Seattle City Council Public Assets & Homelessness Committee 5/4/22

Thank you so much.

Council president war as and council member misguided are excused and will the committee clerk please call the role.

Her ball.

Some of them are Alice.

It's number Lewis.

Chair there are 3 numbers present.

Thank you Mister clerk if there's no objection the agenda will be adopted hearing no objection the agenda is adopted.

I'm chair's report.

So today we have 2 agenda items.

We have a update from the King County regional homelessness authority.

An update in presentation.

We also have a rsji report from the Seattle parks and recreation.

And those are our 2 agenda items so let's just dive right into it.

I believe KCRH is here I see Mark Jones.

President and Nigel her big.

So we should be ready to go right after public comment.

So let's move forward to the public comment period.

I will moderate the public comment period, which will last for 20 minutes.

Each speaker will be given one minute to speak.

I will call on each speaker by name and in the order in which they are registered on the council's website.

Once I call speaker's name, staff will unmute the appropriate microphone and then automatic prompt if you have been unmuted will be the speaker's cue that it is their turn to speak.

The speaker must press star six to begin speaking.

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

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

Once you hear the chime, we ask you begin to wrap up for public comment.

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

Mr. Clerk, will you please moderate the public comment session?

Chair, there is one member of the public who has signed up to comment.

Mr. Haynes is not present.

David, if you are wanting to comment, you should call in now.

Given that we have only one registered speaker and that speaker is not present, Mr. Haynes, sorry to have missed you this afternoon.

You may submit written commentary on today's council meeting and my office will distribute it to other council colleagues.

Now that the public comment period, I will formally end the public comment period as we only have one registered speaker who is not present, and we'll move on to items of business.

Mr. Clerk, will you please read item 1 into the record?

Item one, King County Regional Homelessness Authority updates.

Thank you so much.

We are now joined by our partners at the King County Regional Homelessness Authority.

So Mark, why don't I hand it over to you and you can introduce any other presenters that might be with you.

It's good to have you here this afternoon.

Thanks for having me, Mr. Chair.

And thanks to the committee.

I know that you graciously allowed us to step off the previous schedule so we could do something more comprehensive, and I really appreciate it.

I am joined by my colleague, Nigel Herbig, who can assist in answering any questions that I am not able to answer.

But I think I should be able to cover it.

And let me go ahead and share my screen.

Is everyone able to see that?

Perfect.

Okay, so we have quite a bit of material, a lot of which is in the slides, but I'll be doing quite a bit of voiceover, please.

And I can see you all, but just jump in whenever you have any questions, please.

So first up, I just want to talk a little bit, take a step back and talk about our budget and five-year plan development.

How our five-year plan works is it's required by the ILA, has to be informed by the regional action framework that already exists, informed by sub-regional planning, workshops.

We are looking at having a draft in August of this year to finalize in September.

Much of the activity that is underway, including our FY23 budget, our service redesign, all of that stuff flows into or out of the five-year plan.

That's this big circular graphic.

And I wanted to start with this because I think it's important.

Let folks be clear that like much of the planning activity currently underway at the authority is flowing into what we are going to lay out as our five-year trajectory.

And I wanted to create that clarity because I think we get a number of questions around like, what about this thing?

What about this thing?

And for us, right, we see it as we are required by legislation to chart a course about a broad way forward.

We're on a timeline to deliver that and that's where a lot of our planning energy is right now.

And so what I'm going to try to do actually in part today as I answer some of the questions that we received from you all is also talk about how the things that we that that I'm answering are accounted for are structured within the five year planning work.

By way of timeline, I just wanted to, you know, sort of index that against some of the other activities you may have heard of about this year.

So we had our point-in-time count development, we had our point-in-time count engagement and preliminary analysis, we have synthesis, and we actually have submitted the numbers to HUD as of today.

Five-year data or five-year plan data collection also begins simultaneously.

And then again, as I mentioned, we'll have a draft in August.

In August, right, we intend to, while there'll be a lot of community input that'll go into the crafting of the five-year plan, in August, we tend to then walk it around again.

you know, get people's feedback on that, mark it up, and that's why we look to finalize in September.

The five-year plan has to be adopted at both the Implementation Board and Governing Committee level.

So looking at my two Governing Committee members here and just flagging that you will see this multiple times and have a lot of opportunity to provide your feedback in terms of the priorities of the authority.

Um, thinking about the budget specifically in relationship to this.

So, um, as I mentioned, we're looking at that draft in August and formed by community engagement process and, uh, incorporating sub regional planning, um, in conversation with, uh, council member Mosqueda and her, uh, role as budget chair.

One of the other things that we started to talk about, uh, and then confirmed with our, uh, colleagues at the County is that what we're going to do is, uh, also attach a six year budget to the five-year plan.

Some of those numbers, you know, as we move into out years will be more placeholder, but what it will allow us to do is to spend, rather than to spend every year, generating a sort of de novo budget right like what are we seeing what are we doing and sort of sprinting around for the first half of the year.

What we'll be able to do is have a placeholder number that we know is, you know, if we've been making the right investments along the way, then the number for, you know, FY26 should be X number of millions of dollars.

And, right, any adjustments around that should happen around the edges, really because we're noticing, like, oh, hey, you know, we're seeing an uptick.

In young people who are entering the homeless system because of why event.

And so we want to, you know, you know, increase our capacity in that program portfolio right or, you know, we've actually seen a decrease in the number of folks who are experiencing homelessness and vehicles because we've put a significant focus there.

So we don't need as much vehicle-specific outreach, for example, because we think we're beginning to manage that down.

So those are the kinds of adjustments that we'd be looking to make then in those coming years, always in relationship to data and to the HIC, to the point-in-time count, et cetera, but less of what we're experiencing this year, which is, for folks not on the government committee, A really crunched timeline that like, you know, based on our current structure is not likely to change right like this timeline is likely to stay pretty similar in years forward and so by moving to this six year budget in alignment with the five year plan.

We then at least have six years for biennial, by the way.

We then have the ability to ease into the budget planning with much less of a, oh gosh, what's happening?

How can we pull this material together and get the right people to look at it in time attitude or vibe?

So the projected budgets that will come with that plan in September will take us through 2028. I'll just pause there briefly if there are any questions before I move to the next section of this report out.

Your colleagues have any questions on this first segment of the presentation?

Council Member Herbold.

Thank you.

I'm just trying to get a sense.

As it relates to the sub-regional planning groups, are you saying that Seattle will have its own sub-regional plan?

That is correct.

How is that being developed?

Um, we have a sub regional planning team, led by Alexis Mercedes rank, and the sub regional planning specialist is named Sparrow Carlson, and that that team leads our sub regional planning development and Sparrow is a sub regional planning manager, I'm sorry specialist for Seattle.

and happy to, at a subsequent meeting with this committee or, you know, offline briefing, connect you with that sub-regional planning team to talk about the Seattle Metro plan development in particular, if that's helpful.

Thank you.

Yes, and just as a quick note on that too, look forward to continuing to discuss how we can incorporate that into our work plan and definitely interested in collaborating on that.

So thank you for that offer.

Council Member Morales.

Thank you.

Yeah, can you just clarify that when you talking about the Seattle plan that it includes areas outside of the downtown core as well as as well as the city core will will the entire city be part of that plan.

Yeah, so the Seattle Metro sub-region includes the City of Seattle and like immediate adjacent metro areas, right?

And then we've got, so we have seven distinct sub-regions.

So, but the Seattle Metro plan will account for all of the city.

Any follow-up on that Council Member Morales?

Great.

Okay, CEO Jones, I think we can continue the presentation.

Got it.

Next up, I wanted to talk about our Unsheltered Homelessness Engagement, Understanding Unsheltered Homelessness, or UP, is what we retitled our point-in-time count work.

I wanna just briefly note that, so our approach for this was we did conduct a head count of unsheltered individuals.

We conducted a count of folks who are currently in shelters.

And then we also developed a qualitative data collection strategy.

over the course of the early, well, late winter, February, a little bit into March, where we worked with people experiencing homelessness providers and human services staff from around the county.

We worked, well, actually, just briefly, I will say, our colleague, Owen Kafos, who's the Deputy Chief of Community Impact, led a series of workshops with this group of stakeholders to collect input from about 200 people around what should be asked, why should it be asked, what would we want to better understand about what was happening in the lives of our unsheltered neighbors.

And that is what yielded both the study design and also the questions that we asked people.

How we engaged was through a hub-and-spoke model of wave sampling or respondent-driven sampling.

So essentially, interviewees conducted initial interviews in various encampments or other places where folks experiencing unsheltered homelessness were gathering, and they would give the person a gift card for their time and a coupon booklet, right?

That coupon, that coupon book that essentially, right, someone could say like, oh hey, Councilmember Herbold, like, I think you should also participate in this, like, here's one of the coupons that was given to me.

Then from there, you could go to one of the hubs, we had nine hubs set up across the county.

We were able to provide bus tickets to and from each hub.

and coordinate all of the, we had food and water and all the things necessary to make sure that folks were able to participate.

And once the person got there they were able to do an interview.

fill out a demographic sheet for the headcount and receive their gift card.

That person, in turn, will receive their own booklet.

And so that's the respondent-driven sampling method.

So by wave four, we were in conversation with people who weren't really connected with services at all, are not often seen inside the context of our system.

The results of the work.

Um, we are sorry this runs through the 12 design workshops right.

We collected over 650 interviews with folks experiencing unsheltered homelessness in the county, and because of, you know, matching informed consent signatures and making sure that everything is, you know, above board.

We believe we'll be able to use as a, for research purposes, probably about 550, 575 of those interviews.

Everyone was counted though.

And so we then worked with statistical analysts at the UW who helped do the extrapolation off of the statistical model to get to the number that we submitted to HUD.

And all of this was worked out with the hud snaps office, and we received a methods exception in order to do it and and some of the confusion in the fall about like, are we doing the point in time counter not doing the point in time count was some some miss reporting around.

when I said we will not be doing the point in time count in the usual way and will instead focus on a different method, right?

That HUD greenlit, we proceeded, et cetera.

So just for historical context.

As I mentioned, the numbers were filed today.

I don't want to go into too much detail.

I want us to actually prepare a separate briefing on this because I think it deserves quite a bit of attention.

But suffice to say that based on our unsheltered analysis, we do see an increase in the number of folks experiencing homelessness through the point in time count.

I want to be very clear that we will still be indexing our work against administrative data by and large.

So the point in time count gives us a window into specifically who is experiencing unsheltered homelessness.

When we look at who needs our support in this county, The better way to do that is through administrative crosswalk that we partnered with our colleagues at DCHS around to do last year, which generated the 45,000 number that we now use when we commonly refer to the number of folks experiencing homelessness in the county.

That administrative data crosswalk looks at the number of enrollments in HMIS, in behavioral health recovery division data, in health care for the homeless data and deduplicates and then asks, OK, so how many people used those things over the course of the year?

And that's where we get to 45,000.

The point in time count data has always consistently come in lower.

It came in lower despite its increase.

It came in lower this year.

And so we will really want to focus on using that more accurate higher number when we make policy decisions at the agency.

And I see Council Member Herbold's hand, so I'll pause.

Yeah, thank you, CEO Dones.

Council Member Herbold?

Thank you.

I just wanted to recognize that RHA gave individuals, including elected officials, the opportunity to submit specific locations.

as potential locations for interviews with people living unsheltered and really appreciated that opportunity to provide you with that information.

I imagine that you probably got more locations than you were able to visit.

Yes.

And so can you talk about maybe how you decided, like, let's say hypothetically, I sent you five different locations.

I shouldn't expect you to visit all five locations.

How did you decide which ones to visit?

Thank you, Council Member.

We worked with folks, like oftentimes libraries or chambers of commerce or, you know, like folks who had physical sites.

And basically it was a little bit of a rush to accommodate, right?

So it was like, okay, these were the sites that were provided as potential locations.

Let's reach out.

Let's see if they can accommodate us setting up shop there.

and running a project out of their location for at least a week and a half, maybe two weeks, right?

We did, though, retain, and I should have mentioned this, we retained a list of the places that we didn't activate, and we also looked at where we opened hubs and believe that there may have been still undersampling.

And so we are in the process of constructing a phase two, which will focus on where didn't we go where you know we might still learn something, and also where did we perhaps.

frankly, because of historical patterns of undersampling, maybe not hear from as many people, right?

So for a lot of our, you know, locations that are more rural, for example, that have not historically had point in time count enumerators operate in them, you know, we put the word out, we got in touch with folks, but like, you know, Soqualmie Valley, for example, has a single shelter, and no outreach teams.

And so, like putting the word out there is very different than when we put the word out, in West Seattle, right?

So we do believe that there are some places, and even in Seattle Metro, where there may have been some undersampling, and that is where our phase two work will focus.

It will not be focused on developing better count.

It will be focused on hearing what people's experiences are to better identify gaps in the system.

Yeah, I can imagine.

I don't know for sure which locations my staff submitted, but I can imagine of some of the places I'm aware of in West Seattle, in the Greenbelts and such that they are very removed from the types of places that you would use as interview sites.

So appreciate that follow-up work in phase two.

Thank you.

And we'll, as we did in phase one, we will be reconnecting with folks to talk through locations and make sure that folks are A, just both situationally aware, and then B, have the opportunity to help guide the work.

Are there any other questions?

Okay, I think we can continue on with the presentation.

All right.

Shifting into discussing programs and procurement in particular.

So we have awarded three RFPs in non-congregate shelter, Chief Seattle Club, the, sorry, I'm blanking on what the PDA rebranded as.

They're not the Public Defenders Association anymore.

I believe they did a new name.

Public Defenders Association, maybe reading something else, received an award as well.

Jeff, do you?

Purpose, dignity, action.

Thank you, Jeff.

Purpose, dignity, action.

Formerly, the Public Defenders Association received an award, and Catholic Community Services received an award.

So this will open up 50 new tiny homes between Chief Seattle and Catholic Community Services, as well as creates capacity for PDA to continue to operate 84 of the rooms in their Just Cares portfolio.

Do wanna be clear that this doesn't resolve the cliff that that program is on broadly, right?

still work to do there.

The authority has been in active conversation with the city and with Deputy Mayor Washington and others about what can be done there.

My hope is that we will be able to architect a solution and we will of course notify folks as soon as we have been able to do that.

Awards that were affected by the loss of commerce funds were made whole by the repurposing of ESGCV funding.

There's a total here of 134 shelter beds, could serve more people depending on program models and who's allowing couples and et cetera, et cetera.

But that is the status of our non-congregate work.

On our safe parking RFP, Our 2020 point-in-time count identified about 3,000 folks living in vehicles.

Believe that to be an undercount.

We received an initial $1.9 million for site development to create safe parking.

We increased that potential award to 2.4 million using underspend created by a provider unfortunately going out of business.

um and so uh we um We had been, when contract migration began, we began reaching out to that particular provider, got zero response, and eventually through other means found that they had shuttered.

And so move that allocation into this out of recognition that this has historically been an area of significant underspend and that the need is quite high across not just Seattle Metro, but the county as well.

Um, the timeline for this, um, is that award should be made, uh, by the end of the month.

Um, so the application deadline has passed, um, and, uh, deliberation, um, will begin shortly.

And I see Councilmember Herbold's hand.

All right, Councilmember Herbold.

Thank you so much.

Um, understand that the applications, um, period is closed.

Um, and to the extent that you're able to answer this question, I'd love to hear it.

Otherwise, um, maybe taking the answer offline, but I want to just say that I hope that the RFP was written in a way that it also invited applicants to use the funds for storage of the RVs themselves in those instances where a provider is linking somebody who's living in an RV to to alternate housing options.

And that in knowing, in the individual knowing that there's a place to keep their RV, that they will be potentially more likely to accept the alternative housing services.

So it's an alternate model to the management of an RV safe lot with people living there.

And I've been flagging this as an issue because as we know, people who live in RVs generally consider themselves not to be homeless and are very, very reluctant to leave them behind.

But yet, if there are alternatives, they might be more willing to take them if they know that their most valuable asset is going to be stored.

Yes, um, I appreciate that Councilmember, I, um, to my knowledge, the procurement was written with pretty broad flexibility, because again recognizing that there has been.

So we, we We worked specifically with our vehicle residency working group to craft, including a number of providers and folks living in vehicles, to craft the RFP.

My understanding is that it was written with quite a bit of flexibility, recognizing that people, both providers and people with lived expertise, need to be able to design the programs that work, right, including storage.

And, you know, we had, and I have not reviewed these applications.

I'm not on this panel.

But, you know, internally, I can say we had quite a bit of conversation about, you know, creating flexibility for programs to offer free or low cost repairs, to, you know, to store belongings, to help people, you know, if they have multiple vehicles, to help them consolidate and store one, you know, like, So we really, at least on the program team here, had a really in-depth conversation about the breadth of flexibility necessary in order to be maximally responsive to this underserved population.

My hope is that the applications that the team is reviewing reflect that opportunity.

Thank you.

Jeff, you have something to add?

Yeah, I just want to note per Councilmember Herbold's questions, there's numerous places in the RFP that do use inclusive language, so to say, including but not limited to or services such as etc.

And the funds used in the RFP, as Councilmember Herbold would know best because she sponsored the Statement of Legislative Intent, says that at least some portion of the funds must be used on storage options.

So that's 400,000 of the $2.4 million now, so at least some portion to comply with the legislative intent would have that it's not a proviso it was a statement, but it does appear that there's sufficient flexibility.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Thank you, Jeff.

Are there any additional questions for the slide.

I don't see any I think we can continue.

Moving on to our high acuity shelter partnership with King County.

The five year sort of lease, to my knowledge has been approved.

This preserves the existing 270 beds at Salvation Army at what's called the Soto shelter, a non congregate shelter that was already on that lot.

It is going to add enhanced shelter and behavioral health services for up to 150 additional folks, including 40 to 60 beds for folks with acute behavioral health needs.

It will relocate a sobering center that is currently three floors down from my office in the Yesler building and create new safe parking services for some folks living in RVs that will not be I don't believe that'll be the totality of our safe parking investment to be clear, but like one of the things we are interested in talking with whoever the front runners from that RFP process are is like, can we create some co-location here to reduce cost, increase efficiency, help people access other forms of service, right?

And in particular, given the number of, the intensity of, that we can help people get to, we think will be a little helpful.

Seattle has historically funded the Salvation Army 270-bed shelter, and the council added, as you all know, $5 million to the 2022 budget to support folks with behavioral health needs that went over to King County.

Leo, I'm sorry, Director Floor and I and our teams have a series of meetings over the next several weeks to finalize some of the site planning and then much of this will also then roll into procurement shortly as well.

Council Member Morales, do you have a quick question?

Or a long one, for that matter.

Thank you.

So can you tell me what it means that you're relocating the Sobering Center?

Does that mean it's not going to be at the existing SOTO site?

Sorry, the Sobering Center is currently in the Yesler building.

It's in the same building as my office.

It will move to the SOTO site.

OK, I'm sorry.

And then the timing for that?

That's a question for Director Floor.

We don't fund the sobering center.

We have discussed it moving to that site.

Okay.

Thank you.

Just as a follow-up on that too, this may also be a question for Director Floor, but is it anticipated that there would be continuity of service and the relocation of the sobering center and a similar capacity?

In the new location.

That's my understanding.

Um, but that is a question for director floor.

Thank you.

Did you have a follow up?

Not right now.

Thank you.

Okay, I think we can keep going.

Great.

Um, on the south end tiny home village that has been under question.

Um, so we did identify covert relief dollars that we can use to close the gap, and the gap dropped to $500,000 from.

Some other figures.

And, you know, as a reminder, this proposal was ranked fourth in our competitive bidding process, and did not include the information that the village was already built.

And this slide's a little bit out of date.

We have identified a source of funds, have communicated with Ms. Lee with regard to our ability to move forward with one-time funding.

The broader operational future of that village will need to be secured through ongoing operations and services support, which over the course of our budget conversations with King County and the City of Seattle, you know, we would hope to identify.

Thank you.

I just want to jump in at this point and really thank the KCRHA for their creativity and flexibility in being able to work with the city and Lehigh in figuring out a way to get this asset online.

And just want to state my personal commitment to work with the authority to identify that ongoing support or work through some of those potential issues.

So I appreciate that this was able to effectively resolve.

Do we know at this point, or is it a better question for Lehigh when the village could be operational now that we've resolved the funding questions?

I don't know, Council Member.

I'm sorry, Chair.

I've seen a couple different dates, and so that might be a subsequent conversation.

My understanding is that we're talking about weeks, though, if not days.

Great.

That's good to know.

I don't see any other questions, so I think we can keep going.

Great.

This slide is also a little bit out of date as of yesterday.

I apologize.

The CAM Second Chance, in our system, what's called a project service agreement has been executed.

So that's done and is funded.

And to translate, does that basically mean this is in the provider's hands to get this accomplished at this point?

No, at this point, the provider has completed all of the necessary budget information.

We have executed the agreement with them.

And so the only thing that's next is for them to invoice.

Great.

OK, good.

I'll also just add, I mean, since we're in the project space, we are at about 70, This has probably changed since I last ran the numbers, which was Monday.

On Monday, we were 75% contracts implemented.

It's probably gone up since then.

I will note a couple of things.

One, the remaining contracts that are not implemented sit with a cluster of agencies who have pretty complex portfolios.

And so it's there, there's quite a bit of work happening but it's it's back and forth between the RHA and those agencies about like the various kinds of documentation that we need in order to have a clean audit etc etc.

So we expect having things wrapped up within the next week and a half, I would say, is my goal.

And I think that, you know, for what it's worth in this public setting, I just want to give a shout out to my team and to the providers teams.

When we began contract implementation in December, and sent out notices there was no way that we could know that we were going to get hit with the Omicron surge, which wiped out the entire systems capacity to do anything other than respond to that for about a month and a half.

And so we've all been working as fast as we can and as diligently as we can to get things implemented from behind that significant delay.

And just a lot of appreciation for everyone on all sides necessary to get this huge body of work done so that folks are able to invoice and the system can continue to support those who need its services.

Up next, System Advocates Peer Navigation.

So a little bit of a rebrand here.

Peer Navigation is still the program model we're using.

The folks who run that program have decided that they want to be known as System Advocates, which I personally think is a really cool title.

And we have four co-directors, each coming in with very distinct expertise.

The team has been conducting, has since begun to develop a logic model for their program, a more complete program model, policy procedure, etc.

We have a director who is beginning, I believe, this week, a director who's going to handle the operations specifically of this program.

And they've been furiously interviewing for lead system advocates who will help manage teams, and then system advocates who, you know, will be parts of those teams.

I believe that offer letters should go out sometime in the next week and a half.

And so my hope that the co-directors have assured me is possible is that as we initially discussed around this program, we should have boots on the ground helping to connect people with things no later than the middle of June.

Council Member Herbold.

Thanks.

I just want to thank you, CEO Dones, for getting back to me in response to questions I had.

Last time you visited, specific to the Partnership for Zero plan, I'm flagging this publicly because, believe it or not, members of the public watch these meetings.

And they sometimes will, when they hear questions, They share, they'll follow up, and they'll say, hey, what was the answer to that question you asked?

And that is the case for that particular set of questions that I asked in March.

And just want to thank you for getting those answers.

I have not had a thorough chance to review them, but thank you.

Thank you Council Member Herbolden.

Apologies, I will take public ownership.

There was a delay there.

I'm happy to support and if there are any follow-up questions, please let us know.

Okay, I think we can continue along.

Great.

So briefly outreach.

This has been a broader outreach.

This has been a subject of conversation in the community and wanted to take a moment to chat in depth about it.

Our team has been working across the whole system, right, to analyze how it's currently set up, like what's working, what's not working.

I wanted to daylight some of our thinking around the outreach portion of the portfolio.

and offer some thoughts about where we might go.

So currently, we hold 17 outreach contracts.

One serves folks, young people.

One serves folks with high acuity.

Three providers are sort of outreach specific.

Meaning they just do outreach to whoever is out there.

They can be deployed around the city.

There are three who are culturally specific for historically marginalized folks.

And then there are 14 outreach providers that are centered around housing outcomes.

And so what that means is that, you know, The current structure is that many outreach providers are branches of service that bridge to other project types.

They are not just a front door into the general support that the system can offer.

So, for example, a housing provider, right, might have an outreach person who can help with, you know, connecting them with a narrower subset of services like transitional housing or rapid rehousing or diversion, but maybe not all of the above.

So what we see then, right, is that like what we've got is this very different set of potential outcomes structured, frankly, at the contract level in terms of like what people are orienting towards connecting people to.

And it's one of the reasons why when we talk about, you know, geographic specific outreach, etc.

One of the things that, you know, I think is is underlying that is a recognition that our future system has to directly connect people with a myriad of support types.

And that we can't have the sort of, well, I can only connect you to other programs housed within the agency I am affiliated with, essentially.

And so what we're really going to be leaning into And we're frankly going to do this around most of the system as we gear up to do, again, our five-year planning, and then also submit our necessary report to you all around what's going to be in the system rebid RFP.

We're going to do a number of requests for information, or RFIs, asking providers and other nonprofits and housers to provide input on various sections of the system.

So we'll run an RFI on outreach, we'll run an RFI on shelter, we'll run an RFI on transitional and emergency housing, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

And then use a lot of that input in addition to our other community stakeholder engagement to help structure what we think service redesign needs to be.

And again, also to best furnish you all with the report that you requested.

Um, but I wanted to walk through this because, you know, this has been, uh, quite a bit of a topic lately as we, you know, talk about Woodland or downtown core or other areas.

Um, and I just wanted to surface, um, uh, some of what we see and where we think we need to go.

Thanks.

On the outreach redesign, I know you've heard me say this before, but the council has dedicated funding for specific geographic areas, three FTEs to cover West Seattle, Delridge, South Park, and the Valley, two FTEs to cover Lake City, and two FTEs to cover Northwest Seattle.

I just want to flag again that I hope that as part of the redesign that you also keep in mind the interest to maintain some geographic specificity in outreach in a way that's aligned with the council's earlier budget decisions.

I also want to flag something that was in some response from HSD after our last committee meeting.

as it relates to the work of our contracted outreach providers, and that some providers have elected to not provide shelter offers and connections on the day of encampment removals, and that apparently HSD has asked you to modify those agencies' contracts in a way that uses the city's funding to support individuals throughout the entire process rather than just a portion of it and just interested to know how you're responding to that request from HSD.

Thank you.

Thank you Councilmember.

So our We have not entered into any conversation at this point around modifying contracts with providers.

What we are discussing at this point is working to support humane responses to folks that are prioritized encampments.

Our goal in conversation with Deputy Mayor Washington and others is to have a clear and, you know, broadly unified approach to prioritization.

So like which encampments and why, right?

And being very clear about like, you know, if the concern is violence, that should, for good reason, jump us up in terms of, you know, where you are in the response queue, for example, right?

And, right, coordinating across the development and holding of that prioritization list, and then that will allow us to deploy outreach teams to those sites that are prioritized well in advance and with clarity around, you know, shared clarity, right, around Why we're there, and you know what the driving factors are.

That's what we are working on.

I believe that aligns with, um, you know, based on my, my current conversation anyway I believe that aligns with, you know, Deputy Mayor Washington's understanding although you know she's not here.

to offer correction, although certainly I believe that she wouldn't hop on if she saw this and disagreed.

To that end, what I will also say is part of this, again, links back into that issue of when we begin to look at the structure of the outreach programming, the number of programs that were deployable actually was much smaller than the overall portfolio would lead you to believe.

And that's the thing that I think we want to figure out how to correct.

I also just want to affirm our agency has a real commitment through our subregional planning work, through our downtown core work, like geographic work and knowing the neighborhood, knowing the people is really important in this line of work.

And so we wholeheartedly affirm and intend to carry forward and amplify the council budget action around specific neighborhood-based outreach.

Thank you.

I want to jump in and ask a question about the slide and how the future outreach system is designed to or envisioned as being designed.

Where where would the system navigation component or the system advocate component be put into this?

I mean, I have a conception of it, given that the the system advocates will be working with someone all the way through the process from outreach clear to being housed.

But I just wonder if you could clarify, like if there was a corresponding graphic edition that showed the system advocate role, like how would that kind of interact with this chart?

Yeah, that's a great question, Chair.

You know, from my perspective, the system advocates are not They are, they are kind of outreach and that they have a toe in the outreach world right in terms of where they might engage with folks but to your point because their work is longitudinal.

And it's, it's, it's more of a broader program right so like if I was going to.

reconfigure this specific image that you're looking at to talk about, you know, system advocates and specifically, right, I think what I'd be looking at is, you know, I would sort of Reconfigure it so it's like the little outreach the little red person has a specific set of people who are like their people right like 10 to 15, and then the stuff that they're connecting them to is actually broader than shelter housing and basic benefits right because the system advocates, their role is to help people navigate.

All of the things as opposed to these specific connections right that outreach does to shelter or to housing and and really right like what what you know from a from a model principle.

What outreach as a function in many systems does is serve as the front door right that helps people connect to an immediate, you know, let's get inside what the system advocates role does is that may be part of it, but it might also be about.

you know, helping folks resolve criminal legal issues, it might, you know, they can access, you know, different diversion resources, they can help people connect with different kinds of food supports, and then follow them along the way into housing placement and help stabilize them in housing placement.

Currently, we only have, Like one and a half ish providers who sit in that more longitudinal space reach being the one that folks are most familiar with, you know, the, the PDA, to some degree employs a similar model with just care.

And so I think that what we recognize is that we need to have much more of that in the system.

And we also need to have more straightforwardly dedicated outreach for when we are trying to take complex encampments and help get people inside to bed placements rapidly.

Thank you for clarifying that.

No worries.

I think we can continue here.

I was gonna say, that actually concludes my presentation.

There we are.

Jeff, do you have any remarks now that the presentation is through?

And I just want to state for the record, too, it looks like we've been joined by Council Member Muscata.

For the record, Jeff Sims, Council of Central Staff.

No, I don't actually have additional comments.

Mark, I was hoping, I think that with your staff, and I've clarified this before, Could you go into more detail for council members we had a version issue with what their council members would have received in advance what they had today.

So what they saw talked about a system redesign and a rebid.

And what you talked about today is actually not especially with the outreach component I think it would be helpful, since this is a change from what the committee's heard previously to understand the timeline and how this will go.

Thanks, Jeff.

Yes, I apologize.

In your packets, there was an out-of-date timeline that was mistakenly inserted and corrected with the very helpful collaboration of Jeff and Jacob that referenced an earlier By earlier I mean like November ish of last year, take on when we might do broad system reprocurement.

And again between Omicron and, you know, contract delays and you know organizational stand up and all that kind of stuff, and in conversation with.

both internally and then also with our provider community, we have decided to shift the way we will do the system rebid to a phased re-procurement where we will re-procure the system sort of stepwise based off of the five-year plan.

and, you know, rooted in a lot of that community engagement work and discussion that will come in through the RFIs.

And so our, frankly, like this was just a If we had tried to drive as aggressively as we'd initially conceptualized last year, I think it would have been sort of rushed to the point of breaking on some aspects.

And I think because the five-year plan is slated for September, there was also just some sort of like, you know, some horses and some carts and needing to put the horses in front of the carts, right?

And like, and really wanting to make sure that the five-year planning work was complete and was affirmed and was, you know, pulling behind it, then the re-procurement.

Jeff, does that answer provide all the clarification you were looking for?

For sure, yeah, I think that I need to defer to your colleagues on that answer, but I just want to make sure that that was brought up.

We had covered that when we're trying to get the materials prepared.

Great.

Council colleagues, are there any additional questions for CEO Downs?

Council Member Mosqueda.

Apologies for being a little bit late.

I was wondering if I could do

You're muted, Council Member Mosqueda.

Thanks again to Mark for the materials and the information that you provided.

Mark, I'm wondering, as part of your presentation, if you already covered the safe lots and RV storage.

Initially, when we had talked about safe lots, we had talked about these as being RV safe lots.

And in talking to some folks over the last few weeks, I think that the concept of having RVs be the priority here is not necessarily how the RFPs are playing out.

Could you give us a quick update on that?

And apologies, again, if you've already covered that, but really hoping to hear more about the concept of getting more of those RVs in place, especially if the 72-hour rule is to be changed in the future.

I did cover this briefly.

I will say that like, um, you know, so we constructed the RFP in collaboration with our vehicle residency working group, which includes a number of the providers working on vehicle homelessness.

As well as people experiencing homelessness with vehicles, and it's constructed essentially with, with the wisdom of that group and with maximum flexibility.

So, what we what we put out was, you know, within the guardrails of the community's best thinking.

Tell us what you got and offered flexibility for folks to think about, you know, RV storage to think about, you know, providing repairs for folks for you know all kinds of different program models and approaches.

The RFP is closed, that scoring committee has begun to review those proposals.

I'm not on it, and I can't speak and wouldn't speak anyway to an active procurement process, so I'm not sure what's in them.

But I will say that, like, you know, we, the RFP itself does not limit just to RVs or just to cars.

It really was open for folks to put forward their best thoughts on programming.

Do you have a follow-up, Councilmember Muscata?

Okay.

Councilmember Hussle?

I refer to my colleague, yeah.

I'm sorry, I appreciate you asking Councilmember Muscata if she had a follow-up.

She might have been thinking about it because I just sent her an email that I think might contradict what I just heard from you, CEO Dons.

I have a excerpt from the RFP that specifically says passenger vehicles or cars are not part of this RFP.

Let me.

I, again, I don't have, I don't have.

And I sort of went down this rabbit hole because I had heard that there were some concerns about it being broader than RVs.

And there was some language in some places like on the front page that you both said RVs, it's called an RV, say flood RFP.

And then you mentioned vehicles, it doesn't have the word recreational.

And then Christina in my office, probably assisted by Jeff, actually provided the language from the RFP itself that specifically says that it is not for passenger vehicles or cars.

OK.

I mean, let me follow up.

I have no reason to doubt that that's what it says.

My, my thought would be that that was then what the vehicle residency working group said like this is where they want to put their focus.

So, and because I wasn't directly part of the funding, our funding intent was, yeah, because we've gone through this before we allocated.

funds for our RV safe lot many many years ago and the mayor's office used it for um uh passenger vehicle um camping so because we we've we've we've gone through this road before we we did everything we could to make it very specific what our intent was

So then it may be, and apologies, this is probably just me not tracking this as closely as I need to amongst a thousand other things.

So then if that is the case, then my suspicion is, and this is maybe what Jeff is coming to confirm, my suspicion is that my staff then likely followed your intent on driving towards that specificity.

But it may be that I need to check in with my team on this to provide a fuller answer.

Do you have something to add there?

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair.

So I'll just note that the language in the RFP regularly uses the phrasing and I'll quote.

recreational vehicles, RVs, or other oversized vehicles that have been converted into living quarters like buses, vans, or trucks.

And then it goes on with the sentence that Council Member Herbold quoted, passenger vehicles or cars are not part of this RFP.

I think that the confusion likely lies in the oversized vehicles that could be converted.

There is a degree that we're not just talking about RVs.

There's some fungibility in what could be incorporated, but it is generally something larger.

And so that language is repeatedly used, and I felt like it was rather specific.

This seems like a good time to note that earlier when I indicated that storage is included, storage is never explicitly highlighted in the RFP.

It is always broad, open-ended language of the type of services that could be proposed.

So I assume that's an area where the evaluation of proposals would come in to make sure that that was done.

But those are the two things that the RFP reads.

Councilmember Silva?

Councilmember Muscato?

the sighting, the locations, or probably if you're still looking for locations and encouraging people to apply so that we're talking about a large enough space for these vehicles, whether they're an RV or a bus or a small, I don't know, delivery vehicle that's been converted to an RV.

Many, many folks, I think, throughout the city have seen these types of vehicles And, you know, if I ever would find myself houseless I believe that would be where I would prefer to live as well.

And knowing that there's a roof and a door and a place to stay secure, just to securely be so I completely understand why some folks may want to stay in that vehicle but to be a safer place to be with access to services and hygiene is ideal.

And then as Councilmember Herbold noted and led on in the budgeting, when there's housing available, making sure that that storage is there so that people can get in is really the shared goal.

