AN ORDINANCE relating to taxation; imposing a payroll expense tax on persons engaging in business in Seattle; adding a new Chapter 5.38 to the Seattle Municipal Code; and amending Sections 5.30.010, 5.30.060, 5.55.010, 5.55.040, 5.55.060, 5.55.150, 5.55.165, 5.55.220, 5.55.230, and 6.208.020 of the Seattle Municipal Code.
Agenda Item three Capital 119110 relating to taxation, imposing a payroll tax on persons, engaging in business in Seattle. Adding a new Chapter 5.38 The Elements. The Code Committee recommends the City Council pass the bill as amended with the desire to report the council members together. Herbert Gonzalez. Luis Morales. So what sense drop in favor and Councilmember Suarez and Peterson opposed. Thank you so much, Madam Clerk. For those of you watching and listening in on our conversation. I'm going to try to sort of put this into regular folk parlance, since there's a lot of just Robert's Rules of Order and Procedure in place. Item three and item four are both the, I believe, item for what we're going to hear. Yes. Item or are both items related to related to the Jumpstart Seattle proposal that would impose a payroll tax on certain businesses in the city of Seattle. So this is a really important conversation. We've been working really hard under the leadership of Councilmember Mesquita and others on looking at the Jumpstart Seattle proposal, really trying to be one of the co-sponsor sponsors of that bill and excited to be able to kick off the conversation. So again, for those of you watching, item three and four are related to jumpstart Seattle proposals, which are the payroll tax considerations. So without further ado, I'm going to go ahead and hand it over to Councilmember Mosqueda, who, as chair of the committee, is going to address this item. And I believe there are several amendments that we will work through this afternoon. One brought by Councilmember Mosqueda, another by Councilmember Lewis. It will require a suspension of the rules and then we will be able to close out debate on agenda item three and take a vote. So with that being said, I was hoping to be able to set out a little bit of a road map for or both you colleagues and those watching on the TV, just to orient us all in this zoom world that we find ourselves in as to what the order of business is going to be. So, first of all, hear from Councilor Mosqueda. She has an amendment to make will then hear from Councilmember Lewis, who also has an amendment that will require a suspension of the rules. Then we will open up the doors after taking votes on each of those amendments, will open up the discussion and debate the bill as amended, and then we will do a final roll call. So with that being said, Councilmember Mosqueda, the floor is yours. Thank you, Madam President. And if it pleases the President, I have a few opening comments and then I'll make the motion to bring forward the amendment. Absolutely. Thank you, Madam President. I come to colleagues. We're in the midst of a public health pandemic and an economic crisis. And jumpstart is part of the remedy. This is the antidote or part of the antidote needed to respond to the public health crisis of COVID and the economic instability that COVID has exposed in our local economy. Jumpstart is part of the solution needed to deeply invest in affordable housing, equitable development, and a more resilient economy. Jumpstart injects resources into the social safety net, harmed by decades of underfunding in housing, health services, support for our most vulnerable community members. Jumpstart, reinvest in our families and invest in our neighbors. And invest in local shops and our local economy. And it will help Seattle survive the crisis of COVID and emerge stronger and more equitable every day. Each of our officers is responding to calls and emails. We see people in community every day concerned that they cannot pay for groceries for their young children. They cannot put food on the table because they don't have a job. We've heard concerns from business owners that they didn't get a penny from the federal government, especially among black owned business owners who were disproportionately excluded from getting federal assistance. We've heard concern from shops about their inability to pay vendors because there were no revenues in April and May, and they need to be able to have assurances that they can have money in hand so that they can pay staff and start hiring people again so that they can pay rent and open their shops again. We heard concerns repeatedly from members of this council who've been leaders on fighting for immigrants and refugees, that immigrants and refugees were intentionally left out of the federal support when these are essential workers and they help our economy run. We've heard concerns about the fiscal cliff that we will be presenting itself next year in our budget if we do not have revenue in hand to back. So emergency funds. We're talking about the cliff that can make it quite likely that libraries would close, the parks are closed, that there will be problems with accessing childcare, core government services, that without additional revenue we will not have enough funds to backfill emergency funds. And we've heard the ongoing concern about the lack of affordable housing, the lack of supportive housing that help get folks on on their feet and get them safely. House on the road to recovery and resiliency for our entire community. This is the promise of Jumpstart to invest in our community, invest in housing, childcare, invest in small businesses, support immigrants and refugees, support working families. This is not only the remedy for the emergency that has COVID, but it helps us correct an upside down tax code . Without jumpstart, we're facing a crisis of an unprecedented scale, and it's not going to end anytime soon. And we know in Washington state we are not alone. 1.2 million workers have already filed for unemployment insurance and the numbers continue to grow, especially with uncertainty as we see the numbers of COVID cases continue to grow. In the midst of this crisis. Large companies are continuing to do well. They're still paying three figure salaries in some cases and in some cases even as high as a half a million dollars a year. So we're asking them for this Jumpstart proposal to contribute, contribute a small percentage of those profits to saving our local economy, investing in neighbors and families so that they can, in turn, invest in our local economy and we can come out stronger. We know one thing for sure based on the last ten years and actually data across the country, we cannot drive our way out of this recession. Data from the Great Recession showed us that in the cities and in the states that tried an austerity budget, it did not work. It actually made economies weaker. So we know one thing. We can't stop our way out, but we can grow our way out of the recession. We know an all cuts budget is not a solution and cuts just siphon even more of the critical programs that consumers and families and small businesses depend on in order to weather this storm. Increasing investments is needed in services and infrastructure. That's what keeps people working. That's what creates jobs and injects more money back into our communities. That's what jumpstart our economy when we avoid an all cuts austerity budget. Our economy can rebound faster, which is good for businesses and workers, but also when we do it through the lens of Jumpstart has proposed. It doesn't mean going back to business as usual. It means investing in a more resilient and a more equitable economy. I'm excited about the bill in front of us today. Jumpstart Seattle will promote health, create jobs, and save our local economy. And it's not just the right thing to do. It's the economically sound thing to do in the midst of a pandemic. Housing insecurity isn't just a moral crisis. It's a public health crisis. Expanding nutrition services and vouchers will help struggling people put food on the table and make sure that they can access groceries. It's not just good for families. That's good for the local economy. That's also good for the health of our of our local population. This is about making sure that people can put money in their pockets, which will then in turn send in local businesses that will allow people to stay healthy. They housed and be stable. We are trying to write, sign up or up and down tax code and when we do it, everyone benefits from the public investment, not just some people. These twin health and economic crises have had and will continue to have an outsized impact on communities of color, especially among black, indigenous and the Latino community. Direct assistance to local businesses, especially for the nine out of ten black owned businesses that applied for less than $20,000 in city funds didn't get a penny because they were distributed through traditional lending institutions that have a long history, a long racist history of racist lending practices. And we can change that. We can change that by providing direct assistance to thousands, thousands of undocumented families, thousands of the small businesses, owners and workers right here in our city. And we can help make sure that people who were left out of these federal funds get access to what Seattle is doing right now. This is our way to jump start the economy. I want to thank folks who have been testifying not just in the last three months, but for years, people who have been calling for us to invest, invest in our whole community, working families, small businesses, our neighbors. We want to make sure that our ice cream shop and our local coffee shops can survive. Yes, but we also want to make sure that people stop getting pushed out of the city, especially black and brown communities. We want to make sure that we're investing in affordable housing. We want to make sure we're doing this to equitable development initiatives. And we want to make sure that when people get a job back, it's a good job, that they are able to have sustainability and they're able to go back to work and have access to childcare. That's what this bill contemplates. This