Seattle City Council Governance, Accountability and Economic Development Committee 3/27/2025

Good afternoon, everyone.

It's nice to see a full house here.

This is the Thursday, March 27th meeting of the Governance Accountability and Economic Development Committee.

And we will come to order at 2.02.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

I am Sarah Nelson, chair of the committee.

One note, Councilmember Hollingsworth and Kettle are both excused.

Councilmember Rivera.

Present.

Council Member Solomon.

Present.

Chair Nelson.

Present.

Three present, two excused.

All right.

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

Hearing no objection, the agenda is adopted.

All right.

We will now move into our hybrid public comment period.

Could you please tell us how many people have signed up?

That's scary.

We have a 13 in-person public commenters and two remote council president.

Okay.

We'll go ahead and give folks a 90 seconds.

If that, if that doesn't blow everybody's plan for either a minute or two.

Okay.

Let's do 90 seconds, please.

Actually, I'm just now realizing that we do have somebody that does need to leave earlier.

One minute each, and let's start with the in-person commenters.

We'll do 10, and then switch to remote, and then back again.

All righty.

I'll call in speakers in the order they sign up to speak, starting with in-person commenters.

Speakers will have one minute.

When you hear the chime, you'll have 10 seconds left.

If you exceed that time, your microphone may be cut off so that we can move on to the next speaker.

If you're offering remote comment, please make sure to press star six to unmute yourself.

And with that, the first speaker for in-person public comment will be Hannah Lindell Smith.

following by Andrea B, and then following that, Cindy Black.

Feel free to come on up.

Hello, chair and members of the committee.

My name is Hannah Lindell-Smith.

I am the coalition coordinator for People Powered Elections, and I'm here speaking in strong support of adding a renewal measure for the Seattle Democracy Voucher Program to the August primary ballot.

I've been doing community and political organizing work for over four years, but I've only been able to vote since last May.

As I looked forward to my 18th birthday, I also looked forward to making my voice heard in a different way, one completely unique to Seattle, using my democracy vouchers.

To me, democracy vouchers aren't just about an election or a candidate.

They're a tool for building the more just and beautiful future that I organize for.

from climate justice to affordable housing, from workers' rights to community safety.

It is so easy to lose faith in democracy, especially now, especially when our political system often seems to fail us, but the democracy voucher program is an essential part of ensuring that our voices are heard, our needs are prioritized, and our civic participation is valued.

Thank you for considering adding this renewal to the August ballot.

Thank you, next we'll have Andrea, following Andrea we'll have Cindy, and after Cindy we'll have Cynthia, come on down.

Good afternoon, I'm Andrea Ornelas, Assistant Political Director with LIUNA Labors 242, and I am speaking on behalf of the 7,000 members of LIUNA who have endorsed and signed a letter in strong support of having the Seattle Democracy Voucher Program on the ballot.

The program has demonstrated its effectiveness in increasing voter participation in local elections, broadening representation, and encouraging a more diverse range of candidates to run for office.

By empowering residents to...

have a direct stake in the electoral process.

Democracy vouchers help create a political landscape that better reflects the voice and interest of our communities.

Additionally, the program has unintentionally reduced the influence of large corporate donations in Seattle elections, ensuring that residents, rather than the big, interests have a fair and meaningful say in our democracy.

I urge the council to vote in favor of continuing the democracy voucher program to uphold the more inclusive, accessible, representative electoral process for Seattle residents.

Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you.

Next, we have Cindy.

Following Cindy, we have Cynthia and then Tim.

Good afternoon, Chair Nelson and members of the committee.

My name is Cindy Black and I'm the Executive Director of Fix Democracy First.

I would like to express our strong support for renewing the levy that funds the Seattle Democracy Voucher Program.

Our organization has been working on public funding of elections for over 20 years and believe it's one of the strongest options we have to help address the influence of money in elections.

Before the Seattle voucher program, most people in Seattle had never donated to a candidate before.

This program empowers residents and allows them to directly participate in democracy, giving them a bigger voice in who gets elected.

The program also encourages candidates to engage more with constituents who are all now potential donors that can help fund their campaigns, rather than just focusing on wealthy donors or special interests.

Please move this bill forward so the full council can vote to put it on the August primary ballot and let the voters decide.

Thank you so much for allowing me to testify today.

Thank you, Cindy.

Next, we have Cynthia.

Following Cynthia, we have Tim.

And then after Tim, we have Gabby.

Come on down.

Good afternoon, Chair Nelson and members of the committee.

My name is Cynthia John Vasquez and I serve as the Executive Director of the Washington Bus and I am also a proud member of the People Powered Elections Coalition who have been advocating for the renewal of the Seattle Democracy Vouchers Program.

One of the primary benefits of the program has been its ability to empower more individuals to participate in elections.

By renewing this program's funding, we can continue to increase voter engagement, encourage small donors to support their preferred candidates, and foster more inclusive and diverse democracy.

This year, the program takes on an even deeper meaning for me personally.

As a recent legal permanent resident, I'm finally able to use the democracy vouchers myself.

After years of telling others about this program, I can now experience firsthand what it means to have my voice count in local democracy, even though I still cannot vote.

For me and others, this program isn't just policy, it's personal.

It opens up the door to civic participation that were previously close to us.

I look forward to working together to ensure voters get the chance to renew the program's funding in this August primary.

Thank you, Cynthia.

Next we have Tim.

And then after Tim, we have Gabby and then Abigail.

Come on down.

Good afternoon, Chair Nelson and members of the council.

My name is Tim O'Neill, a District 3 resident and the research and data manager at Washington Community Alliance.

I'm here to support the renewal of Seattle's democracy voucher program.

The DVP lowers financial barriers for candidates from diverse backgrounds to run for office and encourages investment in grassroots organizing to reach a broader base of constituents.

Relative to other cities in Washington, Seattle stands apart with candidates that are more reflective of our population by age, race, and gender.

This strengthens our democracy by ensuring a government that is more representative of and responsive to its people.

The DVP has also had a positive lasting effect on voter turnout in Seattle, particularly among communities that historically did not participate in local elections.

including young voters, low-income voters, and voters of color.

Those who use vouchers are also more likely to vote in future elections, fostering long-term civic participation among our electorate.

For these reasons, I urge you to advance this measure and let the voters decide.

Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you.

Gabby?

Good afternoon, members of the committee.

My name is Gabby Muna, and I am a Seattle District 2 resident.

I urge you to advance legislation to allow Seattle voters to renew the funding for democracy vouchers.

As a student with little disposable income, this program is essential.

Democracy vouchers let me make my first ever contribution to a political campaign.

I grew up thinking that political donations were only for the wealthy and that politics was a game of big money, but democracy vouchers have changed that.

They pushed me to engage with local politics and pay more attention to the down-ballot races because it finally felt like I had a buy-in.

Democracy vouchers empower young people like me, the future of our city, to participate in our democracy when often we feel like our voices aren't heard.

Please pass this measure and let voters decide.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next we have Abigail.

Following Abigail, we have Shannon and then Nilou and then Benjamin to round out the first 10. So feel free to come on down.

Hi, I'm Abigail Leong.

I'm speaking as part of the Washington Voting Justice Coalition.

There's a lot of fear right now that money and not people decide who has a say in our community and democracy vouchers are giving people a little hope.

And I can tell you firsthand that they set us apart from the rest of the state and we are the talk of the town.

I can tell you this because we have listening sessions where we ask people from across the state about voting and civic engagement.

And I'd like to read you some excerpts from that.

People from Seattle who come to those sessions like Josh and Talika said that they love democracy vouchers and think that they should be expanded statewide.

Angie from Auburn said democracy vouchers would be a game changer for low-income folks who wouldn't be able to give otherwise and would be able to support candidates who represent them.

Jim from Marysville said, it would mean a lot to have someone who looks like you rather than someone funded by corporations.

Tazita from Bellevue said, she often felt less involved in politics because things like excess money to donate to campaigns didn't exist for her.

And Regina from Spokane said that they could encourage new candidates to run.

So I'm here to thank you and support the renewal of democracy vouchers and see what we do next.

All right, thank you.

Shannon, Neely, and then Benjamin, come on down.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair Nelson, members of the committee.

My name is Shannon Grimes, senior researcher at Sightline Institute's Democracy Program.

We support this legislation to enable the Democracy Voucher Program's funding to continue.

Speak a little closer to the mic.

Oh, I'm too tall for this.

One of the primary goals of democracy vouchers is to bring more city residents into the campaign finance conversation, and that has been hugely successful.

In 2013, before the program, just 8,800 individuals contributed to a political candidate in the city.

In 2021, it was 59,000.

Seattle now has one of the highest contributor rates of any US city at around 10% of registered voters.

New York City is the only one that comes even close.

Seattle has more than doubled the participation of other comparable cities.

The program has also succeeded in diversifying who gives to campaigns.

While disparities remain, people of color, younger people, and people with lower incomes are much better represented among voucher users than among campaign owners.

In some elections, people using vouchers better represent Seattle's population demographics than voters do.

For many people, using vouchers is the first time they've ever donated to a campaign.

Seattle is showcasing an innovative campaign finance reform model.

Please allow voters to keep funding this program.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Nilou and then Benjamin to finish the first 10.

I'm a little shorter.

Good afternoon, Chair Nelson and members of the committee.

My name is Neeloo Jenks and I'm a representative of Fair Vote Washington.

I'm also a Seattle resident and a former candidate for Seattle City Council.

As someone who has used the democracy voucher program, I'm a strong supporter and urge you to pass this legislation.

I knocked on thousands of doors and talked to voters directly about the voucher program, and I know the opportunity to contribute in this way is received with enthusiasm.

There were two groups who particularly stuck out to me, green card holders and young voters.

For green card holders, the democracy vouchers are a meaningful opportunity to participate in a way that voting is denied to them.

And for young voters, who often have limited finances, they also appreciated being able to contribute to priorities that were important to them.

I urge you to pass this legislation for renewal.

I am proud that Seattle has been a leader in democratic endeavors in our country, and I hope we will continue to be so.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And then to round out the first 10, we have Benjamin.

Come on down.

Greetings, members of the council.

Greetings, members of the council.

I don't do this often.

My name is Ben Sibleman.

I live in District 2. And I am a big picture guy who is deeply concerned about the fact that the president of this country is now ignoring repeatedly both the will of Congress and that of the judges, which effectively means that US federal government is no longer a democracy.

It is therefore our job not just to use nonviolent methods to restore said democracy, but to actively look for ways to make it work by breaking the link between big money and political power, which is what the Seattle Democracy Vouchers Program is about, which I am strongly in support of renewing it, because rather than knuckling under to both the corporate oligarchy and potential rising fascism, we can pave the way for the next iteration of the American experiment in democracy.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We will now move to the remote public comment and same rules apply.

Haley Wu, please feel free to press star six to unmute yourself.

Please press star six to unmute.

Can you all hear me?

Yes, we can.

Yes.

Good morning, everyone, members of the community.

My name is Haley Wu from Asian Counseling and Referral Service.

I work as a community engagement coordinator.

So in my role, I help community members understand what the program is, how to use their voucher, and why their participation matters.

I also work directly with immigrants, seniors, and also other under-representative groups to spread awareness and make the engagement more accessible to everyone.

So this work is personal to me because I once qualified for this program and had the opportunity to use the voucher myself.

Even though I couldn't vote at the time, this program allowed me to support a campaign and have a voice in local elections.

It was empowering to know that my participation matters.

And I have seen some how the program could help others feel the same way.

I also wanted to share a story about a community member that I worked with.

She is an elder who has lived in Seattle for decades, but now has no way to participate in the election because she's a screen card holder.

When I told her about the program, she was surprised and then she could finally take part in shaping her local government.

So I really strongly urge you all to renew the program so that more resident regardless of their citizenship status can continue to engage in a political process.

Thank you.

Thank you, Hailey.

All right, we'll go back to in-person public comment.

The same rules apply.

Just a reminder, if you do hear that chime, you have about five seconds, 10 seconds left.

To conclude the last three, we have got a double here.

We have Barb and Kim.

Following Barb and Kim, we have Katie Stoltz.

