-Hello, I'm your host, Brian Callanan.
The Seattle City Council has just approved a new
$8.9 billion budget.
Some higher taxes are coming your way,
but there are also some new concerns about cuts
to federal programs that could impact the city's
most vulnerable people.
We're talking with Councilmember Dan Strauss,
the council's budget committee chair,
and Councilmember Debora Juarez
from District 5 in North Seattle
to discuss these issues and the questions you're sending in too.
That's next on "City Inside Out: Council Edition."
-We, as the city,
are using our municipality's strength and power
to fight against the idiotic choices made
by the federal government.
-No one is saying you have a constitutional right
to have a grocery store three blocks away,
but you should at least have the right where
the business doesn't decide who gets food and who doesn't.
-All that and more coming up next
on "City Inside Out: Council Edition."
♪♪
And here we are with Councilmember Debora Juarez,
representing District 5 in North Seattle.
Good to have you on the show again.
-Good to be back for DJD5.
-All right. I love it. I love it.
Councilmember Dan Strauss is with us too.
He's Seattle's District 6 representative
in northwest Seattle
from Magnolia down to Green Lake.
Good to have you here, too.
D6 Dan Strauss ready to be here.
-There we go. Okay. We got we got the lines down.
That's good.
Councilmember Strauss, I want to start with you
and point out that you also serve as the council's
budget committee chair.
And while I know that every budget process is a challenge,
this year seemed particularly tricky,
if you will, you've got a federal government
that's been making some cuts that affect Seattle.
You have persistent inflation,
slow job growth in our region over the past year.
How would you describe the economic health
of the city right now.
And how did the council's newly approved budget
of $8.9 billion respond to that?
-I'll start with this is the first year in over a decade
that we had a unanimous vote in favor of passing the budget.
-Okay.
-And so with all of the crises
that have been occurring over the last number of years,
we'll talk about the structural budget deficit at some point.
This year has been a point of inflection
where last year, you know,
we laid off staff for the first time,
then that was absolutely the hardest decision
I've made in office so far.
Um, you know, we'll get into all of this,
but this is all been moving towards this inflection point
with making our budget structurally sound.
In this last year,
as you noted,
we have had manufactured crisis from the federal government.
This year alone,
we had volatility rates in the stock market,
and in our broader economy
that were higher than the volatility rates
during the pandemic.
-Right. -Right.
-And so there have been--
-Those forecasts were changing month to month--
-Month to month.
And so we took on bigger challenges this year,
I'd say, than we have over the last few years.
And we came out successful
because we worked together to solve the city's problems.
-Okay. All right. Thank you.
-We'll dig in more. -We definitely will.
-We've got a lot to impact.
-I appreciate that 10,000-foot view, though.
Councilmember Juarez,
what's your assessment of this year's budget?
Did the council get it right? What do you think?
-I think we did.
And first, let's talk about what Councilmember Strauss said.
Our wonderful budget chair, first of all,
great leadership, transparency. We knew where we were at.
The budget was passed,
-as you said, 8.9 million-- -Billion.
-Billion. I'm sorry.
But I think the big thing is the $350 million investment
in affordable housing targeted at building needs,
affordable rental housing. And there's more there.
But I can go through.
But we don't need to go through each one.
But I think when we were strategic in looking at
what are the what are our needs of our city,
the homelessness, public safety,
all of those infrastructure issues,
and also knowing
that another bigger budget is coming in the fall.
I want to thank the chair
because he's looking at what's the long game here.
What do we what do we backfill now with what
the feds are taking away?
How do we close that gap and what is the next year look like?
The Trump administration, just for some background here,
is not supportive of the Housing First model
that King County and Seattle's
homelessness response is really based on.
Housing First means people have put in housing first,
then treated for medical issues,
substance abuse disorders or behavioral health issues.
The feds are pushing for treatment first
and also adding work requirements for people
who receive government housing as well.
Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner
put it this way a few weeks ago.
So the city council put aside $11.8 million in this budget
for new shelters, emergency housing.
Then you got 12.5 million in rental assistance
and tenant services, plus a reserve of $9 million
for potential future cuts to homeless services here.
I want to talk about what's happening
at the federal level here.
And is that investment that the city is making,
is it going to be enough to deal with what's coming?
-What do you think? -Probably not.
And let me -- let me -- We talked a little bit about this.
