONE, BEFORE ANY
DEVELOPMENT OF A SURVEILLANCE
ORDINANCES CREATED AND THAT
THE RACIAL EQUITY TOOLKIT AND
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT THROUGH
PUBLIC HEARING, COORDINATED BY
THE EXECUTIVE, INVITING
LEGISLATION FROM COUNCIL, THAT
THAT INFORMS WHAT ULTIMATELY
COMES TO COUNCIL IN THE WAY OF
A POTENTIAL ORDINANCE THAT
ALLOWS FOR THIS TECHNOLOGY. WE
CURRENTLY DO NOT HAVE THE
CAPABILITY OR LEGAL CAPABILITY
TO PURCHASE THE TECHNOLOGY NOR
DEPLOY IT, BECAUSE THE
ORDINANCE HAS NOT YET PASSED.
SO WHAT WE ARE REQUESTING
CREATES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT THROUGH A
PUBLIC HEARING COORDINATED BY
THE EXECUTIVE WITH
PARTICIPATION BY THE COUNCIL.
THAT THAT WILL HELP INFORM AND
ANALYSIS WHICH INCLUDES THE
CRAFTING OF THE RACIAL EQUITY
TOOLKIT FROM THE OFFICE OF
CIVIL RIGHTS AND THAT
ULTIMATELY THE ORDINANCE AS IT
COMES TO COUNCIL WILL THEN
INCLUDE AND BE INFORMED BY THE
RACIAL EQUITY ANALYSIS AND
COMMUNITY FORUM. THE HOPE, AS
WELL, IS THAT ALL OF THOSE
CONVERSATIONS ARE
GEOGRAPHICALLY BASED. EACH
CONVERSATION AROUND WHERE THE
TECHNOLOGY IS DEPLOYED. AND
CORRESPONDING ORDINANCE. I WILL
TURN IT OVER TO OUR COLLEAGUES
TO SEE IF THERE IS ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION YOU WOULD LIKE TO
ADD AND FINALLY I WOULD NOTE
THAT I APPRECIATE THE
EXECUTIVE AND THEY HAVE WORKED
TO TRY TO ENSURE THIS WOULD BE
IMPLEMENTED. WE HAD
CONVERSATIONS DIRECTLY WITH
THE EXECUTIVE ABOUT WORKING
WITH OUR OFFICE TO FINALIZE THE
LANGUAGE ON THIS, SO THERE
WOULD BE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
VISION OF THE PROVISO AS
DESCRIBED. ANYTHING ELSE TO
ADD? COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN,
PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
JUST LOOKING AT THE PROVISO
ITSELF WITHIN THE 56 PAGE
GROUP B, I JUST WANTED TO
BETTER UNDERSTAND THIS. THERE
IS A SENTENCE THAT SAYS
ADDITIONALLY THIS FUNDING SHALL
NOT BE SPENT UNTIL AUTHORIZED
BY FUTURE ORDINANCE. SO YOU
ARE SAYING THAT THERE WOULD
HAVE TO BE A COUNCIL BILL THAT
WOULD GO THROUGH THE COUNCIL
NEXT YEAR TO AUTHORIZE WHAT
THIS BUDGET IS SETTING MONEY
ASIDE FOR?
>> YEAH, AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE
-- TO WEIGH IN ON THIS. THAT
WOULD BE REQUIRED. THE
SURVEILLANCE ORDINANCE PROCESS
IS NOT ALREADY APPROVED FOR
THE USE OF THIS TECHNOLOGY, SO
THE REQUIREMENT IS NOT
NECESSARILY ADDED. THE ADDED
COMPONENTS THAT WE HAVE BEEN
WORKING WITH COUNCILMEMBERS IN
THE COMMUNITY AND THE EXECUTIVE
IS TO ENSURE THAT THE TOOLKIT
IS INFORMED BY A PUBLIC
CONVERSATION OR A PUBLIC
HEARING. OBVIOUSLY
COUNCILMEMBERS ARE INVITED TO
PARTICIPATE IN THAT, BUT THAT
IS SOMETHING THAT WILL HELP
INFORM THE TOOLKIT AND
ULTIMATELY INFORM THE
SURVEILLANCE ORDINANCE FOR
CITY COUNCIL. WE DO NOT HAVE
THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND
THUS THE COUNCILMEMBERS WOULD
HAVE TO PASS THAT IN THE
FUTURE, GIVEN THAT THAT IS A
NEW TECHNOLOGY. COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD, I SAW YOU NODDING.
YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING TO
THAT?
>> I THINK YOU EXPLAINED IT
PERFECTLY. THE PROVISO DOES NOT
CREATE THE CONDITIONS WHERE AN
ORDINANCE HAS TO BE PASSED.
THOSE CONDITIONS ALREADY EXIST.
THIS NEEDS TO BE AUTHORIZED
VIA LEGISLATION AS A
SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY.
>> AND I FAILED TO MENTION AS
WELL, MY EXCITEMENT ABOUT THE
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL AS
WELL. THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR
GENERAL IN THEIR POLICY
OVERSIGHT ROLE, AS WELL AS THE
OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS, GIVEN
THEIR VAST EXPERIENCE WITH
WORKING ON ROBUST RACIAL EQUITY
TOOLKIT ANALYSES, THAT IS A
VALUE THAT WE ARE INCLUDING
THEIR. BUT THE ORDINANCE
VELTMAN DOES NOT. AM I COMING
IN CLEAR?
>> SORRY, CHAIR MOSQUEDA, MY
INTERNET CUT OUT FOR A MOMENT.
I AM GOING TO SEE IF GREG
DOSS IS ON THE LINE TO RESPOND.
>> THANK YOU AND I THINK WHAT
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA AND
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD ARE
SAYING IS CORRECT. FROM A
PROCESS STANDPOINT THERE IS AN
ORDINANCE REQUIRED UNDER THE
SURVEILLANCE ORDINANCE. THERE
WOULD BE A SURVEILLANCE IMPACT
REPORT ORDINANCE THAT THE
COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO
AFFIRMATIVELY PASS IN ORDER TO
AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE OF THIS
TECHNOLOGY. IT WOULD ALSO BE
THE CASE THAT THIS PROVISO
WOULD NEED TO BE LIFTED IN
LEGISLATION THAT THE COUNCIL
COULD DO AS PART OF ITS NORMAL
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET OR ANY
OTHER LEGISLATION THAT THE
COUNCIL MIGHT PASS.
>> AND AGAIN, I WOULD
UNDERSCORE THAT THIS HAS BEEN
CRAFTED WITH THE EXECUTIVE.
THEY ARE FULLY AWARE THAT AN
ORDINANCE NEEDS TO BE CRAFTED
AND THE VALUE ADD HERE IS THE
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL IN
THEIR SPD OVERSIGHT ROLE, AS
WELL AS THE OFFICE OF CIVIL
RIGHTS WITH THEIR EXPERIENCE
WORKING ON RACIAL EQUITY
TOOLKITS, I THINK IS GOING TO
BE A VALUE ADD. ALONG WITH THE
EXECUTIVE HOSTING A PUBLIC
HEARING, INVITING PARTICIPATION
FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE
COUNCIL. I THINK THIS WILL HELP
IMPROVE THE TRANSPARENCY AND
OPERATION OF THE ORDINANCE AND
ALSO HELP IN WARM DAYS HELP
INFORM THE ULTIMATE ORDINANCE.
AND NO OBJECTIONS WERE RAISED
ABOUT THE PROVISO AND THE NEED
TO LIFTED LATER BY THE
EXECUTIVE. WITH THAT, ANY
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? THANK YOU
FOR THAT FEEDBACK AND --
>> COUNCILMEMBERS, I MIGHT
JUST ADD THAT THE CONFUSION
HERE I THINK IS AROUND THAT
LAST SENTENCE, BECAUSE IT SAYS
THE FUNDING SHALL NOT BE SPENT
UNTIL AUTHORIZED BY A FUTURE
ORDINANCE. I CAN SEE HOW THAT
MIGHT BE SEEN TO MEAN THE
ORDINANCE THAT WOULD AUTHORIZE
AND ADOPT, BUT IN THIS CASE
THE COUNCIL WOULD PROBABLY
REMOVE THIS PROVISO AS WELL IN
A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET.
>> OKAY, SEEING NO ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS, I AM GOING TO CALL
THE ROLL ON ADOPTION OF THIS
ITEM. ITEM 113, SPD-900-A-2,
MADAM CLERK WILL YOU PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL ON THE ADOPTION
OF THE ITEM?
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER 1025.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> YES.
>> CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
>> AYE.
>> THANK YOU. THE MOTION
CARRIES END AMENDMENT 113 WILL
BE ADOPTED. ITEM NUMBER 114.
>> ITEM 114 IS HSD-813-B-2.
THIS WOULD ADD $300,000 OF
GENERAL FUND TO THE HUMAN
SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO FUND A
COMPREHENSIVE TREATMENT PROGRAM
OR PILOT PROGRAM. THIS IS
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER
NELSON, JOINED BY
COUNCILMEMBERS PEDERSEN AND
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON WOULD YOU
LIKE TO MOVE YOUR AMENDMENT?
>> YES, I MOVED TO AMEND
COUNCIL BILL 120708 AS
PRESENTED ON HSD-813-B-2. IS
THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO CONSIDER
HSD-813-B-2. ITEM NUMBER 114.
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON WOULD YOU
LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR
AMENDMENT?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MY
PROPOSAL WOULD EXPAND ACCESS TO
SUBSTANCE USE DISORDER
TREATMENT WHICH INCLUDES, A
PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL
EVALUATION, MEDICAL DETOX,
BEHAVIORAL THERAPY, PEER
COUNSELING, CASE MANAGEMENT,
AND USUALLY COMES WITH A FEW
WEEKS OF AFTERCARE OF
COUNSELING. AND IT IS INTENDED
TO FILL A GAP IN SERVICES BY
CREATING A RESOURCE FOR
CONTRACTED SERVICE PROVIDERS
TO GET THEIR CLIENTS INTO A
CERTIFIED, STATE LICENSED,
RESIDENTIAL OR INTENSIVE
OUTPATIENT TREATMENT FACILITY,
AFTER WHICH THE CITY WOULD PAY
THE BILL ON A CASE-BY-CASE
BASIS UNTIL FUNDING IS
DEPLETED. THIS VERSION OF THE
CBA IS RESPONSIVE TO COMMENTS
MADE BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
JUAREZ BY INDICATING OUR INTENT
THAT HSD WORK WITH TRIBAL AND
INDIGENOUS LED ORGANIZATIONS TO
ENCOURAGE THAT TREATMENT
FACILITIES BE INCLUDED ON THIS
LIST OF SERVICE PROVIDERS AND
THAT WE FIND FUTURE WAYS TO
COOPERATE IN ADDRESSING THIS
MUTUAL PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS. AS
I SAID BEFORE, THIS WILL NOT
REQUIRE AN ADDITIONAL FTE AND I
DON'T BELIEVE IT WILL BE
COMPLICATED TO SET UP. THE
EXECUTIVE, INCLUDING THE HSD
DIRECTOR, DEPUTY MAYORS AND
MAYOR HARRELL IS SUPPORTIVE,
SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND I
DO HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT
YES, THIS IS NEW, BUT AT THE
SAME TIME, SO IS FENTANYL. IT
IS THE MOST DANGEROUS DRUG TO
HIT OUR STREETS EVER. WE HAVE
TO DO SOMETHING. WE HAVE TO UP
OUR GAME AND WHAT WE'VE GOT,
WHAT WE SEE, IS THAT THE
EXISTING TREATMENT SERVICES
THAT WE HAVE TREAT OPIOID USE
DISORDER, BUT THEY DO NOT TREAT
THE COMBINATION OF DRUGS THAT
MOST PEOPLE ARE DYING OF, WHICH
IS FENTANYL AND
METHAMPHETAMINE. SO WE HAVE TO
EXPAND OUR TREATMENT OPTIONS
AND METHODS. SO I WANT TO READ
SOMETHING. THE SEATTLE TIMES
RAN AN EDITORIAL LAST WEEK IN
SUPPORT OF MY PROPOSAL THAT
STATES, QUOTE, TREATMENT
DOLLARS ARE ESPECIALLY NEEDED
AS THE CITY GOES ABOUT
ENFORCING AN ORDINANCE THAT
MADE PUBLIC DRUG USE A
MISDEMEANOR. THE GOAL OF THE
LEGISLATION WAS NOT TO PUNISH,
BUT TO PROVIDE STRUCTURED
PATHWAYS TO THOSE IN NEED OF
HELP AND THE ORDINANCE ALSO
REQUIRES DIVERSION AND CASE
MANAGERS NEED SOMEPLACE TO SEND
PEOPLE TO TREATMENT. THAT IS
WHY THE DIRECTOR SUPPORTS THIS,
AS WELL AS SO MANY OTHER
SERVICE PROVIDERS. I JUST GOT
AN EMAIL FROM HER THIS MORNING.