And then following that, we have Guillermo.

Come on down.

Good afternoon.

Hello, and thank you to all Governance, Accountability, and Economic Development Committee members for all your work and opening yourselves to listen and consider our comments relative to your work on democracy vouchers.

I'm Barbara Tangshio, and this is Kim Albert, co-president of the League of Women Voters of Seattle King County.

The League is a nonpartisan organization.

Our mission is to empower voters and defend democracy.

We work for all the King County community to lift up our democracy by engaging community members in civic action.

The Seattle Democracy Voucher Program is an already proven program that the league wholeheartedly supports.

It empowers voters.

It has promoted and increased civic engagement, enabled a more diverse range of candidates to run for office, and reduced the influence of big money.

in politics.

This is the exact type of program that our democracy and the city of Seattle community needs.

Let's all protect and expand local civic engagement programs to defend our democracy.

Please do your part and put the democracy about to renewal on the August ballot.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, y'all.

The last two, we have Katie, and then after Katie, we have Guillermo.

Come on down.

Great.

Good afternoon, Chair Nelson and members of the council.

My name is Katie Stoltz, and I am the Seattle District 6 resident and the Data Hub Director for the Washington Community Alliance.

We're also a member of the People Powered Elections Coalition.

I'm here, like many, to urge your support in passing the legislation that will allow Seattle voters to renew the Democracy Voucher Program funding.

Since the creation of the Democracy Voucher Program, we have seen the number of small donors increase five-fold.

Specifically, the dollars from small contributions under $100 has increased by 156%, while money from large contributions over $250 has decreased by 93%.

Currently, Seattle is the number one city in the country for small dollar contributions.

As a young person, my ability to financially support candidates since 2015 was made possible because of the Democracy Voucher Program, and I know I am not alone.

At a time where voting rights are being attacked across the country, I am proud to be the president of Seattle, where I know our leadership and commitment to building a more equitable and representative democracy will be protected.

Please pass this today.

Thank you.

Next, we have Guillermo, and then after that, we do have one final remote public comment for Council President.

Hello.

Hello, Madam Chair and members of the committee.

My name is Guillermo Sasueta, and I'm the lead field organizer with One America.

One America is a 501 nonprofit organization dedicated to building power with immigrant and refugee communities across Washington state.

We come to you in enthusiastic support of renewing the democracy voucher program and urge you to pass this ordinance out of committee for a full council vote.

In 2015, One America played an important role in ensuring that legal permanent residents were able to participate in the program.

Since then, we've seen voters participate more in our local elections.

This program is one of the strongest community-centered campaign finance programs in the country.

When low-income and immigrant communities can contribute real dollars to a candidate, And when we reduce the influence of big business in our local elections, we give real hope to these communities.

And most importantly, we send a message as a city that they can rally around a candidate of their choosing, someone who comes from their community, and reduce the financial barriers that exist in running for office.

Thank you.

Thank you, Guillermo.

And then we're going to go back and conclude public comment with David Haynes.

David, please press star six to unmute yourself.

All right, thank you, David Ains.

How many people get paid to collect data on crime and statistics?

And how many so-called experts on crime are professors that have been influenced by George Soros-sponsored agendas to come up with these ridiculous ideas for the Democrat Party to follow, who already imploded our society, who now act like they're an expert at gun violence prevention, always trying to blame the law-abiding, while ignoring the fact that exempting low-level drug pushers from jail is and sabotaging the integrity of police reform is the number one reason why the violence is out of control.

Couple that with an immoral financial system of middlemen and you have a real dilemma that has destroyed the economy and yet you people are still doubling down on virtue signaling and messaging while still pulling punches on the chief's failures to implement proper policies who instead manipulate crime hotspot data, as if that made it safe after the fact, or they follow evidence based on 911 calls that delay the responses while they argue with you about what constitutes a crime.

And that concludes public comment, Council President.

All right, our public comment period is now closed and we'll move on with the rest of our agenda.

Will the clerk please read item one into the record.

Agenda item number one, appointment 03106, appointment of Vivian Vassal as member Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission for a term to December 31st, 2027 for briefing discussion and possible vote.

Hello.

Hello there.

Thank you, Director Barnett.

I will rely on you to present the commission and also speak a bit to the appointee.

All right.

The woman on the screen is Ms. Vivian Vassell.

I'm glad you've joined me, Vivian.

Vivian is the unanimous choice of the commission for a seat on the commission.

We get one selection on the commission.

So this is the council position, which has just come up.

Commission position, I'm sorry.

Vivian is a graduate of Seattle University as an undergrad and then went to the University of Colorado for law school.

She now works in the Attorney General's office under former Commissioner Nick Brown.

And yes, I'm just hoping you will give her your vote today.

And I'm here to answer any questions you have.

Can you thank you very much for presenting and hello, Vivian.

Thank you for being here today and stepping up to serve.

Could you explain just for people who might not know what the commissioners actually weigh in on?

Oh, the commissioners weigh in on any complaints we get under any complaints I don't dismiss that come in under either the ethics code, the elections code, the lobbying code.

And that's it.

And we also do the whistleblower protection code, but our responsibilities under that are a little different.

So those are the codes we administer.

The commission really, they're there as a backstop.

If I dismiss something and somebody thinks I've done so incorrectly, they can appeal to the commission.

And that's when the commission would step in.

And the democracy voucher program, the commission obviously has oversight over me as well on that.

Got it.

Thank you.

Well, greetings.

I would like to offer you the opportunity to tell us a bit about yourself and why you would like to be on the commission.

Yes, thanks for having me today.

So I'm born and raised in Seattle, so proud to be a Seattleite.

Let's see, so you heard my academic and professional credentials, but more importantly, I've always been, in my opinion, just committed to public service.

I really love living in this city, and the brief stint I took living elsewhere to go to law school kind of solidified my desire to return here and come back.

So I want to be on the committee for a number of reasons.

One, I just, like many of our public commenters earlier, really believe in the Democracy Voucher Program, and that's another program that I'm under the impression that the commission does.

has some role in protecting the integrity of.

So I remember when the program went live here and I was actually right, well, went live and I was inspired by it just as you heard a lot of the speakers speaking today.

And I have some former friends and colleagues or friends and colleagues who are former members of the committee, including Zach, who's the chair, and Shalia, who's one of the outgoing members.

She's a colleague of mine.

And these are just people who really inspire me, as well as my new boss, Nick Brown.

And I'm just honored to have even been invited to interview to be part of the committee.

And so far I've participated in one meeting and it's been sort of everything I anticipated it to be.

And I just want to help kind of make this city, keep this city the great place it is.

The 17 year old that spoke earlier just sort of reminded me of myself.

I know that I at certain points in my high school career spoke before the school board and I also, this doesn't show up on my resume, but back in, back when I was in high school at Garfield, I also wrote for a publication called The Mirror.

It was owned by Seattle Times and it was just for teens and it was published all over the state.

So that was a really wonderful way to get to know political issues and also get to know what other high schoolers in the state were up to.

I also did participate in the Washington bus back in the day when Toby printed and ran it because he and I went to high school together.

But yeah, just a proud Seattleite.

Love it.

I feel like the further I get into my career, the fewer African-American female attorneys I seem to come in contact with as far as government employees go.

And I am proud to be one of the few of the proud, but also want to change that.

And I think one of the best, most effective ways I can change that is to inspire others that look like myself.

So hopefully other students and younger women who look like me can look to me as a role model.

And Yeah, that's pretty much me in a nutshell and why I wanna be on the committee in a nutshell.

And I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you for that.

I did read your appointment packet, but you provided a lot of good information I was going to ask.

Being nominated by the rest of the commission is really, speaks to your standing in the community the integrity that people see in you, and I was going to ask how did you get to know the people on the commission, but you did answer a bit that professional circles and you are close to some people, so that answered my question.

Are there any questions that my colleagues would like to ask or comments?

Just a comment.

Ms. Vassil, you had me at CLU, just saying that, because I'm also a CLU grad, so you're good.

Go Red Hawks.

Isn't that the color?

Anyway, go ahead.

Go Red Hawks, formerly known as the Chiefs, but now the Red Hawks.

Okay.

There you go.

Council Member Rivera.

Well, Council President, I said that we confirmed someone this morning to the levy or not confirmed.

We were moving along for full council consideration to the levy oversight committee for the families and that levy and I'm gonna say what I said this morning now.

What I say every time we have a confirmation is that I so appreciate folks' willingness to serve in these volunteer roles, making the time.

Though volunteer and unpaid, they're really important and it really infuses that community piece into the work that we do.

And so I really wanna thank everyone who signs up for their service.

So thank you so much.

Thank you.

I want to make sure that people, well, I want to reinforce how important the commission is because they are weighing in on really sensitive topics and that have really high stakes.

one's job, the viability of one's race for office, et cetera.

So they really have to get into the detail and have a lot of knowledge and really be willing to spend the time, their own personal time and use their own personal expertise.

And so I also echo the thanks that I would like to express for you for stepping up.

And if there aren't any other questions, thank you very much.

Will the clerk please call the roll, the vote?

Oh, I have to move it first.

All right.

One moment, please.

I move that the committee recommend passage of appointment 03106. Second.

Thank you.

She was just so excited.

It's been moved and seconded to recommend confirmation of appointment 03106. Will the clerk please call the roll?

Council member Rivera.

Aye.

Council member Solomon.

Aye.

Chair Nelson.

Aye.

Three in favor.

Thank you very much.

The motion carries and with this will go to full council, not next Tuesday, but the following Tuesday.

Yes.

That's the way our schedule works in this committee.

Congratulations.

Thank you all.

All right.

Stay seated.

All right, I will.

I won't go anywhere.

I apologize.

Okay.

I'm still at work, so thank you all.

Okay.

Bye.

All right.

Will the clerk please read item two into the record?

Agenda item number two, Council Bill 120957, an ordinance relating to publicly financed election campaigns providing for the submission to the qualified electors of the city on an election to be held on August 5th, 2025 of a proposition authorized...

authorizing the city to levy regular property taxes for up to 10 years in excess of the limitations on levies in chapter 84.55 RCW for the purpose of funding the cost and administration of the city's democracy voucher program and other city purposes outlining a process for contemplation of changes to the program applying RCW 84.36.381 senior citizens and disabled persons exception to such levy and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts for briefing and discussion.

Thank you very much for that.

I want to make sure everybody in this room knows this, of course, but before we hand it over to the presenters, thank you very much for coming.

I want to make sure that anybody who's just tuning in now understands that we are not passing the renewal.

Well, we are passing, we're voting to send the program to the ballot for voter approval.

So this is, we're not making a unilateral decision at the city here.

This will go to the voters as it did before.

and this is the first step to get it on the ballot.

So with that, would you please introduce yourselves, and you can then go ahead and begin your presentation.

I'm Wayne Barnett.

I'm the executive director of the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission.

I'm Renee LeBeau, and I'm the program manager for the Democracy Voucher Program.

Dan Nolte, Mayor's Office.

And Brian Goodnight with Council Central Staff.

All right.

So I'll tee things off.

Council President, thank you for hosting us today.

So earlier this month, Councilmember Kettle and Mayor Harrell were proud to stand with several of the community advocates behind us to tout the groundbreaking success of the Democracy Voucher Program.

As you'll see in the presentation from Executive Director Barnett today, this tool has opened opportunities for candidates who never would have considered running for office without this tool being there.

I expect and I know there are members on this council who probably wouldn't have plunged into this program had this not been available.

So the presentation we're presenting today was a relatively easy one in that most members are already intimately familiar with the democracy voucher program, several having used it themselves.

And thanks to the 2015 voter initiative, this law is already in the books in the Seattle Municipal Code.

So the question before you in this legislation is simply whether you wanna ask voters to continue funding the program for another 10 years via property tax levy.

So before I began working at city council back in 2007, I used to manage political campaigns and worked at a political fundraising firm.

And I saw the toll it took sitting in a conference room dialing for dollars, talking to a limited list of potential donors to help finance their campaigns.

