>>> GOOD AFTERNOON, THE SELECT
BUDGET COMMITTEE WILL COME BACK
TO ORDER. IT IS 2:01 P.M., I'M
DAN STRAUSS, CHAIR OF THE
COMMITTEE. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA?
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER WOO?
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE?
>> PRESENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> HERE.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON?
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> PRESENT.
>> CHAIR STRAUSS?
>> THANK YOU, AND COLLEAGUES
WHO ARE NOT HERE ARE EXCUSED
UNTIL THEY RETURN. GOOD
AFTERNOON COLLEAGUES. FOR THE
VIEWING PUBLIC, MANY OF US ARE
WEARING PURPLE. VICE CHAIR
RIVERA IS WINNING IN THE PURPLE
DEPARTMENT. AND WE'RE DOING
THIS AND THANK YOU TO COUNCIL
MEMBER MOORE FOR BRINGING THIS
TO OUR ATTENTION. IT IS
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PREVENTION
AWARENESS DAY. AND SO WE ARE
HERE SUPPORTING THE EFFORT
BECAUSE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IS
NEVER OKAY, AND WE NEED TO DO
AS MUCH AS WE CAN TO PREVENT
IT. WITH THAT, WE ARE GOING TO
MOVE IN TO OUR NEXT NUMBER OF
ITEMS. WE HAVE TWO MORE FOR
THIS AFTERNOON, AND THEN AGAIN
FOR TOMORROW, TOMORROW IS HUMAN
SERVICES -- NO, WE HAVE HUMAN
SERVICES RIGHT NOW.
>> SDHR. HUMAN RESOURCES.
>> SORRY.
>> HUMAN RESOURCES AND THEN
HUMAN SERVICES TOMORROW. THANK
YOU. AND THEN UNIFIED CARE TEAM
TOMORROW AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT TOMORROW. RIGHT NOW
THIS AFTERNOON, WE ARE DOING
HUMAN RESOURCES AND WITH T
CLERK, WILL YOU READ THE SHORT
TITLE OF THE FIRST ITEM INTO
THE RECORD AND THEN WE'LL TAKE
IT AWAY FROM THERE.
>> AGENDA ITEM 4, SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
FOR BRIEFING AND DISCUSSION.
>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE KARINA
BULL AND DIRECTOR NOBLE AS WE
MENTIONED THIS MORNING. AND THE
REST OF TODAY OR TOMORROW, AND
WE WILL BE BACK WITH US ON
MONDAY AND TUESDAY. SO WITH
THAT, OVER TO YOU, KARINA.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON SELECT BUDGET
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. ONCE AGAIN,
I'M KARINA BULL, CENTRAL STAFF
ANALYST. IN THE BEGINNING PART
OF THIS AFTERNOON'S SESSION,
I'LL PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF
THE SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN
RESOURCES PROPOSED BUDGET AND
PRESENT A POLICY CONSIDERATION.
BEGINNING WITH THE OVERVIEW,
THE 2025, 2026 PROPOSED BUDGET
FOR SDHR AS WE TRY TO SCROLL TO
THAT PORTION OF THE
PRESENTATION WOULD INCREASE
APPROPRIATIONS TO THE
DEPARTMENT BY ALMOST 10%,
REFLECTING A $40 MILLION
INCREASE FROM 2024 TO 2025. AND
AN ADDITIONAL 5.5%, $25 MILLION
BETWEEN 2025 AND 2026. MOST OF
THESE CHANGES WOULD REFLECT
INCREASES FOR BASELINE AND
TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS,
PRIMARILY RELATED TO THE
PERSONNEL COMPENSATION TRUST
FUNDS FOR EMPLOYEE BENEFITS.
THERE WOULD ALSO BE REDUCTIONS
ON THE OPERATIONAL SIDE. THAT
MEANS HR SERVICES PERFORMED BY
STAFF. AND THESE REDUCTIONS
WOULD BE GUIDED BY THE
DEPARTMENT'S DISTINCTION
BETWEEN CORE AND NON-CORE
SERVICES. THE DEPARTMENT
IDENTIFIES CORE SERVICES
VERBATIM AS THOSE REQUIRED BY
LAW OR CITY REGULATION, AND
DIVIDES THESE SERVICES INTO
FOUR CATEGORIES. THE FIRST
CATEGORY INCLUDES EMPLOYEE
BENEFITS, LEAVE OF ABSENCE,
WORKERS COMPENSATION, AND
TALENT ACQUISITION. THE SECOND
CATEGORY IS HR COMPLIANCE
INCLUDING POLICY, PERSONNEL
RULES, AND LEGISLATION. THE
THIRD IS LABOR RELATIONS, AND
THE FOURTH IS CLASSIFICATION OF
POSITIONS AND WAGE MANAGEMENT.
THE DEPARTMENT IDENTIFIES
NON-CORE SERVICES AS WORK FORCE
DEVELOPMENT, WORK FORCE EQUITY,
AND LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT.
AND SO WITH THESE DISTINCTIONS
IN MIND, THE REDUCTIONS INCLUDE
TRANSFER OF 11 FULL-TIME
EQUIVALENCE, FTEs, WHICH WOULD
REFLECT REORGANIZATION OR
CONSOLIDATION OF PROGRAMS AND
PROJECTS THAT WOULD MOVE THE
DEFERRED COMPENSATION UNIT.
FIRE AND POLICE EXAMINES UNIT
TO THE CIVIL COMMISSION, AND
POLICE RECRUITING INNOVATION
UNIT TO THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT. THAT WAS ALREADY
LEGISLATED EARLIER THIS YEAR.
AND GENERAL FUND REDUCTIONS TO
ADDRESS THE GENERAL FUND
DEFICIT WOULD INCLUDE 10.5 FTEs
FOR ABOUT $2.5 MILLION. THIS
WILL INCLUDE LEARNING AND
DEVELOPMENT, WORK FORCE
DEVELOPMENT, EQUITY PERFORMANCE
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AND IF THOSE
WORDS DON'T ORIGINALLY RING A
BELL, THAT MEANS ELIMINATING
THE ONLINE E3 PERFORMANCE
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR THOSE
DEPARTMENTS THAT USE THAT. THEY
WOULD BE DOING THAT ON PAPER BY
THEMSELVES WITHOUT SDHR SUPPORT
EXCEPT FOR ADVISORY SUPPORT.
ELIMINATION OF THE WORK FORCE
EQUITY DIVISION AS A SEPARATE
DIVISION IN THE DEPARTMENT.
REMOVAL OF ONE POSITION IN THE
BENEFITS UNIT AND REDUCTION IN
TEMPORARY CONTRACT LABOR
FUNDING. SO WITH THAT IN MIND,
THE POLICY CONSIDERATION FOR
YEAR REVIEW IS THE ELIMINATION
OF THE WORK FORCE EQUITY
DIVISION. THIS WOULD INCLUDE
ELIMINATION OF THE DIVISION AS
A STANDALONE UNIT, THE FIELD
DIRECTOR POSITION, WHICH IS A
FULL-TIME POSITION AND A VACANT
PART-TIME ADVISORY POSITION,
REMOVING FUNDS FOR ASSOCIATED
NON-LABOR EXPENSES, AND
REMOVING THE TWO REMAINING
POSITIONS TO THE BUSINESS
OPERATIONS DIVISION. SO IN SOME
TOTAL, THERE ARE 3.5 FTE
DEDICATED TO THIS WORK RIGHT
NOW IN THEIR OWN STANDALONE
DIVISION WITHIN SDHR. THE
PROPOSED BUDGET WOULD REMOVE
1.5 OF THOSE POSITIONS AND
REMOVE THE REMAINING TWO TO A
DIFFERENT DIVISION. AS
BACKGROUND, THE WORK FORCE
EQUITY DIVISION WAS ESTABLISHED
BY EXECUTIVE ORDER IN 2015,
AFFIRMED BY A COUNCIL
RESOLUTION LATER THAT YEAR. THE
DIVISION DOES A NUMBER OF
THINGS INCLUDING MANAGING THE
CITY'S WORK FORCE EQUITY
INITIATIVE, IMPLEMENTING THE
FIVE YEAR WORK FORCE EQUITY
STRATEGIC PLAN THAT WAS
RELEASED EARLIER THIS YEAR.
SUPPORTING THE CITY'S BROADER
RACE AND SOCIAL JUSTICE
INITIATIVE, NOW IN ITS 20th
YEAR AT THE CITY AND CODIFIED
AS A CITY POLICY LAST YEAR.
LEADING OTHER EFFORTS TO
ADVANCE EQUITY INCLUDING
IMPLEMENTING RECOMMENDATIONS IN
A RECENT WORK FORCE EQUITY
AUDIT THAT WAS ISSUED BY THE
CITY'S AUDITOR OFFICE LAST
YEAR. MUCH OF THIS WORK IS
FOCUSED ON FINDINGS THAT THE
CITY OF SEATTLE WORK FORCE DOES
NOT REPRESENT THE COMMUNITY
MAKEUP OF KING COUNTY. BLACK
INDIGENOUS AND LATINA WOMEN ARE
HISTORICALLY UNDERPAID WITHIN
THE CITY'S WORK FORCE THAT
INCLUDES UNDERREPRESENTATION AS
SUPERVISORS AND HIGH-WAGE
EARNERS. INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
HAVE BEEN HISTORICALLY
UNDEREMPLOYED AND UNEMPLOYED.