bill provides certainty, predictability and stability for families, for children, for immigrants, for small businesses, because it's baked into the fabric of this legislation. This has been an ongoing conversation for many time for for much of the time that I've been on council, going back two years. It's also been the ongoing conversation for the last four or five months. Again, thank you, Councilmember Morales, for introducing your legislation at the beginning of the year. I want to thank Council for all of your feedback and input on the legislation, as I mentioned this morning during council briefing. Each one of you have your fingerprints on this legislation. Thank you to Reverend Amachree for the work that she did in the halls of Olympia. We built on those proposals, both the original proposal from Sawant and Morales and from the proposal from Representative Macri. And we did this by calling people together. We didn't just you know, we didn't start from scratch. We did this by pulling people together and helping to make sure that more people had the chance to weigh in on legislation that was being considered in Olympia and make it work for Seattle. So thank you, council colleagues. Thank you to the sponsors of Jumpstart. Thank you again, as I mentioned to Councilmember Morales and support for your ongoing work on this and for our dialog that we've had over the last three months, because that dialog I think has improved the legislation in front of us and without all of the community that has been calling on us to right side up or upside down tax system, I don't think that we would be here today. And I want to make sure that folks know that this is just the beginning. We have the most regressive tax system in the entire country. And as we try to find remedies to the COVID crisis, both the economic crisis and the public health crisis, this is one remedy in a much larger, larger scale conversation about right sizing our tax system. Council President. I would like to go ahead and move council to a119810 as presented to include version three of Amendment one that I distributed recently. Thank you so much. Councilmember Mesquita So is there a second on that motion? Second. It's been moved and seconded to adopt Amendment One. Councilmember must get you're recognized in order to address the amendment. Thank you very much, Council President colleagues. This amendment is distributed with our colleague, council member Lewis as well. I want to thank Councilmember Lewis for his feedback on this legislation, along with a handful of other council members who've been asking about how do we address creating certain conditions that would be appropriate for nonprofit health care entities. As I mentioned this morning, Councilmember Peterson, thank you for your feedback as we thought about nonprofit entities in the health care sector. Appreciate your the ongoing conversations we've had there. You know, at the onset, I want to say I'm concerned about any exemptions. The amendment in front of us, however, is carefully crafted to respond to some of the issues that we've heard, for example, from DHS, the International Community Health Services. Today, the person who called in was expressing the unanticipated consequences or cost specific issues, specifically due to COVID that are affecting certain sectors of the nonprofit health care sector. And we wanted to carefully respond to those concerns that were brought up. The legislation in front of us was carefully crafted based on some feedback. I want to thank folks that SEIU Health Care 1199 Northwest folks from Kaiser, from Fred Hutch and from Seattle Children's for their feedback as we tried to think about a carefully crafted amendment . And also again note that while nonprofit hospitals generally are considered charities by the Internal Revenue Service, many nonprofit hospital systems have in all revenues in the billions, with chief operators earning seven or eight figure salaries. And in many ways their peers are large corporations. So the proposal in front of you attempts to find an equitable solution to rebuilding our economy in a way that does not further subsidize profit driven health care providers and prioritize community needs. Instead, with the amendment in front of you suggest that Seattle's economic recovery plan is built around jump start. We should address nonprofit health care providers accordingly and make sure that certain organizations continue to provide resources and make sure that there are contributions coming in. This amendment in front of us contemplates payments, building needs on salaries over 400,000. And I'm hoping that this carefully crafted scope amendment helps meet some of the needs of the community. Again, I'm thinking it's a little for your co-sponsorship. Thank you so much, Councilmember Mosqueda. Are there any other comments on Amendment One? I see a couple of hands. I lost track of which one went up first. So I'm going to call on Councilmember Lewis first and then on Councilmember Herbold. Thank you, Madam President. My remarks will be fairly brief. I do just want to express my gratitude at being able to co-sponsor this amendment with Councilmember Mosquito. Again, I want to thank Councilmember Skater for her leadership and guiding through this important legislation and also making sure that we could develop a very specific and timely exemption for a lot of our nonprofit health care partners who are really on the front lines of helping the region and even the nation. In the case of some of our research focused nonprofit providers in responding to the ongoing COVID public health emergency. I think that this exemption does a good job of recognizing that work, recognizing the added burden and the added costs that those organizations are assuming to really combat the the expansion of COVID. And as we've seen recently, too, it does look like, as we discussed this morning, we are in for a very long fight still on COVID 19. It does not seem to be abating as quickly as we thought it would. And we know that we're going to need to make sure that those nonprofit partners stay strong, that they can stay in the fight, and that we continue to be good partners with them in helping them confront this. I think this amendment was a long way towards doing that. I look forward to voting in favor of it. And similarly, want to thank our partners at SEIU 1199 and our partners at the nonprofits themselves, at Kaiser Permanente, at Children's, at Fred Hutchison four for their work in helping make sure we can shape something that is responsive to the moment. Thank you. Thank you so much, Councilmember Lewis, Councilmember Herbold. Thank you. I have a comment first and then a question about the amendment. So as I understand this amendment, it would exempt salary, expense, taxation at nonprofit health care providers and research orgs, but not at nonprofit service providers, including nonprofit service providers who are not health care providers who have been on the frontlines of responding to coronavirus over the past months, such as a nonprofit, affordable housing operator, shelters, food delivery, childcare providers and more. Last week, there was such an amendment proposed to more broadly impact nonprofit providers. And despite the heroic efforts of the folks who work at these nonprofit providers, large and small, we have not I have not heard from this group of providers acting, asking to be exempted despite the extraordinary expense that they have been incurring and despite the expectation that they will continue to meet a heightened need for the rest of this year and into next. So I'm just really concerned that we are basically saying one kind of work, one kind of nonprofit work, it should be exempt . And the broader nonprofit provider community has not made the argument that they should be exempt. And and I think there's an equity impact of this amendment. We know that larger nonprofits, health care, nonprofits in particular, including hospitals and research institutions, are more likely to be led by white people and men, while small smaller organizations, including many service providers, are more likely to be led by women and people of color. I'm concerned that the effect of this amendment would just unfortunately impact the organizations that are led by women and people of color. While organizations more likely to be white and male, that would their their organizations would receive an exemption. And my my question about the amendment itself relates specifically to clause C in the definition of a nonprofit health care entity. And central staff has declined to to answer questions about this particular section and has encouraged us to direct questions back to to the sponsor. And specifically, the question is, is what is a predominantly. Capitated provider. Provider group. Capitated. Capitated provider. Group. I'm just trying to get a sense of what type of organization is meant to be targeted or by this language because as I understand, C would broaden the exemption to a type of provider that I'm not quite understanding the. The description of that type of a provider. Okay. Which one of the sponsors would like to take that one up? I would defer to Councilmember Lewis. Councilmember, would you like to take this? Yeah. So Councilmember Herbold, that's a good question. And in particular, to section C of the exemption, that is a rather odd phrase. And I'm saying that as a lawyer who would not encountered that particular phrase. And so kind of working with stakeholders on this. My understanding is the only provider in King County that that particular phrase would apply to is Kaiser Permanente based on their kind of group health, their cooperative HMO status. That is like more unique and more it's a more unique and surgical term for the unique area that Kaiser Permanente falls into as a cooperative provider. And that language was worked on in consultation with SEIU 1199 and other stakeholders who verified that that indeed is is the provider that would be included based on that language. Thank you. Elsa morales plays. You are on mute. There you go. I see. So council member will thank you for the. Points that