>>> COMING BACK FROM RECESS.
THE BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING
FOR NOVEMBER 13th, 2023. WE ARE
COMING BACK FROM RECESS. THE
TIME IS 2:02. WILL YOU PLEASE
CALL ROLL.
[ROLL CALL ]
.
>>> NINE PRESENT.
>> EXCELLENT. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, MADAM CLERK. WE WERE IN
THE MIDDLE OF OUR PRESENTATION
TODAY FROM CENTRAL STAFF. WE
COMPLETED THE REVIEW OF ALL OF
THE ITEMS THAT ARE LEGISLATION
OR COUNCIL LEGISLATION THAT
WILL BE PART OF THE 2024 BUDGET
PACKAGE UP FOR CONSIDERATION
TOMORROW. WE COMPLETED THE
SUMMARY OF ALL OF THE ITEMS
LISTED IN GROUP A. FOR CONSENT
PACKAGE CONSIDERATION TOMORROW
AND WE ARE MOVING ON TO ITEMS
OF GROUP B. THEY ARE STAND
ALONE ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION.
THE FACT THEY ARE IN GROUP B.
DOES NOT SIGNAL THE CHAIR'S
INTEREST IN SUPPORT OR NOT
SUPPORT OF ANY OF THESE ITEMS
THEY ARE SIMPLY LISTED THERE
FOR THE PURPOSE OF
DELIBERATIONS AND INDIVIDUAL
VOTE. I AM GOING TO TURN IT
OVER TO CENTRAL STAFF AND HAVE
A CHANCE TO ASK QUESTIONS AGAIN
HOPING FOLKS CAN KEEP THEIR
COMMENTS TO CLARIFYING
QUESTIONS SO WE ARE WELL VERSED
ON EACH OF THE AMENDMENT ITEMS
BEFORE WE GO INTO THE VOTING
PROCESS TOMORROW. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, CENTRAL STAFF?
>>> SORRY, I COULD NOT FIND THE
MUTE BUTTON. THIS IS SPONSORED
BY PEDERSEN AND LEWIS. THIS
WILL ADD TO THE GENERAL FUND OF
THE OFFICE OF CITY AUDITOR TO
INCREASE AUDITING CAPACITY.
ADDING $760,000 OF GENERAL FUND
TO THE TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT TO
IMPLEMENT THE INTERNET FOR ALL
SEATTLE ACTION PLAN AND
$250,000 FOR GENERAL
NEIGHBORHOODS AND $50,000
GENERAL FUND TO THE HUMAN
SERVICES FOR COMMUNITY SAFETY
INITIATIVES AND ANOTHER
$250,000 OF GENERAL FUND IN HSD
TO SUPPORT FOOD BANKS. THIS IS
BALANCED BY A REDUCTION FOR THE
PROPOSED CITY ALLOCATIONS FOR
THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AND THE
SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF
TECHNOLOGY. ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT
THIS ITEM?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBERS, AGAIN, ANY
CLARIFYING QUESTIONS ON THIS
ITEM? I DO HAVE A HANDFUL OF
QUESTIONS. I REALLY WANT TO ASK
ABOUT THE IMPACT ON THIS, COULD
YOU TALK A LITTLE MORE ABOUT
WHAT IMPACT THESE REDUCTIONS
FROM THE EXISTING LINE OF
REVENUE MEANS FOR THOSE CITY
DEPARTMENTS CLEARLY FOR WHAT
GETS FUNDING.
>> SURE. I CAN DO AN INITIAL
DESCRIPTION AND ASK MY
COLLEAGUE TO ADD IN IF THERE
ARE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
>> IT COMES FROM ALL OF THE
CITY FUNDS AND ALL OF THE
DEPARTMENTS. TO FREE OF GENERAL
FUNDS FOR THE EXPENDITURES IT
REQUIRES TAKING A HIGHER
DEDUCTION TO FREE UP THAT
AMOUNT OF GENERAL FUND. THERE
IS MORE DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF
THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS FROM THIS
DESCRIPTION IN THE COUNCIL
BUDGET ACTION THAT INCLUDES A
NUMBER OF DIFFERENT WAYS TO
DESCRIBE IT. WE DON'T KNOW HOW
THE EXECUTIVE WILL IMPLEMENT
THE REDUCTIONS BECAUSE IT COULD
IMPACT STAFFING THAT SUPPORTS
CERTAIN SERVICES THAT THEY
PROVIDE. IT COULD RESULT IN,
YOU KNOW, SERVICE HOUR
REDUCTIONS. AS WE KNOW IN THE
COUNCIL ACTION AND THE CENTRAL
STAFF ISSUE ID MENU THAT
DISCUSSES THEM MORE GENERALLY.
WE DON'T HAVE INFORMATION TO
EITHER CONFIRM OR DENY THE
POTENTIAL IMPACTS THAT ARE
DESCRIBED BY THE EXECUTIVE. SO,
WHAT WE DID IN THE BUDGET
ACTION WAS DESCRIBE WHAT THE
IMPACTS COULD BE BASED ON THE
INFORMATION AVAILABLE TODAY
FROM THE EXECUTIVE AND ALSO
NOTED THAT THE SPONSOR BELIEVES
THESE COSTS CAN BE ABSORBED
WITHOUT THAT SIGNIFICANT OF AN
IMPACT. WE OFFERED BOTH FOR
YOUR CONSIDERATION. I WILL NOTE
FOR FAS, ACCORDING TO THE
DEPARTMENT, A $2.08 MILLION
OVERALL REDUCTION COULD RESULT
IN AS MANY AS REDUCING 18 FULL
TIME POSITIONS, IT COULD ALSO
INCREASE OVERALL COSTS TO THE
CITY IF THE EXECUTIVE CHOOSES
TO DECENTRALIZE CORE FUNCTIONS
AND SHIFT IT TO DEPARTMENTS,
AND THEN THERE IS A LIST OF
POTENTIAL AREAS WHERE THEY
MIGHT TAKE THOSE REDUCTIONS.
AGAIN, WE CAN'T VERIFY HOW THEY
WILL DO THAT. AND IN THE IT
DEPARTMENT ACCORDING TO THE
EXECUTIVE $1.8 MILLION IF JUST
TAKEN FROM LABOR. COULD RESULT
IN REDUCTION OF 11FTEs AND
COUNCIL BUDGET IT TALKS ABOUT
THE OTHER PLACES WHERE
REDUCTIONS COULD BE MADE
BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW OVERALL
EXACTLY HOW IT WILL BE
IMPLEMENTED. WE DON'T KNOW IF
THEY TAKE REDUCTIONS FROM WHERE
THERE IS ONE-TIMESAVINGS OR
ONGOING SAVINGS THAT MAKES IT
CHALLENGING TO UNDERSTAND THE
OVERALL IMPACT OF THE BUDGET
ACTION IN TOTAL BECAUSE IF THEY
LOOK FOR AREAS TO REDUCE
SPENDING ON CENTRAL SERVICES
THAT WERE ONGOING REDUCTIONS IT
COULD SUPPORT THE ONGOING
SPENDING THAT IS PROPOSED IN
THIS COUNCIL BUDGET ACTION IF
THEY USE ONE-TIME REDUCTIONS.
LET'S SAY IF THERE IS REDUCE IN
GAS NEXT YEAR BUT IT WOULD NOT
BE AN ONGOING SOURCE OF FUNDS.
A LOT WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE
OVERALL IMPACTS OF THIS
REDUCTION.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN IS
THERE ANY ANYTHING YOU CAN ADD
TO THE COST OF IT BEING
ABSORBED?
>> THANK YOU CHAIR MOSQUEDA.
FIRST I WANT TO THANK
CO-SPONSORED LEWIS AND MORALES.
EVERYONE IS JUST TRYING TO DO
THEIR JOBS HERE. IT IS NATURAL
TO SAY PRESENTING WORSE CASE
SCENARIOS IT IS NOT A VERY
TRANSPARENT PROCESS OR
CALCULATION THAT THEY HAVE. AND
THERE IS A BASE OF HALF A
BILLION -- SO WHAT WE LEARNED
THERE IS A BASE OF HALF A
BILLION DOLLARS FOR THE CENTRAL
SERVICE COSTS AND WHAT WE ARE
RECEIVING IS A REQUEST TO
INCREASE IT BY ANOTHER $17
MILLION. SO, WE, THIS AMENDMENT
WOULD ENABLE THEM TO GET THE
MAJORITY OF THAT INCREASE IT
JUST IS WE WOULD TAKE SOME OF
IT USE IT FOR THESE THINGS
HELPING AUDITOR, DIGITAL
EQUITY, FOOD BANK, COMMUNITY
SAFETY. BUT THERE ARE SOME
CHARGES IN THERE LIKE SORT OF
PREDICTING WHERE GASOLINE
PRICES WILL BE, PREDICTING
WHERE WHAT LAWSUIT PAYOUTS WILL
BE NEXT YEAR, IT IS A BIT
SPECULATIVE. THIS IS JUST HALF
OF ONE BASE. SO, WE FEEL IT CAN
BE ACCOMPLISHED AND WHAT WE DO
KNOW FOR CERTAIN, THOUGH, WHERE
WE WOULD DEPLOY THE FUNDS TO
GET IT OUT TO THE COMMUNITY AND
THE CITY AUDITOR.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN. I AM
HOPING WE CAN GET ADDITIONAL
FEEDBACK ON THE EXECUTIVE AS
WELL. WE ARE SEPARATE BRANCHES
OF GOVERNMENT AND THE
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH IS MIDWAY OR
MIDWAY THROUGH FOR PROCESS OF
FINALIZING THE BUDGET. OFTEN AS
WE LOOK TO DEPARTMENTS THAT
UNDERSTAND IMPACT IT IS
IMPORTANT FOR US TO GET
FEEDBACK FROM THE EXECUTIVE
BRANCH AS WELL ABOUT HOW ITEMS
WILL BE DEPLOYED OR RECEIVED
AND THEN ADJUSTED FOR IN 2024.
SO, MY HOPE IS THAT THIS
INFORMATION CAN BE SHARED AND
IF I RECEIVE ANYTHING DIRECTLY
I WILL, OF COURSE, SHARE THAT
OUT TO COUNCILMEMBERS FOR THE
FEE INTEREST OF SHARING
INTEREST THAT WE RECEIVED AS
WELL. I HOPE THAT WE GET
FEEDBACK FROM THE EXECUTIVE ON
HOW THIS WILL BE RECEIVED AND
DEPLOYED NEXT YEAR.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. TO THE
EXTENT WE RECEIVE ANYTHING I
WOULD ENCOURAGE COUNCILMEMBERS
TO PROVIDE IT TO CENTRAL STAFF
AND SEE IF WE CAN GET AN
ANALYSIS. AGAIN, WHAT WE MAY
SEE IS SORT OF THE WASHINGTON
MONUMENT SYNDROME, WHERE YOU
ASK THEM TO GET HALF PERCENT
DIFFERENCE IN THEIR BUDGET THEY
WILL SAY SURE AND THEY WILL
SHUTDOWN THE WASHINGTON
MONUMENT. I WANT TO BE CAREFUL
THAT WE RUN IT THROUGH OUR
CENTRAL STAFF PROCESS AS WELL
IF WE ARE GOING TO, YOU KNOW,
INVITE THAT SORT OF REBUTTAL
FROM THEM.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN,
HAPPY TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT. THE
ORIGINAL RESPONSE, WE MAY NOT
HAVE THE INFORMATION I WILL SAY
THAT I DO THINK WHILE IT IS NOT
OVERALL A BIG PERCENTAGE I
THINK WHAT WE ARE HEARING SO
FAR FROM THE EXECUTIVE, AGAIN
LIKE YOU SAID AND I SAID, WE
CAN NOT CONFIRM EXACTLY WHERE
THE IMPACTS WILL BE. THEY ARE
SIGNALING IT WILL IMPACT
STAFFING AND OR SERVICES BUT
LIKE YOU HAVE SAID WE DON'T
KNOW TO WHAT EXTENT. RIGHT NOW
BASED ON WHAT THE INFORMATION
THEY PROVIDED TO DATE IS THERE
ARE LIKELY TO BE IMPACTS THAT
WE WOULD LEARN MORE ABOUT AS
THE YEAR UNFOLDS NEXT YEAR. YOU
WOULD BE MAKING THIS CHOICE
WITHOUT, LIKELY, WITHOUT ANY OF
US KNOWING EXACTLY HOW IT WILL
PLAY OUT.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AND THANKS AS WELL I ASSUME TO
THE EXECUTIVE WHO I AM SURE IS
WATCHING AS WELL, INFORMATION
ABOUT HOW THINGS WILL BE
DEPLOYED. ARE APPRECIATED AND
PRETTY ROUTINE EVEN THOUGH WE
RECOGNIZE THE INDEPENDENCE OF
EACH OF THE BODIES. I HOPE WE
CAN GET THAT INFORMATION AS
SOON AS POSSIBLE, THANK YOU.
OKAY. LET'S GO ON TO THE NEXT
ITEM.
>> THIS, THE NEXT SLIDE IS
ITEMS 110 AND 111 IN GROUP B.
THEY ARE LISTED TOGETHER
BECAUSE THEY ARE BOTH
ASSOCIATED WITH AMENDMENTS TO
11950 THAT WE DISCUSSED
EARLIER. BOTH ASSUME A PASSAGE
OF THE PAYROLL TAX RATES IN
ORDER TO BALANCE THE PROPOSALS,
THE FIRST ONE ADDS TO
JUMP-START FUNDS TO EARLY
EDUCATION AND EARLY LEARNING
FOR K-12 SUPPORT PRIORITIZING
SERVICES THAT IMPROVE MENTAL
HEALTH OUTCOMES. SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT JOINED BY
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD AND CHAIR
MOSQUEDA. AND ADDING $40,000 TO
JUMP-START FUNDS TO INCREASE
RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO SUSTAIN
FUTURE WAGES SECURED IN THE
CITY'S NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE
COALITION OF CITY UNIONS, ALSO
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER
SAWANT AND JOINED BY HERBOLD
AND CHAIR MOSQUEDA
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE HAD
EACH OF THE SPONSORED SPEAK TO
THE ITEM LAST TIME WE MET ON
OCTOBER 27th. ARE THERE ANY
QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THESE ITEMS
HERE? I AM NOT SEEING ANY. WE
CAN MOVE ON.
>> OKAY. THE NEXT ITEMS, 112
AND 113 IN GROUP B. THESE ARE
LISTED TOGETHER BECAUSE ONLY
ONE OR THE OTHER WILL PROCEED.
THE FIRST ITEM HSD4A WOULD ADD
$1.4 MILLION GENERAL FUND TO
HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT FOR
CASE MANAGEMENT, AND
OPERATIONAL COSTS IN EXISTING
SHELTERS AND WOULD REDUCE
PROPOSED FUNDING BY DID 1.5
MILLION FOR CRIME PREVENTION
PROGRAM IN THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT. THT IS SPONSORED BY
SAWANT, HERBOLD AND CLAIRE
MOSQUEDA. IF IT MOVES -- CHAIR
MOSQUEDA. IF IT MOVES FORWARD
IT WILL BE REDUCED. THIS NEXT
ITEM, SP900A WOULD NOT PROCEED.
IT IS AN ALTERNATIVE FOR THE
CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM AND
REQUIRE CERTAIN STEPS THAT WILL
BE MADE PRIOR TO MOVING THE
PILOT PROGRAM FUNDED. FIRST THE
COMMITTEE WILL CONSIDER HSD4A
TOMORROW IF IT PASSES SPD900
WILL BE OFF OF THE TABLE
SPONSORED BY CHAIR MOSQUEDA. IF
IT FAILS YOU CAN CONSIDER THIS
FOR THOSE FUNDS
>> ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ITEM?
NOT SEEING ANY. WE CAN MOVE
FORWARD.
>> THE NEXT ITEM, 114 AND 115.
IT IS A COUNCIL BUDGET ACTION
AND A STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE
INTENT THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH
EACH OTHER. THE FIRST ITEM, IT
WOULD ADD $300,000 OF GENERAL
FUND TO HSD TO FUND
COMPREHENSIVE SUBSTANCE USE
DISORDER TREATMENT SPONSORED BY
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON JOINED BY
PEDERSEN AND STRAUSS. THIS IS
DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS
ORIGINALLY PRESENTED. THIS
PROVIDES THE FUNDING TO GO
DIRECTLY TO HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT, THE ORIGINAL
PROPOSAL WOULD HAVE BEEN A
CONTRACT BUILDING ON AN
EXISTING CONTRACT, I BELIEVE,
WITH KING COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH.
HSD, 813SA IS INTENT TO
REQUEST HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT PROVIDE REPORTS
RELATED TO THIS FUNDING FOR
SUBSTANCE USE DISORDER
TREATMENT AND IT IS SPONSORED
BY COUNCILMEMBER NELSON JOINED
BY PEDERSEN AND STRAUSS.
QUESTIONS?
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER .
>> THANK YOU. I HOPE WE CAN GET
A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION,
SORRY IF IT HAS BEEN PRESENTED
AND I AM MISSING IT. WHAT IT
WILL COVER, IS IT FOR STAFFING?
MEDICATION? FOR -- HOW MANY
PEOPLE MIGHT IT SERVE? GETTING
A SENSE OF THE OUTCOMES FOR
THIS INVESTMENT.
>> SURE. THANKS FOR THE
QUESTION. I THINK I WILL ASK MY
COLLEAGUE IS ON AND SHE COULD
FILL IN A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT
IS IN THE PROPOSAL AND THE
SPONSOR MIGHT HAVE MORE TO ADD
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CENTRAL
STAFF. COUNCILMEMBER IN
RESPONSE TO YOUR QUESTION, THIS
WOULD PROPOSE THE CREATION OF A
NEW PILOT SO THERE ARE SOME
FACETS OF WHAT IT WOULD FUND
THAT ARE NOT KNOWN YET WHICH IS
PART OF THE RATIONAL FOR THE
HSD. THE CBA WOULD RESERVE
$300,000 OF FUNDING FOR HSD TO
MAKE AVAILABLE TO A SELECTED
GROUP OF IN PATIENT OR
INTENSIVE OUTPATIENT TREATMENT
FACILITIES THAT ARE HELPING
PEOPLE TO COMPREHENSIVELY TREAT
THEIR ADDICTION TO SUBSTANCES.
THE FUNDING WOULD REMAIN IN
HSD. HSD WOULD ENGAGE WITH EACH
OF THE PROVIDERS TO DEVELOP A
PROCESS FOR REIMBURSING THE
CENTERS FOR THE TREATMENT THEY
PROVIDE .
>> SO IT IS, SO WE ARE
PROVIDING REIMBURSEMENT FOR
SERVICES THAT ALREADY EXIST? I
AM NOT CLEAR WHAT THE PILOT IS
INTENDED TO DO. SORRY.
>> THE CITY DOES NOT CURRENTLY
MAKE FUNDING AVAILABLE FOR THIS
SUITE OF SERVICES. SO, THE
PILOT IS LET'S MAKE THIS
FUNDING AVAILABLE. LET'S
UNDERSTAND WHAT HAPPENS, LET'S
SEE HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO
BE HELPED AND WHAT THE OUTCOMES
ARE.
>> OKAY. JUST ONE LAST QUESTION
AND MAYBE COUNCILMEMBER NELSON
CAN EXPLAIN IT BETTER F. THAT
INFORMATION IS NOT ALREADY
AVAILABLE FROM THE FOLKS WHO
ARE PROVIDING THE SERVICE AND
WHY, WHY DO WE NEED TO PROVIDE
$300,000 TO PROVIDE THAT
INFORMATION TO US?
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, SORRY,
MAYBE I AM MISSING A LINK HERE.
>> YOU DON'T HAVE TO APOLOGIZE
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES. THIS IS
GOOD BACK AND FORTH. AND OF
COURSE COUNCILMEMBER NELSON YOU
ARE WELCOME TO SPEAK TO THAT OR
IF ANN HAS ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENT THAT IS WELCOMED
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
SO, THIS IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE
A RESOURCE FOR OUR SERVICE
PROVIDERS WHO HAVE CLIENTS THAT
HAVE DECIDED THEY WANT TO GO TO
INPATIENT, ALSO CALLED
RESIDENTIAL OR INTENSIVE
OUTPATIENT TREATMENT TO DEAL
WITH ONE OR MULTIPLE SUBSTANCE
ABUSE DISORDERS. WE ARE NOT
CREATING A NEW PROGRAM WE ARE
FACILITATING ACCESS TO BASIC
REHAB BECAUSE, FOR PEOPLE WHO
DO NOT HAVE PERSONAL INSURANCE
OR CAN'T PAY OUT-OF-POCKET
WHICH IS THE POPULATION THAT WE
ARE TALKING ABOUT. EVEN IF THEY
HAVE MEDICAID THEY ARE GOING TO
BE A MONTH'S LONG WAIT LIST.
WHEN SOMEBODY DECIDES THEY WANT
TO TRY TO STOP USING THAT IS
THE TIME TO TRY TO GET THEM
INTO A TREATMENT FACILITY. SO,
THIS IS, AND RIGHT NOW THAT CAN
NOT HAPPEN. ONLY PUBLIC FUNDING
FOR MEDICATION FOR OPIOID
DISORDER TREATMENT THAT IS
METHADONE AND THAT IS FINE BUT
IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO OVERCOME
AN ADDICTION THAT IS NOT OPIOID
USE DISORDER OR THEY NEED TO GO
INTO DETOX AND THEN HAVE
TREATMENT AFTER THAT, THIS IS
INTENDED TO PROVIDE THAT
RESOURCE. FOR EXAMPLE, SOMEBODY
AT A SUPPORTIVE HOME, HOUSING
FACILITY DECIDES THAT THEY WANT
TO GO AFTER AN OVERDOSE OR
SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THEY
REALLY WANT TO TRY TREATMENT,
THEN THE CASE MANAGER FROM THAT
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
FACILITY CAN CALL ONE OF THE,
UP TO FIVE FACILITIES ON A LIST
THAT IS MAINTAINED AND THE
FACILITIES WOULD BE IN THE
REGION, THEY WOULD BE
CERTIFIED, STATE LICENSED AND
FIND OUT IF THERE IS CAPACITY
AND THE PERSON ON THE LINE
WOULD SAY WHY, YES, WE DO HAVE
ROOM AND THEN THE INTAKE
PERSONAL THAT ANSWERS THE PHONE
WOULD ASK QUESTIONS OF THE
PERSON WHO IS INTERESTED IN
GOING AND IF THAT PERSON DID
NOT, YOU KNOW, SHOULD GO
OTHERWISE TO THE HOSPITAL THEY
CAN BE TAKEN THERE, TREATED AND
THEN AT THE END THE CITY WOULD
BE BILLED AND HSD WOULD DRAW
FROM THESE FUNDS TO PAY THE
FACILITY DIRECTLY UNTIL THE
FUNDS ARE DEPLETED.
>> COUNCILMEMBER -- COUNCIL
PRESIDENT JUAREZ, I WILL GO
BACK TO YOU, COUNCIL STAFF AND
FOREMAN.
>> YES, JUST WANT TO, JUST WANT
TO THE WAY COUNCILMEMBER NELSON
DESCRIBED IT, IT IS ACCURATE. A
GREAT DEAL OF OPERATIONAL
DETAIL IN THE CBA ITSELF ABOUT,
YOU KNOW, WHAT THIS PROGRAM OR
PILOT PROGRAM NEEDS TO LOOK
LIKE IN ORDER TO HAVE THE
DESIRED EFFECT. AND I WOULD
LIKE TO ADD FOR THE RECORD THAT
THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT IS A
CO-SPONSOR OF HSD813B2.
.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> OH, THANK YOU. YES, I WANTED
TO ADD THAT BUT ALSO CO-SPONSOR
OF THE NEXT ONE, THE HSD, 113.
BOTH OF THEM IN THE LANGUAGE
AND THE COUNCIL BUDGET ACTION
DOCUMENT HAS THE LANGUAGE,
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER NELSON
AND MADAM CHAIR FOR INCLUDING
THE LANGUAGE TRIBAL THAT DO
HAVE TREATMENT CENTERS AS WELL.
I WANT TO UTILIZE THE RESOURCES
TO BRING OUR RELATIVES HOME.
>> THANK YOU.
>>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES DID
YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS
THAT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN
ANSWERED?
>> NO, THANK YOU, CHAIR.
>>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON DID
YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP TO SAY
ANYTHING ELSE?
>> NOPE.
>> SO, COUNCIL PRESIDENT DID
YOU STILL HAVE ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS?
>> NO. THAT IS AN OLD HAND.
THAT IS MY OLD INDIAN NAME. I
WILL TAKE THAT DOWN. [ LAUGHTER
]
>> I THINK, YOU KNOW, AGAIN,
WANTING TO IDENTIFY THAT THE
COUNCIL REMAINS IN REDUCING ANY
BARRIERS WHEN SOMEONE IS
WANTING TO ACCESS CARE. THAT IS
THE COMMON GROUND HERE. SOME OF
THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE ARE
ABOUT THE OPERATIONS OF SUCH A
PROPOSED PILOT AT THIS JUNCTURE
AND LAST YEAR AND IF YOU CAN
REMIND US WE HAD A REQUEST FOR
$2 MILLION THAT WAS SLIGHTLY
DIFFERENT ASK THAN WHAT WE SEE
IN FRONT OF US. INSTEAD OF A $2
MILLION IT WAS REINCLUDED AS A
STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE
INTEND. CAN YOU SUMMARIZE FOR
US IF IT RELATED TO A NEW TYPE
OF TREATMENT OR REIMBURSEMENT
PLAN WAS NEEDED OR RECOMMENDED
WITHIN THE CITY OF SEATTLE?
>> I DO NOT, I DO NOT RECALL
RIGHT AT THIS MOMENT THE
SPECIFIC CONCLUSIONS OF THE
STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE INTEND
REGARDING WHETHER OR NOT A
PROGRAM JUST LIKE THIS WAS
NEEDED. I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT
THE RESPONSE AND FOLLOW UP WITH
COUNCILMEMBERS AND I WILL DO
THAT LATER TODAY.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> IF I RECALL THE SLIDE
RESPONSE WAS YES, THIS IS IN
LINE WITH -- SO THEY ASKED FOR
A PLAN THAT WOULD DO THE SAME
THING THAT I PROPOSED FOR THE
$2 MILLION. BUT IT DIRECTED HSD
AND THE MAYOR'S OFFICE TO WORK
UP A PLAN FOR THE USE OF OPIOID
SETTLEMENT DOLLARS TO PAY FOR
THIS EVENTUALLY. AND IT SAID
OKAY THIS IS IN LINE WITH WHAT
THE DOLLARS, THE SETTLEMENT
DOLLARS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE USED
FOR AND ADDED MORE DETAIL AND
SO THAT WAS THE RESPONSE. SO,
WHEN I WAS PUTTING, WHEN I
THOUGHT ABOUT PUTTING THIS
FORWARD AGAIN THIS YEAR, YOU
KNOW, ONE EFFORT FUNDING
POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES THAT
I SAW WAS THE OPIOID USE
SETTLEMENT DOLLARS. IT WAS, I
HEARD FROM THE MAYOR'S OFFICE
THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN ALLOCATED
AND SPOKEN ABOUT THOSE COSTS
AND SO, ANOTHER SOURCE WAS --
THERE WAS A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT
SOURCES BUT IT WAS SETTLED ON
THE ADDED GENERAL FUND
RESOURCES THAT BECAME APPARENT
THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE POST
OCTOBER FORECAST REPORT. SO
THAT IS, SO THE SPIRIT OF THE
TWO PROPOSALS IS RELATIVELY
SIMILAR AND THE FUNDING SOURCES
ARE DIFFERENT AND THIS IS
ONE-TIME FUNDING THAT WOULD
ALLOW JUST TO SEE HOW IT
WORKSES AND WHAT I HEARD FROM
DEPUTY MAYOR WASHINGTON AND
DIRECTOR KIM IT WOULD NOT
REQUIRE NECESSARILY ANOTHER
FTE. WE ARE NOT CREATING AN
ONGOING FUNDING FEE FOR A
ONE-TIME EXPENSE. AND THE
COMMUNICATIONS THAT I THINK
THAT SEVERAL OF US WHO ARE
TALKING RIGHT NOW HAVE RECEIVED
FROM THE EXECUTIVE IS THAT, WE
CAN WORK OUT THESE DIFFERENCES
NEXT YEAR. BUT, IT IS IN
SUPPORT OF GOING FORWARD.
>> OKAY. I AM HAPPY TO HAVE THE
RESPONSE ACTUALLY SENT AROUND
TO THE FLOOR. MY RECOLLECTION
THERE ARE A SMALL GROUP OF
PEOPLE THAT CAN BENEFIT FROM
THIS AND THE PEOPLE THAT WERE
TRYING TO SERVE AND GETTING
THEM IN APPROPRIATE SERVICES MY
RECOLLECTION IT WOULD NOT BE A
RECOMMENDED USE OF CITY FUNDS
FOR A SMALL OF CLIENTS SERVED.
THAT SAID, ANY ONE PERSON THAT
CAN BE SERVED AND TREATED AND
HAVE A PATH TO RECOVERY IS A
BENEFIT. I THINK THE CONCERNS
THAT I HAVE HERE AND I WANT TO
MAKE SURE I FULLY UNDERSTAND
THIS, IS THAT THIS REQUEST IS
PUTTING THE CITY OF SEATTLE IN
A NEW POSITION OF BASICALLY
BEING A THIRD PARTY PAYER.
PAYING FOR SERVICES AND
TREATMENTS FOR INPATIENT
SERVICES THAT IS RELATIVELY
SMALL IN TERMS OF THE DEMAND OR
THE ASK FROM COMMUNITY PARTNERS
AND IN DOING SO BASICALLY
CREATING A PRIVATE PAYER MODEL
FOR A HANDFUL OF PEOPLE. HOW
MANY PEOPLE DO YOU INTEND TO
SERVE ON THIS PILOT PROGRAM
WHEN I ASKED THE SAME
QUESTIONS, VIA THE SAME
CONVERSATIONS THAT I BELIEVE
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON HAD WITH
THE EXECUTIVE. THE RESPONSE WAS
POTENTIALLY 4-8 PEOPLE THAT
WOULD POTENTIALLY BE SERVED DO
WE HAVE ANY OTHER INDICATION OF
HOW MANY PEOPLE WE INTEND TO
SERVE WITH THE $300,000 HERE?
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> I NEVER HEARD 4-8 PEOPLE.
HERE IS THE THING. BECAUSE THE
RESOURCE DOES NOT EXIST OUR
PARTNERS ARE NOT GOING OUT AND
SAYING HEY, DO YOU WANT TO GO
TO INPATIENT OR OUTPATIENT
TREATMENT? IF YOU DON'T HAVE
INSURANCE WE HAVE A WAIT LIST
FOR SIX MONTHS BUT IF YOU ARE
THINKING ABOUT GOING TO
TREATMENT RIGHT NOW HOLD ON AND
WE WILL TRY TO GET YOU ON A
LIST. I AM SURE THE RESPONSE TO
THAT SORT OF OFFER WOULD BE
SMALL. THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE
WHO ARE VERY MUCH WANT TO TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF THESE KINDS OF
SERVICES. YOU CAN TALK TO FOLKS
THAT ARE ACTUALLY DOING THIS
WORK ON THE STREETS IN SEATTLE
AND OTHER CITIES SO I, BECAUSE
I DON'T KNOW THE SOURCE OF THAT
NUMBER I FIND IT HARD TO
BELIEVE THAT THE SAMPLE SIZE OF
PEOPLE THAT WOULD TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF THIS IS THAT
SMALL. A MONTH OF REHAB COSTS
ABOUT $10,000-$13,000. WHEN WE
ARE TALKING ABOUT THE MAGNITUDE
OF THE FENTANYL-DRIVEN DRUG
CRISIS THAT WE HAVE ON OUR
HANDS I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD
BE TRYING EVERYTHING WE
POSSIBLY CAN TO HELP PEOPLE.
SO, THIS IS ONE, YES, NEW WAY
BUT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A
CHOICE. I DON'T THINK WE ARE IN
A POSITION TO NOT TRY SOMETHING
NEW WHEN WE ARE LOOKING AT THE
OVERDOSE NUMBERS WE HAVE BEEN
SEEING.
>> THE QUESTION THAT I AM
ASKING IS ABOUT ETHICS IF WE
HAVE IT THAT WOULD INCLUDE
FUNDS FOR INPATIENT FACILITIES
AND DIRECTLY DEPLOY THOSE WHAT
.
>> OH, I SEE, WERE YOU QUOTING
SMALL SAMPLE WERE YOU QUOTING
THE COUNTY HAD?
>> NO, I WAS QUOTING A
CONVERSATION I BELIEVE YOU HAD.
THE CONCEPT THAT THIS WOULD
SERVE ABOUT THAT UNIVERSITY OF
PEOPLE AND THAT IS WHERE MY
QUESTION HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE
GOING TO BE SERVED AND WHERE
DOES THAT NUMBER COME FROM AND
IT SOUNDS LIKE PERHAPS THAT
MESSAGE DID NOT COME FROM YOU,
PERHAPS IT IS A GAME OF 10 IF
THAT NUMBER DID NOT COME FROM A
CONVERSATION YOU HAD WITH AN
EXECUTIVE. NUMBER 2, WHERE DID
YOU GET A QUOTE IT TAKES SIX
MONTHS FOR SOMEONE ON MEDICAID
TO GET INTO REHABILITATION
SERVICES?
>> I GOT IT FROM PEOPLE THAT
ARE DOING THIS OUT REACH. I GOT
IT FROM THE PEOPLE I MET IN
REHAB, ACTUALLY.
>> I AM WONDERING WHAT
ORGANIZATION IS INDICATING IT
TAKES FOUR TO SIX -- SORRY, SIX
MONTHS INTO REHAB?
>> I DON'T REMEMBER THE NAME OF
THE ORGANIZATION. WHEN I WAS A
PARTICIPANT IN THE PANEL FOR
THE DAY OF RECOVERY PANEL HE
HAS EVERY YEAR THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT I HEARD FROM
PEOPLE THAT ARE MUCH MORE IN
THE WEEDS IN THE RECOVERY
COMMUNITY THAN I AM.
>> OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU FOR
ANSWERING SOME OF THOSE
QUESTIONS AND AGAIN, I THINK
THE IMPORTANT ASPECT HERE IS
THAT WE ARE ALL INTERESTED IN
ENSURING PEOPLE GET TREATMENT
AS SOON AS THEY ARE READY AND
REDUCE THE BARRIER, THE
QUESTION THAT I AM ASKING IS
THE PROCESS FOR EXPEDITING THE
DELIVERY OF THE DOLLARS AND IF
THERE IS EXISTING SYSTEMS THAT
COULD BE SUPPORTED WITH
ADDITIONAL CITY FUNDS OR
WHETHER OR NOT THE CITY WANTS
TO ENTER INTO A NEW ROLE OF
BECOMING A THIRD PARTY PAYER
AND CREATING PRIVATE PAY MODEL
FOR FOLKS THAT OTHERWISE
POTENTIALLY DON'T HAVE
INSURANCE OR HAVE MEDICAID. I
AM STILL A LITTLE UNCLEAR ON
THE NEW ADDED ROLE, THE ROLE OF
THE CITY BECOMING A THIRD PARTY
PAYER AND WHAT IT TAKES TO SET
UP THAT SYSTEM AND HAVE WE
RECEIVED ANY INDICATION ON THE
DEPARTMENT ON HOW MUCH OR HOW
MUCH, HOW MANY HOURS ARE ADDED
TO THIS, STAFF EXISTING
CAPACITY IS NEEDED TO STANDING
IT UP. RECOGNIZING NELSON SAID
THEY WOULD FIGURE IT OUT IN
2024, DO WE HAVE ANY INITIAL
ASSESSMENTS OF WHAT THE STAFF
TIME WILL LOOK LIKE AND WHAT IT
TAKES TO CREATE THE TECHNICAL
SYSTEM TO CREATE A
REIMBURSEMENT MODEL IN THE
CITY?
>> WE DON'T HAVE HSD THAT
ASSESSMENT. WHAT WE DO HAVE IS
THE DEPARTMENT'S COMMITMENT
THAT NO ADDITIONAL STAFF
RESOURCES WOULD BE USED TO DO
THE ADMINISTRATIVE WORK THAT
THE CBA IS ASKING FOR. WITH THE
OPIOID SETTLEMENT REVENUES THAT
ARE DUE TO THE CITY IN 2024,
TWO NEW FTE'S ARE ADDED AND
SOME OF THE, SOME OF THOSE
STAFF RESOURCES WORK HOURS ARE
NOT SPECIFICALLY ALLOCATED TO
PROJECTS SO I THINK THE
EXPECTATION IS THAT THEY CAN
ABSORB THE ADDITIONAL WORK
ASSOCIATED WITH HSD, 813, AND
BECAUSE THIS WORK IS
PERMISSIBLE USE OF THOSE OPIOID
SETTLEMENT REVENUES THAT IS,
THAT IS JUST FINE AND THEY ARE
HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT.
>> THANK YOU. OKAY. LOOKING
FORWARD TO HEARING MORE ABOUT
THIS TOMORROW AND LOOKING AT
THE RESPONSE. I THINK IT WOULD
BE IMPORTANT TO, AGAIN,
CONCLUDE WHERE THERE IS COMMON
GROUND, THERE IS COMMON GROUND
AND UNIFIED INTEREST IN
INSURING IT GETS DEPLOYED FOR
THE MOMENT PEOPLE ARE READY TO
ACCESS TREATMENT AND TREATMENT
OF ALL KINDS THAT COULD INCLUDE
INPATIENT AND OUTPATIENT AS
DESCRIBED ALONG THAT CARE. BUT
THIS SPECIFICALLY IS REALLY
TRYING TO HONE IN ON INPATIENT
TREATMENT WHERE THE SPONSOR
NOTED THERE IS NO DESIRE TO
HAVE ADDITIONAL FUNDS GO TO
THAT TREATMENT.
>> CAN I CLARIFY JUST ONE
THING.
>> EXCUSE ME.
>> YES.
>> WHEN WE TALK ABOUT
OUTPATIENT, NOT ALL OUTPATIENT
IS THE SAME. WHEN ONE HEARS
INTENSIVE OUTPATIENT TREATMENT
WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS
USUALLY ABOUT FOUR HOURS A DAY,
TWO HOUR ACE DAY, EVERY DAY OF
THE WEEK AND THEN SOMEBODY CAN
MAINTAIN AND THAT USUALLY
HAPPENS AFTER DETOX AND IT CAN
INCLUDE OPIOID MEDICATION FOR
ONGOING STABILIZATION, THAT IS
COUNSELING, THAT IS NUTRITION
SUPPORT, THAT IS GROUP THERAPY,
THAT IS BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION
THERAPY ET CETERA. THAT IS
OUTPATIENT THAT IS THE OTHER
SIDE OF RESIDENTIAL OUTPATIENT,
WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT OUT
PATIENT WHERE YOU ARE GIVEN A
PRESCRIPTION ON, YOU KNOW, GO
TO SOME PLACE AND YOU RECEIVE
MEDICATION FOR OPIOID USE
DISORDER AND THEN YOU GO ABOUT
YOUR DAY. SO WE ARE NOT TALKING
ABOUT -- I JUST WANT PEOPLE TO
UNDERSTAND INTENSIVE OUT
PATIENT IS INTENSIVE NOT JUST
SPENDING THE NIGHT AND A FULL
SCHEDULED REGIMENTED DAY OF,
YOU KNOW, RECOVERY SUPPORT
SERVICES.
>> THANK YOU. THANKS FOR THAT
CLARIFICATION. AND, AGAIN, I
THINK THE COMMON GROUND IS
FINDING THE ACCESS TO REDUCING
BARRIERS. I THINK THAT WHEN WE
ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT THE
TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF SETTING UP
REIMBURSEMENT WITHIN THE
DEPARTMENT OR ANY ADDITIONAL
NEEDS THAT WOULD BE TIED TO
THAT KIND OF NEW ROLE THAT THE
CITY'S AGENCY DEPARTMENT IS
PLAYING, THOSE QUESTIONS SHOULD
NOT BE CONFLATED WITH NOT
SUPPORTING. IT WOULD BE
DISINGENIOUS. NOT SUPPORTING
SERVICES AND NEEDS FOR THE
CRISIS THAT FENTANYL AND OTHER
SUBSTANCES THAT ARE RESENTING
IN OUR COMMUNITY AS A PUBLIC
HEALTH CRISIS CLEARLY NEED, IT
IS A QUESTION AROUND CITY
DOLLARS WHEN THERE IS OTHER
PROGRAMS THAT I THINK HAVE BEEN
ALSO IDENTIFIED BUT ALSO A
QUESTION ABOUT THE OPERATION OF
SUCH DOLLARS WITHIN THAT
DEPARTMENT. IS THAT AN OLD
HAND?
>> NO, YES. I WILL TAKE IT
DOWN.
>> OKAY. NO PROBLEM. I THINK WE
CAN MOVE ON.
>> MOVING ON TO ITEMS IN GROUP
B. THAT ARE IN LIMITED TO THE
SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION. I AM GOING TO
START WITH ITEMS 116 AND 117.
THESE ARE TWO OPTIONS PROPOSED
BY COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS JOINED
BY COUNCIL LEWIS AND COUNCIL
PRESIDENT JUAREZ. FOR THE SAME
PURPOSE, OPTION C IS IS
APPROVED IT IS OFF OF THE
TABLE. SO, 116, ADD 250,000 OF
GENERAL FUND TO THE DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION FOR BALLARD
AVENUE AND CAFE STREET AND
IMPROVEMENTS THIS IS BALANCED
BY REDUCING $100,000 OF GENERAL
FUND CONTRIBUTION TO THE
EMERGENCY FUND AND IMPOSING A
PROVISO. THE OTHER PIECE OF
THIS, SORRY I AM JUST HAD TO
PULL SOMETHING UP QUICKLY. I
THINK I MISSED PART OF THIS IN
THE DESCRIPTION. LET'S SEE.
ALSO, I BELIEVE IT REDUCES
FUNDING, YES, USES $150,000 OF
GENERAL FUNDING FOR FILIBUSTER
AND BALANCED FOR $150,000 IN
REDUCTION IN THE YEAR END
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET FROM THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE THAT IS UNDER
SPENT, INCLUDED IN 2023 FOR A
GRANT NOT NEEDED AND IT IS IS
AVAILABLE TO BE REPURPOSED IN
2024. OPTION D., ADDING
$150,000 FOR THE SAME PURPOSE
AND IMPOSE A PROVISO FOR THE
BUDGET FOR REDESIGN RELATED .
QUESTIONS?
>> SEEING NONE.
>> OKAY.
>> WAIT. LET ME PAUSE HERE FOR
A SECOND. ALL OF THE ITEMS ARE
LISTED IN GROUP B. THEY ARE NOT
ALL INNER RELATED. MAYBE WE
SHOULD PAUSE ON EACH ONE TO SEE
IF FOLKS HAVE QUESTIONS ON THEM
SINCE WE WILL BE ASKED TO TAKE
INDIVIDUAL VOTES ON THESE
TOMORROW.
>> YES. YOU WERE JUST
DESCRIBING THEM.
>> OKAY.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. I THINK
THE ONLY QUESTION THAT I HAVE
IS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE HAVE
ANY INDICATION OF WHAT 6D WOULD
RESULT IN IF THERE IS A PROVISO
ON THE PLAN. I ACTUALLY MISREAD
THIS ITEM, COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS, I THOUGHT IT WAS
AMENDED DOWN FOR THE BREWERY
DISTRICT AND IMPOSING A REVISAL
ON IT BUT IT STILL INCLUDES A
PROVISO WITHIN SDOT, IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. YES. SO
JUST COLLEAGUES WHERE WE HAVE
COME FROM WE HAVE $1 MILLION
WORTH OF WORK TO DO IN THIS
AREA IN THE NEXT YEAR. THAT WAS
MY ORIGINAL BUDGET REQUEST.
DROPPED IT DOWN TO $500,000 DID
NOT HAVE A WAY TO MOVE IT
FORWARD I DROPPED IT DOWN TO
$250,000. THAT IS FINE WE ARE
ALL GOING THROUGH THE EXERCISE
TODAY. SO USING THAT $150,000
OF THE MAYOR'S UNDER SPENT. TO
ME WHAT I KNOW $250,000 IS THE
MINIMUM OF WHAT WE NEED TO KEEP
THE PROJECT MOVING THROUGH THE
NEXT YEAR. EITHER PROVISO IN
SDOT OR USING EMERGENCY FUNDS
MY PREFERENCE IS ALWAYS JUST TO
USE HARD DOLLARS AND CHAIR
UNDERSTANDING YOUR STRONG
DESIRE NOT TO PULL EMERGENCY
FUNDS I WANTED TO PUT A SECOND
OPTION FOR THAT, THE SECOND
OPTION IS THE $150,000 OF
MAYORAL UNDER SPENT AND SDOT.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. AND I
SAW, I THINK -- ANY ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION ABOUT WHERE THE
PROVISED DOLLARS WILL BE TAKEN
FROM?
>> IT WOULD LIKELY GO TOWARDS
SDOT URBAN PLANNING PROGRAM
THAT HAS A BUDGET OF $4. 3
MILLION.
>> AND SOME OF THOSE FUNDS I
ASSUME INCLUDE AREAS WITHIN THE
BALLARD NEIGHBORHOOD ALREADY?
>> IT IS, IT IS A, IT IS A
PROGRAM THAT SUPPORTS A NUMBER
OF DIFFERENT INITIATIVES,
THINGS LIKE UPDATING THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS
MANUAL, BUNCH OF OTHER JUST
BROOD STREET SCAPE PLANNING
EFFORTS ACROSS THE CITY. SO I
DON'T KNOW THAT THERE ARE -- I
BELIEVE THERE IS SOME
ADDITIONAL MONEY IN HERE THAT
IS ALREADY BUDGETED FOR WORK IN
BALLARD BUT NOT NECESSARILY FOR
THE SPECIFIC ITEMS PROPOSED.
>> I GUESS I WAS TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT IF THERE WAS ALREADY
A UNIVERSE OF PROJECTS IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IF THE
PROVISO APPLIED IT IS A VALUE
ADD TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WHETHER OR NOT IF IT IS SO THAT
SPECIFIC STREET OR A FEW
STREETS OVER IF THE PRIORITY
FROM THE ELECTED COUNCILMEMBER
IN THAT AREA IS FOR FUNDS IN
THIS AREA IT WOULD BE HELPFUL
TO KNOW WHAT IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD MIGHT SHIFT TO GO
TO THIS PRIORITY. THERE YOU ARE
JUST SEEING A TRADE OFF OF A
FEW DIFFERENT BLOCKS VERSUS
HAVING FUNDING POTENTIALLY
COMING FROM A DIFFERENT AREA OF
THE CITY SPECIFIC TO THIS. TO
THIS CORRIDOR THAT I THINK HAS
A DIFFERENT FEEL TO IT. WE
DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC
INDICATION OF IF THEY WOULD
NECESSARILY VIEW THAT ON THE
$100,000 WITHIN THE SAME
NEIGHBORHOOD.
>> IT IS A LOT OF INITIATIVES
AS IT DEVELOPS OVER THE COURSE
OF THE YEAR. IT IS UNCLEAR IF
THEY SHIFT IF THEY HAD TO, TO
MAKE THAT POSSIBLE.
>> OKAY.
>> I WOULD JUST ADD THAT LIKE
WE DID ASK THE DEPARTMENT SOME
QUESTIONS ABOUT THERE AND THEY
PROVIDED A VARIETY OF
ACTIVITIES THAT THIS BUDGET IS
USED TO SUPPORT DESIGN,
DELIVERY IN A NUMBER OF AREAS
LIKE FORTUNE SQUARE AND BALLARD
AND ACCESS THEY ARE LIKE SOME
OF THE AREAS THAT THE FUNDS
COULD BE DEPLOYED ON AND THE
GENERAL WORK PROGRAM SO
PROPOSING A PROVISO ARE THEY
MAKING THE CHOICES ON THEIR
TIME AND SPENDING FOR THEM? OR,
YOU KNOW, STATING THAT INTENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> I HAD NOTHING ELSE TO ADD.
JUST, I TRIED TO WORK WITH THE
CHAIR AND YOU ASKED ME NOT TO
TAKE RESERVES AND LOOK FOR A
PROVISO, I AM ABLE TO PROVIDE
BOTH BECAUSE I AM TRYING TO
GIVE US ALL OPTIONS TO MOVE
FORWARD. I WOULD SAY THIS IS
FOR THE BALLARD AVENUE WORK.
WE HAVE BEEN WORKING OVER THE
LAST THREE YEARS TO MAKE IT
HAPPEN. SO THEY CAN ACCESS THE
WORK. IT REALLY IS NOT EASY TO
CREATE A NEW TYPE, A STREET
TYPEOLOGY. IT HAS COST SOME
MONEY AND THERE WILL BE
CITYWIDE BENEFITS IF WE ARE
ABLE TO PUT THE ICING ON THE
CAKE AND PUT THE BOW ON THE
PRESENT SO THAT IT IS IN
STREETS ILLUSTRATED. IF IT IS
JUST LEFT AS A ONE-OFF PROJECT
AND NOT IN STREETS ILLUSTRATED
IT IS MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO
REAPPLY TO OTHER STREETS IN OUR
CITY.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS. AND THANK YOU FOR
NOTING THE ONGOING WORK THAT
HAS BEEN PROVIDED IN THIS AREA
LED BY YOU. CENTRAL STAFF CAN
YOU SUMMARIZE FOR US WHAT THE
INVESTMENT IN THE AREA HAVE
BEEN OVER THOSE YEARS?
>> I AM SORRY IS THE QUESTION
SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE WORK ON
BALLARD AVENUE IN THE DISTRICT
OR THE WORK OF THE URBAN
PLANNING PROGRAM?
>> I THINK RELATED TO THE
AVENUE AND THE BREWERY
DISTRICT, IS THAT COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS YOU WERE TEEING UP?
PUTTING IT ON THE WORK FOR THE
INVESTMENT IN THE CITY
>> THIS IS WORK THROUGH
STRAUSS'LEADERSHIP WAS STARTED
TWO YEARS AGO FOR BUDGET
REQUEST. IT WAS ABOUT $250,000
AT THE TIME THAT SUPPORTS OF
ADDITIONAL BASE SUPPORT IN
SDOT'S BUDGET TO MAKE PERMANENT
PROGRAM USING BALLARD AVENUE AS
THE SORT OF A PRIME EXAMPLE HOW
IT CAN BE DONE. THIS BECAME AS
MUCH OF AN URBAN DESIGN EFFORT,
WORK WAS DONE ON BALLARD AVENUE
TO EXPLORE TO RETHINK HOW THAT
SYSTEM WORKS. SO IT WAS BOTH
URBAN DESIGN COMPONENT FOR
BALLARD AVENUE AND I THINK ALSO
TRYING TO DEVELOP A TEMPLET FOR
HOW IT WILL BE DEPLOYED
ELSEWHERE. BEYOND THAT I AM
AFRAID I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER
INSIGHT TO ADD.
>> GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ANYTHING ELSE?
>>> ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO ON TO
THE NEXT ONE.
>> 118. IT IS LISTED ON THE
SCREEN AT 102 IT IS VERSION 3.
IT IS THE CORRECT VERSION OF
THE BUDGET ACTION IS INCLUDED
IN THE AGENDA PACKET, JUST
WRONG ON THIS SLIDE. THIS WOULD
ADD $1.5 MILLION OF GENERAL
FUND AND REAL ESTATE TAX TO
SDOT'S STRUCTURES ARE,
MAINTENANCE, CAPITOL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND
$480,000 OF GENERAL FUND TO
SDOT FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE
SCHOOL ZONE CAMERA PROGRAM.
THIS IS FUNDED BY A REDUCTION
IN THE CITY'S 2024 CONTRIBUTION
TO THE SEATTLE CITY EMPLOYEE'S
RETIREMENT SYSTEM. THIS IS
SOMETHING WE DISCUSSED
PREVIOUSLY IN DISCUSSING
RESOLUTION THAT ESTABLISHING
THE RATE FOR THE CONTRIBUTION.
THIS IS THE SPENDING SIDE OF
THAT PROPOSED RATE CHANGE. IT
IS SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN AND CO-SPONSORED BY
MORALES, AND HERBOLD.
>> NO QUESTIONS ON THERE. I
THINK WE CAN GO ON. WAITING TO
SEE IF OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS
HAVE QUESTIONS. OKAY.
>>> THE NEXT ITEM 119,
$150,000 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A
SIDEWALK USING CONSTRUCTION
METHODS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
NORTH 87TH STREET TO PALETINE
NORTH. SPONSORED BY STRAUSS,
JUAREZ AND PEDERSEN.
>> I DON'T SEE ANY QUESTIONS ON
THIS ONE.
>> OKAY. THE NEXT AND FINAL TWO
ITEMS, RELATED TO THE SEATTLE
POLICE DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET.
SPD, 2A ADD 4.5 MILLION TO THE
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR
SPECIAL EVENT STAFFING, PREMIUM
AND IMPLEMENT MEMORANDUM OF
UNDER STANDING WITH THE SEATTLE
POLICE OFFICER OFFICER'S GUILD
AND HAS A PROVISO, IT SPONSORED
BY COUNCIL HERBOLD, LEWIS AND
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS
>> THIS IS NOT ONE THAT WE
DISCUSSED IN THE LAST ROUND OF
AMENDMENTS, CORRECT?
>> THAT IS CORRECT. THANK YOU.
CHAIR MOSQUEDA FOR THAT. THIS
IS COMING OUT OF A SORT OF
LATER IN THE PROCESS COMING TO
AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SEATTLE
POLICE OFFICERS GUILD. IT WAS
SUBMITTED AND REQUESTED ON TIME
BUT BECAUSE OF
CONFIDENTIALALLITY OF THE
AGREEMENTS UNTIL THEY WERE
READY TO COME FORWARD WE COULD
NOT DISCUSS IT IN COMMITTEE
UNTIL THIS POINT IN THE
PROCESS.
>> SO, IS CENTRAL STAFF
PREPARED TO WALK US THROUGH
MORE OF AN ANALYSIS OR OVERVIEW
THAN WHAT WE JUST RECEIVED?
WHAT DID YOU SAY?
>> I AM SEE FIGURE MY COLLEAGUE
ARE ON THE LINE TO DESCRIBE IT
IN MORE DETAIL. WHAT I CAN SAY
IS THIS IS FUNDED USING FUNDS
IN THE GENERAL FUND PLANNING
RESERVES THAT WERE ASSUMED FOR
THIS PURPOSE BUT NOT ORIGINALLY
PROPOSED FOR APPROPRIATION IN
THE MAYOR'S BUDGET. IT WAS NOT
SETTLED.
>> I SEE COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD'S HAND AND PUBLIC
SAFETY ANALYST ON THE LINE.
GREG ATTACHED A MEMO TO THE
PACKET AND I THINK GREG COULD
WALK THROUGH THE BASICS OF THIS
AGREEMENT.
>> LET ME ASK COUNCIL HERBOLG
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO
IT. IT IS FINE. I AM TURNING IT
OVER TO YOU SINCE WE HAVE NOT
HAD YOU DO THAT AS A SPONSOR
YET.
>> ABSOLUTELY. I AM HAPPY TO
HAVE GREG WALK THROUGH THE
AMENDMENT. HE HAS DONE A LOT OF
ANALYSIS ON THIS AND HE IS
REPRESENTING THE COUNCIL IN THE
DISCUSSIONS WITH THE EXECUTIVE
ON NEGOTIATING THIS AND REALLY
APPRECIATE HIS WORK AND THE
WORK OF LR. MY HAND WAS ONLY UP
BECAUSE I WANTED, I WANTED TO
MAKE A PUBLIC CLARIFICATION OF
SOME INACCURATE INFORMATION
THAT WAS PUT OUT THERE AS IT
RELATES TO WHAT THE MOU SAYS
ABOUT ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE. I
THINK I WILL HOLD ON THAT. AND
LET GREG WALK THROUGH IT. I
THINK HE WILL PROBABLY COVER IT
AND THE DETAILS OF THE THREE
ELEMENTS OF THIS MLU.
>> OKAY. SOUNDS GOOD. WELCOME
GREG.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THIS
AGREEMENT THERE IS A STAFF
REPORT ATTACHED TO IT. AND IT
IS PUBLIC AS WELL. IT IS
SOMETHING THAT THE PUBLIC OR
COUNCILMEMBERS CAN ACCESS FOR
MORE DETAIL I AM JUST SORT OF
GOING TO HIT THE HIGH POINTS.
BY WAY OF CONTEXT WE HAVE HAD
SINCE 2020 A LAPSE IN THE
CURRENT CONTRACT WITH THE
SEATTLE POLICE OFFICER'S GUILD,
MEANING THAT IS WHEN THE GUILD
CONTRACT EXPIRED. AND, THE LAST
COUPLE OF YEARS THE CITY HAS
BEEN FOLLOWING THE STATUTORY
PROCESSES AND BEEN IN
NEGOTIATION WITH THE SEATTLE
POLICE OFFICER'S UNION. THAT
NEGOTIATION IS STILL ONGOING.
THERE WERE A FEW THINGS THE
CITY WANTED TO DO IMMEDIATELY
AND ADDRESS IMMEDIATELY THAT
WAS IN THE INTEREST OF THE
UNION AND INTERESTED AND OF
INTEREST TO THE CITY. AND THE
MLU WAS DESIGNED TO ADDRESS
THOSE NEEDS WITHOUT HAVING TO
SETTLE THE LARGER CONTRACT
WHICH WOULD REQUIRE PAY
INCREASES, ACCOUNTABILITY
PROVISIONS AND A LOT OF OTHER,
A LOT OF OTHER PROVISIONS THAT
THE CITY WAS LOOKING AT. SO,
THIS WAS A SIDE AGREEMENT IF
YOU WILL, THE CURRENT CONTRACT
IS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION AND
WILL BE UNTIL NEXT YEAR. INTO
THE NEXT YEAR. SO, I WILL HIT
THE HIGH POINTS, IT WOULD,
THROUGH A TERM PERIOD, BUT
THROUGH A TERM OF OCTOBER 1st,
2023, JUST THIS LAST OCTOBER,
AND JANUARY 2nd, 2026, SO ABOUT
TWO YEARS, GO THREE DIFFERENT
THINGS FOR THE CITY. THE FIRST
THING IT WOULD DO IS AUTHORIZE
THE DUEL DISPATCH 911 RESPONSE
PILOT THAT WE HAVE HEARD ABOUT.
AND WHAT IT DOES THERE IS IT
ALLOWS THE CITY TO HAVE A DUEL
DISPATCH RESPONSE WHEREBY
OFFICERS MAKE A DETERMINATION
AS TO WHO WILL MAKE THE INITIAL
CONTACT WITH A SUBJECT. THE
OBJECT SIEVE TO MAKE THE
INITIAL CONTACT BE MADE BY AT
CARE RESPONDER. IN WHOLE THE
GOAL OF THE PROGRAM TO ENSURE
SAFETY OF TO BOTH. AND HOW IT
HAPPENS IS THE DETERMINATION OF
THE OFFICER. IF THE OFFICER
NEEDS TO MAKE THE FIRST CONTACT
OR IF THE OFFICER CAN BE ON THE
SITE AND ALLOW THE RESPONDER TO
MAKE THAT CONTRACT. THIS
AGREEMENT WOULD LET THAT
APPROACH MOVE FORWARD. THE
SECOND THING THAT THIS MLU DOES
IS IT ALLOWS THE CITY TO EXPAND
THE USE OF PARK RANGERS FROM
JUST THE DOWNTOWN AREA WHEN
THEY WERE INITIALLY DEPLOYED
BACK IN 2008 IT WAS THE CASE
THAT THEY WERE LIMITED TO THE
DOWNTOWN AREA. THIS AGREEMENT
WOULD LET THEM MOVE INTO ANY
CITY PARK. IT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING THAT THE PARKS
DEPARTMENT IS WORKING TOWARDS
HIRING OF 28 PARK RANGERS AND
SO AS THIS AGREEMENT GOES INTO
EFFECT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO
MAKE THE HIRES AND SPREAD THE
GEOGRAPHY OF THE PARK RANGERS.
THEN THE LAST THING THAT IT
ALLOWS THE CITY TO DO ALLOWS
SPD TO DETERMINE THE NUMBER OF
SPECIAL EVENT SLOTS THAT WOULD
BE FILLED BY SWORN OFFICERS AND
NUMBER BY CIVILIANS. PROBABLY
PARKING ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS AT
THE MOMENT. AND WHAT THAT WILL
ALLOW US TO DO AS A CITY IS AS
WE MOVE INTO FUTURE STAFFING
PLANS FOR BIGGER EVENTS WE WILL
BE ABLE TO MAKE MORE USE OF OUR
CIVILIAN SQUADS AND HAVE THEM
SUPPLEMENT SPECIAL EVENT
STAFFING THAT IT WILL TAKE
BURDEN OFF OF THE OFFICERS WHO
ARE, RIGHT NOW, BEING
MANDATORILY ASSIGNED TO STAFF
SPECIAL EVENTS. IT GIVES US
MORE FLEXIBILITY TO USE
CIVILIANS IN THAT CONTEXT. SO,
WHAT THE TRADE OFF THERE IS,
THAT THE CITY, DURING THAT
TWO-YEAR PERIOD WILL PROVIDE
MEMBER WHO VOLUNTEERS FOR A
SPECIAL EVENT A $225 PREMIUM ON
TOP OF THE OVERTIME. THE
PURPOSE OF THE PREMIUM, BY IN
LARGE IS TO ENCOURAGE
VOLUNTEERISM THE DEPARTMENT IS
AT A POINT WITH THE STAFFING
LEVELS WHERE AS I SAID THEY ARE
MAKING IT MANDATORY TO FILL
SPECIAL EVENTS T. IS SENIORITY
BASE, THE BURDEN FALLS TO NEW
OFFICERS THAT ARE OUT ON THE
STREET. WITH THIS PREMIUM YOU
CAN GET A WIDER RANGE OF
OFFICERS AND RELIEVE THE
BURDENS ON THE FOLKS WHO
NORMALLY HAVE TO WORK THOSE
EVENTS. AND THEN IT WILL ALSO
AUTHORIZE THEM TO WORK THE SPOT
THAT DO NOT REQUIRE AN OFFICER
TO BE IN THAT PARTICULAR SHIFT.
SO THAT IS VERY HIGH-LEVEL. THE
COST IS GOING TO BE $894,000
GOING OUT TO THE FIRST OF LAST
MONTH, THE FIRST OF OCTOBER.
AND THEN ABOUT $3.6 MILLION IN
2024 AND 2025. BECAUSE IT IS A
FIXED PREMIUM WHEN THE FINAL
CONTRACT SETTLES ANY ELEVATION
IN WAGE OR RATE WOULD NOT
EFFECT THAT PREMIUM IT WOULD
REMAIN LOCKED AND IT WOULD
EXPIRE ON THE END OF THAT TWO
YEAR PERIOD. THAT IS MY
HIGH-LEVEL. I WILL STOP AND ASK
IF ANYONE HAS QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU. AND COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING
YOU WANT TO ADD.
>> SURE. I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT,
THE RELEASE THAT WENT OUT THIS
WEEK OR LAST WEEK AND I HAVE
SEEN IT QUOTED BY THE PRESS
CORP. I DON'T THINK IT DOES
SERVICE ON WHAT IT MAKES
POSSIBLE. IT SAYS IT ALLOWS
CARE RESPONDERS AND POLICE TO
ARRIVE AT THE SAME TIME. IT IS
NOT TAKING ADVANTAGE TO PROMOTE
IT TO SAY WHAT IS NOT POSSIBLE
NOW WITHOUT THE MLU. THAT IS
SPECIFICALLY THAT THERE IS
LANGUAGE THAT WE CAREFULLY
INCLUDED IN THE MLU THAT ALLOWS
FOR A POLICE OFFICER NOT ON THE
SCENE WHEN A CARE RESPONDER
ARRIVES THERE FIRST TO CLEAR
THE SCENE. AND THIS IS A VERY,
VERY IMPORTANT ELEMENT OF THIS
PROGRAM. AND IT IS, I JUST FEEL
STRONGLY WE NEED TO DO AS MUCH
AS WE CAN TO UPLIFT IT. THERE
HAS BEEN A LOT OF CONFUSION
ABOUT THE OBJECTIVES OF THE
PROGRAM TO ALLOW A CARE TEAM
RESPONDER TO ARRIVE AT THE
SCENE AND RENDER ASSISTANCE.
THE LANGUAGE SAYS IF THE CCR
GETS THERE FIRST, THEY WAIT
UNTIL AN OFFICER HAS ASSESSED
THE SCENE IN A MANNER THAT THE
OFFICER DEEMS APPROPRIATE. THAT
LANGUAGE MEANS THAT OFFICERS
CAN CLEAR THE SCENE AS THEY
DETERMINE IT TO BE APPROPRIATE
IT MEANS IT IS NOT NEED THE
PHYSICALLY PRESENT AT THE
SCENE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I HAVE
A QUESTION, I THINK FOR CENTRAL
STAFF. JUST SOME OF THE
COVERAGE THAT I HAVE SEEN CHIEF
DIAZ MENTIONED THERE WAS SOME
LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SPD TO
BE THE ONE WORKING ON SOME
EVENTS DUE TO TERRORISM OR
PROXIMITY TO SENSITIVE AREA
THAT IS SOME OF THE CONCERNS
THAT WERE RAISED IN THE IT.
CAN YOU TELL ME HOW THE BONUSES
APPLY. TO ADDRESS THE LEGAL
CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED. I AM
INTERESTED IN TRYING TO ADDRESS
OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS.
>> LET ME STEP BACK TO THE
CHIEF WHAT HE SAID A YEAR AGO.
I BELIEVE THAT WAS RELATIVE TO
REQUIREMENTS THAT THE
DEPARTMENT HAS AROUND HOMELAND
SECURITY. I THINK THAT WHEN WE
LOOKED INTO THAT THERE WERE NO
SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF STAFF OR
SLOTS WHERE THEY HAD TO BE
FILLED. IT WAS MORE THAT THE
DEPARTMENT'S WERE RESPONSIBLE
FOR THE SECURITY OF STATEMENTS
UNDER THE FEDERAL GUIDELINES.
AND HOW THAT TRANSLATES THERE
WILL BE A NUMBER OF OFFICERS ON
THE SCENE FOR PUBLIC SAFETY
PURPOSES. AND, THOSE OFFICERS,
THAT STAFFING PATTERN WILL BE
DETERMINED BY THE DEPARTMENT.
TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE ARE
NOT OFFICERS REQUIRED FOR
PUBLIC SAFETY PURPOSES. SAY
FOR TRAFFIC OR PATROLLING THE
STREETS, WHAT HAVE YOU, THE
DEPARTMENT WOULD HAVE MORE
LEEWAY TO USE CIVILIANS IN
THOSE ROLES THAN THEY DO NOW.
>> THANK YOU.
>> AND THE MONEY IN OVERTIME?
THE EXTRA FUNDING, IS THAT
PEREVENT OR HOUR?
>> IT WILL BE EACH SHIFT.
RECEIVING THE PREMIUM. THAT IS
SO SPECIAL EVENTS
>> THAT IS THEY ARE DOING ONE
SHIFT FOR SPECIAL EVENT OR CAN
THEY DO MORE?
>> THEY CERTAINLY CAN DO MORE
IN THE SENSE THAT THEY MIGHT
WORK CONSECUTIVE DAYS DOING
SPECIAL EVENTS EACH SHIFT IS
WORTH THE PREMIUM.
>> ARE THERE ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS, WE DID NOT HAVE IT
ON OUR BRIEFING SO I JUST WANT
TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE GET ALL OF
THE QUESTIONS THEY MIGHT HAVE.
MORE DISCUSSION TO BE HAD
TOMORROW. THANK YOU FOR
SPEAKING TO THIS. AND THE
SUMMARY HERE, ANY ADDITIONAL
QUESTIONS?
>> GO AHEAD, GREG.
>> JUST ONE MORE THING TO ADD
TO WHAT COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD
WAS SAYING. THE DIVISION HERE
EVENTUALLY IS THAT THE FOLKS
WILL ALL BE ON THE SAME RADIO
SYSTEM. I BELIEVE THAT IS HOW
IT IS ROLLED OUT. AND IN SUCH A
CASE IF THE OFFICERS ARE IN
CONTACT WITH THE CARE
DEPARTMENT FOLKS AND THEY KNOW
THERE IS NO THREAT, THEY DRIVEN
BY IT OR KNOW THE PERSON THAT
MIGHT BE THE INCIDENT WHERE
THEY CAN VERBALLY CALL
THEMSELVES OFF. WHETHER OR NOT
IT WILL HAPPEN ORIGINALLY WHEN
IT FIRST STARTS OUT THERE MIGHT
BE AN ERA OF CAUTION BUT
HOPEFULLY THAT IS WHERE THIS
PROGRAM WILL GO.
>> AND MAY I.
>> OF COURSE.
>> MY POINT BEING IS THAT I
BELIEVE IN DESCRIBING THE
FLEXIBILITY THAT THE MLU
PROVIDES REGARDLESS OF WHERE WE
ARE IN THIS MOMENT OF TIME AND
IMPLEMENTATION WE SHOULD
DESCRIBE THE NEW FLEXIBILITY IN
THE CONTRACT TO MOVE FORWARD
WITH IT. I AM CONCERNED MEDIA
OUTLETS PICKED UP THE ONE LINE
FROM THE PRESS RELEASE THAT
MAKES IT SOUND LIKE MLU DOES
NOT DO ANYTHING BUT MAKE IT
OKAY FOR BOTH TO ARRIVE AT THE
SCENE FOR THE SAME TIME, YOU
KNOW, THAT IS, THAT IS, THAT IS
NOT THE VISION OF THE PROGRAM.
AND THIS MLU DOES ALLOW US TO
EXPLORE OUR FULL VISION FOR
THIS PROGRAM.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. AND I HAVE
NOT SEEN THAT COVERAGE. I WILL
GO BACK AND LOOK FOR IT AS
WELL. I GUESS ONE THING THAT I
WOULD LIKE TO ASK CENTRAL
STAFF, CAN YOU REMIND US HOW
MANY ACCOUNTABILITY RESOLUTIONS
WERE INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL
ORDINANCE, I BELIEVE IT WAS
AROUND 20 OR SO COMPONENTS?
>> MADAM CHAIR WHAT YOU MIGHT
BE REFERRING TO IS THE
PARAMETERS THAT THE BARGAINING
TEAM?
>> NO. OKAY. I CAN NOT TELL YOU
HOW MANY SPECIFIC
ACCOUNTABILITY COMPONENTS. IF
THAT IS YOUR QUESTION.
>> YEAH, I WAS TRYING TO GET A
SENSE OF THE SCOPE. I RECOGNIZE
CERTAIN ITEMS THAT ARE STILL
ONGOING IN NEGOTIATION TABLE
RELATED TO POTENTIALLY A LONGER
LIST OF PARAMETERS THAT THEY
ARE DESIRED FROM, THE
ORDINANCES THAT WERE PASSED
PRIOR TO MY ARRIVAL ON CITY
COUNCIL. AND SO, IT IS JUST A
LONG TIME BUILDING HAS
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD IS
PAINFULLY AWARE OF, TRYING TO
INCLUDE MORE OF A DIRECTIVE TO
ACCOMPLISH THOSE PARAMETERS.
NOT PARAMETERS BUT THOSE
ACCOUNTABILITY COMPONENTS. I
WAS TRYING TO GET A BROODER
SENSE OF THE SCOPE AND THE
SCALE OF WHAT THAT LONGER TERM
VISION IS. THE REASON I AM
ASKING THAT IS, IF WE HAVE A
SENSE OF THE REMAINING KIND OF
COMPONENTS OF THE ORDINANCE
THAT ARE STILL PART OF THE
ONGOING CONVERSATION WITH A
TIME FRAME ON THAT MIGHT BE TO
KNOW WHAT THE UNIVERSE OF
POLICY ADDITIONS THESE MIGHT BE
AND WE DON'T KNOW THE DOLLAR
AMOUNT. AT LEAST THE TIME LINE
FOR WHEN SOME OF THE OTHER
COMPONENTS WOULD BE
ACCOMPLISHED WOULD BE HELPFUL
TO HEAR.
>> I WISH I COULD GIVE YOU A
TIME LINE. THE NEGOTIATIONS
HAVE BEEN GOING ON FOR TWO
YEARS. THERE ARE MANY
PROVISIONS IN THE
ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE THAT
ARE NOT ADDRESSED IN THE
CONTRACT. IT IS A GOAL OF THE
CITY TO INCORPORATE MANY OF
THOSE INTO THE CONTRACT. YOU
KNOW, THAT IS ONE OF THE
REASONS THAT NEGOTIATION IS
CONTINUING.
>> OBVIOUSLY THE ONGOING
CONVERSATION AROUND WHETHER OR
NOT OUR STATE LEGISLATIVE
PARTNERS CAN HELP US WITH
ENSURING ACCOUNTABILITY PIECES
DO NOT MATCH BUT HAVE TO BE
BARGAINED FOR THAT IS PART OF
THE ONGOING STATE, IS IT NOT?
>> IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD,
THANKS AGAIN, I KNOW IT IS A
COLLECTIVE WORK AS YOU NOTED
GREG AND CENTRAL STAFF AND THE
BARGAINING TEAM AND THEIR
ONGOING CONVERSATIONS AROUND
THIS. THANK YOU FOR BRINGING
THIS FORWARD AND I WILL HAVE
SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AND
ITEMS FOR THE PURPOSES OF
DISCUSSION TOMORROW. I DON'T
THINK I HAVE ANYMORE SPECIFIC
QUESTIONS ON THE MLU IN FRONT
OF US. I THINK WE CAN MOVE TO
THE LAST ITEM OF THIS AGENDA.
>> IT WILL BE THE GENERAL FUND
IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENTS 2024
BUDGET TO REINSTATE A CONTRACT
WITH TRULIO OR SIMILAR SERVICE
PROVIDER.
>> AGAIN THIS IS AN ITEM THAT
WAS IN OUR PACKET. WE BELIEVE
WE HAD A CHANCE TO SPEAK TO IT.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, I SHOULD
ASK ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM
OR CLARIFICATION THAT IS
NECESSARY?
>> OKAY. I AM NOT SEEING ANY.
COUNCILMEMBER -- OKAY. OKAY. I
THINK THAT GETS US THROUGH ALL
OF THE 121 ITEMS THAT WE NOTED
WOULD BE IN GROUP A AND B HERE.
QUESTIONS AND CLARITY WITH THE
PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION AND VOTE
TOMORROW. ALL RIGHT, ONE MORE
ITEM ON OUR AGENDA TODAY.
>> SO, THE LAST ITEM, NUMBER 28
IT IS NOT MEANT FOR DISCUSSION
TODAY. THAT IS THE TRACK II
LEGISLATION THAT WE WILL
DISCUSS IN DETAIL HE WANTED TO
KNOW THE PROCESS AND I THINK
STRAUSS WILL HAVE A QUESTION OR
OTHER COMMENTS BUT I JUST
WANTED AND THROUGH THE AGENDA
IN THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
ITEMS TOMORROW. THINGS
DESCRIBED IN THE CONSENT
CALENDAR WILL BE ONE GROUP VOTE
WE WILL MOVE ON TO VOTING ON
INDIVIDUAL PIECES OF
LEGISLATION AND AMENDMENTS TO
IT WHEN WE GET TO ITEM 27 THAT
IS WHAT WE JUST WALKED THROUGH.
WE WILL GO, WE WILL FIRST TAKE
UP GROUP A. THAT WILL BE ONE
GROUP VOTE. NOT BE READING IN
EVERY INDIVIDUAL ITEM SO BE
PREPARED WITH WHICH ITEMS THAT
YOU MAY WANT TO MAKE BRIEF
COMMENTS ON OR IF THERE ARE ANY
YOU WANT TO REMOVE FOR
INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION AND WE
WILL MOVE TO GROUP B. I WANT TO
NOTE FOR ALL OF THE SPONSORS OF
ANY AMENDMENTS TO LEGISLATION
OR CBA THAT ARE LISTED IN GROUP
B. ANY ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL
VOTE AS THE SPONSOR YOU WILL BE
ASKED TO MAKE THE MOTION TO PUT
IT BEFORE THE COMMITTEE. WE
WILL BE HERE WITH SCRIPTS TO
THROW UP ON THE SCREEN IF
NECESSARY BUT JUST KNOW AS IF
YOU ARE THE PRIME SPONSOR YOU
WILL BE ASKED TO MAKE THE
MOTION TO MOVE ANY ITEMS IF
THEY ARE FOR INDIVIDUAL
CONSIDERATION. THAT IS WHAT I
HAVE ON PROCESS.
>> OKAY. LET'S LEAVE THIS SLIDE
UP. I THINK IT IS HELPFUL.
MONDAY, TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY AND
THURSDAY. BUT IT IS PROBABLE
THAT WE WILL NOT NEED THAT
THURSDAY. WE WILL KEEP OUR
FINGER'S CROSSED BUT HOLD ON TO
THAT DATE FOR NOW, FOLKS, IT IS
PROBABLE. COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS?
.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I WANTED
TO SHARE WITH MY, WITH ALL OF
MY COLLEAGUES I TEND TO WALK ON
AMENDMENT FOR CONSIDERATION
TOMORROW. I PLANNED TO SUBMIT
THIS AMENDMENT PREDETERMINED
DEADLINE AND I MISSED IT. MY
APOLOGIZES. I WILL DISTRIBUTE
THIS AMENDMENT TODAY BEFORE
5:00 P.M. IT IS TO COUNCIL BILL
10727 REGUARDING THE CARE
DEPARTMENT -- REGARDING THE
CARE DEPARTMENT SOURCES, CHAIR
YOU PUT FORWARD, SO WE COMPARIS
LANGUAGE YOU PUT FORWARD CHAIR,
I AM PROPOSING WE RETAIN THE
TITLE OF CHIEF RATHER THAN
DIRECTOR. I DID IT FROM THE
CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD IN
COMMITTEE. WE WILL WANT TO
ESTABLISH CO-EQUAL DEPARTMENTS
IN PUBLIC SAFETY WE WANT TO
HAVE THREE CHIEFS, WHAT I HEARD
IN COMMITTEE LANGUAGE MATTERS
WE HEARD IT FROM THE CHIEF
DIRECTOR AND IN FIRST
RESPONDERS HEARING ABOUT HER
EXPERIENCE GOING TO A
CONFERENCE OF CHIEFS AND BEING
THE ONLY NONCHIEF SET HER INTO
A DIFFERENT POSITIONALLITY THAN
I THINK WE WANT TO SET HER UP
FOR. SO, THIS LANGUAGE IS LEVEL
SETTING ACROSS PUBLIC SAFETY TO
SAY THEY ARE ALL THREE OF EQUAL
IMPORTANCE. I WILL BRING IT
FORWARD TOMORROW.
>> I WAS NOT AWARE OF THIS. I
AM ALSO NOT SURE WHAT THE
PROCESS IS HERE. WE HAVE
ADVISED EVERYONE THAT THERE IS
NOT THE ABILITY TO DO WALK ON
AMENDMENTS AT ALL IN THIS
PROCESS GIVEN THE STRUCTURE
THAT WE OUT LINED FOR TODAY. I
SEE THAT WE HAVE DEPUTY
DIRECTOR'S HAND UP HERE. I WILL
JUST SAY I DO NOT, I DID NOT
HAVE A HEAD'S UP ON THIS. WE
HAVE NO OTHER AMENDMENT
INCLUDED FOR POTENTIAL WALK ON
TOMORROW. I THINK THAT THE
OPTIONS AND THE OPTIONS ARE FOR
FOLKS WITH THE CONCERNS FOR THE
AMENDMENT IT IS TO VOTE NO AND
THAN NOT TO SUPPORT THAT
AMENDMENT IN FRONT OF US. I WAS
NOT MADE AWARE OF THIS. AND
FOR A PREVIEW OF TOMORROW, I
HAVE CONCERN WITH. I AM NOT
ABLE TO WALK ON MY OWN
AMENDMENT. SO, I WILL BE ASKING
FOR FOLKS TO POTENTIALLY
CONSIDER A NO VOTE ON ONE OF
THE PIECES OF LEGISLATION
BECAUSE I WAS NOT ABLE TO
IDENTIFY IN A WAY TO AMEND IS
THAT I THOUGHT WAS FAVORABLE. I
AM GOING TO ASK CENTRAL STAFF
TO LET ME KNOW WHAT THE PROCESS
IS HERE. I WAS PRETTY DIRECT
WITH ALL OTHER MEMBERS
INCLUDING MYSELF, ABOUT NO WALK
ON AMENDMENTS CAN YOU ADVISE
WHAT THE PROCESS IS?
>> SURE, HAPPY TO CHAIR
MOSQUEDA. STRAUSS DID NOT
SUBMIT IT BY THE DEADLINE AND
DID NOT HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE
TO ACCEPT IDEAS AFTER THAT FACT
AND AS YOU NOTED WE HAVE BEEN
REGULARLY HOLDING THAT LINE AND
SAYING NO TO DEVELOPING NEW
IDEAS OR ITERATIONS OF IDEAS
THAT CAME UP AFTER THAT
DEADLINE. SO, WE DID NOT
PREPARE IT FOR THE WALK ON FOR
STRAUSS AND PREPARE THE
AMENDMENT TO WALK IT ON FOR THE
COMMITTEE RULES FOR THE SELECT
BUDGET COMMITTEE THAT WERE
ESTABLISHED VIA MEMO. IT SPEAKS
TO IF AN AMENDMENT IS NOT, DOES
NOT MEET THE DEADLINE FOR
REQUESTING CENTRAL STAFF
PREPARE AN AMENDMENT IT WILL
NOT, DID NOT MEET THE
CO-SPONSORSHIP IT WILL NOT BE
PUBLISHED TO AN AGENDA. I WILL
SAY IT IS, IT IS SILENT ON WHAT
HAPPENS IF SOMEONE PROPOSES
SOMETHING OTHERWISE. SO, IN
THIS CASE CENTRAL STAFF HAS NOT
PREPARED ANY WALK ON AMENDMENTS
AND COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS USING
IT PARLIAMENTARY, A DIFFERENT
WAY WOULD HAVE BEEN AN ORAL
AMENDMENT. WE DON'T HAVE A RULE
TO BLOCK THAT BUT WE DO VERY
MUCH APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBERS
NOT BRINGING A LOT OF NEW IDEAS
FORWARD PARTICULARLY THOSE THAT
WOULD THROW US OUT OF BALANCE.
THAT WAS A LONG WAY OF ME
SAYING THAT, BY PARLIAMENTARY
PROCEDURES, CLERKS CORRECT ME
IF I AM WRONG, THERE IS NOTHING
PREVENTING COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS FROM DISTRIBUTING THIS
TECHNICAL RULES OF THE
COMMITTEE.
>> THERE IS NOT IF YOU ARE
ASKING THE DEPUTY CLERKS.
>>.
>> APOLOGIZE TO THE CHAIR. I
THOUGHT IT WAS A LITTLE MORE
WORKED OUT. IF IT IS CAUSING
MORE HEADACHES THAN IT IS
SOLVING, YOU KNOW, MY INTENTION
HERE WAS TO KEEP THE WORK
AROUND PUBLIC HEALTH AND HEALTH
I REALLY APPRECIATE OF WHAT YOU
WROTE I JUST THINK THAT THE
TITLE SHOULD BE DIRECTOR -- I
DID NOT SEE HOW IT INTERSECTED
WE CAN MAKE AN ORAL AMENDMENT
TO YOUR AMENDMENT TOMORROW I AM
HAPPY TO DO THAT. APOLOGIZE FOR
CREATING MORE PROBLEMS THAN
SOLVING HERE.
>> OKAY. SO AT THE RISK OF
TELLING FOLKS THERE IS AN
OPTION FOR ANY USE OF
AMENDMENTS TOMORROW BECAUSE
THERE REALLY IS NOT. VERY, VERY
CONCERNED ABOUT THE CAPACITY
FOR US TO THEN HAVE TO
REBALANCE ANYTHING. THIS IS
OBVIOUSLY NOT AN ITEM THAT IS
DIRECT DOLLAR AMOUNTS, I CAN
SEE PEOPLE SAYING THE PROCESS
IS OPEN. I PREFER THERE NOT TO
BE WALK ON AMENDMENTS, PREFER
FOR US TO HAVE DISCUSS AND
DEBATE OF THE MERITS OF THE
POLICY AND FOR COUNCILMEMBER
THROUGHOUT THAT PROCESS THEN
IDENTIFY AREAS THAT THEY LIKE
AND SHARE THAT WITH THE
COLLEAGUES OR AREAS THEY DON'T
AND SHARE THAT WITH THEIR
COLLEAGUES. I AM GOING TO CALL
ON OUR CHAIR HERBOLD IF YOU
HAVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
>> THANK YOU. MADAM CHAIR. JUST
FOR THE RECORD I AM ANOTHER
PERSON WHO IS PITCHING THE IDEA
OF WALK ON AMENDMENTS AT THIS
STAGE AND WAS TOLD THAT WOULD
BE CONTRARY TO OUR AGREED UPON
POLICY AND THE RULES FOR THE
BUDGET COMMITTEE. THAT IS NOT
WHY I AM COMING IN HERE. I AM
WONDERING IS IT TRUE THERE IS
NO, NO FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THIS
AMENDMENT SHOULD IT PASS? I
THOUGHT THERE WAS A FINANCIAL
IMPACT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS
AMENDMENT. IF I AM WRONG HAPPY
TO BE WRONG. JUST WONDERING?
>> THERE IS, TO MY KNOWLEDGE
THERE IS NO ASSOCIATED BUDGET
ACTION IN THE 2024 BUDGET THE
FISCAL NOTE FOR THIS
LEGISLATION AS PROPOSED BY THE
MAYOR THAT PROPOSED TO CHANGE
THE TITLE TO CHIEF THAT COUNCIL
MEMBER STRAUSS PROPOSING. IT IS
STATED NO FISCAL IMPACTS FROM
CHANGING THAT TITLE. SO IF IT
IS DIRECT OR OR CHIEF BASED ON
WHAT WAS DISCLOSED BY THE
EXECUTIVE THERE WOULD NOT BE A
FISCAL IMPACT AT THERE TIME. IT
IS JUST AMENDING THE .
>> I AM INTERPRETING WHAT CHAIR
MOSQUEDA AND I RECEIVED FROM
ANN. I MAY BE MISREADING WHAT
THAT MESSAGE MEANT. THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS IF I
MIGHT BE ABLE TO CHAT WITH YOU
AFTERWARDS I WOULD LOVE TO TELL
PEOPLE NO WALK ON AMENDMENTS
TOMORROW. RECOGNIZING THIS
CLEARLY WOULD BE A THIS ITEM
AND A HANDFUL OF OTHERS BUT
REALLY WANT TO DISSWAY NOT
HAVE THAT. SO I JUST WANT TO
EMPHASIZE THAT ON BEHALF OF THE
TEAM. WORKING ON FINALIZING IT.
APPRECIATE IT POTENTIALLY DOES
NOT HAVE A FISCAL IMPACT. STILL
ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO BE HEAVILY
DISCOURAGED AS WE TALKED ABOUT
FOR BRINGING WALK ON
AMENDMENTS. USING PARLIAMENTARY
PROCEDURES THAT IS MY FAVORITE
AS WELL. MAYBE WE CAN CHAT A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT PROCESS
AND PROS AND CONS BOTH TOMORROW
AND WE CAN CHAT A LITTLE MORE.
SO, IF IT IS OKAY. LEAVE IT
OPEN FOR RIGHT NOW.
>> CHAIR I WILL NOT BRING ON A
WALK ON
>> LOOK AT THIS HARMONY
>> IT GOES BACK TO COUNCIL
PRESIDENT SHOWED ME THE WAY
WITH THE ZOO CONTRACT WHERE NO
AMENDMENTS WERE ALLOWED AFTER A
CERTAIN DAY. WE USED THAT
EFFECTIVELY. MAYBE A COUPLE
TIMES THIS YEAR AND IT KEPT THE
PROCESS SMOOTH. MY APOLOGIZES
FOR POTENTIALLY UPENDING THE
PROCESS. I WILL NOT BRING THAT
WALK ON AMENDMENT TOMORROW.
LET'S CHAT ABOUT WHAT THE
OPTIONS ARE.
>> OKAY. APPRECIATE THAT.
ENDING ON A HIGH NOTE. ANY
OTHER COMMENTS THAT FOLKS WOULD
LIKE TO MAKE? I KNOW DIRECTOR
ANDY YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP AT
ONE POINT. IS THERE ANY OTHER
COMMENTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
BEFORE I TURN IT OVER FOR
SUMMARY ON THIS?
>> OKAY.
>> THANK YOU, I JUST WANTED TO
CLARIFY. WE ARE UNLIKELY TO USE
THE MEETING HELD THIS THURSDAY,
THE THURSDAY REFERENCED ON THE
SLIDE IS NOVEMBER 30th WHERE WE
PLAN TO HAVE A BUDGET COMMITTEE
TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS AND
VOTES ON TRACK 2 LEGISLATION, I
WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS ON
THE RECORD OF OUR UP COMING
DISCUSSIONS.
>> GREAT, COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD?
>> ONE OTHER PROCESS-RELATED
QUESTION. SO, GIVEN THAT,
GIVEN WHAT THE DIRECTOR SAID
ABOUT THURSDAY, CAN WE COUNT ON
A HARD STOP AT 5:00? ON
WEDNESDAY? IS IT POSSIBLE THAT
WE MIGHT GO LONGER?
>> I WOULD JUST SAY BOTH FOR
TOMORROW, TUESDAY, AND
WEDNESDAY I CAN NOT GUARANTEE A
HARD STOP AT 5:00. I ASK SAY IT
IS LIKELY WE WILL END BEFORE
5:00 P.M. ON BOTH DAYS. I JUST
WANT TO SET EXPECTATIONS TOO
HIGH TO MEET THAT 5:00 TIME
LINE. WE WENT ABOUT 30 MINUTES
OVER ON THE LAST FRIDAY THAT WE
CONVENED ON OCTOBER 27th. SO, I
WILL TRY TO MAKE SURE WE GET
DONE BY 5:00 BUT THIS YEAR
SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THAN I THINK
PREVIOUS YEAR WHERE WE BRIEFED
THE ITEMS AND WE ALSO VOTED. IT
WAS A VERY LONG DAY WHERE I
THINK WE ENDED AT 8:00. WE DID
BRIEFING TODAY WITH THE INTENT
TO VOTE TOMORROW, AND THE HOPE
IS THAT WE CAN END BY 5:00 P.M.
>> THANK YOU.
>> BOTH DAYS AND THAT WE CAN
FREE YOU UP ON THURSDAY. THAT
IS THE GOAL. WE WILL TRY.
>> ALL RIGHT. WE WILL WORK ON
IT.
>> ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. I THINK
WE HAVE REACHED THE END OF
TODAY. THERE IS A PUBLIC
HEARING TONIGHT AND COLLEAGUES
AS I MENTIONED I AM FEELING
UNDER THE WEATHER. I AM GOING
TO BE HERE AND SHARING
REMOTELY. I ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO
LISTEN INTO PUBLIC COMMENT AS
ALWAYS. IF YOU ARE ABLE TO AND
WE HAVE A LOT OF OTHER
COUNCILMEMBERS TO NOTE THEY ARE
FEELING UNDER THE WEATHER. IF
YOU CAN NOT CATCH IT ALL LIVE
TODAY IT WILL BE RECORDED.
THANK YOU CENTRAL STAFF. DO
GIVE COUNCIL A LISTEN IN IF YOU
ARE ABLE TO BEFORE THE VOTES
THIS WILL HELP THEM FORM OUR
DELIBERATIONS TOMORROW. AND I
ALSO WANT TO REMIND FOLKS THAT
WE WILL HAVE ANOTHER
OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN ON WHAT
IS RELATED TO 2025 AND BEYOND,
OTHER BUDGET-RELATED ITEMS THAT
ARE NOT RELATED WE WILL HAVE
FULL COUNCIL. EXCUSE ME, WE
WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
PUBLIC COMMENT AGAIN ON
NOVEMBER 20th. ON NOVEMBER
30th, IF WE CAN WE WILL TRY TO
WORK IT IN ON WEDNESDAY. BUT,
THAT DEPENDS ON TIME SO RIGHT
NOW WE ARE SLATED TO TAKE FULL
PUBLIC COMMENT THIS EVENING
STARTING AT 5:00 P.M. THE
ONLINE PORTAL IS OPEN. WE DO
ENCOURAGE YOU TO SIGN UP AND
PARTICIPATE REMOTELY.
TESTIFYING IN PERSON MY
APOLOGIZES NOT BEING THERE
TODAY. I WILL BE THERE REMOTELY
AND LISTENING TO EVERY WORD.
THANK YOU TO
>>> AND TO MY TEAM WHO IS ON
SITE WITH MELANIE AND WILL BE
HELPING TO PROVIDE SOME
SERVICES FOR THE VOLUNTEERS
THAT ARE THERE TO THE DEGREE
THAT WE HAVE PEOPLE IN THE
BUILDING AS WELL. BUT REALLY
ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO CONSIDER
PARTICIPATING REMOTELY TODAY.
MY APOLOGIES, I WILL BE REMOTE
AS WELL.
>> OKAY, HEARING NONE, GOING TO
GO MAKE SOME TEA, ALL HAVE A
GOOD EVENING AND I'LL SEE YOU
AT 5:00 P.M. THIS MEETING IS