♪♪
-Hello. I'm your host Brian Callahan.
Seattle's Transportation Levy,
the largest levy in city history is now headed to the ballot.
If voters approve it,
what impact could it have on safety, traffic congestion,
and carbon emissions?
Plus, there's a new report on drug overdoses and crime
in Seattle
that the City Council says could lead to some new solutions.
Can Seattle clean up some of its most notorious neighborhoods?
Council President Sara Nelson and Councilmember Rob Saka
join me to answer these questions
and the ones you're sending in too.
Next, on Council Edition.
-We tried to be very thoughtful in putting
this package together to make sure
that we address the concerns of our most vulnerable tax payers.
-This is what keeps me up at night,
seeing the impacts of our drug crisis on -- on the community.
-All that and more,
coming up next on City Inside Out: Council Edition.
♪♪
And here we are, with Council President, Sara Nelson.
Thank you very much for being here.
-Thank you for having me again.
-And we also have with us,
Councilmember Rob Saka from District One.
Councilmember Saka, good to see you too.
-Hey. Good morning, Brian. Happy to be here.
-All right. Let's do this thing.
Councilmember Saka, I'll start with you here.
You chair the Transportation Committee
and helped shepherd through the new Transportation Levy
that voters will be considering this fall.
It's a $1.55 billion dollar levy.
It's the largest in city history,
which works out to be an increase of about $18.58 more
per month for the median homeowner in Seattle.
So, as a way to get the discussion started,
if I could here,
I'll throw in a message from a viewer who writes this:
"Why did the Council approve the new levy size?
Should have cut scope
and treat taxpayer dollars with the respect
they treat their own?"
I wanted to put that out there
because I know there's a lot of discussion
about the size of this levy.
Some councilmembers were pushing for an even bigger levy.
But if you could talk to that -- talk about that,
respond to some of those concerns about the cost
and the size of this levy?
-Yeah. Great question Brian.
I appreciate the question from the constituent as well.
So, first off, let me make clear,
voters are now going to be able to decide.
That said, I'll talk about how we crafted this package.
It was a very deliberative, collaborative process.
The final proposal -- what right now is a proposal --
again, the voters are going to decide.
The final proposal was the direct result of a lot
of collaboration between me and my councilmember colleagues,
community groups -- there's a lot of people involved
and individuals who showed -- took the time
to show up and testify and send emails and call,
and stop me at the grocery store and say, hey.
So, I understand the concerns about affordability.
And it turns -- there was proposals on the table
for $1.7 billion.
-Yeah. Yeah.
-Earlier proposals for a $2 billion levy
and a $3 billion levy. -Right.
-And it turns out the $1.55 billion levy was
the compromise approach.
I'm under -- I'm mindful of those concerns.
I think we crafted the best package.
And -- and --
and not only is it one of the most transformative levy's
in Seattle history,
but it also is, and I'm proud of this, it's the most accountable.
It has the strongest set
of accountability mechanisms and oversight provisions,
and controls baked in,
to make sure that whatever dollar amount we're investing,
whether it's $1 or $1.55 billion,
it -- we're making sure it's responsibly invested.
-I know.
-I know, too, there were some amendments --
-And again -- can I say? -Yeah. Please.
-Voters are going to have the final say.
-Voters will decide. -Yeah.
-And -- and voters need to be aware too,
there are a number of different mechanisms put into this package
that actually, if --
if people want to reach out and get some of the help
that they might help with utility bills,
that's included in this levy too.
I wanted to make sure I pointed that out.
It's an important piece of this.
-Yeah. Yeah.
And we tried to be very thoughtful in putting
this package together to make sure
that we address the concerns of our most vulnerable taxpayers.
-Yeah.
-So, that's why taxpayers
who qualify for existing state and county
tax or property tax exemption and relief programs,
were -- were -- there's a cool initiative in there
to educate people about those -- -Yeah.
--- and better connect them with existing services.
And so, we -- we took this process very seriously.
All of us.
Every last one of us.
-Yeah. Yeah. -So, yeah.
We're -- but I'm -- I'm proud of where we landed and again,
voters are going to have a final say.
-I got you.
And I know we have to be very careful about this
and I want to make sure we're not leaning voters any way here,
but Council President Nelson, any thoughts about this levy?
-I will say, from -- I have a bit of a historical perspective
because I was staffing Councilmember Richard Conlin
when the -- when the bridging the gap levy --
-When it was first called "Bridging the gap." Right.
-Yeah. The first levy.
And that was in a different context of governance.
It was when every single council member represented
the -- the whole city.
-That's right.
-And so, when -- I -- I think a different dynamic,
this time around was -- is --
is district elections in the fact
that seven of the nine council members
are responsive to the constituents in their districts.
And so, each council member is naturally,
and rightly so,
advocating for projects will benefit their part of the city.
And so, I think that when we talk about the size of the --
of the levy, that does come into play as well.
-That's a very good observation. Thanks for bringing that one up.
And Councilmember Saka, I did want to ask a follow up
question from a viewer about what this levy would achieve
if voters approve it.
Carl writes this:
"Seattle has a target of 90% of all personal trips
being zero emissions by 2030. Will this levy get us
across the zero emissions finish line by 2030?
If not, what next steps does the transportation committee
need to take to make sure we stay on track?"
He's raising some concerns that this is an eight-year levy
which takes us into the year 2033.
Are we going to meet that 2030 measure?
I think that's the big question.
-Yeah. So, it's a great question.
I'm proud of the -- so, first off, again,
voters are going to get the final say on this.
Historically, Seattle voters have approved levies
for the past 18 --
transportation levies for the past 18 years,
dating back to the 2006 "Bridging the gap."
This levy that is expiring,
this is a renewal levy, not a new levy.
It's the renewal levy for clarity.
It constitutes approximately 30% of SDOT's budget.
And so, with respect to our ability, look, there are a lot
of strong sustainability and environmental,
like, provisions and programs and projects baked in here.
One of those is -- so, access to transit, you know,
we have a lot of safe routes to schools initiatives.
We have a cool new EV charging infrastructure.
Like, there -- there -- for -- for -- for cars,
there's parallel efforts underway,
as you know, to electrify our -- our transit fleet.
-Right.
-Because we can't -- we don't exist in a vacuum; we're siloes.
We all work together.
So, I -- I -- I think this -- this package,
again it's a proposal; voters are going to decide.
-That's right.
-It -- it puts us in the best possible position to --
to achieve and live up to our climate goals.
-Okay. And we will see what voters do with it.
Thank you for that.
-I want to say one thing about that.
I want to get away from this pitting of pedestrians
and bicyclists versus cars and trucks etcetera --
-Sure.
-We're all using the same transportation infrastructure.
And what we need to do is preserve our infrastructure.
Maintain our infrastructure.
Improve our schedule of maintenance so that
we don't have to pay for more expensive potholes down the way.
And so, we're not talking about pedestrians versus cars,
pedestrians versus bicycles, busses versus trucks, etcetera.
This is our common infrastructure.
Bridges, roads,
that's what all of these modes go on
and that's what's very important for people to recognize,
that we're all in this together.
All modes together. -Okay.
-100%. -Okay.
-I'll just pile on and say
that there's so many interdependencies
between one mode and another,
we can't just slice one off and say, oh --
-I see.
--- we're -- we're only going to prioritize bikes.
-Yeah.
-Bikes travel on roads, which -- which so do cargo trucks --
-Yeah. Freight. Yes. Right.
--- freight mobility, so do cars.
So, we can't just prioritize one set of investments,
it's all tightly interwoven and interconnected.
It's one transportation system. -Yeah.
-So -- so, there was a lot of thought.
So, I feel good about the fact that this levy,
if --
if passed,
it would make significant progress in advancing
whatever our personal choice is, transportation choice.
-Yeah.
-Whether choose to walk, bike,
take transit, drive, whatever it is.
-So, we will see what voters do.
-Voters are going to get the final say, though.
-That's right. That's right.
Council President Nelson, let me head back to you.
The governance committee that you chair,
recently discussed a new report from the city auditor
that was commissioned by former council presidents,
Debora Juarez and Mayor Harrell,
it has 57 pages of research about
where drug overdoses and crime are concentrated in Seattle.
These are areas that are well known to city leadership
and probably many city residents too.
The report had a case study of Third Avenue,
and the auditor says,
"There are 10 continuous street segments in Seattle,
small geographic areas,
where there are 100 plus
crimes against people and overdose incidents combined.
So, really concentrated in a disproportionate way.
And I wanted to talk about this
because you put out a press release;
you've talked about this in committee.
You're very eager to act on this information.
But I want to try to put this in historical context
because I think back to 2015.
Then, Mayor Murray had this 9.5 block strategy;
talked about something very similar.
Working with law enforcement, outreach workers,
to clean up Third Avenue.
Just two years ago,
Mayor Harrell started something called Operation New Day.
Police and social workers,
again, concentrated on this area around Third Avenue.
I just want to ask, what is going to be different this time?
-Well, that's what I want to know too.
And that's why I've put so much attention on this audit.
You know, I identify with the commenters
that spoke before the meeting and -- and --
and the people that write me e-mails daily,
etcetera, saying when are we going to --
when are we going to see some change?
I'm tired of a new plan, etcetera.
And I agree with that,
and perhaps no one is as impatient as I am,
as the Economic Development Chair.
This is what keeps me up at night,
seeing the impacts of our drug crisis on -- on the community.
And so, my --
my goal of putting such a focus on this -- this audit was to --
to make people realize that we --
that we already have the resources.
We -- this audit identified existing federal resources,
technical support, funding support.
It also looked at other jurisdictions where they are --
are having --
are being more effective in dealing with the combined crises
of -- of drug addiction and crime.
And so, what I wanted to do was to get away from this idea
that -- that we don't have the resources to deal with --
with these problems.
And I fall into that trap too.
I've been saying we don't have the -- enough --
you know, SPD is -- until SPD is fully staffed,
we're not going to make significant progress.
What this audit made me realize
is that we can more effectively deploy our existing resources
in a more targeted fashion to make difference in --
in -- in -- in very troubled locations.
-Okay.
-And so, what this audit did is it talked about
what are those conditions
that are generating the problems in those places?
And it was very honest about the fact that what --
the -- the case study that this audit focused on
was based on a two-block sec- segment of Third Avenue
where there is Plymouth -- permanent supportive housing.
There's White -- -Virginia to Blanchard.
Yeah.
--- YWCA, there's also a -- an Evergreen Treatment Services.
-Yeah.
-And so, that is a place where --
where very vulnerable people congregate
that are dealing with addiction.
And so, everybody -- that -- that's okay to recognize.
And so,
how do we address the services that those people need?
They -- the -- the audit focused on the fact
that with inside permit supportive housing
and on the street outside we've got people using
and selling drugs.
And so, we need more recovery-based services inside.
We need to have more targeted law enforcement
response outside.
And so, again, getting away from this -- this scarcity mindset.
We can't solve these problems
because we don't have the resources.
I would love to have more treatment centers
and more officers. But given that,
let's make sure we are deploying our existing resources
effectively, more effectively,
as other neighboring jurisdictions,
such as Snohomish County are and let's get the help
that's already out there and offered to us.
And so, that is what I wanted to -- to bring to light,
and the top three --
or the first three recommendations in the audit
are: The mayor's office should lead on this effort.
Assign someone who will take the lead
and be accountable for results.
-Right.
-And -- and work with these external -- external agencies.
We do not have to create -- recreate the wheel.
We don't need a brand new plan;
we just need to do what we know we have to do
to make a difference. -Thank you.
And I know, Councilmember Saka,
you're on the Governance Committee too,
and you're digesting this audit here.
Some thoughts about it?
Where you want this pro- this process to go?
-Yeah.
So, it's a -- it's a great report.
I want to thank the council president for hearing it in --
in her committee.
I want to thank past Council President Juarez
and Mayor Harrell for their leadership
in commissioning this -- this audit -- important audit.
It's very eye opening from my perspective.
There's a lot of important takeaways
that we -- we need to urgently act upon.
But I think, you know,
I mentioned this yesterday during the committee,
but the -- the -- the public is tired of --
we're not going to report our way out of this.
We're not going to document our way out of this.
We need a better -- do a better job of bringing to life
the concrete, tangible results and actions
that are going to flow from this.
And -- but --
but, you know, this is a necessary pre-condition --
this report is a necessary pre-condition
for allowing us to do that.
One important takeaway, Brian,
that I think, from my perspective,
one -- one of the punchlines,
if you will, from this,
out of the eight audit recommendations
and the 65 plus page report, multiple appendices,
is that the city, as a whole,
we have an opportunity to better collaborate outside of the city.
We're doing a great job
and get better every day collaborating with each other,
with -- like, across departments.
But we need to -- we need to do a better job
of leveraging existing federal resources --
state, county resources,
and understanding best practices
to go after these challenges head-on.
By the way, treat them not only as a -- you know,
the -- a public -- from a public health lens,
but yes, there's an important public safety aspect that our --
our law enforcement professionals need to
be involved with as well.
So, but I'm -- I'm encouraged, and -- but I share the urgency
because we're not going to document our way out of this.
-Right. Please. Yeah.
-Well and building off what you just said,
the Mayor has said he has the council that he wants right now.
-Hmm. Right.
-And the legislative branch has its duties,
and the executive has its duties.
And we can convene because we have committee meetings.
We can convene conversations.
We pass laws. We pass budgets.
We do not control the police or the --
or the unified care team --
-Right. --- etcetera.
And so, part of the -- so, we --
we need to work together and each --
each branch do our jobs in -- in coordination
to make a difference for the people of this city.
-Thank you.
And I just wanted to ask a follow up
question from one of our viewers about resources,
and when I think about this that's a big question.
I know it is for you too.
Joseph wrote this:
"Are we going to increase funding
for outreach and substance use disorder services such as LEAD?
Why doesn't the council encourage the development
of a new therapeutic court after we lost community court?"
I know there's a bit to unpack there,
but I wanted to put that out there,
a response for Joseph
and talking about resources
and what the city's going to do with its resources.
-I think we should only allocate resources to services
that work, frankly, and --
-Is LEAD working?
-I believe that LEAD ha- is a --
is an incredibly important organiz-- it's -- it's --
it's a model that is -- that can work very well.
I need to understand more what is happening to the people
that are -- that are being stopped for public drug use
because we now have a -- a public drug use ordinance.
-Right.
-And they are rightly diverted
into law enforcement diversion programs,
so they don't go to jail,
we're not trying to get people in jail.
We're trying to get them into preferably recovery-based
substance use -- -Services.
-Yeah. Yeah. Addiction services; rehab.
So that they can get their lives back together.
And I need to follow up
and find out what is happening with the people that --
that are stopped for -- for public drug use,
diverted into the LEAD program, and then what happens?
Because LEAD is not the end, it's a means.
-Right.
-And so, I need to -- to -- to go through some --
some data and some reporting and talk to Lisa Daugaard,
who's the head of that agency
and really find out how is it going.
-Yeah.
-And how can we improve things?
-Okay.
-I will always say that fentanyl is a new drug.
It's deadly, ubiquitous, and cheap.
-Yeah.
-And it -- it blows our old strategies out of the water
when it comes to the --
the urgency that we need to get people into --
in -- into services
that they can put their lives back together.
-Okay.
-And also, remember, right now,
our harm reduction strategies,
people focus on -- on medication for opioid use disorder.
-Sure. Right.
-That does nothing for methamphetamine.
Methamphetamine is stronger, it's on the streets now --
-Sure.
--- and so, that is why I'm always focused on actual rehab
where people can either go
and spend some time away from all the pressures
in their daily lives, detox, and get that -- that --
that counseling support or intensive outpatient services.
And that -- those are proven strategies.
Also, the --
the report did document the success
of the contingency management program
that Plymouth Housing piloted. -Right.
-That is -- that is a program that rewarded people who --
-Gift cards. Right. Yeah.
-Yeah.
Everybody called it the gift card thing.
But, you know, and -- and -- and that made it sound trite,
but what it does is it rewards people for trying
to abstain from use for a certain amount of time.
Get a clean urine analysis. -Yeah.
-And then get their minds in a different place --
-Yeah.
--- so they can make different choices going forward?
Maybe go into inpatient or outpatient
treatment if they want to.
-Okay. Thank you for that.
I would like to move on, if I could,
because there's a very important story about gun violence
I want to talk to you about, Councilmember Saka.
You had some recent efforts with this.
There was a fatal shooting of a 22-year-old man
in the Alki neighborhood a couple of weeks ago.
You held a public meeting to talk about this
with a number of neighbors at the Alki UCC.
A number of those neighbors
have been pushing for more action against crimes
like this and street disorder too.
Interim Sher- Interim Chief Sue Rahr was there,
along with a number of other city leaders
and there are a lot of frustrated people,
as you know, in District 1, in that neighborhood.
What message are you trying to put out them?
What sort of action are you working on to respond to this?
-Yeah.
So, it --
that would happen, and just a level set on what happened,
a 22-year-old man was tragically gunned down
at Duwamish Head and Alki at 4:00 in the morning.
And in an area
that we -- that is known to experience problem racing,
problem drinking, partying and, like, gathering Tom foolery --
-Yeah. --- to be honest, Brian --
-Okay.
--- at all hours of the day and night.
And unfortunately, in connection with that,
two nearby residents who live across the street,
their homes were -- were shot up like a war zone.
And so -- so, I was proud to act quickly.
Our response was the -- the very next morning, within hours,
I was down on-scene visiting the scene,
talking to front line first responders, police, fire,
within four days,
five days, however long it was,
we organized and got all the people in the room,
from the city government perspective,
that were -- make no mistake, community,
like, holds a strong role as well.
We're not, like -- they're like --
in any event, I was proud to get all --
like, at least five critical groups in the same room
that are directly accountable to -- to those residents --
-Yeah. --- for what happened.
Me, our colleague council member, Tonya Woo,
who represents city wide --
-Yeah.
--- representatives from mayor's office,
leaders from Parks, SDOT, and the Chief of Police,
and we developed a -- a -- a concrete action plan.
Every --
every last one of the executive departments responsible
for implementing -- -Right.
--- you know, these safety measures
and counter measures took --
took important action items and -- and --
and, you know, next steps away from that.
So, we're -- we're going to be working hard to make sure
and -- and holding people accountable,
myself included, by the way.
-Yeah. Yeah. -I'm fed up with it too.
So, yeah. -Yeah.
Gathering that group is the start of this,
and maybe Council- --
-Well -- -Yeah. Please.
-Well, and also, we, out of the Public Safety Committee,
passed this piece of legislation on street racing,
-I was going to bring that up in a minute; let's go.
-Well, I'm just going to say
that it's going to come before full council
I believe next week, and that was -- that was --
I believe it was generated by the City Attorney's Office,
and then in -- in collaboration with Public Safety Chair Kettle.
-Yes.
-And that's the sort of fast turnaround of --
of legislation that we need to see to deal with these things.
And I would like to know more about --
the other day in committee you mentioned the --
the -- the tragic shooting that began your tenure on council,
and what you think about that,
and changes that need to be made there.
I'd be interested in knowing what you --
-A 15-year-old -- -You know exactly what --
-A 15-year-old that was at the Southwest Community Center.
Did you want to touch on that?
-15-year-old, Mobarak Adam, to be exact.
-Yeah.
-And I had the pleasure of speaking with his brother
just yesterday,
I think, and I'm trying to coordinate another meeting
with the family,
because there are some important actions
and next steps on multiple levels of government,
particularly with respect to potential state law changes
that we -- we might need to make.
But, in any event, yeah.
The -- the Chief of Police mentioned it at --
at -- at the Alki meeting -- -Yes.
--- that I org- helped organize and convene.
The same challenges that impacted and --
and frustrated the ability of law enforcement
to effectively just gather facts.
-Right. Talk with witnesses, right.
-Non-criminal witnesses.
-Right. Right. Right. -Non-criminal.
That's an important element now. And --
and, like the same thing
that prevented facts from being daylighted --
-Right.
--- in the Mubarak Adam case were the same facts
that tragically are,
so far, appear to be thwarting the investigation
of the Garfield student who was killed and gunned down.
Black and brown people are dying
in this -- in this city, and our -- and --
and -- and we need to do better.
We're -- anyways -- Yeah.
-Well, yeah. -Please.
-I mean, sometimes well-intentioned
laws end up having negative impacts when it comes --
-These were laws intended to protect younger people
from talking to the police if they didn't --
if they didn't have legal ground to stand on, etcetera.
Keep going. -Yeah.
And -- and you've been educating me about this,
and I really appreciate your -- your comments in committee,
and we will have a chance to help OIR formulate an execu--
I mean, a legislative agenda going into next session.
So, I will appreciate you leadership there.
-I'm looking forward to that. Thank you.
-We'll see what's happened there.
Another public safety issue,
I wondered if I could talk to you Council President Nelson,
about police hiring.
And I'm going to come at it a different way,
because we got a very interesting question
about this from a viewer.
So, the city recently announced that CARE,
the third public safety agency for the city of Seattle
is expanding,
it's going to have it's 911
alternative response program city-wide.
So, these are behavioral health specialists going out
to these low-intensity calls, instead of police officers.
Our viewer wanted to know this:
"If we can't fill every SPD officer position funded
in the budget,
will the council consider funding CARE responders instead,
who the city would have an easier time recruiting?"
So, these CARE responders don't have to go through
a police academy.
They could get hired more quickly,
seems like they're having a good impact; they don't cost as much.
What do you think?
-I think that the --
that -- there is no one
that doesn't like the idea of officers not responding
to certain situations
where clearly a social worker
or a behavioral health specialist
should be there instead. The question is, how do you --
how do you figure out which -- which are those calls?
And so, I will say that I --
I would say that I am Amy Smi-- Chief Smith's number one fan,
but I have too much competition to be able to make that claim --
-Sure.
--- but I'll say that she is exactly the voice that we need,
because she ta- she brings an analytical mind to this issue.
And -- and -- and the --
the pilot care program has been in effect since October --
-Right.
--- and it's due to sunset next -- at the end of next year.
And so,
when we're talking about the expansion
of the program city-wide, there are labor --
there -- there's a nexus with bargaining
with the police department.
-Right.
--- it has to take place to -- to enable that to happen.
And so, therefore, because I'm on that committee,
I can't really talk more about that, but --
-Okay. Okay.
--- every great idea is more complicated to implement
than one would like.
-Okay. -And so, that's all I'll say.
-Okay. Okay. I -- that -- -Yeah.
--- that's fair.
Could you tell me real quick -- I just wanted to touch on this
with a one-minute version, if I could.
You were working on this app-based
delivery driver legislation.
I know there was a lot of urgency around it,
because these pay up laws went into effect
at the start of this year.
A number of restaurants said, whoa, this is no good.
They have to put on these $5.00 fees because of these laws,
etcetera, and -- and we're not getting as many orders.
I know there was a lot of urgency around this.
I'm just trying to figure out where this is right now.
Can you update us?
-Well, that passed out of my committee
on a vote of four in favor and one abstention.
-Right.
-And that councilmember who abstained requested more time
to do outreach wi-- broader outreach.
There had already been months of outreach
between the drivers and the network companies,
because those are the two --
those are the two stakeholder groups
that are directly impacted by the legislation.
She wanted to broaden -- broaden that conversation,
speak with the advocates that put the --
that -- that pushed the previous council in
to passing that legislation.
And I need to check with her on -- on the status of --
of response to my package that --
of amendments that is on the table,
which is increasing the required payment to workers
of Seattle's minimum wage of 1997.
-Right.
-I go- I got a agreement amongst the account --
the network companies to increase that to 110%
of minimum wage,
so bringing that dollar amount,
I believe -- don't check my math,
but I believe that it is 27? -It's around that, yes.
-$27.00, so $27.00 is on the table right now
and I need to tie things up with --
with my colleagues before deciding
when it will be brought to full council
because I want to make sure that those efforts have --
have concluded before doing so. -Okay.
-And we have been -- I have -- it's --
it's clear that this is urgent
because driver's income has dropped drastically
as have the revenue of small businesses that are --
that deliver -- that require and that depend on these services --
-Yeah.
-I'm going more than one minute.
You get that. -That's -- yeah, you sure are.
Yeah. Yeah. -But basically, it is urgent.
-Yeah.
-The urgency has not gone away.
However, I as president,
need to allow for the --
the process to take its place before ramming something
through to a final vote. -Fair.
Councilmember Saka, the president has spoken,
and unfortunately we are out of time here.
-I wouldn't have anything else to add either,
so I was pretty nose-down with the levy, and --
and my record on that is pretty clear,
so, I need -- also need to get up to speed.
-All right. We've got a busy summer ahead.
Thank you both for joining us,
and we will see you next time on Council Edition.
♪♪