>>> GOOD AFTERNOON, THE SELECT
BUDGET MEETING WILL BE CALLED
BACK TO ORDER. THOSE THAT ARE
NOT HERE WILL BE CALLED AS THEY
ARRIVE. [ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
.
>> FIVE PRESENT.
>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE 15
AMENDMENTS REMAINING. WE WILL BE
HERE AS LATE AS 6:30. IF WE GET
TO THAT LATE HOUR THEN WE WILL
NOT, IF WE GET PASSED 4:00 P.M.
WE WILL NOT TAKE THE BRIEFING ON
THE LEGISLATION THAT WE WILL BE
VOTING ON MONDAY AND YOU CAN
REFER TO THE POWER POINT AND ASK
CENTRAL STAFF QUESTIONS AT YOUR
LEISURE. WITH THAT. WE LEFT OFF
JUST HAVING VOTED ON TO HSD2. AT
THIS TIME, RINK IS SPONSORING
THE AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I MOVE TO
AMEND COUNCIL BILL 12116 AS
PRESENTED.
>> THANK YOU, AND THE FINAL 4
THAT WE HAVE, WE HAVE CENTRAL
STAFF BRIEFING THIS ITEM.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE, I
UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE A
SUBSTITUTE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
HAVE YOUR SUBSTITUTE?
>> YES.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I WOULD
LIKE TO MOVE HS2B1.
>> SECOND.
>> NOW WE HAVE THE SUBSTITUTE TO
COUNCILMEMBER RINK'S AMENDMENT
AND WE HAVE JENNIFER LABREK FROM
CENTRAL STAFF TO PROVIDE A BRIEF
PRESENTATION REGARDING THIS ITEM
BECAUSE IT IS, IT IS EVERYTHING
IS CHANGING BY THE HOUR. WE SAW
EVEN JUST LAST NIGHT THE GROUND
SHIFT REGARDING THIS TOPIC. SO,
COLLEAGUES, I BELIEVE IT IS
PRUDENT FOR US TO BRING A
PRESENTATION HERE. WE NOW HAVE
EVERYONE OTHER THAN
COUNCILMEMBER RIVIERA AND JUST A
REMINDER WE WILL BE HERE UNTIL
6:30. IF WE DO NOT MOVE QUICKLY.
WITH THAT, OVER TO YOU DIRECTOR.
>> I WILL TURN IT OVER TO JEN TO
GIVE YOU AN UPDATE. TO SPEAK TO
IT BUT TO GIVE YOU UPDATE AROUND
FEDERAL FUNDING DECISION. IT
WILL BE MORE APPARENT THAN
CLEAR.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
RIVIERA IS PRESENT. I AM HERE TO
TALK ABOUT THE CONTINUE OF CARE
THAT WAS JUST PUBLISHED LAST
NIGHT. SO I WILL SAY THIS IS A
FLUID SITUATION. I THINK BOTH
MYSELF BUT ALSO OBVIOUSLY MANY
OTHER PARTNERS ARE DIGGING INTO
THAT AND UNDERSTANDING WHAT IT
MEANS BUT IT YOU CAN TELL IT HAS
IMPLICATIONS FOR PROJECTS IN THE
CITY OF SEATTLE. I WANT TO
REVIEW WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR,
UNDERSTANDING THAT THINGS ARE
DEFINITELY FLUID AND SUBJECT TO
CHANGE AS OUR UNDERSTANDING
EVOLVES. SO, AGAIN, WE ALL BEEN
ANTICIPATING THAT THE HOUSING
AND URBAN, THE DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
WOULD BE RELEASING THE CONTINUE
OF CARE, THE COC, NOFO. THEY DID
IT LAST NIGHT SOON AFTER THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT REOPENED.
OVERALL THE FUNDING AMOUNT, THIS
IS WE CALL IT THE 2025NOFA BUT
IT IS TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR
PROJECTS IN 2026. THERE IS
REALLY A RELEVANT ISSUE TO THE
2026 BUDGET. OVERALL THE AMOUNT
IN THE 2025COC, IT IS ABOUT $3.9
BILLION. IT IS A SLIGHT
INCREASE, NOT A DECREASE IN THE
OVERALL APPROPRIATIONS BUT WHAT
WE ARE SEEING ARE SOME OF THE
CHANGES THAT WERE EXPECTED. THE
BIG ONE IS THAT, HISTORICALLY,
HUD ENCOURAGED COC FUNDING FOR
HOUSING PROJECTS. THAT IS WHERE
MONEY OF THE C OC FUNDS IN KING
COUNTY GO. OVERALL, KING COUNTY
RECEIVES ABOUT $67 MILLION IN
CONTINUUM OF CARE FUNDING. AND,
I JUST DOING QUICK MATH, ABOUT
$60 MILLION OF THAT GOES TOWARDS
PERMANENT HOUSING PROJECTS. THE
VAST MAJORITY BEING PERMANENT
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING. HUD IS
SAYING NO MORE THAN 30% OF ANY
CONTINUUM OF CARE AWARD CAN BE
SPENT ON PERMANENT. ANY TYPE.
RAPID REHOUSING, EVEN SOME KIND
OF PROJECTS THAT ARE JOINT
TRANSITIONAL. THAT IS A PROFOUND
SHIFT IN POLICY. IT WILL HAVE A
BIG IMPACTS FOR BOTH KING COUNTY
AND THE CITY OF SEATTLE. AGAIN,
BECAUSE WE, THIS REGION HAS
CHOSEN TO INVEST $60 MILLION OF
SAID COC FUNDING INTO PERMANENT
HOUSING. I AM HEARING OTHER
THINGS AS I AM TRYING TO GET A
HANDLE ON NOW. FOR EXAMPLE, IN
REALLY IN THE PAST IF A PROJECT
GOTTEN COC FUNDING IT CAN COUNT
ON GETTING C OC FUNDING, STABLE
AND PREDICTABLE SOURCE OF
OPERATING FUNDING FOR PROJECTS.
THAT DOES NOT SOUND LIKE IT IS
THE CASE ANY MORE. HUD IS
SAYING, I THINK I WILL PUT IT
CORRECTLY. 30% OF THE FUNDING
CAN SORT OF YOU CAN COUNT ON IT
BUT THE REST OF IT IS UP IN THE
AIR. I THINK WE CAN EXPECT TO
SEE PROJECTS GETTING THIS
FUNDING FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS
MAY NO LONGER CITY IT. THE CITY,
KING COUNTY REGION WILL SUBMIT
AN APPLICATION TO HUD, OF COURSE
THEY WILL ASK FOR THE SAME
AMOUNT OF FUNDING STAY AS
COMPETITIVE AS POSSIBLE. BUT
THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT
UNDER SOME OF THE NEW CRITERIA
THAT KING COUNTY WILL NOT BE
FUNDED AT THE SAME LEVEL AS IT
HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY. I WILL STOP
THERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. I WILL
JUST SAY THE BIGGEST RISK IN
TERMS OF WHAT I AM HEARING IS
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
THAT COUNT ON COC DOLLARS AS A
MAIN SOURCE OF OPERATING
MAINTENANCE AND SERVICES
FUNDING. AND IN SEATTLE, LET'S
SEE, I TOOK THESE NOTES THIS
MORNING. LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE
THEM. 17 PROJECTS IN THE CITY OF
SEATTLE RECEIVING CONTINUUM OF
CARE DOLLARS, FOR A VALUE OF $17
MILLION. AGAIN, THOSE ARE THE
EXAMPLES OF THE PROJECTS THAT
COULD BE AT RISK HERE. I WILL
STOP.
>> THANK YOU.
>> AND, NOW THAT WE HAVE ALL
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT I WILL
REORIENT US TO WHERE WE ARE. WE
WILL BE HERE UNTIL 6:30 P.M.
UNLESS WE MOVE QUICKLY. SO,
COLLEAGUES, I WILL REQUEST THAT
EVERYONE SPEAKS ONLY ONCE TO ONE
ITEM UNLESS THERE IS A QUESTION
THAT WILL CHANGE THE WAY YOU ARE
GOING TO VOTE ON AN ITEM. SO,
EVERYONE WILL HAVE ONE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO EACH
ITEM UNLESS CLARIFYING QUESTIONS
THAT WILL CHANGE HOW YOU VOTE. I
ALSO WANT TO JUST SPEAK TO THE
PROCESS THAT WE ARE HERE AND
THEN I WILL TURN IT OVER TO
COUNCILMEMBER RINK AND THEN
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE AND THEN TO
THE BODY. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A
SUBSTITUTE FROM COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE TO THE AMENDMENT. WE WILL
VOTE ON KETTLE'S AMENDMENT. IF
IT PASSES WE WILL THEN VOTE ON
COUNCILMEMBER RINK AS AMENDED.
IF COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE'S FAILS
WE WILL VOTE ON COUNCILMEMBER
RINK'S AMENDMENT AS PRESENTED.
SO, THAT IS THE PROCESS WE ARE
IN RIGHT NOW. YOU CAN VOTE YES
FOR BOTH COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE
AND RINK'S AMENDMENTS. WITH
THAT, I WILL PASS IT OVER TO
COUNCILMEMBER RINK, COUNSEL
MEMBER KETTLE AND OPEN IT UP FOR
GENERAL DISCUSSION.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STRAUSS.
COLLEAGUES THIS CBA $11.8
MILLION IN HSD FOR THE PURPOSES
OF INCREASING OUR FEDERAL
EMERGENCY RESERVE TO OUR SHELTER
AND HOUSING SYSTEM. I WANT TO
STATE AT THE TOP OF THIS THAT
THE ACTIONS OF THIS FEDERAL
REGIME JEOPARDIZED SO MANY
BODIES OF WORK AT THE CITY AND
OUR COUNTRY. AND INTRODUCED A
LOT OF UNCERTAINTY TO OUR
COMMUNITY. BACK IN APRIL ON THE
SELECT COMMITTEE ON POLICY
CHANGE THAT IS WHETHER WE FIRST
LEARNED FROM THEM DIRECTLY ABOUT
THE POTENTIAL OF THIS FUNDING TO
BE STRIPPED FROM OUR REGION WITH
4500 HOUSEHOLDS WHO WILL HAVE
THEIR HOUSING AND SERVICES
THREATENED. JUST A FEW WEEKS
AGO, PUGET SOUND COUNCIL BECAME
INVOLVED AND STARTED ORGANIZING
A LETTER TO ADVOCATE TO OUR
DELEGATION ON THIS AND I AM
THANKFUL TO RIVIERA AND JUAREZ
TO BRING THE LETTER TO THE BODY
FOR MEMBERS TO SIGN ON,
AFFIRMATION OF THE IMPORT APSE
OF THIS TOPIC. AFTER MONTHS OF
DELAY THE NOFO HAS BEEN RELEASED
LATE LAST NIGHT AFTER HOURS AND
UNDER THE SWEEPING CHANGES IT IS
ESTIMATED THAT 170,000 PEOPLE
ACROSS THE UNITED STATES COULD
FALL INTO OR IN MANY CASES BACK
INTO HOMELESSNESS. TO BE CLEAR
THIS IS DIRECTLY OUT OF THE 2025
PROJECT 2025 PLAYBOOK. THE
FEDERAL COC PROGRAM PLAYS A
MAJOR ROLE IN HOUSING PEOPLE WHO
MAY NOT OTHERWISE BE ABLE TO
HOUSE THEMSELVES INCLUDING
FAMILIES, VETERANS, PEOPLE WITH
DISABILITIES, YOUTH AND OLDER
ADULTS, RIGHT NOW, SEATTLE AND
KING COUNTY RECEIVE $65 MILLION
TO CONTRACT WITH ORGANIZATIONS
THAT HOUSE AND PROVIDE A VARIETY
OF SUPPORTIVE SERVICES FOR
NEARLY 4500 HOUSEHOLDS WHO WERE
OR ARE CURRENTLY EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS. THE PROGRAM AND
CONTRACTING CHANGES INCLUDE
YESTERDAY, THE 30% LIMIT ON USE
OF FUNDS TO PERMANENT HOUSING AS
EXPLAINED. WITHOUT LOCAL AND
STATE GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION
OUR REGION'S NETWORK OF HOUSING
IS GRAVELY AT RISK. THIS IS
INCLUDING PATTY MURRAY VIA A
LETTER SENT TO HUD SECRETARY
KNOWING IT ALL PUTS HUD ON A
PATH THAT QUOTE RISKS CAUSING A
DANGEROUS SPIKE IN STREET
HOMELESSNESS AND CRATING CHAOS
IN URBAN, SUBURBAN AND RURAL
AREAS BY FORCING 200,000
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES AND
HOMELESSNESS BACK ON THE
STREETS. WE WERE MADE AWARE OF
THIS IN SPRING WHEN THEY
PRESENTED. I REMEMBER THE
FEELING OF DREAD THAT I FELT
THAT DAY AND MEMBERS ON THIS DAY
EXPRESSING THE SAME AND I FEEL
THE SAME SENSE OF DREAD AGAIN
TODAY. THIS TIME IT IS NO LONGER
SPECULATION. MY OFFICE HAS BEEN
WORKING WITH ELECTED AND
GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS IN CITY OF
SEATTLE, STATE GOVERNMENT AND
KING COUNTY TO CONTINGENCY PLAN.
LAST WEEK I CONVENED A MEETING
WITH KING COUNTY AND MEMBERS
EVER THE STATE LEGISLATURE
HAVING SIMILAR CONVERSATIONS
WITH THIS STRATEGY AND
DEVELOPING A CONTINGENCY PLAN.
WE ARE IN THIS TOGETHER AS A
REGION. THE BUDGET ACTION BEFORE
YOU IS TO HAVE US PAUSE ON
EXPANSIONS FOR THE NEXT COUPLE
OF MONTHS UNTIL WE RESOLVE AND
UNDERSTAND THE OUT COME OF THIS
COC. THE INTENT IS FOR COUNCIL
TO REEVALUATE THE NEED AFTER THE
FUNDING OF OPPORTUNITY RESULTS
ARE RELEASED BY HUD IN 2026. IF
THE EXECUTIVE DETERMINES SOME OR
ALL OF THE RESERVE WILL NOT BE
NEEDED AND COULD BE DIRECTED BY
NEW PROGRAMS THERE BODY CAN ACT
TO UPLIFT IT. ON THE COUNTY
SIDE, CHAIRS SIMILARLY DOING THE
WORK TO SET UP THEIR PORTION OF
A CONTINGENCY FUND. I WANT TO
EMPHASIZE MY APPRECIATION FOR
THE COUNTY FOR WORKING TOGETHER
WITH US AND THEY ARE HAVING
SIMILAR DISCUSSIONS ON THEIR
SIDE ON HOW TO MAKE A
CONTINGENCY RESERVE POSSIBLE. IN
MOVING FORWARD IN AN IDEAL WORLD
WE ARE LOOKING AT OTHER AREAS OF
OUR BUDGET AND DEPRIORITIZING
OTHER BODIES OF WORK TO ADDRESS
THIS URGENT CHALLENGE. WE NEED
MORE INVESTMENT IN EMERGENCY
HOUSING TO GET MORE OF OUR
NEIGHBORS OFF OF THE STREETS AND
INTO HOUSING. TODAY'S PROPOSAL
IS NOT PERFECT. CIRCUMSTANCES
ARE FAR FROM PERFECT IN THIS
MOMENT. I BELIEVE IT GIVES US
OPTION, I BELIEVE THIS IS
RESPONSIBLE OF THE FUNDING WE
HAVE RIGHT NOW AND THANKFUL TO
HAVE THIS SUPPORT ON THIS
APPROACH FROM PARTNERS AT THE
STATE, COUNTY LEADERS, SERVICE
PROVIDERS IN THE COALITION ON
HOMELESSNESS, THANK YOU, CHAIR
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RINK.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR, STRAUSS.
FIRST LET ME THANK DIRECTOR
NOBLE AND MRS. LEBRECK FOR YOUR
UPDATE. THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND
ALSO, THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RINK FOR THE HIGHLIGHTING ALL OF
THE CHALLENGES THAT WE ARE
FACING WHICH ARE REAL. AND,
AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER
THE CHALLENGES THAT WE SEE, ALL
OF US, ON A REGULAR BASIS AS WE
ARE OUT AND ABOUT. I MENTIONED
EARLIER ABOUT BEING AT MARY'S
PLACE, THE THIRD AVENUE
LOCATION, I WAS AT PLYMOUTH
HOUSING, THE PLACE ON MERCER AND
THERE WEEK THE OPENING OF THE
STEVENS PLACE, THE DSE FACILITY
IN INNER BAY. AND, UNDERSTANDING
WHAT THESE PIECES ARE DOING.
BUT, ALSO, UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS
HAPPENING ON OUR STREETS AND HOW
WE NEED TO FACE THESE
CHALLENGES. AND THAT IS WHY WE
HAVE WHAT WE HAVE IN TERMS OF
THE INITIATIVE, THE PILOT THAT I
AM LOOKING TO, COLLEAGUES, TO
PULL OUT FROM THIS. IT GOES TO
THE SAME PIECES THAT
COUNCILMEMBER RINK IS TALKING
ABOUT. IT GOES TO HELPING THOSE
INDIVIDUALS IN PIONEER SQUARE
THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, FACING THE
CHALLENGES OF HOMELESSNESS. YOU
KNOW, THE PILOT IS FOR
HOMELESSNESS AND PUBLIC SPACE
INITIATIVE. IN PIONEER SQUARE
AND SUPPORTS $4 MILLION. THERE
IS A PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN
DOWNTOWN SEATTLE, AND PDA, AND,
EVERGREEN TREATMENT SERVICES,
REACH AND COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS.
ALL OF THESE ENTITIES HAVE BEEN
WORKING THESE ISSUES AND GAINING
THE LESSENS LESSEN -- LESSONS
LEARNED THIS REALLY IMPORTANT.
IT BUILDS, THERE IS NOT NEW IN A
BROADER SENSE. THE PROJECT OF
COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS AND DSA HAVE
INCORPORATED PLANNING, EXPERTISE
IN LOCAL SERVICE PROVIDERS,
THREE MONTHS OF PLANNING FOR THE
APPROPRIATION, THIS WAS ALREADY
IN THE MAYOR'S BUDGET. THIS HAS
GONE THROUGH THE CHECKS THAT THE
EXECUTIVE DOES IN TERMS OF
BRINGING THIS PROGRAM FORWARD,
THIS PILOT FORWARD. IT IS ABOUT
OUTREACH, DEDICATED 24-HOUR HIGH
SHELTER, GOING TO WHAT WE WILL
NEED TO DO. WE KNOW WE WILL NEED
TO DO THIS OVER THE COURSE OF
THE FIRST QUARTER. WE KNOW WE
NEED TO DO THIS IN THE SENSE OF
WHAT WE SEE IN PIONEER SQUARE.
ALSO IN OTHER PARTS OF OUR CITY.
AND INCLUDES FLEXIBLE FUNDS. YOU
KNOW, THIS IS KEY ABOUT
UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS HAPPENING.
IT IS INTEGRATED APPROACH. AND,
ULTIMATELY THERE IS ABOUT TAKING
IN THE LESSONS LEARNED THAT WE
HAVE BEEN SEEING. THERE IS ABOUT
THE NEED FOR HOUSING BUT ALSO
SERVICES. WE REALLY NEED TO HAVE
BOTH. THIS IS WHAT I SAW THIS
PAST WEEK AT STEVENS PLACE. THE
FACILITY, THIS IS WHAT I SAW AT
KRISTEN BENSON PLACE, MERCER,
PLYMOUTH HOUSING AND MARY'S
PLACE. THIS IS ABOUT BRINGING
THEM TOGETHER. THIS IS WHAT THE
PILOT DOES. ON TOP OF THAT IT
SPOKE AS I MENTIONED IN THE
BEGINNING, PUBLIC SPACE
INITIATIVE. AS I SAID MANY
TIMES, SAID IT IN A PRESS
CONFERENCE RECENTLY UP STAIRS ON
THE 7th FLOOR. IT IS ABOUT OUR
NEIGHBORS BUT ALSO OUR
NEIGHBORHOODS, WITHY HAVE TO
LOOK OUT FOR BOTH. THEY ARE BOTH
SUFFERING AT DIFFERENT TIMES.
THERE IS THE MAIN DRIVER HERE.
LOOKING OUT FOR OUR NEIGHBORS IN
MEADE AND OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. I
SHOULD ADD, TOO, THIS IS PIONEER
SQUARE. WE ARE ONLY SIX MONTHS
AWAY FROM FIFA WORLD CUP. WE
NEED TO BE READY FOR THAT
MASSIVE ENDEAVOR. THIS IS ABOUT
TAKING CARE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD
OF PIONEER SQUARE THAT IS JUST
TO OUR SOUTH AND SOUTHWEST. AND
COLLEAGUES I ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT FOR THIS CARVE OUT TO
ENSURE THAT THIS MOVES FORWARD
TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE DOING THE
WORK THAT IS NEEDED NOW AND IT
WILL BE CONTINUED TO BE NEEDED
IN THIS LOCATION THROUGH THE
COURSE OF THE FIRST QUARTER OF
2026. I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT,
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHAIR
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
COLLEAGUES, NOW IS THE TIME TO
ADDRESS BOTH. WE WILL GO THROUGH
THE VOTING SEQUENCE, QUESTIONS,
COMMENTS, CONCERNS. ANY
QUESTIONS, OR DISCUSSION?
>> I SUPPORT THIS BUDGET ACTION
BECAUSE I DO I DO SUPPORT THE
PILOT PROJECT THAT WAS ADDRESSED
BY COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. I
ALWAYS SAID IF WHAT WE ARE DOING
IS NOT REALLY WORKING WE HAVE TO
TRY DIFFERENT THINGS. THE PILOT
THAT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR
SEVERAL MONTHS NOW IS A MODEL
THAT I SUPPORT. AND, I WANT TO
SEE IT CONTINUE. AND I WOULD
RATHER HAVE, I WOULD PREFER IT
RECEIVED THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT OF
FUNDING IN THE MAYOR'S BUDGET
BUT I DO APPRECIATE THAT THIS
BUDGET ACTION WILL PRESERVE A
QUARTER OF THE FUNDING.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> COLLEAGUES, FURTHER
DISCUSSION? COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA.
>> I AM JUST WONDERING, CAN YOU
TELL ME, A QUARTER OF THE
FUNDING FOR A QUARTER OF THE
YEAR FOR THIS PROGRAM. WHAT DOES
THAT COVER?
>> THANK YOU.
>> I WILL JUST TAKE ONE STEP
BACK AND SAY, THE $4 MILLION
ADDED IN THE 2026 FOR COMMUNITY
SOLUTIONS WAS A ONE-TIME ADD. IT
WAS NOT ONGOING. IS WAS ONE
TIME. AND THEN THE $700,000, THE
ONLY DETAIL IS IT WILL SUPPORT
THE FIRST QUARTER OF OPERATIONS
COST. I DO KNOW THE PILOT
INVOLVED UNITS, IN AN APARTMENT
BUILDING FOR SHELTER. AND THEN
SHORT TERM RENTAL SUBSIDIES FOR
FOLKS TO MOVE ON TO PERMANENT
HOUSING AND SERVICES. I WOULD
HAVE TO ASSUME SOME COMBINATION
OF THOSE THINGS FOR QUARTER ONE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NOTHING MORE?
>> THANK YOU.
>> FURTHER DISCUSSION.
