Gayblack Canadian Man

Foreign Policy Analysis
Seattle City Council Select Budget Committee 10/21/19

Seattle City Council Select Budget Committee 10/21/19


>>>GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. IT’S OCTOBER 21, 2019. THIS IS THE BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING. IT WILL COME TO THE ORDER AT THE TOP OF THE HOUR. I WANT TO WELCOME COUNCILMEMBERS FOR BEING HERE. I AM CHAIR BAGSHAW. WE STILL HAVE ABOUT FOUR WEEKS TO GO, BUT I THINK THINGS ARE COMING TOGETHER NICELY. TODAY, THE COMMITTEE IS GOING TO CONTINUE WITH ITS BUDGET ISSUE IDENTIFICATION. THESE ARE DELIBERATIONS WHERE WE DISCUSS WHAT WE CALL FORM AS. I WANT TO SAY A BIG THANK YOU TO THE COUNCIL STAFF. I KNOW HOW MUCH WORK THIS TAKES FOR YOU. I KNOW IT TAKES A LOT, AND I APPRECIATE THE GOOD WORK YOU’VE BEEN DOING. THE LAST THREE DAYS OF LAST WEEK, WE COVERED A LOT OF GROUND. WE HEARD PRESENTATIONS FROM TRANSPORTATION LAST WEEK OR LAST FRIDAY. WE HAVE ALSO HEARD FROM OUR OFFICE OF HOUSING, FROM OUR HUMAN SERVICES, FOR THINGS THAT WE KNOW HAVE TAKEN A LOT OF TIME AND INTEREST HERE BUT WE’RE GOING TO DIVE INTO THE L.E.A.D. PROGRAM. SPECIFICALLY, SOME BUDGETED ITEMS FOR THE SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT. WHAT’S IMPORTANT TO NOTE HERE IS YOU ALL, AT THE TABLE HAVE WORKED AT THE MAYOR’S BUDGET AND YOU ARE LOOKING AT POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITIES FOR MODIFICATIONS OR ADDITIONS THAT OUR COUNCIL WANTS TO MAKE. WE HAVEN’T EVEN BEGUN TO GET TO THE POINT OF HOW WE ARE GOING TO PAY FOR EVERYTHING EVERYBODY WANTS, BUT WE WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE FACT THAT IDEAS ARE COMING FORWARD, AND YOU ARE HELPING US TO SORT THAT OUT. COLLEAGUES, JUST AS A REMINDER, AGAIN, THIS IS AT LEAST THE 14th ANNOUNCEMENT. TOMORROW AT 5:30, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING. EVERYONE IS INVITED. WE WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES EACH FOR THE SPEAKERS. A GROUP CAN COME UP FOR FIVE MINUTES. I PLEDGE TO BE HERE UNTIL THE LAST PERSON IS LEFT STANDING AND WANTS TO SPEAK TO US. I HOPE SOME OR ALL OF YOU CAN JOIN ME THROUGHOUT THE EVENING. OUR FIRST PRESENTATION WILL COVER BUDGET ISSUES AROUND OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. I WANT TO RECOGNIZE OUR BEAUTIFUL COURT JUDGE FOR BEING HERE WITH US, AND AFTER OUR PRESENTATIONS, I WILL ASK IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. WE’RE GOING TO HIT THE L.E.A.D. PROGRAM, LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANT DIVERSION. THERE IS A LOT OF SUPPORT ON THIS COUNCIL TO MOVE FORWARD WITH FULLY SUPPORTING THE L.E.A.D. PROGRAM. I KNOW WE HAVE A LIMITED BUDGET AND WE ARE LOOKING FOR PRIVATE PARTNERS, AS WELL. I DON’T KNOW WHETHER LISA DUGARD WILL BE JOINING US TODAY, BUT LISA FROM THE PUBLIC DEFENDER’S OFFICE, AND DAN SATTERBERG, OUR KING COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY WERE HERE LAST WEEK AND THE WEEK BEFORE. WE JUST WANT TO RECOGNIZE THE SUCCESS IT’S HAD AS PART OF THE SYSTEMWIDE CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM. IF WE CAN JUST DIVE IN, WE ARE GOING TO ASK YOU. WHY DON’T WE START WITH INTRODUCTIONS? WE WILL GO AROUND THE TABLE? >>ALLISON McLEAN, COUNCILMEMBER BAGHSAW’S STAFF. >>GREG DOSS, COUNCIL CEMTRAL STAFF. >>EXCELLENT. WHO’S KICKING US OFF TODAY? >>I WILL. >>OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS.>>ABSOLUTELY. AS MENTIONED, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT CRIMINAL JUSTICE TODAY. SOME OF THE REASON YOU HAVE ALL OF US AT THE TABLE IN A COORDINATED EFFORT IS BECAUSE OF THE WORK THAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING A LONG CRIMINAL SYSTEM ALIGNMENT. WE ARE TRYING TO DO THAT IN A COORDINATED WAY, AND TO BREAK DOWN SILOS, WHICH IS WHY YOU HAVE THIS STAFF HERE. WE WILL BE DISCUSSING TWO ISSUES TODAY. ISSUE IDENTIFICATION, THE NON- SHELTER RELATED PILOTS, RELATED TO THE HIGH BARRIER INDIVIDUALS WORK GROUP AS WELL AS THE L.E.A.D. PROGRAM. TO START US OFF, YOU WILL SEE ON PAGE 1 OF YOUR MEMO AND AS SHOWN ON THE TABLE UP ON THE SCREEN, WE HAVE TAKEN A SELECT NUMBER OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE RELATED ADDITIONS IN THE MAYOR’S 2020 PROPOSED BUDGET. MOST OF THESE ARE PROVIDED FOR CONTEXT, SO YOU CAN SEE THE BREADTH OF WHAT WE ARE DOING UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM. THESE ARE DESCRIBED IN A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ON PAGES TWO AND THREE OF YOUR MEMO, BUT I WILL RUN DOWN THEM VERY QUICKLY. IN THE CITY’S ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, WE ARE LOOKING AT $110,000 TO EXPAND PROFILING DIVERSION CONTRACTS THAT WE HAVE WITH CHOOSE 180, WHICH WILL ALLOW THE CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE TO CONTACT 12 RATHER THAN SIX OF THE WORKSHOPS THAT THEY DO. THE NEXT ITEM IS IN THE HUMAN SERVICES DEVELOPMENT. IT HAS RAMPED DOWN FUNDING FOR THE $60 FEE. ITS ONE-TIME FUNDS TO SUPPORT THOSE ORGANIZATIONS THAT DIDN’T RECEIVE AWARDS THROUGH THE 2020 RFP PROCESS. THE NEXT ITEM IS ON SITE NURSES, AND ALSO AN HST ISSUE. FIVE EMERGENCY SHELTERS AND PERMANENT HOUSING FACILITIES WOULD BE PLACED. THERE WOULD BE A NURSE CALL LINE. THIS WOULD DEVELOP AND OPERATE THE HOMELESS SERVICES AGENCIES. THERE IS $100,000 TO ENHANCE HEALTH ONE AT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, WHICH ENHANCES THE INTEGRATED HEALTH SERVICE. THERE IS $310,000 TO FUND ADDITIONAL CONTRACTED MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS FOR THE CRISIS RESPONSE UNIT IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. THE NEXT ITEM YOU WILL SEE IS $2.9 MILLION FOR THE BARRIER PILOT PROGRAMS. $2.4 MILLION FOR THE SHELTER IN THE JAIL WEST WING. THE REMAINING $133,000 IS DIVIDED BETWEEN THREE PROPOSED PILOTS. A RAPID REENTRY CONNECTOR IN THE KING COUNTY JAIL, AND A HIGH BARRY PROBATION PROGRAM THROUGH THE MUNICIPAL PORTS COURTS. IF YOU WILL TURN TO PAGE 4, YOU WILL SEE WHAT’S ON THE SCREEN. >>THE 2020 PROPOSED BUDGET ISSUES ARE DEPICTED IN THE GRAPHIC ON THE SCREEN. THIS MODEL IS DEVELOPED TO PROVIDE A CONCEPTUAL VISUALIZATION INTERFACE BEFORE THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. IT MAPS OUT HOW THE CITY IS INVESTING ITS RESOURCES IN THE SYSTEM, AND HAS IT FURTHER DOWNSTREAM IN THE SYSTEM ITSELF. IT WAS ALSO THE INDIVIDUAL WORKGROUP USED IN DELIBERATIONS. THE LEGAL SYSTEM GETS BROKEN INTO SIX INTERCEPTS, WHICH CORRESPONDS TO THE INTERVENTIONS WHERE INDIVIDUALS CAN BE PREVENTED FROM PENETRATING DEEPER INTO THE SYSTEM OR FROM ENTERING. OFFICERS CAN ARREST OR DIVERT THROUGH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. >>IF THERE AREN’T ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS STAGE, WE WILL MOVE INTO ISSUE IDENTIFICATION. >>BEFORE YOU MOVE, I’M TRYING TO FIND THIS OVERVIEW. THANK YOU. IT JUST POPPED UP. WE DON’T HAVE IT IN THE PAPER PRODUCT, BUT WE DO HAVE IT HERE. >>IT’S ON PAGE 4 OF THE MEMO. >>NOT ON MY PAGE 4. >>IT’S ONLINE. >>YOU HAVE TWO HANDOUTS. YOU HAVE THE AGENDA MEMOS AND THEN COPIES OF THE SLIDES. >>OH, GREAT. FOUR OF 13. CAN YOU JUST WALK US THROUGH THIS BRIEFLY? >>THROUGH THIS DIAGRAM? >>YEAH. WE DON’T NEED A DEEP DIVE, BUT JUST TALK ABOUT CONTINUUM. THIS IS WHAT I’VE BEEN ASKING FOR. TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR MONEY BEING SPENT IN A SYSTEMATIC AND THOUGHTFUL WAY, AND WE HAVE THE RESULTS IDENTIFIED OF WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH BY THESE EXPENDITURES. I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE BETTER MODELS I’VE SEEN, SO MAYBE, WE COULD JUST SPEND A MOMENT TALKING ABOUT IT. >>INTERCEPTOR EURO IS BASICALLY THE INTERCEPT WHERE COMMUNITY BASED PROGRAMMING WOULD COME INTO PLAY. THAT WOULD HOPEFULLY PREEMPT AN INDIVIDUAL FROM COMING TO INVOLVEMENT WITH THE CRIMINAL LEGAL SYSTEM. THAT INCLUDES THE SAFETY RFP RAMP DOWN FUNDING, THE ON SITE NURSES, THE NURSE CALL LINE, AND THE HEALTH ONE AND INTERCEPT LINE. AFTER THAT, IT WOULD BE A POINT OF ARREST. THAT INCLUDES A SEATTLE CRISIS TEAM. AS WELL AS L.E.A.D. DIVERSION. INITIAL DETENTION, COURT HEARINGS THAT ALSO INCLUDE PREFILING DIVERSION PROGRAMS. >>EXCUSE ME FOR A SECOND, WHERE IS OUR CHRIST SOLUTIONS CONNECTION THAT WE’VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR SEVERAL MEETINGS NOW? THIS IS ALLIE FRANKLIN. I THINK FOR $450,000 LAST YEAR. IT SHOULD BE IN THE COMMUNITY SERVICE PIECE. I’M NOT SEEING IT UNLESS YOU ARE THINKING OF CRISIS CARE CONTINUUM AS BEING THAT. THAT’S A SIGNIFICANT PIECE OF THIS. >>JEFF, OUR VERY HELPFUL CENTRAL STAFFER. THERE IS NOT FUNDING FOR THAT IN THIS CURRENT PROPOSED BUDGET.>>MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS FIGURE WE ARE LOOKING AT IS JUST ADS AS PROPOSED BY THE MAYOR AND HER 2020 PROPOSED BUDGET. ONLY THOSE ITEMS ARE APPEARING ON THIS FIGURE, THIS DIAGRAM, CORRECT? >>YES. >>OTHER THINGS WE’VE FUNDED THAT MIGHT OSTENSIBLY BE ABLE TO BE SHUFFLED AND FIGURED INTO THIS FIGURE, THAT EXERCISE HAS NOT BEEN DONE. >>THIS PRESENTATION IS FOCUSED VERY NARROWLY ON THE PROPOSED AD. >>HAS THERE BEEN OR WILL THERE BE A MODEL THAT INCLUDES ALL OF OUR INVESTMENTS? THE ONES THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEAL WITH? THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED FOR A SYSTEMS APPROACH THAT WE’VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, THAT WE’VE GOT THE COMMUNITY SERVICES, THE UPSTREAM INVESTMENTS, AND WE TALKED ABOUT NURSE FAMILY PARTNERSHIP AS BEING ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS WE CAN DO TO SUPPORT FAMILIES. I WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO SEE THAT ALL OF IT IS IN ONE PLACE. I HAVE A SENSE THAT MY BUDDY JEFF HAS ALREADY DONE SOME OF THIS, BUT IT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE COULD GET THE TEAM TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A REAL VIEW. >>THIS IS A BODY OF WORK I’VE BEEN MEETING IN MY COMMUNITY WITH A STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT THAT THE COUNCIL SUPPORTED LAST TIME AROUND. I HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH CARLOS, WHO WAS HIRED SPECIFICALLY TO HELP THE CITY COUNCIL LOOK AT ALL OF THESE BODIES OF WORK TO HELP US GET A BETTER A MERGER STANDING UP FOR WE ARE SPENDING OUR DOLLARS AND WHETHER IT’S BEING EFFECTIVE IN TERMS OF RESTORATIVE JUSTICE GOALS, AND ULTIMATELY, REDUCING THE NEGATIVE IMPACT ON COMMUNITIES OF COLOR WHO ARE BEING DISPROPORTIONATELY REPRESENTED IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. I JUST HAD A REALLY GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO CARLOS ABOUT HIS WORKPLAN BETWEEN NOW AND THE END OF NEXT YEAR, EFFECTIVELY, TO REALLY TAKE A LOOK AT A COUPLE DIFFERENT PHASES OF WORK. ONE IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE AN IDENTIFIED SET OF PRINCIPLES AND VALUES THAT EVERYBODY CAN LIVE WITH, AND NOT AGREE TO, BUT LIVE WITH. THE SECOND PART OF THAT WORK WILL BE TO DO THIS TYPE OF INTERCEPT EVALUATION, TO IDENTIFY IN WHICH BUCKETS ALONG THE SPECTRUM DO OUR CURRENT INVESTMENTS FALL INTO TO GIVE US, AS POLICYMAKERS, AND AS THE ULTIMATE BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR THE CITY A DEBTOR SENSE OF WHERE WE ARE INVESTING OUR DOLLARS, AND WHAT KIND OF OUTCOMES WE CAN EXPECT TO SEE FROM THOSE INVESTMENTS. I THINK IT WILL GIVE US A REALLY CLEAR AND IMPORTANT OPPORTUNITY TO MEANINGFULLY EVALUATE WHETHER WE ARE STAYING TRUE TO OUR COMMITMENT TO GET FURTHER UPSTREAM IN THIS CASE TO THE LEFT OF THE CONTINUUM, OR IF WE ARE CONTINUING TO DOUBLE DOWN ON THE BACK END OF THE CONTINUUM, WHICH IS REALLY, YOU KNOW, FOCUSED ON CORRECTIONS AND JAIL. >>THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT. I AM INTERESTED IN INTERCEPT ZERO. WHERE THE INVESTMENTS ARE. WHAT WE CALL UPSTREAM. I NOEL HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT HAS GIVEN US SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN THE PAST, BUT I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE IT LAID OUT, SO WE CAN SEE WHERE THOSE CONNECTIONS ARE AND IF COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ IS GOING TO GO FORWARD WITH ONE AND TWO NEXT YEAR, WE WILL BEGIN TO HAVE THE FRAME WE REALLY NEED. >>I WANT TO FLAG THAT I’M NOT SURE WE HAVE THE CAPACITY TO DO THAT IN THE CONSTRUCT OF THIS BUDGET SEASON. THAT’S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO FLAG FOR YOU, CHAIR BACK SHOT. THAT IS PHASED WORK TO OCCUR. THE FIRST PHASE NEEDS TO BE AN EXERCISE AROUND DEFINING WHAT THE PRINCIPLES AND VALUES ARE, THAT THIS CITY IS COMMITTED TO AS IT RELATES TO OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, AND THEN BEGINNING THE PROCESS OF EVALUATING THE CITY’S INVESTMENTS USING THAT SAME LANGUAGE IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO FILE OUR INVESTMENTS ACCORDINGLY FROM INTERCEPT ZERO TO INTERCEPT FIVE, AND SO I’M NOT SURE IF YOU ARE SUGGESTING THAT THERE BE COUNCIL STAFF ANALYSIS OF INTERCEPT ZERO. I AM SUGGESTING THAT MAYBE PREMATURE GIVEN THAT WE HAVEN’T GONE THROUGH PHASE 1 OF THE WORK, MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE COLLECTIVELY AGREED UPON LANGUAGE THAT ALLOWS US AN OPPORTUNITY TO UNDERSTAND EXACTLY HOW WE ARE COLLECTIVELY DEFINING THINGS THAT SHOULD APPROPRIATELY BE CONSIDERED INTERCEPT ZERO VERSUS SOMEWHERE ELSE ON THIS CONTINUUM. >>THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. I THINK COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD HAS DONE QUITE A WORK AROUND THIS WITH THEORY OF CHANGE. I DON’T WANT TO LOSE THAT. IF WE COULD MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE ARE INVESTING IN NOW, AND I KNOW THAT THE HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT, WE’VE ASKED FOR THIS EVERY SINGLE YEAR, SO LET’S SEE WHAT WE CAN GET, AND HAVE A LOOK AT THIS AS WE MAKE DECISIONS. COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD? >>I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT HOW WE ARE DEFINING INTERCEPT ZERO. IF THIS IS THE APPROACH, AND I UNDERSTAND IT’S ONGOING, AND IT’S GOING TO BE PHASE WORK, AND THERE WILL BE CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT, PROBABLY OF NOT ONLY THE NUMBER OF DOLLARS IN THE BUDGET, BUT HOW WE ARE DEFINING THE DEFINITIONS, BUT THE CONCEPT OF INTERCEPT ZERO SEEMS TO BE THAT I’M JUST CONCERNED THAT WE ARE CHARACTERIZING THOSE DOLLARS AS DOLLARS SPENT. IT WILL HAVE THE IMPACT OF REDUCING CRIMINAL JUSTICE INVOLVED INDIVIDUALS. I THINK THE RECIPIENT OF THESE PARTICULAR SERVICES, I DON’T WANT TO, BY MERIT OF THIS EXERCISE, BE ASSUMING THAT THE RECIPIENT OF THESE SERVICES UNDER INTERCEPT ZERO ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO BE CRIMINALLY INVOLVED INDIVIDUALS. I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT MORE, NOT NOW NECESSARILY, BUT MORE ABOUT HOW WE ARE DEFINING THE PARTICULAR CATEGORY. >>WHY DON’T YOU PLEASE PROCEED. THERE IS A LOT HERE FOR US TO GO THROUGH, AND WE CAN CONTINUE TO TALK ABOUT THIS. >>ABSOLUTELY. THAT LEADS DIRECTLY INTO THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE LAST FIRST ISSUE, WHICH IS A NON- BARRIER PILOT PROGRAM. ON THE SCREEN, WE HAVE CATEGORIZED THOSE AT THE MOMENT. THE CASE CONFERENCE IS AN ON AND DOWN UNDER INTERCEPT ONE. THE CONNECTOR PILOT IS UNDER INTERCEPT FOUR, AND THE HIGHER PROBATION PILOT IS UNDER INTERCEPT FIVE. WE HAVE LISTED THE ENHANCED SHELTER AT THE BOTTOM NOT JUST AS INTERCEPT SPECIFIC, BUT AS WHERE IT WOULD LAND IF WE WERE TO PUT THAT IN THE CHART. AS YOU WILL SEE ON PAGE 3 OF THE MEMO, WHAT’S UP ON THE TABLE, EXCUSE ME ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE THERE IS $250,000 ALLOCATED FOR CASE CONFERENCE, $213,000 FOR THE RAPID REENTRY CONNECTOR, AND $170,000 ON THE HYPER AIR PROBATION PIESTER JUST CONDUCTING A PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF HOW THESE PILOTS WERE DEVELOPED, AND THE ACTUAL úPROPOSAL FOR PILOTS AT THEIR CURRENT LEVEL OF DETAIL, THE ASSESSMENT AT THIS POINT GIVES RISE TO THE OPTIONS THAT ARE LISTED ON PAGE 5 OF YOUR MEMO. THE ACTUAL FUNDING SET ASIDE AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS MAKES SENSE. IT’S NOT ENTIRELY CLEAR THAT THESE ARE THE APPROPRIATE RECOMMENDATIONS WITH WHICH TO MOVE FORWARD, AND THAT THESE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE THE ONES UPON WHICH THE FUNDING SHOULD BE SPENT. DEPENDING ON WHAT LEVEL OF DETAIL YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO GET INTO, I