I know the chair and I have talked about this as well,
and the reserve of 20 million
to talk about what federal cuts and how do you backfill that?
I want to -- I know this is really important.
I know it gets a little bit wonky,
but I think it's really important for people to see
that the crisis of homelessness didn't just start
when Mayor Murray said it in 2015.
-This started in 1987--
-When he declared an emergency on homelessness.
-That was HUD, continuum of care,
and then in 2004 is when HUD said,
"Okay, housing first, rapid rehousing," so that's '04.
So that's what we deal with Congress.
Then we had the '15.
We had our mayor say what he said.
Now the two things that hurt us and that are race based
and just plain cruel is when in January of 2025,
this president came after the transgender community
under his gender identity executive order,
and then he did the what they're calling the anti-homeless order
that he did in July 2025.
And so then what happened is the federal regulations came out.
People saw where we were headed with this.
Everyone went, "Oh, my God, you can't do this.
You can't take away this money," because this legislation,
Congress passed this law in '87
to protect people who were vulnerable for homelessness.
And what happened with this administration
in January and July is they targeted three groups.
They targeted the transgender community, the LGBTQ community.
They targeted immigrant and migrant workers.
And they targeted anything that had to do with DEI.
And what they did is they've taken their hate-fueled
ideology, infused it in a law that was passed in '87.
In fact, that is the overstepping of that.
Congress passed the law. Congress has the purse strings.
It isn't the executive who gets to change those conditions.
And like you said, with rapid rehousing and housing first,
for some reason they really hate that.
And they want to impose, like you said, preconditions.
You got to be sober, you have to have a job.
And they want to reward cities that have bans on camping.
-So you get more points. -Yeah.
-I cannot think of anything more cruel.
And the reason why I know all this,
not because I'm the smartest woman in the room,
is because our great AG Nick Brown,
filed a lawsuit with 19 other states and two governors.
Um, 55 page brief.
But when you read it,
it really is crystal clear what's happening here.
This isn't just hair on fire, clutch our pearls.
You're doing something bad, Mr. Trump.
This is flat-out hatred, cruelty that's been codified
that we have to -- that we have to fight against now.
-Let's talk about that.
Councilmember Strauss, that 9 million put in reserve.
I know that was very important to you
in this budget process here.
Tell us about adding that money and give us a reality check,
if you can, about where you think our region's
homelessness response is going next year.
-Yeah, we've put money aside. It's not enough.
It's not going to solve the problem.
And I think that we might be the only level of government
at this time that has put money aside to be ready
to combat the federal government taking away its money.
I haven't checked King County's budget.
-The state hasn't updated their budget-- -I see.
-Since the last time around. -Right.
-And this was an example.
Or I guess this is an example of how we, as the city,
are using our municipality's strength and power
to fight against the idiotic choices made
by the federal government
that can be hurtful
and damaging to so many people in our community.
So let's just look at this last year.
In the middle of our --
when the council had our budget process,
was when the SNAP benefits stopped.
-Yeah, food stamps, etc.
-The mayor executive -- issued an executive order saying
that we would spend $1 million a week, essentially.
And so from the time that that was issued,
we could have spent $8 million
between the first week of November and Christmas.
We put -- Rather than using the emergency reserves,
we set $4 million aside.
And luckily that's about what we spent.
But when we passed the budget a year ago,
the chairs package came out after the election,
and so we did not foresee these manufactured
crises on our horizon.
So we did not put money to the side.
That was a very important lesson learned,
so that we have been more nimble and ready in this budget.
We have money set aside, yes, for the COC, it's not enough.
-Continuum of care. -Continuum of care.
-We have a Federal Reserve just on its own
that we added another million dollars,
I believe another $2 million to at this point.
Another change is happening next week
as we are allocating the money for the food crisis.
So all of these things, we are continuing to make sure
that our city is in as strong of a position as we can be,
because we don't know what the next problem is going to be,
and we need to be ready to fight it.
-Yeah, yeah. Thank you for that. -Let me just add one thing.
I think what we can -- what we do know from this administration
is the targeting and from Project 2025,
the hate-filled ideology that's coming out of the executive
and executive orders and legislation,
and then coming down to the states
and going back to continuum of care,
It isn't just Washington state.
There's 19 other states in line and two governors from a program.