>> DIRECTOR NOBLE.
>> IN FURTHER RESPONSE, JUST FOR
CLARIFICATION. IMPLICATION
AGAIN, IT IS A PROVISO. TO ME
THE CLEAR IMPLICATION IS THAT IF
IT IS FUNDED FOR THE FIRST
QUARTER SOMEONE WILL RETURN TO
ASK FOR IT TO BE CONTINUED FOR
THE FUNDING. UNLESS SOMEHOW THE
PROGRAM FAILS IN THE FIRST
QUARTER. AND SIMILARLY, TO
EMPHASIZE A POINT JEN MADE, IN
THE MAYOR'S BUDGET FOR $4
MILLION BUT MARKED AS A ONE-TIME
ITEM. TO THE EXTEND TO FUND IT
IN 2026 AND BEYOND IT WILL
DECREASE IT FROM $142, TO $144,
IT IS A $4 MILLION ONGOING, NOT
FOR OR AGAINST BUT JUST TO BE
CLEAR ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON
HERE IF YOU WILL.
>> THANK YOU, FURTHER QUESTIONS?
>> PLEASE, CHAIR. THANK YOU,
BEN, I ASSUME THAT WITH THE $700
THEY WILL DO SOME WORK AND
REVIEW WHAT GOT DONE ASK HOW IT
WORKED AND THEN A FOLLOW UP ASK
BY THEN WE SHOULD HAVE SOME
INFORMATION ON WHAT THE $700
OPERATING SUPPORTED AND WHAT
KINDS OF THINGS ARE NEEDED FOR
AN AREA IN THE CITY. I BELIEVE
THE MAYOR PUT IT IN THE BUDGET
BECAUSE IF IS AN AREA OF THE
CITY AND I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK
FOR YOUR DISTRICT COUNCIL
MEMBERS SAKA, BUT I DO I AM DOWN
THERE FREQUENTLY AND THERE IS
GREAT NEED IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD
WITH UNHOUSED FOLKS NEEDING
SERVICES. SO, I ASSUME THAT IS
WHY THERE WAS DIRECTED IN THIS
FASHION.
>> I WOULD LET COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE SPEAK MORE TO THE INTENT.
I WOULD SAY. I DON'T THINK WE
WILL HAVE A LOT OF OUTCOMES DATA
AFTER ONE QUARTER. I THINK WHAT
WE WILL, THERE WILL BE SOME
THINGS UNDERWAY, RIGHT? AS THEY
ARE STANDING IT UP. IT IS JUST
ONE QUARTER FOR WHAT IS
ESSENTIALLY -- NOT NEW
ACTIVITIES BUT ACTIVITIES THE
CITY HAS DONE BUT A NEW PROGRAM.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH
INFORMATION WILL BE AVAILABLE
AFTER THE FIRST QUARTER.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA FURTHER QUESTIONS OR
DISCUSSIONS.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR, JUST TO SAY
THAT IT IS SOMETHING THEY
ALREADY HAVE BEEN DOING SO, WE
SHOULD HAVE SOME KIND OF
INFORMATION ABOUT AT LEAST WHAT
SERVICES IT HAS GONE TO SUPPORT.
>> THE WAY THAT THIS WAS
DESCRIBED TO ME IN THE 2026
PROPOSED BUDGET IN MY Q&A AND
CONVERSATIONS IS THAT IT IS A
NEW PILOT PROGRAM. I AM NOT TO
SAY THAT THE PDA HAS NOT BEEN
ENGAGED IN SIMILAR TYPES OF
ACTIVITIES BEFORE LIKE WITH THE
ENCAMPMENT RESOLUTION OR
CO-LEAD, I WANT TO BE CLEAR
ABOUT THAT, BUT IT IS A NEW
PROGRAM WITH FOCUS ON PIONEER
SQUARE AND MODEL OF MOVING
PEOPLE FIRST TO SHELTER AND THEN
TO HOUSING.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA YOU
STILL HAVE THE FLOOR.
>> THANK YOU, I WILL LOOK TO
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE TO FILL IN
SOME PIECES, I THINK. THERE IS
SOME INFORMATION HE MAY HAVE AS
WELL.
>> WONDERFUL. I WILL CALL ON
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE AND RINK AT
THE END TO HAVE CLOSEOUT
COMMENTS. COUNCIL PRESIDENT I
SEE A HAND AGAIN? I AM ASKING WE
ONLY SPEAK ONCE FOR SESSION IS
THIS NEW COMMENT OR QUESTION?
>> DIRECTING PEOPLE TO
INFORMATION THAT WAS SENT TO
COUNCIL YESTERDAY AT 3:43 FROM
EMILY BAYLOR IF PEOPLE WANT MORE
INFORMATION.
>> THANK YOU.
>> COLLEAGUES FURTHER
DISCUSSION? I WILL MAKE MY
REMARKS AND THEN IN CLOSING
REMARKS AND THEN THROUGH VOTING.
I WILL BRING UP THE VOTING
PROCEDURE AGAIN IN JUST A
MINUTE. JUST TO SAY THAT THIS
CONTINUUM OF CARE FUNDING, THE
CITY SHOULD HAVE NO BUSINESS IN
FILLING THIS HOLE WHEN THE STATE
AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AS
WELL BE DOING THEIR JOB. THAT
SAID, WE HAVE TO BE PREPARED FOR
WHATEVER MAY COME OUR WAY. THE
MONEY PUT ASIDE IS NOT ENOUGH.
WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A
GROUNDED UNDERSTANDING OF THE
ENVIRONMENT BEFORE US BEFORE WE
START SPENDING MONEY. AND, TO
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE'S POINT WE
HAVE TO CONTINUE TO DO THE WORK
THAT IS CURRENTLY OCCURRING AND
NOT JUST STOP MIDSTREAM. SO, I
FIND THAT BOTH COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE AND COUNCILMEMBER RINKS
AMENDMENTS ARE POSITIVE IN MY
PERSPECTIVE AND I WILL BE VOTING
IN FAVOR OF BOTH OF THEM. WITH
THE UNDERSTANDING AND JUST FOR
CLARITY HERE, WE WILL HAVE TO
COME BACK NEXT YEAR AND DECIDE
HOW WE SPEND THIS MONEY IF IT IS
THE CONTINUUM OF CARE, A NEW
FEDERAL CRISIS THEY CREATED, IF
IT IS OPENING NEW SHELTER OR IF
IT IS THE COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS.
RIGHT NOW, WHAT I SEE FROM MY
COLLEAGUES AND I DEEPLY
APPRECIATE BOTH OF YOU FOR
BRINGING THIS ISSUE FORWARD TO
SAY, WE NEED TO PAUSE, HERE ARE
THINGS WE SHOULD NOT PAUSE AT
THIS VERY SECOND. WE NEED TO
PAUSE BEFORE WE MAKE FURTHER
LARGE DECISIONS. SO, THANK YOU
BOTH FOR YOUR FISCAL
RESPONSIBILITY. AND, FOR ALSO,
CARING ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE
STRUGGLING THE MOST ON OUR
STREETS. WITH THAT,
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE I WILL CALL
ON YOU AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER
RINK I WILL GIVE YOU LAST WORD
ON KETTLES UNLESS YOU HAVE
SOMETHING RIGHT NOW?
>> I AM GOING TO CALL ON
COUNCILMEMBER RINK AND THEN
KETTLE AND MOVE BACK TO RINK'S
AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. COLLEAGUES,
IN THE MIDDLE OF THERE MEETING
JUST GOT ADDITIONAL NEWS AS WE
HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE NOFO
SITUATION IS EVOLVING. AND, HUD
HELD A SEMINAR TODAY AROUND NOON
WITH PROVIDERS WHERE IT WAS
REVEALED THE MAXIMUM OUR
COMMUNITY WILL BE ABLE TO
RECEIVE UNDER THIS IS $19
MILLION. $19 MILLION TOTAL FOR
OUR REGION. THAT IS COMPARED TO,
AGAIN, HISTORICALLY WE RECEIVED
$65 MILLION. THIS IS IN ADDITION
TO THE 30% CAP THEY ARE PLACING
ON PERMANENT HOUSING. SO, I
WANTED TO PROVIDE THAT UPDATE
AND SPEAK WITH ALL OF THIS IN
MIND THAT JUST TAKE INTO ACCOUNT
MY OWN EXPERIENCE IN WORKING
WITH WITH HOMELESS RESPONSE I
FEEL STRONGLY WE MUST PROTECT
HOUSING AND SHELTER FOR THOSE
THAT WE HAVE UNDER OUR CARE
BEFORE WE TRY TO EXPAND
ESPECIALLY UNDER THE
CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE IN RIGHT
NOW. I HAVE BEEN A STRONG
SUPPORTER OF APPROACHES LIKE THE
STATE RIGHT OF INITIATIVE. I
HAVE GONE FOR BAT FOR IT. AND
FUNDING FOR PROGRAMS LIKE THAT
SHOULD BE ONGOING, AND I HAVE
CONCERNED ABOUT STANDING UP A
PROGRAM FOR ONE QUARTER AND THE
PEOPLE THAT ARE BROUGHT INSIDE
UNDER THAT AND, A SCENARIO WHERE
THEY HAVE TO EXIT THE FOLKS
IMMEDIATELY IF THE PILOT DOES
NOT CONTINUE. GENERALLY SPEAKING
IT IS MY POLICY PERSPECTIVE AND
APPROACH WE RUN FAIR COMPETITIVE
APPLICATION PROCESSES. WHY MONEY
IS SENT TO PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS
AND REPORTING THE SUCCESS OF
THOSE OUTCOMES, FROM MY
PERSPECTIVE THAT IS GOOD
GOVERNORRANCE. GOVERNANCE. I ASK
THE COUNCIL FOR THEIR SUPPORT IN
NOT REDUCING THE DOLLAR AMOUNT
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROVISO AS
WE BEST FIGURE OUT THE LOSS IN
COC FUNDING, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RINK, COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. HOW BEST TO
FIGURE OUT. THAT IS WHAT THIS
PILOT DOES. I CAME TO THIS
EVERYTHING FROM PUBLIC SAFETY.
AND AS I MENTIONED EARLIER
DIGGING INTO THE CHALLENGES THAT
WE FACE UNDERSTANDING THAT IN
ORDER TO TRUE HAVE SUCCESS, TO
SUCCEED IN PUBLIC SAFETY IT IS
NOT JUST PUBLIC HEALTH BUT IT IS
ALSO TO SUCCEED IN THOSE
PROGRAMS AND HOUSING AND HUMAN
SERVICES. AND WORKING THESE
PIECES, DELVING INTO IT,
UNDERSTANDING WE HAVE TO HAVE
THIS APPROACH IS WHAT BROUGHT ME
TO THIS, THIS PROJECT AND TO
UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS NEEDED
BECAUSE IT INCORPORATING THE
LESSONS LEARNED. IT TALKS, YOU
KNOW, DEDICATED OUTREACH,
DEVELOPMENT. KEEL, IMPORTANT,
DEDICATED 24-HOUR SUPPORT
SHELTER WITH THE APPROPRIATE
STAFF AND DEESCALATION TEAMS.
THIS PILOT, AGAIN, IS A BIT OF A
MISNOMER. IT IS BUILDING THE
LESSONS LEARNED WE HAVE BEEN
BUILDING OVER THE YEARS. I SEE
IT IN THE THREE EXAMPLES I
MENTIONED EARLIER, MARY'S
PLACE, AND STEVENS PLACE AND
THOSE LOCATIONS AND WHAT THEY
ARE DOING. THEY ARE
INCORPORATING. IT IS THE
ADDITIONAL SERVICES, IT IS ABOUT
GETTING THAT ACCOUNTABILITY AND
UNDERSTANDING TO MOVE FORWARD.
WHICH, BY THE WAY, WILL HELP US,
THIS DATA SETS OTHERS AS I
TALKED SEPARATELY. I WANT TO
HIGHLIGHT WHY IT IS SO IMPORTANT
IS BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY
IF WE WANT TO ENSURE THAT WE
HAVE MEDICAID COVERAGE FOR, YOU
KNOW, THESE SITUATIONS WE HAVE
TO UNDERSTAND THIS IS WHERE THE
CASE MANAGEMENT PIECE COMES IN.
THERE IS THE WORK THEY HAVE
DONE. WE ARE LOOKING TO BUILD ON
THESE THINGS T HAS A RIPPLE
EFFECT NOT JUST HERE BUT IN
OTHER AREAS. AND, COLLEAGUES,
AGAIN, THERE IS IMPORTANT, TOO.
WE HAVE TO LOOK OUT FOR OUR
NEIGHBORS IN NEED. BUT WE HAVE
TO LOOK OUT FOR OUR
NEIGHBORHOODS. AND I THINK THIS
PILOT, AGAIN, A BIT OF A
MISNOMER. WILL DO THIS. THIS
WILL BE THE MODEL MOVING FORWARD
ACROSS THE CITY. AND I THINK
THIS WILL BENEFIT ALL DISTRICTS
IN OUR ENTIRE CITY MOVING
FORWARD. AGAIN, BY BRINGING THE
PIECES TOGETHER, BEING SMART
ABOUT IT, AND MAKE US BETTER IN
TERMS OF HOW WE ARE ADDRESSING
THE CHALLENGES IN THE FACE OF
THE DRASTIC AND INCREDIBLY
TERRIBLE CUTS THAT WE ARE SEEING
AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL. SO, WITH
THAT SAID, COLLEAGUES, I ASK FOR
YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS PIECE AND
THEN FOR THE OVERALL BUDGET
AMENDMENT AS WELL. THANK YOU,
CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE. WE ARE NOW, WE HAVE HSD,
82B IN FRONT OF US RIGHT NOW.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLES WITH THE
UNDER LYING RINK AMENDMENT MINUS
$700,000. IF YOU ARE SUPPORTIVE,
YOU WILL VOTE YES. IF YOU WANT
TO KEEP RINK YOU VOTE NO. I SEE
A HAND FROM HOLLINGSWORTH. YOU
KEPT US ON TIME. I WILL
RECOGNIZE YOU BECAUSE THERE IS
OUT OF ORDER.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STRAUSS. I
WILL BE QUICK. CAN YOU REPEAT
THE LAST THING THAT YOU JUST
SAID SO I KNOW THE VOTING PIECE,
THANK YOU?
>> WE ARE ABOUT TO TAKE TWO
VOTES THE FIRST VOTE, WE WILL
TAKE IS ON COUNCILMEMBER'S
KETTLE'S AMENDMENT THAT REDUCES
COUNCILMEMBER RINK'S BY
$700,000. IF YOU VOTE YES IT
WILL BE AMENDED AND REDUCED. IF
YOU VOTE NO, THEN COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE'S AMENDMENT FAILS WE
WILL HAVE RINK'S AMENDMENT AS
PROPOSED BEFORE US. VOTE YES TO
REDUCE, VOTE NO TO RETAIN.
>> UNDERSTOOD. ANY OTHER
PROCEDURAL QUESTIONS? THIS IS
THE MOST COMPLEX PROCEDURE WE
WILL TAKE REMAINING TODAY W.
THAT, WILL THE CLERK CALL THE
ROLL? [ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
>>> HSD, 82B. PASSES AND AMENDS
HSD82A THAT IS NOW BEFORE US.
COUNCILMEMBER RINK AS SPONSOR OF
THE AMENDMENT I AM GOING TO GIVE
YOU LAST WORD SINCE WE HAVE
DISCUSSION ON BOTH.
>> I THINK I ADDRESSED IT.
STEPPING UP BY ADDRESSING THIS
CHALLENGE AND HAVING FUNDING AS
PART OF THE FUND, ONE, WE ARE
DEMONSTRATING WE ARE GOOD
PARTNERS AS KING COUNTY IS
TAKING UP A SIMILAR PROCESS. AND
THERE PROVIDES US THE
OPPORTUNITY TO BE FLEXIBLE AS WE
CONTINUE TO LEARN WHAT IS GOING
ON WITH THE COC DOLLARS. AGAIN,
AS WE FOUND OUT EVEN IN THE PAST
10 MINUTES IT IS EVOLVING
CRISIS. I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT
ON THIS UNDER LINING AMENDMENT,
THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES, WE WILL
GO BACK TO ONE SPEAKING
OPPORTUNITY FOR AN ITEM. SINCE
IT IS CONFUSING I WILL PROVIDE
GRAZE, COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> APPRECIATE THAT CHAIR. AS WE
ARE TALKING ABOUT THERE
CONTINUUM OF CARE PIECE AND
WORKING TOGETHER TO FIGURE OUT
THE BEST MOVE FORWARD,
ESPECIALLY WITH WHAT IS
HAPPENING AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL.
I DO WANT TO SAY THAT, PERMANENT
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, LOW INCOME
HOUSING AND SHELTERING INCLUDING
EMERGENCY SHELTERING ARE ALL
IMPORTANT RESPONSES AS WE ARE
TRYING TO TAKE CARE OF OUR
UNHOUSED NEIGHBORS. I BELIEVE WE
NEED TO DO ALL OF IT. AND SO I
WANT TO JUST STATE THAT FOR THE
RECORD. WE WILL AT A LATER POINT
ADDRESS THERE PROVISO ONCE WE
HAVE MORE INFORMATION BUT DID
NOT WANT IT TO LET IT BE UNSAID
THAT ALL OF THESE STRATEGIES
INCLUDING THE EMERGENCY
SHELTERING IS IMPORTANT. BECAUSE
WE KNOW WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH
HOUSING UNITS AT THE PERMANENT
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING OR LOW-INCOME
LEVEL TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS ALL
OF THE HOUSING NEED THAT WE
HAVE. THERE BY MAKING EMERGENCY
SHELTERING ALSO AN IMPORTANT
PIECE TO THIS LARGER PUZZLE
WHICH I APPRECIATE JEN OUR
CENTRAL STAFFER WHO IS TAKING
THE LOOK AT THE ENTIRE PIECE OF
HOUSING THANK YOU FOR THAT.
COLLEAGUES, JUST WANTED TO NOTE
THE IMPORTANCE. ESPECIALLY IT IS
EVEN IF WE CAN BACKFILL FOR ALL
OF THE MONEY WE WILL LOSE AT THE
FEDERAL LEVEL WE WILL NOT FILL
ALL OF IT. IT MEANS THERE MIGHT
BE, WE MIGHT BE SEEING MORE
UNHOUSED NEIGHBORS AND WE WILL
HAVE TO RESPOND TO THAT WITH
EMERGENCY SHELTERING. THANK YOU,
CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE NO FURTHER
COMMENTS. SO, COUNCILMEMBER
RINK'S AMENDMENT HAS BEEN
AMENDED AND WE WILL NOW VOTE ON
COUNCILMEMBER RINK'S HSD82A AS
AMENDED. WILL THE CLERK, IF YOU
WOULD LIKE THIS INCLUDED IN THE
BUDGET YOU VOTE YES, IF YOU DO
NOT, YOU VOTE NO. WITH THAT,
WILL THE CLERK CALL THE ROLL ON
H SD82A AS AMENDED. [ ROLL BEING
CALLED ] 8 IN FAVOR, NONE
OPPOSED ONE ABSTAIN. IT PASSES
AND ATTACHED TO COUNCIL BILL
12116. TIME CHECK, WE COMPLETED
5 AMENDMENTS AND HAVE 13 TO GO.
IT IS 2:06 P.M.
>> WILL THAT WE WILL MOVE ON.
RINK SPONSORED THE AMENDMENT YOU
ARE RECOGNIZED TO MOVE THE
AMENDMENT AND CENTRAL STAFF WILL
TAKE IT UP.
>> I MOVE TO AMEND 12116
PRESENTED ON SA1.
>> SECOND.
>> YOU ARE RECOGNIZED TO PRESENT
THIS FOR US.
>> THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR RIVERA.
THIS ITEM, AGAIN, I DESCRIBED
BRIEFLY GOING THROUGH THE
BALANCING PACKAGE. PROVIDE
$400,000. THIS IS FROM RESOURCES
FREED UP FROM CUTS AND FUND
BALANCE THAT WE OTHERWISE
DISCOVERED. IT IS $400,000 TO
GENERAL FUND FOR ARK SIFT ANT
PROGRAMS IN COMBINATION WITH
ANOTHER AMENDMENT PROVIDING
$900,000. AS DESCRIBED HERE. IT
WOULD BE PARTIAL RESTORATION AS
PROVIDED IN PREVIOUS YEARS.
>>,, RINK, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED TO
ADDRESS YOUR AMENDMENT
>> THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR RIVERA.
>> I THINK WE KNOW SEATTLE IS
ONE OF THE MOST EXPENSIVE PLACES
TO LIVE IN THE COUNTRY AND WILL
REMAIN RENTER CITY FOR THE
FUTURE. AND RENTERS DESERVE
PROTECTIONS AND SUPPORT TO STAY
HEALTHY AND HOUSED. DURING THE
2025 CITY BUDGET CYCLE, TENANT
SERVICES WERE CUT BY 40% OR $1
MILLION. THIS WOULD RESTORE THE
FUNDING LEVEL BACK UP TO
$900,000. IT IS DIFFERENT FROM
RENTAL. IT HELPS THEM MAKE THE
CASH PAYMENTS, TENANT SERVICES
IS BROADER CATEGORY THAT
INCLUDES RIGHT TO LEGAL COUNCIL
DURING EVICTION PROCEEDINGS,
LEGAL CLINICS FOR SUPPORT TO
PREVENT EVICTIONS FROM HAPPENING
IN THE FIRST PLACE AS WELL AS
GUIDANCE ON COUNSELING AND HOW
TO DEAL WITH FACING RENTERS
INCLUDING DEBT DEFENSE. TO HIRE
A PRIVATE ATTORNEY FOR THESE
TYPES OF PURPOSES IT CAN COST
LAND REDS TO THOUSANDS OF
DOLLARS. THERE IS MOST CASES
IMPOSSIBLE TO BOTH LOW AND
MIDDLE INCOME SEATTLE RENTERS
WHO ARE PAYING AVERAGE OF $1900
TO $2100 PERMONTH IN RENT. WE
PLEAD TO USE ALL OF THE TOOLS WE
HAVE TO PREVENT RESIDENTS FROM
BECOMING UNHOUSED. REMOVING THE
FUNDING WILL INCREASE EVICTIONS
AND HOMELESSNESS AND
DISPLACEMENT. I WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBERS JUAREZ AND
SOLOMON AND SHAW CHAIR STRAUSS
FOR INCLUDING IT IN THE ORIGINAL
PACKAGE.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RINK. COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU
RINK FOR INCLUDING ME IN THIS
AND THE WORK WE DID WITH
COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON.
COUNCILMEMBER RINK WE GOT COPIES
OF THE TENANT CONTRACTS AND HAD
A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE MOAs AND
WHAT IT MEANS, BEFORE I GET TO
THOSE THREE I WANT TO ADD THAT
WE DO HAVE, AND COUNCILMEMBER
RINK OR WHOMEVER CORRECT ME IF I
AM WRONG. FOR THE INCREASE
FUNDING NEEDED FOR TENANT
SERVICES WE HAVE THE SUPPORT OF
10 ORGANIZATIONS. THE HOUSING
JUSTICE PROJECT AT THE KING
COUNTY BAR. THE LAW CENTER.
