GOOD MORNING. THE SELECT BUDGET
COMMITTEE WILL COME TO ORDER.
IT IS 9:30 A.M., OCTOBER 16,
2024. I AM CHAIR. PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL.
>> [ ROLL CALL ]
>>
THANK YOU. APPRECIATE EVERYONE
BEING HERE ON TIME. THE SEATTLE
CHANNEL TOOK A MOMENT TO GET
GOING. AWARD-WINNING SEATTLE
CHANNEL. WE APPRECIATE YOUR
SERVICE. THE SELECT BUDGET
COMMITTEE IS NOW ACCEPTING
VERBAL PUBLIC COMMENT -- NOT
ACCEPTING VERBAL PUBLIC COMMENT
THIS MORNING. WE WILL HAVE THE
PUBLIC HEARING THIS EVENING
STARTING AT 5:00 P.M. THAT WILL
LAST UNTIL WE HAVE GOTTEN
THROUGH EVERYONE SPEAKING
TONIGHT . PLEASE BE AWARE OF
THAT. WE DO HAVE CHILDCARE
PROVIDED FROM 5:00 UNTIL 7:00.
TODAY ON THE AGENDA WE HAVE THE
INTRODUCTION -- COLLEAGUES,
ALSO, WELCOME. WE ARE NOW IN
THE NEXT SET OF THE BUDGET
MEETINGS, WHICH IS CENTRAL
STAFF. TODAY WE WILL START WITH
THE GENERAL OVERVIEW, GENERAL
LOOK AT OUR BUDGET FROM CENTRAL
STAFF'S POSITION. AND THROUGH
THEIR ANALYSIS. IN THE NEXT FEW
DAYS WE WILL HAVE DEPARTMENT BY
DEPARTMENT. ON THURSDAY WE WILL
HAVE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, OFFICE
OF ARTS AND CULTURE, THE
SEATTLE CHANNEL. IN THE
AFTERNOON, SEATTLE DEPARTMENT
OF HUMAN RESOURCES, SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF INSPECTIONS. ON
FRIDAY, WE WILL DISCUSS THE
PARTICIPANTS OR A BUDGETING ,
HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND
UNIFIED CARE TEAM, AS WELL AS
THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT. WE WILL MOVE INTO
NEXT WEEK AND FILLING THE GAPS
AS THEY ARE CREATED. WE DO HAVE
A PLAN, BUT IT IS ALSO SUBJECT
TO CHANGE. MY APOLOGIES FOR NOT
STARTING OUT THERE. TODAY WE
HAVE THE INTRODUCTION PROCESS
OVERVIEW. THE CENTRAL STAFF
OVERVIEW OF THE 2025-26
PROPOSED BUDGETS, GENERAL FUND
BALANCING, A REVIEW AND
JUMPSTART POLICIES. IF KNOW
WHICH OPTION, THE AGENDA WILL
BE ADOPTED. THE AGENDA IS
ADOPTED. BEFORE WE GET GOING
TODAY, COUNCILMEMBER WOO HAS A
PROCLAMATION FOR SIGNATURE
TODAY PROCLAIMING -- ACTUALLY,
I WILL TURN IT OVER TO
COUNCILMEMBER WOO.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I AM
PRESENTING A PROCLAMATION
PROCLAIMING THE MONTH OF
OCTOBER AS FILIPINO AMERICAN
HISTORY MONTH . WASHINGTON HAS
THE FIFTH LARGEST POPULATION OF
FILIPINOS IN THE UNITED STATES.
CITY OF SEATTLE IS ALSO A
HISTORICAL CITY FOR FILIPINOS.
IT WAS A PORTAL CITY ON THE
PACIFIC COAST AND THEY MADE
PROFOUND CONTRIBUTIONS IN OUR
CITY, AS WELL AS OUR STATES.
THERE ARE MANY IMPORTANT
LOCATIONS SUCH AS FILIPINO TOWN
AND THE INTERNATIONAL PART, THE
FILIPINO COMMUNITY OF SEATTLE
HALL, AND OTHER PLACES. MANY
NOTABLE LEGENDARY CITIZENS WHO
MADE IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO
THE CITY OF SEATTLE, WHICH
INCLUDE AND SO, I WAS HOPING TO
RECOGNIZE THE IMMENSE
CONTRIBUTIONS OF FILIPINO
AMERICANS TO THE CULTURAL,
ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL FABRIC OF
OUR COMMUNITY, FURTHERING THE
SHARED VALUES OF THE ONE
SEATTLE VISION TO BUILD A
THRIVING, INNOVATIVE AND
EQUITABLE CITY WHERE WE ARE ALL
PROUD TO CALL HOME. I HOPE YOU
WILL SUPPORT THIS.
>> COUNT -- THANK YOU. I'M
LOOKING FORWARD TO SIGN IT. ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? WITH
THAT, HEARING A FURTHER
DISCUSSION ON THE PROCURATION,
CLERK, CALL THE ROLL TO
DETERMINE WHICH COUNCILMEMBERS
WOULD LIKE THEIR SIGNATURES
AFFIXED TO TO THE PROCLAMATION
RECOGNIZING OCTOBER 24 --
OCTOBER 2024 TO BE FILIPINO
AMERICAN HISTORY MONTH.
>> [ ROLL CALL ]
>>
THANK YOU. MOVING ONTO THE NEXT
ITEM OF BUSINESS. CLERK, READ
THE SHORT TITLE INTO THE
RECORD. WE SEE THE DIRECTOR AND
DEPUTY DIRECTOR FROM CENTRAL
STAFF AT THE TABLE. I WILL TURN
IT OVER TO YOU. COLLEAGUES,
TODAY WE DO HAVE SOME
FLEXIBILITY WITH OUR TIME,
BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO SAVE
TIME THIS AFTERNOON TO GIVE US
ALL A MOMENT TO GET ALL THE
WORK DONE BEFORE WE ARE HERE
UNTIL POSSIBLY 11:00 OR LATER.
AND SO, WE WILL TAKE QUESTIONS
AS WE GO FOR THE MOMENT, BUT IF
WE START RUNNING INTO TIME
CONSTRAINTS, I WILL MAKE THAT
CHANGE TO HOLDING QUESTIONS
UNTIL THE END. WITH THAT, OVER
TO YOU .
>> THANK YOU CHAIR STROUDSBURG
I WILL TAKE A FEW MOMENTS TO
SET THE STAGE, BOTH FOR TODAY
AND FOR WHAT IS AHEAD OVER THE
NEXT WEEK. ALSO JUST A BRIEF
PREVIEW OF WHAT FOLLOWS AFTER
THAT. AS CHAIR STRAUSS
MENTIONED, WE ARE NOW ENTERING
THE STAGE OF CENTRAL STAFF
PRESENTATIONS FOCUSING FIRST ON
AN OVERVIEW OF THE OVERALL
BUDGET. TODAY YOU WILL HEAR
FROM YOLANDA REPRESENTING WORK
SHE HAS DONE JUST TAKE A LOOK
AT THE BUDGET OVERALL AND
GIVING YOU A SENSE OF WHAT IS
CONTAINED IN THERE AND HOW IT
IS BALANCE. THAT INCLUDES A
FOCUS BEYOND THE GENERAL FUND
INTO THE OVERALL BUDGET AND
LOOKING AT A DEPARTMENT LEVEL
TO HIGHLIGHT ADDITIONAL WORK WE
ARE IN A POSITION TO BROUGHT --
PROVIDE YOU NOW AS WELL. AND
THEN WE WILL PROVIDE YOU A
REALLY DETAILED OVERVIEW OF HOW
THE GENERAL FUND IS BALANCED .
IN THIS PHASE YOU WILL HEAR
FROM CENTRAL STAFF ,
ESSENTIALLY, I WOULD ARGUE, IN
A NEUTRAL PRESENTATION OF THE
BUDGET. WE ARE NOT HERE TO
DEFEND THE MAYOR'S BUDGET OR
ATTACK IT , BUT TO LAY OUT FOR
YOU THE FACTS, IF YOU WILL. YOU
WILL SEE THERE ARE VERY
IMPORTANT DEEPLY TECHNICAL
ANALYSIS WITH IMPORTANT
CONCLUSIONS THAT WILL BE
HIGHLIGHTED AS WE GO.
CONCLUSIONS THAT AFFECT THE
OVERALL PERSPECTIVE ON YOUR
ACTIONS FOR THE BIANNUAL BUDGET
AND HOW THEY WILL AFFECT THE
CITY'S LONG-TERM
SUSTAINABILITY, PARTICULARLY ON
THE GENERAL FUND. I WILL THEN
FOLLOW WITH SETTING THE STAGE
FOR DISCUSSION ABOUT THE
JUMPSTART PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX
AND THE POLICIES AROUND THE
ALLOCATIONS OF THOSE FUNDS .
YOU WILL HEAR FROM TOM MIKE
CELL , THE USE OF THE PAYROLL
EXPENSE TAX TO ESSENTIALLY
BALANCE THE GENERAL FUND IS A
MAJOR MOVE IN THE BUDGET AND
ONE THAT IS CARRIED FORWARD FOR
2025 AND 2026. AND AS YOU WILL
SEE, BY APPLICATION, NEEDED
2027 AND BEYOND TO MAINTAIN THE
GENERAL FUND BALANCE. THERE ARE
IMPORTANT DECISIONS THAT WILL
FACE YOU ON THAT FRONT. I WILL
WALK YOU THROUGH THOSE. FOR THE
REST OF THE WEEK, STARTING
TOMORROW, AND THAT WILL BE
THROUGH NEXT MONDAY -- YOU WILL
GET THE DETAILED SCHEDULE IN A
MOMENT, AND INTO TUESDAY, WE
WILL PROVIDE ANALYSIS
STRUCTURED IN TWO WAYS. ONE FOR
INDIVIDUAL DEPARTMENTS. WE HAVE
DONE OUR WORK TAKING A LOOK AT
EACH DEPARTMENT 'S BUDGET.
YOLANDA WILL PROVIDE YOU SOME
INFORMATION ABOUT HOW YOU CAN
ACCESS SOME OF THAT WORK. BUT
THEN WE ARE ALSO GOING TO BRING
YOU SPECIFIC POLICY
CONSIDERATIONS AROUND PROPOSED
ADDITIONS TO THE BUDGET, AS
WELL AS PROPOSED REDUCTIONS
FROM THE BUDGET HIGHLIGHTING
SOME POTENTIAL OPTIONS. WE WILL
DO THAT BY DEPARTMENT LEVEL,
AND OTHERS WILL BE FOR
CROSSCUTTING ISSUES. FOR
INSTANCE, PROPOSALS AROUND THE
CARE TEAM AND THE UNIFIED CARE
TEAM, WHICH ARE BOTH CROSS
DEPARTMENTAL FUNCTIONS THAT
DON'T REALLY FIT WELL INTO
TAKING A LOOK AT ONE DEPARTMENT
OR ANOTHER. AS WE BRING YOU
THOSE FORWARD, IN MOST CASES,
WE WILL BRING FOR POTENTIAL
OPTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT CONSIDER
IN TERMS OF RESPONDING TO THE
CONSIDERATIONS WE ARE RAISING.
AT THIS STAGE, WE ARE NOT
LOOKING FOR DECISIONS. IDEALLY,
SOME FEEDBACK. SOME SENSE OF
WHETHER YOU HAVE ANY INTEREST
IN PURSUING THOSE, AND IF YOU
DO, WHICH OPTIONS ARE OF
INTEREST TO OUR ANTICIPATION IS
TO WORK WITH YOU AND THE CHAIR
TO POTENTIALLY REFINE THOSE
INTO SPECIFIC PROPOSED BUDGET
ACTIONS. AGAIN, THAT IS TO COME
FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS WEEK
. I WILL HIGHLIGHT THE SCHEDULE
IN A MOMENT. IN TERMS OF WHAT
ELSE IS ON THIS PAGE, I WILL
REMIND YOU THE FIRST PUBLIC
HEARING IS TONIGHT. A KEY
MILESTONE THAT WILL COME NEXT
WEEK, WHICH IS THE REVENUE
FORECAST UPDATE. YOU WILL HAVE
A JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY
FORECAST COUNCIL, WHICH
INCLUDES TWO REPRESENTATIVES
FROM THE EXECUTIVE SIDE ,
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS AND HIS
ROLE OF BUT A CHAIR AND
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON. THOSE ARE
THE VOTING MEMBERS. YOU WILL
JOIN THEM TO HEAR THE REVENUE
UPDATE IN REAL TIME, IF YOU
WILL, AND BE ABLE TO ANSWER
QUESTIONS. THIS HIGHLIGHTS THE
SCHEDULE OVER THE NEXT WEEK
INTO TUESDAY . TODAY THE HIGHER
LEVEL SENSE OF BALANCING BOTH
THE OVERALL BUDGET FOR THE
GENERAL FUND AND FOR JUMPSTART.
STARTING THURSDAY INDIVIDUAL
DEPARTMENTS, AS WELL AS
CROSSCUTTING ISSUES. ONE THING
TO NOTE THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN
THE OTHERS IS THAT AFTER
GETTING THE REVENUE FORECAST
NEXT TUESDAY, WE WILL HAVE
SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION IN . THEY WILL
ACTUALLY BRING THE EXECUTIVE
BACK FOR A PRESENTATION WHERE
THEY ARE GOING TO PRESENT THE
AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD BE NEEDED
TO IMPLEMENT THE LEVY SHOULD IT
PASS ON ELECTION DAY SO IT
COULD BE FULLY ADOPTED AS PART
OF YOUR ACTIONS ON THE BUDGET
FOR 2025. IN ADDITION, WE WILL
HAVE THE ANALYSIS OF THE SDOT
BASE BUDGET AS WELL. THAT IS
THE SCHEDULE OVER THE NEXT
WEEK. SEE NO QUESTIONS, I WILL
MOVE FORWARD. I WILL HIGHLIGHT
LOOKING AHEAD, THE NEXT BIG
MILESTONE AFTER THAT WILL BE
THE PRESENTATION OF THE
CHAIR'S BALANCING PACKAGE ON
OCTOBER 30. A BIT OF A PREVIEW
OF WHAT COMES NEXT. THIS IS THE
OVERALL TIMELINE. YOU CAN SEE
WHERE WE ARE HERE. MOVING FROM
STEP ONE , REALLY STARTING STEP
TWO, AND WE HAVE OUTLINED HOW
STEP THREE, THE REVENUE
FORECAST WILL BE INCORPORATED.
THAT IS PART OF STEP TO MY. I
GOT MY STEPS WRONG. I AM
PUTTING UP A SLIDE I PUT UP
BEFORE . NOT TRYING TO BE
PATRONIZING ABOUT THIS, BUT
ACTUALLY TO PLUG YOU IN AND
REMIND YOU THAT THESE
HIGH-LEVEL CONSIDERATIONS ARE
ABOUT TO BECOME REALITIES FOR
YOU AS YOU START MOVING AND
HEARING ABOUT OPTIONS TO AMEND
THE BUDGET. THERE IS ONE CHANGE
FROM LAST TIME. IT IS IN THE
SECOND BULLET. JUST REMINDING
YOU THAT THE OVERALL ECONOMIC
CONDITIONS, AT THE NATIONAL
LEVEL, THINGS LOOK QUITE
STRONG. WE HAD A GOOD JOBS
REPORT THIS MONTH AND THE FED
IS LOWERING INTEREST RATES.
THERE WAS, HOWEVER, A
SIGNIFICANT LOCAL ANNOUNCEMENT
LAST WEEK. TWO THINGS GOING ON
AT THE SAME PLACE, IF YOU WILL.
A STRIKE AT BOEING, WHICH,
PRESUMING IT DOESN'T LAST FOR
THE LONG RUN, WOULD NOT HAVE
MAJOR LONG-TERM IMPACTS ON THE
LOCAL ECONOMY, OR MAYBE
INTERMEDIATE IMPACTS, BUT THERE
WAS AN ANNOUNCEMENT OF
SIGNIFICANT JOB LAYOFFS
EXPECTED AT BOEING. I THINK
THERE'S EVERY REASON TO THINK
THAT COULD HAVE A MATERIAL
IMPACT ON THE REVENUE FORECAST.
WE ARE PAST THE DAYS WHERE
SEATTLE NEEDS TO TURN OFF THE
LIGHTS BECAUSE BOEING IS
SLOWING DOWN, BUT BOEING STILL
MATTERS IN THE REGIONAL
ECONOMY. THE FORECAST IS
ACTUALLY TWO COUNTY FORECAST,
KING AND SNOHOMISH . SNOHOMISH
COUNTY HAS A BIG IMPACT ON US.
OF ITALY, BOEING OPERATES
WITHIN KING COUNTY AS WELL.
THOSE ARE GENERALLY HIGH-PAYING
JOBS THAT ARE ULTIMATELY
DERIVED FROM SALES OUTSIDE OF
OUR ECONOMY. THOSE ARE KEY
DRIVERS. TESSA FLACK ON THAT.
YOU WILL HEAR THE DETAILS ON
THE 22nd. IN TERMS OF THE
BUDGET SITUATION, THINGS HAVE
NOT CHANGED. THE MAYOR'S
PROPOSED BUDGET SEEKS TO
RESOLVE SIGNIFICANT PROJECTED
GENERAL FUND DEFICITS. TOM
MIKESELL WILL GIVE A GOOD
DETAIL ABOUT HOW THAT WORKS . I
WILL HIGHLIGHT JUMPSTART
REVENUES AND THE POLICIES ABOUT
THAT, AND THAT SOME OF THE
HISTORY, AND PROBABLY CONTEXT
SO YOU UNDERSTAND THE BENEFITS
AND RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT
REVENUE STREAM. AND THEN, THESE
OTHER FACTORS, I WON'T READ
THEM ALL. OBVIOUSLY, THE
ONGOING CHALLENGING POLICY
ISSUES ARE ONES WE HAVE BEEN
ENGAGING AROUND THE BUDGET ARE
ALL, EACH ONE OF THOSE WILL
COME UP. WE WILL -- THEY WILL
INFORM YOUR DECISIONS. WITH
THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO
YOLANDA TO GIVE YOU A HIGHER
LEVEL BUDGET OVERVIEW.
>> GOOD MORNING. BEFORE I DIVE
INTO THE BUDGET OVERVIEW, WE
HAVE THE MORE SPECIFIC
DEPARTMENT BUDGET OVERVIEWS.
YOU WILL NOTE THE ATTACHMENT ,
A 250 PAGE DOCUMENT, FOR EASY
READING . THAT IS A DEPARTMENT
BY DEPARTMENT SUMMARY OF
CENTRAL STAFF. I WANT TO FIRST
APPRECIATE THE TEAM FOR PULLING
THIS TOGETHER AND THREE WEEKS
AFTER WE HAVE RECEIVED THIS
INFORMATION. AS ALWAYS, IT IS
AN INTENSE SCRAMBLE. AS WE
DISCUSSED ABOUT THE SHAREPOINT
QUESTION SITE , WE OFTEN ARE
PUTTING QUESTIONS AND TRYING TO
GET ANSWERS TO HELP INFORM
THESE. ON THAT NOTE, I WILL
JUST SAY THAT INFORMATION
GATHERING IS ONGOING AS WE
SPEAK. THIS IS JUST A SNAPSHOT
IN TIME OF WHAT CENTRAL STAFF
IS AWARE OF AND WOULD LIKE TO
HIGHLIGHT FOR COUNSEL 'S AWARE
AMOUNT -- COUNCIL'S AWARENESS
IN THIS FORMAT. I JUST HAD THIS
UP AS AN EXAMPLE TO WALK
THROUGH. ALSO, I WANT TO THANK
PATTY. PATTY DID IN A MASSIVE
WORK TO GET THIS BEFORE YOU
ALL, WHICH ARE REALIZED CAME AT
11:00 LAST NIGHT. THAT IS REAL.
JUST NOTING THAT IT FOLLOWS THE
FORMAT OF THE 2019-2024 BUDGET
OVERVIEW CENTRAL STAFF CREATED
AND PRESENTED EARLIER THIS
YEAR. IT HIGHLIGHTS NOTABLE
CHANGES FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE
WITHIN EACH DEPARTMENT. IT IS
ORGANIZED BY BUDGET SUMMARY
LEVEL, AND IN SOME CASES, AT
THE MORE DETAILED BUDGET
PROGRAM LEVEL WHERE
APPROPRIATE. IT ALSO INCLUDES
DESCRIPTIONS OF THE 40 PLUS
PIECES OF BUDGET LEGISLATION
THAT WERE TRANSMITTED WITH THE
BUDGET. THAT IS AT THE VERY
END. THERE IS A LIST OF THE
PRE-INTRODUCTION LEGISLATION
WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE
PROPOSED SEATTLE CITY LIGHT
RATE ORDINANCE. NONE OF THESE
HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED, AND SOME
OF THEM WILL NOT BE INTRODUCED
BECAUSE WE HAVE, FOR INSTANCE,
ALTERNATIVE VERSIONS OF THE
PROPERTY TAX BILLS , ONE THAT
ASSUMES PASSAGE OF THE
TRANSPORTATION LEVY AND ONE
DOES NOT. OBVIOUSLY, WE DON'T
ACT ON BOTH OF THOSE. I JUST
WANTED TO SHOW YOU ALL SO WE
HAVE EACH OF THESE FOLLOW THE
SAME FORMAT GENERALLY OF JUST
GOING INTO A GENERAL OVERVIEW,
AND THEN BREAKING DOWN LABOR,
NONLABOR , AND THEN WHERE THERE
IS OPERATING BUDGET VERSUS
CAPITAL, THIS ONE ONLY HAS
OPERATING. THEN THERE WILL BE A
DESCRIPTION OF BUDGET
LEGISLATION SO YOU ALL HAVE AN
UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS ALL IN
THE PROPOSED BUDGET. IN LESSER
ANY QUESTIONS --
>> I WOULD DESCRIBE THIS AS
READER'S DIGEST CONDENSED
VERSION OF THE BUDGET BOOK
WRITTEN FROM A PERSPECTIVE THAT
IS LESS TECHNICALLY FOCUSED , I
ASSUME ALL OF YOU AT SOME LEVEL
READ THE BUDGET, BUT IT IS NOT
ALWAYS THE MOST READER FRIENDLY
DOCUMENT. THIS IS INTENDED TO
GIVE YOU THE HIGHLIGHTS. THESE
DOCUMENTS ARE DISTINCT FROM
POLICY CONSIDERATION MEMOS THAT
REALLY DIG INTO SPECIFIC
ISSUES. THIS IS REALLY MEANT AS
AN OVERVIEW. WE REALLY DON'T
EXPECT ANY OF YOU TO READ ALL
250 PAGES, BUT TO THE EXTENT
THERE ARE INDIVIDUAL
DEPARTMENTS OF INTEREST THAT
YOU MIGHT WANT TO HAVE YOUR
STAFF READ THROUGH, I LEARNED A
LOT BY READING IT. I DO
RECOMMEND IT.
>> DIRECTOR NOBLE, I WILL TAKE
A MOMENT TO EXPAND ON THAT.
THIS YEAR WE IMPLEMENTED SOME
BUDGET REFORM PROCESS REFORMS
BY HAVING THIS FIVE-YEAR LOOK
BACK RATHER THAN LOOKING AT THE
BUDGET INCREMENTALLY. THIS IS A
REALLY NICE UPDATE TO IT SO
THAT WE TAKE WHAT WE WERE
WORKING WITH , ESPECIALLY
DURING THE DEPARTMENT
PRESENTATIONS, ADDING CENTRAL
STAFF ANALYSIS. THIS IS A
PROCESS I HOPE WE CONTINUE INTO
THE FUTURE EVERY YEAR JUST
UPDATING IT SO WE CAN HAVE MORE
OF A HISTORICAL LOOK BACK EACH
YEAR RATHER THAN TAKING BUDGET
INCREMENTALLY. REALLY
APPRECIATE THIS.
>> THANK YOU. JUST NOTING THAT
THE POLICY CONSIDERATION PAPERS
WILL BE ROLLING OUT AS THE
AGENDAS ARE PUBLISHED, JUST
NOTING THAT WE HAVE ROLLING
DEADLINES INTERNALLY TO GET
THOSE OUT. YOU WILL SEE THOSE
THE DAY BEFORE FOR EACH. WITH
THAT, WE WILL MOVE INTO A QUICK
OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSED
BUDGET. I ALSO WANTED VERY MUCH
THANK FOR HIS WORK , AND HIS
WIFE HAD A NEW BABY TWO WEEKS
AGO, BUT HE HAS STILL BEEN
SUPPORTING THE TEAM AND HAS
BEEN REALLY INSTRUMENTAL IN
HELPING US ANALYZE THE BUDGET.
HE WOULD OTHERWISE BE HERE
PRESENTING HIS WORK, BUT I AM
DOING THAT ON HIS BEHALF. JUST
NOTING THIS IS A REALLY HIGH
LEVEL SUMMARY. MODE D -- MORE
DETAILS WILL BE . WITH THAT, I
WILL NOTE THAT THE 2025
PROPOSED BUDGET IS $8.3
BILLION, REPRESENTING AN
INCREASE OF OVER $420 MILLION
AS COMPARED TO THE 2024 ADOPTED
BUDGET . THIS WOULD FURTHER
INCREASE BY OVER $275 MILLION
TO EIGHT.$5 BILLION IN 2026.
THE VAST MAJORITY OF THIS
INCREASE IS DUE TO INCREASED
LABOR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
ANNUAL WAGE INCREASE THAT WAS
NEGOTIATED WITH CITY UNIONS,
AND ALSO PROVIDED TO
NON-REPRESENTED WORKERS, AS
WELL AS RELATED ADJUSTMENTS.
>> YOLANDA, -- YOU ARE LOOKING
DOWN.
>> SORRY. I AM BACK UP. TRYING
TO GET MY NUMBERS RIGHT HERE.
$359 MILLION FOR THIS IN 2025,
AND AN ADDITIONAL $24 MILLION
IN 2026 IS DUE TO THIS , THESE
INCREASED LABOR COSTS. THERE IS
ALSO THE JUMPSTART TRANSFER TO
THE GENERAL FUND OF $287
MILLION IN 2025 AND $202
MILLION IN 2026 THAT WILL BE
DISCUSSED IN MORE DETAIL IN
TOM'S PRESENTATION. JUST
NOTING THAT PERSONNEL COSTS FOR
WORKERS ACROSS ALL FUNDS ARE
ABOUT ONE THIRD OF THE OVERALL
BUDGET, AND OVER HALF OF THE
GENERAL FUND BUDGET. THERE ARE
ALSO A FEW NOTABLE LARGE
INCREASES ACROSS THE
DEPARTMENTS . $72 MILLION IN
2025 AND $101 MILLION IN 2026
FOR SEATTLE CITY LIGHT FOR
PURCHASE OF POWER TO MEET
ANTICIPATED LOAD GROWTH AND
COMPLY WITH THE NEW REGULATIONS
AS THE DEPARTMENT ADDS NEAR
ENERGY RESOURCES TO THE
UTILITIES LONG-TERM PURCHASE
POWER PORTFOLIO. $14 MILLION OF
GENERAL FUND CONTRIBUTION TO
THE JUDGMENT AND CLAIMS FUND IN
2025 BASED ON ACTUARIAL
PROJECTIONS OF ANTICIPATED
LOSSES THAT DEPARTMENTS HAVE
INCURRED OVER THE PREVIOUS FIVE
YEARS. THIS IS A 30% INCREASE
OVER THE 2024 ADOPTED BUDGET ,
AND THE EXECUTIVE EXPECTS THIS
TO MODERATE IN THE NEXT FEW
YEARS BEGINNING IN 2026. ONE OF
THE NOTABLE ADDITION IS $10
MILLION GENERAL FUND TO THE
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR
EMPHASIS PATROLS OVER TIME IN
2025 TO ALLOW THE DEPARTMENT TO
CONTINUE TO DEPLOY EMPHASIS
PATROLS IN AREAS WHERE CRIME IS
CONCENTRATED. OBVIOUSLY, MORE
INFORMATION IN THE SEATTLE
POLICE DEPARTMENT REVIEW. ONTO
POSITION CHANGES. THE PROPOSED
BUDGET SHOWS A NET DECREASE OF
ABOUT 17 FULL-TIME EQUIVALENTS
IN 2025 AND 2026 WILL SEE A NET
INCREASE OF 28 FTE. INCLUDING
2024 LEGISLATIVE CHANGES THAT
HAPPENED THROUGH EITHER THE
MIDYEAR SUPPLEMENTAL ORDINANCE
OR OTHER STANDALONE BILLS, THIS
YEAR THE COUNCIL ADDED A TOTAL
OF 51 FTE, RESULTING IN A NET
GAIN OF ABOUT 38 FTE IN 2025
AND A TOTAL OF 63 FTE ACROSS
THE BIENNIUM. THIS CHART BEFORE
YOU ONLY SHOWS THE NEW POSITION
CHANGES INCLUDED IN THE
PROPOSED BUDGET. NOT THE ONES
THAT WERE LEGISLATED THAT I
DESCRIBED PREVIOUSLY. ONLY
THOSE DEPARTMENTS WITH PROPOSED
CHANGES HAD MORE THAN FIVE FTE
NAMED ON THE SLIDE. ALL OTHERS
ARE ALL OTHER DEPARTMENTS IN
THE MIDDLE. DEPARTMENTS WITH
THE LARGEST FTE ACROSS THE BY
ENEMA -- BIENNIUM ARE THE
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT WHICH
WILL ADD 40, OVER HALF OF WHICH
ARE REAL-TIME CRYING CENTER
ANALYSTS TO FULLY STAFF THE
REAL-TIME CRYING CENTER, IT
ALSO AT CIVILIAN INVESTIGATORS
TO THE OFFICE OF POLICE
ACCOUNTABILITY AND
INVESTIGATIVE SUPPORT TO ASSIST
DETECTIVES AND COVER A NUMBER
OF TEMPORARY COMMUNITY CRISIS
RESPONSE POSITIONS TO PERMANENT
POSITIONS. SEATTLE PUBLIC
UTILITIES WOULD ADD 75 FTE,
MOST OF WHICH ARE TO SUPPORT
VARIOUS STRATEGIC BUSINESS PLAN
PRIORITIES. OTHERS WOULD BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR SEWER PERMIT,
WATER TREATMENT FACILITY, AND
ONE TO ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN
THE CITY UP ITS OWN TREE
NURSERY. NINE FTE FROM SPU WILL
BE TRANSFERRED TO THE SEATTLE
PARKS AND RECREATION FOR
GRAFFITI ABATEMENT SERVICES.
