City Council Special Meeting 7/29/2025

Good afternoon, everyone.

The July 29th, 2025 meeting of the Seattle City Council will come to order.

It is 2.02.

I'm Sarah Nelson, Council President.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

Council Member Sacco?

Here.

Council Member Salomon?

Here.

Council Member Strauss?

Present.

You're here.

Council Member Hollingsworth?

Here.

Council Member Juarez?

Here.

Council Member Juarez?

Thank you.

Council Member Kettle?

Here.

Council Member Rink?

Present.

Council President Nelson?

Present.

A present.

Thank you very much.

If there's no objection, Council Member Rivera will be excused from today's meeting.

Hearing no objection, Councilmember Rivera is excused from today's meeting.

All right, there are no presentations today, so colleagues at this time will open the hybrid public comment period.

Public comment is limited to items on today's agenda, the introduction and referral calendar, and the council work program.

Clerk, how many people are signed up today?

We have 11 in person and six remote.

Okay, we'll give everybody two minutes, please, and begin with the, let's just do all the in-person first.

Thank you.

Okay, the public comment period will be moderated in the following manner.

The public comment period is up to 20 minutes.

Speakers will be called in the order in which they registered.

Please begin by stating your name and the item that you are addressing.

Speakers will hear a chime when 10 seconds are left of their time.

Speakers' mics will be muted if they do not end their comments within the allotted time to allow us to call on the next speaker.

The public comment period is now open and we'll begin with the first speaker on the list.

Okay, we're going to start.

I'm going to call up the first three speakers so we can start lining up.

We have Paul Glumaz, Victoria Palmer, and Joan.

Okay, this is better.

Okay, so I'm Paul Glumass, the King County Republican Party State Committee member.

I have recently identified the outlines of the corrupt political machine that owns King County and the state of Washington.

This machine was built by Frank Chop over many, many decades.

This is the political machine that owns and profits from the homeless industrial complex and is resisting treatment first, which is absolutely essential for our county and our city.

I'm putting you and whoever's part of this machine, and that may not be you, on notice that this machine has to change its policies or find themselves being dismantled by citizens who are now just beginning to make the discovery that such a machine exists.

Okay, so I'm putting you all on notice on this because this is the beginning of the takedown of the machine or the machine changing to deal with the homeless industrial complex, which is destroying our neighborhoods, destroying our city, and so forth.

But there's a tremendous profit being made off of that, and that's got to change.

The President of the United States has now issued an executive order promoting treatment first, and and that's gonna spread.

People are gonna say, well, why aren't we doing that?

Why aren't we doing treatment first?

So that's where we are.

So I'm putting you all on notice, okay?

And I appreciate all of you.

I appreciate being here.

Thank you very much.

After Victoria, we'll do Joe and then Jason.

Hello, council.

I am Victoria Palmer, an executive board member with the King County GOP and Seattle resident in District 6. I'll start with congratulations and a welcome back for Deborah Juarez.

Thank you.

Good to have you back.

but I'm here today to urge the city council members to take action to end Seattle's sanctuary city status.

President Trump's executive order last week was a call to American cities to clean up and get straight.

It's time to get in step with the rest of America and stop being a magnet for the troubled.

Take a moment to consider the damaging effects of 22 years of sanctuary city status, the increase in crime and overall degradation to our city.

This policy does not benefit Seattle, nor the voters that put you in office.

We've turned a blind eye to the foreign cartels creeping in, bringing with them violent crime, human trafficking, and pipelines for illegal drugs.

Sanctuary policies divert funds from programs that should benefit all of us in order to support the needs of illegal immigrants.

This would also save the city council from adding an additional tax burden onto our businesses and taxpayers to cover the lost federal funds.

President Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, recently commented that raids in LA were uncovering dens of human trafficking and child labor, often in squalid conditions.

At the same time, many of these reported kidnappings by ICE agents have turned out to be fabricated by groups that want to frame ICE as the bad guy.

With plenty of evidence that similar illicit conditions exist here in Seattle, we should be honest with ourselves about who our sanctuary policies are protecting.

Together we can clean Seattle up.

Thank you very much, Council.

Hello, I'm Joan Fox, and I would like to comment on Resolution 32174, proposed by Council President Nelson.

While I think the heart of this resolution is solid, I'm concerned with where some of the funds will be going, specifically in regards to funds being directed at We Heart Seattle.

WeHeart Seattle is a non-profit that ostensibly helps the homeless population in our city.

But in reality, cleaning up the encampments often leads to them stealing items from the unhoused individuals.

especially their director, Andrea Suarez, who has been on the record calling unhoused individuals in our city rats and dogs.

Now, I am really concerned with this considering this photo of Andrea Suarez in which she is wearing a Sarah Nelson sticker.

Now, this was taken at the peaceful protest presser that you attended, Council President Nelson.

And I'd just like to ask if you invited her to this, considering I have it on good authority from other elected representatives that the information about the presser didn't even go out till 8 p.m.

Why are you directing potentially millions of dollars of our city's funds to somebody who is attacking the unhoused population in our city and cooperating on your campaign?

Thank you.

We have Jason, following Jason will be Nora.

Councilmember Saka, what sort of personal matter could have kept you locked in your office during the Housing and Human Services Committee meeting?

There is more to running a city than beloviating about sidewalks and workshopping your stand-up routine.

