Seattle City Council Briefing 5262020

will now come to order.

The time is 930 a.m.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

Councilmember Lewis?

Present.

Councilmember Morales?

Here.

Councilmember Mosqueda?

Here.

Councilmember Peterson?

Here.

Councilmember Strauss?

Council Member Herpold.

Council President Gonzalez.

Here.

Dick's present.

Thank you so much.

If there is no objection, the minutes of May 18th, 2020 will be adopted.

Hearing no objection, the minutes are adopted.

President's report, I don't have anything related to operations to report today.

I do, colleagues, want to take a quick moment at the top of our time together here this morning to note just a couple of things.

One is a reminder that Council Member Juarez was excused for today, so she will not be joining us either at council briefing or full council.

And secondly, I received a note over the weekend that council member salon will also not be able to be with us this morning or this afternoon at two o'clock.

So I will be making the standard motion this afternoon to make sure that her.

absence is excused at 2 p.m.

But she wanted me to make sure that I let folks know that she couldn't be here today practically.

And then lastly, folks, I just want to acknowledge that over the weekend, there were some pretty disturbing news reports about some potential hate crimes or actual hate crimes occurring against members of our API community, our Asian community.

a few out in Ballard, and we continue to hear about other incidents, including the one that happened at the Soto parking lot in Home Depot.

It is obviously abhorrent behavior to target people based on their race or ethnicity in response to the coronavirus.

We here at the City Council I think have an obligation to speak up loudly against those types of behaviors and that type of racism in our community is not going to be tolerated.

This virus is a virus that impacts all of us.

No one is to blame for it and we are not going to allow hate to drive our response in the city.

And I, as council president and as a resident of this city, call upon all of our constituents to exercise vigilance in protecting each other and in protecting our neighbors and in speaking out against this type of racist attacks on our neighbors throughout the city of Seattle and across the country.

So I think it's really important for us to take a moment to acknowledge that there have been really disturbing incidents happening across our city.

I want to encourage the police department to continue to investigate those cases.

I want to call on folks who may have any information related to the individuals who engage in this behavior to collaborate and provide information to law enforcement to make sure that those folks are held accountable.

And my most sincerest thoughts and concerns continue to go out to those who were impacted by these atrocious acts and to all members of our API community here in the city of Seattle.

I want to make sure that they know that we stand with them and we are at the ready to support them in the face of these extremely horrific acts that are happening within our community.

So I will end my remarks there and provide folks an opportunity to the extent that they wish to also provide remarks if you're interested in providing reaction or comments.

To that point, just raise your hand and let me know.

Okay, looks like we don't have anybody who wants to make any comments right now.

Thank you so much.

Let's go ahead and move into the presentation on Council Bill 119799, related to premium pay for gig workers.

We have on the line today, Karina Bull.

from our Council Central staff who is prepared to make a presentation.

Colleagues, both the bill and the presentation are on the published agenda for Council briefing.

I'm gonna go ahead and hand it over to Council Member Lewis for some introductory remarks, and then we'll go ahead and hear from Karina.

Council Member Lewis.

Thank you so much, Council President, and I'll be really brief.

And I do want to give Council Member Herbold, the co-sponsor of this legislation, an opportunity to make a few remarks as well before we hear from Karina.

And I really do at the top just want to really thank I want to thank Karina for her diligence and assistance with this.

It's been two weeks of really heavy work and I really look forward to discussing this final product.

So as everyone's aware, about a month ago, We ratified a historic executive order capping restaurant fees for a lot of our neighborhood small business restaurants who have been facing exuberant fees being passed on to them in this new climate where takeout in a lot of cases is their only option.

Part of that discussion had been a lot of our economy workers, and I call them an economy rather than the gig economy, because in COVID, what we generally refer to as the gig economy increasingly is just a massive share of how all of us are getting our goods and how a lot of people are being employed to do it.

And just really learning about the barriers from continuing those conversations after that talk about the restaurant fee caps, where we heard from people who are doing this work that in a lot of cases, since they're mischaracterized as independent contractors, they need to buy their own cleaning supplies, they need to take uncompensated time between fares and between deliveries to clean their vehicles, that these are all things they're not compensated for and that it's been a burden and it's been a hit to their bottom line in this environment.

And then increasingly, while there's a lot of considerations for other folks that are working in this economy, no jurisdictions yet have really taken on.

I think we need to have some kind of consideration in the form of, hey, that these uniquely situated workers who are not hourly employees, who are not collectively bargained contract holders are facing in this environment, and this legislation will take a large step towards having a more equitable treatment for these essential frontline workers, and I'm really proud to sponsor this here today and to be working with Carina, Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

Councilmember Lewis.

of the public health emergency and the fact that these workers are not hourly workers, whereas many workers who are considered essential workers are hourly workers, and some of them are receiving hazard pay or premium pay.

So it's really important that people get paid for their time and the materials that they use.

I want to thank all of the stakeholders who have been involved thus far, both on the labor side, we've had strong participation from Working Washington, UFCW, the Teamsters, and we've also spent a lot of time over the last couple weeks talking also with industry stakeholders, have had probably about six individual meetings with the impacted industry to talk through their concerns around the bill.

So that's all I have right now, and I'm happy to answer questions that folks might have after Karina's presentation.

Thank you, Councilmembers Herbold and Lewis.

So let's go ahead and have Karina go through her presentation.

We are scheduled to be here, I think, for about 30 minutes.

So I'm going to ask Councilmembers to hold their questions until Karina has gone all the way through her presentation.

And then if you have questions, I will call for them at the end.

You can also send me a quick text message or use the chat function to let me know that you will have questions, and I'll make sure to start the queue.

So Karina, we're off to you.

All right, thanks so much.

Good morning to everyone.

Again, I'm Karina Bull.

I'm on Council Central staff, and I am supporting the drafting of this bill.

And to begin, as the council members Lewis and Herbold already teed up for listeners and watchers, this legislation would essentially require food delivery network companies and transportation network companies to provide their gig workers who are providing services for their businesses with premium pay for work that is performed in Seattle.

And this legislation also would declare an emergency, which means that it would have an immediately effective date.

Here's our roadmap for the short presentation this morning and we will begin with coverage.

Now this will be.

Familiar to folks who have been following the paid sick and save time for gig workers legislation, the covered hiring entities and gig workers are the same.

So the hiring entities that are covered are the food delivery network companies with 250 or more gig workers worldwide.

And then the gig workers that are working for them, accepting their offers and providing their delivery and transportation services.

The definitions of these entities, again, are the same as for the paid sick and safe time legislation.

And you can see the definitions on the PowerPoint presentation.

For the Food Delivery Network Company, it is an online enabled application or platform to connect customers with workers for delivery from one or more of the following institutions, an eating and drinking establishment, a food processing establishment, grocery store, or any facility, whether or not it's open to the public, that is intended to fulfill customer orders from a business who is, or that is delivering groceries or prepared food and beverages.

Transportation network company, that is the same definition that is also in the TNC deactivation rights ordinance.

So that would be Uber, Lyft, Via, food delivery network companies, a non-exhaustive list would be Uber Eats, ScrubHub, DoorDash, Instacart, Postmates, and others.

Gig workers are the workers that are providing those services, and this is the heart of the bill.

The actual premium pay requirement would require $5 payment for each online order with a work-related stop in Seattle that the gig worker performs.

A work-related stop in Seattle would mean any kind of commercial stop in Seattle that, to define it in the negative, would not include a personal errand or refueling or driving through Seattle from a beginning point and an end point that are outside of Seattle.

But if there is any online order that has associated services with it that involves stopping in Seattle, it would be covered by this law and it would require $5 payment to the worker that is in addition to what they're already being paid for providing the services, bonuses, commissions, and also separate from any tips that they might earn from a customer.

So an example might be that a delivery driver has an online order for delivery in Everett, and they're shopping at a grocery store in North Seattle.

That example would incur the $5 premium pay because even though the delivery point is in Everett, the shopping is actually taking place in Seattle.

Now, if there was an online order that involved shopping in a store in Seattle or anywhere that had one or more delivery points, there would be $5 for the first delivery point or the first amount of work that happened in Seattle, and then an additional $5 for each additional drop-off point in Seattle.

So for example, if someone is shopping in Seattle, they have four delivery points all in Seattle, that would be $20 in premium pay.

If one of those drop-off points was south of Seattle, then that additional drop-off point would not incur the charge because it was happening outside of Seattle.

There also are transparency requirements with this legislation.

So whenever a gig worker is being paid their premium pay, the hiring entity must include notification of which online orders qualify for that premium pay, and then itemize the premium pay separately from other compensation.

So this would allow the gig workers to know that they actually have earned it and that they have been paid for it as well.

The other requirements in the legislation are typical for Seattle's labor standards, a notice of rights that must be provided to each gig worker, record keeping by the hiring entities for three years, retaliation is prohibited, and then enforcement again, standard for Seattle.

labor standards, the office of labor standards would be authorized to conduct outreach and enforcement and develop rules.

There also would be a private right of action and the remedies would include any unpaid compensation.

That means any premium pay that is owed up to three times that amount, depending on the severity of the violation, penalties payable to the city, to the gig worker and fines.

The duration of the legislation has two components.

The first component is that premium pay is owed for the duration of the mayor's emergency order.

And if the city were to pass a minimum compensation for gig workers, then the council, as this legislation states, would consider eliminating the premium pay requirement, perhaps before the termination of the mayor's emergency order.

The rest of the legislation that relates to the record keeping and the enforcement and the notice of rights, anti-retaliation, that would stay in effect after the premium pay requirement ends and would be automatically repealed three years after the end of the civil emergency is terminated.

The reason for that extended time for the rest of the law is so that OLS can investigate alleged violations.

and that the hiring entities keep their records as well for that period of time.

Next steps are that there's the request for any proposed amendments by Thursday at noon to make sure those can be drafted and reviewed by law.

And then on June 1st, there is an opportunity for a full council vote.

And that is the presentation.

Thank you.

Thank you, Karina, for that presentation.

colleagues, now is an opportunity to ask any questions or make comments regarding this proposed legislation.

Colleagues, are there any questions?

Councilmember Peterson, please.

Good morning.

Thank you for that presentation.

Thank you, Council President.

Good morning, colleagues.

I had a question.

If you could talk more about how you derived the $5, where that number came from.

I'd appreciate that.

And that's probably a question for the sponsors, I imagine.

So Council Member Lewis or Herbold, would one of you like to take that question?

I can jump in at the start there, Madam President.

And Council Member Peterson, thank you so much for that question.

I should have actually addressed that in my opening remarks, so I'm glad that you're giving me the opportunity to address it now.

That number is based on the formula from some of the partners in the labor community who we've been working with on this, who based on that level of premium pay, this would add up on average over an hour for an average number of deliveries to something that approximates a $15 minimum wage.

So the design of this was pegged to try to get these independent contractor workers up to a point where they're making what a similarly situated hourly employee would be making somewhere else in the economy during this COVID time in our community.

So that is where that comes from.

We're definitely going to be talking about that formula more as we start talking about this legislation more I'm also happy to share that information more broadly with other members of the council as we have this conversation as a council and I'll definitely send that your way Councilmember Peterson.

Council Member Herbold, is there anything you'd like to add, please?

Very much, thank you.

So in addition to the formula that Council Member Lewis referenced, I think conceptually it's important to think about that premium pay is a concept that combines both hazard pay, pay associated with the risk that individuals are taking to do essential work, as well as pay for people's time and the costs associated with supplies.

At a recent public hearing, well, last week's meeting, we heard a testifier speak to the fact that they were outlaying sometimes as much as $100 a week in cleaning supplies.

So when I say conceptually think of this as a combination both of pay to compensate people for the risk that they're putting themselves in harm's way to do this essential work and the costs associated with the time.

and supplies necessary to do this important work that makes the provisions of essential work compliant with public health best practices.

The reason why it's important to think of those two things together is, remember, many of our hourly employees who are essential workers are getting Part of that, they're getting the hazard pay part.

So they're already being paid an hourly wage, and they're already being paid for the provision of the products.

And some of those folks are getting $2 just for the hazard pay part, just for the part that is related to putting yourself in harm's way.

But they're already being paid because they're hourly workers working for a company that pays for the goods and products necessary to keep the workstation clean.

So when hearing Council Member Lewis talk about the formula, it's really important to keep in mind sort of the foundation for the two, perhaps you could think of it as three major components of this pay.

Thank you.

And I do have just one last thing to throw in there.

Council Member Herbold's remarks reminded me.

One piece of context that we should bear in mind, and I do want to preface this by saying things do vary somewhat across platforms and across different sectors of this gig economy environment.

But typically, for the food delivery folks at least, Uh, you know, the information we have from our labor partners is, um, you know, per job, you know, they're netting as low as, like, two to two and a half dollars per job, um, that a delivery can take, um, on average about 30 minutes.

So, you know, in some cases folks are only netting in an hour of delivery time.

that they are doing a lot of additional work that they were not expecting to and that similarly situated hourly employees do not need to assume in the jobs that they are doing.

I wanted to throw in that piece of

Great, Council Member Peterson, any follow-up questions regarding that or comments?

No, thank you.

No?

Okay, sounds good.

Okay, thank you.

Colleagues, any other questions for either Council Central staff or the sponsors of the bill?

A very, very quiet group this morning.

I'm so impressed you guys.

Was somebody trying to speak?

This is Council Member Mosqueda.

I have a quick question.

Okay, go for it.

Okay, wonderful, thank you.

Looking at slide six, notification of qualifying orders and premium pay, are we assuming the premium pay is going to be passed on to the consumer in any way based on your conversations with the apps?

Do you want to take that, Corinna, or should I?

Well, I will add, maybe before Councilmember Herbold speaks to the direct question, is that the legislation, either now or in a forthcoming substitute bill, has language stating that the charges should not be passed on to the customers.

Yeah, that's really all I was going to add, is that I believe in the retaliation section, we had talked about adding language prohibiting the cost being passed on to customers, as well as prohibiting the sort of dialing down of the compensation for drivers, and think that some of the record keeping requirements associated with this bill will help enforcement of that.

Great.

Colleagues, any other questions?

I just had one more comment to make, and somebody may have made it earlier, either Karina or Council Member Lewis, but I know there is some concern about the proposal coming out of the mayor's office, hopefully this summer or maybe early fall, associated with minimum compensation of drivers, and I just wanna clarify that we do have language in this bill that expresses the council's intent to ensure that this compensation that we are considering now is not layered on top of the minimum compensation legislation.

So, whereas we have a sunset date that the bill sunsets, after the state of emergency, but we do have some specific language in there that says that if the minimum compensation language law is put into place before that, that we intend to roll this requirement back.