But I guess my point is this is just an example
continuum of care
of all the other hateful stuff that we're dealing with.
So we are going to find ourselves
in a defensive posture,
quite frankly, for the next probably three years.
-More broadly, you know,
we could go through the budget line by line
to say all of the different things.
But we made $4 million ongoing additional funding
for Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs.
That's really critical, so that they know
that they can provide additional services
throughout the community.
And they don't have to worry about coming back and asking --
asking for more money.
There's these emergency reserves all across -- the food funding
that we've increased last year and this year.
All of these are programs that are set up to make sure
that Seattleites are able to stay healthy and safe,
no matter what's going on at the federal government.
-Got it. And I'm not trying to defend
the Trump administration at all.
But when you hear the HUD secretary saying this
is never ending government dependency,
how do you respond to that?
-Well... -The COC funds?
-Essentially, when we're talking about homelessness funding. Yes.
That's what -- That's what the secretary
is talking about there.
-Yeah.
-Well, I might ask Councilmember Juarez to jump in,
but when I asked my dad, you know,
what was homelessness like in the '70s or in the '60s?
He shared with me that, you know,
especially right after Vietnam,
there were a lot of Vietnam vets.
-Sure.
-But folks who are homeless were people
who had really severe mental illness
and had -- had a reason that they didn't want,
or maybe that they -- they were not ill enough
that they didn't get into an institution,
but that they were not part of society enough
that they wanted to be on their own.
-Okay.
-And it stuck out to me
because it's totally different than it is today.
And that's because we had more HUD funding.
The mental health institutions needed immense
and radical change,
but to just close them overnight
and then to close the secondary nonprofits?
-Yeah.
-What we're seeing today
is a product from the early 1980s
of under funding the basic four walls,
a roof and a door that somebody can lock for themselves.
-Got it.
-By creating generations of this instability,
we find ourselves where we are today.
-Thank you.
-So reducing the funding
that keeps people inside rather than on the streets
is just going to make this a generational problem even worse.
-Government is supposed to be the safety net, right?
From Roosevelt days.
I mean, that's what we created, a safety net, income tax.
Because when you live in a civilized society
and you enjoy a library, and a sidewalk, and all these things,
that's that's the point of democracy in a civic society,
government is supposed to be providing those things.
And also, who gets to decide who gets more stuff?
Congress and the states decide with our delegation
and our democracy and our representative government.
So that is the point of government.
We are always going to have those
that are going to not have things.
And that is our job of the -- of the people,
for the people, by the people.
What we have institutionalized, what we codify,
what we look to in our United States Constitution.
That is our job.
So when people say, "Oh, they're leaning on government too much."
No, no, it's never too much. It's never too little.
It really is conventional wisdom of the time
-and what the needs are. -Okay. Thank you.
I want to make sure that I talk about some new
and changing taxes, if I could,
within the budget here,
the city has added a 0.1% sales tax, which the state authorized.
That will go towards public safety needs.
Then there's Seattle Shield,
approved by voters to change our business and occupation
tax system so larger businesses pay more, smaller businesses,
about 90% of businesses in Seattle will pay less
or no taxes at all in some cases.
So together,
these two tax schemes will bring in about $120 million.
But I have a couple questions I want to make sure I ask.
How will adding to the sales tax impact
the average Seattle resident?
And will taxing big businesses
aggressively somehow push jobs out of Seattle?
Can you help me with that?
-Yeah, sales tax is the most regressive tool that we have.
And it's the least -- it's the least --
I like it the least.
You know, I would even venture to say I dislike
sales tax increases because I do.
It's not, as I said,
it's the most regressive form of taxation.
And what was most frustrating
is that the Association of Washington Cities,
all of our 281 cities and towns in this state,
asked the state legislature for additional tools
to combat the fact that we have been limited
on our property tax income less than inflation, right.
So in the pandemic,
we saw -- we saw inflation up in the five, six,
I think at one point briefly for 7% inflation.
Yet cities are only able to increase
their property tax by 1% overall.
That's not 1% per person.
That's 1% amongst the entire body of taxpayers.
Over 30 years of maybe not quite 30 years,
but over this long period of time
where we are holding cities
to being able to increase their revenue less
than the expenditures that they are being forced to pay,
we're stuck.
All cities across the state are stuck right now.
And for the legislature to not provide us relief in the ways
that we were asking,
but to provide us this rate of the public safety sales tax,
we had to take it.