The position you hold is important to this city, and thus far, your performance has been below the bare minimum.

Thank you.

And then Nora, and then I believe it's I believe it's Austin.

Hi, my name is Austin Shea and I'm a renter in District 7. I would like to express my extreme disappointment at the way the renters committee nominees were treated last week and urge the council to please confirm the appointments today.

Considering the Council has said 18 months to fill these seats and has continuously neglected its duty to do so under former Councilmember Moore's direction, are we expected to believe that last week's lack of quorum is purely a coincidence?

The nominees took time out of their busy days to show up, and they were not given the respect they deserve.

This is just one instance of many where renters' voices have been silenced.

Please do the right thing and confirm the nominees today.

And lastly, I do want to thank Councilmembers Rink and Solomon for being present last week and attempting to move this process forward.

Thank you.

Neera?

Hello, my name is Neera Selson.

I'm Sarah's progressive twin.

You also may know me as Connor Nash, Sarah's favorite person to sit next to.

I'm here because NARA actually shows up to work and does the right thing.

For over a year, the council has refused to appoint the vast majority of the renters' commission and attempted to continue to block them last week.

But Council President Nelson decided to put the commissioners up for a vote after a public shaming from people like Councilmember Rink, the press, and more importantly, the people of Seattle.

It's terrible that this is the only way for you to do your job.

I challenge Council President Nelson to tell the public why there was no action on appointing people to the Renters Commission while you have been Council President.

And I also challenge both you and Council Member Saka why you chose not to go to your job last week.

Seattle deserves a Council President who cares about renters and does their job, not a Council President who ignores constituents and supports landlords.

Thank you.

We have Ashton Hope and then Alan Francis.

My name is Ashton Hope, renter in Seattle, addressing the renters' commission.

Sarah Nelson and Rob Saka, last week on Wednesday, you failed to show up to work.

We, the people of Seattle, are already gravely disappointed with both of your performances at your jobs, and this last stunt you two have pulled shows you clearly do not take your jobs seriously.

Whether it is Sarah running to her room like a child because she's being criticized, or Rob, a Christian, mansplaining Islamic representation to a Muslim person, it is clear that both of you are far too immature to be fit with the responsibility of real adults.

This is in fact a statistically recorded thing.

Your approval ratings are some of the lowest in history.

Save your sugar daddy corporations some money before you further embarrass yourselves and resign.

Also, Rob, if it is true that you abandoned your responsibilities because you were having a bad day, that is damning evidence that you are deeply, deeply unqualified for frankly any job.

Good day.

We have Alan Francis and then Bennett Halston and Kate Rubin.

My name is Alan Francis.

I'm a renter in District 4. Once again, I can come down to City Hall, but I don't see my council member here.

I'm here because renters are being sidelined at City Hall.

It's a matter of basic democratic fairness.

We have just one renter on this council, and last year, tenant services were cut by 40%.

Meanwhile, powerful interests have been privately negotiating to weaken our protections.

The Seattle Renters Commission, meant to be our voice, is barely functioning with only five out of 15 commissioners Last Wednesday, dedicated appointees from the Seattle Renters Commission, as well as other critical bodies, were met with blatant disrespect when Councilmember Saka boycotted and Councilmember Nelson reportedly tried to remove their appointments.

This erodes public trust.

To Councilmember Salomon and Rink, thank you for your professionalism.

To the rest of the Council, end the political games.

The 18-month delay on these appointments is intentional suppression.

approve all these appointments immediately.

Renters need their voices heard, not drowned out.

Thank you for your time.

We have Bennett and then Kate Rubin.

Good afternoon, Council.

I'm glad that the appointments are apparently happening today.

I would still like to invite Council Members Nelson and Zaka to give a fuller explanation for why they were absent at the last meeting where we weren't able to reach quorum.

I happened to be here yesterday morning at the 9.30 meeting where Council Member Zaka joined over Zoom and said, you know, sorry, it took some extra time to drop my kids off, that's why it's a few minutes late.

I think that's all it takes.

I think that's all that people are asking for.

And nobody, I think, is prying for information about private medical or family emergencies.

And I understand in briefing, Council Member Saka said something about it was a family issue, so it's possibly that is going along with what I'm asking for here, that that might be enough.

It's your choice if you want to provide more.

So nobody is asking for private medical or family information, but I believe that right up to that boundary, the people who are missing and missed quorum should provide more of an explanation.

There is, I think, a tendency to think that if you're not here, you're not here, and then there's just no more explanation required.

But in most jobs, that's not how it works.

If you request a day off three weeks in advance, that's just it.

They don't ask you where you were.

But if you know you have a meeting the next day where several dozen people are depending on you being there, and you miss that, the standard practice is that you're supposed to give some sort of explanation.

And if you say you're not coming, you're supposed to say, and that expectation, it's not like it doesn't apply to city council.

In city council, there's actual city council rule 7 says you have to come to the meeting unless you are unable, which means the expectation is stronger, I think, for the city council meeting than it would be for a private sector job.

and I think that an objective third party observer would look at this and say that there is an appearance of impropriety unless more of an explanation is provided.

I do believe there's probably an explanation that can mitigate this, but if you don't provide it, then the appearance of impropriety will probably remain.

I don't actually buy into the- The conspiracy theory stuff, the 2.30 in the morning cloak and dagger email.

