>>> WE JUST CALLED THE MEETING
BACK TO ORDER.
SO, FIRST, APPROVAL OF THE
AGENDA.
IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION THE
AGENDA WILL BE ADOPTED.
HEARING NO OBJECTION, THE
AGENDA IS ADOPTED.
CHAIR'S REPORT, BRIEFLY.
THERE IS A SPECIAL MEETING OF
THIS COMMITTEE TODAY WE ARE
GOING TO HEAR DISCUSSION AND
DEBATE AND THEN I HOPE TO HOLD
A VOTE ON THE TRANSITIONAL
LEGISLATION THANK YOU FOR
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT TO BRING
IT FORWARD AND ALL OF THE WORK
BY PEDERSEN AND ALL OF MY OTHER
COLLEAGUES THAT WORKED VERY
CRITICALLY ON THIS ORDINANCE
AND CONTRIBUTED A LOT OF
POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS AND WE
WILL DISCUSS THE AMENDMENTS IN
TURN AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT.
SO, NOW, PUBLIC COMMENT I WILL
OPEN IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
WE HAVE 13 FOLKS WHO SIGNED UP
TO SPEAK.
I WILL ACCEPT FOLK THAT COME UP
TO SPEAK AS A GROUP IT FOLKS
ELECT TO DO SO.
I AM KEEPING THE TIME LIMIT AT
THE 2 MINUTE TIME LIMIT.
WHEN YOU COME UP I WANT TO NOTE
THERE ARE TWO MICROPHONES, ONE
CLOSER TO THE WINDOW, THIS ONE,
USE EITHER ONE.
YOU CAN QUEUE UP.
I WILL CALL THREE NAMES UP AT A
TIME.
I APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE FOR MY
TERRIBLE PRONOUNCING NAMES, I
DON'T MEAN ANYTHING BY IT.
I WILL START
>> -- IT IS REALLY A VITAL
ESSENTIAL NEED FOR THE
HOMELESSNESS CRISIS IN SEATTLE.
IT IS NOT A CURE FOR
HOMELESSNESS IT A STEP UP AND
TO MOVE ON AND TO GET YOUR
DIGNITY AND YOUR RESPECT BACK.
THEY OPENED DOORS FOR ME IN 9
MONTHS THAT I DID NOT SEE
ANYWHERE IN MY FUTURE WHEN I
WAS OUT THERE HOMELESS.
AND THEY HELPED IMMENSELY AND I
AM STILL GOING TO COME IN AND
ADVOCATE FOR HOMELESSNESS AND
FOR TINY HOUSES.
IT IS DEFINITELY BETTER THAN
TENTS AND PEOPLE NEED THAT,
PEOPLE ARE DYING OUT THERE FROM
THE COLD AND FROM HOMELESSNESS.
SENSELESS CRIMES OF THE
CHRISTIE JACKSON THAT GOT SHOT
FOR HELPING SOMEBODY.
IN THE WRONG PLACE AT THE WRONG
TIME.
BUT HOMELESSNESS IT IS NO JOKE.
MAKES YOU BATTERED AND BROKEN
AND AS A WOMAN A TINY HOUSE
SAVED MY LIFE.
THEY ARE EVERYTHING TO HELP
SOMEBODY BOOST THEIR MORAL AND
TO GET MOTIVATED AND BACK ON
THE RIGHT TRACK AND PLEASE KEEP
FUNDING THIS TINY HOMES ARE
ESSENTIAL.
I AM PROVE TO PROVE THEY WORK.
AND I WILL HERE AND KEEP COMING
BACK FOR TINY HOMES BECAUSE
THEY ARE AWESOME AND THEY WORK.
A STEP FORWARD OUT OF
HOMELESSNESS.
AND THEY GIVE YOU EVERY
ESSENTIAL NEED IF YOU NEED THE
TOOLS THAT YOU NEED EVERYTHING
YOU NEED TO PUT YOU BACK ON THE
RIGHT TRACK AND THE TIME AND --
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH YOUR
TIME HAS EXPIRED.
>> THANK YOU.
THANK YOU.
>> NEXT.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
I, TOO, AM A RESIDENT OF CAMP
SECOND CHANCE, TINY HOME
VILLAGE.
I AM ALSO AN EMPLOYEE OF LEE
HIGH.
I FREQUENT GOING DOWNTOWN ON
THE STREETS EVERY WORKDAY.
I SEE THE FOLKS THAT ARE NOT
PRIVILEGED ENOUGH TO HAVE A
TINY HOUSE.
SLEEPING ON THE SIDEWALK WITH
CARDBOARD.
WHATEVER THEY CAN DO TO KEEP
THE COLD, WET OFF OF THEM AND
THE GROUND.
THE VILLAGE HAS ALLOWED ME TO
HAVE SECURITY AND A SAFE PLACE
TO BE WITH 24-HOUR SECURITY FOR
MYSELF TO BE ABLE TO KEEP MY
BELONGINGS AND GO LOOK FOR
WORK.
I SERIOUSLY DON'T KNOW AS A
SINGLE WOMAN WHERE I WOULD BE
IF I DID NOT HAVE THAT
OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A SAFE
PLACE.
I AM ALWAYS FIGHTING FOR THE
HOMELESSNESS.
TINY HOUSE VILLAGES IS A STEP
TOWARDS, YOU KNOW, GIVING FOLKS
A SECOND CHANCE AT CHANGING
THEIR LIVES.
AND I DON'T KNOW ABOUT ALL OF
THE ORDINANCES THAT ARE IN
PLACE BUT I KNOW THAT IF SOME
OF THEM COULD BE ADJUSTED AND
MOVED AND REARRANGED THEN
CERTAINLY THERE COULD BE ROOM
FOR MORE TINY HOUSE VILLAGES TO
BE PLACED THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
THANK YOU.
I HOPE THAT IT PASSES.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> SHARON LEE FOLLOWED BY
PEGGY.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
SHARON LEE DIRECTOR OF LOW
HOUSING INSTITUTE.
I WANT TO LET PEOPLE KNOW OF
THE OVERALL NUMBER OF PEOPLE
WHO HAVE BEEN HELPED BY TINY
HOUSES.
1,624 PEOPLE HAVE BEEN HOUSED
IN TINY HOUSES.
[CROWD APPLAUDS ]
>> OF THE PEOPLE WHO MOVED OUT
WE HAVE 740 HAVE GOTTEN
HOUSING, 740 PEOPLE.
AND 670 PEOPLE HAVE GOTTEN
INCOME SUPPORT.
AND, THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE,
OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OBTAINED
HOUSING WITHIN THE 1-6-MONTH
PERIOD.
WE REALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF TINY
HOUSES A BRIDGE TO LONG TIME
HOUSING.
IN TERMS OF THE AMENDMENT WE
ARE CONCERNED THAT, I BELIEVE,
SAFE PARKING IN TENT CITIES AND
TINY HOUSE VILLAGES ARE
CONSIDERED PART OF THIS COVERED
BY THIS ORDINANCE.
SO WE KNOW THAT SOME PRIVATE
ORGANIZATIONS AND NONPROFITS
WOULD LIKE TO HAVE 5 OR 6 CARS,
YOU KNOW, PEOPLE LIVING IN
THEIR CARS THAT THEY COULD HAVE
A PLACE THAT WOULD BE SAFE AND
WE THINK THAT THE COUNCIL
SHOULD NOT REDUCE THE NUMBER OF
POSSIBILITIES OR OPPORTUNITIES
BECAUSE IT COVERS SAFE PARKING
AS WELL AS TENT CITIES IF YOU
ARE JUST LIMITING IT, IT IS A
DIFFERENT STORY.
BECAUSE SAFE PARKING IS
INCLUDED OVERNIGHT PARKING IS
AN OPTION CASE MANAGEMENT IN
VALUABLE BUT 27/7 SECURITY
WOULD NOT APPLY TO OVERNIGHT
PARKING SITUATION.
OUR FEELING IS IT MAKES SENSE
IF CITY FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE.
CASE MANAGEMENT AS WELL AS
NEEDING THE OUTCOMES MAKES
SENSE IF THE CITY IS FUNDING
IT.
WE FEEL THAT THE NEIGHBORHOODS
JUST ABOUT EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD
HAS HOMELESS PEOPLE SO WE WOULD
LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT TINY
HOUSE VILLAGES WILL BE IN ALL
NEIGHBORHOODS AND NOT LIMIT IT
TO AS ONE MILE OR ONLY ONE
COUNCIL DISTRICT BEFORE YOU
HAVE TO HIT EVERY DISTRICT
BEFORE YOU -- THANK YOU.
>> YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED.
>> GOOD EVENING,
COUNCILMEMBERS.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE
YOU TO VOTE ON IT AS WRITTEN
AND NOT THE AMENDMENTS.
I WILL TUCK ABOUT AMENDMENTS I
FIND WITHOUT MERIT.
>> CUTTING THE NUMBER FROM 40-
20 AND THERE IS NO REASON TO DO
THAT WHEN WE KNOW THEY ARE
EFFECTIVE AND SAFE AND CRITICAL
LOW NEEDED.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 2, DIRECT HSD
TO ESTABLISH THE STANDARDS FOR
OPERATING TINY HOUSE VILLAGES.
HSD SO FAR SHOWING THEY ARE
INCAPABLE OF ADMINISTERING A
PROGRAM.
NO GRIEVANCE PROCESS, NO
PROCESS OR BILL OF RIGHTS FOR
THE RESIDENTS OF TINY HOUSE
VILLAGES AND FURTHER MORE
FOOLISHLY GIVEN THE OPERATION
ONE OPERATOR A MONOPLY ON
OPERATING TINY HOUSE VILLAGES,
AMENDMENT NUMBER 3 IS
REQUEERING CASE MAN ANNUALERS.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU REALIZE
THIS BUT THERE ARE FEW THAT ARE
CASE MANAGERS AT THE TINY HOUSE
VILLAGES, FEW, THEY WOULD HAVE
TO RETRAIN THEM ALL OR SEND
THEM BACK TO SCHOOL IF THAT
WERE A REQUIREMENT.
REALLY THE BIGGEST VALUE IN
TINY HOUSE VILLAGES IS THAT
THEY ARE SAFER AND HEALTHIER
THAN UNSANCTION ENCAMPMENTS AND
THERE IS REALLY.
THEY ARE NOT THE BE ALL AND END
ALL.
THEY ARE VALUE IN AND OF
THEMSELVES WITHOUT THAT.
THANK YOU.
>> AND THEN THE FOLLOWING FOLKS
WILL BE SHAWN SMITH, FOLLOWED
BY ALEX AND FOLLOWED BY TRAVIS
JOHNSON.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL.
MY NAME IS SHAWN SMITH.
I AM RESIDENT OF NICHOLS NORTH
VILLAGE.
I AM HERE TO SPEAK TO AMENDMENT
2. THE CLEAR POLICY SET FORTH
HSD.
I THINK BEFORE DOING THAT WE
FIRST HAVE TO EXAM HSD THAT HAS
NO GRIEVANCE PROCESS AT
PRESENT.
A GRIEVANCE MUST BE ESTABLISHED
BECAUSE THEY MAY BE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE FOR HOLDING ON TO
THE ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN AS
THEY HAVE DONE WITH THE LAST
ORDINANCE.
IT IS VITALLY IMPORTANT TO
PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF RESIDENTS
IN THOSE VILLAGES.
THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL CASES
WHERE THE CASE MANAGERS ARE
VIOLATING THE RIGHTS OF THOSE
VILLAGERS AND THOSE HAVE BEEN
FORWARDED THROUGH THE PRESENT
GRIEVANCE PROCESS AND NOT
ADDRESSED PROPERLY.
AND THERE IS NO OVERSIGHT.
PLEASE FIX THAT BEFORE TRYING
TO FIX THIS AMENDMENT OR AMEND
THIS ORDINANCE, THANK YOU.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON NOON,
COUNCILMEMBERS.
I'M ALEX FINCH.
I AM GOING TO TRY TO APPEAL TO
YOUR HUMAN NATURE TODAY BUT
BECAUSE SEATTLE HAS THREE
FORTHS OF KING COUNTY'S
POPULATION AND AS WE HAVE TOLD
YOU BEFORE, 112 HAVE DIED LAST
YEAR.
THEY SAVED LIVES.
SO, WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO PUT
HUMAN LIVES OVER SPENDING.
WHEN DID PUTTING A DOLLAR
AMOUNT ON A HUMAN LIFE BECOME
THE STANDARD?
PLEASE JUST PASS THIS ORDINANCE
AS IS SO THAT WAY WE CAN HELP
SAVE MORE LIVES.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
TRAVIS JOHNSON IS NEXT.
>> GOOD EVENING SELECT
COMMITTEE.
I AM TRAVIS JOHNSON.
I AM A NICHOLSVILLE VOLUNTEER.
CURRENTLY I AM HOMELESS AND
CURRENTLY I HAVE READ ALL OF
THE -- I AGREE WITH ALEX FINCH
ABOUT IT SHOULD BE AS IS.
IT SHOULD NOT BE AMENDED.
THAT WILL BE JUST CORPORATE BS.
BUT THAT IS ALL I COULD SAY ON
THAT FOR THIS TIME.
I DO THINK THAT TINY HOUSES
SAVE LIVES.
I HAVE SEEN IT DONE.
I HAVE -- I DON'T KNOW ABOUT
CASE MANAGERS.
I KNEW WHEN I WAS IN GEORGETOWN
I HAD A CASE MANAGER I SEEN HIM
ONCE A WEEK.
THAT WAS IT.
AT THE END OF THE DAY I THINK
TINY HOMES SAVE LIVES ON THE
STREETS.
I HAVE SEEN THE STREETS.
BELIEVE ME YOU WOULD NOT WANT
TO BE THERE RIGHT NOW.
IN THE RAIN, IN THE COLD, IN
WITH NO HOME.
BELIEVE ME, TINY HOUSE VILLAGES
SAVE LIVES.