I WAS CAUGHT A LITTLE BIT OFF
GUARD YESTERDAY WHEN ASKED
ABOUT THE LENGTH OF TIME
MEDICAID PATIENTS HAVE TO WAIT
TO GET INTO REHAB, BECAUSE I
WAS GOING OFF OF ANECDOTAL
INFORMATION THAT I HAD GATHERED
OVER THE COURSE OF A COUPLE OF
YEARS WORKING ON THIS AND I
DID NOT GET A PRECISE NUMBER.
BUT I CAN SAY THAT RESEARCH
SHOWS THAT A PERSON'S READINESS
TO ENTER TREATMENT IS THE BEST
PREDICTOR FOR LONG-TERM
RECOVERY. SO IN MY MIND IT
DOESN'T MATTER IF THE AVERAGE
LENGTH OF TIME IS ONE MONTH OR
SIX WEEKS OR A FEW WEEKS,
WHATEVER. WHAT REALLY MEMBERS
-- MATTERS IS THAT SOMEONE
GETS AND AS SOON AS THEY MAKE
THE DECISION TO GO. IT HAS TO
BE AS IMMEDIATE AS POSSIBLE AND
THAT IS WHY ON-DEMAND IS SO
KEY. I HOPE YOU HAVE NOT HAD
THIS EXPERIENCE, BUT MANY
PEOPLE OUT THERE HAVE, OF A
FAMILY MEMBER WHO HAS BEEN
STRUGGLING FOR ADDICTION FOR A
LONG TIME AND CALLS YOU UP AND
SAYS THE WORDS YOU HAVE BEEN
WAITING TO HEAR FOR A LONG
TIME, WHICH IS, I NEED HELP. I
AM READY TO TRY TREATMENT. IF
YOU WERE TO HEAR THAT, CHANCES
ARE YOU DROP EVERYTHING AND
LOOK UP THE NEAREST TREATMENT
FACILITY AND GET THEM THERE
RIGHT AWAY AND HAND OVER THE
INSURANCE CARD AND PAY THE BILL
WHEN TREATMENT WAS FINISHED.
THAT IS THE WAY IT IS MOST
LIKELY TO BE SUCCESSFUL AND I
AM JUST TRYING TO ENABLE OUR
CONTRACTED SERVICE PROVIDERS TO
BE ABLE TO DO THE SAME THING
THAT YOU WOULD DO FOR A FAMILY
MEMBER IN THE CASE OF
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING OR WHATEVER
WHEN THEY SAY ALL RIGHT, I'M
SCARED, I WANT TO TRY
TREATMENT. THAT IS WHAT THIS
PROPOSAL WOULD DO AND I WOULD
THANK YOU FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION. BEFORE I STOP
TALKING, HOWEVER, I WANT TO
THANK MY COSPONSORS FOR
HANGING IN THERE WITH ME.
COUNCILMEMBERS PEDERSEN AND
STRAUSS. ALSO MAYOR HARRELL
AND HIS WHOLE TEAM FOR BEING
SUPPORTIVE. I ALSO WANT TO
THANK AND GORMAN FROM CENTRAL
STAFF FOR HER HARD WORK ON THIS
SINCE LAST YEAR AND ALSO THE
LEADS IN MY OFFICE ON THIS FOR
A LONG TIME. I WOULD BE REMISS
IF I DID NOT ACKNOWLEDGE AND
THANK THE STAKEHOLDERS HAVE
SPENT A LIFETIME TALKING TO AND
ALSO THE CONSTITUENTS THAT
HAVE ENCOURAGED ME TO KEEP ON
FIGHTING FOR EXPANDING OUR
TOOLBOX OF OPTIONS TO BE ABLE
TO HELP FOLKS OUT. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
NELSON. I DON'T SEE ADDITIONAL
HANDS. I WILL CHIME IN ON THIS
ONE. I AM GOING TO BE
SUPPORTING THIS ITEM TODAY. I
DID RAISE CONCERNS. I'VE BEEN
WORKING WITH COUNCILMEMBER
NELSON OVER THE PAST TWO MONTHS
ON THIS ITEM. I THINK IN SEARCH
OF COMMON GROUND, THERE IS AN
INTEREST IN REDUCING BARRIERS
WHEN SOMEONE NEEDS ACCESS TO
TREATMENT. TO THE DEGREE THAT
THIS CAN OFFER ADDITIONAL
ACCESS TO TREATMENT -- I HAVE
A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS AND THOSE
QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS I AM
HOPING THAT THE SPONSOR WILL
BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO TRACK
DOWN IN TERMS OF IMPLEMENTATION
AND OPERATION OF THIS. I THINK
THIS DOES PUT THE CITY IN A
VERY NEW POSITION TO BE A
PAYOR OF SERVICES. REIMBURSING
SERVICES THAT WE HAVE NOT
SERVED IN BEFORE. IT ALMOST
MAKES US A PRIVATE PAYER OR
THIRD-PARTY ADMINISTRATOR OF
FUNDS FOR DIRECT RECOVERY
SERVICES AND I AM HOPEFUL THAT
THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN
MADE ABOUT HOW THIS WILL NOT
TAKE FROM OTHER AREAS OF HSD
ARE ACCURATE. THAT IT DOES NOT
NEED ADDITIONAL STAFFING AND
THIS WILL RESULT IN A SIMPLE
INVOICE PROCESS WITHIN HSD,
THOUGH I AM CAUTIOUS ABOUT THAT
OPTIMISM. THAT SAID, IF IT CAN
REDUCE BARRIERS TO GETTING
PEOPLE INTO TREATMENT, I WILL
BE SUPPORTIVE OF IT. MY HOPE IS
THAT IN FUTURE CONVERSATIONS
BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE
COUNTY, THERE CAN BE ADDITIONAL
WORK DONE TO WORK IN
PARTNERSHIP WITH KING COUNTY
PUBLIC HEALTH. AND I WILL
THANK AND GORMAN FOR THE WORK
THAT SHE DID. THAT THERE ARE
OTHER AREAS TO PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL SERVICES FOR
INPATIENT DETOX TREATMENT. IT
SOUNDS LIKE THERE ARE FEW AND
THE NEED FROM OUR COMMUNITY
THAT WE HEAR A LOT ABOUT IS
MUCH BIGGER ON THE OUTPATIENT
SIDE WITH A SPECIFIC REASON.
THERE IS A NEED FOR ADDITIONAL
SERVICES AND THE ADDITIONAL
FUNDING NEED IS THERE. AS IT
GETS STOOD UP MY HOPE IS THAT
THIS IS DONE IN PARTNERSHIP
WITH KING COUNTY AS WE THINK
ABOUT OPERATIONALIZING THIS AND
ACHIEVING GREATER EFFICIENCIES
FROM THE DEPLOYMENT OF THIS
PILOT. AND FINALLY I THANK
YOU, COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, FOR
THE SUBSEQUENT CONVERSATIONS
WE HAD. WHEN WE INITIALLY
CHATTED IT DID NOT SOUND LIKE
THERE WAS MUCH STAKEHOLDER
ENGAGEMENT. THE REVISED PROCESS
HAS BEEN OUTLINED AND EVOLVED
OVER THE LAST TWO MONTHS AND
NOW YOU HAVE A HANDFUL. I WOULD
VENTURE TO SAY, HALF A DOZEN,
A DOZEN ENTITIES THAT HAVE
EXPRESSED SUPPORT, SO THAT IS
EXCITING AND I HOPE THOSE
FUTURE RELATIONSHIPS RESULT IN
INFORMING THE EVOLUTION OF
THIS CONCEPT AS DEPLOYED.
BECAUSE ENGAGING DIRECTLY WITH
PROVIDERS WHO HAVE A DIRECT
EXPERIENCE. WHETHER A HUMAN
SERVICES PROVIDER OR A
FIREFIGHTER. IF THIS CAN HELP
WITH THAT ALONG WITH
SUPPORTING CENTERS, ALONG WITH
ANY OF THE INVESTMENT THAT
PUBLIC HEALTH IS ABLE TO
CONTINUE TO SEND GIVEN THE
REVENUE CRISIS AS WELL IS ALL
ABOUT VALUE ADDED. SO I WILL BE
SUPPORTING THIS TODAY AND LOOK
FORWARD TO HEARING MORE ABOUT
THIS ITEM.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ANYTHING ELSE? THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER. MADAM CLERK,
WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
ON THE ADOPTION OF ITEM 114,
HSD-813-B-2?
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> YES.
>> NINE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES.
AMENDMENT ITEM NUMBER 114
CARRIES. LET'S CONTINUE THIS
CONVERSATION WITH ITEM NUMBER
115.
>> 115, HSD-813S-A-2, THIS IS
THE STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE
INTENT THAT RIDES ALONGSIDE THE
PREVIOUS ACTION. TO PROVIDE
REPORTS RELATED TO FUNDING FOR
SUBSTANCE USE DISORDER. THIS IS
ALSO SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, JOINED BY
COUNCILMEMBERS PEDERSEN AND
STRAUSS.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO MOVE YOUR
AMENDMENT?
>> YES, I MOVE COUNCIL BILL
120708 AMENDMENT 114 --
>> MOVED AND SECONDED AND YOU
ARE RECOGNIZED TO SPEAK TO THE
AMENDMENT.
>> THANKS. BASICALLY BECAUSE
THIS IS A PILOT, WE NEED TO
FIND OUT HOW WELL IT WORKS.
FIRST OF ALL, THIS SLIDE
REQUESTS BY AUGUST 1, 2024,
HSD REPORTS ON THE BALANCE OF
FUNDING ALLOCATED AND THE
NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE
REFERRED TO TREATMENT
ACCORDING TO THE CBA RUBRIC AND
DEFINITIONS AND THE NUMBER OF
INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE COMPLETED
TREATMENT TO DATE. IN OTHER
WORDS, WE NEED TO TRACK THE
BALANCE ON GOING BECAUSE WE
DON'T WANT TO RUN OUT AND STILL
HAVE SERVICE PROVIDERS TRYING
TO GET TREATMENT. THAT IS A
BASIC BOOKKEEPING
RESPONSIBILITY AND I WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE
UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE NOT
ASKING FOR PRIVATE INFORMATION
ABOUT HOW PEOPLE GET IN
TREATMENT OR ANYTHING LIKE
THAT. WE JUST WANT A SENSE OF
THE NUMBERS OF HOW MANY PEOPLE
WERE REFERRED AND WHICH
ORGANIZATIONS DID SO. THAT IS
THE BASIC SORT OF TECHNICAL
INFORMATION THAT THIS SLIDE
REQUESTS AND HSD SHOULD ALSO
CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING
INFORMATION. AS I NOTED BEFORE
IN RESPONSE TO COUNCIL
PRESIDENT JUAREZ'S WISHES, THE
LANGUAGE SAYS THAT ENGAGEMENT
WITH TRIBAL AND INDIGENOUS LED
ORGANIZATIONS TO IDENTIFY
OPPORTUNITIES FOR FUTURE
COORDINATION REGARDING THE
PROVISION OF TREATMENT AND A
DESCRIPTION OF THE OUTCOMES OF
THAT ENGAGEMENT. THERE ARE
OTHER THINGS IN HERE THAT YOU
CAN READ ON YOUR OWN, BUT
BASICALLY THIS IS A TYPICAL
SLIDE, ASKING FOR BASIC
REPORTING. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. ARE THERE
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON THIS?