CATHOLIC COMMUNITY SERVICES, AND
SOLID GROUND, BE SEATTLE,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES,
UNITED INDIANS OF ALL TRIBES AND
QUEER POWER ALLIANCE AND I
BELIEVE THERE ARE A FEW OTHERS.
LET ME ADD THIS, WE HAD A CHANCE
TO GO AHEAD AND LOOK AT SOME OF
THE MEMORANDUMS OF AGREEMENT.
AND THESE ARE THE AGREEMENTS
THAT WERE PUT TOGETHER WITH SDCI
AND THOSE WERE WITH THE FIRST
ONE WE LOOKED AT WAS THE ONE
WITH SDCI AND UNITED INDIANS OF
ALL TRIBES, THE MOA WITH SDCI
AND THE KING COUNTY BAR
ASSOCIATION, THE HOUSING JUSTICE
PROJECT AND THE MEMORANDUM OF
AGREEMENT OF BE SEATTLE. I AM
PROUD TO SAY THESE ARE STRONG
MEMORANDUMS OF AGREEMENT THAT
SUPPORT THERE IMPORTANT BUDGET
REQUEST OF WHY WE ARE PUSHING
THIS AND I HOPE WE HAVE YOUR
SUPPORT ON THIS IMPORTANT PIECE.
THIS IMPORTANT AMENDMENT, THANK
YOU.
.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER JAR
JUAREZ.
>> JUST TO TALK TO THE PUBLIC IF
THEY ARE FOLLOWING, THE MAYOR'S
PROPOSED $1.6 MILLION FOR TENANT
SERVICES AND THEN SDCI1B ADDING
$500,000. IT BRINGS IT UP TO
2.1. THIS WOULD THEN BRING THE
TOTAL UP TO, I THINK, 2.5 OR
SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THERE IS
ALREADY A COUNCIL BUDGET ACTION
THAT INCREASES WHAT WAS IN THE
MAYOR'S PROPOSED BUDGET. I WAS,
I WAS MADE FUN OF BY A STRANGER
IN MY FIRST YEARS OF THE BUDGET.
I WAS ADVOCATING FOR MORE DIRECT
RENTAL ASSISTANCE, GIVING
RENTERS MORE MONEY TO STAY IN
THEIR PLACE AND LESS IN TENANT
SERVICES BECAUSE I THOUGHT THAT
WOULD BE THE BEST WAY TO KEEP
PEOPLE IN THEIR HOMES, I STILL
DO FEEL THAT WHETHER WE DO HAVE
TO WE NEED TO REPRIORITIZE WHAT
WE HAVE. I WOULD RATHER SEE IT
GO DIRE EITHERLY TO KEEPING
PEOPLE HOUSED INSTEAD OF A BUNCH
OF LAWYERS. THEY SAY THEY DON'T
WANT TO UTILIZE EVICTIONS BUT
SOMETIMES FLOORS IN THEIR
BUILDINGS ARE EMPTY. WE HEARD
LEE TALK ABOUT THERE AND OTHERS
IN THE PUBLIC RECORD. BECAUSE OF
A TENANT THAT MADE IT
IMPOSSIBLE. I AM NOT ADVOCATING
FOR DECREASING THE AMOUNT OF
MONEY THAT IS, THAT HELPS PEOPLE
WHO ARE REALLY, REALLY, REALLY
STRUGGLING WITH THEIR ABILITY TO
PAY RENT BUT I AM ALSO
RECOGNIZING THAT IN SOME CASES
THE CHANGE IS NECESSARY. I AM
NOT ADVOCATING AGAINST WHAT IS
INCLUDED IN THE MAYOR'S BUDGET
BUT TO ALLOCATE ANOTHER $400,000
BRING THE CITY'S TOTAL TO $2.5
MILLION INSTEAD OF ANY OF THAT
GOING DIRECTLY TO RENTERS, IT
JUST, IT DOES NOT FEEL RIGHT TO
ME. I WOULD HAPPILY SUPPORT AN
ADDITIONAL BUDGET TO MOVE SOME
OF THE MONEY TO DIRECT
ASSISTANCE BUT I CAN NOT SUPPORT
AN ADDITIONAL $400,000 FOR THIS
>> THANK YOU, ANY QUESTIONS? AND
FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> I WILL TURN IT BACK TO THE
SPONSOR. THERE IS IMPORTANT
FUNDING FOR IMPORTANT PROGRAMS
THAT WHETHER PEOPLE CALL OUR
OFFICES WHO NEED HELP THESE ARE
THE PLACE THAT WE DIRECT THEM TO
BECAUSE THE CITY OF SEATTLE DOES
NOT DO THIS WORK. IT IS NOT
APPROPRIATE FOR US TO DO THIS
WORK AND WE NEED SOMEBODY TO
CALL WHEN FOLKS ARE CALLING US.
THIS IS WHAT THAT FUNDING FUNDS.
WITH THAT, I URGE A YES VOTE ON
THIS AMENDMENT. COUNCILMEMBER
RINK I WILL GIVE YOU LAST WORD.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. COLLEAGUES,
I ASK FOR YOU SUPPORT ON THIS
IMPORTANT AMENDMENT. AGAIN WHAT
WE ARE DOING HERE IS RESTORE
ORIGINAL LEVELS OF FUNDING WE
HAVE HAD IN PREVIOUS YEARS, IT
IS IMPORTANT TO UPLIFT WE ARE
SEEING RECORD LEVELS OF EVICTION
FILINGS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW. I
KNOW WHEN WE HAVE BEEN WORKING
WITH THE ORGANIZATIONS DOING THE
WORK, DAY IN, DAY OUT, IT IS
CRITICAL. THEY EMPHASIZE HOW
IMPORTANT THIS FUNDING IS TO BE
ABLE TO MEET THE NEED. I ASK FOR
YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RINK. WILL THE CLERK, AGAIN, IF
YOU BELIEVE THAT THE CITY SHOULD
INCREASE THIS FUNDING BY
$400,000 STILL LESS THAN LAST
YEAR PROPOSED. YOU WILL VOTE
YES. IF YOU DO NOT, VOTE NO.
WILL THE CLERK CALL THE ROLL. [
ROLL BEING CALLED ]
>> THANK YOU.
>> SEARCH IN FAVOR, TWO ABSTAIN.
>> THANK YOU, THE MOTION PASSES.
12116A. COLLEAGUES WE FINISHED
THE CONSENT PACKAGE. WE HAVE
CONCLUDED FIVE DIRECT
AMENDMENTS, WE HAVE 13
REMAINING. I WOULD LIKE TO
CONFIRM WITH THE CLERK WE ARE
NOT TAKING UP SECTION B. BECAUSE
THE FUNDING SOURCE WAS RETAINED
IN THE BALANCING PACKAGE? I AM
SEEING YES, WE ARE NOW MOVING ON
TO GROUP C. COUNCILMEMBER SAKA,
SEVEN OF THE NINE PLUS, THEN WE
HAVE THREE WALK ONS FROM
COUNCILMEMBER -- COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON.
>> SORRY. THE ONE .
>> OKAY. WE HAVE, I AM GOING TO
READ THESE OUT SO WE HAVE, AND,
ACTUALLY -- I AM NOT GOING TO DO
CENTRAL STAFF'S JOB. Y'ALL DO
YOUR JOB FOR A GOOD REASON. OVER
TO YOU CENTRAL STAFF.
>> ALL RIGHT. READ IN THE WALK
ON?
>> I WAS GOING TO -- SO, THE
CHART THAT YOU JUST HAD. YES.
>> DO THIS AND THEN I WILL ADD
THE WALK ONS AT THE END. THANK
YOU.
>> SO, AGAIN, THESE ARE 9 STAND
ALONE ITEMS. STAND ALONE IN THE
SENSE THEY ARE EITHER PROVISOS
THAT DO NOT EFFECT BALANCING OR
FINANCIALLY CONTAINED. THEIR
PROPOSED FUNDING SOURCE WITHIN
THE CBA ITSELF. THE FIRST ONE
SAY PROVISO. I AM GOING TO CLICK
THROUGH.
>> I WILL DO QUICK ORIENTATION.
EVERIING AND THEN GO ONE BY ONE.
>> OKAY, COOL. SO THESE NINE
ITEMS, WANT ME TO READ THROUGH
THEM TO PREVIEW THEM? SORRY?
>> I WOULD JUST DO -- LET ME DO
MY JOB AND I WILL PASS IT OVER
TO YOU TO DO THE DEEP DIVE. I AM
STAYING AT A HIGH-LEVEL. HSD57,
REGARDING THE DISTRIBUTION OF
SUPPLIES TO DEAL WITH DRUG
ADDICTION, WE HAVE MO5, NEARLY
$30 MILLION FOR THE UNIFIED CARE
TEAM. WE HAVE OED, 14, $200,000
FOR GEORGETOWN. WE HAVE OH2, $6
MILLION FOR RENTAL ASSISTANCE,
S.2, $4.3 MILLION FOR POTHOLE
REPAIR. S-DOT THREE FOR DESIGN
OF STREET IMPROVEMENTS. AND
S-DOT 17, $1 MILLION FOR S-DOT
AND ADMIRAL WAY. AND INCREASING
MICROMOBILITY CORALS BY USING
CROSSWALK MONEY. SPR-17
INCREASING SPR FOR REST ROOM
MAINTENANCE IN DISTRICT ONE. WE
HAVE 2A, S-DOT 51A, OED19. THAT
IS THE RELM WE ARE IN. IF WE CAN
GO THROUGH THESE ONE BY 1,AND WE
WILL TAKE VOTES ON THESE
INDIVIDUALLY, ONE BY ONE AND WE
-- YES, SO BACK OVER TO YOU.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> SO, FIRST EVER THE ITEMS IS
HSD57, A-1. IT IS A PROVISO TO
HAVE DISTRIBUTION OR PURCHASE --
OF ILLEGAL DRUGS WITH EXCEPTION
OF NEEDLES .
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT
NELSON, AS SPONSOR OF THE
AMENDMENT YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. FIRST
LET ME SAY THAT 100% SUPPORT
NEEDLE EXCHANGE PROGRAMS BECAUSE
THEY REDUCE THE HARM OF
TRANSMITTING DISEASE LIKE HIV
AND HEPATITIS C., BUT I FAIL TO
SEE, HOWEVER, THE HARM THAT IS
BEING REDUCED BY DISTRIBUTING
SUPPLIES LIKE PIPES AND FOIL
THAT ARE USED TO CONSUME DEADLY
DRUGS, 570 DEATHS OVERDOSE
DEATHS IN SEATTLE LAST YEAR AND
1,0 FRENCH 47. IN KING COUNTY.
IT IS SHOCKING TO ME THAT --
THAT -- AND I THINK IT WOULD BE
SHOCKING TO OUR CONSTITUENTS IF
THEY KNEW THAT WE ARE USING
PUBLIC RESOURCES TO HELP PEOPLE
GET HIGH BY DISTRIBUTING PIPES,
FOIL, AND INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO
MAKE IT AROUND AND KIND OF MAKE
IT A PIPE. THERE IS LIKE, TO ME
IT FEELS LIKE GIVING A LOADED
GUN WHO IS SUICIDAL. AND, IT
SENDS THE, I THINK, A CONFUSING
SIGNAL TO OUR CONSTITUENTS, WE
ARE SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY ON
OVERDOSE PREVENTION AND
SUBSTANCE DISORDER TREATMENT
THAT I FULLY SUPPORT, OF COURSE,
I THINK I LEAD ON. BUT JUST,
DISTRIBUTING THESE SUPPLIES IS
IT RUNS COUNTERTO THE EFFORTS
AND IT IS ALSO, I THINK, CRUEL
IN AND OF ITSELF T. IS ARGUED I
WILL SAY, THE PROFESSIONALS SAY
DISTRIBUTING THESE KINDS OF
SO-CALLED SAFE SUPPLIES, WHICH
I, ANY WAY, WILL NOT COMMENT, IS
A STRATEGY TO FORGE A SENSE OF
REPORE WITH REPORE WITH PEOPLE.
THAT IS SAID, THE TIMES I ASKED
OUR PUBLIC HEALTH COLLEAGUES HOW
MANY PEOPLE, DO YOU HAVE DATA
HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE GOTTEN INTO
TREATMENT THAT YOU HAVE BEEN
INTERACTING WITH OR WHO COME AND
ACCESS THESE SUPPLIES, NEVER AN
ANSWER TO THAT. SO, THIS IS A
POLICY CHOICE THAT I AM ASKING
YOUR SUPPORT FOR IN BETWEEN24 I
2024 I REJECTED USING OUR
SETTLEMENT MONEY. I WE ARE NOT
TALKING ABOUT A LOT OF MONEY,
BUT I THINK WE AS WELL BE
FOCUSED 100% ON HELPING PEOPLE
DEAL WITH THEIR SUBSTANCE USE
DISORDER OR GO INTO RECOVERY IF
THAT IS WHERE THEY ARE AT
INSTEAD OF MAKING IT EASIER TO
CONSUME THE DRUGS BECAUSE THAT
IS, IT IS DANGEROUS. IT IS
ACTUALLY DANGEROUS. I DON'T
THINK WE SHOULD BE COMPLICATE IN
THAT. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
COLLEAGUES, QUESTIONS,
DISCUSSION AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT
WILL HAVE THE LAST WORD. AND
ALSO, I FORGET TO MOVE IT. IT IS
AN EXAMPLE WE DO NOT NEED TO
MOVE AN ITEM TO DISCUSS IT. WITH
THAT, COUNCIL PRESIDENT WOULD
YOU LIKE TO MOVE YOUR ITEM?
>> YES, I MOVE, LET'S SEE WHERE
IS MY NUMBER. I MOVE HSD57A1.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. FURTHER DISCUSSION,
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ FROM THE
LAST ROUND?
>> OKAY, HOLLINGSWORTH YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
AND THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THE
BAG FOR US TO ALL SEE. I WILL BE
HONEST. I KNOW THAT THIS HAS
BEEN A CONCERN OF A LOT OF FOLKS
AND I DON'T REALLY, I AM NOT AN
EXPERT MATTER OR HAVE THE
KNOWLEDGE TO WEIGH IN ON THIS,
IF YOU BROUGHT AN AMENDMENT,
THOUGH, I WILL TELL YOU THIS, IF
YOU BROUGHT AN AMENDMENT TO TAKE
MARTIN LUTHER KING'S FACE-OFF
OF THAT BAG THAT WE ARE ADDING
OUT PARAPHERNALIA IN I WOULD
VOTE FOR THAT. THAT IS THE MOST
SEATTLE THING THAT I COULD THINK
OF WHEN I SAW THAT. BUT, JUST
BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE
REAL SERIOUS ISSUES,
PERFORMATIVE TO PUT HIS FACE ON
AND HAND OUT HIS STUFF AS WELL.
I WILL TELL YOU THIS, I DON'T
KNOW TOO MUCH ABOUT THIS. I WILL
ABSTAIN FROM IT. I DO KNOW WE
NEED TO STRENGTHEN THE
RELATIONSHIP AND CONVERSATION
WITH KING COUNTY ACROSS THE
STREET REGARDING THE HEALTH
CRISIS THAT IS ON OUR STREET AND
BETTER OUTCOMES AND MAKING SURE
WE GET PEOPLE INSIDE, SAFE, AND
ALSO, THAT THEY ARE GETTING THE
RAPID RESPONSE OF TREATMENT,
MOBILE TREATMENT, NOT WHERE WE
GIVE PEOPLE A REFERRAL AND THEN
WE THINK THAT THEY CAN JUMP ON A
BUS OR GET TO A PLACE TO GET
THEIR MEDICINE FROM TREATMENT.
WE WILL HAVE TO GO OUT TO
PEOPLE. AND REALLY DO A
DIFFERENT APPROACH TO WHAT WE
ARE SEEING ON OUR STREETS. SO I
REALLY APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING
THIS AMENDMENT. I WILL HAVE TO
ABSTAIN. I WILL SUPPORT TAKING A
DIFFERENT APPROACH IN THE
BRANDING OF THE BAG, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH. WELL SAID. I WILL
SAY THIS, AT LEAST IT IS HIS
FACE UNLIKE OUR SEAL THAT IS NOT
CHIEF SEATTLE'S FACE. JUST
SAYING. [ LAUGHTER ]
>> BUT, MAYBE BOTH NEED TO BE
LOOKED AT A LITTLE MORE DEEPLY.
COLLEAGUES, FURTHER DISCUSSION,
COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILL YOU WILL
HAVE LAST WORD. I WILL CALL ON
YOU LAST. FURTHER DISCUSSION,
QUESTIONS, GOING ONCE, GOING
TWICE, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING
THIS AMENDMENT TODAY. AND, WITH
THAT, COUNCIL PRESIDENT YOU HAVE
LAST WORD AND THEN WE ARE GOING
TO CALL A VOTE.
>> THANK YOU, FOR THE LAST WORD.
I MUST SAY THAT I WILL BE
LEAVING COUNCIL. BUT I
APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT SO FAR
SINCE I HAVE BEEN IN OFFICE
INCREASING ACCESS TO TREATMENT,
SUBSTANCE DISORDER TREATMENT AND
I HOPE IT CONTINUES. AND I HAVE
TO SAY THAT ANY KIND OF --
DEFINING RECOVERY BROADLY, IT
MEANS GETTING YOUR LIFE BACK
TOGETHER. IT DOES NOT REQUIRE --
I SIT ON THE BOARD OF HEALTH FOR
TWO YEARS NOW. A HAVE TO SAY NOW
IF YOU WOULD THINK GIVEN THE
NUMBER EVER DEATHS AND ALTHOUGH
OUR DEATHS ARE COMING DOWN FROM
OVERDOSE NOWADAYS, YOU WOULD
THINK THAT, THAT, OVERDOSE
PREVENTION AND THE OPIOID CRISIS
WOULD BE PRIORITY NUMBER ONE.
BUT EACH YEAR THAT I HAVE BEEN
ON THE BOARD I HAD TO AMEND THE
WORK PLAN TO INCLUDE ITEMS TO
JUST DISCUSS IT. I DO WANT TO
COMMUNICATE TO PUBLIC HEALTH
THAT I, THAT THERE IS MUCH MORE
WORK TO BE DONE AND, AND, JUST
URGE PEOPLE TO CONTINUE TO KEEP
FOCUSING ON THIS BECAUSE EVEN
THOUGH PEOPLE ARE NOT
NECESSARILY DIEING FROM OVERDOSE
BECAUSE WE HAVE RIGHTLY
DISTRIBUTED NARCAN WIDELY. IT IS
STILL BRAIN DAMAGE. YOU ARE, YOU
KNOW, DEPRIVING YOUR BRAINS FROM
OXYGEN WITH OVERDOSES, SO I JUST
WANT TO SAY IT IS STILL AN
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT PUBLIC
HEALTH ISSUE. AND THANK YOU FOR
YOUR CONTINUED ATTENTION.
>> THANK YOU. SO, IF YOU WANT
THERE REDUCTION IN THE ABILITIES
OF WHAT THE MONEY CAN BE SPENT
ON YOU VOTE YES. IF YOU WANT TO
LEAVE THE BUDGET ITEM AS
PRESENTED IN THE CHAIR'S PACKAGE
AND THE MAYOR'S PACKAGE YOU
VOTE FLOW. WITH THAT, WILLING
THE CLARK WILL THE CLERK CALL
ROLL. [ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
FIVE IN FAVOR, THREE NOT IN
FAVOR. TWO ABSTAIN.
>> THE COUNCIL PASSES. IT IS
AMENDED AS PRESENTED IN
HSD57A-1. MOVING ON TO THE NEXT
ITEM. MO5A1, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I MOVE
TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL 12116 AS
PRESENTED ON MO-5-A-1.
>> SECOND.
>> MOVED AND SECONDED. CENTRAL
STAFF IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO
ADDRESS IT AND THEN
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA YOU WILL HAVE
FIRST AND LAST WORD.
>> IT IS DESIGNED TO MAINTAIN
THE STATUS QUO IN TERMS OF THE
AMOUNT OF FUNDING DIRECTED TO
UNIFIED CARE TEAM ACTIVITIES.
CURRENTLY THE CITY SPENDS ALMOST
$30 MILLION IN THE PROPOSED
BUDGET FOR 2026, THE CITY WOULD
SPEND ALMOST $30 MILLION FOR
UNIFIED CARE TEAM ACTIVITIES.
THEY ARE FUNDED ACROSS A TOTAL
OF 7 DEPARTMENTS, THE LARGEST IN
PARKS AND RECREATION. AT $11.7.
THE AMOUNTS IN EACH AMOUNT.
DEDICATED TO UNIFIED CARE TEAM
ACTIVITIES. AGAIN, THE GOAL IS
TO SUSTAIN THE EXISTING LEVEL OF
EFFORT IN THE SPACE. JUST TO SAY
THIS. IT APPLIES TO THESE IT
APPLIES TO ANY THAT THESE DO
NOT, PROVISO CAN NOT FORCE, THE
NOW NEW MAYOR, TO SPEND THE
MONEY. IF THE MONEY IS NOT SPENT
IT CAN NOT BE USED FOR OTHER
ACTIVITIES. OTHER THING OF NOTE.
UNITED CARE ACTIVITIES IS THE
SUBJECT OF THE PROVISO. THERE
MIGHT BE FLEXIBILITY. THE
COUNCIL'S INTENT IS CLEAR AND
IT IS TO SUSTAIN THE LEVEL OF
EFFORT BY THE UNIFIED, SORRY
ABOUT THAT, UNIFIED CARE TEAM
ACROSS THE SEARCH DEPARTMENTS.
>> THANK YOU DIRECTOR NOBLE.
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, AS SPONSOR
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
COLLEAGUES, THERE IS A PROVISO
FOR THE UNIFIED CARE TEAM. I
WANT TO THANK YOU EVERY MEMBER.
DOZENS OF EMPLOYEES, ACROSS
DEPARTMENTS, COORDINATING VERY
DIFFICULT OUTREACH WORK WITH OUR
OWN HOUSED NEIGHBORS AND
CONNECTING THEM WITH
OPPORTUNITIES FOR SHELTER AND
SERVICES, VERY, VERY TOUGH JOB.
DONE, AT LEAST ONE RIDE ALONG
OVER THE LAST YEAR OR TWO WITH
THE UNIFIED CARE TEAM. AND, THEY
DO GREAT WORK. IT IS HARD WORK,
IT IS DIFFICULT WORK. THE
ESSENCE OF THEIR WORK INVOLVES
OUTREACH. THE ESSENCE OF THEIR
WORK INVOLVES CONNECTING PEOPLE
WITH SERVICES AND TREATMENT. THE
ESSENCE OF THEIR WORK INVOLVES
CONNECTING PEOPLE WITH HOUSING
AND GETTING PEOPLE OFF OF THE
STREETS AND INDOORS. IT IS WORK
THAT HAPPENS OVER MULTIPLE
WEEKS, SOMETIMES MONTHS. GOING
INTO ENCAMPMENTS, UNDERSTANDING
WHERE PEOPLE ARE AT. TRYING TO
MEET THEIR NEEDS. ASSESS THEIR
NEEDS. THEN, GOING BACK TO
VARIOUS SERVICE PROVIDERS AND
DEPARTMENTAL TEAMS AND GETTING A
BETTER HANDLE ON WHAT IS
AVAILABLE IN TERMS OF HOUSING.