AND TO SAY THAT ONLY 20 IS
NEEDED I THINK 150 IS NEEDED I
HAVE SEEN THEM.
WE CAN GO DOWN THERE AND PEOPLE
CAN SLEEP OUTSIDE.
THERE IS NO ROOM.
TINY HOUSE VILLAGES ARE A MUST.
YOU WOULD NOT LIKE IT SLEEPING
OUTSIDE IN THE COLD.
IT RAINS 40% OF THE TIME.
BUT, YES.
THAT IS ALL I HAVE TO SAY RIGHT
NOW.
THANK YOU.
>> HI, I AM ANDREW, SITE
COORDINATOR FOR TINY HOUSE
VILLAGE.
GEORGETOWN VILLAGE ON ANY GIVEN
DAY SIX PLUS VILLAGERS AND IT
TAKES REFERRALS EXCLUSIVELY
FROM THE NAVIGATION TEAM.
THE MAJORITY OF OUR VILLAGERS
SUFFERED ON THE STREETS FOR
MANY YEARS, IF NOT DECADES, AND
HAVE LAYERS OF PHYSICAL AND
EMOTIONAL TRAUMA.
THE VILLAGE OFFERS SAFETY AND
COMMUNITY TO THE MOST
VULNERABLE ON OUR STREETS AND
DIRECT ACCESS TO SERVICES
THROUGH OUR ONSITE CASE
MANAGERS.
OUR VILLAGE ENJOYS THE SUPPORT
OF THE GREATER GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE ARE THANKFUL FOR THE
COMPASSION THEY HAVE SHOWN US
TIME AND AGAIN.
>> THE HARDEST PART OF WORKING
FOR THE VILLAGES ARE THE NUMBER
OF THE PEOPLE.
ASKING DAILY ABOUT LOW THEY CAN
BE PLACED IN A TINY HOUSE.
INQUIRIES FROM OPENING OF THE
POLICE, LOCAL NEIGHBORS,
SERVICE PROVIDERS AND PEOPLE IN
CRISIS THEMSELVES.
EVERY DAY.
THE ONLY ANSWER IS TO NOT GIVE
UP AND CALL AGAIN SOON.
TINY HOUSE VILLAGES ARE A SAFE
AND HUMANE WAY TO QUICKLY
ALLEVIATE THE SUPERING OF THOSE
ON OUR STREETS.
LET'S DO MORE.
HI.
I AM A VOLUNTEER AT THE LOW
INCOME HOUSING INSTITUTE AND
THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON.
I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK
SPECIFICALLY TO A COUPLE
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
FIRST, WHILE THE DISTRIBUTION,
THE CURRENT AMENDMENT CREATES
BARRIERS FOR ENCAMPMENTS AND
PROVIDING NEEDED SERVICES FOR
PEOPLE ACROSS THE CITY.
SECOND, ALL OF OUR CITY-FUNDED
VILLAGES HAVE CASE MANAGEMENT.
MANY OPERATE SUCCESSFULLY
WITHOUT 24/7 SECURITY.
IT IS MORE IMPORTANT TO
ALLOCATE THIS MONEY FOR CASE
MANAGEMENT SERVICES.
FINALLY, IT IS IMPORTANT TO
ALLOW FOR AN EXPANDED
DEFINITION.
INCLUDING THE PARKING SAFE
MODEL.
AUTHORIZED ENCAMPMENTS TO
ENSURE ENCAMPMENTS FOR ALL.
I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR ALL OF
THE WORK YOU HAVE DONE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> CHRIS, THANK YOU, SIR.
YOU MAY PROCEED.
>> YES.
I AM ONE OF THE LEADERS IN
GEORGETOWN VILLAGE.
EVERY DAY I TURN PEOPLE AWAY.
MORE THAN I CAN COUNT.
SOMETIMES IT IS 2 OR 3 A DAY.
EVERYBODY THERE HAS SOMEBODY
THEY KNOW WHO IS LIVING OUTSIDE
STILL.
WE HAVE A FEW PEOPLE THAT, YOU
KNOW, VISIT A LOT.
IF YOU CAN HELP ME FUND ONE
MORE IT IS BETTER THAN NONE AT
ALL.
>> THAT IS ABOUT IT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR
PUBLIC COMMENT.
A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS AND THE
CONCERNS YOU RAISE I AM SURE
WILL BE ADDRESSED.
I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO STICK
AROUND FOR THE REST OF THE
AGENDA THAT WE WILL NOW PROCEED
TO.
THAT IS TO CONSIDER COUNCIL
BILL, 119656.
SO, AT THIS TIME I MOVE COUNCIL
RECOMMEND IT MOVED.
IT IS MOVED AND SECONDED.
NOW THAT THE BILL IS BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE I AM GOING TO PROPOSE
TO THE COMMITTEE HEAR A
PRESENTATION FROM CENTRAL STAFF
ON ALL OF THE PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS, COUNCILMEMBERS CAN
ASK QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE
QUESTIONS AS WE GO DOWN THE
LIST.
FREEMAN WILL ADDRESS IT IN THE
ORDER THAT I AM PROPOSING AND
HOW THEY ARE LISTED ON THE
TABLE CHART.
I WILL JUST BRIEFLY SAY THAT
THE REASON THAT I DECIDED ON
THIS ORDER AND CONSULTATION
WITH COUNCIL AND CENTRAL STAFF
AND WITH THE COMMITTEE CLERK IT
IS BASED ON THE DEEPEST CHANGES
TO THE RELATIVELY MORE MINOR
ONES.
OBVIOUSLY HAVE BIG IMPLICATIONS
IF COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN'S
BILL WAS IMMEDIATELY PUT IN.
THAT IS THE BASIS FOR THE
ORDERING.
SO, BASED ON THAT JUST QUICK
OVERVIEW, I WILL HAND IT OVER
TO MR. FREEMAN FOR A GENERAL
REVIEW OF THE AMENDMENTS.
>> EACH OF YOU HAS A COVER
SHEET THAT DESCRIBES THE 8
POTENTIAL AMENITIMENTS.
BEHIND IT IS THE LANGUAGE
DISTRIBUTED TO THEM AND THEN
THIS MORNING WITH THE
ADDITIONAL AMENITIMENTS.
FIRST IS COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN
SUBSTITUTE THE NUMBER AND THE
COUNCIL'S INTENT TOWARDS THE
NUMBER.
THE NEXT CATEGORY HAS TO DO
WITH USE AND OPERATING
STANDARDS AND THE LAST CATEGORY
HAS TO DO WITH INTERIM USE
ENCAMPMENT SET BACKS AND
LOCATION.
WITH RESPECT TO PEDEREN'S
SUBSTITUTE.
WHAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET IS
A TRACK VERSION AND AS WELL AS
A CLEAN COPY.
IT IS PROBABLY WORTH EXPLAINING
A COUPLE -- SOME OF THE CHANGES
VERSION IT IS NOT -- IT IS
POTENTIALLY CONFUSING.
PEDERSEN SUBSTITUTE WOULD LEAVE
MOST PROCEDURAL DEVELOPMENT FOR
ENCAMPMENTS IN PLACE BUT MAKES
SOME OF THE CHANGES SUGGESTED
IN SAWANT'S BILL AND ALLOW 10
ENCAMPMENTS AND MULTIPLE 1 YEAR
EXTENSIONS AND ENCAMPMENTS
TEMPORARY USES AND THE
AMENDMENT WOULD EXTEND THE
SOUTH EXECUTING SUNSET FROM
MARCH 31st, 2020-TO MARCH 31st,
2022.
READING THE BILL FOR THE FOLKS
THAT ARE WATCHING.
YOU WILL SEE STRIKE THROUGHS
FOR SECTIONS THAT INCLUDE SOME
PORTIONS THAT THE COUNCILMEMBER
IS PROPOSING TO AMEND.
IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE 2 OF
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN'S
AMENDMENT, MOST OF THE
STANDARDS ARE ELIMINATED.
THEY ARE ELIMINATED FROM THE
BILL AND NOT FROM THE CODES.
THE EFFECT OF THAT WOULD BE
THAT THE LOCATIONAL STANDARDS
WOULD REMAIN WITH REGULATION
FOR INTERIM USE FOR
ENCAMPMENTS.
MOVING ON TO ANY QUESTIONS
ABOUT COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN'S
AMENDMENT.
MOVING ON TO AMENDMENTS RELATED
TO THE NUMBER OF AUTHORIZED
INTERIM USE ENCAMPMENTS,
MOSQUEDA HAS AMENDMENTS TO
REFLECT THE COUNCIL'S INTENT
AND MAKE BUDGET CHANGES LAST
YEAR AND SIGNALS THE COUNCIL'S
INTENT OF THE FUTURE TO REVIEW
THE CAMP AND BASED ON CHANGED
CIRCUMSTANCES AND THOSE CHANGED
CIRCUMSTANCES COULD INCLUDE
INFORMATION COMING FROM THE
HOMES COUNT THAT IS CONDUCTED
ANNUALLY.
AND SUCCESS OF VILLAGES.
>> NUMBER OF AUTHORIZED
ENCAMPMENTS.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> I LOST MY WAY, GOING BACK TO
AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE THAT
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN IS
SPONSORING.
PART OF IT IS MOVING THE SUNSET
DATE TO 2022, AND I BELIEVE
CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG IS
THAT THIS IS INTENDED TO ALLOW
THE REGIONAL HOMELESS AUTHORITY
TO TAKE OVER THE WORK ON
UPDATING THE CURRENT PROCESS?
>> YES.
>> AND, I GUESS I AM A LITTLE
CONCERNED THAT SINCE IT IS AT
LEAST A YEAR AWAY, DOES THIS
AMENDMENT ALLOW FOR ANYTHING
BEYOND SORT OF MAINTAINING THE
STATUS QUO OVER THE NEXT YEAR
UNTIL THE AUTHORITY BEGINS ITS
WORK?
>> CHAIR CAN I ANSWER THE
QUESTION?
>> THE CAP GOES -- THE 10 CAP
GOES ALSO WITH THE SUNSET, IT
IS NOT LIKE WE CAN MOVE IT
FORWARD WITH 10 NOW AND WAIT
FOR THE REGIONAL HOUSING
AUTHORITY TO DO ITS THING AND
THEN LOOK AT MORE THAN 10?
>> I THINK I UNDERSTAND THE
QUESTION.
MAJOR NEW EXPANSION AND CHANGE
IN OUR POLICY TO MAKE SURE THIS
AUTHORIZATION DOES NOT EXPIRE,
EXTENDED 2 YEARS TO INCREASE
ALLOWED ENCAMPMENTS FROM 3-10
AND TO ALLOW THE ONE-YEAR
EXTENSIONS THAT WERE PART OF
THE ORIGINAL LEGISLATION.
SO IT DOES EXPAND FROM 3-10.
IT ALLOWS ADDITIONAL
FLEXIBILITY AND 1 YEAR
EXTENSIONS AND THE DATE IS
REALLY JUST TO GET US SO THE
REGIONAL HOMELESS AUTHORITY IS
OPERATING AND WE CAN HEAR FROM
THOSE EXPERTS AND IMPLEMENT
THOSE EVIDENCE-BASED STRATEGIES
WE ARE LOOKING FOR.
>> MOVE FROM THE 3-10 UNTIL
AFTER.
>> THE 3-10 WOULD HAPPEN
IMMEDIATELY.
YES.
THANK YOU.
NOW I UNDERSTAND.
IMMEDIATE INCREASE.
>> DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION AS
WELL?
>> ONE PROCESS QUESTION I AM
ASSUMING THIS IS NOT THE TIME
TO TALK ABOUT OUR VIEWS ON THE
AMENDMENT?
IS THAT CORRECT?
>> WE ARE JUST ASKING FOR
CLARIFICATIONS.
>> NOT A FULL DISCUSSION.
>> YES.
>> OKAY.
>> YES.
THAT IS WHERE WE ARE.
>> IT WAS YOUR QUESTION.
>> IT WAS A QUESTION NOT A
LEADING QUESTION.
[ LAUGHTER ]
>> YES.
THAT IS WHY I AM ASKING.
>> YES, IT IS NOT YET TIME TO
ASK OUR RHETORICAL QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THE
PROCESS.
ON ACTUAL QUESTIONS I AM A
LITTLE CONFUSED BY WHAT COUNCIL
PEDERSEN SAID.
IT IS A FUNDING BODY I AM NOT
EXACTLY SURE WHAT -- I DON'T
KNOW -- I DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA
WHAT YOU MEAN, HONESTLY?
>> SO THE REGIONAL HOMELESS
AUTHORITY WILL BE PROVIDING
RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW TO.
PEOPLE LIVED EXPERIENCE.
THE MEMBERS OF THE KING COUNTY
COUNCIL AND SEATTLE CITY
COUNCIL ARE ON THAT.
THOSE BOARDS AND SO I THINK THE
REGIONAL AUTHORITY IS LOOKING
FOR DIRECTION.
THE WHOLE REASON WE CREATED
THAT WAS TO HAVE THAT EXPERTISE
AND SOUND DIRECTION FROM THEM
ON WHERE TO FUND INVESTMENTS
RATHER THAN DOING ANYTHING
DRASTIC OR DOING ANYTHING
CURRENT.
THIS WOULD ALLOW FROM 3-10,
ALLOW THE 1-YEAR EXTENSIONS AND
THEN WE WILL SEE HOW THINGS GO
WITH THE REGIONAL HOMELESS
AUTHORITY.
>> DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER
CLARIFYING QUESTION?
>> IT IS NOT A QUESTION.
I DO WANT TO CLARIFY, THOUGH.
IT DOES NOT COMMENT ON FUNDING
AT ALL.
ADVANCING THE CEILING OF THE
TINY HOUSE PROJECT THAT CAN
POSSIBLY BE SIT WAITED IN OF
THE CITY LIMITS.
BUT, THE FUNDING QUESTION STILL
REMAINS SEPARATE.
AND I HAVE BEEN SAYING OVER AND
OVER AGAIN.
IT IS AN IMPORTANT STEP.
I BELIEVE THE HOMELESS
AUTHORITY WILL PROVIDE GUIDANCE
AND LAND USE THAT WE REQUIRED
VICE TEUT FOR 2 YEARS.
>> THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO
FUND ANYTHING IF THE CITY LAW
DOES NOT ALLOW IT.
>> AT THIS POINT, SPILLING OVER
TO DEBATING THE MERITS OF THE
SUBSTITUTE BILL.
AND GOOD CONVERSATION BUT LET'S
HOLD IT AT THIS POINT UNTIL WE
GET TO FORMALLY CONSIDERING IT.
UNLESS THERE ARE FINAL
QUESTIONS CLARIFYING THE
SUBSTITUTE BILL.
>> THIS IS THE SECOND AMENDMENT
THAT DEALS WITH IT.
PROPOSED BY COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS
THAT WOULD INCREASE THE NUMBER
FROM 3-20.
INTRODUCE THE BILL AND THE
NUMBER FROM 3-40.
AND THE NEXT AMENDMENTS HAVE TO
DO WITH USE AND ENCAMPMENT
OPERATING STANDARDS.
THE FIRST IS AN AMENDMENT
PROVIDED BY PEDERSEN.
TINY HOUSE VILLAGES AND THE
INTERIM USE REGIME SLEEPING
AREAS AND ENCAMPMENTS MUST BE
REQUIRED TO HAVE A STRUCTURE TO
REFLECT THE CONCEPT OF TINY
HOUSES AND REQUIRE 24-HOUR
SECURITY AND CASE MANAGEMENT.
THE NEXT AMENDMENT IS PROPOSED
BY COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
IT IS SIMILAR TO PEDERSEN BUT
DEALS WITH SECURITY AND CONCEPT
OF TINY HOUSE NOT INCLUDED.
>> IF I CAN JUST TAKE A MOMENT
ON THAT ONE.
I WILL BE WITHDRAWING THAT
AMENDMENT TODAY BASED ON SOME
CONVERSATIONS WITH
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA'S OFFICE
AND RAISED CONCERNED WITH THAT
AMENDMENT.
MY UNDERSTAND WAS THAT
AMENDMENT PURELY DEALT WITH
SORT OF MEMORIALIZING
ESTABLISHED REQUIREMENTS AND
OUR CURRENT PRACTICES OF
ADMINISTERING TINY HOUSE
ENCAMPMENTS.
I THINK MY READ FROM E-MAILING
BACK AND FORTH WITH YOU EARLIER
IT IS MORE COMPLICATED THAN
THAT.
MY INTENTION WOULD BE TO TAKE A
WEEK AND WORK ON SOME
SUBSTITUTE LANGUAGE WITH THAT
AMENDMENT WHEN WE BRING IT
FORWARD FOR THE FINAL VOTE.
IT IS SOMETHING THAT
ACCOMPLISHES THE SAME PURPOSE.
BUT A LITTLE MORE REFLECTIVE OF
WHAT OUR CURRENT PRACTICES ARE
WITH HOW CASE MANAGEMENT AND
SECURITY IS PROVIDED IN TINY
HOUSE ENCAMPMENTS.
NOT MY INTENTION TO CREATE NEW
REQUIREMENTS FOR TINY HOUSE OR
TRANSITIONAL IT WAS RATHER TO
PUT IN WRITING PRACTICES THAT
ARE ALREADY IN PLACE.
JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS
WHAT WE ARE DOING WITH THE
AMENDMENT LANGUAGE I AM GOING
TO WITHDRAWAL THAT FROM
CONSIDERATION TODAY AND WORK ON
THAT OVER THE COURSE OF THE
NEXT WEEK.
>> OKAY.
MOVING ON TO THE NEXT
AMENDMENT.
>> JUST ON THAT, I KNOW YOU ARE
-- I KNOW YOU ARE WITHDRAWALING
IT.
>> AND THE USE OF ENCAMPMENTS,
COMPLIANCE WITH CONTRACT
PERFORMANCE THAT RECEIVE CITY
FUNDS BE AN OPERATING
REQUIREMENT FOR THAT
TRANSITIONAL VILLAGE.
>> MOVING ON TO THE NEXT 2.
PROPOSED BY COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD, ENCAMP.
LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY AND
THE ON A SITE.
DEALING WITH SETBACKS.
THE FIRST AMENDMENT AS IT IS
GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION REQUIRE
THAT CURRENTLY REMIND
COUNCILMEMBERS OF THE CURRENT
STANDARD, CURRENTLY INTERIM USE
OF ENCAMPMENTS HAVE TO BE
LOCATED 1 MILE FROM ANY OTHER
TYPE OF ENCAMPMENT WITH CERTAIN
EXCEPTIONS.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD MAINTAIN
THAT STANDARD UNTIL GEOGRAPHIC
DISTRIBUTION IS MET THROUGHOUT
THE CITY.
AND THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS TO
THAT.
THE NEXT AMENDMENT FOR
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
STANDARDS FROM 10 FOOT STAND
BACK FROM SINGLE FAMILIES ON
PROPERTIES AND 5 FEET FROM ALL
OTHERS REQUIRED WHEN THERE IS
NOT AN ESTABLISHED USE.
THOSE ARE THE 8 AMENDMENTS.
>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT
THAT LAST AMENDMENT THAT
HERBOLD PUT FORWARD HOW DOES IT
INTERFACE WITH IT.
>> THIS IS A PICTURE, THIS
DISCUSSION WOULD BENEFIT FROM A
PICTURE OUTSIDE OF IT, DESCRIBE
IT TO YOU.
CENTERED AROUND THE PLANS FOR
EACH OF THE ENCAMPMENTS.
THERE IS REALLY ONLY ONE.
SET BACK FROM ALL RESIDENTIAL
PROPERTIES, WHITTIER HEIGHTS
HAS SITE LIMITATION BASED ON
THAT SET BACK AND THERE IS AN
ADJACENT MULTIFAMILY ZONE
ACROSS THE ALLEY FROM WHITTIER
HEIGHTS TINY HOUSE VILLAGE.
THE ALLEY TOWARDS THAT SET
BACK.
LIMITS THE ALLEY WIDTH.
THERE ARE 9 FEET.
NOT USED FOR ACTIVE AND BICYCLE
PARKING THERE.
ANOTHER PLACE TO LOOK TO
UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS AMENDMENT
MIGHT LOOK LIKE IS TRUE HOPE
VILLAGE.
TRUE HOPE VILLAGE IS NOT
ESTABLISHED AS AN INTERIM IN
USE ENCAMPMENT.
IT IS INSTITUTION OF THE
BAPTIST CHURCH AND THEY
PROVIDED VOLUNTEERED SETBACKS,
THAT IS SPLIT ZONED.
PART OF IT IN A COMMERCIAL ZONE
AND MULTIFAMILY ZONE AND LOW
RISE MULTIFAMILY ZONES, 10 FOOT
SETBACKS ON PROPERTY LINES ON
THE COMMERCIAL ZONE, NO SET
BACK.
>> ALL RIGHT.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT
CLARIFICATION.
ARE THERE ANY FINAL KIND OF
QUESTIONS RELATED TO HOW THE
AMENDMENTS WORK AND WHAT THEY
WILL DO FOR CENTRAL STAFF OR
THE SPONSOR OF THE AMENDMENTS
POTENTIALLY BEFORE WE MOVE ON
TO ACTUALLY CONSIDERING THEM?
YES COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
>> AS IT RELATES TO THE
DISBURSEMENT AMENDMENT.
WE HEARD FROM FOLKS IN PUBLIC
COMMENT ABOUT CONCERNS AS IT
RELATES TO HOW THE ORDINANCE
ADDRESSES SAFE PARKING LOT AND
THAT SAFE PARKING LOT SORT OF
PART OF THE DEFINITION OF A
TRANSITIONAL ENCAMPMENT.
I WANT TO ASK THAT YOU SHARE
WITH ME WHAT I -- WHAT YOU
SHARE WITH MY COLLEAGUES WHAT
YOU SHARE WITH ME AFTER I HEARD
THE PUBLIC COMMENT AS IT
RELATES SPECIFICALLY TO THE
BOTH TRANSITION ALLEN CAMPMENTS
AS TRADITIONALLY THINK OF THEM
AS TINY HOUSE VILLAGES AND SAFE
PARKING LOTS THAT ARE UNDER THE
RELIGIOUS EXCEPTIONS PART OF
THE PERMITTING PROCESS.
>> THE ENCAMPMENT USE OF HAVING
TENTS AND SIMILAR SHELTER
INCLUDING VEHICLES USED FOR
SHELTER THAT PROVIDES TEMPORARY
QUARTERS.
COMMON FOOD PREPARATION, SHOWER
AND OTHER FACILITIES FOR
SLEEPING SHELTERS.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT MOST
SAFE PARKING LOTS ARE NOT
ESTABLISHED AS INTERIM USE
ENCAMPMENTS, THEY ARE ACCESSORY
TO FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATION.
OUT OF A CHURCH.
TRADITIONAL ENCAMPMENT CAN
INCLUDE A SAFE PARKING LOT WITH
OR WITHOUT A ASSOCIATION WITH A
FAITH-BASED INSTITUTION.
BUT, THE BILL AS WRITTEN NOW
WOULD ALLOW SAFE PARKING LOTS
TO BE PERMITTED THROUGH THE
INTERIM PATHWAY.
THEY CAN BE PERMITTED THROUGH A
TEMPORARY USE PROCESS.
AND ONE THING TO KEEP IN MIND
IS THERE IS AN EXCEPTION TO THE
DISBURSEMENT REQUIREMENT AND
THAT IS FOR SMALLER SITES.
SO, LET ME SEE IF I CAN FIND
THE EXACT LANGUAGE.
>> I THINK IT IS IF THERE ARE
10 OR FEWER RESIDENTIAL OR
VILLAGES IT DOES NOT APPLY.
SMALLER SCALE, I AM NOT FINDING
IT HERE COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
FOR SMALLER SCALE ENCAMPMENTS
ESTABLISHED THROUGH THE INTERIM
USE 1 MILE REQUIREMENT DOES NOT
APPLY.
>> YOU THOUGHT OF EVERYTHING,
THANK YOU.
>> AND I HAVE ONE CLARIFYING
QUESTION.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD'S
AMENDMENT 7. IS MY READING
CORRECT ON THE SECOND BRACKETED
PART OF THAT, THAT THE 1 MILE
SEPARATION WOULD NO LONGER
APPLY IF THERE WAS A CAMP, AN
ENCAMPMENT IN EVERY SINGLE
DISTRICT.
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
THAT IS WHAT I THOUGHT.
JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE.
>> DOES ANYONE HAVE ANYMORE
FINAL QUESTIONS FOR CENTRAL
STAFF?
OKAY.
SO, SEEING NONE.
I THINK WE CAN PROCEED ALONG
HERE TO THE AMENDMENTS,
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN WOULD
YOU LIKE TO MOVE YOUR
SUBSTITUTE BILL.
>> YES, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE MY
SUBSTITUTE BILL FOR DISCUSSION.
>> I SECOND.
>> THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR PRESENTING THAT
TO US.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS SUBSTITUTE
BILL IS TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE
CURRENT LAW IS EXPIRING AND WE
WANT TO KEEP THE NUMBER OF
ENCAMPMENTS THAT WE CURRENTLY
HAVE AND NOT LET THE LAW
EXPIRE.
ALSO WANT TO INCREASE SOME
FLEXIBILITY AND INCREASE THE
NUMBERS A LITTLE BIT AS WE WAIT
FOR THE REGIONAL HOMELESS
AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE
INFORMATION TO US SPECIFICALLY
ACCORDING TO THE INTERLOCAL
AGREEMENT FOR COUNCIL, THE
PREVIOUS COUNCIL PASSED.
THE AUTHORITY IS TO DEVELOP AND
IMPLEMENT A 5-YEAR PLAN.
THE 5-YEAR PLAN INCORPORATES
REQUIREMENTS OF THE MASTER
AGREEMENTS FROM THE PARTIES AND
REQUIREMENTS FROM THE FUNDERS.
MAY BE INFORMED BY REGIONAL
ACTION PLAN.
THE 5 YEAR PLAN INCORPORATES
PRINCIPALS OF EQUITY AND SOCIAL
INJUSTICE AND STRATEGIES TO
REDUCE HOMELESS IN YOUTH AND
YOUNG ADULTS AND THOSE THAT
EXPERIENCE HEALTH CHALLENGES.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS SUBSTITUTE
IS REALLY TO GET US TO THAT
PERIOD WHEN WE WILL HAVE THE
FIVE YEAR PLAN FROM THE
AUTHORITY THAT WILL RECOMMEND
VARIOUS INTERVENTIONS BASED ON
THE EXPERTS INCLUDING PEOPLE
WITH EXPERIENCE.
IN ADDITION THE SUBSTITUTE
WOULD INCREASE FROM 3-10.
THE NUMBER OF INTERIM USE
ENCAMPMENTS.
CURRENTLY, CODE ALLOWS UP TO 3.
HOWEVER, IT ALLOWS UNLIMITED
FOR ACCESSORY ENCAMPMENTS AND
TEMPORARY ENCAMPMENTS, LIMITED
FOR THOSE.
MY SUBSTITUTE WOULD INCREASE
THE INTERIM USE FROM 3-10.
AND ALSO ALLOW FOR 1 YEAR
EXTENSIONS OF INTERIM USE
ENCAMPMENT PERMITS TO BE
HANDLED BY THE DIRECTOR OF
SEATTLE CONSTRUCTION AND
INSPECTIONS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN ARE THERE ANYMORE
COMMENTS?
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD.
I HAVE A QUESTION.
I WILL DIRECT IT TO CENTRAL
STAFF IF IT IS OKAY.