I believe that something happened, but I believe people deserve the explanation as fully as you can give it.

Thank you.

We have Kate Rubin and then David Schultz.

Hello, my name is Kate Rubin.

I'm a renter living in Beacon Hill, and I am currently serving as the interim co-chair of the Seattle Renters Commission, one of five members who's been serving by ourselves for the last 18 months.

I also serve as the co-executive director of Be Seattle, an organization that supports renters in the rental relationship and does renter education.

So I'm deeply connected to my renter community.

And this is hard to say, but I understand the limited power of the renters commission.

It's an advisory commission.

This council is not interested in our advice.

There have been so many issues that have impacted renters over the last two years since I've been on the commission and no one has sought our advice.

We repeatedly asked for meetings with council member Moore to talk about the rollbacks that we heard that she was discussing.

She said she wanted to create more dialogue between renters and landlords, but she was only meeting with landlords.

It speaks to just this larger issue.

You defunded tenant services by 40%.

You didn't talk to us when you put forward Proposition 1B, which deeply undermined social housing.

Renters are 60% of the city and we are totally being shut out and you won't even make appointments to a performative commission.

I'm grateful that there was all of the media coverage for council members, Saka and Council President Nelson for not showing up to the meeting.

but honestly, Council President Nelson could have put these appointments on the agenda at any time in the last 18 months as she's been president.

I've testified about this now six times in public comment.

This is unacceptable.

Thank you.

You have David.

Following David will be Noah Williams and then Ethan.

Hi, my name is Dave Schult.

I'm a renter in District 6, a lifelong renter and will continue to be one.

The delay in appointments to the Renters Commission is very disappointing and it shows what side the City Council is on.

I hope someday that the renters are organized enough to vote people like you who have caused this delay out.

And I look forward to that day, and I'll be working for that day to organize all the renters in Seattle to kick people off the City Council who do not do their job.

I am a manager.

I run a small business.

And if people don't show up and don't have a reasonable excuse, I am very unhappy.

And they hear about it.

And you should live to the same standards.

So show up.

Do your job unless there is some family emergency or medical emergency, and we need to know that because our tax money is paying you.

Thank you.

We have Noah Williams and then Ethan Magnuson.

Hi, thank you, council members.

My name's Noah Williams, and I'm a renter who lives on the sea line in council member Saka's district.

You've heard other people address the timing issues, but I just, I wanted to focus back on the core issue, which is that renters deserve representation by other renters.

And I wanted to tell you a couple of reasons for that.

At a previous apartment on Capitol Hill, I had an elderly neighbor who was put in default when she paid rent early because she did so by check rather than through the online portal.

Right now, my neighbors are getting price gouged by rubs, a system which forces renters to pay portions of the building's expenses that are not their responsibility, in one of their cases resulting in a $300 increase in her monthly expenses.

Landlords just don't have incentives to care about these issues, and it's critical that we appoint renters to the actual commission that oversees the issue.

So thank you for hearing this.

And finally, on just a little different note, I used to go by that school all the time that Council Member Saka has talked about to visit a friend who lived in White Center, and I can highly recommend the RapidRide H-Line.

It is very reliable and doesn't often get stuck in traffic.

Thank you.

And then Ethan, and then we'll go into remote speakers.

Hello, my name is Ethan, and I'd like to comment on the renters commission issue.

I think everybody's been piling on pretty well onto Nelson and Saka for missing the meeting, which I think is very appropriate.

But I just also want to thank Solomon and Rink for actually showing up and doing their jobs.

And while I'm not surprised by the disrespect shown towards renters by council members Nelson and Saka, I am surprised at the disrespect shown to your fellow council members who actually showed up to not even show up, not even you know, let them know.

It seems that to me seems very surprising and that's that's all I got to say.

Please appoint the renter commission members today.

Okay, our first remote speaker will be Alberto Alvarez to be followed by Rose Legionnaires.

Callers, please press star six when you hear the prompt that you have been unmuted.

Go ahead, Alberto.

Thank you.

Nelson, Rivera, Saka, wealthy, greedy, arrogant.

Luxury shop owners just received the largest wealth increase in living memory.

They need to pay what they owe.

The Shield legislation will grant tax relief to 90% of struggling businesses.

75% of small mom-and-pop shops would pay nothing with the revised B&O tax.

The vast majority of local shops gross under $38,000 a weekly.

These shops will get immediate financial help with the SHIELDS program.

Meanwhile, wealthy and decadent boutique shops are seeking a carve-out.

These shops say they are above the $38,000 gross weekly.

yet they also say they can't turn a profit.

They are either lying, severely mismanaging money, or selling overpriced luxury goods.

The wealthy and greedy owe this city far more than homeless people, working families, or elders with limited income.

Tax the wealthy, tax the greedy, Have a great day.

The next speaker is Rose Legionnaires.

After Rose will be Red.

Hello, my name is Rose Legionnaires.

Last Sunday, Sunday last week, I woke up at 4 a.m.

to the sounds of a screaming woman.

Her boyfriend had, Eric's boyfriend had broken into her room and had pretended to beat her.

I called the security at my building and they called the police and we waited.

For over an hour, I heard her screams as he took the towel bar off of the bathroom and proceeded to beat her with it for over an hour.