SEATTLE CITY LIGHT WOULD ADD 12
FTE TO SUPPORT THE CITY UP ITS
TRANSPORTATION AND BUILDING
ELECTRIFICATION GOALS, REDUCE
PUBLIC UTILITY AND POWER SUPPLY
COSTS, AND TO ADDRESS CYBER
SECURITY RISKS. FINALLY, OF
NOTE ARE THE HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT, WHICH WOULD ADD
SEVEN FTE, MOST OF WHICH ARE
VICTIM ADVOCATE POSITIONS TO
ASSIST SURVIVORS OF COMMERCIAL
SEXUAL EXPLOITATION. OF THE NEW
POSITIONS WOULD PROVIDE HIM IN
A STRAIGHT UP SUPPORT FOR THE
UNIFIED CARE TEAM AND ADDRESS
SCHOOL-BASED VIOLENCE
INTERVENTION. THERE IS A NET
DECREASE IN POSITIONS IN 2025,
WHICH IS THE RESULT OF THE
PROPOSED AGGREGATION OF OVER
120 FTE . 63 FTE IN THE
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT , SEATTLE I.T., 20
IN SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN
RESOURCES, 20 AND DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES, AND 20 IN THE SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION AND
INSPECTIONS. DESPITE THIS
PROPOSED AGGREGATION, THERE
STILL A 359 MILLION OR 14%
INCREASE IN CELLULAR ARRAYS AND
BENEFITS AS COMPARED TO THE
2020 24 -- 2024 BUDGET.
>> YOLANDA, CAN YOU SAY THAT
ONE MORE TIME? BECAUSE DESPITE
THESE AGGREGATIONS, THERE IS
STILL A NET INCREASE IN COSTS
RELATED TO SALARIES AND
BENEFITS ACROSS THE CITY.
>> THANK YOU.
>> I WANT TO CLARIFY ON THAT
LAST SLIDE. THESE ARE THE
DECREASE IN POSITIONS. IN THE
DARK COLOR , THESE ARE THE
INCREASES IN THIS 2025-BUDGET
PROPOSAL.
>> CORRECT.
>> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I
WAS READING THAT. THANK YOU.
>> THE BARS SHOW 2025 VERSUS
2026. THERE ARE FEWER CHANGES
IN 2026.
>> SO THE DARK IS 2026.
>> CORRECT. LIGHTER GREEN IS
2025.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ONTO CENTRAL SERVICES COSTS.
THESE ARE INDIRECT COSTS THAT
ARE COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS
OVERHEAD OR CENTRAL SERVICES.
THESE ARE COSTS THAT ACCOUNT
FOR SUPPORT SERVICES THAT ARE
PROVIDED BY MULTIPLE
DEPARTMENTS , PRIMARILY THE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES,
SEATTLE I.T., AND SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES.
IT INCLUDES CENTRALLY MANAGED
COSTS FOR HEALTHCARE,
RETIREMENT AND INDUSTRIAL AND
INSURANCE CHARGES FOR THE CITY.
THE PROPOSED BUDGET WOULD ADD
$37 MILLION IN 2025, A 4%
INCREASE, AS COMPARED TO 2024.
AND AN ADDITIONAL $53 MILLION
IN 2026. AN ADDITIONAL 5% ON
TOP OF THAT FOR CENTRAL
SERVICES THESE INCREASES ARE
MOSTLY DUE TO INCREASED RATES
FOR HEALTHCARE AND WORKER'S
COMPENSATION . HEALTHCARE COSTS
ARE DETERMINED BY THE CITY
HEALTHCARE ACTUARY BASED ON
ACTUAL CLAIMS OVER THE PAST TWO
YEARS. THESE WOULD INCREASE
THAT ABOUT A PERCENT IN 2025
AND AN ADDITIONAL 7% IN 2026.
THE WORKERS COMPENSATION IS
FUNDED BY CITY DEPARTMENTS
BASED ON EACH DEPARTMENT UPPER
SHARE OF MEDICAL AND TIME LOSS
CLAIMS OVER THE PAST THREE
YEARS. THESE RATES WOULD
INCREASE BY 41% IN 2025 AS
COMPARED TO 2024. THE NEED TO
REPLENISH RESERVES.
>> YOLANDA, BEFORE YOU MOVE ON,
CAN YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL WORK THE
CONSULTANT IS DOING RIGHT NOW?
>> I WILL TALK ABOUT THAT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THESE RATES ARE ASSOCIATED
WITH THE SEATTLE I.T. , SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
AND DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES. THESE
WOULD ALL DECREASE IN 2025 DUE
TO THE PROPOSED AGGREGATION OF
THE POSITIONS I DESCRIBED
PREVIOUSLY. I WILL TALK MORE
ABOUT THIS AT THE END OF MY
PRESENTATION. JUST A QUICK
SNAPSHOT OF THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. THE
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
SPANS SIX YEARS AND THE
PROPOSED BUDGET SHOWS
APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FIRST
TWO YEARS. CITYWIDE THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TOTALS $8.1
BILLION AND OVER 70% OF THAT IS
FOR UTILITY PROJECTS. AS YOU
ALL ARE WELL AWARE, THE SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION'S
BUDGET DOES NOT ASSUME PASSAGE
OF THE 2024 TRANSPORTATION LEVY
, AND THUS, WAS TRANSMITTED
WITH ABOUT A 30% REDUCTION TO
ITS TOTAL BUDGET, MOST OF WHICH
WAS APPLIED TO ITS CAPITAL
PORTFOLIO. NOTABLE IN THE SDOT
BUDGET IS INCLUSION OF THE
CULTURE CONNECTOR STARTING IN
2030 , BUT THIS HAS NO
IDENTIFIED SOURCE OF FUNDING AT
THIS TIME. AS YOU ALL ALSO
KNOW, SDOT WILL COME TO
COMMITTEE NEXT WEEK TO TALK
ABOUT ITS PACKAGE OF AMENDMENTS
IN THE EVENT THAT THERE LEVY
PASSES. THE REMAINDER OF THE
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDING IS
SPREAD ACROSS PARKS ,
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES,
SEATTLE CENTER, PUBLIC LIBRARY,
AND SEATTLE I.T.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> NO. SORRY. THAT WAS THE LAST
TIME.
>> ONTO FUTURE CONSIDERATION. I
WANTED TO KNOW A COUPLE ITEMS
FOR THE COUNCIL THAT WILL OCCUR
AFTER THE BUDGET IS ADOPTED
THIS YEAR. ONE OF THOSE IS
RELATED TO CENTRAL SERVICE
COSTS. DURING LAST YEAR'S
MID-BIANNUAL BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
DELIBERATIONS, CENTRAL STAFF
NOTED IT WAS DIFFICULT TO TRACK
AND CONNECT VARIOUS CENTRAL
RATES TO BUDGET CHANGES IN
INDIVIDUAL DEPARTMENTS AND
FUNDS . THIS LACK OF CLARITY
LIMITED THE CITY'S ABILITY TO
UNDERSTAND BUDGET IMPACTS, AND
MAY COST IMPLICATIONS OF
CENTRAL INTERNAL SERVICES.
AFTER THE COUNCIL ADOPTED THE
BUDGET LAST YEAR, IT ALSO
ADOPTED RESOLUTION 32116
RELATED TO THE CITY'S ANNUAL
BUDGET PROCESS, WHICH INCLUDED
A SECTION REQUESTING THAT THE
CITY BUDGET OFFICE, DEPARTMENT
OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATOR
SERVICES, SEATTLE I.T. AND
SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN
RESOURCES PROVIDE MORE
INFORMATION ABOUT CENTRAL COSTS
TO INFORM THE 2025 -26 BIENNIUM
IN RESPONSE TO THE CITY -- IN
RESPONSE, THE CITY BUDGET
OFFICE HAS CONTRACTED A
CONSULTANT THAT STARTED EARLIER
THIS YEAR TO CONDUCT AN
EVALUATION OF THE INTERNAL
SERVICES OF THE CITY. THIS
EFFORT IS CURRENTLY UNDERWAY
WITH THE CONSULTANT ENGAGING
WITH SEATTLE I.T., FAS AND SDH
ARE TO UNDERSTAND THE PROGRAMS
AND SERVICES EACH PROVIDES. WE
EXPECT THIS TO COMPLETE IN TIME
TO INFORM THE 2026 MID-BIANNUAL
BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS NEXT YEAR.
MORE TO COME. THE NEXT ITEM --
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AND
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> LOOKS LIKE WE ARE SEATTLE
NICE. WHOEVER WANTS TO GO
FIRST.
>> THANK YOU. ON THIS
CONSULTANT ENGAGEMENT, DID THIS
INCLUDE LOOKING AT THE BENEFITS
SIDE , HEALTHCARE, FOR
INSTANCE, LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW,
TAKING ANOTHER LOOK TO SEE IF
THERE ARE OTHER COMPANIES WE
CAN USE THAT CAN PROVIDE THE
SAME LEVEL OF SUPPORT BUT FOR
LESS MONEY, THINGS OF THAT
NATURE?
>> I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT IS IN
THE SCOPE OF THIS CONTRACT,
BECAUSE IT IS A PRIORITY-BASED
BUDGETING PROJECT. I DESCRIBED
IT IN A LITTLE MORE DETAIL IN
THE FIRST PAPER IN THE BUDGET
OVERVIEW DOCUMENT. IT IS REALLY
FOCUSED ON THE CITY'S INTERNAL
SERVICES AND HOW IT PROVIDES
THOSE TWO DEPARTMENTS JUST SO
WE HAVE A MORE CLARITY ON, YOU
KNOW, HOW THIS WORKS. BECAUSE
IT HASN'T REALLY BEEN
SCRUTINIZED IN RECENT YEARS, TO
MY KNOWLEDGE.
>> [ OVERLAPPING SPEAKERS ]
WHETHER THERE IS OVERLAP AND WE
CAN DO IT MORE EFFICIENTLY.
>> CORRECT. ONE OF THE THINGS A
CONSULTANT IS DOING IS LOOKING
AT PEER CITIES AND WHERE THEY
HAVE ALSO DONE A SIMILAR
EXERCISE SO THEY CAN COMPARE
HOW SEATTLE IS IN RELATION TO
THOSE CITIES.
>> I DESCRIBED IT AS A
BENCHMARKING EXERCISE. DETAILED
BUDGET DATA FROM COMPARABLE
CITIES COULD GIVE US A HANDLE
ON WHAT SHARE OF THEIR BUDGETS
ARE SPENT IN THESE SERVICES AND
WHAT SPECIFIC SERVICES THEY ARE
GETTING WHERE IT LOOKS LIKE WE
ARE THE HIGH COST OF LOW COST
PRODUCER OF CERTAIN SERVICERS.
>> THANK YOU, BEN. I HAD HEARD
THAT THE COUNTY PROVIDES
BENEFITS. WE ARE PAYING MORE,
AND SO, I WONDERED IF THERE IS
AN OPPORTUNITY WITH KEEPING THE
LEVEL OF SERVICE WE ARE
PROVIDING TO OUR TEAMS HERE AT
THE CITY, THE WORKFORCE, SEEING
IF THERE IS OPPORTUNITY TO
SOMETIMES -- SOMETIMES WE CAN
LOOK AT THOSE COMPANIES AND SEE
IF WE CAN DO BETTER COST WISE.
ANYWAY, THANK YOU.
>> SUPER HIGH LEVEL BROAD
EXPERIENCE, THE BIGGEST OF OUR
EXPENSES IS HEALTHCARE. WE ARE
SELF INSURED AND ULTIMATELY
PAYING THE BILLS DIRECTLY FROM
THE CITY. WE HAVE ENGAGED A
NUMBER OF FIRMS TO HELP US
INCENTIVIZE PEOPLE TO ENGAGE
THE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM IN
DIFFERENT WAYS. IDEALLY, IN
WAYS THAT ARE ULTIMATELY MORE
COST-EFFECTIVE, PREVENTATIVE
WHEN APPROPRIATE FOR PEOPLE
WITH CHRONIC CONDITIONS, BUT
BETTER MANAGED. I AM NOT UP TO
SPEED ON THE MOST RECENT WORK
IN THE AREA. THAT IS SOMETHING
IN THE CONTEXT OF THE BUDGET
REVIEW IS UNDERWAY, BUT IF
YOU'RE INTERESTED, WE CAN
ENGAGE POTENTIALLY NEXT YEAR
WITH FURTHER DISCUSSION AND
REVIEW OF WHAT THOSE EFFORTS
HAVE BEEN TO DATE AND WHERE
THEY MAYBE HAD A.
>> THAT WOULD BE GREAT. FOR THE
RECORD, I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE
ARE PROVIDING THE SAME LEVEL OF
HEALTHCARE SERVICE TO FOLKS,
BUT I KNOW YOU CAN NEGOTIATE
WITH COMPANIES AND WIND UP
GETTING OTHER DEALS, ET CETERA?
THAT IS ALL I AM GETTING AT.
>> I SEE COUNCILMEMBER MOORE
WILL HOLD YOUR QUESTIONS UNTIL
THE END. I WILL TAKE THIS
MOMENT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT THIS
IS AN EXAMPLE OF BUDGET REFORM
NOT WE HAVE COME OUT
OF THE PANDEMIC AND DIDN'T
HAVE TO GO THROUGH LAYOFFS
DURING THE PANDEMIC WHEN
MUNICIPALITIES ACROSS THE
NATION WERE. WITH CLIFFORD
FUNDS EXPIRING THIS YEAR, THE
COVID RELIEF FUNDS , AND
PLAINLY WHICH, EXPIRING THIS
YEAR, WHERE SEEING OURSELVES AT
A MOMENT TO HAVE TO MAKE THESE
HARD CHOICES. WE ARE MAKING BIG
DECISIONS THIS YEAR, AND WHAT
IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN LEAPING
OFF A CLIFF IS CREATING A
PATHWAY TO SUSTAINABILITY. WE
DO SEE THE FEDERAL AND NATIONAL
MARKET STARTING TO STABILIZE
AND MOVE INTO SLOW GROWTH
DESPITE OUR LOCAL REGIONAL
ISSUES THAT ARE IMPACTING
SNOHOMISH AND KING COUNTY RIGHT
NOW. AND SO, THIS IS JUST ONE
OF THOSE PATHWAYS WE WILL KEEP
WORKING ON BECAUSE WE ARE GOING
TO MAKE THE DECISIONS THIS
YEAR, BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO
MAKE ALL OF THE DECISIONS THIS
YEAR. BACK TO YOU, DEPUTY
DIRECTOR WOO.
>> MORE TO COME ON THAT ONE.
ALSO NOTING THAT THE FAMILY
PRESCHOOL PROMISE RENEWAL WILL
COME FORTH TO THIS BODY NEXT
YEAR AS THE CURRENT SEVEN YEAR,
$690 MILLION LEVY, WILL EXPIRE.
THIS FUNDS EARLY LEARNING,
COLLEGE READINESS, PHYSICAL AND
MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES TO
SUPPORT LEARNING, AND POST
SECONDARY EDUCATIONAL
OPPORTUNITIES. THERE ARE
SEVERAL PROPOSED REDUCTIONS
THAT BEGAN -- BEGIN IN 2026
THAT INDICATE PROGRAMS THE
EXECUTIVE MAY BE PLANNING TO
FUND WITH THIS LEVY, INCLUDING
A NUMBER OF SWEETENED BEVERAGE
TAX , EARLY EDUCATION PROGRAMS.
SINCE THE PANDEMIC, THE
SWEETENED BEVERAGE TAX REVENUES
HAVE NOT BEEN SUFFICIENT TO
SUSTAIN THE PROGRAM EXPANSIONS
ORIGINALLY FUNDED. WE HAVE HAD
TO BACKFILL THE GENERAL FUND OR
OTHER FUNDS OVER TIME .
ALTHOUGH IT IS SLIGHTLY BETTER,
IT IS STILL INSUFFICIENT TO
FULLY FUND THESE PROGRAMS THAT
ARE IMPORTANT TO COMMUNITY ,
AND SO, THEY WERE LOOKING TO
SEE IF, PERHAPS, THESE COULD BE
FUNDED BY THE LEVY INSTEAD AND
JUST NOTING THAT THE SWEETENED
BEVERAGE TAX FUND RESERVE IS
BASICALLY, WILL BE ZEROED OUT
TO MAINTAIN FUNDING IN 2025 FOR
THESE PROGRAMS, LOOKING TO 2026
TO SEE HOW ELSE THESE COULD BE
FUNDED. ADDITIONALLY, THE OTHER
PROGRAMS CURRENTLY SUPPORTED BY
EITHER THE JUMPSTART FINDER
GENERAL FUND THAT MAY SHIFT TO
THE LEVY AND RECOMMEND LOOKING
AT THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
AND EARLY LEARNING OVERVIEW
PAPER FOR MORE DETAILS THEY
ARE. -- THERE. WITH THAT, I
HAVE CONCLUDED MY PRESENTATION.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHAIR.
I HAD A COUPLE OF QUICK
QUESTIONS ON SLIDE TWO UNDER
THE ANNUAL WAGE INCREASES AND
RELATED MARKET ADJUSTMENTS.
WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THAT IS THE
DRIVER ? I KNOW YOU MENTIONED
THE JUDGMENT AND CLAIMS AS A
30% INCREASE. JUST WONDERING
WHAT THE DWI IS.
>> THERE IS A $420 MILLION
INCREASE, $359 MILLION DUE TO
THE ANNUAL WAGE INCREASE FOR
MARKET ADJUSTMENTS . THE
JUDGMENT AND CLAIMS WAS $14
MILLION.
>> SO THE ANNUAL AWI RELATED
ADJUSTMENTS IS 14% OF THE
SIGNIFICANT DRIVER CHANGE
BETWEEN 2024 AND 2026?
>> SORRY. I WILL GET THIS UP ON
THE SCREEN. SO THERE IS $424
MILLION INCREASE . OF THAT,
$359 MILLION IS DUE TO THE
ANNUAL WAGE INCREASE. DOING
MATH AT THE TABLE. I THINK IT
IS AROUND 90%, I THINK, IS THE
INCREASE, SOMEWHERE AROUND
THERE. BETWEEN THAT , SORRY,
THE JUMPSTART FUND TRANSFER.
THOSE ARE THE LARGE MAJORITY OF
THE INCREASE. I AM SORRY, YOUR
QUESTION ON JUDGMENT AND
CLAIMS.
>> I AM NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT
PERCENTAGE OF THE DRIVERS, WHAT
PERCENTAGE IS THE ANNUAL WAGE
INCREASE.
>> WE ARE GOING TO DO SOME
QUICK MATH FOR YOU.
>> 85% IS THE ANNUAL WAGE
INCREASE.
>> THANK YOU. AND THOSE SALARY
AND BENEFIT INCREASES, THOSE
ARE ACROSS THE BOARD, RIGHT?
FOR ALL DEPARTMENTS?
>> CORRECT.
>> AND THAT DOES INCLUDE ALL
THE LABOR CONTRACTS THIS
COUNCIL HAS APPROVED?
>> THAT'S CORRECT. MARKET
ADJUSTMENTS AS PART OF THAT AS
WELL DATING BACK TO, I THINK,
2021. JUST KIND OF ROLLING
THROUGH AS THERE HAVE BEEN
EVALUATIONS AROUND, YOU KNOW,
HOW OUR POSITIONS ARE PAID
VERSUS OTHERS. THERE IS THAT
ASPECT, IN ADDITION TO THE
ANNUAL WAGE INCREASE.
>> OKAY. SO THAT INCLUDES THE
CITY UNION CONTRACTS, AS WELL
AS FIRE AND ALL THE INDEPENDENT
UNIONS AS WELL?
>> YEAH.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT
SLIDE FOR -- FOUR. THERE'S A
HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE
FIGURES FOR, I AM ASSUMING,
2025 AND 2026. YOU MENTIONED
EACH CATEGORY EVEN IN THE
DEFICIT CATEGORIES. I AM
WONDERING IF YOU CAN EXPLAIN
WHY THERE IS SUCH A SIGNIFICANT
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO
YEARS.
>> I CAN EASILY CLEAN THE 2025
CHANGES IN TERMS OF THE
DEFICITS, BECAUSE THOSE ARE
RELATED TO THE POSITION
AGGREGATIONS IN EACH OF THOSE
DEPARTMENTS. BECAUSE THOSE ARE
PURELY LABOR RELATED COSTS.
THAT IS WHY THOSE ARE GOING
DOWN IN 2025, BUT THERE IS --
YEAH, SORRY.
>> IN 2025 THERE IS A NET
REDUCTION . EACH DEPARTMENT WAS
FACING ITS OWN SET OF
INFLATIONARY PRESSURES, BUT
THEY ARE ACTUALLY ABLE TO
REDUCE , ELIMINATE THAT EFFECT
AND LEAD TO AN OVERALL
REDUCTION. THEY SET A NEW BASE
FOR 2025. LOOKING AT THE LOWER
HALF OF THE TRUCK, I.T., FAS,
THEY SET OF LOWER BASE FOR
2025, AND THERE ARE A SET OF
INFLATIONARY AWI INCREASES THAT
FROM THAT LOWER BASE ADD COST
IN 2026. THAT IS WHY YOU SEE
THE REDUCTION IN 2025 FOLLOWED
BY THE INCREASE IN 2026.
MEDICINE INCREASE RELATIVE TO
THAT NOW LOWERED BASE.
HEALTHCARE, I HAVE TO CHECK.
THAT COULD BE A COMPOUNDING
EFFECT. $27 MILLION A YEAR ,
THAT INCREMENT IN 2025 BECOMES
A HIGHER BASE FOR 2026. THEN
THERE IS ADDITIONAL INCREASES
WITH GROWING PRESSURE ON
HEALTHCARE COSTS .
>> WE ARE LOOKING INTO SOME OF
THESE NUMBERS. THIS IS JUST
WHAT WE WERE PERCEIVING IN THE
TRANSMITTED BUDGETS. WE ARE
STILL TRYING TO INTERROGATE
SOME OF THESE INCREASES AS
WELL.
>> YEAH, I MEAN, THE COSTS -- I
MEAN, IT GOES DOWN BY HALF
BETWEEN 2025 AND 2026. I DON'T
UNDERSTAND HOW HEALTHCARE GETS
CHEAPER OR WORKERS COMPENSATION
GOES DOWN BY $60 MILLION OR
OTHER CENTRAL SERVICE EXPENSES
-- $16 MILLION, OR OTHER
CENTRAL SERVICE EXPENSES --
>> THIS IS A NET CHANGE. IT IS
A $51 MILLION INCREASE IN 2025
AND $27 MILLION INCREASE IN
2026. IT IS NOT GOING DOWN. IT
IS $27 MILLION IN ADDITION TO
THE $51 MILLION. SORRY. A
LITTLE CONFUSING.
>> SO WILL INCREASE $27 MILLION
?
>> ABSOLUTELY. CORRECT.
>> GOT IT. OKAY.
>> I CONFUSED THE COLORS MYSELF
FOR A MOMENT. THANK YOU.
>> ALWAYS CONFUSING WITH THE
TWO YEARS. IT IS EASIER WITH
THE ONE.
>> THANKS.
>> JUST TO CLARIFY, FOR THE $51
MILLION , THAT IS IN ADDITION
TO WHAT WE ARE CURRENTLY
SPENDING.
>> CORRECT. THIS IS THE CHANGE.
>> THE DARK GREEN IS IN
ADDITION TO THE $51 MILLION.
>> CORRECT. IT IS ADDITIVES.
>> THAT IS A CORRECTION WHAT I
SAID. I APOLOGIZE.
>> WE WILL TRY TO DO THIS BAR
CHART IN A DIFFERENT WAY THE
NEXT TIME. [ INAUDIBLE ]
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
FIRST, A QUICK COMMENT ON SLIDE
NUMBER SIX . WITH RESPECT TO
THE BLURB ABOUT THE PENDING
CONSULTANT REPORT AND STUDY ,
KIND OF ANALYZING AND ASSESSING
POLICIES -- WHEN YOU MENTIONED
THE BENCHMARKING EXERCISE BEING
UNDERTAKEN RIGHT NOW, THAT
FILLED MY CUP. THAT GAVE ME THE
WARM AND FUZZIES. AS YOU ALL
KNOW, I HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT
THAT, THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT
YEAR-ROUND. I WILL CONTINUE TO
TALK ABOUT THAT. IT IS
IMPORTANT FOR US TO
COLLABORATE. THAT IS REALLY THE
ONLY WAY, I THINK, TO LIVE UP
TO THE ONE SEATTLE APPROACH AND
A REGIONAL AND STATEWIDE
APPROACH, AND EVEN A NATIONAL
APPROACH ADHERING TO BEST
PRACTICES , AVOIDING
DUPLICATION OF EFFORTS ACROSS
DEPARTMENTS, UNDERSTANDING, YOU
KNOW, WHAT I CALL POLICIES,
PRACTICES AND PROCESSES.
UNDERSTANDING WHAT OTHER
MUNICIPALITIES ARE DOING IN
SIMILAR AREAS IS VERY
INSTRUCTIVE. KUDOS TO THAT. I
LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING THAT
REPORT WHEN FINALIZED. COMMENT
ON, OR QUESTION, RATHER, ON
SLIDE NUMBER THREE. THE
POSITIONS OF PERSONNEL CHANGES
SLIDE. YOLANDA, I HEARD YOU
SPEAK TO CERTAIN CYBERSECURITY
PERSONNEL AND INVESTMENTS. I
CAN'T RECALL WHICH DEPARTMENT
THAT WAS PURPORTEDLY FOR, BUT
CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE
ABOUT WHAT THAT INVESTMENT IS
AND WHERE THAT IS GOING?
>> THAT WAS IN CAD -- SEATTLE
CITY LIGHT. I CANNOT SPEAK TO
ANY DETAIL ON THAT. IT MIGHT BE
OUTLINED IN THE SEATTLE CITY
LIGHT PAPER. I WOULD RECOMMEND
LOOKING THERE. I DO NOT KNOW.
BUT I UNDERSTAND IT IS
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, OBVIOUSLY
, ESPECIALLY IN OUR UTILITIES,
TO HAVE SUCH A FOCUS. I CANNOT
GIVE YOU MORE DETAIL ON THAT AT
THIS TIME.
>> SURE. I COULDN'T AGREE
MORE. I AM A LAWYER, ALTHOUGH A
NONPRACTICING LAWYER, AND I
WOULD SAY , I WAS A TECH
LAWYER, BUT MORE SPECIFICALLY ,
I WAS A CYBERSECURITY LAWYER
WHEN I WAS PRACTICING. SO
HELPING ORGANIZATIONS AND
COMPANIES BE MORE RESILIENT AND
ENHANCING THEIR CYBERSECURITY
PASTOR AND BEST PRACTICES --
POSTURE AND BEST PRACTICES IS A
CRITICALLY IMPORTANT FUNCTION
THAT I KNOW FIRSTHAND. WE HAVE
SEEN FIRSTHAND WITH, WAS AT THE
LIBRARY THIS YEAR?
CYBERSECURITY ATTACK. CRIMINAL
ACTORS. NATIONSTATE ACTORS.
LANDMINES ARE EVERYWHERE. THE
CYBER LANDMINES ARE EVERYWHERE.
I THINK THE PORT RECENTLY
DECLINED TO PAY FOR RANSOMWARE
ATTACK . IT MAKES A LOT OF
SENSE AND WE CONTINUE TO
STRENGTHEN AND BEEF UP OUR
CYBERSECURITY PASTOR ACROSS THE
CITY -- POSTURE ACROSS THE
CITY, ESPECIALLY THE CRITICAL
INFRASTRUCTURE UTILITIES, LIKE
CITY LIGHT AND PUBLIC
UTILITIES, ET CETERA, WHICH ARE
FEDERALLY DESIGNATED EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT , PUBLIC SAFETY
CHAIR KETTLE. THEY ARE
FEDERALLY DESIGNATED IMPORTANT
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE ASSETS.
SO I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE THE
IMPORTANCE OF CONTINUING TO
STRENGTHEN OUR CYBERSECURITY
PASTOR -- POSTURE.
>> OBVIOUSLY, CYBERSECURITY IS
IMPORTANT TO THE ENTIRE CITY ,
BUT TO YOUR POINT, CITY LIGHT ,
AS AN ENERGY SUPPLIER, IS
SUBJECT TO FEDERAL REGULATION I
KNOW FROM PREVIOUS WORK IN THE
CITY THAT THE REQUIREMENTS
AROUND THEIR I.T.
INFRASTRUCTURE IS ANOTHER
LEVEL. WITHOUT HAVING ANY OF
THE DETAILS MYSELF, IT SORT OF
MAKES SENSE TO ME THAT THEY
WOULD HAVE A -- CITY LIGHT
WOULD HAVE AN EVER DEEPER FOCUS
ON THAT ISSUE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
FOLLOWED BY COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STRAUSS. I
WANT TO SAY FIRST, THANK YOU
DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
AND REALLY TO THE ENTIRE STAFF
FOR ALL THE WORK YOU HAVE BEEN
DOING. I HAVE BEEN PRIMARILY
ENGAGING WITH THE PUBLIC SAFETY
REALM, BUT NOT SOLELY. I REALLY
APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK . I
REALLY APPRECIATE IT. MY
QUESTION IS -- WELL, IT IS MORE
OF A STATEMENT. SLIDES THREE
AND SIX, I NOTE WHEN I SEE THE
PERSONNEL CHANGES , AND OUTSIDE
OF THE SDCI , THE REST ALL KIND
OF COME FROM WITHIN THE FAMILY
OF SUPPORT, ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT GENERALLY. IN VARIOUS
WAYS, I.T., FINANCE AND HR. I
AM KEENLY, LIKE MY COLLEAGUE AT
THE OTHER END OF THE DAIS , THE
CENTRAL SERVICE VALUATION. MY
EXPERIENCE AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL
WHEN BUDGETS KIND OF GET
BIGGER, AND ALSO THEY GO LIKE
THIS , AND WHEN THEY GO LIKE
THIS, THE INTENT IS TO CUT THE
ADMINISTRATOR SIDE OF THINGS
USUALLY WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING,
THE WORK DOESN'T GO AWAY, IT
JUST GETS TRANSFERRED TO THE
PEOPLE WHO WEREN'T DOING THAT
WORK IN THE FIRST PLACE. THAT
IS GOT TO BE PART OF THE
CONSIDERATIONS. YOU KNOW, IF WE
NEED TO GO FORWARD ON THAT,
FINE, BUT WE SHOULD DO IT EYES
WIDE OPEN. I SUSPECT THAT AT
THE CITY LEVEL THE EXPERIENCE
WILL BE DIFFERENT THAN MINE AT
THE FEDERAL LEVEL. THAT IS IT.
