Seattle City Council Select Committee on Homelessness Strategies & Investments 22421

Ready?

Yes, we're recording.

All right, great.

Thank you, everybody.

The February 24th, 2021 meeting of the Seattle City Council Select Committee on Homelessness Strategies and Investments will come to order.

It's 2 p.m.

I'm Andrew Lewis, chair of the Select Committee on Homelessness Strategies and Investments.

Will the committee clerk please call the roll?

Gonzalez?

Here.

Herbold.

Juarez.

Here.

Lewis.

Present.

Morales.

Here.

Mosqueda.

Present.

Peterson.

Here.

Saw one.

Strauss?

Present.

Chair, there are seven numbers present.

Thank you so much.

I will note for the record that Council Member Sawant's office did reach out this afternoon to inform me that she likely would not be able to attend due to a power outage that has taken out her internet.

So it is not a willful absence.

Just wanted to note that before proceeding.

So approval of the agenda.

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

hearing no objection, the agenda is adopted.

So before we go into public comment, today we have two agenda items.

We're going to be considering final committee votes on the permanent supportive housing legislation, including amendments that have been proposed by some council members, and that will be queued up and ready to go.

We're also going to have a fairly detailed update that was circulated earlier from the executive and the Human Services Department regarding the shelter investments that this council funded in November of last year and the plan to operationalize those investments.

So looking forward to those presentations and those action matters.

public comment period.

So without any further delay, why don't we go ahead and move on to public comment.

I do want to note Councilmember Herbold has arrived.

Welcome Councilmember Herbold.

So public comment.

I will moderate the public comment period in the following manner.

The public comment period for this meeting will be 20 minutes and each speaker will be given two minutes to speak.

And in the order in which they registered on the council's website, if you have not yet registered to speak but would like to, you can sign up before the end of public comment by going to the council's website at Seattle.gov slash council.

The public comment link is also listed on today's agenda.

Once I call a speaker's name, staff will unmute the appropriate microphone and an automatic prompt of you have been unmuted will be the speaker's cue that it is their turn to speak and then the speaker must press star six to begin speaking.

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

As a reminder, public comment should relate to an item on today's agenda or within the committee's purview.

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

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

If speakers do not end their comments at the end of the allotted time provided, the speaker's microphone will be muted to allow us to call on the next speaker.

Once you have completed your public comment, we ask that you please disconnect from the line.

And if you plan to continue following this meeting, please do so via Seattle Channel or the listening options listed on the agenda.

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

Please remember to press star six after you hear the prompt of you have been unmuted.

Our first speaker that is present, I believe, is Jarvis Capuchin.

It does not look like speakers.

Excuse me, Council Member, you have to go to the top of the list.

Yeah, okay.

Sorry, I just saw that it updated and a few more people are now present.

The first speaker is Brady Nordstrom.

Brady, you are recognized.

Good afternoon, Chair Lewis and committee members.

My name is Brady Nordstrom and I'm with Seattle for Everyone.

We're a broad housing coalition that unites under the belief that everyone, regardless of income or background, deserves access to a safe, stable, and affordable home.

This, of course, includes permanent supportive housing.

I called in to testify at the first hearing for Council Bill one one nine nine seven five.

And we are calling it again to express our strong support.

We believe that this bill can help limited public dollars go further and faster.

We don't have strong reservations on any of the proposed amendments.

The important part that we feel is to get the legislation passed.

I'll just quickly reemphasize some points from before.

We see homelessness in many cases as an extreme effect of lack of affordable housing, and this correlation is well documented.

Permanent supportive housing is also an urgent and evidence-based intervention.

So Seattle's pipeline for permanent supportive housing units, while laudable, is currently not sufficient to meet the level of need this population is experiencing by most estimations.

So we need to find ways to respond faster and to a greater degree, which this bill does.

By creating new zoning designation as allowed by House Bill 1923, the city can avoid common barriers to all housing types.

And some of these include the zoning restrictions that can segregate permanent supportive housing to narrow areas of the city and limit sites.

Drawn out design review processes that some estimate can add up to 18 or more months on average to project times.

and then broad requirements that don't match the use case of future residents.

And these requirements can limit valuable capacity for housing units and add per unit costs.

So we, in general, we just feel this is a smart bill to increase the impact of limited public dollars, and we encourage you to move it forward.

And thank you for your time.

Thank you so much.

Our next speaker is Corbain Cain.

And, Corbin, you are recognized for two minutes.

You may have to hit star six.

We can't hear you.

Hello?

Yeah, we can hear you.

Go ahead.

Okay.

My name is.

Good day, Councilperson Lewis.

My name is Corbin Kane.

I've been a part of Tent City 3 with the ShareWheel organization for the last nine months.

I'm here to speak on the agenda item one, the human services department update on 2021 homelessness investments.

And on the 2021 budget, $80,000 was allocated to our organization share will, which we haven't received.

We are in the need of these resources for our community on February 1st, 2021, we sent a letter regarding this matter to Helen Howell, the H.

We are in desperate need of resources such as tents and

Thank you.

I do want to note that Councilmember Sawant has joined the meeting and notified me, so she is now present.

Next speaker is Orlando Latimer.

And Orlando, you are recognized for two minutes.

Hello, my name is Orlando Latimer.

I'm from Tent City 3. Councilperson Andrew Lewis, I have a very serious question about 2021 Homeless Investment Update.

Sheraton City has sent a letter to Human Services Director Helen Howell on February 1st asking for a meeting.

We are asking you to ask her for a meeting.

We want to talk about the homeless budget that the City Council passed that should be supported, that should be supporting our home.

We have not heard anything about that update.

We are asking Helen how she is presenting her update to you.

When will she meet with us concerning to city three budget?

Thank you for your time.

Councilperson Lewis.

Thank you.

Um, our next speaker is Eddie page.

Eddie, you are recognized.

And remember, you need to press star six.

Can you hear me now?

I can hear you.

Yes, two minutes.

Okay, yeah.

Hi, my name is Ed Pate.

I'm with TC3.

And Council Member Andrew Lewis, would you ask Ms. Howell to speak with Sheriff for the allocations for sharing the city's 2021 budget?

Some of the money in this item is designated for our home, Tent City 3. We have both operating and infrastructural needs, including repurposing and purchasing items we need.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Alexis Lacates.

I apologize in advance if I mispronounced folks' names, but it looks like they're currently not present.

So moving on, Jarvis Capuchian.

is our next speaker, who is present, and you are recognized.

Hello, good afternoon, Councilmember Lewis and present Councilmembers.

Can you hear me?

We can hear you.

Yes, sir.

Oh, great.

Thanks.

I currently live at Newcastle at the Central District, and so far, we are doing well.

Having moved here just last September, and we have successfully passed and will the requirements imposed on us by the fire department, even though we really shouldn't have to, under religious land use ordinances.

Although we are on private property, we operate under a religious sponsor.

We invite all of you to come visit us at any time.

At the moment, residents here are paying for the utilities at the village, even though the council has already appropriated funding for this year's budget for operating expenses and have directed HSD to work with us on having that implemented.

Right now, I don't get it.

Please help me understand.

What's it going to take to make those funds available to us?

In January, Nichols wrote a letter to HSD Interim Director Howell and requested her to meet with us.

To this day, we still have not heard from her, but at least someone from her office recognizing or not even a simple recognition that they have received our request.

You are elected leaders at the City Council, and as such, I hope I expect you to hold accountability.

I implore you to follow through on the budget amendment, HOM 021A001, and direct HSD director to do the same.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Joey McAllister, though it looks like they are currently not present.

And our next present speaker is Renee Jewell.

So Renee, you are recognized.

Good day.

Good day.

My name is Renee Jewell, and I'm here to comment upon homelessness strategies and investments.

On the streets, there are homeless people with part-time jobs unable to find housing affordable enough for them.

They are able to be responsible rent-paying parents.

This transformation is our goal.

But some people are all like, what about the strain on our resources?

But multifamily potential can be seen everywhere, from above commercially zoned stores to industrial zone warehouses and hotels, abandoned and ready for care.

Therefore, if the government could just get to the kitchen, rearrange that zoning and resources, then we could totally have housing for all.

I implore the council to accept the permanent housing bill.

And might I add, it does not say RSVP on the Statue of Liberty.

Thank you.

Thank you, Renee.

That concludes the public comment list.

So I'll do a last call at this point for the folks who were not present.

So Alexis Lacates and Bruce Gogol.

not seeing them present.

So that will conclude then the public comment period.

Alexis and Bruce, if you're out there, feel free to send your written comments.

Your comments are important to us.

I'm sorry we couldn't get to you today, but thank you for signing up.

We will now proceed to our items of business.

Item 1. So Mr. Clerk, will you please read item one into the record and will our presenters please turn on their cameras and unmute.

Human Services Department update on 2021 homelessness investments.

Thank you.

So first I'm going to ask each of our presenters to introduce themselves.

So why don't we go ahead and do that.

I see Deputy Mayor Sixkiller here.

Why don't you kick it off, Mr. Deputy Mayor.

Sure.

Good afternoon.

Casey Sixkiller, Deputy Mayor.

I, Helen Howell, Interim Director, Human Services Department.

Great.

I'm going to ask that we hold questions until the end of the And with that, let's dig into it.

So who wants to start kicking things off here?

Hi.

Go ahead.

OK, I will go ahead and kick things off.

But before I do so, I just want to mention that Catholic Community Services, the organization and its staff, is very much in our thoughts.

The shooting yesterday, very scary.

And it's lucky that no one, no staff or other clients were injured other than the individual who shot himself.

I know the mayor was able to speak with Bill Halliman.

I've been able to do the same.

Randolph Carter Center is closed to, or for services today, but all their other buildings are open.