After an hour of the cops not showing up, I called the 911 again, wondering why no one had arrived.

I proceeded to wait another hour, her screaming, calling the police, her screaming that she had been burned, and her screaming and us being pretty sure that if this was not going to happen that she was going to die.

Thankfully, eventually the cops showed up to go and do something about it, but it took nearly two hours of listening to every single scream, every single being thrown, her being thrown against the wall and her fearing for her life, for anyone to do anything.

The council has poured, what was it, $100 million this last year into the police department, and we still can't get them to show up when it matters?

I'm glad that we're pouring things into, you know, penalizing graffiti, but heaven forbid we stop a woman from being killed by her domestic abuser.

This is happening in our city.

I get that the cops care more about the graffiti on our streets than they do about our people that happen in Chinatown, but they should really be here.

This is the least of what we should do.

Do you all understand between the cops and you all that no one is okay with this?

That everyone is upset?

That people hate the council, they despise them, they despise the police, and you all are saying to do nothing about it?

This is what's going on.

The next speaker is Red to be followed by Aidan Carroll.

Hello.

Good afternoon, council members.

Good afternoon, Seattle voters.

Seattle voters, you should have your ballots in hand.

Council's positions eight and nine are on the ballot, and this moment matters.

One of the sitting council members has repeatedly obstructed renter protections, living wages, ethics reforms, and even the basic function of city government by failing to show up to meetings and delaying appointments to the renter's commission.

We see this obstruction, and we will remember it.

Council members, Your job is to show up to govern and to appoint the people ready to serve their community.

Renters deserve representation, not empty chairs and stalled boats.

Seattle needs leaders who reflect us, not millionaires, not landlords, and not corporate interests.

Don't let apathy decide this election.

Use your voice.

Vote for those who will vote for us, not against us.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next speaker is Aidan Carroll.

Go ahead, Aidan.

Aidan, you may need to unmute your phone.

Oh, can you hear me now?

We can hear you now.

Thank you.

Many tenants cannot be here today.

Many landlords chose not to be here today and the fact that Councilmember Moore suggested that tenants and landlords need the same representation on the commission is hard to fathom because tenants don't have a choice where landlords can go sell and invest in a different kind of stock.

It's even easier when we say Anything good police can do, we can do better.

It requires brainstorming.

But we can all imagine that tenants can take the money they're paying on rent and just use it to cover the mortgage and the plumber and the maintenance and the property tax.

But we notice the shenanigans.

We notice where Kathy Moore is now the specter haunting this council, whether it's orchestrating those Same thing.

The Republican rhetoric at the start of this meeting was disturbing but revealing, because we call it politely exterminationist, using a DARVO technique to paint us on the left the ones causing the problem, but it shows the treatment of immigrants and homeless people as outside enemies is one and the same in today's politics.

Just follow the law.

Just self-support.

Just go to the shelter we supposedly already offered you purports to be accessible.

In the same way that white supremacists appropriate the language of anti-fascism, claiming it's their enemies rather than themselves who aspire to commit genocide, it is more revealing still in that it shows how Republican your policies already are.

When Trump and Miller refuse to differentiate between immigrants who are crying and immigrants who are committing crimes, it's just like how you won't leave camps alone even when they're not doing anything wrong.

We can still deniously appreciate diversity of behavior while upholding an amendment of equal rights.

Thank you.

The next speaker is David Haynes.

Hi.

We should have the staff of Deborah Juarez come before the council and introduce themselves.

because her previous staff were racist and got hired by Tonya Wu, who did nothing but legalized hookah lounges between 2 and 5 a.m.

for the Youth of America to have a so-called safe place to go.

Are these the same staff that don't have the best interests of community?

That said, we don't need three historical preservation commissions to preserve all the flawed floor plans and ill-suited buildings that were built during the racist redlining Why do we want to continue to give welfare to cosmetically prettified, earthquake-prone, unsafe buildings?

And Deborah Juarez, when you talk about performative politics, perhaps we could quell the ridiculous shenanigans of trying to get into the news, acting like a power of privilege, and realize that we need professional negotiators to implement proper policies on public safety, the homeless crisis, and the housing crisis, and convince Trump and the federal government to invest a billion dollars to redevelop the corridor of Aurora Avenue.

And for once and all, tear down all those slum motels that you all have ignored the whole time you've lived here and have the Army Corps of Engineers start cutting the footers and then hire Carpenter's Union and use the homeless crisis money to create emergency hotel housing that could be built very soon, like before you start leaving office.

you know instead of just letting it languish we got so many empty vacant properties and we don't have any legislation to incentivize the banks to prioritize redevelopments where is the proactive capacity build out and with all your 10 million dollars you want to give and all this 2023 racist world defund and shift the paradigm review the funding priority spendings they're still in the budget it's what's exacerbating the public safety We need to solve the homeless crisis, not use it for a reelection apparatus.

Thank you.

There are no additional remote speakers present.

Thank you very much.

We've reached the end of our list of public commenters and we can move on with our agenda.

Public comment is now closed.

If there's no objection, the agenda will be adopted.

Okay, hearing no objection, the agenda is adopted.

Now we'll consider the introduction and referral calendar.

Hearing no objection, the introduction and referral calendar is adopted.

All right, thank you very much.

The introduction and referral calendar is now adopted.

And then finally, we'll now consider the proposed consent calendar.

