Finance, Native Communities and Tribal Governments Committee 3/30/2026

Good morning, the March 30th, 2026, Special Finance Native Communities and Tribal Governments Committee meeting will come to order.

It is 9.30 a.m.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

Anyone not present is excused until they arrive.

Council President Hollingsworth.

Councilmember Kettle.

Here.

Councilmember Saka.

Vice Chair Rivera.

Present.

Chair Strauss.

three present, two excused.

Thank you.

And we also have Council Member Lexis Mercedes-Rink, and I believe we will have Council Member Lynn joining us as well.

With that, we're going to get right into the two items that we have on the agenda today.

I promised colleagues that if I was going to schedule a 9.30 a.m.

Monday morning meeting that we would endeavor to be brief.

I know that we have a hard stop no later than 11. So we have public comment here today.

We have, if you could to bring over the most recent public comment sheet.

We'll read the rules into the record.

But before we do that, we have two items on the agenda today.

Briefing discussion on the 2026 Shelter Expansion Ordinance and a briefing and discussion on the 2026 Expansion Funding Ordinance.

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

Seeing no objection, the agenda is adopted.

We currently have 13 public speakers in person and for online so everyone has two minutes.

That will be a little bit less than a half of an hour.

I will ask that we move expeditiously and so I will call everyone's name up so that everyone knows where in the line that they can go and if everyone can line up and we'll tick right through.

We're excited to receive your public comment this morning.

With 13 plus those online signed up, each person will have two minutes.

We'll start with in-person speakers first.

and the public comment period is up to 60 minutes unless it is extended.

Speakers will be called in the order in which they registered.

We'll begin again with the in-person speakers and you will hear a chime when you have 10 seconds remaining.

So the chime is not the end, the chime is 10 seconds remaining.

We'll start with the first folks here in chambers.

I'm gonna read your names and if you wanna, I always like this center microphone, the taller one, you can move it around to wherever you need it.

It's usually the easiest.

First up, we have Lisa Nizza, Clintonia Vaughan, Miles Richardson, Corey Wilson, Amin Hassan, Sharon Lee, Marta Kidene, Kara Williams, Lisa Dugard, Alan Francis, Anitra Freeman, Sam Wolf.

And with that, clerk, are you ready for public comment?

Fantastic.

Could you share the timer screen?

Mr. G?

Apologies, I've caught an error with the remote public comment code, so I will be sending new emails to the remote public commenters with the correct information.

Fantastic.

Thank you, Mr. G. So if you are watching online, a new code will be sent to you right now, and we will make sure to wait until we receive your public comment.

With that, we have, everyone has two minutes.

We have Lisa with us.

Thank you for being prompt.

Welcome.

Good morning, Chair Strauss.

I got it on.

Anthony, is the microphone on?

Is this on?

OK.

Can you hear me?

Yes, we can.

Yeah.

Yep.

It's good to go.

OK.

If you can hear me, we're good.

Good morning, Chair Strauss and members of the committee.

I'm Lisa Knitsa, principal at Knitsa Stegen, a real estate company active in Seattle for the last 50 years.

We have the Starbucks and Tutabella headquarters in Soto and the Union Station Garage and manage or are in development on over 1,500 attainable apartment homes in South Seattle, the CID in Eastlake.

I'm here as chair of the Downtown Seattle Association Streets to Housing initiative, and after over 30 years of working on social system change initiatives, creating thriving communities, I know we can do better in Seattle to meet the housing and mental health and behavioral health and addiction needs of our unsheltered neighbors.

Having built tiny homes with my colleagues at Knitsa Stegen and visited a number of tiny home villages, I'm here to support funding for the mayor's proposed shelter expansion in downtown Seattle.

and its utilization of a model of evidence-based, high-support, person-centered sheltering.

This shelter expansion needs sufficient funding for the appropriate level of staffing for ongoing care necessary for those being housed in order to address their often complex needs, safely and without negative impact.

In addition, there needs to be an appropriate level of funding allocated to hire staff to support good neighbor agreements.

by developing and implementing good neighbor protocols for residents and effective communication, cooperation, and feedback loops with shelter neighborhoods.

Finally, the true cost of operating each shelter unit needs to be fully understood to be sure that funding allocated does not run out before unit residents have moved into permanent supportive housing or have obtained housing on their own.

If adequate funding is allocated and deployed effectively, the mayor's proposed shelter can be an excellent step towards a combined set of community responses, housing resources, and services that can change lives and outcomes for those in need in Seattle.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Up next we have Clintonia, and then Miles, and then Corey.

Good morning.

Good morning, and get real close to the microphone.

Okay, how's that?

Perfect.

My name is Clintania Van.

I work with the LEAD program on the West Precinct.

I was a case manager for a year, and I'm a LEAD clinical supervisor for the last five years.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak in front of the Council today regarding the shelter expansion proposal.

I'm going to acknowledge the subject of homelessness is overwhelming, so I'm going to speak specifically to the challenges we face as care coordinators with the LEAD program.

We have been entrusted with providing intensive case management, guiding our clients through our complex systems.

This is made incredibly challenging when we cannot provide the most essential resource, shelter.

I cannot express how important shelter is.

A safe and secure placement.

Stability has to be the starting point.

We need to stop expecting it both ways.

Expecting those experiencing long-term homelessness to be productive members of society, rebuilding their lives, addressing mental health and treatment and their legal obligations with the weight of another night of sleeping on the streets.

This approach has repeatedly failed.

It fails the individual and it fails our city.

When our clients are in survival mode, sleep deprived, or at risk of harm, their goals, service plans, and personal care suffers and is delayed.

As a lead supervisor, I can make a referral for mental health, substance use, and provide legal advocacy.

but due to prioritization and limited beds, I cannot make a shelter referral.

This is why this legislation is so critical.

There should be a spot for anyone in need.

Please support the effort to end homelessness in our city and stop the harm it is causing to our community.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Up next is Miles Richardson followed by Corey and then Amin.

Miles, good morning.

Good morning.

My name is Miles Richardson and I'm with Cher Weill and I stay at Tent City 4. Without shelter, people die.

Cher and Weill together operate nearly 500 shelter spots all over Seattle.

We've been calling for more shelters for a long time and urge you to support more funding for shelter.

More shelters in every council district and easier ways to get leases for public space for shelter.

Homelessness touches us all in every neighborhood.

Given additional funding, support now and for future projects, ShareWheel could develop more self-managed shelters this year, and we want to pitch in.

We're sponsoring a faith shelter summit at 1 p.m.

next Wednesday, April 8th.

1 p.m.

April 8th.

And urge you to send representation from your offices.

Faith communities and many other good people want to pitch in too.

Let's all work together.

I'll now pass to some other residents of Cher Weill.

Thank you, Miles.

Up next is Cory, followed by Amin and then Sharon Lee.

My name is Cory Wilson and I stay at Tent City 3. With SHARE, they operate 500 or more shelters and just kinda gonna tell you my story and how the shelters have helped me.

I deal with a lot of mental health issues, anxiety, depression, BPD.

Long story short, I didn't become homeless.

I was on the brink of suicide.

And Tent City 3, I can really say, saved my life.

And I do feel like more of them could be beneficial to the community because it provides structure and it also provides community.

And I know for me, it is like literally, like I said, saved my life.

I wouldn't even be doing this type of thing right now if it weren't for Tent City 3. but like I said, it's brought a lot of community.

I dealt with the suicide and came there and it's kind of gotten better, so yeah.

Thank you.

Thank you, Corey.

Powerful words.

Up next is Amin followed by Sharon and then Marta.

All right.

Thank you for having us here.

My name's Amin.

I stay at Bunkhouse, part of Share Wheel and District 2. Without shelter, people die.

Months ago, I lost my job, and then shortly thereafter, my home of five years.

And for the first time in a decade, I had no place to call my own.

As a person in recovery from addiction, opioid addiction, homelessness is particularly perilous because of the lack of safe shelter for people like myself.

I was one of the lucky ones, because I found Cher the day I lost my apartment, and as a result, I've been staying clean for one year as of the 18th of this month.

But so many others aren't so fortunate.

Recovery is a daunting task in and of itself, but recovery while on the street or outside of the rare few safe shelters like Cher is nearly impossible.

As many of you know, we are in the midst of an opioid epidemic that has ravaged our city.

My story is not unique, but my outcome is, unfortunately, the exception to the rule.

However, with additional funding for SHARE, I truly believe more people can be helped on the path of recovery.

Thank you.

Thank you, Amin.

Up next is Sharon Lee.

