All right, good afternoon, everybody.
Can everyone hear me?
Okay, good.
Mic is on.
So, I will do a call to order.
Good afternoon.
This is a special meeting of the Select Committee on the Library Levy.
The date is April 17th and the time is 2.38.
I'm Councilmember Juarez, Chair of the Committee, and I am joined by Council President Harreld, Councilmember Mosqueda, Councilmember O'Brien, Councilmember Bagshaw, Councilmember Gonzalez, and Councilmember Herbold.
Thank you all for being here today.
I'm going to briefly make some comments in the chair's report and I'll start with.
Last week we held a public hearing and a big thank you to everyone who had an opportunity to share their experiences, concerns, and support for our library programs.
Last Friday the final amendment proposals were sent for review by ASHA, our central staffer, and the law department.
I want to at this time thank Asha very much for the great work that she's done as well as Nageen, my staffer.
I want to thank my colleagues in working so diligently with us to prepare and bring forward this legislation and the proposed amendments.
Quick background, again we were working with the library in talking about the four major categories and this history goes back to 1998, of course the levy that we had in 2012 and now we're looking at 2019 and we should add that in 2018 the library did do an assessment survey.
We, I want to thank the Library Board of Trustees.
It's a volunteer board of five members who dedicate their time and effort to making sure that they give us policy and direction and for the public.
So the, I want to focus and make sure that we're clear that the Library Board of Trustees has exclusive control over library expenditures.
Any allocations, changes in intent, scope and policy regarding the use of funds for a specific purpose is subject to board approval.
There are two other organizations I want to thank as well and that is the Friends of the Library and the Seattle Public Library Foundation.
These three amazing volunteer organizations help again guide our city and our elected officials on how to best plan and use one of our most valuable and public assets that is the Seattle Public Library system in which we have 27 of them.
Today We have three critical amendments to the base legislation, so I want to thank Councilmember Gonzalez, Councilmember O'Brien, and Councilmember Mosqueda for working with our office, and ASHA for coming forward, helping us draft, and actually put together, I think, some pretty good amendments and some pretty good legislation.
And after that, I understand we believe we possibly have two, we do have, if all goes as planned, we'll have two proposed technical amendments to reflect any changes that we make today.
Today is the fourth and last committee meeting for us to deliberate on these proposals before I conduct our committee recommendation in its entirety for the April 22nd City Council agenda for a final vote, which is Monday.
Right, Monday?
Yes.
Okay.
I'm not going to do the whole recap.
I'm just going to add this, though.
In the last two years, the Seattle Public Library hosted at least six major community conversations or town halls and meetings, and they have ran a survey that held more than 26,000 responses on neighborhood priorities citywide, and also several meetings with the city that affirmed the following priorities again for investment.
Open hours and access, collections, technology, and maintaining clean and safe buildings.
I see you took out the word seismic, because you knew I normally can't say that.
Earthquakes.
I know.
Now that I'm looking at it, I can say it.
Thank you.
The proposal continues critical operation and expands on services to keep up with growth.
This proposal is based on these four criteria and encompasses 25% of the entire library budget.
Before we discuss amendments, as chair, it is important for me to remind everyone our role as the legislative body in the levy process.
A final council vote determines the final proposal for a library levy on the August 6th ballot for the voters to decide whether or not the levy is implemented.
I want to thank everyone again for their hard work to find ways to improve this levy.
So with that, that's the chair's report.
Nageen, can you please read the first item into the record?
Council Bill 119491, an ordinance relating to regular property taxes providing for the submission to the qualified electors of the city at an election to be held on August 6, 2019, a proposition to lift the limit on regular property taxes under Chapter 84.55 RCW and authorize the city to levy additional taxes for up to seven years for the purpose of sustaining investments in library operating hours collections, technology, and maintenance while expanding access to opportunity through additional hours, library materials and technology, and undertaking seismic retrofits of three library facilities, authorizing creation of a new fund, and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.
So what we're going to do today is, once you read into the record, we are going to have Asha tee us up, correct?
And then after that, we are going to defer to the council member whose amendment we will be discussing.
So I will hand it over to Asha for a moment, or more than a moment.
