Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Early Learning K12 Supports topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears multiple amendments on preschool feasibility, after‑school programs, restorative practices and foster youth supports
Summary
Several amendments proposed to the Families, Education, Preschool and Promise levy would broaden or clarify investments in early childhood, after‑school programming, restorative justice in schools, foster‑youth transition supports and career pathways in tech; staff stressed that the levy sets high‑level buckets and that DEEL’s implementation and
The committee reviewed a cluster of amendments that would shape early learning and K‑12 supports in the Families, Education, Preschool and Promise levy.
Councilmember Saka proposed amendment 2 to authorize a feasibility study exploring universal citywide preschool and subsidies for families who cannot secure Seattle Preschool Program (SPP) slots. Saka described the proposal as a long‑term goal to lay groundwork for universal preschool and emphasized research showing preschool access increases later educational attainment. Amendment 3, also sponsored by Saka, would add after‑school programming for at‑risk youth to the list of illustrative services under the K‑12 health and safety category.
Vice Chair Rink proposed amendment 7 to add $1,000,000 annually (roughly $6,000,000 total) to support restorative practices in schools, and to add restorative practices to the illustrative list of eligible investments. Rink said restorative practices have reduced exclusionary incidents and exclusionary days in schools where they are deployed and argued the approach advances equity and conflict resolution. The staff briefing noted that restorative practices have received hybrid funding historically — from the levy, general fund and Seattle Public Schools — and that an $800,000 reserve had been used in the current biennium.
Councilmember Saka also sponsored amendment 10 to add support for foster youth transitioning to adulthood and to include career pathways in IT (coding languages such as Python were cited as examples) in the college and career category. Saka framed the change as tapping the levy to expand career pathways and digital skills for underserved youth.
Councilmembers discussed whether specific program lists should be included in levy language at this stage. Chair Rivera, staff and others urged patience for DEEL’s stakeholdering: they said the levy ordinance deliberately lists broad investment buckets and that specific programmatic choices should be developed publicly in the I&E plan. Councilmember Kettle and others said clarifying that the levy can fund particular needs — foster youth supports, after‑school programs, restorative practices — signals Council priorities but cautioned against pinning down program details before stakeholder engagement.
No votes were taken. Committee members reiterated that any funding amounts in amendments are illustrative pending the I&E plan and Council budget decisions; the committee scheduled amendment votes for June 12 and full Council consideration for June 17.