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD. I WILL BE VOTING YES
ON THIS. AND RELATIVE TO THE
EDITORIAL BOARD ON THIS
CONCEPT, THIS IS EXACTLY THE
TYPE OF INVESTMENT I THOUGHT
WAS NECESSARY PRIOR TO THE
PASSAGE OF THE ORDINANCE TO
ENSURE THERE ARE PLACES TO
BRING PEOPLE, THAT THERE ARE
SUFFICIENT PLACES. IT WOULD
HAVE BEEN AN IMPORTANT
INVESTMENT PRIOR TO THE PASSAGE
OF THAT AND I AM HAPPY TO
SUPPORT THE STATEMENT OF
LEGISLATIVE INTENT HERE THAT
WOULD INFORM THE FUTURE
EVOLUTION OF THE POLICY AS
DESCRIBED IN THE AMENDMENT.
SEEING NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS,
MADAM CLERK, WILL YOU PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL ON THE ADOPTION
OF ITEM 115, HSD-813S-A-2?
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> YES.
>> CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
>> AYE.
>> THANK YOU, THE MOTION
CARRIES AND AMENDMENT 115 IS
ADOPTED. MOVING ON,
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, WE HAVE
TWO AMENDMENTS THAT ARE YOURS.
I THINK THEY ARE MUTUALLY
EXCLUSIVE, BUT MAYBE I CAN ASK
YOU IF YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO
ASK CENTRAL STAFF TO T THEM UP
TOGETHER BEFORE WE MAKE A
MOTION?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. THEY ARE
MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE, WHICH WAS
ALSO MY TEAM NAME --
>> IF YOU WANT TO T THEM BOTH
UP AT THE SAME TIME, THAT IS
PROBABLY THE EASIEST BECAUSE IF
ONE GOES, THE OTHER DOES NOT
NEED TO GO.
>> WE WILL TURN TO CENTRAL
STAFF TO WALK US THROUGH
AMENDMENTS 116 AND 117.
>> GREAT, THOSE ITEMS ARE
SDOT-006-C-1 OR SDOT-006-D-1.
BOTH ITEMS ARE PROVIDING
FUNDING FOR THE SAME PURPOSE.
IN BOTH CASES IT WOULD BE
PROVIDING $250,000 TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FOR THE BALLARD AVENUE CAFE
STREET AND BREWERY DISTRICT
IMPROVEMENTS. SDOT-006-C-1
WOULD BE FUNDED BY REDUCING A
$100,000 GENERAL FUND
CONTRIBUTION TO THE EMERGENCY
FUND AND IT USES FUNDS THAT
WERE FREED UP IN THE YEAR-END
SUPPLEMENTAL THROUGH
UNDERSPEND IN THE MAYOR'S
OFFICE. THAT WOULD ADD A TOTAL
OF $250,000 TO THE SDOT 2024
BUDGET FOR THIS PURPOSE. THE
DISTINCTION BETWEEN OPTION C
AND OPTION D IS OPTION D IS
ALSO ADDING THAT $150,000 AND
THE REMAINING WOULD BE
IMPOSING A PROVISO ON THE
EXISTING BASE BUDGET FOR SDOT
IN THE URBAN PLANNING CATEGORY.
>> EXCELLENT. COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS, YOU HAVE TWO
AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD FUND THE
SAME BODY OF WORK. I AM HAPPY
TO TURN IT TO YOU TO DESCRIBE
IT OR IF YOU HAVE ONE THAT IS
YOUR PREFERENCE, YOU ARE
WELCOME TO IDENTIFY THAT ONE
AND WE COULD START WITH THAT
ONE. OBVIOUSLY I THINK WE'VE
HAD A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT MY
CONCERNS AROUND THE EMERGENCY
RESERVE AND I AM IN FAVOR OF
THE ALTERNATIVE YOU OFFERED.
SO I WILL LEAVE IT UP TO YOU IF
YOU STILL WANT TO DO A
WALK-THROUGH'S ON C, BUT -- I
WILL TURN IT TO YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I AM STILL
GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH C,
FIRST, AND IF THAT FAILS THE
MAJORITY VOTE, THEN WE CAN MOVE
ON TO THE PROVISO, WHICH IS
OPTION B. OR, D, I SHOULD SAY,
SORRY. COLLEAGUES, AS I SPOKE
THIS MORNING ABOUT THIS ITEM,
THIS WAS AN ITEM WHERE THERE
ARE CANDIDLY $1 MILLION IN
CHANGES AND FIXES THAT COULD BE
MADE. THIS REQUEST IS FOR
$250,000, WHICH IS BELOW THE
BASE MINIMUM ABILITY THAT I
THINK WE CAN STRETCH EVERY
DOLLAR AS FAR AS POSSIBLE AND
NOT CUT CORNERS, BUT PATCH
OVER SOME OF THESE POTHOLES IN
A WAY THAT WE CAN STILL
ACCOMPLISH THE GOAL. THE GOAL
OF THIS, BECAUSE COLLEAGUES WE
HAVE FUNDED THIS WORK OVER THE
LAST NUMBER OF YEARS, IS TO
FINALIZE THE INTERIM CHANGES ON
BALLARD AVENUE, WHICH IS THE
CAFE STREET PILOT AND
INCORPORATE DESIGN STANDARDS
INTO THE STREETS ILLUSTRATED,
SO THAT IT CAN BE REPLICATED
MORE EASILY IN OTHER PLACES.
THIS IS BEEN A PILOT BECAUSE
THIS IS NOT A THROUGH STREET.
IT ENDS AT THE BALLARD BRIDGE
AND MARKET STREET AND IS ALSO
IN A COMMERCIAL AREA. SO WE
HAVE BEEN ABLE TO CHANGE IT
FROM A TWO DIRECTIONAL STREET
WAY ONE DIRECTIONAL STREET. WE
ARE IN THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW AS
WE SPEAK OF ADDING A LANE
DEDICATED FOR PEOPLE IN THE
SPACE. WE HAVE ALSO MADE
CHANGES TO ALLOW DELIVERY,
PICK UP AND DROP OFF AND
ADDITIONAL PARKING IN AND
AROUND BALLARD AVENUE. THIS
ITERATIVE PROJECT THAT HAS
CREATED A PEOPLE LANE IS ONE
STEP AWAY FROM CREATING THAT
CAFE STREET THAT THEN ALLOWS
US TO INCORPORATE IN THE
STREETS ILLUSTRATED. SO WE ARE
ALSO BRINGING IN ITEMS THAT
INCREASE INVESTMENT IN SAFETY
AND INDUSTRIAL AREAS. YES,
BALLARD AVENUE IS STILL AN
INDUSTRIAL STREET IN PLACES AND
A HISTORIC STREET IN OTHERS.
WHILE THERE IS NOT A LOT OF
THROUGH TRAFFIC, WHICH MADE IT
IDEAL FOR A PILOT, IT ALSO HAD
INCREDIBLE CHALLENGES. WHICH IS
IN SOME PLACES IT IS
INDUSTRIAL ZONED. ONE BLOCK
FROM THE INDUSTRIAL ZONE. ONE
BLOCK FROM THE COMMERCIAL
DISTRICT. IT IS IN A HISTORIC
DISTRICT, SO THERE IS JUST SO
MUCH WORK THAT HAS GONE INTO
THIS. THE WHOLE REASON I HAVE
BEEN DOING THIS WORK IS SO THAT
WE CAN HAVE IT ACROSS THE CITY
AND SDOT CAN COME OUT AND SHOW
THE COMMUNITY THE PLAN FOR
WHAT THE CAFE STREET IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD LOOK LIKE,
RATHER THAN REACTING TO A
STATEMENT LIKE, OR THEIR CARS?
ALL OF THE WORRIES THAT PEOPLE
HAVE ABOUT MAKING CHANGES LIKE
THIS, WE HAVE TAKEN THE TIME
TO MAKE SURE WE ARE GETTING IT
RIGHT AND THIS BUDGET ITEM IS
FINALIZING IT SO WE CAN TURN
THIS PILOT INTO A PROGRAM
PROJECT. WITH THAT, THE
$100,000 COMES FROM THE
EMERGENCY RESERVES AND OPTION
D IS A PROVISO IN THE EXISTING
BUDGET, WHICH I BELIEVE WAS
SAID YESTERDAY IS $100,000 OUT
OF A $4 MILLION LINE ITEM.
THEY WERE GOING BACK AND
FORTH. WITH THAT, DO YOU WANT
ME TO MOVE THE AMENDMENT? DID I
TALK TOO MUCH?
>> IT'S OKAY. WE DID IT A
LITTLE BIT IN REVERSE, BUT THAT
IS FINE. I THINK IT GIVES THE
SENSE OF THE FUNDING GOAL AND
NOW THE QUESTION IS THE FUNDING
SOURCE. IF YOU WOULD STILL LIKE
TO MOVE WITH C, YOU ARE
WELCOME TO DO SO.
>> GREAT, THEN I AMEND -- THEN
I MOVED TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL
120708 -- IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS?
>> NO, THANK YOU.
>> OKAY, COUNCILMEMBER MORALES,
PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU. FIRST I WANT TO
THANK COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
THIS IS AN IDEA WE'VE BEEN
TALKING A LOT ABOUT IN MY
DISTRICT. FOLKS REALLY WANT
TO SEE THIS KIND OF IDEA COME
TO BE. SO I APPRECIATE THE WORK
THAT HAS HAPPENED TO GET US
THIS FAR AND REALLY WANT TO SEE
THE IDEA OF, YOU KNOW,
INCLUDING THIS AS PART OF OUR
STREETS ILLUSTRATED DESIGN
MANUAL. THAT SAID, I MENTIONED
TO COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS
EARLIER TODAY THE IDEA OF THIS
COMING OUT OF THE EMERGENCY
FUND IS SOMETHING I AM
STRUGGLING WITH. PARTICULARLY
GIVEN THE CRISIS THAT WE KNOW
IS COMING, THAT WE ARE ALREADY
IN AND WILL BE LOOKING AT NEXT
YEAR. SO I REALLY CAN'T SUPPORT
THE EMERGENCY FUND AS THE
SOURCE FOR THIS, BUT I DO WANT
TO LET COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS
KNOW, I AM REALLY COMMITTED TO
WORKING TOGETHER ON A
LEGISLATIVE APPROACH TO BE
ABLE TO DO THIS NEXT YEAR AND
WOULD ALSO SUPPORT PERHAPS AN
ONCOMING TRANSPORTATION LEVY
TO SECURE FUNDING THAT COULD
REALLY MAKE CAFE STREETS A
REALITY ACROSS THE CITY. WE
WILL BE SUPPORTING THE NEXT
AMENDMENT IF THIS ONE FAILS.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
MY THOUGHTS ARE EXACTLY THOSE
OF COUNCILMEMBER MORALES. I
WILL BE SUPPORTING THE NEXT
ITEM IF THAT IS WHAT IT COMES
TO. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN. ARE THERE ANY
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? I WILL
SAY THAT MY COMMENTS ARE THE
EXACT SAME AS COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN AND COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES'S. I THINK THERE IS
SUPPORT FOR THE INVESTMENT AND
VISION ARTICULATED BY THE
SPONSOR. CLEARLY SUPPORT IN
THE PAST FOR THE CORRIDOR AND
THE VISION OF ACTIVATING AND
ENCOURAGING PATRONAGE AT LOCAL
SMALL BUSINESSES AND TO
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS'S POINT
YESTERDAY, I THINK IT IS A
DESTINATION FOR PEOPLE AROUND
THE CITY TO HAVE A GLOBAL
IMPACT OR OPPORTUNITY TO
PROVIDE AN OPTION FOR PEOPLE
TO COME TO THIS CORRIDOR,
WHETHER OR NOT YOU LIVE THERE,
SO I THINK IT IS A BENEFIT TO
THE CITY. MY PREFERENCE IS THAT
WE DO NOT TOUCH THE EMERGENCY
RESERVES. IT IS TEMPTING AND I
THOUGHT ABOUT IT A FEW TIMES. I
EVEN DIPPED INTO IT ONCE. IT
IS A METHOD THAT ALLOWS US TO
-- TO PREVENT US FROM DIPPING
INTO THE EMERGENCY RESERVES.