And then I will have Council Member Gonzalez address her amendment.
I'm Asha Venkatraman with Council Central staff.
I'll just do a quick overview of what we've discussed at previous committee meetings and then speak to some of the amendments.
So on March 28th, the library presented its proposal for the renewal of the levy.
to collect $213.3 million over the next levy period.
On April 8th, the committee discussed issues that were identified by central staff in addition to potential amendments that council members were considering bringing.
At our last select committee meeting on April 11th, we again discussed more potential amendments that council members were considering to propose for a vote.
At the last meeting there was some discussion about understanding the role of general fund versus levy funds and how those two support the library's operations and so I'll just speak quickly to that.
General fund has not been displaced as a large excuse me, for the most part by levy funds over the past seven years.
There's been very little displacement intentionally made from the general fund to levy funds for the most part that the general, any decrease in general funds has been through reductions to allocations to general fund rather than displaced by levy funding.
So if no one has any current questions, I will just provide a quick summary of the five proposed amendments that are up today for a vote.
There are three proposed amendments from council members.
One to expand the and learn program by council member Gonzales.
One to add more hours system wide sponsored by council member O'Brien and one to expand the community resource specialist program sponsored by council member Mosqueda.
If any of these amendments move forward, we'll have to make two potential technical amendments, one to update the amount of the tax rate so it's reflected accurately on the ballot, and one to potentially add a levy category.
With that, I will turn it over to the sponsoring council members.
Yes, go ahead.
Thank you.
So, as it relates to the issue of the proportion of levy funds to the general fund contribution, I understand the answer to the question that was asked last time is that there hasn't, over the previous levy, been a displacement of general funds with levy funds increasing the portion.
But this proposal, both the mayor's proposal and the proposal that might result after the council's actions today, would in fact result in significantly more funds coming to the city.
percentage of funds coming from the levy, whereas prior we were around 24, 25% of funds coming from the levy, we would be looking at between 32 and 34%.
So it would increase the amount of funds coming from the levy, but that's not associated with a decrease in general fund, it's just that more services are being funded.
So the increase in the proportion is, proportional to the services that are being provided by the levy funds.
So my follow-up to that is, is there a policy behind the previous mix of levy funds with general funds?
Did that concept of 25% of the library's funds coming from the levy, did that originate from some policy that we decided that the 25% was a good number?
Because if we were gonna change that proportion, I'd wanna know that there aren't unintended consequences resulting from that.
I believe the board has stated that as long as it's under a third of the overall funding, that is a number of, or excuse me, a proportion that they are okay with.
And I believe that is the case moving forward, even with the added amendments.
All right, thank you.
Are you okay?
Before we move forward, and I apologize, Council Member Gonzalez, because I know you were teed up to talk about your amendment, we neglected to do public comment.
So let's go ahead and have, how many people we have signed up?
Two people signed up, and please state your name when you come up, and please address your two minutes to the item that is on the agenda, which is the library levy.
The first person we have signed up is Alex Zimmerman, then Ann Cisney.
Sieg Heil, my dear Fuhrer, a Nazi garbage rat, a racketeer, a criminal.
Oh, and who you are?
Oh, a killer, yeah.
My name Alexey Murman, about this taxation.
Taxation is very good.
More money you suck from people with blood is better for government.
And exactly for people like you, who make $130,000 per year, and many in this chamber, is a multimillionaire.
So, you see, taxes is very stupid from beginning.
First, we have enough money in government.
Right now, there's about $6 billion.
So for the last few years, it's doubled.
So we have more than enough money for another six or seven years.
It's number one.
And number two, for many years, I come and talk, we need to stop in Kamkaz.
Kamkaz is a monopoly.
And I'm 30 years live here, and Kamkaz will suck blood and money from us.
And no one mayor No one consul want talking about a negotiate contract with Comcast.
It's very simple.
So when we negotiate with this monopoly, Crooks Corporation, the pure fascists together with you is a clean fascist.
Excuse me, I would like to ask what does Comcast have to do with the library?
I would like to ask him to stop.
Stop the clock for one second.
Mr. Zimmerman, Mr. Zimmerman, Comcast is not on the agenda.
You have 42 seconds.
Mr. Zimmerman, you have 42 seconds to speak to the agenda item.
I'm giving you a warning now, and now I stop the clock on your behalf to accommodate you.
We are talking about the library levy.
Now, when you're ready to talk about the library levy, I will turn the clock back on.
We are here to talk.
Okay, are you ready?
Are you ready?
Okay, go ahead.
Wait, hold on.
Go ahead and start the clock, and now you can go.
It's a stupid idea, and I'm against this.
We can do this in a different way, and I'm talking about this many times.
When we give 50 percentage people who live in the city right now, make less than $40,000, $10 for internet for another seven years, we don't need a library.
in first place, all library can be closed, theoretically.
So, it's very simple.
And for many year, come here, and I talking about this in every statement, but as I go for election, I talking need stop and come cast, or negotiate with this bandita for $10 for everybody who...
Stand up Seattle, clean this dirty chamber from this...
Thank you, Mr. Zimmerman.
Excuse me?
He said, okay, I want to deem Mr. Zimmerman's behavior disruptive.
He just said F you to the entire city council.
So let's note that on the record and let's make sure we report that because again, our job here is to allow people to come here in a safe space to have dialogue, to talk about the matters on the agenda.
And my job as the officer and the chair of this committee is to make sure that people speak to the items on the agenda for two minutes and to enforce the rules.
Pretty simple, pretty straightforward.
Who is our next individual?
We have Ann Sisney next.
Hi, Ann.
Tell us when you're ready.
Thank you.
I'm ready.
Okay.
My name is Anne Sisney.
I am the president of the Seattle Public Libraries Union and I'm a librarian at the Central Library.
I'm here on my own time in my capacity as a union member to speak in support of the amendment to increase the social service presence in the library.
Thank you very much for putting that amendment forward.
As a librarian, I can tell you from my experience that it's very difficult right now balancing the stresses that we face in our community with the traditional library services that we provide.
If you can imagine, when you're helping somebody with a report on black holes or to start their business or to find a good book to read, and there's another patron who's in crisis in the building right there, You can't do both of those two things at the same time.
It takes quite a bit of time to adequately serve somebody who's in crisis, whether they're experiencing a mental health issue, whether they've been waiting in line for hours and hours for a new ID and then were unable to get it, whether they're looking for housing and are fearful about having a safe place to sleep.
Having an integrated network in the library where we can meet people's social service needs through a social service program and the assistance of our security team and their library needs, such as looking for a job, finding a good book, and getting a little escape from those problems is extremely helpful.
And I really appreciate your entertaining that idea.
Thank you.
Thank you.
With that, I think public comment is closed.
And again, I apologize for the error on my part.
And I will now yield to our sponsor of the amendment, Council Member Gonzales.
It's all yours.
Great, thank you, Chair Juarez.
So this amendment is the first amendment for our consideration today.
I'm really excited about being able to be the sponsor for this particular amendment, which would provide resources to grow early literacy programming at Seattle Public Libraries.
specifically in the play and learn groups area.
So this is, just to be clear, an existing program and service that is offered at Seattle Public Libraries.
And my interest and intent here is to allow for the expansion of that program to continue to promote these really important early literacy opportunities, particularly for kids in that zero to three space.
So that is what the intent is here, and I'm really excited to be able to advance this.
So really quickly, just wanted to talk about what Play and Learn is, and how this is an evidence-based practice, and also speak a little bit more to the usage and the importance of this programming across the city.
And so, compiled some packets for each of you to take a look at that includes all of this information.
So what is Play and Learn?
Play and Learn is facilitated playtime for very young children from birth to age five that is done and provided by trained providers.
It is intended specifically to serve young children and their caregivers or parents as a whole family and whole community model for early literacy and child development.
Play and Learn at its fundamental core is, as I mentioned earlier, an early literacy program that is specifically targeted to provide young children with developmentally appropriate learning experiences with their peers and caregivers.
It is also designed to build connections, friendships, and supports for families with young children as well as their caregivers.
And it provides family, friend, neighbors, and caregivers, as well as young parents, really important child development information and resources that support the optimal development of young children in their growth and ultimately in their readiness to learn when they arrive in kindergarten.
So the packet that I provided, the top sheet, is around the Kaleidoscope Play and Learn program.
That's a partnership that has existed between Kaleidoscope and the Seattle Public Libraries for over 10 years.
Its program, this type of program, is found in many other states.
The Play and Learn groups have consistently helped caregivers support the learning and development of young children, with 78% of those who participate saying that they feel better equipped to help young children be ready for kindergarten.
And that's why in 2012, our state legislature directed the Washington State Institute for Public Policy and the University of Washington's Evidence-Based Practice Institute to identify evidence-based, research-based, and promising practices for preventative and intervention services for children and juveniles in the child welfare, juvenile justice, and mental health systems.
And to no surprise, the Play and Learn Group model has been consistently identified as one of those promising practices that merits additional investment.
Next, behind that page there is some information related to the use by our community members of these early literacy programs and the type of community members that are being served.
So you'll see that there is a sheet here that talks about the demographic information related to those people who participated in the existing five groups of Play and Learn.
There are 649 children that participated and 564 adults that accompany those children.
Current branches exist at Lake City, current programs exist at Lake City, Rainier Beach, Columbia, Columbia City, Beacon Hill, and Broadview.
And as you can tell from the data, it's an incredibly diverse set of people who utilize these Play and Learn programs.
And really importantly, there are a significant number of low-income families that also utilize the Play and Learn program.
And of course, really important to me is the fact that that in most instances, the primary language that's spoken at home by people who take advantage of these early literacy library programs is really, really high.
And so, again, currently SPL hosts PNL groups, play and learn groups in two districts only, that's district two and district five.
I've already mentioned the number of children served through those, and I think that investing in expansion of the play and learn groups would strengthen programming in these districts to more libraries, as well as expand to three branch locations in District 1. So, it would also give the library capacity to be able to increase the number of Planned and Learned groups in different types of languages.
Just really quickly, we learned in our research around this program that it is an incredibly heavily utilized program.
And one of the things that I found really remarkable is learning exactly how the story time and play and learn groups are used.
And I provided information to folks at the very back of this packet that talks about the number of programs that are done through the existing funding in 2018. There were 2,866 programs that were completed in 2018, with a total of 106,740 people attending these programs.
these various story time programs.
I also broke it down by district for folks so that you can get a sense based on your own districts how these story times and play and learn groups are actually utilized at your local libraries in your districts.
And it is definitely used very, very intensely in many, many districts, with District 5 being the one that is the highest user of these services, with 28,924 people who have used these programs in 2018, and District 6 is the second highest user of these services coming in at 20,000.
So, again, really popular programs.
I believe that families who are asked to and the voters who are asked to approve this levy would see this as a very wise investment of their tax dollars to continue to invest and expand in these really important services that will really provide an opportunity for both parents and caregivers and children to continue to focus on in-language, culturally competent literacy opportunities that are supported by promising practices and evidence-based strategies.
So, again, really, honestly, in the absence of accessible and affordable infant care, many folks are turning to their networks of caregivers, family members, neighbors, and friends, and we know that it's really important to provide as many resources as we can to those caregivers to ensure that the development of children as they get ready to enter into preschool and kindergarten will be best prepared to do so.
And in this instance, the research indicates that these plan learn groups actually increase by a significant percentage the number of children who will actually go transition from these types of programs into pre-K and eventually be ready for kindergarten as well.
So really excited about this particular proposal and excited that we can invest in this significant meaningful way at an average annual cost to a median household of 84 cents on top of what the current levy is currently structured to cost property taxpayers.
Thank you, Council.
Is there any other comments?
I'd just like to second the amendment if that was the amendment.
That was the motion.
And I second it.
And the argument.
I was going to say something, but okay.
So, you seconded?
Yes.
Okay.
So, I move.
Well, let me just say this before I move it.
First of all, I want to thank Councilmember Gonzalez and Vee and her staff working so closely with the library folks and Asha.
Putting together the demographics breaking them down by district.
It's just it's To use your words a wise investment.
So thank you for the work that you did.
I really really appreciate that So we have it so moved and we have it seconded So so I ask that we move the committee pass the proposed amendment number one Second, okay, so that's been seconded.