AND THOSE WITH COGNITIVE
DISABILITIES ARE
UNDERREPRESENTED IN THE CITY'S
WORK FORCE. IF COUNCIL ACCEPTS
THIS PROPOSAL, SDHR'S
ADMINISTRATION OF THE WORK
FORCE EQUITY INITIATIVE WOULD
SHIFT TO AN ADVISORY ROLE, THE
STRATEGIC PLAN WOULD BE
ADMINISTERED AT THE DEPARTMENT
LEVEL. CITY WIDE PROGRESS WOULD
BE MONITORED THROUGH AN
INTERNAL SHARE POINT SITE, THAT
WILL GO BIT ACRONYM UNITE, AND
THAT WOULD HAVE INFORMATION ON
EMPLOYEE DEMOGRAPHICS, TURNOVER
RATES, AND IT WOULD LAUNCH LAST
YEAR LATE IN 2025. LASTLY, THEY
WILL ESTIMATE THAT REMOVAL OF
THE FIELD DIRECTOR POSITION
WOULD HAVE THE MOST NOTABLE
IMPACTS ON STRATEGIC
DIRECTIONS, SPANNING ACROSS THE
MODEL OF HR SERVICES AT THE
CITY, AND THAT REMOVE OF THE
PART TIME ADVISORY POSITION
WOULD HAVE LESS IMPACT AS IT IS
THEN VACANT THIS YEAR DUE TO
THE HIRING FREEZE. AND SO
POLICY OPTIONS TO CONSIDER
WOULD BE ADDING APPROPRIATIONS
TO FULLY RESTORE THE EQUITY
DIVISION TO CONTINUE CITY WIDE
EFFORTS TO ADVANCE WORKPLACE
EQUITY OR ACCEPTING THE
PROPOSAL, NO CHANGE IN THE
PROPOSED BUDGET, WHICH WOULD
SHIFT THIS WORK TO THE
DEPARTMENT LEVEL AND RETAIN TWO
POSITIONS TO SERVE AN ADVISORY
ROLE.
>> THANK YOU, KARINA. COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON IS CHAIR OF
THE COMMITTEE OVERSEEING THIS
DEPARTMENT. SHE'S NOT WITH US
RIGHT NOW. COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE, IF YOU WANT TO, I'VE
GOT SOME INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
LUCKILY READY TO GO.
>> CHAIR STRAUSS, I'LL DEFER
TO YOUR INTRODUCTORY REMARKS,
PLEASE.
>> OKAY. GENERALLY I CAN SAY
WITH ALL FTE REDUCTIONS,
WHETHER THEY ARE FILLED OR
UNFILLED, WE'RE GOING TO BE
DOING A LINE-BY-LINE REVIEW OF
ALL OF THIS. SO COLLEAGUES,
I'LL ASK A COUPLE QUESTIONS
ABOUT THIS SPECIFICALLY. IN
YOUR REPORT JUST NOW, YOU
MENTIONED THERE ARE 3.5
POSITIONS, 1.5 WOULD BEING A
AGGREGATED. COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE SAID SOMETHING REALLY
SMART YESTERDAY, WHICH IS YOU
CAN REMOVE PEOPLE FROM DOING
THE WORK, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN
THE WORK DOESN'T STILL HAVE TO
BE DONE. SO THE QUESTION COMES,
THEY'RE MOVING DIFFERENT WORK
GROUPS. WOULD THEIR BODY OF
WORK CONTINUE TO BE PERFORMED
BY THESE INDIVIDUALS OR ARE
THEY TAKING ON A DIFFERENT BODY
OF WORK? THE QUESTION COMES
REALLY, IT MAKES IT CLEAR. IS
THIS A REDUCTION OF THE WORK OR
A CUT OR CLOSURE OF THIS WORK?
>> YES, SO THEY WOULD MOVE TO
AN EXISTING DIFFERENT DIVISION.
THEY WOULD STILL FOCUS ON WORK
FORCE EQUITY, SERVING AN
ADVISORY ROLE FOR DEPARTMENTS.
THEY WOULD UNITE THE SHAREPOINT
SITE. WHAT WOULD CHANGE WITH
THIS PROPOSAL IS THERE
WOULDN'T BE A CITY WIDE
STRATEGIC VISION FOR WORK FORCE
EQUITY. AND SO THAT WOULD BE
DISPERSED AMONG THE DEPARTMENTS
RATHER THAN HAVING IT LIVED
CENTRALLY AT THE SDHR.
>> I KNOW FROM PAST EXPERIENCE
OF THE COUNCIL TRYING TO MANAGE
DEPARTMENTS, THEY HAVE NOT
ALWAYS GONE WELL. DO WE HAVE
THAT ABILITY TO SAY WHICH WORK
GROUP THESE POSITIONS ARE HELD
WITHIN THEIR CURRENT WORK
GROUP? OR DO WE EVEN HAVE
CONTROL OVER THAT?
>> AND THAT SOUNDS
ADMINISTRATIVE IN NATURE. THE
FIELD DIRECTOR, THE TWO ADVISER
POSITIONS, THE ONE THAT'S
VACANT. IT WOULD BE LIKE A
DANGLING TWO POSITIONS THAT
DON'T HAVE A REPORTING
STRUCTURE, SO I BELIEVE THAT IS
WHY THEY WERE ANTICIPATED TO
MOVE.
>> THAT IS VERY HELPFUL. I SEE
YOU HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.
>> NO, HE DEFERRED TO ME.
>> OKAY. AND I DO THINK THAT IT
IS IMPORTANT, YOU KNOW, YOU
MENTIONED ONE OF THE CORE
SERVICES THAT WILL INCLUDE
COMPLIANCE. THE WORK IS REALLY
IMPORTANT CITY WIDE AND THEM
NEEDING TO CHANGE THEIR
CULTURE. WE'RE BEING SUED FOR
HARASSMENT, THAT'S AT LEAST
DUE TO THE FACT THAT THEY'RE
SUING US, YET WE'RE ELIMINATING
STAFF AND THE PROGRAMMING THAT
COULD HELP US START TO CHANGE
CULTURE ACROSS THE CITY. YOU
REFERENCED THE TECHNICAL REPORT
FROM THE AUDITOR. I DID WORK
WITH THE AUDITOR IN 2021 TO
UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF HIRING
AND PROMOTION OF BLACK WOMEN
AND AFTER BEING SUED BY SEVEN
BLACK WOMEN FOR DISCRIMINATION.
WHAT WE FOUND AS YOU REFERENCED
HERE THAT WOMEN RECEIVED LOWER
PROMOTION BAY INCREASES
PARTICULARLY WOMEN OF COLOR,
AND RECEIVING THE LOWEST
PROMOTION PAY OF THEM ALL. THE
IDEA OF SHIFTING THIS WORK BACK
OUT TO DEPARTMENTS IS
INCONSISTENT WITH THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE AUDITOR
FOR ONE. THAT WORK NEEDS TO BE
CENTRALIZED, SO WE DO HAVE A
STRATEGY FOR HOW WE'RE GOING
TO MAKE SURE WE ARE HOLDING OUR
DEPARTMENTS ACCOUNTABLE FOR
UNDERSTANDING WHAT EQUITY
MEANS, WHAT FAIR PROMOTION
PRACTICES MEAN. WE NEED TO
MAINTAIN FUNDING. IT'S A
CRITICAL PART WITH HOW THE CITY
WILL COMPLY WITH THE LAW ABOUT
CREATING A SAFE WORK
ENVIRONMENT ACROSS THE CITY FOR
PEOPLE WHO WANT TO BE CITY
EMPLOYEES. AND SO I AM REALLY
GOING TO BE ADVOCATING FOR
MAINTAINING THIS DEPARTMENT IN
PARTICULAR. THE WORK OF THE
AUDITOR IS NOT FINISHED. THERE
IS MORE WORK THEY WANTED TO DO
TO CONTINUE OUR HIRING
PRACTICES AND WHAT THEY ARE,
PARTICULARLY SO THAT WOMEN OF
COLOR ARE TREATED FAIRLY AND
DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH SOME
OF THE HARASSMENT THAT WE HEARD
ABOUT FROM SOME DEPARTMENTS. SO
THANK YOU FOR SHARING WHAT THIS
CHANGE WOULD LOOK LIKE, BUT
I'M HOPING FOR SUPPORT IN
MAINTAINING THESE POSITIONS AND
THIS WORK IN PARTICULAR. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS? KARINA, COULD YOU
REPEAT WHAT YOU WERE SAYING
ABOUT THE INTERNALLY FOCUSED,
I'M GOING TO CALL IT
CONTINUITY OF GROWTH? AND I'M
LOOKING AT YOUR MEMO RIGHT NOW
AS I HEARD YOU SAY THE WORDS,
BUT I'M NOT SEEING IT IN THE
METRO.
>> CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION
AGAIN?
>> I'M GOING TO SAY ALL THE
WRONG WORDS. AND A PROGRAM
WITHIN SDHR THAT WILL ASSIST
THE CITY EMPLOYEES GROWING
WITHIN THE CITY?
>> OKAY, THAT WILL BE THE WORK
FORCE DEVELOPMENT UNIT. SO
SEPARATE FROM THE WORK FORCE
DIVISION IS THE PROPOSED
ELIMINATION OF WORK FORCE
DEVELOPMENT AT THE CITY. AND IT
WOULD MOVE IT AGAIN TO THE
DEPARTMENT LEVEL, AND THEY
WOULD NOT RETAIN POSITIONS TO
MY MEMORY FOR THIS, BUT THEY
COULD PROVIDE THAT SERVICE TO
OTHER SUSPECTS. AND IT WOULD
ELIMINATE THE ANNUAL TUITION
REIMBURSEMENT, AND MENTORSHIPS,
INTERNSHIPS. THEY WOULD STILL
DO A BIT OF THIS WORK, BUT THE
BROAD CAREER MOBILITY WITHIN
THE CITY, THAT WOULD NO LONGER
BE CONDUCTED.
