>>> GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO
THE MEETING OF THE CIVIL
RIGHTS, UTILITIES, ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT, AND ARTS
COMMITTEE.
IT IS SEPTEMBER 24. I AM LISA
HERBOLD AND I AM THE
CHAIRWOMAN.
I AM JOINT BY COUNCIL MEMBER
O'BRIEN AND COUNCIL MEMBER
PACHEO.
WE ARE GOING TO START OFF WITH
THE MONTHLY EDITION OF THE
CULTURAL SPOTLIGHT.
THEN WE WILL MOVE INTO PUBLIC
COMMENT FOLLOWED BY THE ATOMS
OF BUSINESS FOR THE DAY.
WE HAVE SIX BILLS THAT ARE
TENANTS RIGHTS BILLS.
ONE RELATES SPECIFICALLY TO
PROTECTING SURVIVORS OF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE FROM BEING
HELD LIABLE FROM CHARGES
ASSOCIATED WITH DAMAGES TO A
RENTAL UNIT DONE BY A
PERPETRATOR.
THE OTHER RELATING TO
SPECIFICALLY, THE ABILITY OF
TENANTS TO LIVE WITH THEIR
FAMILY MEMBERS AS WELL AS
ROOMMATES.
ADD ANOTHER RELATED
SPECIFICALLY TO THE REQUIREMENT
OF LANDLORDS TO PROVIDE CERTAIN
INFORMATION ABOUT LANDLORD AND
TENANT RIGHTS AS WELL AS
INFORMATION AND RESOURCES ON
CERTAIN NOTICES THAT TENANTS
RECEIVE.
ANOTHER RELATED TO THE
ACCEPTANCE OF RENT PAYMENTS AND
ENSURING THAT TENANTS ARE NOT
BARRED FROM PROVIDING
NONELECTRONIC PAYMENT OPTIONS.
AND THEN FINALLY, A BILL
RELATED TO THE AND OF
RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES AND THE
REQUIREMENT THAT LANDLORDS,
BEFORE ISSUING NOTICES TO
TERMINATE TENANCY, THE IN FULL
COMPLIANCE WITH THE RENTAL
REGISTRATION AND INSPECTION
ORDINANCE.
AFTER THAT WE WILL MOVE INTO
ANOTHER AREA OF OUR
RESPONSIBILITIES AND THAT
RELATES TO PUBLIC UTILITIES.
THIS IS A PIECE OF LEGISLATION
DEALING WITH AN EASEMENT AND
THEN WE WILL GET A REPORT FROM
THE OFFICE OF ARTS AND
CULTURAL, THEIR CULTURAL SPACE
UPDATE AND WE WILL ALSO HEAR
FROM THE OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS
ON THEIR UPDATE.
AND THEN FINALLY, A
PRESENTATION FROM SPU AND OTHER
JURISDICTIONS AROUND THEIR
EXPERIENCE WITH EVERY OTHER
WEEK GARBAGE COLLECTION.
SO WITH THAT, I AM JUST GOING
TO TURN THIS OVER TO THE OFFICE
OF ARTS AND CULTURE TO PRESENT
TO US OUR OFFERING FOR THE
CULTURAL SPOTLIGHT TODAY.
>> GOOD MORNING.
WE ARE JOINED THIS MORNING BY A
GARDENING CLASS TO TALK ABOUT
AN EVENT COMING UP IN OCTOBER.
SPIKE THANK YOU, SO MUCH, FOR
INVITING US.
WE ARE HERE TODAY TO TALK ABOUT
THE FIRST ANNUAL CELEBRATION OF
GLASS IN OUR CITY.
BACK WHEN WE WERE CELEBRATING
IN SEATTLE, THE WORLDS FAIR,
THE VERY FIRST CLASS PROGRAM
WAS STARTED AT THE UNIVERSITY
OF WISCONSIN MADISON.
AND JUST ABOUT 10 YEARS LATER,
THE GLASS SCHOOL WAS STARTED
AND ABOUT FIVE YEARS AFTER THAT
THE FINE ARTS CENTER WAS
STARTED FOR ACCESS FOR ALL IN
THE DISTRICT.
AT THAT TIME, WE CALL THAT THE
STUDIO GLASS MOVEMENT BECAUSE
IT TOOK US OUT OF THE FACTORIES
AND PUT IN THE HAND OF THE
ARTIST TO CREATE.
EVER SINCE THAT TIME, GLASS HAS
REALLY FLOURISHED IN OUR STATE
AND IN OUR COUNTRY AND ACROSS
THE WORLD.
BUT NOTHING HAS REALLY BEEN
WRITTEN THAT MUCH ABOUT THE
STUDIO GLASS MOVEMENT SINCE THE
VERY BEGINNING.
SO WE THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT
TO DO A STUDY IN 2015.
SO WE PARTNERED WITH ANOTHER
STUDIO TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THE
HUBS OF GLASS ARE AND WHAT THE
PUBLIC INTEREST IS IN IT.
WE WERE PRETTY SURPRISED BY OUR
FINDINGS.
ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT
THINGS IS THAT WE FOUND THAT
SEATTLE IS A HUB OF GLASS ART
IN OUR COUNTRY.
THE STUDY THAT WE DID WAS
ACROSS THE COUNTRY SO WE HAD
THOUSANDS OF RESPONSES.
IT IS NOT SURPRISING THAT THE
PACIFIC NORTHWEST IS A PLACE
WHERE PEOPLE WANT TO COME TO
MAKE GLASS.
ONE OF THE REASONS IS BECAUSE
WE HAVE SO MANY RESOURCES FOR
GLASS.
WE HAVE A GALLERY LIKE TRAVER
ART GALLERY.
WE HAVE PRATT AND WE HAVE JOBS.
IF YOU WANT TO BE A GLASS ARTIST
YOU MOVED TO THE PACIFIC
NORTHWEST BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE
YOU WILL FIND SUPPORT, JOBS AND
THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK AROUND
GLASS ARTISTS FROM AROUND THE
WORLD WHO LIVE HERE TO WORK.
SO IT IS IMPORTANT TO
UNDERSTAND THAT PEOPLE THAT ARE
INTRODUCED TO GLASS ART FOR THE
FIRST TIME ARE EXCITED AND WANT
TO LEARN MORE.
SO WE DECIDED TO PARTNER WITH
VISIT SEATTLE.
WE BROUGHT IN A COMMUNITY OF
PEOPLE.
WE ASKED THEM WHAT THEY WANTED
TO SEE.
I WILL TURN IT OVER TO HILLARY
NOW SO SHE CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT
WE ARE DOING.
SO, REFRACTIVE TOP RING OCTOBER
27 AND 20.
IT IS VERY EXCITING.
IT IS THE FIRST OF ITS KIND.
IT IS A FESTIVAL TO CELEBRATE
THIS REGION.
SO IT IS FROM EVERETT TO TACOMA
FROM BAINBRIDGE TO BELLEVUE AND
EVERYTHING IN BETWEEN THAT
CELEBRATES GLASS ART.
WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT GLASS ART
IT IS NOT JUST GLASSBLOWING.
IT IS STAINED GLASS AND FUSED
GLASS AND DIFFERENT TYPES OF
FRAME WORKING.
AND THERE ARE DIFFERENT GENRES
THAT HAPPEN WITHIN THAT
INDUSTRY SUCH AS WOMEN IN GLASS
AND MIXED MEDIA AND HOW GLASS
ART IS REALLY PUSHING
CONTEMPORARY ART IN GENERAL.
FROM THE STUDY THAT MICHELLE
TALKED ABOUT WE ARE THE
AMERICAN VENICE.
REALLY WANT GENERAL AUDIENCES
TO UNDERSTAND THAT.
WE WORK IN AN INDUSTRY WHERE
LOTS OF PEOPLE ARE ARTISTS BUT
PARTNERING WITH VISIT SEATTLE
HAS REALLY BEEN A GIFT IN
GETTING PEOPLE INVOLVED WITH
THE ART.
WE REACHED OUT TO, WE DID A
CALL TO ARTISTS AND
ORGANIZATIONS AND THE RESPONSE
HAS BEEN OVERWHELMING.
WE HAVE ALMOST 100 DIFFERENT
EVENTS HAPPENING THROUGHOUT THE
REGION FROM CLASS
DEMONSTRATIONS TO CLASSES TO
OPEN STUDIOS AND TOURS.
TWO DIFFERENT WAYS OF
EXHIBITING GLASS AND EVERYONE
IS VERY EXCITED.
ONE OF THE BEST PARTS IS THAT A
LOT OF THESE ARTISTS AND
ORGANIZATIONS ARE COMMUNITY-
BASED SO A LOT OF THAT IS FREE
AND ACCESSIBLE TO A LOT OF
DIFFERENT AUDIENCES.
WE ARE ALREADY ENGAGING WITH
THE AND 16 NETWORKS AND COMING
TOGETHER TO SHOWCASE WHAT WE
HAVE TO ADD TO TOURISM, THE
CITY AND REALLY BRING IN A LOT
MORE PEOPLE TO VISIT.
SO WE JUST WANT TO END BY
SAYING THAT ART CHANGES PEOPLES
LIVES.
THESE TAKE THE TIME TO GO TO
OUR WEBSITE.
THAT IS REFRACTSEATTLE.ORG.
WE CAN BARELY FIT EVERYTHING
INTO THE FOUR DAYS THAT WE HAVE.
>> I AM ALSO LIVING THIS.
>> THANK YOU, FOR NOTING THE
FINDINGS FROM THE ART FUNDING
STUDY.
WE HAD FINDINGS PRESENTED A
COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO SO IT IS
GOOD TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE
REINFORCING THEM.
NOT ONLY THE FINDING THAT ART
IS INDIVIDUAL BUT THE FINDINGS
THAT I FOUND REALLY STRIKING IS
THAT THE ARTS ACTUALLY HELP US
ACCOMPLISH AS A CITY OUR PUBLIC
POLICY GOALS.
SO THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR
ME IN MY JOB TO REMEMBER WHEN
TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT ART IS
INTEGRATED INTO OUR
DISCUSSIONS.
AND THEN, I ALSO JUST WANTED TO
SAY FROM MY OWN EXPERIENCE
MOVING HERE IN 1992 THAT I HAVE
LIVED IN A LOT OF DIFFERENT
PLACES AND I ECHO WHAT YOU
SAID.
I FIRST EXPERIENCED
GLASSBLOWING AS A THING WHEN I
MOVED HERE.
I HAD NOT EXPERIENCED IT IN
OTHER CITIES THAT I HAD LIVED
IN.
I LEARNED VERY QUICKLY THAT IT
IS VIBRANCE AS PART OF THE
SEATTLE LIFE.
THEY HAVE IT IS REALLY TIED TO
THE FACT THAT THERE IS A STRONG
COMMUNITY OF FOLKS WHO SUPPORT
ONE ANOTHER IN PRODUCING THIS
ART BECAUSE THERE IS THAT
STRONG COMMUNITY THERE IS THIS
INFRASTRUCTURE THAT HAS
DEVELOPED OVER THE YEARS.
IT IS JUST REALLY INTERESTING
AS A NON-ARTIST TO OBSERVE AND
EXPERIENCE WHAT YOU HAVE
BROUGHT TO US TODAY.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER O'BRIEN
>> I AM SURE YOU HAVE A LIST OF
EVENTS.
>> AND WHAT IS THE EMAIL THE
WEB ADDRESS AGAIN?
>> 1059.
AND THE DATE OF THE EVENT
COMING UP IS OCTOBER 17-20.
I WILL INVITE YOU PERSONALLY.
>> THANK YOU, VERY MUCH, FOR
JOINING US TODAY.
ALL RIGHT.
SO LET'S MOVE INTO PUBLIC
COMMENT.
WE HAVE TWO SPEAKERS.
AND I WILL READ THE SPEAKERS
INTO THE RECORD JUST JOIN US AT
THE MIKE AND EVERYBODY HAS TWO
MINUTES TO SPEAK.
THE FIRST SPEAKER IS DEVON SO
NOW FOLLOWED BY SOCHI --.
>>> IT IS NICE TO SEE YOU
COUNCIL MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS DEVON SILVERNAIL . I
AM HERE TO PROVIDE MY SUPPORT
TO AGENDA ITEMS NUMBERS ONE
THROUGH SIX.
I ALSO WANTED TO TALK ABOUT
NUMBER ONE, TWO, FIVE AND SIX.
I FIRST WANT TO SHARE A LITTLE
STORY ABOUT MYSELF.
WHEN I WAS SIX YEARS OLD MY
BIRTH MOM AND I MOVED INTO A
HOUSE IN WHITE CENTER WITH A
PERSON WHO WAS NOT A GOOD
PERSON.
AND HE -- IT IS STILL HARD FOR
ME TO TALK ABOUT -- WHEN HE,
BEFORE HE DID ANYTHING, WHEN HE
WAS STARTING TO GET ANGRY, HE
WOULD DAMAGE THE PROPERTY.
SO, THAT WAS THINGS LIKE HOLES
IN THE WALLS AND KICK DOWN
DOORS.
AND IT DID NOT MAKE THE PLACE A
GREAT PLACE TO LIVE.
AND OBVIOUSLY, WHEN MOVING OUT,
AS A TENANT, NORMALLY YOU WOULD
BE REQUIRED TO PAY FOR THOSE
DAMAGES.
IT IS GREAT THAT YOU ARE
WORKING ON THIS.
SO THAT ABUSERS ARE NOT KEEPING
THAT POWER OVER VICTIMS WHO ARE
TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM THEM.
ALSO, I WANTED TO ADD MY
SUPPORT FOR NUMBERS FIVE AND
SIX BECAUSE IN MY DAY TO DAY
LIFE I TALKED TO FOLKS ALL THE
TIME, MAYBE DON'T HAVE ACCESS
TO INTERNET AND CANNOT PAY VIA
AN ONLINE PORTAL.
WHO HAVE A VERY HARD TIME
FINDING OUT HOW TO PAY.
THEY MIGHT GET LATE FEES AND
THINGS LIKE THAT.
ALSO, I JUST WANTED TO FINISH
OUT BY SAYING THAT REQUIRING
THE RIO INSPECTIONS FOR
TERMINATION IS GREAT AS WELL
SINCE WE ARE ALREADY DOING THAT
FOR EVICTION AND IT MAKES SENSE
AT TERMINATION.
THANK YOU, VERY MUCH.
>> HELLO.
