Seattle City Council Gender Equity, Safe Communities, New Americans & Education Committee 3/27/19


>>>GOOD MORNING, TODAY IS WEDNESDAY, MARCH 27, 119, THIS IS OUR REGULARLY — 2019, THIS IS OUR GENDER EQUITY, SAFE COMMUNITIES, NEW AMERICANS, AND EDUCATION COMMITTEE, I AM LORENA GONZALEZ, AND ROB JOHNSON IS HERE, — THIS IS OUR GENDER EQUITY, SAFE COMMUNITIES, NEW AMERICANS, AND EDUCATION COMMITTEE . THERE ARE TWO ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, FIRST WE WILL BE HAVING ANOTHER DISCUSSION ON THE 2018 FAMILIES, EDUCATION, PRESCHOOL, IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, PASSED BY THE SEATTLE VOTERS IN 2018, THIS COMMITTEE MEETING TODAY WILL FOCUS ON ISSUE IENTIFICATION, WITHIN THE PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION PLAN. AS USUAL, WE BEGIN ALL OF OUR MEETINGS WITH SOME PUBLIC COMMENTS, BEFORE WE CONTINUE INTO THE ITEMS OF THE AGENDA, WE WILL HOLD THE REGULAR PUBLIC COMMENT.. AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO SHOULD UP IN CHAMBERS TODAY TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT ON A ISSUE ON THE AGENDA, AND EACH PERSON IS PROVIDED UP TO TWO MINUTES, AND TO GIVE THEIR NAME AND ADDRESS, PUBLIC COMMENT IS NOT A PERIOD OF TIME WHERE PUBLIC COMMENTERS AND COUNCILMEMBERS JUST ENGAGE IN DIALOGUE, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENTERS TO SHOW UP IN THE MORNING, PROVIDE UP TO TWO MINUTES OF PUBLIC TESTIMONY CONSISTENT WITH COUNCIL RULES, AND TO THE EXTENT THAT THE >>– SPEAKER IS ON TOPIC AND COMPLIANT WITH COUNCIL RULES, THEY WILL NOT BE INTERRUPTED, IF THERE IS AN INTERRUPTION, IT’S BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN A VIOLATION OF THE COUNCIL RULES, AND IT WILL BE CORRECTED.>>>THAT BEING SAID, WE WILL ENTER INTO THE PUBLIC COMMENT.. EACH PERSON HAS UP TO 2 MINUTES TO TESTIFY ON AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA, WE ONLY HAVE ONE ITEM, ON THE AGENDA, EACH PERSON WILL BE ASKED TO COME UP TO ONE OF THE MICROPHONES APPEAR IN THE FRONT, THE FIRST PERSON IS ALEX ZIMMERMAN, THE SECOND PERSON IS MELISSA WESTBROOK, FOLLOWED BY KYLA BLACKIE.>>>WHY IS THE CAMERA NOT WORKING?>>THE CAMERA FUNCTIONS ARE NOT ON THE AGENDA.>>I’M ONLY CHECKING IT. PURE CRIMINAL, I WON SPOKE ABOUT — I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE SCHOOL LEVY IS GOOD, THIS IS NOT MONEY FOR A SCHOOLTEACHER, BUT A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES, I THINK WHY SCHOOLTEACHERS DON’T DESERVE MORE MONEY, NUMBER 1, THE FUNDAMENTAL SCHOOLTEACHER, AND SCHOOL UNION, WHO SUPPORTS THIS MAFIA. NUMBER 2, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, I GO TO, BRAINWASHED CHILDREN TOTALLY RIGHT NOW, FOR THE SOCIALISM, THAT IS WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW. IT IS A VERY STUPID AND IDIOTIC SITUATION. IT DOESN’T SURPRISE ME, A SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC MAFIA. >>PLEASE SPEAK TO AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA. >>BECAUSE SCHOOL TEACHERS, TAKING A VIDEO IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY. YOU ARE A CRIMINAL. >>PLEASE SPEAK TO AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA.>>WHY DO YOU –>>YOUR TIME IS UP, ARE YOU NOT — YOU ARE NOT SPEAKING TO AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA, I’M GOING TO ASK YOU TO SIT DOWN.>>>THE NEXT PERSON IS MELISSA WESTBROOK, FOLLOWED BY KYLA LACKEY, FOLLOWED BY KEITH VENISON. — VAN ESSEN . >>>MY NAME IS MELISSA WESTBROOK, I WRITE THE MOST WIDELY READ PUBLIC EDUCATION LOGIN SEATTLE AND WASHINGTON STATE. NUMBER 1, WHY ARE CHARTER SCHOOLS INCLUDED IN SOME LIKE SCHOOL-BASED AND NOT WRAPAROUND SERVICES? NUMBER 2, WHY ARE THEY REQUIRED TO HAVE A SIGNED PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT IN ORDER FOR THEM TO HAVE ACCESS TO PROMISED FUNDS, WHILE CHARTER SCHOOLS ARE NOT? THAT IS PAGE 103. WHY IS ALL THE MENTION OF SERVING HOMELESS STUDENTS SERVING SEATTLE SCHOOLS? WHILE CHARTER SCHOOLS SURF ARE A FEW HOMELESS STUDENTS, THERE MUST BE SOME, AND I ASSUME THIS PLAN IS FAIRLY RECENT, AND YET I NOTE THAT IT SAYS SPS SERVES 2000 HOMELESS STUDENTS. IT’S CLOER TO 3000. IT IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT CHARTER SCHOOLS COUNCIL STUDENTS OUT, THEIR ATTRITION RATES TEND TO BE MUCH HIGHER AND THEIR GRADUATION RATES LOOK BETTER. NUMBER 5, DESPITE THE FREQUENT USE OF THE PHRASE CHARTER SCHOOLS, IT IS UNDER PUBLIC SCHOOLS, WHICH THEY ARE, BUT ACCORDING TO THE WASHINGTON STATE SUPREME COURT, THEY’RE NOT TRUE COMMON SCHOOLS UNDER OUR STATES CONSTITUTION, I WOULD SAY THAT DEFINITION NEEDS CLARIFICATION. LASTLY, CHARTER LAW DOES NOT REQUIRE YOU TO SHARE THESE FUNDS, I ALONG WITH MANY VOTERS ASKED IF CHARTER SCHOOLS WOULD GET K-12 LEVEE DOLLARS, WE WERE TOLD THE CITY WAS WAITING FOR THE LEGAL OPINION FROM THE ATTORNEY, I WAS TOLD THERE IS NO OPINION, AFTER YOU GOT THE MONEY, IT WAS ANNOUNCED THAT ASKED — CHARTER SCHOOLSCOULD ACCESS THE FUNDS. IT WAS VOTED BY A LARGE MARGIN NO, I’M SURPRISED YOU DIDN’T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT DECIDING THIS — IN DECIDING THIS, WHEN THE MAYOR RUNS AGAIN, I WILL BE GLAD TO REMIND THEM. THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU . >>>OUR NEXT >>IS KYLA FOLLOWED BY KEITH. >>MY NAME IS KYLA LACKEY, I AM IN THE PUGET SOUND EDUCATIONAL DISTRICT, STUDENTS NEED POSTSECONDARY CREDENTIALS IN ORDER TO ACCESS FAMILY SUSTAINING JOBS ESPECIALLY IN SEATTLE, I WORK ACROSS PIERCE AND KING COUNTIES, WE KNOW RIGHT NOW ONLY 29% OF CURRENT NINTH GRADERS WILL BE ABLE TO OBTAIN THOSE CREDENTIALS WITHIN SIX YEARS OF GRADUATION OF HIGH SCHOOL, SO UNLESS WE DO SOMETHING VERY DIFFERENT, WE SHOULD EXPECT THE SAME RESULTS, AND I AM SURPRISED TO SEE THIS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, AND I BELIEVE THIS IS SOMETHING VERY DIFFERENT TO TAKE ACTION ON THIS ISSUE. IN THE PROMISE DESIGN TEAM POT — DESIGN TEAM, PEOPLE ARE WORKING TOGETHER TO ENSURE EQUITABLE OPPORTUNITIES FOR STUDENTS IN THE REGION. I WAS PART OF THE DESIGN TEAM, SEATTLE COLLEGES, PUBLIC SCHOOLS, MEMBERS GRAPPLING WITH CROSS SYSTEM ISSUES. THE DESIGN TEAM PERSISTED THROUGH NUMEROUS CHALLENGES AND COMPLEX DECISIONS, AND WORKED HARD TO DEFINE A SHARED VISION FOR HOW TO CREATE MORE EQUITABLE POSTSECONDARY AXIS SYSTEMS IN OUR REGION. WE WORK TO THINK OTSIDE THE BOX, BRIDGE GAPS, AND MAKE IT EASIER FOR STUDENTS TO ACCESS THEIR NEXT STEP. THERE IS EXCITEMENT IN THE REGION TO SUPPORT AND LEARN FROM SEATTLE, MY TEAM WORKS TO STAFF THE PUGET SOUND COALITION FOR COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS, WE ARE EXCITED TO LEARN FROM AND PARTNER WITH SEATTLE, TO SUPPORT THIS AXIS ACROSS THE ENTIRE REGION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND COMMITMENT TO SUPPORTING STUDENTS IN ACCESSING THEIR NEXT STEP. >>THANK YOU. >>>GLASS PERSON IS KEITH.