THE COMMITTEE. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH: COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
HERE: HERE.
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON: COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
COUNCILMEMBER [ INAUDIBLE ]
PRESENT.
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA: COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
COUNCILMEMBER SULLIVAN. AND
CHAIR STRAUSS. FIVE PRESENT.
THANK YOU, THOSE NOT PRESENT
ARE EXCUSED UNTIL THEY ARRIVE.
THE FOUR ITEMS WE HAVE ON THE
AGENDA TODAY ARE ALL FOR
BRIEFING AND DISCUSSION, AND SO
WE ARE GOING TO TAKE AS MUCH
TIME AS WE NEED TO TODAY TO
DISCUSS THE UNDERLYING ELEMENTS
OF THESE BILLS. THANK YOU
COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON FOR
CANCELING THE LAND-USE COMMITTEE
THIS AFTERNOON. I KNOW SOME
FOLKS WILL HAVE HARD STOPS BUT
WE ALSO DO NOT HAVE A COMMITTEE
THIS AFTERNOON. THE FOUR ITEMS
ON TODAY'S AGENDA ARE THE
SHIELD INITIATIVE, THE
LEGISLATION THAT WOULD MAKE
ADJUSTMENTS TUBA CITY'S E AND O
TAX, TWO ORDINANCES RELATING TO
THE MIDYEAR SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET.
THE FIRST IS AN ORDINANCE
ACCEPTING AND AUTHORIZING GRANT
EXPENDITURES AND THE SECOND IS
THE 2025 MIDYEAR SUPPLEMENTAL
BUDGET ORDINANCE. WE ALSO HAVE
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO WORLD
CUP APPROPRIATIONS, AND FINALLY
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE
FINANCING OF HUMAN CAPITAL
MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS PROJECT, MORE
COMMONLY KNOWN AS WORKDAY.
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA IS NOW
PRESENT. BEFORE WE BEGIN, IF
THERE IS NO OBJECTION, THE
AGENDA WILL BE ADOPTED. HEARING
NO OBJECTION, THE AGENDA IS
ADOPTED. WE NOW MOVE INTO THE
HYBRID PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
PUBLIC COMMENTS SHOULD RELATE TO
THE ITEMS ON TODAY'S AGENDA AND
WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE SELECT
COMMITTEE. HOW MANY FOLKS DO WE
HAVE PHYSICALLY SIGNED UP TODAY?
WE HAVE NINE REMOTE AND NINE: WE HAVE NINE REMOTE AND NINE
IN PERSON.
WONDERFUL. WE'LL START WITH
THE IN PERSON SPEAKERS. I'M
GOING TO CALL EVERYONE'S NAME,
AND IF YOU COULD LINE UP SO WE
COULD TAKE THROUGH THIS RAPIDLY,
WITH 18 SIGNED UP WE WILL STILL
STAY WITH TWO MINUTES. THAT DOES
MEAN WE'LL EXCEED THE 20 MINUTE
ALLOTTED TIME AND WE'LL MOVE
FORWARD. SO WITH THAT WE HAVE
RACHEL SNELL, EUGENE WASSERMAN,
HALLIE WILLIS, BLAKE GARFIELD,
JASON AUSTIN, DENNIS SILLS,
ANISHA ZANE, MARTHA KIDNEY, AND
LILLIE HAYWARD. RACHEL, WELCOME?
CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY: CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY?
YES .
PERFECT. ALL RIGHT. GOOD
MORNING CHAIR STRAUSS AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. I NAME
IS RACHEL SNELL TESTIFYING
STRONGLY IN FAVOR OF THE SEATTLE
SHIELD INITIATIVE. IN A TIME
WHERE OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS
GIVING US MASSIVE CUTS, NOW MORE
THAN EVER IT IS CRITICAL TO
SUPPORT RECURSIVE REVENUE. NOW
MORE THAN EVER IT'S CRITICAL TO
PROVIDE AID TO HARD-WORKING
SEATTLEITES AND SMALL BUSINESSES
IN ORDER TO CREATE A ROBUST CITY
FOR ALL TO THRIVE. AND THANK YOU
COUNCILMEMBER RINK FOR YOUR
TIRELESS LEADERSHIP IN THIS
INITIATIVE. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THANK YOU. FOLLOWING RACHEL
IS EUGENE WASSERMAN, EITHER
MICROPHONE, FOLLOWED BY HALEY
WILSON --
[ INAUDIBLE ]
THE BOX NEXT TO YOU WHICH: THE BOX NEXT TO YOU WHICH
SAYS PLEASE PLACE HERE.
HI, I'M EUGENE WASSERMAN.
I'M HERE TODAY SPEAKING AS AN
INDIVIDUAL. NORMALLY I COME AND
SPEAK FOR MY ORGANIZATION, NORTH
SEATTLE INDUSTRIAL ASSOCIATION,
BUT WE HAVE HAD NOT ENOUGH TIME
OR INFORMATION TO REVIEW THIS
PROPOSAL. SO I'LL TELL YOU WHAT
I COME UP WITH. MOST OF THE
MARITIME COMMUNITY WILL BE HIT
WITH THIS TAX. WHEN PEOPLE IN
THE INDUSTRY ARE HAVING A LOT OF
PROBLEMS WITH TARIFFS AND ONE
DAY THE PORT IS FULL, NEXT DAY
IT'S EMPTY. THERE'S A LOT OF
COMPETITION FROM THE RUSSIAN
FISHING INDUSTRY. THIS WOULD NOT
BE A GOOD TIME TO DO IT. I LEFT
YOU THIS, WHICH IS FROM ONE OF
YOUR PACKETS IN COUNCIL. THIS
SHOWS YOU HOW OUT OF WHACK YOUR
BE ENDO TAXES WOULD BE TO THE
REST OF THE REGION, AND RIGHT
NOW SEATTLE'S NOT DOING A LOT
ECONOMICALLY. GO IT DOESN'T
SEEM LIKE IT'S PIERCED THIS
AREA OF CITY HALL BUT THAT'S, I
THINK BECAUSE YOU'RE DOING TOO
MUCH [ INAUDIBLE ] STUFF,
CREATING UNEMPLOYMENT NUMBERS
THAT I DON'T THINK WILL EVER
HAPPEN. BUT WE ARE AT A
COMPETITIVE DISADVANTAGE IN THE
CITY, AND THIS WILL NOT HELP IT.
THIS IS -- BUSINESSES, I'VE
LOST FIVE MAJOR BUSINESSES IN
THE LAST FOUR OR FIVE YEARS AND
THREE OF THEM ARE UNION. THREE
OF THEM ARE UNION. I LOST FOUR,
AND ONE OF THEM WAS NONUNION. SO
THEY JUST LEFT THE AREA. I KNOW
OTHER BUSINESSES ARE
CONTEMPLATING LEAVING THE AREA,
AND PASSING THINGS LIKE THIS,
I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THIS IS
THE FINAL WORD FOR THEM BUT IT
JUST INDICATES HOW ANTIBUSINESS
THE CITY IS TO THEM, NOT TO ME.
I MUST SAY AT THIS POINT THE
CITY HAS MADE A LOT OF PROGRESS
IN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS.
THINGS ARE GETTING A LOT BETTER
BUT THINGS ARE STILL NOT GOOD.
OUR MEMBERS STILL CARRY GUNS TO
PROTECT THEMSELVES AND DOWNTOWN
IS VACANT, [ INAUDIBLE ] 31%,
WHICH IS ONE OF THE HIGHEST IN
THE COUNTRY.
THANK YOU. UP NEXT IS HALEY
WILL IS FOLLOWED BY BLAKE
GARFIELD AND JASON AUSTIN.
WELCOME HALEY. HALLIE, SORRY.
AT EVENING COUNCILMEMBER'S,
MY NAME IS HALLIE WILLIS AND I
AM THE POLICY MANAGER FOR THE
SEATTLE KING COUNTY COALITION ON
HOMELESSNESS, AND I LIVE IN
DISTRICT 5. I'M HERE TO SUPPORT
COUNCIL MEMBER RINCK AND MAYOR
HERR L'S OPPOSED B AND O TAX
REFORM THAT WOULD HELP DETECT
ESSENTIAL SERVICES LIKE HOUSING
AND SHELTER FROM LOCAL AND
FEDERAL BUDGET CUTS. THE $90
MILLION THIS TAX WILL RAISE
EVERY YEAR IS ESSENTIAL AND
COUNCIL SHOULD SEND THIS
PROPOSAL TO THE VOTERS. BUT
IT'S NOT ENOUGH. SETTING ASIDE
MASSIVE FEDERAL CUTS, WE HAVE A
$240 MILLION BUDGET DEFICIT OF
OUR OWN CREATION. THIS BUDGET
DEFICIT WILL ONLY GET WORSE
WITHOUT PERMANENT , NEW,
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE SOURCES. THE
COUNCIL NEEDS TO PASS ADDITIONAL
LONG-TERM PROGRESS OF REVENUE
THIS YEAR AND IN THE COMING
YEARS, TO MAKE SURE THAT SEATTLE
RESIDENTS HAVE FOOD TO EAT AND A
SAFE PLACE TO SLEEP AT NIGHT.
THROUGH THIS CURRENT FEDERAL
ADMINISTRATION AND BEYOND.
PLEASE SEND THIS PROPOSAL TO THE
VOTERS AND PASS ADDITIONAL
LONG-TERM PROGRESSIVE REVENUE
THIS YEAR. THANK YOU.
UP NEXT IS BLAKE BRUMFIELD: UP NEXT IS BLAKE BRUMFIELD
FOLLOWED BY JASON AUSTIN AND
DENNIS [ INAUDIBLE ]. GOOD
MORNING, BLAKE.
I'M BLAKE GARFIELD, MY
FAMILY OWNS BEDROOMS AND MORE.
IT'S A RETAIL STORE. IT'S BEEN
THERE SINCE 1972. I'M ALSO ON
THE BOARD FOR THE WASHINGTON
RETAIL ASSOCIATION. I VOLUNTEER
MY TIME PUTTING ON THE
WALLINGFORD PARADE AND I WAS
RECENTLY ELECTED THE PRESIDENT
OF THE WALLINGFORD CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE, WHICH IS MORE OF AN
HONORARY TITLE, BECAUSE IT
REALLY DOESN'T DO ANYTHING YET.
BUT BEING A SMALL BUSINESS IN
SEATTLE IS REALLY HARD AND WE
HAVE 30 ISH EMPLOYEES AT ANY
GIVEN TIME, OR A LITTLE BIT MORE
THAN THAT. WE TRY AND DO THE
RIGHT KIND OF EMPLOYER, WHERE WE
HAVE FULL COLLEGE TUITION PAID
FOR SOME OF THESE WORKING
FULL-TIME FOR US, MEDICAL
BENEFITS, AND THE JOB WHERE
PEOPLE, IF THEY WORK FOR US FOR
ABOUT FIVE YEARS, SHOULD BE ABLE
TO OWN A HOME WHERE THEY'RE NOT
COMMUTING FROM LACEY TO COME
INTO WORK FOR US. AND WE GET IN
THIS WEIRD SPOT WHERE WE ARE TOO
BIG OF A BUSINESS TO NOT GET
CAUGHT UP IN A TAX LIKE THIS BUT
TOO SMALL FOR IT TO NOT HURT.
DURING THE PANDEMIC WE HAD
$180,000 OF DAMAGE DONE TO OUR
BUILDING ON 45th AND WE GET NO
RELIEF FROM THE CITY. WE
WEREN'T GETTING SUPPORT ON
THAT. AND HERE WE ARE BEING
CAUGHT UP IN A TAX WHERE WE ARE
NOT MAKING MONEY. OUR RENT PER
HOUSE WAS GOING TO GO UP TO
$50,000 PER MONTH TO HAVE A
WAREHOUSE IN THE CITY OF SEATTLE
IF WE RENEWED OUR LEASE, AND
IT'S TOUGH TO TRY AND THREAD
THE NEEDLE, TO BE THE RIGHT KIND
OF EMPLOYER IN A CITY WHERE
YOU'RE GETTING CAUGHT UP IN THE
TAX, AND IT'S SO HARD TO FIND
SOURCES FOR REVENUE. I EMPATHIZE
WITH YOUR CHALLENGE BECAUSE
WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO GO. I'M
NOT A BIG ENOUGH BUSINESS TO
THREATEN TO LEAVE THE CITY AND
HAVE IT REALLY BE MEANINGFUL. IF
YOU TAX ME, THIS IS TOUGH, AND
SO, AND IF I WAS ONE EMPLOYER
AND I HAD $7 MILLION OF REVENUE
FOR ONE EMPLOYEE, YEAH, TAX THE
OUT OF ME. I DESERVE TO PAY THE
TAX BUT IT'S TOUGH WHEN WE ARE
IN THIS SITUATION SO I REALLY
HOPE THAT YOU REEVALUATE YOUR
TAX BASED ON THE NUMBER OF
EMPLOYEES, FOR THE RECORD.
THANKS.
THANK YOU, BLAKE PARKER UP
NEXT IS JASON FOLLOWED DENNIS
SILLS AND THEN FINISHES AIM.
GOOD EVENING -- GOOD MORNING,
JASON.
GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING,
COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME IS JASON
AUSTIN, DISTRICT 2 RESIDENT, AND
THE PROGRAM DIRECTOR WITH THE
MEALS PARTNERSHIP COALITION. I
AM HERE TODAY TO SPEAK IN FAVOR
OF THE SHIELD SEATTLE B AND O
TAX REFORM PROPOSAL. I WANT TO
THANK BOTH MAYOR HERRELL AND
COUNCIL MEMBER RINCK FOR
CHAMPIONING THIS AND URGE THE
FULL COUNCIL TO SUPPORT. THE
MEMBERS OF MPC ARE THE FRONT
LINE OF DEFENSE AGAINST HUNGER
IN SEATTLE. OUR 45 MEMBER
ORGANIZATIONS COLLECTIVELY
PRODUCE OVER 4 MILLION MEALS,
NUTRITIONALLY DENSE, CULTURALLY
UPLIFTING, READY TO EAT FOOD FOR
EVERYONE. OUR MEMBERS INCLUDE
PROGRAMS SUCH AS THE SOUTHEAST
SEATTLE SENIOR CENTER, STARTED
SPEAKING NON-ENGLISH ] FIRST
UNITED METHODIST CHURCH AND
CULTIVATES HEALTH PART. EVERY
SINGLE NEIGHBORHOOD IN SEATTLE
CONTAINS AT LEAST ONE MPC IN
MEMBER SUPPORTING EVERYONE IN
THE CITY. IN 2024 SEATTLE MEAL
PROGRAMS SO A DRAMATIC INCREASE
IN DEMAND FROM THE PREVIOUS
YEAR. PRELIMINARY DATA SUGGEST
THAT 2025 WILL SEE EVEN GREATER
NEED ACROSS THE CITY. WITH OUR
HUNGER RELIEF SYSTEM ALREADY
STRETCHED TO MAXIMUM CAPACITY,
ANY REDUCTIONS IN FUNDING WILL
PUT OUR CITY IN DANGER. TENS OF
THOUSANDS OF SEATTLEITES ARE
EXPECTED TO LOSE THEIR SNAPBACK
BENEFITS AS A RESULT OF THE
FEDERAL BUDGET. IF WE DO NOT
TAKE STEPS NOW TO DEFEND OUR
HUNGER RELIEF INFRASTRUCTURE,
OUR MEMBERS WILL BE OVERWHELMED
AND UNABLE TO RESPOND TO THE
DRAMATIC INCREASE IN NEED.
SHIELD SEATTLE IS A MEANINGFUL
INVESTMENT IN PUBLIC SAFETY AND
COMMUNITY WELL-BEING THAT WILL
HELP EVERYONE WHETHER THE
DIFFICULT YEARS THAT WE HAVE
AHEAD . AGAIN, I WANT TO THANK
THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER
RINCK FOR CHAMPIONING THIS
PROPOSAL ENTERS THE FULL COUNCIL
TO SUPPORT THIS BEAUTIFUL CITY.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU. UP NEXT IS DENNIS
SILLS FOLLOWED BY PHOENICIA ZANE
AND MARGARET [ INAUDIBLE ].
GOOD MORNING CHAIRMAN STRAUSS: GOOD MORNING CHAIRMAN STRAUSS
AND COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME IS
DENNIS SILLS, I WORK AT PUBLIC
HOUSING. WE PROVIDE PERMANENT
SUPPORT HOUSING TO MORE THAN
1300 FORMERLY HOMELESS ADULTS.
VERY GRATEFUL TO MAYOR HERRELL
AND COUNCILMEMBER MERCEDES RINCK
FOR WORKING ON THE B AND O TAX
REFORM. PLYMOUTH HOUSING
PROVIDES ON-SITE SERVICES
INCLUDING CASE MANAGEMENT AND
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT TO SUPPORT
THE NEEDS OF FORMERLY HOMELESS
RESIDENTS, INCLUDING MANY WITH
DISABILITIES. THESE SERVICES ARE
MADE POSSIBLE WITH SUPPORT FROM
MANY GOVERNMENT FUNDERS .
CHANGING CIRCUMSTANCES INCLUDE
INFLATION AND FEDERAL POLICIES
ARE ENDANGERING OUR ABILITY TO
CONTINUE TO SERVE RESIDENTS AT A
HIGH LEVEL. WE STRONGLY SUPPORT
SENDING A REVENUE PROPOSAL TO
THE VOTERS. THIS 90 MILLION
PROPOSAL IS A CRUCIAL FIRST STEP
BUT CANNOT BE AN ONLY STEP. WE
ARE GRAPPLING WITH A $240
MILLION STRUCTURAL BUDGET
DEFICIT AND WE ARE BRACING FOR
SIGNIFICANT FEDERAL CUTS THAT
WILL UNDOUBTEDLY EXACERBATE OUR
PROBLEM. TO TRULY SAFEGUARD OUR
COMMUNITY AND ENSURE ALL SEATTLE
RESIDENTS HAVE FOOD TO EAT AND A
SAFE PLACE TO SLEEP AT NIGHT,
THE COUNCIL MUST COMMIT TO
PASSING LONG-TERM ADDITIONAL
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE MEASURES IN
YEARS TO COME. THIS PROPOSAL IS
IMPERFECT BUT ADDRESSES THE
CHALLENGES HUMAN SERVICE
PROVIDERS ARE FACING NOW. WE
WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS PROPOSAL
PROVIDE DEDICATED SUPPORT TO THE
OFFICE OF HOUSING AND PROVIDERS
ACROSS THE CITY. WE ALSO WOULD
LIKE TO SEE THE PROPOSAL INCLUDE
A REMOVAL OF THE PROPOSED FOUR
YEAR SUNSET TO PROVIDE A MORE
STABLE FUNDING FOR SEATTLE'S
FUTURE. WE URGE YOU TO PASS THIS
PROPOSAL AND CONTINUE WORKING
TOWARDS PROGRESSIVE [ INAUDIBLE
]. THANK YOU.
NEXT IS PHOENICIA FOLLOWED BY: NEXT IS PHOENICIA FOLLOWED BY
MARTY AND WILLIE AND WE'LL
TRANSFER TO CALL IN, VIRTUAL
PUBLIC COMMENTERS, SO IF YOU ARE
CALLED IN YOU'VE GOT ABOUT SIX
MINUTES.
GOOD MORNING COUNCILMEMBERS: GOOD MORNING COUNCILMEMBERS.
MY NAME IS PHOENIX JOHN. I'M
THE POLICY SPECIALIST AT SOLID
GROUND. AND ALSO ONE OF THE
COCHAIRS OF THE BUDGET TASK
FORCE FOR SEATTLE SERVICES
COALITION AND WE'D LIKE TO
START OFF BY THANKING
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK AND THE
MAYOR FOR REDUCING THE STRUCTURE
OF THE B AND O TAX, WHICH
SIMULTANEOUSLY PROTECTS AGAINST
DEEP CUTS TO HOMELESSNESS AND
HUMAN SERVICES WHILE ALSO
PROVIDING SOME WAY TO ALLEVIATE
PRESSURE ON SMALL BUSINESSES. SO
I'M SURE MANY OF YOU HAVE HEARD
TIRELESSLY FROM ADVOCATES LIKE
US AND FROM SERVICE PROVIDERS
ABOUT A REAL NEED FOR THE CITY
TO IDENTIFY MORE REVENUE, AND
YOU ALL TODAY ARE GOING TO BE
BRIEFED ON ONE OF THOSE TOOLS.
AND YOU KNOW, LOTS OF FOLKS HAVE
TALKED ABOUT HOW THIS HAS NEVER
BEEN -- THE NEED HAS NEVER BEEN
MORE ACUTE WITH THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT'S DEFUNDING OF
MEDICAID, S.N.A.P. AND HOUSING
SERVICES. JUST SOME EXAMPLES
FROM SOLID GROUND ON SOME OF THE
SERVICES THAT THE CITY STANDS TO
LOSE WITH FEDERAL CUTS, INCLUDE
OUR RAPID REHOUSING PROGRAM. SO
SOLID GROUND RECEIVES CONTINUING
MONTHLY CARE DOLLARS FROM THE
HUD, WHICH HELPS HUNDREDS OF
FAMILIES AVOID HOMELESSNESS BY
GIVING THEM QUICKLY INTO
HOUSING, WITH MOVING COSTS,
HELPING PAY FOR SECURITY
DEPOSITS. ANOTHER PROGRAM AT
RISK IS OUR COMMUNITY FOOD
EDUCATION PROGRAM, WHICH HELPS
FOOD INSECURE YOUTH AND FAMILIES
ACROSS THE CITY GAIN SKILLS TO
COOK AND SHOP AND EAT ON LOW
BUDGETS, AND THEIR RECENT BUDGET
THAT THE CONGRESS JUST PASSED
INCLUDES A TOTAL ELIMINATION OF
THIS FUNDING SOURCE, WHICH IS
FUNDED THROUGH S.N.A.P.. AND
THIS FUNDING SOURCE IS ABOUT 30%
OF THIS PROGRAM 'S BUDGET. SO
JUST AS AN EXAMPLE OF SOME OF
THE REAL TANGIBLE CUTS THAT
COULD BE COMING OUR WAY TO
SERVICES IN OUR CITY, THIS
PROPOSAL IN FRONT OF YOU COULD
HELP SHIELD SERVICES LIKE THIS
AND GIVE A TAX BREAK TO ABOUT
90% OF SEATTLE BUSINESSES. SO
THIS IS A GOOD, CREATIVE POLICY,
AND WE REALLY ENCOURAGE YOU ALL
TO APPROVE IT TO VOTERS AND
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL REVENUE FOR
THE CITY TO PREVENT AGAINST
CUTS. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR
YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THANK YOU AND APOLOGIES FOR: THANK YOU AND APOLOGIES FOR
MISPRONOUNCING YOUR NAME. UP
NEXT IS MARTA AND WILLIE AND
THEN WE WILL TRANSFER ON TO
ONLINE PUBLIC COMMENTERS
STARTING WITH EMILY JOHNSON ON A
RAINY BANNEKER AND THEN CAROLYN
SANDERS LONDON.
MY NAME IS MARTA KHURANA AND: MY NAME IS MARTA KHURANA AND
I AND THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
EDITOR AT LOW INCOME HOUSING
MANAGEMENT OR LEHIGH. LEHIGH IS
A NONPROFIT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
AND TINY HOUSE VILLAGE PROVIDER
THAT SPECIALIZES IN CREATING
PATHWAYS TO STABLE HOUSING FOR
OUR UNFILTERED NEIGHBORS. I'M
HERE TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THE
CITY'S PROPOSED BUSINESS AND
OCCUPATION B AND O TAX TO
SUPPORT THE ADDITION OF
LONG-TERM AND TO SUPPORT THE
ADDITION OF LONG-TERM
PROGRESSIVE TAX REVENUE.
HOMELESSNESS IN SEATTLE IS AT A
CRISIS LEVEL WITH THOUSANDS OF
PEOPLE LIVING UNFILTERED. LAST
YEAR 359 HOMELESS PEOPLE IN
SEATTLE COUNTY DIED FROM
EXPOSURE, OVERDOSES, SUICIDE AND
VIOLENCE. LEHIGH WOULD LIKE TO
COMMEND THE CITY OF SEATTLE
COUNCIL FOR TAKING THIS STEP TO
INCREASE REVENUE FOR HOUSING,
SHELTER AND HUMAN SERVICES. THIS
TAX WILL BE PIVOTAL IN REDUCING
CUTS TO PROGRAMS IMPORTANT TO
THE SEATTLE COMMUNITY.
UNFORTUNATELY THIS TAX ALONE
WILL NOT RESOLVE SEATTLE'S $250
MILLION BUDGET DEFICIT IN
ADDITION TO THE FEDERAL CUTS TO
COME. WE NEED ADDITIONAL
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE TO PROTECT
COMMUNITY MEMBERS FROM AN
UNCERTAIN FUTURE. THE NUMBER OF
SHELTER BEDS AND TINY HOUSE
VILLAGES MUST BE EXPENDED TO
SUPPORT OUR COMMUNITY'S NEEDS.
FOOD BANKS, HOUSING PROVIDERS,
CLINICS, SHOP CARE PROVIDERS AND
HUMAN SERVICE PROVIDERS AS A
WHOLE ARE FACING HARSH FUNDING
LOSSES THAT WILL RICOCHET ACROSS
THE REGION. NEW PERMANENT
PROGRESSIVE REVENUE SOURCES ARE
REQUIRED TO SAVE LIVES. THIS IS
A FACT THAT MUST BE TAKEN
SERIOUSLY AS THE LACK OF
PREEMPTIVE PLANNING WILL LEAD TO
CATASTROPHIC OUTCOMES. IN
ALIGNMENT WITH OUR SEATTLE KING
COUNTY COALITION ON HOMELESSNESS
PARTNERS, WE ASK THAT THE
COUNCIL ELIMINATE THE FOUR YEAR
SUNSET ON THE B AND O TAX AND
SEND THIS PROPOSAL TO SEATTLE
VOTERS. THANK YOU TO THE COUNCIL
FOR LISTENING TO THE VOICES OF
COMMUNITY MEMBERS HERE TODAY AS
WE REPRESENT NOT ONLY OURSELVES
BUT THE MANY VULNERABLE
POPULATIONS UNABLE TO ADVOCATE
FOR THEMSELVES. WE ARE ALL IN
THIS TOGETHER. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MARTA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH MARTA.
NEXT IS LILY HAYWARD AND I SEE
YOU ALSO SIGNED UP ONLINE AS
WELL SO I'M GOING TO JUST
CANCEL THAT ONE.
I WANTED TO BOTH. JUST
GETTING.
TO COLLEAGUES PER PERSON: TO COLLEAGUES PER PERSON
ALTHOUGH I DID FORGET TO READ
THE RULES OF PUBLIC COMMENT THIS
MORNING BECAUSE I DID NOT TURN
THE PAGE. I'M GLAD TO SEE
EVERYONE IS ABIDING BY THE
RULES. OVER TO YOU, LILY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MORNING
CHAIR STRAUSS AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS LILY HAYWARD
AND I'M HERE SPEAKING ON BEHALF
OF THE 2500 MEMBERS OF THE
SEATTLE METRO CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE WITH CONCERNS ABOUT CD
101-2108. WHILE WE SUPPORT
INCREASING THE STANDARD
ATTENTION TO $2 MILLION IN
CREATING A STANDARD DEDUCTION,
THE CHAMBER HAS ADVOCATED FOR
THE SIMILAR RELIEF AND WE
BELIEVE IT IS ESSENTIAL TO KEEP
BUSINESSES OPEN, TO SPUR
DEVELOPMENT, AND TO FILL EMPTY
STOREFRONTS DOWNTOWN AND ACROSS
THE CITY. WE OPPOSE DOING SO,
HOWEVER, BY RAISING THE B AND O
TAX ON OTHER BUSINESSES. MANY
SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED
BUSINESSES WITH GROSS SALES OVER
THE PROPOSED EXEMPTION HAVE VERY
SMALL MARGINS AND INCREASING
TAXES ON THESE JOB CREATORS IS
SIMPLY A BAD POLICY IDEA. YOU
JUST HEARD FROM ONE OF THEM AND
ABOUT THE IMPACTS THAT THE MANY
CUMULATIVE TAXES THE CITY AND
STATE IMPOSES CAN HAVE ON A
SMALL BUSINESS HERE IN SEATTLE.
AND JUST A MONTH AGO YOU ALL
RECEIVED A PRESENTATION
DELIVERED BY THE CITY ITSELF IN
A JOINT MEETING WITH KING COUNTY
THAT LAID OUT THE FACTS.
REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT HAS
DECLINED, ESPECIALLY IN SEATTLE.
SEATTLE OFFICE VACANCY RATE IS
ONE OF THE HIGHEST IN THE U.S..
CONSUMER SPENDING HAS DECLINED
AND THERE ARE FEWER
INTERNATIONAL VISITORS EXPECTED
THIS YEAR. OF COURSE CHOICES
MADE BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
MAKE THESE CONDITIONS WORSE BUT
IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT
JUST LAST YEAR B AND O WAS DOWN
YEAR-OVER-YEAR. PET COLLECTIONS
WERE DOWN AND THESE CONDITIONS
HAPPEN WHEN THE ECONOMY WAS
RELATIVELY GOOD COMPARED TO
RIGHT NOW . AND NOT TO MENTION
THAT THIS PROPOSAL COMES AFTER
THE STATE LEGISLATURE JUST
INCREASES TAXES TO THE LARGEST
DEGREE IN OUR STATE'S HISTORY.
SO WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO GIVE
SMALL BUSINESSES THIS NEEDED
RELIEF RIGHT NOW. THEY USE FUND
BALANCE AND UNDER SPEND TO DO SO
RATHER THAN RAISING TAXES ON
SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED
EMPLOYERS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU, LILY. WE'LL NOW
TRANSFER TO ONLINE PUBLIC
COMMENTERS AND IF ANYONE WANTS
TO SIGN UP IN PERSON, THEY ARE
ABLE TO DO SO UNTIL THE END OF
THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. I
WILL READ THE IS JUST AS FOLKS
ARE ONLINE. THE PUBLIC COMMENT
PERIOD IS UP TO 20 MINUTES.
SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN THE
ORDER IN WHICH THEY REGISTERED
AND THEY WILL START WITH IN
PERSON NOW TO VIRTUAL. SPEAKERS
WILL HEAR A TIME WHEN 10 SECONDS
ARE LEFT OF THEIR TIME. SEEING
AS WE HAVE 8, POSSIBLY 9 MORE
SPEAKERS, WE WILL EXCEED THE
ALLOTTED 20 MINUTES. IF THERE'S
NO OBJECTION I WILL EXTEND
PUBLIC COMMENTS UNTIL WE HAVE
COMPLETED ALL SPEAKERS. HEARING
NO OBJECTION, WE'LL EXTEND
PUBLIC COMMENTS UNTIL WE HAVE
MOVED THROUGH ALL OF THE PUBLIC
COMMENT SPEAKERS. UP NEXT IS
EMILY JOHNSON FOLLOWED BY RANDY
BANNEKER, CAROLYN SANDERS
LUNDGREN, ENDER MOSS, WILL GRAY,
ALBERTO ALVAREZ, KATE RUBIN,
DAVID HAYNES. YOU ARE LAST TO BE
SIGNED UP AND YOU ARE NOT
PRESENT. CALL HIM NOW IF YOU'D
LIKE TO COMMENT. EMILY JOHNSON,
I SEE YOU ARE OFF MUTE. WHEN YOU
ARE READY WE'LL START THE
CLOCK. WELCOME.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. GOOD
MORNING COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME
IS EMILY JOHNSON AND I'M
PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF
DIRECTORS OF THE HUNGER
INTERVENTION PROGRAM, OR AS
IT'S KNOWN, TIP. I'M ALSO A
RESIDENT OF DISTRICT 4 POINT A
PROUD MEMBER OF THE MEALS
PARTNERSHIP COALITION AND I'M
HERE TODAY TO SPEAK AND PART
SUPPORT OF THE SEATTLE SHIELD
PROPOSAL. I WANT TO THANK MAYOR
HERRELL AND COUNCILMEMBER RINCK
FOR CHAMPIONING THIS
LEGISLATION. IT BUILDS COMMUNITY
CONNECTION BY SECURING MEALS IN
NORTH SEATTLE TO REMOVE
VULNERABLE NEIGHBORS, LOW-INCOME
SENIORS, PEOPLE EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS AND FAMILIES WITH
CHILDREN. LAST YEAR ALONE HAVE
SERVED MORE THAN 190,000 MEALS.
I'D LIKE TO SHARE A QUICK
SNAPSHOT OF OUR SENIOR MEALS
PROGRAM WHICH OPERATES THREE
DAYS A WEEK. WE SERVED MORE THAN
30,000 MEALS IN THIS PROGRAM
LAST YEAR AND I ENCOURAGE YOU TO
IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY, YOU'LL
SEE CONVERSATION AND CONNECTION
AND FOR MANY OF THESE SENIORS
THIS LUNCH IS THE HEALTHIEST
MEAL THAT THEY'LL EAT ALL DAY
AND OFTEN THE ONLY OPPORTUNITY
TO ACCESS VITAL SOCIAL SERVICES.
GO AS JASON MENTIONED EARLIER,
MOST OF OUR FUNDS RELY ON
FEDERAL PROGRAMS LIKE S.N.A.P.
AND MEDICARE TO SURVIVE. WITH
RECENT CUTS TO S.N.A.P. AND JUST
TO PUBLIC HEALTHCARE WE ARE
ALREADY SEEING MORE SENIORS COME
TO OUR DOORS WHILE OUR BUDGET IS
BEING STRETCHED TO THE LIMIT TO
FILL THE NEED. THE RECENT
UNCERTAINTY AND CUTS OF THE
FEDERAL AMERICORPS PROGRAM
RESUMING ONLY MADE IT HARDER TO
CONTINUE TO RUN THOSE PROGRAMS
AND WHILE CITY OF SEATTLE
FUNDING IS JUST ONE PART OF OUR
BUDGET, IT'S ABSOLUTELY
CRITICAL. THE SHIELD SEATTLE
PROGRAM PROPOSAL WOULD PROVIDE A
PROGRESSIVE AND STABLE REVENUE
STREAM THAT ALLOWS PROGRAMS LIKE
HOURS TO RESPOND TO GROWING
NEEDS IN OUR COMMUNITY WITHOUT
TURNING PEOPLE AWAY. THIS IS A
SMART INVESTMENT IN COMMUNITY
WELL-BEING AND PUBLIC SAFETY AND
I URGE THE FULL COUNCIL TO SEND
THE SEATTLE VOTERS. LET'S MEET
THIS CHALLENGING MOMENT WITH THE
COMPASSIONATE LEADERSHIP IT A
MAN'S. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU. UP NEXT IS --
RANDY BANNEKER FOLLOWED BY
CAROLYN SANDERS LUNDGREN AND
THEN ENDER MOSS. RANDY, I SEE
YOU'RE OFF. TAKE IT AWAY. WE'LL
START THE CLOCK WHEN YOU START
TALKING.