A STATEMENT. I CAN TURN IT INTO
A QUESTION, LIKE, WHAT YOU
THINK ABOUT THAT STATEMENT? THE
QUESTION IS THAT WE HAVE DONE
THIS BEFORE IN TERMS OF THE EBB
AND FLOW OF GOVERNMENT. DID WE
GO THROUGH THIS 10 OR 20 YEARS
AGO AND LEARN ANY LESSONS FROM
THAT TIME PERIOD?
>> WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH --
GREAT RECESSION IS THE ONE THAT
COMES TO MIND WITH CITY
LAYOFFS. AS AN EXAMPLE, IN
TERMS OF INDIVIDUALS, THE CITY
HAS A PROGRAM, I AM FLAKING ON
THE NAME, THAT OFFERS THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR CITY EMPLOYEES
WERE LAID OFF TO LOOK FOR
POSITIONS ELSEWHERE IN THE
CITY. AS YOU WILL SEE IN THE
STORE, THE SAME TIME OR
LIMITING AND THERE IS A NET
REDUCTION, THEIR NEW POSITIONS
OPENING IN OTHER DEPARTMENTS.
WHETHER THERE IS A SKILL SET
MATCH IS A DIFFERENT QUESTION.
THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT
THE SALES DEPARTMENT, HUMAN
RESOURCES, WILL ENGAGE IN.
>> I RECOGNIZE THAT. AGAIN, I
DO VALUE THE WORK OF HR, I.T.,
FINANCE ADMINISTRATION , AND MY
CONCERN IS, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH
GETS SHIFTED ON THOSE
INDIVIDUALS WHO NEED TO BE
DOING XYZ WORK ACROSS THEIR
DEPARTMENTS. THANK YOU.
>> AT A HIGH LEVEL, AS A
LONG-TIME BUREAUCRAT, I DO
WORRY AT TIMES THE CITY, THE
PRESSURES ARE CLEAR NOW TO
FOCUS CUTS ELSEWHERE FROM
DIRECT SERVICES, BUT THE
INTERNAL STRUCTURES ARE
ACTUALLY IMPORTANT. THE CITY IS
AN EMPLOYER OF 12,000 PLUS
EMPLOYEES DELIVERING AN AMAZING
ARRAY OF SERVICES AND PRODUCTS
. AND MANAGING THAT IN THE
INTERNALS OF THAT ARE NOT
TRIVIAL. I AM NOT ARGUING WITH
THE PRIORITY PLACED ON SERVICES
DELIVERED TO THE PUBLIC, BUT
THIS INFRASTRUCTURE PIECE, WE
STARVE OURSELVES TOO MUCH THAT
WE ACTUALLY WILL AFFECT THAT AS
WELL. IT IS HARD TO QUANTIFY
THAT. I'M NOT ARGUING AGAINST
ANY SPECIFIC PROPOSED CUT, BUT
JUST TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE
INTERNAL SERVICE DEFINITELY
DOES MAKE THE CITY WORK, IF YOU
WILL.
>> YES, AND SO FAR I LOOK
FORWARD TO THE VALUATION. THANK
YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> HARD TO FIGURE OUT WHERE TO
PUT ALL THIS STUFF. OUR LITTLE
SPACE HERE. I WANT TO STAY ON
THIS SLIDE FIRST, I WANT TO
ECHO WHAT COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE
IS SAYING, WHICH IS THAT , YOU
KNOW, EVEN THE INTERNALLY
FACING STAFF AT THE CITY
PROVIDE ALL OF US A REALLY
IMPORTANT SERVICE AND HELP KEEP
THE MACHINES MOVING. SO IT IS
TROUBLING TO SEE SO MANY
POSITIONS FOR THE CENTRAL
SERVICE COSTS BEING CONSIDERED
TO BE CUT. WHAT I AM INTERESTED
IN ABOUT THIS CHART -- AND I
UNDERSTAND, I AM LOOKING FOR
THE CARE AND USE CT ADDITIONS
WE MADE. I UNDERSTAND THOSE
WERE VOTED ON IN 2024 AND WERE
NOT PART OF THIS BUDGET, PER
SE, IN TERMS OF THE LEGISLATION
THAT CREATED THE POSITIONS, BUT
I AM TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IN
THE LAST BULLET POINT HERE, OF
THE -- I DON'T KNOW IF THEY
ARE INCLUDED IN THE $359
MILLION INCREASE OVER 2024
BUDGET, BUT I AM INTERESTED TO
KNOW WHERE THEY SHOW UP IN THIS
BUDGET, WHETHER IT -- YOU KNOW,
WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE $359
MILLION , OR WHAT SHARE OF THAT
, OF THE INCREASE OVER 2024
THAT ACCOUNTS FOR.
>> I'M NOT SURE WE CAN GIVE
YOU THE ANSWER NOW, BUT WE DO
HAVE COMING UP AND POLICY
CONSIDERATIONS PAPER ABOUT THE
CARE PROGRAM SPECIFICALLY. I
WOULD CALL OUT THE ADDITIONS
AND THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH
THEM AND NOT JUST THE
INCREMENTAL COST OF THE 2025
BUDGET THAT WERE APPROVED THIS
YEAR.
>> FOR THE UNIFIED CARE TEAM,
THAT IS BEEN REALLY HARD TO
TRACK. THERE IS NO LINE ITEM
FOR IT HERE. IT IS NOT IN THE
TABLE OF CONTENTS .
>> THAT WILL BE AN INDIVIDUAL
POLICY CONSIDERATION PAPER AS
WELL. THAT WILL BE BROUGHT
TOGETHER INTO ONE CALISTA
CONVERSATION. BECAUSE OF THAT
EXACT ISSUE. WANTED TO MAKE
SURE A GREAT ADVERTISING FOR
THE WAY WE HAVE ORGANIZED
PRESENTATIONS THIS WEEK SO WE
HAVE ONE SPECIFICALLY ON CARE
ONE SPECIFICALLY THE TOUCHES ON
UCT AND RAISES AN OVERVIEW FOR
THE VERY REASON YOU DESCRIBED.
ENOUGH DEPARTMENTS THAT YOU
CAN'T SEE EASILY IN THE BUDGET
DOCUMENTS THEMSELVES.
>> THANK YOU.
>> I AM GOING TO TAKE THIS
OPPORTUNITY, BECAUSE
COLLEAGUES, WE'RE CLEARLY
ALREADY DIGGING INTO THE
DETAILS HERE. TOMORROW WE WILL
HAVE OPC DEEP DIVE AND THEN WE
WILL HAVE ARTS AND CULTURE,
FOLLOWED BY THE SEATTLE CHANNEL
. TO THE POINT OF COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE, WE WOULD NOT HAVE THIS
BROADCASTED WITHOUT THE SEATTLE
CHANNEL THAT OUR INTERNAL
SERVICES. IN THE AFTERNOON WE
HAVE HEALTH AND HUMAN
DEPARTMENT RESOURCES FOLLOWED
BY , ON FRIDAY PARTICIPATORY
BUDGETING, HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT, UNIFIED CARE TEAM
AND THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT WITH MONDAY HAVING
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT , THE
CARE DEPARTMENT AND THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT, AS WELL AS THE CITY
ATTORNEY OFFICE, PUBLIC SAFETY
MONDAY , FOLLOWED BY TUESDAY
OUR JOINT MEETING OF THE
FORECAST COUNCIL. YOU WILL HEAR
THE NEWS AS SOON AS WE DO. THE
SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION AND THEIR OUT OF
SYNC PRESENTATION. COLLEAGUES,
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS
PRESENTATION? OTHERWISE, WE
WILL MOVE INTO THE NEXT AGENDA
ITEM. CLARK, I'M NOT SURE IF
WE WERE SUPPOSED TO READ EACH
ITEM INTO THE RECORD. I THINK
WE ARE. IF YOU COULD READ --
LET ME POLLUTE MY AGENDA AGAIN.
ITEM NUMBER TWO. ACTUALLY, WE
ALREADY HAD ITEM NUMBER TWO. IF
YOU COULD READ ITEM NUMBER TWO
IN AND THEN ITEM NUMBER THREE
TO KEEP US LEGAL.
>> OKAY. CENTRAL STAFF OVERVIEW
OF 2025 AND 2026 PROPOSED
BUDGETS. AGENDA ITEM 3, GENERAL
FUND BALANCING OVERVIEW.
>> JOINED BY TOM MIKESELL AND
DEPUTY DIRECTOR YOLANDA SUBBING
IN FOR EDWIN. THANK YOU FOR ALL
YOUR WORK. MOVING ON WITH TOM
MIKESELL. WE HAVE THE GENERAL
FUND BALANCING. THIS HAS BOTH A
MEMO AND PRESENTATION ATTACHED
. I WILL LET YOU TAKE IT AWAY.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. OUR
MORNING MEMBERS OF THE SLICK
BUDGET COMMITTEE. I AM YOUR
CENTRAL STAFF. THIS MORNING WE
ARE GOING TO BE COVERING AN
ANALYSIS OF THE GENERAL FUND
AND THE MAYOR'S 2025-26
BUDGET. JUST REAL QUICK, WHY DO
WE LOOK AT THE GENERAL FUND
MORE SPECIFICALLY? IT IS
GENERALLY BECAUSE IT IS THE
LEAST RESTRICTED REVENUE
SOURCE. IT IS THE FUNDS THAT
CAN BE USED FOR A VARIETY OF
CITY PURPOSES. AND FROM THAT
PERSPECTIVE, MANY COMMUNITY AND
COUNCIL PRIORITIES ARE FUNDED
WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND. THE
TRADE-OFFS IMPLICIT AND THE
BALANCE OF SIGNIFICANT
IMPORTANCE. I WILL DIVE RIGHT
IN WITH THIS REVIEW. WITH AN
OUTLINE OF THE OBJECTIVES I
HOPE TO COVER WITH YOU THIS
MORNING. WE ARE GOING TO GO
BACK IN TIME A LITTLE BIT AND
LOOK BACK AT THE 2024 BUDGET ,
HOW THE GENERAL FUND LOOKED
BACK LAST NOVEMBER WHEN THAT
BUDGET WAS ADOPTED , REVIEW
SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT
COUNCIL IS APPROVED SO FAR THIS
YEAR, AND THE IMPACT ON , AT
THE END IN 2024 BALANCE OF
THOSE DECISIONS. BEEN MOVING TO
SOME OF THE PROPOSALS IN THE
MAHER'S BUDGET, THE IMPACT ON
THE 2024 ENDING BALANCES FROM
THOSE CHANGES. AND THEN WRAP IT
UP WITH THE ULTIMATE SUMMATION
OF WHERE THE 2024 BUDGET IS
PROJECTED TO END, WHICH THEN
GENERATES RESOURCES AND THEN
ARE USED OR USE OF THE 2025
PROPOSAL. WE WILL FIRST LOOK AT
THE BASELINE TECHNICAL CHANGES,
KIND OF THE COST OF CONTINUING
THE 2024 PROGRAMS . STOP FOR A
SECOND AND SEE WHAT THE
BASELINE DEFICIT LOOKED LIKE.
THEN PROCEED INTO SOME OF THE
MAHER'S PROPOSED SPENDING
REVENUE CHANGES AGAIN, RECAP
WHAT THE FINAL BUDGET BALANCE
SITUATION LOOKS LIKE, THEN
PROCEED INTO A REVIEW OF THE
PROJECTING OUT OF THE GENERAL
FUND THROUGH THE NEXT TWO YEARS
TO SEE WHAT THE SUSTAINABILITY
VIEW IS, AND THEN END WITH A
SEGUE INTO JUMPSTART FUND AS IT
DOES PLAY A SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN
THE BALANCING OF THE GENERAL
FUND BUDGET. WITHOUT FURTHER
ADO, I WILL GO BACK IN THE WAY
BACK MACHINE ABOUT A YEAR AGO
WHEN THE 2024 BUDGET WAS
ADOPTED. WHAT YOU SEE ON YOUR
SCREEN IS THE PROJECTED
FINANCIAL PLAN THAT PROJECTED
AN APPROXIMATELY $224 MILLION
DEFICIT IN 2025 AND 2026.
ESSENTIALLY, THIS MEANS
REVENUES WERE 220 24 -- $224
MILLION SHORT. EXPENDITURES
THAT WOULD BE PROJECTED IN 2025
AND 2026. REAL QUICK, I
SHOULD'VE SAID THIS FROM THE
BEGINNING, THIS IS FAIRLY
TECHNICAL INFORMATION. THERE IS
AN EVEN MORE TECHNICAL MEMO
THAT HAS BEEN ATTACHED BUT I
WILL NOT COVER ALL OF THOSE ,
THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL. HAPPY TO
DISCUSS IT. EXTEMPORANEOUSLY AS
WE COVER THIS MATERIAL TODAY,
BUT THIS IS TECHNICAL. IN THE
VIEW OF THAT, I INCLUDED KEY
TAKEAWAYS ON EACH ONE OF THE
SLIDES OF WHAT I'VE YOU TO BE
THE MOST IMPORTANT SALIENT
DETAILS I WOULD HOPE YOU WOULD
TAKE AWAY FROM EACH ONE OF
THESE LINES. AND SO, WITH THAT,
YOU CAN SEE THE KEY TAKE AWAY
IS THAT THE BUDGET ADOPTED FOR
2024 LAST FALL PROJECTED AT
$224 MILLION DEFICIT FOR 2025
AND 2026. AND SO, AS I
MENTIONED , FIRST STEP IS TO
LOOK AT THE THINGS THAT COUNCIL
IS APPROVED SO FAR THIS YEAR.
WE STARTED THE PROCESS WITH THE
ASSUMPTION THAT THE GENERAL
FUND WOULD END WITH BASICALLY
$1 MILLION UNRESERVED FUND
BALANCE AT THE END OF THE YEAR.
FIRST THING WAS THE CITY
FINANCE STAFF COMPLETED THEIR
ASSESSMENT OF THE FINANCIAL
SITUATION FROM 2023, AND AS
PART OF THE PROCESS, THEY
DETERMINED THERE WAS ABOUT $164
MILLION MORE CASH IN THE
GENERAL FUND THAN WHAT THEY
ORIGINALLY PROJECTED. THAT IS
GOOD NEWS. A LOT OF THAT MONEY
IS GOING TOWARD SUPPORTING
CARRY FORWARD. SO THIS IS
SPENDING THAT WAS ORIGINALLY
PROPOSED IN 2023 THAT IS KIND
OF -- PROGRAMS THAT ARE NOT YET
FINISHED OR CONTRACTS THAT ARE
STILL ALIVE AND NEED TO HAVE
THE RESOURCES TO PAY THEM. AND
SO, A LOT OF THAT MONEY IS USED
TO SUPPORT THOSE CHANGES . IN
THAT REGARD, THE AUTOMATIC
CARRYFORWARDS AND LEGISLATION
THAT IS BEEN APPROVED TODAY AT
SOME $60 MILLION OF NEW REVENUE
, BUT IT IS REALLY MORE OF AN
OFFSET BY $348 MILLION ADDED
APPROPRIATION. THAT WILL
INCLUDE THINGS LIKE THE WAGE
INCREASE BILL. THERE WERE A
NUMBER OF CITY CONTRACTS WITH
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING GROUPS
THAT WERE APPROVED BY COUNCIL,
AND SO, THE MANY HAVE BEEN
PRESERVED -- RESERVED IN
PLANNING RESERVES IN THE PAST
TO PAY THOSE CONTRACTS TO BUILD
THE MONEY INTO THE BUDGET TO
PAY THOSE SETTLED CONTRACTS.
THAT IS THE LARGEST PIECE OF
THE INCREASE. THERE IS ALSO
SOME MONEY FROM CARRYFORWARD
APPROPRIATIONS FROM 2023. THAT
IS CONTINUING THE PROGRAMS THAT
WERE ADOPTED IN PRIOR YEAR
BUDGETS. ALSO, THE MIDYEAR
SUPPLEMENTAL BILL WHICH WE
DISCUSSED IN AUGUST, WHICH ADDS
SOME SLIGHT NEW SPENDING, BUT
ALSO ADDED SOME MINOR NEW
REVENUE. ALL OF THESE BILLS ARE
DETAILED IN THE MEMO. I WON'T
GO INTO TOO MUCH DETAIL
BECAUSE, AGAIN, IT IS ALREADY
BEEN PASSED. IT IS JUST A
MATTER OF ASSESSING WITH THE
IMPACT ON THE BALANCE IS.
FINALLY, THE AUGUST REVENUE
FORECAST. AS PART OF THE
PROCESS, THEY NOT ONLY DO
PROJECTIONS FOR THE NEXT TWO
YEARS, BUT THEY ALSO RE-UPDATE
WHAT THE FORECAST IS FOR THE
CURRENT YEAR. I GUESS THE LESS
GREAT NEWS IN THAT PROCESS WAS
, AFTER YOU ACCOUNT FOR THINGS
LIKE RANTS AND CARRYFORWARD
REVENUE APPROPRIATIONS, THE
UNDERLYING BASE REVENUE -- I
ACCIDENTALLY HIT THE BUTTON.
SORRY ABOUT THAT. THAT FORECAST
REMOVED ABOUT $10 MILLION OF
REVENUE FROM THE 2024 FORECAST.
THAT HAS KIND OF A DRAG EFFECT
ON THE RESOURCE BALANCE. BUT
THE KEY TAKE AWAY IS THAT AFTER
ALL THE APPROVED CHANGES TO
DATE, SO THE VARIOUS APPROVED
LEGISLATION, CARRYFORWARD FROM
PRIOR YEARS, OPTING TO THE
FORECAST, THE IMPACT ON THE
2024 YEAR-END BALANCE IS
TRANSECTS. THAT IS NOT THE END
OF THE STORY. THAT IS A
GUIDEPOST. THIS IS WHERE WE ARE
ALL . NOW THE PROPOSED CHANGES.
>> EVERYTHING YOU JUST
PRESENTED WAS GIVING US THE
PREFACE FOR THE DECISIONS WE
HAVE TO MAKE IN THIS CURRENT
BUDGET. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT IS PRECISELY CORRECT.
>> SO EVERYTHING YOU JUST
SHARED IS LEADING US UP TO
TODAY WILL RECEIVE THE MAHER'S
NEW PROPOSAL. TAKE IT AWAY.
>> AND HERE WE ARE. YES.
EXACTLY. I SEE VICE CHAIR
RIVERA HAS A QUESTION.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU,
TOM. I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM. SO
AT THE END OF ALL OF THIS, WE
HAVE A BALANCE OF 27.4 IN OUR
FAVOR AND NOT A DEFICIT.
>> LAST NOVEMBER WAS A ONE
MILLION-DOLLAR BALANCE. YES.
>> DOES THAT INCLUDE
CARRYFORWARD AND ALL OF THOSE
THAT WE ARE ON THE HOOK FOR?
>> YES.
>> THE PROPOSED BUDGET FROM THE
MAYOR ACKNOWLEDGED THAT $27.4
MILLION AND HAS SOME IDEAS
ABOUT IT, IF YOU WILL. BACK TO
TOM FOR THAT.
>> NOW WE'RE GOING TO TALK
ABOUT SOME OF THE PROPOSED
CHANGES. AGAIN, THIS IS HIGH
LEVEL. TALKING BROAD STROKES.
HOW IT IMPACTS THE RESOURCES
AVAILABLE. FIRST THERE ARE
THREE KEY PIECES OF LEGISLATION
THAT WERE SUBMITTED WITH THE
BUDGET. YEAR-END SUPPLEMENTAL.
THAT IS THE SECOND OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE BUDGET
LEGISLATION THAT ADJUSTS THE
CURRENT YEAR SPENDING FOR
EMERGING NEEDS. THAT BILL WOULD
INCREASE REVENUES TO THE
GENERAL FUND BY $13.6 MILLION .
NOT THE REVENUE BEING MOVED
FROM THE FUND INTO THE GENERAL
FUND. THERE ALSO SOME
OFFSETTING APPROPRIATIONS TO
SPEND THAT MONEY. IN FACT, THE
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES WILL
INCREASE BY $29.9 MILLION AS
PART OF THAT BILL. THE NET
IMPACT OF THAT LEGISLATION IS
$16 MILLION DRAW ON THAT $27
MILLION BALANCE.
>> JUST QUICKLY, ONE OF THE
ALLOWED USES OF THE DOLLARS IS
REVENUE PLACEMENT. HAVING
EXTENDED IT FOR ALL THINGS ANY
REMAINING BALANCE IS WHAT'S
HAPPENED HERE. THE LAST OF
THOSE DOLLARS NEED TO BE
EXPENDED BY THE END OF THE
YEAR.
>>
>> THANK YOU. THE NEXT BILL,
THIS IS REVENUE NEUTRAL. THIS
IS SIMILAR TO THE MIDYEAR BILL
WHERE THE COUNCIL ACCEPTED
REVENUES FROM EXTERNAL PARTIES.
SO FOR GRANTS AND CONTRACTS
WITH OUTSIDE PROVIDERS. AND
THEN, THAT REVENUE IS THEN
BACKED BY AN OFFSETTING
APPROPRIATION. WE SPAN THE
TOTAL DOLLAR AMOUNT OF THAT
BILL WAS $3.3 MILLION IN THE
GENERAL FUND. BUT IT IS COST
NEUTRAL REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE
OUT. THE THIRD, AND MOST
SIGNIFICANT CHANGE, IS THE
SECOND WAGE INCREASE BILL. BACK
IN AUGUST, I BELIEVE, THERE WAS
THE FIRST OF TWO BILLS OF THIS
TYPE WHEREBY THE CITY BUDGETS
WERE UPDATED, THE SALARY
BUDGETS WERE UPDATED TO ACCOUNT
FOR THE SETTLED LABOR CONTRACTS
AT THAT TIME BECAUSE THERE WAS
A HIRING FREEZE IN PLACE .
THERE WAS THE HOPE THAT THE
TOTAL COST, BECAUSE OF THE
HIGHER INCREASE OF THE IMPACT
ON LABOR BUDGETS IN 2024, COULD
BE REDUCED BECAUSE OF THE
HIRING FREEZE. AND SO, THE FULL
AMOUNT OF THE WAGE INCREASE WAS
NOT BUILT INTO THE BUDGET IN
THE MIDYEAR BILL, ANTICIPATING
WE COULD POSSIBLY REDUCE THE
IMPACT THIS YEAR BECAUSE OF
THAT HIRING FREEZE. IN FACT,
THIS BILL WOULD INCREASE
GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATIONS BY
$110 MILLION , ACTUALLY NOT
GENERAL FUND, TOTAL CITY FUNDS
BY $110 MILLION, AND $29.7
MILLION OF IT IS GENERAL FUND.
THAT IMPACT IS BACKED BY A
SPREADSHEET CHANGE, WHICH IS
DEDUCTING THE AMOUNT FROM THE
PLANNING RESERVES, WHICH ARE
NOT BUDGETED IN THE CITY BUDGET
BUT HELD BACK IN TERMS OF
FINANCIAL PLANNING SO THAT
MONIES ARE AVAILABLE WHEN
CONTRACTS ARE SETTLED. AND
THEN, ALSO, THERE IS WHAT IS
CALLED A HEALTHCARE HOLIDAY.
THIS IS ESSENTIALLY THE
HEALTHCARE FUND BALANCE WAS ,
HAD ACCUMULATED EXTRA MONEY IN
EXCESS OF THE CURRENT YEAR'S
NEED. SO CITY BUDGET OFFICE
DETERMINED THAT THE ASSESSMENT
TO THE SELF-INSURANCE FUND
COULD BE REDUCED FOR 2024 , AND
THEN JUST RELY ON THE EXISTING
BALANCE TO PAY THOSE BILLS.
THAT HAS HELPED OFFSET SOME OF
THE COSTS OF THE WAGE INCREASE
TO THE APPROPRIATION IN 2024.
SO TO RECAP IT ALL, THE NET
BALANCING IMPACT OF THE
PROPOSED LEGISLATION IS A $16
MILLION REDUCTION.
>> THAT MEANS THE 24 .8 IS
REDUCED BY 16?
>> CORRECT.
>> [ INAUDIBLE ]
>> JUST TO DO THE MATH ON THE
BOOKS, 27.4 MILLION-16.
>> THAT IS WHERE THE PROPOSED
CHANGES FOR 24 WOULD LEAVE THE
GENERAL FUND BALANCE AT THE END
OF 2025.
>> YEAH.
>> IT IS NOT A $16 MILLION IN
THE HOLE, THIS IS $16 MILLION
LESS THAN $27 MILLION.
>> THAT IS WHAT I WAS TRYING TO
MAKE.
>> THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES, THE
WAY THE SLIDE LOOKS MAKES IT
LOOK LIKE THE MAHER'S OFFICE
DIDN'T DO EVERYTHING POSSIBLE
, AND THE REALITY IS THAT THEY
DID EVERYTHING THEY COULD TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE NOT IN A
WORSE SITUATION. I WAS GOING TO
ASK YOU, TOM, WHAT WOULD BE THE
SITUATION IF THEY HAD NOT TAKEN
THOSE CORRECTIVE MEASURES
EARLIER IN THE YEAR. I WILL PUT
YOU ON THE SPOT. IT JUST
ILLUSTRATES YOU WERE TALKING
ABOUT HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF
DOLLARS, POSSIBLY, MAYBE
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS HERE.
>> THE GENERALIZED EXPECTATIONS
IS A HIRING FREEZE SAVED ABOUT
$20 MILLION IN GENERAL FUNDS.
TO PUT NUMBERS IN THAT CONTEXT.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE. OLD HAND, NEW HAND?
THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA.
>> WE ARE REALLY ENDING WITH
11.4 MILLION DEFICIT.
>> I HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO THE END
YET . [ LAUGHTER ] THERE IS A
COMPREHENSIVE TABLE ON PAGE 9
OF THE MEMO THAT TRACKS IS ALL
LINEARLY . SO YEAH, ONE MORE
SLIDE TO GO BEFORE WE GET TO
THE PUNCHLINE, IF YOU WILL. THE
CONTINUE CHANGES TO THE 2024
BUDGET. THIS IS ONE I WILL TALK
ABOUT A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE IT
IS ALSO A STRATEGY EMPLOYED IN
2025 AS WELL. ONE IS THAT THE
EXECUTIVE IS INCLUDED IN $24
MILLION UNDER SPEND IN THE
REVISED BUDGET. BASICALLY, WHAT
THEY'RE SAYING IS THAT THEY
ARE COMMITTING THAT SPENDING IN
THE GENERAL FUND WILL COME IN
$24 MILLION BELOW WHAT THE
APPROPRIATION IS. IS ACTUALLY A
STRATEGY THAT HAS BEEN EMPLOYED
IN THE LAST FEW BUDGETS . YOU
WILL SEE, I WILL SHOW YOU THE
TRACK RECORD OF THE ASSUMPTION
AGAINST THE ACTUALS AND HOW
THIS NUMBER IS GENERALLY IN
LINE WITH WHAT HER EXPEDITIONS
WOULD BE. BUT I WILL JUST SAY
THAT I UNDERSTAND IT IS AN
ASSUMPTION, NOT A GUARANTEE .
WHEN ALL IS SAID AND DONE, THE
BUDGET HAS TO COME IN BELOW
AVAILABLE REVENUE. I GUESS IT
IS, PERHAPS, MORE PREDICTABLE
WHEN YOU KNOW WHERE THE CUTS
ARE COMING FROM VERSUS HAVING
TO COME UP WITH THEM ON THE
FLY. THE ABILITY TO MAKE THE
MORE DELIBERATE DECISIONS AND
PUTTING THOSE CUTS INTO THE
BUDGET IN THE FIRST PLACE GIVES
YOU MORE TIME TO THINK IT
THROUGH. WHEN YOU HAVE TO
REACT, THE DECISION SCOPE THAT
YOU HAVE IS A LITTLE MORE
LIMITED. JUST GOING TO POINT
THAT OUT AGAIN. WE HAD UNDER
SPEND IN PRIOR BUDGETS AND HAVE
EXCEEDED THEM, AS YOU WILL SEE.
FINALLY, THE PLANNING RESERVES
. THIS IS THE NON-BUDGETED
AMOUNT IN THE GENERAL FUND
FINANCIAL PLAN. THE BUDGET
OFFICE HAS INCREASED THAT BY
$10 MILLION. SO WHEN ALL IS
SAID AND DONE, THE REVISED 2024
ENDING BALANCE INCREASES TO $24
MILLION, WHICH IS THE $23
MILLION CHANGE FROM WHAT WAS
ASSUMED IN THE ADOPTED BUDGET.
THOSE RESOURCES YOU WILL SEE
OUR FULLY DEPLOYED IN THE
2025-26 PROPOSAL. I WILL STOP
FOR JUST A SECOND.
>> THE RESERVES ARE REFERENCED
THAT ARE HELD FOR LABOR
CONTRACTS, AND ALSO POTENTIAL
CLAIMS ISSUES REFLECTIVE OF
RISKS ON BOTH OF THOSE FUNDS .
>> OKAY. NOW WE WILL DIVE INTO
THE 2025-26 PROPOSED BUDGET.