SUPPORTIVE SERVICES. AND THEN
THEY COME BACK TO THE ENCAMPMENT
SITE, SPEAKING WITH PEOPLE AND
SHARE THE OPTIONS. THAT WE ARE
ABLE TO COME UP WITH. AND
IDEALLY WE WOULD HAVE 100%
ACCEPTANCE RATE OF THE VITAL
TREATMENT SERVICES AND HOUSING.
UNFORTUNATELY WE DON'T TODAY.
THAT IS WHY THERE IS AN
UNRELATED SLY, CALLING ON
REPORTING THAT WAS INCLUDED IN
THE PACKAGE, CALLING ON MORE
DATA, MORE REPORTING, INCLUDING
GETTING A BETTER SENSE EVER THE
SCOPE OF THE ACCEPTANCE RATES OF
THIS VITAL HOUSING AND SERVICES.
SO THIS IS MISSION-CRITICAL WORK
OF OUTREACH. CARING FOR UNHOUSED
NEIGHBORS IN A SAFE, HUMANE WAY
THAT RECOGNIZES THE BASIC HUMAN
DIGNITY AND COMPASSION THAT WE
ALL HAVE. AND COMPASSION FOR
EACH OTHER. AGAIN, THERE UNIFIED
CARE TEAM FUNCTIONS ARE SPREAD
ACROSS MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS,
TOTALING $29 MILLION. IT WOULD,
AS DIRECTOR NOBLE NOTED A MOMENT
AGO. REQUIRE THAT THIS FUNDING
BE SPENT FOR THESE FUNCTIONS AS
THEY ARE PERFORMED TODAY AND,
YOU KNOW, BEST PRACTICES IN THIS
VITAL WORK ARE OBVIOUSLY GOING
TO EVOLVE OVER TIME. AND, I
THINK, COUNCILMEMBER, CHAIR
STRAUSS, IN AN UNRELATED
CONVERSATION ABOUT THE
IMPLICATED UTT, A WHILE BACK, I
REMEMBER HIM SHARING THE
EVOLUTION OF THE UNIFIED CARE
TEAM AND HOW, AND HOW IT, WE AS
A CITY BUILT UPON IT AND
IMPROVED UPON IT OVER TIME AND
OVER YEARS TO GET IT TO WHERE IT
IS TODAY. USE A DATA-BASED
APPROACH TODAY. METHODICAL
APPROACH TODAY. UNDER THE SCORE
SHEET AND USE OBJECTIVE
EVALUATION CRITERIA ABOUT WHICH
PLACES ARE APPROPRIATE TO SELECT
AND WHEN. IN TERMS OF THEIR
ACCESS AND PROXIMITY TO PARKS
AND SCHOOLS AND SO MANY OTHER
THINGS. AND SO, THIS WORK IS
GOING TO CONTINUE TO EVOLVE. I
DON'T CARE WHAT WE CALL IT AS A
CITY. THAT MATTERS LESS. BUT THE
UNDER LYING WORK OF CONNECTING
PEOPLE IN NEED WITH SHELTER AND
TREATMENT IS WORK THAT WILL NEED
TO CONTINUE TO PERFORM. WHAT WE
ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE, FOR
CRYSTAL CLARITY, WHAT WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT HERE IS AN
EMERGENCY RESPONSE TO
HOMELESSNESS. YES, WE NEED TO
BUILD MORE HOUSING, AND WE WILL.
YES WE NEED TO GO UPSTREAM AND,
YOU KNOW, ADDRESS POVERTY TO
PREVENT PEOPLE EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS. YES, WE WILL. WE
NEED A BETTER PLAN FOR TOMORROW.
FOCUS ON PREVENTION. YES. WE
WILL. AND, WITH THE PROBLEM
ALREADY HERE TODAY THIS CRISIS
IS ALREADY HERE TODAY WE NEED TO
RESPOND COMPASSIONATELY AND
APPROPRIATELY AND I THINK THAT
IS WHAT IT ALLOWS US TO DO AND
IT IS A GOOD GOVERNANCE FEATURE
AND I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA, COLLEAGUES, FURTHER
DISCUSSION?
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON AND
RIVERA. EVERYONE WILL HAVE ONE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, I WILL DO
THE MATH IN A MINUTE TO
UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH TIME WE HAVE
REMAINING IN THE DAY.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHAIR.
MR. NOBLE IF YOU COULD SCROLL
DOWN, I WANT TO SEE OF THE
DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS LISTED,
WHAT, WHERE IS THE OUTREACH
COMPONENT. SPECIFICALLY WHAT I
AM TALKING ABOUT IS REACH.
>> THAT IS HUMAN SERVICES.
>> I WILL ASK JENNIFER TO
RESPOND TO THIS. I BELIEVE THEY
ARE CITY EMPLOYEES AND NOT A
CONTRACT. OVER TO YOU.
>> LET ME TAKE A MOMENT. SO,
OUTREACH IS ACTUALLY NOW
CONDUCTED BOTH BY CITY STAFF AND
ALSO BY CONTRACTED PROVIDERS.
BUT, HSD, THE CITY STAFF THAT
CONDUCT OUTREACH DO LIVE IN THE
HUMAN SERVICES OR HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT AS IS THE FUNDING
THAT IS CONTRACTED WITH
PROVIDERS TO DO THE OUTREACH.
>> OKAY.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> AND MR. CHAIR I APOLOGIZE, I
ADDRESSED THEM AS OPPOSED TO
YOU. AND, THE REASON I BRING
THERE IS UP IS BECAUSE IF ANYONE
ON THE PANEL HERE, PROBABLY
WORKED MORE CLOSELY WITH UCT
THAN ANYONE ELSE. AND I KNOW
SOME OF THE CHALLENGES FACED BY
OUR OUTREACH WORKERS WHO ARE
TRYING TO CONNECT TO OUR CLIENTS
THAT WHETHER UCT DOES THEIR
WORK, CLIENTS ARE MOVED AND NOW
THEY ARE HAVING A HARD TIME
RELOCATING THEM. A POTENTIAL FIX
FOR THIS WILL BE BETTER
COORDINATION BETWEEN THE FOLKS
WHO ARE DOING OUTREACH AND THE
FOLKS THAT ARE DOING THE CLAIMS.
THERE IS A BETTER SENSE OF, YOU
KNOW, IF I AM MOVING, YOU KNOW,
IF I AM MOVING JOEY FROM THIS
LOCATION THAT THE PERSON WHO IS
WORKING WITH JOEY HAS A BETTER
SENSE OF WHERE JOEY IS GOING TO
WIND UP SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO
START FROM SCRATCH LOOKING FOR
JOEY. I KNOW THE WORK THEY DO
AND I KNOW THOSE INDIVIDUALS
PERSONALLY. THEY ARE DOING GREAT
WORK ACROSS DEPARTMENTS. THE ONE
AREA WHERE I CAN SEE SOME
IMPROVEMENT IS IN THAT
COORDINATION WITH OUR FOLKS WHO
ARE DOING THE OUTREACH SO THAT
AS SOMEONE IS, A CASEWORKER HAS
A BETTER SENSE OF WHERE THEY ARE
GOING. I THINK IT IS AN EASY FIX
AND CAN BE DONE WITH THE MOU
BETWEEN HSD AND, YOU KNOW,
EVERGREEN SERVICES PROGRAM.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
SOLOMON. COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR, THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER S AKA FOR BRINGING
THIS. I WANT TO TAKE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SHOUT OUT THE UCT
TEAM AND THANK THEM FOR ALL OF
THEIR HARD WORK. WHAT THEY DO IS
NOT EASY. IT IS REALLY HARD WORK
TO WORK WITH OUR UNHOUSED
POPULATION. AND, THEY DO SO WITH
CARE AND DIGNITY. THEY GO
MULTIPLE TIMES AS YOU SAID,
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA AND OFFER
SERVICES AND THE GOAL IS TO TRY
TO GET FOLKS INDOORS BECAUSE IF
THAT WERE MY PARENT, MY CHILD,
MY SISTER, MY BROTHER, AUNT,
UNCLE, I WOULD NOT WANT THEM TO
BE SLEEPING ON THE STREET OR
EVERYONE IN A TENT IN THE
OUTDOORS IN THIS WEATHER. SO,
THAT IS WHAT THEY DO. I HAVE TO
SAY I WANT TO SHOUT OUT DEPUTY
MAYOR WASHINGTON WHO OVERSEES
THIS TEAM AS YOU ALL KNOW DEPUTY
MAYOR WASHINGTON HAS BEEN AT THE
CITY FOR SOME TIME. FOR CITY
TRUSTEE AND THEN IN THE MAYOR'S
OFFICE BUT ALWAYS OVERSEEING THE
UCT AND THE CITY'S HOUSING WORK
OUT OF THE MAYOR'S OFFICE. AND,
BOTH THE LAST TWO
ADMINISTRATIONS. SO I REALLY
WANT TO GIVE HER A SHOUT OUT. I
KNOW HOW MUCH SHE PUTS INTO THIS
WORK. AND HOW MUCH SHE DOES TO
WORK WITH THE UCT TEAM. SO THAT
WE CAN GET, REALLY, A GREAT
SERVICE AND MORE IMPORTANTLY
OUTCOME. OUTCOMES FOR THE FOLKS
THAT ARE UNHOUSED. AND, SO, THE
CARE THAT THE TEAM DOES AND I
HAVE BEEN OUT THERE WITH THEM, I
AM SURE YOU HAVE ALL DONE RIDE
ALONGS, I HAVE, TOO, AND THE
CONSTANT POINT OF CONSTANT
COMMUNICATION IS IMPORTANT. UCT
DOES SO WITH SUCH CARE AND SUCH
COMPASSION AND GRACE. AND THAT
IS NOT TO BE TAKEN LIGHTLY. SO,
I REALLY SUPPORT THIS BUDGET
ACTION AND I REALLY SUPPORT THE
WORK OF THE UCT TEAM. SO, AGAIN,
THANK YOU, AND I WILL BE
SUPPORTING THIS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STRAUSS.
>> I JUST WANT TO SAY TO THE
UNIFY CARE TEAM, THANK YOU FOR
YOUR SERVICE. THEY DO GREAT
WORK. THEY DO HARD WORK. AND I
JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU,
CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE. OTHER FURTHER
DISCUSSION? FURTHER DISCUSSION?
I WILL MAKE MY LAST REMARKS AND
PASS IT TO COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
>> JUST TO SAY I WILL BE
ABSTAINING FROM THIS VOTE TODAY.
I DON'T WANT TO COLOR THE
WATERS BETWEEN US AND THE NEXT
ADMINISTRATION OUT OF THE GATE
RIGHT NOW. I ABSOLUTELY RETAIN
AND RELY, I RELY ON UNIFIED CARE
TEAM IN SO MANY WAYS, I HAVE
WATCHED THEM IN DISTRICT 6.
THERE WAS ONE ENCAMPMENT THAT
HAD BEEN UNDER THE TRAIN BRIDGE
SINCE BEFORE I WAS ELECTED. AND
I KNOW THAT BECAUSE I LIVED
RIGHT BY THAT TRAIN BRIDGE FOR A
NUMBER OF YEARS. AND, NO, NO ONE
COULD GET THEM INSIDE UNTIL OUR
CURRENT SOCIAL WORKER THAT IS
PART OF THE UNIFIED CARE TEAM,
THE CITY WORKER THAT IS SOCIAL
WORKER, SHE GOT THAT WHOLE
ENCAMPMENT INSIDE. ANOTHER
GENTLEMAN THAT RIDES HIS BIKE
AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND
PLAYS THE PICCOLO. I HAVE SEEN
HIM HOMELESS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
SINCE 2003. HE WAS IN HIS 50s
BACK THEN. HE IS NOW IN HIS 70s,
HE WOULD BE DYING ON THE STREET,
WE TRIED SO HARD TO GET HIM
INSIDE AND IT WAS NOT UNTIL THE
CURRENT CARE TEAM WAS ABLE TO
GET THROUGH TO HIM. THAT IS THE
IMPORTANCE OF THE WORK. I LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE NEXT
ADMINISTRATION TO CONTINUE AND
IMPROVE THE UNIFIED CARE TEAM
AND HOW IT OPERATES. THERE ARE
SOME PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS LIKE
ANYTHING WE DO IN LIFE. THERE IS
ALWAYS OPPORTUNITY TO IMPROVE.
AND THERE ARE GOOD WAYS THAT WE
CAN. I WILL ABSTAIN FROM THIS. I
-- I DON'T WANT TO MUDDY THE
WATERS. I EXPECT THEM TO
CONTINUE THIS WORK OF KEEPING
OUR PUBLIC PLACES CLEAR AND FREE
OF PEOPLE HAVING TO LIVE AND WE
NEED TO GET PEOPLE INSIDE. THAT
IS BOTTOM LINE. WITH THAT,
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, LAST WORD
AND WE WILL TAKE A VOTE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I ASK
FOR YOUR SUPPORT. I APPRECIATE
THE GREAT COMMENTS MADE SO FAR.
I, TOO, I WANT TO -- I STARTED
OFF THANKING THE UNIFIED CARE
TEAM. I WANT TO SHOUT OUT DEPUTY
MAYOR WASHINGTON FOR HER
PARTNERSHIP, COLLABORATION AND
LEADERSHIP ON ALL THINGS HUMAN
SERVICES. IN PARTICULAR IN THIS
CONTEXT THAT IS BEFORE US IN
THIS WORK. I APPRECIATE THE
COMMENTS FROM OUR COLLEAGUE,
SOLOMON AND COULD AGREE,
CONCEDE, HE HAS THE MOST DIRECT
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE ON THE
GROUND INCLUDING WITH THIS VITAL
WORK. AND THAT IS WHY HIS
VIEWPOINT AND PERSPECTIVE IS
INVALUABLE. AND IN PARTICULAR
ABOUT THE POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS
THAT NEED TO BE HAD. ADDITIONAL
ENHANCEMENT TO BE HAD INCLUDING
COORDINATION AND HAND OFFS, THE
GOOD NEWS IS, THERE PROPOSAL
WOULD ALLOW FOR THAT FLEXIBILITY
. AND I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS
FROM THE CHAIR. I THINK THIS
LEAVES ROOM FOR THE NEW MAYOR TO
IMPLEMENT AS THEY SEE FIT AS
WELL. AND, WHILE WE HAVE
APPROPRIATE AND NECESSARY
DIALOGUE. AND PARALLEL. SO, FOR
THOSE REASONS, I ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT, COLLEAGUES, THANK YOU
>> THANK YOU, WILL THE CLERK
CALL THE ROLL ON MO581. [ ROLL
BEING CALLED ]
6 IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED, TWO
ABSTAIN.
>> MOTION CARRIES, 121116 IS
AMENDED. MOVING ON TO THE NEXT
ITEM, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED AND MOVE THE NEXT
ITEM.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
PRESENTED .
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. AT THIS TIME, I WILL
CALL ON CENTRAL STAFF. WE ARE
AVERAGING OVER, ABOUT, OVER 10
MINUTES, AVERAGING 15 PLUS ON
EACH ITEM. WE ARE RIGHT NOW
LOOKING AT THE EARLIEST 4:30,
MORE LIKELY, 5:00 OR 5:30. I
KNOW I AM TALKING TO MUCH. I
WILL BE QUIET. WITH THAT, SO,
JUST MINDFUL, COLLEAGUES, WE ARE
IN CONTROL OF OUR OWN DESTINY.
THE MORE WE TALK THE LONGER WE
ARE HERE. DIRECT OR ER. NOBLE?
>> IT IS FOR BUSINESS DISTRICTS
UNLIKELY TO FORM BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT AREAS SOON.
INCLUDING SPECIFICALLY
GEORGETOWN BUT NOT LIMITED TO
GEORGETOWN. I WANT TO BE CLEAR
ABOUT THAT. THAT IS WHAT THE
ITEM DOES.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA, AS SPONSOR YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I WANT TO
THANK MY CO-SPONSORS, JUAREZ AND
SOLOMON. THIS IS, MOST OF MY
ITEMS ARE SOME FLAVOR OF REVIVAL
OF AN EARLIER AMENDMENT WITH A
FEW EXCEPTIONS LIKE THE ONE
RIGHT BEFORE THIS. BUT, SO THIS
IS, THERE IS ESSENTIALLY REVIVAL
OF AN EARLIER PROPOSAL. CHAIR
NOTED EARLIER TODAY IN AN
EARLIER DISCUSSION OF GROUP A
ITEMS, IT WAS, IT WAS ABLE TO
GIVE ME, GIVE DISTRICT ONE,
$250,000 AS PART OF THE REVISED
CHAIR PACKAGE. $250,000 TO MEET
THE NEEDS OF THE NORTH DELL
RIDGE BUSINESS COMMUNITY THAT
ARE BEING DISPLACED. IT WAS NOT
IN ADDITION, HOWEVER, FOR
CLARITY, THAT WAS BECAUSE IN THE
ORIGINAL CHAIR'S PACKAGE THERE
WAS FUNDING, THERE WAS EXACTLY
$250,000 FOR TWO SEPARATE
UN-RELATED COMMUNITY NEEDS BOTH
HAPPEN TO INVOLVE SMALL BUSINESS
SUPPORT, BOTH COINCIDENCE
INVOLVING 1OED, IT IS THIS RIGHT
NOW $200,000 FOR SMALL BUSINESS
SUPPORT IN AREAS THAT CURRENTLY
DO NOT HAVE BIAs INCLUDING
GEORGETOWN. BY THE WAY IT CALLS
OUT HISTORICALLY AND I THINK YOU
CAN LOOK TO THAT AS A GUIDE.
MOST RECENTLY IN OTHER AREAS
THAT DO NOT CURRENTLY HAVE
BENEFIT OR BIAs THAT CAN BENEFIT
UNDER THIS, BEACON BUSINESS
ALLIANCE AREA, RAINIER, FIRST
HILL, NORTH SEATTLE, THERE IS A
CITY-WIDE OPPORTUNITY OF AND
POTENTIAL HERE. AND I AM
GRATEFUL THAT WE WERE ABLE TO
MEET THE NEEDS OF ONE SMALL
BUSINESS COMMUNITY IN THIS CASE
NORTH DEL RIDGE AND THE REVISED
CHAIR PACKAGE FOR THE $250,000
AMOUNT THAT WAS ORIGINALLY
BROKEN UP AND ATTENDED TO
ADDRESS TWO DESPERATE NEEDS. I
AM GRATEFUL FOR THAT WE AT LEAST
GOT THAT DONE. I ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT TO HELP GET THIS DONE AS
WELL WITH THIS IDENTIFIED
FUNDING SOURCES THAT MANY AREAS
AND NEIGHBORHOODS ACROSS THE
CITY CAN BENEFIT FROM, THESE
ADDITIONAL SMALL BUSINESS
SUPPORT. FOR THOSE REASONS I ASK
FOR YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES,
DISCUSSION, I SEE COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION, TO MR.
NOBLE AND TEAM. I AM A LITTLE
CONFUSED. LOOKING AT MY NOTES
UNDER OED07 7 DID YOU CLARIFY
THAT, THERE WERE ALREADY
$250,000 TOWARDS IT ALREADY IN
IS IT ADDITIONAL OR IS THERE
$250,000 IN THERE
>> I WILL EXPLAIN THE CHAIR'S
PACKAGE AND CENTRAL STAFF CAN DO
THE DETAILS. AS WE CREATED THE
CHAIR'S PACKAGE IT WAS
IMPORTANT FOR ME THAT THERE WERE
INVESTMENTS THAT EACH OF YOU
REQUESTED FOR YOUR DISTRICTS OR
FOR CITYWIDE. PROVISORS HELP
DIRECT THE DEPARTMENTS TO MAKE
SURE THEY ARE MADE IN SPECIFIC
PLACES. THE CONCERN FOR ME
BECOMES WHETHER WE BEGIN TO OVER
PROVISO DEPARTMENTS IT IS
IMPACTING CITYWIDE PROGRAMMING
OR ALLOWING THAT DEPARTMENT TO
SPREAD THEIR PROGRAMMING AROUND
THE CITY. WHICH IS WHY IN MY
PERSPECTIVE, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA
BROUGHT TWO SIMILAR PROVISO
REQUESTS IN THE PROPOSAL
SECTION. I MERGED THOSE EVEN
THOUGH THEY COULD BE USED FOR
VERY DIFFERENT CASES IT IS JUST
TO SAY OED, HERE IS $250,000
THAT COUNCILMEMBER SAKA CAN WORK
WITH YOU TO DEPLOY IN GEORGETOWN
OR NORTH DEL RIDGE OR WHATEVER.
FROM THERE WE INCLUDED THAT $250
THROUGH,IN THE CHAIR'S PACKAGE.
I THOUGHT WE RETAINED THAT BUT
INSTEAD WE GET $250,000 TO NORTH
DEL RIDGE. THAT WOULD BE AN
ADDITIONAL $250,000 FOR
GEORGETOWN, DID I GET THAT
RIGHT, CENTRAL STAFF?
>> YEAH. GEORGETOWN AND OTHER
POTENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.
>> OKAY.
>> COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ YOU
STILL HAVE THE FLOOR.
>> I GUESS -- I AM SORRY, I
APOLOGIZE FOR BEING A BIT
OBTUSE. BUT NOW, LOOKING AT IT I
AM A SPONSOR FOR THE ADDITIONAL
TO THE $250?
>> OKAY. CENTRAL STAFF. OKAY,
SO, WHAT COUNCILMEMBER SAKA
SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION IN
THE CHAIR'S BALANCING PACKAGE
WERE TWO SEPARATE. ONE WAS FOR
BUSINESS DISTRICTS INCLUDING BUT
NOT LIMITED TO GEORGETOWN AND
ONE WAS FOR NORTH DEL RIDGE. SOY
MAY OF SPONSORED DURING THAT
STAGE. YOU MAY OF SPONSORED ONE
OR BOTH OF THOSE. AND THEN THE
CHAIR IN THE BALANCING PACKAGE
COMBINED THEM INTO ONE PROVISO.
NOW WHAT IS HAPPENING THERE ARE
TWO SEPARATE. GOING BACK TO BE
TWO SEPARATE CBAs DOES THAT
HELP?
>> YES, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. SO, JUST TO
CLARIFY THE POINT THIS IS NOT,
IT IS -- GEORGETOWN AND OTHER
NEIGHBORHOODS THAT DO NOT HAVE
BIAs. SO, I JUST WANT TO SAY
THAT BIA'S ARE REALLY
IMPORTANT. I AM LUCK TOW HAVE
ONE. THE UDP. THEY PROVIDE A
GREAT BENEFIT TO THE BUSINESSES
THERE AND TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN
GENERAL. NOT JUST THE BUSINESSES
EVERYONE THOUGH THEY ARE
SUPPOSED TO BE, YOU KNOW,
HELPING BUSINESSES THAT GO
BEYOND IT. SHOUT OUT TO THEM AND
ALL OF THE WORK THEY DO IN THE
AREA. THERE ARE OTHER AREAS IN
THE DISTRICT THAT I REPRESENT
THAT I AM LUCKY TO REPRESENT IN
WEDGEWOOD. WE HAVE BUSINESSES ON
35th THAT ARE STRUGGLING. ON
50th WE HAVE BUSINESSES THAT ARE
STRUGGLING AND SANDPOINT WAY. WE
DON'T HAVE BIAs NOR ANY
CONTEMPLATED IN THOSE AREAS
THESE BUSINESSES ARE IN NEED OF
GREAT HELP, PARTICULARLY POST
PANDEMIC. I SUPPORT THE
INVESTMENT BECAUSE IT CAN GO TO
CITYWIDE INCLUDING THE AREAS I
JUST MENTIONED AND MY DISTRICT.