AM HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT WHY THAT’S THE CASE. ESSENTIALLY THREE THINGS. THE FIRST IS THE PILOTS WERE DEVELOPED IN A PROCESS SEPARATED FROM THE ALIGNMENT WORK THAT COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ MENTIONED. THERE ARE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE DRIVERS COUNCIL IDENTIFIED LAST YEAR, AND THE WAYS IN WHICH THIS PILOT, EXCUSE ME, THE WAYS IN WHICH THIS WORKING GROUP CONDUCTED THAT WORK. SECONDLY, IT’S NOT CLEAR TO WHAT EXTENT ANY OF THE PILOTS ALIGN WITH COUNCIL POLICY, AND INTENT. ONE, BECAUSE DETAILS ARE STILL IN PROCESS, BUT ALSO BECAUSE THE ALIGNMENT SYSTEM IS STILL WORKING. LASTLY, IT’S NOT ENTIRELY CLEAR HOW THESE PILOTS ALIGN WITH REENTRY WORK GROUP RECOMMENDATIONS. THAT REPORT CAME OUT IN OCTOBER 2018, AND CONTRIBUTED TO THE WORK THE COUNCIL DID AGAIN AROUND ALIGNMENT. THE OPTIONS THAT ARE LAID OUT HERE ARE OPTION A, WHICH IS TO CUT OR REPROGRAM SOME OR ALL OF THE PROPOSED ADS FOR THE PILOTS. B WOULD BE TO ADD RESTRICTIVE SPENDING, UNTIL ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN PROVIDED. THESE FUNDS ARE CURRENTLY IN FINANCIAL RESERVES THAT LEGISLATION WOULD BE NEEDED TO MOVE THEM OUT, AS WELL. THAT WOULD BE ADDITIONAL WHICH COUNCIL COULD REVIEW THE DETAILS OF THE PROPOSALS. OR C, WHICH IS TO ADAPT THE 2020 PROPOSED BUDGET. THESE ARE NOT IN ANY WAY EXCLUSIVE OPTIONS, BUT ONCE WE HAVE IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME THAT COUNCIL COULD TAKE MOVING FORWARD. >>COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ. >>I REALLY APPRECIATE THE ANALYSIS ON THIS. I ALSO WANT TO FLAG THAT THERE IS ANOTHER POTENTIAL OPTION HERE THAT I’M NOT SURE WE’VE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT, BUT IT COULD ALSO BE AN OPTION TO DO SORT OF A MIX OF A AND KNEE. IN OTHER WORDS, PER VIZO, OR RISK SPENDING ON SOME OF THESE PROPOSALS THAT WE JUST SIMPLY DON’T HAVE DETAILS ON, AND THEN CUT OR REPROGRAM OTHER DOLLARS. IS THAT CORRECT? >>YES. >>SO, I CONTINUE TO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE MAYOR’S PROPOSAL TO CONTINUE TO DOUBLE DOWN ON PROBATION, PARTICULARLY FOR THIS POPULATION. I CONTINUE TO BELIEVE IT’S NOT THE BEST USE OF OUR DOLLARS, THAT IT WILL ACTUALLY ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE MANY COMPLEX, COMORBIDITIES THAT ARE, UNFORTUNATELY, FINDING THEMSELVES THAT THE INTERSECTION WITH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. $170,000 IS THE AMOUNT PROPOSED. IT’S A MODEST AMOUNT, BUT I CONTINUE TO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT WHETHER IT MAKES SENSE TO INVEST IN SOMETHING THAT IS BEING CHARACTERIZED AS NEW, BUT REALLY IS MORE PROBATION AND SUPERVISION. AND WHETHER IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO UTILIZE THOSE DOLLARS AS IDENTIFIED REVENUE FOR OTHER PROGRAMS THAT WE KNOW WORK FOR THIS PARTICULAR POPULATION THAT NEEDS ADDITIONAL CASE MANAGEMENT, THAT NEEDS ADDITIONAL HANDS-ON SERVICES TO BE ABLE TO SUCCESSFULLY REENTER INTO SOCIETY AND STOP OFFENDING. AS IT RELATES TO THE CONFERENCING AND RAPID REENTRY PROGRAM, I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THOSE, BUT NOT TO THE LEVEL OF WANTING TO SUGGEST THAT WE CUT THAT PROGRAMMING. EXCUSE ME, NOT CUT THE PROGRAMMING, BUT CUT THE CONCEPT AROUND ADVANCING THE PROGRAMMING. I DO THINK THOSE WOULD POTENTIALLY MERIT, AND BENEFIT FROM HAVING A PER VIZO UNTIL WE HAVE HEARD ADDITIONAL DETAILS, AND HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THOSE WILL BE CODESIGNED THAT GIVES US CONFIDENCE INTO HOW THEY ARE GOING TO DELIVER ON THE INTENDED POLICY PROGRAMS. I AM INTERESTED IN EXPLORING THE COMBINATION OF A AND B TO FIND THAT BETTER MIX. >>I WOULD LIKE TO ADD ONE THING IN RESPONSE TO THAT. I SPENT SOME TIME WITH JUDGE SADIDE, JUDGE EISENBERG, AND WITH TARA, WHO IS STILL HERE, AND LISA DUGARD, THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS. I WAS VERY IMPRESSED. THIS IS SOMETHING I HOPE ALL OF US WILL TAKE THE CHANCE TO LEARN A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT. WHAT I’M HEARING FROM JUDGE SADIDE IS IN NO SENSE THE PROBATION OF OLD. FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, WHEN WE CALL YOU UP TO TALK ABOUT THIS, IT’S REALLY AN OPPORTUNITY AS SOMETHING OTHER THAN GOING TO JAIL. SOMETHING OTHER THAN TRYING TO CHASE PEOPLE AROUND, BUT RATHER TO PROVIDE YOU, THE JUDGES, WITH AN ALTERNATIVE THAT IS A DIVERSION STRATEGY OTHER THAN MAKING SURE PEOPLE ARE GOING BACK TO JAIL, OR FOLLOWING THE SAME OLD HABITS. I HOPE THAT WHEN WE GET THERE, WE CAN HEAR AGAIN FROM YOU ABOUT WHAT IT IS YOU ARE LOOKING FOR, AND WHAT YOU ARE NEEDING, AND THAT THIS IS NOT JUST TO CHASE THE PERSON AROUND WITH AN ANKLE BRACELET, OR PUT THEM BACK IN JAIL WHEN THEY FAILED TO APPEAR. WHEN WE GET TO THE OPPORTUNITY, I HOPE YOU WILL HAVE THE CHANCE TO SPEAK TO THAT. >>COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT. >> A JUST WANT TO AND SOME OF THE POINTS THAT WERE MADE EARLIER BY COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ. I THINK WE SHOULD BE WARY OF ANY TYPE OF PROBATION PROPOSALS BECAUSE WE HAVE HEARD REPEATEDLY AND DECISIVELY FROM RESTORATIVE JUSTICE ADVOCATES THAT PROBATION VERY OFTEN DOES MORE HARM THAN GOOD. IT KEEPS PEOPLE IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE ADVOCATES OF PROBATION ARE SAYING, OFTEN LONGER THAN NEEDED AND IT DISPROPORTIONALLY AFFECTS PEOPLE OF COLOR. I DO HAVE A BUDGET PROPOSAL TO CUT FUNDING, CUT THE MONEY THAT IS SPENT FOR PROBATION ENFORCEMENT FOR RESTORATIVE JUSTICE PROGRAMS. I WON’T JUMP TO THAT BECAUSE I KNOW WE ARE COMING TO THAT BUDGET ITEM, BUT I WANT TO AT THAT POINT AND LET YOU KNOW, CHAIR BAGSHAW, THAT I HAVE TO LEAVE AT 5:00, SO HOPEFULLY WE WILL COME TO THAT POINT BY THEN. SPOKE OF COURSE, WE HAVE MULTIPLE THINGS TODAY THAT WE ARE GOING TO GET THROUGH, AND WE WILL PROBABLY HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT, TOO, SO I AM SORRY YOU HAVE TO LEAVE AT 5:00. >>JUST REVIEWING THE ACTIONS WE TOOK IN LAST YEAR’S BUDGET CYCLE, I WOULD LOVE TO GET AN UPDATE ON OUR EFFORTS TO DEVELOP A STRATEGIC PLAN TO IMPLEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. THE REENTRY WORK GROUP’S TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS WERE FROM 2018. THOSE FOLKS HAVE REACHED OUT TO ME, ASKING FOR WE ARE AT AND LAMENTING THESE. I POINTED TO THE WORK DURING BUDGET THAT SAYS WE HAVE A PROCESS THAT ISN’T VERY SATISFYING TO FOLKS THAT PARTICIPATED IN THAT WORKGROUP. OTHER WORKERS WERE REIMAGINING THE COURT MEETING JUSTICE COUNCIL, AND WORKING WITH THE EQUITY TEAM, OR A SIMILAR WORKING GROUP TO ALIGN CURRENT AND FUTURE POLICY INVESTMENTS AND OUTCOMES REGARDING THE CRIMINAL LEGAL SYSTEM. IN GENERAL, WE IDENTIFIED SORT OF WHAT OUR APPROACH WAS GOING TO BE TO MAKE THESE INVESTMENTS. THE EXECUTIVE HAS MADE SOME PROPOSALS THAT MIGHT NOT ALIGN WITH WHAT WE WERE ENVISIONING THAT WE WOULD DO THROUGH THIS DEVELOPMENT OF A STRATEGY, BUT YET IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT WE HAVE DEVELOPED THE STRATEGY. IT’S A LITTLE CHICKEN OR THE EGG THING. I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW MORE. >>I THINK I HEARD TWO QUESTIONS, WHICH IS HOW THE WORK IS GOING, AND THE PROPOSALS IN RELATION TO THE WORK. CARLOS CAN SPEAK TO THE PROJECT ITSELF. >>PLEASE, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. >>FIRST OF ALL, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS I AM HEARING. IT GIVES US A FEEL FOR WHAT PEOPLE ARE THINKING. IT’S VERY HELPFUL FOR ME WHEN I START THINKING ABOUT WHAT I DO AND DON’T SUPPORT. I DON’T REALLY KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THE ENHANCED SHELTER, $2.4 MILLION IN CAPITAL COST IMPROVEMENTS TO SPEAK INTELLIGENTLY ABOUT IT, BUT I JUST HAVE A QUESTION THAT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT WITH THE PROBATION PIECE. ON THE ENHANCED SHELTER, PEOPLE THAT ARE CONVICTED OF CRIMES THAT ARE ALSO EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS, IS THAT A SPECIAL WEST WING, IF YOU WILL, FOR PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN CHARGED AND CONVICTED? WHAT IS THIS? ANOTHER HOMELESS SHELTER? WHAT ARE WE DOING? >>AT THIS POINT, WE UNDERSTAND THERE WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL, ENHANCED SHELTER. THE LOCATION WOULD BE AS YOU RECALL RECENTLY OPENED IN THE WEST WING OF THE KING COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, AN ENHANCED SHELTER THERE ALREADY. ON THE SECOND FLOOR, THERE WOULD BE ADDITIONAL SPACE. THE REASON THESE FUNDS HAVE BEEN PLACED IN FINANCE GENERAL IS BECAUSE AT THIS POINT THERE’S NOT FURTHER CLARIFICATION THERE WITH HOW THIS WOULD UNIQUELY TARGET THOSE INDIVIDUALS VERSUS WHAT OUR OTHER ENHANCED SHELTERS WOULD DO. >>OKAY. SO JUST THE FACT THAT IT’S A HIGHER POSITION IN THE JAIL IS COINCIDENTAL? THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GOING THROUGH THE PROSECUTORIAL PROCESS? >>IT HAS BEEN DESCRIBED AS SOMETHING THAT WOULD TARGET THESE KIND OF INDIVIDUALS CLASSIFIED AS HIGH BARRIER INDIVIDUALS, BUT WE DON’T HAVE DETAILS YET ON HOW THAT WOULD HAPPEN. >>ON THE PROBATION PIECE, I AGREE WITH THE COMMENTS FROM MY COLLEAGUES ON HOW PROBATION HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN USED IN THIS COUNTRY, THE STATE, AND MANY CITIES AS YOU TALK ABOUT WEAPONIZE IN A TOOL OF PROSECUTION TO IMPRESS MANY COMMUNITIES. I WOULD DISAGREE THAT OUR MUNICIPAL COURTS ARE HANDLING IT IN SUCH A WAY FROM MY EXPERIENCE. I HAVE MET WITH JUDGE WILLIE GREGORY AND FAYE CHESS. MANY OF THE JUDGES WHO HAPPEN TO BE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS, PUBLIC DEFENDERS, WHO UNDERSTAND VERY FULLY — I WISH WE COULD CALL IT SOMETHING ELSE BECAUSE THEY ARE TRYING TO BE IN LINE WITH RESTORATIVE JUSTICE EFFORTS, AND THE KINDS OF THINGS THE CITY COUNCIL HAS BEEN REALLY COMMITTED TO. THERE’S BEEN A LITTLE MISCOMMUNICATION ON WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO DO, AND WHAT WE ARE FREEZING AS PROBATION. THAT’S WHAT WE BELIEVE. THE BARRIER FOR HIGH BARRIER PROBATION, AND I GUESS I WILL ASK TO SHARE THE CENTRAL STAFF, BUT WHAT’S ALREADY IN THE BUDGET FOR WHAT I’M CALLING PROBATION FOR LACK OF A BETTER DESCRIPTION. THIS IS JUST AN ADDITIONAL 160,000, SO THERE IS A PORTION OF MONEY IN THERE WITH THE COUNSELORS IN PREVENTION FOR THIS IS JUST 170 IN ADDITION TO THAT, CORRECT? >>YES. $170,000 IS GENERAL FUNDS. THE EXISTING IS $120,000 OF IMPROVEMENT ACCOUNTS. THAT’S ALREADY EXISTING AND APPROPRIATED. >>120? >>$120,000. >>THAT’S WHY SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES WOULD BE SOMEWHAT CRITICAL OF DUMBING DOWN PROBATION, SORT OF HOW IT LOOKS. RIGHT? >>WHAT THESE FUNDS DO — SORRY, GO AHEAD. >>GO AHEAD. >>THE ENTIRE PACKAGE FOR PROBATION WOULD BE THIS $170,000 PLUS AN EXISTING $120,000. I BELIEVE THE INTENT FOR THE EXISTING FUNDS IS TO GO TOWARDS AN ADDITIONAL PROBATION COUNSELOR THAT WOULD HAVE THIS ENHANCED CASELOAD, AND THE $170,000 IS SPLIT BETWEEN A POSITION TO ADD A COURT WORKER AND OPERATIONAL FUNDS FOR THE PROGRAM TO MOVE FORWARD. >>AGAIN, THE MEETINGS HAVE GONE TO IN TERMS OF RESTORATIVE JUSTICE EFFORTS AND REENTRY EFFORTS, I AM HEARING FROM THE JUDGES ON HOW THEY ARE LOOKING AND TREATING BOTH THE 170 EDITION, AND THE BASE BUDGET, IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH RESTORATIVE JUSTICE. NOT A VERY PENALIZING PROBATION SYSTEM, BUT I THINK THERE MAY BE A MISCOMMUNICATION. THAT’S MY UNDERSTANDING. >>THE DEFINITION OF RESTORATIVE JUSTICE MAY DIFFER BETWEEN OR BASED ON HOW DIFFERENT PARTIES USE IT. I THINK IT’S BECOMING A MORE COMMON TERM, AND I THINK IT IS USED MORE OFTEN NOW FOR THINGS LIKE SUPPORTIVE SERVICES. AS OPPOSED TO THAT BEING A SEPARATE CATEGORY OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE COURT HANDLES, OR THE ENTIRE SYSTEM HANDLES CRIMINAL JUSTICE, SO IT’S LESS OF A PUNITIVE APPROACH. I WOULD AGREE WITH THE PROBATION CHARACTER. I WOULD SAY THE DETAILS OF THIS PARTICULAR PIECE IS IF IT WASN’T CONNECTED TO PROBATION, IT WOULD BE SERVICES, SOMEBODY GOING ALONG WITH THIS PERSON TO HELP THEM GET MORE SERVICES, BUT GIVEN THAT IT IS A PROGRAM RUN BY OUR PROBATION COUNSELOR, THAT IS ACTUALLY PROBATION REGARDLESS OF THE COUNSELOR’S DISCRETION TO GRADUATE SANCTIONS WERE MOVED TO THE JUDGE. ALL OF THAT IS DISCRETIONARY. THE INTENT ABSOLUTELY MAYBE TO MAKE THIS VERY HIGHLY SUPPORTIVE, AND THAT MAY ACTUALLY BEAR OUT IN SOME CASES, BUT THERE IS NO WAY OF GUARANTEEING THIS KIND OF PROBATION WON’T INCREASE FURTHER INVOLVEMENT. >>THAT’S HELPFUL. IN MY PERSONAL OPINION, RATHER THAN CUTTING IT, I WOULD RATHER TRY TO SEE HOW WE CAN COME UP WITH LANGUAGE TO GUARANTEE THAT IT’S BEING USED MORE FOR SUPPORTIVE THAN PUNITIVE SERVICES. >>COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD? >>I HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS I THINK STAFF WAS PREPARED TO ANSWER. COULD WE GO BACK TO THOSE? TO WANT ME TO ASK AGAIN? >>ONE OF THE QUESTIONS YOU MENTIONED WAS THE STRATEGIC PLAN TO IMPLEMENT PREVIOUSLY MADE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY REGARDING THE CRIMINAL LEGAL SYSTEM. I HAVE BEEN TELLING WORKING ON THAT, BUT WHAT IT WILL LAY OUT IS GOING THROUGH THE REENTRY WORK GROUP’S FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS, AND LOOKING AT WATER ACTIONS AT THE COUNCIL CAN UNILATERALLY TAKE TO BEGIN FURTHERING THOSE? THE SECOND CATEGORY WOULD BE WHAT ARE THE ISSUE AREAS THAT WOULD REQUIRE EITHER FUNDING, A PRETTY ZO, OR COURT NATION WITH THE EXECUTIVE, AND THEN THE THIRD GROUPING IS ESSENTIALLY RECOMMENDATIONS THAT MAY REQUIRE FURTHER STUDY. >>THAT IS A BODY OF WORK THAT THE COUNCIL IS DRIVING, CORRECT? THE OTHER TWO WERE REIMAGINING THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING COUNCIL AND WORKING WITH THE EQUITY TEAM OR SIMILAR WORKGROUP TO ALIGN POLICY INVESTMENTS AND OUTCOMES.>>THOSE ARE MENTIONED IN THE PORTION COUNCIL MEMBER GONZALEZ WAS TENSIONING. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO PROVIDE YOU WITH A COPY OF PLAN AND GET YOU ANY INFORMATION THAT YOU NEED BASICALLY, THAT WORK IS GOING TO BE ONGOING THROUGH THREE PHASES. THE FIRST WAS WORKING WITH COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDERS IN ORDER TO COME UP WITH GUIDING PRINCIPLES THAT WOULD LEAD UP TO ALIGNMENT WORK. IT WOULD ALSO BE WORKING WITH INSTITUTIONAL STAKEHOLDERS IN THE COURT AND CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, TO LOOK AT ESSENTIALLY WHAT HAD HAPPENED WITH PREVIOUS ITERATIONS OF THE COORDINATING COUNCIL TO TRY TO GET A BETTER SENSE OF WHAT WORKED AND WHAT DIDN’T, BEGIN PLANNING THROUGH THAT, AS WELL AS RESEARCH AND TO OTHER STATES, OTHER JURISDICTIONS THAT HAVE COORDINATING COUNCILS TO SEE WHAT BEST PRACTICES ARE TO RECONSTITUTE IT. >>AGAIN, MY POINT IS WE IDENTIFIED THIS WORK AS A PRIORITY LAST BUDGET CYCLE AS A SORT OF PREREQUISITE TO OURSELVES FOR HOW WE WERE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM WORK. I THINK IT’S DIFFICULT TO HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE EXECUTIVE WHEN THIS WORK HASN’T HAPPENED BECAUSE, FOR ME, AS A POLICYMAKER, IT MAKES IT REALLY DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS ALIGN WITH THE WORK WE HAD PLANNED TO DO ALL OF THIS YEAR. WE NEED THE COOPERATION OF THE EXECUTIVE ON THOSE PIECES OF WORK THAT WE IDENTIFIED DURING THE BUDGET LAST YEAR. IS THAT NOT CORRECT? >>I THINK WE ARE HOPING FROM ALIGNMENT WITH THE EXECUTIVE. >>BUT WE CAN’T JUST REIMAGINE THE COORDINATING JUSTICE COUNCIL OURSELVES. THAT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE TO DO WITH THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS? >>ASSUMING THEY WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT EFFORT, WE WOULD CERTAINLY INITIATE THAT, AND WORK WITH THE EXECUTIVE TO MOVE FORWARD IN LIFE THAT DEVELOPMENT LOOKS LIKE, BUT TO YOUR POINT ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO COMPARE THE PROPOSALS TO A YET TO BE DEVELOPED PIECE OF WORK, WHAT WE’VE DONE IS INSTEAD OF ASSUMING THAT THERE ARE PRINCIPLES AND VALUES AGAINST WHICH TO COMPARE THESE PILOTS, INSTEAD, THE COMPARISON HAS BEEN TO THE DRIVERS THAT INITIATED THIS WORK IN LAST BUDGET CYCLE, SO AS COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ MENTIONED, CENTERING THE COMMUNITY AND DEVELOPING THESE PRINCIPLES AND VALUES. SOME OF THAT IS CENTERED AROUND RACIAL EQUITY AND THE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE MOST