you're raising. I had a. Question about that phrasing. As well, but I think for me the bigger issue is that. Part of the appeal of this entire package for. Me is. That because it. Sets the taxation rates specifically for higher income earners. For higher earners, in my mind, it sort of eliminates the need for. A series of. Exemptions. Particularly non-profits, since, you know, I think when most of us think about a nonprofit. It is folks who are, as Councilmember Humble said. Lower wage workers, you know, folks who don't have a lot. Of access to. Benefits and and sort of the the things that come with with the standard corporation. But we also know that health care, in particular, most health care providers, even if there are nonprofit, still, you know, can generate significant revenue. Nonprofit is a. Is a tax status. It's not a business plan. You know, the CEO of. Providence, I think, makes something. Like $10. Million or so. So I would be voting no on this amendment. And I think that. The the language that is already. In the bill. Is structured in such. A way that it protects. Organizations who do have lower wage workers in their. Midst, including health care providers, so that those folks aren't put in jeopardy. When bargaining. Comes time for. Bargaining, for example. But the folks. Who are making higher wages can be. Included in and. So that we don't lose revenue for three. Years with this amendment. So. Thank you for bringing it. Just want to signal. That I will not be supporting this amendment. Thank you, Councilman Morales. Any other questions or comments on Amendment One? Okay. I will close out debate before we call the vote on this. I will also not be supporting this particular amendment. I find it unfortunately inconsistent with my positions on things like Medicare for All, for example, which really which really center us on butting up with the realities that the health care industry is a for profit industry. That's part of the problem with how health care is delivered across the country. And and so for me, I feel like it's really important for us to acknowledge that the tiers have been set in and jump start Seattle in such a way to inherently distribute equity among organizations that may not be paying out in these golden parachutes to their CEOs and and others. You know, massive amounts of money. And so, you know, it morale was brought up the point that the CEO of Providence is making just millions and millions of dollars in salary. I think that's true for a lot of other health care organizations in the city of Seattle that have IRS tax exempt status, but are nonetheless, you know, making quite a bit of money on top of that. We know that the federal government has done a significant bailout and continues to express interest in continuing to do more significant bailout of the health care industry, where many of these organizations that are currently within the city of Seattle, like Providence and others who technically have nonprofit status, stand to likely get millions and millions of more dollars that we don't have control over how they will allocate those dollars between health care delivery service models and executive pay roles . And so I feel really uncomfortable voting in favor of this amendment at this point, not knowing more about those particular details. And in light of, you know, my, my, my deep and profound belief that that as a system, our health care system is designed to be to be for profit and not for the full and maximum benefit of the people who desperately need health care services in our city. So I will be unfortunately not able to support this particular amendment. Any anything else before we close out the debate from the sponsors? Oh. Councilmember Peterson. Yes. I think the council president just wanted to provide some additional context for this amendment. As I understand it, there was a discussion about exempting nonprofits last week, and then there was a discussion about health care providers during COVID. So just for I believe this amendment, correct me if I'm wrong, Councilor Mosquito, but I believe this amendment is just for the initial three years and the sunset clause has been removed from the from the, the overall ordinance. So this will be really focused on those providing health care during COVID. I think it includes Seattle Children's, it includes the Hutch, includes Cancer Care Alliance. I think would be exempt from this or this exemption would would help those organizations. So I'm just. I think that this compromise was put together carefully by Council of Escada and I'll be supporting it. Great. Thank you so much. Okay. Looks like we can go ahead and close out debate on Amendment one. So I am going to ask that the clerk please call the roll on the passage excuse me, on the adoption of Amendment one. Herbold Nay. Whereas. Yes. Lewis. Yes. Morales. No. Mesquita. I. Peterson. I. So what. They. Strauss. I. President Gonzalez, then five in favor, four opposed. I thank you so much. The motion carries in a 5 to 4 vote and Amendment One is adopted. I understand that Councilmember Lewis has another amendment, Amendment two. So we're going to go ahead and move to that potential amendment. So, Councilmember Lewis, you will first need to request suspension of the rules for Amendment two. So I'm going to hand it over to you to walk us to make that motion. Thank you, Madam President. And I do so move to suspend the council rules to consider Amendment two that was not distributed by 12 noon. And when asked if there's a second. Second. Okay, folks. Okay. Thank you so much. So this is a suspension of council rules to consider Amendment two that was not distributed by a noon. There has been a second. Will the clerk please call the roll on the suspension of the council rule? Purple. I. Juarez. I wish I were, Alice. I. Let's get a. I. Peterson. I want. No. Strauss, I. President Gonzalez I eight in favor one opposed. Thank you so much. It's been that suspension of the roles has been granted, so the role is suspended. Councilmember Lewis, you may now proceed with moving first, making the motion for us to debate and consider your proposed amendment to say yes. I moved to amend Council Bill 11 nine 810 as presented on Amendment two, recently distributed. There are second. At. It has been moved and seconded to adopt amendment to Councilmember Lewis. You are the prime sponsor of this amendment, so you are recognized in order to address Amendment two? Yes. Thank you, Madam President. So I do think that it is still important to at least have a discussion today about the reinstitution of some kind of sunset clause to reaffirm the commitment of this Council to eventually transitioning to regional revenue options as an alternative to maintaining our own payroll tax in perpetuity. I did not particularly care for a ten year sunset clause. I thought that was too soon. I thought that it also could put in jeopardy some of the investments that we are proposing to make under this legislation that will probably entail and require accumulation over a longer period of time and possibly entering into certain bonding or capital commitments. So this proposal would create a 20 year sunset clause. The hope would be that in that time we would be able to transition as a state in a region to some regional alternative tax. I have full faith and confidence in the future. Seattle City Council 20 years from now to re extend, renew or expand on this tax in the event that such regional sources of revenue do not exist at that time. I think that that timeline acknowledges and you know, I mean, we had we had Tim Heineman call in and comment earlier to comment on this legislation, you know , making it clear that there are a lot of folks in the state that are still opposed to a conversation around progressive revenue. So I understand that is a heavy lift to get that out of Olympia. But my hope is that on a 20 year timeline, that's more realistic than a ten year one. It won't put in jeopardy the investments that we are making now, nor undercut the urgency of this proposal. And so I would move that we institute this compromise sunset as enumerated out in the amendment. Thank you, Councilmember Lewis. Any questions or comments on a proposed amendment to. Councilmember Sawant, you are recognized. Thank you. I oppose this amendment because this amendment attempts to bring back a sunset clause, even though the city council's budget committee on Wednesday voted for my amendment to eliminate the sunset clause. 20 years may sound like a long time to politicians who are not doing the hard work of building grassroots movements, giving their blood, sweat and tears to build for social justice. 