MY NAME IS SOCHI AND I AM WITH
THE WASHINGTON COMMUNITY ACTION
NETWORK.
I AM HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE
BILLS THAT ARE COMING FORWARD
TO IMPROVE TENANT RATES, IN
PARTICULAR, THE BILL TO PREVENT
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SURVIVORS
FROM BEING LIABLE AND THE BILL
THAT HAS THE RIGHT TO HAVE A
ROOMMATE.
THE MAJORITY OF FOLKS THAT I
ORGANIZE ARE WOMEN AND I THINK
THE MAJORITY OF THEM, FROM WHAT
THEY HAVE SHARED WITH ME HAVE
SURVIVED DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.
AND THAT HAS BEEN A THING THAT
HAS PUSH THEM INTO HOUSING AND
STABILITY.
MAYBE THEY LEFT A BAD
RELATIONSHIP BUT THEN HALF OF
THEIR INCOME WAS GONE.
OR THINGS ALONG THOSE LINES.
AND SO, THE FACT THAT LANDLORDS
ARE CHARGING THE MYSTIC
VIOLENCE SURVIVORS FOR DAMAGE
THAT THEY DID NOT CAUSE IS
IMPORTANT AND THAT WE DON'T
HAVE ANY LEGISLATION TO PREVENT
THAT IS WRONG AS WELL BUT I AM
GLAD THAT THE COUNCIL IS
HOPEFULLY GOING TO RECTIFY THAT.
AND THEN ON THE ROOMMATE PIECE,
LIVING IN SEATTLE IS VERY
EXPENSIVE.
EVEN THOUGH, YOU KNOW, I STILL
HAVE TO LIVE WITH THREE OTHER
PEOPLE.
IF WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO MAKE
SURE THAT PEOPLE CAN STILL LIVE
IN THE CITY NEED TO MAKE SURE
THAT THEY CAN FIND A LIVING
SITUATION THAT ASKED THAT
POSSIBLE.
THE OTHER THING THAT I WILL
MENTION IS AS ONE OF THE
AUTHORS ON THE LOSING HOME
REPORT THAT WAS OFFERED LAST
YEAR, LIVING WITH OTHER PEOPLE
THAT WERE NOT ALLOWED TO BE ON
THE LEASE LED TO EVICTION AND
HOUSING INSTABILITY.
I AM REALLY GLAD THAT THE
COUNCIL IS TAKING THE
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THAT
REPORT SERIOUSLY.
AND THEN ONE OTHER THING THAT I
WILL ADD.
I HAVE A LOT OF THINGS ROLLING
AROUND IN MY HEAD HERE.
ONE OF THE BILLS IS ABOUT
HAVING, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A RIO
INSPECTION BEFORE TERMINATION.
ONE THOUGHT IS THAT MAYBE A RIO
INSPECTION BEFORE NOTICES CAN
BE GIVEN IS JUST A THOUGHT.
THAT IS IT.
>> OKAY.
THANK YOU.
SO THAT ENDS PUBLIC COMMENT.
ONE THING I NEGLECTED TO DO AT
THE START OF THE MEETING WAS TO
MAKE NOTE THAT UNLESS THERE ARE
OBJECTIONS, FIRST, ACTUALLY,
SINCE I DID NOT ACTUALLY MOVED
TO APPROVE THE AGENDA, IF THERE
ARE NO OBJECTIONS I AM GOING TO
TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO ASK IF
THERE ARE OBJECTIONS.
THE AGENDA STARTS WITH ITEM 1.
IT IS AN OLD VERSION OF THE
BILL AS IT RELATES, THE BILL
RELATING TO RENTAL AGREEMENTS
AND TENANT LIABILITY FOR
DAMAGES.
ITEM 02 COVERS THE SAME SUBJECT
BUT IT IS THE NEW VERSION OF
THE BILL.
SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE MOVE
RIGHT INTO ITEM 02 AND THAT WE
NOT DISCUSS ITEM NUMBER ONE ON
THE AGENDA.
IS THAT ALL RIGHT?
>> OKAY.
SO LET'S MOVE RIGHT INTO ITEM
02.
>> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO ISCB
119658 .AN ORDINANCE RELATING
TO RENTAL AGREEMENTS; RELIEVING
A TENANT EXPERIENCING DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE, SEXUAL ASSAULT,
UNLAWFUL HARASSMENT, OR
STALKING FROM LIABILITY FOR
DAMAGE TO THE LANDLORD'S
PROPERTY CAUSED BY A
PERPETRATOR OF DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE, SEXUAL ASSAULT,
UNLAWFUL HARASSMENT, OR
STALKING; CREATING A LANDLORD
MITIGATION PROGRAM; AND
AMENDING SECTIONS 7.24.020,
7.24.030, AND 22.206.170 OF,
AND ADDING NEW SECTION 7.24.033
TO, THE SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE.
>> THANK YOU.
SO INSPECTIONS, PLEASE.
>> I AM ASHA VENKATARAMAN FROM
COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF.
>> THANK YOU.
WE JUST GIVE US SOME BACKGROUND
ON WHERE WE GOT TO HOW WE GOT
TO WHERE WE ARE NOW AND THEN
TALK TO US ABOUT THE CHANGES
MADE TO THE BILL IN RESPONSE TO
CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE HEARD FROM
THE PROVIDERS OF RENTAL HOUSING
AND HOW WE ARE PROPOSING TO
ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS.
>> ABSOLUTELY.
AS IT WAS MENTIONED, THIS BILL
CAME OUT OF THE LOSING HOME
REPORT.
IT WAS PRESENTED TO THIS
COMMITTEE LAST YEAR AROUND THIS
TIME.
A WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT
WAS IN THE REPORT AND THAT WAS
THE OBSTACLES TO SURVIVORS OF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND THE
ISSUES THAT COME OUT WHEN YOU
ARE A SURVIVOR.
SO ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT CAME
UP WAS THAT SURVIVORS ARE OFTEN
REQUIRED TO PAY FOR DAMAGES TO
THE UNIT THAT THEY DID NOT
CAUSE BUT THE PERPETRATOR OF
THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CAUSED.
THE INITIAL VERSION OF THIS BILL
REMOVED LIABILITY FROM THE
TENANT IF DAMAGE WAS DONE WHILE
THEY WERE OCCUPYING THE UNITS
WITH A PERPETRATOR OF DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE.
THE SUBSTITUTE BILL THAT CAME
UP, THAT WE ARE NOW CURRENTLY
DISCUSSING, THAT IS CB 119598
AND IT INCORPORATES A VARIETY
OF AMENDMENTS THAT WE HAVE BEEN
DISCUSSING IN AUGUST AND
SEPTEMBER.
WHAT IT DOES IS, THE BULK OF
THE BILL REMOVES LIABILITY FROM
THE TENANT IF THEY PROVIDE
WRITTEN NOTIFICATION AND
DOCUMENTATION TO A LANDLORD
THAT THEY ARE A VICTIM OF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, STALKING,
SEXUAL ASSAULT OR UNLAWFUL
HARASSMENT.
THE REASON FOR THE SUBSTITUTE
BILL WAS TO ADD IN THOSE
ADDITIONAL CRIMES.
AND THAT REQUIRED THE TITLE
CHANGE.
SO, THE TENANT WOULD HAVE TO
PROVIDE THE LANDLORD WITH THE
DOCUMENTATION THAT SAYS THAT
THEY ARE A SURVIVOR AND THAT IT
IS THE PERPETRATOR THAT CAUSED
THE PROPERTY DAMAGE.
AND IF THEY PROVIDE THOSE
PIECES OF DOCUMENTATION THAN
THEY ARE NO LONGER LIABLE FOR
THE PROPERTY DAMAGE THAT WAS
INCURRED.
SO WHAT THIS BILL DOES, IT
INCORPORATES ALL OF THE
AMENDMENTS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY
DISCUSSED BUT HAS ONE NEW
PIECE.
THAT IS THE CREATION OF A
LANDLORD NEGATION PROGRAM.
THE INTENT OF THE PROGRAM IS IN
LINE WITH THE REST OF THE BILL
IN THAT IT TRIES TO KEEP THE
COST OF THE PERPETRATOR
PROPERTY DAMAGE TO THE UNIT
FROM THE SURVIVOR.
THE MITIGATION PROJECT WOULD
CREATE A PROGRAM UNDER WHICH
THE LANDLORD CAN ACCESS FUNDING
TO GET REIMBURSED FOR THE
REPAIRS OF THE COSTS OF DAMAGE
CAUSED BY A PERPETRATOR OF THE
MYSTIC VIOLENCE, STALKING,
SEXUAL ASSAULT OR UNLAWFUL
HARASSMENT.
AND SO, ESSENTIALLY, THIS
PROGRAM WOULD BE ADMINISTERS BY
THE DEPARTMENT OF INSPECTIONS.
SO I WILL JUST GO THROUGH THE
PIECES THAT A LANDLORD HAS TO
SATISFY BEFORE BEING ELIGIBLE
FOR REIMBURSEMENT AND THEN WHAT
IS ACTUALLY ELIGIBLE FOR
REIMBURSEMENT.
PRIOR TO APPLYING A LANDLORD
MUST MAKE SURE THAT THE RENTAL
UNIT IS REGISTERED UNDER THE
RENTAL REGISTRATION AND
INSPECTION ORDINANCE.
THEY NEED TO COMPLY WITH THE
STATE LAW THAT REQUIRES
COMPLETION OF AN INSPECTION MOVE
IN CHECKLIST AND THEN THE
TENANT HAS TO BE GIVEN A COPY
OF THAT AND THAT IS PART OF
STATE LAW.
THEY NEED TO HAVE REPAIRED THE
PROPERTY DAMAGE.
>> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.
CAN A LANDLORD, UNDER THE
SECOND ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENT,
CAN THEY ASK FOR A MOVE IN
CHECK IN ANYTIME TO THE
TENANCY?
OR IS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIRED STATE LAW THAT SAYS IT
NEEDS TO BE DONE AT THE
BEGINNING OF THE TENANCY?
>> IS CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW
SO IT NEEDS TO BE DONE AT THE
BEGINNING.
>> I CAN JUST THINK OF
CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH A
LANDLORD WAS ANTICIPATING THE
NEED, BASED ON DAMAGE DONE TO
THE UNIT, ANTICIPATING THE NEED
TO ACCESS FUNDING AND WILL GO
TO THE TENANT AT THAT TIME AND
ASK THEM TO DO A CHECKLIST SO
THAT WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED.
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> THE THIRD WOULD BE TO
ACTUALLY ROOT REPAIR THE
PROPERTY DAMAGE OF THE FOURTH
IS THAT THE LANDLORD WILL HAVE
HAD TO SUBMIT AN INSURANCE
CLAIM AND HAVE HAD IT TONIGHT.
SO IF ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE
SATISFIED THE LANDLORD MUST
SUBMIT MATERIALS TO SDC I
WITHIN ONE YEAR. AND WE WILL BE
DEVELOPING RULES TO GOVERN
EXACTLY WHAT NEEDS TO BE
SUBMITTED AND WHAT THE
APPLICATION LOOKS LIKE. AND THE
LEGISLATION OUTLINES THAT THEY
WOULD NEED TO SUBMIT AN
APPLICATION AND THE MATERIALS
THAT SUBSTANTIATE THE DAMAGE
AND THE COST OF REPAIR AND THEN
NOTE THAT THE COSTS NEED TO BE
NORMAL AND CUSTOMARY WITH WORK
THAT HAS BEEN DONE IN THE CITY
OF SEATTLE FOR SIMILAR DAMAGE.
THE LANDLORD WOULD HAVE TO
SUBMIT EVIDENCE THAT THE
PROPERTY DAMAGE WAS CREATED BY
THE PERPETRATOR AND THAT THE
DAMAGE OCCURRED WHEN THE RENTAL
UNIT WAS OCCUPIED BY THE TENANT
, A MEMBER OF THEIR HOUSEHOLD
OR THEIR INTIMATE PARTNER AND
THAT ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE IS A
VICTIM OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND
THAT THE PERPETRATOR WAS THE
SAME PERSON THAT DAMAGE THE
PROPERTY.
THOSE LAST TWO ARE THE ELEMENTS
THAT A TENANT WOULD HAVE TO
SUBMIT TO A LANDLORD SO MY
ASSUMPTION IS THAT SORT OF
DOCUMENTATION WOULD BE THE SAME
THING THAT WOULD BE SUBMITTED.
AND THEN, --
>> SO THE LIMIT FOR THE
LITIGATION FUND WAS UP TO 1000
THAT DOLLARS IN DAMAGE WITH THE
EXPECTATION THAT THE LANDLORD
WOULD CONTRIBUTE $500.
AND IS THAT $500 PART OF THE
$1000 OR IS THAT WHAT THEY CAN
GET ABOVE THEIR PAYMENT OF $500
?
>> THE $1000 IS WHAT THEY COULD
GET ABOVE THE $500.
SO THEY WOULD PAY THE 500 AND
BE ELIGIBLE TO GET THE 500.
>> SO THIS CAUTIONARY
ARRANGEMENT IS THE MODEL THAT
IS USED IN STATE LAW FOR A
LANDLORD ABILITY TO RECOVER
COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT WAS
ENACTED AS PART OF THE SOURCE
OF INCOME DISCRIMINATION
LEGISLATION.
>> YES.
THE STATE FUND REIMBURSES UP TO,
A SPECIFIC AMOUNT FOR UNPAID
RENT, UTILITIES, ATTORNEYS FEES
AND RECENTLY, FOR 100% OF AN
EVICTION.
>> BUT THE LANDLORD, IT IS JUST
A CAUTIONARY MODEL.
>> YES.
THAT IS CORRECT.
AND JUST A COUPLE OF ADDITIONAL
PIECES ON THE PROGRAM.
ACCESSING THE FUNDING WOULD
REQUIRE THAT THE LANDLORD WAIVE
RIGHTS THAT THEY HAVE TO
RECEIVE MONEY FROM THE TENANT
THAT WAS LIVING WITH THE
PERPETRATOR.
EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE ALLOWED
TO SUBMIT AN INSURANCE CLAIM,
IF THE CITY WERE TO REQUIRE
THAT THEY PURSUE A PERPETRATOR
TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS THE
FUNDING, IT COULD CONFLICT WITH
SAFETY ISSUES IN TERMS OF IF
THE TENANT FEELS IT IS SAFE TO
GO AFTER THE PERPETRATOR.
