SPEAKER_31

Good morning.

The August 7, 2024 Select Budget Committee meeting will come to order.

It is 9.32 a.m.

Committee started at 9.30.

I'm Dan Strauss.

I'm chair of the committee.

Councilmember Hollingsworth is running a few minutes late and is excused until that time.

Clerk, will you please call the roll?

SPEAKER_39

Councilmember Kettle?

SPEAKER_25

Here.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Morales.

Here.

Council Member Rivera.

Present.

Council Member Saca.

SPEAKER_31

Here.

SPEAKER_39

And Chair Strauss.

SPEAKER_31

Present.

SPEAKER_39

Five present.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

As other council members arrive, we will announce their presence.

Colleagues, I hope we have all reserved an extra hour after the regularly scheduled time of this committee until 1230. Hopefully we will be able to move forward quickly.

We have five items on the agenda today.

We have the August Economic Revenue Forecast RECAP PRESENTATION FROM THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC AND REVENUE FORECASTS IN CITY BUDGET OFFICE.

WE HAVE A SECOND BRIEFING AND POTENTIAL VOTE ON THE MIDYEAR BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS PACKAGE, THE MIDYEAR SUPPLEMENTAL PACKAGE, INCLUDING THREE BILLS AND I BELIEVE SIX AMENDMENTS.

IT SEEMS LIKE WE MIGHT HAVE A WALK-ON AMENDMENT TODAY AS WELL.

Reminder, we had a July 25th deadline for amendments.

As well, to round us off, we have Council Central Staff Director Ben Noble will return to the presentation table to give us a budget process preview of what to expect once the proposed budget is transmitted in September.

As a reminder, this is the conclusion of our Select Budget Series.

In common years, the Select Budget Committee doesn't get organized until September.

This year we started in April, and this rounds that out.

Before we begin, if there is no objection, the agenda will be adopted.

Hearing no objection, the agenda is adopted.

I'm seeing we have additional council members joining us, council member Nelsons and Moore.

We will now open the hybrid public comment period.

Public comments should relate to the items on today's agenda and within the purview of the select budget committee.

Clerk, how many speakers do we have signed up in person?

I'm seeing we have 11 signed up online.

SPEAKER_39

We have about 22 in person.

SPEAKER_31

I'm going to be taking, I'm going to have public comment at one minute today.

As we have 30 people, we will do all in-person public comment first, and then we will transition to online.

Each speaker will have two minutes, one minute, excuse me.

We will start with in-person speakers and then move to remote.

I'll now read the public comment instructions.

Public comment period will be moderated in the following manner.

The public comment period today, I'm gonna just state, is up to 30 minutes.

Hopefully, we'll be able to complete this.

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

We will begin with the in-person speakers and then move on to remote speakers.

Speakers will hear it.

You'll hear a chime when you have 10 seconds left.

So when you hear the chime, that doesn't mean you're done.

Just start wrapping up.

We will mute the microphones once the speaking time is completed.

Public comment period is now open.

And clerk, if you could pass me the list.

No, you're totally fine.

Thank you kindly.

Great.

And if you are here, have not signed up for public comment, you can still sign up for public comment until we're complete.

We do have three microphones.

If you could line up ahead of time, I'm going to read names in blocks so you know when you're coming.

We're going to start with Jamani Owens, Israel.

I'm having trouble reading your handwriting.

Barbara Lee, Aaron Peace, Brian Duncan, Jeannie Lewis are our first six.

Good morning, Jamani.

SPEAKER_32

That's me.

SPEAKER_31

Oh, sorry.

SPEAKER_32

That's me.

SPEAKER_31

Good morning, Jamani.

SPEAKER_32

Yeah, good morning, good morning.

I'm all right, I'm all right.

So I can start?

Yes.

Ooh, ooh, that was, yeah, that was a lot.

Okay, my name is Jumaane Owens, born and raised Seattle, Washington, specifically South Seattle, you know what I mean?

SPEAKER_31

Be sure you, I'm here today to- Jumaane, hang on, if you could hang on real quick, we're gonna deal with these technical difficulties.

Maybe switch mics later.

SPEAKER_99

Yeah.

SPEAKER_31

It's not you, it's the mic.

SPEAKER_32

I got you, I got you, for sure, for sure.

SPEAKER_31

Good morning.

Whenever you're ready, we'll just get going.

SPEAKER_32

I'll start again.

My name is Jamani Owens, born and raised in Seattle, Washington, specifically South Seattle, Rainier Beach area.

Here today to say, you know, I'm a product of my environment.

I'm here with Urban Family today as a, what do you call that?

Damn, my words are all lost.

I'm all over the place.

Man left.

Yeah, I'm a product of my environment.

I went to prison, got out, been out for like four years now, trying to do good.

Yeah, that's it, pretty much.

That's all I'd say.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

We're happy to have you here today.

Thank you.

Up next, we got...

All right, team, I'm gonna give you...

When we show appreciation in this committee, we raise our hands.

We can wave them around, do little jazz hands.

When we're having all the applause, it's just going to take us a bunch of time.

So if you all could line up, we got Israel, Barbara, Aaron, Brian Duncan, Jeannie Lewis.

If you all could get ready.

And then again, if you want to show appreciation, jazz hands.

Good morning.

SPEAKER_61

Good morning.

My name is Israel Gabriel Miriam.

SPEAKER_31

You've got to speak a little closer to that microphone.

SPEAKER_61

Good morning.

My name is Israel Gabriel Miriam, and I'm here to advocate on the behalf of Urban Family and CSI.

I grew up in South Seattle as well, and I was born in Ethiopia, but I came and grew up here.

But I'm here to say that we need programs like CSI and Urban Family to impact the youth and the neighborhood.

I'm currently going to UW Seattle pursuing computer science.

And I feel like without Urban Family or CSI and programs like this, I wouldn't be where I am right now.

And I would definitely say that we need more funding and more opportunities for youth and people in the neighborhood to get more fundings.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Welcome.

SPEAKER_31

Up next, we have Barbara followed by Erin Peace, Brian Duncan, Jeannie Lewis.

SPEAKER_45

Hello, I'm Barbara Lee and I'm a volunteer with a local chapter of Moms Demand Action.

I'm a retired public school teacher and your constituent in District 4. Our mission is to end gun violence in all its forms, and we feel strongly that the city of Seattle should be fully funding student mental health and the work of community violence intervention programs in our city.

Since the fatal shooting at Ingram High School, when these funds were initially approved, we've seen far too many instances of gun violence harming our young people, including the fatal shooting at Garfield High School.

They deserve better, which is why we must strengthen our investments in the critical work of community violence intervention and live up to the promises made to our students to fully fund mental health support.

Please support Council Member Morales' amendment to fully fund the $20 million budget in 2024 and continue to invest further in 2025 and 2026. Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Up next, we have Aaron Pease, Brian Duncan, Jeannie Lewis, Paul Patu.

Good morning, Aaron.

SPEAKER_00

Thank you.

My name is Erin.

I'm a volunteer with Moms Demand Action, and I'm in the District 36. I urge you to support the Councilmember Morales' $20 million budget amendment for 2024. This funding is essential for continuing investment in youth mental health, education, and the restorative justice practices through 2025 and 2026. Gun violence intervention and restorative justice programs are crucial for students dealing with trauma, stress, and untreated mental health conditions.

By prioritizing mental wellness, reducing conflict, and strengthening communities, we can prevent school shootings, build resilience, and ensure healthier futures for Seattle's families.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Next we have Brian Duncan, Jeannie Lewis, Paul Patu.

SPEAKER_02

Good morning.

Obviously, I'm not Brian Duncan.

He didn't show up, so I'm going to read what we had prepared.

SPEAKER_31

Who are you?

SPEAKER_02

My name is Rebecca Elbaum.

I am chapter lead for Washington Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America.

SPEAKER_31

I can do it.

SPEAKER_02

Let's do that.

SPEAKER_31

We're just going to keep moving to the next one.

We'll get back to you at the end.

SPEAKER_02

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Up next, we have Jeannie Lewis, followed by Paul Patu, Chantel Patu, Annie Patu, Oliver Miska.

Good morning.

SPEAKER_41

Hi, my name is Janine Lewis.

My name is Janine Lewis, and I'm representing the community, the families.

I just want to let you know how necessary that these programs are to me and to my family and to our community.

The youth are being helped.

There's relationships that are being built.

Trust is being built within the communities, which is vital.

It's essential.

I attended recently an event, the block party event, down in South Seattle.

And the event is to bring in the end of the year and then transition the kids into the summer.

And we had the event.

We had food and the traditional activities for the kids.

And during the time I was there, there was a gentleman who attempted to subdue one of the children And immediately, the security- And I'm just-

SPEAKER_31

Okay, that's it?

Yeah, but if you want to submit written public comment, we're happy to accept some.

SPEAKER_41

All right, thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you very much.

Up next, we have Paul, Chantel, Annie, and then Oliver.

Apparently, I mispronounced somebody's name.

I apologize.

SPEAKER_60

Good morning.

Greetings, council members.

I want to first start off by saying if violence is a disease, then our city is infected.

It is important that the council members stay the course of the investments that have been made in the CVI work.

SCSI, along with other programs, and it's extremely important.

There's been millions of dollars that have been spent In prior years, SYVPI, Seattle Team, those were investments that were made that need to continue to be made so that you can continue to build on the foundation that's already been laid.

I am also in support of Council Member Morales' proviso.

It's important that you stay the course and that you fulfill your promises and which to the people.

It's extremely important.

Stay the course.

God bless you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Up next, we're going to do jazz hands, everyone.

Up next is Chantel, Annie, Oliver.

Good morning.

SPEAKER_08

Good morning.

I'm Chantel Patu, and I'm going to actually rescind my time to Annie Patu.

SPEAKER_37

Hello, my name is Annie Patu, and I'm the principal of Rainier Beach High School.

I'm also a 50-year resident of South Seattle.

I want to thank the mayor and the council for investing in the Seattle Community Safety Initiative.

Over the past four years, Rainier Beach High School has partnered with Southeast Network, and they've provided numerous services.

Over 210 students have been case managed, have received housing, basic needs services.

60 of those kids graduated on time and almost all of them have engaged in programs outside of school provided by Southeast Network Urban Family and Community Passage.

I left my Seattle Public School Principal Leadership Institute to come here today because safety in and around our schools is a number one concern.

for me and my principal colleagues.

Kids can't learn if they are not safe.

Gun violence has disproportionately impacted our black and brown communities and our victims and perpetrators are becoming younger and younger at an alarming rate.

It's not like we don't know these kids.

They live in our communities and they have attended our schools.

These are the kids that we know aren't coming to school.

and don't always have safe homes to return to, so they wander in our streets only to be taken in by adults who groom and exploit them.

The Southeast Network has stood in the gap for these kids and their families.

They have provided authentic and trusting relationships with our youth, met needs, provided safe spaces to heal, get healthy, and learn skill sets to prepare...

Principal Patu.

SPEAKER_31

Principal Patu.

Oh, I'm sorry.

It does not work.

We don't do that.

But if Chantel wants to come up, thank you.

Appreciate you.

Remember jazz hands, my good friends.

Up next is Oliver Miska.

Are you ready, Oliver?

Please come to the microphone.

Up next is Elena McCallum, Marty Jackson, Takara Dillon.

Good morning.

Good morning.

SPEAKER_16

I'M A POLICY ORGANIZER, COMMUNITY ORGANIZER AT THE STATE LEDGE, MOSTLY FOCUSING ON EDUCATION POLICY.

I'M ALSO AN EDUCATOR AT SEATTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

I'M TODAY HERE JUST TO URGE YOU TO SUPPORT COUNCILMEMBER MORALES'S PROVISO TO FULLY SPEND THE $20 MILLION FOR STUDENT MENTAL HEALTH AND VIOLENCE PREVENTION.

IT'S CLEAR EVERYONE ELSE IS HERE TOO.

So the biggest thing that I keep hearing about is student voice and teen takes, as the Seattle Times likes to put it.

And what we keep forgetting is actually bringing students into the conversation.

And when you promise $20 million to students, you should fulfill that promise.

That's the city council's job.

Talk to the students at Garfield High School yesterday, the ASB president.

If we're asking...

The student leadership voices, what their perspectives are.

Why won't those students talk to?

I talked to them yesterday, but none of y'all did.

SPEAKER_31

Wondering what's up.

Thank you.

Up next is Elena McCallum, Marty Jackson, Takara Dillon, followed by Cameron Collins.

Good morning.

How are you?

SPEAKER_01

Good morning council members.

I'm a limit Cal middle school teacher here in Seattle public schools and a district three resident.

Please support council member Morales as amendment to restore the proviso to $20 million.

Our current budget prioritizes punishment, having approved $170 million to SPD.

And then yesterday approving additional contract with score by approving the amendment, it is an opportunity for you to show your 500,000 students and initial all you all in here constituents that honor their voice and mental health.

The initial 20 million proposal was brought forth and fought for by the students here in Seattle.

As an educator, I witnessed the impacts of my students not receiving the mental health supports that they asked for and they deserve.

When students...

needs are not met, they are unable to learn and be successful.

Please restore the $20 million that you promised to them last November.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Up next is Marty Jackson, Takara Dillon, Cameron Collins, Jacob Collins.

Good morning.

SPEAKER_36

Hi, I want to thank the mayor and city council members for supporting the Seattle Community Safety Initiative and your investment in that.

On behalf of SESI and all of the young people and community folks you see here today, I'd like to tell you the return on your investment.

We've served 1,000-plus unduplicated at-risk youth and young adults and their families.

Over 85% of these participants reported decreased involvement in violence and general crime and report feeling safe.

We responded to 200-plus hotspot and critical incidents dispatched by SPD and community sources.

We implemented 300-plus community engagement events for hotspot remediation.

We provided safety support for over 100 communities that resulted in zero critical incidents.

We serve 200 plus families by providing emergency rental assistance, utility assistance, food resources, transportation, emergency relocation services.

We provided safety support for over 20 funerals, visuals, and our memorials, and contributed to funeral expenses.

I'm here to tell you today that your investment, you've had a great return on your investment.

Continue to support Seattle Community Safety Initiative.

I also want to say all of these young people here that you see here today, this is the return on your investment.

They all showed up today.

Let's give them a hand.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

All right, friends.

SPEAKER_20

All right.

SPEAKER_31

My friends, I appreciate you so much.

I appreciate you so much.

So, team, I've asked a couple times now.

Can we all just do a demonstration?

Everyone's excited about that speech, right?

So this is how we're going to do it today.

I've asked you three times now.

Let's work as a team to get through this today.

Up next, we have...

That was Takara.

SPEAKER_47

That was Marty.

SPEAKER_31

Marty.

Up next is Takara, then Cameron, and then Jacob.

Come on up.

SPEAKER_99

Great.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_50

My name is Sanaa.

I've been with the Boys and Girls Club for like the past four years.

And I started out with, well, she's not here today, but Carissa, she helped me with career launch.

She helped me like start my resume and like how to get jobs and all that.

She really like, you know.

started with getting me into, like, future things.

She helped me with getting gift cards for when I needed clothes, giving me gift cards for when I needed rides, because I know, like...

I don't know, my family's usually known for being late a lot and not having the transportation when we need it, so she helped me with that.

Yeah, Boys and Girls Club's been there for me, been there, showed me support.

Yeah, they were kind of everything I needed when I needed family, when I couldn't get it at home.

Yeah, that's basically it.

So I would love for you guys to keep, like, continuing funding for the Southeast Network.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Wonderful.

Up next, we have Cameron Collins, Jacob Collins.

Good morning.

SPEAKER_35

My name's Takara.

I've been with the Boys and Girls Club since a junior in high school.

They've helped me graduate, complete resumes.

They've also recently got me housing and four months of my rent covered and paid for all moving costs.

They've helped me get my new job at the other Boys and Girls Club.

So I just want to say keep funding the Boys and Girls Club because they help a lot of youths stay off the streets.

They give us a lot of bunch of different activities to do so we can stay focused and, like, make our goal and what we have to do, because right now I just met my goal.

They've also helped me with college.

They've also gave me car rides to work when I'm late for work.

So just keep funding.

Be safe because they really do make me feel safe.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

And so I am I'm going to get to everyone today, but I do need us to go in order.

That's all I'm asking.

So up next, we have Jacob Collins.

Jacob, are you in the room?

There's Jacob.

Come on up, Jacob.

And if folks want to line up in this middle line, after Jacob, we got Cason Ash, Tyson Yang, Jeffrey Collins, Chance Graves Sr., and Jason Locke.

So if we want to line up in this middle line, if you just heard your name.

Mr. Collins, welcome.

SPEAKER_51

Hi.

SPEAKER_31

Hi.

SPEAKER_51

Um, today I'm talking about Urban Family and how it keeps me safe.

Urban Family keeps me safe because it takes me out the community where violence and gun violence is and takes us better places.

So funny.

But, yeah.

And it keeps me safe because when we're on our field trips, we also talk about how gun violence is impacting us and other stuff.

And I think gun violence is hurting us because people my age is coming up here to talk about it.

SPEAKER_31

All right.

Thank you, Mr. Collins.

Up next is Kason Ash, Tyson Yang, Jeffrey Collins.

And up next is Kason, K-Y-S-O-N Ash.

And this middle line right here is probably an easier place to...

Do you have a question, sir?

What's your name?

Oh, somebody else took your spot.

Come on up, Cameron.

This is why we got to go in order, my friends.

SPEAKER_05

Come on up, Cameron.

SPEAKER_31

I've told them a couple times.

Down this middle aisle, I've been told the message isn't getting through.

Mr. Cameron Collins, the time is yours.

SPEAKER_52

Hi, my name is Cameron Collins.

I'm going to Rainier Beach High School and I'm representing Urban Family.

This program is important because although we have fun and go on field trips, we also learn the important issues within our communities.

This program teaches the struggles of gun violence and how to stay away from it.

We also go on field trips and stuff, but it also makes me feel safe within my community.

Some people like that, you know, are there, like John, Gerald, Devin, Jay Sean, Sergio, TC, Ms. Chantel, and Mr. Paul, and other support staff.

Thank you for making me feel safe within my community.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Up next, we have Kaysen.

Good morning, Mr. Ash.

SPEAKER_58

Hi, my name is Kaysen Ash, and I'm a former student of Aki Kurose Middle School.

When I was in Aki, I was in a program called Urban Family.

When I was with them, I learned how to speak my mind and be myself.

And what I want for future kids of Urban Family to speak their mind and be themselves.

And I would want every single kid in Urban Family, not like if you're going to Urban Family, to be yourself, talk to the staff, and overall just have a good time and just like what camera said, we go on field trips and just to get kids who are in like a bad place, they're able to go and have fun and not think about all the bad stuff going around in their life.

And, um, that's all I had to say.

Thank you.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Up next is Tayson Yang, Jeffrey Collins, Chance Graves, Graves senior.

Good morning.

Up next is Tyson.

SPEAKER_56

Um, Hi.

My name is .

I'm with Urban Family.

I'd like to say that, yes, Urban Family helps us a lot making us resources that we can't get.

They help us.

They take time from themselves to bring us here, like right now, take us on trips to have fun so we don't like stay home and be bored.

And, yeah, like they help us a lot, so.

Like, they take care of us.

They really care about us.

When we're with Urban Family, they help us speak freely and to help us in case, like, we're emotional, anything that's happening in our lifetimes, homes, anywhere.

Like, gun violence, they take us out places so we don't have to, like, pay attention to it.

So, yeah.

Thank you.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Up next is Jeffrey Collins, Chance Graves, and Jason Locke.

Good morning.

SPEAKER_57

Hi, my name is Jeffrey Collins, and I go to Rainier Beach High School.

I just joined the Irving family this year.

And they've helped me in so many ways.

For first, they keep a lot of kids off the streets and away from gang violence.

They take us on field trips to places we've never been able to go because whether we don't have enough funding in our neighborhoods or our parents don't got enough money, they...

I got you.

They help me go places that I really want to go.

And, yeah, they help you stay away from, like, gang violence and, like, stay off of the streets because, like, especially by the Rainier Beach area, there's a lot of stuff that, like, pops up and goes on.

And they help you stay away from that stuff.

And, yeah.

SPEAKER_31

Up next, we have Chance Graves, Sr., followed by Jason Locke.

If you are in the audience and would like to speak, you can sign up on that list.

I believe that's Brian Duncan.

We'll come back to you, Brian.

SPEAKER_59

But take it away.

Hi, my name is Chance Graves, Sr.

I'm born and raised in South Seattle.

I'm here on the behalf of Community Pastors.

I used to be in the Gold Heart.

I would say it's a very helpful program.

I benefited from all the work and support they was giving me throughout the time I was there.

I would say since then, I got a career now in barbering.

And I would just say, like, I would love for them to keep getting the help they need, the benefits they need to keep having these youth get the support they need and stop the violence.

That's pretty much it.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

And, clerk, I realize I might have given you that sheet back with one name at the very bottom below Chance Graves Sr.

Let's see this.

Yes, because we have Jason Locke.

Good morning.

SPEAKER_53

Good morning, counsel.

My name is Jason Locke.

I'm advocating on behalf of Urban Family.

First, I'd like to say please look around the room and you'll see just a small percentage of the youth that we serve.

Our mentorship and our programs for the youth have impacted our youth in a very positive way.

As previously stated, gun violence is a disease in this community of Seattle, and you guys can also help us continue to stay the course by keeping your promise.

Please continue to support our CVI workers and give us the funding that we deserve.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Up next, we have Justin.

SPEAKER_17

That's all I got on this.

Are you Justin?

Yeah.

All right.

Hi, my name is Justin Bastidas.

I'm here to advocate on behalf of our family.

I've been working with Jayshon and TC that's not here today over the past year and a half.

And that's helped me through mental struggles and acting like a big brother when I needed it.

And I needed that type of support.

And now I have a job now because of Urban Family.

And they've always been supporting me in a lot of things.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

And up next, we've got Vivian Song.

And I realize my apologies.

I didn't realize we had a former elected in the room.

We would have brought you straight to the top.

Good morning, Vivian.

Followed by Vivian is Sinai Takara, Erica, and Sean Chandler.

SPEAKER_10

Good morning.

My name is Vivian Song.

I'm a resident of District 3, Seattle Public School parent and former school board director.

As I testified at the July 17th Finance Committee meeting, having visited schools in all seven city council districts, the need to address our kids' mental health crisis head-on is very real.

This is a matter of public safety.

When we unpack our current challenges of homelessness, violent crime, drug addiction, I believe that we will find previous underinvestment in our youth buried there.

I thank you for your willingness to serve in unprecedented times, but these are unprecedented times.

We cannot turn a blind eye to what will be the fallout of the pandemic on our kids and our community.

Fortunately, our youth and our community have the solutions.

That's why they advocated for this investment.

If you want public safety solutions, it's there.

Please, listen to the solutions that they are offering you.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Up next is tonight, Takara Dillon, Erica McCraney, I believe.

Do we have a...

Oh, this is why we can't go out of order.

Okay.

And Takara, you already went.

Is that correct?

Can I get a thumbs up?

Takara in the crowd, thank you.

Erica McCraney, did you already go?

Here's Erica.

Welcome.

After Erica, we will have Shawn Chandler, Orlando Ames, Demario Mallory.

Good morning.

SPEAKER_38

Good morning.

I'm here on behalf of Community Passageways.

My name is Erica McCraney.

I am an SCSI resource navigator for our organization.

I just want to speak to the amazing work our organization does.

We are...

constantly building relationships with youth, not only youth, also their families.

Most of the families that we serve are people who have been impacted by gun violence.

And most people who are impacted by gun violence come from families with poverty.

So we just help those families as a resource navigator, We provide tons of resources.

My team is actually putting on a resource back-to-school event at the end of this month to help give out backpacks and back-to-school necessities.

Also, we'll be doing haircuts and hairstyles for young ladies and young men to get nice and feel comfortable as they return back to school.

And then we're also providing back-to-school stipends to shop and things like that.

So Community Passageway is a great organization.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you very much.

Up next, we have Sean Chandler, Orlando Ames, Demario Mallory, Deshaun Neighbors, and Rebecca Elbaum.

Good morning, Sean.

Hello, Councilman.

I'd use that microphone.

You hear me?

You can push it up if you want.

SPEAKER_54

There you are.

Hello, Councilman.

Hello.

My name is Sean Chandler, and I'm here on behalf of Community Passageways.

Um, I'm just here to advocate to restore funding for such programs as ourselves.

Most of us are out here working with this population you see before us, the youth, young people of color, minorities who have already been abandoned by most of these programs, most of these institutions, and their dire need of our resources, their dire need of our mentorship.

And we have programs out here that provide more than the basic needs.

We're out here with these young people and situations with them that nobody else can help them with.

Besides basic needs, we're providing mentorship, leadership, and we're guiding them.

We're walking them through these things.

And I just ask that you guys continue to allow us to do what we need to do.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Up next, we have Orlando Ames, Demario Mallory, Deshaun Neighbors, and Rebecca Elbaum.

Good morning.

Good morning.

SPEAKER_26

Good morning.

My name is Orlando Ames.

I'm also with community passageways and community.

I'm a critical instance responder.

And as such, we respond to scenes of shots fired.

Our goal overall is to keep our community safe and keeping our community safe, not just in the schools, but outside of the schools, because it's extremely important.

The work that we do, you see all these young faces up in here.

You see all these community members up in here.

This is what we do it for.

In order to continue to do that work, we need that particular funding.

SPEAKER_31

That's all I got.

Well said.

Up next, I lost my spot.

That was Sean.

So now we have Orlando DeMario DeSean.

Good morning.

Hey, real quick.

Can I get my team up here?

And you can restart the time once he starts talking.

SPEAKER_24

Good morning.

My name is Demario Mallory.

I'm the director of the St. Patrick's team, who you see up here with me.

We're outside every day.

We're building relationships with these kids in South Seattle.

We're in the schools.

We're outside.

As you can see, look around the room.

These are just some of the kids that we help.

We're at the middle schools.

We all love what we do.

We love these kids.

We love this community.

Like everyone's been saying, we can't do this without the help.

We appreciate what you've done so far for us.

But please, we need to serve more.

We need to do more for this community.

It's liking, love, and we can provide that.

SPEAKER_27

Anyone want to say anything?

Hi, I'm Brandon from Safe Passage.

But yeah, we serve so many kids.

Every day we get community members, whether it's people that's even living out on the streets, people that's not living on the streets, they thank us every day for what we do in the neighborhood, telling how safe they feel, what it's around.

And our job never stops.

And yeah, we have to serve more, just like he said, because there's generations that keep coming.

Thank you, guys.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

And I'm just going to note that we have reached the end of the 30 minutes.

So if there's no objection, the public comment period will be extended until we're done.

I'm not going to put a time limit on it just until we're done.

Any objections?

Seeing none, and I also want to note, Councilmember Wu showed up about 30 minutes ago.

My apologies, Councilmember Wu.

Didn't announce it in the real time.

So up next, we have...

And Councilmember Moore.

Sorry, I got so caught up with everyone in this room.

Good to see everyone.

That was DeMario.

We got DeSean and Rebecca next.

SPEAKER_62

How you guys doing?

My name is Deshawn.

I work with Community Passageways.

I work for the Deep Dive program.

What Deep Dive is, we work with youth and young adults that are highly impacted by gun violence and the ones that the system says are going to end up dead or in jail.

And what we do, we create a wraparound service around them, try to better their lives, keep them out of trouble, give them resources and avenues, get them back on their feet, get them housing, try to change the way they think so that they're not creating violence in the community.

We really need this work.

They're connected to us because we come from the same community as them.

You're also looking at somebody who's a product of that.

I was a participant far before I ever worked for Community Passageways, and I've been able to impact hundreds myself.

My program has been able to impact thousands, and my organization has been able to impact at least over 100,000.

So if you guys could help us continue this so that we can build the foundation, continue to build on the foundation, and actually make a real impact, something that nobody else would be able to do in this community, we would appreciate it.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Up next, we have a Rebecca Elbaum, and then clerk, I believe we've got more people on the list on the table.

SPEAKER_02

Council Member Strauss, Brian Duncan, I signed him in earlier.

He is here.

SPEAKER_31

Can he do his- I saw him signing up earlier.

We can't sign other people up.

That's definitely against the rules.

SPEAKER_02

All right.

I'll go.

You're Rebecca?

Yes.

My name is Rebecca.

Excellent.

Take it away, Rebecca.

Yes.

I'm Rebecca Elbaum.

I am the Washington State Chapter Lead of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America.

Our organization feels strongly that we should be fully funding student mental health and the work of community violence intervention, prevention, and restorative justice in Seattle.

Now it's the time to fully invest in services and support that will keep young people safe.

Moms Demand Action has worked with organizations like SE Network Safety Net, Community Passageways, Urban Family, Rainier Beach Action Coalition, Choose 180, Rise, and others, and seen firsthand the level of impact they make in the geographies where they operate.

$2 million is not enough to see the impact.

They will truly make a dent in gun violence.

Community-based organizations are often a trusted source of interaction with people most at risk.

We must further invest in what's already working and fill in the identified gaps that will help young people.

Please support Council Member Morales' amendment to fully fund the $20 million budget in 2024 and continue to invest further in 2025 and 2026. Thank you.

Thank you.

Up next is Kim Ford.

SPEAKER_31

Someone Jones.

I can't tell if it's a D, an R.

Is it an R?

There we go.

Is that an R?

A Jola.

Then we got Brian Duncan, Chelsea Stevenson, Crystal Alexander, Cameron Johnson, Mark Rivers, and Richard Finley.

Thank you for your grace with me pronouncing people's names and the handwriting.

Take it away.

SPEAKER_12

Mine was easy, right?

Came for it.

Good morning.

I'm here representing Community Passageways and Seattle Community Safety Initiative.

Usually I like I'm behind the scenes at CP and I'm so much more comfortable behind the scenes.

But this morning I wanted to get out of my comfort zone because All the kids and youth you see here and my fellow colleagues, they are uncomfortable all the time, every day.

So I thought I should make myself be uncomfortable for 60 seconds and just say hi to you and let you know that we really appreciate you, but I don't know if you understand from community-based organizations, we do everything that businesses and government do, but backwards with heels on.

So we really need your support.

Like, thank you very much.

SPEAKER_31

Well said, Kim.

Up next is for Cole Jones, Azola, and Brian Duncan.

SPEAKER_40

Hey, Tammy.

All right.

Hi, everybody else.

How you guys doing?

So I work for Southeast Network out of Boys and Girls Clubs of King County.

And just for a moment, if you're here with Boys and Girls Club or Southeast Network, go ahead and stand up for me real quick.

Hurry up.

You see how well they listen?

I'm proud of that.

So, no, thank you.

I just want to give this opportunity to really be able to appreciate the investment that you all are making into the young people that you see standing up before you today.

And that's one organization.

I challenge you to continue your investment, but then grow upon it because there are real needs that are happening in our community.

I went to a funeral of one of the young men that we've been working with since he was 12, and that funeral got shot up yesterday.

I'm not counting all of our successes.

I'm looking at those failures.

Let's figure out how we can close that gap and welcome an opportunity to continue to work closely with council on serving our community.

SPEAKER_55

My name is Ajala.

Just here to second that.

Hang on.

You have your own time.

I have my own time?

SPEAKER_31

Yes, you do.

My bad.

My bad.

I don't need you.

We need you to give more than 10 seconds.

Okay, for sure.

Timer is repeated.

Ajala?

SPEAKER_55

Ajala.

SPEAKER_31

You can use the tall mic as well if you want.

SPEAKER_55

You ready?

SPEAKER_31

When you are.

SPEAKER_55

Okay.

Hello, my name is Ajala.

I work out of the Southeast Safety Network.

working with these youth and out of the boys and girls club king king county boys and girls club and i'm just here um just to tell you how important the funding is we help hundreds and thousands of youth and we help also just provide a lot of alternative routes just for these youth that don't have alternative routes they just don't have the support that they need both at home after schools or wherever they're at in the community so The Southeast Network, I'm a product of the Southeast Safety Network, has really helped me with opportunities and helped mold me into who I am today.

And it's how we keep these programs going.

I also wanna ask you guys to really just spend time with the community and actually spend time with these organizations so you understand how we get down as a people, who we are, and also just better understand the people that you're counseling and governing.

Thank you.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Up next, we got Brian Duncan, followed by Chelsea Stevenson, Crystal Alexander, Cameron Johnson, Mark Rivers, Richard Finley.

Good morning, Brian.

Thank you for your grace and patience.

SPEAKER_14

Good morning.

Brian Duncan from Ballard District 6. Volunteer dad supporting Moms Demand Action.

Moms Demand Action, Feel Strong.

We should fully fund all the student mental health and community violence intervention groups that you see here today, including Southeast Safety Network, Community Passageway, Urban Family, Rainier Beach Action Coalition, Choose 180, Rise and others.

We have seen firsthand the level of impact that they make to the geographies where they operate.

The proposed $2 million allocation is not enough to see the type of impact that we need from these organizations.

Community-based organizations are often a trusted source of interaction with the people most at risk.

We must further invest in what's already been working and fill in the identified gaps.

Please support Council Member Morales' amendment to fully fund the $20 million budget for 2024 and continue to invest in 2025 and 2026. Our society is currently awash in an absolute sea of guns, too accessible.

Our young people urgently need supports and positive alternatives to believing they must carry.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Brian.

SPEAKER_14

Let us lead the way here in the seat of Seattle.

Thank you, Brian.

Thank you for standing up to reduce gun violence.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Thank you, Brian.

Chris, Chelsea Stevenson, Crystal Alexander, Cameron Johnson, Mark Rivers, Richard Finley.

Good morning.

SPEAKER_06

Hi, my name is Chelsea Stevenson.

I work with the Southeast Network Safety Net Program at the Boys and Girls Clubs of King County.

I just want to thank you guys for your investment in the Seattle Community Safety Initiative.

This past summer has been, out of the nine years I've worked with the initiative, or Southeast Network, I have seen the highest demand for young people needing something to do this summer.

We have been extremely creative in trying to create programs.

We are really happy to report that we went from having a huge list of kids needing to be placed with summer opportunities to having all of those kids placed in some sort of creative targeted programming, summer internship, some groups.

all being paid for their time and having the opportunity to be in community and to make some money and develop some skills.

And I urge you to continue funding and increasing your investment so that we can serve more young people in Southeast Seattle and the greater city.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Up next, we have Crystal Alexander, Cameron Johnson, Mark Rivers, Richard Finley.

SPEAKER_07

Hi, everybody.

My name is Crystal Alexander.

I also work for Southeast Network.

I'm a case manager out of Rainier Beach High School.

Um...

I always get emotional, that's why I didn't want to get up and speak.

I just got emotional just being in the room.

Like, I feel like I'm the auntie at the school.

I get to do things that other people can't do for our kids, like, on a day-to-day basis.

Like, I'm snatching them out the bathroom.

I get to take them to their doctor's appointments and their dentist appointments if they need.

Like, I get to all around be, like, that extra support for their family and their...

Their parents are, some of my kids don't have parents or they're put out, whatever.

I just get to be there to support them.

And also want to second what Chelsea said about being able to serve all our youth this year.

Like even between 13 and 15, those kids get left out all the time and they're just in the streets because they don't get childcare and their parents still have to go and do things.

And most of them can't afford summer camps or, you know, those programs that help enrich their lives.

So thank you guys.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Up next is Cameron Johnson, Mark Rivers, Richard Finley.

SPEAKER_34

Hi, I'm Cameron Johnson.

I go to South Lake High School.

My caseworker, Ms. Crystal and Ms. Tasha from Southeast Network, they help a lot of the students out.

They help me out.

I got into a bad car crash last year, and they helped me get my teeth.

They take me to my dentist appointments.

They take me to my doctor's appointments.

They're there to help you mentally and physically.

If you need to talk to them, I could call them at 3 a.m.

They'll answer the phone.

I could be crying.

They'll answer the phone.

They'll come to me, talk to me.

They Uber me any place I need to be, any place I need to go.

I don't know.

They're just really supportive.

They're really supportive.

They're really helpful.

Like, if we need food, we need any resources, like...

EBT, stuff like that, yeah, they're there.

That's it, yeah.

I don't really know what to say.

SPEAKER_31

You said it.

Nice.

Thank you, Cameron.

Up next is Mark Rivers, followed by Richard Finley.

Mark, welcome.

SPEAKER_33

Hello.

Thank you for your investment already.

My shirt says, we can end gun violence.

As you see, this is the we.

But are you part of the we?

And if you are, then I think We know what we need to do.

And so every single day we go out here and we try to make sure that these babies have somebody that loves them, that takes care of them.

Are you going to make sure you do what you need to do to make sure that they know that somebody loves them and takes care of them?

Every single day we go out in front of those schools.

Garfield, you guys know what happened.

We're out there on those corners where bullets fly.

If we're not there, are you going outside?

on those corners?

Are you going inside that school, wrapping your arms around them, when the moms are screaming and crying at the hospital?

If we're not there, will you be there?

I think we know what we need to do so that we can all be where we need to be.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Well said.

Richard Finley.

Good to see you this morning.

SPEAKER_30

How you doing?

SPEAKER_31

I'm doing well.

Yourself?

SPEAKER_30

I'm great.

There we go.

I am the spokesperson for...

I wrote this down so I can...

Use the microphone now.

Give me a minute.

I might need a little bit more, but...

Richard, Richard, can you use the microphone and we'll restart the time.

So I am the spokesperson...

assigned spokesperson for 51,650 students in Seattle Public Schools.

That'd be me.

They assigned me to this position.

So I say to you guys, I want to appeal to your human side by saying this, if you give a kid and the community options, then you're actually giving them hope.

People like you guys invest in what you believe in.

So my question would be, do you believe in our kids?

Do you believe in the community?

These organizations here today, I work for the Boys and Girls Club.

I've actually worked there for once in about 13 years.

I was a part of the Seattle Team for Youth, as well as ST, what is that?

SYVPI.

I've been doing it so long, I forgot.

But these organizations, they're out here, they're in the streets, while you guys probably hanging out in the suites.

Getting a chance to talk to these people.

If you really want to know the community, you've got to meet the community.

But there's a reason why unity is in the word community, because we need to stand up for the community against the violence that's happening around us.

If you want to make a change, you've got to make a difference.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Richard.

Clerk, do we have anyone else signed up in person right now?

Otherwise, we're going to move to remote.

And if folks feel so moved, they can still sign up while we're doing remote.

Colleagues, if there's no objection, I'm going to suspend the rules.

And Councilmember Hollingsworth is present and accounted for.

And I know that she was listening in on the council listen line on the way in.

We have Tayshia Beasley.

Tayshia, come on up.

SPEAKER_23

Hi, I'm Tasia.

I am the intake and referral specialist at the Southeast Network.

I am like the first point of contact for these students before they enter our program.

So I get in-depth stories, their backgrounds and things that most people don't get.

So I know personally these programs that are needed for these students for mental, physical, and emotional time outside of what they have going on at home or what they have going on in their neighborhoods, what they have going on in their schools.

Our case managers also, like I said, they're very hands-on with the students here.

ON TOP OF, LIKE SHE SAID, THERE'S LIKE A BIG AGE GAP WHERE THESE STUDENTS ARE JUST KIND OF LEFT WITH NOTHING TO DO.

AND SO THESE PROGRAMS AND A SAFE PLACE FOR THEM TO GO THROUGH THE SCHOOL YEAR AND OUTSIDE OF SCHOOL IS DEFINITELY A NEED AND A MUST.

WE FEED THEM.

SO SOME STUDENTS ALSO, YOU KNOW, THEY GET TO EAT.

THEY GO HOME WITHOUT EMPTY STUBBINGS.

THEY LEARN NEW THINGS.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO SAY.

THESE PROGRAMS ARE DEFINITELY NEEDED.

PLEASE KEEP FUNDING.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

And now, colleagues, if there's no objection, I'll suspend the rules.

Colleagues, we can give the adults who are supporting these youth a round of applause here.

And now, for all of the adults in this room, if we can give these youth a round of applause.

SPEAKER_62

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

I appreciate everyone coming out here, and we still have more public comment for those who aren't in this room.

So we're now going to move on to the online public comment.

We have two people.

Oh, Annie and Raquel, you're here in person, so we're not going to call you online.

Good to see you.

Yep, exactly.

So we got Julia Buck, BJ Last, Renee Ouellette, Sierra Parsons, Shomaya...

Tanya Moore, Alberto Alvarez, Katie Gendry, Alice Lockhart.

We'll get moving.

Julia Buck, you're up.

SPEAKER_49

Good morning, Council.

My name is Julia Buck.

I am a homeowner in District 6. And I am calling in to support Tammy Morales' amendment to restore the $20 million for student mental health.

I am also calling to ask council to reject the amendment, extending this sweeps team by another 19 members.

We spent $38 million on sweeps last year, which is a lot of money for something that doesn't actually solve the problem of homelessness.

Unsheltered people account for over 40% of the homicide victims so far.

And a lot of this can be traced to our city's attitude.

It is okay to treat people like garbage to be swept away.

I cannot emphasize enough how disappointing it is to see us trying to double down on this failed strategy when the solution to homelessness is housing.

This council had an opportunity to provide that solution yesterday, and they failed to act on it in contravention to legal requirements.

So I'm asking you, please, no more money for suites.

SPEAKER_31

Up next, we've got BJ Last, followed by Renee Ouellette, and then Sierra Parsons.

BJ, star six to unmute.

I see you there.

SPEAKER_28

Good morning.

My name is BJ Laff.

I'm a D6 homeowner.

I'm calling in support of Councilmember Morales' amendment that restores the full $20 million for student mental health.

The proposed mid-year supplemental, it defunds student mental health by $10 million.

So let's take a look.

Where is that $10 million going?

Where has council decided it can spend $10 million better than on student mental health?

Yesterday, y'all spent $2 to $3 million of it on score to jail people, literally school-to-prison pipeline.

You're giving another million to SPD for, what, more advertising and additionally, like, some training?

Because, no, the reason SPD doesn't investigate sexual assault is priorities.

That's why they keep moving people out of that department to patrol and to things like looking at graffiti.

Another $3 million to golf courses, because that's apparently a priority over student mental health, giving money to freaking golf courses, and expanding the 19 positions on the Unified Care Team that don't have money attached.

Now we know where the money is actually coming from.

It's coming from student mental health.

This is what y'all are actually taking from students to actually go and fund.

You're trying to use school-to-prison pipeline with money.

SPEAKER_31

Up next, we've got Renee Ouellette, followed by Ciara Parsons, and then Shaima Ohtripathy.

Renee, star six to unmute.

Really?

Huh.

Renee Ouellette, star six to unmute.

Clerk, do we have Renee with us?

I see, there you are.

SPEAKER_47

Can you hear me?

SPEAKER_31

We can hear you.

Take it away.

SPEAKER_47

All right.

Thanks so much.

I'm Renee Ouellette, principal of Sugama High School at Southlake in South Seattle.

South East Network is a critical community and safety partner in South Seattle.

They provide essential support to our scholars at high school level.

They provide mentors who reflect scholars' lives and experiences, lunches for celebrations, snacks, and positive reinforcement for goal-setting, and wraparound supports like you've heard earlier, transportation to doctors, transportation to school if they're truant, support in the juvenile justice process, and this year even $100 for an NCA registration fee so a scholar could qualify for a college athletic scholarship.

Excuse me.

These are all supports Seattle Public Schools cannot provide.

Southeast Network has an extensive intake process.

Please support community safety funding.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Renee.

Up next is Sierra Parsons followed by Shoma.

I am saying your name incorrectly, my friend.

And then Tanya Moore.

Sierra.

SPEAKER_42

Hello, my name is Sierra Parsons.

I'm a South Seattle community member and educator.

I'm here to ask you to support Council Member Morales' amendment to fully fund youth mental health by restoring the Jump Start proviso to the full $20 million.

In 2020, students at Rainier Beach High School alongside several community-based and youth-led organizations supported by 18,000 allies called on the Seattle Public School District to divest from the Seattle Police Department and invest in non-clinical and non-traditional mental health supports rather than a police presence.

For many years, Students have asked for available funds across our public school district and our city to be directed toward community needs, including restorative practices, ethnic studies, and mental health services.

These demands have yet to be fully met and sustained.

The city now has an opportunity to respond more comprehensively to these demands by supporting the amendment to fully fund community-led youth mental health using the entire $20 million secured by students last year.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Sierra.

Up next is Shomai.

I am saying your name wrong.

I'm so sorry.

And then Tanya Moore and then Alberto Alvarez.

SPEAKER_44

TANYA MOORE, ALBERTO ALVAREZ, Good afternoon, councilmembers.

My name is Shomai.

I am the policy director at Asian Counseling and Referral Service.

I'm calling today to also address the support of Councilmember Morales' proposed legislation to restore full funding for mental health services in schools.

As a mental health provider to students in Seattle, we have deep concerns about reducing the budget for student mental health to half of what has been appropriated.

The schools are overwhelmed and have been requesting an increase of services, including mental health and prevention services, not a decrease.

With gun violence and other violence occurring, youth have heightened experience of fear and anxiety.

In our student groups, the youth shared that they were present at Garfield when the shootings occurred and did not feel safe, or know where to go or where to hide.

The services we provide help BIPOC youth learn how to resolve conflict, communicate, recognize unhealthy relationships, how to ask for help, and help reduce violence.

We also see increase in specific mental health needs for immigrant and refugee youth, LGBTQIA youth, neurodivergent youth, and Southeast Asian youth that we work with every day.

There's so many indicators through our work that show the deep need for increased holistic mental health services, so please keep your commitment and fully fund mental health services for students this year.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Up next is Tanya Moore, followed by Alberto Alvarez, Katie Gendry, and then Alice Lockhart.

Oh, we lost.

Hang tight.

We're going to put this committee on pause.

We are in.

I'm going to call a brief recess while we reestablish quorum.

Colleagues, you can't just walk out of the room.

Up next is Tanya Moore followed by Alberto Alvarez and then Katie Gendry and finally with Alice Lockhart.

I believe we have.

SPEAKER_48

Hi.

Take it away, Tanya.

Hi.

My name is Tanya Moore.

I'm calling in as the co-director of the Seattle.

I'm a resident of District 5. I'm calling to fully support Morales' amendment to fully fund student mental health.

As a parent, I understand the importance of that.

Also, as someone who believes that our children deserve the right to full support in mental health and for our government to keep their promises, this is essential.

I am also calling to say that I do not support the supplemental budget to double down on the strategy of sweeping people.

from place to place.

Last year was the deadliest year for individuals who were unhoused.

Sweeping them also makes it harder for them to access services.

My last is that I oppose spending.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Tanya.

Up next is Alberto Alvarez, Katie Gendry, and then Alice Lockhart to round us out.

SPEAKER_21

The presentation today states that return to office is lagging.

Return to office is a tax on the working class.

A typical commute average is about one hour per day round trip.

This is time a worker does not get compensation for.

The average worker does not live a short walk or drive from their office, forcing people to spend time in gas on a daily trip when they can be just as productive from home.

Rethink how to incentivize workers back into the city.

Start by giving all workers one hour paid time for travel into the city.

This should be just fine since we're now paying police for a one-hour smoke break to the SCORE facility.

Fair is fair.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Thank you.

Up next is Katie Gendry, followed by Alice Lockhart.

There you are, Katie.

Welcome.

SPEAKER_43

Hi, my name is Katie Gendry.

Thank you, Council Member Morales, for your amendment to Scott Mayer-Harrell from defunding student mental health, which students themselves worked so hard to advocate for.

We need to increase mental health and social services, not decrease them.

I hope the rest of the council does the right thing and supports your amendment.

I firmly reject the proposal to add 19 positions to the Unified Care Team.

This should actually be renamed as the Unified Sweep and Displace Force.

because that is what our city is doing, relentlessly, forcibly disbanding communities of people who want and need services and housing.

Service-adjacent positions should not be soft cops.

We need to expand and invest more in a variety of housing solutions and services and access to low-barrier, voluntary health care and mental health substance use support.

Sweeps kill.

Stop killing our unsheltered neighbors.

Have some compassion and invest in care and support, not punishment and death.

Do not give SPD a million for training.

Do not increase spending on golf courses.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Up next is Alice Lockhart, and then Clerk will check to see if there's any final in-person speakers.

Alice, I see you now.

Star 6 to unmute.

SPEAKER_46

Good morning.

I'm Alice Lockhart in District 5. Chair Strauss, thank you for extending the comment period.

I'll be brief.

This morning, I'm struck by the extent to which you all have a big choice in this budget.

You have a choice between preventing violence and doing violence.

We've heard this morning how funding youth mental health prevents violence.

The mid-year supplemental should spend the full $20 million and add to it.

I also see increases for the misnamed care team that conducts sweeps.

Sweeps where people lose their meager housing and many of their possessions are violence personified.

Please stop doing violence and get serious about preventing it.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

And seeing as we have no additional speakers present physically or remotely, we will move on to the next agenda item.

Colleagues, the select committee quorum is five.

We need five members on the dais at all times.

Otherwise, we're going to have to stop the meeting like we just had to.

And please take breaks as you need to because we're all human.

Moving on to the first item on the agenda.

The first item is the August, and y'all can come on up if you'd like.

The first item on the agenda is the August Economic and Revenue Forecast Recap Presentation from the Office of Economic and Revenue Forecasts and City Budget Office.

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

SPEAKER_39

Agenda item one, August Economic and Revenue Forecast Update for briefing and discussion.

SPEAKER_31

Wonderful.

And as we discussed previously, you had 20 minutes on the agenda agenda.

If there was not a lot of public comment, we've had an hour of public comments, so if we could rapidly run through your slides, I would say probably focus on where are we today, where are we going in the next few years, and what are the items of concern that we need to be aware of, seeing as a few of us were at the official meeting this last Monday.

And if you, Director Duras, if you'd like to introduce your colleagues, I know that we are joined today by Director Jan Duras, Interim Director and Chief Economist.

Then we also have David Hennis from the City Budget Office.

In addition, Sean Thompson, Alex Zang, Joseph Russell.

So we've got a lot of folks here.

But if you want to do a quick introduction, then take it away.

SPEAKER_04

Thank you, Chair Strauss.

Good morning, council members.

My name is Yandros.

I'm the chief economist at the forecast office.

SPEAKER_14

I'm Dave Hennis from the city's budget office.

SPEAKER_21

And Sean Thompson with the Office of Economic Revenue Forecasts.

SPEAKER_04

I'll try to go quickly and focus on the main takeaways here.

So this presentation is going to be a largely shortened version of what we presented two days ago to the forecast council, where we went over the updates to the national economic forecast, the regional economic forecast, and then what they imply for the revenue forecast.

So in the interest of time, I'll sweep through this part and we can come back if there are any questions regarding that underlying economic forecast.

And I'll just really summarize what the takeaways are and where those changes that you'll see for revenues are coming from.

The main takeaway is that the revisions are not particularly large for 2024. We are looking at additional 0.2% added to the general fund revenues relative to the April forecast to an upward revision.

For 2025, it's a downward revision, but an upward revision for 26. So looking at the biennium, 25 plus 26, there is, again, about 1.3 additional revenues added relative to the April forecast.

So bottom line, not large revisions, but what we are concerned about are some underlying risks to the forecast and some recent developments that pose additional risk looking into the future.

They're coming from several sources, and I'll go over them one by one.

But before that, in this meeting on Monday, we have recommended the baseline forecast scenario to be approved, and the forecast council adopted that baseline scenario as the official forecast.

So recognizing that there are risks to the forecast that we have presented and there was a shift of risks towards the downside, we were recommending to use the baseline scenario, which the S&P Global assigns 55% probability.

That said, again, given a lot of developments recently in the last couple of weeks after the national forecasts have been published, there are some downsides coming from the course of the monetary policy.

There is a large amount of uncertainty regarding the interest rates, how fast they'll be coming down, how fast the labor market is going to be slowing and weakening.

So these recent reports have stoked additional anxiety, and there are again talks about possible hard landing and recession, which...

shift those risks to the downside.

They would imply less job growth in the nation.

Now, in addition to that, we have seen less growth in the regional economy, and we have seen rising office vacancy rates, which pose additional risks together with the Initiative 137. The impact on job growth is uncertain, but there are some risks to the revenue.

SPEAKER_31

Director Duras, before we move on, I will Since I gave you the statement to rush, I'll also give you this statement.

It's okay to slow down.

All right.

SPEAKER_04

So I'll try to find the balance.

SPEAKER_31

And just discussing this information, you said that over the course of the next two years, we have about a 1.2 million positive outlook.

Is that correct?

SPEAKER_04

Over 25 and 26, it's 10 million added to the general fund, and it's about 0.3% of the April forecast.

SPEAKER_31

And in a typical year, would we usually see that number higher?

Would we see a larger number of change?

And where I'm getting at is it seems like we're kind of at a status quo stagnant moment.

Is that a correct understanding?

SPEAKER_04

It would be correct to characterize it as a smaller revision compared to those that we have seen in the last couple of years.

Even excluding 2022, there have been some forecasts where the revisions were significantly larger than the ones seen here.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

And when you say significantly larger, we're talking 100 million?

SPEAKER_04

We're talking 10 million in this one, but...

I don't know the numbers off the top of my head, but my general sense is that they were significantly larger and...

Yeah.

Not in this total here is 10 million.

So the total change in those previous forecasts were occasionally several tens of millions.

I don't know if they went over 100 million outside of the 2022. I don't believe that's the case, but I would have to go and check.

SPEAKER_31

And I'll pull this part of the information out.

Three, four weeks ago, we felt more stable with the economic outlook.

In the last few weeks, you note here that there's additional areas of concern.

If we can dive into that a little bit, just understanding that in the Seattle office vacancy, we are seeing a higher vacancy rate as compared to the rest of the national average, which has decreased.

Can you talk about this concern?

SPEAKER_04

All right.

So, yeah, I can, I guess, go a little bit back again if there is an interest in providing additional information here.

What Jared is trying to show is a summary of the changes in the employment outlook for U.S., which are those two blue lines.

They have shifted up, which means higher growth expected going into future.

For Seattle region, they have been, the employment forecast has been revised down so that line has moved down because of revisions to the underlying historical data on actual jobs which we have already seen in place and then taking that into account for the outlook.

We have also seen an increase in the unemployment rate in the region which was larger than the increase in unemployment in the U.S., and currently the regional unemployment rate is above U.S. unemployment rate, and that has occurred really just recently, since March this year.

In addition to that, we have seen and we are still expecting vacancy rates to climb higher, significantly higher than in the U.S., and the direction of the revisions was similar to the direction of revisions for the employment.

HIGHER VACANCY RATE EXPECTED IN SEATTLE, LOWER VACANCY RATE EXPECTED IN THE U.S. SO THE BOTTOM LINE HERE IS IF YOU ARE COMPARING THE GROWTH FOR THIS YEAR, IT'S .7 FOR SEATTLE METRO AREA IN TERMS OF JOB GROWTH, JUST .7% ADDED, WHEREAS FOR THE STATE, IT'S 1.3 AND FOR THE U.S. AS A WHOLE, IT'S 1.6, SO SIGNIFICANT GAP OPENING UP.

THANK YOU.

So those are the developments, the recent developments that we took into account, and again, pose additional risk and are the driving forces behind some of those revisions in revenues, which are driven by the economic indicators.

And we are primarily here talking about sales tax, business and occupation tax, and to a smaller extent, REITs.

So the table here is summarizing the changes for the general fund for 2024. Those rows which are highlighted blue are the revenues that the forecast office is responsible for the other roles are in the CBO's responsibility, and they take some of our inputs, in particular, the regional economic forecast as one of the inputs for when developing that forecast.

So again, just the bottom line here, we are happy to answer any questions, but in the interest of time, for 2024, it's additional 3.3 million, which would be about 0. to 0.3 of a general fund.

For 25 and 26 biennium overall, It's 10 million added, so that would be the line, the total line, adding up minus 5.3 for 2025, plus 15.3 for 2026, and you get the 10 million added for total general fund, which again is about 0.3% of the April forecast.

We are revising the forecast for 2025 down, the forecast for 2026 up.

The downward revision for 2025 does not mean that we are going to see a reduction of the general fund revenue if you take into account the changes in grants and transfers.

So, again, there are some additional details here which we are happy to address.

BUT THE MAIN TAKEAWAY HERE IS NOT THAT WE ARE FORECASTING A DECLINE IN REVENUES YEAR OVER YEAR IN THE NEXT COMING YEARS, BUT RATHER IT'S A REVISION OF REVENUES DOWN COMPARED TO THE APRIL FORECAST IN 2025. BUT AGAIN, FOR 2025-26 BANION, IT'S AN UPWARDS REVISION, SO IT'S SLIGHTLY MORE COMPLICATED.

The lines where we have seen the largest downward revisions for 2025 and 2026 are, again, those blue highlighted lines, the ones where the Office of Economic and Revenue Forecast is building into those models the changes in the expectations regarding the labor market, its outlook in the region relative to the U.S., taking into account the development regarding the office vacancies rate, and additional things which we do believe matter here.

SPEAKER_31

And Director Duras, just for a moment, I see folks squinting at the slides and trying to take photos of the slides.

This slide deck is available on Legistar for you to download so that you can blow it up to whatever size you need.

Take it away, Director Duras.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_04

Yeah, the slides for the Monday presentation in the Forecast Council are also available on our website together with the link to where the recording for that meeting can be found.

So moving on to the other revenues, the non-general fund revenues, the main revisions here were for the payroll expense tax.

For all three years, 24, 25, and 26, we have revised upward the payroll expense tax forecast.

And that, again, is the main change here.

Other than that, the second largest change is for REIT, for real estate excise tax for 2024, where we are adding about 5 million.

There were a couple of larger sales in the second quarter of this year that have added additional revenue beyond what we were expecting.

For 25, 26, very small changes, very small adjustments to the rate.

And in general, other than those two revenues, the total change is rather small.

Now, so a little bit of additional detail for payroll expense tax and what's driving the revision of the forecast.

When we were working on this forecast, the overall outlook for the stock prices, for the stock market in general and for the stock prices of some companies, the main employers in the region, they were very positive.

That, again, changed very recently.

On Monday, there was a large drop in the stock prices.

The markets have stabilized a little bit since then.

A lot of those trades are likely to be trades that were automated, not really driven by the economic fundamentals, and so markets have calmed down a little bit, and depending on where things go with the interest rates, the stock prices and the stock market can, in general, perform very well year over year.

We, based on our previous analysis, believe that stock prices are a big factor for payroll expense tax.

We talked about that in April.

A lot of compensation is in the form of stock rent and is quite dependent on movement of the stock prices.

So that said, between March and July, There has in general been a positive, an overall positive change in the expectations for the stock prices.

S&P 500 as a whole was expected to grow 19% this year.

It has been revised to 23% as of beginning of July.

Again, recent couple of days have not been good, and there might be a downward revision, depending on how things go, might be a large revision, but the stock prices have settled and stabilized recently.

Given the economic fundamentals, there was a bit of an overreaction.

That's the general sense here.

So going back to the payroll expense tax, given that upward revision in the stock prices, given how much they matter for the revenues, we have revised the forecast up for 24, 25, 26, still recognizing that there is a large amount of uncertainty.

possible large revision coming with the way how things will develop depending on what happens next.

SPEAKER_31

So what I just heard is there is like the next revision is going to be large one direction or the other.

SPEAKER_04

Could be.

That's certainly possible.

It's unlike any other stream.

We are in general in the last couple of updates seeing largest revisions especially for payroll expense tax rather than say B&O or sales tax which are more stable.

SPEAKER_31

Great.

Thank you, Director Duras.

Colleagues, if you have questions, I was asking questions to kind of help steward the conversation along.

Director Duras and his team are also available to meet with you individually, as well as we had this as a full committee meeting on Monday.

But I do want to offer and open up, are there any questions at this time?

SPEAKER_09

Council Member Sackett.

SPEAKER_19

Is that you?

Yeah.

Thank you, Ms. Sackett.

Am I recognized?

Yes, you are.

All right, thank you, Mr. Chair.

First off, I guess point of privilege.

Mr. Chair, I do appreciate your efforts to kind of streamline and keep this meeting running efficiently and effectively on time.

I do not think that we should be rushing and kind of speeding through things on the substantive portion of today's meeting.

Stakes are too high.

This is complex, very important stuff that members of the public need to understand outside of a slide deck that people clearly need to squint at, may or may not have the time to read, and also for our own understanding and awareness as well.

Yeah, the substantive portions, from my perspective, I don't think we should be endeavoring to rush through.

So thank you all for this presentation here.

In the absence of slide numbers, I will point back to, let's see here.

The slide towards the beginning, I guess, where you talk about risk.

And there's three, and you list out three bullets that kind of talk about risk.

See if I can pull it up on my end.

SPEAKER_04

Adapted forecast scenario slide, Councilmember Succar.

Let me see.

SPEAKER_19

Yeah, that's it.

Whatever slide number that is, that one.

So thank you for calling this out.

Can you talk a little bit more about So there are these risks that are currently known, any number of risks that are not known or anticipated, which is always going to be the case.

Which single revenue sources for the city are most impacted by the risks that you call it here that we currently know today?

Which specific revenue source or sources are the most subject to risk?

to exposure as a result of these risks?

SPEAKER_04

So, Overall, these are the things that would be affecting labor markets through relevant performance.

In general, the first two bullet points are labor market specific points.

That directly then feeds into any revenue that's directly impacted by that.

Business and occupation tax largely depends on how much work is performed within city of Seattle.

Any change, any drop in the number of jobs, any relocation of those jobs out of the city of Seattle would directly impact business and occupation because of that.

SPEAKER_19

Is that all to say the jumpstart tax, is that the most at risk?

SPEAKER_04

That would be the next one.

Jumpstart payroll expense tax is similar in a sense that similar as business and occupation tax in a sense that it matters where the work is done.

It's not imposed on the receipts of the companies, but on the payroll.

But the way how the tax obligation is determined, it's in some sense similar to the business and occupation tax.

It matters where work gets done and if those jobs are relocated out of the city or if there is less growth, there will be less revenues, with the caveat that payroll expense tax is largely dependent on the stock price movement and they can significantly offset any changes in the number of jobs.

But it is certainly a factor here.

The other taxes, sales and use tax, real estate excise tax, again, would be affected by factors listed here in these three bullets, potentially to a smaller degree for a number of reasons.

But they would be negatively affected by any...

Any risks that cause, let's say, number of jobs to decline or growth to decline?

SPEAKER_19

Thank you.

And my second final question is, so in that third bullet there, you talk about the rising office vacancy rates and specifically calling out Initiative 137 and how they pose additional risk.

Can you provide a little more context?

Like, talk a little bit more about I-137 and the potential risks that...

are imposed as a result.

SPEAKER_04

Sure, I can certainly do that.

I will try to be concise, but please bear with me because it's a longer, going to be a longer answer here.

We are trying to, I will try to provide the details necessary in what makes us specifically point out that one on this slide.

So in economics, the first thing that you learn is that incentives matter and people and businesses respond to incentives.

Now, how large of the response is depends on number of factors and you have to take those into account.

But the point is that Whenever there is a change in the cost of an action, there is going to be a response, depending on how big that change in the cost is.

Now, it can be a small response if a change in the cost in the burden is small.

In case, let's say, the overall burden is large, but spread out over a lot of individuals or a lot of companies, the incentives to change the behavior are small.

That's not going to be the case for...

that excess compensation tax, which is going to affect a relatively small number of companies.

And given what we know about payroll expense tax, it's going to be really very, very small number of companies.

So there is going to be a significant amount of cost The estimate is 15 million, but it's likely to be conservative in terms of the underlying payroll that would be potentially subject to a tax.

That underlying payroll can be significantly larger than what would be implied by 15 million revenue raised.

So the cost is rather large imposed on the small number of taxpayers and those changes in the behavior of those individual taxpayers would matter a lot and they would respond to the incentives created or altered here.

There are additional technical details about the proposal that are again factors that mean that the response is likely to be um to be to be larger there is no adjustment for inflation in the threshold the 1 million threshold which means that as wages grow additional employees would be subject to attacks there is no sunset which means that this will be in place uh indefinitely unless uh some action uh and some action is made.

In addition, unlike the business occupation and sales tax, there is no limit on the tax rate on how they might change, which will again matter for the cost that the employers perceive for this tax to be imposed on them.

State law limits the sales tax, it limits the business and occupation tax, but there is nothing that would limit further increases in the revenue for the changes in the threshold.

And if the employers are using the information they have from the past where we have seen proposals to increase payroll expense tax essentially every single year since it was implemented, they would take that into account.

And they would essentially, they would perceive that as an additional uncertainty that they take into account when they are deciding where exactly to create the jobs.

There's obviously the question of, well, what do we know so far?

Can we make some statements about how large the response is?

The only thing that we do know so far is what happened after the payroll expense tax was introduced.

The fact that Amazon has decreased its headcount in the city of Seattle by 10,000 has been largely publicly made public, may have been reported by the Business Journal.

Those 10,000 jobs represent about 1.6% of the employment as of 2020. At the same time, about the same number of jobs has been added to Bellevue, and that's certainly a factor here.

It goes together with those rising vacancy rates.

So again, in terms of how easy it is to adjust, There is a large amount of space available.

A lot of companies and those big taxpayers do not always own the business spaces.

They lease them.

And as the leases are about to expire, they would reevaluate what the costs are, what the long-term implications might be of locating and creating additional jobs in the Seattle versus outside Seattle.

of the Seattle.

And so the longer response might be significantly stronger as a short response.

Similarly to the case where, let's say, gas prices go up, people might not respond as much in the short term, but in the long term, they would buy more fuel-efficient cars to avoid some of the cost imposed on them by the increased cost.

Now, obviously, there are some benefits in addition to the cost of any policy, and they have to be taken into account.

I don't believe that there has been any, or I haven't seen any estimates, quantitative estimates on the impact of these policies, what the benefits that it creates would imply for the employment or for the incomes.

uh for the unemployment rate how much of that would change um any of those which are the factors that matter for for the revenue in addition there has been some concerns voiced by the business community in terms of how efficient those resources will be in in terms of their use and that again just adds to another factor that When there isn't enough of a buy-in of those that are impacted by a particular policy, those that are going to face the cost of it, they are incentives to act purely based on the cost because they believe that the benefits are small, that changing the behavior might be larger.

SPEAKER_19

So, thank you.

No further questions or comments, Mr. Chair.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Council President Nelson and then Councilmember Kettle.

SPEAKER_15

Thanks.

Chair Struss, I feel like we came away from yesterday's meeting with different impressions, because I came out pretty worried about what we heard yesterday in the meeting, and we're getting a snapshot of this.

And my impressions were more akin with the Seattle Times story on the meeting, which is headlined, Seattle's budget forecast worsens.

And when you look at, and then it goes on to say employment growth in Seattle has lagged national average as unemployment has crept up more quickly.

And that is reflected in part on the slide on page 13. It shows that the national labor market is up in job postings above the average.

The 0%, which is, I believe, a change since the pandemic.

I believe that is what that is.

And we're below it.

And so that is just one indicator.

So I am concerned about what's going on.

And could you please put...

There, that is the slide that I wanted up.

I'm concerned about the red writing in here because those revenue sources, the B&O tax and the sales and use and the utility tax, that represents...

economic activity.

And so that tells me what are the what are Seattle's businesses doing and how are they doing and what is what kind are their sales up or down?

Are they employing more or less people?

Are people buying their goods?

Are they going elsewhere to buy them?

Are they buying things online?

That is what matters to me as the economic development chair.

And the 2026 indication, I know that we're concerned about, all right, what do we have to plan for this biennium?

I've heard the mayor's office or the finance folks say that the fact that we'll be generating or that we'll be receiving $18.4 million, I believe, in the property tax for the Medic 1 is great.

and makes up for the $8.5, $8.7, and $.5 million deficits in sales and use, business and occupation, and utility taxes, respectively.

But again...

Those negatives reflect what is going on in our daily economy.

And that is impacted by the policies that we make.

And we will be looking at that this coming budget and pretty much every day when we make decisions.

Director, you said that the 10,000 jobs that left Seattle and went to Bellevue represent 1.6% of what?

What was that figure you gave us?

SPEAKER_04

Based on the estimates for the employment in 2020, which was reported as a peak year where the headcount of Amazon peaked, it was 1.6% of that total employment in 2020. That's the 10,000 jobs that have been reduced up until this year.

SPEAKER_15

Well, obviously then that will hit our jumpstart revenues and other sources that we, potential future sources of revenue.

But that also hits the small businesses and all the retail and all the ancillary businesses that exist around where those jobs existed in Seattle.

And that is what I'm talking about.

It's bad enough that 10,000 people have left the city to work elsewhere, but it also means that there's a downstream impact of that.

And so I do think that we have to keep that in mind as we look at these numbers.

So thank you very much for digging into this.

I appreciate an independent perspective on our economy, and I'll definitely be keeping this information and probably asking for more information as we go into the budget.

Thanks.

SPEAKER_25

Councilmember Kettle.

Thank you, Chair Strauss.

Thank you very much for the presentation and the data that's within.

I just wanted, can you go to the last slide, that summary slide that you had?

The summary for the GS or the setup forecast?

Yes, this one.

Thank you for the summary, too.

I wanted to highlight or ask both regarding rising office vacancy rates.

Those numbers are stark, very important to understand.

But one question is I talk to many business owners, many businesses, many across the board, so it's not just one sector.

And anecdotally, I'm concerned about those businesses that are situated within a massive office building, and they don't really have an access to the street, to the public generally.

It's kind of like an in-house.

And previously, a fully, you know, worker base in the office would support those businesses.

But because of these vacancies, these businesses at risk, I've been hearing anecdotally a lot of these businesses are soon to close.

Have you seen anything along those lines from your perspective as opposed to my talking to God knows how many folks on this subject?

SPEAKER_04

So we in general focus on the big picture we are occasionally looking at the impact on individual taxpayers if in particular if there are a significant employer we do have access to some data that we could look at in terms of where exactly those office vacancy rates are rising over the city it's mostly a question of how much time we have for these sort of analysis our office is small right now it's just two people working on the forecast the revenue monitoring and any requests that are coming from the executive or the legislative branch so we are trying to focus our effort on the main tasks and to the extent that we believe there's things which matter for the forecast as a whole directed in particular directions where we believe we deserve most of our attention.

But we can certainly look into that.

SPEAKER_25

Okay.

Well, just as a, I guess as a heads up, so the office vacancy rates are having an impact.

And I think standby, we could be having some more articles in the Seattle Times highlighting businesses that are closing within these high rises that we have downtown.

Those businesses, the vacancy rates and the impact on the businesses downtown generally, you've noted the Amazon point, but generally, what does that equate to in terms of lost revenue?

SPEAKER_04

I don't think I would be able to provide some number right now.

At this point, we can certainly run some analysis, what it implies for the office vacancy rate to rise, let's say, 5 or 10 percent.

SPEAKER_25

How much?

What would be a ban that you would think in terms of that loss would, you know, within a range?

So not like a precise answer, but even a ban.

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04

Yeah, so what I'm trying to say is that we usually do not perform some kind of counterfactual analysis where we would compare what the revenue forecast is relative to what it would have been if everything else was the same other than an increase in the office vacancy rate.

So to directly answer the question, what happens when the office vacancy rate goes up by 10% would mean stripping out any other factors, any other changes, and only introducing that particular change.

Our forecast, what they do, they take into account all the developments, so changes in the interest rates, changes in the employment, at the same time as we are seeing the changes in the vacancy rates.

So those changes in the revenue and the downward revisions in the economically driven revenues are the result of all sorts of factors that are changing at the same time.

SPEAKER_25

But it's clear that the office vacancy rates is impacting the revenue that we're receiving.

and not in a negative way?

SPEAKER_04

It is.

What our office is essentially doing is looking at the historical data and how it moves together.

So how the revenue moves together with things like employment, office vacancy rate, incomes, unemployment rate.

And there are these statistical models which are designed to find regularities in those co-movements, some correlations, which things move together.

And one of the things that...

They essentially say is that when office vacancy rates go up, revenue in general goes down.

By how much, we would have to run some analysis because, again, we have not done an analysis that would focus on that factor alone.

What our forecasts do, they take into account all the changes, including the employment, including the impact of the interest rate.

But again, if there is an interest

SPEAKER_25

looking at particular the effect of vacancy?

There is an interest, so I'll ask, you know, that office vacant rates and impact on revenue, you know, be looked at because as someone who's not had the economics that you've had, but I've had some, the impacts, I believe, are substantial and based on yesterday's discussion, more than $2 million.

And again, moving forward, I'm worried because of all the anecdotal evidence.

We're going to lose more businesses, particularly within those that are situated solely within one of the high rises downtown.

And, you know, it goes to yesterday's discussion regarding our public safety environment and how that plays into it.

So thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Kettle.

Vice Chair Rivera.

SPEAKER_09

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Council President, for the synopsis on that meeting.

I walked away feeling the same way.

And thank you, Council Member Kettle, because it's at least thus far and without doing the analysis that you're looking to see, which would be helpful to me as well, it just stands that the vacancy rate is having an impact negatively Overall, I think the thing that I wanted to underscore that I walked away with from being at that meeting earlier this week was that the July scenario was much worse than we had anticipated prior.

And then it really shows based on what happened in the stock market.

And so it really, to me, underscores the volatility that is inherent in this economic forecast.

Unless, Director, you're telling me I walked away with something that is not true.

But I felt like what we talked about was that July was much worse than we had anticipated because it was reacting to something the market was doing.

And it just, again, it shows the volatility.

SPEAKER_04

Yeah, in general, there has been...

A lot of negative news recently in the last couple of weeks that July forecast is the forecast from the beginning of July and some events that have transpired since then are moving the risks towards the negative.

Then we have the revisions in the employment numbers, which came before last week, but again, relatively recent sort of development.

SPEAKER_15

Well, that didn't even take into account the drop in the market.

SPEAKER_31

Council President, as with all members of the committee, you do need to be recognized to have the floor.

Council Member Rivera, Vice Chair Rivera, you have the floor currently.

Do you have anything else to share?

SPEAKER_09

No, thank you, Jan.

I understand and it does to me show the volatility of these things because we don't know what the market's going to do and with the employment numbers and all the factors taken into consideration.

it does give me some pause, some concern moving forward, looking into next year's budget and beyond.

So I think all of this is very real.

And, you know, the forecast is the best.

You do it with the numbers, the best numbers you have at the time.

But it stands to reason that the way things are trending, there is cause for some pause.

SPEAKER_04

Yeah, these are very uncertain times and things are evolving pretty quickly.

Just one more point here to highlight that fact.

The last bullet point which summarizes what the financial markets believe is the probability of a large 0.5% interest rate cut It states there that it's 84.5%.

That was the probability as of Monday afternoon.

Down from 91% that we presented Monday morning, so within a couple of hours, a significant change.

And then, when I was looking at these numbers this morning, it was 64%.

It's really hard to tell right now in which direction or how fast, not necessarily in which direction, because interest rates cards are expected, just how fast they will be coming down, when exactly that will take place, and are these cuts coming early enough to prevent a hard landing?

That's something that we'll just have to wait out and see what happens.

SPEAKER_09

It remains to be seen, but we as folks that are doing policy need to be mindful as we're creating policy that we need to take these things into account and there are a lot of unknowns.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Vice Chair.

Council President, I see you have your hand up for a second time, and I know you were at the revenue forecast meeting this Monday morning.

I'm going to ask that this is the last question for this section, because we still have a number of bills to go through.

Council President, the floor is yours.

SPEAKER_15

Well, I don't know if I want to take up the last one, because I'm just really trying to catch up with the things he's saying in the moment, which is why I did have an impromptu question, and now I have another one based on this last slide.

You said that Before Monday's meeting, the number as of Monday afternoon, it had been 90%, and then it was 84%, and today you're saying it is 60% that there will be a rate hike?

SPEAKER_04

It is.

Yeah, so that probability is essentially the implied probability based on what's called interest rate futures.

So financial markets are essentially, through their actions, through their trades, providing some kind of insight what they believe is the likelihood that the interest rates go down by a certain amount at the next meeting of a federal reserve.

And with new information coming in, there is trades that take place which imply changes in that probability.

So given that there was a negative employment situation report last Friday, the probability of a large cut increased.

And then Monday, when the financial markets opened, there was some additional developments in Japan, which pushed up that probability of a large cut to 90%.

The financial markets have calmed down a little bit.

Over a couple of hours, that probability went from 91% to 84%.

That's the time when these slides were prepared.

We are now, two days later, looking at the probability, which is, again, much lower, given that the financial markets have settled down, have realized that Again, the economic fundamentals for the US economy are not that bad.

The employment report was disappointing, but it's not terrible, outright terrible.

And so the current chance of a large 0.5% cut, which would be a significant interest rate cut, not the usual 0.25%, but an outside 0.5% cut, that probability is at 60%.

That said, that doesn't mean that the Fed will cut the interest rate by half a percent.

There have been times where the expectations of a financial market were not aligned with the eventual action of a Fed, and Fed still might go with a half a percent or might go with a quarter percent, depending on the additional data that's coming in, additional employment.

There will be two more reports until the forecast that we are delivering in October.

Only one report until the Fed decides on the interest rate in September.

So they will take that into account, take into account the inflation, and then act.

It's rapidly evolving, a lot of things going on.

SPEAKER_15

So what is your current thinking on the percent likelihood of recession in this moment in time?

SPEAKER_04

All right.

So that's another probability.

This one is specifically the one on the slide is regarding the interest rate cuts.

There is another probability that we discussed in that forecast council meeting on Monday.

where the economists are in their Wall Street Journal survey providing an answer to the question, what's the probability of a recession occurring at some point within the next 12 months?

Now, that probability in the last survey was somewhere around 25 to 29. I don't remember the exact number.

That was a survey that was done before the disappointing employment report on Friday.

And since then, a couple of economists have been interviewed regarding their perceived probability of the recession.

There has been some discussion regarding that.

And what they indicated is that right now it's probably somewhere around 33, maybe as high as 40%, depending on who you're asking.

So slightly higher probability of a recession, but not significantly elevated as it was a year ago when that probability was around 60%.

SPEAKER_15

And you agree with that for Seattle?

SPEAKER_04

That's a probability of recession in the nation as a whole, and regional economy can occasionally be in what would be technically described as a recession with job losses occurring in the region, income declining in the region, at the same time as a nation as a whole not being in recession.

So we are a small island, but not unrelated to the rest of the country.

There are specific factors that matter for the local economy, and we are taking those into account.

So that would be, again, going back to the employment estimates and the recent rather disappointing slow growth in the region.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Director Duras, and thank you for making yourself available twice this week for public meetings.

Colleagues, you're all welcome to attend the forecast meetings that happen every quarter.

Director Duras, Sean, and David, thank you.

I know, Sean and David, you didn't get into much, but you had good information to share this last Monday.

We appreciate you making yourself available today.

Any final words, Director Duras?

SPEAKER_04

No, we are always happy to answer any questions.

SPEAKER_31

Thanks for having us here today.

Fantastic.

And I highly recommend, colleagues, you take him up on his offer to have a one-on-one briefing because you can talk for years on this stuff.

Incredibly interesting information.

And I think we're going to see in about a month from now where the economy is going.

It could go either way, which is concerning.

Up next, we have items two through four.

The next three items on the agenda, items two through four, is the second hearing and possible vote on the mid-year 2024 supplemental budget legislation package.

Clerk, can you read the short title of all three bills into the record?

SPEAKER_39

Agenda items 2 through 4, Council Bill 120811, amending Ordinance 126955, which adopted the 2024 budget, including 2024 through 2029, Capital Improvement Program.

Agenda item 3, Council Bill 120813, relating to acceptance of funding from non-city sources, and Council Bill 120812, amending Ordinance 126955, which adopted the 2024 budget, including 2024 through 2029, Capital Improvement Program.

These three items will be for briefing, discussion, and possible vote.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

And so we are going to, this is the second time we've had these items in committee today.

We're going to run through a presentation from central staff and CBO.

And then we, so it's going to be an out and back.

We're going to just do a presentation.

If you have burning questions, ask them.

And then we're going to come back to all the information one by one and vote on it.

And that's where statements about how you're going to be voting are best to take place.

And so with that, we have Council Bill 120811, the annual wage increase appropriations, Council Bill 120812, mid-year supplemental budget, And then Council Bill 120813, Mid-Year Grants Acceptance.

I will now turn it over to Director Eder, Director Noble.

We've got Tom Mikesell and Eden Cizek here.

SPEAKER_22

I'll let you take it from here.

Yeah, Tom's going to lead this, so over to you.

SPEAKER_29

Thanks, Ben.

Good morning, Chair Strauss, members of the Select Budget Committee, Tom Mikesell with your central staff.

As the chair referenced, we'll be talking about three bills and what we call the mid-year budget package, including a bill that adjusts the, it accepts grants and spends some of them in the 24 budget.

Another bill that does wage adjustments based on settled contracts, and then a third that adjusts budget, including capital programs, position increases, and appropriation changes.

Oh, wow.

take the bills up a bit out of order in terms of the kind of where the action is, if you will.

The first one we'll talk about is the mid-year supplemental.

And so this is basically a high level overview of a briefing we did earlier in the Finance Native Communities and Tribal Governments Committee.

This is the second comprehensive supplemental adjustment of this year.

The first being the carry forward that was discussed in the spring.

What this does is it adjusts city budget appropriations, makes position changes and adjusts capital projects.

In total, this action as proposed would decrease the total city budget, by $171 million.

That is largely due to capital budget abrogations or abandonments.

So basically we have double counts in the budget and this just kind of makes a technical adjustment.

It also makes it a $1 million change, a reduction to the general fund.

I'll go over the fiscal implication of that in the next bullet.

Oh, I'm sorry.

How do I share it?

SPEAKER_20

Do you know?

SPEAKER_29

Apologies, technical difficulties.

SPEAKER_16

That screen is not popping up at all.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_39

So we need to go to Zoom.

Oh, yeah, nice.

SPEAKER_31

Well, we're taking a quick break right here.

I'm going to do what I was told not to do and recognize Kate Hoffman, my senior policy advisor.

This is her last day in our office.

And so just want to take this moment to thank you for your service.

We couldn't have gotten here without you.

SPEAKER_29

Okay, we're back in action.

So continuing where I left off, in addition to the appropriation changes, the bill would also add 48 FTEs, including six in the Seattle Center, 21 in the Human Services Department, 21 in the Community Assisted Response and Engagement Department.

And then kind of drilling down on the general fund, I did say that there was a $1 million appropriation increase.

However, part of that appropriation decrease is a decrease in the amount of grant revenue we would accept.

So when you net all that out, the ultimate fiscal change is a $1.6 million decrease in the ending fund balance for the general fund.

And then finally, with regards to the CARES positions, those positions are funded within this supplemental adjustment for 2024. However, in 2025 and beyond, There's about a $4.3 million ongoing cost that is not currently funded in the budget.

And that would add to the projected deficit, which was last projected at $258 million in May, in the last update on the forecast.

And then given the information we heard earlier this morning from the forecast office, that's more on the neighborhood of $265 million now.

SPEAKER_31

And Tom, just while we're on the slide, with these additions, what is the percentage of our general fund that is being expended in the supplemental budget today?

SPEAKER_29

Thank you for the question.

So in total, the total change is actually a reduction in the total revised budget.

about 1.7% largely because of those capital project reductions.

If you kind of hone in on the general fund specifically, it's about a one-tenth of a percent reduction with regards to the appropriation change.

So it's small in that context.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

SPEAKER_29

So there were three specific policy proposals that staff highlighted in the analysis of the bill.

and that were covered in more detail at the prior committee meeting.

These include the additional positions in HSD to support the city's response to homelessness.

Again, they were the 21 positions that I referenced previously.

Also, the additional 21 positions added to the care department And then finally, there was a $10 million proviso that is applied to jumpstart fund dollars appropriated in the Department of Education and Early Learning budget.

That proviso expands, allows those funds to be used for their originally intended purposes for student mental health and violence prevention supports.

And you will see later in the presentation that there are amendments that are proposed by members that address each one of these items that we've highlighted.

So next I'll move quickly to the Mid-Year Grant Acceptance and Appropriation Bill, Council Bill 120813. This is the second of this type of bill that's been considered this year, being in the first quarter of this year.

In total, this bill would authorize the city to accept $73.7 million of funding from external sources, and then it would appropriate $53.5 million of those funds for a variety of uses.

Two of the largest ticket items that are being accepted, $18.7 million from the Federal Highway Administration Department for SDOT's Capital Improvements Program.

and then $19.5 million from the Washington Department of Commerce for low to moderate income residential electric utility customers with a one-time $200 bill credit.

SPEAKER_31

And Tom, right there, if the Climate Commitment Act is repealed, would we still have access to those dollars?

SPEAKER_29

I understand that we would because we're dealing with the current year, and I believe the repeal will be going forward, so the money will be collected.

Thank you.

And then just a final wrap this bill up.

One of the items that central staff screens for is the grant and match implications.

So are there cases where we're accepting money and then it's incumbent that we spend more to receive them?

We've done that screen.

And in all cases, the match dollars are already included in the budget.

So there is no unanticipated additional increase from accepting these funds.

final bill this is council bill 120811 which is the would adjust city budgets for recently settled contracts with collective bargaining groups in the city in total it would appropriate 255 million dollars across a variety of city funds with personnel to fund the implications of those labor agreements including retroactive payments and payments for the first half of this fiscal year In terms of implications for the general fund, it's $162 million included for an appropriation request in this bill.

Those dollars have been budgeted in the general fund financial plan and retained in planning reserves, so they are available to fund this appropriation.

The amount that's being requested is only half of the current 2024 amount because as we indicated at the prior meeting, the executive instituted a hiring freeze across the city and also put a pause on contracts over a million dollars, which will generate savings over above original estimates.

So the implication is that the entire amount that's been held in planning reserves will hopefully not be needed to be appropriated to support the cost of the contracts that have settled.

However, in the year end, as part of the fall budget package, there will be a year end supplemental which will true up the actual need based on the analysis of how much savings was generated from those hiring free savings.

And I believe that covers the three bills.

Again, tried to cover them quickly.

So the next steps is today.

There are some amendments that we'll cover next.

Final action, if these bills are voted out of committee, would be on the August 13th full council.

And then in late September, we'll receive the mayor's proposed 25-26 budget, which will include a year-end grant and supplemental adjustment.

Traditionally, it does so, and one would expect that it will this year as well.

SPEAKER_31

Great, Tom, I'm gonna ask you to pause there.

Colleagues, I'm gonna do a temperature check to see how people are feeling, if there are additional questions that you need answered about these three bills, or if you're ready to go into voting on them.

We're gonna take AWI first, followed by grant acceptance, and then the supplemental budget.

Do folks feel comfortable?

I know that everyone's gotten their briefings.

SPEAKER_15

Question of clarification.

SPEAKER_31

Council President.

SPEAKER_15

You said when you asked how much of the budget is represented in this mid-year supplemental or the changes to the budget, you said that's because we're not doing certain capital projects.

Can you please rephrase that?

Because I was trying to find what projects you're talking about.

SPEAKER_29

Absolutely, Council President.

So I'm essentially indicating that because the bill is a $170 million reduction, that is because of a large number of capital project abandonments.

So in the utilities, specifically in the annual budget process, they include amounts for their full CIP.

There's also a carry-forward process that automatically carries forward capital appropriations from the prior year.

So for these utilities, those amounts have been double budgeted.

And so the abandonment is essentially removing the appropriations that they no longer need and clearing the way for the ones that they just adopted in the fall budget process.

And it's fairly standard adjustment that happens each year because of the way they do capital budgeting.

So it's really technical in that regard.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Seeing no other questions, I'm gonna move on to voting on the two bills that do not have amendments.

So that is the Council Bill 120811, Employee Wage Increase Appropriations, followed by Council Bill 120813, the Mid-Year Grant Acceptance Ordinance.

And so I move Council Bill 120811. Is there a second?

SPEAKER_09

Second.

SPEAKER_31

It has been moved and seconded to approve Council Bill 120811. Colleagues, do you have any questions, comments?

Thank you all for receiving your briefings is my comment and statement.

Seeing we have no final comments or statements, Clerk, will you please call the roll on Council Bill 120811.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Wu.

Yes.

Council Member Hollingsworth.

SPEAKER_31

Yes.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Kettle.

SPEAKER_25

Aye.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Moore.

Aye.

Council Member Morales.

Yes.

Council President Nelson.

Aye.

Council Member Rivera.

Aye.

Council Member Saka.

SPEAKER_31

Aye.

SPEAKER_39

And Chair Strauss.

SPEAKER_31

Yes.

SPEAKER_39

Nine in favor, none opposed.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Council Bill 120811 passes and will be sent to the August 13th full city council meeting.

We're gonna now move on to the mid-year grant acceptance and appropriation.

I move council bill 120813, is there a second?

Second.

Thank you, it has been moved and seconded to recommend passage of council bill 120813. Colleagues, are there comments, questions, concerns?

And seeing as we have no amendments on this, I also appreciate my statement again.

I appreciate you all receiving your briefings.

This has been moved and seconded.

Council Bill 120813 has been moved and seconded.

Clerk, will you please call the roll?

SPEAKER_39

Yes.

Council Member Hollingsworth.

SPEAKER_31

Yes.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Kettle.

Aye.

Council Member Moore.

Aye.

Council Member Morales.

Yes.

Council President Nelson.

Aye.

Council Member Rivera.

Aye.

Council Member Saka.

SPEAKER_31

Aye.

SPEAKER_39

And Chair Strauss.

SPEAKER_31

Yes.

SPEAKER_39

Nine in favor, none opposed.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Council Bill 120812...

Sorry, I got ahead in my script.

813 passes, and this will be sent to the August 13th full city council meeting.

Moving on to Council Bill 120812, our mid-year supplemental budget.

I know that we have a number of amendments, and so I now move Council Bill 120812. Is there a second?

Second.

SPEAKER_09

Second.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

It has been moved and seconded to recommend passage of Council Bill 120812. I know that we have a number of amendments, and thank you, Tom, for pulling up a chart of all of the amendments.

We're going to go in order.

I've got too many items on my screen right now.

We're going to go in order with Council Member Rivera first.

Council Member Rivera, the floor is yours.

SPEAKER_09

Chair, I move to amend Council Bill 120812 as presented on Amendment 1, Version 2 on the agenda.

SPEAKER_05

Second.

SPEAKER_31

It has been moved and seconded to recommend Amendment 1, Version 2 to Council Bill 120812. Tom and colleagues, I forgot to give you a quick overview.

Once an amendment is moved, we'll turn it back to central staff to do a quick briefing, and then we'll pass it to the sponsor to have the conversation.

Tom, over to you.

SPEAKER_29

Thank you, Chair.

So this council member Rivera's amendment would create a non-lapsing provision that allows for the carry forward of $150,000 in the general fund budget allocated to crisis, a community crisis response program evaluation.

IN THE CARE DEPARTMENT, 2024 BUDGET, AND IT IMPOSES A PROVISO THAT REQUIRES THAT THE APPROPRIATIONS IN CARE'S 2024 BUDGET FOR BUDGET SUMMARY LEVEL CARE BOCS 4000, 150,000 IS APPROPRIATED SOLELY FOR AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION OF THE CCR PROGRAM AND MAY BE SPENT FOR NO OTHER PURPOSE.

SO ESSENTIALLY IT IMPOSES A PROVISO AND APPLIES A CARE REFORWARD SO THOSE FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE TO MEET THE PURPOSE OF THE PROVISO IN FUTURE YEARS.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Tom.

Over to you, Council Member.

Vice Chair Rivera.

SPEAKER_09

Thank you, Chair.

This amendment is, as everyone knows and has heard me say, accountability is key for me.

We must build in metrics of success so we know how our city programs are performing.

We need to know if what we're paying for is delivering the intended results.

This is even more important during a budget deficit like the one we're facing now.

This amendment ensures that funding is available ongoing to measure the performance of this program, and by ongoing as meaning it's one time, but it's so that it can be used at a point in time that makes the most sense to evaluate the program so we see if it really is working.

So we can make improvements where and when necessary.

Setting aside money for evaluation is not taking money from something else.

It is protecting the taxpayer's investments, and that should always be baked into our budget.

So it's just giving the department the ability to have some funds to do the actual evaluation so we can know when and how we should tweak this program to make sure it is serving the needs.

by which the program was created.

So hope to have your support on this evaluation piece.

Thank you, Chair.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Vice Chair.

Council Member Kettle, I see your hand.

SPEAKER_25

Thank you, Chair Strauss.

I just wanted to note, as chair of the Public Safety Committee, I consider this to be a friendly amendment, and it's in keeping with good governance protocols.

And as I've mentioned many times, and to include to Chief Smith and to others within the public safety world of the executive, that we're going to, in the alternative response area, there's going to be some learning, lessons learned.

There's going to be some adjustments, because this is a new area that we're in.

And I view this amendment as a way to, you know, to get some good looks in terms of, you know, any course corrections that may be needed.

And this is something that we can work together with the executive, with the mayor's team, and particularly in this case with the chief smith and the care department.

Thank you, Councilman Raquel.

Council President Nelson.

SPEAKER_15

Thank you, Councilmember Rivera, for bringing this forward.

And if you may, I would like to be listed as a co-sponsor because you are emphasizing our role as an oversight body.

And it is really important that we understand how the program is doing.

I did ask Chief Smith what the vision is for going forward because we are allocating, we are creating new positions.

And so what does the future of the program look like going forward?

And the program as it exists is set to expire at the end of next year.

And so it does merit looking at what's going well, what's not going well, and how can we modify this going forward with the use of these additional programs.

So thank you very much for emphasizing accountability.

Thank you.

Council Member Rouse.

SPEAKER_05

Thank you.

First of all, thank you for the clarification that the 150 is just meant to carry forward.

I did read it to say 150,000 every year, so I appreciate that.

Can you or maybe somebody talk a little bit about what reporting the department is already required to do and how frequently?

SPEAKER_29

Anyone?

Thank you for the question, Council Member Morales.

I don't know if anybody from central staff is joining on Zoom.

I don't know the answer to that question specifically.

SPEAKER_09

Thank you, Tom.

Vice Chair, you are recognized.

Sorry, thank you.

My understanding is that there was money put in for evaluation.

Actually, it was a bit more money.

It was $500,000 to do evaluation and some other things.

And so as part of the mid-year, that money, I understand, would have been taken out and put into something else.

So this really is just putting back the evaluation.

I don't think we need 500,000 for evaluation.

I know consulting contracts typically run up to 150 for an evaluation, a robust evaluation.

So again, it's giving the department, it's putting the evaluation back in and giving the department the funds necessary to do the evaluation.

So thank you for the question.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

And I see we have Ann Gorman, Central Staff Analyst, online.

Ann, I also see you are just in your office, so you're free to pop down here if you'd like.

SPEAKER_03

I'm here right now, so I'll stay put.

Thank you, Chair.

Ann Gorman, Council Central Staff.

I just want to substantiate what Councilmember Rivera just said.

There was funding in the CARE budget that was originally established for departmental planning purposes.

Planning was left somewhat vague, but there was a reference made to the need to establish ongoing program evaluation measures.

And this amendment would just ensure that $150,000 of the original allocation was used for that intended purpose.

Ms. Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Mr. Thank you.

Colleagues, any further questions, comments, concerns?

Seeing none, the bill has been moved in or the Amendment 1, Version 2 to Council Bill 120812 has been moved and seconded.

Vice Chair, any final words?

SPEAKER_09

Yes, thank you, Chair.

I just want to say, and I should have led with, I support alternatives to policing.

And I always want to make sure that every program that the city Embarks upon really has a robust evaluation process because when we start to implement things especially things that the city hasn't done before it's really important to take a look at some certain amount of time in to make sure if it's really the meeting the intended goals and it gives the city that the Opportunity to shift gears if it's not You know, this is this is an important piece to being a Fiscally responsible and as councilmember kettle likes to say good governance.

So Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you chair Thank you guys chair.

Will the clerk please call the roll on amendment 2 version 1 That's right.

I'm sorry.

I got ahead.

I'm already looking at the next amendment amendment 1 version 2.

SPEAKER_39

Thank you councilmember.

Woo.

Yes, I Council Member Hollingsworth.

Yes.

Council Member Kettle.

SPEAKER_31

Aye.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Moore.

Aye.

Council Member Morales.

Yes.

Council President Nelson.

Aye.

Council Member Rivera.

Aye.

Council Member Saka.

SPEAKER_31

Aye.

SPEAKER_39

And Chair Strauss.

SPEAKER_31

Yes.

SPEAKER_39

Nine in favor, nine opposed.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Now moving on to where I was just a second ago, Amendment 2, Version 1 to Council Bill 120812. This is my amendment, and so I will move Amendment 2, Version 1 to Council Bill 120812. Is there a second?

SPEAKER_11

Second.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

It has been moved and seconded.

Amendment 2, we'll turn it over to Tom, and then I'll make a quick remark.

SPEAKER_29

Thank you, Chair.

So this amendment would eliminate a proposed transfer of $1.9 million of moved Seattle levy funds in the SDOT CIP portfolio.

Those funds are for the Burke-Gilman Trail expansion in the CIP.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Tom.

And thank you to Council Member Moore and your staff for flagging the sidewalk issue here.

In following up with SDOT and CBO, it's my understanding that this was a technical change based on work already completed and a moving of funds between sidewalks and the Berkman Trail for funds that have already been expended.

I will just state I've got more questions to...

to be answered before I'm comfortable moving forward with such, with a quote unquote administrative change.

That said, this was also put forward before the levy vote.

And so there has been additional dollars should the levy pass associated with the Burke-Gilman Trail project, which is why until the questions can be fully answered regarding this pot of money, I would like to have it returned to the sidewalk fund.

Colleagues, any questions?

Fantastic.

SPEAKER_19

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Just for clarification, so this, your proposed amendment would eliminate this transfer from the Move Seattle Levy Fund, and which would be, would have been used under the executive proposal to fund the Berg-Gilman expansion, a specific route, actually, the Shillshole route, and so this amendment would, again, eliminate that, And you aptly called out there are still some pending uncertainty around, you know, what is the preferred route, depending on what happens in November.

But amongst other things.

So just curious where.

So it stops that money from going towards towards that and.

And where does it stay within those existing sort of buckets within the Move Seattle levy funding for those existing?

So sidewalks, paving, you know, other things are, yeah.

SPEAKER_31

Yes, and so this would return to the buckets that they originally came from.

In 2018 and 2019, a section of the Burke-Gilman Trail missing link was completed between the locks and 24th Avenue.

And that there was also work done at that time to repave Market Street.

The curb lines were moved.

New sidewalks were built.

New trees were planted, although not enough.

And the current existing Burke-Gilman Trail, there was an injunction put in.

And so the pavement is temporary.

There are no markings because we legally can't put a trail there, even though SDOT went ahead and built a trail.

And so that's where, and this is just the high level that I just am providing, which is why I've got more questions regarding where did that money come from?

Where did it go?

What we know is that The money here that was being moved will just return to the buckets that it came from.

I will also caveat, colleagues, should I receive adequate answers as to why this money needs to move for past actions, I will bring this amendment forward at a future date.

But until I have those questions fully answered, I think it's prudent to return the money.

Council Member Kettle.

SPEAKER_25

Thank you, Chair Strauss.

I just wanted to note, first, of course, it's good governance to return...

Sorry, like that.

But also your work and the community's work regarding, you know, ending the three decades delay and completing the Burke-Gilman Trail and also protecting, you know, the necessary and required for future economic development in our city, the maritime industrial pieces to that.

So thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Colleagues, any further questions?

Seeing none, Clerk, will you please call the roll on Amendment 2, Version 1 to Council Bill 120812?

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Wu?

Yes.

Council Member Hollingsworth?

Yes.

Council Member Kettle?

SPEAKER_25

Aye.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Moore?

Aye.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council President Nelson?

Aye.

Council Member Rivera?

Aye.

Council Member Saka?

SPEAKER_31

Aye.

SPEAKER_39

And Chair Strauss?

SPEAKER_31

Yes.

SPEAKER_39

Nine in favor, none opposed.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Amendment 2, version 1 to Council Bill 120812 passes.

We will move on to Amendment 3, version 1. Council Member Morales, this is your bill, or your amendment.

SPEAKER_05

I move Amendment 3.

SPEAKER_31

Second.

It has been Amendment 3, version 1 has been moved and seconded.

Over to you, Tom, and then back to you, Council Member Morales.

Yes.

SPEAKER_29

Thank you, Chair Strauss.

So Council Member Morales' amendment would adjust the proviso in the bill as submitted.

So as I referenced earlier in the presentation, there is a $10 million proposed proviso applied to jumpstart funds in the deal budget.

The proposed amendment would expand that to a $20 million proviso, which would allow DEAL to deploy the entire amount that was budgeted in the 2024 budget for student mental health support in DEAL.

THE AMENDMENT ALSO REQUESTS THAT DEAL COLLABORATES WITH OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS AND FOCUS THE INVESTMENTS ON EXISTING PROGRAMS AND PARTNERSHIPS WITHIN COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS.

AND THEN REPORTING REQUIREMENT IS ADDED, WHICH WOULD REQUEST THAT DEAL REPORT TO THE COUNCIL BY OCTOBER 25, 2024, DESCRIBING THE SPENDING PLAN FOR THE ENTIRE $20 MILLION.

SPEAKER_31

THANK YOU, TOM.

COUNCIL MEMBER MORALES, THE FLOOR IS YOURS.

SPEAKER_05

Thank you, Chair.

I was hoping that the students would still be here so I could thank them for coming.

But as we heard from students, not just these folks, but we've been hearing from students across the city that they need greater access to mental health services.

And we know that part of the challenge for young people in many parts of Seattle is that they lack sufficient access to the kinds of activities and programming that can help them heal from trauma, but could also help them stay safe and stay out of trouble.

I will say somebody was speaking about Aki and about the field trips that the Boys and Girls Club takes these kids on.

My daughter went to Aki for middle schools and for three years didn't have a single field trip.

So these programs help students get experiences that they wouldn't otherwise get and the kind of enrichment that they may not otherwise get access to.

So this amendment would maintain the commitment to these students by requesting that deal partner with parks and HSD and community organizations to address mental health by increasing programming that's focused on youth development.

To support Seattle youth, provide services that can address youth mental health and violence crises.

We know that there are organizations doing this critical work in our schools who don't have enough funding to maintain their capacity, let alone to expand their reach.

And this amendment would maintain the city's promise to these kids that was made last year.

And as Tom mentioned, it does also request that deal provide a report to the chair of the Library's Education and Neighborhoods Committee that would explain how this collaboration would be planned.

And I'm asking for my colleague's support.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

I see we have a number of hands.

Council Member Kettle, then Council Member Wu.

SPEAKER_25

Thank you, Chair Strauss.

Like the amendment sponsor, I also wanted to thank the kids that were here.

I think it's fantastic for them to participate, and for the adults that brought them as well, and particularly the organizations like Community Passageways, the Boys and Girls Club of King County, the Southeast Network, and all those others that may have been participating.

It's good for them to be here, and as mentioned, I've met with Community Passageways, you know, sadly when The Garfield student, Amir Murphy Payne, was killed there at Garfield, and it highlights the need to have this work done.

And so I appreciate that they came here.

But also, we also need to note that Olympia needs to be visited by these kids because, as you know, school spending, education, and mental health are a state function.

And that is really important.

So we need to have this advocacy really be in Olympia in terms of holding them to their responsibilities.

And particularly, again, with regards to mental health in schools and also to the school board.

The school board has responsibilities in this area as well.

The school board should be visited by these adults and the kids in the organizations.

Shifting to good governance piece, I noted the amendment sponsor had an action alert on this, and it started off with a paragraph saying, here's some background.

And it noted that City of Seattle has been slow to spend that $20 million.

And then it also said the city only wants to use half that funding, and that's unacceptable.

I feel a need to come to the defense of the executive because when this amendment was passed last year, there was no coordination.

And the old council, the sponsor of that amendment, came out of the blue with this $20 million piece.

And given the fact that the state's not doing its part regarding education and mental health, yes, I can see the city needing to step up, usually after a long piece of advocacy, both with Olympia and with the school board.

But to the defense of the executive, so this came out of nowhere.

So it takes planning and execution to do that.

So to say that they only want to do that, I think is an injustice to the executive, to the teams that are trying to work in this area.

you know, it's more of the city can only at this point spend that amount of money.

So I kind of push back on the that's unacceptable because the background doesn't include how this came about.

It didn't include the fact that there was no coordination by the sponsor and the old council of this amendment to that process.

And that coordination is really important.

And I suspect this amendment itself probably had maybe not as much coordination, if any, related to the executive on this, you know, in terms of pushing this forward, in terms of, hey, can we do this?

You know, good governance, hey, can we do this?

This is very important.

So this needs to be done.

Also here, in terms of this amendment and this mid-year supplemental, because again, I believe probably that has none or very little coordination.

And again, it goes to the ability of the executive to execute.

As I've been saying to my team, because I've met with the executive responsible for this area, and we went through this process of looking at what they're doing with the $10 million.

So a lot of times it comes down to the ability to digest, to be able to work it.

And so I believe that the executive is working this to the best of their ability, hence the $10 million.

And I think it's important to remember, too, that this is a mid-year supplemental.

We're two-thirds of the, through 2024. So if we were to do this 10 million, what would happen with that?

You know, I'm learning about past things with King County Jail regarding $11 million here, $5 million here, and then that $5 million, what happened to it?

So it's the ability to work these processes that needs to be considered and part of court and, you know, the coordination and like, and to take it away from What we heard, because I agree with them, but this is something that we work through the regular budgeting process for 25, you know, because now we have the time to digest it and work it, which was not happening with the old council when this.

PIECE OF FUNDING CAME OUT OF NOWHERE.

SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DO.

WE NEED TO WORK IN COLLABORATION, AND AS THE CHAIR OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE, I'M DEFINITELY LOOKING TO WORK WITH FIRST THE AMENDMENT SPONSOR, BUT ALSO CHAIR RIVERA IN TERMS OF EDUCATION, CHAIR MOORE REGARDING HUMAN SERVICES, HSD PARTICULARLY, AND MY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS HERE ON THE DIAS.

AND, YOU KNOW, AND ONE LAST PIECE TO THIS IS THAT, YOU KNOW, I've also reached out to Dr. Jones.

I didn't have a response, you know, as chair of the public safety, because this is really important, you know, school safety, you know, the safety for our kids, all the work that community passageways and the like's done.

You know, so we need to be also pressing them in terms of what are they doing for security, you know, and I met him last year at the UW-Evan School, and I, you know, had a great discussion with him there, with him and his family, and I'd like to work with him in conjunction with Chair Rivera and to press forward on this.

And because I think we need to understand what the school district is doing regarding security, because this has to be a comprehensive approach.

And ultimately, we need to be in a one Seattle way, engaging with the county, but on this case, engaging with the state regarding mental health and education funding.

So I am definitely in support of working this through the normal budget process to make sure that we're straight and 25 and well coordinated so that we can properly execute the budget and the programs.

But at this point related to this supplemental, given the fact that we're two thirds of the way, and I have spoken to the executive on this and they have their 10 million plan.

I say, let's press with the 10 million plan.

So I will be voting no on this amendment.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Up next is Council Member Wu, followed by Vice Chair Rivera, then Council Member Moore, and Council President Nelson.

Council Member Wu.

SPEAKER_18

Thank you.

So also want to echo the sentiment of thanking those who came in earlier today.

I also run a very similar program, the Community Watch, and I've been mentoring young children my entire life.

And I've been really familiar with the Southeast Seattle Action Network, Can You Passage Ways, Urban Family.

So I really support their work and I see the effects on the kids.

So I will be supporting this amendment.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Council Member Wu.

Council Member Rivera.

SPEAKER_09

Thank you, Chair.

I too want to join in thanking those who were here earlier, especially the kids who came down to City Hall.

to give their public comment.

I'm grateful for their voices and I support the programs that the city's funding.

These community organizations provide meaningful and important work and having been a low income kid myself growing up and a recipient of such programs, I am just so very, I understand how impactful these programs are and how important it is for us to support them.

To Councilmember Kettle's point, this is a mid-year supplemental.

This is meant to take up the work and the funding that Council gave the city departments this year.

We are two-thirds of the way of the year end.

The supplemental does not cut any funding for any of the programs currently funded by DEAL or HSD.

This $20 million is not funding that has been allocated or awarded to anyone at the moment, to any program.

And the department has been in the process of figuring out how to best way to allocate these funds.

Mental health for students is not a body of work that the department does outside of the 29 school-based health centers that the Families Education Preschool and Promise Levy funds.

Until 2019, when Pryor put a very small allocation to Diehl for mental health post the pandemic, which Diehl had to figure out how to implement that funding.

And to Councilmember Kettle's earlier point as well, the council did not have central staff work that I'm aware of on any policy or plan for spending the money.

The money was given to the department to figure out, And I'm not sure how the prior council came to 20 million as the actual allocation.

I've not seen anything from central staff as to how they arrived at that figure or whether we had the ability to implement those funds when they allocated it to the department.

The department allocated the smaller prior funding in a limited way with limited information as best they could.

and subsequently engaged them in a more robust process for additional funding outside of the $20 million that had also been given to them on a second tranche of money.

So this is a third tranche.

I support the mayor's $10 million proposal for the mental health investments, which will be being implemented this coming school year.

Those investments are rooted in work done in collaboration with the public health community.

The city's Department of Innovation and Performance recently released a six month long mental health findings and recommendations report that will also inform these investments.

And having worked with DEAL since 2018, I know that the department, this is not a body of work that they do.

Their main mission is to implement the Families Education Preschool Promise Levy, which is $90 million in yearly funding that the taxpayers have voted for since the 1990s.

We have not yet seen the mayor's budget proposal for the budget, the biennium, 2025-2026, and we won't see that until the end of next month.

At that point, we can address this issue more fully with all the facts at hand.

I too want to learn what the state will be supporting by way of these efforts, since it is the state that is responsible for both education and mental health.

I would like to learn how the state will align with and support the city's efforts and those of the school districts across the country, including Seattle Public Schools.

I have met with Superintendent Jones.

We had a very productive meeting.

I know that SPS has new safety measures they'll be introducing once kids come back in the fall, as I had said earlier this week, and I'm looking forward to hearing more from SPS when they're ready to share on that.

For all of these reasons, I agree with Council Member Kettle, actually, and I won't be voting for this amendment now, but I'm very much looking forward to seeing the mayor's proposal in the fall when we get to respond for the next biennium.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Council Member Rivera.

Council Member Moore and then Council Member Nelson.

SPEAKER_11

Thank you, Chair.

Um, Tom, I had a thank you for their presentation and I had a question about, so if we, uh, what would happen to the 10 million if this, uh, council member Morales's amendment does not pass.

SPEAKER_29

Thank you for the question.

Council member Moore.

Um, so currently if the, if the amendment did not pass and the proviso on $10 million stays as proposed, the, the other $10 million for, um, that was added in the 24 adopted budget, to deal for mental health would be available within the deal budget for other uses or ultimately lapse to the jumpstart fund balance at the year end.

SPEAKER_11

So it could lapse to the jumpstart balance year end?

SPEAKER_29

That is what will occur with the bill as proposed.

SPEAKER_11

And then council could come back and come with a new proposal on how to allocate that particular 10 million or additional monies out of the jumpstart?

SPEAKER_29

Yes, that proposal could come in during the fall budget process or next year.

But that's essentially where the monies will reside absent additional action.

SPEAKER_11

Okay, so the money's not lost effectively.

Okay, thank you.

Chair, may I make my comments?

SPEAKER_31

Yeah, floor's yours until you're, yeah.

SPEAKER_11

Okay, yeah, thank you.

So thank you for that.

I think it's important to have a clarification that this isn't about taking money away or restoring money.

The money is there.

Additionally, I think as my colleagues have pointed out, the executive is not capable of spending $20 million between now and the end of the year.

even if they collaborate with HSD.

I had, while all this was going on, and I very much appreciated the testimony of the Boys and Girls Clubs members, of the Urban Family members, Community Passageways, everybody who was out there telling us about the services that they are receiving, how it's made such a significant difference in their lives and how they need more.

I'm 100% supportive of that.

But really what I'm hearing out there is the work that should be done and is more appropriately housed in the Human Services Department and particularly under the Seattle Community Safety Initiative, which is directly aimed at working with those actual community partners to address gun violence and the holistic environment of prevention and intervention.

And so while I very much support the intent, Council Member Morales, I don't think it is appropriate It shouldn't be in deal.

It needs to be in HSD.

I wanted to bring a walk-on amendment to make that happen.

It is much too complicated when you're moving money from one department to another to do it on the fly.

So I'm not in a position to do that, even though I...

made a request that central staff valiantly tried to comply with.

And then I came to my senses.

So all of that by way of saying that money is there, I'm absolutely committed to going back.

And in fact, I've been asking repeatedly for briefings from Human Services Department, I'm gonna bring them to a committee to talk about the Community Safety Initiative and gun violence prevention intervention.

Just as a plug, we don't have, North Seattle's not listed as a community safety hub, even though South Seattle, and I believe Central Seattle are, and North Seattle's in desperate need of that designation.

So there's a lot of work to be done here.

And I'm reassured to know that that money is going to be there for us to come back and be laser focused on putting it in the right department that can actually get the results that we are talking about.

And then I think we all are seeking here today.

So for those reasons, I am going to be voting against this amendment.

But I appreciate the effort.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Council Member Moore.

Council Member Nelson.

SPEAKER_15

First, I wanted to respond to your question or comment that you don't know where council, the previous council came up with the 20 million.

I'll tell you.

Councilmember Sawant wanted to increase the payroll expense tax, or what she called the Amazon tax, at a rate that would generate $60 million a year.

That did not pass.

Then there was another option.

Then put forward a proposal to generate the same thing, to generate $40 million a year.

That did not pass.

And the $20 million did pass.

And so it was sort of round numbers that were aimed at.

And...

My question is, I have a question for Director Eder, because it's already been mentioned that it might be difficult to spend this additional money, the additional $10 million that is proposed in the amendment, as well as the already existing money that we heard the plan for recently, but I don't know how well we're doing getting that money out the door.

My question is, All right.

You have a plan for $10 million.

It's supposedly generating $20 million.

Parenthetical question, yes or no?

Is it generating $20 million or above or below because it set a rate and it didn't define a particular amount from companies?

That can get to later.

Do you have plans to use the other $10 million to help plug the operating deficit next year?

Is that where that money is parked currently?

No need to tell us what you're planning to spend it on specifically, but what were you thinking about doing with that other $10 million?

SPEAKER_13

Thank you, Councilmember.

As central staff noted, the resources are available to be spent this year.

Just logically speaking, if they are not spent for this purpose, if not all $20 million that was anticipated when the council adopted its amendment in the fall are spent for this purpose or for any other purposes, then that money would be available to help address the 2025 and 2026 budgets.

And the mayor will be assuming that logic train comes to happen.

then that will become part of the resources for the mayor's proposed budget and for council's consideration of how to amend and finally adopt some spending plan and budget for 25 and 26. In short, yes.

SPEAKER_15

Yeah, I was going to get to that.

Seeing as how the budget was probably going to be sent to the printer in the next couple weeks, I was going to say I'll take that as a yes.

And I remind people that this is an ongoing funding source, and so what we don't spend this year It's every year that we're getting this money.

And do you know when the RFPs, there's nobody from HSD here, but when will the RFPs for the community safety programs be let or responded to because we had that presentation in in the housing and human services committee recently you're talking about the two million dollars for a violence intervention gun gun violence intervention was it more than two million because i thought that all of the program i mean there's there's about 4.5 million or something in the

SPEAKER_13

Yeah, there's the gun violence intervention pot of money.

That is going to be announced by the end of this month.

I don't have more details on exactly who will be getting what money to do exactly what with that pot of money, but that's the purpose.

There's an RFI.

for the telehealth portion of the remaining funds.

That RFI is going to help us identify a long-term contractor for the 2025 and beyond.

So we will select a contractor to move forward.

That RFI, the responses came in at the end of July.

So we were evaluating the responses on that.

but we have a contractor who is already on board to do the beginning of the school year through December.

SPEAKER_15

Okay, I was referring to a lot of the programs that fall outside of this particular initiative, but I can follow up and get that information else.

Otherwise, thanks.

SPEAKER_22

As a point of direct related, and I bring this up not because I'm trying to put a finger on either side of whatever the scale is.

But the 10 million that the executive is requesting, it does include $2 million of additional funding for violence prevention.

that would be let through contracts and candidly potentially to some of the agencies you saw today.

There is still $10 million on the table from the original, just to be clear, but we haven't, We made this, the previous briefing we offered detail on what the 10 million that is in the executive proposal includes, but it just, I wanted to emphasize among those things is additional funding, substantial additional funding, a couple million dollars, and that again will complement existing youth violence prevention funding that we, that the city has in its base budget, and I, as I say that I do not know what that base funding is to which the 2 million would be added.

SPEAKER_15

And those were the RFIs that I was referring to, yeah.

SPEAKER_22

That's what I thought was worth clarifying at this stage, but yes.

SPEAKER_13

And to address a question, it was a comment, actually not a question from Council Member Moore.

The $2 million will not be spent, will be spent by HSD for these contracts.

We plan to do it through effectively having the deal funding support the work in HSD through an MOU.

So, I appreciate your comment that this is appropriately done through HSD.

We didn't have that together by the time we transmitted the mid-year supplemental to make that happen in sort of more official terms, but I wanted to be clear about what our plans are.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Director Eder, Director Newell.

Council President, any further questions?

SPEAKER_15

No.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Council Member Saka.

SPEAKER_19

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

And thank you all.

So, and thank you, Council Member Moore.

I asked one of my questions that I had was, what happens to the money if it is unspent, if it passes?

Or, excuse me, does not pass?

A related question I have now is like, if this amendment passes, But not all of the $20 million ends up being spent for whatever reason.

What happens to the money in that case?

SPEAKER_29

Thank you for the question.

So it would depend on whether or not the money has been obligated in any way.

So if any contracts had been established for any portion of those dollars, then they would carry forward automatically into the next year.

anything that was not under contract by year end would lapse to balance or be proposed for carry forward through a legislative bill later next year.

SPEAKER_19

So unpledged, uncommitted through contracting funds could carry forward, could be proposed for something else, any number of things.

SPEAKER_29

Yes.

SPEAKER_19

Yeah.

Okay.

No, thank you.

Uh, Makes sense, and I guess I echo the sentiment shared by my colleagues and wanna express my own personal gratitude and thanks for members of the public that showed up and testified earlier, especially recognizing and uplifting our youth who were here.

Really appreciate hearing their voices and their perspectives directly and not letting adults advocate on their behalf.

Self-advocacy is important too.

And so, also special shout out to the youth who showed up and shared his background, a little bit about his background and journey and mentioned that he was a computer science major at University of Washington.

Having worked in tech for the last 10 years before I took office, I'll say that young man's background and profile and journey is exactly what the industry needs.

It's exactly what our city needs.

And, you know, programs need to keep churning out young men just like that.

Young men and...

Young people just like that.

So in any event, I also appreciate the young folks, especially for showing up and showing out.

So we have a real life tangible.

Let me just like, look, I will be supporting this amendment today.

We have a real life tangible idea proposal on the table today.

And this is a really urgent, important challenge, the broader issue of youth mental health and the associated challenges that it imposes on our society and the responsibilities that it imposes on our society and our community.

And so we have a real-life, tangible proposal on the table today in the form of this amendment.

For one reason or the other only 10 million was was spent or proposed to be spent of the original last year proposed 20 million allocation Which I understand now this amendment would purport to add expand by adding a few different subcategories to provide restorative practices through community-based partners.

That's subsection B.

Subsection C is to invest in safe community spaces and enrichment activities, amongst other things this amendment would purport to do.

If it can be spent in those areas, great.

We have a proposal on the table.

I am mindful, however, and sensitive to the comments from my colleagues who indicated they would not be supporting it, including Councilmember Kettle, which I think one of your comments was echoed by a few of our colleagues here, including Councilmember Rivera, the sort of notion that we're two-thirds of the way through the year and that other departments Hey, we'll see.

We'll kind of wait and see what happens with that.

And I'm mindful of that.

And I also appreciate Council Member Moore, I guess, undertaking, endeavoring to undertake the Herculean and working with central staff to undertake the Herculean task of going through what would be the best appropriation of these resources to have a more targeted impact for, I think, the end goal intended results that I think I don't purport to speak for any of you all, but we can broadly share and kind of rally around.

But in the absence of that, again, we have a proposal on the table today, so I'm prepared to support it today.

If it can't get spent for whatever reason, then we'll have those conversations and look at carry forward, look at reallocating, look at retargeting the investment and any number of things.

But I'm supporting this thing today, so thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Council Member Saka.

Council Member Morales, before I turn it back to you for the final word, I've got a couple comments.

I didn't raise my hand because I know I'm here.

Are there other comments?

SPEAKER_09

I do have one question for...

SPEAKER_31

Council Member Rivera.

SPEAKER_09

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

Director Eder, so my understanding for the $10 million proposal that the mayor has was that the innovation and performance team had worked with UW, Children's Hospital, other healthcare providers, including some of the school-based health clinics and other folks, and that the proposal was based on that work.

And I imagine that part of the reason for the $10 million is because of the ability of to, you know, this is new work in this way, in this particular way.

And so would, and so I imagine the 10 million was because of the way that is being spent, what you're able to do, what the departments are able to do.

So if the additional 10 million were put in, what is the likelihood?

Because I imagine you'd have to engage in a different process.

It's not as simple, which kind of almost defies reason, but having worked at the city for as long as I have, I imagine it's not as easy as just adding more to each of those buckets, but going back and talking again.

and having to craft another proposal for that initial, I mean, excuse me, for that second tranche of money.

And so the ability to be able to do that between now and year's end and plus you're engaged in the budget conversation, which we're going to be looking at in about a month.

SPEAKER_13

Yes, thank you for that opportunity, Councilmember Rivera.

It is true that we have been moving with deliberate speed, but sensing the urgency of the community needs.

It has still taken us several months to put together a proposal for how to spend the money that is in the transmitted version of the program.

Proviso, $10 million would be able to go out the door this year.

That is new money, which has never been spent before by the city in this magnitude for these kind of programs.

So we think that this is a prudent approach that allows us to test new moves, see what the take-up is.

We have some estimates and some projections, but we want to see how the resources we put on the ground are actually used and reevaluate how to balance the needs against the resources that are being spent.

We think that's what the council tasked us with in putting this money in the budget in the first place.

And this is our best attempt after several months of coordinated effort working with other jurisdictions, interviewing young people and community organizations, stakeholders who have worked in this space.

We've formed a plan to partner with key organizations and to bring some consulting expertise under contract.

That too takes some time.

So as you say, it appears to me unlikely that we will be able to spend an additional $10 million if given a green light today.

We would certainly do our best to evaluate a path forward if that's the council's wish.

SPEAKER_09

Thank you, Director.

And just one last question, if I may, Chair.

Thank you for the time.

I just, Director Reeder, can you confirm, deal was given $4 million for mental health in 2022. And it is my understanding that those contracts were just implemented in January in 2024. So it has taken that long for that $4 million tranche.

SPEAKER_13

I believe that's correct.

SPEAKER_09

Yeah.

So the last thing I'll say, colleagues, is very much support.

I don't want to leave the impression that I do not support mental health investments by the city.

I very much do.

I also support community-based organizations.

I am so glad that HSC has current contracts with those organizations and I would support continuing forward with those.

We're talking about this particular 10 million and the inability for the city to actually implement this fund.

And I too have a sense of urgency and it's very tempting to throw money at a problem, but if we can't deliver on it, It just doesn't make sense and it's, you know, I feel the responsibility to taxpayers to be fiscally responsible and to the students who are here who are expecting that if we spend, if we pass this money that somehow they're gonna get it immediately.

It is not true.

unless you're telling me otherwise, Director Eater, as the head of the Central Budget Office.

And so I want to be really clear about that, too, because it really upsets me when we promise people things that we cannot deliver on.

We had many kids here today, and to suggest that somehow passing this, they're going to see this money right away, is just simply not possible.

And I just, in good faith and in good conscience, I cannot support that.

So while I support the underlying reasons, I don't support moving forward in this fashion.

It's just not honest to the kids that came here today.

So thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Council Member Rivera.

Council Member Moore.

SPEAKER_11

Thank you.

Thank you for those remarks, Councilmember Rivera.

I very much share them.

And to that point, I just want to be, I want to hear directly, there's about 2 million of this 10 that's been directed to HSD to deal with gun safety, gun violence prevention, intervention.

Today, we can, if we gave you more money today, you could not actually implement or execute any additional money in the gun violence prevention arena between now and December.

SPEAKER_13

I was speaking more specifically about the mental health aspects.

I don't think we have a game plan for the $2 million.

I don't know if you gave us another $500,000 or $1 million for that purpose.

Could we adjust our game plan for that?

I don't have a specific answer for you.

I can only tell you that we currently have a game plan for spending $2 million in the remaining months of this year.

SPEAKER_11

And why was it $2 million?

How did you come up with that number?

Because, frankly, I did think it was kind of low at the time.

SPEAKER_13

I think we thought that we were going to do a pilot project, begin some seed money, and see how that goes and determine whether to continue it or make adjustments moving forward in 25 and 26. This too is a new investment for us, and we need training wheels to get started.

SPEAKER_11

Okay.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, council members.

I'm just gonna say I support funding mental health for our students.

But I've got a number of concerns with this amendment.

If we had just changed the 10 million to 20 million in this amendment, I'd probably support it.

If we had had a separate amendment about community-based organizations intervening in youth violence, I'd likely support that.

Where I'm having trouble is...

We've not had a direct conversation setting good expectations with the community about the original $20 million that everyone thought could be spent today.

We heard in finance native communities from our subject matter from the mayor's office about if they could spend $20 million, they would, but I'm gonna ask that question to you more directly, Director Eater, in just a second.

They've produced a prudent plan for the $10 million We all know that to be true.

And I think Council Member Morales, I'm going to ask you at the end of my remarks and my questions, if you'd like to hold this amendment for full council, that's an outside of standard approach.

But I think that there are some questions that are good questions from Council Member Moore of how did we arrive at this figure?

This This is part of, and I'll just be candid colleagues, I can't help facilitate this conversation when amendments are held confidential until the agenda is published.

It's really that simple, because at that point, then I'm finding out at the same time the public is, and I can't be asking these probing questions.

But if, Director Eater, if you had a magic wand, and you could spend the $20 million this year Would you do that?

SPEAKER_13

I'm not clear that we would be able to do it.

I know that we are not advocating for that flexibility at this point because we have spent the last few months coming up with a plan for how to spend as much money as we thought was reasonable to get out the door in a responsible way and evaluate new programs.

That's the $10 million that's on the table today.

SPEAKER_31

And what I heard, I was using more of a hypothetical.

You answered me with a real answer.

I appreciate that.

I've heard that this money was slow to get out the door, but I've seen the exact opposite.

Nobody knew that this money was going to be available before the last week of November of last year.

And what we see is we've got $10 million to spend for half of a school year this year.

I expect to see $20 million spent for a full year next year.

Where my concerns are is if we make this change to the underlying legislation, then is it Did we promise last year that we were going to spend on mental health $20 million, and now we're spending $20 million on mental health plus interventions?

This is where I'm just having trouble with what feels like moving the goalposts for our community.

Time and time again.

And so that's where I'm having issues today.

Council Member Morales, it sounds like colleagues have some good questions that might change their mind between now and Monday.

I'm going to ask you if you'd be interested in holding this amendment until Monday.

I'm here trying to steward a good process moving forward that allows everyone to get their questions answered to make an informed decision.

This is a break from my standard practice.

I'm just noting that.

Because at this point, I'm going to be abstaining on this amendment.

With that, Council Member Morales, the floor is yours to, before we take a vote or leave that decision to you.

SPEAKER_05

Thank you.

I do want to respond to some of the comments that have been made.

First, I will say that my staff walked the hall last week with all of my amendments.

So before the agenda was published, I mentioned it at briefing on Monday, and I invited everyone to ask me if there were questions about these amendments.

So I just want to get that fact on the record.

I also spoke to the executive about the $10 million plan.

I understand that that process took some time to get that proposal in place and that it was very specifically about addressing the mental health questions.

And I expressed an interest in trying to figure out what else to do with that additional $10 million that could also support young people with the balance of what had been promised last year.

The intent of the amendment is to increase support for existing programs.

We already provide assistance through different departments for young people, whether it's gun violence prevention, which we support through the Community Safety Initiative at HSD.

We also invest and have invested through DEAL for restorative justice, for leadership programs and mentorship programs specifically for black girls and young women and other kinds of youth programming.

So this isn't a lot of new work.

It's work that we already do at the city.

And the point here is to try to expand the ability to provide access to those services because as we saw this morning, there are hundreds and hundreds of young people across the city who can't afford summer camp and can't afford after school programs and need places to go where they can be safe and get access to other support.

So this may not be very specifically mental health, but it is about providing safe spaces for young people to be able to access enrichment and services that can keep them out of trouble.

So, as I said, it's true that HSD has the CSI contracts, but we've heard MOUs are possible for collaboration, and that is part of the point of this amendment as well.

Deal is not an expert in mental health.

We all agree with that.

But they do understand the need for development programs for young people, for other enrichment programs for young people.

And they also understand that other city departments are offering some of that support through our community centers, through parks programs.

And so...

That's what this amendment is intended to do, is to support greater collaboration through our city departments that do support young people and to provide the resources that all of our departments need in order to provide access to services for our young people.

I think that this is totally in keeping with the goal of improving access to mental health and support for our young people.

Maybe it's not specifically what was talked about last year, but it still supports the environment and greater access to quality programming that young people need in order to keep themselves out of trouble.

And I will ask my colleagues to support the amendment.

Thank you, Chair.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Council Member Morales.

Confirming you'd like to take the vote today?

Yes, please.

Clerk, will you please call the roll on Amendment 3, Version 1 to Council Bill 120812.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Wu?

Yes.

Council Member Hollingsworth?

SPEAKER_25

Yes.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Kettle?

SPEAKER_25

No.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Moore?

No.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council President Nelson?

SPEAKER_15

No.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Rivera?

No.

Council Member Saka?

SPEAKER_31

Aye.

SPEAKER_39

And Chair Strauss?

SPEAKER_31

Abstain.

SPEAKER_39

Four in favor, four opposed, and one abstention.

SPEAKER_31

Fails.

The motion fails, okay.

The motion fails as it is tied, so Amendment 3, Version 1 to Council Bill 120812 does not hang.

And we will move on to the next amendment.

Council Member Morales, amendment four is yours as well.

Floor is yours.

SPEAKER_05

Thank you.

I move amendment four, which would provide increase in support for the care department.

SPEAKER_31

Second.

Thank you.

Amendment four, version two has been moved and seconded.

Over to you, Tom.

SPEAKER_29

Thank you, Chair Strauss.

So this amendment would eliminate position authority that's in the proposed mid-year bill.

Specifically, it would eliminate 19 of 21 proposed positions to the Human Services Department.

Those positions as proposed would include five regional coordinators and 14 councilor positions staffing the Unified Care Team.

Further, this amendment would express council's intent that the funding that had been originally planned to support Those 19 positions instead be repurposed to support on an ongoing basis the new positions added to the care department in the supplemental bill.

And as previously indicated, those positions do not have an ongoing identified, the care positions do not currently have an ongoing identified funding source in 25 and beyond.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Tom.

Council Member Morales, the floor is yours.

SPEAKER_05

Thank you.

So as has been said, this is the mid-year supplemental.

So in general, I think it is not the place to be adding a lot of new positions, particularly those that don't have a funding source on an ongoing basis.

That said, this amendment would provide the ongoing resources that are needed to fully support the care team expansion that the mayor is requesting.

We've heard a lot from our newly confirmed Chief Smith about this new model and the important part, the important role that it plays in our public safety system.

Streamlining the crisis response to better respond to people in crisis and really connect them to appropriate service providers will free up police officers and firefighters to respond to high priority calls.

Specifically, this amendment will not add the five coordinator positions and case manager positions, as Tom just said, but rather would put more resources into and directing those KCRAJ funds into expanding a model that is demonstrating great success in moving people into care and building out our dual dispatch system by allowing us to fund on an ongoing basis the 21 new staff positions for the care team.

And I am requesting my colleagues' support.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Council Member Morales.

Up next is Council Member Kettle, followed by Council Member Wu.

SPEAKER_25

Thank you, Chair Strauss.

As chair of the Public Safety Committee with responsibilities for the Care Department, I don't view this as a friendly amendment.

We're working through these processes, very complicated different areas as it relates to labor and so forth.

So...

That's point one.

Point two is the Unified Care Team.

I've done ride-alongs with Unified Care Team.

These are great civil servants who are working to do outreach to members in our communities in distress who are in crisis.

and they provide a great service to our community, to our city.

And so I disagree with the idea of eliminating positions of the unified care team, particularly as with the new district system, the unified care team is gaining expertise in each of our districts.

I did my right along with the district seven team, and I really appreciate their work.

And their work should be built on and not cut.

So with that, I am a no on this amendment.

Thank you, Councilmember Kettle.

SPEAKER_31

Councilmember Wu.

SPEAKER_18

Well, I have a question.

We just had a outlook on jobs, so this would essentially lay off 14 counselor positions and regional coordinator positions.

Is that correct?

SPEAKER_29

Thank you for the question, Councilmember Wu.

I understand that of the proposed positions, there are some number of the regional coordinators that have been hired under administrative authority.

So in anticipation of council approval to do so, I don't know exactly what would happen with those positions that have been added, but I don't believe the other positions have been filled in any way.

SPEAKER_18

So these positions are not filled?

SPEAKER_22

Or they've...

This is really...

Sorry, I'm just to help clarify.

It's a request to create new positions, not to eliminate existing positions.

SPEAKER_18

So if...

So...

Basically, this...

Okay, maybe you could explain.

So these positions are designated to be filled, but instead of filling them, Council Member Morales is proposing we move those positions to the care team instead?

To...

SPEAKER_29

GO AHEAD.

SO THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL FROM THE EXECUTIVE WOULD ADD 19 POSITIONS TO THE UNIFIED CARE TEAM.

SO THESE WOULD BE BRAND-NEW POSITIONS AS DIRECTOR NOBLE INDICATED.

OF THOSE 14 POSITIONS THAT THEY WISH COUNCIL'S APPROVAL TO ADD, THEY HAVE ACTUALLY FILLED SOME PORTION OF THE REGIONAL COORDINATORS.

I DON'T BELIEVE THE FULL FIVE, BUT SOME PORTION OF THOSE.

BUT ALL THE OTHER POSITIONS HAVE NOT BEEN FILLED PENDING APPROVAL.

the amendment proposal from Council Member Morales would use funding that has been identified for these positions in future years to support the new care positions that are also proposed in the mid-year bill, the 21 care program positions.

So it's essentially saying the money that was going to support those 19 new positions is instead being used to support EXPRESSES THE COUNCIL'S INTENT THAT WITH THIS ACTION, THAT MONEY THAT HAD BEEN IDENTIFIED TO FUND THE UCT POSITIONS INSTEAD BE USED TO SUPPORT THE CARE POSITIONS, BOTH OF WHICH WOULD BE NEWLY ADDED IN THE MID-YEAR PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL BILL.

SPEAKER_18

SO THIS WILL AFFECT ALSO 2025 GOING FORWARD?

SPEAKER_29

YES.

SO THE PROPOSED BUDGET IS UNDER DEVELOPMENT BY THE EXECUTIVE CURRENTLY.

SO THE ULTIMATE FUNDING DECISIONS FOR 2025 WILL BE PART OF THAT BILL.

Part of this proposed amendment would express council's intent that the funding that had been identified for the unified care team positions instead be used in the mayor's budget proposal to fund the care positions, though that that is ultimately up to the executive in the way they propose the budget.

SPEAKER_18

Got it, thank you.

So I have a quick comment.

I think we need to hire more caseworkers, more counselor positions.

Whether it's unified care team or care team, we already have these positions designated in the care team.

So I think if we're trying to stop sweeps, I think there's other ways of doing that and going up and looking at policy in the future.

But I think eliminating counselor positions is not conducive of the goal, that's the goal.

So I will not be voting for this amendment.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Council Member Wu.

Up next is Council Member Rivera.

SPEAKER_09

Thank you, Chair.

These positions for UCT come with funding from the money the city's recovering from KCRH, I understand.

Is that true?

Thank you for confirming that, Director Noble.

This was not an additive request from the mayor's office, given that.

My experience with the UCT team has been very positive.

They are responsive, provide solid on-the-ground services.

They have success connecting those who are unhoused and unwell with needed services, and they also provide, given it is a coordinated service, from various city departments team from various city departments.

They also provide trash mitigation and remove immediate hazards.

The outreach coordinators would form ongoing relationships and they're already doing that actually.

I did a ride along with UCT with those living in encampments well before and after encampment may be resolved so they can build trust and get people into shelter and They have a well-defined scope of work and include specialized SPD officers from the Alternative Response Team to assist in everyone's safety and well-being.

They work not only with the people who need services, but they also engage with the community, the neighborhood constituents, as well as businesses.

So I do see a benefit to this UCT team, and I will not be supporting the amendments because I do support the function of the UCT team.

And given that KCRH was designated as the entity to do the outreach and they're not doing that and we're taking those dollars back, it's prudent to have the UCT be that entity that's doing the outreach since they're already doing some of that.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Council Member Rivera.

Council Member Moore, did I skip over you on accident?

SPEAKER_11

No, you did not.

SPEAKER_31

Excellent.

Thanks.

There you go.

SPEAKER_11

Thank you, Chair.

Yeah, I want to echo the comments of my colleague, Council Member Rivera.

This money has been taken back from KCRHA because KCRHA was having difficulty with the people it was contracting with actually providing the outreach funding.

and prevention services that they were contracting for, and so we brought it back in-house.

And I can say, as Councilmember Kettle has noted, and I also share those comments, that this program is beginning to get to know each of our districts.

It is an opportunity to make this more district-wide and specific, which is something I believe needs to happen.

We need to be hyper-local.

in our approach.

We need a broad umbrella of regionalism, but we also need a hyperlocal approach, which the Unified Care Team does.

I take offense at them being constantly denigrated as simply sweepers.

They are not.

As Councilmember Kettle has noted, they are dedicated public servants.

I meet with them every week.

They are thoughtful.

They are methodical.

They are compassionate.

Sometimes they're a little too slow for my neighborhoods and districts taste, but they get the job done very well, very thoughtfully, very sensitively.

We need encampment removals because we need to get people into tiny house villages, which is the most common placement that the unified care team in District 5 winds up getting people into.

They get them into the Oaks, which is a very successful shelter in Shoreline, and many other, they've gotten them now into the new Chief Sealth housing that's opened up on Lake City.

This is not about whack-a-mole and moving people along.

These are thoughtful public servants who are doing their best to address the street homelessness that we see in all of our neighborhoods.

And as much as I'm supportive of care, care is yet to prove itself.

And so I'm not going to take money from what I consider to be a gem of of working programs and put it into a totally unknown program on the pretext that this is about budget fiscal responsibility.

And also note that the HealthONE program is also working exceedingly well, as well as the 99, and they need a lot more money.

And gee, we haven't thought about giving them money either.

I will be voting strongly against this bill.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Council Member Moore.

SPEAKER_15

I echo those sentiments.

We're talking about getting people into housing.

That is what UTC's mission is.

And let me remind people that leaving people on the street in encampments is leaving them vulnerable to people that are coming in and selling drugs and forcing people into or deeper into addiction.

And so this whole stop the sweeps rhetoric over and over again is, I think, missing a core principle point that we have got to prevent the worsening of our fentanyl epidemic instead of allowing it to continue basically status quo as it is.

And so I will be voting no against this as well.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Any other comments, questions, concerns?

Council Member Morales, last word.

Thank you.

Will the clerk please call the roll on...

make sure I have the right amendment in front of me on Amendment 4, Version 2 to Council Bill 120812.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Wu?

No.

Council Member Hollingsworth?

SPEAKER_31

No.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Kettle?

SPEAKER_38

No.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Moore?

No.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council President Nelson?

SPEAKER_15

No.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Rivera?

No.

Council Member Saca?

SPEAKER_15

No.

SPEAKER_39

Can Chair Strauss?

SPEAKER_31

No.

SPEAKER_39

One in favor, eight opposed.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

The motion does, Amendment 4, Version 2 does not carry.

We will move on to the next item, which is Amendment 5, Version 2. Council Member Morales, this is also your amendment.

The floor is yours.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_05

I move Amendment 5, which is to support recruitment of women at SPD.

SPEAKER_31

Second.

It is.

Amendment 5 has been moved and seconded.

Tom, floor is yours.

SPEAKER_29

Thank you, Chair.

So this amendment would impose a $400,000 proviso on $800,000 that's being added in the proposed mid-year supplemental for police officer recruiting.

The proviso would require that the $400,000 may not be spent until further authorized by ordinance.

SPEAKER_31

Wonderful.

And I am just checking.

I do see that Amendments 5, Version 2, and Amendment 7 are mutually exclusive.

But I believe Amendment 7, is this a walk-on?

Is that correct?

Yes.

SPEAKER_11

Yes, thank you, Chair.

I do have a walk-on.

Is this the appropriate time?

Nope.

SPEAKER_31

Let me read it.

So before we consider these amendments, sorry, I was going off of my mental script, not off of the actual script that I should be reading off of.

So I'm going to take a step back.

to talk about Amendments 5, Version 2, and Amendment 7. So Amendments 5, Version 2, and 7 are mutually exclusive, where only one of the two can be adopted.

So before we consider these amendments, I will ask central staff to set the stage to describe both proposed amendments.

And so I know one has been moved and seconded, so I'm going to pull that back, and we're going to...

Nope, I'm not going to...

We're fine right now, so Councilmember Morales has already moved this, and now...

It has been moved and seconded to amend the bill as presented.

Council Member Morales, you are now recognized.

SPEAKER_39

Central staff will just go through Amendments 5 and 7 together just so that we can set that stage, and then Council Member Morales can then address her Amendment 5, and then we can address Amendment 7, and then we can vote on Amendment 5 and then proceed.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you for keeping us on track.

Amelia.

SPEAKER_29

Great, so shall I re-describe the prior five and then go to the walk on seven?

Yes, please.

Okay, will do.

So council member Morales' amendment five would impose a proviso on $400,000 of $800,000 that's added in the mid-year bill for police recruitment.

That proviso would essentially hold those funds until authorized for appropriation in a future ordinance.

THE WALK-ON AMENDMENT COUNCILMEMBER MOORE'S AMENDMENT 7 WOULD IMPOSE A PROVISO ON $400,000 ON THE PROVISO $400,000 PROVISO ON THE $800,000 ADDED IN THE MID-YEAR BILL FOR RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION AND THEN WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE $400,000 MAY ONLY BE SPENT FOR to expand the recruitment of women officers to achieve the 30-30 goal for a recruitment class that includes 30% of women in the SPD and may be spent for no other purpose.

Further, it imposes a council request that the SPD provide a status update on the recruitment plan by October 7th of this year to the Selected Budget Committee.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Tom.

Now, Amelia, double-checking, I'm passing it over to Councilmember Morales to speak to her amendment, and then we'll pass it to Councilmember Moore.

Is that correct?

Great.

Councilmember Morales, the floor is yours.

Okay.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_05

Thank you.

Thanks for the explanation, Tom.

So earlier this year, council received initial recommendations on steps that the police department should take to address gender discrimination, including better opportunities for promotion and better family leave policies.

One of the issues is that the department does not have enough women in it.

I do appreciate that the department engaged with Dr. James to conduct interviews with women who are serving, but the SPD's 30 by 30 focus group report that we all received a copy of only had vague recommendations.

They included awareness of the situation, childcare, and mentorship for women.

So given that there are resource guides available with actionable recommendations in a report called What Works, the 30 by 30 initiative, which does have a call to action for police departments to increase women officers by 30 percent by 2030. I'm interested in supporting specific steps that the department can take.

And so specifically, I'm asking SPD to identify the projected cost to develop policies, trainings, and practices that improve SPD's results regarding retention of women and improved culture, eliminating barriers for promotion, guidance for developing family-friendly enforcement policies, and assessment of hiring practices, recruitment, and retention.

So council has approved $2.6 million over the last few years for recruitment efforts.

This amendment would require future funding to focus on recruitment of women and would also require monitoring the implementation of recommendations related to the 30 by 30 report.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Council Member Rouse.

Council Member Moore, would you like to speak to your amendment?

SPEAKER_11

Oh, thank you very much, Chair.

So I, too, support making sure that we realize the goals set forth in 30 by 30. And I think mentioned...

February, I think it was, or March, I sent a letter to then Chief Diaz asking for a lot of the things that Councilmember Morales has mentioned here today.

I am still waiting for my response from now Chief Rahr.

So I do think I support the need to have a specific plan put forth.

I know Councilmember Saka and I had also engaged in conversations around this issue and we're moving forward along those lines.

But I guess my position is that I don't, the reason I put forth my amendment as an alternative is because I want to get that money out there now.

I want that money to be working currently to focus their recruitment efforts on women officers and, again, to have them report back to us about what they're doing.

So I think my preference at this point is to be proactive with the money.

We're struggling to get recruitment.

across the board.

I think we're struggling to get recruitment, identified recruitment areas for women officers, so let's make them do that, give them the money to do it, and then we can continue with the ongoing discussion of getting a more solid performance plan on how they are going to implement a very broad array of goals that need to be created in order to, once we get them recruited, to retain them.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

And I see we've got a number of questions from council colleagues.

Council colleagues, I'm going to ask it.

I'm going to take the floor for just a minute.

And I'm going to ask Director Eater, if you can provide us the baseline of where we're coming from in the original transmitted legislation.

And then Director Noble, if you could.

From there, walk us through, we have two paths forward.

So we have the original transmitted bill that Director Eder will speak to, and then Director Noble, can you provide us a summary of, we have two paths to take, what do each do?

SPEAKER_13

Happy to play my part here.

We transmitted the mid-year supplemental that would, in our submittal, transmittal, we would I have $800,000 to continue the surge of advertising and recruitment outreach efforts that we've been doing successfully for the beginning of the year.

This would allow us to continue to reach out to people, to spread the good news that being a police officer pays a good deal more than it did a mere six months ago.

about 24% compounded increase in wages.

That alone is enough to attract people, but spreading the word and letting people know that we have an excellent place to work, we are looking for new people to hire to do this good work, and we pay well.

In response to having this new contract surged the outreach, We will have spent the funds that were originally provided in the adopted budget.

We will not have resources to continue anything like that level of outreach if we decrease the $800,000.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

As a director, just so I can confirm, you had money in this year's budget for recruitment.

You've spent that.

You're requesting $800,000 to continue recruitment for the rest of the year.

SPEAKER_13

That's correct.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

And then Director Noble, if you could walk us down the two scenarios that we have before us.

SPEAKER_22

Yeah, would be my pleasure.

So both focus on half of $400,000 of requested funding and both focus on the $30,000.

30 by 30 program, which I think someone said this, but literally means that 30% of the recruit class by 2030 will be women.

So I would describe that Councilmember Morales' proposal is somewhat more restrictive in that it holds back the money until you would authorize it by a future ordinance.

But it does specify quite clearly what it is you would expect before you'd so authorize.

In particular, a description of how, an explanation of how both the 400,000 that you're not restricting and the 400,000 that you are, have been in the case of the unrestricted and would be in the case of the restricted, spent so as to target women.

It doesn't impose a requirement that any specific share of it be targeted towards women, but rather that they explain how in fact they are using at least some of those dollars in that space.

It further requests additional information about the initial steps that the department is taking to achieve the 30 by 30 goals.

I know this somewhat intimately because I logged into the 30 by 30 website.

There is a 30by30.org.

It's a nationwide movement.

And they specifically call out some initial steps that they recommend that departments NOT NECESSARILY OUR DEPARTMENT, BUT DEPARTMENTS GENERICALLY PURSUE.

AND COUNCILMAN MORALES' AMENDMENT ASKED THE DEPARTMENT, CITING THAT AS ESSENTIALLY AS A SOURCE OF IDEAS, IF YOU WILL, TO COME BACK WITH A SPECIFIC PLAN ABOUT HOW IT how the department plans to take those initial steps, and how it intends to fund those initial steps.

And it does note that if you didn't find any other way to fund them, there is $400,000 that has been held back.

THE HOLDING BACK OF THE MONEY IS, IN MY VIEW, AND COUNCILMAN RALPH WOULD HAVE TO ECHO, DESIGNED TO MOTIVATE THE DEPARTMENT TO DO THOSE THINGS AND TO DO THEM QUICKLY AND SPECIFICALLY.

SO THE RECOMMENDATION, THE REQUEST IS THAT INFORMATION BE PROVIDED BY SEPTEMBER 24TH, WHICH IS NOT COINCIDENTALLY WHEN THE BUDGET IS DUE, SO THAT YOU WOULD THEN HAVE A FULL INFORMATION ABOUT THE OVERALL BUDGET, AS WELL AS INCLUDING HOW 30 BY 30 WOULD BE INITIALLY IMPLEMENTED AND HOW THAT IMPLEMENTATION WOULD BE FUNDED.

Council Member Moore's amendment, again, as she has spoken, she shares the same interest in 30 by 30 and does want this advertising targeted, at least in part, to improve the recruitment of women.

So, but again, as she has stated, goal to advance this recruiting effort, ASAP, if you will.

And so in that context, imposing a restriction somewhat less binding in the media terms on the executive, so have them spend roughly half this money, or precisely half this money targeting women.

I would note, just to state the obvious and just kind of a little bit of real talk, they're not going to have two separate advertising campaigns, one specifically targeting women and one specifically targeting men, but I do think that there's opportunities for them to explain and to provide additional information about how the resources are being targeted and very specifically to what degree and to what extent they are being targeted in audiences or towards audiences that would include women who might be interested.

And I think that is the intent.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you both Director Eder and Noble for setting that stage.

I'm going to repeat back some things just to kind of give us a baseline because I think, colleagues, this might be the first time that we're having amendments before us that we have to choose one or the other.

And so what we have is in Amendment 5, we have a version that restricts half the funding until we receive a report at that time that funding can be used as described.

Or in option seven, we have half of that funding directed to be used in a very certain way and can be used today.

Is that a correct understanding of where we're at today?

Correct.

And Director Eater, do you have something to share?

SPEAKER_13

Yeah, I wanted to underscore the encapsulation that you just gave that is correct.

The executive favors Amendment 7. Both Amendments 5 and 7, as Central Staff Director Noble just described, are consistent with the approach that we plan to use.

Given that there are four months or so left of the campaign, it would be less disruptive for us to know at the front end that we have $800,000 and to plan how to spend it accordingly.

We're very happy to come back with a report that describes how we are highlighting and focusing the campaign effort to help meet the 30 by 30 objectives.

SPEAKER_31

And Director Noble, can I ask just an operational question?

If Amendment 5 were to pass and we were to release that proviso, that has to come back to committee and then we have to pass it or has to happen some point during budget?

SPEAKER_22

IT HAS TO BE BY AN ORDINANCE.

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO ACTUALLY HAPPEN BY A COMMITTEE.

YOU COULD REFER AN ORDINANCE TO FULL COUNCIL, JUST, YOU KNOW.

SURE.

SO WE WOULD EXPECT THAT THE...

I WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT THE EXECUTIVE WOULD MOVE QUICKLY TO FULFILL THE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE LAID OUT AND THE EXPECTATIONS THAT ARE LAID OUT IN COUNCIL MEMBER RALPH'S AMENDMENT.

potentially as early as September, bring forward legislation to release the proviso.

And I, again, I cannot speak for you as a collective, but given the generalized interest in moving quickly, I assume that the council would make an effort to move such piece of legislation quickly as well.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Colleagues, I'm going to turn it over to you.

Thank you for letting me go first.

I see Council Member Kettle, Council Member Saher, Council President Nelson, and then Vice Chair Rivera.

SPEAKER_25

Thank you, Chair Strauss.

Thank you very much.

Up front, as chair of the Public Safety Committee, I do not view Amendment 5 as a friendly amendment.

And I would argue it's not really needed, the provisal specifically, because let me just step through a few things.

One is I, the committee, we've already stated our position related to the 30 by 30 pledge, the initiative, that we're 110% behind it.

regarding recruit and retention.

This council has pushed forward with the Spog bill, which is key to this success that we've had because we are having a big uptick in terms of applications.

The sad part of that is it takes like a year plus to actually get a police officer on the street.

But it's been very successful.

We also had our recruitment bill that we did through the Governance, Accountability, and Economic Development Committee with Chair Nelson.

And that's been great, too, in terms of cleaning up the lines, if you will, regarding our recruitment process, getting some positions done.

for within SPD but then also with the Public Safety Community Service Commission as well very positive and I would note too that and with all the visits to precincts the engagement with the police that this council has fundamentally changed its relationship with SPD and Public Safety generally creating a positive environment for recruitment and retention So that is a point that should be understood as well.

But back to the Public Safety Committee piece of this is that we've had the initial briefing with SBD.

We've had updates.

I've had conversations with Trieff Rohrer on 30 by 30. And I would just say that This amendment's not needed, because I'm more than happy to, and I will continue to have regular updates on by 3030, and I've already built out my schedule, but I have time on September 24th, which will be our last Public Safety Committee meeting ahead of budget, to ask SBD to come and speak to the questions here related, Number one, particularly the status update, and then also speak to, as we move forward in terms of creating the data sets needed to measure where we are.

So basically, I'm suggesting that I would take this on as committee chair for the Public Safety Committee, and I'm happy to have that as the lead-off item.

I also have other items.

POINTS FOR SEPTEMBER 24th, BUT WE CAN DO THIS NO PROBLEM.

BECAUSE IT IS VERY IMPORTANT.

AND TWO, I SAID THIS IS, I DON'T CONSIDER THIS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT BECAUSE I THINK OF THE ISSUES RELATED TO THE PROVISO, BUT I DO APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER MORALES HIGHLIGHTING HOW IMPORTANT THIS IS AND HOW WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD ON IT.

AND SO FROM THAT POINT OF VIEW, I WANT TO THANK HER FOR HIGHLIGHTING THIS.

BUT REST ASSURED, THE COMMITTEE AND THE COUNCIL ARE DEFINITELY PUSHING ON THIS.

And so while I agree with the points here, I disagree with having an amendment to do the proviso when we can just do this through a committee.

And I understand Amendment 7. In a lot of ways, I don't think it's needed in the sense that everything I see regarding recruitment, everything I see is already including women in those recruitment efforts.

I haven't seen anything but women in recruitment efforts.

So I suspect that...

The 400 is already, you know, that kind of balance is already in.

And given Mr. Eater's comment that I will support Amendment 7, even though I think it's already being accomplished, to be honest, based on my view of the initiatives undergoing right now.

So thank you, Chair Strauss.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Councilmember Kettle.

Colleagues, I have been reminded that we have 14 minutes left in this room until we have to leave this room.

And so, yes, that's why I asked for fewer questions during the forecast presentation.

Could add a little bit more time here to do our business.

We are so close.

So we have a couple options.

We can either move quickly in 14 minutes to take votes, ask questions.

If you have long statements to make, I will ask you to stop.

and vote today, or we can come back next Thursday and have another meeting, which I strongly discourage.

So I'm seeing strong encouragement for finishing in 13 minutes.

Council Member Saka, Nelson Rivera, you have your hands raised.

You do have the opportunity to ask questions and make statements.

Please do so very quickly.

SPEAKER_19

Council Member Saka.

So thank you, Mr. Chair.

Can I ask, what is this money for police officer recruiting?

What kind of programs and items is it intended to fund exactly?

Is this consulting?

Is this marketing?

Advertising?

All of the above?

Where is that money?

How is it going to be spent?

That's vague.

Recruitment is vague.

So just a little more clarity on that.

SPEAKER_13

My understanding is not, I can't add a lot of precision, but I can give you a flavor.

It's the development of advertising materials, videos, website content, purchase advertising, and the promotion of those materials, either in print or online.

SPEAKER_19

So, thank you.

That's what I suspected.

And I, so I want to thank both council member Morales and Moore for bringing these amendments forward.

I don't, I don't like that they are mutually exclusive.

And now we have to, we're in a position where we have to choose one or the other, but given, given where we're at, um, I am, I do, so I'm going to support both of them.

If the first one doesn't, if Council Member Morales' amendment doesn't pass, I hope we vote that one on that one first because that one was presented ahead of time.

And if that doesn't pass, I'll be supporting Councilmember Moore's walk-on today.

But as between the two, I do think Councilmember Morales' amendment is the stronger, better amendment.

It has more teeth.

This is more targeted in terms of getting to a very specific problem.

And yes, and I share these concerns that I think all of us have in terms of being concerned and outraged at some of the reports of culture within SPD and some of the impact on women.

And having met directly with some folks within SPD on an official basis, and then also directly with some impacted women, I'll say that I feel good about the path forward, but in the absence of stronger council action and direction and guidance and collaboration, and that's what I see both of these amendments as, by the way.

And so, you know, I think we need to better collaborate.

And like I said, I think the first one would allow, Councilmember Morales' amendment would allow us to do that better.

So this is a challenge ultimately of recruitment, hiring, developing talent, and also retention.

And some of the challenges related to culture, are going to definitely impact the development and retention of great officers.

We can't just be in the business of getting more cops on the force.

We need to do the work to retain them.

And so that's why I think this speaks directly to that.

Councilmember Morales' amendment, it calls for specific steps the SPD can do to better address some of these challenges.

I've long maintained, colleagues, as you know, that we're not going to market our way out of this challenge.

And so it's a necessary component of the broader challenges we're facing with recruitment, hiring, and retention.

But we need to continue the investments, and I think Councilmember Morales' amendment would allow us to do exactly that.

But we're not going to market our way out of this as well.

And we need to do other things, including by better empowering SPD to be successful.

And I think this does exactly that.

And also...

Councilmember?

Well...

Can I finish?

Yes, sir.

Yep, yep.

Because this issue is really important.

It is.

And I know Chair Kettle's comments as well.

I'm mindful of those.

You're right.

You mentioned this council has fundamentally changed its relationship with SPD, and I couldn't agree more.

And we've done that through legislation.

check any number of things that we've worked on or have in the pipe.

We've done that through our actions, visiting our officers, and we'll continue to do that.

And there's also paid media, which is basically what this is, I'm hearing, and there's earned media.

And we're earning media, and we've got to keep doing it, but we're earning media all the time and earning trust, and we've got to keep doing it.

And I think this...

This doesn't take away from anything.

And in fact, it just enables us to have a more holistic approach to the broader challenges because it's not just recruiting higher.

Again, it's development and retention.

And a central part of that is culture.

So for those reasons, I'm going to support both of them.

But I do think that Council Member Morales is a better amendment.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

With eight minutes remaining, Council Member Rivera, I see you're next.

Was Council President, you left and came back?

Do you want to go next?

Yeah.

SPEAKER_15

I just want to remind people that, if that's okay, in May, Council unanimously passed this recruitment and retention or recruitment and hiring processes ordinance, and one of the amendments that was brought forward by Council Member Morales, and I believe it was co-sponsored by you, Council Member Saka, and then Council Member Moore added on to it.

There is a reporting requirement, and there's a whole section that asks for reporting on all things 30 by 30, and I have A copy of that here.

So one of the things I'm saying is that that report was due on July 15th.

It's a little bit late because it's the first time that they are compiling all this information about, okay, so how are we doing on recruitment?

And specifically, how are we doing on the 30-30 goals?

So I'm just throwing it out there that we will have information about how things are going before we start to proviso or add to or whatever existing pots of money.

Just throwing that out there.

Just...

I think it's always good to have a baseline of what has been done before we identify if there is a problem or if we need to change course.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Council Member Rivera.

SPEAKER_09

Thank you, Chair.

In the interest of time, I just want to echo my support of the 30 by 30 initiative.

We need more women in the force, and I will continue to support efforts to make sure that we are robustly trying to recruit women into the force.

So I'll just leave it there.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Council Member Kettle.

SPEAKER_25

Thank you, Chair Strauss.

I say again, this is not a friendly amendment in terms of the Public Safety Committee.

And I recognize the points made by my vice chair.

But I would just point out two things again.

One is, well, three things.

One, thank you, Council President, for your point related to our recruitment bill passed earlier this year and the reporting requirements to that.

Two, as I said, this can be done through committee.

Three, we'll have it on our September 24th schedule.

Four, the proviso would require that $400,000 may not be spent until authorized by our future ordinance.

When is that?

That could be, what, January?

And whose committee?

Does it go through Public Safety Committee, Chair Strauss, or public budget?

SPEAKER_31

As I kind of ran through this, it could come to full council at any time, or it would come to budget committee.

The pathway is not clear.

SPEAKER_25

Well, the pathway in terms of topic areas through the Public Safety Committee, and as I said, September 24th, we will have this on our agenda tomorrow.

bolstering what the council president said in terms of reporting requirements of the earlier requirement recruitment bill.

And I don't think it's good governance to be holding up 400,000, you know, related needing another ordinance to be done to make it happen.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, Council Member Kittle.

Council Member Morales and then Council Member Moore, last words.

And then I will ask our clerk to walk us through our next steps.

SPEAKER_05

Yeah, thank you, Chair.

I don't have a lot to add.

I think it's important that we don't just assume that the department is doing the right thing, but that we actually provide the oversight that this amendment would allow, and I encourage support of the amendment.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Council Member Moore.

SPEAKER_11

Thank you.

I have no further comments.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Clerk, if you could walk us through the next steps.

SPEAKER_39

We currently have a pending motion on Amendment 5, Version 2, so the council members will vote on that amendment.

And if it prevails, then we will proceed with Amendment 6. If it does not prevail, then we'll move on to Amendment 7.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

So just to be clear, if Amendment 5 passes, we do not take 7. If Amendment 5 fails, we take 7. Will the clerk please call the roll on Amendment 5 to Council Bill 120812?

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Wu.

No.

Council Member Hollingsworth.

SPEAKER_41

No.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Kettle.

SPEAKER_41

No.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Moore.

No.

Council Member Morales.

Yes.

Council President Nelson.

SPEAKER_15

No.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Rivera.

No.

Council Member Saka.

SPEAKER_31

Aye.

SPEAKER_39

And Chair Strauss.

SPEAKER_31

No.

The motion does not pass.

Amendment 5, version 2 does not hang to Council Bill 120812. Will the clerk please call the roll on Amendment 7, version 1 to Council Bill 120812?

SPEAKER_39

I'll ask Chair Moore to move it first.

SPEAKER_31

That's correct.

Yes, of course.

The floor is yours to move your amendment.

SPEAKER_99

Oh, okay.

SPEAKER_11

Thank you.

Thank you.

I move Amendment 7 back in.

Second.

SPEAKER_31

It has been moved and seconded to move to attach Amendment 7 to Council Bill 120812. Any final, we've already done final comments.

Clerk, will you please call the roll on it?

Yes.

SPEAKER_05

Excuse me.

Given the similar interest Council Member Moore and I have, I would be asked to co-sponsor this amendment.

Yes, absolutely.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Sorry, I got a little excited.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Wu.

Yes.

Council Member Hollingsworth.

SPEAKER_25

Yes.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Kittle.

SPEAKER_25

Aye.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Moore.

Aye.

Council Member Morales.

Yes.

Council President Nelson.

Aye.

Council Member Rivera.

Aye.

Council Member Saka.

SPEAKER_31

Aye.

SPEAKER_39

Enter a stress.

SPEAKER_31

Yes.

SPEAKER_39

Nine in favor, none opposed.

SPEAKER_31

The motion passes unanimously.

Amendment 7 sponsored by Councilmember Moore and Morales hangs and is attached to Council Bill 120812. We have one final amendment.

Councilmember Nelson, the floor is yours.

SPEAKER_15

Doesn't it get a nice central staff introduction?

SPEAKER_31

You have to move the amendment.

SPEAKER_15

Okay, I'm sorry.

I move my amendment six.

Thank you.

Second.

SPEAKER_31

Amendment six has been moved and seconded.

Over to you, Tom, and then back to you, Council President.

SPEAKER_29

Thank you, Chair.

So this amendment would request that SPD report on the recruitment and retention program added in the 24 adopted budget.

The requested information would include data on spending and performance metrics and qualitative information on various elements of the program.

Some of the specifics include use of hiring incentives, technology initiatives that are used to expedite recruitment and hiring, advertising and marketing services, and the use of outside background services.

The report back would be due September 24th of this year.

Thank you.

Council President.

SPEAKER_15

Thank you very much.

So there's no money proviso or anything involved here, of course.

I just want to know how they're spending the $1.5 million of advertising money that they have in the 2024 budget right now and what they will do or have been doing.

with the proposed additional $800,000 for advertising and marketing.

So very specific to that item here.

I also want to know more about how SPD is using technology initiatives to expedite the recruitment and hiring process, such as automatic case management, and also I'd never heard of, well, I don't know anything about the backgrounding services, so I just wanted to know about that.

And this is simply important to me because this is a budget item that that back in the day before we had a lot of attention on recruitment, this was considered a fairly large item in the 2023-2024 budget.

And so I just want to know mostly, how's it going?

SPEAKER_31

That's it.

Wonderful.

Thank you.

Colleagues, any other questions, comments, concerns?

Seeing as we are at 1.30 and I think we can be done in about two minutes.

Seeing none, will the clerk please call the roll on Amendment 6 to Council Bill 120812.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Wu?

Yes.

Council Member Hollingsworth?

SPEAKER_37

Yes.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Kettle?

Aye.

Council Member Moore?

Aye.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council President Nelson?

Aye.

Council Member Rivera.

Aye.

Council Member Sanka.

Aye.

And Chair Strauss.

SPEAKER_31

Yes.

SPEAKER_39

Nine in favor, nine opposed.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you.

Amendment 6 to Council Bill 120812 passes and hangs on the bill.

Colleagues, we have completed all of our amendments on this package.

Any final comments?

I'm hoping the answer is no.

Thank you.

I'm going to ask the clerk to call the roll on Council Bill 120812 as amended.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Wu.

Yes.

Council Member Hollingsworth.

SPEAKER_31

Yes.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Kettle.

SPEAKER_31

Aye.

SPEAKER_39

Council Member Moore.

Aye.

Council Member Morales.

Yes.

Council President Nelson.

Aye.

Council Member Rivera.

Aye.

Council Member Saka.

SPEAKER_31

Aye.

SPEAKER_39

And Tara Strauss.

SPEAKER_31

Yes.

SPEAKER_39

Nine in favor, none opposed.

SPEAKER_31

Thank you, colleagues.

Thank you for getting through this process.

We have one final item on the agenda today.

Council President, I'm going to request that we move this budget, the next steps in budget to council briefing, if that's all right.

Sure.

Sounds great.

That concludes our August 7th, 2024. Select Budget Committee.

I want to say also a point of personal privilege is my very good friend Ted's birthday.

Happy birthday, Ted.

It's Kate's last day.

If we could all do jazz hands for Kate.

Thank you.

Our next meeting is the Finance, Native Communities, and Tribal Governments Committee meeting, which will be held on September 4th.

There's no further business before the Select Budget Committee.

We will adjourn.

Hearing no further business, we are adjourned.

Thank you, colleagues.

SPEAKER_99

you