I WANT TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE
LIMIT OF 10 WOULD PLAY OUT
LIKELY TO BE PLAYED OUT IN THE
REAL WORLD.
WE NOW HAVE A SITUATION WHERE
WE HAVE ABOUT 7 ENCAMPMENTS,
MAYBE 8 THAT ARE PERMITTED
UNDER THE TEMPORARY PROCESS.
>> IT IS 8. NOT ALL OF THEM ARE
PERMITTED UNDER THE TEMPORARY
USE PROCESS.
LOOKING AT THE PERMIT RECORDS
FOR THE 8 ENCAMPMENTS I BELIEVE
6 OF THEM ARE PERMITTED TO
TEMPORARY USE PERMITS.
SO, AFTER PASSAGE OF THIS
LEGISLATION IS IT REASONABLE TO
ASSUME GIVEN THE TRACK RECORD
OF THE 6 OF 8 THAT ARE
CURRENTLY PERMITTED UNDER THE
TEMPORARY USE PERMIT PROCESS.
THEY ARE GOING TO MOVE TO BE
UNDER THIS ORDINANCE WITH
LONGEVITY.
>> THAT IS A LIKELY SCENARIO.
THE BEST PATHWAY FOR THE
ENCAMPMENT IS WITH AND
ASSOCITION WITH A FAITH-BASED
HOST.
NO LIMIT HOW THE ENCAMPMENT CAN
BE AT THAT LOCATION.
IF THERE ARE A LACK OF HOSTS,
FOR EXAMPLE, THE PATHWAY IS
PREFERRABLE.
MORE SERENITY FOR THE PROVIDER
THAN THE TEMPORARY USE PATHWAY.
>> GIVEN WE DON'T KNOW
EVERYTHING AND IT IS POSSIBLE
FOR SOME ADDITIONAL HOSTS TO
COME BY AND AGREE TO ENTER INTO
A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE
PROPERTY OWNER SO THAT THEY CAN
BE EXEMPT FROM THEIR TEMPORARY
USE PERMIT PROCESS OR THIS
ORDINANCE.
I THINK IT IS REASONABLE TO
ASSUME AT LEAST 6 WILL MOVE TO
BE IMPLEMENTED AND ALLOWED
UNDER THIS ORDINANCE.
SO, MY CONCERN IS IT WILL ONLY
ALLOW FOR 4 ADDITIONAL AND
GIVEN THE COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN'S AMENDMENT,
SUBSTITUTE VERSION WOULD ONLY
ALLOW FOR PROBABLY FOUR
ADDITIONAL ENCAMPMENTS UNTIL
SUNSET ASSOCIATED WITH THE
REGIONAL HOMELESS AUTHORITY.
SO, THAT IS MY CONCERN WITH
THIS.
>> JUST TO GO OVER THE
PROGRESSIVE MEASURES OF THE
ORIGINAL BILL UNDER
CONSIDERATION THAT WOULD BE
REMOVED BY THIS, WHAT IS CALLED
AN AMENDMENT.
THE ORIGINAL, BILL, IF PASSED,
WOULD MAKE TINY HOUSES
AVAILABLE IN DIFFERENT ZONES,
ONE OF THE MAJOR COMPONENTS.
INCREASING THE NUMBER OF
PERMITTED TINY HOUSE THAT IS
WHY WE ARE CONSIDERING IT IN
THE FIRST PLACE.
MAJOR HOMELESSNESS CRISIS AND
WE DON'T WANT MORE BARRIERS,
THE PURPOSE IS TO REMOVE THOSE
BARRIERS AND TO PROVIDE A
EXPANSION OF A SOLUTION THAT IS
WORKING.
EVERYBODY ON THIS COUNCIL SAYS
DATA-DRIVEN 10 TIMES A DAY.
THIS IS INCREDIBLY DATA DRIVEN.
AND, THIS AMENDMENT WOULD
CREATE A CLAUSE EXPIRES IN
2022.
THAT WOULD MEAN GOING TO
ANOTHER 7 MONTHS TO EXTEND THE
PERMITS.
UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS OF THE
NEXT BILL TO EXTEND IT IN THE
NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS.
I MEAN, I OBVIOUSLY OPPOSE THIS
AMENDMENT, UNDO 7 MONTHS OF
WORK AND EXTENDING TINY HOUSE
VILLAGES.
IT IS REALLY AS I SAID, IT IS A
NO VOTE ON THE LEGISLATION AS A
WHOLE.
IT DISMANTLES EVERYTHING.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
SAWANT.
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
OKAY.
SEEING NONE.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO MAKE FINAL
REMARKS.
SO, I AM GOING TO SAY BRIEFLY
FIRST I DO THANK PEDERSEN FOR
BRINGING IT FORWARD.
AND INTRODUCED IN THE NEW
REGIONAL AUTHORITY IN THE
CONTEXT OF ACCOMMODATING THE
NUMBER OF INTERIM USE PERMITS
THAT WE HAVE FUNDING FOR.
I AM GOING TO VOTE AGAINST THIS
AMENDMENT TODAY.
THE REASON FOR IT IS BASED ON A
LOT OF MY CONVERSATIONS WITH
ADVOCATES AND CENTRAL STAFF.
I DO THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO
INCORPORATE FLEXIBILITY, TO
ALLOW MORE USE FOR PERMITS FOR
THE SAME REASONS COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD HIGHLIGHTED IN HER
COMMENTS.
FUNDING TO GO UP TO 10 NOW.
I DON'T WANT TO DO MORE OF OR
PURSUIT MORE ADDITIONAL FUNDING
FOR THIS.
I ALSO AM NOT EXCITED, I FEEL
LIKE I AM SPEAKING FOR OUR LAND
USE ATTORNEYS AND THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE NOW IN
PUTTING THIS OUT THERE, TOO,
FOR THE PROSPECT OF RELYING ON
TEMPORARY USE PERMITS MORE
POTENTIALLY WHILE WE ARE
CONSIDERING THE REGIME.
EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE GOOD AT
IT.
AND I AM PROUD OF OUR LAND USE
DIVISION IN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE.
I DO THINK AS LONG AS WE HAVE A
POSITION WHERE WE CAN NOT
AUTHORIZE MORE AND ADDITIONAL
HOUSING PERMITS LATER.
THAT IS PREFERRED ACTION.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN I DO
WANT YOU TO HAVE THE LAST WORD
AS THE SPONSOR OF IT.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE HEALTHY
DEBATE.
GOOD THAT WE ASKING THESE
QUESTIONS AND I AM GLAD TO HAVE
IT BEFORE US TO SET A BASELINE
TO GIVE PEOPLE THE CHOICE IF
THEY WANTED TO EXTEND THE
EXISTING LAW WITH SOME
ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY.
I STRONGLY BELIEVE IN THE
REGIONAL AUTHORITY THAT WE
NEEDED TO HELP WITH OUR CRISIS.
AND LOOK FORWARD TO THEIR 5
YEAR PLAN.
AND CAUTIOUS ABOUT EXPANDING
CERTAIN POLICIES UNTIL WE HEAR
FROM THE REGIONAL HOMELESS
AUTHORITY.
I APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S
COMMENTS.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR OF
PEDERSEN'S SUBSTITUTE BILL.
>> ALL OF THOSE OPPOSED.
BY A VOTE OF 1-4, THIS
AMENDMENT FAILS.
PROCEEDING NOW TO THE NEXT
AMENDMENT, COUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA CAN NOT JOIN US YET.
HER STAFF DID ASK THAT I MOVE
THIS IN HER ABSENCE.
SO I WILL MOVE COUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA'S AMENDMENT NUMBER
ONE.
THERE HAS BEEN A SECOND.
SHE IS NOT HERE TO SPEAK TO THE
AMENDMENT.
I WILL ALSO SPEAK TO IT.
THIS IS A FAIRLY
STRAIGHTFORWARD AMENDMENT TO
THE WHERE AS SECTIONS OF THE
ORDINANCE.
IT ESTABLISHES THAT REGARDLESS
OF WHAT WE ULTIMATELY LAND ON
IN TERMS OF THE INTERIM USE
PERMITS WE ARE BASICALLY JUST
SAYING THAT WE THINK THE TINY
HOUSE VILLAGES AND TRANSITIONAL
ENCAMPMENTS HAVE A LOT OF VALUE
IN OUR CONVERSATION OF
NAVIGATING FOLKS OUT OF
HOMESNESS.
THAT WE ARE GOING TO CONSTANTLY
-- HOMELESSNESS.
>> THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE
CONSTANTLY LOOKING AT
ENCAMPMENTS, TINY HOUSE
VILLAGES AND IT WILL INFORM
FUTURE DECISIONS ON PERMITS
THAT WE DETERMINE AS A MATTER
OF POLICY WE WANT TO PURSUIT.
IS THERE ANYMORE DISCUSSION ON
THIS AMENDMENT?
OKAY.
SEEING NONE.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR OF
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA'S
AMENDMENT 1.
SIGNIFY BY A VOTE OF 6-0 THAT
AMENDMENT DOES PASS.
>>> NOW MOVING ON TO THE THIRD
AMENDMENT AND THAT IS MY
AMENDMENT THAT WOULD INCREASE
THE NUMBER OF AUTHORIZED
INTERIM USE.
SO I WILL MOVE THAT AMENDMENT
IS THERE A SECOND.
>> AND I -- I WILL ADMIT AT THE
OUT SET OF THIS I DO NOT HAVE
STRONG FEELINGS ABOUT THIS
AMENDMENT BECAUSE THE NUMBER OF
ENCAMPMENT PERMITS AT A CERTAIN
LEVEL IS SYMBOLIC.
THE COUNCIL ONLY HAS FUNDING
CURRENTLY, I BELIEVE, FOR 10
INTERIM USE ENCAMPMENTS.
THE WAY THEY ARE FUNDED IS
PARTICULARLY THROUGH GRANTS AT
HSD THAT GO TO PROVIDER.
I DO THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT
WE ALLUDED TO IN OUR EARLIER
REMARKS TO HAVE A NUMBER.
THE NUMBER THAT WE DO HAVE THE
FUNDING FOR, IN THIS CASE, 10.
WE CAN CONSIDER IN FUTURE
BUDGETS TO INCREASE FUNDING FOR
THE VILLAGES.
TO CONSIDER USING IT AS A
BIGGER TOOL NAVIGATING FOLKS
OUT OF HOMELESSNESS.
I AM CONCERNED THAT IF WE SAY
40 PERMITS FOLKS WILL EXPECT 40
TRANSITIONAL ENCAMPMENTS AND BE
DISAPPOINTED WHEN IT IS ONLY
THERE FOR 10.
BUDGETS AND WHAT WE DO DECIDE
TO FOCUS ON.
I THINK THERE IS ANOTHER
ARGUMENT, THOUGH.
I DON'T THINK 40 ENCAMPMENTS IS
A GOOD USE OF OUR RESOURCES
ULTIMATELY IN COMBATING
HOMELESSNESS.
THAT WHAT WE REALLY NEED TO DO
IS DRAMATICALLY INCREASE OUR
PLACEMENTS INTO PERMIT
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, AND SCALE
IT UP.
THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE
PERMANENT HOUSING.
WE SHOULD NOT GET USED TO THIS
BEING THE METHOD WE ARE USING
AND GETTING FOLKS INTO SHELTER.
SO, FOR THAT REASON I THINK
THAT 20 SEEMS TO BE A GOOD
NUMBER.
I DID REACH THAT NUMBER IN
CONSULTATION WITH A NUMBER OF
PEOPLE.
TO GET ANTICIPATED FUTURE
ENCAMPMENTS.
I DO WANT TO SAY THAT ONE
COUNTERARGUMENT SINCE
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA RAISED
THAT IN THE EVENT OF A NATURAL
DISASTER OR SOMETHING WE WOULD
HAVE TO SITE A DISPERPORTIONATE
NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN ENCAMPMENTS
IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE
FLEXIBILITY OF AN EMERGENCY,
ONE TIME INFLUX OF CAMPS.
BUT, BARRING EXTREME
CIRCUMSTANCES I DON'T THINK IT
IS LIKELY WE WILL GET ANYWHERE
NEAR THE 40 NUMBER.
TO AVOID CONTROVERSY AND UNDO
HEARTBREAK OVER HAVING SUCH A
HIGH NUMBER WITHOUT THE
RESOURCES TO BACK IT UP, 20 IS
MORE APPROPRIATE.
NOW IF THERE ARE ANY COMMENTS
ON THIS COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> CHAIR, I APPRECIATE YOU
BRINGING THE BILL INTO YOUR
COMMITTEE.
IT IS A LAND USE DECISION AND
IT TOUCHES ON THE HOMELESSNESS,
THE CITY HAS FUNDING FOR 10 OF
THESE ENCAMPMENTS OR TINY HOME
VILLAGES AND THIS BILL IS A
DOCUMENT THAT ALIGNS US WITH
OUR ANALYSIS ON THESE TINY HOME
VILLAGES.
SO IT IS A CEILING NOT A
CREATION.
THAT IS I DIDN'T THINK 40 IS
THE APPROPRIATE NUMBER FOR THE
BIG.
TECHNICAL, NOT APPROPRIATION OF
FUNDS, NOT APPROPRIATION OF
CASE MANAGEMENT, NOT
APPROPRIATION OF SECURITY, IT
IS A TECHNICAL BILL ALIGNED
WITH THE ANALYSIS.
I DO WANT TO SPEAK ON SOME
OTHER POINTS AT OTHER TIMES.
I WILL DO A BACK OF THE
ENVELOPE CAL COW HRAEUGZ OF
EVERYONE WHO IS SLEEPING
OUTSIDE RIGHT NOW.
IF ALL 40 WERE BUILT TO THE
MAXIMUM CAPACITY WE WOULD BE
ABLE TO BRING EVERYONE INSIDE.