SO THAT WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED.
HOWEVER, IF THE LANDLORD DOES
CHOOSE TO GO AFTER THE
PERPETRATOR AND THEY HAVE
RECEIVED REIMBURSEMENT FROM THE
FUNDING, THEY WOULD NEED TO
REFUND WHAT THEY WERE
REIMBURSED BY THE CITY.
THE, S SCI WOULD BE ASKED TO
DEVELOP THE RULES.
AND WE ASK THAT THOSE RULES BE
DEVELOPED BY 2020 AND THAT IS
THE SAME DATE AS THE EFFECTIVE
DATE OF THE LANDLORD MITIGATION
PROGRAM PORTION OF THE
LEGISLATION.
THE REMAINDER OF THE
LEGISLATION AROUND THE TENANT
NOT BEING LIABLE WOULD GO INTO
EFFECT ON JANUARY 1. SO IN THE
SIX MONTHS BEFORE THE PROGRAM
IS UP AND RUNNING, LANDLORDS
WOULD NEED TO KEEP TRACK OF THE
SUBSTANTIATION, RECEIPTS AND
ALL OF THOSE THINGS AND THEN
THEY COULD SUBMIT THEIR CLAIM
ONCE THE PROGRAM IS UP AND
RUNNING.
>> THAT MAKE SENSE?
>> YES.
I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF TECHNICAL
QUESTIONS.
SO, ON THE AMOUNT, ESSENTIALLY
THERE IS A DEDUCTIBLE THAT THE
LANDLORD HAS TO PAY UP TO $500.
BUT THEN THE CITY REIMBURSES
THE NEXT 100 OR THE NEXT 1000?
>> THE CITY WOULD REIMBURSE THE
NEXT 1000.
>> SO IF IT WAS $3000 WORTH OF
DAMAGE THEN THEY WOULD GET
REIMBURSED $1000.
>> YES.
>> SO THE INSURANCE CLAIM HAS
TO HAVE BEEN DENIED.
SO LET'S SAY THEY ADDED A $2000
DEDUCTIBLE, THE CITY DOES NOT
COME IN AND PAY SOME OF IT?
IT IS ONLY IN A CASE WHERE THE
INSURANCE HAS REFUSED TO PAY?
>> YES.
THAT IS RIGHT.
>> AND I THINK THERE ALSO WAS
ANOTHER EDITION THAT WAS
REQUESTED.
THAT WAS FROM THE HOUSING
PROVIDER STAKEHOLDERS AND
LANDLORDS.
THEY HAD ASKED BECAUSE IT WOULD
ASSIST THEM IN MAKING CLAIMS,
THAT LANGUAGE INCLUDED IN THE
ORDINANCE SAYS THAT THE
PERPETRATOR IS THE LIABLE PARTY.
WERE WE ABLE TO INCLUDE THAT AS
WELL?
>> THAT WAS IN A RECITAL.
SO WE ADDED IN A WHEREAS CLAUSE
WHERE IT SAYS THE FORMATION OF
THE PROGRAM SUPPORTS LANDLORDS
WHO MAY NOT BE ABLE TO RECOVER
DAMAGES FROM THE PERPETRATOR
AND WHO SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE
FOR PAYING REPAIRS.
>> THANK YOU.
SO, I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL OF
THE WORK THAT YOU HAVE DONE ON
THIS ASHA.
THIS HAS BEEN A STRUGGLE, A
CHALLENGE.
A LOT OF COMPETING IMPORTANT
INTERESTS HERE.
I THINK IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT
IN THAT THIS LEGISLATION CREATES
A DAMAGE MITIGATION FUND.
I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE
REMEMBER WHY WE STARTED THIS
EFFORT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
WE DID NOT START THIS IN ORDER
TO COMPENSATE HOUSING PROVIDERS
FOR DAMAGES DONE TO APARTMENTS
BY THE PERPETRATORS OF DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE.
WE STARTED THIS EFFORT OUT OF A
BELIEF THAT THE VICTIMS AND
SURVIVORS OF THE MYSTIC VIOLENCE
SHOULD NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE
FOR THESE DAMAGES AND, AS I
HAVE SAID BEFORE, I AM FRANKLY
ASTONISHED THAT ANYBODY WOULD
WANT TO SEND A VICTIM A BILL
FOR THE DAMAGE DONE TO A UNIT
BY THAT PERSON BY THE ABUSER OF
THAT PERSON.
NEVERTHELESS, IN ORDER TO
ACCOMPLISH THE UNDERLYING GOALS
OF THE LEGISLATION, I RECOGNIZE
THAT WE HAVE TO BALANCE OUR
PRINCIPLES WITH PRACTICALITIES.
AND IN THIS CASE, THE
PRACTICALITIES INCLUDE
ADDRESSING THE CONCERNS OF
LANDLORDS AS IT RELATES TO
THESE COSTS.
SO I ALSO WANT TO SPEAK TO THE
VERY REAL FACT THAT THAT THESE
KINDS OF DAMAGES CAN BE NOT
JUST A BURDEN TO ACCESSING
RENTAL HOUSING AFTER LEAVING A
UNIT.
IT CAN ACTUALLY BE A
CONTRIBUTOR TO A PERSONS
HOMELESS STATUS.
WHEN YOU HAVE A LARGE BILL
HANGING OVER YOUR HEAD, IT CAN
BE VERY DIFFICULT TO ACCESS A
NEW HOUSING UNIT.
SO IN OUR ONGOING UNITS TO
ADDRESS THE SCOURGE OF
HOMELESSNESS IN OUR COMMUNITIES
AND IN RECOGNITION THAT A
SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE
POPULATION IS HOMELESS BECAUSE
OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INCIDENTS,
I AM REALLY APPRECIATIVE OF
YOUR WORK AND OF THE WORK OF
THE TENANTS RIGHTS ADVOCATES
WHO BROUGHT THIS FORWARD.
IN HELPING US ADDRESS ALL OF
THESE DIFFERENT POLICY GOALS.
SO, WITH THAT, IF THERE ARE NO
FURTHER THOUGHTS OR QUESTIONS,
I AM GOING TO CALL THIS TO A
VOTE.
>> CALL AWAY.
>> ALL RIGHT. I
MOVE PASSAGE OF COUNSEL BILL
119658.
>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR VOTE AYE.
NOT OPPOSING.
THIS WILL MOVE ON TO CITY
COUNCIL ON MONDAY.
ITEM 3.
>> AGENDA ITEM 3 ISCB 119606 .
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO RENTAL
PROPERTIES; RESTRICTING A
LANDLORD'S ABILITY TO LIMIT THE
NUMBER OF PERSONS RESIDING IN A
RENTAL UNIT; PROHIBITING THE
USE OF CONDITIONS THAT ARE
APPLIED TO PERSONS RESIDING IN
A RENTAL UNIT WHO ARE NOT
TENANTS; AND AMENDING SECTIONS
7.24.020 AND 7.24.030 OF, AND
ADDING NEW SECTIONS 7.24.031
AND 7.24.032 TO, THE SEATTLE
MUNICIPAL CODE.
>> I AM ASHA VENKATARAMAN WITH
COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF.
>> AND ON THIS BILL AS WELL WE
HAVE NOT BEEN HERE QUITE AS
MANY TIMES AS WE HAVE BEEN ON
THE PREVIOUS BUT , THIS IS A BE
THE THIRD DISCUSSION.
>> TAKE IT AWAY.
>> SO THIS IS COUNSEL BILL
119606.
THE CURRENT STATE OF THE
LEGISLATION IS THAT WE HAD
DISCUSSED IT INITIALLY ON
AUGUST 8 AND AGAIN ON SEPTEMBER
5. WE INCORPORATED SEVERAL
AMENDMENTS DURING THE SEPTEMBER
10 MEETING.
WHAT THIS DOES AS AMENDED IS IT
ALLOWS THE TENANT TO LIVE WITH
THEIR IMMEDIATE FAMILY, WITH
ONE ADDITIONAL FAMILY WHO IS
NOT A MEMBER OF THE IMMEDIATE
FAMILY.
THE TOTAL NUMBER ALLOWED IN THE
UNIT IS LIMITED BY WHAT IS PUT
IN CITY, STATE AND LOCAL LAW.
IF SOME ROOMMATES MOVE OUT, IT
PROHIBITS THE LANDLORD FROM
IMPOSING ANY CONDITIONS THAT A
TENANT WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO
WHEN ADDING PEOPLE TO THE UNIT.
CURRENTLY, THERE IS ONE
EXEMPTION IN THE BILL AND IT IS
AN EXEMPTION FOR FEDERALLY
ASSISTED HOUSING UNITS IF THE
OCCUPANT IS SUBJECT TO A
LIFETIME SEX OFFENDER
REGISTRATION OR IS CONVICTED OF
PRODUCING, MANUFACTURING OR
SELLING METHAMPHETAMINE ON THE
PREMISES.
IT WOULD ALSO REQUIRE NOTICE TO
THE LANDLORD OF ANY RESIDENCE
IN THE UNIT THAT DO NOT BECOME
PART OF THE RENTAL AGREEMENT
WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE PERSON
BEGINS OCCUPANCY.
SO BETWEEN THE AUGUST MEETING
ON THE PRIOR SEPTEMBER MEETING,
THERE ARE A VARIETY OF ISSUES
AND POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS THAT
HAVE COME UP FOR DISCUSSION.
IT WOULD IF IT WOULD BE HELPFUL
I CAN GO THROUGH EACH OF THE
AMENDMENTS.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO
VOTE ON EACH AMENDMENT OR WAIT
UNTIL THE END.
EITHER WAY, I CAN TAKE US TO
THE NEXT NINE AMENDMENTS.
>> LET'S GO ONE AT A TIME.
>> OKAY.
SO THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS
TECHNICAL AND CLARIFYING
CHANGES.
IT LOOKS A LITTLE COMPLICATED.
IT IS THE FIRST FOUR PAGES OF
ATTACHMENT EIGHT.
THE FIRST CORRECTION IS TO THE
ORDINANCE THAT LAST UPDATED
7.24.020 , 7.24.030 AND
7.24.031 SO FIRST OF ALL IT
USED TO READ THAT FACTORS THAT
THE COURT CAN CONSIDER THAT IT
CAN LOOK AT A DATING
RELATIONSHIP AS THAT IS A TERM
THAT IS USED PREVIOUSLY IN THE
DEFINITION.
AGAIN, UPDATING THE LAST TIME
THE ORDINANCE WAS AMENDED.
AND THEN, STARTING IN THE
MIDDLE OF THE PAGE, ON PAGE
TWO, BECAUSE WE KNOW WHICH DAY,
WHEN THE ORDINANCE IS GOING TO
GO INTO EFFECT, WHICH IS PUT
THAT IN INSTEAD OF THE LANGUAGE
AROUND THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF
THE ORDINANCE.
YOU CAN SEE THAT THE LANGUAGE
THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY IN THE BILL
HAS BEEN NUMBERED AND ENTITLED
TO MAKE IT EASIER TO
UNDERSTAND.
SO MOST OF THAT YOU SEE UNDER
EACH ONE IS CLARIFYING LANGUAGE.
THE LANGUAGE THAT IS CROSSED
OUT AND ITALICIZED IN GREEN IS
REMOVED FROM SUBSECTION 1 AND
PLACED INTO A NEW SUBSECTION 4
IN THE MIDDLE OF PAGE 3. AT THE
TOP OF PAGE 3, THIS IS JUST
REORDERING THE SENTENCE TO MAKE
IT MORE CLEAR ABOUT THE
NOTIFICATION TO A NEW LANDLORD.
SUBSECTION 3 MOVES LANGUAGE
THAT USED TO BE IN 7.24.031,
YOU SEE THE CROSS OUT AT THE
BOTTOM OF THE PAGE THAT IS NOW
LOCATED IN SUBSECTION H3.
LASTLY ON PAGE 4, WE REMOVED A
REFERENCE TO SUBSECTION
7.24.030I , WE WILL REMOVE
THESE BECAUSE IT DOES NOT
EXIST.
>> SO TO CLARIFY, THESE ARE
CORRECTING TYPOS AND OTHER
DRAFTING ERRORS.
IT IS ALL TECHNICAL CHANGES?
>> YES.
NOTHING SUBSTANTIVE.
>> YES.
>> I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE.
EVERYONE IN FAVOR VOTE AYE .
>> AYE
>> THE MOTION PASSES.
>>> SO WHEN WE STARTED
DISCUSSING THE NEXT BILL IT WAS
WAS THE DEFINITION OF HOUSING
AND FAMILY MEMBERS.
THAT INCLUDES A BROAD NUMBER OF
RELATIONSHIPS SO IN REFINING
THE BILL WE HAVE NARROWED IT TO
THOSE PERSONS THAT WOULD
TYPICALLY BE UNDERSTOOD AS
IMMEDIATE FAMILY.
SO WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS WE HAVE
REMOVED ADULT PERSONS WHO ARE
PRESENTLY RESIDING TOGETHER OR
WHO HAVE RESIDED TOGETHER IN
THE PAST.
THAT SEEMS LIKE IT FITS MORE
ACCURATELY INTO A ROOMMATE
DEFINITION.
AND PERSONS 16 YEARS OF AGE OR
OLDER WITH WHOM A PERSON 16
YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER WHO HAS
HAD A DATING RELATIONSHIP.
AND WE REMOVED STEP CHILDREN
AND GRANDCHILDREN BECAUSE THAT
REFERENCES PARENTS AND
STEPPARENTS.
IT DOES NOT REMOVE THE
RELATIONSHIP BUT JUST THE TERMS
FROM A CHILD'S PERSPECTIVE AS
OPPOSED TO A PARENT'S
PERSPECTIVE.
>> AND, RECOLLECTION IS THAT
THIS IS MIRRORING THE IMMEDIATE
FAMILY DEFINITION IN STATE LAW?
>> NO.
THIS IS THE DEFINITION THAT WE
HAVE BEEN TRYING TO PUT
TOGETHER OVER THE LAST COUPLE
OF WEEKS TO DIFFERENTIATE IT
FROM THE FAMILY AND HOUSEHOLD
MEMBERS WORK THAT WE GOT FROM
THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE BILL.
>> SO, IN THAT EFFORT TO MAKE IT
MORE NARROW, ARE WE, ARE THERE
CONCERNS THAT WE ARE EITHER
MAKING IT SO NARROW THAT FOLKS
THAT WE SHOULD BE CONSIDERING
HAVE BEEN TAKEN OUT?