ONE THING YOU HAVE POSSIBLY
HEARD THROUGH THE INTRO TO
BUDGET DURING THE SUMMER , THE
BUDGETS LIKE SUMMER SERIES, IS
THAT WE DO INCREMENTAL
BUDGETING HERE IN THE CITY OF
SEATTLE. EACH YEAR'S BUDGET IS
BASED ON THE PRIOR YEAR'S
BUDGET AS A STARTING POINT. IN
THIS ANALYSIS, THE STARTING
POINT IS , THAT WAS THE 2024
ADOPTER LEVEL. ALL THE CHANGES
I WILL RUN THROUGH IN THE NEXT
FEW SLIDES ARE EITHER
INCREMENTAL OR DETRIMENTAL TO
THAT. THIS IS WHERE WE GET
REALLY TECHNICAL . ONE OF THE
FIRST CHANGES THAT THE BUDGET
OFFICE DOES IS REBASING THE
BUDGET. THAT IS BASICALLY
SAYING, TAKING OUT LARGELY THE
ONE TIME STUFF. THERE IS A
THEME YOU WILL HEAR WHEN WE
TALK ABOUT BUDGETS. ONGOING
VERSUS ONE-TIME SPENDING. ONE
TIME IS KIND OF USUALLY
CAPITAL. SO BUILDING SOMETHING
IS A VERY DISCREET EXPENSE THAT
DOESN'T GET YOU INTO FUTURE
YEARS. ONGOING IS MORE LIKE A
STREAMING SERVICE SUBSCRIPTION
WHERE YOU SIGN UP FOR IT, AND
IT JUST PERPETUATES UNTIL YOU
PROACTIVELY DECIDE TO TAKE IT
OUT OF THE BUDGET. AND SO, THIS
FIRST MECHANISM TAKES OUT THE
STUFF THAT IS ONE TIME AND
READJUSTS SO WE ARE ONLY
INCLUDING THOSE ITEMS THAT ARE
TRULY INTENDED TO GO INTO
FUTURE YEARS. THIS IS THE
LARGEST ADJUSTMENT. A TECHNICAL
INCREASE. THIS IS KIND OF A
MORE TECHNICAL CHANGES, DUSTING
THINGS TO THE LEVELS THAT WOULD
BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN THE
2024 SERVICE LEVELS AT 2025
COSTS. THE BIGGEST CHANGE
THAT'S THIS WILL INCLUDE
THINGS LIKE UPDATING THE BUDGET
FOR LEGISLATION APPROVED THIS
YEAR THAT IS CONTINUING IN
NATURE AND HAS A 2025 COST.
INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES THAT
YOLANDA WAS DISCUSSING EARLIER.
TRANSFERS TO VARIOUS RESERVES,
TRANSFERS TO THINGS LIKE POLICE
AND FIRE PENSION PROGRAMS, AND
THE BIGGEST ONE IS THE AWI. WE
ARE BASICALLY UPDATING THE 2024
BUDGET FOR THE SALARY COSTS
BASED ON APPROVED CONTRACTS.
THAT WAS $158 MILLION TOTAL
TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENT IN 2025
AND $213 MILLION IN 2026. NEXT,
PLANNING RESERVES. AS DIRECTOR
NOBLE MENTIONED, THOSE WERE
THINGS WHERE WE HOLD MONEY FOR
CONTINGENT NEEDS. THAT WAS A
$51 MILLION INCREASE IN 2025
AND $82 MILLION IN 2026.
FINALLY, TRANSFERS TO FISCAL
RESERVES. THE GENERAL FUND
MAKES REGULAR TRANSFERS TO THE
TWO PRINCIPAL FISCAL RESERVES,
THE EMERGENCY FUND, WHICH IS
FOR UNFORESEEN EMERGENT NEEDS
IN THE BUDGET, AND THE REVENUE
STABILIZATION FUND, WHICH IS
FOR WHEN GENERAL FUND REVENUES
COME IN BELOW EXPECTATIONS. WE
WERE ABLE TO DECREASE THE
PROPOSED BUDGET TO DECREASE
THIS TRANSFERS BY $3 MILLION IN
2025 AND $11 MILLION IN 2026.
ON THE NEXT SLIDE I WILL RECAP
WHERE WE ARE WITH THE FISCAL
RESERVES BECAUSE IT IS A GOOD
STORY.
>> TO BE CLEAR, THOSE NEGATIVE
NUMBERS DON'T MEAN WE ARE
DRAWING FROM THOSE RESERVES,
BUT RATHER THE AMOUNT ADDED IN
2025 IS A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN
THE AMOUNT ADDED IN 2024 . TOM
WILL EXPLAIN SIMILARLY FOR
2026. WE ARE CONTINUING TO
BUILD BOTH RESERVES. THE RULES
AND POLICIES ABOUT HOW THEY
BUILD LEAD TO THEM BEING A
SMALLER CONTRIBUTION RELATIVE
TO 2024 IN EACH OF 2025 AND
2026.
>> DIRECTOR NOBLE, DO YOU KNOW
OFFHAND LAST TIME THOSE
POLICIES WERE UPDATED? WAS IT
2008?
>> I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WAS
REVENUES TO STABILIZATION FUND
POLICY UPDATED FOR A WHILE. IT
WAS PRIOR TO MY TIME. BUT THE
EMERGENCY FUND POLICY WAS
UPDATED DURING THE COVID
PANDEMIC BECAUSE , ESSENTIALLY,
THE ENTIRE BALANCE WAS USED,
AND THEN A FIVE-YEAR REPAYMENT
PLAN, AND THAT IS MY GOOD NEWS
STORY, THAT WE ARE AT THE END
OF THE FIVE YEARS. WE FULLY
REPLENISHED AT. I BELIEVE THAT
WAS IN 2021.
>> THE PREVIOUS POLICIES
IMPLIED YOU WOULD RESTORE THE
EMERGENCIES FUND IMMEDIATELY AT
THE BEGINNING OF NEXT YEAR,
WHICH GIVEN HER CIRCUMSTANCES,
WAS NOT PRACTICAL AND DIDN'T
MAKE MUCH SENSE. AT THE SAME
TIME, WE WANT THERE TO BE AN
EMERGENCY FUND IF WE NEEDED
AGAIN. IDEA OF BUILDING A
BACKUP AGGRESSIVELY WAS
IMPORTANT. I THINK IN THE
CONTEXT WE WERE TALKING, WE ARE
CONTRIBUTING TO THAT, WHILE
ALSO CUTTING CITY SERVICES.
THAT IS A CONSCIOUS CHOICE AND
RECOGNITION THAT YOU DON'T
KNOW WHEN THE NEXT STORM, IN A
GENERIC SENSE, MY CALM.
>> WELL SAID. THANK YOU. THE
KEY TAKE AWAY.
>> ADDING TO THE THE STARTING
POINT OF THE BASE BUDGET, THESE
BASELINE AND TECHNICAL CHANGES
I JUST COVERED ADD $171 MILLION
IN 2025 AND $262 MILLION IN
2026. NOW THE FISCAL RESERVES
STATUS. THIS SHOWS YOU THE
BALANCE HISTORY. STARTING WITH
2025 BEGINNING BALANCE AND THEN
SHOWING THE TRANSFERS COMING
FROM THE GENERAL FUND INTO THE
FISCAL RESERVES. AND THEN,
SHOWING WHAT THE ENDING 26
BALANCE IS AND HOW THAT
COMPARES TO OUR POLICY. YOU
WILL SEE UNDERNEATH THE TABLE
WHAT THE DIFFERENT POLICIES
ARE. THAT THE EMERGENCY FUND IS
TO BE FUNDED AT AN AMOUNT EQUAL
TO $60 MILLION INFLATED BY CPI.
AND SO, AT THE END OF 2026 THE
EMERGENCY FUND SHOULD BE AT $88
MILLION. THE TRANSFERS INCLUDED
IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET FUNDED
TO THAT LEVEL. AS YOU CAN SEE,
YOU CAN SEE THE IMPACT OF THE
DECREASE. YOU CAN SEE THE
TRANSFER OF 12.$7 MILLION , AND
AFTER THAT POINT IT WILL JUST
BE MAINTAINING THAT TRANSFER.
THE REVENUE STABILIZATION FUND
HAS BEEN 100% A POLICY FOR A
WHILE. THAT POLICY IS 5% OF
GENERAL FUND TAX REVENUES . AND
THEN, THE ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS
ARE ESSENTIALLY WHAT IS
NECESSARY TO KEEP UP WITH THAT
AT THAT LEVEL. THERE ARE
ADDITIONAL POLICIES THAT COME
INTO PLAY AFTER YOU USE THE
REVENUE STABILIZATION FUND, BUT
THAT IS NOT OUR SITUATION AT
THIS POINT. THE KEY TAKE AWAY
OF THIS IS GOOD NEWS. THE
FISCAL RESERVES WILL BE FULLY
FUNDED AT THE POLICY LEVELS AT
THE END OF 2016 -- 2060. THE
REVENUE STABILIZATION FUND IS
ALREADY THERE. OKAY, SO WE
COVERED THE EXPENDITURE SIDE OF
THE BASELINE TECHNICAL CHANGES.
NOW REALLY QUICKLY TOUCHING ON
THE REVENUE SIDE. THIS DERIVES
FROM THE AUGUST REVENUE
FORECAST FROM THE FORECAST
OFFICE IN CBO. IN AUGUST THEY
PROJECTED THAT GENERAL FUND
REVENUES IN 2025 WOULD BE , AND
THEN IN 2026 IT WOULD BE [ ROLL
CALL ] -- $1.71 BILLION. IT IS
ABOUT 2.3% HIGHER THAN THE 2024
REVISED FORECAST, WHICH IS NOT
REALLY GREAT IN COMPARISON TO
INFLATION. INFLATION IS 2.8%
BASED ON THE AUGUST FORECAST.
WERE ACTUALLY NOT QUITE KEEPING
UP WITH INFLATION IN 2025.
2026, HOWEVER, INCREASES TO
4.3%, WHICH OUTPACES THE
INFLATION RATE OF 2.9% IN THE
FORECAST OFFICE REGIONAL
ECONOMIC MODEL. I WILL SAY
THESE ARE JUST THE BASELINE
NUMBERS. THEY DON'T INCLUDE
THE PROPOSALS IN THE MAHER'S
BUDGET. THAT IS ADDITIVE TO
THESE NUMBERS. FINALLY, I THINK
IT WAS COVERED EARLIER, THE
THIRD AND FINAL FORECAST UPDATE
SETS THE PARAMETERS FOR THE
CHAIR'S BALANCING PROJECT, AND
ITALY, THE BUDGET YOU WILL
CONSIDER. THAT WILL COME TO THE
BUDGET COMMITTEE ON OCTOBER 22.
>> A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY AND
OBSERVATION HERE. THIS PATTERN
WHERE GROWTH IS EITHER
LOW-INFLATION OR JUST ABOVE IS
WHAT IS BEEN FORECASTED AND
REALIZE THE LAST COUPLE OF
YEARS, BUT IT IS A SIGNIFICANT
CHANGE FROM THE PRE-PANDEMIC
SITUATION. WE WERE PRE-PANDEMIC
IN THE MIDST OF A SIGNIFICANT
BOOM BY TECHNOLOGY, BUT THAT
WAS LEADING TO A SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNT OF CONSTRUCTION ON BOTH
THE COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL
SIDE. REVENUES WERE OUT
PIECING, AND WE WERE ALSO IN AN
HISTORICALLY LOW INFLATIONARY
ENVIRONMENT BELOW 2.5 PERCENT.
AND NOT CONTACTS, WE WERE IN
THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS, IF YOU
WILL. THAT IS NOT THE PATTERN
WE ARE EXPERIENCING, NOR THE
ONE PROJECTED. YOU'RE NOT HERE
FOR THAT, BUT THIS IS A
PARADIGM SHIFT FOR THE CITY IN
TERMS OF MANAGING ITS FINANCES
YEAR TO YEAR. IT IS A
SUPPRESSION OF WHAT NEW THINGS
WE CAN FUND AND RATHER HOW WE
CAN MANAGE TO SUSTAIN WHAT WE
HAVE, AND YOU WILL HEAR MORE
ABOUT THAT IS TOM CONTINUES.
THAT IS BEEN A SIGNIFICANT
SHIFT.
>> THIS IS KIND OF A MILESTONE
SINCE WE ARE NOT DONE QUITE
YET, BUT THIS IS THE ASSESSMENT
OF THE BASELINE DEFICIT. THE
COMPARISON FOR THIS IS THE
NUMBERS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT
IN MAY WE DID A FORECAST UPDATE
. AT THAT TIME, WE WERE TALKING
ABOUT A $258 MILLION OR SO
GENERAL FUND DEFICIT IN EACH
YEAR . AS YOU CAN SEE, I
-- WE COVERED ALL THESE POINTS
IN THE TABLE, BUT I LIKE TO
SHOW MY WORK. IT SHOWS THAT
WHEN YOU INCLUDE ALL THE
BASELINE CHANGES, THE PROPOSED
BUDGET HAS ABOUT A $254 MILLION
ONGOING DEFICIT, AND THE 26
PROPOSED IS $262 MILLION. IT IS
VERY MUCH RIGHT IN LINE WITH
WHAT WE WERE PROJECTING BACK
THEN JUST TO SAY THAT THAT IS
WHY WE PROVIDE THE UPDATES, TO
GIVE A LOOK AHEAD OF WHAT TO
EXPECT, AND THOSE KINDS OF
METHODS SEEM TO BE HOLDING
FAST. THIS ISN'T THE END OF
THE STORY, BECAUSE WE CANNOT
ADAPT AN UNBALANCED BUDGET.
WELL LET'S GO INTO SOME OF THE
PROPOSALS, SPENDING AND
REVENUE.
>> WHEN THE MAYOR WAS BUILDING
THE BUDGET IN JULY , JULY AND
AUGUST, THIS IS A SITUATION
THAT THEY WERE FACING
BOTTOMLINE AS A MOVE FORWARD TO
FIND A WAY TO BALANCE, IF YOU
WILL, AND TOM WILL NOW WALK
THROUGH HOW THEY GOT BACK TO
THAT BALANCE. JUST TO SERVE THE
CONTEXT OF THIS , IF YOU WILL.
>> THANK YOU, TOM AND DIRECTOR
NOBLE. I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO
TALK ABOUT JUMPSTART WITH THE
NEXT PRESENTATION, SO I WILL GO
INTO THAT HERE, BUT
UNDERSTANDING THIS WAS THE
SITUATION EVERYONE IN THE CITY
WAS LOOKING AT IN MAY, JUNE AND
JULY, THIS 254 IN 2025 AND 262
AND 26 DOESN'T TAKE INTO
ACCOUNT ANY USE OF JOHN START,
IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> WE WILL GET TO THE
JUMPSTART. EVERY YEAR WE HAVE
HAD JUMPSTART, WE HAVE USED IT.
COLLEAGUES, THERE IS NOT REALLY
AN APPLES TO APPLES , IT MIGHT
BE TYPES OF APPLES TO APPLES
COMPARISONS TO BE MADE. I JUST
WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT I
MIGHT'VE BEEN COOL, CALM AND
COLLECTED DURING THE SELECT
BUDGET SERIES, THIS IS WHAT WAS
KEEPING ME AWAKE AT NIGHT. WE
WILL GET INTO THE NEXT SET OF
THIS IS THE PROBLEM OF THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE AND CBO OFFICE.
>> TO BUILD ON THAT, IT DIDN'T
CONSIDER THE POTENTIAL USE OF
JUMPSTART , BECAUSE UNLESS THIS
COUNCIL APPROVES THE CITY
ORDINANCE, IT IS APPROVED BY
CITY ORDINANCE. DOING THIS
MATH, IT WAS NOT AN OPTION
UNTIL IT WAS MADE AN OPTION.
THE MAYOR IS PROPOSING TO
BECOME AN OPTION. JUST TO
HIGHLIGHT THAT. IT WASN'T MADE
UP. IT REALLY WAS A STATE WE
WERE IN, AND ARGUABLY, STILL
ARE UNTIL YOU CONSIDER THIS
LEGISLATION, WHICH IS ACTUALLY
THE TOPIC OF MY PRESENTATION
THAT WILL FOLLOW THIS.
>> OKAY.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. SOME OF
THIS COULD HAVE COME FROM
JUMPSTART FOR THOSE PURPOSES
FOR WHICH IT WAS PASSED . SOME
OF THIS WILL INCLUDE ALL THOSE
USES OF JUMPSTART. YOU WERE
GUESSING IT CAN'T FULLY BACK
ALL OF IT.
>> THE CITY LAW PAST FEW YEARS
WAS DESIGNED THAT THE JUMPSTART
MONEY BE INCREMENTAL TO THE
BASELINE SPENDING REPRESENTED
IN THIS TABLE. THERE WERE
POTENTIALLY OPPORTUNITIES TO BE
CREATIVE ABOUT THE APPLICATION
OF DEFINITIONS, BUT THAT
CERTAINLY WAS NOT THE INTENT. I
DON'T MEAN TO BELABOR THIS,
BUT THE EXISTING CITY CODE WAS
DESIGNED TO BE PRESCRIPTIVE AND
RESTRICTIVE ON THE USE OF THOSE
DOLLARS.
>> I GUESS THE POINT I AM
TRYING TO MAKE IS THAT SOME OF
THOSE USES ARE PART OF THE
DEFICIT FIGURES HERE. THESE
DEFICIT FIGURES ARE NOT
EXCLUSIVE OF THOSE USES BY
WHICH, FOR WHICH JUMPSTART WAS
PASSED. SOME OF THAT IS
CONTAINED AS PART OF THIS
DEFICIT NUMBER.
>> THERE ARE TWO FLAVORS OF
TRANSFER FROM THE JUMPSTART
FUND TO THE GENERAL FUND. WHAT
IS THE REVENUE , WHICH IN 2024
WITH $85 MILLION. THAT WAS
TEMPORARY BY CURRENT LAW. THERE
IS ALSO ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE,
AND IT IS IN THE GENERAL FUND
FOR TAX COLLECTION PURPOSES AND
SOME ADMINISTRATIVE CP OH AND
THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH GET SOME
OF THAT AS WELL FOR ADDITIONAL
WORK ON JUMPSTART. THAT IS ON
THE ORDER OF $7 MILLION THAT IS
ACTUALLY PROJECTED TO INCREASE.
WE WILL COVER THAT IN A FEW
SLIDES. THAT IS JUST PART OF
THE SPENDING PLAN OF JUMPSTART,
WHICH ALLOWS UP TO 5% IN
CURRENT LAW TO BE SPENT ON THE
ADMINISTRATION.
>> TOM, JUST A PILE ON, IT WAS
5% FOR ADMINISTRATION IN PART
BECAUSE WE WERE SETTING UP A
BRAND NEW TAX.
>> THAT IS THE PARAMETER. AND
THEN, THERE IS CLEARLY AN
ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN OF
COLLECTING THE TAX AND THAT
SORT OF THING. BUT THEN
THERE'S ALSO ADDITIONAL
PROGRAMMATIC THAT NEED
ADMINISTRATION EXPENSE TO BE
COVERED. THAT IS PART OF
PROGRAMS AS WELL.
>> IT SEEMS LIKE -- LIKE I'VE
LED US INTO THE NEXT
PRESENTATION. IT WOULD TURN IT
BACK TO YOU. STICK ON THIS ONE.
>> THIS IS GOING TO BE VERY
HIGH LEVEL. THERE IS AN
ATTACHMENT TO THE MEMO , BUT
THEN EVEN IN THAT CASE, IT
DOESN'T GET THE TRUE FLAVOR.
THAT IS WHY WE HAVE THE BUDGET
OVERVIEW DOCUMENTS AND THE
POLICY CONSIDERATION PAPER. I
AM JUST REALLY TRYING TO
CAPTURE WHAT THE IMPACT IS ON
THE GENERAL FUND BALANCE WITH
ITS. APOLOGIES THAT I AM NOT
GOING TO GO INTO A GREAT LEVEL
OF DETAIL. WHAT THIS TABLE
SHOWS IS KIND OF HOW THE BUDGET
HAS INCREASED THROUGH
APPROPRIATION PROPOSALS.
SOMETIMES IT IS NOT CLEAR. YOU
ONLY HEAR THE NET AND DON'T
HEAR THE INS AND OUTS, IF YOU
WELL. YOU WILL SEE IN THE
ATTACHMENT THAT I SEPARATED
THINGS INTO EXPENDITURE
DECREASES, SO PLACES WHERE THE
BUDGET IS BEING DECREASED IN A
PROPOSAL, AND THEN I ISOLATE
THINGS THAT YOU CAN SEE FROM
THE TABLE, THERE'S ABOUT $54
MILLION OF DECREASES IN 25 AND
ABOUT 50 IN 26. THEN THERE ARE
THESE TRANSFERS. THAT IS MOVING
A PROGRAM FROM ONE PART OF THE
BUDGET TO THE OTHER. THAT
ACTUALLY RESULT IN A NET
DECREASE FOR THE GENERAL FUND
OF $1 MILLION. THE SUM TOTAL OF
MANAGER DECREASES PROBABLY 100
PLUS OF THOSE IS $55 MILLION
REDUCTION IN 25 AND $51 MILLION
IN 26. THEN THAT THE PROPOSED
BUDGET ADDS MORE SPENDING. THIS
IS NOVEL SPENDING AND PROGRAMS.
A TOTAL $78 MILLION IN 25 AND
$74 MILLION IN 26 BUT THE NET
RESULT IS THAT ALL OF THE
PROPOSALS INCLUDED IN THE
BUDGET INCREASED 25 SPENDING BY
$23 MILLION IN BOTH YEARS. IN
THE SECOND YEAR , AGAIN, THIS
IS GETTING INTO THE ONE-TIME
ONGOING DISTINCTION. EVEN
THOUGH IT IS A $23 MILLION
DECREASE IN 2025, IT IS REALLY
$25 MILLION OF ONGOING DECREASE
THAT IS OFFSET BY A $2 MILLION
ONE-TIME REDUCTION. ONCE YOU
MOVE INTO THE NEXT YEAR, THAT
$2 MILLION ONE-TIME GOES AWAY,
AND YOU'RE REALLY JUST
SPENDING THE ONGOING MONEY.
THIS IS JUST, AGAIN, THE GORY
DETAILS, IF YOU WILL, OF THE
VARIOUS PIECES. THE UPS AND
DOWNS OF THE BUDGET, BUT THEN
YOU CAN SEE THE NET RESULT OF
THE NEW PROPOSALS INCLUDED.
>> THESE ARGUMENTS ARE BULLET
TIPS TO THE ADJUSTED BASELINE.
WE'VE TAKEN THE 24 BUDGET AND
INFLATED IT TO WHAT IT WOULD
COST TO MEET CURRENT SERVICES
AND SAID, OKAY, WE WANT TO MAKE
SOME CHANGES. WE ARE GOING TO
MAKE SOME CHANGES . THE MAYOR,
IN PARTICULAR, HAD SOME
PRIORITIES TO MAKE. INCREASE OF
SERVICES IN CERTAIN AREAS GIVEN
THE OVERALL SITUATION OF
REVENUE IN ORDER TO MAKE THOSE
POSSIBLE . THERE HAVE TO BE
REDUCTIONS. YOU MIGHT LITERALLY
READ THIS AS A SHIFTING IN
PRIORITIES. THERE ARE
REDUCTIONS MADE IN SOME AREAS ,
PRESUMABLY, OF LOWER PRIORITY,
TO INVEST IN NEW AREAS OF
HIGHER PRIORITY. NOT TO BE TOO
PHILOSOPHICAL, THAT IS WHAT
BUDGETING IS ABOUT. THAT IS
WHAT YOU ARE SEEING HERE.
AGAIN, REFERRING TO THE COMMENT
I MADE A COUPLE OF SLIDES AGO,
PREVIOUS REVENUE ENVIRONMENT
WHERE REVENUE GROWTH WAS
OUTPACING INCREASES IN COSTS,
YOU COULD HAVE EXPENDITURE
INCREASES WITHOUT HAVING TO
MAKE THAT PRIORITY CHOICE OF
WHAT NEEDS TO BE CUT IN ORDER
TO FUND THEM. THAT IS AN
EXAMPLE OF HOW THIS IS PLAYING
OUT IN THE DECISIONS YOU ARE
FACING THAT ARE, IN SOME WAYS,
DISTINCT FROM THE ONES THAT
PRECEDED YOU IN YEARS WITH THE
REVENUES GOING MORE QUICKLY.
>> -- GROWING MORE QUICKLY.
>> BEFORE WE MOVE TO REVENUE, I
MENTIONED EARLIER THAT IN THE
24 REVISED BUDGET THERE IS THE
$24 MILLION YOU, I GUESS, FOR
LACK OF A BETTER WORD, THE
SUSPENDING WILL COME IN BELOW
BUDGET. THERE'S ALSO A $10
MILLION ASSUMPTION INCLUDED FOR
2025. SMALLER FOR 2025. THAT
HELPS BALANCE THAT YEAR. AS YOU
CAN SEE, IT IS FAIRLY
CONSERVATIVE COMPARED TO RECENT
EXPERIENCE . YOU CAN SEE SINCE
2022 WE HAVE INCLUDED
ASSUMPTIONS AND BUDGETS , AND
AT THE END OF THE YEAR, THE
SPENDING COMES IN IN EXCESS OF
THAT ASSUMPTION. AS PART OF IT,
I AM ONLY MENTIONING IT BECAUSE
IT IS PART OF THE BALANCE
PACKAGE . BUT IT IS AN
ASSUMPTION. THERE'S REALLY NOT
A DECISION SPECIFICALLY TO BE
MADE ON THAT POINT. NOW WE WILL
MOVE INTO THE REVENUE
PROPOSALS. THIS PACKAGES IT UP
AND BALANCES IS DEFICIT
SPENDING. THERE IS A TABLE
INCLUDED IN THE MEMO THAT
CAPTURES THIS. YOU CAN SEE THAT
ABOUT 25 AND 26 THERE IS AN
INCREASE IN PARKING FINES
ACTUALLY BUDGET LEGISLATION
SUBMITTED WITH THE PROPOSED
BUDGET THAT WOULD INSTITUTE
THESE CHANGES. I UNDERSTAND
THAT IS ABOUT A 50% INCREASE IN
THESE , BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT
BEEN UPDATED SINCE 2011, I
THINK. IT HAS BEEN A WHILE.
INFLATION HAS , AS WE ALL
EXPERIENCED, BEEN FAIRLY BRISK.
THIS UPDATES TO INFLATION. IT
GENERATES NEARLY $5 MILLION
EACH YEAR OF ONGOING REVENUE.
NEXT, ANOTHER ONGOING CHANGE IS
THE JUMPSTART ADMINISTRATIVE
TRANSFER. THIS ISN'T TO
BALANCE THE FUND, IT IS TO
PROVIDE RESOURCES TO FIND THEM
IN THE STRAIT OF OFFENSES IN
THE GENERAL FUND. THAT WOULD
INCREASE THE TRANSFER BY $2.5
MILLION IN 20 TO 5 -- 2025 .
MISCELLANEOUS CHANGES AT ABOUT
$1 MILLION EACH YEAR. FINALLY,
THE MOST SIGNIFICANT MOVE IN
THE BUDGET, WHICH THERE IS AN
ENTIRE PRESENTATION TO COVER
THIS, THE INCREASE IN THE
JUMPSTART FUNDS CONTRIBUTION TO
THE GENERAL FUND FOR REVENUE
BACKFILL. THIS TRANSFER WOULD
ADD $287 MILLION IN 25 TO THE
JOURNAL FUND AND $232 MILLION
IN 2026. THE 2025 NUMBER IS
HIGHER BECAUSE IT INCLUDES
EXCESS BALANCE REVENUES IN THE
JUMPSTART FUNDS AVAILABLE TO
HELP BALANCE THE GENERAL FUND,
BUT THE ONGOING CHANGE ACTUALLY
IS 230 -- $232 MILLION IN 2026.
THAT IS CONTINUED IN FUTURE
YEARS OF THE FINANCIAL PLAN.
WILL COVER THAT IN A FEW
SLIDES. BUT THE KEY TAKE AWAY
IS THAT THE REVENUE PROPOSALS
AT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT, $295
MILLION IN TOTAL FOR 2025 OF
THE REVENUE, AND $232 MILLION
IN 2026. THIS BRINGS IT ALL
TOGETHER. AND SO, FIRST THIS
STARTS WITH THE STARTING
BALANCE AND ADDS IN THE
BASELINE OF PROPOSED REVENUES
AND THE BASELINE PROPOSED
EXPENDITURES AND UNDER SPEND
ASSUMPTION, AND THEN SHOWS HOW
THE TWO YEARS BALANCE OUT. SO
IF YOU LOOK AT 2025, YOU CAN
SEE THAT $24 MILLION BALANCE
THAT WE COVERED IN THE
ASSESSMENT OF WHERE 2024 IS
PROJECTED TO END. THAT THEN
GENERATES IN THE END OF 2025
AND $52 MILLION ENDING BALANCE.
THAT IS A ONE TIME RESOURCE,
ONE-TIME CASH IN THE GENERAL
FUND THAT CONTINUES INTO 2026.
REVENUE AND SPENDING PROPOSALS
IN 2026 THEN BRING THAT FINAL
BALANCE DOWN TO $1 MILLION. HOW
STATE LAW AND HOW HE INTERPRETS
IS A BALANCED BUDGET. I WILL
KNOW IT IS BALANCED USING $52
MILLION OF ONE-TIME BALANCE IN
2026. THAT IS IMPORTANT,
BECAUSE NOW WE WILL MOVE OFF
THE PROPOSED BUDGET INTO THE
FUTURE PROJECTION,
SUSTAINABILITY. THIS GRAPH
SHOWS THAT. THIS IS WHERE WE
ARE NOW COMPARED TO THE FIRST
SLIDE IN THE PRESENTATION,
WHICH WAS WHERE WE WERE.. THIS
IS -- ONE THING IS , AS YOU CAN
SEE, THERE IS A PROJECTED
DEFICIT STILL FOR 2026 AND 2027
OF ABOUT $76 MILLION. THIS
MEANS THAT REVENUES ARE
INSUFFICIENT, AT LEAST AS
PROJECTED, TO SUPPORT SPENDING
IN THE FUTURE. I WILL NOTE THAT
I CAN NO LONGER FIT THAT NUMBER
IN BETWEEN THE TWO LINES. SO
THAT IS GOOD NEWS.
>> SAY THAT AGAIN.
