Loading...
10-01-2019 KC Homelessness Authority1 PROPOSED KING COUNTY REGIONAL HOMELESSNESS AUTHORITY (UPDATE and DISCUSSION) PROPOSED KING COUNTY REGIONAL HOMELESSNESS AUTHORITY DISCUSSION 2 Background On September 4, 2019 a proposal was announced to create a King County Regional Homelessness Authority. The proposed Authority will oversee policy, funding, and services for people experiencing homelessness countywide. The legislation includes a Charter that authorizes the creation of the new Public Development Authority (PDA) to administer and oversee regional homelessness efforts and an Inter-Local Agreement (ILA) enabling Cities to participate. PROPOSED KING COUNTY REGIONAL HOMELESSNESS AUTHORITY DISCUSSION 3 Background On September 17, 2019 the Council unanimously approved a letter citing concerns about the absence of collaboration on an initiative for one of the significant issues facing our region. The letter was sent to the Mayor of Seattle, King County Executive, King County Council, Seattle City Council, 38 Mayors and councils from King County cities and the Sound Cities Association Board. PROPOSED KING COUNTY REGIONAL HOMELESSNESS AUTHORITY DISCUSSION 4 The legislation is now before the King County Council and Seattle City Council. Key Venues for Advocacy: Sound Cities Association Public Issues Committee (PIC) on Wednesday, October 9th. King County Council committee process: Regional Policy, Health, Housing & Human Services (discussion today), Budget and Financial Management, the Committee of the Whole and then to the full Council in November. PROPOSED KING COUNTY REGIONAL HOMELESSNESS AUTHORITY DISCUSSION 5 On Friday, September 20th, the SCA requested questions from member cities on the proposed homelessness governance proposal so that they could be submitted to the County.  In order that the County could respond before the materials are sent for the October 9th Public Issues Committee meeting, cities were asked to submit their questions by September 25th. PROPOSED KING COUNTY REGIONAL HOMELESSNESS AUTHORITY DISCUSSION 6 Mayor Ferrell submitted the following concerns about the proposed organization: First, that the discussion must begin with the question: Is the creation of a new “public corporation” necessary when the infrastructure already exists to meet these challenges? This should have occurred at the front-end. This proposal has not taken into consideration the “why” and “what” and has proceeded directly to the “how” by creating a new and all-encompassing agency. PROPOSED KING COUNTY REGIONAL HOMELESSNESS AUTHORITY DISCUSSION 7 Just as important is a discussion of what are the goals and outcomes that need to be accomplished? It proposes a steering committee and governance board that have little representation of our cities. While the proposal alleges the inclusion of funding from the Seattle and the County, the documents allude to a significant investment of staffing and infrastructure. PROPOSED KING COUNTY REGIONAL HOMELESSNESS AUTHORITY DISCUSSION 8 For instance, an executive director and staff will be hired needing office space, equipment including computers, technology services and other services including vehicles. It will require staffing in the areas of human resources, contracting, technology and all the support services required of an agency this size. Important questions need to be asked: How much staffing will be required, where will they be housed, and who are the employees that are being transferred from the City of Seattle and King County? PROPOSED KING COUNTY REGIONAL HOMELESSNESS AUTHORITY DISCUSSION 9 Most importantly, after this agency is formed, how much money will remain for the homeless challenges we face? We are creating a giant that needs to be fed. In conclusion, it is crucial that the Sound Cities Association and the 38 member cities shift the discussion to what strategies are best to meet the challenges of homelessness using the infrastructure currently in place that will benefit all of our cities in the entire county. PROPOSED KING COUNTY REGIONAL HOMELESSNESS AUTHORITY DISCUSSION 10 On September 26, our feedback along with questions from other SCA Cities was submitted to the County. It was requested that answers arrive in time for when the PIC committee materials are emailed tomorrow (October 2). PROPOSED KING COUNTY REGIONAL HOMELESSNESS AUTHORITY DISCUSSION 11 Summary of Feedback of Other Cities: What are the goals and what does success look like? Why is a new government necessary? How much of the funding would go towards administration? Would the new entity create additional bureaucracy or have efficiencies of scale? How is sub-regional planning anticipated to factor in how funds are dispersed in the future? PROPOSED KING COUNTY REGIONAL HOMELESSNESS AUTHORITY DISCUSSION 12 If cities do not sign onto a service agreement, how will that impact how funds are allocated to providers in those jurisdictions? Would the proposed entity have the ability to seek taxing authority? How would this work with no current regional plan? Would the entity limit a city’s ability to determine siting of facilities? Would a city’s ability to determine homelessness policy response be impacted? PROPOSED KING COUNTY REGIONAL HOMELESSNESS AUTHORITY DISCUSSION 13 Could existing infrastructure, or an alternative form obtain the same outcomes without creating an additional layer of bureaucracy? What, if any role, will elected policy makers have in setting the goals and metrics? PROPOSED KING COUNTY REGIONAL HOMELESSNESS AUTHORITY DISCUSSION 14 Discussion