We had to use it because we're out of options.
And I'm really frustrated with the state government right now.
-Can you talk about that B&O tax? -Sure.
-And that I think a few people are saying,
"Hey, you raise these taxes on these big businesses,
you're going to push businesses, push employees out."
-I think that, you know,
one of the best parts of that restructuring of our B&O tax
is that 90% of our city's businesses
will be paying fewer B&O taxes.
And when you look at so many of our,
I call them owner operator, not small businesses,
but they're owner-operator businesses
where the owner is actually operating the business.
Those businesses are are what make up
-the unique fabric of our city. -Okay.
And they're also on razor-thin margins.
-Okay.
-And so as we continue to try to support them,
it is incredibly important that we do all that we can.
And by restructuring this B&O tax,
yes, the city comes up with a little bit more money.
But if that was our North Star goal,
we would have increased the rate a lot more than we did.
-Right.
-But the goal here really was to right size this tax for small
and big businesses.
And in the moment that we passed it,
we also needed to begin to shield ourselves
from this federal government walking away
from their funding commitments.
Because if we didn't have these this additional $120 million,
we would not have been able to address the federal funding cuts
as well as we did.
-Can you touch on that idea,
though, of you're pushing away jobs from Seattle?
I'm sure you've heard that critique
when it comes to Amazon.
Some of these bigger businesses
that are going to be paying more when it comes to a B&O tax,
how do you respond to that?
-I've also heard anecdotally
that their employees like to work in Seattle
-more than they do in-- -Okay.
But, you know, I think every -- every person is different,
every place that they are in their life.
If you live over on the East Side,
you probably want to go to work in Bellevue.
If you live here in the city, you probably want to go here.
-Okay.
-But you know, beyond all,
yes, maybe some businesses, maybe some jobs,
go over to Bellevue.
There's other proposals at the state government
right now to make Jumpstart county wide.
-A statewide thing? -Statewide.
And that balances the playing field.
But at the end of the day,
you know, we're -- there's no where else other than Seattle
that has Pike Place Market,
that has the waterfront,
that has the ferries to Bainbridge into Kitsap.
Um, it's a place
that you can get to catch a concert after work.
Uh, that has the Seattle Center,
that has Fifth Ave Arts and all of our arts.
And Seattle is a very unique place.
You can't make that back up in Bellevue.
I'd say that we've got a strategic advantage here.
-Okay.
-But what's also interesting,
and I know this is not what you asked me about.
-Light rail. -Okay.
-Crossing the lake. -Sure. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
-Not only maybe balances or imbalances this playing field,
but it also starts opening up our housing region wide.
So I've been on your show before talking about
how it only costs an average of $500 to move in Chicago
and an average of 2,000 here in the city.
-Yeah. -Seattle.
That's mostly because of transit.
Taxes do affect business. That's our tax base.
And so what you have to balance is
how much do you tax business knowing that they may leave.
And a lot did. Let's just be honest.
And, um, what the community and what the city needs.
And so in our discussions with -- with big business,
and quite frankly Amazon back in the day before Jumpstart,
after Jumpstart, and then of course with the B&O
is that we still have to balance that.
And what we were trying to say is look,
And I remember when I was on Sound Transit,
that was the joke, is that the rail --
light rail goes both ways.
Is that, yes,
we will lose some businesses and we have to be honest about that.
But the bigger picture is this is the first time
since the Gilded Age
that we have seen such a glaring inequity in wealth.
How do you get to be a trillionaire
and still have people sleeping under the bridge?
That's not -- That's not what this country was built on.
So I know, Dan, you know, zeroed in on more specifics.
But my big thing, and this is something
everyone will struggle with
because we know is the economics, the tax base.
Who do you tax?
But you have to balance that with what are
the essential governmental functions
that we have to provide to our citizens?
-Thank you.
I want to move to the structural budget piece
that I know we touched on earlier.
Councilmember Strauss,
the council was able to balance the budget for next year,
but the city already knows it's going to face
a $140 million deficit in 2027.
Robin, one of our viewers had this question.
How do you respond to that?
-Addressing the structural budget deficit
is a multi-year plan, first and foremost.
-I think you mentioned a few weeks ago, you can't --
At 12 years, you can't fix it in 1 year, things of this nature.
-Yeah, and I mean, this is what I said last year too,
is last year really,
we were starting to set the course for the plan
to address the structural budget deficit
that would take many years to do so.
You're right. You saw me quoted maybe a couple of weeks ago.
-A couple of times, yeah.
-That it would be dangerous.
It would actually be bad for our city to address
the structural budget deficit in one year.
-Okay.
-It took over a decade to create.
And I say that because we need to monitor
how well we're doing in each area
and how the economic environment is, right?
Because if we suddenly get a construction boom --
So back high level.
we got into a structural budget deficit
because we had high construction, low inflation.
-Right.
-Which meant that we had one time dollars every year
for over 10 years that people relied on as an ongoing source,
even though it was one-time funding only.
Plus low inflation meant services and costs
did not drive very high.
We are currently in a low construction,
high inflation environment.
which is the opposite.
And so what we thought would happen a year ago from today
is that we would have started the slow growth.
What we saw was the federal inconsistencies
created volatility.
That slow growth only really started happening
-a couple of months ago. -The tariffs.
-Tariffs.
-Tariffs, I mean, the April tariff scandal
is what I will call it of that volatility rate
was higher than the volatility rate in the pandemic.
And so all of this to say
as our economy starts growing we'll have to monitor that.
The things in our budget
that we need to stop doing within the general fund.
We need to stop doing that.
Not to be so awkward,
because I know that the general fund is a funder
-of the Seattle Channel. -Yeah, sure.
-But that was why-- -And many other things.
-And many other things,
but that was the question that we raised last year.
Rather than cutting the funding for the Seattle Channel,
let's look at what is a multiyear plan
to reestablish a better funding source
so that you're not relying on the people
that you're interviewing for the funding to keep this great,
say it with me now, award-winning Seattle Channel.
-I appreciate you saying that.
I said that with Councilmember Juarez here
because she was the first one to say it out on the dais,
-and we all just mimic her. -I kind of had to.
-Well, but are we heading towards a place
where some -- some cuts need to happen, I think people,
I mean, is that what we're talking about next year?
-Well, I think --
So there are going to be like again, restructuring every year.
-And we get forecasts. -And we get forecasts.
-Quarterly forecasts for national, regional
-right down to interest rates. -Sure.
What's -- what's it looking at like in our rainy-day fund?
What is it looking like with the market
where the city has invested, you know, pensions and funds?
So, and you're right.
And I think Councilmember Strauss said that
and you said it as well, you can't fix something
that's been building for 10 or 11 years.
But you do follow the trends like other cities.
-All cities do. -Okay.
-I -- One more. -Yeah.
I guess just when I'm looking at my levers.
-Yeah.
-We have to look at what are the revenue forecasts
that are happening every, you know, once a quarter.
-Yes.
-We have to look at what programs are we funding
that we may not be needing to fund any longer?
-Okay.
-We need to look at the fund, the programs that are emergent
that we now need to fund,
that we may not have needed to in the past.
And then we have to look at what are programs
that are currently general fund -- funded.
And should they be funded by a discrete and specific source?
-Okay. -Mm-hmm.
-And so we did that this year with the environmental
learning stewards from the Parks Department.
And we put them now
as youth education through the Preschool Promise Levy.
-Got it. -Right?
-And so, you know, I know that that's one of the conversations
that's going on for Seattle Channel is
where should your dedicated source of funding be?
As we find those dedicated sources of funding,
it reduces the pressure on our general fund.
-Okay.
-And it makes that structural budget deficit decrease.
-Thank you.
-Well, I think you also had to ask,
and this is part of Councilmember Strauss's
leadership is when you work with different council members
on what when the budget comes down,
you know, what is a one-time funding operational
and then also what is brick and mortar long term?
Does this nonprofit have the capacity to do what they did,
and have they done it when they've given money before?
And just monitoring that,
and I don't think the -- I think the public thinks that,
you know, I know we've heard the saying many times,
you know, the -- the budget is a moral document.
And I say, "Yes, that's true,
but there's only X amount of money."
-Mm-hmm. -Right?
And so, and as you say, we're going to have this deficit.
And we're always in a --
in a posture where we're trying to make up that deficit.
And now we have the --
the back wall of this administration taking,
in a cruel way,
the most core services
that government is supposed to provide.
-Yeah.
I need to ask you a question briefly here,
and we'll see if you can answer this in a brief way.
I highly doubt that, but we'll see how this goes.
I wanted to talk about this.
-Oh, you didn't tell Dan to be brief, but okay.
-No, no, no, no, I'm leaning on you.
-Okay, fine. All right. -Full -- Full force here.
-I see how this is going to be.
-The council recently enacted this ban
on anti-competitive covenants when it comes to grocery stores.
-Can we touch on this? -Yes, we can.
-It's a big issue up in Lake City when that
-Fred Meyers shut down. -It is. It is.
-I'm trying to figure out what this is about
and if this is going to incentivize grocers
to come in or what's next here?
-Okay, well, I'm really glad you asked that
because that's been the issue.
We've had an executive order and we've had a legislative response
to put a ban on covenants on property.
So just getting right down to -- let's just get right down
-to what happened in D5. -Yeah.
-Because that's a good -- that's a good example of
we got a copy of the deed. Um, we got a copy of the title.
There was no existing covenant there,
but we are encouraging other folks that you can do that.
You can get a copy and look at that.
And what the mayor, Mayor Harrell was trying to do,
and we're forward looking, is that when it comes to food,
there should not be covenants
that you can't provide food to people based
on an economic business model.
-Meaning like another competitor couldn't come in.
That's what these covenants say.
-They -- They say that in -- in theory, but in application,
what it does is it denies people the basic human right of food.
-Okay. -Okay?
-And no one is saying you have a constitutional right
to have a grocery store three blocks away.
-Right.
-But you should at least have the right
where the business doesn't decide who gets food
and who doesn't,
and how much money we give to our food banks
and how much we've we've pumped into not just food banks,
but all the all the other services that they provide.
So now that we have the covenant, the anti --
the anti competitive, I do want to do -- I do want to say this,
that there is hope
and I just want people to hear this is
that we worked really closely with our state delegation
in particular Representative Darya Farivar.
-I can never say that. -Farivar, yeah.
-Farivar, I love working with her.
We put an agreement together with Kroger
to open up the parking lot for
we can still have services to North Helpline Food Bank
and also to the Seattle Indian Health Board,
which has a full-service clinic and a pharmacy.
Every store, Safeway has come around
and provided us with a list of here's all the stores.
Here's where all the pharmacies are.
Here are the -- Here are the stores that are delivering food.
And Indian Country Tribes have really come through,
particularly the Seattle Indian Health Board,
of providing services to all those folks.
And we are still in negotiations
and this gets back to business again.
-Okay. -Okay?
-This gets back to I know people have ideology
and they have an idea about business.
Not all business is bad business.
I think business have to be good civic partners.
And one example I'll just say it is Gates.
Gates is a good civic partner.
The Paul Allen Foundation.
I've watched them put up millions
of dollars to build houses.
And so is Amazon.
A little late to the game, but thank you.
You're busy going to the moon.
So that is what government should be doing.
-Okay okay. -So we've got some wins there.
-Okay, I'm looking forward to a win.
-High five. -What happens there.
-Can we reach? -Yes.
-Okay, there she goes. You never know the wingspan.
You got to watch out. I do need to wrap up.
If I could, maybe the 20-second version.
New Year's resolutions. What do you got?
-Councilmember Strauss. -Oh, 20 seconds.
-New Year's resolution. Work out more.
-Oh, okay. All right.
-I need to get back kayaking.
It's one of my favorite activities.
And this job doesn't necessarily allow me--
-Not always. -I really need to prioritize it.
-Feel the burn. All right, Councilmember Juarez.
-What do you got? -Wow, really?
You're really going there trying to make me look bad?
-My New Year's resolution? -Mm-hmm.
-Well, I'm hoping to finish. This is my last year on council.
-Yes, that's true. -Not coming back.
-Again. -You said that last time.
-But I did promise you before I go, though,
we'll do one last show.
Because the last show we did, I really had fun.
It was like, ask me anything and I'll do one more with you.
You can hold me to that.
-And I hope you had fun today too.
I did. I always have fun.
I think my New Year's resolution is more self-care,
and I would hope everyone else
would start looking at their lives
through a lens of self-care and well-being.
-All right. Thank you very much,
Councilmember Juarez. Councilmember Strauss.
We're on "Council Edition" here.
I'm Brian Callanan, and we'll see you next time.
♪♪