20 years may sound like a long time for people who are not struggling to get by, but for any of us who have been on the grassroots fighting and I don't just mean our generations, I'm talking about people in Seattle who have fought for decades for bringing about an end to regressive taxation. I think they will know that these are hollow words that, you know, that of our Councilmember Lewis to say that 20 years from now, I hope something will be done regionally. Why? Because something was done in the last 20 years and in the 20 years before that. Is that what your hope is based on the fact that nothing was done by regional and state political officials at the same time, that they gave handout after handout to big corporations and executives like Boeing executives? This is extremely problematic and furthermore, completely tone deaf. To bring this amendment at the last second when the public can't speak out against this particular amendment. But, you know but the public has spoken the movement has spoken very clearly against any kind of sunset clause. And it's particularly egregious that this amendment will if this amendment goes through, it would make sure that the tax is automatically repealed, not that there would be any conditions placed on it, even, which would somewhat mitigate. I would I would never support a sunset tax period on progressive revenues, but there is no mitigating aspect about this amendment at all. And as far as what needs to be sunsetted, why not those sales taxes that are so burdensome to working class people, and particularly heat hit black and brown communities and immigrant communities of color? Why not the property taxes that make it difficult for working class and middle class homeowners to keep their homes? Why not a sunset clause on taxes, on struggling small businesses? I just am really stunned that despite all the rhetoric that we have heard, that the sunset clause is back again and that the sunset clause is only being proposed to one of the only taxes that working people do not have to pay, that small businesses do not have to pay. The fact that politicians will go to such lengths to undemocratically sneak through a sunset clause shows which side they are really on. Clearly, the council is going to vote yes on the Amazon tax today because our movement has gathered 30,000 signatures to put this on the ballot. And that represents a real a real threat, not an imaginary or abstract, but a real threat to big business. And that is why this is going through. And the establishment knows that they have no other choice but the fact that this amendment is being brought forward for a sunset clause. It shows what that shows the lengths to which the establishment politicians will go through. I absolutely pledge that if this amendment passes, then we will, in our movement, do everything in our power to make sure that we fight against the establishment. But I will also say that putting this this kind of sunset clause in such a progressive law as the rare progressive laws that we are able to win, that basically is saying that, you know, you hardworking people, you thousands who who spend all your weekends and all your waking hours aside from your work and your family to build this movement, you're going to have to do it in another 20 years. Another generation will have to come and fight the same battles over and over again. And I think this also illustrates why this system ultimately cannot be reformed. And we need substantive, fundamental change to our society. Thank you, Councilmember Swann. Any other comments? I see Councilmember Herbold and colleagues. If anyone else has any comments, please feel free to indicate Councilmember Strauss have you in the queue. Councilmember Herbold, please. Thank you. So I just want to say that although I recognized in past meetings that there was an importance for a sunset clause and its potential to bring useful pressure to bear on other jurisdictions as a as a as a way to encourage legislators and state and business stakeholders to work towards progressive revenue, specifically a regional progressive revenue source. I really feel like last week in committee we we settled this issue because we amended the tax legislation with language that is much clearer about council's intent to repeal this tax that the new progressive regional or state taxes enacted that would provide a similar level of funding to Seattle as we do under this bill. So again, I felt like we sort of resolved this this issue in our in our committee meeting. The amendment we passed in committee, I think, better addresses and settles the circumstances under which the council would support ending this specific tax. And I don't believe that a 20 year sunset clause provides any additional pressure that is not already better addressed through the amendment passed last week in committee. Thank you. John. Thank you, Councilmember Herbold, for those comments. Councilmember Strauss, the floor is yours. Thank you. Council President. Thank you. Council Member Lewis for bringing this amendment forward. Last week I did vote for a sunset clause due to my hesitance regarding the level playing field language. I did think that ten years was too much too short, because in particular, there are aspects of this bill that are tied to 20 year funding segments, especially regarding permanent supportive housing. I do believe that a future council will benefit from evaluating this tax in 20 years to understand if it needs to be raised, lowered or otherwise adjusted to fit the times. I'm supporting a 20 year sunset rather than the ten year sunset because the 20 year sunset is associated with the spending plan that we will be that we've already discussed and will be voting on. While jump start Seattle is different than property tax and sales tax levies which are put to the ballot, they also have renewals which are sunset clauses under a different name. So there are sunset clauses in these sales tax and property tax levies that are put forward to voters. And while these taxes, the Jumpstart proposal is different than the levy, we have mirrored the process for Jumpstart Seattle in creating rates and services rendered to our city and our community. So and that has been a 20 year segment. So I think if nothing else, in 20 years we will need to reassess the rates and create a new spending plan to be associated with the proposal. And sunset could just be as easily worded as a renewal. This amendment fits into the narrowly tailored nature of this bill, and I appreciate the work being put forward on this. Thank you. Council President. Thank you. Councilmember Strauss. Any other comments or questions on the bill? Excuse me, on the agenda item president. If I may. Yes, Councilmember Suarez, please. Thank you. Just briefly, I will be supporting this. And, you know, I don't really want to get into a tit for tat about whose side I'm on trying to approach this with common sense. And I agree with Councilmember Lewis. And my understanding is if we have a 20 year sunset further out of funds, that is the less volatile it is, which gives us a 20 year window, if you will, to plan. And hopefully within 20 years when I'm 80, this state will have progressive taxes in place, not only on income, but certainly hopefully on the tax that the city will probably pass today. So with that, I'll be supporting it. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Suarez perhaps the only tit for tat that i'll get into is to say that I will only be 63 years old in 20 years. Oh, thanks. You're welcome. Any time. Councilmember Mosquito, please. Thank you, Madam President. Colleagues, I had a lot of concerns with the initial ten year proposals that I did included in our draft bill because of some of the feedback that we received from people who were working on legislation as well. I think the points that have been made with concerns are very well taken. I have been clear that in my main concern with the ten year sunset as it was proposed, was that it could potentially unintentionally limit our ability to do permanent supportive housing, which requires, in many cases a 20 year funding commitment because this is at least 20 years, and it will, I hope, be considered a renewal, but more importantly, that there will be more the level action that is taken and get us to a more equitable tax proposal. I'll support a 20 year, but that is, I think, the minimum, given that this is needed funding for from the point of housing. I appreciate that it is that length of time. So thank you. Thank you so much, councilmember mosqueda. Any other questions or comments on this proposed amendment? Councilmember Swartz's. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify something. Clarify on something that Strauss just said and just paraphrasing what he said. He said that he supports this sunset clause because he wants a future council to reconsider this tax to see if it should be raised, lowered or kept the same. That sounds very reasonable, but let's be clear. The amendment does not say raised or lowered or kept the same. It just says, quote, No business shall or a payroll expense tax for payroll expenses after December 31st, 2040. Unquote. So this is a straight up removing of the tax in 20 years, and all the faith is going to be put on that future council as if there's so much evidence that councils will do the right things. I just want to make make clear that what was said was not something that's in the amendment, actually. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. So what I see, Councilmember Strauss's hand has gone up. So, Councilmember Strauss, you are recognized. Are there any colleagues again? Anyone else who wants to speak? Please let me know. Thank you, Council President and thank you, Councilmember Swan. I appreciate your comments there. I would say that that is the same language that is used in the Seattle Transportation Benefit District Tax, which is levied here at the city of Seattle. And while it does not necessarily state that it needs to be reviewed, it also we are bringing it up this week to be renewed. So I appreciate your thoughts and I appreciate your work on this on this bill. Thank you, Councilmember. Thanks so much. Any other comments on Amendment two? And of course, Councilmember Lewis will have the last word on this bill excuse me, on this amendment. Okay. Thank you so much to everyone for the conversation. I just want to sort of signal that unfortunately, I will not be able to support this amendment either, in large part because of the reasons that Councilmember Robles articulated in her statement as well. And so I just wanted to, again, appreciate the sentiment with which this is brought forward and then really just provide a little bit of clarification to the general public. Any council member at any time in any council at any time can you can introduce legislation to either repeal, amend or modify any any ordinances that we've passed in in the past. And so while I appreciate the significance of this sunset, I still think that, you know, whether this amendment passes or not, future councils will not have their hands tied one way or the other as it relates to future policy considerations on this revenue proposal or any other revenue proposal, frankly. So with that being said, I'm going to hand it back over to Councilmember Lewis, who can close out debate if he wishes, and then I will call the roll, have the clerk call the roll on this amendment. Thank you, Madam President. I'll be brief and in closing it out. Definitely appreciate the critical feedback from folks in regards to the overall concept of having a sunset clause. I do still think it's important