Normalized plain-text transcript derived directly from the source .srt.
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.