IMPACTED. WHETHER AND HOW WE SHOULD BE REALIGNING INVESTMENT FROM INTO THE SYSTEM TO RISK RESTORATIVE JUSTICE OPTIONS. IT’S NOT NECESSARILY THAT THESE PILOTS ARE NOT IN ALIGNMENT WITH THOSE THINGS. IT’S JUST THAT LOOKING AT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PILOTS, AND THEN THE INITIAL PROPOSAL THE PILOTS THEMSELVES MAY NOT BE IN ALIGNMENT. I CAN GO THROUGH A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES. >>THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. >>OKAY. ONE OF THE THINGS WE THOUGHT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT DURING LAST YEAR’S BUDGET CYCLE WAS THE RACIAL EQUITY PIECE, MAKING SURE THAT EVERYTHING IS EXAMINED WITH A RACIAL EQUITY LENS, AND IS DRIVEN BY RACIAL EQUITY. LOOKING AT THE PROGRESS REPORT FROM THE WORKING GROUP, THERE IS A SENTIMENT IN THERE ABOUT MAKING SURE THE SOLUTIONS ARE UNDERSTAND THROUGH RACE AND SOCIAL JUSTICE, MAKING SURE THAT THE PILOTS ARE NOT PERPETUATING AND FURTHERING INSTITUTIONALIZED RACISM. THE ISSUE IS NOT SO MUCH WHETHER THESE PILOTS WILL OR WILL NOT DO THAT, IT’S THAT THERE WAS NO RACIAL EQUITY ANALYSIS DONE. THERE’S NO OUTCOME OF THE RACIAL EQUITY TOOLKIT TO SHOW WHAT THE IMPACTS ARE ON NATIVES OF COLOR, THE PEOPLE MOST IMPACTED, AND SO, IT’S JUST SORT OF GENERAL INCONSISTENCY WITH ONE OF THE DRIVERS OF THE WORK. >>ON THAT POINT, THOSE NUMBERS OF THE WORK GROUP WHO PARTICIPATED IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS AS PART OF THE WORKGROUP WHO OSTENSIBLY REPRESENT SOME OF THE MORE RACIALLY DIVERSE GROUPS HAVE EITHER COME OUT PUBLICLY SAYING THEY OPPOSE PORTIONS OF THIS MAYOR’S PROPOSAL, SPECIFICALLY THE PROBATION PIECE, OR HAVE OTHERWISE REFUSED TO SPEAK PUBLICLY ABOUT THESE RECOMMENDATIONS. IS THAT ACCURATE? >>I THINK THAT’S TRUE NOT SO MUCH FROM THE PROGRESS REPORT, BUT IT’S CLEAR THE PILOT PROGRAMS WERE NOT A MATTER OF CONSENSUS. THEY WERE DISCUSSED AMONGST THE GROUP, BUT NOT EVERYONE AGREED THESE WERE THE PILOTS THAT SHOULD MOVE FORWARD. THE PROPOSAL IS FROM THE EXECUTIVE, NOT NECESSARILY THE ENTIRE GROUP’S CONSENSUS. I WOULD JUST NOTE ONE OTHER THING. AGAIN, IT’S NOT THAT THESE PILOTS DO OR DO NOT ALIGN WITH ANY PRINCIPLES, BUT IN LOOKING TO SEE WHETHER THERE SHOULD BE NEW FUNDS ALLOCATED TO THESE PROPOSALS AS OPPOSED TO EXISTING FUNDS, FOR EXAMPLE THE REENTRY CONNECTOR, IN SOME WAYS IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO PEOPLE THAT ARE IN CUSTODY FOR UNDER 72 HOURS, BUT THERE IS NO ANALYSIS IN THE GROUP AS TO WHY PEOPLE ARE BEING DETAINED FOR UNDER 72 HOURS, AND SO WHY ARE PEOPLE IN THERE, AND JUST BEING RELEASED AGAIN? SURE, IT’S ABSOLUTELY TRUE THAT THOSE SERVICES, EXCUSE ME, THOSE INDIVIDUALS REQUIRE REENTRY SERVICES, BUT IF THERE IS AN ANALYSIS OF HOW TO DECREASE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN JAIL FOR UNDER 72 HOURS, THE FUNDS YOU MIGHT SAVE FROM THAT BOOKING COULD BE REPROGRAMMED INTO WHAT A REENTRY CONNECTOR WAS. JUST SORT OF SEEING HOW THESE PROPOSALS STAND UP IN COMPARISON TO THE SORT OF ASIC PRINCIPLES AND DRIVERS BEHIND WHICH THIS ALIGNMENT SYSTEM WORK WAS PROPOSED. THAT IS SORT OF WHERE THE COMPARISON IS. >>I APPRECIATE THAT. >>YOU HAVE BOTH BROUGHT UP REMARKABLY POIGNANT POINTS TODAY, AND I APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH. DO YOU THINK WE ARE GOING TO NEED TO HAVE MORE TIME JUST ON THIS ISSUE PUBLICLY? WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO THAT, TO HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING JUST ON WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED? WOULD THAT BE USEFUL TO YOU? >>I KNOW WHERE I STAND ON THIS ISSUE, SO I DON’T FEEL LIKE I AM PROBABLY THE RIGHT PERSON TO ASK THAT QUESTION. I AM PART OF THE ELECTED LEADERSHIP GROUP. MY STAFF HAS BEEN PARTICIPATING IN THE WORKGROUP, AS WELL, AND I FEEL LIKE I HAVE THE INFORMATION. I NEED TO KNOW THAT I AM NOT TOTALLY ON BOARD WITH THESE INVESTMENTS, SO FOR ME, IT REALLY IS ABOUT PARTICULARLY THE CASE CONFERENCING, THE REENTRY CONNECTOR, MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE A GOOD SENSE AS OUTLINED, WHAT THE CONCEPTS AND THE ACTUAL DETAILS OF THIS PROPOSED PROGRAMMING IN ORDER TO GIVE US A HIGH LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE THAT IT REALLY IS GOING TO BE REACHING DEEPLY INTO HELPING THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS IDENTIFIED AS BEING HIGH BARRIER INDIVIDUALS. ON THE HIGH BARRIER PROBATION, I HAVE READ THROUGH THE LITERATURE. I HAVE A MEETING SET UP WITH SOME OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGES NEXT WEEK. I SPENT A LOT OF TIME THINKING ABOUT PROBATION. I THINK THE QUESTION REALLY COMES DOWN TO THE POLICE THAT THERE IS A VERSION OF PROBATION THAT DOESN’T CAUSE FURTHER HARM. I THINK WE HAVE TO AGREE TO DISAGREE ON THAT. I’M HEARING FROM YOU AND THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT, THERE IS A VERSION THAT ISN’T HARMFUL. I DON’T BELIEVE THAT. I THINK ANY TIME WE PUT PARTICULARLY BLACK AND BROWN PEOPLE UNDER SUPERVISION, OF CORRECTIONS, THAT THERE IS POTENTIAL FOR HARM TO BE CAUSED TO THEM, TO THEIR FAMILIES, AND OUR COMMUNITY OVERALL BECAUSE THE ULTIMATE CONSEQUENCE OF NOT COMPLYING WITH THOSE REQUIREMENTS IS JAIL. THAT’S WHERE YOU WIND UP IF YOU DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF YOUR RELEASE UNDER PROBATION. WE CAN CALL IT ENHANCED PROBATION, BASIC PROBATION, SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT IS SUPERVISION OF PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY, WHO ARE EXPECTED TO UNDER A CARROT STICK APPROACH, COMPLY WITH TERMS OF RELIEF, AND IF THEY DO NOT HAVE A WILL END UP BACK IN JAIL. I AM CALLING TO QUESTION AS A POLICYMAKER, I BELIEVE THAT INVESTING FURTHER IN A PROBATION MODEL, THAT ULTIMATELY LEADS TO A RESULT OF GOING TO JAIL IF YOU DO NOT COMPLY IS NOT THE WISEST INVESTMENT FOR US IN THIS SPACE. I THINK THERE ARE OTHER PROGRAMS AVAILABLE TO US LIKE L.E.A.D., VITAL, AND OTHER TRUE INVESTMENTS IN CASE MANAGEMENT NOT IN PROBATION OFFICERS THAT CAN POTENTIALLY LEAD AND WE HAVE SEEN DO LEAD TO MORE SUCCESSFUL OUTCOMES FOR THIS PARTICULAR POPULATION, SO I AM NOT PROPOSING THAT WE COMPLETELY ABOLISH THE PROBATION DEPARTMENT. I AM ASKING AND I’M GOING TO ADVOCATE A REASONABLE APPROACH OF NOT ADDING ADDITIONAL DOLLARS. BASED ON MY BELIEF THAT I THINK PROBATION AS A TOOL FOR COMPLIANCE IS AND WILL CONTINUE TO CAUSE HARM. >>IT’S IMPORTANT THAT WE ARE NOT INCREASING THE HARM. WHAT I’M HEARING FROM OUR MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGES IS THEY ARE LOOKING FOR THOSE TOOLS THAT YOU ARE SPEAKING TO, COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ THAT L.E.A.D. AND VITAL ARE NOT AVAILABLE TO THEM AFTER SOMEONE COMES BACK TO COURT AND IS IN FRONT OF THEM CREATING ANOTHER SITUATION, OR COMMITTING ANOTHER GROSS MISDEMEANOR. IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, THEY ARE LOOKING FOR TOOLS. AT LEAST, THIS IS MY UNDERSTANDING. THAT DOESN’T PUT THEM BACK IN JAIL OR AT RISK BUT PROVIDES SOMETHING ELSE THE JUDGES CAN USE TO PROVIDE SOME ALTERNATIVES. THAT’S WHAT I’M HEARING. WHEN I ASKED IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MORE TIME ON THIS TOPIC, SINCE WE FIND OURSELVES STRUGGLING WITH OPM ISSUES, I WOULD LOVE TO FULLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE OPTIONS ARE, AND FOR THE JUDGES TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THEIR INPUT BEFORE I MAKE A FINAL DECISION. WE GOT TWO DOWN HERE. COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT, THEN COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ. >> I APPRECIATE YOU SAYING WE SHOULD HEAR MORE. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO. I WOULD NOT OBJECT TO HAVING A DISCUSSION ON IT IN ANY WAY, BUT I ALSO, LIKE COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ SAID, MY OFFICE DOESN’T NEED TO BE CONVINCED ABOUT WHERE TO GO. IN FACT, WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY GROUPS, THIS IS WHERE THE BUDGET DEMANDS THAT WE HAVE COMING UP IN THIS DISCUSSION IS NOT ONLY SAYING NOT ONLY DO NOT DECREASE FUNDS, BUT WE’RE TALKING ABOUT A 25% REDUCTION IN THOSE FUNDS FOR MONEY FOR PROBATION, AND THAT DIDN’T COME FROM NOWHERE. THAT CAME FROM HAVING HAD REPEATED DISCUSSIONS WITH MANY EXPERTS IN THE ADVOCACY SECTOR, AND THE PUBLIC DEFENDER’S OFFICE, PEOPLE WHO HAVE WORKED ON MANY PROGRAMS, AND FOUND THAT THIS PROBATION ULTIMATELY IS A PROBLEMATIC SITUATION. IT CREATES A SITUATION WHERE YOUNG PEOPLE AND UP IN THE JAIL SYSTEM, AND TO WHAT PRESIDENT HARRELL SAID, MAYBE, PROBATION DOESN’T WORK IN GENERAL, BUT IN THE SEATTLE MUNICIPAL COURT, IT’S NOT PROBLEMATIC. THAT’S NOT MY UNDERSTANDING AT ALL. I WOULD SUPPORT SUCH A DISCUSSION. I WELCOME THE JUDGES TO SPEAK, AS WELL IN DISCUSSION. IF WE ARE GOING TO HAVE SUCH A DISCUSSION PUBLICLY, I THINK THE COMMUNITY ADVOCATE WHO THINKS PROBATION IS PROBLEMATIC SHOULD ALSO BE AT THE TABLE, AND WE SHOULD HEAR FROM BOTH SIDES IF WE ARE GOING TO HEAR FROM THEM, AND YOU SAID YOU HAVEN’T MADE UP YOUR MIND. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION TO HELP YOU MAKE UP YOUR MIND, BUT I DON’T THINK WE SHOULD HAVE JUST ONE SIDE. I DON’T JUST MEAN THE PUBLIC DEFENDER’S OFFICE. I MEAN THE ADVOCATES FOR RUNNING PROGRAMS LIKE COMMUNITY PASSAGEWAYS, USE CONSORTIUM, CREATIVE JUSTICE, THE PROGRAMS I AM PROPOSING BE FUNDED INSTEAD OF INCREASING FUNDS FOR PROBATION. I THINK THEY SHOULD BE AT THE TABLE, AS WELL. I THINK THAT WOULD BE A FRUITFUL DISCUSSION. >>COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ. >>I WILL BE BRIEF. I AGREE WITH YOU CHAIRMAN BAGSHAW AND COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ. WE’VE MET WITH JUDGES, AS WELL ON THE WHOLE ISSUE OF PROBATION. CORRECT ME IF I’M WRONG, MY UNDERSTANDING IS A LOT OF THIS IS DEDICATED TO DEFENDANTS WHO ARE ON PROBATION FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, AND DUIs IN WHICH PROBATION IS MANDATORY. IT’S THE CRIMINAL SIDE OF THAT. AS A FORMER PUBLIC DEFENDER AND JUDGE, LET ME TELL YOU WHAT I THINK ABOUT PROBATION. T HAS A LONG, CONVOLUTED HISTORY WHERE, FOR ME, THE FOCUS SHOULD CONTINUE TO BE ON REHABILITATION. NOT JUST PUNITIVE. THAT’S NOT WHAT WE’VE SEEN. WE HAVE SEEN IT START TO CHANGE. WE SAW THAT DIFFERENCE WHEN WE INSTITUTED, IN THE LATE 80s, LATE 90s DRUG COURT. PEOPLE DIDN’T THINK DRUG COURT WOULD WORK. WE HAD TO CONVINCE PEOPLE THAT RELAPSE IS PART OF HEALING. SO, YOU CAN’T JUST PUT PEOPLE IN JAIL WHERE THEY RELAPSE BECAUSE IT’S A MEDICAL CONDITION, NOT A CRIME. IT WAS A MEDICAL CONDITION WE HAD TO LOOK AT. I LIKE WHAT COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ SAID, AND I CERTAINLY AGREE WITH THE CHAIR, THAT THIS DESERVES SOME MORE CONVERSATION, PARTICULARLY AFTER OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE JUDGES, AND WHAT THEIR CONCERNS ARE, AND HOW PROBATION IS USED AS A TOOL. I SHOULD ADD, JUST AS A HISTORICAL NOTE, CRIMINAL LAW FROM A LONG TIME AGO IS REALLY BASED UPON THE BEHAVIOR OF POOR PEOPLE. THAT’S HOW CRIMINAL LAW CAME TO BE. STEALING FOOD, DEBTOR’S JAIL. ALL OF THAT STUFF. IT’S AN EVOLUTION OF THAT. I WANT TO SEE THAT KIND OF VESTIGE, AND I AGREE WITH COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ THAT WE HAVE TO RECALIBRATE HOW WE LOOK AT PROBATION. IT CAN’T BE THE PROBATION THAT I HAD TO DEAL WITH YEARS AGO THAT THIS IS A NEW WAY OF LOOKING AT CRIMINAL LAW, AND WE HAVE THAT REHABILITATIVE, AND WHAT THE CHAIRWOMAN SAID. WE DON’T WANT PEOPLE WITH ANKLE BRACELETS AND PEOPLE THAT ARE JUST RUNNING AROUND, CHASING PEOPLE AROUND TO DO A GOTCHA. I AM STILL LEARNING MORE. THANK YOU. >>THANK YOU, EVERYBODY. PLEASE, GO AHEAD, COUNCIL PRESIDENT HARRELL. >>I WON’T BE BRIEF. I AM NOT GOING TO BE THE DEFENDER OF PROBATION. YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT SOMEBODY WHO DEFENDED FOLKS CHARGED UNLAWFULLY FOR PROBATION VIOLATIONS, IN MY OPINION. I DON’T HAVE TO BE TOLD THE UNFAIRNESS OF THE SYSTEM. I DID THAT FOR MANY YEARS. I AM JUST SAYING, BASED ON MY DISCUSSIONS WITH THESE REALLY WELL INTENDED JUDGE OF, I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR FROM THE ORGANIZATION YOU JUST MENTIONED. MANY OF THE ORGANIZATION WAS ON THE STREETS, HELPING THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING UNLAWFULLY, AND I THINK UNFAIRLY ACCUSED OF PROBATION VIOLATIONS, AND IT BEING USED AS A WEAPON, BUT I THINK WE ARE ALL TRYING TO GET TO THE SAME PLACE. I AM NOT REALLY HEARING DISAGREEMENT ON WHERE WE ARE TRYING TO GET TO, BUT WE MAY HAVE A MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT WHAT’S HAPPENING. >>SORRY, I KNOW YOU ARE TRYING TO CLOSE THIS OUT, AND IT’S 4:20. >>WE WILL McGAHN THROUGH LIKE THREE NOT EVEN. THE FIRST ITEM. >>BECAUSE COUNCIL PRESIDENT, YOU’VE SAID THERE’S BEEN MISCOMMUNICATED, NOBODY HAS MISCOMMUNICATED TO ME ANYTHING. I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE GOAL IS HERE. IT’S TO PROVIDE $170,000 TO SEATTLE MUNICIPAL COURT TO BUY ADDITIONAL PROBATION SERVICES THAT WILL BE CATERED SPECIFICALLY TO THIS POPULATION. BEYOND THAT, WE HAVE NO DETAILS. WE HAVE NO DETAILS WHATSOEVER ABOUT HOW THIS PROBATION PROGRAM WILL BE SET UP OTHER THAN THE ADJECTIVE BEING ADDED IN FRONT OF PROBATION THAT IS THE WORD “ENHANCED.” I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THAT MEANS. I DON’T THINK THE JUDGES OR THE MAYOR KNOWS WHAT IT MEANS. úIT HAS NOT BEEN CLEARLY DEFINED. WE HAVE NO PERFORMANCE METRICS. WE HAVE NO MEASUREMENTS TO DEFINE IT AND I GET IT. WE HAVE A DISAGREEMENT AROUND HOW THE CITY SHOULD OR SHOULDN’T USE PROBATION SERVICES. I AM NOT ASSIGNING ANY NEFARIOUS INTENT TO OUR JUDGES OR THOSE INSTITUTIONAL PLAYERS. THEY HAVE A ROLE TO PLAY, AND I BELIEVE THAT THEY BELIEVE VERY STRONGLY IN THE ROLE THEY HAVE TO PLAY, BUT I CONTINUE TO HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY TURNING A 180 FROM HAVING A CONVERSATION LAST YEAR WHERE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT POTENTIALLY DEFUNDING PROBATION TO NOW BEING HERE A YEAR LATER IN THIS BUDGET CONVERSATION, TALKING ABOUT PROVIDING AN ADDITIONAL $170,000 TO THE VERY THING WE WERE HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT THAT LED TO A BODY OF WORK AROUND REALIGNING THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, AND AKING SERIOUSLY OUR OBLIGATION TO REFORM THE SYSTEM JUST BECAUSE THE COURT SYSTEM, THROUGH ITS EXISTING PROBATION SERVICES, IS CAUSING LESS TIME THAN IT WOULD OTHERWISE BE CALLING IN 1982, DOESN’T MEAN THAT PROBATION IS FUNDAMENTALLY A GOOD, POSITIVE, PRODUCTIVE RESTORATIVE JUSTICE TOOL. I DON’T KNOW OF ANYBODY WHO WOULD DESCRIBE PROBATION AS RESTORATIVE JUSTICE, AND I FEEL VERY STRONGLY AS WE CONTINUE TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION, THAT IT’S A TWO-CITED CONVERSATION. THAT WE AREN’T JUST HEARING FROM PEOPLE WHO OWNED THE SYSTEM, AND WE ARE HEARING FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE IMPACTED FROM THE SYSTEM. AND THAT WE ARE HEARING FROM PEOPLE WE HAVE IN DUST TESTED MEANINGFUL DOLLARS IN, WHO’VE HELPED US TURN THE CORNER ON EFFECTIVELY DIVERTING PEOPLE FROM THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, SO THAT INCLUDES CRIMINAL PASSAGEWAYS. CHOOSE 180 HAS BEEN GETTING A LOT OF ATTENTION, TOO. I FEEL STRONGLY THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE’RE NOT JUST GETTING, AND I KNOW WE ARE ABOUT TO, JUST GIVE THE INSTITUTION AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEFEND THE INSTITUTION. I THINK IT’S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO CHALLENGE OURSELVES, AND ACCEPT THE REALITY THAT PROBATION AS A TOOL STILL CAUSES HARM. IT MAY NOT BE THE SAME VERSION OF HARM THAT WE HAD IN THE PAST BECAUSE WE ADOPTED DIFFERENT PRACTICES NOW. I CANNOT SIT HERE WITH A HIGH LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE AND SAY THAT UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL PROBATION CAUSE HARM. >>JUDGE SADIDE. >>THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THE COUNCILMEMBERS WHO’VE BEEN WILLING TO TALK ABOUT THIS VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE. LET ME START MY COMMENTS BY SAYING SOMETHING AND ACKNOWLEDGING SOMETHING. THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM HAS INSTITUTED STRUCTURAL RACISM THAT HAS RUN THROUGH IT FOR ALL OF HISTORY. FOR A JUDGE TO SAY ANYTHING DIFFERENT IS JUST WRONG. WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT. I BEGAN MY CAREER AS A CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY. I SPECIALIZED IN THE DEFENSE OF NONIMMIGRANT OR NONCITIZEN IMMIGRANTS WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, AND MAKING SURE THEY GET A FAIR SHAKE. MANY OF OUR JUDGES CAME FROM THE SAME TYPES OF PLACES. WE CAME TO THE BENCH WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM HAD SERIOUS FLAWS, SERIOUS RACISM, AND WE CAME TO TRY TO CHANGE THAT. WE CONSIDER OURSELVES REFORMERS. FIRST AND FOREMOST. THE ENTIRE MUNICIPAL COURT BENCH HAS TURNED OVER IN THE LAST EIGHT YEARS. YOU HAVE A COMPLETELY NEW BENCH. I’VE BEEN THERE FOR FIVE YEARS. I AM THE THIRD MOST SENIOR JUDGE THERE. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE HISTORIC PROBLEMS, YOU ARE NOT DEALING WITH THE PRESENT COURT. THE IMPORTANT THING HERE IS, IS PROBATION PART OF A RESTORATIVE JUSTICE PLAN? IS IT CAUSING MORE HARM THAN GOOD? I THINK WE HAVE AN HONEST DISAGREEMENT ON THAT, BUT I THINK IT IS SOMETHING WE CAN HAVE ELOQUENT CONVERSATIONS ABOUT. LET’S TALK ABOUT WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE LAST YEAR. IN THE PAST YEAR, WE HAVE HAD UNPARALLELED COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT PLAYERS OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. OUR PROGRAMS AND SERVICES DEPARTMENT, WHICH WE ARE TRYING TO CHANGE OUR NAME FROM PROBATION TO PROGRAMS AND SERVICES BECAUSE IT MORE ACCURATELY REFLECTS WHO WE ARE, AND WHAT WE’RE DOING, IS THE FORWARD FACING ENTITY WE HAVE TO INTERACT WITH THE COMMUNITY, AND IT HAS TWO GOALS. THE FIRST, TO REDUCE CRIME, AND INCREASE PUBLIC SAFETY. THE SECOND GOAL IS TO CONNECT PEOPLE LONG-TERM WITH THE COMMUNITY WHERE THEY CAN GET THE HELP THEY NEED. THIS IS A GOAL WE SHARE WITH OTHER PROGRAMS LIKE VITAL, REACH, AND L.E.A.D.. THESE ARE PROGRAMS WE WORK WITH IN THE COURT IN ORDER TO TRY TO DO THIS. WHAT HAVE YOU GOTTEN FOR THE MONEY YOU’VE ALREADY SPENT? FOR THE PAST YEAR, WE’VE WORKED WITH OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE PARTNERS TO START A COMMUNITY COURT THAT STRUCTURES PREVIOUS COURTS WHERE SOMEBODY HAD TO PLEAD A PLAY. NOW, THEY WON’T BE GIVING UP RIGHTS. IT WILL BE ALL ABOUT COMMUNITY SERVICE. YOU HAVE A COURT RESOURCE CENTER THAT CONNECTS HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE REGARDLESS OF THEIR CONTACT WITH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. YOU HAVE OUR MENTAL HEALTH COURT, WHICH IS NEWLY REVITALIZED. WE HAVE PEOPLE BEGGING TO GET INTO THE COURT IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THE SERVICES WE ARE ABLE TO GIVE THEM. WE HAVE VETERAN’S TREATMENT COURT WHERE PEOPLE WHO SERVED OUR COUNTRY HAVE A VOICE IN THEIR OWN REHABILITATION. WE HAVE OUR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COURT, AND THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INTERVENTION PROJECT, WHICH WE HAVE BEEN NATIONAL LEADERS ON, IN CREATING A NEW TREATMENT PROGRAM TO MAKE SURE DOMESTIC ABUSE STOPS. IT HURTS ME TO HEAR THAT WE ARE LUMPED IN WITH THE PROBATION DEPARTMENTS OF OTHER CITIES, OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. THIS IS SIMPLY NOT ACCURATE. SOME OF THOSE INSTITUTIONS ARE REVOKING 30, 45 DAYS FOR ABSTAINED VIOLATIONS. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN IN MY COURT. IN MY COURT, WE ADDRESS IT, POSITIVELY. IF SOMEBODY STAYS ABSTINENT, THEY GET A PRIZE IN MENTAL HEALTH COURT. WE TRY TO CONNECT THEM WITH SERVICES AND ENCOURAGE THEM. WE TAKE HARM REDUCTION PRINCIPLES AND TRY TO ADDRESS THEM. I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE A LOT OF HISTORICAL PROBLEMS WITH PROBATION, OR AS I LIKE TO CALL IT, PROGRAMS AND SERVICES, BUT THESE ARE THINGS WE ARE TRYING TO CHANGE AND I THINK THE ESSENTIAL THING HERE IS TRUST. IF WE HAVE TRUST, THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT PROGRAMS LIKE THIS. IF WE DON’T HAVE TRUST, THAT’S SOMETHING WE NEED TO BUILD WITH EACH OTHER, AND CREATE THAT TRUST, SO WHEN THINGS LIKE THIS COME ALONG, WE CAN SAY YES, WE TRUST YOU IN ORDER TO DO THAT PROGRAM IN A WAY WE THINK WILL BE WELL SPENT. IF THAT TRUST HASN’T BEEN BUILT YET, I WOULD LIKE TO STRIVE TO BUILD THAT TRUST OVER THE NEXT YEAR. BUT PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT OUR JUDGES ARE WORKING EVERY DAY TO REFORM THE SYSTEM, AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO HELP US WITH THAT REFORM WORK, PLEASE, TAKE THE HAND THAT IS BEING OFFERED, AND WORK WITH US. I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >>THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR COMING. I WILL ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO CONNECT WITH YOU. THANK YOU. I LIKE TO MOVE ON IF WE CAN. >>CHAIR BACK CHALK, IT’S QUITE PROBLEMATIC IN MY VIEW THAT YOU GAVE SPECIAL TIME TO A JUDGE. THAT’S FINE. I’M ALWAYS UP FOR DEBATE. I THINK ALL SIDES SHOULD BE HEARD EARLY, BUT YOU DID THIS RIGHT AFTER I PROPOSED THAT WE SHOULD HEAR ALL SIDES TOGETHER. AGAIN, I WANT TO BE STATE FOR THE RECORD THAT I THINK, IF WE’RE GOING TO HEAR FROM ONE SIDE, WE NEED TO HEAR FROM THE OTHER SIDE, AND THE BUDGET COMMITTEE SHOULD SCHEDULE TIME TO HEAR FROM ADVOCATES IN THE COMMUNITY WHO HAVE VERY STRONG VIEWS BASED ON THEIR EXPERIENCE THAT PROBATION IS NOT RESTORATIVE JUSTICE, AND SHOULDN’T BE CONSIDERED RESTORATIVE JUSTICE. MY OFFICE WILL BE MEETING WITH ONE OF YOUR COLLEAGUES, THE JUDGE, AND WE’RE TOTALLY OPEN TO HEARING FROM ALL SIDES, BUT I DO THINK IT’S PROBLEMATIC IN A PUBLIC DISCUSSION, WE HAVE GIVEN SPECIAL TIME TO ONE SIDE AND NOT THE OTHER. >>THANK YOU FOR THE REMARKS. I WOULD LIKE US TO CONTINUE, PLEASE. >>BEFORE WE GET INTO ISSUE IDENTIFICATION, JUST IN THIS SECTION, YOU WILL SEE OUR BUDGET ACTIONS PROPOSED THAT ARE NOT RELATED TO L.E.A.D.. THE FIRST IS TO CUT $1.59 FOR MUNICIPAL COURT FUNDING FOR PROBATION ENFORCEMENT. THAT’S FROM COUNCILMEMBER HARRELL. >>WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO IT? >>YES. THIS IS WHAT WE’VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT. AS I SAID BEFORE, MY OFFICE HAS BEEN DISCUSSING WITH MANY, MANY ORGANIZATIONS ON THE IMPACT OF PROBATION AS OPPOSED TO OTHER PROGRAMS. I REALLY APPRECIATE THE DESCRIPTION IN A BASIC LAYOUT OF WHAT DOES PROBATION MEAN, AND IT’S NOT LIKE THEY ARE JUST EQUIVALENT OPTIONS. YOU DO PROBATION OR THIS SERVICE, AND OTHER COULD RESULT IN A RESTORATIVE PATHWAY. IT DOESN’T WORK THAT WAY. PROBATION IS FUNDAMENTALLY A DIFFERENT KIND OF APPROACH THAN OTHER PROGRAMS, AND SO, HAVING DISCUSSED WITH MANY COMMUNITY MEMBERS, ORGANIZERS, WE ARE HOPING THAT THE COUNCIL WILL SUPPORT THIS, NOT ONLY TO NOT ADD NEW MONIES TO PROBATION, BUT CUTTING PROBATION BY 25% TO FUND RESTORATIVE JUSTICE FOR ALL OF THE REASONS I’VE ALWAYS SAID AND WON’T REPEAT THAT PROBATION OFTEN DOES MORE HARM THAN GOOD. IT DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTS PEOPLE OF COLOR AND SENDS THEM ON A SORT OF BIPLANE TO MASS INCARCERATION RATHER THAN BRINGING THEM SOCIALLY BETTER OUTCOMES. RACIAL JUSTICE HAS PROVEN FAR BETTER OUTCOMES. WE ARE WORKING WITH COMMUNITY ORGANIZERS TO PUT TOGETHER A FORM B AS WE SAY IN CITY COUNCIL LINGO FOR THE BUDGET, TO FUND THE COMMUNITY AND RESTORATIVE JUSTICE PROGRAMS THAT HAVE PROVIDED POSITIVE ALTERNATIVES TO INCARCERATION AND PROBATION, AND THE PROPOSAL THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW IS STILL A WORK IN PROGRESS BECAUSE WE ARE STILL DISCUSSING WITH THE GROUPS, BUT WHAT WE HAVE SO FAR IS FUNDING COMMUNITY PASSAGEWAYS AND USE CONSORTIUM TO THE TUNE OF $300,000. CREATIVE JUSTICE TO THE TUNE OF $25,600. AND THE IDEA OF CORNER GREETERS, WHICH WE HAVEN’T ATTACHED A DOLLAR AMOUNT. I WANT TO MENTION QUICKLY, DURING THE DISCUSSION, MY OFFICE PUT FORWARD THE FUNDS, I MEAN THE PROPOSAL FOR FUNDS, FOR FREEDOM SCHOOL, WHICH IS A YOUTH OF COLOR SUMMER PROGRAM THAT HAS HAD A SUCCESSFUL TRACK RECORD. RAINIER BEACH ADVOCATED SUCCESSFULLY FOR O.R.C.A. CARD FUNDING, BUT WE ARE PROPOSING THAT FUNDING THAT HAS FALLEN THROUGH THE CRACKS BE RESTORED, AND EXTEND TO EMERSON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS PUT THAT FREEDOM SCHOOL FUNDING IN THE FORM B’s, AND ADD THIS TO OTHER PROGRAMS, LIKE COMMUNITY PASSAGEWAYS AND CREATIVE JUSTICE. TOGETHER, INTO A UNIFORMED FORM B TO SUPPORT YOUTH OF COLOR IN SUPPORT OF PROGRAMS OTHER THAN THE SCHOOL-TO-PRISON PIPELINE. AS I SAID, THIS AMENDMENT WOULD REDUCE PROBATION FROM THE SEATTLE MUNICIPAL COURT BY 25%, AND THIS WHOLE PROGRAM WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE BUDGET FOR DEMANDS PUT FORWARD BY THE PUBLIC DEFENDER’S ASSOCIATION AND OTHER ALLIED GROUPS. >>COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD ? >>I AM CONFUSED ABOUT THE PROPOSAL TO CUT PROBATION AS IT HAS BEEN EXPLAINED BECAUSE I DON’T HAVE A VERY GOOD SENSE OF HOW IT WOULD IMPACT THE CURRENT PROBATION SERVICES THAT ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO BE PROVIDED, SO DUIs, AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, WHICH I THINK MAKES UP 61%? >>THANK YOU FOR POINTING THAT OUT. I MAY NOT KNOW THE FULL ANSWER TO WHAT YOU’RE SAYING. I WOULD OPEN ALL SIDES TO WEIGH IN ON THIS, BUT I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT IN OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE GROUPS, WITH THE PUBLIC DEFENDER’S ASSOCIATION, THEY MADE IT VERY CLEAR THAT WOULD NOT IMPACT THE DV AND DUI FUNDS IN ANY WAY. >>WE KNOW FROM THE NUMBER OF DOLLARS, YOUR PROPOSAL PROPOSES TO CUT, THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT OVER HALF OF THE SERVICES BEING PROVIDED. BEING PROVIDED FOR STATE- MANDATED PROBATION SERVICES. SO YOUR COTTWOOD LEAVE 60% INTACT? >>ALL OF THE ESSENTIAL ASPECTS, LIKE DV AND DUI, IN MY VIEW, IN MY UNDERSTANDING, WILL BE LEFT INTACT, BUT I AM HAPPY TO HAVE THE GROUPS CLARIFY MORE. >>I THINK OUR BUDGET OFFICE — I DON’T KNOW THAT THAT’S SOMETHING EXTERNAL TO THE CITY GROUPS. >>I THINK THEY WOULD KNOW. I THINK THE GROUPS DO KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT, SO I MAY NOT HAVE ALL THE DETAILS, BUT I’M SURE THEY DO. HAPPY TO RAISE THOSE QUESTIONS. >>THAT’S A GOOD POINT. THE HIGH COMMUNITY RISK, THE PERCENTAGE REQUIRED BY LAW IS 72%. I AM SURE WE CAN GET THAT. DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? >>NO. >>I WOULD BE HAPPY TO FOLLOW UP. THE SECOND IS TO AND RESPONSES TO COMMUNITY HATE VIOLENCE. COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD. >>LET’S SWITCH GEARS. THE MAYOR’S OFFICE HAS CONVENED DISCUSSIONS WITH STAKEHOLDERS AROUND HATE CRIMES COMING OUT OF A SERIES OF AUDITS DONE BY THE CITY AUDITOR. BOTH REQUESTED BY MYSELF, OF THE CITY AUDITOR, AS WELL AS PREVIOUS COUNCILS. THERE’S A CLEAR REQUEST FOR SUPPORT FROM COMMUNITY-BASED RESPONSES, INCLUDING BETTER COORDINATION REPORTING. THIS IS SOMETHING WE’VE HEARD FROM BOTH AFFECTED GROUPS, AS WELL AS THE CITY AUDITOR, IS THAT HATE CRIMES ARE GOING UNREPORTED, BUT WE ALSO HAVE IDENTIFIED A NEED AS IT RELATES TO OUR HATE CRIMES LEGISLATION THAT HAS MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE BUT THAT WE HAVE NOT YET BEEN ABLE TO BRING FORWARD TO FULL COUNCIL YET BECAUSE OF CONCERNS AROUND DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT OF NEW HATE CRIME CHARGES ON PEOPLE BEING CHARGED FOR UNDERLYING CRIMES, AND SO THERE IS INTEREST IN IDENTIFYING SANCTIONS THAT ARE RESTORATIVE JUSTICE SANCTIONS INSTEAD OF PUNITIVE SANCTIONS LIKE HEALING CIRCLES FOR OFFENDERS, AND SURVIVORS OF HATE CRIMES, AND SO THERE MAY BE A POSSIBLE APPROACH MOVING FORWARD, USING SOME EXISTING FUNDS TO ADDRESS ONE OR MORE OF THESE OBJECTIVES.>>OKAY. THAT’S IT? >>OUR NEXT ISSUE IS L.E.A.D.. >>SORRY, I WAS WAITING FOR COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ TO WEIGH IN. GO AHEAD. >>GREG DOSS, COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF HERE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT L.E.A.D.. GIVEN THE HOUR, I CAN SKIP TO THE MEAT OF THE ISSUE, IF YOU LIKE, AND GO AHEAD, AND START WITH THIS ISSUE IDENTIFICATION SLIDE BEFORE YOU. WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS A PROPOSED EXPANSION OF THE PROGRAM, AND THIS IS THE RESULT OF THE STAFF’S LOOK AT THE LAST YEAR, IN WHICH THE CASELOAD HAS DOUBLED. IT HAS GONE FROM SOMEWHERE IN THE HIGH HUNDREDS, TO 754 CASES. THIS HAPPENED AS THE PROGRAM EXPANDED IN 2018 INTO THE NORTH PRECINCT, AND IN THIS YEAR, INTO THE SODO AREA. THAT CAN BE SEEN IN THE CHART TO THE LEFT, THE SORT OF YELLOW BARS THERE. REPRESENTING LEAD INTO THE NORTH PRECINCT. OBVIOUSLY, THE DEMAND WAS A LOT HIGHER THAN ANYONE IN PROGRAM THOUGHT IT WOULD BE, AND AS SUCH, AS THEY MOVED INTO THE SODO AREA, THEY HAD TO ASK THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO PRIORITIZE THE REFERRALS, AND THAT’S WHY YOU SEE TWO LINES HERE ON THE CHART TO THE RIGHT. I AM GOING TO PICK THE FIRST NUMBER, SEPTEMBER 2019. THE 754 IS THE NUMBER OF L.E.A.D. CLIENTS THAT HAVE HAD AN INTAKE. THERE ARE A FEW HUNDRED MORE THAT ARE FOR A LACK OF BETTER WAY TO SAY ON A WAITING LIST. THEY’VE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS HIGH- PRIORITY INTAKES, POTENTIAL INTAKES WITH THE SODO AREA, AND NORTH PRECINCT, BUT JUST PUT SIMPLY, THE PROGRAM DOESN’T HAVE THE CASE MANAGERS TO BE ABLE TO GET TO THOSE FOLKS, SO IF THE L.E.A.D. PROGRAM DID HAVE ENOUGH CASE MANAGERS, RIGHT AWAY, THEY WOULD HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO HAVE 1051 CASES. I WOULD ASK YOU TO CHANGE THAT OVER. WHAT I’M GOING TO TALK ABOUT NOW IS FUNDING. WHAT YOU CAN SEE TO THE LEFT IS THE FUNDING THE L.E.A.D. PROGRAM CURRENTLY HAS FOR SEATTLE SERVICES YOU CAN SEE THERE IS 718 IN TRUE BLOOD FUNDING. THAT’S THE COURT CASE THAT I’M NOT GOING INTO TOO MUCH DETAIL, BUT IT HAD TO DO WITH IMPRISONING FOLKS WHO HAD YET TO STAND COMPETENCY HEARINGS. THERE IS SEATTLE FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $2.55 MILLION, AND THEN THE KING COUNTY FUNDING OF $1.6 MILLION. I WILL NOTE HERE THAT THE KING COUNTY FUNDING IS A MUCH SMALLER PICTURE THAN WHAT YOU SAW ON OCTOBER 2 WHEN THE PROGRAM PRESENTED, AND THAT IS BECAUSE THIS IS THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING KING COUNTY PROVIDES I CAN GO TO SEATTLE CLIENTS, SO L.E.A.D. IS OFFERED ELSEWHERE IN THE COUNTY. IN BURIEN, AND THEY ARE SPREADING INTO THE SOUTH AREA OF THE COUNTY. BUT THE MONEY THAT THEY RECEIVED FROM KING COUNTY, THEY HAVE SEATTLE SPECIFIC DOLLARS. THAT’S THE $1.6 MILLION. WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS NEXT YEAR, THE PROGRAM IS GOING TO HAVE $4.87 MILLION IN REVENUES THEY CAN USE TO PROVIDE SERVICE IN SEATTLE. GOING BACK REALLY QUICKLY TO THAT LINE CHART, WHAT THEY ARE PROJECTING IS THAT BY THE END OF DECEMBER, THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE L.E.A.D. PROGRAM SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 1400 CASES. THIS IS A PROJECTION THAT IS COMING FROM THE LEAD STAFF. IT IS ONE THAT SPD IS STILL THINKING ABOUT, AND DOESN’T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH THE LINEAR NATURE OF WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED HERE, AND SAYS AS L.E.A.D. COMES INTO PRECINCTS, THERE TENDS TO BE AN INITIAL BUMP OF CLIENTS, AND THEN IT LEVELS OUT. I THINK, WELL THAT’S LIKELY THE CASE, YOU CAN SEE THE BUMP IN NORTH PRECINCT WAS PRETTY HIGH, KNOWING THAT THERE IS 300 FOLKS ON THE WAITING LIST RIGHT NOW, IT CERTAINLY SEEMS THAT EXPANSION INTO THE SOUTH PRECINCT, AN UNTAPPED AREA, OR ON SERVICED AREA IN THE SOUTHWEST PRECINCT, AND THEN REMOVING OR ALLOWING ANY REFERRALS FROM SODO, IT’S PRETTY EASY TO SEE HOW THEY CAN GET UP TO 1400 BY THE END OF NEXT YEAR. IF THAT IS INDEED THE CASE, L.E.A.D. IS GOING TO NEED A LOT MORE SUPPORT. WHAT THEY’VE DONE IS TO ENVISION WHAT A BUDGET WOULD LOOK LIKE IF THEY WERE TO PROVIDE SUPPORT TO 1400 ACTIVE CLIENTS. THE VERY FIRST BUDGET LINE ITEM THAT YOU CAN SEE UNDER DIRECT PROGRAM IS CASE MANAGEMENT SERVICES. THAT’S EVERGREEN TREATMENT SERVICES. THOSE ARE THE OUTREACH COORDINATORS THAT ARE EMPLOYED BY L.E.A.D., AND CONTRACTED TO L.E.A.D.. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PROJECTED 2019 EXPENDITURE IS $20.4 MILLION. AS OF RIGHT NOW, THERE IS ABOUT 19 CASE MANAGERS. WHAT YOU CAN SEE IN 2020 IS IF YOU WERE TO GO TO THE MAXIMUM CASES THAT THE STAFF IS PROJECTING, YOU WOULD REACH A NEED FOR 73 CASE MANAGERS, AND $7.9 MILLION. AS YOU SEE, THERE ARE SOME OTHER INCREASES FOR AFTER-HOURS COVERAGE, INCREASES FOR LEGAL SERVICES, AND I THINK MISTER GUARD AND HER PRESENTATION WILL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE NEED FOR RAISES, WHICH ARE FAIRLY MINIMAL FOR THE OUTREACH PERSONNEL, AND SO, WHAT THIS COMES DOWN TO IS A NEED FOR $4.72 MILLION, AND THAT IS THE GAP BETWEEN WHAT WE EXPECT ON THE LEFT, THE 4.87 WINDOWS IN REVENUE THAT’S GOING TO COME IN, AND WHAT WE SEE IN THE LOWEST RIGHT HAND CORNER, THE $9.175 MILLION. IN ORDER TO FULLY FUND THE BUDGET ON THE RIGHT, THAT WOULD BE NEEDED TO PROVIDE SERVICE TO 1400 CLIENTS, THERE WOULD NEED TO BE AN AND OF $4.7 MILLION. I WILL STOP AND ASK IF THERE IS ANY QUESTIONS. >>BEFORE WE DIVE IN, MY SENSE IS THAT THERE IS UNANIMOUS MANY APPEAR FOR SUPPORT. NUMBER FOUR IS A PROPOSED $3.5 MILLION I HAVE PROPOSED TO L.E.A.D.. I DON’T THINK THERE’S ANYTHING DIFFERENT BETWEEN THREE AND FOUR OTHER THAN THE REDUCED NUMBER. I WAS RELYING UPON WHAT I HAD HEARD FROM LISA DAUGAARD, AND DAN SATTERBERG ABOUT THE AVAILABILITY OF SOME PRIVATE FUNDS IF WE PUT IN A 3.5 NUMBER AS A BASELINE, SO FOR MY COLLEAGUES, IN NO WAY AM I TRYING TO REDUCE THE EFFICACY OF L.E.A.D.. I’M GOING TO LET YOU DUKE IT OUT AT UP HERE, AND THEN WHATEVER THE BUDGET NUMBER IS WILL BE DEALT UPON OTHER THINGS THAT WE ARE LOOKING TO FUND OVER THE NEXT FEW WEEKS. COUNCILMEMBER O’BRIEN? >>JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS TO HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE NUMBERS. THAT CHART COMPARES 19 PROJECTED TO THE 2020. THAT WOULD BE THE $1400 OR 1400 ACTIVE CLIENTS? >>YES. WHAT DOES THE 2020 ENDORSE? >>THE 2020 ENDORSED IS THE SAME LEVEL AS THE LEFT HERE. $2.55 MILLION. >>AND THEN, IN THE CHART BEFORE THAT WE DISCUSSED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PRESENTATION, THE PROPOSED BUDGET, THERE WAS A L.E.A.D. DIVERSION OF $2.5 MILLION IN A LINE ITEM THERE. >>THAT IS ALL OF THE L.E.A.D. PROGRAM FUNDING FOR 2020. THAT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE FUNDING THAT THE PROGRAM HAS ALREADY RECEIVED FOR EAST PRECINCT, WEST PRECINCT, NORTH PRECINCT. ALL OF THE FUNDING TO DATE IF THE COUNCIL DID NOTHING ELSE. THE L.E.A.D. PROGRAM WOULD HAVE A $2.5 MILLION. >>SO THAT’S NOT JUST THE ADS FOR 2020, WHICH REALLY DON’T EXIST. BUT WE WERE DISCUSSING THAT EARLIER. A LOT OF THE THINGS LOOKS LIKE ADS, BUT FOR L.E.A.D., IT’S THE BASE FUNDING. >>THAT’S CORRECT. >>WERE TALKING ABOUT THE INTERCEPT CHART? I WAS WONDERING ABOUT THAT. WHY WAS THAT SHOWN AS AN ADD? >>I THINK THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A LITTLE APPLES AND ORANGES IN THERE OR SOMETHING. >>A FRUIT SALAD? >>THE DISCUSSION WE HAD EARLIER, WHICH IS A DIFFERENT SET OF FOLKS, WAS THAT EVERYTHING ON THE WAS THE MARGINAL INCREASE TO 20 2020. WE ARE NOT ADDING — THE MAYOR’S BUDGET DOESN’T PROPOSE $2.5 MILLION IN FUNDING FOR L.E.A.D.. >>YOU ARE RIGHT. THAT IS JUST STAFF PUTTING TOGETHER A CHART WAY TOO FAST BUT I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. 2.5 IS THE AMOUNT L.E.A.D. HAS NOW. I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE SUPPORT FOR MY FUNDING HERE. FOR THE SAKE OF IT BEING LATE IN THE DAY, I WANT TO LET FOLKS KNOW THAT I WILL DO WHATEVER CALISTHENICS ARE NECESSARY TO GET SOMETHING CLOSE TO FULL FUNDING FOR THE FULL 1400. LIKE YOU SAID, COUNCILMEMBER BAGSHAW I WANT TO BELIEVE THERE IS OPPORTUNITIES THAT IF THE CITY COMES IN WITH A STRONG COMMITMENT, WE’RE GOING TO FIND OUTSIDE SOURCES TO HELP. MAYBE, THEY ARE PUBLIC OR PRIVATE. I WANT TO SPEAK WITH THOSE FOLKS. I DON’T KNOW THAT IT NEEDS TO BE THE CITY GETTING US 100% OF THE WAY THERE, BUT WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING BOLD. >>ANY MORE COMMENTS? >>CALISTHENICS? >>IT AIN’T PRETTY. ú>>ALL RIGHT. I CAN’T BELIEVE IT, BUT LET’S CONTINUE. >>THAT’S ALL I HAD. I THINK COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE ADDRESSED THEIR ACTIONS. $4.279. I WOULD ASK IF THOSE COUNCILMEMBERS BESIDES COUNCILMEMBER CONTROLS, IF GONZALEZ OR SAWANT WANTED TO SAY ANYTHING. MY UNDERSTANDING IS WHAT YOU SAID, MADAME CHAIR. ALL OF THE PROPOSALS ARE ALIKE IN THE SENSE THAT THEY WOULD FULLY FUND THE L.E.A.D. PROGRAM, AND THAT YOURS IS DIFFERENT ONLY IN THE HOPES THAT THERE WOULD BE PRIVATE SECTOR FUNDING. I KNOW LISA DAUGAARD RIGHT NOW IS ON THE EAST COAST, TRYING TO SECURE THAT FUNDING. SHE BELIEVES SHE WILL HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS. >>THANK YOU FOR THAT. ANYTHING TO ADD DOWN HERE? OKAY. THAT’S PRETTY IMPRESSIVE THAT THERE IS NO DOUBT IN MY MIND THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE ONE OF THE COUNCIL’S TOP PRIORITIES. WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH DUGARD WHEN SHE RETURNS. BASED UPON WHAT WE HEARD LAST WEEK, BUT ALSO FROM DAN SATTERBERG WHEN HE WAS HERE, JUST THE REAL BELIEF THAT THIS IS THE WAVE OF THE FUTURE. THIS IS WHAT IS SHOWING SUCCESS. AS LONG AS WE HAVE OPPORTUNITIES IN PLACES FOR PEOPLE SO THEY HAVE HOUSING OVER THEIR HEADS, THAT IS GOING TO BE THE FIRST STEP THAT IS REALLY GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR GOOD WORK ON THIS. >>THANK YOU. I SHOULD ALSO MENTION, I WILL KEEP THE COUNCIL INFORMED AS I GET NEW INFORMATION FROM MISTER GUARD. THE $4.7 MILLION, OF COURSE, THIS IS PHASING IN WHEN YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT 53 CASE MANAGERS BEING ADDED, SO THERE WILL BE AN ONGOING EFFECT. WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT BUDGET DELIBERATION. >>THAT’S GREAT BECAUSE IT’S ONE OF MY CONCERNS, WHEN SHE TALKS ABOUT MEETING 53 CASE MANAGERS. THOSE ARE 53 QUALIFIED CASE MANAGERS WITH EXPERIENCE, AND NOT JUST SOMEBODY WHO IS NEW AND FRESH. WE MAY HAVE THAT, AS WELL, BUT IT’S GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME TO FIND INDIVIDUALS WHO CAN REALLY DO THIS WORK. I AM DELIGHTED TO BE PART OF THIS, SEEING THE PACKAGE GOES FORWARD. THAT’S IT. WE’VE GOT THE NEXT ITEMS IN THE SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT. THAT’S RIGHT. YES. IT’S A GOOD THING WE HAVEN’T BEEN IN COUNCIL MEETINGS ALL DAY. >>THANK YOU. >>THIS HAS EVERYTHING. >>ALL BY YOURSELF? >>EVERYBODY ELSE LEFT ME. >>THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND THANK YOU TO MY COLLEAGUES FOR HANGING IN. THIS IS ONE OF THE LIGHTER SUBJECTS WE HAVE, LIKE COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ SAID. >>I’M SORRY, I’M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE AS FAST AS I WAS IN THE LAST PRESENTATION. THERE’S A LOT GOING ON WITH SPD. I WILL TRY TO GO QUICKLY, BUT I DON’T WANT TO MISS ANYTHING, EITHER. BY WAY OF BACKGROUND, SPD AS YOU KNOW IS A $410 MILLION AGENCY AND WITH OVER 2000 EMPLOYEES, THEY ARE THE LARGEST WORKFORCE OF ANY CITY DEPARTMENT, AND ABOUT TWO THIRDS OF THEIR PERSONNEL ARE SWORN OFFICERS. BECAUSE THEY ARE SO STAFF INTENSIVE, ABOUT 80% OF THEIR BUDGET IS STAFFING COSTS AND PERSONNEL COSTS. YOU WILL FIND IN MY CENTRAL STAFF MEMO, THAT YOU’VE BEEN ISSUED, THAT THERE IS A LOT OF INFORMATION, AND I’M NOT GOING TO GO OVER ALL OF THAT INFORMATION TODAY, BUT YOU WILL FIND IN THE APPENDICES, THERE ARE ANSWERS TO A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS THAT COUNCILMEMBERS USUALLY HAVE ABOUT PATROL STAFFING. THERE IS AN APPENDING THAT ADDRESSES THE MIX OF SWORN OFFICERS THROUGHOUT THE DEPARTMENT. THERE IS ONE ON 911 RESPONSE TIME, ONE ON PROACTIVE CALLS, AND THE AMOUNT OF TIME POLICE OFFICERS HAVE FOR COMMUNITY POLICING, AND FINALLY AN APPENDIX THAT IS ON THE NUMBER OF TRAINED OFFICERS AND CRISIS RESPONSE TACTICS. THAT’S ALL THERE FOR YOU. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT, LET ME KNOW. WITH ME JUMP IN AND COMPARE THE 2020 ENDORSEMENT TO THE 2020 PROPOSED. THE FIRST THING THAT’S GOING ON IS A BIT OF A REORGANIZATION. WHAT YOU SEE IN THE 2020 PROPOSED COLUMN IS SOME PLACES WHERE THERE ARE BLANKS, AND I’M GOING TO GO OVER THAT ONE PRETTY QUICKLY. THERE’S A NEW BUREAU THAT IS CREATED, THE COLLABORATIVE POLICING BUREAU. THAT’S GOING TO HOUSE THE CRIME PREVENTION COORDINATORS AND COMMUNITY SERVICE OPERATORS WHEN THEY COME ON BOARD AT THE END OF THIS YEAR. A NUMBER OF OTHER SORT OF CUSTOMER FACING ORGANIZATIONS WITH SPD. THERE IS A REDISTRIBUTION, OR I SHOULD SAY A CONSOLIDATION OF THE VERIEST PRECINCTS, AS YOU CAN SEE. SOUTHWEST, NORTH, ETC., ARE ALL BROUGHT INTO THE PATROL OPS. LIKEWISE, WITH CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS, THERE’S A NUMBER OF SPECIALTY UNITS THAT ARE BEING ASSUMED BY THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS BSL, SO IT’S A SKINNY NIANG DOWN OF THE DEPARTMENT IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER OF BCL’S COUNCIL WILL BE WORKING WITH. >>I KNOW THIS IS YOUR WHOLE AREA. I WILL LET YOU JUMP IN. >>JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ON THIS CHART. UNDER SOMETHING YOU DIDN’T TALK ABOUT, IS THAT A DECREASE OF 4.4% IN THE CHIEF OF POLICE BSL? AM I READING THAT CORRECTLY? >>YES. >>AND THIS IS IN THOUSANDS? >>YES. $10.7 MILLION TO $10.2 MILLION. >>WHAT IS THIS? >>THE COLLABORATIVE POLICING FUNCTIONS. I CAN GET YOU A LIST. >>AND SO WE ARE GIVING THE CHIEF OF POLICE A LINE ITEM OF $10.3 MILLION WHY? >>THERE IS A LOT HOUSED THERE. THAT’S WHERE THE GRANTS ARE TYPICALLY LOCATED. THAT’S WHERE VARIOUS KINDS OF TRAVEL MONIES FOR THE CHIEF TO DO, AND THE COMMAND STAFF TO GO OUT FOR TRAINING. THERE’S A LOT THERE. I WOULD HAVE TO GIVE YOU A LIST LATER ON. I CAN’T RECALL ALL OF IT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. >>LEADERSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION, I’M ALSO NOTICING THAT IS A .6% REDUCTION FROM THE ENDORSED AND PROPOSED. HOW IS THAT DIFFERENT THAN THE CHIEF OF POLICE LINE YOU JUST DESCRIBED. >>I’M GOING TO HAVE TO GET YOU THAT, TOO. >>THAT’S ANOTHER QUESTION. SPECIAL OPERATIONS. AGAIN, WE ARE SEEING DAY DECREASE IN THE BUDGET OF 1.4%, SO IT’S GOING TO PROPOSE TO GO FROM THE MAYOR’S PROPOSAL FROM $58.4 MILLION TO $57.6 MILLION. I’M JUST NOT TRACKING THE SPECIAL OPERATIONS. >>SPECIAL OPERATIONS TYPICALLY DOES THINGS LIKE EVENT PLANNING, EVENT MANAGEMENT PLANNING. THE 1.4% COULD BE A SMALL ADJUSTMENT. I HONESTLY DIDN’T PAY THAT CLOSE ATTENTION TO THOSE. >>I AM PAYING ATTENTION TO IT BECAUSE SOMETIMES THOSE NUMBERS ADD UP TO MORE THAN A FEW DOLLARS IN THE PIGGY BANK, YOU KNOW? I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHERE THOSE DOLLARS ARE GOING IF THERE’S A REDUCTION. THE MAYOR HAS PROPOSED APPROPRIATING THOSE DOLLARS BECAUSE YOU KNOW, JUST IN THAT SPECIAL OPERATIONS LINE, IT’S GOING FROM 58 TO 57. THAT’S NOT INSIGNIFICANT IN TERMS OF DOLLARS THAT MIGHT BE AVAILABLE FOR CITY COUNCIL PRIORITIES, IF THERE IS ALREADY A PROPOSED CUT BEING MADE. >>OKAY. I WILL GET YOU A CROSSWALK ON THIS. >>THANK YOU. >>I THINK THE POINTS ARE RIGHT ON, AND I’M VERY INTERESTED IF THERE IS MONEY THAT’S THERE, CAN IT BE USED IN WAYS THAT WE ALL ARE INTERESTED IN USING THEM? THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT ALL WITH US. >>THAT’S PROBABLY A GOOD SEGUE TO MY NEXT TOPIC, WHICH IS TO TALK ABOUT WHAT IS IN THE 2020 PROPOSED BUDGET. THIS IS IN FRONT OF YOU WITH A REORGANIZATION OF PROGRAMS, BUT WE’RE GOING TO GO INTO WHAT IS IN THE BUDGET. FIRST, THERE IS A $6.2 MILLION TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENT THAT LINES THE SPD SALARY BUDGET WITH ACTUAL COSTS. THIS IS MADE TO REFLECT A NET LOSS OF OFFICERS AND 2018 AS WELL AS ADJUSTMENTS TO THE STAFFING PLAN IN 2019 AND 2020. THE FIRST ISSUE I’M GOING TO DISCUSS TODAY IS STAFFING, AND I’M GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE SALARY SAVINGS ITEMS, BUT THERE IS A $6.2 MILLION CUT, AS I MENTIONED, AND THAT RESULTS IN A GENERAL FUND RESOURCE. THERE IS A $6.4 MILLION AD OF NEW THINGS IN THE BUDGET THAT I’M GOING TO GO THROUGH RIGHT NOW. THE FIRST ONE IS MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS. YOU HEARD A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS IN THE LAST PRESENTATION. RIGHT NOW, THE CRISIS RESPONSE TEAM HAS ONE CONTACTED MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL, AND IT’S EXPANDING SO THERE WILL BE FIVE. ONE FOR A CRISIS RESPONSE TEAM IN EACH PRECINCT OF THE CITY. THAT’S $310,000. THERE IS AN INVESTMENT OF $1.6 MILLION IN THE MAYOR’S RETENTION AND RECRUITMENT INITIATIVE. THE MAYOR HAD A REPORT WITH 12 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WOULD AFFECT RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION. I WILL BE DISCUSSING THAT LEADER, AS WELL. MOVING ALONG, THERE IS A $100,000 AD FOR IMPLICIT BIAS TRAINING. THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE THE $100,000 IS PAYING FOR THE TRAINER, AND THERE IS ALREADY MONEY IN THE TRAINING BUDGET TO PAY FOR OFFICERS ON OVERTIME TO RECEIVE THE TRAINING. THIS IS SIGNIFICANTLY BIGGER THAN THE $700,000. THE $100,000 IS JUST THE INCREMENTAL PIECE. THE MONEY THAT’S USED TO TRAIN OFFICERS IS ALREADY IN THEIR BASE BUDGET. THERE IS A SWORN OFFICER HIRING INCENTIVE. AS YOU KNOW, THE COUNCIL PASSED 125784 LAST YEAR. I’M SORRY, THIS YEAR. THAT AUTHORIZED THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE HIRING BONUSES OF UP TO $15,000 FOR EXPERIENCED OFFICERS AND UP TO $7500 FOR NEW RECRUITS. THIS ITEM WOULD CARRY THAT THROUGH 2020 FOR ALL RECRUITS AND LATERALS THAT ARE HIRED. THERE IS AN AD OF 840 — AND PLEASE STOP ME. I KNOW I AM RATTLING THESE OFF, BUT I WILL TALK ABOUT SOME OF THESE IN DETAILS. PLEASE, DO STOP ME IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THERE IS AN AD OF $848,000. IN 2019, THE DEPARTMENT LAUNCHED OVER THE SUMMER, A MULTI-DEPARTMENT EMPHASIS PATROL THAT ENGAGES WITH COMMUNITY MEMBERS, IN ABOUT EIGHT DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOODS. I THINK THIS HAS BEEN REFERRED TO IN A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT WAYS. THE PRE-SUMMER EMPHASIS PATROL GOT EXTENDED THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE SUMMER. THE SEVEN NEIGHBORHOOD EMPHASIS PATROL ADDED A NEIGHBORHOOD, AND SO I’M GOING TO BE CALLING IT THE EIGHTH NEIGHBORHOOD EMPHASIS PATROL TODAY. THE AD OF $848,000 WOULD ALLOW THE DEPARTMENT TO CONTINUE THAT NEXT YEAR AT THE SAME LEVEL OF EFFORT THAT YOU PROVIDED THIS YEAR. THERE IS A PROPOSAL TO EXPAND THE COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER PROGRAM. RIGHT NOW, THEY ARE FUNDED IN THE 2019 BUDGET, 12 COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS. THAT’S 10 OFFICERS AND TWO SUPERVISORS. THOSE FOLKS ARE SCHEDULED TO COME ON BOARD LATER THIS YEAR. PROBABLY, CLOSER TO DECEMBER. AND THEN, THIS AD WOULD ADD SIX MORE TO BRING THE TOTAL TO 18. AGAIN, I AM GOING TO DISCUSS THAT LATER, TOO. THERE IS THE AD OF AN FTE, AND SOME MONEY IDENTIFIED IN THE BASE BUDGET FOR A NATIVE AMERICAN LIAISON. THIS WOULD ALLOW THE COLLABORATIVE POLICING BUREAU TO PROVIDE CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE SERVICES TO INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES, AND HELP NAVIGATE THE CRIMINAL LEGAL SYSTEM. THERE IS A $150,000 AD OF A CIVILIAN INVESTIGATOR TO THE OFFICE OF POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY. THE LAST SPOT CONTRACT NEGOTIATED A PLACE WHERE SPD COULD HIRE THREE CIVILIANS TO DO INVESTIGATIONS. THIS IS THE THIRD. THE OTHER TWO HAVE ALREADY BEEN ADDED. THE REST OF THE OFFICE IS STILL SWORN IN, DOING THE INVESTIGATIONS. THERE IS A SCHOOL ZONE CAMERA EXPANSION OF $171,000. THIS IS BECAUSE SDOT HAS PROPOSED TO ADD FIVE NEW LOCATIONS EVERY TIME THERE IS A NEW SCHOOL ZONE CAMERA LOCATION, IT REQUIRES OFFICERS TO WORK ON OVERTIME, TO REVIEW THE CITATIONS. THE CAMERAS ACTUALLY SEND A VIDEO TO A WEBPAGE, AND OFFICERS REVIEW IT TO MAKE SURE THERE WAS AN ACTUAL INFRACTION. IF THERE IS, THEY ISSUE THE TICKET. THIS IS TO FUND THAT PIECE. LASTLY, THERE IS A $2.6 MILLION INVESTMENT TO REPLACE THE CAD SYSTEM THAT’S CURRENTLY OUTDATED, AND NEAR END OF ITS LIFE. IT WAS IMPLEMENTED IN 2008, AND IT CAN’T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF MANY OF THE NEWEST FEATURES, LIKE ENHANCED 911, AND LOCATION INFO, SO THAT’S A QUICK RUNDOWN OF THE ADS IN THE MAYOR’S BUDGET. AS I SAID, THEY ADD UP TO $6.4 MILLION IN NEW GENERAL FUNDS, AND WITH THAT, I AM READY TO GO INTO ISSUE NUMBER ONE, WHICH IS STAFFING. >>COUNCILMEMBER FELIZ? >>I WILL JUST GIVE YOU A RUNDOWN OF MY ISSUES. THE FIRST IS POLICE STAFFING. THE SECOND IS RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION WITH AN UPDATE ON THE STAFFING PICTURE IN 2019 , MY HOPE IS THAT I CAN GIVE YOU SOME CONTEXT FOR THE SALARY SAVINGS CUTS THAT ARE MADE BOTH IN THE 