>> BECAUSE IT IS GETTING
SMALLER. HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF
THAT USE OF THAT ONE TIME $52
MILLION TO BALANCE 26, AND
BECAUSE GENERALLY, SPENDING
GROWTH IS OUTPACING REVENUE
GROWTH , YOU HAVE THAT $76
MILLION DEFICIT. ONE THING I
WILL POINT OUT FROM A PURELY
TECHNICAL POINT, AND I BELIEVE
IT WILL BE COVERED IN THE NEXT
PRESENTATION, IS A FINANCIAL
PLAN SUBMITTED FOR THE GENERAL
FUND ASSUMES THAT $232 MILLION
FROM THE JUMPSTART FUND IS FLAT
IN THE FUTURE. THAT IS AN
ASSUMPTION. HOWEVER, THAT
REVENUE SOURCE, OVERALL, IS
PROJECTED TO GROW 4% IN 25 AND
6% IN 27. SO THE JUMPSTART
FUND, PAYROLL TAX REVENUE IS
GROWING, HOWEVER, THE GENERAL
FUND PLANNED AS SUBMITTED DOES
NOT ASSUME THAT GROWTH. IF YOU
ASSUME THAT GROWTH, THAT IS
PART OF THE -- IF YOU ASSUME
THE GENERAL FUND OF THE
JUMPSTART FUND TRANSFER
INCREASES AT THE SAME RATE AS
REVENUE GROWTH, THAT DEFICIT
PROJECTION GETS SMALLER. THAT
IS A POLICY DECISION THAT WILL
BE IN THE NEXT PRESENTATION.
$10 MILLION DOESN'T GO AWAY.
>> IT DOESN'T GO AWAY.
>> BEFORE WE MOVE ON, I JUST
WANTED TO REALLY HIGHLIGHT THAT
TO GET TO THE SLIDE, THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE MADE REALLY
HARD DECISIONS. THIS WAS NOT AN
EASY TO COME TO PROJECTED
DEFICIT . WE HAVE BEEN GOING
OVER THIS AND HEARING IT IN
DEPARTMENT PRESENTATIONS. WE
HAVE BEEN HEARING IT FROM THE
COMMUNITY. I SHARE WITH US,
COLLEAGUES, 20 OUT THIS DEFICIT
THIS YEAR WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE
-- THE MAGNITUDE OF DIFFICULT
DECISION -- DECISIONS INCREASES
EXPONENTIALLY. THIS IS WHY I
SENT ON THE FACT THAT WE NEED
TO CREATE A PATHWAY TO
SUSTAINABILITY. IF YOU REMEMBER
THE PERMANENT CHART WE HAD,
RIGHT NOW, THE INCOMING PERMITS
ARE AT THE SAME LEVEL THEY WERE
IN 2010, WHICH IS THE ROLE OF
OUR PERMITS. IF WE RETURN BACK
TO THE GROWTH HUB , THIS
DEFICIT BECOMES SMALLER. WE
HAVE ALREADY HAD TO -- AGAIN,
REALLY TOUGH DECISIONS ABOUT
INTERNAL SERVICES AND THE
PROGRAM AND NEVER WE ARE
PROVIDING. I THINK EVERYONE IS
HAPPY TO SEE THIS NUMBER SMALL.
IT IS NOT AN EASY PATH TO GET
THERE TO GET TO COMPLETE
SUSTAINABILITY OF THIS YEAR
WOULD BE, IN MY OPINION,
DETRIMENTAL TO OUR CITY. I WANT
ALL OF THIS TO SAY, THANK YOU
TO THE CBO AND THE MAYOR'S
OFFICE FOR GETTING US HERE. WE
NEED TO MAKE SURE TO REVIEW ALL
OF THE DETAILS ON HOW WE GOT
HERE. AGAIN, COLLEAGUES, I WILL
GO LINE BY LINE TO LOOK AT THE
AGGREGATIONS AND LOOK AT THE
LAYOFFS, BUT THAT IS A FUTURE
CONVERSATION. BACK TO YOU, TOM.
>> IF I COULD ADD, THERE IS A
DISCLAIMER AT THE BEGINNING OF
THE MEMO THAT IS PROBABLY
USEFUL TO ADD NOW. NO
REQUIREMENT TO BALANCE THE
FUTURE YEARS. IT IS ALL A
PROJECTION INTO YEARS THE
NUMBERS WILL BE DIFFERENT.
HOPEFULLY TO THE GOOD . HIGHER
COLLECTIONS THAN IN GENERAL
FUND WILL TRANSFER INTO LOWER
PROTECTED DEFICITS. THIS IS A
USEFUL PLANNING EXERCISE, BUT
THE PROPOSED BALANCE, THE
PROPOSED BUDGET, IS BALANCED IN
THE FUTURE YEARS ARE JUST A
PROJECTION. WITH THAT IN MIND,
I JUST WANT TO TOUCH REALLY
QUICKLY ON THE PAYROLL EXPENSE
TAX. EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE BEEN
TALKING ABOUT IT, IT IS REALLY
ONLY WITH THE CITY, IN THE CITY
UP ITS FINANCES, FOR THREE
YEARS. IT IS A NOVEL TAX. THERE
ARE SOME INSIGHTS ABOUT THAT
TAX WITH REGARDS TO THE
UNPREDICTABILITY OF IT. THERE
ARE TWO GRAPHS INCLUDED IN THE
MEMO. ONE SHOWS THE COMPARISON
OF THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX IN
TOTAL WITH THE SALES TAXES,
WHICH ARE ALSO TAXES COLLECTED
FROM BUSINESSES. YOU CAN SEE
THAT IN 2024, AND THEN
CONTINUING THEREAFTER, THE
PAYROLL TAX BECOMES THE SECOND
MOST SIGNIFICANT TAX IN THE
CITY . THAT IS ONLY BECAUSE ,
IF YOU ADD UP ALL OF THE
INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY TAX LEVIES,
PROPERTY TAXES ARE HIGHER. IT
IS BECOMING AN EVER INCREASING
PART OF CITY FINANCES BASED ON
THE PROJECTION FOR THE FORECAST
OFFICE. IN FACT, IT IS
OUTPACING SALES TAXES. AS YOU
CAN ALSO SEE FROM THE GRAPH, IN
TERMS OF
TAX WENT DOWN IN 2022 WHILE THE
OTHER BUSINESS TAXES WENT UP.
IT IS VOLATILE BASED ON
INFORMATION FROM THE FORECAST
OFFICE. IT IS HIGHLY LINKED TO
PERFORMANCE IN A FAIRLY SMALL
SECTOR . HIGH-PERFORMING SECTOR
AS WELL, BUT A SMALL SECTOR OF
THE STOCKMARKET. THE SUCCESS OR
FAILURES OF THAT KIND OF TRY
THAT SUCCESS OR FAILURE OF THIS
TAX IN A NONSIGNIFICANT WAY ,
OR NOT IN AN INSIGNIFICANT WAY.
THAT DRAWS TO THE SECOND GRAPH,
WHICH IS HOW MUCH OF EACH ONE
OF THESE TAXES ARE COLLECTED
FROM 10 TAXPAYERS. AS YOU CAN
SEE, AND I JUST CHOSE 10, I
SURE THERE IS A LEVEL WHERE I
CAN GO DOWN IN THE TERMS OF THE
NUMBERS OF TAXPAYERS, WHICH
WILL THEY WILL NOT CLOSE,
BECAUSE OF CONFIDENTIAL LOYALTY
REQUIREMENTS. AS YOU CAN SAY,
DESSIE, 10% OF THE REVENUE
COMES FROM 10 -- ABOUT 20% IN
THE BNO TAX. THE PAYROLL
EXPENSE TAX, 70% OF THE REVENUE
COMES FROM TAXPAYERS. WERE
TALKING ABOUT THOUSANDS OF
BUSINESSES ACROSS THE CITY THAT
PARTICIPATE. AND THERE ONLY 10
TAXPAYERS TO PAY THIS TAX.
>> AGAIN, IT IS WHAT IT IS, BUT
IT SHOWS THAT THIS IS A
VOLATILE TAX AND HIGHLY
CONCENTRATED TO A SMALL NUMBER
OF TAXPAYERS. WHAT WE DO TO
HEDGE AGAINST VOLATILITY IS
COLLECT RESERVES. AS I
MENTIONED EARLIER, WE HAVE A
REVENUE STABILIZATION FUND THAT
WE FUND FROM THE GENERAL FUND
THAT IS SIZED ON 5% OF GENERAL
FUND TAX REVENUES. BECAUSE THIS
IS A TRANSFER INTO THE GENERAL
FUND AND NOT A TAX REVENUE
COLLECTED IN THE GENERAL FUND,
IT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THAT
CALCULATION. THE FINANCIAL PLAN
THAT CBO PROVIDED ACTUALLY
INCLUDES , I BELIEVE, IT IS
ABOUT A $37 MILLION RESERVE
ASSUMPTION. THAT IS MONEY THAT
IS NOT INCLUDED IN
APPROPRIATIONS IN 2026, PART OF
WHICH PROVIDES BUFFER AGAINST
THAT UNPREDICTABILITY. THAT IS
THE END OF MY COMMENTS. I'M
HAPPY TO ANSWER ADDITIONAL
QUESTIONS .
>> THANK YOU, TOM. I WILL
HIGHLIGHT FOR OUR COLLEAGUES
WHILE FOLKS START RAISING THEIR
HANDS, BECAUSE I'M PRETTY SURE
FOLKS WILL HAVE SOMETHING TO
SAY, THIS PRESENTATION IS A
SUMMARY OF YOUR MEMO , WHICH IS
A SUMMARY OF YOUR ATTACHMENT TO
THE MEMO. SO THIS IS THE THIRD
LEVEL OF SUMMARY A VERY
DETAILED INFORMATION. I JUST
WANT TO THANK YOU, TOM. I DO
HAVE SOME QUESTIONS . I SET UP
MY QUESTIONS BASED ON YOUR
MEMO. I WILL LET MY COLLEAGUES
GO FIRST AND GIVE YOU THAT
HEADS UP RIGHT NOW.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. DIRECTOR
NOBLE THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE
AND YOUR INSIGHT. MR. MIKESELL,
I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR
INSIGHT AND THE WORK THAT IS
GONE INTO ALL LEVELS OF
PRODUCTION IT IS INTERESTING
LOOKING AT THIS . A FEW THINGS.
ONE IS , DIRECTOR NOBLE, YOU
MENTIONED THE PREVIOUS BEST OF
ALL WORLDS. THAT WAS THE
GOLDILOCKS MOMENT. WE ARE NOW
SITTING HERE WITH A LOT OF
PORRIDGE THAT HAS BEEN EATEN.
WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE IN THAT
SAME POSITION. THAT IS A
MINDSET CHANGE THAT WE ARE IN
NOW COMPARED TO THAT TIME
PERIOD NOT TOO LONG AGO. I
THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT AS WE
LOOK FORWARD. BECAUSE AS WE
HAVE OFTEN NOTED, WE ARE THE
NUTS AND BOLTS, THE
FUNDAMENTALS AND THE BASICS
APPROACH TO THE CHALLENGES WE
ARE FACING IN THE BUDGET AND
OTHERWISE. THANK YOU FOR THAT
HIGHLIGHT. I THINK IT REALLY
UNDERSCORES THE DIFFERENCES
BETWEEN NOW AND THEN. I SHOULD
SAY THE ASSUMPTIONS BUILT IN
ACROSS THE BOARD, THERE ARE
MANY OF THEM , AND ONE IS ON
THE INFLATION PIECE. I HAVE
ALWAYS BEEN WELL AWARE OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE AND THE FED
CHAIR MAN AND SO FORTH, BUT
SITTING HERE NOW, I AM SO
APPRECIATIVE OF HIM TRYING TO
MEET HIS INFLATION TARGETS ,
BECAUSE IF HE DOESN'T, THAT
JUST MAKES THINGS SO MUCH
HARDER. THAT IS ANOTHER
ASSUMPTION BUILT IN HERE. ONE
OF THE ASSUMPTIONS AS YOU ARE
GOING THROUGH, AND THIS IS A
QUESTION I HAVE, BECAUSE I
STATED EARLIER AND EARLIER
MEETINGS THAT CHAIR STRAUSS HAD
THAT THE NEED TO ENSURE THAT
THE EMERGENCY AND REVENUE
STABILIZATION FUNDS WERE FILLED
BACK UP POST THE GREAT
RECESSION AND THE PANDEMIC TO
BE READY FOR THE NEXT ONE , MY
QUESTION NOW IS IF THAT -- IS
5% A GOOD ASSUMPTION? WHATEVER
IT MAY BE. WHAT IS THE RIGOR
THAT GOES BEHIND THESE
ASSUMPTIONS ON WHAT THE
EMERGENCY AND REVENUE
STABILIZATION FUND SHOULD BE?
>> THERE IS NO MAGIC . WHAT WE
HAVE DONE IN THE PAST IS TO
LOOK INTO PREVIOUS DOWN PERIODS
AND SEE HOW LARGE A DIP AND HOW
LONG IT IS SUSTAINED. I WOULD
NOTE THAT THE PANDEMIC , OUR
OWN RESERVES HAVE NOT BEEN
SUFFICIENT. IT HELPED A GOOD
DEAL TO HAVE THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT, PARTICULARLY IN THE
FIRST YEAR. IT IS A DIFFICULT
TRADE-OFF YOU'RE GOING TO FACE
EITHER WAY, BECAUSE IF YOU
BUILD UP THE RESERVES, YOU'RE
NOT PROVIDING CURRENT SERVICES.
IF AND WHEN THERE IS A
DOWNTURN, YOU HAVE TO THINK
ABOUT HOW QUICKLY TO RUN DOWN
THAT RESERVE. I WOULD SAY THE
POLICIES HAVE SERVED US WELL
OVER TIME. WE HAVE DIPPED INTO
THE RESERVE. I THINK THAT HAS
SERVED US WELL OVER TIME. AS
FORMER BUDGET DIRECTOR, IS THAT
THERE IS A BIGGER CUSHION, THAT
ALWAYS FEELS BETTER. ON THE
EMERGENCY FUND SIDE, I WILL
TELL YOU THIS STORY. I USED TO
CALL THAT AN EARTHQUAKE FUND .
THAT IT IS NOT NEARLY
SUFFICIENT FOR AN EARTHQUAKE.
IF YOU CONSIDER THE COST OF A
SINGLE BRIDGE , 80 MILLION OR
SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IT IS MORE
OF THE FLAVOR OF A LARGE STORM
. NOR DO I THINK THE CITY CAN
REALISTICALLY BUILD UP A
RESERVE SUFFICIENT FOR THAT
KIND OF SCENARIO . THERE IS
FEMA AND THE FEDS AND THE LIKE.
I HAVE OBSERVED THE POLITICAL
PRESSURE THAT COMES ON THE
COUNCIL TO USE THOSE RESERVES
IN TIMES WHEN SPENDING GETS A
LITTLE TIGHT EVEN THOUGH THE
DEFINITIONS OF WHY THEY ARE
NEEDED. MAINTAINING A LARGE
RESERVE BECOMES A POLICY
CHALLENGE BECAUSE THERE ARE
NEEDS ON THE STREET AS WE SPEAK
TODAY THAT CANNOT BE FULLY MET,
AND AS YOU ARE BUILDING UP THE
RESERVE, LITERALLY, THE REASONS
YOU ARE ELECTED IS TO GIVE THE
INFORMATION FOR THE DECISIONS.
>> EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS IS
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS. KEY
PART OF PUBLIC SAFETY. WE NEED
TO STILL -- ON THE
UNPREDICTABILITY IN TERMS OF
THE LAST SLIDE . IS SOMEONE OLD
ENOUGH TO REMEMBER THE.COM BUST
OF THE LATE '90s AND THE OTHER
UPS AND DOWNS WE HAVE HAD? I AM
VERY MINDFUL OF THAT. THE
PENDULUM MAY COME BACK THE
OTHER WAY, AND WE MAY HAVE
ANOTHER DIP. I'M ALSO MINDFUL,
AND REALLY APPRECIATE THE
SLIDE, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE
TEND TO THINK OF IT IN TERMS OF
THE STOCKMARKET GOING UP OR
DOWN, BUT WHEN IT IS SO
CONCENTRATED, AND THIS GRAPH IS
BEAUTIFUL FOR THAT, THIS IS A
CITY TAX. THIS IS A CITY EFFORT
. THIS IS NOT A COUNTY TAX.
EVEN THE NATURE OF THE WORK, IT
IS EASY TO SHIFT FROM CITY TO
COUNTY OR CITY TO THE OTHER
SIDE OF THE LAKE. I THINK THAT
IS ANOTHER THING WE NEED TO BE
MINDFUL OF. I THINK WE PROBABLY
ALL HAVE FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES
THAT ARE BEING SHIFTED TO
BELLEVUE, OR MAYBE FOR PERSONAL
REASONS, THEY GET THEMSELVES
SHIFTED BACK TO SEATTLE . BUT
THOSE SHIFTS ARE EASY TO MAKE.
THAT IS ANOTHER VOLATILITY AND
UNPREDICTABILITY AS IT RELATES
TO THIS. I AM THINKING OF THE
LITTLE THING I HAVE IN MY
OFFICE. BE PRESENT . BE HERE,
FOCUS, BE MINDFUL. THAT MEANS
REALLY UNDERSTANDING THOSE
KINDS OF PIECES, AND BE
PREPARED TO TAKE THE DECISION
NEEDED THAT WILL COME UP IN THE
NEXT BRIEFING. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
COUTO. -- KETTLE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
>> APPRECIATE THIS LATEST
ITERATION OF PRESENTATION HERE.
I WANT TO CONTINUE THAT LINE OF
QUESTIONING. I WANT TO PULL A
THREAD I HEARD CHAIR STRAUSS
MENTIONED EARLIER IN TERMS OF
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS AND
TIMING OF WHEN THESE WERE LAST
CONSIDERED. WE KNOW THAT THE
PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX, TOP 10
PAYERS INTO THAT SOURCE OF
FUNDING , TOP 10 ACCOUNT FOR
ROUGHLY 70% OF THE TOTAL
REVENUES RECEIVED. FOR THOSE
REASONS, OBVIOUSLY, AND THOSE
REASONS ALONE, THERE IS MORE.
BUT IT IS AN EXTREMELY VOLATILE
TAX , EXTREMELY VOLATILE
REVENUE SOURCE. AND SO, I THINK
THE PRINCIPLES OF THOUGHTFUL
PLANNING AND GOOD GOVERNANCE
DEMAND THAT WE BE PREPARED FOR
ANY NUMBER OF SCENARIOS. I
THINK THERE IS A POLICY CHOICE,
ULTIMATELY, HERE . THERE ARE
GROWING NEEDS IN TERMS OF BASIC
CITY SERVICES , HEDGING THAT
AGAINST THE FACT THAT THIS IS,
AGAIN, AN EXTREMELY VOLATILE
REVENUE SOURCE . THERE ARE
CIRCUMSTANCES WITH OUR DIRECT
CONTROL IN SPHERE OF INFLUENCE.
MANY, AND MOST, OF WHICH ARE
NOT. HOW DO WE BETTER HEDGE
AGAINST THAT VOLATILITY WITH
OUR FISCAL RESERVES , THE TWO
FISCAL RESERVES FUNDS ? AS I
UNDERSTAND IT, THE EMERGENCY OF
THE TWO FUNDS, THE EMERGENCY
FUND IS LESS RELEVANT . THE
MORE OPPORTUNE ONE DIRECTLY
GERMANE TO THIS CONVERSATION IS
THE REVENUE STABILIZATION FUND
. IS THAT CORRECT? IF SO, WHEN
WAS THE LAST TIME -- I DIDN'T
CATCH THIS EARLIER, WHEN WAS
THE LAST TIME THAT POLICY, I
THINK THAT IS A POLICY, WHEN
WAS THE LAST TIME THAT WAS
SPECIFICALLY REVISED?
>> THE TARGET HAS BEEN IN PLACE
FOR MANY YEARS YOU ARE DOING A
GREAT JOB OF PREVIEWING A KEY
COMPONENT OF THE NEXT
PRESENTATION THAT WILL TEE UP
THE QUESTION, ESSENTIALLY, IF
THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX
REVENUES CONTINUE TO BE
MAINTAINED OUTSIDE THE GENERAL
FUND, THEN I THINK THERE IS
EVERY REASON TO ESSENTIALLY
RECOMMEND THAT WE PUT THE --
HAD THE COUNCIL ADOPT A POLICY
TO BUILD A RESERVE FOR THAT
SPECIFIC FUND. OF THOSE
REVENUES WERE MOVED INTO THE
GENERAL FUND, THE EXISTING 5%
POLICY MIGHT APPLY, ALTHOUGH
GIVEN THE CONCENTRATION AND
POTENTIAL VOLATILITY WITH THE
NEW SOURCE THAT WOULD BE AT A,
IT MIGHT BE THAT THE 5% IS NOT
SUFFICIENT. A BIT TECHNICAL,
BUT IF THE JUMPSTART PATTERN
FUND WILL BE ITS OWN SEPARATE
THING, I THINK WE NEED RESERVE
POLICIES ABOUT IT, ITSELF. THE
MAYOR'S PROPOSED BUDGET
INCLUDES FUNDS OF RESERVE, BUT
IT DOESN'T EXLEY SET A
SPECIFIC PATTERN -- POLICY
AROUND THAT. I THINK THAT IS
SOMETHING YOU SHOULD WELL
CONSIDER AS PART OF THIS BUDGET
PROCESS.
>> ABSOLUTELY. IF THERE IS NO
FORMAL POLICY, OR THE LAST TIME
IT WAS UPDATED IT WAS ON A
PRE-PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX BASIS,
WHICH I THINK IS THE CASE, THEN
WE ARE PAST DUE TO DO EXACTLY
THAT. TO REVISIT AND UPDATE
THAT SPECIFIC POLICY TO BETTER
PLAN AND MEET THE NEEDS AND
CONTEMPLATE ANY NUMBER OF
SCENARIOS . AGAIN, PRINCIPLES
OF GOOD GOVERNANCE AND GOOD
OLD-FASHIONED CONTINGENCY PLAN
AND DEMAND THAT WE DO EXACTLY
THAT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> TO PREVIEW THAT DISCUSSION,
IT OBVIOUSLY MIGHT NOT ONLY BE
ABOUT THE TARGET AMOUNT, BUT
ALSO THE MECHANISMS TO GET TO
THAT OF MOUNT. FOR INSTANCE,
PART OF THE POLICIES AROUND THE
REVENUE STABILIZATION FUND HAVE
TO DO WITH AUTOMATICALLY
FILLING IT WITH SOME OF THE
UNEXPECTED FUND BALANCE AT YEAR
END, IF THERE IS ANY. THAT
MIGHT ALSO BE A MODEL THAT CAN
BE APPLIED TO THE PAYROLL
EXPENSE TAX AS WELL.
>> THANK YOU. NO FURTHER
QUESTIONS.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I WILL
MAYBE RESTATE EXACTLY WHAT MY
COLLEAGUES JUST DEAD -- SAID,
WHICH IT BEARS MENTIONING
AGAIN. I AM HEARING IT AS A
WARNING. WE ARE HINGING OUR
BUDGET ON A VERY VOLATILE FUND
SOURCE. AS A PERSON WHO
ACTUALLY WORKED AT THE CITY
DURING COVID AND THEN COVID HIT
AND WE SAW EVERYTHING TANK, AND
WE HAD TO TAKE SOME DRASTIC
MEASURES TO BE ABLE TO ENSURE
WE WERE BACKFILLING FOR THAT
PLUNGE, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT
HINGING OUR BUDGET ON THIS ,
YOU KNOW, 70% OF OUR BUDGET ,
ON THIS VOLATILE FUND
SOURCE. I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A
WARNING TO US THAT IN THE VERY
NEAR FUTURE, IF ANY OF THIS
FUND SOURCE TANKS, WE ARE GOING
TO BE IN BIG TROUBLE, NOT A
LITTLE BIT OF TROUBLE, BIG
TROUBLE. AND SO, I JUST THINK
IT IS INCUMBENT UPON US TO
REALLY LOOK AT THIS, AND THANK
YOU COUNCILMEMBER SAKA , FOR
DAYLIGHTING THE NEW
STABILIZATION FUND HAS NOT BEEN
LOOKED AT SINCE BEFORE WE HAD
THIS NEW, FAIRLY NEW, FUND
SOURCE , THE PAYROLL EXPENSE
TAX. AND SO, WE REALLY NEED TO
TAKE A LOOK AT -- AND WHAT WE
HAVE ALL BEEN SAYING SINCE HE
GOT HERE IN JANUARY, THE
IMPORTANCE OF LOOKING AT OUR
CITY BUDGET, BECAUSE I FEEL
LIKE WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS A
SPENDING PROBLEM, NOT A REVENUE
PROBLEM. BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS
NEW REVENUE SOURCE, WE NOW HAVE
ADDED MORE SPENDING TO OUR
BUDGET. NOTWITHSTANDING THE
FACT I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE SOME
SERVICE NEEDS IN THE CITY, WE
ALSO HAVE TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE
BALANCING THE BUDGET ON
SOMETHING THAT IS STABLE SO IN
THE NEAR FUTURE WE DON'T HAVE
A SITUATION WHERE NOW WE ARE IN
THE MIDDLE OF A CRISIS TRYING
TO RIGHT SIZE OUR BUDGET. THAT
IS A THING THAT ACTUALLY KEEPS
ME UP AT NIGHT. I REALLY WANTED
TO UNDERSCORE THAT POINT. I AM
HEARING YOU, TOM. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES, AND THEN I WILL FOCUS
QUESTIONS ON ANYTHING OTHER
THAN JUMPSTART FOR THIS
PRESENTATION. WE'RE GOING TO
MOVE RIGHT INTO JUMPSTART.
>> THANK YOU. TAKING THE CUE
FROM THE CHAIR, MY QUESTION IS,
GIVEN THAT THIS PROPOSED BUDGET
DOES RELY SIGNIFICANTLY ON THAT
TAX, AND ACCORDING TO YOUR
CHARTS, WE WILL SEE IN 2027
POTENTIALLY ANOTHER $75 MILLION
ADDED TO THAT THE COMES TO
ABOUT $330 MILLION GAP THAT WE
HAVE . IF WE DON'T INCLUDE
JUMPSTART.
>> JUMPSTART , IF IT IS NOT IN
THE GENERAL FUND THAT
>> WE HAVE ABOUT A $300 MILLION
GAP. PREVIOUS PROJECTIONS HAVE
ESTIMATED MORE OR LESS THAT IT
WILL CONTINUE TO GROW. THE
QUESTION IS, IF WE CHOOSE NOT
TO RELY SO HEAVILY ON THIS TAX
BECAUSE OF ITS VOLATILITY, WHAT
OTHER OPTIONS DO WE HAVE ? WE
CAN CONTINUE TO CONTEMPLATE
CUTTING STAFF, CUTTING
PROGRAMS, CUTTING SERVICES, OR
WE CAN CONTEMPLATE MAYBE
TURNING THE DIALS ON HOW AND
WHO GETS TAXED HERE , OR
CONTEMPLATE ADDITIONAL
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE OPTIONS.
THIS MIGHT BE A CONVERSATION
THAT IS PLANNED FOR WHEN WE
HAVE THE REVENUE FORECAST
DISCUSSION NEXT WEEK. THIS IS
GOING TO BE AN ONGOING PROBLEM.
WE HAVE KNOW WE HAVE A
STRUCTURAL PROBLEM FOR SOME
TIME. WE KEEP KICKING THE CAN
DOWN THE ROAD. I AM SURE WE
HAVE THIS PARTICULAR SOURCE NOW
TO HELP ADDRESS IT, BUT I THINK
WE ALL HEAR YOU LOUD AND CLEAR
THAT RELYING ON 10 PEOPLE TO
FUND CITY SERVICES IS PROBABLY
NOT PARTICULARLY WISE. I GUESS
THAT IS MAYBE NOT A QUESTION
FOR YOU TO ANSWER, TOM, BUT IT
IS SOMETHING I WOULD LIKE FOR
US AS A COUNCIL TO GRAPPLE WITH
OVER THIS BUDGET PROCESS,
BECAUSE IT MAKES ME VERY
UNCOMFORTABLE TO KNOW THAT WE
ARE CONTEMPLATING LAYING OFF
150 PEOPLE IN THE CITY WHO WILL
THEN HAVE TO, PERHAPS,
PARTICIPATE IN OTHER CITY
SERVICES BECAUSE THEY DON'T
HAVE INCOME. THANK YOU, CHAIR.
>> WILL SAID, COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES. WE HAVE 78 FILLED
POSITIONS OF 160 TOTAL
POSITIONS .
>> IT IS NOT 160 LAOS, IT IS
ABOUT HALF THAT.
>> FAIR ENOUGH. THERE ARE
PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING
CONTEMPLATED TO LOSE THEIR
JOBS.. I WAS ABOUT TO SAY THE
SAME THING. YOU DON'T NEED A
LECTURE FOR ME.
>> I WILL BRING UP WHAT I WAS
GOING TO SAY LATER, WHICH IS
THAT EACH OF THESE PEOPLE IS
SOMEBODY THAT SERVES THE CITY
OF SEATTLE, SERVES ALL OF
SEATTLE. LIKELY HAVE MOORE
BEACHES ERROR RENT TO PAY,
TRANSIT COSTS OR CAR PAYMENTS,
CHILDCARE OR ELDERCARE. NOTED
THAT IS TAKEN LIGHTLY. I WANT
TO COME BACK TO THE MEMO, TOM.
ON PAGE 1 OF YOUR MEMO, I
WANTED TO CHECK SOMETHING HERE.
IN 25 AND 26 WE USE $52 MILLION
ONE TIME FUND BALANCES. THE
NEXT BULLET BEGINNING IN 27 HAS
AN OPERATING DEFICIT OF 76
MILLION PER YEAR. CAN YOU HELP
ME UNDERSTAND ? HELP ME UNPACK
THIS. IS THIS ADDITIVE? IS IT
CUMULATIVE? IS IT SUBSTITUTED?
HELP ME UNDERSTAND THESE.
