SPEAKER_20

Well, good morning, everyone.

The Special Governance Accountability and Economic Development Committee will come to order.

It is 9.32 a.m.

I'm Sarah Nelson, chair of the committee.

And we've got a couple people joining us remotely as well.

So will the clerk please call the roll?

SPEAKER_05

Councilmember Kettle?

SPEAKER_20

Here.

SPEAKER_05

Councilmember Hollingsworth?

Councilmember Saka?

SPEAKER_04

Here.

SPEAKER_05

Councilmember Rivera?

Three present.

SPEAKER_20

Could you please take that role again because I think that somebody just unmuted.

Of course.

SPEAKER_05

Councilmember Kettle.

Here.

Councilmember Hollingsworth.

Present.

Councilmember Saka.

Here.

Councilmember Rivera.

Chair Nelson.

SPEAKER_20

Present.

SPEAKER_05

Four present.

SPEAKER_20

Thank you very much.

On today's agenda, we've got a continued discussion and possible vote on appointment 02930 of Mina Hashemi as Director of the Office of Intergovernmental Relations, and a briefing and discussion of Council Bill 120862, an ordinance related to recruitment and retention of police officers in the Seattle Police Department, making permanent a hiring incentives program in the in SPD and amending ordinance 126654. With that, we'll now move into public comment.

How many people have signed up to speak, please?

SPEAKER_05

Council President, we have two in-person speakers and seven virtual speakers this morning.

SPEAKER_20

Okay, we will start with in-person speakers to speak on items on the agenda, and we'll give folks two minutes.

And Councilmember Rivera has joined us.

SPEAKER_05

As Council President mentioned-

SPEAKER_20

Go ahead, sorry.

SPEAKER_05

As Council President mentioned, I'll call on speakers in the order they signed up to speak, starting with the in-person commenters.

Speakers will have two minutes.

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

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

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

And as Council President mentioned, we'll be starting with the in-person commenters.

First, we'll have Lars Erickson, followed by Alex Zimmerman.

Lars.

SPEAKER_17

Good morning, Chair Nelson and committee members.

My name is Lars Erickson.

I'm speaking on behalf of the more than 2,500 members of the Seattle Metro Chamber of Commerce in support of Council Bill 120862. Our city's shortage of police officers impacts all members of our community.

For the employer community, it means waiting on non-emergency lines for hours after a break-in, training employees in de-escalation, hiring private security, and paying skyrocketing insurance rates after continuous break-ins.

Some of you have heard these stories in meetings in the Chamber.

posted with small businesses and council members.

Several restaurant owners even said they've slept in their businesses in order to deter break-ins.

We support an all of the above approach to public safety, and that must include attracting and retaining highly qualified police officers.

We need to be competitive with municipalities in Washington and other states, and making permanent these hiring incentives is an essential way we can do that.

Please pass the legislation and continue finding ways to make our community safer.

Thank you for your time.

SPEAKER_20

Thank you.

SPEAKER_05

Thank you.

Next, we have Alex German.

SPEAKER_99

Thank you.

SPEAKER_15

See how my lovely.

Damn Nazi.

Pause.

SPEAKER_20

You have that is. abusive language, which equates to disruptive behavior.

You've been warned several times.

Please refrain from such speech.

SPEAKER_15

Okay.

And address an item on the agenda.

I will speak about agenda number 62. I will speak about 62. Give me a chance.

Policeman problem is a serious problem.

SPEAKER_20

Go ahead.

SPEAKER_15

Okay.

Thank you very much.

So last time you remember, I remember you give examples of Bellevue police very good.

No, Bellevue police not so good.

It's not only not so good, they acting like a Gestapo.

I have experience with them almost for 40 year, four time prosecute me, 65 ticket, all in court and I win always.

So this every hearing cost $3,000 for every ticket.

It's okay.

So what is I want to explain to you guys, how you can hire somebody when you don't have a chief.

You understand?

I cannot understand this.

And who controls this, everything?

Same people what is staying in this chamber for 20 years.

Look here.

Counsel Harrell and another people, what does he prefer?

Assist him, you know what it means?

In this chamber for 20 years.

You cannot teach new old dog new trick.

You want good policemen?

We need changes.

First, my proposition, and I told you before, we need start hire a civil man for police department.

There's only one way what is we can change something.

I close involved in last three policemen, close involved, and go to every hearing what is possible.

They all freaking idiot, low-class professional.

For $400,000, What are you talking about?

We cannot find one intellectual man who can handle very important and critical department for all city.

How is this possible?

We don't have smart people around?

Where is the problem?

Who can explain to me?

Stand up, America.

We need bring Seattle back to America.

SPEAKER_06

Thank you, Alex.

SPEAKER_15

Thank you very much.

SPEAKER_05

Now that concludes in-person public comment, and we'll move to the virtual public comment.

Same rules apply.

First, we have Matt Offenbacher.

Matt, you have been unmuted.

Hi.

SPEAKER_09

Thanks.

Good morning, council members.

Thanks for being here bright and early doing the city's business.

I'm a Capitol Hill resident.

and a small business owner in Soto.

And I'm calling today to ask you to vote no on the $50,000 hiring bonuses for police officers.

I'm sure you've heard the expression, insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Every study, including SPD's own studies, have found that hiring bonuses don't work.

We've had them on and off for five years, and SPD has yet to come close to meeting its hiring targets.

Why is this?

It's because we're asking officers to do a job they are not suited for and don't want to do.

If you've been listening to your police chief, you'll know that the police officers are not any kind of solution to the complex problems caused by poverty, housing shortages, and cheap, powerful drugs.

$1.5 million for these bonuses this year means that you will have to defund something else by that same amount.

So I would love in your discussion today of this bill for you to talk about what you think should be reduced by $1.5 million to pay for these bonuses.

Libraries, mental health services, food access, pedestrian safety.

We don't need more police officers to make us safer, and we certainly don't need to be throwing good money after bad, especially in this upcoming budget season where we the people of Seattle will be watching closely as you wrestle with a $260 million budget deficit.

Thank you very much.

SPEAKER_05

Thank you, Matt.

Next, we have Flora Wright.

Flora, you've been unmuted.

SPEAKER_16

Laura.

Hello.

Can you hear me?

Hello.

Hello, I'm Flora Ray, a Seattle resident calling in to oppose CB 120862, which would give $50,000 hiring bonuses to cops.

The city is in an over $260 million budget deficit, and the first funds under attack were necessary services like student mental health and libraries.

Council members also spent the year trying to cut minimum wage for gig and tipped workers.

And despite the city already giving SPD a 24.27% raise four months ago, you still somehow managed to find more money to give to cops.

A single hiring bonus could pay the rent of two average households in Seattle for a year.

If you want to reduce crime, invest in housing.

SPD's own report on the current hiring bonuses and prior reports by central staff have shown that hiring bonuses that have been in place for the majority of the past five years don't actually increase hiring.

And decades of research going back to the 1974 Kansas City Preventative Patrol experiment have thoroughly debunked the myth that more police somehow equals less crime or violence.

Just one example, Kevin Dave, the officer SPD hired despite a, quote, checkered history, who killed Genevieve Kondula while driving three times the speed limit without running his lights and sirens and without a valid Washington State driver's license, received a hiring bonus.

Seattle is required to have a balanced budget, which means it's either or between police spending and community investments.

Reject hiring bonuses and transfer the $1.5 million to equitable community-based investments that, unlike cops, are proven to reduce violence.

SPEAKER_06

Thank you.

Next, we have Julia Buck.

Julia?

Julia, you've been unmuted.

SPEAKER_07

Good morning, counsel.

My name is Julia Buck and I'm a Ballard resident.

I am calling to suggest that you should all vote no on the police hiring bonuses for $50,000 for transfers.

The Atlantic recently published an article over 20 years of data that found that 70% of officers hold just one job and 21% hold just two.

And the remaining 9% are some of the most prone to disciplinary issues.

And so what we're doing is we're paying a $7,500 rookie bonus for police officers.

And we're paying a $50,000 bonus to attract basically officers with disciplinary record issues potentially.

And that doesn't make any sense at all.

So I'm asking you to please vote no, especially in a budget crisis.

Throwing more money at this in this manner does not make any sense.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_05

Thank you, Julia.

Next we got Max Doggett.

Max?

You've been unmuted, Max.

SPEAKER_11

Hi, my name's Max.

I've been for the better part of the past decade a job coach for adults with disabilities all around King County.

In Seattle, I am here to urge the county not to increase the hiring bonus for new police hires.

I think a lot of people are going to speak to the statistics and things better than I will, and I'm rushing.

I'm going to yield maybe some of my time if I can to uh i'm actually going to help some uh asylum seekers who the city police have pushed out to the to the outskirts outside the city where they're farther from services but um

SPEAKER_05

Hey, Max.

SPEAKER_20

We cannot hear you, Max.

So if there's something wrong with your mic.

SPEAKER_05

Max, if you're having technical difficulties, please feel free to sign on again.

If not, we're going to move to BJ last.

BJ, you have been unmuted.

SPEAKER_08

Good morning.

My name is BJ Last, a Ballard homeowner.

I'm also calling on council to reject CB 120-862, which would give SPD permanent hiring bonuses of up to $50,000.

I do appreciate that it's actually finally honest about why cops are cops.

Like this is the one time council will be honest, like why they're in this role.

These aren't people that are there if they want to like help community or do the right thing.

It's because they're in it for the money.

This is SPD's own finding that salary was the most important factor in applicants' decision to become a police officer.

So, hooray, we're actually being honest about who it is that we're giving guns and pretty much immunity to give violence against people.

But what's really kind of funny is even with them being such mercenaries, bonuses don't actually work to attract cops.

We've seen this time and again with SPD's study, Central Staff's study, and others, that the hiring bonuses don't work.

That's kind of easy to see why because these bonus structures actually tell existing cops to leave.

If you're a current cop on SPD, you just got your back pay from the new SPOG contract.

So you can go to another police department now, collect a bonus, and in two years come back to Seattle and get another $50,000 bonus.

So you're telling cops to leave because it's not like that would even impact their pension because their pension is statewide based on years of earnings regardless of the department that it's with.

This legislation also tells new recruits not to bother joining SPD because their bonus is so much smaller.

They might as well join a different department and then, you know, maybe come to SPD in a few years to get that bigger bonus.

So this legislation, you know, array potentially tells cops to leave because we could actually finally get rid of some of them.

Then we'd have more salary savings.

I could actually go to other departments.

Of course, You'll never do that.

You'll just keep throwing money at the cops, even though they don't make anything safer.

So reject cop bonuses.

SPEAKER_05

Thank you, BJ.

Next, we got Alice Lockhart.

Alice, you've been unmuted.

SPEAKER_19

Good morning.

Good morning, committee members.

I'm Alice Lockhart, a homeowner in District 5. I'm calling to express my confidence that this committee is as concerned about fiscal responsibility as I am.

Committee members, next month you will be faced, most of you, with your first budget season, dealing with the hard questions of a budget shortfall of over $200 million.

I'm sure you will agree that now is not the time to commit funds that are not there.

In the interest of government and transparency, and fiscal responsibility, please delay committing to huge police hiring budget until the amendment process during budget season.

At that time, you will be able to make explicit exactly what you are going to cut in order to fund those bonuses.

Please be transparent and let us know that information during budget season and please be cautious.

It may turn out to be really, really hard to find something to cut.

And you can absolutely cross that bridge when you come to it in October.

Thank you so much.

SPEAKER_05

Thank you, Alice.

Last virtual public commenter is Alberto Alvarez.

Alberto, you have been unmuted.

SPEAKER_13

What are we doing here?

The Sarah Nelson Council seems only focused on regression.

Millions in back pay to police.

a blank check for police harassing black, brown, and LGBT sex workers, and now millions in bonuses for rehiring officers?

You have squandered this entire year on the grievances of NIMBYs and the Officers Guild.

Can this council name three good things they have done for the average working person in Seattle?

Any word on affordable housing?

Any push to raise wages for all?

What of the children who were begging you to fund their diversion activities and mental health services.

Make some effort to improve our lives, our lives, not just the rich and well-connected.

Council is a service to all, not a rubber stamp for the elite.

Thank you and I yield my time.

SPEAKER_05

We've reached the end of the list of people signed up to speak and public comment is now closed, Council President.

SPEAKER_20

Thank you very much.

Hearing that public comment is closed, would you please read agenda item one into the record?

SPEAKER_05

Agenda item number one, appointment 02930, appointment of Mina Hashemi as Director of the Office of Intergovernmental Relations, briefing discussion and possible vote.

SPEAKER_20

So colleagues at our regularly scheduled meeting last week, Deputy Mayor Wong introduced Mina Hashemi as the mayor's pick for OIR director, and we had the opportunity to to hear directly from her interim director and also ask some questions of our own and elaborate on some of the questions that were submitted and answered prior to the meeting.

And so this is another opportunity to ask additional questions and it's my hope that we can vote this out today.

In fact, this is one of the reasons why we scheduled a special meeting today because I wanted to make sure that we got this vote out before we entered our budget season, which is coming up.

And that is because, although this session doesn't start until January, it's clear that those conversations about the upcoming session are happening right now.

And just for an example, I was invited to attend the Apple Cup last week, or on Saturday, and there were other elected officials there, and I had the pleasure of sitting next to Representative Hackney and talking about the conversation naturally drifted to this upcoming session and some of his priorities.

And so it is important that we...

that as this is ramping up and the table is being set for what's coming up, that we have a fully credentialed leader working behind the scenes and also hard at work strengthening all the processes that you talked about last week when it comes to making sure that your office is as effective as it can possibly be in representing the city's interests.

So with that, I just would like to open this up to any additional comments or questions from my colleagues.

I am not seeing any, so we invited you here to be at the table to also offer you the opportunity to have any last words in this discussion, and then I will move the actual legislation.

SPEAKER_12

Thank you.

Good morning.

Thank you, Council President Nelson and members of the committee.

Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of my appointment as Director of the Office of Intergovernmental Relations, otherwise known as OIR.

I appreciate the opportunity to be here with you today and also want to thank you for the conversation last week in the committee.

It's always great to hear from you directly about your priorities and goals for OIR and I appreciate the opportunity to answer your questions.

and also your investment in our success as i shared last week i'm super excited about this position it's been such a great experience and a privilege to serve as interim director these last few months and to build relationships with you council members and to serve you mayor harrell and the beautiful city that we call home the future of seattle is bright and it's truly an honor to have your consideration for this appointment As I shared throughout my career, I've served elected officials at the state, local, and regional level, working directly for an executive and a legislative body.

And in each role, I've gained understanding of the unique needs of each type of legislator and demonstrated my ability to build relationships with people from diverse regions, backgrounds, ideologies, and access to government.

This type of work drives me and I'm excited and ready to use this experience to help council achieve your goals and to have a hand in directly solving the problems and achieving progress in the city that I live in.

As we talked about last week, we all know the city is most effective when we are regular and collaborative partners in conversations with government at all levels.

OAR plays such an important role building and stewarding positive relationships on behalf of the city with these partners through many avenues, including direct lobbying, effective communication about the city's priorities, compelling asks, and regular engagement.

And as I shared, my vision for OIR is action-oriented.

So I've been hard at work these last few months planning and organizing to capitalize on greater opportunities for funding and policy solutions to address the city's needs and to move us forward on our goals.

So as I mentioned, I've really been focusing on setting the city up for more success in the 2025 legislative session.

through not only a more concise state legislative agenda, but also with earlier engagement with legislators and stakeholders this fall to find shared alignment.

I'm happy to hear that you've already been working on that.

I've also put heavy emphasis on OIR's critical role identifying funding solutions to address our city's budget needs and working with partners to identify system improvements to make sure that we're seeking the best opportunities for funding and that we're delivering really compelling asks.

I'm happy to report that OIR is talking more frequently with regional partners and that we're seeking opportunities to better coordinate on state and federal asks as well as implementation of policy at a regional level.

As director of OIR, again, I can commit that I will always fight for Seattle to have a seat at the table and that you can always count on OIR and our team for fierce advocacy and open, transparent communication as well as a deep respect for the intricacies of our city as well as all of our elected officials and the people that we serve.

I'm super grateful for Council's collaboration on this work and your openness to working with us on these priorities.

And I want to thank you again for the very thoughtful consideration of my appointment and for the opportunity to be here with you again today.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_20

Thank you very much for those additional remarks.

I learned something new, that the number of conversations has gone up.

So with that, I will move the legislation and then get to my colleagues' questions and comments.

So I move that the committee recommend confirmation of appointment 02930 of Mina Hashemi as director of the Office of Intergovernmental Relations.

Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded to confirm appointment 02930. Council Member Kettle, you had a question.

SPEAKER_10

Yes, thank you, Chair Nelson, and thank you, Ms. Nashimi, for being here again.

And I really appreciate our conversations that range from the international, spent a lot of time on that, and down to tribal government, native community, which is fantastic.

And what's really fantastic is in order to solve our challenges that we face in public safety, public health, and homelessness, We really need to be in sync with the county and the state.

It's got to be a three-prong approach.

They need to understand our requirements, our needs, and the changes that have happened due to different pieces of legislation and so forth, and just changes on the ground.

And so I look forward to...

leveraging that experience you noted because we really need to have the state, the county, and the city working in concert.

Otherwise, we're taking one step forward and potentially two steps back.

So thank you very much.

Thank you.

And yes, I will support your nomination.

SPEAKER_20

Let's see, additional comments?

I would like to note that it seems like the state legislative agenda gets a lot of attention as it should.

However, you have staff that are working very hard daily to support council members in their work on regional committees.

So I really want to note all that hard work that often goes unnoticed or unremarked upon, but it's really important to prepare us for the content of those meetings and also the executive position, et cetera.

And also, we are all members of two sister city organizations, and so therefore that is also very important because we've got a lot of good work that broadens our horizons and also enriches us when it comes to understanding what's going on in other cities, best practices, et cetera, that we could institute here.

And of course, on one of my sister city trips to Christchurch, Tim Reynon of OIR's Tribal Relations was a key member of that delegation.

So kudos to all of the work that your office does, and I really look forward to engaging further on the legislative agenda as it's developed, finalized, presented, and voted on by this body, and also just continuing to work with your fantastic team, not just in Olympia, but every day.

right here.

So I really appreciate your work.

SPEAKER_12

And I will be supporting you.

Thank you, Council President.

I appreciate you highlighting that.

And I know my staff will be really happy to hear that.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_20

And if I missed any level of government there, I do apologize.

Forgot the national level, et cetera.

But yes, it's all important.

All right.

With that, if there are no further comments, looking once, looking twice.

Okay.

Will the clerk please call the roll on the legislation?

SPEAKER_05

Council Member Kettle?

Aye.

Council Member Hollingsworth?

Aye.

Council Member Saka?

Aye.

Council Member Rivera?

Aye.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Five in favor, none opposed.

SPEAKER_20

Excellent.

The motion carries and the committee recommendation to confirm the appointment will be forwarded to the Seattle City Council for consideration on September 24th.

So congratulations.

See you then.

Appreciate it.

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

SPEAKER_05

Agenda item number two, Council Bill 120862, an ordinance related to recruitment and retention of police officers in the Seattle Police Department, making permanent a hiring incentives program in the Seattle Police Department and amending ordinance 126654, briefing and discussion.

SPEAKER_20

Thank you very much.

As folks are getting to the table, just some history.

In March of 2022, I put forward Resolution 32050 calling for a hiring incentive program and also stating our intent to lift a budget proviso on the salary savings of vacant police positions in order to pay for those incentives.

A couple months later, council passed ordinance 126654. which lifted the proviso and authorized the creation of a hiring incentive program.

And as you will hear at this presentation, that program is, those incentives are scheduled to end at the end of this year.

And so we'll hear about this legislation to extend and modify slightly that program.

So would the presenters please introduce yourselves and then feel free to get started on the presentation.

SPEAKER_02

Good morning.

Members of the committee, Chair Nelson, Tomaso Johnson, Council Central Staff Analyst.

Good morning.

SPEAKER_03

I'm Deputy Mayor Tim Burgess.

Good morning.

Mike Fields, SPD's HR Director.

SPEAKER_01

Good morning.

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

SPEAKER_20

Thank you very much.

The executive does have a presentation, but would you like to frame the discussion here very briefly?

SPEAKER_02

I think I'll let them take it away, and then I'll come back in if there's other things to add.

Perfect.

SPEAKER_20

Thank you.

SPEAKER_04

Good morning, committee members.

We're delighted to be here this morning to give you perspective on this legislation that is before you.

I think, as you all know, we need more police officers in Seattle.

We are somewhere between 300 and 350 short of the ideal number of officers that we can deploy in our city.

This legislation helps by offering higher incentives to lateral transfers, individuals who are already commissioned as police officers and want to transfer to the Seattle Police Department.

It increases that incentive to $50,000 from $30,000.

It also continues the $7,500 incentive for first-time recruits who are joining the department.

And then finally, it makes this program ongoing.

Next slide, please.

We just covered this slide, so we'll go to the next slide.

Thank you.

This slide shows the number of recruits by month.

In July, we reached a high of 446 applicants, which is the highest number since back around 2013. The previous most recent high was in January of 2021, when 428 new applicants applied.

As you look at this chart from March of 2024 on, I think it's significant to note that the new contract with the Seattle Police Officers Guild was signed on March 14, and we saw an immediate surge in applications.

Next slide, please.

This slide graphically shows the problem we're attempting to address.

We are averaging in the current exam cycle for police officers one And I'm going to turn to Director Fields, have him talk just for a moment about why lateral transfers are so attractive to the city.

SPEAKER_03

It's just worth mentioning that lateral hires are field deployable significantly faster than entry-level officers and are really the most efficient way to address our staffing issues.

The total training time for a lateral is approximately 22 weeks quicker than entry-level, meaning that lateral hires are out in the field much more quickly.

I do think it's worth mentioning that laterals are held to the same standard as entry-level candidates in terms of completing their training checkouts and backgrounding standards.

However, their previous law enforcement experience allows them to be out in the field much more quickly.

SPEAKER_04

Next slide, please.

So this slide shows the competition that we face in hiring police officers.

You'll see in the far right column, we're suggesting raising the incentive for laterals from 30,000 to 50,000.

That will move us ahead of Everett, Federal Way, Des Moines, and Mercer Island.

Next slide, please.

We conducted a survey last year of new applicants to the police department.

60 respondents to this survey, and all but two of them suggested that incentive pay had some level of importance in their decision to become a police officer in Seattle.

23% ranked incentive pay first or second in importance.

41% ranked it third.

and 36% ranked it as fourth or fifth.

But only two of these 60 individuals did not give any rank to incentive pay.

So in order to be competitive regionally, we want to continue the hiring incentive program and specifically increase the incentive for lateral hires.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_02

If I might, members of the committee, the only other details that I would add is just by way of background, there were recent prior hiring incentive programs in 2019 that council adopted an ordinance authorizing a one-time incentive payment of $15,000 for lateral transfers.

Following the expiration of that ordinance, there was another one-time incentive program created under emergency executive authority of former Mayor Durkan pursuant to the COVID-19 pandemic that included a $25,000 lateral hiring bonus.

And as you noted earlier, this current pilot program authorizing $30,000 lateral hiring bonuses is set to expire at the end of this year.

A couple of other minor notes I wanted to make about the effect of this legislation in addition to the increase in the amount of the bonus and the removal of the temporary nature of the bonus structure.

This bill also modifies the clawback provision of the incentive program.

That was one of the items identified by the evaluation.

It was recommended that the clawback period be modified, noting that other jurisdictions have a shorter clawback period on the scope of one to three years, whereas our Clawback provision in our incentive program is five years, meaning that if an officer receives a lateral hiring bonus and then leaves the department prior to five years under the current pilot program, they repay that amount in full.

The modification that this legislation introduces is a prorated system, meaning that the amount that they pay back if they leave prior to five years is based on the time that they are working.

There are some other technical changes that this legislation makes to the program to better reflect the different ways that lateral employees can enter the department if they're formerly employed with SPD.

I'll also note that the bill strikes the reporting requirement as that was completed earlier this year and that was a facet of the pilot program.

Briefly on the fiscal impact, the summary and fiscal note for this legislation identifies a $1.5 million annual ongoing cost and also identifies that that amount will be paid out of SPD salary savings.

Those salary savings are expected to be ongoing, at least into the near term, and that funding structure is expected to be reflected in the executive's 2025-26 budget when transmitted.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_20

Thank you.

Is there any further information you would like to share?

SPEAKER_04

No, happy to respond to questions.

SPEAKER_20

Okay, so I'll just start a bit.

Tomasi, you mentioned the answer to my first question, which was if the funding source was still going to be the salary savings from vacant positions.

So I'm understanding that that is the case.

SPEAKER_02

Okay, great.

Yes, based on the information that we have available at this time.

Right.

SPEAKER_20

And that is important, so that money is already allocated for this purpose.

So I had a couple questions about the slides.

On slide three, could you pull up slide three, please?

I am wondering, go on with slide three.

Well, if you can accompany.

So I'm looking at the jaggedy, the up and down line of applications.

And to what do you attribute the decline in applications between July and August from 446 to 378, which is a net negative of 68?

And that's the first monthly decline since February 24th.

And the largest decline since September and October 2022. I'm mostly just asking a question of do you have ways of accounting for the up and down nature of the applications month to month?

SPEAKER_04

I think that as you look over the multi-years that are reported here, we see that kind of fluctuation each month.

I don't think we could tell you precisely why the number of applicants went down in August.

Mike, do you have any?

SPEAKER_03

I would just speculate that the reason we're seeing it go up and down over time, including recently, is a function of the testing windows that we have.

Four testing windows a year.

And I think, as you all know, that's going to be changing where we'll be getting registers every two weeks starting next month, which will be very helpful for lots of reasons.

But we can dig into the data more closely.

But I suspect it's a function of when that testing window hits relative to a given month.

And it might skew the data that way.

SPEAKER_20

Okay, that makes a lot of sense.

I was wondering if it had to do with any marketing efforts, like an ad placement or something like that.

Is that discernible in the data at all?

SPEAKER_04

There's been no material change in the ad placement volume.

We continue to test messaging in advertising, but the volume of advertising has pretty much been consistent.

SPEAKER_03

And I would just add, Council President, that the rate of daily application, which is, of course, a different metric, continues to stay high.

So I do suspect that it's a function of the testing window lining up with particular months.

SPEAKER_20

Got it.

Thank you.

The other significant bump on that slide is, as mentioned, in January of 2020. When was that?

SPEAKER_99

2021.

SPEAKER_20

Yes, and that was following the previous, or the penultimate, hiring incentive program, I believe.

And so because hiring takes a very long time to actually, because the application process is so long, it's difficult to track whether or not a hiring incentive program is successful.

There have been comments on the notion that they don't work based on a report that came out at the beginning of mid-2022, but that was before we could actually see the hirings from that bump resulting from the institution of the hiring incentive program.

So I continue to believe that this is a this is that hiring incentives in general are necessary to ensure that we're competitive with neighboring jurisdiction and we're all fighting for the same recruits.

Are there any comments or questions from anybody else?

Go ahead, Councilmember Saka.

SPEAKER_18

All right.

Thank you, Madam Council President.

And thank you for being here today.

Really appreciate this presentation and more data to support and help empower and inform our decision-making here.

I've long been calling for...

or commenting and noting that, yes, we need to improve and streamline our hiring of officers, but we're not going to hire 400 to 600 more officers to get us to appropriate staffing levels merely by attracting those entry-level recruits.

And we need to supplement entry-level recruits with a significant number of lateral hires for the reasons mentioned.

Also, the experience as well in dealing with members of the community uh but i but i appreciate the data that you gave to to uh i guess buttress that point including the total number of time to get ramp someone up essentially that is a lateral is 22 weeks quicker than an entry level uh officer so very important and you know i think these uh incentives will help us better achieve a comprehensive, thoughtful balance to how we go about restoring our officer staffing levels.

You actually took one of my questions, Council President.

It was an excellent—I was wondering the same thing.

And the five—so maybe I'll approach it from a slightly different angle.

You know, on that slide there, slide three, there is, as Council President noted, a notable decline from July to October.

August and this is a snapshot.

It's a five-year roll-up and at a quick glance all but one year From July to August.

It looks like the there was a decline of some sort Although this year it is it is more Substantial than prior years for sure So in addition to just being curious about why it sounds like there's no YOU KNOW, STRONG VIEW ON THAT RIGHT NOW.

WOULD ALSO BE CURIOUS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND HOW THAT NUMBER, AND THIS DATA JUST MORE BROADLY COMPARES TO THE APPLICATION DATA AT NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS.

You know, it's obviously very important.

And on a later slide, slide five, to be exact, it shows how the incentive program stacks against neighboring jurisdictions in Seattle, which makes a lot of sense.

But do you have an initial view of...

how that 68 or whatever that number is declined from july to august this year how that compares to what other jurisdictions are experiencing because yes we are we always collaborate with our neighboring jurisdictions on any number of policy uh priorities and points um but but this Officer hiring is unique insofar as, yes, we're collaborating, but many neighboring jurisdictions are also trying to boost and restore their officer staffing levels, although none to the extent that we are here.

So on the one hand, not only are we collaborating closely with them, we're also competing fiercely for talent.

But it would be good to understand if you have an initial view on How that decline from July to August compares to what other jurisdictions are experiencing?

SPEAKER_04

Council Member Saka, we don't have data from surrounding jurisdictions as to the number of applicants they are receiving.

I would point out, as you have both, the Council President, and you have pointed out the decline in August, but August at 378 is the third highest month in the last four years.

So while there is a decline, it's still much, much higher than we have been experiencing over the last four years.

SPEAKER_18

Got it.

And thank you.

So I have another question pertaining to slide five, where it shows that chart.

SPEAKER_20

I'm sorry.

Can I just add to that just to wrap up that issue?

That is a very good point, Deputy Mayor.

And I do note that since...

The good news is that line has been going up since...

April of 2022. And that is when we started talking about hiring incentives to begin with.

I'm not going to say that it's because of the council or anything, but the line is going in the right direction when it comes to growing the pool of applicants, which is the first step toward actually hiring folks.

So go ahead.

SPEAKER_18

Thank you, Madam Council President.

So on this slide five here, it notes the incentive for recruits today.

Is that, okay, so for all recruits, so it doesn't distinguish between lateral or entry level, is that correct?

SPEAKER_04

Well, it does.

Prior, before, before.

So we're not changing the entry level for new recruits that are staying at $7,500, and the lateral amount was $30,000.

This legislation would move it to $50,000.

SPEAKER_18

Got it, got it.

Okay, so yeah, that was the focus of my question.

The $50,000 figure, so up from $30,000...

How did we arrive at that number in particular, in addition to, looks like, so $30,000 was at the higher end, but there are, as we note, there are a number of jurisdictions with the higher 40,000.

How did we arrive at 50,000?

Just to be the best in class, so to speak, in which, by the way, if that's the case, that's a perfectly acceptable answer, but just want to better understand the thought process that went into arriving at that $50,000 proposed figure.

SPEAKER_04

we're suggesting that change in order to be competitive in our regional marketplace.

We know that lateral officers who meet our standards are quicker to hire and train and put in the field by 22 weeks, which we heard from Director Fields.

They're also more effective as police officers once they are deployed because they have the experience of being police officers.

So raising the incentive, which we know is important, especially to laterals, puts us in a much stronger competitive position with some of our regional competitors.

SPEAKER_18

Makes a lot of sense.

Final question.

So with respect to the new prorated clawback amount that Tommaso was talking about a moment ago, just to just be curious to better understand how that new revised structure compares to what other jurisdictions do with the same incentive.

SPEAKER_02

I'm just refreshing my memory.

There was some information provided, Councilmember, in the memo that was transmitted in February.

As I said, that was one of the recommendations made.

And I don't know off the top of my head what the other jurisdictions have specifically for clawback periods.

The memo does mention that King County Sheriff's Office and Bellevue PD employ a three-year clawback period, whereas Kent and Federal Way have a one-year clawback period.

So that's the sample set that we have as far as other jurisdictions.

SPEAKER_18

So this new approach is a one-year?

SPEAKER_02

It retains the five-year period, but it prorates that based on the amount of years following receiving the bonus.

SPEAKER_10

Thank you.

SPEAKER_20

Council Member Kittle.

SPEAKER_10

Thank you, Chair Nelson.

Thank you, everyone, for coming this morning.

I do listen to public comment.

Some may accuse me of not, but I do.

And one of the repeated themes from like this morning's public comment was the funding sources.

And I do believe that we need to get that out better in terms of where this is coming, because clearly some of the comments were not germane in the sense that THIS IS COMING FROM SALARY SAVINGS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE CAN DO TO BETTER GET THAT OUT INTO THE PUBLIC SPACE SO THEY UNDERSTAND THIS IS A SEPARATE CONSIDERATION.

AND IT'S A SEPARATE CONSIDERATION, TOO, FROM AN EXPECTATION MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVE IS THAT IN TERMS OF THE SALARY SAVINGS AND BUILDING UP OUR NUMBERS, I view this as like going to take the entirety of our term on the council, if not into the next term.

And I think it's important for expectation management to make that point because I think a lot of people are expecting the immediate change, you know, and that doesn't happen.

And I was wondering, is there any efforts in terms of educating both those points in terms of the expectation management of how long it's going to take to get back to where we need to be with overall police staffing?

and then also with elements like this, you know, initiatives like this in terms of what we're trying to do.

SPEAKER_04

Thank you, Councilmember.

The current budget for 2024 includes funding for these incentives, and the mayor's budget, which will be transmitted to you next Monday, funds this in 2025 and 2026. Monday or Tuesday?

Excuse me, Tuesday.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm from the old days when Monday was the council function day.

But it's fully covered in this year's budget and in the mayor's proposed budget, which you'll receive next week.

The reason that we're submitting this legislation now, and we hope that you will act favorably on it, is that we would like to be able to pay these incentives starting as quickly as we can as soon as this legislation takes effect.

So if it passes out of full council soon and then the normal 30-day window, we should be able to pay these incentives in the last couple of months of this year.

SPEAKER_10

Thank you.

Another question that came out of public comment, and I think it's important to restate it, is because it is a position of the council, is that quality is key.

And I recognize on each individual basis there may be some one-offs, which will get all the focus.

And I think it's important to restate the standards and then the accountability side from us.

to include each of these transfers would go through the process to include the Before the Badge program where they go into each of the neighborhoods to learn the neighborhoods, to learn all these different pieces, where they're still evaluated too, by the way.

I've seen that before over the course of the last year or two.

Can you speak to the quality and the standards and accountability aspects of what we're looking to do today?

SPEAKER_03

Thank you, Councilmember.

Yes, that's exactly right.

I'll start kind of in the order of events as they occur.

In terms of backgrounding standards, laterals are backgrounded in the same way.

They're subject to all the same requirements and restrictions, and it's not a foregone conclusion that they will be hired.

So there is a full vetting in the background process.

In terms of training, although it's a shortened time period, laterals go through a field training process that culminates in a checkout process.

And until you meet that checkout process, which holds them to the same high standards that we hold entry-level officers to, they are not field deployable.

And if they do not complete that process and do not successfully check out, they can be separated on probation.

Okay.

SPEAKER_10

Thank you.

It's an important point.

I always appreciate Mr. Johnson's memos from central staff.

Thank you for those.

And I notice basically you're taking the September one in a lot of ways as an update from your February memo.

And in that memo, you talked about how respondents to the survey who are looking to transfer to Seattle were also looking at other local agencies to include 18 that were mentioned, include some that were essentially out of state, LA, Houston, New Orleans, and Honolulu.

I wanted to ask the converse of that in terms of these applicants, where did they come from?

Like in terms of like this February, and you can, I don't need exact numbers, but for these transfers, where are we seeing them come from?

Are they coming from across the country, the West Coast, or here locally in Washington State, or even here in Puget Sound?

SPEAKER_02

That's a great question, Councilmember.

I'm not actually familiar with the information enough to answer that.

My colleague, I think you're referring to the memo earlier by my colleague Greg Doss earlier in the year on this issue, but I'll defer to SPD as they may have more information about that to be responsive to your question.

SPEAKER_04

Councilmember Kettle, we know that of all applicants, so first-time recruits and laterals, most, the overwhelming number of them, come from Washington State and then on the West Coast, Oregon, California.

But we do attract candidates from elsewhere in the United States as well.

But the overwhelming numbers, and I'm not sure if it's a majority or slightly higher than a majority, come from Washington State.

SPEAKER_10

Okay, thank you for that.

It's an important piece because that goes to other issues that we're all aware of.

And we'd be happy to send you, and we will send you, that information.

Yeah, yes, thank you.

That would be very helpful.

I just wanted to close with the idea that recruitment is retention and retention is recruitment.

All different programs that kind of cycle around and can be recruiting newbies in the sense of they can anticipate in the future.

So I really appreciate having a broad approach to what we're doing.

And I really like how the chart has gone up.

I think that's a reflection of the Seattle Police Department, the mayor's office working together with the council and multiple committees, labor, governance, accountability, and the public safety committee.

And as I noted before, at the beginning of the year and public safety, you know, give us one year if you're looking to leave or retire, I also want to make a call for those that are currently working in another jurisdiction, maybe Bellevue or others nearby, to look at the city of Seattle, the Seattle Police Department.

And I think that the environment is such, particularly with our SPOG, Interim deal, the recruitment bill from earlier that came out of this committee, not to mention the automatic license plate reader, street racing, discord jail bill, obviously also currently soda and soap, and starting this week, the real-time crime center and CCTV.

It shows a commitment to achieve my mission of creating a safe base in our city and doing it with accountability and standards as well.

So thank you very much for coming.

SPEAKER_04

Thank you.

I'll just share one other comment.

Mayor Harrell has said many, many times how proud he is of our Seattle police officers and the work that they do every day.

We think we have the best police department in the state, if not the United States.

There's one other part of this incentive program that I'll mention, and that is city employees.

who refer an individual to be considered as a Seattle police officer and that person is hired and successfully completes the academy and the field training program can receive a $1,000 referral fee.

That's eligible to every city employee except those who work for the Public Safety Civil Service Commission or are part of the recruiting unit in the police department.

But it's a nice incentive for city employees to refer friends and neighbors and others that they know who would like to be police officers and would like to join the best police department in our state.

SPEAKER_20

Council Member Rivera.

SPEAKER_14

Thank you, Council President, and thank you all for being here.

I appreciate my colleague, Council Member Kettle, underscoring that This money is coming from salary savings, so we are not going to be cutting something in order to pay for this.

I assume that the permanency, the change in the permanency is we will always assume that we'll have some salary savings because there are folks that wind up retiring, et cetera.

And so there's always some amount of salary savings that every department carries from year to year.

So I assume that that this will continue to be taken out of that salary savings and not a different program at the city.

So thank you for confirming that.

And I will also say that these are one-time incentives.

These are not ongoing incentives.

So this is really to try to get folks in now and continuing to hire more folks.

And I do want to say in terms of police staffing levels because I hear the number you know it fluctuates between three and four hundred or something to that effect but I will say that that's just the overall number as I continue to speak to North Precinct for instance I know that we have about 20 officers on any given night available at North Precinct.

And so I think that's really important because that other number seems higher.

But the fact that of the 300 to 400 officers that we are down, we really only have 20 available at any given time at any of these precincts.

which I think is something we need to talk more about in those numbers because we've had, as you know, Deputy Mayor, some crime on the north end, more recent crime, or I should say there were a couple of shootings.

We've had crime all along.

And our ability to be able to address the crime that happens, we can only do so if we have the officers there.

And if we only have 20 officers, you can see how quickly it hinders our ability to address every single thing that is happening.

And we're seeing more violence across the city, particularly of shootings.

And so I think, not I think, I know we are all working hard to effectuate the ability to have them more than 20 officers at any given time at any of those precincts to be able to address the crime that is happening.

And I think that is something that is critical and why we all are looking at these kinds of efforts to try to attract more officers.

I very much appreciate you delineating that, you know, we are not sacrificing standards when we're looking at laterals that they too have to meet our standards and requirements for all officers at the city.

And I support and I continue to say, you know, we need young people wanting to do these jobs.

Obviously, they would be entry level recruits and we need, you know, more of those as well.

So I just wanted to underscore that because we are tackling a huge public safety issue in this city.

and I too hear council member kettle the folks that come for public comment and also I hear from a lot of the constituents because we know that there are 750,000 constituents in the city and we only hear from a couple of them at any given time and so I am out there in the district that I represent hearing from folks who are very worried about the public safety situation because people are getting killed This is really something people are getting killed.

And we need the ability to address this.

And we cannot do that if we don't think of creative ways, including incentives, to be able to hire more officers at the city.

And that is just the bottom line.

It's simple.

It's based on facts.

It's based on data.

And it is our job to work with the mayor's office and SPD to figure out ways that we're going to be able to hire more folks so we can address these issues.

We have a lot of violence in the schools.

We have more gun violence in the schools.

And our ability to address that really relies on having a police force that can go out to these schools when these things happen.

No matter how people feel about policing, at the end of the day, it is a fact that we are having kids getting killed across the city.

all of our districts are not immune from the shootings as I said two shootings in about a month fatal shootings just on the north end and so we really need to do all that we can to support the hiring of more officers so that folks can show up and so this is this is critical to in in my mind and it's certainly something that I will be supporting on behalf of the constituents in the district that I represent.

So thank you so much for your efforts.

I know none of this is taken lightly.

There's a lot that goes into these proposals that are made and we are being asked to vote on.

And folks need to understand that.

And that is what we're tackling when we're doing this.

So thank you.

Thank you, Council President.

SPEAKER_20

Well, you sort of took my closing remarks out of my mouth, but I will say, and I'm not closing discussion, but on the heels of those remarks, we take an oath to protect the health and well-being of the residents, citizens of the city of Seattle.

Our charter says there shall be maintained...

adequate police protection in every district of the city.

And I am sorry that I don't have that direct quote, but I said it often enough when I put forward the legislation to initiate the hiring incentive program in 2022. I said it over and over again as we were deliberating on the legislation passed earlier this year to improve hiring processes and recruitment efforts.

I am very much looking forward to a report on how that is going.

I believe that we should be expecting that anytime now.

This is one piece, one piece of doing our duty for the people of Seattle.

You mentioned North Precinct, 20 officers.

That is everything north of the Ship Canal.

That is our largest precinct.

And that is extremely frightening when you think about the time it takes for first responders to come to an emergency.

It's also frightening when you think that those are, that we have pulled investigators from special units to patrol in order to have 20 people at any time on patrol in the North Precinct.

So emphatically, when I say no stone unturned, do everything we possibly can, this is money that is sitting there to be used to fill a historic staffing deficit at SPD.

And so I want to make sure that, yes, we are listening to all of our constituents and On a daily basis, what we hear from our constituents, from small businesses is pretty devastating what's going on out there.

And so, of course, I will be supporting this as we go forward.

And I would like to invite any other council members to say some closing words.

Go ahead, Councilmember Hollingsworth.

SPEAKER_00

Thank you, Council President.

I just had one quick question, just for the record, and I appreciate Councilmember Rivera for reiterating this.

These are funds that have already been allocated to our Seattle Police Department, and they're just been moving from one bucket to a different bucket to be allocated.

additional money that's been offered.

There's no redirection of funds coming from another city department.

These are funds that have already been allocated to our Seattle Police Department that have been unused, and they were just switching buckets within that piece.

That's correct.

Okay, awesome.

I just wanted to clarify that for the record.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_20

And month to month, I don't know if this is still the case, we're looking at a net negative in new officers hired.

So the money is there, unfortunately.

Okay, well, thank you very much for this.

Okay, go ahead.

SPEAKER_18

Thank you, Madam Council President.

And so appreciate all the thoughtful contributions from you all colleagues.

Yeah, 100% agree.

And I guess from my perspective, I'm just going to pile on because it's worth it.

Let us now use this as an opportunity to directly address, demystify, and debunk some of the most egregious myths that are likely to swirl from all this conversation.

This is being funded solely as a direct result of existing salary savings.

This does not reflect net new spending or net new income.

Well, net new spending.

So just wanted to pile on on that point.

But I did have one more question.

One more pesky question.

Sorry.

But this is important stuff.

And just wanted to double click a little bit more on some of the information contained in that slide five that includes that table of incentives.

So You know, we talked a little bit earlier about the basis for arriving at this $50,000 proposed lateral incentive number.

Makes sense.

Would just be curious to better understand a little bit more about the efficacy of this kind of data, and in particular...

What kind of impact can we expect, roughly, to see as a direct result of going $10,000 above the highest jurisdiction today?

And the reason why I ask is because if, and to the extent we end up back here, the same exact spot, six months from now or a year from now or at any point in the future, raising it even further to $75,000 because Des Moines and Mercer Island also...

raise theirs to $60,000 above and beyond ours, I'm fine to have that conversation, but I just want to make sure it's not purely because a reactionary.

I want to make sure that, you know, it's been known to show that it is an important consideration.

And so all that is to say, Yeah, again, I'll restate my question.

What kind of impact can we expect to see as a direct result of this $50,000 lateral hiring incentive proposal?

SPEAKER_04

Our goal is to be able to hire more lateral transfers so that we'll attract more.

One of the slides showed that we're getting on average one lateral application a day currently.

We'd like to move that to 1.5 or even two if possible.

As to your comment about the future, there are some California cities that are paying incentives close to $100,000 today.

This whole challenge of hiring police officers is not unique to Seattle.

It's happening in the entire country and especially in major cities.

Some analysis that I've read shows that we're maybe a little worse off than many of our competing major cities, but It clearly is a challenge.

And so far this year, we're still losing more officers than we are hiring.

So we're still in a net deficit.

So we need, as Council President Nelson just said, to use every tool, every incentive, every opportunity we can to increase the number of people who are applying so that they can go through the background and the the field training that Director Fields referred to.

But even out of, you know, 100 applicants today, we will be doing really well if we hire two or three of those people.

So it's a challenge.

And, you know, obviously we're up for the challenge.

We're working hard.

The police recruiting unit is working really hard.

They're bringing on retired detectives to help with the backgrounding process in order to speed it up.

Chief Rahr has eliminated the oral board phase of onboarding.

They've hired outside service bureaus to help with some of the technical verification of employment and credit history.

criminal history, those types of things.

So they're taking lots of steps to improve that onboarding process in terms of time.

So we're doing what we think is necessary.

But I'll be the first to admit, hiring police officers in the United States today is hard, hard work.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_20

Thank you for talking about some of those changes.

I didn't realize that some of those changes were happening, and I'm glad to hear it.

And again, I would like to, offline we can talk about ways of transmitting that information to council also, because I think that falls within some of the things that that reporting requirement of the incentives or the recruitment and retention legislation was asking for, because it's really good to know what else is happening besides just money.

And then I would like to say that before we get too far or before we close, I wanted to mention that this is in my committee, our committee today, instead of public safety, because this is urgent, because it was recognized that this program is ending and our responsibility is to, again, protect the wellbeing and safety of the people of Seattle.

And also because the Public Safety Committee was absolutely chock full of other legislation.

So I do want to mention that earlier, Council Member Kettle, Chair Kettle did ask to be a co-sponsor of this legislation.

I wanted to put that on the record in a public meeting as well.

SPEAKER_14

Yes, go ahead.

Just one quick point of clarification, too, for what I mentioned earlier.

Obviously, I represent D4, which is on the north end, but we've also seen, and I care about the entire city.

That's why I am here, representing the D4 and caring about everyone else in the city as well.

So I wanted to mention, obviously, we've had kids being shot and killed at Garfield and Council Member Hollingsworth's district, at the community center and Council Member Saka's district and that's just by way of example and lots of other folks we are losing across the city and lots of crime happening across the city so I did not want it to stand that we're just talking about the north end.

We are talking about all across the city and those of us that represent particular districts.

We are here to represent our districts, and we're here to represent all 750,000 approximate residents of Seattle.

So I did want that noted for the record.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_20

Thank you.

Okay.

With that, let's end this discussion, and we'll take this up again in our special meeting on September 23rd, correct?

All right.

Thank you very much.

I appreciate the presentation.

And if there's any questions in between, go ahead and ask them so we can get them all on the table before a vote before budget.

All right.

This concludes, well, for me, this concludes the special September 16th meeting of the Governance, Accountability, and Economic Development Committee, unless there is additional business that colleagues would like to bring forward.

All right, seeing none, our next committee meeting is scheduled for 9.30 a.m.

on Monday, September 23rd.

And again, please note that this is a special meeting, and if you can't attend, please have your office reach out to our office and let us know.

With that, it is 10.48, and this meeting is adjourned.

Thanks, everyone.