WE HAVE BEEN REALLY, REALLY
TRYING TO PROVIDE A JOINT
EFFORT TO NOT DIP INTO THE
RESERVES OR THE EMERGENCY FUND
AT ALL. SO, GIVEN THAT THE
PROVISO, I THINK, IS A VIABLE
PATH, I FEEL ALLEVIATED TO
KNOW THAT THE LARGER SCOPE OF
THE FUNDING POOL AND THAT THE
PROVISO IS A MINIMAL AMOUNT
AND THAT COULD BE A REALLY
EFFECTIVE WAY TO FUND THIS. SO
IF THE VOTE BEFORE US ON THIS
ITEM -- I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE
FOLKS TO VOTE YES ON 6 D. ANY
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON THIS?
>> NO.
>> OKAY, GREAT.
>> LET'S GO FORTH AND VOTE
THEN. MADAM CLERK CAN YOU
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE
ADOPTION OF ITEM --
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
>> EXCUSE ME. ABSTAIN.
>> ABSTAIN, THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> YES.
>> CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
>> NO.
>> THREE IN FAVOR, FIVE
OPPOSED, AND ONE ABSTENTION.
>> THANK YOU, VERY MUCH. I
THINK THERE WERE TWO
ABSTENTIONS. I THINK IT WAS
THREE IN FAVOR, FOR OPPOSED,
TWO ABSTENTIONS, IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> I HAD ONE ABSTENTION.
>> I NOTED COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD AND COUNCILMEMBER
NELSON AS ABSTAINING.
>> I HEARD --
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD, HOW
DO YOU VOTE?
>> I ABSTAINED.
>> THANK YOU.
>> OKAY, APOLOGIES.
>> THAT'S OKAY. SO, THREE IN
FAVOR, FOUR OPPOSED, TWO
ABSTENTIONS.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK. THE
AMENDMENT DOES NOT ADVANCE, BUT
LUCKILY WE HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO MOVE THE AMENDMENT?
>> YES, THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES.
I HOPE TO EARN YOUR SUPPORT ON
THE SAME AMENDMENT WITH A
SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT SOURCE. I
MOVE SDOT-006-D-1 --
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS? HEARING NONE, MADAM
CLERK WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL DAY SORRY, EXCUSE ME.
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON. PLEASE
GO AHEAD.
>> I HAVE TO ADMIT THAT I
PAUSED THERE TO FIGURE OUT MY
VOTE, BECAUSE I WAS STRUGGLING
TO TRACK THE DIFFERENCES
BETWEEN THE TWO AND JUST
LANDED ON ABSTAINING, BECAUSE
OF THE EMERGENCY FUND ISSUE,
BUT I WANTED TO VOICE MY STRONG
SUPPORT TO THIS AND THANK YOU
VERY MUCH FOR BRINGING IT
FORWARD.
>> ALL RIGHT, COUNCILMEMBER. I
WOULD JUST WANT TO ASSURE YOU
THAT -- WHAT DID YOU SAY? IF
YOU ARE PLANNING ON PUTTING US
ON THAT LAST ONE, IT WOULD
NOT HAVE MATTERED, BECAUSE A
SPLIT VOTE STILL MAKES THE
AMENDMENT FAILED, SO AMENDMENT
D IS STILL APPROPRIATE TO PUT
IN FRONT OF US. THANK YOU.
SORRY. I WAS CHECKING ON THE
DOOR. YOU MIGHT'VE HEARD THE
DOORBELL RING. LET'S GO AHEAD,
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, UNLESS
YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS ON THE ITEM IN FRONT
OF US.
>> NO FURTHER COMMENTS.
>> MADAM CLERK, WOULD YOU
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE
ADOPTION OF ITEM 117?
>> SORRY, COUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA, I DON'T BELIEVE IT
WAS MOVED YET. I BELIEVE
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS DID
DISCUSS IT, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE
IT HAS BEEN MOVED AT THIS
POINT.
>> I WILL DO IT AGAIN.
>> IT WAS MOVED.
>> I THINK WE HAD PEDERSEN AND
HERBOLD SECOND THE SECOND
ONE.
>> FOR THE RECORD,
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS MOVED IT
AND COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN WAS
THE FIRST TO COME OFF TO
SECOND IT.
>> WE BOTH MISSED IT GETTING
MOVED, SO, SORRY.
>> NO PROBLEM. WE ARE GETTING
TOWARD THE END, FOLKS, I
PROMISE. LET'S KEEP GOING.
MADAM CLERK, IF YOU COULD
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE
ADOPTION OF ITEM NUMBER 117.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> YES.
>> CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
>> AYE.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES AND
AMENDMENT ITEM 117 IS ADOPTED.
MOVING ON, RESOLUTION ITEM 118.
EXCUSE ME, 118 IS NO LONGER IN
FRONT OF US, CORRECT, BECAUSE
THE FUNDING SOURCE DID NOT PASS
THIS MORNING?
>> IT PASSED.
>> IT DID PASS.
>> AGAINST MY OBJECTION, BUT
THAT IS OKAY. EXCUSE ME,
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN. I
HAVE REVISIONIST HISTORY ON
THAT ONE AND IT HAS ONLY BEEN A
FEW HOURS. PLEASE GO AHEAD.
ALY.
>> OKAY, SORRY. ITEM 118,
SDOT-101-A-3 WOULD ADD $1.5
MILLION OF GENERAL FUND AND
$80,000 EXCISE TAX TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION'S
STRUCTURES MAJOR MAINTENANCE
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
AND ADD $480,000 FOR EXPANSION
OF THE SCHOOL'S OWN CAMERA
PROGRAM. THIS IS FUNDED BY
REDUCING THE CONTRIBUTION TO
THE RETIREMENT SYSTEM. TO THE
ACTUARIAL RATE. AS DISCUSSED
PREVIOUSLY, THE AMENDMENT TO
THE RESOLUTION THAT ESTABLISHES
THAT RATE THAT SUPPORTS THE
SPENDING WAS PASSED BY
COMMITTEE EARLIER THIS MORNING
OR RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WOULD
YOU LIKE TO MOVE YOUR
AMENDMENT?
>> THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES, I
MOVED TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL
120708 AS PRESENTED ON
SDOT-101-A-3.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED. IS THERE
A SECOND? I BELIEVE I HEARD A
SECOND FROM COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, COUNCILMEMBERS. PLEASE GO
AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> ICCU, CHAIR, AND THANK YOU
FOR AMENDING AND APPROVING
RESOLUTION 32114 EARLIER
TODAY. THAT EARLIER ACTION IS
LINKED TO THIS COUNCIL BUDGET
ACTION TO INVEST IN BRIDGE
MAINTENANCE AND SCHOOL ZONE
TRAFFIC SAFETY. THANK YOU,
COSPONSORS OF THIS ACTION.
COUNCILMEMBERS HERBOLD, -- TO
BRING INVESTMENT UP TO THE BARE
MINIMUM RECOMMENDED BY OUR
CITY AUDITOR. THAT IS NOT ALL.
IT ALSO PROVIDES STARTUP COSTS
TOWARD THE PREVIOUS DIRECTION
LAST YEAR TO DOUBLE THE SCHOOL
ZONE TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERA
PROGRAM. WE ALREADY KNOW THE
BENEFITS OF THIS PEDESTRIAN
SAFETY TOOL, DISCOURAGING
SPEEDING, REMOVING THE NEED
FOR POLICE TO PURSUE SPEEDERS
AND OVERALL IMPROVING SAFETY
FOR SCHOOLCHILDREN WALKING AND
BIKING TO AND FROM THEIR
SCHOOL. COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED TO THOSE INVESTMENT
PRIORITIES AND THIS WOULD
ENABLE COUNCIL TO REITERATE
THEM TO ACTUALLY GET IT DONE.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN. IS THERE ANY
ADDITIONAL COMMENT?
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, PLEASE
GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU. VERY SIMILAR TO
MY COMMENTS EARLIER, I LOVE
EVERYTHING IN THIS AMENDMENT
AND THE FUNDING SOURCES GIVE ME
A LOT OF HEARTBURN. I THINK IT
IS DANGEROUS TO BE PLAYING
WITH THE CITY EMPLOYEES
RETIREMENT SYSTEM. I THINK
THAT IS VERY DANGEROUS FOR US
IN THE OUT YEARS AND AGAIN,
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I REALLY
SUPPORT. I WOULD LOVE TO
SUPPORT IT. THE FUNDING SOURCE
IS A PROBLEM FOR ME. THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN FOR
YOUR CONTINUED ADVOCACY.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS. SIMILARLY I AM GOING
TO CONTINUE TO VOTE NO AGAINST
THIS JUST BECAUSE OF THE
CONTINUED FUNDING SOURCE
CONCERN. I KNOW THAT THE
FUNDING SOURCE WAS DECIDED
EARLIER TODAY BUT I WILL AGAIN
REITERATE THAT THE LOWER RATE
HERE WILL REQUIRE AN INCREASE
FOR CONTRIBUTIONS IN FUTURE
YEARS TO ADJUST FOR THAT 2022
IMPACT THAT THE BOARD AND
ACTUARIES HAVE ALREADY
IDENTIFIED AND OUTLINED. SO I
AM GOING TO MAINTAIN THE
POSITION THAT I HAD FROM
ANALYSIS EARLIER AND AGAIN,
URGE US TO VOTE THIS DOWN SO
THAT WE COULD ENSURE THAT THE
FUNDING WAS STILL AVAILABLE
FOR INVESTMENT AND AGAIN,
CAUTION FOLKS FOR FUTURE YEARS
THAT THERE WILL BE A FISCAL
CLIFF FOR PAYMENTS INTO THE
FUND, THE RETIREMENT FUND, IF
WE CONTINUE TO LOWER IT.
CLEARLY I SUPPORT THE
INVESTMENT, BUT I ALSO HAVE
SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT WHETHER
OR NOT THE FUNDING WILL GET
DEPLOYED, GIVEN THAT WE DID NOT
IMPLEMENT THE CAMERAS -- I
HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER OR
NOT WE WILL BE ABLE TO
CONTINUE TO MAKE THE
INVESTMENTS OUTLINED HERE, SO I
WILL BE VOTING NO. ANY
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
>> MADAM CHAIR.
>> YES.
>> JUST A QUICK POINT OF ORDER.
MY NOTES REFLECT THIS MORNING
ON ITEM 17 THAT COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN PUT BEFORE US, MY
NOTES REFLECT THAT YOU AND
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT ABSTAINED.
>> I BELIEVE, COUNCILMEMBER,
YOU ARE REFERRING TO THE BOND
ISSUE. I DID ABSTAIN ON THAT
AND THAT WAS ITEM NUMBER 18.
>> OKAY.
>> I WILL DEFER TO THE CLERK
BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT ITEM NUMBER 17, WHICH THIS
WAS IN REGARDS TO, CORRECT?
EARLIER TODAY, ITEM NUMBER 17,
IS THE ONE THAT I
MISREMEMBERED.
>> OKAY.
>> CHAIR MOSQUEDA, WE CAN
CONFIRM WITH THE CLERKS. WE
ARE ALSO TRACKING VOTES AND
ALSO HAVE YOU NOTED AS
ABSTAINING FROM ITEMS 17 AND
18.
>> O, THEN I WILL RETAIN MY
VOTE AND ABSTAIN.
>> OKAY, I WILL TELL YOU WHY I
AM ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION,
BECAUSE BELIEVE IT OR NOT I
KEEP TRACK OF THIS SO I CAN
UNDERSTAND. BECAUSE I VOTED NO,
SO I WAS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND
THE RESOLUTION. IT PASSED, SO
NOW THIS AMENDMENT IS IN FRONT
OF US IN REGARDS TO THE
RESOLUTION THAT PASSED THIS
MORNING ON WHICH I VOTED NO
AND A COUPLE OTHER PEOPLE
ABSTAINED. I JUST WANT TO
CLARIFY THE RECORD ON THAT ONE.
>> MY NOTES, UNFORTUNATELY I
STARTED TAKING HANDWRITTEN
NOTES ON ITEM 18. CAN SOMEONE
PLEASE REMIND ME WHAT THE TOTAL
VOTE WAS ON ITEM 17?
