AN ORDINANCE relating to the 2015 Budget; amending Ordinance 124648, which adopted the 2015 Budget, including the 2015-2020 Capital Improvement Program (CIP); changing appropriations to various departments and budget control levels, and from various funds in the Budget; creating new appropriations; adding new projects; revising project allocations for certain projects in the 2015-2020 CIP; creating both exempt and nonexempt positions; abrogating positions, modifying positions, making cash transfers between various City funds; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts; all by a 3/4 vote of the City Council.
Agenda item four Council Bill 118453 relating to the 2015 budget amending ordinance 124648, which adopted the 2015 budget, including the 2015 to 2020 Capital Improvement Program Program. C. I. P. Thank you. Councilmember gotten council bill 118453 is a second quarter supplemental ordinance. This council bill proposes adjustments to the 2015 adopted budget and includes funding for a new labor economist position to coordinate the work of the workforce equity and funding to coordinate performance management. We're very pleased about the fact that the new Labor Economist position will be very good for analyzing the gender wage gap within city department and we urge its passage. Thank you. Questions or comments? Council Members one. This is the item that's listed number five in the agenda. Number four. It's number four, but I guess mine says number five. Yeah, it's related to the previous burglary. But I did. I did quote the proper council bill number. Yeah. We're we're on item number four, which is the capital improvement budget. It's because we. Go ahead, Councilmember Swan, if you have any questions. Yes. I mean, this is just to make clear, this is a supplemental budget appropriations. Yeah, we're talking about. Yes, I'm voting yes, but I just wanted to take a moment to highlight the process that's being used. I mean, this is the summary of the changes to the city's budget that are included in this quarter's supplement. It's a pretty thick booklet, as you can see. I don't know if anyone has had a chance to read through this, but it's 22 pages of summaries. Many of these are small. Some of these are small changes, but many of them are not. They're substantive issues of city priorities. And some of the line items are million dollar changes. I'm not sure how it's possible to have a meaningful discussion about these items when they come as a package like this. And I'm sure that the committee discussed it as much as is possible. But I think that just for a future reference, these issues should be discussed one at a time as they come up not lumped together into one document of 98 different budget actions and extra credit to any of my colleagues who can name three of them without looking, which would be a does not of your memory, but of the fact that this process is so, you know, sort of really omnibus. But even though it should be actually individually discussed. One item I do want to highlight myself is an example of an extremely important item that truly deserves its own discussion. And it reads, This item transfers appropriation authority in the amount of $1.7 million from the litigation expenses of to the police action vehicle. The judgments and settlements are anticipated to exceed the available appropriation in the Police Police Action Vehicle in 2015. Does this mean that the Seattle Police Department expects to have to pay more money in lawsuits this year than in the past? What are the lawsuits or are they excessive force lawsuits? Are they related to free speech issues around Black Lives Matter protests? I think this sort of line item is an example where it's not just it should not just be part of a nine year item summary, but should be a separate discussion. Who is it? Who is accountable for the extra $1.7 million? And even more important, who is accountable for the $1.7 million worth of harm that is done to our communities for which the SBT will face lawsuits? My point is not simply about this packet of budget appropriations. It is generally about how can we structure these discussions to maximize democratic participation of the public in important issues? Again, I am not I am very confident that the Finance Committee has discussed this. This is not to point a finger at them, but just to discuss how we can do this going forward. Given that much of this agenda item funds important city department and programs and contains the logistical changes necessary for routine operations, I will not stand in the way of its passage, but I want to stress that they should have much more democratic participation. Any other questions or comments? Councilmember. So often these items were discussed in detail and there is a central staff memo that summarizes the various changes. The Budget Office and department folks appeared before the committee. I think we had three separate committee. Meetings as members. And you're certainly welcome to attend those and participate with regard to the Police Action Fund. There's a summary of those cases. It's distributed to council members and you could review those and then ask the law department questions about any of those matters that you're concerned about. Any other questions or comments? Councilmember Herold I would just add that the Council has had in place at some point any lawsuit that we settle that's 500,000 or more are required to come to the council for discussion. Many of us in the plaintiffs community talk to plaintiffs lawyers, and we know I've referred many cases actually to people to sue the city. I want sued the city of, well, more than once. And so these discussions are had to make sure that we are accountable. Quite frankly, we are self-insured, self insured as an entity, and many people encourage us to keep us accountable out there in the plaintiffs community. I think Councilman Swann's points are are understood, but hopefully we have the right policies in place to make sure that when we are liable, we are liable. And there are proven cases where we have been liable. And I want to certainly commend the process where these are brought to the council and we've been have had an opportunity to discuss them. Please call the roll and the passage of the bill. Gordon Harrell. All right. O'Brien All right. Okamoto Rasmussen All right. So want I Bagshot and president Burgess eight in favor then oppose the bill. Passes and the chair will sign it. Please read item five.