>>> THANK YOU AND GOOD MORNING.
THIS IS THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED
MEETING OF THE SUSTAINABILITY
AND RENTERS RIGHTS COMMITTEE OF
THE SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL, IT IS
FRIDAY, MAY 20th, 2022 AND I AM
THE CHAIR, WOULD YOU PLEASE
CALL THE ROLE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT?
>> PRESENT .
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> PRESENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES ?
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> PRESENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ ? FOUR
PRESENT.
>> THANK YOU AND WELCOME ALL
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE AND TO
COUNCILMEMBERS MOSQUEDA AND
PEDERSEN WHO WILL BE JOINING
US AS SPONSORS OF EITHER
LEGISLATION OR AMENDMENTS TO
LEGISLATION.
WE HAVE THREE ITEMS ON THE
AGENDA, THE COMMITTEE WILL
DISCUSS AND VOTE ON A BILL
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN TO ADD INFORMATION
ABOUT RENT CHARGED TO THE
INFORMATION THAT LANDLORDS ARE
REQUIRED TO REPORT UNDER THE
RENTAL REGISTRATION AND
INSPECTION ORDINANCE.
COUNCIL MEMBER PEDERSEN HASN'T
BEEN MET TO CLARIFY HOW IT
WILL BE ENFORCED AND THE
COMMITTEE WILL DISCUSS A BILL
SPONSORED BY MY OFFICE IN
RESPONSE TO A COURT OF APPEALS
DECISION THAT OBJECTED TO ONE
SMALL PART OF THE SEATTLE SIX-
MONTH EVICTION DEFENSE WHICH
REQUIRES LANDLORDS -- SORRY,
RENTERS TO ASSESS THEY HAVE
SUFFERED FINANCIAL HARDSHIP TO
BE ELIGIBLE TO USE THE DEFENSE
AGAINST EVICTION AND THE COURT
OF APPEALS OBJECTED TO THE
MECHANICS OF THAT STATION,
SPECIFICALLY THAT THERE IS NOT
LANGUAGE GIVING LANDLORDS THE
ABILITY TO REBUT THE CLAIM THAT
RENTERS FACE FINANCIAL
HARDSHIP.
I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT THE
EVICTION DEFENSE IS IN EFFECT
BECAUSE THE CITY HAS APPEALED
THE COURT OF APPEALS DECISION,
HOWEVER, OUT OF AN ABUNDANCE OF
CAUTION, PARTICULARLY TO AVOID
CONFUSION, MY OFFICE IS
SPONSORING THE BILL TO RESPOND
TO THE COURT OF APPEALS
CONCERTS AND THERE ARE TWO WAYS
TO ADDRESS THE DECISION BY THE
COURT OF APPEALS, THE CITY
COUNCIL COULD ADD A LIGHT
EXPLAINING HOW LANDLORDS CAN
REBUT THE CLAIMS BY RENTERS OF
FINANCIAL HARDSHIP, OR THE
COUNCIL COULD REMOVE THE
REQUIREMENT THAT RENTERS HAVE
FACED FINANCIAL HARDSHIP, THAT
THE REQUIREMENT RENTERS HAVE TO
CLAIM THAT SO THAT THERE IS NO
CLAIM TO REBUT.
AS I HAVE ARGUED REPEATEDLY IN
THE PAST, I STRONGLY PREFER
THAT WE HAVE NO ELEMENTS OF
MEANS TESTING, HOWEVER MINOR IN
THE RENTERS RIGHTS LEGISLATION
AND I STRONGLY PREFER THE
SECOND OPTION, IT SHOULD BE
GIVEN THAT IF A RENTER IS AN
EVICTION COURT, THEY HAVE
SUFFERED FINANCIAL HARDSHIP
BECAUSE NOBODY IN THEIR RIGHT
MIND WOULD BE IN EVICTION COURT
OUT OF CHOICE.
WHY ELSE WOULD THEY BE THERE
OTHER THAN IF THEY HAD
FINANCIAL HARDSHIP?
REQUIRING THAT THEY DECLARE
FINANCIAL HARDSHIP,
PARTICULARLY IF THE LANDLORD
CHALLENGES THE CLAIM, DRAGS
RENTERS REGULATING PROCESS
THAT, IN REALITY, HAS A
CHILLING EFFECT RENT --
PREVENTING PEOPLE, THIS DEFENSE
WAS INTENDED TO HELP IN THE
FIRST PLACE, FROM USING IT AND
THERE IS DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
TO SHOW HOW THE PROCESS
OVERWHELMINGLY IS IN BALANCE
TOWARDS PROTECTING LANDLORDS
BECAUSE THEY FEEL -- BECAUSE
LANDLORDS ARE MUCH MORE
EXPERIENCED IN DEALING WITH
LEGAL PROCESSES.
MY OFFICE HAS DISCUSSED WITH
THE HOUSING JUSTICE PROJECT TO
DEFEND RENTERS IN EVICTION
COURT ON THIS EVICTION DEFENSE
IS RARELY NEEDED RIGHT NOW
BECAUSE BOTH RENTERS AND
LANDLORDS USUALLY PREFER A
DIFFERENT EVICTION DEFENSE
CONNECTED TO RENTAL ASSISTANCE
MONEY TO PAY OFF BACK RENT BUT
THOSE PROGRAMS ARE ONLY FUNDED
TO THE END OF JUNE AND
HOPEFULLY BE EXTENDED, IN THE
MEANTIME, THIS BILL WILL
CLARIFY THE NEXT LINE OF
DEFENSE FOR RENTERS.
BECAUSE LEGISLATION REQUIRES 20
DAYS AFTER SIGNATURE BY THE
MAYOR TO GO INTO EFFECT, IF THE
BILL IS PASSED, I INTEND TO
MOVE TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO
HAVE IT APPEAR ON TUESDAY OF
NEXT WEEK AND THE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA, RATHER THAN THE
FOLLOWING WEEK AS WOULD
TYPICALLY HAPPEN FOR
LEGISLATION.
THERE ARE TWO WAYS THIS BILL
COULD HAVE RESPONDED TO THE
COURT OF APPEALS CONCERNING,
THE BILL I HAVE PROPOSED
RESPONSE BY ELIMINATING THE
NEEDS FOR ANY MEANS TEST BY THE
RENTER.
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA HAS AN
AMENDMENT TO INSTEAD USE THE
OTHER APPROACH, ADDING A LINE
ABOUT HOW LANDLORDS CAN REBUT
RENTERS. OUR FINAL AGENDA ITEM
IS A REPORT FROM THE OFFICE OF
SUSTAINABILITY AND ENVIRONMENT
ON THEIR WORK IN THE RECENT
SOCIAL JUSTICE REPORT.
BEFORE WE BEGIN, WE HAVE PUBLIC
COMMENT.
WE HAVE 11 PEOPLE, 12 PEOPLE
NOW SIGNED UP -- 11 PEOPLE NOW
SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
BECAUSE SOME MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
HAVE SCHEDULING RESTRICTIONS, I
AM GOING TO HAVE SPEAKERS HAVE
ONE MINUTE EACH, NOT TWO
MINUTES, I APOLOGIZE BUT WE
NEED COUNCILMEMBERS HERE FOR AS
MUCH OF THE COMMITTEE AS
POSSIBLE.
PUBLIC COMMENTS WILL HAVE ONE
MINUTE EACH.
I WILL READ OUT THE NAMES.
YOU WILL BE PROMPTED WHEN I
CALL A GRENADE TO UNMUTE, HIT
STAR 6 ON YOUR PHONE TO UNMUTE
AND BEGIN SPEAKING.
OUR FIRST THE SPEAKER SHOWN IS
PRESENT ARE JENNIFER, CANDACE,
AND BRUCE BECKER.
ANTHONY IS SHOWN UP AS NOT
PRESENT, IF YOU CAN HEAR THIS,
YOU ARE SHOWED UP AS NOT
PRESENT.
GO AHEAD, JENNIFER.
>> JENNIFER YOU ARE MUTED, HIT
STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF.
JENNIFER, YOU ARE STILL SHOWING
UP AS MUTED, HIT STAR 6 ON YOUR
PHONE.
>> JENNIFER, I WILL MOVE ON AND
COME BACK TO YOU AND SEE IF
THAT WORKS THEN.
ANTHONY JACOB IS STILL NOT
PRESENT.
NEXT IS CANDACE, BRUCE.
WE HAVE BEEN JOINED BY
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ WHO WAS
ALSO A MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE.
GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
THIS IS CANDACE AND I WOULD
LIKE TO URGE YOU TO KNOW ON
COUNCIL BILL 120330 AND
120325.
I WANTED TO MENTION THAT I
REPRESENT A LOT OF APARTMENT
OWNERS IN THE SALE OF THEIR
BUILDING AND I CAN SEE HOW
THESE REGULATIONS REALLY AFFECT
THEIR DECISION TO SELL VERSUS
CONTINUE TO OWN THE PROPERTY.
THIS REPORTING WOULD BE REALLY
ONEROUS ON A SMALLER LANDLORDS
WHICH HAVE THE NATURALLY
OCCURRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING
THAT WE SO VALUE IN OUR CITY.
I ALSO WANTED TO ADD THAT THERE
IS SOME TALK ABOUT USING A
LOCAL RESEARCH UNIVERSITY FOR
SOME OF THE RESEARCH.
THAT IS NOT BE CONDUCTED AND
GATHERED.
I STARTED A COMPANY CALLED
COMMERCIAL ANALYTICS, WHICH WAS
INTENDED TO REPLACE THE VOID
LEFT BY DUPREE AND SCOTT.
I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
COUNCIL IS AWARE THERE IS AN
EXISTING SYSTEM THAT COULD BE
USED IN ORDER TO COLLECT THIS
DATA.
FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME IF YOU
WANT MORE INFORMATION.
I SENT A WRITTEN EMAIL AS WELL.
>> NEXT IS BRUCE BECKER.
THEN MARILYN, THEN RACHEL WHO
IS SHOWING UP IS NOT PRESENT,
THEN TRAN LARSON.
>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.
I AM ENCOURAGING YOU TO VOTE
AGAINST MOST OF THESE COUNCIL
BILLS , FIRST OF ALL, THE FIRST
ONE THAT ELIMINATES THE NEED
FOR A -- TO SHOW NEED, A
FINANCIAL NEED TO AVOID PAYING
RENT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.
IT IS MUCH BETTER -- IF THE
TENANT CANNOT PAY, THEY SHOULD
CLAIM I CANNOT PAY AND THIS IS
WHY.
IF A LANDLORD CAN REBUT THAT
SUCCESSFULLY, THAT IS GOOD,
THAT IS WHAT A JUDGES FOR.
THE PROBLEM IS -- IT MEANS THAT
PEOPLE DO NOT NEED TO PAY RENT
TO AVOID EVICTION.
THE OTHER BILL PRESENTS A
PROBLEM WITH THE REPORTING.
THESE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS
DRIVING SMALL LANDLORDS LIKE ME
OUT OF SEATTLE AND THIS IS A
PROBLEM BECAUSE WE PROVIDE
LOCAL --
>> MARYLAND FOLLOWED BY TRAN
AND KATE MARTIN.
>> I AM SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION
TO THE TWO COUNCIL BILLS BEFORE
YOU, JANUARY 2020 , THE HOUSING
CHOICES REPORT FOUND THAT TWO
THIRDS OF RENTERS PREFER
RENTING ONE TO FOUR UNIT
PROPERTIES AT THREE QUARTERS OF
RESPONDENTS WANT TO BE POLICY
TO ENCOURAGE MORE OPTIONS BUT
THE CITY HAS LOST 11% OF ITS
RENTAL HOUSING, 94% OF WHICH IS
THE VERY SAME PROPERTIES THE
MAJORITY OF RENTERS PREFER,
THAT SAME REPORT CAUTIONED
AGAINST THE DATA GATHERING IT
PROPOSES AND SHOWS A DISCONNECT
BETWEEN THE POLICY OF THE
CITIES AND ACTUAL OUTCOMES FOR
RENTERS AND SMALL MOM-AND-POP
PROVIDERS.
CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS SUCH AS
THOSE CONSIDERED THEY ARE
DRIVING OUT THE VERY PROPERTIES
THAT MOST CITY RESIDENTS WANT
MORE OF AND YOU ARE NOT
COLLECTING DATA TO FIGURE OUT
WHY THIS IS HAPPENING YOU WANT
TO SUSPEND RENTAL PAYMENTS
INDEFINITELY WITH NO ADDITIONAL
RENTAL ASSISTANCE WHEN THERE
ARE HOUSING PROVIDERS WITH
$50,000-$100,000 RIGHT NOW,
THAT IS MY MOM AND POPS RIGHT
NOW ARE LEAVING, WITH HARSH
LEGISLATION BUT YOU ARE
ALIENATING US WITH TODAY BEING
A LOOSE EXAMPLE.
SPEAK WITH STAKEHOLDERS AND
STOP PASSING LAWS THAT MAKE THE
HOUSING CRISIS WORSE.
THANK YOU.
>> RACHEL, GO AHEAD.
AFTER THAT, TRAN.
>> I JUST WANTED TO CALL IN AND
EXPRESS THE FACT THAT I AM
CONSIDERED A SMALL LANDLORD
HERE AND I DO HAVE TWO
PROPERTIES THAT RECENTLY BECAME
VACANT.
JUST THE IDEA OF EXPANDING THIS
MORATORIUM PUTS ME IN A
POSITION WHERE I WILL PROBABLY
BE CHOOSING TO SELL MY PROPERTY
AS OPPOSED TO RENTING THEM OUT
AGAIN BECAUSE I CANNOT AFFORD
TO NOT RECEIVE RENTAL FROM MY
TENANTS.
I HOPE THAT YOU DO CONSIDER HOW
THIS AFFECTS SMALL LANDLORDS
AND SMALL PROPERTY OWNERS.
>> NEXT IS TRAN LARSON, THEN
KATE MARTIN.
>> I AM THE COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT MANAGER OF THE
HOUSING JUMPED OUR PROJECT AND
ON BEHALF OF US WE SUPPORT THE
PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE
LANGUAGE IN THE DEFENSE TO AN
ACTION TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF
THE COURT OF APPEALS WHICH IS A
RELATIVELY MINOR FIX.
TENANTS ARE STILL STRUGGLING TO
PAY RENT AS HOURS AND WAGES ARE
FLUCTUATING WITH THE RISING
COVID CASES , THE LARGEST
RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM HAS
CLOSE TO -- TENANTS HAVE FEW
RESOURCES, THEY ARE NOT JUST
REFUSING TO PAY RENT.
WE SUPPORT THE ORDINANCE FROM
COUNCIL PEDERSEN THAT SUPPORTS
THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION
ON LANDLORDS CLAIMS THAT THEY
ARE SELLING THE PROPERTIES
WHEN WE DON'T HAVE ANY EVIDENCE
THAT SUPPORTS THESE CLAIMS
ASIDE FROM MISINTERPRETATION OF
THE LITTLE INFORMATION THAT IS
THERE.
IT IS BENEFICIAL TO KNOW WHAT
THE HOUSING INVENTORY LOOKS
LIKE AND WHAT ACTION THE CITY
NEEDS TO TAKE TO PRESERVE THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND ADDRESS
THE DEBT THAT EXISTS.
THANK YOU.
>>> NEXT IS KATE MARTIN AND
THEN GORDON, THE SPEAKER AFTER
THAT IS DANIEL, BUT YOU ARE
SHOWING IS NOT PRESENT.
GO AHEAD, KATE MARTIN.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A FEW
COMMENTS TO MY OPPOSITION TO
EXTENDING THE MORATORIUM ON
EVICTIONS.
I AM A SMALL LANDLORD RUNNING A
SHARED HOUSE THAT I OWN, I HAVE
VERY AFFORDABLE RENT AND IT HAS
PUT ME IN A TERRIBLE POSITION
TO NOT BE ABLE TO RENT ROOMS
BECAUSE OF THE IDEA OF A RENT
STRIKE.
AS YOU KNOW, IN NEW YORK CITY,
THEY ENDED THE EVICTION
MORATORIUM A LONG TIME AGO.
IS SEPARATED THE WHEAT FROM THE
CHAFF, SEPARATED THE RENT
STRIKERS FROM THE PEOPLE WHO
LEGITIMATELY NEEDED HELP, AND
IT HAS NOT CAUSED A TSUNAMI OF
ANYTHING TO HAPPEN IN THE
UNITED STATES'S LARGEST CITY
AND I WANT YOU TO CONSIDER
ENDING THAT RIGHT NOW.
WE HAVE LOST OVER 5000 SMALL
LANDLORD HOUSING OPTIONS
BECAUSE OF THE RISK THAT WE
FACE TO HAVE STRIKERS IN OUR
HOMES AND IN OUR APARTMENTS.
IT IS UNSUSTAINABLE AND I'M
ASKING YOU TO END IT NOW.
THANK YOU.
>> GORDON HAGGERTY, GO AHEAD.
>> HELLO, THIS IS GORDON
HAGGERTY AND I HAVE BEEN A
SMALL HOUSING PROVIDER FOR OVER
50 YEARS.
I HAVE HAD GREAT SUCCESS WITH
TENANT RELATIONS AND HAVE NOT
HAD TO DO EVICTIONS.
WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO WORK THIS
OUT.
BUT WHAT YOU ARE DOING, I AM
IN OPPOSITION OF BOTH OF THESE
COUNCIL BILLS , AND I WILL SEND
WRITTEN COMMENTS IN MORE
DETAIL, BUT I JUST HAVE TO SAY
I AM STRONGLY OPPOSED AND
CONCERNED TO BOTH OF THESE AS
ADDING EXTRA BURDENS ON HOUSING
PROVIDERS.
IT IS AFFECTING OUR
AFFORDABILITY TO BE ABLE TO
CONTINUE TO PROVIDE HOUSING
HERE.
I WANT TO SAY THAT YOU HAVE
LOST HOUSING UNITS.
YOUR RECORDS SHOW THAT YOU ARE
GOING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION
WITH THIS AND WILL BE GOING
FURTHER.
IF YOU WANT TO DESTROY PRIVATE
RENTAL HOUSING IN SEATTLE,
CONTINUE TO DO WHAT YOU ARE
DOING BECAUSE YOU ARE DOING A
GREAT JOB OF IT.
YOU WILL REGRET IT AND YOU'RE
NOT HELPING THE PEOPLE --
>> KAY AND THEN ANGIE, THEN
JENNIFER IF SHE IS AVAILABLE.
GO AHEAD, KATE.
>> KATE, YOU ARE STILL MUTED.
THERE YOU GO.
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> YES.
>> THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS KAY, AND I HAVE BEEN
A SMALL LANDLORD FOR 15 YEARS
AND CITY COUNCIL, THANK YOU FOR
HEARING MY COMMENT.
SPEAKING OUT AGAINST THE BILLS
RELATING TO JUST CAUSE OF
ACTION AND EVICTION DEFENSES
AND AMENDING 22.205.090 OF THE
SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE.
THE CITY WAS ONCE FOUND
NEGLIGENT OF PROVIDING DUE
PROCESS TO LANDLORDS BECAUSE IT
DID NOT ALLOW THEM TO TEST THE
VERACITY OF A TENANT AND THEIR
CELEBRATION OF HARDSHIP.
THE CITY APPEALED THE DECISION
AND IS NOW CHALLENGING THE
DECISION BY FAX CHECKING THIS
LEGISLATION THROUGH A VOTE.
I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE EVICTION
PROCESS IS HARD ON BOTH TENANTS
AND LANDLORDS AND THIS IS THE
KEY, ACKNOWLEDGING BOTH
PARTIES, BOTH PARTIES HAVE
RESPONSIBILITIES TO MAINTAIN
HOUSING AND THE LANDLORD MUST
PROVIDE A SAFE UNIT THAT IS IN
GOOD WORKING ORDER AND THE
TENANT --
>> ANGIE, GO AHEAD.
>> MY HUSBAND AND I ARE SMALL
LANDLORDS IN BALLARD.
I AM CALLING TO ASK THAT CITY
COUNCIL VOTE NO ON BOTH ITEMS
TODAY, SEATTLE IS EXPERIENCING
A GREAT LOSS OF SMALL RENTAL
PROPERTIES.
WHICH IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO
THE SYNONYMY OF LEGISLATION
THAT COUNCIL HAS TURNED OUT IN
THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
WITHOUT ANY COLLABORATION OR
INPUT FROM SMALL RENTAL
PROPERTY OWNERS TO PROVIDE A
LARGE PROPORTION OF AFFORDABLE
RENTAL HOUSING IN SEATTLE,
ESPECIALLY A FAMILY SIZED
HOUSE.
COUNCIL FUNDED A SMALL LANDLORD
STAKEHOLDER GROUP WHICH THEY
HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO IMPLEMENT
YET.
COUNCIL ALSO FUNDED A NEW
RENTAL HOUSING STUDY WHICH HAS
NOT BEGUN TO HAPPEN.
YOU DEVELOPING POLICIES AND AN
ECHO CHAMBER, INCLUDE
STAKEHOLDERS BEFORE DEVELOPING
A NEW RENTAL REGULATION.
THANK YOU.
>> TWO MORE SPEAKERS WHO ARE
SHOWING AS PRESENT AND HAVE NOT
SPOKEN.
LET'S SEE IF THEY CAN SPEAK,
JENNIFER AND DANIEL.
GO AHEAD, JENNIFER.
>> JENNIFER IS STILL MUTED.
IT JUST PROMPTED ME TO UNMUTE,
THIS IS DANIEL.
I AM CALLING ON BEHALF OF THE
RENTAL HOUSING ASSOCIATION OF
WASHINGTON REPRESENTS OVER 5000
SMALL HOUSING PROVIDER ACROSS
THE STATE, MANY IN SEATTLE AND
I WANT YOU TO KNOW ON BOTH
BILLS.
THE FIRST PUTS AN UNNECESSARY
BURDEN ON EVERY HOUSING
PROVIDER IN THE CITY TO PROVIDE
PRIVATE INFORMATION TO THE
CITY, MANDATORY PARTICIPATION
HAS ALREADY BEEN SHOWN TO
RESULT IN INACCURATE AND
UNRELIABLE DATA, MANDATING
HOUSING PROVIDERS TO PROVIDE A
PRIVATE INFORMATION TO A THIRD
PARTY WITH CERTIFICATION AND
MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES ONLY
ADDING UNNECESSARY COST TO
HOUSING PROVIDERS WHILE THE
CITY CLAIMS TO CARE ABOUT
AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THE CITY SHOULD FOCUS ON
PARTNERING WITH THE INDUSTRY
AND FUNDING RESEARCH PROJECTS
RATHER THAN PASSING IMPOSSIBLE
TO ENFORCE MANDATES THAT WILL,
ACCORDING TO RESEARCH, PRODUCE
MEANINGLESS DATA.
PLEASE STOP PASSING LEGISLATION
THAT HARMS HOUSING PROVIDERS
WHEN WE HAVE THE DESIRE TO WORK
TOGETHER TO SOLVE OUR ISSUES.
MOVING ON TO THE SECOND --
>> LAST TRY FOR JENNIFER.
ARE YOU ABLE TO UNMUTE BY
PRESSING STAR 6?
>> SHE IS STILL MUTED.
>> OKAY, UNFORTUNATELY IT IS
NOT WORKING SO ALL OF THE OTHER
SPEAKERS HAVE SPOKEN.
ANTHONY JACOB IS STILL SHOWING
NOT PRESENT AND I WILL CLOSE
PUBLIC COMMENT AND BEGIN OUR
AGENDA ITEMS.
OUR FIRST AGENDA ITEM IS THE
BILL FROM COUNCIL MEMBER
PEDERSEN TO INCLUDE INFORMATION
ABOUT RENT, INFORMATION
LANDLORDS NEED TO REPORT UNDER
THE RENDERED RENTAL
REGISTRATION INSPECTION
ORDINANCE.
I WILL READ THE TITLE AND TURN
IT OVER TO COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN . WE ARE JOINED BY
ASHA VENKATARAMAN FROM COUNCIL
CENTER STAFF . THE BILL
RELATING TO HOUSING AND
DISPLACEMENT LITIGATION,
EXPANDING THE INFORMATION
REQUIRED FOR SUBMISSION UNDER
THE RENTAL REGISTRATION
INSPECTION ORDINANCE FOR MAC
RENTAL HOUSING UNITS REQUIRING
SUBMISSION OF RENTAL HOUSING
RELATED INFORMATION AND
AMENDING CHAPTER --
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, WELCOME
.
>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME AS A
GUEST TO DISCUSS THIS BILL.