>> CHAIR MOSQUEDA, THIS IS
LINDA. ON ITEM 18 I HAVE SEVEN
IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED, AND TO
ABSTAINED.
>> AND ITEM 17 I THINK WAS IN
QUESTION.
>> DID YOU WANT TO VOTE ON 17
ALSO?
>> YES PLEASE.
>> I HAVE FIVE IN FAVOR, TO
OPPOSED, AND TWO ABSTENTIONS.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK.
ITEM 17, WHICH RELATES TO THIS
ITEM, CORRECT?
>> YES, THERE WERE TWO VOTES.
12 AMEND IT AND THEN WE HAD TO
PASS IT, SO THERE WERE TWO
DIFFERENT VOTE COUNTS. I THINK
THE FINAL VOTE WAS WHAT THE
CLERK JUST SAID. BUT NOW THIS
IS ABOUT THE CBA TO SPEND THE
MONEY.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR
REMINDING ME, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, ABOUT THAT
ABSTENTION. EITHER IF I HAD
VOTED NO OR TO ABSTAIN, IT
STILL WOULD NOT HAVE CHANGED
THE OUTCOME OF THE VOTE ON ITEM
17 AND I DID RAISE OBJECTIONS
TO THE USE OF THE FUND SOURCE
AND GOING LOWER THAN THE
AGREED UPON CONTRIBUTION RATE.
SO I STILL HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT
THE ONGOING FUND SOURCE HERE AS
ARTICULATED -- BUT THANK YOU
FOR THE REMINDER ON THIS.
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT, DO YOU
HAVE A COMMENT?
>> YES, I THINK TO REITERATE I
BELIEVE WHAT HAPPENED IS WE
VOTED NO ON THE AMENDMENT BUT
ABSTAINED ON THE BILL AS A
WHOLE.
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> I THINK IT IS SIGNIFICANT
--
>> THANK YOU BOTH. AND ON THE
AMENDMENT IS WHERE I RAISED
CONCERNS AND THEN I ABSTAINED
ON THE OTHER. OKAY. AND I JUST
GOT A MESSAGE CONFIRMING THAT.
THIS IS FUN, ISN'T IT? WOULD
YOU LIKE TO ADD?
>> IF I MAY, CHAIR, IF PEOPLE
ARE DONE I CAN CLOSE IT OUT.
>> YOU CAN. I WILL JUST
REITERATE FOR THE KNOWLEDGE OF
THE BODY HERE, I WILL BE VOTING
NO ON THIS AMENDMENT. THANK
YOU. COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR MOSQUEDA
AND THANK YOU TO COUNCILMEMBERS
WHO HAVE, IN THE PAST,
SUPPORTED BRIDGE MAINTENANCE
AND SCHOOL ZONE SAFETY CAMERAS
AND THAT IS WHAT THIS CBA IS
DOING. IT IS ACCOMPLISHING
BOTH OF THOSE IN ONE BUDGET
ACTION AND JUST RESPOND, JUST
TO LIFT UP THE CENTRAL STAFF
MEMO FROM OCTOBER 11 ON THIS
TOPIC, USING THE EXPERT ACTUARY
RATE, QUOTE, THE CITY
RETIREMENT SYSTEM WOULD REMAIN
ON COURSE TO 100% FUNDED
STATUS. SO LET'S INVEST IN
MAINTENANCE AND THE SCHOOL ZONE
TRAFFIC SAFETY MEASURES, NOW
THAT WE ARE AT THIS POINT IN
THE PROCESS. IT IS REALLY
IMPORTANT TO ME FOR THE OVERALL
BUDGET. THANK YOU.
>> OKAY, MADAM CLERK, COULD YOU
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE
ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT 118?
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER 1025.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> ABSTAIN.
>> CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
>> NO.
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, THREE
OPPOSED, WITH ONE ABSTENTION.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK. THE
MOTION CARRIES AND AMENDMENT
118 SDOT-101-A-3 IS ADOPTED.
MOVING ON TO ITEM 119.
>> ITEM 119, SDOT-202-A-2
WOULD PROVISO $150,000 IN THE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A SIDEWALK
USING ALTERNATIVE CONSTRUCTION
METHODS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
NORTH 87th STREET FROM FIRST
AVENUE NORTHWEST TO PALATINE
AVENUE NORTH. THIS IS SPONSORED
BY COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED.
>> THANK YOU. I AM LOOKING TO
THE SIDE OF MY SCREEN, BECAUSE
I AM ACTUALLY COUNTING THE
BLOCKS THAT ARE CONNECTED
RIGHT NOW AND DON'T HAVE A
WHOLE CONNECTION BECAUSE THIS
ONE BLOCK DOES NOT HAVE ANY
SIDEWALKS ON IT. JUST ONE
SECOND. WE HAVE ONE, TWO,
THREE BLOCKS IN BETWEEN THIRD
AVENUE -- TWO OF THEM HAVE
SIDEWALKS. ONE OF THEM DOES
NOT. THIS IS THE ONE THAT DOES
NOT. COLLEAGUES, FOR COMPLETE
TRANSPARENCY HERE, THERE IS
AN ALLOCATION THAT WILL BE
COMING BEFORE US FOR THIS
BLOCK, WHERE THE PLAN IS TO
ADD A SIDEWALK HERE. WHAT I
HAVE DISCUSSED WITH THE OWNERS
OF THIS PROPERTY IS THAT I
WOULD BE ADDING AN ADDITIONAL
ITEM FOR THE SAME AMOUNT OF
MONEY IT WILL TAKE TO PUT IN
THE SIDEWALK ALTERNATIVE. WE
KNOW FROM PERMITTING AND
CONSTRUCTION TIMELINES THAT THE
LIKELIHOOD THAT THE SIDEWALK
WOULD BE PUT INTO PLACE WITHIN
FIVE YEARS IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY.
AS WELL AS ONE OF THE ASPECTS
OF THIS ALTERNATIVE SIDEWALK
THAT THE ADJACENT PROPERTY
OWNER NEEDS TO CREATE AN
INTERIM USE ON THEIR PROPERTY.
BETWEEN NOW AND CONSTRUCTION.
CURRENTLY IT IS A VACANT LOT
THAT IS UNDERUTILIZED BY THE
NEIGHBORHOOD. SO THERE ARE A
COUPLE OF MOVING PIECES TO
THIS. ONE IS THAT THE VACANT
LOT HAS TO BE PUBLICLY
ACCESSIBLE. NUMBER TWO, ANY
FUNDS FROM THE CITY THAT ARE
USED TO CREATE AN INTERIM
SIDEWALK USING AN ALTERNATIVE
WILL THEN BE ADDED ON TO THE
ALLEY VACATION. SOMETHING THAT
IS ALSO INTERESTING, THE LAST
BIT ABOUT FUN SIDEWALKS IS
THAT THE DRAINAGE IS ALREADY
IN PLACE ON THIS BLOCK. THAT
IS WHY IT IS SUCH A LOW FIGURE
FOR BEING ABLE TO CREATE AN
ENTIRE BLOCK OF SIDEWALK.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS. I THINK WE STILL NEED
TO MOVE THE AMENDMENT.
>> SORRY ABOUT THAT, I DIDN'T
READ MY SCRIPT, I JUST STARTED
TALKING. I MOVED COUNCIL BILL
120708 AS PRESENTED ON
SDOT-202-A-2. IS THERE A
SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> MOVED AND SECONDED.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, DO YOU
HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD
LIKE TO ADD?
>> I WOULD LOVE TO EARN YOUR
SUPPORT ON THIS.
>> IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS?
WELL LET ME ASK ONE MORE
QUESTION. THE SAME ANALYSIS
APPLIES IN TERMS OF THE
UNIVERSE OF SPD DOLLARS. THE
PROVISO FOR THIS SPECIFIC
SECTOR, NO IMPACT ON -- NO
FEEDBACK ON WHAT THE IMPACT
WOULD BE AT THIS JUNCTURE?
>> I DON'T REMEMBER, BUT AT THE
END OF THE DAY, THIS MONEY WILL
BE COMING BACK TO THE CITY
THROUGH ADDITIONAL PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS THAT WILL BE
REQUIRED. WHETHER IT IS
ADDITIONAL SIDEWALKS ELSEWHERE
OR --
>> OKAY, THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. SEEING
NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, MADAM
CLERK WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL ON THE ADOPTION OF ITEM
108 TEEN --
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> YES.
>> CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
>> AYE.
>> SEVEN IN FAVOR WITH ONE
ABSTENTION.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE
MOTION CARRIES AND THE
AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED. MOVING ON
TO ITEM 120.
>> ITEM 120 IS SPD-002-A-2.
THIS WOULD ADD $4.5 MILLION
GENERAL FUND TO THE SEATTLE
POLICE DEPARTMENT BUDGET FOR
STAFFING PREMIUM AND TO
IMPLEMENT A MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING WITH THE SEATTLE
POLICE OFFICERS KILLED AND
PLACE A PROVISO. THIS WAS HELD
IN PLANNING RESERVES FOR THIS
PURPOSE. THIS IS SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD, JOINED
BY COUNCILMEMBERS LEWIS AND
COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD, YOU
ARE RECOGNIZED TO MOVE THE
AMENDMENT.
>> I MOVED COUNCIL BILL 120708
SPD-200-A-2.
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
SPEAK TO YOUR AMENDMENT?
>> SURE, I WOULD START FOR
CLARIFICATION'S SAKE, BECAUSE
OF SOME OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT
WE HEARD IN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THIS IS NOT THE NEW SPOT
CONTRACT. THAT IS A BODY OF
WORK THAT IS STILL BEING
NEGOTIATED. THIS IS A SIDE MOU
TO FULFILL SEPARATE
OBJECTIVES, SPECIFICALLY THE
OBJECTIVES OF ALLOWING FOR THE
COMMUNITY RESPONDER PROGRAM,
ALLOWING FOR THE PARKS RANGERS
TO NOT ONLY BE IN DOWNTOWN
PARKS. AND ALSO ALLOWING FOR,
HOPEFULLY IN TIME, MORE
SPECIAL EVENTS. SO, THE MOU
SUPPORTS THE LAUNCH OF THE DUAL
DISPATCH PROGRAM. AND AS I
MENTIONED YESTERDAY, I THINK IT
IS REALLY IMPORTANT, TO PUT
THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE IN THE
MOU. IT SAYS OFFICERS CAN
CLEAR THE SCENE AS THEY
DETERMINE TO BE APPROPRIATE.
AND THIS IS THE LANGUAGE. IT
SAYS, IT DOESN'T SAY THAT THEY
DON'T NEED TO BE PRESENT AT THE
SCENE. I AM CONFIRMED THAT IS
WHAT THE MOU LANGUAGE MEANS. IT
SAYS THAT OFFICERS CAN CLEAR
THE SCENE AS THEY DETERMINE TO
BE APPROPRIATE. THE LANGUAGE,
AS THEY DETERMINE TO BE
APPROPRIATE, MEANS THAT THEY
CAN CLEAR THE SCENE WITHOUT
PHYSICALLY BEING THERE. SO
SPD DOES NOT NEED TO PHYSICALLY
BE PRESENT IN ORDER FOR THE
COMMUNITY RESPONDER TO BEGIN
THEIR WORK. AS I MENTIONED THE
RANGERS I THINK SHARE A VISION
TO ENSURE THEY ARE SERVING IN
PARKS ALL ACROSS THE CITY AND
PRIOR TO THIS MOU THERE WAS A
GEOGRAPHIC LIMITATION IN THE
CONTRACT THAT ONLY ALLOWED
PARK RANGERS TO BE DEPLOYED IN
DOWNTOWN PARKS. SO, GIVEN THE
FACT THAT THE COUNCIL HAS USED
THE PARK DISTRICT RENEWAL TO
SIGNIFICANTLY EXPAND THE PARK,
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
ADDITIONAL PARK RANGERS BE
DEPLOYED THROUGHOUT THE CITY
AND LASTLY THE CITYWIDE
OFFICER AVAILABILITY TO
STRENGTHEN STAFFING AT SPECIAL
EVENTS. THE PROPOSAL IS TO USE
A NEW SPECIAL EVENT STAFFING
SYSTEM THAT ALLOWS OFFICERS TO
VOLUNTEER TO STAFF SPECIAL
EVENTS, RATHER THAN DRAFTING
OFFICERS TO STAFF SPECIAL
EVENTS. THIS CURRENT APPROACH
FOR FILLING VACANT POSITIONS
RELIES ON THIS DRAFT SYSTEM,
WHICH HAS AN IMPACT ON OFFICER
MORALE, DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND
CITYWIDE STAFFING AND AGAIN,
THERE IS LANGUAGE IN THE MOU
THAT HAS ALLOWED MORE
FLEXIBILITY IN MAKING A
DETERMINATION OF WHEN OFFICERS
NEED TO BE USED, VERSUS WHEN
A SWORN, UNSWORN CIVILIAN STAFF
CAN BE USED. PREVIOUSLY IN
THE CONTRACT THERE WAS LANGUAGE
THAT WAS VERY LIMITING TO THE
ABILITY OF SPD TO USE
NON-SWORN OFFICERS. THIS
ACCOMPLISHES OUR GOAL OF
CREATING GREATER FLEXIBILITY
SO THAT WE DON'T ALWAYS HAVE TO
BE USING SWORN OFFICERS,
RECOGNIZING THAT THAT MEANS
THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE THE
HIRING OF MORE CIVILIANS TO
FILL THAT GOAL, BUT AGAIN I
THINK THIS IS A SHARED GOAL --
POLICE DEPARTMENT RESPONSES.