And I just want to mention that they're in our thoughts.

And with that, I will launch in.

Deputy Mayor Sixkiller and I are here to present about the winter storm response, the street to housing initiative, as well as the hope team update and to have a Q&A session with you.

In terms of the winter storm, Basically, earlier this month, HSD in partnership with Seattle Parks and Recreation implemented our severe winter response plan.

The city opened four severe weather shelters over the course of six days that could accommodate 239 guests.

The locations were Fisher Pavilion, Garfield Community Center, Bitter Lake Community Center, and City Hall.

The city also opened a new shelter, the Women's Shelter, managed by Catholic Community Services and operated by Wheel at First Presbyterian Church.

The severe weather shelters at their peak on Sunday, February 14th, were at 90% occupancy with guests staying in 216 out of 239. beds.

All four of the severe weather sites became 24 hours.

Three meals a day were provided by OSL, formerly Operations Back Lunch.

Showers were available to guests at Fisher Pavilion, along with the community center shelters.

And City Hall and the community center shelters were able to accommodate pets and service animals.

The temporary shelter spaces all met COVID-19 safety protocols recommended by public health and the Centers for Disease Control.

And those include screening for COVID-19, expanded space to allow physical distancing, hygiene access, and increased sanitation guidelines.

The very important to this effort were our partners.

Our emergency shelter provider is the Salvation Army, and they were able to stand up and operate Fisher Pavilion shelter very quickly.

However, it's an ongoing capacity issue for providers all across the system, especially with the pandemic and the logistical complexity of setting up COVID-19 compliant shelter locations quickly in response to weather.

For example, it's difficult for providers to dedicate employees solely to one-time weather events.

or to quickly move resources from a critical program to staffing an intake desk at an emergency shelter.

Also COVID-19 compliance requires additional resources and not to mention travel impacts from the snow.

HSD worked around the clock to set up these resources and the entire effort would not have been possible without our many partners some of whom include Parks, the Seattle Center, Finance and Administration Services, the Office of Emergency Management, King County, the Seattle Police Department's Community Service Officers, a number of them volunteered with us, and our incredible providers, partners, the Salvation Army Compass Housing Alliance and the Low-Income Housing Institute, Lehigh.

Also, as has been the case with previous winter storm responses, as the weather improved and operations ramped down, the city brought in additional service providers to help people transition to longer term shelter resources instead of going back to the streets.

More than 80 people from the temporary severe weather shelters were referred were referred either to shelters or hotels, including 20 women who went to the new shelter at First Presbyterian Church.

We had a number of partners who helped coordinate referrals, including Compass Housing Alliance, Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle, Salvation Army Wheel, Catholic Community Services, and other community organizations.

In addition, the HOPE team made 13 referrals from the community center shelters to the navigation center, Otto's Place, and Exhibition Hall.

Also, the HOPE team, in partnership with HealthONE and City Light and Parks, performed welfare checks, provided weather and basic needs supplies, and coordinated rides to severe weather shelters Parks loaned vehicles to the HOPE team and Seattle City Light employees who provided additional transportation for individuals to severe weather shelters.

And as you can see here, the numbers are provided for you in terms of other services and resources that were provided.

And these efforts spanned across Seattle from Lake City to Georgetown.

And with that, I will pass it over to Deputy Mayor Sixkiller.

Okay, thanks, Helen.

Let me get...

I'm going to turn it back over to councilmember Herbold.

Thank you.

You're so kind and attentive.

I really appreciate it.

I have been receiving some questions from constituents.

I may have already mentioned this to you, Director Howell, so I apologize if I'm being repetitive.

But I've received concerns about the lack of winter response shelter in District 1. particularly considering the mobility challenges that people who reside and visit West Seattle are facing, greatly reduced metro capacity, and the closure of the bridge, and everybody knows.

So just wondering, how, given that we've sponsored different types of shelters in community centers in the past, most recently a youth shelter for for social distancing, and I think it was with youth care out at the Southwest Community Center.

Just wondering whether or not there was an effort to replicate that during winter response, and whether or not, given that there was no winter response shelter in District 1, whether or not there were efforts made by the HOPE team to outreach to people living unsheltered in District 1.

With regard to your last point, I believe that the HOPE team outreach efforts were citywide.

I couldn't tell you precisely how much was done in District 1. And also with regard to the opening of the community center there, we are in the process of doing a debriefing and lessons learned and that sort of thing.

and updating planning for the next go round.

So I certainly can put it on the list to talk with Parks and Recreation Department about.

Great.

Council Member Herbold, did you have a follow up to that?

Okay.

Excellent.

Council Member Strauss, you have a question pertaining to the snowstorm?

Yes, thank you, Chair.

And thank you, Director Howell.

You know, one of you touched briefly on one of my questions, which is how much back end work went into getting these shelter, these winter shelters up and running.

And a follow up question to that is how do we create systems that we will be able to use in the future for winter or summer, you know, we know that we're going to have a hot summer, we know that we'll have climate fires again this summer.

So, and we know that next winter is we will have cold weather days as well.

How do we bake in all of this back end work into our institutional memory so that we don't have to recreate the wheel next time.

Thank you for your question Councilmember Strauss.

Back-end work, there certainly was a lot.

As I mentioned, it's very difficult for providers to have staff on call for weather-dependent emergency shelter stand-up.

But there are a few things that I think we could do.

Right now, we only have one provider, the Salvation Army, with whom we actually have a contract for this type of work.

more resources could be put toward winter severe weather shelter needs.

And so that might be one possibility where we have more than one provider.

Also, I think that's the biggest one.

I think that's the biggest one, just planning to try to scale it a little bit more and have the flexibility to increase the numbers.

And as Council Member Herbold suggested by her question, do our best to ensure to get as much citywide coverage as possible.

Do you have a follow up there, Council Member Strauss?

Yes, thank you.

You touched a bit on this, Director Howell, which is how do we utilize the team that you had in place to set this up and set up the hotel and motels that we're about to hear about?

How do we utilize your team to use the economy of scale to get us the shelter capacity that we need and that has been allocated already, but maybe not yet funded?

And maybe I'll focus my question a little bit more tightly there.

You know, this winter shelter, bringing this online was probably one of the largest lifts within your first month and a half, two months on the job.

Do you have areas of improvement that you noticed, areas of success that you want to highlight?

As I mentioned, I would like for it not to be as much of a fire drill as it is and was to the extent that we had a number of staff who worked day and night.

to help this happen.

And as you're aware, with the anticipation of the new regional authority, HSI staff is a fraction of what it used to be.

So we have a lot of core staff who are working every one of the issues, and it's incredibly taxing on them, a heavy burden to carry.

And I don't want to lose them.

They're really important.

So I think there will some thought will have to be put into What the city is going to do with regard to severe winter weather shelter.

What role the regional authority will have how this fits.

So I do think it's one of the things that we'll have to explore going forward.

I don't know that we'll have the same staffing capacity that we do now, but is this something we need to think about as we plan for the transition to the regional authority?

If I might, if I could add on to that, Council Member, I'd say, you know, It also, I think, continues as our first winter weather event with snow in the COVID era.

You know, the snowstorm we got last year on my first day on the job, thank you, Mother Nature, was before we had COVID, COVID protocols and all the other challenges that we see among our our shelter network operators, etc.

Everyone's just working so hard.

So certainly appreciate very much your question.

And as Director Howell mentioned, we'll be doing our after action.

And, you know, COVID will be with us for quite some time.

And so how we don't have to recreate the wheel every time but but bake that in.

It's a great flag for us to as we go as we head toward the summer months and potential smoke events, which, as you know, last summer presented some significant barriers to us and our ability to open up areas for folks to come in out of the smoke.

So great flag and we'll look forward to working with you and council on that.

Great, thank you.

And for folks who have asked their questions, if you could lower the raise hand feature after you're done, just so I don't get tripped up by that.

But now we'll move into the street to housing presentation, as we just did with the snowstorm.

Folks, please hold their comments until the end of the presentation, and then we will open it up to questions.

So Deputy Mayor Sixkiller, take it away.

Okay, thank you, Council Member and Council Members, great to be with you again.

Thank you for the time and the continued support.

Yesterday, we made a number of announcements about our enhanced shelter program, including naming our first two hotels, tiny home village sites, or the first tiny home village site, and then a second tiny home village site that we'll be able to provide more specificity about soon, our new women's shelter, All of which coming together amounts to about 350 new units of shelter spaces that are connected to our permanent housing resources.

And also both rapid rehousing and permanent supportive housing.

So we're very excited to be in this position finally to bring these new shelter assets online.

Just as a reminder, the goal of this program is to create new shelter capacity.

New shelter capacity.

To help people living unsheltered both utilize shelter assets to come inside, but also get connected to to housing resources.

So the model that we've settled on was our enhanced shelter model.

with a key focus on housing navigation to assist clients into the permanent housing, whether that's through the rapid rehousing program or PSH units that we're bringing online here later this year, or throughout the year, but many of which will be online later this year.

As you know, this has been a long effort, and I want to really thank our team at HSD and our team at FAS for all of their hard work.

We started with a list of almost 100 hotels, a short list of nine, and then moved into contract negotiations with two of them that we felt best fit our program.

So we're excited to be here in this moment today.

Again, we will be using COVID-specific ESG funding for these investments, including the rapid rehousing component.

And as you've got there on the screen, the Kings Inn will be operated by the Chief Seattle Club.

It includes 66 non-congregate hotel rooms.

The Chief Seattle Club will be providing case management and housing navigation services.

And I think importantly, I will be able to provide those in a way that's culturally appropriate for their clients.

So they will be focused exclusively on serving the native population here in Seattle, which everyone knows disproportionately experiences unsheltered homelessness.