And this is obviously intended to address the concerns of the mayor's office and many of the stakeholders we've met with.

I don't know if there's any other questions.

take a different look at this particular ordinance or this ordinance will sunset sooner.

So I appreciate you making a note of that.

And then, Karina, in terms of your work on this particular piece of legislation, do you have a sense of sort of where these app-based drivers rank in terms of volume of work that they are seeing relative to other parts of the country?

Well, so the TNC for hire drivers have seen a dramatic reduction in work.

I think that there's 80% drop in volume of for hire rides in Seattle.

the food delivery workers have seen a dramatic increase in their work.

And I think that's probably true throughout the rest of the country.

I don't have any data to support that that's happening around the rest of the country, but I think just common sense would show that that is indeed happening.

There's a lot of deliveries in Seattle and around the country right now.

But we don't have any actual concrete data that would tell us exactly where the Delta is relative to the type of driver.

In terms of how many deliveries or how many passenger trips they're doing per hour, is that the kind of data?

Yeah.

Not to my knowledge.

Okay, great.

Okay, colleagues, any other questions or comments before we move along?

Council Member Mosqueda, please.

Thank you, Madam President.

So just clarifying on the last question that I asked, does that mean that there will be a substitute or clarifying amendments about how that $5 does not get passed on.

I wasn't quite clear with the language that you read, Karina, and then sort of the intent that Council Member Herbold talked about.

Is there, it's still work being done on that aspect to prevent that from being passed on, prohibiting it in legislation or just discouraging it?

So there's two pieces and again, I'm sorry, because I've been working on a substitute bill.

So I would have to look and see if it's in the bill that was uploaded on on Friday, but there is intended to be or there already is language in the anti retaliation section that prohibits passing on the charge to.

the customer and it's also in the recitals as well.

So there is a prohibition on modifying service to different areas of the city, which is also reflected in the mayor's emergency order, capping delivery commission fees.

And then there also is the prohibition on reducing the compensation that's paid to workers as a result of the legislation and adding charges or passing on charges to customers.

What those provisions are seeking to do is to have current compensation and current charges to customers remain the same and then have the premium pay layered on top of that is something that the company would pay for the gig workers.

I see.

Follow-up question, Madam President.

Please.

And similar to some of the questions that were asked about paid sick and safe leave on rulemaking, can you talk a little bit about how much rulemaking is left to Office of Labor Standards and what the process or timeline is anticipated to be given the emergency nature of this?

So this legislation, along with the paid sick and safe time legislation, has incorporated a number of drafting techniques or drafting language in order to make the rulemaking work by office of labor standards lighter and faster than with typical labor standards.

So director rules are able to be issued through guidance via a question and answer document.

And there also is anytime there is reference to director rules, instead of conditioning the implementation of the legislation on rules, the rules are discretionary.

So OLS has the authority to issue rules but is not required to issue rules.

And there also is a provision that says that if OLS in an investigation doesn't get sufficient records from a respondent or maybe gets so many records that are not organized well enough to quickly go through them that they are not able to quickly determine how much is owed to the worker or if there was a violation to begin with, then they can designate a daily amount of compensation that would be like an automatic amount of compensation in lieu of determining the precise amount.

Those measures are intended to make enforcement.

easier for OLS along with that notification transparency requirement that the hiring entities must itemize each time a worker is paid, what orders qualified for the premium pay, and what that exact amount of premium pay is.

So all of those things are intended to help workers and help OLS as well.

And this is intended to be voted on next week, next Monday, and then it would go into effect immediately.

The legislation does declare an emergency and would require a three-quarter vote of counsel.

Madam President, one last question.

I did some grocery shopping this weekend, and I was asked three times while I was at the store if I was Instacart.

And I asked, finally, the third person.

I said, the third person asked me, what is sort of the reasoning that folks are asking you that?

What do you think?

And they said, well, it's because you're buying a lot of groceries.

We haven't gone for a few weeks.

So I guess I'm wondering how often folks are doing large pickups, for example, and then doing the multiple stops.

Do you have any sense, you gave the example of the four stops within Seattle and then one stop that would potentially be in Durian, not counting, but do we know how often there are orders that contain multiple pickup points or multiple drop-off points, multiple pickup points?

It's not information that I have, but perhaps that is something that Council Member Herbold or Lewis know more about.

I don't have that information.

In our conversations with Instacart and Postmates, a lot of the questions that we had, we received a response that information is proprietary.

I do get an openness to answer some specific questions related to this particular piece of legislation.

So I'm happy to share that question on your behalf, Council Member Mosqueda, with those two stakeholders.

And I'll add that the legislation was drafted in such a way to cover the full range of situations that might happen.

So that stacked order situation was contemplated in the draft and then also the language and.

at least in the forthcoming substitute bill, talks about any additional stops that may result from the online order.

So perhaps if there's two riders in a vehicle where one person's paying the bill, but the rider asks for a separate drop-off point or something happens along the way after the order has been placed that results in a separate drop-off order, the legislation is written in such a way to incur the charge for each drop-off, even if it wasn't initially in the online order.

Okay, colleagues, any other questions or comments?

Looks like there are none.

Colleagues, this is a reminder that the sponsor's timeline is to provide any sort of information related to amendments.

On May 28 by noon.

So that's in a couple of days here and we intend to if all goes well to.

to allow for consideration of this bill by the full Council on June 1st, 2020, at our 2 p.m.

full Council meeting.

So obviously, Karina is available to Council members who are interested in making amendments or want to know more about the legislation.

And the sponsors, I'm sure, are also equally happy to speak with each of you individually about any ongoing questions or concerns that you might have or additional information that you need.

Thank you, Karina, for being with us this morning and for that presentation.

We're going to go ahead and move along now through our agenda.

And our next agenda item is, of course, beginning our discussion on the preview of today's City Council actions.

council and regional committees and any other information that council members would like to share.

We will, again, go in the roll call order.

And today's roll call order is Council Member Lewis, Morales, Mosqueda, Peterson, Strauss, Lewis, and then I will conclude that section.

So let's go ahead and get started.

First up is Council Member Lewis, please.

Thank you, Madam President.

Not a whole lot to cover this morning.

You know, a lot of the update was worked into our presentation just now on the premium pay legislation.

And I do just want to echo the comments made by Council President, as well as Karina and others, that folks can reach out to me if they have any more questions or want to talk about potential amendments.

Definitely want to have an open process and work with all of you to make a strong and lasting ordinance.

So please do not hesitate to reach out.

On Wednesday, the 27th this week, the Select Committee on Homelessness Strategies and Investments will meet to discuss Councilmember Morales' Council Bill 119796 relating to the navigation team and encampment removals.

Just to remind everybody, it is a committee of the whole, so if folks can to make sure that they plan on attending that, to make sure that we have a quorum, that'd be great.

It should be a good discussion.

I'm working with Jacob Thorpe on my staff to put the panels together to have a good and robust discussion of that legislation with members of the community, folks that will be coming down from the executive's office to talk about the city's homelessness response more broadly.

And I really look forward to being able to have that exchange and have a discussion, not just about 119-796, but also how we can get more of our neighbors experiencing homelessness off the street, inside, and in a safe place where they can practice social distancing and be part of our public health response here in the city.

On Thursday, May 28th, the Queen Anne Farmers Market is going to be opening again for another season.

Really proud of the work that my office did working with Queen Anne Farmers Market and the Mayor's Office to make sure they could meet that critical deadline and maintain that critical sense of continuity during these really difficult times where so many of our festivals, traditions, farmers markets are being postponed, delayed, and in some cases might not be coming back.

It's going to be really good to see the Queen Anne Farmer's Market, which is our premier independent farmer's market in the city of Seattle, coming back to that community on Thursday afternoons.

I do encourage folks that are watching at home, head over to the Queen Anne Farmer's Market, you know, buy some vegetables, buy some cheese.

I'm going to be there on Thursday for the opening, and, you know, wearing a mask, and we'll hope that you'll be there as well, and we can all squint and try our masks.

But that's really good to know that that's opening up again and joining so many of our other neighborhood farmers that are open and doing their best to adapt to this difficult environment.

I had another really good round of office hours last week meeting with a variety of constituents across the district.

I do just want to plug those office hours one more time that I still on a weekly basis have that opportunity to meet.

I believe that making that known publicly has boosted it because for the last two weeks, they've been completely full.

So I do definitely encourage members of the public to take advantage of that on my website, to sign up for those slots and make your concerns known so that I can be a better advocate for all the people of District 7 here on the City Council.

With that, Madam President, I don't have any additional updates and I look forward to hearing from everybody else.

Thank you so much, Councilmember Lewis.

Any questions or comments for Councilmember Lewis on his report?

Okay, hearing and seeing none, thank you so much again, Councilmember Lewis, for that report.

Looking forward to your committee meeting on Wednesday.

I'll just note that, again, I'll reiterate Councilmember Lewis's request for the need to establish quorum in order for that council meeting to occur for his committee.

That means that five of us need to be present.

Councilmember Lewis, if in the work that you are doing to prepare for Wednesday, you end up having some difficulty establishing quorum, please make sure you let my office know as quickly as possible.

We'll try to help out where we can.

So thank you so much.

Next up is Councilmember Morales.

Hi, good morning, everyone.

I hope everybody got to have a little bit of rest over this holiday weekend.

Let's see, tomorrow is, we have nothing on the calendar this afternoon, but we do have two hearings tomorrow or meetings tomorrow.

In my community economic development committee, we will be having a hearing on the business improvement area for the U district.

And that will be open to the public.

We will be, taking comment from folks and then hearing from Council Central staff about the bill.

I think we do have several amendments that are also being considered there.

Additionally, as Council Member Lewis mentioned, we have the Committee on Homelessness Investment Strategies, where we will be talking about the bill that our office has proposed to limit encampment removals during the COVID epidemic.

I do want to say I went last week to the encampment removal on King Street last Wednesday, where we had several conversations with people who had been moved.

And it was a hard morning to be talking with people who have been traumatized and moved repeatedly as they try to find some sort of stability.

One person I spoke with had been removed several times, and really was not interested in going into congregate shelter.

He was afraid of doing that, especially because of COVID-19, and was really eager for the chance to get into a stable situation.

When I asked what he had been offered, he said nothing, that the REACH workers had come by and had taken his information, but they do that every time he's moved and that he has been asking to go into a tiny home village for two years, but has not been able to get in.

And that he would be eager to get into a hotel room or some, you know, individual unit that would allow him to be safe during this epidemic.

So I think there's a lot of a lot of folks who really are not interested in being moved from neighborhood to neighborhood.

We know our neighbors.

don't want people moved especially if they might be at risk of infection moving around the city.

So I'm looking forward to the conversation tomorrow and to the discussion that we will be having.

I will say also that in the last week we've had I think four conversations with folks from the community from the Chinatown International District.

Folks are frustrated, and that is understandable.

We've also been listening to service providers to hear about their work and really want to have a conversation tomorrow that allows us to understand the reality of what our shelter situation is, what our availability is, and what options we might have for making sure that we are protecting people during this pandemic, protecting our communities and protecting the people who are most vulnerable, which is the folks who are living on the street right now.

So I'm eager for that conversation and hope that all of you will be able to join us and move that conversation forward.

We did not have office hours last week.

This week, we will be talking with folks again on Friday.

That's really all I have for this morning.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Morales.

Any questions or comments on that report?

Council Member Lewis and Herbold were like a race, but I saw Council Member Lewis go first, followed by Council Member Herbold.

Yeah, OK.

Beat you, Lisa.

I get to go first, I guess.

So Council Member Morales, thank you for that update.

It did just remind me that I forgot to mention that last week I did participate along with Council Members Herbold and Mosqueda.

I mean, it feels like a month ago, right?

I mean, COVID weeks are like dog years.

But I did participate in the launching of Third Door, which is focused on the ultimate goal, obviously, of scaling up permanent supportive housing placements, 6,500 placements over five years through some kind of regional partnership between different governments and the private sector.

And, you know, we all share and know the goal.

I just wanted to bring it up to highlight and put in, you know, my director to Council Member Morales, which was I appreciated you bringing up that the gentleman that you talked to indicated that he really wants to get into a tiny home village.

I think that's important because what we have seen is even though the tiny home villages are, to an extent, quasi-congregate, I mean hygiene facilities are congregate, the places where folks eat are congregate, Lehigh has done a really good job at maintaining really sound public health in their villages.

There hasn't been a confirmed COVID case in a tiny house village.

I bring that up because we know that tiny house villages are very affordable and can also be scaled up quickly.

And while I continue to be a big fan of hoteling, as I know a member of us on the council are, I think another thing we could start exploring more as a council, and I do want to flag this because I know that we have seventh floor folks that listen to our briefings too.

Increasingly, I think that tiny house villages could also be part of the response.

I know that early in our I think that that could be a critical part of our response, just given that they have to be very effective, and we know they are very desirable from a lot of our neighbors experiencing homelessness and trying to, also on their end, do their best to get off the street and work with us halfway, but we need to have good placements that are agreeable to them, and tiny house villages, I think, are a good strategy to explore that.

So I just wanted to flag that, and I appreciate you raising that, Council Member Morales.

Yeah, can I respond?

Yes, of course.

So thank you Council Member Lewis.

I do think that you know we just passed earlier in the year legislation to allow for more villages so I do think that that is one option that we need to look at and and knowing that if we are talking about supporting folks who are chronically homeless that by definition means that people who have high behavioral needs the people who are really the hardest to serve from a social service and social provision perspective.

And so I do think it's important for us to keep that component of this in mind, too.

If we are talking about that particular population, it is both the public health crisis that we are dealing with in terms of the global pandemic and the fact that These folks already are in dire need of intensive social services, very many of them.

So there's a lot to weigh, and I'm looking forward to us having the conversation about what the best approach is for us going forward.

Thank you so much.

Council Member Herbold, please.

Thank you.

So I want to just flag that I had a conversation over the weekend with Senior Deputy Mayor Fong about my interest in ongoing continuous reform.

in the area of encampment removals in such a way that we can ensure that encampment removals are used in rare circumstances when health and safety is at risk.

And my interest in moving towards a place where we are working with encampments to mitigate concerns instead of always responding with the blunt tool of removing the entire community.

And in that conversation, I flagged to Deputy Mayor Fong the specific interest related to the COVID-19 crisis and the council's concerns that the city has not been acting in concert with the CDC recommendations.

regarding encampment removals.

And in previous conversations with the executive about this issue, the executive has indicated, for instance, for the instance of the Ballard Commons removal, there was a Seattle Times article which suggested that the city did not consult with public health on the removal.

Nevertheless, the executive said that public health.

agreed with the city's assessment about the encampment removals.

I've also heard murmurings that public health was consulted on the two encampment removals last week.

So I indicated my interest to Deputy Mayor Fong over the weekend that if there's a relationship with King County Public Health, where they do an assessment and they confirm for the city, for the navigation team, that a removal is consistent with COVID-19 related best practices, that we formalize that engagement with King County Public Health, and that that should be something that we consider doing regardless of whether or not that the legislation is enacted.

I think there was an openness to talking about that path forward.

I also signaled my interest in addressing one of the issues raised in Deputy Mayor Fong's letter to council last week related to public safety and asked for some mandatory language for the legislation should the legislation move forward.

to address some of their concerns around around public safety and their concerns that if The legislation moves forward they will not have the ability to do removals that are that are sparked by I am not aware of any serious public safety concerns either related to criminal activity occurring inside the encampment or fire hazards.

I have made a request for some language that I could offer as an amendment there as well.

I want to flag that for my colleagues.

Thank you.

what I suspect will be further discussed during Wednesday's Select Committee on Homeless Investments and Strategies.

Any other questions or comments from my colleagues before we go ahead and go through the rest of the reports?

Okay, hearing none, Council Member Lewis, I did want to ask, I noticed on the agenda, you did mention in your remarks that you're talking to folks on the executive side about being available for presentation during your committee meeting.

Can you talk a little bit more about where you are in terms of those conversations with the executive?

I do think it's important for them to to be available to councilmembers for questions and answers, and it would certainly be my strong preference that somebody be there to be able to answer questions, questions live about the legislation and some of the concerns that they've stated that they have via Senior Deputy Mayor Fong.

That's one question.

And then secondly, with regard to the, presenters as well.

Have you had any conversations with anyone from Seattle King County Public Health in terms of their willingness to participate in your committee meeting on Wednesday afternoon?

Yeah, thank you for those questions, Councilmember.

I need to have a meeting with my committee clerk, Jacob Thorpe, to see where everything has landed.

I mean, the long weekend getting in the way has sort of meant that today is sort of the finalizing panelist day.

You know, I think that we're going to have definitely Deputy Mayor Fong present, possibly Deputy Mayor Sixkiller as well.

It's possible that we're going to have Chiefs Scoggins and Best want to come to the hearing as well.

I continue to want to have someone from King County Public Health.

I think we're still working on who exactly that is going to be at this current time.

Um, but, uh, you know, today we're gonna, um, definitely be finalizing those, um, executive side, um, panelists, and we're definitely gonna let everybody know, um, uh, you know, as soon as everything's confirmed, um, who they'll be, and, uh, so folks can prepare their questioning adequately.

Great, I think if you know, as soon as you could give us an update on who we can expect to be at the table for presentations, that would be really helpful.

I know for myself and probably for many of my colleagues as we prepare our notes and thoughts around tomorrow's meeting.

I know that we have a couple of hours slated to be together.

I would not be surprised if we end up going more than two hours.

And so I just want to make sure that at least I'll speak for myself, that I have the benefit of knowing exactly who's going to be at the table so I can curate my questions and lines of inquiry accordingly.

So appreciate your work in that.

And if you can let us know as soon as you know, that would be helpful, preferably sometime later today.

That would be great.

Colleagues, any other questions or comments for we're on this subject matter.

Okay, so we're going to go ahead and move on through the reports.

Next up is Councilmember Mosqueda.

Thank you, Madam President.

I first have a report from Councilmember Juarez, if I may read that into the record.

Sure.

Council Member Juarez is not with us today, but she provided the following updates.

First, she wanted to send her thanks to her colleagues for supporting and signing on to the May 18th letter, which asks the South Dakota governor to end threats towards the Lakota Nation's infection prevention measures.

To recall, she has demanded security checkpoints used to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 novel coronavirus be taken down due to potential quote, highway interruptions.

Unfortunately, she called for President Trump to help her take this infection prevention measure down.

We're talking about the governor of South Dakota.

The governor's decisions consistently move towards putting thousands of lives at risk and are more vulnerable, put more people vulnerable to the disease.

That is why the letter was so important.

This is a show of a serious message that shows how we must respect and recognize tribal sovereignty.

Council Member Juarez also wanted to relay that the Sioux Tribal Chair message of gratitude for sending this message in solidarity publicly.

So thanking us publicly for sending this letter.

Council Member Juarez's office sent an email last Friday including the thank you letter provided by the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Council as well.

As far as P-A-N-C legislation, there are no items from the Public Assets and Native Communities Committee this afternoon on City Council's agenda.

In terms of Parks Weekly Report, Council Member Juarez's office will email updates once they become available from the Long Memorial Weekend, and she wanted to provide this update from last week's report.

Last week, Council Member Juarez taped an episode of Council Edition on the Seattle Channel with Council Member Strauss.

Thank you to Brian Callahan, she says.

Council Member Juarez took a tour of the arena construction project at the Seattle Center.

Big thank you to OBG for providing a safety-guided tour to show how the project is progressing and how our engineers and construction workers adjusted their work plans due to COVID-19 without serious delays.

That's from Council Member Juarez.

Moving on to my report, there are no items from the Finance and Housing or the Select Budget Committee on today's full council agenda.

I also want to say thank you.

I participated in last week's press conference regarding the third door announcement, and I greatly appreciate the homeless advocates, academics, the business partners who were part of third door and for coming together and asking for this collaborative approach to outlining the problem, which is hundreds of thousands of housing units that we need to bring online, specifically 6,500 permanent supportive housing units in the very near term, and also outlining the funding crisis that this demands.

They acknowledge at the same time that the government alone cannot do this and philanthropy alone cannot do this.

So I think it's a really great example of a partnership between both business academics and community advocates, and looking forward to participating with them on next steps, and also recognizing that this is still a call for us to respond in kind with additional local revenue as we see the crisis continue to grow.

Last week I also held a forum, the economic forum on the inequities created and worsened by COVID on Tuesday last week, featuring national and local experts.

The forum highlighted the need for spending and supporting public services, small businesses, and our community members to show how we can recover stronger and quicker due to the crisis.

And as we think about recovering, to make sure that it's not just recovering and getting back to normal, but that it's creating a new sense of normal that creates a more inclusive economy.

It was a really great forum.

It's going to air again on Seattle Channel at 9 a.m.

on Thursday, and we'll push out some information on our social media platforms for folks who didn't have a chance to view the content yet.

It was really great to hear from those national and local experts.

I want to thank Councilmember Strauss and Herbold for viewing via the live streaming online and for Councilmember Swanton Morales for joining in the community forum on the Zoom platform.

hoping you all have a chance to take a look at it, and we will push out that information soon.

The last thing, I just want to make a quick comment about the form also coming up for tomorrow for Council Member Lewis's committee.

Thank you, Council Member Lewis, for coordinating this presentation, the panels, and the opportunity to hear about the bill that Council Member Morales introduced.

I do have a possible amendment, one or two possible amendments that were sent by Ali Panucci last night.

There was a memo that was shared, a 10-page memo that went around to all of our council colleagues, featuring the content of the two possible amendments that I'd like to introduce to better mirror the CDC guidance.

My hope was to ensure that we were providing an opportunity for the CDC guidance to be applied before any posting of a removal was put around the camps.

Because we know that once those posts go up, people disperse into the community.

And especially during the time of COVID, we want to make sure that we're preventing folks from dispersing into the community if they may have signs or symptoms.

of COVID or could potentially put them at greater risk from moving into other parts of the city if there's also other areas of COVID that they then move to.

As a reminder, there is a link on the central staff memo on page three to the interim guidance from the Unsheltered Homelessness and Coronavirus Disease 2019 list of measures that homeless service providers and local officials are asked to take into account from the CDC.

Council Member Herbold mentioned this in her comments just a minute ago and I want to just provide a quick summary.

In the context of coronavirus 19 spread and transmission, the CDC has advised that the risk associated with sleeping outdoors or in an encampment setting are different than the risk from staying indoors in a congregate setting because outdoor settings may better accommodate increased physical distancing.

So that is really the reason that I think folks are raising concerns about potential dismantling of encampments outside to be moving folks into congregate shelters.

I understand that not all of the beds that were offered in the last two or three removals were congregate shelters, some were tiny homes, but the CDC guidance really acknowledges that public health concerns from being unsheltered are definitely going to persist outside and inside, but that it, quote, we need to balance the risk needed to be considered within the context of the COVID-19 spread of the transmission.

In order to prevent the transmission of COVID-19 throughout the general population and avoid increasing risk for people experiencing homelessness, the CDC guidelines suggest that for people living in encampments, the following guidance should be considered.

First, if individual housing options are not available, then allow people who are living unsheltered or in encampments to remain where they are.

This is from the CDC.

It goes on to say clearing encampments can cause people to disperse into the community and break connections with service providers.

This increases the potential for infectious disease spread.

That's from the CDC.

They then go on to say that if folks are being allowed to stay outside, we must quote, encourage those staying in encampments to set up their tents, sleeping quarters within a 12 by 12 feet, and to make sure that people, if they're remaining where they are, they have links to service providers and that those who are at risk for severe illness get into individual rooms or safe shelters.

So it's in that context, council colleagues, that I wanted to draw your attention to the memo that was sent yesterday, which has the two amendments that we would potentially discuss tomorrow with the chairs.

with the chair's blessing.

And it's really an attempt to make sure that I was clear on what I think the part of the legislative intent was, which would be to make sure that we're not preventing outright any.

the removal's period, but that it clarifies that if the reason for the encampment relocation or removal is the presence of a communicable disease, including COVID, and certain actions have been taken prior to posting the removal notice, then the relocation can go forward.

But those prior actions would need to be, as Council Member Herbold talked about, coordination with public health, trying to get folks into individual rooms, and making sure that other public health strategies have been deployed.

Again, if there is an effort to do this administratively, that's great.

If the legislation doesn't move forward, I just think that it's really critical that we have clarification that those public health strategies have been deployed.

The second thing is that it says that if we're gonna leave folks outside because we can't accommodate individual rooms, that we do everything we can to follow the CDC guidance, which is to make sure that folks have a 12 by 12 space, that we're able to move folks off of ADA accessible walkways, and that we are doing everything that we can to make it a safe place for individuals in the neighborhood.

I think it's important to clarify, because some of the comments provided to the Seattle Times I think were inaccurate, that there is nothing in the bill that restricts the navigation team in the current form of the bill.

And this is, again, in the central staff's memo.

There is nothing in the bill that would prohibit the navigation team from responding to criminal safety hazards or obstruction.

It says Council Bill 119796, as is, does not restrict the ability for the navigation team to offer housing or connections to other services during COVID-19.

Further, it does not prohibit outright removals from four public safety concerns.

Under the definition of immediate hazard, a public safety situation that creates a risk of serious injury or death to others would be allowable would be an allowable cause for relocation or removal.

So I think tomorrow will be very helpful as Councilmember Lewis, as the chair is setting up the panels, I think it will offer us a chance to talk about the intent and if there are other strategies that are being used to accomplish the goals for public health strategies to be deployed.

I know I am all ears, but I do think it will also be a good opportunity to clarify what the original bill did and did not do because some of the messaging is counter to what we've seen from the central staff's memo that was sent yesterday.

And I think that clarification is really important because all of us are interested in the health and safety of the entire community, including neighbors surrounding encampments and those same encampments.

And with that, I look forward to tomorrow's presentation.

Okay, Council Member Mosqueda, I think we heard most of what you said.

You were breaking up quite a bit towards the end, but colleagues, I want to make sure that we're not, that we are sort of using our time here this morning to just sort of have some high-level conversations.

I certainly don't want to turn council briefing into a committee hearing.

And so I just want to, I know that this is a subject that is of high importance to folks.

We will all have an opportunity to have a very detailed conversation about this council bill and any proposed amendments tomorrow during the select committee on homeless investments and strategy.

So, again, I appreciate that we are getting courtesy flags from all of the council members who have spoken already about potential issues that will come up during committee tomorrow afternoon, but I want to make sure that we don't I don't want to slip too much into detail here at Council briefing and effectively have a working session on singular bills.

With that being said, I will go ahead and do what I usually do, which is call for any comments or questions based on

Yeah, I just want to thank Council Member Mosqueda for the amendment that she's brought forward and let folks know that we consider those friendly amendments and appreciate the clarification.

Great, thank you Council Member Morales.

Looking forward to a deeper dive conversation tomorrow afternoon.

Next up is Council Member Peterson.

Good morning, colleagues.

On this afternoon's City Council agenda, there are no items from the Transportation Utilities Committee.

Councilmember Herbold and I continue to focus on the crisis of the West Seattle Bridge.

In District 4 last week, I connected with neighborhood restaurants in Wallingford and Bryant, discussing their challenges as they look forward to reopening once the governor clears King County for Phase 2 of his reopening of our state's economy.

These small businesses are laying out their tables and getting ready for appropriate social distancing, and they're eager to see their District 4 customers again.

Internet for All.

Last week I announced my proposed resolution to chart a course for universal access to affordable and reliable internet, what I'm calling Internet for All.

Now, this is not officially COVID-related legislation, but the recent COVID pandemic has shined a bright light on the inequities of the digital divide.

Since this resolution is not routine and not required for COVID response, I'll wait and officially introduce it later when we can have the regular committee meetings.

More information about this internet for all proposal is on my city council blog, which you can get to, get to all of our council pages, Seattle.gov forward slash council.

The business improvement area for the University District, which is in District 4, I want to thank Chair Councilmember Morales for the excellent meeting we had last week.

And as she mentioned, there's a public hearing this Wednesday, 9.30 in the morning.

public comment.

Again, you can get to instructions on public comment through Seattle.gov forward slash council.

There's also a special email address, UdistrictBIA at Seattle.gov.

UdistrictBIA at Seattle.gov.

So our central staff is circulating at least three amendments to the executive's bill on the BIA.

The purpose of my amendments is to make sure we achieve our goal of giving small neighborhood businesses a greater voice and making sure there's a competitive process for awarding what is essentially a $1 million contract to the program manager that administers the BIA.

Happy to answer questions about my amendments and my legislative aid contacting your L.A.s about this.

Office hours by telephone.

I continue to hold my weekly district office hours by Skype and telephone.

District 4 constituents, please sign up on my website.

Again, that's, you know, get to it by Seattle.gov slash council.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Peterson for that report.

Just really quickly on the U District BIA and your amendments in particular, have those amendments been published already or has that yet to occur?

I think it's just via a memo from central staff.

I don't think they're actually on the website for the committee yet.

Okay, and will your amendments be subject to an additional committee meeting of Council Member Morales, or are those amendments intended to be taken up during full council?

Oh, those will be, we're going to have the public hearing this Wednesday and a meeting shortly thereafter.

And I believe we're also having another committee meeting on June 3rd.

Right, OK, OK, so so until June 3rd.

So those amendments will be considered through the committee process and.

There will be committee action on June 3rd and.

Full Council action sometime thereafter.

Correct.

Is my understanding accurate?

Yes.

Okay, great.

Thank you so much.

Any questions or comments for Councilmember Peterson on his report?

Okay, hearing none, we'll go ahead and move along.

Next up is Councilmember Strauss.

Hi, good morning, Council colleagues.

There are no items from the Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee on the introduction and referral calendar, or on today's committee agenda.

The Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee currently plans to host a meeting by June 24th when we have public hearings scheduled for both the land use omnibus bill, which makes technical changes to the land use code, and for my Child Care Near You package, which removes barriers to the development of childcare in more Seattle neighborhoods.

This is all per guidance around the Open Public Meetings Act proclamation to ensure that we fit within the four corners of that bill.

Last week I continued to meet with constituents.

We sent our regular constituent newsletter and as you heard I visited CIL channel with Councilmember Wallow.

She brought up Oakview Group and the work that is occurring at the Seattle Center.

I want to highlight the importance of this work because it is privately financed which allows that project to continue without any hiccups, and it is an investment in our public space so big thanks to Oakview Group for all the amazing work you're doing there.

I also want to highlight Memorial Day, which this is a holiday dedicated to honor military fallen with a special focus on those killed during military service or through contact military contact as compared to Veterans Day, which honors all veterans.

So I just wanted to take a moment to because typically on Memorial Day, we spend time in cemeteries or times with family and friends.

With COVID-19 occurring this year, that wasn't possible like years in the past.

I just wanted to take a moment to honor our fallen military veterans, military service members.

Thank you.

Also, I overlooked very important notes last week as there was so much to discuss.

And so I'd like to share some of those with you now.

I continue to focus my work around all ages and abilities and the Human Services Department continues to do important work across our county.

Human Services Department is actually the county wide administrator for aging and disability services and these case managers in Seattle and Renton along with four partner agencies complete wellness checks, calls, and with almost 12,000 clients to determine who is at greatest risk to triage income in home care.

Just as an example of the difference that good case management can make, a client tested positive for the COVID-19 and had been isolated in their apartment for more than a week with insufficient access to food.

ADS was able to assist this client.

And in addition, this client did not receive medication advice from the hospital that performed the test.

So their case manager encouraged this individual to remain in isolation, contact their primary care physician, and immediately connected the client with food so that they could remain in their home and in isolation.

Human Services Department continues to invest nearly $5 million to expand food access for older adults.

This $5 million in federal funds to food and meal programs for older adults living with disabilities.

This is ranging from congregate meal programs to in-home delivery.

And especially at this time, the home delivery meal programs are very important.

So during COVID, there has been an expansion of home delivered meals to adults, Sound Generations Meals on Wheels program, and Lifelong's Chicken Supergate are some of the community partners that are helping in important ways with this work.

And also during this time, HSD has shifted staff to augment the food delivery meal program.

Agencies employing community choice guides, housing specialists who serve HSD aging and disability services, Medicaid, long-term care clients, have also been able to reassign staff to help deliver food from congregate meal sites to in-home care.

And this is just some of the really important work that as older adults in our community who may not have the same familial or community resources that many of us do, this type of work is just so important because this is also a population of people that is at risk to COVID-19.

So just wanted to thank Human Services Department, Aging and Disability Services, and anyone who works on all ages and abilities work here at the city and throughout our county.

I continue to put policy through all ages and abilities framework so that when we pass legislation here at City Council, we know that it works for everyone.

looking at this coming week.

I'll be attending the Washington Association of Washington City's Federal Policy Committee and we have last week we had many many meetings with constituents over the phone.

I've got many more meetings this week.

I really enjoy speaking to everyone especially as I'm missing seeing people in person.

That's my report Council President and thank you for your time.

Thank you so much Council Member Strass.

Are there any questions or comments on that report?

Okay, hearing and seeing none, we'll go ahead and move to the next individual, which is on my list.

Not correct.

Council Member Herbold, please.

You're on mute.

my mouth moving, but no words.

Okay.

On today's full council agenda, I have one item.

The item is appointment of Andrea Scheel as the executive director of the Public Safety Civil Service Commission.

And she has served in an interim capacity since October of last year.

She was formally appointed by the two commissions in a joint committee meeting on January 22nd.

Again, this is a joint position.

The appointing authority lies with the two commissions themselves.

Again, that's the Public Safety Civil Service Commission and the Civil Service Commission.

The commission's conducted a recruitment process and unanimously selected Ms. Scheele.

Their letter of appointment states that her combination of knowledge and experience have prepared her to lead the important work of the Civil Service and Public Safety Civil Service Commissions.

Through her service as Interim Director, Andrea has demonstrated a commitment to embed equity in her work at every level, serve as a collaborative partner, and provide thoughtful and authoritative counsel.

Both commissions are impartial, quasi-judicial bodies.

The Executive Director makes recommendations for their approval.

She manages the meetings and oversight of the public safety civil service exam process.

As interim director, she has managed the COVID-19 related issues regarding testing.

And just last week, the Public Safety Civil Service Commission voted to resolve a longstanding issue regarding veterans' preference points for firefighter promotions.

Her background includes experience as a human resources manager in the Department of Finance and Administrative Services, directing HR investigations, assistant city attorney providing labor and employment legal representation, and advice to human resources teams, including litigation regarding labor arbitration and other administrative proceedings.

My office has confirmed with the law department that the appointment as other commission related appointments meet the standards of the governor's order 2028. And just as a bit of background on both commissions, The Public Safety and Civil Service Commission hears appeals of sworn police and uniformed fire employees regarding disciplinary actions, examination and testing, and alleged violations of the City Charter Personnel Rules and the Personnel Ordinance.

The Civil Service Commission hears similar appeals for non-public safety personnel.

and can submit recommendations to the mayor and council related to the city's personnel system and other duties.

Both commissions have three members with the mayor and council, both appointing members and its employees electing the third.

This appointment is through January 21st, 2023. And just as a point of information, some folks might recall resolution 31868, regarding department head appointment processes.

This legislation identifies a recruitment and selection process for department heads.

This was legislation that was sponsored by Council Member Mosqueda a couple years ago, or maybe a year ago.

This legislation does not apply to cases like this one.

This legislation applies in cases where the mayor appoints and the council confirms, and that isn't the situation here.

This is a position where the appointing authority lies with the two commissions itself.

And so just providing that as a point of information.

And again, the resolution addresses department heads and this position is not considered a department head in that same vein.

Other items coming up, there is of course no Public Safety and Human Services Committee meeting this week.

I am holding office hours this Friday between 3 p.m.

and 6 p.m.

Last week I joined the launch of the Third Door Coalition, as we've heard others speak of today.

The Third Door Coalition is an effort among self-described unlikely allies to tackle chronic homelessness in our region.

They are a coalition of business stakeholders and social service and homelessness advocates.

They're working to help people who have struggled without homes for the longest time, specifically focused on chronic homelessness.

They have a plan to build 6,500 units of permanent supportive housing in the next five years.

As we all know, permanent supportive housing is well-established as the most effective for people and also the most cost-effective solution to chronic homelessness.

About 95% of people who get into permanent supportive housing stay in it, regardless of their underlying conditions, such as mental health issues or substance abuse issues.

And one year of permanent supportive housing costs the same as three days in the hospital or three months in jail.

The Third Door Coalition members have identified a plan to reduce the cost of building permanent supportive housing while raising the resources necessary to bring permanent supportive housing to scale across the region.

Their work recognizes that cities can't do this alone.

and they are proposing a public-private partnership in order to increase funding to meet this important goal.

I also want to flag that I attended Councilmember Mosqueda's economic forum last week, really appreciated the focus.

on the importance of not slipping into austerity budgeting despite the city's revenue shortfalls.

Message that we've learned from previous recessions is that when governments cut essential services and programs that invest in individuals, it takes much longer for the economy to recover.

Upcoming budget discussions will be difficult, but we have to keep in mind the lessons from the past and make investments in people and in our economy to spur growth.

And we must look for new revenue.

I'm really heartened that Portland area voters last week overwhelmingly approved 2.5 billion in new taxes over 10 years to tackle their homelessness crisis.

This was a measure that was taken to the ballot and the voters of Portland And just really want to also flag that the majority of the business community was also behind this measure.

The exception, I think, as far as organized opposition in the business community was the grocers.

but there was a broad, strong coalition, very similar to what we see with the Third Door Coalition, aligned to recognize that private resources need to be brought to this problem.

And yeah, it was passed by 57% of ballot among voters in three counties.

So 1% income tax for people who make $125,000 annually, or couples who earn $200,000 combined, and a 1% tax on businesses that generate $5 million annually.

So again, looking to learn from our neighboring jurisdictions, as well as looking to learn from history on how to implement policies and budgets that will pull us into an economic recovery.

I want to also add to the great shout out we heard from Councilmember Strauss earlier to the human services department.

Councilmember Strauss referenced investments in needs associated with aging populations.

Folks probably saw last week the mayor's office announced several million in additional investments focused on food delivery.

And I really am so proud of our Human Services Department and the work that individual staffers there have been doing to redeploy staff, everybody from policy advisors to planners to grant monitors, redeploying HSD, Human Services Department, staffed the front lines from almost the first day of the public health emergency.

They are filling a critical gap and allowing essential services to stay home as many nonprofits are struggling with short staffing, fewer volunteers, and increased operating costs.

between March 26th and April 25th, Human Services Department staff covered 242 shifts at two different homeless shelters, contributing a total of 723 hours of service.

Since May 6th, as of the end of April, the HSD staff shifted from shelter service to food service.

Since May 6th, Human Services Department staff have covered 78 shifts, at food distribution sites, contributing a total of 380 hours of service.

Many more HSD staff were already on the front lines in their usual jobs providing care and support to help more Seattleites thrive.

This is all part of the Human Resources Department's Talent Redeployment Hub, where city workers can take on a few hours of work out in the community and be compensated, just as they're compensated for their regular work.

And if folks listening in who are city staff don't know about the Redeployment Hub, I urge you to check it out and find out how you can plug in and help as well.

I've had a great honor being able to support Human Services Department staff by attending the food delivery, food distribution centers both at the West Seattle Food Bank and taking on shifts on Fridays as well as the South Park Senior Center again, last Friday to help pack food for delivery for neighbors alongside our city staff.

I think it's really important that we show support for our city staffers doing this work.

And with that, that's all I have for today.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Herbold.

Great report.

Really appreciate you highlighting some of the work coming out of our neighbors to the south, Portland.

I followed that news with great interest over the weekend, and I think your point around the breadth and of the coalition to make that type of an endeavor come to fruition and be successful just cannot be understated.

So I appreciate you making a note, especially since you were one of the main sponsors on our own city's income tax legislation a few years ago.

Really appreciate your ongoing effort in that space.

Any comments or questions for Council Member Herbold on her report?

Okay, hearing and seeing none, we'll go ahead and end today's meeting with my report.

We have no meeting at the Governance and Education Committee in June.

I do have two items on this afternoon's agenda.

It will be Council Bill 119794 along with Council Bill 119795. Colleagues, both of these bills are labor-related bills, so I'm bringing these forward as the chair of the Committee Select Labor Committee.

So the first bill, 119794, is related to the Seattle Parking Enforcement Officers Guild Collective Bargaining Agreement.

This bill will authorize the execution of a negotiated union contract between the city of Seattle and that bargaining unit.

It is a three-year contract from January 1st, 2019, through December 31st, 2021, and it will include approximately 105 regularly appointed city employees that are housed within the Seattle Police Department.

I will provide additional details this afternoon about the financial terms, but all financial and non-financial terms of this collective bargaining agreement were considered and approved by members of the Labor Relations Policy Committee and are within those previously approved parameters.

Council Bill 119795 is also related to our labor unions, so this council bill authorizes the execution of a memorandum of understanding between the city and the city coalitions, the coalition of city unions, excuse me, regarding flexibility and other supports for the city workforce during the COVID-19 public health crisis.

This memorandum of understanding would be effective from March 3rd, 2020 through September 1st, 2020, or until the mayor's proclamation of the civil emergency ends, whichever date is earlier.

The memorandum applies only to employees represented by the coalition.

However, the city will use the same approach as presented in the MOU for non-represented employees.

The main provisions and detailed provisions of the memorandum of understanding are highlighted in Karina Bull's memorandum, which is attached to today's Bull Council agenda.

Some of the highlights are providing telecommuting and alternative work schedules, providing for new paid leave, provisions dictated by the Federal Families First Coronavirus Response Act.

It also includes revisions to employees' vacation accrual caps and provides for the maintenance of medical benefits of employees who are on unpaid leave.

So it's my understanding also, based on representations from the executive and the city budget office, that any additional costs incurred due to this legislation would be and would be paid for by existing appropriations.

Once again, the labor relations team did reach out to each of the members of the labor relations policy committee, which include myself, council members Herbold, Mosqueda, Morales, and Lewis, and we are moving this legislation forward after that particular outreach.

With that being said, those are the two bills that will be at the end of our full council meeting today.

Happy to answer any additional questions or hear comments about those items now if colleagues have any.

Okay.

hearing none, just that last bill, Council Bill 119795 requires a signature by members of the coalition as well as the labor relations team.

So I don't see any red flags there in terms of advancing that legislation and it is clearly COVID related.

So that is all I have.

Actually, I wanted to just quickly highlight last week, thank you to some of you for participating in the day of action on behalf of our undocumented immigrants throughout the state of Washington.

I had the great fortune and opportunity to partner with organizations like One America and Northwest Immigrant Rights Projects and Entre Hermanos and others to have a virtual day of action where we called upon Governor Inslee to establish a $100 million worker relief fund for undocumented immigrants across the state.

Of course, we are home to about 250,000 undocumented immigrants, many of whom are paying into our system by virtue of paying taxes, but not being able to access the benefits of those taxes fund like unemployment insurance, for example.

So really appreciate all of your support in passing that resolution.

related to that Worker Relief Fund the prior Monday, and appreciate all of those of you who participated in carrying the message and standing in solidarity with our undocumented immigrants here in Seattle and across the state as we worked with advocates in community to continue to highlight the need for swift and quick action in that space.

That is all I have on my report.

Happy to take any questions.

Okay, seeing and hearing none, colleagues, that is the end of our agenda for this morning's council briefing.

We don't have any other business, so we are adjourned, and we will see you all at 2 p.m.

this afternoon.

Bye.