THANK YOU.
>> ARE THERE ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS? ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS? COUNCILMEMBER
SAWANT.
>> THANK YOU. I WILL BE VOTING
NO ON THE AMENDMENT FOR THE
$4.5 MILLION IN MOU WITH THE
POLICE OFFICERS KILLED WHICH
GIVES EXTRA MONEY AND OVERTIME
-- MOST CONCERNING, THIS DOES
NOT INCLUDE ANY AGREEMENT ON
ACCOUNTABILITY. THE POLITICAL
ESTABLISHMENT GOES AND SIGNS
AND MOU WITHOUT PROVIDING THE
MONEY FIRST AND ONLY THEN
TRYING TO NEGOTIATE, SAYING
THEY WOULD NEGOTIATE. IN
REALITY IT NEVER HAPPENS AND
THEY SAY THAT THEY COULD NOT
GET AN AGREEMENT. SO I DO NOT
THINK THAT IS THE CORRECT
APPROACH AND I WILL BE VOTING
NO, THANK YOU.
>> ARE THERE ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, I
WILL ALSO MAKE SOME COMMENTS,
THEN. COLLEAGUES. I NO LONGER
AM ON THE LABOR RELATIONS
POLICY COMMITTEE, BECAUSE I
HAVE A CONCERN AROUND WANTING
TO ENSURE THAT THE WHOLE SCOPE
OF ALL OF THE CONTRACTS IN
FRONT OF US ARE INCLUDED AND
THAT WE UNDERSTAND THE UNIVERSE
OF CONTRACTS BEING NEGOTIATED.
BEFORE I CONTINUE,
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD, DID YOU
HAVE SOME COMMENTS YOU WOULD
LIKE TO OFFER?
>> I WOULD LIKE TO FOLLOW YOU
DEPENDING ON WHAT IT IS YOU
SAY.
>> OKAY, I WILL COME TO YOU AS
THE FINAL SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM.
I WANT TO REITERATE THAT AS
THE BUDGET CHAIR I THINK IT IS
IMPORTANT THAT WE LOOK AT THE
FULL SCOPE OF THE CONTRACTS IN
FRONT OF THE COUNCIL THAT HAVE
YET TO BE VOTED ON. WE DO NOT
HAVE THE CONTRACT IN FRONT OF
US. THIS IS A TEMPORARY END
PARTIAL DEPLOYMENT. WE
DEFINITELY DON'T HAVE THE
COALITION OF CITY UNION
CONTRACTS, WHICH WE HAVE HEARD
MUCH ABOUT OVER THE PAST FEW
MONTHS, AND MUCH CONCERN OVER
THE NEED TO ENSURE THAT THAT
CONTRACT HELPS RECOGNIZE
EMPLOYEES FOR LIVING IN THIS
REGION AND ALSO THE WORK THEY
HAVE DONE DURING THE COVID
CRISIS AND THE ONGOING
PANDEMIC IMPACT, THE IMPACT AND
THE NEED TO CONTINUE TO SERVE
A GROWING POPULATION AND THE
GROWING NEEDS OF THAT
COMMUNITY. IT WARRANTS A
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT INTO OUR
CITY WORKERS. AS THE BUDGET
CHAIR, ONE OF MY CONCERNS IS
LOOKING AT THE MACRO, WHETHER
OR NOT ALL OF THE CONTRACTS IN
FRONT OF US ARE GOING TO YIELD
A NUMBER THAT THE CITY COULD
ACCURATELY FULFILL AND PART OF
MY CONCERN IS THIS DISCUSSION
AROUND HAVING A PARTIAL
AGREEMENT IN FRONT OF US.
NUMBER ONE ON BUDGET, I HAVE
CONCERNS, AS THE BUDGET CHAIR.
NUMBER TWO ON STRATEGY. I AM
GOING TO BE VOTING AGAINST THIS
TODAY BECAUSE I DO NOT BELIEVE
THIS IS A STRATEGIC WAY TO
ENSURE FOR MORE OF THE
ACCOUNTABILITY PROVISIONS WE
ALL WENT TO SEE AND I KNOW HAVE
BEEN WORKED ON VERY HARD. WE
WANT TO SEE THOSE PROVISIONS GO
INTO PLACE. WHILE I RECOGNIZE
THIS HAS A FEW OF THE CRITICAL
ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE
COMPONENTS INCLUDED, I AM VERY
CONCERNED ABOUND -- CONCERNED
AROUND A STRATEGY THAT ALLOWS
EXTRA FUNDS FOR CERTAIN
COMPONENTS OF THE
ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE AND
NOT A FULL PICTURE OF HOW MUCH
THE OTHER ACCOUNTABILITY
REQUIREMENTS WILL COST US. IF
WE PUT FUNDING FORWARD, $8
MILLION OVER THE LIFE OF THIS
TENTATIVE AGREEMENT, I DON'T
KNOW WHAT THAT IS GOING TO DO
AND AS A BUDGET CHAIR IT MAKES
ME NERVOUS ABOUT WHAT THE TOTAL
DOLLARS WILL BE AND OFFERING
UP FUNDING FOR A HANDFUL OF
ACCOUNTABILITY WITHOUT
ASSURANCES THAT WE WILL BE
ABLE TO GET THE ADDITIONAL
PIECES IN. NUMBER THREE, I
THINK THAT THE FUNDING SHOULD
BE COMING FROM WITHIN THE
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT
BUDGET, BECAUSE WE KNOW FROM
LAST YEAR THAT THERE WAS ABOUT
$20 MILLION IN NEW INVESTMENTS
THAT WERE MADE IN THE
DEPARTMENT FROM THE SALARY
SAVINGS THAT WERE NOT DEPLOYED
TOWARD EMPLOYMENT. AS YOU
RECALL LAST YEAR WHEN WE
RECEIVED THE BUDGET, THERE WAS
ABOUT $40 MILLION IN SALARY
SAVINGS. THE MAYOR SMARTLY
CHOSE TO PUT 20 MILLION OF
THAT INTO THE GENERAL FUND AND
WE CONTINUE THAT EFFORT AND
MADE IT AN ONGOING INVESTMENT
INTO THE GENERAL FUND, BECAUSE
WE KNOW THAT IN THE NEAR TERM
IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO THE
HIRING PLAN OR THE RETENTION --
SO THAT $20 MILLION OF THE $40
MILLION, MOVED BY THE MARE,
SUPPORTED BY US AND MADE
PERMANENT BIAS IN LAST YEAR'S
BUDGET, STILL LEFT $20 MILLION
IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BUDGET
THAT I BELIEVE SHOULD BE USED
IN PART TO PAY THIS TEMPORARY
AGREEMENT. THE REQUEST HERE IS
TO ALLOW FOR FUNDING FROM THE
PLANNING RESERVES TO FUND THE
CONTRACT, WHICH IS TYPICAL, BUT
IT IS NOT TYPICAL FOR ANY OTHER
DEPARTMENT TO HAVE THAT AMOUNT
OF FUNDING. $20 MILLION IN LAST
YEAR'S BUDGET, MUCH OF WHICH
WAS GOING INTO ONE TIME
INVESTMENTS THAT THE
DEPARTMENT AND MAYOR'S OFFICE
HAD IDENTIFIED. MY SUGGESTION
WOULD BE IN ORDER TO FUND THE
AGREEMENT IN FRONT OF US, A
MORE APPROPRIATE FUND SOURCE
INSTEAD OF ADDING FUNDING
WOULD HAVE BEEN TO REQUEST THAT
FUNDING COME FROM THE ONGOING
$20 MILLION THAT IS NOT BEING
FULLY UTILIZED FOR SEATTLE
BUDGET SALARIES AND WINTER
WHICH IS NEW FUNDING WE
AUTHORIZED LAST YEAR. FINALLY I
HAVE SOME ONGOING QUESTIONS
ABOUT THE POLICY, BUT I WILL
PAUSE THERE TO SEE IF YOU HAVE
OTHER THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT AND
GET BACK TO YOUR ORIGINAL POINT
--
>> THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO
CLARIFY AGAIN, THIS IS NOT THE
CONTRACT. THIS IS NOT A
TEMPORARY CONTRACT. THIS IS A
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AND
THIS MIGHT MAKE YOUR POINT
EVEN MORE ACUTELY, CHAIR
MOSQUEDA, BUT I JUST WANT TO BE
CLEAR WITHOUT DIVULGING ANY
PRIVILEGES OF LRPC, THE
ACCOUNTABILITY ELEMENTS THAT
WE ARE WORKING ON AS PART OF
THAT DISCUSSION ARE NOT PART OF
THIS IN MOU. THIS MOU HAS NO
ACCOUNTABILITY ELEMENTS. THE
ONLY ELEMENT IS THE FINANCIAL
PREMIUM FOR SPECIAL EVENTS,
THE FLEXIBILITY OF THE CHIEF
TO ASSIGN NON-SWORN OFFICERS
TO SPECIAL EVENTS. THE
FLEXIBILITY AROUND THE CARE
DEPARTMENT AND HOW THE
CIVILIANS ARE GOING TO BE
DEPLOYED AND THE PARKS RANGERS.
THE MOU IS A SEPARATE TRACK
FROM THE CONVERSATIONS AROUND
THE SPOG CONTRACT AS A WHOLE,
SO I REALLY WANT TO MAKE THAT
CLEAR FOR THE VIEWING PUBLIC.
LOOKING AT THIS MOU, BECAUSE
WHAT I HEARD WAS THAT SOME OF
THE ACCOUNTABILITY ELEMENTS ARE
IN THERE. NONE OF THEM ARE IN
THERE. THAT IS COMPLETELY ON A
SEPARATE TRACK AND I WISH WE
WOULD'VE GOTTEN MORE DONE THIS
YEAR AND I WOULD HOPE THAT
NEW COUNCIL TAKES THE EFFORT OF
THIS COUNCIL, THE FIVE MEMBERS
WHO SERVE ON LRPC, TO TAKE IT
SERIOUSLY. ALSO TO LOOK BACK
AS PART OF A SAFEGUARD ON THAT
NEGOTIATION, THAT THE CONSENT
DECREE REQUIRES THAT WITHIN 30
DAYS OF REACHING A TENTATIVE
AGREEMENT WITH SPOG, REGARDING
A RENEWAL, THAT THE CITY MUST
FILE WITH THE COURT AND
ANALYSIS OF THE TENTATIVE
AGREEMENT AND ITS EFFECT ON
SPD IS ACCOUNTABILITY AND
REVIEW SYSTEM. SO THE WORK WILL
HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT
THE WORK OF THE LRPC AS IT
RELATES SPECIFICALLY TO THE
ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE AND
THE COMMITMENTS THAT THE
COUNCIL HAS MADE BOTH IN THE
ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE AND IN
THE SUBSEQUENT RESOLUTION THAT
THE COUNCIL PASSED WITH THE
LAST CONTRACT AND THE
OPPORTUNITY TO OPINE ON WHETHER
OR NOT NEGOTIATIONS WERE
SUCCESSFUL. WE WANTED TO
CLARIFY THAT IN CASE THERE IS
ANYONE LOOKING FOR WHAT
ACCOUNTABILITY ELEMENTS WERE
INCLUDED IN THIS MOU. THOSE ARE
ALL ON A SEPARATE TRACK. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I THINK I
WAS USING THE TERM,
ACCOUNTABILITY, INTERCHANGEABLY
WITH THE ALTERNATIVE MODEL.
AND HAVING TO PAY FOR SOME OF
THOSE MODELS THAT THERE IS
BROAD SUPPORT FOR IS OBVIOUSLY
FRUSTRATING. WHEN I THINK THERE
IS JOINT INTEREST BY THE
EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE
BRANCH TO MOVE IN THOSE
DIRECTIONS. NOW WE HAVE TO PAY
FOR THOSE, IN ADDITION TO THE
SPOG CONTRACT NOT BEING
COMPLETED YET AND NO ASSURANCE
ABOUT HOW MANY OF THOSE
ACCOUNTABILITY COMPONENTS FROM
THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE WILL
ULTIMATELY BE -- WE KNOW THAT
SPOG WILL BE DEMANDING
ADDITIONAL PAYMENT AND I HOPE
THE LEGISLATURE IS ABLE TO HELP
US WITH THAT, SO THAT IN FUTURE
NEGOTIATIONS WE DON'T HAVE
ACCOUNTABILITY BEING TARGETED,
BUT AS YOU NOTED IT IS
WELL-MADE THAT WE STILL NEED TO
HAVE A FULL CONTRACT IN FRONT
OF US. WE DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH
WE WILL HAVE TO PAY AND HERE WE
ARE PAYING FOR COMPONENTS OF
ALTERNATIVE MODELS AND THEIR
COMMON SENSE, BUT WE STILL HAVE
TO PAY FOR THOSE. SO JUST
LOOKING AT THAT STRATEGY
PERSPECTIVE, I DON'T BELIEVE
THAT THIS GIVES US LEVERAGE,
ADDITIONAL LEVERAGE AS A CITY
FOR THE JOINT INTEREST WE HAVE
IN SEEING THE ACCOUNTABILITY
WITHOUT ULTIMATELY PUTTING
MILLIONS MORE INTO THAT
CONTRACT AND NOT HAVING THOSE
MILLIONS COME OUT OF THE
EXISTING BUDGET WHEN WE KNOW
THERE IS $20 MILLION IN NEW
FUNDING IN LAST YEAR'S BUDGET.
THAT WAS NOT HELD IN SALARY
AND INSTEAD OF BEING DEPLOYED
AS A ONE TIME USE, I THINK THAT
WOULD BE THE PLACE AND AGAIN I
AM RAISING CONCERNS AROUND THE
STRATEGY OF DOING THIS NOW
VERSUS SEEING WHAT THE
UNIVERSAL PAYOUT WILL HAVE TO
BE FOR A FUTURE CONTRACT.
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> THANK YOU. I WANT TO
REITERATE WHAT COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD SAID AND I WANT TO
CAUTION THAT WE ARE GETTING
VERY CLOSE TO TALKING ABOUT
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ISSUES
THAT ARE SUBJECT TO LABOR
NEGOTIATIONS. I WANT TO GO
BACK TO WHAT WAS SHARED WITH
US YESTERDAY WHEN WE TALKED
ABOUT THE NEED FOR THIS. THAT
THIS IS FOR EMERGENT NEEDS AND
IT DID THREE THINGS AND IT IS
A SIGNED AGREEMENT ON DUAL
DISPATCH, THE EXPANDED USE OF
PARK RANGERS AND THE NUMBER OF
SPECIAL EVENTS FILLED BY SWORN
OFFICERS AND CIVILIAN STAFF. SO
THERE IS -- I JUST DON'T THINK
THE PLACE HERE TO START
DISCUSSING AND I UNDERSTAND YOU
ARE USING ACCOUNTABILITY
DIFFERENTLY, BUT THOSE OF US,
YOU WERE THERE, TOO,
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA, BEFORE
YOU STEPPED DOWN. HOW WE GOT TO
THIS SIDE AGREEMENT THAT WOULD
GO FROM OCTOBER. COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD, CORRECT ME IF I AM
WRONG, OCTOBER 1, 2023, TO
JANUARY 2, 2026, WHICH WOULD
BE TWO YEARS. I WANT TO
UNDERSCORE THAT WHAT
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD IS SAYING
IS THAT THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE
CONTRACT. THE CONSENT, ALL OF
THOSE THINGS OVER HERE. THIS IS
ABOUT ADDRESSING EMERGENCY
NEEDS NOW. IT ISN'T ABOUT
LEVERAGING OR THE SPOG
CONTRACT AND THAT IS WHY THERE
IS KIND OF A CARVEOUT FOR THIS
EMERGENT NEED NOW, BECAUSE WE
ARE OPERATING ON A CONTRACT
THAT EXPIRED IN 2020, SO THAT
IS MY CONCERN. COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD, IF I MISSPOKE, PLEASE
CORRECT ME, BUT THOSE ARE MY
UNDERSTANDING ON DISCUSSIONS
AND A CAUTIONARY NOTE THAT WE
RECEIVED. THANK YOU, I WILL BE
SUPPORTING THIS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT. I ABSOLUTELY
UNDERSTAND THE CONFIDENTIALITY
OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING. I
SUPPORT THAT. THE FREEDOM
FOUNDATION ATTEMPTS TO
UNDERMINE THAT. WITHOUT
DISCLOSING ANYTHING
CONFIDENTIAL, I THINK IT SHOULD
BE NO ONE'S SURPRISE THAT THE
COMMUNITY IS EXPECTING US TO
HAVE A CONTRACT THAT
ULTIMATELY INCLUDES
ACCOUNTABILITY. AND THE TIE
THAT I AM TRYING TO MAKE HERE
IS THAT WE ARE PUTTING
ADDITIONAL FUNDING, MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS, NEW ADDED FUNDING TO
THE DEPARTMENT, WITHOUT
KNOWING WHAT THE TOTAL COST OF
THE CONTRACT WAS. SO WE ARE, IN
ESSENCE, LOSING SOME LEVERAGE
ON SOME OF THOSE PIECES WHERE
WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE
COMMONALITY. THE COMMUNITY
SUPPORT IS ONE THING TO MOVE
FORWARD ON THIS, BUT WE ARE
PUTTING THESE DOLLARS FORWARD
WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT THE TOTAL
UNIVERSAL DOLLARS IS GOING TO
BE FOR THE SPOG CONTRACT AND I
THINK WE LOSE LEVERAGE WITHOUT
THOSE OTHER ACCOUNTABILITY
PIECES THAT WE WILL ULTIMATELY
WANT TO SEE. I AM NOT PART OF
THAT NEGOTIATION AND I DO NOT
THINK THAT IT OFFERS A FULL
PICTURE OF WHAT THE UNIVERSAL
DOLLARS WILL BE FOR THIS. I
THINK THAT OVERALL WHEN IT
COMES TO SPOG AS A COMPLETE
PICTURE LATER ON, I THINK IT IS
NOT A GOOD STRATEGY IN TERMS
OF THE LEVERAGE THAT WE COULD
MAINTAIN AND AGAIN, I HAVE A
NUMBER OF CONCERNS. I GUESS I
WILL AIR THOSE NOW AND AT THE
RISK OF BRINGING A POLICY,
BECAUSE I KNOW YOU ARE ON
THIS, I WILL JUST RAISE SOME
OF THE CONCERNS THAT I HAVE
ABOUT SPD STILL HAVING TO BE
THE ONE TO GIVE ALTERNATE
RESPONDERS THE PERMISSION TO
GO ON-SITE. I REFERENCE THE
ARTICLE A NUMBER OF TIMES THAT
CAME UP ABOUT CONCERNS AROUND
THE DUAL DISPATCH MODEL THAT
CREATES THIS MODEL TO REQUIRE
THE NEED TO GIVE PERMISSION TO
CASE MANAGERS OR HOUSING
CONNECTORS TO COME ON SITE AND
BE THAT PERSON THAT ULTIMATELY
DE-ESCALATE THE SITUATION AND
DOESN'T HAVE AN OFFICER
RESPONDING IN THE FIRST PLACE.
IT WOULD BE IDEAL IF WE WERE
FREEING UP THOSE OFFICERS TO DO
SOMETHING ELSE. I THINK THERE
IS THE CONCERN THAT THE
OFFICERS RESPONSIBILITY IS
STILL TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION
OF WHO WILL MAKE THE INITIAL
CONTACT AND A CRISIS RESPONDER
DOES NOT APPROACH THE SCENE
UNLESS THEY ARE CLEARED BY AN
OFFICER. THE OFFICER STILL
HOLDS THAT DISCRETION. IT IS
ULTIMATELY A GATEKEEPING ROLE
THAT THE OFFICER HAS. I THINK
THAT THIS CREATES A CONCERNING
POWER DYNAMIC WHEN WE HAVE
RESTRICTIONS ON WHO IS ALLOWING
ALTERNATIVE RESPONDERS TO
ENTER A SCENE AND I HOPE WE CAN
CONTINUE TO EVOLVE THIS POLICY
SO THAT IT IS NOT SUPPLEMENTING
POLICE, BUT INSTEAD IS
PROVIDING AN ALTERNATIVE. AND
WITH THAT I WILL NOTE THAT
JUST YESTERDAY WE SAW A SEATTLE
TIMES ARTICLE ABOUT A GROUP OF
OFFICERS WHO RESPONDED TO A
CRISIS CALL AND THEY BROKE
INTO THE RESIDENCE. THEY BROKE
THROUGH A WINDOW. EXCUSE ME,
AN INTOXICATED MAN WHO WAS
BREAKING A WINDOW AND THROWING
THINGS ON THE STREET AND WHILE
THE MEDIC AND FIREFIGHTERS
CONDUCTED THE INITIAL CRISIS
RESPONSE, SPD ENTERED A
DIFFERENT BUILDING AND FIVE
OFFICERS, INCLUDING ONE WHO
WAS ARMED WITH A HIGH-CALIBER,
SEMI AUTOMATIC RIFLE, BROKE
DOWN THE WRONG PERSON STORE. A
WOMAN'S DOOR. WHO WAS JUST
ABOUT TO ENTER THE BATH. THIS
IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF WHERE I
THINK ESPECIALLY ON CRISIS
CALLS WHERE WE NEED A CRISIS
RESPONDER TO BE THE FIRST
PERSON, I WOULD PREFER TO HAVE
THAT ALTERNATIVE. SO I WILL BE
VOTING NO ON THIS FROM A
STRATEGY PERSPECTIVE, BUDGET
CONCERNS. AND SALARY SAVINGS
THAT IS STILL SITTING WITHIN
THE DEPARTMENT, BEING USED ON
NEW INVESTMENTS AND SOME OF THE
CONCERNS THAT I OUTLINED --
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS I THINK AND
COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> OLD HAND, SORRY.
>> THAT'S OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA,
THANK YOU SO MUCH. I DON'T
DISAGREE WITH SEVERAL OF THE
POINTS YOU HAVE RAISED ABOUT
WHAT AN IDEAL ALTERNATIVE
RESPONSE PROGRAM WOULD BE
LIKE. WHAT I WOULD POSIT IS
THAT THE SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE
DEVISED IN PARTNERSHIP WITH
THE EXECUTIVE AND THAT THIS
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
MAKES POSSIBLE IS A REALLY
CRITICAL STEP IN THAT
DIRECTION. CHIEF SMITH HAS MADE
IT CLEAR THAT HER GOAL WOULD
BE FOR THE PROGRAM TO EVOLVE TO
BE MORE LIKE PROGRAMS IN
DENVER AND ALBUQUERQUE THAT
ARE COMPLETELY AND ENTIRELY
INDEPENDENT. EVEN IN THOSE
SYSTEMS, EVEN WITH THOSE
RESPONSES, THE RESPONSE
ALTERNATIVE SYSTEMS DO NOT HAVE
A COMPLETELY SEPARATE OR
ANTAGONISTIC RELATIONSHIP WITH
TRADITIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT.