VICE CHAIR RIVERA, MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE, THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITIES COMMENTS. I'M
RANDY BANNEKER ON BEHALF OF THE
SEATTLE KING COUNTY REALTORS. IN
PLACING THE B AND O TAX
THRESHOLD TO $2 MILLION IT'S A
GREAT IDEA. IT CAN AND SHOULD BE
DOWN WITHOUT THE PROPOSED 54%
INCREASE TO B AND O TAX RATES ON
BUSINESSES WITH REVENUE ABOVE $2
MILLION. YOU CAN FUND IT WITH
THE CITY'S GROWING PAYROLL
EXPENSE TAX CASH BALANCE OR
THROUGH THE NORMAL BUDGETING
PROCESS. REMEMBER THE B AND O IS
A TAX ON GROSS REVENUE, NOT
PROFIT. GROCERY AND RESTAURANTS
ARE PRIME EXAMPLES OF BUSINESSES
WITH HIGH GROSS AND LOW PROFIT
AFTER CERTAIN LABOR COSTS HAVE
BEEN PAID. A GOOD RULE OF THUMB
FOR ANYTHING, YOU WANT LESS OF,
IS TO TAX IT. GROCERY AND
RESTAURANTS ARE KEY TO
SEATTLE'S HIGH QUALITY OF LIFE.
WE DON'T WANT LESS OF THEM. AS
THE COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF MEMO
POINTS OUT, THERE'S BEEN A
BARRAGE OF NEW TAXES THAT
ALREADY ROBUSTLY FUND THE GOALS
OF THIS B AND O TAX INCREASE.
THE PAYROLL IT'S BEEN STACKS OF
2020, THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX
INCREASE OF 2023, THE SOCIAL
HOUSING TAX OF 2024 POINT IN
ADDITION, VOTERS HAVE GENEROUSLY
APPROVED MAJOR INCREASES IN THE
HOUSING LEVY RENEWAL . IT GREW
234% TO NEARLY $1 BILLION. THE
TRANSPORTATION LEVY RENEWAL GREW
67%, $1.55 BILLION AND THE
PROPOSED FAMILIES AND EDUCATION
LEVY RENEWAL IS GROWING 110% TO
$1.3 BILLION. THERE IS NOT A
REVENUE PROBLEM HERE. THERE IS A
PROBLEM IN THE CONFRONTATIONAL
MESSAGE WE ARE SENDING TO
BUSINESS AT A TIME WHEN THE
CITY'S OWN FORECAST OFFICE RUNS
A 40% TO 50% CHANCE OF A
NATIONAL RECESSION IN THE NEXT
12 MONTHS. THE ECONOMY IS
FRAGILE. BUSINESSES CAN MOVE OUT
OF A BAD BUSINESS CLIMATE. LOOK
AT AMAZON'S DEPARTURE FROM
SEATTLE TO BELLEVUE. MANY OF OUR
MEMBER REAL ESTATE FIRMS WILL BE
HIT BY THIS 54% TAX INCREASE AND
ALL OF OUR AND MEMBERS RELY ON
THE HEALTHY BUSINESS CLIMATE
WITH A STRONG JOB BASE AND
PLENTIFUL EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITIES. DON'T MOVE THIS
MEASURE TO THE BALLOT BUT STOP
GIVING BUSINESSES A REASON TO
LEAVE SEATTLE.
THANK YOU, RANDY. UP NEXT IS
CAROLYN FOLLOWED BY ENDER, THEN
LAUREL GRAY, AND FOR ANYONE
WHO'S JOINED US, IF YOU'D LIKE
TO SIGN UP YOU CAN SIGN UP UNTIL
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS CLOSED.
CAROLYN, I SEE YOU ARE HERE.
STAR SIX TO UNMUTE. THERE YOU
ARE. TAKE IT AWAY WHEN YOU'RE
READY.
GOOD MORNING COUNCILMEMBERS: GOOD MORNING COUNCILMEMBERS.
FOR THE RECORD MY NAME IS
CAROLYN SANDERS LUNDGREN. I'M
CALLING IN ON BEHALF OF [
INAUDIBLE ] ACTION IN SUPPORT OF
THE SHIELD SEATTLE PROPOSAL. AT
PDA WE PROVIDE PUBLIC HEALTH
SOLUTIONS TO PUBLIC SAFETY
CHALLENGES. THOSE CHALLENGES ARE
GROWING, YES IN SEATTLE, BUT
ALSO CITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY
AND WHAT'S MORE, THEY ARE NOW
COMPOUNDED BY A NEW PUBLIC
SAFETY THREAT, WHICH IS A
FEDERAL RECONCILIATION BILL THAT
BY DESIGN PUTS HEALTH AND
SECURITY FURTHER OUT OF REACH
FOR EVERY SINGLE MEMBER OF OUR
COMMUNITY. THIS WILL BE
STABILIZED. OUR HEALTH AND
SAFETY ECOSYSTEM. EVERY MEMBER
OF OUR COMMUNITY WILL FEEL THE
EFFECTS OF THIS AND SO AGAINST
THAT BACKGROUND WE COMMEND
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK AND THE
EXECUTIVE FOR TAKING WHAT I'M
SURE FEELS LIKE A DIFFICULT
ACTION, BUT IT'S ALSO ONE THAT
WE CANNOT AFFORD TO DELAY WITH
THE PROPOSED RESTRUCTURING OF
OUR B AND O TAX. THIS IS A
SIGNIFICANT FIRST STEP AND WE
LOOK FORWARD TO COUNCIL SENDING
THIS PROPOSAL TO THE VOTERS. I
DO ALSO WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO
SAY THAT SMALL BUSINESSES ARE
SOME OF THE GREATEST CHAMPIONS
OF PDA'S WORK. THERE
MISSION-CRITICAL PARTNERS IN
ADVANCING PUBLIC SAFETY AND SO
WE APPRECIATE AND RECORD HIGHS
THE CHAIR THAT YOU'VE TAKEN AND
WILL NO DOUBT CONTINUE TO TAKE
IN A WAY THAT IS NOT [ INAUDIBLE
] FUNDUS LIKE I REALLY
APPRECIATE THE SMALL BUSINESSES
TAKING THEIR TIME TO SHOW UP
TODAY AND SHARE THEIR
PERSPECTIVE ON THIS. IN TERMS OF
IMPLEMENTATION, IT IS INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT THAT WE GET THIS
RIGHT. WE HAVE TO USE THESE
FUNDS TO BUOY HUMAN SERVICE
INVESTMENTS THAT ARE
EVIDENCE-BASED, THAT ARE
STRATEGIC, THAT ARE POSITIONED
FOR COLLECTIVE IMPACT. AT THE
END OF THE DAY THIS IS ABOUT THE
FRAYING OF OUR SOCIAL SAFETY NET
AND OUR SOCIAL FABRIC AND HIS
COUNCIL HAS RECOGNIZED THAT WE
HAVE A DUTY TO REPAIR , SO WE
LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU
ON THAT AT PDA. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. UP NEXT IS ENDER
MOSS FOLLOWED BY LAUREL GRAY AND
ALBERTO ALVAREZ. DAVID HAYNES,
YOU ARE STILL NOT PRESENT.
YOU'VE GOT ABOUT 8 TO 10
MINUTES UNTIL WE CALL ON YOU.
ENDER, I SEE YOU ARE HERE. STAR
SIX TO UNMUTE. I SEE YOU'RE OFF
MUTE. TAKE IT AWAY WHEN YOU'RE
READY.
HELLO COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME
IS ENDER. IMA HOMELESSNESS AND
FOSTER CARE ADVOCATE AND I'VE
BEEN FOR ABOUT THREE YEARS NOW.
I USED TO BE HOMELESS FOR ALMOST
4 YEARS. I AM 22 YEARS OLD. AS
MOST PEOPLE HERE ARE AWARE,
THERE ARE A LOT OF BUDGET CUTS
THAT ARE GOING TO BE TAKING
PLACE THAT WILL SEVERELY IMPACT
ALL WORKING-CLASS AND LOW INCOME
PEOPLE ACROSS THE UNITED STATES.
SERVICES FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE IN
EMERGENCIES LIKE HOMELESSNESS OR
TRYING TO PREVENT THEMSELVES
BECOMING HOMELESS ARE GOING TO
NOT ONLY NEED GREAT RELIEF AND
CAPACITY BUT NUMBERS AS MANY
RESOURCES WILL BE LOST THAT ARE
NEEDED FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE TO
LITERALLY SURVIVE. I'M
DEFINITELY IN THE BELIEF THAT
THE FOUR-YEAR SUNSET SHOULD BE
EXTENDED IF NOT ELIMINATED TO
SECURE A FUTURE FOR EVERYONE TO
HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE SURE
THAT OUR CURRENTLY BARELY
FEDERALLY FUNDED RESOURCES ARE
ABLE TO BE USED. THAT $90
MILLION IS ESTIMATED TO BE
RAISED BY THIS TAX WOULD NOT BE
ENOUGH TO PREVENT ALL OF THE
EFFECTS FROM SEATTLE'S $250
MILLION STRUCTURAL BUDGET
DEFICIT FOR THE LOSS IN FEDERAL
CUTS BUT WOULD AT LEAST HELP TO
ATTEMPT TO KEEP AS MANY OF THESE
PROGRAMS RUNNING AND HELPING
HUGE AMOUNTS OF PEOPLE, BOTH
HOMELESS AND NOT, THAT NEED THEM
DESPERATELY. THIS BILL WOULD NOT
SEVERELY AFFECT SMALL BUSINESSES
WHO NEED THEIR FUNDING TO STAY
AFLOAT AND WOULD ONLY BE A BLIP
ON THE ALREADY VERY LARGE RADARS
OF CORPORATIONS THAT NOT ONLY DO
NOT BUT WOULD NOT NEED THAT
MONEY TO BE PROFITABLE
BUSINESSES, AND ANYONE WHO IS
WORKING CLASS THAT SAYS
OTHERWISE SHOULD QUESTION WHO
THAT MONEY WOULD BE GOING TO,
BECAUSE I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT IS
NOT CURRENTLY GOING TO THE
WORKING CLASS AMERICANS IN THESE
PAYCHECKS FROM THESE
INDIVIDUALS. THANKS, YOU ALL.
THANK YOU. UP NEXT IS LAUREL
GRAY FOLLOWED BY ALBERTO ALVAREZ
AND KATE RUBIN. DAVID HAYNES,
YOU ARE STILL NOT PRESENT.
LAUREL, WELCOME. WE SEE YOU'RE
OFF MUTE. WHEN YOU'RE READY
WE'LL START THE CLOCK. WELCOME.
GOOD MORNING MEMBERS OF THE: GOOD MORNING MEMBERS OF THE
COUNCIL. MY NAME IS LAUREL GRAY,
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LSL SERVICES
TO DISTRICT 5 RESIDENTS. I'M
HERE TODAY TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF
THE B AND O TAX REFORM PROPOSAL
AND I WANT TO THANK MAYOR
HARRELL AND COUNCILMEMBER RINCK
FOR THEIR LEADERSHIP ENTERS THE
FULL COUNCIL TO SUPPORT. WE
PREPARE AND DELIVER NUTRIENT
DENSE, CULTURALLY AND MEDICALLY
INFORMED MEALS AT NO COSTS TO
INDIVIDUALS NEED ACROSS THE CITY
OF SEATTLE AND BEYOND. OUR
MURALS SUPPORT 59 PROGRAMS
INCLUDING SHELTERS, PERMANENT
HOUSING, YOUTH SERVICES,
VETERANS PROGRAMS, SENIOR
PROGRAMS, CITY SANCTIONED
ENCAMPMENTS AND MORE. OUR FOOD
IMMERSION PROGRAM, WE RESCUED
AND REDISTRIBUTED NEARLY 1
MILLION POUNDS OF FOOD IN 2024,
THROUGH THE WOULD'VE OTHERWISE
GONE DIRECTLY INTO THE WASTE
STREAM. THIS INCLUDES 220,000
POUNDS OF RECOVERED FOOD AND
554,000 POUNDS OF DONATED FOOD.
VALUED CONSERVATIVELY AT $3.9
MILLION. DISTRIBUTED 749,000
POUNDS OF THIS FOOD TO LOCAL
ORGANIZATIONS INCLUDING MEAL
PROVIDERS, FOOD BANK AND HUMAN
SERVICES AGENCIES. FOOD IN
MOTION IS PARTIALLY FUNDED FOR
HOUR-LONG STANDING CONTRACT WITH
THE CITY OF SEATTLE . IF THIS
PROPOSAL FAILS AND WE LOSE THIS
FUNDING WE FACE DEEP CUTS TO OUR
PROGRAM INCLUDING RESTRICTIONS
IN OUR 17 VEHICLE FLEET OF FOOD
RECOVERY OPERATIONS HAVING FEWER
MEALS FOR OUR MOST VULNERABLE
NEIGHBORS AND MORE FOOD ENDING
UP IN LANDFILLS. WHILE SITTING
FUNDING DOES NOT MAKE UP OUR
BUDGET IT IS CRITICAL TO SUSTAIN
OUR WORK. HUNGER RELIEF IS
PUBLIC SAFETY. I'LL SAY IT
AGAIN. HUNGER RELIEF IS PUBLIC
SAFETY. A MEANINGFUL INVESTMENT
IN THE WELL-BEING OF OUR
COMMUNITIES FOR THE FUTURE OF
OUR CITY. AGAIN I THANK MAYOR
HARRELL AND COUNCILMEMBER RINCK
FOR THEIR LEADERSHIP ON THIS
ISSUE AND I STRONGLY URGE THE
FULL COUNCIL TO SUPPORT THIS
APPRAISAL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
THANK YOU LAUREL. UP NEXT IS
ALBERTO ALVAREZ FOLLOWED BY KATE
RUBIN, MARISSA PEREZ HAS ALSO
SIGNED UP REMOTELY BUT YOU HAVE
NOT LOGGED IN YET. ALBERTO, I
SEE YOU'RE OFF MUTE. TAKE IT
AWAY WHEN YOU'RE READY,
WELCOME.
THANK YOU, OUR CITY IS A
TOP-FIVE GLOBAL ECONOMIC
POWERHOUSE. THE THREAT OF BIG
COMPANIES CLOSING SOUNDS MORE
LIKE A HOSTAGE SITUATION THAT
THEY USE TO BLEED OUR COMMUNITY
MORE THAN THEY ALREADY DO. CALL
THEIR BLUFF. THEY KNOW THEY NEED
OUR WORKERS, OUR FAMILIES
SPENDING TO KEEP THEIR
SHAREHOLDERS HAPPY.
COUNCILMEMBERS MENTIONED SAFEWAY
STORES MIGHT RUN THE RISK OF
CLOSING DOWN. THEIR PARENT
COMPANY KROGER HAS A STOCK THAT
WENT UP 15% THIS YEAR AND OVER
90, THAT'S 90% SINCE THE
PANDEMIC. THEY UNDERPAY AND
OVERWORK THEIR STAFF, MAKING THE
REST OF US DO THE WORK OF
CHECKING OUT. THERE SLIM MARGINS
ARE SELF-INFLICTED IT. BIG
COMPANIES ALREADY GET MANY TAX
BREAKS, WHICH THEY USE TO PAY
SHAREHOLDERS WITH STOCK BUYBACKS
AND DIVIDENDS. INSTEAD OF MORE
MONEY BEING SIPHONED OFF TO
COMPANIES LIKE KROGER, THE BIG
COMPANY TAX CAN MAKE SURE OUR
DOLLARS REINFORCE OUR NEEDS AND
SERVICES, NOT SHAREHOLDERS. GO
VOTE YES ON SHIELD TO DEFEND OUR
CITY. THANK YOU AND HAVE A GOOD
DAY.
THANK YOU. UP NEXT IS KATE
RUBIN, DAVID HAYNES, MARISSA
PEREZ, YOU ARE NOT PRESENT
REMOTELY. WE WILL MOVE BACK INTO
THE LAST PHYSICAL PUBLIC
COMMENTOR. I SEE KATE, YOU ARE
OFF MUTE SO TAKE IT AWAY WHEN
YOU'RE READY. DAVID AND
MARISSA, PLEASE CALL IN NOW.
MY NAME IS KATE RUBIN AND: MY NAME IS KATE RUBIN AND
I'M THE COEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
[ INAUDIBLE ] SEATTLE , [
INAUDIBLE ]. THANK YOU TO
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK AND [
INAUDIBLE ] FOR BRINGING FORWARD
THE SEATTLE SHIELD PROPOSAL.
IT'S A WELCOME CHANGE . I ALSO
WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT
RAISING $90 MILLION, NEARLY A
THIRD OF THE CITY $251 MILLION
SHORTFALL, IS NOT ENOUGH. THE
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION AND [
INAUDIBLE ] ARE PULLING FUNDING
FOR CRITICAL PROGRAMS IN THE
CITY BUDGET DECISION WILL
DETERMINE WHO CARRIES THE
BURDEN. OUR COMMUNITIES ARE
ALREADY HURTING AND WHEN IT
COMES TO IMPORTANT PROGRAMS
DURING LAST YEAR'S BUDGET
PROCESS LIKE A 40% CUT TO THE
SERVICES GRANT, APRIL 2025
ADDICTION FILINGS, 112 FILINGS
PER MONTH, UP FROM 385. WE
CANNOT AFFORD TO TAKE MONEY FROM
OUR OTHER PROGRAMS OR DRAIN [
INAUDIBLE ] WHEN THE FUNDS NEED
TO BE GOING TO AFFORDABLE
HOUSING. YOU HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THIS MUCH
STRONGER, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE
FACT THAT IT'S ONLY FOUR YEARS
FROM NOW. THINGS CAN CHANGE IF
IT'S NOT WORKING IN THE WAY YOU
ENVISIONED . SEATTLE SHIELD
SHOULD BE PASSED AND THE FUNDS
SHOULD NOT BE DIVERTED FOR ANY
OTHER USES. THAT IS NOT GOING TO
SAVE US FROM USING PUBLIC
PROGRAMS THAT OUR COMMUNITIES
NEED TO. HELPING US WITH URGENCY
TO CLOSE THE FULL DEFICIT AT THE
STATE LEVEL AND ENSURE THAT
SEATTLEITES ARE PROTECTED FROM
HARM AT THE FEDERAL HOUSING. WE
NEED A PERMANENT PROGRESSIVE
REVENUE STREAM THAT ENSURES THAT
RESOURCES GO TO THE NEEDS OF THE
PEOPLE, HOUSING, FOOD, PUBLIC
HEALTH AND COMMUNITY CARE.
FUNDING FOR BENEFITS MANDATORY
AND ADDRESSED WITH URGENCY.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. MARISSA, I SEE
THAT YOU HAVE CALLED IN SO WE
ARE GOING TO GO WITH YOU AND
THEN THE FINAL PUBLIC COMMENTOR
IN PERSON AND THEN DAVID HAYNES,
IF YOU CALL IN YOU'LL BE UP
NEXT. MARISSA, AS YOU'RE BEING
PROMOTED YOU'LL PRESS STAR SIX
AND WE'LL START THE CLOCK WHEN
YOU'RE READY. I SEE YOU HAVE
NOT PRESSED STAR SIX YET,
MARISSA. WILL HOLD ON, MARISSA.
YOU CAN LEVERING THE
PRESENTATION. IF WE CAN HAVE THE
FINAL PUBLIC COMMENTOR COME ON
UP. I SAW YOU REGISTERED BUT I
DON'T HAVE --
HELLO: HELLO.
MARISSA, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE
YOU GIVE PUBLIC COMMENT NOW SO
WHEN YOU START TALKING WE'LL
STOP .
I'M SO SORRY. OKAY. I AM SO
SORRY. I'M STRUGGLING WITH
BUTTONS THIS MORNING. GOOD
MORNING CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS
MARISSA PEREZ . THANK YOU FOR
HAVING US. I AM THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE SEATTLE HUMAN
SERVICES COALITION. WE ARE
STRONGLY IN SUPPORT OF THE
PROPOSED RESTRUCTURE OF THE
BUSINESS AND OCCUPATION TAX.
THIS PROPOSAL IS A REALLY
IMPORTANT STEP TOWARDS
ADDRESSING THE REGRESSIVE TAX
WHILE ALSO CARRYING REVENUES AND
SUPPORT ESSENTIAL COMMUNITY
NEEDS, ADJUST HUMAN SERVICES.
SEATTLE OR WASHINGTON HAS NO
INCOME TAX, WHICH MAKES IT
ESSENTIALLY A HAVEN FOR A LOT OF
LARGE BUSINESSES WHO ARE OFTEN
NOT PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE IN
TAXES. THIS MEANS THEY CAN TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF OUR BEAUTIFUL CITY
WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY IGNORING
THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY THEY
OPERATE IN. I WANT TO BE CLEAR
THAT THIS WHAT I'M TALKING
ABOUT DOES NOT APPLY TO OUR
SMALL BUSINESS PARTNERS WHO HAVE
LINED UP IN SUPPORT OF THIS
EFFORT TO REDUCE THEIR TAX
BURDEN WHILE AT THE SAME TIME
ASSISTING THE NEIGHBORS THAT
THEY LIVE AND SURROUNDED BY. OUR
COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE STRUGGLING
RIGHT NOW TO PUT FOOD ON THE
TABLE AND WE ARE BEING TARGETED.
OUR AGENCIES ARE BEING TARGETED
BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
BECAUSE WE REFUSED TO BOW TO THE
GUIDRY AND HATE. HUMAN SERVICE
FUNDING IS DESPERATELY NEEDED AT
THIS POINT IN TIME AND YOU KNOW
WE ARE LOOKING AT A $250
MILLION, $260 MILLION BUDGET
DEFICIT IN THE CITY OF SEATTLE,
WHICH MEANS THAT OUR HUMAN
SERVICES AGENCIES ARE FACING
LOSING NOT ONLY FEDERAL FUNDING,
NOT ONLY STATE FUNDING BUT CITY
FUNDING AS WELL. THIS WILL BE
DEVASTATING TO THOSE COMMUNITY
MEMBERS THAT DESPERATELY NEED
THE SERVICES THAT OUR AGENCIES
PROVIDE. I ASK YOU TO PLEASE
CONSIDER ASKING THE VOTERS WHAT
THEY BELIEVE AND WHERE THEIR
VALUES LIE AND SENDING THIS
PROPOSAL TO THE BALLOT. THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU: THANK YOU.
AND YOUR PARTNERSHIP ON THIS: AND YOUR PARTNERSHIP ON THIS
EFFORT.
THANK YOU. WE ARE GOING TO GO
WITH DAVID HAYNES, JUST SINCE
THEY ARE HERE, READY TO GO.
DAVID, STAR SIX TO UNMUTE.
YOU'VE GOT TO MINUTES. WE'LL
START THE CLOCK WHEN YOU START
TALKING. WELCOME.
THANK YOU, DAVID HAYNES. IT
WOULDN'T BE SUCH AN ECONOMIC
AND BUDGET CRISIS OF DEBT IF THE
DEMOCRATS DIDN'T EXEMPT DRUG
PUSHERS FROM JAIL, THEN
PRIORITIZE REPEAT OFFENDERS FOR
HOUSING AND SERVICES BEFORE
INNOCENT HOMELESS THAT ARE
RACIST WE DISCRIMINATED AN
SUBHUMAN LEAD TREATED, BUT WE
SEE THE SAME BAD SPENDING
PRIORITIES THAT HAVE EXACERBATED
THE CRISIS ON THIS AGENDA TODAY
WITH THE AMENDMENTS TAKEN FROM
THE JAIL TO EXEMPT MORE
CRIMINALS FROM JAIL HIDING
BEHIND DRUG ADDICTION WITHOUT
NONPROFIT BEST PRACTICES
EMBRACING THEIR ADDICTION
BECAUSE THERE'S A MORE
PROFITABLE WRAP AROUND SERVICE
CONNECTED TO UNQUALIFIED
NONPROFITS THAT DONATE AND
SUPPORT ELECTIONS. WE WILL SEE
THE SAME BOGUS, FRAUDULENT,
RACIST GUN VIOLENCE LIKE
COMMUNITY SAFETY LINING THEIR
POCKETS WITH MORE TAX MONEY, AND
THEY ARE SOMEWHAT SUSPECT IN
THEIR EFFORTS TO BOW DOWN TO
DRUG PUSHERS. ANYWAY, WE NEED A
DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT
EFFICIENCY APPLIED TO THE
SEATTLE BUDGET BECAUSE IT LOOKS
LIKE THE EXECUTIVE IS REPEATING
THE HISTORY OF PULLING THE WOOL
OVER THE EYES OF LAST YEAR'S
COUNCIL 'S IN THE SAME LESS
THAN TRANSPARENT STORYTELLING
CENTRAL STAFF TO PASS THE SAME
BAD SPENDING PRIORITIES THAT
ORIGINATED FROM THE FUNDING OF
POLICE, SHIFTING A PARADIGM AWAY
FROM IMPROVING THE WAR ON DRUGS,
AND CREATING BAD SPENDING
PRIORITIES THAT EXEMPT CRIMINALS
FROM JAIL, EVEN HOUSING AND
SERVICES FIRST USING HOMELESS
CRISIS MONEY WHILE RACIST ROGUE
SOCIAL ENGINEERING RACIAL TOOL
EQUITIES ARE [ INAUDIBLE ]
EXPERIENCE ARE APPLYING A RACIST
SKIN COLOR DISCRIMINATION
AGAINST INNOCENT WHITE HOMELESS
WHO ARE PURPOSELY BEING DENIED A
PROPER INTERPRETATION OF SHELTER
AND CAPACITY, BUT YET WE HAVE
THESE RACIST ON THE AGENDA WHERE
THEY WANT TO MANIPULATE THE SKIN
COLORS AS TO HELPED AND WHO'S
NOT IN JAIL ANYMORE. EITHER WAY,
WE NEED TO STOP THE BAD SPENDING
PRIORITIES AND PURGE THE RACIST
[ INAUDIBLE ]
THANK YOU, DAVID. OUR FINAL
PUBLIC COMMENTOR TODAY IS
AMARANTH A TAURUS. WELCOME AND
THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE FIRST
AGENDA ITEM. ONCE SHE'S DONE
TALKING THAN THE FIRST
PRESENTATION CAN COME ON UP.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. IS THIS
ON? THANK YOU SO MUCH. GOOD
MORNING COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME
IS AMARANTH VIATOR IS. I'M THE
COEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE
COALITION OF NATALIE AND WE
SUPPORT OVER 35 COMMUNITY-BASED
ORGANIZATIONS WORKING TOWARDS AN
END TO GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE
SUCH AS SEXUAL ASSAULT,
TRAFFICKING AND VIOLENCE. CB
102028 RELATING TO THE
RESTRUCTURING OF THE AND O TAX.
WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS
ORDINANCE BECAUSE AT THE FEDERAL
LEVEL ABUSES OF POWER ARE REALLY
FORCING LOCAL GENDER-BASED
VIOLENCE PROGRAMS TO MAKE IT
IMPOSSIBLE CHOICE TO DENY
LIFESAVING SERVICES TO
IMMIGRANTS AND LGBTQ SURVIVORS
OR LOSE THEIR FUNDING. THIS
BINARY CHOICE ISN'T REALLY A
CHOICE AT ALL AND IT'S AN
AFFRONT TO THE CORE VALUES OF
OUR FIELD, AND IT'S A RISK TO
ALL THE GAINS THAT WE HAVE MADE
IN OUR SECTOR OVER THE LAST MANY
DECADES. THIS ORDINANCE IS A
STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION
TOWARDS FAIR, EQUITABLE, AND
MUCH-NEEDED LOCAL REVENUE TO
PROTECT OUR VALUES AND ENSURE
THAT PROGRAMS CAN KEEP THEIR
DOORS OPEN TO ALL SURVIVORS IN
OUR CITY AS THEY SEEK SAFETY,
DIGNITY, AND SELF-DETERMINATION
FROM THE IMPACTS OF ABUSE. THANK
YOU TO COUNCILMEMBER RINCK AND
MAYOR HARRELL FOR THEIR
LEADERSHIP ON THIS PROPOSAL. I
URGE THE FULL COUNCIL TO SUPPORT
THIS ORDINANCE AND THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR THE TIME TO SPEAK .
THANK YOU. SOON AS WE HAVE NO
ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS PHYSICALLY
OR REMOTELY PRESENT, WE WILL
MOVE ON TO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM.
FOLKS WELCOME TO COME ON UP TO
THE DAIS. WILL THE CLERK THESE
READ THE SHORT TITLE OF ITEM
NUMBER ONE INTO THE RECORD?
MENTIONED ITEM 1, COUNCIL
BILL 1210 28, RELATING TO
BUSINESS OCCUPATION TAX SPECIAL
ELECTION WITH NOVEMBER 4th, 2025
GENERAL ELECTION FOR SUBMISSION
TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF THE
CITY, PROPOSITION TO LIFT THE
LIMIT ON BUSINESSES AND
OCCUPATION TAX FOR BRIEFING AND
DISCUSSION.
THANK YOU. THIS IS THE SECOND
TIME THAT WE'VE HAD THIS ITEM
IN COMMITTEE. WE DID HAVE IT IN
THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND TRIBAL
GOVERNMENTS COMMITTEE, WHICH IS
A SMALLER SUBSET OF THIS FULL
SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE. SO
WE'LL START -- WE'RE JOINED
TODAY BY DEPUTY MAYOR GREG LONG,
CBO DIRECTOR DAN EDER AND TOM
MIKESELL AND JENNIFER LABRECQUE
OF COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF AS WELL
AS THE DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL
STAFF. WE'LL START WITH JUST
SOME OPENING REMARKS FROM
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK AND THEN
DEPUTY MAYOR WONG. SINCE WE'VE
HAD THESE PRESENTATIONS IN
COMMITTEE BUT NOT THIS FULL
COMMITTEE, WE WILL HAVE TOM
MIKESELL AND JENNIFER LABRECQUE
WALK US THROUGH THEIR
PRESENTATION AND DEPUTY MAYOR,
IF THERE'S TIME AS WELL WE CAN
GO BACK TO THE PRESENTATION THAT
YOU PROVIDED AT THE LAST
COMMITTEE MEETING. WITH THAT
I'LL TURN IT OVER TO
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK FOR SOME
OPENING REMARKS OF HER BILL.
THANK YOU CHAIR STRAUSS AND: THANK YOU CHAIR STRAUSS AND
THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR BEING
HERE TODAY. COLLEAGUES, I KNOW A
NUMBER OF YOU HAVE HEARD THIS
PRESENTATION BEFORE, SO I THANK
YOU AGAIN FOR TAKING THE TIME
AND CONSIDERING THIS PROPOSAL.
FUNDAMENTALLY THIS PROPOSAL IS
ABOUT GIVING SEATTLE VOTERS THE
CHOICE THEY DESERVE ABOUT OUR
CITY'S FUTURE. THE SEATTLE
SHIELD INITIATIVE IS MORE THAN
JUST A POLICY PROPOSAL. IT'S
OUR RESPONSE TO AN UNPRECEDENTED
CHALLENGE, AND WHILE OUR CITY
FACES A BUDGET DEFICIT AND
FEDERAL CUTS THAT THREATEN THE
SERVICES SO MANY OF OUR
RESIDENTS DEPEND ON, WE HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO LEAD WITH VALUES
THAT MAKE SEATTLE WHO WE ARE.
AND THE SEATTLE SHIELD
INITIATIVE REFLECTS THREE CORE
PRINCIPLES I BELIEVE WE ALL
SHARE. THE FIRST IS THAT SMALL
BUSINESSES ARE THE BACKBONE OF
OUR LOCAL ECONOMY, AND THIS
LEGISLATION PROVIDES IMMEDIATE
TAX RELIEF FOR BUSINESSES WITH A
BREAKEVEN POINT OF $5.7 MILLION
IN GROSS RECEIPTS, MEANING THAT
90% OF SEATTLE BUSINESSES WILL
PAY LESS IN TAXES. WHILE WE ARE
ASKING FOR THE TOP 10% OF
BUSINESSES TO STEP UP, WE ARE
PROVIDING CONCRETE SUPPORT WHERE
IT'S NEEDED MOST. THIS IS MORE
ESSENTIAL NOW MORE THAN EVER
WITH IN THIS PARTICULARLY GIVEN
THE FACT THAT BIG DISMISSES
RECEIVED ANOTHER BIG TAX BREAK
ON THE NATIONAL LEVEL WITH THE
PASSAGE OF TRUMP AND
CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS BIG
BETRAYAL BILL. SECOND, WORKERS
DESERVE PROTECTION AND US
FEDERAL WORKFORCE PROTECTIONS
SECURE OUR OFFICE OF LABOR
STANDARDS BECOMES EVEN MORE
CRITICAL IN THIS INITIATIVE
ENSURES THAT WE CONTINUE
PROTECTING THEIR RIGHTS MAKING
SEATTLE A PLACE WHERE WORK PAYS
AND THIRD, ESSENTIAL SERVICES
PROTECT ALL OF US AND THE $90
MILLION GENERATED WILL MAINTAIN
FAMILIES HOUSED, FED AND SAFE.
THE SERVICES THAT STRENGTHEN OUR
COMMUNITY, NOT THOSE WHO USE
THEM DIRECTLY AND IN DEVELOPING
THIS PROPOSAL WE MET WITH AS WE
STATED IN COMMITTEE LAST TIME,
AND SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS AND
SMALL-BUSINESS CHAMBERS TO HUMAN
SERVICES PROVIDERS, LABOR
ADVOCATES AND UNIONS. AND SINCE
WE MET ON THIS TOPIC MY TEAM HAS
BEEN DOING ADDITIONAL WORK ON
THE GROUND, CANVASSING DISTRICTS
TO ENGAGE WITH SMALL BUSINESSES
AND WE'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY
TO CONNECT WITH 23 ADDITIONAL
BUSINESSES TO INFORM THEM OF THE
PROPOSAL AND GARNER FEEDBACK.
AND SO WE'VE CONSULTED AND
REFINED THIS TO CREATE BOTH A
MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITY FOR SMALL
BUSINESSES AND ALSO TO OFFSET
THE TAX INCREASE IS COMING FROM
OLYMPIA AND FOCUS THESE
INVESTMENTS IN A WAY THAT
BALANCES THE HARM COMING FROM
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. AND
SINCE THE RELEASE WE'VE
RECEIVED AN OUTPOURING OF
SUPPORT FROM ACROSS THE CITY. WE
HAVE SEVERAL LETTERS OF SUPPORT
FROM HUMAN SERVICES PROVIDERS,
SMALL BUSINESSES AND LABOR
ORGANIZATIONS ASKING US TO LET
VOTERS MAKE THIS CHOICE. IN
BUILDING ON THAT I AM GRATEFUL
THAT MAYOR HARRELL AND I FOUND
COMMON GROUND ON THIS ISSUE
BECAUSE THE NEED IS CLEAR AND
THE POLICY SOLUTION IS SOUND. IN
WORKING WITH MAYOR HARRELL AND
HIS TEAM, INCLUDING CBO DIRECTOR
EDER, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO WALK
THE WALK OF TRUE COLLABORATIVE
PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE COUNCIL
AND THE EXECUTIVE. SO THE
CHALLENGE OF THIS MOMENT
REQUIRES NO LESS AND I KNOW THAT
SAME SPIRIT OF COLLABORATION
EXISTS IN THIS CHAMBER. AND WITH
THAT, THANK YOU CHAIR FOR
ALLOWING ME TO MAKE SOME OPENING
REMARKS.
THANK YOU. DEPUTY MAYOR WONG,
IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE SOME
OPENING REMARKS AND WE'LL TURN
IT OVER TO COUNCIL CENTRAL
STAFF.
THANK YOU CHAIR AND THANK YOU: THANK YOU CHAIR AND THANK YOU
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK FOR THIS
OPENING REMARKS. DEPUTY MAYOR
GREG WONG FROM MAYOR HARRELL'S
OFFICE. IT'S A PLEASURE TO BE
WITH YOU ALL AGAIN TODAY. I
WOULD DEFER MOST OF MY COMMENTS
TO THE PRESENTATION PART BUT I
WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT THIS
IS A POLICY THAT WE BELIEVE
STRIKES THE RIGHT BALANCE. OUR
CITY IS FACING SEVERAL
CHALLENGES AND NOT JUST AS A
CITY, BUT OUR RESIDENTS AND OUR
SMALL BUSINESSES AS WELL. SO
WHAT WE TRY TO DO IS TO FIND
THAT RIGHT BALANCE OF HOW DO WE,
GIVEN THE FEDERAL, STATE, THE
LOCAL ECONOMIC HEADWINDS WE ARE
FACING, THE CHALLENGES WITH
AFFORDABILITY, PARTICULARLY FOR
OUR SMALL BUSINESSES, AND THE
NEED TO PROTECT OUR RESIDENTS AS
WE SEE DIFFERENT IMPACTS COME
THROUGH ON MOST BASIC SERVICES
THAT WE OFFER THEM, KEEP THEM
SAFE AND SECURE. HOW DO WE DO
THAT ALL AT ONE TIME? IT'S A
CHALLENGE. IT'S A CHALLENGE YOU
ALL FACE EVERY DAY AND WE HAVE
TO MAKE THOSE HARD POLICY
DECISIONS. IN THIS PROPOSAL WE
ARE ABLE TO ALLOW 90% OF THE
BUSINESSES IN SEATTLE WHO
CURRENTLY PAY THE B AND O TAX TO
EITHER PAY NO OR LESS CITY
TAXES. I DON'T KNOW, AT LEAST
IN MY MEMORY, IF THERE'S BEEN A
TIME THAT THE CITY HAS ACTUALLY
LOWERED COSTS ON SMALL
BUSINESSES. AND THIS IS A POLICY
THAT WILL ACTUALLY DO SO. AT THE
END OF THE DAY, IF YOU TAKE INTO
ACCOUNT ALL THE BUSINESSES IN
SEATTLE, 95% OF BUSINESSES IN
SEATTLE WILL PAY NO OR LOWER
TAXES AS A RESULT OF THIS
POLICY. THAT IS A GOOD POLICY IN
OUR OPINION, FOR BUSINESSES, FOR
THE SMALL BUSINESSES WHO WANT TO
STAY HERE, WHO WANT TO HIRE
EMPLOYEES AND DO BUSINESS AND
CREATE STRONG COMMUNITIES. AT
THE SAME TIME, WE ARE ABLE TO
USE REVENUE TO HELP MITIGATE
SOME OF THE IMPACTS THAT WE ARE
SEEING. AND WE DON'T PRETEND
THAT THIS WILL ENTIRELY MITIGATE
ALL IMPACTS, WHETHER THEY'RE
FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THE
STATE BUDGET DEFICIT THAT WE
SAW, OR FROM THE LOCAL BUDGET
HEADWINDS WE FACE. BUT WE KNOW
THAT THEY WILL TAKE A LITTLE BIT
OF THE STING OFF AND HELPING TO
PROVIDE SERVICES THAT ARE
NECESSARY. WE ALSO WANTED TO
MAKE SURE THAT THIS WAS A
PROPOSAL TO THE RESPONSE AT THE
TIME AND THAT'S WHY THERE'S A
BUILT-IN FOUR-YEAR SUNSET. IF
THE VOTERS TO APPROVE THIS, THE
BILL WILL SUNSET UNLESS FUTURE
COUNCIL RENEWS IT, AND AS A
ONE-TIME RENEWAL FOR FOUR MORE
YEARS. AND AFTER THEN IT WILL GO
TO THE VOTERS AGAIN BECAUSE
ULTIMATELY A POLICY OF THIS
WEIGHT WE BELIEVE SHOULD GO TO
THE VOTERS AND THEY SHOULD HAVE
A SAY ON WHETHER OR NOT IT'S
THE TYPE OF POLICY THAT THEY
WANTED THE CITY OF SEATTLE. SO
WITH THAT I WILL TURN THE
PRESENTATION OVER TO CENTRAL
STAFF TO WALK THROUGH THE
LOGISTICS AND THEN THANK YOU,
CHAIR, IF THERE IS TIME, AND
I'D LOVE TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE
A LITTLE MORE CONTEXT FOR THE
BILL ITSELF. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU DEPUTY MAYOR. YES,
IF THERE'S TIME, GETTING BACK
TO THE -- IN YOUR SLIDE IT WAS
IN PARTICULAR THE FACT THAT THIS
ONE PROPOSAL WON'T SOLVE THE
ENTIRE BUDGET PROBLEM, THAT
THERE ARE MULTIPLE FACTORS,
MULTIPLE TOOLS AND MULTIPLE
LEVERS THAT HAVE TO BE USED TO
ADDRESS THIS STRUCTURAL ISSUE. I
WILL NOTE THAT TODAY'S
PRESENTATION IS GOING TO BE
DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'VE DONE
IN THE PAST. GO I STRIVE TOWARDS
ART DISSIPATION IN TRANSPARENCY,
WHICH IS WHY THE END OF THIS
PROPOSAL WILL HAVE THIS IN
COMMITTEE THREE TIMES. SO WE HAD
THE PRESENTATION THAT TOM
PROVIDED AT THE LAST COMMITTEE
AND WE HAVE TO HOLD QUESTIONS TO
THE END. TODAY I'D LIKE A
LITTLE MORE PARTICIPATION. SO IF
YOU DO HAVE QUESTIONS ALONG THE
WAY, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ASK
TOM. THE BIGGEST HEADLINE THAT
ANY OF US ON THE DAIS NEED TO
TAKE AWAY FROM TODAY IS THAT
AMENDMENTS FOR THIS AND THE
SUPPLEMENTAL ARE DUE ON JULY
22nd. BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY
SEEN THIS PRESENTATION BEFORE,
IF YOU DO HAVE IDEAS OF
AMENDMENTS, HAVING THAT
DISCUSSION TODAY IS HELPFUL. AND
AGAIN, THIS ONE PROPOSAL WILL
NOT SOLVE OUR ENTIRE BUDGET
ISSUE ALONE, AND THAT IS WHY
MULTIPLE LEVERS WILL STILL NEED
TO BE PULLED. WITH THAT I SEE
DIRECTOR NOBLE WITH SOME
COMMENTS AND THEN WE'LL PASS IT
OVER TO TOM AND JENNIFER.
WITH RESPECT TO THE DEADLINE: WITH RESPECT TO THE DEADLINE
AND AMENDMENTS, I WANTED TO NOTE
THAT THAT IS THE LAST
OPPORTUNITY TO BRING IS AN
ISSUE. YOU ARE WELCOME TO BRING
THEM SOONER. IN FACT, WE ARE
WORKING WITH SEVERAL OF YOU ON
SOME IDEAS NOW. IT'S A
PARTICULARLY COMPLICATED ISSUE
SO THE SOONER YOU CAN GET TO US,
THE BETTER. JUST IN EFFORT TO
OFFER YOU BETTER SERVICE RATHER
THAN NOT, PLEASE COME FIND US
AND ANYBODY AT THE TABLE IF YOU
ARE CENTRAL STAFF OR OTHERWISE,
JUST WANTED TO ENCOURAGE THAT,
THAT'S ALL.
THANK YOU. TOM, JENNIFER,
OVER TO YOU. AND AGAIN,
QUESTIONS AS WE GO.
GOOD MORNING CHAIR STRAUSS,
VICE CHAIR WITH HER AND MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE. I'M TOM
MIKESELL WITH YOUR CENTRAL STAFF
ALSO WITH CITY COUNCIL: ALSO WITH CITY COUNCIL
CENTRAL STAFF.
AND THIS MORNING WE ARE GOING: AND THIS MORNING WE ARE GOING
TO BE TALKING ABOUT COUNCIL BILL
121028, BUSINESS AND OCCUPATION
TAX REBALANCING PROPOSAL. SO IN
TERMS OF A BROAD OUTLINE, WE ARE
GOING TO FIRST TALK ABOUT THE
BACKGROUND OF THE EXISTING
BUSINESS AND OCCUPATION TAX AT
THE CITY. GIVEN A BRIEF OVERVIEW
OF THE PROPOSAL ITSELF, DIG A
BIT INTO THIS SPECIFIC PIECES OF
THE PROPOSAL, TALK ABOUT THE USE
OF THE PROCEEDS GENERATED FROM
THE PROPOSAL, AND THEN CLOSE OUT
WITH SOME CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE
COMMITTEE. SO CITY CURRENTLY
LEVIES A BUSINESS AND OCCUPATION
TAX, WHICH IS A TAX ON THE GROSS
REVENUE OF BUSINESSES, REVENUE
EARNED IN THE CITY OF SEATTLE.
SO I UNDERLINE GROSS HERE
BECAUSE THIS IS DISTINCT FROM
WHAT IS MORE FAMILIAR, WHICH IS
THE COURT INCOME TAX, WHICH IS A
TAX ON NET REVENUE OR NET
PROFITS AFTER DEDUCTIONS FOR
OPERATING EXPENSES. SO AGAIN
IT'S IMPORTANT DISTINCTION TO
REMEMBER BUT BECAUSE IT IS A TAX
ON GROSS, THE TOTAL REVENUES OF
THESE BUSINESSES, THE RATES ARE
ACTUALLY FAIRLY SMALL. THE
CURRENT RATES CHARGED IN OUR
CITY TAX ARE -- THERE ARE TWO
DIFFERENT RATES DEPENDING ON THE
TYPE OF BUSINESS BEING
CONDUCTED. FIRST IS A .222%. SO
THAT IS LESS THAN A QUARTER OF A
PERCENT ON ACTIVITIES FROM
RETAIL SALES AND SERVICES,
WHOLESALING AND MANUFACTURING
AND EXTRACTING. AND SO, TO KIND
OF PUT THAT INTO SOME CONTEXT,
THAT BASICALLY GROSSES UP TO
$.22 PER $100 OF REVENUE. THE
OTHER RATE IS A .4 TO 7% RATE ON
SERVICE, TRANSPORTING FREIGHT
FOR HIRE AND OTHER, BASICALLY
ANY OTHER ACTIVITY NOT COVERED
IN THE OTHER RATE. AND AGAIN, SO
THAT'S LESS THAN HALF A PERCENT
AND GROSSES UP TO $.43 PER $100
OF REVENUE. THERE IS A CURRENTLY
SMALL BUSINESS EXEMPTION WHICH
IS $100,000 OF REVENUE. SO ANY
BUSINESS LESS THAN $100,000 IN
NEW REVENUE CURRENTLY DOES NOT
HAVE TO PAY THE TAX. THE RATES
ARE AT THEIR CURRENT STATUTORY
MAXIMUM , AS STATED IN RCW. SO
STATE LAW 35217 11. HOWEVER, BY
PURSUANT TO THAT STATE LAW THERE
IS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR VOTERS TO
APPROVE A HIGHER TAX RATE.
BEFORE YOU MOVE ON, TO
CLARIFY THE WORDS ON YOUR
SLIDES, ON YOUR SUB BULLETS,
.222% FOR RETAIL SALES AND
SERVICES AND THEN .427% FOR
SERVICES. COULD YOU HAVE THE
WORD SERVICES ON BOTH LINES. CAN
YOU GIVE US A LITTLE BIT MORE
FLAVOR OF WHAT THE DIFFERENCE
IS?
GREAT QUESTION, CHAIR. SO
THIS WOULD BE SERVICES THAT ARE
SOLD AT RETAIL AS OPPOSED TO
SERVICES THAT ARE PROVIDED SO
LIKE A -- ACCOUNTING OR LAWYER
SERVICES, SO THAT WOULD BE
CAPTURED IN THE LOWER RATE. THE
TOP RATE WOULD BE SELLING A
SERVICE, SO LIKE A SOFTWARE
SERVICE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT,
THAT'S MORE PACKAGED AND CAN BE
SOLD DISCREETLY AT RETAIL. SO
THERE'S A SLIGHT DISTINCTION OF
WHETHER OR NOT IT'S KIND OF AT
A TRANSACTIONAL BASIS VERSUS A
CONTRACT THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED.
WE'LL DIG IN MORE TO THIS
LATER BUT I'D LOVE A MORE FULL
EXPLANATION LATER ON AND NOT
NECESSARILY AT THIS MOMENT. IF
THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS ON
THE SLIDE, FEEL FREE TO KEEP
GOING.
SO JUST TO CLOSE OUT THE: SO JUST TO CLOSE OUT THE
BACKGROUND DESCRIPTION, IN 2024
THERE WERE A TOTAL OF 42,000
FILERS OF THE B AND O TAX SO
THOSE ARE NOT ALL TAXPAYERS. AS
YOU CAN SEE IN THE PIE CHART,
BASICALLY IT RAKES DOWN, YOU
KNOW, CONSIDERING THE EXISTING
$100,000 EXEMPTION, THAT ABOUT
HALF, JUST SHY OF HALF OF THE
TOTAL FILERS ACTUALLY OWED NO B
AND O TAX IN 2024, MEANING THE
REMAINING $21,000 OR SO OF
TAXPAYERS DID OH TAX. THE TOTAL
B AND O TAX GENERATED IN 2024
WAS $353 MILLION. THE CURRENT
PROJECTIONS BASED ON THE
FORECAST ARE $359 MILLION IN
2025 AND $385 MILLION IN '26.
AND THEN TOTAL THIS REPRESENTS
ABOUT 20% OF GENERAL FUND
REVENUE EACH YEAR. I WOULD POINT
OUT THAT THERE IS A RECENT STATE
CHAIN . GROSS STATE SENATE BILL
2015, WHICH DID CLASSIFY SOME,
GETTING TO THE QUESTION,
CLASSIFIED SOME TECHNOLOGY
SERVICES AS RETAIL AND WOULD IN
FACT DECREASE B AND O TAX
REVENUES AS A RESULT OF THAT
CHAIN BECAUSE THE CITY TAX SORT
OF PIGGYBACKS ON THE
DEFINITIONS, THE BASE
DEFINITIONS IN THE STATE TAX AND
SO THOSE ESTIMATES ARE NOT
INCLUDED IN THE PROJECTIONS THAT
I CITED IN THE THIRD BILL, WHICH
WERE FROM THE APRIL FORECAST,
BUT THEY WERE INCLUDED IN THE
ESTIMATES OF THE RATE AND
REVENUE GENERATED FROM THIS
PROPOSAL. SO NOW I'LL MOVE TO
THE OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSAL IN
THIS COUNCIL BILL. THIS PROPOSAL
WOULD DO A NUMBER OF THINGS. IT
WOULD INCREASE THE EXEMPTION
THRESHOLD SO THAT $100,000 WOULD
INCREASE TO $2 MILLION. THEY
WOULD CREATE A NEW $2 MILLION
STANDARD DEDUCTION. THERE WOULD
BE AN ALIGNMENT OF THE BUSINESS
LICENSE FEE STRUCTURE WITH THE
ABOVE-MENTIONED CHANGES. SO
BASICALLY THE BUSINESS LICENSE
FEE IS DEPENDED ON THE
DEFINITIONS OF TAXABLE REVENUE
AND THE B AND O TAX SO IN ORDER
TO AVOID UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES, THAT CHANGE WOULD
BE NECESSARY. AND THEN FINALLY
IT WOULD INCREASE THE B AND O
TAX RATES TO FUND THE PRIOR TWO
ADJUSTMENTS AND TO GENERATE
ADDITIONAL REVENUE. AND WOULD
DESIGNATE THE DUST OF THOSE
PROCEEDS, ALL CONTINGENT ON
VOTER APPROVAL. THE BILL WOULD
THEN SUBMIT THAT QUESTION IN
BULLET ONE TO THE NOVEMBER 4th
SO THIS IS A TYPO ON THE SLIDE,
NOVEMBER 4th, 2025 GENERAL
ELECTION FOR THE SEATTLE VOTERS.
ALL THE CHANGES EMBEDDED IN THE
PROPOSAL WOULD EFFECTIVE JANUARY
1st OF 2026 AND THERE IS A KIND
OF CONTINGENT SUNSET. THERE IS
AN INITIAL SUNSET DATE OF
JANUARY 1st, 2030, HOWEVER THAT
CAN BE EXTENDED FOR AN
ADDITIONAL FOUR YEARS OF COUNCIL
APPROVED AN ORDINANCE BY JULY
31st OF 2029 TO EXTEND IT FOR AN
ADDITIONAL FOUR YEARS. HOWEVER,
THAT IS THE ONLY OPTIONAL
EXEMPTION. IN ANY CASE, THIS TAX
AND THE REVENUE GENERATED FROM
IT WOULD SUNSET IN EIGHT YEARS.
SO I'M GOING TO NOW DIG A BIT
INTO THE DETAILS OF THE
RESTRUCTURED PROPOSAL, GOING
KIND OF IN PEACE THROUGH THE
DIFFERENT COMPONENTS. THE FIRST
--
TOM, JUST ONE -- KEEP GOING,
THEN COUNCILMEMBER KELLY HAS A
SECOND.
FIRST PIECE OF THE PROPOSAL: FIRST PIECE OF THE PROPOSAL
WOULD BE TO INCREASE THE SMALL
BUSINESS EXEMPTION THRESHOLD
FROM $100,000-$2 MILLION. SO
AGAIN USING THE ACTUAL DATA AT
HAND, THE FORECAST OFFICE
ESTIMATED THAT THAT EXEMPT AN
ADDITIONAL 16,000 TAXPAYERS. SO
RECALL BACK THAT THERE WAS
21,000 TOTAL TAXPAYERS IN 2024.
THIS MOVE WOULD THEN EXEMPT AN
ADDITIONAL 16,000, MEANING THE
REMAINING TAXPAYER BASE TO 5000
TAXPAYERS. THE FORECAST OFFICE
ESTIMATES THE IMPACT OF THAT
CHANGE AS ABOUT $28.4 MILLION.
SO I PUT TOGETHER A TABLE HERE
OFF TO THE SIDE THAT SHOWS HOW
THOSE ADDITIONAL EXEMPTED
BUSINESSES WOULD BREAK DOWN BY
BUSINESS TYPE SO IT SHOWS THE
NUMBER OF TAXPAYERS WITHIN EACH
ONE OF THESE KIND OF GENERAL
BUSINESS CATEGORY AND WHAT
PERCENTAGE THAT NUMBER
REPRESENTS TOTAL TAXPAYERS IN
THE CITY . JUST PULLING ONE YOU
COULD SEE FROM RESTAURANTS FOR
EXAMPLE, THERE WOULD BE AN
ADDITIONAL 1343 BUSINESSES THAT
WOULD BE EXEMPT SO NOT PAYING
TAX AND THAT WOULD REPRESENT 82%
OF ALL THE TAXPAYERS. SO
APPROXIMATELY 18 TAXPAYERS WOULD
BE PAYING SOME LEVEL OF TAX.
I'LL PAUSE FOR THE QUESTION.
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE.
THANK YOU TARA STRAUSS, MR.
MIKESELL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR
BRIEFING. ACTUALLY MS.
LABRECQUE, DIRECTOR NOBLE,
DEPUTY MAYOR WONG AND NOW
DIRECTOR EDER, WELCOME. MY
QUESTION IS IT'S PLAYING OFF
THE PUBLIC COMMENT AND I REALLY
APPRECIATE THE COST PUBLIC
COMMENT RECEIVED. I ALSO
APPRECIATE THAT WE GOT SOME
YOUNG WITNESS TO THE DEMOCRATIC
ACTION AS IT RELATES TO
BUSINESS. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT
YOU, DON'T WORRY. I REALLY
APPRECIATE YOU HAVING OUR NAP
RECORDS REPRESENT TO INCLUDE
WALLINGFORD AND THAT WAS AN
IMPORTANT QUESTION
CONSIDERATION. MY QUESTION NOW
RELATES TO MR. WASSERMAN, WHO
HAS NOW LEFT. GIVEN THE FACT WE
ARE A PORT CITY, MARITIME, WE
HAVE INDUSTRIAL MARITIME, THANK
YOU CHAIR, BIG SECTIONS OF OUR
CITY THAT ARE MARITIME. THERE IS
NO MARITIME BUSINESS TYPE AND
I'M CURIOUS IS THIS PART TRADE,
IS IT CONSIDERED MARITIME
MANUFACTURING, CONSIDERED
MARITIME MANUFACTURING? KIND OF
JUST POPS PARTICULARLY WITH MR.
WASSERMAN'S QUESTION AND POINT
THAT MARITIME IS NOT REALLY
INCLUDED AS A BUSINESS TYPE,
GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE ARE ONE
OF THE NATION'S MAJOR PORT
CITIES.
THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. SO
IN DISCUSSIONS WITH OFFICE OF
CITY FINANCE TAX ADMINISTRATION
DIVISION, THE ACTIVITIES AT THE
PORT CAN ENCOMPASS A BROAD RANGE
OF BUSINESS ACTIVITIES THAT ARE
CAPTURED. THEY CAN -- SO IT'S
NOT JUST ONE SPECIFIC DISMISSED
DEFINITION. IT'S MORE OF A
COLLECTION OF DIFFERENT BUSINESS
DEFINITIONS. THE ACTUAL TAX
RETURN THAT A TAXPAYER WOULD BE
FILLING OUT WOULD ACTUALLY
INCLUDE ALL THOSE VARIOUS
REVENUE STREAMS WITHIN THAT SO
IT'S NOT -- IT DOESN'T FIT
SQUARELY IN ONE SPECIFIC TAX
SECTOR IN TERMS OF BUSINESS
TYPE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT
ANSWERS THE QUESTION BUT IT'S
KIND OF INTO THE COMPLEXITY OF
HOW THE RETURN IS FILED.
I UNDERSTAND YOUR ANSWER. AT
THE SAME TIME I'M ALMOST
WANTING TO ASK, MAYBE IT'S A
COMBINATION OF ASSOCIATION
SUPPORT, ALL THE PEOPLE THAT
CHAIR STRAUSS KNOWS BETTER THAN
I COME TOGETHER AND KIND OF GIVE
A SNAPSHOT OF THE MARITIME
WORLD, PULLING THE DIFFERENT
PIECES, JUST TO HAVE AN
UNDERSTANDING, IN TERMS OF OUR
WOULD FOR THE PORT, HOW IT COMES
IN MAJOR REVENUE SOURCE FOR OUR
GENERAL FUND, WE SHOULD HAVE AN
UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE IMPACT IS
ON OUR MARITIME COMMUNITY. I'LL
FOLLOW-UP ON TERMS OF HOW TO
BEST ASK THAT QUESTION AND IT'S
REALLY A QUESTION FOR THE
COMMUNITY, TOO. I WELCOME THE
ASSOCIATION, MR. WASSERMAN AND
OTHERS TO COME TOGETHER AND KIND
OF HIGHLIGHT WHAT THE MARITIME
WORLD IS FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE.
THANK YOU, CHAIR.
THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER: THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
KELLY. OUR WORKING WATERFRONT IS
MADE UP OF A VERY DIVERSE NUMBER
OF SECTORS OF OUR ECONOMY AND
THAT'S WHAT GIVES IT ITS
STRENGTH. I SEE COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER [
INAUDIBLE ]
THANK YOU CHAIR STRAUSS. I
WANTED TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE FOR THAT QUESTION AND
BUILDING UPON THAT, I WANT TO
ASK IF TOM COULD ELABORATE ABOUT
SOME OF THE PARAMETERS THAT WE
NEED TO ABIDE BY BASED ON THE
STATE AND HOW CURRENTLY WITH,
YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
THE STATE HAS A B AND O TAX AND
THEN AUTHORIZES THE EMPOWERED
CITIES TO BE ABLE TO LEVY THEIR
OWN B AND O BUT JURISDICTIONS
ARE LIMITED IN TERMS OF HOW
THEY'RE ABLE TO CREATE ITS
ABILITY WITHIN B AND O. SO I'M
WONDERING IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO
A LITTLE BIT OF THAT AND THE SET
CATEGORIES THAT THE STATE KIND
OF REQUIRES US TO OPERATE
WITHIN.
I THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION: I THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. SO IT IS
ACCURATE .SO THE B AND O TAX IS
A STATE TAX THAT CITIES ARE
AUTHORIZED TO LEVY. ONE OF THE
FEATURES THAT IS PART OF THAT
KIND OF BROAD STATE APPROACH IS
WHAT'S CALLED THE MODEL TAX
ORDINANCE. SO ESSENTIALLY CITIES
THAT HAVE THIS TYPE OF A TAX ALL
HAVE AGREED TO THIS KIND OF
STRUCTURAL AND ORGANIZATION
WHEREBY THE DIFFERENT TAX
STRUCTURES THAT WE IMPOSE IN
DIFFERENT CITIES ACROSS THE
STATE ALL HAVE KIND OF THE
GENERAL SIMILAR FACETS SO THAT
IS KIND OF THE HIGH-LEVEL
CONSTRAINT. I DON'T HAVE IT AT
MY FINGERTIPS ALL THOSE SPECIFIC
THINGS BUT IT COMES DOWN TO
ISSUES OF UNIFORMITY OF TAX
TREATMENT, SO THAT'S ONE
PROVISION WHERE LIKE GOING BACK
TO THE RATES THAT I SHOWED YOU
THAT ANY BUSINESS THAT IS IN THE
RETAIL SALES AND SERVICE HAS TO
BE ASSESSED A UNIFORM RATE. SO
THAT'S KIND OF ONE OF THOSE
COMMON FEATURES OF THE MODEL TAX
THAT WE HAVE TO ABIDE BY, ALL
CITIES IN THE STATE DO. AND THEN
THE KIND OF DEFINITIONS OF
DIFFERENT THINGS WHERE THEY
APPLY. SO FOR EXAMPLE I CITED
THE SENATE BILL 2015 WHERE THEY
MADE SOME CHANGES OF HOW
BUSINESSES ARE -- HOW DIFFERENT
TYPES OF BUSINESS REVENUE
ACTIVITIES, SO BASICALLY TECH,
IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE IT WAS
SOME TYPE OF TECH SERVICES HAVE
BEEN NOW CLASSIFIED BY THE STATE
AS RETAIL. SERVICES INSTEAD. SO
THERE ARE DIFFERENT RATE IMPACTS
FOR THAT. SO THOSE TYPE OF
CHANGES THAT HAPPEN AT THE STATE
LEVEL TRANSLATE DOWN TO ALL THE
VARIOUS CITIES THROUGH THE KIND
OF MODEL TAX ORDINANCE APPROACH.
IT IS A CONSTRAINT, WE AS A CITY
WE DO HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY IN
TERMS OF DEDUCTIONS AND
EXEMPTIONS AND CREDITS THAT CAN
BE APPLIED SO THEY DON'T
IMPINGE UPON UNIFORMITY OF
THINGS OF THAT NATURE SO THAT'S
KIND OF A VERY HIGH LEVEL VIEW
OF HOW WE WORK WITHIN THAT
SYSTEM.
THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER: THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS?
THANK YOU FOR THAT, CHAIR.
AND THANK YOU FOR THAT
EXPLANATION, TOM AND COLLEAGUES.
I WANTED TO ELEVATE THAT POINT
BECAUSE WE HEARD THROUGH THIS
EDUCATION PROCESS ASKING IF
THERE WERE OPPORTUNITIES TO
EXEMPT GROCERY STORES, FOR
EXAMPLE, BUT UNDERSTANDING
BECAUSE OF THE LIMITATIONS ON
THE STATE LEVEL TO EXEMPT
GROCERY STORES, WE HAVE TO
EXEMPT ALL OF THE RETAIL
CATEGORY. SO I BRING THIS UP AS
JUST A CONSTRAINT IN TERMS OF
WHAT WE ARE ABLE TO DO ON THE
LOCAL LEVEL AND IN TERMS OF
OPERATING WITHIN THE PARAMETERS
SET BY THE STATE AND CERTAINLY
WELCOME A CONVERSATION, TOO,
WITH OUR PARTNERS OF THE STATE,
ABOUT HOW WE CAN TAILOR AND
ADJUST AND HAVE MORE FLEXIBILITY
WITH THIS TAX IN PARTICULAR. SO
I WANT TO ELEVATE THAT POINT.
THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER: THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK. COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON
FOLLOWED COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
ACTUALLY A POINT OF: ACTUALLY A POINT OF
CLARIFICATION THAT CHAIR STRAUSS
ALLUDED TO, IF YOU GO BACK TO
SLIDE TWO, WHAT I'M TRYING TO
GET A SENSE OF IS LOOKING AT THE
DIFFERENT RATES WHERE YOU HAVE
SALES AND SERVICES AND OTHER
SERVICES AGAIN IS ONE CATEGORY
THAT PROFESSIONAL AND BUSINESS
SERVICES AND RETAIL SERVICES, IS
THAT WE ARE IT'S KIND OF BROKEN
UP? I JUST WANT TO GIVE A SENSE
OF WHERE THAT IS.
IN GENERAL, YES. MADE THROUGH
THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS TO
DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT A
TAXPAYER REPORTING INDEED
CORRECT WAY, THAT'S KIND OF
THROUGH THE TAX ADMINISTRATION
AND AUDIT PROCESS. BUT IT'S
BASICALLY IF SOMETHING IS GOING
TO BE SOLD AS A POINT OF SALE,
THEN IT'S LARGELY CONSIDERED
RETAIL. IF SOMETHING IS BEING
PROVIDED ON AN HOURLY BASIS AND
THEN YOU KIND OF GET AN INVOICE
AT THE END, THAT'S MORE CLOSELY
CONSIDERED A SERVICE.
AND FOR THAT, WHICH -- WHAT
DO THOSE SERVICES -- I'M TRYING
TO FIGURE OUT WHAT DO THOSE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, THOSE
CONTRACTS, THE HOURLY BILLING
STUFF, WHERE DOES THAT FIT ON
THIS CHART?
THIS WOULD FIT ON THE DECK OF: THIS WOULD FIT ON THE DECK OF
4 TO 7% RATE.
THAT'S CLARITY I WAS LOOKING
FOR SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
LASTLY IN RELATION TO THE
SPONSORS COMMENT ABOUT GROCERY,
BEEN GETTING SOME INFORMATION
FROM WASHINGTON FOOD INDUSTRY
WHICH REPRESENTS SMALL GROCERS,
LOCALLY OWNED GROCERS, AND WHILE
ON THE STATE THE GROCERS ARE
EXEMPT FROM B AND O .
WHOLESALERS ARE NOT AND THAT
WOULD INCLUDE THOSE SMALL,
LOCALLY OWNED GROCERS SO JUST
LOOKING AT HAS THERE BEEN
CONSIDERATION FOR OUR SMALL MOM
AND POP SHOPS HERE, AS RELATED
TO WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO
OVERALL RELATED TO THIS. AGAIN
JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE DON'T
HAVE ANY IMPACTS ON OUR SMALL
LOCALLY OWNED GROCERS.
I APOLOGIZE, COUNCILMEMBER. I
DIDN'T QUITE FOLLOW THE
QUESTION.
AGAIN, JUST LOOKING AT -- I
WAS GOING TO SAY WE ARE
RECEIVING INFORMATION, I THINK
WE ALL HAVE, FROM WASHINGTON
FOOD INDUSTRY, WHO REPRESENTS
SMALL, LOCALLY OWNED GROCERS,
MANY OF WHOM ARE CONSIDERED
WHOLESALERS. AND WHILE GROCERS
ARE EXEMPT FROM B AND O ON THE
STATE LEVEL, WHOLESALERS, FOOD
WHOLESALERS ARE NOT AND THAT'S
WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT, IS
ARE WE LOOKING AT THE IMPACTS OF
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO ON
THOSE SMALL INDEPENDENT GROCERS?
OKAY. I APPRECIATE THE
QUESTION. SO I WOULD SAY SO WE
CAN'T OBVIOUSLY CHANGE THE
STATE'S EXEMPTIONS WHICH THEY
HAVE PROVIDED AND KIND OF
PULLING BACK TO THE UNIFORMITY
DISCUSSION ABOUT RETAIL, WE
DON'T REALLY HAVE THE ABILITY
TO MAKE OUR OWN -- EVEN THOUGH
WE DO HAVE SOME ABILITY TO GIVE
DEDUCTIONS, EXEMPTIONS, AND
CREDITS WITHIN THE RETAIL SPACE,
EVEN THE KIND OF UNIFORM RATE
APPLICATION AND MODEL TAX
ORDINANCE, WE DON'T HAVE THE
ABILITY TO MAKE THOSE SPECIFIC
TARGETED ADJUSTMENTS FOR
ANYTHING THAT FALLS WITHIN THE
RETAIL CATEGORY. IF THEY'RE
FALLING WITHIN THE WHOLESALER
CATEGORY, THEN THERE MIGHT BE
SOME OPTIONS TO CONSIDER AND
LOOK AT BUT I WOULDN'T -- YOU
HAVE TO KIND OF KNOW THE
SPECIFIC TAXPAYERS BUSINESS
SPECIFICS WHICH OF COURSE IS
CONFIDENTIAL, SO WE DON'T HAVE
A. SO WE CAN'T REALLY TELL ON A
TAXPAYER BY TAXPAYER BASIS BUT
WE CAN LOOK AT THE BROAD
CONTOURS OF OUR ABILITY WITHIN
WORKING WITHIN THE UNIFORMITY
CONSTRAINT TO SEE IF THERE ARE
CASES IN WHOLESALING WHERE AN
EXEMPTION COULD BE PROVIDED.
THANK YOU: THANK YOU.
THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER: THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
SOLOMON. COUNCIL PRESIDENT
NELSON FOLLOWED BY COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I
BELIEVE THIS IS PROBABLY MORE A
QUESTION TO DM WONG AND ALSO
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK BUT THE
TABLE CAN ANSWER IT. AT THE FNC
MEETING ON JULY 2nd , WHEN THIS
CONCEPT WAS DISCUSSED, I ASKED
WHAT OUTREACH HAD BEEN PERFORMED
BY TWO SMALL BUSINESSES AND I
ASKED THAT QUESTION BECAUSE THE
GSC BA HAD JUST COME OUT WITH
THEIR POSITION IN OPPOSITION AND
THEY ARE THE LARGEST SMALL
BUSINESS ASSOCIATION IN
WASHINGTON STATE, IF NOT
MULTIPLE STATES. AND I REMINDED
THE EXECUTIVE AND CENTRAL STAFF
THAT I WAS INTERESTED IN HAVING
THIS INFORMATION SPECIFICALLY
WHICH BUSINESSES HAVE YOU TALKED
TO, WHICH BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS
HAVE YOU CONFERRED WITH TO
REALLY GET THEIR INPUT ON THE
PACKAGE AS A WHOLE. SO I ASKED
THAT BY EMAIL ON THE SEVENTH OF
JULY AND STILL HAVE NOT GOTTEN A
RESPONSE. SO WHEN WILL I GET
INFORMATION ABOUT THE OUTREACH
THAT HAD BEEN PERFORMED, AND
HERE'S WHY I'M ASKING. NOW
I'M SPEAKING MORE AS COUNCIL
PRESIDENT TO SAY THAT THE TIMING
OF THIS IS REALLY DIFFICULT
BECAUSE OUR COMMITTEES,
COUNCILMEMBERS AND CENTRAL STAFF
ARE RUSHING TO FINISH
LEGISLATION THAT'S IN THE
PIPELINE BEFORE RECESS OR AT
LEAST BEFORE BUDGET AND THAT'S
A LOT OF WORK IN ITSELF, AND
THEN WE'VE GOT THE COMP PLAN ON
OUR HANDS AND THAT IS A LOT OF
OUTREACH TO NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS
AND STAKEHOLDERS, AND ALSO OF
COURSE WE GOT A VACANCY TO FILL
IN ALL OF THIS REQUIRES EITHER A
LOT OF ONE-ON-ONE GROUP BOARD
MEETINGS OFFSITE OR IN
COMMUNITY. THAT IS A LOT OF TIME
AND NOW WE ARE BEING PASSED WITH
EVALUATING A PROPOSAL TO END --
WE NEED TO CONFIRM AND DO OUR
DUE DILIGENCE BUT CONFIRM AS YOU
JUST SAID, DEPUTY MAYOR WONG,
THAT IT STRIKES THE RIGHT
BALANCE. SO WE NEED TO DO OUR
DUE DILIGENCE AND THE TIME IS
SHORT. AND WE HAVE A BALLOT
MEASURE SORT OF ON OUR PLATES AT
THE LAST MINUTE. SO CAN YOU LET
US KNOW WHEN WE WILL BE GETTING
THAT INFORMATION? AND THIS
QUESTION ALSO APPLIES TO
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK, THAT I
WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO CHECK
OFF ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE
ALREADY BEEN MET WITH SO THAT I
CAN PICK HOW TO TARGET MY
COMMUNICATIONS GOING FORWARD.
THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT: THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT
FOR RAISING THOSE ISSUES AND
FIRST TO GO TO YOUR ROLE THAT
YOU MENTIONED AS COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, VERY MUCH APPRECIATE
ALL OF THE VERY WEIGHTY AND
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENT POLICY
ISSUES THAT YOU'RE JUGGLING
RIGHT NOW. AND ACKNOWLEDGE THE
TIMING IS ONE THAT QUITE FRANKLY
IDEALLY WOULD BE DONE WITH THE
BUDGET FOR THIS TYPE OF
PROPOSAL. WE ARE CONSTRAINED BY
THE STATE LAW THAT IT HAS TO GO
TO THE VOTERS AND THAT IS WHAT
ACCELERATED THE TIMING HERE IN A
WAY THAT UNFORTUNATELY WAS OUT
OF OUR CONTROL, BUT ACKNOWLEDGE
AND APPRECIATE THE ADDITIONAL
BURDEN THAT PUTS ON THIS COUNCIL
AND APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THE
TIME AND CHAIR STRAUSS FOR
TAKING THE TIME, THREE TIMES AS
YOU MENTIONED BEFORE. AS TO
OUTREACH , SO APOLOGIES THAT YOU
DID NOT GET THAT RESPONSE. MY
UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT WE HAVE
RESPONDED TO OUR OFFICE OF
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. I WILL
DOUBLE CHECK WITH THAT AND WE'VE
MET WITH ALL OF THE BIAS. OED
HAS A QUARTERLY MEETING WITH THE
BIAS IN TERMS OF GROUPS THAT MAY
HAVE MULTI MEMBERS. WE'VE MET
WITH THE CHAMBER. WE HAD A
CONVERSATION WITH THE GSB A AND
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY HAVE
NOT ACTUALLY TAKEN A POSITION ON
THE BILL, WHICH IS WHAT THEY
EXPRESSED TO US AND THEY WERE
PULLING MEMBERS CURRENTLY AND
MAY HAVE A POSITION IN THE NEXT
WEEK OR SO. AND SO THEY HAD MADE
AN INITIAL STATEMENT ON THAT BUT
THAT THEY WERE STILL IN PROCESS
FOR WHERE THEY ALTERNATELY MAY
LAND ON IT. AND SO AND THEN
THERE'S THOUSANDS OF SMALL
BUSINESSES AND JUST THROUGHOUT
OUR COMMUNITY MEETINGS, JUST
RAISING THIS, A LOT OF FOLKS
HAVE QUESTIONS, I THINK LIKE FOR
EXAMPLE, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS WE
GET A LOT IS A LITTLE CONFUSION
AROUND THE EXCEPTION AND THE
DEDUCTION . PEOPLE THINK IF I
MAKE $3 MILLION AND GOING TO BE
PAYING HIGHER TAXES AND WE
EXPLAINED, WELL NO, THE
DEDUCTION GOES UP TO 5.8 IN
DOLLARS IN EXTRA REVENUE SO YOU
ACTUALLY BENEFIT FROM THIS BILL
EVEN THOUGH YOU HAVE 5.8 ALIEN
DOLLARS ROUGHLY IN GROSS REVENUE
SO IT'S A LOT OF EXPLAINING OF
THAT TO OUR COMMUNITY MEETINGS.
TO REPEAT THAT: TO REPEAT THAT.
ONGOING TO FACILITATE THIS: ONGOING TO FACILITATE THIS
MEETING. I WILL LET YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, HAVE THE FLOOR UNTIL
WE ARE DONE BUT I'M GOING TO
LET THE DEPUTY MAYOR FINISH
THEIR COMMENTS AND I'LL RETURN
TO YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
THANK YOU, CHAIR. SO WE WILL
FOLLOW UP WITH YOU. I APOLOGIZE
IF THERE'S SPECIFIC GROUPS YOU
ARE WONDERING, IF WE TALK TO YOU
OR NOT OR IF THERE'S SPECIFIC
BUSINESSES YOU WANT TO KNOW,
WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT BUT
WE'RE DOING IT MOSTLY THROUGH
OUR OFFICE OF ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT WHICH HAS MOST OF
THE RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE SMALL
BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND HAPPY TO
HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH YOU
FURTHER, AND APOLOGIES IF YOU
DIDN'T GET THAT BACK IN
WRITING.
COULD YOU REPEAT THE PART: COULD YOU REPEAT THE PART
THAT YOU WERE SAYING THAT WAS
YOU JUST SAID THAT FAST AND I
WAS TRYING TO FOLLOW?
SORRY, I SHOULD SLOW DOWN. I
APPRECIATE THAT AND IF THE
QUESTION WE GET THE MOST SO IT
DOES DESERVE A LITTLE BIT OF A
SLOWER EXPLANATION. SO THERE'S
A LOT OF NUMBERS THAT GET THROWN
AROUND WITH THIS BILL AND SO IT
IS IMPORTANT FOR, I THINK THE
COMMUNITY, FOR THE BUSINESSES
AND FOR ALL OF THE POLICYMAKERS
TO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S KIND
OF TWO GROUPS OF BUSINESSES,
I'D SAY THAT BENEFIT FROM THIS
BILL. THE FIRST GROUP IS THOSE
THAT HAVE GROSS REVENUES UP TO
$2 MILLION. THAT'S THE
THRESHOLD THAT TOM AND CENTRAL
STAFF EXPLAINED. THOSE
BUSINESSES WERE NO LONGER PAY
ANY CITY B AND O TAX SO THEY'RE
ESSENTIALLY DOWN TO ZERO. WE
ALSO BUILT IN A SEPARATE $2
MILLION DEDUCTION AND WHAT THAT
MEANS IS THAT ALL BUSINESSES,
WHETHER YOU MAKE $3 MILLION OR
$100 MILLION, GET TO DEDUCT THE
FIRST $2 MILLION OFF OF THE
GROSS REVENUES BEFORE PAYING
THEIR TAXES. SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF
YOU ARE A $5 MILLION GROSS
REVENUE BUSINESS, YOU CAN DEDUCT
$2 MILLION OF YOUR REVENUE AND
ESSENTIALLY BE TAXED ONLY ON THE
REMAINING $3 MILLION. THE NET
RESULT OF THAT IS THERE IS THIS
TEAR OF BUSINESSES THAT WANT TO
BE PAYING ZERO TAXES BUT WILL
ACTUALLY BE PAYING LESS THAN
WHAT THEY CURRENTLY DO UNDER
THIS PROPOSAL. AND THOUGH THAT
RUNS ROUGHLY BETWEEN THOSE WHO
MAKE TWEEN $2 MILLION IN GROSS
REVENUE AND AROUND $5.8 MILLION
AND CENTRAL STAFF MAY HAVE A
BUDGET, MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT
NUMBER, IT'S 5.7, 5.8 IT'S
ROUGHLY AROUND THAT SO THOSE
BUSINESSES, ALL BUSINESSES
AROUND THAT $5.8 MILLION WERE
LOWER IN GROSS REVENUE WILL BE
PAYING LESS OR NO CITY B AND O
TAXES UNDER THIS PROPOSAL. SO
THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO
EXPLAIN WITH THAT.
THANK YOU FOR THAT: THANK YOU FOR THAT
EXPLANATION. YOU SAID THAT YOU
WILL BE TALKING TO THE GSB A,
BECAUSE I HAVE OFFICIAL
RESPONSE, RIGHT, IF YOU CAN SEE.
SO I THOUGHT THEY ALREADY PUT
OUT THEIR OFFICIAL RESPONSE IN
OPPOSITION.
I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH: I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH
THEM YESTERDAY ON THIS TO
UNDERSTAND IS THEY STILL HAVE
LOTS OF QUESTIONS, TOO SO
THERE'S STILL, WITH MANY OF THE
BUSINESS GROUPS I THINK THERE'S
CLEARLY THERE'S MIXED
RESPONSES. SOME BUSINESSES
REALLY LIKE IT. SOME ARE NOT AS
THRILLED ABOUT IT AND SO THEY'RE
WORKING THROUGH WITH THEIR
MEMBERS TO UNDERSTAND WHERE
THEIR MEMBERSHIP IS AND THEY MAY
HAVE A MORE FORMAL POSITION
COMING UP . THAT'S MY
UNDERSTANDING. I DON'T WANT TO
SPEAK FOR THEM FROM THE TABLE
BUT THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING OF
THEIR CONVERSATION.
OKAY. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. VICE CHAIR RIVERA?
THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE: THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE.
DEPUTY MAYOR WONG, AND/OR TOM, I
JUST WANT TO CLARIFY ON SLIDE
FIVE, THESE 15,906 BUSINESSES
ARE NOT PAYING, IN THIS
PROPOSAL, WILL NOT PAY ANY B AND
O TAX OR SOME OF THESE ONES AS
YOU ARE DESCRIBING MAKE $5
MILLION AND SO THE FIRST $2
MILLION WILL BE EXEMPT AND
THEY'LL ONLY PAY THE $3
MILLION, WHICH YOU ARE SEEING IS
LESS THAN WHAT THEY CURRENTLY
PAY TODAY. IS THIS A COMBO OF
THOSE TWO THESE ONES THAT JUST
WON'T PAY IT OFF?
THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION,
VICE CHAIR RIVERA. SO THIS IS
PURELY THOSE TAXPAYERS THAT ARE
EXEMPT OF THE INCREASE TO THE
STANDARD EXEMPTION THRESHOLD OF
$2 MILLION, SO THERE WILL BE
ADDITIONAL TAXPAYERS THAT WILL
FIND THAT BECAUSE OF THE HIGHER
STANDARD DEDUCTION, WHICH IS THE
NEXT SLIDE ON THE PRESENTATION,
NOT THE NEXT YEAR BUT THE
STANDARD DEDUCTION WOULD HAVE NO
TAX BILL AS WELL BUT THOSE
TAXPAYERS ARE NOT CONCLUDED IN
THE SPECIFIC TABLE.
YOUR GOING TO GO THERE NEXT,
I DON'T WANT TO GET AHEAD OF
OURSELVES. I GUESS I'LL SAVE MY
QUESTION , CHAIR, FOR THE NEXT
SLIDE BECAUSE IT PERTAINS TO
THAT $5 MILLION.
THANK YOU, SO NOTICING THAT
WE ARE EIGHT MINUTES BEFORE
11:00 A.M., THE COMMITTEE
TECHNICALLY GOES TO 11:30.
COLLEAGUES HAVE ASKED THAT WE
STAY LONGER TODAY, JUST NOTICING
TIME SO TOM, BACK OVER TO YOU
AND I'M GOING TO HAVE
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA ASK HER
QUESTION ON THE NEXT SLIDE AND
THEN I WILL ASK TO HOLD
QUESTIONS UNTIL THE END OF THE
RESTRUCTURE SO THAT WE CAN GET
THROUGH THIS SECTION OF THE
PRESENTATION AND THEN WE'LL
TAKE UP THE NEXT SECTION OF THE
PRESENTATION, WHICH IS HOW THE
REVENUE IS USED AFTER THAT. SO
OVER TO YOU,, AND THEN
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA AND WE'LL
HOLD QUESTIONS UNTIL THE END OF
THE RESTRUCTURE.
SO NOW CONTINUING ON THE: SO NOW CONTINUING ON THE
DETAILED ANALYSIS OF THE
RESTRUCTURE, NEXT PIECE IS THE
$2 MILLION STANDARD DEDUCTION.
SO WHAT THIS WOULD REPRESENT, SO
THIS IS A NOVEL CONCEPT. THERE
IS NOT CURRENTLY A STANDARD
DEDUCTION IN OUR CURRENT B AND O
TAX. THIS WOULD ALLOW TEXT
PLAYERS WHEN THEY FILE TO
BASICALLY TAKE AN INITIAL $2
MILLION RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF
THEIR REVENUE AND KIND OF
DECREASED THEIR TAXABLE REVENUE
FOR PURPOSES OF FILING THEIR
TAXES. SO BASED ON THE ANALYSIS
OF THIS BY THE ECONOMIC REVENUE
FORECAST, THIS WOULD EXEMPT
AROUND 10.8 ILION DOLLARS OF
REVENUE FROM TAX AND THE
ESTIMATE OF THE IMPACT . SO THE
IMPACT ON REVENUES THAT WE WOULD
OTHERWISE COLLECT IS $33 MILLION
PRIOR TO THE RATE INCREASE. SO
I'LL PAUSE THERE, PERHAPS IF
THE QUESTION IS WITH REGARDS TO
THE STANDARD DEDUCTION, OR SHALL
I CONTINUE?
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA: COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
THANK YOU, CHAIR. MY QUESTION
WAS GOING TO BE ON THESE
BUSINESSES THAT MAKE $5 MILLION,
WHERE THEY GET TO DEDUCT THE $2
MILLION. HOW MANY BUSINESSES ARE
WE TALKING ABOUT FROM THAT
LEVEL? AND THEN I WANT TO KNOW
HOW MANY BUSINESSES ARE GOING TO
BE PAYING MORE? EVERYBODY ELSE
WILL BE PAYING MORE.
THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. I
DON'T HAVE THAT SPECIFIC DETAIL
AT THIS TIME. I'VE HEARD -- SO
THE PRIOR, THE STANDARD
DEDUCTION OR THE EXEMPTION
THRESHOLD INCREASE WOULD GET TO
75% OF BUSINESSES WOULD BE
EXEMPT, LEAVING 5000. THE
ADDITIONAL NUMBER OF BUSINESSES
THAT WOULD BE EXEMPT, I CAN
FOLLOW UP WITH THAT SPECIFIC
DETAIL. I'VE HEARD THAT IT'S
ABOUT AN ADDITIONAL 15% OF
BUSINESSES WOULD BE EXEMPT BUT
AGAIN I DON'T HAVE THE
BREAKDOWN IN THAT SAME
CATEGORIZATION BUT I CAN FOLLOW
UP WITH THAT.
SORRY, TOM, DID YOU SAY 50%
OF THE REMAINDER? SO 50% OF THE
25% 2
SO APOLOGIZE IF I MISSPOKE: SO APOLOGIZE IF I MISSPOKE.
THE EXEMPTION THRESHOLD WOULD
GET TO 75% OF THE CURRENT
TAXPAYERS WOULD BE EXEMPT. THE
STANDARD DEDUCTION WOULD BE AN
ADDITIONAL 15% SO ABOUT 90%, AND
AGAIN, I HEARD THIS INFORMATION
FROM THE EXECUTIVE. I HAVEN'T
SEEN THE SPECIFIC NUMBERS AT MY
HANDS BUT I CAN COME UP WITH THE
BREAKDOWN BY BUSINESS TYPE OF
WHAT THOSE ADDITIONAL BUSINESSES
REPRESENT.
SO WE'LL GET THAT LATER WITH
THE ACTUAL NUMBERS OF
BUSINESSES? PERCENTAGE?
WE CAN PROVIDE THAT DETAIL: WE CAN PROVIDE THAT DETAIL
FOR SURE. BROADLY SPEAKING THERE
WOULD BE ABOUT 5000 BUSINESSES
LEFT IN THE POOL, IF YOU WILL,
OF BUSINESSES THAT ARE STILL
PAYING THE B AND O TAX AFTER
BOTH THE EXEMPTION AND THE
DEDUCTION. ABOUT HALF OF THAT
ROUGHLY $5000 NUMBER WOULD BE
FOLKS WHO ARE PAYING LESS,
RATHER THAN PAYING MORE. SO
IT'S ABOUT SPLIT HALF AND HALF.
THAT'S IMPORTANT, DIRECTOR,
BECAUSE I'VE HEARD THAT FROM A
LOT OF BUSINESSES, THAT 5
MILLION SOUNDS LIKE A LOT OF
MONEY. IT'S GROSS SALES AND SO
YOU KNOW YOU HAVE THOSE MIDDLE
BUSINESSES WHERE IT'S ACTUALLY
-- THEY'RE NOT MAKING AS MUCH
AS YOU THINK, EVEN THOUGH $5
MILLION SOUNDS LIKE A LOT, WHICH
IT IS TO ME, AS AN INDIVIDUAL.
BUT WHEN YOU'RE PAYING STAFF
AND EVERYTHING ELSE, AND
OVERHEAD, IT WINDS UP NOT BEEN A
TON. SO I JUST -- I WANT TO BE
CLEAR ON HOW MANY OF THOSE
BUSINESSES ARE PAYING MORE THAN
THEY ARE TODAY. I THINK THAT'S
IMPORTANT. WE CAN SET ASIDE THE
LARGE, LARGE BUSINESSES. I
UNDERSTAND THAT BUT THIS LITTLE,
YOU KNOW THIS AREA OR THESE
NUMBER OF BUSINESSES IS
IMPORTANT IN LIGHT OF WHAT WE'VE
HEARD, ACTUALLY EVEN IN PUBLIC
COMMENT TODAY. BUT I'VE HEARD
PRIOR TO TODAY THIS CONCERN AS
WELL SO I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR
ON HOW MANY OF THOSE BUSINESSES
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.
WE'LL FOLLOW UP WITH YOU BUT
IT'S ON THE ORDER OF 2500
BUSINESSES WILL BE PAYING MORE
AND THE OTHER BUSINESSES ARE
EITHER PAYING NOTHING FOR B AND
O TAX OR THEY'RE PAYING
SOMEWHAT LESS AND THE BREAKEVEN
POINT IS ABOUT $6 MILLION OF
CURRENTLY TAXABLE GROSS
RECEIPTS. IF YOU ARE A BUSINESS
THAT HAS ABOUT $6 MILLION OF
CURRENTLY TAXABLE GROSS
RECEIPTS, YOU ARE EITHER NO
LONGER PAYING ANY B AND O TAX OR
YOU'RE PAYING LESS THAN YOU'RE
CURRENTLY PAYING. IF YOU HAVE 6
MILLION OR SO OR MORE IN
CURRENTLY TAXABLE GROSS
RECEIPTS, YOU WILL BE PAYING A
HIGHER AMOUNT OF A TAX UNDER THE
RESTRUCTURED TAX BILL.
OKAY. SO WE'LL GET FOLLOW-UP
INFORMATION ON THAT POINT.
ANOTHER JUST TO CLARIFY,
NONPROFITS ARE NOT EXEMPT FROM
THESE TOTALS AS WELL, SO DO WE
KNOW WHAT THE NONPROFIT
PERCENTAGE IS VERSUS THE
FOR-PROFIT INSTITUTIONS? AND
I'M THINKING SPECIFICALLY HERE,
OBVIOUSLY CAME TO MY ATTENTION
JUST TODAY THAT FRED HUTCH WOULD
BE SUBJECT TO PAYING FOR THIS,
OUR MAIN CANCER RESEARCH
INSTITUTE IN THE CITY. THEY'RE
EXEMPT FROM THE STATE B AND O
AND SO I'M GETTING MORE
INFORMATION ON THAT BUT I JUST
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE
LOOKED AT THE NONPROFITS AND
IMPACTS ON PLACES LIKE FRED
HUTCH.
I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY NUMBERS: I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY NUMBERS
ON NONPROFITS. AS WAS MENTIONED
EARLIER, WE CAN'T GET
INDIVIDUAL TAXPAYER INFORMATION,
AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE BREAK IT
DOWN BY NONPROFIT VERSUS
FOR-PROFIT BUT WE CAN ASK AND
SEE IF WE ARE ABLE TO GET AT
LEAST THE AGGREGATE NUMBER ON
THAT. I'M NOT SURE. I HAVE NOT
SEEN THAT YET.
I APPRECIATE THAT, DEPUTY
MAYOR. I KNOW WE TOUCHED BASE
JUST A SECOND AGO ON
TRANSPARENCY, BECAUSE I HAVE
THIS QUESTION SO I APPRECIATE
YOU WORKING WITH ME TO FIGURE
THAT OUT AND FIGURE OUT IF FRED
HUTCH AND OTHER SIMILAR
INSTITUTIONS, SO THANK YOU FOR
THAT. THANK YOU, CHAIR.
THANK YOU VICE CHAIR: THANK YOU VICE CHAIR.
COLLEAGUES, I'M BREAKING THE
RULE, A GOOD RULE OF
FACILITATION, WHICH IS BEING
CONSISTENT AND PREDICTABLE. I'M
NOTICING THAT THE NEXT FEW
SLIDES ARE SUMMARIES, AND SO,
COLLEAGUES, IF YOU DO HAVE
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DEDUCTIONS,
I'M HAPPY TO TAKE THEM RIGHT
NOW. AS WE MOVE FORWARD THROUGH
THIS PRESENTATION THERE ARE TWO
MORE SECTIONS AND IN THE NEXT
PRESENTATION THERE ARE SECTIONS
OF THE PRESENTATIONS. WE'LL
HOLD QUESTIONS UNTIL THE END OF
THE SESSIONS AND THEN WE'LL ASK
THEM SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT
DIFFERENT THAN USUAL BUT JUST
WANT TO CHECK AND SEE IF THERE
ARE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT
THIS RESTRUCTURE IN THE
DEDUCTION. IF NOT, THEN WE WILL
HOLD QUESTIONS UNTIL SLIDE C,
COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I: I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I
HEARD CORRECTLY. NONPROFITS ARE
COVERED BY THIS. THEY WILL BE --
I MEAN IF A NONPROFIT BRINGS IN
MORE THAN $2 MILLION, COULD YOU
PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW NONPROFITS
ARE TREATED WITH THIS PROPOSAL?
YEAH, SO THANKS FOR THE
QUESTION, COUNCIL PRESIDENT
NELSON. SO THIS SPECIFIC
PROPOSAL WOULDN'T CHANGE
ANYTHING WITH REGARDS TO
NONPROFITS SPECIFICALLY. IF A
NONPROFIT IS BELOW $2 MILLION IN
ANNUAL REVENUE, IT WOULD BE
EXEMPT, SO THAT WOULD BE A
CHANGE AS A RESULT OF THIS
PROPOSAL. IF A -- AND AGAIN,
KIND OF GOING AHEAD TO KIND OF
SOME OF THE KIND OF DESCRIPTIONS
OF THE COMPARATIVE IMPACTS, BUT
IF A NONPROFIT IS HIGHER THAN
ANNUAL REVENUE OF $5.7 MILLION,
IT WOULD PAY A HIGHER TAX. SO
I'M NOT AWARE THAT THERE IS A
BROAD MARKET OF EXEMPTION IN THE
TAX FOR NONPROFITS. THEY ARE
ELIGIBLE KIND OF IN A BROAD
LEVEL TO PAY THE TAX. SO REALLY
THIS CHANGE WITH RESPECT TO
NONPROFITS IS REALLY WHETHER
THEY FALL ABOVE $2 MILLION OR
BELOW AND THEN IF THEY ARE ABOVE
$2 MILLION, WHETHER OR NOT THEY
HAVE $5.7 MILLION OF ANNUAL
REVENUE OR BELOW, IF THEY HAVE
BELOW $5.7 MILLION OF REVENUE
THEY WILL PAY A LOWER TAX. IF
THEY HAVE ABOVE 5.7 THEY WILL
PAY A HIGHER TAX.
THANK YOU: THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS, COUNCIL PRESIDENT?
COLLEAGUES, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
ON THE DEDUCTIONS SECTION? SEE
NONE, IF YOU WANT TO TICK
THROUGH YOUR NEXT SLIDES, WE'LL
TAKE QUESTIONS FROM
COUNCILMEMBERS ON SLIDE 10.
OKAY. SO CONTINUING THE NEXT
CHANGE IN THE PROPOSAL WOULD BE
A COMPARTMENT CHANGE TO THE
BUSINESS LICENSE FEE AND A HIGH
LEVEL, AS I MENTIONED, THE
BUSINESS LICENSE FEE AND THE B
AND O TAX ARE LINKED THROUGH THE
DEFINITION OF REVENUE,
SPECIFICALLY TAXABLE REVENUE.
AND TO PULL BACK EVEN FURTHER,
THE CITY HAS TWO, A FEE AND A
TAX SO JUST A BUSINESS LICENSE
FEE IS ASSESSED FOR JUST THE
PRIVILEGE OF DOING BUSINESS IN
THE CITY OF SEATTLE, AND THEN IF
YOU ARE A BUSINESS LICENSE FEE
OLDER THAN YOU MAY BE LIABLE TO
PAY THE B AND O TAX. THIS CHANGE
WILL BASICALLY CHANGE FOR ALL
TAXPAYERS WHAT THEIR TAX REBEL
-- WHAT THEIR TAXABLE REVENUES
ARE BY VIRTUE OF THE NEW
STANDARD DEDUCTION, AND BECAUSE
OF THAT, THERE WOULD'VE BEEN AN
UNANTICIPATED CHANGE IN THE
SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR FOLKS
PAYING THE BUSINESS LICENSE FEE.
SO THIS IS SIMPLY A CONFORMING
CHANGE TO MITIGATE AGAINST ANY
UNINTENDED REVENUE LOSS FROM THE
BUSINESS LICENSE FEE AS A RESULT
OF THIS CHANGE. SO FINALLY, THE
FINAL PIECE OF THE TAX
RESTRUCTURE IS A RATE INCREASE
WHICH INCREASES THE RATES TO THE
NEW PROPOSED RATES OF .342% FOR
WHOLESALE TRADE AND
MANUFACTURING AND .658 PERCENT
FOR SERVICES AND ALL THE OTHER
ACTIVITIES. YOU CAN SEE HERE IN
THE TABLE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE
SLIDE, WHAT THAT MEANS FOR A
BUSINESS WITH $1 MILLION FOR
EACH INCREMENTAL MILLION DOLLARS
OF REVENUE, FOR THE RETAIL RATE.
IT'S BASICALLY $1200 PER
ADDITIONAL MILLION DOLLARS OF
REVENUE AS A RESULT OF THIS TEXT
CHAIN FOR THE SERVICES AND OTHER
CATEGORY, IT'S TO 2300, A
LITTLE OVER $2300 WITH REGARDS
TO THE CHANGE FOR MILLION
DOLLARS OF REVENUE. AND I WOULD
SAY THAT ALL THESE NUMBERS AND
ESTIMATES COME BY WAY OF THE
CITY'S INDEPENDENT FORECAST
OFFICE, WHO ESTIMATE THAT THE
RATE INCREASE WOULD GENERATE
$151 MILLION OF ADDITIONAL
REVENUE IN 2026, HOWEVER, THERE
ARE EMBEDDED CAVEATS AND RISKS
IN ALL REVENUE ESTIMATES,
INCLUDING THIS ONE. TO KIND OF
PULL BACK A BIT AND LOOK AT WHAT
THIS MEANS FOR SEATTLE'S RATES
WITH REGARDS TO RATES CHARGED BY
OUR NEIGHBORING CITIES, YOU CAN
SEE KIND OF FIRST THE SEATTLE'S
CURRENT RATE IN THE BOLD RED
BARS. THAN THE SEATTLE PROPOSAL,
THE PROPOSED RATE WITH THIS
COUNCIL BILL OF WHAT IT WOULD
LOOK LIKE AND HOW THESE COMPARE
TO OTHER CITIES IN THE REGION.
AND YOU WILL NOTE THAT THE
CITIES OF REDMOND AND KIRKLAND
ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THIS CHART,
AND THAT'S BECAUSE THEY DO NOT
CURRENTLY ASSESS THIS TYPE OF B
AND O TAX. THEY INSTEAD ASSESS
HEAD TAXES. AND SO NOW A FEW
EXAMPLES. WE'VE KIND OF TALKED
ABOUT THIS A BIT WITH REGARDS TO
WHERE THE IMPACTS ARE WITHIN
THIS RESTRUCTURE. THERE WAS
MENTION WE DO NOT KNOW SPECIFIC
BUSINESSES. THAT'S REALLY
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
SO WE'VE KIND OF JUST PUT IT IN
TERMS OF BUSINESS A AND BUSINESS
B JUST FOR PURPOSES OF
COMPARISONS, AND DIFFERENT KIND
OF ANNUAL REVENUES FOR EACH OF
THESE SORT OF EXAMPLE BUSINESS
IS. GOING FROM $250,000 REVENUE
UP TO HALF $1 BILLION AND I
DON'T KNOW HOW MANY BUSINESSES
WOULD FALL INTO ANY ONE OF THESE
CATEGORIES. THESE ARE JUST
REALLY FOR PURPOSES OF EXAMPLE
IMPACTS. AND THE WAY THAT THE
TABLE IS SORTED, IT SHOWS THE
TAX DUE UNDER THE CURRENT
STRUCTURE THAT'S IN PLACE TODAY
AND THEN WHAT THE TAX DUE WOULD
BE AFTER THE RESTRUCTURE. SO YOU
CAN SEE CLEARLY THAT AROUND $5.7
MILLION REVENUE POINT IS WHERE
THE TAX BURDEN IS LOWER UNDER
THE RESTRUCTURE OR HIRE
DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU ARE WITH
REGARDS TO THAT INFLECTION
POINT. SO ESSENTIALLY ANYBODY
UNDER $5.7 MILLION OF REVENUE
WOULD OWE A LOWER TAX, ABOVE
WOULD OWE A HIGHER TAX AND THEN
LOOKING AT THE HALF $1 BILLION
REVENUE LEVEL, THE DIFFERENCE IS
A LITTLE BIT ABOVE HALF $1
MILLION OF ADDITIONAL REVENUE
IMPACT AFTER THE RESTRUCTURE.
AND THIS IS AGAIN , SINCE WE GOT
OUR TWO RATES, THIS IS
DESCRIBING THE CHANGES FOR THE
RETAIL, WHOLESALING AND
MANUFACTURING RATE. THE HIGHER
RATE, THE TRANSFER SERVICE FEE
FOR HIRE AND OTHER RATE, KIND OF
SIMILAR EXAMPLES. AGAIN THE AND
ELECTION POINT IS ABOUT $5.7
MILLION AND THEN THE ADDITIONAL
TAX FOR A HALF $1 BILLION
TAXPAYER WOULD BE ABOUT $1.1
MILLION PER YEAR AND SO THIS --
A LOT OF DIFFERENT PIECES OF THE
PROPOSAL, OF THE RESTRUCTURE.
BUT THIS PULLS IT ALL TOGETHER
TO SHOW HOW FISCALLY IT ALL
HANGS TOGETHER. FIRST THERE IS A
COST OF INCREASING THE SMALL
BUSINESS EXEMPTION. THAT'S $28
MILLION. SO THAT WOULD BE A
REVENUE LOSS. ALL ELSE BEING
EQUAL. THE $2 MILLION STANDARD
DEDUCTION WOULD REDUCE REVENUES
BY $33 MILLION. AGAIN, ALL ELSE
BEING EQUAL. HOWEVER, THE IMPACT
OF THE HIGHER TAX RATES BRINGS
AN ADDITIONAL $151 MILLION,
WHICH NETS TO $90 MILLION OF
ANNUAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE. AND
NOW I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER
TO JEN LOOK REQ TO EXPLAIN THE
USE OF THAT $90 MILLION.
HANG TIGHT, WE ARE GOING TO
PAUSE ON SLIDE 10 AND SEE IF
THERE ARE COUNCILMEMBER
QUESTIONS AT THE END OF THIS
SESSION? ALL RIGHT. NOW OVER TO
YOU, JENNIFER. I'M GOING TO ASK
THAT WE NOW GO THROUGH YOUR
SECTION SO THERE ARE THREE
SLIDES AND WE'LL HAVE QUESTIONS
FROM COUNCILMEMBERS AT THE END
OF YOUR THIRD SLIDE HERE.
SOUNDS GOOD. ALL RIGHT. SO I
WILL TALK ABOUT THE USE OF THE
NET REVENUE, AND HERE AGAIN,
JUST AS TOM COVERED, THE NET
REVENUE IS THE MONEY THAT'S
LEFT OVER AFTER PAYING FOR THE
LOSS OF REVENUE CREATED BY THE
STANDARD DEDUCTION AND THE
HIGHER EXEMPTION. ALL RIGHT. SO
UNDER THIS COUNCIL BILL THE NET
REVENUE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BE
USED FOR SEVERAL PURPOSES. THOSE
PURPOSES ARE AREAS OF FOOD
ACCESS, GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE
PROGRAMS, HOMELESSNESS
PREVENTION, EMERGENCY SHELTER,
AND SUPPORT FOR WORKERS RIGHTS ,
WORKERS RIGHTS AND PROTECTIONS
AND SMALL BUSINESS SUPPORTS.