Items on the consent calendar include the minutes of July 15th, 17th and 22nd, 2025. Council Bill 121041, payment of bills, 17 appointments from the City Council and 11 appointments from the Library's Education and Neighborhoods Committee.

Are there any items council members would like to remove from today's consent calendar?

All right.

Hearing none, I move to adopt the consent calendar.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you very much.

It's been moved and seconded to adopt the consent calendar.

Will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of the consent calendar?

Council Member Saka.

Aye.

Council Member Solomon.

Aye.

Council Member Solomon.

Aye.

Thank you.

Council Member Strauss.

Aye.

Council Member Hollingsworth.

Yes.

Council Member Juarez.

Aye.

Council Member Kettle.

Aye.

Council Member Rink.

Yes.

Council President Nelson.

Aye.

Eight in favor, none opposed.

Thank you very much.

The consent calendar items are adopted.

Will the clerk please affix my signature to the minutes and legislation on the consent calendar on my behalf.

All right, will the clerk please read item one into the record.

The report of the City Council agenda item one, Council Bill 121034, bailing into funding for housing and community development programs, adopting annual action plan updates to the 2024 through 2028 consolidated plan for housing and community development.

Thank you very much.

I move to pass Council Bill 121034. Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded to pass the bill.

Council Member Solomon, as sponsor, you're recognized in order to address it.

Thank you very much, Madam President.

This legislation adopts the 2025 Action Plan to the 2024-2028 Consolidated Plan for Housing and Community Development and authorizes its middle to the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development.

The consolidated plan governs the use of City's annual allocation of funds from several programs in HUD.

In total, funds amount to approximately $30.7 million in entitlement funds awarded in 2025 and in prior years, and program income, which are used to provide services, housing, and facilities to low and moderate income persons, businesses, and neighborhoods.

To receive the annual allocations, jurisdictions must submit a consolidated plan which describes the policies governing the city's use of these funds and an annual allocation plan which identifies the specific uses of the funds for a particular program year.

The 2024-2028 consolidated plan goals, i.e. how we plan to prioritize the money, would increase services and prevent people from experiencing homelessness, address needs of people impacted by mental health and substance use, such as opioids and fentanyl abuse, improve equitable access to community infrastructure and recreation opportunities, increase economic development and job retraining programs for low and moderate income households and those disadvantaged in recovering from recent economic instability and increase affordable housing options.

So I ask for your support and passage of this legislation, this ordinance rather.

Thank you for that synopsis.

Are there any questions or comments on the legislation?

All right, I'm not seeing any.

Would the clerk please call the roll on the passage of the bill.

Council Member Salka?

Aye.

Council Member Solomon?

Aye.

Council Member Strauss?

Aye.

Council Member Hollingsworth?

Aye.

Yes.

Council Member Juarez?

Aye.

Council Member Kettle?

Aye.

Council Member Rink?

Yes.

Council President Nelson?

Aye.

Eight in favor, none opposed.

Thank you very much.

The bill passes and the chair will sign it.

Will the clerk please affix my signature on the legislation on my behalf?

Okay, and will the clerk please read item two into the record?

The report of the Governance Accountability and Economic Development Committee, Gen. 2, Resolution 32174, setting out public safety-related funding priorities in anticipation of a proposal that the city impose the additional one-tenth of one percent local option public safety sales tax authorized by the 2025 state legislature.

The committee recommends the resolution be adopted.

Thank you very much for that.

As the chair of the committee, I'll provide the committee report.

First, I'll talk about what this bill does not do.

This resolution does not call for an increase in the sales tax.

However, the mayor has indicated that he's looking into the 0.1% increase in the sales tax for a public safety sales tax at some point in the future as we approach the budget.

So assuming that that legislation will be sent down, this resolution states that in that event, up to 25% of that revenue should be allocated to new and existing recovery-based services.

So this is right now just a statement.

It's a legislative statement of how this revenue should be used.

And I want to say that it, and then the legislation itself has a whole long list of of items that the money could be used for.

Now, obviously, the anticipated revenue from a 0.1% increase in the sales tax is about 40 million, 25% of that is 10 million, so that's a very small amount of money, but those items are listed as examples of the sorts of things that could be funded.

Now, why those things?

And I'll just basically try to lay out my argument.

if it's not about the amount of money, it's about the intention behind laying out this list of needed services because for too long we've watched people suffering from addiction and also from deteriorating mental illness and we don't really have a coherent set of services and responsible parties that are readily available to provide relief.

We basically just sort of watch them deteriorate on our streets while our neighborhoods become less safe.

And that is why I'm fighting to put with this resolution treatment at the center of the city's agenda.

Again, we have no real plan for dealing with the root cause of the greatest public health and public safety challenge of our time and no plan or a coherent system for helping people recover.

And when I talk about recover, I'm not talking about abstinence.

I am using what the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration defines as recovery, which is a process of change through which individuals improve their health and wellness, live a self-directed life, and strive to reach their full potential.

So that's what we're talking about.

Of course, it is, yes, admittedly, a regressive tax.

Assuming it goes forward, that is the unfortunate part of this measure.

However, this measure was advanced by Representative Entenmann with the intention of broadening what is understood to be public safety.

It's not just about officers, it's about community safety and it includes behavioral health as well.