FOR THOSE REASONS I WILL BE
SUPPORTING THIS. BUSINESSES ARE
IN GREAT NEED. SMALL BUSINESSES
ARE IN GREAT NEED RIGHT NOW. SO,
MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE AN
ABILITY TO HELP THOSE BUSINESSES
WHERE THEY IS NOT A BIA IT IS
REALLY CRITICAL. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES OTHERS
FURTHER DISCUSSION. AND I TRIED
TO MEET WITH OUR COUNCILMEMBERS
NEEDS. IT DID NOT WORK. HERE WE
HAVE IT. I WILL NOT SUPPORT IT
TODAY. I AM WORRIED ABOUT THE
CITYWIDE IMPLICATIONS. WITH THAT
COUNCILMEMBER YOU HAVE LAST
WORD.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU,
JASMINE. AND, DIRECTOR NOBLE FOR
CLARIFYING THE, THE PROCEDURE
AND THE HISTORY IN PROCESS OF
THIS AND THE EVOLUTION OF THERE
ONE UNDER A SHORT, SHORT TIMING,
DID IT WAY BETTER THAN I
ATTEMPTED AND CLEARLY FAILED TO
DO RIGHT BEFORE THAT. SO, THANK
YOU. AND, AND IT -- THIS IS
SUPPORT FOR, THIS IS ABOUT
SUPPORTING OUR SMALL BUSINESSES
ACROSS OUR CITY, COLLEAGUES.
GEORGETOWN IS CALLED OUT AS ONE
OF MANY POTENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS
TO BENEFIT THIS CITYWIDE AND I
CALLED OUT NEIGHBORHOOD THAT
COULD BENEFIT, BEACON HILL,
RAINIER, MOUNT BAKER, NORTH
SEATTLE, IT IS, AS JASMINE NOTED
IT IS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
TO. MORE SPECIFICALLY THE WORDS
ON THE TEXT OF THE PROPOSED
BUDGET AMENDMENT SAY TO SUPPORT
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOODS,
BUSINESS DISTRICT COMMA AND MAY
INCLUDE OTHERS AND A ROAD PLAN
TO WHAT HAS BEEN DONE. I THINK
IT HAS CITYWIDE IMPORT. AND FOR
THOSE REASONS I ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, WILL THE CLERK
CALL THE ROLL. [ ROLL BEING
CALLED ] 6 IN FAVOR, THREE
OPPOSED.
>> THE MOTION PASSES. IT IS ADD
TO COUNCIL BILL 12116. WILL THE
CLERK OR COUNCILMEMBER SAKA --
NOPE. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON YOU
ARE RECOGNIZED TO READ YOUR
AMENDMENT IN.
>> I MOVE COUNCIL BUDGET ACTION
OHO2-B.
>> SECOND.
>> MOVED AND SECONDED. CENTRAL
STAFF WOULD YOU LIKE TO BRIEF
THE BILL?
>> THIS ITEM IS A PROVISO ON
OFFICE OF HOUSING. ON $6 MILLION
OF THE FUNDING TO OFFICE OF
HOUSING TO BE HELD, TO BE USED
FOR RENTAL ASSISTANCE TO OH
FUNDED NONPROFIT AFFORDABLE
HOUSING. THAT IS DESCRIBED HERE
AND CENTRAL STAFF SUMMARY. IT
WILL BE IN ADDITION TO 28
MILLION FOR THE PURPOSE THAT IS
POSTED IN RFP. I CAN NOT SPEAK
TO OVERALL NEED. I WANTED YOU TO
KNOW IT IS ADDED TO THAT MOVE
FROM THE OFFICE OF HOUSING. THIS
WOULD, THE SHIFTING OF $6
MILLION, TWO RENTAL ASSISTANCE
MEANS LESS MONEY FOR OH CAPITAL
PROJECTS OF 1 FORM OR ANOTHER
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
NELSON, SPONSOR OF THE AMENDMENT
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.
>> THIS IS THE SECOND TRIAL
AMENDMENT TO THE CBA I PUT
FORWARD EARLIER THAT DID NOT GET
INTO THE CHAIR'S PACKAGE THAT
WAS $10 MILLION UNANIMOUSLY
SUPPORTED BY EVERYONE ON
COUNCIL. AND SO, THIS IS $6
MILLION FOR THE SAME PURPOSE
WHICH IS RENTAL ASSISTANCE. WE
KNOW FROM NOT JUST INFORMATION
BUT WE, IT HAS BEEN, THERE HAVE
BEEN A LOT OF REPORTS, A LOT OF
PUBLIC TESTIMONY THAT OUR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVIDERS ARE
IN A BAD SPOT BECAUSE THEY CAN
NOT COVER THEIR EXPENSES OR
NEEDS OF TENANTS. THERE IS TO
PROVIDE IMMEDIATE ONE-TIME
SUPPORT. NOW, LET ME JUST GO
THROUGH THE MATH A LITTLE BIT
HERE. IN JUNE, AS OF JUNE 20th,
2025, THE OFFICE OF HOUSING HAD
233 MILLION OF PAYROLL EXPENSE
TAX ALLOCATED IN 2025 OR PRIOR
YEARS. NOT YET EXPANDED. HOLD
THAT IN YOUR MIND. OF THAT $91
MILLION WAS AWARDED IN PROJECTS
UNDER CONTRACT. AND $52 MILLION
WAS AWARDED TO PROJECTS BUT NOT
YET UNDER CONTRACT. I DID THE
MATH, IT LEAVES $90 MILLION THAT
IS NOT ALREADY AWARDED OR SPOKEN
FOR. AND I AM FOCUSING ON THE
PTE SOURCE BECAUSE THERE ARE
RESTRICTIONS ON USE OF HOUSING
LEVY. MY POINT IS SIMPLY THAT
THIS IS A SHORT TERM, THIS IS A
ONE-TIME HELP FOR OUR PROVIDERS
THAT MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT RESULT
IN A REDUCTION OF NEW HOUSING
UNITS BUILT IN THE COMING YEAR.
THERE IS ALREADY A LOT OF MONEY
NOT USED RIGHT NOW. WE HEARD
THIS FUNDING WOULD HELP 3,000
RENTERS. AND I CAN JUST SAY
THAT, I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS SO
MUCH MORE TO DO FOR US TO DO TO
HELP OUR HOUSING PROVIDERS.
WHETHER WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, I
AM A FIX IT FIRST PERSON. WE
HAVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR TAKING
CARE OF OUR OWN INFRASTRUCTURE.
ROADS, BRIDGES, ET CETERA. I
BELIEVE IT IS THE PREFERENCE OF
HOUSING PROVIDERS, WE RECEIVED A
LETTER EARLIER WITH MANY, MANY
SIGNATURES FOR THE $10 MILLION
ASK. WE HAVE GOT TO MAKE SURE
THAT THEY CAN TAKE CARE OF THEIR
EXISTING RENTERS AND EXISTING
UNITS THAT IS THE RATIONAL
BEHIND THIS FUNDING REQUEST.
>> THANK YOU.
>> IS THAT AN OLD HAND?
>> OLD.
>> NO PROBLEM. 3:02, ANY OTHER
COMMENTS? I SUPPORT THIS
CONCEPT, SUPPORT THIS IDEA. MUCH
LIKE ALL OF THESE PROPOSALS IN
GROUP C. I WOULD SUPPORT THEM IF
WE HAD THE FREE AND ABLE FUNDING
TO DO SO. I DO NOT SUPPORT THE
FUNDING SOURCE, I DO NOT SUPPORT
TAKING RENTAL ASSISTANCE, TAKING
CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION MONEY FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO PAY FOR
RENTAL ASSISTANCE. I DID SUPPORT
FUNDING RENTAL ASSISTANCE.
DIRECTOR NOBLE CAN YOU REMIND ME
HOW MUCH MONEY THE BASE PACKAGE
HAS R HAD FOR RENTAL ASSISTANCE
FOR THIS PURPOSE?.
>> YOU GOT PHONE A FRIEND?
>> OH, JUST RELEASED FOR $28
MILLION FOR THIS PURPOSE. I WILL
DEFER TO MY COLLEAGUE.
>> I FEEL LIKE PHONE A FRIEND IS
A STEP BEHIND. THE 2026 BUDGET
PROVIDED $ELEVEN $11.4. IT HAS
BEEN REFERENCED IN ADDITION
THAT. RELEASING A $28 MILLION
REQUEST. OPERATING STABILIZATION
FUNDING FOR OH-FUNDED BUILDINGS.
THAT OPERATING STABILIZATION
MONEY CAN BE USED FOR A NUMBER
OF DIFFERENT THINGS, ONE OF THE
USES IS RENT ASSISTANCE.
>> THANK YOU, JENNIFER. AS I DID
THE BACK OF THE ENVELOPE MATH,
$13 MILLION FOR THESE PURPOSES
IS THAT CORRECT?
>> I DON'T THINK THAT IS QUITE
CORRECT. I WOULD SAY THERE IS
DEFINITELY $11.4. THE RFP GOING
OUT IN NOVEMBER THAT CAN BE USED
FOR A VARIETY OF THINGS T COULD
BE THAT OR IT COULD PAY FOR
INCREASED INSURANCE COSTS OR
HELP THEM, YOU KNOW, PAY FOR
REHABBING UNIT THAT HAVE BEEN,
YOU KNOW, LEFT IN BAD SHAPE. I
DON'T THINK WE CAN SAY ALL OF
THAT IS FOR RENTAL ASSISTANT.
JENNIFER I WILL ASK THE QUESTION
TO YOU AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT CAN
RESPOND IN HER CLOSING REMARKS,
MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS
ADDITIONAL $6 MILLION AND THE
$10 MILLION REQUESTED
PREVIOUSLY, I SUPPORT BUT WE
DON'T HAVE THE EXCESS FUNDING
FOR AT THIS TIME IS INTENDED TO
BUOY THE RENTAL AFFORDABLE
HOUSING PROVIDERS BECAUSE THEY
ARE HAVING ISSUES ACROSS THE
BOARD WITH THEIR FUNDING THAT IS
BASED ON TENANTS NOT NECESSARILY
PAYING THEIR RENT?
>> YEAH, THE $6 MILLION WOULD BE
TARGETED AS WOULD HAVE BEEN THE
$10 MILLION PART OF THE ORIGINAL
AMENDMENT, IT WOULD BE
SPECIFICALLY FOR TENANTS BEHIND
ON THEIR RENT IN OH-FUNDED
BUILDINGS.
>> RENT IS ONE USE BUT IT COULD
BE BROADER THAN THAT, TOO.
>> OKAY. WE HAVE ANYWHERE FROM
28-39 MILLION GENERALLY FOR THIS
GENERAL BUCKET OF PROGRAMMING?
>> YEAH.
>> BROADLY SPEAKING. AND THIS
WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL 6 ON TOP
OF THAT $39?
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS
OR COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA NEW
HAND?
>> YEP.
>> NEW HAND AND THEN I WILL PASS
IT BACK TO COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR, THANK YOU,
JEN, FOR RUNNING US THROUGH THE
CURRENT INVESTMENTS. THE 11 IS
FOR RENTAL ASSISTANCE BUT THE
STABILIZATION FUNDS, THE 28 CAN
BE FOR A VARIETY OF THINGS
INCLUDING PUBLIC SAFETY. WE KNOW
THE NON-FOR PROFIT. I KNOW UNITS
ARE EXPENSIVE TO FIX. UPWARDS OF
$100,000 FOR UNIT. THAT $28
MILLION DWINDLES IF THERE ARE
MULTIIMUNITS THAT NEED TO BE
FIXED. I BELIEVE I HAVE HEARD
FROM OUR HOUSING PROVIDERS. THAT
IS THE CASE. AND IN ADDITION TO
SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS THEY
NEED. RENTAL AND SECURITY,
STAFFING AND THINGS OF THAT
NATURE. WE SUPPORT THAT FOR OUR
NON-FOR PROFIT HOUSING BUILDING.
THE IDEA OF THE RENTAL
ASSISTANCE IS REALLY IMPORTANT
PARTICULARLY IN LIGHT OF THE
CONVERSATION THAT WE HAVE HAD
TODAY AND MAKING SURE THAT
TENANTS ARE NOT OUT ON THE
STREET BECAUSE WE WANT FOLKS TO
STAY HOUSED. WE ARE TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT THE BEST WAY TO
SUPPORT THE NONFOR PROFIT
PROVIDERS, THERE IS A LOT THAT
WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW BEST
TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO THAT.
WHILE WE DO THAT, THERE IS A
NEED FOR RENTAL ASSISTANCE. I
DON'T THINK ANYONE CAN DENY
THAT. GIVEN THAT IS THE CASE I
AM GOING TO SUPPORT THIS. THIS
TODAY BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE
LEARCH PLUS SIX IS MORE RO-- THE
11 PLUS 6 IS NEEDED. UNLESS YOU
SAY THERE IS NO NEED. THE
HOUSING PROVIDERS EXPRESSED
THERE IS A NEED. UNLESS YOU ARE
TELLING ME OTHERWISE, WHICH I
WOULD WELCOME, I WILL SUPPORT
THIS KNOWING WE NEED TO CONTINUE
TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT
HOW TO BEST SUPPORT THE EXISTING
UNITS. AS WE ARE TRYING TO
CREATE MORE UNITS.
>> JENNIFER?
>> I WOULD SAY, WE HAVE EVIDENCE
THAT THERE IS NEED FOR THE
ADDITIONAL $6 MILLION COMING
FROM PROVIDERS. I DON'T HAVE
HARD DATA AT THIS POINT TO BACK
IT UP EITHER WAY.
>> I HEARD FROM RESIDENTS
THEMSELVES ABOUT THE COST. AT
LEAST IN THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE
IN THE DISTRICT THAT I
REPRESENT. SO, I DON'T HAVE
REASON TO BELIEVE IT IS UNTRUE.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. FURTHER COMMENTS?
QUESTIONS?
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I AM NOT
CALLING ON ANYONE ELSE AFTER YOU
AND THEN VOTE
>> THE MAYOR'S PROPOSED BUDGET
HAS $350 MILLION FOR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING. EVERYONE THOUGH MANY
BUILDINGS RIGHT NOW THAT WERE
BUILT BY OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
PROVIDERS ARE HALF EMPTY OR IN
BAD SHAPE OF IN NEED OF REPAIR.
AND, I WOULD SAY THAT I BELIEVE
THAT THE $11 MILLION THAT WAS
MENTIONED BY JEN DOES NOT GO TO
OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVIDERS
BUT FOR, FOR RENTERS IN PRIVATE
HOUSING. AND I AM TALKING ABOUT
PROTECTING OUR INVESTMENT GOING
FORWARD. AND TAKING MONEY AWAY
FROM CAPITAL BUILDING IN THE
FUTURE. HOWEVER, AGAIN, IT DOES
NOT MAKE ANY SENSE TO KEEP
BUILDING BUILDINGS IF OUR
HOUSING PROVIDERS ARE HAVING A
REALLY HARD TIME MAINTAINING
THEIR EXISTING BUILDINGS. THAT
IS THE $28 MILLION. IT IS
REFURBISHING, SOME CASES,
REFINANCING BECAUSE THEY ARE
HAVING A HARD TIME AFFORDING
THEIR REPAIRS ET CETERA. BECAUSE
ALSO THE MARKET HAS CHANGED. THE
ISSUE RIGHT NOW IS THAT WE GOT
TO HELP OUT OUR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING PROVIDERS, FOR SOME
REASON OR ANOTHER TENANTS ARE
HAVING A HARD TIME PAYING THEIR
RENT AND THIS WOULD PROVIDE FOR
THAT NEED FOR FUNDS TO BE USED
FOR OTHER NEEDS IN THEIR BROAD
ARRAY OF CAPITAL NEEDS AND ALSO
THE NEEDS OF TENANTS RIGHT NOW
FOR HELP. AGAIN, THERE IS, THIS
IS AN EXAMPLE OF MY ALWAYS, MY
WANTING TO FALL ON THE SIDE OF
DIRECT ASSISTANCE TO THE RENTERS
THEMSELVES OR THROUGH OUR
HOUSING PROVIDERS.
>> THANK YOU, CLERK PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. [ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
.
>> THANK YOU, THE MOTION PASSES.
IT IS ADDED TO COUNCIL BILL
12116. MOVING ON 2B1,
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA YOU ARE MOVED
FOR THE AMENDMENT.
>> I MOVE TO AMEND BILL 12116.
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU. MOVED AND
SECONDED. COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED AND THEN WE
WILL MOVE TO COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
>> THANK YOU, THIS ITEM WOULD
IMPOSE A PROVISO ON THE PROPOSED
BUDGET. AND RESTRICT THAT
SPENDING FOR THE INTENDED
PURPOSE.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. SIMPLE,
CLEAN, BUDGET NEUTRAL PROVISO TO
MAKE SURE S-DOT DELIVERS. AS
NOTED $4.3 MILLION IN S-DOT FOR
POTHOLE REPAIR PROGRAM
IMPLEMENTATIONS. A GOOD
GOVERNORRANCE GOVERNORANCE. WE
SIGNAL ENSURING FIXING OUR ROADS
AND KEEPING THOSE THAT USE THEM
SAFE IS A PRIORITY FOR THIS
COUNCIL. IT IS KEEPING PEOPLE
SAFE IS OUR CHARTER
RESPONSIBILITY AND THEN THE NEXT
WRUNG UP THAT MOST PEOPLE EXPECT
US TO WISELY INVEST THEIR TAX
DOLLAR IN IS MAINTAINING OUR
ROADS AND BRIDGES, THERE IS,
AGAIN, A FEATURE THAT HAS US DO
THAT AND SUPPORTS FIFA WORLD
CUP, PREPAREDNESS, READINESS AND
WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES,
COUNCILMEMBERS KETTLE AND
SOLOMON. FELLOW GOOD GOVERNANCE
CHAMPIONS AND I ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES,
DISCUSSION. QUESTIONS? I WILL
ASK MY QUESTION WHICH IS, I
BELIEVE THIS IS THE FUNDING THAT
IS CURRENTLY ALLOCATED IN THE
POTHOLE SUMMARY LEVEL S THAT
CORRECT?
>> IT IS NOT, BUT BUDGET
PROGRAM. SPECIFIC LINEUP ITEM
WITHIN THE BUDGET ON THE
ACCOUNTING SIDE.
>> THIS IS PRVISOING THE MONEY
SET ASIDE FOR POTHOLES?
>> CORRECT.
>> I DON'T KNOW, I STILL HAVE
QUESTIONS. I WILL ABSTAIN ON
THIS AMENDMENT COLLEAGUES, OTHER
QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, DISCUSSION?
NO FURTHER DISCUSSION I WILL
CALL ON COUNCILMEMBER SAKA FOR
LAST WORD.
>> I BELIEVE IT IS
STRAIGHTFORWARD AND SIMPLE.
MAKING SURE WORLD CUP
PREPAREDNESS AND ENSURING WE ARE
WELL POSITIONED TO DELIVERY ON
THE EVERYDAY BASICS OF
GOVERNMENT I ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
>> WILL THE CLERK CALL THE ROLL.
[ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
>> FIVE IN FAVOR. YES, FIVE IN
FAVOR, TWO OPPOSED. TWO ABSTAIN.
>> THANK YOU, THE MOTION CARRIES
IT IS ADD TO COUNCIL BILL 12116.
MOVING ON. COUNCILMEMBER SAKA
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED AGAIN.
>> I MOVE TO AMEND 12116
PRESENTED ON S-DOT 003-001.
MOVED AND SECONDED.
>> IT WILL PROVISO $250,000 FOR
30% FOR ROX BURY STREET PAVING
>>.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STRAUSS AND
RINK TO PAVE OR $250,000 TO
DESIGN AND REPAVE. ROXBURY. IF
YOU DRENCH THERE IT IS ON THE
CUT LINE BETWEEN THE CITY OF
SEATTLE TO THE NORTH AND WHITE
CENTER TO THE SOUTH. YOU WILL
KNOW THE AREA, THE AREA OF
EQUITY. IT IS A NEED. AND SO,
THE ROAD IS IN DIRE CONDITIONS,
LET'S JUST SAY THAT. THE
COMMUNITY LONG CALLED UPON US
GOVERNMENTS -- APPLICABLE
GOVERNMENTS TO HELP GET US THERE
OVER TIME. AND IT WILL, BECAUSE
IT IS ON THE BOUNDARY LINE OF
UNINCORPORATED KING COUNTY IT
WILL NEED COORDINATION WITH OUR
PARTNERS AND COLLEAGUES AT KING
COUNTY GOVERNMENT. I ALREADY HAD
MULTIIMPRODUCTIVE MULTIPLE
PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS WITH MY
COUNTERPART. IN ANY EVENT THIS
WOULD PROVIDE DESIGN MONEY TO
HELP US BETTER EXPLORE, HOW TO
GET IT DONE. THANK YOU, I ASK
FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
>> COLLEAGUES, DISCUSSION?
QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? I WILL JUST
SAY THAT WE CONSIDERED THIS AS
WELL AS THE ADMIRAL AREA
FUNDING. SOMETHING THAT I SHARED
WITH COUNCILMEMBER SAKA AHEAD OF
THE PACKAGE THAT WE WOULD NOT
ADD GENERAL FUND TO S-DOT'S
BUDGET SEEING THEY HAVE SUCH A
LARGE LEVY. SAKA HAD MANY S-DOT
REQUESTS, PROVIDING GENERAL
FUNDS FOR ADMIRAL. NOT FUND THIS
ONE. I WILL NOTE THAT I AM
CONCERNED WITH THE AMOUNT OF
MONEY THAT WE ARE PROVISOING. I
AM VOTING NO. HERE TO SUPPORT
ALL OF THIS WORK. COUNCILMEMBER
RINK
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I URN STAND
I WAS A CO-SPONSOR ON THE
ORIGINAL AMENDMENT. I WILL NOT
SUPPORT THIS TODAY. CITYWIDE
REPRESENTATIVE ON THIS BODY AT
LARGE I AM KEEPING AN EYE ON
BALANCE, INVESTMENT. I KNOW WE
ARE HERE TO ADVOCATE FOR OUR
CONSTITUENTS AND RESIDENTS AND
COUNCILMEMBERS I UNDERSTAND THE
APPROACH HERE AND THE SENTIMENTS
HERE AND THE PASSION. BUT I GROW
CONCERNED WHETHER WE HAVE SO
MANY PROVISOS IN ONE DISTRICT
AND MOVING TO THE TOP OF THE
S-DOT AND THE INEQUITIES. THERE
IS NOTHING AGAINST THIS PROJECT
BUT RATHER MORE OF OUR WHOLE
APPROACH. AND HOPING THAT WE CAN
TAKE THIS UP NEXT YEAR IN
DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW WE APPROACH
AND TALK TO DEPARTMENTS ABOUT
WORK THAT IS HAPPENING IN EACH
OF OUR DISTRICTS AND RELATES IN
S-DOT IN PARTICULAR HOW THE ROLE
OF THE DISTRICT FUND COMES INTO
EFFECT HERE AS WELL. THANK YOU,
CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER RINK.
FURTHER DISCUSSION, COMMENTS,
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA LAST WORD AND
THEN A VOTE.
>> I THINK THERE ONE IS
STRAIGHTFORWARD, I ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT.
>> THANK YOU, CLERK PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. [ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
.
>> THREE IN FAVOR, SIX OPPOSED.
>> THE MOTION DOES NOT PASS AND
WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT
ITEM. COUNCILMEMBER SAKA YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED TO MOVE YOUR NEXT
ITEM.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, I MOVE
TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL 12116
PRESENTED ON S-.DOT 02A1.
>> YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.
>> THIS ITEM WOULD PROVIDE $1
MILLION FOR S-DOT AND TRAFFIC
IMPROVEMENTS ON ADMIRAL WAY NEAR
THE, EXCUSE ME, ADMIRAL
VIEWPOINT PARK.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA
YOU ARE SPONSOR.
>> I WANT TO THANK MY
CO-SPONSORS, NELSON AND SOLOMON.
WHEN WE HAD SEPARATE ONE-ON-ONE
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS, THIS
PARTICULAR STRETCH OF SOUTHWEST
ADMIRAL WAY AND THE BLIND CURVE
THAT THIS, THAT THIS SWATH OF
GEOGRAPHIC TERRITORY COVER AND
IMPROVE AND MAKE SAFE. YES, I
KNOW EXACTLY THAT AREA AND,
COULD NOT AGREE MORE. AND, SO,
THIS ALLOWS US TO, THIS IS A
PROVISO OF EXITING FUNDS, $1
MILLION FOR FUNDS FOR SOUTHWEST
ADMIRAL WAYS IMPROVEMENTS, THIS
IS ONE OF THE MAIN ROUTES OR
GATEWAYS INTO WEST SEATTLE.
GETTING OFF OF THE WEST SEATTLE
BRIDGE, TAKING ADMIRAL WAY EXIT.
GO UP THAT HILL. AND IT IS LIKE
SHORTLY BEFORE IT STARTS TO
CURVE LEFT. THERE IS A BLIND
CURVE. AND VERY, VERY DANGEROUS.
VERY DANGEROUS. PEOPLE LIVE --
RESIDENTS LIVE ON EITHER SIDE OF
ADMIRAL WAY, ONE EFFORT BUSIEST
CORRIDORS IN THE CITY, CERTAINLY
IN DISTRICT ONE. A LOT OF CROSS
POLLINATION BETWEEN THE TWO.
PEOPLE GOING TO AND FRO ON ONE
SIDE AND THE OTHER. THE
COMMUNITY LONG DEMANDED THAT WE
AS A CITY MAKE APPROPRIATE SAFE
GUARDS AND IMPROVEMENTS TO
IMPROVE THIS PARTICULAR, IT IS
ABOUT THE STRETCH OF ROAD OF
ADMIRAL IT COVERS IS ABOUT 3/4S
OF A MILE. THE COMMUNITY LONG
DEMAND THAT WE ADDRESS SAFETY
AND THE BLIND TURN. CARS GOING
DOWN SUPER FAST. AND, IN FACT
THERE IS, THERE IS A CHANGE.ORG
PETITION FROM A SMALL SET OF
NEIGHBORS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD,
IN A COUPLE SQUARE BLOCKS, 330
PLUS SIGNATURES CALLING ON THE
CITY TO MAKE THIS PARTICULAR
AREA SAFE. THERE WAS A TEMPORARY
CROSS WALK IMPLEMENTED LAST YEAR
OR MIGHT HAVE BEEN TAKEN AWAY
EARLIER THIS YEAR. IN ANY EVENT.
THAT WAS THE DEPARTMENT ONLY HAD
THAT, THAT WAS INTENDED TO BE
TEMPORARY ONLY AND IN CONNECTION
BRIDGE MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR
WORK THAT WAS GOING ON FURTHER
UP ADMIRAL. SO, THIS WOULD
ADDRESS ROAD SAFETY. I WANT TO
THANK THE CHAIR FOR PUTTING IN
-- IT IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO A
WALK ABILITY INVESTMENT THAT WAS
INCLUDED IN THE CHAIR'S PACKAGE
FOR $150,000 PROVISO TO IMPROVE
THE WALKABILITY. IT WAS MODELED
AFTER AND INSPIRED AFTER
COMMUNITY. THAT IS NEARBY. I
STOPT CAREFULLY WANT TO LOOK AT
THE TWO. THEY ARE DIFFERENT, IN
FACT. THIS WOULD GRAB $1
MILLION. TO MAKE THIS AREA SAFE.
THIS IS OVER TWO YEARS FROM NOW.
THERE IS THE QUARRIES AND THE
CONCERNS THAT MY OFFICE RECEIVES
FROM CONSTITUENTS IN DISTRICT
ONE. AND EVERY TIME WE, WE
FOLLOW UP WITH OUR PARTNERS AT
S-DOT AND ASK THEM TO LOOK INTO
IT, WHAT ADDITIONAL CHANGES CAN
BE MADE. AND IN TWO YEARS NOW,
THERE ARE NO CHANGES AND
IMPROVEMENTS ON THIS ROAD.
NONEXISTENT. AND, I THINK WE AS
A CITY NEED TO DO BETTER, TO
MAKE THESE NECESSARY AND
APPROPRIATE CHANGES AND REPAIRS.
I THOUGHT OF EXPLORING A
POTENTIAL COUNCIL DISTRICT FUND
FOR THIS. BUT, I THINK THE
INTENT OF THAT PROGRAM IS FOR
KIND OF NON-ARTIREAL STREETS,
NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL, YOU KNOW,
STOP SIGNS AND CROSSWALKS AND
THINGS LIKE THAT. AND THE
UNDERLYING ISSUES IN THIS
DANGEROUS 3/4S OF A STRETCH OF
SOUTHWEST ADMIRAL WAY ARE BEYOND
THE SCOPE OF WHAT IS POSSIBLE.
AND INTENDED WITH THE OTHER
FUND. I RECOGNIZE COLLEAGUES, AS
CHAIR OF OUR TRANSPORTATION
COMMITTEE. EVERYONE PUTTING IT
FORWARD WAS NOT MADE LIGHTLY. I
RECOGNIZE THE PROBLEM OF
ADDRESSING THE ISSUES CITYWIDE
AND I DON'T, IT IS MY, IT IS MY
VIEW THAT THIS WILL NOT
MATERIALLY IMPACT OUR ABILITY AS
A CITY. AND I HOPE, AND I WANT
YOU ALL TO UNDERSTAND,
COLLEAGUES, I WOULD NOT
INTENTIONALLY, ESPECIALLY MY
DISTRICT COLLEAGUES, I WOULD NOT
PROPOSE THIS IF I KNEW THERE WAS
GOING TO BE SOME SORT OF IMPACT,
MAJOR IMPACT ON AND PARTICULAR
PROJECT IN YOUR DISTRICT. I KNOW
COLLEAGUES THERE IS
APPROXIMATELY, I DID NOT DO THE
MATH AND I AM NOT GOOD AT
NUMBERS AND I BECAME A LAWYER ON
THE PROMISE YOU DID NOT HAVE TO
BE GOOD AT NEIGHBORS. BUT,
BALLPARK THERE IS ROUGHLY $8-10
MILLION IN THE REVISED CHAIR'S
PACKAGE FOR EXISTING FUNDS
SPECIFICALLY FROM S-DOT, ALL
ACROSS THE CITY AND I AM
GRATEFUL I GOT $150,000 OF THAT
FOR THE SEPARATE UNRELATED
ADMIRAL WALKABILITY PROJECT IN
MY DISTRICT. AND I STRONGLY
SUPPORT, EVERY LAST ONE OF THOSE
PROJECTS IN OTHER COUNCIL
DISTRICTS. DESERVE TO BE IN
THERE. THEY ARE ADDRESSING, SOME
CASES THEY ARE ADDRESSING UNDER
LYING SIMILAR CONCERNS IN TERMS
OF SAFETY, POINTING FOR EXAMPLE
FOR SOME OF THE ONES TO
COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON ALONG
RAINIER AS AN EXAMPLE. I
STRONGLY SUPPORT IT. ALMOST
$8-10 MILLION. I AM GRATEFUL FOR
MY $150,000 FOR ADMIRAL
WALKABILITY NEARBY. I ASK FOR
YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS VITAL,
VITAL VERY DANGEROUS STRETCH OF
ROAD. IT IS DANGEROUS FOR
RESIDENTS, FOR VISITORS, AGAIN,
IT IS GATEWAY. ONE OF THE KEY
GATEWAYS TO WEST SEATTLE.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA. I SUPPORT EVERYTHING THAT
YOU SAY. IT WAS GENERAL FUND.
NEW MONEY. AND THAT WAS, I MADE
THAT DECISION IN THE CHAIR'S
PACKAGE BECAUSE I WAS BECOMING
CONCERNED WITH HOW MUCH MONEY WE
WERE PROVISOING. WITH THAT I
WILL VOTE NO ON THIS. SIMPLY
BECAUSE I, OF THE CITYWIDE
PRIORITIES I AM BECOMING NERVOUS
AND I SUPPORT EVERYTHING THAT
YOU ARE ADVOCATING FOR, AGAIN,
IF WE HAD A MAGIC WAND WE WOULD
SAY YES TO IT ALL. COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON.
>> I JUST WANT TO RESPOND TO, I
UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN OF ALL OF
THE PROVISO, WHAT MONEY DOES
THAT LEAVE FOR OTHER THINGS. I
HAVE BEEN SUPPORTING THESE
PROVISOS, THIS IS THE SECOND
YEAR OF A BIANNUAL BUDGET. IN
THEORY IT SHOULD NOT CHANGE.
WHAT WE ARE DOING WITH THESE
PROV, ISO IS MAKING SURE ALL OF
THE PROJECTS GO ON. CONTINUE.
GET, YOU KNOW, GET ACTUALLY
BUILT OR FINISHED. SO, ALTHOUGH
THESE NUMBERS MIGHT SEEM BIG WE
ARE TALKING ABOUT THE CAPITAL
BUDGET HERE. SO, THEREFORE, THAT
PUTTING THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE.
THIS PROJECT, I BELIEVE, A
VISION 0 PROJECT. I THINK IT IS
IN, I DON'T KNOW, I CAN NOT
REMEMBER WHAT SECTION IT WAS IN
I WAS LOOKING IT UP. BUT, THE,
THE TOTAL TRANSPORTATION CIP
BUDGET IS $345.2 MILLION. SO,
WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, CAN
WE MAKE SURE THIS ONE LITTLE
PROJECT ACTUALLY GETS DONE, I
DON'T THINK THAT IS MUCH TO
ASK. I WILL SUPPORT THIS
PROJECT.
>> THANK YOU. FURTHER
DISCUSSION.
>> THANK YOU, I WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. HI THE STAFF
PULL UP THE PROJECT 0 PLAN. AND
THE HIGH NETWORK SCORE AND
RAINIER AVENUE HAS THE HIGHEST .
>> I DO APPRECIATE WHAT
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA IS TRYING TO
DO FOR ADMIRAL WAY BUT I WILL
NOT SUPPORT THIS.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA LAST WORD.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I ASK
FOR YOUR SUPPORT. I THINK IT
LEAVES US FLEXIBILITY AND CHAIR
OF TRANSPORTATION, ALL OF THE
INVESTMENTS, THE PROVISOS THAT
WE APPROVED ON TODAY, ON OTHER
DISTRICTS AND THOSE ON THE HIGH
INJURY AND THOSE THAT ARE NOT, I
STRONGLY SUPPORT THOSE. AND, SO,
I AM SAYING YES AND -- WE NEED
TO BE RESPONSIVE HERE, TOO. AND
I DON'T THINK THIS MATERIALLY
IMPACTS OUR ABILITY AS A CITY TO
DELIVER UPON OUR COMMITMENTS
FROM A CITYWIDE PERSPECTIVE. FOR
THOSE REASONS, COLLEAGUES, I
HUMBLY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> WILL THE CLERK CALL THE ROLL
ON S-DOT 17A1. [ ROLL BEING
CALLED ]
>>> THREE IN FAVOR, SIX OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU, THE MOTION DOES
NOT PASS AND WILL MOVE ON TO THE
NEXT ITEM, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED AGAIN.
>> I SEE THE LIGHT AT THE END OF
THE TUNNEL. I APPRECIATE YOU
COLLEAGUES FOR BEARING WITH ME.
ALL RIGHT, I MOVE TO AMEND
COUNCIL BILL 121116 AS PRESENTED
ON S-DOT-017-A-1.
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO TAKE UP S-DOT
31-A-1.
>> CENTRAL STAFF?
>> DIRECTS $200,000 FROM THE
CROSSING IMPROVEMENTS TO FUND --
[INAUDIBLE]
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I
APPRECIATE -- I WANT TO EXTEND
MY APPRECIATION TO MEMBERS OF
THE COMMUNITY ADVOCACY
ORGANIZATIONS WHO HAVE SUPPORTED
THIS, WHO MY OFFICE WORKED ON
DIRECTLY TO CRAFT THERE OR AFTER
THE FACT HAVE COME OUT AND
SUPPORTED THIS. THERE IS COMMON
SENSE -- THERE IS CONSENSUS,
RATHER, ACROSS THE VIEWS, ACROSS
THE SPECTRUM THAT WE NEED MORE
SCOOTER CORALS. IT CAN HELP, ONE
OF MANY TOOLS TO EMPLOY TO HELP
KEEP PEOPLE SAFE. TO KEEP OUR
STREETS AND RIGHT-OF-WAYS CLEAR,
CLEAN, SAFE, ORGANIZED. ADDRESS
SOME OF THE ASSOCIATED
UNATTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF A LOT
OF SCOOTERS CLUSTERED UP AND
SPECIFICALLY SPECIFIC LOCATIONS,
IT IS NOT THE END ALL BE ALL.
PART OF THE STAKEHOLDERS WE
WORKED ON WITH WERE SOME OF THE
SCOOTER PROVIDER, THE VENDORS,
LYME DIRECTLY FOR EXAMPLE. AND
WHO WERE ASKING FOR THIS. AGAIN,
IT SPANS, CHECK THE IN BOXES, IT
SPANS ACROSS VIEWS AND I THINK
THIS IS A COMMON SENSE THING
THAT WE NEED. THERE IS ANOTHER
SORT OF REVIVAL, IF YOU WILL, OF
SOMETHING I PROPOSED EARLIER AS
A MEANS TO ENCOURAGE S-DOT TO
BUILD THESE OUT. BUILD MORE OF
THESE OUT. IT IS COUNCIL'S
SPECIFIC WISH AND INTENT AND
GOAL THAT WE TRY TO DEPLOY 600
EVER THESE BEFORE WORLD CUP.
RECENTLY THE DEPARTMENT SAID
THEY ARE ABLE TO ONLY DEPLOY
AROUND 200 PLUS OR SO. WHICH I
THINK IT IS A GREAT FIRST START.
AND, HAVE, I WANT THEM AND I
UNDERSTAND THERE ARE MANY
CITYWIDE NEEDS AND PRIORITIES
AND THIS IS ONE OF MANY COMPLEX
WORK STREAMS THEY ARE
UNDERTAKING NEXT YEAR IN GOING
FORWARD AND THEY ARE APPROACHING
THINGS FROM A CITYWIDE VIEW, SO
AM I HERE. THERE IS, CITYWIDE
VIEW HERE WE WOULD ALL BENEFIT
FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE. THEY MAY
CHOOSE, CAPACITY CONSTRAINTS, I
UNDERSTAND THAT. MULTIPLE, THEY
ARE MANAGING MULTIPLE THINGS.
BUT, I WANT TO MAKE SURE TO THE
EXTENT TO MEET THE WISH AND
INTEND IN THE SLIDE THAT WAS
ADOPTED ON A SIMILAR SUBJECT.
TOPIC IN THE REVISED CHAIR'S
PACKAGE, SETTING IT FROM 600F
THE DEPARTMENT IS NOT ABLE TO,
IT IS MY GOAL TO DO WITH MY
POWER TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY CAN
CHOOSE NOT TO DO SO FOR ANY
NUMBER OF VALID REASONS,
UNDERSTANDABLE. RESOURCING
LIMITATIONS OR LACK THEREOF
SHALL NOT BE ONE OF THEM. THAT
IS WHAT THIS DOES. $200,000 FOR
CROSSINGS AND MARK WALKS,
BUDGET. ON TOP OF THE MONEY
THERE IS NO CLEARLY IDENTIFIED
SINGLE SOURCE OF FUND TO DO THIS
WORK TODAY. BUT, HERE IS AN
EXTRA $200,000 TO PRIORITIZE
THIS WORK. SUPPORTED BY
ADVOCATES IN TRANSPORTATION. I
THINK IT IS A COMMON SENSE
THING. HELPS THERE IS A STRONG
WORLD CUP NEXTUS.
>> THANK YOU.
>> DISCUSSION.
>> A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS.
>> I BELIEVE THERE WAS A
PROPOSAL FROM LYME TO BUILD OUT
THE CORALS THEMSELVES AS OPPOSED
TO S-DOT DOING IT? COULD OR
CENTRAL STAFF SPEAK TO THAT?
>> CENTRAL STAFF?
>> COUNCILMEMBER I AM NOT AWARE
OF A LYME PROPOSAL. THERE MAY BE
CONVERSATIONS GOING ON BUT I AM
NOT AWARE OF THEM.
>> GREAT, THANK YOU.
>> ALL RIGHT, COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STRAUSS AND
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, I RECOGNIZE
THE POINTS FOR THE PREVIOUS
VOTES WE HAVE TAKEN. BUT WITH
E-MOBILITY, SCOOTERS, RAPIDLY
CHANGING ENVIRONMENT THAT WE ARE
SEEING. IT IS INTERESTING, WE
ARE HAVING AN EVERINCREASING
RANGE OF STAKEHOLDER THAT
RECOGNIZE THE CHANGING DYNAMICS
AND THE FACT THAT ACTION HAS TO
BE TAKEN. CORALS IS JUST
ONE-PIECE. THERE WILL BE OTHERS.
WITH FIFA COMING UP. IT IS A
CHALLENGE FOR T-MOBILE.
>> CHRISTMAS. AND I BELIEVE WE
NEED TO TAKE THE WORK AND HAVE A
PRESS ON THIS AND ALSO IN
COMMITTEE WORK THE VARIOUS
CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES
THAT EXIST WITH THERE AND REALLY
ENGAGE. LIKE I SAID THERE IS AN
EVERINCREASING RANGE OF
INCREASING IN SHAREHOLDERS. IT
IS UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES IF
YOU WILL, IT IS AN OPPORTUNITY
TO TAKE A FIRST STEP. THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA AND CHAIR
STRAUSS.
>> THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES.
>> I WILL ASK CENTRAL STAFF TO
BRIEF US ON THE LEGISLATIVE
INTENT THAT WE INCLUDED FROM
SAKA IN THE CHAIR'S PACKAGE? WE
BREEZED PASS TODAY IN GROUP A
BUT IT IS A COMPANION TO THIS.
>> YES. IT IS A SLY THAT ASKS
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR HOW
THE DEPARTMENT WOULD IMPLEMENT
MORE CORALS.
>> THANK YOU.
>> AND I BELIEVE THAT IS AN
IMPORTANT QUESTION TO ASK
BECAUSE AS I HAVE ASKED THE
QUESTIONS ABOUT MICROMOBILITY
CORALS, THE QUESTION OF
CRUDE-DELIVERED TIME, THE AMOUNT
OF TIME THAT THE S-DOT CREWS
HAVE TO DELIVER THEM.
>> YOU HAVE MORE ON THAT?
>> JUST A LITTLE, THIS CALLS FOR
A STUDO THIS, A REPORT OUT AND
THEN A PLAN BASED ON THE
FINDINGS OF THE REPORT THAT HAVE
THE KIND OF COMPONENTS WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> I AM IN SUPPORT OF ADDITIONAL
MICROMOBILITY CORALS. I AM
CONCERNED OF THE FUNDING SOURCE.
CAN I RECALL AND THEN I AM GOING
TO ASK WHAT IS THE FUNDING
SOURCE OF THIS AMENDMENT AND
THEN HOW MUCH MONEY IN THE BASE
BUDGET FOR THEM.
>> GO AHEAD. YEAH. I CAN SAY IN
THE QUESTION AND ANSWER RESPONSE
FROM S-DOT. THEY DID PROVIDE AN
ASSESSMENT. $675,000 TO DELIVER
200 MARKED CROSSWALKS BY JUNE
2026. AND ANOTHER 37 CORALS
THROUGH THE PROGRAM. THEY ARE
USING A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT
PROGRAMS TO DELIVER THAT AND IF
YOU CAN GIVE ME A MOMENT I CAN
FIND THE AMOUNT OF MONEY IN THE
CROSSING PROGRAM.
>> SORRY. THE, THE AMOUNT OF
MONEY SET ASIDE FOR CORALS AND
THEN THE FUND FOR THE CROSS WALK
FUNDING
>> THAT IS CORRECT $650,000 IS
THE AMOUNT FOR CORALS. I WILL
FIND OUT WHAT IS IN CROSS WALKS.
>> DON'T WORRY. WE HAVE
$600,000 THAT IS IN THE BASE.
>> $675,000.
>> THIS AMENDMENT IS LOOKING TO
INCREASE IT BY ANOTHER $200,000
IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> THE FUNDING SOURCE IS THE
CROSSWALK FUNDS?
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
SUPPORTIVE OF MORE CORALS, NOT
SUPPORTIVE OF THE FUNDING
SOURCE. I AM GOING TO MAKE A BAD
JOKE, EVERYONE ON MY TEAM IS
HOLDING THEIR BREATH RIGHT NOW.
HOW DID THE SIDEWALK CROSS THE
ROAD WITH THE CROSSWALK? THAT IS
PART OF WHY I DO NOT WANT TO
SUPPORT THE FUNDING SOURCE. BUT,
AGAIN, I INCLUDED YOUR STATEMENT
BECAUSE YOU ARE ASKING THE
ABSOLUTE QUESTIONS AND I WANT TO
HELP YOU MOVE THIS WORK FORWARD.
>> COLLEAGUES, FURTHER
QUESTIONS? I SEE COUNCILMEMBER
RINK.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I WANT TO
HONE IN ON THE SOURCE OF FUNDING
AND THAT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT,
WHERE HAS THIS PROJECT BEEN
IDENTIFIED AND WHERE IS IT
LOCATED?
>> PROGRAM IN THE CIP. IT DOES
CROSSING IMPROVEMENTS ACROSS THE
CITY. THERE MAY BE A PROGRAM
LEVEL OF PROJECTS THAT IS
IDENTIFIED. YOU WILL NOT FIND
THAT. IF YOU NEED TO KNOW THAT
NUMBER, I CAN FIND IT FOR YOU.
NO NEED, I JUST WANTED IT TO THE
RECORD TO UNDERSTAND WHAT KIND
OF PROJECT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT
HERE AND I WILL SAY, I AM A
SUPPORTER OF MICROABILITY AND
FINDING PLACES TO STOW AWAY AND
CORAL SCOOTERS TO GET THEM OFF
OF THE SIDEWALK. I AM STRUGGLING
WITH, AGAIN, WHY THE CITY IS
PAYING TO HELP SUPPORT A PRIVATE
FOR-PROFIT COMPANY. IN TRYING TO
DO THIS WORK AND WOULD LIKE TO
SAY I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A
CONVERSATION WITH THE COMPANIES
ABOUT THEIR ROLE AND SUPPORTING
MANAGEMENT OF OUR RIGHT-OF-WAY.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RINK? FURTHER DISCUSSION.
FURTHER DISCUSSION, COMMENTS,
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED.
>> I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE
COMMENTS SO FAR. YOU RAISED
GREAT COMMENTS AND
SELF-REFLECTIONS. I THINK -- I
THINK YOUR QUESTION RINK, I
DON'T WANT TO INFER INTENT BUT
I THINK COUNCILMEMBER RINCK, I
KNOW THEY HAD MANY PRODUCTIVE
CONVERSATIONS AND THAT IS THE
BEST WAY. AS OPPOSED TO
LEGISLATION AND BUDGET. THERE
ARE CONVERSATIONS THAT WILL
CONTINUE. BUT, IN SIMILAR, ALONG
A SIMILAR VAIN WITH SOLOMON'S
EARLIER QUARRY. MY UNDERSTANDING
IS THAT THE PROVIDER, THE VENDOR
DID OFFER TO DO THIS WORK
THEMSELVES AND MY UNDERSTANDING
IS THERE ARE REAL LEGAL
OPERATIONAL CHALLENGES
ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
POTENTIALLY LABOR ONES. AND, SO,
THEY INDICATED A WILLING
INNOCENCE TO DO THAT IF THE CITY
CAN DO IT. MY UNDERSTANDING IS
THAT IT CAN'T. SO, I AM ONLY
HERE TO MAKE SURE WE AS A CITY
ARE ABLE TO -- OUR BEST POSITION
TO DO THIS VITAL WORK ESPECIALLY
AHEAD OF WORLD CUP. THE GOAL OF
THIS PROPOSED INVESTMENT OUR
CITY CAN CHOOSE NOT TO BUILD
THEM OUT AND DEPLOY THEM, AS
MANY AS WE WANT, 600 FOR WORLD
CUP FOR ANY NUMBER OF VALID
REASONS, LACK OF FUNDING SHOULD
NOT BE ONE OF THEM. THANK YOU, I
ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL.
[ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
>> THREE IN FAVOR, FOUR OPPOSED,
TWO ABSTAIN.
>> THANK YOU, THE MOTION DOES
NOT PASS. COUNCILMEMBER SAKA YOU
ARE RECOGNIZED FOR THE NEXT
AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. LET ME
GET TO MY NOTES. I MOVE TO AMEND
COUNCIL BILL 12116 PRESENTED ON
SPR-0127-A-1.
>> SECOND.
>> MOVED AND SECONDED CENTRAL
STAFF?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. THE TITLE
IS MISLEADING. THE GOAL IS TO
PROVIDE $1.1 MILLION FOR
FREESTANDING REST ROOMS AND A
STUDY OF THOSE FOR DISTRICT 1.
THE FUNDING HERE, WE IDENTIFIED
UNUSED FUND BALANCE. $500,000 OF
PARKS LEVY FUND AND AFTER THE
BALANCE, WE WERE AWARE OF IT
BEFORE. LIMITED USES AND HAD NOT
APPLIED TO OTHER ASKS.
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA IS ASKING FOR
THAT AND THE PROVISO TO GET YOU
TO THE TOTAL. THE GOAL IS
PROVIDE FUNDING FOR INSULATION
OF FREESTANDING PRE-FABRICATED
REST ROOMS, ONE OR MORE
LOCATIONS IN DISTRICT 1. JUST IN
THE CONTEXT OF THE CONVERSATION
YOU HAVE BEEN HAVING ABOUT
PROVISOS OVERALL. THE
OPPORTUNITY COST IS THAT THE
PROVISO AND THE FUNDING ARE
THINGS THAT CAN BE USED FOR
MAJOR MAINTENANCE ELSEWHERE THE
CITY. WE ATTACHED TO THIS
PROPOSAL. I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN
PULL UP A LIST OF THE PROJECTS
THAT ARE OTHERWISE FUNDED. HERE
WE GO. THANK YOU. GLAD WE HAVE
THIS. THESE ARE THE THINGS
FUNDED FROM THAT. IN THAT MAJOR
MAINTENANCE CATEGORY THAT
PROJECT THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT
FOR THE PROVISO. AN EXAMPLE. IT
ADDS $500,000 OF NEW MONEY AND
IMPOSES A PROVISO ON 1.1.
$600,000 OF EXISTING FUNDING FOR
IT AND THE LIKE FROM THE PARKING
DEPARTMENT.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA.
>> THANK YOU, I WANT TO THANK MY
CO-SPONSORS OF THIS PROPOSAL,
COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON AND
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH.
MORE SPECIFICALLY, PARKS
COMMITTEE, HOLLINGSWORTH. I
THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT. IT IS
IMPORTANT BECAUSE I WORKED
CLOSELY WITH THE CHAIR TO
DEVELOP THIS PACKAGE, THIS
PROPOSAL. IT DOES HAVE CITYWIDE
IMPACTS, WE STRUCTURE TODAY IN
SUCH A MANNER IT IS FORBIDDABLE.
1.1 IS THE GRAND TOTAL. AS THE
BUDGET TITLE ALLUDES TO $500,000
WILL BE PULLED FROM THE KING
COUNTY PARKS LEVY FUND, LEAVING
$600,000 THAT COMES FROM PARKS,
$27 PLUS MILLION PARKS MAJOR
MAINTENANCE BUCKET. AND AS WE
LEARNED AT LEAST TWO OF THESE
GRAFFITI, TAMPER WITH-RESISTANT
TYPE, ONE EXAMPLE WILL BE PLACED
AT SPECIFIC, AT LEAST ONE
SPECIFIC LOCATION WITHIN
DISTRICT 1. AND THIS IS COMPLEX
BUT IT IS REMARKABLY
STRAIGHTFORWARD AT THE SAME
TIME. $100,000 OF THAT WILL GO
TOWARDS A STUDY TO FIGURE OUT
HOW WE AS A CITY CAN BETTER MAKE
APPROPRIATE UPGRADES POTENTIALLY
ALONG A SIMILAR VAIN OR NOT.
MORE APPROPRIATE UPGRADES FROM A
CITYWIDE PERSPECTIVE. AND, SO, I
FAILED TO KIND OF ACKNOWLEDGE
THE HISTORY HERE THAT NO DOUBT
EVERYONE IS AWARE OF. MEMBERS OF
THE PUBLIC TRACKING ALONG.
EARLIER WE LEARNED ABOUT A AUDIT
THAT RELATED TO THE
OVERALL-STATE OF OUR PARK'S
REST ROOMS, I THINK THE
DEPARTMENT CONCURRED WITH MOST
OF THE FINDINGS. DID NOT DISPUTE
THEM. I THINK THERE IS A SHARED
COLLECTIVE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT
WE NEED TO DO BETTER WITH
RESPECT TO THE CLEANLINESS AND
MAINTENANCE OF OUR PARK'S REST
ROOMS. AND, AS PART OF THAT
CONVERSATION, PARKS REVEALED A
TOP 20 LIST, A BOTTOM 20 LIST IS
MORE APPROPRIATE OF PARKS THAT
IMPOSE THE GREATEST, THAT ARE
WORST OFF IN TERMS OF PERSONNEL
HOURS TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM,
GRAFFITI AND VANDALISM THAT
OCCURS. AND DESPITE ONLY
CONSTITUTING 1/7 OF THE
POPULATION IN DISTRICT 1, WE
WERE OVERLY REPRESENTED ON THE
WORST LIST. 40%. OF THE CITY'S
PARKS IN THE WORST STATE. THE
REST ROOMS IN THE CITY'S PARKS
IN THE WORST STATE, DISTRICT
ONE. AND THOSE INCLUDED THREE
PARKS THAT I CALLED OUT HERE AS
A POTENTIAL FOR SOME OF THESE
PORTLAND TYPE UPGRADES TO HARDEN
THE PARKS REST ROOMS, MAKE THEM
MORE TAMPER RESISTANT AND MORE
GRAFFITIY RESISTANT LIKE THE
PORTLAND. THESE INCLUDED LINCOLN
PARK. EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THE
TREASURER OF PARKS THAT EACH OF
THESE LOCATIONS REPRESENTS IN
THE CITY OF SEATTLE. THOSE
LOCATIONS WERE CHOSEN NOT ONLY
BECAUSE THEY WERE ON THAT BOTTOM
20 LIST BUT ALSO BECAUSE THEY
ARE, THEY HAVE A HIGH NUMBER OF
VISITORS FROM OUTSIDE OF THE
CITY OF SEATTLE WHO COME AND
THEY ARE TOURISTS AND VISIT THE
PARKS. WHEN THEY SEE THESE
HORRIBLE REST ROOMS AND POOR
STATE OF CONDITION THAT IS THE
FIRST IMPRESSION OF THE CITY OF
SEATTLE THAT THEY HAVE. AND, SO,
THIS IS REALLY JUST A, A
REFLECTION IN RESPONSE TO A
SCATHING AUDIT. I PRESSURE CRATE
CHAIR HOLLINGSWORTH ON THIS
BECAUSE WE HAD TOUGH
CONVERSATIONS. YOU SAW A MOMENT
AGO, SHE TOOK UP SOME PRINCIPAL
POSITIONS ON -- I DON'T WANT TO
SPEAK FOR HER, SHE TOOK
PRINCIPAL POSITIONS AGAINST
OTHER PROPOSALS I HAD FOR MY
DISTRICT BUT I THINK THIS IS
DIFFERENT BECAUSE THE GRAVITY
OF, AND SEVERITY OF THE
UNDERLINING PROBLEM AT ISSUE IN
THE OPPORTUNITY WE HAVE AS A
CITY TO DO BETTER. AND PLUS THE
STUDY THAT WOULD FIND A PATH TO
INVEST IN OTHER SIMILAR UPGRADES
ACROSS THE CITY. RECOGNIZING
THAT DISTRICT WORN RIGHT NOW IS
IN MOST IN NEED AS IT RELATES TO
ADDRESSING THIS AUDIT.
>> 1 RIGHT NOW IS IN MOST IN
NEED AS IT RELATES TO ADDRESSING
THERE AUDIT.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA. COLLEAGUES ANY QUESTIONS?
>> COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
>> THANK YOU. I WILL DIRECT IT
TO THE TABLE. I AM GUESSING SAKA
WILL ANSWER SOME OF THIS IN HIS
CLOSING STATEMENT. I AM CONFUSED
ABOUT IF THERE WAS AN AUDIT
DONE. I KNOW YOU SAID THE AUDIT
THAT 40% OF, HIGH USAGE PARKS,
THE THREE PARKS IN WEST SEATTLE.
SO, WHAT WERE WE TALKING ABOUT
THE $100,000 FOR A STUDY IF WE
HAVE DONE AN AUDIT. I WANT TO
GET CLARIFICATION THERE.
>> I BELIEVE THE STUDY IS ABOUT
THE SPECIFIC PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY
IF YOU WILL. THE PORTLAND LU AS
THE SOLUTION AS OPPOSED TO OTHER
KINDS OF PUBLIC REST ROOMS.
>> BACK UP.
>> OKAY. AT THE COMMITTEE TABLE.
WELCOME TRACY. IT IS 3:55.
>> THE STUDY IS TO LOOK AT THE
MODELS, PORTLAND LOO.
>> THAT COULD BE DEPLOYED AT
THESE THROW PARKS AND LOOKING AT
THE VANDALISM RESISTANT EFFORTS
TO IMPROVE THE BATHROOMS IN HIS
DISTRICT BUT CITYWIDE.
>> THANK YOU. IT IS FAIR TO SAY
-- I JUST DON'T WANT TO PILE ON
SAKA. NOT JUST FOR D1. IT IS
LIKE WE HAVE, YES, WE HAVE THESE
THREE PARKS HE HIGHLIGHTED BUT,
THE $100,000 FOR A STUDY IS NOT
-- THEY ARE HIGH USAGE PARKS, I
UNDERSTAND THAT. I AM GUESSING
WHAT YOU ARE SAYING THE STUDY,
OTHER AREAS WOULD BE STUDIED AS
WELL?
>> THE $100,000 FOR THE STUDY
THAT CAN BE APPLICABLE CITYWIDE
BUT THE BULK OF THE MONEY IS D1
REST ROOMS TO BE CLEAR.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES,
FURTHER QUESTIONS, HOLLINGSWORTH
AND THEN I HAVE A COUPLE
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I
APPRECIATE YOU CALLING ON ME. I
DID NOT REALIZE I RAISED MY
HAND. I APOLOGIZE. I DO WANT TO
SAY THIS. I DO SUPPORT. I WENT
BACK AND FORTH WITH
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA FOR LONG
PERIODS OF TIME. . I STAND
PRINCIPAL IN TERMS OF THE
PROVISO. I CAME TO YES ON THIS.
AND I WILL VOTE YES ON THIS. WE
DID HAVE AN AUDIT DONE AND WE
DEDICATED A WHOLE COMMITTEE TO
THE REST ROOMS. IT WAS VERY
APPARENT THAT IN DISTRICT 1 WAS
IMPACTED BY NOT HAVING ENOUGH
ACCESS TO REST ROOMS WHEN WE
WERE LOOKING AT PARKS TO TURF IN
THE CITY, WE SETTLED ON LOWER
WOODLAND BECAUSE OF MULTIPLE
TEAMS THAT USE THAT FIELD
THROUGHOUT THE CITY. AND, SO,
JUST LOOKING AT IT THROUGH A█N
EQUITY LENS I WAS WALKING MYSELF
THROUGH ALL OF THE YESSES AND
NOS THROUGH PARKS DEPARTMENT AND
I SETTLED ON YES ON THIS BECAUSE
IT WAS SUBSTANTIALLY. YOU CAN
SEE THE IMPACTS OF THE AMOUNT OF
REST ROOMS THEY DID NOT HAVE
ACCESS THROUGH, AND WHAT WAS
GOING TO SET UP NEW REST ROOMS,
WE SAW WITH THE AUDIT WE COULD
NOT TAKE CARE OF THE ONES WE HAD
IN THE CITY ASK KEEP IT SAFE AND
CLEAN AND THE AMOUNT OF
VANDALISM THAT HAS BEEN
HAPPENING IN DIFFERENT REST
ROOMS. I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT
FOR THE RECORD AND GIVE
COLLEAGUE BACKGROUND. I WILL
SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT, THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR AND THANK
YOU COUNCILMEMBER S AKA FOR
HIGHLIGHTING THIS IMPORTANT
ISSUE AND THE AUDIT. I SEEM TO
RECALL AND TRACY I DON'T KNOW
IF YOU CAN REMEMBER OFF OF THE
TOP OF YOUR HEAD. I SEEM TO
RECALL THE AUDIT SHOWED VARIOUS
NEIGHBORHOODS. I FEEL LIKE EVEN
IN THE D4 IT SHOWED ISSUES WITH
THE REST ROOMS BUT I CAN NOT
REMEMBER OFF OF THE TOP OF MY
HEAD AND I WILL NOT HOLD YOU TO
REMEMBER. BUT I WILL SAY THAT I
I WILL SAY MY CONSTITUENTS IN
THE U HAD EVER DISTRICT HAVE
BEEN ASKING FOR A BATHROOM FOR A
VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY LONG
TIME. AND NOT IN A SUBTLE WAY.
AND I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO FIND
FUNDING TO HELP THEM WITH A
BATHROOM THERE BECAUSE EVER THE
ONGOING COSTS. SO, THAT HAS BEEN
VERY CHALLENGING. WE HAVE ALSO
HAD ISSUES WITH REST ROOMS IN
THE PARKS LIKE DOLL FIELD, A LOT
OF KIDS USE BECAUSE IT IS A
BASEBALL FIELD. AND THAT, THERE
WAS NO REST ROOM USE THERE AND
THEN CONSTITUENTS IN THAT
NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE BEEN VERY
VOCAL AND ASKING FOR HELP. AND I
JUST HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO
IDENTIFY FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO
DO THESE THINGS AND I KNOW
COUNCIL, I MEAN, PARKS CHAIR HOL
HOLLINGSWORTH HAVE HAD
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT ALL THINGS
FIELD AND PARK BATHROOMS. IT IS
SOMETHING THAT THE CITY IS
GRAPPLING WITH IN VARIOUS PARTS
OF THE CITY. AND I WILL SAY IN
TERMS OF THE PORTLAND LOO AND
TRACY YOU WILL REMEMBER AND
DIRECTOR NOBLE, WE HAVE ALL BEEN
HERE LONG ENOUGH TO REMEMBER THE
BATHROOMS AT PIONEER SQUARE AND
I THINK WE HAD THREE. OF THE $1
MILLION BATHROOMS WE HAD TO
SHUTDOWN BECAUSE THERE WERE
VARIOUS ISSUES NOT THE LEAST OF
WHICH WERE DRUG USE AND OTHER
ACTIVITY IN THOSE BATHROOMS.
THIS IS A CHALLENGING ISSUE
BECAUSE OF THIS I CAN NOT
SUPPORT THIS PARTICULAR AD FOR
JUST ONE DISTRICT. YOU KNOW, IT
WOULD BE A DISRESPECT TO MY
CONSTITUENTS THAT ARE ALSO
DESPERATE TO HAVE A REST ROOM
THERE AND I WILL SAY IN THE
U-DISTRICT IN PARTICULAR BECAUSE
THERE ARE A LOT OF FOLKS RIDING
THE LIGHT RAIL UP TO THE U
DISTRICT STATION, WE HAVE A LOT
OF UNHOUSED NEIGHBORS UP THERE
AND THERE IS NOWHERE FOR THEM TO
USE A REST ROOM. THE BUSINESSES
HAVE HAD TO ABSORB A LOT OF
THAT. THAT IS WHY WE ARE HEARING
A LOT FROM THE BUSINESSES. IF
YOU ARE HEARING BUSINESSES, I AM
HERE, I AM LISTENING. I SUPPORT.
WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO
MANAGE THIS. AND I AM HOPING
THAT PERHAPS WITH THE FUTURE
PARKS LEVY I DON'T KNOW IT
COULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY WHICH I
KNOW WE WILL HAVE COMING UP, AN
OPPORTUNITY TO AT LEAST FIX SOME
OF THE ONES THAT ARE IN THE
PARKS, ET CETERA. I DON'T KNOW,
THAT IS MY HOPE WE ARE ABLE TO
HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AS PART
OF THAT. ANY WAY, ALL OF THAT TO
SAY I AM, YOU KNOW,
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, THANK YOU, I
HEAR YOU, I FEEL YOUR PAIN, AND
I WON'T BE ABLE TO SUPPORT YOUR
PARTICULAR AD. I WILL, I WANT TO
PARTNER WITH YOU TO FIGURE OUT
HOW WE CAN TAKE CARE OF THE
SITUATION ACROSS THE CITY ON
BEHALF OF OUR CONSTITUENTS THAT
NEED THIS.
>> THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES,
QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? I WILL ASK
MY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, THIS
STUDY WILL BUILD A PORTLAND LOO?
CORRECT?
>> NO GUARANTEE. OUR EXPERIENCE
WITH THE PORTLAND LOO. YOU WOULD
REMEMBER THIS ONE WAS IN
BALLARD. THAT ONE COST OVER $1
MILLION. DEPENDS ON THE
LOCATION, HOW CLOSE IT IS TO THE
SEWER LINES, ELECTRICITY. IT CAN
BE THAT MUCH OR IT CAN BE LESS.
WE DID ONE AT RAINIER BEACH THAT
WAS $500. IT WAS CLOSE TO
ELECTRICAL AND SEWER. THE COST
DEPENDS ON LOCATION THAT IS WHAT
I CAN TELL YOU ABOUT PORTLAND
LOO.
>> ONLY BECAUSE YOU BROUGHT IT
UP I WILL GIVE THE DEEP HISTORY,
NEIGHBORS WERE MAD, THEY THOUGHT
PEOPLE WOULD USE IT THEY DID NOT
WANT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY
DID NOT MUST THE REST ROOM IN
THERE TO BE FOUND OUT IF YOU
HAVE A WATER FEATURE YOU HAVE TO
HAVE A REST ROOM. WE HAD TO COME
BACK AND PUT THAT REST ROOM IN.
AND, SO, IT IS BETTER TO PUT ONE
IN AT THE OUT SET OF A PARK THAN
DO IT LATER. I WILL JUST SAY
THAT, THAT IS WHY I HAVE THE
CONCERN OF ARE WE USING
MAINTENANCE MONEY TO FUND NEW
CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT WILL NEED
MAINTENANCE? I CAN TELL YOU THAT
THE PORTLAND LOO AT THE BALLARD
COMMONS PARK, EVEN THOUGH IT IS
DESCRIBED HERE GRAFFITI AND
VANDALISM RESISTANT, RESISTANT
IS NOT PROOF. WE NEED MORE
FUNDING TO DEAL WITH THIS. I AM
CONCERNED ABOUT THE FUNDING
SOURCE, AGAIN. AND UNDERSTANDING
THAT WE NEED TO MAKE GOOD ON
THAT REST ROOM AUDIT. OUR PARKS
REST ROOMS ARE IN BAD CONDITION.
THE ONES FAILING IN PLACE TO BE
REPLACED BY THE PARK DISTRICT
NEED TO BE REPLACED TO FREE UP
THAT MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT
NANCE MONEY FOR OTHER PLACES.
>> TRACY?
>> I NEED TO GET ON THE RECORD.
THE MAINTENANCE ON THE BATHROOMS
HAPPENED DURING A TIME THERE WAS
A HIRING FREEZE AND PARKS COULD
NOT HIRE PEOPLE. SO, THEY WERE A
BIT LAMSTRUNG IN THAT ONE YEAR
-- HAM STRUNG FROM DOING THE
MAINTENANCE THEY WERE TO DO.
JUST TO BE CLEAR THAT.
>> FANTASTIC. COLLEAGUES, OTHER
QUESTIONS, COMMENTS?
>> LAST WORD AND THEN THREE MORE
AMENDMENTS.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU. I WANT TO THANK
YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP
AND JUST REALLY YOUR PATIENCE
AND GRACE WITH ME. I KNOW YOU
ARE NAVIGATING ALL OF THE
COMPLEX CONSTITUENT ISSUES IN
YOUR DISTRICT, WORKING ON BUDGET
INVESTMENTS TO HELP FROM A
CITYWIDE PERSPECTIVE. AND, ALSO,
YOUR DISTRICT AND I KNOW, ALSO
KNOW YOU CARE DEEPLY ABOUT US AS
A CITY REMEDIATING SOME OF THE
TROUBLING FINDINGS FROM THE
AUDIT. I DO APPRECIATE YOUR
PARTNERSHIP IN CRAFTING THIS. I
THINK IT IS A PROPOSAL THAT
ADDRESSES THE ACUTE NEED IN
DISTRICT ONE. AND THAT HAPPENS
SOMETIMES, COLLEAGUES. SOMETIMES
DISTRICT ONE NEEDS RESOURCES IN
ONE PROBLEM AREA A LITTLE MORE
THAN OTHERS RELATIVE TO OTHERS,
AND ANOTHER ISSUE, ANOTHER
DISTRICT AND THAT, AND THAT IS
WHY OUR DISTRICT SYSTEM AND OUR
CITYWIDE SYSTEM IS GREAT. I
WOULD STRONGLY SUPPORT AND
SACRIFICE IF NEEDED TO ADDRESS
PROBLEMS IN YOUR DISTRICT
ESPECIALLY IF WE ARE TALKING
ABOUT AN AREA THAT IS THE WINDOW
PAYNE TO THE CITY OF SEATTLE FOR
MANY. AGAIN, THESE LOCATIONS,
THESE THREE LOCATIONS DISTRICT
COLLEAGUES, YOUR CONSTITUENTS GO
THERE, TOO. BUT IMPORTANTLY, A
LOT OF PEOPLE FROM OUTSIDE OF
THE CITY OF SEATTLE VISIT THESE
AREAS, A LOT OF EYEBALLS ON
THEM. SO, IT HELPS US ADDRESS
CRITICAL NEED, IT HELPS US BE
RESPONSIVE IN PART AMONG OTHER
SOLUTIONS THAT WE ARE
IMPLEMENTING. I WANT TO THANK
THE CHAIR FOR LEADERSHIP BECAUSE
THIS IS ONE OF MANY POTENTIAL
THINGS. AND, AGAIN, A STRONG
CITYWIDE ANGLE. WITH THE
ADDITIONAL UPGRADES, CALLING
OUT, I THINK, THE TECHNICAL TERM
THAT WE LANDED ON, INSULATION OF
QUOTE UNQUOTE FREESTANDING, IT
USES PORTLAND LOO AND THROWN.