Good morning, I'm Sharon Lee and I'm the executive director of the Low Income Housing Institute or Lehigh.

I first want to thank the council for all your past initiatives because you consistently have funded new tiny house villages as well as RV safe parking.

And so we are really happy to support today both council bills before you.

The impact has been tremendous in terms of what the city has done.

Right now we are housing 1,000, actually last year we housed 1,145 people in tiny houses in Seattle.

And because of our commitment to the region, we also

have tiny houses in King County outside of Seattle and also in Pierce County.

So total, Lehigh is housing 1,665 men, women, and children in tiny houses.

And if we did not have this opportunity, everyone would be living unsheltered.

I want to say that the first bill to allow FAS to sign leases is really important.

We have had a great working relation with FAS.

If you remember Lake Union Village, they were able to set up the utilities and hygiene services.

And then we work very closely with SPU and City Light so they're able to bring in the power pole, they're able to connect us to water and sewer.

So I think this partnership is very, very important to quickly stand up more tiny house villages.

And I want to say on the second bill, We also support this because we actually want to thank the mayor's office and the budget office for digging around for additional funding.

And I know this is very important to set up villages as well as operate them.

And we hope that you will more funds in the hard to, you know, we know that there are resources and we hope that you will commit funds this year.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And Sharon Lee was right.

The FAS bill is first.

We were just looking at the printed agenda.

Well done, Sharon.

We always appreciate your attention to the detail.

With that, Marta is up next and then Kara followed by her.

Marta, welcome.

Thank you.

Thank you council members for taking the time to hear from community members this morning.

My name is Marta Quirana and I am the Community Engagement Manager at Low Income Housing Institute, a shelter, urban rest stop, and affordable housing provider.

We believe the homelessness crisis in Seattle needs to be addressed in line with the deep need for our unhoused neighbors.

Doing this work has shown me how much dignity a person feels when given the autonomy over their personal space after having been unhoused.

Reclamation of self is possible when the adequate services and shelter resources are made available.

The legislation before you today is an opportunity to implement a solution I ask that you support the expansion of shelter by approving the 4.9 million before you and allowing the finance and administrative director to identify and sign lease agreements for properties at a minimum of 65,000 square feet to allow city staff to coordinate with providers with the urgency required.

Through both of these pieces of legislation, and deep shelter resources, Seattle will be able to take a huge step into a future where clients in search of a shelter will be able to find a bed and services to help them on their path.

I believe it takes a village.

Additionally, we would like the council to prioritize deep supportive services to make high support shelter possible.

Our fellow shelter providers are here today because we know that meeting community needs is most successful when a wrap-around approach including case management and behavioral health services are integrated.

Thank you.

Thank you, Marta.

Up next is, I always think I get it wrong, but Kara Williams and then Lisa Dugard and then Alan Francis.

Yes.

Good morning, council members.

My name's Kara Williams.

I live in District 3 and work at the Low Income Housing Institute.

I'm here today to speak in support of the legislation before you to give the Finance and Administrative Services Director leasing authority and to allocate 4.9 million to expand shelter capacity.

The scale of unsheltered homelessness in our city demands urgent action.

As I walked to City Hall today, I walked right underneath I-5, where I saw 10 or more people living in tents in a place that could not be louder, less private, or more destructive to their health.

Giving the FAS director leasing authority will give the city greater flexibility to execute lease agreements for shelter programs.

This will enable the city to prepare sites for shelter much more quickly than currently possible.

At Lehigh, working to identify and prepare land adds months to the timeline to opening new tiny house villages.

This change could make that process go from 7 to 12 months to 3 to 4 months.

I also support the budget legislation allocating $4.9 million to support shelter acceleration.

This funding will back proven solutions to bring people indoors.

We ask for your support of this legislation.

In addition, in order for these shelter acceleration efforts to work, we need high support shelter models that support people living with high acuity mental illness and substance use disorder.

It will require more funding to meet the operational costs of hiring skilled case managers, providing integrated behavioral health support, staffing 24-7, 365, and ensuring throughput to housing.

We have a chance to get this right and we need deeper funding to do so.

Thank you for your commitment to ending homelessness in our city.

Thank you.

Up next is Lisa Dugard followed by Alan Francis.

Lisa, welcome.

Good morning, council members.

I'm co-executive director of Purpose Dignity Action, PDA.

We strongly support the mayor's effort to greatly increase the availability of dignified, non-congregate shelter this year.

We appreciate the urgency the mayor and her team are bringing to bear on this, which is a dramatic difference from the past, and we're committed to help in any way that we can.

However, we need your help.

The resources that will be required to do this well exceed what are currently in hand.

We primarily need low-barrier, high-support staffing models, and we need strong neighborhood impact mitigation strategies.

These models exist, but they require significantly more resources than the customary Seattle shelter staffing approach.

REACH's data on over 4,000 unique individuals encountered citywide last year suggests that the large majority of those living unsheltered in Seattle are dealing with complex behavioral health issues and face other difficult barriers.

We need to avoid the path that Portland went down last year, opening 1,200 new shelter units but without committing to a low-barrier, high-support program model.

As a result, 80% of those offered shelter units declined to come inside or weren't welcome.

Here in Seattle, we know how to do it differently.

From 2020 to 2025, in the Just Care and state right-of-way encampment resolution programs, over 95% of the chronically unsheltered individuals offered shelter accepted entered case management, and over 70% of those people moved on into permanent housing.

In January, Portland's Mayor Keith Wilson actually came to Seattle to figure out how to increase their engagement rates and successful outcomes and took the lessons of low barrier high support programs back to Portland to make some changes.

Thank you for the strong support.

This council has shown for addressing neighborhood issues through effective interventions that actually address human needs.

Please help the shelter expansion efforts succeed by ensuring that it has the resources needed to actually work effectively with those who historically have not been welcome in our shelters and who can stabilize and thrive with intensive support.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Up next is Alan Francis followed by Anitra Freeman.

and then Sam Wolf and then Dennis Sills.

And if anyone else would like to speak, now's the time to sign up.

Alan, great to see you.

Good morning, my name is Alan Francis.

I'm here today in support of the mayor's shelter expansion.

The biggest barrier people face when they're living outside is not lack of willingness to accept help, it's a lack of available shelter.

We need shelter of all kinds.

Share and wheel together operate nearly 500 shelter spots all over Seattle.

We've been calling up for more shelter for a long time and urge you to support more funding for shelters, more shelters in every council district, and easier ways to get leases for public space for shelter.

Homelessness touches us all in every neighborhood.

Shelter delayed is shelter denied.

Every postponed project means another month of uncertainty.

Every cold night feels longer.

Given additional funding, support now, and for future projects, Sharon Wheel could develop more self-managed shelter this year.

Let us put our expertise to use and pitch in.

Years ago, I was discharged from the hospital in Olympia with no place to go.

My mental health became too much for my family to be able to care for me.

I stepped off the bus in Seattle without a clue what my next step was going to be.

Once I screened in a share and had stable shelter, I was able to get the mental health support I needed to work towards getting out of homelessness.

Thank you.

Thank you, Alan.

Up next is Anitra Freeman followed by Sam Wolf, Dennis Sills, and then we will move to the online public commenters.

Good morning.

My name is Neetra Freeman.

I'm here with Cher and Weill and the Weill Women in Black, who stood again just last week for another 21 people who died unsheltered.

Without shelter, people die.

Cher and Weill have to nearly 500 shelter beds.

And still, our real homeless women's shelters have to turn women away at night, certain that some of them we'll never see again until we stand for them.

We need all kinds of shelter.

We need low barrier, high service shelter.

We also need more of the self-managed congregate shelters that SHARE does.

I stayed in a SHARE self-managed congregate shelter while I was homeless in 1995. And that community helped me survive homelessness.

get into housing and stay stable in housing since February of 96. It's still my community.

Remember the power of community.

And let's all pitch in to create the beloved community here in Seattle.

Thank you, Neetra.

Up next is Sam Wolf, followed by Dennis Sills, and we'll move online, Joel Killa, Illa Vigder, Daniel Viveros, and Jeff Paul.

Good morning.

Good morning, counsel.

My name is Sam Wolf.

I work for PDA as the Seattle King County Policy Director.

I'm here to support the mayor's proposed shelter expansion and advocating that we spend the money to do it correctly.

PDA runs a program called CoLead, which is a high-support shelter model that works with people who have unaddressed behavioral health needs, especially substance use disorder.

PDA's CoLead program has excellent outcomes related to intake, retention and stabilization, and move-ons to permanent housing.