19 BUDGET AND 20 BUDGET AND I WILL START BY POINTING TO THE POINT TO MY LEFT. PLUS THE 12th 2018, AND WHAT YOU WILL BE THERE IS A STORY I THINK THAT YOU’RE PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH, AND LAST YEAR, THERE WERE SOME RETENTION AND RECRUITMENT ISSUES THAT RESULTED IN A -41 OFFICERS LEAVING THE DEPARTMENT. AND THAT WAS QUITE A DEPARTURE FROM PRIOR YEARS AS COUNCIL MEMBER GONZALES HAS NOTED IN OTHER PRESENTATIONS, ONE OF THE BIGGEST REASONS IS THE SEPARATION RATE INCREASED DRAMATICALLY FROM, AS YOU CAN SEE 79 IN 2000 IN 2018 TO 109 AND 2018. AND IT IS FOR THAT REASON THAT THE FUTURE HIRING PLANS, THE ONES FOR THIS YEAR AND FOR NEXT YEAR, ASSUME A TOTAL OF 90 AND 91 SEPARATIONS. AGAIN, QUITE HIGH, WHEN COMPARED WITH THE HISTORICAL SEPARATIONS THAT YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT. SO NOW I’M GOING TO TALK LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHERE THEY ARE THIS YEAR, AND THAT IS A CHART ON THE RIGHT. AND THE FIRST COLUMN, ORIGINAL PROJECTIONS ARE AUGUST, WE HAVE INFORMATION ON HIRING THROUGH AUGUST, AND THAT IS THE ACTUAL, THE ACTUAL IN THE MIDDLE COLUMN AND OF COURSE THE DIFFERENCE SO THE FIRST RING I WOULD HIGHLIGHT THAT YOU CAN HE IS THAT THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT THE DEPARTMENT IS KEEPING UP WITH ITS TARGETS ON RECRUITS. THEY HAD HOPED TO HAVE A FEW RECRUITS THERE AUGUST, 56 THROUGH AUGUST AND THEY HAVE THE RECORDS, SO THAT IS EXTREMELY POSITIVE, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT 2018, THE ENTIRE YEAR THAT THEY HAD, 59. THE LATERALS, NOT QUITE AS WELL, THEY HAD HOPED TO HAVE 15, BY THIS TIME IN THE YEAR OR BY AUGUST, I SHOULD SAY. THEY HAD EIGHT, AND SO THEY ARE SEVEN BEHIND. AND WHAT GOT A COUPLE OF REHIRE’S, AND WHEN YOU FACTOR IN SEPARATIONS AND EVERYTHING ELSE YOU WILL AT THE BOTTOM, THE BOTTOM LINE, THE NET CHANGES THAT THROUGH AUGUST, AGAINST THE PROJECTIONS OREGON’S THE PLAN, WE ARE ONE OFFICER DOWN. COUNSEL NEVER GONZCEZ HAS MENTIONED THAT POSITIONS. >>I WANT TO TAKE A QUICK PAUSE HERE, IF WE CAN. CHAIR BAGSHAW, IF YOU ALLOW ME TO MAKE A FEW BRIEF COMMENTS. I JUST WANTED TO COMMEND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT’S EFFORTS IN THIS SPACE, TO REALLY FOCUS ON SOME STRATEGIES THAT COULD HELP IN HIRING NEW OFFICERS. I BELIEVE THAT THE ACTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL TOOK TO NOT JUST FOCUS ON LATERAL HIRES, TO THE HIRING INCENTIVE, BUT TO ADD A PROGRAM, A BONUS PROGRAM, SPECIFICALLY FOR NEW HIRES AS WELL, HAS REALLY HELPED US TURN THIS TREND AROUND IN A WAY THAT IS VERY POSITIVE, SO I WANT TO THANK THE CATS NUMBERS WHO SUPPORTED THE HIRING BONUS PROGRAM TO NOT JUST INCLUDE LATERALS BUT ALSO INCLUDE NEW HIRES, I THINK IT IS MAKING A BIG DIFFERENCE COME YOU KNOW, THEY ARE STILL EVALUATING THE REASONS WHY WE ARE EXPERIENCING POSITIVE NUMBERS IN THE NEW HIRES COLUMN, BUT I’M HOPEFUL THAT THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HELPED, AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, GREG WILL GET TO THE PART WHERE WE ARE STILL FACING SOME CHALLENGES AND THAT IS IN THE RETENTION CATEGORY, HOW DO WE KEEP OFFICERS FROM GOING TO OTHER DEPARTMENTS. I THINK THAT IS STILL ON TREND, UNFORTUNATELY, WITH WHAT WE ARE SEEING NATIONALLY, SO THE SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS NOT AN OUTLIER WITH REGARD TO THE NUMBERS AND THE DATA THAT WE ARE GOING THROUGH RIGHT NOW, THANKS TO GREG’S ANALYSIS, AND THE COOPERATION OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BUT I REALLY WANT TO COMMEND THE FOLKS WHO FOCUS ON THIS WORK DAY IN AND DAY OUT, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ABLE TO POSITION THE DEPARTMENT IN THE BEST POSITION POSSIBLE TO HIRE SOME GOOD PEOPLE TO COME IN AND BE PART OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND I AM HOPEFUL THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO THE THE TREND MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. THANK YOU. >>THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP. I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT IT BEFORE. I WILL CONFESS THAT I HAD A BIT OF SKEPTICISM THAT IT WOULD DO THE TRICK, BUT IT SEEMS TO HAVE HAVE HELPED, SO THAT WAS A GOOD STRATEGY. >>SEVERE WEATHER GOOD THINGS I SHOULD ALSO MENTION THE IMPACT ON PATROL STAFFING HAVE BEEN RELATIVELY GOOD, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TRY TO DO WHEN THEY’RE CONFRONTED WITH STAFFING CHALLENGES IS TO KEEP THE NUMBER OF 911 WAS WANDERS THE SAME, IF POSSIBLE SO THEY ARE NOT DEGRADING RESPONSE TIMES OR SERVICE, AND THEY HAVE DONE THAT. AT THE END OF LAST YEAR, THEY WERE ABLE TO HOLD 911 WAS WANDERS AT 538, AND SO THERE SHOULD BE NO DEGRADATION IN RESPONSE TIME, AND SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC. THERE IS A CUT TO OTHER PATROL OFFICERS, NOT A CUT, BUT THEY ARE DOWN BY ABOUT 17 OFFICERS, WHEN IT COMES TO FOOT BEATS AND CRIME PREVENTION TEAM OFFICERS. IT IS THE CASE WHERE WE ARE GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE OVERTIME EMPHASIS PATROL THAT WAS DONE OVER THE SUMMER, IT IS LIKELY THE CASE THAT THE OVERTIME EMPHASIS PATROL’S ARE BACKFILLING FOR THE LOSS OF OFFICERS WHEN WE TALK ABOUT HAVING BEEN TEAM VIEWER IN FOOD BEAT AND COMMUNITY POLICE TEAMS, AND SO, THAT IS A STRATEGIC USE OF OVERTIME TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS NOT A LOSS OF STREET STRENGTH. SO THE DEPARTMENT HAS OBVIOUSLY KEPT A PRIORITY TO MAKE SURE THAT BOTH IT’S 911 RESPONDERS AND IT’S STREET STRENGTH, THE FOLKS THAT ENGAGE WITH THE PUBLIC, ARE, THEY STILL HAVE A CAPACITY THERE. ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. >>COUNSEL NUMBER O’BRIEN. >>I KNOW THAT TRYING TO MAKE THE MATH ALL RECONCILED MAY NOT WORK EXACTLY BECAUSE OF THE FLOWS BUT I JUST WANT TO ASK THE QUESTION, THOUGH IF THE PREVIOUS CHART SHOWS THE NET CHANGE TO DATE WAS DOWN SIX, AND 911 RESPONSES HAVE BEEN HELD, BUT WE’VE LOST 17, DOES THAT MEAN THERE IS +11 SOMEWHERE OR IS THE REALITY THAT SOME OF THESE FOLKS, THE NUMBERS ARE HOLD, AND THEY ARE STILL MULTI- YOUR TRAINING PROGRAMS AND ACCOUNTED HERE? >>JUST TO CLARIFY ON THE CHART, WE ARE ACTUALLY DOWN ONLY ONE. WE HAD PROJECTED AND HOPED THAT THEY HAD PROJECTED AND HOPED THAT THEY WOULD GET, THEY WOULD BE FIVE AHEAD BY THIS TIME OF THE YEAR. AND THEY ARE NOT. BUT THE ONE IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE FOLKS THAT ARE LEAVING, AND THE FOLKS THAT THEY ARE HIRING. SO IF IT WERE PERFECT, THAT WOULD BE A ZERO. IF WE WERE DOING BETTER, THEN YOU HAVE A POSITIVE NUMBER THERE. BUT IN TERMS OF, ARE YOU ASKING WHERE THE OTHER REDUCTIONS ARE BESIDE THE 17? >>CORRECT, IF WE ARE ESSENTIALLY JUST DOWN ONE BUT WE HAVE HAD 17 REDUCTIONS HERE, DOES THAT MEAN THERE IS AN INCREASE SOMEWHERE ELSE? >>YEAH, THERE ARE GOING TO BE REDUCTIONS THAT WILL BE HELD OUT SIDE OF PATROL, THEY WILL BE SOME THAT IT, THEY ARE IN THE SPECIAL TEAMS. THE 41 OFFICERS NET FROM LAST YEAR, THOSE VACANCIES ARE GOING TO BE HELD IN OTHER PLACES. SO SPEAKING OF VACANCIES, I WILL GO TO THE VACANCY CUTS, IF THAT IS ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT, SO THE BEST WAY THAT I CAN DESCRIBE THIS IS THAT IN 2018, WHEN THE -41 OFFICERS WAS HAPPENING, OF COURSE, THAT HAPPENED THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, AT THE SUMMER FORECAST, AND WHEN THE DEPARTMENT WAS LOOKING FOR WORDS, THEY KNEW AT THAT POINT IN TIME, THAT THERE WAS A DOWNTURN, AND THAT THEY WERE GOING TO HAVE NET SEPARATION, A NEGATIVE NET SEPARATION, AND THE COUNCIL KNEW IT, TOO, AND SO, THE COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR TOGETHER IN THE ADOPTED BUDGET TO THE SALARY SAVINGS CUT OF ABOUT 1.3 MILLION. WHAT HAPPENED, AS THINGS KEPT GETTING WORSE, AND AS MORE OFFICERS LEFT, THROUGH THE FALL, AND INTO THE WINTER, THERE WAS MORE SALARY SAVINGS THAT BECAME AVAILABLE. AND WHAT YOU ARE SEEING NOW, IN THE 2019 THIRD QUARTER SUPPLEMENTAL IS AN ATTEMPT TO GRAB THAT LAST FOR THE SALARY SAVINGS, IN 2019, THAT WON’T BE NEEDED BECAUSE THOSE OFFICERS LAST YEAR HAD VACATED THEIR POSITIONS AND THOSE POSITIONS ARE STILL VACANT. AS YOU CAN SEE FROM OUR STAFFING DISCUSSION EARLIER, WE COME OF THE DEPARTMENT, HAS NOT CAUGHT UP YET, SO. >>SO THE 6.2 MILLION FOR VACANCY SAVINGS, AND THE 2020 PROPOSED? WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH AT $6.2 MILLION? >>WELL, PART OF THAT, I WAS GOING TO GET TO. >>NOT THAT I WANTED, BUT. >>PART OF THAT IS STILL THE 2018 POSITIONS, THEY ARE STILL VACANT, AND THEY ASSUME THAT THEY WILL STILL BE VACATED IN 2020 BECAUSE WE ARE NOT GOING TO , THE DEPARTMENT WILL NOT CATCH UP FAST ENOUGH, AND PART OF IT IS, IF YOU GO BACK TO, IF I GO BACK HERE TO THE PERFORMANCE, SO FAR THIS YEAR, YOU, AND I WILL GO BACK TO THAT LATERAL LINE, AND USE THIS AS AN EXAMPLE, THE DEPARTMENT ACTUALLY HAD MONEY TO HIRE 15 LATERALS. AND THEY DIDN’T MAKE IT, AS DISCUSSED. THEIR SEVEN DOWN, SO WHAT THE MAYOR’S PROPOSED BUDGET DOES IS IT TAKES THE SALARY FOR THOSE SEVEN, AND IT, IT CAPTURES THAT SALARY AS PART OF THE 2019 THIRD QUARTER SUPPLEMENTAL ADJUSTMENT. AND OF COURSE, SINCE WE ARE STILL CATCHING UP, THE DEPARTMENT IS STILL CATCHING UP, THEY KNOW THAT THE SALARY FOR THOSE SEVEN WON’T BE NEEDED IN 2020, EITHER. AND SO THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE CAPTURING, WITH THE 6.2 MILLION FOR VACANCY SAVINGS. >>SO I KNOW WE ARE HIRING COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS, AND THE MAYOR HAS RECOMMENDED EXPANDING THAT, WHICH I THINK IS TERRIFIC. BECAUSE IT SEEMS THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD WANTS. THEY LIKE TO HAVE A FACE, A FAMILIAR AND DIFFERENTLY FACE. IS THERE ANY THOUGHT ABOUT DOING MORE OF THAT TO FILL SOME OF THE, KIND OF THE EMPTY STREET, MPTY BEAT OFFICERS? I KNOW THEYCAN’T DO THE SAME KINDS OF THINGS, BUT WE DO SEE THAT THERE IS A SENSE OF SAFETY AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, WHEN WE HAVE THESE TYPES OF OFFICE OTHERS OUTSIDE AND AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE TO TALK TO. >>ABSOLUTELY, AND I THINK THAT IS WHAT THE CHIEF IS TRYING TO DO BY SPENDING ADDITIONAL FUNDING ON EMPHASIS PATROL’S. IS TO HAVE THE VISIBILITY OF OFFICERS WORKING WITH THE PUBLIC. CSO WILL ALSO BE WORKING WITH OFFICERS AND WITH SERVICE PROVIDERS, JUST IN A DIFFERENT WAY. >>IF I CAN, I THINK YOUR QUESTION AROUND HOW ARE WE BENDING THE SALARY SAVINGS IS A VERY GOOD ONE, AND WE HAVE BEEN SPENDING SOME TIME DIGGING INTO THAT AS WELL. AND MY INTEREST DANCING OF HOW THOSE DOLLARS HAVE BEEN REAPPROPRIATED OR PROPOSED TO BE REAPPROPRIATED, IS IN SEVERAL WAYS, ONE IS TO SUPPORT AN ADDITIONAL EXPANSION OF THE COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER PROGRAM, WHICH GREG ALREADY HIGHLIGHTED AS PART OF THE COME YOU KNOW, PROPOSED CHANGES BETWEEN THE ENDORSED AND WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US, SO THAT IS $1.2 MILLION TO GO FROM THE ORIGINAL 12 TO 18 COMMITTEE SERVICE OFFICERS, SO THAT IS PART OF THE RE-APPROPRIATION. THE OTHER PART WOULD BE TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE EMPHASIS PATROL’S, THAT IS ANOTHER $840,000 TICKET ITEM IT ADDITIONALLY TO THAT WOULD BE TO SUPPORT THE RECRUITMENT INITIATIVES AS PROPOSED BY THE RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION REPORT TO THE TUNE OF ABOUT ONE POINT INITIATIVES AS PROPOSED BY THE RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION REPORT TO THE TUNE OF ABOUT $1.1 MILLION, AND THEN, ON TOP OF THAT, SUPPORTING THE NURSE HELP LINE, THE NURSE HELP LINE AND THERE ARE FIVE, I BELIEVE FIVE NURSES THAT ARE GOING TO BE AVAILABLE AT FIVE DIFFERENT PRECINCTS, AND THAT IS ALSO BEING FUNDED BY THE 6.2 MILLION BE FUNDED THROUGH THE 6.2 MILLION-DOLLAR SALARY SAVINGS. BUT I THINK IT IS, IT IS NOT ALL GONE BECAUSE IT HAS NOT BEEN SPENT, BUT THE MAYOR HAS PROPOSED THE IDEAS OF HOW TO SUSPEND THAT. WE HAVE THE DISCRETION UNDER YOUR LEADERSHIP, CHAIR, TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT WHETHER WE AGREE WITH THE PROPOSED EXPENDITURES OR WHETHER WE HAVE OTHER PRIORITIES, OR WE WANT TO SHIFT THOSE DOLLARS AROUND TO TIP THE BALANCE TOWARD SOME OF THOSE PROGRAMS, MORE THAN OTHERS BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT SORT OF REPRESENTS, IN A VERY ROUGH CUT WAY, AS I DESCRIBED IT. ALL OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT WOULD BE FUNDED THROUGH THIS BUDGET. >>THANK YOU. BACK TO YOU. >>ALL RIGHT, SO AS COUNCILMEMBER GONZCEZ MENTIONED, THERE ARE A LOT OF BIG-TICKET ITEMS THAT ARE FUNDED IN THE SPD BUDGET, IT COMES OUT TO ABOUT 6.4 MILLION. ONE OF THE BIGGEST ONE IS THE RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION INITIATIVES, THERE ARE NUMBER OF DIFFERENT, A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT INITIATIVES WITHIN THIS PROGRAM, AND I CAN, I’M GOING TO BRIEFLY SUMMARIZE THAT , WHAT YOU WILL SEE BEFORE YOU IS THAT THERE IS ABOUT 120 102,000 DEVOTED TO RECRUITMENT, WHICH IS THAT FIRST RECRUITMENT THERE, THERE HIRING IMPROVEMENTS, AND THAT IS A PROCESS OF MAKING THE HIRING PROCESS MORE EFFICIENT, AND FASTER. SO THAT THE DEPARTMENT DOESN’T LOSE CANDIDATES, AS THEY’RE TRYING TO GET THEM IN THE DOOR. THERE IS AN $843,000 INVESTMENT AND RETENTION. AND THAT IS SORT OF THE THIRD TIER THERE AND THE FOURTH TIER — CAN ASK A QUICK QUESTION? >>TELL ME WHAT STEP INTO OUR SHOES IS. >>THESE ARE THE NAMES OF THE VARIOUS INITIATIVES. I’M HAVING TO GO THROUGH THEM BRIEFLY, OR — >>JUST A COUPLE OF SENTENCES. >>ON THE RETENTION MY CARD, TH OR A REPORT OF BIAS, EXCESSIVE FORCE, VARIOUS CHARGES THAT HAVE BROUGHT AGAINST OFFICERS. AND IN SEVERAL — AND QUITE A FEW INSTANCES THOSE ARE UNSUBSTANTIATED. AND WHEN THEY ARE THROUGH THE INVESTIGATION PROCESS, THROUGH OPA, IF THEY ARE FOUND TO BE UNSUBSTANTIATED THEN WHAT THE DEPARTMENT IS SAYING THEY SHOULD BE TAKEN OUT OF YOUR FILES. SO TO SPEAK. AND THIS WOULD BE AN EFFORT TO DO JUST THAT. THE $10,000 IS A SOFTWARE THAT WOULD MAKE SURE THAT WHEN THERE WAS AN UNSUBSTANTIATED COMPLAINT, THAT IT WAS TAKEN OUT. >>THEN GREG, IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE RECORDS, RETENTION, REQUIREMENTS UNDER POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE. RIGHT? IN OTHER WORDS IT ISN’T PURGED FOREVER. IT JUST GOES AWAY FROM THIS PART OF THE OFFICERS’ FILE THAT IS OFTEN TIMES RELIED UPON FOR PURPOSES OF MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT PERFORMANCE AND PROMOTIONS. >>I WOULD GUESS THAT IS TRUE. >>LET’S CONFIRM THAT. MY UNDERSTANDING THE WAY IT WAS DESCRIBED IN COMMITTEE WAS THAT THIS WAS REALLY FOCUSED ON A VERY NARROW AREA. AND THAT THERE WOULD STILL BE RECORD RETENTION REQUIREMENTS BOTH UNDER THE PUBLIC DISCLOSURE ACT AND CERTAINLY UNDER ACCOUNTABILITY ORDINANCE. I WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS ISN’T PUTTING UP AGAINST THAT. IN ADDITION TO THE FACT THAT THERE HAS BEEN AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND POLICE UNION ON RECORDS RETENTION ISSUES AS IT RELATES TO THESE TYPES OF COMPLAINTS. WHETHER THEY ARE SUBSTANTIATED OR NOT. >>THANK YOU. >>SHOULD I GO THROUGH — >>LET’S KEEP MOVING ON. THANK YOU. >>DO YOU WANT ME TO HIT THE BIG ONES? OR JUST MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ISSUE? >>NEXT ISSUE, PLEASE. >>OKAY. THE NEXT ISSUE IS EMPHASIS PATROLS. WHAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU — >>HANG ON. I DON’T THINK YOU QUEUED UP THE OPTIONS FOR THIS ONE. >>I WOULD THE OPTIONS AT THE END. >>OKAY. I CAN DO IT NOW. >>I DIDN’T MEAN TO PUT YOU OFF THE PRESENTATION. I WAS FOLLOWING THE MEMO AND OPTIONS WAS NEXT. >>THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT. OPTION NUMBER 1 WOULD BE TO REQUEST SOME KIND OF IMPLEMENTATION REPORT. I HAVE THOUGHT THAT MAYBE A JUNE 1 DEADLINE WOULD BE GOOD BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT WILL BE COMING FROM THE EXECUTIVE ON THE RECRUITMENT BONUSES. AND IT MIGHT ALSO BE A GOOD TIME TO HEAR WHETHER OR NOT THE INITIATIVES BEFORE YOU ARE HAVING ANY SUCCESS. ANOTHER OPTION IS TO NOT FUND ONE OR MORE OF THE POTENTIAL INITIATIVES. COUNCILMEMBER HAD ONE AS AN OPTION AND A THIRD WOULD BE TO DO NOTHING. >>OKAY. I THINK ASKING FOR REPORT AND IMPLEMENTATION WOULD BE GOOD. WHEN WE HEARD THIS ISSUE IN MY COMMITTEE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I APPRECIATED WAS THAT THE OVERALL RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION STRATEGIES REPORT ACTUALLY HAD SOME DELIVERABLES, QUARTER BY QUARTER. I’M NOT SURE IF THAT COMPLETELY ALIGNS WITH THE JUNE 1 PROPOSAL. THAT I DO THINK THAT CONCEPTUALLY AND IMPLEMENTATION REPORT TO PROVIDE TO CITY COUNCIL PROVIDES ADDITIONAL INSIGHT INTO HOW THE DEPARTMENT INTENDS TO IMPLEMENT SOME OF THESE PROPOSALS. IT IS IMPORTANT. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT ON SOME OF THESE WE HAVE SCANT DETAILS ABOUT THE ACTUAL PARTICULARS OF SOME OF THESE PROPOSALS. AND I WOULD HOPE THE IMPLEMENTATION REPORT COULD GIVE US THOSE ADDITIONAL DETAILS AS WELL. SO I WOULD SUPPORT A VARIATION OF OPTION A. >>YOU WANT AN OPTION? >>YEAH, I JUST — I’M NOT SURE THAT THE JUNE 1, 2019 WORKS FOR ALL OF THESE. AS I THINK THEY HAVE THEM ON A PHASED SCHEDULE IN TERMS OF SOME OF THESE INITIATIVES. I WOULD WANT TO BE SENSITIVE TO WHAT WE HAVE HEARD IN TERMS OF HOW THEY INTEND TO FACE THE WORK IN. >>THAT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING WE CAN ASK THE DEPARTMENT. WHAT THEY WOULD THINK WOULD BE AN EFFECTIVE DATE. >>OKAY, THANK YOU. >>SO THE EMPHASIS PATROLS, I’M CALLING IT THE EIGHTH NEIGHBORHOOD EMPHASIS PATROLS. THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE ALKI, PIONEER SQUARE, SOTO, GEORGETOWN, SOUTHPARK, FREMONT AND BALLARD. FINALLY THE PIKE PINE CORRIDOR. THOSE WERE EMPHASIS THAT STARTED AT PRE-SUMMER IN MAY OF THIS YEAR. AND THE MAYOR CONTINUED THROUGHOUT THE SUMMER. AND THE EMPHASIS PATROLS HAVE BEEN COUPLED WITH OTHER WORK BY OTHER SEATTLE DEPARTMENTS AROUND INFRASTRUCTURE TO ADDRESS MAINTENANCE NEEDS AND FINALLY TO PROVIDE OUTREACH TO HUMAN SERVICES TO VARIOUS COMMUNITIES. AND AS YOU CAN SEE IN TABLE NUMBER 5, THIS IS A TABLE THAT SHOWS ALL OF THE OVERTIME THAT WAS USED IN ALL OF THE EMPHASIS PATROLS THROUGH THE SUMMER. AND THE EIGHTH NEIGHBORHOOD PATROL I’VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IS THE LARGEST COMPONENT. THAT IS THE $1.6 MILLION. THAT IS WHAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS SPENT THIS YEAR ON THAT SERVICE. OTHER EMPHASIS PATROLS AROUND CAPITOL HILL, AROUND NIGHTLIFE, AROUND THE CENTRAL DISTRICT, ANTIVIOLENCE, THOSE ARE ALL LUMP INTO THE SECOND LINE. WHICH IS THE $290,000 FOR A TOTAL OF $1.9 MILLION THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS SPENT ON EMPHASIS PATROLS THIS YEAR. >>GREAT. AS WE GO THROUGH THIS, AND LOOK AT OPTIONS, I REALLY WANT — I HAVE RAISED THIS MULTIPLE TIMES. MY CONSTITUENTS IN PIONEER SQUARE AND THE PIKE PINE CORRIDOR COULD SAY NOTHING BUT GOOD THINGS ABOUT THE OFFICERS, WHERE THEY WERE AND HOW THEY WERE RESPONDING AND CARING FOR PEOPLE. AND THE ONLY THING I’VE HEARD IS THAT MORE OF THIS WOULD BE APPRECIATED BY FOLKS THAT LIVE AND WORK IN THIS AREA. I DON’T KNOW HOW WE WILL PAY FOR GOING FORWARD. BUT I WANT TO PUT A BOOKMARK IN HERE THAT I THINK IT IS PRETTY POSITIVE. >>I JUST WANT TO ADD ADDITIONALLY THAT THIS IS A POINT I MADE EARLIER IN THE SUMMER. DURING THE COUNCILMEMBER GONZALES’ COMMITTEE. IN NORTH SEATTLE, THE NUMBER 1 REAL CRIME RATE AND PERCEIVED CRIME RATE WAS HIGHEST IN THE DISTRICT. ADDITIONALLY THE THIRD LARGEST HATE CRIME RATE WAS IN THE U DISTRICT. GIVEN THAT THE CITY AS WELL AS THE REGION MULTIBILLION-DOLLAR INVESTMENT IN LIGHT RAIL WOULD HAVE HEARD CONSISTENTLY THROUGH CONSTITUENTS THAT THEY HAD REAL ANXIETIES AND FEARS ABOUT GOING TO THE SO I FLAGGED AS AN AREA OF INTEREST IN COMMITTEE. AND I CONTINUE TO FLAG IT AS AN ISSUE OF INTEREST BECAUSE NOT ONLY IS IT GOOD PUBLIC POLICY FOR US OUR POLICY FOR US TO FOCUS AND ADDRESS WHAT I THINK ARE SOME OF THE NECESSARY INSTRUCTION INVESTMENTS. BUT ALSO JUST IN TERMS OF WHAT I HAD SAID DURING COMMITTEE AND TO SHARE IT WITH ALL OF YOU AS WELL. >>THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOU. GO AHEAD. >>WHAT I WANTED TO POINT OUT IS THAT THIS IS SUSPENDING IN 2019. THE $1.6 MILLION TO C FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD EMPHASIS PATROLS, IF THAT WAS TO BE CONTINUED IN 2020 AT THAT SAME LEVEL, $1.6 MILLION THE DEPARTMENT WOULD NEED THE OUT OF $848,000. OF THE COUNCIL DECIDED NOT TO MAKE THAT AD OF $840,000, THAT WOULD REDUCE BY APPROXIMATELY HALF THE FUNDING THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD EMPHASIS PATROL. OR OTHER PATROLS. I SHOULD NOTE THAT THIS IS FUNGIBLE OVER TIME. IT CAN BE USED FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD PATROLS OR IF SOMETHING HAPPENS NEXT YEAR THAT THE CHIEF URGENTLY NEEDS TO ATTEND TO, SHE CAN REDIRECT THAT TO OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS. OR 2 OTHER ACTIVITIES. BUT IF THE COUNCIL DOESN’T FUND THE $848,000 THAT WILL REDUCE CAPACITY HERE. >>I’VE GOT CLARITY HERE, OPTION B IS BY COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT’S PROPOSAL, WOULD THAT ELIMINATE MONEY FOR THE EMPHASIS PATROLS ENTIRELY? >>THAT WOULD NOT FUND THE $848,000. AND IT WOULD TAKE THE 1.6 NUMBER UP BY — DOWN BY APPROXIMATELY HALF IN TERMS OF ABILITY TO SPEND. >>GREG, WALK ME THROUGH HOW THAT WORKS. BECAUSE EMPHASIS PATROLS IS JUST — YOU KNOW, A TERM OF ART FOR OVER TIME. IS THE PROPOSAL TO REDUCE — OF COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT’S PROPOSAL TO EFFECTIVELY REDUCE THE SEATTLE DEPARTMENTS OVERTIME BUDGET BY THIS AMOUNT? >>NOT EXACTLY. I THINK I CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTION IN THE NEXT SLIDE. >>I’M GOING TO HOLD YOU TO THAT GREG. >>I’M SORRY? >>I SAID I’M GOING TO HOLD YOU TO THAT. [ LAUGHING ] >>WHAT YOU’RE SEEING HERE AND I’M GOING TO STEP BACK AND DO SOME EDUCATION. I APOLOGIZE. WHAT YOU’RE SEEING HERE IS THE OVERTIME ACTUAL HOURS TO BUDGETED HOURS. AND THE BUDGET IS THE GRAY LINE. THAT IS LOWER. AND THE ACTUAL IS THE LINE THAT IS RED THAT IS HIGHER. AND WHAT YOU CAN SEE — I CAN SEE IF THIS WORKS. HERE WE GO. YOU CAN SEE IN THE PRIOR YEARS, IN THE SUMMER TIMES, JUNE AND JULY, IN EACH OF THE LAST 2 YEARS, THE EXPENDITURES HAVE GONE IN EXCESS OF THE BUDGET FOR OVER TIME. AND WHAT YOU’RE SEEING THERE IS THE DEPARTMENT IS USING SALARY SAVINGS THAT IT HAS THE VACANT POSITIONS TO BE ABLE TO FUND THE OVERTIME FOR THOSE ACTIVITIES. THE SAME THING HAPPENED THIS YEAR HERE. WHERE THEY GOT TO THE SUMMER TIME AND NEEDED TO FUND THE EMPHASIS PATROLS AND DIDN’T QUITE HAVE ENOUGH FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. AND THEREFORE THEY GOT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE GRAY LINE AND THE REDLINE FROM SALARY SAVINGS. THE ADJUSTMENTS THAT YOU HAVE SEEN TO THE SALARY SAVINGS EARLIER TODAY, IS GOING TO IMPACT THEIR ABILITY TO DO THAT. SO THEY HAVE CUT SALARY SAVINGS KIND OF DOWN TO THE BONE AND WHAT THAT MEANS IS, IF THEY’RE GOING TO PROVIDE THE SERVICE NEXT YEAR, THAT $1.6 MILLION LEVEL THEY’RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE AN AD OF $848,000. >>I UNDERSTAND THAT PART, GREG. I GUESS I’M JUST SAYING IF THERE IS A PROPOSAL TO CUT $848,000 FOR EMPHASIS PATROLS IN PARTICULAR, REALLY AT THE END OF THE DAY WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS REDUCING THE APPROPRIATED OVERTIME BUDGET BY $848,000. BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE THE MONEY COMES FROM. >>I THINK THE MONEY CAME LAST YEAR FROM SALARY SAVINGS. >>I SEE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. >>THAT SALARY SAVINGS IS NOW TAKEN. SO THEY WOULD NEED AN AD OF $848,000 TO DELIVER THE SAME SERVICE. AND COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT’S PROPOSAL WOULD BE TO NOT GIVE THAT AD. IN THAT CASE THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO 768 TO $800,000. >>OKAY. I THOUGHT THE $848,000 WITH EFFECTIVELY MAINTAINING THE STATUS QUO. AM I HEARING YOU SAY THAT THE ADDITIONAL $848,000 WOULD ACTUALLY EXPAND THE EMPHASIS PATROL PROGRAM? >>THE $848,000 IS NEEDED TO MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO. THE STATUS QUO LAST YEAR WAS GOTTEN BY USE OF SALARY SAVINGS. SINCE THE SALARY SAVINGS ARE NOW GONE, THE ONLY WAY TO MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO IS TO ADD OVER TIME FUNDING. >>FROM THE GENERAL FUND? >>THAT IS CORRECT. >>GOT IT. >>THERE’S A SORT OF SYNERGY BETWEEN THE GENERAL FUND — BETWEEN OVER TIME AND SALLY SAVINGS AND AS FAR AS WHEN THERE ARE SALARY SAVINGS IT IS USEFUL TO USE THE SALARY SAVINGS FOR OVERTIME TO BACKFILL FOR PATROL AND OTHER FOOT BEATS WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT. AND JUST GENERAL EMPHASIS. >>OKAY. >>MOVING ON TO THE LAST ISSUE. WHICH IS THE COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS. WHAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU IS A VERY COMPLICATED TABLE THAT I’M NOT GOING TO GO IN TO. I PUT HERE TO MAKE THE POINT IT HAS BEEN A LONG ROAD TO GET THE COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS TO THE POINT WHERE THEY’RE GETTING CLOSE TO BEING HIRED. AND COULD BE ON BOARD BY THE END OF DECEMBER. AND THAT WOULD BE THE 12 COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS THAT WERE FUNDED. REALLY, THE SEEDS FOR FUNDING WENT ALL THE WAY BACK TO 2017. OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS THERE HAVE BEEN A SERIES OF RE- APPROPRIATIONS AND THERE HAS BEEN A SERIES OF SIDES PROVIDING TO ASK THE DEPARTMENT FOR MORE INFORMATION. THEY LAUNCHED A REALLY — A PRETTY EXPENSIVE EFFORT WITH COMMUNITY TO TRY AND HELP DEFINE EVERYTHING FROM WHAT THE COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS WOULD WEAR TO WHERE THEY WOULD BE STATIONED, WHAT KIND OF HOURS THEY WOULD WORK. SO IT HAS BEEN DELIVERED OF — A DELIBERATE PROCESS TO FIGURE OUT HOW THOSE FOLKS WOULD WORK. AND NOW IT IS DONE, AND THE COUNCILS RECEIVE THE INFORMATION, THEY ARE READY TO PULL THE TRIGGER. >>WE DON’T LIKE TO USE THAT. >>WE DON’T LIKE TO USE THAT PHRASE. >>I’M SORRY. >>YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT ANYMORE? >>AGAIN, THIS HAS BEEN A VERY LONG EFFORT. I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER O’BRIEN FOR HIS ONGOING DEDICATION TO CHAMPIONING THIS WORK. AND TO REALLY MAKING SURE THAT AS THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAM IS OCCURRING THAT WE WERE INCLUDING IMPORTANT STAKEHOLDERS. BOTH HISTORICALLY SPEAKING, THOSE THAT ENGAGE WITH THE CSO PROGRAM IN THE PAST AND CURRENT STAKEHOLDERS THAT ARE PROBABLY NEWER TO THE CONVERSATION AROUND CSO. AND REALLY, REALLY THANKFUL TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND ALL OF THOSE WHO ENGAGED IN THAT. THE PROCESS FOR COMING UP WITH A PROGRAM THAT I THINK WE CAN ALL BE VERY PROUD OF. IF I HAD ONE THING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT, IT IS THAT THEY ARE NOT HIRED AND ALREADY OUT IN THE FIELD. YOU KNOW IT IS TAKING US AN EXTRAORDINARILY LONG TIME TO GET THIS JUST GOING. SO I’M EAGER TO SEE THESE FOLKS ACTUALLY BE HIRED AND TRAINED AND IN THE FIELD. I THINK IT IS GOING TO BE A POTENTIAL GAME CHANGER IN TERMS OF HOW WE APPROACH PUBLIC SAFETY AND WILL LEAD TO MORE POSITIVE OPPORTUNITIES. >>I SO AGREE AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT IS ADEQUATELY FUNDED. THANK YOU FOR BRINGING UP FOR IT. >>SO I WOULD SAY THE MAIN DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 12 THAT ARE COMING ON BOARD AT THE END OF THE YEAR, IS THAT THE DEPLOYMENT, IF THEY, BY THEMSELVES AND THE MAYOR’S ADD OF 6 MORE DOESN’T HAPPEN, IF IT IS JUST THE 12 THEY WILL WORK TWO DIFFERENT SHIPS. ONE ON MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY AND THE SECOND TUESDAY THROUGH SATURDAY. AND THEY ARE GOING TO BE HOUSED DOWNTOWN ACROSS THE STREET. AND RESPONSE CITYWIDE. >>WHEN YOU SAY DOWNTOWN ACROSS THE STREET? >>THE SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT HEADQUARTERS. >>IF THERE WERE SIX MORE ADDED, IF THE MAYOR’S PROPOSAL WERE ADOPTED, THEN THEY WOULD DO THE CONFIGURATION A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY. THEY WOULD ASSIGN THE CSO TO THE PRECINCT AND THEY WOULD BE DEDICATED AND HOUSED IN THE DIFFERENT PRECINCTS. THAT IS THE MAIN DIFFERENCE. >>SO YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT ADDING SIX MORE SO WE WOULD HAVE 18? DIVIDED BY THE FIVE PRECINCTS. WE ARE GETTING CLOSE TO THREE IN EACH PRECINCT PLUS A FEW SPARES. ROUGHLY — >>ROUGHLY THERE ARE A FEW POSITIONS CONSIDERED SUPERVISORS. THEY WOULD PROBABLY STILL BE A HEADQUARTERS I WOULD IMAGINE. AND SORT OF DOING TRAFFIC CONTROL, NOT — THEY WOULD BE MAKING SURE THAT THE WORK ASSIGNMENTS ARE HAPPENING ACCORDING TO PRECINCT NEED. BUT GREG’S POINT IS AN IMPORTANT ONE. BECAUSE THE SCALING UP BEFORE WE HAVE SCALED, THE CONSTRUCT ISRAEL HERE. SO WE CERTAINLY DON’T WANT TO DO ANYTHING TO CREATE FURTHER DELAY IN TERMS OF STANDING UP THE PROGRAM. BUT I THINK HAVING THE CSO’S BE ASSIGNED TO SPECIFIC PRECINCTS BY A POLICY PERSPECTIVE, MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. THOSE INDIVIDUALS WILL START TO DEEPLY UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO THOSE PARTICULAR PRECINCT FOOTPRINTS. AND REALLY I THINK YOU’LL BE ABLE TO HAVE A BETTER RESULT AS OPPOSED TO ROVING FOLKS ACROSS THE CITY. BUT YOU KNOW EVERYTHING WE CAN DO — I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE DONE WHAT WE CAN DO FROM A CITY COUNCIL PERSPECTIVE TO ENCOURAGE A QUICK IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAM. EVEN IF IT IS 18 VERSUS 12. AND IF I’M WRONG ON THAT, WE WILL POINT OUT THAT EVERYTHING IS BEING DONE TO IMPLEMENT THE PROCESS OF IMPLEMENTATION. >>I THINK THERE IS A LOT OF PROCESS. >>MORE THAN WE LIKED. >>I THINK SUMMER HERE AT THIS POINT FINALLY. >>I’M ABOUT TO RECOMMEND MORE PROCESS. IT MAY BE THAT THE COUNCIL WANTS TO REQUEST A MIDYEAR REPORT ON 12 CSO’S AND HOW THEY ARE WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY. SINCE THEY ARE GOING TO BE OUT THERE FIRST, ALTHOUGH THE DEPARTMENT HAS SAID IF THEY GOT THE ADDITIONAL SIX, THEY COULD GET THEM ON BOARD PRETTY QUICKLY TOO. THEY HAVE ONE REALLY BIG BATCH OF RESUMES THEY CAME IN. AND THEY CONDUCTED A HOLISTIC REVIEW. AND COULD GET ALL OF THE POTENTIALS ON QUICKLY. THEY ARE HOLDING BACK ON THE SIX TO MAKE SURE WHAT THE COUNCIL DOES CHOOSES TO DO. BUT EITHER WAY IF YOU WANT TO ASK FOR REPORT NEXT YEAR TO SEE HOW THINGS ARE GOING. >>THAT IS VERY LIKELY. AND ONE THING I WANT TO GRADUALLY AND SAY THANK YOU ON IS THAT AS WE ARE STRUGGLING TO GET POLICE OFFICERS HIRED AND TO RETAIN, TO HAVE THE NUMBERS RIGHT THAT 700 APPLICANTS CAME IN FOR THE CSO POSITIONS? >>1000. >>AT LEAST. >>WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE INTERESTED IN GOING TO WORK IN THESE POSITIONS. AND I THINK IT SHOULD BE UNDERSCORED. THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO DO THIS WORK AND THE COMMUNITY REALLY WANTS FROM THERE. SO FRANKLY I — IF THERE’S MONEY TO BE HAD, GOING FULL ON 18 WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE. >>YOU ARE DOING CALISTHENICS. >>I AM, EXACTLY. >>GOOD NEWS, YOU DON’T HAVE TO BECAUSE THE MAYOR’S PROPOSED BUDGET INCLUDES THE EXPANSION FROM 12 TO 18. >>AS LONG AS CERTAIN PROPOSALS AND ACTIONS FROM THE COUNCIL MEMBERS DON’T CUT IT OUT. >>RIGHT, THERE’S THAT. >>WITH THAT I WILL CONCLUDE AND GO TO THE BUDGET ACTIONS THAT ARE PROPOSED BY COUNCIL MEMBERS. THE FIRST ONE IS BY COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT A CUT OF $3.3 MILLION. AND WHAT SHE IS PROPOSING THERE IS A CUT OF 3 OF THE ADS THAT WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT TODAY. ONE WOULD BE THE $1.6 MILLION IN RETENTION AND RECRUITMENT, THE INITIATIVES THERE. ONE WOULD BE THE $848,000, IN MONEY THAT IS NEEDED TO — OR PROPOSE TO KEEP EMPHASIS PATROLS AT THE SAME LEVEL. AND THE FINAL ONE IS $814,000 WHICH IS TO MAINTAIN THE HIRING BONUSES FOR LATERALS AND RECRUITS THAT COME ON BOARD. AND THE RATIONALE IS TO MAKE THE $3.3 MILLION AVAILABLE TO OTHER COUNSEL PRIORITIES. THE SECOND ONE IS TO ADOPT A STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE ATTEMPT THAT WOULD REQUIRE SPD TO UNDERGO TRAINING RELATED TO SEX WORKERS. AND THAT IS SIMILAR IN BOTH NUMBER 2 AND NUMBER 3. I THINK THE INTENTION THERE IS SIMILAR. AND I WILL ASK COUNCILMEMBER GONZALES TO SPEAK TO HER PROPOSAL. >>GREAT. THIS WOULD BE A STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT TO REQUEST THAT THE SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT UNDERGO TRAINING RELATED TO SEX WORKERS. WE HAVE BEEN HEARING A LOT ABOUT WHAT APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN A CHANGE IN POLICY FROM THE SEATTLE PLEASE DEPARTMENT IN TERMS OF ARRESTS VERSUS DIVERSION. OF SEX WORKERS. IN OUR CITY. YOU NOTICE ON ONE OF THE PREVIOUS