Seattle City Council Governance, Equity, and Technology Committee 5/7/2019

Good morning, everybody.

Thank you for being here at City Hall.

We are here for our Governance, Equity, and Technology Committee, our regularly scheduled May 7th meeting.

We have two agenda items.

We're going to go over this Seattle Information Technology, RSGI presentation, Race and Social Justice Initiative, and the Digital Equity Progress Report.

We're going to open it up first for public comment.

I don't know if we have no one up for public comment, so we're going to move right into our agenda.

What I'm going to suggest, Ms. Samuels, is that you read them both into the record.

Why don't we have, they're very closely related, they're a separate topic, but they're closely related.

I'm very comfortable with having everyone come up to the table at once and we can sort of cross pollinate the discussion a little bit.

So why don't you read them both in record and if you're here for the RSGI presentation or the Digital Equity Progress Report, come up to the table and join me.

Okay, agenda item one, Seattle Information Technology Department, Seattle IT, race and social justice presentation.

Agenda item number two, digital equity progress report.

Okay, what I'll try to use is those seats, because I may have council members join us on this side, at least two, and we have Council Member Mosqueda joining us.

Thank you very much, Council Member Mosqueda.

So, unless some of you have political ambitions I need to know about, you can come.

Yeah, two's perfect.

Okay.

Before we dive into the RSGI discussion, why don't we just go around the table with introductions?

Let's see.

Do I push?

Yeah, push and turn green.

I think you're green already.

You're good to go.

Okay.

I am Tracy Cantrell.

I'm here on behalf of Saad Bashir, the Chief of Staff for Seattle IT.

I'm Ted Weinberg, one of the co-leads for the RSGI change team in Seattle IT.

Anthony Davis, the other co-lead for Seattle IT.

Grady Benitez, the former RSGI co-lead.

Jeremy Doan, contracts manager for Seattle IT.

David Keyes, digital equity program manager in Seattle IT.

And Jim Loder, director of digital engagement with Seattle IT.

All right, great.

Thanks for everyone for being here.

Let's dive in with our RSGI presentation and I'll just relinquish the floor and you can proceed any way you'd like.

Okay, well I'm gonna get us started.

What I'll describe is what we want to do is have as many of the people that have participated in this effort talk directly to you.

And so we will kind of step through the memo that we sent, and each person will describe their participation.

And so we're going to hear from our change leads, and we're also going to hear from the digital equity director, Jim Loder.

And I will let Jim begin with the digital equity piece.

Great, thank you.

So as luck would have it, or coincidence would have it, we're also on the agenda to discuss the 2018 progress report on our digital equity initiative.

So I'll keep My comments are brief in this context, but Seattle IT is very proud to lead the city's efforts to close the digital divide and expand technology access and skills to all residents and communities.

Our objectives in the Digital Engagement Office are consistent with the city's RSJI commitments to eliminate racial disparities and achieve racial equity.

in Seattle.

Through our work in 2018, over 4,600 residents received digital skills training through our community grant programs and other support that we offer to organizations in Seattle.

Through our work to administer the city's cable franchise and the benefits that we've negotiated from cable operators, we support 223 community organizations in receiving free broadband access to help serve their mission and their constituents.

And we've also helped 2,469 households enroll in discount internet services provided by Comcast and Wave Broadband.

Through the free Wi-Fi and computer access that we support at community centers, the city serves over 50,000 connections per month in those facilities, plus hundreds of thousands more in libraries and other city buildings.

We arranged the delivery and setup of 162 computers to low-income residents and 198 devices in total to 13 different community organizations through our partnerships with affordable technology partners and through the Technology Matching Fund and other similar programs.

Total, we supported 16 community projects this year.

Last year, excuse me.

In 2018, we also completed our technology access and adoption report, which was a comprehensive population-level survey that was related to internet access and adoption and the barriers that people experience trying to fully utilize the internet.

And you'll hear more about those findings later on the agenda.

And finally, I'm proud to also oversee the Seattle Channel, who, in addition to filming and streaming us all right now, and at every council meeting and committee meeting, I told them to make sure they got my good side, so they're shooting me from the back, I think, yeah, produces award-winning original programming that showcases the cultural, civic, and community life of Seattle.

In 2018, the channel produced 60 programs that featured people of color and organizations doing RSJI-related work.

For example, we covered Indigenous People's Day events here at City Hall.

We featured Robin DiAngelo talking about her book, White Fragility.

And we covered topics such as immigration and community displacement in Seattle on programs such as CityStream and City Inside Out.

So that, I look forward later in the agenda to working with David Keys here to review our digital equity work in more depth.

But for now, I think I'm passing things to Greti Benitez.

or to...

Back to Tracy.

Back to Tracy.

Okay, back to Tracy.

Thank you.

Is looking at the WMBIE numbers, and so each department is required to submit those.

I am pleased to say that we did achieve our goal.

What's more exciting about just the statistics, though, of meeting a goal is, and this is where I want Greti to chime in, We've made a real emphasis on contracting and bringing in consultants from minority businesses.

And so I want Gretty to share a little bit about that work because those are really the drivers of our statistics.

So one of the biggest initiatives that our SGI change team has committed to over the last two years is to help bring more minority business enterprise contracting to Seattle IT and the city.

So we are holding an annual, this year will be our third annual MBE event.

We usually hold it between July and August.

usually those Those results aren't seen until the year after just because of the way consulting contracting works But we have to say there are people coming from all over the Pacific Northwest to attend this It's also a good opportunity for the hiring managers to talk a little bit about the projects that they see coming in the next year or two and get that one-to-one engagement with potential vendors or potential consultants.

So again, this will be our third annual MBE event.

I was speaking to Jeremy, and when we migrated to PeopleSoft 9.2, we don't have the capabilities yet to pull specific MBE versus WMBE capabilities at the moment, but I do I do think that we have been able to contract consultants from the very first MBE vendor event that we did in 2017. So in addition, our change team last year in March decided to, we have a 44% change team, and we decided to divide and conquer.

So we divided our change team into four subcommittees.

One is the events and engagement, one is the resources committee, another one is the workforce equity committee, and then the RSJI RET, racial equity toolkit committee.

Our events and engagement committee has focused on doing at least a monthly event.

All of last year, we did the MBE event, we did where I'm from, which was an internal engagement.

for Seattle IT.

We also partnered with other city departments like SPU to do the Juneteenth event, and also the Bite of Seattle.

We've also continued to have leadership engaged in two implicit bias trainings a year, and they have fulfilled that commitment and plan to continue doing that.

We've also incorporated book clubs and Lunch and Learns.

So we've held a few conversation cafes around different topics going on in the Seattle area, but also implicit bias.

Our Workforce Committee.

Gretty, may I interrupt you with a question?

It's Gretty, correct?

Gretty.

Got it.

In some departments, there have been challenges to get employees to engage in the RSGI.

initiative in the change teams.

Some are much smaller, even in larger departments.

And in some departments, it's really just gotten full engagement, energized engagement, I should say.

So where are you in terms of feeling as though you got the kind of engagement from employees as you'd like?

Are you low, medium, high?

Can you sort of describe the context?

And I do recognize it's always a challenge because people are very, very busy.

Yeah, so there's just a theme in terms of bandwidth, in terms of is this supported.

I think last year compared to the first year and a half after we consolidated, there's been an increased participation.

We went from in 2017, we had a solid 12, 13 person change team, now we are at 44. So I have seen a significant participation from the entire department as these events and these opportunities for RSGI activities come about.

Not everyone wants to go to, you know, the MBE Fair, but they may want to go to a conversation cafe, which is a little bit more intimate, a little bit more of a deep dive for these types of conversations.

I do feel that ever since last year, we've had a lot of one-on-ones with our interim CTO and now our current CTO where we've expressed how much we need leadership support to get that momentum for employees to feel like they are supported and they are allowed to take time away from their desk to participate in this.

That's sort of key, right?

That's been my observation that where we get leadership or a department head fully engaged and supportive, you see the change.

But I don't always attribute it to that, but that seems to be a consistent theme and where we get energized engagement.

And we have made the recommendation as change team leads that we usually charge our time through project codes.

And this has been a request that we've made throughout the last couple of years.

So we're hoping that this year we are able to get it.

Because when managers fill out timesheets, they want to know what you've been working on.

So we do want it to be a line item so that that could be built into our E3 goals.

we can see where we need to increase participation or seek more participation from, depending on the different divisions.

Very good.

So I think I was the next one in the speaking queue.

There was a paragraph in the memo at the very end that was talking about the concerns that we've expressed about the resource constraints, which I think resonates with what you were asking, Bruce.

In 2018, the five divisions of Seattle IT outside of the digital engagement division struggled, frankly, to get more than, say, two projects through the racial equity toolkit to get sufficient amounts of training available and attended by our employees at all levels of the organization.

And we struggled to get the data necessary to conduct a workforce equity study.

The good news is that in 2019, Anthony and I are working directly with Seattle IT leadership to identify that there is a gap, to acknowledge there is a gap, and to secure the resources necessary to close that gap and move beyond it to create like a technology specific racial equity toolkit that we can apply to a broader swath of our 150 project portfolio.

And did you want to explain some of the other items that we're doing?

Well, in addition to the toolkit, our plan is to kind of partner and align ourselves with what HR, ITHR has been developing a training and development plan to kind of align ourselves to provide more training for all staff and some refresher courses, things that we were reassured that would be funded and hopefully backed, you know, all the way up the chain, as well as we've made a request for a workforce, excuse me, this word always gets me because there's work first and there's workforce, split between city and state.

Anyway, so a workforce, The equity study, thank you, which would provide us with more data exactly on where we might lack as a department.

as far as equity and diversity, as well as some service.

Service equity.

Service equity.

Thank you for the acronyms you're giving me today.

To provide, again, just more data so we can find out where the need is to move forward.

And with provided support by our new CTO and hopefully continuing support, hopefully, you know, in the next year when we come to sit down with you, we'll have greater results and more data.

Customer Mosqueda.

And we're joined by Customer Herbold.

Thanks for being here.

Customer Mosqueda.

Thank you so much.

Good morning.

When you say the term service equity, and I was just looking back in the memo, and I'm sorry if it's already defined, but just for our large viewing audience, are we talking about making sure that there's adequate services to the smallest departments as well?

Because I think of folks like Office of Civil Rights, who are clearly a smaller entity, And also are probably more likely to be filled with women and people of color.

Is that what you mean by service equity?

Yes, by services rendered by the department itself, both internal and external.

I'm really excited to hear more about that.

We know that as the consolidation has happened, especially for some of our smaller departments, we continue to hear that being able to access IT services in a timely manner that's cost efficient as well has been a challenge.

So looking forward to hearing more about that equity service model.

And just to put a finer point on it, to follow up and make a plug for, specifically for some help to SOCR on some of their website needs.

It's really, I know it's a request that's been in with y'all.

Just really, that's a, it's a resource that the public really relies on because it has all of the public facing information.

about our civil rights laws and how the public can contact SOCR for enforcement of them.

I know they're in the queue.

So the Citywide Change Team has a committee working on developing more SharePoint assistance, so to speak.

I recently visited the site and it is, yes, completely outdated, but there is a team working to provide a SharePoint that would both encompass the external and the internal and house both documents and trainings and things of that nature that would be accessible by all.

Thank you.

Very good.

I didn't think about that issue, about the internal services to smaller departments.

I sort of see that as a, not to push the blame on anyone, but I sort of see that as a resource management from the executive side, as much as anything else.

I see a RSAI sort of angle, if you will, because of what Council Member Miskiewicz said about some of the employees might be in some of the smaller departments.

But in terms of a resource allocation issue and time deadlines on service, I would be more than happy to talk to any of you about how we can improve that.

I always tell folks, unless I hear complaints sometimes, I don't know where, but I have to commend CLIT on, for the most part, outstanding service.

But I do want to hear about the problems to smaller departments.

I just wasn't aware of that.

Yeah, so my day job is being the resource manager for the portfolio team, one of the two resource managers that we have.

So we can blame you for it.

I can show you, if you like, we can get into, have a conversation later about what the process is that we've established over the last 18 months for prioritizing our portfolio across the entire city so that we're not just looking at what's going to produce revenue or what's going to produce cost savings, but factoring in RSGI and factoring in the service to underserved communities and factoring in life and safety and all the different factors that go into the public sector project portfolio.

It's been quite a challenge.

We've actually created a subcommittee of the business steering committee to focus on that prioritization.

And once a quarter, we get together and look at the entire portfolio and resequence it based on which one really has to come first, which one is going to have the biggest impact to the city first.

And it's tough, because there's always got to be something that's first and something that's last.

Right.

Good point.

I wanted to say that a lot of the conversations, and you asked about, I think it's incredible that our change team has grown from a dozen to over 40. And there is no end of enthusiasm in Seattle IT for moving things forwards.

Our struggles really are, we want to do more.

How do we do more?

How do you balance that with your resources?

When we get to the Digital Equity Report, I had some ideas there, too.

So that's a great point, Tracy.

Thank you very much.

I'm not doing a hard cutoff from one to the other.

So you sort of lead me on terms of when we want to just move more into the Digital Equity Report and when the RSGI piece is finished.

So I'm letting you cue me.

So are you pretty much through your presentation?

I think we can shift.

OK.

Let's see if there are any other questions.

If there are no more questions specifically about RSGI, we can take it over and turn to the PowerPoint.

The questions I have.

are sort of RSGI related, so I'll reserve until we get to the digital equity piece.

Okay.

Okay.

Yeah, you got it.

Yeah, so I gave a brief overview of our efforts in 2018, but David Keyes here is the digital equity program manager in digital engagement.

He's going to be taking you through our 2018 annual report.

David?

Okay, great.

So, thanks.

It's great to have an opportunity to come back and share this.

Council was really involved about four, almost five years ago as we were developing a digital equity initiative.

plan and so we've been working on executing that and also responding to community as we keep going as well.

So this is a little bit of a report on what was done in 2018 and we'll talk a little bit about where we're going in 2019 as well.

So our vision, our digital equity mission as a city, both big C and small C, because as we're doing digital equity work, we rely a lot on our trusted ambassadors in the community, our partners, both across the city in different departments, as well as across the tech sector, as well as the community-based organization.

the variety of folks that are really on the front lines of making digital equity work with us.

And so our vision is that Seattle's a city where technology opportunities equitably empower all residents and communities, especially those who are historically underserved or underrepresented.

So that continues to be a guide in where our investments and our effort go.

And this is just a little snapshot.

I'll talk a little bit more about the detailed numbers in each column here as we go.

But our digital equity framework in general covers these sort of three primary areas and a couple others.

So as we think about digital equity, it involves skills to be able to use technology, connectivity.

Jim mentioned earlier, for instance, the work on signing up folks for discounted internet programs.

devices so that people have them and can use them, and then applications and online services.

So what are we doing in our web portals to make information more accessible, to enable people to interact, to enable people to transact with the city on a more equitable basis?

I'll also mention as we look at our strategies to ensure every resident has those necessary technologies, we also recognize that part of our work is to build capacity for community organizations to deliver services also.

So you'll see that reflected as we talk about some of what we've accomplished, that that's both building capacity for individuals out in the community and building capacity for organizations that help serve community.

I can ask you a question on the connectivity scope.

So those internet service providers have discounted services that they offer.

An example would be kids on free and reduced lunch in self-plug schools, correct?

Comcast would have it.

Yeah, right now there are two cable company offered low-income internet programs, and there's another low-cost option as well.

So both Wave, which we started up last year, their low-income program, and then Comcast has their low-income program.

That wasn't my question.

That was a preface to the question.

So yes, it was just a short answer on that question.

So with those particular organizations, I'm assuming that we are working closely with them to get their potential customers hooked up to their, so we're, and what does that look like?

What are we doing to assist the residents or the users to get the internet, the lower internet charge?

Because some of them might be eligible and they're paying full retail for the service and not even know they're eligible.

So what does that look like?

Correct.

Our engagement.

Well, I think there's a couple things.

So one is that, particularly with the Wave franchise, what we were able to do is to partner with them so that our cable office folks within digital engagement are able to actually assist in doing the eligibility verification for folks.

and help them sign up.

So that's a really direct thing that we also, in part, learned from earlier experience with Comcast and others.

And then we're doing marketing assistance.

Do we have independent information, either through utility bills or primarily through utility bills, that would flag to us, oh, this person is eligible, and then are we capable of sharing that data with the customer and saying, by the way, you're missing a swath of people in this neighborhood because they're all on.

discounted.

Are we doing that kind of work or do you have that capabilities or other departments I understand?

We haven't done the direct handoff between the utility assistance and the cable customers yet.

In the latest cable billing that went out we also let folks know about the program.

We also did include it in our technology adoption community survey last year, a question about people's awareness and use of the low income internet programs.

So, um, and I'll just jump into the operators are required to provide information about these programs in bills that they send to customers.

Um, we also partner with Seattle housing authority to get the word out through their facilities that they both manage and, um, have relationships with through the housing voucher program.

But there are issues with using the utility billing data in this context that we're trying to work out, just because of the nature of what's represented to the user when they sign up for the utility discount program, how their information's gonna be used.

I wasn't so much thinking about, well, I guess that's where we get creative.

Because it would seem to me that if we know the eligible consumers, if we just simply told them directly, hey, over here, I don't know who your subscriber is because you can't show partiality, but you might be eligible for this, that kind of thing.

Yeah, we can contact people through that channel, certainly.

Council Member Herbold's in queue.

Just following up on that, it sounds like maybe you are doing this already, but with the city's utility discount program, We've recently moved towards, which you would want to do this because there's still a cost to the low income internet, but we've moved towards allowing SHA to work with SPU and City Light to automatically sign up because SHA knows the income because you would not be living in SHA housing if you weren't already low income.

And so they've been able to automatically, not waiting for people to contact them to sign up for UDP, it's an automatic sign up and I'm just wondering.

We can't automatically sign people up for low-income internet, but you could certainly have a way of automatically contacting them.

Yeah, it's a great idea.

Yeah.

Sorry to take you off track.

When I looked at the connectivity piece, I was wondering what else we could do.

And I'm also aware that some of the internet providers in recent years have said that sometimes they believe their subscribership on the low internet is lower than it should be, and they're not hitting their targets to provide all of the eligible.

And then we know that also that people are subscribing to services at a higher rate than they need to.

But sometimes making, there has to be a, the companies have a waiting period.

If you're already subscribed to the company at a higher rate, you can't, you can't have service for three months to transition to the lower rate because their target is just at new subscribers only.

So that's a challenge also in terms of transitioning people to cheaper rates.

We could have changed that in the franchise agreement though, right?

We tried.

Oh, that was it.

Gotcha.

Yeah.

Because I remember that issue.

That's just what I saw.

So, Council Member Mosqueda.

Thank you.

I'm really excited about this conversation and excited about the work that we've already done to connect folks to services that they're eligible for.

I oversee City Light.

Council Member Herbold oversees public utilities.

So this is a really great synergy in your committee.

Mr. Chair, but I think we are missing huge opportunities and I know this is a slight deviation from your report But I do want to put a pin in this and and publicly acknowledge that this is something that I think we are far behind the ball on and I think IT you are in a perfect position to help us catch up and When we look at what the state does with enrollment into health care, Apple Health for kids or Apple Health for adults, we have automatic enrollment.

If you're eligible for WIC, if you're eligible for food stamps, if you're eligible for Take Charge, you are eligible for all these other services as well.

And they have the data and they also make it less traumatizing and confusing for people to refill out the application.

So we've made some strides.

Seattle City Light has I think it's increased the amount of people enrolled in the utility discount program by threefold, but there's still three quarters of the eligible population not enrolled.

And so when we think about ways to streamline the system, instead of just giving folks a phone number or saying we're required to give them the information, We need to be figuring out how to automatically enroll them.

And I just think that this might be something we would want to take up this year budget related potentially or otherwise for you all to give us a sense of what we need to do to make that not just a warm handoff because that would be the second best thing compared to giving somebody a phone number, but to actually automatically enroll them.

I agree with everything you said.

I do have an appreciation for the challenges with that, though.

I mean, if it were that easy, it probably would have been done.

But I think Council Member Muscat's point is well taken.

Maybe in 2020, we can really think, if it's resources, then let's address the resource issue.

But I do recognize some of the challenges on that.

And not the least of which is these are commercial services as opposed to government programs.

So automatically enrolling in the internet service may present some challenges because of that.

And yes, and I think now we're realizing the critical nature of having high speed internet access.

I mean, it is truly a digital divide.

So it's no longer a luxury for affluent folks.

It's essential for job applications, for access to so much information.

So I think to get as creative as possible.

And it could be, there could be perhaps outside consultants and other resources that can help us really astronomically change the needle on this.

And so.

Got it.

Thank you.

Great.

And I'll, I'll be coming back a little bit more to connectivity as well, but important points.

Thanks for those points.

Yeah.

Thank you.

So, you know, we know that digital skills is a huge issue for folks.

We know from our survey at minimal at least 14% of our population has low digital skills and we know that it's greater than that.

So, last year we supported 23 community organizations directly that provided digital skills training.

The picture here is of Education for All.

where immigrants are taking classes on basic computer usage, internet citizenship, and digital self-sufficiency to build skills.

So we provided training for almost 1,500 residents, and we know at least 373 of those received training in job search and career skills.

And those are the ones that specifically identified that.

Certainly in some cases there was one-on-one assistance.

That wasn't necessarily always tracked, so we know the number's higher than that.

And then we were able to help at least 1,285 youth with STEM, digital literacy, and enrollment programs.

So there's quite a number of our projects that are providing after school programming and teaching digital skills at that time too.

And so this is just a small cross section of some of those folks, the ones that we have reported.

So, you know, at least 2,249 people are low income, reached about, 1,456 immigrants and refugees, 1,200 youth, 96 folks with people living with a disability.

One of our projects and partners was with folks working at Seattle Housing Authority, reaching some of those communities, and 677 older adults, and 45 people that we know of experiencing homelessness.

This is just an example.

One of the projects last year was the West Seattle senior center, with a shout out to a gentleman there, a volunteer from the community, Burke Dykes, who's really helped lead the West Seattle Senior Center, and we were able to help equip them and provide training.

Yeah, I'm sorry to pepper you with a question, Jerry, but that's the only way I could sort of process sometimes.

The residents on the skills part that we served, are those pretty much a result of organizations we're funding doing that kind of work?

Yeah.

And because part of my thought when I looked at the people experiencing homelessness number, that number seems somewhat low.

And I realize that's a challenging demographic.

But the thought occurred to me that here in City Hall, as an example, when we have people experiencing homeless sleeping here, they come fairly early, have to wake up fairly early, I think.

I don't know what time they have to be out now.

But it would seem to me that even if there's some basic skills or some basic access in addition to the, it seems like we should triple that number pretty easily, but I don't know if those are the organisms, because that becomes critical.

I'm looking right now, we're going to have this Samaritan technology that I'm interested in at least, and looking at how Now some folks I think that are experiencing homelessness maybe have other behavioral issues that may not be conducive toward this kind of internet access.

But a great number of them I think are right there at the edge where get the resume tightened up, get access to service could really make a huge difference.

And I know there's more than 45 people like that out there.

So that number seems a little low.

So I guess when we look at our portfolio, the question becomes how do we sort of address that gap?

Yeah, I think it's a really important point as well.

I'm with you on that.

I mean, we know that folks are coming in and using showers at our community center and using the kiosks there, you know, and coming in using some of the training there.

So we know that public Wi-Fi in those kiosks is one way that we also serve folks.

In the past, we have funded and worked with Plymouth Housing Groups, Lehigh, Downtown Emergency Service Centers, and others to help put technology in there to help.

So I think that there's still a lot more that can be done.

I'll talk a little bit too about the Wi-Fi's, the Seattle Public Library's expansion into the tiny home villages this year as one thing as well.

But certainly there's more that can be done and I think in terms of helping to link people to the pathways to opportunity, then having the exposure and having the equipment and the connectivity and the training is an important piece of that pathway also.

Councillor Herbold.

Just a follow-up on that.

So I'm just trying to conceptualize the service delivery model.

The previous slide, you referenced that the City of Seattle supported 23 community organizations that provided digital skills training.

And then on the next slide, we break up into sort of the demographics of folks who receive that training.

So we can assume that these 23 organizations were organizations that were serving these different demographics, and that's how the services were delivered.

So is it maybe reasonable to assume that of these 23 organizations, perhaps only one of them was an organization that was focused on serving the particular demographic of people experiencing homelessness?

Yeah, I think this past year that Let's see, so we completed the 23 projects that we assisted.

And so to some extent it varies from year to year, if the technology matching fund, if our grants are more youth programs or seniors or disability or serving homelessness.

So one of the ones this past year, this current year that's working now, for instance, then is Millionaire Club.

So I presume we'll probably see more this coming year.

I think there's also a challenge that, again, also in the capacity of some of the community organizations to track.

So both for people's privacy sake and also data tracking systems and also that comfort in collecting the data from people.

So that's something that we're working with them as well helping them better tell the story and collect that information, and there's some room to go there as well.

I guess to Councilmember Herbold's point, one of the things you can consider, and this is a departmental call, I'm not putting a strong directive out, but when we do look at the technology matching grant program, we can, you know, we have to shift the emphasis on the needs of the day sometimes, and maybe there could be an emphasis on, and I know Youth Care and other organizations that benefited from this, do focus on this demographic.

But that might be a consideration, the homelessness angle of the award.

Great.

OK.

Good.

Thank you.

Good.

So on connectivity, so we mentioned that 223 organizations are receiving the free broadband internet that we are able to offer to organizations providing access and training through our agreements with Comcast.

and WAVE, so that total value is about $468,000.

And those sites, those 223 organizations, estimated that they serve 205,000 residents.

It's the first time we've really collected that data from those.

We've been doing an audit of all the sites, and that's helping us collect, get more information.

And we're continuing to also tie those organizations to our other grant programs.

So, you know, so when we ask people when they're applying for technology matching fund, we ask them if they have a cable broadband connection, and if they don't, it's an opportunity for us to also increase those numbers.

So we have some of those services that will continue to grow the number of sites this year.

Councilman Herbold.

So on the community organizations, this is super exciting because what I hear you saying is that if they're eligible, they can receive actually not just discounted, but free internet access.

Is that sort of an opportunity that is only limited by the number of eligible organizations, or is there a cap on the number of these types of agreements that we, perhaps under the franchise agreement, have purchased?

Yeah, so we do have a limit on how many that we can add each year and a cap.

So it's like a maximum, I believe it's 500 in Comcast and then there's a limit on Wave as well.

It's about 20 new sites we can add per year right now.

20?

Yeah.

So there's certainly room to do that.

And what's the eligibility?

So it's basically the eligibility is that it has to be a non-profit and has to be providing some community access and training and or training.

Do they also have to have no internet service at the time that they're signed up?

No, they can have whatever internet service they might.

I'm going to go out to my district and start telling people about this opportunity.

Yeah, we'll send you we'll send you full details.

Oh, yeah, the entire committee will get that information.

Yeah, and it's a third clear third tier class business service.

So it's a quality service for organizations and lets them put that money back into services instead of the internet.

So it's a great resource.

I'll just mention 194 of the folks that subscribed to the discount internet programs last year were residents of Seattle Housing Authority communities.

So that's been a really helpful partnership, I think, with them.

And so the city of Seattle provides free public access to computers and Wi-Fi in 70 sites.

And so that's 27 libraries, 29 parks and rec community centers, six of our FAS customer service centers that provide just kiosks right now.

and other city sites, including City Hall here, Justice Center, King Street Station.

And so through that combination of public sites, we were able to provide almost 900,000 kiosk sessions and 3.8 million Wi-Fi connections to people's devices across the city.

And then here's what the library's been working on in the mobile connectivity.

So they have 300, I mean 675 mobile hotspots available for checkout.

Last year they had 8,254 of them and 527 checkouts were through prioritized community outreach.

So that's when they're reaching into immigrant refugee.

communities and others.

So they also have done more outreach to some of the homeless communities this past couple years.

And this past year that also resulted in connecting five tiny home villages with internet through hotspots, through fixed hotspots with T-Mobile as a partner there.

So that's just a really positive thing as we see it as well.

I really appreciate the work you're doing to especially help those who are experiencing homelessness have access to Internet.

Can you also talk about the access to hot spots or Wi-Fi in enhanced shelters or mat on the ground shelters?

I don't have a lot of information about that.

You know, we know that We have supported in community rooms in some of those organizations Wi-Fi connectivity.

And so some organizations, we haven't done a full survey of exactly where that is.

We know through a couple of matching fund projects and through some of the cable broadband connections that go to organizations serving homeless that they've added Wi-Fi to those primarily community rooms.

I know anecdotally of some organizations that have increased that access to individual apartments.

We haven't done a full survey on that at this point.

I saw you writing it down, so I appreciate that.

It would be helpful, I think, to have a better understanding of how many of our enhanced shelters and non-enhanced shelters, the met on the ground places, along with the number of our permanent supportive housing units that Office of Housing helps to generate, how many of those facilities do have access to Wi-Fi services?

As Councilmember Herbold and, I'm sorry, Council President Harrell mentioned, It's no longer a luxury.

It's a necessity, especially for access to medical care and keeping your job, access to kiddos, homework even.

That'll be an interesting learning curve for me.

It's really important that we have access to that internet service.

So I'd love to hear more about the shelters and the permanent supportive housing.

Yeah, we'll look into that and get back to you.

Thanks.

That's what I heard.

A question about the Hotspot program.

My understanding, the Hotspot program the library runs is run through their budget.

What sort of support can we offer them in expanding that program?

Last I checked, the waiting list was about three months long and 1,500 people.

So it's a really, really popular program.

And if there's something that we as a city can do to leverage their investment in hotspots, I would really like to look at that.

Well, I, you know, used to work at the library and started the program when I was there.

I would say it's a function of money.

It really just comes down to that.

I think since the program was started, the library was able to negotiate a much better deal.

And so the money that they have allocated to that is going farther and was able to get that wait list down to the level that you're saying.

It's still not great, but it's better than it was when I was there.

So, I mean, that without, you know, three years divorced from the organization, I can say it's probably still all about money.

So, likewise, if we wanted to support them in purchasing more hotspots, it would be a matter of this council making it a priority to provide the funding.

Sure, yeah.

I mean, I think that would be one option, the one that you would have the control of the lever on, certainly.

But, yeah, again, I don't know.

I haven't delved into the details of the levy that was just approved, for example, to see if specific funding was set aside to expand that program.

But, you know, I know it's wildly popular, and it's just a supply and demand issue at this point.

Very good.

We're on 10 of 20.

Okay.

Take the hint, David.

Move along.

So this is just a slide in terms of the devices that we've helped the community get for organizations.

So in 974 of This total number of devices came from finance and administrative services from our city surplus computers being redistributed to schools and community organizations.

And so you just start to see a little bit of the distribution that went out there, 46 tablets, you know, we funded seven smartphones, and then a few robotic kits and 3D printers and other things that are providing access to more advanced technology for education purposes.

So, and this is just an example of the library and us and Somali Family Safety Task Force working together where the library provided training to participants through Somali Family Safety Task Force.

And we also helped enable them to get laptops through that program.

So, bringing together that skills connectivity devices training.

So, 182 laptops went directly to low income individuals.

Some of that was through our partnership with Seattle Housing Authority and the HUD Connect Home program that we were participating in.

And then just kind of turning then to online services.

So part of the goal is increasing accessibility.

Summer of last year, and then this program has continued, we partnered with the civic user testing groups to do usability testing on the Seattle.gov website.

They worked with Seattle Housing Authority residents for them to also be usability testers, which I think is a great kind of step forward in terms of diversity and who uses our site.

And so that's helping us with navigation, more friendly design, looking at voice-activated online services.

And then the city worked on its affordability portal.

So, you know, so that single point of presence where people can find out about ways to get free and discounted services to help ease some of their financial needs.

And finally, just a last couple slides here.

I just want to kind of reemphasize, you know, as we work towards digital equity, what a partnership that is.

So the funding that the council approves for us to work on digital equity that we reinvest in community and are able to match the efforts from the community to enable this work to go forward.

So it really is us public sector folks with a library, the housing authority, Seattle Schools working together.

along with contributions from the private sector, from Comcast, Wave, Facebook that contributed to the Tech Matching Fund last year, T-Mobile, and then the community.

So, you know, through that work there were 269 nonprofits involved, 244 community volunteers who donated almost 7,500 hours of service working towards digital equity.

So that really extends what we're able to do with the dollars that you guys allocate to this work.

This is online now, so that's a portal by which a person go and now get the utility, discounted utilities is down at the bottom.

Is that sort of what that's intended to do?

They can access the information about the programs and filter based on their interests.

So we've just combined all the information into one place.

There's work going on right now to streamline the application process for some of those programs.

The majority of those programs are not city programs, so there's sort of limited control we have over that.

But for the ones that we do control, there's a project underway right now.

So does that link to the, does it link, that's information on the programs, but then does it link to the application process?

Sure, where those applications are available online, the links are all in there as well, yeah.

So it's a step in the direction.

Actually, and I just,

I haven't been on the City of Seattle's, on this website.

Is this pretty obvious to someone that just happens to go on it, or how many pages back is it, or do we know?

I mean, how would one get to this?

How would they know that there's a making Seattle more affordable?

Well, we, I can check to see where the links are available.

We also just completed a major enhancement of our search functionality, and we have the ability to bring certain resources up to the top of search.

and have more granular control over that.

So that's another thing that we could do.

Because affordability is not a term, I think, that a lot of people looking for a discount program would use.

It's a term of art that we know what it means.

But we have the ability now to pepper that page with all sorts of terms and metadata and keywords to make it easier to find.

And I can go back to the team and find out what they've done to make it more discoverable.

Yeah, I was just, I'm sort of curious.

I had no judgment.

I don't know where the, this webpage is really fascinating to me.

It's got some really good stuff on there.

Just wondering how easy it is to get to and how much usage we're getting out of it.

So, but I like that page.

I just want to come back to it.

You could go forward, but I hadn't seen that page.

So Seattle.gov slash affordable.

Just to put that one out there, Ryan, folks, try that.

And while we continue to work on that visibility and presence, go to Seattle.gov slash affordable.

So just a shout out that it's not just Seattle IT, but there were eight departments that contributed to improving digital equity in 2018. So it really is putting that digital equity lens into the delivery of program services that helps us all together as a city work towards this goal.

And then last year we launched and are continuing to develop a digital equity network.

We're actually working with King County as well, so this is a little bit more regional approach, to bring people together to look at how we can leverage, share best practices.

And so I think that digital equity network as we keep going forward will again, help sort of further that knowledge and that effort on digital equity.

I think just to jump in real quick, the concept behind this really emerged a few years ago when a third party report on Seattle commended us on having a lot of programs in the community to support people on achieving digital literacy, but sort of dinged us on those programs not being well aligned or coordinated or easy to find.

So we took it on to convene the major players in that space and are working with them and some research partners at the UW to develop more alignment, common outcomes, and best practices for digital skills providers to use.

So I guess one of the questions I had I was going to reserve, but I think this might be a good point is, and let me preface it by saying, This has been a phenomenal presentation, and I think you're doing some outstanding work.

You're very committed in executing well.

Now, you usually have to compliment like that.

There's going to be a but, right?

Actually, not a but.

What I noticed that I think is conspicuously missing when I look at what we can do better as a city.

I don't point the finger, what we can do.

is I know there's a lot of phenomenal programs that a lot of corporations are doing.

Like Microsoft has the DigiGirl program that they put a lot of resources behind.

Amazon has some program where they use what they call Amazonians and they're teaching folks how to code and they have many more resources than the city.

And what I'm not seeing is really a very intentional effort for us to get maximum use out of our dollars to try to partner or support our kids and our elders, our aging population, and our lower income folks partnered in getting some of those resources programmed.

And a personal story is, My wife, who works at Microsoft, she took a bunch of kids from Cleveland High School when my daughter was there to DigiGirl.

And she was shocked at the lack of diversity over there.

And then she's on the other end hammering Microsoft on how to increase the diversity.

And we know that there's a problem with women in some of these areas and minorities in some of these areas.

And so when I looked at the presentation, in spite of all the great work, and I wouldn't take a dollar away from the technology matching fund when we're doing a lot of these, working with a lot of these grassroots organizations.

Wouldn't it be great if we can get some of the large corporations in there with them, piping resources and piping services into the same organizations that we're funding?

We as a city, as a hub, can play a role to facilitate that.

It's a strategic direction, one of which I don't think we've taken in the past.

And I don't even know if we as a city are all aware of what these private corporations are doing for philanthropy and for addressing the digital divide.

And I think that's something that I can work with the leadership team and SAAD because it is a very

with companies that work within our city or in our surrounding areas.

So we, as a city, sort of set up the framework, I think, through the Innovation Advisory Council, where we have those same players, Microsoft, Amazon, Zillow, they're all at the table.

And it's, you know, you got to form, norm, storm, whatever that saying goes, you got to get there.

But this is exactly the kind of partnership that I would like to see.

And I think the IT group is in an ideal situation Not just fund small organizations, but sort of give the structure, if you will, for these different programs.

Anyway, it was just a, I had some other questions on a few other issues, but I wanted to get that in here when I'm looking at some of the work we're doing.

Yeah, I think linking with the Innovation Advisory Council is a good one.

As we look at those pathways to opportunity, what we are also continuing to do that I think we can do more of is link those projects together.

So a group from Microsoft, former Microsoft employees, called Computing Skills for All, brought a technology career training to one of our centers with exposure to careers.

And so we did a visit to Big Fish Games with them, for instance, as well.

So another example of kind of creating both the exposure and ultimately getting some of those technology partners to understand what the community is and to bring some of their investments as well.

That's exactly what I'm talking about.

Very good.

So just kind of to sum up then, so last year there were about 1.4 million in city contracts with community organizations.

So we had the technology matching fund and a couple directed grants from our department.

Just also a shout out to the Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs Ready to Work program.

So we're in kind of constant communication with Glenn Davis and folks there about that program as well.

And the Neighborhood Matching Fund awarded a total of $97,000 to projects that focused on tech skills.

And then we conducted the Technology Access and Adoption Study.

So we released the results of this about a month and a half or so ago.

So we're taking this information out and using it as part of discussion with city departments, outside organizations, We have a meeting coming up with Seattle Jobs Initiative, so taking some of the data that we know about the needs in the community and using that as part of the frame to keep folks working forward on digital equity work as well.

And we also, Jim just mentioned, we're working with the University of Washington.

So we've done a comparison of different career and different skills curricula and assessments so that we can articulate what different levels of skills are so that we can help be clear about where we're getting to in terms of training folks and work with organizations that are providing training so they understand and can help residents understand what the foundations are on those pathways and the next level to get them to other tech career training.

I don't think we've done a briefing for you on this yet.

We'd be happy to.

So it's a great piece of work.

It is available right now at Seattle.gov slash 2018 tech survey.

So that's it.

Very good.

A couple of questions.

First of all, through all of your leadership, and Jim is the digital I think you're just doing some cutting-edge work, so I want to thank you for that.

I want to bounce around a little bit if I can, and I don't have a lot to say.

On the consulting contract, first of all, I want to always thank you for giving me so much data.

A lot of departments in my experience, sometimes they're afraid of the data, but facts are facts.

And so you do sort of leave yourself exposed to some poking around when you do that.

But I think by doing that, you're being very transparent.

So if I could go back to the contracting results a little bit, I think we have some challenges here.

And I'm just wondering.

You recognize them as well, and what are we sort of looking at?

We have a lot of zeros in some certain categories that are not ideal in terms of the consulting contracts and the purchasing order work.

So maybe you could walk me through this number five of eight, whoever, I don't know if it's the RSGI team or the department leaders, but do you see some challenges here?

And maybe you could talk about the challenges you've had.

So there's a couple of observations when you look at this.

And what I focus on is, do we see a zero anywhere?

Because that, for me, is kind of a call to action.

And you can look at the 10 of them.

and calls to action.

So when you see that, and this goes back to the comments that Greti made, what we're doing is we're looking at this data and going, these are areas where we need to shore things up.

And so there's this concerted effort at these vendor fairs that we're having to reach out in a more aggressive manner.

One of the things that we're trying to understand is if we brought people to the table Why didn't they result in actual contract work?

Some of it is because it takes time and others of it is we may have enthusiasm but they walk away and maybe they don't register on the roster.

So we're trying to make those things be part of the sessions that we're having while they're coming to learn about opportunities.

We're allowing them to sit down and register at the same time.

So, those are some actionable items that we're looking at when we see some areas that we have to shore up.

So, I assume that, Tracy.

So, if you're looking at, let's take an example where in purchasing a blanket contract, what is a blanket contract?

I'm going to let Jeremy.

So a blanket contract is a contract that's put out by FAS Purchasing.

It's usually for a limited term, like 3, 5, 7 years, something like that.

And it's always the result of an RFP.

And anybody who is awarded a blanket contract, any department can do business with them with generally no thresholds of dollar limit.

So like Home Depot or something like that, you know.

So, does a vendor have a blanket contract with the city or a particular department?

With the city.

So, you have the ability to use the blanket contract with any other vendor that has a blanket contract with other departments to buy pencils, let's say?

Correct.

So, yeah, Seattle IT could buy as well as, you know, any other department within the city.

And a purchase order, then, is just a one-off.

You have an item, you do a purchase order, but they don't have a standing contract.

Is that the difference?

Yeah, it's anything under $52,000 without a blanket contract.

Okay, so when you do that, you have the ability, you don't RFP that, you have the ability just to select someone on a purchase order?

So between $8,000 and $52,000, you have to get three quotes, and you have to go with the lowest quote.

So between $8,000 and $50,000, and that's governed by what?

That's our internal procedures or state law or what?

Yeah, those are the annual thresholds that are set by the FASN.

So that's just an internal, is that consistent with all the departments or is that unique to the IT, the 8,000 to 50,000?

All the departments, citywide.

So the departments between 8,000 to 50,000 purchase, they still have to RFP it?

No, they would have to get three quotes.

They have to get three quotes, I'm sorry.

And are they required to go with the lowest quote?

Yes.

They're always required.

That's just a policy.

There's no legal basis.

That's just our policy.

Why would you go to the higher court?

Okay.

Yes, I was just getting warmed up, but go ahead We can now as far as changing I'm referencing and I this is not an area that I Think the council has started to move in yet, but I'm excited to start asking questions But given the changes in the state legislative session as relates to I 200 it seems like this might be an area where we could look at those requirements and create different levers for prioritizing some of these contracts.

quick question to follow up on how we're defining, I guess, most affordable.

Isn't there some caveat with that?

At the state legislature, we don't do just the cheapest.

It has to be the cheapest and best or lowest cost and best to indicate that we're not interested in low-quality products that might be short-cutting workers.

Is there not a caveat like that in our statute?

I'm not familiar with the fine detail, but I would assume that it's not only low cost, but you need to meet a standard of quality.

And Jeremy?

Yeah, and so in the purchasing, we're talking about just goods, basically.

And so it would be like a specific brand of something, so it would be, you wouldn't be So if I needed a number two standard pencil, it would be the exact same product sold by three different companies.

I do remember that Seattle had, at one point, ethical sourcing legislation.

It might be interesting to see how that's being applied or if it was for only certain products.

And if it is for only certain products, including pencils, we should see how we expand that.

I think at the state level, we were looking at the city's example when we were thinking about purchasing uniforms, for example, for our corrections officers.

and wanting to make sure that we weren't looking at sweatshop produced uniforms.

And so while there might be the cheapest option, we wanted to go with the cheapest and the most ethically sourced.

And if our Seattle ethical sourcing laws don't apply across the board, perhaps that's another way for us to get at this question.

I'm sorry I interrupted your line of inquiry.

Well, it's okay.

I mean, I remember in prior work, I examined the the criteria to do a sole-source procurement and what the threshold was to try to do sole-source procurements on occasion.

And Jeremy, I want to thank you.

You're basically just educating me on a process throughout citywide, so I don't mean to cross-examine you.

You're teaching me, so I appreciate that.

So on the purchase order situation, when we do the purchase order and get three bids, it seems to me that If we realize, for example, the number of African Americans on the purchase order side is zero, and Native Americans are zero as an example, and we step back from that, and we said, okay, let's look at the purchase orders we've done, because you have over a million dollars of purchasing order power.

If someone stepped back and says, well, you know, our numbers are low, but over here at SDOT, they're buying their pencils and they're doing well in this category, maybe we get our pencils from the same vendor.

It just seems, is anyone stepping back and looking at these numbers and then being very intentional on how we can get these numbers up?

Well, I think from our perspective, we get these desegregated numbers on an annual basis at the end of the year when the WMBI report is published.

When the Wimby reports come out on a quarterly basis, they're not this granular.

We can only see the total amount of Wimby for consultant roster.

They don't break them down by category.

Let me ask you a better question.

You saw this report as I did, right?

So when you saw these, actually there were 12 zeros.

What did you do?

What did the RSGI team do?

What did you do?

Well, I know at least for forecasting in the future, Ted and I both looked at the numbers and we wanted to try and build in sort of a clause to management as far as fulfilling their WMB goals or WMBE goals at a level of I want to use the term OKRs, which is the objective and key results, which is a philosophy that SAAD wants to use going forward as far as, I don't know if it's parallel with E3.

Somebody help me here if it's different, but.

And Anthony, I can kind of chime in here, but to Anthony's point, so you look at these numbers, and what we wanted to do is make not only the change team aware, but leadership team aware.

And so the items that he's referring to, OKRs, are really leadership goals.

And so making them very clear to Seattle IT leadership where we would like to see improvements.

Does that kind of characterize your intent?

Right.

I think it was more exactly to your point, but also just as an accountability source, where there was more than just an ask to participate, but an ask to fulfill at a certain rate to meet the goals.

So let me ask a question just to understand the chart.

So let's take the million dollar of purchasing order capability that we have.

So total WMBI participation is only 15%.

So does that mean that 85% just went to larger non-WMBI organizations?

But those are for smaller purchases, right?

Right, under $52,000 and less.

Could they have also gone to MBE?

MBE would still be combined.

Yeah, it would still be shown up here.

Yeah, that just seems as though, and let's see, what is our target for that category for WMBE?

Participation for purchase orders.

What's our target?

Is that?

17 target for purchasing overall is it was 17% They don't we don't do a target per Blanket contract or blanket order.

It's just all of purchasing combined

What seems like particularly on, I have to assume that on the purchase order side of things, those are smaller purchase, because I have to authorize purchases at the department head.

So, it seems like you have a, the goal should be much higher than the 17%, number one, and it seems like you should just knock that one out of the park if we're serious about this kind of inclusion, inclusionary work.

Maybe I'm missing something.

I'm getting blank stares.

And so, would you agree with that?

That the goal should be higher on the, that, you know, part of the challenge we always see in this kind of work is, well, we can't find anyone to do this kind of work.

But these are small purchases, and I have to assume that you can.

Yeah.

And so, I mean, our actual for purchasing in 2018 was 24%.

I think our goal for 2019 is 25%.

And that's the highest of any department in the city.

And can you explain the direct voucher again?

The direct voucher is anything under $8,000.

I see.

And with a direct voucher, you don't have to get three quotes.

You can just go directly to any vendor that can offer you the good that you need.

I see.

OK.

I'll talk offline about this issue.

And maybe we could come up with some creative ideas on how do better, basically.

Do you share my enthusiasm on wanting to improve this area?

I hope you do because the numbers speak for themselves.

I think one of the discussions that came out was this ethical sourcing piece and how that could be woven into this procurement process is something that could be explored.

Council Member Herbold.

Moving back up to the consultant section, I understand the challenges when folks are not on the roster or that low numbers of people are on the roster.

So it's difficult if you're not even on the roster to move you into a category where you're actually receiving contracts.

But in the, I'm just curious if you know, because I think your role is just putting together the information.

This is FAS's body of work.

Is that correct?

Or is this your department specifically?

This is our department specifically.

So this is the procurement for your department, not...

Okay, got it.

What's going on in the Asian Pacific Islander category?

We've got almost 40% on the consultant roster, but only 1.3% actually getting contracts.

That seems like sort of the inverse of the problem with folks not being on the roster.

I'm gonna...

My take would be that it's the type of firms that we're working with that lend itself to those numbers.

But Jeremy, do you have some insight?

Yeah, so the consultant contract is basically used for large businesses, which you can do up to $52,000 for a direct contract.

Anything with a large business over $52,000 has to go out for an RFP.

The consultant roster is only eligible for small businesses.

And small business, the consultant roster has about 77 different categories.

If you're a small business, you can register for the appropriate categories, and then you can do up to $314,000 with somebody on the consultant roster.

So they're both contracts, but the consultant roster is specific only for small businesses within one of those 77 categories.

The consultant contract is, for small or large businesses up to $52,000.

Just the number, I mean the percentage of people getting contracts under that demographic is like 1 38th of who's eligible is the way I read it.

Whereas if you look at Caucasian women, it's about a third.

I see.

So this actually represents our spend.

So under the consultant roster, we actually are spending $4.3 million, and 39% of that spend is with Asian Pacific Islander-owned businesses.

So that's an actual spend.

So this, I don't know, and maybe I'm not interpreting your question correctly.

Both of these line items represent our department's spend on contracts, just two different flavors of contracts.

Is that, does that help or did I just completely?

The percentage, so this is percentage spent, not percentage of companies within the demographic that are make up the consultant roster?

Correct, yeah.

So of the spend that we did on the consultant roster, the 4.3 million of that, 39% of that spend was with Asian Pacific Highlander owned businesses, if they were on the consultant roster.

That helps a lot.

That was confusing to me.

I thought, like you read it, the consultant roster, that would total 100. have the percentages, but that's not what that means.

Got it.

OK.

Thank you.

Yeah.

And again, what I'm going to do is sort of look at the other, like FAS, we had a great RCI presentation in FAS, and sort of look at where their numbers are very good.

And then we could sort of figure out what they're doing, how they're able to achieve that, and look back at this and what we can do.

Part of my strategy is now that I1,000 modified I 200, which gives us much more flexibility in being affirmative in our goals here.

Anticipating that there may be something put on a ballot at some point that if we can, the city can quickly get some really good success stories on how we can use the freedom under the new law to really do better.

And so I'm going to talk to the executive about what that looks like.

My goal, my suggestion would be under the old law, we had all these 12 zeros.

But under the new law, we're going to get all these numbers up.

And so I want to have those success stories be able to evangelize in the world in case something gets on the balance.

So that's my goal.

Okay, great presentation.

I didn't mean to start, it's not a negative note, it's just where there's opportunity.

So, and I will say this, this might be a little negative, but I don't like glossing over this.

If you guys saw these zeros and you're coming here talking about you're committed to RSGI and you see zeros, I do expect, I don't want to have to be the one to cross-examine people on this data.

So, you're doing some phenomenal work, but I'd like a conversation that sort of goes like, we're doing some great work, here it is, there's some challenges we have.

It just works for a better working relationship, at least with me.

But I appreciate all the efforts everyone's doing.

Any other questions from any of my colleagues?

We're good.

Okay.

With that, we'll stand adjourned.

Everyone have a great afternoon.