Finance, Native Communities and Tribal Governments Committee 5/5/2026

Good morning.

The May 5th Finance Native Communities and Tribal Governments Committee will come to order.

It is 9.31 a.m.

I'm Dan Strauss, chair of the committee.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

Council Member Kettle.

Here.

Council President Hollingsworth.

One moment.

joining as a panelist right now.

Okay.

You can keep rolling and come back to her.

Council Member Sokka.

Morning.

Here.

Vice Chair Rivera.

Chair Strauss.

Here.

And just one more time, Council President Hollingsworth.

Present.

We had, and Katzmarva Rivera is excused until she arrives.

That's four present, one excused.

Thank you.

Good morning.

We have three items on today's agenda.

We have a presentation on the Centennial Accord.

At our last meeting, we had a little bit of preparation from Francesca.

And we also have a briefing and likely vote on legislation related to the FIFA World Cup.

as well as the first of two meetings for the appointment of Dwight Dively as Director of the Office of City Finance.

If there is no objection, the agenda will be adopted.

Hearing no objection, the agenda is adopted.

We'll now open the in person and remote public comment.

I see Vice Chair Rivera is present.

I am not seeing anyone signed up in person.

Can you confirm, Anthony?

No one in person.

And we do have two folks signed up, but We have Joe Kunzler talking about the drone grant and David Haynes about the agenda.

So with that, we will move into the hybrid public comment period.

Public comments should relate to items on the day's agenda.

We have two speakers remotely signed up.

So folks will have two minutes each.

Start with the online public commenters.

This period is up to 60 minutes.

Speakers will be called in the order in which they registered and speakers will hear a chime when 10 seconds are left of their allotted time.

So with that, the public comment period is now open.

We will start with Joe Kunzler who is president and then David Haynes, you are not yet present.

So when you've got about two and a half minutes to join us.

With that, Joe, welcome.

We are promoting you right now, Joe.

I see you're here, Joe.

Star six to unmute.

Okay, good.

We got me unmuted.

I want to thank staff for enabling this roll of testimony this morning because I just heard you guys are applying for a grant to make sure we don't have any more damn droning crews.

I hope this is a permanent thing.

As a drone pilot who is a registered Part 107 drone pilot, I take my responsibilities very seriously.

I have an app on my phone.

So when I'm flying in the Seattle area, I know what the maximum altitude is.

I know what the airspace is.

I'm also required to have my license on my person and have my phone on my person because air traffic control may need to get a hold of me.

These are all basic responsibilities you take in a test before you get your Part 107. There's also a recreational license, but you're not allowed to use that in controlled airspace.

which covers a big part of Seattle.

I am all for filling the book at the drone pilots that seem to think it's okay to take your drone and get close to a stadium.

My understanding is that stadium events have a free nautical mile airspace limit around them on the safety of everyone.

And believe it or not, I happen to believe that should be stringently enforced.

We just can't afford to be taking chances here.

We're going to have low-flight helicopters, possibly blimps.

Of course, we're going to have aircraft on final approach and takeoff from Boeing Field as well as SeaTac.

So it's going to be a congested airspace and we really need to have control of the airspace for the safety of everyone in the air and, yes, on the ground.

So I strongly support this grant and with 30 seconds left to go, I'm gonna have to call in the general public comment at the council at two today about the subject and give some unpleasant news.

I'm not looking forward to sharing.

Thank you, Joe.

Thank you for your public comment as always.

And we'll do one last check for David Haynes.

I'm not saying David Haynes as present.

Can we confirm David Haynes is not present?

Not present.

Thank you, Mr. G, as always.

With that, we have no additional remote or in-person speakers, and so that will conclude our public comment period.

We will now move on to the next agenda item.

We have our first item of business here today.

Clerk, will you please read the short title into the record?

Item one, review of the Centennial Accord for briefing and discussion.

Presenters are Gordon James with the Washington State Governor's Office of Indian Affairs and Francesca Murnin, Office of Intergovernmental Relations.

Wonderful.

Francesca, welcome back to committee.

It was great to have you last month and if you want to introduce yourself and Mr. James and we'll go from there.

Thank you, Chair Strauss and members of the committee.

It's a pleasure to return to you today to continue our discussion of successful tribal relations frameworks for the state and local level.

And I will introduce Gordon here shortly, but wanted to take a moment to just, for the record, my name is Francesca Bernan and I'm a member of the Shawnee Tribe and Cherokee Nation.

I work in the Office of Intergovernmental Relations as the city's tribal relations director.

and today we'll be doing a little bit of that deeper dive that builds off the conversation that we had last month.

As we have discussed, the signing of the Centennial Accord in 1989 was a defining moment in our state's history.

In the 36 years that it's been adopted, it has continued to evolve and continues to be a model for state and local governments nationwide.

Here in Washington, the lessons continue to be learned because the work is evolving, including lessons for the city, who has our own sordid history of engagement with tribal governments and native communities.

And the opportunity before us is to thoughtfully and proactively explore this model and what it teaches us as a local government.

We've taken foundational steps as a city and will continue to take all of us, especially through the leadership of tribal nations and city leaders, to solidify this foundation for generations to come.

and I'm pleased to welcome Gordon James of the Governor's Office of Indian Affairs who is steeped in this effort through many capacities over many decades and he has served his tribal people and the state of Washington.

You've heard my rendition of the state's journey and we have the distinct pleasure of taking in another perspective from someone who has lived this work and continues to educate state employees today.

and that's because the work never stops and that's a message that I hope you hear today.

We must continue to affirm and commit and invest in our efforts to foster more meaningful and collaborative relationships with tribal governments and native communities.

Gordon James is a training and special projects manager for the state's Governor's Office of Indian Affairs.

He is the co-developer of the government-to-government training curriculum and in this role Gordon leads the curriculum work to improve the governmental relationships of state agencies with federally recognized tribes while improving cultural competency, expanding understanding of tribal sovereignty, and exploring how a history of legal impacts to these relationships continues to define our efforts for effective intergovernmental relations.

Gordon was a longtime consultant to Governor's Office of Indian Affairs before joining their staff in 2004, and he has provided this training to over 25,000 administrators and staff of state and federal agencies, nonprofit organizations, city and county governments, colleges and universities, public school districts, and much more.

Gordon has also previously served eight years as the chairman of the Skokomish Tribal Council and continues to serve as a gaming commissioner.

and with that I'll hand the conversation over Gordon who will walk us through a little bit more in depth of the state's work and where we are today.

Thanks Gordon.

Thank you very much Francesca and good morning to everyone.

I appreciate the opportunity to be here and share a little bit of time with you to talk through elements of how that history has evolved in the relationships between the federally recognized tribes and the state of Washington.

I understand that you've had some look at the Centennial Accord Millennium Agreement some other elements of that relationship so let's kind of move backwards a little bit into that history when we talk about the Centennial Accord I mean it evolves originally as there is the state of Washington celebrating its 100th birthday in 1989. And as lots of festivities are being planned in different parts of the state, part of the discussion going on between many of the tribal leaders and then Governor Booth Gardner is the recognition that the state and the tribes have had a much more difficult history, particularly in those recent decades leading up to 1989. You may have some awareness of all of the fish wars and those kinds of legal battles going on between the governments.

and in the period following the Bolton decision in 1974, there were these continuing efforts between the state and the tribes to figure out what exactly their relationship is supposed to be.

and through some of the animosity and getting over those struggles, they realized that there needed to be a better way than that.

And so what was designed to become the Centennial Accord was really intended to be a continuous improvement process for that relationship of building.

There were several tribal leaders who were very instrumental in the development of that original document.

I wanted to call out particularly to President Joe Dela Cruz, former president for the Quinault Nation.

and Council Member Melton Ascot from the Colville Confederated Tribes and Chairman Ron Allen from the Jamestown-Sklallam Tribe.

They had put together basically a rough draft of a lot of the concepts they were hoping that they could to develop an improved relationship with the state around.

And in sharing those concepts with other tribal leaders, with folks that they knew within the state attorney general's office, with the chief of staff for Governor Gardner getting lots of input and developing and refining the concepts.

Governor Gardner looked at the document and realized that it did provide the potential for that continuous improvement.

So he called together the very first Centennial Accord meeting in 1989. His intention, of course, to be able to sign the document in front of tribal leaders to show his commitment to that relationship and building.

As that process happens, the Centennial Accord provides the basic foundation that continually evolves into today.

But in that beginning, it recognizes the inherent sovereignty of all of the parties involved.

I would point out that in 1989, there were only 26 federally recognized tribes within the state.

and at the time, 24 of them have signed on to the Centennial Accord.

So there were still some who had some basic concerns over whether that was really the appropriate approach for their relationship of building with the state.

But in the very beginning of this process, it also recognizes a few basic ways that they're going to consistently move forward at least once a year.

There would be a meeting planned between the governor and leaders of these federally recognized tribes.

where they were supposed to sit down together and really consider what they've each accomplished over the course of that year.

What were the parts that were working well?

How do they report that out?

Where are the challenges that were still existing within those relationships?

How do we identify some kind of an action plan so that we're addressing those challenges and maybe the next year we get together and we actually have solved some of these challenges that led to this in the first place.

With that kind of history, it also allowed that the Governor's Office of Indian Affairs was going to be providing training to the state agencies, their administrators, their personnel.

How do they better understand this government-to-government relationship?

What is it?

What could it be?

How do we improve communication?

All of these all of these efforts were, how do we get more of the people who bear the responsibility for carrying out that relationship?

So there's an identification within the Centennial Accord that the state itself is divided into lots of different agencies and there would be directors, secretaries, whatever title you want to use for the leads of those agencies who bear the responsibility for the work of that agency while the relationship for the Centennial Accord exists between the governor and the tribal leaders, there's a recognition that problem solving really needs to start at its most basic levels.

How do we get the challenges between the tribes and the agencies to begin being worked out by the people who are actually carrying out that work in the moment with the opportunity to continue to elevate should other problems occur?

The recognition of the Centennial Accord also included that if agencies were going to be doing this work with the tribes trying to put any resources, personnel, interest in doing that, it would be valuable to also have a public education component to that because you're going to have people questioning, why is this happening?

Why are you doing this?

What's that effort all about?

So all of these are basic concepts that were designed into the Centennial Accord.

Beginning in 1990 then, there would be these annual meetings and of course the governor turns to all of the agencies under the governor's direct authority and gathers reports.

Here's what those agencies have accomplished during this time frame.

Tribal leaders are doing something similar within each of their governments, gathering this information, coming together and discussing how this is working or not working.

And one of the things that I would also point out about the Centennial Accord process, while it had the immediate effect of getting people to be much more thoughtful about this relationship building and the communication that goes on, There was also no real design and no real formulation for how this was supposed to work.

People were gathering information, they were sharing it.

And over several years, realizing that this wasn't really meeting the need they had hoped for.

And part of that process was there was no structure to how this was being gathered and how this was being discussed.

So 10 years into that process, in 1999, under then-governor Gary Locke, an outside consultant is brought into this process to be able to gather more information, to try and create some recommendations to how do we standardize a process.

The gathering of that information includes, in both directions, reaching out to 16 different state agencies, the leaders of those agencies, and asking lots of questions about what their experience has been in the Centennial Accords so far.

What is it that they do for consultation?

How is it that they communicate with the tribes, what their agencies are involved with?

How is it that they identify whose voices are supposed to be heard in those relationships?

Is there such a thing as formal consultation and informal consultation?

So all of these kinds of very leading questions, gathering that information, the consultants then turn to the tribes, 16 different tribes, leaders from those tribes, asking very similar kinds of questions, what their experience has been, what would they recommend to be different, how would they change the process if they could to make it more effective in their eyes, and gathering all of this information, they then create a report.

and if you're interested in the report, it is on the Governor's Office of Indian Affairs website.

It's called the Prothrow Report.

Martha Prothrow is the author of the report for the consultants.

And the report outlines so much of the level of detail of what everybody on both the tribal and non-tribals on the state side of that relationship were thinking at the time, what was working, not working, what would they recommend.

So they create a series of recommendations.

that are identified in the Pro Throw Report.

Essentially, the concept revolves around the idea that the Centennial Accord had good intentions, but because it did not have a formal structure to carry those intentions out, it kind of wandered a little bit all over the place.

So the report and its implementation guidelines that are being recommended, that is brought together for a three-day meeting between then-Governor Locke and many of these tribal leaders in Leavenworth, Washington.

That year is a Centennial Accord.

They're reviewing the implementation guidelines recommended by the consultants and through that process they amend the Centennial Accord with a new addition called the New Millennium Agreement.

it recognizes the wonderful work that's already occurred under the Centennial Accord, but also then says we need to create this structure.

That structure is including the implementation guidelines recommended by the report and adopted in discussion between Governor Lock and these tribal leaders at the 1999 Centennial Accord.

The implementation guidelines then are broken down into several areas, recognizing the structure that was necessary.

Part of that includes that each agency works in a very different way with tribes.

So there was not really a mechanism to say, here's how we're going to have a structure that fits for everybody and just follow it.

It needed to be left to each agency for the way that you work with tribes.

How would you design your process for that interaction?

How would you communicate regularly?

How would you engage them early and often?

How would you consult when that was necessary?

How would you share information?

all of those kinds of concepts would be developed into something called a Centennial Accord Plan that each of the agencies would then have all of this documentation in a central location that anyone in their agency would be able to look at that document and realize I am either aligned or not aligned with the way that the agency has said we're supposed to work so let me get aligned now and so you get this consistency that did not happen before As those agencies were creating their Centennial Accord plans, there's also an understanding that There will be times where more formal kinds of consultation are needed between that agency and tribes.

So there is a process that was identified within the implementation guidelines that it wasn't a specific consultation policy, but it was identifying consultation principles that each of the agencies in the way that they work with the tribes and each of the tribes in fact could also develop their own version of what they see as an appropriate consultation policy for working with them.

But if everyone were to follow the principles identified within these implementation guidelines we should have nobody becoming surprised in the process and people are then able to develop these in a way that's going to be most effective.

Now, there will be occasions then where it's recognized that a tribe and a state agency may both develop their own concepts of here's what our consultation policies are and that means then as you're carrying out that consultation practice the very first step in that would be to say you know how are we going to either look at yours or ours or how do we combine some elements of this so that we can actually begin a formal consultation process.

So that was part of the implementation guidelines.

Another part, recognize that consultations not always going to get you to a solution.

there will be some challenges that continue.

And as a result, there are dispute resolution mechanisms built into the implementation guidelines.

It recognizes that you may want to continue elevating to higher levels of decision making.

I mean, you want to start at the most local level, the people who are trying to carry out that immediate work, but you can move up through the varying levels and up to and including the tribal leader having discussion with the governor.

and there's an opportunity so you don't have to go through the whole process if you want to short circuit it sometimes it just makes sense that those leaders should be talking sooner and then getting their staff aligned to whatever that that decision or that agreement is but it allows an identified process to get there.

There's also recognition of all the different roles and responsibilities for the parties that are involved on both the tribal and the state side of that, identifying some of the different parties that would be involved, what their responsibilities were.

So it does lay out not just the responsibilities on the state agency side, but the tribes have also made commitments through the Centennial Accord and the Millennium Agreement.

Here's what they're going to be doing on their end to formalize that process.

Here's how they're going to identify who the pertinent parties are, who the different directors are, who the people who are responsible for consultation, on each side are supposed to be.

So there's a lot of that identified in these roles and responsibilities.

As that rolls into the in the early 2000s, there's also an understanding that on the state's side, the Governor's Office of Indian Affairs is the liaison representing the governor of the state in this work with the tribes.

And so there was an encouragement to the different agencies.

There would be a value for those agencies also to have a liaison specific to the work that they do and the way that they do it with tribes.

that encouragement begins in this timeframe as well and in the early 2000s a number of the agencies are going about the business of developing their Centennial Accord plans identifying who is going to be a tribal liaison there's a learning process involved there too as many of the agencies were identifying internal staff to be the tribal liaison to represent them in those discussions with the tribes they were sometimes identifying folks who did not have the proper familiarity with how that work is supposed to happen.

How do we do outreach to tribes?

What are the cultural context for some of that communication?

What's the concepts of protocol and how does that differ from tribes?

There's a history that has played out where the tribes come from a variety of different perspectives in terms of what is the appropriate protocol to interact with them, some being much more formal in those processes and some being much more flexible in those processes.

So you're gonna have a wide range of what to expect as your work goes out to the tribe.

So we needed to make sure a person would be identified who's going to do that legwork to lay the foundation for better understanding for each of the different tribal governments are working with.

Here's gonna be our most appropriate process for being able to carry out that approach.

There was also additional, recognition over this timeframe of the early 2000s that the different agencies sometimes were not recognizing the value that that tribal liaison presented for their agency in building these relationships with the tribes.

So additionally, in 2012, the state passes RCW 43.376, which clearly identifies for each of those state agencies under the governor's direct authority that the tribal liaison would specifically report to the head of the agency because that's the level that this value is best represented.

Being able to not only provide more understanding to the decision makers within the agencies about here's how the tribes operate and here's how we're going to interact best with them, but also to be able to make sure that on the the agency side of that they're getting that direct feedback so that the approaches the questions that that they're early getting this this understanding of as we make new choices as we make new programs are we taking this into account how it's going to interact with the tribes and there's this mantra that evolves as a part of that process.

How do we engage early and often?

And unfortunately some of that history had been new programs roll out, new laws roll out, new practices roll out, and we find out then after the state agencies have rolled these things out, here's where that becomes problematic in the relationship with tribes.

As we move closer to the present day, we also have The Governor's Executive Order 2510 comes out October 22, 2025. It is working in two ways.

In one way, it is a reminder to many of the agencies under the Governor's direct authority Here are lots of the commitments that have been made already in this relationship building with tribes, either through state legislation or through other executive orders.

So let's remind everybody, here's commitments that we're supposed to be carrying out are you making sure that that's happening at the same time it also identifies some new elements that we want to make sure are included in that relationship building like additional types of training new ways of approaching contracting new ways of considering how do we use indigenous knowledge in the development of environmental protection policies things like that so it is spurring lots of new effort within the state agencies now that they've been reminded of this work.

Sometimes elements of this relationship becomes a little bit more of a check the box and we've moved on and that does allow, on some occasions, not to give full recognition of the value of what that relationship represents and how we can collectively move forward in very much more proactive and very powerful ways.

So as that is taking root, it also means we have the development on the state level of a number of different work groups to carry out functions of the Executive Order 2510. And some examples would include things like there is a work group that has been developed called the Centennial Accord Innovation Work Group.

It comprises of elected tribal leaders, state agency representatives, tribal liaisons, the Governor's Office of Indian Affairs.

As we discussed, how do we continue evolving the centennial accord forward so it actually becomes more effective again at the high the whole concept from 36 years ago was this is supposed to be a continuous improvement process so as we refocus on that continuous improvement aspect the work group is looking at a variety of things and changes have already started to be implemented for instance rather than these annual meetings we have evolved to the development of quarterly follow-ups between Centennial Accord meetings so that we have folks on the tribal and state side checking back in on each one of the commitments that had been made during the course of the Centennial Accord discussions over four days in October of 2025. As those check-ins happen, we get to measure, has progress been made?

Are folks on both sides of that relationship carrying out the commitments that they had made to each other to make this positive change?

We're also involving a number of the other intergovernmental agencies that also have regular meetings throughout the course of the year, but by the topic areas that they're involved in.

For instance, we have outreach to the Tribal Leaders Congress on Education within the state of Washington.

They have their quarterly meetings set up.

So if we're going to have a quarterly follow-up on education discussion from the Centennial Accord, How do we involve them in that process?

We have the Governor's Health Advisory Committee who meets regularly to discuss health issues.

So we're incorporating their feedback and their proactivity in discussing the health-related concerns that come out of the the Centennial Accord meeting.

So lots of thoughtful processes that continue to evolve.

We have another work group that is the State Agency Tribal Liaison Collaboration Work Group.

The various agency liaisons, not all of them have to participate, but there will be areas where it would be valuable for us to share information amongst each other.

How are those areas of collaboration going to be addressed?

Who's gonna take charge of which part?

What information needs to be shared?

What things are each of the different agencies involved with that might be critical for other agencies to know so that we can learn from their ongoing experiences?

So there's a number of different work groups that continue to evolve in this process, really reflecting that it is a continuous improvement process.

And that kind of brings us up to today and the moment.

I know that there are Questions that you are considering internally.

How are you going to continue to develop a continuous improvement process in the city's relationship with the federally recognized tribes?

And hopefully there's some some learning opportunities from the experiences that the state agencies and the tribes are going through right now.

Certainly I'm open to answering any other questions that you may have about how any of these processes are working out, any of the other lessons learned.

so let me go ahead and be quiet for just a few moments if you do have questions.

Thank you, Mr. Gordon.

I'd say we probably have many questions and as you were presenting and I know that Francesca had sent out and we'd sent out the links to the Centennial Accord and the New Millennium Agreement and so we've also had them passed out here on the dais.

We'll have them attached to the official record so that we can reference them again in the future.

I learned quite a bit and we were lucky enough to have Francesca walk us through most of this and it allows me to get into another layer deeper with you, Mr. Gordon.

But before I got my questions, I wanna check to see if colleagues have questions at this time.

Well, then let's jump in, Mr. Gordon.

Thank you.

So in your early years, you know, and as I have been looking at your website with the new layer of information that you've provided us, it helps me better understand why there are only reports from 2007 on to today.

It also helps me understand how the...

those early years of the 90s were, I think you said, good intentions without structure.

And I would say that's a little bit more close to where we are right now in the City of Seattle.

We have our Tribal Nations Summit that is happening every other year that has now since we've been able to create more of those commitment areas in the second one rather than just saying, how are we talking about this?

From those commitment areas, we're now doing more of a strategic plan to make sure that we're following up on things in this area of continuous improvement.

Can you share with us in those early years before the Millennium Accord What were those, if you had an opportunity to go back and do it again, what do you think are a couple things that could have been supported better and maybe what are a couple things that could have been avoided just from jump?

I think part of the process that is just an element of human nature is the idea that When we talked about this continuous improvement process, I think one of the first and foremost things on all different directions are going to be concerned with is how do we identify all those steps that we take that we believe are moving in the right process, that are moving things forward.

But really there hadn't been these discussions intergovernmentally.

What are the right steps?

What are the right processes?

Are these things that are actually moving us forward?

is this just something helpful in a moment how do we create a policy or practice protocol something that's going to be consistent over time so that there is a continuous improvement process rather than we just we've done all these things and we believe that they're good for the for the movement forward so there is that that part of the challenge and that's why there was such inconsistency um there weren't specifically identified steps that the state agencies and the tribal governments could be taking that that you could collectively say this is a step in the right direction.

They were moving each in their own concepts of this is going to be better let me share these in these bits of information with the other parties.

So I think having those discussions early on what helps to identify where are their conflict areas?

Where are their questions?

Where can we create protocols that are going to actually create a continuous improvement process?

How do we consult early and often so that rather than being surprised later, we get to the heart of what really needs to happen in this moment so that when we get to the later, it's actually achieving the value we had hoped for.

Very well said.

And I've got a couple questions about state agencies and the training program that you have.

What I believe I heard is that, and what I see on the website, although WSDOT needs to update their link, is because it's a 404 website right now, but each agency has their own framework in which they work, identifying what you said are the conflict areas, the collaboration areas, and those processes.

and then also for each tribe.

Those are a lot of different bureaucracies.

Those are a lot of different governments to do this work.

Was there a train the trainer program that you had?

Was there a framework that you were able to help create a starting point for these agencies or how did you get those agencies from zero, you know, each going their own different route to having a more refined process?

Okay.

Great question in the sense that, I mean, again, how are we developing this so that everybody's involved and In the earliest years of this, in 1989 in the Centennial Accord, there hadn't been that kind of thought process.

It was good intentioned, how do we do things that are going to make our communication a little bit better, I think was the original concept.

And as such, It took several years before there was a realization of something along the lines of train the trainer.

Most of the agencies do not begin to bring aboard a tribal liaison until sometime after the Millennium Agreement in 1999. So they did not get that internal dialogue about how do they better understand working with tribes.

and even for those agencies who have tribal liaisons there are a number of agencies who or at least a number of the tribal liaisons who've been in this business for quite a while and based on their own personal life experiences have been very successful in guiding the agencies that they work for and over time some of them work with multiple agencies but the process of making sure that the liaisons for each of the agencies had a more consistent understanding knowledge base to work from, that's evolving from 2012 forward.

Again, it's continuous improvement.

We're learning along the way and some of the agencies were hiring liaisons, as I described it, that didn't have a full understanding of what all this actually was and how to best do that role representing their agencies to the tribe.

So it takes a little while of some learning curve.

And the RCW 43.376 in 2012 is the one that identifies, okay, you're gonna have this liaison who reports directly to your lead for your agency and that this liaison has to have certain kinds of training, certain kinds of understanding within this process.

So there's a recommendation in that that they could reach, that they could be trained by the Governor's Office of Indian Affairs and the government-to-government training that we provide.

That particular training had evolved from the Centennial Accord originally in 1989. They had a two-day version between 1989 and 1999 but with the new millennium agreement there had been a call to redesign that training day and I happened to be part of that group that was called in in 1999 as a consultant to redesign that training day, co-developed the training to focus on four specific topic areas.

The first is to better understand some of the cultural context that relationship comes from.

One of the easiest things to recognize is that there is a culturally different perspective that the tribal communities represented by their tribal governments are bringing to how their governments operate and how their governments interact with the rest of the world around them, including the state agencies.

So we needed to make sure that people within the state agencies understood that there are culturally different perspectives, that as you reach out to work with these tribal communities, how do we do it in a culturally respectful way?

There's discussion about the legal impacts that have affected this relationship over time.

Congress has passed a number of laws that continue to change that relationship, and those laws have had impacts positively and negatively within these tribal communities.

As such, when we come in as agencies in a modern day, we're interacting with these communities that already have a history of some levels of mistrust, some levels of concern over how they interact with those other governments.

So it's more of a matter of how do we help the state agencies' representatives to understand here are different perspectives that tribes are going to be bringing into that relationship based on how these selected legal impacts have affected their communities over time.

Part of the way I describe it is, you know, when we look at us in a modern day, we did not do this.

There's a whole bunch of that challenge that existed before we were born, but it still plays out within the tribal community.

So it's how do we get the state agency personnel to better understand what some of those elements are so that they're not triggering some of that other earlier challenge in their efforts to build relationships.

We have a discussion of understanding the basic concept of what tribal sovereignty represents Sovereignty can be many, many things, but the federal courts have made lots of interpretations of what they believe tribal sovereignty is that has heavy impacts because that doesn't always align with what the tribes think their concept of tribal sovereignty is supposed to be.

So we want to make sure that the agency personnel who are interacting with the tribes understand that dilemma that there is a different tribal perspective to what the the federal perspective is so again How do we go in, do that work, and not trigger some of the challenge that comes from those other things that existed before we were here?

We have segments just discussing the tribal government work itself, that each tribal government is set up, structured, can be structured very differently.

It's intriguing that you can go into every single one of these tribal governments within the state of Washington and find similarities within those structures.

At the same time, every single one of them has differences within those structures.

So it has to be the norm to expect every single time I go to work with a tribe, I have to figure out how it's different from the others so I can make my most effective approach to this specific tribe.

So all of that's built into a training day.

Try to get all of the tribal liaisons representing agencies.

And when I say that term, there will be specifically folks within agencies who are by title, you know, director of tribal affairs, tribal liaison.

What we want to make sure that the agencies are aware of is that anybody in your agency who is working with this relationship building with tribes, you're representing your agency to tribal personnel, all of those folks are literally connecting through government to government relationship building.

They're all serving in some kind of a liaison capacity and representing their agencies, which is Why it becomes so important?

How do we get more and more agency personnel to have this understanding of what that relationship is so that they can also be most effective in their work?

Very well said.

Your response there has stemmed a lot of questions for me, but I want to really drill into not necessarily what's in the Centennial Accord, but in the operations.

You have mentioned that there is the Governor's Office of Indian Affairs, and then there are the tribal liaisons.

It was interesting to look at the 2007 report where it was a lot of agency directors or assistant directors listed.

Department of Ecology did have a liaison.

There were a couple other departments that had liaisons as compared to today where each agency has a liaison.

I've got questions about the RCWs in just a minute, but can you shed a little bit more light on how your standalone department interacts with these liaisons?

What is that relationship?

I see in the RCW that the liaison has to be able to report directly to the department director, but can you give us a little bit more information about the structure both within departments and within your own department?

The Governor's Office of Indian Affairs, through much of its history, unfortunately, had only been one or two personnel.

As of the most recent few years, the funding has been made available so that we could actually extend that.

We currently have five personnel within the office.

We have different areas of focus for our work.

We have one individual whose focus is on social services and health services within the state and the relationship between those agencies that carry out those functions with the tribal governments.

We have a person whose focus is dealing with the elements of the natural resources, environmental protections, clean energy and the effect that that has on environmental issues.

So her work with the tribal governments is to be the liaison to help kind of shape that.

The agencies do have their own tribal liaisons.

The Governor's Office of Indian Affairs is the liaison for the governor to the tribes.

But over time, our roles have been shaped by that continuous improvement process as well because we do have occasionally there may be legislators that are reaching out to our agency for some guidance and support.

We have legislators who may pass legislation and include the Governor's Office of Indian Affairs in some of the work that they intend for that relationship with the federally recognized tribes.

There are a number of the the city, county agencies who may reach out to us with questions because our work on behalf of representing the governor as a liaison, while it is mainly focused on the work with the federally recognized tribes, the mission that we operate under recognizes that there are lots of other areas of focus, including, for instance, a number of the natives who have moved away from the reservations, moved into say the urban settings and other places and they still have some needs that they may bring questions to us as well and we have responsibilities there.

We have responsibilities to continue these proactive education processes to share with almost everybody that you can imagine.

So it's a big, big task.

My focus is really on the education component between the state and the tribes and to conduct a lot of the training work that goes on.

Having been part of co-developing the training in 1999, brought in as a consultant beginning in 2000 to do that kind of training work a couple times a month.

with the Governor's Office on behalf of the Governor's Office of Indian Affairs but more recently being hired on as staff as the Governor's Office of Indian Affairs made that commitment to significantly increase the frequency of these trainings so that we get more and more people aware of the information that they need to be most effective at doing that relationship building work.

In that way, we've literally worked with well over 25,000 people at this point.

That's a lot of people.

It's a lot of agencies.

It's a lot of tribes.

My last question for you today, and then you've got a couple minutes to share any closing remarks or if colleagues have additional questions.

The question is about the RCW.

Yes.

Was that a product of agreement or was it a product of ensuring that all of the departments followed the rules?

Was it carrot?

Was it stick?

Was it a little bit of both?

It's my understanding it's a little bit of both because the way that we would describe it is that following the millennium agreement in 1999, the understanding as I described here was that the Governor's Office of Indian Affairs is the liaison for the governor in that relationship with the tribes.

and there was encouragement for the state agencies themselves to develop that component.

Some of them are early adopters and some of them are taking a little while.

There's certainly those in the cabinet agencies, they are under the direct authority of the governor, so the governor can direct them, here's the thing we need to do, we need to bring tribal liaisons into your agencies.

So there's a more direct connection there that makes that happen faster.

But as I'm aware, there's well over 200 different agencies, committees, commissions, boards, all these different entities that have their own representation of the state.

And there was an encouragement, even though they're not under the direct authority of the governor, how do we get more of them to be involved in this practice so that they become improved in their relationship to building with the tribes.

And so the RCW in 2012 was a culmination of all of those things.

How do we get more folks involved in bringing these tribal liaisons on board, and since some of them aren't under the direct authority of the governor, how do we make that happen?

Because in an executive order, I mean, certainly you can, there's almost all those executive orders related to this will have a little segment at the bottom, encouraging all of the other agencies and boards and committees, commissions representing the state to do something similar.

But that's just a carrot.

So some of the stick would be the RCW saying, hey, everybody else, you need to get involved in this process because if we're going to do continuous improvement, we can't only halfway do it.

Very well said.

Really, I will say my first interaction with the Centennial Accord, I was confused because of how simple the words were.

I was a bit confused as to what the Millennium Accord was because again, so simple.

A lot of the answers to my questions today are simple, that is continue to meet create that action plan, we can't meet to talk, we have to meet to do.

It can be confusing to be really just that simple, but it is not in the meeting to meet, it's not in the meeting to have the conversations, it's in the accomplishments of what occurs in between those meetings that is, is what makes this a robust program.

And so I really appreciate you spending some time with us today to help us better understand how can something so complex be so simple.

And the message that I've heard today is empower the folks within the departments, ensure that they are direct reports, ensure that there's an action plan of continuous improvement, and that that is work, not just talk.

So I really appreciate you helping me understand how a really complex topic is so simple as long as we do the work.

But with that, do you have any closing remarks for us or any words of inspiration as we continue to endeavor to make our Tribal Nations Summit more akin to the Centennial and the Millennium Accords?

I think one of the things I would share before closing is just that what I believe is one of the great values of this process, the Centennial Accord, the Millennium Agreement, and so on, is that it is not a binding agreement.

It is not a state tribal compound.

I think one of the challenges could certainly be that if you develop a formal agreement, as soon as that's signed and put in place, then each side then retires and confers with all of their representation and says, okay, what does this really mean we have to do?

What do we not have to do?

If you say this is more of a handshake agreement, that we're in good faith going to make a commitment to continuous improvement, and that's a lot harder to escape from for folks.

You have made your commitment, so how are you going to follow through now?

So I think that's a great value in not specifically identifying what you're doing, but leaving this opening that what does count as continuous improvement will be everything that we're going to work on.

Yeah, very well said.

Well, I can't wait to meet you in person.

Please do tap me on the shoulder because I am like many folks, I have trouble recognizing people I've only met over the computer when I meet them in person.

So I look forward to seeing you soon, Mr. James and Francesca.

Do you have any closing comments for us today?

Quick closing comments.

Thank you, Gordon, for all of your work.

I continue to learn so much from your leadership and expertise and appreciate you taking the time to share with us today.

And I think something that I'm really taking away from this message is the piece around public education and the space of this committee and the forum that you all have created to continue the public education component.

Because as you know and have learned, a lot of this work is happening quietly through our departments and through the everyday relationships.

that are happening with our tribal governments and native communities across the region.

And this forum has proven to be very valuable in sharing this with the general public as well.

And so for the rest of the year, we're working with Chair on some opportunities to come back and do a piece of that accountability measure and do annual reporting.

Instead of waiting for a one-year report, break that out into smaller segments, look at our commitment areas and bring our departmental partners to the table to more routinely and periodically update you on the progress of efforts made, something we've also learned from the state efforts.

So we appreciate the opportunity to do this with you today.

Wonderful.

We look forward to the next time we get to meet and to go over the action plan in between our tribal nation summits so that we don't show up to the next summit flat-footed.

With that, thank you, Mr. James.

Thank you, Ms. Merton.

And we'll move on to the next agenda item.

I look forward to seeing you again soon.

With that, if the clerk wants to read the short title of the next agenda item into the record.

Item 2, Council Bill 121201, an ordinance relating to the 2026 Federation International Football Association World Cup, authorizing the mayor or the mayor's designee to execute an agreement between Seattle FWC 26 and the City of Seattle, authorizing the mayor or the mayor's designee to accept and authorize the expenditure of specific grants and to execute, deliver, and perform corresponding agreements.

for briefing discussion and possible vote.

We have presenters Kylie Rolf with the Mayor's Office, Alan Lee, City Budget Office, Dan Nelson, Seattle Police Department, Andy Collins, Seattle Fire Department, Emily Reardon, Seattle Department of Transportation, Jake Hammack, Seattle Information Technology, Diamatris Winston Seattle Center, Nathan Hacia Care Department, Kenneth Niercy Office of Emergency Management and Tracy Radcliffe Council Central Staff.

Wonderful with that my folks that have their backs to us we can scoot around it'll be a little bit tight And I know there are a lot of folks there so we're gonna go through and have folks introduce themselves again This is not so different than our tribal relations work where there are many different departments Implementing the the work and Emily you might want to well however you all want to do Yeah, I would say Emily, if you wanna jump down by Kenneth.

Yeah, I think so.

It makes it a little less cramped.

Sorry, we try and things change.

We now do committee from up here.

So good to see you all.

With that, I'm gonna turn it over to Kylie to just start the presentation.

Colleagues, if we can hold questions to the end of the first segment, we've developed this in a way that that everyone can kind of have their moment to share what their department does, what the overall plan is across the board.

But Kylie, if you wanna start and Tracy, I'll ask if you want, before we launch into everything, if you want to give us an overview from your position as central staff.

So with that, we are pulling up the presentation right now.

We're going to just have folks introduce themselves because Anthony said everyone's name, but that doesn't necessarily track to who you are.

And so just starting here at the end of the end of the table, Andy, if you'd like to introduce yourself and with titles, I know that you and Dan didn't have titles on here.

So we'd love to take it away.

Absolutely.

My name is Battalion Chief Andy Collins representing the Seattle Fire Department.

Tracy Ratzliff, Council Central Staff.

Alan Lee, City Budget Office, Analyst.

Captain Daniel Nelson, Seattle Police Department.

Riley Rolf, Mayor's Office.

Jay Kammack, Chief Information Security Officer, Seattle IT.

Dematris Winston, Deputy Director of Seattle Center.

Nathan Hatias, Strategic Advisor, CARE.

Ken Napsey, Operations Manager, City of Seattle Office of Emergency Management.

Emily Reardon, Seattle Department of Transportation.

takes a whole city to host a FIFA World Cup.

And we also have the local organizing committee here in the audience as well.

I want to recognize you.

Thank you for coming today.

With that, over to you, Kylie, for brief introduction.

And Tracy, if you want to say anything upfront, or do you want to hold it to the end?

We'll hold that to the end.

So we'll take the presentation away.

Colleagues, let's hold questions to the end of the presentation if we can.

Great.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

We're happy to be here talking about Council Bill 121-201.

We're about 36 days out from the start of the tournament, so I've been before I think all of you in several different occasions.

Hard to believe time has flown, and here we are about a month out.

As you all know, the city has been heavily engaged in planning for this tournament for several years now, so we're very glad to be here before you today to talk about one of the most critical and final pieces of our operational planning and execution efforts, which is safety and security and enhanced city services funding.

But before we get into the components of the legislation before you all today, I did just want to take a moment to ground us a bit in the overall tournament management structure that we're operating within.

For most of you, this will just be a quick review.

There are three distinct but tightly coordinated main players here.

You heard Chair Strauss refer to the Local Organizing Committee, that is Seattle FWC 26. Then there is FIFA itself.

And then, of course, our government agencies at the federal, state, regional, and local level.

So, an easy way to think about it is really our Local Organizing Committee, or LOC, as you'll hear it referred to.

is the lead on our local planning, coordination, and central fan activations.

They are a separate entity from FIFA, but are the main conduit to them, along with all of the other local organizing committees from the other US host cities.

So FIFA itself is responsible for planning and operations within the stadium walls.

So in this case, this means the Seattle Stadium, Lumen Field, and is from the north lot inside the stadium.

The local organizing committee is leading coordination and planning for all things outside of that stadium perimeter.

or stadium footprint.

And then, of course, city and other governmental agencies provide our normal and, in some cases, enhanced services on match days and throughout the duration of the tournament.

So we are providing public safety services and other normal city services to support the games.

The proposed legislation before you today provides some of the funding to support this work.

So moving on to the legislation before us today, it accepts a total of $18.1 million from three sources.

And we'll go through each of these in our presentation here.

The first is the approval of the contribution agreement with Seattle FWC 26, the LOC.

The second is the acceptance of the FIFA World Cup grant program awards and safety and security state funding, which is about 15 million.

and then the acceptance of counter unmanned aircraft systems, otherwise known as CUAS, the federal grant program award to SPD in the amount of 2.1 million.

So again, the legislation before you today accepts a total of 18.1 million from these three sources.

The first component is the contribution agreement with the LOC.

So the city is receiving $1 million from the LOC for enhanced city services relating to hosting the events.

We are proposing to hold the contribution in finance general until after the Seattle matches conclude.

and then we will come back and backfill costs incurred.

But we do know that part of this contribution will go to support enhanced right-of-way cleaning.

So our Clean Cities team has pulled together an interdepartmental team of SPU, SDOT, and Parks.

to develop a comprehensive right-of-way cleaning program for leading up to, for the duration of, and then post-tournament.

So those services include increased cleaning in high-use city parks, increased street sweeping, litter abatement, graffiti abatement, et cetera.

So we do anticipate that some of this contribution agreement will go towards funding that enhanced right-of-way cleaning plan.

Moving on to the second component, the federal and state grant funding for safety and security.

So this is the bulk of the funding being accepted today at $15 million.

It's a mix of primarily federal funding with some state funding in there to support safety and security needs related to the tournament.

So all eligible costs for these awards must have a demonstrated nexus to preventing, preparing for, protecting against, and responding to acts of terrorism.

Allowable project categories included planning, organization, equipment, training, and exercises.

So each department receiving an award will have their own grant agreement.

So the city is not receiving one lump sum.

Each award is made to specific departments.

And each department, although developed in coordination with each other, put together and applied for their own budget and their own projects.

Just a side note here, none of these funds were allowed to be used for the purchase of weapons or weapons accessories, so important thing to mention there.

We have our operational departmental experts here at the table today, so we will go around and have each of them just give a high-level overview on their awards.

and their projects, starting...

Sorry, Alan.

No worries.

I'm sorry to interrupt here.

I just wanted to note Amendment 1 in the agenda, noting before the departments provide their summaries that there is a late amendment to the council bill.

The amount for Seattle Center needs to be revised $2,000 upward.

The number here in the presentation, in this slide, and all the slides of the presentation reflect the revised number.

So thank you to Tracy Ratzler for creating the amendment.

Great.

Thank you, Alan.

So we'll start with SPD.

Good morning.

So the Seattle Police Department is receiving a total of $8.6 million.

$5,295,000 has been allocated to reimburse for operational overtime related to staffing the area around the stadium fan celebration.

sites as well as mutual aid partner reimbursement contracts.

The remaining funds are being leveraged to procure via rental the equipment necessary to harden the perimeter immediately around the stadium.

This includes the anti-vehicle barriers required to establish the Pioneer Square pedestrianization zone that we talked about previously.

Additionally, various equipment purchases were pursued to close equipment capability gaps to ensure the Seattle Police Department is prepared to combat a forecasted increase in human trafficking behavior related to FIFA's time here in Seattle.

Alright, now we have fire.

Good morning.

Andy Collins with Seattle Fire Department.

Thank you for the opportunity to present and your commitment to public safety.

Seattle Fire Department was awarded just under $4.1 million.

Of this, $2.7 million, or 66% of our entire award, was for operational overtime to conduct the activities as described on these match days.

and this includes $200,000 to contract with the Washington Army National Guard's Homeland Response Force to provide a mass decontamination capability on standby if needed.

14% of our awards, $553,000 is for equipment and this is necessary to perform our mission in all of these locations in a decentralized fashion simultaneously.

Specifically, $345,000 that is for EMS specific, the needs to have that equipment onsite to perform ALS and BLS.

The remainder of our award was allocated as such, 5% for planning, 8% to participate in training events leading up to the World Cup, 3% to participate in exercises, one of which was a full-scale exercise at Lumen Field, and then the standard 5% M&A to manage the award.

So I appreciate your time and I'm happy to answer your questions at the end.

All right.

Good morning, council members.

Emily Reardon, Seattle Department of Transportation.

The Seattle Department of Transportation received $938,000.

Similarly to other departments, the majority of this is for overtime for operational staffing needs.

So this is the Incident Management Team, the SDAT Response Team, Emergency Operations Center, and transportation operations center, simply going beyond our standard operating needs.

And then we also received a portion of funds for the Pike Place Barrier Project.

Thank you.

Morning, Chair Charles, council members.

in Seattle Information Technology Department.

Of the $697,702 awarded, approximately more than 70% is allocated to cybersecurity operations and preparedness in the amount of $475,841.

We've also were approved for $143,080 for critical public safety operations and emergency operations center upgrades in partnership with the Office of Emergency Management.

and the remaining IT surge support staffing for all city departments, excuse me, in the amount of $78,781.

Any of your questions, thank you.

Good morning, Councilmember Strauss and committee members.

Seattle Center received $435,000 to support public safety and security for World Cup matches and fan celebrations across campus and the waterfront.

This investment is critical for safety and accessibility in a well-managed event.

About 80 percent, over 80 percent of the funding is being used for dedicated staff, primarily for our expanded deployment, our emergency services unit, and supplemental support through peer security.

And we'll have close coordination with SPD for the broader safety needs on campus and the waterfront.

Good morning Council Members, Nathan Hatia with CARE.

The $238,000 that was granted to CARE will be used for over time for operational funding for both 911 communication center as well as the CCR team.

The 911 communication staff will include call takers, dispatchers as well as supervisors and technical support staff.

The CCR teams anticipates a higher call volume, therefore will be running overtime throughout the city for both the entire World Cup period and as well as during the games.

Good morning.

This is Ken Nafsi, Seattle Emergency Management.

OEM has asked for $31,000, which is going to be evenly split between pre-event training on our event operations plans for city employees, as well as orientation on the unified command post operations that'll be taking place in the EOC.

And with that, I'll turn it back over to Kylie.

Thank you very much.

So this brings us to the third and final component of the legislation before you, which is the acceptance of the Counter Unmanned Aircraft Systems Grant Program.

This is a DHS grant via Washington State, the purpose of which is to ensure agencies and public safety entities have the resources, training, and operational capacity to detect, identify, track, or monitor aerial drone threats.

So SPD expenditures for this $2.1 million award is solely for going towards personnel, training, planning, and contracts related to drone mitigation strategies.

It does not include any equipment in that funding.

And I'll turn it over to Alan for the last slide.

Thank you.

So this slide shows a history of World Cup appropriations to date.

In 2025, in the left-most column, we have 6.4 million in appropriations between the two ordinances.

Ordinance 127265, standalone, and Ordinance 127350, also known as a 2025 mid-year supplemental and then in the next column we have in the 2026 adopted budget the council approving 7.4 million in appropriations bringing the total to date appropriated 13.8 million and so council bill 121201 would bring the total FIFA related appropriations to 31.9 million

And with that, we're happy to take any questions.

Thanks.

And before questions, Tracy, if you've got anything that you'd like to share with the central staff's perspective on this.

Just to note that when the descriptions were of what was funding in the different departments, the funding, you note that it said overtime.

That's because the grant actually would not fund, as I understand it, regular time.

So for example, for SPD, and I want to thank the captain here that he gave us a great description the other day of the staffing model.

They put a lot of thought into how could you maximize that grant, but also recognize that we want to use existing staff for the costs that we need to cover.

And so we are in fact covering those costs by using existing officers who will be deployed to provide the protection during those games, those six game days.

and that's gonna cost the city some money that's already been appropriated, but just in transparency, understanding that's part of what our contribution is in terms of providing the public safety and given that the grant wouldn't fund a regular time, unfortunately.

So that's the only thing I have to say.

We've looked at the review.

We've worked many years on the planning for this event.

And so I think everybody has done the best they can.

with the resources that are available or have been made available to us to provide a good event.

And then the only other comment I will have is the amendment that we'll have to move at the end of the discussion and question period.

Thank you very much, Tracy.

And I do want to thank Kylie and Alan.

We met a week ago to go over this presentation.

The version that we are seeing today is so spot on.

You did really great work.

I really appreciate all of the efforts.

And a lot of that couldn't have been done without Tracy holding even me, my feet to the fire on this.

And so in those moments, this is an exception of my unofficial rule of trying to have a bill before us in one meeting that says required additional preparation in ways that we don't usually go.

And I think all of that preparation has set us up into being even more prepared today than we expected to be.

And so I really appreciate everyone's diligence on this.

With that, I've been able to speak with this team a number of times, so I want to open it up to colleagues for any questions at this time.

I'm seeing Council Member Kettle, then Saka, and then I'll call on you, Vice Chair, if you don't have anything, that's totally okay.

Council Member Kettle.

Thank you, and I did get the briefings as well, and so thank you for that and the discussion.

One of the things I just wanted to highlight, maybe this is kind of like expectations for our public, because these dollar amounts are set, but it, you know, we have six matches which are I believe is spikes but we're gonna have activity in between.

Can you speak to this?

Is this like game day only kind of expenditures or we're looking to cover the gaps in between because we're gonna have elevated individuals in the city for the cup generally?

Is that something that you could speak to just so people understand in the public like this is not just game day, but it's for the entirety of the experience.

and folks can chime in here.

The majority of the awards do go towards match day services, although the performance period for the grant was July 2025 through July of this year.

So some of the planning costs in particular will go towards planning work that has already happened last year.

Yeah, just noting that the period of performance is through mid-August.

Sorry about that, yeah.

Okay, and just for the, also for the public, we're going to, and Public Safety Committee meeting on the 26th, the 26th Tuesday, the 26th of May, we're going to have a meeting focused on on the FIFA World Cup, pieces from a public safety OEM primary in the league, but with the supporting cast.

So I may see some of you again later in the month.

Just so people in the city know ahead of time that we're ready for the FIFA World Cup with our representatives here in chamber and across the board.

And just highlighting the various pieces that go to this.

One of the things I did want to highlight though, just as for background, is in the briefing it says, particularly the major grant related to the nexus preventing, preparing for, protecting against and responding to acts of terrorism, which could range from international domestic, you know, across the board.

And, you know, a breakout of that funding on a different slide, you know, shows that, you know, the 200K were for the CCTV cameras for the stadium district.

which is a very important topic, something that is being installed, although with the caveat related to an audit and so forth.

I did want to note that the and the reason I did so, I want to make this comment is, you know, the mayor and her comments following the Yesler Community Center gunfire incident, you know, noted various pieces that go to the audit.

And I think if people listened to that, they would think that none of this has been addressed.

And so I think it's really important for the people to know that the technology program for the real-time crime center, for the CCTV, for the automatic license plate readers, and so forth, has as its basis the surveillance ordinance, the SEER.

But it also has an ordinance with ALPR, two with the CCTV and the Real Time Crime Center, and also was part of the budget ordinance, the CBA's related to that.

and I think it's important for the public to note, because again, if you listen to the mayor, you may think that none of this has been done, but all these bills that were very focused on the contract language, protecting Seattle's rights, putting all those Seattle values into place with the work of many of my colleagues that are sitting here on the dais, the computer audit process, we got IT here, I mean, it's incredible, but we have, relative to other jurisdictions, in terms of being able to discern what was happening in terms of requests and potential intrusions and the like.

The processes, the policies, the fact that there's only one sworn officer there, because a lot of times what happens is somebody would walk out with some information.

There's only one sworn officer.

The processes and the protocols that we put into place for the technology program address all the things that were kind of hinted to in the mayor's comments.

you know, the, all these touch points.

And, you know, and then obviously it's been updated with automatic license plate reader based on Olympia's Senate Bill 6002. And here's the thing that, too, that I think most people don't realize is that, and I appreciate the concern, that's why we did everything that we did for all these bills.

But here's the thing is, The federal government is plowing so much money into federal law enforcement, so much into Homeland Security.

They have their own systems.

And those systems, the capability of those systems to collect their own data, whatever their needs are, really address what they have.

And so I recognize that some have concerns regarding our systems here in Seattle, but rest assured, we put all these pieces in place.

The processes, the protocols, you know, the contract language, all these pieces to protect Seattle.

And so I say that because part of this, there's 200K that's in this package that we're voting on that was for the CCTV.

And it is really important to note that.

It's important to note all the points that I just made as opposed to what is being portrayed out there and can be inferred.

And I really do thank the mayor for pressing forward on the regular CCTV set and also the installation of the stadium district because it is important related to the nexus of preventing, preparing for, protecting against and responding to acts of terrorism, what type it may be.

This is professionalism 101. Any other city would be pressing forward on that program, particularly with all the ordinances that have been passed by this council, across terms of the council too, I might add.

So I just wanted to make that point, colleagues, chair and colleagues, because it's important.

We have to carry out these games for the LLC, for the people of Seattle, for all those that come.

and to do so we have to be the best prepared we can.

So I appreciate all the efforts that go into this, but clearly we have to also take steps related to the Stadium District CCTV program.

So Chair, I just wanted to, I'm bringing a little public safety into the finance, but the nexus, pardon the pun, is here with this briefing.

So thank you.

Fantastic.

Tracy, if you've got anything- Just a slight correction.

So the money for the CCTV was actually appropriated in the 2025 and spent in 2025. It is not part of the package that is in front of you today.

So it is part of what we funded in a previous ordinance and was expended then.

What was the number of that ordinance?

There was- Is it one?

One, two, seven, three, five, zero.

There's also appropriations in the 2026 adopted budget as well for that purpose for SPD, and that's included in the summary column as well.

I think this is your opportunity to use your appendix slide.

Yes, and that's where I was told at that point right there, Tracy.

So I don't know where that line came from, but that's what my understanding was that tied in.

Bottom line, though, Bottom line is we appropriated the money and we authorized the money for the Stadium District CCTV program.

So now we need the execution of it.

Thank you.

Every meeting is a public safety meeting.

With that, Councilmember Saka.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you everyone for being here today.

So, question on policing resources, and I don't know if it's best for our partners at SPD or the Mayor's Office or both, but, so no doubt this is going to be a Herculean effort.

No doubt this is going to require the dispatch and use and leveraging of mutual aid resources.

We can't solely provide the adequate and sufficient level of resources to staff this event, relying solely on our internal officers.

and this proposed legislation would allow the city to accept 18 million total in resources, some of that which would be used towards policing.

So to cover all the the King County Sheriff's Office deputies, Washington State Patrol, other regional jurisdictions from Kent to Renton and Auburn, et cetera, that are gonna be in the city helping out on a mutual aid basis.

the proposed allocations for SPD cover that amount, and therefore that would be the city's responsibility as part of this acceptance, or does either the local organizing committee or FIFA that covers the north lot inside the stadium, would they separately contract with King County sheriffs, for example, or Washington State Patrol?

Who covers the mutual aid resources?

I guess another way of saying that in a more simplified version is like, who is responsible for covering those mutual aid resources?

Thank you.

It's a great question.

And before I answer, I just want to acknowledge all of our great mutual aid partners from across the state.

Earlier this year, I've been on the talking tour for a couple of years about this and I've been priming everybody.

And I set out state right request out at the beginning of the year and actually received a pretty robust response from across the state.

As far as way as Spokane Valley Police Department, they're sending over some tech.

So, you know, this is a team effort.

and we're all in it together.

So more directly to your question, the funding is segmented out by mission, right?

So let's just start with Lumenfield, because that's the quickest delineation.

Historically, Lumenfield through First and Goal Incorporated, they hire off-duty officers from across the state, and that's usually who you see on game days.

And so if you go to a Seahawk game or a Sounder game, you might see people with SPD patches or Key County Sheriff's patches, State Troopers, Bellevue, a couple other different agencies, they all work directly for the stadium.

That model holds true for FIFA.

As Kylie mentioned, everything inside the fence will be covered by Lumen and FIFA through whatever agreements that they have.

Everything on the outside of the fence, that's where we come in.

So SPD is holding contracts with all of our non-major mutual aid partners.

And so the King County Sheriff's Office, again, through the fantastic leadership of Sheriff Colt Tindall, Under Sheriff Floor, Assistant Chief Marenko, they are owning their normal responsibilities.

So think Sound Transit, King County Metro, all of the air missions.

So I know we spoke briefly about a counter UAS, and so they are owning, they are the county air boss, and so they are running that program.

And so Our proposal and the legislation before you does not contemplate any overtime costs for the King County Sheriff's Office.

It does include funding for the Washington State Patrol.

And so to help supplement staffing, they have agreed to assist with activities in our last mile area.

And that is essentially everywhere from our transit hubs in towards the stadium, which includes everything from the stadium platform, the CID platform and Pioneer Square in towards Lumen Field.

as well as assistance with our escort project and mission.

Obviously, we're going to have a lot of people in town and teams and dignitaries and things like that.

So the state patrol was very generous in allowing for that.

So we are directly contracting with the state patrol to reimburse them for those, as well as all of our other mutual aid partners.

And so, again, I think we have 15, 16 different agencies right now we're in talks with.

We haven't been able to sign the contracts because we're still waiting to get the contract from the state.

Once that's done, we'll be able to go through Adobe Sign and execute all the contracts.

But on game days, we have, you know, if you look in last mile, we have about 25-ish agencies.

I'm sorry, 25-ish people in the last mile and about 20 for the escort mission.

And that will all be reimbursed through our mutual aid processes here.

Thank you.

Did I hear you correctly?

It's essentially a mix of both in terms of city financial contribution and private, in this case, whether it's levy over, or excuse me, the other local organizing committee or FIFA itself, similar to the first single model that you said at a regular Seahawks match, for example.

So, you know, a mix of both.

Yes, sir.

And the King County Sheriff's Office put in their own grant proposals and received their own grant award for their overtime.

So it's very similar.

We didn't want to just have the City of Seattle essentially have to hold all the contracts for all of these major providers.

It just did not make sense to do that.

And so we encourage, again, some of the larger players to kind of move their own.

Yeah.

Makes perfect sense from my perspective as well.

We're already shouldering a heavy, healthy burden and get a ton of benefit in exchange, of course, as well, but that sort of workload should be shared.

So awesome.

Well, second question here pertains to our IT efforts.

I'll say as a non-practicing cybersecurity lawyer, keenly interested in this kind of stuff and frankly geek out about it a lot, so really love it.

So of the proposed allocation for Seattle IT, you noted that there was roughly 70% allocated for preparedness and, you know, in any public or community safety realm, prevention is always the number one goal, it's a gold standard and and especially in the cybersecurity space, preparing for and preventing, you know, ransomware attacks, malware attacks, other malicious attacks, whether it's from, comes from cyber criminals or nation state actors or combination of both.

Prevention is the name of the game because once you're responding and like it's, Hectic.

Ask Seattle Public Libraries or The Port or whoever it is from a government perspective.

So just curious to better understand of that 70% allocation generally for preparedness, what is that gonna cover exactly?

Is that for additional software and services support, enhanced capability on some of the existing software that we use today?

Is that for training of staff?

What is that gonna cover exactly?

Yes, sir.

Excellent question.

And the short answer is all of the above.

There will be additional software to include managed detection and response services that we'll be enabling as a defense in-depth strategy to the city.

We will also be conducting operational technology testing for all of our utilities.

We have firewalls enabled, and we need to test all of the operational technology grid utilities behind them.

that will include that testing, breach readiness review assessment, technological capabilities, and our security operations center assessment.

And it will also include a few tabletop exercises that we'll be running with cabinet and our mayor's office staff.

in addition to training with managed detection and response, there was also a series of threat hunting activities within our network.

So we will be running active response, threat hunting activities, replicating hacker behavior within all of our networks to see exactly what we are exposed to and how we can remediate that.

And I'll say the final point, to offer within our preparedness is vulnerability remediation program expansion.

How quickly can we remediate vulnerabilities when we find them, which is the other name of the game.

We can find the vulnerabilities, but how quickly we can remediate them really is how we mitigate that mean time to detection to mean time to response recovery loop.

That's exactly what we're investing in right now for the city to include our operational technology, Seattle City Lights, Seattle Department of Transportation, and Seattle Public Utilities in partnership.

Thank you.

Getting the red team and blue team activated and ready to roll for this event.

Thank you.

Love it.

Thank you, Councilmember Socket.

Colleagues, any further questions?

Vice-Chair?

Thank you.

I just want to say that I really appreciate it.

It's really clear that all our departments are working together to make sure this is a successful event.

And then, Councilmember Kettle, I appreciate you making everything a public safety um, committee, but you know what?

This is a public safety committee because we have not only SPD, but our great partners at fire and also office of emergency management.

I've had the pleasure of working with them for many years and really it's going to take all our city departments together to make sure that this is a fun and safe event for not just our residents, but for our visitors.

And it's very clear all the coordination that has happened.

Obviously this is a meeting to vote on acceptance of this grant.

I really appreciate that we have, while I would have loved to have seen more money going to not just the overtime piece, at the very least, I appreciate the ability to accept this grant so we can manage.

I'm sure there'll be plenty of overtime during these events, these matches, and so I appreciate that we have that ability.

and I wanna say council member Kettle that I agree with you just in general notes about the surveillance, about the, I hate that word surveillance, but about the cameras that we place in order to help us investigate crime when it does happen.

And I will make a note that I was at Yesler Terrace on the day that the mayor announced and we all announced, cause this was our collective effort, the Families and Education Levy implementation plan was our collective effort.

And the day we announced that, there was the sad state of affairs.

Luckily, nobody got hurt.

But I was there with my staff and Director Chappelle was there ushering people into the community center once we heard the shots fired.

And sadly, there were a couple of little boys ages, I don't know, as a mom, I'd say there were about seven or eight who identified very readily the gunshots and knew exactly while the grownups, some of the grownups were confused about whether it was fireworks.

Neither of the children were confused and neither was I, having grown up in the inner city.

But I say all that to say that the camera at the Yester Community Center helped SPD be able to identify the vehicle where the gunshots were stemming from, that gives us the ability to investigate crime.

And really at the end of the day, none of us are trying to, we're trying to make sure that we have a tool to help us investigate crime, particularly when it is you know, guns going off, shots being fired.

And so I appreciate my colleague, Council Member Kettle, bringing attention to this at this spot because we are placing cameras that will not be activated unless there's, quote unquote, a credible threat.

I don't know what that would be.

How would we know ahead of time?

We were at that community center.

No one would know who could have predicted someone was gonna roll up while we were having this event.

and have shots fired.

And, you know, sadly, it's a regular occurrence in some of our neighborhoods, including Yesler Terrace.

And I will also note that in the odds of, in my household, having my kids be at a school, nowhere near Yesler, where there was a child killed inside the school, and that I would be five years later about at a different location where there are shots fired within where kids were, the odds are really slim in one household.

So I say that to say this has become a regular occurrence that we really do need to, we need to be taking bolder action on this.

And I think the cameras help with the, like I said, investigation or crime, particularly because we all care about privacy and we want to make sure that we put privacy protections in place, which we have done via all the amendments that went when we allowed use of that tool and technology.

So this is really important.

And I'll say, you know, for me and my household, that was the experience, but for kids at Yesler and in other parts of the city, this is an everyday experience.

The fact that these little kids could identify the gunfire, they're hearing it all the time.

That's not okay.

That is really troubling to everybody.

So we do need to be able to deploy these tools in order to be able to investigate these crimes.

And so I hope nothing happens at our FIFA matches and at this event, but I don't feel comfortable knowing that we have cameras during this huge event that are not gonna be operational unless we somehow have, you know, ahead of time some knowledge that something will be happening.

That to me is not the best way to move forward.

I appreciate this administration's privacy concerns.

I do, I had similar, I added an amendment or two to the technology legislation because I also have privacy concerns.

I worked for the ACLU many years ago, I understand, you know, I'm Latina, I understand the consequences to my community and we need these tools to be able to keep our folks safe.

So anyway, I went off on a different direction but it is related because we are talking about FIFA and we're talking about our ability to keep people safe and we need to accept the grant in order to do the overtime for public safety that's gonna happen at the game.

So bringing it back to the original, but I think it was important to say those things because I think we are concerned about FIFA and public safety and keeping our folks safe.

So all my comments are related to that.

in any event, thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

I will just make a note for the record, since we're running a little over time, I'm gonna save my comments because we've been able to have a number of different meetings.

I'm really impressed with the progress everything has made.

I was very impressed with the presentation today.

Colleagues, I'm holding my comments because this is an acceptance of these grants.

This is not the appropriation.

And so we will have that opportunity to come back in the future, unless I'm seeing from Tracy.

Did I get that wrong?

It's actually acceptance and appropriation, Mr. Chair.

Say that again?

It's acceptance as well as appropriation, Mr. Chair.

Yes.

That was described to me differently during our preparation session.

Oh, excuse me.

Well, no, the contribution agreement also.

So yeah, so again, it's $1 million appropriated to Finance General, and then the appropriations outlined in the table, those are part of the Council Bill.

And when you made the comment that you'll be coming back in July to appropriate those to the specific departments, can you walk me through how that works differently from Finance General?

I think you're referencing the million dollars that they're putting into Finance General that they would have to in fact come back, the executive will have to come back, mid-year supplemental, end-of-year supplemental to say, here's where we want that million dollars from Finance General to go in terms of the departments that accrued the expense that needs to be paid for.

Thank you, because that is the only grant that we are accepting that is not necessarily specific to what we were talking about, the drones, we were talking about overtime.

Do I have that correct?

Yes.

Fantastic.

We almost stopped midstream right there.

I apologize, Mr. Chair.

Just one small nuance is that the agreement is not a grant agreement.

So just that nuance I wanted to share.

Fantastic.

Since we are staying on track, I will now move Council Bill 121201. Is there a second?

I will second.

Thank you.

It has been moved and seconded.

And Tracy, if you could present Amendment 1 for the record.

Correct.

Literally all this does is change the appropriation for the Seattle Center from $432,000 to $434,522.

That is all it does.

And that's attached to the agenda as well for your information.

And Anthony, can you help Tracy share the amendment on the screen?

I think it's on the flash drive, is it not?

Thank you.

If you could scroll down just a little bit so we can see the whole page there, it is really just changing $2,000, but I want that to be shown for the record.

There it is. and there's nothing below it on the table.

There is not.

Colleagues, do we have any questions about $2,000 going to Seattle Center?

Seeing as we have no questions at this time, will the clerk please call the roll on Amendment 1 to Council Bill?

And maybe I need to move it.

So I will move to amend Council Bill 121201 as presented on Amendment 1. Is there a second?

Second.

has been moved and seconded to approve Amendment 1 to Council Bill 121201. Will the clerk please call the roll?

Councilmember Kettle?

Aye.

Council President Hollingsworth?

Yes.

Councilmember Saka?

Aye.

Vice Chair Rivera?

Aye.

Chair Strauss?

Aye.

Five in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The Amendment 1 passes to Council Bill 121201. Colleagues, are there any final comments on the bill as amended?

The bill has been moved and seconded.

Will the clerk please call the roll on Council Bill 121201 as amended.

Council Member Kettle.

Aye.

Council President Hollingsworth.

Aye.

Council Member Saka.

Aye.

Vice Chair Rivera.

Aye.

Chair Strauss.

Aye.

Five in favor, none opposed.

Thank you very much.

Council Bill 121201 passes to full council as amended.

We look forward to this.

You don't all have to come to full council.

and just I really appreciate it.

Thank you, Emily, Ken, Nathan Dematris, Jake, Kylie, Captain, Alan, Tracy, Battalion Chief, Amy, and Dylan.

Thank you all for being here and all of the great work that you do.

With that, we'll move on to item number three on the agenda.

Will the clerk please read the short title of item three into the agenda?

Item three.

Appointment 03468, appointment of Dwight D. Dively as Director of Finance of the Office of City Finance for a term to December 31st, 2029. For briefing and discussion, presenters are Acting Director Dwight Dively of the Office of City of Finance and Mark Ellerbrook, Mayor's Office.

Thank you.

We have Mark and Dwight joining us at the committee table now.

Welcome, gentlemen.

As I'm filling a little bit of time, I've had the pleasure of getting to work with Dwight already on the Seattle City Employee Retirement Systems Board, as well as I believe we've got a DIMPAC meeting coming up next week.

We already have the forecast council that we work on together.

Gentlemen, great to see you in committee today.

Mark, I'll turn it over to you for brief introductions.

Good morning.

Mark Ellerbroek, for the record.

I am the Deputy Director for City Operations in the Mayor's Office.

Good morning.

Thanks for having me this morning.

I'm going to make this really fast.

I am here to present the Mayor's nominee, Dwight Dively, for the Office of City Finance.

I've known Dwight for a long time now, in fact.

I think I first met Dwight back in 2007. Dwight actually hired me when I went to work at the county, so it is a little odd for me to now be presenting Dwight to all of you.

I can go through, but I won't, all the things that Dwight has done both at the city and the county over time.

I also just want to note that it is hard to go to any room where there are public folks participating and not find somebody who has taken Dwight's class at the University of Washington.

Councilmember Kettle raising his hand for that.

And the last thing that I will say, and Dwight probably won't talk about this today, but Dwight used to do this really fascinating presentation about the 10 best things and the 10 worst things that the city of Seattle ever did in its history.

It's interesting to sort of go through that, and I will point out at least two of them that he points out on the best list.

We won't go into the negative list, but one was buying Seattle Municipal Tower, the opportunity when that was available, and the other was the long view around the investments in the Skagit proposal and the Skagit dams and how that has served the city well.

I think Dwight is uniquely qualified to be our Director of the Office of City Finance.

And with that, I'm gonna turn it over to Dwight.

Great.

Thank you.

Thanks for the opportunity to be here today.

I've had the chance to meet with three of you individually, and I think Councilor Osaka and I are meeting later this week.

I'm looking forward to that.

I think most of you know my background.

I started here at the Seattle City Council Central Staff in 1987, and I will tell a short story about how I became interested and involved in budgeting and finance, because that was not why I was hired.

I was hired because I'm actually an engineer by profession.

And I was hired after doing engineering and a public policy degree from Princeton to work on things like energy policy, environmental policy, transportation policy, information technology projects, and so on.

And so that's what I started in July of 1987. And about a month after I started, my boss, the council staff director, Paul Matsuoka, came down the hall and casually said, do you know something about a thing called Lotus?

And for those of you that are younger than me, which is everyone, Lotus was really the first spreadsheet program that was widely used.

And I didn't know how to use Lotus.

And so I said, yeah, Paul, I know how to use Lotus.

And he said, good, you're our budget expert.

and I looked at him and I said, Paul, I don't know anything about the city's budget.

You didn't hire me to work on the city's budget.

And he says, well, you're the only one on the staff who knows anything about Lotus.

In fact, you're the only one on the staff who knows how to turn on the one computer that the council central staff had in 1987. And so he said, you've got a month to learn.

You're gonna be our budget expert.

and so I was the budget coordinator for the city council in 1987, really loved it, learned a lot and was pretty good at it and so gradually transitioned from what I had been hired to do to basically working on budgeting and finance and that led to the opportunity when Mayor Norm Rice hired me as the city's second finance director in 1994. I did that for about 16 years.

We went through many, many reorganizations in that period of time.

At one point I had a department that included what today is human resources, information technology, everything in FAS, OCF, CBO, and a whole bunch of other things.

So I got the opportunity to have some experience managing line operations, which was frankly very valuable in my career.

Did that all for 16 years.

Dow Constantine hired me when he took office as county executive to be the budget performance and strategy director for King County.

I did that for 16 years, the last six of which I was also the chief operating officer, so had 10 of the 11 county departments reporting to me.

And then I had the absolute pleasure to get an outreach from Mark, soon after Mayor Wilson was elected, saying, hey, would you like to come back to the city?

and that was very intriguing and I was very interested, so I had a chance to meet with the mayor and talk with her about kind of her interests and her priorities.

And so it was a pleasure and a privilege to be offered the position to come back as finance director, having been gone for almost exactly 16 years.

I have received your questions that you sent on Friday.

I should have answers back to you by the end of this week.

And I look forward to discussing those at our next meeting.

And with that, I will see if there are questions or thoughts that you want to share while we're here today.

Thank you.

I'll turn it over to my colleagues.

Colleagues, we have six minutes left.

I'm gonna take one of those minutes of Mr. Ellerbroek and your description and introduction.

If Husky admissions had been, had not wait-listed me, I would have been your student too, but I went to a Superior School Go Ducks with that.

Colleagues, any questions?

As did my son, so.

There we go.

Something in common there.

Colleagues, any questions?

Any rebuts to that last statement?

Council Member Kettle.

I just wanted to add, since I did raise my hand to the question from Mr. Ellerberg, that I did take the class.

It was a great class, and it reflects well upon Mr. Diley and his ability to work.

And it's true.

It's kind of like head coaches.

in the NFL that have their assistants, and then eventually their assistants go out and do things.

So it's funny that at least two of us, two out of nine, took a class from Mr. Dye, excuse me, Professor Dye.

And I'm sure it's sprinkled throughout the executive and other places as well.

And the insight gained from that class is really fundamental and helps, you know, the program overall too, by the way, in terms of what we're doing in the council, at least for my colleague, council member Rink and myself, you know, the program was with his class is really helpful.

And so welcome and and one thing I'll add as a preface for next meeting is, I don't know if everybody's seen it, but the Seattle Times has a editorial out today talking about how the state does its budgeting and its financing.

It's a must read and I think could be the basis of a number of good questions next time around in terms of how they're doing business.

and as usual as I learn more about Olympia, it's like how to learn from their mistakes so that we don't do the same.

So, thank you.

Well said, Councilmember Kettle.

Colleagues, any other statements, questions?

I'll just round it out by saying the smarter half of my household was a student of Dwight's and had a near perfect score.

So, thank you for, thank you for, you know, we would go in a little bit more deeply, but as you know, we're running up against the end of the committee time.

Your resume comes well known throughout the community, both from your students, but also from all of the executives, both in the departments, but the county executive and so many of us just know your history so well.

Another fun fact is that I believe you let me know that you've helped finance the building of the current City Hall.

Is that correct as well?

Correct.

I was on the committee that did the civic campus, the building across the street and City Hall and what was supposed to be across that has never been.

It was a challenge because the mayor at that point was Paul Schell, who was a developer, and the lead for the city council was Peter Steinberg, who was an architect.

So a finance guy on a committee like that is a challenging role.

Amen.

Amen.

Any final comments before we close out today?

Thank you both for being here.

Colleagues, this does conclude the Tuesday, May 5th meeting of the Finance Native Communities and Tribal Governments.

I do want to bring to our attention that we will be having a special committee meeting, yes, on a Friday, yes, at 2 p.m.

It is May 15th at 2 p.m.

At that meeting, we will anticipate voting on Acting Director Dwight Dively's appointment as well as we will be having the first of two briefings on both the 2025 exceptions ordinance and the 2026 carry forward ordinances.

So with that, colleagues, unless there's further business, meeting is adjourned at 1128. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.