The motion has been moved and seconded Again, councilman gonzalez anything you want to say in conclusion?
I'm just really excited about this and it continues to I think reaffirm this council's commitment to making sure that we continue to invest in our littlest learners and this is a really important way for us to continue to do that not just through our families and education levy but also by investing in libraries where all of the literacy materials reside.
And again, I think this will also invite, and what we have heard from library staff is that these types of programs have allowed people who have who wouldn't ordinarily take advantage of library services, it has attracted those community members to use the library.
And I'm really excited about the opportunity, the entry point that this provides to new families to be able to experience the joy of reading and the joy of using our public library system.
Thank you, Councilmember Gonzalez.
Is there any more discussion?
Okay, seeing none.
All in favor of this amendment say aye.
Aye.
Those opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The motion passes and the committee amends Council Bill 119491 to include amendment number one.
Thank you, Councilmember Gonzalez.
Okay, so now I'm going to actually follow my script and not throw Nagin off again.
Asha, can you please read the amendment, the next amendment, amendment number two to the record and give us a short briefing on the stipulations and then I'll yield to our sponsor, Council Member O'Brien.
Sure.
If it would be helpful, I can read the proposed memo language for the First Amendment as well.
It's essentially a recital to the ordinance that signals Council's intent around this funding.
So it reads, and this is, excuse me, in Attachment 1 on the first page, Attachment 1 of the memo, whereas Council intends that by increasing the amount of the levy by $2,000,120, Sorry, $2,120,760 over the $213.3 million as transmitted.
Funding will be allocated to support a new levy category for supporting children, including one expanding play and learn programming for children.
Great, thank you.
For Proposed Amendment 2, there are several options provided.
This is an amendment sponsored by Council Member O'Brien that has three options.
The first would be to open the Central Library for an additional hour, Monday through Thursday.
option B would be to open all of the branch libraries by an additional hour, Monday through Thursday, and both of those options include staffing, appropriate custodial staffing, and option C would open both the central branch and the 26 branch libraries by an additional hour, Monday through Thursday, with the appropriate custodial staffing.
All right, Council Member O'Brien.
Thank you.
Asha, thank you for preparing that for me.
I'm going to use a couple numbers here, so please chime in if I get them wrong here.
My recommendation, colleagues, would be to go with option three, which would be to extend an additional hour four days a week at all libraries.
That would come at a total cost over the life of the levy of about $6.2 million, which translates to the median household, I believe, sorry, is it the median homeowner?
Okay, so a median homeowner of $2.47 per year.
I look at the cost to the average homeowner compared to the benefit we get, and it seems like for the, as someone said, for the cost of about a bus ticket a year, we could have additional service for a variety of folks across the whole system.
That would be my first recommendation, colleagues, and I'd be curious to hear if folks are supportive of that.
An alternate that I would propose is option B, I believe, the second of them, which would be to extend the hours at the branch libraries only at a cost of a little under $2 million, and do the math about a
With the custodial staffing, it would be 2.5 million.
2.5 million.
Thank you.
So we're looking at a little over a dollar a year for the median household on it there.
I would not recommend doing exclusively the downtown library, but not the branch library.
So option one, I would not put forward for consideration.
I guess I'd invite discussion from colleagues, if that's OK, to hear where folks are on this.
I guess I could formally just put an amendment forward and see what happens.
But some discussion might be nice to just get through it.
Let's have some discussion.
Sure.
Councilmember O'Brien, I love this idea of keeping libraries open as much as possible.
I'm also concerned about increasing the amount of this levy.
So I am inclined to help the branch libraries.
Not that I wouldn't love to have my own library, which is the central library open, but if we're trying to make a balance here and make a decision and be wary of getting it up the library total amount up too high for the levy, I would recommend and would consider option B at this point.
So I'd love to hear from my colleagues and comments that you have.
Anyone before I speak, any other, my colleagues?
Casper Gonzalez.
Yeah, I would be supportive of option B as well.
Again, love the central library, but I also think that this is a citywide levy that is designed to make sure that there is access to our libraries across the city.
And so to me, it makes sense to focus on the all branch libraries option that is represented in option B to ensure that the voters and residents and users of the library system feel as though these levy dollars are going to be equitably distributed throughout the city and that they will see the return in terms of additional hours at their branch libraries.
Thank you.
Anyone else before I speak?
Council Member Mosqueda.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I really appreciate what you've put forward here, Council Member O'Brien, including option A.
I think that as we look at trying to increase access, especially to one of our highest utilized libraries in the downtown core, you've incorporated not only the central core, but you've incorporated all branches.
I, too, would love to see that approach.
I think if we're going to go down a route of having to scale back to be fiscally responsible.
I understand where you're at in terms of option B being out there.
Of course, would love to support the full extent of your amendments.
I'm happy to support option B if that's the direction of the body.
Anyone else?
Okay.
I'm sorry, go ahead Council Member Herbold.
Do we have information about why the library considered it but not, did not include this proposal in the mayor's proposal?
I believe it was the mayor's office decision.
Okay.
The staffing member says the library considered but not, did not include in the mayor's proposed, in the mayor's proposal.
So it was actually the mayor's decision, not the library saying, hey, we don't want the extra hours.
Okay.
Great.
Thank you.
Okay.
So with that, I have a few comments.
First of all, I want to thank Council Member O'Brien for giving me a ton of amendments.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate all of them.
And also giving me a menu of choices.
After having discussions with the library folks and the foundation folks and my colleagues and hearing the comments of Council Member Bagshaw and Council Member Gonzalez, I too am concerned about the cost of the levy and the taxpayers and the voters and what we are.
and trying to keep to those four categories that are most important to us and obviously to the people that hopefully where this levy will pass.
So, I am too going to ask that we look at option B.
That is what I would be recommending is option B, and that's what I would be voting for.
Anyone else?
Okay.
So, I move that the committee pass, well, I'm sorry, Councilor O'Brien, you need to wrap things up.
Is there anything else you want to add before I move?
No, unless I haven't heard, I appreciate the support for the broader Councilor Muscata.
I haven't heard from others unless folks have strong feelings.
I'm supportive of option B.
B, okay.
Why don't I move the option that would exclusively, they would add an additional hour at all of the branch libraries but not the central library.
I'll second that.
Did you want to say, did you want to?
I can just read it into the.
That would be great.
Whereas council intends that by increasing the amount of the levy by $2,512,000 over the $213.3 million as transmitted, funding will be allocated to support open hours and access by one, opening the 26 library branches for one additional hour Monday through Thursday with appropriate custodial staffing.
Excellent.
That is my motion.
And I'll second that.
Thank you.
Okay.
So with that, now I know you'll correct me if I get this wrong, I move the committee pass proposed amendment two, which is now option B, correct?
Second.
Second.
Okay.
The motion has been moved and seconded.
Councillor O'Brien, is there anything else you want to add?
No.
Thank you, Chair.
There's no further discussion.
All those in favor, say aye.
Aye.
Those opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The motion passes and the committee amends Council Bill 119491 to include Amendment 2, which is affectionately known as Option B. Thank you.
All right.
Asha, you want to go ahead with the third one?
Sure.
Proposed Amendment 3 is proposed by Council Member Mosqueda, and it would expand the currently existing Community Resource Specialist Program to add youth service support.
That would come at a cost of $1.1 million in addition to the proposed levy.
Great.
And with that, I'll yield to our sponsor, Council Member Mosqueda.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
So, I want to first start by thanking you, Madam Chair, for the work that you've done with our office over the last few weeks.
I'm really excited that we're able to contribute to these minimum desired benefits that we're including in the levy this year as we move forward.
We know that we would love to scale up on so many ideas that have come forward, and with your help and with the board's help, I think we're trying to stay within a certain framework so that People understand what's both included in the levy and that it's a passable number.
So we had initially brought forward for your consideration a feasibility analysis of trying to see which of our libraries across the city could include a childcare facility.
I'm not bringing that forward today.
I look forward to working with our council colleagues and through the budget process in the future to see what's possible in terms of a feasibility study on that.
We had considered bringing forward two additional security guards so that folks who are both working in our libraries and also patrons of our libraries continue to feel safe accessing all branches.
Again, that's something I look forward to talking to you all about and the folks who are in the direct directly working within the libraries as well to ensure that we're getting the information we need as we think about additional budget items.
And then lastly, this was something that was really underscored by one of the individuals who came to testify at your committee last time we met, and that was Paula Becker, who talked about her child and the love of libraries, growing up, having her kiddo.
I go with her to story time and always having a love of libraries.
And unfortunately, due to addiction, ended up using our libraries as a day center, as many folks do, if they're both experiencing homelessness or having a mental health situation, unfortunately sometimes coupled with addiction.
We want to make sure that as folks access our libraries, we have the resources necessary to connect them to the services in the community that can help stabilize people.
get them housed and get them back on the road to recovery.
So this is really exciting.
I think blending both what we've heard directly from the librarians, thank you very much for presenting.
Thank you to the board and to all of the work that you've done over the last few weeks to try to really help us scope this effort.
I think this is the top priority of the ones that we brought forward.
This would allow for 1.5 FTEs to be added to the resources as a community resource specialist program to identify one youth-focused social worker and a halftime youth-focused caseworker.
Currently, as you know, the library contracts to ensure that there is some roaming staff both at the Central Library and the Rainier Beach Library.
And having heard directly from the folks who are working within the libraries, there is a deep desire to make sure that in high-need locations like in Ballard, Lake City, and in University District, that we create a safe and accessible environment and meet the needs of our patrons.
I love the idea of connecting people with programs and books, and in this case, also with the life-saving services that our city is also offering.
I'm really excited to bring this forward.
I think that this is both continuing to enhance the type of services that our library is maybe not known for, because we always think books, but the types of programs and the connection and the community that they actually create in the walls of our public libraries across the city is a tremendous asset to our community, our residents, our families.
And with your indulgence, Madam Chair, I'd love to move the consideration of amendment three, option A, which would only be four cents a month to add this incredible new resource.
I would second that.
Thank you, Council Member O'Brien.
For the low, low price of five cents.
Are there any more comments from my colleagues?
Okay.
So.
Madam Chair, may I make one more comment just before?
Yeah, go ahead.
Okay.
Just before we move forward, I want to underscore my appreciation for you getting us to this point of having a really tight proposal, but also having it be robust in quality.
And I wanted to thank Asha for your quick work with our office, my office staff, Aaron House for working with us.
really the direct librarians, the folks on the front line, especially folks from AFSCME Council, too, for your identification of what you'd like to see to help make sure that our library continues to serve our residents, our patrons, and our workforce.
I'm very excited to work with you, Madam Chair, to bring this forward today.
Thank you.
So, with that, I'm going to move forward and move the committee past proposed amendment three by Councilmember Mosqueda.
And I want to thank you, too, because I know we've had long talks about how this is going to work.
And I really appreciate you and your staff working with us right up until 8 o'clock last night and then this morning.
Again, Councilmember Mosqueda was calling me to make sure that we had this nailed down.
So, I move the committee pass proposed amendment number three.
Do I have a second?
The motion has been moved and seconded.
Council Member Mosqueda, do you want to wrap it up, and then we'll go to the actual vote?
I think approval generally did that.
Oh, okay.
Is there no further discussion?
All those in favor, say aye.
Oh wait, point of information.
We need to state it in the record for OSHA.
You were doing great.
We just need to put it into the record.
Oh, okay.
I'm sorry.
Go ahead.
So the proposed language, for a vote is another recital clause.
It's whereas council intends that by increasing the amount of the levy by $1,149,992 over the $213.3 million as transmitted, funding will be allocated to support open hours and access by two, expanding the community resource specialist program with support for youth.
Okay, now I can move to a vote.
Right, Nageen?
We okay?
Yes.
Okay, thank you.
All those in favor say aye.
Aye.
Those opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The motion passes and the committee amends Council Bill 119491 to include Councilor Mosqueda's amendment number three.
Well done, thank you.
Okay, so we're gonna move forward on the two technicals and now these are, I understand we have two technical amendments about changing the levy amount which I'm understanding that Asha has been doing, has a calculator down there.
And also, amendment number five would be adding the levy category.
And Asha, I'm gonna let you kind of take over on this part, because it involves math.
And I'm not gonna, yeah.
So in the ordinance as it is currently drafted, the tax rate as allocated in section two, so this is on page three of attachment A, In section two, the sentence that's being amended is the proposition shall be limited so that in the first year, the city shall not levy an additional tax rate of more than 0.119 cents per thousand dollars of assessed value.
The amendment would be to change that to 0.122 cents per thousand dollars of assessed value.
And that same change would be made, sorry, that same change would be made on page four under section six of the levy.
And this is what will go on the ballot and the sentences, the 2020 tax increase up to 0.119 per thousand dollars of assessed value.
And that would be changed to 0.122.
So, both of those are proposed amendment four.
Just so I understand then, so we're going from 0.119 to 0.122.
Yes, that's correct.
And that's the amendment, correct?
Yes.
Okay.
Any discussion?
I move the committee pass proposed amendment four.
Second.
Motion is moved and seconded.
Any further discussion?
All those in favor, say aye.
Aye.
Those opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The motion passes.
The committee amends Council Bill 119491 to include Amendment 4, which changed the levy amount, additional tax rate of more than 0.119 to 0.122%.
With that, we will move to our Final technical amendment, number five, adding a levy category.
And Asha, the floor is yours.
So this amendment amends section four of the ordinance.
First, it would expand the sentence that says, levy investments will be made in five categories of library services.
Instead of five, that will be six.
And then the next sentence, program elements in subsections four A through four E, that is changed to subsections four A through four F.
And at the end of page seven, you will see the addition of a lobby category, which is a subsection 4F, supporting children.
Program elements include support for programming targeted towards children ages zero to, I'm sorry, that should not be three, that should be five.
Zero to five, okay.
Can I ask you a question, Asha?
So this is reflecting Council Member Gonzalez's, which we passed, okay.
That's correct.
So it is zero to five.
Yes.
Okay, right.
Any discussion?
I move the committee pass.
Well, do you have to say anything else before I move?
Okay.
I just want to make sure Nagin doesn't interrupt me here.
I move the committee pass proposed amendment, technical amendment number five.
Motion is moved and seconded.
Any further discussion?
I see none.
All those in favor say aye.
Aye.
Those opposed say no.
The ayes have it.
The final action is the motion passes and the committee amends council bill 119491 to include the technical amendment number five.
All right.
So now that we've done the amendments, we are going to go to the actual final passage of the amended bill of the original base legislation.
So item one has already been read into the record, or we need to do it again?
It's read in the record.
We're fine.
OK.
Well, usually you all got opinions.
I just want to make sure.
Okay, good.
Item one has been read into the record because that's what my script says.
I move the committee...
As amended.
As amended.
I'm getting there.
I move the committee pass Council Bill 119491 as amended.
Second.
Motion is moved and seconded.
Any further discussion from any of my colleagues regarding the library levy?
Oh, yes.
Council Member Gonzalez.
Thank you.
I just wanted to echo Council Member Mosqueda's thanks to you, Chair Juarez, for your work on developing and shepherding through this piece of legislation.
And I also want to thank the folks over at the library, including the Board of Trustees, for your ongoing stewardship, good stewardship of these really important investments in our public library system.
So really excited about the next step and really honored to be able to advance this to the next phase.
Thank you, Council Member Gonzalez.
Anyone else?
Okay.
So with that, oh, if there's no further discussion, all those in favor say aye.
Aye.
Those opposed?
No.
The ayes have it.
So the motion passes and the committee recommends Council Bill 119491 as amended.
And with that, I think we're done.
Wait, wait, don't leave yet.
I got one more thing to say.
So I'm just glad this is over.
It's been a pleasure working with my colleagues.
It was really nice working with Asha.
Asha, great job on all your research.
Thank you, MT, and your staff.
Thank you, Jay.
All of you folks have been great getting this information.
And I want to thank the council members who did the amendments because their staff was phenomenal in getting back information and working with us in editing and editing and rewriting.
And I'm always proud when we all work together and things get done.
So with that, before we adjourn, I look forward to discussing the proposal in its finality to the April 22nd city council meeting for a final vote to be placed on the proposal on the August 6th ballot.
And with that, we stand adjourned.
Thank you.