CHARTS THAT GREG, YOU SHOWED US, IN THE SUMMER MONTHS, PARTICULARLY FROM THE NORTH PRECINCT WE SAW A MASSIVE UPTICK OF REFERRALS TO LEAD, FOR EXAMPLE. IT IS UNCLEAR WHETHER THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH COMMENSURATE INCREASE IN THE ARREST OF SEX WORKERS OR INTERACTIONS WITH SEX WORKERS. OR IF IT HAS MORE TO DO WITH THE EMPHASIS PATROLS THAT WERE ALSO COMING OUT OF THE NORTH PRECINCT LEADING TO REFERRALS TO LEAVE. I WOULD LIKE TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WAS PUSHING THOSE NUMBERS OFF THE CHART, IF YOU WILL. IN TERMS OF THE PREVIOUS CHART YOU ARE SHOWING US. BUT BACK TO THIS ISSUE, I THINK IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE POLICE DEPARTMENT WITH THE TOOLS WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND AND TAKE A VICTIM CENTERED APPROACH. I AM CONCERNED THAT CURRENTLY WE DON’T HAVE PERHAPS THE MOST ROBUST TRAINING IN THIS PARTICULAR SPACE TO ALLOW FOR OFFICERS WHO INTERACT WITH SEX WORKERS TO ACTUALLY BE ADOPTING AND IMPLEMENTING AND DEPLOYING VICTIM CENTERED APPROACHES. IN THE SEX WORKERS SPACE. AND SETTING ASIDE VICTIM CENTERED APPROACHES, WE OFTEN TIMES I THINK IT IN THE TRAP OF TALKING ABOUT SEX WORKERS ONLY BEING VICTIMS. IONAL SENSE OF THAT IS NOT ALWAYS THE CASE. SO SOMETIMES IT IS ABOUT HARM REDUCTION. AS OPPOSED TO TALKING ABOUT SEX WORKERS FROM A VICTIM PERSPECTIVE ONLY. SO I THINK IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO MAKE SURE THAT WE, AS CITY STAKEHOLDERS ARE APPROPRIATELY TRAINED AND IN THE NUANCES. AND THAT THE INDUSTRY AND MAKING SURE THAT WE’RE PROVIDING OUR OFFICERS WHO MAY COME INTO INTERACTION WITH SEX WORKERS WITH THE APPROPRIATE TOOLS TO BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY WHO NEEDS TO BE DIVERTED. IS TRULY A VICTIM. AND ANY OTHER SHADES OF GRAY THAT MAY EXIST WITHIN THE SPECTRUM. I SEE COUNCILMEMBER PROVIDING THE PLOT COMPLEMENTARY STIGMATA OF LEGISLATIVE ATTEMPT THAT I ADVANCED. BECAUSE OF SPD DOESN’T CURRENTLY UNDERGO THE TRAINING AND IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO HAVE SOME ADVANCE WORK BEING DONE TO REALLY CODESIGN AND REDEVELOP WHAT THE TRAINING PROGRAM WOULD BE. BY VISION AND HOPE WOULD BE IT WOULD BE DONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH ORGANIZATIONS — COMMUNITY- BASED ORGANIZATIONS THAT DO REACHING OUT TO SEX WORKERS. ACROSS THE CITY. AND TO REALLY WORK TOGETHER TO COME UP WITH A GOOD TRAINING PROGRAM THAT CAN BE IMPLEMENTED AMONG THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. BOTH ON THE COMMAND STAFF LEVEL BUT ALSO ON THE PATROL OFFICER LEVEL OR DETECTIVE LEVEL WHERE THERE IS INTERACTION BETWEEN OFFICERS AND SEX WORKERS TO REALLY MAKE THIS A WIN WIN PROPOSITION FOR THE DEPARTMENT AND FOR THE SEX WORKERS THAT THEY COME INTO INTERACTION WITH . WHATEVER THE CIRCUMSTANCES MIGHT BE. OBVIOUSLY COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA PROVIDES A COMPLEMENTARY BECAUSE IT IS THINKING FORWARD ABOUT THE ONES WE HAVE THAT DESIGN IN PLACE AND HOW WE FUND THE TRAINING. I WILL SUBMIT A FORM THAT IS LIKELY A LITTLE BIT BIGGER THAN THE $200,000. BUT WE ARE WORKING WITH COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS TO HAVE THE APPROPRIATE ESTIMATE. AND WE’RE TALKING TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A CONSENT OF THE SCOPE OF WHO WOULD NEED TO DO THE TRAINING TO HELP FINE-TUNE WHAT THE COST FOR THIS ITEM WOULD BE. BUT I THINK IT IS IS AN IMPORTANT INVESTMENT. AND I HOPE THAT WE CAN PRIORITIZE IT IN THIS CYCLE. >>VERY GOOD. I APPRECIATE THAT YOU AND COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA ARE WORKING COLLABORATIVELY WITH HER OFFICE WHILE IN HER ABSENCE. THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT. >>IT CAN BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO COMBINE THEM TO REDUCE PAPER IN THE FUTURE. AND WE ARE HAPPY TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION. >>SUPER. >>THE LAST ONE COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD ADOPTING A SLIDE THAT WOULD REQUEST SPD TO REPORT TO THE COUNCIL FOR COMPLIANCE WITH COPPER WIRE SALES TRANSACTIONS AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS. >>THE STOLEN COPPER WIRE? >>YES. >>COUNCILMEMBER O’BRIEN? >> JUST TO SUPPORT COUNCILMEMBER GONZALEZ AND MOSQUEDA’S . IF THERE’S ANYTHING I CAN DO TO HELP. IT IS BASED ON THE LAST CONVERSATION A FEW WEEKS AGO. SOME FUNDING FOR TRAINING AND — IT DOESN’T SEEM THAT THE CITY IS ALIGNED AROUND WHAT I THOUGHT THE VISION WAS. THANK YOU. >>OKAY. ARE YOU GOING TO THE APPENDICES? >>NO, I’M DONE. >>I’M REALLY SORRY, I THOUGHT WE WOULD GO TO THEM LINE BY LINE. >>ARE YOU REGRETTING THAT NOW? >>I WILL NEED ANOTHER COFFEE. >>ANYTHING ELSE? >>WELL DONE, GREG. THIS IS A VERY MEATY PRESENTATION. >>WE WILL MOVE INTO PUBLIC COMMENT. >>DAVID IS COMING. HE WANTS TO SPEAK TO US. >>OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE’VE GOT FOUR PEOPLE. THE FIRST ONE, LEASE OR TAYLOR LOPEZ AND CHELSEA — AND DAVID HAYNES. IF THE 3 OF YOU WILL GET CLOSE. THEN THE LAST SPEAKER SIGNED UP — WHAT IS YOUR NAME? >>SAVANNA. >>THANK YOU VERY MUCH, YOU WILL BE FORTH. GO-AHEAD. >>HELLO CITY COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME IS LISA TAYLOR LOPEZ AND I SPEAK AS A FORMER LEADER OF THE BIPOLAR ALLIANCE AND THE SUPPORT OF THE SEATTLE CHAPTER OF THE SEX WORKER RIGHTS PROGRAM. THANK YOU FOR RECOGNIZING THE NEED OF AWARENESS FOR SEX WORKERS AND FOR THE IN THERE AWARENESS OF THE NEED OF THE CITY BUDGET TO INCLUDE MONIES TO HELP THESE HUMAN. NORTH AURORA RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT THE INCREASE OF CRIMINALIZED ACTIVITY DUE TO THE LEGISLATION. PRESIDENT TRUMP SIGNED IN APRIL 2018. WE ADVISED THE CONCERNED CITIZENS LEARN ABOUT THE SEX TRADE AND LISTEN TO WHAT’S WHAT SEATTLE VICTIMS AND SEX WORKERS OF ALL KINDS, TRAFFICKED, CIRCUMSTANTIAL AND CONSENTING, ARE SAYING ABOUT SEX WORKERS. ESPECIALLY OF THOSE OF COLOR AND TRANS-WORKERS. IT WILL HELP US TO LEARN ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT AND HOW IT IS IN THE SEX TRADE WORLD. THESE COMMUNITY MEMBERS WOULD BE ABLE TO BETTER HELP. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO CHOOSE TO SWAP. WE HELP WITH THE PASSING OF THE CITIZEN, THE CITIZENS WILL TAKE YOUR LEAD AND DO WHAT THEY CAN TO HELP THESE MARGINALIZED SEX WORKERS. ESPECIALLY SEX WORKERS OF COLOR AND TRANS-WORKERS. THEY ARE NOT UNIMPORTANT OVER THERE WITH LITTLE PROBLEMS. WE ARE EVERYWHERE AND DESERVING OF HUMAN RIGHTS, HUMAN RIGHTS THAT ARE PROMISED YOU EVERYONE. WE ARE YOUR SISTER, YOUR NEPHEW, YOUR EMPLOYEE, YOUR DAUGHTER. THE REASON YOU DON’T KNOW US IS DUE TO THE SHAME AND STIGMA OF SEX WORK. WE MUST ERADICATE. THE SAME OF SEX IN GENERAL AND BE POLITICALLY ACTIVE ABOUT SUPPORTING THE VICTIMS AND CONSENTING SEX WORKERS ALIKE. IN ORDER TO HELP TRAFFIC VICTIMS WE MUST TEACH THEM HOW TO NOT FEEL SHAME ABOUT HAVING DONE SEX WORK. REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY ARE TRAFFICKED OR CONSENTING. REGARDLESS OF THEIR INVOLVEMENT IN SEX WORK. LEARN ABOUT THE VARIOUS ASPECTS OF THE SEX TRADE AND TRY NOT TO BE SECOND STIGMATIZING HOUR — OR JUDGMENTAL. IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THE SEX WORK INDUSTRY CONSISTS OF 3 GENERAL CATEGORIES OF WORKERS. AS I SAID. THOSE COERCED AND TRAFFICKED, THOSE WHO DO SEX WORK BECAUSE OF DIRE ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES AND THOSE THAT CONSENTED FULLY. LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANT DIVERSION IS A GOOD PROGRAM. I THINK A BETTER ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE SENDING THE POLICE TO HELP WITH TRAINED SOCIAL SERVICE WORKERS SUCH AS — GREENLIGHT PROJECT ON NORTH AURORA AND SWAP SEATTLE’S OUTREACH CENTER ON SOUTH PACK HIGHWAY. AS A PRIVATE CITIZEN I SPEAK AS A SEATTLE NATIVE, DISABLED RESIDENT OF SEATTLE AND THE FORMERLY COERCED TRAFFICKED AND NOW CONSENTING SEX WORKER. I URGE YOU TO ALLOW YOURSELF TO BE INFORMED BY SEX WORKERS OF ALL KINDS. >>THANK YOU FOR COMING, LISA. CHELSEA, DAVID AND SAVANNA. >>HOW ARE YOU? >>COULDN’T BE BETTER. I LOVE TO SEE YOU. >>THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. MY NAME IS CHELSEA AND I’M FROM DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION. I DO ADVOCACY WORK INVOLVING PUBLIC SAFETY. HOMELESSNESS, AND OTHER THINGS TOO. AND A PERSONAL NOTE BEFORE, I WAS AT DSA I WORKED IN THE LABOR MOVEMENT AND WORKED A LOT IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM. I VISITED PRESIDENT PRISONS AND JAILS THROUGHOUT WASHINGTON AND THE COUNTRY. I WAS A LITTLE BIT WORRIED THAT WHEN I GOT INVOLVED IN THIS WORK IT WOULD PROVIDE SOME INTERNAL CONFLICT. BECAUSE OF MY PREVIOUS WORK. AND IT HASN’T. THE WORK WITH THE INDIVIDUALS HAS GIVEN A BROADER PERSPECTIVE. I’M HERE REPRESENTING TSA TO URGE YOU TO FUND THE MAYOR PROPOSAL. DSA AND PARTNERS, WE WANTED TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM BECAUSE OF OUR MEMBERS WHO KEPT TELLING US THAT IT IS HARD TO DO BUSINESS IN SEATTLE. AS YOU KNOW, WE WORKED WITH SCOTT LINDSAY AND COMMISSIONED TWO REPORTS THAT GAVE US A DEEPER DIVE. WHAT WE LEARNED IS THE SYSTEM AS IT STANDS NOW ISN’T WORKING. IT IS NOT WORKING FOR PEOPLE RECYCLING THROUGH THE SYSTEM AND IS NOT WORKING FOR MEMBERS. IS NOT WORKING FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC. OFTEN TIMES, WOMEN AND LOW-WAGE WORKERS ARE THE ONES BEING VICTIMIZED. SO ALL OF THAT TO SAY, WE DID SOME LEARNING AND VISITED DIFFERENT CITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY. MINNEAPOLIS BEING ONE OF THEM LAST WEEK. MINNEAPOLIS WAS HERE. AND A LOT OF WHAT CITIES WHO WE THINK ARE MAKING PROGRESS WITH THIS POPULATION, THE INVESTMENTS AT THE MAYOR HAS PROPOSED MIRROR OR MIMIC WHAT WE THINK IS WORKING IN OTHER CITIES. SO WE URGE YOU TO SUPPORT AND TO FUND THE MAYOR’S PROPOSALS AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU ALL MOVING FORWARD. THANK YOU. >>DAVID AND SAVANNA. SAVANNA, DO YOU WANT TO COME UP? >>CITY COUNCIL SHOULD STOP BEING ALOOF AND OUT OF TOUCH AND DELETE ONE OUT OF THE FOUR EXEMPTIONS FOR LEAD. AND NOT ALLOW THE EVIL DRUG PUSHERS WHO DESTROY LIVES DAILY TO BE EXEMPTED FROM JAIL. BECAUSE IT IS NOT A LOW-LEVEL CRIME. A LOW-LEVEL CRIME IS STEALING AN APPLE FROM THE GROCERY STORE. BUT HIGH-LEVEL AND LOW-LEVEL DRUG PUSHERS ARE THE SAME EVIL PIECES OF YOU KNOW WHAT. IT IS OBVIOUS WE HAVE THE MOST RACIST LEADERS IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, ILL TRAINED AND COWARDICE, REFUSING TO GO AFTER THE BAD GUYS BECAUSE THE RACES CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR IS FINANCING A BIAS, UNCONSTITUTIONAL POLICE DATE OF CONDUCTING WAR ON THE POOR. CLAIMING THE WAR ON DRUGS FAILED BECAUSE THE WRONG COPS WERE HIRED. AND ILL TRAINED AND ACTIVIST 05 CITY COUNCIL INTO BELIEVING IT IS PROGRESSIVE TO EMPLOY SOCIETY KEEPING DRUG PUSHERS OUT OF JAIL WHILE SUPPORTING THE MOST RACIST, BIASED BUDGET IN THE 21st CENTURY IN THE FIRST WORLD. SHAME A CITY COUNCIL BOARD PLATE VIOLATIONS. WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO CONVINCE YOU — FILLED IN THE BLANKS OF MARIJUANA WITH CRACK, METH AND HEROIN. A LOWLIFE THAT BRINGS TRUCKS AND RENTS A LIFE. WEEKS AND PUSHERS FROM JAIL THEN? CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM SHOULD BE ABOUT IMPROVING THE GEL PUNISHMENTS. NOT DISCOUNTING THE VICTIMS WHILE EMBRACING EVIL BECAUSE THEY HAVE RADICAL THINKING LAWYERS LOOKING TO GET RICH, KEEPING THEM OUT OF JAIL. USING MORE UNQUALIFIED CASE MANAGERS WHO WORK BANKERS HOURS, CHEERLEADING AND ENCOURAGING EVIL PUSHERS TO BE BETTER PEOPLE., STATE, CL IMPLODED BECAUSE DRUG PUSHERS KNOW THEY AIN’T GOING TO JAIL, ESPECIALLY IF THEY USE THEIR OWN PRODUCT. WHEN IS CITY COUNCIL GOING TO DEMAND THE SAME AMOUNT OF EFFORT AND INVESTMENT TO HELP THE INNOCENT SOBER, DRUG C, CIVILIZED, UPSTANDING HOMELESS. YOU DISCRIMINATE AGAINST HIM AND INNOCENCE FOR EVIL DESTROYERS OF LIFE GIVING PUSHERS HOME ALLOWS THEM TO BE MORE SOPHISTICATED. ABUSING OTHERS. >>THANK YOU, DAVID. >>SAVANNA? THANK YOU FOR COMING. >>HELLO COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. MY NAME IS SAVANNA FLY AND I’M A SEX WORKER AND I’M THE FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE SEX WORKERS OUTREACH THE ‘GRAM USA., MEMBER OF SWAP SEATTLE AND ALSO AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF THE RIGHTS AND SAFETY OF THOSE IN THE SEX TRADE AND I APPRECIATE THE THOUGHT AND ATTENTION BROUGHT TO THE SEX TRADE IN THE PAST FEW WEEKS. I WANT TO SPEAK TO 2 THINGS. ACTUALLY THREE THINGS REAL QUICK. THE FUNDING FOR SPD. WE APPLY THIS AND APPRECIATE THIS. WE HOPE YOU REACH OUT TO A WIDE RANGE OF ORGANIZATIONS. SOMETHING THAT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT HAS HAPPENED AMONG ADVOCATES IN THE SEX TRADE THROUGH THE PAST INITIATIVES. OVER THE PAST 2 YEARS AROUND TRYING TO AND DEMAND FOR PROSTITUTION AND ERADICATE THE SEX TRADE. A BIG DIVISION HAS BEEN CREATED BETWEEN PEOPLE IDENTIFIED AS SURVIVORS AND IDENTIFIED AS SIX WORKERS. WE ARE ALL PEOPLE IN THE SEX TRADE AND WE HAVE A TRAINING LIKE THIS COULD BE A COLLABORATION BETWEEN PEOPLE BECAUSE WE ALL HAVE VERY SIMILAR EXPERIENCES. ALSO LEAD IS DOING GREAT WORK. IT IS DEFINITELY BETTER THAN JUST ARRESTING EVERYBODY. BUT LEAD ISN’T NECESSARILY EQUIPPED TO HELP PEOPLE IN THE SEX TRADE THAT MIGHT BE THERE, IF THEY’RE NOT BEING TOTALLY COURSE. THERE’S A LOT OF PEOPLE WORKING ON THE STREETS THAT HAVE VERY BAD SITUATIONS. AND THINGS THAT COULD HELP THEM WOULD BE, AS LISA SAID ASSISTANCE AROUND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, HOUSING, JOB TRAINING, THINGS LIKE THAT. THOSE ARE NECESSARILY THINGS THE LEAD IS FULLY EQUIPPED TO HELP. WE MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER HAVING MORE SOCIAL WORKERS ON THE STREET TO BUILD RELATIONSHIPS WITH PEOPLE. IS AN INHERENTLY ANTAGONISTIC RELATIONSHIP WITH POLICE BECAUSE PEOPLE IN THE SEX TRADE ARE CRIMINALIZED AND IT ISN’T ALWAYS THE BEST FIRST POINT OF . WE LIKE TO SAY HELP DOESN’T BEGIN WITH HANDCUFFS. WE MIGHT LOOK UP TO OUR NEIGHBORS UP NORTH IN VANCOUVER, CANADA HAS A DIFFERENT RESTITUTION MODEL. BUT THEY HAVE A COMMUTE SLEEP COMMUNITY LIAISON WITH NO POWER TO ARREST. SHE’S THERE TO FILE POLICE REPORTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THANKS FOR THINKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE, WE APPRECIATE IT. >>SAVANNA, DO YOU HAVE A CONTACT? >>I DO. >>I ASK YOU TO PUT IT ON THERE? I WOULD LIKE TO FOLLOW UP WITH YOU. >>ANYBODY ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? >>ANYTHING TO SAY? JUST GETTING. WHILE I HAVE SAVANNA, AND I MISSED YOUR NAME. LISA? SAVANNA AND LISA ARE HERE. WE DID GET — FROM OF SURVIVOR PERSPECTIVE, WE DID RECEIVE A REQUEST. TO ADVANCE ANOTHER BUDGET ADD THAT WOULD CREATE A DIVERSION PROGRAM FOR SEX WORKERS WHO MAY COME INTO CONTACT WITH THE CRIMINAL LEGAL SYSTEM. AND THAT DOES HAVE A STRONGER FOCUS ON FUNNELING RESOURCES OVER TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS OF ALL VARIETY. THAT WORK ACROSS THE SPECTRUM WITHIN THE SEX TRADE. WHAT WOULD BE REALLY HAPPY TO STAY IN CONTRACT AND MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE BENEFIT OF YOUR INPUT AND PERSPECTIVE AS WE ADVANCE THIS PARTICULAR BUDGET ITEM. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WILL COME UP IN THE FORM. AND I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW SINCE I HAD YOU HERE. >>THANK YOU. IF THE 2 OF YOU WOULD BE INTERESTED AND WILLING TO TALK WITH ME OFF-LINE, I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A CHANCE TO PURSUE SOME OF YOUR SUGGESTIONS FURTHER. >>ABSOLUTELY. ONE QUICK THING, RECENTLY A WORKGROUP AND STUDY ON REENTRY THAT I THINK YOU HELPED COMMISSION. ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS WAS DECRIMINALIZATION OF PROSTITUTION AND DRUG LOITERING . I’M NOT SURE WHERE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE GOING BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO BRING THEM UP SO THEY DON’T GET VERY. >>THANK YOU SO MUCH. IF YOU WILL JUST GIVE ME YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION. I WILL FOLLOW UP. I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY, THANK YOU FOR STAYING THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE AFTERNOON. THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED AND WE WILL START AGAIN TOMORROW MORNING AT 9:30 AM.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *