-Hello. I'm your host, Brian Callanan.
The Seattle City Council has just completed the first phase
of a comprehensive plan process,
meant to shape how and where the city will grow
over the next 20 years.
So, what does that really mean for your neighborhood?
I'm talking with Council Member Mark Solomon,
the Council's Land Use Committee chair,
to get some perspective on that,
and what to make of a new $8.9 billion budget proposal
from Mayor Bruce Harrell.
We're discussing those issues and the questions
you're sending in, too.
Next on City Inside Out, Council Edition.
-Let's find a way to make sure that the priorities
we have for the people of Seattle continue,
because while the federal funding may have gone away,
the needs have not.
-All that and more coming up next
on City Inside Out, Council Edition.
♪♪
And here he is,
Mark Solomon is the interim council member
from District 2 in Southeast Seattle.
And, council member Solomon,
for someone who came in as a caretaker,
not a candidate for the job,
you've been taking care of quite a lot,
so I thank you for taking the time with me.
-Well, thank you very much.
-Let's get into it here.
Top of the news here in late September
is the mayor's budget proposal, which he recently unveiled.
It's an $8.9 billion package.
That's up from $8.3 billion last year,
and as the mayor pointed out,
he's trying to respond to a multimillion-dollar
city deficit, an unsettled US economy,
and the threat of cuts to the city's
federal funding coming from the White House.
-With Trump's economic chaos
and a fluctuating national economy,
we were faced with a forecasted revenue shortfall of
over $200 million.
We took immediate action, extending our hiring freeze,
stopping non-essential travel, training,
and technology upgrades. And moving forward,
bold proposals to advance our priorities
and safeguard funding for critical programs.
Because of this effective approach,
we are able to propose this budget for the future
without touching our rainy day fund and without new layoffs.
-So, Council Member Solomon,
when I hear no layoffs, not touching the rainy day fund,
that sounds a lot rosier than what the council was wrestling
with a few months ago, back in June,
with that pessimistic economic forecast.
And what is your take on the Mayor's proposal?
And I have to ask what could change
when the council gets an updated economic forecast in October?
-Well, I'm glad you asked that, because,
as you pointed out,
the forecast we got a few months back was bleak,
when people have come to us and said, "Hey, here's our budget,"
that's when everyone's going,
"Yeah, that's nice, we're broke," right?
So, you know,
but I'm also looking at the reality that, you know,
as the Mayor pointed out,
we cannot count on the feds at this point.
You know, even money that was supposed to be coming our way,
the money that was supposed to be allocated for transportation,
for housing, for human services.
-This recession we've heard about, yeah.
-When I first got here,
I remember being asked, you know,
with the potential of federal cuts, what should we do?
And my response was, okay,
if we're going to get cut off from the feds,
let's find our own money, right?
Let's find a way to make sure that the priorities
we have for the people of Seattle continue,
because while the federal funding may have gone away,
the needs have not, right?
So, what I'm looking at in this budget,
not only what the Mayor has proposed,
but we as council can put forward,
is how do we make sure those essential services continue.
How do we ensure that we provide for services
for unaccompanied minors that wind up in our country?
How do we make sure that there are legal services
for those who need it?
How do we make sure
that we have legal advice or tenant assistance
for renters to make sure that they can stay in their home,
so we're not putting more people out on the street,
because they don't have the technical assistance
they can tap into to help them navigate that,
so they don't wind up in front of, you know, eviction court?
-Yeah, I do want to talk about one specific part of the budget.
We had a viewer that wrote in this question here.
"What do you think of the Mayor's proposed plan
to raise the sales tax
and use the money to fund an expanded CARE Team?"
This is a 0.1% sales tax hike authorized by the state,
as you know, it would bring in about $40 million a year.
The Mayor is talking about expanding the CARE Team,
Community Assisted Response and Engagement,
this is the 911 alternative responders
that go out to lower intensity 911 calls,
like a person lying down on the sidewalk, for example.