EVERYBODY IS IN THE FIELD ON
THE SAME RADIO, RESPONDING TO
CALLS IN AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE
THEY ARE ALL WORKING TOGETHER.
SO THE PROGRAM THAT WE HAVE IN
FRONT OF US, THE RESPONDER
PROGRAM, IS A CRITICAL FIRST
STEP THAT CAN EVOLVE STEADILY
OVER THE COURSE OF ITS
EXISTENCE TO BE MORE
INDEPENDENT AND HAVE THE HIGH
UTILITY THAT THESE OTHER
SYSTEMS HAVE. THE OTHER THING
THAT I WOULD MENTION THAT I
THINK IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF
THIS, BECAUSE I GET ASKED ALL
THE TIME, GIVEN THAT THERE IS
SUCH A BROAD POLICY CONSENSUS
IN THE PUBLIC CONSENSUS FOR
WANTING THESE SERVICES, PEOPLE
ASK ALL THE TIME, WHY DON'T WE
HAVE THIS WHEN OTHER STATES
HAVE THIS? YOU KNOW, A LOT OF
THE OTHER JURISDICTIONS THAT
HAVE THESE SYSTEMS ARE
UNFORTUNATELY, THEY ARE RIGHT
TO WORK STATES. THEY ARE
STATES WHERE NOTHING HAS TO BE
BARGAINED. IN THE STATE OF
WASHINGTON WE HAVE VERY STRONG
LABOR LAWS AND I AM PROUD THAT
WE HAVE STRONG LABOR LAWS AND
UNIONS, BUT THERE ARE OCCASIONS
LIKE THIS WHERE THAT CAN POSE
ADDITIONAL WORK THAT WE NEED TO
WORK THROUGH AND MEMORIALIZE
IN A DOCUMENT LIKE THIS. SO
THIS IS A VERY BIG STEP
FORWARD. I THINK IT WOULD SLOW
DOWN THIS WORK TO A GREAT
EXTENT, WERE WE NOT TO APPROVE
THIS MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING. I THINK IT IS
AN AGREEMENT THAT GIVES MORE
FLEXIBILITY THAT LIFTS UP THE
SUPPORT AND ALTERNATIVE
RESPONSE WORK AND OTHER PUBLIC
SAFETY EMPLOYEES WHO DO WORK
ADJACENT TO WHAT UNIFORMED
POLICE DO TO ALLOW US TO BE
MORE INNOVATIVE AND DYNAMIC AND
NOT SEND A GUN AND A BADGE TO
EVERY CALL FOR SERVICE, 911 OR
OTHER TYPES OF PUBLIC SERVICE
THAT THE CITY PROVIDES. SO FOR
THOSE REASONS I SUPPORT THIS
AGREEMENT AND I STRONGLY
ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO DO
THE SAME.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU SO MUCH AND
THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD. I KNOW
YOU HAVE BEEN WORKING ON
ALTERNATIVE RESPONSES FOR A
LONG TIME. THANK YOU FOR THE
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THIS.
ALL RIGHT, COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD DO YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS YOU WOULD LIKE TO
MAKE? SEEING NONE, MADAM CLERK
WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
ON THE ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT --
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> YES.
>> CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
>> NO.
>> SIX IN FAVOR, TO A POST AND
ONE ABSTENTION.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES AND
AMENDMENT 120 -- WE ARE ON OUR
FINAL AMENDMENT TODAY.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, I WILL
TURN IT TO CENTRAL STAFF FIRST.
PLEASE GO AHEAD, ALY.
>> ITEM 121, SPD-200-A-2,
WOULD IMPOSE A PROVISO ON
$200,000 OF GENERAL FUND IN THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT BUDGET TO
REINSTATE CONTRACTS WITH TRULEO
OR A SIMILAR SERVICE PROVIDER.
THIS IS SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, JOINED
BY COUNCILMEMBERS HERBOLD AND
COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO MOVE YOUR
AMENDMENT?
>> YES, I MOVED TO AMEND
COUNCIL BILL 120708 AS
PRESENTED ON SPD-200-A-2.
>> IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
SPEAK?
>> THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT IS A
PROVISO ON THE DISCRETIONARY
BUDGET IN 2024 TO REQUIRE THEM
TO ONCE AGAIN ENTER A CONTRACT
WITH A THIRD PARTY SERVICE
PROVIDER, SUCH AS TRULEO, TO
ASSIST IN REVIEWING AND
ANALYZING POLICE OFFICER BODY
CAMERA FOOTAGE. IDEALLY THE
CONTRACT WOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN
CANCELED EARLIER THIS YEAR. I
WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBERS
HERBOLD AND JUAREZ FOR
SPONSORING THIS AMENDMENT. WE
CAN SHOW UNITY AND REQUIRING
THIS BY VOTING YES ON THIS
PROVISO. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. ANY
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON THIS?
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD. GO
AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I AM
HAPPY TO SUPPORT THIS BUDGET
ACTION BY COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN. I WAS DISAPPOINTED
THAT THE CONTRACT WAS CANCELED.
I AM OF THE MIND THAT THE
OBLIGATION TO WEAR A BODY WORN
CAMERA ON THE PART OF POLICE
OFFICERS WAS BARGAINED AND TO
USE A STRONG WORD, LUDICROUS,
TO THINK THAT THE MATERIAL
FROM THAT CAMERA WOULD NOT BE
MONITORED AND REVIEWED. THAT
WAS THE BASIS OF WITHDRAWING
THE CONTRACT. WHEN SPOG
LEADERSHIP FOUND OUT THAT THIS
TOOL WAS REVIEWING THE CONTENT
FROM THE CAMERAS AND AGAIN,
YOU CAN'T JUST AGREE TO WEAR
BODY WORN CAMERAS BASED ON THE
HOPE THAT NOBODY IS GOING TO
LOOK AT THE MATERIAL THAT IS
CAPTURED ON THE CAMERAS AND
AGAIN, I THINK THAT THIS IS A
VERY USEFUL TOOL FOR THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT IN IDENTIFYING
TRENDS FOR TRAINING AND ISSUES
ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTITUTIONAL
PLACING. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. ANY
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON THIS?
GIVEN SOME OF THE FEEDBACK THAT
WE RECEIVED FROM THE ACLU OF
WASHINGTON, I AM GOING TO VOTE
NO ON THIS TODAY AND ENCOURAGE
FOLKS -- CLEARLY WE HAVE MORE
WORK TO DO ON MAKING SURE THAT
THERE IS TECHNOLOGY THAT DOES
NOT ANALYZE LANGUAGE OR
SENTIMENTS THAT DISPLAY BIAS
AND SOMETIMES THIS IS
SPECIFICALLY IN REFERENCE TO
HOW A.I. SYSTEMS HAVE BEEN USED
IN THE PAST. SO ON THIS ONE I
WILL BE A NOTE TODAY. ANY
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? SING NONE,
MADAM CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL AND ADOPTION OF
SPD-200-A-2.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> YES.
>> CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
>> NO.
>> SEVEN IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED,
AND ONE ABSTENTION.
>> THANKS SO MUCH AND THE
AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED. WE HAVE
GOTTEN THROUGH ALL OF OUR
AMENDMENTS HERE TODAY. I THINK
THAT IT HAS BEEN A LONG DAY. IT
IS 5:09. COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD
ASKED YESTERDAY IF WE WOULD BE
DONE BY 5:00. WE ALMOST MADE
IT. AT THIS JUNCTURE I THINK
WE ARE GOING TO TAKE
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD'S ITEM
FIRST TOMORROW. WE WILL COME
BACK AND DISCUSS ITEM 28 ON THE
AGENDA TODAY AND THEN WE WILL
GET RIGHT INTO OTHER ITEMS ON
THE AGENDA. THIS ALSO
INCLUDES -- CENTRAL STAFF, WHAT
AM I FORGETTING THAT WE WILL
ALSO DISCUSS TOMORROW? THE
REVENUE, THE LEGISLATIVE
CHANGES TO THE TRANSPARENCY
DOCUMENT?
>> EIGHT AMENDMENTS.
>> WE WILL RETURN TO ITEM, I
THINK IT WAS 22 ON THE AGENDA
AND TAKE UP COUNCIL BILL
120706 AND THE EIGHT
AMENDMENTS THAT WERE REACHED
TODAY AND THEN WE WILL MOVE ON
TO ITEM 28, WHICH IS A
BRIEFING ON THE TRACK TO
LEGISLATION AND AN UPDATE ON
THE REVENUE LEGISLATION.
>> ARE THOSE THE POWERPOINTS?
>> YES, BUT WE WILL DO OUR BEST
TO DRAW ON OUR CONCISE
PRESENTATIONS, JUST FOR YOU.
>> BIG POWERPOINTS.
>> GREAT. WELL, AT THIS
JUNCTURE I THINK WE ARE AT THE
END OF OUR AGENDA. COLLEAGUES,
THANK YOU SO MUCH. YOU HAVE
ENHANCED THIS BUDGET AND WE
WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO WALK
THROUGH THEM -- NOT WALK
THROUGH THEM. DON'T HAVE A
HEART ATTACK, WE WILL NOT READ
EACH ITEM IN AGAIN, BUT WE WILL
HAVE A CHANCE TO VOTE ON THE
FINAL PACKAGE ON MONDAY AND
JUST NOTE THAT THAT FINAL VOTE
IS COMING, TO GIVE CENTRAL
STAFF A LITTLE BIT OF TIME FOR
MAKING THE FINAL VOTE FOR THE
AMENDMENTS THAT WE VOTED ON
TODAY, ALIGNED WITH THE BUDGET.
YOU HAVE A QUESTION?
>> I JUST WANTED TO ASSURE
EVERYONE THAT WHEN YOU SEE THE
AGENDA FOR TOMORROW IT WILL
LOOK THE SAME AS TODAY WITH A
SPECIAL PROVISION THAT SAYS
WHATEVER WE DIDN'T ADDRESS
TODAY WE WILL ADDRESS TOMORROW.
SO I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO
THINK WE ARE DOING THIS OVER
AGAIN TOMORROW, BUT THE AGENDA
WILL LOOK THE SAME.
>> I'M GOING TO MAKE A FORMAL
MOTION TO ENSURE THAT THIS ITEM
THAT WE HAVE BEEN VOTING ON
TODAY FOR ITEM 27, COUNCIL BILL
120708, IS RETAINED ON THE
AGENDA SO UNLESS THERE IS
OBJECTION I WILL BE POSTPONING
FINAL VOTE ON COUNCIL BILL
120708 TO THE NOVEMBER 20
MEETING. HEARING NO OBJECTION,
THE ITEM IS POSTPONED AND HELD
TO OUR MONDAY, NOVEMBER 20
MEETING TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE
THAT FINAL VOTE AND TOMORROW
WE WILL RECONVENE AT 10:00 A.M.
COLLEAGUES, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
I KNOW THAT THERE HAVE BEEN
DISAGREEMENTS, GOOD DISCUSSION
BACK AND FORTH, BUT THERE WAS
A LOT OF COMMON GROUND AND
PEOPLE COMING TOGETHER AND
FINDING SOLUTIONS. WITH THAT I
WILL TURN TO MY VICE CHAIR.
>> I'M SORRY. I APPRECIATE THAT
YOU GAVE THE COUNCIL BILL
NUMBER, BUT IN PLAIN LANGUAGE
WHAT BILL ARE WE NOT PICKING UP
TOMORROW?
>> IT IS THE BILL THAT IS IN
FRONT OF US THAT INCLUDED ALL
OF THE 121 AMENDMENTS, SO IT IS
THE ACTUAL 2024 BUDGET ADOPTION
ORDINANCE.
>> PERFECT.
>> SO WE WILL VOTE AT THE END
ON THE AMENDED PACKAGE. WE
WILL HOLD THAT AND THAT IS WHAT
WE VOTE ON ON THE 20th. THANKS
FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
COLLEAGUES, HAVE A GOOD NIGHT
AND THANKS FOR ALL YOUR WORK.
TAKE CARE. THE MEETING IS
ADJOURNED.