that we have another opportunity to weigh in on it at this hearing and look forward to voting on it. The only thing that I would say is that I actually am, and maybe it's because I'm only going to be 50 years old in 20 years that that I actually am optimistic that we are going to be in a position to get progressive revenue from Olympia on a regional basis. I think that we saw sort of a initial glimpse of that with Senator Wynne successful attempt at getting us a progressive real estate excise tax. You know, I've been engaged in a lot of conversations with stakeholders about getting. State and. Local capital gains tax, which remains a passion of mine and something I will be introducing legislation here at the council to consider. But I do think that it's important that we continue to think of ourselves as a regional partner. And I think that this amendment signals and centers that idea that we are committed to working together with the county and the state to come up with comprehensive revenue proposals that do make sure that we are also scaling our benefit across borders, make sure that we are being responsive and spreading the burden, quite frankly, to across the rest of the county and the rest of the state. Do I think it's going to happen fast now? Which is why I wouldn't wouldn't support a ten year sunset. And I'm now I'm proposing a 20 year sunset. So I think that that, unfortunately, probably more closely matches the timeline of what we're dealing with here. And I look forward to giving us an opportunity to do we on this one more time. And I would just ask that we call the question. So much, Councilmember Lewis. With that being said, I would ask the clerk, please call the roll on adoption of Amendment two. Herbold. Ned Suarez? Yes. Lewis. Yes. Morales? No. Let's get a. I. PETERSON Right. So what? Nay Strauss. I. President Gonzalez. Now. Five in favor, four opposed. Okay. That motion carries an amendment to is adopted. Are there any if for there. Her comments on the bill as amended. And again, this is this is that the next vote will be on the passage of the bill as amended. So are there any additional comments on the bill as amended? I see. Councilmember Lewis and I know that Councilmember Suarez also wanted to make a comment and she will let me know at what point she would like to do that. So, Councilmember Lewis, you. Thank you so much, Madam President. I really appreciate the opportunity to have co-sponsored this legislation, along with council members Muscat, Gonzalez, Herbold and Strauss. I really do think that we can't wait any longer, echoing my comments from earlier. To have true progressive revenue to confront head on the situation that we are facing here today on so many different fronts. You know, I think it's it's first, I just want to take a moment to acknowledge the process that Council Member Muscat undertook this spring under really difficult circumstances, in the middle of a pandemic, in the middle of a lot of budget uncertainty, and was able to cobble together a coalition of of labor, of small business owners, of nonprofits, of service providers, really to unite all of us in our common cause that the massive, inequitable struggles that we are facing will not yield until we have some kind of significant progressive revenue package in front of us that will rise to the ambitions and the scope of our problems. And this package really does get there. You know, I'm committed to a regional approach, as I talked earlier during our discussion of the sunset clause. But we can't wait for Olympia to act to provide this relief. We can't wait for Olympia to act to provide this relief. When we saw last week and, you know, this this would have been bigger news, I think, in other times. But we saw last week that there was an increase in King County of people entering homelessness, and that increase was exceeding the rate of exit. We saw thousands of our neighbors who are unemployed due to the COVID crisis are in a situation where. While they were rent burdened before they are now increasingly rent insecure beyond where they were prior to the to this new and completely unprecedented emergency in my life experience and the experience of many of my friends. And we really are in a position where the cavalry is not going to come over the hill. I mean, it doesn't look like there's going to be a special session of the legislature this year. It doesn't look like there's going to be bold action from the legislature to fill this void. We have a complete abdication of any kind of duty or responsibility from our federal executive. While we have lots of allies in Congress who have been fighting very valiantly to get us the resources that we need, federal leadership from the president has been completely absent. We need to step in and. We need to raise this revenue. I, I appreciate that this follows on the model of House Bill 2907, the council member or our House member, then State Representative Nicole Macri, submitted in the last legislative session of only targeting positions, only taxing positions at large, very large and successful corporations that make over a certain amount of money. I really appreciate that we made a couple of surgical exemptions to make sure that this tax does not fall on folks that are on the front line of the current public health issue that we're facing with COVID 19. And I'm also just very appreciative that there is going to be a massive multiplier effect of this. I mean, we are passing this revenue package to bill. We are passing this revenue package to build housing, to support people, to stay in their housing, to make these investments at a truly unprecedented scale and rise to the level of challenge that we're facing. As the chair of the Select Committee on Homelessness Strategies and Investments, I can say unequivocally that this is going to help us move towards our goal of meeting our on righting the wrong of our long time shortfall in permanent supportive housing and making sure we are in a position to meet that obligation. So with that, I want to turn it over, proud to to vote for this today. And I'm going to again want to thank all the co-sponsors, and particularly Councilmember Skinner, for her leadership in guiding us through this. Thank you, Councilmember Lewis. Next up in the queue is Councilmember Suarez and for those of you on video zoom, please do raise your hand and let me know if you'd like to make some remarks. Councilmember Words. Thank you. Council President Um, I want to again thank Council or Budget Chair Councilman Ms.. Data for our long conversations and discussions and even today's discussions that you and I had offline and all the experience and enthusiasm you have brought to City Council. I appreciate the effort that went into this the phone calls, the emails, the meetings to create a proposal for us to move forward. I know how much work was dedicated to this effort now and back in the fall of 2017, along with Councilmember Gonzalez, Councilmember Stewart and Councilmember Herbert, as I stated at the Budget Committee last week . I do support a progressive revenue tax. I do support a tax on corporations. I have supported a countywide regional approach and also a statewide approach to a progressive tax solution. However, Judy, I can't support this proposal. I support the merits, though, not the procedural process. As was stated earlier, that we all know our city is facing the pandemic and economic recession that this country has never seen the likes of in civil unrest due to racism. Again, as I shared last week, this is a trifecta that is unprecedented because we're in the midst of this pandemic fueled economic recession with no end in sight. I have concerns about not putting this proposal. In. Front of the voters. Councilmember Lewis, a short note to you. To some of us, the Calvary is not a welcome sight. I just want to point out that no economist, no politician, no public policy, academic or expert can forecast when these challenges will end. We don't know the depth, the length of the duration of this pandemic fueled recession. There's currently no jobs bill or stimulus package for growth while we face historic unemployment levels. And that concerns me. We don't know what the economic landscape looks like as we impose this tax again from city council. I like what Portland did in May of 2020. Portland voters approved an income and a business tax for homelessness services to pass with nearly 60% of the vote. But the sunset clause for 2030 Oregon's unemployment rate is about 14% and Seattle's is 16%. As I have participated in, observed and shared, Seattle has a well-established Democratic tradition of giving voters the final say. Again, as I shared in the last 15 years, the voters have approved over 11 city city levies from library to housing to education to transportation to park. Daily voters have also supported over six county wide levies for vets, human services, homelessness, seniors, children in parks and Seattle voters have supported two multi-billion dollar regional levies for transportation. As you all know, in 2006, the voters approved a small local payroll tax on businesses as part of bridging the gap transportation ballot measure. And again, that tax was repealed by council in 2009 due to the 2008 recession. I share this not as a compare and contrast lecture between levies and taxes, but to the testament that Seattle voters are smart, caring and generous. I trust their civic judgment and voice. Again, nobody is against taxing corporations or a progressive tax. It's how we get there. At the end of the day, I trust the voters of Seattle to tax corporations so we can truly re-imagine the new economy and not be faced with another difficult choice to repeal this tax, as we did in 2008. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Juarez, are there any other comments from my colleagues? Councilmember Morales, please. Oh. Okay. Thank you, colleagues. I'm, I will admit, very frustrated about the two amendments that just got added to this bill. But I don't want that to. Take away from the historic nature of what we are about. To pass here. We know that today the city takes a crucial. Step to embrace. Equity and reject. Corporate. Influence over our tax. Policies. Today, the Seattle City Council is boldly leading to create a more equitable way to finance public services. And we challenge elected. Officials at the state level. To join us in choosing investment over austerity. By passing this proposal, we will shift some of the burden from individual households to. The wealthiest corporations in the city. Next week, we'll finalize the plan for how we invest. We'll provide significant. Relief for renters. Small businesses. For immigrants and others impacted by the COVID crisis. And this this structural change will also allow us to rethink our social spending so we can improve our population health, improve community conditions, and begin. To reverse. Intergenerational. Poverty in the city. Exactly six months ago today, I was sworn in to begin serving the people of District two. I will say my first six months have been a little extra. To say the least. And I want to thank my staff for their. Unwavering commitment to keep. Our office accountable to our black and brown neighbors. If this council is going to act on anti-racist principles, we. Can't just talk to black led organizations when. We're talking about police. We have to partner with Bipoc communities in everything we do taxation, zoning, utilities, parks, education, green economies and community development. That's how we demonstrate. That Black Lives Matter. For Alexis Charla Leticia Farmer Darcel Touch. Devin Silver Nail my staff. Exactly six months into our. First term in office. We're voting on major legislation that will improve the lives of our neighbors. And your work has helped to get us here. So I want to. Thank you for that. I'm excited to vote yes today on behalf of the people of District two. And I want to thank our colleagues for. Supporting this legislation. Thank you, Councilmember Morales. Councilmember Salant. Thank you. Today's vote to pass an Amazon tax in Seattle is a historic victory for working people. This victory was hard fought and it was hard won by a movement that wouldn't give up and that faced down a seemingly endless series of obstacles from the shameful attempts of corporate Democrats in the state legislature to pass a ban on municipal big business taxes to unfounded delays in the city council to a pandemic and lockdown which prevented signature gathering during relentless attacks in the corporate media in Seattle and nationally. We are winning because of the determination of workers and socialists to smash all obstacles and to find a path to victory. Congratulations to the Grassroots Jacks Amazon campaign led by the coalition that included my organization, Socialist Alternative and many progressive organizations and unions. Today's vote comes eight months after working people roundly defeated Amazon in the elections and two years after Amazon and the Chamber of Commerce bullied City Council with the majority of the Council shamefully repealing the 2018 Amazon tax. Now, Jeff Bezos and his billionaire friends are wishing they could call a do over and have the modest 2018 tax back because this new tax on Seattle's wealthiest businesses is four times larger and every penny is needed and far more, in fact, to stop the racist gentrification, sky high rents and homelessness in the city with a massive expansion of publicly owned affordable housing and jobs. This Amazon tax is a housing and jobs bill. It's no accident. This comes in the midst of the historic Black Lives Matter rebellion. The legitimacy of the status quo has been utterly smashed by the protest movement, the pandemic and the deepening crisis of capitalism. In Seattle, Amazon was widely taken up at the Justice for George Floyd protests, where we gathered 20,000 signatures in 20 days. Now that total is over 30,000 signatures. The Amazon tax is perhaps the biggest progressive win in Seattle since socialists and labor unions led the way on the $15 minimum wage, which passed first here and then was won in cities and states around the country. We hope that once again, we can inspire working people and yield nationally and globally in this crucial fight against the billionaire class, which is attempting to force working people to pay for the current crisis of capitalism with massive budget cuts. Our rallying cry nationally must be no austerity. That's big business, not working people. The Amazon tax shows working people do not need to play defense. We can and should go on the offensive and win big. We must reject all the pathetic attempts of corporate media who, after years of attacking the idea of taxing big business and those fighting for it now desperately want to spin a narrative to discourage working class struggle and empowerment. Let's be real. The Amazon tax had nothing to do with the quote unquote, savvy of establishment politicians. It had everything to do with the self-organization of working people. Specifically, it has been the thread of the movement's ballot initiative that has pressured the city establishment to act. Amazon filed the ballot measure after a series of actual grassroots Democratic action conferences where hundreds of people, indeed by now thousands discussed and voted. We did not win everything we wanted, and I strongly oppose the insertion of a sunset clause. But while I disagree with other council members on watering down the legislation, I want to acknowledge their support and votes for the passage of this Amazon tax. I want to thank Councilmember Mosquito for her work. I want to thank Councilman Morales for her support of the strong Amazon tax proposal we put forward together in solidarity with the movement. We must build on our momentum. The movement to tax Amazon and big business to fund housing and essential services is needed everywhere, and we must actively spread it. Here in Seattle, we will need to immediately take this energy toward winning the release of all arrested protesters without charges. To defund Seattle police by at least 50%. To stop the sweeps of our homeless neighbors and to fund tiny house villages. And to when at least a thousand quality, affordable homes in the Central District for black working families. The struggle for black liberation will also mean campaigning for elected community oversight boats with full powers over the police, including hiring and firing policies and procedures. Our movement was clear eyed about naming the real force, pulling the strings. Amazon Many argue that we should not, quote unquote, antagonize big business and instead try to broker a deal. But we know that our power comes from working people getting organized, not from any negotiations with the elite. For those watching from outside Seattle, don't let anyone tell you in your fight to tax big business in your city that you are being divisive because class struggle is what gets the goods. The private for profit housing market has utterly failed working people, not just here and now, but everywhere and always because capitalism is completely incapable of meeting the most basic needs of working people. Internationally, the working class needs to take the top 500 corporations into democratic public ownership run by workers in the interests of human need and the environment, not billionaires. Greed. I have a message for Jeff Bezos and his class. If you attempt again to overturn the Amazon tax, working people will go all out in the thousands to defeat you. And we will not stop there because, you see, we are fighting for far more than the stacks. We are preparing the ground for a different kind of society. And if you, Jeff Bezos, want to drive that process forward by lashing out against us in our modest demands, then so be it, because we are coming for you and your rotten system. We are coming to dismantle this deeply oppressive, racist, sexist, violent, morally bankrupt system of capitalism, this police state. We cannot and will not stop until we overthrow it and replace it with a world based instead on solidarity, genuine democracy and equality. A socialist world. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. So on any other comments I see. Councilmember Herbold, please. Thank you so much. I want to I can just lots of thanks to go around. And I want to thank Councilmember Swann for leading the grassroots effort. And I want to also thank Councilmember Mosqueda for proposing a structure that was different from the 2018 Employee Hours Tax or the 2020 Amazon tax, which would have been a flat tax to employers for each employee, regardless of their pay. Because this new proposal was narrow and taxed taxes only the largest businesses paying the highest salaries, which I believe is drive most driving our city's affordability crisis. It's made it possible for me to vote to enact this version of the measure rather than voting to put it on the ballot. As I had said I was considering voting to do when we were looking at a model that looked more like the employee hours tax or. Councilmember. Salons, Amazon tax. So I really I only say this to say that I think there's lots of of banks to go around and lots of credit to to be to be shared. And again, this this model represents the same tax structure that the business community was poised to support when it was proposed at the state legislature. And I hope that their their position on our tax is is consistent with the position that they had taken on state legislation that would have allowed for a regional tax. We've talked a lot about our cities and states upside down tax code, where Seattle residents are struggling on the smallest incomes and they pay six times more in taxes as a percent of their income than our wealthiest residents. This helps us raise more funds for crucial investments without further burdening Seattle residents struggling on the smallest incomes. With this revenue, we can invest in COVID relief, rental assistance, affordable housing. We can help Seattle workers who have lost jobs or hours due to the public health emergency. And we can help immigrant and refugee households that may be ineligible for federal relief programs, people who are living unsheltered in the black and brown communities that have been most impacted by COVID 19. We can and must make investments in Seattle's residents that are in line with their values, and that will help speed our community's recovery. And again, we'll finally take a step towards addressing our upside down tax code. Thank you. So that. Thank you. Councilmember Herbold. Are there any other comments from my colleagues? Councilmember Strauss, please. And then Councilmember Peterson, Councilmember. The council president just wants to thank everyone for all of their work on this bill. It is a well-tailored proposal even Danny West wrote this week, and even critics are straining to come up with political arguments against it. The important aspects of this bill are that it addresses gaps that other levels of government have not provided. I've heard from residents and small businesses alike that the need for child care. Food access. Funding for immigrants and refugees who have not received. Support from other levels of government. And importantly, the small business stimulus are really critical aspects of this bill. The proper sideboards that allow this solution to scale to a county wide, region wide, and if the state is able to do so, a statewide solution. This bill and many definitions were derived from the state legislature, and I know there will be important rule making during the implementation phase of Jumpstart. I really want to thank everyone who has led in this effort and especially to Councilmember Mosqueda, for spending hours upon hours on the phone with me and my team. I can't thank you enough for all of your work, and that's to all the sponsors and everyone who has worked on many different iterations of a similar proposal over the years. Thank you. Council President. Thank you. Councilmember Straus. Councilmember Peterson. Thank you. Council President So today it appears that a majority of our city council will vote to approve this new tax on large Seattle Employers Council Bill 119810. This new tax will be in addition to the business and occupation taxes, property taxes and business license fees paid by Seattle employers. I want to thank and commend our budget chair, Councilmember Mesquita. As a masterful legislator, she put together a more targeted proposal and worked in an open and collaborative way with many of us here on the city council and those in the community to incorporate various ideas to improve her already thoughtful tax and spend package. And I appreciate why many of my colleagues are going to vote yes today. I'd like to thank the thousands of District four constituents who took the time to provide input on this. And after much consideration and consultation with my constituents, my strong concerns remain. I represent a city council district that has a variety of views on issues that makes many votes difficult. I hear passionate pleas from all sides of complex issues. So later today, I'll post a longer statement on my blog explaining my vote. For now, just present a quick summary because I'm not planning to change my vote from our Budget Committee just a few days ago. Please note that later this month they will likely vote in favor of the short term COVID relief bill from Councilmember Mosqueda. That's the upcoming Council bill 119812, which will tap our City Government's Emergency Fund and revenue stabilization fund at amounts higher than proposed by our Mayor. I've consistently voted in favor of relief packages and regulatory changes to help those impacted most by the COVID crisis. The tax and spend packages before us today, however, are long term policies that require additional considerations. As I've mentioned before, I'm concerned that this is it penalizes only Seattle employers. It's not a regional solution. I'm concerned that companies providing tens of thousands of jobs to our residents may leave the city, and the small businesses that support the large employers could also be negatively impacted. I'm concerned that it does not exempt all nonprofits. No, I appreciate the amendment today for the health care providers. I'm concerned the spending plan. We're in a position now to enact the new tax without knowing the full details of how we would spend the money. Because the version of the spending plan in front of us today, Council Bill 119811 has removed many of the key details that the previous more detailed version of the spending plan was better and more targeted and more specific. I'm concerned this is a situation where taxing first, asking questions later. As Councilmember Suarez noted, this does not give voters a choice. The tax before us today is four times larger than the head tax. The previous city council reversed just two years ago sending a large tax and spending proposal to the November ballot for voters to decide would have been consistent with other large tax measures and would provide more time to see whether the economy is recovering. Whether our state government can pass a better statewide or regional measure for revenue. Unfortunately, that idea was rejected at our Budget Committee last week. I feel that we could also do a better job looking for savings in our existing budget. I see common ground and points of unity emerging and how we look at our police budget. The large salaries there are also in other city departments, as noted in the recent investigation by Forbes magazine published on June 23rd. The lessons learned as we dove into the police budget. Salaries could be applied to other city departments so that we expand social services, not government salaries. To me, that's not austerity, it's sustainability. I will look forward to joining my colleagues and pushing our governor and state legislature to pass progressive tax tools that our region can use. I support progressive taxes. We need progressive taxes. I supported HB 2907. We need our state government to act for the sake of our city. I hope my concerns are just concerns and will not actually occur. I look forward to working with my colleagues and the mayor to create a sustainable tax and spend path as part of our fall budget discussions for our 2021 budget. I hope the public today sees not division or dispute among the council members, but rather debate and discussion. I believe this whole process has really made our city council stronger. Again, I think Councilor Mesquita, for our hard work on this and congratulate her on what appears to be a success successful effort today. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Peterson So I think that concludes comments from everyone. And so as usual, we will end comment with hearing from the prime sponsor who is Councilmember Skate. I just wanted to chime in really quickly and say how much I appreciated the opportunity to reengage on this conversation. Of course, for those of us who are on the city council and to those 18, we still understand and and believe how difficult it was to not just pass that the former iteration of a tax on big business, but then to unfortunately have to repeal that law. I really do appreciate, Councilman Ross, get getting your process here and your and your staff's willingness to want to give a big shots per week in your office, who I know has been spending countless number of hours on the phone and in Zoom calls, I'm sure, with many shareholders throughout the city and and really want to appreciate the the hard work that you and your staff have put in on on this important proposal. I think this is a smart approach. I think that it is an important approach. And I think that there is probably no other time like the present, where we have a triple crisis on our hands. For us to not only consider this, but to take swift action, we are, at the end of the day, a nine member body that was elected by, in some cases, districts, and for Councilmember Mosqueda and I citywide. And we were elected to make tough decisions, to dig into the policy work, to identify significant policy issues and to identify potential solutions to those issues. That's part of the reason why I think now at this point, given this triple crisis, I do think that the political winds have significantly changed across the city. I think that our constituents across the city want us to take action now as opposed to punting to a ballot issue. And so I feel more than comfortable showing up today in in this council meeting to vote yes on jump start for Seattle and to to be proud of the fact that I am one of the co-sponsors of this of this proposal. And I just want to commend everybody for the hard work that they've been doing, all of the folks on the outside who've been emailing us and antagonists on social media about why they think this is important. And and all the calls that we have received in support of this bill is really important. And again, part of the record that shows to me that that that our constituents expect us to take action as their elected representatives on the city council. And I'm going to be very proud to be able to cast a yes vote in favor of of this of Jumpstart Seattle and the next piece of legislation we will be considering. So with that being said, I'm going to go ahead and close out debate by asking Councilmember Mesquita to give closing remarks before we call the roll. Thank you. Council president, council colleagues, city in Seattle. This is a huge win. Thank you so very much for your ongoing feedback. As we have together crafted a proposal to respond to the crisis that is COVID, to invest in our local community, to invest in historic amounts of funding for our community, who been affected by displacement, and to make sure that those who are the most vulnerable in this public health crisis have the care that they need. This is about caring for Seattle now and into the future. We together are making history. I want to thank all of you for your comments, your feedback and again, your amendments. Over the last few weeks, especially last week, as we crafted the base of this proposal, we put together a piece of legislation that I am incredibly proud of and incredibly proud that the city of Seattle is leading yet again here today. We've balanced labor protections with affordable housing priorities. We're figuring out how to meet urgent needs due to COVID 19. Invest in housing and homelessness. And we haven't shied away from some really from some really tough decisions. With your vote today, we will be dealing with the problem presented and exposed by COVID. We are rolling up our sleeves. We are doing the work. And we are leading by passing Jump Start Seattle. None of us, none of the council members, none of the voters in Seattle, no one expected to come into 2020 with the issues that we are dealing with right now. COVID presenting a massive public health, deadly pandemic across the country. The type of depression that we will soon be facing is no longer going to be considered a recession in the near future. And we we must shift our priorities, shift to make sure that we're investing in those who are the most vulnerable and those who've been historically left out so that we do not have an austerity budget in front of us. Jumpstart Seattle provides that alternative to make sure that we have the funding needed to respond immediately to the COVID crisis and to make sure that there is not an austerity budget that lands in our lap this fall. More importantly, it invests in the long term funding that we need for affordable housing to invest in home, to shelter those who are living unsheltered and homeless in Seattle, and to make sure that we have a resilient community. Again, thank you to Councilmember Morales for her work on the Equitable Development Initiative work. We will be having conversations in the long run about EPA and the spend plan, but that is a core component that you see reflected there. Thanks again to Councilmember Sawant for all the work that she has been bringing to council over the last years on pushing for progressive revenue. And we will continue the conversations in the next week about Green New Deal investments and making sure that we have affordable housing that's geographically located across Seattle to specifically address historic disinvestment and displacement from communities of color and the needs of housing. Today. With your support, though, we are passing progressive revenue in the city of Seattle. We are coming together and supporting our city and supporting our most vulnerable. We have taken the lead from communities of color, from neighborhood and small businesses, from those who are fighting for food access, those who are rallying together to support small businesses, those who are supporting health care workers and immigrants and refugees together. Today we are leading like we have in the past. We are taking direction from community, just like you have in past. Council passed $15 minimum wage and secure scheduling and. And thankfully those issues ripple throughout our country and I am hoping the same will happen today. We are leading like we did on the Domestic Workers Bill of Rights and the hotel worker protections. Which city after city has continued to call us to say. How did you do it? How was it done? I want to echo the comments that were made before to other cities that are looking to pass progressive revenue and recognize that the city of Seattle and Washington State has ground to make up for given. We are in the most regressive city and state in the country in terms of our tax code. But we're hoping today that we continue to show that leadership across the country and legislating solutions for our communities, providing immediate relief and support to those who've been left out, responding to this moment of crisis and investing in areas that have had historic disinvestment and division. We are acting at the local level as a good partner, a good partner with the state and the county as we find and push for additional progressive revenue solutions and implementing this effort today to right size our upside down tax system. This is a small component of that larger solution Jumpstart Seattle, reinvest in our families, our neighborhoods and our local community. And this is how we emerge stronger and more equitable after this crisis. I have a few thank you, but I want to provide. And then I will stop, I promise. I want to thank Council Central South Band Leader Tom Michael, all the community throughout Rateliff, early morning late night weekend who have been sending messages and emails and making sure that all of the council members ideas were vetted and drafted. The piece of legislation in front of us reflects those amendments from Council colleagues to make sure that our values and our priorities are included. And we would not be able to have a piece of legislation that reflected these priorities without all of your work in the legislative branch. So thank you for all of your work, and I do hope that you hear our appreciation and also are able to get some rest soon. I want to thank Paddy Wagon. I want to thank Patty and Pearson for their patience as we work together to provide the agendas for our meetings that were ongoing and for all of the thought that you provided to us from the Legislative Department. Thanks to the city clerk's office, Monica, Amelia and Jody, without you, we would be out of order all the time. So thank you for helping us with the various amendments and the legislative process. And thanks to Danna, Stephanie and Joseph and the communication team for putting in the extra work to make sure that the Jumpstart plan, including the detailed spend plan that we will be voting on next, was easily digestible and was clearly understood by the public so that we didn't hear the same type of criticism we heard in the past. There is a detailed spend plan that not only has the ordinance that we're voting on today, but will be followed up with a resolution much like we have in previous efforts related to levees, to be even more specific about where to go. So thank you for that. Thanks to our I.T. department and Eric and Sun for all you are doing to help keeping these for all you are doing to help us keep working remotely and for making sure that all the public can continue to call and testify. And thank you to everybody who's continued to testify, which I'll get to in a second. Thank you, counsel, colleagues, especially all of those who've spoken today, talking about the historic moment that we're in. I just want to underscore how incredibly important it is for us to take away the historic win that is today by voting on Jump Start Seattle. And thanks again to I think I mentioned this earlier. But Councilmember Morales, for the earlier iterations of the bill that you introduced and council to represent a for her bill as well. I think we have carefully pulled from each of these pieces to make sure that we are advancing strong legislation today. And as the council president said, a huge thank you to my team. I know that your work, as has been recognized by every council member and the staff, but thank you thank you to several chief of staff for your leadership on this effort. And thank you to my incredible team, Aaron House, Buddy Cuevas, Aretha Butterfield, each who reached out to specific constituencies and got feedback from folks and worked on various amendments. I count the president, I know I am going long, but I would be remiss if I didn't say thank you to the council. The committee, sorry, a handful of organizations, if you might be so kind, to allow me a few more minutes to the faith organization. Thank you. Folks like this Action Network, the ultimate Mennonite Church, Interfaith Task Force on Homelessness Justice Council, and the Church Council of Greater Seattle to Food Access Organizations, Food and Water Action North North Helpline and to Operations that lunch to local businesses and Transit to Mobility Organizations. Cafe, Road and Station and Cafe Bicycle Club. Thank you to the community resilience organizations such as Bird Bar, Place, Child Care Resources and MSP Neighborhood House Lifelong Aides and Queen and Help Line. Along with Somali youth organization, progressive organizations like Civic Ventures and Policy Center, Fuel, Puget Sound Stage Poverty Action Park for Recovery, and who does not act to shut down action for retirement? Retirement? Pizarro Labor organizations SEIU 6775 1190 9925. AIDS and Protect 17 MLK Labor The Laborers, Painters, Iron Workers, U S.W. 21 and the Washington Nightlife Music Association also want to thank immigrant refugee organizations like Catholic Unite. And our motto is One America and Housing and Homelessness Organization Campus Housing, Low Income Housing Institute, the UCLA Brown Reid Housing Alliance, Youth Care, Nightwatch Housing Development Consortium, Lake City Partners. Plymouth Housing. The Coalition on Homelessness and Real Change, just to name a few. And thank you finally to Seattleites who are struggling, whether unemployed or underemployed, whether you've experienced the increase in workload or balancing childcare and working and pitching, whether your business is closed or just reopening, whether you're missing hugs or have lost loved ones . I know you're wrapping your head around this policy right now, and it's a loss. It is a huge win. And I know you must need to focus on making sure that your family is making ends meet. We are here in the meantime, working on this policy, Jumpstart Seattle, to make sure that communities across Seattle can continue to have access to core services, core protections like housing and food, and that we're investing in the long term so that we are creating a more united, a more resilient and more equitable Seattle as we recover from this COVID crisis. Thank you, council colleagues. Looking forward to voting on jump start Seattle with all of you. And well, thank you once again for making this all possible. Great. Thank you so much. That closes out our debate. So I am now going to ask that the clerk please call the role on the passage of the bill as amended Herbold. Guy Juarez? No. Lewis, I. Morales. I must get. A. I. PETERSON No. So what. I. Strauss. I. President Gonzalez, I. Seven in favor. Two opposed the bill passes as amended and the chair will sign it. And I'd ask that the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf. Okay. Item four I think this is our last agenda item on today's agenda. So I'd ask that the clerk please read item four into the record.