‎GOOD MORNING. THE SELECT
BUDGET COMMITTEE WILL COME TO
ORDER. IT IS NOVEMBER 13th
2024. WILL THE -- PLEASE CALL
THE ROW?
‎COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
‎HERE.
‎COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
‎PRESENT.
‎COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
‎PRESENT.
‎TODAY, WE HAVE A HEARING ON
THE MEMORIAL STADIUM
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. WE HAVE
A PRESENTATION OF BUDGET
LEGISLATION, INCLUDING GROUPS
A, B, C, AND D, INCLUDING
CONSENT AMENDMENTS AS PRESENTED
ON THE BALANCING PACKAGE ON
OCTOBER 30th. HER POST
AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED ON
NOVEMBER 1st, AND LEGISLATION
GENERATING ADDITIONAL REVENUE
SURFACE -- SOURCES. HEARING NO
OBJECTION, THE AGENDA IS
ADOPTED. I JUST HAD A BRIEF
OVERVIEW OF THE AGENDA AND VERY
TECHNICAL TERMS. I'M GOING TO
SAY IT IN MORE PLAIN LANGUAGE
FOR US, AND THEN WE ARE GOING
TO GET MOVING. TODAY, WE HAVE
TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF PUBLIC
COMMENT. WE HAD A PUBLIC
HEARING THAT WAS NOTICED IN THE
NEWSPAPERS OF RECORD FOR THE
LAST 30 DAYS REGARDING THE
MEMORIAL STADIUM REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT. WE WILL THEN MOVE INTO
VERBAL PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK
YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE LESS
THAN 12 HOURS AGO, RECEIVING
PUBLIC COMMENT, AS WELL. WE
WILL HAVE A PRESENTATION -- IT
IS AN OVERVIEW OVER THE NEXT
FEW DAYS. TODAY, THERE ARE ZERO
VOTES. WE WILL NOT BE VOTING ON
ANYTHING TODAY. TODAY IS
INFORMATIONAL ONLY. IN THIS
PART OF THE BUDGET, WE ARE DEAD
SET IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR TWO
LONGEST DAYS, HAVING THE
HEARING LAST NIGHT AND THE
OVERVIEW TODAY. FROM HERE, WE
WILL TURN OVER SOME OF THE MORE
DIFFICULT DAYS, BUT NOT AS
LONG. WE ARE DOING NO FLOATS.
WE WILL LOOK AT OTHER BUDGET
REGISTRATION. THE PAYROLL
EXPENSE TEXT LEGISLATION FOR
MYSELF. WE WILL REVIEW THE
CONSENT CALENDAR. THOSE ARE
ITEMS IN GROUP A THAT WERE IN
THE PACKAGE. TODAY, WHEN WE GO
OVER THEM, WE WILL ONLY BE
TALKING ABOUT THE CHANGES SINCE
THE SHARES PACKAGE. WE WILL
HAVE THESE IN GROUPS LABELED BY
DEPARTMENTS. I WILL ASK
COLLEAGUES FOR YOU TO HOLD
QUESTIONS UNTIL WE GET THROUGH
THE ENTIRE DEPARTMENT, AND
THEN, AT THAT POINT, WE CAN GO
BACK TO INDIVIDUAL CBAS WITHIN
THAT DEPARTMENT. FROM THERE, WE
WILL BRIEF GROUPS B, C, AND D.
IF YOU ARE THE SPONSOR, I WILL
TURN IT OVER TO YOU. YOU HAVE A
BRIEF INTRODUCTION FROM CENTRAL
STAFF COME AND THEN I WILL TURN
IT OVER TO YOU, COLLEAGUES, IF
YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING
TO ASK THEM. OR IF YOU WOULD
LIKE TO HOLD YOUR QUESTIONS FOR
ONE-ON-ONE SESSIONS WITH
CENTRAL STAFF, WE WILL MAKE
SURE THAT WE ARE OUT BY FIVE.
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE HAS A
MEETING TO GO TO AT 5:00. I
ALSO HAVE AN OPEN HOUSE AT
5:00. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, I
WISH THESE THE PERMITS WOULD
CHECK THE SCHEDULE, BUT HERE WE
ARE. AND SO, YOU CAN SPEAK AS
LONG AS YOU WANT, BUT PLEASE
HOLD YOUR COMMENTS AND
QUESTIONS IF POSSIBLE BECAUSE
YOU HAVE SEEN THE LIST. WE HAVE
A LONG LIST TO GET THROUGH
TODAY. WHEN WE MOVE INTO THE
NEXT FEW DAYS, THE STATUS
TODAY. WE ARE DOING THE
OVERVIEW. WHEN WE GET INTO
TOMORROW, WE WILL BE VOTING
GROUPS LETTER A AND B. WE WILL
BE GOING THROUGH THE VOTING.
THE BALANCING PACKAGE --
MEMBERS, IF YOU WANT TO PULL AN
ITEM OUT OF THE CONSENT
PACKAGE, YOU ARE FREE TO DO SO.
YOU DO NOT NEED TO PULL AN ITEM
OUT TO SPEAK TO IT. SO WHEN WE
VOTE ON GROUP 8 TOMORROW, IF
THERE IS AN ITEM THAT YOU WANT
TO SPEAK TO, YOU CAN SPEAK TO
IT. WHEN WE START PULLING ITEMS
OUT, IF WE HAVE TO VOTE
AFFIRMATIVELY FOR 150 ITEMS, WE
ARE GOING TO BE HERE FOR A
REALLY LONG TIME. SO IT IS AN
OPERATIONAL PROCESS. AGAIN, YOU
CAN PULL ITEMS UP FOR
INDIVIDUAL VOTES. WE WILL THEN
GO TO GROUP B. GROUP C IS
GENERAL CONSENSUS. THEY
COULD'VE BEEN IN GROUP A, BUT
WE DIDN'T GET THEM INTO THE
SHARES PACKAGE. AGAIN, THE
SPONSOR WILL SPEAK TO THE ITEM.
THIS IS GROUP C, WHERE WE
RESERVE MORE TIME FOR MORE
ROBUST DISCUSSION. TOMORROW, WE
WILL GROUP -- VOTE ON GROUP A
AND B AND C. IF WE ARE NOT
VOTING ON GROUP D BY 3:00 P.M.,
I WILL HOLD IT FOR FRIDAY. I
CAN TELL YOU, IT CAN GET
EXHAUSTING UP HERE VOTING FOR
THAT MANY HOURS. FOR GROUP D, I
WOULD LIKE US TO BE AS FRESH
AND READY TO GO. WE HAVE TWO
BUSINESS DAYS TO VOTE ON ALL OF
THESE ITEMS. IT MAY GO FAST. IT
MAY GO SLOW. WE WILL TAKE IT AS
IT COMES. COLLEAGUES, ANY
QUESTIONS ON THE SHARES REPORT?
LET'S MOVE INTO THE PUBLIC
HEARING. THE SELECT BUDGET
COMMITTEE WILL OPEN THE
HEARING. IF YOU HAVE GENERAL
COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED
BUDGET, THOSE COMMENTS WILL BE
ACCEPTED AT THE CONCLUSION OF
THIS HEARING. CLERK, HOW MANY
SPEAKERS ARE SET UP TO ADDRESS
THAT MEMORIAL STADIUM
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT?
‎I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE
IS ONE -- THERE IS ONE THING I
WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY. DARCY,
THE REMOTE SPEAKER. OTHER THAN
THAT, NO ONE IN PERSON.
‎GOOD MORNING, DARCY. IF YOU
COULD PRESS START SIX TO
UNMUTE. ARE YOU HERE TO SPEAK
ABOUT THAT MEMORIAL STADIUM
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT OR FOR
GENERAL COMMENTS?
‎[ INAUDIBLE ]
‎THANK YOU. WE WILL COME BACK
TO YOU IN A MOMENT.
‎SEEING AS THERE ARE NO
SPEAKERS PRESENT FOR THIS
HEARING, THE HEARING ON THE
MEMORIAL STADIUM REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT IS NOW CLOSED. THANK
YOU, COLLEAGUES. WE ARE GOING
TO MOVE INTO THE OPEN HYBRID
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. CLERK,
HOW MANY FOLKS DO WE HAVE
SIGNED UP TODAY?
‎SORRY. FOUR IN PERSON AND
TENT REMOTE.
‎THANK YOU. WE ARE GOING TO
TAKE GROUPS OF 10. WE WILL DO
IN PERSON FIRST. AND THEN WE
WILL MOVE TO THE GROUP ONLINE.
IN PERSON, YOU CAN STAND UP AT
BOTH PODIUMS AND ALTERNATE. WE
HAVE BRIAN, JASON, ALEX, AND
HALLIE. BRIAN, WELCOME.
‎GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU,
COUNCIL. I WANT TO THANK YOU
FOR YOUR SERVICE FOR COMING
BACK SO SOON FOR SOMEONE THAT
HAS EXPERIENCE. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR SERVICE LAST NIGHT, AND
TONIGHT, AND TODAY. I AM HERE
TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE
S.D.O.T. GROUP. ONE OF MY
COLLEAGUES SPOKE LAST NIGHT. I
WILL HAVE SOME ABBREVIATED
REMARKS SIMILAR TO HERS. I WANT
TO REITERATE THAT WE STRONGLY
URGE COUNCIL TO SUPPORT THIS.
WE URGE YOU STRONGLY TO
PRIORITIZE THESE INVESTMENTS,
ESPECIALLY FOR OUR MOST
VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES,
INCLUDING LOW INCOME, BIPOC,
IMMIGRANT REFUGEES, AND
UNHOUSED AND ASIAN COMMUNITIES.
PERSONALLY SPEAKING, SOMEONE
WHO WORKS WITH INDIVIDUALS AND
FAMILIES IN THE COMMUNITY, WITH
TRANSITION EQUITY OPTIONS -- IT
IS SOME OF THE GREATEST
DETERMINATES FOR THEM TO GET
HOUSING, PARTICULARLY IN THEIR
JOB SEARCH OR HOUSING SEARCH.
WE REALLY APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW,
PROGRAMS SUCH AS THE NISPP. WE
WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR
CLOSE ATTENTION TO THOSE
PROGRAMS. AS MY COLLEAGUE
MENTIONED EARLIER, FACETS LIKE
LANGUAGE ACCESSIBILITY,
FACE-TO-FACE ENGAGEMENT AND
DATA-DRIVEN DECISIONS ARE WHAT
WE FEEL ARE IMPORTANT
CONSIDERATIONS. WE APPRECIATED
THE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE PUBLIC
COMMENT, TO GIVE FEEDBACK, TO
WORK WITH THE COUNCIL, MAYOR
HARRELL, AND S.D.O.T. ON THIS
BUDGET. WE LOOK FORWARD TO
ADVOCATING FOR MORE ASPORTATION
ACCESSIBILITY AND INFORMATION
TRANSPARENCY. WE HOPE THAT YOU
WOULD WORK TOGETHER WITH
S.D.O.T. TO MAKE SURE THE
BUDGET CAN BE IMPLEMENTED
SMOOTHLY IN A TIMELY MANNER.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
‎THANK YOU, BRIAN.
‎NEXT UP IS JASON. GOOD
MORNING, JASON.
‎GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS
JASON AUSTIN PRUITT PROGRAM
DIRECTOR AT THE NIELS
PARTNERSHIP COALITION. I AM
HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF
INVESTING IN SEATTLE MEAL
PROGRAMS. I WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH AND
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS FOR
SUPPORTING THESE AMENDMENTS. I
ALSO WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE FOR
PROPOSING A CAPITAL GAINS TAX.
THEY ARE THE FRONT LINE OF
DEFENSE AGAINST HUNGER IN
SEATTLE. OUR 45 MEMBER
ORGANIZATIONS PRODUCE OVER 4
MILLION READY TO EAT MEALS
EVERY YEAR. OUR MEMBERS INCLUDE
ORGANIZATIONS SUCH AS THE
SENIOR CENTER, THE CITY MY
FIND, AND CULTIVATE SOUTH PARK.
EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD IN SEATTLE
CONTAINS AT LEAST ONE MEAL
PROGRAM THAT WILL BENEFIT FROM
THESE INVESTMENTS. THIS WILL
HELP OUR MEMBERS STAY AFLOAT.
THIS YEAR, SEATTLE MEAL
PROGRAMS THAT MISSED A INCREASE
IN DEMAND. THIS COULD NOT HAVE
COME AT A WORSE TIME AS FEDERAL
FUNDING FOR HUNGER RELIEF
PROGRAMS ARE NOW IN SERIOUS
JEOPARDY. WHEN PEOPLE ARE
UNABLE TO FEED THEMSELVES AND
THEIR FAMILIES, THEY WILL
RESORT TO WHATEVER MEANS
NECESSARY TO GET THEIR NEXT
MEAL. MEAL PROGRAMS PROVIDE
STABILITY AND STRUCTURE TO
PEOPLE THAT WOULD OTHERWISE
CYCLE THROUGH THE MEDICAL AND
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AT
GREAT EXPENSE TO TAXPAYERS.
AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR FUNDING
BOTH CAPITAL AND OPERATIONS
FUNDING SUPPORT FOR MEAL
PROGRAMS. THESE MODEST
INVESTMENTS IN FOOD SECURITY
WILL HELP CREATE A SEATTLE THAT
IS SAFE AND WELCOMING TO ALL.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
‎THANK YOU.
‎UP NEXT IS ALEX, FOLLOWED BY
HALLIE.
‎ALEX, WELCOME.
‎HELLO. GOOD MORNING,
COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME IS
ALEX. I AM THE KITCHEN MANAGER
AT CHIEF SEATTLE CLUB. I'M
HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF
INVESTING IN SEATTLE MEAL
PROGRAMS. I WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH AND
STRAUSS FOR SUPPORTING
AMENDMENTS DSH4 AND 10. I WANT
TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER MOORE
FOR PROPOSING A TAX. THIS HAS
ALLOWED CHIEF SEATTLE CLUB TO
PURCHASE FOOD AND AMOUNTS WE
NEED. BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE
THIS IS IMPORTANT, BOTH
CULTURALLY AND HEALTHWISE. IT
BRINGS OUR PEOPLE TOGETHER, AND
IT IS IMPORTANT TO KEEP
TRADITIONAL MEALS ALIVE AND IN
OUR DIETS. WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO
REPLACE AND PURCHASE NEW
KITCHEN EQUIPMENT THAT KEEPS US
RUNNING SMOOTHLY WITH LARGE
NUMBERS OF MEMBERS SERVED
DAILY. THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH'S
PROPOSAL TO INVEST IN MEAL
PROGRAMS LIKE OURS. SO WE CAN
CONTINUE TO MEET THE NEEDS OF
EVERYONE WHO CALLS SEATTLE
HOME. THANK YOU, GUYS.
‎THANK YOU. HALLIE, WELCOME.
‎GOOD MORNING,
COUNCILMEMBERS. LONG TIME NO
SEE. MY NAME IS HALLIE WILLIS.
I'M THE MANAGER FOR THE
COALITION ON HOMELESSNESS. I'M
A RENTER IN DISTRICT 6. I WANT
TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER MORALES
HOLLINGSWORTH, AND MOORE. THOSE
SERVICES ARE ESSENTIAL TO KEEP
PEOPLE HOUSED AND RESOLVE
ISSUES BEFORE SOMEONE LOSES
THEIR HOUSING. THESE ARE SOME
OF THE MOST COST-EFFECTIVE
TOOLS WE HAVE TO PREVENT
HOMELESSNESS. PLEASE VOTE YES
ON SDCI 002 AND SDCI 005. IT IS
ESSENTIAL WE GROW THOSE
INVESTMENTS. BUT NOT AT THE
EXPENSE OF ALREADY MODEST
TENANT SERVICE INVESTMENTS.
COUNCIL SHOULD AVOID CARVING
THOSE FUNDS OUT OF TENANT
SERVICES AND VOTE NO ON HSD 331
TO KEEP THOSE SERVICES WHOLE.
THE CITY NEEDS TO ENSURE THAT
RENTAL ASSISTANCE AND TENANT
SERVICES ARE CONNECTED, SO THAT
PEOPLE ACCESSING TENANT
SERVICES THROUGH
COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS
CAN GET ACCESS TO RENTAL
ASSISTANCE FUNDING TO KEEP THEM
HOUSED. WE ALSO RECOMMEND THAT
YOU AVOID LIMITING LEGAL
DEFENSE TO PEOPLE AT OR BELOW
200% OF FEDERAL POVERTY. THAT
IS ABOUT $30,000 PER YEAR. THAT
IS AN OUTDATED METRIC THAT
DOESN'T REFLECT THE EXTREMELY
HIGH COST OF LIVING IN THIS
CITY. IF WE WANT TO PREVENT
HOMELESSNESS, WE NEED TO EXPAND
THESE SERVICES, NOT RESTRICT
THEM. PLEASE VOTE NO ON THE
PROVISO THAT WOULD LIMIT THESE
SERVICES. THANK YOU.
‎THANK YOU. WE WILL NOW MOVE
ON TO ONLINE PUBLIC COMMENT. WE
DO HAVE A PARTICIPANT,
PATRICIA, WHO IS LISTED NOT
PRESENT. PATRICIA, PLEASE CALL
IN NOW. WE HAVE NOW 11 FOLKS
WHO HAVE SIGNED UP ONLINE. AND
SO, PATRICIA, YOU HAVE ABOUT 20
MINUTES RIGHT NOW UNTIL WE WILL
CALL ON YOU. YOU'RE GOING TO
MOVE THROUGH THIS. I WILL CALL
EVERYONE IN THE ORDER IN WHICH
THEY ARE REGISTERED AND THEN WE
WILL GO ONE BY ONE. WE WILL
FIRST HAVE ALBERTO ALVAREZ.
ALLEN GREENE, PATRICIA BOWEN,
IF SHE CALLS IN. I SAID THAT
WRONG -- DARCY , KATE, AND BJ.
WITH THAT, STARTING WITH
ALBERTO ALVAREZ, I SEE YOU ARE
ON MUTE, ALBERTO. THANK YOU.
WELCOME. GOOD MORNING.
‎GOOD MORNING. AFFORDABLE
HOUSING, WORKER PROTECTIONS,
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE. COUNCIL,
YOU KNOW THE SPIEL BY NOW. BUT
I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO
POINT OUT HOW WELL THE BUDGET
MEETINGS HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED.
WHEN THE PUBLIC IS ALLOWED TO
SPEAK, TRUE GOVERNANCE IS
ACHIEVED. RESPECT IS EARNED,
AND OUT OF ALL THE MEETINGS I
FOLLOWED, IT IS CLEARLY PROVEN
THAT PEOPLE WILL MAINTAIN ORDER
AS LONG AS THEY KNOW THEY WILL
BE HEARD. TO BUDGET CHAIR
STRAUSS, WELL DONE. TO
COUNCILMEMBERS HOLLINGSWORTH,
MOORE, SAKA, AND STRAUSS,
PLEASE WORK TOGETHER, REACH
OUT, AND PARTNER UP ON A BUDGET
THAT WILL BUILD HOUSING,
PROTECT WORKERS, AND BRING IN
THE REVENUE NEEDED TO BUILD A
CITY FOR THE WORKING CLASS.
THANK YOU, AND HAVE A GOOD DAY.
‎THANK YOU. NEXT IS
SALISTINE. I SEE YOU ARE HERE.
STAR 62 ON MUTE. -- UNMUTE.
‎I MANAGE A TENANT SERVICES
PROGRAM. I WANT TO THANK THE
COUNCIL, ESPECIALLY
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, MOORE,
AND HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR THEIR
EFFORT TO FULLY FUND TENANT
SERVICES. WHEN TENANT SERVICES
ARE FULLY FUNDED, WE CAN HELP
THEM RESOLVE ISSUES BEFORE THEY
REACH [ INAUDIBLE ] HE WAS
QUESTIONING WHY THEIR LANDLORD
WAS INSISTING THEY MOVE OUT.
THEY DID NOT WANT TO PAY FOR
THE LODGING AND INCREASE THE
RENT WITHOUT ISSUING EIGHT 180
DAY NOTICE. OUR COUNSELOR
EDUCATED THIS COLOR ON RIGHTS
THEY WERE NOT AWARE OF AND
HELPS THEM AVOID A POTENTIAL
FUTURE EVICTION NOTICE. IN
2023, OVER 1700 MENTORS IN
SEATTLE AND KING COUNTY GOT
SUPPORT FROM OUR PROGRAM AT
SOLID GROUND. WITH MORE PEOPLE
HOMELESS IN OUR CITY THAN EVER
BEFORE, AND WITH INTEREST RATES
AT HISTORIC HIGHS, WE NEED
TENANT SERVICES PROGRAMS TO BE
FULLY FUNDED. PLEASE SUPPORT
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES'S
AMENDMENT. THANK YOU FOR
CONSIDERING OUR COMMENTS.
‎THANK YOU, SALISTINE. UP
NEXT IS ANKUR . I SEE YOU ARE
HERE NOW, ANKUR. STAR SIX TO ON
MUTE. THANK YOU. WELCOME.
‎GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS --
ANKUR.
‎THIS WILL DELIVER SAFETY
IMPROVEMENTS FOR ALL USERS AND
RELIABILITY IMPROVEMENTS FOR
TRANSPORTATION USERS ALONG THE
CORRIDOR. CURVE EXTENSIONS --
THESE ARE PROVEN TOOLS AND THE
CITY SHOULD CONTINUE TO
IMPLEMENT THEM. ROUTE 40 IS THE
TYPE OF PROJECT THAT SEATTLE
SHOULD DELIVER MORE OF TO MEET
CLIMATE COMMITMENTS. I WOULD
LIKE TO SUPPORT THAT USE OF
AUTOMATED CAMERA ENFORCEMENT
REVENUE, BACK INTO TRAFFIC
SAFETY, INSTEAD OF AS AN
INDEFINITE FUNDING SOURCE FOR
OTHER PROJECTS. THE GOAL SHOULD
BE TO MAKE OUR STREETS SAFE BY
DESIGN AND INFRASTRUCTURE AND
REMOVE THE RELIANCE ON
AUTOMATED ENFORCEMENT. THANK
YOU.
‎THANK YOU. NEXT, ALAN. ALAN,
I SEE ARE HERE. STAR SIX TO
UNMUTE. I SEE YOU ARE OFF MUTE.
WELCOME.
‎HI. MY NAME IS ELLEN CRANE.
I AM A DISTRICT 3 RESIDENT. ON
BEHALF OF THE FIRST HILL, I
WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THIS
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU ALL
AND THANK COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH FOR HER PROPOSAL
TO INCLUDE CRITICAL MAINTENANCE
FUNDING IN THE BUDGET FOR FIRST
HILL PARK. THIS PARK IS A
CENTRAL GREEN SPACE IN ONE OF
THE NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE OPEN
SPACES ARE INCREDIBLY LIMITED.
EVERY SQUARE FOOT OF GREEN
SPACE MATTERS TO THIS
COMMUNITY. FIRST HILL PARK WENT
THROUGH A COMMUNITY REMODEL
INTO THE CENTENNIAL, TESTAMENT
TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS CARE AND
COMMITMENT TO THIS PARK.
WITHOUT FUNDING FOR
MAINTENANCE, THAT INVESTMENT IS
NOW AT RISK. WITHOUT REGULAR
UPKEEP, THE PARK CAN BECOME
QUICKLY UNUTILIZED. IT CAN
CREATE UNSANITARY CONDITIONS
FOR ALL. TO BE CLEAR, MEETING
THE PARK IS NOT JUST ABOUT
KEEPING IT PRETTY. IT IS ABOUT
KEEPING IT ACTIVATED AND SAFE.
PLEASE HELP US IN CREATING THIS
ENVIRONMENT. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
‎THANK YOU. PATRICIA BOWEN IS
NOT PRESENT. WE WILL MOVE ON TO
[ INAUDIBLE ] . I SEE YOU ARE
OFF MUTE. WELCOME.
‎HI, EVERYONE. GOOD MORNING.
I AM THE DIRECTOR AT ASIAN
COUNSELING. WE ARE URGING
COUNCIL TO INVEST IN OUR
CITY'S MOST VULNERABLE
COMMUNITIES. WITH MORE CLIENTS
AND COMMUNITIES ON THE STREET
THAN EVER, WE ASK COUNCIL TO
APPROVE THE [ INAUDIBLE ]
PENTKE MIKE GOODING 62%
INVESTMENT IN AFFORDABLE
HOUSING. WE NEED TO INVEST IN
STRUCTURES THAT SUPPORT OUR
UNHOUSED, INCLUDING INCREASING
RENTAL ASSISTANCE, RESTRAINT
TENANT SUPPORTS COME AND
FUNDING 300 SHELTER BEDS, DAY
CENTERS, AND REHOUSING
SERVICES. WE HAVE SEEN FUNDING
FOR GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE
PREVENTION. [ INAUDIBLE ] WHO
ARE VULNERABLE TO TRAFFIC AND
VIOLENCE ARE VERY HIGH. WHILE
WE RECOGNIZE THAT WE ARE FACING
MAJOR DEFICITS, WE ARE ALSO
TRYING TO CHOOSE BETWEEN
ESSENTIAL SERVICES THAT ARE
COMMITTEE MEMBERS NEED. THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION.
‎THANK YOU. UP NEXT IS
PHONIKA. MY APOLOGIES FOR
GETTING YOUR NAME WRONG. I SEE
YOU ARE OFF MUTE. WELCOME.
‎GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU.
WELCOME COUNCILMEMBERS AND
CHAIR STRAUSS. I APPRECIATE THE
EFFORT. MY NAME IS PHONIKA
JOHN. MY COLLEAGUE, PATRICIA
BOWEN, WHO MANAGES THE BENEFITS
LEGAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM THE
SITE HAD TO STEP AWAY. SHE
WANTED TO THANK THE COUNCIL FOR
RESTORING FUNDS FOR LEGAL
SERVICES FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE
TRYING TO ACCESS PUBLIC
BENEFITS, AND WE HOPE THAT YOU
ALL WILL FINALIZE THOSE IN THE
CONSENT PACKAGE. WE WANTED TO
SHARE SOME GRATITUDE TO
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES AND MOORE
AND HOLLINGSWORTH . WE ASK THAT
THE COUNCIL SUPPORT THIS
AMENDMENT THAT KEEPS SERVICES
WHOLE. AND REJECT THE AMENDMENT
TO TAKE FUNDING AWAY FROM THESE
SERVICES TO FUND RENTAL
ASSISTANCE. AS YOU HEARD FROM
ANOTHER COMMENTOR, FROM HER
SERVICES PROGRAM, RENTAL
ASSISTANCE IS CRUCIAL. WE
SUPPORT THOSE INVESTMENTS. IN
TENANT SERVICE PROGRAMS CAN
HELP PEOPLE NEEDING RENTAL
ASSISTANCE -- IN THE FIRST
PLACE. WE THINK THAT THIS IS AN
IMPORTANT THING AT A TIME WHEN
WE ARE GOING TO EXPECT MORE
RENTERS STRUGGLING. LASTLY, WE
WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU ALL TO
HOLD OFF ON MAKING PERMANENT
POLICY CHANGES DURING THE
BUDGET PROCESS. NUMEROUS
COMMUNITY GROUPS HAVE WORKED
WITH US. WITH SUCH A MAJOR
CHANGE TO SUCH A MAJOR REVENUE
STREAM, WE HOPE THERE IS A MORE
THOROUGH THE COLDER INVESTMENT
PROCESS. I WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE FOR
INTRODUCING THE CAPITAL GAINS
TAX AND RECOGNIZING THE NEED
FOR MORE PROGRESSIVE REVENUE TO
FUND CRITICAL SERVICES. THANK
YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR YOUR HARD
WORK DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS.
AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING
WITH YOU.
‎THANK YOU. UP NEXT IS
PAULINA. PAULINA, I SEE YOU ARE
HERE. PRESS START SIX -- STAR
SIX TO UNMUTE.
‎ON TO TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET.
[ INAUDIBLE ] COULD LOSE
100,000 IN ANNUAL FUNDING.
GENERALLY, THERE ARE 1600
PROJECTS OVER THE NEXT TWO
YEARS. IT CONTINUES TO BE A TOP
ISSUE FOR VOTERS AND RESIDENTS
IN POLL AFTER POLL. I URGE
COUNCIL MEMBERS TO KEEP THAT IN
MIND AND TO PROTECT THE
JUMPSTART FUND PLAN. EVERYONE
IN OUR CITY HAS THE ABILITY TO
STAY HERE, LIVE, AND WORK.
THANK YOU.
‎THANK YOU, PAULINA. UP NEXT
IS DARCY. DARCY, WELCOME. I SEE
YOU ARE OFF MUTE.
‎GOOD MORNING, CITY COUNCIL.
MY NAME IS DARCY. I AM
CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. I AM A
RENTER IN DISTRICT 3. I AM PART
OF THE COALITION. I AM HERE TO
SPEAK IN FAVOR OF INVESTING IN
THE SEATTLE MEALS PROGRAM. I'M
THANKFUL FOR COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH AND STRAUSS , WHO
HAVE SUPPORTED AMENDMENTS 4 AND
10, WHICH PROVIDES FUNDING FOR
THE BUDGET. I WOULD ALSO LIKE
TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER MOORE
FOR PROPOSING THE CAPITAL GAINS
TAX. NEW REVENUE SOURCES ARE SO
NEEDED. THIS PROPOSED FUNDING
IS CRITICAL TO PROGRAMS, BIG
AND SMALL. IN COALITION
MEETINGS, IT IS PAINFULLY CLEAR
THAT WE ARE SERVING MORE MEALS
AND DOING IT WITH LESS
FINANCIAL SUPPORT THAN EVER.
MANY OF US ARE FACING THE
SOBERING DECISION OF LETTING
OUR NEIGHBORS GO WITHOUT MEALS.
AT HUNGER INTERVENTION
PROGRAMS, WE ARE STRUGGLING TO
KEEP OUR SENIOR MEALS PROGRAM
MONEY. THIS REACHES OUR MOST
VULNERABLE, OFTEN HOMEBOUND [
INAUDIBLE ] COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
SEATTLE IS STRONG ENOUGH TO
SUPPORT EVERY CITIZEN. THIS
FUNDING HELPS MAKE THAT A
REALITY. THERE ARE SERIOUS
FUNDING GAPS FOR COMMUNITY
MEMBERS. FUNDING LIKE THIS GOES
FORWARD WITH A MEAL PROGRAM.
FUNDING LIKE THIS MAKES SEATTLE
A SAFER AND STRONGER PLACE FOR
EVERY COMMUNITY MEMBER. THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY
TO SPEAK TODAY.
‎THANK YOU, DARCY. NEXT IS
KENNY, FOLLOWED BY BJ. KATE, I
SEE YOU ARE HERE. STAR SIX TO
UNMUTE..
