AN ORDINANCE related to COVID-19; making a supplemental appropriation of $2,460,000 to several general fund agencies; making a supplemental appropriation of $78,312,500 to several non-general fund agencies; making a supplemental appropriation of $17,437,000 to several capital improvement funds; amending the 2019-2020 Biennial Budget Ordinance, Ordinance 18835, Sections 19, 19, 24, 33, 35, 62, 73, 84, 84, 85, 85, 95, 112, 116, 116 and 126, as amended, and Attachment A, as amended; and declaring an emergency.
We recognize that in use and even in unusual times working virtually. We do want to make sure we're hearing from everyone as much as possible. With that, we will move to item five on today's agenda, which is the fourth supplemental budget ordinance related to the COVID 19 response effort. We have Mr. Tillery Williams and Andrew Kim from central staff to provide a staff report and White Daily, the director of the Office of Performance Strategy and Budget, available for questions. Mr.. Kim. Mr. Williams. The line is yours. Thank you, Mr. Chair. For the record, Hilary Williams, counsel, policy staff. I will begin with the staff report, which begins on page 11 of your agenda packet proposed ordinance 2020 279, which would be the fourth COVID 19 emergency omnibus, would make a total supplemental appropriation of $87.3 million, of which $1.4 million would be made to general fund agencies $68.5 million to non general fund agencies and $17.4 million to the capital improvement program. To date, the council has appropriated $180.9 million to support activities and necessary expenditures to prepare, prepare for, and respond to the COVID 19 public health emergency. Similar to the prior COVID 19 emergency omnibus legislations, most of the appropriations included in this proposal would be funded by state monies and federal monies that are currently or will be available to the county from the Corona Virus Aid Relief and Economic Security Act, which is commonly referenced to as the CARES Act. I'd also like to add that the bulk of this round of funding is made up of appropriation requests or the continuing of existing COVID 19 related programs and operations as stated by executive staff. These requests, which I will cover later in the briefing, will allow the county to continue to support the staffing and operating of COVID 19 response programs through the end of the year. Moving along the page to Table one provides a summary of all the emergency omnibus legislations that have been adopted thus far by this Council, as well as what is currently being proposed looming. That Council adopts the proposed ordinance, as is the total amount appropriated for all of the climate related emergency. Supplementals would be $268.2 million. The executive does expect to transmit one last COVID 19 emergency omnibus legislation on or around October 15th. Beginning at the top of page 13 is table two, which provides a summary of each of the appropriations included in this proposed performance. I will now quickly cover each of those requests. First on the list is a $1.2 million request from District Court to purchase supplies and make workplace modifications to support social distancing requirements in response to COVID. This were covered. Things such as the installation of plexiglass barriers for customer facing services in courtrooms and the purchasing, cleaning and personal protection supplies for staff and the public. This request would also cover the installation of a complete remote video court system. Next. The Department of Judicial Administration is requesting $182,000 to add temporary staff for six months to provide customer service, triage and juvenile administration locations in order to adhere to public health standards, update current software applications and purchase additional miscellaneous items for safe operations during the COVID 19 pandemic. Under the Community and Human Services Administration appropriation unit. The approach to the proposed ordinance would appropriate $1 million to the Department of Community and Human Services for support for a COVID 19 Health Ambassadors program to educate the public about strategies to mitigate the spread of COVID 19, especially in communities disproportionately impacted by the virus. Executive staff state the health ambassador that the health ambassador recruitment is currently underway to identify and as possible provide a choice for continue county employee county employment for employees whose jobs will be or have been eliminated due to COVID related economic conditions. DCH has plans to hire up to 45 ambassadors. Moving on to the Cultural Development Authority Appropriation Unit. The executive is requesting $2 million to enhance four cultures support to cultural workers and organizations affected by COVID 19 to either four Cultures Cultural Relief Fund or the recently announced reopened fund. The Reopen Fund provides grants between 2520 $4,000 for training, protective equipment, infrastructure improvements, system upgrades, and additional personal personnel needed for cultural organizations and stewards of designated landmarks in response to COVID 19. Executive staff stated that the Cultural Relief Fund has granted a total of $1.9 million, and the reopen bond currently has 1.3 million in allocations. But those funds have not yet been granted. Under the Local Services Administration Appropriation Unit, the proposed ordinance would modify grant criteria for the Small Business Relief Grant Program, which was approved in the April emergency call with. According to executive staff, approximately 83% of all round one grant applications did not meet one or more of the eligibility criteria . These modifications would allow additional small businesses and unincorporated King County to qualify in a second round of funding from the remaining balance of grant funds. Moving along. The proposed ordinance would continue to support the county's COVID 19 response by appropriately appropriating roughly $8.9 million in the Corona Virus Relief Fund to the Department of Community and Human Services to cover new expenditures. Which includes $4 million to support congregate, shelter, fortification, $3 million to provide emergency child care for essential workers. 2.5 million to support the intensification from hotel vouchers. And roughly $2.3 million to support county operated isolation and quarantine facilities. Moving on to page 14. The next five requests on the list are from public health. In the first item, public health is requesting $1.7 million to provide assistance to support those identified by contact tracers to self-isolate through home quarantine for 14 days. According to the fiscal note, about 20% of these individuals identified require additional resources to successfully remain in isolation and quarantine. To offer this support. Public Health will employ a team of 35 community health workers that are representative of the communities that they serve sharing life, experience, cultures and language. The community health workers will help facilitate access to some immediate resources, including groceries, infection control supplies, entertainment, prescription drugs, support, referrals to housing assistance, and new COVID 19 pandemic specific programs that are under development to support our community, such as rental assistance being developed by DC Tech's. Public health is also requesting approximately 1.4 million to expand the global assessment team to ensure the ability of the team to fully execute the active, proactive and unsheltered COVID 19 testing strategies needed to meet surge demands targeted at high risk populations and respond to community requests through the end of the year. Public health is also requesting 2020 8.9 million, which is the largest request being proposed to continue a number of COVID 19 response activities, including coordination of the entire public health response, community mitigation and recovery, surveillance, contact tracing and existing testing and lab programs. This also includes funding to continue a public education campaign and funding for mobile assessment teams in isolation and quarantine. Set aside staffing. Next, there is a $4.3 million request from public health to provide resources for schools to safely reopen and mitigate COVID 19 transmission by dedicated supports to the school sector for communication, health, education. Communicable disease and epidemiology. Investigation, contact tracing and data accessibility. The last request from public health would appropriate approximately $11.2 million to expand high volume drive thru walk over 19 testing sites that provide 500 to 1000 tests a day in multiple locations in South and End in East Kane County. This would also cover implementing a partnership with community health centers to add medium volume testing, which includes 200 to 500 tests a day to expand testing opportunities for currently underserved communities, according to executive staff. There are there are no high volume drive thru walk up testing sites currently operated in Southeast King County. However, public health is planning to open a high volume testing site in Auburn and a medium volume site in Renton no later than the end of August. The city of Seattle currently operates two high volume sites and Sodo and Aurora, respectively, and one medium volume walk up site in Rainier Beach. Moving along to environmental health. Environmental Health is requesting roughly $2.7 million to implement an outreach and compliance initiative with restaurants, bars and taverns to increase compliance with the Governor's Safe Start requirements. This appropriation also includes reopening technical assistance for other non restaurant food establishment businesses and municipalities. Now moving on to the top of page 15. Finance and business operations is requesting $1.3 million to add outside consultant support to proper to properly set up a system of eligibility review and monitoring for expenditures related to the county's Corona Virus Relief Fund to ensure maximum reimbursement of costs. This request also supports a reporting expert. To assist, effort and PSP and ongoing reporting needs. There is a $5.9 million request from FDA to support ongoing operating costs that COVID 19 sites throughout the county. This proposed appropriation assumes the state and federal grants revenue to match the general fund transferred to FMD according to a fiscal balance to the fiscal. The money would be expended as follows. $1.2 million for catering services. $2 million for a security services contract. And $2.7 million for the building operations services and Security Management Services. According to executive staff, this appropriation would allow the executive to continue operations through the end of the calendar year. The proposed ordinance would also modify expenditure restriction IR three related to the mitigation fund for local governments to recover documented costs related to the county's isolation and quarantine sites to also include businesses. Next, Andy is requesting $6.1 million to support leasing costs for eight isolation, quarantine and shelter at the anticipation sites across King County. The proclamation would also support leasing costs associated with the occupying of the Made in Bower Center in Bellevue. According to the executive staff. The Made in Borrower Center would provide a bigger space, which would allow for King County Superior Court to resume jury trials while adhering to social distancing guidelines. There is also a request for eight years. Capital City is requesting $6.2 million to plan, design, acquire and roll out a new unified communications platform. Microsoft Teams to replace the existing Skype system currently in U.S.. It should be noted that executive staff stated that city will likely renew the county's limited Zoom licenses in 2021, whereas Microsoft teams will become the county's platform for unified communications. Zoom will be used for specific use cases like breakout rooms currently not offered by Microsoft team. And last on the list is an additional appropriation of $5.5 million for the isolation, quarantine, modular and superior court arraignment court capital projects. According to executive staff, the Superior Court Arraignment Court Project includes physical and technological elements to address COVID 19 physical distancing as it liftings are required parties for hearings. It also allows for increased safety and process efficiency measures for hearing participants. Executive staff state that this increase is project and project cost is due to updated cost information and an adjustment to previous project cost estimate estimates informed by actual costs. The primary cause for additional costs beyond budget primarily and involve age back and climbing costs at the Soho warehouse and the Elliott Modular Facility. Additional details for each of these items that I just presented in the summary are provided beginning on the bottom of page 15 and ending at the top of page 27 of your staff reports. But getting halfway down on page 27 is a quick summary of the county's Federal Cares Act funding. Again, as I stated earlier in the briefing, most of the appropriations that have been included would be funded by this part of money. This includes FEMA disaster relief funds and the Treasury Department's coronavirus relief fund. As you know, the county received $262 million from the Treasury Department's coronavirus relief fund back in April. This fund provides the most flexibility for the county to use relief money to support the necessary expenditures related to COVID. Executive staff have stated that they have made it a priority to try and exhaust all other available state and federal funding before utilizing any of the $262 million from the Coronavirus Relief Fund. Executive staff has also stated that most of the expenditures related to the quarantine and shelter intensification sites may be reimbursed in favor. However, FEMA reimbursements require local governments to cover 12.5% of the total expenditures. In prior months, it was unknown whether the state would cover this portion on behalf of the county. But as of today, its state executive staff believes it is unlikely that the state would cover this local match. Therefore, a portion of the $262 million in coronavirus in the coronavirus relief fund would need to be used to fund the county's portion of the FEMA expenditures. According to executive staff, the total appropriations adopted by council to date that would be funded by coronavirus relief fund dollars is approximately 180,000,000 million, which includes the proposed appropriations in this fourth COVID 19 governance. In addition, the executive is setting aside $70 million to cover the cost of the counties. FEMA's match costs related to staff that were either redeployed to support the COVID 19 response or that have taken leave due to COVID 19. And lastly, for unknown risks that may come up in the future. That breakdown of the total allocation of the $262 million to date is provided in table six on page 28 of your staff reports. And in conclusion, table seven on page 29 provides a timeline of activities that would need to be conducted in anticipation of possible action of the proposed ordinance or the September 1st council meeting, which would be next Tuesday. Mr. Chair, that concludes my remarks, and I will be happy to answer any questions you may have at this time. Thank you, Mr. Williams. Colleagues. Councilmember Lambert. Thank you. I wanted to ask a couple of questions. Going back to page 14. You said that you were going to open some some sites in the East County and South County. And then you mentioned Renton and Auburn. Those are both South County. I didn't hear the name of the place in East County. Could you fill me in on what the places in East County were that were open? Because you're correct, we have nothing at these county. So that Councilmember Lambert, that information was provided by exact staff. I do believe we have director debris on the phone, on the council. If you could, please step. Thank you. For the record, Dwight Hively, Director of the Office of Performance Strategy and Budget. Councilmember Lambert We are still struggling to find a location on the East Side. I just during this meeting opened the latest communication we got and we have not found a location yet. There are several that are being looked at. I think Councilmember Balducci mentioned that we could, if we needed to use the Eastgate site that we already have set up as a facility. It's not perfect, but it is something that we control and could use. So if you have suggestions, we would welcome them. Just ask. I have several suggestions, so that would be wonderful. So let's get in touch. Why don't you just email me council member and I will pass them on to the appropriate people. Okay. Sounds great. And then I was on some phone calls with the state on the. I realize this is federal and such, but the auditing that is going to be done is of concern to me when we have so much overlap, especially in the allocation of the 2920 $8.9 million. There are so many things in there that are overlapped into other budgets, and I am concerned about how we will do the accounting because at last I heard at the end of the pandemic, when they come back and audit, we will be charged for anything that doesn't pass the audit. And so there are some things in there that I am concerned about. One of them is the isolation of quarantine sites. And when you look at the list of them, first of all, that is the cost. It's not even on the list. And secondly, last I heard, the biggest number we had had was 27 people, plus the 36 from the boat, which we offered billing have to take their people for them. So I'm concerned about oh, okay, I see on this page, but still I see it now on table four and another chart that the Issaquah is in there now on this chart. But on the other side it wasn't. So we are spending or they look at this chart or the other chart together, 14 million here and 25 over there. A lot of money for 27 people that were ours. So can you explain to me why we are providing so many more beds at this point? I realize the flu's coming. We could have a second wave, but if if 27 was the highest we've had. I don't know why we're preparing that many beds. So if you could help me understand that, that'd be great. Councilman. You want me to take that one? Thank you. Okay. So I am looking at information from I believe this was Monday night of this week. We had 77 people in isolation and quarantine facilities, 12 at Aurora and 65 at Issaquah. We are now cumulatively approaching a thousand people total who we have served at those facilities. You are correct that we have opened some facilities or constructed some facilities that we have not yet used. That, frankly, was because back in March and April we had no idea how serious this was going to be here. If it had turned out to be something like New York City. Even everything that we had would have been overwhelmed. And so we have started to take down our facilities. I think you're all aware we took down the shoreline what we called a CRC facility that we had used a little bit, but not a lot. And so we will be looking at alternative uses for these facilities if we get through the fall without needing a whole lot more than we have now, we are reasonably confident that even if we have not used the facilities, that we will be eligible for FEMA reimbursement because it was based on the reasonable expectations at the time we did. She said, If I could vote one more, I looking at table one in an April which I understand the capital amount at 30.9 million. And then because of what you just said, it dropped down in June to the capital of 4.5, but then it goes back up again in August to 17.4. So. We do know that we use all of these and yes, cumulatively 8000 people, but that wasn't on any one night. So why are we back up at 17.4? So there's a difference between the capital costs, the operating costs. The capital costs are all basically sunk costs. We are coming back to you with appropriations as we finalize projects and get the bills. So we always knew at the beginning that the cost of these was going to be way more than 50 million. We just didn't know how much. And so what we've done with capital is to bring to you each time the next increment of bills that have come in to seek appropriation, whereas on the operating costs of those facilities, we're kind of doing a pay as you go. And so we actually expected to spend more on operations than we have because we haven't had to have every facility in operation. So I think I mentioned to you either two weeks ago or four weeks ago, it would have been two weeks because you were on recess. So four weeks ago that the temp facility we had put into what we call worm status, so it's available but not staffed as a way to save operating costs. And we can bring that back if we need it in 72 hours. But we're trying to not operate things that we don't need. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Bagley. You're most welcome, colleagues. I would be interested in either from Mr. Williams or Mr. Lively, a little bit more explanation about where the about the investments that would be seen made from for culture. Why don't we have your staff start and then I will add if necessary. Okay. Let me get your my and my darkroom. So before for culture. This is according to executive staff. You have two farms here. So the cultural relief fund was designed to lessen the financial impact of COVID 19 related closures and cancelations, while the reopened fund is designed to help organizations move forward and adapt programing or space to meet public health restrictions. I don't know how much you want me to go into this, Mr. Chair, so just stop me if I'm going too far and maybe a little more. Mr. WILLIAMS, Let me be a little bit more specific. What types of organizations are eligible for each of the two sources of funds? So based on the information that we receive from executive staff, most of these organizations will be cultural in nature with racial equity and priority given to organizations, landmarks located in or that provide most of their service to a census tract designated as 40%. Excuse me. And this is this is coming out of the 2018 communities of Opportunity Combined Composite Index. Thank you. Colleagues further questions. DG Duty. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to do my best, my daily impersonation. I have four questions and one comment, if I may. The first one is very specific as I look at the list of shelter, the intensification sites to be funded with this supplemental, I don't see the Red Lion in Bellevue, which has been used as a shelter d intensification site for the women and family shelter at Sophia Way on the east side. And now last week, we just had a celebration of opening their new building. And so I just would like to know whether we what's the plan there? Is the plan to shut down the red line and have that function move into the new building or what. We've received some advocacy from folks working with this population that they still could use the hotel space. I'm just wondering why that doesn't appear in this proposal. Because talking about duty, I would defer to the executive staff if you. And Councilmember, I need to ask my folks about that. There has been considerable confusion about facilities in Bellevue and whether they're included or not. But I may have asked about the wrong one, so let me track that down and we'll get that back to your staff right away. Thank you very much. Second question is, some of us have heard, including the executive, have heard from our immigrant and refugee commissioners with concerns about whether important health information and guidance is reaching hard to reach populations, linguistically isolated folks, and particularly the Latin Hispanic community, which is in our county, seeing such a disproportionate number of cases and impacts from COVID 19. When we spoke previously and you gave us a briefing on the budget to come, I recall somebody asked the question, I believe it might have been the budget chair of Councilmember Cowles, whether there was enough resources for outreach to these organizations. I city in this proposal we have some more health ambassadors, but I feel like there's a bit of a disconnect here somehow. And I wonder if we could get to the bottom of why we're hearing from community based organizations and representatives of our commission that information still isn't getting where it needs to go. But we feel that we've got more than enough resources to make that to close that loop. So that may just be a problem statement, not a question, but I'm trying to get to the bottom of that and we'd love to talk to you more about it. Dwight Yeah. Let me let me follow up with OSHA and public health about that. I think the perception is that we have resources to do that, but we may not be connecting with the right people. Okay, great. Did you say, Councilmember, that the executive office has been approached by by these these groups as well? There are. He and I received a grant, a joint letter, which we jointly responded to. And we had a follow up meeting last week that included the staff member for the commission, who's an executive staff. I don't know if that meeting would have worked its way all the way up, but yeah, there's been some communication. Okay. Okay. And then on inside the testing sites, I would love to follow up along with Councilmember Lambert and FDA, because they may have tried out some of the ideas that we have, but it would be nice to just share information and see if we can help in any way. Also, a comment, not a question. Fourth item is you heard testimony. We heard testimony and I'm sure you did as well from a member of the public advocating to continue the access food delivery service. Any any information there about what's going on with that? Yeah, that one I actually can answer. So we are going to continue that. What we're struggling with is making sure we understand what revenue sources can be used for that purpose. And so we are working with Metro and the prosecutor's office and outside counsel about whether the money that Metro got through the CARES Act, which was separate from the 262 million, whether that can be used, whether we can use our own metro resources like fare revenue, they definitely can use the 262 million if we need to. Okay. We are going to continue that. And if we need to come back with a subsequent appropriation, we will. Do you have a sense of how much that costs through the end of the year? It's probably a bit before the end of the year. It's probably something on the order of $2 million. But let me give you a number for that. Thank you. The comment is I was going to ask about rental assistance and whether we have sufficient resources in rental assistance. But then the executive announced just a few days ago the additional rental assistance using the COVID three, I believe funding that the council passed, plus a significant amount that came from the state. And so thank you for that. I think that's going to be very important. And my final comment, I realize I got the numbers on virtually six things so I failed in my Dwight president is about that. Number just the numbers wrong. Never gets them wrong. But councilmember what I do when I make a mistake partway through, I say I have part A and B. Oh, excellent. I am still not good one skills about child care. So we have additional funding in this supplemental for childcare for essential workers. This continues, I believe, a program that we started towards the beginning. Actually, one of the first things we did after COVID hit was this. And my question is, do we feel that the program as it's being implemented, is meeting both of the stated goals of the program? The first goal was to make sure that child care is as available and affordable for essential workers. But there was a secondary goal that was to put money into the child care system so that we preserve and keep alive some of these child care providers because the system was not robust enough to meet needs prior to COVID and to see childcare providers go out of business was just sort of making that problem far worse for when we eventually do come out of these times. And I just I wonder if the method of funding which was to fund slots basically were giving were or paying for people's space in the childcare. Whether that was meeting the second variable, I had heard early on some concern from childcare providers that this wasn't enough of a support to any individual provider to help them. But I did not I haven't heard anything recently where about to reinvest in the same program. So I'm asking the question now. So I think Mr. Williams and his staff report has little information on how the first money was spent, and then I can follow up after that. And yeah, so. To date, there are 55 providers that received a $4,000 one times to use for insurance, cleaning supplies and other resources. In a monthly reimbursement of $2,083 per slot. So there were 184 slots funded in April, 271 in May and 278 in June, or a total of 733 slots for that three month period with an expenditure of roughly 100 million. In conversations with executive staff, we have been able to gather that the demand is there and people are using the program. But to get more more specific than that, that's definitely something that we can follow up on to see if there might be more of a demand and what that might look like. Let me thank you and I totally that's that's super helpful. And I was flipping through the staff report and I didn't find your information in time. So thank you for sharing that with me. The the question, though, is if out of those 733 slots we purchased, if you were a modest sized provider with 2530 slots in your child care and you got one of those that may or may not help you to stay alive. If you're a large child care provider like the YMCA and you only got a handful of those, it's the I, I see that we're doing a ton of good and that's our primary purpose, is to make sure that child care is available and affordable to essential workers. But we also have the secondary purpose of trying to prop up, if you will, child care providers, because there's a social good there that if they go out of business, we lose the ability for many of our workers to go back to work. It becomes an economic hit. So I would just love to follow up later on maybe and see if the folks who are administering the program have any sense of how the providers are benefiting from it. So Councilmember then also note, we did have a proposal that we considered that was more investing in the infrastructure of the child care system, which it sounds a little bit is what you're talking about a little bit. So why don't we share that with your staff and with council members for you to consider whether you would want to do some or all of that in this ordinance? I will be frank that we asked for a prioritization between that proposal and the one that's included here. And the one that's included here was what our department thought was a higher priority to continue the child care for essential workers. But you also there is some money that has not been allocated, and if the council wanted to consider that, that would certainly be reasonable. Thank you. I appreciate taking a look at that. And it may be that this is the best possible use of what was now limited CARES Act funding that we have left. But I appreciate the opportunity to take a look at it. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you, Mr. Williams and Mr. David. Further questions. Mr. Chair. Council Member Coles. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a few questions of Dwight, possibly of artillery. I'll first of all, we have on page 28, table six, that indicates there would be $70 million in, in effect, available for, I believe, our October 15th transmitted COVID five budget. Is that accurate? Actor Wood Correct. Yeah. And so we have some unknown that we're not sure what FEMA will come through on. And but we have to reserve the match requirements and staff costs and unknown risks. Do you have any estimate at all, even a range of how much that would be available for additional appropriations, applications for services and so forth? So council member, that 70 million is three approximations, let's call them that, and it's $30 million, which is our best guess of what we will need for FEMA match. And, you know, could that be 25? Could it be 35? Sure, it could, because we don't know for sure what FEMA's going to cover. And as I think Mr. Williams noted, we don't know what the state is really going to do because traditionally federal funding is 75%, with the expectation that state and local is 25%. The state's practice has been to fund 12 and a half for. Leaving 12 and a half percent for us here, locally there. Early on, there was some discussion from the state saying, oops, I may get rid of this phone call here from the state, saying that they would cover their 12 and a half percent. And then pretty soon thereafter they said, oh, well, we're not sure we can afford that. And so they started to say they wouldn't cover anything. And then they said they'd covered for a while and not after that. And then they never really finished their thought about that. So we have some uncertainty in the FEMA amount and in the amount that we will get from the state as a portion of the local maps. So that's why that one so squishy. We are currently working through the second reserve, which is how much of our preexisting staff time can we charge to the CARES Act and how much of the covered leave that was granted? Can we charge to CARES Act? And as we finish up the 2122 budget, we will make determinations about that for at a minimum, the general fund and quite possibly other funds like the Public Health Fund and some of the DC funds, where in essence we will use the federal money and create fund balance in those funds that we can use in the 2122 budget. So when we come to you in October, we will know what we have built in for that so that there's uncertainty there now that will go away because we're going to have to come to a decision about that. And then the last 10 million is just we don't know what could happen in the fall that we haven't thought about yet. It's entirely possible that's zero. But we set aside 10 million for that purpose. And so our best estimate is there's 9 million that we haven't reserved and that is completely spoken for by you all. As the folks who ultimately decide how to spend the county's money can ignore all of the reserves I am creating and do whatever you want. So ultimately it's up to you to make those decisions. I'm also I would just note that Councilmember Dombrowski has pointed out a couple of times that is likely that we have underspending in some programs that you have already appropriated, and I have no sense of whether that was top secret. Dwight. Sorry. That's all your saying is always. That's. No, that's okay. I'm just kidding. Yeah. So, I mean, there's probably a couple, 3 to $5 million of money that you've appropriated that ultimately won't get spent. So if, you know, if the council is looking for do we have capacity to add a few things? You definitely do. Certainly the 9 million is entirely unspoken spoken for at this point. And if you felt the need to do a little more than that, you probably can and not endanger anything else that we've set aside. Okay. That's very helpful. And along those same lines, I'm wondering about when we do have COVID five transmitted to us. Well, what options might there be that would be closed off in effect because of the time frame? I mean, October 15th leaves six weeks or so till the end of the year. We will have we will be taking up coverage five in December following our action on the biannual budget. So I'm just wondering if there's anything that really comes to your mind that you think is not included in the cupboard for a budget that by October 15th and then a vote in December would really be too late, given the December 31st, December 31st restriction. So I don't I can't think of anything that would be too late now. For example, let's say you decided you wanted to do more for child care, but you wait. Or we did. And we waited. And you waited until December to fund that. That's obviously too late. They'd get that money out the door. What we are planning to include in the COVID five in October as a contingency is an appropriation authority probably for the Office of Emergency Management to purchase a bunch of staff at the end of the year if we know we have money that we haven't spent. So, for example, they have contracts in place for. PPE. For masks, for things like that that we will probably ask you for appropriation authority up to some limit. And if we get to December 20th and we're looking around and say, hey, we know we've got $5 million that we're not going to spend, we would have them go forward and make those purchases and that would make sure we spend most of the money that we have received. And again, if it turns out we don't have any unspent money, we just won't use that appropriation for it. Thank you. And another question which she probably will not be able to answer, but I'd like to hear your your response. I ask you this every week when we meet, but we have we have been hopeful that we will receive additional funds from Congress, and it's looking more unlikely now. We were hopeful for a while. But are you hearing anything more at this point that gives you any encouragement or more discouragement? I would have to say I am more discouraged than encouraged. So as I think you all know, the House called itself into session last Saturday to pass a bill reelected Postal Service. There had been some discussion of additional legislation for other COVID related purposes, including state and local government relief, just to kind of call attention to those issues again. They didn't do that. It is my understanding that the Senate has no plans to come back into session to take up the Postal Service legislation, and the president has said he would veto it if passed. That all suggests to me that the possibility of federal action prior to the election is very low. It clearly we are developing the executive's proposed budget with the assumption there is no more federal money before he submits his budget to you. That seems inevitable. There's always a theoretical possibility they would come back before the council needs to act on the budget. That seems very unlikely in a presidential election year, with many representatives and senators up in difficult races. So my if I had to bet, I would bet there is a chance in late November, early December, they would come back and do something that's too late for the council's process. So we would have to come up with an emergency supplemental in January. We're actually getting very good at doing that right now. So and as are you. So maybe we can pull that off. If I had a really bad, I would bet we won't see anything until after the election results are in effect. And the new Congress and new or not president are in place. And so I would bet nothing till January. Okay. Thank you. And one more question. I represent I mean, Councilmember DEMBOSKY had mentioned when you related about there being some underspending in a way because of less demand with some of the grant programs we opened up, I think one of them was with Chambers of Commerce, correct? Yes. But I think there's also some understanding where the demand is being higher than had been anticipated. So do you have any thought about what we could do to perhaps open up that funding and direct it to other. So the examples that I gave you of understanding are in, as you said, at the business organizations, or maybe a shorthand is chambers. As you remember, there were two different buckets of that. And in both of them they were administered through my office. Both of those there was less demand than we expected. So we have some unspent funds, A and I and I think even with the amendments to the unincorporated area, small business grants that are before you. I've been talking with John Taylor in Dallas. They think even with that broader eligibility, they still won't spend the whole 4 million. So those are examples where there's probably savings in a just giving example where there was more demand than we could meet in the money that you all set aside for some of the cultural organizations, live music venues, etc. We received more applications for more money than we had. So you could, in your example, Councilmember, ask for more in one place and disappear operating in a different place. We didn't do that. I'll just say very frankly, it's because we in my office right now, we do not have capacity to manage that. We are totally consumed with the budget. But if there was interest in the council doing that and maybe we can find a different way to get the money out, like in my example for culture to maybe do that, there might be some opportunities to do that. We are getting very late in the year to run new grant processes. Okay. And so even if you were to be able to go back through the applicant list for like the live music and the science, the arts, culture, education where we had or yes, that amount more demand and supply, it would not necessarily mean opening the whole thing up again. It could just go down the list and be able to award more to that. We could do that relatively easily. You would have to amend each of those agreements, but that is a lot easier than going through another RFP process. Okay. We would if you wanted to do that, we would probably want you to actually direct us to do that, because that way we have legislative intent and we are not being asked to run a new process. Okay. And actually, one last question, a little different, but with regard to timing on all of this. What can you provide us any sense of the urgency of passing the COVID fall budget? If it were delayed, what would be the effects? So let me just answer the question by saying how much we have appreciated the speed with which the Council has passed these ordinances. I realize that is not traditional and it's a lot of work for you and your staff, but it has been really valuable to us and frankly to everybody who benefits from these programs. Some of the things that are in here, like paying the capital costs for stuff we've already spent, would not be affected at all by delay. But some of the other things in here would be greatly affected by delay. So just to give you a few examples, the $2 million that for culture as requested, they obviously can't do any processes until that money has been appropriated. Similarly, the request that the Department of Local Services has made to change the eligibility for the unincorporated small business grants. They can't do that until the Council has acted to change those expenditure restrictions. And then to give you another example, the expansion that public health has proposed of the medical assistance team. They wouldn't be able to do that until you have acted, because that's a that's a whole new body of work. And there's there are many other examples in here of where the sooner you act, the sooner we can get money out to organizations or provide additional services. So again, it's obviously the council gets to decide what its schedule is, but we have appreciated your prompt action in the past and if at all possible, would encourage you to continue to do so. Thanks very much, Mr. Chair. What are your plans for taking action on this today? Madam Committee chair, budget chair and sponsor. My inclination would be to take some lead from you. I know that this is our first briefing today and you had sent out an email earlier outlining a timeline of action that would have council action next week, whether we wanted to move it out of committee today or follow your timeline and expect to relieve the committee of it next week with a striking amendment ready. I would be willing to take some direction from you in some conversations, my colleagues. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And just as a reminder, we have done we've gone through the same process twice already with COVID two and COVID three. So I think the the way we've operated has been very effective. It has meant that we've had to all act very quickly. I really appreciated my colleagues getting in their conceptual request for a conceptual striker on Fast and the other two occasions. Our plan this time around had been that we would have a deadline of this Thursday at noon on the 27th for council members to submit items for the striking vote striking amendment. And then on Friday afternoon or evening, we would release the striking proposal to finalize a conceptual striker, and then the staff would be able to come out with the finalized striker amendment striking on Sunday afternoon or evening and then. Members could get in their standalone amendments on Monday, we concluded that that cut off would be at 11 a.m. on Monday. It puts a lot of onus on the staff, but they've done a great job thus far, and I'm sure they will again. And then we would have action on this on Tuesday next week. My my understanding is that because we are only having council meetings every other Tuesday, it's made our agendas very lengthy in the council. Of course, council chair Balducci can speak to that. I'm concerned, though, if we delayed this for a couple of weeks, then which would mean we would not be able to vote on this Colbeck for our budget until the 15th of September would be running into the time period where with all the preparations for the biennial budget. Staff going through all of that, the committee stand downs and so forth. So my preference is to go ahead and make make sure as possible as we can to have a vote in the council next Tuesday. Whether it means we vote, we take action today, go through the process of outlined as we've done in the last two covered budgets or the council votes next Tuesday to leave the committee of the legislation. I think that's probably up to our council chair. My preference is the first option, and I think we can do that very well. But I'd be very happy to hear from our chair. Madam Chair. Mr. Chair, thank you. And, Madam Chair, all the chairs. So I don't have any real concern that we can vote this on September one. I believe we can. Councilmember Caldwell's has laid out very accurately how it has worked in the past. And I think we've done a pretty remarkable job of moving through a large number of supplementals. I mean, that chart is sort of amazing in Mr. Williams staff report about the four Cogan supplementals, and that leaves out the Non-Woven supplemental and everything else we're going to do for the rest of this year. So I've developed a great deal of confidence in our ability to move this stuff, and I think that our budget chair has done an incredible job because she keeps us moving. My my comment is only because I have been, especially since the break ended, really asking all of our colleagues to try to get as much committee work that committee as possible so that we avoid those marathon council meetings, which I think sometimes we don't always do our best work when we have them. It's just hard as a human being to do a four or five, six, seven hour meeting. So I'm not objecting to moving it out today. I think we can get it done. I do think that as we get into the budget and stand down and if we continue operating this way in late into this year and early next year, we should maybe think about a way to structure our committees so that the work is able to be done in committees. And then we can still move quickly. Because you're right, with the only council meeting every two weeks, any delay is a minimum two week delay, including a courtesy delay. I think the current process here would be to leave it in committee and call it next week. But I don't care. I don't have a strong feeling about that. We can do it either way. If it relieves people's stress to vote it out today, I think that's valuable. And I would vote yes. But and I also just want to thank all of the other committee chairs, because a number of folks this week agreed to take some stuff into their committees so that we can make sure we get the work done there. And that's that's why I think it'll be fine either way. And I have a strong feeling. I'm just trying to really emphasize as much committee work as we can do on any item. I think the better off we're going to be. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for that. Decisive leadership. Council members do what you want with that decisive leadership provided for us. I would call on Budget and Fiscal Management Committee Chair Caldwell's to either remind us of the deadlines or to make a motion as you did so desires. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was just going to say, how about both? I appreciate the council chairman's concern about how we get so chamber packed in council meetings, and we've been there sometimes for 8 hours or so. It's very stressful. But on the other hand, I like the idea of transparency and making sure that we do things normally, that we go ahead with the process rather than pulling up legislation from a committee in an extraordinary and an ordinary time. And as straight as mentioned, it's really critical that we are able to get needed funds out in a very timely fashion. The sooner the better. With regard to the schedule, I'd actually like to move the change in and I've conferred with budget staff about this. That should be very helpful for them and I don't think this should be an issue. We had scheduled and this is on page 29, if you want to look at that at the top of the page. After the CAO briefing we have Thursday, this Thursday, August 27th at noon is the deadline for Stryker amendments to the budget . Fiscal Management Chair Myself. I'd like to actually change that until tomorrow at close of business. That would be very helpful to staff to have that extra time to work on drafting a conceptual striker that we can get out to on Friday. We are having our colored leadership team meeting tomorrow afternoon at 330 and it would be helpful for them to have more of an opportunity to see what's coming in and to discuss that. So I will be joining us with that as well. And I think the sooner we can get going on this, the more time the staff can put in and addressing the requests that I would authorize and perhaps even be able to get the actual spinal striker to all of us before Sunday night, which has been the case with the last two budgets. I think the more likely that we will have to have an expedited time on Tuesday, next Tuesday at our council meeting. So that's my recommendation. And I would like to move Ordinance 2020 0279. Council member Coles has moved to give it to pass recommendation. Estimates do pass. Yes, it is a do pass. I mean, I knew it was not do not pass. But I decided I did not add that in. The most ordinance 2020 279. We have a from the Budget Committee chair. We have a timeline for amendments. I'm in concept and written to be submitted and compiled both for Stryker and standalone. And we've had a brief our first briefing today with intended action for council next week. Is there further discussion debate? Regarding the motion, the recommendation before us. Saying none. I'd ask the court to please call the roll. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Council Member Producing Council Member. Body Chief Arts Council Member Dombrowski I. Council Member Dombrowski votes I. Council member done. I. Council member done votes I. Council member Caldwell's I council member Caldwell spoke to I Council member Lambert. Council member, Lambert. Council member off the ground. I was a member of the lower council member. Lambert votes. I council member by my former. I council member upon my thorough votes. I council members. All High Council members. All my votes. I am Mr. Chair. Hi, Mr. Chair. Votes I. Mr. Chair, you have 99 zero in us. By your vote. We have given a do pass recommendation to ordinance 2020 279 and will expedite it to full council. So it will be in full council next Tuesday. Thank you very much. And with that, we move on to item six, a motion that would approve the implementation plan for the Puget Sound Taxpayer Accountability Act or Posture