OR THAT IT IS STILL TOO BROAD?
I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION FOR
SOME REASON THAT THERE WAS A
FAMILY MEMBER DEFINITION IN
STATE LAW THAT WE WERE TRYING
TO REPLICATE.
I AM OBVIOUSLY WRONG.
I GUESS I JUST WOULD LIKE TO
UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT MORE
ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THESE
CHANGES.
>> ABSOLUTELY.
IN TERMS OF THE ADULT PERSONS
RESIDING TOGETHER OR THAT HAVE
IN THE PAST, THAT IS A
REFERENCE THAT COULD BE, THE
RELATIONSHIP ITSELF, IN THE
CONTEXT THAT WE WANTED TO BE,
WHICH IS FOR PARTNERS TO BE
ABLE TO LIVE WITH EACH OTHER,
COULD BE UNDER THE NEXT
RELATIONSHIP THERE.
SO A PERSON 16 YEARS OF AGE OR
OLDER THAT ARE RESIDING
TOGETHER OR HAVE OR HAVE HAD A
DATING RELATIONSHIP.
SO TAKING OUT THE ADULT PERSONS
WHO ARE PRESENTLY RESIDING
TOGETHER DOES NOT REMOVE
PARTNERS FROM THAT DEFINITION.
IT SIMPLY REMOVES BASICALLY
FRIENDS WHO WOULD BE LIVING
TOGETHER THAT WE WOULD NOT
ORDINARILY DEFINE AS IMMEDIATE
FAMILY.
>> UNDERSTOOD.
>> THE PIECE AROUND 16 YEARS OF
AGE OR OLDER IS ALSO COVERED IN
THE PARTNER'S PIECE AND SO, IT
REALLY IS MORE OF A REPETITIVE
INCLUSION THAT I ASSUME WAS IN
THE DOMESTIC PIECE OF THE BILL
FOR A SPECIFIC REASON BUT IT IS
NOT NECESSARY IN OUR IMMEDIATE
DEFINITION OF FAMILY.
>> I THINK YOU HAVE SAID IT NOW
TWICE.
IT TOOK THE SECOND TIME FOR ME
TO CATCH IT.
THERE WAS AN ALIGNMENT ISSUE
WITH THE FAMILY DEFINITION AND
THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
LEGISLATION.
THAT IS WHAT I WAS CONFUSING
THE STATE LAW WITH.
>> IT IS VERY BROAD IN THE
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE BILL.
>> I'VE GOT IT.
AND I THINK THE REASON WHY THIS
DISTINCTION IS IMPORTANT IS
BECAUSE THE FOLKS WHO ARE
DEFINED AS FAMILY MEMBERS HAVE
DIFFERENT RIGHTS THAN THE
PEOPLE THAT ARE DEFINED AS
ROOMMATES.
SPECIFICALLY, AS IT RELATES TO
THE DEFINITION OF THEIR
PARTICIPATION IN THE TENANCY
AND THE SCREENING AND SO ON AND
SO FORTH.
THANK YOU.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS?
>> OKAY.
I WILL MOVE PASSAGE OF
AMENDMENT 2.
>> SECOND.
>> THOSE IN FAVOR VOTE AYE .
NONE OPPOSED AND THEN
ABSTAINING.
THE MOTION PASSES.
>> ITEM NUMBER THREE, YOU WILL
FIND THIS IN ATTACHMENT EIGHT.
THIS REPLICATES THE LANGUAGE
THAT WAS PASSED IN THE FIRST
AMENDMENT.
IT JUST PUTS LANGUAGE INTO THE
SUBSTANTIVE LANGUAGE OF THE
SUBSTANTIVE LANGUAGE. IT JUST
INCLUDES THE TERM ON THE LAST
LINE.
SO THAT ARE BEYOND THOSE
IMPOSED ON A TENANT TO OCCUPY A
RENTAL UNIT.
>> OKAY.
UNDERSTOOD.
>> IF YOU ARE AND SO IN SUPPORT
VOTE AYE.
>> THAT PASSES.
>> NOW FINALLY, IT JUST MAKES
CLEAR THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT
THE FOURTH TERM. OF WHEN THE
TENANCY IS COMPLETED IS WHEN
THESE PROVISIONS WOULD APPLY.
>> SO I UNDERSTAND THE
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS OF THAT.
HOW WOULD THAT FUNCTION ON THE
GROUND?
>> SO, WITHOUT THAT LANGUAGE,
IT IS NOT ENTIRELY CLEAR THAT A
TENANT HAD, LET'S SAY THEY HAD
A RENTAL AGREEMENT FOR A YEAR.
IF THEY VACATE THE RENTAL
AGREEMENT AT THE END OF THE
YEAR, THESE PROTECTIONS DON'T
NECESSARILY KICK IN BECAUSE THE
TERM OF THE TENANCY IS OVER AND
YOU WOULD NEED TO START THE NEW
TERM.
SO THERE IS NOT ANY REMAINING
TIME FOR THE TENANT TO HAVE
LEFT OR FOR THE PEOPLE RESIDING
IN THE UNIT TO STAY.
SO PRACTICALLY, THIS WOULD
HAPPEN IF THE TENANT LEFT AT
NINE MONTHS OUT OF A 12 MONTH
TERM SO THEY WOULD VACATE
BEFORE THE EXPIRATION OF THE
TENANCY BECAUSE IT WAS FOR A
YEAR.
AND THEN YOU HAD THE THREE
MONTHS REMAINING FOR THOSE THAT
ARE OCCUPYING TO REMAIN IN THE
TENANCY.
>> OKAY.
THAT MAKES SENSE.
I'M A FOR PASSAGE OF AMENDMENT
NUMBER FOUR.
>> I SECOND.
>> AYE.
NONE OPPOSED AND NONE
ABSTAINING.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE.
>> YOU WILL FIND THIS ON THE
LAST PAGE OF ATTACHMENT EIGHT.
IN THIS, AGES NOTE THAT IN THIS
AMENDMENT AND AMENDMENT SEVEN
THERE IS A PROVISION AROUND THE
LANDLORD BEING ABLE TO ISSUE A
WRITTEN NOTICE.
THOSE PROVISIONS SPECIFICALLY
ARE BEING REVIEWED BY THE CITY
ATTORNEYS OFFICE.
IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THERE MAY
BE CHANGES THAT REQUIRE FURTHER
AMENDMENT THAT IT IS JUST THOSE
SPECIFIC PIECES.
SUBSTANTIVELY, THIS DOES
REQUIRES THE LANDLORD ANYBODY
THEY ARE REQUIRED TO VACATE
WITHIN 45 DAYS AFTER RECEIVING
THAT NOTICE.
THE DISTINCTION HERE IS BETWEEN
THE IMMEDIATE FAMILY OF THE
TENANT AND ANY OTHER RESIDENTS
IN THE UNIT.
THE RATIONALE FOR IT IS, A
TENANT DOES NOT HAVE A CHOICE
ABOUT WHO THEIR IMMEDIATE
FAMILY IS, FOR BETTER OR FOR
WORSE.
THEY ARE WHO THEY ARE.
SO YOU COULD END UP IN A
SITUATION IN WHICH THE RIGHT TO
IVE WITH A TENANT CONFLICTS
WITH THE LANDLORDS LIGHTS
AROUND WHO THEY ARE RENTING A
UNIT TWO.
AND SO, TO AVOID THAT CONFLICT,
THE LANDLORD IS NOT REQUIRED OR
ALLOWED TO REQUIRE THE
IMMEDIATE FAMILY BECOME A PART
OF THAT.
THEY ARE JUST ALLOWED TO RESIDE
IN THE UNIT.
IN TERMS OF A ROOMMATE, THE
IDENTITY OF THOSE PERSONS ARE
NOT PARTICULARLY RELEVANT.
YOU MIGHT LIKE TO LIVE WITH
SOMEONE THAT IT IS NOT PROHIBIT
YOU FROM LIVING WITH SOMEBODY
ELSE.
SO THOSE RESIDENTS ARE NOT
REQUIRED TO LIVE THERE.
THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH
THE SAME PROCESS AS THE TENANT
DID TO BE ABLE TO LIVE IN THE
UNIT.
>> GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS
AND BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR
FULFILLING THE RENTAL
RESPONSIBILITIES JUST LIKE THE
TENANT?
>> YES.
ALL OF THE SAME
>> SO THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY
THAT THEY COULD BE DENIED
TENANCY BASED ON SCREENING
MATERIAL AT THAT POINT?
>> YES.
>> OKAY.
SPECTACLE.
I MOVE FOR AMENDMENT FIVE.
>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR VOTE AYE
.
>> AYE.
>> NONE OPPOSED AND NONE
ABSTAINING.
SO MOOT.
>> THIS MIRRORS WHAT WE JUST
DISCUSSED.
THE LANDLORD CAN SCREEN ANYONE
IN THE UNIT.
THE ADDITIONAL RESIDENT. THE
DISTINCTION HERE IS THAT THE
LANDLORD CAN OR TONIGHT BECOMING
PART OF THE RENTAL AGREEMENT.
THAT JUST DOES NOT APPLY WITH
THE IMMEDIATE FAMILY FOR THE
SAME REASONS THAT WE JUST
DISCUSSED.
>> I MOVE AMENDMENT SIX.
>>
>>.
>> THAT PASSES.
>> AMENDMENT 11, YOU WILL SEE
THAT AN ATTACHMENT EIGHT.
WHAT THIS DOES IS THIS IS WHAT
HAPPENS IF A TENANT VACATES A
RENTAL UNIT EARLY.
THE INITIAL INTENT OF THIS WAS
TO GO INTO A SITUATION WHERE IF
THE TENANT DIES.
SO, BEFORE THE TERM OF THE
TENANCY IS UP ON WHAT HAPPENS
TO THE REMAINING PEOPLE THAT
ARE RESIDING IN THE UNIT WHEN
THAT HAPPENS.
SO IN TERMS OF, THIS IS
SEPARATED INTO SUBSECTIONS A, B
AND C. IN THE SAME WAY, AS THEY
WERE, THEY WILL BE TREATED
UNDER THE PREVIOUS TWO
AMENDMENTS.
THE LANDLORD CAN REQUIRE THAT
THEY BECOME PARTIES TO THE
RENTAL AGREEMENT.
SUBJECT TO THE SAME TERMS THAT
APPLY TO THE VACATED TENANT.
THEY ALSO SCREENED THE
IMMEDIATEFAMILY BUT CANNOT
EXCLUDE ANYBODY FROM BECOMING A
PART OF THAT.
FOR ADDITIONAL RESIDENCE, THE
LANDLORD MAY, MAY BECOME
PARTIES TO THE RENTAL AGREEMENT
AS WELL SUBJECT TO THE SAME
TERMS AS THE VACATING TENANT BUT
THE LANDLORD MAY SCREEN THESE
SUBSECTION C THIS WILL ALLOW
THE LANDLORD TO ISSUE A
STATEMENT TO THOSE LIVING THERE.
IF THE DO NOT AGREE WITH THE
RENTAL AGREEMENT THEY ARE
REQUIRED TO MOVE.
>> AND SO, ROOMMATES HAVE THE
RIGHT TO CONTINUE OCCUPYING THE
UNIT IF THEY HAVE LIVED THEY
HAVE A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS
THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE LIVED
FAMILY MEMBERS THERE IS NO
PARTICULAR TIME PERIOD.
IS THAT CORRECT?
>> IF YOU CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT
DOES IT MEAN TO BE A PART OF
THE RENTAL AGREEMENT.
>> IT IS WORDED LIKE THAT
BECAUSE IT NEEDS TO BE IN
WRITING.
IF IT WAS AN ORAL AGREEMENT
THEY WOULD BECOME PARTIES TO
THE RENTAL AGREEMENT I ORALLY
AGREED TO THAT.
OTHERWISE IT IS JUST SIGNING
THE LEASE.
>> I MOVE PASSAGE OF AMENDMENT
SEVEN.
>> A SECOND.
>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
NONE OPPOSING AND NONE
ABSTAINING . A MOTION PASSES.
>> WHAT THIS DOES IS IT DOES
ADD ONE ADDITIONAL EXEMPTION TO
THE BILL.
THE INTENT HERE REALLY IS TO
PROTECT THE OWNERS RIGHT TO
LIVE WITH WHOEVER THEY WANT TO.
SO IF THEY OWN THE PROPERTY
THEY ARE EXEMPT FROM SHARING
THEIR LIVING SPACE ESSENTIALLY
DOES EXCUSE ME, NOT EXEMPT,
THEY ARE ENTITLED TO FIGURE OUT
WHO THEY ARE EATING WITH.
THAT CIRCUMSTANCES EXEMPTED
FROM THIS LEGISLATION.
>> OKAY.
>> JUST TO MAKE SURE I
UNDERSTAND, IF THE PROPERTY
OWNER IS RENTING OUT A ROOM OR
PART OF THE HOUSE THEN THAT
TENANT DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT
THAT WE TALKED ABOUT HERE?
>> THAT IS RIGHT.
>> I MOVE PASSAGE OF NONE
OPPOSING AND NONE ABSTAINING .
>> LAST ONE.
INSTRUCTION FOR APOSTATES.
I ALSO WANT TO GIVE A QUICK
OVERVIEW OF WHAT THE BILL DOES.
>> THIS BILL REQUIRES A
STATEMENT ON ALL NOTICES TO
TERMINATE TENDENCIES AND ENTER
UNITS OR INCREASE HOUSING
COSTS.
AND THAT STATEMENT WOULD BE FOR
TENANTS TO FIND OUT THEIR
RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES AND
ANY RESOURCES.
SO, THEY PLAN TO HAVE A
DIRECTORS WILL TO DEVELOP THE
SUBMISSIVE SPECIFIC STATEMENT
LANGUAGE BUT AS IT STANDS THIS
IS ALREADY REQUIRED ON NOTICES
TO INCREASE HOUSING CAUSE SO IT
WOULD JUST ADDITIONALLY REQUIRE
THAT STATEMENT APPEAR ON NOTICES
TO TERMINATE TENANCY AND
NOTICES TO ENTER TENANTS RENTAL
PROPERTIES.
WE INDICATED THAT THE BILL WAS
TO BE PROVIDE RESOURCES TO
TENANTS AS SOON AS THEIR RIGHTS
ARE IMPACTED SO THEY CAN ACCESS
ANY RESOURCES OR INFORMATION
THEY NEED.
BEFORE WE END UP IN A HOUSING
CRISIS.
>> THE INFORMATION ABOUT FOLKS
RIGHTS AS IT RELATES TO
SPECIFIC ACTIONS THAT RENTAL
HOUSING PROVIDERS MIGHT TAKE,
SO, WHEN YOU GET A NOTICE
TERMINATING TENANCY WHAT YOU --
YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO BE EVICTED
WITH CAUSE AND ALL THAT STUFF.
ALSO, IT'S NOT JUST INFORMATION
ABOUT YOUR RIGHTS BUT
INFORMATION ABOUT RESOURCES AND
FOLKS YOU CAN TURN TO, IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> YES, I BELIEVE THAT IS
CORRECT.
>> WITH THAT I MOVE PASSAGE OF
COUNSEL BILL 1196-19.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
NONE OPPOSING AND NONE
ABSTAINING COUNSEL BILL 1196
19 PASSES AND WE WILL MOVE IT
TO COUNSEL.
>> ITEM NUMBER FIVE ISCOUNCIL
BILL 119620 AN ORDINANCE
RELATING TO RESIDENTIAL RENT
PAYMENTS; REQUIRING RECEIPTS
AND NON-ELECTRONIC PAYMENT
OPTIONS; AND AMENDING SECTION
7.24.030 OF THE SEATTLE
MUNICIPAL CODE.
>> THANK YOU.
SO, AGAIN, THIS ALSO IS THE
SECOND TIME WE HAVE DISCUSSED
THE BILL AND THE THIRD TIME WE
DISCUSSED THE TOPIC.
TCI HAS BEEN IN AND VISIT US
TWICE ABOUT THIS TOPIC.
ONCE WAS WHEN WE HAD THE ACTUAL
BILL BEFORE US.
THERE HAS BEEN SOME CONFUSION
ABOUT THIS BILL THAT IT DOES
NOT CREATE AN OUTRIGHT RIGHT
FOR TENANTS TO PAY IN CASH WHICH
WITH SOME OF THE CONFUSING
FOLKS HAPPY FOR.
, WHAT IT DOES DO IS IT IS NOT
ABOUT LANDLORDS TO REQUIRE
ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> YES.
>> DO YOU WANT TO GIVE A QUICK
OVERVIEW.
>> CURRENTLY STATE WHAT
REQUIRES -- THIS BILL HAS TWO
PIECES.
THE REQUIRING RECEIPTS FOR CASH
PAYMENTS AND THAT NONELECTRONIC
PEACE IN TERMS OF THE RECEIPTS
FOR CASH PAYMENT STATE LAW
REQUIRES THAT A LANDLORD IS
REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A RECEIPT
AND UPON -- EXCUSE ME REQUIRED
TO PROVIDE A RECEIPT FOR CASH
PAYMENTS AND FOR ANY OTHER TYPE
OF PAYMENT UPON THE TENANTS
REQUEST WHAT IT DOES IS PUTS A
PIECE OF THE CODE INTO THE
SEATTLE MISCIBLE COAT SO STC I
CAN ENFORCE VIOLATIONS OF THAT
REQUIREMENT.
THE SECOND PIECE OF THE BILL IS
A NEW RIGHT WHICH WOULD REQUIRE
LANDLORDS TO PROVIDE TENANTS
WITH THE NONELECTRONIC MEANS TO
PAY RENT AND HOUSING COSTS SO
AS YOU MENTIONED THIS IS NOT A
RIGHT TO PROVIDE RENT OR
HOUSING COST IN CASH SIMPLY
NONELECTRONIC VERSION WHICH
COULD BE SOMETHING LIKE MONEY
ORDERS.
SO, THE REASON FOR THIS IS
BECAUSE PAY ELECTRONICALLY CAN
BE PROBLEMATIC FOR PEOPLE WHO
ARE NOT TECHNOLOGICALLY SAVVY
DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE
INTERNET OR USE TRADITIONAL
BANKING SERVICES.
IN ADDITION BECAUSE MANY ONLINE
PORTALS CAN ADD FEES FOR
PAYMENTS WHICH RAISES AND
PRACTICALLY RAISES THE RENT FOR
PEOPLE THAT ARE LOW INCOME.
SO, THIS ADDITIONAL RIGHT, IT
DOES NOT HAVE TO BE IN CASH.
THEY DON'T HAVE TO CHANGE ANY
CURRENT PRACTICES AROUND NOT
EXPECTING CASH PAYMENTS.
IT SIMPLY IS NOT ELECTRONIC
MEANS.
>> WHAT IS THE MEANS BY WHICH
STC I WOULD ENFORCE THIS.
IF A LANDLORD WAS TRYING TO
MAKE A TENANT PAY
ELECTRONICALLY, WHAT WOULD
HAPPEN?
>> THEY COULD ESSENTIALLY CALL
AND SAY, TELL STC I THAT THIS
IS HAPPENING AND THEY WOULD
THEN GO THROUGH THEIR NORMAL
ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS TO TELL
THE LANDLORD THAT THAT IS NOT
SOMETHING THEY ARE ALLOWED TO
DO.
AND TO THAT EXTENT THE ISSUE
AND NOTICE OR VIOLATION.
>> THANK YOU.
ANY QUESTIONS?
I WILL MOVE PASSAGE OF COUNSEL
BILL 1196 20.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
NONE OPPOSING AND NONE
ABSTAINING THE FINAL TENANTS
RIGHTS BILL, ITEM 6. NEW MAC
ITEM 6 ISCOUNCIL BILL 119621 AN
ORDINANCE RELATING TO
TERMINATION OF RESIDENTIAL
RENTAL TENANCIES; REQUIRING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE RENTAL
REGISTRATION AND INSPECTION
ORDINANCE BEFORE ISSUING
NOTICES TO TERMINATE A TENANCY;
AND AMENDING SECTIONS
22.206.160 AND 22.214.075 OF
THE SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE.
THE NECK --
>> SO AS MENTIONED IN THE
TITLE THIS WOULD REQUIRE
COMPLIANCE WITH BEFORE SHOWING
TENANT TRANCE UP UNDER THE
CURRENT LAW LANDLORDS ARE
REQUIRED TO REGISTER UNDER THE
ORDINANCE BUT ONLY BEFORE A
COURT ORDER THAT ENTERS AN
ADDICTION JUDGMENT.
THAT CAN BE AS LATE AS THE DATE
THE COURT ACTUALLY ORDERS THE
ADDICTION.
THAT CAN DO IT THIS MORNING, OR
THEY COULD ISSUE IT THE COURT
COULD ISSUE PICKETT SAID THIS A
MENSA CODE TO SAY THAT
LANDLORDS HAVE TO REGISTER
THEIR UNITS BEFORE ISSUING AN
NOTICE TO TERMINATE TENANCY.
-- ANY NOTICES THAT WERE
ISSUED BY UNREGISTERED
LANDLORDS WOULD NOT MEET THE
PROVISIONS FOR JUST CAUSE SO
THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO EVICT
THE PERSON.
LANDLORDS THAT ARE CURRENTLY
REQUIRED TO REGISTER AREN'T
AFFECTED BY THIS CHANGE.
>> SO, THE PRACTICAL EFFECT OF
THAT WOULD BE THAT LANDLORDS
WHO FAIL TO MEET THEIR
OBLIGATIONS UNDER RIO AND THERE
THEY ARE HEADING TOWARDS EVICTED
-- THEY WOULD HAVE TO START
THE PROCESS ALL OVER AGAIN?
>> YES.
>> AND ISSUE A NEW NOTICE.
>> YES.
>> MOVE PASSAGE OF COUNSEL BILL
119621.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
NONE OPPOSING AND NONE
ABSTAINING AND THIS WILL MOVE
ON TO FULL COUNCIL ON MONDAY.
>> YOUR EXPERTISE HAS BEEN VERY
VALUABLE.
>> WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM
NUMBER SEVEN PLEASE.
>> IT ISCOUNCIL BILL 119639 AN
ORDINANCE RELATING TO SEATTLE
PUBLIC UTILITIES; DECLARING
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY RIGHTS TO
BE SURPLUS TO THE NEEDS OF
SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES; AND
AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL
MANAGER/CEO OF SEATTLE PUBLIC
UTILITIES TO EXECUTE AN
EASEMENT AGREEMENT WITH LITTLE
GREEN VALLEY, LLC, A WASHINGTON
LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY;
NANCY J. GLEASON; RON L.
NICKELL AKA RONALD L. NICKELL
AND SANDRA FLINT NICKELL,
HUSBAND AND WIFE; WILLIAM H.
FLINT; THE HEIRS OF CHARLES
EUGENE FLINT; AND JOAN H.
ZIMMERMAN, ALLOWING THE USE OF
CERTAIN CITY OF SEATTLE
PROPERTY IN THE NORTH HALF OF
THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF
SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH,
RANGE 6 EAST, W.M., IN KING
COUNTY WASHINGTON FOR ACCESS
PURPOSES.
>> BEFORE WE GET STARTED I WANT
TO NOTE THAT THIS ITEM REQUIRES
A PUBLIC HEARING.
SO AFTER THE PRESENTATION WE
WILL TAKE A PAUSE AND SEE IF
ANYBODY SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC
TESTIMONY.
IF THERE IS ANY WE WILL HEAR
THAT AND MOVE ON FROM THERE.
INSTRUCTIONS PLEASE
>> BOB GAMBLE, SEATTLE PUBLIC
UTILITIES, SEEKING A RENTAL
PROPERTY AGENT.
>> JUDITH CROSS, --
>> WHO WOULD LIKE TO GET US
STARTED?
>> COULD YOU PROVIDE SOME
ASSISTANCE WITH THE
PRESENTATION?
>> LEGISLATION WE HAVE TODAY IS
FOR AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT WITH
LITTLE GREEN VALLEY LLC.
OVER THE CITY OF SEATTLE CEDAR
RIVER PIPELINE.
THE PURPOSE FOR ENTERING THIS
AGREEMENT ARE TO CLARIFY THE
RIGHTS TO USE ACCESS ROAD BY
NEIGHBORING LITTLE GREEN VALLEY
PROPERTY OWNERS AND PROTECT THE
CITY'S UTILITY OPERATIONS,
ASSIGN MAINTENANCE
RESPONSIBILITIES TO THE
PROPERTY OWNERS, AND SETTLE A
2017 LAWSUIT FILED AGAINST THE
CITY AND KING COUNTY.
THE LOCATION OF THIS EASEMENT
IS NEAR FAIRWOOD BETWEEN
FAIRWOOD AND MAPLE VALLEY NEAR
OUR LAKE YOUNG'S RIVERS --
SITE.
AND, A CLOSE UP TO THIS SHOWS
WHAT WE SHOW HERE IS THE
SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES RIGHT-
OF-WAY FOR LAKE YOUNG'S SUPPLY
LINE PIPELINE.
WE HAVE THE ROAD THAT CROSSES
THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ON THE LEFT
SIDE OF THE PICTURE AND MORE OR
LESS FOLLOWS PARALLEL SOUTH OF
THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
AND THE RED INDICATES WHERE THE
EASEMENT WOULD BE TO SERVE THE
PROPERTY THAT IS OUTLINED IN
THE BLUE.
AS SHOWN UP THERE.
>> IS AT PROPERTY A SINGLE
PROPERTY OR A COMMUNITY?
>> IS A FAMILY COMMUNITY.
I BELIEVE THERE ARE SIX PARCELS
THERE WITH ONE FAMILY OWNING
THEM ALL.
>> AND THAT IS LITTLE GREEN
VALLEY?
>> YES, THAT IS THE LITTLE
GREEN VALLEY LLC.
>> SO LITTLE GREEN VALLEY IS AN
LLC THAT WAS CREATED FOR THE
PURPOSES OF JOINTLY OWNING THIS
PROPERTY?
>> APPARENTLY.
I DON'T KNOW THE DETAILS.
>> I WASN'T SURE IF IT WAS A
PLACE OR A BUSINESS.
>> IT'S A FAMILY CORPORATION
I'M GUESSING.
>> CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT WHAT THE LAWSUIT AGAINST
THE CITY AND THE COUNTY THAT WE
ARE SETTLING WITH THIS EASEMENT
ALLEGES?
>> THE BIG PROBLEM FOR THEM IS
THERE IS NO LEGAL ACCESS TO
THEIR PROPERTY THAT IS
CONVENIENT. NOBODY KNOWS
EXACTLY WHEN THIS ALL STARTED
BUT WHEN THE PIPELINE WAS PUT IN
PROBABLY 100 AND SOME YEARS
AGO, THERE WERE VERY FEW ROADS
IN THE AREA SO THE PIPELINE ROAD
WAS USED BY FOLKS TO ACCESS
PROPERTY AND COME INTO SEATTLE
AND ALL KINDS OF THINGS.
SO IT'S A ROAD ABOVE THE
PIPELINE.
THE PIPELINE RIGHT-OF-WAY ROAD
MAINTENANCE ROAD BASICALLY.
AND WHEN IT WAS BUILT IN THE
60s, IT IS UP ON TOP OF A HILL
THAT YOU CAN'T GET DOWN TO THIS
PROPERTY FROM THERE.
SO THEY CONTINUED TO USE THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY.
>> IT'S NOT -- OR ANYTHING LIKE
THAT?
>> WE DO HAVE A FENCE THAT
CONTROLS ACCESS.
THEY HAVE A KEY TO THAT FENCE
TO GET IN AND OUT.
>> ISN'T IT TRUE THAT THE DIRT
ROAD IS USED TO ACCESS THE KING
CARTY KING COUNTY PARK AS WELL?
>> THAT IS JUST NORTH OF THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY INCLUDING THE LAKE
THAT YOU CAN SEE.
AND, THE RIGHT-OF-WAY NEAR
PETROVICH SKI IS USED QUITE A
BIT BY PEOPLE THAT GO TO THE
PARK.
A PARK ON THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
>> SO IS THERE NOT A TENSE ON
THAT END OF IT?
>> NO.
THE GATE IS ACTUALLY QUITE A
WAYS DOWN.
I BELIEVE IT IS CLOSE TO WHERE
IT LEAVES OUR RIGHT AWAY AND
GOES ON TO THE PARK PROPERTY.
>> SO, THERE HAS BEEN A
RELATIONSHIP FOR YEARS FORMAL
AND INFORMAL IT SOUNDS LIKE.
