-Hello, I'm your host, Brian Callanan.
What's the real story behind the city council's
split vote over police funding this year?
How will a new addition and labor standards
impact a growing number of gig workers in our economy?
And why is councilmember Lisa Herbold
not running for another term?
And what effect will that have on city politics?
We're talking to Councilmember Herbold herself
to ask these questions and yours too, next on "Council Edition."
-SPD would have to meet its hiring goals for 10 years,
every year for 10 years straight to use up
all those 130 remaining positions.
-All that and more coming up next,
on "City Inside/Out: Council Edition."
♪♪
-And here she is, councilmember Lisa Herbold,
from district one from South Park in West Seattle
all the way up to Pioneer Square
now following the redistricting process.
Thank you very much for joining me
and we do have some ground to cover,
but I want to make sure that I start with one piece here.
We are going to get into the fact
that you're not going to be running for your position again,
but I want to dive into some budget issues with you
because there was an investment
in affordable housing to happen in this budget
that seemed to take the backstage,
which I think any other year would have been front page news.
Can we talk about that? We haven't heard a lot about it,
but it was a very important part of the budget
that was just passed a couple of weeks ago.
-Bring it on. -Yeah, what happened there?
Where are the investments where they go?
-Sure, well, they're investments that are consistent
with our spend plan for Jumpstart,
we're looking at more than doubling
our typical annual housing, levy investments.
Now, the dollars that will be going out next year
aren't just from the housing levy and from the mandatory
housing affordability program, but they're also dollars
that were generated through the Jumpstart payroll tax.
-Got it and about a half billion dollars
if I'm counting it right -That's right.
-over the next two years.
And this is for different affordable housing projects
that are shovel ready, etc.
Because I know that there's always a backlog
that the city is dealing with,
where's this money going to go in terms of that?
-Every time the Office of Housing
does what's called a request for proposals,
there are many, many, many more applicants
and there are dollars for and this time around,
we might actually have the number of dollars
necessary to meet the need.
-Okay, thank you.
I want to make sure that I touch on a couple of issues.
I always get emails about housing from constituents here
and I wanted to throw them out here,
actually I have two advocates that are kind of on different
sides of the housing spectrum that always send me questions,
and I thank the both of you for doing that.
Here's what they want to know. Eric writes this first.
Okay, we've got that.
Then we've got a small landlord asking this.
Thank you very much for the questions.
Could you talk to me about this, getting more ADU's online,
helping small landlords
these are maybe small issues for some people,
but they are big issues in the housing sector.
-The city has done a lot
to liberalize the land use standards
that allow for the development of ADU's
and I'm sorry that this particular person
is writing with frustration
and not being able to use those new liberalized standards.
I hear from other constituents who are frustrated
that ADU's are going up in their communities.
-I see, okay. I feel like maybe that means
that we hit the balance just right.
-Okay, Okay. Going
We know that we are definitely increasing the number of ADU's.
I'm not on the land use committee.
-That's right, that's true.
-And so I don't know the nuances
of this particular problem this constituent has,
but I do know for a fact that the ADU's are going up.
-Okay. And this issue is small landlords,
I know I've heard from a number of them
over this past year here,
with a lot of different tenant regulations in place.
Some thoughts about that>
-Yeah. The idea that a lot of small landlords
have left the market is not one that we have data on.
People point to the rental housing registration program,
and the number of landlords that are registered
as compared to previous years as evidence of that.
During COVID, the Department of Constructions and Inspections
suspended their enforcement of the requirement to register,
so that that's a big reason
why we see so many fewer landlords registered.
-I see, didn't realize that.
Thank you for answering those questions and thanks
for sending those into both of those writers there.
I want to talk about the budget again,
in terms of the work that you've done as chair
of the Public Safety Committee, mayor sent down a budget
that shifted money from 200 unfilled positions
in the Seattle Police Department to the general fund,
but still gave the department the hiring authority
to fill those positions later.
Just want to make sure we get the story straight here.
The final proposal the council approved
while fully funding the SPD's hiring plan,
which is an important part here eliminates
80 of those unfunded positions
and that whole counts up really split the council here.
Council members Peterson and Nelson
both said no to the final package as you know,
joining councilmember Sawant's annual opposition.
Here's what councilmember Nelson said in the meeting
prior to her vote.
-This is just simply not the budget
that I've been advocating for and I think it's out of sync
with what most people in Seattle want.
So I don't take this lightly, but I'll be voting no.
-Councilmember Nelson really thought this move with the SPD
could be seen as weakening in the department
and played into a defund narrative.
I know you see this a much different way.
Please break that down, these ideas that you're talking.
-I certainly do see it much differently
and I was really disappointed that the decision,
which was a budgetary decision
that didn't have any fiscal impact on the ability to hire,
that it was portrayed by some folks in the press
as well as my colleagues in the way that it was.
I think they themselves are promoting a defund narrative.
The reduction of police department of 80 unfunded,
vacant positions,
again, has no impact on the ability of SPD
to hire fully for its staffing plan.
There are still another 130
vacant unfunded positions in the budget.
And what that means is that SPD
would have to meet its hiring goals for 10 years,
every year for 10 years straight,
to use up all those 130 remaining positions.
-I guess in looking a little more deeply
at that I can understand that this is a council
that's kind of finding its feet in some ways
when it comes to learning about this budget
and also this whole narrative,
if you want to call it that, over public safety and police,
but I think about this in terms of our soon
to be new police chief confirmation --
excuse me, confirmation hearings happened just a short
while before we had this discussion here.
How does chief Diaz view this, this this whole back and forth?
Because I know last year when he was still interim chief,
he was kind of upset about this. Sent a video out there
while the council was going through its budget process.
-He did.
-With this whole concept of abrogation.
Didn't do that this year.
It's a different year, but can you talk to me
about what the chief thinks about this situation?
Because I know you talk to him a lot
when it comes to not filling
or not having these 80 positions,
having these 80 positions eliminated,
I should say. in the budget?
-Yeah, I really think what we heard last year
versus what we heard this year,
a lot has to do with who our mayor.
Our mayor is a mayor who believes that we're stronger
when we emphasize the things that we agree on.
Last year, again, there was fear and misinformation
whipped up about the idea of abrogating vacant
unfunded positions
that would have no impact on the ability to hire.
And just really pleased to see that that level
of misinformation isn't happening anymore.
-And I wanted to make sure I went into one piece here
because when it comes to hiring that
is happening in the Seattle Police Department right now,
hasn't been all that rosy a picture
over the past year or so.
But there are some signs of life here.
Can you speak to that issue?
Because I know the chief is happy to see that certainly
and wants to continue that trend.
What's going on there? -Yeah, absolutely.
So the council in the fall,
voted to fund a few different things.
We voted to fund a bonus program
to incentivize new officers coming on.
It's a financial incentive to pay either laterals
coming from other departments or new recruits.
We voted for a new recruitment staff.
The department only had one recruiter at the time.
We funded additional backgrounders to work,
to make sure that the application process
moves more quickly.
And we funded a new program that allows for the city to pay
for relocation costs for new employees to the city
and hard to fill positions including SPD.
And then finally, we began to fund portions of the mayor's
proposed hiring and recruitment program.
We doubled down on those investments
in the budget process this year. So we'll be continuing to fund
those investments moving forward in in 2023.
And even though as you say
we are starting to see some progress,
we have to be really realistic with what progress looks like.
We're looking at about 15 net new hires.
So that takes into consideration
all of the new hires minus people
who are either retiring or moving onto other departments.
-Right.
-So we're looking at about 15 net new hires in 2023 and 2024.
And one of the things that we heard today in the mayor's,
I'm sorry, the chiefs confirmation process,
was a lot of discussion of around
how that's not going to be sufficient.
And how the fact that that's not going to be sufficient.
underscores the importance to develop alternatives
to uniformed policing.
-And I want to touch on those alternatives
in just a minute here. But in looking at that,
is there a right number of police officers?
I know chief Diaz when he was still interim
was talking about 1400,
we're not really near that right now,
it's closer to, well it's less than 1000 I know that right now.
Is there a right number that we need to have
X amount of officers for X amount of population?
How do you look at that? How does the chief look at that?
How does your Public Safety Committee look at that?
-Yeah, I mean, you're right count.
The chief has pointed to the number of 1400
as the target for SPD. It's a complex question.
There was a study done a few years ago,
it's inconclusive of whether or not
we've really embraced the numbers
associated with that study,
that sort of what is the right size?
I can tell you though, that a lot of people point
to the size of the city and other cities,
particularly other cities on the east coast
as evidence that you know,
we need a particular number that matches that per capita,
per capita approach towards hiring
is not the recommended best practice.
And then I just, again underscore
that the 1400 number of officers
is to serve a Seattle Police Department
that is primarily doing the same functions as it does now.
-Right, right.
-Again, as we move towards alternatives,
I think it's going to be really important
to look at that number,
because alternatives don't just mean 911 calls
that don't need an armed police officer.
It also means things like online reporting,
which we currently have an online reporting system
that is underused,
because it's not very functional.
It doesn't have languages built in.
It doesn't allow for reporting of several different types
of criminal activity that I know the public wants to report.
-Yeah, right. Okay.
Can I jump on to those alternatives with you
because this dual dispatch proposal,
I believe you sponsored this the council passed in the budget,
this new way to respond to 911 calls.
So you've got social workers, civilians,
that could essentially get dispatched here,
as well as or in place of police officers on certain calls.
I know it's a pilot program and I know it's supposed to be
starting sometime early next year,
but I just had this big underlying question.
Are 911 dispatchers ready for this?
Are they ready to make that decision on,
okay, with this kind of call,
it's okay to send just an outreach worker.
With this, we need police and what does that look like?
And what happens if they're wrong in those different cases?
I know it's something that you've looked into.
-Yeah.
And so that's what we've been building in the background
over the last year.
I know that there's a lot of frustration
that we don't have this new system stood up yet.
My colleague councilmember Lewis
talked at great length in committee today
about the fact that in Albuquerque, New Mexico,
they stood up a third Public Safety Department in six months.
Already had an Alternatives to Police Response Program.
But we have been doing the work
as it relates to the infrastructure.
And so last year in the last year's budget process,
we funded a new dispatch protocol system.
-Right.
-That I've talked to you about before.
-Yes.
-That has been purchased,
it's being implemented and 911 dispatchers
are being trained on it.
It's a system that allows for sort of a phone
a question tree approach
-Yes, right. -opposed to a yes or no.
-I see, I see, okay.
-And part of the reason why we've spent time
in the department, have spent time
doing different risk analysis, you've heard of the NICJR,
-Yeah.
National Institute of Criminal Justice Reform. There we go.
-You got it, you got it.
More recently, there's been sort of SPD hired outside consultants
to sort of do a check on that report.
And what they're doing as they're identifying call types
that could be eligible.
-Yeah.
-And that that system is going to be built
into the 911 operator system.
-Okay. -It's not --
they're not just identifying call types
that 100% of those call types will always be diverted.
-Yeah, yeah. -It's actually a system
that is overlaid into the 911 call center system.
And so the calls that come in, they can determine
what the risk factor is for an alternate response.
-Okay, thank you and I'm very much looking forward
to see how that gets rolled out in the new year.
But there was a very specific addition
when it comes to public safety for district one in this budget,
supporting Seattle Fires Ladder 13 and Medic Truck 26.
There was a need for this service definitely
when the when the West Seattle bridge was shut down,
this was helping out kind of the south end of West Seattle there,
but these units now we're going to stay in place.
I know this was a bit of a challenging add
during a tight budget year. But can you talk about this?
I think this is very interesting.
It's not just one area that's getting helped here.
This could really have a ripple effect across the city.
-That's exactly correct.
You know, one of the things that made this budget campaign
so gratifying to me
is that I heard from so many people in district
one who had experienced the lifesaving services
of the ladder truck and the Medic Unit
and that really made for a compelling story.
But we also have the data that shows
maintaining that infrastructure in West Seattle
and in South Park, saves minutes
and these are these are lifesaving minutes.
And as you say, the ability to have these services
in West Seattle and South Park means that a ladder truck
or an aid car doesn't have to come from further away.
And that means that that ladder truck
and aid car in another geographic area of the city
can better serve people in need there.
-Right, even if you're going through red lights
down 35th Avenue Southwest,
it's going to take some time to get there from the north side.
So I appreciate that break down.
There was one other public safety issue
I wanted to talk about with you.
You recently went to a symposium on gun violence
with the number of local officials,
this was a couple of weeks ago.
The stats we're seeing on gun violence in Seattle
are starting to improve, but we're really coming off
a very active a deadly summer as you know,
not to mention the terrible school shooting that we had
Ingram just back in November. What works, what doesn't,
what did you learn in this gun violence symposium?
Is there anything that's folded into the budget more specific
to this? What can you tell us?
-Yeah, you know, one thing I learned
is that there are an awful lot of people doing incredible work
in this area throughout our region,
and they're doing community
based work to prevent gun violence,
to interrupt violence and in the cycle of violence
that we often see in communities.
And they're, you know,
you're right gun violence has really increased
but one of the things that you think you don't see
is the areas in which it's decreased.
Because you can't kind of can't see a negative.
One of the areas where we're seeing improve improvements
is gun violence among young people.
-I see.
-And you probably have heard me talk
about the Harborview Hospital Based Program.
-Right.
-It's based on a simple theory that victims of gun violence
and their families and loved ones
can if not helped, become and are more likely, frankly,
to become offenders of violence.
And this is a wraparound program
that has done amazing work.
It is evidence based and it is producing reductions
in gun violence in that cohort of people under 24.
-Yeah, making those connections there.
-We are seeing increases though in in older adults.
-Yeah. Thank you for breaking that piece down.
I really wanted to jump on one other piece with you,
Councilmember Herbold. It was another tough budget
add putting the council's PayUp Program,
we're fully into effect with some funding
provided for the Office of Labor Standards here.
The council approved this program to establish
a minimum wage for gig workers, back at the end of May.
First of its kind of the nation we're talking about here.
Now you're adding some resources to the Office of Labor Standards
to make sure the program sticks,
it's doing what it said it was going to do.
Gig work is such a fast growing part of our economy.
What's this budget amendment can do? What can you tell us?
-Sure. So the funding that was provided in the budget
for 2023 and 2024 is, in part,
to fund the implementation of the PayUp regulation.
This legislation will not go into effect
until January 1st, 2024. -Okay.
-And so one of the things that the Office of Labor
Standards has to do is has to do rulemaking,
to basically put a finer point on
how workers use the ordinance, use the rights in the ordinance
and how employers comply with it.
-Right. Going And then a lot of outreach and education.
You know, one thing to keep in mind
was the Office of Labor Standards,
it's only been around since 2015.
-Yeah.
-It's a small and mighty office.
Since 2015, The Office of Labor Standards
has put nearly $31 million
into the pockets of more than 42 --
52, sorry, 52,000 workers in Seattle.
So this investment that we're making in enforcing
the city's nine local labor laws,
is resulting in money in workers pockets.
-Right, and I know PayUp
is kind of just getting started here.
There's going to be some regulations
with regard to bathroom breaks
and things of this nature in the years upcoming here.
Was it difficult to push this one across the line?
I know there were a lot of things
that were really on the fence this budget session.
How about this one?
-The funding? -Yeah, yeah.
-For you know, I think I want to take this opportunity
to thank our budget chair.
-Yeah.
-You know, Councilmember Mosqueda,
is somebody who has had oversight of the Office of Labor
Standards, like I have in past years.
-Yeah.
-And she knows how important it is
to adequately fund the department.
-Yeah, yeah, thank you.
I'm going to start wrapping up with you here
with a question I know a lot of people have had for you
over the past several days here about your decision
not to run again for office in 2023.
You have worked with the city in some capacity for decades here.
It's a big, big part of your life.
I know you served two terms on the council,
you served as a legislative aide before that,
certainly something you're passionate about.
Why are you not seeking another term?
And what does this mean for district one
and its future representation?
-Yeah, you know, I've been doing this work for what I like
to refer to as the very best branch of local government,
the legislative department
and I've been doing it for 26 years --
well, it'll be 26 years at the end of next year.
-Wow. You started when you were two years old?
-Yeah, thanks. Thank you.
-Sure, yeah, okay. I tried, yeah.
-And it's been really the highlight of my life.
I really believe that, you know, local government
is the government that's closest people.
And if we can encourage positive change at the local level,
will have more faith in their government.
But as I reported out on my blog,
when I said that I'd made the decision,
more than even my love
of serving the residents of district one,
I really believe that we need another progressive
to serve district one, to serve the council.
And I think an open seat
for that position will drive turnout.
I think somebody, a new progressive
that people can get excited about,
is going to be really, really necessary.
Progressives did really well and the midterm elections,
but next year is going to be tough.
And you know, I just really believe,
I don't want to see what happened
to city attorney Pete Holmes happen here without you know,
getting into party politics. -Sure, sure. Right.
-Let's just stick with I want
to see a progressive in that in that seat.
-Yeah. What does it mean for the
for the future of representation there?
You mentioned this different progressive voice
or whatever else, but this can be
such a very interesting thing to focus on
when it's just one district not a city wide position.
Is that what district one needs? Is that what they want?
What are you hearing?
-Well, you know, I think one of the most important things
that people want is another thing,
an attribute if I say it's myself,
that I brought to this office,
and it's the paying attention to constituent services,
and getting back to people to address their concerns,
and that takes up a lot of time.
And really requires somebody who, again,
is committed to lifting the voices of their constituents
to address the kinds of things in their neighborhood
that that make a difference.
And so I think, I think one of the things
that people will need to hear in the campaign's next year,
is that that regardless of whether or not somebody
is going to be the same sort of champion,
as I've been for workers' rights and renters rights,
and progressive taxation,
they're gonna want to hear that they're gonna get responses
when they have complaints about the condition of the parks
or the conditions in the streets,
their utility bills being too high,
you know, all those types of constituent casework
that I and my staff spend so much time on.
-Yeah, and I know that these are,
these are bruising campaigns.
I remember 2019 sitting right with you
and Phil Tavel right here and talking about that,
I guess just in your experience,
26 years working with council as an LA
and past two terms as a councilmember,
how was the council changed?
Districting has made for some interesting situations
but I in my 11 years doing this job,
it is seemed a lot more collegial
and now is a little bit more competitive
and I don't know if you see that,
but I'm trying to figure out what's changed over the years
in terms of city council
and what it means to run for this position?
-I mean, I think the main thing that has changed
is it's less to me about the collegiality
of the council members, the relationship with the mayor.
It's what's most changed, I think,
is the tenor of politics, generally.
Whether in -- it's just -- it's very polarized.
People are -- have high expectations,
as they should, for their elected officials.
You know, we work for the taxpayers.
But people are, are frustrated
and are not shy about expressing their frustration
in a way that is, I think, is new to me,
as somebody who has worked on the council
in some capacity for 26 years. -Yeah, yeah.
Well, I know I'm going to talk to you again
before you leave office, Councilmember Herbold,
but thank you very much for joining us.
Thank you for all that you've said here
and we will see you next time, on "Council Edition."
♪♪