>>– THE LAST PERSON IS KEITH. >>I SERVE AS THE DIRECTOR OF PROGRAMS FOR THE COLLEGE SUCCESS PROGRAM IN SEATTLE AND THE GREATER KING COUNTY REGION, I WAS PRIVILEGED TO SERVE, LIKE KYLA, ON THE DESIGN TEAM IN DEVELOPING SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THIS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, I AM REALLY EXCITED, BECAUSE MY VESTED INTEREST WAS SUPPORTING LOW INCOME STUDENTS IN OUR CITY AND TRANSITIONING INTO COLLEGE, AND POSTSECONDARY INSTITUTIONS, FOR THE LAST 11 YEARS, SINCE I’VE BEEN IN THIS WORK, THE BIGGEST CHALLENGE HAS BEEN THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN K-12 AND POSTSECONDARY, THIS HAS A LASER FOCUS ON TYING THE INSTITUTIONS TOGETHER, AND WITH SUPPORT AND FUNDING THAT WILL HELP STUDENTS TRANSITION MORE EFFECTIVELY AND BRINGS PEOPLE TO THE TABLE FROM BOTH OF THOSE SYSTEMS MORE REGULARLY TO ENSURE THAT HAPPENS. THAT HAS BEEN THE BIGGEST RUB FOR ME, SUPPORTING HUNDREDS OF STUDENTS IN SOUTH KING COUNTY AND SEATTLE, HAS BEEN THE FACT THAT THESE DON’T COMMUNICATE ENOUGH, THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY WITH THE IMITATION PLAN, A WONDERFUL STEP FORWARD, WHILE IMPERFECT, I THINK IT WILL EVOLVE INTO SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE REALLY EFFECTIVE TO MOVE THE NEEDLE FOR A STUDENTS GOING FORWARD, I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME IN THIS, AND I LOOK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. >>THANK YOU SO MUCH.>>>KEITH WAS THE LAST PERSON WHO SIGNED UP ON THE SHEET, IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE IN CHAMBERS WHO IS NOT GIVEN PUBLIC TESTIMONY WOULD LIKE TO OFFER SOME? I SAW YOU WALKING AND RENCE, PERFECT TIMING, IT IS LIKE THE ANNOUNCEMENT WAS MADE FOR YOU. >>THANK YOU, SORRY I AM LATE, I AM RENCE MARIE, YOUTH DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES, THANK YOU FOR THE PROCESS, WE HAVE SUPPORTED THE FEP SINCE THE BEGINNING, AND THE INCLUSION OF THE COMMUNITY, LOOKING AT THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, I THINK WE CONTINUE TO HOPE FOR, A LITTLE BIT WORRIED ABOUT HOW THE EXPANDED LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES WERE REDUCED, BUT WE THINK HOW THEY ARE BEING IMPLEMENTED IS WONDERFUL, AND WE APPRECIATE THE WORK.>>THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? WE WILL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE OUT THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, I WANT TO TAKE TIME FOR — TO THANK EVERYBODY WHO SHOWED UP TO GIVE US THEIR THOUGHTS, THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE, FOR THOSE WHO CAN’T MAKE TIME OUT OF THEIR BUSY SCHEDULES JOIN US IN CHAMBERS AT 9:30 AM ON A WEDNESDAY, WHICH IS PROBABLY 95% OF THE CITY, YOU ARE WELCOME TO REACH OUT TO MY OFFICE DIRECTLY, IF YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS AND CONCERNS, IDEAS, OR JUST FEEDBACK ON THE FEP IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION PLAN , YOU CAN REACH OUT TO MY OFFICE. OR YOU CAN EMAIL ME AT [email protected] OR THE FACEBOOK, INSTAGRAM ACCOUNTS, WE ARE AVAILABLE, READY TO LISTEN TO YOUR FEEDBACK ON SOME OF THESE ISSUES. OR CALL ME AT 2066848802.>>> FAMILIES, EDUCATION, PRESCHOOL, AND PROMISE LEVY IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION PLAN FOR BRIEFING AND DISCUSSION.>>LIST — LET’S START WITH INTRODUCTIONS, DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION, OR JUST THE MEMO? OKAY ROXANA CAN HELP PROJECT THE MEMO. LET’S DO INTRODUCTIONS. >>BRIAN GOOD NIGHT, COUNCIL STAFF.>>TAKE IT AWAY.>>AT THE PREVIOUS COMMITTEE MEETING, A PRESENTATION ON THE EDUCATION, PRESCHOOL AND PROMISE IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION PLAN, I WILL CALL THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN GOING FORWARD, THE PURPOSE IS TO WALK THROUGH THE CENTRAL STAFF MEMO, IT GIVES INFORMATION, EVALUATING THE CONSISTENCY, WITH POLICY DIRECTION, AND RAISING EIGHT ISSUES WERE COUNCIL CONSIDERATION. >>>LAST JUNE, ORDINANCE 125604 WAS APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL, WITH THE VOTERS, TO CREATE A PROPERTY TAX GENERATING THE MONEY OVER A SEVEN-YEAR PERIOD, APPROVED BY 69% OF THE VOTERS, SECTION 7 STATES THAT THE LEVY PROCEEDS MAY ONLY BE SPENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH A IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION PLAN THAT IS APPROVED BY ORDINANCE, AND IT SHOULD INCLUDE PRIORITY CRITERIA AND OUTCOMES FOR LEVY FUNDED STRATEGIES, THE PROCESS FOR CONTRACTING PARTNERS, AND THE METHODOLOGY TO MEASURE INDIVIDUAL INVESTMENTS AND IMPACTS. THE SAME TIME, A COMPANION RESOLUTION, 318 21, FUNDING GUIDANCE FOR THE PROGRAMS, AND REQUESTING THAT THE EXECUTIVE ADDRESS SPECIFIC PRIORITIES IN THE PLAN.>>>COUNCIL BILL 119480, PROPOSING A PLAN INTENDED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ORDINANCE AND ADDRESS THE COUNCIL’S RESOLUTION REQUESTS. IT MAINTAINS THE BROAD INVESTMENT AREAS AND SPENDING LEVELS FROM THE APPROVED ORDINANCE, IF YOU’RE INTERESTED, AT THE TOP OF PAGE 2, TABLE 1, THOSE ARE THE 4 BROAD INVESTMENT AREAS AND THE FUNDING AMOUNTS.>>>IN ADDITION IT AMENDS THE 2019 ADOPTED BUDGET, ESSENTIALLY DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUDGET, THE DEAL INTENDED TO MOVE AWAY FROM THE CURRENT PRACTICE, SUBMITTING THOSE PAYMENTS TO PROVIDERS, SO THEY DECIDED AGAINST THE POLICY SHIFT, AND IN ORDER TO STILL ALLOW THEM TO SEND THE PAYMENTS, IT INCREASES THE APPROPRIATION AUTHORITY BY $860,000, AND THAT IS ENTIRELY BACKED BY TUITION REVENUE.>>>AS MENTIONED A MOMENT AGO, A COMPANION RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED, PROVIDING GUIDANCE REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, IT INCLUDES A REFERENCE TABLE WITH PRIORITIES, PAGE NUMBERS WHERE IT IS ADDRESSED, AND SOME CORRECTIONS WERE NEEDED, A REVISED TABLE IS ATTACHED TO THE BACK OF THIS MEMO AS ATTACHMENT NUMBER 1. AT THE NEXT MEETING, YOU MAY WANT TO CORRECT THIS TABLE AND ANY DRAFTING ERRORS.>>>OVERALL, IT HAS A FEW EXCEPTIONS, THREE AREAS THAT ARE NOT FULLY ADDRESSED, PRIORITIZING INVESTMENTS FOR CERTAIN GROUPS, EXPECTATIONS FOR THE FAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES FUNDING, AND THE WAY THAT RESOURCES ARE PRIORITIZED FOR SEATTLE PROMISE. THEY ARE ADDRESSED BY THINGS WE WILL GET TO IN THE MEMO. >>BRIAN, ON THE CHART THAT IS ATTACHMENT ONE TO YOUR MEMO, IT APPEARS THAT THOSE ARE TECHNICAL CHANGES, IS THAT HE ACCURATE CHARACTERIZATION? >>AS THE PLAN IS DEVELOPED, THE PAGE NUMBERS CHANGE. >>IF YOU ARE WANTING TO RECEIVE SOME DIRECTION ON HOW TO INCORPORATE THOSE INTO A SUITE OF AMENDMENTS, I THINK IT IS FAIR TO SAY THAT WE ARE FINE WITH THAT, ADVANCING AS A SUITE OF AMENDMENTS. NO OBJECTION FROM MY COLLEAGUE. YOU CAN CHECK THAT OFF YOUR LIST.>>I LIKE TO DO THAT. >>>THE LAST PART, THREE OTHER ITEMS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE RESOLUTION THAT AREN’T SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSED IN THE PLAN, BUT WHERE THE EXECUTIVE HAS PERFORMED SOME MORE, THE FIRST IS DEVELOPING A UNIFIED APPLICATION PROCESS, THE SVP APPLICATION, IDENTIFYING FAMILIES THAT MIGHT BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE CHILD ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, PURSUING OPPORTUNITIES TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS WERE THAT IS AVAILABLE.>>>THE SECOND IS RESEARCHING THE CONCEPT OF A CROSS SUBSIDIZED TUITION METHODOLOGY, WHICH IS NOT TO PURSUE IT, DUE TO INCREASING TUITION LEVELS WERE HIGHER INCOME FAMILIES MAY DISCOURAGE THEIR PARTICIPATION, A CONCEPT THAT WE WILL RETURN TO THEM MOMENT IN ISSUE THREE. >>>EXPLORING BITTER CLINICIAN WITH THE STATES PRESCHOOL PROGRAM, LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO WORK WITH THE STATE AND THE CITY’S OFFICE OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS, THE IMPROVEMENTS TO CHILDCARE AND PRESCHOOL PROGRAMS BROADLY.>>BRIAN, AND ANY ONE OF THESE THREE CATEGORIES, WITH THE úEXC 2, DOES THE IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION PLAN, AND ANY OF YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM, ANY INDICATION AS TO WHEN WE CAN EXPECT WORK PRODUCT IN THOSE CATEGORIES? TIMELINES? >>THAT SPECIFICALLY, ITEMS ONE AND 3 ARE ONGOING BODIES OF WORK, WE COULD MAKE A REQUEST OF THEM, BUT WE HAVE NOT DISCUSSED THAT. >>WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO INCLUDE COUNCILS EXPECTATIONS AROUND TIMELINES IN THE LEVY AS IT RELATES TO THE THOSE ONGOING BODIES WERE? >>WE CAN DO SO. >>I WOULD LIKE TO DO SO.>>>THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS, WE CAN MOVE TO IDENTIFIED ISSUES.>>THE FIRST ISSUE RELATES TO LEVIES, GOALS AND OUTCOMES, IT CONTAINS — TO PROPERLY RECOGNIZE THE GROUPS, INCLUDES ONE GOAL AND MANY OUTCOMES FOR EACH OF THOSE 4 INVESTMENT AREAS, A GOAL AND OUTCOME FOR THE LEVY OVERALL, IF YOU’RE INTERESTED IN THE PROPOSED PLAN, THE COMPLETE LIST CAN BE FOUND ON PAGE 10, WHICH IS TABLE NUMBER 2 IN THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. >>>THE FIRST OF THE TWO ITEMS THAT MIGHT REQUIRE EXPANSION, IS THE PROPOSED OUTCOME OVERALL, IT CONTAINS AN ABBREVIATED LIST, RELATIVE TO THE LIST THAT THE COUNCIL CONSIDERED IN LAST YEAR’S LEVY ORDINANCE, PRINCIPLE NUMBER 1, I’M GOING TO READ IT, STATES THAT PRIVATIZING INVESTMENTS TO ENSURE EDUCATIONAL EQUITY FOR HISTORICALLY UNDERSERVED GROUPS, AFRICAN-AMERICAN, BLACK, HISPANIC, NATIVE AMERICAN, PACIFIC ISLANDERS, UNDERSERVED ASIAN POPULATIONS, OTHER STUDENTS OF COLOR, A REFUGEE, IMMIGRANT, HOMELESS, ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS, AND LGBTQ STUDENTS. SO THE LIST OMITS THE FINAL FOUR GROUPS FROM THAT LIST, A REFUGEE, IMMIGRANT, HOMELESS, WHISTLING WITCH, AND LGBTQ, IN ADDITION TO THE LEVY OUTCOME ITSELF, IT OCCURS IN OTHER SECTIONS OF THE PLAN, INCLUDING SECTIONS RELATED TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENTS, AND PRIORITIZATION PROCESS, FOR THE SEATTLE PROMISE TUITION FUNDS.>>>THE SECOND ITEM THAT MIGHT NEED EXPANSION IS THE PROPOSED GO FOR THE K-12 INVESTMENT AREA, THE PROBE — THE PROPOSED GOAL READS SEATTLE STUDENTS HAVE ACCESS TO AND UTILIZE COLLEGE AND JOB READINESS EXPERIENCES THAT PROMOTES — PROMOTE HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION. THIS FOCUSES ON COLLEGE AND JOB READINESS, AND DOESN’T HAVE ALL THE STRATEGIES CONTAINED IN THAT K-12, OTHER EXAMPLES, INSTRUCTIONAL TIME, ACADEMIC PREPARATION, SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL SKILL DEVELOPING, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.>>>WITH RESPECT TO POTENTIAL OPTIONS, I WILL SCROLL DOWN, A POOR JOB OF KEEPING THIS UP TODAY, JUST AS A KIND OF ORIENTATION, THE FIRST OPTION FOR ALL OF THESE IS TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED PLAN AS DRAFTED, THAT IS OPTION A, AND WHERE THERE ARE OTHER MULTIPLE OPTIONS, B AND C, THOSE AREN’T MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE, YOU CAN CHOOSE TO DO ONE OF THE OTHER, OR COMBINATION. FOR THIS ONE, OPTION B IS THE OVERALL LEVY OUTCOME, IT ENTAILS MODIFYING THE OUTCOME TO INCLUDE THE ADDITIONAL GROUPS THAT WERE LEFT OFF THE LIST, AND OTHER REFERENCES IN THE PLAN WHERE IT IS APPROPRIATE, COULD BE UPDATED TO REFLECT THE COMPLETE LIST. OPTION C IS THE K-12 GOAL, MODIFIED TO INCLUDE ACTIVITIES — FOR YOUNGER AND K-12 STUDENTS.>>>COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON? >>RYAN, WHILE IT IS CERTAINLY TRUE THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR HIGH SCHOOL KIDS ARE VERY FOCUSED ON COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS, I THINK THE WAY THAT THE COMMUNITY-BASED GOAL RIGHT NOW IS PRETTY NARROWLY DEFINED, WRITTEN AS IT IS NOW, FOR ME, THINKING ABOUT THE K-8 SET OF THINGS, I WOULD LOVE TO TALK THROUGH OPTION C, COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS IS SOMETHIN THAT NINTH GRADERS CAN TOTALLY GRASP IN CONCEPT, BUT THEY MIGHT NOT BE TOTALLY READY FOR, SOME SENIORS MIGHT — MIGHT NOT BE TOTALLY READY, BUT IN THAT K-8 ENVIRONMENT, SOME OF THE OPTIONS THAT YOU’VE OUTLINED, ACADEMIC PREPAREDNESS, SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL HEALTH AND WELL- BEING, THOSE WOULD BE VERY WELCOME ADDITIONS TO THIS COMMUNITY-BASED GOAL, I WOULD LOVE FOR US TO TALK THROUGH AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULD BROADEN THAT SLIGHTLY TO THINK THROUGH LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHAT SOME OF THOSE K-8 GOALS COULD BE OUTSIDE OF THE COLLAGEN CAREER READINESS SIDE. >>– COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS SIDE. >>WE WOULD PROBABLY PREFER AN OPTION — A VERSION OF OPTION C, AND I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT OPTION B, THAT THE LEVY OUTCOME IS REFLECTIVE OF WHAT THE INTENTION WAS, WHO WOULD BE PRIORITIZED THROUGH THESE RESOURCES. >>THANK YOU.>>>MOVING ON TO ISSUE NUMBER 2, THE PROPOSED PLAN AS DRAFTED CONTAINS LANGUAGE THAT WOULD ALLOW YOU TO MODIFIED ELEMENTS OF THE PLAN DURING THE TERM OF THE LEVY WITHOUT COUNCIL APPROVAL, RESOURCE ALLOCATIONS AND CRITERIA, FOR EXAMPLE, PAGE 77, K-12 WRAPAROUND SERVICES, IT SAYS THE DEAL HAS THE AUTHORITY TO — OVER THE LIFE OF THE LEVY, STUDENT NEED, DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES, AND DISTRICT AND STATE POLICY SHIFTS. — DEEL. ANOTHER EXAMPLE ON THE MEMO, RELATED TO THE SEATTLE PROMISE PROGRAM, THIS MODIFICATION IS SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THE PLAN IN ABOUT 17 DIFFERENT SECTIONS, THE REFERENCES ARE NOT ALL THE SAME, THE COUNCIL MAY BE COMFORTABLE DELEGATING SOME OF THE AUTHORITY, ONE OF THEM IS THE ABILITY TO ISSUE ADDITIONAL COMPETITIVE FUNDING POLICIES, THAT SEEMS IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF BUSINESS, OTHER AREAS, COUNCIL MAY WANT TO HAVE CONTROL, ONE MODEL, FROM PLAN MODIFICATIONS, THE SEATTLE PRESCHOOL PROGRAM, IN 2015, IT ESSENTIALLY IN THE OVERVIEW SECTION LISTED CIRCUMSTANCES WERE MODIFICATIONS WOULD REQUIRE COUNCIL APPROVAL BY ORDINANCE, AND A SEPARATE SECTION THAT REQUIRED WRITTEN NOTIFICATION FROM THE COUNCIL, THAT COULD BE A MODEL TO FOLLOW.>>>IN ADDITION TO CONTROLLING THE SPECIFIC MODIFICATIONS, COUNCIL MIGHT WANT TO SPECIFY TOPICS FOR REPORTING BY DEAL, GETTING BACK TO THE REPORTING, WE COULD HAVE REPORTS ON THAT, AND ALSO ANY OTHER THINGS THAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE REGULAR REPORTING ON. THE OPTIONS ARE TO ACCEPT THE LANGUAGE AS CURRENTLY DRAFTED, OPTION B IS TO CREATE A NEW SECTION OR APPENDIX THAT WOULD SPECIFY WHICH MODIFICATIONS REQUIRE APPROVAL AUTHORITY. OPTION C, A SECTION THAT IDENTIFIES WHAT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS THE COUNCIL WISHES TO ADD. >>COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON? >>ONE OF THE MODELS FOR US TO CONTEMPLATE, BRIAN, IS THE HOUSING LEVIES IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, THE ANF PLAN. ADMINISTRATIVE AND FINANCIAL PLAN, THANK YOU. WE AS A COUNCIL DON’T REGULARLY APPROVE THAT EVERY YEAR, HOWEVER WE GET REGULAR REPORTS ON THINGS LIKE THE IMPLEMENTATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE MULTIFAMILY TAX EXEMPTION PROJECTS, OR THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS BY TYPE, FOR EXAMPLE, I THINK THAT KIND OF DATA WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL FOR US TO CONTINUE TO SEE THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, EARLY LEARNING, ENROLLMENT NUMBERS, DIFFERENT INVESTMENTS THAT WE ARE SEEING, AND DIFFERENT SCHOOL-BASED HEALTH CENTERS, THE PARTNERSHIPS THAT WE MAY HAVE WITH AFTERSCHOOL PROVIDERS, CAN BE OVERWHELMING, BUT A APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF DETAIL TO BE SHARED WITH FOLKS, THREADING THAT NEEDLE IS GOING TO BE REALLY GREAT TO WORK ON.>>>ANOTHER THING THAT I’M CURIOUS ABOUT IS TO WHAT EXTENT COUNCIL WANT TO SEE THE SIGNED PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT THAT WE MAY HAVE BETWEEN THE CITY AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS AS WELL, THOSE AGREEMENTS, I PRESUME WE WOULD NEVER WANT TO GO ALL THE WAY UP TO COUNCIL FOR SIGNATURE, IT’S SOMETIMES GOOD OPPORTUNITIES FOR PROACTIVE RELATIONSHIP BUILDING BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE DISTRICT AND OUR PARTNERS, SO GETTING UPDATES ABOUT HOW THOSE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS ARE BEING SIGNED, WHEN THEY ARE SIGNED, WHAT THEY ARE ABOUT, THOSE MIGHT BE OF INTEREST I THINK TO THE COUNCIL AS WELL, SO WE CAN UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE WORKING PROACTIVELY TOGETHER, AND CONTINUE TO BUILD OFF OF THAT GOOD RELATIONSHIP. SO I’M NOT SUGGESTING THAT WE BE THE ONES TO SIGN THOSE PARTNER AGREEMENTS, I DON’T THINK THAT IS OUR ROLE OR JOB, BUT UPDATES ABOUT WHAT THOSE — WHAT IS INSIDE FOR THOSE.>>A MODEL THAT HAS WORKED REALLY WELL IN THE PAST, IN THIS SPECIFIC CONTEXT OF EDUCATION RELATED PROGRAMS, IS AROUND SORT OF HOW WE HAVE STRUCTURED THE SPP INVESTMENTS, AND WHAT WE LAY OUT AS PRINCIPALS, OR CRITERIA RELATED TO WHEN WE EXPECT THE DEAL TO COME BACK TO US, AND EFFECTIVELY REQUESTING MODIFICATION, I THINK IT IS A IMPORTANT PART OF THE COUNCILS OVERSIGHT ROLE, TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THERE IS A FUNDAMENTAL SHIFT AWAY FROM A COUNCIL PRIORITY FOR EXAMPLE, OR FROM POTENTIAL ASPECTS OF THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF THE ORDINANCE THAT ADOPTED THIS PARTICULAR LEVY, THOSE ARE REASONABLE SPACES FOR THE — FOR DEEL TO EXPECT TO COME BACK AS THE OVERSIGHT ENTITY , THE COUNCIL, TO MODIFY THE PROGRAMS AUTHORITY. I THINK WHERE THE LINE GETS TRICKY IS TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ALLOW THE DEPARTMENT TO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY THAT THEY NEED TO CONTINUE TO INNOVATE, AND TO BE FLEXIBLE. WITH THEIR HEARING AND EMERGING PROGRAMS, AN UNDERSTANDING OF HOW IT HAS WORKED IN THAT CONTEXT, IT HAS BEEN ABLE TO ACHIEVE THE FLEXIBILITY BUT ALSO THE EXPECTATION AND COMPLIANCE WITH THE COUNCILS RESPONSIBILITY IS TO CONTINUE TO EXERT OVERSIGHT, I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN PURSUING A SPP MODEL.>>THANK YOU.>>>THE SCALE, INCREASING THAT’S RELATIVE TO THE SCALE, IT CHARGES FAMILIES WITH HOUSEHOLD INCOMES GREATER THAN 300 PERCENT — 300% A PERCENTAGE — PERCENTAGE OF THE TUITION COST, HOUSEHOLD SIZE, AND FAMILY INCOME, THE SCALE OF THE PLAN, HOUSEHOLD DUTCH HOUSEHOLDS PAY PROGRESSIVELY MORE AS INCOME RISES, AND A SUBSIDY FOR ALL PARTICIPATING FAMILIES, IN PRACTICE, 301%, UP TO 760% OF FPL, THE TUITION IS — SUBSIDY IS $535, THE MAXIMUM THAT FAMILIES PAY IS ABOUT $10,000,, COLLUDING WITH THE SUBSIDY LEVEL IS, ESSENTIALLY, WE ARE COMPARING THE FAMILY’S TOTAL TUITION AMOUNT, COMPARED TO THE AVERAGE AMOUNT OF THE CITY PAYS DIRECTLY TO PROVIDERS FOR DIRECT SERVICES, THEY REFER TO IT AS THE BASE SLOT COST. THE PLAN MAKES A FEW CHANGES FOR THE TUITION SCALE, IT INCREASES THE FREE TUITION THRESHOLD, FROM 300% UP TO 350%, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS AT THE LAST MEETING. >>>SECOND, IT SIMPLIFIES THE INDUSTRY OF COMPLEXITY BY REDUCING THE NUMBER OF STEPS THAT IT CONTAINS, AND THE THIRD IS THAT IT CAPS THE MAXIMUM FAMILY TUITION AMOUNT, THIS IS WHERE THE POTENTIAL ISSUE ARISES. TRINITY SEVEN HAS PROPOSED TO A $10,000, DUE TO THE BELIEF THAT THIS IS EFFECTIVELY THE THEM — THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT WITHOUT ENCOURAGING THEM TO SEEK ELSEWHERE, FAMILIES AT THE TOP END OF THE SKILL WOULD RECEIVE EIGHT TUITION SUBSIDY OF ABOUT $1000. JUST IN TERMS OF HOW IT IS STRUCTURED, IN ADDITION THE SCALE REACHES THIS MAXIMUM TUITION AMOUNT AT 711% OF FPL, RATHER THAN 760%, LIKE THE CURRENT MODEL, THE OPTION THAT IS IDENTIFIED, THE MODEL AS IS — AS IT IS DRAFTED, AND ALSO TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM TUITION AMOUNT FOR FAMILIES OF THE TOP OF THE INCOME SCALE, CHANGES COULD INCLUDE REVISING THE NUMBER OF STEPS THAT IS CONTAINED WITHIN THE SYSTEM, AND ALSO HOW FAR UP ON THE FPL SCALE WE GO INCREASING THAT.>>>A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS, ONE OF WHICH IS, PART OF THE GOAL, OF HAVING A VOTER APPROVED PRESCHOOL PROGRAM IS TO PROVIDE SOME LEVEL OF SUBSIDIES TO ALMOST EVERYBODY IN THE PROGRAM, I WAS ONE OF THOSE FOLKS WHO PUSHED A RESOLUTION TO CONSIDER A CROSS SUBSIDIZE MODEL DASHCAM SUBSIDIZE, WHICH HAS TURNED OUT NOT TO BE A PREFERRED MODEL, BUT FOR THOSE FOLKS THAT ARE AT THE 711% OF FPL, THE SUBSIDY IS SOMETHING THAT I WILL NEED TO UNDERSTAND MORE ABOUT, I BELIEVE EVERYONE WHO IS PARTICIPATING SHOULD RECEIVE SOME LEVEL OF SUBSIDY, AS I HAVE ARTICULATED AT THIS TABLE MANY A TIME, I BELIEVE THAT A SIX HOUR DAY MODEL, FIVE DAYS A WEEK, THEY ARE GETTING A HECKUVA DEAL COMPARED TO WHAT THEY WOULD BE GETTING ON THE PRIVATE MARKETPLACE. FULL DISCLOSURE, THE PRESCHOOL TUITION CHECK, FOR THREE DAYS A WEEK, FOUR HOURS PER MORNING, $11,000 A YEAR RANGE. AN SPP CERTIFIED SCHOOL, FIVE DAYS A WEEK, I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF BENEFITS TO OUR PROGRAM, THEY SHOULD BE OFFERING SOME LEVEL OF SUBSIDY, I HAVEN’T LANDED ON WHETHER $1000, ALMOST A 10% SUBSIDY, IF IT IS THE RIGHT LEVEL. THE FOLKS IN THE EARLY LEARNING TEAM, CONTINUING TO CONTEMPLATE THE DIFFERENCE, A TEN-HOUR MODEL, WHETHER THAT AFFECTS THESE — THIS BASED SLOT COST, AND HOW MUCH FAMILIES MIGHT BE PAYING INTUITION AS WE CONTEMPLATE REACHING OUT TO PROVIDERS THAT HAVE SUGGESTED TO US THAT THEY MIGHT BE MORE LIKELY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM, IF A TEN-HOUR MODEL WAS AN OPTION FOR THEM, I WANT TO MAKE THAT LETTER A 1 AMENDMENT DISCUSSION, I THINK IT WAS GREAT TO SEE THE SCALE SHRINK, BECAUSE OF THE 850 DIFFERENT OPTIONS. OR 460 DIFFERENT OPTIONS, PEOPLE WERE FINDING ON THE SCALE, THAT WAS REALLY HARD, THAT HAS BEEN A GOOD CHANGE, I THINK IT IS WORTHWHILE, THE UPPER TIER, HOW MUCH SUBSIDY SHOULD THEY GET, THEY SHOULD GET SOME I THINK I WOULD HOW MUCH IS THE RIGHT QUESTION, AND DOES THAT CHANGE IF IT IS A TEN- HOUR SLOT MODEL, VERSUS A SIX HOUR SLOT MODEL, AND THE SUBSIDIES ASSOCIATED, I WANT TIME TO THINK THAT THROUGH, THE CHAIR MAY HAVE ALL THESE THINGS, AN ANSWER READY TO GO, I LOVE THE CHANCE TO THINK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE.>> I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT OBSERVATION, TO HOW THE MODEL IS IMPACTED, IF WE ASSUME A HYBRID OR COMBINATION OF SIX HOUR TIMESLOTS VERSUS TEN-HOUR TIMESLOTS, THAT IS SOME WORK THAT WE WOULD NEED TO DO OFF- LINE TO GET A BETTER SENSE OF HOW THIS MODEL AS PROPOSED WOULD BE IMPACTED BY LONGER DAYS, OR HOW WE CAN MODIFY THE SUBSIDIZATION MODELS BY RATCHETING UP THE PERCENT OR RATCHETING DOWN THE BOTTOM TO ALSO — AND THEN LATER OVER THE NUMBER OF HOURS AVAILABLE, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE WOULD NEED TO PLAY WITH AND EXPERIMENT WITH, BEFORE WE GET A SENSE OF HOW THE MODEL IMPACTS THE SLOTS THAT THEY WILL HAVE AVAILABLE BY DOING THAT MODIFICATION, STAYING TRUE AND COMMITTED, WITH OUR INTENT OF DOUBLING THE PRESCHOOL SEATS AVAILABLE FOR KIDS IN THE CITY, IS THAT ENOUGH DIRECTION, AND SINCE TO BE ABLE TO WORK ON SOMETHING OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS?>>THEY HAVE SHARE THEIR MODEL, SOMETHING WE CAN PLUG AND PLAY, LOOK AT DIFFERENT SCENARIOS WITH, WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO DO THAT AND SHARE THEM WITH YOU, SEE WHAT THINGS LOOK LIKE A WE START PUTTING NUMBERS INTO THE MODEL. >>THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. >>DOES THAT PLUG-AND-PLAY PLATFORM ALLOW YOU TO ALSO MODIFY THE NUMBER OF HOURS? >>THAT IS SOMETHING I HAVEN’T DISCUSSED, I WOULD HAVE TO TALK TO THEM AND SEE IF THEY HAVE CONSIDERED OR HOW THAT WORKS, THE BEFORE AND AFTER THE SIX HOURS, THROUGH THE CHILDCARE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, IT IS LAYERED ON TOP, I DON’T KNOW HOW THE TEN-HOUR DAY WOULD AFFECT THAT.>>LET’S TAKE A LOOK AT ALL OF THOSE OF AYER — úALL OF THOSE VARIABLES, AND SE WHAT OUTCOMES WE GET AS A RESULT OF THAT, I KNOW THERE ARE SOME FOLKS IN THE AUDIENCE TODAY, THEY ARE LISTENING AND TAKING NOTES, AND THEY WILL HOPEFULLY WORK WITH US ON SEEING IF WE CAN MOVE SOME OF THOSE DIALS, IN A WAY THAT STILL MEETS THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF WANTING TO MEANINGFULLY EXPAND THE NUMBER OF PRESCHOOL SLOTS AVAILABLE WHILE STAYING TRUE TO WHAT THE ULTIMATE GOAL IS, WHICH IS TO HAVE MIXED INCOME CLASSROOMS THROUGHOUT THE CITY WE KNOW THAT IS A MODEL FOR HIGH-QUALITY PRESCHOOL, AND ENRICHES THE EXPERIENCE FOR EVERYBODY WHO IS PARTICIPATING IN THE PROGRAM. I HOPE YOU HAVE ENOUGH DIRECTION, IF YOU DON’T, CHAT WITH US AFTER COMMITTEE AND SURE WITH US A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT YOUR THOUGHTS. TO BE TOTALLY TRANSPARENT, I THINK MICHAEL HERE ON THE — MY GOAL HERE IS TO UNDERSTAND HOW MANY FAMILIES WE HAVE, IF WE HAVE A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THOSE FAMILIES, AND WE CAN NDERSTAND THAT A DIFFERA $1000 SUBSIDY, AND A $1000 SUBSIDY, $500 SUBSIDY, THEY MIGHT BE VALUABLE TO THE STUDENTS WHO COULD GET ACCESS TO THE PROGRAM, THAT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO EXIT BEFORE — ACCESS IT BEFORE, BUT THOSE FIVE SLOTS FROM EVEN EXISTING, WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THE EFFORT TO REDUCE IT TO $500 PER YEAR, TO OPEN UP FIVE MORE SLOTS, BUT THEY CAN’T GET FILLED, BECAUSE WE DON’T HAVE PROVIDERS THAT CAN MAKE THE ECONOMICS OF ADDING FIVE MORE SPOTS WERE, THEN THAT IS NOT WORTH THE INTELLECTUAL OR FINANCIAL EXERCISE IN DOING SO. THAT IS THE KIND OF MODEL RUN THAT I AM INTERESTED IN, HOW DO WE TAKE THE UPPER ECHELON, AND TWEAK A LITTLE BIT SOME OF THE SUBSIDIES THAT THEY ARE RECEIVING, AND SEE IF THAT CREATES MORE SLOTS, AND IF IT DOES, AND THE SLOTS ARE REAL, IT IS WORTH CONSIDERING, THE SLOTS AREN’T REAL, IT IS NOT, AND IT DOESN’T, AND IS NOT, AND THEN IT IS DEFINITELY NOT. JUST MY PERSONAL INTEREST IN UNDERSTANDING A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT IT.>>THANK YOU. >>>LET’S MOVE ON.>>>THE FOURTH ISSUE RELATES TO FAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES, ESSENTIALLY THE UNCERTAINTY WITH HOW THE INVESTMENT WILL BE UTILIZED AFTER THE FIRST YEAR IN THE SEATTLE EFFORT TWO COORDINATE A SCHOOL PLAN, DURING THE LEVY., THE SUPPORT SERVICES ARE IN TWO DIFFERENT WAYS, IN AGREEMENT WITH PUBLIC HEALTH OF SEATTLE KING COUNTY, AND SCHOOL INVESTMENT, THE FUNDING THAT HAS GONE TO PUBLIC HEALTH HAS BEEN PASSED THROUGH TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, FOR THE FAMILY SUPPORT PROGRAM, THE CENTRAL PROGRAM ALLOWS THE DISTRICT TO LOCATE STAFF AT SCHOOLS BASED ON THE LEVEL OF STUDENTS IN NEED, THE 2018-19 SCHOOL YEAR, FUNDING 5 FAMILY SUPPORT WORKERS, WITH THOSE DOLLARS, AND THE SCHOOL INVESTMENTS, A STRATEGY, IN ORDER TO HELP THEM MEET THEIR FAMILY INVESTMENT OUTCOMES, AND THE CURRENT SCHOOL YEAR, CONTRACTING WITH SEATTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, SEPARATE FROM HOW — THE FUNDS WILL BE DIRECTED GENERALLY, WITH HIGH CONCENTRATIONS OF STUDENTS, FOR EXAMPLE THAT OUR MEETING GRADE LEVEL STANDARDS, THAT ARE NOT SCORING WELL OR MAKING PROGRESS ON STATE ASSESSMENTS, EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS OR CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM. >>>IN CONSIDERING THE FEP LEVY, ADDING TO A TOTAL OF 44 — $14.5 MILLION, 15 FAMILY SUPPORT WORKERS, FOR THE FUNDING, THE FLEXIBILITY TO DEVELOP A CARE PLAN FOR FAMILY SUPPORT IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS RECEIVING SERVICES. ONE ASPECT IS DIFFERENT JOB CLASSIFICATIONS TO PROVIDE THE SERVICES, THE INTENT TO PROVIDED OVER THE NEXT YEAR. >>>DURING THAT YEAR, INTENDED TO PROVIDE FUNDING TO THE DISTRICT TO SUPPORT FAMILY SUPPORT WORKERS, WHO HAVE IN THE PAST, FUNDING THEM WITH FUNDS, THE REMAINDER WOULD GO TO THE PROGRAM,BUT IT IS UNCLEAR HOW MANY DISTRICT STAFFED WITH BE — STAFF WOULD BE PROVIDING THE SERVICES. THE OPTIONS THAT ARE LAID OUT IN THE MEMO ARE TO JUST ACCEPT THE PLAN AS IT IS CURRENTLY DRAFTED, OR SINCE WE DON’T KNOW WHAT IT WILL BE, DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS COURT NEEDED CARE PLAN, DURING THIS PERIOD, AND IN ADVANCE OF ACTUALLY THE DEAL ENTERING INTO THE DISTRICT FOR THE 2021 SCHOOL YEAR, ESSENTIALLY JUST INCREASING INFORMATION TO THE COUNCIL.>>ON THIS ONE, SO I THINK THE REASONABLE OPTION HERE , IN LARGE PART BECAUSE WE DON’T KNOW WHAT WE DON’T KNOW, OPTION B IN MY MIND, I WOULD JUST SAY THAT I THINK FOR ME, WHEN WE REALLY EXPLORED INVESTMENT IN THIS AREA, AND THIS IS ONE OF THOSE AREAS THAT WE WORKED REALLY HARD TO RESTORE FUNDING TO, OR PROTECT THE FUNDING OF TO MAKE SURE THE CITY DIDN’T BACK AWAY FROM THIS PARTICULAR INVESTMENT, IS THAT FOR ME, THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT THESE INVESTMENTS WERE MADE NOT WITH THE INTENT TO BACKFILL, A VERY STRONG ATTEMPT TO SUPPLEMENT THAT WERE HAPPENING, WITH K-12, WHATEVER THE MODEL IS, AND HOWEVER THE DISTRICT CHOOSES TO ULTIMATELY ADMINISTER THE PROGRAM, IS I THINK APPROPRIATE FOR THE DISTRICT TO DETERMINE, BUT I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, OUR SHARED GOAL, IS THAT WE WILL NOT BE BACKFILLING, THAT THIS IS ACTUALLY INTENDED TO SUPPLEMENT EXISTING THINGS IN THE SPACE, AND I HOPE THEY WILL CONTINUE TO PARTNER IN THE SPACE, AND CONTINUE TO INVEST AT THE LEVEL THAT THEY HAVE BEEN HISTORICALLY INVESTING IN THIS AREA, IN ORDER TO GET THESE REALLY CRITICALLY IMPORTANT WRAPAROUND SERVICES TO STUDENTS WHO REALLY NEED IT. I HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SIT DOWN WITH A GROUP OF FAMILY SUPPORT WORKERS WHO WORK IN THE K-12 SYSTEM A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, AND STORIES OF THE HELP THAT THEY GIVE TO STUDENTS IN THE K-12 SYSTEM ARE JUST REALLY IMPRESSIVE. STORIES OF PEOPLE DRIVING KIDS TO HOTELS, DRIVING THEM TO SHELTERS, IMMEDIATE HOUSING OPPORTUNITY, BEING THAT SAFE PLACE FOR THEM TO NOT ONLY EXPRESS THAT, THE PERSON THEY ARE TELLING IT TO, READY, WILLING AND ABLE TO DO ANYTHING THEY CAN TO HELP THEM FIND THE STABILITY, IS SO IMPORTANT, AND I DON’T THINK IT CAN BE UNDERVALUED. WE HAD A GREAT MEETING WITH SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS YESTERDAY AT CITY HALL, AND HEARD FROM THEM, THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT FUNCTION AND A IMPORTANT SERVICE THAT IS PROVIDED TO STUDENTS AND THEIR FAMILIES IN THE K-12 SYSTEM, MY HOPE IS THAT SETTING ASIDE HOW THE DISTRICT CHOOSES TO MANAGE THE PROGRAM, TAKING THAT POSITION, THAT WE ARE NOT BACKFILLING SERVICES, WE INTEND FOR THESE DOLLARS TO BE LEVERAGED IN EQUAL PARTS WITH THE DISTRICT. ANYTHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD? >>THE CONCEPT OF CONTINUITY IS IMPORTANT, THE INDIVIDUALIZED BUDGET CHALLENGES, I HOPE WHAT WE ARE DOING WITH THIS LEVEL OF INVESTMENT I THINK TO YOUR POINT, WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO ADMINISTER THAT. THE POTENTIAL BUDGET DOWNTURN, THE IMPORTANT FUNCTIONS, WITHIN A SCHOOL, IN AND OF ITSELF, THE FAMILY SUPPORT WORKERS STAY THERE, THE –>>THANK YOU.>>>ISSUE NUMBER 5, THE SEATTLE PROMISE PROGRAM, HOW THE PROPOSED ALLOCATIONS FOR THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT STRATEGIES MAY NEED TO BE ALLOCATED, FOR THE STUDENTS BEING PRIORITIZED, TWO STRATEGIES, TO ASSIST WITH THE COST OF ATTENDING COLLEGE, THE SCHOLARSHIP THAT COVERS TUITION COSTS AFTER FEDERAL AND STATE SUPPORT, AND INDIVIDUAL SCHOLARSHIPS ARE APPLIED, IT IS THE SECOND ONE, THE HIGHEST FINANCIAL NEED, PROVIDING FUNDING FOR NONRELATED FUND — BOOKS, FEEDS, CHILDCARE, THE COMPANION RESOLUTION. REQUESTING THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, PRIORITIZING RESOURCES, TO STUDENTS WITH THE GREATEST NEED IF NECESSARY, THE TUITION STRATEGY, THE PRIVATIZATION PROCESS, IF DEMAND EXCEEDS SUPPLY, THE FUNDING SPLIT BETWEEN THE SCHOLARSHIP AND THE EQUITY FUNDING BUCKET, THE LOWER INCOME STUDENTS WILL RECEIVE FEDERAL STATE SUPPORT, THEY WON’T NEED THE SEATTLE FAMILIES LIKELY WITH A ZERO EXPECTED FAMILY CONTRIBUTION, EFC, THEY WILL BE THE ONES ELIGIBLE FOR THE EQUITY SCHOLARSHIP. STUDENTS WITH HIGHER INCOMES MIGHT RECEIVE NOT ENOUGH OR THEY MIGHT NOT RECEIVE ANY FINANCIAL OR STATE AID TO ATTEND COLLEGE, THEREFORE THEY WOULD RECEIVE TUITION SUPPORT FROM THE PROMISE PROGRAM, THOSE STUDENTS WOULD NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE EQUITY SCHOLARSHIP, SO A SITUATION WHERE PROMISE STUDENTS WOULD ONLY BE RECEIVING FINANCIAL SUPPORT THROUGH ONE OF THE BUCKETS. ALLOCATING $60 MILLION OVER THE SEVEN-YEAR LEVY, AND $3.6 MILLION FOR THE EQUITY SCHOLARSHIP STRATEGY. THEY MIGHT BE ENTIRELY SUFFICIENT, OR REALLOCATED OVER TIME, TO MEET STUDENT NEEDS, THE CONCERN IS THAT IF THERE ARE MORE STUDENTS ON THE SCHOLARSHIP, ENOUGH FUNDING, IF THERE IS EXCESS FUNDING, IT MIGHT NEED TO BE REALLOCATED BETWEEN THOSE TWO. EXCEPTING THE PLANET IS DRAFTED OR ANOTHER SITUATION WE DON’T KNOW WHAT THE UPTAKE IS GOING TO BE, DETAILED FOR THE DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION, THE STRATEGY, TO ENSURE THEY ARE ADEQUATELY FUNDING THE PRIORITIES OF STUDENTS.>>IT SEEMS LIKE WE SHOULD GO WITH OPTION B ON THIS ONE. AND THANKS FOR LAYING THAT OUT, IT WAS COMPLICATED TO DO THE MAPPING, I APPRECIATE THE CLEAR AND CONCISE LANGUAGE IN THE MEMO.>>I FEEL I NEED TO REITERATE, THE COMMITTEE, WHICH I THINK OUR GOAL IS WHO MAY NOT HAVE THE SAME SET OF ACCESS, BECAUSE OF THEIR FINANCIAL CIRCUMSTANCES, OTHER INSTITUTIONAL BARRIERS THAT THEY HAVE, AND ENSURE THAT THE KIDS WHO BENEFIT FROM A SYSTEM THAT ENCOURAGES THEM, THAT IT’S NOT THOSE THAT ARE 575 — IN THE QUEUE, I THINK IT WILL BE IMPORTANT TO ENSURE THAT THE GOALS THAT WE HAVE, HOW THEY ARE PARTICIPATING. THEY ARE NOT FROM LINCOLN AND ROOSEVELT, MAKE SURE IT IS THE KIDS WHO WE HAVE INTENDED TO BE DOING A LOT OF OUTREACH ON, THE OBJECTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT, AND THE MAYOR, AND THE OBJECTIVE OF SEATTLE COLLEGES, AND OUR OBJECTIVE, TOO, ENSURING THAT IS THE OUTCOME THAT WE ARE GOING FOR.>>WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL AND AWARE OF THE UNINTENTIONAL CONSEQUENCES OF WELL-INTENTIONED POLICY CHOICES, WE MEET THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE INTENTIONAL AND DELIBERATE IN MONITORING WHAT WE ARE ACTUALLY SEEING HAPPEN IN THE DEPLOYMENT OF THESE INVESTMENTS, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON’T HAVE THOSE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.>>>ISSUE SIX, THE DESIGN OF THE SEATTLE PROMISE PROGRAM, HOW IT IS TARGETED. TO THEM ON A FULL-TIME BASIS, THE EFFECT OF EXCLUDING PART- TIME STUDENTS WITH THE SUPPORTS, OPERATING ON THE COHO — COHORT MODEL, ATTENDING FULL-TIME FOR TWO YEARS OR 90 CREDITS AFTERWARDS, FULL-TIME ENROLLMENT DURING THE FALL, WINTER, AND IT IS OPTIONAL, IT EXPLAINS THE DESIGN DECISION, BY STATING THAT THEY HAVE PROVEN TO SUPPORT STUDENTS, NOTING A SENSE OF. SUPPORT. THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR STATISTICS NOT IN THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, 51% ATTENDING TWO-YEAR INSTITUTIONS, ATTENDED PART- TIME, SEATTLE COLLEGES, IN RULING ON A PART-TIME BASIS. THE PROMISE PROGRAM IS BUILT AND DESIGNED TO TARGET FIRST- TIME COLLEGE STUDENTS THAT ARE JUST GRADUATED FROM HIGH SCHOOL, ROUGHLY 1100 STUDENTS, THOSE TYPE OF STUDENTS, EVEN IF THAT GROUP, 44% ATTEND PART-TIME, SERVING A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF STUDENTS BENEFITING FROM THE PROGRAM. THERE ARE ESSENTIALLY TWO WAYS PART-TIME ENROLLMENT COULD BE ADDRESSED, THE FIRST IS TO ALLOW STUDENTS TO ATTEND PART- TIME THAT’S ON A PART-TIME BASIS, STUDENTS MAY HAVE A ROLE LESS THAN FULL-TIME ON A QUARTERLY BASIS, THEY ARE ALREADY DOING THAT, THE PLAN AS CURRENTLY DRAFTED DOESN’T MAKE THAT CLEAR, ADDRESSING PART- TIME STUDENTS, THAT ONE TO NEED TO ATTEND PART-TIME ON AN EXCLUSIVE BASIS, DEVELOPING THE POLICIES, FOR PART-TIME ATTENDANCE WILL LIKELY INCLUDE A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT, COMPLETING THEIR 90 CREDITS, FOUR YEARS, SIX YEARS, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE. GIVEN THAT IT WILL TAKE SOME WORK, IT MAY ALIGN WITH THE RACIAL EQUITY TOOLKIT PROCESS, úINTENDING TO COMPLETE IN 20, 2, EXPANDING ACCESS FOR OPPORTUNITY YOUTH, ONCE AGAIN, OPTION B WOULD BE TO AMEND THEM, JUST TO CLARIFY, PART- TIME ATTENDANCE ON A TEMPORARY BASIS, IS ALREADY AVAILABLE, OPTION C, AMEND THE DESCRIPTION OF A POTENTIAL PROGRAM EXPANSION TO INCLUDE PART-TIME STUDENTS, LOOKING AT OPPORTUNITY YOUTH AND PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOLS, AND ALSO LOOK AT INCLUDING PART-TIME STUDENTS IN THE PROGRAM.>>I WOULD JUST SAY THAT I THINK, THIS WAS AN ISSUE THAT THAT MY OFFICE FLAGGED IN CONVERSATIONS, AND MEETINGS WITH THE SEATTLE COLLEGES AND , AND I APPRECIATE YOU GETTING MORE DATA ON WHAT DOES THIS ACTUAL POPULATION LOOK LIKE IN TERMS OF FULL-TIME ATTENDANCE AND PART-TIME ATTENDANCE, I WAS SHOCKED BY THE NUMBERS, I DID NOT APPRECIATE UNTIL I RECEIVED THE REPORT BACK FROM YOU, THE HIGH PERCENTAGE OF RECENT HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES WHO WERE ATTENDING COLLEGES, BUT ATTENDING ON A PART-TIME BASIS, IT IS IMPORTANT TO MEET STUDENTS WHERE THEY ARE AT, PART OF THAT INCLUDES CREATING A MEANINGFUL PATH FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE ROUTE, TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT PART-TIME, WHILE I APPRECIATE AND RESPECT SEATTLE COLLEGES RESOURCES AND COMMITMENT TO THOSE WHO HAVE A HIGH LEVEL OF MATRICULATION, STUDENTS WHO GO FULL-TIME, IT — I DON’T THINK IT WOULD BE WISE FOR US AS POLICYMAKERS TO IGNORE OR UNDERFUND THE NEED OF PART-TIME STUDENTS TO HAVE THE SAME SUPPORTS, AND I BELIEVE THAT IN DOING SO, WE WILL ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO TURN THE QUARTER — CORNER ON POTENTIALLY SEEING BETTER MATRICULATION RATES FROM PART- TIME STUDENTS, THAT TO ME IS A IMPORTANT POLICY GOAL.>>CAN ASK A FEW QUESTIONS? BRIAN, CAN YOU SAY LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE APPEALS PROCESS? IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT IS SOMETHING PEOPLE CAN DO NOW, I.E., A HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT CURRENTLY ENROLLED IN OUR CURRENT VERSION OF THE SEATTLE PROMISE PROGRAM COULD APPEAL TO BE A PART-TIME ATTENDEE, BUT WHAT DOES THAT PROCESS LOOK LIKE? >>I DON’T HAVE A LOT OF DETAIL, BUT PART OF IT, THE EXISTING PROGRAM THAT HAS BEEN DONE, A STRONG LEVEL OF ADVISING THAT OCCURS, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO MEET ON A QUARTERLY BASIS, I DON’T THINK THEY COULD APPLY CURRENTLY, ATTENDING EXCLUSIVELY ON A PART-TIME BASIS, IF THEY WERE ENROLLED, AND BY THE SPRING QUARTER, IT REQUIRED THEM TO BE ON A PART- TIME BASIS, THEY COULD WORK WITH THE ADVISOR TO ATTEND THE SPRING QUARTER OF THE 13th YEAR ON A PART-TIME BASIS, THEY WOULD THEN SWITCH BACK WHEN ABLE TO DO SO. THAT IS PRETTY MUCH ALL THE INFORMATION THAT I UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE PROGRAM RIGHT NOW, IF YOU JUST READ THE TEXT, IT IS FOR A FULL-TIME BASIS, A MINIMUM OF 12 CREDITS PER QUARTER.>>WHEN WE’VE HAD VARIOUS MEMBERS AT THE TABLE, THOSE ADVISORS, HOW IMPORTANT THAT IS, HOW THEY BELIEVE THOSE ADVISORS ARE GOING TO BE KIND OF GUIDEPOSTS, THE RATIO OF STUDENTS I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN UNDERSTANDING LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT HOW THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO DIRECT THE PROGRAM ON A PART-TIME BASIS, HOW WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO GIVE THAT TOOL, A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEARLY, THEN IT SOUNDS LIKE IT IS BEING ARTICULATED, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT IS AN OPTION, IT IS RARE AND COME FORWARD PROACTIVELY AND ASKED FOR, THERE MIGHT BE AN OPTION THAT IS AVAILABLE TO US, WHERE WE ARE BEING — WE ARE WORKING WITH THE STUDENTS, YOU KNOW THE STUDENTS BEST, A LIFE EVENT, KEEP THEM FROM MATRICULATING FULL-TIME, THE KIND OF KID THAT IS GOING TO BENEFIT FROM THE PROGRAM, WE SHOULD BE TALKING WITH THAT KIT ABOUT A PART-TIME OPTION, UNDERSTANDING LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT HOW THEY WOULD HAVE A REAL ROLE TO PLAY, THE ADVISORS, AND THE APPEALS PROCESS ITSELF, THE WORD APPEAL DOESN’T APPEAL, A VIABLE OPTION FOR PEOPLE, NOMENCLATURE MATTERS, I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT HOW WE CAN CHANGE SOME OF THAT NOMENCLATURE TO ALLOW FOR THIS AS MORE OF AN OPTION, MAYBE NOT THAT WE PROMOTE A TON, BUT WE KNOW IT IS AVAILABLE TO THEIR STUDENTS, AND YOU KNOW, I’M SURPRISED AT THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS ATTENDING PART-TIME, AND A NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO ARE NOT COMING STRAIGHT FROM STRAIGHT FROM HIGH SCHOOL, IT IS AN OVERWHELMING NUMBER, 24,000, 23,900 STUDENTS, WERE NOT COMING STRAIGHT, THE POPULATION, IS A SELECT ONE, IF WE CAN BE DISCREET ABOUT THAT POPULATION, GETTING ACCESS TO THIS, THAT IS GOING TO BE AN IMPORTANT PATHWAY TO YOUR POINT. TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO ENCOURAGE AXIS FOR EVERYBODY, REGARDLESS OF THE ECONOMIC STANCE.>>IN THE 1100 STUDENTS THAT ARE COMING, RECENT HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES, 43% OF THOSE ARE ATTENDING PART-TIME. THAT IS AN ASTONISHING NUMBER OF STUDENTS, I THINK CREATING SOME PATH TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IS WHO WE ARE TRYING TO HELP, IS REALLY IMPORTANT, YOU KNOW, I JUST FEEL REALLY STRONGLY THAT NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO PART- TIME STUDENTS IS A HUGE MISTAKE, AND IT DOESN’T FEEL GOOD TO ME. SO LET’S MAKE THAT HAPPEN, BRIAN.>>>MOVING ON TO ISSUE NUMBER 7, THE MARCH 13 COMMITTEE MEETING, COUNCILMEMBERS REQUESTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE SAP ELIGIBILITY MILESTONE FOR THE PROGRAM, IN GENERAL, DETERMINED BY INDIVIDUAL COLLEGES, APPLICABLE TO STUDENTS THAT ARE NOT COVERING THE EDUCATION COSTS INDEPENDENTLY, STATE AND FEDERAL FINANCIAL AID, MAINTAINING A MINIMUM HUMILITY GRADE POINT AVERAGE, GENERALLY TO .0, AND A MINIMUM PERCENTAGE OF CREDITS RELATIVE THOSE THAT’S TO THOSE ATTEMPTED, AND COMPLETION TOWARDS THE DEGREE OR POTENTIAL, HUNDRED AND 25% OR HUNDRED AND 50% OF THE NORMAL DURATION, IF THE STUDENT WAS TRYING TO PURSUE A DEGREE THAT REQUIRED 90 CREDITS, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COMPLETED WITHIN 135 CREDITS, THE PROGRESS MARKER, ANNUAL AND QUARTERLY, GOOD STANDING, PROBATIONARY OR WARNING STATUS, OR BECOME INELIGIBLE FOR FINANCIAL AID, STUDENTS HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPEAL THE INELIGIBILITY STATUS, IF THEY ARE SUCCESSFUL, THEY ARE PER — PLACED INTO A PROBATIONARY STATUS. THEY’RE NOT REALLY SOMETHING THAT THE CITY HAS THE ABILITY TO DIRECTLY INFLUENCE. SINCE THE SEATTLE PROMISE PROGRAM IS DESIGNED TO PROVIDE SUPPORT, HOW IT IS AFFECTING DIFFERENT GROUPS OF STUDENTS, THAT IS WHERE THE OPTIONS, WE WILL WILL PULL THEM UP, OPTION B, I’M IN THE PLAN, AGAIN, LINKING IT TO THE RACIAL EQUITY TOOLKIT PROCESS, AN EVALUATION OF WHERE THE REQUIREMENTS, IF THEY ARE DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTING DIFFERENT GROUPS OF STUDENTS, SUGGESTING A JUDGMENTS — ADJUSTMENTS ARE NEEDED.>>I THINK THAT IS A REASONABLE APPROACH, SPENDING A LOT OF TIMES — A LOT OF TIME WITH TRINITY SEVEN ABOUT UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, A VERY LARGE STREAM WHERE WE CAN HAVE POTENTIAL DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT ON STUDENTS THAT WE ARE TRYING TO HELP, AND I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THOSE AREAS, WHILE I UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THAT WE CAN’T MODIFY THE COLLEGES LEGALLY MANDATED, SATISFACTORY ACADEMIC PROGRESS, I THINK IT IS REASONABLE FOR US AS A CITY THAT IS INVESTING IN THE SPACE TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A GOOD AND CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THOSE PARTICULAR LEGAL REQUIREMENTS MAY OR MAY NOT BE DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTING GROUPS OF STUDENTS THAT WE HAVE SET UP BEING PRIORITIZED THROUGH THESE INVESTMENTS, AND MY HOPE IS THAT WILL PROVIDE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHIFT AND BE FLEXIBLE IN THE EVENT THAT WE SEE THERE IS A DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT. AND THE LAST ONE?>>>THE FINAL ISSUE RELATES TO THE TYPES OF ADVISORY SERVICES, THAT ARE PROVIDED TO PROMISE STUDENTS, ENSURING THAT — COMPLEMENTARY SERVICES, ONE OF THE STRATEGIES, AS WE DISCUSSED A MOMENT AGO, PROVIDING ADVICE AND SUPPORT TO STUDENTS, BEGINNING IN HIGH SCHOOL AND CAN USE — CONTINUES THROUGHOUT THE 13th AND 14th YEAR, AS I MENTIONED, THE STUDENTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE WITH AN ADVISOR, A WANT — A 100-1 RATIO, AND IN ADDITION TO PROVIDING COURSE GUIDANCE, AND REGISTRATION GUIDANCE, COMPLETING FINANCIAL AID FILES, CAMPUS SUPPORT THAT MIGHT BE AVAILABLE. IT IMPLIES THAT STUDENTS WOULD BE CONNECTED TO AT LEAST SOME OF THE ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS THEY MIGHT BE ELIGIBLE FOR, BUT IT DOESN’T EXPLICITLY DISCUSS THOSE. ESPECIALLY THE EQUITY SCHOLARSHIP. THE OPTIONS FOR THIS ONE, OPTION B AND OPTION C, AMEND THE PLAN, PROVIDE ADDITIONAL DIRECTION, THE TYPES OF REFERRAL THAT SHOULD BE INTENDED, EXPLICIT, OPTION C, REQUEST THE DEAL IN A ANNUAL REPORTING PROCESS TO REPORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL ON THE REFERRAL RATES AND THE SUCCESSFUL STUDENT CONNECTIONS TO THOSE PROGRAMS.>>I LIKE BOTH OF THOSE.>>I DO TOO, MADAM CHAIR, I THINK THE WORDS MATTER, I’VE REFERENCED THIS AT THE LAST COMMITTEE DISCUSSION, A QUESTION ON THE FORM THAT WOULD ASK, ARE YOU ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE LOW INCOME, AND A CARD, VERSUS WOULD YOU BE INTERESTED IN RECEIVING THAT, THAT PRESUMES TWO DIFFERENT PIECES OF INFORMATION, ONE WHICH SAYS I AM IN A ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCE THAT REQUIRES ME TO GET THIS IN ORDER TO MAKE ENDS MEET, THE OTHER IS COP I WOULD LOVE THAT BENEFIT IF I’M ELIGIBLE FOR IT. EVEN JUST THE FRAMING OF HOW WE TALK ABOUT AVAILABILITY OF SERVICES MATTERS. SO I LIKE THESE OPTIONS. — THE OTHER IS, I WILL LOVE THAT. AND CONTINUING TO AS STUDENTS ABOUT HOW THEY MIGHT NEED ADDITIONAL HELP.>>EXCELLENT. ANYTHING ELSE? >>THAT DOES IT FOR ME.>>>THAT IS THE ONE AND ONLY ITEM ON THE AGENDA, I WANTED TO JUST GIVE FOLKS A? REMINDER THAT NEXT WEEK, APRIL 2, WE HAVE A DEADLINE RELATED TO ANY ADDITIONAL ISSUES OR POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS TO THE IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION PLAN, THEY ARE DUE TO THE STAFF, BY CLOSE OF BUSINESS ON APRIL 2, I SENT OUT AN EMAIL TO ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES YESTERDAY AS A REMINDER OF THAT DEADLINE, AND SO IT IS MY EXPECTATION THAT ANY POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COMMITTEE WILL BE SUBMITTED ON APRIL 2, AND IT IS FAIR TO SAY THAT I WILL BE LOATH TO CONSIDER ANY AMENDMENTS THAT COME TO US AFTER APRIL 2 OF 2019, WE WILL THEN HAVE A SPECIAL COMMITTEE MEETING OF THIS COMMITTEE ON APRIL 18, THAT IS A THURSDAY, AT 2 PM, HERE IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, TO CONSIDER ALL OF THE MANDATORY LANGUAGE, BOTH TECHNICAL AND SUBSTANTIVE, AND TO CONSIDER A POSSIBLE VOTE ON THOSE AMENDMENTS, IF ALL GOES WELL, WE WILL LIKELY HAVE AN AMENDED PACKAGE AVAILABLE FOR FULL CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ON APRIL 22, 2019, 2 PM, DURING THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED FULL COUNCIL MEETING. SO BEFORE WE ADJOURN, I WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND EARLY LEARNING FOR STICKING IT OUT WITH US, AND YOUR HARD WORK IN GETTING US TO THIS POINT IN THIS DRAFT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION PLAN, I HAVE APPRECIATED WORKING WITH ALL OF YOU, I’M SURE WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH YOU ALL TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THIS RIGHT, I WANT TO THANK THE MEMBERS OF THE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE, FEP, THE HARD ADVANCED WORK FOR SEVERAL MONTHS BEFORE THE PACKAGE WAS TRANSMITTED TO CITY COUNCIL, REALLY EXCITED TO HEAR THAT IN THE FEBRUARY MEETING, THE LOC UNANIMOUSLY BACK TO THE PLAN, I APPRECIATE THERE WERE, IN MAKING SURE THAT THE ISSUES THEY CARE ABOUT AND THE ISSUES THAT THE ISSUES AND THE COMMUNITIES THEY REPRESENT ARE INCLUDED AND REFLECTED IN THE BASE PLAN.>>>A LOT OF GOOD STUFF HERE, REALLY EXCITED ABOUT IT. AND LASTLY, I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THIS IS COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON’S LAST COMMITTEE HEARING IN THIS COMMITTEE, AS A MEMBER OF THIS COMMITTEE, I’VE HAD THE PLEASURE OF HAVING YOU BE ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES ON THIS COMMITTEE, AND HAVE REALLY ENJOYED OF THE LAST TWO YEARS WE HAVE BEEN ON THE COMMITTEE, YES, HAVE REALLY APPRECIATED THE THOUGHTFULNESS AND THE FACT THAT YOU SHOW UP, AND YOU ARE ALWAYS READY TO DO THE WORK, AND YOU HAVE BEEN JUST SORT OF A REALLY STRONG ALLY FOR ME AND IN CHAMPIONING THE NEEDS OF KIDS AND FAMILIES, AND OF COURSE TALKING ABOUT EDUCATION NOW, YOU HAVE BEEN THERE ALONG THE WAY FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, AND GENDER EQUITY ISSUES, IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE ISSUES, AND HAVE APPRECIATED THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE WITH YOU IN THIS COMMITTEE, AND I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR ALL OF YOUR SERVICE, IN THIS COMMITTEE AND BEYOND, TO THE PEOPLE OF SEATTLE. THERE ARE SOME FOLKS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WE SHOULD APPLAUD COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GIVE ANY REMARKS? >>IT HAS BEEN MY PLEASURE.>>HE IS SO CONCISE. HE’S GOING TO SAVE ALL OF HIS WORDS FOR APRIL 1. [ LAUGHTER ]>>>FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE TUNING IN, WONDERING WHY I’M SING A LONG GOODBYE TO COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON, HIS LAST COMMITTEE HEARING, HE WILL NO LONGER BE ON THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER APRIL 5, I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR PUBLIC SERVICE. THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU. >>>THE END OF THE AGENDA, THERE BEING NO ADDITIOAL BUSINESS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE, WE ARE ADJOURNED.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *