‎GOOD MORNING. THE SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE WILL COME TO ORDER. IT IS NOVEMBER 13th 2024. WILL THE -- PLEASE CALL THE ROW? ‎COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. ‎HERE. ‎COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. ‎PRESENT. ‎COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS. ‎PRESENT. ‎TODAY, WE HAVE A HEARING ON THE MEMORIAL STADIUM REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. WE HAVE A PRESENTATION OF BUDGET LEGISLATION, INCLUDING GROUPS A, B, C, AND D, INCLUDING CONSENT AMENDMENTS AS PRESENTED ON THE BALANCING PACKAGE ON OCTOBER 30th. HER POST AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED ON NOVEMBER 1st, AND LEGISLATION GENERATING ADDITIONAL REVENUE SURFACE -- SOURCES. HEARING NO OBJECTION, THE AGENDA IS ADOPTED. I JUST HAD A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE AGENDA AND VERY TECHNICAL TERMS. I'M GOING TO SAY IT IN MORE PLAIN LANGUAGE FOR US, AND THEN WE ARE GOING TO GET MOVING. TODAY, WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF PUBLIC COMMENT. WE HAD A PUBLIC HEARING THAT WAS NOTICED IN THE NEWSPAPERS OF RECORD FOR THE LAST 30 DAYS REGARDING THE MEMORIAL STADIUM REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. WE WILL THEN MOVE INTO VERBAL PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE LESS THAN 12 HOURS AGO, RECEIVING PUBLIC COMMENT, AS WELL. WE WILL HAVE A PRESENTATION -- IT IS AN OVERVIEW OVER THE NEXT FEW DAYS. TODAY, THERE ARE ZERO VOTES. WE WILL NOT BE VOTING ON ANYTHING TODAY. TODAY IS INFORMATIONAL ONLY. IN THIS PART OF THE BUDGET, WE ARE DEAD SET IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR TWO LONGEST DAYS, HAVING THE HEARING LAST NIGHT AND THE OVERVIEW TODAY. FROM HERE, WE WILL TURN OVER SOME OF THE MORE DIFFICULT DAYS, BUT NOT AS LONG. WE ARE DOING NO FLOATS. WE WILL LOOK AT OTHER BUDGET REGISTRATION. THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TEXT LEGISLATION FOR MYSELF. WE WILL REVIEW THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THOSE ARE ITEMS IN GROUP A THAT WERE IN THE PACKAGE. TODAY, WHEN WE GO OVER THEM, WE WILL ONLY BE TALKING ABOUT THE CHANGES SINCE THE SHARES PACKAGE. WE WILL HAVE THESE IN GROUPS LABELED BY DEPARTMENTS. I WILL ASK COLLEAGUES FOR YOU TO HOLD QUESTIONS UNTIL WE GET THROUGH THE ENTIRE DEPARTMENT, AND THEN, AT THAT POINT, WE CAN GO BACK TO INDIVIDUAL CBAS WITHIN THAT DEPARTMENT. FROM THERE, WE WILL BRIEF GROUPS B, C, AND D. IF YOU ARE THE SPONSOR, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO YOU. YOU HAVE A BRIEF INTRODUCTION FROM CENTRAL STAFF COME AND THEN I WILL TURN IT OVER TO YOU, COLLEAGUES, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING TO ASK THEM. OR IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO HOLD YOUR QUESTIONS FOR ONE-ON-ONE SESSIONS WITH CENTRAL STAFF, WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE OUT BY FIVE. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE HAS A MEETING TO GO TO AT 5:00. I ALSO HAVE AN OPEN HOUSE AT 5:00. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, I WISH THESE THE PERMITS WOULD CHECK THE SCHEDULE, BUT HERE WE ARE. AND SO, YOU CAN SPEAK AS LONG AS YOU WANT, BUT PLEASE HOLD YOUR COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS IF POSSIBLE BECAUSE YOU HAVE SEEN THE LIST. WE HAVE A LONG LIST TO GET THROUGH TODAY. WHEN WE MOVE INTO THE NEXT FEW DAYS, THE STATUS TODAY. WE ARE DOING THE OVERVIEW. WHEN WE GET INTO TOMORROW, WE WILL BE VOTING GROUPS LETTER A AND B. WE WILL BE GOING THROUGH THE VOTING. THE BALANCING PACKAGE -- MEMBERS, IF YOU WANT TO PULL AN ITEM OUT OF THE CONSENT PACKAGE, YOU ARE FREE TO DO SO. YOU DO NOT NEED TO PULL AN ITEM OUT TO SPEAK TO IT. SO WHEN WE VOTE ON GROUP 8 TOMORROW, IF THERE IS AN ITEM THAT YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO, YOU CAN SPEAK TO IT. WHEN WE START PULLING ITEMS OUT, IF WE HAVE TO VOTE AFFIRMATIVELY FOR 150 ITEMS, WE ARE GOING TO BE HERE FOR A REALLY LONG TIME. SO IT IS AN OPERATIONAL PROCESS. AGAIN, YOU CAN PULL ITEMS UP FOR INDIVIDUAL VOTES. WE WILL THEN GO TO GROUP B. GROUP C IS GENERAL CONSENSUS. THEY COULD'VE BEEN IN GROUP A, BUT WE DIDN'T GET THEM INTO THE SHARES PACKAGE. AGAIN, THE SPONSOR WILL SPEAK TO THE ITEM. THIS IS GROUP C, WHERE WE RESERVE MORE TIME FOR MORE ROBUST DISCUSSION. TOMORROW, WE WILL GROUP -- VOTE ON GROUP A AND B AND C. IF WE ARE NOT VOTING ON GROUP D BY 3:00 P.M., I WILL HOLD IT FOR FRIDAY. I CAN TELL YOU, IT CAN GET EXHAUSTING UP HERE VOTING FOR THAT MANY HOURS. FOR GROUP D, I WOULD LIKE US TO BE AS FRESH AND READY TO GO. WE HAVE TWO BUSINESS DAYS TO VOTE ON ALL OF THESE ITEMS. IT MAY GO FAST. IT MAY GO SLOW. WE WILL TAKE IT AS IT COMES. COLLEAGUES, ANY QUESTIONS ON THE SHARES REPORT? LET'S MOVE INTO THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE WILL OPEN THE HEARING. IF YOU HAVE GENERAL COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED BUDGET, THOSE COMMENTS WILL BE ACCEPTED AT THE CONCLUSION OF THIS HEARING. CLERK, HOW MANY SPEAKERS ARE SET UP TO ADDRESS THAT MEMORIAL STADIUM REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT? ‎I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE IS ONE -- THERE IS ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY. DARCY, THE REMOTE SPEAKER. OTHER THAN THAT, NO ONE IN PERSON. ‎GOOD MORNING, DARCY. IF YOU COULD PRESS START SIX TO UNMUTE. ARE YOU HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT THAT MEMORIAL STADIUM REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT OR FOR GENERAL COMMENTS? ‎[ INAUDIBLE ] ‎THANK YOU. WE WILL COME BACK TO YOU IN A MOMENT. ‎SEEING AS THERE ARE NO SPEAKERS PRESENT FOR THIS HEARING, THE HEARING ON THE MEMORIAL STADIUM REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT IS NOW CLOSED. THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES. WE ARE GOING TO MOVE INTO THE OPEN HYBRID PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. CLERK, HOW MANY FOLKS DO WE HAVE SIGNED UP TODAY? ‎SORRY. FOUR IN PERSON AND TENT REMOTE. ‎THANK YOU. WE ARE GOING TO TAKE GROUPS OF 10. WE WILL DO IN PERSON FIRST. AND THEN WE WILL MOVE TO THE GROUP ONLINE. IN PERSON, YOU CAN STAND UP AT BOTH PODIUMS AND ALTERNATE. WE HAVE BRIAN, JASON, ALEX, AND HALLIE. BRIAN, WELCOME. ‎GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU, COUNCIL. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE FOR COMING BACK SO SOON FOR SOMEONE THAT HAS EXPERIENCE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE LAST NIGHT, AND TONIGHT, AND TODAY. I AM HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE S.D.O.T. GROUP. ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES SPOKE LAST NIGHT. I WILL HAVE SOME ABBREVIATED REMARKS SIMILAR TO HERS. I WANT TO REITERATE THAT WE STRONGLY URGE COUNCIL TO SUPPORT THIS. WE URGE YOU STRONGLY TO PRIORITIZE THESE INVESTMENTS, ESPECIALLY FOR OUR MOST VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES, INCLUDING LOW INCOME, BIPOC, IMMIGRANT REFUGEES, AND UNHOUSED AND ASIAN COMMUNITIES. PERSONALLY SPEAKING, SOMEONE WHO WORKS WITH INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES IN THE COMMUNITY, WITH TRANSITION EQUITY OPTIONS -- IT IS SOME OF THE GREATEST DETERMINATES FOR THEM TO GET HOUSING, PARTICULARLY IN THEIR JOB SEARCH OR HOUSING SEARCH. WE REALLY APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW, PROGRAMS SUCH AS THE NISPP. WE WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR CLOSE ATTENTION TO THOSE PROGRAMS. AS MY COLLEAGUE MENTIONED EARLIER, FACETS LIKE LANGUAGE ACCESSIBILITY, FACE-TO-FACE ENGAGEMENT AND DATA-DRIVEN DECISIONS ARE WHAT WE FEEL ARE IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS. WE APPRECIATED THE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE PUBLIC COMMENT, TO GIVE FEEDBACK, TO WORK WITH THE COUNCIL, MAYOR HARRELL, AND S.D.O.T. ON THIS BUDGET. WE LOOK FORWARD TO ADVOCATING FOR MORE ASPORTATION ACCESSIBILITY AND INFORMATION TRANSPARENCY. WE HOPE THAT YOU WOULD WORK TOGETHER WITH S.D.O.T. TO MAKE SURE THE BUDGET CAN BE IMPLEMENTED SMOOTHLY IN A TIMELY MANNER. THANK YOU SO MUCH. ‎THANK YOU, BRIAN. ‎NEXT UP IS JASON. GOOD MORNING, JASON. ‎GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS JASON AUSTIN PRUITT PROGRAM DIRECTOR AT THE NIELS PARTNERSHIP COALITION. I AM HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF INVESTING IN SEATTLE MEAL PROGRAMS. I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH AND COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS FOR SUPPORTING THESE AMENDMENTS. I ALSO WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER MOORE FOR PROPOSING A CAPITAL GAINS TAX. THEY ARE THE FRONT LINE OF DEFENSE AGAINST HUNGER IN SEATTLE. OUR 45 MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS PRODUCE OVER 4 MILLION READY TO EAT MEALS EVERY YEAR. OUR MEMBERS INCLUDE ORGANIZATIONS SUCH AS THE SENIOR CENTER, THE CITY MY FIND, AND CULTIVATE SOUTH PARK. EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD IN SEATTLE CONTAINS AT LEAST ONE MEAL PROGRAM THAT WILL BENEFIT FROM THESE INVESTMENTS. THIS WILL HELP OUR MEMBERS STAY AFLOAT. THIS YEAR, SEATTLE MEAL PROGRAMS THAT MISSED A INCREASE IN DEMAND. THIS COULD NOT HAVE COME AT A WORSE TIME AS FEDERAL FUNDING FOR HUNGER RELIEF PROGRAMS ARE NOW IN SERIOUS JEOPARDY. WHEN PEOPLE ARE UNABLE TO FEED THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILIES, THEY WILL RESORT TO WHATEVER MEANS NECESSARY TO GET THEIR NEXT MEAL. MEAL PROGRAMS PROVIDE STABILITY AND STRUCTURE TO PEOPLE THAT WOULD OTHERWISE CYCLE THROUGH THE MEDICAL AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AT GREAT EXPENSE TO TAXPAYERS. AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR FUNDING BOTH CAPITAL AND OPERATIONS FUNDING SUPPORT FOR MEAL PROGRAMS. THESE MODEST INVESTMENTS IN FOOD SECURITY WILL HELP CREATE A SEATTLE THAT IS SAFE AND WELCOMING TO ALL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. ‎THANK YOU. ‎UP NEXT IS ALEX, FOLLOWED BY HALLIE. ‎ALEX, WELCOME. ‎HELLO. GOOD MORNING, COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME IS ALEX. I AM THE KITCHEN MANAGER AT CHIEF SEATTLE CLUB. I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF INVESTING IN SEATTLE MEAL PROGRAMS. I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH AND STRAUSS FOR SUPPORTING AMENDMENTS DSH4 AND 10. I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER MOORE FOR PROPOSING A TAX. THIS HAS ALLOWED CHIEF SEATTLE CLUB TO PURCHASE FOOD AND AMOUNTS WE NEED. BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE THIS IS IMPORTANT, BOTH CULTURALLY AND HEALTHWISE. IT BRINGS OUR PEOPLE TOGETHER, AND IT IS IMPORTANT TO KEEP TRADITIONAL MEALS ALIVE AND IN OUR DIETS. WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO REPLACE AND PURCHASE NEW KITCHEN EQUIPMENT THAT KEEPS US RUNNING SMOOTHLY WITH LARGE NUMBERS OF MEMBERS SERVED DAILY. THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH'S PROPOSAL TO INVEST IN MEAL PROGRAMS LIKE OURS. SO WE CAN CONTINUE TO MEET THE NEEDS OF EVERYONE WHO CALLS SEATTLE HOME. THANK YOU, GUYS. ‎THANK YOU. HALLIE, WELCOME. ‎GOOD MORNING, COUNCILMEMBERS. LONG TIME NO SEE. MY NAME IS HALLIE WILLIS. I'M THE MANAGER FOR THE COALITION ON HOMELESSNESS. I'M A RENTER IN DISTRICT 6. I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER MORALES HOLLINGSWORTH, AND MOORE. THOSE SERVICES ARE ESSENTIAL TO KEEP PEOPLE HOUSED AND RESOLVE ISSUES BEFORE SOMEONE LOSES THEIR HOUSING. THESE ARE SOME OF THE MOST COST-EFFECTIVE TOOLS WE HAVE TO PREVENT HOMELESSNESS. PLEASE VOTE YES ON SDCI 002 AND SDCI 005. IT IS ESSENTIAL WE GROW THOSE INVESTMENTS. BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF ALREADY MODEST TENANT SERVICE INVESTMENTS. COUNCIL SHOULD AVOID CARVING THOSE FUNDS OUT OF TENANT SERVICES AND VOTE NO ON HSD 331 TO KEEP THOSE SERVICES WHOLE. THE CITY NEEDS TO ENSURE THAT RENTAL ASSISTANCE AND TENANT SERVICES ARE CONNECTED, SO THAT PEOPLE ACCESSING TENANT SERVICES THROUGH COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS CAN GET ACCESS TO RENTAL ASSISTANCE FUNDING TO KEEP THEM HOUSED. WE ALSO RECOMMEND THAT YOU AVOID LIMITING LEGAL DEFENSE TO PEOPLE AT OR BELOW 200% OF FEDERAL POVERTY. THAT IS ABOUT $30,000 PER YEAR. THAT IS AN OUTDATED METRIC THAT DOESN'T REFLECT THE EXTREMELY HIGH COST OF LIVING IN THIS CITY. IF WE WANT TO PREVENT HOMELESSNESS, WE NEED TO EXPAND THESE SERVICES, NOT RESTRICT THEM. PLEASE VOTE NO ON THE PROVISO THAT WOULD LIMIT THESE SERVICES. THANK YOU. ‎THANK YOU. WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO ONLINE PUBLIC COMMENT. WE DO HAVE A PARTICIPANT, PATRICIA, WHO IS LISTED NOT PRESENT. PATRICIA, PLEASE CALL IN NOW. WE HAVE NOW 11 FOLKS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP ONLINE. AND SO, PATRICIA, YOU HAVE ABOUT 20 MINUTES RIGHT NOW UNTIL WE WILL CALL ON YOU. YOU'RE GOING TO MOVE THROUGH THIS. I WILL CALL EVERYONE IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE REGISTERED AND THEN WE WILL GO ONE BY ONE. WE WILL FIRST HAVE ALBERTO ALVAREZ. ALLEN GREENE, PATRICIA BOWEN, IF SHE CALLS IN. I SAID THAT WRONG -- DARCY , KATE, AND BJ. WITH THAT, STARTING WITH ALBERTO ALVAREZ, I SEE YOU ARE ON MUTE, ALBERTO. THANK YOU. WELCOME. GOOD MORNING. ‎GOOD MORNING. AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WORKER PROTECTIONS, PROGRESSIVE REVENUE. COUNCIL, YOU KNOW THE SPIEL BY NOW. BUT I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO POINT OUT HOW WELL THE BUDGET MEETINGS HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED. WHEN THE PUBLIC IS ALLOWED TO SPEAK, TRUE GOVERNANCE IS ACHIEVED. RESPECT IS EARNED, AND OUT OF ALL THE MEETINGS I FOLLOWED, IT IS CLEARLY PROVEN THAT PEOPLE WILL MAINTAIN ORDER AS LONG AS THEY KNOW THEY WILL BE HEARD. TO BUDGET CHAIR STRAUSS, WELL DONE. TO COUNCILMEMBERS HOLLINGSWORTH, MOORE, SAKA, AND STRAUSS, PLEASE WORK TOGETHER, REACH OUT, AND PARTNER UP ON A BUDGET THAT WILL BUILD HOUSING, PROTECT WORKERS, AND BRING IN THE REVENUE NEEDED TO BUILD A CITY FOR THE WORKING CLASS. THANK YOU, AND HAVE A GOOD DAY. ‎THANK YOU. NEXT IS SALISTINE. I SEE YOU ARE HERE. STAR 62 ON MUTE. -- UNMUTE. ‎I MANAGE A TENANT SERVICES PROGRAM. I WANT TO THANK THE COUNCIL, ESPECIALLY COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, MOORE, AND HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR THEIR EFFORT TO FULLY FUND TENANT SERVICES. WHEN TENANT SERVICES ARE FULLY FUNDED, WE CAN HELP THEM RESOLVE ISSUES BEFORE THEY REACH [ INAUDIBLE ] HE WAS QUESTIONING WHY THEIR LANDLORD WAS INSISTING THEY MOVE OUT. THEY DID NOT WANT TO PAY FOR THE LODGING AND INCREASE THE RENT WITHOUT ISSUING EIGHT 180 DAY NOTICE. OUR COUNSELOR EDUCATED THIS COLOR ON RIGHTS THEY WERE NOT AWARE OF AND HELPS THEM AVOID A POTENTIAL FUTURE EVICTION NOTICE. IN 2023, OVER 1700 MENTORS IN SEATTLE AND KING COUNTY GOT SUPPORT FROM OUR PROGRAM AT SOLID GROUND. WITH MORE PEOPLE HOMELESS IN OUR CITY THAN EVER BEFORE, AND WITH INTEREST RATES AT HISTORIC HIGHS, WE NEED TENANT SERVICES PROGRAMS TO BE FULLY FUNDED. PLEASE SUPPORT COUNCILMEMBER MORALES'S AMENDMENT. THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING OUR COMMENTS. ‎THANK YOU, SALISTINE. UP NEXT IS ANKUR . I SEE YOU ARE HERE NOW, ANKUR. STAR SIX TO ON MUTE. THANK YOU. WELCOME. ‎GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS -- ANKUR. ‎THIS WILL DELIVER SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS FOR ALL USERS AND RELIABILITY IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRANSPORTATION USERS ALONG THE CORRIDOR. CURVE EXTENSIONS -- THESE ARE PROVEN TOOLS AND THE CITY SHOULD CONTINUE TO IMPLEMENT THEM. ROUTE 40 IS THE TYPE OF PROJECT THAT SEATTLE SHOULD DELIVER MORE OF TO MEET CLIMATE COMMITMENTS. I WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT THAT USE OF AUTOMATED CAMERA ENFORCEMENT REVENUE, BACK INTO TRAFFIC SAFETY, INSTEAD OF AS AN INDEFINITE FUNDING SOURCE FOR OTHER PROJECTS. THE GOAL SHOULD BE TO MAKE OUR STREETS SAFE BY DESIGN AND INFRASTRUCTURE AND REMOVE THE RELIANCE ON AUTOMATED ENFORCEMENT. THANK YOU. ‎THANK YOU. NEXT, ALAN. ALAN, I SEE ARE HERE. STAR SIX TO UNMUTE. I SEE YOU ARE OFF MUTE. WELCOME. ‎HI. MY NAME IS ELLEN CRANE. I AM A DISTRICT 3 RESIDENT. ON BEHALF OF THE FIRST HILL, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU ALL AND THANK COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH FOR HER PROPOSAL TO INCLUDE CRITICAL MAINTENANCE FUNDING IN THE BUDGET FOR FIRST HILL PARK. THIS PARK IS A CENTRAL GREEN SPACE IN ONE OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE OPEN SPACES ARE INCREDIBLY LIMITED. EVERY SQUARE FOOT OF GREEN SPACE MATTERS TO THIS COMMUNITY. FIRST HILL PARK WENT THROUGH A COMMUNITY REMODEL INTO THE CENTENNIAL, TESTAMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS CARE AND COMMITMENT TO THIS PARK. WITHOUT FUNDING FOR MAINTENANCE, THAT INVESTMENT IS NOW AT RISK. WITHOUT REGULAR UPKEEP, THE PARK CAN BECOME QUICKLY UNUTILIZED. IT CAN CREATE UNSANITARY CONDITIONS FOR ALL. TO BE CLEAR, MEETING THE PARK IS NOT JUST ABOUT KEEPING IT PRETTY. IT IS ABOUT KEEPING IT ACTIVATED AND SAFE. PLEASE HELP US IN CREATING THIS ENVIRONMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ‎THANK YOU. PATRICIA BOWEN IS NOT PRESENT. WE WILL MOVE ON TO [ INAUDIBLE ] . I SEE YOU ARE OFF MUTE. WELCOME. ‎HI, EVERYONE. GOOD MORNING. I AM THE DIRECTOR AT ASIAN COUNSELING. WE ARE URGING COUNCIL TO INVEST IN OUR CITY'S MOST VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES. WITH MORE CLIENTS AND COMMUNITIES ON THE STREET THAN EVER, WE ASK COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE [ INAUDIBLE ] PENTKE MIKE GOODING 62% INVESTMENT IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WE NEED TO INVEST IN STRUCTURES THAT SUPPORT OUR UNHOUSED, INCLUDING INCREASING RENTAL ASSISTANCE, RESTRAINT TENANT SUPPORTS COME AND FUNDING 300 SHELTER BEDS, DAY CENTERS, AND REHOUSING SERVICES. WE HAVE SEEN FUNDING FOR GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE PREVENTION. [ INAUDIBLE ] WHO ARE VULNERABLE TO TRAFFIC AND VIOLENCE ARE VERY HIGH. WHILE WE RECOGNIZE THAT WE ARE FACING MAJOR DEFICITS, WE ARE ALSO TRYING TO CHOOSE BETWEEN ESSENTIAL SERVICES THAT ARE COMMITTEE MEMBERS NEED. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. ‎THANK YOU. UP NEXT IS PHONIKA. MY APOLOGIES FOR GETTING YOUR NAME WRONG. I SEE YOU ARE OFF MUTE. WELCOME. ‎GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU. WELCOME COUNCILMEMBERS AND CHAIR STRAUSS. I APPRECIATE THE EFFORT. MY NAME IS PHONIKA JOHN. MY COLLEAGUE, PATRICIA BOWEN, WHO MANAGES THE BENEFITS LEGAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM THE SITE HAD TO STEP AWAY. SHE WANTED TO THANK THE COUNCIL FOR RESTORING FUNDS FOR LEGAL SERVICES FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE TRYING TO ACCESS PUBLIC BENEFITS, AND WE HOPE THAT YOU ALL WILL FINALIZE THOSE IN THE CONSENT PACKAGE. WE WANTED TO SHARE SOME GRATITUDE TO COUNCILMEMBER MORALES AND MOORE AND HOLLINGSWORTH . WE ASK THAT THE COUNCIL SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT THAT KEEPS SERVICES WHOLE. AND REJECT THE AMENDMENT TO TAKE FUNDING AWAY FROM THESE SERVICES TO FUND RENTAL ASSISTANCE. AS YOU HEARD FROM ANOTHER COMMENTOR, FROM HER SERVICES PROGRAM, RENTAL ASSISTANCE IS CRUCIAL. WE SUPPORT THOSE INVESTMENTS. IN TENANT SERVICE PROGRAMS CAN HELP PEOPLE NEEDING RENTAL ASSISTANCE -- IN THE FIRST PLACE. WE THINK THAT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT THING AT A TIME WHEN WE ARE GOING TO EXPECT MORE RENTERS STRUGGLING. LASTLY, WE WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU ALL TO HOLD OFF ON MAKING PERMANENT POLICY CHANGES DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS. NUMEROUS COMMUNITY GROUPS HAVE WORKED WITH US. WITH SUCH A MAJOR CHANGE TO SUCH A MAJOR REVENUE STREAM, WE HOPE THERE IS A MORE THOROUGH THE COLDER INVESTMENT PROCESS. I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER MOORE FOR INTRODUCING THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX AND RECOGNIZING THE NEED FOR MORE PROGRESSIVE REVENUE TO FUND CRITICAL SERVICES. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR YOUR HARD WORK DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS. AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU. ‎THANK YOU. UP NEXT IS PAULINA. PAULINA, I SEE YOU ARE HERE. PRESS START SIX -- STAR SIX TO UNMUTE. ‎ON TO TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET. [ INAUDIBLE ] COULD LOSE 100,000 IN ANNUAL FUNDING. GENERALLY, THERE ARE 1600 PROJECTS OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS. IT CONTINUES TO BE A TOP ISSUE FOR VOTERS AND RESIDENTS IN POLL AFTER POLL. I URGE COUNCIL MEMBERS TO KEEP THAT IN MIND AND TO PROTECT THE JUMPSTART FUND PLAN. EVERYONE IN OUR CITY HAS THE ABILITY TO STAY HERE, LIVE, AND WORK. THANK YOU. ‎THANK YOU, PAULINA. UP NEXT IS DARCY. DARCY, WELCOME. I SEE YOU ARE OFF MUTE. ‎GOOD MORNING, CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS DARCY. I AM CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. I AM A RENTER IN DISTRICT 3. I AM PART OF THE COALITION. I AM HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF INVESTING IN THE SEATTLE MEALS PROGRAM. I'M THANKFUL FOR COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH AND STRAUSS , WHO HAVE SUPPORTED AMENDMENTS 4 AND 10, WHICH PROVIDES FUNDING FOR THE BUDGET. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER MOORE FOR PROPOSING THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX. NEW REVENUE SOURCES ARE SO NEEDED. THIS PROPOSED FUNDING IS CRITICAL TO PROGRAMS, BIG AND SMALL. IN COALITION MEETINGS, IT IS PAINFULLY CLEAR THAT WE ARE SERVING MORE MEALS AND DOING IT WITH LESS FINANCIAL SUPPORT THAN EVER. MANY OF US ARE FACING THE SOBERING DECISION OF LETTING OUR NEIGHBORS GO WITHOUT MEALS. AT HUNGER INTERVENTION PROGRAMS, WE ARE STRUGGLING TO KEEP OUR SENIOR MEALS PROGRAM MONEY. THIS REACHES OUR MOST VULNERABLE, OFTEN HOMEBOUND [ INAUDIBLE ] COMMUNITY MEMBERS. SEATTLE IS STRONG ENOUGH TO SUPPORT EVERY CITIZEN. THIS FUNDING HELPS MAKE THAT A REALITY. THERE ARE SERIOUS FUNDING GAPS FOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS. FUNDING LIKE THIS GOES FORWARD WITH A MEAL PROGRAM. FUNDING LIKE THIS MAKES SEATTLE A SAFER AND STRONGER PLACE FOR EVERY COMMUNITY MEMBER. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY. ‎THANK YOU, DARCY. NEXT IS KENNY, FOLLOWED BY BJ. KATE, I SEE YOU ARE HERE. STAR SIX TO UNMUTE.. ‎I AM THE CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. I WOULD LIKE TO THINK COUNCILMEMBER MORALES , MOORE, AND'S WORTH FOR RESTORING FUNDING. DUE TO THE CONFUSING WAY THESE SERVICES WERE COMBINED, ANOTHER $527,000 IS NEEDED TO RESTORE THE FUNDING AND HAVE THE IMPACT THE AMENDMENT INTENSE. I URGE THE COUNCIL TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT AND EXPLORE ADDITIONAL EFFORTS TO FULLY RESTORE SERVICES TO 24 LEVELS AND REJECT [ INAUDIBLE ] UNDER SDCI TO HSC. THEY SHOULD NOT BE PITTED AGAINST EACH OTHER. BECAUSE SDCI IS MANAGING A TENANT SERVICES CONTRACT, TO REDUCE OVERLAP AND ENSURE THAT RENTAL ASSISTANCE IS USED EFFECTIVELY, IT SHOULD BE DISTRIBUTED BY THE SAME DEPARTMENT. I OPPOSE PROVISO SDCI 006A. IT REQUIRES INCOME VERIFICATION REPORTING. IT WOULD CREATE A BENEFITS [ INAUDIBLE ] . THEY ARE SPENDING MORE THAN HALF THEIR INCOME ON RENT. GIVEN THAT IT IS 45% HIGHER, AND HAVING 112% HIGHER THAN THE NATIONAL AVERAGE, BASED ON FEDERAL INCOME LIMITS, IT IS A DISREGARD FOR THE REALITY THAT SEATTLE RENTERS FACE. FINALLY, WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE ROLE OF THE PAYROLL TAX AND BALANCING THE BUDGET, I URGE AGAINST MAKING A PERMANENT FIX TO THE FUND SHORTFALL. PLEASE REJECT PROPOSALS TO [ INAUDIBLE ] THIS PLAN. EXPLORE OTHER OPTIONS AND COULD INCRIMINATE WITHOUT DIVERTING FUNDS FROM EEI. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. ‎THANK YOU, KATE. ‎NEXT, WE HAVE BJ . WELCOME, BJ. GOOD MORNING. ‎GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS BJ. I AM A CHICKS -- D6 HOMEOWNER. I'M DISAPPOINTED WITH THE WAY THAT COUNCIL IS TRYING TO USE THIS BUDGET TO ADVANCE POLICY ITEMS THAT FELL DURING THE YEAR, LIKE THE ATTEMPT TO GUT MINIMUM WAGE FOR GIG WORKERS. THIS DOES THAT BY DEFUNDING OLS, OFFICE OF LABOR STANDARDS. THAT SHOWS WHAT VITAL WORK THEY ARE DOING TO KEEP -- WELL, TO FIGHT CRIME. WAGE THEFT IS CRIME, EVEN THOUGH ALL DON'T REFER TO IT AS MUCH. IT SHOULD BE GETTING EXPENDED TO HELP PEOPLE GET THEIR PAY AND GET -- STAY HOUSED. THIS EFFECTIVELY CUTS RETRO PRODUCTIONS, WHICH COUNCIL TALKED ABOUT DOING EARLIER THIS YEAR BUT THE BUDGET DOES THAT BY CUTTING TENANT SERVICES, AND MAKING EVICTION DEFENSE PRETTY MUCH UNAVAILABLE BY PUTTING IN INCOME REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE CERTAINLY LOW FOR THE CITY OF SEATTLE. I WOULD URGE COUNCIL, IF THEY DON'T WANT TO ROLL BACK TENANT PROTECTIONS, TO DO WITH THE LAST CALLER LAID OUT IN TERMS OF WHICH AMENDMENT'S TO ACCEPT, AND WHICH TO REJECT. THE FEW CUTS TO OLS AND TENANT EXPENSE ARE NOT DUE UNTIL LACK OF FUNDS. AT THE SAME TIME, SPD IS GETTING 2.5 MILLION FOR GHOST COMPS. [ INAUDIBLE ] YOU CAN SEE IT IF YOU LOOK AT THE MEMOS FROM THIS RYAN LESTER. THIS YEAR'S COST OF THE CUP IS $183,000. LAST YEAR, IT WAS 142,000 WHILE WE ARE CUTTING PAY AND NOT GIVING HUMAN SERVICE WORKERS PAY, CUTTING LABOR PROTECTIONS AND TENTATIVE -- TENANT SERVICES, THOSE COPS ARE GETTING A MASSIVE RAISE. ON TOP OF THAT, THAT DOESN'T COUNT THE MILLIONS THAT SPD GETS FOUR [ INAUDIBLE ] . THEY HAVE NO JURISDICTION ON ANY WATERS, AND THE 9/11 AGENCIES ALSO DO SEARCH AND RESCUE THERE, MAKING THEM PURELY -- ‎THANK YOU, BJ, AND FEEL FREE TO EMAIL ANY COMMENTS TO CANCEL. WE SEE A LATE ARRIVAL IN OUR PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. MR. DAVID HAYNES. DAVID, YOU ARE NOT PRESENT RIGHT NOW. I WILL TRY TO STALL FOR JUST A SECOND TO SEE IF WE CAN GET THAT TO COME IN. OTHERWISE, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO EMAIL YOUR PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS, AS WELL AS YOUR GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS TO COUNCIL -- COUNCIL@SEATTLE.GOV. UNFORTUNATELY, WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD. THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS PRESENT. WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS TODAY. I WANT TO START OUT BY THANKING YOU AND YOUR TEAM. I WILL HAVE THE CLERK READ THE ITEM INTO THE RECORD, BUT WHAT MANY FOLKS DON'T KNOW IS THAT YOU WORKED REALLY HARD TO GET THE AGENDA FOR THESE NEXT FEW DAYS OUT WITH ENOUGH TIME FOR THE PUBLIC TO SEE THE AGENDA BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING LAST NIGHT, WHICH REQUIRED YOU TO WORK OVER THE WEEKEND AND ON A HOLIDAY. I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU. YOU HAVE BEEN GOING NONSTOP SINCE SEPTEMBER 24th, AND IT IS NOW NOVEMBER 13th. SO, WITH THAT, THANK YOU. HAVE THE CLERK READ THE SHORT TITLE INTO THE RECORD. ‎AGENDA ITEM 1. ‎I'M GOING TO TURN THIS OVER TO YOLANDA TO SET THE AGENDA FOR THE DAY. ‎I'M SO SORRY. I FORGOT. COLLEAGUES, WE HAVE COFFEE IN THE GREEN ROOM. THERE ARE CLIFF BARS. FEEL FREE TO GRAB SOME IF YOU WANT. IT'S FOR EVERYONE. BACK TO YOU ALL. ‎GREAT. GOOD MORNING, MEMBERS OF THE SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE. I AM YOLANDA HO. I WANT TO THANK OUR TEAM FOR THEIR INCREDIBLY HARD WORK OF TURNING AROUND CLOSE TO 170 BUDGET AMENDMENTS IN A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, AND WORKING WITH YOU ALL, DEFINITELY, TO REFLECT THEIR INTENT, AND WE WILL FACILITATE OUR CONVERSATION TODAY. WITH THAT, I WILL TURN TO THE OVERVIEW OF WHAT IS IN STORE FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS WEEK, AND GOING INTO NEXT WEEK. WE ARE GOING TO START UP-TO-DATE WITH TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE ARE CATEGORIZING AS OTHER BUDGET LEGISLATION. THIS IS LEGISLATION THAT IS ON A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT TRACK BECAUSE JUST TIMING ISSUES AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS, SO, TODAY, CENTRAL STAFF WILL BE DESCRIBING THOSE ITEMS FOR THE COMMITTEE, AND ALSO, FACILITATING DISCUSSION THERE. THOSE ITEMS WILL BE FOR A VOTE ON TUESDAY -- NEXT TUESDAY, THE FINAL COMMITTEE MEETING. OF THIS SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE BEFORE ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET. ANY AMENDMENTS TO THOSE PIECES OF LEGISLATION, THAT WILL BE PRESENTED AT THE FRONT OF OUR SERIES OF PRESENTATIONS . IT NEEDS TO BE SUBMITTED TO CENTRAL STAFF BY NOON ON FRIDAY. SO IT IS A QUICK TURNAROUND. THAT IS WHY WE ARE PRESENTING THOSE AT THE FRONT END OF ALL OUR PRESENTATIONS. NEXT, WE WILL BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE BUDGET LEGISLATION THAT HAS NO PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THAT WERE TRANSMITTED WITH THE BUDGET. THIS IS PROPOSED AS A GESTATION CONSENT CALENDAR. THEN WE'LL DESCRIBE THOSE BRIEFLY FOR YOUR AWARENESS, AND THE INTENT IS TO VOTE ON THOSE PIECES OF LEGISLATION. NEXT, WE WILL BE PRESENTING ON BUDGET LEGISLATION THAT HAS PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. THERE WILL BE THREE ITEMS IN THAT CATEGORY. VOTES WILL BE TAKEN BEGINNING TOMORROW ON THOSE. FINALLY, OF COURSE, THERE ARE THE 164 AMENDMENTS TO THE BUDGET ADOPTION ORDINANCE, AND WE WILL BE DESCRIBING THOSE TODAY, AND WE WILL BE VOTING ON THOSE AMENDMENTS. ONLY THE AMENDMENTS, TOMORROW, AND POSSIBLY FRIDAY, IF NEEDED. AND THEN, THAT WILL BE VOTED ON THE 19th -- ON THE BILL, AS AMENDED. THAT IS THE PLAN OF ACTION, AND, AS YOU HAVE NOTED IN THE AGENDA PACKET, IT IS 164 AMENDMENTS -- THOSE ARE ORGANIZED INTO GROUPS A, B, C, AND D. SO, FOR TODAY, DISCUSSION ONLY. SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE KNOWS. DON'T GET READY TO VOTE. THAT WILL COMMENCE TOMORROW, AND WE WILL PROVIDE SOME BRIEF REMINDERS ON MOTIONS THAT ARE COMMON DURING BUDGET COMMITTEE THAT ARE NOT COMMON DURING OTHER TIMES OF THE YEAR. WE WILL GIVE YOU A BRIEF REFRESHER ON SCRIPTING ON THOSE ITEMS, BUT TODAY, WE ARE JUST TALKING ABOUT ALL THE STUFF THAT IS BEFORE YOU ON THE AGENDA. SO, AS I MENTIONED, WE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT THE BUDGET LEGISLATION THAT WILL BE ULTIMATELY VOTED ON NEXT TUESDAY. THAT WILL BE OUR FIRST ROUND OF PRESENTATIONS, AND, WE WILL NOTE SOME INITIAL AMENDMENTS IN PARTICULAR TO THE JUMP START PAYROLL TAX POLICIES AND ANSWER QUESTIONS AND KIND OF HELP THE COMMITTEE DISCUSSION, AND THEN WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE LEGISLATION CONSENT CALENDAR, AND THEN GO ON TO BUDGET LEGISLATION. THE BUDGET LEGISLATION CONSENT CALENDAR, AND THEN WE WILL BRIEFLY DESCRIBED THE GROUP AS A WHOLE, AND THEN WE WILL PAUSED AT THE END TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. AND THEN, WITH THE BUDGET LEGISLATION, WITH PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, THE FIRST ONE SHOULD BE VERY SHORT BECAUSE IT WAS ACTUALLY JUST A TECHNICAL AMENDMENT THAT WE NOTED NEEDED TO HAPPEN YESTERDAY. SO WE HAD TO PULL THAT ONE OUT OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR, OTHERWISE, IT WOULD'VE BEEN INCLUDED BECAUSE THERE WAS NOTHING SUBSTANTIVE THERE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. AND THEN, WE WILL MOVE ON TO DESCRIBING THE AMENDMENTS. THAT SHOULD BE THE 2025 BUDGET ADOPTION ORDINANCE, NOT THAT HE DOESN'T 24, SO, ANYWAY. HERE WE ARE. GROUP A SHOULD LOOK FAMILIAR TO YOU ALL. THOSE ARE MOSTLY -- THOSE ARE ALL AMENDMENTS. ALMOST ALL THE AMENDMENTS THAT WERE DISCUSSED ON OCTOBER 30th, THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE BALANCING PACKAGE. GROUP B IS CURRENTLY ONLY ONE ITEM THAT IS PROPOSED AS A SUBSTITUTE DEVOTING GROUP A, AND THEN GROUP C IS ANOTHER PROPOSED CONSENT AMENDMENT PACKAGE THAT CONSISTS OF IDEAS THAT WERE SUBMITTED ON NOVEMBER 1st BY VARIOUS MEMBERS OF THIS COMMITTEE, AND THOSE ARE PROPOSED FOR A SINGLE VOTE TO HELP EXPEDITE THE VOTING. THERE'S A LOT OF VOTING. GROUP D IS AMENDMENTS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED BY THE CHAIR AS WARRANTING ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION WITH US INCLUDING THIS INDIVIDUAL VOTE CATEGORY. THE PLAN OF ACTION TODAY, FOR YOUR AWARENESS, IS THAT, BECAUSE WE ALREADY PRESENTED THE ITEMS IN GROUP A, INDIVIDUALLY, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE VARIOUS CENTRAL STAFFERS READ EACH TITLE OF GROUP A BY DEPARTMENT INTO THE RECORD. THEY'RE GOING TO PROCEED BY DEPARTMENT. THEY WILL PAUSE AT THE END. THEY WILL NOTE IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES BETWEEN OCTOBER 30th AND TODAY FOR YOUR AWARENESS, AND ALLOW FOR ANY QUESTIONS. AFTER EACH DEPARTMENT IS COMPLETED, AND ALSO PAUSE TO ALLOW FOR QUESTIONS, AND THE INTENT IS TO MOVE THROUGH THAT FAIRLY SPEEDILY, SO WE CAN GET TO NEW ITEMS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN PRESENTED TO THE COMMITTEE PREVIOUSLY. ‎THANK YOU, DEPUTY DIRECTOR . ‎IT IS A BUSY DAY. YOU WILL SEE EVERYTHING THAT IS UP FOR DISCUSSION BEFORE YOU ARE ASKED ABOUT ANY INDIVIDUAL THING. THAT WILL GIVE YOU A CONFERENCE OF VIEW OF ALL THE THINGS UNDER CONSIDERATION. A QUICK REVIEW OF THE BALANCING PACKAGE, BUT THE NEW MATERIALS, AS WELL, AND YOU WILL HAVE SEEN EVERYTHING. WHEN YOU COMMENCE VOTING, YOU WILL HAVE THAT BACKGROUND. ‎THE INTENT IS FOR TOMORROW -- THE GROUP A PRESENTATION TOMORROW WILL BE EVEN SHORTER, SO THAT YOU CAN MOVE TOWARDS VOTING. RIGHT. WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT TODAY. TOMORROW, THEY WILL BE DESCRIBED AS ONE GROUP, AND THEN, FOLKS CAN DO THAT. YOU CAN MAKE YOUR MOTIONS AND ALL THAT. OUR INTENT IS TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION TODAY SO THAT TOMORROW WE CAN BE FOCUSING ON THE VOTING AND THE MOTIONS AND ALL THAT, AND HAVING THAT DISCUSSION AROUND THE AMENDMENTS AND WHAT YOU ALL ARE PLANNING TO DO. THAT IS HOW WE ARE STRUCTURING THIS SERIES OF MEETINGS. ‎THANK YOU, DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR. I WILL AT SOME OPERATIONAL DETAILS HERE. COLLEAGUES, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PRESENTATION, THIS IS THE TIME. WE ENGAGED IN A FEW PROCESS REFORMS THIS YEAR. YOU WILL BE SEEING IT WHEN IT COMES TO FULL COUNCIL AND THE COMMITTEE FOR VOTE. WE ARE USING THE CONSENT CALENDAR, WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM PAST YEARS, WHEN WE HAD TO TAKE A VOICE VOTE ON EVERY SINGLE BILL, WHICH TAKES HOURS. AND SO, THAT IS PART OF WHY WE ARE USING THE GROUPS A, B, C, AND D, SO WE CAN PRESERVE MORE TIME FOR YOU TO SPEAK, THEN FOR YOU TO SAY YES OR NO, BECAUSE IT ENDS UP TWO HOURS OF EVERYONE SAYING YES FOR TWO HOURS, AND THAT IS NOT VERY PRODUCTIVE. SO TRYING TO SAVE SOME TIME. COLLEAGUES, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THIS OVERVIEW? AGAIN, AMENDMENTS TO THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX, AND THE CAPITAL GAINS, OR ANY OF THESE OTHERS ARE DUE BY FRIDAY AT NOON. SEEING NO QUESTIONS, I THINK WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ONE. DO I NEED TO READ IN THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM? IT IS THE SAME ONE. JUST KEEP GOING. THANK YOU. ‎GOOD MORNING, CHAIR STRAUSS, VICE CHAIR RIVERA AND MEMBERS OF THE SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE. I'M GOING TO BRIEF YOU ON TWO PIECES OF LEGISLATION REGARDING A CITY CAPITAL GAINS EXCISE TAX STARTING WITH THE LEGISLATION THAT IMPOSES THE TEXT, AND THEN ENDING WITH A BILL THAT ALLOCATES THE REVENUES FROM THE TAX. FIRST, I'M GOING TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND BECAUSE THE CITY'S TAX IS BASED DIRECTLY OFF OF A STATE TAX OF THE SAME TYPE. THAT WAS IMPOSED A FEW YEARS BACK. SPECIFICALLY, THAT TAX WAS ADOPTED BY CHAPTER 196 OF 2001. THE STATE OF WASHINGTON LEGISLATURE. IT WAS EFFECTIVE IN JULY OF 2020 ONE THAT TAX IMPOSED A 7% RATE OF TAX ON LONG-TERM CAPITAL ASSET SALES, TO A MINIMUM STANDARD DEDUCTION OF $215,000. THAT WAS IN $2022. THE PRICE HAS SINCE BEEN INFLATED. I WILL COVER THAT LATER IN THE PRESENTATION BECAUSE THAT HOW APPLIES TO HOW THE SEATTLE TEXAS SET UP. THE PROCEEDS FROM THAT TEXT WERE DEPOSITED INTO THE EDUCATION LEGACY TRUST ACCOUNT IN THE STATE. AND THE COMMON SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION ACCOUNT. THE TAX WAS CHALLENGED. IT WAS SUCCESSFULLY -- WAS MAINTAINED TO BE A CONSTITUTIONAL TAX. EXERCISES THE STATE'S TAXATION POWER. THE CASE WAS [ INAUDIBLE ] VERSUS STATE OF WASHINGTON. THE TAX HAS BEEN VOIDED FOR TWO YEARS. IN THE FIRST YEAR OF COLLECTION IN 2023, $140,000 -- MILLION REQUESTED BY THE STATE. LET'S GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. SO, THAT WAS THE STATE TAX. THIS IS THE CITY'S TAX NOW, THAT WE WILL TALK ABOUT IN TERMS OF STRUCTURE. THE STRUCTURE IS THE SAME, WHICH HAS BENEFITS IN TERMS OF COMPLIANCE AND ADMINISTRATION AND FORECASTING OF REVENUES FOR THE TEXT. THE ONE KEY DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE CITY TAX IS APPLIED ONLY WITHIN THE CITY OF SEATTLE JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES, AND IT IS A 2% TAX. IT IS IN ADDITION TO THE STATE TAX. SO, I MENTIONED THE INFLATIONARY ADJUSTMENTS. THERE HAS BEEN ONE INFLATIONARY DEDUCTION SINCE THE 2022 INITIAL IMPOSITION. AND THAT BRINGS THAT STANDARD DEDUCTION UP TO $262,000. FOR THIS YEAR. THAT IS WHAT THE CURRENT CITY TEXT BEFORE YOU IS BASED ON, THAT THRESHOLD. THERE IS ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE WITHIN THE BILL THAT KEEPS THAT THRESHOLD UP-TO-DATE WITH THE ESTATE TAX. EVERY YEAR, THERE IS AN INFLATIONARY ADJUSTMENT MADE BY THE STATE. IT WOULD INFLATE IN PARALLEL. IN TERMS OF OTHER THINGS THAT ARE STANDARD DEDUCTIONS FOR THE TEXT IN THE AMOUNTS DEBITED FOR TAXATION BY THE STATE OR FEDERAL CONSTITUTION, GAINS FROM THE SALE OF A QUALIFIED FAMILY SMALL BUSINESS. TO UP TO $105,000 OF CHARITABLE DEDUCTIONS ABOVE THE MINIMUM STANDARD DEDUCTION OF $262,000. AS I SAID, ALL THOSE THRESHOLDS ARE INFLATED AUTOMATICALLY EACH YEAR BY INFLATION. SO THEN, THERE'S ALSO EXEMPTIONS. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DEDUCTION AND EXEMPTION WILL BE -- IF YOU ARE CLAIMING A DEDUCTION, THAT MEANS YOU ARE SUBMITTING A TAX RETURN. HOWEVER, THINGS THAT ARE EXEMPT, IF YOU'RE FULLY ACCEPT, YOU DON'T HAVE TO SUBMIT A TAX RETURN. MOST OF THE TAXPAYERS IN THIS CITY WOULD BE THE SHORT POTENTIAL TAXPAYERS DISH WOULD NOT QUALIFY BECAUSE OF THE EXEMPTION. ONE OF THE KEY EXEMPTIONS IS REAL ESTATE SALES. THIS WOULD NOT APPLY TO ANY SALES OF REAL ESTATE IN THE CITY. FURTHERMORE, RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS, WHICH IS A LOT OF POTENTIAL TAXPAYERS HAVE RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS. ALL THE GAINS WITHIN THOSE ACCOUNTS ARE FULLY EXEMPT UNDER THIS TAX. CONDEMNATIONS, LIVESTOCK COMMERCIAL FISHING, TIMBER, GOODWILL FROM AUTO SALES ARE SIMILARLY EXEMPT. THAT WAS THE ONLY TYPE OF TAX LIABILITY. FINALLY, THE TAX WOULD BE EFFECTIVE ON JANUARY OF 2026, JANUARY 1st, WITH THE FIRST COLLECTIONS COMING IN APRIL OF 2027, SO ABOUT EVERY YEAR AND A FEW MONTHS AFTER THE TAX IS IMPOSED. THESE ARE REALLY SIMPLE EXAMPLES, TO SHOW THAT -- HOW THE EXEMPTIONS AND DEDUCTIONS WORK. IN THIS FIRST EXAMPLE, LET'S JUST ASSUME THAT THE RESIDENT SOLD $1 MILLION OF STOCK, AND THE ORIGINAL BASIS, WHEN THEY PURCHASED THAT STOCK WAS $700,000. NOW, THEY ARE SELLING IT, AND THEY REALIZED THE LONG-TERM GAIN OF $3000. SO, FIRST STEP, APPLY THE STANDARD DEDUCTION, $262,000, WHICH BRINGS YOU TO A NET GAIN OF 48,000. APPLY THE 2% RATE FOR EIGHT $916,000 TAX. THE NEXT EXAMPLE -- THIS IS THE REAL ESTATE EXEMPTION THAT I MENTIONED. SOMEONE SELLS A HOUSE IN 2026. ORIGINALLY PURCHASED IT IN 2010. THEY SOLD IT FOR $1.2 MILLION. THAT IS A CAPITAL GAIN OF $1 MILLION, BUT BECAUSE THAT PROPERTY SALE IS COMPLETELY EXEMPT, THERE IS 100% EXEMPTION OF $1 MILLION. THERE IS NO CAPITAL GAIN IN THIS EXAMPLE, BUT WE STILL APPLY THE TAX. LET ME POSIT JUST REAL QUICK BEFORE I MOVE. OKAY. OKAY. LET'S LOOK AT THE NEXT SLIDE. ‎I WOULD JUST SAY, RUN THROUGH IT ALL. I'M GOING TO GO TO COUNCILMEMBER MOORE ONCE YOU ARE DONE WITH YOUR PRESENTATION. ‎SO NOW, WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE REVENUE FROM THE TAX. SO, I GUESS, TO START OFF, BECAUSE THE TAX WOULD APPLY IN 2026, THE FIRST COLLECTIONS WOULD BE IN 2027. THIS EXERCISE IS ESTIMATING REVENUES FOR A TAX TWO YEARS FROM NOW, BASED ON LIMITED DATA, SO, THIS ESTIMATE WAS DEVELOPED BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC FORECAST FOR THE CITY. I REALLY APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT THEY DID. HOWEVER, THERE IS A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY EMBEDDED IN IT. WE ARE PROVIDING A RANGE OF ESTIMATES, AS OPPOSED TO A SINGLE NUMBER TO HONE IN ON. SO, WITHIN THAT RANGE, THERE ARE A LOT OF EXEMPTIONS AND DATA THAT THE INFORMATION IS BASED ON. PRIMARILY, BECAUSE THIS IS A STATE TAX, THERE IS A STATE FORECAST THAT THEY CAN RELY ON TO GENERATE SOME OF THE INFORMATION. AS I MENTIONED, THE FIRST YEAR OF THE ESTATE TAX WAS $870,000 OR SO. THE SECOND-YEAR DROPPED TO 370. SO, THAT INDICATES A LOT OF THE VOLATILITY OF THE TAX AT THE STATE LEVEL. THERE IS DATA FOR THE 2023 TAX THAT IS AVAILABLE TO US, AVAILABLE TO THE FORECAST OFFICE SPECIFICALLY, THAT TELLS HOW MANY TAXPAYERS PAID THE TAX, AND MORE SO, HOW MANY OF THOSE POTENTIAL TAXPAYERS ARE IN THE CITY. IT GIVES US A SENSE OF HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD BE LIABLE TO PAY THIS TAX IF IT WERE IMPOSED. AT A HIGH LEVEL, THERE WAS INFORMATION ATTACHED TO THIS BILL THAT INDICATED THAT I BELIEVE THE ESTATE TAX WAS RECEIVED BY TAXPAYERS IN 2023. A VERY SMALL NUMBER OF TAXPAYERS AT THE STATE LEVEL. THE CITY LEVEL WAS SMALLER THAN THAT. I THINK IT WAS 163 TOTAL TAXPAYERS THAT PAID THE TAX AT THE CITY LEVEL. AND SO, WITH THE FORECAST OFFICE DID IS APPLIED THOSE RELATIONSHIPS TO THE STATES FORECAST TO GENERATE A RANGE OF ESTIMATES, INCLUDING HOW MANY POTENTIAL TAXPAYERS THEY WOULD BE. WHAT THEY WOULD BE AS A PERCENT OF THE STATEWIDE SHARE. AND ESTIMATES ABOUT COMPLIANCE, SO THE STATE ASSUMED THAT COMPLIANCE -- THAT THE PERCENT OF TAXPAYERS THAT WOULD COMPLY WITH THE TAX WOULD BE LOWER AT THE BEGINNING, AND GROW IN FUTURE YEARS, AS THE INFORMATIONAL EFFORTS WERE IMPROVED AND COMPLAINTS IS IMPROVED FROM 85% UP TO 95% COMPLAINTS BY 2026. THAT IS ONE ASSUMPTION. HOWEVER, AN ALTERNATE ASSUMPTION WOULD BE THAT COMPLIANCE STAYED LOW. SO THE RANGE OF ESTIMATES THAT THE FORECAST OFFICE PROVIDED WAS FOR 227. $50 MILLION AT THE HIGH END, AND SO THAT IS USING BASICALLY A HIGHER LEVEL OF COMPLIANCE FOR THE TAX. AND A LITTLE TAXPAYER RESPONSE. SO ELASTICITY. WHEN YOU RAISE THE TAX, YOU EXPECT SOME BEHAVIORS TO CHANGE. THEY ARE ANTICIPATING THAT THERE WOULD BE NOT A LOT OF RESPONSE TO THE TAX. AND THEN, FINALLY, THIS IS A DIFFERENT ASSUMPTION ABOUT THE SHARE OF TAX AND THE AMOUNT OF GROWTH IN THE STOCK MARKET. IN THE STATE FORECAST, THEY ASSUME A 13% GROWTH RATE COMING INTO 2025, HOWEVER, THE FORECAST OFFICE LOOKED AT IRS DATA FOR RETURNS, AND INDICATED THAT THERE COULD BE A MUCH GREATER GROWTH GOING INTO TWO DOZEN 25 OUT OF 2024, AS TAXPAYERS MONITORED THE BALLOT INITIATIVE AT THE STATE LEVEL THAT WOULD REPEAL THE STATE TAX. THE IMPLICATION IS THAT THEY WERE WAITING TO SEE WHAT THE RESULT WAS OF THAT BALLOT INITIATIVE, BEFORE THEY SOLD STOCKS TO GENERATE A POTENTIAL GAIN. NOW, THAT HAS BEEN RESOLVED. THAT INITIATIVE FAILED AT THE BALLOT. NOW, THE ASSUMPTION IS THAT THOSE GRADES WOULD BE HIGHER THAN WHAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE STATES FORECAST. THAT IS THE $51 MILLION RANGE. THE $16 MILLION -- THE LOW END OF THE RANGE -- IS AN ASSUMPTION THAT THE TAXPAYER COMPLAINTS STAYS AT 85%. THE RESPONSE TO THE TAX AT THE CITY LEVEL, PARTICULARLY, IS HIGH. SO, A LOT OF DROP OFF IN RECEIPTS BECAUSE TAXPAYERS CHANGE THEIR BEHAVIOR. TO BE QUITE BLUNT, THEY PERHAPS CHANGE RESIDENCE. BECAUSE THIS IS A LOCALLY IMPOSED CAPITAL GAINS TAX, AND IT APPLIES TO PEOPLE THAT ARE ASSUMED TO BE OF HIGH NET WORTH, THEY HAVE OPTIONS, AND ARE BETTER PREPARED TO RESPOND TO A LOCAL TAX. NONE OF IT IS A GUARANTEE, BUT THESE ARE THE CONSIDERATIONS THAT ARE IMPLICIT IN FORECASTING REVENUE FROM THIS TYPE OF TAX. HOWEVER, IF THE TAX WAS IMPOSED, EVEN IF THE TOTAL TAX IS NOT IMPOSED, WE WILL GET SUCCESSIVE REVENUE ESTIMATES IN 2025. IN 2026, IT WILL HELP THAT RANGE WHEN IT COMES TIME TO BUDGET THE REVENUES HERE IN THE CITY. IF WE COULD LOOK AT THE NEXT SLIDE, I TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT SOME OF THESE RISKS WITH THE ESTIMATE. ONE IS THE SMALL NUMBER OF TAXPAYERS. I SAID 85% CAME FROM 163 TAXPAYERS. THERE WAS A LARGER GROUP. 