>> THANKS FOR THE QUESTION. IT
IS A FUNCTION OF THE GROWTH IN
THE FINANCIAL PLAN. A LITTLE
BIT OF BOTH. 25 BUDGET IS
BALANCED WITH $52 MILLION OF
ONE-TIME MONEY. THAT IS A
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SPENDING AND
REVENUE , ONGOING TAX REVENUE
IN THOSE REGULAR REVENUES OF
$52 MILLION. THAT CONTINUES
INTO FUTURE YEARS. IN ADDITION,
THE UNDERLYING GROWTH IN
SPENDING GOING INTO THE NEXT
YEAR IS LACKING THE UNDERLYING
GROWTH IN REVENUES GOING TO THE
NEXT YEAR. SOME OF THAT, BUT
NOT ALL OF IT, IS BECAUSE THE
CITY BUDGET OFFICE ASSUMED THAT
THE JUMPSTART TRANSFERRED TO
THE GENERAL FUND WOULD STAY
FLAT IN THE FUTURE. I THINK
DIRECTOR NOBLE WILL COVER SOME
OF THIS IN THE NEXT
PRESENTATION. THAT IS PART OF
IT. IF YOU JUST ASSUME THAT THE
JUMPSTART CONTRIBUTION IS GOING
TO INCREASE BY SOME LEVEL, THAT
WILL HELP WITH SOME OF THAT. IT
IS BASICALLY TWO THINGS. THE
PROPOSAL USES ONE-TIME BALANCES
IN 25, BUT THAT IS A DIFFERENCE
THAT CONTINUES IN EVERY FUTURE
HERE, AND THEN THERE ARE
DIFFERENCES IN THE GROWTH
BETWEEN THE TWO LINES THAT MAKE
UP FOR THE DIFFERENCE.
>> THANK YOU. IN ADDITION TO
THIS, I ALREADY BROUGHT UP
ATTACHMENT A TO THIS MEMO.
COLLIES, PLEASE TAKE A LOOK
THERE. AGAIN, I BELIEVE IT WAS
A SLIGHT HE JUST HAD UP, YOUR
MEMO AND THIS PRESENTATION SHOW
WE HAVE BIG DECISIONS AND EAT A
PATHWAY AHEAD . THIS IS CLEARLY
DESCRIBED BY COMPARING THE
NOVEMBER 2023 PROJECTIONS TO
THE PROJECTED DEFICIT OF $76
MILLION. I THINK PUTTING THOSE
TWO WITHIN YOUR MEMO, I
BELIEVE, IS ON PAGE 16. AND
PAGE 5. COMPARING THESE TWO
DIFFERENT GRAPHS YOU CREATED
REALLY HELPS SHAPE IN VISUAL
FORMAT THE PATH THAT WE HAVE
COME THROUGH OVER THE LAST YEAR
TO GET TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
THIS COULD HAVE BEEN A LOT
WORSE. THE 160 POSITIONS , 78
OR SO THAT ARE FILLED , THAT
NUMBER WOULD HAVE BEEN TWICE AS
HIGH, IF NOT EVEN HIGHER THAN
THAT, WITHOUT THE WORK
ACCOMPLISHED THIS YEAR. I DO
WANT TO NOTE THAT WE HAVE
TALKED ABOUT NEW REVENUE IN
THIS COMMITTEE. ON JUNE 5 WE
HAD IN THE SELECT BUDGET SERIES
THE PRESENTATION OF WHAT
HAPPENED IN THE OUTCOMES OF THE
REVENUE STABILIZATION TASK
FORCE, AS WELL AS ON SLIDE 12 ,
YOU DEMONSTRATE THE NEW
REVENUES THAT ARE BEING
UTILIZED HERE. IN ADDITION TO
EVERYTHING ALREADY SAID, I JUST
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT , FOR
THE VIEWING PUBLIC ON THE
AWARD-WINNING SEATTLE CHANNEL,
THAT THERE IS HIS UNDERSTANDING
WE DID NOT TURN A BLIND EYE TO
NEW REVENUE WE LOOKED AT IT,
AND THERE ARE DEFINITELY SOME
VARIABLES THAT HAVE LED US TO
THE DECISION WE ARE IN TODAY.
JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT ON THE
RECORD. ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS
PRESENTATION? SHALL WE MOVE?
CLERK, READ ITEM NUMBER FOUR
INTO THE RECORD.
>> JUMPSTART POLICIES BRIEFING
AND DISCUSSION.
>> MY APOLOGIES, TOM. WAS
LOOKING OFF OF A DIFFERENT SET
OF NOTES. I JUST WANTED TO
PRES
UNINTENTIONALLY STARTED WITH --
THIS PRESENTATION IS SHOWN AS
THE GRAPH BETWEEN NOVEMBER 23
AND TODAY THAT WE HAVE BEEN
EMERGING FROM THE PANDEMIC AND
THE DOWNSTREAM ECONOMIC IMPACTS
OF THE DOWNTURN WE EXPERIENCED
IN 2020 AND 2021 HERE WE ARE
FILLING THE EMERGENCY FUNDS.
WERE FORMALIZING KEEPING
BENEFICIAL CHANGES THAT WERE
MADE DURING THE PANDEMIC.
CLEARLY, JUMPSTART JUMPSTARTED
SEATTLE WHEN WE NEEDED IT MOST,
DEMONSTRATING WHEN CITIES
ACROSS THE COUNTRY , WHEN THE
JOB MARKET WAS FOR THE
PROCUREMENT SEATTLE WE KEPT OUR
EMPLOYEES DURING THE WORST OF
THE STORM , AND THESE ARE THE
HARDEST DECISIONS, ESPECIALLY
THE LAOS. SOME OF THE HARDEST
DECISIONS BECAUSE EVERY FILLED
POSITION IS A PERSON WHO SERVES
OUR CITY AND SEATTLEITES . THEY
HAVE RENT OR MORTGAGE TO PAY,
CHILDCARE, ELDERCARE, TRANSIT
TO COVER OR CAR PAYMENTS ON TOP
OF EVERYTHING ELSE IN LIFE,
GROCERIES, YOU NAME IT. I WANT
TO RAISE THAT AS MY HIGH-LEVEL
OBSERVATION FROM YOUR MEMO AND
PRESENTATION THAT THIS IS US
EMERGING FROM THE PANDEMIC. IT
HELPS SO MUCH WE ARE HERE IN
PERSON WORKING TOGETHER IN
PERSON, BECAUSE MAKING THESE
DECISIONS VIRTUALLY WOULD NOT
HAVE WORKED . OVER TO YOU FOR
THE NEXT PRESENTATION.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STROUDSBURG
AS A DISCUSSION OF THE LAST
HALF HOUR OF SO HAS
HIGHLIGHTED, ONE OF THE MOST
SIGNIFICANT POLICY PROPOSALS
FOR YOU IN THE BUDGET IS AROUND
JUMPSTART AND HOW THOSE
REVENUES ARE EMPLOYED. THERE
ARE AT LEAST TWO ELEMENTS, WHAT
IS THE ACTUAL PROPOSED SPENDING
FOR 25 AND 26, WHICH THIS WILL
HIGHLIGHT, BUT ALSO THE
POLICIES THAT GOVERN THAT
SPENDING AND WOULD GOVERN THAT
SPENDING IN 2027 AND BEYOND AS
TOM DESCRIBES, THE OVERALL
SUSTAINABILITY PICTURE IS
SIGNIFICANTLY INFLUENCED BY THE
USE OF JUMPSTART GOING FORWARD.
THIS PRESENTATION IS STRUCTURED
AS FOLLOWS. TRYING TO GIVE YOU
GENERAL BACKGROUND ON THE
REVENUE STREAM AND EXPANDING ON
THE OBSERVATIONS THAT TOM HAS
MADE ABOUT CONCENTRATION AND
THE VOLATILITY AND HISTORY.
THEN TALK ABOUT THE EXISTING
POLICIES THAT ARE SET IN CITY
CODE AND THE RESTRICTIONS THEY
NOW IMPOSE . THEN SHIFTED TALK
ABOUT THE MAYOR'S PROPOSED
POLICIES. THERE'S A PIECE OF
LEGISLATION BEFORE YOU AS PART
OF THE BUDGET THAT WOULD CHANGE
THOSE POLICIES . THE
ALLOCATIONS THAT ARE PROPOSED
FOR 25 AND 26 ARE CONSISTENT
WITH THOSE POLICIES, BUT AGAIN,
THEY ALSO APPLY GOING FORWARD.
PURPOSELY, THE PRESENTATION
ENDS WITH A SLIDE WITH A SERIES
OF QUESTIONS THAT ARE QUESTIONS
TO YOU AT THIS STAGE. NOT
INSPECTED SPECIFIC ANSWERS, BUT
HOPING THAT THIS WILL GIVE YOU
AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THESE
DYNAMICS AMONGST YOURSELVES TO
PROVIDE SOME LEVEL OF DIRECTION
ABOUT WHERE YOU MIGHT WANT TO
HEAD, AND ALSO AT THIS POINT TO
FORCE THE ISSUES FOR YOU AND
HAVE THEM , HAVE YOU START
THINKING THROUGH THEM IN MORE
SPECIFICS IN DETAIL. WITH THAT,
I WILL DIVE IN AND TALK ABOUT A
LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY AND
FORECAST. THIS PRESENTATION IS
LARGELY WITH GRAPHS ON PURPOSE
TO MAKE THIS CONSUMABLE. HAPPY
TO ANSWER DETAILED QUESTIONS AS
WELL. THIS CHART COMPARES TWO
THINGS. ONE, THE GRAY BARS ARE
THE ORIGINAL SPENDING PLAN FOR
THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX AS IT
WAS CONCEIVED AND IMAGINED,
ESSENTIALLY, IN 2020 . IN SOME
WAYS, THAT WAS REALLY AN
INITIAL SPENDING PLAN. THERE
WAS A RECOGNITION THAT THIS WAS
LIKELY, THE GRAYBAR, THAT LEVEL
OF EXPENDITURES WAS A
CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE OF WHAT
THE TAX WOULD BRING IN AND
WOULD BE RELIABLE. A TECHNICAL
POINT TO ADD TO THIS IS THAT IN
2024 , VOTES TAKEN IN 23, THERE
WAS PURPOSELY $21 MILLION ADDED
FOR STUDENT MENTAL HEALTH. I
INCLUDED THAT IN THE GRAY AS
THE ORIGINAL PLAN IT SERVES A
BASE ASSUMPTION. THE GRAY BARS,
BEYOND THAT $20 MILLION,,
THEY'RE BASICALLY GROWING AT
2% PER YEAR. IMAGINE $240
MILLION OF PET PRIORITY
SPENDING, AND THE FIRST YEAR IT
WOULD GROW AT 2%. THE BLUE
BARS, THE FIRST THREE BARS,
WHICH ARE SOLID BLUE, ARE
ACTUAL RECEIVED REVENUES. THE
DOTTED BARS ARE THE FORECASTS.
THE BUDGET , THE CURRENT
PROPOSED BUDGET IS BALANCED TO
THE 404 AND 23 FOUR, BECAUSE
THAT REPRESENTS A SIGNIFICANT
UPWARD FORECAST OVER THE
INITIAL 24 FORECAST, AND ALSO
THE FORECAST FOR 25 AND 2026
NORTH OF 400 MILLION EACH. TO
HIT ON A POINT AND PUT MORE
SPECIFICS TO IT, THE REVENUE
SOURCE HAS NOT BEEN, TO USE
FANCY MATH, MONETARILY GROWING.
A DROPPED ONE YEAR,
PARTICULARLY IN 2022.
POTENTIALLY TO INFORM A
QUESTION ABOUT AN APPROPRIATE
RESERVE, IT DROPPED BY ABOUT
10%, A LITTLE BIT MORE. IF YOU
RECALL, THIS WAS THE IMMEDIATE
POST-PANDEMIC PERIOD . UNLESS
WE STOP SHOPPING ONLINE AND
RETURN TO THE MORE PHYSICAL
WORLD. THAT HAD SOME IMPACT ON
TECHNICAL NEEDS. YOU RECALL
LAOS AMONG -- OR AT LEAST
HIRING FREEZES. THE GROWTH IN
ACTUAL AND PROJECTED REVENUES
IS INFORMED BY TWO THINGS. WHAT
IS THE POTENTIAL FOR
COMPENSATION TO BE INCREASING
AS SALARIES AND STOCKS VALUES
GO UP, BUT ALSO FOR TOTAL
EMPLOYMENT TO BE INCREASING.
AGAIN, NOT EXCLUSIVELY A
TAX THAT AFFECTS THE TECHNOLOGY
SECTOR, BUT THAT SECTOR IS A
KEY DRIVER OF THESE REVENUES.
YOU CAN SEE THAT IN THE POST
BACK THEN IT DROPPED. --
POST-PANDEMIC DRAW. AND THEN A
RETURN TO BROKE. I WOULD KNOW,
AS WELL, THE VERY SIGNIFICANT
GROWTH PROJECTED FOR 2024 AND
25 , BUT REALLY, A BIG JUMP
FROM 23 AND 24. I EMPHASIZE
THAT IS NOT BEEN REALIZED YET.
WE DO NOT KNOW HOW MUCH REVENUE
WE WILL TAKEN FOR 2024. IN
FACT, WE WON'T KNOW UNTIL LATE
FEBRUARY OF NEXT YEAR. IT IS AN
ANNUAL TAX. WE HAVE UNTIL
JANUARY 31 TO WRITE THE CHECK,
IN THAT IT TAKES A LITTLE WHILE
TO PROCESS ALL OF THAT. FIRMS
ARE ASKED TO MAKE QUARTERLY
PAYMENTS. WE HAVE SEEN THAT.
BUT IT DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY.
THESE ARE EFFECTIVELY
VOLUNTARILY QUARTERLY PAYMENTS.
IS THE PENALTY FOR GETTING IT
WRONG. WE KNOW THEY CAN'T
NECESSARILY KNOW WHAT THE TAX
LIABILITY WILL BE. IN TERMS OF
PAYING 25% OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR
AND TRUING UP AT THE END OF THE
YEAR ONCE THEY KNOW WHAT THAT
IS. ANOTHER.JUST TO HIGHLIGHT
THE TOUCHES ON SOMETHING THAT
COMES FROM COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE, THE TAX APPLIES TO WORK
THAT IS DONE IN THE CITY.
PHYSICALLY IN THE CITY. IF YOU
ARE WORKING FOR A FIRM ON THE
EAST SIDE BUT WORKING FROM YOUR
OFFICE AT HOME FOR MORE THAN
50% OF THE TIME, TAXES OWED,
BUT IF YOU'RE WORKING FROM
HOME BASED IN SEATTLE AND NOT
IN THE CITY, WE DON'T GET THE
TAX. WORK FROM HOME IS A
DYNAMIC IN THIS. IN FACT, WHEN
THE FACTORS THAT GOES INTO THE
FORECAST IS MONITORING THE
OCCUPANCY OF OFFICES IN THE
CITY, BECAUSE THAT BECOMES A
DRIVER. JUST TO SAY IT, YOU CAN
SEE IT. WE HAVE HAD EXACTLY 3
YEARS OF ACTUAL RECEIPTS, AND
ONE OF THOSE DROPPED FROM THE
PREVIOUS YEARS. CONTRAST THAT
TO THINGS LIKE PROPERTY TAX, WE
HAVE LITERALLY 50 YEARS OF
HISTORY AND 50 YEARS OF REVENUE
HISTORY WE CAN CORRELATE WITH
LOCAL EMPLOYMENT AND THE LIKE.
THAT IS HOW THE REVENUE
FORECASTS WORK. IT IS
UNDERSTANDING THOSE
CORRELATIONS OVER TIME. YOU GET
BETTER AT THOSE FORECASTS BY
DEFINITION. VERY LIMITED
INFORMATION. JUST TO HIGHLIGHT
, AGAIN. THIS IS EFFECTIVELY AN
UNDISCLOSED -- OR DISCLOSED
MORNING AT THIS POINT. HIGHLY
CONCENTRATED. WE HAVE SEEN A
DROP, AND THE BUDGETS ARE
ANTICIPATING A VERY SIGNIFICANT
INCREASE THAT WE HAVE NOT
REALIZED. THAT IS JUST THE
REALITY OF THIS TAX. I DON'T
HAVE AN ANSWER FOR DECREASING
OUR DEPENDENCE ON IT IN THE
NEAR TERM BECAUSE THESE ARE
REVENUES WE ARE RECEIVING. IT
DOES HIGHLIGHT THE QUESTION OF
BUILDING UP A RESERVE. THAT IS
THE HISTORY ON ACTUAL REVENUES.
TALKING ABOUT THE HISTORY ON
THE SPENDING. THE GRAY BARS ARE
THE SAME AS ON THE PREVIOUS
CHART. THE SCALE IS DIFFERENT
BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TO
INCLUDE ALL OF THAT. THE GRAY
IS THE ORIGINAL SPENDING PLAN.
THE GREEN FOR 22, 23 AND 24 ARE
ESSENTIALLY THE ACTUAL SPENDING
ON THE ORIGINAL PET PRIORITIES.
JUST TO SAY THAT IN 2021 THERE
WAS NO SPENDING ON THE PET
PRIORITIES. THE MONEY WAS ALL
USED TO PRESERVE EXISTING CITY
SERVICES. THAT WAS THE EXACT
PHRASE . ANYWAY, IT WAS
SUSTAINING CITY SERVICES WITH
THE IDEA AND USED EXCLUSIVELY
FOR THAT. IN 2022, IS BACKING
UP REAL QUICK . ACTUAL REVENUES
WERE 262. OF THAT, 148 WAS USED
FOR THE PET PRIORITIES. STILL
LESS THAN THE ORIGINAL PLAN ,
ESSENTIALLY , BUT THE REMAINDER
OF 85 MILLION BEING USED TO
SUPPORT THE GENERAL FUND AGAIN.
I WILL SHOW THE GENERAL FUND
AMOUNTS IN A MOMENT. 2023
ACTUALLY ACHIEVE THE ORIGINAL
SPENDING PLAN IN TERMS OF
APPROPRIATED DOLLARS. THAT WAS
PER POLICY. THE POLICY SAID
WE'RE GOING TO DEDICATE THE
FIRST 223 MILLION OF JUMPSTART
REVENUES TO THE JUMPSTART
PRIORITIES, AND THE REMAINDER
WILL BE FOR THE GENERAL FUND. I
WILL SHOW YOU HOW MUCH THAT
LEFT FOR THE GENERAL FUND. IN
2024, THIS YEAR WE WILL FALL
JUST SHORT, ARGUABLY A
TECHNICAL POINT. THE ADDITIONAL
20 MILLION FOR STUDENT MENTAL
HEALTH NOT TO BE FULLY
ALLOCATED THIS YEAR. GOING
BEYOND , IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET
FOR 25 AND 26, IF YOU LOOK AT
THE SPENDING PLAN BEYOND , THE
ALLOCATION TO THE ORIGINAL PET
STUDENT PRIORITIES AND MENTAL
HEALTH ADDED TO FALL SHORT OF
THAT ORIGINAL PLAN . THE
INCREMENTS ARE ARGUABLY SMALL,
BUT THEY ARE NOT ZERO. THE
ORIGINAL , THE IDEA THAT WE
WOULD MEET THE ORIGINAL
SPENDING PLAN IS NOT CONSISTENT
WITH WHAT IS IN THE PROPOSED
BUDGET. BUT AGAIN, I WOULD NOTE
THAT FOR AT LEAST , WE'VE ONLY
ACHIEVE THOSE GOALS IN TWO OF
THE FOUR YEARS WE HAVE BEEN
APPROPRIATING THE TAX TO DATE.
>> DIRECTOR NOBLE, ONE OF THOSE
TWO YEARS WAS 2021, CORRECT?
>> IN 2021 THERE WAS NO
PRIORITY SPENDING. YES. 2022
FELL SHORT.
>> YOU SAID WE ACHIEVED THE
ORIGINAL PET SPENDING PLAN IN
TWO YEARS BUT I WOULD ARGUE 23
AND ALMOST 24.
>> GOT YOU. THANK YOU.
>> EXPECTING WE MIGHT GET TO
QUESTIONS. THIS IS THE AMOUNT
OF MONEY GOING TO THE GENERAL
FUND FROM PET. THE REVERSE OF
THE PREVIOUS CHART. SO AGAIN,
IN 2021 IT WAS THE FULL AMOUNT
. IN 2022 $86 MILLION, 2023 100
, THIS YEAR 85. WHAT IS
PROPOSED GOING FORWARD IS A
SIGNIFICANT INCREASE. THE 2025
NUMBER IS A BIT DISTORTED
BECAUSE THERE IS ONE TIME
ALLOCATION. THE FORECAST FOR
2024 INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY
SINCE THE 2024 BUDGET WAS
ADOPTED. THE PROPOSED 2025
BUDGET EXPENSE THAT ONE TIME
INCREMENT FROM 2024. THE
ONGOING STORY IS TOLD WITH
2026. AGAIN, $223 MILLION OF
JUMPSTART REVENUE, AND I DREW
THAT ARROW TO INDICATE THAT
CONTINUES INTO THE FUTURE. THAT
IS THE ALLOCATIONS WE
ANTICIPATE GOING FORWARD. BUT
AGAIN, AT THAT LEVEL, YOU END
UP WITH A BIG GENERAL FUND
DEFICIT. THAT IS NOT SUFFICIENT
UNTO ITSELF TO CLOSE THAT GAP.
I WANTED TO PROVIDE --
>> IN ADDITION TO THIS, UNTIL
THE END OF THIS YEAR, UNTIL THE
END OF 2024, WE HAVE BEEN
RELYING ON COVID RELIEF
FUNDING, ONE-TIME FUNDING FROM
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. IS THAT
TRUE?
>> THAT IS TRUE. ARE OWNED FUND
BALANCE HAS GONE UP OVER TIME.
AS TOM DESCRIBED, WE FINISHED
2023 A LITTLE AHEAD OF WHERE WE
THOUGHT WE WOULD.
>> RETURNING HERE, THE PREVIOUS
CHART HAD AN EXTRA LINE ADDED.
THE GRAY BARS ARE THE ORIGINAL
SPENDING PLAN. I'VE TAKEN THE
DOLLAR LABELS OFTEN BECAUSE
THERE ARE SO MANY DOLLAR LEVELS
IN THE PICTURE. BUT THERE IS A
REFERENCE. THE GRAY IS WHAT THE
ORIGINAL SPENDING PLAN WOULD
CALL FOR. THE GREEN IS THE
ACTUAL, AND THE PROPOSED
SPENDING PLAN. YELLOW LINE HAS
BEEN ADDED. I ADDED IT IN
SPECIFIC RESPONSE FOR A
QUESTION THAT CAME UP WHEN YOU
WERE DISCUSSING THIS A COUPLE
WEEKS AGO. WELL, THAT GRAY
TARGET, THE LINE, WITH ONLY 2%
GROWTH. WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK
LIKE IF THE COMMITMENTS TO PET
PRIORITIES HAS BEEN GROWING
WITH INFLATION? THAT IS THE
YELLOW LINE. THAT IS BOTH FOR
THE PAST AND THE FUTURE. THAT
IS AN ADMIRABLE BENCHMARK, BUT
ONE THAT HAD NOT BEEN MET TO
DATE AND EMPHASIZES IT IS NOT
MET IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET. TO
HIGHLIGHT HOW FAR OFF WE ARE,
IF YOU LOOK AT 2025 , THE
INFLATION-ADJUSTED SPENDING
FROM THAT BASE 214 MILLION
WOULD BE 289. THE PROPOSAL FROM
THE MAYOR IS FOR 233. 289
COMPARED TO 233 IS A $56
MILLION DIFFERENCE I NOTED ON
THE RIGHT. IF YOU WANTED TO TRY
TO GET BACK TO THAT SPENDING
PLAN, INFLATION-ADJUSTED, YOU
HAVE A VERY SIGNIFICANT
CHALLENGE. YOU WOULD HAVE TO
FIND NEW REVENUE , OR CUT
SOMETHING FROM THE GENERAL FUND
TO THE TUNE OF 56 MILLION.
BOTTOMLINE, AND THIS IS
EDITORIAL, I'M NOT SURE EITHER
OF THESE BENCHMARKS, THE YELLOW
ONE OR THE GRAY ONE, A REALLY
HELPFUL IN TERMS OF THE
SITUATION THAT YOU ARE FINDING
OURSELVES IN NOW. I TOTALLY
RECOGNIZE THERE WAS A SENSE OF
COMMITMENT MADE BACK IN 2021
WHEN IT HAPPENED, BUT
CONDITIONS HAVE EVOLVED
SIGNIFICANTLY SINCE THEN. THESE
ARE YOUR JUDGMENTS, NOT MINE. I
WANTED TO MAKE THIS VERY CLEAR
WHAT THOSE BENCHMARKS LOOK LIKE
AND WHERE THE PROPOSAL STANDS
RELATIVE TO THOSE BENCHMARKS.
ALL OF THIS IS CONTEXT FOR
IMPORTANT COLLARS -- POLICY
QUESTIONS TO CALM.
>> BEFORE YOU MOVE ON, QUICKLY,
AND ALL OF THIS, THE YELLOW
LINE AND THE GRAY BARS ARE
REALLY DEMONSTRATING AN
ASPIRATIONAL GOAL, WHICH WE HAD
WHEN WE PASSED THE JUMPSTART
PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX. IT IS
CLEAR FROM HERE THE ONLY YEAR
WE ATTAINED THE METRICS WAS IN
2023, WHICH WOULD BE BACK FUND
WITH A FAIR AMOUNT OF FEDERAL
COVID RELIEF FUNDING. WHERE
HAVE WE COME FROM? HOW DID WE
GET HERE ? DIRECTOR, YOU
MENTIONED WE HAD A SPENDING
PLAN ASSOCIATED WITH THE
ORIGINAL JUMPSTART PAYROLL
EXPENSE TAX. THAT EVENTUALLY
BECAME AN ORDINANCE.
COLLEAGUES, A LITTLE BIT OF
THAT WAS SOME BACK-AND-FORTH
WHEN EVERYONE WAS WORKING
VIRTUALLY AND A PRETTY SERIOUS
DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SECOND
AND SEVENTH FLOORS ABOUT THE
FUTURE OF THIS FUNDING. AND SO,
WHAT WE WOULD TYPICALLY USE AS
A SPENDING PLAN BECAME AN
ORDINANCE BECAUSE OF AN
ARGUMENT. THAT IS THE BEST WAY
I CAN FRAME THAT. THESE ARE THE
ASPIRATIONAL GOALS WE SET OUT
TO. WE WERE ABLE TO ACHIEVE IT
ONE YEAR WITH THE FEDERAL
FUNDING TO BACKSTOP . BUT I SIT
HERE BECAUSE THERE ARE MULTIPLE
REALITIES , AND THIS IS
DEMONSTRATING WHERE WE TRULY
HAVE COME FROM WHEN WE ARE
LOOKING AT THE JUMPSTART TAX. I
HAVE MORE COMMENTS I WILL SHARE
LATER. I WANTED TO FOCUS IN
HERE. DID I GET ANYTHING WRONG?
>> YOU PROVIDED A GREAT
TRANSITION TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
>> OKAY.
>> TALKING ABOUT WHAT ARE
ACTUALLY THE CURRENT POLICIES
UNDER THE UNIT CIVIL CODE. PER
EXISTING CODE THESE ARE THE
ALLOCATIONS BY PERCENTAGES
OTHERWISE REQUIRED UNLESS YOU
HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD BE
REQUIRED FOR 2025. I HAVE TAKEN
THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT THIS
TOTALS TO , THE CURRENT
PROJECTED REVENUES FOR 2025,
THEY DON'T INCLUDE THE
RESOURCES FOR 2024. A CASHABLE
VARIANT. I HAVE INCLUDED THE
STUDENT MENTAL HEALTH. JUST IN
TERMS OF MATH, IT IS OUTSIDE
THE PERCENTAGES. WASN'T
ACTUALLY CONTEMPLATED IN THE
ORIGINAL PLAN. TO BE CANDID, IT
IS NOT ACTUALLY IN THIS
ORDINANCE. A LITTLE BIT OF
INTERPRETATION ON MY PART. IS
ENTIRELY CONSISTENT WITH THE
EXISTENT ORDINANCE. AGAIN. THE
PERCENTAGES A SET OUT AND I
HAVE DONE THE MATH. $430
MILLION TOTAL REVENUE FORECAST,
IF YOU MULTIPLY BY 62%, YOU END
UP WITH 267 MILLION. THAT IS A
MATH THERE. THE THING TO NOTE,
IS THAT THERE IS ZERO GOING TO
THE GENERAL FUND UNDER THE
EXISTING POLICIES. AND THAT IS
FOR 25 AND BEYOND. THE OTHER
CONTEXT I WOULD ADD TO THE
EARLIER COMMENTS ARE THAT AT
THE SAME TIME THIS ORDINANCE
WAS IMPOSED, THERE WAS A
SPECIFIC EFFORT MADE TO EMPOWER
AND IMPANEL A REVENUE
STABILIZATION TASK FORCE THAT
WAS DESIGNED TO IDENTIFY WAYS
TO RAISE ADDITIONAL REVENUE.
THE COUNCIL THAT PASSED THIS
ORDINANCE WAS AWARE IT WAS
CREATING A SIGNIFICANT BUDGET
HOLE FOR 25 AND 26. IT IS NOT
HARD TO CONNECT THE DOTS THAT
THE CREATION OF THE REVENUE
TASK FORCE WAS TO FIGURE OUT
HOW TO CLOSE THAT, BUT DO IT
FROM THE REVENUE SIDE. NO
JUDGMENT. I THINK IT IS
RELEVANT HISTORY ON HOW THIS
ORDINANCE COULD HAVE MADE
SENSE, AND ACKNOWLEDGING THE
DISCRIMINATES BETWEEN THE MAYOR
AND THE COUNCIL AT THE TIME
ABOUT THE BEST APPROACH TO
BALANCING THE CITY SPENDING AND
ITS REVENUES.
>> BEFORE YOU MOVE ON, THAT
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I HAVE A
QUESTION AND MAYBE THE CHAIR
CAN ANSWER THIS. HOW DID THE
ACTUAL PERCENTAGES GET
DEVELOPED? I KNOW IN TALKING TO
THE HUMAN SERVICES COALITION,
TALKING ABOUT YOUR MOSQUITO
PUTTING TOGETHER AN INFORMAL
WORKING GROUP. THEY FIGURED OUT
WHAT THE PERCENTAGES WERE GOING
TO BE, BUT IT WOULD BE REALLY
HELPFUL TO ME TO KNOW THESE
PERCENTAGES , WHAT THEY ARE
BASED ON, HOW THEY ARE CREATED
. ALSO, JUST TO NOTE THAT THE
ORDINANCE PERMITTED SUPPORTING
THE GENERAL FUND IN 2023 AND
2024, BUT YOU ARE SAYING THAT
WE WERE STILL RECEIVING A FAIR
AMOUNT OF COVID MONEY IN 2023.