I WAS BACK AT YOUR COMMITTEE IN
MARCH DISCUSSING A
SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR BILL,
CENTRAL STAFF WILL DISCUSS,
TODAY, A COUPLE OF CHANGES THAT
HAVE BEEN MADE SINCE THEN.
HOPEFULLY THIS HAS GIVEN PEOPLE
A LOT OF TIME TO THINK ABOUT
THIS BILL AND THE NEED FOR
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
I BELIEVE IT WOULD EFFICIENTLY
FILL THE LONG-STANDING GAP IN
DATA FOR THE SEATTLE RENTAL
HOUSING INVENTORY SO THAT WE
FINALLY GET THE DETAILED
INFORMATION WE NEED FOR WELL-
INFORMED POLICYMAKING ABOUT
AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THE RENTAL HOUSING REGISTRATION
IN SEATTLE AND INSPECTION
ORDINANCE ADOPTED SEVERAL YEARS
AGO ALREADY REQUIRES LANDLORDS
TO SUBMIT A LIST OF THE RENTAL
UNITS AND THIS BILL WOULD
SIMPLY HAVE PROPERTY OWNERS
INCLUDE THAT LIST, ALONG WITH
RENTAL RATES, SQUARE FOOTAGE,
VACANCY INFORMATION, TO A
RESEARCH UNIVERSITY TO COMPILE
AND ANALYZE THIS IMPORTANT
DATA, NO PERSONAL INFORMATION
WOULD BE PROVIDED.
OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS,
CITY GOVERNMENT HAS LACKED A
LEVEL OF DETAIL NEEDED TO
UNDERSTAND MUCH INFORMATION
ABOUT THE SEATTLE HOUSING
INVENTORY, INCLUDING NON-
SUBSIDIZED HOUSING THAT HAPPENS
TO HAVE BELOW MARKET RENTS WERE
MORE AFFORDABLE RENT, WE DO NOT
KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THE HOUSING
IS AND WE NEED TO KNOW THAT AS
WE MAKE DECISIONS SUCH AS
UPDATING OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
WHICH WE WILL BE DOING VERY
SHORTLY.
WE HAVE TRIED TO GET THIS
INFORMATION IN OTHER WAYS AS WE
HAVE A STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE
INTENT IN NOVEMBER OF 2020 AND
GOT A RESPONSE FROM THE
EXECUTIVE WHICH WAS -- WHICH
INDICATED THAT THERE IS STILL A
GAP IN THE DATA.
WE PROPOSE THIS AS A SOLUTION.
I KNOW THAT SMALL LANDLORDS ARE
UPSET ABOUT THIS BECAUSE THEY
HAVE BEEN SUBJECTED TO A LOT OF
REGULATORY CHANGES OVER THE
PAST FEW YEARS BUT I BELIEVE
THEY HAVE A COMPELLING NEED FOR
THIS DATA.
SO WE KNOW AND UNDERSTAND OUR
CITIES HOUSING INVENTORY AS WE
APPROACH THESE BIG DECISIONS
SUCH AS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WE WANT TO DO MORE TO PREVENT
DISPLACEMENT, ECONOMIC
DISPLACEMENT OF EXISTING
RESIDENTS AND WE NEED TO
UNDERSTAND WHERE THIS BELOW
MARKET HOUSING EXISTS.
I THINK THAT CENTRAL STAFF HAS
DONE A GREAT JOB WORKING WITH
MY TEAM, I WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT AND HER
COMMITTEE CLERK FOR
ACCOMMODATING US TODAY.
BUT MAYBE TURNING IT OVER TO
CENTRAL STAFF TO TALK THROUGH
THE DETAILS OF THE BILL WOULD
BE HELPFUL.
>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL
MEMBERS.
I AM WITH COUNCIL CENTRAL
STAFF, ASHA VENKATARAMAN, THANK
YOU COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN , WE
ARE TALKING ABOUT BILL 120325.
I WILL JUST GO THROUGH A SHORT
DESCRIPTION OF THE DIFFERENCES
IN THE BILLS AND TALK THROUGH
THE ISSUES FOR THE COUNCIL
MEMBERS TO CONSIDER, AND THEN
TALK ABOUT POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS
AND NEXT STEPS.