So this isn't about raising taxes on working families.

This is about using public safety dollars for public safety.

And when we invest in getting people off the streets and into treatment, we also invest in crime prevention and we reduce emergency responses and we make every neighborhood safer.

So that is the That is the intention behind this legislation and I have been working on it for months with partners who represent pretty much the largest service providers in the city.

And I will now answer any questions that you might have or you're free to make comments.

All right, hearing none.

Council Member Strauss.

Thank you, apologies.

I thought others were gonna speak.

I will just state that I'm gonna vote in favor of this because I support the programs that are listed out there.

I've been in support of programs like this for a long time and I think that we have to do everything that we can to battle addiction along the continuum of that path of recovery.

My vote today, however, is not an endorsement of the funding structure laid out in this resolution.

because this is why we have a broad budget process to take into consideration all of our funding sources for all of the different things that we have to fund with our city budget.

Thank you.

Thank you for those comments and I, I recognize that and you have made the, that point before and I have responded that it is not uncommon to present a, um, a legislative intent through resolutions prior to the budget process, but I appreciate making that point again.

Council member Rank.

Thank you, Council President.

As was mentioned in public comment earlier, last week the Trump administration signed an executive order pertaining to drug use and homelessness response, and the executive order seeks to end federal funds for harm reduction and housing-first policies and programs, while also laying out a foundation for increasing incarceration and involuntary civil commitment.

And this executive order, unfortunately, shouldn't be a surprise.

It was very clearly articulated in Project 2025 that this was something they intended to do.

And I have been concerned for the past year about this exact scenario.

And in light of this news, I have spoken with a number of behavioral health, addiction, and homelessness advocates on what this means for their organizations and folks that they're serving across our community.

And while analysis is underway, to understand the full impact of this executive order.

What is clear at this time is that it has generated a lot of uncertainty for the state of our services at a time when this sector needs stability and need is high.

Understanding that this news just came out and understanding that this resolution is before us today broadly sets out a framework for if we do go forward with this sales tax.

Ideally, I'd like for us to continue this conversation if we get to a point where legislation is before us that implements the sales tax, possibly dedicating all of this funding towards these services.

But for today, understanding where we're at and the intentions here, I will be supporting the resolution.

Thank you.

Thank you.

You know, you make the point out loud that I've been thinking in my mind, which is why does 25% when you think about the gravity of this problem, the lives that it ruins and the root, the problems on the public safety side and the homelessness side that is fueled by addiction to not just fentanyl, but 90% pure meth and tranq, et cetera.

So it really should be 100% and that was mentioned in a blog, I mean a podcast recently.

I do want to say that it was long before the executive order came through that Daniel Malone and Lisa Dugard and Steve Woolworth were concerned about their funding because of potential federal cuts.

When the office closed across the street, we had a sense of what was gonna be happening.

And so that is precisely why there is specific language in this list, which basically says, I'm trying to, ensure capacity for low barrier shelter, case management, aftercare and legal coordination for people living in sheltered with severe substance use disorder using the Co-Lead model.

So, and then elsewhere it says something about stabilizing law enforcement diversion services.

And so it was very intentional that we're talking about stabilizing and adding to our toolbox to help people.

so but thank you for making that point and ultimately I just I mean that sort of leads into what I want you know people to recognize is that there really is no one-size solution to addiction and at the press conference that I convened on July 24th I believe I was joined at by representatives from PDA, DESC, Evergreen Treatment Services, along with, yes, a broad range of small businesses, homelessness services, and recovery community representatives.

In all, it was about 20 people representing about 13 organizations, and many in this broad spectrum had never appeared on the same stage before.

but this will take all of us and all approaches to really make some improvement because people choose different paths and this will take all of us because the name of the game is really truly expansion of methodologies and service modalities and philosophical approaches because there is no single path of recovery.

So that is what I want people to understand.

There is no preferred solution, but there is a, I am making a call for a plan, a system, and this is the beginning.

Any further comments?

All right.

Will the clerk please call the roll on the passage of the bill?

Council member Socket?

Aye.

Council member Solomon?

Aye.

Council member Solomon?

Aye.

Thank you.

Council member Strauss?

Councilmember Hollingsworth?

Councilmember Juarez?

Councilmember Juarez?

Councilmember Juarez?

Councilmember Juarez?

Councilmember Juarez?

Councilmember Kettle?

Councilmember Rink?

Council President Nelson?

Eight in favor, none opposed.

Thank you very much.

The bill passes and the chair will sign it.

Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf?

Thank you, everyone.

Will the clerk please read item three into the record?

Agenda item three, resolution 32173, adopting general rules and procedures of the Seattle City Council, superseding resolution 32096. The committee recommends the resolution be adopted as amended.

Okay, as chair of the committee, I'll provide the committee report.

Okay colleagues, every two years our council rules stipulate that we reopen them to discuss potential changes and modifications to make our council operate better.

and these 16 rule ideas were generated through months of discussion stemming largely from ideas from central staff and the clerks and also the law department.

And there was an internal working group that consisted of a whole host.

There was an internal working group who considered a whole host of concepts but narrowed it down to what is most needed and would be most beneficial to the function of our body.

and so once the list of 15 was decided on, I sent it to you all in June for feedback, which we incorporated and I think we added one and then we held our final committee discussion on this where one, okay, where an additional one was added at the last council meeting.