THERE'S CURRENTLY ROUGHLY ABOUT
$145 MILLION IN GENERAL FUND
SUPPORTING THESE PROGRAM AREAS
AND ABOUT $10 MILLION OF PET. I
WANTED TO TAKE A FEW MOMENTS TO
TALK ABOUT WHAT THIS ORDINANCE
WOULD DO AND ALSO WHAT IT
WOULDN'T DO IN TERMS OF
SPECIFICITY. YOU KNOW AT HEART
THE ORDINANCE OR THE COUNCIL
BILL STATES THE CITY'S
PRIORITIES FOR USE OF THIS NET
REVENUE IN THE FACE OF BOTH
GENERAL FUND AND PET DEFICIT IN
THE COMING YEARS. IT IS INTENDED
TO PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY IN THE
FACE OF A LOT OF UNKNOWNS AND
THAT INCLUDES WHAT THE AUGUST
AND OCTOBER REVENUE FORECAST
WILL LOOK LIKE. AND IF THOSE
FORECAST WILL INCREASE THE
PROJECTED BUDGET DEFICIT. AS A
RESULT, THE ORDINANCE DOESN'T
SPECIFY FUNDING AMOUNTS OR
PERCENTAGES FOR EACH OF THE
ABOVE USES. IT ALSO DOES NOT
REQUIRE THAT ALL OF THESE USES
BE FUNDED OR THAT THE COUNCIL
MAINTAIN TODAY'S INVESTMENT
LEVELS. OVERALL I WOULD SAY THAT
IT IS THE INTENT OF THE
LEGISLATION THAT THE NET REVENUE
BE USED TO BACKFILL FOR PROGRAMS
THAT ARE CURRENTLY FUNDED WITH
THE GENERAL FUND AND TO AN
EXTENT ALSO PROGRAMS THAT ARE
FUNDED WITH PET, WHICH HAS
INCREASINGLY BECOME FUNGIBLE
WITH GENERAL FUND. BUT THE
ORDINANCE DOES NOT EXPLICITLY
SAY THAT, BUT THAT IS THE
INTENT, IS THE BACKFILL OF
EXISTING GENERAL FUNDED PROGRAMS
IN THESE FIVE AREAS THAT I JUST
MENTIONED.
NEXT SLIDE: NEXT SLIDE.
ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. THE
ORDINANCE ALSO SAYS THAT UP TO
$30 MILLION IN NET REVENUE MAY
BE USED FOR IMPLEMENTATION COSTS
AND THE ONGOING ADMINISTRATION
OF THE TAX. GIVE ME ONE MOMENT
HERE. ALL RIGHT. AS WE TALKED
ABOUT LAST TIME, IMPLEMENTATION
COSTS INCLUDE $2.3 MILLION FOR
SYSTEM CHANGES IN 2025. THAT'S
A ONE TIME COST, AND POTENTIALLY
ANOTHER $2.7 MILLION IN ONE-TIME
COSTS IF THERE IS A NEEDED
UPDATE TO THE CITY'S LEGACY
SYSTEM FOR ADMINISTERING TAXES.
AND THEN THERE WOULD BE
APPROXIMATELY $1.5 MILLION IN
ONGOING COSTS TO MOST OF THE TAX
INCLUDING PERSONNEL. THE SECOND
USE HERE IS FOR THIS UP TO $30
MILLION, IS TO MITIGATE THE
IMPACT OF FEDERAL FUNDING
REDUCTIONS IN FOUR DIFFERENT
AREAS, HOUSING STABILITY FOR LOW
INCOME TENANTS, FOOD INSECURITY,
FINANCIAL SECURITY FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVIDERS,
AND EMERGENCY SHELTER AND
HOMELESSNESS. AS WRITTEN, THE
LEGISLATION SAYS UP TO $30
MILLION. SO THAT IS AN ELIGIBLE
USE FOR THIS FUNDING TO MITIGATE
THE IMPACT OF FEDERAL FUNDING
REDUCTIONS. BUT IT DOES NOT
NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE USED FOR
THAT PURPOSE. NET REVENUE, IF
THE LEGISLATION DOESN'T REQUIRE
THAT IT BE USED FOR THAT
PURPOSE. IT PRESERVES
FLEXIBILITY TO USE NET REVENUE
TO BACKFILL FOR GENERAL FUND IF
NEEDED AS WELL, DEPENDING ON
FUTURE FORECASTS. NEXT SLIDE,
PLEASE. THE COUNCIL BILL DOES
REQUIRE THE EXECUTIVE TO PROVIDE
SOME INFORMATION TO COUNCIL,
BOTH IN ADVANCE OF TRANSMITTING
THE BUDGET, AND ALSO WITH
TRANSMITTAL OF THE BUDGET. IT
REQUIRES THAT AT LEAST THREE
MONTHS PRIOR TO THE MAYOR
SUBMITTING THE ANNUAL BUDGET,
THE EXECUTIVE CONSULT WITH
COUNCIL ON THE IMPACT OF ACTUAL
AND ANTICIPATED REVENUE
REDUCTIONS AND FEDERAL FUNDING
CUTS ON THE IDENTIFIED PROGRAM
AREAS, AND INFORM COUNCIL HOW
THE NEW REVENUE GENERATED BY
THIS ORDINANCE WOULD BE
UTILIZED. ONCE THE BUDGET IS
TRANSMITTED, THE COUNCIL BILL
ALSO REQUIRES A WRITTEN PROPOSED
PLAN OUTLINING HOW THE NEW
REVENUE GENERATED BY THIS
ORDINANCE IS TO BE UTILIZED
AGAIN IN THE IDENTIFIED PROGRAM
AREAS, AND I WILL STOP THERE FOR
QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU, JENNIFER.
COUNCILMEMBER?
THANK CHAIR STRAUSS AND THANK: THANK CHAIR STRAUSS AND THANK
YOU MS. LABRECQUE. I'M LOOKING
AT YOUR LAST SLIDE SO I JUST
WANTED TO SAY FIRST SINCE THIS
IS UP RIGHT NOW THAT I DO
SUPPORT THESE BULLETS, THESE
POINTS ABOUT HAVING THE MAYOR
SUBMIT THE BUDGETS, THE SHELL
AND THE SECOND BILL REGARDING
HOW THE ORDINANCE WOULD BE
UTILIZED. MY QUESTION GOING
BACK, BRINGING UP MY BRIEFING
COMBINATION IS WE HAVE A DEFICIT
AND SO MY QUESTION IS FOR ALL
THE SLIDES IN THE SECTION, I
DON'T SEE THE WORD DEFICIT. IS
THAT A CONSCIOUS -- I MEAN --
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE, I'M
GOING TO ACTUALLY LEAVE THAT ONE
TO THE SPONSORS OF THIS BILL,
UNLESS THERE'S A RESPONSE THAT
JENNIFER OR TOM HAS.
MY ONLY RESPONSE IS THAT: MY ONLY RESPONSE IS THAT
ALTHOUGH THE WORD DEFICIT WAS
NOT ON THE SLIDE, I SAID THE
WORD DEFICIT A LOT AND I DID SAY
THAT BECAUSE I THINK THIS WAS
CONSTRUCTED. THE ORDINANCE WAS
CONSTRUCTED TO MAINTAIN
FLEXIBILITY ABOUT USES. YES
THERE ARE BUCKETS BUT WITHIN
THOSE BUCKETS OR THOSE
IDENTIFIED PROGRAM AREAS THAT
ARE PRIORITIES, THERE'S
FLEXIBILITY ABOUT HOW THE
FUNDING WILL BE USED AND ALSO
FLEXIBILITY FOR EXAMPLE, NOT
AROUND MAINTAINING INVESTMENTS.
IT DOESN'T SAY THE CITY WILL
MAINTAIN INVESTMENTS. IT
DOESN'T SPECIFY THE AMOUNT OF
SPENDING OR PERCENTAGE OF
SPENDING IN EACH AREA, AND THAT
REALLY IS BECAUSE FLEXIBILITY IS
NEEDED GIVEN THE PROJECTED
BUDGET DEFICIT AND BECAUSE WE
DON'T KNOW WITH FUTURE
FORECASTS IF THE DEFICIT WILL
GET WORSE.
I SEE DIRECTOR NOBLE HAS A: I SEE DIRECTOR NOBLE HAS A
QUESTION. I'M GOING TO GIVE A
HIGH-LEVEL BUDGET RESPONSE.
DEPUTY MAYOR, YOU CAN GO BEFORE
DIRECT OR NOBLE. OVER TO YOU,
SIR.
I'LL JUST ADD ON TO WHAT
JENNIFER SAID, WHICH IS IS WE
TALK ABOUT THE DEFICIT BECAUSE
OF TALK ABOUT THE CON -- HOW
THIS IS RAISING QUITE A BIT SO
TO THE EXTENT WE HAVE TIME TO
COVER THAT WE ARE HAPPY TO TALK
ABOUT THAT AND HOW THAT FACTORED
INTO OUR THINKING ON THIS.
THANKS, DIRECTOR NOBLE.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE THE: I JUST WANT TO MAKE THE
GENERAL OBSERVATION THAT
BUDGETING PROCESS IS INHERENTLY
DYNAMIC AND I THINK IT'S GOING
TO BE A LOT MORE DYNAMIC OVER
THE NEXT FEW YEARS, WE TEND TO
BE THINKING ABOUT SHORTFALLS IN
THE CITY FUNDING SUPPORTING A
VARIETY OF ACTIVITIES. I SUSPECT
OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS WE ARE
GOING TO SEE LOSSES OF FUNDING
FROM VARIOUS OTHER DIRECTIONS.
THEY MAY ULTIMATELY BE TIED BACK
TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. NOT
CLEAR BUT FOR INSTANCE WE
RECEIVE STATE PASS-THROUGHS OF
FEDERAL MONEY, THE COUNTY
SUPPORTS MANY OF THE SAME
ACTIVITIES SO IF ONE TRIES TO
GET TO RIGID AND SAYING WE ARE
GOING TO FILL IN FOR THIS LOSS
OF MONEY WITH THIS PARTICULAR
SOURCE OR THAT ONE FOR THIS
PARTICULAR PRIORITY OR ANOTHER,
I'M GOING TO GO OUT ON A LIMB,
I THINK YOU ARE PLAYING A FOOLS
ERRAND. IT'S GOING TO BE MORE
DYNAMIC THAN THAT. WE ARE GOING
TO LOSE TRACK OF WHAT THE BASE
IS BECAUSE THE FUNDING THAT FOR
MANY YEARS HAS SUPPORTED CERTAIN
ACTIVITIES I THINK IS GOING TO
BE SHIFTING AROUND SO AS YOU
APPROACH THIS ALL , A
RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU
RECOGNIZE THE DYNAMIC NATURE AND
I THINK FLEXIBILITY AND I
UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A REAL
TENSION BETWEEN ACCOUNTABILITY,
COMMITMENT AND FLEX ABILITY AND
YOU'RE GOING TO STRUGGLE WITH
IT BECAUSE OF THE ENVIRONMENT
YOU'RE IN SOME EDITORIAL
COMMENT AND POTENTIAL ADVICE.
THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER: THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK, I'LL LET YOU HAVE A
RESPONSE AND I GOT A BUDGET
LEVEL RESPONSE AS WELL AND
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE, YOU STILL
HAVE THE FLOOR.
THANK YOU CHAIR STRAUSS. I
DON'T HAVE TOO MUCH TO ADD BUT
JUST TO CONTRIBUTE THAT. THE
EXECUTIVE IN MY OFFICE AND THE
DEVELOPMENT OF THIS TRIED TO
WALK THAT BALANCE IN PROVIDING
THAT SUBTLETY, CREATING ALSO
OPPORTUNITIES FOR
ACCOUNTABILITY. THAT'S WHY WE
HAVE THE INCLUSION OF THE REPORT
FROM THE EXECUTIVE TO ENSURE
AGAIN THAT WE ARE MAKING SURE
THAT THESE FUNDS GO TOWARDS THE
OUTLINED AREAS IN THIS ORDINANCE
BUT AGAIN WE HAVE A LOT OF
UNCERTAINTY COMING OUR WAY.
WE'VE HEARD DISCUSSIONS FROM
THE PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS ABOUT
CUTS TO CRITICAL HOUSING
SERVICES, HOUSING AND
HOMELESSNESS SERVICES, A NUMBER
OF WHICH WE'VE DISCUSSED IN THE
SELECT COMMITTEE ON FEDERAL
ADMINISTRATION POLICY CHANGES.
BUT A NUMBER OF THEM HAVEN'T
COME THROUGH YET, BUT WHO'S TO
SAY WHAT TOMORROW HOLDS. AND SO
TRYING TO CREATE THAT AMOUNT OF
FLEXIBILITY WHILE CREATING ALSO
A PLANET OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE
TO BACKFILL FOR THOSE, THAT WAS
THE BALANCE WE TRIED TO PROVIDE
WITH THIS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. DIRECTOR NOBLE
TOOK WHAT I WAS GENERALLY GOING
TO SAY, WHICH IS THAT AS WE MOVE
INTO THE BUDGET PROCESS,
THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF
DIFFERENT REVENUE SOURCES THAT
WE ALREADY HAVE WITHIN OUR
BUDGET, NOT INCLUDING THE
PROPOSAL BEFORE US. THOSE
SOURCES CAN BE SHIFTED AROUND SO
THAT WE CAN DO OUR BEST TO SERVE
SEATTLEITES TO THE BEST OF OUR
ABILITIES. AND I STARTED THIS
PRESENTATION OFF BY TALKING
ABOUT DEPUTY MAYOR'S LIED ABOUT
WE HAVE THREE GENERAL BUCKETS OF
TOOLS, EFFICIENCIES, REDUCTIONS
IN REVENUE. WE CANNOT RELY ON A
SINGLE ONE OF THOSE TO GET US
OUT OF THE SITUATION THAT WE ARE
IN AND WHILE IT IS EASY, IT'S
NOT EASY FOR US TO SAY TODAY
WHAT THOSE REDUCTIONS WOULD BE,
WE KNOW THAT SOME REDUCTIONS
WILL BE COMING IN THIS BUDGET.
IF WE ARE NOT PREPARING
OURSELVES TO SOLIDIFY THE VERY
PROGRAMS THAT HAVE ALREADY
RECEIVED REDUCTIONS AT THE STATE
AND FEDERAL LEVEL, THESE WOULD
END UP AS TRIPLE CUTS AND WHAT I
HAVE SEEN THREE BUDGETING
PROCESSES, FROM THE GREAT
RECESSION TO OVER THE LAST
NUMBER OF YEARS IS THAT OFTEN
TIMES THE SERVICES THAT SUPPORT
THE LEAST AMONGST US ARE THE
FIRST TO GET REDUCED AND THIS IS
A WAY TO BALANCE AGAINST THAT.
I THINK THAT'S VERY
IMPORTANT, DIRECTOR NOBLE. THANK
YOU. THIS IS ONE OF THE POINTS
I'VE BEEN SAYING ABOUT THIS. WE
SHOULD NOT BE LOOKING AT B AND O
IN AND OF ITSELF. WE SHOULD BE
LOOKING AT A WAY WITH ALL THE
VARIOUS PIECES AND HAVE
COMPREHENSIVE BUDGET REFORM AND
SET OURSELVES UP FOR SUCCESS IN
2027. AND PART OF OUR THING IS
THE MAYOR HAS THIS
RESPONSIBILITY. I'M NOT A FAN
OF THESE BUCKETS OR THESE LINE
AND TO GO TO THIS POINT, I
WOULD'VE HAD THIS THIRD SLIDE
BE THE FIRST SLIDE BECAUSE THAT
GOES TO THAT AND I REALLY
APPRECIATE THAT. SECOND IS I
APPRECIATE THE SECOND SLIDE
STILL BE IN THE SECOND SLIDE
BECAUSE AS IT PLAYS TO THE
POINTS RAISED, THE FEDERAL
FUNDING REDUCTIONS, YOU KNOW
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE
TO OFFSET. THAT GOES TO HAVING A
STRATEGY AND HAVING A PLAN.
OKAY, IF YOU LOST THE FEDERAL
PEACE, OKAY. THEN THIRD WOULD
BE, SAY HEY, UNDER THESE FEDERAL
PIECES TO THE BUDGET BUCKETS, WE
TEND TO BE IMPACTED HERE FROM
FEMA, FOR OEM, TO ALL THE PIECES
HERE. FOR EXAMPLE, I DON'T SEE
FEMA ON THIS LIST BUT WHERE THE
FEDERAL DOLLARS REALLY HAVE AN
IMPACT, AS OPPOSED TO LEADING
WITH THIS, BECAUSE ULTIMATELY I
THINK WE STARTED DOING THIS, WE
TAKE AWAY FROM THE IDEA THAT THE
MAYOR HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY AND
THE ACCOUNTABILITY TO HAVE THE
BUDGET COVER THE NEEDS OF THE
CITY AND WE HAVE OUR ROLE THIS
PROCESS AND LIKE WITH PET, I'M
NOT A FAN OF THAT BECAUSE I
THINK IT DISTORTS THAT PROCESS A
BIT SO A LITTLE BIT EDITORIAL AT
THE END BUT I WOULD SAY THANK
YOU MS. LABRECQUE FOR THE
BRIEFING AND FOR ME, I WOULD'VE
DONE THE THIRD SLIDE FIRST AND
TO HIGHLIGHT THAT POINT, THE
SECOND SLIDE, FOCUSING ON THE
FEDERAL REDUCTION AND THEN
WEARING THE AREAS OF FEDERAL
FUNDING DO WE NEED THE SUPPORT?
LIKELY HAD THE DV PIECE. THIS
GOES BACK TO PUBLIC COMMENT SO
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, BY THE
WAY. LIKE HEY, HOW DO WE ADJUST
FOR THOSE AREAS WHERE WE ARE
BEING HURT BECAUSE OF THE
FEDERAL CUTS? AND SINCE I AM THE
PUBLIC SAFETY CHAIR I WILL DO A
PLUG FOR THE FEMA RELATED AREAS,
TOO. SO THANK YOU.
CHAIR STRAUSS, CAN I SAY ONE
CLARIFYING THING? JUST TO
CLARIFY, AND MAYBE I'M JUST
MISUNDERSTANDING YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE, BUT UP TO
$30 MILLION MAY BE USED TO
MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF A FEDERAL
FUNDING REDUCTION BUT THE
REMAINING ESTIMATED $60 MILLION
IS INTENDED TO BACKFILL EXISTING
PROGRAMS THAT ARE FUNDED WITH
GENERAL FUNDS, SO THAT $60
MILLION IS NOT RELATED TO
OFFSETTING FEDERAL FUNDING
REDUCTIONS. JUST WANTED TO
CLARIFY.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT AND THEN: COUNCIL PRESIDENT AND THEN
VICE CHAIR RIVERA.
JUST GETTING AT SOME OF THE: JUST GETTING AT SOME OF THE
SPENDING BUCKET. SO YOU
MENTIONED THE FIGURE $145
MILLION. SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT
YOU SAID THAT WE ARE ALREADY
SPENDING ON THE FIRST CATEGORY
OF EXPENSES, RIGHT? I'M JUST
TRYING TO -- JUST HEAR ME OUT,
THOUGH, BECAUSE I WANT TO KNOW
HOW MUCH IS THE DEFICIT AS IT IS
RIGHT NOW AND I KNOW THAT
PERHAPS DEPUTY MAYOR WONG WILL
BE ADDRESSING THAT IF WE CAN
FINALLY GET TO HIS PRESENTATION.
BUT WHAT IS THE DEFICIT NOW AND
THEN WILL THIS PROPOSAL THEN
SOLVE THE LONG-TERM GENERAL FUND
AND JUMPSTART OR PET SHORTAGES
GOING FORWARD? SO JUST KNOWING
THE BIG NUMBER AND WHAT WE ARE
WALKING BACK FROM WOULD BE GOOD
TO KNOW. AND ANOTHER QUESTION
THAT I HAVE IS HAVING TO DO WITH
FORECASTING THE LAST THREE OR
FOUR QUARTERLY FORECASTS, EVEN
BEFORE THE PET SHORTFALL, THE
FIGURES THAT ARE IN THE RED ARE
ALWAYS SALES TAX AND B AND O AND
SOMETIMES REIT AND THAT SHOWS
DECREASED ECONOMIC ACTIVITY. NOW
WE HAVE ADOPTED THE PESSIMISTIC
OUTLOOK OR FORECAST. AND SO WHEN
WE'RE LOOKING AT THE REVENUES
OR THE INCOME COMING FROM THIS
PROPOSAL GOING FORWARD FROM THE
B AND O, I ASSUME THAT THERE IS
A THE ESCALATOR ON THERE
SOMEWHERE, WHERE WE CAN ACCOUNT
FOR DECREASED ECONOMIC ACTIVITY,
INVEST REVENUE, RIGHT?
I'M GOING TO TAKE A SHOT AT
ALL OF THAT SO BASED ON THE
APRIL FORECAST, THE PRESENTATION
THAT PROVIDED AN ESTIMATE OF
COMBINED GENERAL FUND AND
PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX AND I REALLY
DO THINK THAT THE USEFUL WAY TO
BE DOING THIS BECAUSE OF THE
FLUIDITY BETWEEN THOSE TWO FUNDS
THAT YOU HAVE NOW ESTABLISHED IN
POLICY, WORKING WITH THE
EXECUTIVE TO DO SO. OUR ESTIMATE
OF THAT DEFICIT IS BETWEEN 235
AND 240 MILLION. I WOULD PUT
SOME CARROTS, SOME GRAINS OF
SALT ON THAT, BUT IT'S WELL
NORTH OF $200 MILLION. THIS
REVENUE PROPOSAL IS WELL SHORT
OF THAT SO I VERY MUCH
APPRECIATE THE QUESTION BECAUSE
I THINK EVERYBODY HERE AND
CANDIDLY THE VOTING PUBLIC NEED
TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT
GOING TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM. I
THINK YOU WILL SEE THAT WHEN THE
BUDGET COMES DOWN IN THE FALL
THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET
THROUGH, IF YOU CHOOSE TO
IMPLEMENT AS PROPOSED, 2026 WITH
REDUCTIONS BUT IN SOME SENSE
MINIMAL REDUCTIONS. BUT THE
CHALLENGE THAT SETS UP FOR '27
NOW IS GOING TO BE SIGNIFICANT
AND SEVERE, IF YOU WILL, BECAUSE
230, 245 MINUS 60 REALLY BECAUSE
30 OF THIS IS REALLY INTENDED
FOR SOMETHING ELSE, IS WELL
ABOVE 150 MILLION, EVEN TO PUT
THIS IN A BALLPARK. AND I REMIND
COUNCILMEMBERS, THE IDEA
STREAMLINING A CITY BUDGET
SOUNDS GREAT IN THEORY BUT THE
ACTUAL REALITY, THE REDUCTIONS
THAT HAVE COME TO COUNCIL IN THE
PAST FEW YEARS OR I HAVE SEEN IN
THIS CHAIR AND IN THAT CHAIR IS
THE SAME BUDGET, ARE ONES THAT
ARE ALWAYS DIFFICULT TO SWALLOW.
THE CITY IS PROVIDING SERVICES
THAT ARE OF VALUE TO CITIZENS OF
ALL DIFFERENT FRAMES AND I JUST
WANT TO EMPHASIZE THE CHALLENGE
THAT YOU'RE FACING AND LOOKING
AHEAD SO NOW WITH RESPECT TO THE
OTHER PART OF YOUR QUESTION, THE
OTHER PART OF THE FORECAST, WHEN
YOU SEE THE FORECAST, WHAT RED
GENERALLY MEANS IS WE ARE
USUALLY COMPARING -- TWO
DIFFERENT THINGS WE'RE
COMPARING. SOMETIMES WE ARE
COMPARING THIS YEAR TO THE
PREVIOUS YEAR IN WHICH CASE RED
ACTUALLY SHOWS A DECLINE IN
REVENUES. OTHER TIMES WE ARE
SHOWING THE CURRENT FORECAST FOR
SAKE THIS YEAR OR NEXT YEAR AND
WE'RE COMPARING IT TO THE
PREVIOUS FORECAST AND IF THE
FORECAST GOES DOWN EVEN IF
POTENTIALLY UNDERLYING GO UP :-(
WHEN I WAS JUST LEAVING WE: WHEN I WAS JUST LEAVING WE
WERE ANTICIPATING A PERIOD OF
LOWER GROWTH GOING FORWARD THAT
THE U.S. ECONOMY AS A WHOLE IN
THIS REGION IN PARTICULAR AND WE
ARE SEEING THAT. WE ARE
DEFINITELY SEEING SLOWER GROWTH
AND ANTICIPATE THAT GOING
FORWARD. THAT IS A CHALLENGE FOR
THE CITY BECAUSE OUR EXPENSES
ARE GROWING QUICKLY AND BECAUSE
THE DEMAND FOR SERVICES AT SOME
LEVEL WAS ALWAYS INFINITE AND
WITH THE CHANGES IN FEDERAL
POLICY IS ACTIVELY GROWING TWO
KINDS OF SERVICES THAT THE CITY
PROVIDES SO IT'S LESS THAT WE
ARE SEEING ECONOMIC DECLINE BUT
RATHER THE PACE OF GROWTH HAS
BEEN SLOWER AND WE'RE EXPECTING
IT TO BE SLOWER GOING FORWARD.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I'LL LET
YOU CONTINUE. I JUST WANT TO
SAY, DIRECTOR NOBLE, I BELIEVE
YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON WHO HAS
SET IN THE DIRECT HER SEAT OF
THE CITY BUDGET OFFICE, THE
FORECASTING OFFICE AND CENTRAL
STAFF, IS THAT CORRECT?
IT'S ONLY EXISTED FOR A FEW
YEARS BUT THE ANSWER IS YES. NO
I RAISE THAT FACT BECAUSE OF: I RAISE THAT FACT BECAUSE OF
THE WARNING THAT YOU JUST
PROVIDED THAT EVERY TIME
EFFICIENCIES OR REDUCTIONS HAVE,
IT HAS BEEN VERY DIFFICULT TO
IMPLEMENT BECAUSE OF THE REALITY
OF THE IMPACT IT HAS OF EVERYDAY
LIVES OF EVERYDAY SEATTLEITES.
YOU STILL GOT THE FLOOR SO
CONTINUE TO
WHEN I SAY READ I SAY SLOWER: WHEN I SAY READ I SAY SLOWER
GROWTH. WHEN I SAY READ I SEE
SOMETHING IT IS
DRIVING HIS THE FORECAST
REVEALED THAT THE ECONOMY,
PARTICULARLY THE TECHNOLOGY SIDE
HAS BEEN GROWING SLOWER . THE
ECONOMIC IMPACTS OUR LANDING
GEAR AS REVENUE IMPACTS.
VICE CHAIR: VICE CHAIR?
THANK YOU. THANK YOU ,
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE . I FIND
YOUR POINTS COMPELLING. WE HAVE
ALL THESE FUNDING SOURCES, WE
ARE DEDICATING SPECIFIC THINGS
TO THEM. WE HAVE THIS BUDGET
DEFICIT. THERE DOES NOT SEEM TO
BE A HOLISTIC PLAN FOR HOW TO
TACKLE THE BUDGET AND THE
DEFICIT. TOWARD THAT END, THIS
PARTICULAR REVENUE SOURCE IS NOT
GOING TO BACKFILL FOR THE
DEFICIT. YOU CAN'T EVEN GET TO
THE FEDERAL CUTS IF YOU CAN'T
EVEN GET TO OUR CITY DEFICIT.
THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
WE DON'T KNOW, AND I THINK YOU
ARE GOING TO TELL US WHAT THE
FEDERAL IMPACT FOR TO THE CITY
SO WE NEED TO KNOW THAT. THEN
HARD CHOICES WILL HAVE TO BE
MADE ON -- DO WE PAY FOR
SOMETHING WE ARE LOSING FOR THE
FEDS? OR DO WE GO TO THE DEFICIT
. I SUSPECT SOME OF THE STUFF WE
ARE LOSING FROM THE FEDS
ACTUALLY GOES TO OUR CITY
DEFICIT BECAUSE WE ARE GETTING
SOME MONEY THAT IS CONTRIBUTING
TO EVEN A BIGGER DEFICIT THAN
YOU JUST OUTLINED. MAYBE IT IS
MORE DEPENDING ON WHATEVER THIS
IS. AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT
BEGS THE QUESTION WHY NOT JUST
PUT ALL OF THIS IN THE GENERAL
FUND AND AS YOU ARE DOING THE
BUDGET PROCESS YOU ARE
DELINEATED AND WHERE IT GOES. WE
KEEP DOING THESE FUNDING SOURCES
AND THEN NARROWING BUT WE CAN
USE TO SPEND WITH IT. THEREBY IN
SOME CASES WE ARE CONTINUING TO
CREATE THIS GENERAL FUND
DEFICIT. ONCE WE ALLOCATE THE
USE TO THAT PARTICULAR FUND WE
CAN'T USE IT FOR OTHER THINGS.
SOME OF THE THINGS GOING THROUGH
YOUR MIND YOU ARE MAKING THE
STATEMENTS ABOUT BUDGET REFORM
AND HOW TO BEST TACKLE ALL
REVENUE SOURCES TO THINK ABOUT
THEM AND DO WE JUST THINK ABOUT
THEM ALL AS GENERAL FUND DUE TO
THOSE ALLOCATIONS OR DO WE
CONTINUE TO DO THIS IN A WAY
WHERE IT IS VERY IN MY MIND AD
HOC. TO YOUR POINT,
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE , AS WELL
IN TERMS OF REVENUE I DON'T
KNOW HOW THESE GOT DETERMINED TO
BE IN HERE. OTHER THINGS ARE NOT
IN HERE THAT PEOPLE CARE ABOUT
THE CITY FUNDING AS WELL. YOU
MENTION FEMA BUT THERE ARE OTHER
THINGS THAT PEOPLE CARE ABOUT
THAT ARE NOT ON THE LIST. I'M
NOT REALLY SURE HOW THE LIST
CAME TO BE. I DO HAVE A
QUESTION. THE QUESTION IS, GIVEN
ALL OF THAT IS THERE
CONSIDERATION TO JUST NOT SINGLE
OUT THINGS TO BE FUNDED BUT THIS
WILL GO INTO THE GENERAL FUND TO
HELP BACKFILL FOR THE DEFICIT
AND FEDERAL IMPACTS AND THEN
DURING BUDGET TIME ALLOCATE
DEPENDING ON HOW THIS IMPACTS
ARE GOING TO BE.
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER, FOR
THE QUESTION. I WILL MAKE AN
OBSERVATION THAT I APPRECIATE
YOUR AND COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE'S
GOOD GOVERNANCE POLICY AND
LOGICAL APPROACH TO THE BUDGET.
IN A WAY, THE BUDGET WE SEND
DOWN AND YOU APPROVE IS THE
ROUGH PLAN. I THINK YOU ARE
ASKING FOR A LITTLE BIT OF GOING
UP A LEVEL TRYING TO THINK ABOUT
HOW DOES THIS WORK TOGETHER
PRACTICALLY. I THINK THAT IS THE
RIGHT APPROACH. I WOULD SAY IT
IS INCREDIBLY CHALLENGING WITH
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND THE
PLACE IT IS BECAUSE IT IS
GOVERNING BY CHAOS. IT IS HARD
TO ANTICIPATE AND RESPOND IN THE
RESPONSIBLE WAY WHEN YOU HAVE
SUCH AN UNPREDICTABLE LEVER . AT
BEN'S POINT EARLIER WE ARE NOT
SURE ABOUT WHERE THAT WILL LAND.
THE POTENTIAL IMPACT IS BROAD.
WE KNOW IT IS A QUESTION OF
WHEN, NOT IF. I THINK THERE WILL
BE A BRIEFING ON THE SO-CALLED
BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL AND FEDERAL
RESPONSE COMMITTEE COMING UP
BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE WE WILL
REALLY SEE SOME AND ACT IN THE
COMING YEARS. MORE DIRECTLY TO
YOUR QUESTION THAT YOU RAISED,
ABSOLUTELY. THERE IS
CONSIDERATION ALWAYS . WE ARE
TRYING TO STRIKE A BALANCE OF
ASSURING THE PUBLIC THAT THESE
FUNDS WILL BE GOING TO THINGS
THAT ARE COVERING THE MOST BASIC
NEEDS AS WAS POINTED OUT WHETHER
IT IS FOOD, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE,
THINGS WE KNOW ARE IMPORTANT
PRIORITIES FOR THE PEOPLE OF
SEATTLE WHILE ALLOWING FOR
FLEXIBILITY IN A WAY THAT WE
KNOW THERE IS A NUMBER OF
DIFFERENT AREAS THAT COULD COME
TO THAT. HOUSING, HOMELESSNESS
OBVIOUSLY VERY BROAD AND WHAT WE
FUNDS THERE. WE KNOW THAT THE
NEED WILL BE GREAT. IT TRIES TO
STRIKE THAT BALANCE BETWEEN
FLEXIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY.
I DO NOT THINK THERE IS A
PERFECT MATHEMATICAL EQUATION
FOR A HOW YOU FIND THAT BALANCE.
IT IS APOLOGIES -- A POLICY
DECISION. I WILL REFER TO
COUNCILMEMBER RINK.
THIS IS WHERE WE ARE: THIS IS WHERE WE ARE
ANTICIPATING THE CUTS WILL BE
THE DEEPEST. THESE SERVICES AS
WE KNOW HAVE OFFERED TREMENDOUS
BENEFIT TO OUR COMMUNITY IN
TERMS OF TAKING CARE OF OUR MOST
VULNERABLE NEIGHBORS. WE HAVE
BEEN EXPLORING THE PROSPECTIVE
CUTS COMING OUR WAY .
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA KNOW YOU
WERE ASKING ABOUT HOW WE
UNDERSTAND THOSE CHANGES. WE
HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING THOSE OVER
THE PAST COUPLE OF SESSIONS. I
KNOW YOU HAVE NOT ALWAYS BEEN
ABLE TO JOIN THOSE SESSIONS BUT
WE WILL BE MEETING THIS FRIDAY
TO BE TALKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT
THE NATURE OF THE CUTS OUTLINED
IN, AS I CALL IT THE PEWTER --
BRUTAL BETRAYAL BILL . WE WILL
HAVE A NUMBER OF PROVIDERS WHO
WORK IN THE AREAS OUTLINED IN
THIS LEGISLATION WHO WILL BE
SPEAKING TO THE DIRECT IMPACTS
TO THEIR WORK. THESE OUTLINED
AREAS ARE INFORMED BY THE
FINDINGS OF OUR SELECT COMMITTEE
MEETINGS. ADDITIONALLY, THE
INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN
BROUGHT TO MY OFFICE BY A NUMBER
OF FOLKS ACROSS THE COMMUNITY.
AND WHAT WE CONTINUE TO HEAR ARE
THE LARGEST CONCERNS. WE KNOW
THAT HOMELESSNESS CONTINUES TO
BE THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE. SOME OF
THE CUT THAT HAVE BEEN
HIGHLIGHTED AS POTENTIALLY
COMING OUR WAY ARE RELATED TO
CONTINUUM OF CARE FUNDING AS
WELL AS EMERGENCY HOUSING
VOUCHERS. I WILL REMIND THE BODY
THAT THE CONTINUING CARE KEEPS
4500 HOUSEHOLDS HOUSED . THAT IS
HOUSEHOLDS NOT PEOPLE . WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT THOUSANDS OF
RESIDENTS IN THE REGION. IT HAS
ALSO BEEN INDICATED THAT THE
EMERGENCY HOUSING VOUCHERS THAT
CAME THROUGH THE AMERICAN RESCUE
PLAN, THESE HOUSING VOUCHERS
WERE INTENDED TO HAVE 10 YEARS
OF HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
ASSOCIATED WITH IT IS INDICATED
THAT THESE WILL AND IN THE
COMING MONTHS . SPRUCE SEATTLE
HOUSING AUTHORITY WE HAVE ABOUT
500 HOUSEHOLDS AND VOUCHERS
ASSOCIATED . THIS OFFERS AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR SOME PIECES.
THIS MATTERS AS THE CUT TO SNAP
BECAUSE OF THE BIG BETRAYAL
BUILT BEEN CUT BY ABOUT A THIRD.
MY OFFICE HAS ASKED FOR AN
ANALYSIS THAT OF WHAT THAT MEANS
FOR RESIDENTS. BEING ABLE TO
ADDRESS THAT NEED WHILE ALSO
MOCKING AND ON SERVICES WILL BE
A REAL NEED. I WILL CLOSE BY
SAYING AGAIN THIS IS AN
OPPORTUNITY TO SEND SOMETHING TO
VOTERS. WE NEED TO BE CLEAR
ABOUT WHAT WE INTEND TO USE
THESE FUNDS FOR. HAVING SOME
AMOUNT OF OUTLINING WHAT WE
INTEND TO SPEND THESE FUNDS ON
WILL BE REALLY IMPORTANT FOR
SENDING A CLEAR MESSAGE TO
VOTERS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. PLEASE BE
ASSURED WHEN I'M NOT ABLE TO
ATTEND I WATCH TO GET THE
INFORMATION. I HAVE NOT SEEN
INFORMATION DATA AT THAT
COMMITTEE. I JUST MEAN HOLISTIC
DATA ON WHAT ALL THE CUTS ARE
FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. I
APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING
COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS IN
CHAMBERS. IT IS IMPORTANT TO
HEAR FROM THEM ON THE IMPACTS
THEY ARE DIRECTLY FACING. THERE
IS A BIGGER LANDSCAPE HERE. AS A
GOVERNMENT WE NEED TO GET TO
THAT INFORMATION, NOT JUST ONE
BY ONE BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE
ALL OF THEM COMING IN HERE
TELLING US HOW MUCH WE ARE
LOSING ON FOOD ET CETERA. I WILL
SAY I SUPPORT ALL OF THESE
INVESTMENTS. I WANT TO MAKE IT
CLEAR THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M
TRYING TO SAY. THERE ARE OTHER
INVESTMENTS THAT AREN'T HERE. I
WANT TO KNOW WHAT WHETHER THERE
WAS STATED THAT INFORMED THE
LIST. WE KNOW THAT OTHER FOLKS
WILL BE ASKING FOR SUPPORT IN
THESE OTHER AREAS. I AM JUST
TRYING TO GET TO HOW THESE
PARTICULAR, WHAT IS THE DATA BY
WHICH INFORMED THESE PARTICULAR
ONES VERSUS WHAT I SAID EARLIER
PUTTING IT ALL INTO GENERAL FUND
MAKING SURE WE HAVE ENOUGH TO
COVER ALL OF THE VARIOUS HUMAN
SERVICES WE SUPPORT INCLUDING
HOUSING VOUCHERS. A PARTICULAR
QUESTION TO THE HOUSING PIECES,
I KNOW WE HAVE HOUSING DOLLARS
WE ARE NOT UTILIZING CURRENTLY.
CAMMACK GOT A BACKFILL FOR SOME
OF THIS EMERGENCY SHELTER OR
VOUCHER RENTAL ASSISTANCE ET
CETERA RATHER THAN UTILIZE SOME
OF THIS MONEY THAT IS NOT GOING
TO COVER THE FULL DEPTH THAT IT
AND ANY -- DEFICIT AND ANY
FEDERAL IMPACTS FOR THESE OTHER
HUMAN SERVICES INVESTMENTS.
THANK YOU. A LITTLE BIT ON
THE FEDERAL PIECE. I WILL SAY
JUST AS YOU KNOW WE ARE DOING
EVERYTHING TO FIGHT THESE
FEDERAL CUTS WHETHER IT IS
LITIGATION OR WORKING WITH A
CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION . THEY
ARE STRONG ADVOCATES SO WE'VE
BEEN DOING EVERYTHING FROM DAY
ONE OF THE ADMINISTRATION TO
ENSURE THAT WE ARE PROTECTING
THE FUNDING THAT WE HAVE TO TRY
TO ASSURE GOING FORWARD. THAT
ADDS TO THE FLUID NATURE . WE
CAN'T SAY WE ARE GOING TO FACE
X DOLLARS IN TRANSPORTATION
VERSUS FEMA PICK IT IS AN EVER
SHIFTING LANDSCAPE BETWEEN WHAT
THE COURTS ARE DOING AT THE
FEDERAL LANDSCAPE IS DOING. IT
IS SOMETHING WE ARE GETTING A
SENSE OF. TO YOUR QUESTION, I
WANT TO BE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND
IT RIGHT ON HOUSING MONEY THAT
CAN BE USED, ARE YOU REFERRING
TO MONEY LIKE FOR EXAMPLE THE
OFFICE OF HOUSING?
WE HAVE THAT HOUSING LEVY: WE HAVE THAT HOUSING LEVY
THAT WE ARE STARTING TO COLLECT.
IF I AM UNDERSTANDING IT: IF I AM UNDERSTANDING IT
CORRECTLY THERE IS MONEY THAT IS
DEDICATED TO HOUSING . IT ROLLS
OVER FROM YEAR TO YEAR BECAUSE
LIKE WITH MANY LONG-TERM OR
CAPITOL PROJECTS THEY ARE NOT
PROJECTS THAT START OR FINISH IN
A CALENDAR YEAR. THAT AMOUNT OF
MONEY IS THERE. IT'S BEEN
PROMISED AND DEDICATED TO MOSTLY
AFFORDABLE HOUSING SO THERE HAS
TO BE A CHOICE TO TAKE THAT
MONEY AWAY FROM A DEDICATED
PURPOSE OF HOUSING AND
REALLOCATED TO OTHER PURPOSES.
WE KNOW THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT
NEEDS . A LOT OF DISCUSSION
AROUND AFFORDABILITY IN GENERAL
FOR THE CITY. MAINTAINING THOSE
STRONG INVESTMENTS IS A
PRIORITY. THAT IS NOT A POT OF
MONEY THE EXECUTIVE WANTS TO
TOUCH BECAUSE WE WANT TO
MAINTAIN PROMISES AND
INVESTMENTS IN AFFORDABLE
HOUSING. THAT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE I THINK
YOUR QUESTION WAS GOING.
I UNDERSTAND THE ENCUMBER AND: I UNDERSTAND THE ENCUMBER AND
AWARDS WE HAVE MADE ARE
NATURALLY ENCUMBERED AS
CONTRACTS. I DO KNOW THAT THINGS
ARE NOT GETTING BUILT AND THE
MONEY WILL CONTINUE TO COME IN.
IF IT IS NOT BEING USED TODAY WE
KNOW MONEY IS CONTINUING TO COME
IN. WE CAN MAKE IT DOWN THE LINE
ON THE AWARD OR INVESTMENT. WE
HAVE NEEDS TODAY AND WE HAVE
MONEY SITTING SOMEWHERE TODAY.
IT SEEMS TO ME FROM AN
ACCOUNTING PURPOSE, AND I'M NOT
AN ACCOUNTANT BUT IT SEEMS TO ME
-- MAYBE THIS MEANS WE MIGHT NOT
PUT OUT A NEW RFP SO THAT DOWN
THE LINE WE HAVE THE MONEY TO
COVER WHAT WE HAVE PROMISED
TODAY. GIVEN NOTHING IS BEING
BUILT IT SEEMS LIKE THERE SHOULD
BE A POLICY DECISION HERE AT
SOME POINT SOON WHETHER WE USE
THIS MONEY THAT WE HAVE
AVAILABLE TO COVER SOME OF THESE
REALLY IMPORTANT LIKE THIS LIST
AND MANY OTHER HUMAN SERVICES WE
NEED TO COVER TODAY,
PARTICULARLY IN LIGHT OF FEDERAL
CUTS. I WILL SAY LAST YEAR WHEN
IT WAS A DIFFERENT
ADMINISTRATION, WE STILL HAVE
THE $200 MILLION DEFICIT. WE
WOULD HAVE THAT NO MATTER WHAT
WAS HAPPENING AT THE FEDERAL
LEVEL SO THAT IS IMPORTANT ALSO.
OF COURSE, IT'S MADE ALL MORE
HORRIBLE BECAUSE OF THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT. NOT TAKEN AWAY FROM
THAT. I WILL SAY AS TO THE
LAWSUITS I'M REALLY PROUD OF
THE AG FOR JOINING THE LAWSUIT
TO TRY TO GET THE $7 BILLION
THAT THE STATE WILL BE LOSING IN
EDUCATION CUTS. THERE ARE
ASPECTS OF THIS WHERE WE DO HAVE
INFORMATION MORE THAN MAYBE WE
THINK WE DO ON WHAT WE WILL BE
LOSING . TYING IT BACK TO YOUR
EARLIER COMMENT. ON THE HOUSING
STUFF, WHY ARE WE NOT MAKING
POLICY DECISIONS TO UTILIZE MANY
WE HAVE TO BACKFILL TODAY SINCE
THIS IS ONE OF THESE THINGS
LISTED AS A POSSIBLE USE OF THIS
NEW TAX RATHER THAN --
YOU HAVE ALREADY GOTTEN INTO: YOU HAVE ALREADY GOTTEN INTO
THE NEXT PRESENTATION.
I WILL ASK THE PRESENTERS TO: I WILL ASK THE PRESENTERS TO
HOLD QUESTIONS. IT'S MY
UNDERSTANDING THE FIRST HARD
STOP THAT WE HAVE IS 1:00 OR
1:15. WE HAVE A LOT MORE TO GET
THROUGH . WE WILL COME BACK TO
THAT QUESTION IN THE NEXT
PRESENTATION. THIS IS WHY HAVING
A TAX PROPOSAL WITH THE
CARRYFORWARD AND THE
SUPPLEMENTAL IN ONE MEETING IS A
HEAVY LIFT AND IS IMPORTANT
BUDGET PRACTICES BECAUSE IT IS
ALL INTERWOVEN AS COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA JUST MENTIONED. WE HAVE
ONE MORE SECTION HERE WHICH ARE
CONSIDERATIONS FOR THIS TAX .
THEN WE WILL MOVE TO THE NEXT
PRESENTATION AS THREE SECTIONS
CARRYFORWARD, GRANT
APPROPRIATIONS AND THE
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET. IS IT
CORRECT THAT EVERYBODY IS GOOD
UNTIL 1:00 P.M.? WONDERFUL.
JENNIFER, I WILL PASS IT BACK TO
YOU ARE TOM OR WHOMEVER FOR THE
CONSIDERATION. WE CAN ASK
QUESTIONS AT THE END OF THE
SECOND SLIDE ABOUT THE
CONSIDERATIONS AND THEN MOVE
ONTO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM. I
WILL RESERVE ABOUT AN HOUR FOR
THE NEXT THREE TOPICS AND
MINIMUM OF 15 MINUTES FOR THE
FINAL TWO SO WE CAN AT LEAST
COVER THEM TODAY. WITH THAT,
OVER TO YOU.
THESE NEXT LINES WILL JUST: THESE NEXT LINES WILL JUST
COVER A FEW CONSIDERATIONS. TO
KEEP IN MIND WHEN THINKING ABOUT
THIS TAX
FIRST AS WE DISCUSSED THAT IS: FIRST AS WE DISCUSSED THAT IS
THE NUMBER OF TAXPAYERS ADDING
VOLATILITY THE IMPACTS OF ONE OF
THE MEMBERS OF THAT REMAINING
POOL HAVE A LARGER OUTSIZED
IMPACT ON THE TOTAL RESULT. WHEN
YOU THINK ABOUT THAT YOU THINK
ALSO ABOUT THE NUMBER OF
SUCCESSIVE CITY TAX CHANGES THAT
HAVE OCCURRED STARTING WITH THE
PAYROLL TAX OF 2020. AN INCREASE
TO THOSE RATES IN 2023 FOR
STUDENT MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES.
THEN A SOCIAL HOUSING TAX
PROPOSAL THAT WAS APPROVED IN
2024. ALL OF THOSE ARE BUSINESS
TAXES IMPACTING BUSINESSES WHO
WOULD ALSO BE PAYING THE CURRENT
AND HIGHER TAX. I WOULD AFFECT
ABOUT A THIRD OF THE TAX
INCREASE IN THIS PROPOSAL WOULD
BE IMPOSED PAYING ABOUT 87%.
NEARLY 90% OF THE TOTAL PAYROLL
EXPENSE TAX REVENUES THAT WERE
COLLECTED IN 2024. THERE IS ALSO
A REVENUE FORECAST RISK . THERE
IS ALWAYS A RISK AS THE COUNCIL
PRESIDENT REVEALED IN HER
QUESTIONING. WHEN WE REVIEW EACH
FORECAST SOMETIMES THE NUMBERS
ARE HIGHER THAN WHAT THEY EXPECT
AND SOMETIMES THEY ARE LOWER OR
IN THE RED. IT IS ALWAYS A VERY
PROFESSIONAL GUESS OF WHAT
COLLECTIONS WOULD BE IN TOTAL
AND THAT SAME LEVEL OF POTENTIAL
IMPRECISION FOR THIS ESTIMATE AS
WELL. IN THE APRIL FORECAST, THE
FORECAST OFFICE NOTED A 40 TO
50% CHANCE OF RECESSION IN THE
NEXT 12 MONTHS. WE WILL GET AN
UPDATED FORECAST AUGUST OF THIS
YEAR. THAT ACTUAL CHANCE OF A
RECESSION MAY BE LOWER BASED ON
INFORMATION THAT WE'VE SEEN SO
IT IS GOOD NEWS TO BE COGNIZANT
IN THE FORECAST. WITH THE
RECESSION THE TOTAL REVENUE
COULD COME IN LOWER THAN
EXPECTED. THE REVENUES COULD
COME LOWER THAN EXPECTED AS
WELL. THERE'S ALSO THE
ESTIMATED IMPACTS OF STATE LAW
CHANGES I TOUCHED ON BRIEFLY AND
HOW THE CHANGES OF THE STATE ARE
CHANGING THE TAX BASE THAT WE
USE HERE AT THE CITY. THE
FORECAST OFFICE IS LOOKING AT
INFORMATION THAT THEY HAVE TO
SEE HOW THOSE CHANGES IMPACT THE
BASE . THAT IS EMBEDDED IN THEIR
ESTIMATE. TO THE EXTENT THAT THE
INFORMATION THEY ARE USING IS
IMPRECISE THAT COULD IMPACT
REVENUE AS WELL. GOING TO THE
NEXT SLIDE, THESE ARE MORE TIED
TO THE CITY RISKS, NOT
NECESSARILY THE REVENUE
ESTIMATE. WHEN WE IMPLEMENT A
BUSINESS AND OCCUPATION TAX
USING A LEGACY SYSTEM THAT'S
BEEN IN PLACE FOR A NUMBER OF
YEARS. THERE WAS A CAPITOL
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT TO REPLACE
IT IN THE FUTURE THOUGH IT IS
CURRENTLY WE ARE WORKING WITH
THE LEGACY SYSTEM. TO MEET THE
JANUARY 1 IMPLEMENTATION
TIMEFRAME STAFF WOULD NEED TO
BEGIN WORK NOW AND INCUR THESE
COST TO GET THE SYSTEM IN PLACE
PRIOR TO KNOWING WHETHER VOTERS
APPROVE THE TAX. THERE ARE RISKS
EMBEDDED IN ALL WITH REGARDS TO
IMPLEMENTING THESE CHANGES.
THINGS LIKE KEY PERSONNEL AND
FACILITATION . THE EXECUTIVE
INTENDS TO MITIGATE THESE RISKS
TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE. IF THERE
IS A CHANGE TO THE SCOPE AND THE
PROPOSAL VERSUS WHAT WAS TODAY
THAN THAT WOULD REQUIRE
REASSESSMENT OF THE RISKS.
FINALLY, THE EXECUTIVE WILL
SUBMIT A 2026 BUDGET ASSUMING
THE $90 MILLION OF REVENUE IS
SENT TO THE VOTERS. HOWEVER, IF
THE MEASURE FAILS THEN COUNCIL
WILL NEED TO QUICKLY REBALANCE
THE RESOURCES AND EXPENDITURES
AS NEEDED TO MEET THAT
UNANTICIPATED SHORTFALL. THERE
WILL ALSO BE A THIRD AND FINAL
REVENUE FORECAST PRESENTED IN
OCTOBER IF THOSE NUMBERS COME IN
IN THE RED THAT WOULD BE AN
ADDITIONAL CHALLENGE ON TOP OF
THIS THAT COULD INTENSIFY THE
PRESSURE TO REBALANCE. THOSE ARE
THE FINAL CONSIDERATIONS.
COLLEAGUES, ANY QUESTIONS ON
THESE LAST TWO SLIDES OF
CONSIDERATION? GOING ONCE ,
GOING TWICE, DEPUTY MAYOR, MY
APOLOGIES. WE DO NOT HAVE TIME
FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. WE WILL
JUST HIGHLIGHT IT IS ATTACHED TO
THE AGENDA AND THE THREE LARGE
CONSIDERATIONS . COLLEAGUES, I
WILL GIVE THE DEPUTY MAYOR AND
COUNCIL MEMBER RINCK LAST WORD
AFTER THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT AND
THEN WE NEED TO MOVE ALONG .
NEVERMIND. I WAS GOING TO ASK
FOR MORE INFORMATION BUT I WILL
JUST REACH OUT ONE ON ONE. THANK
YOU.
I'M GOING TO GO WITH DEPUTY
MAYOR AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBERS
RINCK.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR THOUGHTFUL: THANK YOU FOR YOUR THOUGHTFUL
CONSIDERATION AND QUESTIONS. I
REALLY APPRECIATE IT. AS WE HAVE
SAID MANY TIMES THESE ARE
DIFFICULT ISSUES. WE DON'T LOOK
AT THEM IN ISOLATION OR TAKE
THEM LIGHTLY. I APPRECIATE THIS
REALLY SIGNIFICANT CONSIDERATION
OF THIS POLICY. I THINK THAT WE
HAVE TOUCHED ON MOST OF THE
THINGS I WAS GOING TO COVER IN
MY PRESENTATION ANYWAYS. I JUST
WANT TWO POINTS HERE. ONE OF
WHICH IS TO THE COMMENTS ABOUT
THIS IS REALLY JUST ONE PIECE OF
A BIGGER BUDGET PUZZLE. THE
EXECUTIVE AND THE COUNCIL HAS
REPEATEDLY THROUGH THE PAST FEW
CYCLES FACED WITH DECLINING
REVENUE FORECASTS TAKEN HARD
DECISIONS. WE HAVE DONE
REDUCTIONS. WE'VE HAD TO DO
LAYOFFS. WE'VE TAKEN
EFFICIENCIES. EVEN IN LIGHT OF
THIS REVENUE PROPOSAL WE WILL
CONTINUE TO BE LOOKING AT THOSE
SAME LOVERS RIGHT NOW. WE ARE
ALREADY ASKING THE DEPARTMENT TO
UNDERSTAND FOR THE CURRENT YEAR.
WE DID HARD WORK TO GET A
BALANCED BUDGET PASSED LAST YEAR
THAT SHOULD HAVE TAKEN US
THROUGH THIS YEAR AND NEXT.
UNFORTUNATELY THE REVENUE
FORECAST IN APRIL UPSET THAT
BALANCE WE HAD STRUCK AND THAT
IS WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY BUT WE
ARE COMMITTED TO SOLVING THIS
TOGETHER. ANOTHER POINT I WANT
TO MAKE CLEAR IS THAT THE MAYOR
HAS BEEN COMMITTED TO BUSINESSES
AND MAKING SURE WE HAVE A
VIBRANT BUSINESS COMMUNITY
THROUGHOUT THE PAST 3 1/2 YEARS
IN OFFICE WHETHER IT IS THE
DOWNTOWN ACTIVATION PLAN, TEAM,
UNIFIED CARE TEAM, ADDRESSING
THE ISSUES WE HEAR THE MOST FROM
BUSINESSES WHICH OFTEN COME TO
ISSUES AROUND PUBLIC SAFETY,
HOMELESSNESS, THOSE ARE THINGS
WE ARE COMMITTED TO DOING. WHILE
WE UNDERSTAND THAT THIS MEASURE
WILL HAVE IMPACTS ON BUSINESSES,
AND AGAIN THE VAST MAJORITY WILL
BE BETTER OFF FINANCIALLY UNDER
IT, BUT SOME WILL BE WORSE OFF.
WE KNOW THAT WE NEED TO BE
CONTINUALLY DOUBLING DOWN MAKING
SURE COMMUNITIES AND
NEIGHBORHOODS ARE SAFE PLACES
THAT PEOPLE WANT TO GO. WANT TO
BE ABLE TO HANG OUT LATE AT
NIGHT, USE THE SIDEWALK CAFÉS
AND RESTAURANTS, LOCAL COFFEE
SHOP. WE ARE COMMITTED TO ALL
THOSE INVESTMENTS. AT THE SAME
TIME WE ARE ENCOURAGED BY THE
HIGHER NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS TO
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT. WE
HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT SOME GOOD
TRENDS IN THAT REGARD AND WE
WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO BECAUSE
WE ARE COMMITTED TO HAVING A
VIBRANT BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND
WE WILL CONTINUE THAT WORK WITH
YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION. PLEASE TO REACH
OUT WITH QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY
HAVE . WE ARE HAPPY TO WORK WITH
YOU AND ANSWER THOSE.
THANK YOU: THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. I PROMISE TO BE
BRIEF WITH CONSIDERATION OF
TIME. THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR
TIME AND ENGAGING ON THIS
PROPOSAL. I WANT TO TAKE A
MOMENT TO RESPOND TO SOME OF THE
POINTS RAISED FROM OUR PARTNERS
IN BUSINESS, PARTICULARLY LARGER
BUSINESSES . WHEN FOLKS ARE
NAMING ABOUT THEIR CONCERNS
ABOUT THE CITY BECOMING LESS
BUSINESS FRIENDLY I WANT TO TAKE
A MOMENT TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT
THE ONLY OTHER STATE IN THE
UNITED STATES THAT HAS A MORE
BUSINESS FRIENDLY TAXCO THAN
OURS IS FLORIDA. WITH SOME OF
THE MEDIUM-SIZE BUSINESSES WE'VE
HEARD ENGAGEMENT FROM I THINK IT
IS IMPORTANT TO STATE THAT FROM
A FACTUAL BASIS. AS WE HAVE
DISCUSSED ON THE OUTLINE SPEND
AREAS NOT ONLY IS IT MORALLY
IMPERATIVE TO DO OUR BEST TO
KEEP FOLKS HOUSED, HEALTHY, AND
SAFE I WANT TO BE MINDFUL THAT
WHAT FOR US AS A COMMUNITY THAT
IS FRIENDLY FOR BUSINESS, HOW DO
FOLKS THINK IT WILL DO FOR OUR
COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE AS A CITY
IF WE HAVE THOUSANDS MORE OF OUR
NEIGHBORS LIVING UNSHELTERED.
THAT IS A REALITY WE ARE TRYING
TO GRAPPLE WITH. WE HAVE WORKED
HARD TO PUT TOGETHER A BALANCED
PROPOSAL THAT I THINK MEETS THIS
MOMENT. THIS IS OUR CHANCE TO
PROVE THAT LOCAL GOVERNMENT CAN
STEP UP WHEN FEDERAL LEADERSHIP
STEPS BACK. IT'S OUR
OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW THAT SEATTLE
CHOOSES COLLABORATION OVER
DIVISION FOR A FUTURE WE ALL
DESERVE. THE COALITION OF
SUPPORT FROM SMALL BUSINESSES,
HUMAN SERVICES PROVIDERS REALLY
SPEAKS TO THAT . I BELIEVE THAT
WHEN WE GIVE VOTERS THE CHOICE
THEY DESERVE THEY WILL CHOOSE TO
SHIELD OUR CITY AND PROTECT WHAT
MATTERS MOST. I WILL CLOSE MY
COMMENTS WITH A SPECIAL THANK
YOU TO STAFF FROM DIRECTOR NOBLE
AND TOM AND JEN, THANK YOU FOR
YOUR HARD WORK ON THIS. IT WAS A
JOURNEY TO GET HERE AND I WANT
TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR HARD WORK
IN CRAFTING THIS PROPOSAL AND
WALKING US THROUGH THE DETAILS
TODAY.
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK. CLERK, CAN YOU READ THE
SHORT TITLE OF ITEMS TWO AND
THREE.
[ CAPTIONERS TRANSITIONING ]
CONFIRM WITH
ME
COUNCIL PRESIDENT IS FOR THE
DAY.
WITH THAT, WE'LL TRANSITION
INTO THIS NEXT AGENDA ITEM.
SORRY.
I TRIED TO ASK HER AS WE WERE
EXIT, BUT THE CLERK
WAS SPEAKING.
WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT
TWO AGENDA ITEMS, AND THERE IS
A THIRD ITEM THAT IS CONTAINED
WITHIN HERE REGARDING THE
CARRY FORWARD BILL THAT HAS BEEN
TRANSMITTED, BUT NOT YET
INTRODUCED, AND SO WE WILL
TAKE THE ITEMS TOGETHER IN THIS
PRESENTATION.
YOU WILL SEE IT IS DIVIDED
INTO THREE SECTIONS CARRY
FORWARD.
AMID YOUR SUPPLEMENTAL
BUDGET ORDINANCE.
WITHIN HERE, WE ASK THAT WE
WILL WITHHOLD QUESTIONS AND WE
HAVE 45 MINUTES TO GO THROUGH
THESE VERY DENSE TOPICS, AND
JUST TO
KIND OF SET THE STAGE
AGAIN, WHERE WE LEFT BUDGET LAST
YEAR IS THAT WE WERE PREDICTING
SLOW GROWTH RETURN AND THAT WE
WERE IN IT.
WE HAD CLOSED $250 MILLION OR
SO BUDGET HOLE, AND THEN AT
THE BEGINNING OF THIS YEAR THAT
HOLD WAS RE -- CAME BACK IN A
NEW
FORM AFTER ALL OF THE
BUDGET EFFICIENCIES THAT WE HAD
TAKEN,
AND WE ARE NOW IN A WORSE --
A HARDER PLACE THAN WE WERE
LAST YEAR BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY
GONE THROUGH THE EXERCISE OF
MAKING THOSE TOUGH DECISIONS,
AND SO HERE WE ARE.
WITH THAT, OVER TO YOU, TOM AND
BEN.
THANK YOU, CHAIR.
I THINK WE INTRODUCED OURSELVES
FOR THE RECORD, AND FOR THE
SAKE, TOM MENZEL, CENTER STAFF.
TOM KNOWLES, CENTER
STAFF DIRECTOR.
WEAL BE TALKING: WEAL BE TALKING
SPECIFICALLY GOING INTO DETAIL
AND COUNCIL
BILL 130, AND 131131
WHICH IS THE SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET
ORDINANCE AND WE'LL BE
LEADING OFF WITH THE DISCUSSION
OF THE
CARRY FORWARD ORDINANCE,
AND THIS GIVES AN OVERVIEW OF
THE
PRESENTATION AND WE'LL
TOUCH ON THE CARRY FORWARD
ORDINANCE UPDATE AND TALK ABOUT
THE
MID- YEAR GRANT ACCEPTANCE BILL
AND THE MID- YEAR SUPPLEMENTAL
ORDINANCE AND
TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET PROCESS,
AND I'LL TURN IT
OVER TO THEM.
THANK YOU, TOM.
THE PRINCIPLE POINT: THE PRINCIPLE POINT
OF DISCUSSION AND THE GRANT
ACCEPTANCE, BUT IN DOING
SO, WE'RE TAKING THINGS UP OUT
OF
ORDER. THE CARRY FORWARD
ORDINANCE MAY HAVE BEEN
CONSIDERED AND LIKELY
APPROVED, AND
WHAT'S GOING ON AND WHY?
BEFORE I ANSWER MY
QUESTION, I'LL START ON WHAT
THE CARRY
FORWARD IS AND WHAT I'M TALKING
ABOUT AND WHAT IS THE
PURPOSE OF THE CARRY
FORWARD ORDINANCE? IN GENERAL,
UNLESS
OTHERWISE SPECIFIED, OPERATING
APPROPRIATIONS LAPSED THAT'S A
TECHNICAL TERM AND WHAT HAPPENS
TO
THE APPROPRIATION ONCE IT
EXPIRES.
AND THE DEPARTMENT APPROPRIATED
$100 MILLION AND THEY'VE GOT 5
MILLION LEFT AT THE END OF
THE YEAR AND THEY LOSE THE
AUTHORITY TO SPEND THE 1 MILLION
AND THEY'LL HAVE AUTHORITY FOR
NEXT
YEAR'S BUDGET AND THE
UNSPENT MONEY FROM THE PREVIOUS
YEAR, THEY DO NOT HAVE AUTHORITY
TO
SPEND, BUT IT COULD WELL
BE THAT THAT $5 MILLION WAS
ALLOCATED FOR IS SOMETHING THAT
THE
CITY WANTS TO CONTINUE, AND
WHEN I SAY THE CITY, I MEAN YOU
AND THE
MAYOR ON SOME LEVEL, AND
IF THAT'S THE CASE, THE
DEPARTMENT
CAN CARRY FORWARD THE
APPROPRIATION FROM LAST YEAR,
THAT WANTS TO GET SPENT
ON WHATEVER ACTIVITY PROGRAM
IT MIGHT BE.
SO THAT'S WHAT IT'S FOR AND
WHAT
IT DOES.
ASSUMING THE MONEY WILL
GET SPENT AND IT'S AN IMPORTANT
INVESTMENT AND WE STILL WANT IT
TO HAPPEN.
NORMALLY, GIVEN THAT
WE'RE DEALING WITH THINGS THAT
DIDN'T HAPPEN IN THE PREVIOUS
YEAR
AND WE DEAL WITH THE CARRY
FORWARD IN THE FIRST QUARTER
AND SOMETIMES COUNCIL HASN'T
VOTED IN THE BEGINNING OF
THE SECOND, BUT THAT'S
GENERALLY THE
TIME
LINE. SO WHY ARE WE STILL
TALKING ABOUT IT AND WHY ISN'T
IT BEFORE
YOU YET AS A REFERRED PIECE
OF LEGISLATION AND THE SHORT
ANSWER
IS THE APRIL FORECAST.
THE LEGISLATION HAD
BEEN TRANSMITTED TO THE COUNCIL
IN
ADVANCE OF THAT FORECAST,
BUT WE WERE ABOUT TO TAKE IT UP
AND WHEN THE FORECAST ARRIVED
THE IMPACT PARTICULARLY ON
THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX IN TERMS
OF REDUCTION IN THE FORECAST
MEANT THAT THE TOTAL
APPROPRIATIONS
PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET THAT
HAD BEEN APPROVED, THE 2025
BUDGET AND THAT HAD BEEN
PREPARED TO BE
REQUESTED, IF YOU WILL, IN
THE CARRY FORWARD, SO
UNSPENT DOLLARS IN '24 THAT THE
COMBINATION WAS LARGER THAN
THE FORECAST FOR THE PAYROLL
EXPENSE TAX AT THAT POINT IN
APRIL. SO -- IT DID NOT MAKE
SENSE
FROM OUR VIEW FOR THE COUNCIL TO
BE APPROPRIATING MORE MONEY THAN
WE UNDERSTAND OURSELVES TO HAVE.
I SAY UNDERSTAND OURSELVES
TO HAVE BECAUSE IT'S A
FORECAST.
THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
FOR PASSING A BALANCED BUDGET
LIKELY ONLY APPLY IN NOVEMBER
AND
IN SOME SENSE THEY COULD
STILL APPROPRIATE MORE MONEY
THAN YOU WOULD EXPECT TO GET AND
IT
MAKES NO SENSE AND IT REALLY
VOIDS
THE UNDERLYING ISSUES TO THE
FACT THAT THERE HAS BEEN A
MEANINGFUL RESOURCE, AND A
MEANINGFUL
REDUCTION IN RESOURCES.
SO SOME RESOURCES NEED TO
BE MADE WITH THE CARRY FORWARD
AND
ON ITS OWN WHAT THE BEST WAY
TO APPROACH
THAT WOULD BE. SO -- NEXT SLIDE.
THE COMBINATION OF THE
CARRY FORWARD WOULD BRING THE
EXPENDITURES
INTO BALANCE. WE'RE REVIEWING
THAT RIGHT NOW.
IN ADDITION, WE NEED TO
COMPLETE CHANGES TO THE ORIGINAL
AND WE'LL MAKE INTRODUCTION
CHANGES SO THAT THE PACKAGE
TOGETHER WILL NOW BE BALANCED
FOR
2025, AND FORTUNATELY, IN TERMS
OF TIMING YOU WILL SEE AND HEAR
ALL THREE.
SO YOU WILL HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO TIE THIS ALL
TOGETHER, IF
YOU
WILL. AS A BIT OF A PREVIEW, LET
ME TALK ABOUT -- NEXT SLIDE,
HOW WE'RE GOING TO SOLVE THIS
PROBLEM AND HOW IS THE EXECUTIVE
PROPOSING TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM.
AGAIN, THE KEY ISSUE HERE IS
ON THE PAYROLL EXPENSE SIDE.
IF YOU RECALL ON THE
GENERAL FUND SIDE THERE WAS A
REDUCTION IN REVENUES FORECAST
FOR '25
AND THEY UNDERSPENT RESOURCES
FROM
'24 MEANT THAT THAT WAS MORE
OR LESS A WASH, BUT IT WAS THE
P.E.T. THAT WAS IVING
THE INCREASE GOING FORWARD
AND CREATED A DEFICIT IF WE WANT
TO CARRY THINGS FORWARD FOR '25.
SO WHAT THE EXECUTIVE
IS PROPOSING TO DO IS TO REDUCE.
WE HAVE OVERCOMMITTED IN
SOME SENSE BECAUSE OF THE
THINGS IN THE CARRY FORWARD, WE
WANT
TO, OR THE EXECUTIVE, TO
OVERCOMMIT P.E.T. RESOURCES AND
WE NEED
TO REDUCE SOMEWHERE AND
THE PROPOSAL IS TO REDUCE
THE TRANSFER TO THE GENERAL
FUND, AND AS A TACTICAL MATTER,
THIS DOES WORK, AND THE REASON
IT WORKS IS THAT WHEN WE
BALANCED FOR '25 AND '26, THE
OVERALL
STRATEGY WAS ONE THAT
INVOLVED RUNG DOWN SOME
BALANCES,
FUND BALANCES IN THE GENERAL
FUND AND
ALSO IN P.E.T. OVER '25 AND
'26.
THEY HAD ACCUMULATED
RESOURCES FOR A VARIETY OF
REASONS
UNDER FORECASTS AND THE STRATEGY
WAS TO SPEND PART OF THAT ONE-
TIME
RESOURCE AND PART OF THE
ONE- TIME RESOURCE IN '26.
THAT MEANT AND MEANS THAT THE
EXPECTATION IN 2025 WAS GOING
TO END WITH A
POSITIVE FUND BALANCE IN THE
GENERAL FUND ABOUT $25
MILLION. THE '26 ENDORSED
BUDGET
THAT ANTICIPATED SPENDING THAT
$35 MILLION DOWN TO ZERO AND
THAT'S
OVER BY ANY AND WE'LL GET TO
ZERO. WHAT THE EXECUTIVE IS ABLE
TO
DO HERE IS TO REDUCE THE
TRANSFER
TO THE FUND AND THE FUND
BALANCE AND WE ANNES IT PATED WE
WOULD
HAVE IN 2025 WON'T NECESSARILY
BE THERE BECAUSE WE ARE GOING
TO HAVE LESS GENERAL FUND
RESOURCE
BECAUSE THEY TRANSFER
ININ FROM PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX
WOULD
BE
LOWER. IT DOES CREATE A
CHALLENGE FOR
'26 AND IT DOES SOLVE THETHE
'25 PROBLEM AND IT WOULD
REDUCE HOW MUCH P.E.T. WOULD GO
TO
THE GENERAL FUND AND RUN DOWN
THE FUND BALANCE WE HAVE IN
THE GENERAL FUND AND THUS
ENTERED
'26 IN A SLIGHTLY WORSE
POSITION
EXCEPT, AND THIS IS AN
IMPORTANT EXCEPT THAT THE
EXECUTIVE IS
SIMULTANEOUSLY WORKING TO
UNDERSPEND THE 2025 BUDGET
TO TRY TO BUILD UP GENERAL
FUND FUND BALANCE SO THEY CAN
TAKE ON THE 2026 PROBLEM.
THAT IS ESSENTIALLY THE SET OF
TRANSACTIONS THAT ARE GOING
ON
HERE. GIVEN THAT THE EXECUTIVE
IS WORKING TO UNDERSPEND
TECHNICALLY ANOTHER
POSSIBILITY WOULD BE TO TRY TO
REDUCE
2025 GENERAL FUND
APPROPRIATIONS AND THE EXECUTIVE
DOESN'T
GET ANYWHERE AND THAT'S NOT A
PRACTICAL WAY TO DO IT.
THIS IS A PRACTICAL WAY TO SOLVE
THE PROBLEM OF ROPRIATE
P.E.T. AND WE DO NOT
ANTICIPATE TO SPEND THIS YEAR
AND SOME
NEXT
YEAR. THE ALTERNATIVE APPROACH
IS
TO REDUCE APPROPRIATIONS ON THE
P.E.T. SIDE BECAUSE I KNOW
THAT THERE ARE RESOURCES I KNOW
WE'RE NOT SPENDING AND THERE
MAY
BE OTHERS.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, OTHERWISE
THEY'LL LEAVE THE CITY IN
THE SAME FUNDAMENTAL PLACE
BECAUSE THE MONEY WON'T GET
SPENT OUT OF P.E.T. WHETHER WE
SPEND IT
OR NOT AND THE APPROPRIATIONS
NEED TO BE BALANCED AND THE
ACTUAL CASH FLOW IS THROUGH
THE APPROPRIATION LEVELS AND
THEY'RE NOT BEING CONSTRAINED,
AND THEY'RE BEING CONSTRAINED
BY THEIR OWN MANAGEMENT BY
THE RESOURCES AND THE
KNOWLEDGE OF THE DEFICIT THAT
THEY HAVE.
I WILL TIE THIS TO THE MID- YEAR
SUPPLEMENTAL.
HANG TIGHT: HANG TIGHT.
BEFORE WE GO TO MID-
YEAR
SUPPLEMENTAL. DO YOU NEED TO SAY
ANYTHING
TO CARRY FORWARD?
JUST TO SAY THAT AS I: JUST TO SAY THAT AS I
SAID, THE EXECUTIVE IS MANAGING
THE
BUDGET NOT BECAUSE
OF APPROPRIATION CONSTRAINS AND
THEIR OWN RECOGNITION OF
THE DEFICITS OF CASH AND THERE
ARE EXCEPTIONS IN THE MID-
YEAR SUPPLEMENTAL WHERE THEY DO
WANT TO SPEND ADDITIONAL WHERE
THEY
ARE BEING CONSTRAINED BY
LIMITS ON APPROPRIATION AND
THAT'S
ALL I WANTED TO SAY.
THANK YOU: THANK YOU.
WE'LL SIT ON THE CARRY FORWARD.
I SEE DIRECTOR
EDER AND VICE CHAIR RIVERA WE'LL
COME BACK
TO QUESTIONS FROM THE
LAST PRESENTATION
NOW AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I SEE
YOU HAVE
JOINED REMOTELY FROM YOUR OFFICE
AND
WE'LL GO
TO THAT. .
DIRECTOR
EDER.
THANK YOU FOR: THANK YOU FOR
THE OPPORTUNITY.
DAN EDER, I DIDN'T
INTRODUCE
MYSELF EARLIER. I APOLOGIZE.
I AM -- I AGREE WITH
EVERYTHING BEN SAID AND WE ARE
NO
WORSE WITH THE PROPOSAL THAT WE
HAVE AND NO BETTER AND IT'S
AN EVENING OUT OF THE FUNDS.
THE BAD NEWS ALREADY CAME IN
APRIL AND THAT'S THAT THE
OFFICE OF ECONOMIC AND REVENUE
FORECAST
HAS TOLD US ON A POINT IN TIME
BASIS THAT THEY
EXPECT THERE WILL BE
SIGNIFICANTLY
LESS REVENUE COMING IN IN BOTH
THE GENERAL FUND AND THE P.E.T.
PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX FUND FOR '25
AND '26.
AS I SAID, WE'LL GET
ANOTHER LOOK AT THAT, ANOTHER
POINT
IN TIME LOOK AT IT IN THE
BEGINNING
OF AUGUST.
WE HOPE THERE'S BETTER NEWS
AND HOPE THERE IS NOT
A PLAN. WE'LL FIGURE OUT WHERE
WE
REALLY ARE AND WHAT WE KNOW IS
THAT AS OF APRIL, THINGS WERE
WORSE
THAN THEY WERE WHEN THE CITY
ADOPTED ITS BUDGET IN THE FALL
OF '24.
THIS IS A RECOGNITION
THAT WE CAN HAVE THE GENERAL
FUND AND THE P.E.T. WHERE THE
PROBLEM
LIVES. WE'LL HAVE TO SOLVE
THAT,
WE'LL HAVE TO SOLVE THAT WITHIN
THE PROPOSED BUDGET AND WE
INTEND DO
THAT.
WE WILL TAKE THE LATEST
NEWS THAT COMES IN AUGUST.
HOPEFULLY THAT'S BETTER
THAN WHAT WE FOUND OUT IS THE
LOOK
FORWARD FROM APRIL.
IF IT IS EXACTLY THE SAME OR
BETTER NO MATTER WHAT
THE FORECAST IS WE WILL HAVE
A PROPOSED BUDGET TO YOU
THAT ADDRESSES THE CURRENT-
LOOKING REVENUE PICTURE.
WITH THAT, I'LL JUST BE HAPPY
TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU: THANK YOU.
COUNCIL MEMBER RIVERA, DO
YOU WANT TO RESTATE YOUR
QUESTION, BUT I MIGHT ASK A
LITTLE MORE
FOCUSED THAN LAST TIME.
THERE WERE MANY POINTS, I
WAS TRYING TO MAKE SURE, BUT
YES.
THANK YOU.
I WILL KEEP IT TO THE
POINT ABOUT THE HOUSING DOLLARS,
UNDERSTAND, AND OUR
TRUSTY CENTRAL STAFF, I WANT TO
GIVE TRACY RATSCLIFF A SHOUT OUT
BECAUSE SHE WATCHES AND
SHE ANSWERS QUESTIONS
WHILE WE'RE GOING.
I SEE YOU, TRACY AND I
APPRECIATE YOU.
SHE SHARED SOME INFORMATION
THAT WE GOT FROM THE OFFICE OF
HOUSE ON THIS PIECE ABOUT
WHAT'S BEEN
ENCUMBERED AND HOW MUCH HAS
BEEN AWARDED, BUT NOT YET
ENCUMBERED MEANING WE DON'T
HAVE A
CONTRACT FOR THOSE DOLLARS AND
IT'S ALMOST LIKE A FUTURE
PROMISE,
IF YOU WILL.
AND SO ON THE
AWARDED SIDE AND FOR SOME RAN MY
COMPUTER NOW
HAS DECIDED TO HUM THAT E MALE,
AND
WE PULLED UP THE DIRECTION AND
DIRECTOR EDER, YOU CAN TALK
ABOUT THIS. BOTTOM LINE IS THAT
IT HAS BEEN
AWARDED AND NOT ENCUMBERED
AND WE HAVE NEEDS TODAY AND
WE DECIDE AS A POLICY
MATTER, NOTHING IS
GETTING CONSTRUCTED AND THAT'S
IMPORTANT
BECAUSE PEOPLE KEEP TALKING
ABOUT
BUILDING OF HOUSING AND THINGS
ARE NOT GETTING BUILT.
SO, BEN,
GO AHEAD. SO, I JUST WANT TO
FROM A
POLICY STAND POINT, WE COULD,
WHY ARE
WE USING SOME OF THE FUNS NOW
KNOWING THAT WE'LL CONTINUE
TO COLLECT THIS MONEY FORFOR
AND AS LONG ASAS MONEY
THE BUILDING STARTS AGAIN, THAT
IS A
BIT TO TACKLE THIS PROBLEM AND
I WANT TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT
AND BEN, IT LOOKED
LIKE YOU WERE GOING TO TACKLE
THE QUESTION
OR ADD TO WHAT I WAS
SEAING.
WILL ALLOW DIRECTOR EDER TO: WILL ALLOW DIRECTOR EDER TO
RESPOND FIRST AND WE'LL TAKE
THAT.
COUNCIL MEMBER, I
REACHED A DIFFERENT CONCLUSION
THAN THE
PLAIN WORDS THAT YOU JUST SPOKE
DID.
WE ARE OPENING HUNDREDS
AND HUNDREDS OF AFFORDABLE
HOUSING
UNITS. SO THERE SAY LOT MOVING
ALREADY.
IN 2024 THERE WERE NEARLY 1300
NEW UNITS OF AFFORDABLE
HOUSING THAT WERE BROUGHT
ONLINE WITH THE COMBINATION OF
FUNDING THAT
THE CITY PROVIDED AND
OTHER ENTITIES WHO WERE PARTNERS
IN IN THOSE ENDEAVORS.
IT IS TRUE THAT THE WAY THE
CITY BUDGET, WE AWARD PROJECTS
AND FULLY FUND THOSE COMMITMENTS
IN
YEAR ONE, IF YOU WILL.
ON ANY GIVEN YEAR, WE
PUT ALL OF THE MONEY ASIDE FOR
THE
FUTURE PAYMENT WHEN WE OWE A
NEW PROJECT THAT IS GOING TO BE
BMENT AND WE PUT IN
$10037 WE PUT THAT $100 ASIDE
AND WE DON'T
SPEND IT ON ANYTHING
ELSE. THAT ALLOWS US WHEN THE
PROJECT NEEDS THE MONEY TO KNOW
THAT
IT HAS THE FULL BACKING OF THE
CITY. TYPICALLY PROJECTS THAT
GET
$100 FROM THE CITY GET ANOTHER
$100 OR MORE FROM OTHER ENTITIES
AND IT TAKES TIME WHEN WE AWARD
THE PROJECT TO GET FULL
FUNDING, COMPLETE ALL OF ITS
DESIGN AND
PERMITTING AND BE READY TO
START CONSTRUCTION AND THEN
COMPLETE
CONSTRUCTION. TYPICALLY, THAT'S
THREE OR
MORE YEARS FROM THE DATE THAT WE
MAKE THE AWARD, AND IT IS --
THERE
IS A POLICY CHOICE THAT WE
HAVE MADE TO PUT THAT MONEY INTO
ESSENTIALLY OUR FUND AS
LOCKED DOWN AND NOT AVAILABLE
FOR OTHER
SPENDING.
THE CITY COULD MAKE
DIFFERENT CHOICES.
WE HAVE NOT, HISTORICALLY,
CHOSEN TO DO THAT.
WHEN THE YEAR COMES A
ENSURE THAT WE HAVE THE MONEY TO
PAY THOSE BILLS AND B, THAT WE
DON'T HAVE -- WE DON'T USE THE
MONEY FOR ONGOING, OTHER
PURPOSES THAT
THIS IS ONE- TIME SOURCE FOR
IT, AND SO THERE ARE OTHER
REASONS THAT I DON'T WANT TO --
I DON'T WANT TO ELABORATE TOO
MUCH
ON BECAUSE I KNOW THERE ARE
OTHER
QUESTION, BUT THOSE
IN COMBINATION HAVE LED US TO
NOT
TO REPURPOSE THE MONEY THAT
HAS BEEN COMMITTED, BUT FOR A
FUTURE YEAR TO CURRENT YEAR
NEEDS.
DO
YOU WANT TO ADD TO IT?
NO, THE HOUSING PRODUCTION
IS ONGOING.
IT ALWAYS TAKES A LOT OF
TIME AND LOW INCOME
HOUSING PROTECTION CONTINUES.
IT WAS NEVER DRIVEN BY A PROFIT
MOTIVE WHICH HAS CLOSED DOWN
A PRIVATE BUILDING AND THERE
IS SOME LEVEL OF PRODUCTION
STILL
ONGOING.
YES.
AND STILL, MY QUESTION -- IT
IS A POLICY CHOICE BECAUSE
AS LONG AS YOU HAVE THE MONEY TO
COVER
IN THE FUTURE YEARS WHEN THINGS
ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO
GET COMPLETED THOSE PROJECTS
THEN,
AND YOU COULD DECIDE NOT TO PUT
AN RFP OUT TO CATCH UP, I
MEAN, IT'S A LOT OF MONEY, AND
IT
ALSO HAS NOT RESERVED -- SORRY,
IT'S
EARNING TRUST.
AND SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT
HAPPENS TO THE MONEY -- NOT
TRUST, EXCUSE ME, EARNING
INTEREST.
I'M NOT SURE WHERE THE
INTEREST IS GOING BECAUSE THAT
ALSO CAN
BE UTILIZED BECAUSE
THEY'RE HOUSING AND RENTAL
ASSISTANCE
IS HOUSING IN MY MIND AND
THESE HOUSING PROJECTS THAT ARE
STRUGGLING, THAT'S STILL
HOUSING AND THERE ARE HOUSING
PROVIDERS
THAT HAVE HAD TO CLOSE
BUILDINGS AND I'M NOT SURE HOW
MANY
UNITS WE'VE LOST.
I UNDERSTAND WE GAINED 1300 AND
NOT SURE HOW MANY WE'VE LOST
BECAUSE THE PROVIDE VERSE HAD
TO CLOSE BUILDINGS AND THERE IS
AN
UNCLEAR PICK THE OUT
HOUSING SPACE WHICH IS WHY
COUNCIL MEMBER KETTLE AND I
HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE COMMITTEE,
AND I
KNOW THERE'S A SLIDE.
I THINK WE GET THIS
RESPONSE BACK IN A MONTH OR SO
ON WHAT'S
YOUR FIVE- YEAR PLAN FOR
HOUSING, SO THAT WE KNOW ALL OF
THESE PIECES THAT ARE
INTERRELATED WE ARE PLANNING IN
THIS HOLISTIC
FASHION, STRATEGIC FASHION AS A
PLAN.
DIRECTOR EGER, I DIDN'T MEAN
TO CUT YOU
OFF.
THAT'S OKAY.
I'M JUST MAKE THE POINT THAT WE
ARE MAKING POLICY CHOICES THAT
WE CAN SUPPORT IT AT THE
SAME TOO AND MAKE DIFFERENT
CHOICES
SO THAT THERE IS SOME
AVAILABLEAVAILABLE TODAY AND
PARTICULARLY FUNDS THAT HAVEN'T
BEEN ENCUMBERED
YET AND STILL MAKE GOOD ON THAT
LATER ON SO THAT WE CAN BUILD.
WE DO NEED MORE HOUSING, BUT
HOW WE'RE DOING THIS, IN MY
MIND, IS NOT WORKING, AND SO I
WANT A DAY
LIKE THAT AND IT IS
CONTRIBUTING TO THIS DEFICIT
PIECE.
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE HOUSING
DOLLARS AND THE HOUSING SPACE
SO THAT WE'RE ABLE TO
COVER ALL OF THE NEEDS INCLUDING
THE RENTAL
ASSISTANCE IF CURRENT PROVIDERS
NEED HELP KEEPING THOSE CURRENT
UNITS ONLINE, ALL OF THAT
IS PART OF THE SAME -- THE
SAME HOUSING -- SHOULD BE
PART OF THE SAME HOUSING PLAN.
THANK YOU,
CHAIR.
THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR.
DIRECTOR EDER AND
NOBLE, ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD
THERE?
THANK YOU.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT, DID YOU
STILL WANT TO ASK A QUESTION?
SHE'S ON MUTE.
YES, YES, I DO.
I UNMUTED MYSELF.
PLEASE: PLEASE.
TAKE IT AWAY.
THANK YOU: THANK YOU.
HELPFUL INFORMATION TO BUILD
UPON WHAT WE WERE SAYING.
THE OFFICE OF HOUSING'S CASH
BALANCE IS $624 MILLION AS
OF MAY -- AT THE END OF MAY, AND
SOME OF THAT'S INCUMBERED
AND SOME OF IT ISN'T, BUT THE
BOTTOM LINE IS THAT 107 MILLION
IS
ANTICIPATED FOR FUTURE NOFAs
AND THAT IS NOT ENCUMBERED OR
COMMITTED, ET CETERA, AND SO
FAR AT THE END OF MAY, 36
MILLION HAS
BEEN EXPENDED. SO THAT JUST
GIVES YOU KIND OF
A SENSE OF HOW THE FLOW OF MONEY
OUT VERSUS WHAT IS LEFT IN, YOU
KNOW, IN VARIOUS ACCOUNTS
IN HOUSING JUST TO FILL IN
THE BLANKS OVER THE
LAST CONVERSATION.
MY QUESTION IS, I KNOW THAT
THERE AREN'T NUMBERS HERE
AND WE'LL KEEP TALKING ABOUT
THIS,
BUT MY UNDERSTANDING
WAS THAT THE CARRY FORWARD THAT
WE
FIRST RECEIVED WAS ABOUT 30
MILLION
SHORT BECAUSE OF THE P.E.T.
REVENUE.
SO THE FIX IS TO TAKE
MONEY OUT OUT GENERAL, I
BELIEVE, 32 OUT
OF FINANCE GENERAL THAT
WOULD NOT GO FORWARD TO PAY
FOR GENERAL FUND COSTSCOSTS
2026, IF THAT
IS THE -- IF I'VE GOT THAT
RIGHT, HOW MUCH IS LEFT
IN FINANCE GENERAL IS MY
QUESTION?
DIRECTOR EDER: DIRECTOR EDER?
THERE WAS $25 MILLION IN
THE BUDGET AS CENTRAL STAFF
MENTIONED AVAILABLE TO BUY
DOWN THE ANTICIPATED, AND THE
THEN- ANTICIPATED COST OF
THE ADOPTED BUDGET.
THAT NUMBER HAS EVOLVED
AS WE HAVE LAPSED SOME
MONEYMONEY FROM
UNDERSPEND FROM 2024 THAT IS
NOT IMPLICATED IN THE CARRY
FORWARD
AND THEN ALSO, SO THAT INCREASED
THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE THAT
WE WOULD OTHERWISE, ALL
THINGS BEING EQUAL LEFT OVER, IF
YOU
WILL, TO HELP PAY FOR 2026
EXPENSES AND IT WAS A DECREASE
IN THE APRIL FORECAST,
THAT DECREASED SOME OF THE
REVENUES.
THERE WAS, BOTTOM LINE, ENOUGH
MONEY TO LEAVE A
POSITIVE BALANCE OF GREATER THAN
$32
MILLION THAT WE HAVE TRANSMITTED
LEGISLATION TO ESSENTIALLY
DECREASE. IT'S DECREASING THE
PAYROLL
EXPENSE TAX FUND,
SUPPORT FOR THE GENERAL FUND
THAT
ISN'T NEEDED IN 2025.
THAT MEANS THAT WE EITHER NEED
TO HAVE A DECREASE IN
2026 GENERAL FUND EXPENSES OR A
DECREASE IN '25 OR '26
PAYROLL EXPENSE FUNDS IN ORDER
TO BE
BALANCED ACROSS BOTH OF
THOSE FUNDS WITH THE
PROPOSED BUDGET AND THE ADOPTED
BUDGET FOR 2026.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION,
COUNCIL PRESIDENT?
SO, BASICALLY, ALL OF IT.
THE 32 MILLION THAT SORT
OF BALANCES THE CARRY FORWARD IS
PRETTY MUCH DOESN'T
LEAVE ANYTHING LEFT GOING
FORWARD.
IT LEAVES --
35 MINUS 32, GOT IT.
IT LEAVES 30-SOME- ODD
MILLION LESS THAN WHAT WOULD
OTHERWISE BE THERE FOR 2026 AND
THAT
WAS THE NEWS THAT CAME OUT OF
THE APRIL FORECAST IS THE CITY
HAS LESS MONEY.
WE HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO
PAY FOR THE ADOPTED BUDGET AND
THE
MID- YEAR AND THE CARRY
FORWARD IN 2025.
WE HAVE A PROBLEM COME 2026 AND
WE ARE PURPOSELY
UNDERSPENDING AND LOOKING FOR
REDUCTIONS
IN SPENDING FOR 2026 THAT WE
WILL BE WORKING ON OVER
THE SUMMER AND IN SEPTEMBER
WE'LL
HAVE A PROPOSED BUDGET FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION.
THANK YOU: THANK YOU.
I LOOK FORWARD TO THE SLIDE
THAT SHOWS HISTORY OF UNDER
SPEND.
IT'S GOOD TO FIND THE MONEY
WHEN YOU NEED IT.
WE'RE WORKING ON IT.
THANK YOU.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? HARD TO
TELL.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT?
NO.
COLLEAGUE, ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS ON CARRY FORWARD?
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON
CARRY FORWARD?
JUST GOING TO SUMMARIZE
WHAT I'VE HEARD IS IN THE --
YOU
SENT THE CARRY FORWARD
LEGISLATION AHEAD OF THE APRIL
FORECAST.
THE APRIL FORECAST CAME IN UNDER
THAN EXPECTED, THE GENERAL
FUND COMING IN ABOVE WHEN
WE EXPECTED.
AS WE SAID LAST YEAR
WHEN WE WERE HAVING THE JUMP-
START POLICY CONVERSATIONS WE
SAID THAT AT THAT TIME JUMPSTART
HAD ONLY GONE UP.
I SAID WE HAD TO BE
CAREFUL BECAUSE THAT WAS
UNREASONABLE AND WE DIDN'T
HAVE TAX COLLECTION TO DO FIVE
YEARS
SMOOTHING. IN A FUTURE STATE
JUMP- START
CAME IN THAN WHEN A GENERAL
FUND WOULD SUPPORT THOSE JUMP-
START
DOLLARS. THAT IS WHAT I HAVE
RECEIVED
TODAY.
THAT IS WHAT WE ARE DOING TODAY.
THIS IS ACTIONS MEETING
THE WORDS THAT WE HAVE SAID,
AND MAYBE I SHOULDN'T HAVE SAID
THAT THAT JUMP- START COULD COME
IN UNDER BECAUSE ONLY THREE
MONTHS LATER
IT DID. THIS POLICY CHOICE DOES,
IN
FACT, GIVE US FEWER
RESERVES TO ADDRESS 2026 BUDGET,
UNDERSTANDING THE
CURRENT PRACTICE OF FUNDING
HOUSING IN
PARTICULAR, BUT WITH THAT,
I'M GOING MOVE US ON TO THE
NEXT SECTION OF THIS WHICH IS
THE
GRANT ACCEPTANCE AND
APPROPRIATION.
SO, TOM, TAKE IT AWAY.
SO NOW WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE
MID-YEAR GRANT ACCEPTANCE
AND FOLLOW WITH THE
SUPPLEMENTAL.
SO THIS IS THE SECOND MID-
YEAR, THE SECOND GRANT
ACCEPTANCE OF THE YEAR AND
THERE'S BEEN
ONE THAT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED AND
APPROVED BY COUNCIL.
THE Q1 GRANTS AND THERE WILL
BE A THIRD WITH THE MAYOR'S
BUDGET
PROPOSAL, I WOULD ASSUME, TO
CLOSE OUT THE YEAR.
THIS SPECIFIC BILL
WOULD AUTHORIZE STATE
DEPARTMENTS ON
ACCEPT $23 MILLION FROM
EXTERNAL PROVIDERS AND
APPROPRIATE
$22 MILLION BY
THE CITY. HEAR LIMITED
MATCHING REQUIREMENTS AND ANY
INSTANCES
WHERE THE CITY WOULD NEED
TO COME UP WITH MONEY TO KIND OF
GO ALONG WITH THE FUNDS THAT WE
ARE RECEIVING, BUT THEY'RE ALL
MET WITH THE EXISTING
BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS AND
THERE'S NO
CITY IMPACT FOR ACCEPTING THESE
MONIES, SO I'M GOING TO
COVER THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE
$23 MILLION AND THE BILL.
FIRST, THERE'S $4 MILLION
BEING RECEIVED FROM THE SEATTLE
CENTER
FROM THE STATE DEPARTMENT
OF COMMERCE AND THAT MONEY IS
FOR MEMORIAL STADIUM
REDEVELOPMENT AND THAT'S
CONSISTENT WITH THE
ILA AND THE
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
$3.7 MILLION TO THE HUMAN
SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND
HSD FROM THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF
SOCIAL
AND HEALTH SERVICES AND THIS IS
FOR THE WASHINGTON CARES
PROGRAM, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY,
WASHINGTON'S LONG- TERM
CARE INSURANCE SYSTEM.
THE GRANT DOES FUND NINE
NEW POSITIONS AND THEY'RE NOT
IN THIS BILL, THEY'RE IN THE
NEXT
BILL THAT COVERS INCREASED NEW
POSITIONS.
THOSE NEW POSITIONS THAT ARE
ONGOING AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT
THAT IN THE NEW BILL.
THERE IS A $2.5
MILLION FROM THE CRIMINAL
JUSTICE
TRAINING COMMISSION AND THAT'S
FOR
HOMELESS PEOPLE IN SEATTLE. THE
FUNDING WILL ACTUALLY BE
ADMINISTERED BY A
COMMUNITY-BASED
ORGANIZATION ON CONTRACT WITH
THE
CITY, AND THEN THERE ARE $2
MILLION TO OFFSET
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR
THE ENGAGEMENT AND EVALUATION
FOR
PLANNING ACTIVITIES, AND THAT
IS -- THAT IS THE MID- YEAR
BILL AT A VERY HIGH LEVEL.
THIS BILL JUST REQUIRES A SIMPLE
MAJORITY VOTE FOR APPROVAL.
THANK: THANK
YOU, TOM. COLLEAGUES, ACCEPTANCE
AND
APPROPRIATIONS? COLLEAGUES?
GOING ONCE.
GOING TWICE.
I WILL MAKE MY ONLY COMMENT
AND THIS KIND OF COMES BACK TO
THE COMP PLAN CONVERSATIONS
THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING.
I'LL BE LOOKING TO
ENGAGE WITH THE OFFICE OF
PLANNING
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REGARDING
THE
LIVINGLIVING INTERSTATE I- 5
BECAUSE WE
SEE ESPECIALLY BETWEEN 45th
AND ALMOST 65th, REALLY.
55th EVEN THOUGH THERE'S AN
OVERPASS AT 55th AND THAT AREA
IS PRIMED AND READY TO BE
LIDDED IN A SIMILAR WAY THAT IT
WAS DONE IN WASHINGTON, D.C. ,
WITH ZERO PUBLIC DOLLARS.
IT RECONNECTED THE GRID,
AND CREATED NEW OFFICE SPACE
WHICH
GENERATES, I BELIEVE, WAS $20
OR $40 MILLION IN PROPERTY
TAXES FOR WASHINGTON, D.C. , AND
THAT AREA WE HAVE A GREAT
POTENTIAL TO RECONNECT THE
NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE REVIVED I-
WORK HAVING BEEN PAUSED AND EVEN
THOUGH
THIS WEEKEND STARTS THE FIRST
30-
DAY CLOSURE OF SOME LANES WITH
THE WORK BETWEEN THE SHIP CANAL
BRIDGE HAS BEEN DELAYED
WHICH GIVES US THE ABILITY THAT
AS
WE DO THAT, ENSURING
THAT THEY DO THE WORK IN A WAY
THAT
ALLOWS FOR PILINGS TO BE PUT IN
PLACE, AND IT IS
CRITICAL. THAT WAS COMMENTARY,
AND NOT A
QUESTION.
COLLEAGUES, I WILL TICK
ON, USUALLY THIS TIME OF
YEARYEAR THE SUBJECT THAT WE
HAVE
AND TODAY IT'S COMING IN THIRD
WITH THE MID- YEAR
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET OVER TO YOU,
TOM,
AND WE'LL HOLD QUESTIONS UNTIL
THE END OF THIS SECTION AND THEN
ASK QUESTIONS.
WE ONLY HAVE 14 MINUTES FOR
THIS
SECTION.
THANK YOU, CHAIR.
THIS WOULD BE THE: THIS WOULD BE THE
FIRST COMPREHENSIVE
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET LEGISLATION
CONSIDERED
BY COUNCIL IN 2025.
TYPICALLY, WE TALKED ABOUT
THIS, TYPICALLY IT WOULD BE THE
CARRY FORWARD BILL AND THERE ARE
EXTENDED CIRCUMSTANCES AND THIS
IS THE FIRST COM PRO
HENCIVE BILL BEFORE YOU.
IT'S A MIDYEAR APPROPRIATION
AND CAPITAL PROJECT CHANGE
BILL THAT'S INTENDED TO MEET
NEEDS THAT WERE UNFORESEEABLE
OR ASSUMED TO BE UNFORESEEABLE
WHEN
THE 2025 BUDGET WAS
ADOPTED IN THE FALL OF LAST
YEAR.
THIS BILL WOULD DECREASE IN
TOTAL, CITY APPROPRIATIONS BY
$221 MILLION AND ADDS 11
FTEs AND FIRST RATE OFF THE BACK
I'LL GET TO HOW AN
APPROPRIATION
BILL IS IN TOTAL OF DECREASING
THE CITY BUDGET AND THAT'S
BECAUSE THE CITY UTILITIES WHEN
THEY
DO THEIR CAPITAL PROJECTS IN
THE BUDGET PROCESS THEY -- THEY
DO THEIR FULL ALLOCATION IN
THE BUDGET PROCESS INCLUDING
THESE THEY INTEND TO CARRY
FORWARD IN THE
NEXT YEAR. WHAT THAT DOES
BECAUSE
CAPITAL -- ALL
CAPITAL APPROPRIATIONS BY STATE
LAW
CARRY FORWARD, AND I DO BELIEVE
DIRECTOR NOBLE COVERED THIS
IN HIS EARLIER COMMENTS.
BECAUSE OF THOSE
APPROPRIATIONS CARRY OVER THAT
WOULD BE
A DOUBLE COUNT.
THIS IS A VERY CONSISTENT THING
WITH BEST PRACTICE AND THE
UTILITIES TO ACCOUNT FOR
THE DOUBLE COUNT ABANDON THE
CARRY FORWARD CAPITAL
APPROPRIATIONS.
SO BASICALLY, THAT TOTAL
AMOUNT OF THAT REDUCTION, SO
BASICALLY BACKING OUT ANY AMOUNT
OF THE
CARRY FORWARD CAPITAL IS $263
MILLION.
SO WHEN YOU ACCOUNT FOR THAT
VERY
TECHNICAL EXERCISE, YOU THEN
UNEARTH A $43.6 MILLION
TOTAL INCREASE IN THIS MID- YEAR
APPROACH
APPROPRIATION BILL AND TO BREAK
IT DOWN,
IT WOULD BE A $2.3 MILLION FUND
INCREASE, AND
AGAIN, I'LL TALK ABOUT THE
DETAILS, AND NEXT SLIDE AND
THEN A $44.3 MILLION AND I'LL
TALK ABOUT THE OTHER HIELS AND
THE
DISTIFRPGSZ TO THE MID- YEAR
BILL AND I DID A SUPPLEMENTAL
BILL
AND IT WOULD REQUIRE COUNSEL FOR
PACKAGE.
THE ONE THING THAT THIS BILL: THE ONE THING THAT THIS BILL
DOES IS IT REDUCES THE DRUG
DIVERSION DEPARTMENT IN
THE MUNICIPAL COURT.
THERE'S FUNDING INCLUDED
FOR PARTIAL YEAR FUNDING SINCE
WE
ARE HALF WAY THROUGH THE
YEAR WITH THE MUNICIPAL COURT
AND
TWO FT POSITIONS IN LAW.
THIS IS ENVISIONED AS AN
ONGOING PROGRAM AND THE AMOUNT
THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE BILL IS
HAPPIER
FUNDING AND POSITION
AUTHORITY, BUT AGAIN, THIS IS A
TRANSFER OF
MONEYS AND AN ORIGINAL USE AND
INSTEAD REBURDEN OF PROOFING
THEM FOR THE DRUG DIVERSION
PROGRAM. NEXT IS THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOCIAL
HOUSING ATTACKS
IN 2024.
THIS ADS $74,000 TO
CITY FINANCES TAX ADMINISTRATIVE
FUNCTION, BUT THIS IS
ENTIRELY FUNDED FROM
PROCEEDS RECEIVED FROM THAT TAX
AND IT IS AN
ONGOING -- AN ONGOING ADD GIVEN
THE ONGOING NATURE OF THE TAX.
NEXT IS A $298,000 INCREASE TO
THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
AND TO F.T. POSITIONS TO
BASICALLY
AUGMENT THE -- THE
RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO RESPOND
TO ACTIONS
TAKEN AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL
AND THIS IS
ALSO PART-YEAR FUNDING AND THE
VISION TO BE
ONGOING AFTER THIS YEAR.
AND THEN FINALLY, I'VE TALKED
TO
ADDITIONS AND THAT WAS
$3.3 MILLION REDUCTION TO
THE BILL AND THE
ANSWER IS THERE ARE ABOUT $4
MILLION OF REDUCTION TO
GRANTS ACROSS CITY
DEPARTMENTS TO THE ACTUAL
AMOUNTS THAT
THEY EXPECT TO RECEIVE WITH
THE AMOUNTS THAT THEY'VE
BEEN BUDGETED AND THAT'S
A HOUSEKEEPING EXERCISE AND
BECAUSE THESE GRANTS ARE A
PART OF THE BUDGET THEY NEED
TO ACTUALLY MAKE THE FORMAL
REQUEST TO REDUCE
THESE AMOUNTS AND CLEAR THOSE
GRANTS OUT.
PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX HIGHLIGHT
AND IT'S A $1.5 MILLION
TOTAL INCREASE AND THE FIRST
CHANGE
THAT I WANTED TO POINT OUT IS
ACTUALLY A TRANSFER AND
IT'S TAKEN INDEPENDENTLY.
IT'S A REVENUE NEUTRAL,
BUDGET NEUTRAL CHANGE THAT
SHIFTS
$1.2 MILLION FROM THE OFFICE OF
HOUSING AND MULTI- FAMILY
HOUSING
PROGRAM TO THE HUMAN
SERVICES DEPARTMENTS SUPPORTING
SAFE COMMUNITIES PROGRAM, AND
THE PURPOSE OF THAT SHIFT IS TO
FUND
HOMELESSNESS, LTER RENTAL
COSTS. NEXT IT'S AN INESTO HSD
THAT WOULD FUND STREET
LEVEL ACTIVATION RELATED TO
THE STABILITY THROUGH ACCESS OF
RESOURCES CENTER.
NEXT IS THE $527,000 INCREASE
THAT'S A TECHNICAL
CORRECTION IN THE SENSE THAT
ALIGNS
PAYROLL EXPENSE TAXES TO THE
PROPOSAL
IN THE 2025 BUDGET.
THOSE RENTAL ASSISTANCE ADDS AND
THE $527,000 WAS INCLUDED IN
THE BUDGET FROM THE HUMAN
SERVICES FUND THAT WAS AN ERROR
AND IT WAS INTENDED TO BE FUNDED
IN
THE TAX FUND AND THIS CORRECTS
THAT
TO ALIGN WITH THE COUNCIL'S
INTENT.
NOW I'LL TURN TO THE OTHER FUND
HIGHLIGHTS AND I'LL JUST
SAY THAT THERE ARE QUITE A FEW
ITEMS
IN THIS BILL.
MOST OF THEM ARE MUCH
SMALLER THAN WHAT WE ARE
DISCUSSING TODAY AND AFTER
THIS PRESENTATION IF THERE ARE
FOLLOW-UPS FOR ANY OF
THE DETAILED ITEMS
PLEASE LET US KNOW AND LOOKING
AT THESE
HIGH-LEVEL CHANGES, THERE'S AN
REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX REIT ONE
REDUX OF $7 MILLION IN 2025
AND THAT'S TO THE SEATTLE
POLICE FACILITIES PROJECT, BUT
THE
MONEY, IN FACT, IT'S
BEING SPREAD FOR FUTURE YEARS IN
THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
PROGRAM.
IT'S NOT AS A TOTAL REDUCTION
OF
RESOURCE JUST A REDUCTION IN
THE 2025 USE OF THAT RESOURCE.
NEXT IS A $12 MILLION ADD
TO REDUCE THE SEWER AT THE
MEMORIAL STADIUM BECAUSE OF THE
WAY
WE MANAGE OUR MONEY
AND PARTICULARLY WITH REGARD TO
THE UTILITIES WHERE WE HAVE TO
BE VERY PRECISE ABOUT ALIGNING
RATE CHARGES WITH THE USES
FOR
CUSTOMERS. THE $12 MILLION IS
ALSO BUDGETED
IN THE DRAINAGE OF THE
WASTE WATER FUND AND THE SEATTLE
CENTER SPENDS THE $12
MILLION AND SENDS IT TO THE
UTILITY WHERE THE UTILITY DOES
THE
WORK AND THAT'S A BIT OF A
DOUBLE
COUNT. FINALLY, WITH THE PARKS
AND
RECREATION FUND, THERE IS A
$1.7 MILLION INCREASE FOR
THE CITY GOLF COURSES AND A
$2.6 MILLION INCREASE FOR
THE COMMUNITY CENTER
REHABILITATION AND DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT AND THIS
FUNDED FROM INSURANCE
SETTLEMENT PROCEED ATTRIBUTABLE
TO
THE ARSON AT THE CAMP LONG
LODGE.
FINAL SLIDE ON THE -- ON
THE APPROPRIATION CHANGES AND
THE TRANSPORTATION FUND, THERE
IS A
$3.3 MILLION INCREASE
FOR DOWNTOWN STREET CLEANING
AND GRAFFITI ABATEMENT AND THE
$2.
4 INCREASE OF THE THOMAS STREET
REDESIGNED PROJECT AND
THAT'S FUNDED WITH THE
DEVELOPER
STREET VACATION PROCEEDS AND THE
MOVE
SEATTLE LEVITY FUND HAS A
FAIRLY LARGE CHANGE THAT'S
ESSENTIALLY
A TRANSFER OF $8.3 MILLION
OF VARIOUS PROJECTS TO THE
MADISON
BUS TRANSIT PROJECT AND ALSO
ADDS $3 MILLION IN TOTAL FOR
THE PROJECT FOR
INTEREST EARNINGS AND THOSE
CHANGES ARE
NECESSARY TO CLOSE OUT.
THE PROJECTS HAVE
BEEN FINISHED AND HOWEVER, THERE
WERE
COST INCREASES ABOVE WHAT
WAS ORIGINALLY BUDGETED AND
IN ORDER TO CLOSE IT OUT THEY
NEED TO PUT
THESE FUNDS
IN ORDER TO FILL THOSE GAPS.
SO I DID MENTION: SO I DID MENTION
THAT THERE ARE A TOTAL OF 11 NEW
POSITIONS
ADDED IN THE BILL ON THIS
TABLE SUMMARIZES THOSE POSITIONS
AND I'VE TALKED ABOUT SOME OF
THESE
WITH REGARDS TO
THE APPROPRIATIONS THAT
WERE INCREASED TO
SUPPORT THEM. IN F.A.S. , FINE
ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES, THEY ADMINISTER THE
SOCIAL
HOUSING TAX. THE ARTS AND
CULTURE HAS A NEW
POSITION ADDED
TO ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT TO THE
LAW TEAM.
THE LAW DEPARTMENT HAS
FOUR POSITIONS INCLUDING THE
DRUG DIVERSION PROGRAM AND
FEDERAL
RESPONSE NEEDS. SEATTLE
MUNICIPAL COURT HAS THE
DRUG DWERGDZ PROGRAM AND THESE
ARE THE NINE IN THE MID-
YEAR GRANT ACCEPTANCE AND THAT
WOULD
BE THE WASHINGTON CARES GRANT
FUNDS.
THERE ARE TWO POSITIONS ADDED
IN SEATTLE CENTER FOR
WATERFRONT LANDSCAPING AND THOSE
ARE POSITIONS THAT ARE
ONGOING. HOWEVER, THEY ARE
THREE-YEAR
TERM LIMITED AND THEY'RE
ONGOING FOR A LIMITED TIME.
THE SEATTLE
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ARE
SWAPPING FOR
TECH POSITIONS FROM THE SEATTLE
I.T.
INTO CITY LIGHT ITSELF AND THEN
FINALLY, THERE ARE
SUNSET POSITIONS IN SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTIONS AND
INSPECTIONS THAT WERE EXTENDED
FOR
SIX MONTHS IN THE BUDGET,
HOWEVER, FOR THE YEAR IN TOTAL,
ASK
ND THEY HAVE THE STAFFING ROSTER
IN
THE CITY AND THAT'S AN 11-
CITY REDUCTION AND THAT'S 11
POSITIONS.
THERE ARE A FEW OTHERS
EMBEDDED IN THE BILL
INCLUDING THE PROJECTS IN THE
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM AND THIS
IS A
BETTER BIKE BARRIER PROJECT AND
THE GRANT STREET ACCESS AND
COMPLETE STREET
PROJECT. FINALLY, THERE IS A
PROVIDER LIST THAT WOULD LIFT
THE
PROVISO AND THE TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT FUND IS NOT AN
APPROPRIATE PLACE
FOR THIS, THIS PURPOSE AND THE
WATERFRONT SHUTTLE AND ACTUALLY
WITHIN THE
SUPPLEMENTAL, THERE IS A SHIFT
OF $500,000 FROM
THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TAX TOTO
USE TO ALIGN THOSE FUNDS WITH
THE
FUNDING THE SHUTTLE INSTEAD
OF USING THE TRANSPORTATION
BENEFIT DISTRICT FUNDS FOR THAT
PURPOSE AND THOSE COSTS WOULD BE
FOUND
AT THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT, AND I'LL JUST WRAP
UP WITH A COUPLE
OF CONSIDERATIONS IN REVIEW OF
THIS
BILL. ONE, GIVEN THAT WE HAVE
TALKED A
GREAT DEAL ABOUT A
BUDGET CHALLENGE AND THE GENERAL
FUND AND THE PAYROLL EXPENSE
TAX FUND.
THIS BILL DOES ADD IN
THE SUPPLEMENTAL PROCESS
ONGOING NEW POSITIONS THIS WOULD
BE CONSIDERED TECHNICAL
ADDITIONS IN THE BUDGET
PRESENTATION IN THE FALL, SO
I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT, AND
THEN NEXT,
AGAIN, GIVEN THE
ONGOING CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE
WITH
THE PAYROLL EXPENSE TAXTAX
THEY WOULD HAVE TAX
APPROPRIATIONS
BY
$1.5 MILLION. FINALLY, SO WE'LL
TALK ABOUT THE
NEXT STEPS IN THE BUDGET
PROCESS AND THERE IS A JULY
30th SELECT BUDGET COMMITTEE TWO
WEEKS
FROM NOW WHICH WE'LL HEAR
THE POSSIBLE TWO
BILLS AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
TIMELINE FOR THE TAX PROPOSAL.
WE WOULD ASK THAT WE WOULD
BE MADE AWARE OF ANY CONCEPTS SO
THAT WE CAN HELP YOU
DEVELOP THEM BY JULY 22 nd.
THE FINAL ACTION OF THE BILL
IS SCHEDULED FOR AUGUST 8t h,
BOTH BILLS AND WE'LL GET THE
MAYOR'S BUDGET IN LATE
SEPTEMBER.
THANK: THANK
YOU, TOM. VERY COM PREHNSIVE AND
WE'LL END HERE AND STICK ON THE
NEXT STEPS.
COLLEAGUE, WITH ONE
MINUTE REMAINING BEFORE -- IF WE
DO HAVE QUESTIONS I WILL ALSO
OFFER EVERYONE THAT HAS
PRESENTED
TODAY, WE HAVE THE
GREATEST ACCESS TO TOM AS HE IS
ON
OUR CENTRAL STAFF, AND SO
HE'S AVAILABLE TO US IF WE
DON'T HAVE
TIME FOR ALL OF THE QUESTIONS.
I DO SEE COUNCIL MEMBER
KETTLE'S HAND AND COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA,
DO YOU HAVE A HAND?
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
LOOKING AT THE LONG LIST OF: LOOKING AT THE LONG LIST OF
PIECES, I WANT TO KNOW FROM MY
COLLEAGUES THAT I'VE
BEEN INVOLVED WITH THE
DRUG ALTERNATIVE.
AND THE PROGRAM IS
DRUG PROSECUTION ALTERNATIVE
AND THAT'S BEEN COORDINATED AND
ALSO THE STAR CENTER.
I JUST WANTED TO KNOW THAT WE
ENGAGE ON THIS, TOO.
IT'S A HUMAN SERVICES
PROJECT, AND IT ALSO HAS A
PUBLIC
SAFETY PIECE AND IT'S BEEN LOW
LO KATED
BETWEEN D7 AND D1 ASH ACROSS THE
PIT TO MY RIGHT
AND THANK YOU FOR HIGHLIGHTING
THE STADIUM.
A VERY IMPORTANT PROJECTION,
AND TO MAKE
IT WORK. I APPRECIATE THE
EFFORTS THAT ARE EXHIBITED HERE
IN
THIS BRIEFING TO MAKE SURE THAT
THEY HAPPEN SO THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
ANY RESPONSES? NOT NEEDED?
THE TAKEAWAY FROM TODAY, IF
THERE'S ONLY ONE THING THAT
YOU HAVE LEARNED TODAY IS
THAT AMENDMENTS FOR BOTH BNO
AND SUPPLEMENTAL ARE DUE ON JULY
22nd BY NOON.
WE ARE NOW WITH 12:45 WITH
15 MINUTES RESERVED FOR THE
FINAL
TWO ITEMS, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I
SEE YOU HAVE A HAND, BUT WE
CALL LAST CALL.
IS IT OKAY TO CONTINUE MOVING
FORWARD? HARD TO TELL WITH YOUR
CAMERA
ON.
THAT'S FINE.
THANK YOU: THANK YOU.
WOULD THE CLERK READ ITEM NUMBER
5 INTO THE TITLE -- ITEM
NUMBER 4.
CB 12 BETWEEN 32 AMENDING
ORDINANCE 127156 WHICH
ADOPTED THE 2025 BUDGET
INCLUDING THE
2025- 2030 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM, CHANGING
APPROPRIATIONS TO VARIOUS
DEPARTMENTS
AND BUDGET CONTROL LEVELSLEVELS
FROM VARIOUS FUNDS IN THE
BUDGET.
WE ARE JOINED BY TRACE I: WE ARE JOINED BY TRACE I
RATZLIFF AND WE WILL START WITH
OLE, OLE, OLE, PLAYOFFS START
TOMORROW.
TAKE IT AWAY FOR THE PRESSEN
TAGSZ. TAGZ -- PRESENTATIONS,
YOU
GET
EIGHT MINUTES.
I'M KYLIE ROLF FROM THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE AND TRACI
RATZLIFF COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF.
SO --
WE'LL BRING YOU SOME
TECH SUPPORT RIGHT NOW, AND IF
YOU WANT TO START TALKING
AND WE WILL JUST KEEP CLICKING.
YEP. THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBERS FOR
THE OPPORTUNITY TO BRIEF YOU ON
COUNCIL BILL
121032 TODAY.
OOPS!
SORRY. I WAS LAST YEAR BEFORE
YOU
ALL WITH THE LOCAL
ORGANIZING COMMITTEE IN MARCH
WHEN WE GAVE
YOU AN UPDATE ON THE
OVERALL PLANNING EFFORTS
FOR THE WORLD
CUP NEXT YEAR. YOU KNOW THE
WORLD COUPLE BE
THE LARGEST EVER WITH MATCHES
ACROSS 16 CITY ACROSS THREE
COUNTRIES
TAKING PLACE BETWEEN JUNE
11th AND JULY 19th OVERALL.
THE SIX MATCHES -- HERE WE GO.
THE SIX MATCHES THAT SEATTLE IS
HOSTING IS ABOUT A FOUR- WEEK
PERIOD. THE TOP PRIORITIES AS A
CITY
IS CREATING A SAFE, ACCESSIBLE
AND ENJOYABLE EXPERIENCE FOR
BOTH VISITORS AND RESIDENTS,
AND IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT WE
ACHIEVE
THOSE GOALS,
STRATEGIC INVESTMENTS IN RIGHT
OF WAY
INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC
SAFETY AS WELL AS STAFF PLANNING
AND EXECUTION RESOURCES ARE
NEEDED.
SO THIS BRINGS US TO
THE PIECE OF LEGISLATION BEFORE
YOU NOW.
LAST YEAR, COUNCIL DEDICATED
$12.2 MILLION FOR
NEEDED WORLD CUP INVESTMENTS IN
THE 2025- 2026
BUDGET INCLUDING 2 MILLION OF
OPERATING FUNDS IN 2025 AND
$4 MILLION OF OPERATING FUNDS IN
2026 AND 6.2 MILLION IN CAPITAL
FUNDS FOR THIS YEAR AND NEXT.
TODAY IS REVENUE NEUTRAL
ACTION MOVES $6.2 MILLION OF
THOSE FUNDS TO OPERATING
DEPARTMENTS.
SPECIFICALLY, SEATTLE
CENTER, SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION, SEATTLE
FIRE DEPARTMENT AND SEATTLE
PARKS AND
RECREATION WHO HAVE
IDENTIFIED FEEDED CAPITAL AND
EVENT ORGANIZATIONS AND PUBLIC
SAFETY- RELATED NEEDS AND
THIS INCLUDES INFRASTRUCTURE AND
PARK FEATURES AS WELL AS
EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT-RELATED EQUIPMENT
AND COMMUNICATION IMPROVEMENTS
AS WELL AS TEMPORARY
STAFFING RELATED TO THE FAN
CELEBRATION.
ALL OF THE INVESTMENTS
CONTAINED IN THIS LEGISLATION
ARE DIRECTLY
GERMANE TO PUBLIC SAFETY
RICK MITIGATION, RIGHT OF
WAY ACCESSIBILITY AND MOBILITY
IMPROVEMENTS AND
NEEDED OPERATIONAL SUPPORT.
IF PASSED, AND YOU WILL SEE
IF PASSED AS PROPOSED, THE
REMAINING RESOURCES TO BE
ALLOCATED ARE $200,000 IN 2025
OPERATING RESERVES AND
$4 MILLION IN 2026 OP RIGHTING
RESERVES AND
1.8 MILLION OF CAPITAL RESERVES.
SO HERE, YOU THE SEE THE
BREAKDOWN BY DEPARTMENT IN
TERMS OF PUBLIC SAFETY RISK
MITIGATION AND THEY'RE LARGELY
FOR SCALING
UP EQUIPMENT RELATED TO
HAZARDOUS IDENTIFICATION AS
WELL AS EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVICE
SUPPLIES. THE MAJORITY OF THIS
EQUIPMENT
IS ALREADY IN USE BY THE
SEATTLE FIRE DEPARTMENT, BUT
GIVEN
THE SCOPE AND SCALE OF THE
TOURNAMENT AND THE FAN
CELEBRATION, THEY NEED
TO PURCHASE MORE TO BE ABLE TO
HANDLE THE INCREASED
NEED AT BOTH VENUES AT THE SAME
TIME.
SEATTLE CENTER AND SEATTLE PARKS
AND RECREATION EXPENDITURES ARE
TO IMPLEMENT VEHICLE RAMMING
RISK, MITIGATION MEASURES ON THE
SEATTLE CENTER CAMPUS AS WELL
AS WESTLAKE PARK.
SDOT CAPITAL INVESTMENTS IS
FOR SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS IN
KEY AREAS SURROUNDING LUMENFIELD
WHERE VEHICLE TRAFFIC ARE
EXPECTED AND THEN FINALLY,
THE REMAINING SEATTLE
CENTER EXPENDITURESES ARE
RELATED
TO FAN CELEBRATION SPECIFICALLY
FOR THEM TO BRING ON
FOUR TEMPORARY POSITIONS
BEGINNING IN
THE END OF 026, AND WITH THAT I
CAN
TAKE QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU: THANK YOU.
IF YOU CAN TAKE IT BACK
ONE PREVIOUS SLIDE AND TRACI,
ANY COMMENT
ANALYSIS OR CONCERNS?
I HAVE NOTHING TO ADD TO THE: I HAVE NOTHING TO ADD TO THE
PROPOSAL. THE EMO I SENT TELLS
YOU WHERE
WE ARE WITH THE AGREEMENT THAT
WE WOULD EXPECT TO COME
TO
COUNCIL HOPEFULLY BEFORE THE
BUDGET THAT WILL GIVE US
A BETTER SENSE FOR
EXPECTATIONS AS IT RELATES TO
OUR
ADDITIONAL COSTS THAT WE MIGHT
INCUR AS
IT RELATES FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF
THE
COST AS IT RELATES TO THE
WORLD
CUP.
THANK YOU,
TRACI, TO PUT A FINER POINT ON
THIS, ONE OF
THE REASONS WHY I WAS HAVING
LESS COMFORTABLE OF TIME IN
COMMITTEE TODAY IS BECAUSE WE
HAD PART
OF THIS CONVERSATION DURING THE
BUDGET THIS LAST FALL WHERE
WE SET THIS MONEY ASIDE.
THIS IS APPROPRIATING SOME,
NOT ALL, OF THE MONEY AND YOU'VE
BEEN VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT
WHAT YOU ARE FUNDING.
SO WE, AGAIN, REVENUE
NEUTRAL, BECAUSE WE SET THE
MONEY
ASIDE AND WE ARE APPROPRIATING
TODAY.
COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON, I SEE
YOUR HAND AND WE HAVE
ANOTHER MINUTE OR SO BEFORE WE
NEED TO
MOVE ON TO THE NEXT
ITEM.
UNDERSTOOD: UNDERSTOOD.
I'LL HAVE TO GET TO MY 1:00.
CAN WE GO BACK TO THE
PREVIOUS
SLIDE? I JUST WANT TO SEE THE
NUMBERS RELATED TO SPD.
ARE THERE NUMBERS RELATED
SPECIFICALLY TO SPD?
I WILL ADDRESS THAT AND: I WILL ADDRESS THAT AND
I'LL PASS IT OVER TO YOU AND WE
HAD
ADDITIONAL ITEMS IN THE
APPROACH WRAGZS AND THOSE ITEMS
NEED TO GO THROUGH THE THE SRS
PROCESS AND SO IT WOULD BE
INAPPROPRIATE
FOR US TO APPROPRIATE THE
FUNDS AHEAD OF TIME AND THAT'S
WHY
THE BILL HAS BEEN HELD UP
OVERALL.
OKAY.
GOOD.
THANK YOU FOR THE
EXPLANATION, WE APPRECIATE IT
AND WHEN
WE LOOK AT THE VEHICLE AND THE
NEXT
SLIDE. THE VEHICLE RAMMING
MITIGATION
MEASURES, RATHER, HAVE YOU
DRILLED DOWN AS TO WHAT
THOSE EXACT MEASURES MIGHT BE?
ARE WE TALKING PLANTER BOXES?
WHAT KIND OF STUFF?
ALL OF THE ABOVE, FOR
SEATTLE CENTER CAMPUS, MY
UNDERSTANDING IS IT LARGELY
CONSISTS OF
HARD SCAPE BALLARDS, AND I
CAN CERTAINLY GET YOU MORE
DETAILS ABOUT THAT AFTER THIS IF
YAUD
YAUD LIKE.
I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT: I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY YOU
DON'T HAVE TO PAY A CONSULTANT
FEE BECAUSE HE IS A
COUNCILMEMBER NOW.
EXCELLENT: EXCELLENT.
WITH THAT, ANY
OTHER
QUESTIONS?
I'M AN INHOUSE RESOURCE.
INHOUSE: INHOUSE
RESOURCE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON
FIFA WORLD CUP?
DON'T MISS THE USL 2
PLAYOFFS STARTING TOMORROW AND
BALLARD
FC ARE IN THE GAMES.
THANK YOU BOTH VERY MUCH.
WE WILL SEE YOU SOON.
IF THE CLERK
WANTS TO READ THE SHORT TITLE OF
ITEM NUMBER 5.
CB 121033, AN ORDINANCE
RELATEING TO THE
FINANCING OF THE HUMAN CAPITAL
MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM PROJECT, AMENDING
ORDINANCE 127131 TO INCREASE
THE AMOUNT OF AN EXISTING
INTERFUND LOAN, ALLOWING IT TO
BE A
BORROWING FUND FOR
THE LOAN.
WE HAVE DIRECTOR: WE HAVE DIRECTOR
CARNELL TODAY AND REMIND
ME, TOM SHOULD BE RETURNING TO
THE
TABLE ANY MINUTE NOW AS THE
PRESENTATION IS GETTING
UPLOADED, I'LL
KIND OF GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW.
WE ARE CHANGING THE AMOUNT OF
A REVOLVING LOAN THAT
CAN RECEIVE. SO REVOLVING LOAN
BEING ONE
THAT HAS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF
MONEY
THAT CAN BE BORROWED
AGAINST, BUT MUST BE PAID BACK
BEFORE IT
CAN BE BORROWED AGAINST AGAIN.
WE ARE CHANGING THE
CEILING OF THE REVOLVING LOAN
AND THE
LOAN HAS BEEN UTILIZED, SO ALL
OF
THE MONEY HAS BEEN TAKEN OUT AND
THEN IT HAS ALL BEEN PAID
BACK, SO WE ARE AT ZERO,
BUT WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE
CEILING
OF THIS LOAN AND I'LL HAVE
DIRECTOR CARNELL SHARE THIS
PRESENTATION AS WELL AS I'VE
ASKED DIRECTOR
CARNELL TO BRING ANOTHER
SLIDE IN THE PRESENTATION THAT
GOES INTO MORE DETAIL OF WHAT
DO -- AND YOU'LL HAVE TO REMIND
ME
THE TITLE OF THESE
INDIVIDUAL'S NAMES AND THE
PEOPLE WO DO
THE WORK AND WHAT ARE THE TASKS
THAT THEY'RE DOING.
WITH THAT, DIRECTOR CARNELL AND
UNFORTUNATELY, WE ONLY HAVE
FOUR MINUTES SO I'LL ASK
COLLEAGUES
TO HOLD THEIR
QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU, EVERYONE.
I DON'T THINK YOUR MIKE IS
ON.
IT'S GREEN BUTTON.
GO.
THERE: THERE
IT IS.
THAT TOOK UP ONE: THAT TOOK UP ONE
MINUTE. SORRY.
[ LAUGHTER ] GOOD AFTERNOON,
EVERYONE, JAMIE
CARNELL DIRECTOR OFFICE OF
CITY FINANCE AND THIS IS RELATED
TO
COUNCIL BILL 121033 WHICH IS THE
INTERFUND
LOAN. TO THE NEXT PAGE, SORRY.
SO THIS COUNCIL BILL IS FOR
THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
PROJECT
ALSO KNOWN AS WORK DAY.
THIS IS REPLACING THE CRITICAL
REPLACEMENT OF THE
TIMEKEEPING AND PAYROLL SYSTEM.
IN NOVEMBER '24 AS
COUNCILCOUNCIL MEMBER POINTED
OUT WE THE
INTERFUND LOAN TO PAY FOR THE
CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT
COSTS RELATED TO THE SYSTEM AND
THAT
LOAN EXPIRES ON
DECEMBER 21,
2026. AS STATED, THAT HAS BEEN
FULLY
DRAWN DOWN AND REPAID
AND IT AMENDS ORDINANCE 137131
TO
RECOGNIZE CHAMGES IN THE BUDGET
AND THE INTERFUND LOAN LIMIT TO
BRING THE PROJECT TO COMPLETION.
SO THIS PROPOSED LEGISLATION
AMENDS THE ORDINANCE TO INCREASE
THE LOAN AUTHORIZATION
CEILING FROM THE ADDITIONAL TO
13. 2 TO
CHANGE THE BORROWING
FUND FROM THE 25 MULTIPURPOSE
LTGO
BOND FUND TO THE '26 FUND
REJECTING
THE PAYMENT FOR THE
INTERFUND LOAN AMOUNT WHICH WILL
COME
FROM THE PROCEEDS OF THE BOND
ISSUANCE.
THIS INTERFUND LOAN
REMAINS CURRENT WHICH EXPIRES
IN DECEMBER 21 OF '26 AND
IT INCLUDES THE
BUDGET APPROPRIATION BY 13. 2
MILLION.
SO ONCE APPROVED, WE WILL
COMPLETE THE HCMS
SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION AND THE
PROJECT COST BY DRAWING ON THE
INTERFUND LOAN AND THEN WE WILL
PAY THE
INTERFUND LOAN WITH THE BOND
ISSUANCE.
THANK YOU, DIRECTOR CARNELL.
TOM, CAN YOU SHARE YOUR ANALYSIS
AND REVIEW OF THIS LEGISLATION
AND ANYTHING THAT WE NEED TO
BE CONCERNED ABOUT OR ANYTHING
THAT
YOU'RE AWARE
OF.
THANK YOU, CHAIR
STRAUSS. NO, THEY DID NOT REVIEW
FOR THE
PROPOSAL AND I APOLOGIZE
I WASN'T AT THE
PRESENTATION AND THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOR
ANY TECHNICAL ISSUES TO
ELEVATE. THAT PROCESS WAS CLEAN
AND THE
IMPACT COMMITTEE, YOU KNOW,
NOT ENDORSED IT, BUT REVIEWED
THE PROPOSAL AND FOUND
NO ISSUES WITH IT AND FORWARDED
IT TO
THE COUNCIL FOR STAFF
ANALYSIS THAT'S SIMILAR IN THAT
REGARD.
THANK YOU: THANK YOU.
AND I WILL JUST
NOTE FOR THE RECORD AND FOR
COLLEAGUES, DIRECTOR CARNELL HAS
COMMITTED
TO PROVIDING A MORE DETAILED
LIST OF WHAT THE TASKS AND
ACCOMPLISH ACCOMPLISHMENT, BUT
ANY FLAVOR
THAT YOU WANT TO GIVE US TODAY,
DIRECTOR CARNELL OF WHAT
THESE
FOLKS ARE DOING.
THIS IS PRIMARILY: THIS IS PRIMARILY
USED FOR THE SYSTEM
IMPLEMENTERS, SO
THAT COULD BE DELIGHT, WHO IS
OUR PRIMARY SYSTEM AND WE
ALSO MAINTAINED A NUMBER OF
SMALLER CONSULTING FIRMS TO HELP
WITH
THIS, AND THIS 13. 2 IS REALLY
TO FINALIZE THE IMPLEMENTATION
PROJECT, AND I WANT TO GET TO
MY NOTES AND THAT INCLUDES
ENSURING THAT OUR BIWEEKLY
PAYROLL
IS STABLE ADMITTING THAT THE
NUANCES ARE GOING FROM THE
30+ SYSTEM INTO THE
NEW STATE-OF-THE- ART SYSTEM
THAT WE HAVE ACCOUNTED FOR AND
ALL OF THE NUANCES THAT THE CITY
OF SEATTLE HAS
INCLUDING SCHEDULING AND THE
TIMEKEEPING SYSTEMS
THAT THE DEPARTMENTS LIKE SDOT
OR PUBLIC SAFETY TEAMS HAVE.
SO IT'S REALLY ALSO SUPPORTING
HR AND PAYROLL STAFF AS WE MOVE
THEM TOWARDS PROVIDING
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT, AND THIS
IS TRULY AROUND UTILIZING
THE SYSTEM IMPLEMENTERS AND
OUR CONSULTANTS TO FINALIZE
THE PROJECT.
THANK YOU, DIRECTOR
CARNELL AND COLLEAGUE, JUST AS A
BRIEF REMINDER HERE, WORK
DAY IS THE FIRST WE UPDATED THE
PAYROLL SYSTEM SINCE 1994,
AND I BELIEVE THE YEAR THAT
"CLUELESS" CAME
OUT, IF ANYONE REMEMBERS MY
TIME ON THE DEUS, 30+ YEARS AGO
--
SO THIS IS OLD TECHNOLOGY THAT
WE
HAVE NOW UPDATED.
IT TALKS SYSTEM IMPLEMENTERS TO
CUSTOMIZE THE WORK DAY
PRODUCT FOR THE CITY OF SEATTLE,
SO WE HAVE 39 DEPARTMENTS.
SDOT IS DIFFERENT THAN THE
PARKS DEPARTMENT WHICH IS
DIFFERENT THAN THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT,
THIS WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT AND DIFFERENT
THAN THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND
ALL OF THESE ASPECTS NEED TO
BE CUSTOMIZED AND IT'S
MY UNDERSTANDING AND THAT'S
MY UNDERSTANDING AND
THAT'S WHAT SYSTEM IMPLEMENTERS
DO.
WITH THAT -- AND SO THAT'S
WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY.
SO THIS BILL WOULD,
AGAIN, INCREASE THE CEILING BY
$2.2 MILLION AND THEN
APPROPRIATE THESE FUNDS FOR THIS
WORK TO BE ACCOMPLISHED.
IS THAT CORRECT?
13.2, AND CHANGE THE CAPITAL
APPROPRIATION TO 13.2.
YEAH.
GREAT. COLLEAGUE, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, I SEE YOU DO HAVE
YOUR HAND --
YES.
IF I -- THANK YOU.
IT'S DISAPPOINTING TO ME TO
KNOW THAT WE ARE PAYING
OUR IMPLEMENTERS MORE MONEY
THAT A WHOLE BUNCH OF PROBLEMS
ENSUED FROM THE WORK
DAY IMPLEMENTED AND I DON'T KNOW
THE
STATUS OF THE RESOLUTION OF
THOSE PROBLEMS
AND BECAUSE HR REPORTS TO
THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE AND I
WOULD
LIKE MORE INFORMATION ON THE
STATUS OF THOSE RESOLUTIONS
AND MAYBE A LITTLE BIT MORE
INFORMATION ABOUT WHY WE ARE --
WHY THE BILL HAS GONE UP, SO TO
SPEAK.
THANK.
THANKS.
SOUNDS GOOD: SOUNDS GOOD.
SO NOTED: SO NOTED.
WE WILL WE WILL FOLLOW UP.
GREAT: GREAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS,
COUNCIL PRESIDENT?
NO.
WITH THAT, WE HAVE
REACHED THE COP COLLUSION OF THE
AGENDA
AND WE WILL HAVE A MORE
ROBUST MEETING.
THE JULY 16th AND THESETHESE
WORDS ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT.
TODAY WE HAVE TAKEN A LONG
TIME TO WALK THROUGH ALL OF
THESE PRESENTATIONS AND ALLOW
FOR AS MANY QUESTIONS AS
POSSIBLE WHICH HAS RESULTED IN A
THREE AND A
HALF-PLUS HOUR COMMITTEE.
AT THE NEXT
COMMITTEE, WE WILL TAKE UP ALL
OF THESE SAME ITEMS
AGAIN AND WE WILL
HAVE TO BE MUCH MORE JUDICIOUS
WITH OUR
TIME. TODAY WAS THE BREATHING
ROOM
TO TAKE THE QUESTIONS AND THE
NEXT WILL BE THE WORKING MEETING
WHERE WE'LL HAVE TO STAY
FOCUSED AND I MIGHT ASK
COLLEAGUES
TO REIN IN THEIR COMMENTS
IN DURATION AND NOT IN CONTENT.
WITH THAT, AS YOU CAN SEE,
AGAIN, PLEASE HAVE
YOUR AMENDMENTS IN BY JULY 22nd
AND OUR NEXT SELECT BUDGET
COMMITTEE IS JULY 30th.
THANK YOU FOR ATTENDING.
WE ARE ADJOURNED AT 1:03 P.M.