So thank you for following up on that, especially for the folks who are living in vehicles like that.

Mr. Chair, I do have two more questions, if I might.

Oh.

Please, go ahead.

Sorry to cut you off.

about sort of this, not necessarily the vision that you outlined, I appreciate the update on where you're at in terms of hiring and the notification that will go out to the person who can help us make sure that there's coordinated systems for navigating.

Also appreciate that there's been some sort of analysis on whether or not the program was you know, ready to go out the door as soon as folks wanted it to.

And this question about a cart for the horse, especially if you think about your five slash six year plan.

I wanted to ask if there was any update that we might be able to provide to folks who are calling and writing in.

I think, as you noted, you know, many of the hot spots are are maybe fewer than people would think, but some of those hot spots and the concerns that are coming up from residents who are calling either us or other folks within the city is not knowing who to call.

And we talked a little bit about this last time with Deputy Mayor Washington, like that one point of contact.

And at the time, I think Deputy Mayor Washington was like, I'm going to help out within the city.

But do you have any updates for us on where we should be directing folks if they see a concern, if they see someone having a mental health crisis or might be in need of an outreach worker of any type because we all don't want to be trying to make assessments of what a person needs in the moment and would love to be able to call a number and ideally that number is not 911 because we're reaching out to folks before that moment of crisis.

Yeah, so for crisis stuff.

That's still I think a conversation, just to be candid right like if you see someone who's decompensating and who to call the best thing to do at this point if you're in Seattle Metro is still I believe, based on, frankly, what I have done.

is to call 911 and specifically request HealthONE, right?

Because you are not asking for a law enforcement response, you're asking for a health response.

So you describe what you are seeing, and you request HealthONE.

On the broader question of what to see.

I believe and I apologize for couching this this way because I really do not want to speak on behalf of Deputy Mayor Washington, but I believe the city has a public facing way to say like, hey, like it is an encampment.

I'm seeing this troubling thing, that information is shared.

So we do receive updates out of that as well.

And then I work with our team to, you know, assess what we can deploy in order to help coordinate a response across all of the folks who have resources to bear.

I think and, you know, I think that there is still a robust conversation to have about what is the crisis response when And just to be candid, this is where the conversation is.

We have some role there, but not everyone who experiences acute psychiatric distress is experiencing homelessness, right?

And so I think that is a space where we really want to support.

And we also want to be, be cognizant of like what our role in lane is and how to choreograph that with director floor with interim director Kim is something that I think we are.

you know, really open to the conversation on.

We know that we need to be providing, you know, as we've all discussed at length now, the high acuity shelter beds, the things that are, again, for people experiencing homelessness who also have these specific needs.

I think I, you know, there's just a question about how to set up a broader apparatus that could respond to any acute psychiatric need that we saw anywhere in the Seattle metro area.

Is that helpful, council member?

I'm not trying to dodge the question.

I'm just trying to elevate where we are stuck from a roles perspective and where we think there's collaboration that needs to happen.

Oh, there you are.

I can take my earbud out too.

I can't hear me.

Can you hear me now?

Perhaps Council Member Mosqueda, turning the visual off might assist.

Oh, I see.

Okay.

I mean, I don't know.

Sure.

Okay.

Let me give that a shot.

Can you hear me now?

Yes.

Yeah.

Okay, great.

And I will switch devices as well.

I think it's helpful.

Thank you for the answer.

I think internal to the city when we get in a request or people see a concerning thing happening, perhaps in an encampment, specifically or an encampment, you know, or an individual just outside the elements and folks writing us wanting to get them assistance.

It sounds like the best solution at this point, internal to the city, is to fill out that request form that has been sent to us.

And I know we've been putting that in our Hot Topic responses and sharing that out.

Sometimes that's not a very satisfactory response to the folks who are writing us or calling us.

And so I just wanted to double check what the timeline is for when a request gets in.

When a request gets in, and how fast that gets to you, right?

So if I see someone who, for example, looks like they may need not just housing support, but might need a whole host of other services, if I write in how fast might that get to you all?

That's a good question.

You know, we share information routinely with what Deputy Mayor Washington, the Unified Care Team, the setup that Deputy Mayor Washington runs, my staff attend that meeting.

So if things come in through a city-based portal and then get indexed in that meeting, my staff become aware of it at the same time as the rest of the city staff do.

If, you know, there is some other triaging that happens, you know, it would then come to us later in the same way that it would come to other city staff later right so we are really trying to to link arms and and walk on this one so that we are all getting the same information at the same time.

Um I am I am just like I just to be candid I do not want to speak on behalf of uh CSB and like how they move that data because that is not a thing that that I am privy to or part of.

We become aware of it in that meeting now.

So, a follow-up on that.

Well, do you have a follow-up council member?

I'm hoping that we might be able to get a follow-up from the city as well, because if folks are writing and saying, hey, there's someone at this intersection, if that doesn't get to you all in a timely way, or a group of folks, if that doesn't get to you in a timely way, then are we missing an opportunity for critical outreach?

We'll follow up internal as well, but thanks for your answer.

Yeah, I had a related response to what Council Member Mosqueda just said, that is the best conduit for information, the unified care team in the city, is that who we should be notifying?

And then that in turn, triggers some kind of response from the authority.

For right now, I think that that is the fastest way, because it's where we're all meeting to triage and move information and resources.

And to be clear, those meetings are twice a week.

So it's not like a, you know, Oh, we meet quarterly on it, right?

Like it is a significant amount of time and a significant amount of folks who are coming together multiple times a week and then working in, you know, essentially subgroups to then drive action out of those meetings.

So that's where I would direct people right now.

You know, the authority, as part of our broader county wide stuff is going to set up some form of give us your information, whether it is a portal or a hotline.

I'm actually, you know, I'm not clear yet what is the best way or if it's both.

Obviously, hotlines need to be staffed and like that is a an operations consideration for us right now.

But You know, I think that we'll look to sort of analyze, you know, how are people currently communicating?

Shockingly, I receive a lot of communication.

And much of it, you know, comes directly from constituents, but then we also receive a lot of communication.

coming from a whole bunch of different city and county departments in all 39 cities and you know from the county.

And so I think what we need to do at the authority as we begin to build out the future system direction is look at how we can as much as possible see where that communication is coming from and then figure out how to port it all into either one place either in an easy way that like government back end can move the whatever the request is over or if we are directing people to something that is an authority front door where again, you can just come and ask us directly.

Thanks for that breakdown mark.

One thing I might flag at this point too is I really do think at this point in the year, and given that the unified care team is becoming a bigger part of the city's work in this, I just want to flag for Jacob, my committee clerk, and Jeff Sims, it'd probably be good to get the unified care team to come in as the subject of a committee session to learn a little bit more about that work and where we are with that and how it integrates into the KCRHA.

Obviously, open invitation to KCRHA to participate.

in that hearing, if that makes sense.

I imagine it would, so we could just get everyone in one place.

I have a related question, I think, I suspect it'll involve coordination with the Unified Care Team.

But I wanted to ask, because increasingly, the Human Services Department, and then I see Councilor Hurdwell's question too, maybe it's a similar question, let's see.

I know that, One of the concerns the Human Services Department is relaying is that folks are telling people in encampments to go and congregate in spaces, like mutual aid volunteers and others, are telling people to go to camp in places that are more likely to have outreach and services offered.

So for example, Woodland Park, which is in the news a lot and area of focus for the city.

Downtown Seattle is the designated, you know, Partnership for Zero area, Chinatown International District, with, you know, Just Care being very active there.

So what are some of the strategies we're working on to prevent that kind of a concentration of people seeking assistance.

I mean, it's a very hard thing to plan around and one we've talked about in committee, but what's sort of the current status of that?

I would say that it is, I don't want to overstate chair, like it is discussed.

I wouldn't say there's planning that's been done.

Right.

And I think some of this, will be planned around in our in our actual five-year plan work right around like you know what is what does it mean to invest in the appropriate resourcing of neighborhoods and communities etc so that like people are able to access things where they're at, as opposed to having to migrate, you know, from South County to Seattle or from, you know, Woodland Park to downtown, in order to get access to something.

And that just, I mean, that has to be part of how we talk about bringing the system to scale.

And some of that Council Member Herbold's earlier point is about a real focus on neighborhood by neighborhood tactics and, you know, both at the outreach level and at the bed level, right?

Like, we do need to think about how we get creative in terms of the creation of new assets for folks.

And I don't want to, I don't want to speak too out of hand, but if approved, some of the proposals in the FY23 budget that the KCRHA is putting forward are about more spaces for people to be.

That's the underlying issue here and we need to drive that change.

Thank you for clarifying that.

I totally was not expecting the perfect answer that this is all figured out.

It is very complicated.

So definitely going to be patient with figuring out how we can make a more comprehensive system.

So I appreciate the honesty of that answer, and we'll continue to be partners on that.

Council Member Herbold?

Thank you.

Just following up, Chair Lewis, to your, I think, very timely suggestion of having the Unified Care Team present at a future meeting.

I think many of us, since the creation of the HOPE team, have been struggling and asking over and over and over in these meetings how the city is prioritizing locations that they feel should be priorities for removals.