So we are very excited about that partnership and Chief Seattle Club's ability to step into space and help us continue to get more folks inside.

The Executive Pacific Hotel will be operated by Lehigh.

Everyone's familiar with Lehigh and the great work that Sharon and her team do.

I want to give her a thank out.

Her and her team, as Helen mentioned, they were a critical partner for us a couple weekends ago as we stood up our winter weather shelters at two of our community centers.

So Lehigh will be operating the Executive Hotel Pacific with 155 non-congregate hotel rooms.

Case management and housing navigation services will be provided.

And Catholic Community Services, who's our rapid rehousing service provider, will be paired with Lehigh at the Executive Pacific to help move folks, both connect folks to housing resources and out of those temporary hotel shelter units.

A couple other specifics, again, we have leased these hotels for 12 months.

That includes one month for ramp up and one month for ramp down.

So the maximum stay for someone in a hotel unit, I suppose, would be 10 months.

Again, our goal, though, is to create throughput in this work, which is why that rapid rehousing piece and those housing navigation services are so important, we think, for this program.

Lehigh and Chief Seattle Club will take control of the facilities in March with clients beginning to move in over the following weeks.

Referrals into these shelter facilities will be made and coordinated by the HOPE team.

And we'll talk a little bit more about that in a little bit.

So we're excited about this work.

That's certainly very excited about our two partners that we're that we're working in on working with and look forward to getting those sites up and running here in just a couple weeks.

On our street, sort of the 2nd, part of our street to housing program is our new tiny home village units.

We announced yesterday two of those.

And Lehigh will be operating both of those sites on behalf of the city.

We expect these villages to create up to 80 new tiny home units.

And again, those referrals will be made by the HOPE team into those units.

The first site, which I believe I alluded to last time was before council, is at the University District.

We are continuing our work to finalize that lease agreement with Sound Transit.

But again, Lehigh will be our operator there as well.

So next steps there, we have to finalize the lease with Sound Transit.

and then finalize our agreement with Lehigh as well.

But we're working through those final steps now.

Our hope is to have that open in April, pending all of the things that go along with that work and resolution of some of the secret requirements that we're working through there and elsewhere.

I especially want to thank Council Member Peterson for your support of this work and other stakeholders throughout the University District who have been engaged in support of our effort to stand up this new resource up in the U District.

We also announced yesterday a new tiny house village in North Seattle.

I want to thank Councilmember Juarez for her support and ongoing conversation with us about about siting that second village.

That will be for 40 new tiny homes.

And obviously with both of these, we will continue to do a community engagement both with Dawn and others and other stakeholders to make sure that folks understand what we're doing, program design, service agreements, and all the other pieces that make sure that that these operations, that folks understand what they are, how they interact with the local community, where folks can go if they have questions or concerns.

And so we're working through all of that now and we'll continue to do that both in the lead up to these sites being opened as well as during their operation.

We also are really excited yesterday to announce our new shelter for women is going to be operated by Wheel at the First Presbyterian Church.

This is a new new shelter as part of our street to housing program.

We were able to work with wheel to get that open to open as part of our winter weather response a couple weeks ago.

I really want to thank wheel for pulling everything together and working with us to do that.

And obviously with Director Howell's presentation, we were able to navigate folks to that shelter resource.

I want to thank Council for that support and certainly for Wheel and our HOPE team and others.

That program right now, again, will add 60 24-7 enhanced shelter beds for women.

It is currently overnight.

It was 24-7 during the snowstorm.

It will transition to a 24-7 facility here over the next few weeks as Wheel ramps up their operations.

there as well.

It includes showers, dining area, nurse's station, case manager's office, and storage.

So it really is turning to be a great location, both for the operator and I think for the folks that will utilize that shelter system as well.

I know I'm sure a ton of questions are ready.

I'm going to try to kind of work through a couple more slides here and then open it up to questions for folks.

So I do want to provide a quick update on the HOPE team.

So the HOPE team obviously is continuing to work very closely with service providers, including providing technical assistance to match unsheltered persons to shelter and housing programs that can best meet that individual's needs.

And we are working in partnership with REACH and our other contracted outreach providers.

We meet, that team meets twice a week with folks, Mondays and Wednesdays, to problem solve, to identify areas of need and support.

And also as we work toward sort of really landing a set of not just priority engagement, but the criteria by which we deploy limited resources.

But that work is ongoing in this new sort of new paradigm.

But again, I want to say really thank the HOPE team and others for the work they did during our winter weather response.

I think Council Member Lewis, I think you were out and about that day with with the Seattle Fire Department, I think probably came across some of our HOPE team members as they were engaging encampments.

You know, obviously the HOPE team's work continues to, you know, lead with outreach and coordinating with outreach to try to avoid MDAR removal as best we can to get folks to come inside.

Uh, and voluntary relocate from sort of what we call a high priority location.

These are examples, you know, a hazard, uh, around city infrastructure, uh, construction projects, uh, or we've got, um, 100% ADA blockages, uh, along, uh, sidewalks.

Um, and we are, um, so we've been working through that process with folks.

Um, you know, we are looking.

to our outreach providers to be collecting a variety of data.

And that's something that we will continue to be working with our outreach providers on through this year and through their contracts so that we have information coming in from them from the field.

Frankly, that is very similar to the data that the navigation team was required to collect.

We think that's important to understand program performance, individual service provider performance, and frankly, just to have a better sense of who's being engaged, what services they're being offered, who accepted, and so on and so forth.

I think that's a shared goal, and making sure we have that data, I think, is a really important piece of the ongoing work and engagement the HOPE team is having with our contracted outreach providers.

With that, Councilmember, I will be quiet, and Director Howell and I are here to take questions.

I thank you so much for that thorough overview.

And I certainly have a lot of questions, and I know my colleagues do.

So why don't we start with Council Member Morales, who's raised her hand, and take it from there.

Thank you, Council Member Lewis.

Thank you, Deputy Mayor and Director Hoffman for being here with us.

I have a few questions, so if it's okay, maybe I'll just kind of put them all out there and then we can have the conversation.

The first thing is we know that, as one of the commenters mentioned, Council did receive a letter recently from Nicholsville stating that they hadn't received any updates on funding for the new self-governed tiny house village.

Clearly Lehigh is getting stood up.

So I'm wondering why it's taking longer for the Nicholsville villages.

And if you can just talk a little bit, because we have heard from some other organizations that they've had a similar experience receiving or not receiving updates.

So is the process different for smaller community organizations?

And if so, how can we make sure that they understand how they will be communicated with?

That's kind of one question.

And then regarding the HOPE team, we've had a lot of communication recently in my office, folks who are unhoused, folks who do a lot of mutual aid work.

have been really concerned about the way in which parks or the community clean teams are conducting cleanups around encampments.

A lot of people sort of losing property that was believed to be waste or trash but was not and you know was still considered by the individuals themselves to be their property.

Can you talk a little bit about if HOPE is notified about these cleanups and how they can mitigate those concerns?

And then finally, I want to ask about the just sort of the basic operations about hope we had a little bit of conversation the last time you were here deputy mayor um about how hope is operating differently from what the navigation team had been doing um or in what what ways are they similar um and how can we ensure that hope really operates with the stated intent that was behind the um the budget amendment that was established so those are some of my main questions for now and i'll I'll mute and wait for your answer.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you, Council Member.

I might ask you to restate a couple of those as we go here, but on the first, on Nicholsville, one of our challenges there, we're continuing to try to figure out how we work with Nicholsville.

You know, we do not have a master services agreement with Nicholsville, which is a traditional way in which we contract and award dollars to state-funded sites.

That's something we don't have.

As you know, Nicholsville is completely unconnected to the rest of our system.

So we are not getting data.

We are not understanding the efforts they're making to connect folks to long-term permanent housing.

But that said, we are working through that.

I will just simply say that from a staff perspective, we have the same folks trying to problem solve that, the same folks that have been working on setting up these new shelter assets.

So we have not forgotten about it.

And we will, let me get a better, more complete update for you and council on where we are in that process.

This is Helen Howell.

I would just add that we know that we need to be exploring non-traditional ways of engaging.

And so I know that they do not have the MSA, but how else might this work?

And do they need a fiscal agent of some sort?

You know, we need to be exploring this and we'll be happy to follow up with you.

And then on the second question, in terms of the clean, the sort of the intersection between clean cities work and encampments, we do, we are, the HOPE team is aware of where our clean cities teams are going.

We have four, we have four teams across all four quadrants of the city.

Those schedules are being shared in those Monday, Wednesday meetings I mentioned.

At the front half of which our entire contracted outreach continuum is invited to come.

Not everyone comes all the time.

But everyone is does come and that is where we are sharing.

Where folks are going hope also has been working and again, it's sort of a continuous improvement environment here.

To try to also get information in and from our outreach continuum about other ways that we can help to coordinate trash and refuse removal from encampments.

And whether that's abandoned tents or other things or purple bag programs.

We are trying to be as transparent and communicative as possible.

I think some of the folks that you referenced may not, I realize may not be part of that official group of folks, you know, if you're doing mutual aid and others.

And so that's a, that's a great flag.

And we will work to problem solve that a little bit.

I would say, you know, the, the, the, but the clean cities team does have field coordinators assigned to it.

So, you know, none of our clean cities teams are out there.

You know, everyone is not no 1 is out there engaging or bumping up against an encampment.

Without understanding what the storage requirements are and other rules are around.

I think it is important to make sure that we are communicating that with the property of individuals in those encampments.

Helen and I will both go back and make sure that we are communicating that with not just the hope team but as well as our clean cities teams as well.

That you are hearing from others that there are some concerns there.

So thank you for flagging that.

I would say right now, you know, they are very focused again on sort of number one is making sure that we're sharing information, making sure that we are working together on sort of, you know, what the priority, what our priority areas.

We did just issue or in the process of issuing an RFP to get money out that the council included as part of the 21 adopted budget to continue to increase I want to thank counsel for their support of that.

That is going to be a real benefit to all of the work that is sort of process improvement projects underway now in terms of how data comes in, how shelter placements are made and improving that technology, which we launched, I want to say about a month and a half ago and are working with REACH and others about how to improve that overall experience and the efficiency of that technology I don't know, Helen, if there was anything else you wanted to add to that.

Thank you.

And Council Member Morales, did you have a follow-up to your line of questioning?

I'm good right now.

Thank you very much.

Great.

Council Member Herbold, you are next.

Thank you.

different areas that I'd like to ask some questions in.

I think one group of questions is related to the hoteling strategy, and the other group of questions relates to the HOPE team's assessments of locations and connections of individuals to spaces.

So as it relates specifically to the selection of hotels, I appreciate Deputy Mayor Sixkiller, you described in the beginning of your presentation the process that was used to narrow it down to two hotels.

I have questions about the decisions around using the Executive Hotel.

And I'm really curious, given our previous contract with the Executive Hotel for $3.9 million for 150 rooms, Once upon a time, during the three months where we were using that hotel, I was monitoring the use of the rooms and I think we all worked together to expand it from first responders to service providers.

But at any given time, there was never a week where there was any more than 20 rooms of 150 rooms in use.

So I'm wondering, and the initial contract period ended in June.

I'm wondering, did we get any sort of a credit of that $3.9 million that we're applying now to this new arrangement with the Executive Pacific Hotel?

I also, I mean, I know this is, The old funding for the Executive Pacific was under FEMA reimbursement.

I don't know how much we were able to get reimbursed of that $3.9 million, but I understand that there's a preclearance for the selection of hotels under the FEMA program.

I don't know if a similar requirement is necessary under the CRF program, but given that the Pacific Hotel had pre-clearance.

I'm just wondering if that also potentially made this a higher priority location.

So that's one set of questions I have about the selection of the hotels.

I also am interested to know whether or not there is an intention to seek a third hotel, given the fact that I think our goal for hoteling was a significantly larger number of rooms than apparently we're looking at right now.

Whether or not that might be, you know, in fact, we have a contract with the executive Pacific for 151 rooms, maybe we would be able to expand the current agreement we have for that particular location so that we can actually meet the original intent for hoteling.

I think it was more like 300 or 350 rooms.

And then as it relates specifically to the HOPE strategy, And when you were with us last time, I said I had a lot of interest in being able to share with members of the public who contact me about encampment locations.

We've all worked together to craft a response that HSD worked with our office in crafting that describes what the whole team does and how it replaces the navigation team, and that we aren't focused on removing encampments, but we're instead focused on engagement in identifying ways to meet people's needs and mitigate the impacts on communities.

But the piece that's still missing that I was hoping to hear more from you about today is how, once you receive a complaint from a member of the public about a location, how does the HOPE team make an assessment of whether or not that is a priority location to do engagement on?

That is still a missing piece for me, and I think it's something I want to be able to explain to members of the public who contact me so we can level set expectations about whether or not Just because you made a complaint doesn't mean that you're necessarily going to get a visit.

We have this intervention and this is how we prioritize it.

I know Council President Gonzalez and I have been engaged with a business owner.

in District 1 about an outdoor encampment in the neighborhood abutting his business.

And I've been just really struggling, even though I know there's been a complaint that's gone in, I've been struggling to figure out whether or not it's reasonable for him to expect to receive a visit from the HOPE team.

And then lastly, also related to the HOPE team, there were some principles that we created when we funded the HOPE team of what the high priority populations of people are that we want this HOPE team to be interacting with and then identifying those individuals to be prioritized with our hoteling strategy and our tiny house village strategy.

And I just want the assurance that they're high risk, high impact individuals.

I want the reassurance that that is exactly what's happening, that those are the people that the HOPE team is interacting with and those are the people that will be receiving shelter in the hotel rooms.

Thank you.

Let me start with hotels and then come back to hope if that's okay, Council Member.

On the Executive Pacific, you're right, that was procured.

Thank you for acknowledging the difference between a FEMA procurement and others.

I appreciate that very much.

I'll need to get back to you in terms of the credit question.

I can tell you we, it's my understanding we just submitted in October to FEMA that round of reimbursement requests.

We have not, you know, we've not gotten payment, received payment, I should say, from FEMA yet.

So I don't, I just can't speak to how much they covered of that or didn't cover in the credit piece.

So if it's OK, I'd like to get an actual more detailed answer back to you.

But let me find out first what sort of the time frame is for that so that you have a sense of when we can get you an actual answer.

And our hope is that the check from FEMA is in the mail, right?

And then in terms of why the Executive Pacific made it on this list, again, It was through a process led by FAS.

Oh, you moved on my screen.

Of FAS, you know, it started in 90, whittling down.

You know, we had, we did have a little bit longer shortlist, and one of those was a civic hotel, which the county leased.

And so, but I think the fact is that we, you know, in terms of the whole, hotels that were willing to lease to us their entire site was a pretty small list once we got into the nitty gritty and what made sense, what didn't make sense, whether it was HVAC, whether it was the size of the rooms, all of the things.

But I am not the expert on that.

I'm happy to have FAS follow up with you more specifically.

I think I may have mentioned at our last council briefing The executive Pacific is also part of San Francisco's homelessness response plan.

And so that also was intriguing to us, sort of like as an aside, this was an interesting component because they could talk with us about their experience in San Francisco and some of the things they were seeing.

I'll tell you in San Francisco, they were dealing with a very high acuity population and that created some concern for them.

given their experience in San Francisco.

So we have worked with them through a lot of those issues.

Again, I'm not in the nitty-gritty of that, so I don't want to get too far beyond my skis.

But I did think that was an interesting compliment to them, not a factor in their selection, but a compliment to them that they did have experience in a similar but different program approach.

On the HOPE T, well, let me stop and see if you had any follow-up to either of those.

Yes, question about whether or not, given that the plan was 300 rooms, we're looking at 220 rooms, is there capacity to expand?

Yeah, thank you.

I'm sorry, I lost that.

Yes, no, I think we are not approaching our work now as these are the two hotels that will be with us forever and ever, and I think Our goal right now is to get these two hotels up and running, and we will continue to be evaluating additional hotel possibilities.

So I think the answer is yes, we are open to and will continue to look at adding potentially a third hotel.

We are to your, you made a statement about, we had originally intended for our program to hit 300 hotels.

We are rooms, I think we're about 80 or, short of that, so we're going to continue to work toward that.

But I do think, you know, getting these two up and running now, sort of understanding what fine-tuning we need to do in terms of programming, how that informs, you know, future site selection, I think are all things that benefit the program going forward.

My thinking about the expansion that was specific to the Executive Pacific, given that we had previously rented 150 rooms, is there the ability to expand from the current proposed, I believe it's 60 rooms?

I need to get back to you on that.

Okay, thank you.

I'm happy to get back to you on that.

And then you asked about the whole team.

I will say as a general matter, and I think Councilmember Morales would, I think, I hope would agree with me on this, that I think there continues to be a lot of questions about what the HOPE team does versus, you know, today versus what the navigation team used to do.

And I, you know, I experienced that even earlier this week.

I think Councilmember Lewis was on the phone when we met with folks in Pioneer Square asking some of those questions.

And so we actually have have talked internally about needing to do a little bit of a roadshow and a sort of a standard, here's what we do, or here's what they do, a little bit of here's what they don't do.

So folks understand that.

We had a little bit of a conversation about that with the BIA directors a week or so ago.

So I think, number one, there is more that we can and should be doing to explain that.

And two is, as I said before, they, the HOPE team and outreach are working behind the scenes to really start to narrow in on what those criteria are and how they inform priority engagement so that we can be really transparent about that.

And folks know that when they call in, this is the filter it's going to go through.

You and I have had a lot of conversations about that.

And I think we all agree that that level of transparency is really important.

And so I was just briefed on some early ideas about that just a week or so ago.

And so one of the things that I was going to offer today was if it would be, and it sounds like it would be helpful, but it's obviously up to you all, is whether you'd want perhaps the next month's briefing to do a little bit deeper dive into and some of these other components related to it.

Because, you know, Councilmember, there are simple things, and I heard from the VI directors, like, we don't know who to call.

And, you know, so we need to unearth those things a little bit more and make sure there's that that clarity, not just for the BIAs, but for residents writ large.

And we can manage that.

And the Customer Service Bureau, still on its form, has a place for people to put in encampment referrals.

So if those are not going anywhere, we need to be straight with people.

And they are, we are tracking all of that information.

We are tracking, you know, where we see trends.

We are sharing that information with outreach.

We're problem solving as best we can.

We problem solve down third Avenue, you know, just earlier this week, the hope team folks had been out there in coordination with the reach, with reach.

I think, no, no, maybe it was the, the mid folks.

So, you know, we're, we are working through those things, but, but I agree it's right now.

It's a little opaque.

This is, Helen, how I just wanted to.

In broad terms, my understanding is that the HOPE team prioritizes safety and individual well-being first, the physical distress of the individual, environmental or traffic hazards, critical fire concerns that impact safety, safety of schools and daycare, and then kind of the next category would be sites impacting construction or city maintenance projects, and then the next category would be general impacts to neighborhoods or business.

But as Deputy Mayor Sixkiller suggested, we certainly can bring in the experts to talk in more detail about how it's working currently.

Thank you, Director Howell.

That's very, very helpful information.

Appreciate it.

Okay, I just want to make sure I answer all of her questions.

Yeah, it comes from a herbal.

Do you good there?

