Select Budget Committee Session I 10/30/20

Good morning, everyone.

Thank you very much for joining the Seattle City Council Select Budget Committee.

Today is October 30th, 2020. The time is 9.35 a.m.

I'm Teresa Mosqueda, chair of the Select Budget Committee.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

Councilmember Strauss?

Present.

Councilmember Gonzalez?

Here.

Councilmember Herbold?

Here.

Councilmember Juarez?

Here.

Councilmember Lewis?

Present.

Council Member Morales.

Here.

Council Member Peterson.

Here.

Council Member Sawant.

Here.

Chair Mosqueda.

Present.

Nine present.

Thank you very much, Madam Clerk.

Thank you all again for joining the third and final day of our consideration of Form Bs.

This is our opportunity to highlight priority items for either amendments or additions that we would like to see for the Mayor's proposed budget.

The Council has gone through two full days and today will be another long day.

Just a quick reminder, we will take a break between 1 and 2 p.m.

for a lunch break, and we will endeavor to make sure that you get done and back to your community or family obligations by 5 p.m.

today.

As you can tell, there's over 50 items on today's agenda, so we will go through them with with all the due conversations necessary for questions for people to be understanding the proposals, but also would ask you to keep your comments brief as we have over the last two days.

It's been very helpful.

Thank you for keeping your comments brief.

We've been able to adjourn about an hour, hour and a half early both days.

So thank you.

We will get through today, and I want to thank you all and wish you a happy early Halloween.

With that, as we have done in the last two meetings, we have reminded the viewing public and reminded our teams as well that the Form Bs in front of us were submitted, yes, let's see, last week on Thursday at 5 p.m.

We did ask for two co-sponsors to be listed in addition to the one prime sponsor.

This is our effort to try to make sure that council offices have ample time to review the proposals and that they have sufficient time to have been worked with central staff or law if necessary.

To make sure that they're ready for discussion, this allows for us to have the materials in hand and really make sure that there's not a lot of surprise amendments coming forward, which helps both the viewing public and all of us as well.

But as we have done over the last two days, those amendments that you would like to consider for consideration that did not meet that 5 p.m.

deadline last Thursday, we can still do that.

To make sure that they're ready for discussion, we've asked for all walk-on amendments to be circulated by 5 p.m.

the day before and that the proposing council members submit the information identifying whether the proposal has been discussed with Seattle's residents and stakeholders, whether central staff has had time to review, and if necessary, whether it's been reviewed by law.

This allows for us to make sure that the council is considering potential amendments that have sufficient research gone into them for our consideration today.

As a reminder, the discussion about amending the agenda to add additional forms is not about whether or not individual council members like the proposal or whether you find it meritorious, but rather a question about process.

Does the amendment meet the criteria for consideration today by amending the agenda?

Do we have enough information in front of us to make sure that it has met that criteria?

And we are asking those questions merely on a process standpoint at this point at the top of the agenda.

As a reminder, just because the proposal might not be deemed right for conversation today by way of amending the agenda, that does not mean the conversation is over.

We still have form B, form Cs, or these change documents to the council's proposed balancing package that can be considered in the upcoming weeks.

With that, we do know that we have at least one walk-on amendment for consideration this morning.

Councilmember Morales, I believe that amendment comes from you.

Before we consider it, I'm going to move to have the agenda in front of us.

I move to adopt the agenda.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda.

Councilmember Morales, my understanding is that this amendment that you are circulating, amendment number one, was sent to all of our our offices before 5 p.m.

yesterday.

Thank you very much but for the record I need to verify with rule with the clerk.

Madam clerk can you please verify that the amendment council member Morales's amendment number one did meet the rule on circulation for the amendment and it was circulated before 5 p.m.

on the night before today's agenda.

Chair Mosqueda, yes, it was circulated before 5 p.m.

Thank you very much, Madam Clerk.

With that, Council Member Morales, would you like to move your amendment?

Thank you.

Yes, I move that we amend the agenda by adding SPD walk-on amendment.

I have two, entitled Allocate Funds from SPD Cuts to the Participatory Budgeting Process and by placing it at the end of the corresponding department section.

Second.

Okay, it's been moved and seconded.

Can we take them in individual order?

Can you, again, tell us the name of the first amendment that you're considering here?

So, sorry, no.

I have it as listed as Amendment 2, and I believe you said Amendment 1, so I guess I'm asking for some clarification there.

Okay, thank you.

Allie, please go ahead.

Yes, thank you, Chair Muscata.

Good morning, Council Members.

Allie Canucci with Council Central staff.

We had initially been working with a few offices on potential walk-on amendments.

And so sometimes the numbering gets a little out of order.

There is just one walk-on amendment for SBD today, but it is numbered SBD walk-on two.

But it is the only walk-on amendment for SBD.

Well, that helps me and I'm sure it helps the viewing public as well.

So again, just one amendment to be considered today.

Just one amendment from Councilmember Morales.

It is titled Amendment Number 2. It's been moved and seconded.

Councilmember Morales, I will turn it back over to you to describe Amendment Number 2.

Thank you.

So this amendment would, sorry, let me get to my notes.

This is a budget action that would allocate all savings from cuts to the Seattle Police Department's 2021 budget and other sources to fund a community-led annual participatory budget process in which Seattle residents would democratically decide how to spend a portion of the city's budget on programs and projects that address community safety, to fund proposals coming out of that process.

Shall I continue?

Thank you.

I think that's helpful for right now.

There may be questions, and then we'll ask you to continue.

But if you have anything else, please feel free.

I don't mean to cut you off.

Sure.

Um, so, um, the idea here is that we would, um, allocate up to a million dollars to community based organizations and to city departments who basically to run the participatory budget process.

Um, and so this is kind of setting the stage for the fact that we will need to be thinking about the infrastructure of how we run a process, um, through the course of the year.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Council member Morales.

Council colleagues, the cover memo that our office generated to summarize whether or not the walk-on amendment met the criteria was circulated.

Just to summarize, it appears that the proposal was vetted and discussed with key community members, such as Solidarity Budget Partners, including Decriminalize Seattle, King County Equity Now, and others have been listed.

That it was discussed with central staff, and we do have Liz Schwitzen present with us.

and that it did not need a law review, works with central staff and does not need law review.

At this point, it does say that the department that this would affect has not been consulted with, but just like the first amendment that we considered on Wednesday, if this is to move forward, we will obviously be working and seeking feedback from the department as well.

That's the criteria that I will be looking at to ensure that it met this first baseline question.

Council colleagues, is there any questions or comments on this amendment before consideration for amending the agenda?

I don't see any additional questions.

Thank you very much, Council Member Morales, and thanks for submitting the cover sheet information as well.

Let's go ahead and have Madam Clerk, if you could go ahead and read, call the roll so that we can take a vote on amendment number two.

Strouse.

Yes.

Gonzales.

Yes.

Herbold.

Yes.

Juarez.

Yes.

Lewis.

Yes.

Morales.

Yes.

Peterson.

Yes.

Sawant.

Yes.

Chair Mosqueda.

Yes.

Nine in favor, none opposed.

Thank you very much.

The motion carries and the agenda is amended to include amendment number two at the end of the corresponding department.

I'm not aware of any additional walk on amendments or amendments this morning.

I do have one technical correction that I'd like us to consider before we vote on the amended agenda.

We have one additional item added to today's agenda.

The council budget item BLG031B001 did meet Form B's deadline and the co-sponsor requirements, but it was inadvertently left off of today's agenda.

The budget action would amend the recommended passage of Council Bill 119933, which would remove the existing Office of Emergency Management from the Seattle Police Department and establish it as a separate office in the Executive Department.

The amendment would maintain OEM's existing authority under the Seattle Municipal Code and remove reference to internal operating policies.

Council Member Herbold is the sponsor.

Since the item was not placed on the agenda, I will need to first move to suspend the rules before moving to amend the agenda.

If there's no objection, the Select Budget Council rule relating to circulation of amendments by 5 p.m.

on the preceding business day will be suspended.

hearing no objection, the rule is suspended.

I'll now move to amend the agenda.

I move to amend the agenda by adding council budget action item BLG031B001 entitled amend and pass as amended council bill 119933, which would create the office of emergency management in the executive department by placing it at the end of the corresponding department section.

Is there a second?

second.

It's been moved and seconded.

Thank you very much.

To amend the agenda by adding the council budget action related to the office of emergency management at the end of the corresponding department section, are there any comments on the amendment to the agenda?

Seeing none, will the clerk call the roll on the adoption of the amendment to the agenda?

Strauss?

Yes.

Ariel Ambruster-Browne, COB.: : Gonzalez.

Yes.

Herbal.

Yes.

Juarez.

Ariel Ambruster-Browne, COB.: : Yeah, Louis.

Yes.

Morales.

Yes.

Peterson.

Yes.

So want Ariel Ambruster-Browne, COB.: : Yes.

Chair mosquito.

Yes.

Nine in favor.

None opposed.

Thank you, colleagues.

The motion carries.

The agenda is amended by adding amendment two to the end of the, I'm sorry, I'm adding amendment two to the end of the corresponding department section, we already did, and adding this amendment for BLG031B011 to the end of the corresponding department section as well.

Are there any other further comments on today's agenda?

Hearing none, Madam Clerk, could you please call the roll on the adoption of the amended agenda?

Strauss?

Yes.

Gonzales?

Yes.

Herbold?

Yes.

Juarez?

Yes.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales?

Yes.

Peterson?

Yes.

So what?

Yes.

Chair Mosqueda?

Yes.

Nine in favor, none opposed.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

The motion carries and the amended agenda is adopted.

Okay, thank you very much.

With that, let's go into public comment.

I want to make sure that folks know that we do, we have reserved the ability to have public comment at the beginning of every Select Budget Committee meeting.

We are only reserving 30 minutes for this conversation, so we apologize to those who might not be able to get their time heard.

we will also have public comment every budget meeting and look forward to hearing more from you all.

At this point, let's go ahead and open up public comment.

I'll read the names in the order in which they appear on today's call-in list.

You will have one minute to provide public comment.

You'll hear a 10-second chime.

We encourage you to hang up and dial in to the listen in line or all of the other options listed on today's agenda.

I appreciate all of you dialing in today.

Good morning.

Good morning.

This is Howard Dale Lower Queen Anne District 7. Last year on May 8th, Ryan Smith, who was near comatose with a blood alcohol content of 0.38, was killed by Seattle Police.

The OPA found this murder to be within policy.

This year on May 19th, six days before the murder of George Floyd, Harry Caver was murdered in Seattle.

The OPA failed to show any interest in investigating this until I filed a complaint, which was then lost for two months.

These men had many things in common.

They were black and they were experiencing a severe mental health crisis.

We also shared another trait that made it easy for Seattle's politicians and its police accountability system to ignore them.

Their families lived outside of Seattle and mostly out of state.

Seattle needs a police accountability system governed by mercy and morality and not whether a murder becomes a meme.

We need a system that is sensitive to tragedy and not what is trending is motivated by empathy not by avoidance of embarrassment.

A system that seeks justice and not justification.

To protect life and not to justify policy.

Thank you Howard.

The next person is Brittany.

Good morning Brittany.

Good morning Council.

My name is Brittany Bush-Bolay.

I'm the chair of CR Club Seattle Group and I'm calling this morning to express our support for the solidarity budget.

including reductions in the police budget scope and staffing and the participatory budgeting process, as well as the following specific items from today's agenda.

The Capitol Hill Public Life Study, the Market to Mohai Project, the Thomas Street Redesign Project, the Route 44 Corridor Project, construction of the Georgetown South Park Trail and other bike projects, Route 7 Rainier Avenue South sidewalk improvement, and increased housing and shelter services for unhoused neighbors who are particularly vulnerable to heat, smoke, extreme weather, and other effects of climate change.

Thank you for your time and all of your work.

Have a great day.

Thank you, Brittany.

You too.

Kate, good morning.

Hi, my name is Kate Rubin.

I'm a renter in District 2 and I'm the Executive Director of B Seattle.

I'm calling in today in support of the solidarity budget.

We are due to divest from SPD by at least 50% and invest these funds into Black communities and community-led health and safety programs through a participatory budgeting process.

Even before the pandemic, we were experiencing a homelessness crisis in this city with Black and Indigenous folks being disproportionately affected.

We've spent millions of taxpayer dollars to criminalize people experiencing homelessness.

The proposed HOPE team is a safer and more compassionate alternative to the navigation team than the unsheltered outreach and response team because they prioritize health, sanitation, and coordination with trusted community-based agencies.

As an outreach worker, I have seen firsthand how neglecting sanitation has harmed our houseless neighbors.

Programs like street sinks and the purple bag trash pickup for encampments are essential for the health of our community.

We need adequate funding for tiny homes, hotels for shelter, Tent 53, share wheel services, and additional DESC engagement work.

Thank you, Kate.

Please send the rest of your comments in as well.

The next three people are Patrick Taylor, Carly Gary, and Peggy Hotz.

Good morning, Patrick.

Just looking for Patrick.

Hi, Patrick.

It looks like you are still muted.

If you can push star six one more time.

Wonderful.

Can you hear me now?

Yes.

Thank you so much.

All right.

Thank you.

Sorry about that.

My name is Patrick Taylor.

I'm a South Seattle resident and co-chair of the Seattle Bicycle Advisory Board, but I speak to you today as an individual.

I'm calling in to urge you to support item number five, funding for the Georgetown to South Park Trail, and item number seven, funding for the planning of the MLK bike route south of Mt. Baker and the Georgetown to downtown bike route.

During the last Bicycle Master Plan implementation plan, South Seattle was underrepresented in most of the projects.

South Seattle has fewer high-quality bike facilities than Central and North Seattle.

Our goal on the bike board has been to undo this disparity and provide all ages, all abilities, Allegra bike routes to connect the people of South Seattle to each other and the larger city.

The board works with Cascade, Seattle Neighborhood Greenways, and community advocates to get these crucial projects added to the plan.

In addition, during the SDOT outreach, these projects were identified as the highest priority.

Restoring funding will help the city live up to its equity goals.

Two of the projects will also help mitigate West Seattle bridge traffic and continue with the two planning projects will ensure the projects are shovel-ready if additional funding becomes available.

Thank you for your time and attention and for the work you do for our city.

Thank you very much.

The next person is Carly.

Good morning, Carly.

Hi my name is Carly Gray.

I'm a resident of Andrew Lewis.

I'm also a member of Sunrise Movement Seattle and UAW 4121. I'm calling in support of a solidarity budget that makes six key amendments to Mayor Durkin's budget.

But today I'm specifically wanting to address the hiring freeze in the Seattle Police Department.

I'm asking that council continue the SPD firing hiring freeze into 2021. As you've heard in many budget meetings in the streets and even outside your residences we need to divest from the police by at least 50 percent.

The huge amount of money sunk into SPD year after year has been public money invested in harassment of and violence towards Seattle residents.

The very people paying their salaries.

This violence has disproportionately been towards Seattle's Black community and our unhoused neighbors.

Rather than welcoming new people into this brutal violent institution one which does not create public safety I ask that you continue the hiring freeze in 2021. Every officer retiring or resigning presents an opportunity to expand critical investments in public safety solutions that elevate Black lives over police budget.

This would allow the city to reallocate money out of police salaries and into community identified priorities.

This is one of many.

Thank you very much, Carly.

Peggy, good morning.

Good morning.

My name is Peggy Hotz and I'm a Nicholsville founder and volunteer.

It's Halloween Eve and I'm stocked up on candy, reading an amendment that looks quite dandy.

Four council members with infinite wisdom are proposing a two-tiered tiny house village system.

Some homeless people just need a rest, but for other people, our model works best.

Democracy and empowering self-management are where it's at.

Nickelodeons know you got to be sober to do that.

I'm not going to yell or throw out an invective.

I'm just going to say our villages are way more cost effective.

So vote for the amendment, even if it hurts, because when the pandemic's over, we're coming back in our pink shirts.

Thank you.

That was excellent.

Thank you very much.

You're welcome.

Have a great day.

The next three speakers are Matthew Lang Christine Sapp and Robert Streuser.

Good morning Matthew.

Good morning.

Can you hear me.

Yes.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Great.

Hi my name is Matthew Lang.

I'm a North Seattle resident local small business owner and representing today as the lead organizer of the Seattle Transit Riders Union.

First off I'd like to thank all the community members and council members who have been working tirelessly to ensure that equity for Black and Indigenous communities is front and center in this budget.

The Trans-Riders Union is proud to support the six action points of the Solidarity Budget and not raid jumpstart funding to backfill the budget.

We support the Hope Outreach Team proposal to replace the Navigation Team.

Over the past few years I've spent a great deal of time in encampments and working alongside our unhoused neighbors and service providers with the aim of finding solutions that work best for communities as prescribed by community rather than for it.

What's happening now and has been for years isn't working.

As someone who is formerly homeless myself, this issue resonates deeply with me and I believe the HOPE proposal is a big step forward, putting their aims in the hands of community and especially without police presence.

Please pass this amendment and let's continue the conversation.

Thank you and have a good day.

Thank you, Matthew.

Next person's Christianne.

Christianne?

Christianne, sorry about that.

Good morning, council members.

It is Chrisanne.

Thank you.

Hi.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak.