And we're just not getting information about that, and as recently as the document that you sent, Chair Lewis, prior to this meeting, answering questions from the March meeting, HSD, in response to our question about how locations are prioritized simply says The unified care team determines what encampments are prioritized and the timelines for that, but they don't say how that work is done like what are the criteria that that make an encampment rise to top the list of locations.

that should be, that they are considering for removal.

We don't know who serves on the unified care team.

We don't know how specific sites come to their attention.

We don't know what criteria they use to assess prioritization.

And we don't know how they actually come to the decisions on prioritizing among, you know, A couple hundred sites in the city that I'm sure there are complaint complaints in the system for so, you know, again, very frustrated.

We've been trying to get this information for many months right now.

I appreciate that there is a unified care team in place.

I appreciate all the players are at the table having those discussions.

I think that's incredibly important and is real progress.

I don't wanna gloss over that because that is progress and I do appreciate that.

But again, I think just having a greater understanding of how they do that work is what we've been waiting for here.

Thank you.

Are there any other questions for CEO Jones I, I think we've had a pretty good conversation for the last hour and a half here, but I don't want to cut it short, if someone's just burning to ask one more thing doesn't look like it like that's the case.

CO Dones, thank you so much for coming by.

Definitely want to acknowledge and thank Mayor Herbig for being there in the background.

Didn't have to tap in at any point, but always good to have him present.

Definitely some stuff we'll follow up on.

Definitely looking forward to having a conversation for some of the city side that we have in the space as well through the unified care team and human services department at the next meeting.

And with that, I think we're good to move on to the next agenda item.

So, Mr. Clerk, would you please read agenda item two into the record?

Item 2, Parks and Recreation 2021 Race and Social Justice Initiative Report.

Thank you.

We are joined now by Superintendent Christopher Williams from Seattle Parks and Recreation.

Good afternoon, sir.

How are you?

Good, thank you.

So I will hand it over to you, Superintendent Williams, to introduce yourself and any fellow panelists that you have, and we look forward to jumping into the presentation.

Great.

So I'm Christopher Williams, acting superintendent Seattle parks and I will, after I go through a few talking points, turn it over to my team members to introduce themselves.

Just to give you kind of big picture perspective you all know the history of the race and social justice initiative really well.

in our city.

But back in 2003, under the Nichols administration, Seattle Parks was one of the first city departments to pilot a race and social justice initiative.

We were one of the first city departments to organize an internal race and social justice change team.

And during this work, we developed one of the first work plans.

And this was 20 years ago almost.

During those early years, we spent a lot of time just getting our bearings.

relative to this work.

Over time, we have deepened our commitment to race and social justice values.

Public parks are all about equity, access, and inclusion.

We have a Parks for All, Dispree Decor in the Seattle Park and Recreation Department, which means that every employee believes park programs and services should be accessible to everyone.

principles of equity, access, and inclusion show up in our everyday work, from how we provide child care scholarships to families that need them most, to how we make decisions on large capital investments.

We use an equity heat map process to identify areas that have the most need for equitable investment.

The spirit of race and social justice is alive and well.

It's embedded in the culture of Seattle Parks and Recreation.

It is the essence of the work we do every day.

So at this point, I'd like to turn it over to Bea Hill to introduce herself and then Belinda, Angela, and Tricia.

Thanks, Christopher.

I'm Bea Hill, Equity and Engagement.

a strategic advisor in the superintendent's office.

My pronouns are they, them, theirs, and I identify as Black.

I'll go next.

My name is Angela Smith.

I'm a race and social justice change team co-lead with Seattle Parks.

And my pronouns are she, hers.

And although next Tricia Diaz, and I work work in parks and environment as the equity hub coordinator, and my pronouns are she her hers.

Great, thank you team.

So we also have we also have Donna.

I'm sorry.

Oh, hello.

I'm Donna Brown, and I'm with facilities management and asset management.

Thank you.

Hi, and I'm Belinda Chin.

I'm one of the co-leads of the SPR RSJ Change Team.

Glad to be here.

I go by she, her, hers pronouns, and I identify as Chinese.

Back to you, Bea.

All right, Christopher.

Okay, thank you.

Sorry, team.

Got ahead of myself there.

So some of the most positive experiences people have with our local city government is through the far-reaching services and programs provided by Seattle Parks and Recreation.

Seattle Parks provides welcoming, safe opportunities to play, learn, contemplate, and build community.

And this promotes responsible stewardship of the land.

The values that guide our work include opportunity, access, sustainability, and equity.

We offer a broad range of facilities and programs across our system.

We like to say we serve people in this community from the age of 8 to 80. Shown here is a visual snapshot of some of the spaces and services we use to bring communities together.

We get people active, we connect people to nature.

As you can see, this spans widely from the recreation programs for all ages to job readiness programs to environmental education programs, to physical infrastructure play areas like sports courts, aquatic facilities, community centers, and much, much more.

We are deeply focused on what set of actions produce the desired equity-centered outcomes for employees as well as the public.

So with that, I'll turn it over to Bea Hill.

Thanks again.

So Christopher gave an overview of the Grace and Social Justice Initiative.

And we also thought it was important to center in on pathway to equity, SPR's pathway to equity.

In 2019, SPR adopted the Pathway to Equity Framework.

And this framework is one guiding approach to lend to supporting SPR's commitment to the advancement of RSJI.

You could think of this framework that is a part of our larger strategic direction, and it provides a strategic and organized way to approach the work, as well as it identifies foundational elements to support our anti-racist and equity-centered infrastructure.

As you see on the screen, the pathway to equity principles are organizing and advocacy, building relationships and infrastructure, creating accessible tools and resources, training and capacity building, applied learning and accountability, and embedded practice so that we continuously move to embody and embed anti-racism and equity in our daily practices.

So what you see next on the screen is our 2021 impact report.

And if we think of outcomes, it would be expanding access to equity-seeking and vulnerable communities.

So we just want to take some time by the data, by the numbers to highlight these services and programs and that impact.

With Wrecking the Street, 7,620 hours of Wrecking the Street programs were provided to community via traveling community centers with meals for children, 11,730 meals for children were provided in our summer outdoor programs.

With our hygiene and shower program, 12,870 users at these programs throughout five community centers.

With specialized programs in lifelong recreation, 939 enrollees in specialized programs, over 50 programs, and also there were 2,800 participants and lifelong recreation programming hours.

With Seattle Conservation Corps, 32 formerly homeless adults secured employment after completion of the core program.

When we're talking about continuing to expand access, 10 of our athletic fields were provided for free drop-in play with no schedule activities and hours for those 10 fields.

It was truly provided for drop-in play for community.

And then with scholarship and access, 2020 people received a total of $2.39 million in scholarships to access recreational aquatics and wellness programs.

And now I'll hand it off to Belinda.

Thanks be.

I'm pleased to be here to highlight, two of our accomplishments in program equity.

We piloted our new consolidated associated Recreation Council budget process.

Last year.

Recreation facilities hosted public fitness programs with funding that focused on a collective budgeting at a systems wide level rather than a solo site level so that programs in neighborhoods with the highest equity and priority populations index score, otherwise known for short EPPI score, had a budget that was partially subsidized by the sites in neighborhoods with a lower EPPI score.

And those with a lower EPPI score were expected to bring in additional revenue to support other sites.

A final report is forthcoming with an evaluation of the overall impacts of this new budget model.

A challenge of this new model was transitioning from staff used to holding on to their site revenues to an understanding how this redistribution of resources supports equitable programs, or excuse me, supports equitable access to programs to more people.

Next slide, please.

So, Bee referenced Rec in the Streets just a moment ago.

It's a mobile recreation program that provides access to outdoor activities and experiences to communities furthest from racial, educational, economic, health, and social equities.

The pilot of 2018 to extend recreational opportunities to neighborhoods in equity zones blossomed to being a source of relief and a balm for health and wellness during the height of the pandemic.

The impact is documented by the ample amounts of feedback from community members of what the outdoor activities meant to them.

And I'm going to reference a message from a mom named Jessica And her note reads, Rocky hasn't missed a day of Wrecking the Streets.

That says it all about how we feel about Wrecking the Streets.

As a mother of a special needs child, the teams we have gone to have been very accommodating, kind, sweet, and understanding.

A challenge for this program has been the instability of staffing, funding, and mobility.

What would be of benefit is long-term investment to support and sustain the compassionate skilled recreation staff of Reckon the Streets.

a fleet of electric vans, and their objective to serve as many people as they are able over the longest period of time, and in particular, neighborhoods in equity zones.

Thank you.

Next slide, please.

And I'm passing it on to my colleague, Tricia Diaz.

Thanks, Melinda.

So I will present two of our impactful service equity projects.

And the first was with the parks trails.

And one of the obstacles of the project was the lack of current data of the trail system and their condition.

So the first step was to map all the trails with the ArcGIS mapping system.

And then that enabled us to add data from the racial and social equity composite index, which as many of you know, it contains three layers of maps.

And then to identify the trails and the trail heads in underserved communities.

So all of the mapping and the data helped us do that and identify areas that needed service in those communities.

So we considered those locations and how they connect schools, bus lines, amenities, and other high use needs.

So then we dedicated resources to put towards clearing improvement, special safety pruning, and best management practices to promote a thriving ecosystem in the trails system.