INTERESTING THAT WE GET TO USE
THE JUMPSTART MONEY FROM THE
GENERAL FUND TOP UP EVEN WHEN
WE ARE GETTING A LOT OF COVID
MONEY. ANYWAY, I AM REALLY
CURIOUS ABOUT HOW THESE
PERCENTAGES WERE CREATED.
>> I ACTUALLY WASN'T HERE. I
AM NOT IN A POSITION TO ANSWER.
THERE FOLKS HER WHO WERE, AND
WE CAN GET YOU -- I DON'T KNOW
IF THAT'S THE ROSE MORE THAN
ONE COUNCILMEMBER HERE AT THE
TIME.
>> YOU HAVE TWO HISTORICAL
COUNCIL MEMBERS YOUR. FROM MY
RECOLLECTION, IT WAS A SMALL
WORKING GROUP NOT FORMALIZED.
HE WAS A BIT OF HOW WE CAN BOTH
SUPPORT HOUSING, WHICH WHEN WE
WERE TALKING ABOUT THE HISTORY
OF HOW WE FUNDED HOUSING, WE
STILL HAVE NOT RECEIVE IT --
STILL HAD NOT STARTED RECEIVING
DOLLARS. HOUSING WAS NUMBER ONE
MOST IMPORTANT. WITH THE
ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION WE WERE
IN THE MOMENT OF FREEFALL WITH
THE ECONOMY MARKET STREET ARE
DOING VERY POORLY. EQUITABLE
DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE IS
REALLY THE BEST TOOL THAT WE
HAVE FOR ANTI-DISPLACEMENT AND
CULTURAL GATHERING SPACES IN
THE CITY. THERE WAS A
RECOGNITION THAT, WHEN I WAS
SHARING WHAT HAPPENED TO THE
NEIGHBORHOOD I GREW UP IN, I
DON'T WANT THAT SAME THING TO
HAPPEN TO OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS.
THAT IS WHERE THAT PART IS
COMING FROM. GREEN NEW DEAL,
JUST UNDERSTANDING IF WE DON'T
GET AHEAD OF THE CLIMATE
CRISIS, WERE NOT GOING TO HAVE
A PLANET TO LIVE ON . I THINK
IN THE FIRST EIGHT WEEKS OF
2022 ONE COUNCILMEMBER MORALES
AND I WERE HERE IN PERSON, IT
WAS REALLY ONLY EIGHT WORKS --
WEEKS WE WERE IN PERSON DURING
THAT FIRST TWO YEARS. THERE WAS
AN ENORMOUS BONFIRES --
WILDFIRES IN AUSTRALIA IN THE
MIDDLE OF THE WINTER HERE. ON
TOP OF ALL OF THE CLAIMANT
THINGS THAT WERE OCCURRING
HERE. THAT IS REALLY WHERE
THOSE PRIORITIES WERE COMING
FROM, HOW WE INVEST BOTH IN THE
DUWAMISH VALLEY WITH THE GREEN
NEW DEAL, HOW DO WE HEDGE
AGAINST DISPLACEMENT , HOW DO
WE SUPPORT OUR SMALLEST
BUSINESSES, AND HOW DO WE
CREATE THE HOUSING WE NEEDED
HERE IN THE CITY. THAT WAS A
GENERAL FRAMEWORK WE WERE
WORKING WITHIN . COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES?
>> THANK YOU. THE ONLY THING I
WILL ADD TO THAT IS THAT IT
REALLY WAS INTENDED TO BE , TO
BOLSTER INVESTMENT,
PARTICULARLY FOR COMMUNITY OF
COLOR , AND FOR FOLKS WHO HAD
HISTORICALLY BEEN LEFT OUT OF
THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS.
ACKNOWLEDGING THAT WE HAVE THIS
HUGE HOUSING CRISIS IN THE
CITY, AND THAT, AS
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS WAS
SAYING, AT THE MOMENT SO MANY
OF OUR SMALL BUSINESSES THAT
WERE SHUTTING DOWN WERE ALSO
RUN BY PEOPLE OF COLOR. YOU
KNOW, EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT WAS
INCLUDED HERE BECAUSE IT HAD
NEVER BEEN FULLY FUNDED. IT DID
NOT HAVE A PERMANENT FUNDING
SOURCE, AND WE KNEW THAT OUR
ONE ANTI-DISPLACEMENT STRATEGY
NEEDED A PERMANENT FUNDING
SOURCE. SO A LOT OF IT WAS
ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE
THE ADDITIONAL INVESTMENT FOR
FOLKS WHO HAVE ONGOING NEEDS
BECAUSE WE HAD NOT INVESTED
SUBSTANTIALLY ENOUGH IN OUR
PREVIOUS HISTORY.
>> HOW DID YOU COME ABOUT ,
COME UP WITH THE PERCENTAGES?
>> I THINK WE HAVE TO GET BACK
TO ONE THAT ONE.
>> I THINK IT WAS THE SCALE OF
THE ISSUE . I DON'T KNOW IF
THERE WAS HARD SCIENCE BEHIND
IT.
>> I THINK WE ALL REALLY
UNDERSTOOD THAT HOUSING -- I
MEAN, EVEN TODAY IN SEATTLE,
WE'RE HAVING A PRETTY STRONG
FOCUS ON HOUSING. IT WAS
TWOFOLD IN 2020. AGAIN, WE WERE
RELYING ON A HOUSING LEVY THAT
WAS THREE QUARTERS TO HALF THE
SIZE WE HAVE TODAY. WE REALLY
HAD ONLY STARTED GETTING
MANDATORY HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
PAYMENTS, AND THAT IS A LOT.
>> IF I MAY ASK MORE QUESTION,
YOU ARE SAYING THAT THESE AREAS
HAD NOT BEEN APPROPRIATELY
FUNDED BY PREVIOUS COUNCIL
THEIR GENERAL FUNDING, AND I
GUESS THROUGH THE MAYOR'S
OFFICE, SO WHY WAS THE DECISION
MADE THAT YOU HAD TO USE A
SEPARATE FUNDING SOURCE TO
ACTUALLY CREATE THESE FUNDING
PRIORITIES? WHY COULD YOU NOT
JUST BRING THOSE PRIORITIES TO
THE GENERAL FUND?
>> I THINK TOM HAS AN ANSWER.
BUT I CAN EDITORIALIZE.
>> THANKS FOR THE QUESTION. THE
FIRST YEAR OF THE TAX IT WENT
INTO THE GENERAL FUND. THERE
WAS AN ORDINANCE THAT WAS
ELABORATING ON THE CATEGORIES,
BUT IT REQUESTED THAT THE
EXECUTIVE COME BACK WITH A
SPENDING PLAN IN THE BUDGET TO
SHOW . THERE WAS NO SPENDING
PLAN EVER PRODUCED. SO AS THE
NEXT STEP, COUNCIL ADOPTED AND
FORMALIZED THE FUND THAT HAS
BEEN IN ORDINANCE PUT IN PLACE
THOSE PERCENTAGES.
>> THAT IS HELPFUL.
>> THE SCALE OF THE DESIRED
INVESTMENT WAS SUCH THAT IT
COULDN'T BE MET WITH EXISTING
RESOURCES WITHOUT MAKING MORE
PAINFUL REPAIRERS AS ASIANS --
REPRIORITIZING. THE 5% NUMBER
WAS A BIT OF A NEGOTIATION WITH
THE EXECUTIVE, WHICH I WAS A
MEMBER AT THE TIME. IT WAS AN
ACKNOWLEDGMENT, IN PART, FOR
THE ACTUAL DIRECT COLLECTION
COSTS, BUT ALSO BECAUSE IF YOU
ADD $200 MILLION OF SPENDING TO
THE CITY ACROSS MULTIPLE
DEPARTMENTS, THERE IS
ULTIMATELY ADMINISTRATIVE
PRESSURE PUT ON ON SOME MARGIN
FOR ADDITIONAL ACCOUNTING
STAFF, ADDITIONAL HR STAFF . IT
IS NOT POSSIBLE TO FIND EVERY
INCREMENT AND ASSOCIATE THAT
WITH EACH PIECE. IT WAS AN
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THERE BEING
SOME INCREASE IN THE OVERALL
OVERHEAD COST WE CAN'T
IDENTIFY EASILY, BUT LET'S BE
REASONABLE ABOUT THIS, IF YOU
WILL, AND THAT NUMBER, THE
ALLOCATION BECAME A GENERAL
FUND REVENUE STREAM EVEN
WITHOUT REGARD TO THE TRANSFER
TO TRY TO COVER THOSE REAL, BUT
DIFFICULT, TO QUANTIFY COSTS. I
KNOW THAT HAS BEEN A QUESTION
THAT HAS COME UP. IT IS NOT
PRECISE, BUT IT IS ALSO A
BETTER WAY TO PUT IT.
>> I WILL EDITORIALIZE NOW. IF
WE COULD GO BACK TO SLIDE FOUR
TO HELP. DURING THE PANDEMIC,
THE CITY OF SEATTLE INVESTED
HEAVILY IN RENTAL
STABILIZATION. WE INVESTED
HEAVILY IN PROGRAMS LIKE THE
BROKEN WINDOW FUND FOR SMALL
BUSINESSES. WE DID NOT LAYOFF
ANY STAFF, IF I RECALL, I NEED
TO DOUBLE CHECK. WE DID NOT
CUT. WE EXPANDED FUNDING FOR
FRESH FOOD AND FOR FOOD
BENEFITS . AND THE ONLY WAY WE
WERE ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT RENT
STABILIZATION AND KEEPING
PEOPLE IN THEIR JOBS AND NOT
CUTTING SERVICES THAT
SEATTLEITES DEPENDED ON WAS
USING THE FEDERAL FUNDS TO DO
THAT. THOSE FEDERAL FUNDS , AND
EVERY OTHER CITY, WERE USED TO
CREATE THAT GRAY BAR IN 2021.
AND SO, WE UNDERSTOOD, AND THE
REASON WE CALLED IT JUMPSTART
WAS, IF THE CITY HAD FLATLINED,
WE WOULD STILL BE FEELING THE
ECONOMIC IMPACTS IN OUR REVENUE
FORECASTS TODAY. SPENDING
THROUGHOUT THE CITY WOULD HAVE
BEEN DOWN, WHICH LIKE WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT THIS MORNING,
BOEING HAVING AN IMPACT , THOSE
LAOS HAVING AN IMPACT ON THE
GENERAL ECONOMY. IF WE HAD
ADDED TO THAT, IT WOULD HAVE
BEEN WORSE FOR US. THAT FIRST
YEAR IT WAS TO MAKE SURE TO
MAKE UP THE GAP OF THE REVENUES
WE WERE SEEING -- RECEIVING
COMPARED TO PREVIOUS FORECAST,
NOT THE EARTHQUAKE FUND, BUT
THE PANDEMIC FUND IN THAT
SENSE. THAT IS GENERALLY WHERE
I WAS GOING WITH IT. I HAD ONE
MORE THING BUT IT FELL OUT OF
MY HEAD. AGAIN, COLLEAGUES, I
AM NOT READING OFF A SCRIPT.
THIS IS OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
>> THE WAY BACK MEMORY.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, ANYTHING
ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD?
OTHERWISE, WE CAN MOVE ON TO
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. ONLY THAT
IT WAS THE HARDEST THING I HAVE
EVER HAD TO DO, GOVERNING
THROUGH THOSE FEW YEARS . I
THINK THOSE OF US WHO WERE HERE
STILL HAVE PTSD.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT . YOU'RE
REMINDED ME WHAT I WAS GOING TO
SAY. COLLEAGUES, FOR MANY ON
THE DAIS, THIS IS YOUR FIRST
NINE MONTHS, 10 MONTHS IN
OFFICE. ONE COUNCILMEMBER MOREL
IS AND I HAD OUR FIRST 10
MONTHS IN THE FIRST SIX MONTHS,
WE LEFT A DAY 53, BUT BETWEEN
THAT AND THE MIDDLE OF AUGUST
WE HAD DEALT WITH A RECESSION.
A PANDEMIC RECESSION,
CIVIL-RIGHTS RECKONING AND
CIVIL UNREST WITHIN THE CITY.
>> A LOT.
>> WE KEPT ON MOVING. HERE WE
ARE. ONE OF THOSE THINGS WOULD
HAVE BROKEN MOST PEOPLE . WE
WERE ABLE TO KEEP EMPLOYEES
EMPLOYED. WE WERE ABLE TO KEEP
SERVICES RUNNING OUT THE DOOR
FOR SEATTLEITES THAT THEY
DEPENDED ON. FROM THERE WE ALSO
UNDERSTOOD THAT JUMPSTART WOULD
BE BRINGING IN REVENUES ONCE WE
STABILIZE, IT WAS COVID REALLY
FUNDING WAS NOT PRESENT, AND
THEREFORE, WE PUT PERCENTAGES
ON TO WHAT WE BELIEVED AT THAT
TIME WOULD BE THE TOP FOUR
PRIORITIES OF THE CITY. SINCE
THEN IN THE LAST YEAR THE
COUNCIL ALSO ADDED MENTAL
HEALTH FUNDING. I WILL SAVE MY
OVERVIEW COMMENTS FOR THE END.
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA, YOU HAVE
BEEN WAITING QUITE A LONG TIME
AS WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION.
WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THAT. THE
FLOOR IS YOURS.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. NO WORRIES
AT ALL. I WILL SAY, DIRECTOR
AND NOBLE AND I WERE HERE
DURING THE COVID YEARS AS WELL.
WE KNOW ALL TOO WELL THE
CONSEQUENCES.
>> I CAN FEEL THE PTSD COMING.
NOT TO TRIVIALIZE PTSD. WAS A
VERY DIFFICULT TIME.
>> I WAS IN THE OFFICE OF
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT IN THE
EEOC WHEN ALL THIS WAS GOING
ON. CIVIL UNREST WAS HAPPENING
IN THE CITY AND WATCHING IT ALL
HAPPENING AS I WAS THERE. I
THINK THERE IS A LEVEL OF PTSD
ALL THE WAY AROUND. BUT THAT
SAID, PRIOR TO THE JUMPSTART,
WAS THERE A BUDGET DEFICIT IN
THE CITY?
>> BY DEFINITION, THERE WASN'T.
WE ONLY HAD TO ADOPT A BALANCED
BUDGET. IT IS FUNNY YOU ASKED,
I WAS GOING TO GO BACK AND LOOK
MYSELF. THERE WERE PROJECTED
BUT DEFICITS IN THE OUTER
YEARS. NOT NECESSARILY THE
SCALE THAT YOU SEE HERE, BUT IT
IS THE NATURE , IN MY
EXPERIENCE, WHAT INVARIABLY
HAPPENS IS THAT THERE ARE
ALWAYS -- WE ALWAYS FINISH THE
YEAR WITH SOME AMOUNT OF
ONE-TIME RESOURCE. WE ALWAYS
HAVE SOME AMOUNT OF ONE-TIME
RESOURCE AVAILABLE AS WE
APPROACH BUDGETING. EITHER
BECAUSE OF REVENUE FORECASTING
GOING UP A LITTLE BIT OR UNDER
SPENDING. EVERY YEAR A
RECESSION OR NOT. IT WILL BE
TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. AT
ONE POINT -- YOU HAVE THIS
ONE-TIME RESOURCE, AND AS MAYOR
AND COUNCIL YOU ARE TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT THE RIGHT THING TO
DO. YOU HAVE NEEDS , UNMET
NEEDS, THAT HER ONGOING UNMET
NEEDS. FROM A PURELY
SUSTAINABILITY TECHNICAL
PERSPECTIVE YOU WOULD SPEND
THAT ONE-TIME RESOURCE ON
SOMETHING CAPITAL BASED,
SOMETHING TRULY ONE TIME. BUT
YOU LOOK OUTSIDE AND YOU'RE
LIKE, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE CAN
CONTINUE THESE PROGRAMS FOR
ANOTHER YEAR OR TWO, AND YES,
THAT MAY FORCE A RECKONING, BUT
WHAT TO BE NOW VERSUS WHAT WE
DO THEN ASK AND IT IS A
BALANCE. THE $250 MILLION
DEFICIT FOR 26, EXCUSE ME,
2027, THAT WOULD LEAVE ME VERY
UNCOMFORTABLE. THE 75 ON THE
TABLE IS NOT IDEAL, BUT IT
COULD FORETELL DIFFICULT
DECISIONS COME BUDGETING IN THE
FALL OF 2026, BUT -- SO THERE
IS ALWAYS SOME LEVEL , AND IT
IS BECOME THIS ONE-TIME
RESOURCE IS AVAILABLE, AND
THERE IS REAL TENSION ABOUT THE
APPROPRIATE WAY TO DEPLOY.
>> THANK YOU. I ASKED BECAUSE,
AS YOU KNOW, AT ANY GIVEN TIME
WE DO HAVE DEFICITS THAT WE
BACKFILL BEFORE PET WAS UNDER
SPEND. GIVEN ALL OF THAT, IT
SOUNDS TO ME LIKE PART OF THE
PET CALCULATION WHEN IT WAS
FIRST INTRODUCED WAS ADDING NEW
REVENUE FOR NEW THINGS THAT WE
WEREN'T DOING BEFORE . IT IS
INTERESTING THAT IN 2021 WE
WOULD ADD , COUNCIL WOULD ADD,
NEW THINGS FOR THINGS WE
WEREN'T DOING BEFORE IN THE
MIDDLE OF A CRISIS BECAUSE WE
WERE STILL DURING COVID. SO I
SAY ALL THAT TO SAY THAT A LOT
OF THE STUFF WAS NOT A SCIENCE
NECESSARILY, AND THAT NOW THAT
WE ARE POST COVID , IT SEEMS
APPROPRIATE TO LOOK AT ALL OF
THIS AND , YOU KNOW, DETERMINE
THE BEST PATH FORWARD BECAUSE ,
YOU KNOW, GIVEN LIKE I SAID,
THERE WAS A DEFICIT PRIOR, I'M
NOT SURE HOW THE CALCULATION
WAS MADE TO FUND THESE
PARTICULAR THINGS AND NEW
THINGS , IF YOU WILL, WHEN WE
HAD ALL THINGS WE WERE DOING.
I'M NOT SURE THAT WAS EVER AN
ANALYSIS MADE ON WHAT PROGRAMS
WE WERE RUNNING BEFORE AND
WHETHER WE SHOULD MEAN TONE
THOSE -- MAINTAINED THOSE
BEFORE WE ADD A NEW THINGS TO
THE MIX. I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR
MORE ABOUT WHERE WE WERE PRIOR
TO PET IN OUR BUDGETING SO I
COULD BETTER UNDERSTAND THIS
NEW , THESE NEW ITEMS THAT WERE
ADDED AND WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO
THEN VERSUS WHAT WE SHOULD BE
DOING NOW. I THINK THAT WOULD
BE HELPFUL TO ME.
>> I WAS INTRIGUED TO GO BACK
MYSELF. WE WILL GET YOU THAT
INFORMATION.
>> THANK YOU, BEN.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA. I WILL EDITORIALIZE.
WHEN I WAS WORKING FOR THE
BUDGET CHAIR IN 2019, THIS IS
ALL OFF OF RECOLLECTION, I
COULD BE TOTALLY WRONG, BUT I
BELIEVE YOU WERE SHARING WE
WERE HAVING A PROJECTED DEFICIT
FROM WHEN WE WERE IN 2019 IN
2023 AND 2024. BUT IT WASN'T
RED LIGHTS FLASHING , BUT HERE
JUST TO BE AWARE THAT THIS IS
COMING DOWN THE PIKE.
>> AND IT WAS BORN FROM THE USE
OF ONE-TIME RESOURCES. IT IS
ALMOST INHERENT AT SOME LEVEL.
>> AND IT WAS NOT TOO BAD
BECAUSE OF THE GROWTH WE WERE
STILL EXPERIENCING IN 2019,
BECAUSE ALL OF THOSE ONE-TIME
-- IF WE HAD ONE-TIME FUNDS
EVERY SINGLE YEAR, I THINK OF
TRYING TO MANAGE THE HOUSEHOLD
BUDGET AND YOUR REVENUE STREAM
MIGHT SHOW A DEFICIT, BUT YOU
HAVE ONE-TIME DOLLARS, YOU ARE
STILL GOING TO PURCHASE THE
THINGS YOU NEED TO LIVE. WHEN
WE, AS A CITY, RELIED ON
ONE-TIME FUNDING FOR A DECADE
THAT THEN TURNED OFF, THAT IS,
IN PART, WE CREATED -- THERE
WAS A PROBLEM IN 23 AND 24 , WE
HAVE TO SOLVE A STRUCTURAL
ISSUE TODAY. I GUESS THERE'S
NOT A QUESTION. THAT IS REALLY
JUST EDITORIAL.
>> VERY GOOD SET UP. THIS IS
THE CURRENT POLICIES . THIS IS
WHAT THE MAYOR HAS PROPOSED AS
A SET OF POLICIES. I WILL
REVIEW THEM QUICKLY FOR YOU.
THIS IS A PROPOSED ORDINANCE
NOT YET REFERRED. IT DEFINES
SEVEN ELIGIBLE CATEGORIES. I
PUT THE TWO NEW ONES AT THE
TOP. EXCUSE ME, THE FIRST NEW
ONES AT THE TOP. THE GENERAL
FUND CURRENTLY, GENERAL FUND IS
NOT AN ALLOWED USE OF THE
PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX. ONE-TIME
ACCOMMODATIONS WERE MADE FOR 23
AND 24. AND INCLUDES THE
INITIAL SET OF AFFORDABLE
HOUSING, ECONOMIC VALORIZATION,
EQUITABLE REDEVELOPMENT,
GREATER DUPLICATE CORRECT IN
SOME WAYS THE OVERSIGHT AND
THAT WHEN COUNCIL APPROVED THE
ADDITIONAL 20 MILLION FOR
STUDENT MENTAL HEALTH , BUT I
DESCRIBED STUDENT MENTAL
HEALTH/YOUTH VIOLENCE
PREVENTION BECAUSE THAT WAS
SOME OF THE ORIGINAL MOTIVATION
BEHIND THE INVESTMENT AND HAS
BEEN SOME OF THE PROPOSED
SPENDING. THAT ACTUALLY WASN'T
, ALL THE $20 MILLION WITH AT
A, IT WAS NOT APPROVED TO USE.
SO IT ADDS UP TO KNOW
SPECIFICALLY THAT THE CATEGORY
OF STUDENT MENTAL HEALTH UNDER
THE MAYOR'S PULSE HE WILL ONLY
BE ELIGIBLE FOR 25 AND 26 WITH
THE CLEAR IMPLICATION THAT THE
FUNDING FOR THAT BE SHIFTED TO
THE EDUCATION LEVY IF THAT WAS
ULTIMATELY . IT DOESN'T SHOW
THE LONG-TERM SPENDING PLAN
THAT SHOWS A STACEY DASH THE
LONG-TERM SPENDING PLAN
DOESN'T SHOW IT FOR THAT
PURPOSE. BUT IT IS NOT AN
INTENT TO END THE INVESTMENT,
BUT FIND AN ALTERNATIVE FUNDING
SOURCE WITH THE LEVY BEING THE
OBVIOUS ONE. AND THEN,
ADMINISTRATION IS ALLOWED. IT
IDENTIFIES A SET OF ALLOWED
USES, ONE OF THEM FOR THE NEXT
TWO YEARS, BUT NOT BEYOND. IS
THAT ELIMINATES THE PERCENTAGE
RESTRICTIONS. IT DOESN'T SAY
HOW MUCH EACH OF THOSE
CATEGORIES WOULD RECEIVE IN ANY
GIVEN YEAR. THAT IS PURPOSEFUL.
IT IS AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT
PRIORITIES CHANGE OVER TIME,
AND THAT THE THEN ELECTED
OFFICIALS OF THE CITY -- I AM
MAKING THEIR ARGUMENT WITHOUT
HAVING NECESSARILY BEEN
INFORMED BY IT, BUT I CAN
IMAGINE THAT THE THEN ELECTED
OFFICIALS ARE BEST POSITIONED
TO DECIDE HOW THESE MONIES
WOULD BE ALLOCATED. JUST AS YOU
MAKE THE SAME DECISIONS ABOUT
THE GENERAL FUND THAT IS
OTHERWISE NOT RESERVED FOR OF
THE THINGS. THAT IS
INCONSISTENT WITH THE ORIGINAL
PLAN AND THE ORIGINAL
PROPOSALS. ALSO, THE PROPOSALS
WOULD ELIMINATE THE JUMPSTART
PET OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. THE
COMMITTEE IS NOT ACTUALLY --
HAS NOT ACTUALLY EVER MET. THE
IDEA IS THAT IT WILL PROVIDE
ONGOING OVERSIGHT AND ADVICE
ABOUT THE USE OF THE PET
RESOURCES . AMONG ITS TASKS WAS
TO CONDUCT AN ASSESSMENT OF THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PROGRAMS
BEING FUNDED BY THE PAYROLL
EXPENSE TAX, AND ALSO TO
MEASURE THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF
THE TAX. THE MAYOR'S PROPOSED
BUDGET SHIFTS THE
RESPONSIBILITIES TO CBO AND
PROVIDE RESOURCES, I AM
PRESUMING, TO HELP THEM HIRE A
CONSULTANT OR THE LIKE THAT IS
A COMMON. THAT IS ANALYSIS
COUNSEL -- COUNCIL WHITE --
MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER WITH
COORDINATION WITH CBO ON THAT
IF YOU WANT TO GO DOWN THAT
PATH. THAT IS ANOTHER PIECE. AS
I MENTIONED EARLIER, THE
PROPOSED BUDGET FUNDS , AN
APPROXIMATE 10% REVENUE
STABILIZATION RESERVED. AS A
PROXIMATE BECAUSE IT IS $43
MILLION IN 2025, WHICH IS
EXACTLY 10%. THEY USE SOME OF
THE RESOURCE IN 2026. SO THE
EFFECTIVE RESERVE AT THE THE
END OF THE TWO-YEAR BIENNIUM IS
37 MILLION. PROBABLY CLOSER TO
8.5% RATHER THAN 10. IT IS A
SIGNIFICANT PROPOSAL. IT IS NOT
CODIFIED AS PART OF THE
POLICIES. I THINK THAT IS A
SHORTCOMING AND ONE YOU MIGHT
WANT TO CONSIDER REVISING. THAT
IS WHAT THE MAYOR'S ACTUAL
ORDINANCE DOES. IT IDENTIFIES,
ESSENTIALLY, ADD THE GENERAL
FUND AS A NEW SPENDING CATEGORY
AND ELIMINATES THE PERCENTAGE
OF ALLOCATION. GIVING FULL
FLEXIBILITY TO FUTURE MAYORS TO
DETERMINE THE BALANCE BETWEEN
SUPPORTING THE GENERAL FUND AND
THE ORIGINAL PET PRIORITIES.
>> JUST BEFORE YOU MOVE OFF OF
THAT, RAISING UP WHAT YOU JUST
SAID, WHILE THE MAYOR'S
TRANSMITTED ORDINANCE DOESN'T
HAVE PERCENTAGES ASSOCIATED,
THEIR ACTIONS OF TRANSMITTING
THE BUDGET HAS MET THOSE
ORIGINAL PERCENTAGES.
>> MY NEXT SLIDE.
>> SORRY. KEEP GOING.
>> WHAT IS INTERESTING IS ON
THE PREVIOUS SLIDE IT WAS ABOUT
THE POLICIES, AND THIS ONE IS
ABOUT THE ACTUAL SPENDING. WHAT
IS INTERESTING IS THAT, OF THE
MONEY ALLOCATED FOR THE PAYROLL
EXPENSE ORIGINAL PRIORITIES ,
WHICH IN THIS CASE, FOR 2025 ,
233 MILLION, THE PERCENTAGES
LARGELY TRACK WITH THE ORIGINAL
PROPOSALS. ON THEIR OWN
POLICIES, THAT IS NOT REQUIRED,
BUT THAT IS EFFECTIVELY WHAT
THEY ARE DOING. THEY HAVE
RECOGNIZED THOSE -- THEY SHARE
THAT NOTION OF RELATIVE
PRIORITIES AMONG THOSE. THE
YOUTH VIOLENCE MENTAL HEALTH
PIECE WAS NEVER IN THE ORIGINAL
PERCENTAGES. THOSE ARE OUTSIDE
THE MATH. AND I WANT TO
HIGHLIGHT THAT. THAT LEAVES THE
REMAINDER FOR THE GENERAL FUND
, AND AGAIN, I WOULD POINT OUT
THAT -- THE INTENTION IS TO
LOCK THIS AND, IF YOU WILL, AND
SAY THE SPLIT, WHICH IF YOU
LOOK AT IT, IS ROUGHLY 50% TO
THE PET PRIORITIES AND 50% TO
THE GENERAL FUND. YOU MIGHT BE
TEMPTED TO LOCK THAT IN AS A
POLICY GOING FORWARD. THE
CHALLENGE WITH THAT IS THAT WE
HAVE THIS DEFICIT FACING US IN
2027. IF YOU WALK IN, YOU MIGHT
OR MIGHT NOT REGRET THAT. JUST
POINTING OUT THAT DYNAMIC THAT
TOM HAS ALSO POINTED OUT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE I AM
UNDERSTANDING. IT SOUNDED LIKE
, YOU CAN CLARIFY IF I
MISUNDERSTOOD, BUT IT SOUNDED
LIKE BASED ON YOUR QUESTION
THAT THERE WAS THE THINKING
THAT THE REASON WE HAVE THE
DEFICIT IS BECAUSE WE ADDED ALL
THIS NEW SPENDING FOR THE
JUMPSTART PROGRAMMING , AND
WITHOUT THIS SPENDING, WE
WOULDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM. BUT
WHAT I SEE HERE IS THAT IT DOES
ACCOUNT FOR $233 MILLION WORTH
OF SPENDING, BUT EVEN STILL,
THERE IS A $287 MILLION
DEFICIT.
>> I THINK THERE WAS OPPRESSION
ABOUT 2019 VERSUS WHAT WAS MORE
RECENTLY PROPOSED.
>> OKAY.
>> AND THE DECISION ABOUT HOW
TO SPEND THE PET MONEY.
>> ASK FOR RECOGNITION TO KEEP
THE FACILITATION ROLLING. IT
SEEMS AS THIS COUNSEL NEVER
MORALES HAS QUESTIONS.
>> I WAS JUST ADDRESSING --
>> SHE WAS ASKING --
>> THE POINT I WANT TO MAKE IS
THAT, EVEN WITHOUT THE SPENDING
IN THE JUMPSTART CATEGORIES, WE
STILL HAVE AN ALMOST $300
MILLION DEFICIT TO ADDRESS. IN
MY UNDERSTANDING THIS RIGHT?
>> ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL IN
2027, YES. THAT IS THE 223
SHOWN IN 20 PHYSICS GOING TO
THE GENERAL FUND [ INAUDIBLE ]
$75 MILLION -- THE MATH IS
CLEAR FOR EVERYONE. BUT YES,
JUST FOR BACKING THIS UP AND
REVISITING SOME OF TIME AT THE
SLIDES, INTO THE PANDEMIC, THE
CITY REVENUES CRASHED . HIGH
INFLATION HIT, AND WE ENDED UP
WITH A BIG GAP BETWEEN
EXPENDITURES AND REVENUES. THAT
HAS PERSISTED . REVENUES HAVE
RECOVERED SOME, BUT THE
INFLATIONARY COSTS HAVE NOW
DRIVEN UP CITY COSTS AS HAS
BEEN REFLECTED IN NO SMALL PART
IN WAGE INCREASES. WE HAVE NOT
GOTTEN OUT OF THAT REALITY. WE
ARE NOW -- PLAGUED IS PROBABLY
TOO BIG TO WORK, BUT REVENUES
-- WE ARE NOT GOING TO GROW OUT
OF THIS ANYTIME SOON. REVENUES
ARE NOT OUTPACING COSTS. THERE
IS NOT A VERSION -- AND IN THE
PAST WHEN I WAS DOING THIS WORK
AND LOOKING AT PROJECTIONS AND
SEE DEFICITS, THERE WAS SOME
HOPE THE FORECAST WOULD BE
CONSERVATIVE TO GROW YOUR WAY
OUT OF IT . THERE WERE STEPS ON
THE SCALE NOT HAPPENING. THAT
IS WHAT YOU SEE THE PROPOSED
TRANSFER TO THE GENERAL FUND.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> JUST TO CLARIFY MY POINT .
RATHER THAN USE THE JUMPSTART
TO COVER THE DEFICIT THAT WAS
INCREASING, PRIOR LEADERSHIP
DECIDED TO ADD PROGRAMS ON TOP
OF THE FACT THAT WE STILL HAVE
TO DEAL WITH AN UNDERLYING
DEFICIT. THAT WAS MY POINT.
>> WE COULD GO DEEPER INTO THAT
HISTORY, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO.
COLLIES, THE REASON I AM SO FOR
ABOUT MY FACILITATION OF OUR
CONVERSATIONS IS BECAUSE I COME
FROM A TIME WHERE IMPUGNING
PEOPLE'S MOTIVES WAS A DAILY
OCCURRENCE WHERE , WITH SEEM TO
BE A NICE CONVERSATION,
SUDDENLY BECAME A VERY
DIFFICULT TO MANAGE COUNCIL. I
DON'T BELIEVE THAT TO BE US .
I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT TO BE US.
THAT IS ALSO WHERE THIS IS
COMING FROM. AN OUNCE OF
PREVENTION IS GREAT. OVER TO
YOU, DIRECTOR NOBLE.
>> [ INAUDIBLE ]
>> I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO
ATTEMPT THAT'S THE
INTELLIGENCE OFFICER REMINDED
US THAT IT IS PTS.
>> THIS IS AN INTERESTING
REALITY. THE MAYOR HAS PROPOSED
VERY POSSIBLE POLICIES , THE
MOST POSSIBLE YOU COULD
IMAGINE, BUT I CAN HIGHLIGHT
THERE IS A VERY REAL ADVANTAGE.
THEY OFFER THE OPPORTUNITY FOR
THE THEN ELECTED TO MAKE
DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT THE
PRIORITIES ARE AND WHERE THE
MONEY SHOULD BE SPENT WITHOUT
HAVING TO REVISIT AND UNDO THIS
EVERY COUPLE OF YEARS. BUT AT
THE SAME TIME, THE ALLOCATIONS
MADE , ALTHOUGH MONEY IS GOING
TO THE PET PRIORITIES, LARGELY
CONSISTED WITH THE --
CONSISTENT WITH THE ORIGINAL
PERCENTAGES, IF NOTHING ELSE.
THIS NEXT CHART IS THE SAME
DATA VISUALLY, IN CASE THAT WAS
-- LOTS OF TABLES. THIS IS A
VISUAL DEPICTION OF THE SAME ,
IF THAT IS HELPFUL. WHAT YOU
GENERAL SEE IS THE INVESTMENTS
IN EACH OF THE CATEGORIES, THEY
REDUCED SOMEWHAT IN 2025 AND AN
ALLOCATION, BUT THE PROPORTIONS
ARE ROUGHLY THE SAME
POUGHKEEPSIE THE LARGE SPIKE IN
THE GENERAL FUND IN 2025, AND
THAT IS BECAUSE OF THE USE OF
THE ONE TIME 2024 RESOURCES TO
HELP BALANCE THE BIENNIUM. THAT
LEADS ME TO THE SET OF
QUESTIONS I THINK YOU ALL NEED
TO BATTLE WITH, IF YOU WILL.
THE GOAL HAS BEEN THE
DISCUSSION YOU HAD TODAY THIS
MAY INSTIGATE SOME FURTHER
THAT. LET ME WALK THROUGH THESE
AND FRAME UP WHAT I SEE AS A
QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. YOU HAVE TO
ANSWER. ONE VERSION WOULD BE TO
ADOPT THE MAYOR'S PROPOSED
POLICIES . THAT WOULD
EFFECTIVELY HAVE AN ANSWER FOR
ALL OF THESE EXCEPT NUMBER
FIVE. ONE PIECE OF THIS IS THAT
YOU COULD OBVIATE THE NEED FOR
JUMPSTART SPECIFIC POLICIES IF
YOU DECIDE THAT JUMPSTART NO
LONGER HAD HIS OWN FUND AND
WOULD BE PUT INTO THE GENERAL
FUND. I THINK THAT WOULD MAKE
IT HARDER TO TRACK HOW THE
RESOURCES ARE USED. YOU WOULD
LOSE SOME TRANSPARENCY THERE.
BUT THERE -- IT IS A POLICY
DECISION ITSELF TO SEPARATE THE
JUMPSTART REVENUES INTO THEIR
OWN FUND . ACTUALLY, THE FIRST
YEAR THEY WERE NOT. IF YOU DO
THAT, MUCH OF THIS DISCUSSION
THAT FOLLOWS IS NOT NECESSARY.
IF THERE IS TO BE A JUMPSTART
FUND , I THINK THE UNDERLYING
QUESTION OF , WOULD YOU WANT TO
SET UP ANY KIND OF RESTRICTION
ON HOW MUCH MONEY COULD BE
AVAILABLE FOR THE GENERAL FUND?
AGAIN, IF YOU LOOK TO THIS
ALLOCATION , IN 2026, THE
ONGOING VERSION, THERE IS ABOUT
A 5050 SPLIT BETWEEN THE
JUMPSTART PRIORITIES AND
GENERAL FUNDS . GIVES YOU A
SENSE . YOU CAN THINK ABOUT A
PERCENTAGE THAT GOES TO THE
GENERAL FUND. THE MORNING ABOUT
THAT IS THAT THERE IS A
PROJECTED DEFICIT FOR 2027, IF
YOU ALLOCATE THAT SAME
PERCENTAGE, YOU WON'T HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO USE ANYMORE OF
THE PET TO CLOSE THAT GAP. THAT
MIGHT BE EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANT
TO DO, OR MIGHT BE WHAT YOU
WILL WANT TO DO IN ORDER TO
AVOID OTHER CUTS. BE ON THE
GENERAL FUND THERE IS A
QUESTION OF WITHIN WHATEVER IS
LEFT FOR THE PET CATEGORIES, DO
YOU WANT TO SET UP SPECIFIC
ALLOCATIONS FOR EACH ? THE
CURRENT ONES ARE SUSTAINED
EFFECTIVELY THROUGH 25 AND 26 .
IT WOULDN'T BE HARD TO
CONTINUE THOSE . I WOULD KNOW
IF YOU'RE GOING TO SET
PERCENTAGES, ANOTHER VERSION
WOULD BE TO CONSIDER SOME
FLEXIBILITY IN THOSE. I DID THE
MATH. I THINK THE ONE THAT IS
9% GOES TO 10%. THERE IS A
LITTLE BIT OF MOVEMENT BETWEEN
THEM. AGAIN, A QUESTION OF HOW
STRICTLY YOU WOULD WANT THOSE
POLICY BINDS TO BIND. ANOTHER
THOUGHT IS A QUESTION OF WHAT
HAPPENS IF AND WHEN THIS
REVENUE SOURCE DECLINES, AND
WOULD THERE BE A RELATIVE
PRIORITY PLACED BETWEEN THE
GENERAL FUND SUPPORT VERSUS THE
PET PRIORITIES. ONE QUESTION
WOULD BE, DOES THE FIRST SHARE
OF MONEY GO TO THE GENERAL FUND
OR DOES IT GO TO THE PET
PRIORITIES? AND WITHIN THE PET
PRIORITIES, ARE THERE SOME
HIGHER PRIORITY THAN OTHERS? IN
HOUSING, NOT NECESSARILY TO THE
EXCLUSION OF OTHERS, BUT JUST
AS AN EXAMPLE. THERE ARE A LOT
OF LEVERS. AGAIN, THE MAYOR'S
VERSION MAKES THOSE LEVERS
AVAILABLE TO YOU AND THE MAYOR
EACH AND EVERY YEAR TO
DETERMINE. THE LAST POINT IS
WHEN WE HAVE RAISED A GOOD DEAL
ABOUT THE QUESTION OF REVENUE
STABILIZATION RESERVE. IT WOULD
BE MY RECOMMENDATION THAT THERE
BE SUCH A RESERVE ESTABLISHED.
THE AMOUNT, AGAIN, THERE ISN'T
A MAGIC TO THAT. WE HAVE SEEN
THAT'S THE REASON I
HIGHLIGHTED IT EARLIER , WE
HAVE THIS LIMITED HISTORY. WE
HAVE NOT SEEN -- IT WAS JUST
OVER 10% AND WHEN GIVEN YEAR.
IT GIVES YOU SOME SENSE OF THE
SCALE . AGAIN, THE
CONCENTRATION , JUST A
TECHNICAL POINT, NOT TO -- WE
ACTUALLY HAVE NOT SEEN A WHOLE
LOT OF -- WE HAVE LIMITED THE
SPIRITS OF VOLATILITY BECAUSE
WE ONLY HAVE THREE YEARS, BUT
WE HAVE SEEN IT DROP AND GO UP.
BUT WE KNOW FOR SURE THE
CONCENTRATION. THE
CONCENTRATION BODES POORLY IN
TERMS OF THAT VOLATILITY. IN
THE PREVIOUS ROLE, AT SOME
LEVEL, GIVEN THERE ARE 10 FIRMS
THAT GENERATE 70% OF THIS
REVENUE, THE FORECAST IS ABOUT
TRYING TO PREDICT THE FINANCIAL
FORTUNES, THE ECONOMIC
FORTUNES, OF 10 PRIVATE
COMPANIES. IF ANYONE WAS REALLY
GOOD AT THAT, THEY WOULDN'T BE
DOING THIS WORK. THEY WOULD BE
IN THE STOCKMARKET THEMSELVES.
THE CONCENTRATION WILL ALWAYS
BE A CHALLENGE. IN TERMS OF
MECHANISMS, ONE WAY TO DO IT IS
TO DEDICATE A SHARE OF THE
FORECAST REVENUES INTO THAT
POT. AND OTHER STRATEGY WE HAVE
USED ON THE GENERAL FUN SIDE IS
TO SAY, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT
THE YEAR END, COMPARING THE
BALANCE WHERE THERE IS
POTENTIAL FOR REVENUES TO HAVE
OVER PERFORMED FOR EXPENDITURES
AND TO HAVE UNDERPERFORMED WITH
UNDER SPENT. AND DEDICATE SOME,
OR ALL, OF THAT UNEXPECTED FUND
BALANCE IF IT EXISTS TO THE
REVENUE STABILIZATION FUND. IT
IS ONE OF THE MECHANISMS WE
HAVE USED ON THE GENERAL FUN
SIDE. AGAIN, THAT ESSENTIALLY,
TAKING ADVANTAGE OF WHAT WE
ANTICIPATE TO BE SOME LEVEL IN
THE FORECAST. BUT THE
HIGHLIGHT, YOU'RE NOT
GUARANTEED THAT UNANTICIPATED
FUND BALANCE. IF THE REVENUE
FORECAST FALL SHORT, YOU'RE IN
THE OPPOSITE SITUATION. I
DON'T HAVE ANSWERS FOR YOU TO
THESE QUESTIONS. THESE ARE ONES
OVER THE NEXT FEW WEEKS WILL
NEED TO GET RESOLVED IN SOME
KIND OF PROPOSAL. THE LAST
POINT I WOULD NOTE IS THAT YOU
MAY THINK YOU ARE SETTING THESE
POLICIES FOR ALL TIME, BUT THE
LAST FOUR YEARS SUGGEST EXACTLY
THE OPPOSITE. AS NEW PRESSURES
EMERGE , I THINK THESE ARE
POLICIES OR IMPOSING UPON
YOURSELVES OR UPON THE CITY
THAT CAN BE CHANGED BY,
LITERALLY, FIVE VOTES. I'M NOT
TRYING TO TRIVIALIZE IT IN ANY
WAY, BUT I'M HIGHLIGHTING YOU
CAN GET TOO WRAPPED UP IN THIS
AND SOME LEVEL BECAUSE THERE IS
INHERENT POSSIBILITY BECAUSE IT
IS NOT A STATE OR FEDERAL
RESTRICTION, IT IS WHEN WE ARE
IMPOSING ON OURSELVES. THAT
SAID, THERE IS A QUESTION ABOUT
TRANSPARENCY AND COMMITMENT TO
THE RESIDENCE ABOUT THESE
SPENDING PRIORITIES AND THE USE
OF THESE RESOURCES. THAT IS
WHAT I HAD FOR YOU ON THIS.
WHAT I KNOW TO BE ONE OF THE
MORE SIGNIFICANT POLICIES AS
PART OF THE BUDGET.
>> THANK YOU, DIRECTOR NOBLE. I
ALSO NEED TO THINK THE MAYOR'S
OFFICE FOR FUNDING THESE
PRIORITIES AT THE LEVELS . THIS
CONVERSATION TODAY MIGHT BE THE
MOST FRANK AND CANDID
CONVERSATION I HAVE SEEN ABOUT
THE LAST NUMBER OF YEARS TO
DATE. I DO SEE AT LEAST ONE
HAND FROM A COLLEAGUE. I WILL
SAVE MY COMMENTS FOR THE END. I
JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR
SETTING THE STAGE FOR THE
CANDID CONVERSATION.
>> I ECHO THOSE COMMENTS ABOUT
ALL THE WORK THAT HAS BEEN
DONE. THANK YOU FOR SETTING THE
STAGE. I JUST NEED TO CLARIFY.
IF WE WERE TO AGREE TO BACKFILL
EVERYTHING EVERYTHING IN THE
GENERAL FUND, WE WOULD STILL BE
FACING A DEFICIT IN 2027,
CORRECT?
>> YES. THE MAYOR'S PROPOSED
BUDGET ALLOCATING 230 PLUS
MILLION OF $937 MILLION GENERAL
FUNDS LEASE A FORECAST DEFICIT
IN 2027 OF 75 MILLION.
>> REALLY, THE ONLY WAY WE CAN
ADDRESS , ASSUMING WE DID THAT,
THE ONLY WAY WE CAN ADDRESS AN
ONGOING DEFICIT, THE CHOICES
ARE TO STOP GROWING OR TO FIND
OTHER REVENUE , SOURCE OF
REVENUE.
>> YES.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION, I KNOW
YOU TALK A LOT ABOUT THE
JUMPSTART BEING VERY VOLATILE.
AND THAT WE ONLY HAVE A SHORT
PERIOD, A SHORT WINDOW OF
EXPERIENCE FOR THAT. AND THAT
IS BASED ON THE STOCKMARKET,
BUT BECAUSE IT IS LARGELY BASED
ON THE STOCKMARKET, WOULD IT BE
WORTHWHILE TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT
THE PERFORMANCE OF THE
STOCKMARKET OVER A 50 YEAR
PERIOD? BECAUSE REALLY, WHEN
YOU LOOK AT THE PERFORMANCE OF
THE STOCKMARKET OVER A LONG
PERIOD OF TIME, IT CONTINUES TO
OUTPERFORM AND DO VERY WELL.
>> LET ME EXPAND THAT. THE
REASON -- IT IS PARTICULARLY
THE
>>> VALUE OF THE MOST
CONCENTRATED PAYERS, BECAUSE IN
THE TECHNOLOGY SECTOR, A FAIR
META CAPITATION COMES IN THE
FORM OF STOCKED RANTS. --
GRANTS. I'VE SEEN THE
CORRELATIONS. YOU CAN VERY MUCH
SEE HOW CHANGES IN STOCKED
VALUES FOR THOSE PARTICULAR
COMPANIES , AND FOR BUSINESS
PRIVACY REASONS I CAN'T NAME,
ARE CORRELATED WITH THE CHANGES
IN OUR TAX PAYMENTS. THOSE
COMPANIES , PROJECTING THEIR
PERFORMANCE GOING FORWARD IS
DIFFICULT. IF ONE WERE REALLY
GOOD AT IT, ONE WOULD NOT BE
SITTING IN THIS CHAIR. I DON'T
KNOW THAT THE OVERALL MARKET
HISTORY WOULD BE INFORMATIVE.
THE HISTORY OF THOSE COMPANIES,
POTENTIALLY, YES. BUT AGAIN,
GOING FORWARD, IT IS A
DIFFICULT THING TO GUESS.
TALKING ABOUT THE LARGER
TECHNOLOGY FIRMS ENGAGED IN
TRANSFORMING MARKETS AS WE
SPEAK. IT IS REALLY DIFFICULT.
I'M NOT ARGUING THAT THERE IS
NOT SOME VALUE IN LOOKING BACK.
ACTUALLY, WHEN THE DIRECTORS
HERE NEXT WEEK TO PRESENT THE
FORECAST , YOU ARE ALL INVITED
AS A JOINT MEETING. IT WOULD BE
A GREAT QUESTION FOR HIM.
>> I THINK WE NEED A BROADER
PERSPECTIVE. THANK YOU FOR
CLARIFYING. I DO THINK A
BROADER PERSPECTIVE WOULD BE
HELPFUL. WE ARE LOOKING AT
TYING OUR POTENTIAL FUTURE TO
SOMETHING THAT IS UP AND DOWN,
BUT THE STOCKMARKET -- ANYWAY.
THANK YOU.
>> WELL SAID, COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE. COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STRAUSS.
THANK YOU DIRECTOR NOBLE AND
MR. MIKESELL. I WAS THINKING
ANOTHER FACTOR TOO IS TECH
COMPANIES. AGAIN, WE PROBABLY
ALL KNOW A LOT OF TECHIES .
THEY MAY MAKE A DECISION TO
MOVE AWAY. NOT ALL TECH
COMPANIES ARE THE SAME IN TERMS
OF COMPENSATING STOCKS VERSUS
SALARY. THAT IS ANOTHER
WILDCARD FACTOR. LISTENING TO
THAT. I JUST WANTED TO THANK
YOU FOR THESE POLICY POSITIONS,
BUT ALSO IT IS HELPFUL, AND
THIS KIND OF GOES TO REFORMING
THE BUDGET PROCESS. HAVING A
FIVE-YEAR LOOK BACK. EACH OF
THESE AREAS DON'T OPERATE IN
ISOLATION. THINGS ARE
CONSTANTLY CHANGING. IT IS
REALLY HELPFUL TO HAVE THAT
KIND OF LOOK BACK. I THINK IT
WILL INFORM OUR DECISIONS ON
THIS MUCH BETTER IN TERMS OF
MOVING AHEAD. I JUST WANTED TO
SAY THANK YOU ONE THAT. THE
ONLY THING I WILL SAY ABOUT
THIS, BECAUSE I HAVE ALWAYS --
ALREADY BEEN QUITE STRONG ABOUT
EMERGENCY FUND AND REVENUE
STABILIZATION FUND, ONE ASPECT
I WILL SAY RIGHT NOW THAT IS
HAVING A SIMILAR STABILIZATION
REVENUE FOR THE PET MAKES A LOT
OF SENSE FOR ALL THE REASONS WE
HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE. COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU
BOTH FOR BEING HERE. THESE WERE
REALLY IMPORTANT
CONSIDERATIONS. I WANT TO SAY
THAT I VERY MUCH AM FACTS
ORIENTED. I DON'T LIKE TO
IMPUGN MOTIVES. I WANT TO KNOW
THE FACTS, AND I WANT TO KNOW
WHAT HAPPENED IN 2019 AND 2018
LEADING INTO 2021 AND
SUBSEQUENT DECISIONS. IT IS THE
ONLY WAY THAT, PERSONALLY, I
CAN ANSWER SOME OF THESE VERY
KEY AND IMPORTANT POLICY
DECISIONS YOU HAVE PUT BEFORE
US. I DO WANT TO KNOW IF WE
WERE IN A DEFICIT SITUATION
PRIOR TO PET , IT WILL HELP
INFORM US TODAY. WE NEED TO BE
MOVING FORWARD TODAY, BUT IT
WILL HELP INFORM TODAY HOW WE
SHOULD ANSWER SOME OF THESE
QUESTIONS. I THINK THAT IS
IMPORTANT. THANK YOU FOR
FOLLOWING UP WITH THAT
INFORMATION. I REALLY
APPRECIATE HOW YOU CLEARLY LAID
OUT THE HISTORY ON PET FROM
2021 TWO NOW . AND ALL THESE
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS. I TOO,
YOU KNOW, WANT TO ECHO THE
APPRECIATION TO THE MAYOR'S
OFFICE FOR PUTTING TOGETHER THE
BUDGET . I LOOK FORWARD TO ALL
OF US WORKING TOGETHER TO GET
SOMEWHERE THAT WILL REALLY HELP
OUR CITY BE IN A SPACE WHERE WE
ARE PROVIDING THEM MUCH-NEEDED
SERVICES WHILE AT THE SAME TIME
BEING ACCOUNTABLE TO THE TAX
DOLLARS AND WHILE AT THE SAME
TIME PUTTING SOMETHING THAT IS
MORE STABLE INTO THE FUTURE,
BECAUSE GIVEN THAT WE HAVE SEEN
WHAT HAPPENED DURING COVID, YOU
KNOW, EVEN IF -- AND I VERY
MUCH APPRECIATE THE QUESTION BY
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. A GREAT
QUESTION. THE STOCKMARKET, IF
TOMORROW IT PLUMMETS, WE HAVE
TO DEAL WITH TOMORROW. IT MIGHT
GO UP AGAIN IN FIVE YEARS. BUT
THEN WE ARE STUCK WITH WHAT WE
DO ABOUT TOMORROW, AND I THINK
THAT IS A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT
YOU WERE GETTING AT , IF I WAS
UNDERSTANDING YOU CORRECTLY.
ALL OF THESE ARE
CONSIDERATIONS. I VERY MUCH
APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT IS
BEFORE US, AND HOPEFULLY,
WORKING TOGETHER WE CAN GET TO
SOME OF THESE THINGS IN A MORE
STABLE WAY. THANK YOU, CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE ?
OTHERWISE, I WILL SUMMARIZE MY
REFLECTIONS FROM THIS
PRESENTATION. SEEING NO OTHER
COMMENTS. I WILL SUMMARIZE. AS
ONE OF THE ORIGINAL COSPONSORS
OF JUMPSTART, IT IS REALLY
IMPORTANT THAT WE ACKNOWLEDGE
TWO TRUTHS. NUMBER ONE,
JUMPSTART WORKS. MORE THAN
THAT, IT IS A CRITICAL PART OF
OUR BUDGET. WITHOUT JUMPSTART,
WE WOULD BE IN A MUCH WORSE
BUDGET SITUATION TODAY. IT IS
THE CENTERPIECE OF OUR
INVESTMENTS IN AREAS OF
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, EQUITABLE
DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE, THE
GREEN NEW DEAL, AND VERY, VERY
HELPFUL FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THE SECOND TRUTH IS THAT EVERY
YEAR SINCE WE PASSED JUMPSTART
WE HAVE USED SOME OF IT TO
PROTECT OTHER CRUCIAL CITY
PRIORITIES FROM LIBRARIES TO
COMMUNITY CENTERS. IF WE WERE
TO -- IF WE DECIDED WE WERE
GOING TO END THE PRACTICE OF
USING IT FOR GENERAL FUND THIS
YEAR, AND NOT USE ANY OF THE
JUMPSTART TO ASSIST WITH
GENERAL FUND PRIORITIES, WE
WOULD BE CHANGING COURSE FROM
PAST PRACTICE FOR THE FIRST
TIME EVER. WE WOULD ALSO BE IN
A VERY BAD POSITION. WE WOULD
BE TALKING ABOUT MASS LAYOFFS ,
AND EVEN BIGGER REDUCTIONS TO
BASIC SERVICES SATELLITES RELY
ON , AND BIGGER REDUCTIONS TO
OUR SOCIAL SAFETY NET. AS WE
LOOK AHEAD TO THE FUTURE OF
JUMPSTART, I BELIEVE IT IS
IMPORTANT THAT WE BALANCE THESE
TWO PRIORITIES. WE NEED TO MAKE
SURE THE JUMPSTART IS LIVING UP
TO ITS PROMISES. WE ALSO NEED
TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS AND PROTECT
OTHER PRIORITIES IN OUR BUDGET
WHEN THE CITY BUDGET FACES
TOUGH ECONOMIC CYCLES . WE NEED
TO MAKE THESE ADJUSTMENTS
BECAUSE , IN THESE VERY SHORT
FOUR YEARS, JUMPSTART HAS BEEN
ON THE BOOKS AND WE HAVE USED
IT DIFFERENTLY EVERY YEAR. WE
HAVE ADDED PRIORITIES WITHOUT A
COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW. WE HAVE
NOT BEEN COLLECTING REVENUE
LONG ENOUGH TO COMPLETE A
FIVE-YEAR SMOOTHING ANALYSIS.
AS MENTIONED, JUMPSTART CAN BE
A VOLATILE REVENUE SOURCE. WE
HAVE ONLY EXPERIENCED IT IN THE
GOOD TIMES. WE DON'T USE OUR
WISDOM, WE ARE FUTURE COUNCIL,
MAY FIND REVENUES COMING IN
BELOW ORIGINAL 2020
PROJECTIONS. PAGE 16 OF 17 IN
THE MEMO CLEARLY DESCRIBES
THIS. I APPRECIATE THE DEEP
ANALYSIS THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED
. COLLEAGUES, MY APPROACH TO
THIS LEGISLATION WILL BE TO
BALANCE THESE PRIORITIES TO
MAKE SURE JUMPSTART LIVES UP TO
ITS PROMISES TO INCORPORATE THE
REALITY OF HOW WE HAVE USED IT
AND CHANGED IT, AND TO MAKE
SURE WE INSULATE THESE
IMPORTANT PRIORITIES FROM THE
INEVITABLE ECONOMIC SWINGS.
WITH THAT, THAT BRINGS US TO
THE END OF ITEM 4 ON THE
AGENDA. I WILL NOTE A NEW THING
I LEARNED TODAY IS THAT IF YOU
WANT TO CHANGE THE WEATHER FROM
CLOUDY TO SUNNY, YOU PROMISED
THE SEATTLE CHANNEL THAT WE CAN
OPEN ALL OF THE WINDOWS AND
THERE WON'T BE ANY PROBLEMS.
THANK YOU SEATTLE CHANNEL FOR
YOUR GRACE. I HAVE WATCHED AS
BEHIND THE SCENES YOU HAVE
CHANGE THE WHITE BALANCE A FEW
TIMES. THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES,
TOMORROW MORNING IS OCTOBER 17.
IS NOT PUBLIC SAFETY DAY .
EVERY DAY IS PUBLIC SAFETY DAY
FOR COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. IT IS
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS DAY.
WHILE WE WON'T HAVE AN
EARTHQUAKE FUND IN THE BUDGET,
WE WILL HAVE AN EARTHQUAKE
DRILL DURING BUDGET. AND SO,
THIS IS PART OF THE GREAT SHAKE
OUT ACROSS WASHINGTON STATE
TOMORROW AT 10:17 PER PREPARE
FOR SOME MORE DETAILS THERE. WE
WILL CLOSE THIS MEETING. WE
WILL RESTART ANOTHER SLICK
BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING TODAY
AT 5:00 P.M. SHARP. EVERYONE
WAS ON TIME TODAY. I REALLY
APPRECIATE THAT. WE WILL HAVE
CHILDCARE UNTIL SEVEN COPY OF
TONIGHT. WE WOULD APPRECIATE
VOLUNTEERS FROM EVERYONE'S
OFFICES. WE'RE GOING TO GO AS
LATE AS NEEDED. COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE.
>> MAY MAKE ONE ANNOUNCEMENT TO
REMIND EVERYBODY THAT TOMORROW
IS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AWARENESS
DAY. PLEASE WEAR SOMETHING
PURPLE.
>> PURPLE. THIS IS DIFFERENT
THAN DENIM DAY.
>> DIFFERENT THAN DENIM DAY.
YES.
>> GREAT. PURPLE TOMORROW.
SINGLE FOR THE COMMENTS. THIS
DOES CONCLUDE THE SEPTEMBER --
OCTOBER 16, 2024 BUDGET
COMMITTEE MEETING . SEE NO
FURTHER BUSINESS. WE ARE
ADJOURNED.