So that leaves us with 16 rules before us.

So now I understand, are there any comments?

Council President.

Yes, Councilmember Strauss.

Thank you, Council President.

I move to amend Resolution 32173 as presented in Amendment A. Second.

Okay, it's been moved and seconded to amend the resolution via amendment A.

Go ahead, please.

Thank you.

My amendment would help create more clear and more consistent rules around public comment in two ways.

First, the current version of council rules says that public comment shall not exceed 20 minutes unless extended by the chair and I'll acknowledge that we almost never abide by that timeline and almost always we extend it beyond 20 minutes and almost never actually take a motion to do so.

This, so, extending the amount of time will help us conduct council business and do our duty to listen to the public.

Second, this amendment would standardize the amount of time each member of the public is given to speak.

So currently the amount of time for a member of the public to speak is set at the discretion of the chair.

It is up to two minutes, but routinely gets shrunken down to one minute or less without any clear policy of when, why, or how that happens.

Because of this, members of the public, many of whom take time off of work to come give public comment, don't know how much time they'll have to speak.

I think all of us have seen somebody come to counsel for the first time to give public comment.

They've prepared a two-minute speech, are required to pare it down to one minute, and it does not set them up for success.

People are already nervous.

I mean, just today, I think I've seen a couple people come to council for the first time to give public comment, and it can be an awkward experience.

without notice, changing how much time they have to speak even sets that foundation on more shaky grounds.

My amendment would standardize our rules to give the public more predictability.

These are the standards that I use during the budget process, not for public hearings, rather just for the committee meetings, and I've seen a version of this used at the comp plan meetings as well.

If there are 30 or fewer people signed up for public comment, everyone would get two minutes.

That's an hour, which is what it's extended to.

If there are more than 30 people, everyone would get one minute.

Then there's flexibility for the presiding officer to make even more adjustments if there are more than 60 people.

The way we run this in the budget committee is if there are fewer than 30 people, everyone gets two minutes.

If there are up to 60 people, everyone gets a minute and then over 60, everyone gets 30 seconds.

That's traditionally how we've run it.

It's the information that we put out in advance so that everyone knows what they are coming to do.

This amendment does not put that level of specificity.

It just says that there's discretion if there are more than 60 people.

There's also the element that this says at the beginning of public comment if so many people are signed up.

We could not find a way to say if a bunch of people, if suddenly 60 people walk in the door, how does that change?

That is up to the discretion of the chair.

and I would advise any chair that it is the merit of what is written here is to say if 60 people are coming to public comment, it doesn't matter if they signed up at 1.58 or 2.10 p.m.

How many people are coming to comment?

Because we want to provide predictability to the people providing public comment.

If we had unlimited time, I'd say that we should hear from everyone for as long as possible at every single meeting.

That being said, we do have work that is time sensitive and our committee meetings are only scheduled for two hours.

The morning committee meetings actually cannot functionally roll into the afternoon without making changes to the schedule overall.

I believe these changes will give the public more time and more predictability around public comment while still balancing our need to get business of this council done.

The lack of predictability of the length of public comment and limits on individual speakers has caused tension in the past and that tension has boiled over in ways that could have been prevented.

I think that this amendment seeks to standardize and set a even playing field of understanding for both council members and for the public.

I don't believe it's a perfect fix.

This change would strike a balance and that would create more standard, predictable, and I believe a fair system for running public comment.

Thank you.

Thank you for putting this forward, Councilmember Strauss.

And as I said in briefings yesterday, I view this as a positive or as a friendly amendment, and I will be supportive.

The change that regards public comment that is in the legislation before us was an attempt to get at what I perceive as a an unfair amount of discretion in the part of the president or the presiding officer of full or select committee meetings.

When comment goes beyond 20 minutes, then it's completely discretionary how long to let it go on and it's also completely unpredictable for the people that come to chambers or are waiting on the phone wondering whether or not they'll be able to speak.

and so I wanted to take that decision making out of the presiding officer and provide the ability for council members to weigh in.

Do we want it to go more than 20 minutes or not?

But I think this is a more comprehensive fix in that it sets a defined amount of time and it also defines the amount of minutes people will have to speak depending on the number of people there, which I completely welcome because it prevents me from having to do that math.

Doubling the number of speakers means how many minutes, et cetera.

So I appreciate you putting this forward and I plan to support it.

Thank you.

Are there any other comments on amendment A?

Looking at the, okay.

Seeing no further comments, is there any last thing you would like to say, Council Member Strauss?

I urge I vote.

Okay.

Will the clerk please call the roll on Amendment A?

Council Member Salka?

Aye.

Council Member Solomon?

Aye.

Council Member Strauss?

Yes, aye.

Council Member Hollingsworth?

Aye.

Council Member Juarez?

Aye.

Council Member Kettle?

Aye.

Council Member Rink?

Yes.

And Council President Nelson?

Aye.

Eight in favor, none opposed.

The motion carries and Amendment A is adopted.

Are there any final comments on the resolution as amended?

Council Member Hollingsworth.

Oh, sorry, I saw you moving your mic and I thought that might be to speak.

Excuse me.

Thank you.

Okay.

All right, I'm not seeing any other comments.

I would just like to extend a huge thank you to the internal working group who've been meeting on this topic and working on this project for many, many months now, especially Ben, Emilia, Lauren, and Jeremy.

So if there are no other comments, will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of the resolution as amended?

Council member Salka?

Council member Solomon?

Council member Strauss?

Councilmember Hollingsworth?

Yes.

Councilmember Juarez?

Aye.

Councilmember Kettle?

Aye.

Councilmember Rink?

Yes.

Council President Nelson?

Aye.

Eight in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted as amended and the chair will sign it.

Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf?

All right, and will the clerk please read item four into the record?

The report of the Parks Public Utilities and Technology Committee, June 4, Council Bill 121038 relating to Seattle Parks and Recreation authorizing the Superintendent of Parks and Recreation to enter into a five-year agreement with options to extend with lost evenings to operate and provide management of the Green Lake Pitch and Putt at Green Lake Park.

The committee recommends the bill pass.

Okay, Councilmember Hollingsworth as Chair of the Committee are recognized to provide the committee report.

Thank you, Council President.

It's what we all came here for, is that correct?

The pitch and putt?

No, okay, that's okay.

So the Green Lake Pitch and Putt, this is for a five-year agreement extension from our Seattle Parks Department.

with a green light pitch and putt, and it's gonna be continued public access for enjoyment, professional management and operational stability, support for local partnerships.

The city also gets a percentage of revenue, which is 10%, is open for 10 months.

or excuse me, eight months in the year.

My apologies, I can't count eight months.

And it also, the five year gives long-term planning and flexibility.

I think Green Lake Pitch and Putt is a great way for families to stay connected and for us also to have outdoor activities in Seattle.

And it's one of my favorite places to play.

So with that council, I hope I urge you for a yes vote.

Thank you very much.

Are there any comments?

That smile down there is me.

I'm smiling.

I'm just smiling because it's Joy's thing.

Okay.

Because I know she doesn't do this, but it's okay.

All right.

Okay.

I'm not seeing any other comments, but lots of smiles here.

So will the clerk please call the roll on the passage of the bill?

Council member Salka.

Council member Solomon.

Councilmember Strauss?

Aye.

Councilmember Hollingsworth?

Yes.

Councilmember Juarez?

Aye.

Councilmember Juarez?

Aye.

Is my mic not working?

Because this has been a thing all day.

Thank you.

Councilmember Kettle?

Aye.

Councilmember Rink?

Yes.

Council President Nelson?

Aye.

Eight in favor, none opposed.

The bill passes and the chair will sign it.

Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf?

All right folks, there were no items removed from the consent calendar and there is not a resolution for introduction and adoption today.

Let's see, I am requesting to be excused from the August 5th City Council meeting if there is no objection.

Okay, then I, Council President Sarah Nelson, will be excused from the August 5th City Council meeting.

All right, and is there any further business to come before Council?

Council Member Hollingsworth.

Thank you, Council President.

Council President, I am requesting an open session to ask Council Member Solomon if I may be added to co-sponsor Council Bill 121039, the predatory home buying legislation.

Yes.

Thank you, Council Member Solomon.

Sorry, I have to do that in open session.

I didn't realize that.

So that was my script.

And so thank you, Council Member Solomon for that.

And just the plug, I think it's a great legislation.

I think the...

thanking the mayor's office for sending it down and then for you sponsoring that legislation.

We've heard from a ton of people, especially in District 2 and District 3, about some of the predatory home buying practices that people do.

Just personally alone, I have boxes of these predatory homes.

purchasing agreements where people come to people's front porches and drop off a signed contract already and leave it under their porch, or they're hounding them, they're calling them constantly, they're coming to their doors.

It's very, very bad, and I think this legislation does a great job of protecting those people and then offering them resources so they know how to navigate some of these things so they don't feel pressured into selling their homes.

So I just want to thank Council Member Solomon for sponsoring this legislation, so thank you.

Thank you for giving us a preview of that.

Can you please tell me when the, uh, when is that coming for a full council vote?

I believe that one is going to be on the 6th, um, at our next, uh, land use committee meeting.

You know, we have a land use committee meeting tomorrow.

That one's not going to be taken up, but I believe it's going to be on the 6th.

It's going to be taken up if not there on the 13th at the next housing and human services committee, but it will be within the next two weeks.

Okay, got it.

I didn't miss it then.

No, you did not.

All right, thank you very much.

Okay, looking again to see if there is any further business.

Is that an old hand?

Oh, go ahead, please.

Thank you, Council President.

I wanted to take a moment on a celebratory note because I know it happened so quickly we hardly even noticed it.

I want to give a congratulations to some of the appointees in the room for being officially appointed now to the Renters Commission and all the subsequent commissions that we, pardon me, did today.

Congratulations.

Just ending on a positive note on that point.

Thank you for your service to this city and we look forward to working with you.

Thank you, Council President.

Thank you.

I was going to mention that as well because I didn't know if people realized that that was during the consent calendar part of our agenda.

So congratulations.

All right.

I'm not seeing any other hands raised.

So it looks like we're done with our business.

The City Council meeting will be adjourned.

It is 3.03.

I do have one.

Let's see.

We've reached the end of today's agenda.

The City Council will hold a special meeting on August 4th at 2 p.m.

and then meet again on August 5th at 2 p.m.

Hearing no further business, we are adjourned.

All right.

It's 3.03.

Thanks, everyone.