This is because the model is specifically designed for its population, with 24-7 staffing, on-site safety teams, and programming that meets its clients' needs.

PDA agrees with other low barrier and high support shelter providers that the estimated cost per unit per year of this type of model exceeds the estimated $28,000.

And yet, over 60% of the people who talked to REACH's outreach program living unhoused disclosed unaddressed needs related to behavioral health or physical health needs.

This is a huge portion of the unhoused population who deserves dignified shelter with support that meets their needs.

The shelter expansion is a huge opportunity to make a difference for Seattle and it's important that we invest in it, but equally important that we invest in it to do what we need it to do, which is to work for the people living unhoused in Seattle.

Please ensure that this shelter expansion is designed in a way that meets the needs of our people and significantly increases the capacity of high support shelter programs.

Thank you.

Thank you, Sam.

Up next is Dennis Sills.

Good morning, Dennis.

Always good to see you.

Good morning.

My name is Dennis Sills.

I work at the Downtown Seattle Association.

Chairman Strauss and council members, these two ordinances are important first steps to expand shelter in our city.

Both ordinances you are considering stand to deliver more units of enhanced shelter, but do not fund the outreach, services, supports needed to get people into housing and keep them housed.

The Downtown Seattle Association manages the Metropolitan Improvement District, where more than 165 downtown ambassadors serve our neighbors every day.

Many of those ambassadors themselves experience homelessness, and today they encounter individuals daily who are in urgent need of housing and support.

That perspective informs our work and our urgency.

In Seattle, more than 4,000 people are living unsheltered, with a significant concentration in the downtown core and in Pioneer Square.

DSA has shared a comprehensive plan with the mayor's team and each of you.

And that would begin in Pioneer Square to demonstrate how better alignment and reallocation of resources can lead to improved outcomes.

We can't continue to do the same and expect different results.

But again, this is only an important first step.

To scale this work, we must resolve the federal HUD continuum of care risk while releasing the $11.1 million in withheld city funding to support this effort with shelter expansion and also to make a meaningful impact before the World Cup and beyond.

These additional resources are needed to strengthen street outreach, expand services within enhanced shelter, provide financial support to keep people stably housed, and activate support and outreach positions in partnership with BIAs and local stakeholders, and also to deploy analytics to measure outcomes and improve accountability.

We are hoping to advance these bills and continue building toward a more complete solution.

Thanks.

Thank you, Dennis.

We're gonna move to online public comment.

Anyone in person can still sign up until we are complete with public comment.

If that is of interest to you, please do so now.

We've got Joel Killa, Ea Vigder, Daniel Viveros, Jeff Paul.

And we are just taking a moment.

I see Joel is present with us now.

Start already off mute.

Take it away, Joel.

Good morning.

My name is Joel Killo.

I've worked at Evergreen Treatment Services REACH for nearly nine years, both as an outreach worker and now as our Associate Director of Outreach.

I've seen firsthand how life-changing a shelter referral can be for someone living outside.

It is often a monumental step towards stability, allowing people the physical security needed for them to improve their physical health, begin treatment, find employment, and or move into permanent housing.

As an outreach worker, I came across people with vastly different needs and in all kinds of different situations.

Well-trained homeless service providers were able to help people living outside find the right shelter match for the specific needs for them.

But this matching only works if we have a diverse set of shelters with available openings that offer robust services and staffing on site.

One size fits all approaches with many vulnerable folks outside.

I'm thrilled that Mayor Wilson is focused on building out this system.

Last year, the outreach team at REACH came across nearly 4,000 people living outside.

Of those people, over 60% requested support with physical health, behavioral health, and or substance use.

Our team is ready and able to connect these people to the right shelter for them to work towards their goals.

Far too much of my time at REACH has been focused on telling people no.

Over and over again, I've had to tell clients I'm working with, no, there is not any availability for shelter tonight.

I've had to explain to hospital social workers that there's often no capacity for people with serious medical needs to move from a hospital stay to anywhere but the streets.

I've had to break into countless frontline staff at REACH that our shelter system has no capacity to support their high-need clients.

We're unable to give these clients a safe place to stay while they work on their complex goals like housing or treatment.

I'm hopeful I'll be able to start saying yes soon.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Joel.

Up next is Eva Victor followed by Daniel Viveros.

Looks like Victor is not present.

Daniel Viveros is next, followed by Jeff Paul.

Thank you.

I see Daniel now.

Star six to unmute.

And thank you to Mr. G and the whole Ledge IT team for getting that new confirmation code out there with enough time for everyone to get it.

Daniel Viveros, if you want to press star six.

Star six.

Daniel Viveros, I see you're here.

Star six to unmute.

And Anthony, if you want to promote Jeff Paul as well.

And I see Daniel is off mute.

Take it away, Daniel.

Hi, good morning.

Thank you for your patience.

My name is Daniel.

I am a certified addiction nurse and lead several of Evergreen Treatment Service REACH's drug user health focus program.

I wrote a spiel.

and I also think that many of my partners in this work and service providers have already identified the key issues.

We need more shelters.

We need a diversity of different types of shelter including low barrier and types that have services embedded in them.

I also just encourage the City Council to tap into the deep wells of knowledge that already exist in our city, including individuals and groups that represent the unhoused community and organizations that are experienced doing this work, such as REACH and many different organizations as well.

Embedding behavioral health services in a certain majority of the shelters available will help this project find more success and I thank you all for your time.

Thank you for your work supporting our own house neighbors.

Thank you, Daniel.

And up next, we have Jeff Paul and we'll come back to Ia Vigder.

Jeff, I see you're here.

Star six to unmute.

Here you are.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Hello, council.

My name is Jeff Paul.

I'm a member of the Services Not Sweeps Coalition.

I've seen Seattle's response to homelessness up close and personal over the last five years.

And while positive things have no doubt happened, a lot has just been truly devastating to watch.

I've known many people living outside who thought the city would come and offer a spot in a shelter to help them get out of the traumatic cycle of homelessness.

Instead, the Unified Care team has come and told them they had to leave, but there was no shelter beds for them to offer.

I've watched folks give into despair following this and choose to end their lives rather than go through this cycle again.

Rest in peace, Tom.

I miss you, man.

We need more shelter now.

We need more housing as quickly as possible.

Adding these funds, making it easier to build shelter, and taking even more funds from the encampment sweeps is necessary to save lives and ensure that our city can finally get out of this crisis.

Pass this legislation and let's take a step forward towards a city that lives up to our values.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jeff.

We're gonna come back one last check for E of Victor.

Not seeing it and clerk is checking to see if there's any additional, nope, no additional public commenters present or remotely present.

And with that, we will move on to the next agenda item.

Seeing as we have no additional speakers, we will move on to the next agenda item.

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

Item 1, Council Bill 121184, an ordinance relating to leases, expanding the Director of Finance and Administrative Services authority to execute leases when the land is used for transitional encampment purposes, amending Section 3.127.020 of the Seattle Municipal Code and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

For briefing and discussion, presenters are Ali Panucci, Director of the City Budget Office, Nicole Vallestro-Soper, Director of Policy and Innovation, and John Grant, Mayor's Office.

Thank you, and as I introduce folks, if you wanna start sharing screen, colleagues, we are moving on a quick timeline, and if it is too quick, just let me know and we will slow down.

But with this, this will be the second time we've had this presentation.

Feel free to share screen.

And so this is the second time we've had the presentation.

We had it in council briefing before.

This does satisfy the first of two in my informal rules of having a budget or any bill in my committee twice before voting.

With our timeline as it stands, we plan to vote this legislation out of this committee next Tuesday, April 7th.

And so that means amendments need to have, the deadline for ideas is tomorrow.

and then the deadline for pencils down is Thursday by 5 p.m.

I know that folks have already been working on amendments, so I appreciate everyone being ahead of schedule and thank you for the entire committee table for presenting at council briefing.

It sure has sped everything up.

With that, I'm gonna turn it over to Director Panucci and Nicole from the Mayor's Office and we've got Jennifer Labreck from Council Central Staff here today.

So with that, I'm gonna turn it over to the table if you wanna do introductions.

And colleagues, we will take questions as we go unless we start chewing through a lot of time because I know that we have a hard stop in 54 minutes.

So feel free to take it away, Nicole.

Great, thank you Councilmember Strauss and thank you to the entire Council for quickly moving through these pieces of legislation that meet the emergency that we all know exists in our city.

And I also want to extend a big gratitude to all of the providers and the residents of Shelter that are here with us today.

Your voices really center us on why we do this work.

and another just extended gratitude to Councilmember Strauss for moving through this very quickly.

So I am speaking to Shelter Expansion Council in Bill 12-1184.

My name's Nicole Vallistero-Soper and I'm the Director of Policy and Innovation with the Mayor's Office.

and this bill really helps us expedite expanding a thousand new shelter units in the first year of 2026 in order to have as many people as possible to have a safe place indoors.

Next slide, please.

As we know, service providers are burdened with navigating permits, negotiating lease terms, and finding land suitable for standing up new shelter programs.

Many service providers lack background in real estate and working with brokers and typical micro shelter programs often exceed 18 square feet, ranging from 20,000 square feet to 55,000 square feet.

and up to nine months of delay can occur just in site selection, permitting and negotiating lease terms.

So this piece of legislation allows the finance and administration services director greater flexibility in signing lease agreements related to shelter programs.

It increases the square footage limit from 18,000 square feet up to 65,000 square feet in alignment with the SEPA legislation moved earlier this year.

It removes cost per square foot cap to allow for market costs.

The existing limit is tied to inflation and would otherwise be capped at $9.50 per square foot.

And a lot of the costs that we're seeing right now go up to $12 per square foot.

and enables the city to lease sites and do initial prep work for raw land.

And it would allow the city to select and prepare sites quickly to be turned over to shelter operators and significantly expedite the opening of new micro shelter programs.

And this gives you a sense of the active square footage of active micro shelters.

You can see that a good number of them already exceed the 18,000 square foot limit.

and this gives you a sense of the current process that it takes to stand up shelter.

Would you click the illustration?

So right now, when we want to cite new shelter, a mayor's office and council approves a budget and then they hand over that budget to KCRHA and HSD.

They add sites to master services agreement with KCRHA and then they issue an RFP to select providers and then they select those providers.

and then once the providers are selected they have to go through a process of identifying land either through purchase or through lease or through donation and then at that point they have to do the prep work to either get permits or do the earth work and set that land up and then they get to actually start building.

What we are looking at now is moving the, move it over here, the site procurement and the selection, provider selection in tandem and the city selects the sites and prepares the raw land.

And so that might look like making sure the utility hookups are set up and that it's ready for a developer to go ahead and start constructing tiny house villages.

and this is really key to unlocking a much faster timeline.

It would reduce the timeline from nine to 12 months down to three to five months.

Thank you very much and any questions on this piece of legislation?

Thank you.

Director Pannucci, you don't have overlay on this one or do you?

Nope.

Fantastic.

Jennifer Lebrecht, over to you with council considerations.

I don't have anything to add.

I think that is an accurate description of the legislation and would say that it does address.

I think site selection has been identified as one of the primary challenges, although not the only challenge for sure, in standing up new shelters, that's consistently been an issue.

And so that this legislation does take steps to bring the site selection responsibility into the city rather than individual providers.

And so is reasonable to assume that it could help to facilitate the creation of more shelters on a faster timeline.

Thank you.

If you could tick back to slide five, I'll make some comments, but I would just wanna see if my colleagues have any questions or comments on the signing authority bill.

Finance and Administrative Services reports to this committee, which is why the FAS bill comes through this committee.

If you could tick back to slide five.

Oh, okay.

And I see actually, Council Member Rivera has her hand.

Over to you.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you all for being here this morning.

Chair, are we only to ask questions about the finance piece, but not the actual shelter plan?

Yeah, this bill is just about the signing authority.

We'll take up the budget in just a moment.

Okay, then I don't have questions about the signing authority.

I do have questions about the shelters as proposed here and the information given about the active micro-shelters.

Okay.

So you let me know when that's appropriate for me to raise.

Thank you.

Fantastic.

We'll move on to that bill in just a moment.

Any other questions?

I just raised this the slide, I think it's five, slide five, the square footage.

Can you walk through this one more time?

We were taken through it so quickly.

It's just that this is really the crux of the issue.

And I really appreciate how the mayor's office has brought this forward as a way that we can expedite the acquisition of the land so that we're not just kind of out there trying to look around.

We're actually moving the needle on opening these shelters.

Thank you very much, Budget Chair Strauss.

So average square foot of active micro-shelters.

So here you can see in terms of some of the shelters, Camp Second Chance, Georgetown, Henderson, Inner Bay, Maple Leaf, New Rosies, Olympic Hills, South End and Junction Point.

These are nine sites in Seattle right now that all exceed 18,000 square feet.

and most sites that we are looking at that would be within existing census limits are going to exceed 18,000 square feet.

So if we want to site, if we find a piece of private property or a piece of land that is owned by another government entity that we would wanna lease, this would allow us to site average size shelters across the city based on land availability.

Thank you.

And this changes nothing about SEPA regulations or the neighborhood meeting requirements or anything like that.

This is really about the rules that we place on our own department directors as far as what they are and are not allowed to do on behalf of the city.

Am I understanding that correctly?

That is precisely correct.

Thank you.

and so when it comes to all of the other siting provisions, those remain constant and the status quo is out there still today.

Really, all we are talking about is what authority we are delegating to our Department of Finance and Administrative Services Director.

Colleagues, any other questions?

Councilmember Rivera.

Thank you, Chair.

I do have a question about the Nicholsville Central District and Northlake sites were not included on here.

but I'd like to know what the square footage of those are and also it says they're a different model, how so?

I think these started out as a similar model and now are operating under a different model and would like to, for the record, ask about that.

Thank you, Council Member Rivera.

I'm gonna pass this over to my colleague, John Grant, to answer.

Yes, Councilmember.

Excuse me.

I believe in the central staff memo that was sent to you, the full list of all the different sites in square foot was listed.

I don't have that in front of me, but you can make reference to it.

But I would estimate it's around 5,000 to 10,000 square feet for those sites, so it would reduce the average to maybe 21,000, so not a substantive difference.

And the main difference between those sites and some of the ones that are listed here is, you know, Nicholsville and Sherwield, it's a self-management model versus a staffed model, and that was the big distinction.

Thank you.

I really wanted the information also for the record.

The public doesn't always read the memos that were provided by central staff, so I also want to note for the record that those sites were 7,500 and I believe 5,000 respectively.

I do think that at the time those shelters were put together or rather the tiny home villages were put together this particular model you're contemplating now is not in effect but also would like to know for the existing tiny home villages that we do have are their models going to change to fit this particular now new model with the supportive services etc.

Thank you, Council Member Rivera.

Speaking to this specific piece of legislation, this legislation wouldn't change requirements around how any sites act.

It just allows us to, allows the FAS director to sign leases and set up new shelter more quickly.

In terms of the broader question that you have, speaking to the shelter program and the vision for it, There are a number of high acuity shelters that currently operate in the city.

We are building on what works and then also hearing the need for improved services and staffing models and working with providers to ensure that the resources that we have as we stand up new shelter take into account their feedback on how we more accurately and adequately provide services to folks who have a lot of needs in this moment.

So it wouldn't change any existing sites, and this wouldn't legislate that, and none of the legislation that we put forward legislates that.

However, it is the intention of this program, assuming adequate budget, to do that work.

Thank you.

And I ask in the context of it would have a budget implication if we're changing existing sites to conform with this model.

That's why I'm raising a chair in the context of this conversation.

I do understand that an aspect of this shelter proposal will go through land use where we're going to be talking more at detail and Jen can confirm for us about the actual proposal and what it might look like, correct?

I just want to make sure the actual proposal in terms of what the shelter expansion will look like or I think that conversation is taking place over really all three of these bills I do think today when we get into the budget legislation that we'll be hearing more detail from the executive about what their plans are although and I think that is just the nature of where we are at with this legislation that many details are still to be determined, including things like per unit operating costs and the level of services to be offered.

I think the executive can offer at a high level some of the assumptions they're making, for example, when they're putting together their budgets and coming up with the estimated number of units.

But we just don't know for sure.

And that is the nature of the decision that is before council right now.

Thank you Jen.

I have lots more questions but then it sounds like I'll have opportunity to ask those later.

Thank you, Chair.

Fantastic.

Last question from me today is this is simply regarding the FAS director's ability to sign leases when the land is used for transitional encampment purposes only.

So the lower level that is restricted for their ability to sign leases is still retained for all other uses.

Is that correct?

That is correct.

And this is a narrow exemption simply for transitional encampments.

So said another way, if the Charles Street garage, if we suddenly needed more room to fix our city's motor fleet, the FAS director would not be able to just sign if it was at 65,000 square feet.

Is that correct?

Correct.

Thank you very much.

Colleagues, any further questions on this item?

Seeing no further questions on this item, will the clerk please read the second item into the record?

And you can read the short title if you'd like.

Item two, Council Bill 121185, an ordinance relating to the city's response to homelessness, amending ordinance 127362, which adopted the 2026 budget, including 26 to 31 capital improvement project.

Fantastic, thank you.

And what I'm gonna ask for is if, The committee table can run through this entire presentation and then we'll take questions.

So colleagues, if you have questions on specific slides, just take note, but I will also ask for slide numbers next time.

With that, back to the committee table.

I don't know who's kicking it off, Nicole or Director Panucci this time.

Director Panucci, over to you.

Thank you.

Good morning Chair Strauss, Council Members.

Thanks for having us today.

I will walk through the budget bill associated with the Shelter Expansion Proposal, Council Bill 121185. If we can go to the next slide.

I'm going to sort of provide an overview of the entire budget we are looking at, identified to date for this work this year, and then we'll highlight where I'm talking specifically about the items that are in the bill before you, but wanted you to have the full context.

So this slide just summarized what our current estimates are for the costs for the first 500 shelter beds.

But as Jen just described, this is a estimate at this point in time.

And as more specifics are developed, we will refine the numbers.

But we are estimating about $17 million, $17.5 million of costs to stand up these first shelter beds, as well as the ongoing operating costs of about $17 million per year.

Again, this is based on a number of assumptions and estimates, and it will ultimately depend on the actual costs of each site development, as well as the level and types of services needed for any individual site.

But we are estimating the cost per unit in an ongoing way could be about $25,000 to $45,000.

overall.

That kind of sets the framework.

Moving on to the next slide.

This is actually the table that is in the legislation before you.

This is the spending that we are asking the council to authorize right now that isn't already assumed in the budget.

I just wanted to explain, because of the way our budget system works, It appears like we're asking you to approve $8.2 million, but it is actually $4.9 million.

It's because we have to move money from, authorize the movement of money from one fund into another fund, and it's what we call a double appropriation.

So just want to clarify for public transparency, you would be authorizing $4.9 million of spending in total.

That's what's in the bill before you.

Moving on to the next slide, this is the summary of the sources of funds we are looking at.

The two lines in blue text with the asterisk are the ones that are actually subject to the legislation before you.

The other sources are money that is available to the executive to spend without needing additional council authority.

You provided authority previously.

I do just want to flag that the KCRHA underspend line should actually be 7.58, not 7.75.

I got a refinement this morning, and so I'll update central staff on those details, but just a minor modification there.

But this is the total funding that we have currently identified for this work this year.

So the first two items I'll describe are use of federal funds, community development block grant funds.

The first one is $3.3 million from a revolving loan fund in the Office of Housing.

The Office of Housing has been unable to award these funds, and in 2025 it was proposed to be dissolved and reallocated in order to use the $2.8 million of CDBG funding that's described in the next section that expires in 2026. These funds must be spent first.

And so these kind of move as a package together.

Moving on to the next section of funding, $1.6 million that is in the legislation.

This is from a downtown fund.

We discussed this a bit at Council Briefing.

It was part of a fund that was established in 1985, and it was part of a floor area bonus program.

So funds must be used for the provision of downtown health and human services.

So that's what the funds will be used for in this case.

And then also using $2.1 million of funding that is subject to a proviso that council placed for substance use treatment and recovery services of this amount.

according to the proviso, up to 2.1 can be used for providing substance use disorder treatment and other behavioral health supports.

So these buckets of funds will be used to help support the service side of the program.

And then finally, some underspend that was allocated in the 2025 budget for homeless services at year end.

The King County Regional Homelessness Authority, or KCRHA, had about $20.5 million in unexpended general from balance from the 25 budget.

Unexpended can mean a number of things.

Some of these are outstanding invoices that have not yet been paid from the previous year.

Some of it is work that was intended to be completed but wasn't spent.

So about 13 million is needed to pay for those outstanding invoices and to complete work that is intended to be completed and is still needed.

And about seven and a half million dollars will be used for the shelter expansion program.

That is a summary of the proposed budget.

I know there are questions about the budget, so I'm happy to take those.

Fantastic.

Before we jump into that, I will appreciate the fact that you somehow got slide numbers in here halfway through the presentation.

That was fast response on your behalf, Director Panucci.

Before we move on, I would like to check in with Jennifer Labreck to see what council considerations there are.

I realize we didn't have time to check in to see if you've got a formal presentation today or what you'd like to share with us from your conversations with our colleagues.

First, I'm gonna turn my mic on.

I do not have a formal presentation today.

The memo, the central staff memo was distributed late last week, and so it does provide an overview, actually, of all three pieces of legislation, including the one that increases the census count that's going to the Land Use Committee.

Because the mayor has transmitted these as a package, we are providing our analysis of all three together.

I will walk through very briefly just a couple of the policy considerations in the memo.

The first policy consideration is really that council is being asked to approve legislation to fund and facilitate the creation of the first 500 new shelter units, but without detail on actual costs and how the city will pay for those ongoing obligations associated with those units.

Perhaps another way of putting that is that council is being asked to pre-commit resources to these ongoing obligations without knowing what kind of trade-offs it will need to make in the future to pay for them.

And that is just the nature of this piece of legislation.

As we also just discussed, there are many details that are still being figured out including things like what are the services that will be offered and how much they will cost and so while we do have some estimates from the executive we don't at this point for example have detailed operating budgets of what will be offered and how the shelter will be resourced to be part of the neighborhood.

If it's okay, I'll just run through the couple other policy considerations if we have time.

All right.

I think the second policy consideration is just around timing.

I do think that it is reasonable to assume that the legislation, all three pieces really that are before council, could help to facilitate the faster creation of shelter units in 2026 and beyond.

I don't think it's a reasonable expectation to assume that passage of the legislation would necessarily result in 500 new units before June won the World Cup, just given the challenges with standing up shelters, no matter how much dedicated time there is to it.

And the third policy consideration is really just shelter itself has value, as we've heard today, can provide a secure place for people experiencing unsheltered homelessness and a better opportunity to receive services.

It's also intended to be a temporary solution with the end goal of a shelter resident moving on to permanent housing.

and throughput from shelter to permanent housing is a challenge and it will be exacerbated by a current lack of funding for more permanent supportive housing.

We know that the Office of Housing currently has one permanent supportive housing project in their pipeline and does not intend to fund any more at this time because of a large amount of uncertainty around both federal and state funding for permanent supportive housing.

So we're looking at increasing shelter in a time when we're bringing on less of the housing with services that many people need who are exiting homelessness.

OH does have a number of other units in their pipeline funded, you know, generally between to be affordable to 30 to 60% AMI, but even for people who don't need services, often their income is too low to be able to afford even one of those affordable units.

so council can anticipate future conversations about the need for housing and programs that can help people transition out of shelter and into permanent housing.

And I will stop there.

Thank you, Jennifer.

I do see attached to the agenda item today just a two-page PowerPoint looking over some of the potential amendment ideas.

Do you want to walk through that with us?

Is this story time?

Sure.

Let's do it.

I think I need to swap.

So actually, I'll take a pause.

I'll check in with colleagues about the base bill, and then we'll move to amendments.

Okay, sounds good.

There we are.

Colleagues, any questions at this time?

I see Council Member Rivera.

Thank you, Council Member Strauss.

I'm gathering my thoughts.

Thank you.

On slide one, the cost estimates, 500 shelter beds at the cost of 17 million, which is 25, to $45K a year per unit.

So I'm calculating $2,000 to $3,750 a month per unit.

What is included for that cost?

Thank you for the question.

I'm going to ask my colleague, John, to talk the details of what's assumed.

Thank you, Councilmember.

So we are assuming that these are programs that are fully staffed with 24-7 staffing, that there are on-site case managers and on-site behavioral health specialists.

This can vary from program to program.

So for some high-acuity programs, the cost could be much higher, around $45,000 per unit.

for other programs that maybe have lighter touch services and fewer behavioral health supports, it could be that lower amount.

Another thing that informs the cost per unit is whether it's on privately owned land or publicly owned land.

For example, Inner Bay Village, which is a tiny house village that is sited on I believe, Port of Seattle land.

The lease is something like $10 a year for that site.

So that dramatically reduces the cost per unit when it's on public land because there's no, in many situations, there's no rent costs.

So it depends on each site and it depends on the program model that'll tell you that cost per unit.

Thank you, Mr. Grant.

So are you saying that the $2,000 a month cost could be on publicly owned land?

The lowest of that average, the $25,000 per unit, I think that would take into an assumption that it's usually on publicly owned land, yeah.

So the more expensive end of the range is privately owned?

It is informed by many factors.

including the cost of land and I would say the service model.

So like how many FTEs are at that site or how many behavioral health specialists are on that site.

The biggest cost for these programs is the 24-7 staffing typically.

And for the 500 shelter beds, do you have a sense of how much support, staffing support they will need?

Are you expecting these 500 units to be needing the 24-7 behavioral health and case management support?

Yeah, so just to be clear, there's 24-7 staffing, which doesn't necessarily mean behavioral health staffing.

Typically, behavioral health staff can, you know, be, like, four to five days a week, and it just depends on the program model.

So, for example, like, the STAR Center, which is DESC's high-acuity program, that would be way outside of the realm of this budget to have 500 star centers, if that makes sense.

It's going to be a range.

So some service providers are going to have lighter touch services or fewer case managers, depending on the acuity of the folks that they're trying to serve.

And we're trying to be in conversations with providers to make sure that there is a good service match with the funding level that will work for that provider and the specialization of services that they provide at those sites.

If I could just add, said another way, we are not assuming that every single one of these sites and shelters will need the highest touch of shelter service, because that would be assuming every bed is at the 45,000.

However, should the first couple of sites where we actually have contracts in place and all of that need that level of service, this budget will not stretch to as many units.

And 24-7 means seven days a week, 24 hours, but you're saying in some of these it could be less than that?

No.

Every site would have, is assuming that they're at a base level, would be 24-7 staffed.

And you don't know how many sites you're going to stand up for these 500 shelter beds because these are 500 units and you don't know how many actual sites you will have for those because you're still figuring that piece out.

I'd say that's accurate.

And then so with the service, with the ones that have that service component for the higher acuity, what happens when folks then are in hopefully recovery?

They move, they go through treatment because this is supposed to provide treatment as well.

And then they get into the recovery stage.

But there are other folks there who may not be at that same stage.

So do you switch them to a different?

place, do you find, I mean, like, what happens?

I guess I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I'm thinking ahead to folks that may, hopefully what we want is for folks to get treatment and be in recovery, and then what happens to those folks?

Yeah, I know that, not at this hearing, but at a future hearing, there's going to be a number of providers to help provide some texture to the services that they provide, but I think what I've been hearing from providers is that there is a a focus on case managers providing housing navigation services.

So when folks, I think, are stabilizing in shelter and could be good candidates to get into permanent housing, I think the hope would be to graduate those folks and get them into housing as the next step.

Thank you, Mr. Grant.

But we know we don't have enough permanent housing or permanent supportive housing either.

So either of those types of housing.

So presumably then they would be here until a place would be identified, a permanent place, and we don't know how long that would last.

Is that fair to say?

I'm not sure with that hypothetical situation, Councilmember, how to answer.

Well, we don't have enough permanent housing for people.

That's why we're standing up these tiny house villages, correct?

I'll speak to this, so thank you Councilmember Rivera and then I'll pass it back to my colleague John to add anything that he needs to.

What we're seeking to do in this moment is meet the emergency in the moment that we're in and putting as many folks and providing as many people as possible with the option to be sheltered.

We understand and know that the permanent supportive housing gap is a real crisis that due to a lack of federal dollars that we're also facing and we want to work with the council and to identify other potential solutions to bring people into long-term stable housing that might not just be permanent supportive housing, but we would have to work together to figure out what those specific models would be.

And I'll pass it over to John to add anything that you want to...

Yeah, I think that the focus of the program council member is to address folks who are unsheltered and to get them into a shelter program as quickly as possible, and then, when we can, match them to a housing program that will meet their needs as it becomes available.

I'm sorry.

Again, though, if we had permanent supportive housing and or permanent housing for those that don't need the permanent supportive housing, the goal would be to get people into that type of housing, not temporary housing.

A big piece of that is that we don't currently have permanent supportive housing units to house people or permanent housing to house people that don't need the permanent supportive piece, correct?

That's correct.

Okay, thank you.

That was the question I was asking for about earlier.

I have another question, if that's okay.

May we come back to you?

We've got two other folks with 20 minutes until Council Member Kettle's hard stop.

Okay, Council Member.

May we go on?

So Council Member Kettle and Council President Hollingsworth and then Council Member Rivera, we can come back to you.

Great, thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

I just want to first welcome Dr. Panucci, Director, did I say doctor?

Some of your colleagues have got me into that habit, but Director Panucci, but also Director Velasoro Supa and Mr. Grant and of course our own Ms. LeBrecq.

And I really want to thank everybody who came out today in public comment.

Groups that I've been working with on a regular basis, no particular order, but PDA, great to hear about co-lead and lead shared wheel.

My team will be potentially there.

I can't be there next week.

Lehigh, obviously working with Lehigh on a regular basis.

to reach DSA.

I really want to thank DSA for their work, and then tied to that, Ms. Nitze's gone, but with her program as well.

It's really important to have all these pieces in place, and, you know, as Anita said, the power of community, let's all pitch in.

There's a lot of people pitching in, and so I want to thank, and Evergreen, too, by the way.

Sorry.

Obviously I've mentioned to the mayor directly that I'm supportive of ramping up this shelter effort for a host of reasons, some of which I'll start to go into.

But key here too is, and so I'm gonna say it first, is that this is us doing our job better, so then we can also help KCRHA do its job better too.

We have to set up that regional effort for success.

and you hear little bits, even today, you hear little bits why that regional approach is so important.

And it's tied to this too, we should be putting pressure, engaging with the county to do a similar effort.

And I think there's some, support in that, but nothing concrete, definitely nothing like what we're doing here in the city.

But at the bottom line, we do need to ensure that regional approach is strong and what we do contributes to the strength of that regional approach and augments it in a lot of ways.

And we should also more broadly be calling out the county and the state for their work because as mentioned in one of my amendments that may come up later in the meeting, when they had the point in time count, You know, just a touch over a third had serious mental illness, which is a state function, mental health.

47% had a substance abuse disorder, nearly half.

That's a public health challenge.

That just reiterates, we need the county and the state to do its job.

If the county and the state did its job, if we had a stronger regional approach, a lot of these things could start falling in place in terms of what we're doing in the city.

So I just wanted to highlight that.

to start off, because we can't lose that piece.

That's a bit of a foot stomp.

I am supportive of Tiny Home Villages.

We just stood up Olympic Hills in Lake City, which came about from a council budget action we took.

My team was really working hard on that.

And I'm a supporter of the Tiny Home Village and RV combination, which we had in District 7, but then had to shut down.

But that effort, of which I've been there more than once, was successful.

I started seeing a lot less RVs on Nickerson, and those that I did see, that lower number, were in much better condition.

And I'll say it again because I've said it many times, once you have five, you have a drug market.

Once you have a drug market, you have stolen good markets.

And so these are the things that we need to be mindful of what we're doing.

And tied to this is the engagement with community, and I've talked to various service providers about this.

And so I note the good neighbor agreement.

I've also gotten a lot of pushback on that.

And I understand because the usual concept, the construct of a good neighbor agreement can be problematic sometimes.

And that's why we as a council have our neighborhood engagement and mitigation plan.

So this year, the legislative department is doing its study.

So then next year we can put this out as best practices.

and I thank my team for all the work they're doing on that because that goes to how do we engage better with our communities, our neighborhoods, which in the long term helps us.

For example, the Salmon Bay Village was run well.

Was there instances here and there?

But it ran well, which aids the follow-on to be stood up.

Because I can say, hey, my district, it was run well.

In fact, not too far from where I live.

And so that neighborhood engagement mitigation plan also known as good neighbor agreement kind of pieces, are really important in terms of long-term success.

And also tied to this is our SHIP, the Seattle Housing Investment Plan.

And with the change in administration, we need to make sure this goes over well.

The first part of this was only looking at affordable housing, and we got the report.

And Ms. Labreck, I think, will tell you sitting there at the table, that it was a very valuable tool in terms of what we were doing as a city in terms of affordable housing.

And this year during the budget process we said it was so successful we want to give you a little bit more.

Look at affordable housing but also on one hand look at permanent supportive housing and on the other side social housing and how it impacts affordable housing.

How can we be smart strategy wise?

How can we make smart decisions related to build new or renovate or you know maintain?

All these kinds of things and I think that would help long-term in terms of what we're doing to deal with the emergency, you know, in terms of the shelter initiative.

And so I think that's so very important.

And again, all hands on deck effort.

So again, everybody that's here to include the Community Solutions Initiative.

I think that's very important.

Accountability.

We got numbers here.

Everybody can read Danny Westneet from this weekend.

I have been talking for the public, I have been talking to providers, departments on a regular basis saying, we can't have the county happen here.

So what are you doing in terms of these contracts?

It's so important that we do not have what happened in the county, as highlighted by Danny Westneet's article over the weekend, happened here in the city government.

It's about good governance.

I think we have a strong team.

My team will engage.

We have a, you know, a budget director who's on it, but that needs to be said though.

And so I just wanted to say that.

And in the end, in addition, I am supportive of this effort also because it helps address the seam between public safety and housing, between public safety and human services.

The more that we work that seam where those pieces come together and make sure that it's working well, I think we'll be in a better place.

And I just want to end Oh, she's not here anymore.

Again, by saying, you know, so important is the power of community and let's all pitch in.

So, Chair, that was a statement.

No questions, unless you have a response.

That's my question is, do you have any response to that?

But otherwise, thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Councilmember Cattle.

Anything to share?

You'll have many opportunities in a couple minutes.

Seeing none at this time, Council President Hollingsworth.

Thank you, Chair.

Really quick, thank you all for being here and the presentation.

Really quick, can you all define what underspent is for King County, for the King County Regional Homeless Authority?

Sure, so underspend is a...

Think type real quick.

Common practice is not to stop sharing a screen just so that we can keep ticking back to the PowerPoint.

So if maybe, and I might have messed that up when we were talking about amendments, but if you could go back to that underspend slide, because this is a very important point.

And thank you, Director Pannucci for the clarifications that you provided in those written words.

Back to you.

So underspend is, in any given budget year, a department or a contract or that sort of thing is allocated a certain budget amount.

So they assumed they would spend, let's just say $100 million, because I can do that math faster in my head.

And at year end, when the books closed at the end of the year and all the invoices that had been filed to date and people's paychecks went out the door and all of that thing, some money will be left unspent.

In general, that money in the general fund, what would happen if no other action was taken, it would lapse, what we call lapse to the general fund.

So it would be money that would be available to be appropriated for something else.

However, there are a couple of processes that happens.

Sometimes there's work that occurred in the previous year where the invoice just was not submitted in time to be paid before the counting year.

ended.

So a good chunk of that is related to work that happened in 25. Invoices were not paid before the year closed, and so it allows us to pay that.

Sometimes there's money added to a budget.

Let's say a council priority for a specific thing.

Sometimes it's added in a mid-year budget or an annual process for a number of reasons.

like taking nine months to set up a site, for example, or tricky policy considerations.

The money was budgeted but wasn't spent.

It was one-time money.

There isn't money in the current year budget to complete that work.

So that is what we call carrying forward and or if it was carried forward in a contract.

So the contract is part way done but not fully completed.

Awesome.

Thank you for that.

just because we had passed some budget stuff in 2024 and I know a service provider was having a hard time finding a location for a day shelter for youth.

And so they're still in that process with King County Regional Homes Authority.

We still want that set up and just wanted to make sure like those funds, even though it was considered underspend or whatever those definitions are, that that money would be not considered in this 7.7.

I can check and follow up on that very specific question.

I will say there is also sometimes money that is in the annual budget that is allocated, so my office will look at it and say, actually, you have enough budget in 26 to cover that cost, so we don't need to carry it forward from the previous year.

So as you can imagine, I'm looking at every dollar request carefully and doing our best to to keep everything moving forward as intended.

Awesome.

I'll follow up offline, because the day shelter for the youth is incredibly important, and they're just trying to find a location.

So anyways, but yeah.

But thank you, Director Panucci.

I appreciate it.

We'll follow up offline.

Thank you.

If that money was part of the participatory budgeting process, which your very smart staffer just reminded me of, that is absolutely carrying forward.

Awesome.

Thank you.

Fantastic, nice work.

Before we go back to you, Council Member Rivera, I wanna check in Council Member Rink, Council Member Lynn, do you have anything to share for today?

We are starting to run up against the clock.

And Council Member Rivera, do you mind if I share my comments, then I'll give you last word?

Sure.

Fantastic.

Colleagues, just another reminder, We haven't even gotten into amendments, so I'm going to be even more brief.

So this is our nice reminder that amendment concepts are due tomorrow and amendments pencils down this coming Thursday.

I've asked a number of questions about structural deficits, ongoing costs.

We can continue to follow up with this.

A couple things.

When we talk about the expediency of setting up shelter, the signing authority, this funding is all important.

It comes down to permitting, which is not in any of these bills.

We know that Everett Washington was able to set up an entire shelter in 48 hours.

I bring that up.

Everett is the seventh largest city in Washington.

The seventh largest city in Washington on May 29, 1907 was Ballard until it was annexed.

That was 119 years and one day ago.

But I just say that because it doesn't matter what we're doing here if we don't have the boots on the ground making sure that those plans are permitted and that we're giving that certificate of occupancy quickly.

At my town hall last week, we had an individual talk about what their needs were and I haven't heard them necessarily addressed here.

their needs are to make sure that their wheelchair can get into the unit their needs are to make sure that they're able to get their medicine that they can have their possessions their partners and their pets and that was something that was very direct and I don't know that that is what this shelter is setting up I don't know that today and so that's something that I will continue to follow up with you about how are we providing access to people that is different than what is available today because we have gotten the folks inside that are the most straightforward to house and shelter.

The folks that are remaining out there have the more complex issues like what we heard about in public comment.

I remember three years ago A number of the organizations in the audience today and myself set up a LearyPod pilot where it was a mix of people who had straightforward issues and very complex issues.

There were over 50 people involved.

When we had access to the highest needs shelter, We got 37 folks directly into that type of shelter, but we had three more people who unfortunately needed to go to tiny homes that didn't have that type of 24 seven case management.

I understand that they all have 24 seven staffing, but what I'm talking about is the case management.

When we got the 37 people into the high-need shelter, they were all successful.

The folks that were straightforward that went to the tiny homes that did not have 24-7 case management, most of them were successful except for these three folks that really needed those higher needs.

What I can tell you is I watched the ebbs and flows of homelessness in my district.

Last summer, it was ebbing in the wrong direction.

It was getting worse.

During the fall, it stagnated and got better.

It has not gotten better from then.

We stagnated over the winter in a time where there's usually a reduction.

Today, things are worse than they were two months ago in Ballard, and it's not the folks with straightforward issues.

It's not the folks that were going to get into tiny homes that don't have the 24-7 case management.

not staffing, case management.

The folks that are out there right now need that 24 seven medically assisted treatment access.

And so we're gonna continue the conversations.

I'm not gonna keep up much more airtime, but I'm letting everyone know where we're at in district six and what we need, because we've seen from 2023, we got a lot of those folks who had straightforward issues out into shelter.

and we haven't seen a resurgence of that population in the same way.

We have seen an increase in the population of people who have really complex needs that need a higher level of shelter than just a tiny home.

With that, Jennifer Labreck set me up with a great question earlier for you, Director Panucci, talking about usually in a budget process, we get to explore the trade-offs before us with the dollars that we are spending compared to all of our other city needs.

Right now we're taking this a little bit out of cycle and that's okay.

And usually we would have that ability to see the trade-offs.

Can you help us understand if we were to approve this funding, how would we explore these trade-offs moving forward throughout this year and in the fall budget process?

Sure, I would say you usually can explore the trade-offs during the annual budget process.

You usually cannot explore those trade-offs when there's a budget adjustment that happens throughout the year, which is actually not that unusual, although we do try to keep it to a minimum.

And so I think what we are saying here is this is the mayor coming out early, expressing one of her key priorities as she begins to work towards building a budget proposal to transmit to you this fall.

And so for the ongoing costs, that's where we will see the trade-offs that the mayor considered in building the budget and the choices that she made in proposing a budget to you on how to cover these ongoing costs.

and then you can decide whether or not you agree or disagree.

As you know, we are embarked on the budget process.

We're collecting ideas from departments.

My team is looking across the city for options to identify, but this is really the mayor saying to you very transparently, this is a priority for her in building her next budget and identifying those ongoing costs along with the ongoing costs of many, many things that do not have sustainable fund sources that were included in this year's budget.

Thank you very much.

I'll just end here with saying that we need to have more dignified, as I heard in public comment, more dignified shelters supporting with the supports that meet the needs of the clients.

There are so many complex issues out there.

Everyone's a little bit different.

And I'll also say once in shelter, we don't necessarily need to send everyone to permanent supportive housing or all the time to affordable housing.

that is where this is a one step in a process to a better life.

And for me, when we're having this conversation from earlier of a higher cost unit that has more services compared to more units at a lower cost, at this point, I'm gonna go for a higher cost unit that has more services because if we can use that one shelter more appropriately and more efficiently to get those people into housing, that higher services shelter bed will serve the people, at least in District 6, more than a low-needs tiny home.

Nicole, over to you, and then I'm gonna keep moving us on.

A quick response to that.

We are looking at a mix of shelter, so it's tiny house villages and master leasing apartments as part of this mix as well.

So just wanna make sure that folks are aware of that.

Fantastic.

And I did not keep my promise to Council Member Kettle to get us out by 11 a.m.

My apologies, Council Member Kettle.

Do you want any last words before I pass it over to Council Member Rivera and we go through the amendments?

Not today.

And because we've got just a high level amendment, Council Member Rivera, do you mind if we talk amendments just while Council Member Kettle's here?

Actually, I'd like to ask my questions.

Thank you.

On slide three on the CDBG COVID funds, these funds must have a nexus with COVID prevention you have here on slide four.

And I'm just curious, I'm surprised to see that these funds are legally, I mean, I assume you've already cleared with law that they can be used for this purpose.

questions because I remember back during the COVID days, the strict rules around use of funding, the federal funding.

Yeah, I will say that in general, the CDBG funds in general can be difficult to deploy.

But yes, we're working closely with the city attorney's office as well as the human services department is in close coordination with our federal partners to make sure before we make any expenditures that we are certain that it is consistent with the intent of each specific bucket.

So we don't risk losing those funds and then not having the money.

That's why I ask.

Correct.

Director Panucci, so thank you.

So that's outstanding, making sure that we can actually use the money for that purpose without the feds trying to claw it back.

Correct.

Okay.

Thanks for confirming that.

Also, I have a question about KCRHA.

They're responsible for temporary shelter response.

And so how does that weave into this tiny house and master leasing shelter plan?

I'm going to ask John to...

He answered a similar question in briefing and had a good response.

I'm going to ask him to take that.

Yeah, thank you, Councilmember.

It's a really good question, and what we would say is that, right now, different tasks call for different conventions.

The City of Seattle has tremendous resources and assets in its city departments.

Strengths, for example, with FAS, in doing research on real estate, strengths with SDCI and expediting permitting, strengths with Seattle City Light and connecting utilities to these locations.

So our goal is to try to stand these up as quickly as possible and trying to task that to the King County Regional Homeless Authority.

It would just be a mismatch in terms of what their strengths are.

So in this initial push, as we stand up shelter, we are deploying these many different assets and expert levels of expertise at the department level with the city so that we can quickly stand these up.

So what will King County Regional Housing Authority be responsible for if they're not gonna be working on this because they don't have the expertise is what I'm hearing you say for this.

And then we'll be using some of that money then to, because I see they were tasked with this temporary sheltering response.

So moving forward, can we expect to see either this work transferred to them, but you're saying they don't really have the expertise, so will some of that money go to this work?

I'm just trying to understand how it all sits together, and I just want to be transparent with the public on what we're doing here.

Yeah, no, I think that we will be working in partnership with KCRHA in the long term here.

We're looking to leverage the specific expertise of the city departments like around real estate and permitting, not so much in the provision of shelter per se.

So I just want to make that distinction.

Thank you, I look forward to hearing more about how KCRHA fits into this approach.

And lastly, Chair, I'm just gonna say that I don't think you'll find anyone that doesn't support sheltering of our unhoused populations in the city and also the treatment to make sure folks are successful.

So I don't want to leave the impression that because I'm asking all these hard questions that I don't support sheltering of people.

Of course, I very much do.

And I also want to make sure that whatever efforts we take are successful to the folks that need the shelter and to our city writ large.

So thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Rivera.

Colleagues, any further questions on the underlying bill?

I'm gonna follow up with my questions with y'all offline.

I would like to walk us through the amendments, potential amendments briefly.

I will say at this time, Jennifer, if you would like to just read the top line in, if folks who are, I guess it's just Council Member Rivera who is present, if you wanna say anything about yours.

feel free to, Council Member Kettle let me know that he did not need to say anything about his today.

But with that, I will turn it over to you, Jennifer, and then I'll let everyone have a closing statement and we'll close out the meeting.

Thank you.

These, the amendments, the potential amendments are all to Council Bill 121-185.

So that is the budget bill that allocates the $4.9 million.

And these should all read as essentially statements of legislative intent.

So this is a budget bill.

And so, again, these are statements of intent from Council.

Amendment number one, which is from Councilmember Kettle, affirm Council's priority is to maintain existing permanent supportive housing and commit to collaborating with the executive on maintaining PSH, creating new shelter units, and addressing the structural budget gap.

Amendment 2, again, Councilmember Kettle is the sponsor.

The mayor's office should submit a report due on September 14, 2026 on implementation of the first 500 shelter units and a plan for how the executive plans to achieve 4,000 new units overall.

Amendment number three, council member Rivera, is the sponsor.

At least one of the new shelters should be exclusively for people in recovery from substance abuse disorders and offer a clean and sober environment.

Amendment number four, potential amendment number four, council member Rivera is the sponsor.

Priority for shelter units should be given to people experiencing unsheltered homelessness in the neighborhood and district council district in which the shelter is located.

Amendment number five, council member Rivera is the sponsor.

The executive should establish and enforce zones around each shelter in which no unsanctioned encampments are allowed.

Next two amendments, council member Saka is the sponsor.

Amendment six, the executive should develop and implement a public safety plan to keep the area surrounding any new shelter safe, clean, and free of unsanctioned encampments.

Last one, amendment number seven.

Again, Councilmember Saka, at least one third of the newly created shelter units should be reserved for people experiencing homelessness in the neighborhood in which the new shelter is located to the extent possible.

Thank you.

Councilmember Rivera.

Thank you, Chair.

On the recovery amendment number three, that is because I have concerns and I have heard from folks that are in treatment and then recover and it's not helpful for them to be in shelters with other folks that are not yet in the recovery phase.

And so having a shelter where it supports the folks that are in recovery be able to stay, and recovery, it takes a long time.

As everyone knows, that is the interest here, to make sure that we are really supporting folks' recovery.

And if it's not helpful for them to be in a shelter with other folks that aren't there yet, then this is really a way to support folks in that space.

And then amendments four and five really follow the San Jose model.

who've also done this similar type of sheltering model and making sure that the zones around the shelters, we don't have the sanctioned encampments or unsanctioned rather because we have that sanctioned tiny house village and also ensuring that the folks that are unhoused in that neighborhood and district have a prioritization for that shelter.

That's pretty self-explanatory.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you so much.

Colleagues, are there any initial questions on amendment ideas?

If you're not on the committee, you can still submit an amendment.

I'm happy to move it forward for you, should that be your desire.

That deadline is tomorrow.

I will ask, just since you prompted me, Council Member Rivera, and we can dig into this offline.

I know that the federal funding around shelter and housing has shifted drastically, where we have had a lot of funding previously going into low to no barrier treatment housing shelter.

And that has taken a, it has changed gears, the federal government to be more focused on the clean, sober type of housing and recovery.

We don't need to talk about it today.

Council Member Rivera is right.

We have to be able to provide clean and sober places for people to recover.

And I'd like to understand her point well taken in context of the federal shift in funding.

Again, we don't need to take it up right now.

I just prep us for April 7th because it will be a busy committee.

With that, colleagues, unless there's anything else to come before the committee, we will be concluding now.

I'm gonna give us the preview for April 7th.

We will have a presentation from Francesca Murnon on the Centennial Accord, and that is the agreement and the process in which we create agreements at the state level between federally recognized tribes and the state government.

We're gonna be having a prep presentation from Francesca before we have the gentleman who could come down from Olympia to walk us through that training.

So we've got a pretty important presentation in the morning, first up off the bat.

And then we've got this legislation, the FAS legislation, and I believe we'll have grants or FIFA appropriations.

We've got a lot going on.

And so we will have these amendments as well.

So I ask that as to the best degree possible, please get prepared.

offline and before the 7th, because we're going to use every minute of committee to the greatest ability that we've got.

It looks like Seattle Channel almost cut this committee off.

That means we got to get off the air.

Award-winning Seattle Channel knows when to cut the mic.

This concludes the Monday, March 30th Special Finance Native Communities and Tribal Governments Committee meeting.

This committee will meet next on Tuesday, April 7th.

Hearing no further business to come before the committee, we are adjourned.

Thank you all for attending, and my apologies for not keeping my promise for an hour-long meeting.