My name is Chrisanne Sapp and I have been a parking enforcement officer for two and a half years.

I'm also the vice president of the Seattle Parking Enforcement Officers Guild.

When I became a parking enforcement officer, I was struck by the diversity and talent within our unit.

60% of our unit is BIPOC and 12 different languages are spoken.

Our officers bring various backgrounds, cultures, experiences, and knowledge to the table, making our unit a diverse workforce.

When the city council announced possible changes and civilianization in the response to nonviolent incidents, I became excited at the prospect of potential opportunities for growth within the parking enforcement unit.

As vice president of our guild, I fully support the proposal to move PEOs to the Department of Community Safety and Communication Center.

Thank you so much for allowing me to speak, and thank you for all the work you do.

Thank you very much, Vice President Sepp.

The next person is Robert.

Good morning, Robert.

Good morning.

My name is Robert Strozier, and I am a parking enforcement officer, as well as biracial.

I've been a PEO for five and a half years, and I'm calling to say that I support the proposal.

that Councilmember Herbold has put forth to move the parking enforcement section into the new Community Safety and Communication Center and expand our official duties.

With all that's going on with policing in this country, it's imperative that we as a society evolve, which means evolving public safety as we know it.

With that in mind, we have volunteered to take on additional duties to be a part of the solution.

This will help ensure the community receives the response it deserves.

By moving forward with Councilmember Herbold's idea, we would become a part of the solution to help the community heal.

Thank you for your time, Councilmembers.

Thank you for your time and for your work as well.

Let's see.

The next person is, um, the next three people are, uh, Nanate Tshomya, Susan Wells, and Jackson Petrish.

Nanate, good morning.

Good morning.

I am Nanette Treyashima.

I've been a parking enforcement officer for 14 years.

I'm also the president of the Parking Enforcement Officers Guild and represent 98 CEOs.

All of us have seen the horrific events in 2020 that led to a community divided, divided by anger, divided by despair, divided by distrust.

As public servants and as a unit that is 60% BIPOC, this has been deeply saddening to us.

Our guild began to think of ways we could be part of the solution.

We looked at civilianization and other programs such as those in Eugene and Denver.

We suggested to Councilmember Herbold that expanding our duties would be a good starting point to reimagining policing.

And in my 14 years as a PEO and as a field training officer, I know that PEOs are adaptable and highly trained.

As president of our guild, I fully support the proposal to move PEOs to the Department of Community Safety and Communication Center.

I speak for our members when I say we are eager and excited to expand our duties once collective bargaining between the city and SPOG is concluded.

Thank you for listening to me.

Thank you to council members Herbold, Lewis, and Morales for your sponsorship.

We look forward to being part of the solution.

Thank you very much, President Toyoshima.

The next person is Susan.

Good morning, Susan.

Good morning, Council.

My name is Susan Wells, and I'm also a parking enforcement officer with the City of Seattle.

I'm calling to show my support for Council Member Herbold's proposal of creating community safety and communication center and moving the parking enforcement unit to this new department, enlisting unarmed civilians to assist community with low priority level calls makes sense, and we're very interested in taking on the larger role in the city's new approach to public safety and responsibilities that encompass these changes.

We're very acclimated to this environment of law enforcement in ways that are beneficial to both the Seattle community and the police department.

Our job is dynamic in nature, and we're very capable, resourceful, and adept units.

Our core values are centered around providing quality service, responding to and resolving issues within our community, I just want to say these proposals are bold and forward-thinking.

The call for change is now.

In closing, we believe our unit skill sets would be best utilized by moving forward with these proposals.

I thank you so much for your time.

Have a good day.

Thank you for your time this morning.

The next person is Jackson.

Good morning, Jackson.

Hi, good morning, council members.

Thanks for the opportunity to comment.

I'm Jackson peach like the fruit.

I'm a renter in district for council member Peterson.

Yes to the tiny house village proposed on 45th and Roosevelt and please support council member Morales's amendment for a participatory budget process council.

I appreciate your warnings that Mayor Durkin's actions can perpetuate racist violence wrapped in social justice language.

I hope by now you've heard the name of Kevin Peterson Jr., who was a black man shot and killed in Vancouver, Washington last night and left to lie on the ground for 11 hours.

And I hope you recognize that Seattle is Vancouver, is Philly, is Minneapolis, is Louisville, and SPD's own decades-long history of resisting accountability for killings notwithstanding.

As long as our invasions of the state are called to handle all kinds of social problems more than they should, then no matter how much training they get, no matter how diverse the force is, this will happen again here.

Please keep up your hard work of building a city where our Black and Indigenous people have real safety and equity.

Continue the hiring freeze into 2021. Thank you for your work.

Thank you very much.

The next three speakers are Debra Furtaso, Dana Lastimado, and Barbara Van Gassen.

Good morning, Debra.

Good morning.

Good morning, my name is Deborah frost.

So I represent the uptown alliance and a broad coalition that supports the funding of Thomas Street.

We would like you to consider the sponsorship and support a council member Louis Strauss and Gonzalez to include funding for Thomas Street as their in their amendment.

This project and corridor when finished achieves the city's goals of promoting equity and accessibility to the range of Seattle Center programs to all of Seattle by providing a more affordable way to access the Seattle Center.

Allowing people and visitors from all over Seattle to park remotely or arrive by transit to have a safe, affordable, and accessible route to Seattle Center supports the original vision of also placing the new Climate Pledge Arena in a residential neighborhood without destroying it with traffic.

Thank you.

Excellent.

Thank you.

Dana, good morning.

Good morning.

My name is Dana Lacimato.

I'm the former vice president of the Parking Enforcement Guild.

I've been a parking enforcement officer now for eight years.

And I just want to reiterate with my other coworkers, we are BIPOC, majority BIPOC.

We're ready for a change and we want to be part of the solution.

So I just ask that you consider Council Member Horvath's proposal and move us to the community safe game communication center.

Thank you.

That's excellent.

Thank you so much.

The next person is Barbara.

Good morning, Barbara.

Good morning, City Council.

My name is Barbara Bankston.

I'm a resident in District 7. I'm asking City Council to make a concrete plan for defunding Seattle PD by 50% and investing the funds in black communities and community-led health and safety programs through a participatory budgeting process.

The $100 million promised by Mayor Durkan are a good start but must not come at the expense of Jump Start, Seattle, or any other city funds.

Instead of austerity, we need investments in public services, economic relief, housing, infrastructure, and the Green New Deal.

Instead of punishing poverty, we need to end it.

As ACLU Washington writes, the amount of money a city allocates for human services and housing versus police, for example, says a lot about not only the kind of society we are, but also the kind of society we want to be.

I'm asking City Council to pass a solidarity budget that mitigates the harms caused by systemic racism, builds resilient communities, and sets Seattle on the path to become the equitable, sustainable city that it needs to be in the 21st century.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

The next three people are Lorette, Colbert, Will Kendlick, and Billy Hetherington.

And I will note, Will, we see you listed as not present.

So if you dial in, we're still able to get to you, number 18. Until then, we'll go with Lorette and then Billy.

Good morning, Lorette.

Good morning.

Can you hear me?

Yes, we can.

Thank you.

Good, thank you.

My name is Lorette Colbert.

Let's restart.

I'm so sorry, Lorette.

Let's restart.

There we go.

Okay, just want to give you a full minute.

There you go.

Okay, thank you.

I'm a retired teacher union member.

I'm calling to voice my support for councilmember Sawant's proposal for an elected civilian police accountability commission.

And, of course, to encourage you to do the same.

The important point I want to make this morning concerns timing.

It's crucial in Seattle's work toward police reform to end excessive use of force, to end racially biased policing, that the accountability system problem be addressed now, at the same time as police reforms such as funding and responsibility redistribution, those reforms that will come up this year.

Accountability and reform are two sides of the same coin.

It's obvious that the police accountability system isn't working, and timing now is everything.

Whatever reforms are to come this year, the reforms cannot and will not be fully effective without a change in police accountability.

So please, support Council Member Sawant's proposal for an elected civilian police accountability.

Thank you so much.

The next person is Will.

Will, we still see you listed as not present.

So we're going to go to Billy.

Good morning, Billy.

Good morning, Chair Mosqueda and Council Members.

My name is Billy Hetherington.

I'm the Political Director of Labor's Local Union 242 and the Secretary of the Washington State Good Roads Association.

I'm here today to speak in support of Agenda Item 8, the $24 million in added funding for maintenance activities on SDOT bridges.

In light of the recent West Seattle Bridge closure I want to thank praise Councilmember Peterson for his leadership in asking for an audit of SDOT's bridge infrastructure.

The audit shows the extreme lack of funding in the budget to properly maintain Seattle's current bridge infrastructure.

Local 242 members and Seattle residents as a whole are currently experiencing the effects a closure such as the West Seattle Bridge can have on moving people and goods throughout the region.

Reservation and maintenance of our roads and bridges has been drastically underfunded throughout the state, and I would ask the council to adequately fund the preservation and maintenance of its bridge infrastructure.

Thank you for your time, and happy Halloween to everybody.

Thank you so much, Billy.

The next three speakers are Lynn Judge, Paul Chapman, and Jonathan Furco.

Good morning, Lynn.

Hi.

Thank you.

My name is Lynn Judge, and I'm a homeowner in District 6. I'm calling on you to pass this 2021 budget that reflects your stated commitment to supporting and protecting Black communities and dismantling systemic racism.

In particular, I'm asking you to prioritize the following.

First, extend the SPD hiring freeze through 2021 and invest attrition-related savings in community-led alternatives to policing.

Second, support Council Member Morales' amendment to allocate all funds cut from SPD to community-led safety solutions through a participatory budget process that empowers those most affected by police racism and violence to create equitable safety solutions.

Third, support council members to launch an amendment to fully fund Africastown's affordable housing project on East Yessler Way.

This project will combat gentrification that has displaced so much of Seattle's Black community in the Central District.

Fourth, I'm asking you to reject the Mayor's austerity budget that puts critical priorities against each other and preserve funding for the Green New Deal, affordable housing, and COVID-19 support.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

And the next person is Paul.

Good morning, Paul.

Hi, good morning.

Analysis yesterday found that Seattle City Council has proposed cutting just 17% of the Seattle Police budget.

17% isn't bold and it won't send a message.

The community has asked for a clear message.

King County Equity Now, the Seattle Immigrant and Refugee Commission, the Seattle Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Commission, the Human Rights Commission, the 43rd District Democrats, the 37th District Democrats, the 36th District Democrats, Nickelville, Real Change.

These groups have asked you to send a message.

17% won't stop cops from inflicting permanent nerve damage.

17% won't stop harassment arrests.

17% won't stop cops from shooting people in mental crisis.

17% won't stop cops from gassing our kiddos.

I know we can do better.

I urge you to do better.

Please defund SPD by 50%.

But that's not all.

We need a new deal.

I implore you to also replace the white supremacy encoded in the dysfunctional, expensive, and inflexible unjust cop contract.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next person is Jonathan.

Good morning, Jonathan.

Yeah, good morning, good morning.

I misspelled my name, my bad.

My name is Jonathan Figrueux, and I'm reporting live from Beacon Hill.

And today I just want to urge council members to maintain the hiring freeze of SPD as part of the solidarity budget.

You know, my background is in climate justice organizing, and part of my organizing philosophy is that we got to, one, stop the bad, and two, build the new.

I think releasing the hiring freeze is, or maintaining the hiring increase, I'm sorry, is part of the stop the bad.

You know, I think this whole year we have seen police brutality displayed at such drastic, you know, high levels.

And, you know, it just doesn't make sense to hire more cops right now.

That doesn't seem like the thing that people have been calling for, the people taking it to the streets.

You know, this whole, this whole uprising has not been about hiring more cops.

And so please maintain the hiring freeze.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

The next three people are Maria Hall, Stan Esteban and Katie Lewis.

Good morning Maria.

Good morning.

My name is Maria Hall and I've been a parking enforcement officer for the City of Seattle for the past five years.

I am calling in today to support the proposal to expand the responsibilities of the Parking Enforcement Unit.

We are a diverse team, and we have valuable training in a variety of services.

Currently, we do a few things such as traffic control, responding to customer service requests, obviously enforcing the parking codes, and partnering with other agencies and social services to address parking-related issues.

We are customer service-driven, and we strongly believe that we are capable of providing additional services to the community of Seattle if given the opportunity to do so.

Thank you very much for your time and consideration today.

Thank you as well.

The next person Stan.

Hi.

Good morning.

Thank you for your time.

I am Officer Esteban also currently employed with SPD's Parking Enforcement Unit and have been employed as such for the past 15 years.

I am hoping to expand our responsibilities beyond parking enforcement.

As a unit, I believe we have the ability and experience to handle emergent situations beyond parking-related issues.

In my experience, I've handled situations where I've reunited a lost pet with their owner, helping the elderly find their vehicle, jump-starting stranded motorists, as well as assisted SPD patrol units in communication and capturing a bank robbery suspect during a routine patrol call on Capitol Hill.

As PEOs, we are trained to observe and identify suspicious activities, writing reports, and take immediate control of any traffic control situations.

I hope you consider our proposal to transferring parking enforcement to the Department of Community Safety and Communication Center.

I fully support the potential move 100%.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

And good morning, Katie.

Hi.

My name is Katie Lewis.

I'm a resident of the U District.

First, I wanted to thank you for proposing to add funding back for Route 44 improvements.

A full workhorse of a bus up here, it really helped stitching the city together east-west.

Second, I wanted to ask that you include funding as part of that for the proposed pedestrian and cyclist improvements across I-5 at 45th Street, connecting the U District This is a critical connection point, builds on our light rail investments, provides a lot of value with minimal investment, delivers on our promise of the Move Seattle levy, and it makes sense to do this now.

Critical connection point.

I saw it acts as a barrier between Wallingford and the U District.

There aren't a lot of crossing points, and a number of them are not great.

You have a really good experience with the Burt Gilman down in the south and a really solid experience with Ravenna crossing up in the north.

45th and 50th are both not great experiences.

And with Light Rail going in, 45th will be the most central connection between Central Langford and U District.

Both of those are not great.

We need a good connection to come in before Light Rail.

Thank you very much.

The next person is Valerie.

Good morning, Valerie.

Just perfect.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning, this is Valerie Schloret from District 2. Agenda item 28 today is $65,000 to the OIG for a sentinel review of police interactions during the summer's George Floyd demonstrations.

I listened to a virtual community listening forum hosted by the OIG in August.

It was a dramatic example of everything that's wrong with the police accountability system in Seattle.

The event was not publicized.

A few protesters called in to provide evidence of violent and traumatizing police behavior at demonstrations over the summer.

As the event continued, it appeared to be a setup.

Once again, our so-called accountability system provided the illusion of official response with no real consequences for abusive policing.

The OIG is the wrong entity to review police behavior It is not truly independent of the SPD like the OPA.

Please move funds from our current accountability system, particularly the OIG and the OPA.

Support council.

Thank you very much, Valerie.

The next three speakers are Vicky Clark, Melanie Kay, and Doug Trump.

Vicky, good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning, Council.

This is Vicki Clark, Policy Director for Cascade Bicycle Club, speaking this morning to express support for the Solidarity Budget and the Move All Seattle Sustainably priorities that have already been circulated to Council.

I specifically want to highlight this morning support for two budget amendments proposed by Council.

One, funding for the Georgetown South Park Trail, and two, $400,000 towards planning for a South Seattle bike route.

I want to echo the comments of an earlier speaker, Patrick, regarding how these projects mirror the Bike Advisory Board's priorities.

Additionally, these projects were the highest priorities identified through public outreach as the 2019 Bike Master Plan Implementation Plan, what a mouthful, was developed just last year.

Specific to item number seven, the 400,000 for planning of a bike route through the Rainier Valley and another route between Georgetown to downtown.

needed to make bare minimum advances towards safer biking in historically underinvested parts of the city.

These routes are sadly years off, and without this funding, they're on ice indefinitely.

Thanks, Council, for support of these priorities.

Thank you.

Good morning, Melanie.

Good morning.

Can you hear me okay?

Yes, we can.

Thank you, Council.

My name is Melanie Kay.

I'm a resident and homeowner in the Northgate area.

I'm calling to express my opposition to the continued cuts and the hiring freeze to the SPD.

I believe we need more resources to the police and not less.

And I'd like to speak generally about the proposal presented by Councilman Herbold, I believe, to expand the defense of misdemeanor crimes to include drug abuse, mental illness and poverty as a valid excuse for unlawful behavior.

This is deeply concerning on the surface and even more so that it was presented as a budget issue when clearly it is a public safety issue and ought to be legislated as such.

I think it's important to remember that people are responsible for their own choices and there ought to be recognize of personal accountability.

It seems as if the council failed to recognize this principle, and I think it's foolish and dangerous to pursue policies that perpetuate placing a value on victimhood.

The purpose of local government is to protect our rights, including the right to private property, and it seems that this proposal and the recent cuts to the SPD are the exact opposite of that.

Again, this seems to be a public safety issue.

It's important to people like me and my family who care about living in a safe, lawful society.

Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you.

Good morning.

Good morning, Doug.

Please go ahead.

Hi, I'm Doug Trum, Executive Director of the Urbanist and a renter in D4.