‎I AM THE CO-EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR. I WOULD LIKE TO THINK
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES , MOORE,
AND'S WORTH FOR RESTORING
FUNDING. DUE TO THE CONFUSING
WAY THESE SERVICES WERE
COMBINED, ANOTHER $527,000 IS
NEEDED TO RESTORE THE FUNDING
AND HAVE THE IMPACT THE
AMENDMENT INTENSE. I URGE THE
COUNCIL TO SUPPORT THIS
AMENDMENT AND EXPLORE
ADDITIONAL EFFORTS TO FULLY
RESTORE SERVICES TO 24 LEVELS
AND REJECT [ INAUDIBLE ] UNDER
SDCI TO HSC. THEY SHOULD NOT BE
PITTED AGAINST EACH OTHER.
BECAUSE SDCI IS MANAGING A
TENANT SERVICES CONTRACT, TO
REDUCE OVERLAP AND ENSURE THAT
RENTAL ASSISTANCE IS USED
EFFECTIVELY, IT SHOULD BE
DISTRIBUTED BY THE SAME
DEPARTMENT. I OPPOSE PROVISO
SDCI 006A. IT REQUIRES INCOME
VERIFICATION REPORTING. IT
WOULD CREATE A BENEFITS [
INAUDIBLE ] . THEY ARE SPENDING
MORE THAN HALF THEIR INCOME ON
RENT. GIVEN THAT IT IS 45%
HIGHER, AND HAVING 112% HIGHER
THAN THE NATIONAL AVERAGE,
BASED ON FEDERAL INCOME LIMITS,
IT IS A DISREGARD FOR THE
REALITY THAT SEATTLE RENTERS
FACE. FINALLY, WHILE I
UNDERSTAND THE ROLE OF THE
PAYROLL TAX AND BALANCING THE
BUDGET, I URGE AGAINST MAKING A
PERMANENT FIX TO THE FUND
SHORTFALL. PLEASE REJECT
PROPOSALS TO [ INAUDIBLE ] THIS
PLAN. EXPLORE OTHER OPTIONS AND
COULD INCRIMINATE WITHOUT
DIVERTING FUNDS FROM EEI. THANK
YOU, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
‎THANK YOU, KATE.
‎NEXT, WE HAVE BJ . WELCOME,
BJ. GOOD MORNING.
‎GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS BJ.
I AM A CHICKS -- D6 HOMEOWNER.
I'M DISAPPOINTED WITH THE WAY
THAT COUNCIL IS TRYING TO USE
THIS BUDGET TO ADVANCE POLICY
ITEMS THAT FELL DURING THE
YEAR, LIKE THE ATTEMPT TO GUT
MINIMUM WAGE FOR GIG WORKERS.
THIS DOES THAT BY DEFUNDING
OLS, OFFICE OF LABOR STANDARDS.
THAT SHOWS WHAT VITAL WORK THEY
ARE DOING TO KEEP -- WELL, TO
FIGHT CRIME. WAGE THEFT IS
CRIME, EVEN THOUGH ALL DON'T
REFER TO IT AS MUCH. IT SHOULD
BE GETTING EXPENDED TO HELP
PEOPLE GET THEIR PAY AND GET --
STAY HOUSED. THIS EFFECTIVELY
CUTS RETRO PRODUCTIONS, WHICH
COUNCIL TALKED ABOUT DOING
EARLIER THIS YEAR BUT THE
BUDGET DOES THAT BY CUTTING
TENANT SERVICES, AND MAKING
EVICTION DEFENSE PRETTY MUCH
UNAVAILABLE BY PUTTING IN
INCOME REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE
CERTAINLY LOW FOR THE CITY OF
SEATTLE. I WOULD URGE COUNCIL,
IF THEY DON'T WANT TO ROLL
BACK TENANT PROTECTIONS, TO DO
WITH THE LAST CALLER LAID OUT
IN TERMS OF WHICH AMENDMENT'S
TO ACCEPT, AND WHICH TO REJECT.
THE FEW CUTS TO OLS AND TENANT
EXPENSE ARE NOT DUE UNTIL LACK
OF FUNDS. AT THE SAME TIME, SPD
IS GETTING 2.5 MILLION FOR
GHOST COMPS. [ INAUDIBLE ] YOU
CAN SEE IT IF YOU LOOK AT THE
MEMOS FROM THIS RYAN LESTER.
THIS YEAR'S COST OF THE CUP IS
$183,000. LAST YEAR, IT WAS
142,000 WHILE WE ARE CUTTING
PAY AND NOT GIVING HUMAN
SERVICE WORKERS PAY, CUTTING
LABOR PROTECTIONS AND TENTATIVE
-- TENANT SERVICES, THOSE COPS
ARE GETTING A MASSIVE RAISE. ON
TOP OF THAT, THAT DOESN'T
COUNT THE MILLIONS THAT SPD
GETS FOUR [ INAUDIBLE ] . THEY
HAVE NO JURISDICTION ON ANY
WATERS, AND THE 9/11 AGENCIES
ALSO DO SEARCH AND RESCUE
THERE, MAKING THEM PURELY --
‎THANK YOU, BJ, AND FEEL FREE
TO EMAIL ANY COMMENTS TO
CANCEL. WE SEE A LATE ARRIVAL
IN OUR PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
MR. DAVID HAYNES. DAVID, YOU
ARE NOT PRESENT RIGHT NOW. I
WILL TRY TO STALL FOR JUST A
SECOND TO SEE IF WE CAN GET
THAT TO COME IN. OTHERWISE,
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO EMAIL YOUR
PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS, AS
WELL AS YOUR GENERAL PUBLIC
COMMENTS TO COUNCIL --
COUNCIL@SEATTLE.GOV.
UNFORTUNATELY, WE NEED TO MOVE
FORWARD. THERE ARE NO
ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS PRESENT. WE
WILL MOVE ON TO THE FIRST ITEM
OF BUSINESS TODAY. I WANT TO
START OUT BY THANKING YOU AND
YOUR TEAM. I WILL HAVE THE
CLERK READ THE ITEM INTO THE
RECORD, BUT WHAT MANY FOLKS
DON'T KNOW IS THAT YOU WORKED
REALLY HARD TO GET THE AGENDA
FOR THESE NEXT FEW DAYS OUT
WITH ENOUGH TIME FOR THE PUBLIC
TO SEE THE AGENDA BEFORE THE
PUBLIC HEARING LAST NIGHT,
WHICH REQUIRED YOU TO WORK OVER
THE WEEKEND AND ON A HOLIDAY. I
JUST WANT TO THANK YOU. YOU
HAVE BEEN GOING NONSTOP SINCE
SEPTEMBER 24th, AND IT IS NOW
NOVEMBER 13th. SO, WITH THAT,
THANK YOU. HAVE THE CLERK READ
THE SHORT TITLE INTO THE
RECORD.
‎AGENDA ITEM 1.
‎I'M GOING TO TURN THIS OVER
TO YOLANDA TO SET THE AGENDA
FOR THE DAY.
‎I'M SO SORRY. I FORGOT.
COLLEAGUES, WE HAVE COFFEE IN
THE GREEN ROOM. THERE ARE CLIFF
BARS. FEEL FREE TO GRAB SOME IF
YOU WANT. IT'S FOR EVERYONE.
BACK TO YOU ALL.
‎GREAT. GOOD MORNING, MEMBERS
OF THE SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE.
I AM YOLANDA HO. I WANT TO
THANK OUR TEAM FOR THEIR
INCREDIBLY HARD WORK OF TURNING
AROUND CLOSE TO 170 BUDGET
AMENDMENTS IN A VERY SHORT
PERIOD OF TIME, AND WORKING
WITH YOU ALL, DEFINITELY, TO
REFLECT THEIR INTENT, AND WE
WILL FACILITATE OUR
CONVERSATION TODAY. WITH THAT,
I WILL TURN TO THE OVERVIEW OF
WHAT IS IN STORE FOR THE
REMAINDER OF THIS WEEK, AND
GOING INTO NEXT WEEK. WE ARE
GOING TO START UP-TO-DATE WITH
TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE ARE
CATEGORIZING AS OTHER BUDGET
LEGISLATION. THIS IS
LEGISLATION THAT IS ON A
SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT TRACK
BECAUSE JUST TIMING ISSUES AND
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS, SO,
TODAY, CENTRAL STAFF WILL BE
DESCRIBING THOSE ITEMS FOR THE
COMMITTEE, AND ALSO,
FACILITATING DISCUSSION THERE.
THOSE ITEMS WILL BE FOR A VOTE
ON TUESDAY -- NEXT TUESDAY, THE
FINAL COMMITTEE MEETING. OF
THIS SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE
BEFORE ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET.
ANY AMENDMENTS TO THOSE PIECES
OF LEGISLATION, THAT WILL BE
PRESENTED AT THE FRONT OF OUR
SERIES OF PRESENTATIONS . IT
NEEDS TO BE SUBMITTED TO
CENTRAL STAFF BY NOON ON
FRIDAY. SO IT IS A QUICK
TURNAROUND. THAT IS WHY WE ARE
PRESENTING THOSE AT THE FRONT
END OF ALL OUR PRESENTATIONS.
NEXT, WE WILL BRIEFLY DESCRIBE
THE BUDGET LEGISLATION THAT HAS
NO PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THAT
WERE TRANSMITTED WITH THE
BUDGET. THIS IS PROPOSED AS A
GESTATION CONSENT CALENDAR.
THEN WE'LL DESCRIBE THOSE
BRIEFLY FOR YOUR AWARENESS, AND
THE INTENT IS TO VOTE ON THOSE
PIECES OF LEGISLATION. NEXT, WE
WILL BE PRESENTING ON BUDGET
LEGISLATION THAT HAS PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS. THERE WILL BE THREE
ITEMS IN THAT CATEGORY. VOTES
WILL BE TAKEN BEGINNING
TOMORROW ON THOSE. FINALLY, OF
COURSE, THERE ARE THE 164
AMENDMENTS TO THE BUDGET
ADOPTION ORDINANCE, AND WE WILL
BE DESCRIBING THOSE TODAY, AND
WE WILL BE VOTING ON THOSE
AMENDMENTS. ONLY THE
AMENDMENTS, TOMORROW, AND
POSSIBLY FRIDAY, IF NEEDED. AND
THEN, THAT WILL BE VOTED ON THE
19th -- ON THE BILL, AS
AMENDED. THAT IS THE PLAN OF
ACTION, AND, AS YOU HAVE NOTED
IN THE AGENDA PACKET, IT IS 164
AMENDMENTS -- THOSE ARE
ORGANIZED INTO GROUPS A, B, C,
AND D. SO, FOR TODAY,
DISCUSSION ONLY. SO I JUST
WANTED TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE
KNOWS. DON'T GET READY TO
VOTE. THAT WILL COMMENCE
TOMORROW, AND WE WILL PROVIDE
SOME BRIEF REMINDERS ON MOTIONS
THAT ARE COMMON DURING BUDGET
COMMITTEE THAT ARE NOT COMMON
DURING OTHER TIMES OF THE YEAR.
WE WILL GIVE YOU A BRIEF
REFRESHER ON SCRIPTING ON THOSE
ITEMS, BUT TODAY, WE ARE JUST
TALKING ABOUT ALL THE STUFF
THAT IS BEFORE YOU ON THE
AGENDA. SO, AS I MENTIONED, WE
WILL BE TALKING ABOUT THE
BUDGET LEGISLATION THAT WILL BE
ULTIMATELY VOTED ON NEXT
TUESDAY. THAT WILL BE OUR FIRST
ROUND OF PRESENTATIONS, AND, WE
WILL NOTE SOME INITIAL
AMENDMENTS IN PARTICULAR TO THE
JUMP START PAYROLL TAX POLICIES
AND ANSWER QUESTIONS AND KIND
OF HELP THE COMMITTEE
DISCUSSION, AND THEN WE WILL
MOVE ON TO THE LEGISLATION
CONSENT CALENDAR, AND THEN GO
ON TO BUDGET LEGISLATION. THE
BUDGET LEGISLATION CONSENT
CALENDAR, AND THEN WE WILL
BRIEFLY DESCRIBED THE GROUP AS
A WHOLE, AND THEN WE WILL
PAUSED AT THE END TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS. AND THEN, WITH THE
BUDGET LEGISLATION, WITH
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, THE FIRST
ONE SHOULD BE VERY SHORT
BECAUSE IT WAS ACTUALLY JUST A
TECHNICAL AMENDMENT THAT WE
NOTED NEEDED TO HAPPEN
YESTERDAY. SO WE HAD TO PULL
THAT ONE OUT OF THE CONSENT
CALENDAR, OTHERWISE, IT
WOULD'VE BEEN INCLUDED BECAUSE
THERE WAS NOTHING SUBSTANTIVE
THERE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
AND THEN, WE WILL MOVE ON TO
DESCRIBING THE AMENDMENTS. THAT
SHOULD BE THE 2025 BUDGET
ADOPTION ORDINANCE, NOT THAT HE
DOESN'T 24, SO, ANYWAY. HERE
WE ARE. GROUP A SHOULD LOOK
FAMILIAR TO YOU ALL. THOSE ARE
MOSTLY -- THOSE ARE ALL
AMENDMENTS. ALMOST ALL THE
AMENDMENTS THAT WERE DISCUSSED
ON OCTOBER 30th, THAT WERE
INCLUDED IN THE BALANCING
PACKAGE. GROUP B IS CURRENTLY
ONLY ONE ITEM THAT IS PROPOSED
AS A SUBSTITUTE DEVOTING GROUP
A, AND THEN GROUP C IS ANOTHER
PROPOSED CONSENT AMENDMENT
PACKAGE THAT CONSISTS OF IDEAS
THAT WERE SUBMITTED ON NOVEMBER
1st BY VARIOUS MEMBERS OF THIS
COMMITTEE, AND THOSE ARE
PROPOSED FOR A SINGLE VOTE TO
HELP EXPEDITE THE VOTING.
THERE'S A LOT OF VOTING. GROUP
D IS AMENDMENTS THAT WERE
IDENTIFIED BY THE CHAIR AS
WARRANTING ADDITIONAL
DISCUSSION WITH US INCLUDING
THIS INDIVIDUAL VOTE CATEGORY.
THE PLAN OF ACTION TODAY, FOR
YOUR AWARENESS, IS THAT,
BECAUSE WE ALREADY PRESENTED
THE ITEMS IN GROUP A,
INDIVIDUALLY, THEY'RE GOING TO
HAVE VARIOUS CENTRAL STAFFERS
READ EACH TITLE OF GROUP A BY
DEPARTMENT INTO THE RECORD.
THEY'RE GOING TO PROCEED BY
DEPARTMENT. THEY WILL PAUSE AT
THE END. THEY WILL NOTE IF
THERE ARE ANY CHANGES BETWEEN
OCTOBER 30th AND TODAY FOR YOUR
AWARENESS, AND ALLOW FOR ANY
QUESTIONS. AFTER EACH
DEPARTMENT IS COMPLETED, AND
ALSO PAUSE TO ALLOW FOR
QUESTIONS, AND THE INTENT IS TO
MOVE THROUGH THAT FAIRLY
SPEEDILY, SO WE CAN GET TO NEW
ITEMS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN
PRESENTED TO THE COMMITTEE
PREVIOUSLY.
‎THANK YOU, DEPUTY DIRECTOR .
‎IT IS A BUSY DAY. YOU WILL
SEE EVERYTHING THAT IS UP FOR
DISCUSSION BEFORE YOU ARE ASKED
ABOUT ANY INDIVIDUAL THING.
THAT WILL GIVE YOU A CONFERENCE
OF VIEW OF ALL THE THINGS UNDER
CONSIDERATION. A QUICK REVIEW
OF THE BALANCING PACKAGE, BUT
THE NEW MATERIALS, AS WELL, AND
YOU WILL HAVE SEEN EVERYTHING.
WHEN YOU COMMENCE VOTING, YOU
WILL HAVE THAT BACKGROUND.
‎THE INTENT IS FOR TOMORROW
-- THE GROUP A PRESENTATION
TOMORROW WILL BE EVEN SHORTER,
SO THAT YOU CAN MOVE TOWARDS
VOTING. RIGHT. WE'LL TALK
ABOUT IT TODAY. TOMORROW, THEY
WILL BE DESCRIBED AS ONE GROUP,
AND THEN, FOLKS CAN DO THAT.
YOU CAN MAKE YOUR MOTIONS AND
ALL THAT. OUR INTENT IS TO HAVE
THE CONVERSATION TODAY SO THAT
TOMORROW WE CAN BE FOCUSING ON
THE VOTING AND THE MOTIONS AND
ALL THAT, AND HAVING THAT
DISCUSSION AROUND THE
AMENDMENTS AND WHAT YOU ALL ARE
PLANNING TO DO. THAT IS HOW WE
ARE STRUCTURING THIS SERIES OF
MEETINGS.
‎THANK YOU, DIRECTOR AND
DEPUTY DIRECTOR. I WILL AT SOME
OPERATIONAL DETAILS HERE.
COLLEAGUES, IF YOU HAVE
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE
PRESENTATION, THIS IS THE TIME.
WE ENGAGED IN A FEW PROCESS
REFORMS THIS YEAR. YOU WILL BE
SEEING IT WHEN IT COMES TO FULL
COUNCIL AND THE COMMITTEE FOR
VOTE. WE ARE USING THE CONSENT
CALENDAR, WHICH IS DIFFERENT
FROM PAST YEARS, WHEN WE HAD TO
TAKE A VOICE VOTE ON EVERY
SINGLE BILL, WHICH TAKES HOURS.
AND SO, THAT IS PART OF WHY WE
ARE USING THE GROUPS A, B, C,
AND D, SO WE CAN PRESERVE MORE
TIME FOR YOU TO SPEAK, THEN FOR
YOU TO SAY YES OR NO, BECAUSE
IT ENDS UP TWO HOURS OF
EVERYONE SAYING YES FOR TWO
HOURS, AND THAT IS NOT VERY
PRODUCTIVE. SO TRYING TO SAVE
SOME TIME. COLLEAGUES, ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THIS
OVERVIEW? AGAIN, AMENDMENTS TO
THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX, AND
THE CAPITAL GAINS, OR ANY OF
THESE OTHERS ARE DUE BY FRIDAY
AT NOON. SEEING NO QUESTIONS, I
THINK WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON
TO THE NEXT ONE. DO I NEED TO
READ IN THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM?
IT IS THE SAME ONE. JUST KEEP
GOING. THANK YOU.
‎GOOD MORNING, CHAIR STRAUSS,
VICE CHAIR RIVERA AND MEMBERS
OF THE SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE.
I'M GOING TO BRIEF YOU ON TWO
PIECES OF LEGISLATION REGARDING
A CITY CAPITAL GAINS EXCISE TAX
STARTING WITH THE LEGISLATION
THAT IMPOSES THE TEXT, AND THEN
ENDING WITH A BILL THAT
ALLOCATES THE REVENUES FROM THE
TAX. FIRST, I'M GOING TO GIVE
A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND
BECAUSE THE CITY'S TAX IS
BASED DIRECTLY OFF OF A STATE
TAX OF THE SAME TYPE. THAT WAS
IMPOSED A FEW YEARS BACK.
SPECIFICALLY, THAT TAX WAS
ADOPTED BY CHAPTER 196 OF 2001.
THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
LEGISLATURE. IT WAS EFFECTIVE
IN JULY OF 2020 ONE THAT TAX
IMPOSED A 7% RATE OF TAX ON
LONG-TERM CAPITAL ASSET SALES,
TO A MINIMUM STANDARD DEDUCTION
OF $215,000. THAT WAS IN $2022.
THE PRICE HAS SINCE BEEN
INFLATED. I WILL COVER THAT
LATER IN THE PRESENTATION
BECAUSE THAT HOW APPLIES TO HOW
THE SEATTLE TEXAS SET UP. THE
PROCEEDS FROM THAT TEXT WERE
DEPOSITED INTO THE EDUCATION
LEGACY TRUST ACCOUNT IN THE
STATE. AND THE COMMON SCHOOL
CONSTRUCTION ACCOUNT. THE TAX
WAS CHALLENGED. IT WAS
SUCCESSFULLY -- WAS MAINTAINED
TO BE A CONSTITUTIONAL TAX.
EXERCISES THE STATE'S TAXATION
POWER. THE CASE WAS [ INAUDIBLE
] VERSUS STATE OF WASHINGTON.
THE TAX HAS BEEN VOIDED FOR TWO
YEARS. IN THE FIRST YEAR OF
COLLECTION IN 2023, $140,000 --
MILLION REQUESTED BY THE STATE.
LET'S GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
SO, THAT WAS THE STATE TAX.
THIS IS THE CITY'S TAX NOW,
THAT WE WILL TALK ABOUT IN
TERMS OF STRUCTURE. THE
STRUCTURE IS THE SAME, WHICH
HAS BENEFITS IN TERMS OF
COMPLIANCE AND ADMINISTRATION
AND FORECASTING OF REVENUES FOR
THE TEXT. THE ONE KEY
DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE CITY TAX
IS APPLIED ONLY WITHIN THE CITY
OF SEATTLE JURISDICTIONAL
BOUNDARIES, AND IT IS A 2% TAX.
IT IS IN ADDITION TO THE STATE
TAX. SO, I MENTIONED THE
INFLATIONARY ADJUSTMENTS. THERE
HAS BEEN ONE INFLATIONARY
DEDUCTION SINCE THE 2022
INITIAL IMPOSITION. AND THAT
BRINGS THAT STANDARD DEDUCTION
UP TO $262,000. FOR THIS YEAR.
THAT IS WHAT THE CURRENT CITY
TEXT BEFORE YOU IS BASED ON,
THAT THRESHOLD. THERE IS
ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE WITHIN THE
BILL THAT KEEPS THAT THRESHOLD
UP-TO-DATE WITH THE ESTATE TAX.
EVERY YEAR, THERE IS AN
INFLATIONARY ADJUSTMENT MADE BY
THE STATE. IT WOULD INFLATE IN
PARALLEL. IN TERMS OF OTHER
THINGS THAT ARE STANDARD
DEDUCTIONS FOR THE TEXT IN THE
AMOUNTS DEBITED FOR TAXATION BY
THE STATE OR FEDERAL
CONSTITUTION, GAINS FROM THE
SALE OF A QUALIFIED FAMILY
SMALL BUSINESS. TO UP TO
$105,000 OF CHARITABLE
DEDUCTIONS ABOVE THE MINIMUM
STANDARD DEDUCTION OF $262,000.
AS I SAID, ALL THOSE THRESHOLDS
ARE INFLATED AUTOMATICALLY EACH
YEAR BY INFLATION. SO THEN,
THERE'S ALSO EXEMPTIONS. THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DEDUCTION
AND EXEMPTION WILL BE -- IF YOU
ARE CLAIMING A DEDUCTION, THAT
MEANS YOU ARE SUBMITTING A TAX
RETURN. HOWEVER, THINGS THAT
ARE EXEMPT, IF YOU'RE FULLY
ACCEPT, YOU DON'T HAVE TO
SUBMIT A TAX RETURN. MOST OF
THE TAXPAYERS IN THIS CITY
WOULD BE THE SHORT POTENTIAL
TAXPAYERS DISH WOULD NOT
QUALIFY BECAUSE OF THE
EXEMPTION. ONE OF THE KEY
EXEMPTIONS IS REAL ESTATE
SALES. THIS WOULD NOT APPLY TO
ANY SALES OF REAL ESTATE IN THE
CITY. FURTHERMORE, RETIREMENT
ACCOUNTS, WHICH IS A LOT OF
POTENTIAL TAXPAYERS HAVE
RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS. ALL THE
GAINS WITHIN THOSE ACCOUNTS ARE
FULLY EXEMPT UNDER THIS TAX.
CONDEMNATIONS, LIVESTOCK
COMMERCIAL FISHING, TIMBER,
GOODWILL FROM AUTO SALES ARE
SIMILARLY EXEMPT. THAT WAS THE
ONLY TYPE OF TAX LIABILITY.
FINALLY, THE TAX WOULD BE
EFFECTIVE ON JANUARY OF 2026,
JANUARY 1st, WITH THE FIRST
COLLECTIONS COMING IN APRIL OF
2027, SO ABOUT EVERY YEAR AND A
FEW MONTHS AFTER THE TAX IS
IMPOSED. THESE ARE REALLY
SIMPLE EXAMPLES, TO SHOW THAT
-- HOW THE EXEMPTIONS AND
DEDUCTIONS WORK. IN THIS FIRST
EXAMPLE, LET'S JUST ASSUME
THAT THE RESIDENT SOLD $1
MILLION OF STOCK, AND THE
ORIGINAL BASIS, WHEN THEY
PURCHASED THAT STOCK WAS
$700,000. NOW, THEY ARE SELLING
IT, AND THEY REALIZED THE
LONG-TERM GAIN OF $3000. SO,
FIRST STEP, APPLY THE STANDARD
DEDUCTION, $262,000, WHICH
BRINGS YOU TO A NET GAIN OF
48,000. APPLY THE 2% RATE FOR
EIGHT $916,000 TAX. THE NEXT
EXAMPLE -- THIS IS THE REAL
ESTATE EXEMPTION THAT I
MENTIONED. SOMEONE SELLS A
HOUSE IN 2026. ORIGINALLY
PURCHASED IT IN 2010. THEY SOLD
IT FOR $1.2 MILLION. THAT IS A
CAPITAL GAIN OF $1 MILLION, BUT
BECAUSE THAT PROPERTY SALE IS
COMPLETELY EXEMPT, THERE IS
100% EXEMPTION OF $1 MILLION.
THERE IS NO CAPITAL GAIN IN
THIS EXAMPLE, BUT WE STILL
APPLY THE TAX. LET ME POSIT
JUST REAL QUICK BEFORE I MOVE.
OKAY. OKAY. LET'S LOOK AT THE
NEXT SLIDE.
‎I WOULD JUST SAY, RUN
THROUGH IT ALL. I'M GOING TO
GO TO COUNCILMEMBER MOORE ONCE
YOU ARE DONE WITH YOUR
PRESENTATION.
‎SO NOW, WE'RE GOING TO TALK
ABOUT THE REVENUE FROM THE TAX.
SO, I GUESS, TO START OFF,
BECAUSE THE TAX WOULD APPLY IN
2026, THE FIRST COLLECTIONS
WOULD BE IN 2027. THIS EXERCISE
IS ESTIMATING REVENUES FOR A
TAX TWO YEARS FROM NOW, BASED
ON LIMITED DATA, SO, THIS
ESTIMATE WAS DEVELOPED BY THE
DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF
ECONOMIC FORECAST FOR THE CITY.
I REALLY APPRECIATE THE WORK
THAT THEY DID. HOWEVER, THERE
IS A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY
EMBEDDED IN IT. WE ARE
PROVIDING A RANGE OF ESTIMATES,
AS OPPOSED TO A SINGLE NUMBER
TO HONE IN ON. SO, WITHIN THAT
RANGE, THERE ARE A LOT OF
EXEMPTIONS AND DATA THAT THE
INFORMATION IS BASED ON.
PRIMARILY, BECAUSE THIS IS A
STATE TAX, THERE IS A STATE
FORECAST THAT THEY CAN RELY ON
TO GENERATE SOME OF THE
INFORMATION. AS I MENTIONED,
THE FIRST YEAR OF THE ESTATE
TAX WAS $870,000 OR SO. THE
SECOND-YEAR DROPPED TO 370. SO,
THAT INDICATES A LOT OF THE
VOLATILITY OF THE TAX AT THE
STATE LEVEL. THERE IS DATA FOR
THE 2023 TAX THAT IS AVAILABLE
TO US, AVAILABLE TO THE
FORECAST OFFICE SPECIFICALLY,
THAT TELLS HOW MANY TAXPAYERS
PAID THE TAX, AND MORE SO, HOW
MANY OF THOSE POTENTIAL
TAXPAYERS ARE IN THE CITY. IT
GIVES US A SENSE OF HOW MANY
PEOPLE WOULD BE LIABLE TO PAY
THIS TAX IF IT WERE IMPOSED. AT
A HIGH LEVEL, THERE WAS
INFORMATION ATTACHED TO THIS
BILL THAT INDICATED THAT I
BELIEVE THE ESTATE TAX WAS
RECEIVED BY TAXPAYERS IN 2023.
A VERY SMALL NUMBER OF
TAXPAYERS AT THE STATE LEVEL.
THE CITY LEVEL WAS SMALLER THAN
THAT. I THINK IT WAS 163 TOTAL
TAXPAYERS THAT PAID THE TAX AT
THE CITY LEVEL. AND SO, WITH
THE FORECAST OFFICE DID IS
APPLIED THOSE RELATIONSHIPS TO
THE STATES FORECAST TO GENERATE
A RANGE OF ESTIMATES, INCLUDING
HOW MANY POTENTIAL TAXPAYERS
THEY WOULD BE. WHAT THEY WOULD
BE AS A PERCENT OF THE
STATEWIDE SHARE. AND ESTIMATES
ABOUT COMPLIANCE, SO THE STATE
ASSUMED THAT COMPLIANCE -- THAT
THE PERCENT OF TAXPAYERS THAT
WOULD COMPLY WITH THE TAX WOULD
BE LOWER AT THE BEGINNING, AND
GROW IN FUTURE YEARS, AS THE
INFORMATIONAL EFFORTS WERE
IMPROVED AND COMPLAINTS IS
IMPROVED FROM 85% UP TO 95%
COMPLAINTS BY 2026. THAT IS ONE
ASSUMPTION. HOWEVER, AN
ALTERNATE ASSUMPTION WOULD BE
THAT COMPLIANCE STAYED LOW. SO
THE RANGE OF ESTIMATES THAT THE
FORECAST OFFICE PROVIDED WAS
FOR 227. $50 MILLION AT THE
HIGH END, AND SO THAT IS USING
BASICALLY A HIGHER LEVEL OF
COMPLIANCE FOR THE TAX. AND A
LITTLE TAXPAYER RESPONSE. SO
ELASTICITY. WHEN YOU RAISE THE
TAX, YOU EXPECT SOME BEHAVIORS
TO CHANGE. THEY ARE
ANTICIPATING THAT THERE WOULD
BE NOT A LOT OF RESPONSE TO THE
TAX. AND THEN, FINALLY, THIS IS
A DIFFERENT ASSUMPTION ABOUT
THE SHARE OF TAX AND THE AMOUNT
OF GROWTH IN THE STOCK MARKET.
IN THE STATE FORECAST, THEY
ASSUME A 13% GROWTH RATE COMING
INTO 2025, HOWEVER, THE
FORECAST OFFICE LOOKED AT IRS
DATA FOR RETURNS, AND INDICATED
THAT THERE COULD BE A MUCH
GREATER GROWTH GOING INTO TWO
DOZEN 25 OUT OF 2024, AS
TAXPAYERS MONITORED THE BALLOT
INITIATIVE AT THE STATE LEVEL
THAT WOULD REPEAL THE STATE
TAX. THE IMPLICATION IS THAT
THEY WERE WAITING TO SEE WHAT
THE RESULT WAS OF THAT BALLOT
INITIATIVE, BEFORE THEY SOLD
STOCKS TO GENERATE A POTENTIAL
GAIN. NOW, THAT HAS BEEN
RESOLVED. THAT INITIATIVE
FAILED AT THE BALLOT. NOW, THE
ASSUMPTION IS THAT THOSE GRADES
WOULD BE HIGHER THAN WHAT WAS
INCLUDED IN THE STATES
FORECAST. THAT IS THE $51
MILLION RANGE. THE $16 MILLION
-- THE LOW END OF THE RANGE --
IS AN ASSUMPTION THAT THE
TAXPAYER COMPLAINTS STAYS AT
85%. THE RESPONSE TO THE TAX AT
THE CITY LEVEL, PARTICULARLY,
IS HIGH. SO, A LOT OF DROP OFF
IN RECEIPTS BECAUSE TAXPAYERS
CHANGE THEIR BEHAVIOR. TO BE
QUITE BLUNT, THEY PERHAPS
CHANGE RESIDENCE. BECAUSE THIS
IS A LOCALLY IMPOSED CAPITAL
GAINS TAX, AND IT APPLIES TO
PEOPLE THAT ARE ASSUMED TO BE
OF HIGH NET WORTH, THEY HAVE
OPTIONS, AND ARE BETTER
PREPARED TO RESPOND TO A LOCAL
TAX. NONE OF IT IS A GUARANTEE,
BUT THESE ARE THE
CONSIDERATIONS THAT ARE
IMPLICIT IN FORECASTING REVENUE
FROM THIS TYPE OF TAX. HOWEVER,
IF THE TAX WAS IMPOSED, EVEN IF
THE TOTAL TAX IS NOT IMPOSED,
WE WILL GET SUCCESSIVE REVENUE
ESTIMATES IN 2025. IN 2026, IT
WILL HELP THAT RANGE WHEN IT
COMES TIME TO BUDGET THE
REVENUES HERE IN THE CITY. IF
WE COULD LOOK AT THE NEXT
SLIDE, I TALKED A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT SOME OF THESE RISKS WITH
THE ESTIMATE. ONE IS THE SMALL
NUMBER OF TAXPAYERS. I SAID 85%
CAME FROM 163 TAXPAYERS. THERE
WAS A LARGER GROUP. 116
TAXPAYERS INCLUDED. IT IS
MOSTLY EQUITIES BECAUSE OF THE
EXEMPTIONS -- BECAUSE OF THE
EXEMPTIONS THAT ARE APPLIED TO
REAL ESTATE. IT ALL DEPENDS ON
WHERE THE TAXPAYER DOMICILE IS.
WHAT DO THEY CONSIDER THEIR
HOME? THERE ARE SPECIFIC
DEFINITIONS IN THE BILL THAT
DEFINE WHAT THAT MEANS. THERE
WAS THE MEMO AGAIN. THEY
REFERENCED THAT THERE WAS A LOT
OF VOLATILITY AND UNCERTAINTY
IN THIS TEXT. EVEN THOUGH THERE
IS A RANGE, IT COULD STILL COME
IN HIGHER OR LOWER THAN THAT
RANGE. AND NOW, IF WE CAN LOOK
AT THE NEXT SLIDE. SO, THESE
ARE BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS. ONE
IS THAT I MENTIONED, THE FIRST
REVENUE FROM THIS TAX WOULD NOT
BE UNTIL 2027. THERE ARE
IMPLEMENTATION COSTS. THESE ARE
ROUGH ESTIMATES THAT WOULD BE
INFORMED BY FUTURE BUDGET
REQUESTS. AND IN THIS CASE, I
WOULD THINK THEM FOR PROVIDING
THIS INFORMATION ON A SHORT
TIMEFRAME. THEY INDICATED THERE
WOULD BE ONE COST IN GETTING
SYSTEMS UP-TO-DATE TO COLLECT
THIS INFORMATION. $1 MILLION,
AND THEN ONGOING COSTS
INCLUDING SYSTEMS AND STAFF.
THEY INDICATED THEY WOULD
REQUIRE 18 TO 24 MONTHS TO
IMPLEMENT, WHICH DOES NOT
NECESSARILY POSE A PROBLEM IN
THIS CASE. AGAIN, THIS IS JUST
A PHYSICAL NOTE ESTIMATE. THE
ACTUAL COST WOULD PROVIDE
FURTHER ANALYSIS AND BE PART OF
THE BUDGET REQUEST. THIS IS IN
THE CAVEATS AND RISK REALM.
BUDGETING THESE REVENUES WITH A
HIGH LEVEL OF UNCERTAINTY, AND
IN SOME WAYS, TO COMPENSATE FOR
THAT UNCERTAINTY WOULD BE TO
USE THE LOW END OF THE RANGE,
OR TO WAIT FOR THE FIRST YEAR
OF COLLECTIONS TO ACTUALLY COME
IN BEFORE MAKING THE BUDGET
ALLOCATIONS. AND I BELIEVE THAT
IS THE FINAL SLIDE. I CAN POSIT
ABOUT THE ACTUAL TAX BEFORE WE
CAN TALK ABOUT THE USE OF
PROCEEDS BILL.
‎THANK YOU.
‎COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED. COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE.
‎THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHAIR.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, TOM, FOR
YOUR PRESENTATION AND YOUR WORK
ON THIS. SO, I JUST WANT TO
MAKE SOME GENERAL REMARKS -- I
MADE THEM ALREADY. I RECOGNIZE
THAT MOST OF US CAME TO THIS
POSITION TALKING ABOUT FISCALLY
CONSERVATIVE AND PRUDENT, AND
WANTING TO DO IT A DEEP DIVE ON
THE BUDGET BEFORE WE TALK ABOUT
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE, AND I
THINK THAT WE HAVE DONE THAT,
THANKS TO THE LEADERSHIP OF
CHAIR STRESS, I THINK WE HAVE
ENGAGED IN AN UNPRECEDENTED
DEEP DIVE AND REVIEW. I REALLY
APPRECIATE THAT. I KNOW THERE
WAS A LITTLE BACK AND FORTH
ABOUT WHETHER THERE WAS
TECHNICALLY AN AUDIT.
OTHERWISE, IT HAS BEEN A
THOUGHTFUL REVIEW. AND, THROUGH
THAT, WE HAVE ALSO HAD THE
MAYOR PRESENT TO US A PLAN TO
DEAL WITH OUR $270 MILLION
DEFICIT BY LOOKING AT PAYROLL
EXPENSE TAX MONEY, TO COVER
THAT. IN THE GENERAL FUND. WE
HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB. WE ARE
TRYING TO COVER THAT DEFICIT
AND REMAIN TRUE TO THE VALUES
THAT WE HAVE EXPRESSED. IT
BECAME VERY CLEAR TO ME IN THAT
PROCESS, THAT WE ARE STILL
FALLING SHORT ON CRITICAL
AREAS. WHILE OUR BUDGET DOES
HAVE MONEY FOR RENTAL
ASSISTANCE, IT DOES HAVE MONEY
FOR HOMEOWNERSHIP DOWN PAYMENT
ASSISTANCE. AND IT DOES HAVE
SOME MONEY FOR FOOD INSECURITY.
ALL OF THOSE FUNDS ARE SEVERELY
LACKING TO THE LEVEL OF NEED
THAT WE HAVE, AND I THINK THAT
HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED BY THE
COMMENTS OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE
COME TO COUNCIL. AND SO, IT IS
NEVER FUN TO LOOK AT ADDITIONAL
REVENUE, BUT I THINK THE FACT
THAT THIS REVENUE SOURCE HAS
BEEN TESTED, BOTH IN TERMS OF
GOING THROUGH THE LEGAL PROCESS
IN THE COURTS, AND UPHELD AT
THE STATE LEVEL, AND WAS
CHALLENGED IN THE INITIATIVE --
AND I THINK IT WAS A 60% VOTE
TO RETAIN IT -- INDICATES TO ME
THAT THIS IS A SOLID -- IT IS A
SOLID FORM OF ADDITIONAL
REVENUE, AND THAT IT HAS BROAD
PUBLIC SUPPORT. AND I'M HOPING
MY AMENDMENT TO INCREASE RENTAL
ASSISTANCE BY 3.3 MILLION WILL
PASS, BUT EVEN IF THAT DOESN'T
PASS, WE ARE IN ADDITIONAL NEED
FOR MORE RENTAL ASSISTANCE. I
RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS A
VOLATILE TAX. SO IS PAYROLL
EXPENSE TAX. WE ARE LOOKING AT
USING THAT AS A SIGNIFICANT
SOURCE OF REVENUE FOR OUR CITY
NOW COME AND GOING FORWARD.
MOST OF THESE TAXES ARE
VOLATILE. WE DO NOT HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO PURSUE AN INCOME
TAX. THE STATE LEGISLATURE MADE
THAT DECISION. IT WAS ONE OF
THE INITIATIVES THAT THEY
ADOPTED, SO WE ARE REALLY
SOMEWHAT HAMSTRUNG IN WHERE WE
CAN LOOK FOR SUSTAINABLE
REVENUE. ONE OF THE REASONS --
THE REASON -- I THINK I
EXPLAINED WHY I CHOSE THE
DESIGNATED CATEGORIES, BUT I
DID NOT SET A PERCENTAGE. ONE
OF THE REASONS I DID NOT SET
THE PERCENTAGE IS BECAUSE OF
THE FACT THAT WE DON'T KNOW
WHAT THE INCOME IS GOING TO
GENERATE EACH YEAR. MY THINKING
IS THAT WE GET THE MONEY. WE
SEE HOW MUCH WE HAVE, AND WE
USE OUR DISCRETION, AS WE ARE
ELECTED TO DO, WITH INPUT FROM
STAKEHOLDERS IN THE COMMUNITY
ABOUT WHAT IS THE MOST PRESSING
NEED, AND HOW DO WE DISTRIBUTE
THE MONEY. THAT IS AN ONGOING
BUDGETING DECISION. IT GIVES US
THE FLEXIBILITY WE NEED TO
ADDRESS ISSUES AS THEY ARISE.
THOSE ARE MY BASIC POINTS ABOUT
THIS. THE OTHER REASON THAT
I'M BRINGING IT NOW IS THAT IT
IS A LENGTHY PROCESS. IT WOULD
TAKE A YEAR TO TRACK, A YEAR TO
COLLECT. THERE IS THE
POSSIBILITY OF THE LEGAL
CHALLENGE. I WANT TO
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT. AND THEN, WE
WOULD ONLY BE IN POSITION TO
BEGIN TO ALLOCATE IN 2027, AND
SO, WE ARE LOOKING AT A
SIGNIFICANT DEFICIT IN 2027, SO
I WANTED TO GET THE BALL
ROLLING TO PROVIDE SOME
ADDITIONAL REVENUE SOURCES AT
THAT POINT, RATHER THAN
CONTINUING TO HAVE ADDITIONAL
DISCUSSION, AND WEIGHT LONGER.
-- WAIT LONGER.
‎IT BUGS ME TO WATCH IT ON
THE SCREEN. I HAVE A QUESTION
ABOUT THE PRESENTATION. JUST A
CLARIFICATION.
‎PLEASE.
‎I THINK YOU ARE SAYING -- I
THINK I HEARD YOU SAY THAT THE
FIRST YEAR ANTICIPATED REVENUE
FROM THE STATE INCOME CAPITAL
GAINS TAX WAS X AMOUNT IN THE
FOLLOWING YEAR IT WAS QUITE A
BIT LESS. WAS THAT WHAT YOU
SAID?
‎COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I WOULD
SAY THAT IT WASN'T THE FIRST
YEAR OF EXPECTED REVENUE FROM
THE TAX. IT WAS THE FIRST
ACTUAL COLLECTIONS FROM THE
TEXT FOR $870 MILLION. IN FACT,
THE STATE EXPECTED LESS THAN
THAT AMOUNT IN THE FIRST YEAR.
IN THE SECOND YEAR, IT CAME IN
AT $370 MILLION.
‎SO FROM 800 TO 300
SOMETHING. SO, AND WHAT WERE
THE REASONS FOR THAT DROP.
‎I DON'T KNOW.
‎I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WERE
ANY SPECIFIC REASONS. ONE OF
THE RATIONALES IS WAITING FOR
THE RESULTS OF THE BALLOT
INITIATIVE. HOWEVER, IT COULD
BE RESPONSE TO THE TAX. IT IS
UNCLEAR. THE NUMBER OF
TAXPAYERS WAS ROUGHLY THE SAME
DOSE ONE DATA POINT PROVIDED BY
THE FORECAST OFFICE.
‎THE ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
CHANGED BY THE TAXPAYERS. IT
DIDN'T NECESSARILY MOVE OUT OF
WASHINGTON IS WHAT YOU ARE
SAYING.
‎YEAH.
‎THE CONCENTRATION AT THE
STATE LEVEL WAS ALSO EXTREME.
SO A RELATIVELY LARGE SHARE OF
THE STATEWIDE REVENUE. THOSE
INDIVIDUALS MAKING DIFFERENT
FINANCIAL DECISIONS WITH REGARD
TO THEIR FINANCES CAN HAVE THAT
KIND OF IMPACT. THEY WERE
RESPONSIBLE FOR 25% STATEWIDE.
IT IS MIND-BOGGLING AT SOME
LEVEL. THOSE DECISIONS COULD
DRIVE LITERALLY TENS OF
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF REVENUE.
THAT IS HIGHLIGHTED IN THE
COMMENTS HERE ABOUT NATURAL
VOLATILITY.
‎THANK YOU. LAST YEAR, WE
TALKED ABOUT ESTABLISHING A
CAPITAL GAINS TAX TO OFFSET THE
REMOVAL OF THE UTILITY TAX, AND
I BELIEVE THAT WAS ABOUT 32
MILLION. IS THAT CORRECT? DO
YOU REMEMBER WHAT PERCENTAGE
THAT WAS?
‎I RECALL THAT THE NUMBER WAS
IN THE $30 MILLION RANGE. IT
WAS ESTIMATED LAST YEAR AT THAT
TIME -- THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE
THE RESULTS FROM THE 2023
COLLECTIONS.
‎IT WAS 2%.
‎THANK YOU.
‎THANK YOU, TRENIN. ANYTHING
FURTHER?
‎YOU GOOD?
‎COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
‎I AM CURIOUS IF WE DO
SOMETHING LIKE THIS, GIVEN THE
FLUCTUATION AT NOT HAVING A
GOOD SENSE OF WHAT MIGHT BE
COMING YEAR-TO-YEAR, HOW WE
MIGHT ANTICIPATE WHAT THAT
MIGHT MEAN FOR PROGRAMMING OF
THE DOLLARS, BECAUSE I
APPRECIATE THAT THE IDEA HERE
IS TO MAKE SURE IT IS GOING
INTO HOUSING, BUT WHAT DOES IT
MEAN FOR US IN TERMS OF
PROGRAMMING EXPECTATIONS?
‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES. THAT IS THE PART, HOW
TO DEAL WITH THE RISK. WE WILL
GET TWO MORE DATA POINTS IN
TERMS OF COLLECTIONS FROM THE
STATE TAX. SO THE 2025 REVENUE
WILL COME IN, AND WE WILL SEE
WHAT THE TRENDS ARE TO ANALYZE
HOW MUCH OF THAT IS COMING FROM
SEATTLE ADDRESSES TO GIVE A
BETTER SENSE THAN WE HAVE NOW
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE TWO
DATA POINTS. WE WILL GET A FEW
MORE DATA POINTS, AND THEN,
ALSO, ASSUMING THERE IS STILL A
RANGE PROVIDED FROM THE
FORECAST OFFICE, BUDGETING TO
THE LOW END OF THE RANGE WOULD
BE THE SAFER MOVE TO DO, OR,
EVEN PAUSE YEAR, APPLY THE TAX
IN THE FIRST YEAR, AND THEN
KIND OF BUDGET THE MONEY YOU
COLLECTED, AS OPPOSED TO
BUDGETING BASED ON THE
FORECAST.
‎YOU GOT IT. OKAY.
‎YOU CAN BUDGET IT TO THE LOW
END, AND THEN WHEN YOU'VE GOT
THE RECEIPTS, SOME PEOPLE MAY
MAKE THE APPROPRIATION. IT
WOULD IMPLY THAT YOU ARE
WAITING TO SEE WHAT YOU GET
BEFORE YOU MAKE THE COMMITMENT
ABOUT SPENDING.
‎OKAY. THANK YOU. I
APPRECIATE THAT. I WILL SAY
I'M EXCITED TO BE COSPONSORING
THIS WITH COUNCILMEMBER MOORE
AND APPRECIATE THAT WE ARE
BEGINNING THE CONVERSATION
ABOUT HOW WE ARE GOING TO FIX
THIS STRUCTURAL BUDGET DEFICIT.
THANK YOU, CHAIR.
‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES. COLLEAGUES, ANY
FURTHER AT THIS TIME? AND WE
ARE GOING TO BE BRINGING THIS
UP FOR A VOTE ON THE 19th.
CORRECT?
‎YES.
‎WITH AN AMENDMENT DEADLINE
ON THIS FRIDAY.
‎CORRECT.
‎DIRECTOR NOBLE, IF YOU COULD
PULL YOUR MICROPHONE CLOSER TO
YOU. I HAD TOO MANY CONCERTS
AND CHAINSAWS IN MY LIFE.
‎COUNCILMEMBER MOORE,
ANYTHING TO CLOSE US OUT?
‎THANK YOU. EXCUSE ME. YEAH.
I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IT
IS NOT PERFECT, BY ANY MEANS.
IT IS INTENDED TO BE
SUPPLEMENTAL BECAUSE OF THE
FACT THAT WE DON'T HAVE ALL
THE DATA POINTS. THAT IS PART
OF THE REASON THAT I'VE
LIMITED IT TO THOSE THREE AREAS
TO SUPPLEMENT THE FUNDING IN
THE CURRENT CITY BUDGET. IT
WOULD CERTAINLY BEAT MY INTENT
TO BUDGET BASED ON RECEIPTS,
NOT PROJECTED REVENUE, GIVEN
THAT WE NEED MORE TIME TO SEE
HOW IT IS GOING TO PERFORM.
THANK YOU.
‎THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA, THAT WAS THE LAST WORD.
I'M GOING TO TURN IT BACK OVER
TO YOU. WE WILL LET THE SPONSOR
HAVE THE LAST WORD. BACK TO
YOU, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
‎THANK YOU, MR. CHO. THERE IS
ONE MORE SLIDE, SLIDE 12, ON
THIS DISCUSSION. I WANT TO
SHARE SOME THOUGHTS ON THIS
TOPIC. I WILL DEFER TO YOU ON
THAT.
‎THAT IS THE NEXT ORDINANCE,
SO I WILL HOLD YOUR COMMENTS
UNTIL THE NEXT ORDINANCE.
‎OKAY. TOM, BACK TO YOU.
‎THE CONVERSATION HAS SORT OF
GONE INTO THE IMPLICATIONS OF
THIS AGAIN ORDINANCE. THIS IS
COUNCIL BILL 120929 IS THE
ALLOCATION OF THE PROCEEDS FROM
THE CAPITAL GAINS EXCISE TAX.
THEIR SEPARATE BILLS. THE BILLS
NEED TO REFERENCE A SINGLE
SUBJECT, SO, SO 120908 APPLIES
THE TAX. 120909 EARMARKS THOSE
REVENUES, BUILDING OFF OF
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. DOWN
PAYMENT ASSISTANCE, TO
HOUSEHOLDS, AND FOOD ASSISTANCE
TO FOOD INSECURE HOUSEHOLDS.
AND THEN, IT FOR THE INDICATES
THE INTENT TO DO THE PROCESS TO
EITHER PUT INTO PLACE THE
RESOLUTION THAT PUTS FINER TENT
ALLEGATIONS, OR TO MAKE THAT
ALLOCATION FOR THE BUDGET
PROCESS. SO.
‎THANK YOU.
‎COUNCILMEMBER MOORE,
ANYTHING FURTHER? COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA, OVER TO YOU.
‎THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I WANT
TO CLARIFY A FEW THINGS.
NAMELY, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
ITEMS THAT I COSPONSORED AS
PART OF THIS BUDGET THAT I
COSPONSORED FOR PURPOSES OF
ELEVATING THE DISCUSSION, EVEN
THOUGH I KNOW I AM NOT GOING TO
ULTIMATELY SUPPORT IT THIS
YEAR. AND FOR PURPOSES OF,
ELEVATING DISCUSSION -- WE ALL
DESERVE TO HAVE OUR VARIOUS
ISSUES HEARD AND THOUGHTFULLY
DISCUSSED. WITHIN REASON, WE
NEED IT STREAMLINED AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE. WE CANNOT VOTE ON
130+ INDIVIDUAL THINGS. BUT
THERE ARE A HANDFUL OF ITEMS
THAT I AGREED TO COSPONSOR,
EVEN THOUGH I KNOW I AM NOT
GOING TO ULTIMATELY VOTE TO
SUPPORT IT. THIS IS ONE OF
THEM. ALTHOUGH THIS IS ONE THAT
I FEEL THE MOST SANGUINE ABOUT
OVERALL. THERE IS TOO MUCH THAT
NEEDS TO BE WORKED OUT. THIS
YEAR. BUT, TWO COMMENTS
ATTENDING TO THIS. THIS CAPITAL
GAINS TAX IDEA MORE BROADLY.
ONE IS, I THINK IT IS THE RIGHT
IDEA AT THE WRONG TIME. SOME IN
OUR CITY WOULD ARGUE THAT WE
HAVE A REVENUE PROBLEM. OTHERS
WOULD SAY, NO, NO, WE HAVE A
SPENDING PROBLEM. I HAVE BEEN
TO FIND ELEMENTS OF THOSE
ARGUMENTS COMPELLING. I
PERSONALLY FEEL I WAS SELECTED
TO SPECIFICALLY REJECT THE
FALSE CHOICE NARRATIVE AND
FRAME, AND CLIENT BACK AGAINST
THE EITHER OR DIVISIVE
RHETORIC, AND CHAMPION WHAT
MAYOR HARRELL CALLS THE
POLITICS OF A&D. I THINK BOTH
ARE TRUE. REGARDLESS OF WHERE
YOU FIT ON THE SPECTRUM,
WHETHER YOU THINK WE HAVE A
SPENDING PROBLEM, OR A REVENUE
PROBLEM, I THINK IT IS MORE
CRYSTAL-CLEAR -- THERE IS MORE
CONSENSUS THAN SEATTLE IN
PARTICULAR, WE HAVE AN OUTCOMES
PROBLEM. IN SEATTLE, WE HAVE A
RESULT PROBLEM. SO, UNLESS AND
UNTIL WE ARE ABLE TO BETTER GET
A HOLD OF THAT AND START
PRODUCING BETTER RESULTS, I
DON'T THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE
TO GO BACK AND START LOOKING AT
NEW REVENUE OPTIONS. I HEARD
OVER AND OVER ON THE CAMPAIGN
TRAIL THAT PEOPLE DON'T MIND
PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE. FOR
WHATEVER IT IS. EVEN SOME OF
THE WEALTHIEST INDIVIDUALS SAID
THAT TO ME, TO MY FACE. 16,000
DOORS I KNOCKED ON PERSONALLY.
I HEARD IT OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
PEOPLE HAVE A STRONG PROBLEM
WITH DOING THAT IF THEY'RE NOT
SEEING ANY RETURN ON INVESTMENT
FOR THEIR EXISTING TAX DOLLARS.
SO I THINK WE NEED TO BETTER
POSITION OURSELVES AS A CITY TO
CRUSH THESE EVERYDAY BASICS OF
LOCAL GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC
SAFETY, PARKS, POTHOLES,
INFRASTRUCTURE, IT IS NOT AN
EXHAUSTIVE LIST. LIBRARIES,
AMONGST OTHER THINGS. ONCE WE
START YIELDING BETTER RESULTS
ON THOSE THINGS, THEN I THINK
IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO LOOK
AT OTHER REVENUE OPTIONS,
ESPECIALLY PROGRESSIVE REVENUE,
THAT IMPACT THE WEALTHIEST
INDIVIDUALS, AND THIS IS A
CLEAR, CONCRETE EXAMPLE OF WHAT
IS ACTUALLY DOABLE IN TERMS OF
OPTIONS. AND LOOKING AT THE
ELECTION RESULTS FROM LAST
WEEK, I NOTE THAT THE
INITIATIVE 2109 AT THE STATE
LEVEL WAS OVERWHELMINGLY
REJECTED IN THE CITY OF SEATTLE
IN ALL PRECINCTS BUT A HANDFUL.
IN MY OWN DISTRICT, DISTRICT 1,
IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY REJECTED,
AND SO, I THINK THIS IS A
REVENUE IDEA THAT PEOPLE WOULD
GENERALLY SUPPORT, BUT I ALSO
THINK WE NEED TO DO MORE WORK
TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO BEST BRING
IT TO LIFE, SO THAT IS POINT
NUMBER ONE, UNLESS AND UNTIL --
AND LET'S REVISIT THIS EVERY
YEAR, PERIODICALLY. LET'S
REVISIT THIS BECAUSE I DON'T
THINK IT MAKES SENSE THIS YEAR
UNTIL WE CAN GET A BETTER HAND
AT PRODUCING BETTER RESULTS,
BUT LET'S CONTINUE TO REVISIT
ON AN ONGOING BASIS. THE OTHER
THING I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE IS
THAT I APPRECIATE THE WORK OF
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP IN BRINGING
US FORWARD SO WE CAN HAVE THIS
CONVERSATION NOW. I WOULD
PROBABLY HAVE SLIGHTLY
DIFFERENT SPENDING ALLOCATIONS
OR DESIGNATED CATEGORIES OF
AUTHORIZED SPENDING FOR THIS. I
DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE OR
DISAGREE WITH ANY OF THE THINGS
INCLUDED IN THIS SUGGESTION,
BUT, AS SOMEONE WHO STRONGLY
SUPPORTS INFRASTRUCTURE ,
GETTING HAMMERS HANDS, SHOVELS
AND GROUNDS, KNOWING THE IMPACT
OF THE ANTICIPATED GROWTH WE
CAN EXPECT TO SEE IN OUR CITY
AND THE CORRELATED STRAIN IT
HAS ON OUR ALREADY DECREPIT AND
AGING INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THE
FACT THAT PEOPLE EXPECT LOCAL
GOVERNMENT IN PARTICULAR TO
LOOK AFTER AND HEAVILY INVEST
IN INFRASTRUCTURE, I CAN'T IN
GOOD FAITH SUPPORT A NEW
REVENUE OPTION THAT DOES NOT
INCLUDE SOME SORT O█F
INFRASTRUCTURE -- GENERIC
RESEARCHER, WHETHER THAT IS
STRUCTURE FOR MODERNIZATION,
SOMETHING TO BETTER ADDRESS AND
HELP US GET A HOLD OF AND
ARREST THE DETERIORATING
INFRASTRUCTURE SITUATION. THERE
IS A FINANCIAL TASK FORCE THAT
IS GOING TO BE SET UP PURSUANT
TO THAT. I WOULDN'T BE
SURPRISED IF ONE OF THE
RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE
PRINCIPAL WITH THE HIGH LEVEL
WOULD BE EVERY NEW REVENUE
OPTION YOU GET, YOU SHOULD
ALLOCATE A PORTION OF THAT FOR
INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADES. SO, I
THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A MORE
THOUGHTFUL ANALYSIS OF, WHAT
ARE THE APPROPRIATE CATEGORIES
OF SPENDING? BUT, AGAIN, RIGHT
IDEA, WRONG TIME, BUT I DO WANT
TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER MOORE
FOR HER LEADERSHIP, AND
CHAMPIONING THIS, AND I'M
HONORED TO COSPONSOR IT ALONG
WITH COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
THANK YOU.
‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA. COUNCILMEMBER WOO,
FOLLOWED BY VICE MAYOR.
‎THERE AMENDMENTS COMING UP.
I WANT TO MAKE A GENERAL
COMMENT ABOUT RENTAL ASSISTANCE
AND TENANT ASSISTANCE. WE
ALWAYS TALK ABOUT GIVING MORE
MONEY TO HELP PEOPLE WITH RENT,
BUT, LET'S THINK ABOUT THE
ROOT CAUSE, OF WHY PEOPLE NEED
ASSISTANCE, AND IT IS DIFFERENT
FOR EVERY SINGLE PERSON, AND
SO, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE MORE
PRIORITY IS GIVEN TO POSSIBLY
HAVING SOCIAL WORKERS INSIDE
BUILDINGS, OR RESIDENT ADVISERS
INSIDE THESE BUILDINGS, TO HELP
PEOPLE GET TO THE ROOT CAUSE,
AND TRY TO GIVE MORE RESOURCES
ON WHY THEY GET TO THE POINT
WHERE THEY WILL NEED RENTAL
ASSISTANCE -- WHERE THEY GET TO
THE POINT WHERE THEY MAY HAVE
TO FACE EVICTION, AND TRY TO
HELP GET TO THE ROOT CAUSE, AND
TRY TO HELP THEM GET
APPROPRIATE RESOURCES. WHEN IT
COMES TO RENTAL ASSISTANCE, IT
IS VERY -- I GUESS, IT DOESN'T
REALLY ADDRESS CERTAIN ISSUES.
SO I THINK WHEN WE TALK ABOUT
MORE MONEY FOR TENANT
ASSISTANCE, RENTAL ASSISTANCE,
FOR HELPING PEOPLE WHO ARE
FACING EVICTION, I THINK WE
NEED TO LOOK AT POSSIBLY
FUNDING, HOW DO WE GET DOWN TO
THE ROOT CAUSE OF WHY THEY HAVE
GOTTEN TO THAT POINT , AND IT
IS DIFFERENT FOR EVERY SINGLE
PERSON. IT IS THE SAME THING OF
WHY PEOPLE ARE UNHOUSED. IT IS
DIFFERENT FOR EVERY SINGLE
PERSON, AND JUST GIVING THEM, I
BELIEVE, YOU KNOW, PAYMENT
ASSISTANCE WITHOUT ADDRESSING
THE RESOURCES THEY ACTUALLY
NEED, CAN BE, IN A WAY, THAT,
YOU KNOW, SOLVING THE ENTIRE
DOSE THE REASON WHY THEY GOT TO
THAT POINT. I WAS HOPING WE
COULD, YOU KNOW, THINK ABOUT
THIS, WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR
DIFFERENT AMENDMENTS OF, IS
THIS REALLY TACKLING THE ROOT
CAUSE OF THE SITUATION?
‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
WOO. VICE CHAIR RIVERA.
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE WILL HAVE
THE LAST WORD.
‎THANK YOU, CHAIR.
‎FIRST, I WANT TO THANK
CENTRAL STAFF IN GENERAL FOR
THE HARD WORK THEY HAVE DONE
DURING THIS BUDGET PROCESS. I
WANT TO THANK -- THIS WAS THE
FIRST CHANCE I COULD TAKE TO
REALLY THANK BEN AND YOLANDA
AND THEIR STAFF FOR THEIR HARD
WORK THE LAST, YOU KNOW, COUPLE
OF WEEKS, ESPECIALLY THE LAST
WEEK WITH THE AMENDMENT
SCRAMBLED. I APPRECIATE THE
LONG HOURS THAT HAVE GONE INTO
THIS. THAT SAID, I WANTED TO
BRING UP A COUPLE OF POINTS
RELATED TO THIS PARTICULAR
TOPIC, WHICH IS THAT, I
APPRECIATE -- IN YOU WILL SEE
IN THIS BUDGET A NUMBER OF
SLIDES BECAUSE WE ARE JUST
GETTING TO THE INFORMATION
GATHERING BY WHICH TO MAKE
FUTURE DECISIONS. IT TAKES TIME
TO GATHER THAT INFORMATION. AS
A LEGISLATIVE BODY, WE DON'T
CONTROL THE DEPARTMENTS, AND SO
IT IS THROUGH THE BUDGET
PROCESS, THAT WE ARE REALLY
ABLE TO COMPEL DEPARTMENTS TO
GIVE US INFORMATION ON THE WORK
THAT THEY ARE DOING, AND SO WE
HAVE REALLY STARTED TO, IN MY
OPINION, DIG INTO THESE
PROGRAMS NOW, AND A LOT OF US
HAVE PUT INSIGHTS BY WHICH,
LIKE I SAID EARLIER, WE ARE
GETTING INFORMATION AND DATA,
BY WHICH WE ARE MAKING INFORMED
DECISIONS. AS TO THIS
PARTICULAR -- I APPRECIATE AND
THANK MY COLLEAGUE,
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, FOR HER
THOUGHTFULNESS AND PASSION
AROUND THESE ISSUES. I,
HOWEVER, THINK THAT WE HAVEN'T
DONE OUR HOMEWORK, BY WHICH WE
ARE ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION OF
THIS NATURE. I WILL SAY, I'M
NOT MORALLY OPPOSED, HOWEVER,
WE ARE FAR FROM REALLY BEING
ABLE TO BRING A PROPOSAL THAT
IS STEEPED IN THE DATA. THERE
ARE A LOT OF THINGS IN OUR
BUDGET AT THE CITY THAT WE
FUND. THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS
THAT WE REALLY CARE ABOUT AND
THAT OUR CONSTITUENTS REALLY
CARE ABOUT. THERE IS A LOT OF
NEED OUT THERE. YOU KNOW, WE
HAD 100 PEOPLE COME TO CHAMBERS
YESTERDAY, TO TALK ABOUT THEIR
PARTICULAR INTEREST. THAT IS
200 PEOPLE OUT OF 750,000
PEOPLE. I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY
DATA POINTS TO DEMONSTRATE THE
NEEDS, WHICH, YOU KNOW, THAT
DOESN'T MEAN I'M NOT -- I
VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THAT THE
FOLKS THAT COME DOWN HERE TO
EXPRESS THEIR NEEDS HAVE THOSE
NEEDS, OF COURSE. AND I'M VERY
COMPELLED BY THAT. I ALSO NOTE
THAT THERE ARE OTHER FOLKS THAT
ARE NOT ABLE TO COME DOWN HERE
FOR WHATEVER REASON, WHO ALSO
HAVE NEEDS THAT WE NEED TO BE
ABLE TO ADDRESS, AND THAT WE
DON'T KNOW THE LEVEL OF THOSE
NEEDS UNTIL WE GET THESE DATA
POINTS AND INFORMATION FROM
DEPARTMENTS, AND I THINK THAT
IS REALLY CRITICAL, AND THAT IS
PART OF THE HOMEWORK THAT WE
HAVE TO BE DOING AS A
LEGISLATIVE BODY, AND IT IS OUR
RESPONSIBILITY TO DO SO. IT IS
PART OF THE ACCOUNTABILITY
PIECE TO OUR CONSTITUENTS, THAT
WE DO THAT WORK BEFORE WE THEN
ENGAGE IN THIS KIND OF
EXERCISE. AND SO, I APPRECIATE
MY COLLEAGUE, COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA'S OBSERVATIONS AND POINTS
ABOUT SEATTLEITES DON'T HAVE
THE INFORMATION REGARDING
OUTCOMES AND RESULTS. WE DO
HAVE AN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS
PROBLEM. I HAVE BEEN SAYING
THAT SINCE I GOT HERE IN
JANUARY, AND IT IS SOMETHING I
HAVE COMMITTED TO MY
CONSTITUENTS TO REALLY CONTINUE
TO LOOK INTO AND TAKE INTO, AND
I DON'T FEEL WE ARE THERE YET.
WE DON'T HAVE INFORMATION BY
WHICH TO MAKE A LOT OF
DECISIONS, I WILL SAY. NOT JUST
THIS DECISION. MANY OTHER
DECISIONS. I WILL BE VERY
TRANSPARENT ABOUT THAT. AS I
SAID EARLIER, WE ARE USING THIS
BUDGET PROCESS TO PUT IN OUR
SLIDES REQUESTING INFORMATION,
SO WHEN WE ARE MAKING DECISIONS
IN THE FUTURE, IT IS ACTUALLY
BASED ON REAL DATA AND
INFORMATION. ABOUT THE THINGS
THAT WE DECIDED TO FUND AS BODY
AND AS A CITY, AND SO, FOR ME,
IN TERMS OF THE ACCOUNTABILITY
PIECES, WE ARE NOT THERE WITH
THE INFORMATION. I APPRECIATE
THAT THIS BODY, AND I
APPRECIATE WORKING WITH YOU
ALTOGETHER, AS PART OF THIS
PARTICULAR BUDGET PROCESS, TO
REQUEST THAT INFORMATION. I
LOOK FORWARD TO NEXT YEAR'S
BUDGET, BY WHICH, HOPEFULLY, WE
HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING AND
BETTER INFORMATION BY WHICH WE
CAN MAKE BETTER DECISIONS ABOUT
CITY BUDGETING, AND WHAT THE
NEEDS ARE IN THE COMMUNITY, AND
SEE FROM THE ACTUAL DATA WHAT
THE NEEDS ARE, AND HOW TO
BETTER MANAGE THE MONEY THAT WE
ACTUALLY SPEND ON THESE
PROGRAMS, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I
AM VERY SUPPORTIVE OF -- WE
HAVE ALL SAID -- AFFORDABILITY,
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY, THE
IMPORTANCE OF, YOU KNOW, RENTAL
ASSISTANCE, AND FOOD SECURITY,
AND YET, WE ARE SPENDING ALL
THIS MONEY, AND I DON'T
ACTUALLY -- NONE OF US CAN
ACTUALLY SAY HOW THIS MONEY IS
BEING SPENT, AND WHAT THE
ACTUAL CONTINUAL, CONTINUED
NEED IS. HOW MUCH ARE WE
FALLING SHORT? I HAVE NO IDEA.
AND IF YOU ALL KNOW, PLEASE DO
SHARE THAT WITH ME. I HAVE NOT
SEEN WHAT THE ACTUAL NUMBERS
NEED IS, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ALL
OF THESE THINGS. I THINK THAT
IS CRITICAL TO THIS
CONVERSATION. SO I REALLY LOOK
FORWARD TO THE CONTINUED
CONVERSATION MOVING FORWARD, AS
PART OF THIS AND MANY DECISIONS
THAT WE WILL HAVE TO MAKE IN
THE TIME THAT WE ARE HERE.
THANK YOU, CHAIR.
‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA. COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH.
‎THANK YOU , MR. CHAIR. I
WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE AND COUNCILMEMBER SAKA
FOR BRINGING THIS FOR US TO
TALK ABOUT. WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN
A GIVING CITY AND WANTING TO,
YOU KNOW, HAVE AN IMPACT FOR
OUTCOMES, AND SO, I JUST WANTED
TO THANK YOU ALL FOR BRINGING
THIS TO THE CONVERSATION, FOR
US TO DISCUSS AS A COUNCIL
BECAUSE I THINK IT IS
INCREDIBLY FOR IMPORTANT FOR US
TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION. I
WANTED TO PUBLICLY SAY THAT.
‎THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE, LAST WORD.
‎THANK YOU. SO I DID WANT TO
TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO THANK
BOTH COUNCILMEMBER MORALES FOR
HER SPONSORSHIP AND
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA FOR THE
COSPONSORSHIP, RECOGNIZING THIS
WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET IT
BEFORE US. I APPRECIATE YOUR
BEING WILLING TO DO THAT.
AGAIN, I THINK WE CLEARLY HAVE
RESPECTFUL DIFFERENCES OF
OPINION. I GUESS, IN TERMS OF
-- TRUE. I SHARE COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA'S CONCERN. I SHARE THE
CONCERN THAT WE HAVE A RESULTS,
OUTCOMES PROBLEM. AND WE DO.
AND WE DO NEED TO DO A BETTER
JOB OF CREATING CLEAR,
OBJECTIVE MEASURES OF
PERFORMANCE. ALL OF THAT SAID,
WE HAVE UNMET NEED IN THE CITY.
WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO
HAVE UNMET NEED IN THE CITY. I
THINK THIS IS A TIME WHEN WE
CAN BEGIN COLLECTING THE FUNDS.
WE CAN THEN HAVE INTELLIGENT
DISCUSSION ABOUT WHERE SHOULD
IT GO. THIS IS REALLY TO START
THAT PROCESS. TO THE POINT
ABOUT ROOT CAUSES, YEAH.
ABSOLUTELY. WE NEED TO ADDRESS
THE ROOT CAUSES, AND I
CERTAINLY SUPPORT HAVING MORE
RESIDENT SERVICES IN BUILDINGS,
PARTICULARLY IN OUR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING BUILDINGS. PERMANENT
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING. WE NEED TO
BEEF UP THOSE SERVICES. THE
OTHER THING I WANT TO POINT OUT
HERE IS THAT STATISTICS ARE
QUITE COMPELLING. 67% OF
SEATTLE RESIDENTS ARE RENTERS.
44% OF HOUSEHOLDS IN SEATTLE
ARE COST BURDENS. THEY ARE
SPENDING 30% OF THEIR INCOME
AND RENT ON UTILITIES. 30% IS
THE CUTOFF AT WHICH PEOPLE ARE
CONSIDERED -- THAT'S THE
AMOUNT PEOPLE ARE CONSIDERED
REASONABLE FOR THEM TO MANAGE.
BUT THEN I WOULD NOTE THAT 19%
OF HOUSEHOLDS IN SEATTLE ARE
SEVERELY COST BURDENS. THEY ARE
PAYING 50% OR MORE IN RENT AND
UTILITIES. THEN YOU LOOK OUR
MFTE PROGRAM, WHERE PEOPLE GET
LOWER RENT AT 60% AND BELOW.
85% OF THOSE HOUSEHOLDS ARE
COST BURDENS. 25% ARE SEVERELY
COST BURDENS. THAT MEETS 25%
AND REDUCED INCOME SUBSIDIZED
HOUSING ARE STILL PAYING US --
[ INAUDIBLE ] THIS IS IN A CITY
WITH ONE OF THE HIGHEST MINIMUM
WAGES IN THE COUNTRY. I DON'T
KNOW HOW WE COMPARE TO SAN
FRANCISCO, BUT, ANYWAY, ONE OF
THE ROOT CAUSES IS THAT
PEOPLE'S INCOME IS NOT KEEPING
UP WITH THE COST OF LIVING. IT
IS NOT KEEPING UP WITH RENT. IT
IS NOT KEEPING UP WITH FOOD OR
UTILITIES. WE LIVE IN A VERY
EXPENSIVE CITY. WE LIVE IN A
CITY IN WHICH THE INCOME
INEQUALITY IS CONTINUING TO
GROW AT A RAPID PACE. WITH OF
THE NATIONAL ELECTION, WE ARE
GOING TO SEE THAT ACCELERATE
EXPONENTIALLY. SO, YES, THERE
ARE ROOT CAUSES OF POVERTY.
THERE ARE ROOT CAUSES OF MENTAL
ILLNESS. THERE ARE ROOT CAUSES
OF ADDICTION. THERE IS ALSO
ROOT CAUSE OF ECONOMIC
INABILITY TO KEEP UP. WE HAVE
AN OBLIGATION IN THE CITY TO
HELP PEOPLE KEEP UP. AND WE
HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO NOT
CONTINUE TO CREATE A CITY WHERE
EVERYBODY IS UNSTABLE. YOU
KNOW, THE FOCUS ON HER HOUSING
LEVY, AND OUR OFFICE OF HOUSING
IS BUILDING MORE RENTAL UNITS.
THAT IS GREAT. WE NEED TO PUT A
LOT MORE MONEY IN BUILDING
HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES. WE
NEED TO REBUILD A MIDDLE-CLASS
IN THIS CITY, AND WE ARE NOT
PUTTING ENOUGH MONEY. AND I
AGREE WE DON'T KNOW WHERE IT
IS ALL GOING AND THERE IS A
PIPELINE ISSUE, AND WE NEED TO
WORK ON THAT. WE ALSO AS A CITY
NEED TO HAVE A VISION AND MAKE
A COMMITMENT. IN MY OPINION,
THAT IS GOING TO BE EVEN MORE
IMPORTANT AS WE GO FORWARD WITH
THE NATIONAL RESULTS. SO, THANK
YOU VERY MUCH.
‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE. SEATTLE IS THE ONLY CITY
WITH A HIGHER MINIMUM WAGE THAN
SAN FRANCISCO. IT HAS JUST BEEN
SINCE YOU MADE THAT COMMENT.
MOVING ON, IF WE WANT TO MOVE
ON TO SEATTLE CHANNEL FUNDING,
SPONSORED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
NELSON.
‎CANCELED BILL 120911,
SPONSORED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
NELSON AND COSPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBERS KENDALL AND
RIVERA. THIS IS DECLINING
REVENUES FROM CABLE FRANCHISE
FEES. CABLE FRANCHISE FEES HAVE
BEEN DECLINING FOR A NUMBER OF
YEARS AND ARE PREDICTED TO
CONTINUE TO DECLINE. AS
CUSTOMERS MOVE AWAY FROM
TRADITIONAL CABLE SERVICES TO
STREAMING SERVICES. THIS BILL
STATES THE COUNCIL'S INTENT TO
ESTABLISH A DEDICATED AND
ONGOING FUNDING PLAN SUFFICIENT
TO MEET THE OPERATING AND
CAPITAL NEEDS OF THE SEATTLE
CHANNEL SUCH THAT THEY CAN
CONTINUE TO PROVIDE THE
GOVERNMENT PROGRAMMING AND ALSO
THE TYPES OF CIVIC, CULTURAL,
AND COMMUNITY PROGRAMMING THAT
THEY PRODUCE. WHEN ESTABLISHED,
THE FUNDING PLAN SHOULD INCLUDE
BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO THE
FOLLOWING SOURCES. SO THE FIRST
IS AT LEAST 50%, BUT NO LESS
THAN $1.7 MILLION OF CABLE
FRANCHISE FEE REVENUES EVERY
YEAR SHOULD BE DEDICATED TO THE
SEATTLE CHANNEL. THE SECOND IS
THAT SEATTLE INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT SHOULD
INCORPORATE A PORTION OF
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES'S
EXPENSES INTO ITS COST
ALLOCATION MODEL. THAT ENSURES
THAT THOSE IN SUPPORT OF THE
SERVICES AND PRIORITIES OF
OTHER THE PERMITS ARE ALLOCATED
TO THOSE DEPARTMENTS. THE THIRD
CATEGORY IS THE GENERAL FUND.
THE GENERAL FUND SHOULD BE USED
EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE COVERAGE OF
MEETINGS, PRESS CONFERENCES AND
OTHER PUBLIC EVENTS OF THE CITY
COUNCIL, AND OTHER CITY OF
SEATTLE ELECTED OFFICIALS. THEY
COMMENTED THAT THEY PRESENT THE
FUNDING PLAN WITH ELEMENTS
CONSISTENT WITH THE BILL AND
LEGISLATION NECESSARY TO
IMPLEMENT THE PLAN. INTO NEXT
YEAR, 2025, LESLIE, THE BILL
STATES THE COUNCIL'S
EXPEDITION THAT INTEGRATING THE
FUNDING PLAN, THE EXECUTIVE
WILL USE THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF
ANY ADVISORY WORKGROUPS THAT
ARE ESTABLISHED TO STUDY THE
SEATTLE CHANNEL'S OPERATIONS
AND FINANCING. THIS REFERENCE
IS TWO ADVISORY WORKGROUPS.
THAT IS INCLUDED IN GROUP C.
THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED LATER
TODAY.
‎FANTASTIC. THANK YOU.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
‎THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WOULD
LIKE TO THANK COUNCIL CHAIR FOR
INCLUDING THAT IN THE PACKAGE
THROUGH 2026. I KNOW THAT
PROBABLY EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US
WAS REALLY INTERESTED IN
ENSURING THAT SEATTLE CHANNEL
WAS FUNDED ENOUGH TO CONTINUE
ITS PROGRAMMING THROUGH THIS
YEAR AND INTO NEXT. AS NOTED
ALREADY, THIS LEGISLATION DOES
DIRECT THE EXECUTIVE TO
ESTABLISH AN ONGOING AND
SUSTAINABLE FUNDING PLAN. IT
IDENTIFIES FUNDING SOURCES THAT
INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT NECESSARILY
LIMITED TO 50% OF THE EXISTING
CABLE FUND REVENUES, AND I PUT
THIS IN HERE BECAUSE IT IS THE
PERCENTAGE OF CABLE FUND
REVENUES HAS BEEN DECLINING
OVER THE YEARS, AS MORE DEMANDS
HAVE BEEN MADE ON THE FUND AS A
WHOLE. THE RESOLUTION THAT WAS
PASSED IN 2001 DOES INDICATE
THAT PAYING FOR SEATTLE CHANNEL
WAS THE FIRST PRIORITY AFTER
SOME OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND
OBLIGATORY THINGS THAT THE
CABLE FUND HAD TO PAY FOR. THAT
IS THE MARKER FOR, YES, WE ARE
STILL CONSIDERING THE SEATTLE
CHANNEL AS A MAJOR RECIPIENT OF
THE CABLE FUND REVENUES. THE
SECOND IS THE COST ALLOCATION
TO DIFFERENCE IS ALREADY SET.
THE THIRD WOULD BE GENERAL FUND
REVENUES. THAT WOULD BE
DEDICATED FOR PAYING FOR THE
PRODUCTION COSTS OF OUR
MEETINGS. SO ALL THE HARD WORK
THAT SEATTLE CHANNEL IS DOING
RIGHT NOW, AND ALSO, FOR PRESS
CONFERENCES AND OTHER PUBLIC
MEETINGS. WHY? BECAUSE WE ARE
OBLIGATED TO HAVE PUBLIC
MEETINGS AND SO, THEREFORE, THE
THINKING IS THAT NOBODY WOULD
EVER TRY. NO FUTURE POLITICIAN
WOULD EVER TRY TO GO AFTER THAT
SIZE OF FUNDING. AS NOTED, THIS
LEGISLATION DOES ANTICIPATE
PASSAGE OF THE SLIDE, THAT WILL
CONVENE A WORKGROUP THAT WILL
MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION FOR
LONG-TERM FUNDING. I COMPLETELY
WELCOME THAT. I AM TOLD -- NOT
TO GET INTO THE WEEDS, BUT IT
IS IMPORTANT THAT THE SEATTLE
CHANNEL BE REPRESENTED ON THAT
WORKGROUP. I HAVE NO REASON TO
DOUBT THAT THAT WILL BE THE
CASE. ULTIMATELY, WHAT IS
NECESSARY, COLLEAGUES, IS
CERTAINTY. IS CERTAINTY. WE
DON'T WANT TO LOSE THE TALENT
OR THE EMPLOYEES THAT PRODUCE
AND MAKE POSSIBLE THE
AWARD-WINNING PROGRAMMING AND
ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL PUBLIC
SERVICE THAT IS THE SEATTLE
CHANNEL RIGHT NOW. THAT IS WHY
I WAS MOTIVATED TO PUT FORTH
LEGISLATION THAT SETS THE DATE
FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A
FUNDING PLAN THAT COULD BE
IMPLEMENTED IN 2026 SO THAT
THERE IS NO QUESTION GOING
FORWARD THAT WE WILL BE TALKING
ABOUT THIS AGAIN. THANK YOU.
‎THANK YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT. COLLEAGUES? THERE
ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS BUT I
WILL SHARE MY COMMENTS ON THE
PASS IT BACK TO YOU FOR LAST
WORD, TRENIN. JUST REALLY
APPRECIATE YOUR WORK ON THIS.
EVERYONE ON THIS DAIS EXPRESSED
THEIR SUPPORT FOR CONTINUING
THE SEATTLE CHANNEL FUNDING AND
MAKING SURE THEY REMAIN A
STRONG ENTITY WITHIN THE CITY
OF SEATTLE. I APPRECIATE THE
SUPPORT ACROSS THE DAIS. WE
HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEIR
FUNDING SOURCE IS INDEPENDENT
FROM ELECTED OFFICIAL
INFLUENCE, CONSIDERING THE
CABLE FRANCHISE TAX REDUCTIONS
AT SUCH A RAPID RATE AT THIS
POINT. THE FACT THAT WE NEED TO
MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE
WATCHING DOWNSTAIRS KNOW THAT
WE HAVE THEIR BACK NO MATTER
WHAT, UNTIL WE CAN FIND A
BIGGER, BROADER WAY TO MAKE
SURE THAT SUPPORT CAN HOPEFULLY
EXPAND THEIR ABILITIES. THIS IS
A GOOD BILL. THANK YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT. DO YOU WANT FINAL
WORD?
‎I WANT TO THANK BRIAN FOR
PUTTING ALL YOUR EFFORT INTO
THIS AT THE LAST MINUTE. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU TO MY
COLLEAGUES FOR YOUR SUPPORT,
HOPEFULLY.
‎THANK YOU.
‎I THINK WE WILL MOVE ON TO
THE NEXT ITEM.
‎THE NEXT ITEM IS ANOTHER NEW
PIECE OF LEGISLATION, ONE THAT
WOULD ESTABLISH NEW PAYROLL
EXPENSE POLICIES. ABOUT A MONTH
AGO, I WAS HERE WHEN THE POLICY
CONSIDERATIONS PHASE. I'M
GOING TO USE THE PHRASE
JUMPSTART POLICIES. [ INAUDIBLE
] AS PART OF THAT, I HAD THAT
SERIES OF QUESTIONS THAT I
THOUGHT WOULD BE ESSENTIAL FOR
YOU COLLECTIVELY TO ANSWER, AS
YOU SAID, EITHER ADOPT POLICIES
OR SET ONES OF YOUR OWN. I'M
HERE TO DESCRIBE THE PROPOSALS
FROM THE CHAIR REGARDING THOSE
POLICIES AND ESSENTIALLY
ANSWERING THOSE QUESTIONS. I'M
GOING TO TAKE THE FIRST COUPLE
OF SLIDES TO PROVIDE THE
SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSAL. THIS
IS LEGISLATION MADE FOR THE
COMMITTEE YESTERDAY. I'M GOING
TO HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE OF
AMENDMENTS BEING PROPOSED BY
COUNCILMEMBERS MOORE AND
MORALES. THEY HAVE ALREADY
ENGAGED STAFF ON THOSE OVEN
MITTS. IF OTHERS ARE
INTERESTED, THE DEADLINE IS,
AGAIN, THIS FRIDAY. THE
CALENDAR HAS YOU PUTTING ON THE
LEGISLATION AND AMENDMENTS ON
THE 19th. THE LEGISLATION WAS
BY CHAIR STRAUSS. IT BEGINS
WITH THE EXECUTIVES AS A BASE,
BUT MAKES A NUMBER OF
SIGNIFICANT AND IMPORTANT
CHANGES. FIRST OF ALL, LIKE THE
EXECUTIVES, IT ESTABLISHES
SPENDING CATEGORIES. THOSE
INCLUDE WHAT I WOULD DESCRIBE
AS THE ORIGINAL FIVE JUMPSTART
CATEGORIES. THE ADMINISTRATION
OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THE
EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT
INITIATIVE, ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT REORGANIZATION, AND
THE GREEN NEW DEAL. IT WAS
ADDED AS PART OF THAT BUDGET
PROCESS. I WOULD USE THAT TO
DESCRIBE THAT BODY OF SERVICES.
THIS LEGISLATION WOULD ADD
GENERAL FUND -- TRANSFERS TO
THE GENERAL FUND, AS ELIGIBLE
USE. AND AT A REVENUE
STABILIZATION ACCOUNT. THIS
LEGISLATION FORMALIZES THE
REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT
FOR THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX. [
INAUDIBLE ] AGAIN, [ INAUDIBLE
] THEY APPRECIATED THE VALUE OF
THE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT HERE.
THE VOLATILITY OF THIS REVENUE
SOURCE IS ONE OF THE REASONS
THAT SUCH AN ACCOUNT WOULD MAKE
A FAIR AMOUNT OF SENSE. I WILL
EXPLAIN THIS FURTHER, BUT THERE
ARE NO RESTRICTIONS PUT ON THE
ALLOCATIONS AMONG THESE
CATEGORIES. IT IS FLEXIBLE IN
THAT WAY. IT ALLOWS YOU, THIS
YEAR, AND NEXT YEAR, AND GOING
FORWARD, TO ESTABLISH WHAT THE
ALLEGATION IS BETWEEN THESE
SPENDING CATEGORIES, AND
SPECIFICALLY, BETWEEN THE
GENERAL FUND SUPPORT, AND THE
OTHER ORIGINAL PRIORITIES. I
WOULD ADD, WITH RESPECT TO ONE
OF THE PRIORITIES, MENTAL
HEALTH AND VIOLENCE PREVENTION,
WE IDENTIFIED THOSE AS ELIGIBLE
USES FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS FOR
25 AND 26, BUT NOT BEYOND, WITH
THE IMPLIED INTENT TO PROVIDE
FUNDING FOR THOSE TO THE
RENEWAL OF THE FAMILIES AND
EDUCATION LEVY. AND NOW HAS A
LONGER TITLE, BUT I'M GOING TO
FORGET IT. THIS LEGISLATION
DEALS WITH THAT ISSUE SLIGHTLY
DIFFERENTLY. THAT IS WHAT THAT
FOOTNOTE IS. IT IS AN IMPORTANT
FOOTNOTE. IT WOULD MAINTAIN
YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH AND
VIOLENCE PREVENTION AS ELIGIBLE
USE UNTIL A SUSTAINABLE
ALTERNATIVE FUNDING SOURCES
PROVIDED FOR THOSE ITEMS. THAT
FUNDING SOURCE COULD BE THE
LEVY, BUT IT COULD BE SOMETHING
ELSE, SO, BUT IT IS EXPLICIT
ABOUT THAT. IT IS A NOTABLE
DIFFERENCE. IN TERMS OF
PERCENTAGE ALLOCATIONS, THE
LEGISLATION SETS OUT AS
GUIDELINES, BUT NOT
CONSTRAINTS, THE ORIGINAL
TARGETS IN THE LEGISLATION. I
SET IT UP SO THAT IT HAS THREE
PLANKS. THE WEIGHT THESE
PERCENTAGES WORK, OF THE MONEY
ALLOCATED FOR THOSE FIVE
CATEGORIES, THIS IS HOW IT IS
DIVIDED. THEY DON'T SAY HOW
MUCH MONEY -- WHICH SHARE OF
THE REVENUES HAVE TO GO TO THIS
SET OF THINGS. THAT FLEXIBILITY
REMAINS . OF THE MONEY
ALLOCATED TO THESE FIVE ITEMS,
THESE PERCENTAGES ARE SET AS
GUIDELINES. THE INTENT HERE IS
TO PRESERVE THE RELATIVE
PRIORITIES ESTABLISHED IN THE
ORIGINAL JUMPSTART LEGISLATION,
BUT AGAIN, TO PROVIDE THE
FLEXIBILITY ABOUT THE TOTAL
AMOUNT OF FUNDING PROVIDED
EITHER TO THE GENERAL FUND OR
TO THESE PRIORITIES, SO, THOSE
ARE GUIDELINES, BUT NOT FINDING
CONSTRAINTS. NEXT SLIDE. AS I
DESCRIBED MOMENTS AGO, BUT NOW,
IN MORE DETAIL, IT DOESN'T
ESTABLISH A FORMAL REVENUE
STABILIZATION ACCOUNT, AN RSA,
IF YOU WILL, WITHIN THE
JUMPSTART FUND. IT TARGETS THE
BALANCE AT 10% OF FORECAST
REVENUES. THAT IS IN THE RANGE
OF FRENCH $50 MILLION --
$45-$50 MILLION. IT ESTABLISHES
THAT THE TARGET SHOULD BE
REACHED WITHIN FOUR YEARS AS
PART OF THE CURRENT PROPOSED
BALANCING PACKAGE. SOME OF THE
RESERVE PROPOSED BY THE
EXECUTIVE IS BEING ALLOCATED TO
OTHER THINGS. THIS SETS THE
TARGET SO THAT THE BALANCE GETS
REBUILT. THE FOUR-YEAR TIME
FRAME IS CONSISTENT WITH THE
TIMEFRAME FOR THE RSA FOR THE
GENERAL FUND. SIMILARLY TO THE
GENERAL FUND RSA, THE PROPOSED
POLICIES ESTABLISHED AS AN
AUTOMATIC MECHANISM TO HELP
MAKE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE
REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT,
AND IN PARTICULAR, WE WOULD
LOOK AT THE BALANCE. AS WE
BUDGET FROM YEAR-TO-YEAR, THERE
WAS A REASON WHY YOU MIGHT HAVE
A PROJECTED FUND BALANCE --
PURPOSEFUL FUND BALANCE IN THE
FIRST YEAR. YOU EXPECT TO SPEND
SOME OF THAT MONEY IN THE FIRST
YEAR, BUT NOT ALL OF IT. SO
THERE WILL BE A PROJECTED FUND
BALANCE. IF THE FUND BALANCE
ENDS UP ABOVE THAT LEVEL, AND
IT COULD END UP ABOVE THE LEVEL
FOR TWO FUNDAMENTAL REASONS --
ONE IS THAT REVENUES CAME IN
HIGHER THAN THE FORECAST, AND
THE OTHER IS THAT THE
EXPENDITURES DIDN'T REACH THE
LEVEL THAT HAD BEEN
ANTICIPATED. YOU TAKE THE
DIFFERENCE OF THOSE THINGS, AND
HALF OF THAT DIFFERENCE IS
AUTOMATICALLY TRANSFERRED TO
THE REVENUE STABILIZATION
ACCOUNT. THE OTHER HALF IS
AVAILABLE TO ADDRESS IMMEDIATE
NEEDS, WHATEVER THOSE MIGHT BE,
OR TO INCREASE THE
CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE
STABILIZATION ACCOUNT. IT WOULD
BE FLEXIBILITY ABOUT THE OTHER
HAVE, IF YOU WILL, AND A
TECHNICAL NOTE, AND COMPARING
THE ACTUAL AND THE FORECAST
FUND BALANCE, IT WOULD TAKE
ACCOUNT FOR CARRYFORWARD. THERE
ARE SOME ALLOCATIONS THAT MIGHT
NOT HAVE BEEN SPENT IN THE
PREVIOUS YEAR. THERE IS EVERY
INSPIRATION THAT THEY WOULD
HAVE. THE GOAL WOULD BE TO
CARRYFORWARD THOSE REVENUES. WE
WILL TAKE ACCOUNT FOR THAT. IN
PARTICULAR, IF YOU MADE AN
ALLOCATION FOR SOME CAPITAL
PURPOSE THAT DIDN'T QUITE GET
EXECUTED IN THAT YEAR, IT WOULD
BE NATURAL TO CARRY THAT
FORWARD AS PART OF THE FUND
BALANCE. IT IS REALLY A
TECHNICAL POINT. AND THEN,
WITHDRAWALS. THERE ARE CRITERIA
SET FOR WHEN YOU COULD TURN TO
THE JUMPSTART REVENUE
STABILIZATION ACCOUNT. I HAVE
DESCRIBED THEM MECHANICALLY OR
PARTLY IN TWO WAYS. ONE IS,
BETWEEN THE TIME THAT MAYOR
SUBMITTED HIS BUDGET AND YOU
TAKE FINAL ACTION ON, THE
FORECAST FOR THOSE REVENUES
DROPPED. THE OPPOSITE THING
HAPPENED THIS YEAR, BUT IT
COULD EASILY HAPPEN THAT THE
FORECAST THAT WAS PREPARED IN
AUGUST, VERSUS THE ONE PREPARED
IN OCTOBER SHOWS A DECLINE IN
REVENUES. THAT WOULD BE A
LAST-MINUTE CHANGE. TO MAKE
DIFFICULT CHOICES ABOUT CUTTING
APPROPRIATIONS, SO IT COULD
MAKE SENSE TO LEAN ON THE
REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT.
THAT IS ONE OF THE TIMES YOU
COULD DO IT. THE OTHER IS,
AFTER YOU ADOPT THE BUDGET, SO
THE BUDGET GETS ADOPTED A WEEK
FROM NOW, AND THEN, COME APRIL,
THERE IS A REVENUE FORECAST
UPDATE THAT REDUCES THE AMOUNT
OF REVENUE THAT IS ANTICIPATED
FOR THE THEN CURRENT YEAR, FOR
2025, FOR INSTANCE. AT THAT
POINT, YOUR BUDGET IS OUT OF
BALANCE. IT IS A REVENUE
FORECAST. THE FORECAST HAS COME
DOWN. YOU HAVE TWO CHOICES AT
THAT POINT. WELL, THE EXECUTIVE
-- YOU COULD REDUCE
EXPENDITURES. THE EXECUTIVE
DOES THAT ADMINISTRATIVELY, OR
YOU REDUCE APPROPRIATIONS, OR
YOU CAN TURN THE ACCOUNT. THAT
IS WHAT IS IMAGINED THERE. THAT
IS THE 15. MOVING ON TO OTHER
ELEMENTS OF THE LEGISLATION,
CONSISTENT WITH THE PROPOSAL,
LEGISLATION BEFORE YOU, IT
ELIMINATES THE JUMPSTART
OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. THAT
COMMITTEE HAD BEEN ESTABLISHED
AS A NINE-MEMBER BODY. IT WAS
CREATED TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF
JUMPSTART SPENDING AND ALSO, TO
ASSESS THE TAXES IMPACT ON THE
LOCAL ECONOMY. COUNCIL
APPOINTED FIVE MEMBERS ABOUT A
YEAR AGO. THE EXECUTIVE HAS NOT
MADE NOMINATIONS. THE LAST
ELEMENT IS ANOTHER SIGNIFICANT
ONE. IT WILL REMOVE THE SUNSET
DATE. CURRENTLY, THE PAYROLL
EXPENSE TEXT SUNSETS AT THE END
OF 2040. THIS LEGISLATION WOULD
ELIMINATE THAT SUNSET AND
ESTABLISH THE TAXES AS AN
ONGOING AFFAIR, IF YOU WILL. I
THINK IT IS WORTH OF A STOP TO
ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT.
‎THANK YOU, DIRECTOR. EVEN
THOUGH I STEPPED OUT FOR A
SECOND, I COULD HEAR EVERY WORD
YOU SAID. LET'S PAUSE HERE AND
LOOK AT THIS IN TOTAL, AND MOVE
ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE WITH TWO
POLICY PROPOSALS. NOT A
CORRECTION, FOR THE RECORD, BUT
MAYBE A CLARIFICATION FOR THE
RECORD. THE REMOVAL OF THE
JUMPSTART OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
WAS NOT A CHANGE MADE AT
COUNCIL AND THE BASE BILL.
‎I MEANT TO SAY THAT.
‎CORRECT.
‎COLLECTS, I AM GOING -- AS A
SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION, I
AM GOING TO SPEAK TO IT, AND
THEN WE WILL TAKE QUESTIONS AND
COMMENTS. I SEE THE COUNCIL
PRESIDENT ALREADY HAS HER HAND
UP. I'M GOING TO START IN THE
WAY BACK AND CURRENT TIME
MACHINE. COUNCIL PRESIDENT, IF
YOU COULD LEAVE YOUR HAND UP.
OTHERWISE, I'M GOING TO LOSE
YOU. WHEN THE LAST SET OF
POLICIES WERE VOTED ON, AND
THAT IS THE BILL -- THE
ORDINANCE ON THE LEGISLATION
TODAY, WE AT COUNCIL BELIEVED
THAT TODAY, SETTING UP FOR
2025, WE WOULD BE PAST THE
DOWNSTREAM ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF
THE PANDEMIC. AND SO, WE HAD
HOPED -- THIS IS PART OF WHY
THE QUESTION ABOUT THE
JUMPSTART USES -- THIS QUESTION
IS BEING CALLED IN THIS BUDGET
CYCLE. I REALLY WISH THAT WE
HAD BEEN CORRECT IN 2025. WE
WOULD BE PAST THE DOWNSTREAM
ECONOMIC ISSUES. THE REALITY IS
THAT THE DOWNTURN FOR THE
BUDGET HAS ONLY BEEN EXPRESSED
IN 2028 -- 2008 AND 2020. WE
NEED THE PATIENT FOR THIS
BUDGET SO WE DO NOT
UNNECESSARILY CUT STAFF AND
PROGRAMMING. SO WE DO NOT
ENGAGE IN AUSTERITY. EVEN WITH
THIS PROJECT, WE ARE CUTTING
STAFF AND PROGRAMMING, WHICH
ARE INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT
DECISIONS. DUE TO CENTRAL STEPS
REALLY GOOD WORK THIS YEAR, WE
FOUND EXISTING FUNDING FOR
COUNCIL PRIORITIES, WITHOUT
USING THE JUMPSTART RESERVE
FUND , UNTIL THE DOWNTURN
FORECAST, WHICH IS WHY WE HAD
TO USE THE MAJORITY OF THE
RESERVE FUND SEED FUNDING. THE
RESERVE ACCOUNT DID NOT EXIST
90 DAYS AGO, AND IT IS A REALLY
GOOD IDEA. WITH THIS EXPERIENCE
TAUGHT ME IS THE IMPORTANCE OF
HOW JUMPSTART ENSURES WE DO NOT
ENGAGE IN AUSTERITY BUDGETING.
WE USED JUMPSTART FUNDING TO
INCREASE ACCESS TO FOOD, LEGAL
ASSISTANCE, ADDITIONAL
HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES,
SERVING HOMELESS YOUTH, AND SO
MUCH MORE. THAT IS WHAT
JUMPSTART IS BEING USED OF --
ON THIS YEAR. LAST TIME WE HAD
LEGISLATION BEFORE US, WE
THOUGHT WE WOULD BE OUT OF THE
WOODS, BUT IN FACT, WE ARE IN
THE EYE OF THE STORM. WE ARE
EXPENSING THE DOWNTURNS OF THE
PANDEMIC AND AT THE SAME TIME,
COVERT RELIEF FUNDS ARE
EXPERIENCING -- EXPIRING. THE
BUOY WE USED IS NO LONGER
AVAILABLE TO US. WE NEED
FLEXIBILITY TO GET US THROUGH
THIS MOMENT. WE NEED TO ENSURE
THAT THE ORIGINAL PRIORITIES
ARE FUNDED ONCE WE ARE PAST
THIS ECONOMIC DOWNTURN WE ARE
IN. WE WILL LIKELY NEED BUDGET
FLEXIBILITY TO BE RESPONSIVE TO
THE MOMENT OVER THE COURSE OF
THE NEXT FOUR YEARS. EIGHT
YEARS AGO -- SO NOW, NOT
JUMPSTART, BUT EIGHT YEARS AGO,
IF YOU CAN TRACK WITH ME, WE
BEGAN FUNDING IMPORTANT
PRIORITIES TO SERVE SATELLITES
UNDER THE LAST PRESIDENTIAL
ADMINISTRATION. I FORESEE US
HAVING TO DO THE SAME THING
AGAIN, INCREASING FUNDING FOR
OFFICE OF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE
AFFAIRS, OFFICE OF CIVIL
RIGHTS, BACKFILLING FOR
CHANGING FEDERAL FUNDING
PRIORITIES. IF YOU REMEMBER THE
GRANDSON ACCEPTANCE ORDINANCE,
WE RECEIVED A LOT OF FEDERAL
FUNDING OVER THE LAST FOUR
YEARS. BECAUSE THE
INFRASTRUCTURE ACT, THE CLIMATE
ACT, IF YOU LOOK ON I-5 RIGHT
NOW, WE HAVE MORE FEDERAL FUNDS
COMING IN THERE. YOU'RE NOT
GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF THAT
FUNDING. WE WILL ALSO NEED TO
FUND COMMUNITY-BASED
ORGANIZATIONS TO MEET THE NEEDS
OF SEATTLEITES, AND MANY
PRIORITIES WE DON'T YET KNOW
ABOUT FOR THE NEXT FOUR YEARS.
I SAY THIS BECAUSE WHILE WE
DON'T KNOW WHAT OUR FUTURE
HOLDS, I DO KNOW THAT EVERY ONE
OF US UP HERE WILL WANT TO BE
NIMBLE AND RESPONSIVE TO
SERVING SEATTLEITES THROUGH
UNCERTAIN TIMES. THE POINT
THERE IS, THAT IS WHY WE NEED
FLEXIBILITY FOR THE NEXT FOUR
YEARS. LET'S WALK THROUGH WHAT
I'M PROPOSING. DIRECTOR NOBLE
DID A VERY GOOD JOB OF GIVING A
PRESENTATION ON HERE. I WANT TO
SPEAK ABOUT WHY THE COMPETENCE
OF REVIEW -- WHY I REQUESTED A
COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW. THIS GOES
BACK TO THESE GRANTS WE HAD
WITH JUMPSTART, THAT IT HAS OUR
NEEDS FOR THE GENERAL FUND HAVE
CHANGED AS WE GET OUT OF THIS
ECONOMIC RECESSION. DOWNSTREAM
IMPACTS. WHAT I DID NOT KNOW A
FEW YEARS AGO WAS THAT WE WOULD
STILL BE IN IT IN 2025. I
THOUGHT WE WOULD BE OUT OF THE
WOODS. THAT IS WHY I DON'T
WANT TO PUT STRICT PARAMETERS.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WILL BE
OUT OF THE WOODS. I DON'T KNOW
WHAT ELSE WE NEED TO BE
RESPONSIVE TO FOR THE NEXT TWO
YEARS, WHEN THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT NO LONGER
PARTICIPATES. AND I KNOW THAT
IN FOUR YEARS, WE HAVE TO HAVE
A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS AND
REVIEW ABOUT THESE POLICIES.
THE NEXT THING THIS DOES IS,
WHILE THE ORIGINAL PRIORITY --
FIVE, IF YOU COUNT ADMISSION --
WAS INCLUDED. WE INCLUDED THIS
WITH ORIGINAL PERCENTAGES TO BE
ALLOCATED OF JUMPSTART FUNDING
TO THESE CATEGORIES. THIS IS
WHAT MAYOR HARRELL DID THIS
YEAR. AND THEN, THROUGH THE
PACKAGE, USING THE JUMP START
RESERVE FUNDS, THINGS LIKE
FUNDING UNTIL ASSISTANCE AND
HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES,
THOSE ARE WITHIN THE ORIGINAL
FOUR CATEGORIES, BUT THEY WERE
NOT NECESSARILY CONSISTENT WITH
THE PERCENTAGES. I HAVE NOT
INCLUDED A HARD NUMBER FOR
JUMPSTART BEING USED FOR
PRIORITIES OR THE AMOUNT OF
GENERAL FUND TO BE USED THIS
YEAR, BECAUSE THE NUMBER OF
VARIABLES THAT ARE UNCERTAIN
TODAY ON NOVEMBER 13th, IS
HIGHER THAN THE NUMBER OF
VARIABLES WITH UNCERTAINTY IN
SEPTEMBER. SAID ANOTHER WAY, WE
ARE IN A MORE UNCERTAIN PLACE
TODAY THAN WE WERE THREE MONTHS
AGO. AND THAT'S WHY I DON'T
THINK THAT ADDING HARD NUMBERS
TODAY IS PRUDENT. I DO THINK
THAT THAT IS ABSOLUTELY
SOMETHING WE SHOULD DO, WHICH
IS WHY I REQUESTED THE TWO AND
FOUR YEAR CHECK INS. WE HAVE
INCLUDED MENTAL HEALTH AS A
USE, UNTIL A MORE STABLE
FUNDING SOURCE IS IMPLEMENTED.
NOT JUST IDENTIFIED. IT CAN'T
JUST BE PAST. THERE CANNOT BE
CAPPED IN ADDRESSING -- A GAP
IN ADDRESSING YOUTH MENTAL
HEALTH. THE NOTE IN ADDING
CLARITY THAT WITHIN THIS
ORDINANCE, IF THEY JUMPSTART
REVENUE DECREASES AND OTHER
SOURCES OF REVENUE SUPPORTING
GENERAL FUND ARE NOT REDUCED,
THE GENERAL FUND SHOULD BE USED
TO HONOR JUMPSTART PRIORITIES.
DURING THE SELECT BUDGET
SERIES, PART ONE OF -- I CANNOT
REMEMBER. WE HAVE HAD SO MANY
PRESENTATIONS ABOUT THIS. IF
YOU REMEMBER HOW MUCH WE WERE
FUNDING FOR EQUITABLE ELEMENT
INITIATIVES, IT WAS NOT VERY
MUCH. IT WAS FROM SWEET AND
BEVERAGE TASKS. IF YOU REMEMBER
THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT, THEY DID NOT HAVE
A LARGE BUDGET COMPARED TO WHAT
THEY HAVE TODAY. I REMEMBER
BOBBY LEE, FORMER DIRECTOR OF
OED, SAYING THAT WE SHOULD PUT
1% ON ALL CONTRACTS TO FUND
OED, AND I THINK AT THAT TIME,
DIRECTOR NOBLE , THE BUDGET
OFFICE KICKED HIM UNDER THE
TABLE, BUT THE REASON THAT
BOBBY BROUGHT THAT UP WAS
BECAUSE THERE WAS NOT A
DEDICATED SOURCE OF FUNDING TO
SUPPORT OUR SMALLEST
BUSINESSES, AND THAT IS WHAT
JUMPSTART DOES. GREEN NEW DEAL
WAS A PRIORITY CLEARLY IN 2018,
2018. THAT TERM, YOU DON'T
HEAR SO MUCH ANYMORE, BECAUSE
IT IS GENERALLY THAT THE
CLIMATE CRISIS IS REAL AND IN
OUR FACE. WE NEED TO LOOK
FURTHER THAN SOUTH PARK WITH
THE FLOODING THAT IS OCCURRING
WITH THE KING TIDE'S, ET
CETERA. TO HOUSING. WE HAVE
MORE SUPPORT FOR HOUSING SINCE
JUMPSTART WAS PASSED, AND WE
ARE STILL DECADES BEHIND IN
PRODUCTION. I SPEAK ABOUT THIS
BECAUSE THIS SIMPLY NOTES THAT
JUMPSTART IS NOT A STABLE
FUNDING SOURCE, AND THE
PRIORITIES I ORIGINALLY
IDENTIFIED REMAIN INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT FOR US TO FUND IF WE
WANT A STRONG AND HEALTHY
SEATTLE. MOVING ONTO THE
RESERVE ACCOUNT, I THINK IT IS
PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. THIS IS
A VERY SMART DECISION BY THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE BECAUSE AGAIN,
THIS IS NOT A STABLE FUNDING
SOURCE. CREATING A RESERVE
ACCOUNT, I SPOKE TO THE USE OF
THE RESERVE ACCOUNT THIS YEAR.
IT HAD BEEN MY INTENT BEFORE
THE REVENUE FORECAST TO RETAIN
THAT RESERVE ACCOUNT, AND IT
DID ITS DROP THIS YEAR. SAID
ANOTHER WAY, IF THE $33 MILLION
HAD BEEN PROGRAMMED , RATHER
THAN HELD IN AN ACCOUNT, WE
WOULD'VE HAD A REALLY HARD
COST-BENEFIT CHOICES TO MAKE TO
USE THAT FUNDING. I GREATLY
APPRECIATE THE ABILITY TO HAVE
THAT FUND. IT IS VERY SMART. AS
DIRECTOR NOBLE LEGEND, USING
THE RAINY DAY FUND AND
EMERGENCY FUNDS AS GUIDES, WE
CREATED A POLICY FOR FILLING
THE RESERVE, AS WELL AS HOW WE
ARE TO USE THOSE RESERVE
DOLLARS. LASTLY, I'LL TALK
ABOUT REMOVING THE SUNSET. MY
GOAL IS THAT JUMPSTART FUNDS
ARE USED AS A PARACHUTE FOR THE
GENERAL FUNDS FOR A LIMITED
AMOUNT OF TIME. WITH THE
REALITY THAT JUMPSTART HAS BEEN
USED IN THE GENERAL FUND EVERY
YEAR OF ITS EXISTENCE.
RETAINING A SUNSET AND A
FUNDING SOURCE WE RELY SO
HEAVILY ON CREATES A STRUCTURAL
DEFICIT IN 2040, ON A SKILL WE
HAVE NOT EXPERIENCED.
COLLEAGUES, IF THIS TAX SUNSET
IT TODAY, WE WOULD HAVE A $430
MILLION DEFICIT IN 2025. WE
WOULD HAVE 84 $52 MILLION
DEFICIT IN 2026. FOR REFERENCE,
THIS YEAR, WE HAD A TICKET -- [
INAUDIBLE ] DEFICIT. WE ARE
SETTING OURSELVES UP FOR A
STRUCTURAL DEFICIT ON THE SCALE
OF HALF $1 BILLION. IF IN FOUR
YEARS, THE CONFERENCE OF REVIEW
DETERMINES THE GENERAL FUND
SHOULD BE AN ALLOWED USE MOVING
FORWARD, THE STRUCTURAL DEFICIT
BECOMES EVEN MORE REAL, BECAUSE
THE COUNCILMEMBERS IN FOUR
YEARS, IF THEY DECIDE TO
CONTINUE USING JUMPSTART FOR
THE GENERAL FUND, IT ABSOLUTELY
IS A SOURCE THAT THE GENERAL
FUND IS RELIANT ON. AND EVEN IF
WE ARE ABLE -- WHICH MAKES THE
STRUCTURAL DEFICIT EVEN MORE
REAL -- AND IF WE ARE ABLE TO
ACTUALIZE OUR GOALS OF HAVING A
STRUCTURALLY SOUND BUDGET
WITHOUT USING JUMPSTART IN THE
GENERAL FUND, THE SUNSET ENDS
ARE INVESTMENT AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AND REVITALIZATION
WITH SUPPORT FOR THE SMALLEST
BUSINESSES, LIKE I SPOKE ABOUT.
IT REMOVES OUR INVESTMENT, THE
MAJORITY SOURCE OF FUNDING FOR
THE INITIATIVE. IT REMOVES OUR
FUNDING SOURCE FOR ADDRESSING
THE CLIMATE CRISIS. VIA THE
GREEN NEW DEAL. AND AGAIN, IT
REDUCES OUR INVESTMENT IN
HOUSING. SO IF WE ARE GOING TO
CONTINUE USING JUMP START FOR
GENERAL FUND PROGRAMS,
HOMEOWNERSHIP -- IT IS
RESPONSIBLE GOVERNING FOR US TO
REMOVE THE SUNSET. IF WE
CONTINUE USING JUMPSTART
FUNDING FOR THE GENERAL FUND
PAST FOUR YEARS FROM NOW, THE
SUNSET NEEDS TO BE REMOVED IF
WE DO NOT WANT TO CREATE THE
STRUCTURAL DEFICIT LARGER THAN
WE HAVE EVER SEEN. WITH THAT,
COLLEAGUES, I WILL CALL ON
COUNCIL PRESIDENT AND THEN
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
COLLEAGUES, IF YOU HAVE
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, NOW IS
THE TIME. WE WILL MOVE ON AFTER
COMMENTS NOW TO AN OVERVIEW OF
A FEW OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT
HAVE BEEN DELETED SO FAR.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
‎I HAD A QUESTION, BUT COULD
YOU REPEAT YOUR LAST SENTENCE?
IT WAS POIGNANT, AND I WANT TO
MAKE SURE I HEARD IT.
‎IF WE CONTINUE TO USE
JUMPSTART FUNDING PAST FOUR
YEARS FROM NOW, IN FOUR YEARS,
WE NEED TO HAVE A CONFERENCE OF
REVIEW. WE NEED FLEXIBILITY FOR
THE NEXT FOUR YEARS. THAT IS
WHY THE BILL IS WRITTEN AS IT
IS. FOR YEARS FROM NOW, WE NEED
TO HAVE CONFIDENCE OF REVIEWS
BECAUSE I THINK IF WE ARE OUT
OF THE WOODS ON THE ECONOMIC
DOWNTURN, WE SHOULD RETURN TO
THE ORIGINAL PRIORITIES, PLUS
MENTAL HEALTH. BUT IF WE DON'T,
AND IN FOUR YEARS FROM NOW, THE
CHOICE IS MADE THAT THE GENERAL
FUND IS AN ACCEPTABLE USE OF
JUMPSTART FUNDING, THE
STRUCTURAL DEFICIT CREATED BY
THE SUNSET IN THIS BILL CREATES
A STRUCTURAL DEFICIT LARGER
THAN WE HAVE EVER SEEN BEFORE.
‎THANK YOU FOR THAT. SO, I
COULD BE WRONG, BUT I LIKE THE
IDEA OF THE REVENUE
STABILIZATION ACCOUNT. RSA. WE
SAW HOW FAST THAT WENT. THE WAY
I'M READING THIS, THE PROPOSED
BUDGET WAS AT 10% OF THE
CURRENT PET FORECAST. WE SAW
HOW FAST FOUR TIMES THE MINIMUM
AMOUNT PUT INTO THE RSA WENT
THIS YEAR. I DON'T KNOW HOW WE
WILL DEFINE WHAT THAT CAN BE
SPENT ON, BUT, IN GENERAL, I
WANTED TO SAY THAT I SUPPORT
TRANSPARENCY IN HOW WE SPEND
THIS TAX SOURCE, OR THIS
REVENUE SOURCE, BECAUSE UP
UNTIL NOW, THERE'S ALWAYS BEEN
A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT
A PROPOSED EXPENDITURE BY A
COUNCILMEMBER WOULD COUNT AS
CLOSE ENOUGH TO WHAT THE
JUMPSTART SPENDING PLAN
DESCRIBED, AND SO THERE WAS
ALWAYS THAT BACK AND FORTH.
THAT IS WHY THE OVERSIGHT BOARD
WAS -- THAT WAS ONE OF THE
FUNCTIONS OF THE OVERSIGHT
BOARD, WAS TO NEGOTIATE, WELL,
WHAT IS ELIGIBLE FOR THIS FUND?
I UNDERSTAND ON PAGE 15 -- I AM
GETTING TO MY POINT -- THERE
WAS A NINE MEMBER COMMITTEE
CREATED TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT TO
PERHAPS HELP COUNCIL DECIDE
WHAT START -- COUNTS AS A
JUMPSTART PROCEDURE. THAT WAS
NEVER CONVENED. I DO THINK THAT
IT IS IMPORTANT -- THAT WE DO
NEED TO HAVE CONTINUAL
ASSESSMENT OF THE JUMPSTART'S'
IMPACT ON OUR LOCAL ECONOMY,
AND ALSO, AS IT INTO PLACE WITH
OTHER POLICY DECISIONS WE MAY
MAKE. WHAT'S MOST -- BUT --
THE THING THAT I APPRECIATE
ABOUT PUTTING IT TOGETHER IN
JUMPSTART IS SIMPLY THIS. WE
NEED TO BE ABLE TO COMPARE THE
VIABILITY OR VALIDITY OF
EXPENDITURES AGAINST EACH OTHER
IN AN APPLES TO APPLES MANNER.
WITH THE EXPENDITURES OF OUR
GENERAL FUND ADJACENT REVENUE
SOURCES, IS THAT THEY ARE KIND
OF BUT ASIDE, AND THEY DON'T
HAVE TO COMPETE WITH OTHER
PRIORITIES, AND SO, THAT IS --
I WELCOME THAT THERE IS A
MELDING OF RESOURCES SO THAT WE
CAN MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON A
BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF ALL THE
REVENUE THAT WE MIGHT HAVE FOR
THAT PURPOSE. KEEPING IN MIND,
HOWEVER, THAT THERE ARE OTHER
RESTRICTED FUNDS THAT WE ARE
NOT TALKING ABOUT. SWEETENED
BEVERAGE, SHORT-TERM RENTAL,
TRANSIT. I WANT TO NOTE THAT
ONE HUGE THING THAT I'M SEEING
MISSING AS A PRIORITY MIGHT BE
COVERED UNDER MENTAL HEALTH. IT
IS TREATMENT. SO, TREATMENT FOR
ADDICTION, AND A RESPONSE TO
THE OPIOID CRISIS, HOWEVER YOU
WANT TO PUT IT, AND AS FAR AS I
CAN TELL, THE ONLY NEW FUNDING
FOR ADDICTION OR TREATMENT IN
THIS BUDGET BEFORE US RIGHT NOW
IS $470,000, THAT I PUT IN
THERE, AND I DIDN'T EVEN PUT
IN NEW MONEY. IT WAS A
REDIRECTION OF OPIOID
SETTLEMENT DOLLARS, FOR A
DIFFERENT PURPOSE, AND I DO
WANT TO URGE US THAT THIS IS A
ROOT CAUSE, EVERYBODY. AND I
WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT , AND
AS WE GO FORWARD, PLEASE,
EVERYBODY REMEMBER, THAT
ADDICTION, THE DRUG CRISIS, ET
CETERA, IS INEXTRICABLY LINKED
TO OUR HOMELESSNESS CRISIS, AND
OUR PUBLIC SAFETY CRISIS, AND I
URGE FOLKS TO TAKE THAT MINDSET
INTO FUTURE BUDGETS. THAT IS
ALL I HAVE TO SAY AND
PONTIFICATE.
‎THANK YOU. VICE CHAIR
RIVERA.
‎THANK YOU, CHAIR. SO I HAVE
A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, ON THE
REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT,
WHICH I THINK IS VERY PRUDENT.
CAN YOU TELL ME -- IS THIS THE
SIMILAR APPROACH THAT IS TAKEN
WHEN WE DO THE GENERAL FUND
RAINY DAY ACCOUNTS?
‎IT IS. IT IS NOT IDENTICAL,
BUT I PULLED THAT PIECE OF AND
USED IT FOR MODELING.
‎IT IS BASED ON PRACTICE THAT
WE USED -- A PRUDENT PRACTICE
THAT WE USE.
‎I SHOULD SAY, THE PERCENTAGE
HERE IS SOMEWHAT HIGHER BECAUSE
OF THE VOLATILITY. WE HAVE SEEN
SOME DROPPED 10% FROM ONE YEAR
TO ANOTHER.
‎THAT MAKES SENSE, THEN.
THANK YOU FOR CONFIRMING THAT.
ALSO, I WILL SAY THAT I
APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT, I
MEAN, IT IS A FACT THAT
JUMPSTART WAS PASSED, COUNCIL
HAS ALWAYS HAD TO USE IT FOR
CATEGORIES OTHER THAN THE ONES
THAT HAD BEEN NAMED ORIGINALLY.
AND I DON'T SEE -- I AGREE
WITH CHAIR, THE NEXT FOUR
YEARS, THAT CHANGING. I WOULD
SAY, I'M NOT SURE BEYOND THE
FOUR YEARS BECAUSE IT WOULD
HAVE TWO -- WE WOULD HAVE TO
TAKE A CLOSE LOOK AT THE BUDGET
AND START TO CUT THINGS, I
THINK, TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE. I
JUST DON'T SEE A LIKELY
SCENARIO, WHERE THINGS ARE
GOING TO CHANGE TO THE GENERAL
FUND, WHERE WE ARE NOT GOING TO
BE ABLE TO WERE NOT GOING TO
HAVE TO TAKE SOME CERTAIN
PORTION OF THIS JUMPSTART TEXT
TO BACKFILL.
‎JUST TO CLARIFY THIS POINT
-- AS WRITTEN, THESE POLICIES
CAN CONTINUE UNTIL THEY DO NOT.
AS CHAIR STRAUSS POINTED OUT,
THE CALLOUT OF COUNCILS INTENT
TO CHECK ON THEM IN TWO YEARS
AND TO COME PENSIVELY REVIEW
THEM IN FOUR YEARS, I THINK
THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH WHAT
YOU ARE SAYING ABOUT THE HOPE
IS, WE WANT TO BE IN A BETTER
SITUATION, BUT AGAIN, NO
GUARANTEE THAT WE WILL BE.