I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE A
MOMENT TO UNDERSTAND THAT
BECAUSE AS I LOOK AT MY
COMMUNITY IN BALLARD THE GREEN
SPACE I LOOK AT OUTSIDE OF MY
BEDROOM WINDOW HAS PEOPLE IN
PUBLIC SPACE.
THEY HAVE BEEN MOVED AND HELD
BACK.
RIGHT?
SO I CAN SEE A TENT FROM MY
BEDROOM WINDOW.
THIS IS A BLOCK FROM WHERE THE
TINY HOME VILLAGE WAS IN
BALLARD.
THERE IS AN OUTSET.
WHEN THEY WERE READY TO BELIEVE
MORE EYES ON THE STREET, MORE
ACTIVATION AND WE HAVE LESS
NEGATIVE BEHAVIOR BECAUSE THERE
ARE MORE PEOPLE HERE.
WHITTIER HEIGHTS IS ANOTHER
TINY HOME VILLAGE IN MY
COMMUNITY THAT IS EXCELLING
VERY WELL AND IS LOVED BY THE
COMMUNITY.
THINKING THIS ENTIRE BILL IS A
PROCEDURAL TECHNICAL FIX TO
ALIGN US WITH THE AMENDMENTS
AND THERE IS STILL A PERMITTING
PROCESS.
EXCUSE ME, A PERMITTING PROCESS
FOR EVERY TINY HOUSE BUILT UP.
NOT CREATING NEW TINY HOME
VILLAGES, NOT SETTING MORE
MONEY FOR TINY HOME VILLAGES,
NOT PERMITTING THEM, IT IS
SIMPLY SETTING A CREELING IN
LINE WITH THE PROCESS THAT HAS
OCCURRED.
>> THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS
AMENDMENT COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD.
>> I WANT TO REMIND THE
COMMITTEE IT IS NOT A BILL TO
ALLOW THEM.
IT IS A BILL TO PERMIT
SANCTIONED TEMPORARY
ENCAMPMENTS.
SOMETIMES THOSE ARE TINY HOME
VILLAGES.
OFTEN THEY ARE NOT.
EVERY SINGLE ONE OF OUR TINY
HOME VILLAGES WE HAVE NOW
STARTED AS A TEMPORARY OUTDOOR
TENT ENCAMPMENT.
WHERE AS ON ONE HAND I CAN SEE
SOMEONE CHARACTERIZING THIS
LEGISLATION AS A PROCEDURE JUST
TO REMIND PROCEDURE WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE
ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS ON
ENCAMPMENTS THAT, IN SOME
CASES, WILL BE TINY HOME
VILLAGES AND OTHER CASES IT
WILL NOT.
AND I WANT TO REMIND FOLKS THAT
WE -- WHEN WE ARE THINKING
ABOUT THIS BILL I THINK WE
TONIGHT THINK OF TINY HOME
VILLAGES THAT ARE RECIPIENTS OF
FUNDING FOR THE CITY FOR CASE
MANAGEMENT.
THAT IS NOT A REQUIREMENT.
TO FUNCTION THERE IS NOT A
REQUIREMENT FOR CASE MANAGEMENT
OR OPERATING COSTS ASSOCIATED
WITH THE TINY HOME.
THERE IS AN ALLOWANCE FOR AN
OPERATOR TO ESTABLISH AN
ENCAMPMENT OF WHICH CAN BE MANY
FORMS.
FOR THAT REASON.
I DO THINK THAT WE ARE GROWING,
GRADUALLY IS APPROPRIATE.
>> THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT?
>> YES.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY -- FIRST
OF ALL I AGREE WITH YOU
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS.
THAT THE GOAL IS -- WE SAY IT
ALL OF THE TIME.
THE GOAL IS PERMANENT HOUSING,
PERMANENT HOUSING, DEPENDING ON
WHAT THE NEEDS ARE.
BUT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT
ALLOWING MORE TINY HOUSES TO
NUMBER OUR CITY BECAUSE OF LACK
OF FUNDING FOR OUR HOUSING.
AND THREAT FROM PREEPGZ --
CONTINUING.
SO, I FEEL LIKE HAVING A LIMIT
OF 40 AS THE CEILING IT IS MUCH
BETTER THAN 20 BECAUSE OF ALL
OF THE -- I DON'T WANT TO
REPEAT THE POINTS THAT WERE
MADE BUT I FEEL LIKE JUST
BECAUSE YOU -- YOU HAVE TINY
HOUSE VILLAGES OR YOU PERMIT
THEM DOES NOT MEAN IT WILL MAKE
PEOPLE HOMELESS, NOT IF YOU
MADE MORE RELIGION THERE WOULD
BE MORE HOMELESS PEOPLE.
THE QUESTION IS IF PEOPLE ARE
HOMELESS WOULD WE RATHER THEM
HAVE ACCESS TO A TINY HOME
VILLAGE AND AN OPPORTUNITY TO
MAINTAIN THEIR DIGNITY AND
HUMANITY OR WOULD YOU RATHER
THEM SLEEPING ON THE STREETS.
I THINK FOR ME THE ANSWER IS
CLEAR.
I WOULD BE VOTING NO ON THIS
AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU.
ARE THERE ANY FINAL COMMENTS ON
THE AMENDMENT?
SEEING NONE, I WILL MAKE A FEW
FINAL COMMENTS AS THE CHAIR.
I TOTALLY APPRECIATE AND
UNDERSTAND THE COMMENTS BY
STRAUSS AND SAWANT.
I INTEND TO WORK WITH BOTH OF
YOU FOR MORE FUNDING.
AS SOMEONE WHO HAS SOME NEAR
WHERE I LIVE AND TWO IN MY
DISTRICT I AM A BIG SUPPORTER
OF THEM.
I HAVE SEEN FIRSTHAND THE
OUTCOMES THAT WE CAN GET.
REALISTICALLY I DON'T THINK
THAT OVER THE COURSE OF THIS
AUTHORIZING LANGUAGE WE WILL BE
ANYWHERE CLOSE.
JUST GOING THROUGH IT, IT IS A
NUMBER TO SET.
I WILL, AT THIS POINT, CALL FOR
A VOTE ON THIS AMENDMENT AND WE
CAN PROCEED TO THE REST OF THE
AGENDA.
SIGNIFY.
BY A VOTE OF 3-3 I DON'T KNOW
WHAT HAPPENS.
>> FAILS.
>> OKAY.
EXCELLENT.
THANK YOU.
PROCEEDING THEN TO THE NEXT
AMENDMENT.
THIS IS COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN'S AMENDMENT 1. WOULD
YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR
AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU.
ACTUALLY --
>> FIRST OFF, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
MOVE YOUR AMENDMENT?
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE MY
AMENDMENT THAT IS LIST AS
NUMBER 4.
>> IS THERE A SECOND.
>> SECOND.
>> OKAY.
YOU MAY NOW SPEAK TO YOUR
AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU.
WE HAVE BEEN TALKING A LOT
ABOUT TINY HOME VILLAGES, THE
LEGISLATIONS ADVERTISED.
I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE
THAT THE ACTUAL SEATTLE
MUNICIPAL CODE IS A TRANSITION
ALLEN ENCAMPMENT.
PROVIDING TEMPORARY QUARTERS
AND SLEEPING.
THE USE MAY HAVE COMMON FOOD
PREPARATION, SHOWER OR OTHER
COMMONLY USED FACILITIES THAT
ARE SEPARATE FROM THE SLEEPING
SHELTERS.
IT DOES NOT ACTUALLY HAVE WHAT
WE HAVE GROWN TO KNOW AS TINY
HOME VILLAGES.
SOMETHING THAT STARTED OFF WITH
NOT GREAT RESULTS IN TERMS OF
EXITING PEOPLE EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS TO PERMANENT
HOUSING.
WHEN THERE WAS A STRUCTURE
PROVIDED.
WHEN THERE WAS CASE MANAGEMENT,
SECURITY, THE TINY HOME VILLAGE
MODEL BCAME SUCCESSFUL.
SO, WITH THIS AMENDMENT, WHAT
IT WILL DO IS GRANDFATHER THE
ENCOURAGEMENTS AS THEY ARE.
AND WE HAVE TINY HOME VILLAGES.
WHAT WE HAVE IS THE STRUCTURE
OF THE TINY HOME.
IT HAS 4 WALLS, AND THEN, IT
HAS WHAT WE KNOW TO BE THE KEY
TO SUCCESS.
IS THE ONGOING CASE MANAGEMENT
FOR THE RESIDENTS SO THEY CAN
GET INTO PERMANENT HOUSING.
THAT LED TO THE SUCCESS RATE.
TO ACTUALLY DO WHATY WITH ARE
SAYING TO DO AND CREATE TINY
VILLAGE THAT HAVE THE CASE
MANAGEMENT.
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER, ARE
THERE ANYMORE COMMENTS?
GIVEN THE FACT THAT THIS IS A
QUESTION FROM THE PROPOSER OF
THE AMENDMENT.
NEARLY EVERY IF NOT EVERY TINY
HOUSE VILLAGE STARTED AS AN
ENCAMPMENT I SORT OF SEE THE
LAND USE CODE LEGISLATION THAT
ALLOWS FOR ENCAMPMENTS AS
CREATING A PATHWAY TO BE BORN
IF YOU WILL AS ATTEMPT
ENCAMPMENT AND GROW INTO A TINY
HOUSE VILLAGE.
WE ALSO SEE SOME INTEREST IN
SOME OF THE PROPERTIES THAT
HAVE HOSTED ENCAMPMENTS AND NOW
TINY HOUSE VILLAGES IN THE NEAR
FUTURE.
SO, IT IS SORT OF -- LIKE I
SAID IT IS AN EVOLUTION IN
PATHWAY.
I SHARE YOUR ANGST THAT WE KEEP
TALKING ABOUT IT AS A TINY
HOUSE VILLAGE.
IT IS NOT.
WE NEED TO BE ACCURATE.
SO WE ARE UNDER THAT.
I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR YOUR
THOUGHTS ABOUT HOW THAT PATHWAY
WOULD BE IMPACTED AS A TENT
ENCAMPMENT.
>> WE HAVE A TINY HOUSE VILLAGE
IN MY DISTRICT, THE NORTH LAKE
VILLAGE AND IT IS, TO ITS
SUCCESS IS TO HAVE THE
STRUCTURE AND TO HAVE THE CASE
MANAGEMENT.
THERE WAS NOT NOT A CASE THERE.
IF WE ARE LOOKING TO EXPAND
SOMETHING WE NEED TO START
RIGHT.
SO, IF WE ARE GOING TO EXPAND
IT TO A LARGE NUMBER WE SHOULD
HAVE THEM START IN A WAY TO GET
PEOPLE MOVING FROM THE
ENCAMPMENT INTO PERMANENT
HOUSING AT A HIGHER PERCENTAGE
RATE.
WE ARE HELPING PEOPLE.
>> AND MY FOLLOW UP.
ALONG WITH THE POSSIBILITY FOR
THESE LOCATIONS TO SERVE AS
TRANSITION ENCAMPMENTS AND
HAVING PEOPLE LIVE IN CARS OR
RVs, GIVEN THE POPULATION IN
LAST YEAR'S POINT TIME COUNT IS
MADE UP OF THOSE FOLKS I WOULD
HATE TO FORECLOSE THOSE FOLKS
AS WELL.
>> IT IS -- IT IS NOT MEANT TO.
BECAUSE IT IS TALKING ABOUT
HAVING THE STRUCTURE OF THE 4
WALLS, A ROOF, AND A DOOR THE
VEHICLES WOULD HAVE THAT
STRUCTURE.
IF YOU FELT LIKE THAT WAS
IMPORTANT TO CLARIFY THAT WITH,
TO SAY OR NONRV VEHICLES, I
WOULD ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT TO
THIS TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT CAR
SAFE LAWS WOULD BE ALLOWED
UNDER THIS.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT HAD HER
HAND UP.
>> AND THEN MORALES.
>> I APPRECIATE THAT POINT.
HERBOLD BROUGHT UP.
I THINK IT IS CONCRETE TO
UNDERSTAND HOW THEY ARE
ESTABLISHED.
EVERY TINY HOUSE AND
COUNCILMEMBER POINTED THIS OUT
IS BEFORE EVERY TINY IN SEATTLE
STARTED WITH IT AND REPLACE
TINY HOUSES AS IT DEVELOPED.
YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE BEING LONG
TIME ADVOCATES KNOW WHAT I AM
TALKING ABOUT.
SECOND CHANCE IN WEST SEATTLE.
STARTED AS UNPERMITTED
ENCAMPMENT OF TENTS.
COMMUNITY SUPPORT, THEY WON
LEGAL PERMITTING AND BEGAN
REPLACING THE TENTS WITH TINY
HOUSES, MY OFFICE, SUPPORTED
THEM AND WE SUCCESSFULLY
PREVENTED THEM FROM BEING
SWEPT.
AND THEN AFTER THAT MY OFFICE
AND OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS
SUPPORTED THE FORMAL PERMITTING
AND THE FUNDING THAT HELPED GET
THEM TO BRING IN TINY HOUSES IN
PLACE OF TENTS.
THIS IS THE EVOLUTION OF TINY
HOUSE VILLAGES.
IT IS NOT HOW IT HAS EVOLVED
THESE ARE PEOPLE EXPERIENCING
EXTREME HARDSHIP AND THEY ARE
HELD BY SHOESTRING NONPROFITS.
DOING A LOT OF WORK ON THE
GROUND.
MAKING IT INTO REALITY.
IT DID NOT 19 ONE DAY AND IT
NEEDED OUR SUPPORT, FIRST, TO
ALLOW THEM TO BE PERMITTED IN
ENCAMPMENTS AND TINY HOUSE
RELIGIONS.
AND THE TINY HOUSE RELIGIONS.
OR HOUSES.
BEFORE GETTING THE PERMIT.
I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY WOULD OF
GOTTEN TO THIS POINT.
LEGAL STAT US AND -- STATUS AND
THEY WOULD NOT HAVE GOTTEN TINY
HOUSE VILLAGES.
I REALLY URGE THAT IF
COUNCILMEMBERS SUPPORT TINY
HOUSES WHICH I, OF COURSE,
AGREE WITH YOU ON, WITHOUT
THEM, IF THAT IS TRU I TRUE I
WOULD PROVIDE FUNDING.
NOT BUILT IN, IT IS A LAND USE
BILL, RATHER THAN CRATING
OBSTACLES FOR SOMETHING THAT IS
UNIMAGINABLY DIFFICULT.
>> ALL RIGHT, COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR.
THANK YOU, PEDERSEN.
I SPOKE TO BOTH OF YOU ABOUT
THE 24-HOUR SECURITY ISSUE IN
YOUR AMENDMENTS TODAY.
I ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT HAVING
CASE MANAGERS ON EVERY SINGLE
TINY HOME VILLAGE SITE.
AND, I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT 24-
HOUR SECURITY LOOKS DIFFERENT
FOR THE LEVEL OF BARRIERS THAT
THE SITE IS HOUSING.
SO, COMPLETELY SOBBER HOUSING
HAS A DIFFERENT NEED FOR
SECURITY THAN NO BARRIER
HOUSING, RIGHT?
>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE
USING OUR TAXPAYER THERE ARES
EFFECTIVELY AND EFFICIENTLY.
AS WELL AS PEDERSEN YOU MAY OF
HEARD THE REQUIREMENT OF
GETTING THE ROOF AND THE DOOR
THAT SOMEONE CAN WALK
THROUGHOUT THE LAST NUMBER OF
MONTHS AS MY GOLD STANDARD FOR
HOW WE BRING PEOPLE INSIDE.
I AGREE WITH THE INTENTION OF
THIS AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE
SURE WE ARE NOT CREATING ANY
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES AND
BEING OVERLY PERSCRIPTIVE
BECAUSE ALL OF THE BILLS WILL
GO THROUGH THE BILL THAT WE ARE
PASSING TODAY.
NOT THE FINAL STOP FOR ANYONE
HAVING ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
PUT UPON THEM FOR EACH OF THESE
TRANSITIONAL ENCAMPMENTS, THERE
IS THE WAY THEY WILL GO
THROUGH.
APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF SECURITY.
SUPPORT CASE MANAGEMENT AND
FOUR WALLS AND A ROOF THAT AN
INDIVIDUAL CAN WALK.
I THINK THAT THIS AMENDMENT
MIGHT NEED A LITTLE MORE TIME
AND HAPPILY SUPPORT YOU FOR
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> ALL RIGHT.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> I WANT TO CALL ATTENTION TO
TWO IMPORTANT WORDS IN THIS
DESCRIPTION.
THIS IS ABOUT TRANSITIONAL
ENCAMPMENTS, BY NATURE OF WHAT
WE ARE TRYING TO DO HERE.
THIS IS A PROCESS THAT IS --
THAT IS CREATING A FIRST STEP
HOPEFULLY FOR PEOPLE WHO GET
OFF OF THE STREET AND INTO A
SITUATION AND ENVIRONMENT WHERE
THERE IS MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR
PEOPLE TO BE TOGETHER AND TO
START TO BUILD THE KIND OF
COMMUNITY IT COULD LEAD TO THE
DEVELOPMENT OF TINY VILLAGE.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER
THAT THIS KIND OF REQUIREMENT
BRINGS WITH IT HUGE COSTS.
AND HAVING THESE FIXED
STRUCTURES WOULD CREATE
ISSUE THAT WE ARE TRYING TO
ADDRESS THAT IS TO HELP PEOPLE
GET OFF OF THE STREET.
SO, THESE KINDS OF ENCAMPMENTS
ARE HOW WE ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF
HOMELESSNESS IN OUR CITY.
AND IT IS NOT THE PERMANENT
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING OR THE LOW
INCOME HOUSING OR THE WARM
PLACE WE WOULD LIKE PEOPLE TO
HAVE NECESSARILY.
IT IS A STEP IN THAT DIRECTION.
AND I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT
THAT WE ALLOW FOR, YOU KNOW,
FOLKS IN WHATEVER PLACE THEY
ARE IN TO GET INTO A SITUATION
WHERE THEY HAVE A LITTLE MORE
STABILITY.
EVEN IF IT MEANS THEY ARE
GETTING THERE IN A TENT AND WE
ALLOW FOR THE EVOLUTION OF THAT
ENCAMPMENT TO BECOME A TINY
HOME VILLAGE.
SO, I THINK WE NEED TO THINK
MORE CAREFULLY BEFORE PASSING
THIS AMENDMENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR.
>> JUST WHAT COUNCILMEMBER
SAID, IT IS THE COMMUNITY AND
THE SUPPORT AND THAT KIND OF
HUMANITY YOU GET FROM HAVING
PEOPLE AROUND YOU THAT ALLOWS
YOU TO MOVE TOWARDS A VILLAGE
WITH FOUR WALL STRUCTURE.
IT IS NOT JUST ABOUT THE
STRUCTURE.
THE EVOLUTION COMES OUT WHEN
YOU HAVE THAT COMMUNITY OF
ENCAMPMENT.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ARE THERE ANY FINAL COMMENTS?
SEEING NONE.
-- JUST TO SPEAK TO SOME OF
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS'CONCERNS.
I FORGET, I FORGET I AM SORRY
THAT YOU RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT
THAT AMENDMENT AS WELL.
AND ACTUALLY AFTER YOU FLAGGED
YOUR CONCERNS AND IT IS A
LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED WITH
HOW THE SECURITY REQUIREMENT IS
PHRASED IN HSD'S CURRENT
CONTRACTING WHEN THEY DO HAVE A
SECURITY REQUIREMENT.
IT IS PART OF THE STANDARD TO
GET THE HSD MONEY.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CERTAIN
AMOUNT OF SECURITY.
>> WE SHOULD HAVE SECURITY.
>> YES, CERTAINLY.
MY UNDERSTANDING HAD BEEN THAT
THE HR-RPBL IN THE A PHUPBDMENT
REFLECTED CURRENT PRACTICES.
THAT MIGHT NOT BE QUITE AS
CLEAR THE WAY IT IS PHRASED
RIGHT NOW.
I WOULD LIKE TO WORK OVER THE
COURSE OF THE NEXT WEEK ON
MAKING SURE THAT WE AREN'T
ESTABLISHING A BIG HURDLE ABOVE
AND BEYOND WHAT THEY DO.
I DON'T WANT US TO CREATE
BARRIERS TO LIKE PURE BASED
SECURITY SYSTEMS THAT SOME OF
THE MORE DEMOCRATICALLY
GOVERNED ENCAMPMENTS MIGHT USE.
I AGREE THAT IT REQUIRES A
LITTLE MORE TIME JUST TO MAKE
SURE THAT IT IS NOT TOO BURDEN
SOME AND NOT INTRODUCING
SOMETHING EXTREMELY
FUNDAMENTALLY NEW.
SO, BASED ON THAT I AM GOING TO
VOTE AGAINST THIS NOW.
I WANT TO WORK WITH
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN AND
OTHERS OVER THE COURSE OF THE
NEXT WEEK TO GET LANGUAGE THAT
REFLECTS WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO
GET AT HERE.
>> OKAY.
>> SO, I WILL CALL TO QUESTION
AT THIS POINT, ALL OF THOSE IN
FAVOR OF THIS AMENDMENT SIGNIFY
BY A VOTE OF 5-1 THE AMENDMENT
FAILS.
>> I HAVE WITHDRAWN FOR SIMILAR
REASONS I JUST DISCUSSED
AMENDMENT 5. LEWIS AMENDMENT 3.
MOVING ON TO AMENDMENT 6. THE
LEWIS AMENDMENT 2. THIS ONE IS
A LITTLE MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD,
I THINK.
I AM GOING TO MOVE IT FIRST.
I MOVE THIS AMENDMENT FOR
CONSIDERATION.
AND IT IS MOVED AND SECONDED.
SPEAKING OF, AS A SPONSOR, YOU
KNOW, FOR THE ENCAMPMENTS THAT
OPERATE WITH FUNDING FOR THE
HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
IT IS ALL OF THE CURRENT
ENCAMPMENTS IN SEATTLE.
THERE ARE METRICS THAT GO THAT
ARE ATTACHED TO THAT MONEY.
THE LANGUAGE IS THERE.
THIS IS PURELY SORT OF A
CLARIFYING AMENDMENT.
IT DOES NOT FUNCTION ALLEY
CHANGE ANYTHING STATES THE
REALITY THAT THE HUMAN
PERFORMANCE METRICS TO THE
FUNDING THAT GOES WITH IT.
I THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT
AMENDMENT FOR A COUPLE OF
REASONS.
AND PUBLIC FACING STANDPOINT.
GOOD FOR THE REGION AND GOOD
FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY.
PERFORMANCE METRICS THAT ARE
ATTACHED TO THE TINY HOUSE
VILLAGE.
TRANSITIONAL ENCAMPMENTS, WE
HEARD IT WHEN WE HEARD IT FROM
THE SITE COMMITTEE FROM
STEINBERG, THE PORT OF SEATTLE,
FROM SHARON LEE, FROM A PERSON
WHO EXPERIENCED HOMELESSNESS
AND GOT THROUGH SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING THROUGH OUR VILLAGE
THAT THE PROVIDERS THAT OPERATE
THESE TRANSITION ALLEN
CAMPMENTS THEY ARE PRETTY GOOD
AT PROVIDING THE DATA AND THE
MET REUBGS PROVIDED BY HSD.
I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE
APPROPRIATE JUST TO KIND OF
RECOGNIZE THAT IT IS A PRACTICE
AND TO INSULATE OURSELVES FROM
PUBLIC CRITICISM FROM PEOPLE
WHO MIGHT SAY OTHERWISE.
ORDINANCE GIVEN IT IS
SIMPLICITY.
ANY OTHER FURTHER DISCUSSION.
>> I WANT TO SUPPORT THIS.
I DO WANT TO POINT OUT AND SEE
HOW WE FOLLOW UP WITH HSD AND
THE MET RIX.
I DON'T THINK USING IT IS AN
IMPORTANT METRICK WHEN THE
PERMANENT HOUSING, LOW INCOME
HOUSING TO MOVE PEOPLE DOES NOT
EXIST.
SO, I JUST WANT TO FLAG THAT AS
ANOTHER CONVERSATION THAT WE
NEED TO CONTINUE TO HAVE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
THOSE COMMENTS.
I COMPLETELY AGREE.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE?
>> I JUST WANT TO SAY I
STRONGLY AGREE WITH WHAT
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES JUST
SAID.
FUNCTIONAL RATHER THAN
SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT MAKE
SENSE.
I INTEND IT TO BE A PIG PART OF
THE COMMITTEE OVER THE NEXT
YEAR.
OKAY.
IF THERE IS NO FINAL QUESTIONS
JUST TAKE A VOTE.
WITH 6 IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED
THE AMENDMENT PASSES.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 7. THIS IS
COUNCILMEMBER NUMBER 1. IS
THERE A MOTION.
>> I MOVE IT.
I SECOND.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THIS AMENDMENT IS INTENDED
TO ADDRESS NEEDED GEOGRAPHIC
IMPARITY TO MAKE SURE
ENCAMPMENTS ARE WHERE THEY ARE
MOST NEEDED AND NOT
CONCENTRATED WITHIN CERTAIN
COMMUNITIES IT REQUIRES THEY
ARE CITED EVENLY AMONG
DISTRICTS ONE MILE IS
MAINTAINED.
AS I DESCRIBED EARLIER,
CURRENTLY THERE ARE 6 THAT ARE
PERMITTED UNDER THE TEMPORARY
USE PERMIT.
ASSUMING THEY ALL MOVE TO BE
PERMITTED UNDER THIS ORDINANCE.
6 DISTRICTS THAT HAVE
ENCAMPMENTS IN THEM.
ONLY ONE WILL NOT.
THIS 1 MILE WILL ONLY BE IN
EFFECT UNTIL THE LAST DISTRICT
THAT DOES NOT CURRENTLY HAVE AN
ENCAMPMENT HAS ONE.
THE INTENT HERE, AGAIN, NOT --
IT IS TO ENSURE NEW ENCAMPMENTS
ARE NOT CONCENTRATED IN
COMMUNITIES THAT ARE GENEROUSLY
HOSTING ENCAMPMENTS AND THAT
ENCAMPMENTS ARE AVAILABLE
THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE CITY.
BECAUSE WE HAVE HOMELESS PEOPLE
WHO ARE LIVING OUTSIDE
THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE CITY.
THE INTENT IS TO BRING
RESOURCES TO PEOPLE WHERE THEY
ARE.
ONE OF THE POINTS THAT WE HEARD
IN PUBLIC COMMENT THAT I ASKED
CENTRAL STAFF TO SPEAK TO.
IT IS HOW THIS WILL INNER PLAY.
WITH TRANSITION ALLEN CAMPMENTS
AS THEY ARE DEFINED.
DEFINED IN SUCH A WAY TO
INCLUDE SAFE PARKING.
CURRENTLY THE SAFE PARKING LOTS
WITHIN THE CITY ARE ALL UNDER
THE RELIGION PERMITTING
LEGISLATION.
BECAUSE --
>> -- SURE -- SO, WHETHER OR
NOT YOU ARE A SAFE PARKING
ENCAMPMENT OR YOU ARE A TENT
ENCAMPMENT OR TINY HOUSE
VILLAGE ENCAMPMENT YOU WOULD
NOT BE SUBJECT TO IT.
IT WOULD BE EXEMPT BECAUSE THEY
ARE BASED ON THE PACT THAT THEY
ARE FULFILLING THEIR MISSION
UNDER THEIR RELIGION EXEMPTION.
IT ONLY RELATES TO ENCAMPMENTS
THAT ARE UNDER THIS ORDPHAPBS
AND UNDER THE TEMPORARY USE
PROCESS.
FINALLY, MY DISTRICT HAS BEEN
HOME SPECIFICALLY ONE
NEIGHBORHOOD IN PARTICULAR HAS
BEEN HOME TO CAMP SECOND CHANCE
FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS AND FOR
SEVERAL YEARS BEFORE THAT THEY
WERE HOME TO NICHOLSVILLE.
BOTH AT THE CURRENT SECOND
CHANCE AS WELL AS DOWN THE
HILL.
AND IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO
THE FOLKS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD
TO SEE THAT TINY HOUSE VILLAGES
AND OTHER TYPES OF TRANSITIONAL
ENCAMPMENTS ARE LOCATED IN
OTHER PARTS OF THE DISTRICT.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD I AM SPEAKING
OF IS A LOW INCOME DISTRICT.
LOW INCOME NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT
IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO THEM IN
RECOGNITION OF THEIR GENEROUS
HOSTING FOR SIX YEARS NOW
BETWEEN THE 2 ENCAMPMENTS THAT
OTHER PARTS OF DISTRICT 1 ALSO
HOST TRANSITIONAL ENCAMPMENTS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT?
>> FIRST OF ALL, TWO POINTS,
ONE IS ON -- THANK YOU FOR
CLARIFYING WHICH TYPES OF
ENCAMPMENTS WOULD BE COVERED
UNDER THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE OF
THE UNDERLYING BILL.
EVEN UNDER THAT IF -- AS YOU
POINTED OUT ONE DISTRICT THAT
DOES NOT HAVE IT, DISTRICT 5.
SO, IN OTHER WORDS IF -- UNTIL
THAT DISTRICT GOT THIS
PERMITTING PROCESS GOT AN
ENCAMPMENT NO KNEW ONES COULD
BE PERMITTED UNDER --
>> NO PERMITTED BUT THEY WOULD
HAVE TO BE A MILE AWAY FROM THE
DISTRICT ENCAMPMENT IN THE
DISTRICT.
>> OKAY.
SO THE TWO PARTS OF THE
AMENDMENT THAT ARE RELATED TO
EACH OTHER.
>> THAT IS RIGHT.
>> THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING
THAT.
I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT
THERE ARE TWO -- ACTUALLY I
WILL HOLD MY POINTS.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
I THINK MY QUESTION GOT
ANSWERED BUT I WILL ASK IT ANY
WAY.
>> I APPRECIATE THE EFFORT TO
GET BETTER GEOGRAPHIC
DISTRIBUTION.
I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT AND THE
CYNIC IN ME IS RECALLING THE
VERY HEATED CONVERSATIONS WE
HAVE HAD IN THIS CITY ABOUT
HOMELESS PEOPLE AND WHAT
NEIGHBORHOODS SHOULD GET THEM
AND -- INVITE THEM IN AND WHICH
ONES DON'T WANT TO DO THAT.
MY CONCERN WOULD BE THAT WE
HAVE A HUGE NEED.
THAT THERE IS A BARRIER IF ONE
COMMUNITY INSISTS ON NOT
ALLOWING AN ENCAMPMENT IN AND
WE NEED MORE ENCAMPMENTS THAT
THEY WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO
GET -- TO BECOME ESTABLISHED
AND SORT OF THIS PULL AND PUSH
OF A CLEAR NEED AND AN
INABILITY TO MOVE FORWARD?
>> SO, MY BEST ATTEMPT TO
RESPOND TO THAT, THE INTENT OF
THIS AMENDMENT IS TO ENSURE
THAT COMMUNITIES THAT ARE NOT
CURRENTLY HOSTS TO ENCAMPMENTS
HAVE A CHANCE TO DO SO.
THAT IS WHERE THIS IS COMING
FROM.
RESIDENTS SURROUNDING THE
HOSTED ENCAMPMENTS IN DISTRICT
1. THEY ARE FRUSTRATED.
NONE OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS ON
THE WEST SIDE OF 35th HAVE BEEN
A HOST AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE
TRYING TO GET AT HERE.
AGAIN, TO GO BACK TO THE
EARLIER POINT THIS DOES NOT
LIMIT THE CITING WITHIN
DISTRICTS JUST THAT ONE MILE
DISPWURGZ OF EACH OTHER.
>> I BELIEVE DISTRICT 7 IS HOST
TO TINY HOUSE VILLAGES
CURRENTLY.
WE HEARD SOME PRESENTATION ON
THE ONE ON PORT OF SEATTLE
LAND, WE HEARD FROM THE
COMMISSIONER THAT THAT
ENCAMPMENT IS POPULAR WITH THE
BUSINESSES IN THE KRAEUR AND IT
WAS NOT WHEN IT WAS CITED
THERE, THEY ARE GREAT
NEIGHBORS, A LOT OF THE
COMMUNITY HAS BEEN DEDICATED TO
PROTECTING AND EXPANDING THAT
TINY HOUSE VILLAGE AND STORIES
LIKE THAT HAVE BEEN REPLICATED
ALL OVER THE CITY.
I AM VERY PROUD OF THE WORK
THAT FOLKS IN THE TINY HOUSE
VILLAGES HAVE DONE.
TO BE EXCEPTIONAL NEIGHBORS AND
TO SOMEONE WHO IS TO
ENCAMPMENTS I CAN ATTEST TO
THAT.
I DO AGREE WITH COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD'S UNDERLINING DRIVE FOR
THIS AMENDMENT.
I DO THINK IT IS FAIR FOR US TO
REQUIRE MORE GEOGRAPHIC EQUITY
AND HOW WE DISTRIBUTE PLACEMENT
OF THE ENCAMPMENTS.
I THINK THAT IT IS REASONABLE
TO EXPECT THAT EVERY COUNCIL
SHOULD HAVE AT LEAST ONE AND WE
SHOULD ATTACH ONE, THE BUFFER
ZONE TO THE CITING OF FUTURE
CAMP.
ONE REASON I AM VOTING FOR IT.
THE ONE MILE SEPARATION, I
BELIEVE, A COMPONENT FOR THE
PRIOR ORDINANCE LANGUAGE.
UNDER THE OLD INTERIM
PERMITTING LANGUAGE, ALL OF THE
CURRENT ONES WILL BE
GRANDFATHERED IN.
IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A PRIMARY
CONCERN.
BASED ON THAT, I THINK THAT
THIS IS A GOOD WAY TO BUILD IN
A LITTLE MORE GEOGRAPHIC INTENT
HERE.
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD YOU HAVE
THE LAST WORD.
>> I AM HAPPY TO CALL FOR THE
VOTE.
ALLOW YOU TO CALL FOR THE VOTE.
>> THE VOTE SHOULD BE CALLED
FOR.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE
AMENDMENT TWO VOTES OPPOSED.
2-2 THE AMENDMENT PASSES.
>> I AM GOING TO ASK QUESTIONS.
>>> NEXT, WILL BE AMENDMENT 8.
HERBOLD'S NUMBER 2. THE ONE ON
THE SET BACK REQUIREMENT.
DO YOU WANT A MOTION TO
CONSIDER YOUR AMENDMENT?
>> I MOVE HERBOLD AMENDMENT 2.
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU.
AS CENTER STAFF MENTIONED IN
THE OPENING REMARKS THE
EXISTING LEGISLATION INCLUDES
THE LEGISLATION THAT IS BEFORE
US WITHOUT AMENDMENTS INCLUDES
A REMOVAL OF THE EXISTING 25
FOOT SET BACK FROM RESIDENTIAL
ZONES.
THAT HAS BEEN THE STANDARD 25
FOOT SET BACK.
THIS IS A 10-FOOT SET BACK.
NOT ACROSS THE BOARD ONLY WHEN
THERE IS AN ESTABLISHED USE.
SO, IF THE LAW DOES NOT HAVE AN
ESTABLISHED USE THERE IS NO SET
BACK REQUIRED.
IF THE ESTABLISHED USE IS A
RESIDENTIAL USE THE SET BACK IS
10 FEET INSTEAD OF THE EXISTING
25 FEET.
OTHER ZONES, A 5 FOOT SET BACK
IS REQUIRED.
AGAIN, IF THERE IS NO
ESTABLISHED USE IN THE LAW, NO
SET BACK.
THIS IS A LOWER STANDARD THAN
IS CURRENTLY REQUIRED BUT, ALSO
LOOKING AT THE SCENARIOS THAT
WE HAVE IN EXISTENCE IT IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT
PRACTICE IN THE FEW SCENARIOS
WHERE THERE ARE CURRENT
ENCAMPMENTS ARE USING DIFFERENT
PERMITTING TYPES.
SINCEEL FAMILY ZONE PROPERTIES,
ENCAMPMENTS ARE OBSERVING A 5
FOOT OR A 10 FOOT SET BACK ON
LOT LINES, IT ALLOWS FOR
APPROPRIATE BREATHING ROOM
BETWEEN LOT USAGE AND
RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
WHILE STILL SIGNIFICANT
MOANINGFUL SPACE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ANY COMMENTS ON
COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD'S
AMENDMENT.
>> I DON'T NECESSARILY OPPOSE
IN GENERAL THE IDEA THAT HAS
BEEN PUT FORWARD AS A WHOLE FOR
THE CITY.
THOSE STANDARDS THAT EXTREMELY,
TRYING TO MAKE IT MORE FLEXIBLE
FOR TINY HOME VILLAGES TO BE
SET UP.
I DON'T KNOW WHY WE HAVE TO BE
PERSCRIPTIVE IN THIS.
THEY HAVE TALL WOODEN SOLID
FENCE AROUND THEM.
IF YOU -- FOR EXAMPLE YOU ARE
WALKING ALONGSIDE.
THERE ARE TWO IN MY DISTRICT.
I PASS BY THEM VIRTUALLY EVERY
DAY.
YOU HARDLY -- THEY ARE HARDLY
VISIBLE.
I DON'T HONESTLY THINK THAT THE
NEIGHBORS CARE ABOUT THE
SETBACKS.
THE NEIGHBORS ARE WELCOMING
THEM IN GENERAL.
AND SO, JUST IN THE SPIRIT OF
TRYING TO KEEP IT AS EASY AS
POSSIBLE I DON'T THINK WE
SHOULD DO IT.
>> SEEING NONE.
>> I AM RAISING MY HAND.
>> OKAY.
SURE.
YES.
GO, AHEAD, YES, PLEASE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> I JUST WANT TO REMIND THE
COMMITTEE WE ARE NOT PERMITTING
TINY HOUSE VILLAGES.
WE ARE PERMITTING TEMPORARY
ENCAMPMENTS.
SO THE STANDARDS THAT YOU SEE
CURRENTLY AS IT RELATES
SPECIFICALLY TO TINY HOUSE
VILLAGES ARE NOT PART OF THE
LEGISLATION AND WITHOUT
REQUIRING SOME SORT OF BUFFER
WE SHOULD NOT EXPECT THEM TO
EXIST.
>> ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS.
SEEING NONE.
I DO INTEND TO VOTE TO PASS
THIS AMENDMENT.
PART OF THE REASON IS I DON'T
THINK THERE IS ANY LANGUAGE IN
THE CURRENT ORDINANCE RELATED
TO SETBACKS.
I WOULD JUST REMIND EVERYBODY
THAT IN THE OLD AUTHORIZING
ORDINANCE THERE WAS LANGUAGE
RELATED TO SETBACKS.
PRIMARILY FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONES
I DON'T THINK THAT 25 SET BACK
WOULD BE APPROPRIATE ANY LONGER
SINCE WE ARE EXPANDING.
I DO THINK THAT THIS MORE
MODEST SET BACK LANGUAGE THAT
IS PUT IN DOES ANTICIPATE THE
DIFFERENT SETBACKS APPROPRIATE
FOR DIFFERENT USES.
IT IS A GOOD WAY TO PROCEED
WITH THE VISION WE EXPAND THE
AVAILABLE SITES FOR
TRANSITIONAL ENCAMPMENTS, A SET
BACK IS APPROPRIATE.
IT GETS THROUGH SOME OF THE
POTENTIAL CONCERNS.
AND THERE ARE ANY OTHER
COMMENTS?
OKAY.
HERBOLD YOU HAVE THE LAST WORD
IF THERE IS ANYTHING ELSE YOU
WANTED TO ADD.
>> I AM SORRY.
I COULD OF WAITED.
>> THAT IS WHAT I WAS --
>> I WAS NOT READING YOUR
NONVERBAL LANGUAGE.
>> I WAS BUSY TYING MY SHOES.
>> NO CLOSEOUT COMMENTS, THANK
YOU.
>> OKAY, THANKS, WITH THAT
SAID, SIGNIFY
4 IN FAVOR, 2 AGAINST, THE
AMENDMENT PASSES.
AND THAT IS ALL OF THE
AMENDMENTS THAT ARE BEFORE THIS
COMMITTEE FOR CONSIDERATION
TODAY.
SO BEFORE WE ADJOURN -- WELL,
ACTUALLY, BEFORE WE PROCEED TO
ADJOURNMENT LET'S DO A VOTE ON
THE BILL IF THERE IS A MOTION.
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT.
>> I MOVE TO VOTE ON 119656.
>> IT IS MOVED.
IS IT SECONDED.
>> SECOND.
>> IT IS MOVED AND SECONDED.
SAWANT DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO
YOUR ORDINANCE BILL?
>> JUST BRIEFLY.
I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE
COUNCILMEMBERS ENGAGING IN THE
DISCUSSION AND COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS YOU ACCOMMODATING THIS AS
A PRIORITY ITEM IN YOUR NEW
COMMITTEE AS SOON AS YOU TOOK
OFFICE.
AND, JUST TO REITERATE VERY
QUICKLY, JUST WE ALL AGREE.
WE DO HAVE TO BE CLEAR.
NONE OF US WHO HAVE BEEN
ADVOCATING FOR IT.