So the outcome provided improved safety and use of the trails and access to the trailheads in these vulnerable communities.

So in addition to the lack of data, there were other challenges.

Staff shortages exist, and we have a very small crew compared to the size of the trail system.

So we relied on program volunteers and other park crews for assistance to meet the 2021 goals of clearing five trailheads and 1,440 linear feet of trails.

And another challenge was the numerous citizen requests received from the higher income neighborhoods where there's fewer requests placed by the areas of higher need.

And so we have a demand-based work order system And so we had to override the request system and manually identify these areas of greatest need.

So next slide, please.

So a second service equity project is our tree planting program.

And the current two for one tree planting budget from the REIT does not provide enough money to fill the existing needs or the goal to reach a net zero tree loss.

So the 200-year Olmstead commemoration came up and the Friends of Olmstead Park volunteers saw an opportunity to solicit additional funding to add trees.

So the project started and the parks hired the Berger Partnership to identify areas of tree loss in the city, in parks, in underserved communities.

And so the contractor used the current tree data and layered information from four additional maps, the heat index map and the racial and social justice index maps that we mentioned.

And then they identified locations in underserved communities with a high heat index due to the lack of sufficient tree canopy.

So along with the primary goal to plant additional trees, there are targets and benefits which also address the challenges.

So one being improved heat index in underserved communities.

And this is going to be done through soliciting corporate sponsorships to help fund the additional trees and expand the tree canopy in those areas.

And then two is encouraging community partnerships through a new tree watering program that will engage the public and it will also alleviate the high cost of watering the new trees.

And then finally is creating apprenticeship positions, which are parks job pathways, but they're targeted and open to citizens in the vulnerable communities.

So next slide, please.

And I will pass it to Donna and Bea.

Thanks, Tricia.

So in highlighting some systems equity work that was also completed, equity analysis considerations were conducted on projects, programs, policy, and budgetary decisions, as well as processes.

And so we've highlighted a few of those equity analysis tools that were utilized.

Either they were developed in 2021 or they received some level of refinement.

And this included the SPR equity impact filter, which is utilized at the beginning of decision making and program and service delivery so that we know we are leading with embedding equity considerations.

in our decision-making.

With the strategic action plan, the process of developing the strategic action plan included many equity considerations and equity principles that were embedded into process.

The budget analysis tool was utilized in 2021, as well as the GIS and MOE equity mapping tool, which actually exists as a mobile app and as well on desktop.

to prioritize decision making for service delivery, primarily in our parts and environment, and also facilities divisions, and also capital project equity prioritization, and also equity considerations during the stage gate process, which Donna will talk a little bit more about.

And you also see here some upcoming work for 2022, but I will get into that in some later slides, Donna.

Hello, everyone.

Donna Brown again, Equity Advisor.

StageGate is the decision-making workflow process, and it considers financial equity and environmental factors in the assessment of the impact and benefits and costs for decision-making.

Analysis in 2021, which were centered upon the Race and Social Equity Index, included prioritization of projects for REET funding in 2022, selection of land bank site projects to receive 2022 funding, prioritization of community centers for AFIMA grants for heating, air filtration improvements, and the play area program.

Planners use the equity toolkit to compile needed information for the in-house or contracted designers that design the project.

This information is incorporated into the design program for each capital project and planners are resourceful in seeking out BIPOC and stakeholder groups or people of color.

Thank you.

And back to me.

And I'll hand it off to Angela.

Hi, thanks, B.

So again, Angela Smith, Change Team Co-Lead.

This slide that you see here is a front cover page of our RSJ Change Team Annual Report that we produced this year.

As Christopher mentioned, the RSJ initiative is about 20 years old, and it was started with the founder by the name of Glenn Harris, who was Seattle Seattle Office of Civil Rights manager back then, he went on to start the Government Alliance of Race and Equity, which is called GEAR.

It's a national organization now.

The change team used an equity tool from this organization's platform to put our ideas into action.

On this slide, you'll see an outline of the changing strategic work plan, which has both quantitative and qualitative data to highlight our accomplishments, which you'll see on the next page.

And doing this work, the central question is, is anyone better off from the accomplishments that we attained?

Next slide.

So is anyone better off?

What impacts did these accomplishments have?

Our work plan had an internal focus for 2021. Change Team did take the responsibility of delivering training and opportunities to gather in spaces to enhance RSJ learning with and for the workforce.

So to highlight a few, last year we got a pulse on the growth of affinity and equity committees internally.

In 2017, there were three total groups.

In 2021, we identified 13. Identifying who are the leads of these spaces, their mission, then disseminating the contact information as a tangible resource, allow others to join per their interest and enhance the visibility for these groups.

The change team was just this convener for this information.

We do applaud and credit does go to the individuals who took leadership roles to making the growth of RSJ happen.

Another accomplishment that we wanna highlight is the change team, the investment of 150K for the change team budget.

Each city has, each department has a change team and whether or not there's dedicated or undedicated funds depends on the department.

But having a dedicated budget does put some parameters regarding the change teams and how we spend our time.

Yeah, it also, lends to some creativity on training opportunities, RSA special events, and ideas on how to recruit members to join for the change team.

There has been notable change for equity committees and RSJ positions across the nation.

And right now there is definitely an uptake of investment in the body of work of RSJ and the compensation of this work.

Next slide.

Here are our challenges.

And so the diagram on the left shows, is a diagram from the Seattle Office of Civil Rights.

that shows the learning and vocabulary of the four levels of racism.

In the conversation about challenges, trying to understand where the challenges live helps to provide some direction on how to overcome them.

Structural means history, institutional is practice policies and procedures, and interpersonal is prejudice and biases.

Based on the engagement of the change team and feedback of the workforce, the themes that we were able to identify was workplace culture, change team recruitment and capacity, systems of accountability, alignment of RSD roles and work, and advocating for safe and healthy, safe and health.

So this diagram on the right shows where they lie within the four levels of racism.

Next slide.

All right.

So we also wanted to take the time to highlight foundations of change for 2021. Foundations of change began in 2018 to center SPR to anti-racist principles.

In 2019, we introduced the city's leadership expectation and accountability plan, as well as pathway to equity to lead to the leadership team to integrate the foundational anti-racist principles.

And in 2020, we took the opportunity to be intentional in our planning to develop our RSJ applied learning and growth opportunities for 2021 and beyond.

So Foundations of Change saw a shift in 2021 and it became a training and development model that was shifted to weekly RSJ training and knowledge building with monthly facilitation designed for all staff and led by our executive team members, and so in this next slide.

You will see some data again and just feedback and engagement from SPR employees of gauging the employee experience with Foundations of Change.

And so on the left, you see the overall program and the categories within the overall program scoring.

And as you see, mainly good and some fair there with employee rating.

With weekly lessons, 45% showed a satisfied rate, 37% very satisfied.

And also you see the rating on the anti-racist continuum.

We came in at about 3.8 for the department, which is moving from that place of being symbolic change, a compliance department to moving into identity change and being affirming.

an agency that is truly working towards developing an anti-racist identity.

Much work still to be done.

However, still wanted to give you an idea of that rating.

In the spirit of RSJI, it manifested through a commitment backed by developing resources and implementing those resources towards undoing and eliminating, seeking to work and undo and eliminate barriers to communication flow and access to information.

The department's work included, which is still ongoing, developing entry points for all staff to inform decision making and to be aware of decisions as they are being made, particularly by those who will be most affected by decisions.

And some highlighted examples of that are all staff meetings that are held monthly and they're at a department level as well as a divisional level.

We have our SPR care team and wellness resources, which is led by our HR team.

And the care team really centers in and focuses on supporting the whole employee by addressing employee needs through timely resources, support, and communication, as well as our change team and division equity lead support of affinity groups and division equity teams.

growing and developing and establishing these groups.

And as well as I'll wrap it up here with looking forward, I mentioned early with our 2022 SPR line of business equity toolkits, we plan to start a multi-year process this year of conducting line of business equity toolkits to ensure we are being intentional about how we are providing programs and services and decision-making and ensuring that they are rooted in anti-racism and equity.

There's where we will wrap it up at this point for any questions and insights.

Well, thank you so much for this great and thorough presentation.

I'll open it up first to colleagues.

Oh, there, Council Member Morales, please.

Thank you.

Well, first, thank you, everybody, for this presentation.

I'm really excited to hear that there's so much work happening in the department, not just within your lines of business and how you serve community, but internal work happening.

And I do think that, you know, this last slide The identifying change that's needed is an important place, you know, to acknowledge that the department has work to do and to really be intentional about figuring out what that work is so that so that our city family gets what they need to be supported.

I did want to go to a couple of the early slides.

On slide four, you talk about athletic fields being 10 fields having drop-in play available and the consolidated budgeting pilot, which I think is very interesting and exciting.

And the wrecks in the street so those three slides are really interesting to me because they acknowledge that there is some inequity that exists in the way, some of the community centers or, or parks are operating or lack of park space in some of our communities.

I will say that one of the things that I hear pretty consistently from folks in the south end is that the way the reservation system works in our community centers is really problematic, either because It's the same organizations that get access to classroom space or community, you know, classroom space.

And so, new groups don't have the opportunity to come in and use the space.

That's one thing I hear.

And then another thing I hear is about the athletic fields in particular that I've heard this in Rainier Beach and Georgetown that because the fields get reserved by private schools or by adult athletic leagues, that the kids who actually live in some of these neighborhoods don't get to play on those fields.

And so I wonder, I don't know if we can solve that problem right now, but I just wanna share with you, and it sounds like, looks like by the shaking heads that this is not new to you, but I wonder if you can just talk a little bit about, what seems like an inequity for some folks who are trying to access fields and for any number of reasons aren't able to get to our park system.

So maybe I'll jump in here.

Thank you for the question, Council Member Morales.

This problem is, so I want to acknowledge it is a real problem, particularly on athletic fields.

We have a finite number of usable fields, and we have way more demand for the use of those fields than we have field time availability.

In fact, we were just having a discussion this morning about the same problem.

It is a historical practice for park and recreation organizations across the country to use historic use for leagues, teams, et cetera.

This is something we need to continue to work on We are going to stand up kind of a community action committee to take a look at this issue and to see if there's some innovation that can be brought to the solution here.

We have much more flexibility in our interior spaces.

We have 27 community centers across the city.

And sometimes a person may not get the exact location or the exact space they want to use.

but invariably some space is always available in our indoor spaces.

So we really do try to work with people to balance that need.

Thank you.

And thank you for flagging that Council Member Morales.

I've had similar feedback from community members in District 7. So, you know, something does certainly continue to look into and appreciate the answers, Council Member Herbold.

Thank you so much.

I just want to talk a little bit about a potential effort from parks that I became aware of because one of my constituents in South Park had reached out to me earlier this year about the Mara Farm Park project and wishing that it had included a playground for the so many small children in the neighborhood, highest per capita youth population in the city.

And they don't have a whole lot of access to green space.

This constituent noted that we understand that there's an approach for communities to raise their own funds for a project like this.

and that parks does work with communities who want to raise their own funds.

But of course, not every community can do that.

And when we had this back and forth, including parks, I learned that you are actually encouraging more affluent communities who go the private fundraising route to consider voluntarily raising twice the amount they need in order to fund a similar project in a neighborhood without that ability.

And that this is a new approach that you're testing out.

And I'm just wanting to say here and now that this is something I'd love to learn more about and whether or not you're considering some sort of an equity fund that communities can access for these kinds of projects.

Yes, so thank you for calling that out this is a perfect time to be raising that issue as we are prioritizing park district spending in the first cycle of the park district, we had a major.

challenge fund and communities had to generate a match for up to 1.8 million dollars and not every community had the capacity to do that.

So a lot of projects didn't happen and what we are looking at now is a grant cycle that won't require a match.

you know, just because we realized not all neighborhoods have the same capacity, the same ability to fundraise.

And a match isn't all or rather a match isn't the answer, depending on which neighborhood you go to.

And we are continuing to work with community groups that have the financial affluency to raise money to sort of advocate for a shared approach where if they have the ability to fundraise we try to pair them with a community that has some aspirational desires for some improvements and it's been working out moderately well to some effect.

So you pair the affluent communities project with the less affluent communities project And the fundraising effort goes out for both together simultaneously.

Am I hearing that correctly?

It sounds like a really neat model.

Yeah.

So the way it works, and it works better on the advisory council side where we have community centers and we have advisory councils that want to do some improvement at a community center because they are all under the ARC umbrella.

So we can facilitate those kinds of partnerships much easier.

Sometimes they're outdoor projects, but we've been very successful piloting some of those approaches.

Thank you.

Councilor Morales, is that a new hand raise?

It is.

Okay, thank you.

I do have one other question that council member her old reminded me, so I know that we've had.

I've had a constituent who's contacted my office who's contacted the department about.

fencing, playground space for very young kids, creating sort of a toddler space.

And I think she submitted a petition and there's been a little bit of back and forth.

My understanding is that there is a frustration that for parents of small kids, especially if there's more than one, there isn't a place where parents feel safe being able to manage their kids without them being at risk of running off.

And so I'm wondering about how we might provide opportunity for that.

I don't know if it's a funding issue.

But it seems to me that if we can, we if we can create a shy dog park, we can create some some know, protected space for parents with very small kids.

So can you just talk a little bit about either what the decision-making process is for that or how we might change the way we do something like that?

You bet.

So generally, public parks and recreation is anathema to fencing.

We don't like to fence stuff off.

But that is not to say that there aren't legitimate recreational activities that require a fence boundary.

We've taken a programmatic approach to fence play areas.

We recognize that there are play areas for smaller kids that require fencing and, you know, either because of their proximity to the street edge, their proximity to kind of open space areas where kids could run out of a play area.

So we do have those strategically positioned across the city.

And I think in that case, we responded back and pointed out two or three fenced play areas within, oh, I think a mile or two, but we would be happy to go back and take another look and reassess that, to reassess that fencing request.

Thank you.

Are there any other questions from colleagues?

Council Member Mosqueda.

Thanks so much for the presentation.

I'm intrigued by how the department you and the RSGI change team uses.

I think you call it a heat map to make determinations on where the biggest priorities are.

Can you tell me a little bit more about that and whether that's a tool that is available to other RSGI teams for looking at prioritizing where policy changes are needed?

So I've taken all of the questions so far.

Does any team member have a desire chime in here, B, maybe.

Yeah, and I was going to call on Tricia to chime in, too, with the work that she does in Parks and Environment.

And so with that, of course, it identifies the areas of the city with the highest disadvantage, highest need, and the lowest disadvantage, right?

And so how are Parks and Environment crews and how our facility crews are using that is to prioritize where services are offered.

So with our facilities crews, where work is offered on facilities maintenance end, it's a prioritization based on the area of the city that the work is needed in, as well with parks and environment.

So when our grounds crews are programming and planning for litter pickup, grounds maintenance work, they have an actual tool now to actually make real-time decisions based on the information provided from this app.

And there are different data sets.

It's built off the Race and Social Equity Index.

That's the foundation of it.

But then there are other data sets, which I'm not a technical expert as far as what data sets are a part of it.

But there are additional data sets that can be clicked on and clicked off to be able to help with decision making.

But it starts with making sure it's equity-centered and the economic considerations are a part of decision making and prioritization of work.

And the map includes data sets like free and reduced lunch, school scholarship program eligibility, and TANF, you know, so some of the standard geographically centered measurements help drive that heat map.

And if I could add, this is Linda from the change team, just that there's a layer of literal heat maps where the over consecutive days of heat, there were members of, I think, SDOT, SPU, they went around and actually measured the temperatures.

And so those areas will not surprisingly, it won't surprise you that they sync up with historically redlined areas.

So that information is used as well for decision-making.

And can I add that along with the heat, it associates with the number of trees in the area and the shading that contributes to the heat.

And it also aligns with disadvantaged areas when you look at an area that is overly hot and the temperatures coincide with that.

Yeah, it's all connected, isn't it?

All connected.

And I guess what I wanted, if I could just shout out that team.

Oh, please, please, please.

Shout out that team who led the development of that body of work.

Because it's a true representation of how we actually manifest not only the tools, but the utilization of the tools.

Because it's not just enough to have the tool, we have to utilize them.

And so they have really modeled from development, to utilization, to training, how we embed our decision making.

and anti-racism and equity.

Can I ask a last question about that point, Chair?

Thank you.

So to that point, I do want to go back to slide 14, where you've sort of checked the department off at stage four of the anti-racist continuum.

I think it's important to acknowledge that, you know, the department, as one of several departments in the, in the city has a history of some problematic promotion or alleged promotion and hiring practices.

particularly as it relates to black women in the department.

So I'm happy to see so many folks here.

I will admit I don't know what your titles are, necessarily.

But I would like to have a little bit of understanding of how you plan to move from, you know, step four to step five to step six, and if there is, I don't know, a timeline or, you know, additional work that the department is doing to really start to move toward that transformation phase in the department.

So thank you for raising that question.

So we're doing a couple of things.

We're creating a set of equity-based workplace expectations.

One of the things we did last year for all of the APEC SAM managers, directors, people who lead people in our department is we have required some higher level of human relationship training for our leaders.

And this recognizes that if you're a frontline employee, and you see your crew chief or supervisor every day, they are the department to you.

If you don't have a good working relationship with that person, then you don't have a good working relationship with the department.

And we want our leaders to become more sensitive to relationship management with employees.

We hire people in leadership jobs, not just to be subject matter experts, not just to be technical experts, but to steward the department's relationship with its workforce.

So, we are really pressing home this need to have our leaders be more relational in how they relate to people who report to them.

And we're a work in progress, and we're acknowledging that, you know, this is driven by a need for greater accountability for people who lead people in the department.

All right, well, it is four oh nine.

So I think we should start wrapping up our committee.

And I want to thank the panel for this item.

This was a really great presentation outlining the progress we've made and all the work that we still need to do.

So I appreciate everyone coming to join us this afternoon and look forward to some follow up items from this.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thanks, everybody.

Thank you.

And Council colleagues, that was our last agenda item.

So hearing no further business before the committee, unless there is, doesn't sound like there is, I will go ahead and adjourn this meeting.

It is 4.09 p.m.

And everyone have a pleasant evening.