‎YES. YES. THANK YOU, BEN.
SO, I'M JUST REITERATING THAT
I DON'T EVEN THINK -- I MEAN,
I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE A
LONGER TERM POLICY DECISION.
AND I DO SHARE THE CHAIRS --
AND MANY OF OUR COLLEAGUES --
IT IS REALLY FORTUITOUS THAT WE
HAD JUMPSTART, OTHERWISE, WE
WOULD BE SITTING HERE, HAVING
TO CUT MANY THINGS IN THIS
BUDGET. AND WE DIDN'T HAVE TO
DO THAT BECAUSE WE HAD THAT
RESERVES BY WHICH TO BACKFILL,
AND, YOU KNOW, I VERY MUCH
APPRECIATE THE REVENUE
STABILIZATION ACCOUNT BECAUSE,
YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO, IF
SOMETHING HAPPENS, WE NEED TO
BE ABLE TO HAVE A RESERVE BY
WHICH TO UTILIZE FUNDS, AND IN
A WAY, LIKE WE DID THIS YEAR.
BUT THERE COULD BE, YOU KNOW,
COVID HAPPENED. I DON'T THINK
COVID WILL HAPPEN AGAIN, BUT
SOMETHING LIKE COVID COULD
HAPPEN, AND WE NEED TO BE
PRUDENT. WE NEED TO BE PRUDENT
ABOUT THE RESERVES, BOTH FOR
THE GENERAL FUND RESERVE, AND
THEN CREATING THIS VERY
DELIBERATE REVENUE
STABILIZATION ACCOUNT, SO I
VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE WORK
THAT WENT INTO THAT, AND I
APPRECIATE THAT MAYOR'S OFFICE
FOR SENDING IT DOWN LIKE THIS,
AND TO THE CHAIR, FOR INCLUDING
IT, KEEPING IT IN THIS PACKAGE.
AND THEN, I HAVE ONE LAST
QUESTION, CHAIR, IF THAT IS
OKAY. ON THE SUNSET DATE, WHAT
WAS ANTICIPATED WHEN THIS WAS
ORIGINALLY PUT IN -- WAS IT A
REVIEW? WE DIDN'T GET A LOT OF
INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT WENT
BEHIND THAT THOUGHT. AND LET ME
JUST SAY, I DON'T, YOU KNOW,
SUNSET DATES ARE -- ONE THING
THEY ACTUALLY HELP WITH IS
REALLY FORCING BODIES TO TAKE A
HARD LOOK AT THAT MOMENT,
WHENEVER THAT SUNSET IS COMING
UP, TO MAKE DECISIONS BY,
VERSUS GETTING COMPLACENT ABOUT
THINGS, ESPECIALLY IN THIS CASE
OF A VOLATILE TAX . I'M
WONDERING WHAT THE THOUGHT
PROCESS WAS AT THE TIME.
‎I DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW THE
ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. DO
YOU, CHAIR?
‎NOT TO GET IN THE WAY BACK
TIME MACHINE OF THE FIGHTS THAT
WE HAVE BEEN IN IN THE
CHAMBERS, I CAN TELL YOU THAT
THERE WERE SOME PEOPLE VERY
EXCITED ABOUT THIS TAX, AND
SOME PEOPLE VERY UPSET ABOUT
THIS TAX. THE SUNSET WAS A NICE
MIDDLE GROUND, AND AFTER THAT,
THE BILL WAS VETOED. THE VETO
WAS OVERTURNED. IT WAS
CHALLENGED IN COURT. HERE WE
ARE TODAY. TO YOUR POINT, VICE
CHAIR, REALLY WELL SAID. IF WE
DIDN'T HAVE JUMPSTART THIS
YEAR, WE WOULD'VE HAD $416
MILLION OF CUTS TO MAKE. THAT
WAS POIGNANT, AND I APPRECIATE
YOU MAKING THAT POINT. AS WELL
AS, IN THE ORIGINAL IDEATION OF
JUMPSTART, IT WAS TO GET US TO
FOCUS ON THESE PRIORITIES. WHAT
WE HAVE FOUND IS THAT WE
HAVEN'T GOTTEN OUT OF THESE
DOWNSTREAM ECONOMIC IMPACTS
FROM THE PANDEMIC YET, AND, TWO
THINGS THERE ARE TRUE. WE
DON'T HAVE THE COVID FEDERAL
FUNDS ANYMORE. THEY EXPIRE THIS
YEAR. WE WERE ABLE TO NOT LAY
OFF ANY CITY EMPLOYEES DURING
THE PANDEMIC. VERY FEW OTHER
CITIES IN THIS ENTIRE NATION
DID THAT. AND THEN WE HAD TO
MAKE THIS OUR CHOICES TODAY.
AND THROUGH THAT PROCESS, WE
CREATED A HABIT OF USING
JUMPSTART IN THE GENERAL FUND.
THAT IS DIFFERENT. THE LAST
POINTS I WAS MAKING WAS THAT,
IF ONLY THOSE FOUR CATEGORIES
ARE FUNDED, IN 2040, WE WILL
HAVE TO CUT ALL OF THOSE
FUNDING. IF WE USE IT FOR THE
GENERAL FUND, WE ARE CREATING A
STRUCTURAL DEFICIT FOR US TO
FACE. SORRY. THAT WAS A REALLY
LONG ANSWER.
‎I APPRECIATE THAT. I
APPRECIATE THE CLAIMANT THAT
REMIND ME THAT WHEN THIS FUND
WAS PASSED, IT IS TRUE THAT MY
RECOLLECTION, FROM HAVING BEEN
WITH THE CITY, THEN, WAS THAT
THERE WERE THINGS ADDED TO THE
BUDGET FROM BEYOND THOSE OF
FIVE CATEGORIES. BECAUSE WE HAD
THE FEDERAL FUNDS, THE
JUMPSTART FUNDS. WE ACTUALLY
USED JUMPSTART FUNDS TO EITHER
EXPAND CURRENT THINGS, OR ADD
PROGRAMS, AND I THINK THAT ALSO
IS REALLY CRITICAL TO MENTION,
BECAUSE, IT BEARS WHY WE ALSO
HAVE THIS STRUCTURAL DEFICIT
THAT NOW WE ARE LOOKING TO
JUMPSTART TO BACKFILL, BECAUSE
WE DON'T HAVE THIS TEMPORARY
FEDERAL RELIEF FUNDS. MAYBE IF
WE HAD NOT USED THE FUNDS TO
START NEW THINGS. MAYBE WE
WOULD BE IN A POSITION WHERE WE
DIDN'T HAVE TO TAKE THE
JUMPSTART TO BACKFILL. IT IS
IMPOTENT TO BE ASKED ABOUT
THAT, AND BE TRANSPARENT ABOUT
THAT. I WANTED TO CALL THAT
OUT. THANK YOU FOR THE
REMINDER. I CAN THINK OF SOME
PROGRAMS HERE THAT GOT FUNDING.
IT GOT THROUGH THOSE FUNDS. BEN
WAS HERE, SO HE KNOWS HIS
BUDGET. HE WAS THE DIRECTOR AT
THE TIME. ANYWAY, THAT IS
REALLY IMPORTANT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING MY
QUESTIONS, THEN AND CHAIR, FOR
ADDING TO IT.
‎THANK YOU. I THOUGHT I SAW
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA'S HAND UP.
DO YOU STILL WANT TO SPEAK?
‎IT IS OKAY.
‎WE GOT A LOT OF TIME TO TALK
ABOUT THIS.
‎ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
‎THANK YOU. I WILL END BY
SAYING, THAT TO CLARIFY, THE
JUMPSTART FUNDS WILL BE
DEPOSITED INTO THE JUMPSTART
ACCOUNT, AND THEN WILL BE
TRANSFERRED INTO OTHER BSLS,
WHETHER THEY ARE IN THE
ORIGINAL PRIORITIES WERE NOT,
AND THAT IS A RESPONSIBLE
GOVERNANCE PRACTICE TO BE ABLE
TO TRACK HOW THE FUNDING IS
USED. COUNCIL PRESIDENT, YOU
MADE A REALLY GOOD POINT ABOUT
RESPONDING TO THE OPIOID
EPIDEMIC. THE FENTANYL. THE
FENTANYL ON OUR STREETS.
COLLEAGUES, JUST TO PUT IT IN
PERSPECTIVE, THE FENTANYL
EPIDEMIC HAS SKYROCKETED IN THE
FOUR YEARS SINCE THIS TAX WAS
PASSED. WHEN THIS WAS
ORIGINALLY PASSED, FENTANYL WAS
NOT THE MAJOR DRUG BEING USED
ON THE STREET. IT WAS HEROIN
AND METH AT THAT TIME.
‎IT IS SUCH A SLOW
EARTHQUAKE.
‎PLEASE REMEMBER TO BE
RECOGNIZED. I'M JUST -- USING
THIS POINT TO MAKE THE POINT
THAT PRIORITIES CHANGE, AND WE
HAVE TO BE FLEXIBLE AND NIMBLE.
THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT. WE
DON'T KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO
HAPPEN IN THE NEXT FOUR YEARS.
LASTLY, I WILL READ ITEM C
HERE, THE ALLEGATIONS OF THE
PAYROLL EXPENSE ACT, PROCEEDS
TO PROGRAMS AND SERVICES,
SUPPORTED BY THE CITY'S
GENERAL FUND SHALL BE LIMITED
TO THE AMOUNT NEEDED TO SUSTAIN
CRITICAL SERVICES AND TEND TO
NEEDS THAT CAN OTHERWISE NOT BE
SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED WITH THE
FUND SOURCES. THIS IS IN HERE
TO SAY THAT IT CANNOT JUST BE
CARTE BLANCHE. IT REALLY NEEDS
TO BE AN EMERGENCY RELEASE
VALVE, OR PRESSURED, IF YOU
WILL. THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.
AMENDMENTS ARE DUE FRIDAY, AT
NOON. BACK TO YOU, DIRECTOR
NOBLE, FOR A COUPLE OF
AMENDMENT IDEAS.
‎THERE ARE THREE AMENDMENTS
UNDER DEVELOPMENT. THEY HAVE
BEEN PROPOSED. WE CAN PAUSE FOR
THE COMMENT. WE CAN WRAP THIS
UP. THIS WOULD PRESERVE THE
PAYROLL. IT IS TO ASSESS THE
IMPACTS ON THE TAXES ON CITY.
COUNCIL MADE AN EFFORT TO [
INAUDIBLE ] ALL OF LAST YEAR.
TO SIMPLY RESTORE THE LANGUAGE
-- TO BE APPOINTED, AND TO
PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES.
‎PET [ INAUDIBLE ]
‎LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF MY
TRANSFER TO THE GENERAL FUND TO
20% OF THE TOTAL PROCEEDS AND
ALLOCATE THE REMAINING
RESOURCES ACCORDING TO THE
PERCENTAGES AND THE ALLEGATIONS
THAT HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED
PREVIOUSLY. ON THE FINANCIAL
SIDE, THIS WOULD INCREASE THE
PRIORITIES. I'M USING THE 2047
FOR THIS MATH. WITHOUT THIS --
THE FORECAST FOR 2027 IS FOR [
INAUDIBLE ] . THAT LEAVES 250
MILLION FOR JUMPSTART
PRIORITIES IN 2027. I WOULD
NOTE THAT THE $233 MILLION
TRANSFER STILL LEAVES THE
DEFICIT INCLUSIVE OF THE
PACKAGE OF ABOUT $100 MILLION.
IT IS A TRANSFER OF 233,
LEAVING A 250 FOR THE JUMPSTART
PRIORITIES, BUT ALSO THE $100
MILLION DEFICIT. THAT IS THE
BASE MATH. SO, WITH THIS
POLICY, RESTRICTING TRANSFER TO
THE GENERAL FUND, 20%, YOU
WOULD INCREASE THE AMOUNT
AVAILABLE FOR THE JUMPSTART
PRIORITIES FROM THAT BASE 250,
TO ABOUT 386 MILLION. AND THEN,
THAT EVENT HAS THE DIRECT
APPLICATION ON THE DEFICIT,
THOUGH, BECAUSE IN THE BASE
CASE, THE ASSUMPTION WOULD BE
TO 33 MILLION, AND YOU STILL
HAD THE DEFICIT. THE DEFICIT
GOES FROM 100 MILLION TO ABOUT
236. BUT AGAIN, YOU HAVE
SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES AVAILABLE
FOR THE JUMP START PRIORITIES.
‎THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
ELLIS HAS SPONSORED THE
AMENDMENT. RECOGNIZED.
‎THANK YOU. JUST AS A
CLARIFICATION, I DID NOT INTEND
THESE TO BE TWO SEPARATE
AMENDMENT SPIRIT I DON'T KNOW
IF IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE. THAT
WASN'T MY INTENT. SO, THANK
YOU. THERE WAS A LOT OF WORK
FOR YOU PARTICULARLY THE LAST
FEW DAYS, SO I APPRECIATE YOU
GETTING US THROUGH THIS POINT.
I KNOW HOW IMPORTANT IT IS FOR
US TO PURCHASE IN A FISCALLY
RESPONSIBLE WAY. WE HAVE A
BUDGET THAT INCLUDES $75
MILLION IN NEW SPENDING FROM
THE MAYOR. WE HAVE ADDED
ANOTHER $25 MILLION. MUCH OF
THIS IS GOING ON, THIS
SPENDING. WE HAVE A STRUCTURAL
BUDGET THAT HAS BEEN POINTED
OUT IN A PREVIOUS MEETING IN
TWO DOZEN 27 BUT WE GO BACK TO
HAVING A DEFICIT. CHAIR STRAUSS
MENTIONED, IT WILL BE ENORMOUS
IF WE DON'T SUNSET THIS BILL,
OR IF WE DO PLAN TO SUNSET IT.
EVEN IF WE DO USE THIS PAYROLL
EXPENSE TAX, THOUGH, WE HAVE
HAD A STRUCTURAL BUDGET ISSUE
FOR WELL OVER A DECADE. I
REMEMBER ASKING PEOPLE IN THE
BUDGET OFFICE OVER 10 YEARS AGO
WHAT SOME OF THE CHALLENGES
WERE, SO, I KNOW THAT THIS HAS
BEEN A LONG-STANDING PROBLEM,
AND IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE
CAN'T WAIT TO RESULT IN FOUR
YEARS FROM NOW. I BELIEVE WE
SHOULD OF BEEN GRAPPLING WITH
THIS ALL YEAR, RATHER THAN
ASSUME THAT THE PAYROLL EXPENSE
TAX WOULD SOLVE THIS ISSUE FOR
US INDEFINITELY. CLEARLY, IT IS
NOT. WE NEED OTHER SOURCES. WE
WILL BACK -- BE BACK HERE
FACING A DEFICIT. I APPRECIATE
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE CALLING
THIS INTO QUESTION. I HAVE TWO
SLIDES THAT I WILL BE ADDING TO
THE DISCUSSION LATER. SO, THIS
AMENDMENT WOULD ACKNOWLEDGE THE
NEED FOR ADDITIONAL GENERAL
FUND -- ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR
THE GENERAL FUND BY ALLOCATING
25% OF PAYROLL TAX REVENUE,
STARTING IN 2027, SO IT WOULD
MAINTAIN THIS TRANSFER. IT
WOULD, I THINK, ESTIMATED, BE
ABOUT $88 MILLION. I DO WANT TO
CLARIFY THAT THIS DOES HAVE A
10% RESERVE. THAT IS NOT CLEAR
IN THE MEMO THAT WE HAVE HERE.
IT ALSO ACKNOWLEDGES THAT WHAT
WE HAVE HEARD FROM HUNDREDS OF
PEOPLE LAST NIGHT IS THAT
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT AND SMALL BUSINESS
INVESTMENTS FROM THE PAYROLL
EXPENSE TAX ARE PART OF THE
SOLUTION TO OUR HOMELESSNESS
AND HOUSING AND PUBLIC SAFETY
CRISES. AND WHAT WE CAN'T
IGNORE IS THAT WHETHER IT IS
$100 MILLION OR $200 MILLION
DEFICIT IN THE NEXT COMING
YEARS, THAT IS NOT THE POINT.
THE POINT IS THAT WE NEED NEW
REVENUE TO ADDRESS BASIC CITY
SERVICES. SO, THE PROPOSED
SHIFT OF MORE THAN 50% OF
GENERAL FUND -- TO GENERAL
FUND, I BELIEVE, SHOULD BE
TEMPORARY. WHILE I UNDERSTAND
THIS COUNCIL HAS DIFFERENT
PRIORITIES FOR HOW THIS REVENUE
SOURCE SHOULD BE SPENT, ANY
PERMANENT CHANGES SHOULD BE
DONE THROUGH A PUBLIC PROCESS,
JUST LIKE WE DO FOR OTHER MAJOR
REVENUE STREAMS, LIKE OUR
LEVEES, AND LIKE WE DID FOR
THIS VERY SOURCE. WE SHOULD
START THAT DISCUSSION NOW, AND
SO, THAT'S PART OF THE REASON
WHY I APPRECIATE, AGAIN,
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, RAISING
THE QUESTION. AS BEEN
MENTIONED, IT DOES RESTORE THE
OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. THIS IS AN
ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURE. IT IS A
MEASURE WE HAVE FOR ALL OF OUR
OTHER MAJOR REVENUE SOURCES.
ALL OF OUR LEVEES HAVE ONE THAT
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE
RESISTANCE IS TO SITTING IN
THIS BODY AND CONVENING IT TO
HELP US UNDERSTAND HOW THIS IS
WORKING, WHERE WE MIGHT NEED
TWEAKS, AND PARTICULARLY, GIVEN
THAT THESE TAXES ARE COLLECTED
FROM OUR LOCAL BUSINESSES, I
WOULD THINK THAT AN OVERSIGHT
COMMITTEE WOULD BE WELCOME. SO,
THIS IS, AGAIN, AS WE HAVE SAID
ALL MORNING, A CHANCE FOR US TO
BEGIN THE DISCUSSION OF HOW WE
WILL PLUG THE HOLE. I DON'T
THINK WE CAN WAIT FOR FOUR
YEARS TO HAVE SERIOUS
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT HOW WE
ADDRESS THIS BECAUSE IN FOUR
YEARS, WE COULD BE IN WORSE
SHAPE IF WE DON'T START
ADDRESSING IT NOW AND FIGURE
OUT HOW WE ARE GOING TO FILL
THE GAP THAT WE HAVE IN THE
CITY. THANK YOU, CHAIR.
‎THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES, ANY
QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ON THESE
AMENDMENTS? I WILL JUST SAY,
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, I AGREE,
THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING THAT WE
HAVE USED THAT WE USED THIS
YEAR IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS
SUSTAINABLE. WE WERE RESPONDING
TO THE ISSUES THAT WE HAD, AND,
I WILL POLITELY PUSH BACK AND
SAY THAT WE ARE NOT SOARING THE
COMPOSITION IN FOUR YEARS. WE
STARTED THE CONVERSATION
EARLIER THIS YEAR. WE ARE DOING
THAT WORK NOW. DOES ANYONE ELSE
HAVE OTHER WORK TO ANYTHING TO
SAY? FANTASTIC. DO YOU HAVE
ANYTHING ON THIS? AND
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, YOU WILL
HAVE THE LAST WORD.
‎THANK YOU, CHAIR. I AGREE
WITH THE POINT YOU MADE THERE.
I THINK EVERY BUDGET YEAR IS AN
OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE
CONVERSATION AGAIN, BECAUSE
ULTIMATELY, WE ARE THE ONES --
THE MAYOR SENDS THE BUDGET DOWN
AND WE DECIDE WHAT TO DO WITH
IT. WE MAKE ADS BASED ON OUR
PRIORITIES AND WHAT THE CITY
NEEDS ARE. EVERY YEAR IS AN
OPPORTUNITY TO REVISIT
EVERYTHING. REALLY. I WANTED TO
UNDERSCORE THAT IMPORTANT
POINT. THANK YOU, CHAIR.
‎14, ANYTHING ELSE?
‎WE MOVED BACK TO YOU,
DIRECTOR NOBLE.
‎WE HAVE ANOTHER AMENDMENT.
THIS IS FROM COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE, TAKING A DIFFERENT
APPROACH TO THE JUMPSTART
FUNDS. [ INAUDIBLE ] . IT WOULD
ALLOCATE IT FOR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING. USING COMPARABLE MAP
AS I WENT THROUGH BEFORE, AND
HE DOESN'T ON HIS OWN, IT
WOULD MEAN $266 MILLION FOR
JUMPSTART FUNDING FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THERE IS A
BULLET I MEANT TO ADD HERE. SO,
THE FUNDING FOR THE REVENUE
STABILIZATION ACCOUNT -- I'M
HAVING TROUBLE WITH THAT TODAY
-- IT WOULD BE PROVIDED BY THAT
YEAR END TRANSFER. BUT ALSO,
TRANSFERS FROM THE GENERAL
FUND. NOT JUST FROM THE PAYROLL
EXPENSE TAXES THEMSELVES. OF
THE FUNDS THAT ARE TRANSFERRED
TO THE GENERAL FUND, IT WOULD
PUT PRIORITY ON THE ORIGINAL
JUMPSTART PRIORITIES
THEMSELVES. AGAIN, THERE WOULD
BE SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES
AVAILABLE TO THE GENERAL FUND,
BUT OF THAT RESOURCE, THE
PRIORITY WOULD BE THE JUMPSTART
CATEGORIES. PRESUMABLY OTHER
THAN AFFORDABLE HOUSING. SO THE
IMPLICATION HERE IS SIGNIFICANT
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE DEFICIT
ARE QUITE SMALL. IT IS
INITIALLY $60 MILLION. ALL
THINGS BEING EQUAL, THE
TRANSFER OF THE FUND
ANTICIPATED IN 2027 IS JUST
OVER 45%, SO THIS IS A SMALL IT
IS MEANT. IT IS IN HEAVEN
IMPACT OR BIG IMPACT ON THE
DEFICIT. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE --
THE GENERAL APPLICATION IS THAT
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS ELEVATED
TO KEEP PRIORITY FROM THE
JUMPSTART RESOURCES. THE FUNDS
THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO TRANSFER
THE GENERAL FUND CAN SUPPORT
BASIC CITY SERVICES, BUT ALSO,
WITH THE PRIORITY AROUND THE
ORIGINAL JUMPSTART CATEGORIES.
‎COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED.
‎THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHAIR.
I WANT TO SAY, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, BEN, FOR DOING THIS. AND
NOTING THAT THE SLIDE DOESN'T
REPRESENT THE LAST POINT THAT
BEEN MADE. THAT CAME ABOUT THIS
MORNING. THIS IS STILL A WORK
IN PROGRESS. I APPRECIATE THE
FLEXIBILITY. SO, I GUESS NOBODY
SHOULD BE SURPRISED THAT I
WOULD BE BRINGING SOMETHING
ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND I
APPRECIATE THAT THE MAYOR BEGAN
THIS CONVERSATION. I ALSO
APPRECIATE, CHAIR, THAT YOU ARE
FOLLOWING UP WITH THE
CONVERSATION, AND REALLY TRYING
TO WALK A FINE LINE THERE. BUT
I ALSO, ALSO, VERY MUCH SUPPORT
AND APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA'S COMMENTS THAT, AS
MUCH AS I WOULD LOVE TO THINK
THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE OUT OF
THIS MESS IN FOUR YEARS, I
REALLY DON'T THINK THAT WE
ARE. WE HAVE A NEW REALITY, AND
I KEEP HARKING BACK TO WHAT
HAPPENED. I DON'T EVEN WANT TO
THINK ABOUT IT, BUT ON THE
NATIONAL SCENE. AND WE NEED TO
HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY, TO
ADDRESS THE PRIORITIES. AND
THAT THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAS
POINTED OUT. WE ARE TRYING TO
ADDRESS AN ADDICTION CRISIS
THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND, BUT
WE DON'T HAVE THAT LISTED AS A
PRIORITY. WE HAD YOUTH MENTAL
HEALTH COME UP AS A PRIORITY,
SO WE HAD TO MAKE ANOTHER BOX.
SO, IN SOME WAYS, I THINK THAT
WE ARE SETTING UP SORT OF A WAY
OF DISAPPOINTING PEOPLE EVERY
TIME WE COME TO THEM BECAUSE
THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN THIS
POSITION WHERE WE HAVE TO
CONTINUE TO UTILIZE PAYROLL
EXPENSE MONEY FOR GENERAL FUND.
WE HAVE DONE THROUGHOUT
HISTORY. IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A
QUESTION OF HOW MUCH. SO, MAYBE
LET'S JUST BITE THE BULLET NOW
AND DECIDE THAT WE ARE GOING TO
SET ASIDE A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE,
45%, AND THEN SET THE REST AT
55 FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE
REASON IS THAT CATEGORY AS THE
REQUIRED PERCENTAGE -- IT IS
NOT -- YOU KNOW, SHOULD WE BE
ABLE TO, BUT IT IS DESIGNATED
-- IS BECAUSE OF ALL OF THOSE
PRIORITIES. THEY ARE ALL
CRITICALLY IMPORTANT. IT IS THE
ONE WHERE WE HAVE A LEGAL
OBLIGATION TO FULFILL UNDER THE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT. THE
OTHERS -- WE DON'T HAVE A
LEGAL OBLIGATION. TO ME, THAT
IS A COMPELLING REASON TO MAKE
THIS A MANDATORY PERCENTAGE
THAT IS SET ASIDE. OBVIOUSLY,
WE CAN GO ABOVE , AND THAT
WOULD BE THE GOAL. THE HOPE
THAT WE WOULD HAVE ENOUGH MONEY
TO SPEND MORE THAN 55%, BUT I
THINK WE NEED TO SET THE FLOOR.
IN TERMS OF -- I DID ALSO WANT
TO CARRY FORTH THE VALUES AND
PRIORITIES THAT WERE
ARTICULATED IN JUMPSTART. I
THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR US
TO STATE THAT THOSE ARE
PRIORITIES IN THE GENERAL FUND.
SO THAT WE DO NOT LOSE TRACK OF
THOSE PRIORITIES THAT WERE
ARTICULATED BY PRIOR COUNCILS
AND THAT HAVE BEEN AND CONTINUE
TO BE DELETED BY PEOPLE WHO
HAVE COME HERE, ALTHOUGH,
NOTING THAT, AGAIN, THOSE
PRIORITIES WERE SET BY SMALLER
GROUPS OF PEOPLE WHO TEND TO BE
MORE POLITICALLY ACTIVE, AND
SO, THERE IS A BROADER BASED
INTEREST , WHICH WE HEAR
CLEARLY FROM THE SEATTLE
RESIDENCE AS A WHOLE. PUBLIC
SAFETY IS A NUMBER ONE
PRIORITY. AND HOUSING AND
HOMELESSNESS. WE HEAR THOSE
REPEATEDLY. THE PIECES THAT ARE
COROLLARY TO ALL OF THAT. SO,
AGAIN, I THINK, BEING
FORTHRIGHT ABOUT THE NEED TO
HAVE CONTINUING ACCESS TO THE
MONEY THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND,
TO SUPPORT THOSE GENERAL FUND
PRIORITIES, BUT ALSO MAKING
SURE THAT WE COMMIT OURSELVES
TO A PARTICULAR LEVEL OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, IS WHY I
HAVE BROUGHT THIS. THANK YOU.
‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE. ANY COMMENTS ON
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE'S
PROPOSAL? I AM SEEING NONE.
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, ANY LAST
WORDS?
‎THANK YOU.
‎FANTASTIC. WE WILL MOVE ON
TO THE NEXT ITEM. BACK TO YOU,
BEN. I KNOW WE ARE MOVING INTO
THE PROPOSED CONSENT CALENDAR.
AGAIN, ALEX, A COUPLE OF
DIFFERENT CONSENT CALENDARS WE
ARE USING. WE SHOULD PROBABLY
USE A DIFFERENT WORD FOR THIS,
WHICH IS CONSENT OF AMENDMENTS.
‎I WANT TO MOVE YOU THROUGH
36 PIECES OF LEGISLATION. [
INAUDIBLE ] THIS IS NOT
PARTICULARLY UNUSUAL. WE MIGHT
THINK OF THIS AS BEING THE
BUDGET ORDINANCE, BUT THERE ARE
ORDINANCES USED TO IMPLEMENT
THE BUDGETS. MICHAEL, GIVEN
TIME CONSTRAINTS IS TO GIVE YOU
A ONE SENTENCE SUMMARY OF EACH.
I HAVE THE WORKING KNOWLEDGE OF
THEM OVER THE LAST FEW DAYS. I
HAVE ACCESS TO ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION. I MIGHT BE ABLE TO
HANDLE THEM HERE, BUT ALSO,
POTENTIALLY OFF-LINE. I WOULD
ADD THAT CENTRAL STAFF HAS
REVIEWED EACH OF THESE IN MORE
DETAIL. MY WORKING KNOWLEDGE IS
NOT OUR FULL KNOWLEDGE. AT THE
STAGE WHEN WE WERE DOING THE
CONSIDERATIONS, WE PROVIDED A
SUMMARY OF EACH DEPONENT'S
BUDGET. AT THE END OF THAT,
THERE WAS A SECTION ON
LEGISLATION. IF YOU WERE
CURIOUS, MAYBE THE WRITEUP OF
EACH OF THESE WAS COMPLETED. SO
WITH THAT INTRODUCTION, THE
FIRST BILL -- I'M JUST GOING
TO GO DOWN THE LIST. THE 2024
BILL. IT COMPLETES THE
ALLOCATION OF MONEY TO ADDRESS
THE WAGE INCREASES THAT WERE
ADOPTED AS PART OF THE
LEGISLATION THAT YOU SUPPORTED
EARLIER THIS YEAR. THE SECOND
PIECE -- AND ORDINANCE THAT
ESTABLISHES NEW FEES FOR
SEATTLE'S CENTER FACILITIES.
THEY RENT OUT VARIOUS ROOMS. [
INAUDIBLE ] SMALLER FACILITIES.
THERE ARE SOME THEATERS. THERE
IS A RANGE FOR EACH OF THOSE.
ENTER FUND LOAN FOR MEMORIAL
STADIUM. I REALIZED THIS
CONCEPT MAY BE [ INAUDIBLE ]
NOT RELEVANT TO SOME OF YOU.