And I wanted to express the support for the solidarity budget and for the move all Seattle sustainably budget.

And I echo what Vicki said about the bike investments in there.

And thank you to Council Member Morales for leading on that.

And I also wanted to speak to the Georgetown to South Park Trail and the Route 44 upgrades.

Both these projects are a long time coming and would greatly improve bottlenecks and the South Park Trail, and particularly with the bridge out, is a huge priority for getting people through that busy South Park Bridge area.

And I also, you know, this is all part of the solidarity budget, and I really encourage the council to be bold in reworking the mayor's budget, because there is a lot of talk of reimagining policing, but the imagination so far seems mostly focused on budget tricks, so I hope that the...

Okay, colleagues, that brings us to the end of the 30-minute allotment.

We do have five more people, I'm sorry, six more people present.

I would like to offer six more minutes of public testimony.

We have a long agenda today, but I would like to do that.

If there's no objection, the public comment will be extended for another six minutes.

Okay, let's get through everyone.

I hear no objection to that.

Let's go ahead.

Jennifer Gosar, followed by Morgan Barlett, Lauren Hansley.

Then the last three will be Elena Looper, David Hines, and David Kappens.

Good morning, Jennifer.

Good morning, Chairperson Mosqueda, and good morning, Council Members.

I have called back in today to again advocate for the SPD Civilian Oversight Board proposed by Councilperson Fuentes.

I'm a constituent of Councilperson Dan Strauss in District 6, as well as Chairperson Mosqueda and Council President Gonzalez.

As I stated yesterday, both accountability bodies, the CPC and LBA, have been ineffectual and or dysfunctional.

It is imperative that we also reimagine police accountability and civilian oversight with real accountability powers and practices.

In order to illustrate my point I want to ask you all to think of one just one significant practice change that either the CPC or the OPA have affected in SPD.

There isn't one because these bodies don't have what they need and at this point have a practice activity despite 27 deaths at the hands of SPD.

How is it that Seattle mourns people killed in other places without a single complaint by the two bodies charged with SBE accountability for the murder of Terry Kramer?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning, Morgan.

Just star 610 mute.

Perfect.

Hey there.

My name is Morgan Bartlett.

I'm a two-year Seattle resident that works directly with Homeless and Housing Insecure Youth in the University District.

I'd first like to say thank you to Councilwoman Shama Sawant for treating housing like the human right it is.

Their proposal of $12 million in additional funding to expand tiny homes is an affirmation of what anyone in my field already knows, which is that the best way to solve homelessness is by giving people a place to call home.

No discussion of homelessness is complete, however, without addressing the systemic violence that places people into my care in the first place.

I'm talking, of course, about the Seattle Police Department.

We used to say to each other after the third crisis of the night and shelter that we were doing more than SPD and we should have that level of funding.

And we now have an unprecedented opportunity to make that dream a reality by defunding SPD by 50% at least and reallocating that funding into black is a public services that all of us depend on.

I fully support the solidarity budget and I call on the city council to reject any budget that makes cuts to the public services we need instead of the cuts to the oppressive systems that we don't.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next person is Lauren.

Good morning.

Good morning.

My name is Lauren Hancy Butler.

I'm calling to voice my support for deeply divesting from SPD.

I work in social services currently with folks living with HIV and every hour of my day is spent trying to do more with less resources.

Every agency I've worked for faces budget cuts all the time and our response is to just work harder and more creatively to meet the needs of those we serve.

SPD's response to such minimal budget cuts is extremely revealing of their lack of ability to respond to the safety priorities of the community whose budget they drain in order to supposedly protect.

It's truly wild to me that SPD continues to cynically threaten our community with many dangers we will supposedly face if they lose even a few officers.

Please defund SPD to invest in true community safety.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning Elena.

Just star six to unmute.

Perfect.

Good morning, council members.

My name is Elena Loper.

I live in District 5, Council Member Juarez's district.

I'm mourning the loss this week of Walter Wallace Jr. and Kevin Peterson Jr., who were senselessly murdered by law enforcement officials.

The police don't keep us safe.

I support the demands of King County Equity Now to defund the police by 50% and invest in BIPOC community through a participatory budget.

As part of the 2021 budget City Council must maintain the hiring freeze for cops as a necessary step toward honoring Black lives and building a new normal rooted in equity.

We need council to hold the line and continue the hiring freeze into 2021. With every officer retiring or resiring presents resigning presents an opportunity to expand critical investments in public safety solutions and elevate Black lives over police budgets.

As Seattle Police Department employees leave the department the last thing we need is new cops to replace those who have voluntarily left.

Every new police hire would mean another investment into a police salary and pension.

All right, thank you.

I yield my time.

Oh, okay.

Well, thank you very much for your time this morning.

Thank you.

And the next person is David Hines.

Thank you.

Good morning.

We have a homeless crisis right now, not next year during election time or during budget demands for more races.

We need to solve the homeless crisis and use that money immediately to get people off the streets and where they need to be.

And stop exempting the drug pushers destroying lives daily, making it impossible to deal with all the junkie thieves who keep giving a pass exempting from jail after stealing 18 of my bicycles while squandering emergency grant money this winter to pay off Sharon Lee.

and the activists for next election while still not solving the crisis right now.

We can't even get a shower in Ballard because Sharon Lee rips off her subsidiary, Urban Rest Stop, so Lehigh can remortgage a rundown flawed building design, creating cheating homeless with subhuman rights violating disservice.

Council needs to reconsider their use of emergency COVID homeless crisis money used by the Democratic Party of Mayor and council re-election apparatus financed through contract owners and donors whose activist employees saturate public comment, intimidating council never to investigate while Sharon Lee of Lehigh is also unqualified.

Thank you, David.

The last person is David Kappes.

Kappes, good morning, David.

Looks like you're still muted on my end, David.

One more try, star six to unmute.

David, I'm so sorry.

I know you were waiting on the line this whole time, so one more try, star six to unmute.

I'll give it another second.

Perfect.

Great.

Go ahead, please.

Hi, my name is David Kipnis.

I'm a stranded West Seattle resident, but there's much more important things going on here.

I'd like to speak about that systemic threat, such as police behavior, bias laws, and even gerrymandering are only symptoms of the real barrier to equality.

True equality starts here with a budget process that promotes economic equity.

Each year across America, acts of economic inequality are reenacted to a budget process that only marginally includes the needs and voices of the BIPOC community.

At the end, a balanced budget is proudly paraded to its citizens as an accomplishment.

But it's not balanced at all, because it's not balanced from the start.

And the amount of money dedicated to militarized policing is a prime example.

I'm a Seattle patriot.

I, too, believe that Seattle is a community that is willing to abandon writing the history of BICOC community for them, and that we are a city of people willing to give up power to communities historically marginalized.

in a process which from the start, which includes, incorporates new voices to reenact the foundation of equality, economic equality.

What Seattle needs is a government willing to do the same.

Let's start a new history by decreasing police funding by 50% and divide funds to areas that engaged BIPOC communities recommend, such as a green economy,

Okay, everybody, thank you so much for calling in this morning.

That concludes our public testimony for Friday, October 30th.

Appreciate you all offering additional time for those last speakers.

Let's go ahead and move on to items in our agenda as published.

Madam Clerk, could you please read items number one and two for this morning's session into the record?

Agenda items, Roman numeral one, Seattle Department of Transportation, and Roman numeral two, homelessness.

Thank you very much, Madam Clerk.

Okay, colleagues, we have a robust list of amendments and possible ideas for our consideration for the proposed budget package.

Let's turn it over to Calvin, who has the first item from Council President Gonzales.

Good morning, council members.

My name is Calvin Chow with Council Central staff.

There are nine items related to SDOT today, and I'll be moving forward at a fairly crisp clip and then ask the sponsors to speak to the proposals in more detail.

Item number one is SDOT 1A1, and this item would add $150,000 for a public life study of Capitol Hill.

This item was proposed in the 2020 budget using TNC tax revenue, which did not materialize this year.

So this item would restore that funding for next year.

This is sponsored by Council Member Gonzalez and co-sponsored by Council Member Swat and Council Member Strauss.

Excellent.

Council President, good morning.

Good morning, everyone.

Kelvin did a fantastic job giving the overview of what this is.

This is a legacy item from last year's budget that I'm hoping that we can continue to prioritize.

I do think that the focus of the Public Life Study, which is on Capitol Hill, will be really critical to the post-COVID recovery efforts as well, and just want to strongly encourage my colleagues to continue to support this particular public life study, which will focus on identifying how to make this neighborhood more walkable, sustainable, and multimodal for neighborhood-wide use.

And the hope is that this pilot would take hold in Capitol Hill, and that we would be able to learn a lot from it and emulate its lessons and its models in other neighborhoods who are looking to create for pedestrian forward, non-motorized vehicle forward options for public life and public safety improvement in the built environment in neighborhoods that we can be able to extrapolate from the lessons here and apply it to other neighborhoods who are looking for similar strategies to improve public life and public safety in their built environment.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much, Council President.

Any additional comments or questions on this?

Appreciate you bringing this item forward.

Let me just make sure my screen is showing correctly there.

Okay, so as we've done in the past, if you are interested in co-sponsoring, please do raise the virtual hand here and we will get folks added.

Council President Gonzalez, I see you're joined by Council Member Sawant and Council Member Strauss.

Thank you very much.

Let's move on to the next item.

Item number two is S.2A1.

This item would add $400,000 for the Market to Mohai project.

This project similarly was included in the 2020 budget using TNC revenues, which did not occur.

So this proposal would restore that funding for 2021. The proposal is sponsored by Council Member Lewis with co-sponsorship from Council Member Strauss and Council Member Gonzalez.

Excellent, thank you.

Council Member Lewis, please go ahead.

Calvin, thank you for queuing that up.

I'm happy to bring this forward and want to do a recognition and tip of the hat to Councilmember Strauss for his work on this in Councilmember Bagshaw's office and a tip of the hat to former Councilmember Bagshaw for being a big leader.

on the market to Mojave.

And, you know, this is gonna be a critical pedestrian and infrastructure and tourism investment as we come out of COVID and are looking to attract people to come back to downtown Seattle to take advantage of the sort of two civic jewels of Pike Place Market and the new Mojave campus in South Lake Union.

It's really important that we keep this going, especially given that there is money from other jurisdictions and a lot of stakeholder investment in this, and really want to make sure that even in these difficult times, we keep this on the track to be part of our broader stitching together of a lot of the civic institutions downtown that are important cultural and the city.

And we will be able to do that in a variety of different spaces in the city.

With that I really appreciate Councilmember Juarez, Councilmember Strauss and Councilmember Gonzalez and Councilmember Sawant jumping on board and look forward to moving this forward.

Thank you very much.

No additional questions on that.

Let's move to the next one.

Item number three is S.3A1.

This item would add $777,000 for the Thomas Street redesign project.

Similar to the last two, this item was in the 2020 proposed budget or adopted budget using TNC revenues, which have not materialized.

This item is sponsored by Council Member Lewis and co-sponsored by Council Member Strauss and Council Member Gonzalez.

Councilmember Lewis, please go ahead.

Thank you, Calvin.

I'm really happy to be bringing this forward again.

Tip of the hat to Councilmember Strauss and Councilmember Bagshaw for getting this done in past budgets.

The Thomas Street redesign is one of the things that I'm most excited about in terms of the infrastructure projects in District 7. It has very broad implications for the transportation mitigation and congestion planning around what we're expecting to see when the stadium at Seattle Center is up and operational and hockey comes to Seattle.

a really critical example of the kinds of infrastructures around multimodal street design that I hope is an example for the future in the city.

And that there are more streets that will be designed but it's anticipated in the Thomas Street redesign.

I really think getting this getting this piece of infrastructure off the ground so it can serve as that example of things to come and be a critical part of our multimodal infrastructure is something we should continue to push for.

And I'm proud to bring this forward to build on that work of former legislative aide Dan Strauss and former council member Bagshaw.

Thank you very much.

Council colleagues, any questions on this?

Okay.

Thank you very much, Council Member Lewis.

I see Council Members Sawant, Juarez, along with Council Member Strauss and Council President Gonzalez.

No additional questions?

Okay, let's go on.

Item number four is SDOT 4A1.

This item would add $1 million to SDOT for the Route 44 Transit Plus Multimodal Corridor Project.

This project was reduced in total budget by $1 million in the proposed CIP this year.

So this proposal would restore that funding to the project to the previous level.

It is sponsored by Council Member Strauss with support from Council Member Morales and Council Member Lewis.

Thank you.

Council Member Strauss, please go ahead.

Good morning, Chair, and thank you, Calvin.

It's a great summary.

Thank you, Council Members Morales and Lewis.

Route 44 Transit Multimodal Project has been an ongoing effort with King County Metro since 2019. This project aims to improve transit reliability and travel times and pedestrian safety along Route 44, which runs between Ballard, Longford, and the University of Washington.

Improvements include bus-only lanes, signal upgrades, channelization changes, sidewalk upgrades, and safety improvements.

And Route 44 is a critical east-west connection connecting RapidRides DE and the light rail.

It makes it one of the highest ridership routes in the city.

And Route 44 provides a connection to the University of Washington Light Rail Station and will be one of the primary connections to the University District of Light Rail, which is just off the ave next year.

And as a Route 44 rider myself, and I'm sure any Route 44 rider could tell you, travel times through this corridor can vary dramatically and be hard to predict.

The changes being delivered in this project are so important to bringing predictability and faster travel times to this key connection for so many neighborhoods.

Because we know that when people can depend and rely on predictable travel times on their bus, they're more able to use and rely on the bus.

Because when you don't know how long it will take you to get where you're going, you're not as likely to use that bus.

So that's why this is so important.

And Council Member Peterson, following up on our conversations, I would be happy to include your your aspects about the I-5 overpass as well.

So thank you, Chair.

Thank you very much.

Are there additional questions or comments?

Council Member Peterson, please go ahead.

Thank you, Chair Mosqueda.

Thank you, Council Member Strauss, for moving this forward.

I want to thank the director of the Seattle Department of Transportation, Sam Zimbabwe, for putting together an SDOT budget, it was very difficult to craft during the back-to-back budget deficits that we've had.

So there are lots of projects here that have merit, and so I've been very careful about what I sign on to initially.

This one is very compelling because it connects so many different neighborhoods and different modes of travel.

And as Council Member Strauss alluded to, that crossing over I-5 on 45th Street connecting Wallingford to the U-District as we're about to open the Sound Transit Station on Brooklyn Avenue, it's really important that there be pedestrian improvements there.

I've been working with some neighbors, some cycling advocates, pedestrian safety advocates for that crossing.

So I appreciate Council Member Strauss mentioning that.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, and either for the sponsor, the chair or Calvin, how does this fit in with other priorities in the prioritization process?

It is 1 of the move Seattle projects, so it was 1 of several multimodal quarter projects that were included in Seattle.

It is part of sort of the ongoing management and balance of that portfolio projects that the Move Seattle Oversight Board helps advise the department, the mayor and the council on.

Beyond that, I'm not sure I can explain how it's prioritized.

It was identified early on as one of the corridors when we went to voters back in 2005. 15. Apologies.

Feels like that long ago.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

I don't see additional questions.

Anything else to add to that, colleagues?

Okay.

So Councilmember Strauss is joined by Councilmembers Morales, Sawant, Peterson, Lewis, and Council President Gonzalez.

All right.

Let's go ahead and move on.

Item number five is S.5A1, and before I go into this one, I just wanted to highlight that I have some additional information that came after this proposal was published for the agenda, so please bear with me.

As written, this item would add $1.8 million for the Georgetown-South Park Trail.

The 1.8 million was originally identified by council as a future funding need that was not funded when the project was first identified.

Essentially, the council approved some design money and put a placeholder in the future budget years to identify that construction money would be needed for this project.

The project is currently fully funded through design.

but we have a revised cost estimate.

We now know that the cost estimate for this project is 6.8 million.

The department has identified a 1.6 million potential grant for this project.

So it leaves a unfunded construction amount of 5.2 million.

So that is new information that is not included in the write-up, and I apologize for that.

It's new information.

This proposal is sponsored by Council Member Morales.

and it has co-sponsorship from Councilmember Herbold and Councilmember Sawant.

Thank you.

Councilmember Morales, please go ahead.

Good morning, everyone.

Thank you, Calvin.

I want to thank the co-sponsors with me, Councilmember Sawant and Herbold.

I appreciate the new information, Calvin.

I know that we have been trying to get a little more clarity on whether the design phase was fully funded and completed or not.

I will say that if what we are now understanding is that there is a $5 million construction balance that we need to work on, I might ask Chair, if we can dig into this a little bit more and try to get a better understanding of what we need to do.

I was prepared to ask my colleagues to support the 1.8.

I still think this is a really important project for the community.

This is a project that Duwamish Valley Safe Streets and 19 other organizations have been advocating for for a very long time, over 20 years, communities been asking for a connection between South Park and Georgetown to connect these communities that are on opposite sides of the Duwamish.

And I do think that this would provide a really important Economic development connection between the business corridors in both neighborhoods provide a really much safer and family friendly way for neighbors in both communities to walk and bike across the route.

and would really just kind of unite the Duwamish Valley by connecting to schools and medical facilities and public library.