And when I look at many of the campaigns being run today, I see people standing in front of grocery stores, outside light rail stations, hosting democracy voucher house parties, and there's no other city doing this, as several of the commenters testified before you today.

So it's been a remarkable change, and one for the better, which is why Mayor Harrell has proposed to continue funding this endeavor for another decade.

And ultimately, as the council president noted, it will be up to Seattle voters to decide whether they'd want to do this.

So with that, let me turn this over to Executive Director Barnett, who can talk you through the last 10 years of this program and the next 10 years to come.

All right.

Thank you very much, Dan.

And we just put together a brief PowerPoint for you just on the program.

Democracy vouchers were created by voters in 2015. They went into effect in 2017. It is the first program of its kind anywhere in the world.

And it's administered by us at the SCEC.

We send four $25 vouchers to everyone in the city.

every registered voter and legal permanent resident who asks to be on the program.

And they can use those vouchers to contribute to whatever candidate they want as long as they're participating in the program.

You have to be a participant in the program to be able to use the vouchers.

And the mayor has proposed a 10-year levy to renew it.

And that's what I'll try to talk you through here is just what's been good about the program.

Okay, this is the first slide.

This is just something, it's two pictures.

The first one was prepared by Sightline prior to the vote to put this measure on the ballot.

It's 2013 and showing where voters lived, or donors to Seattle races.

And as you can see, it's not a very bright, There are a lot of people who don't contribute.

In 2019, that was the second year under the program.

That's the second map.

And you can just see the dots are everywhere.

People are contributing from everywhere in the city.

You can kind of tell where the zoo is there and Discovery Park and Magnuson Park.

That's probably the best thing for the map, but yes.

So that just goes to show how much people have really taken up the program.

Oh, sorry.

Total number of contributors.

This is something we've seen.

Prior to the program going into effect in 2013, less than 17,000 people gave money to a candidate.

By 2021, with the mayor's office on the ballot and the other citywide seats, that rose to 68,000.

So we're seeing numbers unlike any other city in the country.

It did a little bit in 2023, but we attribute that a little bit to the coming out of the pandemic, so.

Here's another thing that it's done is percentage of contributors from outside Seattle, roughly a third of the money for our city races used to flow from outside Seattle prior to the dawn of the program.

Since then, it's plummeted to 7%, just a little bit more than seven.

So that's, I think, a notable thing.

This is, again, this graph shows that before the voucher program, the two year cycle before, where all the council members were elected, compares that with the two years after the program, when all nine council members were elected.

We only had 2.67 candidates per council race prior to the program.

Five of the nine races had no competitive primary.

So that was, you just got one chance, the general, to vote for people.

And oftentimes, And several of the candidates, we had one candidate who actually endorsed his opponent.

So that's every incumbent was on the ballot.

Eight of nine won.

Seven won by more than 20 points.

Three got more than 80. So that's kind of Soviet-style elections prior to the program.

Afterwards, we're up to six candidates per election.

Everything goes to the primary.

And only three of the nine races are decided by more than 20 points.

So only three candidates got more than 60% of the vote.

Um, uh, it's a 10, so the renewal, this is what you're voting on.

Um, 10 year property tax levy, $4.5 million a year over 10 years.

So 45 million, um, 0.0142% tax rate, which works out to $13 and seven cents on the owner of a median priced home, which is $920,000 next year.

And the voters will consider this in August if you vote to put it to them.

Oh, I have one more.

Can you take me to the next one?

Oh, thanks.

Oh, this goes to show how we got to the 4.5 million.

And just the bottom line is if it was kept at 3 million.

And you can see it would go quickly into the red.

By 2029, we would run out of money.

So that would be a problem, actually.

Next one up is $4 million, and still in the outer years, we do run out of money.

The top one is $4.5, and you can see we just narrowly are in the black for all 10 years.

So this is a problem when we're trying to budget for something 10 years out, so that's just a problem.

And with that, I think I'm ready to turn it over for questions, except next steps.

We do have your next committee vote on the 11th or 10th, and you'll have the chance to cast a vote on this.

Would then go to full council on the 22nd.

King County's submission deadline is May 2nd.

So that's when we have to have it over to the county to let them know we're going to put this to voters.

An election day would be August 5th.

Property tax collection would start next January 1st, and we'd also put together a task force.

In the first quarter of next year, we'll put together a task force with the council and the mayor to start looking at programmatic changes.

We're not seeing any right now, but if people want us to consider them or if council wants to take action without us, that would be available after the end of that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Would you like to add anything, Ryan?

Sure, thank you, Council President.

There is a central staff memo that's attached to the agenda and that was sent out to committee members earlier this week.

It's mostly background, similar content to what was presented today.

The only thing I'll add for the kind of Benefit of the council here is in terms of comparison of what it would cost the current levy versus the proposed levy.

The existing levy on average over the last three years has costed the owner of a median value residential property about $8.80 a year.

So the proposed renewal, as Director Barnett said, would be about $13.07 per year.

So just in terms of comparison.

Thank you.

That sparked a couple questions.

Want to add anything to the table before I ask?

So you just talked about how, Brian, what the property owner would be paying, but what is the lump sum that you're hoping that the existing program collects, and I know it varies year by year depending on the property, but what was the target, and then what will the renewal target?

The target was $3 million a year for the last 10 years, and that's why I showed you that last...

Did you want him to answer or me?

No, no, no.

So we're looking for the next 10 years to raise that to $4.5 million a year, so $1.5 million more each year.

In anticipation of about six candidates or something a year.

Right, and also rising costs.

I mean, really...

That's something just for budgeting.

That's why we do the six candidates per race, each of them using solely vouchers.

That's just a budgeting thing we do.

But in the end, we really plan.

I think our graph here even shows it's roughly 65 percent of that is what we're ultimately going to spend.

and the rationale for the increase is a presumption of 4.1% annual CPI increase.

And that, and I think Brian mentioned that in his memo, just basically brings you right up to the 4.5 million that we're recommending be collected per year.

Do you have a question?

Thank you.

You're looking at me like you would like to, go ahead.

I just, I'm trying to, the CPI increase, I, Why is it calculated?

I mean, I guess what I'm looking at is we have a certain amount that we estimate, which I understand how you arrived at the estimate, right?

And then how much do you actually use of the estimate?

And so is it that you're proposing an increase because we're using...

you know, X amount.

We think we will use X amount more than we originally estimated for the first, you know, 10 years of this program.

Right.

I mean, the figures that we use so far were set in 2015 when this went to the voters.

So this is now the figures are already 10 years out.

And then another 10 years will be 20 years old.

So this is taking account of like the rising cost of paper and staff and mailing and campaigning.

So those are all costs, which we're taking in and we're just trying to estimate them.

And I guess my question, thank you.

And I guess my question is different is how much are we using?

Because you're saying we utilize it at about a 65%.

Is that what I heard you say earlier?

It's like the six, what we utilize as a percent is like, I think the six candidates per race all using vouchers.

That has turned out to be kind of, that's just a mechanism we're supposed to use and the law says we have to use it.

So that's what we do.

But we figure, like, on 10 years of experience, we now know we're spending roughly 65% of that.

And all the numbers in my budget there were based on the 65% spending.

Did you say overspending?

Sorry.

Just spending.

How about I take a crack at it?

Yes.

So if they were to have six candidates per election and fully funded with democracy vouchers, the renewal proposal would be much more than what's being proposed right now.

So what they said is they've looked at the historical, how much has been used of it, which is .

And so on the increases to staff costs, voucher distributions, printing, mailing, those types of administrative costs, and then how many candidates are participating and how much each candidate is allowed to receive in democracy vouchers, then they ran it out for 10 years.

And the 4.5 million is the only one that didn't go into the red over that 10-year period.

Thank you, Brian.

That's what I was asking.

Usage versus underspend.

versus do we really need what we're asking for based on our underspend, if you will, of the program?

Because I understand how you're calculating the estimate, but usage is important.

If people aren't really utilizing it and we have underspend every year, then you could go lesser than the estimate of the $4 million because you're not actually utilizing that much.

Does that make sense?

So that goes to my question, Brian.

Yeah.

So with their projections, then the 4.5 per year would be required if it comes true.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council President.

What has happened to the 35% left in the coffers after each?

I mean, if you say that we're only using 65%, what's happening with the 35% leftover?

And I think it was closer to 50 or something one of the years, no?

It rolls over into the fund.

All the funds have only been used to do this program.

So that's, I think the drafters who put it on the ballot, that was something to make clear.

Like, this can only be used for the voucher program.

So yeah, and I think we really don't have that much left over right now.

I think we're about to run out anyway.

So yes.

Got it.

Can I ask a follow-up?

So year to year, it evens out because you have more usage in some years than others.

Yes.

Yeah, we're very hard to budget because we go up, we go down, we go up, we go down.

Yes.

And what about the DM?

Can I ask one more question, council president, just in terms of outreach and letting folks know to use these vouchers, you know, what they are.

I mean, I will say I get a lot of and got a lot of questions about how to utilize them.

Do they expire?

Just all of that information from an outreach standpoint, an education standpoint.

What is the education campaign, if you will, if there is one to let folks know how they're able to use these?

Yeah, we do some stuff in-house.

We did it all in-house the first year.

But then when we had the study look at it, I think Burke was a people retained after the year to look at what we'd done and what we could do better.

They actually recommended we start doing some contracts with community-based organizations because we did not have much success in getting into those communities that are harder to reach and telling people what they were.

So we've done a lot of education over 10 years.

We continue to print a lot of stuff.

in several languages, and we really rely on the CBOs to really go out there and spread the word.

Right, because the point is to reach those folks that don't have the means, but we want to get them engaged, and so that's why I'm asking about the outreach and making sure we're reaching the folks that we really want to be reaching.

I see nods in the audience.

Thank you.

Thank you.

While at the same time making sure that that educational outreach doesn't bleed into some kind of campaigning for...

Oh, yes.

We make sure.

We always say, like, you can go out.

We want you to promote the program.

For love of God, please don't mention candidates.

Yes.

Yes.

Correct, very important.

Thank you, Council President.

Well, I support this program.

I wish that Council Member Kettle were here because he is a big champion as well.

I know that he would have loved to say some remarks, but the choice was, do we process the renewal through this committee, or do we make people go out and collect signatures all over again, which I certainly did not want to do.

I'm really glad that we have time in this committee to process, or not process, but deliberate, and then make sure that it gets on the primary ballot.

So I have one last question.

When you talk about programmatic changes, some changes I understand are made from cycle to cycle by the commission or recommended or accepted by the commission based on candidates' suggestions for tweaking.

make it easier to campaign with them.

And then there are other changes that could be made that have to do with, that would require a change in the, I don't know, the enabling legislation.

Is that how it would go?

Tell me what kind of changes can be made, how, and what this task force is about.

I think this might be better handled by the mayor's representative.

Sure.

So, yeah, part of the legislation will have us convene early next year.

Yeah, some things can be imposed by the Ethics Commission.

For instance, earlier a few years ago, I think they changed the regulation for paid democracy voucher collectors.

But there's other issues that in talking with council members and other stakeholders, for instance, some council members, sorry, some candidates are worried that the amount of money that they're collecting doesn't allow them to do sufficient outreach and also pay their campaign manager a living wage.

I read a recent editorial in the Times that recommended democracy vouchers be sent out later.

There's one stakeholder group I wanted to figure out how to make it easier to qualify as candidates.

And all of those things are probably worthy of having the conversation about, probably when we're not at fever pitch in the middle of a campaign season when several incumbents are on the ballot.

So once we have another full year of mayoral data, because we've only done one mayoral term, through the Democracy Voucher Program is a time to take a comprehensive look at everything we've done to date and take a deeper dive in consultation with counsel and the Ethics Commission.

Mayoral and citywide council term.

It's gone.

That's exactly.

I should point out two minutes.

There's been two, I think.

2017 and 2021.

2017 didn't have the mayor's office in it, so yeah.

We really think of ourselves as having two sets of customers.

One, our candidates.

We obviously look to, because we want them to take part in the program and to use it, so we really want to hear from them on their experience.

Our other customers, though, are just regular people out there on the street, people who use the vouchers.

So we really, we try to make sure we hear from both of those groups before we do any changes to the program.

Got it.

All right, well, if there are no other questions or comments, I look forward to continuing the discussion and a possible vote at our next meeting, which is April 10th.

Yay, I was right.

All right, thank you very much.

Thank you.

And who should, if council members who aren't here have any questions, to whom should they direct them?

You should run those questions through me.

I'm happy to take them.

If they require input from others, then I'll be happy to distribute that.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

All right, with that, let's move on to the next item, please, and read it into the record.

Item three.

Agenda item number three, four recommendations to better understand and address current gun violence patterns in Seattle for briefing and discussion.

Well, while you are getting settled, I will just say some opening remarks, if I may.

Well, I'll wait until the noise pipes down.

Okay, well thank you so much for being here today to present this audit.

I just will explain how this audit got here just briefly and then turn it over to our presenters.

First of all, I will say that, uh, this, just a second, let me, this particular audit grew out of a request, uh, from mayor Harrell and I, uh, to the office of the city auditor, um, that was submitted, I believe on January 7th, 2024, after I became council president and we respectfully, and it reads, we respectfully request that your office assist us in evaluating the city's current crime prevention and reduction programs and investments.

and the soon to be deployed technologies described below.

We request that your office update your 2012 assessment of crime prevention programs funded by the city, including programs operated by the city and those run by the community-based nonprofit organizations.

like the 2012 assessment, please identify the evidence-based programs, those with no evidence of effectiveness, those that may be promising, and those that may cause harm.

We also value your opinion on what crime prevention or reduction programs the city is not using that we should consider implementing.

We would like this assessment as soon as possible to help inform decisions for the 2025 city budget, which will start being made in April.

And so that was the...

that was the request and because it was signed by the mayor and the council president, it got bumped up to the, uh, the auditor's very busy list of requests and, uh, it was going forward.

And then I was surprised to learn shortly after the Garfield high school shooting at the end of last, uh, school year.

Cause I said, how's that audit coming along?

I was surprised to learn that the audit request had been put on pause by the mayor's office because, and the explanation was, HSD is preparing to issue a new round of RFPs that will result in new funding opportunities.

Assessing these programs in the context of the RFP responses seems more prudent.

Well, I disagreed.

I thought that the audit could inform the kinds of programs that we want to ask the recipients or the bidders to have the capacity to execute.

Anyway, I kvetched about this on the dais.

I ended up talking to the mayor's office, and so that's neither here nor there, but I did feel very strongly that the focus on gun violence was extremely important to have more answers on because that is the most serious and people are dying and also again, a tragic fatality had just happened at Garfield.

So the request was, I made the request to focus on that slice of crime prevention and this is what we've got before us.

I unpaused the work on the broader range of programs and that will be ongoing but I'm very grateful that you have worked so hard to get us the information about gun violence, the nature of it, and provide some recommendations right now.

So with that, I will let you introduce yourselves and begin your presentation.

Great, thank you very much.

I'm Claudia Gross-Shader.

I'm the Research and Evaluation Director with the Office of City Auditor.

I'd just like to quickly acknowledge my colleague, Andrew Scoggin, who also worked on this report, as well as our City Auditor, who's in the audience.

Natalie Walton Anderson, Chief of Public Safety for the Mayor's Office.

Tiffany Washington, Deputy Mayor.

Rebecca Boatwright, General Counsel and Executive Director of Analytics and Research for the Seattle Police Department.

Great, thank you.

Thank you, Council President Nelson.

Our report offers four concrete things that the city could do to better understand and address the current gun violence patterns that we're experiencing in Seattle.

It's important to note, especially now, that our four recommendations do not require more city resources.

our recommendations do require the city to get more organized, more organized around data that can help us better understand and address gun violence, and more organized in coordinating activities among city departments, other government entities, community partners, all using an all-hands-on-deck approach to addressing gun violence.

We don't have to reinvent the wheel on this.

Our report offers examples from other jurisdictions that have led to declines in gun violence.

And we have noted in the report where free technical assistance is available to Seattle.

Next slide, please.

Here's the bottom line.

The mayor's office agrees with all four of our audit recommendations, and the mayor's office response letter is included as Appendix A in our report.

In the letter, the city's chief public safety officer here, Natalie Walton Anderson, identifies the things that the executive is currently doing and plans to do to address our audit recommendations.

The letter closes by saying, our city government is a learning organization.

We strive to do better, improve performance, meet the expectations of the people of Seattle, and do so with integrity, fairness, and justice.

And our office, the Office of City Auditor, is part of this learning organization.

Our work, our audit findings, our audit recommendations, and our follow-up on our audit recommendations can be uncomfortable and challenging for the executive.

So we really appreciate the executive's collaboration on this audit and their acknowledgement of our shared goal of doing better for the people of Seattle.

The next slide, please.

For members of the public, you can find our report on our websites.

The link is up there.

And with all of our audits, we followed the US government auditing standards so you can be assured of the quality and independence of our work.

In addition for this audit, we harnessed the collective power of additional agencies and stakeholders.

We received free federal technical assistance from the US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Violent Crime Reduction Roadmap Program, as well as from the Police Executive Research Forum.

The Police Executive Research Forum funded a researcher, Dr. Lexi Gill, who worked in collaboration with the King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office, their Crime Strategies Unit, to conduct a Seattle gun violence landscape analysis for this audit.

And David Baker, the Director of Data and Analytics from the King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office, he was here earlier, he had to leave, but we really do appreciate their collaboration on this work.

Also, we appreciate the deep collaboration from the Seattle Police Department.

Their performance analytics and research group provided two custom reports for this audit.

And Rebecca Boatwright, who oversees that group, is here today.

And finally, the city departments and organizations listed here on this slide also provided feedback on the report and the recommendations.

Next slide.

As Council President mentioned, this audit grew out of a request from Mayor Harrell and Council President Sarah Nelson to evaluate the city's investments in preventing and reducing crime.

And this audit is a first step toward that goal of ensuring that the city's investments are effective.

We looked specifically at the issue of gun violence in Seattle.

Seattle has sustained a post-pandemic increase in shootings.

According to SPD data, between 2020 and 2024, shots fired increased by 71%.

Non-fatal shootings increased 58%, and fatal shootings increased 23%.

In this audit, we sought to understand more about the current gun violence patterns that Seattle is experiencing.

We wanted to learn how gun violence intersects with other issues like homelessness and domestic violence.

What are the trends in youth gun violence?

And where are the specific places in Seattle where gun violence incidents are concentrated?

Next slide, please.

When we went to find the data to answer these types of questions, we bumped into our first finding area.

We found that unlike some other cities, Seattle does not have a framework or an umbrella for coming together as city agencies and partners to ask these types of questions and look at the data together.

And this should not be misunderstood as a criticism of the Seattle Police Department.

In fact, SPD has capacity to perform sophisticated diagnostic and geospatial analyses related to gun violence.

And we have links to some examples of these types of analyses in our report.

So what's missing is systematic information sharing.

And here's an example from our audits.

Early on in our audit, we spoke with parks officials, SPD, and the King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office.

and everyone acknowledged that there were certain parks in Seattle where gun violence was concentrated.

But they all collected the data differently.

Different time periods, different types of incidents, and even different names for the locations.

So we all got on the same page and SPD created a consensus report for us.

It's summarized in exhibit seven of our report on page 21. It's titled Seattle Parks with High Incidence of Shootings and Shots Fired from January 2021 through August 2024. And so now this type of information could be helpful to the city in focusing its limited resources.

As council member Solomon knows, there are many proven effective place-based strategies for reducing violent crime, like improved lighting and increased access controls that could be effective at these park locations.

And this is just one example.

Without this framework or umbrella for information sharing, the city's missing out on important opportunities for greater understanding and action.

Our report offers some examples of systematic information sharing from other jurisdictions.

Baltimore has experienced a drop in violent crime since 2021, including a 23% drop in fatal shootings and a 34% decline in non-fatal shootings from 2023 to 2024. It's important to note that in Baltimore and in a number of other cities that we highlighted in our report, the police department is not the convener.

The police participate in the information sharing, but they don't hold the umbrella, if you will.

In Baltimore, for example, the convening agency is the Mayor's Office of Neighborhood Safety and Engagement.

They maintain an online dashboard, and we link to it in our report on page 11. It's called the Public Safety Accountability Dashboard, and it combines data from police, from prosecutors, and from Baltimore's evidence-based public health interventions, all in one place.

The officials in Baltimore note that the dashboard is designed to, quote, allow the public to hold the agencies accountable.

We offer two recommendations in this area, and both of our recommendations are on page 14. First, we recommend that the city develop a more systematic reporting and information sharing framework for gun violence.

And we note that the technical assistance that we received from the police executive research forum, it's still available if the city wants to continue on this path.

Second, we recommend that the city take a look at the ordinance that established our care department.

And there's language in this ordinance that suggests that care could possibly potentially be a convener for information sharing around gun violence.

Next slide, please.

Our second finding area is that the city does not routinely or systematically engage other city departments, other government entities and community partners in an all hands on deck approach to addressing gun violence based on data and problem solving.

From the data that we were able to gather for this audit, we identified some opportunities for the city to engage in problem solving.

Problem solving to address gun violence in parks, or gun violence with a domestic violence nexus, or gun violence with a nexus of homelessness.

We highlight some examples from other jurisdictions that have implemented an all hands on deck problem solving approach.

Again, Baltimore has documented their all hands on deck approach in their violence prevention plan that was required by ordinance in 2020. The 2024 update of the Baltimore plan shows that 56% or 38 action items of that plan are now completed.

And Baltimore is measuring its results through rigorous evaluations and through the public safety accountability dashboard that I mentioned earlier.

Milwaukee pioneered the development of another framework.

It's called the Homicide Review Commission, and it brings together police, city agencies, schools, hospitals, prosecutors, corrections, social service agencies, and community organizations to use strategic problem analysis and to focus city resources effectively to address gun violence.

Homicide counts in Milwaukee fell 52% over eight years through the use of the Homicide Review Commission.

The next generation of the Homicide Review Commission is called Violence Reduction Councils, and that's on page 16 and 17 of our report.

The Violence Reduction Councils have been developed by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, And Dr. Mallory O'Brien and her team from Johns Hopkins have offered to provide the city with free technical assistance to help understand and implement this framework.

So for this area, we recommend that the city improve its capacity for problem analysis to address gun violence.

And we recommend that the city implement a framework for regular systematic coordination among city departments, other government entities, and community organizations, like the Violence Reduction Council model.

The next slide, please.

Last, we have an item for city council consideration.

We're not making a formal audit recommendation because we ourselves did not do any audit work in this area.

However, in 2023, at Mayor Harrell's request, the Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy conducted a review of SPD investigations, and they found that many of SPD's practices related to investigations were not well aligned with the research on what is effective for police investigations.

For example, there were no standard operating procedures or manuals for investigations, no formal training processes, and few opportunities for collaboration between control and investigations.

They noted that, quote, even if the SPD returns to full personnel capacity, these organizational weaknesses will continue if unattended.

And the reason this is important related to our audit report is that information from police investigations is crucial for understanding more about the current gun violence patterns in Seattle.

Further, effective police investigations can be an effective strategy for addressing gun violence.

And therefore, we urge the city council to continue to monitor SPD's efforts to address the weaknesses identified in its investigative operations.

Next slide, please.

This is a summary of our four recommendations, and it's a busy slide.

It's really just available in case folks who are viewing this presentation would like to download this slide.

Next slide, please.

OK, in conclusion, although addressing gun violence is extremely challenging.

Our audit identifies some concrete steps that the city can take today to better understand gun violence and engage the whole of city government and its partners in an all hands on deck approach.

And these recommendations do not require additional city resources.

In fact, our report includes offers of free technical assistance to help Seattle implement systems that have a track record for reducing gun violence in other cities.

Again, thank you for your interest in the audit report and for inviting us today.

And with that, I will turn it over to our panel.

starting starting with natalie walton anderson or deputy mayor washington i'm not sure um actually i'm gonna go first great thank you first of all thank you council president nelson and council members for the opportunity to speak and respond let's try that again um so thank you council president nelson and thank you council members for the opportunity to speak on behalf of the mayor's office i think first of all i want to extend my thanks um to the auditor's office and Dr. Claudia Gross-Shader for the work and the recommendations made from this audit that were commissioned by, again, Mayor Harrell and Council President Nelson to better understand and address the current gun violence in our city.

The mayor's top priority is public safety, and in particular, addressing gun violence is urgent and of the utmost importance to every member of our community.

Our police department also shares this urgent priority and works tirelessly to analyze and investigate and solve crimes to get guns off our street, enforce our laws by arresting those intricately involved in gun violence.

The mayor's office introduced the One Seattle Restoration Framework that specifically calls out that reducing gun violence citywide is a top priority.

And it affirms that no one department, no one system, or no one community provider can do this work alone.

And that the solutions must come from a collaboration across city departments, regional partners, and must also involve our community and their input and what they say, and also an overall holistic approach.

We have made significant investments to expand hospital-based violence intervention and provide access to trauma-informed care and wraparound services.

There have also been investments to support Seattle Public Schools focused on mental health, school-based safety measures, and investment in early childhood programming.

And that programming is a clear upstream approach to preventing gun violence.

SPD continues to build and strengthen their ability to address this issue, utilizing data to establish patterns and trends, resulting in the ability to use our existing investigative resources to have the most impact.

And I know my colleague, Rebecca Boatreich, will talk more about that.

But we're working with both prosecutor's offices and also around the region to enforce gun surrender laws as well.

And SPD continues to expand its work and partnerships regionally, touching many of the other 38 municipalities because, as we all know, gun violence does not stay within the borders of the city of Seattle, and it intersects with the cities across the country.

SPD continues to actively participate and expand its regional task force work with our regional and federal partners.

This work includes a commitment to understanding and continuing to look at the data as to where these guns are sourced.

In addition, the city is also in progress to update the 2019 Gun Trace Report.

And that's important because we have to understand and know the origins of how these guns come into our city and our region in order to combat and reduce gun violence.

SPD continues to work with our joint federal and regional task force investigations and operations, and that has resulted in guns off the streets, countless arrests, and cases submitted for prosecution.

In 2023, Seattle Police Department recovered 1,918 guns.

In 2024, they recovered 1,934 guns.

And as of February 28th of this year, they recovered 436 guns.

That's seven guns on average per day.

To address gun violence, we are aligned with the auditor's report, and we must have a comprehensive approach and strong partnerships to address this challenge.

And we know that we have more work to do.

Turning to the recommendations, the first recommendation encourages the city to report gun violence patterns publicly.

The mayor's office is committed to transparency and in terms of measuring outcomes and establishing key performance metrics.

And having outwardly facing public data and dashboards that can be integrated and publicly shared will increase collaboration and provide visibility for city departments, for external partners, and for our community to understand what is being done.

Simply put, we agree with that recommendation.

And SPD has currently maintained a public facing dashboard for quite some time with some of the data and analysis suggested in the auditor's report.

The expansion of this data and the ability to communicate it more widely is absolutely possible.

However, balancing the necessary interest and not compromising information necessary for purposes of the investigative work also has to be considered.

Recommendation number two regarding continuous updates related to the care department, the mayor is also committed to providing those updates to the council members on the status of the care department.

We've done that just recently.

The key here is to update council members in our community on the status of care, the progress related to the ordinance and the potential integration of programs.

We've started that work with the integrations of the lead and co-lead contract within care.

Remembering that CARE was launched in October of 2023, not even two years old yet, it is important to understand and consider that the brand new department that needed time to build the foundation for staffing, training, and building upon new policies and procedures.

Again, we are building that infrastructure and we will continue to report on the ability to have those programs integrated in support of the ordinance and currently working with Chief Barden and her team to continue to update Council on that progress.

I know that that is a priority for Council.

Recommendation three encourages SPD to improve its capacity for problem-solving analysis and problem-oriented policing.

Again, we are aligned on this recommendation as well, and SPD supports and utilizes problem-oriented and evidence-based analysis to address crime and has been doing so for years.

In hiring Chief Barnes, our new police chief, evidence-based policing is a priority for the chief, as is looking for areas of continued improvement within the department.

SPD shared in their response several examples of problem-solving-based work, including CEPTED work, crime prevention through design at every precinct, and work more concentrated recently with the FODEP initiative and also the Downtown Activation Team.

SPD works routinely to address those few individuals that create the most impact with our high utilizer initiative at the city attorney's office, working with both the city and county prosecutor in a coordinated way to focus enforcement and where appropriate holistic response for those individuals.

In addition, Seattle police department has taken the time to assess the San Francisco DMACC model for addressing crime and disorder.

And they brought back some lessons learned that were thought of and comprehended in terms of our launch of the downtown activation team.

New technologies like our automatic license plate readers that are installed in almost 400 patrol cars, our real-time crime center will allow a much more rapid approach to responding and addressing gun violence as well.

And we've utilized the crime data to pick three pilot areas where crime is concentrated for installation of those CCTV cameras.

SPD is readily available to provide updates as to the implementation of the recommendations from the assessment that evaluated SPD's current criminal investigation systems, policies, and practices.

That report was commissioned by the mayor that led on this issue that called for an executive order that said that we needed to reform PD's current investigative policies.

Update on this progress is crucial, and this is a priority for both the mayor's office and Chief Barnes and the Seattle Police Department.

The last recommendation states that the city should implement framework for regular systematic coordination among city departments, governmental entities, and organizations to address gun violence.

The One Seattle Restoration Framework named this coordination.

And the city has taken the first step in implementing that with establishing the multi-department and multi-stakeholder downtown activation team.

We took lessons learned from the planning stages and steps of the unified care team and the downtown activation plan.

Taking from these planning stages and steps, we are now ready to build and expand this approach with the anticipated launch of our One Seattle Restoration subcabinet.

And this subcabinet will be responsible for the oversight and initiatives across the department and investments as well.

Integrating and making sure that we have a data-centric strategy to address the most urgent public safety needs, gun violence being at the top.

We all benefit from the recommendations and lessons learned in this audit to understand and continue to inform our next actions urgently to address gun violence and to ensure those efforts are effective and that are aligned in the vision.

In closing, I wanna thank the mayor, the council, Auditor David Jones, and Dr. Gross-Shader for the audit and the recommendations.

Thank you.

I'm gonna say a brief couple words before I pass it over.

Deputy Mayor Washington, I want to say, and I am so happy and blessed to have such a strong, competent woman in this position who's doing amazing work with the police department and the care department.

So thank you for inviting me, Director Walter Anderson.

I think words are powerful, and so I want to just provide some clarity around the word agreement.

I would say the mayor's office agrees with the audit findings, but we were already doing the things that were in the audit findings.

And there's a big distinction.

I would also add that as a woman who's raising a black son married to a black man and who lost my brother in Skyway to gun violence and last summer lost my nephew to gun violence in downtown Seattle, I can assure you that the person that the mayor has put over organizing the community safety work, which is me, you're not gonna find anybody more motivated or dedicated to doing such a thing.

And I think it matters because sometimes when we say to the community, that the auditor has findings and then we respond to the findings, we take away from them the fact that they were already in some cases doing the very things that were in the findings.

So yes, I agree with your recommendations and I wanna give space and room for recognition that through the Seattle Restoration Framework, through the establishment of the care department, through the establishment of the unified care team, through the establishment of a RFP that will be released this summer, utilizing the Baltimore model.

Given the fact that our liaison for gun violence and the mayor's office is enrolled in a national CVI workshop, I just wanna take a moment to recognize and give ourselves some kudos for the work that we've already done.

We have a lot of work to do, but we do need to recognize the work that's been done.

Good afternoon.

Thank you for the opportunity to be here today.

And thank you to the city auditor's office for a good overview of the types of problem oriented policing approaches that within all of government effort have been shown to lead to demonstrable improvements in public safety.

Chief Walton Anderson ably described much of the work that SPD is doing in this area.

And so I won't reiterate all of the details that she shared.

I do want to emphasize a few points.

Within the totality of the ecosystem of criminal justice and public safety, SPD obviously plays a critical role, and SPD has long utilized problem-oriented policing approaches for addressing chronic issues, including those partnerships with the city attorney's office that are discussed in the response that's included within the report.

The ultimate long-term success of these programs, however, requires the partnership of all stakeholders, public, private, and nonprofit, upstream and downstream of police.

Shifting police resources to address crime and disorder has been proven to have some effect on crime, but these strategies are not sustainable over time, absent the participation of other players.

And we're pleased to see that acknowledged, and that is a critical part of Mayor Harrell's One Seattle approach.

There is no one-size-fits-all approach to crime and disorder.

And to that end, I want to highlight a couple points about gun violence in Seattle.

First, in contrast to the jurisdictions noted in the audit report, gun violence in Seattle is not so neatly tied empirically to a particular location such that strategies highlighted in other jurisdictions to decouple the violence from a particular location are necessarily appropriate.

And we know this because SPD tracks all shots fired events reported, whether or not there is associated property damage or injury.

And with a team of highly trained and experienced intelligence and data analysts, SPD has, as Chief Walton Anderson noted, sophisticated ability to identify any emerging or forecasted trends.

As you know, Chief Barnes is himself a member of the Evidence-Based Policing Hall of Fame out of George Mason University, has made very clear that SPD's strategies around crime and harm reduction will be rooted in rigorous analysis and adhere to best practices in evidence-based policing.

SPD has the teams in place to support this direction.

Second, we also know that most gun violence in Seattle is highly linked to specific persons or networks of individuals.

And this gets into a limitation of this audit like any third-party report.

Due to legal and regulatory parameters that often guard information material to ongoing investigative work, the strategies, methods, and sources that underlie much of SPD's work in this area is not information that we can openly share.

until a case and associated cases involving these individuals are closed.

For that reason, the audit does not get into a comprehensive review of the cases that SPD is presently building frequently alongside others, as has been noted at the regional and the federal level, which all do rely on evidence-based practices and strategies.

Finally, I want to touch briefly upon the work SPD is doing to address the findings of the GMU report mentioned earlier.

As Chief Barnes previewed in his remarks before Council a few weeks ago, It is a high priority to address these findings.

SPD has made significant improvements towards increasing staffing, bringing online new technology systems, building up department protocols and SOPs, and, importantly, implementing rigorous data and records governance practices, all of which lead to greater efficiency and effectiveness.

I know Chief Barnes looks forward to briefing Council on this work when we have more time than is allotted today.

Thank you again for the opportunity to be here.

Thank you very much for your comments, everyone.

Before I proceed, can you tell me when was your first draft out of this audit?

Pardon?

Early November, 2024.

Okay, I thought it was sometime over the summer more.

Anyway, okay.

Well, I hope that there was an opportunity to talk about more frankly and perhaps one-on-one about some disagreements or questions about the content because I now feel like it's a little bit awkward, but I would like to give you a chance to respond to the ways that your findings were characterized before we move on to questions or anything.

I saw you writing down, so is there anything that you'd like to nuance?

As Chief Walton Anderson said in the executive response letter, our city government is a learning organization.

And this is part of the conversation of a learning organization, the whole audit process.

is part of that learning.

As you saw in our slides, this audit work was scaled back from the original request that came to us because we can understand the effectiveness of our investments in crime reduction, crime prevention, community safety.

But it's an iterative process.

And this is really part of that iterative process.

We have to, at the beginning, understand more about what the current problem looks like in Seattle today.

And I think that there's agreement here at this table that gun violence has changed significantly since the pandemic.

And And so what do those new patterns of gun violence look like?

It seems like there's broad agreement there.

I was actually writing the areas where we were in agreement.

I was really thrilled to hear from Deputy Mayor Washington that HSD will be using Baltimore model for the RFP that they'll be releasing for community safety investments.

Just correct me real quick.

We're not using the model.

We use the model to inform the model we developed.

So I agree with you.

It's a powerful model that informed our RFP.

Yes, thank you for that.

And another aspect that makes that model so powerful is that they rigorously evaluate that work.

And by a rigorous evaluation, that means that they use scientific methods and it is possible even with community-based interventions to use scientific methods to understand whether or not the programs are effective, have a zero effect, and unfortunately, sometimes our social interventions can have the opposite effect.

They can actually harm the people that we are intending to serve.

So I hope that rigorous evaluation will also be part of the city's commitment as HSD looks to release the RFP.

I could go on, but I want, and I will jump in again if needed.

We'll ask questions.

I come at this from the point of that council is trying to do everything we possibly can to address our very, very serious problems.

And so we can pass new laws providing enforcement tools like soda and soap, but those don't do any good unless officers are using them, unless the courts grant the stay out of this area order, et cetera.

So that is an issue, that we pass the laws and the executive executes.

And council also is trying very hard to exercise our oversight responsibility as evidenced by all the slides that we pass during budget, asking a bunch of questions to make informed budget decisions, which is also legislation, it's a law.

So we are trying to ask the right questions, and that is why we request audits that are presented here.

And this audit is designed to identify what are we doing now and what should we be doing and why.

And what I love about this is that this provides for resources that are free.

in this declining budget environment that we're existing in, we don't have to pay any money for the already existing models and methodologies and advice and technical assistance that the federal offices around this region, DEA, DOJ, the PERF, which stands for...

Police Executive Research Forum.

And that's not a governmental entity.

And also we do have an offer of free technical assistance from Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.

Right, and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the ones that work on addiction.

And then there's the DEA's office of the high-intensity drug area.

Is that how they're called?

Yes.

And I learned all this from the last audit.

And so I come at this from the perspective when I'm reading these questions.

these audits, they often refer to recommendations in previous audits that have not yet been implemented.

And so that is, that's kind of, that's fueling some of my frustration that if there is expertise and resources out there, why aren't we using them?

Well, some of you presented really good reasons why or things that you are already doing.

I hadn't heard of the Restoration Framework, Framework for Restoration.

I don't know when that started, but that could have been my lack of attention.

Didn't you, I think you came to one.

It was when the mayor went around the city and held public safety forums in the community and took all the feedback.

And then I think it was when last year?

October.

He released the One Seattle Restoration Framework.

Okay.

Well, it wasn't, I did not go to any of those meetings around the city, but I, it, So there is something going on and I'm glad to know that you have, it is informed a bit by the Baltimore work because there's so many, you know, police-based policing is now part of our civic lexicon now from, I believe, I don't know, we can't take credit for it, but you're on the overlap of drugs and crime.

And so this is where I'm coming from is just, I'm reading from one perspective, great ideas that we could implement to make perhaps faster progress on some of our problems.

I'll note that on page, let's see, this particular audit says, our 2023 audit on organized retail crime in Seattle recommended that the city consider using free technical assistance from the US Department of Justice to begin to apply POP, which is problem-oriented policing techniques to address known organized retail crime fencing.

fencing operations, these same resources could be used to help the city apply POP techniques to address gun violence in the city.

Further, as we describe in our 2024 audit on places in Seattle where overdoses and crimes are concentrated, the city has not routinely used an evidence-based public health problem-solving framework to address places where crime is concentrated, end quote.

That's on page 17. Another one says, focused deterrence is an evidence-based strategy for reducing violent crime used also in Baltimore and numerous other cities.

Our 2015 Street Outreach Audit noted that the city of Seattle does not use a focused deterrence approach.

to address violent crime and victimization, and that is still the case today.

So this is what I am picking up on, and it certainly serves no one for one branch of government to blame the other one.

I would like to know if the executive is open to any of these, to reaching out to the DOJ, the DEA, and the agencies that are suggested here to maybe more systematically adopt what seems to be working in other cities.

And you, Director, stepped up valiantly at the briefing on the last presentation and took the lead on that, and I would love to talk with you about how that's going, and I have no reason to doubt that it's not.

It's just I feel a sense of urgency and want to make sure that we're doing everything that we possibly can to go forward.

So that's all I'll say right now.

Go ahead.

So SPD routinely does a fair amount of work with problem-oriented policing and place-based policing, and that goes back to the days of Chief Kurlikowski and has expanded on through since Chief O'Toole at the micro-community policing plans on through.

our past chiefs, and Chief Barnes is obviously very committed to evidence-based policing approaches and the work that he's directing SPD to do.

For purposes of this particular audit, SPD focused on the topic of gun violence, which is very unique relative to other types of crime and disorder that we are engaged with the executive's office closely in addressing.

So the downtown activation team initiatives at 3rd and Pike and in the CID and, as I understand, may soon be coming to other areas of the city.

Those are examples of the type of place-based policing approaches that are used to address crime and disorder in discrete locations where we have the empirical basis from the data to say this is, in fact, a hotspot for this type of activity that lends itself to interventions that will serve to decouple the disorder from the particular place.

So I don't want to leave council with the impression from SPD that we're not engaged in this work ongoing and have been for at least the two decades that I've been with the city.

And we're certainly happy to brief council on any of the projects that are ongoing on that end.

And if I can just add, I was present and responded on behalf of the mayor's office to the last two audits that in terms of the ones you just referenced in terms of the intersectionality between overdose and where crime is concentrated and also the organized retail theft audit.

We've used those recommendations as roadmaps for our downtown activation team, for our place-based strategies, the data that was there.

We've connected with Northwest Haida and had several meetings and forwarded trainings.

We've even reached out to Snohomish County, which was one of the things that was noted in Dr. Gross-Shader.

They had an example of, again, more of a coordinated approach.

So I would just, I want to confirm, but also just correct that we are taking seriously the recommendations in those last two audits, you know, under my direction in terms of the public safety team and utilizing those recommendations as we plan out how to address where crime is concentrated, where violent crime is concentrated.

throughout the city.

And so I just wanted to clarify that.

And actually, I think that might be helpful.

And I don't wanna volunteer you for an update on this, but this could be something that the council could get an update on from Natalie and her team as what have been the follow-up steps on the organized retail crime audit and the overdose and crime prevention audit.

I'd also like to offer that, well, appreciate that the executive has used our previous audits as roadmaps.

And in this audit today, for example, it might be helpful since there's general concurrence on our audit recommendations.

And since there is this new structure in place, the One Seattle Restoration Framework, framework, thank you.

How does that, what's the crosswalk between the practices that are being contemplated for that one Seattle restoration framework and something that has more of a track record, like the violence reduction councils from Johns Hopkins?

I mean, I think that this is something that Johns Hopkins would be happy to help us consider if we have missed anything in how Seattle's proceeding or if there's some learning from their work in other jurisdictions with the violence reduction councils that we could incorporate into the one Seattle restoration framework.

As I said at the beginning, we don't have to reinvent the wheel.

We can use these other resources, the technical assistance, actually the folks from Baltimore that we talked to were very forthcoming and very willing to share information, so they also stand as a resource.

And I think that this conversation gives us an opportunity to build on what Seattle is doing or contemplating doing.

I also want to add that Director Kim's team in Safe and Thriving has taken on, they're going on field trips to all the cities that have like demographics to Seattle to visit them and say, hey, how is this working?

Also, again, DaVita is taking trips to other jurisdictions.

And so they have Baltimore on their schedule.

They have a list of cities that they're going to to use that information to help inform the RFP.

And so sometimes I think we suffer from just not communicating some things to each other.

And I think what I learned from this audit is that we should probably communicate a little bit more so that you all are updated on efforts and also that you know what's happening so that when we do utilize the brilliance of the auditor's office, that we make sure that you know what we're already doing, and therefore we can get the best out of an audit report and recommendation.

And I'm not saying that to say this wasn't the best of it, but I'm just saying there seems to be some miscommunication on what's happening and what's not happening.

Well, and that's why it was put out months ago and that's why I was waiting to schedule it because I thought that there was, you know, conversations back and forth on any kind of misunderstandings or whatever.

I will say that I did talk to Dr. Mallory O'Brien yesterday from Johns Hopkins and she did explain some of the next steps that would have to take place for the Violence Reduction Council, and given the success that it has had in other jurisdictions, I think that that would be a very good first step.

Council Member Solomon, go ahead.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair, Madam President.

I am in awe of you four.

I think you know that already.

We go back away.

I think, Claudia, I think we first met doing the Rainier Beach, a beautiful, safe place for you thing.

Yes, we did.

So we have a long history there.

And I'm looking at the dream team, right?

Just saying it right up front.

Deputy Mayor Washington, I can't agree more.

with what you're saying, with your words, work is being done.

And I can't think of a better person to be at the top of the chain and trying to get these things done.

And I also want to express my sympathies to you and for the losses that you personally have experienced.

I know that this is personal.

This isn't academic.

This isn't theoretical.

This is personal.

And I want to acknowledge that.

I could talk to you all about this for hours.

But in the interest of time, I do just want to say, for clarification, we're talking about pop.

you know, problem-oriented policing, using the SARA model, you know, the crime triangle, that actually predates Colonel Kowski, goes back to Stamper.

You know, this was the work that, as crime prevention coordinators, we were doing, we were implementing in the stuff that we were doing in community.

And violence prevention, in particular neighborhoods, that hotspot prevention, that place-based stuff is something I've always been interested in.

And thinking about Rainier Beach, for example, why is Rainier and Henderson a hotspot?

What is it about that particular physical location where things are always popping off?

So I've always wanted to get a handle on that.

And when I look at the work that we've been able to do between the police department and the parks department, you know, realizing that, okay, we have certain parks, four of which are in my district that are on this list where we've had violent incidents in those parks.

One of the easiest solutions is to close off the parking lots, lock them at night.

And trying to get cooperation from our other city departments to actually make that happen has been tough.

But when it has happened, we've seen a dramatic result.

So I would say that cooperation between departments, between agencies, that absolutely needs to happen because it ain't just a police issue.

It ain't just a parks issue.

It ain't just an S-DOT issue or a City Light issue.

It's a Seattle issue.

So all those departments need to be working together and let's not get in our own way in terms of solving this.

When I think about The violence prevention, violence interruption efforts that had been underway in community and realizing that some of those have been interrupted recently, right?

And I understand that that's probably why we've got new RFPs going out there to try to get, you know, claw some of that capacity back.

My fear is while we can go to Johns Hopkins and Perf for this research and assistance, I'm not gonna count on the feds to give us anything.

to, you know, at this point.

So how do we as a city support those community-based efforts when we're facing a 47 mil shortfall?

You know, where are we going to come up with the cash to support those community violence prevention efforts?

And I would welcome any ideas that you have, you know, along those lines.

So that's one question.

Thank you, Council Member Solomon.

There's a lot in there and I'm gonna give it a start with the last thing that you asked about, which is how do we support the community-based organizations?

I think one of the best ways that the city can support the good work of these community-based organizations is by helping to share with them what we know about what is effective and what is not effective.

And our office looked at that in 2012. And there is a lot more known about what types of interventions are effective and what is not effective.

And that is an important thing that the city can do to support its community-based partners.

I also...

I also want to talk a little bit about problem-oriented policing in Seattle.

In 2013, for our office, I was working on a grant with folks from the Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy to address hot spots of crime in downtown Seattle.

We wound up running into a problem when we were putting together the training materials for the team at the West Precinct.

And the issue was that there wasn't a broad understanding about problem-oriented policing.

And everyone acknowledged that it had been introduced to the department by Chief Stamper, but it hadn't been fully adopted.

So I, along with folks from the Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy, we called former Chief Stamper and asked him, about problem-oriented policing, and he indicated that he did try to introduce that framework during his tenure at SPD, and it wasn't widely adopted by the department.

It's a specific framework, and it requires four steps.

The four steps are quite specific.

It's scanning the environment, analyzing the problem, the response, and doing the assessment.

It's called the SARA model.

S is for scanning, A is for analysis, R is for response, and the A is for assessment.

And so if we are actually rigorously doing problem-oriented policing in Seattle, we will have documentation of that in that assessment piece.

We will have a library of our efforts in problem-oriented policing that we can look back on and go through and learn from.

And we will have reports that we can view and learn from.

We have not been able to come across that in our audit work from 2013 to present day in terms of the implementation of problem-oriented policing in Seattle.

I'm thrilled to hear that our new chief is really super committed to evidence-based policing and that there's enthusiasm for this, but it requires a level of rigor and focus on all of those steps, including the assessment step.

And that is very helpful for continuous improvement and continuous learning.

And if we're really doing that type of evidence-based policing, it will include all of those steps.

One other thing that I would just like to say broadly, I don't think that there, as Deputy Mayor Washington said, that words are important and there was a word of misunderstanding that was used.

And I actually don't think there have been misunderstandings I think that, and I'd like to also thank Davida Briscoe, who's the mayor's gun violence liaison who worked with us on this audit.

And she's incredibly knowledgeable about what is going on on the ground here in Seattle and what's going on nationally.

and we worked with her very closely on the development of this report and she agrees with everything that's in the report, all of the recommendations.

I think that what we're hearing is this tension that I talked about at the beginning.

We are part of the city's learning ecosystem, but we're in the legislative branch and we're always pushing the executive to do more and to do better.

Hey, have you heard of this resource?

Hey, you could take your framework up a notch by looking at this model from Johns Hopkins.

And so I think that, that part of what you're hearing at the table today is actually part of the healthy tension of being a learning organization.

And, and, It will be strengthened if we continue these conversations together and pursue opportunities to work together in real time, like on these visits that you're going to, to other jurisdictions.

Hey, well, if the executive is going, maybe we can tag along at least virtually so that we can be learning in real time with you and sharing our information in real time with you all.

So I will leave it at that, but I see that you're nodding.

So Deputy Mayor Washington.

Councilmember Solomon, I just want to answer one of your other questions.

So totally agree.

Thank you.

So when Mayor Harrell first started, and I was telling him this morning, we have short memories.

I was driving here today and I passed a WSDOT encampment that at one point there was, and you all will remember it because all of you guys contacted me, where there were shots fired at an unbelievable amount every day, propane tanks exploding.

It was chaotic when we came out of COVID for various reasons.

And so I had to remind myself that we've done a lot of work together, collectively.

And when I say together, I mean council, the mayor's office, the community, everybody.

So I passed by and I was just like, wow, they're clean.

And people were offered places to go inside.

And then I saw a security guard helping a woman move past some disturbance and thoughtfully and helpfully having somebody move on.

And I thought, the streets are bustling and people are out here.

And so...

When the mayor first started, the first thing he said to me is, I want every single organization who receives community safety funding in Bertha Knight Landis, and I want them to tell me what they do, how long they've been doing it, how much they have, and what the outcomes were.

That room was packed.

That was in month two, probably, when he started.

Once that was over, he brought Director Kim and I upstairs to his office, and he said, we need to put this money out to bid, but we need to do so thoughtfully, and it needs to be based on research.

So we did that.

Lots of stuff happened that we don't need to talk about.

And then to your point, some bad things happened.

There's organizations that are under investigation, which I won't go into because I'm not a lawyer and it's an investigation which shook the kind of movement up and caused mourning.

And I'm hoping that the community can heal and be restored from the trauma that they experienced and want to remind us that every day, People that are in trusted positions of power misuse that trust, whether it's money laundering, sexual assault, fraud, whatever it is.

And I just want to be careful that we don't hyper focus when an organization ran by people of color in the community makes a mistake.

What we're responsible for is to ensure that our money is being used for the purpose that we funded that organization for and that we can hold our head up high and say to the young people and the young adults that we serve that we are doing our best work.

And so I just wanted to, so the RFP was actually asked for in Mayor Harold's first year And it was put off for very good reasons because we had to address the first thing first.

And I think we can all agree that daily, maybe sometimes weekly explosions, fires constantly happening, trying to convince police officers that we are a city that appreciate them and want them here, that took three years.

And so what I said to the director is we're right on time.

I don't believe we're behind.

We're right on time because collectively we did the most important things first.

And now it's time to go a layer deeper and start working at how do we make the system, the community gun violence system, and then the system, police, fire, and all that, stronger.

That's where we are right now.

Great.

Thank you.

Just a couple more comments.

I know we're running short on time.

To the point about the RFPs, I think this is a concern that Council Member Rivera has.

I think it's our responsibility to find out what are we spending, what are we spending it on, and what are the results?

If we're giving money to X organization, I want to make sure we're getting the outcomes from that expenditure.

And if we're not, maybe we shift that money someplace else.

So it's that whole accountability thing.

Two quick things.

One is...

Before you...

I don't know if you...

You were talking about the, and that is why we don't, we're not going to beat this to death.

We've already been around this deputy mayor, but that is why I believe all that necessary work had to happen.

But before issuing a new RFP for a different kind of work, figure out what is, what kinds of work that we're already paying for has been effective and then try to feel like how can that influence the next round of RFPs?

But we already did that.

That was my only argument.

We're not going to beat the horse.

We already did it.

The audit that Claudia and her team did years ago still stands.

So my argument back was, we don't need to publish another report.

Let us do the work from the last audit, which we tried to do, and we're basically got as far as city council, And we were not allowed to hold people accountable.

And so when I say we're right on time, thank God we have a council and a mayor's office who do agree that holding people accountable is important and the conditions are right to do so.

And I hope you know what I hope everybody can acknowledge.

The conditions were not right to do so.

two years ago.

You have to have two bodies that are willing to do that.

The audit that the mayor and I requested was to go back and look at the 2012 audit.

And that was when the council was different than the council that you're referring to.

And presumably the organizations had changed also.

So in any case, go ahead.

You wanted to add a couple more points.

Just a couple things.

One, getting back to the whole problem-oriented policing model.

Of course, I was with the department at that time, and I remember the resistance, and I remember what the resistance was.

And let's just say the department has evolved from those times.

So I think we recognize...

The department recognizes that problem-oriented policing, that SARA, actually are good tools, as opposed to, eh, that sounds too much.

Like, eh, I came here to arrest people, that whole kind of attitude.

And some of it actually came down to personalities that were in leadership at the time that rank and file had issues with.

Let's just put it that way.

Last thing is one of the things on the street level that will help officers in the precincts is getting our staffing levels back to the point where we can actually have crime analysis detectives back in the precinct level and not just sitting in the real-time crime center.

It's something that I really relied on in doing my work, you know, in meeting with community is just going to my crime analysis detective and say, hey, can you run me stats for this quarter mile for this much amount of time?

And within a few clicks, I had the data.

That was incredible.

And I know because of attrition, we've lost that ability.

It would be wonderful to have that capability come back.

So.

Okay.

Council member Rivera.

Oh, sorry.

Sorry, I would love the opportunity to brief you on the work of the performance analytics team, which now includes all of our crime analysis groups.

We now have all of our data consolidated under one system.

We're able to analyze our data at a level of sophistication that is unrivaled in this country, if not the world.

We're pushing this out to precincts.

The dashboards are up to date.

They're parsable.

If you have internal access to the dashboards, they are parsable down to the street level.

of data, we're not only providing the numbers, but we're providing the analysis as to what those numbers mean, and we're working with the in-precinct crime prevention coordinators to be able to bring them up to speed as data analysts, ensuring that we're all operating off of the same data set and frameworks.

Thank you very much.

And your work, your analytics were complemented in the audit and the issue was let's make sure that people have the benefit of it beyond the people that might be doing the direct work.

But go on.

Council Member Rivera.

Thank you, Council President.

I want to thank Deputy Mayor Washington for being here.

I've known Deputy Mayor Washington for a long time and there is no, she, I mean, I can't even underscore.

The level of integrity and the care that she brings to the work and the commitment is unquestionable.

And I know firsthand.

General Counsel Boatwright, I've had the pleasure of working with you for the last year.

We knew of each other before that.

And I know how hard SPD is working to provide the service.

I tell everyone I know how much SPD is doing to really respond to public safety in the district.

Director Walton Anderson, you're newer to the mayor's office.

You and I have had many conversations about the situation in Magnuson Park and the surrounding neighborhoods.

And Claudia Grosheter, I saved you for last because I want to thank you for validating the constituents of my district and me with this audit.

I've been here a little over a year, and my constituents have told me on a daily basis what is basically contained in your report.

that the situation in the district is as bad as they think it is.

That Magnuson Park, who rates fourth out of 11 on here, is as bad as they think it is.

While I have to say that I'm disappointed that I've been sounding the alarm with some folks in the mayor's office, not Deputy Mayor Washington, about what is happening in the district to no avail in my mind.

I do think that this report underscores there is a centralization problem in the public safety and particularly the gun violence space.

The departments are doing great work, and I will also say parks because parks are listed here.

Parks is giving great attention as well.

And last summer, when the situation at Magnuson Park was really heating up, Parks took me seriously.

SPD took me seriously.

The mayor's office did not.

They tried to diminish what I was saying.

Oh, those are kids partying at the park.

No, they were not kids partying at the park.

So to me, there is exactly what the report says.

We need centralized leadership to tackle these problems.

The community-based organizations are also doing the best they can.

They need leadership too.

Because when I was looking at the roadmap, I feel like Seattle started at step seven instead of starting at step one.

And you're nodding, so I think you agree.

And so to me, there is notwithstanding what Deputy Washington, and I don't want to take away from what you're saying because I know that it's true, notwithstanding that, we need to be honest.

We need to be honest with our constituents about what is happening in Seattle.

And yes, post-COVID, things got worse.

Yes, that is absolutely true.

And we need to be honest about where we are today and what we can do better.

And that doesn't take away from the hard work that the mayor's office has been engaged in, that SPD has done, that Parks has done.

and HSD and the other city departments, but I feel like everybody's going every which way direction and there isn't a centralized, we're all really one Seattle.

And not just one Seattle with the executive and his departments that he oversees, but with the council as well.

That was very clear to me out of this audit.

And in fact, it was just yesterday that I was speaking with Chief Barnes, and I was saying, because he was explaining all the hard work they're doing, and I said, Chief, every day, at least once a day, I tell people how hard SPD is working.

But you know what, Chief Barnes, it's not just you.

This doesn't fall on just SPD.

And I hadn't even read this report yet because I read it today this morning.

So it was exactly as I was saying.

We have to work together.

Every department has to work together.

And some of the stuff in here about closing gates at the parks and the lighting, I just was having this conversation with Deputy Mayor Farrell about the importance of this and also with the Parks Department.

This is to me, low hanging fruit.

And we ought to be able to find ways to accomplish this.

And so to me, it was really, like I said, validating.

And I want action.

I do.

And I'm here to work with the mayor's office to get to where we need to get.

But my constituents know I've been here for a year, pushing, pushing, pushing, pushing, pushing.

And I need action from the mayor's office that I have not received.

And that is not too much to ask for because these are constituents.

And I'm tired of people telling me that somehow constituents in the D4 are overblowing the situation.

They're not.

This report shows how bad things are at Magnuson Park.

And as I've been saying for over a year, we have low-income people with teenagers and young children living at Magnuson Park.

They are my constituents as well.

And I'm here for them, too.

I am here for everybody.

So I'm not going to sit around and pat ourselves on the back for the things that we have done thus far.

And I really appreciate you, Deputy Mayor Washington in particular, because you and I talk about this often.

We do need to do better.

We need to acknowledge absolutely the things that we're doing.

And we know that we can, we have to do better working together.

And to me, the communication problem is the biggest problem.

and this decentralized approach that we're taking.

And we have a resource issue.

There is a deficit to the city.

And we know that if we're working together, we can make those resources work better for us.

And I don't want people blaming SPD or anyone individually or council or the mayor's office individually.

But we do have to work together.

And so you're hearing my frustration because I feel like I've been sounding the alarm for a year.

And my constituents are not getting the attention.

They are getting dismissed.

And I don't want that anymore.

And I think this report shows that they are not wrong.

And so I really cannot underscore how grateful I am for this audit.

I wanna thank you Council President Nelson for really pushing on this audit to happen.

And you know, I really don't, I would like to see a response to this sooner rather than later in terms of, are we reaching out to DOJ and to John Hopkins?

And I understand and I appreciate Council Member Solomon The fact that we've got, there is a federal, you know, we have a crisis with this new administration.

And we know that there are partners in Baltimore and Milwaukee and other places who worked very closely with the DOJ and with John Hopkins to build a model that we don't, we can just replicate.

We don't need to go on our own.

We don't need to be the first for everything.

Being the first sometimes doesn't mean we get it right.

Someone else is doing it.

Baltimore, everybody knows.

It's not a secret how bad Baltimore was.

And they're having success.

Let's replicate some of that here, and what do we need to do to do that?

And I'm here for that.

So thank you, Council President.

I don't have a question.

I just had that comment.

And I want to thank you all for being here.

And I welcome a conversation with Mayor Harrell.

I mean, public safety is number one for him.

I would have loved for him to stop by today.

Let's work together.

This isn't executive council taking credit.

I'm not about the credit.

DM Washington, you know that too.

I don't like the spotlight, I don't like cameras, I don't like to be in the news.

I'm about working together on behalf of the people to get things done.

And so, again, I really want to thank you all for being here.

I want to partner with you, Director Walton Anderson, in a robust way.

There is no credit here.

Let's work together to get it done.

And let's be honest about what needs to happen to achieve what we all mutually want.

And thank you again, Claudia.

Council member Rivera, thank you so much.

I would like to say that the city council in Baltimore found it to be a helpful tool to write an ordinance that required the development of a gun violence.

Oh my goodness, look at that.

That looks like the ordinance.

I'm giving it some consideration, let's just say.

And also to your point about Magnuson Park, and it's really so impactful when you actually do come together and look at the data, and we all got on one page with the way the data was collected, and thank you SPD for producing that report that allowed us to see.

And an example of looking at the data together is happening right now.

The Friends of Little Saigon, a small community-based organization, are actually doing place-based problem solving, and they've even used some of the techniques that we have mentioned in our audit, and they've come up with about 30 recommendations.

And one of the recommendations, it doesn't require any additional resources, but it speaks to your point, Council Member Rivera, it is, increase intergovernmental coordination between the city and county.

They're just asking for our agencies to communicate better.

That's one of their recommendations.

To work together.

And I will say that I had Don present about that effort in Little Saigon a couple weeks ago at the committee that I chair.

So yes, I mean, constituents want all of us, the agencies, to work together.

And like I said, the violence prevention partners, they need help, too, identifying how to even best do their work.

But it has to start with a top-down coordination and best practices, and then that's what we're giving them.

And then when we have contracts with them, we put that in their contracts.

But we did kind of an upside-down.

And they might not know what best practices are.

And also what best practices today may not be what they were pre-COVID.

Let's be honest about that too.

Councilmember Rivera, can I please, thank you so much.

I'm gonna continue to reiterate, and I told you this when you asked me about it a few months, maybe last year.

There is a reason why we're sitting here.

There's a reason why we started at step seven.

It is nobody's fault that's on the dais right now, and it's not any of the department's faults.

I've been here for 10 years.

Every single time we got ready to implement something that was evidence-based, that had outcomes, the chambers would fill with people, and it never got approved.

And so I'm not gonna do my job.

I have to stand up for the departments who have tried to do this work over and over again.

And I cannot underscore, we have a moment right now that I fully intend to utilize where we have a city council and a mayor's office who agrees that organizations should be held accountable.

And so there will come a time, and I think Council Member Solomon, you said this, where we would be sitting at this very table Probably third, fourth quarter saying, here are the results of the RFP.

Here's what we're going to pay for.

Here's what we're going to do.

And so I hope that for the first time in the 10 years I've been here, we can actually get across the finish line and implement contracts with outcomes and accountability in it.

And so it just matters to me so deeply that that's not lost.

People haven't just been sitting around for decades twiddling their thumbs, not trying to get to that very point.

They've been stopped.

And that's the part that I really wanted to make sure that that was heard.

Yes, and please don't think that's what I'm saying.

Oh, no, I didn't hear you say that.

Okay.

No, you're good.

Can I just briefly respond in terms of what Council Member Rivera said in terms of communication?

I think that is one of the keys.

And I want to address a couple of things that Council Member Rivera and Council Member Solomon said, just in relationship to gun violence at the parks and the boat launches.

I think one thing is, obviously, Dr. Gross-Shader did a data analysis with working with SPD on the shots fired.

Our public safety team, and again, this goes to communication, had the same frustrations when I first arrived here last summer, and the constituent emails over and over about not just shots fired, but the noise and the other issues that were going on across the parks, Magnuson being our biggest and largest park, but also in the south precinct as well in the parks and the boat launches that have, you know, obviously next to the water.

SPD was able to do the same sort of data because we are doing our summer parks.

not in exclusion of council members, but trying to figure out what sort of capital investments can we have in terms of gates and in terms of doing something more than a one-off MOUs.

And so I'll just share with you that that planning is in progress.

And what I'm hearing from you, because your constituents are absolutely validated, I didn't need this report to know that the things that were going on in Magnuson were important.

And that is why meeting with Magnuson Mercy Housing, meeting with Santos Place, and asking them to make those connections with SPD, what is your security plan?

What is your plan to address tenants.

Those are things that were done, not in exclusion, but actually based on your input and advocacy, Councilmember Rivera.

And also, too, in terms of the parks safety plan, we are in a planning and drafting stage trying to work with DM Ferrell and parks to actually congregate both parks and SDOT to come up with a draft plan for presentation that hope that will actually be presented to try and meet the needs that you've said because, as you've indicated, those MOUs are not there.

But I'm hearing you in terms of we need enhanced communication and figuring out the right way in which to make sure we're working with council, communicating on a plan that works for all of the constituents that we all serve.

But I am here to take action, for sure, as your chief of public safety for the mayor's office.

I will validate all day long the gun violence that has happened in Magnuson because Like you, I have heard from those constituents and want to work with you.

And I've heard specifically from you in terms of your advocacy.

And so we do want to take action.

We actually want a plan that works long term and not just for a one-off for a few days.

So I just wanted to convey that.

And I appreciate the feedback.

And we'll continue to try and do more to communicate and do more to show that we are taking urgent action in partnership and collaboration with all of you.

I just want to address one thing because I mean my one of my biggest things about this report and just that one Seattle approach is making sure that council members are on the front end so that if you are meeting, you know, I want to know on the front end when you're coming to the district.

I don't want constituents to tell me that you've been there or that the mayor has been there or get a call the night before that the mayor is going to be in the district if he's going to be in the district.

And as to the public safety forums that he hosted in the beginning, he wasn't at the one in Bitter Lake, which was the one on the north end.

So this is the type of thing that we want to be involved on the front end so that we really are working together.

And I understand the mayor is the boss of the departments.

I don't want to be the boss of the departments.

I just want to be a partner on the front end because we can serve constituents better that way.

So when I'm meeting with the constituents, we have a consistent message and I have the information to share.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council President.

Thanks, and I want to recognize that the people at this table, except for you, Claudia, you are representing your boss, your executive boss here.

you have to provide certain information and respond a certain way, and I understand that.

And what I really want to hear, to me, it seems like another acceptable response would be, huh, wow, I learned something in this audit, and maybe we should do that.

I guess, you know, well, okay, we don't have to rehash the whole conversation.

I think leaders have to have humility when you hear from constituents, as I'm sure you do, and from council, and everybody's saying, we must do better.

Because it did read, I heard a lot today and in the letter, we're doing this, this, and this, which is great for me to know.

there was less and we recognize these are some of the challenges or these are some of our weaknesses or we had never considered that.

And if that's not, if that's the case, then that's fine.

Can we ask for the same fact though, Council President?

No, please don't interrupt me.

Can we ask for the same respect back?

which is when you were getting ready to launch this, my argument to you was we heard the last audit.

We are working on this.

And we didn't get that same respect back of humility, because I believe in humility.

And so it would have been nice to know that you guys heard us when we were telling you that we were already working on it.

So I agree with you.

I'm asking for humility both ways.

Okay, the last audit, you mean the Windows one?

The one that you did, I think it was 2012 or 2018, where SYVPI and all of those things were involved in it.

And the reason I said I didn't learn anything is because what I told you before is The things that are in the audit are literature.

It's global literature.

I have a master's degree in human services.

And so I don't need an audit to tell me the things that I can see on the streets and tell me the things that I hear from constituents.

And so I'm just asking, because you are talking to the executive's office when you're making the comments, that the humility go both ways.

I'm happy to be humble if we can partner in being humble both ways.

Absolutely.

And that was...

the executive that came to me and said, hey, would you sign on with me?

Because I was only two years into my job here on council, so I didn't know.

both ways I know I mean it was it was said hey would you sign on we should do this especially before the budget so we make sure that we're spending money on the right program so that's how that started that's how I agreed to sign on in any case it is going to be all of us working together and and when it comes to to communication there are there's room for improvement on all fronts and I just hope that what matters.

I hope that maybe we can be brought in earlier, but I do think I would also like to know more specifically some of the things that are mentioned in the audit that are brought up that could be really valuable.

And because again, if they are already developing a new program, probably has really site-specific, Seattle-specific elements in it, but there are also tried and true, tested, evidence-based programs that when I see 52% reduction in violence over the course of eight years for Milwaukee, when I see 29% in one year in Las Vegas for implementing problem-oriented policing, and when I hear Let's see another one was in I already said the Las Vegas Cincinnati had a tremendous reduction as well so when I'm seeing those double-digit reductions in gun violence in other cities for having implemented some of these models and These models are available to us for free.

That's what is interesting to me and And then at some point we can, you know, parse it out.

Well, what are we already doing?

But that is what I'm going to keep pushing so that we don't have the next model audit on something else.

And there aren't things saying, well, as we said in this one, in the 2025 audit, we should do this.

That's the circular dynamic that I want to avoid.

And if there are good ideas, let's do them.

Okay.

Yeah.

Just to lighten the conversation here.

I have a science degree and I always think of molecules, you know, when atoms are heated, they're like bumping into each other.

And I feel like there's a little of that happening.

And so let's like come together so we can really work together.

And we know that you all, you're here representing the executive and individually, it's not a frustration on people individually, but as a whole.

And so you're sensing a frustration that's coming from our collective constituents.

And CP, you're citywide, so you hear it from everyone across the city.

And so it's just that we need to work together.

to do better together because individually there's so much happening.

But if we can, you know, work at the front end together in the centralized approach and then it goes down to the departments, I think we will achieve more faster.

And I guess that's what we're trying to communicate.

And I hear a request for better communication up front.

And I just don't mince words.

You know that about me.

I do know that.

And so for me, what's important is that I didn't actually feel respected.

And I didn't feel heard through this audit process.

And I did feel dismissed.

And I didn't feel like the work was being recognized.

And I hold both the professional degree and the personal degree.

And I deserve that respect.

And so I also have thick skin.

And I love this kind of discord.

We all talk offline.

This isn't to be misunderstood as not getting along.

But I also want to make sure that, as we move forward, that we all feel respected.

Clearly, you didn't feel respected at some point on behalf of your constituencies.

And that makes me sad.

And it makes me sad when anybody doesn't feel heard.

But I have to be honest and say that I didn't feel respected and heard at all as well.

So how do we do this better next time?

And if that was coming from me, apologies, because this is not that I don't individually respect everyone here.

That's why I started the way that I did, and you and I are like-minded that way, Deputy Mayor, and you know that we work well together because we've worked together for so long, and we always bring each other early, often, from the beginning.

And in the time that I've been here, we've worked on a few things, not many, because I don't sit on human services, but I know that we, because we work early and often, we achieve good outcomes, I think.

Agreed.

Yeah.

All right.

Thank you, CP.

And the strong feelings of all these women here and also expressed...

Sorry, Councilman Solomon.

No, no, no.

There is no apology.

There should be no apology for caring so much.

I think that is what is being...

That's what's on display here.

We care about our work.

We care about the integrity of our work.

And that's why we're reacting strongly.

And also we're...

Channeling the emotion strong emotion anger frustration and hope from our constituents hundred percent.

Yeah Thank you guys.

Thank you very much for your audit and thank you all for presenting today.

I Will keep asking for oh yeah Is there any business anybody would like to bring up I Okay.

This concludes the March 26th meeting of the governance, accountability, and economic development meeting.

It is 429, and we are adjourned.