THE CITY HAS BALANCES IN
VARIOUS FUNDS AND CAN RENT
THEM. IN THIS CASE, WHAT IS
HAPPENING IS THERE IS A PLANNED
DEBT ISSUE TO HELP PAY FOR THE
COST OF REDEVELOPING MEMORIAL
STADIUM. THIS WILL GIVE ACCESS
TO THAT MONEY AHEAD OF TIME. WE
DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY IS
GOING TO BE NEEDED NEXT YEAR AS
THE PROJECT MOVES FORWARD. THIS
MEANS WE CAN WAIT UNTIL WE HAVE
A BETTER SENSE OF THAT TO ISSUE
THE ACTUAL DEBT, AND ONCE YOU
DO THAT, THERE ARE LEGAL AND
FINANCIAL CONSTRAINTS ON DEBT.
THIS IS ESSENTIALLY A
CONVENIENCE TO MOVE THE PROJECT
FORWARD. IT IS IN THE ENDORSED
BUDGET, AND THERE ARE RESOURCES
ALLOCATED TO PAY OFF THAT DEBT.
THE NEXT ONE IS THAT SEATTLE
CENTER PARKING RATES. AGAIN,
THE VARIOUS PARKING GARAGES IN
SEATTLE CENTER. THIS PROVIDES
THE RANGE OF RATES THAT CAN BE
CHARGED FOR THOSE FACILITIES,
AGAIN, WITH ADJUSTMENTS FOR
INFLATION IN OUR PARKING
CONDITIONS, AS WELL. THE NEXT
ONE IS A POLICY CHANGE, BUT THE
REORGANIZATION FOR THE CITY.
CURRENTLY, THE EXAMS FOR LEASE
AND FIRE ARE RUN FROM SDHR AND
CORONATION WITH THE CIVIL
SERVICE DEPARTMENT. THIS WOULD
BE AN EFFORT TO MAKE THAT MORE
STREAMLINED AND TRANSFER THE
EXAM FUNCTION INTO THE CIVIL
SERVICE COMMISSION. NEXT ON HIS
ANIMAL SHELTER FEES. THERE ARE
ADJUSTMENTS IN THESE FEES. SOME
OF THEM ARE INCREASING.
MODESTLY, FOR INFLATION BUT
OTHERS DECREASE, REFLECTING
ESSENTIALLY, IF YOU WILL,
MARKET PRESSURE. ADOPTION FEES
GO DOWN. SPACE AND NEUTER FEES
GO UP A LITTLE BIT. THE NEXT
ONE, AGAIN, IT IS A FEE THAT
FAS CHARGES FOR COMPANIES THAT
ENGAGE IN RECYCLING. THAT IS A
MINOR ONE TO THE NEXT ONE IS --
I LOVE THIS ACRONYM. HXM, THIS
IS THE FEE THAT THE HEARING
EXAMINER CHARGES FOR REVIEWS.
IT HASN'T CHANGED SINCE TWO
DOZEN 12. THERE IS SEGMENTATION
THAT INDICATES THAT IT IS IN
LINE WITH WHAT OTHER CITY
HEARING EXAMINERS CHARGE FOR
COMPARABLE SERVICES. THE NEXT
ONE IS REALLY OBSCURE. YOU CAN
SEE THE INTERFUND LOAN. THIS
ONE, YOU ARE PROBABLY AWARE OF
THE UPGRADED WORKADAY THAT WAS
ROLLED OUT THIS YEAR. THAT IS
PART OF A MORE COMPREHENSIVE
UPDATE OF THE CITY'S HR
SYSTEMS. SO THE COMPUTER
SYSTEMS THAT KEEP PERSONNEL
RECORDS AND TRACK THESE AND ALL
THOSE SORTS OF THINGS. THAT
SYSTEM IS MORE THAN 20 YEARS
OLD, AND IS IN THE PROCESS OF
BEING UPDATED, SO AGAIN, THIS
IS A SIMILAR SITUATION. THERE
IS A DEBT ISSUANCE ANTICIPATED
FOR NEXT YEAR. IT'S -- THIS
GETS CASH OUT OF THAT. THEY ARE
NOT DESIGNED TO LAST 20 YEARS.
IT IS MUCH SHORTER, LIKE EIGHT
YEARS. THE NEXT ITEMS ARE
RESOLUTIONS RELATED TO THE'S
RETIREMENT SYSTEM. ONE
ESTABLISHES THE ACTUARIAL
RECOMMENDED CONTRIBUTION. SO
THE CITY IS TRYING TO MAINTAIN
THE FINANCIAL HEALTH OF ITS
RETIREMENT SYSTEM. POST THE
GREAT RECESSION AND THE MARKET
CRASH. THEY FELT IT WAS
UNDERFUNDED. THE CITY SET
ITSELF ON A SIX-YEAR PATH TO
RESTORE FULL FUNDING, AND THIS
CONTINUES US ON THAT PATH. THE
NEXT ONE IS THE INTEREST RATE
THAT IS ESSENTIALLY NOMINALLY
PAID TO CITY IN PLACE. IF YOU
DON'T STAY THROUGH RETIREMENT,
YOU CAN PULL OUT THE MONEY THAT
YOU CONTRIBUTED -- YOU EARN
INTEREST RATES ON THAT. THIS
SETS THAT INTEREST RATE. IT
FLUCTUATES SOME WITH THE SAID
RATE. IT IS A LOW, SECURE
GUARANTEED RATE. THE NEXT ITEM
WOULD TRANSFER OVERSIGHT AND
ADMINISTRATION OF THE CITIES TO
THE DEFERRED COMPENSATION
SYSTEM TO THE RETIREMENT
SYSTEM, LOOKING FOR
EFFICIENCIES IN THE WAY THE
CITY OPERATES, GIVEN THE
CONFERENCE OF PLACE TO WORK ON
CITY RETIREMENT. THE NEXT TWO
ORDINANCES IMPOSE A RELATIVELY
[ INAUDIBLE ] INFLATIONARY RATE
FOR THE FEES AT SDCI. THEY DID
RAISE RATES. THERE IS A LITTLE
BIT OF CATCH UP HERE. THE
INCREASE IS ABOUT 6%.
SIMILARLY, THE NEXT ITEM, THE
FEE USE SCHEDULE -- THESE ARE
FEES CHARGED FOR CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITIES THAT OCCUPY THE
RIGHT OF WAY. PROPERTY OWNERS
ARE CHARGED A FEE. IT INCREASES
THROUGH TIME TO INCENTIVIZE
THEM TO NOT STAY IN THE RIGHT
OF WAY. IT IS UPDATING THOSE
FEES. IT HAD TRIMMED HIS IMPACT
ON SOME OF THE REVENUE STREAMS.
PARTICULARLY, PARKING TAX. THE
DECISION WAS MADE AT THAT TIME
NOT TO BACKFILL THAT WITH THE
GENERAL FUND, BUT TO ALLOW
S.D.O.T. TO COME BACK AND
SMOOTH OUT THOSE REVENUES. THEY
HAVE SPECIFIC REVENUE STREAMS
TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE
INTERFUND LOAN IN 2020 AND
2021, KNOWING THAT WE COULD
REPAY THAT. THIS EXTENDS THAT
THROUGH THE END OF NEXT YEAR.
WE REVIEW THE PAYMENT SCHEDULE.
THAT WILL CONFIRM THAT IT WILL
BE COMPLETE BY THE END OF NEXT
YEAR, AS IS REQUIRED. THE NEXT
ONE LISTS A PROVISO ON SEATTLE
TRANSPORTATION MEASURE. THIS IS
THE .15% VOTER APPROVED VOTER
TAX DEDICATED TO TRANSIT. THERE
WAS A PROVISO PROPOSED LAST
YEAR OR THE YEAR BEFORE
REQUIRING THAT SOME OF THAT
MONEY BE DIRECTED TOWARDS
BRIDGE MAINTENANCE PROJECTS.
S.D.O.T. HAS RUN INTO A LIMIT
OF TRANSIT ELIGIBLE PROJECTS.
KNOWING THAT THE LEVY, WHICH
PASSED, INCLUDED FUNDING FOR
BRIDGE MAINTENANCE, THE
UNDERLYING POLICY HAS SEEMINGLY
BEEN ADDRESSED. CONTINUING, SO,
THE FIRE DEPARTMENT CHARGES
PERMIT FEES, AS WELL. THEY DO
INSPECTIONS OF ELECTRICAL
PLANS, SO THOSE ARE MODEST
CHANGES THERE. THIS NEXT ITEM
WAS DISCUSSED DURING THE POLICY
CONSIDERATION PHASE. IT WOULD
ALLOW THE VERDICT FROM TO
CHURCH IN SITUATIONS WHERE IT
PROVIDED BLS TRANSPORT
SERVICES, SO BASIC TRANSPORT
SERVICES, RATHER THAN
LIFE-THREATENING. THE NEXT ONE
IS SMC FEES. CHANGING THERE,
THE NEXT ONE, NUMBER 26 IS SPD,
CLEANING UP THEIR FEE SCHEDULE.
I LOOKED AT THIS ONE THERE WAS
A FEE FOR A POLAROID
IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM. THAT IS
NO LONGER IN USE. THE NEXT ONE
IS THE SEATTLE PARKS
DEPARTMENT. CHANGES IN THEIR
FEES A█ND CHARGES. THERE ARE A
VARIETY OF CHANGES. THOSE
CHANGES ARE RELATIVELY MODEST,
AND THEY ARE IN LINE WITH THAT
CHARGED IN NEARBY AREAS.
SEATTLE CITY LIGHT. THIS IS THE
RATE ORDINANCE. IT INCREASES
THE RATES CHARGED FOR 25 AND
26. THIS WAS DISCUSSED WITH THE
RELEVANT COMMITTEE. WE RAN OUT
OF MEETING TIME IN SEPTEMBER.
THIS LEGISLATION WAS BROUGHT TO
THE BUDGET COMMITTEE FOR FINAL
ACTION, BUT IT WAS REVIEWED IN
COMMITTEE. THE NEXT ITEM WOULD
EXEMPT RAFFLES AND BINGO FROM
THE CITY'S 5% TAX ON GAMBLING.
THE MAJOR IMPACT HERE, AS I
UNDERSTAND IT, IS ON THE 50-50
RAFFLES THAT HAVE BECOME
COMMON. I KNOW WITH HOCKEY
GAMES AND BASEBALL GAMES.
CURRENTLY, THEY ARE CALLED
50-50, BUT SOMEWHERE, THERE IS
5% LOST TO THE CITY. THIS NEXT
ONE WE WORKED ON WITH THE
BUDGET OFFICE. WE, BEING
CENTRAL STAFF. CLEANING UP SOME
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. COUNCIL
HAS ESTABLISHED REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS OVER TIME FOR
VARIOUS ACTIONS, BUT,
SOMETIMES, THOSE THINGS EVOLVE,
AND WE DON'T DO A GREAT JOB OF
CLEANING UP REPORTS THAT
AREN'T NECESSARY ANYMORE. THAT
IS WHAT THIS IS DOING, TRYING
TO ALIGN THOSE TOWARDS THE REAL
NEEDS IN TERMS OF OVERSIGHT AND
TRANSPARENCY. AGAIN, THAT IS
ONE THAT WE WORKED ON DIRECTLY
WITH THEM. THE NEXT ONE IS THE
TN SEATAC SPENDING PLAN. THIS
IS A RESOLUTION. AGAIN, THE DNC
REVENUES ARE DEPOSITED IN THE
FUND. [ INAUDIBLE ] THIS
EXPENDS -- EXTENDS THE PERIOD.
THE NEXT THREE ITEMS ARE BONDS.
THE CITY ISSUES DEBT ON A
REGULAR BASIS. THERE IS
CLASSICALLY IN ISSUANCE EVERY
YEAR OR EVERY OTHER YEAR FOR
THE GENERAL FUND, AND THEN EACH
OF THE UTILITIES -- AND
RECOGNIZING THE SEATTLE PUBLIC
UTILITIES -- THREE SEPARATE
UTILITIES THAT ISSUE
SEPARATELY. THESE BOND
ISSUANCES GO THROUGH SOMETHING
CALLED THE DEBT POLICY
DEMONSTRATED IMPACT. THERE IS
AN INTERNAL REVIEW WITHIN THE
CITY ON THAT COMMITTEE. EACH OF
THE UTILITIES HAVE
REPRESENTATIVES. THERE IS A
GOOD BACK AND FORTH ABOUT WHY
YOU NEED THIS. WHAT ARE THE
PARTICULAR USES? THESE HAVE
BEEN REVIEWED IN THAT WAY.
THAT'S ITEMS 32, 33, AND 34.
35 IS THE YEAR END SUPPLEMENTAL
ORDINANCE. THAT IS ACTUALLY
BOUNCING 2024 OUT AGAIN. MAKING
SOME APPROPRIATIONS TO ADDRESS
THE NEEDS AND THE LIKE. IT HAS
BEEN REVIEWED BY CENTRAL STAFF.
ASSOCIATED WITH THAT IS THE
YEAR END GRANT ACCEPTANCE
ORDINANCE. THERE ARE ADDITIONAL
ORDINANCES THAT THE CITY HAS
EARNED OR LANDED SINCE THE
MIDYEAR SUPPLEMENTAL WAS
CONSIDERED IN JULY. THERE IS
ALSO A COMPARABLE ORDINANCE FOR
2025, SO, WE ACCEPT THE
ORDINANCES MIDYEAR, BUT ALSO,
THE DEPARTMENTS NOTE WITH A
HIGH DEGREE OF CERTAINTY ABOUT
CERTAIN GRANTS THAT THEY WILL
RECEIVE IN 2025. IT WILL BE
ASSUMED IN OUR BUDGETS. THE
LAST TWO ITEMS, THE BUDGET
ORDINANCE -- PROPOSED ORDINANCE
ITSELF, WHICH IS THE CLERK
FILE, AND AS YOU MAKE YOUR
OMENS, THEY WILL BE ADDED TO
THAT COURT FILE, AND THEN THE
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM,
DESCRIBED AS THE CIP. SO WITH
EIGHT DEEP BREATH, THAT IS THE
FULL SET OF BUDGET LEGISLATION
INTENDED FOR THE CONSENT
AGENDA. THERE WILL BE A SINGLE
VOTE TOMORROW ON THIS. IF YOU
HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY
TO ANSWER THEM. I'M ALSO HAPPY
TO ANSWER THEM OFF-LINE LATER
TODAY OR TOMORROW.
‎I WILL CLARIFY, THE LESS
ITEMS, 38 AND 39, THOSE ARE THE
FILES ASSOCIATED WITH THE
COUNCIL BILLS FOR ITEM 38, THE
ASSOCIATED COUNCIL BILL,
COUNCIL 12095.
‎ACTUALLY, I WANTED TO
CLARIFY. I THINK THOSE ARE
ACTUALLY THE PROPOSED BUDGETS.
SO, IT IS THE MAYOR
TRANSMITTAL. THAT IS WHY THEY
ARE ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
BUT WE WILL BE ADOPTING IS A
SEPARATE CLERK FILE ON THE
19th, SO THESE TWO ARE JUST THE
MAYOR'S PROPOSED.
‎WONDERFUL. CLARIFYING THAT
WE WILL BE MAKING AMENDMENTS TO
COUNCIL BILL 9205 . I HAD A
QUESTION ABOUT THE RUFFLES,
CLARIFYING THAT THESE ARE 50-50
RAFFLES FOR NONPROFIT
ORGANIZATIONS THAT PROVIDE
PROCEEDS TO NONPROFITS THAT
PROVIDE SERVICES. THIS IS NOT
THE BAR DOWN THE STREET DOING A
50-50 RAFFLE AND SOMEBODY IS
MAKING MONEY. SPOKE EXACTLY.
THE ONES HOSTED AT THE SPORTS
FACILITIES ARE JUST USING IT AS
THE VENUE TO RAISE MONEY, IF
YOU WILL.
‎FOR THE ORGANIZATIONS.
‎CORRECT.
‎ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS? I
HAVE SPENT HOURS ON SOME OF
THESE BILLS. I'M HAPPY TO READ
YOU IN, BUT MAYBE NOT ON THE
RECORD BECAUSE WE HAVE 46
INDIVIDUAL ITEMS JUST IN GROUPS
C AND D. SEEING NO FURTHER
QUESTIONS, LET'S MOVE ON. I
DID RECEIVE -- OH,
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
‎CAN YOU HELP ME BETTER
UNDERSTAND HOW THESE PROPOSED
CONSENT CALENDAR IMPLEMENTING
PIECES OF LEGISLATION -- HOW
THEY DIFFER FROM THE PROPOSED
CONSENT AMENDMENT PACKAGE,
ITEMS, AND THOSE GROUPINGS.
LETTER A AND C.
‎THE IDEA IS THE VOTING
PROCESS CAN BE TIME-CONSUMING
AND AT SOME LEVEL,
UNNECESSARILY SO. WE LOOKED TO
BOOK THINGS THAT ARE SOMEWHAT
ALIKE. THIS IS THE ALIKE SET OF
ROUTINE BUDGET LEGISLATION.
THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT ACTIONS
HERE, JUST TO BE CLEAR. THE
IDEA IS THAT THESE WILL FIT AS
A GROUP AS THE BASE
LEGISLATION. THE OTHER GROUPS
-- ONE OF THEM IS THE BOUNCING
PACKAGE, WHICH IS A DEFINED
PECK DISH CONCEPTS. THEY ARE
LIKELY MUTUALLY AGREEABLE. FOR
EFFICIENCY, WE VOTED AS A
GROUP. TO BE CLEAR, YOU WILL
HAVE THE PREROGATIVE OF PULLING
OUT ANY INDIVIDUAL ITEM THAT
YOU SEE IS WORTHY OF FURTHER
AND SEPARATE DISCUSSION.
‎THANK YOU. I THINK I
UNDERSTAND THAT PART. WHAT IS
LESS CLEAR RIGHT NOW IS, TO ANY
OF THESE PROPOSED CONSENT
CALENDAR ITEMS, THESE ARE
COMPLETELY SEPARATE AND APART
FROM OTHER GROUPINGS, A, B, C,
AND D. IT IS SEPARATE. I AM
SEEING YOLANDA NOD HER HEAD,
YES. WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO VOTE
ON THIS? WHEN IS THE
ANTICIPATED VOTE DATE?
‎THE INTENT IS TO VOTE FOR
THIS TOMORROW.
‎GOT IT. THANK YOU.
‎IF YOU HAVE CONCERNS WITH
THESE BILLS, PLEASE LET ME
KNOW, AND WE CAN PUSH THEM
UNTIL NEXT TUESDAY. THIS IS
WHERE IN THE PAST, WE HAVE
TAKEN VOICE VOTES ON EACH OF
THESE ITEMS, SO IT WAS ABOUT AN
HOUR, HOUR AND A HALF OF
EVERYONE SAYING YES. THIS IS
WHY WE ARE PUTTING THEM ON THE
CONSENT CALENDAR. THE
AMENDMENTS AND THE GROUPS ARE
ALL AMOUNTS TO COUNCIL BILL .
‎IT IS INDIVIDUAL PIECES OF
LEGISLATION, AS YOU SEE IN THE
RIGHT COLUMN. THE PACKAGES ARE
PACKAGES OF AMENDMENTS TO THE
BUDGET ADOPTION ORDINANCE. THAT
IS A SLIGHT NUANCE THERE. THE
CONSENT CALENDAR IS FAMILIAR TO
YOU ALL WITH THE CITY COUNCIL
MEETINGS WHERE THERE IS THE
LEGISLATION. THAT IS A MINOR
POINT OF CLARIFICATION AROUND
THE LINKAGE WE USE ON THESE
VARIOUS MEANS BY WHICH WE TRY
TO HELP EXPEDITE THE VOTING
PROCESS.
‎GREAT. WELL, WE ARE ON ITEM
39. I WOULD LOVE FOR US TO GET
THROUGH ITEM 41, IF NOT TO ITEM
42. SO LET'S CONTINUE ON.
‎GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL
MEMBERS. ITEM 40 IS COUNTABLE
CB 120887. IT IS TO WORK ON THE
PROJECTS, AS WELL AS
POTENTIALLY FOR A THIRD-PARTY
PARTNERSHIP IN SUPPORT OF THESE
PROJECTS. THE BUDGET DOES
INCLUDE PERSONNEL WORKING ON
THE PROJECT BUT DOES NOT
INCLUDE ANY PARTNERSHIP. THE
TECHNICAL AMENDMENT THERE WAS
AN ERRONEOUS REFERENCE RELATED
TO A SEPARATE PUBLIC HEARING
THAT WAS NOT NECESSARY, AND WE
DID NOT HOLD ONE, SO WE REMOVED
THAT REFERENCE.
‎THANK YOU. QUESTIONS?
COMMENTS? LET'S MOVE ON TO
PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING
ORDINANCE. COUNCIL BILL 120893.
‎GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.
AGENDA ITEM 41 IS THE
PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING
IMPLEMENTATION ORDINANCE. YOU
WERE BRIEFED ON THIS EARLIER
DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS. THE
UNDERLYING ORDINANCE WOULD
ALLOCATE $27.3 MILLION THAT HAS
BEEN HELD OVER IN FINANCE
GENERAL SINCE IT WAS
APPROPRIATED IN 2021, AND IT
WOULD MOVE THAT MONEY TO
VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS TO
IMPLEMENT ELEMENTS OF DIFFERENT
PROJECTS OF THE PARTICIPATORY
BUDGETING PROCESS. THERE ARE
AMENDMENTS TO THIS PROCESS, ALL
PROPOSED BY COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH AND COSPONSORED
BY COUNCILMEMBERS MOORE AND
WOO. YOU HAVE THAT IN YOUR
RECEIPT. THIS WOULD APPROPRIATE
$7 MILLION FOR THE OFFICE OF
ARTS AND CULTURE TO PROVIDE
GRANTS TO SUPPORT ARTS AND
CULTURAL RESERVATIONS, FOCUSING
ON HISTORICALLY MARGINALIZED
COMMUNITIES SUCH AS THE BLACK
COMMUNITY. THE AMENDMENT WOULD
APPROPRIATE $315 TO $15,000 FOR
CONTRACTED YOUTH ACTIVITIES FOR
SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED
ENTITIES IN 2025, JUST TO NOTE
THIS PART OF THE AMENDMENT
WOULD RENDER ANOTHER CBA MOOT.
IF THIS PASSES, MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH
INTENDS TO WITHDRAW HSD 335.
THIS WOULD FUND THE NEW
PROGRAMS BY DECREASING THE
PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING
APPROPRIATIONS TO THE SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND
RECREATION BY $5 MILLION. THE
ORIGINAL PROPOSAL WILL DIRECT
$7.2 MILLION TO PERKS TO
IMPLEMENT PUBLIC RESTROOM AXIS
PROJECT INVOLVING PURCHASE OF
STAFFING AT NEW AND EXISTING
FACILITIES. THIS WOULD
APPROPRIATE $2.2 MILLION TO SPR
FOR THIS PURPOSE, TO PROMOTE A
SKILLED DOWN RESTROOM
IMPROVEMENT. IT WOULD PROVIDE
FUNDING FOR OUTREACH AND
ENGAGEMENT, HOMEOWNER
STABILIZATION SERVICES, TO
INCREASE ON OWNERSHIP FOR
COMMUNITIES AT HIGH RISK OF
DISPLACEMENT. THIS WILL HAVE A
MIX OF WORK THAT THE OFFICE OF
HOUSING WILL DO, PLUS CONTRACTS
WITH COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS
THAT HAVE EXPENSES WITH THESE.
THIS PROJECT WOULD BE FUNDED
VIA A DECREASE TO THE
PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING
APPROPRIATIONS INTENDED FOR THE
DEPARTMENT NEIGHBORHOODS, OR
D.A.W.N.. THE PROPOSAL WOULD
HAVE APPROPRIATED $7 MILLION TO
D.A.W.N. FOR FOOD AND FARMING
PROJECTS. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD
RETAIN FOR MILLION DOLLARS TO
IMPLEMENT A SKILLED DOWN
VERSION OF THAT SAME PROJECT.
AMENDMENT THREE WOULD PROVIDE
PROVISO $2 MILLION OF THE
PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING FUNDS
FOR THE HUMAN SERVICES TO TO
FUND THAT YOUNG ADULT THEY
SHELTERED -- EXCUSE ME. YOUNG
ADULT THEY CENTER IN CENTRAL
DISTRICT. THIS WILL PROVISO THE
REMAINING $1.9 MILLION OF
PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING FUNDS
TO BE USED FOR YOUTH AND YOUNG
ADULT SHELTER CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS. ONCE AGAIN, THE
PERSONAL BUDGETING PROPOSAL
WOULD HAVE FUNDED TWO PROJECTS
AT A TOTAL OF $2.9 MILLION. THE
FIRST PROJECT AT $2 MILLION
WOULD BE FOR ENHANCED HOMELESS
NAVIGATION SERVICES, AND THE
SECOND PROPOSAL, 1.9 FOR YOUTH
SHELTER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.
THIS AMENDMENT RETAINS THE 1.9
FOR YOUTH CAPITAL SHELTER
IMPROVEMENTS. IT WAS INCLUDED
IN THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL, AND
SUBSTITUTES A DIFFERENT PROJECT
FOR THE 2.0 MILLION, WHICH
WOULD BE THAT YOUNG ADULT DAY
CENTER. THE FOURTH AMENDMENT
SIMPLY COMMENCE THE RECITALS TO
REFLECT A STATEMENT OF COUNCIL
INTENT REGARDING THE NEW
FUNDING PRIORITIES.
‎THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH HAS SPONSORED THE
AMENDMENT. THE FLOOR IS YOURS.
A PRACTICE I WILL IMPLEMENT
MOVING FORWARD FOR THE REST OF
THE DAY AND ARE -- OUR CYCLE,
IF YOU'RE COSPONSORED, YOU
WILL BE SECOND PRIORITY TO
EVERYONE ELSE. THE FLOOR IS
YOURS.
‎THANK YOU, CHAIR STRASSE.
THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES, FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION ON THESE
AMENDMENTS TO YOUR DUST -- THE
PARTICIPATORY BUDGET. I WANT TO
THANK COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AND
COUNCILMEMBER WOO. I HAVE
COUNCIL PRESIDENT SARA NELSON
ON SOME OF THESE AMENDMENTS, AS
WELL. TO GLOBALLY FOR THE
PROVISO FOR YOUTH DEVELOPMENT
PIECE, SO I WANT TO THANK YOU
ALL FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON THAT.
I'M REALLY GRATEFUL. THE
ORIGINAL INTENTIONS -- I ALSO
WANT TO THANK CENTRAL STAFF
TOMMASO AND TRACY FOR DEALING
WITH ME. I KNOW YOU ALL DIDN'T
HAVE A CHOICE, SO I WANT TO
THANK YOU.
‎YOU ARE A JOY TO WORK WITH.
‎IS THAT A DAD JOKE? THAT WAS
A GOOD ONE. THANK YOU.
‎THE ORIGINAL INTENTIONS OF
THE PARTICIPATORY BUDGET WAS TO
ENSURE THAT BUT COMMUNITIES
WERE INVITED. WE ALL SAW THIS
DURING 2020, THE MURDER OF
GEORGE FLOYD, AND THE BUDGET,
HOW THIS ALL ARISE FROM WANTING
TO MAKE SURE THAT COMMUNITIES
THAT HAD BEEN HISTORICALLY
EXCLUDED WERE IMPACTED . HOW IT
CAME OUT WAS WE HAD COMMUNITY
MEMBERS CONCERNED ABOUT SOME OF
THE OUTCOMES, AND SOME OF THE
BUCKETS, AND HOW THEY WERE
REFLECTED IN SOME OF THE
SPENDING, SO IT COULD IMPACT
OUR COMMUNITY, AND I TOOK IT --
I LISTENED WITH THEM --
CONNECTED WITH THEM TO AND CAME
UP WITH A LOT OF THESE
AMENDMENTS. YOU HEARD
YESTERDAY, SOME OF THE FIVE
POINTS OF PROGRESS FOR BLACK
COMMITTEES. HOME OWNERSHIP AND
PLANT, ECONOMIC MOBILITY
THROUGH SMALL BUSINESS, HEALTH
AND WELLNESS, EDUCATION, AND WE
PAIR THAT WITH THE ARTS. SO
OFTEN, WE THINK OF EDUCATION,
K-12 AS BEING THE ONLY
EDUCATION FOR OUR KIDS, BUT FOR
BLACK COMMUNITY, A LOT OF IT IS
THE ARTS BECAUSE OF OUR
STORYTELLING, BECAUSE OF DANCE,
MUSIC, HEALTH, ALL THESE GREAT
THINGS THAT COME WITH THAT
PIECE OF EDUCATION, AS WELL,
AND THEN ALSO, WORKFORCE
DEVELOPED, AND THE TRADES. JUST
SOME STATS HERE, THAT I WANT TO
SHARE WITH MY COLLEAGUES. HOME
OWNERSHIP PIECE -- SO THE FIRST
ONE, THE FIVE POINTS OF
PROGRESS, 31% OF BLACK
HOUSEHOLDS OWNED THEIR HOME. IN
1970, IT WAS 50% IN THE CITY OF
SEATTLE. ECONOMIC MOBILITY. 1%
OF THE OVERALL BUSINESSES IN
SEATTLE ARE BLACK AND THEY ONLY
EQUATE FOR 1% OF THE OVERALL
REVENUE. HEALTH AND WELLNESS.
32% OF BLACK HOUSEHOLDS ARE
FOOD INSECURE. EDUCATION IN THE
ARTS. 40% OF BLACK STUDENTS ARE
READY FOR KINDERGARTEN,
COMPARED TO THEIR COUNTERPART
AT 58% PRINT WORKFORCE
DEVELOPED IN THE TRADES AND IN
JOBS. THE MEDIUM -- MEDIAN
SALARY IS $41,000. SO WE
CAREFULLY CRAFTED THIS WITH
COMMUNITY AT HEART, AND FIGURED
OUT, HOW ARE WE ABLE TO HAVE
THIS MEANINGFUL IMPACT TO OUR
COMMUNITY? AND YOU HEARD FROM
MR. JOHNSON TODAY ABOUT TOMMASO
-- I'M SORRY. I SAID MR.
JOHNSON. IS THAT OKAY? ABOUT
THE AMENDMENTS WE ARE BRINGING
FORTH TO YOU TODAY. THE FIRST
ONE IS THROUGH ARTS AND
CULTURE. THIS WOULD BE FOR
ORGANIZATIONS LIKE THIS. YOU
HAVE URBAN LINK. YOU HAVE
AFRICAN LAND TRUST. WE HAVE THE
GOOD FOOTPRINT YOU HAVE COLOR
GIRL GARDENS CLUB. YOU HAVE ALL
THESE GREAT FOLKS THAT WOULD BE
ABLE TO BRING ARTS AND CULTURE
INTO THE CITY OF SEATTLE
THROUGH SOME OF THEIR EVENTS
THAT THEY DO. MAYBE THEY WANT
TO HAVE A SPEAKER COME TO THEIR
CLASSROOM. THEY WANT TO BRING A
NATIONAL, YOU KNOW, A BIG
PERSON TO COME INTO THE CITY OF
SEATTLE TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE
THE BEAUTIFUL ARTS AND CULTURE
FOR BLACK COMMUNITIES, SO, THAT
IS REALLY KEY. THE SECOND IS
THE APPROPRIATION FOR
HOMEOWNERSHIP AND RETENTION. WE
REALLY PUSH ON THIS TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE HAD THE PROPER
OUTREACH FOR THIS, AS WELL, IN
THE LAST THREE MONTHS OR EIGHT
MONTHS, I HAVE HAD THREE REALLY
GREAT FRIENDS LOSE THEIR HOME
IN THE SOUTH END, TWO
DIFFERENT, WHETHER IT IS TAXES
OR REVERSE MORTGAGE OR WHETHER
THE HOUSE WAS PASSED DOWN, THEY
DID NOT KNOW ABOUT WHAT --
WOULD YOU CALL IT -- PROBATE
WAS. THESE THINGS ARE REALLY
IMPORTANT TO OUR COMMUNITY, AND
NOT KNOWING THAT DOES THIS
MONEY WOULD HELP WITH THE
OUTREACH TO THAT. A LOT OF
TIMES, A LOT OF PEOPLE, WE HAVE
THE PROGRAMS. WE HAVE THE
MONEY. THESE PEOPLE GO DOOR TO
DOOR TO TALK WITH PEOPLE TO
CONNECT WITH FOLKS. THEY CAN
UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S
A LOT OF SHAME THAT GOES IN
WHEN PEOPLE LOSE THEIR HOME, OR
THEY HAVE HIGH TAXES, SO,
HAVING THE RIGHT PEOPLE AT
THEIR DOOR, IT'S LIKE, HEY,
IT'S OKAY. COME WITH ME.
THAT'S BE ABLE TO NAVIGATE YOU
THROUGH THIS. I THINK IT IS
INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. THE THIRD
ONE, THE PROVISO FOR YOUNG
ADULT CENTER. WE HAVE A PUBLIC
SAFETY CRISIS IN THIS CITY. THE
KIDS ARE GRADUATE HIGH SCHOOL,
AND BETWEEN THE AGES OF 18 AND
25, WE HAVE SEEN GUN VIOLENCE
AT UNPRECEDENTED NUMBERS IN OUR
CITY OF SEATTLE, PARTICULARLY
FOR BLACK MALES. AND SO WITH
THIS PIECE, AND WE DON'T KNOW
IF IT WOULD POTENTIALLY BE IN
THE CENTRAL DISTRICT -- WE HAVE
SEEN A TON OF GUN VIOLENCE --
OR BUT THAT -- THIS WOULD BE A
DAY CENTER FOR YOUTH BETWEEN 18
TO 25, 8:00 A.M. TO 8:00 P.M.
IT IS ALREADY A STRUCTURE THAT
HAS BEEN SET UP. THEY NEED THE
FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO DO SOME
OF THE WORK . THE WORKFORCE
TRADES. THEY ALSO HAVE PEOPLE
TO HELP THEM DO THEIR RESUME
AND CONNECT THEM WITH
RESOURCES. JUST GET A HOT MEAL
FOR SOME OF OUR KIDS THAT ARE
EXPERIENCING -- THAT ARE ON THE
BRINK OF BREAKING DOWN, AND
BEING ABLE TO HAVE SOMEPLACE TO
GO, WHICH I THINK IS INCREDIBLY
IMPOTENT. LAST BUT NOT LEAST,
THIS BILL ALSO MODIFIES TO BE
ABLE TO RECITE AND REFLECT WHAT
THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THIS
BUDGET WAS, TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE ARE IMPACTING BLACK
COMMUNITIES, FOR THE RESOURCES
THAT BEST ARE UTILIZED FOR THEM
TO HAVE THE HEALTH AND
WELLNESS, THE EDUCATION, THE
ARTS, THE WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT, THE HOME OWNERSHIP
AND ECONOMIC MOBILITY. WE HAVE
ALSO IDENTIFIED 12
ORGANIZATIONS, AS WELL, AND I
WANT TO THANK COUNCIL PRESIDENT
NELSON FOR COSPONSORING THIS
WITH ME. WE IDENTIFIED 12
ORGANIZATIONS. ONE OF HER BILLS
THAT CAME DOWN THAT MADE IT
INTO THE BOUNCING PACKAGE WAS
SUPPORTING OUR CD PANTHERS . [
INAUDIBLE ] TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE ARE FUNDING AT THE LEVELS
THAT WE ARE ALSO DOING
ENFORCEMENT, OKAY, WITH SPD AND
ALL THESE THINGS, THAT WE ARE
ALSO FINDING THAT PREVENTATIVE
PIECE. THAT IS SO BURDENED THAT
WE BALANCE THAT OUT. YOU KNOW,
FROM COUNCIL, WE HAVEN'T MADE
A LOT OF BILLS COME DOWN FOR
ENFORCEMENT, WHICH WAS
IMPORTANT. I VOTED FOR IT, AND
I AGREE WITH THAT, BUT I AGREE
WITH THE PREVENTATIVE PIECE, AS
WELL. PEOPLE AREN'T GETTING TO
THAT ENFORCEMENT PIECE. THAT IS
WHY THE PREVENTATIVE PIECE IS
IMPOTENT. FUNDING GROUPS THAT
DO YOUTH DEVELOPMENT HAS SET
THEM ON THE PATH, YOU KNOW, SO
THEY ARE SUCCESSFUL. COUNCIL
PRESIDENT MADE A COMMENT, TOO,
WHICH I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT. THE
FOOD PIECE. A LOT OF THESE KIDS
ARE HUNGRY, AND THEY GET TO BE
ANGRY. THEY ARE HANGRY. THEY
DON'T HAVE TO OVER THE WEEKEND
AND ON MONDAY AND TUESDAY, IT
IS A HOT MESS BECAUSE THEY
HAVEN'T EATEN OVER THE
WEEKEND. A LOT OF THESE ISSUES,
BECAUSE THEY ARE HUNGRY. THESE
GROUPS WE IDENTIFIED ALSO DO
FOOD INSECURITY STUFF, AND THEY
DO A LOT OF PROGRAMMING FOR
YOUTH. SO, ANYWAYS, WITH THAT,
I WILL STOP. I WANT TO THANK
CENTRAL STAFF FOR US BEING ABLE
TO CAREFULLY CRAFT A LOT OF
THIS STUFF. I WANT TO THANK
SOME OF THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS
THAT SHUT OUT MUST NIGHT IN
PERSON AND ON VIRTUAL, AND HAVE
SENT EMAILS REGARDING
SUPPORTING THESE CHANGES,
BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE THAT THESE
WILL IMPACT COMMUNITY FOR THE
BETTER, BUT ALSO, THE INTENDED
OUTCOMES, IMPORTANT FOR THIS
PARTICIPATORY BUDGET, WHICH WAS
THE ORIGINAL SPIRIT OF THIS, I
THINK THIS REALLY ALIGNS WITH
WHAT PEOPLE REALLY WANT COME
AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, EVEN
THOUGH THERE IS A FOOD BUCKET,
THAT WE HAVE TAKEN FROM TO BE
ABLE TO ALLOCATE FOR
HOMEOWNERSHIP, THERE ARE STILL
THOSE PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING
TO BE DONE, WHERE THEY ARE JUST
GOING TO BE SCALED BACK, BUT WE
ALSO DISH AND I HAVE TO DOUBLE
CHECK WITH THE CENTRAL STAFF TO
SEE IF WE HAVE ADDED LANGUAGE
FOR EXPANDING SOME OF THEIR
SCOPE OF WORK WITH THE
DEPARTMENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD AND
SO FORTH. ANYWAYS, THANK YOU,
MR. CHAIR. THAT IS MY LONG
EXPLANATION FOR THIS
PARTICIPATORY BUDGET. THANK
YOU.
‎THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH. COUNCILMEMBER
WOO.
‎I WANT TO ADD, THANK YOU,
JOY, FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS.
MANY HAVE COME UP TO US WITH
CONCERNS. AS YOU HEARD MY SITE
THROUGH PUBLIC COMMENTS, THIS
SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD SOLUTION TO
ADDRESS MANY OF THE CURRENTS WE
ARE HEARING IN OUR OFFICE.
THANK YOU.
‎THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE.
‎THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHIP
AND I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR PURSUING
THIS, AND ALSO, FOR MAINTAINING
THE FUNDING FOR THE DUWAMISH,
WHICH WAS CRITICALLY IMPOTENT,
AS WILL. THIS IS GOING TO BE
PHENOMENAL FOR THE COMMUNITY.
THANK YOU.
‎THANK YOU. THAT BRINGS UP
THE ONE QUESTION I HAD. I'M
GOING TO INTERJECT FOR PROCESS
OF FACILITATION BRITT THIS
SLIDE REFERENCES THAT
MODIFICATIONS TO PARTICIPATORY
BUDGETING. CAN YOU SHARE WHAT
ASPECTS OF THE BILL THAT WE
HAVE BEEN ON OUR RETAINED? I
KNOW THE ANSWER, BUT I WANT TO
HAVE IT ON THE RECORD.
‎ABSOLUTELY. SO, THE ELEMENTS
OF THE PARTICIPATORY BUDGET
PROPOSAL IN THE UNDERLYING BILL
THAT ARE NOT MODIFIED ARE $2
MILLION ONE TIME FOR HER CARE
TEAM EXPANSION IN 2025, AND AS
I MENTIONED WHEN WE DISCUSSED
THIS BEFORE, THE MAYOR'S
BUDGET BUILDS IN THE ASSUMPTION
THAT THE PARTICIPATORY BUDGET
ORDINANCE WILL FUND TEAM
EXPANSION FOR THE INITIAL PHASE
AND AT $2 MILLION. THAT IS
RETAINED. PUBLIC RESTROOM AXIS,
AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, IS
REDUCED FROM 7.2 TO 2.2, AND
THE DEPARTMENT AND CEO HAVE
INDICATED THAT THE PARKS THE
PERMIT WILL BE ABLE TO
IMPLEMENT A SCALED-DOWN VERSION
OF THAT PROJECT. THAT PROJECT
WILL BE ABLE TO SCALE TO THAT
AMOUNT. URBAN FOOD AND FARMING,
DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOODS
REDUCED FROM $7 MILLION-$4
MILLION. SAME STORY THERE. THE
DEPARTMENT HAS INDICATED THAT
THEY WILL BE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT
A SCALED DOWN VERSION OF THAT
PROJECT. AND THEY HAVE
INDICATED THAT THEY ARE
INTERESTED IN FAVORABLE,
EXPANDING THE SCOPE IN THE WAY
YOU DESCRIBED IT. THEY DON'T
NEED ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY TO DO
THAT. THEY ARE ON BOARD WITH
THAT. AS YOU MENTIONED, THAT
NATIVE YOUTH, PAST, PRESENT,
AND FUTURE, THE DUWAMISH CENTER
IS RETAINED AT THE $2.2 MILLION
MUCH. THE ENHANCED HOMELESS
NAVIGATION, $2 MILLION, WHICH
WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED BY
KCRHA. THAT HAS BEEN REMOVED IN
FAVOR OF THE OTHER CENTER. AND
THEN THAT YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULT
SHELTERED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
IN THE REALM OF $1.9 MILLION
HAS BEEN RETAINED FROM THE
ORIGINAL PROPOSAL.
‎I SHOULD ALSO SAY THAT THE
AMENDMENTS ALL AT CARRYFORWARD
LANGUAGE TO ENSURE THAT THE
PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED AS
DESIGNED IN 2025.
‎THANK YOU.
‎COUNCIL MEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH, I SEE HER HAND
AGAIN. YOU ALSO HAVE THE LAST
WORD.
‎I APOLOGIZE. THANK YOU.
‎COUNCILMEMBER SAKA AND
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
‎THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, FOR
CLARIFYING THE IMPORTANT
FEATURES AND SPECIFIC ELEMENTS
THAT HAVE BEEN CHANGED,
RETAINED, OR MODIFIED IN ANY
WAY. THAT REALLY CLARIFIED MY,
YOU KNOW, UNCERTAINTY AND
CONFUSION I HAD ABOUT THE
IMPACT ON THOSE ORIGINAL ITEMS
THAT WERE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED
IN THE MAYOR'S ORIGINAL
PROPOSED PARTICIPATORY BUDGET
INVESTMENTS. AND SO, I'M VERY
GLAD TO HEAR THAT THE $7.2
MILLION FOR THE DUWAMISH
LONGHOUSE PROJECT IS RETAINED.
IT IS IN MY DISTRICT. IT HAS
BEEN PROMISED AND COMMITTED TO
THAT COMMUNITY YEARS AGO. IT IS
IMPORTANT THAT WE ACTUALLY
FINALLY DELIVER, AND SO, I AM
THANKFUL. FIRST OFF, FOR THE
LEADERSHIP, THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH,
FOR CHAMPIONING THIS
COLLECTIVE, HOLISTIC APPROACH
THAT ALLOWS US AS A CITY TO
LIVE UP TO SOME OF THOSE
ORIGINAL COMMITMENTS TO THE
BLACK COMMUNITY, AND ALSO, I
THINK YOUR COSPONSORS, AS WELL,
FOR ALLOWING US TO GET TO THIS
POINT. I STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS
BILL FOR THE REASONS THAT I
MENTIONED. THANK YOU AGAIN FOR
BRINGING IT.
‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA. COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE,
FOLLOWED BY COUNCILMEMBERS
RIVERA AND NELSON.
‎THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I
WANTED TO SAY A FEW THINGS.
ONE, I WANTED TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH FOR
THE LEADERSHIP ON THE ISSUE. IT
IS VERY NEEDED, AND IT IS KEY.
I ALSO WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH FOR
BEING A TRUSTED ADVISER IN THIS
AREA FOR ME. HER INSIGHT, HER
LIVED EXPENSE, EVERYTHING THAT
SHE BRINGS TO THIS IS VERY
IMPORTANT, AS I LOOK AT THESE
ISSUES, AND THE BUDGET, JUST IN
GENERAL, AND SO, I LOOK AT HER
AS A TRUSTED ADVISER, AND I
THINK SHE HAS ALSO BEEN A KEY
LINK FOR ME TO INDIVIDUALS AND
ORGANIZATIONS -- MANY OF WHOM
WHO WE SAW AND HEARD FROM LAST
NIGHT. I THANK HER FOR THAT. I
ALSO THANK THEM FOR COMING LAST
NIGHT, AND FOR SPEAKING ON
BEHALF OF THEIR GROUPS, AND
CONSTITUENCIES. LOOKING AT THE
ORIGINAL LEGISLATION AND WHERE
WE ARE GOING, I WOULD ALSO
THINK THAT COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH WOULD PROBABLY BE
A GREAT LINK TO THE EXECUTIVE
AS THEY LOOK AT NEXT YEARS
PROGRAM, FOR HSD AND OTHER KEY
DEPARTMENTS. THE LAST THING I
WANTED TO SAY -- COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH BRINGS UP AN
IMPORTANT POINT. AND I THINK
RIGHT NOW IS A FANTASTIC TIME
TO EXPAND ON IT. THAT IS THE
PREVENTATIVE ASPECT. SO MANY
TIMES IN THE PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMITTEE. I TALK ABOUT LEADING
WITH COMPASSION AND HAVING
EMPATHY FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS
THAT ARE IN CRISIS AND SIMILAR
CONDITIONS, BUT THEN HAVING THE
WISDOM TO LOOK AT, FOR THE
FULLER COMMUNITY, AND THE
NEIGHBORHOODS INVOLVED, YOU
KNOW, I ALSO TALK ABOUT, YOU
CAN'T SUCCEED IN PUBLIC SAFETY
WITHOUT ALSO SUCCEEDING IN
PUBLIC HEALTH. AS WE HAVE
GOTTEN TO THE END OF THIS FIRST
YEAR, AND WORKING THROUGH ALL
THE POINTS, AS COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH TALKED ABOUT ON
THE PUBLIC SAFETY SIDE, IT IS
IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE HUMAN
SERVICES IN A MORE GENERAL
CONTEXT , TO HAVE THAT PIECE
THERE. THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR,
FOR EXAMPLE, WITH OUR BILL,
WHICH I THINK HAS ENGENDERED A
GREAT INCREASE IN TERMS OF
RESOURCES FOR WOMEN AND GIRLS
THAT HAVE BEEN AFFECTED. IN
THAT PIECE. IT IS ALSO HERE,
TOO, SOMETHING WHERE, WE CAN
HELP THOSE INDIVIDUALS,
PARTICULARLY THE YOUTH AND
YOUNG ADULTS, WHICH IS SO KEY
-- IT HAS NOT BEEN A MAIN FOCUS
FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMITTEE, BUT IT IS SOMETHING
THAT IS VITAL IN TERMS OF THAT
BALANCE WITH THE PUBLIC SAFETY
AND HUMAN SERVICES AS
REPRESENTED BY COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE'S HOUSING COMMITTEE, TO
ENSURE THAT WE ARE HELPING
THOSE IN NEED, AND AS MANY
PEOPLE SAID LAST NIGHT, AN
OUNCE OF PREVENTION IS WORTH A
POUND OF CURE. THIS COULD BE AN
AREA THAT COULD BE SO
IMPORTANT. SO, I THINK IT IS
IMPORTANT TO HIGHLIGHT THIS
PREVENTATIVE PIECE, THE HUMAN
SERVICES PIECE, THE PUBLIC
HEALTH PIECE FROM THOSE ANGLES.
IN TERMS OF THEIR COMPANION
EFFORTS. TO WHAT WE HAVE BEEN
DOING ON PUBLIC SAFETY, SO,
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH, AND FOR THE
PEOPLE THAT ARE SUPPORTING IT,
I APPRECIATE IT.
‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE. COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA ,
‎I WANT TO EXPRESS MY
GRATITUDE FOR COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH WORKING TO
FULFILL THE COMMITMENT TO
COMMUNITY. I KNOW THAT MAYOR
SENT DOWN THE PACKAGE. I VERY
MUCH APPRECIATE HIS DOING SO,
AND THEN, ALSO, JUST APPRECIATE
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH,
FOR, LIKE IS IT, WORKING WITH
COMMUNITY, TO FINE-TUNE THE
PROPOSAL, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT
SHE DID WORK WITH COMMUNITY, TO
PUT THIS FORWARD, AND WE KNOW
THIS IS WHAT IS NEEDED IN
COMMUNITY, AND WE HEARD LAST
NIGHT, THESE ITEMS ARE WHAT
COMMUNITIES SUPPORT. AND I WANT
TO PARTICULARLY UNDERSCORE MY
APPRECIATION FOR, YOU KNOW, THE
YOUTH. THAT IS A BIG PIECE OF
THESE AMENDMENTS. AND THEN,
ALSO, ON THE HOMEOWNERSHIP
SAID, YOU KNOW, OUR OLDER
COMMUNITY, BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT
A LOT OF THE FOLKS ARE IN
DANGER OF LOSING THEIR HOMES.
OUR OLDER FOLKS ARE NOW LIVING
ON FIXED INCOMES, AND THEN WHEN
THEIR PROPERTY TAXES GO UP,
THEY DON'T HAVE RESOURCES FROM
WHICH TO PULL FROM TO BE ABLE
TO KEEP THEIR HOMES, SO I VERY
MUCH APPRECIATE THE ATTENTION
TO BOTH ON THE YOUTH AND, AND
OLDER, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK
PERSONALLY, WE DO ENOUGH TO
SUPPORT OUR SENIORS AND OLDER
FOLKS IN COMMUNITY ACROSS THE
UNITED STATES. I VERY MUCH
APPRECIATE YOUR PUTTING THIS
FORWARD, AND I VERY MUCH
SUPPORT ALL THE WORK THAT WENT
INTO THIS, AND I VERY MUCH
SUPPORT THIS, SO THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH,
FOR REALLY LENDING YOUR PART,
ALONG WITH THE MAYORS AND THE
VARIOUS FOLKS. AND REALLY, MANY
OF US HERE, ALL OF US HERE, FOR
REALLY HIGHLIGHTING THE
APPEARANCE OF KEEPING THE
PROMISES TO THE COMMUNITIES.
‎THANK YOU. COUNCIL
PRESIDENT.
‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH. IF YOU DIDN'T
ALREADY HAVE TWO COSPONSORS, I
WOULD REQUEST TO BE A
COSPONSOR. I FULLY SUPPORT
THIS. I THANK YOU FOR DOING THE
WORK. YOU STEPPED INTO A
PROJECT THAT HAD BEEN SITTING
ON THE BOOKS FOR A LONG TIME
AND WAS ALMOST TO THE POINT OF
BEING WRAPPED UP WITH A BOW,
AND THEN CAME IN AND MADE SOME
IMPORTANT CHANGES. I DO
APPRECIATE THAT YOUR CHANGES
KEEP IN MIND SOME OF OUR
EXPRESSED -- NOT NECESSARILY
CONCERNS, BUT WHAT WE ARE
FUNDING DOES HAVE AN ENDING
DATE, SO WE MAKE SURE THE
COMMUNITY UNDERSTANDS HOW TO
TAKE IT FORWARD. AND SO, LAST
BUT NOT LEAST, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH TO THE OFFICE OF CIVIL
RIGHTS. THIS HAS BEEN ON THEIR
BOOKS FOR A LONG TIME. I JUST
WANTED TO EXPRESS APPRECIATION
FOR THAT. YES, KING COUNTY ALSO
DID A BUDGETING PROJECT, BUT IT
WAS 5 MILLION, I BELIEVE, OR 3
MILLION. AND IT IS A LOT EASIER
TO GIVE AWAY A SMALL AMOUNT OF
MONEY, THEN IT IS TO DELEGATE
$27 MILLION BECAUSE, THE STAKES
ARE SO HIGH. EVERYBODY WITHIN
THE EXECUTIVE THAT WORKED ON
THIS ALSO, I JUST WANTED TO
EXTEND THE THANK YOU AND THE
CONVERSATIONS ALSO, TO
‎COUNCILMEMBER MORALES., WHO
HAS BEEN WITH US FOR A REALLY
LONG TIME. THANK YOU.
‎OTHER COLLEAGUES? I WILL
SHARE MY COMMENTS AND THEN I
WILL PASS IT OVER TO
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH FOR
THE LAST WORD. I WANT TO THANK
STAFF FOR DELIVERING THIS
PROGRAM. IT WAS NOT AN EASY
PATHWAY FORWARD. CLEARLY, YOUR
WORK HAS DELIVERED BECAUSE ALL
THE PROGRAMS ARE BEING FUNDED
DESPITE CHANGES AT DIFFERENT
LEVELS. MY REFLECTION IS THAT
THE FACT THAT THE BLACK
COMMUNITY IS NOT A MONOLITH.
AND WHAT I REFLECT ON FROM US
THAT IS THAT WE HEARD A UNITED
VOICE. THAT WAS REALLY
IMPORTANT. I WILL SAY THE ONE
THING THAT I SAID THE LAST TIME
THIS WAS BEFORE US, ADDING
FUNDING TO BLACK ORGANIZATIONS
AND INDIGENOUS ORGANIZATIONS,
AL GETTING FUNDING, MONEY, AND
RESOURCES TO THESE TYPES OF
ORGANIZATIONS SHOULD NOT BE A
ONE-TIME ACTION OR A MOMENT IN
TIME. BUT WE HAVE BEFORE US IS
A REACTION TO THE MURDER OF
GEORGE FLOYD, AND THIS CAN'T
BE A ONE-TIME PRACTICE OR
MOMENT IN TIME. AND THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH,
FOR ALL YOUR WORK. OVER TO YOU
FOR THE LAST WORD.
‎EASY. LAST WORDS. THANK YOU,
CHAIR STRAUSS. I'M SO GLAD
THAT YOU BROUGHT IT UP. I WANT
TO THANK THE OFFICE OF CIVIL
RIGHTS DIRECTOR DEREK WHEELER
SMITH, FOR HIS WORK ON THIS. I
KNOW HE STEPPED IN ON THE TAIL
END OF IT, AND CONTINUED THE
PROCESS, SO THANK YOU SO MUCH.
I ALSO WANT TO RECOGNIZE THE
EXECUTIVE OFFICE. YOU KNOW, WE
WERE TALKING TO THEM DURING
THIS PROCESS TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE WERE KIND OF ALIGNED WITH A
LOT OF THE VALUES THAT THEY HAD
EXPRESSED, AS WELL, SO I
DEFINITELY WANT TO THANK OUR
EXECUTIVE OFFICE. I ALSO WANT
TO THINK OUR CENTRAL STAFF FOR
ALL THEIR HELP, AND THE OTHER
DEFERMENTS THAT HAD BEEN
ALLOCATED MONEY, AND, YOU KNOW,
FOR US, TO COME AND SAY, HEY,
WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH THIS,
AND WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH THAT
COMMENT TALKING ABOUT THOSE
THINGS WITH CENTRAL STAFF, AND
REALLY BEING OPEN TO THIS, AS
WE KNOW, IT WAS ALREADY BAKED
INCOME AND THEY PUT THE BOW ON
IT. I'M GOING TO GO DOWN THE
LINE AND THANK ALL OF YOU.
THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT,
FOR YOUR EARLY SUPPORT ON THIS,
AND LEADERSHIP. COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA, THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING
THE DUWAMISH PEACE AND SAYING
HOW IMPORTANT THAT IS FOR YOUR
DISTRICT, AND MAKING SURE THAT,
YOU KNOW, THAT WE ARE MAKING
DOSE KEEPING OUR PROMISE. I
THINK IT IS INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT. THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. AND I
SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON THE
PHONES FROM DIFFERENT PEOPLE IN
THE COMMUNITY WHO EXPRESSED
THEIR, YOU KNOW, SUPPORT FOR
THIS, BUT ALSO COMING UP, HAD
TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH
FOLKS ABOUT THINGS. SO JUST
THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES, YOU STARTED THIS. YOU
STARTED THIS BALL. THAT IS
INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. I WANT TO
THANK YOU FOR ACTUALLY STARTING
THE BALL, FOR US TO GET HERE.
YOU KNOW. I'M JUST TRYING TO
RUN THROUGH THE ENDS ON WITH
IT. YOU CAN BEAT RUSSELL WILSON
PRINT WHATEVER YOU WANT.
RUSSELL WILSON DIDN'T HAND IT
OFF TO MARSHAWN LYNCH SO DON'T
PASS IT. WE WILL TALK ABOUT
THIS IS MAYBE A FIRST DOWN.
THANK YOU, COUNCIL CHAIR DAN
STRAUSS FOR YOUR ADVICE ON HOW
TO NAVIGATE THINGS AND HOW TO
MOVE THROUGH STUFF. REALLY, THE
INSIGHT THAT YOU HAVE HAS BEEN
INCREDIBLE. COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE, THANK YOU. HE HAS BEEN
INCREDIBLY SUPPORTIVE SINCE DAY
ONE. AND, YOU KNOW, YOUR
LEADERSHIP, AS WELL. JUST
INCREDIBLE. THANK YOU. AND YOUR
SPONSORSHIP. COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE, THANK YOU. YOU COME
WITH ME TO PLACES THAT, YOU
KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T
LOOK LIKE YOU. THOSE ARE HARD
TO FIND IN THE CITY, BUT YOU
COME IN THOSE PLACES, AND YOU
LISTEN TO PEOPLE. AND THEY GIVE
YOU THE FEEDBACK, WHETHER IT IS
TOUGH OR IT IS NOT. YOU LISTEN
AND YOU TAKE IT, AND I
APPRECIATE YOU OBSERVING THAT.
AND THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
WOO, FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS
IN YOUR SPONSORSHIP AND JUST
BEING LIKE, HEY, WHAT OF THE
COMMUNITY WANTS, THANK YOU FOR
THAT. OKAY? SO ANYWAYS, WITH
THAT BEING SAID, THANK YOU. I
HOPE WE CAN EARN YOUR SUPPORT
ON THIS FOR THE PARTICIPATORY
BUDGET, AND THAT IS ALL I HAVE.
SO THANK YOU, CHAIR. HOPEFULLY
I DIDN'T FORGET THE THINKING
ONE THANK YOU.
‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH BREAD FOR THE
RECORD, I AM MISSING PETE
CARROLL THIS YEAR AND DON'T
PASS THE BALL IN THE END ZONE.
RUN IT. RUN IT, RUN IT. WITH
THAT, COLLEAGUES, I'M GOING TO
DO A LITTLE BIT OF A TIME CHECK
FOR US. WE ARE GOING TO GO ON
LUNCH RECESS FOR 30 MINUTES,
COMING BACK AT 1:30. WHAT WE
HAVE BEFORE US ARE 118 ITEMS IN
LETTER A. NOT ALL OF THEM WILL
BE DEEP DIVES. THAT IS TWO
HOURS. IT ONLY TAKES ONE MINUTE
-- THAT IS TWO HOURS. WE THEN
HAVE 46 ITEMS IN GROUPS C AND
D. WE ONLY HAVE ONE ITEM IN B,
SO I'M JUST NOT TALKING ABOUT
IT. IF WE SPEND ONE MINUTE ON
EACH OF THE ITEMS IN GROUPS C
AND D, THAT IS 46 MINUTES. I
KNOW CENTRAL STAFF WILL TAKE A
MINUTE. I KNOW THAT EACH OF US
WILL TAKE LONGER THAN A MINUTE,
SO LET'S GIVE IT TWO. RUNNING
THAT MATH, THAT IS 90 MINUTES.
WE WILL COME BACK AT 1:30. THE
EARLIEST WE WILL GET OUT IS
4:15 ON THIS PROJECTION. IF WE
GO LONGER -- IF WE HIT THE TWO
MINUTES PER ITEM C AND D, WE
WILL BE OUT AT 5:00 P.M. SHARP,
WHICH MAKES COUNCILMEMBER MOORE
LATE. IT MAKES ME LATE. IF WE
GO OVER TWO MINUTES, I CAN'T
TELL YOU HOW LONG WE WILL BE
HERE. WE WILL BE HERE UNTIL
6:00 P.M. AT THE LATEST, SO
THAT IS WHERE WE ARE. ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, WE WILL
BE RETURNING, AND I AM SO
SERIOUS, IT'S NOT FUNNY. BE
HERE AT 1:30, BECAUSE THIS IS A
REALLY TIGHT SHIP RIGHT NOW. WE
ARE RIGHT, BARELY ON TIME. ANY
QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, CONCERNS?
SEEING NOT COME IF THERE IS NO
OBJECTION, THE SELECT BUDGET
COMMITTEE WILL BE IN RECESS
UNTIL 1:30 P.M. WE ARE IN
RECESS UNTIL 1:30 P.M.