So I do think that this is a really important project.

And I would ask for the chair's indulgence for us to have another conversation about what resources there might be available to fund that 5 million.

Thank you, Council Member Morales.

Council Member Herbold, comment.

Yes, thank you so much.

I really want to thank Council Member Morales for bringing this forward.

This is a high priority item for Georgetown and South Park.

I also appreciate that ReConnect West Seattle has agreed to provide funding to complete the 90% design for this project.

and recognize that they are prioritizing this project among many, many ReConnect West Seattle priorities.

I'm not sure if the funding gap that Calvin mentioned does include the PSRC construction grant.

It does take that into consideration.

Okay, thank you.

And the other question that I had, and perhaps it was answered in SharePoint and I just missed it, Calvin, can you remind us of the action that the council took last year within the context of prioritizing bike master plan projects?

This was one of the highly prioritized plan, sorry, one of the highly prioritized projects from the master plan.

We, I think, passed a resolution during budget last year identifying a half dozen projects as things that we really felt strongly the priorities need to be focused on.

And just what was the outcome of that?

What was the action and what was the outcome of the action?

If I remember correctly, I believe it actually was perhaps in the 2019 budget, there was additional money identified from the Mercer Mega Block sale.

uh, transportation funding related to the Mercy Mega Block that could only be used for transportation purposes that was, um, uh, highlighted for additional work on some of these, um, bike facilities.

A lot of it was directed to, uh, kind of further that, uh, that design and-and the concepts.

Um, a lot of focus on the MLK route, uh, the South Downtown to Georgetown routes.

Uh, I-I believe that was the same time when this project was identified as a-a new, um, It had been advocated by the community.

And so that's when the design money and the identification of future construction money being necessary, but not really knowing what the cost estimate was at that time.

So I think this item and is also the item number seven that we'll come to in a moment are sort of the follow on from some of that work.

Thank you so much.

I'm going to offer Ali a chance to chime in.

Ali, did you have anything else to add?

No, I was just jumping in if Calvin needed additional information, but he had it all at hand.

I was just going to reference the resolution.

I think Council Member Herbold was referring to his resolution 31894 that listed, did list this project, but Calvin described it in the way.

It was a list without funding priority, without the specific funding identified.

but it was a prioritized list.

Thank you all for that information.

I'm not seeing additional hands at this point.

I want to thank Councilmember Morales for flagging the ongoing evaluation here.

Happy to continue chatting with you about this and look forward to following up on this item in more detail soon.

At this point, it looks like Councilmember Morales is joined by Councilmembers Strauss and Herbold along with Sawant.

Thank you very much.

Item number six is S.6A1.

This item would add $943,000 to the Route 7 multimodal project, specifically for sidewalk projects in the Rainier Corridor.

This funding would replace some funding that was removed from the project in the 2021-2026 proposed CIP.

Specifically, it would restore funding for five sidewalk segments in the Rainier Valley.

This project is sponsored by Council Member Morales with co-sponsorship from Council Member Sawant and Council Member Lewis.

Excellent, thank you.

Council Member Morales.

Thank you.

I do want to thank the co-sponsors for joining me here.

Almost every week, my office receives an email about sidewalks.

And my constituents may not have safe streets to go across to walk home, to walk to school.

Rainier is a major arterial.

We know it's the most dangerous street in the city.

And so they're certainly not exempt from the challenges community I'm trying to go up and down that street.

So Rainier Avenue was going to receive some repairs as part of the rapid ride improvements.

And so I'm hoping to restore funding.

As Calvin mentioned, it's for several different segments of sidewalk along the road.

And we have strong support from front mass member organizations, including Transit Riders Union, Sierra Club, Seattle Neighborhood Greenways, 350 Seattle, Cascade Bicycle Club and others.

who understand that being able to get through our neighborhood safely is really important, particularly because we do have so many elderly and a lot of folks who have mobility impairments who need to be able to get down that road safely.

So I am seeking support to restore funding for these improvements.

Thank you, colleagues.

Thank you, Council Member Morales.

Are there questions on this item?

Just have a quick question.

On the five sidewalk corridors that are listed on the back of the form, is there sort of corresponding data that identifies which of these areas are the biggest hazard or risk right now?

I can follow up with the department to see if there's a rating on these.

I'm fairly sure they all rank fairly high on the list.

Thank you very much.

Thanks for that, Calvin.

Okay.

Council Members, thank you so much for signing on.

Council Member Morales is joined by Council Members Sawant, Peterson, Straus, Lewis, and Council President Gonzalez.

Thank you very much.

Item number seven.

Item number seven is S.7A1.

This item would add $400,000 for the Bike Master Plan Protected Bike Lanes Project, specifically to fund conceptual planning and preliminary design work on two segments, the Georgetown to downtown bicycle connection and the bicycle connection on MLK from Rainier to Henderson Street.

This is proposed by Council Member Morales with sponsorship from Council Member Swatt and Council Member Strauss.

Thank you, Council Member Morales.

Please go ahead.

Thank you very much, Calvin, and thank you to Council Members Strauss and Sawant.

We are hoping that $400,000 can be distributed to, as Calvin said, complete the MLK planning study, which did start this year.

Funding for the Georgetown to downtown via SOTO study, which has not really begun, and we're hoping to get that started.

And also to advance design from the Georgetown to downtown Soto Trail, at least to get it to about 60%.

As we just heard, you know, a lot of these projects need some design time before they're even ready for construction.

And so we're trying to get the ball rolling here.

Finishing the study on MLK in particular keeps that conversation alive about a safe biking route.

through the Rainier Valley, and this is one of the parts of town where we don't have any safe bike path to get into the downtown area.

So there are lots of different studies that are being proposed, and we would like to figure out how to do this well and safely.

Both of these connections, along with the important Beacon Avenue Trail, which was funded through the Mercer Block proceeds, would really help highlight the missing gaps that we have in the bike network in the Rainier Valley.

And so we want to make sure that we're retaining funding for the planning and design of these two routes, along with the work that's already happening on Beacon Hill.

and really honor the community input and time that our neighbors put in to identifying these priorities and to make sure that we are keeping the promises that we made through the Bike Master Plan Improvement Programs.

Thank you, Council Colleagues.

Are there any questions?

I do have a question similar to the one I was asking earlier.

Do we have a sense of where this fits in with the various priority documents that SDOT has produced already?

They were identified in the bike master plan implementation plan, so I can follow up with you about where they fit on the on the priority list.

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much Council Member Morales, Council Members Sola and Strauss are your co-sponsors.

Let's keep going.

Item number eight is S.8A1.

This item would add 24 million of funding for four separate S.bridge maintenance activities, two of which are capital improvement projects and two are regular operations and maintenance.

This is an annual funding increase to match recommendations from the city auditor's 2020 bridge maintenance report.

It is sponsored by Council Member Peterson with co-sponsorship from Council Member Herbold and Council Member Lewis.

Thank you.

Council Member Peterson, please go ahead.

Thank you, Chair Mosqueda, and thanks to the initial co-sponsors, Council Members Lewis and Herbold, and for others who might sign on.

Thank you to the laborers for calling and writing to us, and for the Soto Small Business Improvement Area for writing to us about the need to repair our bridges.

The recent independent audit of bridges across Seattle conducted by our city auditor, who reports in the legislative department, It concluded that our city government has been substantially under-investing in the maintenance of our bridges throughout the city.

The result of underfunding our bridge infrastructure increases the risk of harm and disruption.

Failing to invest at adequate levels today means taxpayers might have to bear an even larger replacement cost later, pay now or pay more later.

The sudden closure of the West Seattle Bridge should be a wake-up call that we must take care of our city's infrastructure, keep our residents and our local economy moving.

I appreciate that the mayor's budget tried to keep level the amount of spending for bridge maintenance despite the budget deficits we're facing.

This budget action would increase SDOT's budget to provide the bare minimum of maintenance funding for 2021 as recommended by the audit of all the bridges by our city auditor.

Happy to answer questions.

Councilmember Herbold, please go ahead.

Thank you so much.

Really appreciate it.

Really appreciate Councilmember Peterson bringing this forward and his leadership and asking for the bridge audit.

Just a little bit of Behind the scenes on the deliberations around the future path to address the West Seattle Bridge closure for folks who aren't paying super close attention, you know, the.

city is seriously considering not moving forward with a repair, despite the fact that its cost is modest, and there's a high confidence from the technical advisory panel that a repair would last.

And one of the reasons, one of the biggest reasons why the city is leaning towards replacement of the bridge at a much higher cost, upfront purchase cost, is because they're not confident that we will fund the annual maintenance of the existing bridge.

So a new bridge would cost about $250 million annually to maintain.

Whereas the existing bridge would cost about $500 million annually to maintain.

And I am finding it a little bit difficult to justify the expenditure when we have finite transportation dollars to meet a lot of needs.

the building of a brand new bridge, just because we're afraid that we're going to continue these, what I think are dysfunctional practices about maintaining our current infrastructure.

And so I really hope that we find a way to follow the city auditor's recommendations as it relates to how we can better maintain our existing bridges.

Our bridges are serving more and more commuters using transit.

And, you know, many of our bridges now have transit only lanes and they're multimodal.

They serve also freight corridors that are so important to our small businesses.

Really, really feeling that in West Seattle, the impacts to small businesses from not having the bridge running.

So I really hope that everybody takes I think that is a great way to address this need seriously and we work together to figure out how to address the recommendations of the city auditor.

Thank you.

I'm happy to co-sponsor this, but I think it's important to also note that the Department of Transportation's budget has been cut by, the proposed cut by Mayor Durkin is $117 million.

And this sort of very necessary maintenance is an example of what is being cut.

And so while I'm happy to co-sponsor this, I've also proposed a budget amendment to restore all the $117 million worth of cuts by increasing the taxes on big businesses that the council passed earlier this year.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

I don't see initial hands.

I do have a few questions.

Councilmember or Calvin you have four items listed in the maintenance proposal here Three items with a four million dollar price tag and one with a twelve million dollar price tag.

Are those sequential or Are those standalone items?

Do you understand my question?

Yes, those are, so the way we allocate the 24 million, the idea is to get up to the $34 million figure, which was the bare minimum recommended by the auditor.

The auditor said you should be spending between 34 million and 102 million on annual bridge maintenance.

So we're spending about 10 million right now.

So these four items are the line items the auditor identified with SDOT as the core bridge maintenance items.

And so we would be adding it proportional to what the existing budget is for those line items.

So we're taking the 24 million and applying it proportionally to those line items.

So it's a percentage increase, basically.

It's a proportional increase on items that are already there.

You couldn't, you know, your proposal I'm asking, would it be feasible if you identified one or two of those four items?

And it sounds like the answer is no, it needs to be a proportional increase.

That's yes, exactly.

Okay.

And then on the second page here, um, you mentioned some of the proposed revenue sources.

Um, and I'm just wondering if you have also had the ability to have conversations with the, I don't know if there's anything else that you would like to add to that.

Mayor's office about their interest in any of these items as well.

Specifically item 3 and 4. If not, that's okay.

We can chat about it.

I think that the question is really about how do we try to identify the needed revenue sources to, you know,

I'm looking forward to the new revenue forecast and obviously with the overturning of I-976 that might present an opportunity as well with vehicle license fees.

I might just add this item too is an annual maintenance budget.

So it is the sorts of revenue for ongoing costs is going to be a major consideration.

Say that again, Calvin.

Unlike some of the other proposals we've talked about, which are one-time ads for 2021, this is an annual increase in bridge maintenance to meet the commitment or meet the need that was identified in the auditors report.

So I just wanted to highlight that, you know, fund balance is a one-time thing.

Some of these revenue sources that are identified would need to be pledged for ongoing time to fill the need over time.

Thank you very much.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you very much, Council Member Peterson.

Council Member Peterson, you are joined by Council Members Herbold, Sawant, Juarez, Strauss, and Lewis.

I think we got everyone.

Thank you, colleagues.

Let's move on to item number nine.

Item number nine is S.9A1.

It is a statement of legislative intent that requests that SDOT provide weekly reporting on progress on the West Seattle Bridge Immediate Response Program.

It identifies four main categories of reporting, one on the West Seattle Bridge, one on the Lower Spokane Swing Bridge, one on maintenance of other bridges in the corridor, and one on the Reconnecting West Seattle program, which is the traffic mitigation and response program that's associated with the project.

This slide is sponsored by Councilmember Herbold, and it's co-sponsored by Councilmember Peterson and Councilmember Strauss.

Councilmember Herbold, this seems to be of growing importance.

Please let us know more about this.

Thank you so much.

The intent of the slide is to continue the weekly reporting that the council has been receiving from SDOT on the West Seattle Bridge and the ReConnect West Seattle investments.

This is, I think, a reasonable request, given that the budget proposes a bond sale of $100 million to fund these activities.

And this is adding $30 million in addition to the Interfund loan of $70 million already approved by the council.

One note is that we originally expected a decision from the mayor whether to identify as a preferred alternative either repair or replace by this time.

So depending on what happens next month, it's possible that this item could be edited to be tailored to the preferred alternative.

The current version as it's drafted now mentions repair or replace.

Thank you, Councilmember Herbold.

Are there questions on this item?

Councilmember, excuse me, Council President Gonzalez.

Thank you, Chair Muscata.

Just really quickly, can you, can Councilmember Herbold or Calvin, can you remind me what the cadence of the reporting is?

currently on the west Seattle bridge.

I do think it's currently it's weekly.

Okay so this would just this slide just proposes continuation of those weekly reports that are currently being provided by the department to city council on this particular project.

Correct.

Okay thank you so much.

I do uh want to note for the record I believe council member Juarez uh is it accurate that you are interested in adding your name to this one as well?

I think we have everyone, so I will Lewis and Council President Gonzalez.

Thank you so much.

So, does that conclude all of our items in the SDOT category?

That is the end of the SDOT section.

Thank you.

Okay.

Are there any additional questions or anybody didn't get a chance to add their names to any SDOT items?

Okay, excellent.

Thank you very much, Calvin.

Good to see you.

Before we jump in, Jeff, I might offer to my colleagues the next four items in the homelessness section when we did our Form A walkthroughs.

These are four items where I suggested that it sounded like there was a lot of commonality, perhaps synergy between what we were asking for.

So I don't see them here listed as one Form B. But as we walk through these first four forms, I would like to continue to think about the opportunities to identify commonalities between these items.

And if you are also able to speak to that concept of trying to create that connective tissue across the city, because there's clearly identified need in various districts, that would be helpful.

So just again, signaling my interest in seeing how these four items could potentially be woven together in some way that is satisfying the objective of the proposals.

Let's turn it over to Jeff to walk us through the first one in the homelessness section.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

For the record, Jeff Sims, Council Central staff, and you're exactly correct on items.

10, 11, 12, and 13 on the agenda.

Actually, all of the sponsor offices also emailed me as they submitted these, and it was really more of a function of time in order to work out the specifics of how to merge these all together.

But the sentiment from all the offices was that they wanted to work to find a way to roll each of these items together, given the amount of overlaps, and then come out with a crisp new proposal that would just be one single item.

As you noted, each of them run through homelessness outreach.

They're all in a general dollar range of $100,000 or $200,000.

And there are some that have unique specifics to them.

So I'll start off with HOM1.

And the unique factor here is a focus on the behavioral health, the ability of the providers to provide behavioral health services.

There is a geographic focus to each of these as well, I should have noted.

In this case, HOM1 is related to West Seattle and South Park.

And there's also a strong description, as you can see in the form that was provided, related to the way that this team would interact with members, both of the community and people experiencing unsheltered homelessness and businesses in the area.

The sponsor for H-1-1 is Council Member Herbold.

Please go ahead, Council Member Herbold.

Thank you so much.

As you stated, Madam Chair and Greg, I'm sorry, Jeff.

I think there is a lot of potential to combine my proposed budget action with those of other council members.

I think the important thing to focus on is that there is a really strong interest to have geographically focused, neighborhood focused outreach services.

And I think the call for these services is really a testament to how much our neighborhoods and communities are understanding the importance of outreach as a critical skill set and service right now.

Outreach is a compassionate response as people are trying to survive without a roof over their heads.

And it's also a practical response as new neighbors are struggling to find ways to live side by side.

Of course, outreach is not a replacement for sufficient non-congregate shelter space and affordable housing.

And so it's vital that we continue to invest in scaling up these resources as well so that folks living unsheltered have a healthy and safe alternative to living outside.

Outreach, as we know, can help connect to other needed services, such as LEED or healthcare, identify the need for city services, such as garbage removal, help encampment residents make changes to address safety or hazard concerns, and build relationships and provide information to encampment neighbors.

There's a great need for this skill set in West Seattle and South Park.

We're seeing an increase of people living unsheltered due to the pandemic and economic downturn.

And because of the strains on mobility due to the West Seattle Bridge being out of commission, it's hard for outreach workers who are not stationed in District 1 to make it here regularly.

I really appreciate the work that REACH has been doing to be present in District 1 at least once a week.

I also want to signal that if we were able to work together to I would see that to be a really the proposal that we'll be hearing later from Councilmember Morales on the HOPE proposal.

I don't want to call it a team.

I think we're trying to move away from calling it a team.

But that is the new approach to replace the navigation team.

The thing that's really missing from that is the funding for outreach and flexible services that we just passed on Monday when we lifted the proviso on the navigation team.

If you recall, we lifted the proviso on the old navigation team, funded a person, HSD, staffing that does not do We don't have that compliment for 2021 in the budget that we perhaps doing this citywide, but still with a neighborhood geographic focus for outreach that we replicate the approach that we used in the budget provisor that we just lifted and make clear that funding outreach also includes funding case management.

funding access to housing navigators, funding the services of the diversion services that work so well when outreach providers have access to them, and some flexible financial services.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Council Member Herbold.

Any questions on that?

Okay, no questions on that.

I appreciate you flagging how this could potentially, these geographic specific outreach efforts could potentially tie into a broader reframe on how we do outreach and housing and shelter placement.

So we'll look forward to hearing more as we continue to discuss that today, and also as we hear back from providers and from the executive office.

Thank you for flagging that opportunity there.

Makes me hopeful.

Okay, I'll stop.

I don't see any additional questions.

We have, in addition to Council Members Morales and Strauss, a co-sponsor adding is Council Member Sawant.

Thank you very much, Council Member Herbold.

Our next item up is HOM 2A1.

This is put forward by Council Member Morales.

And similar, as I mentioned, similar to the other first four homelessness proposals, this one would provide $98,000 to expand homelessness outreach services.

In this case, the geographic target would be Columbia City and Rainier Beach.

And I'll note that another unique aspect of this proposal compared to the other three is utilizing an agency that credibly represents BIPOC individuals who have lived experience of homelessness and as the agency that would provide the services.

Council Member Morales, please go ahead.

Thank you.

So this is This is an attempt again to address the need for neighborhood specific outreach services.

This would add a homelessness outreach worker to the Rainier Valley, which would allow more engagement with folks in district two.

As I stated before, we've recently had the opportunity to visit with several encampments and with RV residents.

going alongside outreach workers.

And so we've been able to see firsthand the really important work that they do through this sort of engagement.

And really, you know, beyond the outreach itself, offering clothing and helping connect folks to services and connecting them to shelter, just having these outreach workers there to be present and to be a resource to folks has been really important.

And we know that is deeply appreciated.

So as the chair mentioned earlier, we have had conversations with their staff.

There's been a staff level conversation about rolling these all up into one proposal.

Happy to do that and think about something larger.

I do want to say, though, that we've also had conversations during this budget process.

that rightly call out outreach as only one piece of a greater ecosystem.

And that is what we're trying to do as we'll discuss later with the HOPE proposal.

But this really is about creating a broader ecosystem so that it isn't just outreach that we're talking about.

We wanna acknowledge that there's a need to build more permanent supportive housing, more low and no barrier shelter, And so our hope is that we start to really move towards having a deep conversation about those investments as well.

And yeah, that said, the engagement and outreach really are something that mean a lot to the folks who are living outside, and we're happy to bring this budget action to support the outreach work that's being done.

Thank you, Council Member Morales.

Are there any questions on this item?

Okay, you specifically mentioned REACH.

I just wanted to note that the proposal you're bringing forward really identifies REACH as its core service provider in partnership, it sounds like, with BIPOC organizations.

We know that there's BIPOC members who are strong members and leaders within REACH, but I just wanted to make sure because REACH has obviously got a lot of support and evidence behind it and wanted to hear more about that.

Yeah sure.

So we've throughout these conversations we've been talking with for example the Seattle Indian Health Board with Chief Seattle Club.

And we want to make sure that as we move forward that we are with that we are finding folks and supporting organizations that have more direct contact reaches one organization.

But there are others that are engaged in this work as well.

OK.

Any additional questions on this?

Okay.

Thank you very much.

I see Council Members Sawant and Straus joining along with Council Member Herbold and Lewis.

Excellent.

Thank you very much, Council Member Morales.

Next item, please.

Next item is HOM 3A1.

This would add $220,000 general fund to HSD to increase homelessness service outreach services in North Seattle.

So in this case the area of focus would be the Lake City neighborhood and overall North in North Seattle.

And this this budget act proposed budget action is a little bit different from the others in that it is discussed as having two staff that would be added in order to provide those outreach services.

This is put forward by Council Member Waters.

Thank you very much.

Council Member Juarez.

Thank you.

I'm glad that you characterized, Madam Chair, what we're dealing with here.

I think it's no coincidence that items number 10, 11, 12, and 13 correspond with Districts 1, District 2, District 5, and District 6. that we are feeling the effects of the removal of the navigation team.

Whatever the politics are, the need is still there.

And it's a gaping need that we're finding more and more.

We've been laser focused on community and outreach.

So I want to just add one thing before I kind of go through my advocacy here.

I want to caution that we really want this to be community based.

for the unsheltered people that actually live here, that have the resources, that have family, that are on a transit spine, that use our community center, that use our library, that use our food bank, our clinic, where they get their health care.

A lot of our folks actually live here.

So that is why I'm putting the focus on having a presence in the community.

So you're not just deploying people from HSD from the south end up to the north end who aren't familiar with the community.

Some of the best successes we've had in getting people into housing, the Tiny House Village, the McDermott House, is because folks like Aurora Commons, North Helpline, God's Little Acre, the Mennonite community, Lake City First, all know these folks because we feed them twice a week at the community center, at the North Seattle Library, the Lake City Library, the Broadview Library.

And I know some people don't, maybe in the, those of us that understand and know our unsheltered community, we know these folks, we see them all the time.

And that has been our greatest success.

Councilor Morales pointed that out too, with Chief Seattle Club.

That is the point of the kinship, that we see them, they know us, and the trust is already there.

And that's 80% of it.

And once you get to that point, you can meet people where they're at to get them endorsed, to get their services, without any judgment.

So that's what we've been dealing with.

And I've lived in this district, in this neighborhood, in the North End for 34 years.

So let me just go a little bit into some of the wonky stuff of my script here, because I just want to make sure I tick off the boxes here or my staff is going to kill me.

Yes, this proposal would add $220,000 to hire two individuals to work with community to provide de-escalation and crisis intervention.

In Lake City and anywhere 80th up to 145th, community members on a volunteer basis have already organized and taken action to help their unsheltered neighbors.

Through a grassroots effort of residents, business owners, nonprofit leaders, and faith-based organizations and a group of 30 community members, they're the ones that have proposed and came to us and work with us in hiring two trained behavioral health workers to provide de-escalation and crisis intervention for folks living in the encampment with collaboration from the nonprofit Build Lake City Together.

We hope these social workers can be located or deployed immediately to the north to be on the scene and helping folks within minutes, because that's the kind of crisis we're dealing with now.

This model could be replicated in other neighborhoods to provide help to those in need quickly.

As I shared, community folks up here are already doing the work.

Two weeks ago, we met with our volunteers They're already picking up trash, picking up needles, delivering food alongside of SDOT, SPR, and SPU, as those city departments empty sandy cans, pick up trash, pick up needles, and replenish hand-washing stations, et cetera.

Just to name a few parks that in the last three months that have increased from four-tenths to up to 60, Albert Davis Park, the mini park on Lake City Way, 125th, Virgil Edward Parks, and now I've looked the other day and we have six new RVs.

So obviously the need is there.

Let me just move forward a little bit on some of the numbers or what we hope to see.

So Lake City needs trained professionals to build relationships with folks living in these encampments to keep them safe during COVID-19 and help them when in distress.

As I shared, Lake City has social services and outreach organizations in a strong faith-based community.

Organizations that have supported this budget action include Bethany Community Church, the Refugee Artisan Initiative, East Lake City Collaborative, Jet City, Beyond the Bowl, Pierre Enterprises, Literacy Source, God's Little Acre, the Mennonite Church and Community, and many, many community volunteers.

Last count was 30. So I'm here to share whether, and I have no problem joining my other brothers and sisters who represent districts, particularly districts one, two, and six, because I think we're seeing hit the hardest because we have more space and more parks and more green space.

And I haven't even listed all the parks.

I've just given you the top three that have quadrupled in size since July.

So there is a need, and I hope that you will join us.

And I have no problem working with the other district representatives and maybe bundling this up together.

But again, I just want to caution one thing.

It's really important that we use the people that are already on the ground who live here, who work here, who have businesses here, who are already doing the work.

So that is my only caution.

Thank you.

And thank you very much, council member.

I really appreciate your points.

I want to add a few pieces as well.

I think that there is a national trend, especially with COVID presenting itself in congregate settings, that there is a lot of concern, especially among those who are living on shelter.

And we know that from public testimony and from working with folks on the ground, those trusted community partners, that it's been really challenging because people are aware that COVID is spreading in those indoor areas.

So nationally, I think we've seen more visible presence of folks who are living outside and unsheltered.

And I think that helps underscore your point that we need those trusted community partners on the ground who have relationships, who know the neighborhood, who know folks in the community, and how maybe to approach people in a more trustworthy way to make sure that they are not only building a relationship, but when there is space, ideally in non-congregate shelter settings, they're able to help them get in quickly.

So I think that that's a really important point.

I also think that, you know, this is a phenomenon that we saw play out in the summer and in June and July, we started to see more visible presence of unsheltered folks.

And I think all of you who are providing these forms are recognizing that.

And this was well before the navigation team discussion, which, didn't go into effect until October 22nd.

So I do think that both at the national level, we're seeing this trend, everything that you all as council members are experiencing at the hyper local level in districts.

I really underscore the need for us to not only get more money out at the door for this outreach effort, but as you and the previous council member just spoke about the need to make sure that it's not just outreach, that you're getting folks inside.

So appreciate that and getting inside in the middle of a deadly pandemic requires that non-congregate shelter setting.

So I think that these are all issues that dovetail well and absolutely heard the need to make sure that we're working with those on the ground level.

But this is definitely something that we've seen over the last for five months and not just over the last two or three weeks.

Additional comments or questions?

Council Member Sawant.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member.

Council Member Sawant.

Thank you.

I'm already co-sponsoring this budget amendment as it shows up there.

And undoubtedly my office supports the outreach workers and social workers completely.

In fact, that is why my office is consistently fighting to defund the police by at least 50% and instead use those funds for services that actually work.

And in addition to also proposing to increase the Amazon tax so that we can fund what our communities need, which is services and housing and the Green New Deal.

And unfortunately, so far, my office is the only office to have put forward these proposals, these two proposals, let alone fight for it in any meaningful way.

I want to clarify that in response to some of the comments that were made, the navigation team was never actually removed.

The city council's summer budget vote never took effect.

And this past Monday, the city council minimized the summer ordinance even further.

I was the sole no vote on that ordinance.

Mayor Durkin likes to blame homelessness on the supposed end of the navigation team, but that is simply not based in facts.

And I would like to add in terms of where the funds should come from, not only should the city council be responding to the community demand to reduce the Seattle police bloated budget to fund services, but also I would note this week, we've got some important news.

Three Seattle corporations have reported staggering profits this week.

Amazon reported $6.2 billion of profit for the third quarter, which is, and these are all, you know, the quarterly profit reports.

This is a 200% increase over the corporation's last year's profits.

And since the pandemic struck earlier this year, Amazon's owners have made record profits of $11.5 billion.

Also this week, Microsoft announced $13.9 billion in quarterly profits, which is a 30% increase.

And I don't think we should be you know, quibbling about technically which corporation is going to be taxed in Seattle, because the point that I'm trying to make here is that many corporations, unlike struggling small businesses, have profiteered during this pandemic, and it's only correct that the burden of the crisis should not be placed on working people and marginalized communities, especially our homeless neighbors, and instead the taxes on big business should be increased because they are making higher profits.

Another corporation in Seattle, Starbucks just reported nearly $400 million profits for the third quarter, which has delighted financial analysts because it has exceeded their expectations.

So these are very important facts to take into account and understand that the full funding of services will require Those progressive bold progressive measures and I also add that I've co-sponsored all the proposals from all the districts for regional or district based coordinators outreach workers, and we certainly want to propose.

We are seeing an increased issue of homelessness that is affecting the community here.

I hope that we can make sure that every part of the city has adequate funds because it is not one region versus another.

regions of our city need this help because it's ultimately our homeless neighbors, our constituents who are suffering.

But at the end of the day, all of that leaves the question of how these services are going to be funded.

It leaves that question unanswered.

And I think we have answers, but we will need political will on the council.

Okay, we have quite a bit more to cover.

I don't see any additional hands on this one.

Thank you again, Council Member Juarez.

Joining Council Member Juarez is Council Members Morales, Sawant, Peterson, Strauss, and Lewis.

Just checking, I think I got everyone.

All right, let's keep going.

Item number 13 on the agenda is CBA HOM 4A1.

This was put forward by Council Member Strauss.

As noted, this is a $200,000 increase to HSD, again, for Homelessness Outreach Services.

In this case, the unique description here would be a partnership with the Program Managers for Business and Procurement Associations.

That's a model that's already been undertaken in Ballard and the U District, and this would propose on expanding that model.

Thank you councilmember stress please go ahead.

Thank you chair and thank you Jeff like the last three proposals this would add funding for homelessness outreach services in district six.

This is a continuation of previous budget actions and previous years of a cost sharing model for reach outreach workers hired hired by the ballot Alliance for the downtown ballot area.

also very interested and willing to combine this request with the other three requests we just heard.

We, as folks before me have said, we know that having properly trained and community based outreach workers are the most effective But again, outreach will only be as successful as the resources of adequate and appropriate shelter and case management these outreach workers have access to.

So this proposal would build on the Ballard Alliance contract for a REACH outreach worker, which has been widely appreciated by businesses and community members in the area by providing $200,000 for organizations that serve as program managers for BIAs.

This funding would allow BIAs to expand the hours that outreach workers operate And, or expand the services to additional areas as we know that the concentration of people experiencing homelessness in the ballot area has also expanded.

This proposal would also allow some funding to be used for cleaning or security purposes as long as the majority of the funds are used for outreach workers.

The reason that I made this slight change is because we have noticed as bars and restaurants close earlier due to the pandemic, the hours of no one being on the streets has extended.

It used to be under typical business practices, it could be one to two hours per night, And it is now four or five hours per night.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Jeff.

Thank you, colleagues.

Thank you very much.

And are there any additional questions or comments on this one?

OK, thank you.

Appreciate it.

And I look forward to learning more as well about the ongoing partnership with the BIA.

OK.

House members Herbold, Peterson and We are the co-sponsors on Councilmember Strauss' proposed form B.

Let's go to the next one.

The next item, number 14 on the agenda, is CBA HON 5A1.

This is put forward by Councilmember Morales.

This creates what is called the Hope Team, which has already been alluded to, by cutting three FTE from the Unsheltered Outreach and Engagement Team that is It proposed in the 2021 budget and associated funding with those reductions.

And then repurposing the remaining five individuals to different roles.

And then also utilizing the funds that were saved by the abrogation of those three positions to expand homelessness outreach services.

Thank you very much.

I want to just state for the record, we do require two co-sponsors.

This form did have two co-sponsors on it.

Thank you, Council Member Lewis.

So the primary sponsor did receive sufficient co-sponsorship to make it in time for the filing here.

As is the prerogative by any council member, they did remove their name, so that is reflected here on this form.

I think that it's just an indication that more work needs to be done if I can say that, and I don't want to put any words in anybody's mouth, but I think that this is something you'll hear from the sponsor here in a moment.

Council Member Morales, thank you for walking us through this proposal here.

I understand that this is a work in progress and just wanted to offer that clarification in case folks were wondering about these co-sponsors at this point.

Council Member Morales, would you like to add anything to this item?

Yes, thank you.

Sorry, it's lunch lady time again.

Okay, so thank you, Jeff and Chair Mosqueda.

First, I do need to thank Council Member Sawant for co-sponsoring this.

and do want to say thank you to our unhoused neighbors, to folks who have lived experience with homelessness service providers, and to our council colleagues who have really helped shape this proposal thus far.

I do want to also thank Deputy Mayor Sixkiller.

He's been working with providers over the last many weeks, and that work has really made this proposal possible.

So I want to say that we are in continuous conversation with stakeholders on this proposal.

And I would like to signal also that it didn't make it into the Form B, but the number of FTEs is flexible, up to eight, as long as those roles reflect the new structure that we're working on here.

And we do look forward to continuing this work with stakeholders and with the budget chair.

For several years, this council has heard from folks living unhoused and from providers and from other advocates that the navigation team was just not working.

In fact, for many neighbors, it was doing more harm than good.

So this summer, we were able to address those concerns and shift away from the navigation team model and to try to.

Since then, very possible I might lose my connection here again.

Providers, the executive, and council members Herbold and Lewis and I have been engaged in some really promising conversations about outreach.

And I'm happy to say that between the executive and the service providers, those conversations are still going, still ongoing.

So this proposal is an attempt to finalize, shift away from the navigation team model and was really born out of the conversations that we've been having, that my office has been having since as far back as April.

So just to tell you a little bit about what we're trying to do here, the transformed team or program would act in support and coordination roles within a provider-led outreach ecosystem.

And that means coordinating things like litter picks or the purple bag program, collaborating with service providers on best outcomes for folks who are living unhoused, The ecosystem would really try to uplift and align the framework that many of us, well, that we all received this week that was designed by the executive and providers and would allow for first responders and police to address issues within encampments if providers are calling for that.

But it wouldn't give license for just wholesale eviction of folks.

So this hope program is really meant to become the city's apparatus for a more holistic approach to addressing encampments and unsheltered homelessness, one where the city collaborates with experts in the field and with folks on the ground every day.

And those are the folks who have the relationships like Councilmember Juarez was pointing out.

They're the ones who are on the streets who know who these neighbors are and what they need.

Hope is how we can start to repair the harm caused by the navigation team.

If you want an example of this approach, what it might look like, we all received an email this week from Just Care, the pilot project that was happening in the CID.

That really demonstrates how effective this kind of a model can be.

And I do want to thank Devin Silvernail on my staff, who was the person who facilitated the conversation between Just Cares and the community members who were really frustrated by that particular encampment.

Because of the work that he did, that our office did to make those connections and to explain to frustrated community members what this program could be, it really gave the folks who were living in the encampment a little bit of breathing room.

And they voluntarily moved because of the outreach that was provided to them.

So it really kind of ratcheted down the tension that was happening there.

That's what we could be doing.

So I want to thank REACH and COLEAD and ACRS and the Chief Seattle Club and Seattle Indian Health Board.

All of those folks worked really hard to make that happen, and I'm deeply appreciative of that.

This is our chance to move forward and to finally close the book on the navigation team.

And it's my hope that my colleagues will see the value in this approach and look forward to having your support on this proposal.

I think that is the best way to do it.

Thank you.

very much.

Councilmember Morales, any questions or comments?

I want to make a few brief comments.

I appreciate Councilmember Morales bringing this forward.

I did remove my name just over some concerns about sequencing with the parallel process that is And I think that there is going to be a, just given that there's negotiations for several hours on a daily basis still between them, that that process, which Council Member Morales is also involved in, will ultimately lead to I think it is important for us to be able to bring that synthesis into a model like hope that is reflective of the framework that was distributed on Monday.

I think one of the unfortunate timing things is that our budget process is not necessarily lined up exactly with those conversations which have been fruitful.

the executive has perceived outreach and an acknowledgment on what needs to be done to change how outreach works to be moving towards this model.

I look forward to us continuing to push this through the budget process and hope that Those two different conversations will be able to merge in the next couple of weeks to inform each other.

Because we do need, there is going to need to be legislation of some kind to reflect the new model of outreach.

It is no longer acknowledged by anybody that just putting forward what has been presented in the default proposal from last month that the executive put forward, that that is going to be the thing that we adopt.

there will definitely need to be legislative changes.

And it is from the conversations I've had, looking like that conversation continues to lean towards a lot of what is manifested in the hope model.

So this will be a good conversation over the next two weeks.

And the rate of those conversations between the executive and the providers should be able to catch up to where we are here.

before we have to set a budget in November.

Thank you, Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Herbold, please.

And did I see another hand?

Councilmember Peterson.

Okay.

Councilmember Herbold, please go ahead.

Thank you very much.

I just want to say at the start that I really appreciate Councilmember Morales proposing this action item, which I think and hope can build on the conversations that have been ongoing between council outreach providers in the mayor's office.

Really appreciate that we all took a step on Monday in approving legislation that marks a real before and after moment.

We in all parties agreed to take the navigation team out of the field and instead build a new approach based on city coordination of encampment management with contracted outreach providers who will be out in the field, helping people shelter safely in place and be good neighbors, as well as helping them get into shelter and housing.

As I noted at the time, that legislation and the accompanying framework that was agreed to by providers and the mayor's office marked the beginning of building this new approach.

And I see a lot of that framework reflected in this budget action proposed by Council Member Morales, which in some budget action is necessary.

Councilmember Lewis just mentioned, is necessary to carry this new approach into the 2021 budget.

And as I've expressed to the sponsor in the past, I do have some concerns about the budget action in its current form.

And I appreciate the sponsors mention of them, but I'm just wondering whether or not we could consider some changes with the, the goal of avoiding roadblocks to continuing the work that was started Monday.

And that is an ongoing conversation.

I don't I don't want.

I don't want things that we do in this budget cycle to be interpreted by the executive as a reason to end the really productive conversations that they're having.

So specifically, I'm concerned about the inclusion in this to take the new group of city employees assigned to Hope.

I'm just interested whether or not the sponsor.

would be willing to keep the staffing level at eight FTEs.

And I'm also concerned about potentially being too prescriptive around the specific role descriptions.

I understand what the purpose here, which is to ensure that city employees assigned to HOPE are not duplicating the work of contracted outreach providers and are staying within prescribed functions, such as coordination and prioritization.

but I know it's difficult that when building something entirely new, like hope, to always predict with 100% accuracy what functions and positions will be needed.

So I'd like to just offer a little bit of flexibility here.

And I think the legislation passed on Monday, along with the accompanying framework and the remainder of the language in this budget action contain guardrails that I believe are sufficient, really focusing on the fact that we The thing that we don't want is we don't want the city functions assigned to hope to be duplicating the activities of the folks who are out in the field.

Thank you.

Councilmember Morales, I believe you spoke to some of those items at the beginning.

Could you Would you offer any additional clarification to those?

Well, as I thank you chair, as I said, it didn't make it into the form B, but we are certainly flexible in terms of the number and roles.

of the FTEs.

So I'm happy to continue having that conversation.

I do want to say that we were on the phone just last night with several different providers who are eager to see this move forward.

They are eager to, as we were talking about during the outreach conversation, eager to see that work and have the additional conversation added to it about how we are going to begin investing in the actual housing part of this conversation.

So I think it's important that we do continue this conversation.

This is not the end.

The language that is in the Form B, I will say, is a bit prescriptive.

And so we understand that there is a desire to see a little bit more flexibility in that and to see a little bit more flexibility in the funding and what things can be used for as well.

I do think that all of that is part of the conversation that needs to continue to think about how this can become a program that is not just about outreach, but is a more comprehensive and a more holistic approach for the city in how we deal with homelessness.

We have invested so much in outreach already and we know that there are not enough places for people to go.

That's how we're going to solve homelessness is by making sure that we have the permanent supportive housing, low barrier shelter, affordable housing.

We need people, as I've heard several of my colleagues say, we need places to navigate people to, which is why we need to change the way we're doing it.

And I think this is an important first step in getting us there.

I would like to add my name as a sponsor today.

In addition to your statement that you are willing to be I would love to have a conversation with the FTEs so I can agree to sponsor this today.

Thank you so much.

Thank you both for the clarification on the flexibility and ongoing conversations around the scope of work and the conversation around the FTEs.

Councilmember Peterson, please go ahead.

you know, really looking forward to the regional homelessness authority being, um, you know, that getting up and running so we can address this regional crisis of homelessness.

And I agree, we need to build more permanent supportive housing and more permanent affordable housing.

Um, I, I am very concerned with the initial draft of the proposal.

I feel like, you know, we agreed during the summer to remove police officers from the navigation team.

That was really important.

A lot of unity on that issue.

to really change that model.

And then there was another effort to reduce the size and to refocus how outreach was done.

And that's where we went from 14 HSD employees down to eight.

And so I feel like, you know, that accord was just reached.

You know, we literally just voted on that days ago.

And then I was viewing this as sort of, you know, could be interpreted as moving the goalposts right after the accord was reached.

And I feel like we need more support and coordination from, and I want to lift up the work of our HSD employees who provide, you know, who care about reducing homelessness and helping those who are, who are experiencing homelessness, and that coordination effort is so important from the city government to be in the lead so that we're tracking the information centrally.

We're going to increase the trash pickup services, for example.

There's a lot of moving pieces, and I want to make sure we have sufficient support from our human services department.

So, you know, to me, eight employees is too few to have since we just cut it from 14, and I don't want to see it go in that smaller direction.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Peterson.

Additional comments?

I see Councilmembers Lewis and President Gonzalez.

Councilmember Lewis?

Thank you, Madam Chair, and I did just want to reflect that, you know, given the representations made in the exchange between Council Member Morales and Council Member Herbold, I too am willing to be added at this point as a co-sponsor given I would like to take a moment to express my appreciation for to be able to have these ongoing really difficult conversations to try to iron out the differences between the Council, the providers, and the mayor to come to a path forward and break the impasse.

And, you know, it's been really great to have Councilmember Morales and Councilmember Herbold to be doing that work.

And it's, you know, it's manifesting itself in a process that seems to be moving forward very well.

And just wanted to take a second to recognize their contributions.

Well said.

Thank you very much.

Council President Gonzalez.

Thank you, Chairman Skid.

I just wanted to make a couple of comments really quickly as to why I am adding my name as a co-sponsor here.

I'll start off by saying thanks to Council Member Morales and others working in the background to identify where the gaps are and how we can bridge the gap as it relates to what the city plans to do.

collectively with providers who we rely on to provide these critical services and with the mayor's office who's responsible for the administration and the operationalizing of whatever it is that policy direction is.

And of course, of the council members for helping us think about what the policy framework should be and what the strategy should be moving forward.

So thank you to everybody who's been working on those particular issues and really appreciate the flexibility of council members even through this conversation in this public setting to agree to signal support now for moving in this general direction, which leads me to my second point, which is that I think there's a lot of emphasis placed sometimes on the regional homelessness authority.

I do want to note for the record that The navigation team services were never slated to be transferred over to the Regional Homelessness Authority.

There's a reason for that.

The reason for that is because the county didn't want to take on that model that did include law enforcement on it, given the voluminous amount of literature that exists in this particular space that clearly tells us that having law enforcement Working hand in hand with social service providers on doing outreach work is counterproductive to the ultimate goal of actually transferring and transitioning people from outside to shelter or to other permanent or temporary housing options and interventions.

And so I just want to make sure that the record is clear that the regional homelessness authority was never intended to house the navigation team.

They are intended to absorb many other aspects of our homelessness outreach efforts and our strategies and our interventions generally.

That does not absolve, of course, the city from the need to continue to do outreach and services in this space.

And I think ultimately it's important that the city council signal to the public and to the mayor and to our provider partners, a general direction in which we are headed.

And I know that there's been conversation here about how many bodies should be doing this work.

And I hope that we're equally focused on what the work should be, substantively, in addition to how many people should be doing this important work.

And so I think it's important to make sure that the council is providing Council Member Morales and others who are working on this issue with the support of as many council members as we can get to allow her and Council Member Herbold and the chair and providers to be able to effectively negotiate on a consensus approach on how we are going to move beyond the navigation team and implement a outreach and provider ecosystem that is really truly designed to do outreach and to outreach people to an intervention that is appropriate for that person.

So I am happy to add my name as a co-sponsor with the understanding that there are many details that are still being worked on.

And also in the spirit of offering Council Member Morales as a prime sponsor, my support in her efforts to continue to negotiate this on behalf of the city council and in partnership with service providers and in collaboration with the mayor's office.

And I am deeply appreciative for those ongoing efforts from all parties and all layers of the city government and our partners who we rely on deeply to actually provide these services.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Absolutely.

Thank you very much, Council President.

Council Member Strauss, please go ahead.

Thank you, Chair and Council President.

You summarized the remarks that I was going to make in a better way than I could have.

Just to say, signaling a directional support for this proposal, understanding that there are many details to be ironed out, and Councilmember Herbold and Councilmember Lewis, your comments, questions, and answers provided also made me feel comfortable signing on to signal that this is a direction that we want to go and that there are more details to be ironed out.

So thank you, colleagues, for all of your work on this.

Thank you for the mayor's office for continuing to work on this and for everyone getting to work together because we need to work together to solve this crisis together.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Are there any additional comments on this item?

Okay, I am going to offer as well as a symbol of my support for the ongoing negotiations to go ahead and add my name to this item.

I think that the Council colleagues have made a very important statement, not just about the policy and discussion, but the intent to show a united effort along with the executive's office and our community partners.

But this is clearly an item that we're committed to finalizing.

I want to underscore the importance of the discussion today, which identified not just flexibility on the number of FTEs, but a real interest in making sure we get the scope of the work right.

that this is not just about outreach, but it's about that put through, that throughput into stable housing, if I understand.

And a lot of details yet to be worked out, but indicating my interest in making sure that this core issue, this core component of the budget continues to have the support for the ongoing negotiations.

I want to echo my appreciation for the prime sponsor and for all of you who have been engaged in this conversation.

We are looking forward to hearing more about what the potential details are, but I think that showing that we want to come together and identify a path forward that is evidence-based and really that we are going to be able to work with the city to make sure that the coordination between organizations and individuals is critical.

I see a lot of that coming together here.

Clearly still a work in progress.

Let's not underscore that.

I want to make sure you know this is an area that we are going to as a Council want to see finalized before the budget is completed at the end of November.

and Council President Gonzalez.

With that, let's go to the next item.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The next item is item number 15, CBA HOM 7A1.

Just to make sure that no one thinks that we missed anything, there is not an HOM 6. That was relabeled, so that's why there's not a 6. HOM 7A1 provides $1 million in general fund support to increase funding for mobile crisis teams.

such as DESC's mobile crisis team.

The DESC mobile crisis team is currently a 43-member team, or actually I think it's currently, it varies a little bit due to staffing.

I think it might be 38 people right now.

But it is a team that provides a connection to behavioral health services.

And the mobile crisis team is facing reduction in funding.

Its primary funding source is from the mental illness and drug dependency sales tax that flows through the county.

And then also there was not a COLA provided for this contract this year by the county, where there's not anticipated to be.

As a result, the team is looking at about a $750,000 shortfall compared to its current operations.

This budget action would both fill in for that shortfall and expand capacity by another $250,000, which would be between three and four additional staff.

The primary sponsor on this is Council Member Strauss.

Wonderful.

Council Member Strauss, please go ahead.

Thank you chair and thank you Jeff your summary is is very excellent the mobile crisis team is one much like health one is one of the primary first responders that we need to be transferring our 911 calls to mobile crisis team.

It currently requires primarily relies on law enforcement referrals.

So this means that a law enforcement officer has to show up on scene, make a referral, and then the mobile crisis team comes.

So beyond the fact that they have a shortfall, this is a budgetary shortfall.

This is the very type of program that we need to be investing in to scale up so that we can transfer the areas of responsibility of our first responders to having the most appropriate first responders show up in a timely manner.

So as Jeff mentioned, the mobile crisis team is a 43-member team, including mental health professionals and substance use disorder professionals.

The team currently takes referrals from the crisis connections line, designated crisis responders, and first responders primarily to law enforcement.

When responding to a referral, the team can refer people to resources they need, whether it's services, shelters, health care, or just food or clothing, and will transport individuals to DESC's Crisis Solutions Center when needed.

Unfortunately, the team has a budget deficit, as Jeff said, of $750,000 next year, which is expected to lead to layoff of 11 members.

about a quarter of the team, more than a quarter of the team.

So this $1 million proposal will provide funding to retain those 11 positions, as well as $250,000 to expand the team to meet our growing needs.

Finally, and what I find to be one of the most important aspects of this provide this budgetary action is this proposal includes a request for report on strategies to decouple law enforcement's role from the program's referral process.

And so, by adding our city funding.

to mobile crisis team, we will be able to move forward reporting in strategies to decouple law enforcement's role from the referral process as being a primary referrer.

Thank you, colleagues.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Jeff.

Thank you, Council Member Strauss.

Are there any questions?

Madam Chair, I'd like to join in support of item number 15. This is Council Member Juarez.

Thank you very much, Council Member Juarez.

We will note you.

Appreciate it.

I do want to just double check.

It looks like the hole in the gap in funding is $750,000.

Is the additional $250,000 you said to expand the program and there's sufficient capacity to scale up?

That's my understanding, yes.

When I originally investigated this budget proposal, I wanted to expand the team by 11 people.

But when we realized that there is already a budget deficit, we wanted to make sure that that deficit was covered and save a little bit of money to make sure that we can expand it as we are able to.

Thank you so much.

And the 250K, again, would allow for how many additional team members?

Do we know?

Jeff, could you help me out with that one?

Sure.

You're correct in your description, Council Member Straus.

It's expected to be three or four additional members of the team.

Wonderful.

Thank you very much.

Great summary.

Appreciate it.

Council Member Straus, I don't see any questions on this one.

We do see a number of hands, so let me summarize those for you.

Council Member Straus is now joined by Council Member Herbold, Juarez, Sawant, Juarez, and Lewis.

And Council President Gonzalez.

Just give us a quick second so we can visually reflect that.

And Council Member Strauss, thank you very much for all of your work on this.

Look forward to talking more about it.

Let's start with the next one.

Our next item, number 16 on the agenda is CBA HOM 8A1.

This is proposed by Council Member Sawant.

This would add $12 million in general fund to the Human Services Department's budget in order to increase tiny home villages.

As we discussed previously in committee, there are two tiers to this expansion.

The $11.2 million of this expansion would support what are the common model that is already supported at HSD for tiny home villages, where there is a homeless services agency that operates as the manager for the agency.

or sorry for the tiny home village and provides case management services, and the other types of supports utilities food things like that hygiene services, and then a second component of this would be $800,000 for self managed encampments that are not receiving managed by some type of homeless services agency, but are only managed by the encampment residents.

So there would not be a role for an outside agency in providing the hygiene trailer or the food supports, things like that.

That total is $800,000.

And the primary sponsor on this is Council Member Swan.

Excellent.

Thank you, Council Member Sawant.

Please go ahead.

Thank you.

This budget amendment would essentially double the number of tiny house villages in Seattle.

It would add $11.2 million to establish eight new managed tiny villages like the highly successful villages operated by Lehigh.

And as Jeff correctly indicated, also includes an additional $800,000 to support authorized democratically self-managed encampments like those operated by the residents of Nicholsville and Sharon wheel.

And I wanted to I want to thank councilmembers A couple of weeks ago when the Human Services Department was presenting about their 2021 budget, tiny house villages have been the homeless services that have had by far the most impact.

There is simply overwhelming evidence.

We have heard from hundreds of homeless people over the past few years about how tiny house villages have been, without exaggeration, a lifesaver.

There's been no other homeless service that has had anything like the level of support from the actual people who have experienced homelessness and then experienced being in a tiny house and wherever funding for affordable housing has been available, transitioning from the tiny house into permanent affordable housing.

In addition, at the recent People's Budget Town Hall, we heard from many residents how tiny house villages have been quite effective in helping keep COVID infections at bay.

The first step in Seattle's race and social justice initiative is to talk to the people who are actually facing homelessness to learn what is needed.

And if that method was really used for homeless services in Seattle, then we would have had hundreds of tiny houses already available for anyone who needed them.

But that's the principle behind the race and social justice initiative, talk to the people who are facing the impact of whatever injustice or oppression we're talking about.

So by that measure, tiny house villages should have tremendous support.

Tiny houses are safe, warm and secure.

They have electricity to charge your phone and a locked door, providing the peace of mind, privacy, security that you will not be attacked or robbed in the night.

Self-managed villages also help people overcome the crushing isolation and alienation of living on the streets.

There's simply no excuse for a city with this staggering wealth that exists in Seattle to fail to provide Real housing for everyone, but as long as there is a homelessness crisis, there should also be tiny houses available for whoever needs them so that they don't have to go through the dehumanizing and dangerous experience of living unsheltered.

My office has discussed with Lehigh and they are confident they could open eight new villages next year if the city provided the funding, and they've already identified locations for six of them.

And my office has also talked to Sharon Wheel and Nicholsville, and they have authorized villages that receive no support from the city and that could be really transformed by electricity, tiny houses, garbage service, and hygiene trailers.

So the $800,000 will be put to very good use and will transform people's lives in those villages.

Every time Seattle opens tiny house villages, people immediately move off the streets to fill them.

And in fact, we've heard from the service providers that the request for tiny homes far outpaces what's available right now.

So if the council passes this budget amendment, it will provide funding to open at least 300 new tiny houses, allowing around 500 people to get off the streets.

out from under highways, out of parks, and into warm and safe tiny houses.

There are several budget amendments today to fund social workers to do outreach to homeless people in our communities, but talk to any outreach worker and they will tell you that the most important thing they need to support their homeless clients is places for them to go.

They will tell you that if there are tiny houses available, people accept them.

So I hope council members will support it.

And once again, thank you to council members Libous and Morales.

Thank you very much Councilmember Sawant.

Councilmember Lewis, question or comment?

Just a quick comment.

I totally agree with everything Councilmember Sawant said in setting this up and it's been good to collaborate with her office on this priority.

You know, there's a very common sort of trope of people who are critical of a compassionate approach to addressing the homelessness crisis, that people who are living on shelter don't want help, that there's plenty of shelter available, and that the only issue is that they don't want to go.

And that is just manifestly not true, and I know all of us here know that's not true.

And there's no better evidence of that than tiny house villages.

In addition to the universal opinion of service providers based on their experience that tiny houses are highly in demand, among the folks who they provide outreach to.

I have heard the same sentiments expressed by business improvement area directors, police officers, like uniformly among anyone who has been having any interaction with unsheltered people, they can confirm that tiny house villages are highly in demand and that yes, there can be high rates of refusal of mats on floors.

or congregate shelters in the middle of a pandemic because people have agency and people weigh their choices and people weigh what is best for their health and safety and tiny house villages deliver on all of those factors and we really need to be structuring a policy that is centered on what do our neighbors who are currently living on sheltered need, what do they want, and what will they accept offers to?

And tiny house villages, check all those boxes, and we should definitely be adding more.

I do just want to briefly flag, you know, my hope is that we not put ourselves in a position where tiny house village expansion competes with scaling up hoteling as a potential intervention.

It's good from everyone that I've talked to in the provider community and beyond to have a diverse portfolio of offerings.

And there are some potential advantages to hotel rooms.

And of course, hotel rooms are also a highly desirable intervention as well.

So I do want to make sure that as we go forward, we not be put in a position where we ratchet down the commitment and the request to expand hoteling in order to accommodate the tiny house ad.

But that we do both at the same time to increase the transitional shelter capacity to meet the crushing, crushing need that we're seeing in the city.

Well said, thank you very much.

Council members want anything to add?

Okay, thank you very much.

Councilmember Sawant is joined by Councilmember Morales and Councilmember Lewis.

Thank you.

Let's go to the next one.

The next item on our agenda, number 17, is CBA HOM 9A1.

This is sponsored by Councilmember Peterson.

This would impose a proviso on $1.65 million of ESG funding to and to use those funds for a temporary tiny home village in the U District.

For some context here the proposed 2021 proposed budget has in addition to the resources in 2020 that are ESG funds there's also $23.45 million in ESG funds utilized for either hotel rooms that would be leased to provide non-congregate shelter.

an expansion, briefly, of rapid rehousing services, and also a small expansion of diversion services.

So this would impose a portion of those funds to utilize elsewhere.

I'm also aware that the sponsor's office has identified and learned a little bit more about the site, and I believe that there are some revisions to the estimated total cost here, and the primary sponsor is Councilmember Peterson.

Excellent, Councilmember Peterson.

Thank you chair Mosqueda and to my initial co-sponsors and thanks to Jeff Sims on our city council staff here who's been working with our office on these details to make this tiny home village a reality.

This council budget action would set aside funds within the proposed 2021 budget necessary to set up and operate with case management a potential new tiny home village in Northeast Seattle.

of 35 to 40 units, specifically in the University District, which has great access to transit.

Given the COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing homelessness crisis, I agree that well-organized tiny house villages can be cost-effective as an intervention when combined with case management and performance-based contract with HSD.

We've seen a sharp rise in encampments in District 4 and have now done the late work on finding an actual suitable site, a short-term location for a tiny house village.

This budget would enable us to expeditiously address this urgent need of finding shelter with case management.

Based on further research, as Jeff alluded to, We believe that this amount of 1.65 could come down by at least $150,000 based on the condition of the site, which is in good condition to start up right away.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

And I also will note that Council Member Juarez has indicated support as well.

I see Council Member Lewis and then Council Member Herbold.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to really thank Council Member Peterson for his extremely energetic advocacy of this and also his responsiveness to some of my questions last week, specifically around possible cost savings due to the state of the site.

It's a site that I was familiar with and that I knew had been supporting temporary buildings for a while through Sound Transit and the possibility that could save money.

I appreciate the diligence and following up on that and coming back this week and demonstrating that yes, due to the site, there are some savings where we can stretch those limited ESG dollars a little bit more.

And just really appreciate that.

I also further just want to make a point that my office has been receiving a lot of emails about this project from people in Councilmember Peterson's district who are organized.

And I really just want to say at a time when we were getting lots of constituent emails about homelessness, and those constituent emails are not always framed in compassion for the people who are living on sheltered and who are facing this, that Councilmember Peterson in his office and with his team did outreach to a lot of concerned neighbors to really direct that energy in a very positive and compassionate direction in advocating for this policy.

and that it is having a material impact where we are being lobbied by constituencies that do not always lobby us for a tiny house village.

And I just, I really appreciate that.

And just also the groundwork on like the maps and the plans that were distributed in Council Member Peterson's newsletter of what it could look like to put it in.

And I think this will be a great site and a successful site for a tiny house village and happy to support this.

Thank you very much.

Councilmember Lewis, Councilmember Herbold, please go ahead.

Thank you.

be otherwise very excited to support this proposal.

I am really concerned about the suggested source of funds though.

As it relates to the suggestion, I'm concerned that dipping into funds that are intended to lease hotel rooms, that's part of the mayor's proposed sort of through put approach to address moving folks off the street into leased hotel rooms.

I agree that tiny home villages are also a very attractive and desirable place to go from the street, just like hotel rooms.

I'm also concerned that the other pots of money here are things that I am either, I have historically advocated for, or I'm currently now in this budget advocating for.

The $9 million for rapid rehousing in the 2021 budget is not sufficient to meet the need.

And there are people who are receiving rapid rehousing vouchers right now.

who will become homeless because of the length of stay people are experiencing on the rapid rehousing program.

And so I actually have a budget proposal to expand rapid rehousing above this $9 million.

And then finally, the homeless diversion funds are funds that I've been advocating for.

We haven't had a centralized homelessness diversion fund For outreach workers to access or for the nav team to access.

This was a central recommendation of the city auditor several years ago is that the navigation team should be able to access the diversion fund and.

Last year, the city worked to get the navigation team trained on how to access the diversion fund.

And just as they became trained for accessing the diversion fund, the centralized diversion fund was depleted.

So there were no dollars to access.

And this proposed budget corrects that.

And I think it's a really important intervention for folks who are living outside.

to address the needs of the community.

And again, support the effort concerned about the impacts of these identified funds to address other needs that I have been strongly advocating for.

Thank you.

Thank you, councilmember Herbold.

So in addition to looking at the cost side of things for this particular tiny home village and reducing the cost down to about 1.5 million, I believe, uh, Jeff, I don't know if you're prepared to talk about, um, you know, your calculations on the providing of the hotel, the 300 hotel rooms and where there might be, uh, some differences in numbers there that might be, you know, there might be more funds available.

or less cost.

I'm happy to go into that.

So obviously this would be at the discretion of the budget chair as the balancing package is put together.

But I have gone through and looked at the estimated costs that the executive provided both for activities at the end of 2020 using ESG funds and the 2021 resources in the allocation.

So first I want to look at the, the executive has provided the cost of an enhanced shelter and utilizing hotel rooms and leasing those hotel rooms in order to be a non-congregate shelter.

And just looking at those costs and projecting them out over the timeframe that we were told and the number of units, there seems to be about a $365,000 padding in the amount that is provided by the executive compared to what they said our calculation approach should be.

That primarily comes from the resources provided in, that would be used in the first couple months of this.

So it's actually money that would, that the executive has said, we'll try it, we'll begin using this in 2020 and then carry anything that's unspent into 2021. That's $3 million, even though it looks like it's more likely that that would only cost around $2.6 million.

And then I'd also note that at this point in time we haven't seen the the budget proposed beginning the use of these hotel rooms on November 1st.

So in two days time and to my knowledge at this point we didn't we neither have a provider that could be operating these these hotel rooms I believe in RFQ if not already posted is being distributed at this point.

But the it seems unlikely that the executive will be able to begin the operation of these by November 1st which Um, as council members are aware is quite early earlier than we would be providing these funds through legislation.

Uh, and then finally, um.

The 3rd place that I've been double checking the executives analysis.

Again, use numbers that they provided based on the 125 new shelter beds that they hope to provide.

And just using the numbers that they provided and multiplying it out, it seems like there is an overestimation of about $270,000 for that project in 2021. Those would be general fund dollars.

So if you add all of that up together, that does open up a substantial amount of space that a proposal like this could be supported.

Most of them are EESG funds, which have limited purposes, mostly related to homelessness.

And as Council Member Peterson noted, we've also done some revisions to the actual cost.

And the site, for example, that has been proposed, because it's a sound transit site, it's already been graded.

It already has a fence.

The utility stubs are still in place.

So all of those will substantially reduce the startup costs.

We are still working to refine the final number there, but I think it would certainly be less than what is displayed in this this provides for sorry this budget action.

I'm going to turn it over to Jeff.

Thank you, Jeff.

I want to thank my staff for her hard work on this.

We are trying to make it work.

We are trying to make this site a reality.

I know we talk a lot about tiny home villages.

There are some good ones that are up and running.

We want to do more.

We are trying to make this a reality.

We are trying to shave costs and find additional funds.

I think we can make it work.

Thanks.

Make sure I'm off of mute.

Yes, I am.

So yes, I hope we can make it work too.

And I heard Jeff speak to what sounded like it's possible to do all the things that we want to do with this sum of dollars.

It sounds like the hotelling strategy could still move forward.

It may just cost less.

Are we also saying that we are not going to need to touch the rapid rehousing dollars nor the diversion dollars?

I have reviewed the estimates and the calculation approach that the executive provided for both rapid rehousing and diversion, and I didn't find any overestimation of cost there for that.

With both of those, I would note that Those vary a great deal.

So what you talked about is the average cost to serve a household.

And as you noted Council Member, costs for rent and the ability for families to move.

I have also heard that there are a requirement for having longer periods of service or stay in our Rapid Rehousing Programs.

So there's differences there.

but I think to your direct question, um, know that I didn't list anything that would be reducing the amount proposed by the executive, either for the rapid rehousing or the diversion expansions.

Okay.

Thank you.

Uh, please add my name as a, as a sponsor.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Council members, additional questions or comments.

Okay.

I found this conversation very helpful.

I have additional questions about some upcoming items that I have my name on.

So, Jeff, we may need your expertise as we think about how these funding sources interweave.

But Council Member Peterson, really appreciate your comments and your ongoing support for this type of non-congregate shelter option.

It looks like there's a handful of hands that got added, so let me go ahead and read those.

Council Member Peterson is joined by Council Members Herbold Sawant, Juarez, Straus, Lewis, and Council President Gonzalez.

Thank you very much.

Let's go on to the next one.

Item number 18 on the agenda is CBA HOM 10A1.

This is put forward by Council Member Sawant.

I'm sorry.

Yes, Council Member Sawant.

This would provide $655,000 in general fund to support 24-hour operations at basic shelters.

For some context for council members, some of this I provided previously.

During the pandemic, a lot of the programs that would be targeted with these funds operate in facilities that are faith-based institutions.

And because of the pandemic, they were not utilizing spaces that they otherwise in the evenings allow basic shelters to exist in.

And so over the course of the year, funds were provided to these organizations, especially ShareWheel to, or primarily ShareWheel, to increase the hours of operations so that instead of having people stay out on the floor just overnight, they are permitted to stay in these locations all day long.

And this proposal would both annualize that amount.

Last year, it was approximately $1.5 million.

And I don't have readily the, up here it is $265,000 is what was provided last year between the county and the city to support those 24 hour services.

Annualizing that would be about $353,000.

And then the, after some consultation with the providers also noted some other costs where they're hoping to address a variety of changes, such as their normal staff wages increases, health benefits for the staff.

adding two more part-time employees and making some changes to their food and meal offerings, as well as some assumptions about increased maintenance they may have to incur or increased utility costs due to utilizing these facilities for a longer period.

The total cost there for this CBA is $655,000.

And as I mentioned, the primary sponsor is Council Member Sawant.

Thank you, Council Member Sawant.

Thank you.

And thank you, Jeff, for that description.

And thanks to Council Member Herbold and Morales and President Gonzalez for their support.

This budget action would add, as was mentioned, $655,000 to the Human Services department to contract with non-profit organizations such as share and wheel to maintain 24 hour operations of basic shelters.

Share and wheel operates self-managed basic shelters in Seattle.

Basic shelters are the shelters that do not have many of the services provided in enhanced shelters, but because there isn't enough shelter space overall I think we need to protect every shelter bed possible.

Also, the fact that the share wheel shelter are self-managed allows them to build a community in a way that other shelters, even enhanced shelters, often cannot.

This year, the basic shelters that share and wheel operate were provided extra funding, as was mentioned, to allow them to provide 24 hours service instead of just being overnight.

And we heard testimonials as to how it makes a difference.

And we heard that directly from the people who have availed of these services and how much difference it makes for them to have a 24-hour service.

And we also know that it is essential, especially now, to help keep people safe during COVID.

But even without COVID, we know the 24-hour shelter is a huge improvement compared to having it overnight.

I mean, for housed people, it is like imagining not being able to go home during the day or even to use the bathroom.

The residents are fighting to maintain 24-hour operations for the four shared shelters and one wheel shelter in 2021, and this budget amendment would make that funding possible.

Thank you, Council Member Sawant.

Additional comments or questions?

Okay, I am not seeing any comments or questions.

I just wanted to ask, when we were talking about This last week, if I remember correctly, Council Member Swann, the question was whether or not this $655,000 amount was just for two sites, or what would the amount be for overall across the city?

Jeff, did you get a chance to look into that question?

Yeah, my understanding is that this does not talk about just two sites because the nature of how Sharon Wheel work with these faith-based institutions is that there's a rotation often.

So they don't stay in one facility at all times.

But this is intended to encompass the entirety of Sharon Wheel's operations across all of their locations.

OK, great.

So it is 655,000.

total to be able to convert these basic shelters into 24-7 shelters.

I shouldn't say basic.

I guess I can say basic.

These are basic shelters, correct?

Yes, you'd be correct, Councilmember.

These would still be what we call basic shelters, because we would not be adding the type of services that we then refer to as an enhanced shelter.

And a lot of that is, as Councilmember Sawant noted, due to the space limitations that these shelters operate in.

So this would allow the presence of people for a 24-hour period.

However, it would not move these from being basic shelters and start providing the case management and other types of services that become an enhanced shelter.

Great.

Thank you very much for following up on that question.

Anything else council members still want?

No, just thanks to Jeff for the thorough responses.

Great.

Thank you.

Okay, Council Member Solant is joined by Council President Gonzalez, Council Member Morales, and Council Member Herbold.

Excellent, let's move on.

Our next item, number 19 on the agenda, is CBA HOM 11A1.

This adds $1 million, a little bit more than $1 million, general fund and one-time funding to HSD to continue the operation in City Hall of basic shelter beds.

As council members are, I believe, aware, there's a substantial amount of funding over the course of 2020 that has allowed for the de-intensification of shelters in order to increase social distancing and provide other types of protections, as well as the equipment necessary, such as PPE or masks, things like that, for the staff and residents.

And as a result of that, many of the expanded spaces that have been used to spread out the existing number of shelter beds or have another types of modifications are going to be able to be returned back into locations.

In particular, though, there will be a new location opening in Soto.

I'm not sure how many council members may have had a chance to explore this or be taken to it, but this is where the majority of the programs operated by the Salvation Army will be moving to.

It's going to be a staged move.

Initially, though, the shelter that has been operating in City Hall would move to that location.

They've also been, the City Hall shelter, I just want to note, also many of the individuals that normally utilize that shelter have been staying in Fisher Pavilion during the pandemic.

All of these Salvation Army programs will be moving to the Soto Shelter then.

The county's programs that are also operated by Salvation Army, like in the King County Administration Building, for example, will eventually, it's a stage, not everybody moving all on the same day.

When we move there, I understand there's other plans for this facility as well.

With that, then, the city would not be continuing at this time to provide the shelter beds that are basic shelter beds in City Hall.

And so this proposal would continue that funding.

And the proposal right now from the executive is that the City Hall shelter would be maintained As a storm shelter as a surge shelter we've seen for both of the last two years actually when there's been snow and especially extreme weather, there's been expansion usually usually we've been utilizing facilities at Seattle center to have some additional basic shelter space.

so that individuals that are unsheltered can come inside.

That's what the executive plans to use City Hall for currently, but this would actually support the continuation of the basic shelter that has been operating in City Hall.

The primary sponsor of this is Council President Gonzalez.

Thank you, Council President Gonzalez.

Thank you, thank you, chairman, just really quickly over the past year, H.

S. D.

s use of city hall as an overnight basic shelter facility has been a welcome addition to our.

Cities shelter infrastructure across the city in this year's budget.

Of course, this funding was not included.

And I understand that the motivation for this budget reduction is belief that they will be unable to identify a provider to operate the shelter.

As Jeff just mentioned, the current operator will be moving their operations to the new SOTO site, and as a result, may not have capacity to continue operating the City Hall shelter.

My office is going to continue to work with Council Central staff, service providers, and HSD to identify whether there is any possibility of identifying an interested operator for this additional shelter capacity.

If it does, however, become clear that this funding will not be needed for the city hall shelter, then it's my understanding that even without this funding, as Jeff just mentioned, it just does continue to intend to use city hall as a flexible.

Surge shelter space to provide additional emergency shelter beds during cold weather events this winter winter similar to the ones we.

have experienced in the past two to three years.

So there's some flexibility here and a little bit of work that needs to happen.

But my hope is that we'll be able to realize this funding in order to continue to bolster the city's shelter infrastructure through the use of a city hall facility.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Council President.

Council Member Herbold, please go ahead.

Thank you so much.

I am indicating my sponsorship of, co-sponsorship of this item.

Thank Madam President for bringing this forward.

The, there has been a shelter operating in City Hall since, well, in this City Hall since it opened in 2001. The intent when, it was first built was not to include the city hall or the shelter that was actually in the previous city hall.

And I remember there was a campaign led by advocates called Behind the Red Doors.

And that was the campaign to open up the area behind the red doors at city hall to allow the shelter at city hall that had been in the previous building to continue in 2001 in this particular new city hall.

So I think it's a really important statement about the city's commitment to use its own resources and facilities to support folks who are living unsheltered and again, was until I saw Madam President's recommendation to include this, I had no idea that there was a plan to end it.

And again, this is a commitment that goes longer than 20 years to provide this service in our city's building that is sort of our civic home.

So thank you so much for doing that.

Thank you very much.

I do want to ask a quick question on this.

I just want to double check.

Was there any caveats included here?

I didn't see it in the summary about opening this back up when COVID conditions improve, or is this just making sure that the funding is there for the full calendar year?

Jeff?

My belief is that it's for the full calendar year.

The City Hall space is an interesting space.

So the shelter used to be primarily located downstairs behind the red wall, as Councilmember Herbold just reminded us of that historical perspective.

There was at some point an expansion of the operations to allow for mats to be placed on the I guess, first floor, the main floor, which is much more spread out.

So I think there's an opportunity here to look at how the city hall shelter beds could be structured in a way to have appropriate social distancing and further contribute to the city's de-densification strategies as it relates to congregate shelter.

And that may, frankly, require a little bit more resources.

I'm happy to take a further look at that question and would ask for Jeff's support in making sure that we track that particular issue as you have highlighted it.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Additional comments or questions?

Okay, wonderful.

Colleagues, I see a number of folks who have signed on.

So Council President Gonzalez is now joined by Council Members Herbold, Morales, Sawant, Peterson, and Lewis.

Okay, let's go to the next one.

Item number 20 on our agenda is H1-1281.

This would impose a proviso on 200, sorry, $2.5 million of emergency solutions grant funding, one-time funding in HSD to acquire a facility or emergency shelter for housing.

This is put forward by Council Member Lewis.

Thank you very much.

Council Member Lewis, please go ahead.

We can come back.

Yes, getting to the little mute button was hard there for some reason.

No problem.

This is a proposal similar when we were here last week talking about this that Council Member Sawant had put forward.

And I appreciate working with her office on this.

This is really a joint proposal from us.

If there's an ability to jointly primary sponsor it, that would be appropriate here.

But we've both been talking to the same folks at Lehigh who are interested in exploring a way to use some of this ESG money to acquire a hotel or some other facility for transitional shelter and then ultimately permanent supportive housing.

It's something that I think could be a really interesting arrangement.

In the context of our hotelling ambitions that are in this budget to potentially squeeze more value out of a third of those units.

If, for example, we help to provide or acquire a 100 unit hotel and then entered into a more favorable lease, but that is sort of dependent on.

maybe talking to HSD and the executive side about how some kind of arrangement like that might impact their plan next year.

But I would think that it could be a way to take full advantage of this temporary money to create a permanent resource designed around expanding our shelter capacity with high quality, highly desirable units.

And from talking to some providers, there are very detailed and thoughtful proposals about how this could be done and be done quickly with hotels that are sort of a turnkey operation where we could get people inside very fast.

And also potentially with more long-term reliability, because we wouldn't need to be in a position where a lease expires in 10 months or there's pressures for tourism and travel to resume.

Essentially, for all intents and purposes, they become part of our broader system of transitional shelter.

And then, ultimately, with some improvements around kitchenettes or whatever, permanent supportive housing, if there's other things that is needed for the code, that could be particularly attractive, given that, as we know from a lot of work, the provider community has done in analyzing the costs.

They cost about $320,000 per unit to build affordable permanent supportive housing.

Some of these proposals I've seen from providers could be $170,000 per unit in terms of the cost of acquiring hotels and then retrofitting them.

So I think that this is a creative way to use this money to build lasting change.

And I do think there's still some conversations that need to happen Executive end in terms of appetite for implementing and pursuing this.

I know that King County is putting a lot of resources into acquiring hotels through their sales tax and bonding program as well.

And there might be some room for collaboration there.

But in the meantime, there are providers out there who are interested in engaging in this kind of partnership.

And I think it's something we should provide the opportunity for them and the executive to pursue.

Additional comments?

Council Member Swatt, please go ahead.

Thank you.

And thank you to Council Member Lewis.

Also, likewise, for the excellent opportunity we had to work together on this and also on the tiny house village proposal that we just talked about.

And to add to the excellent comments that have already been made by Council Member Lewis, I would say, yes, this is a really important opportunity.

I mean, there are millions invested in housing.

It would be even better because it would purchase the building and can serve another purpose after the health emergency in well thought out proposal Lehigh has identified and I would really urge council members to support this.

Council Member Herbold, did I see your name a hand as well?

Please go ahead.

Thank you so much.

So similar to my earlier comments around the housing surge proposal from the mayor and its connection to the success of the HOPE program, council voted earlier this week to approve a new approach to encampment management and homelessness outreach.

That approach is being co-developed by outreach providers.

And it's important that we have the agreement of the mayor's office.

The legislation was accompanied by a framework that includes shared principles.

And that framework was shared with council members and is available also publicly.

You know, part of those principles is a statement where they're seeking to support current resources allocated to relocate 425 additional people from unsafe conditions on the street into safe lodging.

For example, temporary hotels and enhanced shelters through outreach that leads to placement in lodging appropriate to the needs of individuals given available resources.

And so this is the framework that outreach providers gave to us.

this week.

You know, again, it's not, it's not, we're not at mission accomplished on the whole issue of encampment management and outreach.

These are, these, there are a lot of questions to be answered, but this surge housing placement initiative is a really important part of those conversations.

The mayor's budget uses ESG funds to open up 425 short-term shelters, shelter or hoteling beds.

and uses that surge investment also for housing support programs like diversion and rapid rehousing, as mentioned earlier.

At the budget presentation on October 2nd, Deputy Mayor Sixkiller and HSD Director Johnson spoke to this new investment.

and indicated that 425 new beds would be stood up and available later this year, making it essential that the funding is continued into 2021 as well.

And they described the plan as one that pairs the new outreach approach that we're all working on together with this surge investment in new shelter and hoteling units, new rapid rehousing and new diversion resources.

the 600 units of permanent supportive housing that is going to be coming on next year.

So I'm really seeking to make sure that what is being proposed today is additive, not intended to, you know, To replace the mayor's plan for this, the hotel and strategy.

I'm definitely interested in this proposal, but I'm also really interested to know what the total purchase price is for the hotel.

and how the remainder would be financed.

The information I received about this hotel purchase is that in addition to the 2.5 million in acquisition, the operator would also need the city's hotel lease rate for 102 units.

And I understand that there are further requests to the city that would be necessary to help pay for the hotel.

And again, this is 102 units versus the 300 units under the mayor's proposal.

So, again, just want to hear that this is additive, not intended to replace the hotel and strategy that is intended planning to come online.

very soon without additional resources as opposed to replacing that strategy with this one, which is for a third of the units, not going to require a lot more city resources and not likely to come on as quickly as the hoteling strategy will.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Herbold.

Is there a Council Member who would like to answer that?

Council Member Lewis is the current sponsor, or Central Staff, if you have any technical feedback as well, you're welcome to chime in.

I would defer to Central Staff at this point.

I mean, as I alluded to in my earlier comments, I don't at this point really have any of those updates.

So unless Central Staff does, that might be waiting more for the next round of our discussions.

I can provide some additional detail here.

So the $2.5 million proposed to be placed under proviso in this CBA is the maximum allowable under clarity of rule regulation.

Typically, we are not able to use ESG dollars for the acquisition of a facility at all.

There's only special rules with the COVID amounts that allow us to spend up to $2.5 million.

That's why that number was chosen here.

$2.5 million would not be adequate to purchase or renovate the facility.

I won't speculate on the exact dollar amount, but I have heard numbers that are substantially higher than that.

And it seems incredibly unlikely this would provide that.

To Council Member Herbold's question, there would necessarily then need to be some type of trade-off if these funds were taken to acquire a hotel that was not also the hotel that is then leased by the city.

They have to, I don't know the details of what it sounds like as a Lehigh proposal, but if it is, if we're talking about two different locations, then yes, we would be talking about a reduction in funding for those 300 units that would be leased hotel rooms along with their services that are intended to be stood up this year.

The, so then there's that you referred to Council Member Herbold, the total number of 425 beds.

It is correct that approximately, total, that between ESG money both in 2020 and 21 and well actually let's just talk 2021 so I don't confuse the issue we'd be talking about 15.8 million dollars in 2021 between ESG and CDBG funds the that would support about 300 or an estimated 300 hotel room non-shelter non-congregate shelter beds an additional 125 units to get to the hundred to the 425 total are actually the intended acquisition of some facility.

I don't have the details of that.

It's not a proposal that HSD would be HSD would not be acquiring the facility though I understand that a variety of locations are under consideration.

The 125 units are maintained with general fund dollars so they would not be in direct competition here.

But, um, and I can't speak to whether or not the facility in question is necessarily all the same facility.

But there could, there's likely some impacts on the ability to support 300 hotel rooms that would be leased if $2.5 million of these funds were provided.

Okay, Jeff, I am thinking some sort of flow chart might be helpful after the last two conversations.

I just was noting for my team, I think I need to go back and listen to the last half hour in a little bit more detail.

So if others are having similar questions or if it's all clear to you, that's great.

But if there's some visual that might be able to accompany this conversation, that would be helpful.

Council Member Herbold?

Yeah, I just want to again say that Our vote on Monday included a framework.

And that was a framework given to us by providers.

And in that framework, this hoteling strategy is in the mayor's proposed hotel hoteling strategy is is included.

So I just I just don't want an effort here to contradict our support of that framework earlier this week.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Important point duly noted.

I see Ali on screen and I'm going to go to council members to want after that in case Ali has some technical feedback as well.

Thank you, Chair Mosqueda.

I just wanted to sort of clarify one point that Jeff made, or sort of focus more on it, that this is sort of a question of trade-offs.

I think if $2.5 million of the ESG funds are used to acquire a facility, you could think about it either as meaning the funds from ESG that were meant to support the 300 hotel rooms would either be support it for a shorter amount of time.

So 300 rooms for not 10 months, but six months until the new hotel is online.

But that the investment, if the city was able to acquire a hotel over the long term, there would be more rooms available for for a longer term.

So it is just, or it would be fewer rooms for the same amount of time.

So it just, it is taking two and a half million dollars out of the leasing strategy and directing it towards acquisition.

We just don't know when that acquisition piece would be stood up and what the total cost from the city would be.

Yeah.

Council Member Swant.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Did you want to defer to Council Member Herbold?

Okay.

I don't, I do want to speak.

I'm not deferring, but I feel like...

Okay.

I don't know if that makes sense for her to speak first.

That is a follow-up.

Councilmember Herbold anything else?

I am good.

I was concerned that in Ali's description of the trade-offs there would not be again the recognition that it is not a trade-off among this particular number of dollars.

Because there is an unknown number of dollars that this to purchase this hotel.

And that is the city dollars they would be seeking in order to purchase this hotel.

Councilmember Sawant?

Councilmember Juarez you can go next.

I yeah, first of all, thanks to Jeff and Ali for providing very important clarification.

I mean, for sure, I would say this is a proviso.

So in that sense, it's not additive.

We would certainly be very happy for it to be additive because we are in an unfortunate situation where whatever services we provide, it's not like it's going to go waste because there is such a huge problem.

of homelessness and housing insecurity in our city.

And so if council members want to support another source of funding to make it sort of very purely or clearly additive, of course, I would not be opposed to that in any way.

And I would strongly champion that.

I would say just in general, there's a real advantage to purchasing a hotel.

Because then it can be used for affordable housing afterward, rather than just giving it as money to the for-profit hotel owner, who's going to be happy to get it.

But the city should have something.

And in fact, it's better to have more affordable housing than anything else.

Because ultimately, the lack of affordable housing is at the root of many of these problems.

But, and as far as, just lastly, as far as the question of, well, we don't know how much Lehigh will need to really complete this project.

Well, we can have that dollar figure.

I have no doubt that the providers being so thorough in their work will be able to tell us that in some I think we will be able to do that in some time.

The point I'm trying to make is we have so much need in our community.

I don't think we should be, I'm just taken by how much debate there is on what I see as very small amounts for very real problems that need to be solved.

All of these dollars could be easily made available by

Thank you very much.

So I am going to see if there's any last comments.

I don't see any hands right now.

I do think that this conversation about acquisition overall is not done.

We're going to put a time out for a quick second to take a lunch break for a full hour and want to make sure, though, that we do continue, as other council members have said, see how these pieces interact with the overall acquisition efforts.

So we'll pick up again on an acquisition-related topic and when we come back from our break.

Councilmember Juarez has let me know that her questions were answered and sentiments were stated already.

So we're going to go ahead and summarize this item.

Councilmember Lewis was joined by Councilmembers Morales, Straus, and Sawant.

Thank you very much for that discussion, folks.

And we'll come back.

We will be on item HOM 013A-001.

And we'll see you at 2.05.

Oh, Council Member Sawant, did you have something for the good of the order?

Yes, I'm sorry, but unfortunately, I have an unavoidable conflict starting at roughly 3 o'clock.

And I believe I have one more item from my office, which is the very last item on today's agenda.

So with your indulgence, if we could take it before I have to leave, I would appreciate that.

I will work with you on that.

Thank you very much.

The meeting is in recess.

We'll see you at 2.05 PM.

Have a good lunch break.