IN THE NEEDS OF HOMELESS WHILE
HOMESNESS EXISTS THERE IS
ABSOLUTELY NO JUSTIFICATION FOR
PEOPLE TO BE LEFT UNSHELTERED.
WE KNOW IT HAS DEVASTATING,
DEVASTATING CONSEQUENCES.
AND I KNOW WE DO NOT TALK ABOUT
ENCAMPMENTS AND TINY HOUSES.
WE SHOULD ACKNOWLEDGE AND
CONGRATULATE YOU ON INCREDIBLE
THE EFFORTS HAVE BEEN FROM THE
COMMUNITY AND FROM OUR
ORGANIZATION, SOCIAL SERVICE
ORGANIZATIONS.
FROM 10 ENCAMPMENTS TO TINY
VILLAGES, I THINK WE SHOULD
AMEND THE EFFORT THAT IS BEING
MADE TO GO.
AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE
WORTH IT.
THE TINY HOUSE BRIDGE TO PERMIT
HOUSING.
NONE OF IT, FOR TWO FINAL
POINTS, THE BILL'S PASSAGE IS
IMPORTANT BUT AGAIN WE WILL
STILL HAVE TO FIGHT TO FUND
ADDITIONAL VILLAGES.
HAVING THE ABILITY TO DO IT AND
HAVING THE MONEY IS ANOTHER.
WE WILL CONTINUE THAT STRUGGLE
AND ON TOP OF THAT REALLY, WE
NEED PARAMOUNT STRUGGLE IT IS
FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
SAWANT.
YES, COUNCILMEMBER MORALES.
>> I WOULD HAVE TO SAY I AM
FRUSTRATED.
TODAY WE HAVE THE PRIVILEGE TO
VOTE ON 2 BILLS TO COMBAT IT.
ONE TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORS
HOUSED AND THIS ONE TO HOUSE
MORE OF OUR NEIGHBORS TO BE
IMPACTED BY A SYSTEM THAT
CRIMINALIZES POVERTY.
IN THE WEEK SINCE OUR LAST
MEETING, TWO WEEKS AGO, WE HAD
A CHANCE TO MEET WITH
CONSTITUENTS WHO WANT TO SEE A
PATHWAY OUT OF HOMELESSNESS.
WE MET AND HEARD STORIES OF
MOTHERS FINDING COMMUNITY AFTER
LOSING THEIR HOMES OF NEIGHBORS
COMING OUT OF HOMELESSNESS TO
DEVOTE THEIR LIVES FOR FIGHTING
FOR THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE WHO
FACE SIMILAR SITUATIONS.
AND, I SAY ALL OF THAT BECAUSE
AT OUR LAST COMMITTEE MEETING
WE COLLECTIVELY DECIDED TO
DELAY THERE VOTE UNTIL TODAY.
SO THAT COUNCILMEMBERS COULD
RESEARCH ISSUES MORE AND
POTENTIALLY SUBMIT AMENDMENTS
FOR OTHERS TO CONSIDER.
WE DID NOT SEE THESE UNTIL
YESTERDAY AT 3:00 P.M.
THAT IS WHEN THEY WERE SHARED
WITH COUNCIL COLLEAGUES.
OFFERING THESE AMENDMENTS AT
THAT LATE OF A TIME IS NEITHER
TRANSPARENT OR EFFICIENT, NOT
TO MENTION WE HAD SEVERAL STAFF
MEMBERS HERE WORKING OVER THE
WEEKEND.
GIVING LESS THAN A DAY SEEMS TO
DEFEAT THE PURPOSE OF DELAYING
THE VOTE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
IF MY OPINION IT WILL DELAY THE
PROCESS AGAIN AND I AM NOT ON
BOARD WITH THAT.
I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD
KEEP KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE
ROAD ON THESE IMPORTANT PIECES
OF LEGISLATION IF WE HAVE
AMENDMENTS WE WANT TO RESEARCH
WE NEED TO GET IT DONE AND STOP
PUSHING THINGS OFF.
SO, YOU KNOW, IT SENDS A
MESSAGE TO OUR HOMELESS
NEIGHBORS ABOUT OUR PRIORITY
AND IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE
SAKE OF TRANSPARENCY TO OUR
CITY THAT WE IF WE ARE GOING TO
DELAY A VOTE WE MOVE FASTER AND
FOR THE SAKE OF US AS
COUNCILMEMBERS TO DO OUR DUE
DILIGENCE AND UNDERSTANDING
THESE 6 OR EIGHT AMENDMENTS ON
THIS BILL, THE 6 OR 8 ON THE
BILL THAT WE SPOKE ABOUT
EARLIER IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE
HAVE MORE THAN, YOU KNOW, 12
HOURS TO LOOK AT THESE
AMENDMENTS AND REALLY
UNDERSTAND THEM IF WE ARE
EXPECTED TO VOTE ON THEM.
>> THANK YOU.
>> JUST TO RESPOND TO SOME OF
THOSE.
I DO AGREE WITH COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES.
I WOULD SAY THAT PART OF GOING
THROUGH PREPARING FOR THIS, I
MEAN, SOME OF SPONSORED WERE
NOT AT A PLACE WHERE THEY WERE
READY FOR PRIME TIME UNTIL
CLOSE TO THE VOTE
UNFORTUNATELY.
PART OF THAT REFLECTS ON WE ARE
DEALING WITH A UNIQUE DEADLINE,
TOO.
THAT IS WHY I AM MOVING IT AS
QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
SO, THE CURRENT INTERIM
PERMITTING LANGUAGE DOES EXPIRE
ON MARCH 31st.
THE GOAL WITH THE TIME LINE WE
LINED UP IS JUST TO MAKE IT IN
TIME TO MAKE SURE THE PROVIDERS
HAVE ENOUGH LEEWAY WHERE IT IS
NOT GOING TO LEAD TO POTENTIAL
DISPLACEMENT OR EVICTION EVER
THE ENCAMPMENTS.
THAT IS PARTLY WHY, I CALLED A
SPECIAL MEETING.
TRYING TO HAVE ENOUGH MEET UP.
ESPECIALLY A COMMITTEE OF THE
WHOLE MEMBER SHR-P IN ADVANCE
OF THE VOTES ON THESE.
ESPECIALLY THIS PARTICULAR
ORDINANCE INVOLVED A LOT OF
TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TODAY.
I DO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.
I HOPE IN THE RUN UP TO WHAT I
AM SURE WILL BE A FEW MORE
AMENDMENTS THAT WILL BE
CONSIDERED FOR COUNCIL NEXT
MONDAY THAT WE CAN WORK TO TRY
TO GET MORE NOTICE OF THOSE
AMENITIMENTS BEFORE WE VOTE ON
THEM.
BUT I DO.
TO MEET THAT MARCH 31st
DEADLINE I DO INTEND TO PUSH
THE COUNCIL TO MOVE THIS NEXT
WEDNESDAY.
AND THANK YOU FOR SHARING THOSE
COMMENTS.
I APPRECIATE IT.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS.
>> JUST NOTE NEXT TUESDAY THERE
WILL LIKELY BE A SUBSTITUTE
BILL.
>> THAT IS RIGHT IT WILL BE
TUESDAY.
>> AND THIS BILL HAS A
SIGNATURE BLOCK FROM 2019 THAT
NEEDS TO BE CHANGED.
>> I WANT TO REVISIT YOUR
AMENDMENT NUMBER 7 TO MAKE SURE
THE COMMITTEE'S INTENT IS
REFLECTED IN THE LANGUAGE.
POSSIBLE WE MAY WANT TO COME
BACK WITH THAT ON TUESDAY AS
WELL.
>> AND SAWANT DO YOU HAVE
ANOTHER COMMENT.
>> YES, IN THE SPIRIT OF WHAT
MORALES SAID, CAN WE OR YOU AS
CHAIR SPECIFY NEW AMENDMENTS.
WE CONSIDERED A SLEW OF
AMENDMENTS.
IT IS DIFFICULT FOR THOSE OF US
THAT ARE SPONSORING THE BILLS
IN WE HAVE TO LOOK AT ALL OF
THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT OUR
COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE ABLE TO
COME AND ENGAGE IN IT.
SO CAN WE SET WEDNESDAY OR
WEDNESDAY MORNING DEADLINE.
>> I WAS GOING --
>> ONLY FAIR THIS BILL HAS BEEN
AROUND FOR SO LONG.
>> I WAS GOING TO RECOMMEND
CLOSE OF BUSINESS ON WEDNESDAY
IF YOU CAN GET YOUR AMENDMENTS.
IF WE CAN POTENTIALLY MAYBE
HAVE A SUMMARY OF THOSE
AMENDMENTS BY THE CLOSE OF
BUSINESS ON FRIDAY SO WE HAVE
THE FULL WEEKEND TO CONSIDER,
THE FULL 3 DAY WEEKEND TO
CONSIDER THE AMENDMENTS AND
KIND OF DWELL ON THEM AND TAKE
A LOOK AT THEM THAT WOULD BE
ADVISABLE AS WELL.
I KNOW IT IS ASKING A LOT.
AND MONDAY NOON DEADLINE OR I
GUESS IT WOULD BE NOON TUESDAY
DEADLINE FOR AMENDMENTS.
ULTIMATELY IT IS UP TO YOU ALL
TO BE CIVIL -- SELF-POLICING.
AND FOR WHAT IS KNOWN THEN FOR
DISTRIBUTION.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH I
APPRECIATE THAT.
OKAY.
ARE THERE ANY FINAL COMMENTS.
AND LOOK AT SCHEDULING AND
PROCEDURAL THINGS OFF LINE.
IF THERE IS ANY FINAL COMMENTS.
SEEING NONE.
I WILL JUST BRIEFLY -- I WANT
TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT
FOR BRINGING IT FORWARD.
I THINK IT IS A STRONG
ORDINANCE.
THE STRENGTH OF IT REPRESENTED
BY THE CHANGES BEING COSMETIC
TODAY.
THE AMENDMENTS WE CONSIDERED
SUBSTANCE OF THE USE OF
PERMITTING.
AND THE STRENGTH OF PRODUCING
THE ORDINANCE.
AND I MOVE THAT WE RECOMMEND
THAT THE FULL COUNCIL PASS
COUNCIL BILL 1196.
YES.
WHY ISN'T IT RIGHT HERE IN THE
THING?
COUNCIL BILL 119656.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR ALL OF
THOSE OPPOSED.
ALL OF THOSE ABSTAINING,
SIGNIFY.
>> I AM GOING TO ABSTAIN.
WE CAN TALK ABOUT MY AMENDMENTS
LATER.
>> THAT WOULD BE BY A VOTE OF 5-
0-1. DUE PASS TO FULL COUNCIL.
I AM GOING TO KEEP MY CLOSING
REMARKS SUPER BRIEF AND THAT IS
GOING TO BE THAT IT WILL BE
CONSIDERED AGAIN ON TUESDAY
FEBRUARY 18th AS WE JUST
DISCUSSED.
AND IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
BUSINESS BEFORE WE ADJOURN.
>> THIS MORNING FOLKS WE HAVE A
LETTER THAT I AM SEEKING
SIGNATURES ON.
THIS RELATES TO A COUNCIL
PRIORITY DURING THE BUDGET
PROCESS LAST YEAR.
WE CIRCULATED A DRAFTED LETTER
OVER THE WEEKEND.
AND A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT.
IT IS EXPRESSING THE TOWN'S
INTENT FOR THE HOME OF A GOOD
PILOT IT IS FUNDED FOR 12
MONTHS.
HOME FOR GOOD IS THE NAME OF
THE PILOT IN DEVELOPMENT RIGHT
NOW TO PREVENT OR END
HOMELESSNESS FOR OVER 50 YEARS
OLD WHO ARE LIVING ON FEDERAL
DISABILITY BENEFITS.
OFTEN THE BENEFIT THEY RECEIVE
IS INADEQUATE TO COVER THE COST
OF RENT AND STILL LEAVE ENOUGH
LEFT OVER TO LIVE ON EVEN IN
SUBSIDIZED HOUSING.
THIS LEAVES THIS POPULATION
VULNERABLE TO EVICTION AND
HOMELESSNESS.
EVEN WHEN THEY ARE HOUSED IN
SUBSIDIZED HOUSING.
750,000 TO CREATE AND EVALUATE
A PROJECT TO PROVIDE
SUBSTANTIAL SUBSIDY.
AND FOR THE BUDGET REQUIREMENT
AND THERE IS SOME CONFUSION IN
THAT STAKEHOLDER MEETING IF THE
FUNDING WILL BE EXTENDED BY
DECEMBER 31st AS A HARD
DEADLINE.
IF THAT WAS THE CASE IT WOULD
MAKE FOR A SHORT PILOT.
SINCE THE HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT IS STILL IN THE
PROCESS OF BOTH DEVELOPING THE
PROGRAM, DEVELOPING AN RFP.
THEY WILL ISSUE AN RPF.
THEY WILL RECEIVE APPLICATIONS
AND THEN THEY WILL SELECT AN
AWARDEE AND ENTER INTO
CONTRACT.
EXPECTING IT TO TAKE UP MUCH OF
THE FIRST QUARTER, 2020.
THIS LETTER EXPRESSES THE
COUNCIL'S HOPE THAT THE
$750,000 AVAILABLE FOR A FULL
YEAR'S FUNDING AND IT QUEUES UP
AN INTEREST OF POTENTIAL A
TKEUGDZAL FUNDING DURING THE
BUDGET DELIBERATIONS LATER THIS
YEAR.
>> QUESTIONS?
>> NO QUESTIONS.
>> WITH THAT I WILL CIRCULATE
THE LATER AND WE CAN SIGN IT
AND OPEN SESSION WE GET THE
FILIBUSTER.
THE AWKWARD SILENCE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> LEWIS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER.
OKAY.
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS TO
THE ATTENTION OF THE COMMITTEE.
>> ALL RIGHT WITH THAT WE ARE
ADJOURNED.
THANK YOU, CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU, THANK YOU