Input: You the committee of the Home to order. As a student of Irish history, if not literature, I want to wish everyone a good Bloomsday. In light of the public health emergency, the governor has issued an emergency order suspending the session of the Open Public Meetings Act. That requires we have a physical space for the public to watch our meetings. This order has been extended by leadership of the Senate and the State Senate and the state House of Representatives. As we start today, I would like to acknowledge that we are on the traditional lands of the Puget Salish peoples, past and present. We thank these caretakers of the land who have lived here and continue to live here since time immemorial. We'd also like to acknowledge the many urban Indians who live in King County and have brought their cultural ways of life here greatly enriching the community. Madam Clerk, we please call the roll. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Councilmember Belcher. You. Councilmember Dombrowski. Here. Councilmember Dunn. Here. Council Member Commonwealth You're a member member council member of the ground here. Councilmember member right there. Councilmember Vaughn. Right there. Here. Council members are high here. Mr. Chair. Here, Mr. Chair on rhetoric and see the concern in your eye. We have you as president. Today we have a briefing from council staff on the COVID 19 supplemental appropriation request that was transmitted to the IG to the Council last week. We'll also take up the Harborview Bond proposal and after we hear from council staff, I anticipate going into executive session prior to taking action on the Harborview Bond proposal. We also have on the agenda a briefing from members of the Charter Review Commission, the first related to subpoena power of the Office of Law Enforcement, Law Enforcement Oversight . The second charter amendment related to the process for inquests. Depending on the conversation today, it is possible we would take action on each of those proposals today. Following the charter amendments, we'll take up a motion that asks the executive to provide flexibility to an end to unincorporated area restaurants and retail businesses to operate outdoors. The last item on the agenda is a motion that asks the executive to provide for property tax payment plans or 2020 property tax payers. A housekeeping note as we get rolling. To help us manage the meeting and ask the public as well as executive and council staff to please keep the video off until just before you plan to speak. With that, I'd entertain a motion to approve the merits of our June 2nd council meeting. Soma Councilmember Yvonne Roper has moved adoption approval of the minutes. See? No discussion. All those in favor, please say I, i, i opposed. No, the ayes have it. The minutes were approved. Will now turn to public comment, though we are getting used to it having an entirely remote meeting of the committee. The whole is somewhat unusual for the council. They want to be sure that everyone who calls in understands the rules for public comment and how the process will be managed. First, our standard ground rules of the comment must be related to items on today's meeting agenda. Must not be used for the purpose of assisting a campaign for election of any person to any office, or for the promotion or opposition of any ballot proposition. It also should not include obscene speech. If the speaker fails to abide by these restrictions. I will rule them out of order, require them to conclude their testimony. Now I'll describe the process as members of the public joined the Zoom call. You are automatically muted. We can see your name or the last three digits of your telephone number or our committee clerk will call the names or numbers when your name or last three digits of your phone number is called. Staff will unmute your line. Please be sure to also on your phone if you have muted yourself as a courtesy before before you begin your testimony. If you might just state your name and then pause, we will acknowledge we can hear you. And then if you begin by saying and spelling your name. So we have it accurate for the record. And if you wish your video to be turned on for your public comment, please request that at the beginning. As you are recognized, you have 2 minutes to speak. And you'll hear a timer to go. Go off when you've reached 2 minutes. You can certainly finish your thoughts, but please wrap up your comments to allow the next person to speak. If you go much past your 2 minutes, I may interrupt and ultimately ask you to conclude or be muted. And if you are listening on TV or streaming the meeting or audio before your testimony, we ask that you please mute those features so that we don't have feedback on the lie. Please hang up after you provided your public comment to make it easier to manage the call and you can follow the remainder of the meeting on King County Television Channel 22 or stream online. The link to stream online is on the Council's website, which is at WW W dot King County back site I'm sorry WW dot King County dot gov backslash counsel. And then click on the watch us live button. Well, now go to go to public comment reminder when your name or number is called to state your name so we can confirm that we can hear you, madam. Please go ahead with public comment. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The first caller on the line is Bernadine. No, go ahead. You're unmuted. Great. Thank you. I am Bernadine Dark? No. Or Bernie Dark? No. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Go ahead. Great. Thanks. Last name is spelled Dios C H NHL. I live at one three 208 Kathleen Road in Renton, Washington. I'm currently the chair of the Harborview Board of Trustees. Thank you for considering the Harborview facilities improvement issue. Harborview is a critical asset for our mission population. King County, Washington State and the region. I support the Harborview proposal before you. It has received unanimous support from the Harborview Board, the Harborview Leadership Group and the Capital Projects Oversight Committee. The proposal addresses critical medical center needs. A majority of the medical center's facilities are aging and out of date in terms of modern best practice standards for infection control and privacy. Certainly, it's being tested now in the course of a pandemic. Harborview often operates at 100% capacity. On average, 50 patient beds per day cannot be used due to infection control. Harborview provides world class, quality leadership and patient care. We can be proud of all of our providers and staff at Harborview. It's outstanding organization. Help us keep our promises to all the populations that depend upon us. Thank you very much. Thank you. The next caller on the line is Kansas. Please go ahead. You're unmuted. Hello. This is Candice. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Go ahead. Okay. My name is Candace Tkachuk, and I'm a concerned citizen of King County. Last Friday observed the Lord Justice meeting that you convened and was glad to see council members who are white, like myself, aligning themselves with the transform transformative calls for justice that are happening across the country right now. I could sense that many of you believed, as I do, that we white people are endlessly accountable for the way that white supremacy has made a mockery of justice in this country. Today, you have the opportunity to address this mockery by supporting subpoena powers for the Office of Law Enforcement Oversight. Although your support of this provision will assist all its critically important work in doing so, you can strike against the white pattern in which the appearance of reform is allowed to cloak the true absence of it. And let me be clear, my urging here is not a criticism of Oleo, I think, very highly of its staff, but rather I am hoping that we can arrive at a place where those who have sought to contain only those authority will have no power to do so . Diminished another provision. I urge you to move on as one that would make the inquest process for those who are killed by police a truth finding an experience rather than a process that exists to protect police officers. I believe that we can all understand the message from the streets these days. The era of covering up the terrorizing disproportionate and racially biased actions of police through formal processes is over. It is now time to refashion our system so that it truly serves those who are forever changed by police brutality rather than those who are the source of it. Thank you. Thank you. The next caller on the line is Amy. Darlene. Go ahead, please. You are a muted. I did not. I did not intend to sign up. I have nothing to offer other than reiterating Candice's articulate words. Thank you very much. The next caller on the line is Ernest Do. I'm trying to unmute you. Can you mute yourself? There you go. Go ahead, please. I'm not calling in for public comment. I'm sorry about that. Thank you for letting me know. The next caller on the line is Carla. I'm trying to mute Carla in. Carla Boyer, C.A.R. MLA. BAIER Thank you. Go ahead, please. I'm speaking in support of Olio and in support of the more authentic oversight of the actions of the Sheriff's Department. The more power a public agency has, the more essential it is both for the welfare of that agency and for the public that it has meaningful oversight. Now, in the case of the police. They they have power to. Take away freedom and they have power to extinguish life. And so it's essential that we have meaningful oversight. Now, I agree with one of the council persons comments that a decade of oxygenation against meaningful oversight by oleo is far too long. And so I'm speaking in support of subpoena power, which is understood by people at right minded people who want meaningful support as an essential tool for meaningful oversight. And I'm also speaking in support of having the sheriff be an appointed office. And finally. There was a there was a a just and necessary movement. I think it's almost been a year ago now to reform the inquest process in Seattle and so that it so that the inquest process would be a search for truth rather than a continuation of trauma to the families impact. And I wish to see them forward. Thank you. Thank you. The next caller on the line is named Carol. I'm trying to meet you. If you'd like to speak. Please meet yourself. There it is. Hi. I'm a staff member. I'm not here for public comment. Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much. The next speaker is listed as Equity and Education Coalition. I'm trying to a mute you if you'd like to speak. Go ahead. You might have to just tell. The name I have is Equity in Education Coalition. If you'd like to speak, please unmute yourself and go ahead. So I'll move on to the next one. Who the next person is? Fernando Luna. I'm trying to meet you. You'll have to. There you go. Would you like to speak? Hello. My name is Fernando Luna. I'm a civic engagement coordinator for Inter Menos, a Latino LGBTQ organization based in Seattle. Race, ethnicity and sexual orientation are a powerful set of were hers and get our community persistently under invested in. When Buster files were passed, our communities received only 10%. That teeny destination live. Community based organizations aren't capable to lead or. I'll be staffed by immigrants, refugees, indigenous people and other people of color. This is unfortunately happening again. In this current public health crisis. Latinos account for 41% of the COVID 19 cases in the state of Washington. Despite that, we are only 13% of the whole state population. This is the equivalent of genocide to our communities. I know there is a lot of talk of equity and other stuff, but I'm asking you, council members will do allow for the CARES budget to shed more crumbs while our community die. And. Is, in fact, in all of their. Thank you. Thank you. The next caller on the line is Helen Shaw warm? Please unmute yourself and go ahead. Thank you. My name is. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Go ahead. My name is Helen Shaw. Wang and I work with the White Center Community Development Association on economic strategies that prevent displacement, especially within our first and second generation immigrant, refugee and black owned business community. Given current COVID 19 funds, council members, please think about what it means to co-create with the community right now. Council Please think about the words racial justice and how those words can be realized. Given the COVID 19 funds, how can council allocate those funds to co-create a true picture of racial justice? We ask that you consider the historical disinvestment in our communities. The crimes that we continue to receive. The harm and brokenness caused by past decisions. Like the one of recent regarding the building of the White Center quarantine site. Displacement within our community has already occurred prior to COVID 19, and it continues to occur. With COVID 19 now. We are and will experience unprecedented displacement. Residents are asking How will we pay rent next month? How will I feed my family this month? Leaders are asking, How can we innovate? Council members. The COVID 19 funds are really already allocated are really not enough. Show us an allocation of COVID 19 funds that truly co-create racial justice now. Thank you. Thank you. The next caller on the line is Andre Helman. Go ahead, please. You are muted. Hello. This is Anya Hellman. I'm the pastor at Northlake Lutheran Church in Kenmore, Washington. And I just wanted to call to to state my support for allowing subpoena powers to oleo, as well as my support for the sheriff to become an appointed office, like many others who have called in and already spoken. I would like to see more accountability with the King County Sheriff's Office. And these seem to be good proposal, good, good ways to try and make that occur. I'm also not aware I was just looking on the site to see if I could figure out whether the term limits for the King County Sheriff's Office right now are for the sheriff. But if if there are not, I hope that there would be. And if there are, I hope that those would continue even with we have this position be appointed. Thank you. Thank you. The next on the line is James Johnston. Go ahead, please. You are muted. For a fellow James Johnson. Common spelling. I'm the I'm the current president of the Lawn Mower Bar Association on behalf of the LMB, and we support the Charter Amendment which concern granting me all the subpoena powers and clarification inquests can be held. Simply put, in times where police accountability is at the forefront of our minds, the necessity for a complete and transparent investigation process is underscored without a thorough investigation and transparency to the process. I fear that the same injustice as we've seen in minority communities time and time again will continue to happen, which simply cannot occur. I think the message of minority communities to police is clear and that is stop taking the lives of our black and brown people. Furthermore, if someone's life is taken by law enforcement or as the result of law enforcement action, the investigation should be permitted for that person. Furthermore, the family of the deceased, they deserve some representation in the inquest process. They know more than ever. It's essential that we have a strong inquest process and the current charter language is vague, since it's not always clear when a death involves by law enforcement. So again, the NBA supports the charter amendment. Thank you. The next caller on the line is James. When? I'm trying to unmute you. Please unmute yourself by sharing. Thank you. Mr. James, when can you hear me? Yes, please go ahead. And I'm speaking as a concerned Kent resident, but also would like to supplement and reaffirm all the prior comments have been made. And I definitely believe that there is ample opportunity for the King County Council to not only take a local and sort of city oriented stand of a national and global stand to hear approaches to accountability enforcement, as well as inclusive equity in the way that they not only allocate resources, but also. Continue to engage in the conversations with the community members that continually reach out to them. In particular, I am speaking to I believe it is your briefing number 2020 b0051 end of today. I apologize if that's the incorrect one. I'm a little anxious and this is unfamiliar space for me. However, I'd like to still speak about my summary and the board. I believe it's called the the budget crosswalk that the King County Council has shared to the public not too long ago. I've noticed that there seems to be a growing divide in terms of a divide wouldn't be the word that preferred they would like to use. But in terms of the budget allocations that are being given and then used to support communities of color as minorities and those that are mostly marginalized and underrepresented, not only in this conversation , in this space, but in our own local communities, in the schools and in the public spaces that are currently shrinking and global pandemics, climate change, technological revolutions, and the growing elderly populations and those that are more vulnerable and more susceptible to and not only systemic and institutionalized oppressions and forms of trauma are not only being exasperated, exasperated and unhelpful in these times as a whole. On a personal level, I know that there are a lot of people we're doing the work out there right now, and all of this is to say that I would strongly advocate for King County Council to take a stand and to be able to use and clarify every avenue that they have to be able to support this collective movement, as well as transformative, trauma relieving change that our society needs today. And thank you so much for your time and attention. Thank you. The next caller on the line is Jenna Franklin. Go ahead. You are muted. Oh, shoot. Now. I don't know how I am. We can hear you. Go ahead. Oh, you can. Sorry. No, I didn't want to provide any comment. I apologize. That's okay. Thank you. The next caller on the line is Joseph Shoji Lockman. Please mute yourself and go ahead. Hello, council members. My name is Joseph Challenging Lockman. I'm the policy analyst for Asian Counseling Referral Service. And thank you for the opportunities today. And I'd like to speak in support of the on the county's inquest process and the charter amendment as well as Olio. And first of all, I want to say that we absolutely support the the Oleo having subpoena power to make sure that they're able to perform a thorough investigation. And to build on this, we are part of, along with others, including on the Lawn Milk Bar Association and others who are on this call. We are part of the group that works with both the county executive's office to strengthen the inquest process. And on top of that, we also worked with Nikita Oliver and others, Alejandro Torres and others to to make sure that there was a community in the community color lens in terms of crafting the charter amendments, which we fully support. We absolutely need to guarantee that there's inquest representation. I think there's a strong understanding that families need to have that legal representation to ensure that they have equal opportunity for seeking justice, especially when they've lost a loved one to lethal force by law enforcement. And then there's the need to clarify when a death involves law enforcement, the current language, as James mentioned, is vague. And in terms of situations, for example, where a person who was transported to hospital after an encounter with lots more shooting died later and needing to clarify that that is a death involving law enforcement and requires investigation and through the inquest process. And I think this also just needs to be said that there's a broader attack going on, on the current inquest process. And this is a time for the county to set up and strengthen the inquest process and stand up for black communities and show a commitment to racial justice. Considering that the sheriff's office, King County Sheriff's Office, cities of rent rents in Kent and are often federal way so not backed off of this law. This lawsuit although the city of Seattle did back off the letter that we passed around as a community sign on at this point has received about 4500 signs, including close to 70 organizations in the King County area as well. As you know, as I stated, over 4000 individuals have signed on in just a short period of time. And I hope that the council will see that this is really something that needs to be fixed now and something that can be done in these times to show support for black communities and other communities that are affected disproportionately by police violence. Thank you. Thank you. The next person on the line is listed as legal team Zoom. If you'd like to speak, can you please provide your name? Yes. This is Corey Gill. Matt. C. 0rey. Go, Matt. Ju i l m e t t. And I'm an attorney representing a family of those killed by law enforcement. I'm testifying here today on behalf of the Public Defender Association. I'd like to first start by thanking Council Members Angela Cornwell's Dombrowski and McDermott for sponsoring the Charter Reform Amendment before the Council today. First, like to support all your subpoena authority for the reasons others have shared. I would like to spend bulk of my time expressing my support for the proposed improvement to King County's charter language related to inquests. The proposed change to King County's charter enshrines the right to representation for families within the charter itself. When families lose loved ones to actions involving law enforcement, they shouldn't have to foot the bill to be able to participate in the inquest process. The proposed inquest charter change also ensures that any death where law enforcement contributed to the death receives an inquest. Current charter language, which requires inquests and deaths involving law enforcement, is vague. For example, a similar death to Emmanuel Ellis's that we saw recently in Tacoma. Someone dies several hours after being placed in a chokehold. The autopsy was the cause of death as acute methamphetamine intoxication. However, it appears the chokehold may have also contributed to the death by depriving the individual of oxygen. Under current rules, it's not clear whether an inquest would be called in this situation. The proposed language, drafted and passed unanimously by the Charter Review Commission, calls for an inquest where any member of a law enforcement agencies action decision or possible failure to offer the appropriate care may have contributed to an individual's death. This language provides the much needed clarity and will ensure that all deaths that the community expects to receive an inquest will receive an inquest. This is improvement. To strengthen Kincaid's inquest process is important more than now, more than ever. I urge the Council to pass this Charter amendment with all due speed. Thank you. Thank you. The next person on the line is Liliana Ballesteros. Go ahead. You are a mute. This is Lillian. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Go ahead. Hi. My name is Lillian by yourself, and I'm the executive director with the Latino Community Fund, as well as programs for Latino. I'm here to address the CARES budget, which right now is not looking to reach our community. We every year get to work with tens of thousands of voters in our county across the state. And we co-create we work with communities to create innovative programs in health and around economic development. And we see time and again our smaller Latino groups are community led groups with the proper resources are receiving the funds. They actually get to the heart of what community needs and the ideas that community is creating. And it's miraculous. But we don't need miracles right now. We need action. We see that time and time again, even in the midst of this public health crisis that is based in racial injustice. The county has said how they are racially, just a racially just county and how you want to co-create policy solutions that we need. And yet the investment is not in line with that. Conversation it. We do not see that that investment is there. And for true authentic equity authentic with more than words it's actions. And this is a time for action. We in order to walk the talk, you need to invest significant significantly more than the pitiful amount outlined right now in the executive cares budget. Right now, our communities are going to work every day. They are investing in our community with their bodies, with their lives, with their health. The county needs to invest in us and our communities. These funds need to rescue the disasters that hit our black and brown communities who are hit first or hit hardest or hit longest. When we see something like COVID 19 come through and the executive's cares budget needs to address that, the intersections of police brutality and equity. These are all rusted and root causes. And root causes are not going to be they haven't been they are not going to be cured by words. We need action. It's time that the county, especially in this health crisis and the economic crisis and the community crisis, step up and invest more than words. Your words alone are killing us. We need more of an investment through the executive care budget into communities that are hit by this COVID crisis. Thank you. Thank you. The next caller on the line is Sam. Now, go ahead. You are muted. I thank you. Thank you. My name is Mel and I work with Equity and Education Coalition, other Partners in Change program. Thank you again Council Chair and council members for allowing me to speak in support of the Equity in Education Coalition's Partners and Change program. We definitely want our communities to be invested through the CARES Budget Part budget. So Partners and Change has been bringing together more than four dozen organizations in the past month to coalesce and respond to the COVID 19 implications on our health, safety and communities of color, specifically working to support our vulnerable communities at the frontlines. So Partners and Change is strongly positioned as a connected source of trusted advocates to do systems work and in connecting our communities to policymakers and government departments. Our work involves securing resources to provide to those in need, working to change systems by infusing our racial and social equity and justice principles to transform the way that we work together and also change systems to benefit the most impacted peoples. And I would like to ask the Council to have Partners in Change be funded at the request that has been submitted to the Executive and the County Council, because these monies will directly support rental and food resources and needs towards grassroots organizations and our communities that we work directly with. Also offer the right tools and capacity to strengthen and expand our COVID 19 response and prepare our communities to face the recovery and the possible second wave of COVID 19 that's going to impact our region. So King County stands to benefit immensely from this investment to the project and to the communities that are impacted and from the engagement that it provides the necessary resources to our communities. As we know, strong regions require strong communities, and strong communities needs strong investments and long term relationship building. Thank you. Thank you. The next caller on the line is Sarang LAMB. I've unmuted you. Please go ahead. I. Good afternoon. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Thank you and good afternoon. My name is Seven LAMB and I am with the Cambodian American Community Council of Washington. We have over 14 Cambodian American organizations throughout the state of Washington that is currently part of our council. And today we wanted to show support and request that you support the Partners in Change program. For the past month that we've been involved, our Cambodian community have been directly and indirectly impacted by COVID 19. And we definitely would appreciate your support and so that you can then support our community as well. Thank you so much. Thank you. And next caller on the line is listed as Tenant's Union of Washington. If you could give us your name, you can go ahead. Your immunity. Thank you. My name is Violet Laverty and the director of the Tenant Union of Washington. And I'm actually here to speak about the executive care budget. And right now, we operated a hut. They were tended to call in. There are a lot of tenants right now who are experiencing not receiving their unemployment checks. And what I'm calling the ball is where I'm coming to testify about is getting funding to organizations who are really on the front line, like United Way, extending some of the programs that exist right now in King County to further out the help to the community. We get calls daily are are hotlines right now is overwhelmed with calls coming in and we're trying to get as many resources connection to them. A lot of tenants right now can't. Pay. Their rent. And so the fear is not receiving the funding that they're supposed to get right now. And we're asking King County to fund the programs to get more money in communities, vulnerable, marginalized communities right now who need the help so much. And so we're taking and building calls, getting them connected to resources. And United Way is helping them rental assistance, expanding and investing in food programs that are that will help communities all over King County. And so that is my ask today. I just received three more calls this morning that are in fear of losing their their their homes and of not being able to pay their rent or even get food. And so what we're trying to do is get as many resources together to send it to them, and hopefully that you will invest in programs that are already existing right now to give them more funding to help more people. Thank you. Thank you. The next person is Velma Valeria. You. I'm trying to unmute you. Please unmute yourself. And there you go. Yes. Thank you. Good afternoon, Sharon McDermott and members of the council. Thank you for having us for taking us to testify this afternoon. My name is Velma Valeria Vitiello, RIAA. I'm a former Washington state representative and I work with the Equity in Education Coalition Nursing Change Program. We appreciate the funding for community services, but really there's something big missing, and that is funding for community based organizations led by people of color to deal with the disproportionate impact of COVID 19 on our communities. The EEOC Partnership and Change Program has asked for $2.5 million to provide. Food and rental assistance masks, gloves and hand sanitizers. We also providing translation or public health information in six different languages. We ask that all financial support for small and micro nonprofit community organizations to have their resources and infrastructure to respond to their needs. We're also doing something that's really the first of the kind. We're mapping out technology, hardware and Internet deserts throughout King County. We are mapping out cultural, ethnic and linguistic assets of the CBO to facilitate engagement with government agencies. We are ensuring kids have the necessary technology and Internet connection needed to continue their virtual education. We truly, truly want to be a partner with King County Council and King County Government to increase our own advocacy presence and oppose and guide ongoing and future response to current and future emergencies. So we ask you to take us as a partner and work with us to continue our work in the communities. Thank you. Thank you. The next caller on the line has last week digits of their phone number as 084. Go ahead, please. You are a muted. Hello. My name is Estella Evans. A s e l e s e c h larson. Evans. I work with the Housing Development Consortium. I've been involved with Partners and Change for the past month and have seen the Direct Impact Partners and Change is providing to communities during this time during the pandemic, partners and change, unlike a lot of organized organizations, has been able to effectively bring together policymakers, decision makers and stakeholders to meet the immediate needs of communities of color who are mostly impacted by the pandemic. Right now, Partners in Change is also reflective of the communities that are being hit hardest with this pandemic, and I believe they would be able to meet their needs given that they reflect that population. I highly urge the County Council and county executive Dow Constantine to fully fund partners and change ask of 2.5 million so that we can directly support and continue this important work of our racial justice in serving the communities that are disproportionately impacted by the pandemic. Thank you. Thank you. The next has the last three decades of the phone number as 951. Go ahead, please. The last three digits of your phone number 951. And you are a muted. Please go ahead. If you don't wish to speak with you, just let us know. 951206951. I'm not sure they're still on the call. Okay. I learned when you started a951 still here, but not speaking. Right. I'll just move on. The next person on the line has last three digits of 139. Go ahead. You are muted. Yes. My name is Marilyn of. Can you or me, please? Hello? Yes. Can you spell your name for me, please? It's the obvious in Victor a are you piers and boy, i f. Thank you very much. Go ahead. Okay. I'm just. I'm just calling to to see just a few things. I have a statement. All people are impacted, but especially people of color by the police department. Department. My name is Marilyn Covarrubias. I am the mother of Daniel Carol Beals, who was killed in Lakewood, Washington, on board 21, 2015. Essential oversight. Subpoena power is crucial. As we can see, we've seen in the Emanuel or Emanuel Ellis situation around Ramsdale, the chief of police, he said that he didn't know about the autopsy, finding that it was ruled a homicide. But he was killed by oxygen deprivation. I feel that this is. This is incompetence on his part. Or he just doesn't care. Traffic stop that end to end. That should have ended in a ticket and in death. Walking home from the hospital ended in death for my son. Incidents where people call in and ask for help for their or their family member because they're attempting suicide and in death because the police come and kill them. Qualified immunity and the unions that protect police officers from accountability and prosecution are wrong. And that's all I have to say. Thank you for your comments, Mr. Chair. I believe I've called everyone on the line. Any time. You myself. Equity in education. Is that Sharon? Are you still on the line? Did you wish to offer testimony? I'm looking to see if I can unmute equity in education. Unmute. I can't unmute. And you miss dealing? No, I wasn't able to ask. I think that person needs to unmute themselves. If that is Sharon and you wish to testify. If you please, try to meet yourself. Not seeing that happening. Madam Clerk, I would ask you to unmute all of the attendees for a moment. It may be chaotic if there is background noise, but I want to ask if everyone has had a chance to testify. Well, I have a muted everybody. Mr. Chair. Thank you. Is there anyone who can speak up now who has not had to suffer public testimony and would like to. Anyone hearing no one and no one to close public testimony. Want to thank everybody. Mr. Chair, I'm going to a mute I'm going to mute everyone now. And I'm not sure if that's going to mute use. So please, I'll be prepared. Here we go. I am muted everybody. And I'm muted myself. Thank you very much, madam. Thank you. Well, close the public hearing. And that takes us to item five on today's agenda. For the first discussion item, we have Tillery Williams and Andrew Tan from Council Central Staff here to provide a briefing on the COVID 19 supplemental budget that was transmitted last week. This is the third COVID supplemental budget transmitted since we've been addressing the pandemic here in King County and White Dave Lee and Aaron Robert from the Office of Performance Strategy and Budget are here answering questions as well. Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Kim, the line is yours. Thank you, Mr. Chair. For the record, Tillery Williams, Capital Central Staff. I will begin with the staff report, which begins on page nine of your agenda packet. Proposed Ordinance 2022 11 would make a total supplemental appropriation of approximately $70.4 million, of which 19.4 million would be made to general fund agencies 36.5 million to 9 general fund agencies and 4.5 million to capital improvement program. The June COVID 19 emergency omnibus would be the third emergency supplemental appropriation ordinance to date. Moving along to page ten, Table one provides a summary of all of the emergency omnibus legislations that have been adopted thus far by this Council. In March, Council appropriated a total of $27.4 million, and with the April Omnibus Council appropriated a total of 62.9 million. Again, for this particular omnibus, the executive is proposing a total of $70.4 million. The Executive expects to transmit two more COVID 19 emergency omnibus legislations later in the year. The Office of Performance Strategy and Budget anticipates transmitting the fourth omnibus on August 13th and the fifth omnibus on October 15. Also beginning on page ten is table two, which provides a summary of each of the appropriations included in the proposed ordinance. I will briefly go through these and try to get through them as quickly as possible. The first request of $1.5 million to the Office of Emergency Management would fund upgrades and replacement of mission critical audiovisual components to support continued COVID 19 response operations according to the fiscal. Not replacing the equipment jeopardizes continuity of the response and the health and well-being of Kane County first responders. There is also a request of roughly $12.3 million from the Office of Emergency Management to purchase non-medical personal protective equipment to provide across county government, as well as to businesses and organizations and faith based organizations. Security Corps is requesting $4.3 million in temporary support for remote video conferencing and evidence sharing and superior court courtrooms. This appropriation would enable the courts to start working through its lengthy case backlogs due to the required COVID 19 related closure. Moving on to page 11, the next couple of items in the summary for Superior Court includes a request of $67,000 for the purchase of sanitation supplies, including masks, gloves, surface wipes and sanitizer to be used by staff, jurors and the public, and a request of $12,000 for the purchase of COVID 19 related workplace accommodation, supplies and equipment , including plexiglass screens for high volume courtrooms, accessory equipment for working at home, and portable video cards to provide immediate accommodations for courtroom hearings that need to be done by video. The Department of Judicial Administration is requesting $256,000 for the purchase of sanitation supplies and two temporary reconfiguration facility costs to continue operations during the COVID 19 emergency. Next, there is a general fund transfer request of $1 million to the Department of Local Services Permitting Division. This would support the continuity of government operations for the permitting staff. The moneys would be transferred to local services to fund the retention of permanent staff in March and April. As a result as a result of a 50% decrease of fee revenue due to the public health emergency orders. The next item on the list is a request of roughly $1.4 million for the Water and Land Resources Division to implement a grant program to provide economic support specifically to King County farmers and farm businesses, according to the executive. This program would include grants to farmers markets for business interruption. Grants to farmers for protests, personal protective equipment, grants to farms for technology upgrades to facilitate compliance with social distancing measures. Food Bank and food pantry support and facilitation of senior center partnerships. Moving on. The next two items were appropriate. $3 million to DC H. S to contract with United Way to support a food and shelter program, to provide food security and to provide rental assistance and eviction prevention. There was also a request of $1 million for DHS to increase contracts for legal services that focus on COVID 19 related eviction prevention and foreclosure defense. Moving to Page 12, the next three items on the list include a request of $1 million for DHS to increase contracts for domestic and sexual violence victims services and support $3 million for DHS to implement a grant program for shelter and housing providers to support current higher cost operations. And lastly, a request of $900,000 to provide support to the law enforcement assisted diversion programs. COVID 19 response and during. Moving on to public health. First, there is a request, a $4.8 million to provide food security assistance for eligible individuals to purchase food and to strengthen and expand infrastructure for food banks and providers. The proposed ordinance would also appropriate $297,000 to support hazard pay for protect 17 represented staff working at care sites similar to the hazard pay for Western State Nurses Association members as approved in the last COVID 19 omnibus. There's also a $900,000 request to provide funding to community based organizations to curb the increased violence associated with the COVID 19 crisis as part of the Zero Youth Detention Initiative. Next is an appropriation request of approximately 4.1. $4 million, an expenditure authority for a Health Resources and Services Administration grant to expand COVID 19 testing and medical services for persons experiencing homelessness and to purchase medical supplies and personal protective equipment. Following that is a request for $467,000 in expenditure authority for Y and for Ryan. Y Herzl passed on funding for building, preparing for and responding to COVID 19. The Ryan White Act is a federal program that addresses unmet health and social service needs of persons living with HIV across the United States. There are two more requests for expenditure authority for grants under public health. This includes $108,000 for a CDC foundation grant, which would provide support for contract COVID incident management teams in March and April. And $1 million for the Gates Foundation grant that would create a Bec communications campaign and address community needs that cannot be covered by other funding sources. The next item is the largest proposed appropriation in the ordinance. The executive is requesting $17.8 million to support public health, health and medical area command operations and COVID 19 response, which would expand staffing, contract labor and supplies, including testing, surveillance, isolation, quarantine support services, data analytics and informatics. Logistics Planning. Emergency Operations and contact tracing. Following that is a proposed increase of $415,000 and budget authority for the airport to support labor supplies, equipment and temporary retrofit costs associated with the ongoing COVID 19 response. FMD Internet Service is requesting $2.9 million for operating costs and security and food service costs to COVID 19 related leased sites to $900,000 for touchless plumbing fixtures in county on buildings. There are four items on the list for the item. The first item would appropriate roughly $1.1 million to build new network sites in support of the county's response to COVID 19. I'd like to add that six have already been built and three are in the process of getting built. This amount also includes temporary term, limited labor resources, staff, overtime and equipment needed to build sites. The second item would appropriate $2.4 million to enhance King County's Internet connectivity, to support increased demand for high speed and large volume data during COVID 19. The third item would appropriate $1.1 million to facility to acquire new tools and subscribe for technologies that enhance public outreach and engagement in support of counties in response to COVID 19. And this would be things such as Zoom, video conferences, licensing and support. Moving on to page 14, which covers the last three appropriation items. Lastly, TCI is requesting roughly $1.4 million to purchase 875 laptops. This includes costs, a full four year cycle laptop leases from Dell and other peripheral equipment. The last two items make up the capital portion of the proposed ordinance, as proposed ordinance would appropriate $2.5 million for leasing costs for two new COVID related quarantine sites, as well as lease extensions and three at three existing sites. It would also appropriate $200,000 of additional funding to the existing COVID 19 related modular sites across the county, and one point my $1.9 million to fund temporary reconfiguration to floors two and three of the Kane County Correctional Facility West Wing. This would be for social distancing purposes related to COVID 19. Additional details for each of these items presented in summary are provided beginning on page 14 of your staff reports and ending at the top of page 25. Executive staff indicate that most of the appropriations included in the proposed ordinance would be funded would be funded by state monies and federal monies that are currently or will be available to the county from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security or Cares Act, including Federal Emergency Management Agency, disaster relief funding and the Treasury Department's coronavirus relief . I'd like to note that during the week of April 20 of 2020, the county received $262 million from the Treasury Department's Coronavirus Relief Fund. Executive staff indicate they are making an effort to ensure that the county exhausts all other available state and federal funding before utilizing the $262 million. Executive staff also indicate that most of the expenditures related to the ice belong to the isolation, and quarantine sites may be reimbursed through payment. Executive staff did provide an estimate of how the $262 million relief fund would be used. So far, the executive has designated 70% of the proceeds to support county government expenditures and the remaining 30% to Non-Covid County government expenditures such as community and economic support and recovery and support for cities and fire districts. Table four on page 26 provides a summary of the estimate and the funds that would remain should the proposed ordinance be adopted. As shown in the table, 125 million would be reserved in anticipation of a second wave of coronavirus cases later this calendar year and $50.6 million remains on designated. One thing to note, though, is any new allocations should be consistent with the coronavirus relief fund guidance. Any expenditures that are incurred, audited and ultimately deemed unaligned on allowable will likely have to be covered by the general fund or another appropriate revenue source. A key limitation is the prohibition on revenue replacement, meaning the coronavirus relief fund cannot be used to pay any taxes, permits or fees paid to the county. Beginning at the bottom of the PS 26 of the Stack Report is a selection that summarizes the June 2020 Office of Economic and Financial Analysis Revenue Forecast for the county. And lastly, on page 28 is Table five, which provides a timeline of the activities that would need to be conducted, anticipation and in anticipation of possible action on this proposed ordinance. And that would take place at the June 2030 Council meeting. 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. Mr. WILLIAMS. Since I wasn't keeping tally of the numbers, but a substantial amount of the expenditures, at least in the first half the table as you went down was for actual protective equipment, PPE, sanitary wipes, other such materials, but at least earlier in the pandemic were in short supply. Do we have an indication about our ability to secure the quantities that we'd be budgeting at this time? Yes. In the staff report. Let me find it here on page four. I'll just go ahead and say that our PSB has stated that they are working. They have identified some vendors that could provide large quantities of this of these equipment and little to no cost. And they are expecting shipments of this equipment within the coming weeks. Okay. Thank you, Councilmember Dombrowski, and then others who have questions. But I know Councilmember Dombrowski has a question, Councilmember. Oh, thank you, Mr. Chair. And sorry, I'm receiving a delivery of about 25,000 county masks right now. Believe it or not, I'll show you the truck. Got our county employees on the job for distribution into the community. Hey, I had a question. Tillery, I really appreciate your comprehensive staff report. Really excellent and understandable, but I had a question just drilling down a little bit on the Surface Water Management Fund and the transfer. What is it, 1.2 or $3 million to support look like ag related in farmers market programs. You know, we in the Budget Committee have really worked hard to try and build that fund up to meet critical water quality management needs. And it is a charge in the unincorporated areas on property taxes. And it can it's a significant amount of money. But I was just surprised to see the proposed use of those funds, which is my understanding as a utility. And I, I one, I wonder what the nexus is to to water quality. It looked like I saw in the footnote it was tied to maybe supporting ag lands. But I'm just wondering if. If there's a what the nexus is there, if those truly are swim water dollars that are proposed. Councilmember Dombrowski I don't have the answer to that, but we do have Director Di Billy on the line. If he would like to step in. Yes. Can you hear me? Okay. Thank you. Great. So, Councilmember de Baffsky, that proposal is to use some of the federal funds for this purpose. It goes through that particular fund just because that's where the agriculture programs are. But we are not proposing to use utility revenue for this pork. Okay. That that makes more sense. And just. Well, I've got the opportunity here. But with respect to the lead dollars, $900,000 for the brewery and work. Is that so? Call me. Understand that a little bit. Is that to help mitigate with some of the a loss of mid mid dollars. But but trying to shift it to new programing so it's not revenue replacement. How's that how's that working? And then myself. So this is because Reid is doing things that were not originally budgeted in response to COVID. And the staff report actually has some detail about that, like hotel rooms and things like that. So this is in no way replacing mid funding. It is incremental costs associated with COVID that would be supported with federal funds. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Tillery, for that great report. Colleagues. Member. Councilmember Lambert. You, sir. So two questions. Number one, I'm glad that way. This here on the line and Hillary and others. I just got a very interesting phone call with a state auditor and a crew and there was some interesting pieces of information that I will type up and said to you later today about documentation of these expenditures that I had not heard before. So I will let you know what I learned a few hours ago. On the masks, I see that we will give two masks to every person in the county. I know in my house I bought four for me and two for my husband. So not everybody is going to need two masks. So how did we. I see that we're going to get new shipments every three days. Is there a possibility maybe the 25,000 at Rod's house may go pretty fast, but if we don't end up needing as many, because that is an $11 million expenditures to expenditure. Is there any way of scaling back? I realize that these are reimbursable from the federal government, but the federal government is also our money indirectly. So I would like to know that. And the second thing is that as we go forward, I understand. So I'd like to know and verify this, that for the people who are in our hotels right now, in our centers is $155 a day for each person in there. And I'd like to look at how over time, we can begin to see how to reduce that cost. It's pretty high cost. And I'd like to know those two things. Thank you. Thank you. Council member member staff can definitely follow up on those things and get back to. For questions, colleagues. Was close. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a couple of questions. Probably, Dwight, but perhaps of artillery. First of all, with regard to the United Way appropriations for assistance and food security and rental assistance, I have all the respect in the world for United Way. I'm just wondering why those that organization was selected, how much would go into overhead, if anything? And is this decision, this determination based on inadequate capacity at the county to be able to handle a distribution of the funds. To Tillery here. I did speak with PSB and it is a capacity issue. The thinking behind that was that United Way had the capacity to hit the ground running right away. Now, with the overhead cost, I would have to defer to Director Guiseley to answer that question. Oh, Councilmember, I don't know the answer to that question, but it's an easy one to find out. I know they're doing things with basically their existing staff, so whatever overhead cost there is should be quite modest. But we'll get you an answer to that question. Okay. Thank you. And to follow up on that, I know quite a lot of compelling testimony from individuals who are involved with partnership and change. And I've been very impressed with the work that they've done and the proposal that they made, which I did see several weeks ago. And it's a coalition of, I think they said, over four dozen community based organizations. Would that be some type of organization that would be in your mind, would be able to distribute some of the funds, especially in those community communities that have had difficulties in accessing racial justice, but also really have a need for the resources. Yeah. So they are eligible to apply for the funding through the RFP processes that we're running. So usually the practice we have is to not just designate one in advance, as there are some particular reason that you need to do that and there's some special advantage. So they would we would expect that they would be applying for a share of the funds. We can give you more information about that if you're interested. I appreciate that. And are you talking about applying for funds from United Way or for other parts of this funding. Or other parts that are relevant? You will recall that the Council has already appropriated $2 million for working with these kinds of organizations. So there's a variety of different sets of money that are available to support these kind of groups that are working in our communities. Great. And just to let everybody know, I am intending to increase to add in additional funds for that eastern part of the funding that we've provided in the previous two covered budgets. Another question has to do with Gates Foundation Grant, since this has not passed through. When do we get federal funds? Or could you let us know more about that? Council member. I believe that the Gates Foundation money is there money they are granting to public health. It would not involve federal money in any way, any advantage of it. It provides some communication support that we don't believe we have other funding sources to support. Thank you. And lastly, with regard to Casey Anthony, I see $2.4 million for Internet connectivity to support increased demand for high speed and large volume data during COVID 19. You know where that money is intended to be spent. I know some of that would go internally for county departments and perhaps for the libraries for the parents. But what about really getting funding out for this was brought up by a couple of our people testifying for individuals, families for students who are not able to connect to their schools for remote learning. We checked, but I don't. Believe. That individuals of that description you're providing are connected to our network or iiNet or our internal network and therefore probably in effect from this investment. As we discussed previously, Councilor, I think you have a somewhat different idea that would be more appropriate to reach individuals. We're working on that. Yeah, I. There are some members. Hello. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Sorry. Do I just want to follow up on Councilmember Caldwell's questions? I'm not sure if I. Maybe I just missed that. Do we have has the executive tried partnering with smaller community based organizations that do food assistance and rental assistance programing? You know, we heard from the Partners for Change Coalition during public comment, for example. I think we often hear a justified frustration from smaller CBOs that have better relationships with community, how they're not getting supported by bigger, bigger, bigger nonprofits are. So it are just thinking through wondering why united way for these $3 million rather than smaller CBOs that have closer connections to community. So let me give you a partial answer to that question, COUNCILMEMBER. And I think we need to have this DHS follow up with you and with the council generally. So one of the things we are trying to do is get money out as quickly as we can once you appropriate it. And organizations like the United Way who already are set up to do that, can do it very quickly. And so that's kind of the rationale for doing it. As I mentioned earlier, DHS would also be working with potentially with our processes to involve other groups in doing that as well. But I want to I don't know the details of whether some of the groups who testified today already have relationships with DHS. And so let me get back to them and find out what exists already today, that, you know, if the council were to direct it, that we could easily get resources out through those other networks. I think you're right that that would be great. I know for a fact there are several smaller CBOs that already have the capacity to do rental assistance and food banks that serve particular neighborhoods in all of our district that would love this kind of support. So I would appreciate if we directed our energy toward that alternative moving forward. Further questions. Council Member Caldwell's. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. I just would like to again thank the staff. Tillery And Andrew, that's phenomenal and really did great work on this staff report. But I'd also like to remind my colleagues that we will be welcoming your suggestions for what we will include in a striking amendment. Are those suggestions in the way of either actual language or concepts should get to Tillery and the Andrew by this Thursday at noon, we will then come out with a striking amendment, hopefully by Friday afternoon, maybe over the weekend. But I. Think. We can likely at least provide a memo with concepts of what are what will be included in the striking amendment by Friday, and then following up with that language as soon as possible on Saturday or Sunday. And then we'll be welcoming your on line items, write amendments on by Monday at noon. And the plan is that we will vote on the striking amendment at the council meeting next Tuesday, the 23rd. Tony, do you want to add anything more to that? I think that sums up everything. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. And I think Councilmember Bell did she has a question. I see. Councilmember up the goal of raising his hand as well. But I do want to let my colleagues know that I need to step away for a minute. So I'm going to hand the gavel to Councilmember Bell Dutchie. And with that, Councilmember Balducci. There you go. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. And I'll so I'll call on Councilmember Up the Grove next, and I'll hold on to give my comments in a moment. Councilmember Grove, go ahead. Thank you, Madam Chair. TILLERY For the the largest appropriation, the 17 million for public health. What does the budget bill say about how that money has to be spent? I know you in your staff report, you gave a narrative of the kinds of things they were interested in spending on it, but do we put any constraints on it or is that just funding? Do we just give kind of a blank check? I don't mean that in the pejorative sense, but do we give a. We're just going to give 17 million to public health or are there constraints in the budget bill that limit or specify how it can be spent? So usually what the executive shares with us, any proposals? The council does have the ability to go in and restrict some of those funds, but I would have to defer to Director David Lee. The only information that we will provide it was what was in the fiscal no. But other than that, I'd have to defer. So councilmember up the grove. The way the legislation is written, there is no detailed restriction on the money that we are requesting for public health. Clearly it will have to comply. Since we're intending to use federal money, it will have to comply with the federal restrictions. So it will have to be incremental. COVID related costs can't be revenue replacement. It has to be spent before the end of the year. All of those kind of things. But otherwise, we are providing a general list of the kind of things public health is doing, mostly expanding testing and expanding contact tracing. We did not have a level of detail that's a whole lot more specific than that. If there is interest in the council in writing some language that either prevents it from being used for a particular thing or ensures that some of it is used for particular thing. We're happy to work with you on that. I was, if I may follow up, Madam Chair. I was more through sort of where the number comes from. If we don't have that level of detail, why is it 17.4 instead of 16.5 or, you know, where? Yes. So it is. And obviously, this is now about ten days old from the executive side. It was the estimate that public health had at the time that body of work, you know, counting short term temporary employees, estimating how much they would be paid, how much test kits would be. I guarantee you that if we asked them today to recalculate the number from scratch, it would turn out slightly differently because we'd have different assumptions about things. And so it is frankly just an estimate and it probably has some false precision to the detail of the number of do we allow does do our budget systems allow for sort of real time tracking? For example, we get our next COVID. Omnibus. Is it sort of reconciled if they ended up spending less or more than that that we had just the. I assume this is for a. A time duration. That estimate is to get us through to the. Yeah. So that estimate was for from basically now to the end of the year for this set of activities. Okay. So if I'm just completely making this up, if a month from now we get new guidance from the federal government about public health should be doing this other thing we have not been doing. Then they'll come back and say, okay, then we need $2.63 million from August the end of the year to do this new thing. And yes, we do. Obviously, at the end of every month, we figure out what we spend and in some cases, we'll be back to you asking for more money. In other cases, we'll probably be able to say, hey, that didn't cost as much as we thought. So we're going to add, in essence, turn back $2 million back into the pool and we'll ask for a different use of it. And finally, I'll be super quick, Madam Chair. I don't even need an answer. But would you at any time, do you see us venturing on an expenditure that has some risk or uncertainty that could end up in us having to use general fund? Will you let us know? Yes. And we work very closely with your staff about things like that. So they'll ask, hey, we have this idea that's coming from a council member or does it fit? We're happy to give that feedback. We also have outside legal counsel we can consult with and we've done that several times and they've told us, Yeah, that's okay or probably shouldn't do that. Okay, thanks. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Any other questions from other members before I mention Councilmember Lambert backing out what the previous speaker said? I, too, am concerned at some of the reasonableness of the past when we were putting a speeding up within $2 million for outreach to inform about COVID. At this point, I think everybody knows COVID exists. So those expenditures may be difficult, ongoing to to rationalize. So I am concerned that we look at some of the expenditures at this point and say, is that still necessary? That range is I think it's going to be difficult to verify some of this if it doesn't pay them out. Thank you. Thank you. Any other members? Okay. My comments. I want to underscore something that our budget chair, Councilmember Coldwell, said this. This proposal is going to be moving through council at a speed that I don't believe I've ever seen before. We're having this briefing today and then next Tuesday in full council, we're expected to take up any amendments and vote. So it's going to go very, very fast. And I want to say a couple of things. First of all, I want to suggest that since we're having a series of COVID budgets and NON-COVID budgets that will be coming through over the next several months. If you see something in here or you don't, rather, if you don't see something in here that you feel is missing, that can be added. We will have future opportunities to do that, and I just think we should all keep that in mind rather than trying to come up with programing like in five business days. Right. And secondly, Councilmember Coles, I want to just thank you and remind everyone that she's been leading us through a process where we went through a serving of the membership, put down our top priorities, found a lot of coalescing around principles. We adopted a principles document and in my opinion, this proposed budget. When you look at the community based support areas that are being proposed, really responds to that. So we've found, I think, a place of some coordination or coalescing between the branches and among the officers in the council. I'm pleased to see the focus on survival types supports like rental assistance, keeping a roof overhead, food assistance, keeping food on the table. And I think what we heard from the community members who testified today was not don't do that, but rather there are specific areas in the specific communities that are that are suffering intensely and acutely . And we should make sure that the money gets to the people who are suffering intensely and acutely. I'm going to be asking my colleagues and I'm going to work with the budget chair to see if we can't do more. Now we've had a number of reports about how much COVID Cares Act funding is coming to the county. We need to be cautious. I agree. And you know, per our adopted statement, make sure that we are preserving enough of that money to support the very expensive public health work we still have to do. The contact tracing is going to be critical and it's going to have to go on for a long time. So we want to make sure that we don't overspend and not have money to do those kinds of activities. However, it does seem to me that somewhere within the 260 million that we received from CARES Act funding, that we could do more than what we're talking about here to support the community now when the need is the most acute and the most challenging. So I'm going to be asking that we look at that between now and next Tuesday and hopefully support a striking amendment that will will address that. That said, I just really wanted to give a comment not not not ask a question, but if anybody, the staff or Mr. Daley wanted to respond to that, please feel free to do so. Okay. Not seeing anybody, Councilmember. Oh, yeah. Councilmember calls. Please. Go ahead. I mentioned your time. Thank you. This, this. And I appreciate your bringing up that. We do have a couple of more covered budgets. I just want to remind my colleagues on the council that this could be information that can be helpful to the public besides this covered budget 24 hours now, which we hope to take action on next Tuesday at our council meeting. We also will have transmitted likely this week the third omnibus from the current biennium, and that will be taken up in July. So we don't have to deal with that at the same time as this COVID budget. The fourth COVID budget is likely to be transmitted mid August and we were we are projecting council action on that on September 1st or thereabouts. We also have the biennial budget for 2021 to 2022 coming up. And it will be transmitted on or about September 22nd. And the projected council passage for that is November 17. But we as well will have likely have a fifth council, a covered budget to be transmitted on or about October 15th and to a fourth omnibus supplemental budget for this current biennium, also projected to be transmitted on October 5th 10th. And both of those would likely be taken up for action by the Council on December eight. I also will be getting the format to all of you within the next week to get your recommendations for what will go into. The. The biennial budget so that the executive can plan for trying to accommodate our policy and funding priorities. So watch for that in the next few days. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you very much. Councilmember Wells. I think that's a probably a good point to wrap up this item, unless there's any final words from anyone on the panel or any members. Okay. So we will move on. This was not for action today. This is going to be on the council agenda next week. This brings us to item number six, which is a proposed ordinance number 2020 20176, which would place on the November ballot a bond proposal for public health, safety and seismic improvements at Harborview Medical Center. We're going to have a briefing on this in a moment. But I just want to alert folks that when the briefing is done, we will be going into executive session, which means that the council members will leave this Zoom meeting. The Zoom meeting will continue without us in it. We are going to another meeting to have our executive session to discuss an item that I will describe if the chair isn't back. And and then we will come back into this Zoom meeting to take final action on the Harborview Bond and move on in our agenda. So that will all be announced and flagged as we go ahead. But I wanted to make sure people knew that was coming. And before that, we have a briefing from our council central staff, Sam Porter and Nick Bowman. Why don't you are you are you on the line, Sam or Nick? Yes. I don't think. You don't have. To. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Materials for this item begin on page 67 of your packet. As the committee was previously briefed on this item at the May 19th meeting, I will just provide a very quick, high level overview today and lead with the only notable change since May 19th being the Revised Office of Economic and Financial Analysis on the weather forecast that was released earlier this month. This forecast anticipates significantly lower assessed values than previous forecasts, the result of which being that while the average rate of approximately $0.08 per thousand dollars of assessed value has not changed for the proposed harbor view bond, the average increase in property taxes is now estimated to be approximately $75 annually for homeowner over the life. Of the. Proposed bond. This is $7 more than estimates previously provided based on the August 2019 forecast, and that was included in the previous staff report for this item. The staff report in your packet has been revised to reflect this change. The proposed ordinance 2020 0176 would place a 20 year $1.74 billion capital improvement bond on the November 2020 general election ballot, the proceeds of which would go towards new construction, renovation, seismic retrofitting and other health and safety improvements of Harborview Medical Center facilities. Attachment of the proposed ordinance provides a high level overview of the improvements which may be funded with levy proceeds. These improvements are based on the Harborview Leadership Group recommendation report that was transmitted to council on April 8th of this year. This report, requested through Motion 15183, provides background and detail on the Harborview Leadership Group efforts and summarizes the size and scope of their bond recommendation in order to meet the elections deadline to include the proposed bond on the November ballot. The last regular council meeting to adopt with maximum processing time is July seven. The deadline for elections to receive the effective ordinance is August 4th. And that concludes my remarks. I'm happy to answer any questions. And we have Nick Bowman available as well. Thank you. Councilmember Bell, did you are there Councilmember, other council members, other questions? This is our second briefing on the item. C-note Councilmember Dombrowski. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes. And thanks for having this second briefing on this important legislation. Sam, thanks for the report and the updated information with respect to the property taxes. My recollection from reading the materials in the first briefing was that in the first, certainly first year, but maybe then the second and third that the actual amounts collected are quite small. And then it goes. Then it begins to peak and then tapers off. Can you confirm that? And I'm just and then I'm wondering, is there any ability I don't know that we'd want to do this, but is there an ability to seek approval this November? But because the amounts are so small in the first year, or to actually delay collection or commence collection some time, say, in 2022 or 23 without materially impacting the time or or length of the of the period of taxes imposed. Yes. Council Member, I will direct you to pages 72 and 73 of your packet. This is a revised debt issuance schedule with the estimated annual levy rate based on the June 29th 2020 or even forecast the first few years. And the estimated levy rate for 2021 is about $0.12 per thousand dollars and then goes up from there. Does that kind of get to the answer of your question? Yeah, I thought the numbers were quite works worse, much smaller in the first year or so. I just missed the mystery of calling. I believe Patrick Hamacher is available to answer this. I think I think I think so. Very briefly in this book, that's not $0.12. That's quite $0.22 in the first couple of years. And Sam said $0.12. It was just an honest mistake. So it doesn't even get to a full penny until the third year. It's 2.8 $0.08. But I was I was coming on the line to get to the second part of your question, Councilmember, because it's a little different than what we normally have about can we not? Levy Initially, and I think we would ultimately want to ask legal counsel about that. But in general, I believe the answer is yes, because in as opposed to your normal little lift levies where you say we're going to collect a certain rate per year or up to a certain rate per year, what you approve in bond ordinances is a principal amount up to a certain amount. So what you would probably need to find out in the first couple of years if you didn't want to levy it initially, is how you were going to raise the cash to do the planning and design work in the first couple of years, which is why that rate is so low. It's a small expenditure if you're on the way to do that. I do believe you could wait a year or two before you started levying it, but it's such a small rate too. That would kind of be a policy option. Yeah, it's a it's such a small rate for a small amount of money. You could maybe look at an inner fund loan. And I even wonder if the administration of collecting that small amount is is very efficient. So I don't know, we probably lost weight deeply and I don't want to do anything that would take this off of that the track toward a strong launch. But given the economic times it and the very small sums collected, I know that sounds somewhat inconsistent, but I just wonder if we might take a look at that between now and final adoption as to when the collections would start. So. Councilmember, I'm still here. Oh, Dwight. And I think Mr. Henniker had the right idea. You should ask legal counsel, but my recollection when we did something similar many years ago, when I was at the city of Seattle with the Libraries for all bond issue, if you put a measure on the ballot in a year, I believe the legal advice we received at that time is you have to levy the tax the next year, even a very small amount. Otherwise, you're basically asking voters for something that's speculative that way in advance. And the law, as I remember, does not allow you to do that. Thank you. Appreciate it. Right. Mr. Chair, are you looking to advance this to a full council today? Not at this moment I am, but not at this moment. Okay. Are there any other questions? Colleagues. Colleagues, for your information, this is one I would anticipate questions, certainly, which is why I'm asking for questions. And then we do have a unrelated matter regarding Harborview. They will introduce as an executive session and we'll go into executive session before I would be seeking a motion on the bond measure. And just so you know what course we're charting here. So questions on the policy of the bond measure. Okay. Thank you. Just wanted to know in the chart when he heard that estimated rate is three and a quarter. With what's happening right now, is it a possibility? The best estimate actually could be lower. Mr. Hamacher. Yes. Like that king sized insect. What might it be at this point? But remember that because of this, we might issue some debt in the first year. Back to the customary Damascus question, but it'd be for very small amounts to do planning and design. So when we start to issue the construction debt in maybe three years, the market could be completely different. If we were selling 20 year bonds today, I think the rate would be closer to 2% than it was to 3%. But because of that, the executive, I think they did they have brought the estimate for the interest rates down during the time the council's been considering it. But I think they do want to plan to be more conservative than less conservative when they're trying to guess the interest rates for a couple of years down the road. I think if. Hey, no further questions. While not related to the bond proposal, the Harborview Medical Center Board of Trustees has been directly and indirectly authorized as directly and indirectly off until agreements for four properties that are being operated under Harborview is a hospital license and the rents paid out of Harborview Medical Center revenues. However, both the county code and the Hospital Services Agreement specifically define what properties are considered to be part of the medical center. These additional properties are not included in those definitions. The Council needs to go into executive session to confer with the county's attorneys to obtain legal advice of potential actions the county may take related to this matter. Therefore, the grounds for executive session under RTW 4231 ten are to discuss with legal counsel legal risks of a proposed action when public knowledge regarding the action is likely to result in an adverse legal or financial consequence to the county. The committee will be the executive session for approximately 15 minutes until about 3:02 a.m., asking QC KPTV to please post the virtual meeting to that effect. And I'm asking only council members and any county employees directly necessary for the discussion to join the executive session by state at this time and council members, you may still stay logged in to zoom and leave yourself muted and step and committee assistance will make sure that you're muted when you leave Zoom as well so you can leave zoom open and I will see you in the executive session scope momentarily. Thank you. All right, then we're coming out of executive session and as we've ascertained that all members are accounted for. Councilmember Dombrowski, I would entertain a motion if you were so inclined. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I move adoption of the Harborview Bond ordinance, and as the prime sponsor, I defer to you for opening remarks. Thank you, Councilmember Dombrowski, for moving. We give a do pass recommendation to ordinance 2020 176, and it was my pleasure to serve with you, Councilmember Dombrowski, people from Harborview, people from UTEP Medicine, our labor partners at the hospital and neighbors around Harborview on first tail, and perhaps most importantly, the mission population. The hospital's duty is to serve. And as you already heard, when the board chair for Harborview Board of Trustees testified during public comment, the recommendation from that working group was unanimous for the package that has continued from the working group that Councilmember Nebraskan I served on through the Harborview Board, the Facilities Committee and the executive to arrive to us in the same form. We see now in the middle of a pandemic the work that Harborview and its partner that we contract with operate medicine do so well. But to single out and be particular the work that Harborview does as the county hospital and in fact serving our mission population, recognizing that they have a mission to serve non-English speaking poor persons, the uninsured and underinsured victims of domestic violence and sexual assault, people incarcerated in our jails, people with mental illness or substance abuse issues there has been treated and voluntarily. People with sexually transmitted diseases and those who require emergency trauma or burn care. That's truly the mission population of the hospital and who they serve every day. The bond measure itself does some critical work that Bernie spoke to in her testimony, particularly making the the hospital rooms single patient because of the number of beds that end up unusable on any given night due to infection control, something that I think the layperson is probably more aware of today in this pandemic than we might have been before. As we come to understand the transmission of COVID 19, and this is a as the current by measure is expiring, this is our chance to make substantial investments in the Harbor Harborview campus and truly its mission, including up to 150 respite beds in Harborview Hall while maintaining the shelter capacity at the most appropriate place within the campus, redesigning the arrival of the medical helicopter. Because currently, if you arrived at Harborview by helicopter, you're under being transported from that building to another by ambulance rather than simply an elevator ride down into an emergency room. That that will be addressed within the bond measure and enhancing the greatly enhancing and in investing in behavioral health, in the investments that are so needed in behavioral health and our ability to provide support and treatment to people. So I will ask my colleagues to join in this sustained investment not only in our county hospital, but truly in our community and our own well-being. Further remarks. Saying None. Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Council member belt reaching. I council member Baluchi votes. I Council Member Dombrowski. I Council member Belsky. Both I Council member. Done. High Council member downvotes i council member calls I Council Member Commonwealth Votes Council Member Lambert i. Member Lambert I council member us across. Council member of After Grow. Councilmember Vaughn right there I. Councilmember Vaughn right there are both I council members online. Council members on lifeboats. I. Mr. Chair. I. Mr. Chairman. Mr.. Full time. Mr. Chair, the vote is nine zero on us. By your vote, we have given a do pass recommendation to ordinance 2020 176, and we will send that to full council without it. Without objection, we will expedite. So it appears that the account on the council agenda one week from today. See? See? No objection. So order. Thank you, colleagues. This takes us to briefing 2020 B 51. It's a briefing from the Charter Review Commission. You remember that last year the co-chairs of the Charter Review Commission, Louise Miller and Ryan Simms, presented their early reports. Today, co-chair Louise Miller is going to provide an overview of the commission process and final recommendations. Then we'll hear from commission members Alejandro Torres, Rob Saca and on the two Charter amendment proposals we are discussing today related to all the subpoena powers and the counties inquests process. From my colleague's reference, the slides for the presentation are included in the CAO package beginning on page 373 of your packet. With that. Former Councilmember Miller. The floor is yours. Really? Let me and you. There you go. Thank you. My welcome to the council. I can see you've had a lot of really important things that you've been doing this a bit. It sounds like it's been a big day, so we'll try to move through this as smoothly as possible. The overview of the process. 23 commissioners were appointed by the executive and confirmed by the council, and we held town hall style public meetings at the beginning of our work. And also we did the same when we were working on our final recommendations. The Commission operated on a consensus model and recommended 11 amendments be placed on the ballot. The recommended amendments in the order that they appear in the charter are some changes to the preamble, which I won't go over. You can go over it in your own report, but updates and clarifications to the initiative and referendum process. Much has changed over the last several decades in election law, and the charter has fallen behind on being current with state law. And there are also some sections that would benefit from clarification. So this amendment addresses those issues. Subpoena Power for law enforcement oversight. I will briefly read it, but we have, I believe, a commissioner who will cover this issue, because I think this is one that you're scheduling to move forward with. The amendment would add subpoena powers to those listed under the Office of the Law Enforcement Oversight. He recommended amendments in the order again as they appear in the charter. The next would be the additional exempt positions. This request from the the County Council and the Executive. I think the Charter includes specific language around which county positions are exempt from a career service system. This amendment would allow the Council to adopt an ordinance changing the exempt positions. Something that surprised me. You did not have any language in the charter that allowed a removal process for elected officials. So we had really top staff work on this and they really researched a lot of this throughout the country. And we found out that, you know, the very city we're in, Seattle has this kind of language. So this is what we're proposing to go into the charter. The amendment would allow elected officials to be removed from office by a supermajority of the County Council for misfeasance, malfeasance or violations of their oath of office. Currently, the only option for removal is a recall election. Here's one that won't be controversial, I'm sure. This is the county sheriff's suggestion to revert it to an appointed position. This amendment would revert the office of county sheriff to that of an appointed official, whereby the executive would appoint and the county council would confirm the county sheriff . Next comes the increased antidiscrimination protections. This amendment would add protections against discrimination for family caregivers, honorably discharged members of the military, and add protections to those discharged solely because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. We also have additional requirements for inquests. This is one that you will get more information on. I feel this amendment will require that an attorney be appointed for family matters involved in inquests, and require an inquest to be conducted when a member of law enforcement may have contributed to the death of a person in custody. Another one that's in relationship to something the state is changing is affordable housing. The property sales career properties owned by agencies that used to be part of the Metropolitan Municipality of Seattle are required to be sold for full value at a recent change in state law allows the property to be sold for less than full value if it's going to be used for affordable housing. This would correct this conflict and allow for these types of transactions. And I know there's been discussion about this because we know that we just don't have all of the housing that we need for our workforce and for our low income friends. Then there are some omnibus changes. There are two amendments to make a series of changes throughout the document. These include typographical and radical, an amendment containing a series of typographical and technical changes throughout the charter. And also we decided to revise the concept of citizenship throughout the document. This amendment revises all references to citizenship except one. The amendment changes the term of citizen to either resident when describing a person or public when describing things like public participation. There is one reference to the citizenship left and regarding the need to be a citizen to hold elective office, which is a requirement of state law. The Charter Review Commission believes very strongly that the County Council should place all 11 of these amendments. However, we realize that that might be too much to go on one ballot. So we are saying that we think you might need to decide which would be the first batch and which would be the second batch. And that depends on your discussions and debate, whether you think you could present. All of them. I want to just make a couple of comments that came up in our report to you earlier on suggestions to the next commission. One of the things we discovered was that we really needed to have a facilitator from the beginning once we got the facilitator to work with this. We really it really moved along better and we really started to focus in. We also created subcommittees for some of the topics and split some of the work and then asked those commissioners, come back to us. We think that's a good thing to continue to. And the one thing that we didn't do, but that we think probably should be done is set sort of a length of time we want to spend on this. How long do you want to deliberate over these changes? And our suggestion would be it would be best to be able to report back to the council between nine and maybe 12 months, not a year and a half later, which is what it was for us. Now, one other thing I'd like to say is that we were served by excellent county employees. They did a fabulous job and they did enormous amounts of research, but they were always ready to go. They always got us started on time. We tried to finish on time and considering we had many, many, two and three hour meetings and had to have set up for all the electronic things that we needed and the research papers. I really compliment the staff that you loaned to the commission for this process. Thank you. Oh, sure. Miller You're very welcome. And Councilmember Dombroski and I can personally vouch for the time you and all the other people on the commission invested, because our Harborview Leadership Group was meeting on the same floor on the same night pretty regularly through that entire year. So we were coming and going from the building at the same time you were coming and going and know the work you were investing at me by way of further introduction, point out that co-chair Miller has spoken of 11 amendments. At this point in time. There are five introduced and two on today's call agenda. No, the other three will be scheduled and we'll continue our work from there. But just in time management, you're already aware that this meeting, it's now 328. I mean, we have the two ahead of us and two motions, but no, the others will be scheduled. It was a matter of time management that set that up. And I have a question for co-chair Miller Councilmember Von Right. Our. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Louise, thank you very much for your service and thanks, Ron, as well. I have a question relative to the sheriff's position. Can you hear me? Yes, I can hear you. You mentioned that the under the proposal that the county executive would nominate and the county council would confirm, when I was in the state Senate, I chaired the confirmation process. And it was a very interesting process because. One of the misjudgments by members of the Senate was a person could serve well regardless of whether or not they're confirmed by the state Senate. Does this allow an appointee to serve? Prior to or has to wait for confirmation by the county council. Boy, I wish I could tell you that perhaps one of the staff members there has this in their mind. I don't. I think that the council has to confirm before they can serve. But that's maybe. So if I can jump in. Council member that appointed process, the amendment that it was brought forward by the Charter Review Commission would effectively review forever the appointment of the sheriff to the same process, followed by all of the other department heads. And there are allowances for short durations of time. And I just don't know that my head of it's 60 or 90 days and there can be continuances of those interim appointments until that confirmation occurs. We can check with the legal counsel and advise the Charter Review Commission and get back to you on that. But I do believe that it would just be the same process followed for appointment of all of the other department heads. And so there is a period of time where they can serve before having been confirmed legitimate by me. Continue. I would like to see a definitive answer. I appreciate Patrick's comment, but I'd like to have a definitive answer. Louise, thank you again. You and I were part of a process by which we did put the. Process of election of the sheriff out to the public. I thought then it was it increased accountability. I believe that we've had a number of very good sheriffs in the process. And I continue to believe that accountability starts with the public, not with politicians. Thank you. I concur. Further questions, Coach Miller And let me interject and ask this. Is it Saca and Mistress, are you presenting on the overall recommendations or on the first charter amendment itself? I'll be presenting on Olio and Raab will be presenting on inquests. Okay. Then I will continue taking questions for co-chair Miller, if there are any on the overall presentation before we get to the individual amendments. Councilmember Bell. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm not sure who this question is for, and it's partially historical, partially a judgment question. These charter amendments can only be on a November ballot. November ballots, especially in a presidential year like this year, are extremely long. And and I think that we had all more or less confusion coalesced around the idea that we wouldn't try to put all of the 11 on one ballot, even if even if everybody agreed to all of them. And so my question is, is, does anybody, staff or chair Miller, recall past versions of updates to the charter? I recall voting on them and sometimes there were quite a few. I'm just trying to wrap my brain around what's the right number or what's too many, I think is probably the more important thing because and let me just say, we proposed out of my office the one about the about the gosh, you know, the initiatives to to the to the council and to the and to the public, because we had a group of people trying to run an initiative. And regardless of what you thought about the substance of it, the process was not good. And it really created a lot of concern and disillusionment in the public because they did what they thought they needed to do on the timelines. They thought they needed to do it only to find they were too late. And so we've updated our ordinances and other procedures internal to King County, and now we need this charter change to fix it. But if it was if you were to ask me, is it the most important thing, the most time sensitive thing, it probably isn't. So I'm just trying to wrap my brain around the question of how many makes sense at a time. Yeah, and I know and I believe we felt the same way, which is why our report said, you know, we know you might not be able to put them all on the same ballot, but that was one of the reasons that we took some of the early. If you remember, we had an early report that I did that had some of the things that we thought were less controversial and maybe could be put on the ballot in 2019. And it didn't happen. So that's and, you know, that's up to the council, lots of things going on. But that's why we're now faced with, oh, we either have to do them all here in a really busy year. That's very true. Or we'll have to pick and choose what we think. We really need to get changed now. And you've raised one issue where it was complicated to look at the length of time people had to get signatures and what they had to write and what kind of paper it had to be on and and on and on and on. There were a lot of things that seemed like they weren't necessary, but that you still have to work with your election departments and they still have to have the time to be able to actually get things out in the voters pamphlet, etc.. So yep. Anyway, that was one of the reasons that we gave you sort of our early report with the, a gentle suggestion that you might want to put it on the 19, 2019. Are you suggesting, though, that the committee thought that 11 would be a number that you could do on one ballot? I don't know that we've had that direct conversation. I think some people thought, well, maybe, but we didn't for a while. There were a couple that we didn't think we're going to be considered. But after we had worked through language and then had public hearings and heard from people, we thought, well, you know, maybe we need to sit back and say, do we go ahead with this or not? And so we realized that Eleven's quite a bit. And some of them are easier for people to understand than others. Well, thank you and thank you for the your being a go to person. Councilmember Miller, we always appreciate your advice and considered work on so many big issues at King County. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions for Coach Miller? Being none. We thank you very much. And we will take up the first of the two charter amendments that are on our agenda today. This is proposed ordinance 2020 206, which would amend the county charter to grant the Office of Law Enforcement Oversight subpoena powers. Nick Bowman will give a staff report on the proposal. Mr. Bowman, the one is yours. Good afternoon, council members. For the record, Nic Bowman, council central staff. The materials for this item begin on page 389 of your packet. Proposed Ordinance 2020 0206 would submit to the voters of Clayton County an amendment to the county charter to be placed on the next general election, which would add the authority to subpoena documents, witnesses and other relevant evidence. The list of charter powers granted to the Office of Law Enforcement Oversight. As the council is well aware, King County has worked for many years to improve oversight of the King County Sheriff's Office. In the interest of time, I won't go into the full background of those efforts, but I will say that they began in 2006 with the establishment of a blue ribbon panel on police oversight and the adoption of Ordinance 15 611 Creating Aliyah. In November 2015, the voters of King County approved an amendment to the county charter that established OLEO as a charter mandated county office within the legislative branch. This amendment, now Section 265 of the King County Charter, increased oversight responsibilities for Oleo and requiring that those authorities be established by ordinance. And in April 2017, the Council adopted Ordinance 818 500, expanding all those authorities to include investigative authority with subpoena powers for the office, complaint and concern intake responsibilities, including the authority to review Ccso complaint intake classifications, authorization to review policies, procedures, training and operations and to make recommendations. Access to relevant information and crime scene authorities. Notification requirements regarding cases of Complaint Handling Processes and review of inquest findings. Proposed Ordinance 2020 0206, as I said, would submit to the voters an amendment of the King County Amendment to the King County Charter, which would add the authority to subpoena witnesses, documents and other evidence relating to its investigations or review to the list of all your powers described in Section 265 of the County Charter. As stated earlier, Oleo has subpoena powers under King County Code 2.75.055. However, unlike its charter provision that can only be added or removed by a vote of the people lost, ravished by ordinance is transitory and can be changed by the council adopting a new ordinance. If the subpoena power were added to the charter, it can only be removed by a vote of the people. According to Olio director Deborah Jacobs, without the ability to compel the sheriff's office personnel to be interviewed and to produce relevant records. OLEO has limited ability to complete, thorough and objective investigations. Now the authority to issue subpoenas is an established power within oversight agencies around the country and one granted to numerous county entities. A non-exhaustive list of oversight offices in other jurisdictions across the country where some form of subpoena powers can be found on page 391 of your packet and includes. Oakland, California. Washington, D.C.. Chicago, Illinois. Denver, Colorado. Indianapolis, Indiana. Detroit, Michigan. Los Angeles, California. New York City. Cambridge, Massachusetts and Rochester, New York. The table on page 392, your packet lists the county entities with the authority to issue subpoenas as well as any limitations to that authority. And some of these entities include the County Council, the Ombud office, the Office of Civil Rights, the auditor, the chief medical examiner. The Personnel Board and the hearing examiner. It should be noted that should the proposed ordinance be adopted and subsequently approved by the voters, the amendment passage alone may not be enough to effectuate the desired change , as the proposed amendment may affect the working conditions of cso's unionized workforce. The county would most likely need to engage in bargaining with the affected unions before Oleo could exercise the powers granted by that amendment. I also just want to touch briefly on some election timing requirements in order to place on the November three, 2020 ballot and effective ordinance must be transmitted to Elections Department by August 4th, 2020. Therefore, the last regular council meeting date for adoption is July 21st and August 4th. 2020 is the last special council meeting date to adopt the ordinance as an emergency. Finally, there are two amendments. Amendment one would make changes to the language and substance of the proposed charter amendment, including changing the general election date in which the proposed charter minute would appear on the ballot from November 2019 to November 2020. Granting Oleo the authority to administer oaths to witnesses subpoenaed by Oleo and clarifying that any witness subpoenaed by Oleo shall have the right to be represented by legal counsel. Amendment One confirms the title of the proposed ordinance to the changes made by Amendment One. With regards to changing the general election date in which the proposed charter amendment would appear on the ballot from 2019 to 20 2nd November 2020. That concludes my staff report. We have also director for Jacobs and she's Patrick Singleton, CSO Online to help answer any questions the committee may have. Mr. Bowman For my clarity. Clarity? The two amendments are the one substantive amendment and the title amendment. Is that correct? That's correct. Thank you. And next, I'd like to call on our commissioner from the Charter Review Commission. I believe, as I'm prepared to present on this amendment. Alejandro. Pausing at 100 trees. There we go. Hi, everyone. One thing, Councilor McDermott, first of all, is that it says that my Internet is a bit unstable here in rural unincorporated, which I think all of us feel a little unstable during COVID. So let me know if I'm lagging. And I can try to adjust or shut off my video. I wanted to thank you, Councilmember German pair and all the council members for this discussion. I also want to express my gratefulness to the charter commission, some of whom are watching especially. At 100, you just walk up. Of 100 drives. I suggest you turn your video off. Okay. Will do. Is this any better? Yes. Okay. Excellent. So just wanted to say thanks again to the charter commission, especially the equity committee, especially my co-chair, Liz Ford, who was a main driver. I think Nick actually mentioned quite a number of things, so I don't know that I'm going to be doing a lot more of fleshing that out. But I just want to say a little bit from the charter conditions perspective as to what we felt that this amendment would do and also why we felt it was necessary. As Nick mentioned, this also needs to have the authority to subpoena records and provide effective civilian oversight for law enforcement. And, of course, the amendment for subpoena power would add to that list of oleo of authority charters granted to oleo in the charter, and the county code already has a reflection and contemplates granting this authority to oleo. But it is not listed as in the charter as it is with other agencies. Now the CRC believes this amendment, if this amendment passes and ultimately can be bargained, that subpoenas rarely be used as parties will share information and not want to have to use the subpoena process. Well, with that in mind, why do we feel this is necessary? The Charter Commission believes that the residents can county have expected civilian oversight of the King County Sheriff's Office since 2006 and before, but at least 2006 when the council created the office, and certainly since 2015, when the voters added oleo to the county charter. However, efforts for effective civilian oversight, including subpoena power, have consistently been thwarted by the collective bargaining process. The issues to this day, the charter commission believes, continues to this day and we feel is a powerful statement to add the subpoena power to the charter and make it consistent with other agencies. It's been almost 14 years since the council first created Oleo, and that way it is long enough for effective civilian oversight. We feel by you moving this forward to the ballot, voter approval will help clarify the public's desire for more empowered oversight of our sheriff's office. Thank you. Thank you. Council members questions of Mr. Goldman Miss Trace and I'm Patty content. I'm sorry, Miss Court. And I don't know your current title, Undersheriff. In another week, I'll be the undersheriff. And currently you don't, chief, but okay. And also Director Jacobs are all available for questions as well. Colleagues. Ashton Lambert Councilmember, remember? LAMBERT Thank you. So I have two questions. One is, will this change the requirement for it to be parliament? And secondly, if you look at the chart, there are many departments that have the subpoena, including us. And to my knowledge, we have never used it. So how often in all of this has it ever been used? To my knowledge, it hasn't been. So I would like to be updated on that. I can speak generally to the first question, which is that it may require bargaining. It is our understanding that, yes, bargaining would need to take place before the olio to actually be able to subpoena you. So personnel that but that of course we would have to actually have the men would have to be adopted by the voters . So I don't want to put the cart before the horse too much. Right. And in addition, I do not have on hand a record of how many Times County entities have issued subpoenas. I would have to query all of those offices to determine that. It should be pretty easy because I think the answer is probably zero. I don't understand what is different. We already have the ability for them to subpoena. And as she said, it's been years that it hasn't been fired and for a variety of reasons that we probably should get to the bottom of. But this this doesn't change it. We'll be back exactly where we are right now in my mind. So that's a concern. We're making a pretty much false assumptions public that this will change the underlying. Richard Jacobs, did you have a response either to the previous question or the current one? Yes. Thank you. I appreciate you hearing from me a couple contextual comments. So the officers in the county that have subpoena power are counsel of Ombud, Office of Civil Rights Auditor, Chief Medical Examiner, Personnel Board and hearing examiner. And I also want to let folks know that it's a pretty much a norm for investigatory oversight agencies to have subpoena power. And I have a list of about 15 or 20 that I'm aware of that have it. In fact, almost none of them use it. And there's a good reason why. The reason is, is that once they have it, the threat of using it suffices to get the access to information that they need. That's been the lesson I have learned from hearing from my nationwide colleagues, is that once you have it, it sort of works without having to assert it. But Councilmember Lambert's comments are so well taken. The other thing I did want to mention is that there's specifically a real concern, the current collective bargaining agreement. It says that. That if the charter is amended, then it's a reopen after bargaining subpoena power as required by law. So that's one reason to do it now, because I know we have a lot of ambitions for the next round of bargaining. I also feel like having the voters affirm that this is their desire and make it consistent with the council's understanding of the role and the investigation role will be very important. And I think that affirmation would be meaningful and even potentially meaningful if there are challenges in the context of bargaining. So no, it's definitely does not overcome the state law challenges presented by collective bargaining for or oversight. But I still think it's important and worthy thing to be in the charter, to speak the will of the county . Thank you. Thank you. Further questions, colleagues. John. Councilmember Dunn. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Appreciate. And this is a question for our two questions. One is, does the sheriff's office have a position on this particular the charter amendment aside, appreciate your articulating it. And then the other question I have is, and maybe Debra countered, there are different kinds of subpoenas in the world. There are civil or criminal. There are legislative subpoenas. What is the what is the type of subpoena we are talking about here? And is there any standard that has to be met in order to request the subpoena? In other words, does it have to be within the scope of an active investigation, or can it be very broadly used in terms of various policy? What is what is the charter amendment speak to with specificity? Thank you. So I can keep cold Tindal sheriff's office, so I can answer Councilmember Dunn's question. So the position of the sheriff and our office is that we really are not taking a position on this. Obviously, this is something that has been an issue, if it goes to the voters, becomes part of the charter. It does have to be bargained. At least that's my perspective as your previous director of labor relations responsible for collective bargaining in the county, and that currently it is the executive who has that responsibility to negotiate this, which is really a working condition but because the voters previously. Basically approved that, you know, we would not bargain our own working conditions, which makes sense. Thank you. You're welcome. And on the second. So I don't have a full answer to your question. What I can tell you is the intent is that it would be able to have compel people, personnel to be interviewed about incidents and also to compel to get banking or phone records as far as the legal complexities of sort of how it would be administered. I don't have the familiarity and we'd have to have some research done on that. Can I just make one state? I'm sorry. Yeah, I'm sorry. Go ahead. Go ahead. I want to ask I think that like some other issues, I need some legal clarity on it. It may be just that it's substantially similar, as you said, are other independent counsel appointed positions. But I'd like to know and in particular, I'm interested in the in the contours or in other words, the limitations and what the subpoena power provide for my own information at some point. I mean, we're going to take action to travel with your passport. Helpful. So appreciate that. And go ahead. I just want to clarify one other thing about a reopen or that Deborah mentioned. That still has to be something that the guild would be interested in doing while it's in the contract. It still requires that there is the willingness to reopen. So I just wanted to point that out. Thank you. I mention one other thing, Councilmember. Councilmember Dunn, you know, the questions you're asking also would relate to what kind of independent investigations are being conducted. And this is something I'm really eager for a council to give some thought to and hopefully have a stakeholders conversation that includes guild members and KSO and the public. There are different ways it could be approached and I won't go into details now because I know we're short on time, but I think that there's a lot into sort of what this might look like. Yeah. And I appreciate that and I'll just finish with this. And so I'm not like, you guys aren't like searching in the dark. What I'm looking for is that the subpoena power is rationally related to the charter, the mission of Oleo in the charter, and other subsequent motions and legislation we put forward as well as staffing that is that it if it goes forward, that it move in a way that is directly related to that mission as opposed to some, you know, blanket authority to subpoena whatever it is that is desire for the purpose of driving some policies or set of policies forward. That's a little bit different and it just needs to be discussed so we don't work or buy in here, so to speak. Up the road. Can about the growth. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think I know the answer to this, but I want to make sure is the Sheriffs Guild contract next up for renewal at the end of next year. The crisis heads nodding. This charter amendment wouldn't take effect. The November ballot take effect, I assume, January one. And imagine that timing would be just about right to begin going into negotiations and. Right. So perfect timing. So that speaks to me as one reason to act. And I'd just one comment, if I may, if that's appropriate, Mr. Chair, then I. My constituents or people I hear from are often very confused about this process. And it's frustrating as an elected official because the heat is on us. I don't think most people realize that the only tools of civilian oversight that we're able to conduct over our sheriff's department or those in which the police agreed to. Because of this provision in state law that allows not only for the police guild to negotiate, but if we don't reach agreement, it goes to a third party and that decision is final. And when that third party often looks at comparables, it means it's a barrier to change. And so this. Just to be clear about communicating what we're doing, we're. You know, this is being proposed to go in front of the voters, be put into our county constitution or county charter to strengthen our position there . Whether legally, politically, structurally. But at the end of the day, the only oversight we're allowed to provide is that in which the police agree to let us provide intel if and when state law were to change, and so not to get people's hopes up too much who are advocating for this? Because unless again, unless that state law changes, this is going to be. Only if the police want us to, basically. So that's my my comment on it. But I'm very supportive moving forward. Colleagues. Edification. Was my remember. So could you clarify? I think all of us had the right to do independent investigations. And I thought that there was a grievance at some point about that. Can you tell me where the grievance landed in and is there the right to do independent investigations? So I can say on the history that there was a grievance filed after the audience was initially passed in 2006. Most of that ordinance was repealed and then the grievance was dropped and the ordinance was passed in 2008 that aligned with the contract with guilds at the time, and then the powers were later established. I'll let Deborah speak it to the individual or the independent investigations, but that the initial grievance was for the initial ordinance, and then another ordinance was put in place. So I you're talking about the more current grievance. The grievance was over a systemic review of the shooting of my chance to get involved. And the guild has been on hold with its grievance because it wants to present it to Oehler in person and because of the virus that has not happened. 310. I do not believe that report is an investigation is because no investigation was done, meaning no one was called. It was just the review of the file, much like, you know, of adding and then adding expertize. So if they don't like that, they're really not going to like what an investigation is. And that's something that, as I mentioned earlier, we really need to discuss, but that's a status after it's presented to all our rules. And then it's possible it could be appealed to arbitration. That would be the next step. I would love for us to be able to resolve it peacefully before that myself, and I've expressed that to Olara. So at this very moment, you have the right to do. Whatever. I'm sorry. The right to what? You independent investigations. So on a very limited scope, for example, it would be possible under limited circumstances to investigate someone who is not represented by the Guild. Yes. So basically, Deborah is correct. That would mean the chiefs, the undersheriff. Perhaps our legal advisers, those that are know, I think there's seven or eight of us that are not represented. A very limited. And beyond that, Patty, I believe the scope is also limited, meaning it might have to be a use of force or something like that as well. I'd have to look at the language, but I think it's along those lines. Thank you. Councilmember Dombrowski. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've had some discussion about this. And I want to remind folks and please Deborah or Nick or legal counsel, correct me if I'm wrong, but Nick mentioned the 2017 implementing ordinance that I had worked on with councilmen, Councilmember Gossett, which carried that brought to life the the charter amendments passed by the voters. And we, I believe, already adopted in that ordinance the authority for the Office of Law Enforcement Oversight to issue subpoenas so that the the it's in their charge today. And I know that hasn't really been mentioned or has it's maybe got lost a little bit that this charter amendment would basically the thinking behind putting in the charter is that it elevates the importance and to the extent we don't get agreement from the guild at the bargaining table coming up, the grove is 100% right. And I like the way you phrased it, that we can only do the oversight that the guild lets us do. But the thinking is that perhaps what the voters speaking on this particular topic, that it might, if necessary, to go to an arbitrator, have some extra strength in terms of the the people speaking so that the power is there by ordinance. This just puts it in the charter. We're not changing the contours of it at all in terms of the kind of subpoena power. And I think with respect to the individual investigations, the investigations of individuals, their use of force versus other investigations by the office, the subpoena power could be helpful in their systemic review as well to the extent they need documents to complete that. And maybe that's my question to Director Jacobs. Would you agree with that? I would say at this point we are fairly successful in getting the documents we need from the sheriff's office. They have capacity problems, so there's a timeliness issue. But besides that, we have that kind of access. So it would be hard for me to envision that systemic review. I guess we would have to be trying to get data from like outside sources. It's possible, but I'll have to think a little bit more on that and I'll let you know. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. You're welcome. Colleagues, anything else? Would you like a motion? I would welcome a motion. They, Mr. Chair, I'd be happy to move. Adoption of proposed ordinance number 2020 0206, which would with a do pass recommendation of the full council. The ordinance would put before the voters in the November 2020 election the question of whether they would like to amend King County Charter to specifically grant the Office of Law Enforcement Oversight, which was created by Charter. The power to issue subpoenas. And if amended here by Amendment one, to compel witnesses to testify with the assistance if they wish to counsel. Councilmember Dombrowski is moved to give a to pass recommendation to ordinance 2020 206. Councilmember Dombrowski if you want to move adoption of the amendment so moved to amendment one is before us. Staff addressed the amendment as the discussion on the amendment. All those in favor. Please say I i i opposed nay. A. The ayes have it. The amendment is adopted. Move t one and two. Two. One is before us discussion. All those in favor of Taiwan. Please signify by saying I oppose. Nay, the ayes have it. Total amendment is adopted. We have ordinance 2020 206 as amended before us discussion. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to speak. As a member of No Duty. Thank you. Thank you. It's been a while since somebody did that. I didn't speak up during the question and answer, but I wanted to just make my feelings on this clear is I have always believed as somebody who spent a lot of time working with internal investigations, people as labor advisers, legal adviser, as a director, I have always believed that a good oversight, oversight that is accepted by all sides, by the public, by the people who have been harmed in most situations where we're doing an investigation and somebody has been harmed somehow and by the people who are providing critical services like law enforcement, feeling that they get a fair shake, I think that public oversight provides that kind of assurance to everyone when it's done right. But in order for it to be done right, the investigators need access to the information they need to to do their job without full information. They cannot provide the transparency. That's what we seek with oversight. And so I think this is almost almost a no brainer. I don't have any concerns with this level of of of authority at all. I hope that we can implement it. I personally also believe that oversight should not be subject to bargaining. I should not be able to say whether somebody what somebody how somebody judges me. I should not control that process for myself. That's just that's almost unethical. And so I think it's really important that we move in this direction for everybody. By the way, I'm very much in favor of having a process that was briefed to us in that earlier briefing about how elected officials can be held accountable, not holding in on myself or my colleagues separate from this. So I just feel very strongly this is a good step. I will vote for it. I hope that it passes in November and that we can find a way to implement it. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Other colleagues. Councilmember Dombrowski. I think it was I know the meeting's running long and I'll try to be very brief here, but I echo the comments, of course, from about 80. And I've been thinking a lot lately about the phrase law enforcement. And there's two pieces to that, the laws and the enforcement. And I think in the debate we're having here in our country right now, we should look at what laws we are passing and have passed and determine whether they are laws that have just put impacts in the way they come down on folks and make changes. We also need to look at our enforcement side and make sure that it's just and fair and effective and that people have confidence in it. This is one small piece of building confidence in the enforcement side of the laws that we as politicians and others have adopted. And like any profession, I just think that independent oversight, checks and balances, if you will, on that is par for the course. And it not only builds confidence by it in the system, by the public, or at least it can if it's done well, but it can also improve the organization. This is not about getting somebody or going after somebody. This is about ensuring that there is transparency when something goes wrong and that there is accountability and that there can also be vindication and clearance. Right. Let's let's keep in mind that these outcomes are not predetermined. We have independence in the structure to take a look at things when there's been a complaint made and make sure that when the decision is rendered that it comes from not an internal investigation unit or somebody part of the organization, but rather somebody outside. It's why our courts are independent. It's why the judge wears a black robe to signify neutrality. This is these are values enshrined in our in our in our country. And this today is just a tool for our independent oversight office to be able to hopefully carry out that mission. I want to just signal to colleagues, we've had a good discussion today about the role that the labor negotiations plays in this. And I've heard some new statements, including one echoing our county executives leadership saying, hey, you know, buffer state law, we wouldn't and maybe shouldn't have to negotiate this. We set the labor policy today for the county as the county council. And I think that we shouldn't wait on this issue and also on the ability of Oleo to conduct independent investigations until the next bargaining cycle. I know a lot has happened since we adopted that contract a couple of months ago. And I, I want to just let you all know that we're working on a draft labor policy that would ask the executive to go back to the bargaining table and see if the guild is willing to reopen the contract on those two items and get it done. Because I just don't think you can watch what's occurred here in America and have the same answer that we've had for a decade, which is no. And if it is no, I think that tells us some valuable information about what policy responses and what budget steps we might need to take. Because as I said at the last meeting, we talked about this on Friday. I think our public wants us to fund a law enforcement system that protects and serves in a fair and just way. And effective oversight and transparency is a part of us, a critical part of that and is necessary, in my view, before significant funds are put in. So I think the governor about it, she got it right. This is like almost a no brainer. We've already done it. The ordinance, this enshrines it if the voters approve it in our county constitution and courage colleagues support. Appreciate the co-sponsors that have come on councilmembers alkali co wells and McDermott. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The discussion. Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Council member, Belgium. I Councilmember Carducci, but I also remember asking. I. Councilmember Demovsky both to council member. II. Council member done both I Council member calls I Council Member Caldwell's full time Council Member Lambert No. Council member Lambert Voltz, now council member of the drop. By. Council member of the Girl Scouts, council member Conroy Fowler. I council member by night thereabouts. I council members are high. I council members on halibut i. Mr. Chair. Hi. Mr. Chair. The vote is eight ice. Councilmember Lambert. No. By your vote, we've given a do pass recommendation to ordinance 2020 206 and. We will. Staff. Is this the one that time to engross might be needed? Yes, I think it's possible. But it's it's also if if there's a desire to expedite, that would be fine as well. Is there a desire to expedite? Mira. Then I will. We will not expedite. It will be a regular course of action to full council and not on consent. That takes us to item nine. Proposed Ordinance 2019 to 36, which would amend the County Charter to clarify when an inquest was being held and to provide for legal representation for the family of the decedent. I know my colleagues are aware of litigation surrounding the inquest process. I want to point out that the litigation is separate from the charter amendment we'll be discussing. And it's my hope that we'll be able we will focus on the charter amendment and not discuss the litigation issues which would it would necessitate in executive session. Jennie Jim, John Batiste will give a staff report on the proposed charter amendment. And Ms.. Jon Batiste, the line is yours. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Jenny. Jon Batiste, Counsel. Staff. Agenda item nine begins on page 43 of your packet. As you noted, Mr. Chair, this is a charter amendment related inquests, and it would add language to the charter about when an inquest is to occur, and it requires the county to assign an attorney to represent the family of the decedent in the inquest proceeding. In the interest of time. I will be covering highlights in each section of my staff report. I'd like to start with a few background facts on inquests on page 404 of the packet. An inquest is an administrative fact finding inquiry into in the review of the manner, facts and circumstances of the death of an individual in King County. Inquests are held when a death involves a member of any law enforcement agency within King County, while in the performance of his or her duties. The scope of the inquest is limited to the cause and circumstances of the death, including whether the law enforcement member acted pursuant to policy and training. The purpose of the inquest is not to find fault or determine whether the use of force was justified. An inquest is not a trial in the sense that there is no judgment on liability or found fault is produced. However, an inquest has some of the attributes of a trial, including hearing, sworn testimony of witnesses and a selection of a jury in the case of an inquest known as a panel is the finders of fact. As you are well aware, there have been recent changes to the inquest process in recent years. I wanted to highlight a few of those changes on page four, oh five and four and six of the packet. In December of 2017, the executive convened a six member King County Inquest Process Review Committee. Then in January of 2018, the executive temporarily halted all King County inquests in order to allow more time to review the existing inquest policies and procedures. In October of 2018, based on some of the review panel recommendations, the executive signed a revised executive order for the policies and procedures for the inquests. Then, in May 2019, under the new inquest process, Judge Michael Spearman was appointed as an inquest administrator. There was a pause again in the inquest process in December 2020 as the parties indicated that they intended to seek review of the inquest procedures in King County Superior Court. Petitions were filed with the King County Superior Court subsequent to that, and most recently on Friday, June 11th, the Executive signed a revised executive order which includes revised policies and procedures. However, of note, there were really two things that were revised. Substantive changes to now allow for subpoenas to be issued to involved officers and to allow counsel for the involved officers to participate in the inquest hearings regardless of whether they offer testimony. The next date. That's coming up is July 17th of 2020. That is when you hear your court is scheduled to address all of the pending petitions related to the inquest process. I want to note that it's my understanding that the outcome of the litigation won't affect implementation of the charter amendment if it's approved by the voters. Page 5405 of the packet provides a very high level summary of the current inquest process that is outlined in the executive order. The process starts with the prosecuting attorney's office receiving information from a law enforcement agency within King County of a death of an individual involving more law enforcement. The PAO then reviews that information and advises the executive as to whether there should be an inquest. Upon receiving the advisory opinion, the executive determines whether to hold an inquest. If the inquest is to be held, the executive then directs the manager to proceed with the inquest and the manager then assigns one of the inquest administrators to preside over the inquest and the Superior Court provides the facilities, the jurors and the courtroom staff. Specifically now looking at the language in the charter amendment. Please turn to page four of six and four seven of the packet. The proposed changes to the Charter, if adopted by voters, include several substantive changes to Section 895 of the Charter. Specifically, it adds additional language regarding when an inquest is to be conducted. This additional language specifies that an inquest shall be held where a member of any law enforcement agencies actions, decision or possible failure to offer the appropriate care may have contributed to an individual's death. Was this language the intent of the Charter Review Commission was to expand and broaden the number and circumstances under which the inquests are to occur. The next substantive change in the charter amendment is that it defines what a member of any law enforcement agency is for purposes of this section of the charter. And that is the second substantive change. The third one is that it requires the county to assign an attorney to represent the family of the deceased decedent in the inquest proceeding. But the family has the option of accepting the attorney or not. As Council members are aware, in January of 2018, the Council did adopt Ordinance 18652, which requires the Department of Public Defense to provide legal representation to the family participating in inquests regardless of the income level of the family. The proposed charter amendment is very similar to this language. Mr. Chair, I would note that there are two amendments in your separate amendment packet starting on page seven. These amendments are not substantive to the First Amendment, which is on page seven, and it also has a corresponding title amendment reflects suggestions by legal counsel so that all the charter amendments use the same language when referring to the election dates. The Second Amendment on page nine is really a style and readability change so that the sentence reads a little bit better. Well, Mr. Chair, that concludes my comments. I'm happy to answer any questions for you. Thank you. Mr. Jon Batiste, before we go to questions, I would call on Mr. Surkov to take to present. Minister from the Review Commission. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Good afternoon, Council members. My name is Rob Soca and I'm a commissioner. Can you hear me? Yes. I'm sorry. Right. And I'm a commissioner on the Charter Review Commission. It is my honor to appear before you all today, and especially Council Member Sala. Tommy Lee. Hey, Suz Fernandez Marial. Joseph Pepin. My chance. Dunlap. Giddens. Malina Lyles. These are just a few of the people. That when we talk about inquests, irrespective of whether the death is is deemed to be justified or not, we must never forget to acknowledge the humanity in the names of those killed in encounters with police. Sadly, the lives of families and communities are forever changed when someone is killed by police. Nationally. We're also mindful of the recent brutal killings by law enforcement of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and others across the country. And I'll tell you that in my personal capacity over the last few weeks, I've been absolutely honored to march alongside my my dear friend and old colleague council members Natalie. As well as thousands of others in the movement for Black Lives across our region and our nation. Personally, I've also been moved by Dormice devotion to serving others and humbled by his presence and inspired by his bold leadership. And I thank him. And I think every one of the council members who have supported this particular proposal today. I'm also hopeful that our region. Our region's unified voice will bring meaningful, lasting policy change to address issues of police accountability and transparency. But in this forum, in this legislative body in which I virtually stand before you today, you must move from protest the policy. And here is the opportunity at hand. And when we're talking about the proposed charter amendment, what will it specifically accomplish? Well, on the commission, we believe that this common sense charter amendment recommendation before this committee would directly advance three basic ideals and law enforcement accountability, truth and transparency. Therefore, the Commission recommends making two substantive changes, which Jenny already highlighted. As it pertains to inquests. To recap. We want to do. We want to elevate to the charter the relevant county code provision for writing a county funded attorney, the families of the deceased during the inquest process. Again, this particular proposal, with respect to this particular proposal, it's 100% consistent with existing law and interpretation. The second thing that we want to do, as Danny alluded to, is we want to ensure that the inquests process occurs in the event of an in-custody death. She talked about some of the the textual underpinnings and some of the specifics as it relates to the exact language. But broadly, what we want to do is make sure it applies to law enforcement agencies and corrections agencies and require an inquest at any time that any action or decision or failure to act may have contributed to a death. We talked about what an inquest is. There's some egregious myths out there. We've heard from the community during this process, but the overwhelming majority of community input that we've heard and gathered during this process was was strongly in favor of having the inquest, as we we've proposed today. It's just the Administrative Fact-Finding Inquiry. The purpose is not to determine liability or fault. It doesn't address wrongdoing or whether the death could have been avoided or whether it was justified. So why do we why do why are we moving this specific proposed charge, a charter amendment before you today? Well, broadly when we began our work on the commission to help enhance the inquest process potentially at the charter level, we started with the premise that agree families deserve answers, they deserve truth as well. Again, inquests are not a finger pointing exercise to assign blame. One way or the other, the findings of an inquest help all stakeholders, including policy makers, including you all help you understand the causes and circumstances of the death to enable people to learn and grow from these experiences. We we found that inquest reform at the charter level helps maintain and improve public confidence and trust in the integrity and professionalism of the community's various law enforcement agencies across King County. During officer involved killings. Again, the goal is to enable departments to be held accountable for creating better safer. And more equitable ways of protecting and policing. So we know that it adds legal representation and affirmative right to legal representation for family members of the deceased. We think that this will fully and more equitably allow participation in the in the inquest process, regardless of a family's financial means. And we also learned that providing legal counsel for all families of the deceased will better ensure each party to an inquest will have equal opportunity to participate. Again, that one is 100% consistent with the existing law, but we felt strongly that as a matter of policy and priority. Before the current crisis that we're seeing. And I'm not talking about the COVID crisis. That it was important to up level that particular provision to the charter. And then with respect to the in-custody death clarification. The Commission wanted to shine a light. The light of transparency that's inherent with a more robust inquest by expanding the requirement to all in-custody death situations. And we felt that understanding in-custody deaths, learning from each other's deaths, and using that information to make positive, positive changes to the system outweighed any potential concern or cost of having too many inquests. Again, we felt that aggrieved families deserve answers. So does the public and members in the law enforcement community. They all deserve a full and complete investigation of the facts that led to any tragic death. Which of course, is tragic. So, Mr. Chair. And Council. In sum, we believe that these common sense reforms to the Charter to create additional transparency and accountability and trust in law enforcement are necessary. And now the time for action and accountability is more. Is more clear than ever, in my view, and we must move forward together to get to the truth. And I'd finally like to make it clear that this was one of the early action items that Chair Miller identified earlier, that we moved forward last summer because it was adopted unanimously. We thought it was less controversial, and so we felt strongly about it then. And given current events, we feel well. I personally feel even even more strongly about it. So, Mr. Chair, that concludes my overview of the inquest proposals. At this time, I welcome any questions or comments that you all may have. Thank you very much. Colleagues questions. Seeing no questions. Council members all i. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to first thank Rob soccer. Thank you for first of all, for making me blush. I appreciate you. I got to know Rob when I was an associate at Perkins Curry, and he's always been an exceptional attorney and tireless champion for justice. I want to thank him all and trace Mikita, Oliver, Chair Miller and everybody on the Charter Commission, Charter Review Commission for all the hard work that you all have done. I'm very supportive of this amendment. You know, families that have gone through the inquest process, our families who we owe the most to these are families who lost loved ones at the hands of the government. And this charter amendment would make sure that if one of our constituents has had to suffer the death of a loved one , that they would be provided an attorney to go through the inquest or investigation process. So it's the absolute minimum that can be done, in my opinion, to provide the fundamental right to representation during what is the most unimaginable situation that a family could go through. So I ask for everyone's support on this, and thank you also to the co-sponsors on this legislation. Some of those. Councilmember Dunn. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm a little unclear. I got all the good arguments and the good arguments in favor of the legislation. I didn't get sort of a real breakdown with specificity of the of the language. Is this are passing an ordinance is charter amendment. I guess I'm missing exactly what the details in terms of the inquest language. This is a charter amendment as recommended by the charter commission. Okay. So let me ask this question. What I heard was was a very good explanation of the arguments in favor of the charter amendment. I didn't hear a central staff breakdown, and we're not going to do that. We're just going to rely on the charter review commissioners to provide the briefing. And that's fine. But I think there needs to be. A little more analysis in terms of what it does with the language does. And in terms of pro and con, there's a mr. Sanchez presentation is the commissioner was preceded by a staff report by Getty Jon Batiste. And if you have questions of Mr. Batiste or or want further information, we can certainly facilitate that. Yeah. I mean, Jenny, can you just break this down to quick parameters? I might have missed that. I was out of service for just a little bit longer. Can you break down the parameters of what the language changes? Yes. So on page 4:06 a.m. 407 of the packet, it's just a sentence that we're talking two sentences. The existing language is is very short and the changes are also very short, but they are substantive. So I'll go over it again. If adopted by voters, these changes to Section 895 of the charter would add the additional language regarding when an inquest is to be conducted. This additional language specifies and so this is the following is new language. An inquest shall be held where a member of any law enforcement agencies actions, decision or possible failure to offer the appropriate care may have contributed to an individual's death. Additionally, there is another sentence added for the purposes of this section. Members of any law enforcement agency includes a commissioned officer, noncommissioned staff and agent of any local or state police force, jail, detention facility or corrections agency. The next substantive and it's an is again, a one sentence but very substantive. The county shall assign an attorney to represent the family of the decedent in the inquest proceeding, but the family has the option of accepting the attorney or not. As Mr. Sokka indicated. Currently, the current code provides that the Department of Public Defense shall provide an attorney to represent the family. So this would not change. The county's the current practice now, but it would elevate that to the charter. Additionally, as I noted earlier, the added language is intended to expand and broaden the number of inquests that occur with that additional language. Got it. Very good. That's okay. That that that helps me. I try and thank you for that. And I missed part of that. Is there a beneficial note or anything in terms of the cost associated with it, with that those additional changes. There has not been a fiscal note currently the. County does fund the administration of the inquest process. But there has not been a fiscal note to specify how many what the additional costs, if any, would be. And Mr. Chair, real quick on this, we got 11 charter amendments to the plan will be a central staffer will introduce the issue, then we'll have a charter review. Commissioner, make the pitch essentially. That's the point. Just so I understand. That's how we've done it today. If there are additions, if when we take up additional charter amendments. And to date, only five of the 11 have been introduced. There are commissioners who wish to make presentations. The commission supplies somebody. Then, yes, we would follow a very similar format. Okay. Thank you. Councilmember Yvonne, regular. True. That was the question. Council member Dunn's question was the one I was curious about. If there is a fiscal note, if there is a limit on how much we pay and I want that, we'd have an opportunity to evaluate that and the forecast. Thank you, Councilmember Lambert. You can understand it. Agree with Councilmember Graham there couldn't be a more horrendous experience than life for anybody but to lose a loved one's. I did support the inquest process and paying for the attorneys. But the reason for a charger for me is how the government works not to pick special laws. We like the Mexican charter so can't be changed for ten years. So the things that are important here are writing in law or providing the attorneys and we have inquests. And so I think that as a policy, taking our favorite pieces of legislation and sticking it in the charter, that's not what the charters for. And I have some concerns about some of the language, like possible failure, appropriate care, who who decides what was appropriate care. And that's the reason we have laws so that we can define what is possible failure, what is appropriate care. So we have a definition, we put it in the charter. We don't have that. These are already existing in the existing law. And I think that they are important. I can't imagine them being changed. So having them clearly defined in law is in my mind where these things should be, not in charter. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Further discussing colleagues. Councilmember Bell DC. Mr. Chair, just a brief comment. I really appreciate the what appears to be some serious care that went into drafting the language around when an inquest will be required. I'm glad to see that this came out of the executives process because I think, as we all know, currently, the executive or prior to his executive orders of recent times would have a decision. Yes, this one gets an inquest. No, that one doesn't get an inquest and that can. And that in and of itself can be, I imagine, a very difficult decision to make, but also seems very odd and unfair to the people who have been infected by the person who's been, you know, their family member's death. Like, why is one one death worthy of this kind of deep public inquiry? And another one isn't? So I think the standardization of it is really good. But also, the the Department of Justice has standards for when we report what what in custody death is. That counts for purposes of data collection. And it sometimes doesn't make a whole lot of sense, I'll tell you. Like so we have had people who have never, ever set foot in our jail, who died in custody and were counted as a death inside the King County jails. We have likewise had people who have come into jail, had bad things happen to them in jail, got sent to the hospital because of the injuries they incurred, died at the hospital from their injuries and don't count as an end to custody death, which is just crazy, right. So I like when I read this, it to me it makes a lot of sense that the way it's been stated and I appreciate the work that apparently went into that and I'm happy to support both the standard that's being set here for a routine inquest be happening whenever there is a death in our custody, whether that be in police custody or in or in like sheriff's custody or in our jails. And I really I mean, I don't I'm very happy to support the proposal that the family gets a support person who understands this difficult process, which I think would be hard for a layperson to navigate at the best of times. It all makes good sense to me and I support it. Thank you. Further questions. Councilmember Carlos. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just to chime in, I also support, since I was pleased to work on this issue in one justice committee when it came through earlier. And I think it's an important step forward thinking. Council members are prime sponsor. I'd like to move the amendment. Mr. Chair. Councilmember Sala has moved adoption of Ordinance 119 to 36 and moved adoption of Amendment one. There are two amendments, correct? That's correct. There are two amendments in a title amendment to conform with the First Amendment. Can you remind us the contents of Amendment one in Amendment two? Yes, they are both non substantive amendments and Amendment One is simply to make the same changes to the election date language. And then Amendment two is intended for style and readability changes that. The sentence reads a little bit better. Councilmember Zala has moved to adoption, a move that would give a two passed recommendation to Ordinance 2019 to 36 and adoption of Amendment one. The date change discussion on Amendment One seen none of those in favor of Amendment One. Please signify by saying i. I. I opposed. Nay, the ayes have it. Amendment one is adopted. Council members all by Amendment two. So move. Mr. Chair and some of his allies moved the adoption of amendment to see no discussion. All those in favor of amendment to please signify by saying i. I opposed nay. The ayes have it. Amendment two is adopted. Council members on how they would you move it? Adoption of Title Amendment one, please. So move, Mr. Chair. Adult Amendment Tier one as before. See no discussion. All those in favor of title amendment to one please signify by saying I, i all those opposed. No, the ayes have it. Total Amendment one is adopted. We have Ordinance 2019 to 36 as amended before us. Discussion Council members. Hello. Would you like to open? Sorry, but I think we have said everything that needs to be said at this point. I hope everybody supports this amendment and I'm very thankful for all those who worked on it and co-sponsored it. Thank you. Thank you for the discussion, Councilmember Caldwell's. Sorry, Mr. Chair. I just left the unmute. None. It's my little trick to see. Oh, I think it's my advance warning if I realize some of these mute is off. I see people meeting all over the place right now. See no further. No one further to speak. I'd ask the clerk to please call the roll. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Councilmember Belushi. Hi, Councilman. Douchey Council member Dombrowski. I. Council member Dombrowski. Both I Council member. Done. No. Council member done votes now. Council member Cole wells. I. Councilmember Caldwell's votes I. Councilmember Lambert. No. Councilmember Lambert. Votes. No. Councilmember. Autograph. I. Councilmember after grove votes. I. Councilmember Yvonne Wraith. Our. No. Councilmember von Right. Thereabouts, no. Council members only. By. Council members on high votes? Yes. Mr. Chair. Hi. Mr. Chair. The vote is six I's Council Councilmembers Lambert on rank power and one vote no. By your vote, we've given a do pass recommendation to ordinance 2019 to 36, and we will advance that to full council. We will expedite it. So it would appear on next Tuesday's council agenda. That takes us to the next to them on our agenda. Proposed Motion 2020 208 calling for the executive to allow restaurants and retail businesses in unincorporated King County to have flexibility to provide more outdoor service. Mary Annan will give the Senate report has begun. The line is yours. Thank you, Mr. Chair. For the record, Mary Bergeron from the council staff and the materials for this item began on page 433 of your packet. As you noted, proposed motion 2020 0208 would ask the executive to allow restaurants and retail services in unincorporated King County flexibility to provide outdoor dining or retail services in addition to what is allowed indoors during the phased reopening plan. As you all know, King County is right now in modified phase one of the Safe Start reopening plan and has applied to move into phase two, which could be permitted as early as the end of this week. Both of those phases impose fairly significant limitations on the kinds of activities that can happen indoors. And you'll see on page 435 of the packet, there is a chart that lists the types of activities that are allowed in modified phase one. And I'll call out in particular that for restaurants. Indoor seating is allowed at 25% capacity in modified phase one, 50% in phase two for retail operations, 15% indoor capacity in modified phase one, 30% in phase two for both of those types of services. Outdoor activities are more expansive, basically because the risk of transmission is lower outdoors. And so for restaurants in both phases, outdoor seating is allowed at 50% of existing capacity, with new or additional seating allowed if it can be spaced so that there's six feet of distance between tables. And then for retail activities again, there would be additional activities allowed outdoors as long as there is appropriate distancing. So what this motion would do is ask the executive that for restaurants and retail services in unincorporated King County, that they be given flexibility to expand outdoor activities in privately owned areas such as parking areas or other private property, as well as adjacent sidewalks, alleys or other right of way ensuring that steps are taken to ensure adequate pedestrian pathways and that there be no additional permits or fees required. So the proposed motion would ask the executive to look into this to prepare any legislation needed and to implement this request with the provision that at the time that the county enters phase four of the Safe Start plan, which would essentially be the back to normal activity that these provisions would sunset. That concludes my report. At this point, I know that we've got executive staff here, if there are any questions, and I'm happy to answer any questions as well. Thank you. Astronauts. Up the Grove. Member of the Grove. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I assume, Mary, that this has flexibility, given that it's a motion to the executive to somehow account for any potential conflicts. Should. One person's right, you know, new ability to set up tables. Impact. Other peoples, something other than a traffic flow was the only thing. But I'm if it reduces the number of parking spaces or creates noise for a business next door. I mean, is there I don't think it'll be a problem, but I assume we don't get in that level of detail here, that we just ask the executive to come up with a way to do this? Yes, that's correct. Councilmember, this motion would just ask the executive to implement the appropriate regulations and again, to do them in a way that doesn't require additional permits or fees during the Safe Start reopening period. Executive staff have noted that there would be essentially additional complications for businesses expanding into the right of way that would have to do with access and, you know, to maintain appropriate ADA access, for instance. And so all of those would, of course, have to be looked into as part of the permitting process. And this motion would ask the executive to take those steps. Okay, thanks. Further questions. Obuchi. Councilmember Vale Dewji. I think this is. A great idea. Thank you to the sponsor and the co-sponsor. And I just want to ask, is it something that's written in a way that we could update the code so that there are opportunities to allow this sort of activity even when we are beyond like COVID one, just just because it's a good thing to do. I would love to see that as well. I wouldn't say no because it wasn't in there. But it would be great if it was something that was permissive where you could see more outdoor eating and encourage more outdoor activity this way into the future. Thank you. Council Member The motion as written would sunset these temporary and more expansive opportunities. At the time that the county enters phase four, however, it does ask the executive to prepare any needed legislation to implement them. And so it would certainly be something that were there to be additional legislation. The Council could choose to keep it in force or to evaluate it at such time as we get back to normal life. Thank you. Thank you for that question. Councilmember Bell duty for further questions to preference to those who often complimented the sponsors of the motion. Councilmember Dombrowski I do want to compliment the sponsors and let it be known that I will accept any invitation for al fresco dining for many of my colleagues in their districts pursuant to this legislation. And I'll buy the first round. Very good. With that, I see no more questions. This was an idea that I started to work on, and I was obviously not thinking as big as Councilmember Lambert, who always things very big because I was only thinking restaurants. It was her idea to make sure we were including retail as well. Councilmember Lambert Promotion. Mr. Jack, pleasure working with you. I'd like to make a motion that we that we pass ordinance 2020 0208 with a DE Pass recommendation. Councilmember Lambert has moved to the we get a do pass recommendation the motion 2020 208. Discussion Council member Lambert. Thank you well and to the just ears back council member. I'm a beauty. I will enjoy eating with you afterwards and the speaker and speaker after that. And we will look for how many rounds. But this is important. I would like to thank the city of Spokane. They had the legislation and had put together quite a extensive book on what their thinking process were. And so we were able to get a lot of information that might be helpful in going forward if you choose to do this. After we get the phase four and this will help our businesses that are having a huge struggle being sustainable to have more options of being able to keep their businesses. So I look forward to more evenings out and having a nice dinner or something. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Further discussion. Say, No, no, that's the court to please call the roll. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Council member. Founder. It's a great idea. Hi. Council Member. Calgary Chief Outside Council Member. Dombrowski. It's a fabulous idea. I Council Member Dombrowski Both I Council member one. We. The council member done both. So I council member calls it a high. Council member wells full time. Council member. Member. Council member Lambert I Council member Lambert Oh, it's like. I guess I. Kill council member of the group outside council member gun our. Fears I. Council member go and make report council members online. By. Members. ALL Hello, Bullseye. Mr. Chair. Fantastic sponsors. I vote. I know the vote is 980 now. Thank you. By your vote, we have given a unanimous do past recommendation to motion 2022 await and we will expedite that posthaste. And Council Madam Council Chair, I urge you to have a meeting next Tuesday so we might take this legislation up and with that we move to item 11 on today's agenda. Motion 2020 192. This calls for the County Treasurer to provide for payment agreements for 2020 property tax payers. Wendy Sue who will give our staff reports. Ms. who the line is yours. Thank you. Wendy Sidhu Council staff. I'm really hoping the sponsor of this legislation can actually see my video because I feel like he would appreciate it. So the materials for this item begin on page 453, but I'm going to actually move you to the analysis section that starts on page 424. Of your packet. Proposed motion 2020 0192 would request the County Treasurer to provide four monthly payment agreements for 2020 and 2021 for tax payers affected by the COVID 19 pandemic. Under state law, however, the Treasurer can only provide for payment agreements once a count because what's once a tax account becomes delinquent and so payment agreements can't actually be offered prospectively . The Treasury section does have a property tax payment agreement program in place for taxpayers who are delinquent on prior year taxes. There was a change in state law earlier this year that would allow the Treasury to expand the program to taxpayers who are delinquent on current year taxes. So that means that as of this change in state law this year, people who did not make their payment as of June 2nd, they would now be eligible to enter into payment limits are turning to page 455. The amendment section at the direction of the sponsor council staff has drafted a striking amendment as one that would request the Treasurer to identify those accounts delinquent on 2020 taxes as of June 2nd, 2020. The executive would also be asked to perform outreach to promote the delinquent tax payment program and also to look at considering waiving or subsidizing fees charged by the third party vendor that Treasury uses to administer the payment agreement program. Then finally, the motion also requests the Treasurer to report on utilization of the program by April 1st, 2021. The striking amendment is on page 13 of the amendment packet and I'd be happy to answer any questions. And Ken Guy and Carol Basler are here as well. So who does the legislation? Is the county able to do this without legislative action from the state legislature? Yes. We have. We have the authority. We need to do this now. Yes, there was a state law change that allows for counties to offer payment programs for current year delinquent taxes. Further questions? Council member done, Mr. Chair move proposed the motion 2020 0192 to speak to it. Council member Dennis moved to give a dubious recommendation to motion 2020 192. Council Member Dunn Thank you. And Wendy, I wish I could see you. I tried like crazy to do that, but I'm I'm a I'm a low tech man in a high tech world. So just barely able to hang on to the speaker phone. But I appreciate your patience. Um, I want to thank my colleague to work with me on this plan to provide property tax assistance to King County residents who, in a number of cases, many cases desperately need it. Over the past few weeks, we've worked really hard with the executive offices and the Treasurer to integrate a lot of their valuable input into the strike or that is before you. Today we are painfully aware of the financial strains caused by the COVID 19 pandemic, and we share the common goals of getting help to those who are most affected by our present crisis this year. And this is important to note this year, 28% more King County residents are delinquent on their property taxes compared to 2019. That's an additional 10,000 people who are not able to pay their property tax bill. And what today's striker does is focus on those taxpayers who are currently delinquent June one being the deadline, and offers more flexibility to the county treasurer in implementing a proposed payment program while maintaining the intent of the original motion. The amendment asked the county treasurer take steps, affirmative steps to engage those who are delinquent in the first half property tax payments for the June 2nd and offer them a payment plan for their 2020 property taxes. However, it leaves up to the Treasurer to determine the details of designing and implementing the payment plan. The amendment maintains the request that County Treasurer consider the feasibility of either waiving or possible subsidizing third party vendor fees that accrue during that are accrued due to that payment plan. So basically payment plans are already authorized under state law. They're are also something we already do. The county does not promote them or reach out in an effective way. And Ken may want to speak to the details of that, but there are vendor fees and other things that are involved. So I appreciate, again, my colleagues willingness to work with me on these, providing some flexibility for tax payers during these challenging times. And I also think that putting a payment plan together actually will end up generating the county more revenue because instead of people just abandoning their taxes for six months or a year until there's a leave , it gives them a decent payment plan option that they might be able to pay to amortize this debt. And I thank you for your consideration. Thank you for the further discussion. McCormick, would you please call the roll? I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Councilmember Dunn, will you remove adoption address one? I move as one? Strike Amendment. S-1 is before us saying no discussion and all those in favor of S1 please signify by saying hi are opposed. Nay, the ayes have it. S1 is adopted. Then see no further discussion. Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll? And Mr. Chair. Council Member Bellucci I Council Member about due to votes I Council Member Dombrowski I Council Member Dombroski votes i council member done. Hi. Council member downvotes i council member. Commonwealth High. School Member. Cornwall School Science Council Member Lambert I. Council Member Lambert Outside Sponsor Member of the Grass. Fire. Council member of the crowd outside council member Yvonne right. Are I council member or outside council member? While I. Remember I saw the light bulbs, I missed your chair. By your. Chair. The vote is nine zero now. Thank you. By your vote, we have given a do pass recommendation to motion 2020 192, and we will expedite that to full council a week from today. Madam Clerk, I believe we have no council members who missed any votes, so no need for reconsideration. Is that correct? Mr. Chair. All right. And Members, I will remind you before we adjourn, I will remind you, we have an Employment and Administration committee meeting that will immediately follow this. So the fun is not over. Do not hang up. Do not depart with that. The council meeting is adjourned and you may not hang up despite what my script says.

Output: AN ORDINANCE providing for the submission to the qualified electors of King County, at a general election to be held on November 3, 2020, of a proposition authorizing the county to issue its general obligation bonds in the aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $1,740,000,000 or so much thereof as may be issued under the laws governing the indebtedness of counties, for the purpose of providing funds to pay for public health, safety and seismic improvements for Harborview Medical Center.