>> OKAY, THAT'S SOMETHING I'D
LIKE TO DIG IN WITH YOU MORE
DEEPLY TO MAKE SURE WE'RE
SUPPORTING OUR CURRENT
EMPLOYEES IN WAYS TO GROW
WITHIN THE CITY. AND DIRECTOR
NOBLE DID NOT KNOW I'D USE HIM
AS AN EXAMPLE ON WHY GROWTH IN
THE CITY IS IMPORTANT. YOU MAY
NOT KNOW, BUT DIRECTOR NOBLE
STARTED HERE AT CENTRAL STAFF
IN THE POSITION CURRENTLY HELD
BY ERIC. AND AS THE CENTRAL
STAFF ANALYST. AND THROUGH THE
COURSE OF HIS CAREER, HE SAT IN
MANY DIFFERENT CHAIRS, CENTRAL
STAFF DIRECTOR PREVIOUSLY CBO
FORECAST COUNCIL AND THE
DIRECTOR AGAIN. I BELIEVE THE
WESTERN ENERGY WORM THAT CAME
UP THIS YEAR THAT WAS A
PRODUCT, THE POLICY DID A
REALLY GOOD JOB OF SAYING HEY,
I DON'T THINK THIS GOES FAR
ENOUGH. THIS IS A POLICY THAT
THE DIRECTOR HAD WORKED ON AS A
STAFF ANALYST. AND THAT INSIGHT
THERE WAS HELPFUL TO US, AND
THAT IS THE IMPORTANCE OF
GROWING OUR OWN WITHIN THE
CITY. AND SORRY, I USED YOUR
NAME. YOU DIDN'T KNOW I WAS
GOING TO SAY THAT.
>> IT HAS OCCURRED TO ME AND
I'M NOT SURE I'M HAPPY ABOUT
IT, BUT IT HAS HAPPENED.
>> AND IT JUST REALLY FOCUSES
ON THE FOLKS THAT WE HAVE
WORKING ON THE CITY. THERE IS A
BENEFIT IN KEEPING THEM AND
GROWING THEM. AND I'M NOT
SEEING ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AT
THIS TIME. I APPRECIATE THIS
ANALYSIS, AND I KNOW WE'LL BE
FOLLOWING UP IN THE NEXT WEEK
OR SO. THAT WAS SO FAR I
BELIEVE THE FASTEST
PRESENTATION THAT WE'VE HAD.
NICE WORK, KARINA. PHIL, IF YOU
COULD READ THE NEXT ITEM INTO
THE AGENDA, AND THEN WE'RE
GOING TO BRING UP SOME MORE
CENTRAL STAFF ANALYSTS.
>> AGENDA ITEM 5, SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION AND
INSPECTIONS, BRIEFING AND
DISCUSSION.
>> WONDERFUL. WE ARE NOW JOINED
BY KETIL AND JEN. THANK YOU FOR
COMING UP. AS THEY'RE BRINGING
UP THEIR PRESENTATION, WE WILL
DIG INTO THE SEATTLE DEPARTMENT
OF INSPECTIONS AND THEY WILL DO
THE BUDGET AT A HIGH LEVEL. AND
THEN WE WILL GO THROUGH POLICY
COMMISSIONS.
>> ALL RIGHT, KETIL FREEMAN,
COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF.
>> HI, JENNIFER, ALSO COUNCIL
CENTRAL STAFF. IT
>> I MENTIONED A FEW THINGS
HERE ABOUT THEIR BUDGET JUST TO
REFRESH THE COMMITTEE. AND SOME
COMMENTS AS WELL. AND STAFF
REDUCTIONS AND THE GRANTS AND
THE CONTRACTS, WITH THE FOCUS
ON THE RENTAL ASSISTANCE. AND
STARTING OUT HERE BY WAY OF A
REMINDER. AND THE FUND SOURCES,
SO THE OPERATING FUND IS THE
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION FUND
REVENUE TO THAT FUND THAT COME
FROM FEES AND CHARGES FOR THE
REGULATORY SERVICES. AND MOST
APPROPRIATION ARE IN THE
COMPLIANCE SIDE, AND SO WHEN
SOMEBODY HAS A COMPLAINT ABOUT
SOMETHING, THEY WILL SAY IT IS
A VACANT BUILDING OR SOMETHING
LIKE THAT. AND I'LL HAVE TO
SEE IF THAT COULD BE ISSUED AND
THAT IS DONE ON THE FUND, WHICH
IS WHY MOST OF THE INSTRUCTION
FUNDS ARE TO THAT. THAT IS ALSO
WHERE THE ASSISTANCE GROUP
WOULD RECEIVE SOME GENERAL FUND
FUNDING. YOU MAY REMEMBER
DIRECTOR TORTLESON SAID THERE
WOULD BE A RESTRUCTURING.
YOU'LL SEE SOME WILL ZERO OUT
AND THAT IS BECAUSE OF THE
REALIGNMENT OF THE STAFF
RESOURCES IN PART TO RESPOND TO
THE PERMANENT AUDIT DONE A
COUPLE YEARS AGO AND ALSO TO
RESPOND TO SOME CHANGES,
REQUIRED BY THE HOUSE BILL,
WHICH IS THE LOCAL PROJECT
REVIEW ACT. AND THERE WILL BE
SOME LAYOFFS AND TRANSFERS,
APPROXIMATE LIT STAFF WILL BE
REDUCED, INCLUDING DEFUNDING
AND THE POSITION AUTHORITY THAT
WILL BE MAINTAINED AND
TRANSFERRING 10 POSITIONS THAT
WILL SEE A PERMANENT VIEW,
WHICH I HAVE PREVIOUSLY DONE
THAT WORK. FINALLY, THERE ARE
TWO PIECES OF THE BUDGET
LEGISLATION IN 2025 FEE
INCREASES, AND THOSE ARE TWO
PIECES OF LEGISLATION THAT WILL
MAKE ADJUSTMENTS. AND SO THAT
IS MY REMINDER TO YOU ABOUT
WHAT'S IN THEIR PROPOSED
BUDGET NOW AND I'LL TURN IT
OVER TO MORALES AND TO TEE
THINGS UP.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES? CHAIR
OF THE COMMITTEE?
>> AND THANKS, KETIL. SO LAST
NIGHT, WE HEARD FROM A LOT OF
THE FOLKS THAT WILL BE IMPACTED
BY THESE DEPARTMENT CHANGES.
YOU ALL MISSED IT, BUT WE WERE
HERE UNTIL 10:00. AND SO WE
HEARD FROM FOLKS ABOUT THE
PERMITTING TEAM. WE KNOW THAT
THEY HAVE DECLINED, BUT THIS IS
STAFF THAT STILL WORKS ON
IMPLEMENTING CHANGES TO OUR
LAND USE, AND THEY HAVE A LOT
OF WORK TO DO. ANTICIPATING
INCREASED PERMITS WITH HOUSING.
AND THEY WOULD ALSO LOOK AT
SINGLE FAMILY CONSTRUCTION,
COACHING, PRESUBMITTAL
CONFERENCES, AND WHAT WE HEARD
LAST NIGHT IS THE ANTICIPATED
HIT IN REVIEW TIME IF ALL THESE
POSITIONS ARE LOST. THE
REDUCTION OF ABOUT 55% IN THE
AMOUNT OF TIME THAT IT WILL
TAKE THEM TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW
PERMITS. AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT
WILL UNDERMINE THE PROGRESS
THAT WE HAVE MADE AND WE WILL
CONTINUE TO MAKE WITH THE
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE AUDIT
THAT WAS DONE LAST YEAR. WE
ALSO HEARD FROM RENTERS LAST
NIGHT, THAT THEY ARE INTERESTED
IN THE ONE-STOP SHOP LIKE OLS W
WORK AND THE RENTER PROGRAMS
FROM THE OFFICE OF CIVIL
RIGHTS. AND A REQUEST TO FUND
THE WORK GROUP. WE DID PUT
$50,000 IN LAST YEAR TO FUND
THE WORK GROUP. MANY OF US HAVE
TRIED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE
NEW REGULATIONS ARE, HOW FOLKS
CAN WORK TOGETHER, AND HOW THEY
CAN UNDERSTAND ON HOW TO
NAVIGATE AND NEGOTIATE WHEN
THERE IS SOMEBODY THAT IS
DEALING WITH A CHALLENGE PAYING
FOR THEIR RENT. SO COLLEAGUES,
THAT IS SOMETHING I'LL BE
LOOKING AT TRYING TO RETAIN IN
THIS BUDGET. THE OTHER THING WE
HEARD FROM TENANTS AND A LOT OF
ADVOCATES AND FOLKS WHO
ACTUALLY DELIVERED THE SERVICES
LAST NIGHT, IT'S THE NEED TO
FULLY FUND RENTER RIGHTS. AND
NOT JUST THE $800,000 THAT WAS
PROPOSED TO BE CUT, BUT
SIGNIFICANTLY MORE IS BEING
ASKED FOR, SO WE WOULD PRESERVE
THE SERVICES ACROSS THE BOARD.
AND I REALIZED COUNCIL MEMBER
MOORE, THIS IS ACTUALLY YOUR
PART OF THE SDCI, BUT I WANT TO
NOTE SOME OF THE COMMENTS WE
HEARD LAST NIGHT. AND I HAVE
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS IF I CAN
CONTINUE.
>> AND UNLESS HAD IT IS POLICY
CONSIDERATIONS, AND THEN LET'S
DIVE INTO THAT.
>> YES, PLEASE CONTINUE.
>> AND THEN I'LL TURN IT BACK
TO YOU UNLESS YOU'VE GOT
SOMETHING TO SHARE RIGHT NOW
AND BACK TO YOU.
>> ALL RIGHT, HERE WE GO. AND
IT'S THE PERMANENT REVIEW
STAFFING REDUCTIONS AS I
MENTIONED THE PROPOSED BUDGET
WOULD SEE THE 20 TERM POSITIONS
AND NINE POSITIONS THAT WILL DO
THE PERMIT REVIEWS, INCLUDING
THE LAND USE PLANNERS AND THE
SPECIALISTS, ONE OF WHOM IS A
SUPERVISOR AND THE TECHNICIAN
AND STRATEGIC ADVISER. AND TO
HAVE THOSE POSITIONS. I WENT
BACK TO LOOK AT LAYOFFS AFTER
THE GREAT RECESSIONS. AND
BETWEEN 2008 AND 2012, THERE
ARE REDUCTIONS, WHICH WILL GIVE
YOU A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT,
REDUCING THEM BY 48 POSITIONS
OH THE FOUR-YEAR PERIOD, SO IT
IS ABOUT AN 11% REDUCTION FROM
THOSE POSITION BASE DOWN TO
ABOUT A 393 POSITION BASE AND
THEN BEGAN ADDING POSITIONS
BACK IN 2013 AS THEY INCREASED.
AND SO WHY THAT POSITION
MODIFICATIONS? WE HAVE TALKED
ABOUT IT ALREADY AND IT IS AN
OPERATING FUND DEPARTMENT THAT
WILL NEED REVENUE FROM PERMIT
REVIEW SERVICES AND TO FUND THE
POSITIONS AT SDCI, SO THERE ARE
A COUPLE OF MECHANISMS THAT
THEY WILL HAVE TO RESPOND TO
THE VOLATILITY AND THE
CONSTRUCTION MARKET AND WE ALL
NOTE REASONS FOR THE VOLATILITY
AND THE ECONOMIC TRENDS AND
AMONG OTHER THINGS. AND ALSO
JUST THE INEFFICIENCY OF THE
REAL ESTATE MARKET AND THE
DEVELOPERS THAT ARE CHASING THE
SAME FUTURE TENANTS, SO A LOT
OF THINGS ARE BEING BUILT IN
THE SAME TIME WHERE ALL OF A
SUDDEN THE CITY MIGHT FIND
THEMSELVES OVERBUILT, AND WE
MAY BE IN THAT POSITION NOW AS
LOOKING AT THE SURVEY DATA AND
VACANCY RATES FOR RENTAL UNITS
IN THE CITY ACCORDING TO ACS,
SO THAT IS PRETTY HIGH.
>> AND KETIL, COULD YOU SPEAK
LITTLE BIT CLOSER?
>> ALL RIGHT. SO THE TWO
MECHANISMS, SORT OF THE
STRUCTURAL MECHANISM IN SDCI'S
BUDGET TO ADDRESS VOLATILITY
FOR THE RAPID SWINGS AND
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY ARE
CONTINGENT BUDGET AUTHORITY.
SDCI HAS THIS IN THEIR STREET
USE DIVISION, ALLOWING SDCI UP
TO AN APPROVED LIMIT TO ADD
POSITIONS, TO SORT OF ACCESS
AUTHORITY, AND TO ADD POSITIONS
WHEN THERE ARE INCREASES, SO
THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK
TO COUNCIL. THAT'S ABOUT A
THREE MONTH TIME SAVINGS THERE
BY THE BUDGET AUTHORITY THAT
SDCI HAS. AND THE OTHER
MECHANISM THAT SPD -- SDCI HAS
IS STAFFING RESERVE. WHEN THERE
ARE DOWNTURNS IN THE 2025
BUDGET, THAT RESERVE IS $22
MILLION AND ALSO $6 MILLION IN
UNDERSERVED FUND BALANCE IN
SDCI. SO THOSE ARE THE TWO
MECHANISMS THAT SDCI HAS TO
ADDRESS RAPID CHANGES AND THE
REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT MARKET.
AND SO THERE ARE A LOT OF
THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING NEXT
YEAR, IMPLEMENTING HOUSE BILL
11, 10, AND THE CITY OF SEATTLE
AND ALSO IMPLEMENTING THE HOUSE
BILL, WHICH WILL REQUIRE SOME
CHANGES TO THE DESIGN REVIEW
PROGRAM AND ALSO IMPLEMENTING
HOUSE BILL 1337, WHICH WILL
MAKE SOME CHANGES IN HOW WE
WOULD REGULATE THE LDUs, THEY
COULD INDUCE THE PERMIT
ACTIVITY NEXT YEAR AND UNCLEAR
IF THAT WILL HAPPEN, BUT SOME
CHANGES THAT THEY HAVE TO
IMPLEMENT THAT COULD MAKE SOME
THINGS FOR FOLKS TO APPLY FOR
PERMITS WITH THE CITY OF
SEATTLE. AND THERE IS A CHANGE
TO THE REVIEW ACTS. WHICH WILL
BECOME EFFECTIVE ON JANUARY 1
OF 2025 AND THAT THOSE CHANGES
AMONG OTHER THINGS WILL REQUIRE
THEM TO STREAMLINE THE PERMIT
PROCESSES AND RUN THE RISK,
POTENTIALLY OF HAVING TO REFUND
IF NEW TIMELINES ARE NOT MET.
SO THOSE ARE ALL CHANGE
CIRCUMSTANCES COMING FROM THE
STATE AND THAT MIGHT AFFECT THE
STAFFING NEEDS NEXT YEAR. AND
SO THE QUESTION HERE FOR YOU
ALL IS ARE THE LAYOFFS THE
RIGHT AMOUNT? IS THIS THE RIGHT
TIME? AND I DON'T HAVE ANY
KIND OF RULE OF THUMB HERE TO
SORT OF HELP YOU GUIDE THAT
DECISION MAKING AND CERTAINLY
SOME OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO YOU
AND IT WILL INVOLVE USING THE
CORE STAFFING RESERVE, WHICH IS
ONE OF THE STRONG MECHANISMS
AND TO ADDRESS PERIODS LIKE WE
ARE EXPERIENCING NOW. SOON
OPTION HERE FOR THE COUNCIL
WOULD BE TO USE THE CORE STAFF
TO MAINTAIN POSITION ON THE
AUTHORITY FOR ALL OF THE
POSITIONS THAT ARE PROPOSED TO
BE AGGREGATED. SO I THINK I
MENTIONED SOME OF THOSE
POSITIONS ARE SUNSET POSITIONS
THAT WOULD SUNSET IN 2025 AS IT
CURRENTLY STANDS. USE THE CORE
STAFFING RESERVE TO MAINTAIN
POSITION AUTHORITY FOR SOME OR
ALL THE POSITIONS THAT WOULD BE
DEFUNDED, SO THOSE ARE NOT THE
SUNSET POSITIONS, BUT THE
POSITIONS FOR WHICH SDCI WOULD
RETAIN AUTHORITY, BUT DEFUND
THOSE POSITIONS. AND OF COURSE,
THE COUNCIL COULD MAKE NO
CHANGE TO THE MAYOR'S PROPOSED
BUDGET. THERE IS OBVIOUSLY A
TRADE-OFF WITH THESE THINGS ON
THE STAFFING RESERVE. IF YOU
USE IT NOW, THERE WILL BE LESS
OF IT FOR YOU TO USE IN THE
FUTURE. SO IF THEY LAST LONGER
THAN SAY THE FOUR YEARS THAT
WILL FOLLOW THE 2008 GREAT
RECESSION, THEN THERE WILL BE
FEWER RESOURCES AND THE FUTURE
FOR THE COUNCIL TO LOOK TO TO
MAINTAIN CORE STAFFING FOR
SDCI.
>> THANK YOU, KETIL.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, ANYTHING
TO KICK US OFF? AND THEN
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE?
>> YES. I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS
ABOUT THIS. SO I THINK FOR ME,
THE QUESTION IS, YOU KNOW, IF
THESE POSITIONS ARE $5 MILLION
IN THE BUDGET FOR '25 AND $5.2
FOR '26. IF I'M UNDERSTANDING
RIGHT, WE COULD STILL HAVE HALF
OF THE RESERVE, IS THAT RIGHT?
YOU SAID IT'S $22 MILLION?
>> AND SO THE SALARY SAVINGS TO
THE CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
FUND, IT IS NOT A FUND OR
SOURCE OF MONEY. BUT TO THE
INSPECTION FUND FROM REDUCING
THESE REVIEW POSITIONS. AND SO
THERE IS ABOUT TWO YEARS OF
STAFFING RESERVE THAT COULD BE
AVAILABLE TO THE CITY.
>> AND SO THE RISK OVERREADING
THAT BY HALF IF THINGS DON'T
COME BACK IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF
YEARS, THEY WILL AFFECT OUR
ABILITY TO MAINTAIN STAFFING?
>> THAT'S RIGHT. CAN YOU
EXPLAIN WHY THEY WERE CENSORED
IN THE FIRST PLACE?
>> AND I BELIEVE THEY WERE
ADDED. SO THIS IS SOMETHING
THAT I WILL NEED TO CONFIRM AND
THEY WERE ADDED BECAUSE OF THE
UPTICK AND FOR THOSE POSITIONS.
>> OKAY.
>> AND FOR WHAT IT IS WORTH,
THAT MAKES SENSE, SO THEY WOULD
HAVE GOTTEN THAT INEQUATION,
AND THEY WOULD HAVE ASKED FOR
THOSE POSITIONS, WHERE THAT
WOULD MAKE SENSE AND TO PUT
SOME SUNSET ON THEM BECAUSE YOU
DID NOT KNOW WHEN THAT WAS
GOING TO HIT IF IT WAS GOING TO
HIT. THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH
HOW THEY HAVE BEEN DEPLOYED
PREVIOUSLY.
>> GIVEN ALL THE CHANGES THAT
ARE COMING IF THE NEXT YEAR, IS
THERE A YEAR TO PROJECT HOW
MANY PERMITS WE MIGHT BE
GETTING AND WHETHER THIS IS THE
RIGHT NUMBER OF PEOPLE TO BE
LETTING GO?
>> I DON'T THINK SO. I MEAN
POSSIBLY. IT DEPENDS ON THE
CHANGES AND WHEN THOSE CHANGES
ARE ACTUALLY IMPLEMENTED. AN
EXAMPLE HERE, WHERE THERE MAY
BE INCREASED ACTIVITIES FOR
MASTER USE PERMITS MIGHT BE
WITH CHANGES TO ADU STUFF THAT
COULD HAPPEN SOONER THAN THE
HOUSE BILL IMPLEMENTATIONS. AND
SO WITH THOSE CHANGES MAY
COMAKING THAT SORT OF ALLOWS
FOR SIMPLE OWNERSHIP OF THE
ADUs THAT ARE INSTRUCTED
THROUGH THE UNIT LOT DIVISIONS,
WHICH YOU CANNOT DO NOW. TO OWN
AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT,
REALLY ONLY IN THE NAME OF THIS
CASE. AND SOMEBODY COULD
DEVELOP THE DWELLING UNIT AND
SELL IT THAT WAY AND WITH
SUBDIVIDED LAND. THAT'S A
LIKELY CHANGE THAT WILL COME
WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF SOME OF
THESE STATE LAWS. AND SO THAT
CHANGE ALONE COULD INDUCE SOME
PERMIT ACTIVITY FOR FOLKS AND
JUST HAVE THAT KIND OF SIMPLE
OWNERSHIP, SO THAT IS ONE
POSSIBILITY. BUT IT IS REALLY
HARD TO KNOW HOW MANY FOLKS
WOULD CHOOSE TO DO THAT.
>> AND WHAT IT IS WORTH, YOU
WILL BE JOINING THE REVENUE
FORECAST COUNCIL, AND THEY WILL
BE PRESENTING THEIR FORECAST.
THAT'S AN ECONOMIC FORECAST,
AS WE WERE SEEING YESTERDAY'S
MATTER. AND THERE ARE SPECIFIC
PROJECTIONS IN THERE ABOUT
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. AND TO
BE CLEAR, IT IS A FORECAST. IT
IS WHAT IT IS. BUT GIVEN THE
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS, THERE IS NO
EVIDENCE WE WERE HEADED BACK TO
THE KIND OF BOOM THAT WE WERE
IN. I'M NOT SAYING THAT WITH
ANY JOY. WE ARE NOT SEEING
EMPLOYMENT GROWTH AND IT IS NOT
PROJECTED. THAT IS ULTIMATELY
WHAT DROVE ALL THE ACTIVITIES,
THE JOBS, WHERE PEOPLE WILL BE
MOVING LOOKING FOR SOMEWHERE TO
LIVE.
>> OKAY. THAT'S MY QUESTION
ABOUT THAT. I AM -- SORRY, LET
ME GET BACK TO MY NOTES.
>> AND WE'VE GOT ONE
FOR POLICY CONSIDERATION --
>> YES. YEAH, OKAY. I'LL COME
BACK.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, DO YOU
HAVE A COMMENT ON THIS POLICY
CONSIDERATION?
>> I DO, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT HOW
THESE POSITIONS ENGAGE IN TREE
PERMITTING, TO REMOVE TREES AND
AS A PART OF THAT?
>> YEAH, SO SOME OF THESE
POSITIONS PROBABLY DO PLAY A
ROLE IN ADMINISTERING THE TREE
CODE. AND WHEN THEY WERE
AMENDED. AND I HAVE TO DOUBLE
CHECK THAT TO MAKE SURE IT IS A
TRUE STATEMENT, WHERE THEY
WOULD PLAY A ROLE. SO THERE
WOULD BE FEWER STAFF TO DO
THAT, BUT THERE WOULD BE STILL
BE STAFF AT SDCI TO DO THOSE
POSITIONS.
>> AND THIS MIGHT BE A RUMOR.
MAYBE YOU COULD CONFIRM OR DENY
IT. BUT THERE ARE CURRENTLY
STAFF WHO ARE ENGAGED IN
REVIEWING THE TREE -- OR THE
REVIEWING OF THE PERMITS TO
COMPLY WITH THE TREE ORDINANCE
AND THEY WOULD LOSE THEIR
POSITION AND NEW STAFF WOULD BE
REPLACING THEM?
>> THAT IS NEW TO ME. I CANNOT
CONFIRM NOR DENY THAT.
>> IF WE COULD GET INFORMATION
ABOUT TRANSFER OF STAFF AND WHO
HAVE SOME TRAINING IN THE
ORDINANCE AND THEY WOULD
REPLACE STAFF WHO ARE NO VAS TO
THAT. BUT I WOULD APPRECIATE
IT, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE. OTHER COLLEAGUES?
OTHERWISE I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF
QUESTIONS. AND IT SPEAKS TO WHY
WE HAVE THE CONTINGENCY FUND.
KETTLE SPOKE ABOUT IT IN 2008.
WE HAD ABOUT A 40 EMPLOYEE
REDUCTION.
>> YES, THAT HAPPENED IN 2008,
WHERE THAT WAS REDUCED TO 393.
SO 48 POSITIONS.
>> AND IN THAT TIME, I SPENT
THE LAST FOUR YEARS REALLY
WORKING ON THIS PERMIT ISSUE.
THE AUDIT WAS JUST ONE STEP IN
THAT AND WHAT REALLY BECAME
CLEAR TO ME THAT DURING THAT
RECESSION, WE LOST A LOT OF
HIGHLY TRAINED PERMIT
REVIEWERS, WHICH IS THE
IMPORTANCE OF OUR FUND BECAUSE
THEY WILL TAKE, I HEARD LAST
NIGHT, TWO YEARS FOR SOMEBODY
TO COME FULLY ON BOARD, AND WE
UNDERSTAND THEY SHOW THE START
REASON THAT THEY ARE TERM
LIMITED, AND HAVE WE GROWN TOO
FAR? ARE WE AT RIGHT LEVEL? AND
WHAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME
THAT WE CONTINUE OUR WORK
TOWARDS REVIEWING AND ISSUING
BOTH PERMITS AT A FASTER
TIMELINE. AND THAT IS A CONCERN
THAT I HAVE NOW, SIMILAR OF
THAT IN 2010. DO YOU HAVE A
GOOD SENSE OF HOW MANY PERMITS
THESE REVIEWERS, THAT THEY ARE
REVIEWING RIGHT NOW IN
COMPARISON TO THE LAST FEW
YEARS?
>> I DON'T. I INCLUDED A CHART
THAT WILL LIST UNITS BEING
PERMITTED. AND THE LAST SEVERAL
YEARS, THEY HAVE BEEN
RESIDENTIAL, WHICH IS WHERE A
LOT OF THOSE PROJECTS ARE NOW.
AND THAT IS ONE THING I WANT TO
KEEP IN MIND OF THE DECLINING,
WELL, INCREASING THE INTEREST
RATES, AND THAT THERE ARE FEWER
WHERE THEY EXTENDED THE LIFE,
WHERE THEY WILL MAKE THAT A
LITTLE BIT LONGER IN SOME WAYS
BECAUSE THEY WILL BE ALIVE FOR
A LITTLE BIT LONGER AND FOLKS
CAN BRING THEM BACK TO LIFE AND
THEY WILL BUILD PROJECTS IN THE
FUTURE WHEN THEY INCLUDE THAT
SHOT OF JUST RESIDENTIAL PERMIT
ACTIVITIES, AND THAT THINGS, AT
LEAST FOR NEW PERM RESIDENTIAL
UNITS, THAT THINGS HAVE LEVELED
OFF SINCE 2022 AND THAT WE ARE
MORE OR LESS ON TREND YEAR TO
DATE. SO YEAH, WE MAY BE IN
THAT TROUGH.
>> AND WHAT IS CLEAR TO ME ALSO
THAT THE NATIONAL ECONOMY IS
KNOCKING ON WOOD, NOW BEGINNING
SLOW GROWTH. THE KEYWORD THERE
IS SLOW. AND THE OTHER KEYWORD
IS GROWTH. WE ARE GOING IN THE
RIGHT DIRECTION, BUT MAYBE NOT
AS, I HEARD DIRECTOR NOBLE SAY
YESTERDAY, WE CAN'T GROW OUR
WAY OUT OF EVEN THAT $79
MILLION DEFICIT THAT WE HAVE
PROJECTED IN 2027. AND THAT
SAID, WE ALSO HAVE AS YOU
MENTIONED, HB1110 AND OTHER
POLICY DIVISIONS AND THAT WAS
EVEN MORE MAPS WERE RELEASED
YESTERDAY. AND THAT WE COULD
KEEP THESE STAFF, BUT WE COULD
KEEP ALL THE STAFF FOR A
SHORTER PERIOD OF TIME OR A
FEWER NUMBER OF THE STAFF AT
LONGER PERIOD OF TIME. AND IS
THAT GENERALLY CORRECT?
>> THAT IS GENERALLY TRUE. THIS
IS WHERE THE BALANCE IS BECAUSE
WE NEED TO KEEP THAT KNOWLEDGE
TO BRIDGE THAT GAP UNTIL WE GET
INTO FASTER OR THE SLOW GROWTH.
AND THAT IS THE POLICY
CHALLENGE THAT WE HAVE RIGHT
NOW BEYOND THE FACT THEY'RE
HUMANS THAT WILL SERVE SEATTLE
RESIDENTS AND WE HEARD MANY OF
THOSE STORIES LAST NIGHT. I
DON'T THINK I HAVE A QUESTION
FOR YOU KETIL. I SEE
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA HAS A
HAND. I'LL COME BACK TO
ANYMORE QUESTIONS THAT I'VE
GOT. COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. AND SO
THESE POSITIONS, SO PLUS ONE TO
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE'S COMMENT
ABOUT THE TREE ORDINANCE AND
ARE WE LOSING EXPERTISE WITHIN
ANY OF THESE POSITIONS? THANK
YOU FOR GETTING BACK TO US
ABOUT THAT LATER. AND IN TERMS
OF THESE POSITIONS, DO WE HAVE,
IS IT IMPACTING THE WAIT TIMES?