AND THEN SOMETHING HAPPENED
RECENTLY THAT TRIGGERED A
LAWSUIT AND THIS RESOLUTION?
>> PROBABLY THE BIGGEST THING IS
FINANCE INSTITUTIONS HAVE
GOTTEN PROBABLY MORE
SOPHISTICATED ABOUT WHAT THEY
EXPECT TO HAVE AS FAR AS LEGAL
ACCESS PROVIDES.
WHEN PEOPLE GO TO REFINANCE THE
PROPERTY OR FINANCE A PROPERTY
THEY LOOK AT THE TITLE AND IF
THEY CAN'T FIND HOW THEY GET
LEGAL ACCESS THEN THAT
RESTRICTS THEIR FINANCING
ABILITY.
THEY DID HAVE A PERMIT FROM US
TO USE THIS RIGHT-OF-WAY ALL
THIS TIME, BUT THAT WAS NOT
GOOD ENOUGH APPARENTLY FOR THE
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS.
AND SO THEY HAD THE PROBLEM
WITH OURSELVES AND KING COUNTY
CROSSING THE PART.
SO THEY FILED THE SUIT TO GET A
RESOLUTION TO PERMIT TO A
PERMANENT ACCESS AND THAT'S
WHAT THEY AGREED TO WASN'T
EASEMENT ACCESS ACROSS OUR
PROPERTY AND KING COUNTY'S
PROPERTY
>> SO THIS SETTLES THEIR CLAIM
AGAINST KING COUNTY AS WELL?
THIS ACTION?
>> YES.
>> AND THIS EASEMENT, IS IT IN
-- IN PERPETUITY?
>> YES, IT IS.
>> SO, $3500 AND I'M ASSUMING
IT DOESN'T IMPACT OUR ABILITY
TO MAINTAIN AND SERVICE THE
PIPELINE?
>> NO.
WE FEEL IT ACTUALLY IN MANY
WAYS WILL HELP PROTECT IT.
-- AS TO HOW MANY PROPERTIES
CAN BE DEVELOPED . IT CAN
HAPPEN JUST ORGANICALLY BUT YOU
NEVER KNOW.
IF SOMEONE DECIDED TO PUT A 100
UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX DOWN
THERE THERE COULD BE A LOT OF
TRAFFIC WHERE THIS WAY WE ARE
LIMITING TO HOW MUCH WILL BE
THERE FOR NOW.
>> ALL RIGHT.
LET'S MOVE INTO THE PUBLIC
HEARING PORTION OF THIS ITEM.
AND THERE IS NOBODY SIGNED UP.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> WITH THAT I WILL OPEN AND
CLOSE THE ITEM.
AND MOVE PASSAGE OF BILL NUMBER
119639.
>> CAN I ASK YOU ANOTHER
QUESTION.
THE $3500 WITH THAT ARRIVED AT
THE TYPICAL HOW WE DO LAND
VALUE ASSESSMENT OR LEGAL
NEGOTIATION OR?
>> IT WAS PART OF THE
SETTLEMENT.
THE NUMBER WAS DECIDED ON AS
PART OF THE SETTLEMENT IN THAT
CASE.
>> WITH THAT, I MOVE AND I CALL
FOR A VOTE.
PASSAGE OF COUNSEL BILL 119639.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
NONE OPPOSING AND NONE
ABSTAINING .
>> LET'S JUST DO IT FOR FUN.
>> IT SEEMS LIKE A FUN THING TO
DO.
MOVE TO SUSPEND THE ROLES.
>> I SECOND THAT.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.
IS A CULTURAL SPACE UPDATE.
>> I CAN MOVE ON IF YOU WANT.
>> I'M READY.
>> WELCOME, HELLO.
LET'S START OFF WITH SOME
INTRODUCTIONS.
>> I THOUGHT WE WERE ON THE
LAST THING.
>> WE WILL SEE YOU IN A COUPLE
MINUTES.
>> THAT'S REALLY FUNNY.
>> BACK TO OUR REGULARLY
SCHEDULED PROGRAM.
>> THAT'S A BLAST.
LET'S GET INTO IT.
>> THIS GIVES ME HOPE FOR
FUTURE WHEN I'M NO LONGER ON
THE COUNCIL.
>> I THINK I'M SUPPOSED TO SET
THIS UP BUT THAT'S OKAY.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING US.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY MORE
TIMES I WILL SIT ACROSS THE
TABLE WITH YOU BUT AFTER SEVEN
YEARS IN THIS JOB IT'S BEEN A
PLEASURE.
ANYWAY.
>>> SO, AS YOU KNOW, WE HAVE
BEEN STEWARDING THE CULTURAL
SPACE PROGRAM AT CREATING
AFFORDABILITY SOLUTIONS FOR
ARTISTS AND CULTURAL WORKERS
AND CREATIVE IN OUR CITY FOR
THE LAST SIX YEARS.
BEFORE THAT UNDER THE
LEADERSHIP OF CASSIE CHAN AND
-- ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO
WE RELEASED THE REPORT WHICH IS
IDEAS FOR THE CREATION,
ACTIVATION AND ONE OF THE IDEAS
WAS SO SUBSTANTIAL THAT IT LED
TO ITS OWN REPORT WHICH IS NOW
THE STRUCTURE FOR STABILITY THE
EXPLORATION OF WHAT A CULTURAL
SPACE PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY COULD LOOK LIKE AND
HOW IT COULD BE DESIGNED AND
WHAT IT COULD DO.
I AM MOSTLY TEEING UP THIS POST
FIRST LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE
ABSOLUTE HEROIC WORK OF BOTH
MATTHEW AND THE ARTS COMMISSION
BUT ALSO UP ALL OF THESE OTHER
PEOPLE.
I'VE NEVER AND SEVEN YEARS
WORKED ON A PROJECT THAT HAS
HAD THIS MUCH COLLABORATIVE
SUPPORT FROM COMMUNITY FROM
DEPARTMENTS FROM THE MAYOR'S
OFFICE AND CITY COUNCIL AND
COMMISSION.
WE HAVE DONE MULTIPLE TOOLKITS
ON THIS AND IT HAS ONLY
STRENGTHEN OUR WORK.
I THINK THE PREDICATE TO ALL OF
THIS IS IN A CITY THAT HAS
100,000 MORE PEOPLE THAN WHEN I
STARTED THIS JOB AND RENT IS
GOING UP SEEMINGLY BY THE
MINUTE, WE NEED NEW TOOLS TO
CREATE AND PRESERVE LONG-TERM
AFFORDABILITY SPECIFICALLY WE
NEED THE TOOLS TO STAND IN OUR
EQUITY VALUE SO I HOPE THAT
WHAT YOU WILL HEAR TODAY IS OUR
BEST THINKING TOWARDS THAT END.
WE ARE STILL IN THE PROCESS.
THIS IS AN INCREDIBLY COMPLEX
INSTRUMENT THAT WE ARE AIMING
TO DESIGN SO WE ARE STILL SORT
OF ON THE ROAD BUT THE MILE
MARKERS ARE GETTING SMALLER AS
WE NEAR WHAT I HOPE IS REALITY.
SO, WITH THAT I WILL TURN IT
OVER TO MATTHEW THANKS AGAIN
FOR YOUR CONTINUING SUPPORT OF
THIS WORK
>> ABSOLUTELY.
I'M SO EXCITED ABOUT THIS
REPORT AND YOUR
RECOMMENDATIONS.
I WAS EXCITED WHEN I FIRST
HEARD ABOUT THE IDEA AND GLAD
YOU GUYS ARE THINKING OUTSIDE
THE BOX AND BEING CREATIVE AND
KEEPING THE PROBLEM THAT WE ARE
TROTTING TO STOP AT THE CENTER
AND THE PEOPLE WHO THIS PROBLEM
IMPACTS.
THANK YOU ALL.
>> WE WANT TO GIVE THANKS TO THE
COHORT AND THE ARTS COMMISSION
AND THE EQUITABLE TO BELLAMY
COMMITTEE AS WELL AS THE MANY
FOCUS GROUP PARTICIPANTS WHO
WANTED TO ENSURE GOING FORWARD
THAT WE ARTICULATED AND
CENTERED VALUES AND WANTED TO
ESTABLISH THAT AS AN ONGOING
GUIDING FOUNDATION GOING
FORWARD TO BE ABLE TO KEEP
WHATEVER IS CREATED ON A SURE
PATH.
YOU CAN SEE THE VALUES THAT
THEY ARTICULATED.
THEY WANT TO CONTINUE THIS
FOCUS ON RACIAL ACTIVITY AND
CENTERING THAT THEY ALSO NOTED
THIS WAS AN EXCITING
OPPORTUNITY TO PROPEL THE NEXUS
BETWEEN CULTURAL CAPITAL,
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND FINANCIAL
CAPITAL AND HOW TO BRING THOSE
TOGETHER IN AMAZING INNOVATIVE
WAYS.
WITH THAT SAID, THEY NOTED THAT
WE ALSO NEED TO BE CONTINUALLY
LEARNING.
I'M EXCITED ABOUT THE CULTURAL
SPACE POTENTIAL FOR THIS PDA
BECAUSE IT IS NOT SET ON ONE
SINGLE FIXED SINGLE PROJECT.
WE ARE EXCITED ABOUT THAT.
THE LAST TWO VALUES, THEY ARE
ALSO SIGNIFICANT AND IMPORTANT
AND PROBABLY AT THE CRUX OF
THIS PROPOSAL AS WELL.
BECAUSE THE IDEA IS TO USE THIS
AS A TOOL TO BUILD COMMUNITY
OWNERSHIP AND WEALTH.
AND THINK OF IT AS THAT ASPECT,
WE KNOW INEQUITIES EXIST
HISTORICALLY.
AND THEN THEY NOTED THAT
GOVERNANCE IS KEY, WHO DECIDES,
WHO DECIDES BEING ABLE TO ENSURE
COMMUNITY LED DECISION-MAKING
AND GUIDANCE.
ENSURE ONGOING ENGAGEMENT BUT
ALSO THAT DECISION-MAKING POWER.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT.
BECAUSE THAT IS SO IMPORTANT I
THINK IT REALLY SPEAKS TO THE
GOVERNANCE MODEL OF THE PDA.
AND I KNOW THAT IN THE
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS YOU HAVE
IDENTIFIED MR. JOHNSON AS A
CONTRIBUTOR TO THE REPORT AND
AS WE KNOW HE HAS BEEN
INSTRUMENTAL TO THE CREATION OF
MANY, MANY PDAS IN THE CITY.
BABY HE MIGHT'VE HAD HIS
FINGERS ON MOST OF THEM.
DEAFLY NOT ALL BUT MOST OF THEM.
ARE WE ANTICIPATING A DIFFERENT
TYPE OF GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE
THAT WE HAVE SEEN BEFORE
WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THAT WHO
DECIDES IS SO IMPORTANT
>> IT'S IMPORTANT IT SHOWS UP
IN ANOTHER COUPLE SLIDES.
>> TAKING THAT IDEA AND TRYING
TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS THE BEST
WAY TO GOVERN THAT AND ADVANCE
THE CITY'S PRIORITIES WHILE
KEEPING THAT OVERSIGHT AND THE
DEEP INVESTMENT IN PROCESS FROM
TO BE THAT WE CONTINUE TO HEAR.
IT WILL BE A CONTINUING
BALANCING ACT AS WE MOVE
FORWARD AND LOOKING FOR
MECHANISMS THAT ALLOW FOR THAT
BALANCE.
ONE OF THOSE OPPORTUNITIES IS
IN BOARD MEMBERSHIP AND WE'VE
BEEN LOOKING AT A MODEL WHERE
ONE THIRD OF THE BOARD
MEMBERSHIP COULD BE THE CITY
BOARD BUT LOOKING AT THAT
COMING FROM ACROSS DEPARTMENTAL
TEAM OF PEOPLE WHO ALREADY HAVE
THE EXPERTISE BECAUSE THEY BEEN
WORKING ON THESE TYPES OF
INITIATIVES.
AND BALANCING THAT WITH THE
COMMUNITY FACILITIES AT
EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT AND THE
EDI PROJECT AND CREATING A
BALANCE THAT WAY.
ALSO IN LOOKING AT KIND OF THE
CITY POWERING UP THIS AND THE
ON THE AUTHORITY AND LOOKING AT
THE OFFICE OF ARTS AND CULTURE
BRINGING FORTH AN OPERATING
SUBSIDY FUNDS THAT ARE
ALLOCATED FROM THE BUDGET RIGHT
FROM THE START.
AND ONCE THAT BONDING MECHANISM
COMES INTO PLAY REALLOCATING
THOSE TOWARDS THAT REPAYMENT IN
A SIMILAR WAY ANALOGOUS TO
LANGSTON.
AND THEN KIND OF --
And those typically benefiting
from that value that has been
added to nonlocal developers and
building community wealth can
come from a lot of community
strategies.
With the about equitable equity.
Kind of proportional and
proportional benefits coming
out and that needs to be the
center of this.
There can be strategies,
anything we have looked at from
individual shares owned by
community members to partnering
with social impact investors
capping with their return on a
project and anything above that
goes back into the project,
stacked affordability projects
and that is always partnering
with affordable residential and
commercial along with new and
cultural so that the entire
community can grow from an area
like that rather than
displacement.
And that is really what it is
about.
>> This concept of individual
shares being owned by the
community, is that the core we
are seeing in Portland?
Separate -- that is super
exciting and I would be
interested in having maybe
another focus conversation
about that model.
It seems incredibly powerful to
be deployed in a targeted way.
And I would love to get those
folks up here to talk about
what they have been able to do
in Portland.
I am glad that you guys are
taking that, as well.
>> There are three different
projects in Portland and we are
looking forward to bringing
folks from all three of four
conversation.
>> I am probably printed out
and given copies of the report
that I happen to have.
To anybody who talks about core
development, it is a really
exciting idea.
>> I think to Cassie's point,
there are interesting models
popping up everywhere because
of this issue of affordability,
a crisis in most cities so who
is doing what, how can we learn
from each other and talk only
ground that in our values?
Portland is doing some really
interesting stuff.
>> With humanity ownership, who
holds the ownership?
Is it an entity or individuals?
>> It is one thing we are
trying to figure out.
Ideally, it is both individuals
in the community who can own
individually scaled shares,
something that the folks can
buy.
It would also be represented by
those who can leverage
philanthropy into the
investments and there would be
social impact investors, those
willing to cap their return on
investment and let anything
above that cap returned back to
the project, itself.
>> And how do we think about
long-term affordability?
I mean, do we look at limited
equity co-ops? Whoever is at
the front end, hopefully there
is equity there but also, they
move on to something else and
someone else like it is a one
time deal?
>> A very liquid market but
there is some liquidity built in
so that there are some
fungibility, some replacement
of capital in this project and
that replacement will be
delivered to the community as
defined whether that is
geographic community, cultural
community, etc.
I get a really fun slide so
this gets into more debt --
technical ideology.
What we referred to as twin
organizations, we are referring
to all of this as a
constellation of organizations
because that is really where
this report landed in terms of
organizational recommendations.
You need a little bit of
everything in order to make
this work.
So the poor you see a PDA and
nonprofit that from the
public's perspective, there is
very little differentiation
between them. They would likely
share the Board of Directors,
share staff, they would each do
functions that were more suited
to the corporate type but from
the public's perspective, it
would be one organization in
the middle. At the upper left,
juicy governance and there are
three prongs of government
structure.
One is an interdepartmental
team.
The government gets to place a
certain number of seats on that
board and, typically, you pick
community members who work in
alliance with the PDA.
The twist on that is that it
would actually be city staff,
those who actually represent
the departments. The
departmental team and the
members of that
interdepartmental team would
sit on the Board of Directors
of the PDA and the nonprofit,
as well.
The second prong would be the
equitable development
initiatives and true advisory
board, once established,
representatives would have
seats and representatives from
the facilities and equitable
development would be the final
third. There are some
mechanisms built in to marry
both community bedding and city
government bedding in each of
these sort of free prongs.
That we will get to when we get
to that lower right, as well.
>> Holding our questions about
government?
Now is a good time?
So the interdepartmental team
that those would be
representatives of the
departments whose work touches
on the issues related to
cultural space. The EDI board,
that is a mix, also.
Not also but that is a mix of
city staff and members of the
public?
>> The board is just members of
the public, I believe.
>> On the EDI board, as well.
And they are in the process of
establishing the not interim
board and what God
>>.
But the baseline for that is
that it is directly people
involved in the work, members
of the public.
And what we have found on this
past work is that there's a lot
of overlap between folks
involved in the EDI, cohort and
individual securing cultural
space.
So we can see that this is a
really strong opportunity to
build strength, together.
>> The third leg, that is also
a group of folks exclusively
members of the public?
>> There have been other city
staff from other departments
reflect on the ITI and OFM on
the Fed in the past.
I think the goal is that those
two thirds would be community
members and not city staff.
City staff would be the other
third and specifically drawing
from housing.
Folks that we built this model
closely with.
>> The shared equity
instruments, the mechanisms
actually on the property that
we are talking about and the LCs
are a type of corporate
structure.
The shares of those instruments
, that would be a subsidiary to
the EPA. Community partners
would be investors in that and
that is both individual, shared
and nonprofits.
Housing partners would be
involved in that and we are
talking about constantly
stacking affordability
strategies combining
residential, commercial and
affordability.
Housing partners of those
instruments, as well and social
impact investors with capital
return.
The connection to community in
the lower right, there is a
mechanism when you create a
nonprofit called memberships
and PDAs are called
constituencies and they are
basically an option that you
can either create or not to
ensure community control.
Members of RBI.
That is the one of the benefits
of membership.
Another layer of community
control in these organizations.
>> I don't know how many of our
-- obviously, the one that
comes to mind is the
marketplace PDI, a separate
group called the constituency.
I don't know how many of our
PDI's have that.
>> About half of them do.
An organization that had a
constituency ended last moving
to a non-constituency model.
The base cohorts have been
running for about a year and a
half and it is a group of 20
people, all people of color
coming from the cultural
community and from the cultural
real estate community working
together for a year to learn
about the other side of that
divide and to create ultimately
an army of folks who can turn
around and hack commercial real
estate to make it more
equitable.
And there would be some role
for the base cohort in this
structure whether that is the
membership constituency and to
be certified in order to serve
on one of those boards, we have
also talked about them as an
advisory board that brings
projects to the organization.
And the Fed community facilities
, again, providing a layer of
connection to the community and
in the upper right, the fund
development, we are talking
about philanthropy and what the
city can leverage through its
investments in this
organization from the
philanthropy world, developing
partnerships with, for example,
housing providers and from the
investment gaps. Again, from
the social impact of investors,
that is money that accrues to
that central area that is the
nonprofit on the PDA.
I am going to leave this slide
unless there are more
structural questions?
>> Just let me -- let me state
back my understanding of this.
So there is this parent entity
which is a hybrid of a PDA and
nonprofit but fairly
transparent to the public.
Disparity that you see doing
the work, years from now, they
will in theory be invested in
multiple projects around the
úcity.
Each project will have separate
proctors -- partners.
There may be some investors
that come in that our mission
driven.
They may be a partner that is
straight up affordable housing
that is running a couple of
floors on that and have brought
some resources.
Each project might have a
different mix but the overall
mission is parasitization. And
that is driven by the mix of
governance and there's other
axes for community members?
>> Correct.
Each individual project any
space or building would have
its own shared equity
instruments, its own LLC, its
own corporation and each of
those could have a different
mix of investors.
>> I don't know at about
commercial real estate but it's
probably not different.
Oftentimes, we will see the
company's name on it.
The banks and investors.
>> When I got hired to run the
young cultural arts Center,
there were 60 cities, housing,
tax credits, cultural on the
ground floor.
It is not unusual to have to
use layers of ownership in
order to access the variance.
>> I should say that the
pairing is also really common.
I think we found one of the
eight TDs in Seattle that
didn't have a paired nonprofit.
>> Back on that, one more time,
sorry.
But the input to -- under the
connection to the community for
the membership of the
constituent seen in this model,
it goes up to the nonprofit
corporation instead of the PDA.
That looks like that might be a
little bit different.
>> That is a little misleading
because the girls are pointed
at that central core.
>> All right.
Thank you.
>> In terms of what mechanisms
or property control this thing
would employ, it is really a
spectrum from the lightest touch
which might be management for
HP or APA nonprofit does not
have side control but it
manages a series of projects in
the space for the landlord for
someone else.
It can sublease.
It could by individual spaces
and a larger building as
commercial condos face.
It can acquire property and
soup to nuts.
Or it can develop property from
the ground up with partners, as
well. So a spectrum of psych
control options there.
And then a spectrum of projects
that would go into these.
Each of the footprints would
contain does not each would
contain all of these but would
potentially contain individual
artist and what we mean is
genitive space, studio space,
rehearsal space, project space,
presentation projects show an
expansion that props up and it
has a live span and closes a
month or two later.
Pop up experiments was our new
organizations taking over the
first time intended to
stabilize but maybe not in that
space using that space as a
safety net.
Training will space to launch a
new experiment. Cultural
organizations partnering with
fine arts, Northwest have in to
get space together and
communities to benefit small
businesses.
We are not closing the door for
small locally owned small
businesses in these footprints,
as well.
So you might have a coffee shop
in one of them, as well.
>> So, in the instant that you
would have a community serving
small business within the arts
space that is owned by the PDA,
what would be the relationship
there?
Just rental?
Or something also unique?
>> I would imagine that it
would be any of the
relationships that we would
have with the arts
organization, as well.
It could be a coownership model
or a simple release model and
you would always be in the mix
of uses.
I don't think the space agency
has we have been referring to
it for short would go into a
site with the sultanate, the
sole presence would be for
profit, small business, that
would be an ancillary use to
the visual arts. The artist
studio use would also then have
potentially a small business
added to it.
>> I have also noticed one of
the strengths of this model is
the ability to help provide
capacity building for
individuals depending on where
they are in a spectrum towards
cultural space.
I think the experience of the
museum itself in our previous
home, we were renting and
leasing managed by the
international district
preservation authority on our
pathway to ownership.
So, that definitely can help
meet the need that we have also
heard from a host of people
saying, how can we find and
learn about how to do this
along the way?
>> So what are the next steps?
What happens next?
>> There are multiple paths
that this organization can take
over the next 12 months and we
are planning for three
how various funding discussions
and property discussions play
out in the next two or three
months.
There would be likely a launch
of a nonprofit before the end
of this year to begin with
administrative tasks and we
would be looking at launching
the PDA which would be an
legislative act in the first
quarter of 2020.
>> One of the interesting
things is that the city has not
legislated a PDA. There are no
digital copies of however we
did that before and the person
who did it is now retired.
And we want to measure Tyson
wants and we want to get it
right.
We also want to make sure this
is complementary and not
competitive with our housing
agenda, our investment agenda.
There's a lot of moving parts
that this entity could play a
role in but if we get ahead of
ourselves and legislating it,
we could miss out on some
opportunities.
It is a little bit about
timing.
I do think that the nonprofit
to incubate the governance model
. At the end of the day, that
might be the most important
decision to make, who is going
to decide and really spending
our time with that.
And if we feel like the city is
really ready to go, I think we
have to do some due diligence
around our potential funding
partners and our philanthropy
partners I know who is going to
go with us.
>> How would this be different
than, for instance, a for
culture?
>> A for culture who is one of
the partners we talked to in
this work, they are dedicated
revenue, their tax is committed
to doing all of the things that
the arts and culture currently
does.
They work the arts program,
maintain gallery space.
They could do this if they
wanted to.
This is not where they are
choosing to go as an
organization which is
completely fine. And I think we
said this a number of times,
this organization will be about
developing and sustaining
physical space.
That is its mission.
That is what it does.
It is not a funder. It holds
space. It allows for things
like culture or the EDI or
other folks that have dedicated
capacity to partner into it.
If the culture wants to do that
as part of the revenue. They
also have the responsibility of
serving an entire county.
>> I think it is helpful to
make that distinction.
Government is often accused of
duplicating our efforts and I
think this is a very -- maybe
using somewhat structure but
towards a different set of ends.
And addressing a different set
of challenges.
That, I think, may not be
unique to Seattle.
It may also be shared by the
County but it is one that we put
a lot of smart people,
impassioned people together to
come up with some ways to move
forward.
Could we just drill down just a
little bit more on the next
steps?
So, talking about pulling
together, launching a nonprofit
. Where are we at on that?
Where do we expect to go?
>> We are working with a
consultant right now to
establish bylaws and articles
that would be specifically
suited to a slightly weird
situation.
And that is where we are at,
right now.
We are in the middle of that
conversation with an attorney.
>> I am super excited about
this work.
Thank you for what you are
doing.
I think this is the right
solution to a big set of
challenges and I think it will
serve the arts community well.
I think it will serve a lot of
our broader goals in the city
around affordability and
economic development, jobs and
all of the things that we care
about.
>> The only thing I would add
as we talked to 900 people this
summer and surveyed another 1500
, regardless of whether you are
a studio musician, a filmmakr,
a union stage tech, the
affordability crisis is hitting
everybody and if we don't take
aggressive action to create
long-term affordability, we are
going to lose our cultural and
creative community and we feel
that pressure.
>> I am looking forward to
figuring out ways we can help
move this forward. We really
appreciate your passion and
your dedication and the
product.
>> Thank you.
Thank you so much.
>> And now, we are going to
skip to the last item which is
item #10.
>> Every other week garbage
collection and other
jurisdiction findings.
>> Thank you, Newell.
We appreciate you sticking
through the long agenda.
I really appreciate it.
>> I have a cold and I hope I
don't disturb you too much.
>> I think we are great.
Let's start off with quick
introductions that we will set
the agenda for this discussion.
Linda Knight, city of Renton
staff of solid waste utility.
>> Alice Lockhart, 350 Seattle.
>> Thank you so much.
This request for you to come
and join us from Renton, Linda
is really -- came out of my
interest in revisiting the
city's experience, Seattle
Public utilities experience
with every other week garbage
pilot that was conducted
several years ago, I think it
was 2015.
We invited Seattle Public
utilities to come earlier this
year to give a presentation on
the survey results associated
with that pilot and I heard a
little bit about those results
on the questions, and
experiment that I am playing
with right now, 2015 was
relatively speaking, a long
time ago.
úAs it relates specifically to
the public's expectations
around trade-offs, around our
convenience.
And our concerns around climate
change.
Although the executive has
expressed a lack of interest in
moving forward, I want to hear
about other jurisdictions
experiences and I think, in
some cases, for many, many years
.
>> I would be happy to tell you
Renton's experience.
I will tell you the conditions
on the motivations, I think, or
slightly different, based on
the time that we were looking
at every other week. Collection,
if it is okay, I will give a
broad overview and you can ask
specific questions and any
detailed data that you need,
you can ask Alex to grab for
you and I will provide that in
the back of the office.
So we were nearing the end of a
contract.
At the time, we contracted with
Waste Management and Waste
Management city for many years.
And we were faced in 2007 with
some indecision, to some
degree, about whether to extend
the contract or whether to go
out for a competitive process.
And at that point in time, we
were also approached by King
County who is interested in
looking at different models for
collection, every other week
models.
And also looking at the food
waste with the green bin
organics card.
Issue.
It wasn't, some cities were
actually collecting food waste
at that time.
Renton was not.
Renton's system in 2007 was
stackable bins which Seattle
had but you guys went to single
strain before we did.
So our city had a three
collection bins, customers on
their own garbage can.
We did not have food waste in
with the green waste.
And we had a fairly restrictive
risk of recyclables acceptable
in the program. So we partnered
with King County and the County
of public health and Waste
Management to do a collection
pilot and what we piloted was
every other week, all three
strains of material. And at the
time, we were weekly, all three
strains.
Very intense collection so we
piloted every other week, three
strains your and we also
piloted every other week,
garbage and recycling with your
food waste and garbage waste
going weekly.
>> Three different geographies?
>> Yes, we basically tested.
We took similar neighborhoods.
One was South Renton and one
was North Renton but the
demographics were very similar.
There were about 700 households
in each of the pilot areas and
then we had a control group
with a similar number and
demographic.
So the result of the pilot we
ran from August through
December and the pilot included
both audits. We didn't actually
ask the residents whether they
wanted to be participants.
We required them to be part of
the pilot.
We did not give them any money
or any incentives to be a part
of the pilot.
What we did do which is
different than when we launched
the program, eventually, was
that we up sized the container
so that if a customer had a 32
gallon container as the regular
subscription, we increased it
to 64 gallons for them.
And we did Street audits,
windshield audits with the
drivers.
We went out a couple of times a
month auditing to look at what
the conditions of the bins
were.
We also had the Seattle health
department walking routes to
monitor up close and personal,
looking for her factors and
odors and whatnot.
Any problems.
And I will probably lose some
of my trains thought here. And
we did two surveys.
We did not do a pre-survey but
we did do a survey once the
pilot had begun.
We did a mail out survey to all
of the pilot residence and we
did a phone survey.
And basically, at the end of
the pilot program, the surveys
came back which were very
positive, I think, for that
type of abrupt change in
service.
Garbage is very personal to
people.
Unless you work in the
industry, you will never know
what it is like.
I am sure as council members,
you have heard people complain
about garbage, before.
We have over 70% of our
households that were satisfied
with the program.
No matter which one, which
neighborhood was tested.
So we brought that to counsel.
We were also faced with 2007
running into 2008.
We continue negotiating with
Waste Management and we were
hit with the economic downturn.
Fuel costs were escalating.
What we ended up doing was
having Waste Management bid the
weekly model and then both
every other week models so we
had three different cost models
to look at.
I mean, it doesn't take too
much thought to know that a
weekly model will be the most
expensive because it is the
most labor-intensive and has
the most capital and fuel
intensive.
Staff actually recommended
every other week, all three
strains.
We thought we could get the
best benefit in terms of
reduction of noise and
disturbances in the
neighborhood plus greenhouse
gases.
But ended up recycling and
weekly organics.
I think that is a brilliant
model for a couple of reasons.
We did launch in 2009 and we
had a number of different
changes in that contract.
It wasn't every other week.
Our customers finally got
single stream bins and were
able to put food waste and.
Customers no longer had to
supply their own garbage can.
We did all contractor owned
cars so the system was much
cleaner and easier. And we
extended the list of
recyclables.
So there were a lot of benefits
to the customers.
The benefit was the service
reduction which is seen as a
benefit and the other was cost
because our rates were in the
double digits.
Anywhere we have a variable
structure, depending on what
level of cart you would
subscribe to, your rights
could've gone up anywhere from
35% to 75% which is pretty
steep.
>> In Renton, the race actually
went up when you moved because
you had not had a rate increase
for a number of years?
>> We had not had a rate
increase in a number of years.
The economics had not changed
since our last contracts.
Contracts are dependent upon
what the economic conditions
are.
>> It is interesting that, as
far as the reasons for
dissatisfaction in Seattle, one
of the top reasons for the size
faction in Seattle was a
perception that rates should be
halved because you are getting
have as much service.
Ratepayers saw a reduction in
rates to participate in the
pilot but it was not as much of
a reduction as they expected.
Nevertheless, your experience
in Renton moving forward was
actually a rate increase due to
a bunch of different factors.
I think it wasn't so much the
satisfaction.
>> I will say that.
I think that the pilot program
itself, the pilot residence
which are around 1400 in total
were satisfied.
Of course, we had people who
didn't like it and even
launching forward in 2009, we
definitely had our detractors
but I think of myself as an
optimist, mostly.
And I also talked back to, in
1989 when we launched curbside
recycling, prior to that,
customers have been receiving
their garbage service at their
back door, quite personal
service. And now, in 89,
Seattle would have experienced
something similar.
Customers now had to sort
material, they had to put their
carts out at the curbside.
And I know when Renton
implemented its curbside
program initially, people were,
I don't know, dissatisfied, to
a certain extent because of the
extra work they had to do.
Two years into the program,
people were very proud of being
, of helping the environment so
I would use that analogy much
of the time with my customers
calling in who were
complaining, basically, the
message. The issues were the
same, people perceive it as,
you are cutting my service and
have.
What my response was in our
program is different than
Seattle in that we do have
variable can rate structure for
garbage, unlimited recycling
and it is no fee for recycling.
It is embedded in the garbage.
The organic container is also
embedded in our garbage so
people don't subscribe to those
streams material.
Garbage is mandatory.
Recycling and organics is
voluntary.
We assume everybody is going to
participate.
We deliver bins and carts to
them but they are not required
by ordinance to participate.
Our organics is unlimited.
And I think we are one of the
only cities in King County that
offers that.
So I at least had the message
to them that, look, we are only
coming, the garbage truck is
only coming every other week.
But you have capacity to handle
all of the material that you
are consuming in a months time.
Was that like the ideal
message?
Ultimately, as a solid waste
professional, I want people to
reduce their overall
consumption, that is the goal.
But for that transition, you
needed to assure people that
they had someplace for the
materials to go on any given
collection day and storage for
the non-collection days.
What we found in the end as
part of it was the economic
conditions, was that we did not
upsize customers for the actual
implementation.
Primarily because we were
having these huge rate
increases.
We did not feel it was fair to
automatically assume they
should go to the higher levels
of service.
So we maintained to customers
in their existing cart.
So there was one exception, we
had 10 gallons and now we only
have 20 gallons.
But for the standard 32 gallon
canned customer, they remained
at 32 gallons and they would
have to live with 32 gallons
for two weeks full of garbage.
>> Also the optimist. I know it
is possible.
I practice it at home, already.
I am a Seattle customer.
I know it is doable.
And so, what we did was assume
that they would stay at that
level.
We were slammed.
I won't mince words or
anything, we were slammed with
customer calls.
We did a lot of public outreach,
a dozen community meetings that
were very well attended and
ended up being a lot of give-
and-take between the community
and also opportunities to teach
people again about what goes
into which. That seems to be a
really common question no
matter what year it is and even
with all of the community
outreach, all of the mailers,
all of the media going out, I
think we underestimated the
public reaction when we
actually implemented.
It also didn't help that in
December before our January
implementation, in December
when our contract was out
delivering the public education
materials on the new part, we
were slammed with two
snowstorms that hits week after
week.
So here we had two.
Snowstorms are like, no pickup
in two weeks and then people
are concerned about moving to
an every other week model and
they are nervous.
All of that said, we handled it.
And I will say that, for the
most part, I would say that our
customers have adapted which, I
think that anyone can adapt.
It is all about setting up your
system. A little story I tell
is that in 2017, we have a new
contractor in 2017.
25 years with Waste Management
and now we are with public
services.
So we are out again in the
community holding public
meetings.
We were also bringing in
another 5000 new customers from
annexation who had never had
mandatory garbage.
And #2, they had had every
other week service.
So, there were some loud voices
at those meetings and I was at
all of the meetings and given
the presentation and answering
the public's questions.
It was heartening to me because
customers would stand up in the
meeting and say, trying to rile
the rest of the participants.
other week garbage. ave every
Things are going to stink and
we are going to have rats and
bears and recommends and every
type of animal that you can
think of in Renton.
There are some rural areas of
Renton.
And other members of the public
would stand up and say, hey, we
are only doing it and we like
it.
They were his there to hear. Do
we still have our detractors?
I think we always will but our
experience has been very good
with every other week.
Again, being a Seattle customer
, I think that conditions in
Seattle are different than the
conditions in Renton in the
sense that you already have
some management strategies for
your collection program and
that you mandate garbage, you
mandate recycling, you mandate
organics and not all three of
those things exist in the city
of Renton.
Diapers are going to be a big
issue.
>> That was one of my
questions, how do you guys
handle that?
>> When we did our pilot,
customers handling personal
hygiene products, we just
suggested that they double
bagged the personal hygiene
products and put them in the
garbage can. If you remember,
we had public health staff
blocking. They basically did
not sense any kind of issue.
We had families, obviously, in
the neighborhoods that we were
running our pilot in.
We did it in the hot summer
months in the cold winter
months.
There doesn't seem to be a
problem with it.
It is more of a public
perception than reality.
The other caution I would have
is that in checking that
customers are right sized for
their container, people in
Renton still to this day, I
think, believe that there is
only one can size and it is the
candidate they have.
It is just getting the message
out there, you have options for
sizing up or sizing down.
>> Sorry, I go on a bit.
Anyway, thank you for your time.
>> Have you in Renton done any
calculations around emission
savings?
>> We have not.
We have limited resources in
the city so we have not
conducted any study on the
greenhouse gas emissions.
Essentially, we eliminated two
whole routes.
One for garbage and one for
recycling and our organics
still run weekly.
>> One of the things that folks
have pointed to in our pilot
that we did is that folks who
ran that pilot did an analysis
on satisfaction according to
different demographics of people
and found that greater
dissatisfaction correlated with
family size and ZIP Codes.
And so, people who lived in
lower income communities of
color have larger families were
more likely to be dissatisfied
and that was one of the
findings that led to the
counsel not enacting every
other week garbage at that time.
What is your experience with
large families?
>> We do have large families in
the city of Renton and we have
not conducted any type of
detailed studies such as
Seattle has conducted.
I have dealt with calls from
large households.
Largely, those households
subscribe to the highest level
of garbage.
If you have a seven person
household with young children
or elders using personal
hygiene products, they are
going to be using a 96 gallon
garbage can.
It is rightsizing.
It is really looking at -- we
do have senior rates and we
have disabled rights.
We don't have rates just for
low income.
So, again, you are paying for
the usage of the garbage you
are producing.
>> Alice, what do you have to
share with us?
>> I just love this idea.
I particularly love this idea.
At this moment in time. Because
I see sort of across the city
Council and things that are
going on in department.
Basically, folks are starting
to look at all kinds of
policies and programs through a
climate lens as well as our
usual and the other thing I
love, our equity lens.
And putting those things
together.
And this just feels like a
really sweet example of this.
And from the client perspective
, there are three areas of
goodness, one of which reflects
difficulty in our trash
collection.
The first was the 2012 study
found that if we went to every
other week, we would see a 35%
reduction on admissions which,
you know, that is greenhouse
gas as well as air pollution.
And the second is a little bit
more difficult because when I
drove down into what our
garbage fleet actually is, we
have a few really nice
prototype electric vehicles.
And the rest of it runs on
natural gas which has the big
sign on the side that says
clean natural gas.
We ride in SPU's or material.
It says Waste Management
creates some biogas which they
stick run into the natural
pipeline system which means
those trucks are taking it out
of the gas line system and it
is largely fractal gas which is
a huge warming potential in the
short term when we are trying
to avoid reaching the
reversible tipping point and it
is looking dicey.
So anything we can do to reduce
that use of Frak gas is a
really great thing and our
motivation to do it or to be
correspondingly strong.
Thirdly does and this is
something that 350 Seattle is
getting increasingly interested
in, our carbon footprint and
how we measure our greenhouse
gas emissions, we measure
direct greenhouse gas emissions
that occur right here and those
are largely buildings and
transportation.
However, we all have like this
hidden, huge carbon footprint
which is the stuff we use and
other cities since 2012, you
can tell I am excited those
other cities since the 2012
study who have done this and
have majored it have found
there is a reduction in waste.
It is hard to tell how much of
this can be attributed to
moving compost out of the waste
stream and how much of it is
using less stuff but some of it
is using less stuff and if, at
the same time we do this, we
talk about it and we publicize
it, you talked about that a
little bit. I think the better
the communication that this is
a really great thing that
people can do, the better
results we are going to have.
In reducing greenhouse gas
emissions as part of such a
program.
So I find it really exciting.
I also find it exciting in the
context of the green new deal
which is all sort of that full,
big transformation which we
must do.
But at the same time, that
transformation needs to be
transformation in how we do
everything in this kind of a
program is just exemplary in
that area where we have
something we are already doing,
we do it better.
We bring down omissions.
In the big bold area for trash,
we are going to have to, if we
want to meet the green new deal
goal that we signed up for, we
are going to have to replace
those trucks, those natural gas
truck with an all electric fleet
which isn't going to be cheap.
So this program can give a
little contribution to that in
the form of having to purchase
a few less trucks.
So there is just a lot of
goodness, there.
>> I am happy to say that our
contractors, even though we are
in the middle of the contractor
open to having this discussion,
I think that is really important
that we have the partner given
we are in the middle of the
contract.
Linda, which was the
implementation period?
How much time did it take from
-- I am assuming there was some
sort of legislative action?
>> Yes, we do things kind of
fast.
I think we had a six-month,
maybe a little bit less than
six months to implement the
program.
The contractor ordering all of
the new equipment which, for
us, was changing over to clean,
natural gas to diesel so that
was an improvement.
And doing all of your public
education, all of the community
meetings outreach to the
community, ordering all of the
capital equipment that needed
to be distributed to all of the
residence.
And if you were to give Seattle
advice, what would your advice
be on how to move forward, this
conversation.
>> I have to commend our counsel
and our administration because
I think that they had some
reservations about moving to
every other week collection but
they made the leap.
I think you have to have a
strong backbone because you
will have the public.
[ Technical difficulties ] it
may not be the majority [
Technical difficulties ] but
loud and vocal.
And the other is to be really
prepared with not only the prep
that we did a lot.
I don't know that everybody
read the materials or came to
the meetings.
It is not until the public is
actually confronted with what
is right before them. That
makes people very angst. But, I
do believe that people can
adjust.
It is about developing a system
for yourself, in your own home,
about how you handle and how
you consume.
And I do think that our program
the people wake up to how much
they were consuming.
And I agree with you, Alice.
Some of the gains were made in
the food waste and green bin
but overall, we saw reduction
in all three streams.
We saw increases in yard waste
or the green waste and
recycling.
But overall, per customer, if
you look at the overall
consumption, we saw an overall
reduction.
>> So you saw an increase in
recycling at 27%, an increase
in organic at 44%, a decrease
in garbage at 44%.
What was the overall capita?
>> If I could get back to you,
and provide Alice with all of
the stats, that would be super
helpful.
>> I think the top line is that
Renton has had every other week
garbage for more than 10 years,
now.
>> Right and we still have our
detractors.
Even today, I could go back to
the office and someone could be
calling me.
They see this and they call me
and say they don't like it.
Alice, do you want to have the
last word?
>> I have two things to chime
in.
Maybe three.
Other cities that have done
this have seen similar but in
the ones I was able to dig up
even larger, decreases in
waste, for instance.
Portland saw a 35% decrease in
weight.
The city waste in Lavinia, they
have done amazing stuff and a
lot of it has involved what
they say to the public.
And I, personally find that we
switched to the very smallest
container.
And we are down to less than a
bag of chips to put our garbage
in every week if we are not
doing any construction and if
we do construction, we save it.
It is super fun.
>> It is a challenge.
>> Exactly!
And the urgency. We talk about
the speed