116 TAXPAYERS INCLUDED. IT IS MOSTLY EQUITIES BECAUSE OF THE EXEMPTIONS -- BECAUSE OF THE EXEMPTIONS THAT ARE APPLIED TO REAL ESTATE. IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHERE THE TAXPAYER DOMICILE IS. WHAT DO THEY CONSIDER THEIR HOME? THERE ARE SPECIFIC DEFINITIONS IN THE BILL THAT DEFINE WHAT THAT MEANS. THERE WAS THE MEMO AGAIN. THEY REFERENCED THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF VOLATILITY AND UNCERTAINTY IN THIS TEXT. EVEN THOUGH THERE IS A RANGE, IT COULD STILL COME IN HIGHER OR LOWER THAN THAT RANGE. AND NOW, IF WE CAN LOOK AT THE NEXT SLIDE. SO, THESE ARE BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS. ONE IS THAT I MENTIONED, THE FIRST REVENUE FROM THIS TAX WOULD NOT BE UNTIL 2027. THERE ARE IMPLEMENTATION COSTS. THESE ARE ROUGH ESTIMATES THAT WOULD BE INFORMED BY FUTURE BUDGET REQUESTS. AND IN THIS CASE, I WOULD THINK THEM FOR PROVIDING THIS INFORMATION ON A SHORT TIMEFRAME. THEY INDICATED THERE WOULD BE ONE COST IN GETTING SYSTEMS UP-TO-DATE TO COLLECT THIS INFORMATION. $1 MILLION, AND THEN ONGOING COSTS INCLUDING SYSTEMS AND STAFF. THEY INDICATED THEY WOULD REQUIRE 18 TO 24 MONTHS TO IMPLEMENT, WHICH DOES NOT NECESSARILY POSE A PROBLEM IN THIS CASE. AGAIN, THIS IS JUST A PHYSICAL NOTE ESTIMATE. THE ACTUAL COST WOULD PROVIDE FURTHER ANALYSIS AND BE PART OF THE BUDGET REQUEST. THIS IS IN THE CAVEATS AND RISK REALM. BUDGETING THESE REVENUES WITH A HIGH LEVEL OF UNCERTAINTY, AND IN SOME WAYS, TO COMPENSATE FOR THAT UNCERTAINTY WOULD BE TO USE THE LOW END OF THE RANGE, OR TO WAIT FOR THE FIRST YEAR OF COLLECTIONS TO ACTUALLY COME IN BEFORE MAKING THE BUDGET ALLOCATIONS. AND I BELIEVE THAT IS THE FINAL SLIDE. I CAN POSIT ABOUT THE ACTUAL TAX BEFORE WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE USE OF PROCEEDS BILL. ‎THANK YOU. ‎COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. ‎THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHAIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, TOM, FOR YOUR PRESENTATION AND YOUR WORK ON THIS. SO, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SOME GENERAL REMARKS -- I MADE THEM ALREADY. I RECOGNIZE THAT MOST OF US CAME TO THIS POSITION TALKING ABOUT FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE AND PRUDENT, AND WANTING TO DO IT A DEEP DIVE ON THE BUDGET BEFORE WE TALK ABOUT PROGRESSIVE REVENUE, AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE DONE THAT, THANKS TO THE LEADERSHIP OF CHAIR STRESS, I THINK WE HAVE ENGAGED IN AN UNPRECEDENTED DEEP DIVE AND REVIEW. I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. I KNOW THERE WAS A LITTLE BACK AND FORTH ABOUT WHETHER THERE WAS TECHNICALLY AN AUDIT. OTHERWISE, IT HAS BEEN A THOUGHTFUL REVIEW. AND, THROUGH THAT, WE HAVE ALSO HAD THE MAYOR PRESENT TO US A PLAN TO DEAL WITH OUR $270 MILLION DEFICIT BY LOOKING AT PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX MONEY, TO COVER THAT. IN THE GENERAL FUND. WE HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB. WE ARE TRYING TO COVER THAT DEFICIT AND REMAIN TRUE TO THE VALUES THAT WE HAVE EXPRESSED. IT BECAME VERY CLEAR TO ME IN THAT PROCESS, THAT WE ARE STILL FALLING SHORT ON CRITICAL AREAS. WHILE OUR BUDGET DOES HAVE MONEY FOR RENTAL ASSISTANCE, IT DOES HAVE MONEY FOR HOMEOWNERSHIP DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE. AND IT DOES HAVE SOME MONEY FOR FOOD INSECURITY. ALL OF THOSE FUNDS ARE SEVERELY LACKING TO THE LEVEL OF NEED THAT WE HAVE, AND I THINK THAT HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED BY THE COMMENTS OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE COME TO COUNCIL. AND SO, IT IS NEVER FUN TO LOOK AT ADDITIONAL REVENUE, BUT I THINK THE FACT THAT THIS REVENUE SOURCE HAS BEEN TESTED, BOTH IN TERMS OF GOING THROUGH THE LEGAL PROCESS IN THE COURTS, AND UPHELD AT THE STATE LEVEL, AND WAS CHALLENGED IN THE INITIATIVE -- AND I THINK IT WAS A 60% VOTE TO RETAIN IT -- INDICATES TO ME THAT THIS IS A SOLID -- IT IS A SOLID FORM OF ADDITIONAL REVENUE, AND THAT IT HAS BROAD PUBLIC SUPPORT. AND I'M HOPING MY AMENDMENT TO INCREASE RENTAL ASSISTANCE BY 3.3 MILLION WILL PASS, BUT EVEN IF THAT DOESN'T PASS, WE ARE IN ADDITIONAL NEED FOR MORE RENTAL ASSISTANCE. I RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS A VOLATILE TAX. SO IS PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX. WE ARE LOOKING AT USING THAT AS A SIGNIFICANT SOURCE OF REVENUE FOR OUR CITY NOW COME AND GOING FORWARD. MOST OF THESE TAXES ARE VOLATILE. WE DO NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PURSUE AN INCOME TAX. THE STATE LEGISLATURE MADE THAT DECISION. IT WAS ONE OF THE INITIATIVES THAT THEY ADOPTED, SO WE ARE REALLY SOMEWHAT HAMSTRUNG IN WHERE WE CAN LOOK FOR SUSTAINABLE REVENUE. ONE OF THE REASONS -- THE REASON -- I THINK I EXPLAINED WHY I CHOSE THE DESIGNATED CATEGORIES, BUT I DID NOT SET A PERCENTAGE. ONE OF THE REASONS I DID NOT SET THE PERCENTAGE IS BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE INCOME IS GOING TO GENERATE EACH YEAR. MY THINKING IS THAT WE GET THE MONEY. WE SEE HOW MUCH WE HAVE, AND WE USE OUR DISCRETION, AS WE ARE ELECTED TO DO, WITH INPUT FROM STAKEHOLDERS IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT WHAT IS THE MOST PRESSING NEED, AND HOW DO WE DISTRIBUTE THE MONEY. THAT IS AN ONGOING BUDGETING DECISION. IT GIVES US THE FLEXIBILITY WE NEED TO ADDRESS ISSUES AS THEY ARISE. THOSE ARE MY BASIC POINTS ABOUT THIS. THE OTHER REASON THAT I'M BRINGING IT NOW IS THAT IT IS A LENGTHY PROCESS. IT WOULD TAKE A YEAR TO TRACK, A YEAR TO COLLECT. THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF THE LEGAL CHALLENGE. I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT. AND THEN, WE WOULD ONLY BE IN POSITION TO BEGIN TO ALLOCATE IN 2027, AND SO, WE ARE LOOKING AT A SIGNIFICANT DEFICIT IN 2027, SO I WANTED TO GET THE BALL ROLLING TO PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL REVENUE SOURCES AT THAT POINT, RATHER THAN CONTINUING TO HAVE ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION, AND WEIGHT LONGER. -- WAIT LONGER. ‎IT BUGS ME TO WATCH IT ON THE SCREEN. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE PRESENTATION. JUST A CLARIFICATION. ‎PLEASE. ‎I THINK YOU ARE SAYING -- I THINK I HEARD YOU SAY THAT THE FIRST YEAR ANTICIPATED REVENUE FROM THE STATE INCOME CAPITAL GAINS TAX WAS X AMOUNT IN THE FOLLOWING YEAR IT WAS QUITE A BIT LESS. WAS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? ‎COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I WOULD SAY THAT IT WASN'T THE FIRST YEAR OF EXPECTED REVENUE FROM THE TAX. IT WAS THE FIRST ACTUAL COLLECTIONS FROM THE TEXT FOR $870 MILLION. IN FACT, THE STATE EXPECTED LESS THAN THAT AMOUNT IN THE FIRST YEAR. IN THE SECOND YEAR, IT CAME IN AT $370 MILLION. ‎SO FROM 800 TO 300 SOMETHING. SO, AND WHAT WERE THE REASONS FOR THAT DROP. ‎I DON'T KNOW. ‎I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WERE ANY SPECIFIC REASONS. ONE OF THE RATIONALES IS WAITING FOR THE RESULTS OF THE BALLOT INITIATIVE. HOWEVER, IT COULD BE RESPONSE TO THE TAX. IT IS UNCLEAR. THE NUMBER OF TAXPAYERS WAS ROUGHLY THE SAME DOSE ONE DATA POINT PROVIDED BY THE FORECAST OFFICE. ‎THE ECONOMIC ACTIVITY CHANGED BY THE TAXPAYERS. IT DIDN'T NECESSARILY MOVE OUT OF WASHINGTON IS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. ‎YEAH. ‎THE CONCENTRATION AT THE STATE LEVEL WAS ALSO EXTREME. SO A RELATIVELY LARGE SHARE OF THE STATEWIDE REVENUE. THOSE INDIVIDUALS MAKING DIFFERENT FINANCIAL DECISIONS WITH REGARD TO THEIR FINANCES CAN HAVE THAT KIND OF IMPACT. THEY WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR 25% STATEWIDE. IT IS MIND-BOGGLING AT SOME LEVEL. THOSE DECISIONS COULD DRIVE LITERALLY TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF REVENUE. THAT IS HIGHLIGHTED IN THE COMMENTS HERE ABOUT NATURAL VOLATILITY. ‎THANK YOU. LAST YEAR, WE TALKED ABOUT ESTABLISHING A CAPITAL GAINS TAX TO OFFSET THE REMOVAL OF THE UTILITY TAX, AND I BELIEVE THAT WAS ABOUT 32 MILLION. IS THAT CORRECT? DO YOU REMEMBER WHAT PERCENTAGE THAT WAS? ‎I RECALL THAT THE NUMBER WAS IN THE $30 MILLION RANGE. IT WAS ESTIMATED LAST YEAR AT THAT TIME -- THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE THE RESULTS FROM THE 2023 COLLECTIONS. ‎IT WAS 2%. ‎IT WAS 2%. ‎THANK YOU. ‎THANK YOU, TRENIN. ANYTHING FURTHER? ‎YOU GOOD? ‎COUNCILMEMBER MORALES. ‎I AM CURIOUS IF WE DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, GIVEN THE FLUCTUATION AT NOT HAVING A GOOD SENSE OF WHAT MIGHT BE COMING YEAR-TO-YEAR, HOW WE MIGHT ANTICIPATE WHAT THAT MIGHT MEAN FOR PROGRAMMING OF THE DOLLARS, BECAUSE I APPRECIATE THAT THE IDEA HERE IS TO MAKE SURE IT IS GOING INTO HOUSING, BUT WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR US IN TERMS OF PROGRAMMING EXPECTATIONS? ‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER MORALES. THAT IS THE PART, HOW TO DEAL WITH THE RISK. WE WILL GET TWO MORE DATA POINTS IN TERMS OF COLLECTIONS FROM THE STATE TAX. SO THE 2025 REVENUE WILL COME IN, AND WE WILL SEE WHAT THE TRENDS ARE TO ANALYZE HOW MUCH OF THAT IS COMING FROM SEATTLE ADDRESSES TO GIVE A BETTER SENSE THAN WE HAVE NOW BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE TWO DATA POINTS. WE WILL GET A FEW MORE DATA POINTS, AND THEN, ALSO, ASSUMING THERE IS STILL A RANGE PROVIDED FROM THE FORECAST OFFICE, BUDGETING TO THE LOW END OF THE RANGE WOULD BE THE SAFER MOVE TO DO, OR, EVEN PAUSE YEAR, APPLY THE TAX IN THE FIRST YEAR, AND THEN KIND OF BUDGET THE MONEY YOU COLLECTED, AS OPPOSED TO BUDGETING BASED ON THE FORECAST. ‎YOU GOT IT. OKAY. ‎YOU CAN BUDGET IT TO THE LOW END, AND THEN WHEN YOU'VE GOT THE RECEIPTS, SOME PEOPLE MAY MAKE THE APPROPRIATION. IT WOULD IMPLY THAT YOU ARE WAITING TO SEE WHAT YOU GET BEFORE YOU MAKE THE COMMITMENT ABOUT SPENDING. ‎OKAY. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT. I WILL SAY I'M EXCITED TO BE COSPONSORING THIS WITH COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AND APPRECIATE THAT WE ARE BEGINNING THE CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW WE ARE GOING TO FIX THIS STRUCTURAL BUDGET DEFICIT. THANK YOU, CHAIR. ‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER MORALES. COLLEAGUES, ANY FURTHER AT THIS TIME? AND WE ARE GOING TO BE BRINGING THIS UP FOR A VOTE ON THE 19th. CORRECT? ‎YES. ‎WITH AN AMENDMENT DEADLINE ON THIS FRIDAY. ‎CORRECT. ‎DIRECTOR NOBLE, IF YOU COULD PULL YOUR MICROPHONE CLOSER TO YOU. I HAD TOO MANY CONCERTS AND CHAINSAWS IN MY LIFE. ‎COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, ANYTHING TO CLOSE US OUT? ‎THANK YOU. EXCUSE ME. YEAH. I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IT IS NOT PERFECT, BY ANY MEANS. IT IS INTENDED TO BE SUPPLEMENTAL BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE DATA POINTS. THAT IS PART OF THE REASON THAT I'VE LIMITED IT TO THOSE THREE AREAS TO SUPPLEMENT THE FUNDING IN THE CURRENT CITY BUDGET. IT WOULD CERTAINLY BEAT MY INTENT TO BUDGET BASED ON RECEIPTS, NOT PROJECTED REVENUE, GIVEN THAT WE NEED MORE TIME TO SEE HOW IT IS GOING TO PERFORM. THANK YOU. ‎THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, THAT WAS THE LAST WORD. I'M GOING TO TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU. WE WILL LET THE SPONSOR HAVE THE LAST WORD. BACK TO YOU, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. ‎THANK YOU, MR. CHO. THERE IS ONE MORE SLIDE, SLIDE 12, ON THIS DISCUSSION. I WANT TO SHARE SOME THOUGHTS ON THIS TOPIC. I WILL DEFER TO YOU ON THAT. ‎THAT IS THE NEXT ORDINANCE, SO I WILL HOLD YOUR COMMENTS UNTIL THE NEXT ORDINANCE. ‎OKAY. TOM, BACK TO YOU. ‎THE CONVERSATION HAS SORT OF GONE INTO THE IMPLICATIONS OF THIS AGAIN ORDINANCE. THIS IS COUNCIL BILL 120929 IS THE ALLOCATION OF THE PROCEEDS FROM THE CAPITAL GAINS EXCISE TAX. THEIR SEPARATE BILLS. THE BILLS NEED TO REFERENCE A SINGLE SUBJECT, SO, SO 120908 APPLIES THE TAX. 120909 EARMARKS THOSE REVENUES, BUILDING OFF OF COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE, TO HOUSEHOLDS, AND FOOD ASSISTANCE TO FOOD INSECURE HOUSEHOLDS. AND THEN, IT FOR THE INDICATES THE INTENT TO DO THE PROCESS TO EITHER PUT INTO PLACE THE RESOLUTION THAT PUTS FINER TENT ALLEGATIONS, OR TO MAKE THAT ALLOCATION FOR THE BUDGET PROCESS. SO. ‎THANK YOU. ‎COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, ANYTHING FURTHER? COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, OVER TO YOU. ‎THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I WANT TO CLARIFY A FEW THINGS. NAMELY, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF ITEMS THAT I COSPONSORED AS PART OF THIS BUDGET THAT I COSPONSORED FOR PURPOSES OF ELEVATING THE DISCUSSION, EVEN THOUGH I KNOW I AM NOT GOING TO ULTIMATELY SUPPORT IT THIS YEAR. AND FOR PURPOSES OF, ELEVATING DISCUSSION -- WE ALL DESERVE TO HAVE OUR VARIOUS ISSUES HEARD AND THOUGHTFULLY DISCUSSED. WITHIN REASON, WE NEED IT STREAMLINED AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. WE CANNOT VOTE ON 130+ INDIVIDUAL THINGS. BUT THERE ARE A HANDFUL OF ITEMS THAT I AGREED TO COSPONSOR, EVEN THOUGH I KNOW I AM NOT GOING TO ULTIMATELY VOTE TO SUPPORT IT. THIS IS ONE OF THEM. ALTHOUGH THIS IS ONE THAT I FEEL THE MOST SANGUINE ABOUT OVERALL. THERE IS TOO MUCH THAT NEEDS TO BE WORKED OUT. THIS YEAR. BUT, TWO COMMENTS ATTENDING TO THIS. THIS CAPITAL GAINS TAX IDEA MORE BROADLY. ONE IS, I THINK IT IS THE RIGHT IDEA AT THE WRONG TIME. SOME IN OUR CITY WOULD ARGUE THAT WE HAVE A REVENUE PROBLEM. OTHERS WOULD SAY, NO, NO, WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM. I HAVE BEEN TO FIND ELEMENTS OF THOSE ARGUMENTS COMPELLING. I PERSONALLY FEEL I WAS SELECTED TO SPECIFICALLY REJECT THE FALSE CHOICE NARRATIVE AND FRAME, AND CLIENT BACK AGAINST THE EITHER OR DIVISIVE RHETORIC, AND CHAMPION WHAT MAYOR HARRELL CALLS THE POLITICS OF A&D. I THINK BOTH ARE TRUE. REGARDLESS OF WHERE YOU FIT ON THE SPECTRUM, WHETHER YOU THINK WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM, OR A REVENUE PROBLEM, I THINK IT IS MORE CRYSTAL-CLEAR -- THERE IS MORE CONSENSUS THAN SEATTLE IN PARTICULAR, WE HAVE AN OUTCOMES PROBLEM. IN SEATTLE, WE HAVE A RESULT PROBLEM. SO, UNLESS AND UNTIL WE ARE ABLE TO BETTER GET A HOLD OF THAT AND START PRODUCING BETTER RESULTS, I DON'T THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE TO GO BACK AND START LOOKING AT NEW REVENUE OPTIONS. I HEARD OVER AND OVER ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL THAT PEOPLE DON'T MIND PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE. FOR WHATEVER IT IS. EVEN SOME OF THE WEALTHIEST INDIVIDUALS SAID THAT TO ME, TO MY FACE. 16,000 DOORS I KNOCKED ON PERSONALLY. I HEARD IT OVER AND OVER AGAIN. PEOPLE HAVE A STRONG PROBLEM WITH DOING THAT IF THEY'RE NOT SEEING ANY RETURN ON INVESTMENT FOR THEIR EXISTING TAX DOLLARS. SO I THINK WE NEED TO BETTER POSITION OURSELVES AS A CITY TO CRUSH THESE EVERYDAY BASICS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC SAFETY PARKS POTHOLES INFRASTRUCTURE, IT IS NOT AN EXHAUSTIVE LIST. LIBRARIES, AMONGST OTHER THINGS. ONCE WE START YIELDING BETTER RESULTS ON THOSE THINGS, THEN I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO LOOK AT OTHER REVENUE OPTIONS, ESPECIALLY PROGRESSIVE REVENUE, THAT IMPACT THE WEALTHIEST INDIVIDUALS, AND THIS IS A CLEAR, CONCRETE EXAMPLE OF WHAT IS ACTUALLY DOABLE IN TERMS OF OPTIONS. AND LOOKING AT THE ELECTION RESULTS FROM LAST WEEK, I NOTE THAT THE INITIATIVE 2109 AT THE STATE LEVEL WAS OVERWHELMINGLY REJECTED IN THE CITY OF SEATTLE IN ALL PRECINCTS BUT A HANDFUL. IN MY OWN DISTRICT, DISTRICT 1, IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY REJECTED, AND SO, I THINK THIS IS A REVENUE IDEA THAT PEOPLE WOULD GENERALLY SUPPORT, BUT I ALSO THINK WE NEED TO DO MORE WORK TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO BEST BRING IT TO LIFE, SO THAT IS POINT NUMBER ONE, UNLESS AND UNTIL -- AND LET'S REVISIT THIS EVERY YEAR, PERIODICALLY. LET'S REVISIT THIS BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT MAKES SENSE THIS YEAR UNTIL WE CAN GET A BETTER HAND AT PRODUCING BETTER RESULTS, BUT LET'S CONTINUE TO REVISIT ON AN ONGOING BASIS. THE OTHER THING I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE IS THAT I APPRECIATE THE WORK OF COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP IN BRINGING US FORWARD SO WE CAN HAVE THIS CONVERSATION NOW. I WOULD PROBABLY HAVE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT SPENDING ALLOCATIONS OR DESIGNATED CATEGORIES OF AUTHORIZED SPENDING FOR THIS. I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH ANY OF THE THINGS INCLUDED IN THIS SUGGESTION, BUT, AS SOMEONE WHO STRONGLY SUPPORTS INFRASTRUCTURE , GETTING HAMMERS HANDS, SHOVELS AND GROUNDS, KNOWING THE IMPACT OF THE ANTICIPATED GROWTH WE CAN EXPECT TO SEE IN OUR CITY AND THE CORRELATED STRAIN IT HAS ON OUR ALREADY DECREPIT AND AGING INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THE FACT THAT PEOPLE EXPECT LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN PARTICULAR TO LOOK AFTER AND HEAVILY INVEST IN INFRASTRUCTURE, I CAN'T IN GOOD FAITH SUPPORT A NEW REVENUE OPTION THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE SOME SORT O█F INFRASTRUCTURE -- GENERIC RESEARCHER, WHETHER THAT IS STRUCTURE FOR MODERNIZATION, SOMETHING TO BETTER ADDRESS AND HELP US GET A HOLD OF AND ARREST THE DETERIORATING INFRASTRUCTURE SITUATION. THERE IS A FINANCIAL TASK FORCE THAT IS GOING TO BE SET UP PURSUANT TO THAT. I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE PRINCIPAL WITH THE HIGH LEVEL WOULD BE EVERY NEW REVENUE OPTION YOU GET, YOU SHOULD ALLOCATE A PORTION OF THAT FOR INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADES. SO, I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A MORE THOUGHTFUL ANALYSIS OF, WHAT ARE THE APPROPRIATE CATEGORIES OF SPENDING? BUT, AGAIN, RIGHT IDEA, WRONG TIME, BUT I DO WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER MOORE FOR HER LEADERSHIP, AND CHAMPIONING THIS, AND I'M HONORED TO COSPONSOR IT ALONG WITH COUNCILMEMBER MORALES. THANK YOU. ‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. COUNCILMEMBER WOO, FOLLOWED BY VICE MAYOR. ‎THERE AMENDMENTS COMING UP. I WANT TO MAKE A GENERAL COMMENT ABOUT RENTAL ASSISTANCE AND TENANT ASSISTANCE. WE ALWAYS TALK ABOUT GIVING MORE MONEY TO HELP PEOPLE WITH RENT, BUT, LET'S THINK ABOUT THE ROOT CAUSE, OF WHY PEOPLE NEED ASSISTANCE, AND IT IS DIFFERENT FOR EVERY SINGLE PERSON, AND SO, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE MORE PRIORITY IS GIVEN TO POSSIBLY HAVING SOCIAL WORKERS INSIDE BUILDINGS, OR RESIDENT ADVISERS INSIDE THESE BUILDINGS, TO HELP PEOPLE GET TO THE ROOT CAUSE, AND TRY TO GIVE MORE RESOURCES ON WHY THEY GET TO THE POINT WHERE THEY WILL NEED RENTAL ASSISTANCE -- WHERE THEY GET TO THE POINT WHERE THEY MAY HAVE TO FACE EVICTION, AND TRY TO HELP GET TO THE ROOT CAUSE, AND TRY TO HELP THEM GET APPROPRIATE RESOURCES. WHEN IT COMES TO RENTAL ASSISTANCE, IT IS VERY -- I GUESS, IT DOESN'T REALLY ADDRESS CERTAIN ISSUES. SO I THINK WHEN WE TALK ABOUT MORE MONEY FOR TENANT ASSISTANCE, RENTAL ASSISTANCE, FOR HELPING PEOPLE WHO ARE FACING EVICTION, I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT POSSIBLY FUNDING, HOW DO WE GET DOWN TO THE ROOT CAUSE OF WHY THEY HAVE GOTTEN TO THAT POINT , AND IT IS DIFFERENT FOR EVERY SINGLE PERSON. IT IS THE SAME THING OF WHY PEOPLE ARE UNHOUSED. IT IS DIFFERENT FOR EVERY SINGLE PERSON, AND JUST GIVING THEM, I BELIEVE, YOU KNOW, PAYMENT ASSISTANCE WITHOUT ADDRESSING THE RESOURCES THEY ACTUALLY NEED, CAN BE, IN A WAY, THAT, YOU KNOW, SOLVING THE ENTIRE DOSE THE REASON WHY THEY GOT TO THAT POINT. I WAS HOPING WE COULD, YOU KNOW, THINK ABOUT THIS, WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR DIFFERENT AMENDMENTS OF, IS THIS REALLY TACKLING THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE SITUATION? ‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER WOO. VICE CHAIR RIVERA. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE WILL HAVE THE LAST WORD. ‎THANK YOU, CHAIR. ‎FIRST, I WANT TO THANK CENTRAL STAFF IN GENERAL FOR THE HARD WORK THEY HAVE DONE DURING THIS BUDGET PROCESS. I WANT TO THANK -- THIS WAS THE FIRST CHANCE I COULD TAKE TO REALLY THANK BEN AND YOLANDA AND THEIR STAFF FOR THEIR HARD WORK THE LAST, YOU KNOW, COUPLE OF WEEKS, ESPECIALLY THE LAST WEEK WITH THE AMENDMENT SCRAMBLED. I APPRECIATE THE LONG HOURS THAT HAVE GONE INTO THIS. THAT SAID, I WANTED TO BRING UP A COUPLE OF POINTS RELATED TO THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC, WHICH IS THAT, I APPRECIATE -- IN YOU WILL SEE IN THIS BUDGET A NUMBER OF SLIDES BECAUSE WE ARE JUST GETTING TO THE INFORMATION GATHERING BY WHICH TO MAKE FUTURE DECISIONS. IT TAKES TIME TO GATHER THAT INFORMATION. AS A LEGISLATIVE BODY, WE DON'T CONTROL THE DEPARTMENTS, AND SO IT IS THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS, THAT WE ARE REALLY ABLE TO COMPEL DEPARTMENTS TO GIVE US INFORMATION ON THE WORK THAT THEY ARE DOING, AND SO WE HAVE REALLY STARTED TO, IN MY OPINION, DIG INTO THESE PROGRAMS NOW, AND A LOT OF US HAVE PUT INSIGHTS BY WHICH, LIKE I SAID EARLIER, WE ARE GETTING INFORMATION AND DATA, BY WHICH WE ARE MAKING INFORMED DECISIONS. AS TO THIS PARTICULAR -- I APPRECIATE AND THANK MY COLLEAGUE, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, FOR HER THOUGHTFULNESS AND PASSION AROUND THESE ISSUES. I, HOWEVER, THINK THAT WE HAVEN'T DONE OUR HOMEWORK, BY WHICH WE ARE ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION OF THIS NATURE. I WILL SAY, I'M NOT MORALLY OPPOSED, HOWEVER, WE ARE FAR FROM REALLY BEING ABLE TO BRING A PROPOSAL THAT IS STEEPED IN THE DATA. THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS IN OUR BUDGET AT THE CITY THAT WE FUND. THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE REALLY CARE ABOUT AND THAT OUR CONSTITUENTS REALLY CARE ABOUT. THERE IS A LOT OF NEED OUT THERE. YOU KNOW, WE HAD 100 PEOPLE COME TO CHAMBERS YESTERDAY, TO TALK ABOUT THEIR PARTICULAR INTEREST. THAT IS 200 PEOPLE OUT OF 750,000 PEOPLE. I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY DATA POINTS TO DEMONSTRATE THE NEEDS, WHICH, YOU KNOW, THAT DOESN'T MEAN I'M NOT -- I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THAT THE FOLKS THAT COME DOWN HERE TO EXPRESS THEIR NEEDS HAVE THOSE NEEDS, OF COURSE. AND I'M VERY COMPELLED BY THAT. I ALSO NOTE THAT THERE ARE OTHER FOLKS THAT ARE NOT ABLE TO COME DOWN HERE FOR WHATEVER REASON, WHO ALSO HAVE NEEDS THAT WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS, AND THAT WE DON'T KNOW THE LEVEL OF THOSE NEEDS UNTIL WE GET THESE DATA POINTS AND INFORMATION FROM DEPARTMENTS, AND I THINK THAT IS REALLY CRITICAL, AND THAT IS PART OF THE HOMEWORK THAT WE HAVE TO BE DOING AS A LEGISLATIVE BODY, AND IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO DO SO. IT IS PART OF THE ACCOUNTABILITY PIECE TO OUR CONSTITUENTS, THAT WE DO THAT WORK BEFORE WE THEN ENGAGE IN THIS KIND OF EXERCISE. AND SO, I APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUE, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA'S OBSERVATIONS AND POINTS ABOUT SEATTLEITES DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION REGARDING OUTCOMES AND RESULTS. WE DO HAVE AN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS PROBLEM. I HAVE BEEN SAYING THAT SINCE I GOT HERE IN JANUARY, AND IT IS SOMETHING I HAVE COMMITTED TO MY CONSTITUENTS TO REALLY CONTINUE TO LOOK INTO AND TAKE INTO, AND I DON'T FEEL WE ARE THERE YET. WE DON'T HAVE INFORMATION BY WHICH TO MAKE A LOT OF DECISIONS, I WILL SAY. NOT JUST THIS DECISION. MANY OTHER DECISIONS. I WILL BE VERY TRANSPARENT ABOUT THAT. AS I SAID EARLIER, WE ARE USING THIS BUDGET PROCESS TO PUT IN OUR SLIDES REQUESTING INFORMATION, SO WHEN WE ARE MAKING DECISIONS IN THE FUTURE, IT IS ACTUALLY BASED ON REAL DATA AND INFORMATION. ABOUT THE THINGS THAT WE DECIDED TO FUND AS BODY AND AS A CITY, AND SO, FOR ME, IN TERMS OF THE ACCOUNTABILITY PIECES, WE ARE NOT THERE WITH THE INFORMATION. I APPRECIATE THAT THIS BODY, AND I APPRECIATE WORKING WITH YOU ALTOGETHER, AS PART OF THIS PARTICULAR BUDGET PROCESS, TO REQUEST THAT INFORMATION. I LOOK FORWARD TO NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET, BY WHICH, HOPEFULLY, WE HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING AND BETTER INFORMATION BY WHICH WE CAN MAKE BETTER DECISIONS ABOUT CITY BUDGETING, AND WHAT THE NEEDS ARE IN THE COMMUNITY, AND SEE FROM THE ACTUAL DATA WHAT THE NEEDS ARE, AND HOW TO BETTER MANAGE THE MONEY THAT WE ACTUALLY SPEND ON THESE PROGRAMS, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I AM VERY SUPPORTIVE OF -- WE HAVE ALL SAID -- AFFORDABILITY, HOUSING AFFORDABILITY, THE IMPORTANCE OF, YOU KNOW, RENTAL ASSISTANCE, AND FOOD SECURITY, AND YET, WE ARE SPENDING ALL THIS MONEY, AND I DON'T ACTUALLY -- NONE OF US CAN ACTUALLY SAY HOW THIS MONEY IS BEING SPENT, AND WHAT THE ACTUAL CONTINUAL, CONTINUED NEED IS. HOW MUCH ARE WE FALLING SHORT? I HAVE NO IDEA. AND IF YOU ALL KNOW, PLEASE DO SHARE THAT WITH ME. I HAVE NOT SEEN WHAT THE ACTUAL NUMBERS NEED IS, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ALL OF THESE THINGS. I THINK THAT IS CRITICAL TO THIS CONVERSATION. SO I REALLY LOOK FORWARD TO THE CONTINUED CONVERSATION MOVING FORWARD, AS PART OF THIS AND MANY DECISIONS THAT WE WILL HAVE TO MAKE IN THE TIME THAT WE ARE HERE. THANK YOU, CHAIR. ‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH. ‎THANK YOU , MR. CHAIR. I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AND COUNCILMEMBER SAKA FOR BRINGING THIS FOR US TO TALK ABOUT. WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN A GIVING CITY AND WANTING TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE AN IMPACT FOR OUTCOMES, AND SO, I JUST WANTED TO THANK YOU ALL FOR BRINGING THIS TO THE CONVERSATION, FOR US TO DISCUSS AS A COUNCIL BECAUSE I THINK IT IS INCREDIBLY FOR IMPORTANT FOR US TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION. I WANTED TO PUBLICLY SAY THAT. ‎THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, LAST WORD. ‎THANK YOU. SO I DID WANT TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO THANK BOTH COUNCILMEMBER MORALES FOR HER SPONSORSHIP AND COUNCILMEMBER SAKA FOR THE COSPONSORSHIP, RECOGNIZING THIS WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET IT BEFORE US. I APPRECIATE YOUR BEING WILLING TO DO THAT. AGAIN, I THINK WE CLEARLY HAVE RESPECTFUL DIFFERENCES OF OPINION. I GUESS, IN TERMS OF -- TRUE. I SHARE COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA'S CONCERN. I SHARE THE CONCERN THAT WE HAVE A RESULTS, OUTCOMES PROBLEM. AND WE DO. AND WE DO NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB OF CREATING CLEAR, OBJECTIVE MEASURES OF PERFORMANCE. ALL OF THAT SAID, WE HAVE UNMET NEED IN THE CITY. WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAVE UNMET NEED IN THE CITY. I THINK THIS IS A TIME WHEN WE CAN BEGIN COLLECTING THE FUNDS. WE CAN THEN HAVE INTELLIGENT DISCUSSION ABOUT WHERE SHOULD IT GO. THIS IS REALLY TO START THAT PROCESS. TO THE POINT ABOUT ROOT CAUSES, YEAH. ABSOLUTELY. WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE ROOT CAUSES, AND I CERTAINLY SUPPORT HAVING MORE RESIDENT SERVICES IN BUILDINGS, PARTICULARLY IN OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUILDINGS. PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING. WE NEED TO BEEF UP THOSE SERVICES. THE OTHER THING I WANT TO POINT OUT HERE IS THAT STATISTICS ARE QUITE COMPELLING. 67% OF SEATTLE RESIDENTS ARE RENTERS. 44% OF HOUSEHOLDS IN SEATTLE ARE COST BURDENS. THEY ARE SPENDING 30% OF THEIR INCOME AND RENT ON UTILITIES. 30% IS THE CUTOFF AT WHICH PEOPLE ARE CONSIDERED -- THAT'S THE AMOUNT PEOPLE ARE CONSIDERED REASONABLE FOR THEM TO MANAGE. BUT THEN I WOULD NOTE THAT 19% OF HOUSEHOLDS IN SEATTLE ARE SEVERELY COST BURDENS. THEY ARE PAYING 50% OR MORE IN RENT AND UTILITIES. THEN YOU LOOK OUR MFTE PROGRAM, WHERE PEOPLE GET LOWER RENT AT 60% AND BELOW. 85% OF THOSE HOUSEHOLDS ARE COST BURDENS. 25% ARE SEVERELY COST BURDENS. THAT MEETS 25% AND REDUCED INCOME SUBSIDIZED HOUSING ARE STILL PAYING US -- [ INAUDIBLE ] THIS IS IN A CITY WITH ONE OF THE HIGHEST MINIMUM WAGES IN THE COUNTRY. I DON'T KNOW HOW WE COMPARE TO SAN FRANCISCO, BUT, ANYWAY, ONE OF THE ROOT CAUSES IS THAT PEOPLE'S INCOME IS NOT KEEPING UP WITH THE COST OF LIVING. IT IS NOT KEEPING UP WITH RENT. IT IS NOT KEEPING UP WITH FOOD OR UTILITIES. WE LIVE IN A VERY EXPENSIVE CITY. WE LIVE IN A CITY IN WHICH THE INCOME INEQUALITY IS CONTINUING TO GROW AT A RAPID PACE. WITH OF THE NATIONAL ELECTION, WE ARE GOING TO SEE THAT ACCELERATE EXPONENTIALLY. SO, YES, THERE ARE ROOT CAUSES OF POVERTY. THERE ARE ROOT CAUSES OF MENTAL ILLNESS. THERE ARE ROOT CAUSES OF ADDICTION. THERE IS ALSO ROOT CAUSE OF ECONOMIC INABILITY TO KEEP UP. WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION IN THE CITY TO HELP PEOPLE KEEP UP. AND WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO NOT CONTINUE TO CREATE A CITY WHERE EVERYBODY IS UNSTABLE. YOU KNOW, THE FOCUS ON HER HOUSING LEVY, AND OUR OFFICE OF HOUSING IS BUILDING MORE RENTAL UNITS. THAT IS GREAT. WE NEED TO PUT A LOT MORE MONEY IN BUILDING HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES. WE NEED TO REBUILD A MIDDLE-CLASS IN THIS CITY, AND WE ARE NOT PUTTING ENOUGH MONEY. AND I AGREE WE DON'T KNOW WHERE IT IS ALL GOING AND THERE IS A PIPELINE ISSUE, AND WE NEED TO WORK ON THAT. WE ALSO AS A CITY NEED TO HAVE A VISION AND MAKE A COMMITMENT. IN MY OPINION, THAT IS GOING TO BE EVEN MORE IMPORTANT AS WE GO FORWARD WITH THE NATIONAL RESULTS. SO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. SEATTLE IS THE ONLY CITY WITH A HIGHER MINIMUM WAGE THAN SAN FRANCISCO. IT HAS JUST BEEN SINCE YOU MADE THAT COMMENT. MOVING ON, IF WE WANT TO MOVE ON TO SEATTLE CHANNEL FUNDING, SPONSORED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON. ‎CANCELED BILL 120911, SPONSORED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON AND COSPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBERS KENDALL AND RIVERA. THIS IS DECLINING REVENUES FROM CABLE FRANCHISE FEES. CABLE FRANCHISE FEES HAVE BEEN DECLINING FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS AND ARE PREDICTED TO CONTINUE TO DECLINE. AS CUSTOMERS MOVE AWAY FROM TRADITIONAL CABLE SERVICES TO STREAMING SERVICES. THIS BILL STATES THE COUNCIL'S INTENT TO ESTABLISH A DEDICATED AND ONGOING FUNDING PLAN SUFFICIENT TO MEET THE OPERATING AND CAPITAL NEEDS OF THE SEATTLE CHANNEL SUCH THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE TO PROVIDE THE GOVERNMENT PROGRAMMING AND ALSO THE TYPES OF CIVIC, CULTURAL, AND COMMUNITY PROGRAMMING THAT THEY PRODUCE. WHEN ESTABLISHED, THE FUNDING PLAN SHOULD INCLUDE BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING SOURCES. SO THE FIRST IS AT LEAST 50%, BUT NO LESS THAN $1.7 MILLION OF CABLE FRANCHISE FEE REVENUES EVERY YEAR SHOULD BE DEDICATED TO THE SEATTLE CHANNEL. THE SECOND IS THAT SEATTLE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT SHOULD INCORPORATE A PORTION OF COUNCILMEMBER MORALES'S EXPENSES INTO ITS COST ALLOCATION MODEL. THAT ENSURES THAT THOSE IN SUPPORT OF THE SERVICES AND PRIORITIES OF OTHER THE PERMITS ARE ALLOCATED TO THOSE DEPARTMENTS. THE THIRD CATEGORY IS THE GENERAL FUND. THE GENERAL FUND SHOULD BE USED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE COVERAGE OF MEETINGS, PRESS CONFERENCES AND OTHER PUBLIC EVENTS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AND OTHER CITY OF SEATTLE ELECTED OFFICIALS. THEY COMMENTED THAT THEY PRESENT THE FUNDING PLAN WITH ELEMENTS CONSISTENT WITH THE BILL AND LEGISLATION NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THE PLAN. INTO NEXT YEAR, 2025, LESLIE, THE BILL STATES THE COUNCIL'S EXPEDITION THAT INTEGRATING THE FUNDING PLAN, THE EXECUTIVE WILL USE THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF ANY ADVISORY WORKGROUPS THAT ARE ESTABLISHED TO STUDY THE SEATTLE CHANNEL'S OPERATIONS AND FINANCING. THIS REFERENCE IS TWO ADVISORY WORKGROUPS. THAT IS INCLUDED IN GROUP C. THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED LATER TODAY. ‎FANTASTIC. THANK YOU. COUNCIL PRESIDENT. ‎THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK COUNCIL CHAIR FOR INCLUDING THAT IN THE PACKAGE THROUGH 2026. I KNOW THAT PROBABLY EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US WAS REALLY INTERESTED IN ENSURING THAT SEATTLE CHANNEL WAS FUNDED ENOUGH TO CONTINUE ITS PROGRAMMING THROUGH THIS YEAR AND INTO NEXT. AS NOTED ALREADY, THIS LEGISLATION DOES DIRECT THE EXECUTIVE TO ESTABLISH AN ONGOING AND SUSTAINABLE FUNDING PLAN. IT IDENTIFIES FUNDING SOURCES THAT INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT NECESSARILY LIMITED TO 50% OF THE EXISTING CABLE FUND REVENUES, AND I PUT THIS IN HERE BECAUSE IT IS THE PERCENTAGE OF CABLE FUND REVENUES HAS BEEN DECLINING OVER THE YEARS, AS MORE DEMANDS HAVE BEEN MADE ON THE FUND AS A WHOLE. THE RESOLUTION THAT WAS PASSED IN 2001 DOES INDICATE THAT PAYING FOR SEATTLE CHANNEL WAS THE FIRST PRIORITY AFTER SOME OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND OBLIGATORY THINGS THAT THE CABLE FUND HAD TO PAY FOR. THAT IS THE MARKER FOR, YES, WE ARE STILL CONSIDERING THE SEATTLE CHANNEL AS A MAJOR RECIPIENT OF THE CABLE FUND REVENUES. THE SECOND IS THE COST ALLOCATION TO DIFFERENCE IS ALREADY SET. THE THIRD WOULD BE GENERAL FUND REVENUES. THAT WOULD BE DEDICATED FOR PAYING FOR THE PRODUCTION COSTS OF OUR MEETINGS. SO ALL THE HARD WORK THAT SEATTLE CHANNEL IS DOING RIGHT NOW, AND ALSO, FOR PRESS CONFERENCES AND OTHER PUBLIC MEETINGS. WHY? BECAUSE WE ARE OBLIGATED TO HAVE PUBLIC MEETINGS AND SO, THEREFORE, THE THINKING IS THAT NOBODY WOULD EVER TRY. NO FUTURE POLITICIAN WOULD EVER TRY TO GO AFTER THAT SIZE OF FUNDING. AS NOTED, THIS LEGISLATION DOES ANTICIPATE PASSAGE OF THE SLIDE, THAT WILL CONVENE A WORKGROUP THAT WILL MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION FOR LONG-TERM FUNDING. I COMPLETELY WELCOME THAT. I AM TOLD -- NOT TO GET INTO THE WEEDS, BUT IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THE SEATTLE CHANNEL BE REPRESENTED ON THAT WORKGROUP. I HAVE NO REASON TO DOUBT THAT THAT WILL BE THE CASE. ULTIMATELY, WHAT IS NECESSARY, COLLEAGUES, IS CERTAINTY. IS CERTAINTY. WE DON'T WANT TO LOSE THE TALENT OR THE EMPLOYEES THAT PRODUCE AND MAKE POSSIBLE THE AWARD-WINNING PROGRAMMING AND ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL PUBLIC SERVICE THAT IS THE SEATTLE CHANNEL RIGHT NOW. THAT IS WHY I WAS MOTIVATED TO PUT FORTH LEGISLATION THAT SETS THE DATE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A FUNDING PLAN THAT COULD BE IMPLEMENTED IN 2026 SO THAT THERE IS NO QUESTION GOING FORWARD THAT WE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT THIS AGAIN. THANK YOU. ‎THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. COLLEAGUES? THERE ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS BUT I WILL SHARE MY COMMENTS ON THE PASS IT BACK TO YOU FOR LAST WORD, TRENIN. JUST REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR WORK ON THIS. EVERYONE ON THIS DAIS EXPRESSED THEIR SUPPORT FOR CONTINUING THE SEATTLE CHANNEL FUNDING AND MAKING SURE THEY REMAIN A STRONG ENTITY WITHIN THE CITY OF SEATTLE. I APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT ACROSS THE DAIS. WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEIR FUNDING SOURCE IS INDEPENDENT FROM ELECTED OFFICIAL INFLUENCE, CONSIDERING THE CABLE FRANCHISE TAX REDUCTIONS AT SUCH A RAPID RATE AT THIS POINT. THE FACT THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE WATCHING DOWNSTAIRS KNOW THAT WE HAVE THEIR BACK NO MATTER WHAT, UNTIL WE CAN FIND A BIGGER, BROADER WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT SUPPORT CAN HOPEFULLY EXPAND THEIR ABILITIES. THIS IS A GOOD BILL. THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. DO YOU WANT FINAL WORD? ‎I WANT TO THANK BRIAN FOR PUTTING ALL YOUR EFFORT INTO THIS AT THE LAST MINUTE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU TO MY COLLEAGUES FOR YOUR SUPPORT, HOPEFULLY. ‎THANK YOU. ‎I THINK WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. ‎THE NEXT ITEM IS ANOTHER NEW PIECE OF LEGISLATION, ONE THAT WOULD ESTABLISH NEW PAYROLL EXPENSE POLICIES. ABOUT A MONTH AGO, I WAS HERE WHEN THE POLICY CONSIDERATIONS PHASE. I'M GOING TO USE THE PHRASE JUMPSTART POLICIES. [ INAUDIBLE ] AS PART OF THAT, I HAD THAT SERIES OF QUESTIONS THAT I THOUGHT WOULD BE ESSENTIAL FOR YOU COLLECTIVELY TO ANSWER, AS YOU SAID, EITHER ADOPT POLICIES OR SET ONES OF YOUR OWN. I'M HERE TO DESCRIBE THE PROPOSALS FROM THE CHAIR REGARDING THOSE POLICIES AND ESSENTIALLY ANSWERING THOSE QUESTIONS. I'M GOING TO TAKE THE FIRST COUPLE OF SLIDES TO PROVIDE THE SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSAL. THIS IS LEGISLATION MADE FOR THE COMMITTEE YESTERDAY. I'M GOING TO HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE OF AMENDMENTS BEING PROPOSED BY COUNCILMEMBERS MOORE AND MORALES. THEY HAVE ALREADY ENGAGED STAFF ON THOSE OVEN MITTS. IF OTHERS ARE INTERESTED, THE DEADLINE IS, AGAIN, THIS FRIDAY. THE CALENDAR HAS YOU PUTTING ON THE LEGISLATION AND AMENDMENTS ON THE 19th. THE LEGISLATION WAS BY CHAIR STRAUSS. IT BEGINS WITH THE EXECUTIVES AS A BASE, BUT MAKES A NUMBER OF SIGNIFICANT AND IMPORTANT CHANGES. FIRST OF ALL, LIKE THE EXECUTIVES, IT ESTABLISHES SPENDING CATEGORIES. THOSE INCLUDE WHAT I WOULD DESCRIBE AS THE ORIGINAL FIVE JUMPSTART CATEGORIES. THE ADMINISTRATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THE EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REORGANIZATION, AND THE GREEN NEW DEAL. IT WAS ADDED AS PART OF THAT BUDGET PROCESS. I WOULD USE THAT TO DESCRIBE THAT BODY OF SERVICES. THIS LEGISLATION WOULD ADD GENERAL FUND -- TRANSFERS TO THE GENERAL FUND, AS ELIGIBLE USE. AND AT A REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT. THIS LEGISLATION FORMALIZES THE REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT FOR THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX. [ INAUDIBLE ] AGAIN, [ INAUDIBLE ] THEY APPRECIATED THE VALUE OF THE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT HERE. THE VOLATILITY OF THIS REVENUE SOURCE IS ONE OF THE REASONS THAT SUCH AN ACCOUNT WOULD MAKE A FAIR AMOUNT OF SENSE. I WILL EXPLAIN THIS FURTHER, BUT THERE ARE NO RESTRICTIONS PUT ON THE ALLOCATIONS AMONG THESE CATEGORIES. IT IS FLEXIBLE IN THAT WAY. IT ALLOWS YOU, THIS YEAR, AND NEXT YEAR, AND GOING FORWARD, TO ESTABLISH WHAT THE ALLEGATION IS BETWEEN THESE SPENDING CATEGORIES, AND SPECIFICALLY, BETWEEN THE GENERAL FUND SUPPORT, AND THE OTHER ORIGINAL PRIORITIES. I WOULD ADD, WITH RESPECT TO ONE OF THE PRIORITIES, MENTAL HEALTH AND VIOLENCE PREVENTION, WE IDENTIFIED THOSE AS ELIGIBLE USES FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS FOR 25 AND 26, BUT NOT BEYOND, WITH THE IMPLIED INTENT TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR THOSE TO THE RENEWAL OF THE FAMILIES AND EDUCATION LEVY. AND NOW HAS A LONGER TITLE, BUT I'M GOING TO FORGET IT. THIS LEGISLATION DEALS WITH THAT ISSUE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENTLY. THAT IS WHAT THAT FOOTNOTE IS. IT IS AN IMPORTANT FOOTNOTE. IT WOULD MAINTAIN YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH AND VIOLENCE PREVENTION AS ELIGIBLE USE UNTIL A SUSTAINABLE ALTERNATIVE FUNDING SOURCES PROVIDED FOR THOSE ITEMS. THAT FUNDING SOURCE COULD BE THE LEVY, BUT IT COULD BE SOMETHING ELSE, SO, BUT IT IS EXPLICIT ABOUT THAT. IT IS A NOTABLE DIFFERENCE. IN TERMS OF PERCENTAGE ALLOCATIONS, THE LEGISLATION SETS OUT AS GUIDELINES, BUT NOT CONSTRAINTS, THE ORIGINAL TARGETS IN THE LEGISLATION. I SET IT UP SO THAT IT HAS THREE PLANKS. THE WEIGHT THESE PERCENTAGES WORK, OF THE MONEY ALLOCATED FOR THOSE FIVE CATEGORIES, THIS IS HOW IT IS DIVIDED. THEY DON'T SAY HOW MUCH MONEY -- WHICH SHARE OF THE REVENUES HAVE TO GO TO THIS SET OF THINGS. THAT FLEXIBILITY REMAINS . OF THE MONEY ALLOCATED TO THESE FIVE ITEMS, THESE PERCENTAGES ARE SET AS GUIDELINES. THE INTENT HERE IS TO PRESERVE THE RELATIVE PRIORITIES ESTABLISHED IN THE ORIGINAL JUMPSTART LEGISLATION, BUT AGAIN, TO PROVIDE THE FLEXIBILITY ABOUT THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF FUNDING PROVIDED EITHER TO THE GENERAL FUND OR TO THESE PRIORITIES, SO, THOSE ARE GUIDELINES, BUT NOT FINDING CONSTRAINTS. NEXT SLIDE. AS I DESCRIBED MOMENTS AGO, BUT NOW, IN MORE DETAIL, IT DOESN'T ESTABLISH A FORMAL REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT, AN RSA, IF YOU WILL, WITHIN THE JUMPSTART FUND. IT TARGETS THE BALANCE AT 10% OF FORECAST REVENUES. THAT IS IN THE RANGE OF FRENCH $50 MILLION -- $45-$50 MILLION. IT ESTABLISHES THAT THE TARGET SHOULD BE REACHED WITHIN FOUR YEARS AS PART OF THE CURRENT PROPOSED BALANCING PACKAGE. SOME OF THE RESERVE PROPOSED BY THE EXECUTIVE IS BEING ALLOCATED TO OTHER THINGS. THIS SETS THE TARGET SO THAT THE BALANCE GETS REBUILT. THE FOUR-YEAR TIME FRAME IS CONSISTENT WITH THE TIMEFRAME FOR THE RSA FOR THE GENERAL FUND. SIMILARLY TO THE GENERAL FUND RSA, THE PROPOSED POLICIES ESTABLISHED AS AN AUTOMATIC MECHANISM TO HELP MAKE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT, AND IN PARTICULAR, WE WOULD LOOK AT THE BALANCE. AS WE BUDGET FROM YEAR-TO-YEAR, THERE WAS A REASON WHY YOU MIGHT HAVE A PROJECTED FUND BALANCE -- PURPOSEFUL FUND BALANCE IN THE FIRST YEAR. YOU EXPECT TO SPEND SOME OF THAT MONEY IN THE FIRST YEAR, BUT NOT ALL OF IT. SO THERE WILL BE A PROJECTED FUND BALANCE. IF THE FUND BALANCE ENDS UP ABOVE THAT LEVEL, AND IT COULD END UP ABOVE THE LEVEL FOR TWO FUNDAMENTAL REASONS -- ONE IS THAT REVENUES CAME IN HIGHER THAN THE FORECAST, AND THE OTHER IS THAT THE EXPENDITURES DIDN'T REACH THE LEVEL THAT HAD BEEN ANTICIPATED. YOU TAKE THE DIFFERENCE OF THOSE THINGS, AND HALF OF THAT DIFFERENCE IS AUTOMATICALLY TRANSFERRED TO THE REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT. THE OTHER HALF IS AVAILABLE TO ADDRESS IMMEDIATE NEEDS, WHATEVER THOSE MIGHT BE, OR TO INCREASE THE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT. IT WOULD BE FLEXIBILITY ABOUT THE OTHER HAVE, IF YOU WILL, AND A TECHNICAL NOTE, AND COMPARING THE ACTUAL AND THE FORECAST FUND BALANCE, IT WOULD TAKE ACCOUNT FOR CARRYFORWARD. THERE ARE SOME ALLOCATIONS THAT MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN SPENT IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR. THERE IS EVERY INSPIRATION THAT THEY WOULD HAVE. THE GOAL WOULD BE TO CARRYFORWARD THOSE REVENUES. WE WILL TAKE ACCOUNT FOR THAT. IN PARTICULAR, IF YOU MADE AN ALLOCATION FOR SOME CAPITAL PURPOSE THAT DIDN'T QUITE GET EXECUTED IN THAT YEAR, IT WOULD BE NATURAL TO CARRY THAT FORWARD AS PART OF THE FUND BALANCE. IT IS REALLY A TECHNICAL POINT. AND THEN, WITHDRAWALS. THERE ARE CRITERIA SET FOR WHEN YOU COULD TURN TO THE JUMPSTART REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT. I HAVE DESCRIBED THEM MECHANICALLY OR PARTLY IN TWO WAYS. ONE IS, BETWEEN THE TIME THAT MAYOR SUBMITTED HIS BUDGET AND YOU TAKE FINAL ACTION ON, THE FORECAST FOR THOSE REVENUES DROPPED. THE OPPOSITE THING HAPPENED THIS YEAR, BUT IT COULD EASILY HAPPEN THAT THE FORECAST THAT WAS PREPARED IN AUGUST, VERSUS THE ONE PREPARED IN OCTOBER SHOWS A DECLINE IN REVENUES. THAT WOULD BE A LAST-MINUTE CHANGE. TO MAKE DIFFICULT CHOICES ABOUT CUTTING APPROPRIATIONS, SO IT COULD MAKE SENSE TO LEAN ON THE REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT. THAT IS ONE OF THE TIMES YOU COULD DO IT. THE OTHER IS, AFTER YOU ADOPT THE BUDGET, SO THE BUDGET GETS ADOPTED A WEEK FROM NOW, AND THEN, COME APRIL, THERE IS A REVENUE FORECAST UPDATE THAT REDUCES THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE THAT IS ANTICIPATED FOR THE THEN CURRENT YEAR, FOR 2025, FOR INSTANCE. AT THAT POINT, YOUR BUDGET IS OUT OF BALANCE. IT IS A REVENUE FORECAST. THE FORECAST HAS COME DOWN. YOU HAVE TWO CHOICES AT THAT POINT. WELL, THE EXECUTIVE -- YOU COULD REDUCE EXPENDITURES. THE EXECUTIVE DOES THAT ADMINISTRATIVELY, OR YOU REDUCE APPROPRIATIONS, OR YOU CAN TURN THE ACCOUNT. THAT IS WHAT IS IMAGINED THERE. THAT IS THE 15. MOVING ON TO OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE LEGISLATION, CONSISTENT WITH THE PROPOSAL, LEGISLATION BEFORE YOU, IT ELIMINATES THE JUMPSTART OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. THAT COMMITTEE HAD BEEN ESTABLISHED AS A NINE-MEMBER BODY. IT WAS CREATED TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF JUMPSTART SPENDING AND ALSO, TO ASSESS THE TAXES IMPACT ON THE LOCAL ECONOMY. COUNCIL APPOINTED FIVE MEMBERS ABOUT A YEAR AGO. THE EXECUTIVE HAS NOT MADE NOMINATIONS. THE LAST ELEMENT IS ANOTHER SIGNIFICANT ONE. IT WILL REMOVE THE SUNSET DATE. CURRENTLY, THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TEXT SUNSETS AT THE END OF 2040. THIS LEGISLATION WOULD ELIMINATE THAT SUNSET AND ESTABLISH THE TAXES AS AN ONGOING AFFAIR, IF YOU WILL. I THINK IT IS WORTH OF A STOP TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. ‎THANK YOU, DIRECTOR. EVEN THOUGH I STEPPED OUT FOR A SECOND, I COULD HEAR EVERY WORD YOU SAID. LET'S PAUSE HERE AND LOOK AT THIS IN TOTAL, AND MOVE ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE WITH TWO POLICY PROPOSALS. NOT A CORRECTION, FOR THE RECORD, BUT MAYBE A CLARIFICATION FOR THE RECORD. THE REMOVAL OF THE JUMPSTART OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE WAS NOT A CHANGE MADE AT COUNCIL AND THE BASE BILL. ‎I MEANT TO SAY THAT. ‎CORRECT. ‎COLLECTS, I AM GOING -- AS A SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION, I AM GOING TO SPEAK TO IT, AND THEN WE WILL TAKE QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. I SEE THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT ALREADY HAS HER HAND UP. I'M GOING TO START IN THE WAY BACK AND CURRENT TIME MACHINE. COUNCIL PRESIDENT, IF YOU COULD LEAVE YOUR HAND UP. OTHERWISE, I'M GOING TO LOSE YOU. WHEN THE LAST SET OF POLICIES WERE VOTED ON, AND THAT IS THE BILL -- THE ORDINANCE ON THE LEGISLATION TODAY, WE AT COUNCIL BELIEVED THAT TODAY, SETTING UP FOR 2025, WE WOULD BE PAST THE DOWNSTREAM ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE PANDEMIC. AND SO, WE HAD HOPED -- THIS IS PART OF WHY THE QUESTION ABOUT THE JUMPSTART USES -- THIS QUESTION IS BEING CALLED IN THIS BUDGET CYCLE. I REALLY WISH THAT WE HAD BEEN CORRECT IN 2025. WE WOULD BE PAST THE DOWNSTREAM ECONOMIC ISSUES. THE REALITY IS THAT THE DOWNTURN FOR THE BUDGET HAS ONLY BEEN EXPRESSED IN 2028 -- 2008 AND 2020. WE NEED THE PATIENT FOR THIS BUDGET SO WE DO NOT UNNECESSARILY CUT STAFF AND PROGRAMMING. SO WE DO NOT ENGAGE IN AUSTERITY. EVEN WITH THIS PROJECT, WE ARE CUTTING STAFF AND PROGRAMMING, WHICH ARE INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT DECISIONS. DUE TO CENTRAL STEPS REALLY GOOD WORK THIS YEAR, WE FOUND EXISTING FUNDING FOR COUNCIL PRIORITIES, WITHOUT USING THE JUMPSTART RESERVE FUND , UNTIL THE DOWNTURN FORECAST, WHICH IS WHY WE HAD TO USE THE MAJORITY OF THE RESERVE FUND SEED FUNDING. THE RESERVE ACCOUNT DID NOT EXIST 90 DAYS AGO, AND IT IS A REALLY GOOD IDEA. WITH THIS EXPERIENCE TAUGHT ME IS THE IMPORTANCE OF HOW JUMPSTART ENSURES WE DO NOT ENGAGE IN AUSTERITY BUDGETING. WE USED JUMPSTART FUNDING TO INCREASE ACCESS TO FOOD, LEGAL ASSISTANCE, ADDITIONAL HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES, SERVING HOMELESS YOUTH, AND SO MUCH MORE. THAT IS WHAT JUMPSTART IS BEING USED OF -- ON THIS YEAR. LAST TIME WE HAD LEGISLATION BEFORE US, WE THOUGHT WE WOULD BE OUT OF THE WOODS, BUT IN FACT, WE ARE IN THE EYE OF THE STORM. WE ARE EXPENSING THE DOWNTURNS OF THE PANDEMIC AND AT THE SAME TIME, COVERT RELIEF FUNDS ARE EXPERIENCING -- EXPIRING. THE BUOY WE USED IS NO LONGER AVAILABLE TO US. WE NEED FLEXIBILITY TO GET US THROUGH THIS MOMENT. WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT THE ORIGINAL PRIORITIES ARE FUNDED ONCE WE ARE PAST THIS ECONOMIC DOWNTURN WE ARE IN. WE WILL LIKELY NEED BUDGET FLEXIBILITY TO BE RESPONSIVE TO THE MOMENT OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT FOUR YEARS. EIGHT YEARS AGO -- SO NOW, NOT JUMPSTART, BUT EIGHT YEARS AGO, IF YOU CAN TRACK WITH ME, WE BEGAN FUNDING IMPORTANT PRIORITIES TO SERVE SATELLITES UNDER THE LAST PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATION. I FORESEE US HAVING TO DO THE SAME THING AGAIN, INCREASING FUNDING FOR OFFICE OF IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE AFFAIRS, OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS, BACKFILLING FOR CHANGING FEDERAL FUNDING PRIORITIES. IF YOU REMEMBER THE GRANDSON ACCEPTANCE ORDINANCE, WE RECEIVED A LOT OF FEDERAL FUNDING OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS. BECAUSE THE INFRASTRUCTURE ACT, THE CLIMATE ACT, IF YOU LOOK ON I-5 RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE MORE FEDERAL FUNDS COMING IN THERE. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF THAT FUNDING. WE WILL ALSO NEED TO FUND COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS TO MEET THE NEEDS OF SEATTLEITES, AND MANY PRIORITIES WE DON'T YET KNOW ABOUT FOR THE NEXT FOUR YEARS. I SAY THIS BECAUSE WHILE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT OUR FUTURE HOLDS, I DO KNOW THAT EVERY ONE OF US UP HERE WILL WANT TO BE NIMBLE AND RESPONSIVE TO SERVING SEATTLEITES THROUGH UNCERTAIN TIMES. THE POINT THERE IS, THAT IS WHY WE NEED FLEXIBILITY FOR THE NEXT FOUR YEARS. LET'S WALK THROUGH WHAT I'M PROPOSING. DIRECTOR NOBLE DID A VERY GOOD JOB OF GIVING A PRESENTATION ON HERE. I WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT WHY THE COMPETENCE OF REVIEW -- WHY I REQUESTED A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW. THIS GOES BACK TO THESE GRANTS WE HAD WITH JUMPSTART, THAT IT HAS OUR NEEDS FOR THE GENERAL FUND HAVE CHANGED AS WE GET OUT OF THIS ECONOMIC RECESSION. DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS. WHAT I DID NOT KNOW A FEW YEARS AGO WAS THAT WE WOULD STILL BE IN IT IN 2025. I THOUGHT WE WOULD BE OUT OF THE WOODS. THAT IS WHY I DON'T WANT TO PUT STRICT PARAMETERS. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WILL BE OUT OF THE WOODS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE WE NEED TO BE RESPONSIVE TO FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS, WHEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NO LONGER PARTICIPATES. AND I KNOW THAT IN FOUR YEARS, WE HAVE TO HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS AND REVIEW ABOUT THESE POLICIES. THE NEXT THING THIS DOES IS, WHILE THE ORIGINAL PRIORITY -- FIVE, IF YOU COUNT ADMISSION -- WAS INCLUDED. WE INCLUDED THIS WITH ORIGINAL PERCENTAGES TO BE ALLOCATED OF JUMPSTART FUNDING TO THESE CATEGORIES. THIS IS WHAT MAYOR HARRELL DID THIS YEAR. AND THEN, THROUGH THE PACKAGE, USING THE JUMP START RESERVE FUNDS, THINGS LIKE FUNDING UNTIL ASSISTANCE AND HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES, THOSE ARE WITHIN THE ORIGINAL FOUR CATEGORIES, BUT THEY WERE NOT NECESSARILY CONSISTENT WITH THE PERCENTAGES. I HAVE NOT INCLUDED A HARD NUMBER FOR JUMPSTART BEING USED FOR PRIORITIES OR THE AMOUNT OF GENERAL FUND TO BE USED THIS YEAR, BECAUSE THE NUMBER OF VARIABLES THAT ARE UNCERTAIN TODAY ON NOVEMBER 13th, IS HIGHER THAN THE NUMBER OF VARIABLES WITH UNCERTAINTY IN SEPTEMBER. SAID ANOTHER WAY, WE ARE IN A MORE UNCERTAIN PLACE TODAY THAN WE WERE THREE MONTHS AGO. AND THAT'S WHY I DON'T THINK THAT ADDING HARD NUMBERS TODAY IS PRUDENT. I DO THINK THAT THAT IS ABSOLUTELY SOMETHING WE SHOULD DO, WHICH IS WHY I REQUESTED THE TWO AND FOUR YEAR CHECK INS. WE HAVE INCLUDED MENTAL HEALTH AS A USE, UNTIL A MORE STABLE FUNDING SOURCE IS IMPLEMENTED. NOT JUST IDENTIFIED. IT CAN'T JUST BE PAST. THERE CANNOT BE CAPPED IN ADDRESSING -- A GAP IN ADDRESSING YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH. THE NOTE IN ADDING CLARITY THAT WITHIN THIS ORDINANCE, IF THEY JUMPSTART REVENUE DECREASES AND OTHER SOURCES OF REVENUE SUPPORTING GENERAL FUND ARE NOT REDUCED, THE GENERAL FUND SHOULD BE USED TO HONOR JUMPSTART PRIORITIES. DURING THE SELECT BUDGET SERIES, PART ONE OF -- I CANNOT REMEMBER. WE HAVE HAD SO MANY PRESENTATIONS ABOUT THIS. IF YOU REMEMBER HOW MUCH WE WERE FUNDING FOR EQUITABLE ELEMENT INITIATIVES, IT WAS NOT VERY MUCH. IT WAS FROM SWEET AND BEVERAGE TASKS. IF YOU REMEMBER THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, THEY DID NOT HAVE A LARGE BUDGET COMPARED TO WHAT THEY HAVE TODAY. I REMEMBER BOBBY LEE, FORMER DIRECTOR OF OED, SAYING THAT WE SHOULD PUT 1% ON ALL CONTRACTS TO FUND OED, AND I THINK AT THAT TIME, DIRECTOR NOBLE , THE BUDGET OFFICE KICKED HIM UNDER THE TABLE, BUT THE REASON THAT BOBBY BROUGHT THAT UP WAS BECAUSE THERE WAS NOT A DEDICATED SOURCE OF FUNDING TO SUPPORT OUR SMALLEST BUSINESSES, AND THAT IS WHAT JUMPSTART DOES. GREEN NEW DEAL WAS A PRIORITY CLEARLY IN 2018, 2018. THAT TERM, YOU DON'T HEAR SO MUCH ANYMORE, BECAUSE IT IS GENERALLY THAT THE CLIMATE CRISIS IS REAL AND IN OUR FACE. WE NEED TO LOOK FURTHER THAN SOUTH PARK WITH THE FLOODING THAT IS OCCURRING WITH THE KING TIDE'S, ET CETERA. TO HOUSING. WE HAVE MORE SUPPORT FOR HOUSING SINCE JUMPSTART WAS PASSED, AND WE ARE STILL DECADES BEHIND IN PRODUCTION. I SPEAK ABOUT THIS BECAUSE THIS SIMPLY NOTES THAT JUMPSTART IS NOT A STABLE FUNDING SOURCE, AND THE PRIORITIES I ORIGINALLY IDENTIFIED REMAIN INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO FUND IF WE WANT A STRONG AND HEALTHY SEATTLE. MOVING ONTO THE RESERVE ACCOUNT, I THINK IT IS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. THIS IS A VERY SMART DECISION BY THE MAYOR'S OFFICE BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A STABLE FUNDING SOURCE. CREATING A RESERVE ACCOUNT, I SPOKE TO THE USE OF THE RESERVE ACCOUNT THIS YEAR. IT HAD BEEN MY INTENT BEFORE THE REVENUE FORECAST TO RETAIN THAT RESERVE ACCOUNT, AND IT DID ITS DROP THIS YEAR. SAID ANOTHER WAY, IF THE $33 MILLION HAD BEEN PROGRAMMED , RATHER THAN HELD IN AN ACCOUNT, WE WOULD'VE HAD A REALLY HARD COST-BENEFIT CHOICES TO MAKE TO USE THAT FUNDING. I GREATLY APPRECIATE THE ABILITY TO HAVE THAT FUND. IT IS VERY SMART. AS DIRECTOR NOBLE LEGEND, USING THE RAINY DAY FUND AND EMERGENCY FUNDS AS GUIDES, WE CREATED A POLICY FOR FILLING THE RESERVE, AS WELL AS HOW WE ARE TO USE THOSE RESERVE DOLLARS. LASTLY, I'LL TALK ABOUT REMOVING THE SUNSET. MY GOAL IS THAT JUMPSTART FUNDS ARE USED AS A PARACHUTE FOR THE GENERAL FUNDS FOR A LIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME. WITH THE REALITY THAT JUMPSTART HAS BEEN USED IN THE GENERAL FUND EVERY YEAR OF ITS EXISTENCE. RETAINING A SUNSET AND A FUNDING SOURCE WE RELY SO HEAVILY ON CREATES A STRUCTURAL DEFICIT IN 2040, ON A SKILL WE HAVE NOT EXPERIENCED. COLLEAGUES, IF THIS TAX SUNSET IT TODAY, WE WOULD HAVE A $430 MILLION DEFICIT IN 2025. WE WOULD HAVE 84 $52 MILLION DEFICIT IN 2026. FOR REFERENCE, THIS YEAR, WE HAD A TICKET -- [ INAUDIBLE ] DEFICIT. WE ARE SETTING OURSELVES UP FOR A STRUCTURAL DEFICIT ON THE SCALE OF HALF $1 BILLION. IF IN FOUR YEARS, THE CONFERENCE OF REVIEW DETERMINES THE GENERAL FUND SHOULD BE AN ALLOWED USE MOVING FORWARD, THE STRUCTURAL DEFICIT BECOMES EVEN MORE REAL, BECAUSE THE COUNCILMEMBERS IN FOUR YEARS, IF THEY DECIDE TO CONTINUE USING JUMPSTART FOR THE GENERAL FUND, IT ABSOLUTELY IS A SOURCE THAT THE GENERAL FUND IS RELIANT ON. AND EVEN IF WE ARE ABLE -- WHICH MAKES THE STRUCTURAL DEFICIT EVEN MORE REAL -- AND IF WE ARE ABLE TO ACTUALIZE OUR GOALS OF HAVING A STRUCTURALLY SOUND BUDGET WITHOUT USING JUMPSTART IN THE GENERAL FUND, THE SUNSET ENDS ARE INVESTMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REVITALIZATION WITH SUPPORT FOR THE SMALLEST BUSINESSES, LIKE I SPOKE ABOUT. IT REMOVES OUR INVESTMENT, THE MAJORITY SOURCE OF FUNDING FOR THE INITIATIVE. IT REMOVES OUR FUNDING SOURCE FOR ADDRESSING THE CLIMATE CRISIS. VIA THE GREEN NEW DEAL. AND AGAIN, IT REDUCES OUR INVESTMENT IN HOUSING. SO IF WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE USING JUMP START FOR GENERAL FUND PROGRAMS, HOMEOWNERSHIP -- IT IS RESPONSIBLE GOVERNING FOR US TO REMOVE THE SUNSET. IF WE CONTINUE USING JUMPSTART FUNDING FOR THE GENERAL FUND PAST FOUR YEARS FROM NOW, THE SUNSET NEEDS TO BE REMOVED IF WE DO NOT WANT TO CREATE THE STRUCTURAL DEFICIT LARGER THAN WE HAVE EVER SEEN. WITH THAT, COLLEAGUES, I WILL CALL ON COUNCIL PRESIDENT AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. COLLEAGUES, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, NOW IS THE TIME. WE WILL MOVE ON AFTER COMMENTS NOW TO AN OVERVIEW OF A FEW OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN DELETED SO FAR. COUNCIL PRESIDENT. ‎I HAD A QUESTION, BUT COULD YOU REPEAT YOUR LAST SENTENCE? IT WAS POIGNANT, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE I HEARD IT. ‎IF WE CONTINUE TO USE JUMPSTART FUNDING PAST FOUR YEARS FROM NOW, IN FOUR YEARS, WE NEED TO HAVE A CONFERENCE OF REVIEW. WE NEED FLEXIBILITY FOR THE NEXT FOUR YEARS. THAT IS WHY THE BILL IS WRITTEN AS IT IS. FOR YEARS FROM NOW, WE NEED TO HAVE CONFIDENCE OF REVIEWS BECAUSE I THINK IF WE ARE OUT OF THE WOODS ON THE ECONOMIC DOWNTURN, WE SHOULD RETURN TO THE ORIGINAL PRIORITIES, PLUS MENTAL HEALTH. BUT IF WE DON'T, AND IN FOUR YEARS FROM NOW, THE CHOICE IS MADE THAT THE GENERAL FUND IS AN ACCEPTABLE USE OF JUMPSTART FUNDING, THE STRUCTURAL DEFICIT CREATED BY THE SUNSET IN THIS BILL CREATES A STRUCTURAL DEFICIT LARGER THAN WE HAVE EVER SEEN BEFORE. ‎THANK YOU FOR THAT. SO, I COULD BE WRONG, BUT I LIKE THE IDEA OF THE REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT. RSA. WE SAW HOW FAST THAT WENT. THE WAY I'M READING THIS, THE PROPOSED BUDGET WAS AT 10% OF THE CURRENT PET FORECAST. WE SAW HOW FAST FOUR TIMES THE MINIMUM AMOUNT PUT INTO THE RSA WENT THIS YEAR. I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WILL DEFINE WHAT THAT CAN BE SPENT ON, BUT, IN GENERAL, I WANTED TO SAY THAT I SUPPORT TRANSPARENCY IN HOW WE SPEND THIS TAX SOURCE, OR THIS REVENUE SOURCE, BECAUSE UP UNTIL NOW, THERE'S ALWAYS BEEN A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT A PROPOSED EXPENDITURE BY A COUNCILMEMBER WOULD COUNT AS CLOSE ENOUGH TO WHAT THE JUMPSTART SPENDING PLAN DESCRIBED, AND SO THERE WAS ALWAYS THAT BACK AND FORTH. THAT IS WHY THE OVERSIGHT BOARD WAS -- THAT WAS ONE OF THE FUNCTIONS OF THE OVERSIGHT BOARD, WAS TO NEGOTIATE, WELL, WHAT IS ELIGIBLE FOR THIS FUND? I UNDERSTAND ON PAGE 15 -- I AM GETTING TO MY POINT -- THERE WAS A NINE MEMBER COMMITTEE CREATED TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT TO PERHAPS HELP COUNCIL DECIDE WHAT START -- COUNTS AS A JUMPSTART PROCEDURE. THAT WAS NEVER CONVENED. I DO THINK THAT IT IS IMPORTANT -- THAT WE DO NEED TO HAVE CONTINUAL ASSESSMENT OF THE JUMPSTART'S' IMPACT ON OUR LOCAL ECONOMY, AND ALSO, AS IT INTO PLACE WITH OTHER POLICY DECISIONS WE MAY MAKE. WHAT'S MOST -- BUT -- THE THING THAT I APPRECIATE ABOUT PUTTING IT TOGETHER IN JUMPSTART IS SIMPLY THIS. WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO COMPARE THE VIABILITY OR VALIDITY OF EXPENDITURES AGAINST EACH OTHER IN AN APPLES TO APPLES MANNER. WITH THE EXPENDITURES OF OUR GENERAL FUND ADJACENT REVENUE SOURCES, IS THAT THEY ARE KIND OF BUT ASIDE, AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO COMPETE WITH OTHER PRIORITIES, AND SO, THAT IS -- I WELCOME THAT THERE IS A MELDING OF RESOURCES SO THAT WE CAN MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF ALL THE REVENUE THAT WE MIGHT HAVE FOR THAT PURPOSE. KEEPING IN MIND, HOWEVER, THAT THERE ARE OTHER RESTRICTED FUNDS THAT WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT. SWEETENED BEVERAGE, SHORT-TERM RENTAL, TRANSIT. I WANT TO NOTE THAT ONE HUGE THING THAT I'M SEEING MISSING AS A PRIORITY MIGHT BE COVERED UNDER MENTAL HEALTH. IT IS TREATMENT. SO, TREATMENT FOR ADDICTION, AND A RESPONSE TO THE OPIOID CRISIS, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO PUT IT, AND AS FAR AS I CAN TELL, THE ONLY NEW FUNDING FOR ADDICTION OR TREATMENT IN THIS BUDGET BEFORE US RIGHT NOW IS $470,000, THAT I PUT IN THERE, AND I DIDN'T EVEN PUT IN NEW MONEY. IT WAS A REDIRECTION OF OPIOID SETTLEMENT DOLLARS, FOR A DIFFERENT PURPOSE, AND I DO WANT TO URGE US THAT THIS IS A ROOT CAUSE, EVERYBODY. AND I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT , AND AS WE GO FORWARD, PLEASE, EVERYBODY REMEMBER, THAT ADDICTION, THE DRUG CRISIS, ET CETERA, IS INEXTRICABLY LINKED TO OUR HOMELESSNESS CRISIS, AND OUR PUBLIC SAFETY CRISIS, AND I URGE FOLKS TO TAKE THAT MINDSET INTO FUTURE BUDGETS. THAT IS ALL I HAVE TO SAY AND PONTIFICATE. ‎THANK YOU. VICE CHAIR RIVERA. ‎THANK YOU, CHAIR. SO I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, ON THE REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT, WHICH I THINK IS VERY PRUDENT. CAN YOU TELL ME -- IS THIS THE SIMILAR APPROACH THAT IS TAKEN WHEN WE DO THE GENERAL FUND RAINY DAY ACCOUNTS? ‎IT IS. IT IS NOT IDENTICAL, BUT I PULLED THAT PIECE OF AND USED IT FOR MODELING. ‎IT IS BASED ON PRACTICE THAT WE USED -- A PRUDENT PRACTICE THAT WE USE. ‎I SHOULD SAY, THE PERCENTAGE HERE IS SOMEWHAT HIGHER BECAUSE OF THE VOLATILITY. WE HAVE SEEN SOME DROPPED 10% FROM ONE YEAR TO ANOTHER. ‎THAT MAKES SENSE, THEN. THANK YOU FOR CONFIRMING THAT. ALSO, I WILL SAY THAT I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT, I MEAN, IT IS A FACT THAT JUMPSTART WAS PASSED, COUNCIL HAS ALWAYS HAD TO USE IT FOR CATEGORIES OTHER THAN THE ONES THAT HAD BEEN NAMED ORIGINALLY. AND I DON'T SEE -- I AGREE WITH CHAIR, THE NEXT FOUR YEARS, THAT CHANGING. I WOULD SAY, I'M NOT SURE BEYOND THE FOUR YEARS BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE TWO -- WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE A CLOSE LOOK AT THE BUDGET AND START TO CUT THINGS, I THINK, TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE. I JUST DON'T SEE A LIKELY SCENARIO, WHERE THINGS ARE GOING TO CHANGE TO THE GENERAL FUND, WHERE WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO WERE NOT GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE SOME CERTAIN PORTION OF THIS JUMPSTART TEXT TO BACKFILL. ‎JUST TO CLARIFY THIS POINT -- AS WRITTEN, THESE POLICIES CAN CONTINUE UNTIL THEY DO NOT. AS CHAIR STRAUSS POINTED OUT, THE CALLOUT OF COUNCILS INTENT TO CHECK ON THEM IN TWO YEARS AND TO COME PENSIVELY REVIEW THEM IN FOUR YEARS, I THINK THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH WHAT YOU ARE SAYING ABOUT THE HOPE IS, WE WANT TO BE IN A BETTER SITUATION, BUT AGAIN, NO GUARANTEE THAT WE WILL BE. ‎YES. YES. THANK YOU, BEN. SO, I'M JUST REITERATING THAT I DON'T EVEN THINK -- I MEAN, I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE A LONGER TERM POLICY DECISION. AND I DO SHARE THE CHAIRS -- AND MANY OF OUR COLLEAGUES -- IT IS REALLY FORTUITOUS THAT WE HAD JUMPSTART, OTHERWISE, WE WOULD BE SITTING HERE, HAVING TO CUT MANY THINGS IN THIS BUDGET. AND WE DIDN'T HAVE TO DO THAT BECAUSE WE HAD THAT RESERVES BY WHICH TO BACKFILL, AND, YOU KNOW, I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO, IF SOMETHING HAPPENS, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A RESERVE BY WHICH TO UTILIZE FUNDS, AND IN A WAY, LIKE WE DID THIS YEAR. BUT THERE COULD BE, YOU KNOW, COVID HAPPENED. I DON'T THINK COVID WILL HAPPEN AGAIN, BUT SOMETHING LIKE COVID COULD HAPPEN, AND WE NEED TO BE PRUDENT. WE NEED TO BE PRUDENT ABOUT THE RESERVES, BOTH FOR THE GENERAL FUND RESERVE, AND THEN CREATING THIS VERY DELIBERATE REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT, SO I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT WENT INTO THAT, AND I APPRECIATE THAT MAYOR'S OFFICE FOR SENDING IT DOWN LIKE THIS, AND TO THE CHAIR, FOR INCLUDING IT, KEEPING IT IN THIS PACKAGE. AND THEN, I HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION, CHAIR, IF THAT IS OKAY. ON THE SUNSET DATE, WHAT WAS ANTICIPATED WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY PUT IN -- WAS IT A REVIEW? WE DIDN'T GET A LOT OF INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT WENT BEHIND THAT THOUGHT. AND LET ME JUST SAY, I DON'T, YOU KNOW, SUNSET DATES ARE -- ONE THING THEY ACTUALLY HELP WITH IS REALLY FORCING BODIES TO TAKE A HARD LOOK AT THAT MOMENT, WHENEVER THAT SUNSET IS COMING UP, TO MAKE DECISIONS BY, VERSUS GETTING COMPLACENT ABOUT THINGS, ESPECIALLY IN THIS CASE OF A VOLATILE TAX . I'M WONDERING WHAT THE THOUGHT PROCESS WAS AT THE TIME. ‎I DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. DO YOU, CHAIR? ‎NOT TO GET IN THE WAY BACK TIME MACHINE OF THE FIGHTS THAT WE HAVE BEEN IN IN THE CHAMBERS, I CAN TELL YOU THAT THERE WERE SOME PEOPLE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS TAX, AND SOME PEOPLE VERY UPSET ABOUT THIS TAX. THE SUNSET WAS A NICE MIDDLE GROUND, AND AFTER THAT, THE BILL WAS VETOED. THE VETO WAS OVERTURNED. IT WAS CHALLENGED IN COURT. HERE WE ARE TODAY. TO YOUR POINT, VICE CHAIR, REALLY WELL SAID. IF WE DIDN'T HAVE JUMPSTART THIS YEAR, WE WOULD'VE HAD $416 MILLION OF CUTS TO MAKE. THAT WAS POIGNANT, AND I APPRECIATE YOU MAKING THAT POINT. AS WELL AS, IN THE ORIGINAL IDEATION OF JUMPSTART, IT WAS TO GET US TO FOCUS ON THESE PRIORITIES. WHAT WE HAVE FOUND IS THAT WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN OUT OF THESE DOWNSTREAM ECONOMIC IMPACTS FROM THE PANDEMIC YET, AND, TWO THINGS THERE ARE TRUE. WE DON'T HAVE THE COVID FEDERAL FUNDS ANYMORE. THEY EXPIRE THIS YEAR. WE WERE ABLE TO NOT LAY OFF ANY CITY EMPLOYEES DURING THE PANDEMIC. VERY FEW OTHER CITIES IN THIS ENTIRE NATION DID THAT. AND THEN WE HAD TO MAKE THIS OUR CHOICES TODAY. AND THROUGH THAT PROCESS, WE CREATED A HABIT OF USING JUMPSTART IN THE GENERAL FUND. THAT IS DIFFERENT. THE LAST POINTS I WAS MAKING WAS THAT, IF ONLY THOSE FOUR CATEGORIES ARE FUNDED, IN 2040, WE WILL HAVE TO CUT ALL OF THOSE FUNDING. IF WE USE IT FOR THE GENERAL FUND, WE ARE CREATING A STRUCTURAL DEFICIT FOR US TO FACE. SORRY. THAT WAS A REALLY LONG ANSWER. ‎I APPRECIATE THAT. I APPRECIATE THE CLAIMANT THAT REMIND ME THAT WHEN THIS FUND WAS PASSED, IT IS TRUE THAT MY RECOLLECTION, FROM HAVING BEEN WITH THE CITY, THEN, WAS THAT THERE WERE THINGS ADDED TO THE BUDGET FROM BEYOND THOSE OF FIVE CATEGORIES. BECAUSE WE HAD THE FEDERAL FUNDS, THE JUMPSTART FUNDS. WE ACTUALLY USED JUMPSTART FUNDS TO EITHER EXPAND CURRENT THINGS, OR ADD PROGRAMS, AND I THINK THAT ALSO IS REALLY CRITICAL TO MENTION, BECAUSE, IT BEARS WHY WE ALSO HAVE THIS STRUCTURAL DEFICIT THAT NOW WE ARE LOOKING TO JUMPSTART TO BACKFILL, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THIS TEMPORARY FEDERAL RELIEF FUNDS. MAYBE IF WE HAD NOT USED THE FUNDS TO START NEW THINGS. MAYBE WE WOULD BE IN A POSITION WHERE WE DIDN'T HAVE TO TAKE THE JUMPSTART TO BACKFILL. IT IS IMPOTENT TO BE ASKED ABOUT THAT, AND BE TRANSPARENT ABOUT THAT. I WANTED TO CALL THAT OUT. THANK YOU FOR THE REMINDER. I CAN THINK OF SOME PROGRAMS HERE THAT GOT FUNDING. IT GOT THROUGH THOSE FUNDS. BEN WAS HERE, SO HE KNOWS HIS BUDGET. HE WAS THE DIRECTOR AT THE TIME. ANYWAY, THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS, THEN AND CHAIR, FOR ADDING TO IT. ‎THANK YOU. I THOUGHT I SAW COUNCILMEMBER SAKA'S HAND UP. DO YOU STILL WANT TO SPEAK? ‎IT IS OKAY. ‎WE GOT A LOT OF TIME TO TALK ABOUT THIS. ‎ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ‎THANK YOU. I WILL END BY SAYING, THAT TO CLARIFY, THE JUMPSTART FUNDS WILL BE DEPOSITED INTO THE JUMPSTART ACCOUNT, AND THEN WILL BE TRANSFERRED INTO OTHER BSLS, WHETHER THEY ARE IN THE ORIGINAL PRIORITIES WERE NOT, AND THAT IS A RESPONSIBLE GOVERNANCE PRACTICE TO BE ABLE TO TRACK HOW THE FUNDING IS USED. COUNCIL PRESIDENT, YOU MADE A REALLY GOOD POINT ABOUT RESPONDING TO THE OPIOID EPIDEMIC. THE FENTANYL. THE FENTANYL ON OUR STREETS. COLLEAGUES, JUST TO PUT IT IN PERSPECTIVE, THE FENTANYL EPIDEMIC HAS SKYROCKETED IN THE FOUR YEARS SINCE THIS TAX WAS PASSED. WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY PASSED, FENTANYL WAS NOT THE MAJOR DRUG BEING USED ON THE STREET. IT WAS HEROIN AND METH AT THAT TIME. ‎IT IS SUCH A SLOW EARTHQUAKE. ‎PLEASE REMEMBER TO BE RECOGNIZED. I'M JUST -- USING THIS POINT TO MAKE THE POINT THAT PRIORITIES CHANGE, AND WE HAVE TO BE FLEXIBLE AND NIMBLE. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE NEXT FOUR YEARS. LASTLY, I WILL READ ITEM C HERE, THE ALLEGATIONS OF THE PAYROLL EXPENSE ACT, PROCEEDS TO PROGRAMS AND SERVICES, SUPPORTED BY THE CITY'S GENERAL FUND SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE AMOUNT NEEDED TO SUSTAIN CRITICAL SERVICES AND TEND TO NEEDS THAT CAN OTHERWISE NOT BE SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED WITH THE FUND SOURCES. THIS IS IN HERE TO SAY THAT IT CANNOT JUST BE CARTE BLANCHE. IT REALLY NEEDS TO BE AN EMERGENCY RELEASE VALVE, OR PRESSURED, IF YOU WILL. THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. AMENDMENTS ARE DUE FRIDAY, AT NOON. BACK TO YOU, DIRECTOR NOBLE, FOR A COUPLE OF AMENDMENT IDEAS. ‎THERE ARE THREE AMENDMENTS UNDER DEVELOPMENT. THEY HAVE BEEN PROPOSED. WE CAN PAUSE FOR THE COMMENT. WE CAN WRAP THIS UP. THIS WOULD PRESERVE THE PAYROLL. IT IS TO ASSESS THE IMPACTS ON THE TAXES ON CITY. COUNCIL MADE AN EFFORT TO [ INAUDIBLE ] ALL OF LAST YEAR. TO SIMPLY RESTORE THE LANGUAGE -- TO BE APPOINTED, AND TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES. ‎PET [ INAUDIBLE ] ‎LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF MY TRANSFER TO THE GENERAL FUND TO 20% OF THE TOTAL PROCEEDS AND ALLOCATE THE REMAINING RESOURCES ACCORDING TO THE PERCENTAGES AND THE ALLEGATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED PREVIOUSLY. ON THE FINANCIAL SIDE, THIS WOULD INCREASE THE PRIORITIES. I'M USING THE 2047 FOR THIS MATH. WITHOUT THIS -- THE FORECAST FOR 2027 IS FOR [ INAUDIBLE ] . THAT LEAVES 250 MILLION FOR JUMPSTART PRIORITIES IN 2027. I WOULD NOTE THAT THE $233 MILLION TRANSFER STILL LEAVES THE DEFICIT INCLUSIVE OF THE PACKAGE OF ABOUT $100 MILLION. IT IS A TRANSFER OF 233, LEAVING A 250 FOR THE JUMPSTART PRIORITIES, BUT ALSO THE $100 MILLION DEFICIT. THAT IS THE BASE MATH. SO, WITH THIS POLICY, RESTRICTING TRANSFER TO THE GENERAL FUND, 20%, YOU WOULD INCREASE THE AMOUNT AVAILABLE FOR THE JUMPSTART PRIORITIES FROM THAT BASE 250, TO ABOUT 386 MILLION. AND THEN, THAT EVENT HAS THE DIRECT APPLICATION ON THE DEFICIT, THOUGH, BECAUSE IN THE BASE CASE, THE ASSUMPTION WOULD BE TO 33 MILLION, AND YOU STILL HAD THE DEFICIT. THE DEFICIT GOES FROM 100 MILLION TO ABOUT 236. BUT AGAIN, YOU HAVE SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES AVAILABLE FOR THE JUMP START PRIORITIES. ‎THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER ELLIS HAS SPONSORED THE AMENDMENT. RECOGNIZED. ‎THANK YOU. JUST AS A CLARIFICATION, I DID NOT INTEND THESE TO BE TWO SEPARATE AMENDMENT SPIRIT I DON'T KNOW IF IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE. THAT WASN'T MY INTENT. SO, THANK YOU. THERE WAS A LOT OF WORK FOR YOU PARTICULARLY THE LAST FEW DAYS, SO I APPRECIATE YOU GETTING US THROUGH THIS POINT. I KNOW HOW IMPORTANT IT IS FOR US TO PURCHASE IN A FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE WAY. WE HAVE A BUDGET THAT INCLUDES $75 MILLION IN NEW SPENDING FROM THE MAYOR. WE HAVE ADDED ANOTHER $25 MILLION. MUCH OF THIS IS GOING ON, THIS SPENDING. WE HAVE A STRUCTURAL BUDGET THAT HAS BEEN POINTED OUT IN A PREVIOUS MEETING IN TWO DOZEN 27 BUT WE GO BACK TO HAVING A DEFICIT. CHAIR STRAUSS MENTIONED, IT WILL BE ENORMOUS IF WE DON'T SUNSET THIS BILL, OR IF WE DO PLAN TO SUNSET IT. EVEN IF WE DO USE THIS PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX, THOUGH, WE HAVE HAD A STRUCTURAL BUDGET ISSUE FOR WELL OVER A DECADE. I REMEMBER ASKING PEOPLE IN THE BUDGET OFFICE OVER 10 YEARS AGO WHAT SOME OF THE CHALLENGES WERE, SO, I KNOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN A LONG-STANDING PROBLEM, AND IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN'T WAIT TO RESULT IN FOUR YEARS FROM NOW. I BELIEVE WE SHOULD OF BEEN GRAPPLING WITH THIS ALL YEAR, RATHER THAN ASSUME THAT THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX WOULD SOLVE THIS ISSUE FOR US INDEFINITELY. CLEARLY, IT IS NOT. WE NEED OTHER SOURCES. WE WILL BACK -- BE BACK HERE FACING A DEFICIT. I APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER MOORE CALLING THIS INTO QUESTION. I HAVE TWO SLIDES THAT I WILL BE ADDING TO THE DISCUSSION LATER. SO, THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ACKNOWLEDGE THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL GENERAL FUND -- ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR THE GENERAL FUND BY ALLOCATING 25% OF PAYROLL TAX REVENUE, STARTING IN 2027, SO IT WOULD MAINTAIN THIS TRANSFER. IT WOULD, I THINK, ESTIMATED, BE ABOUT $88 MILLION. I DO WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THIS DOES HAVE A 10% RESERVE. THAT IS NOT CLEAR IN THE MEMO THAT WE HAVE HERE. IT ALSO ACKNOWLEDGES THAT WHAT WE HAVE HEARD FROM HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE LAST NIGHT IS THAT HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SMALL BUSINESS INVESTMENTS FROM THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX ARE PART OF THE SOLUTION TO OUR HOMELESSNESS AND HOUSING AND PUBLIC SAFETY CRISES. AND WHAT WE CAN'T IGNORE IS THAT WHETHER IT IS $100 MILLION OR $200 MILLION DEFICIT IN THE NEXT COMING YEARS, THAT IS NOT THE POINT. THE POINT IS THAT WE NEED NEW REVENUE TO ADDRESS BASIC CITY SERVICES. SO, THE PROPOSED SHIFT OF MORE THAN 50% OF GENERAL FUND -- TO GENERAL FUND, I BELIEVE, SHOULD BE TEMPORARY. WHILE I UNDERSTAND THIS COUNCIL HAS DIFFERENT PRIORITIES FOR HOW THIS REVENUE SOURCE SHOULD BE SPENT, ANY PERMANENT CHANGES SHOULD BE DONE THROUGH A PUBLIC PROCESS, JUST LIKE WE DO FOR OTHER MAJOR REVENUE STREAMS, LIKE OUR LEVEES, AND LIKE WE DID FOR THIS VERY SOURCE. WE SHOULD START THAT DISCUSSION NOW, AND SO, THAT'S PART OF THE REASON WHY I APPRECIATE, AGAIN, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, RAISING THE QUESTION. AS BEEN MENTIONED, IT DOES RESTORE THE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. THIS IS AN ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURE. IT IS A MEASURE WE HAVE FOR ALL OF OUR OTHER MAJOR REVENUE SOURCES. ALL OF OUR LEVEES HAVE ONE THAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE RESISTANCE IS TO SITTING IN THIS BODY AND CONVENING IT TO HELP US UNDERSTAND HOW THIS IS WORKING, WHERE WE MIGHT NEED TWEAKS, AND PARTICULARLY, GIVEN THAT THESE TAXES ARE COLLECTED FROM OUR LOCAL BUSINESSES, I WOULD THINK THAT AN OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE WOULD BE WELCOME. SO, THIS IS, AGAIN, AS WE HAVE SAID ALL MORNING, A CHANCE FOR US TO BEGIN THE DISCUSSION OF HOW WE WILL PLUG THE HOLE. I DON'T THINK WE CAN WAIT FOR FOUR YEARS TO HAVE SERIOUS CONVERSATIONS ABOUT HOW WE ADDRESS THIS BECAUSE IN FOUR YEARS, WE COULD BE IN WORSE SHAPE IF WE DON'T START ADDRESSING IT NOW AND FIGURE OUT HOW WE ARE GOING TO FILL THE GAP THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY. THANK YOU, CHAIR. ‎THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ON THESE AMENDMENTS? I WILL JUST SAY, COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, I AGREE, THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING THAT WE HAVE USED THAT WE USED THIS YEAR IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS SUSTAINABLE. WE WERE RESPONDING TO THE ISSUES THAT WE HAD, AND, I WILL POLITELY PUSH BACK AND SAY THAT WE ARE NOT SOARING THE COMPOSITION IN FOUR YEARS. WE STARTED THE CONVERSATION EARLIER THIS YEAR. WE ARE DOING THAT WORK NOW. DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE OTHER WORK TO ANYTHING TO SAY? FANTASTIC. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ON THIS? AND COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, YOU WILL HAVE THE LAST WORD. ‎THANK YOU, CHAIR. I AGREE WITH THE POINT YOU MADE THERE. I THINK EVERY BUDGET YEAR IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION AGAIN, BECAUSE ULTIMATELY, WE ARE THE ONES -- THE MAYOR SENDS THE BUDGET DOWN AND WE DECIDE WHAT TO DO WITH IT. WE MAKE ADS BASED ON OUR PRIORITIES AND WHAT THE CITY NEEDS ARE. EVERY YEAR IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVISIT EVERYTHING. REALLY. I WANTED TO UNDERSCORE THAT IMPORTANT POINT. THANK YOU, CHAIR. ‎14, ANYTHING ELSE? ‎WE MOVED BACK TO YOU, DIRECTOR NOBLE. ‎WE HAVE ANOTHER AMENDMENT. THIS IS FROM COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, TAKING A DIFFERENT APPROACH TO THE JUMPSTART FUNDS. [ INAUDIBLE ] . IT WOULD ALLOCATE IT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. USING COMPARABLE MAP AS I WENT THROUGH BEFORE, AND HE DOESN'T ON HIS OWN, IT WOULD MEAN $266 MILLION FOR JUMPSTART FUNDING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THERE IS A BULLET I MEANT TO ADD HERE. SO, THE FUNDING FOR THE REVENUE STABILIZATION ACCOUNT -- I'M HAVING TROUBLE WITH THAT TODAY -- IT WOULD BE PROVIDED BY THAT YEAR END TRANSFER. BUT ALSO, TRANSFERS FROM THE GENERAL FUND. NOT JUST FROM THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TAXES THEMSELVES. OF THE FUNDS THAT ARE TRANSFERRED TO THE GENERAL FUND, IT WOULD PUT PRIORITY ON THE ORIGINAL JUMPSTART PRIORITIES THEMSELVES. AGAIN, THERE WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE GENERAL FUND, BUT OF THAT RESOURCE, THE PRIORITY WOULD BE THE JUMPSTART CATEGORIES. PRESUMABLY OTHER THAN AFFORDABLE HOUSING. SO THE IMPLICATION HERE IS SIGNIFICANT ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE IMPLICATIONS FOR THE DEFICIT ARE QUITE SMALL. IT IS INITIALLY $60 MILLION. ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL, THE TRANSFER OF THE FUND ANTICIPATED IN 2027 IS JUST OVER 45%, SO THIS IS A SMALL IT IS MEANT. IT IS IN HEAVEN IMPACT OR BIG IMPACT ON THE DEFICIT. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE -- THE GENERAL APPLICATION IS THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS ELEVATED TO KEEP PRIORITY FROM THE JUMPSTART RESOURCES. THE FUNDS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO TRANSFER THE GENERAL FUND CAN SUPPORT BASIC CITY SERVICES, BUT ALSO, WITH THE PRIORITY AROUND THE ORIGINAL JUMPSTART CATEGORIES. ‎COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED. ‎THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHAIR. I WANT TO SAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, BEN, FOR DOING THIS. AND NOTING THAT THE SLIDE DOESN'T REPRESENT THE LAST POINT THAT BEEN MADE. THAT CAME ABOUT THIS MORNING. THIS IS STILL A WORK IN PROGRESS. I APPRECIATE THE FLEXIBILITY. SO, I GUESS NOBODY SHOULD BE SURPRISED THAT I WOULD BE BRINGING SOMETHING ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND I APPRECIATE THAT THE MAYOR BEGAN THIS CONVERSATION. I ALSO APPRECIATE, CHAIR, THAT YOU ARE FOLLOWING UP WITH THE CONVERSATION, AND REALLY TRYING TO WALK A FINE LINE THERE. BUT I ALSO, ALSO, VERY MUCH SUPPORT AND APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA'S COMMENTS THAT, AS MUCH AS I WOULD LOVE TO THINK THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE OUT OF THIS MESS IN FOUR YEARS, I REALLY DON'T THINK THAT WE ARE. WE HAVE A NEW REALITY, AND I KEEP HARKING BACK TO WHAT HAPPENED. I DON'T EVEN WANT TO THINK ABOUT IT, BUT ON THE NATIONAL SCENE. AND WE NEED TO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY, TO ADDRESS THE PRIORITIES. AND THAT THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAS POINTED OUT. WE ARE TRYING TO ADDRESS AN ADDICTION CRISIS THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THAT LISTED AS A PRIORITY. WE HAD YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH COME UP AS A PRIORITY, SO WE HAD TO MAKE ANOTHER BOX. SO, IN SOME WAYS, I THINK THAT WE ARE SETTING UP SORT OF A WAY OF DISAPPOINTING PEOPLE EVERY TIME WE COME TO THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN THIS POSITION WHERE WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TO UTILIZE PAYROLL EXPENSE MONEY FOR GENERAL FUND. WE HAVE DONE THROUGHOUT HISTORY. IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A QUESTION OF HOW MUCH. SO, MAYBE LET'S JUST BITE THE BULLET NOW AND DECIDE THAT WE ARE GOING TO SET ASIDE A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE, 45%, AND THEN SET THE REST AT 55 FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE REASON IS THAT CATEGORY AS THE REQUIRED PERCENTAGE -- IT IS NOT -- YOU KNOW, SHOULD WE BE ABLE TO, BUT IT IS DESIGNATED -- IS BECAUSE OF ALL OF THOSE PRIORITIES. THEY ARE ALL CRITICALLY IMPORTANT. IT IS THE ONE WHERE WE HAVE A LEGAL OBLIGATION TO FULFILL UNDER THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT. THE OTHERS -- WE DON'T HAVE A LEGAL OBLIGATION. TO ME, THAT IS A COMPELLING REASON TO MAKE THIS A MANDATORY PERCENTAGE THAT IS SET ASIDE. OBVIOUSLY, WE CAN GO ABOVE , AND THAT WOULD BE THE GOAL. THE HOPE THAT WE WOULD HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO SPEND MORE THAN 55%, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO SET THE FLOOR. IN TERMS OF -- I DID ALSO WANT TO CARRY FORTH THE VALUES AND PRIORITIES THAT WERE ARTICULATED IN JUMPSTART. I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO STATE THAT THOSE ARE PRIORITIES IN THE GENERAL FUND. SO THAT WE DO NOT LOSE TRACK OF THOSE PRIORITIES THAT WERE ARTICULATED BY PRIOR COUNCILS AND THAT HAVE BEEN AND CONTINUE TO BE DELETED BY PEOPLE WHO HAVE COME HERE, ALTHOUGH, NOTING THAT, AGAIN, THOSE PRIORITIES WERE SET BY SMALLER GROUPS OF PEOPLE WHO TEND TO BE MORE POLITICALLY ACTIVE, AND SO, THERE IS A BROADER BASED INTEREST , WHICH WE HEAR CLEARLY FROM THE SEATTLE RESIDENCE AS A WHOLE. PUBLIC SAFETY IS A NUMBER ONE PRIORITY. AND HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS. WE HEAR THOSE REPEATEDLY. THE PIECES THAT ARE COROLLARY TO ALL OF THAT. SO, AGAIN, I THINK, BEING FORTHRIGHT ABOUT THE NEED TO HAVE CONTINUING ACCESS TO THE MONEY THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND, TO SUPPORT THOSE GENERAL FUND PRIORITIES, BUT ALSO MAKING SURE THAT WE COMMIT OURSELVES TO A PARTICULAR LEVEL OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, IS WHY I HAVE BROUGHT THIS. THANK YOU. ‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. ANY COMMENTS ON COUNCILMEMBER MOORE'S PROPOSAL? I AM SEEING NONE. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, ANY LAST WORDS? ‎THANK YOU. ‎FANTASTIC. WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. BACK TO YOU, BEN. I KNOW WE ARE MOVING INTO THE PROPOSED CONSENT CALENDAR. AGAIN, ALEX, A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT CONSENT CALENDARS WE ARE USING. WE SHOULD PROBABLY USE A DIFFERENT WORD FOR THIS, WHICH IS CONSENT OF AMENDMENTS. ‎I WANT TO MOVE YOU THROUGH 36 PIECES OF LEGISLATION. [ INAUDIBLE ] THIS IS NOT PARTICULARLY UNUSUAL. WE MIGHT THINK OF THIS AS BEING THE BUDGET ORDINANCE, BUT THERE ARE ORDINANCES USED TO IMPLEMENT THE BUDGETS. MICHAEL, GIVEN TIME CONSTRAINTS IS TO GIVE YOU A ONE SENTENCE SUMMARY OF EACH. I HAVE THE WORKING KNOWLEDGE OF THEM OVER THE LAST FEW DAYS. I HAVE ACCESS TO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. I MIGHT BE ABLE TO HANDLE THEM HERE, BUT ALSO, POTENTIALLY OFF-LINE. I WOULD ADD THAT CENTRAL STAFF HAS REVIEWED EACH OF THESE IN MORE DETAIL. MY WORKING KNOWLEDGE IS NOT OUR FULL KNOWLEDGE. AT THE STAGE WHEN WE WERE DOING THE CONSIDERATIONS, WE PROVIDED A SUMMARY OF EACH DEPONENT'S BUDGET. AT THE END OF THAT, THERE WAS A SECTION ON LEGISLATION. IF YOU WERE CURIOUS, MAYBE THE WRITEUP OF EACH OF THESE WAS COMPLETED. SO WITH THAT INTRODUCTION, THE FIRST BILL -- I'M JUST GOING TO GO DOWN THE LIST. THE 2024 BILL. IT COMPLETES THE ALLOCATION OF MONEY TO ADDRESS THE WAGE INCREASES THAT WERE ADOPTED AS PART OF THE LEGISLATION THAT YOU SUPPORTED EARLIER THIS YEAR. THE SECOND PIECE -- AND ORDINANCE THAT ESTABLISHES NEW FEES FOR SEATTLE'S CENTER FACILITIES. THEY RENT OUT VARIOUS ROOMS. [ INAUDIBLE ] SMALLER FACILITIES. THERE ARE SOME THEATERS. THERE IS A RANGE FOR EACH OF THOSE. ENTER FUND LOAN FOR MEMORIAL STADIUM. I REALIZED THIS CONCEPT MAY BE [ INAUDIBLE ] NOT RELEVANT TO SOME OF YOU. THE CITY HAS BALANCES IN VARIOUS FUNDS AND CAN RENT THEM. IN THIS CASE, WHAT IS HAPPENING IS THERE IS A PLANNED DEBT ISSUE TO HELP PAY FOR THE COST OF REDEVELOPING MEMORIAL STADIUM. THIS WILL GIVE ACCESS TO THAT MONEY AHEAD OF TIME. WE DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY IS GOING TO BE NEEDED NEXT YEAR AS THE PROJECT MOVES FORWARD. THIS MEANS WE CAN WAIT UNTIL WE HAVE A BETTER SENSE OF THAT TO ISSUE THE ACTUAL DEBT, AND ONCE YOU DO THAT, THERE ARE LEGAL AND FINANCIAL CONSTRAINTS ON DEBT. THIS IS ESSENTIALLY A CONVENIENCE TO MOVE THE PROJECT FORWARD. IT IS IN THE ENDORSED BUDGET, AND THERE ARE RESOURCES ALLOCATED TO PAY OFF THAT DEBT. THE NEXT ONE IS THAT SEATTLE CENTER PARKING RATES. AGAIN, THE VARIOUS PARKING GARAGES IN SEATTLE CENTER. THIS PROVIDES THE RANGE OF RATES THAT CAN BE CHARGED FOR THOSE FACILITIES, AGAIN, WITH ADJUSTMENTS FOR INFLATION IN OUR PARKING CONDITIONS, AS WELL. THE NEXT ONE IS A POLICY CHANGE, BUT THE REORGANIZATION FOR THE CITY. CURRENTLY, THE EXAMS FOR LEASE AND FIRE ARE RUN FROM SDHR AND CORONATION WITH THE CIVIL SERVICE DEPARTMENT. THIS WOULD BE AN EFFORT TO MAKE THAT MORE STREAMLINED AND TRANSFER THE EXAM FUNCTION INTO THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION. NEXT ON HIS ANIMAL SHELTER FEES. THERE ARE ADJUSTMENTS IN THESE FEES. SOME OF THEM ARE INCREASING. MODESTLY, FOR INFLATION BUT OTHERS DECREASE, REFLECTING ESSENTIALLY, IF YOU WILL, MARKET PRESSURE. ADOPTION FEES GO DOWN. SPACE AND NEUTER FEES GO UP A LITTLE BIT. THE NEXT ONE, AGAIN, IT IS A FEE THAT FAS CHARGES FOR COMPANIES THAT ENGAGE IN RECYCLING. THAT IS A MINOR ONE TO THE NEXT ONE IS -- I LOVE THIS ACRONYM. HXM, THIS IS THE FEE THAT THE HEARING EXAMINER CHARGES FOR REVIEWS. IT HASN'T CHANGED SINCE TWO DOZEN 12. THERE IS SEGMENTATION THAT INDICATES THAT IT IS IN LINE WITH WHAT OTHER CITY HEARING EXAMINERS CHARGE FOR COMPARABLE SERVICES. THE NEXT ONE IS REALLY OBSCURE. YOU CAN SEE THE INTERFUND LOAN. THIS ONE, YOU ARE PROBABLY AWARE OF THE UPGRADED WORKADAY THAT WAS ROLLED OUT THIS YEAR. THAT IS PART OF A MORE COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE OF THE CITY'S HR SYSTEMS. SO THE COMPUTER SYSTEMS THAT KEEP PERSONNEL RECORDS AND TRACK THESE AND ALL THOSE SORTS OF THINGS. THAT SYSTEM IS MORE THAN 20 YEARS OLD, AND IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING UPDATED, SO AGAIN, THIS IS A SIMILAR SITUATION. THERE IS A DEBT ISSUANCE ANTICIPATED FOR NEXT YEAR. IT'S -- THIS GETS CASH OUT OF THAT. THEY ARE NOT DESIGNED TO LAST 20 YEARS. IT IS MUCH SHORTER, LIKE EIGHT YEARS. THE NEXT ITEMS ARE RESOLUTIONS RELATED TO THE'S RETIREMENT SYSTEM. ONE ESTABLISHES THE ACTUARIAL RECOMMENDED CONTRIBUTION. SO THE CITY IS TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE FINANCIAL HEALTH OF ITS RETIREMENT SYSTEM. POST THE GREAT RECESSION AND THE MARKET CRASH. THEY FELT IT WAS UNDERFUNDED. THE CITY SET ITSELF ON A SIX-YEAR PATH TO RESTORE FULL FUNDING, AND THIS CONTINUES US ON THAT PATH. THE NEXT ONE IS THE INTEREST RATE THAT IS ESSENTIALLY NOMINALLY PAID TO CITY IN PLACE. IF YOU DON'T STAY THROUGH RETIREMENT, YOU CAN PULL OUT THE MONEY THAT YOU CONTRIBUTED -- YOU EARN INTEREST RATES ON THAT. THIS SETS THAT INTEREST RATE. IT FLUCTUATES SOME WITH THE SAID RATE. IT IS A LOW, SECURE GUARANTEED RATE. THE NEXT ITEM WOULD TRANSFER OVERSIGHT AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE CITIES TO THE DEFERRED COMPENSATION SYSTEM TO THE RETIREMENT SYSTEM, LOOKING FOR EFFICIENCIES IN THE WAY THE CITY OPERATES, GIVEN THE CONFERENCE OF PLACE TO WORK ON CITY RETIREMENT. THE NEXT TWO ORDINANCES IMPOSE A RELATIVELY [ INAUDIBLE ] INFLATIONARY RATE FOR THE FEES AT SDCI. THEY DID RAISE RATES. THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF CATCH UP HERE. THE INCREASE IS ABOUT 6%. SIMILARLY, THE NEXT ITEM, THE FEE USE SCHEDULE -- THESE ARE FEES CHARGED FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES THAT OCCUPY THE RIGHT OF WAY. PROPERTY OWNERS ARE CHARGED A FEE. IT INCREASES THROUGH TIME TO INCENTIVIZE THEM TO NOT STAY IN THE RIGHT OF WAY. IT IS UPDATING THOSE FEES. IT HAD TRIMMED HIS IMPACT ON SOME OF THE REVENUE STREAMS. PARTICULARLY, PARKING TAX. THE DECISION WAS MADE AT THAT TIME NOT TO BACKFILL THAT WITH THE GENERAL FUND, BUT TO ALLOW S.D.O.T. TO COME BACK AND SMOOTH OUT THOSE REVENUES. THEY HAVE SPECIFIC REVENUE STREAMS TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE INTERFUND LOAN IN 2020 AND 2021, KNOWING THAT WE COULD REPAY THAT. THIS EXTENDS THAT THROUGH THE END OF NEXT YEAR. WE REVIEW THE PAYMENT SCHEDULE. THAT WILL CONFIRM THAT IT WILL BE COMPLETE BY THE END OF NEXT YEAR, AS IS REQUIRED. THE NEXT ONE LISTS A PROVISO ON SEATTLE TRANSPORTATION MEASURE. THIS IS THE .15% VOTER APPROVED VOTER TAX DEDICATED TO TRANSIT. THERE WAS A PROVISO PROPOSED LAST YEAR OR THE YEAR BEFORE REQUIRING THAT SOME OF THAT MONEY BE DIRECTED TOWARDS BRIDGE MAINTENANCE PROJECTS. S.D.O.T. HAS RUN INTO A LIMIT OF TRANSIT ELIGIBLE PROJECTS. KNOWING THAT THE LEVY, WHICH PASSED, INCLUDED FUNDING FOR BRIDGE MAINTENANCE, THE UNDERLYING POLICY HAS SEEMINGLY BEEN ADDRESSED. CONTINUING, SO, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT CHARGES PERMIT FEES, AS WELL. THEY DO INSPECTIONS OF ELECTRICAL PLANS, SO THOSE ARE MODEST CHANGES THERE. THIS NEXT ITEM WAS DISCUSSED DURING THE POLICY CONSIDERATION PHASE. IT WOULD ALLOW THE VERDICT FROM TO CHURCH IN SITUATIONS WHERE IT PROVIDED BLS TRANSPORT SERVICES, SO BASIC TRANSPORT SERVICES, RATHER THAN LIFE-THREATENING. THE NEXT ONE IS SMC FEES. CHANGING THERE, THE NEXT ONE, NUMBER 26 IS SPD, CLEANING UP THEIR FEE SCHEDULE. I LOOKED AT THIS ONE THERE WAS A FEE FOR A POLAROID IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM. THAT IS NO LONGER IN USE. THE NEXT ONE IS THE SEATTLE PARKS DEPARTMENT. CHANGES IN THEIR FEES A█ND CHARGES. THERE ARE A VARIETY OF CHANGES. THOSE CHANGES ARE RELATIVELY MODEST, AND THEY ARE IN LINE WITH THAT CHARGED IN NEARBY AREAS. SEATTLE CITY LIGHT. THIS IS THE RATE ORDINANCE. IT INCREASES THE RATES CHARGED FOR 25 AND 26. THIS WAS DISCUSSED WITH THE RELEVANT COMMITTEE. WE RAN OUT OF MEETING TIME IN SEPTEMBER. THIS LEGISLATION WAS BROUGHT TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE FOR FINAL ACTION, BUT IT WAS REVIEWED IN COMMITTEE. THE NEXT ITEM WOULD EXEMPT RAFFLES AND BINGO FROM THE CITY'S 5% TAX ON GAMBLING. THE MAJOR IMPACT HERE, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IS ON THE 50-50 RAFFLES THAT HAVE BECOME COMMON. I KNOW WITH HOCKEY GAMES AND BASEBALL GAMES. CURRENTLY, THEY ARE CALLED 50-50, BUT SOMEWHERE, THERE IS 5% LOST TO THE CITY. THIS NEXT ONE WE WORKED ON WITH THE BUDGET OFFICE. WE, BEING CENTRAL STAFF. CLEANING UP SOME REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. COUNCIL HAS ESTABLISHED REPORTING REQUIREMENTS OVER TIME FOR VARIOUS ACTIONS, BUT, SOMETIMES, THOSE THINGS EVOLVE, AND WE DON'T DO A GREAT JOB OF CLEANING UP REPORTS THAT AREN'T NECESSARY ANYMORE. THAT IS WHAT THIS IS DOING, TRYING TO ALIGN THOSE TOWARDS THE REAL NEEDS IN TERMS OF OVERSIGHT AND TRANSPARENCY. AGAIN, THAT IS ONE THAT WE WORKED ON DIRECTLY WITH THEM. THE NEXT ONE IS THE TN SEATAC SPENDING PLAN. THIS IS A RESOLUTION. AGAIN, THE DNC REVENUES ARE DEPOSITED IN THE FUND. [ INAUDIBLE ] THIS EXPENDS -- EXTENDS THE PERIOD. THE NEXT THREE ITEMS ARE BONDS. THE CITY ISSUES DEBT ON A REGULAR BASIS. THERE IS CLASSICALLY IN ISSUANCE EVERY YEAR OR EVERY OTHER YEAR FOR THE GENERAL FUND, AND THEN EACH OF THE UTILITIES -- AND RECOGNIZING THE SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES -- THREE SEPARATE UTILITIES THAT ISSUE SEPARATELY. THESE BOND ISSUANCES GO THROUGH SOMETHING CALLED THE DEBT POLICY DEMONSTRATED IMPACT. THERE IS AN INTERNAL REVIEW WITHIN THE CITY ON THAT COMMITTEE. EACH OF THE UTILITIES HAVE REPRESENTATIVES. THERE IS A GOOD BACK AND FORTH ABOUT WHY YOU NEED THIS. WHAT ARE THE PARTICULAR USES? THESE HAVE BEEN REVIEWED IN THAT WAY. THAT'S ITEMS 32, 33, AND 34. 35 IS THE YEAR END SUPPLEMENTAL ORDINANCE. THAT IS ACTUALLY BOUNCING 2024 OUT AGAIN. MAKING SOME APPROPRIATIONS TO ADDRESS THE NEEDS AND THE LIKE. IT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY CENTRAL STAFF. ASSOCIATED WITH THAT IS THE YEAR END GRANT ACCEPTANCE ORDINANCE. THERE ARE ADDITIONAL ORDINANCES THAT THE CITY HAS EARNED OR LANDED SINCE THE MIDYEAR SUPPLEMENTAL WAS CONSIDERED IN JULY. THERE IS ALSO A COMPARABLE ORDINANCE FOR 2025, SO, WE ACCEPT THE ORDINANCES MIDYEAR, BUT ALSO, THE DEPARTMENTS NOTE WITH A HIGH DEGREE OF CERTAINTY ABOUT CERTAIN GRANTS THAT THEY WILL RECEIVE IN 2025. IT WILL BE ASSUMED IN OUR BUDGETS. THE LAST TWO ITEMS, THE BUDGET ORDINANCE -- PROPOSED ORDINANCE ITSELF, WHICH IS THE CLERK FILE, AND AS YOU MAKE YOUR OMENS, THEY WILL BE ADDED TO THAT COURT FILE, AND THEN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, DESCRIBED AS THE CIP. SO WITH EIGHT DEEP BREATH, THAT IS THE FULL SET OF BUDGET LEGISLATION INTENDED FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA. THERE WILL BE A SINGLE VOTE TOMORROW ON THIS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM. I'M ALSO HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM OFF-LINE LATER TODAY OR TOMORROW. ‎I WILL CLARIFY, THE LESS ITEMS, 38 AND 39, THOSE ARE THE FILES ASSOCIATED WITH THE COUNCIL BILLS FOR ITEM 38, THE ASSOCIATED COUNCIL BILL, COUNCIL 12095. ‎ACTUALLY, I WANTED TO CLARIFY. I THINK THOSE ARE ACTUALLY THE PROPOSED BUDGETS. SO, IT IS THE MAYOR TRANSMITTAL. THAT IS WHY THEY ARE ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. BUT WE WILL BE ADOPTING IS A SEPARATE CLERK FILE ON THE 19th, SO THESE TWO ARE JUST THE MAYOR'S PROPOSED. ‎WONDERFUL. CLARIFYING THAT WE WILL BE MAKING AMENDMENTS TO COUNCIL BILL 9205 . I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE RUFFLES, CLARIFYING THAT THESE ARE 50-50 RAFFLES FOR NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS THAT PROVIDE PROCEEDS TO NONPROFITS THAT PROVIDE SERVICES. THIS IS NOT THE BAR DOWN THE STREET DOING A 50-50 RAFFLE AND SOMEBODY IS MAKING MONEY. SPOKE EXACTLY. THE ONES HOSTED AT THE SPORTS FACILITIES ARE JUST USING IT AS THE VENUE TO RAISE MONEY, IF YOU WILL. ‎FOR THE ORGANIZATIONS. ‎CORRECT. ‎ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS? I HAVE SPENT HOURS ON SOME OF THESE BILLS. I'M HAPPY TO READ YOU IN, BUT MAYBE NOT ON THE RECORD BECAUSE WE HAVE 46 INDIVIDUAL ITEMS JUST IN GROUPS C AND D. SEEING NO FURTHER QUESTIONS, LET'S MOVE ON. I DID RECEIVE -- OH, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. ‎CAN YOU HELP ME BETTER UNDERSTAND HOW THESE PROPOSED CONSENT CALENDAR IMPLEMENTING PIECES OF LEGISLATION -- HOW THEY DIFFER FROM THE PROPOSED CONSENT AMENDMENT PACKAGE, ITEMS, AND THOSE GROUPINGS. LETTER A AND C. ‎THE IDEA IS THE VOTING PROCESS CAN BE TIME-CONSUMING AND AT SOME LEVEL, UNNECESSARILY SO. WE LOOKED TO BOOK THINGS THAT ARE SOMEWHAT ALIKE. THIS IS THE ALIKE SET OF ROUTINE BUDGET LEGISLATION. THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT ACTIONS HERE, JUST TO BE CLEAR. THE IDEA IS THAT THESE WILL FIT AS A GROUP AS THE BASE LEGISLATION. THE OTHER GROUPS -- ONE OF THEM IS THE BOUNCING PACKAGE, WHICH IS A DEFINED PECK DISH CONCEPTS. THEY ARE LIKELY MUTUALLY AGREEABLE. FOR EFFICIENCY, WE VOTED AS A GROUP. TO BE CLEAR, YOU WILL HAVE THE PREROGATIVE OF PULLING OUT ANY INDIVIDUAL ITEM THAT YOU SEE IS WORTHY OF FURTHER AND SEPARATE DISCUSSION. ‎THANK YOU. I THINK I UNDERSTAND THAT PART. WHAT IS LESS CLEAR RIGHT NOW IS, TO ANY OF THESE PROPOSED CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS, THESE ARE COMPLETELY SEPARATE AND APART FROM OTHER GROUPINGS, A, B, C, AND D. IT IS SEPARATE. I AM SEEING YOLANDA NOD HER HEAD, YES. WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO VOTE ON THIS? WHEN IS THE ANTICIPATED VOTE DATE? ‎THE INTENT IS TO VOTE FOR THIS TOMORROW. ‎GOT IT. THANK YOU. ‎IF YOU HAVE CONCERNS WITH THESE BILLS, PLEASE LET ME KNOW, AND WE CAN PUSH THEM UNTIL NEXT TUESDAY. THIS IS WHERE IN THE PAST, WE HAVE TAKEN VOICE VOTES ON EACH OF THESE ITEMS, SO IT WAS ABOUT AN HOUR, HOUR AND A HALF OF EVERYONE SAYING YES. THIS IS WHY WE ARE PUTTING THEM ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE AMENDMENTS AND THE GROUPS ARE ALL AMOUNTS TO COUNCIL BILL . ‎IT IS INDIVIDUAL PIECES OF LEGISLATION, AS YOU SEE IN THE RIGHT COLUMN. THE PACKAGES ARE PACKAGES OF AMENDMENTS TO THE BUDGET ADOPTION ORDINANCE. THAT IS A SLIGHT NUANCE THERE. THE CONSENT CALENDAR IS FAMILIAR TO YOU ALL WITH THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS WHERE THERE IS THE LEGISLATION. THAT IS A MINOR POINT OF CLARIFICATION AROUND THE LINKAGE WE USE ON THESE VARIOUS MEANS BY WHICH WE TRY TO HELP EXPEDITE THE VOTING PROCESS. ‎GREAT. WELL, WE ARE ON ITEM 39. I WOULD LOVE FOR US TO GET THROUGH ITEM 41, IF NOT TO ITEM 42. SO LET'S CONTINUE ON. ‎GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL MEMBERS. ITEM 40 IS COUNTABLE CB 120887. IT IS TO WORK ON THE PROJECTS, AS WELL AS POTENTIALLY FOR A THIRD-PARTY PARTNERSHIP IN SUPPORT OF THESE PROJECTS. THE BUDGET DOES INCLUDE PERSONNEL WORKING ON THE PROJECT BUT DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY PARTNERSHIP. THE TECHNICAL AMENDMENT THERE WAS AN ERRONEOUS REFERENCE RELATED TO A SEPARATE PUBLIC HEARING THAT WAS NOT NECESSARY, AND WE DID NOT HOLD ONE, SO WE REMOVED THAT REFERENCE. ‎THANK YOU. QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? LET'S MOVE ON TO PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING ORDINANCE. COUNCIL BILL 120893. ‎GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. AGENDA ITEM 41 IS THE PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING IMPLEMENTATION ORDINANCE. YOU WERE BRIEFED ON THIS EARLIER DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS. THE UNDERLYING ORDINANCE WOULD ALLOCATE $27.3 MILLION THAT HAS BEEN HELD OVER IN FINANCE GENERAL SINCE IT WAS APPROPRIATED IN 2021, AND IT WOULD MOVE THAT MONEY TO VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS TO IMPLEMENT ELEMENTS OF DIFFERENT PROJECTS OF THE PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING PROCESS. THERE ARE AMENDMENTS TO THIS PROCESS, ALL PROPOSED BY COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH AND COSPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBERS MOORE AND WOO. YOU HAVE THAT IN YOUR RECEIPT. THIS WOULD APPROPRIATE $7 MILLION FOR THE OFFICE OF ARTS AND CULTURE TO PROVIDE GRANTS TO SUPPORT ARTS AND CULTURAL RESERVATIONS, FOCUSING ON HISTORICALLY MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES SUCH AS THE BLACK COMMUNITY. THE AMENDMENT WOULD APPROPRIATE $315 TO $15,000 FOR CONTRACTED YOUTH ACTIVITIES FOR SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED ENTITIES IN 2025, JUST TO NOTE THIS PART OF THE AMENDMENT WOULD RENDER ANOTHER CBA MOOT. IF THIS PASSES, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH INTENDS TO WITHDRAW HSD 335. THIS WOULD FUND THE NEW PROGRAMS BY DECREASING THE PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING APPROPRIATIONS TO THE SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION BY $5 MILLION. THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL WILL DIRECT $7.2 MILLION TO PERKS TO IMPLEMENT PUBLIC RESTROOM AXIS PROJECT INVOLVING PURCHASE OF STAFFING AT NEW AND EXISTING FACILITIES. THIS WOULD APPROPRIATE $2.2 MILLION TO SPR FOR THIS PURPOSE, TO PROMOTE A SKILLED DOWN RESTROOM IMPROVEMENT. IT WOULD PROVIDE FUNDING FOR OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT, HOMEOWNER STABILIZATION SERVICES, TO INCREASE ON OWNERSHIP FOR COMMUNITIES AT HIGH RISK OF DISPLACEMENT. THIS WILL HAVE A MIX OF WORK THAT THE OFFICE OF HOUSING WILL DO, PLUS CONTRACTS WITH COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE EXPENSES WITH THESE. THIS PROJECT WOULD BE FUNDED VIA A DECREASE TO THE PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING APPROPRIATIONS INTENDED FOR THE DEPARTMENT NEIGHBORHOODS, OR D.A.W.N.. THE PROPOSAL WOULD HAVE APPROPRIATED $7 MILLION TO D.A.W.N. FOR FOOD AND FARMING PROJECTS. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD RETAIN FOR MILLION DOLLARS TO IMPLEMENT A SKILLED DOWN VERSION OF THAT SAME PROJECT. AMENDMENT THREE WOULD PROVIDE PROVISO $2 MILLION OF THE PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING FUNDS FOR THE HUMAN SERVICES TO TO FUND THAT YOUNG ADULT THEY SHELTERED -- EXCUSE ME. YOUNG ADULT THEY CENTER IN CENTRAL DISTRICT. THIS WILL PROVISO THE REMAINING $1.9 MILLION OF PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING FUNDS TO BE USED FOR YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULT SHELTER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. ONCE AGAIN, THE PERSONAL BUDGETING PROPOSAL WOULD HAVE FUNDED TWO PROJECTS AT A TOTAL OF $2.9 MILLION. THE FIRST PROJECT AT $2 MILLION WOULD BE FOR ENHANCED HOMELESS NAVIGATION SERVICES, AND THE SECOND PROPOSAL, 1.9 FOR YOUTH SHELTER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. THIS AMENDMENT RETAINS THE 1.9 FOR YOUTH CAPITAL SHELTER IMPROVEMENTS. IT WAS INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL, AND SUBSTITUTES A DIFFERENT PROJECT FOR THE 2.0 MILLION, WHICH WOULD BE THAT YOUNG ADULT DAY CENTER. THE FOURTH AMENDMENT SIMPLY COMMENCE THE RECITALS TO REFLECT A STATEMENT OF COUNCIL INTENT REGARDING THE NEW FUNDING PRIORITIES. ‎THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH HAS SPONSORED THE AMENDMENT. THE FLOOR IS YOURS. A PRACTICE I WILL IMPLEMENT MOVING FORWARD FOR THE REST OF THE DAY AND ARE -- OUR CYCLE, IF YOU'RE COSPONSORED, YOU WILL BE SECOND PRIORITY TO EVERYONE ELSE. THE FLOOR IS YOURS. ‎THANK YOU, CHAIR STRASSE. THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES, FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ON THESE AMENDMENTS TO YOUR DUST -- THE PARTICIPATORY BUDGET. I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AND COUNCILMEMBER WOO. I HAVE COUNCIL PRESIDENT SARA NELSON ON SOME OF THESE AMENDMENTS, AS WELL. TO GLOBALLY FOR THE PROVISO FOR YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PIECE, SO I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON THAT. I'M REALLY GRATEFUL. THE ORIGINAL INTENTIONS -- I ALSO WANT TO THANK CENTRAL STAFF TOMMASO AND TRACY FOR DEALING WITH ME. I KNOW YOU ALL DIDN'T HAVE A CHOICE, SO I WANT TO THANK YOU. ‎YOU ARE A JOY TO WORK WITH. ‎IS THAT A DAD JOKE? THAT WAS A GOOD ONE. THANK YOU. ‎THE ORIGINAL INTENTIONS OF THE PARTICIPATORY BUDGET WAS TO ENSURE THAT BUT COMMUNITIES WERE INVITED. WE ALL SAW THIS DURING 2020, THE MURDER OF GEORGE FLOYD, AND THE BUDGET, HOW THIS ALL ARISE FROM WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT COMMUNITIES THAT HAD BEEN HISTORICALLY EXCLUDED WERE IMPACTED . HOW IT CAME OUT WAS WE HAD COMMUNITY MEMBERS CONCERNED ABOUT SOME OF THE OUTCOMES, AND SOME OF THE BUCKETS, AND HOW THEY WERE REFLECTED IN SOME OF THE SPENDING, SO IT COULD IMPACT OUR COMMUNITY, AND I TOOK IT -- I LISTENED WITH THEM -- CONNECTED WITH THEM TO AND CAME UP WITH A LOT OF THESE AMENDMENTS. YOU HEARD YESTERDAY, SOME OF THE FIVE POINTS OF PROGRESS FOR BLACK COMMITTEES. HOME OWNERSHIP AND PLANT, ECONOMIC MOBILITY THROUGH SMALL BUSINESS, HEALTH AND WELLNESS, EDUCATION, AND WE PAIR THAT WITH THE ARTS. SO OFTEN, WE THINK OF EDUCATION, K-12 AS BEING THE ONLY EDUCATION FOR OUR KIDS, BUT FOR BLACK COMMUNITY, A LOT OF IT IS THE ARTS BECAUSE OF OUR STORYTELLING, BECAUSE OF DANCE, MUSIC, HEALTH, ALL THESE GREAT THINGS THAT COME WITH THAT PIECE OF EDUCATION, AS WELL, AND THEN ALSO, WORKFORCE DEVELOPED, AND THE TRADES. JUST SOME STATS HERE, THAT I WANT TO SHARE WITH MY COLLEAGUES. HOME OWNERSHIP PIECE -- SO THE FIRST ONE, THE FIVE POINTS OF PROGRESS, 31% OF BLACK HOUSEHOLDS OWNED THEIR HOME. IN 1970, IT WAS 50% IN THE CITY OF SEATTLE. ECONOMIC MOBILITY. 1% OF THE OVERALL BUSINESSES IN SEATTLE ARE BLACK AND THEY ONLY EQUATE FOR 1% OF THE OVERALL REVENUE. HEALTH AND WELLNESS. 32% OF BLACK HOUSEHOLDS ARE FOOD INSECURE. EDUCATION IN THE ARTS. 40% OF BLACK STUDENTS ARE READY FOR KINDERGARTEN, COMPARED TO THEIR COUNTERPART AT 58% PRINT WORKFORCE DEVELOPED IN THE TRADES AND IN JOBS. THE MEDIUM -- MEDIAN SALARY IS $41,000. SO WE CAREFULLY CRAFTED THIS WITH COMMUNITY AT HEART, AND FIGURED OUT, HOW ARE WE ABLE TO HAVE THIS MEANINGFUL IMPACT TO OUR COMMUNITY? AND YOU HEARD FROM MR. JOHNSON TODAY ABOUT TOMMASO -- I'M SORRY. I SAID MR. JOHNSON. IS THAT OKAY? ABOUT THE AMENDMENTS WE ARE BRINGING FORTH TO YOU TODAY. THE FIRST ONE IS THROUGH ARTS AND CULTURE. THIS WOULD BE FOR ORGANIZATIONS LIKE THIS. YOU HAVE URBAN LINK. YOU HAVE AFRICAN LAND TRUST. WE HAVE THE GOOD FOOTPRINT YOU HAVE COLOR GIRL GARDENS CLUB. YOU HAVE ALL THESE GREAT FOLKS THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO BRING ARTS AND CULTURE INTO THE CITY OF SEATTLE THROUGH SOME OF THEIR EVENTS THAT THEY DO. MAYBE THEY WANT TO HAVE A SPEAKER COME TO THEIR CLASSROOM. THEY WANT TO BRING A NATIONAL, YOU KNOW, A BIG PERSON TO COME INTO THE CITY OF SEATTLE TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE THE BEAUTIFUL ARTS AND CULTURE FOR BLACK COMMUNITIES, SO, THAT IS REALLY KEY. THE SECOND IS THE APPROPRIATION FOR HOMEOWNERSHIP AND RETENTION. WE REALLY PUSH ON THIS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD THE PROPER OUTREACH FOR THIS, AS WELL, IN THE LAST THREE MONTHS OR EIGHT MONTHS, I HAVE HAD THREE REALLY GREAT FRIENDS LOSE THEIR HOME IN THE SOUTH END, TWO DIFFERENT, WHETHER IT IS TAXES OR REVERSE MORTGAGE OR WHETHER THE HOUSE WAS PASSED DOWN, THEY DID NOT KNOW ABOUT WHAT -- WOULD YOU CALL IT -- PROBATE WAS. THESE THINGS ARE REALLY IMPORTANT TO OUR COMMUNITY, AND NOT KNOWING THAT DOES THIS MONEY WOULD HELP WITH THE OUTREACH TO THAT. A LOT OF TIMES, A LOT OF PEOPLE, WE HAVE THE PROGRAMS. WE HAVE THE MONEY. THESE PEOPLE GO DOOR TO DOOR TO TALK WITH PEOPLE TO CONNECT WITH FOLKS. THEY CAN UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF SHAME THAT GOES IN WHEN PEOPLE LOSE THEIR HOME, OR THEY HAVE HIGH TAXES, SO, HAVING THE RIGHT PEOPLE AT THEIR DOOR, IT'S LIKE, HEY, IT'S OKAY. COME WITH ME. THAT'S BE ABLE TO NAVIGATE YOU THROUGH THIS. I THINK IT IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. THE THIRD ONE, THE PROVISO FOR YOUNG ADULT CENTER. WE HAVE A PUBLIC SAFETY CRISIS IN THIS CITY. THE KIDS ARE GRADUATE HIGH SCHOOL, AND BETWEEN THE AGES OF 18 AND 25, WE HAVE SEEN GUN VIOLENCE AT UNPRECEDENTED NUMBERS IN OUR CITY OF SEATTLE, PARTICULARLY FOR BLACK MALES. AND SO WITH THIS PIECE, AND WE DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD POTENTIALLY BE IN THE CENTRAL DISTRICT -- WE HAVE SEEN A TON OF GUN VIOLENCE -- OR BUT THAT -- THIS WOULD BE A DAY CENTER FOR YOUTH BETWEEN 18 TO 25, 8:00 A.M. TO 8:00 P.M. IT IS ALREADY A STRUCTURE THAT HAS BEEN SET UP. THEY NEED THE FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO DO SOME OF THE WORK . THE WORKFORCE TRADES. THEY ALSO HAVE PEOPLE TO HELP THEM DO THEIR RESUME AND CONNECT THEM WITH RESOURCES. JUST GET A HOT MEAL FOR SOME OF OUR KIDS THAT ARE EXPERIENCING -- THAT ARE ON THE BRINK OF BREAKING DOWN, AND BEING ABLE TO HAVE SOMEPLACE TO GO, WHICH I THINK IS INCREDIBLY IMPOTENT. LAST BUT NOT LEAST, THIS BILL ALSO MODIFIES TO BE ABLE TO RECITE AND REFLECT WHAT THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THIS BUDGET WAS, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE IMPACTING BLACK COMMUNITIES, FOR THE RESOURCES THAT BEST ARE UTILIZED FOR THEM TO HAVE THE HEALTH AND WELLNESS, THE EDUCATION, THE ARTS, THE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT, THE HOME OWNERSHIP AND ECONOMIC MOBILITY. WE HAVE ALSO IDENTIFIED 12 ORGANIZATIONS, AS WELL, AND I WANT TO THANK COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON FOR COSPONSORING THIS WITH ME. WE IDENTIFIED 12 ORGANIZATIONS. ONE OF HER BILLS THAT CAME DOWN THAT MADE IT INTO THE BOUNCING PACKAGE WAS SUPPORTING OUR CD PANTHERS . [ INAUDIBLE ] TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE FUNDING AT THE LEVELS THAT WE ARE ALSO DOING ENFORCEMENT, OKAY, WITH SPD AND ALL THESE THINGS, THAT WE ARE ALSO FINDING THAT PREVENTATIVE PIECE. THAT IS SO BURDENED THAT WE BALANCE THAT OUT. YOU KNOW, FROM COUNCIL, WE HAVEN'T MADE A LOT OF BILLS COME DOWN FOR ENFORCEMENT, WHICH WAS IMPORTANT. I VOTED FOR IT, AND I AGREE WITH THAT, BUT I AGREE WITH THE PREVENTATIVE PIECE, AS WELL. PEOPLE AREN'T GETTING TO THAT ENFORCEMENT PIECE. THAT IS WHY THE PREVENTATIVE PIECE IS IMPOTENT. FUNDING GROUPS THAT DO YOUTH DEVELOPMENT HAS SET THEM ON THE PATH, YOU KNOW, SO THEY ARE SUCCESSFUL. COUNCIL PRESIDENT MADE A COMMENT, TOO, WHICH I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT. THE FOOD PIECE. A LOT OF THESE KIDS ARE HUNGRY, AND THEY GET TO BE ANGRY. THEY ARE HANGRY. THEY DON'T HAVE TO OVER THE WEEKEND AND ON MONDAY AND TUESDAY, IT IS A HOT MESS BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T EATEN OVER THE WEEKEND. A LOT OF THESE ISSUES, BECAUSE THEY ARE HUNGRY. THESE GROUPS WE IDENTIFIED ALSO DO FOOD INSECURITY STUFF, AND THEY DO A LOT OF PROGRAMMING FOR YOUTH. SO, ANYWAYS, WITH THAT, I WILL STOP. I WANT TO THANK CENTRAL STAFF FOR US BEING ABLE TO CAREFULLY CRAFT A LOT OF THIS STUFF. I WANT TO THANK SOME OF THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT SHUT OUT MUST NIGHT IN PERSON AND ON VIRTUAL, AND HAVE SENT EMAILS REGARDING SUPPORTING THESE CHANGES, BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE THAT THESE WILL IMPACT COMMUNITY FOR THE BETTER, BUT ALSO, THE INTENDED OUTCOMES, IMPORTANT FOR THIS PARTICIPATORY BUDGET, WHICH WAS THE ORIGINAL SPIRIT OF THIS, I THINK THIS REALLY ALIGNS WITH WHAT PEOPLE REALLY WANT COME AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, EVEN THOUGH THERE IS A FOOD BUCKET, THAT WE HAVE TAKEN FROM TO BE ABLE TO ALLOCATE FOR HOMEOWNERSHIP, THERE ARE STILL THOSE PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE DONE, WHERE THEY ARE JUST GOING TO BE SCALED BACK, BUT WE ALSO DISH AND I HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK WITH THE CENTRAL STAFF TO SEE IF WE HAVE ADDED LANGUAGE FOR EXPANDING SOME OF THEIR SCOPE OF WORK WITH THE DEPARTMENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD AND SO FORTH. ANYWAYS, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THAT IS MY LONG EXPLANATION FOR THIS PARTICIPATORY BUDGET. THANK YOU. ‎THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH. COUNCILMEMBER WOO. ‎I WANT TO ADD, THANK YOU, JOY, FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS. MANY HAVE COME UP TO US WITH CONCERNS. AS YOU HEARD MY SITE THROUGH PUBLIC COMMENTS, THIS SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD SOLUTION TO ADDRESS MANY OF THE CURRENTS WE ARE HEARING IN OUR OFFICE. THANK YOU. ‎THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. ‎THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHIP AND I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR PURSUING THIS, AND ALSO, FOR MAINTAINING THE FUNDING FOR THE DUWAMISH, WHICH WAS CRITICALLY IMPOTENT, AS WILL. THIS IS GOING TO BE PHENOMENAL FOR THE COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. ‎THANK YOU. THAT BRINGS UP THE ONE QUESTION I HAD. I'M GOING TO INTERJECT FOR PROCESS OF FACILITATION BRITT THIS SLIDE REFERENCES THAT MODIFICATIONS TO PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING. CAN YOU SHARE WHAT ASPECTS OF THE BILL THAT WE HAVE BEEN ON OUR RETAINED? I KNOW THE ANSWER, BUT I WANT TO HAVE IT ON THE RECORD. ‎ABSOLUTELY. SO, THE ELEMENTS OF THE PARTICIPATORY BUDGET PROPOSAL IN THE UNDERLYING BILL THAT ARE NOT MODIFIED ARE $2 MILLION ONE TIME FOR HER CARE TEAM EXPANSION IN 2025, AND AS I MENTIONED WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS BEFORE, THE MAYOR'S BUDGET BUILDS IN THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE PARTICIPATORY BUDGET ORDINANCE WILL FUND TEAM EXPANSION FOR THE INITIAL PHASE AND AT $2 MILLION. THAT IS RETAINED. PUBLIC RESTROOM AXIS, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, IS REDUCED FROM 7.2 TO 2.2, AND THE DEPARTMENT AND CEO HAVE INDICATED THAT THE PARKS THE PERMIT WILL BE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT A SCALED-DOWN VERSION OF THAT PROJECT. THAT PROJECT WILL BE ABLE TO SCALE TO THAT AMOUNT. URBAN FOOD AND FARMING, DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOODS REDUCED FROM $7 MILLION-$4 MILLION. SAME STORY THERE. THE DEPARTMENT HAS INDICATED THAT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT A SCALED DOWN VERSION OF THAT PROJECT. AND THEY HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY ARE INTERESTED IN FAVORABLE, EXPANDING THE SCOPE IN THE WAY YOU DESCRIBED IT. THEY DON'T NEED ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY TO DO THAT. THEY ARE ON BOARD WITH THAT. AS YOU MENTIONED, THAT NATIVE YOUTH, PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE, THE DUWAMISH CENTER IS RETAINED AT THE $2.2 MILLION MUCH. THE ENHANCED HOMELESS NAVIGATION, $2 MILLION, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED BY KCRHA. THAT HAS BEEN REMOVED IN FAVOR OF THE OTHER CENTER. AND THEN THAT YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULT SHELTERED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS IN THE REALM OF $1.9 MILLION HAS BEEN RETAINED FROM THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL. ‎I SHOULD ALSO SAY THAT THE AMENDMENTS ALL AT CARRYFORWARD LANGUAGE TO ENSURE THAT THE PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED AS DESIGNED IN 2025. ‎THANK YOU. ‎COUNCIL MEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, I SEE HER HAND AGAIN. YOU ALSO HAVE THE LAST WORD. ‎I APOLOGIZE. THANK YOU. ‎COUNCILMEMBER SAKA AND COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. ‎THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, FOR CLARIFYING THE IMPORTANT FEATURES AND SPECIFIC ELEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN CHANGED, RETAINED, OR MODIFIED IN ANY WAY. THAT REALLY CLARIFIED MY, YOU KNOW, UNCERTAINTY AND CONFUSION I HAD ABOUT THE IMPACT ON THOSE ORIGINAL ITEMS THAT WERE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED IN THE MAYOR'S ORIGINAL PROPOSED PARTICIPATORY BUDGET INVESTMENTS. AND SO, I'M VERY GLAD TO HEAR THAT THE $7.2 MILLION FOR THE DUWAMISH LONGHOUSE PROJECT IS RETAINED. IT IS IN MY DISTRICT. IT HAS BEEN PROMISED AND COMMITTED TO THAT COMMUNITY YEARS AGO. IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE ACTUALLY FINALLY DELIVER, AND SO, I AM THANKFUL. FIRST OFF, FOR THE LEADERSHIP, THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR CHAMPIONING THIS COLLECTIVE, HOLISTIC APPROACH THAT ALLOWS US AS A CITY TO LIVE UP TO SOME OF THOSE ORIGINAL COMMITMENTS TO THE BLACK COMMUNITY, AND ALSO, I THINK YOUR COSPONSORS, AS WELL, FOR ALLOWING US TO GET TO THIS POINT. I STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS BILL FOR THE REASONS THAT I MENTIONED. THANK YOU AGAIN FOR BRINGING IT. ‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE, FOLLOWED BY COUNCILMEMBERS RIVERA AND NELSON. ‎THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WANTED TO SAY A FEW THINGS. ONE, I WANTED TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH FOR THE LEADERSHIP ON THE ISSUE. IT IS VERY NEEDED, AND IT IS KEY. I ALSO WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH FOR BEING A TRUSTED ADVISER IN THIS AREA FOR ME. HER INSIGHT, HER LIVED EXPENSE, EVERYTHING THAT SHE BRINGS TO THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT, AS I LOOK AT THESE ISSUES, AND THE BUDGET, JUST IN GENERAL, AND SO, I LOOK AT HER AS A TRUSTED ADVISER, AND I THINK SHE HAS ALSO BEEN A KEY LINK FOR ME TO INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS -- MANY OF WHOM WHO WE SAW AND HEARD FROM LAST NIGHT. I THANK HER FOR THAT. I ALSO THANK THEM FOR COMING LAST NIGHT, AND FOR SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THEIR GROUPS, AND CONSTITUENCIES. LOOKING AT THE ORIGINAL LEGISLATION AND WHERE WE ARE GOING, I WOULD ALSO THINK THAT COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH WOULD PROBABLY BE A GREAT LINK TO THE EXECUTIVE AS THEY LOOK AT NEXT YEARS PROGRAM, FOR HSD AND OTHER KEY DEPARTMENTS. THE LAST THING I WANTED TO SAY -- COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH BRINGS UP AN IMPORTANT POINT. AND I THINK RIGHT NOW IS A FANTASTIC TIME TO EXPAND ON IT. THAT IS THE PREVENTATIVE ASPECT. SO MANY TIMES IN THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. I TALK ABOUT LEADING WITH COMPASSION AND HAVING EMPATHY FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE IN CRISIS AND SIMILAR CONDITIONS, BUT THEN HAVING THE WISDOM TO LOOK AT, FOR THE FULLER COMMUNITY, AND THE NEIGHBORHOODS INVOLVED, YOU KNOW, I ALSO TALK ABOUT, YOU CAN'T SUCCEED IN PUBLIC SAFETY WITHOUT ALSO SUCCEEDING IN PUBLIC HEALTH. AS WE HAVE GOTTEN TO THE END OF THIS FIRST YEAR, AND WORKING THROUGH ALL THE POINTS, AS COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH TALKED ABOUT ON THE PUBLIC SAFETY SIDE, IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE HUMAN SERVICES IN A MORE GENERAL CONTEXT , TO HAVE THAT PIECE THERE. THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR, FOR EXAMPLE, WITH OUR BILL, WHICH I THINK HAS ENGENDERED A GREAT INCREASE IN TERMS OF RESOURCES FOR WOMEN AND GIRLS THAT HAVE BEEN AFFECTED. IN THAT PIECE. IT IS ALSO HERE, TOO, SOMETHING WHERE, WE CAN HELP THOSE INDIVIDUALS, PARTICULARLY THE YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULTS, WHICH IS SO KEY -- IT HAS NOT BEEN A MAIN FOCUS FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT IS VITAL IN TERMS OF THAT BALANCE WITH THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND HUMAN SERVICES AS REPRESENTED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE'S HOUSING COMMITTEE, TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE HELPING THOSE IN NEED, AND AS MANY PEOPLE SAID LAST NIGHT, AN OUNCE OF PREVENTION IS WORTH A POUND OF CURE. THIS COULD BE AN AREA THAT COULD BE SO IMPORTANT. SO, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO HIGHLIGHT THIS PREVENTATIVE PIECE, THE HUMAN SERVICES PIECE, THE PUBLIC HEALTH PIECE FROM THOSE ANGLES. IN TERMS OF THEIR COMPANION EFFORTS. TO WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING ON PUBLIC SAFETY, SO, THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, AND FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE SUPPORTING IT, I APPRECIATE IT. ‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE. COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA , ‎I WANT TO EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE FOR COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH WORKING TO FULFILL THE COMMITMENT TO COMMUNITY. I KNOW THAT MAYOR SENT DOWN THE PACKAGE. I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE HIS DOING SO, AND THEN, ALSO, JUST APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR, LIKE IS IT, WORKING WITH COMMUNITY, TO FINE-TUNE THE PROPOSAL, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT SHE DID WORK WITH COMMUNITY, TO PUT THIS FORWARD, AND WE KNOW THIS IS WHAT IS NEEDED IN COMMUNITY, AND WE HEARD LAST NIGHT, THESE ITEMS ARE WHAT COMMUNITIES SUPPORT. AND I WANT TO PARTICULARLY UNDERSCORE MY APPRECIATION FOR, YOU KNOW, THE YOUTH. THAT IS A BIG PIECE OF THESE AMENDMENTS. AND THEN, ALSO, ON THE HOMEOWNERSHIP SAID, YOU KNOW, OUR OLDER COMMUNITY, BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT A LOT OF THE FOLKS ARE IN DANGER OF LOSING THEIR HOMES. OUR OLDER FOLKS ARE NOW LIVING ON FIXED INCOMES, AND THEN WHEN THEIR PROPERTY TAXES GO UP, THEY DON'T HAVE RESOURCES FROM WHICH TO PULL FROM TO BE ABLE TO KEEP THEIR HOMES, SO I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE ATTENTION TO BOTH ON THE YOUTH AND, AND OLDER, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK PERSONALLY, WE DO ENOUGH TO SUPPORT OUR SENIORS AND OLDER FOLKS IN COMMUNITY ACROSS THE UNITED STATES. I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE YOUR PUTTING THIS FORWARD, AND I VERY MUCH SUPPORT ALL THE WORK THAT WENT INTO THIS, AND I VERY MUCH SUPPORT THIS, SO THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR REALLY LENDING YOUR PART, ALONG WITH THE MAYORS AND THE VARIOUS FOLKS. AND REALLY, MANY OF US HERE, ALL OF US HERE, FOR REALLY HIGHLIGHTING THE APPEARANCE OF KEEPING THE PROMISES TO THE COMMUNITIES. ‎THANK YOU. COUNCIL PRESIDENT. ‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH. IF YOU DIDN'T ALREADY HAVE TWO COSPONSORS, I WOULD REQUEST TO BE A COSPONSOR. I FULLY SUPPORT THIS. I THANK YOU FOR DOING THE WORK. YOU STEPPED INTO A PROJECT THAT HAD BEEN SITTING ON THE BOOKS FOR A LONG TIME AND WAS ALMOST TO THE POINT OF BEING WRAPPED UP WITH A BOW, AND THEN CAME IN AND MADE SOME IMPORTANT CHANGES. I DO APPRECIATE THAT YOUR CHANGES KEEP IN MIND SOME OF OUR EXPRESSED -- NOT NECESSARILY CONCERNS, BUT WHAT WE ARE FUNDING DOES HAVE AN ENDING DATE, SO WE MAKE SURE THE COMMUNITY UNDERSTANDS HOW TO TAKE IT FORWARD. AND SO, LAST BUT NOT LEAST, THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO THE OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS. THIS HAS BEEN ON THEIR BOOKS FOR A LONG TIME. I JUST WANTED TO EXPRESS APPRECIATION FOR THAT. YES, KING COUNTY ALSO DID A BUDGETING PROJECT, BUT IT WAS 5 MILLION, I BELIEVE, OR 3 MILLION. AND IT IS A LOT EASIER TO GIVE AWAY A SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY, THEN IT IS TO DELEGATE $27 MILLION BECAUSE, THE STAKES ARE SO HIGH. EVERYBODY WITHIN THE EXECUTIVE THAT WORKED ON THIS ALSO, I JUST WANTED TO EXTEND THE THANK YOU AND THE CONVERSATIONS ALSO, TO ‎COUNCILMEMBER MORALES., WHO HAS BEEN WITH US FOR A REALLY LONG TIME. THANK YOU. ‎OTHER COLLEAGUES? I WILL SHARE MY COMMENTS AND THEN I WILL PASS IT OVER TO COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH FOR THE LAST WORD. I WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR DELIVERING THIS PROGRAM. IT WAS NOT AN EASY PATHWAY FORWARD. CLEARLY, YOUR WORK HAS DELIVERED BECAUSE ALL THE PROGRAMS ARE BEING FUNDED DESPITE CHANGES AT DIFFERENT LEVELS. MY REFLECTION IS THAT THE FACT THAT THE BLACK COMMUNITY IS NOT A MONOLITH. AND WHAT I REFLECT ON FROM US THAT IS THAT WE HEARD A UNITED VOICE. THAT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT. I WILL SAY THE ONE THING THAT I SAID THE LAST TIME THIS WAS BEFORE US, ADDING FUNDING TO BLACK ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIGENOUS ORGANIZATIONS, AL GETTING FUNDING, MONEY, AND RESOURCES TO THESE TYPES OF ORGANIZATIONS SHOULD NOT BE A ONE-TIME ACTION OR A MOMENT IN TIME. BUT WE HAVE BEFORE US IS A REACTION TO THE MURDER OF GEORGE FLOYD, AND THIS CAN'T BE A ONE-TIME PRACTICE OR MOMENT IN TIME. AND THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR ALL YOUR WORK. OVER TO YOU FOR THE LAST WORD. ‎EASY. LAST WORDS. THANK YOU, CHAIR STRAUSS. I'M SO GLAD THAT YOU BROUGHT IT UP. I WANT TO THANK THE OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS DIRECTOR DEREK WHEELER SMITH, FOR HIS WORK ON THIS. I KNOW HE STEPPED IN ON THE TAIL END OF IT, AND CONTINUED THE PROCESS, SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. I ALSO WANT TO RECOGNIZE THE EXECUTIVE OFFICE. YOU KNOW, WE WERE TALKING TO THEM DURING THIS PROCESS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE KIND OF ALIGNED WITH A LOT OF THE VALUES THAT THEY HAD EXPRESSED, AS WELL, SO I DEFINITELY WANT TO THANK OUR EXECUTIVE OFFICE. I ALSO WANT TO THINK OUR CENTRAL STAFF FOR ALL THEIR HELP, AND THE OTHER DEFERMENTS THAT HAD BEEN ALLOCATED MONEY, AND, YOU KNOW, FOR US, TO COME AND SAY, HEY, WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH THIS, AND WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH THAT COMMENT TALKING ABOUT THOSE THINGS WITH CENTRAL STAFF, AND REALLY BEING OPEN TO THIS, AS WE KNOW, IT WAS ALREADY BAKED INCOME AND THEY PUT THE BOW ON IT. I'M GOING TO GO DOWN THE LINE AND THANK ALL OF YOU. THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, FOR YOUR EARLY SUPPORT ON THIS, AND LEADERSHIP. COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING THE DUWAMISH PEACE AND SAYING HOW IMPORTANT THAT IS FOR YOUR DISTRICT, AND MAKING SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT WE ARE MAKING DOSE KEEPING OUR PROMISE. I THINK IT IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. AND I SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON THE PHONES FROM DIFFERENT PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY WHO EXPRESSED THEIR, YOU KNOW, SUPPORT FOR THIS, BUT ALSO COMING UP, HAD TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH FOLKS ABOUT THINGS. SO JUST THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, YOU STARTED THIS. YOU STARTED THIS BALL. THAT IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR ACTUALLY STARTING THE BALL, FOR US TO GET HERE. YOU KNOW. I'M JUST TRYING TO RUN THROUGH THE ENDS ON WITH IT. YOU CAN BEAT RUSSELL WILSON PRINT WHATEVER YOU WANT. RUSSELL WILSON DIDN'T HAND IT OFF TO MARSHAWN LYNCH SO DON'T PASS IT. WE WILL TALK ABOUT THIS IS MAYBE A FIRST DOWN. THANK YOU, COUNCIL CHAIR DAN STRAUSS FOR YOUR ADVICE ON HOW TO NAVIGATE THINGS AND HOW TO MOVE THROUGH STUFF. REALLY, THE INSIGHT THAT YOU HAVE HAS BEEN INCREDIBLE. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, THANK YOU. HE HAS BEEN INCREDIBLY SUPPORTIVE SINCE DAY ONE. AND, YOU KNOW, YOUR LEADERSHIP, AS WELL. JUST INCREDIBLE. THANK YOU. AND YOUR SPONSORSHIP. COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE, THANK YOU. YOU COME WITH ME TO PLACES THAT, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T LOOK LIKE YOU. THOSE ARE HARD TO FIND IN THE CITY, BUT YOU COME IN THOSE PLACES, AND YOU LISTEN TO PEOPLE. AND THEY GIVE YOU THE FEEDBACK, WHETHER IT IS TOUGH OR IT IS NOT. YOU LISTEN AND YOU TAKE IT, AND I APPRECIATE YOU OBSERVING THAT. AND THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER WOO, FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS IN YOUR SPONSORSHIP AND JUST BEING LIKE, HEY, WHAT OF THE COMMUNITY WANTS, THANK YOU FOR THAT. OKAY? SO ANYWAYS, WITH THAT BEING SAID, THANK YOU. I HOPE WE CAN EARN YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS FOR THE PARTICIPATORY BUDGET, AND THAT IS ALL I HAVE. SO THANK YOU, CHAIR. HOPEFULLY I DIDN'T FORGET THE THINKING ONE THANK YOU. ‎THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH BREAD FOR THE RECORD, I AM MISSING PETE CARROLL THIS YEAR AND DON'T PASS THE BALL IN THE END ZONE. RUN IT. RUN IT, RUN IT. WITH THAT, COLLEAGUES, I'M GOING TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF A TIME CHECK FOR US. WE ARE GOING TO GO ON LUNCH RECESS FOR 30 MINUTES, COMING BACK AT 1:30. WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US ARE 118 ITEMS IN LETTER A. NOT ALL OF THEM WILL BE DEEP DIVES. THAT IS TWO HOURS. IT ONLY TAKES ONE MINUTE -- THAT IS TWO HOURS. WE THEN HAVE 46 ITEMS IN GROUPS C AND D. WE ONLY HAVE ONE ITEM IN B, SO I'M JUST NOT TALKING ABOUT IT. IF WE SPEND ONE MINUTE ON EACH OF THE ITEMS IN GROUPS C AND D, THAT IS 46 MINUTES. I KNOW CENTRAL STAFF WILL TAKE A MINUTE. I KNOW THAT EACH OF US WILL TAKE LONGER THAN A MINUTE, SO LET'S GIVE IT TWO. RUNNING THAT MATH, THAT IS 90 MINUTES. WE WILL COME BACK AT 1:30. THE EARLIEST WE WILL GET OUT IS 4:15 ON THIS PROJECTION. IF WE GO LONGER -- IF WE HIT THE TWO MINUTES PER ITEM C AND D, WE WILL BE OUT AT 5:00 P.M. SHARP, WHICH MAKES COUNCILMEMBER MOORE LATE. IT MAKES ME LATE. IF WE GO OVER TWO MINUTES, I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW LONG WE WILL BE HERE. WE WILL BE HERE UNTIL 6:00 P.M. AT THE LATEST, SO THAT IS WHERE WE ARE. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, WE WILL BE RETURNING, AND I AM SO SERIOUS, IT'S NOT FUNNY. BE HERE AT 1:30, BECAUSE THIS IS A REALLY TIGHT SHIP RIGHT NOW. WE ARE RIGHT, BARELY ON TIME. ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, CONCERNS? SEEING NOT COME IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION, THE SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE WILL BE IN RECESS UNTIL 1:30 P.M. WE ARE IN RECESS UNTIL 1:30 P.M.