Okay, perfect.

I'm good.

Thank you so much.

And thank you for that line of questioning.

Council President Gonzalez.

Um, if you have a question, go ahead.

Yeah, it's a little bit of a pile on to the last inquiry that council member herbal made.

Um, so I think I think Director Howell I really appreciated sort of hearing that prioritization that that was a I hadn't heard it so clearly and distinctly laid out.

So I appreciate that.

I do think that that because this is a shift in the way we're doing engagement and outreach in this space it would be welcome I think a deeper dive into how it's working would be welcome, certainly from my perspective as a policymaker, but I also think that it would be beneficial to members of the public to get an understanding of what this is and what it isn't.

Similar to what Councilmember Herbold just said, I did have an opportunity to have some conversation with folks expressing concerns about about some unsanctioned encampments that appear to be having neighborhood impacts on the incorporated side of White Center.

And I think what I heard them say is that Hope had done outreach and then two weeks went by and nobody heard anything.

And so I think there's an opportunity to increase connectivity and communication between the work that is being done by HOPE team members and impacted businesses.

And I think that's really what I'm hearing community folks expressing is just sort of a lack of communication in general and a desire to want to be kept informed about what they can expect to happen next, right?

When we are moving from a model of navigation team enforcement focus of encampment removals to an outreach and engagement model, we need to make sure that people understand what that means in terms of how we're going to be interacting with both those experiencing homelessness and also the impact and surrounding neighborhood.

And I'm nervous that that piece is um, really missing right now.

And so, um, so I hope that we can have a more concerted strategic effort around making sure that that communication is there and that people aren't left with the impression that just by virtue of engaging with hope that that means that, um, there's going to be a removal or other kind of enforcement action.

And so I'd like to, I'll follow up with you all offline to sort of hear a little bit more about what kind of engagement was being done for that particular neighborhood that both Council Member Herbold and I are referring to.

I made a commitment to get back to folks with a better understanding of what was going on there.

So look forward to having those offline conversations and appreciate your all's offer to come back and give us a deeper dive both for our benefit and the benefit of the viewing public.

Thank you, Council President.

I'm happy to have that conversation with you, and certainly to follow up on that specific example you gave.

I would maybe do two things just to add one, just a clarification.

The HOPE team, as currently structured, is not itself doing that outreach.

That is being conducted through, is maybe being helped coordinating and sharing information with contracted outreach providers.

But I just wanna make sure that Council Member Morales knows that the HOPE team is not outdoing that direct person engagement.

That was a big part of the HOPE team budget language.

But we are very much working with our contracted outreach providers to flag those areas.

I think one of the process improvement areas that we're working with folks on is how we get that feed sort of close that loop.

Um, and, uh, both in making sure that, you know, if we ask contracted outreach to go out and do specific engagement of a specific encampment or individual, um, that a, they're doing it and B that we get the feedback, uh, if that issue has been resolved or if there are other services that they might need that the city can provide.

Um, so we're working through that.

Um, um, uh, but, uh, but I, I very much appreciate your, your comments and I'm happy to have that.

offline follow-up.

Yeah, and I would just say that I think for members of the public, they don't know the difference between HOPE Team or a contracted service provider.

They just know that somebody is out there related to this particular issue.

And so I think regardless of what the label of the folks are, there is, there's clearly something that is not connecting in terms of people feeling like something meaningful and timely is occurring, right?

So our job as the ones who own the bureaucracy is to make sure that we're creating an opportunity for understanding and information sharing and information gathering and really strong communication with folks who are in the impacted neighborhood, but also folks who are experiencing homelessness.

And it doesn't matter whether it's under the moniker of this or under the moniker of that.

And so I just wanna, I think what I'm communicating to you is that people were telling me it was the hope team that was out there.

And so I think that therein lies a little bit of the disconnect and also an opportunity to really figure out how to do this work in a way that sort of addresses the underlying issues and the need to connect people safe, warm place to be while also making sure that impacted neighbors in the area understand that the city takes their concerns seriously and that we have a shared goal of addressing the issue with compassion and care.

And that's sort of what I hope we can work towards together here.

Council Member González, I just want to add that we're also adjusting to reliance on outreach providers.

So there's also an additional communications.

Real time information is more difficult for the HOPE team than it was for the navigation team because they literally employed, right?

It was a team.

that all work directly together.

So we're adjusting to, you know, the contractual arrangement being the guide and how to get more frequent communications and information in more real time.

So it's only adds to, not subtracts from that list that you provided.

But I just wanted to add that and mention that.

Great, thank you so much.

Council Member Strauss, you're recognized.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Deputy Mayor, for being with us today.

My original question was, has the hotel shelter unit count increased, decreased, or stayed the same from our budget conversation in the fall?

It sounds like from the earlier questions and answers that that number has decreased.

So my question is then, what is being done to meet the original goal?

Do you need more funds allocated, or is it a matter of I think it is too early for us to

getting this program up and running.

And really, this is something that we've never done before.

And so I do think we are experiencing the growth pains a little bit.

But I think once we get these things up and running and are able to work with Lehigh and Chief Seattle Club to understand what their needs are what other resources or supports they may need, or the program overall may need.

We will certainly not be bashful about identifying those for the council.

But as I said in response to Council Member Herbold, we are focused on delivering what the council funded, and we are endeavoring to move that program forward.

Beginning with these two, and these two hotels.

And then I think we'll continue to find ways to fill in the rest of that commitment.

Thank you.

Yes, please never hesitate to let us know how we can help.

This surge investment from last year's budgeting process really is, in my opinion, the down payment that we need to be making and setting up the programs to be scalable to address the crisis at the scale that we're experiencing it.

One question I did have about the hotels that we are currently utilizing is case management present to house the hardest to house folks that have chemical dependency or behavioral health conditions, or are we focusing on folks that are the easiest to house people that are already stabilized.

Oh, thank you.

Councilmember Herbold actually asked a version of that question and I didn't answer it.

So thank you for asking that as well.

You know, the shelter units will be, all of our shelter units, right?

You know, we are trying to pair individuals with the best, with the housing that best meets their needs and the services that they need to be successful in making that transition from being outside into housing and hopefully on you know, on the journey into more permanent housing.

So, you know, our goal here is sort of a both and council member.

So both, you know, individuals who have high acuity needs, as well as others.

And, but those, but our service providers are experienced with that and case management will be onsite to help support that as well.

I don't know, Director Howell, if you have anything to add there, but I think that's the short, simple answer.

Thank you.

Yes.

I mean, may I just editorialize that I think that the issues that we experience in our neighborhoods can be most relieved by depending on the people who are maybe the hardest to house.

And so ensuring that the programs that we're bringing online are able to house those individuals will be critical to our success.

I guess I did have another question, which is more on the tiny home villages.

Thanks to my North End colleagues, it sounds like we will now have tiny home villages in all of the districts in North Seattle, two in District 4, with one in District 5, and one in District 6. Do we now have tiny home villages in all districts?

And do you have a timeline for that third tiny home village?

I believe with the addition of the university district tiny home village, we now have tiny home we have a number of tiny home villages in each of the council districts that are connected to the city program.

And so that is a great thing.

And in terms of the third site, we do have sites that FAS is reviewing now.

Councilmember Lewis has Voltron it together.

And so I think that's important.

I think I misspoke.

I think actually the the tiny home in D5 is maybe our last district to be covered.

But yeah, so we have not identified the third site yet, Council Member, but our hope is to do that as soon as we can.

I will tell you that Council Member Lewis, we were on a call earlier this week, I think I mentioned with the Pioneer Square folks, and they're trying to garner support for a bill down in Olympia that would allow us to there's sort of exempt tiny home villages from the SIPA program from SIPA requirements.

That is a is a mirror is can be a a significant barrier to the timeline for delivering these projects.

I'll say though with the selection of our second site one of the reasons why we we chose that was it would be very quick to stand up.

So we are trying to embrace expediency over maybe the perfect, and we'll certainly be applying that here as we look at siting the third village, and then obviously through the work of you all, if additional funding comes online, siting additional villages as well.

Thank you.

And the reason I paused just before that last question is I had another question that I had not written down yet, came back to my mind.

In terms of the hoteling and us bringing on a high number of units all at one time.

Are we going to be able to move cohorts of people who are camping together outside together out of public space and into these shelters?

Or are we going to be doing more of a piecemeal approach?

Again, I can't speak to the cohort thing.

I'm not being evasive.

That just is a layer of detail that I don't...

I don't, I don't have but just as a general matter right those referrals we done in coordination with with contracted outreach to the whole team.

And you know whether those individuals are are navigated to a tiny home village or the hotel unit or any other kind of shelter that we have in the system right now.

You know we again we try to do that based on the individual in the field.

and what makes the most sense for them longer term.

So I'm not saying no.

I'm not saying yes.

I just don't know.

But we can flag that as something that we will, I think, as a follow-up, either between now and the next meeting, or if we do have a deeper dive with the HOPE team next month, we can talk.

I'll make sure we're prepared to talk about that.

Thank you.

And the last question here.

and maybe this is setting us up for the next time you come before us, is a bit to your last answer, which is that to have solutions at the scale of this crisis, the programs that we're investing in right now, as I said before, are the down payments to addressing the crisis at the scale that we're experiencing it.

Meaning that if we know that we have 4,000 people living in our public space, then we need to have 4,000 places for people to go.

Can you share with me what you believe the barriers are to providing the level of shelter and housing that we are experiencing the need for?

Is it just, as I've heard before, funding?

Is it siting?

Can you share with me what your thoughts are?

I think it's a combination of things.

I think most importantly, it's important we have places for people to go to.

I don't know that I agree that we need to have 5,000 units of shelter space for 5,000 individuals experiencing homelessness.