So the CARE Team has been doing some great work,
Councilmember Solomon, and on the other hand,
this plan will give Seattle one
of the highest sales tax rates in the US.
What do you think about this issue?
-Knowing the CARE Team, knowing the work they do,
and knowing that we need that service to expand city-wide,
right, however we fund it,
right, now, it would be ideal
if we didn't have to go to one
of the more aggressive tax solutions.
-Venues or vehicles, excuse me.
-Tax vehicles that there is,
which is a sales tax.
Yet, we're in a position
where we really don't have an alternative.
And yes, sales tax is high.
Yet, the services are so needed,
and they're so needed in every part of our city.
And again, I know the work that the CARE Team does.
And as we're talking about alternative responses to,
you know, an officer showing up, CARE Team is it, right?
So, yeah, I favor, you know,
that bump in the sales tax to fund, you know, the care team.
Did I wish there were other ways to do it other than,
you know, the most regressive means that we have?
Yeah, of course.
-That's the tool that the state gave you,
essentially there.
A quick one on the CARE Team there.
There's been a lot of talk about,
hey, let's make sure they can get dispatched by themselves
rather than having to go with the police,
which is the situation right now,
this single dispatch model out there.
I know that's something
that has to be negotiated with the police officers' union,
but can you talk to me about that,
because I think a lot of people are clamoring for that too,
including CARE chief Amy Barden. -Right.
And that would be an ideal situation.
But I also know that, you know,
when the initial 911 call comes in--
we're not going to send somebody in
that's an unarmed civilian into a situation
where they may be in danger.
That's a lot of times where you do have that call response.
You know, the officer gets their discernments,
okay, the scene safe, you know, we can bring in the CARE Team.
We don't want to put them at risk.
And I've talked to mental health providers in the past who,
you know, even with our crisis response unit,
you know,
the team's a mental health professional
with a police officer, and they go, you know, in tandem.
Because, yeah, you can send that MHP out there,
but they're not going to necessarily feel secure
going out there by themselves,
not knowing what they're walking into.
-Mental health professional.
Yeah, I understand what you're saying.
-So that's why you have that dual dispatch.
And when you can get to a situation where it's like,
okay, this is something where they can go by themselves,
but having that backup just in case, you know,
for that MHP's safety.
Just like with our community service officers,
yes, we can send community service officers out
to something
right now without having a uniform officer go with him,
but that's a very narrow band of responses.
So again, thought and care needs to be put into that
before we're putting someone in a situation
where they have their safety being compromised.
-To be continued, I know that discussion will be.
I wanted to talk more about the budget proposal from the Mayor
because it appears he's really banking
on voters passing the Seattle Shield measure, Prop 2,
which would change the city's business and occupation
tax system and raise about $80 million if voters approve it,
plus the Families, Education, Preschool, and Promise Levy,
which could help the budget even more.
I know Seattle voters historically really like
to approve taxes,
but does it bother you at all
that those funds are included in the budget before the election?
What do you think about that? -What bothers me more
is that we have to keep going back to voters again
and again and again, and saying, hey, help us out, right?
We can get into the philosophy of what I think
should happen on the state level,
so we don't have to keep going to these,
you know, regressive measures like property tax
and, you know, sales tax.
And Seattle voters have been generous.
At a certain point,
they're probably going to get tired of that, right?
So that's my worry is, you know,
we are asking so much of our citizenry
to fund so many things that are essential, okay?
And again, I appreciate-- I know that generosity,
and it's like, hey, if this is going to help some folks,
you know, count me in.
-Yep.
-Is there a better way to do it?
Yeah,
but that's going to require some partnership
with our folks on the state level.
-Okay. All right. Thank you for that.
Another discussion that it's going to continue.
-To be continued. -That's right.
I did want to mention this.
Your work on the council
is essentially done after election day
because of the temporary role you're serving.
The budget won't be final for a few weeks after that.
But I know you want to guide this process with the role
that you have and in the time that you have.
Can you talk to me about that?
What you're going to be doing over the next six weeks,
plus here to really guide this?
-All budget, all the time.
-Okay.
-And the way that the calendar is set up,
I will be able to help get the budget across the finish line
before I actually leave the seat.
So, you know, you have the November 4th election,
the election results are certified on November 25th.
I anticipate that we're going to have a final vote on the budget
on November 21st,
so that whoever is going to come behind me
and occupy the seat doesn't have to come at the speed,
doesn't have to, you know, do all the homework, and,
you know, vote on something
that they haven't been intimately involved with.
So I want to thank, you know, the budget chair,
Councilmember Strauss, for scheduling it that way
so that, you know, I can put my stamp on it.
-Fair enough.
And let me know about that.
Let's talk about some of your budget priorities,
maybe some specific things for District 2.
What's on your mind?
-Well, there are some things that were important to us
that we did get some into the Mayor's budget,
like the Thunderbird Treatment Center, you know,
funding for the Pearl Warren Building,
the demolition of that building,
so that the Indian Commission can do, you know,
housing, housing at the location of the old Navigation Center.
-Okay.
-And there are some other funding priorities
that we're looking at.
One for me is Tubman Health Center,
they provide gender-affirming care and reproductive care in,
you know, District 2.
So I'd like to see some funding go to them.
I mentioned earlier, you know, funding for our tenants' rights,
like the Tenant Law Center, for example,
and other organizations that are in that realm
that are providing supports for tenants
to help keep them in their homes.
So that's something I'm going to be looking at in terms of,
you know, the anti-displacement future.
You may know that back in July-- back in June,
rather, we did an Anti-Displacement Resource Fair
at the Rainier Beach Community Center,
bringing together different entities
that have some piece of something
that can help people stay in their homes,
whether it's rental assistance, home,
low- or no-cost home repair,
discounts on utilities, tax breaks.
And a lot of the providers we had,
many of them did not know the others provided the amount
of resources that they did.
So when I look at, you know,
those anti-displacement resources,
and, you know,
a focus of mine is keeping people housed,
keeping people in their home,
building generational wealth, pushing back on gentrification,
when we can bring those resources to folks,
and when we can promote programs
that will help people stay in their homes
and not face eviction.
I want to support those efforts.
-Got it.
And let's talk a little bit more about housing.
I'd like to guide our conversation
towards the Comprehensive Plan.
This, of course,
is the plan for urban growth in Seattle over the next 20 years.
The council just passed phase 1 of this plan in mid-September.
I know you weren't there for one of the big days
of voting on this, which was an excused absence;
I should point that out.
But some of our viewers still do have some questions for you.
The main issue I'm hearing from them
is this did the Comprehensive Plan do enough
to deal with Seattle's housing crisis?
Robin boiled it down like this.
"In the recent voting on the Comp Plan,
a number of council members
requested less growth for their districts.
What does Councilmember Solomon think
of this new district focus?
It seems to me that districts that have less growth
and more homeowners will continue to get less growth,
while districts with more renters will get more growth."
Some thoughts about that.
-Something I've been saying, you know, early on,
since I've been here is when it comes to the Comprehensive Plan,
D2 already has the density. Okay.
I would like to see that density spread out throughout the city,
throughout more neighborhoods.
So, again, we got it in D2, you know, it should be shared.
You know, let's share that wealth, right?
You know, we mentioned earlier about building
generational wealth.
-Yeah, okay.
-You know, when I look at some projects that are, you know,
helping families build those ADUs or DADUs
on their own parcels.
-Accessory dwelling units, yep, keep going.
-Right.
So the accessory dwelling units,
the detached accessory dwelling units,
make it easier for families to do that,
so they can have, you know, grandma and grandpa in one.
-Sure.
-You know, mom and dad in the other, kids,
you know, all on the same parcel, right?
And again, keeping families together,
helping build that generational wealth,
and those are the kind of things I'm looking in the Comp Plan.
I'm looking at also trees, right?
How do we-- and I know this is a big--
-This is a big battle for the council, yeah.
-Big battle, yeah. A couple of things on that.
One, we probably need to reexamine the tree code
and strengthen it.
And when I looked at some of the amendments,
I felt that there are some amendments
that need to be tackled separately from the Comp Plan.
-I see.
-Right? -It needs to be strengthened.
We need to protect more trees,
or what are you saying?
-We need to protect more trees.
And here's the thing that's always struck me,
is that you've got one side
that says we need to preserve the tree canopy,
and then you have another side that says,
but we need more houses, we need more densities.
And I don't see it as an either/or,
I see it as a both and.
We can have density, and we can have trees;
it's just a matter of how you design, you know, the project.
Does that mean that you go vertical?
Yeah, it probably means you go vertical,
because we've only got so much of a footprint in terms of,
you know, how much real estate we got.
If we're going to increase density,
we're going to have to go higher, right?
If we want to increase our tree canopy,
you know, we're going to have to go higher.
We're going to have to look at setbacks.
We're going to have to look at incentives to preserve,
you know, those tier one
and tier two trees rather than having them cut down.
-Right.
Those are the bigger trees out there.
-Right.
So again, I've heard arguments on both sides,
and I think we can do both.
We can, you know, have more trees,
we can increase our tree canopy,
and we can increase our housing stock.
We can do both.
We just need to sit down and figure out how to do it.
And some of the amendments that were passed,
you know, try to get to that flexibility to allow for that.
-Okay.
And we got a ton of questions about this
with the Comprehensive Plan.
Kyle actually sent us one about your work in CPTED,
CPTED, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design,
something you're trying to codify the city law.
We've talked about that before on the show.
Kyle asks this,
"As someone very invested in crime prevention,"
that would be you,
"I'd also love to hear the councilmember speak to the role
he believes housing insecurity plays in the sorts of crimes
he seeks to address."
Some thoughts about that.
-Wow.
Well, first, I do want to acknowledge
that one of the amendments
that was put forward in the Comp Plan,
I believe it was Amendment 32 by Councilmember Kettle,
inserts CPTED into the Comprehensive Plan.
Also, we're looking at design review, you know,
interim design review legislation
and permanent design review legislation that's coming,
probably the spring of 2026. -Right.
-CPTED is going to be baked into that as well.
Then you probably know that the Office of Economic Development
announced their back-to-business program,
the storefront improvement program.
CPTED is in there as well.
-This is stuff that's going to happen
after you leave office, it sounds like.
Okay.
-But it's there,
especially with the storefront improvement program.
It's already in there.
And when I look at,
you know, CPTED, it's basically a way
to make public safety investments
without spending public safety dollars.
-Okay.
-If you can design a space to be welcoming
where you encourage community interaction,
that community connection actually helps drive crime down.
-I was going to say,
housing insecurity was the question that Kyle was asking.
Yeah, that does have a connection to crime.
-Yeah, so when you're talking about housing insecurity,
I think, you know, that's not necessarily a CPTED thing.
-Okay, okay.
-The one way to address housing insecurity
is build more housing.
-Okay, all right.
-Yet, when we build that housing,
build it so it's safer for everybody to be in there.
-Okay, okay.
-So, yeah, so CPTED plays a role in the design,
but not necessarily in the amount of units
that are produced.
-Okay. Thank you for that, yeah.
I did want to move on to another piece with this
because we got a ton of great questions.
Blake was asking this one
because the council was dealing with more than 100 amendments
to the Comprehensive Plan.
-Only 114. -Yeah, but who's counting?
Some of which were more rushed than others,
and Blake had a question about that.
"Last-minute walk-on amendments make it hard
to follow council actions,
and lately it seems like there are more of them.
In your view,
why do these happen,
and what can be done to reduce them
so the community can better follow the council process?"
What do you got?
-There are times when you're,
you know, looking at some legislation going,
okay, I see it, I get it, but I've got an idea.
I got something that may make it a little bit better.
So when you see those and--
-Is there an example you can think of?
-Yes, I can think of an example with the Roots to Roofs
legislation that just passed yesterday.
-That's right.
-There were some last-minute amendments
that councilmember Hollingsworth had that were fantastic,
that actually strengthened the bill
and actually got it passed unanimously.
-Yeah, this is another affordable housing
that's out there.
-Right. -Right.
-So that's an example of, you know, sometimes,
you know, those last-minute things,
it's like the last-minute idea.
And most councilmembers will tell you that,
you know, they're not a fan of walk-on amendments
because they haven't had a chance to, you know,
digest them and, you know, really dig into them,
which is often why when there are amendments,
we do want to take time to actually absorb them and say,
okay, well, what does this mean.
Asking questions of central staff,
asking questions of our legal counsel.
What is the impact of these things
that we're getting ready to vote on?
So, the decisions are informed, right?
We're not going up there and, you know,
pulling things out of the air, going,
"Yeah, this sounds good."
-Okay. -So there is--
-It does make it challenging, though.
-It does, yeah. -For people to follow.
-Right, right.
So it might make it challenging for some folks to follow
when they don't see the things ahead of time.
And we acknowledge that. Sometimes, though,
it's necessary in order to make the legislation better.
-Okay. Thank you for that.
The council just had a very hard-fought debate
over expanding the use of surveillance cameras
from the Seattle Police Department.
Cameras will be added in the Capitol Hill neighborhood,
the stadium district, areas near Garfield High as a way
to fight crime and help police investigations.
This went through with a 7-2 vote.
Supporters like Councilmember Hollingsworth
were saying this will be an important way
to protect the city.
Then you had opponents like Councilmember Rinck,
who was saying she was very worried
the federal government would seize this information
and use it in their mass deportation efforts.
-People's windows that have been blown out,
daycare shot up, families that have been hurt.
Every single day, I have to talk to these people
and deal with their trauma with them
and comfort them every single day.
And it's my job to help keep them safe.
-I do not look forward to the day
where we have to sit back up here on this dais
and deal with the aftermath
of our data being handed over to other actors.
I do not want to be sitting up here in the future
telling people, "I'm sorry we put your community in danger."
When we could have stopped it today.
It is a matter of when,
not if, our data will be handed over to the federal government
and other actors.
-You voted to approve this expansion
of surveillance cameras.
Why? -Okay.
Probably more than anybody else on the dais.
I know these systems.
-You have a background with this.
-Yeah, I have a background.
It was made in public commentary that,
you know, there are two intel guys, you know,
that are on the council. Actually, there are three.
-Oh, okay.
-I used to work in what's called an indication
of warning center.
I'm looking at information in real time
as to the events that are going on.
And if I'm not paying attention or if I screw up,
bad things could happen.
-Just part of your military background.
-Right. Yeah.
So the worst thing that could happen would be, you know--
not the worst thing.
One thing that could happen
would be an international incident.
The worst thing that could happen
is that people would die, right?
So I took that responsibility very seriously.
So when I look at the real-time crime center,
I think about that more along the lines of the indication
of the warning center.
And then when I look at, you know, camera systems,
something I mentioned, you know, during the debate was, one,
these are investigative tools. Okay?
Two, for something to be investigated
or even to be assigned, it needs to be solvable, right?
So, what do you need for something to be solvable?
You need hard evidence, you need a credible witness,
or you need video surveillance.
And when I think about the communities
that I've worked with, and especially in D2,
who, you know, we're talking about shootings,
we're talking about break-ins,
where the only way that we were able to identify
and arrest is because there was video cameras.
I've also talked to the vendors and about--
-Who provide these cameras and systems.
-You know,
the different-- there's so many
different surveillance technologies out there,
so many different surveillance companies.
-Okay.
-And again, I have an understanding of how they work.
And my thing about cameras is, if you've got a camera
but you don't have a protocol for what's done with
the footage, then--
or it's like, okay, you pick something up, you know,
camera picks something up,
but who's doing anything about what's being picked up.
-And I think that's the concern.
I mean, because Washington, DC, it was essentially a situation.
I know it's a different city than Seattle,
but essentially, Feds came in
and took over that real-time crime system,
and I think people are worried that
would happen here in Seattle.
-Right.
And I look at the safeguards
that have been built into the legislation to say,
okay, if ICE comes fishing,
we're going to shut the program down, right?
So, and thinking about that retention,
let me just reiterate,
I am comfortable with the protections
that have been built into the legislation
to push back on any attempts of the feds to try to get,
you know, try to get that footage.
In the meantime,
if I've got a shooting at Rainier Beach, you know,
the community center,
which happened last-- right by South Shore last Monday.
-Oh, wow. -Okay.
When I have, you know,
our trans neighbors being beat up by six or seven guys
on Cap Hill,
I would like to have footage of the guys
who did that beatdown so that we can identify them
and hold them accountable. So this is where,
you know, I'm looking at these technologies as tools
to help problem solve, to help identify,
and to help hold folks accountable for the harm
they're causing in our community.
-Thank you.
I wanted to talk about another police issue here,
SPD, working on getting officers back into Seattle schools.
The school district is discussing having a cop
at Garfield High in the next few weeks here.
Officers were taken out of Seattle schools in June of 2020.
I know this isn't your call directly,
it's for schools to decide,
but is this something you'd like to see?
Do you think this would be helpful?
-Oh, absolutely.
-Okay, why?
-Because when I think about the school officers that I knew,
you know,
like Benny Radford at Garfield or Aaron Lucas or
Jojo Caminero that were down in the South
and at South Shore in Rainier Beach,
they were an asset to the kids.
They cared about the kids.
They weren't there for enforcement purposes.
-It wasn't the discipline type of thing.
-No, they weren't there for discipline.
Benny would actually, you know, be at the door
as kids were coming in and greeting them and saying,
"Hey man, you weren't here yesterday.
How are you doing? You doing okay?
Everything good at home?
Hey, bro, you look like you're hungry.
You need a granola bar?"
I mean, that was the kind of relationship
that Benny had with those kids. And, you know,
when I talked to different law enforcement agencies
around the state,
and they actually are educational services districts,
they want to have a relationship with local law enforcement,
not for discipline purposes,
but just relationship building, right?
And to be a resource, you know, not only for the school,
but to be a resource for those kids.
-Yeah. I need to wrap up with you.
We have about a minute and a half left here.
You have a few weeks left as a councilmember
before that November deadline,
when you hand over your role to whoever wins out in District 2.
Can you reflect on what you've been
able to do over this past year?
Was this what you expected with this job?
-You know, people have asked me, is it what you expected?
And I got to be honest, I had no idea what to expect.
I will say a couple of things. One, we have a great council.
You know, I can't say enough about my colleagues,
the interactions, the camaraderie,
the things that we've been able to work together
to actually get done.
So that's one.
I also got a shout-out to my staff.
I've been able to come in and make a checklist of everything
I want to get done.
And I frustrate them because I keep adding to that list.
And we're able to check a lot of things off.
I would not have had the success in getting stuff
done if it hadn't been for my staff.
So shout out to Sarah Mayes, Murphy Bush, you know,
Christine Hendrickson, and Thaddaeus Gregory.
So, love you guys.
-All right. Had to be done, yeah.
-And so I'll-- you know,
I'm going to be happy to welcome the new person in and say,
here's what we got done.
Now, what do you need teed up for you, you know,
until-- you know, when you get here?
-Yep.
-So that we can tee it up, so we can set you up for success.
-Okay, all right.
Well, thank you very much for this.
That's Councilmember Mark Solomon.
Thank you very much for joining me.
-Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity.
-You bet. I'm Brian Callanan,
and we'll see you next time on Council Edition.
♪♪