WILL IT BE IMPACTING THE WAIT
TIMES FOR THE PROJECTS THAT ARE
WAITING TO GET PERMITTED? ANY
IMPACTS TO THAT?
>> AND PROBABLY NOT IN THAT
SHORT TERM AS THEYW THAT THERE
AN IMPACT THERE.
>> AND GIVEN THAT LOW, WE
SHOULD BE FINE?
>> AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THERE
IS NOT AN EXTENSIVE BACKLOG TO
GET IN THE DOOR.
>> AND SO IF WE WENT THAT ROUTE
AS THEY WERE SAYING, DO WE KEEP
FOLKS NOW OR WAIT UNTIL IT
PICKS BACK UP? AND WHAT WILL
THEY DO IF WE DON'T ACTUALLY
HAVE THE NEED REALLY FOR THIS
SERVICE RIGHT NOW GIVEN THE
LOW? IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE
THAT THEY COULD BE DOING? I
MANE I'M NOT CLEAR.
>> I MEAN THEY ARE PERMIT
REVIEW STAFF AND THERE MAY BE
OTHER THINGS THEY COULD DO. IT
DEPENDS ON THE FUNCTION OF WHAT
THEY'RE DOING MAY NOT
NECESSARILY MEAN WHAT THEY'RE
DOING IS CONSTRUCTION
INSTRUCTION FEE ELIGIBLE. AND
SO THEY ARE ALWAYS PROCESSING
THE ACTIVITY GOING ON AND A
CHANGE TO RECOGNIZE THAT AND
THE PROPOSED BUDGET, SO THERE
COULD BE IMPROVEMENT WORK THAT
STAFF THAT HAS LESS OF A CASE
LOAD, A PERMIT REVIEW CASE LOAD
COULD OCCUPY THEMSELVES DURING
THE LOW. ALL RIGHT. AND THAT IS
A GOOD POINT. TO YOUR POINT, IF
THERE ARE NOT PERMITS TO
REVIEW, THERE MIGHT NOT BE.
>> THAT'S THE TRICKY PART.
THEN BEN IN GENERAL, AND THIS
IS JUST IN TERMS OF THE
STAFFING. THE CITY HELP
EMPLOYEES FIND OTHER POSITIONS
IN THE CITY THAT MAY BE VACANT
LIKE DOES HR HELP WITH THAT?
AND I KNOW WE DO AT THE
DEPARTMENT LEVEL, BUT I DON'T
KNOW WHETHER HR DOES THAT.
>> AND I HAD FORGOTTEN IT
YESTERDAY. AND ESSENTIALLY THEY
DO LINK EMPLOYEES WHO ARE
GETTING LAID OFF TO OTHER
OPPORTUNITIES THAT ARE IN THE
CITY AND GIVEN SOME PREFERENCE
IN TERMS OF INJURIES. AND IT IS
A QUESTION OF SKILL SETS AND
WHETHER THEY HAVE THE
APPROPRIATE BACKGROUND. AND
THAT IS OBVIOUSLY INDIVIDUAL
BASED. AND YOU ALREADY KNOW
THIS. I DON'T NECESSARILY NEED
TO SAY IT, BUT YOU WILL RETAIN
THESE POSITIONS FOR A WHILE AND
USE THE STAFFING, THE RESERVE
THAT WILL EXIST. IF THEY DON'T
COME BACK, THEN THE RISK IS
YOU'LL END UP LAYING OFF MORE
LATER, AND THEN SACRIFICING FOR
THAT TERM AND THAT EXPERTISE.
AND SO THEN THE RISK THERE
FURTHER IS WHEN IT COMES BACK,
YOU WANT THE PERM VOLUMES TO
COME BACK, AND YOU HAVE THAT
MANY FOLKS YOU COULD HIRE. MY
GENERALIZED UNDERSTANDING,
THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT
HAPPENED WITH THE PERMIT
VOLUMES THAT PICKED UP QUICKLY
ONCE THINGS GOT BEGINNING
AGAIN.. THERE IS NO WINNING
HERE. IT IS NOT THAT WE HAD A
DISCUSSION ABOUT IT YESTERDAY
AND KIND OF A GENERAL FUND
STABILIZATION THAT IT IS THE
QUESTION OF HOW QUICKLY DO YOU
RUN IT DOWN? AND WHEN DO YOU
THINK IT WILL GO BACK UP AND
YOU COULD NEVER KNOW THAT.
AGAIN, JUST HIGHLIGHTING, AND
THAT TRADE-OFF IS VERY REAL.
>> AND IF WE CANNOT HIRE PEOPLE
BECAUSE WE DECIDED TO KEEP
FOLKS NOW IS VERY REAL BECAUSE
WE'RE MANAGING THOSE WAIT
TIMES AGAIN. AND SO IT'S IT
DEFINITELY HARD CHOICES, BUT
GOOD TO HAVE ALL THIS
INFORMATION, THANK YOU, AND
I'M GLAD TO HEAR HR DOES HELP
WITH SOME OF THAT, YOU KNOW,
HELPING EMPLOYEES FIND OTHER
PLACES TO LAND IF POSSIBLE, SO
THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING THAT.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> I WILL CLICK THROUGH MY
QUESTIONS ON SHAREPOINT, AND
THEN I'LL PASS IT BACK TO
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES AND/OR
MOORE. ACTUALLY, WE HAVE
ANOTHER POLICY CONSIDERATION.
FOR THIS QUESTION FOR SHARE
POINT AGAIN ABOUT THE PERMIT
LEVELS, FOR BOTH BUILDING
PERMITS, THAT'S A DISTINCTION
AS WELL AS WHAT OTHER TASKS ARE
THEY PERFORMING WHETHER THEY
ARE FEE SUPPORTED OR NOT. FOR
YOU AND ME KETIL, I WANT TO RUN
SOME OPTIONS WITH YOU REGARDING
THE CONTINGENCY FUND LEVELS,
REGARDING THE PROJECTIONS AND
FORECAST ESPECIALLY AFTER
TUESDAY'S REVENUE FORECAST.
AND THEN COLLEAGUES, THIS IS
NOT A QUESTION FOR SHAREPOINT,
BUT AN OBSERVATION. SDCI IS
PRETTY WELL PROTECTED MOST OF
THE TIME BECAUSE THEIR WORK IS
FEE SUPPORTED. MEANING THEY
HAVE DEDICATED FUNDS. THIS IS
THE MOMENT WHERE IT WILL BECOME
HARDER BECAUSE OF THE WORK THEY
DO IS BASED ON THE FUNDING FOR
THE WORK THEY DO. I DO
APPRECIATE, AND I'M USING
SPECIFIC TERMS WHEN I'M
TALKING ABOUT REDUCTION THAT IT
MEANS THEY ARE STILL FUNDING IN
THE PROGRAM AND THAT IT MEANS
IT IS GONE. THOSE ARE JUST THE
DISTINCTION IN THE PAST, AND
I'M HAPPY TO HEAR THAT THEY
HAVE THE FUNDING CUT, THE
POSITION AUTHORITY IS RETAINED
BECAUSE THAT IS A PRETTY BIG
HURDLE, IF WE NEED TO RESTAFF
UP TO NOT HAVE SDCI RETURN TO
US TO ASK FOR THAT AUTHORITY
AND THAT THEY WILL HAVE THAT
AUTHORITY. AND THE PERMIT FEES
WILL COME IN A HIGHER RATE THAT
THEY ARE WILLING TO GO WITH US.
THAT'S THE GOOD AND THE BAD
AND MY OBSERVATION. ANYTHING --
DID I GET THAT RIGHT? SHARE
WITH ME, KETIL.
>> YOU GOT THAT RIGHT.
>> ALL RIGHT. [ LAUGHTER ] ALL
RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON
THIS POLICY CONSIDERATION? I
THINK WE'VE GOT ANOTHER ONE.
>> ALL RIGHT. SO THE NEXT
POLICY CONSIDERATION HAS TO DO
WITH KENTTIVE ASSISTANT GRANTS
AND CONTRACTS, WHICH IS IN PART
BY THE TABLE WITH ME HERE. THEY
HAVE ADMINISTERED SOME, BUT
IT'S NOT THE ONLY DEPARTMENT
IN THE CITY THAT WILL DO THAT.
SHE IS HERE FOR COLOR
COMMENTARY. AS THEY KNOW, THEY
WILL HAVE A CONTRACTING GRANT,
WHERE THAT WORK IS DONE BY THE
TENTATIVE ASSISTANT GROUPS.
CONTRACTS WITH TEN
ORGANIZATIONS, PROVIDES
TENTATIVE EDUCATION, LANGUAGE
ACTION, LANGUAGE ACCESS,
EVICTION DEFENSE, DIRECT
COUNSELING, AND OTHER SERVICES.
THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT
WHY IS THIS FUNCTIONING? AND I
HAD TO GO BACK TO REMIND MYSELF
A LITTLE BIT OF THE HISTORY
HERE. SOME OF IT HAS TO DO WITH
WHAT THAT CODE SAYS THAT WILL
RESIDE, AND THAT HAS NOT
HISTORICALLY ALWAYS BEEN THE
CASE. THAT'S THE AUTHORITY
THAT WAS ADDED IN 2015, SO
IT'S IT BEEN ONGOING HERE FOR
ABOUT TEN YEARS. THAT'S NOT
ALWAYS THE CASE THAT THEY WOULD
HAVE THE PROTECTION FUNCTION.
IT'S ALWAYS HAD A ROLL,
ESPECIALLY THAT WILL BE
HABITABLE AND THINGS LIKE THAT
AND NOT THIS PROTECTION
FUNCTION. BUT A PART OF THE
REASON FOR SDCI TAKING ON THE
TENANT PROTECTION IN 2015 WAS
ACTUALLY SORT OF A GOOD
GOVERNMENT IMPULSE OF THE CITY
AT TIME. THERE HAD BEEN A
SCATHING AUDIT; AND SO AS
CONSEQUENCE OF THAT OR
DETERMINING SDCE ON. SO OF THE
WELCOME AND ONE OF THE
CONVERSATIONS. SO THE PROPOSED
BUDGET WOULD REDUCE FUNDING
FROM ABOUT $2.4 MILLION IN 2024
TO $1.8 MILLION, DEPENDING ON
HOW YOU COUNT IT. IT'S A 25%
REDUCTION. AND A PART OF THE
$2.4 MILLION WAS $1 MILLION
ADDED ON THE ONE-TIME BASIS FOR
RENTAL ASSISTANCE TO BE
ADMINISTERED IN CONJUNCTION
WITH THE EVICTION AND THE LEGAL
DEFENSE. ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT
ANY OF THAT? ALL RIGHT. SO THE
PROPOSED BUDGET INDICATES THAT
SDCI WOULD RETAIN AND WOULD
CONTINUE TO PROVIDE EVICTION TO
THE TUNE OF ABOUT $527,000.
AGAIN, THEY ARE NOT THE ONLY
ONE IN THE CITY THAT WILL
PROVIDE THE LEGAL DEFENSE, AND
PROVIDE THE RENTAL ASSISTANCE.
I THINK I JUST MISSED BOTH. THE
$527,000 WOULD BE PROVIDED FOR
RENTAL ASSISTANCE, WHICH IS
SOMETHING THE MAYOR IS
PROPOSING TO CONTINUE AT A
REDUCED AMOUNT. THEY'RE NOT
THE ONLY ENTITY THAT WILL
PROVIDE THE RENTAL ASSISTANCE.
HSD IS PROPOSED TO PROVIDE THE
ASSISTANCE WITH THE 11 BASED
ORGANIZATIONS FOR THAT SERVICE
AND THE TOTAL AMOUNT
ANTICIPATED IN 2025 IS $4.6
MILLION. $2.6 MILLION WOULD
COME FROM THE GENERAL FUND AND
THE HOUSING LIMIT, THAT'S KIND
OF THE BASELINE AMOUNT AND THE
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR RENTAL
ASSISTANCE THAT COULD COME FROM
HOUSING LEVY INTEREST EARNINGS.
AND SO SDCI WILL SHARE
APPROXIMATELY $5 MILLION AMOUNT
THAT'S ABOUT 10%. AND THAT
$527,000 PROPOSED BY THE MAYOR
IS ABOUT 10% OF THE TOTAL THAT
WILL BE AVAILABLE CITY WIDE.
>> SORRY, KETIL, I CANNOT HEAR
YOU.
>> SURE, JUST GIVING YOU SOME
PERCENTAGES HERE. ABOUT $5
MILLION CITY WIDE PROVIDED FOR
RENTAL ASSISTANCE. SDCI'S
SHARE OF THAT, WHICH IS A
LITTLE OVER $500,000 WOULD BE
ABOUT 10% OF THAT TOTAL
APPROPRIATION. SO D SDCI DOES
WORK WITH THE PROGRAMS AND
GRANTS, BUT THERE IS NOT, YOU
KNOW, THAT IS A CONSULTATION
ONLY. IT IS NOT NECESSARILY
SORT OF A FORMAL POLICY BASIS
FOR MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT HOW
FUNDS SHOULD BE DISTRIBUTED
LIKE A UNIFIED RFP OR SOMETHING
LIKE THAT. SO THERE'S A COUPLE
OF OPTIONS HERE FOR THE COUNCIL
TO CONSIDER ONE, ADOPTING THE
LEGISLATIVE INTENT, AND
REQUESTING THE REPORT TO THE
COUNCIL ON A PROCESS FOR THAT
CONTRACTING RFP. AND ANOTHER
COULD BE TO MAKE NO CHANGE TO
THE PROPOSED BUDGET. THERE ARE
MANY OPTIONS FOR THOSE BEYOND
THESE TWO AND DECIDING HOW TO
MAKE APPROPRIATION FOR THE
LEGAL DEFENSE AND TENANT
ASSISTANCE. I KEEP CONFUSING
THOSE TWO THINGS. I MEANT
RENTAL ASSISTANCE, SORRY.
>> FAIR ENOUGH.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, I'M
GOING TO PASS IT TO YOU.
>> GREAT, THANK YOU. I DON'T
NECESSARILY HAVE A QUESTION. IT
IS MORE OF A STATEMENT. I THINK
ONE OF THE THINGS WE, WELL THE
COUNCIL DID, AND THROUGH THE
HOUSING COMMITTEE. IT'S TO GET
THROUGH THE ADMINISTRATION AND
FINANCIAL PLAN FOR THE HOUSING
LEVY IS TO SET ASIDE THE
INTEREST PAYMENT AND DIRECT
THAT DIRECTLY TO RENTAL
ASSISTANCE. AND THAT HAS NOT
BEEN DONE BEFORE. WE ARE
LOOKING AT HAVING ADDITIONAL
INTEREST MONEY TO DIRECT
TOWARDS THE RENTAL ASSISTANCE,
SO BETWEEN $1 TO $3 MILLION A
YEAR. AND THAT IS SOMETHING
ALSO THAT WE SHOULD BE TAKING
INTO CONSIDERATION. AND I JUST
WANT TO BE ON THE RECORD THAT I
BELIEVE WE NEED TO BE GOING IN
THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION AND
INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF RENTAL
ASSISTANCE IN OUR COMMUNITY
RATHER THAN CUTTING IT. IT IS
MY OPINION THAT IT SHOULD BE
HOUSED IN ONE ENTITY. WE SHOULD
TRY TO BE AS EFFICIENT AND
ONE-STOP SHOP AS POSSIBLE. IN
ADDITION TO LOOKING AT HAVING
RENTAL ASSISTANCE TO ADDRESS
THE REARS, I WOULD REALLY LIKE
TO SEE US HAVING MECHANISMS,
IDENTIFYING THE NEEDS BEFORE
THEY GET THAT EVICTION NOTICE
AND BEFORE SOMEBODY IS LOOKING
AT TRYING TO DIG OUT OF
THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS OF THE
REARS. I'VE GOT SOME IDEAS ON
HOW TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. BUT I
THINK WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY
HERE TO RESET THE SHIP. TO ME
RENTAL ASSISTANCE IS A CRITICAL
PIECE TO PROVIDE HOUSING
BECAUSE THEY KEEP PEOPLE
HOUSED. AND IT IS GOING TO TAKE
US A LONG TIME TO GET AS MUCH
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS WE NEED
IN THIS COMMUNITY. WHILE WE'RE
WORKING TO BUILD PLACES FOR
PEOPLE TO LIVE AND THAT THEY
CAN AFFORD. SO THAT IS JUST
WHAT I'M PUTTING OUT MY POLICY
POSITIONS THERE.
>> THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES, ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS?
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> YEAH. I REALLY WANT TO
APPRECIATE WHAT COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE SAID, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE
HEARD, JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS
THAT WE HEARD FROM FOLKS LAST
NIGHT. AND THAT THE
ORGANIZATIONS THAT PROVIDE
THESE SERVICES, THEY ARE NOT
ONLY DOING, KNOW YOUR RIGHTS
WORKSHOP. AND SO THAT
EVICTIONS, THEY WILL NOT GET
PROCESSED THOSE WHO NEED TO
FIND A PLACE TO STAY. YOU KNOW,
IN THIS BUDGET, THE SERVICES
ARE LOSING 50% OF OUR BUDGET.
AND THAT MANY OF THEM ARE
DEEPLY RENT BURDENED ALREADY.
AND SO THESE ARE REALLY
IMPORTANT SERVICES THAT ARE
NEEDED TO PREVENT EVICTION, TO
PREVENT THE HOMELESSNESS CRISIS
FROM GETTING WORSE. I DO THINK
ONCE AGAIN THE ONE-STOP SHOP
IDEA TO SUPPORT EVERYBODY IN
THIS ECOSYSTEM OF RENTAL
LANDLORDS AND TENANTS ARE
SOMETHING WE SHOULD CONSIDER.
IT IS JUST A SMALL FIRST STEP,
BUT I THINK IT WOULD HELP IN
TRYING TO FIND A PLACE FOR US
TO GET CLARITY -- THE SPREAD
SHEET THAT I CREATED FOR
MYSELF. THERE IS $1.7 MILLION
IN FUNDING FOR HOMEOWNERSHIP
AND SUSTAINABILITY. AND I WOULD
BE INTERESTED IN TRYING TO
RESTORE THAT AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE, SO THAT WE DON'T FALL
BELOW THE THRESHOLD. AND THERE
IS A POTENTIAL TO CREATE 276
NEW HOMES. AND GIVEN THE
HOUSING CRISIS THAT WE WOULD
HAVE THAT IT WILL BE REALLY
IMPORTANT FOR US TO DO
EVERYTHING THAT WE COULD TO
HELP 276 FAMILIES FIND THE SAFE
PLACE TO STAY. AND THE LIST OF
QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER. THANK
YOU, SHERIFF.
>> THANK YOU.
>> AND IT IS IMPORTANT TO ME.
AND WHEN WE ARE ABLE TO PREVENT
SOMEBODY FROM LOSING THEIR
HOUSING AND IT IS A LOWER
DOLLAR AMOUNT BEYOND THE REST
OF THE TRAUMA THAT WILL OCCUR
TO GET THEM BACK INTO HOUSING.
AND IT IS $200 TO SAVE $2,000
OF REHOUSING COST. DON'T QUOTE
ME ON THAT AND EVEN THOUGH I'M
SAYING THAT ON MY RECORD AND
THAT IS MY RECOLLECTION. AND
DURING THE PANDEMIC, WE WERE
ABLE TO GET TO A HISTORIC LEVEL
IF I RECALL, HISTORIC LEVEL OF
RENTAL ASSISTANCE FUNDING
MAINLY DUE TO THE FEDERAL COVID
RELIEF FUNDING THAT WILL EXPIRE
THIS YEAR. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS
THAT I WILL BE ASKINGFECTION
WEEK IF YOU WANT TO PUT IT INTO
SHARE POINT OR YOUR OWN
ANALYSIS IS OVER THE COURSE OF
HISTORY AND WHAT OUR LEVEL OF
ASSISTANCE HAVE BEEN. AND IS
THAT A REDUCTION FROM 2019
LEVELS OR A REDUCTION FROM THAT
AMOUNT? AND MY VALUE AND
MISSION IS TO GET AS MUCH
RENTAL ASSISTANCE OUT THE DOOR
AS POSSIBLE, AND THAT I WANT TO
BE ABLE TO COMPARE APPLES TO
APPLES. ALSO, COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE, YOUR POINT ABOUT HAVING
A ONE-STOP SHOP IS TAKEN. AND
WITH THIS BUDGET IN THE MOMENT.
SEATTLE MAY BE DIFFERENT IN
2008 AND 2009. I WOULD LOOK AT
THE SIMILAR CONVERSATION THAT
WE JUST FINISHED HAVING ABOUT
THAT SEATTLE CHANNEL. AND ABOUT
ARBORISTS, ALL BEING IN ONE
DEPARTMENT RATHER THAN SPLIT
ACROSS THE CITY DEPARTMENT. THE
SAME THING ABOUT RENTAL
ASSISTANCE. AND THAT IT IS
HELPFUL TO HAVE BOTH THE
PROPERTY OWNERS AND TENANT
ASSISTANCE IN THE SAME GROUP,
AND I ALSO HEARD FEARS THAT IF
SOMEBODY IS SIMPLY REALLY THE
LANDLORD THAT IS TRYING TO GET
INFORMATION WILL ASK THOSE
FOLKS FOR INFORMATION, AND THEN
THEY'RE FOLLOWED UP WITH THE
VIOLATION. AND SO THERE IS A
BIT TO UNPACT HERE. AND THE
LANDLORDS THAT HAVE ONE UNIT OR
FOUR UNITS THAT ARE HERE WILL
NOT HAVE THE TEAM OF LAWYERS
THAT AN EIGHT-STORY APARTMENT
BLOCK HAS TO UNDERSTAND OUR
TENANT LAWS, AND WE NEED TO BE
ABLE TO KEEP OUR RENTERS IN
THEIR HOMES. AND THE HISTORY OF
THE LOWS FOR THE RENTAL
ASSISTANCE BECAUSE I DO KNOW
THAT DURING THE PANDEMIC, IT
WAS A BIT CONFUSING FOR THE
NON-PROFITS EVEN TO BE ABLE TO
GET THEM OUT THE DOOR BECAUSE
THEY DID NOT KNOW WHO TO SPEAK
TO IN THAT CITY. AND THE POINT
WELL TAKEN. COLLEAGUES, ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS POLICY
CONSIDERATION? I SEE COUNCIL
MEMBER RIVERA?
>> YEAH, JUST TO LEND MY VOICE
TO THE SUPPORT FOR RENTAL
ASSISTANCE AND THEN EQUALLY AS
IMPORTANT AS ENSURING WE ARE
GETTING FOLKS TO SOMETHING THEY
COULD AFFORD IS CRITICAL. I
KNOW THAT I'VE HAD AT LEAST
ONE CONSTITUENT THAT WE WERE
ABLE TO HELP WITH SOME RENTAL
ASSISTANCE, SO THEY WOULD NOT
GET EVICTED. NOW, YOU KNOW, HE
WILL CONTINUE TO NEED SUPPORT.
HE'S GOT NOW A VOUCHER, WHICH
IS GREAT. AND HOW DO WE ENSURE
WE'RE LOOKING AT THE SYSTEM
HOLISTICALLY? AND THANK YOU
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE FOR YOUR
LEADERSHIP AS CHAIR OF THE
HOUSING COMMITTEE, LOOKING AT
THIS WORK, MAKING SURE IT'S
CENTRALIZED EFFICIENT AND
LOOKING AT ALL THE PIECES TO IT
AND NOT JUST ONE PIECE BECAUSE
IT IS NOT JUST RENTAL
ASSISTANCE, RIGHT? AND AS YOU
MENTIONED AND AS THEY
MENTIONED, SO ALL OF THAT IS
IMPORTANT, AND I APPRECIATE YOU
LOOKING INTO THAT AND DOING THE
DEEP DIVE THAT I KNOW YOU'RE
GOING TO BE ENGAGED IN, SO
THANK YOU.
>> COLLEAGUES, OTHER QUESTIONS
OR ANYTHING BEYOND THESE TWO
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS THAT YOU
WOULD LIKE TO BRING UP?
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO CLOSE US OUT HERE?
THE SECOND FASTEST PRESENTATION
OF THE SERIES SO FAR. GRANT IT,
IT'S THE FIRST FULL DAY OF
PRESENTATIONS.
>> WELL, I'LL THANK CENTRAL
STAFF. THERE IS A LOT TO DELVE
INTO HERE. AND THIS IS ONE OF
THE CRITICAL FUNCTIONS AS WE'RE
TRYING TO SUPPORT OUR NEIGHBORS
IN STAYING IN THEIR HOMES. AND
SO I LOOK FORWARD TO DIVING IN
WITH YOU TO PRESERVE THIS AS
MUCH AS POSSIBLE, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER
FROM THE TABLE? OKAY.
FANTASTIC. IT SEEMS THAT WE
HAVE ALL BEEN IN THE CHAMBERS
FOR 12 HOURS YESTERDAY AND A
LOT OF HOURS TODAY, I
APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S TIME AND
ATTENTION ON THIS. WE WILL COME
BACK TOGETHER TOMORROW MORNING.
WE'LL START OFF WITH THE
PARTICAPATORY BUDGET AND MONDAY
IS GOING TO BE A PRETTY FULL
DAY WITH PUBLIC SAFETY AND CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND TUESDAY
WILL BE INTERESTING. BOTH
THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING ON
TUESDAY ARE NOT NORMAL. WE ARE
NOT STANDARD OF THE PAST.
NUMBER ONE, WE HAVE NOT IN THAT
PAST HAVING TO MEET WITH THE
BUDGET COMMITTEE. IT'S BEEN A
SEPARATE MEETING THAT WE JUST
REPORTED OUT AT THE SELECT
BUDGET MEETING. I HEARD THE
BUDGET REFORM PROCESS CHOICE OF
HAVING US ALL HERE, SO WE ALL
HAVE EQUAL ACCESS TO THIS
INFORMATION. AND THEY WILL BE
COMING TO BRING US WHAT
AMENDMENTS WOULD BE
IMPLEMENTED. ANYTHING IN THE
GOOD OF THE ORDER TODAY?
>> JUST REAL QUICK THAT'S
UPCOMING. WE ARE STILL WORKING
ON THE LOGISTICS OF THAT. SO
YOU'RE AWARE. THE FOUR VOTING
MEMBERS OF THE FORECAST COUNCIL
AND VERY LITTLE FOR THEM TO
VOTE ON IN THOSE MEETINGS,
WHERE THEY DO NOT ACTUALLY VOTE
TO APPROVE THE FORECAST. THEY
WOULD VOTE TO MAKE -- THE
FORECAST DIRECTOR WILL MAKE THE
RECOMMENDATION AND IT IS ONLY
IF THE COUNCIL WANTS TO
OVERRIDE THAT RECOMMENDATION
THAT THEY WOULD REQUIRE THE
VOTE. AND ALL TO SAY EXCEPT FOR
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS AND
COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON, THE
REST OF YOU ARE NOT VOTING
MEMBERS WITH THE COMMITTEE. AND
SO IT'S UNUSUAL. BUT THE REAL
GOAL IS TO HAVE YOU THERE TO BE
ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS OF THE
FORECAST TEAM AND PER MY
SUGGESTION, COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES, ABOUT ASKING ABOUT
CONSTRUCTION FORECAST. AGAIN, I
JUST WANT TO SAY THERE WILL BE
MORE OF THIS TO COME. CLEARLY
THERE WILL BE AN UPSIDE ON THIS
AND TO THE LOGISTICS IF YOU
WILL.
>> YES, WE MAY OPEN THE
FORECAST COUNCIL WITH THE
FORECAST MEMBERS SITTING AROUND
THE TABLE. THIS IS GOOD
GOVERNANCE IN MY OPINION,
INCREASING TRANSPARENCY. SO
WITH THAT, I HOPE YOU ALL HAVE
A WONDERFUL AFTERNOON. WE'VE
REACHED THE END OF THE MEETING
AND AGENDA, AND THE NEXT BUDGET
COMMITTEE MEETING IS FRIDAY,
OCTOBER 19. ONLY WRITTEN PUBLIC
COMMENT WILL BE ACCEPTED.
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY
CONSIDER TO WRITE AT
SEATTLE.GOV. IS THERE ANY
FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE
THE SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE
BEFORE WE ADJOURN? HEARING NO
FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE
THE SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE
HEARING, WE'RE ADJOURNED. IT
IS 3:10 P.M. THANK YOU.