What we need is places for people and we need more permanent housing for people to move into.

to create throughput in the shelter system and get people connected to those services, whether it's PSH or other services that they need to be successful outside of the shelter system, right?

The shelter system was never designed, nor should it be, sort of be the end state.

I know you're not suggesting that, but I do think, you know, what we've tried to accomplish, or we're trying to accomplish with our current hoteling program is, again, create a pathway for folks to come inside, have an exit plan for those folks as they come inside, if that's rapid rehousing, if it's moving them to permanent supportive housing, as those units start to become available throughout the course of the year and where other units become available.

You know, remember we were bringing 600 PSH units online this year that does not count.

The units that we are working in partnership with the county executive's office about in terms of citing additional PSH units in the city of Seattle.

So, you know, I think, again, the combination of.

creating capacity in the shelter system, which is being overutilized and has not as much throughput as it has had before with rapid rehousing and exits from the hoteling or other shelters into permanent housing, I think continues to be to our goal.

And of course, in between those two things, there's a variety of of speed bumps along the way.

But at the end of the day, I do think it is about creating more permanent homes for folks to end up in.

I completely agree that we need to keep our capital dollars focused on building affordable housing and permanent supportive housing.

In my mind, that permanent supportive housing that comes online should be counted against our total metrics of providing places for people to go.

I just also recognize that allowing people to suffer in the streets as we are doing today cannot last for much longer because it's not a solution that works for anyone.

And so I appreciate your work on this surge investment.

And as I continue to think of it as our down payment towards to be able to bring solutions to this crisis.

Thank you, Deputy Mayor.

Thank you, Director Howell.

Thank you, Councilmember Strauss.

I know we're going to lose you soon.

I see Councilmember Kerbal has another question.

I want to jump in and ask a couple of questions real quickly and then have Councilmember Kerbal close us out so we can move on to the next topic here.

But I want to delve in a little bit to the rapid rehousing.

And I know that You know, initially we had wanted, you know, 300 hotel rooms and we've sort of talked a lot about that.

And in this hearing today, I think that the way we've sort of set this up, the impact can be much greater if the rapid rehousing is firing on all cylinders.

We're getting folks.

you know, the casework to navigate through.

I wonder if you could maybe talk a little bit right now, like if we're looking back at the end of 12 months, are there any estimates in the department, because I think I've seen some reporting on this, on how many people total could be served and rapidly rehoused over the course of this program?

And how are you coming at those numbers?

So our rapid rehousing, I'm just looking, I want to make sure I use the right number, Council Member, I believe it's 220, I'm sorry, I have so many numbers in front of me here.

230 units for rapid rehousing.

Again, our service provider there is Catholic Community Services.

And, you know, unlike our sort of traditional rapid rehousing program, I think, you know, we have expanded that, the timeline for that program to try to help make it more, I don't want to say more successful, but to sort of recognize the unique period of time that we're in and pairing it again with folks who are coming into our hotels, shelter assets.

It is a key component of our exit plan for individuals as they come into the hotels.

And so, but happy to do a deeper dive with you on rapid rehousing and other ways that we could deploy rapid rehousing to other strategies.

Happy to do it.

But again, our program is up to 12 months.

So an increase from what sort of the standard rapid rehousing program is for about 230.

≫ Okay.

≫ Thank you.

you know, we're able to move 230 people through these hotels.

So at any given time, the capacity of the hotel system could be about 200 people who are currently housed in a hotel.

And then we have a maximum of 230 units the way this has been laid out right now.

That'll be like a permanent accommodation.

I guess I'm just getting a little confused with, like, are we talking about, um, uh, like is the 230 units inclusive of the hotels or are we talking about like a separate chunk of units that are in addition that are gonna help the people that are passing through?

Do you understand what I'm trying to convey?

Yeah, it's a both, right?

So we'll be doing rapid rehousing for folks that in the hotel shelter units where that makes I think it would make sense for those individuals, but also working, I think, again, as part of this surge is also utilizing rapid rehousing.

If we do encounter folks as we are navigating them to new shelter units where it makes sense, we will do that as well.

We may have 230 or 220 rooms in our hotel program as we get started.

The goal is not to just serve 220 or 230 people over the course of the program, but using rapid rehousing and other supports to get folks out so we can keep moving people through.

We even saw that in our winter weather shelters a couple of weeks ago.

We were able to get just shy of 220 folks or so inside and then actually connect them to longer term shelter, so we did have even turnover just in a few days or throughput in just a few days of that operation.

So we're hopeful for how the hotel units will work then in a similar fashion.

Great.

And I just want to touch on a few other things really quick.

We know that this will be kicking in, it looks like, in mid-March.

That's a little later than was initially anticipated, but obviously there's a lot of logistical things that had to be nailed down.

Do we anticipate any savings from the implementation delay from what the council appropriated, given that it's starting a little later in the calendar than we thought it would be?

No.

No.

We'll just, you know, we've still anticipated it's a 12, you know, it's a 12-month program.

And we will be, you know, we're not going to cut it off at the end of the year.

And LVA-12, our anticipation in working with you all will be able to LVA-12 program into 2022 at this point.

All right, so it'll just kind of go a little longer on the other end, is what you're saying.

Yeah.

OK.

And then finally, I know it's been reported a little bit.

I just want to try to nail down the cost here that the initial cost of $17,000 per person is not ultimately the cost that's being used.

What ultimately was kind of settled on by the department for the level of service to effectuate the program here?

We are still in negotiations with one of our providers, council members, so I prefer not to get into that level of specificity right now as we're working through those final numbers, but I'm happy to follow up with you once those conclude.

Right.

Do we have, so, and I also, well, maybe you could answer this just generally, does that number reflect the services and the hotel, or is it just the service number?

It is just the service number.

I think that is correct.

We have the hotel per spot number now.

That is correct.

You are going to ask me for that number and I don't know off the top of my head.

I'm sorry.

Thank you.

Given that it sounds like you are still in the midst of negotiations with the operator of at least one of the hotels, I hope they're listening and we have you here to listen to because you're part of those negotiations.

I just want to again go back to the principles in the council's budget action for not just the work of the HOPE team, but how that work will be linked to our lodging strategy.

And one of the principles is to focus lodging offers towards unsheltered people who lack a variety of barriers to accessing housing and permanent housing, a group that is disproportionately black and indigenous and disabled, and in situations with significant impacts on individuals who are unsheltered, neighborhoods, and the city as a whole.

Public safety impacts, impacts on struggling businesses and vulnerable neighborhoods, individual and public health, including COVID-19 vulnerability and public disorder.

I'm emphasizing this because There was reporting that one of the potential operators was quoted saying that referrals to the shelter will go through the HOPE team, which coordinates shelter referrals at the city level, but will originate from Lehigh.

And so I'm concerned that this implies that Lehigh will get to make its own choices about who is referred.

into the Pacific, the Executive Pacific, without making sure that these principles are front and center.

That's just a statement and expression of expectation.

And then my last two questions relate, one, to the new enhanced shelter and then two to the mayor's housing surge announcement last year that referred to diversion to support 130 more households finding safer places.

I'm going to ask that question first.

So last year there was a housing surge announcement that made a $687,000 commitment for increased diversion services.

And that's a priority that I have spoken to a lot as it relates to making sure that folks who are doing street outreach actually have access to diversion services.

Last year and the year before that, the diversion fund was depleted.

And so I've been and active advocate, this is also something that the city auditor has raised as an issue, that the folks that are doing street outreach should also have access to diversion funds.

So I'm interested to know whether or not there's been any progress made on that particular investment.

And then as it relates to the new enhanced shelter, we've got a lot of different pots of dollars, and it's hard to determine what funding has gone into the announcements that we're talking about today.

So council funded $655,000.

to support 24-hour operations at basic shelters.

Then there's also the $2.75 million approved for the mayor's 125-bed enhanced shelter surge.

I'm interested to know which source of funds Went into the new enhanced shelter that we're talking about now for these 60 beds and whether or not there's we are still looking to fully fund the 125 beds that were announced in the mayor's housing surge Thanks Okay, so

One, some of that I'm going to need to respond, do some follow-up work.

Council member, those are all very good questions.

Let me see if Director Howell and I can get through a few of them.

Number one, just on your statement, thank you for flagging that.

Absolutely, no.

These shelter referrals of all kinds that are funded by the city and operated by city contract will go through the HOPE team.

And that is something that will be part of our contract and has been an area of frustration here over in recent history.

So thank you for flagging that.

I appreciate it and your support.

In terms of the diversion money, I know exactly what you are referring to.

To be honest, I did not get briefed up on that before I came here, so I'll need to follow up with you on that.

I know we had conversations with Outreach Continuum in the fourth quarter of last year about making sure they had flex funding available to them.

to utilize in their engagement individuals.

But I'll be honest, I've kind of lost the thread on that.

It doesn't mean it's not occurring.

I just, I don't know.

So I'll need to follow up with you.

Won't follow up with you on that.

In terms of the colors of money, I will need to get back to you on that as well.

I just, I don't want to give you the wrong answer.

So I just need to get back to you on that.

I cannot remember if it was ESG money or general fund money that was utilized for the new share shelter.

But I'm happy to get back to you.

It's an important question.

And I'm just sorry, I don't know that off the top of my head.

Thank you, and I'm happy to, you can probably tell I'm doing some reading on my screen.

I'm happy to send those questions in writing if it's easier, that way you don't have to go back and rewatch or try to figure it out from your notes.

But I mean, really the main reason that I'm asking the question is that the one pot of money was intended to create 24-hour access at existing shelters, and then the other pot of money, as we understood it, was intended to add 120 new shelter units.

And it looks like what we have is 60 new shelter units.

So it's not just an academic exercise of what pot of money it is, it's what the intent was and what the capacity impact was hoped for.

Got it.

OK.

Yes, we'll follow up with you on that.

I can tell you that the new women's shelter is utilizing general fund dollars.

And we will continue to be looking for ways to expand those non-congregate shelter options consistent with what the council appropriated in the 21 adopted budget.

Great.

I realize Councilmember Morales wasn't present.

I think when I gave my previous admonition that it would be the last question from Councilmember Herbold.

So I'm going to recognize her for the next question.

And then Councilmember Mesquite has been very patient.

And then we are going to close it out and move to the next thing, given the hour.

Thank you.

Thanks very much.

I apologize.

I've been flipping back and forth between a couple of meetings.

So related to the questions from Council Member Herbold and Council President Gonzalez, I think, you know, folks are understandably have trauma from, you know, related to the navigation team and may be more willing to engage.

If they learn more about hope, similar to house neighbors and businesses who are starting to learn or could start to learn more about how this is and how it works.

I believe, you know, folks who are experiencing homelessness could also benefit from this sort of engagement.

So can you talk about whether or how our unhoused neighbors could be provided with information about HOPE and how it works and how it's different from the navigation team that existed before?

Again, I'm happy to do that.

I think it probably would be, Council Member might make more sense for us to talk about how we're doing that with contracted outreach at our next meeting or between now and then again.

The HOPE team is not out in the field doing that direct engagement with individuals.

So to the extent that there is or was trauma from that experience, the daily interaction between the city and on behalf of the city is with our contracted outreach providers, whether that's REACH, Chief Seattle Club, Urban League, whomever that is.

But I hear you that we need to continue inform individuals of that as well as not just those who are part of our outreach continuum, but other advocates and individuals with lived experience or are experiencing homelessness now.

So I do hear you and look forward to talking more about that and any ideas that you have of ways in which we can do that.

We're happy to work with you on it.

Great, thank you, Deputy Mayor and Council Member Morales.

Council Member Mosqueda, close us out.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Deputy Mayor, thank you very much.

I think that, number one, I'm very concerned.

I think that my concern is that these resources are not actually going to help the additional folks that we see out in encampments.

And some of the questions that you have answered have been helpful today, but there is still a level of vagueness in who is going to be helped and who is actually engaging with folks in encampments.

I feel like Council Member Herbold's questions that she asked specifically about the fund sources that are going to be used, is critical.

So I appreciate your commitment to getting back to her on those questions and all of us.

And I know she has that reference right in front of her and we'll be sending that.

So we have something to look forward to in terms of getting answers to those questions.

But I think it's especially important that we get that with a sense of urgency, especially since we just learned last Friday that there's $28 million in underspend in terms of the COVID relief fund money, and we know $10 million is to be spent pretty quickly.

We understand that there is an earmark for $10 million, but with $17 million underspent, it feels like there's a huge opportunity, and that the level of need that we have needs to match our outreach efforts.

I would very much have liked to have had a chance to review this PowerPoint in advance so that we could have sent you a series of questions.

And I know that everyone is working as fast as they can.

But with the chair's permission, I would very much like to follow up with a handful of questions as well.

I think our outreach has to have appropriate shelter to mitigate concerns in encampments.

and that these resources that we're talking about today seem to mostly respond to people who are more independent and have fewer needs.

And I know we talked a little bit about this at the last meeting when we talked about the high needs folks who require human service members and trained personnel to be with them.

But it really is important for us if we are going to make a marked impact, a noticeable impact for communities who see people living outdoors, who don't just need a room or a roof, but they need services to go with it.

I am very fearful that the type of services that we're talking about right now are not necessarily going to yield the type of supportive services to keep folks sheltered and housed.

So those are a series of mostly concerns and also a note of appreciation for follow-up specifically on the fund source question that Council Member Herbold teed up.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Again, our hotelling program is, we will get back to you on the colors of money.

Those colors of money, with them come a program requirements and expectations as well from the federal government.

And again, the hotelling program is being funded by those federal ESG of which there are program requirements about exits with that.

But nevertheless, we will be serving individuals with high acuity needs as part of this program.

Absolutely.

And working to, you know, exit them and everyone into more permanent housing.

So really very much appreciate your feedback, Councilmember, I'm happy to answer further questions that come from the committee.

Thank you so much Deputy Mayor for being generous with your time.

I know you were supposed to have a hard stop at 330. I know that also never happens when you come down here to the committee.

I appreciate you staying extra for a little bit of time and look forward to the update next month where we will have started seeing some folks move into these assets at that appreciate it and why don't we go ahead and move on then to the next agenda item.

So item two, Mr. Clerk, could you please read it into the record?

Council Bill 119975, an ordinance relating to land use and zoning, establishing regulations for development of permanent supportive housing, adding a new section and amending the Seattle Municipal Code.

All right, thank you everyone for being here for the third discussion of this bill in this committee.

And this will be the opportunity now that all the discussion, all the formalities have been resolved and we can finally move forward and start voting on some of the underlying legislation.

Ketel Freeman is here from Council Central staff.

If there's any last minute questions for Ketel.

So before we move the bill, I'm just going to ask Ketel to provide a brief refresher since it's been a month and an overview of the amendments in particular.

And then after the presentation, we'll open it up for some questions for Ketel.

So Ketel, take it away, please.

Thank you.

Councilmember Lewis, Ketel Freeman, Council Central staff.

So, as the committee will recall, the Select Committee held a public hearing on this bill last month, about a month ago, on the 27th of January.

I'll mostly be working from the materials and the memo that was provided in advance of that public hearing.

It stated January 25th, 2021. Just to refresh your memories here, Council Bill 119975 would add a definition of permanent supportive housing to the land use code, establish new regulations and procedures for developing permanent supportive housing, and modify existing regulations to remove barriers to permanent supportive housing.

It does a variety of things.

Among other things, it exempts permanent supportive housing from design review, provides floor area ratio exemptions, authorizes the director of the Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections to waive or modify as an administrative decision specified development standards.

If those waivers would result in more PSH units, it would exempt permanent supportive housing from providing both a vehicle and and bicycle parking and allow permanent supportive housing in certain zones and locations where permanent supportive housing is not allowed as a matter of right.

I can share, maybe perhaps for the interest of clarity, I can share the memo from the 25th, which has the amendments.

In addition to four amendments, one from Council Member Lewis and three from Council Member Peterson, there is a substitute bill, which is an attachment to that memo, and that substitute makes clarifying and technical corrections to pages three and four of the substitute.

There are no substantive changes there.

So prior to moving any of the other amendments, the council should first consider moving the substitute bill.

I'll move on here to the proposed amendments, and I'll briefly share my screen here.

So this is the memo from the 25th.

can you all see that?

And there are four proposed amendments.

The first amendment proposed by Council Member Lewis would modify the definition of permanent supportive housing.

This is based on some feedback from the Office of Housing.

As proposed, at least 90% of dwelling units would have to be occupied by households that are defined as very low-income households in the code.

The amendment would modify that to at least 50% occupied by households with incomes not exceeding 30% of AMI.

This is to better reflect the population that would be served by permanent supportive housing.

Councilmember Peterson has three proposed amendments.

One amendment would add a recital, establishing the council's intent to consider future amendments to the city's housing funding policies to require that is in the proposed bill.

And this would establish a minimum public relations, a minimum component to the public relations to the outreach that would go along with permanent supportive housing projects.

And that minimum component would be at least one neighborhood meeting.

with advertising to new neighbors of the opportunity to come and learn about the project.

And finally, Council Member Peterson has an amendment that would also modify the definition of permanent supportive housing to require that the housing be paired with on or off-site supportive services.

So that is a brief description of the amendments and a reminder of what the bill does.

I'm happy to answer any questions before you all consider those amendments.

Are there any questions for Ketel before we get into this?

Seeing none, Ketel, I think you're off the hook for now, but why don't you hang around just in case?

With that presentation completed, I move the committee recommend passage of Council Bill 119975. Is there a second?

Second.

have been moved and seconded to recommend passage of the bill.

Are there any comments at this point?

Okay.

Note that we are about to move the substitute.

If you hold off, there'll be plenty of time to talk about the substitute here in just a moment.

So at this point, I will move the substitute to amend Council Bill 119975 as presented on the substitute in the central staff memo.

Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded to amend the bill as presented on the substitute in the central staff memo.

I will make additional comments on this item, and then I'm going to open the floor to general comments on the substitute.

I think we've had an extensive discussion over the last couple of months about the importance of this bill.

I think it should be noted that in 2021, we are going to see 600 units of I think it is important to note that we have moved up permanent supportive housing from the housing levy that the office of housing has prioritized.

It is going to be a considerable component of a lot of the outreach and shelter figuring out strategies to do more of this, figuring out ways to realize some of the regional planning that's been discussed by the Third Door Coalition and others over the last year to really scale regionally permanent supportive housing.

This bill is going to help us get there.

Obviously, it's just a regulatory change.

We're going to need to back this up with resources, with new revenue.

by building coalitions with our regional partners through the Regional Homelessness Authority.

We can truly say, having passed this, that we're doing everything we can from a regulatory and reform standpoint to stretch the value of taxpayer money, to remove red tape for our friends in the provider and housing community to get more of this stood up, and to really be putting our money where our mouth is when we're saying that this is an emergency and we should be responding to it like I will open it up if folks want to make more comments on the substitute.

Any comments at this time?

Seeing none, will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of the substitute?

Gonzales?

Herbold?

Yes.

Juarez?

Aye.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales?

Yes.

Mosqueda?

Aye.

Peterson?

Yes.

Yes.

Strauss?

Yes.

Mr. Chair, there are eight in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

Jacob, so the motion carries, the substitute is adopted, and the bill as amended is before the committee.

Are there additional comments on the amended bill before we consider amendments?

Seeing none, we will proceed to the amendments.

I move to amend Council Bill 119975 as presented on Amendment 1 in the Central Staff Memo.

Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded to amend the bill as presented on Amendment 1 in the Central Staff Memo.

So we've discussed this amendment a little bit before in previous conversations.

I think it is important to reflect area median income levels in this code section that more accurately reflects the true nature of permanent supportive housing in terms of the indigency or near indigency of a lot of the people who take advantage of the ability to get into permanent supportive housing.

I think this responds to some criticisms from colleagues who have been worried about the possibility that different types of development or different types of projects could fall under this.

This is an added layer of protection to make sure that it is truly limited to helping the universe of folks that we see every day that we really need to be providing more housing options for.

And I think that this amendment helps address that.

So are there any other comments on Amendment 1?

Seeing no additional comments on Amendment 1, will the clerk please call the roll on adoption of Amendment 1.

Gonzalez?

Aye.

Herbold?

Yes.

Juarez?

Aye.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales?

You get me.

Mosqueda.

I. Peterson, yes.

So on.

Yes.

Strauss, yes.

Mr. Chair, there are nine in favor and unopposed.

Thank you.

The motion carries.

The amendment is adopted and the bill as amended is before the committee.

Thank you.

Moving on to the next

Thank you, Chair Lewis, and just to take a step back, wanted to thank you for this legislation to expedite permanent supportive housing and also for your work on the tiny home villages and and for bringing the Dirk administration earlier to talk about their efforts to reduce homelessness so that we have a comprehensive picture.

So with that, I've had three amendments.

The first one is the whereas clause.

I move to amend Council Bill 119975 as presented on Amendment 2 in the Central Staff Memo.

Second.

It's been moved and seconded to amend the bill as presented on Amendment 2. Council Member Peterson, you are recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, Chair Lewis.

So, Council Members, as you know, we all adopted Resolution 31956, establishing the Council's goal to implement internet for all.

So, as we consider housing legislation, this whereas clause talks about being mindful of trying to get more internet connections in housing that we are subsidizing and so the way that would be done in the most practical fashion talking with central staff is to eventually amend the housing levies administrative and finance plan that this whereas clause is non-binding it's just signaling that we want to be always thinking about how to expand internet access and adoption and here we have an important housing bill in front of us and we just want to remind everybody that we still are committed to that resolution and want to look at ways to increase access and adoption of internet.

So happy to answer any questions.

Are there any questions or comments on Councilmember Peterson's Amendment 2?

Okay, I don't see any.

I can just flag Councilmember Peterson that I will be supporting this amendment.

I have talked to a lot of the stakeholders we worked with on this legislation.

No one has raised concerns regarding this amendment.

So I do consider it to be friendly and in keeping with the underlying spirit and purpose of the bill.

So thank you for bringing this forward.

Seeing no other comments or questions, Mr. Clerk, will you please call the roll on the adoption of Amendment 2?

Gonzales?

Aye.

Herbold?

Yes.

Juarez?

Aye.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales?

Yes.

Mosqueda?

Aye.

Peterson?

Yes.

Sawant?

Yes.

Strauss?

Yes.

Mr. Chair, there are nine in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The motion carries.

The amendment is adopted, and the bill as amended is before the committee.

There are two other amendments from Councilmember Peterson.

So Councilmember Peterson, would you like to move your amendment number three?

Thank you, Chair Lewis.

I move to amend Council Bill 119975 as presented on Amendment 3 in the Central Staff Memo.

Is there a second?

Oh, sorry.

Great.

It's been seconded.

So it's been moved and seconded to amend.

The bill is presented on amendment number three.

Council Member Peterson, you are recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, Chair Lewis.

Council Members, as we discussed at the last meeting, this is to put a baseline requirement in there that there be at least one community meeting so that the real estate developers are connecting with the surrounding community, explaining the project to them, because this will be, since this will be not having design review, it'll be a process removed where public and others get to get involved with the project, this just puts a baseline.

Like, yes, let's speed it up.

And as part of your community relations plan, that community relations plan should have a public meeting with neighbors to discuss the project so that they're aware of it and can be supportive of it.

Are there any comments on Council Member Peterson's amendment number three?

Okay, seeing no comments, Mr. Clerk, will you please call the roll on amendment number three?

Gonzalez?

Aye.

Herbold?

Yes.

Juarez?

Aye.

Lewis?

No.

Morales?

Yes.

Mosqueda?

Yes.

Peterson?

Yes.

Sawant?

Yes.

Strauss?

Yes.

Mr. Chair, there are eight in favor, one opposed.

Thank you, Mr. Clerk.

The motion carries.

The amendment is adopted and the bill as amended is before the committee.

Council Member Peterson, would you like to move your fourth amendment?

Thank you, Chair Lewis.

And acknowledging your vote earlier, I mean, if this does turn out to be an issue later, happy to revisit that with you.

I'm hoping that it'll be implemented smoothly, but want to respect your intent as well.

So this, I'd like to move to amend Council Bill 119975 as presented on Amendment 4 in the Central Staff Memo.

Is there a second?

There we go.

So it's been moved and seconded to amend the bills presented on amendment four.

Councilmember Peterson, you are recognized to address the amendment.

Thank you, Chair Lewis.

Council colleagues, as we talked about at the last meeting, this is, and as Keetil explained, the way it's currently written is that this is about permanent supportive housing getting the exemption from design review.

This is just clarifying what we're talking about, because the existing draft says may, and so this is just saying permanent supportive housing means multifamily residential use, which is paired with on or off-site voluntary human services.

So it's really just trying to specify what we're talking about when we talk about permanent supportive housing so that it gets that exemption.

I'm happy to answer questions about it.

Are there any comments or questions on Councilmember Peterson's amendment number four?

Okay, seeing none, Mr. Clerk, will you please call the roll on amendment number four?

Councilmember Mosqueda, raise your hand.

Oh, I'm sorry, Councilmember Mosqueda.

I didn't see you.

Go ahead, please.

It's okay, Mr. Chair.

Just a comment.

I think the last time we talked about the word voluntary in this context, there was a question just from the workers' right perspective on whether or not the services were being provided voluntarily.

And the clarification was it's actually the recipient, that the recipient is voluntarily receiving those.

And I thought that was important just to highlight so that no one thought we were asking for volunteers and not paying folks because that is also wage theft.

So we do not support wage theft and just thought that that clarification was helpful.

It's on the recipient who's voluntarily receiving those services.

Thank you, Council Member Mosqueda.

I will also maybe just briefly say that we did talk to a number of stakeholders in the Office of Housing, and no major issues were raised with this amendment, so I will be voting yes on it.

Any other comments or questions before we call this amendment?

Okay, seeing none, Mr. Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Gonzalez?

Yes.

Herbold?

Yes.

Juarez?

Aye.

Lewis?

Yes.

Morales?

Morales?

Mosqueda?

Aye.

Peterson?

Yes.

Sawant?

Yes.

Strauss?

Yes.

Mr. Chair, there are nine in favor and none opposed.

Thank you.

Mr. Clerk, the motion carries.

The amendment is adopted and the bill as amended is before the committee.

Are there any additional comments on the bill as it has been amended before we vote on final passage?

Council Member Muscata.

Mr. Chair, I just want to say thank you.

Thank you for shepherding this through.

I think that these changes are important and meaningful and obviously a component of a larger puzzle that we're all continuing to work on for more affordable, accessible and supportive housing for families across our city.

So thank you for your leadership on pulling this together.

It's a critical piece of the larger puzzle.

Thank you, Council Member Mosqueda.

Are there any other comments before we vote on final passage of the bill?

Seeing none, Mr. Clerk, will you please call the roll on the recommendation that the bill pass as amended?

Gonzalez?

Aye.

Herbold?

Yes.

Juarez?

Aye.

Lewis.

Yes.

Morales.

Yes.

Mosqueda.

Aye.

Peterson.

Yes.

Sawant.

Yes.

Strauss.

Yes.

Mr. Chair, there are nine in favor and none opposed.

Thank you, Mr. Clerk.

The motion carries.

The recommendation that the bill passes amended will be sent to the March 1st City Council meeting for final consideration.

With that, Council colleagues, if there's no further business to come before the committee and nothing for the good of the order, we are adjourned.

But hey, Council Member Mosqueda has something for the good of the order.

I'm sorry, Council Member Morris is probably not surprised.

She likes to tease me about always coming in at the last minute with a comment.

But question, Council Member Lewis, I really appreciate you stewarding these meetings, given that they are select committee meetings of the Council of a whole.

Do you have a sense of when we are going to meet again to follow up on some of these important questions that many of the Council members put out, including yourself, related to homeless services?

given the urgency of these issues.

Mr. Clerk, when is our March meeting scheduled for?

It's always scheduled for the fourth Wednesday of the month, and that will be March 24th.

Great.

And I will say, Council Member Mosqueda, that my intent is to have Um, another update from the executive on on the topics we covered earlier.

I don't know if it'll be as as.

as detailed as today's slide-based presentation, but I do remain committed to having that standing update from the mayor's office and human services on the status of the shelter surge investments and ongoing fine-tuning and work around the HOPE team as we discussed today.

And I will say that we will circulate we will circulate responses that we get from the executive to some of the questions where the answers might not have been clear or they had to go back and find something that wasn't immediately available.

If they distribute it only to our office, we will distribute it to everybody else.

I just wanted to flag that.

With that, if there are no other comments for good of the order, we are adjourned.

Are you sure, Council Member Musqueda?

You don't got anything else?

Come on, girl.

I know you got one more.

Thank you, everyone.

Have a good afternoon.

Bye-bye.