SOME EXAMPLES OF THE VENDORS
RECOGNIZING, OF COURSE, EACH ONE
OF THOSE OR BOTH OR ALL ARE
IMPERFECT OF THEMSELVES THE GOAL
-- THEY ARE CERTAINLY MORE
RESISTANT AND I THINK THE GOAL
IS TO REDUCE, GET DOWN SOME OF
THAT STAFF TIME NEEDED TO
CONSTANTLY MAINTAIN, CONSTANTLY
UPGRADE, CONSTANTLY CLEAN AND
THIS IS PART OF A BROADER
SOLUTION. FOR THOSE REASONS,
COLLEAGUES, I ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT
>> THANK YOU.
>> WILL THE CLERK CALL THE ROLL.
[ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
>> SIX IN FAVOR, THREE OPPOSED.
>> THE MOTION PASSES IT WILL BE
INCLUDED. WE ARE MOVING ON TO
THE LAST ITEMS, 4:08. I AM GOING
TO ASK TO MOVE QUICKLY BECAUSE
THEY ARE WALK ON. WE HAVE 2A,
S-DOT 51 AND OED19.
COUNCILMEMBER PRESIDENT NELSON
YOU ARE ASKED TO MOVE YOUR
AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I MOVE
S-DOT 051A.
>> SECOND.
>> I AM SORRY COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I BELIEVE WE ARE ON LA2A.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, TRY AGAIN.
>> OKAY, JUST A MOMENT PLEASE.
>> I MOVE COUNCIL BILL LA2A IS
THERE A SECOND
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED TO ADDRESS
CBALA-2 A
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. CENTRAL
STAFF. IT IS A PROVISO ON
TWOYIN,000 FOR THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FOR DRUG A
VERSION WORK. THIS IS -- THAT
YOU HEARD AROUND THE CARE TEAM,
THE INTENT HERE IT IS TO
PRESERVE FUNDING VIA PROVISO FOR
SOME OF OF THE WORK BEING DONE
NOW IN THE MUNICIPAL COURT. THIS
WOULD BE FUNDS THAT SUPPORTS ONE
CITY PROSECUTOR AND A LEGAL
ASSISTANT IN THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFERS. FUNDS
OFFICE. IT WAS VIA GENERAL FUND
IN THE JAIL SERVICES FUND THAT
WAS INTENDED FOR THE SCORE JAIL
CONTRACT BUT WAS NOT USED FOR
THAT PURPOSE. SO, THIS PROVISO
WOULD APPROPRIATE THAT FOR DRUG
A VERSION PROGRAM ACTIVITIES AND
NO OTHER PURPOSE. THE COUNCIL
INTENT SIGNALED WITH THIS IS
THAT THE DRUG A VERSION PROGRAM
FOR THE SEATTLE DRUG RESOURCE
CENTER TO COMPLETE DRUG TEST AND
REFERRAL TO SERVICES WHERE
APPLICABLE AND STAY OUT OF DRUG
AREA ORDER AND PARTICIPANTS
AGREEMENT NOT TO VIOLATE
CRIMINAL LAW FOR A 60 DAY
PERIOD. THESE ELEMENTS ARE DRAWN
FROM THE CURRENT DRUG
PROSECUTION ALTERNATIVE. IT WAS
ESTABLISHED EARLIER THERE YEAR.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED TO SPEAK TO
YOUR AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THERE IS
A FAIRLY NEW PROJECT THAT HAS --
BUT THE NEED WAS IDENTIFIED A
COUPLE YEARS AGO WHEN IN JUNE OF
2023 I BELIEVE. IT IS CLEAR THAT
THE DRUG COURT AT THE COUNTY
LEVEL DOES WORK. IT DOES PROVIDE
AN ALTERNATIVE TO INCARCERATION
IF PEOPLE SEEK TREATMENT. THAT
IS EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE. THAT IS
WHY WE DON'T HAVE A MUNICIPAL
DRUG COURT. THIS IS A PROJECT
THAT IS DESIGNED TO PROVIDE THE
FOLLOWING, DEFENDANTS ARRESTED
FOR DRUG USE TO BE PRESENTED
WITH A LAWYER AND HAND OFF TO
THE MUNICIPAL RESOURCE CENTER
AND COMMIT NO NEW LAW VIOLATIONS
TO HAVE THEIR DRUG CASES
DISMISSED. AGAIN, THERE ACTS
LIKE THE COUNTY DRUG COURT BUT
IT IS A SMALLER SCALE AND
PRESERVE THE FUNDING FOR THE
PERSONNEL THAT ARE CURRENTLY
WORKING IN DRUG COURT. AND, SO,
AGAIN, THIS IS, IT IS AN
ALTERNATIVE TO INCARCERATION AND
IT GETS AT ONE OF OUR MOST
UNTRACTABLE PROBLEMS RIGHT NOW
IN THE CITY OF SEATTLE THAT IS
DEALING WITH OUR FENTANYL CRISIS
AND SOME OF THE PUBLIC DISORDER
THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH DRUG USE
AND ADDICTION. THAT IS WHY I,
ALTHOUGH IT IS A NEW PROJECT AND
A NEW EFFORT, IT IS SOMETHING
THAT THE CITY HAS FOR A COUPLE
YEARS RECOGNIZED AS NEEDED TO
ADDRESS NOT JUST THE OPIOID
CRISIS AND DRUG DRIESIS IN
FINANCIAL BUT TO HELP PEOPLE
AVOID JAIL -- CRISIS BUT TO HELP
PEOPLE AVOID JAIL AND GET
BETTER.
>> ONE COMMENT PERIOD AND THEN
COUNCIL PRESIDENT AT THE END.
>> COLLEAGUES, COMMENTS,
QUESTIONS, DISCUSSION?
>> I WILL BE ABSTAINING FROM
THIS AMENDMENT SIMILAR TO THE
REASONS ON THE UNIFIED CARE TEAM
AMENDMENT. FURTHER DISCUSSION,
COUNCIL PRESIDENT, LAST WORD.
>> SIMPLY THAT WITHOUT THIS
SMALL PIECE OF THE PUZZLE THAT
THE PATHWAY TO RECOVERY THAT I
BELIEVE THAT WE ALL SHARE IS A
COMMON GOOD THAT WE WANT TO
ENCOURAGE OUR CONSTITUENTS TO
ENTER UPON AND ALSO THE
OFF-STATED GOAL OF KEEPING
PEOPLE OUT OF JAIL. THIS IS A
VERY IMPORTANT PIECE OF THAT
PUZZLE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
CONSIDERING IT.
>> THANK YOU, WILL THE CLERK
CALL THE ROLL. [ ROLL BEING
CALLED ]
>> SEVEN IN FAVOR, TWO ABSTAIN.
>> THANK YOU, MOTION PASSES AND
IT WILL BE ATTACHED TO COUNCIL
BILE 1211 6. MOVING ON. COUNCIL
PRESIDENT YOU ARE RECOGNIZED AND
MOVE YOUR AMENDMENT.
>> I MOVE 19-0A1 DO I HAVE THE
RIGHT ONE?
>> NO.
>> I MOVE IT. I AM SORRY.
>> I MOVE IT IS THERE A SECOND
MOVED AND SECONDED.
>> COUNCILMEMBERS THIS ITEM WILL
ABOUT A 4.1 MILLION IN S-DOT FOR
GRAFFITI ABATEMENT AND CLEANING
SERVICES, THIS WAS INCLUDED IN
THE MAYOR'S BUDGET FOR THE
DOWNTOWN ACTIVATION TEAM
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED TO ADDRESS YOUR
AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, I AM
SEEKING TO MAINTAIN PROGRAMS
THAT SEEM TO BE WORKING.
DOWNTOWN ACTIVATION TEAM IS THE
DEPARTMENTAL GROUP THAT DOES
THIS WORK. THE BIGGEST PIECE OF
WORK IT DOES IS THE STREET
CLEANING THAT IS WITH OUR MAJOR
CORRIDORS DOWNTOWN. WE WANT TO
KEEP OUR DOWNTOWN CLEAN AND
WELCOMING FOR BOTH VISITORS AND
LOCALS ALIKE. AND THIS WOULD
PRESERVE ONE ASPECT OF THAT. I
DID HAVE A PIECE OF LEGISLATION
THAT WOULD HAVE ALSO, A $6
MILLION PROVISO THAT PRESERVES
THE FUND THAT COMES FROM SPU AND
PARKS AND SPD THAT MAKE THE
PROGRAM SUCCESSFUL BUT I HAVE
HEARD FROM BOTH DOWNTOWN
BUSINESSES AND RESIDENTS OF THE
DOWNTOWN COMMUNITY COUNCIL THAT
IT HAS BEEN TREMENDOUS BENEFIT
TO DOWNTOWN OVER THE PAST YEAR
OR SO. YEAR AND A HALF OR SO.
SO, THIS IS SIMPLY TO MAINTAIN
THE S-DOT PORTION OF THAT WORK.
>> THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES,
DISCUSSION?
>> QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? I AM
GOING TO ABSTAIN FOR THE SAME
REASON I ABSTAINED ON THE LAST
ONE. WILL THE CLERK CALL THE
ROLL. [ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
>> SEVEN IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED,
ONE ABSTAIN.
>> THANK YOU, THE MOTION PASSES
AND S-DOT 51A IS ATTACHED TO
COUNCIL BILL 12116. COUNCIL
PRESIDENT I WILL HELP YOU OUT
HERE. FOR THE VIEWING PUBLIC. WE
ARE IN THE WALK ON AMENDMENT
SECTION, THAT IS WHY THESE ARE
NOT ON THE AGENDA. I WILL MOVE
OED-19. IS THERE A SECOND
>> SECOND
>> MOVED AND SECONDED AND
COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF WOULD YOU
LIKE TO BRIEF THE AMENDMENT,
PLEASE.
>> OED-19A, ACTION TO PROVIDE A
PROVISO FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
TO CONTINUE THE LIBERTY PROJECT.
IT IS A PARTNERSHIP WITH THE
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON AND
TABLE 100 TO SUPPORT SMALL
BUSINESSES, PRIMARILY
BLACK-OWNED BUSINESSES FOR
STRATEGY, MARKETING AND OTHER
HELP. THE PROJECT IS CURRENTLY
FUNDED AT $500,000 ONGOING AND
THE 2026 BUDGET. THAT IS IT.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED TO ADDRESS
YOUR AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE
LIBERTY PROJECT IS NAMED AFTER
LIBERTY BANK. BUT THAT IS, AS
MENTION TODAY IS A PARTNERSHIP.
SOME OF YOU MIGHT HAVE BEEN TO
THE GALA, AND HEARD THE
TESTIMONIAL FROM THIS THE SMALL
BUSINESSES THAT HAVE BEEN HELPED
BY THIS PROJECT. AGAIN, IT IS A
PARTNERSHIP THAT PROVIDES DIRECT
SERVICES TO SMALL BUSINESSES
PRIMARILY BLACK SMALL BUSINESSES
TO ACCESS CAPITAL TO MAKE
IMPROVEMENTS IN THEIR MANAGEMENT
CAPACITY AND ALSO TO POSITION
THEMSELVES FOR OBTAINING
CONTRACTS WITH THE CITY AND
OTHER JURISDICTIONS. AND, SO, I
AM USUALLY, THIS WOULD BE
$500,000 NEXT YEAR. BUT IT WAS
SUPPOSED TO BE $250,000. I AM
WILL LET CENTRAL STAFF EXPLAIN
THE DIFFERENCE. OUR SMALL
BUSINESSES HAVE BEEN THROUGH A
LOT COMING OUT OF PANDEMIC AND
SEEKING TO SURVIVE. THIS IS A
PROJECT THAT BRINGS A LOT OF
EXPERTS TOGETHER TO PROVIDE FREE
SERVICES. I AM JUST ASKING THAT
WE MAINTAIN ITS FUNDING.
>> THANK YOU, SO LATE IN THE DAY
I FORGET TO WELCOME THE CENTRAL
STAFF TO BRIEF THE ITEM.
>> I DID.
>> IT WAS A LONG DAY.
>> I CAN ELABORATE.
>> YES. PLEASE, THANK YOU.
>> SO, THERE IS A BIT OF
CONFUSION BECAUSE IN THE 2025
THIS YEAR THE AMOUNT WAS REDUCED
BY $250,000 BECAUSE THERE WAS
$250,000 FROM 2024 TO THEN MAKE
IT $500,000 FOR 2025. BUT, THERE
IS AN ONGOING EXPENDITURE AT
$500,000 CURRENTLY. SO, THE
PROVISO IS, I BELIEVE, THE
INTENTION IS FOR IT TO RETAIN
AND ENSURE THAT THE ONGOING
SPENDING IS SPENT IN 2026. SO,
BECAUSE OF THAT, THE PROVISOR IS
SET AT $500,000.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANYTHING
FURTHER OR YOU HAVE LAST WORD, I
WILL COME BACK TO YOU.
COLLEAGUES, QUESTIONS, COMMENTS,
DISCUSSION? KNOW THAT I HAVE FOR
YOU JASMINE. THIS IS IN A
BUDGET, THIS WORK IS DESCRIBED
IN THIS WAY IN A BUDGET IN OED
CURRENTLY, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> SO THERE PROVISO IS TO SIMPLY
ENSURE IT KEEPS GOING AFTER
JANUARY 1st?.
>> I BELIEVE THAT IS THE
SPONSOR'S INTENTION.
>> WE DID NOT RECEIVE THIS UNTIL
THIS MORNING, ALL OTHERS WERE
PROVIDED BEFORE 5:00 P.M.
YESTERDAY. I AM GOING TO EITHER
ABSTAIN OR VOTE NO BECAUSE I
HAVE MORE QUESTIONS, NOT -- I
ONLY FEEL COMFORTABLE DOING THAT
HEARING JASMINE'S STATEMENT
THAT THESE ARE ALREADY INTENDED
FUNDING PROJECTS OF THIS BUDGET.
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
>> I KNOW IT WAS WALKED ON AT
11:00 THIS MORNING, I AM WITH
YOU MR. CHAIR. I DON'T KNOW
WHEN WE WILL HAVE ANOTHER
OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS ONGOING
$500K A YEAR. OBVIOUSLY IT MAKES
SENSE. I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH
INFORMATION. I THINK IN THE
WHOLE TIME I HAVE BEEN ON
COUNCIL I NEVER ABSTAINED EVER,
I THINK THE CLERK CAN BACK ME ON
THAT. IF THERE IS SOMETHING MORE
THAT YOU CAN SHARE. MY CONFUSION
IS THIS. I UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU
SAID ABOUT THE $250 AND THEN
BRING IT UP FOR 2026 FOR
$500,000. SO DOES THAT MEAN
EVERY -- WE ARE ASKING FOR
$500,000 EVERY .
>> SO, IN THE, IN 2023, I
BELIEVE, WE, THE COUNCIL ADOPTED
THE BUDGET FOR $500,000 ONGOING
FOR THE LIBERTY PROJECT. IN THIS
YEAR, BECAUSE THERE WAS UNDER
SPENT FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR
THEY CUT $250,000 FOR IT. THEY
STILL SPENT $500,000 IN 2025. I
BELIEVE THAT IS WHERE THE
$250,000 VERSUS $500,000 LAY.
THE PROJECT IS SLATED TO BE
FUNDED AT $500,000 ONGOING,
INCLUDING NEXT YEAR, ALREADY. I
BELIEVE THE INTENTION WITH THIS
PROVISO IS TO PROVIDE INSURANCE
THAT THE $500,000 WILL BE SPENT
FOR THE LIBERTY PROJECT AS IT IS
DESCRIBED IN THE BUDGET.
>> AND I DON'T REMEMBER FROM
2023. IT WAS A BLUR BUT WE DID,
THE INTENT IN 2023 WAS HERE IS
$500,000 K FOR EACH YEAR FOR ALL
OF THESE BUSINESSES AND THAT WAS
OUR INTENT. OKAY, AND I KNOW
WHAT HAPPENS FOR BUDGET. LOOKING
FOR UNDERSPENT .
>> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU COLLEAGUES, FURTHER
DISCUSSION? COUNCIL PRESIDENT,
LAST WORD.
>> I JUST HAVE TO SAY I HEAR YOU
WHETHER YOU MENTIONED THAT THIS
IS A VERY LATE WALK ON. I HAVE
TO SAY I RECOGNIZE THAT. I WAS
MOVED WHEN I SAW MAYOR HARRELL
ADDRESS THE CITY FAMILY
YESTERDAY. AND THINKING THIS
WAS, THIS WAS, HIS BRAINCHILD IN
COOPERATION WITH TAPER 100. AND
I JUST, AND, SINCE 2023, I HEARD
FROM SMALL BUSINESSES HOW VITAL
THIS PROGRAM IS TO HELPING SMALL
BUSINESSES WHO DON'T HAVE A LOT
OF OTHER RESOURCES TO JUST GET
OFF OF THE GROUND. SO, IT WAS AN
EMOTIONAL MOVE ON MY PART TO PUT
IT FORWARD LATE IN THE GAME.
BECAUSE I, AND I WAS MOVED BY
THINKING I JUST REALLY WANT TO
MAKE SURE IT CAN WORK FOR MAYOR
HARRELL. I RECOGNIZE IT IS LAST
MINUTE. THANK YOU FOR
UNDERSTANDING.
>> THANK YOU. THE WILL CLERK
CALL THE ROLE ON OED-19. [ ROLL
BEING CALLED ]
>> EIGHT IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED
AND ONE ABSTAIN.
>> THE MOTION PASSES. COUNCIL
BILL 12116 IS A MENDED TO
REFLECT OED-19. COLLEAGUES T IS
4:26 P.M. WE JUST WENT THROUGH A
LOT OF VOTING TODAY. I WOULD
LIKE TO GET US OUT OF HERE IN
THE NEXT THREE MINUTES. SO, I AM
GOING TO REQUEST THAT YOU REVIEW
THE POWER POINT PRESENTATION
REGARDING THE BILLS WE WILL VOTE
ON MONDAY. WITH YOURSELF, WITH
YOUR STAFF, ASK CENTRAL STAFF
FOR CLARIFICATION. IF YOU HAVE
ANY. ON MONDAY WE WILL MEET AT
9:30 A.M. WE DO NOT HAVE VERBAL
PUBLIC COMMENT. ONLY WRITTEN
PUBLIC COMMENT. WE WILL MOVE
DIRECTLY INTO THE MEETING AND AT
THAT TIME I WILL ASK THE GROUP
IF WE NEED TO GO THROUGH THE
POWER POINT THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO
BE PRESENTED TODAY BEFORE WE
BEGIN VOTING OR FOLKS ARE MORE
COMFORTABLE MOVING INTO VOTING.
IT IS A MATTER OF COMFORT YOU
MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE. IT IS JUST
ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF TIME WE WANT
TO CONTINUE SITTING AT THE DAIS.
THOSE ARE THE FACTORS AND WITH
THAT, WE WILL HAVE A NUMBER OF
BUDGET, PIECES OF BUDGET
LEGISLATION ON MONDAY. THE BILL
THAT WE JUST AMENDED WILL NOT BE
BACK BEFORE THE COMMITTEE UNTIL
NEXT THURSDAY. THE TIME BETWEEN
HERE AND THERE IS TO ENSURE THAT
ANY ERRORS ARE CORRECTED AND
ANY, THE T'S ARE CROSSED, THE
I'S ARE DOTTED. WE WILL NOT
TAKE AMENDMENTS TO THIS COUNCIL
BILL TO THIS BUDGET NEXT
THURSDAY. SO, WE CAN NOT, WE ARE
NOT CHANGING FUNDING LEVELS. WE
ARE NOT CHANGING ANYTHING
SUBSTANCIVE. SUBSTANCES. THERE
ARE NO WALK ONS.
>> OH, GOOD
>> IF WE DID MAKE THE CHANGES
NEXT THURSDAY WE WOULD HAVE TO
WAIT ANOTHER WEEK TO PASS THE
BILL AND THAT WOULD MEAN WE COME
IN ON THE FRIDAY AFTER
THANKSGIVING. EVERYONE LOVES
THAT IDEA. WITH THAT DIRECTOR
NOBLE YOU HAVE A COUPLE MORE
STATEMENTS.
>> JUST WANT TO LET THE
COUNCILMEMBERS KNOW, CENTRAL
STAFF HAS NOT IDENTIFIED ANY
ISSUES. THE LAST TIME YOU HEARD
ABOUT IT, MORE THAN A MONTH AGO
WHEN CENTRAL STAFF PRESENTED
THEIR OVERVIEW OF DEPARTMENTS AS
PART OF THAT WE LOOKED AT ALL OF
THE LEGISLATION, THERE ARE A
COUPLE OF PIECES THAT FACILITATE
SOME OF YOUR AMENDMENTS, AGAIN,
NO ISSUES AND NO CONCERNS THERE,
ALL CONSISTENT WITH THE ACTIONS
YOU HAVE TAKEN TODAY AND
PREVIOUS REVIEW. AGAIN, HAPPY TO
ANSWER QUESTIONS INCLUDING OVER
THE WEEKEND WE ARE REACHABLE
ELECTRICALLY.
>> THANK YOU.
>> AND SO, COLLEAGUES AT THIS
TIME, IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION I
WILL POSTPONE 121126 UNTIL
THURSDAY. NOVEMBER 20th.
>> I REALLY WANTED TO SEE BEN'S
POWER POINT. I GUESS I WILL HAVE
TO WAIT.
>> YES, MA'AM. HEARING NO
OBJECTION T IS POSTPONED UNTIL
NOVEMBER 20th. ANY OTHER GOOD OF
THE ORDER? SEEING NONE, I THANK
YOU ALL FOR YOUR ATTENTION, WE
HAVE BEEN HERE SINCE 1 1/2 HOURS
BEFORE THE SUNRISE AND SUNSET.
WE REACHED THE END OF TODAY'S
AGENDA. SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE
MEETING WILL MEET ON NOVEMBER
17th AT 9:30. VERBAL PUBLIC
COMMENT NOT ACCEPTED AT THAT
PUBLIC MEETING, FOLKS CAN
CONTINUE TO SUBMIT WRITTEN
QUESTIONS. ANY FURTHER