COUNCIL BILL 120284,
CONCEPTUALLY, THE INTENT OF
THAT BILL AND 120325, THEY
WOULD REQUIRE LANDLORDS TO
SUBMIT AN RENTAL HOUSING
INFORMATION TO A RESEARCH
UNIVERSITY TO CERTIFY TO THE
SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF
CONSTRUCTION AND INSPECTIONS
THAT IT HAS DONE SO THROUGH A
CERTIFICATION, THROUGH THE
RENTAL REGISTRATION AND
INSPECTION ORDINANCE EXISTING
PROCESS.
IT CONTEMPLATES THAT AN
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, EITHER
THE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OR THE
OFFICE OF HOUSING, AS THE MOST
LIKELY CANDIDATES, WOULD
CONTRACT THE RESEARCH
UNIVERSITY TO HAVE THIS
INFORMATION ANALYZED AND GET
ANALYSIS BACK TO THE CITY ABOUT
DISPLACEMENT RISKS AND THE
RENTAL MARKET.
BETWEEN THE TIME WE DISCUSSED
THESE BILLS, A COUPLE OF
CHANGES TO BE BUILT WERE
INCORPORATED.
SOME OF WHICH REQUIRED A
CHANGE, WHICH IS WHY THERE IS A
NEW COUNCIL BUILT IN FRONT OF
YOU.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF CHANGES,
ONE IS THE DATE FOR SUBMISSION
OF THIS INFORMATION BY
LANDLORDS, WAS ORIGINALLY
SLATED FOR INFORMATION ABOUT
RENTAL INFORMATION ABOUT
FEBRUARY WAS DUE ON MARCH 31st,
AND INSTEAD THE DUE DATE
SIFTED TO RENTAL INFORMATION
ABOUT THE MONTH OF MARCH BEING
PUSHED OUT TO -- EXCUSE ME, FOR
SUBMISSION THROUGH APRIL 14th,
AND ORIGINALLY INFORMATION
ABOUT RENT AND RENTAL HOUSING
UNITS WAS DUE BY AUGUST.
THAT SHIFTED TO INFORMATION
ABOUT SEPTEMBER IS NOW DUE
OCTOBER 15th.
ADDITIONALLY, WE HAVE ADDED THE
NAME OF THE PROPERTY OWNER AND
THE ADDRESS OF THE PROPERTY TO
THE LIST OF INFORMATION TO BE
SUBMITTED, THAT WAS
INADVERTENTLY LEFT OFF OF THE
ORIGINAL DRAFT.
AND IT ADDED THE NEED FOR
ANALYSIS OF THE RENTAL MARKET
HOUSING ADDITIONS TO THE
ANALYSIS OF DISPLACEMENT RISKS
TO MAKE SURE BOTH ISSUES WERE
COVERED.
IN ADDITION, THE BILL ADDS A
SUNSET PROVISION THAT REQUIRES
THE INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED
UP UNTIL THE NEXT TIME THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS UPDATED
AND ADOPTED, OR AT THE END OF
2025, WHICHEVER ONE IS LATER.
THOSE ARE THE MAJORITY OF THE
CHANGES IN THIS NEW BILL.
I WILL GO THROUGH AND TALK
ABOUT SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT
WE DID DISCUSS DURING THE LAST
COMMITTEE MEETING BUT CONTINUE
TO APPLY TO THIS NEW COUNCIL
BILL . ONE OF THOSE IS THAT
THEY WILL REQUIRE SOME TIME TO
UPDATE THE I.T.
SYSTEM TO TRACK COMPLIANCE
EFFECTIVELY.
IN ADDITION, WHATEVER
DEPARTMENT DECIDES TO CONTRACT
WITH THE RESEARCH UNIVERSITY
WILL REQUIRE SOME TIME TO
NEGOTIATE PROJECT SCOPE, SELECT
THE RESEARCH UNIVERSITY THROUGH
A GERMAN PROCESS, AND FINALIZE
IT SO THE PROPERTY OWNERS KNOW
TO WHOM THEY ARE SUBMITTING THE
INFORMATION REQUESTED.
ONE OF THE ISSUES WE DISCUSSED
AT THE LAST COMMITTEE MEETING
ALSO CONCERNED THE FUNDING THAT
WOULD BE NEEDED TO SUPPORT THIS
PROGRAM.
SO BOTH FUNDING FOR THE
CONTRACT ITSELF, AS WELL AS
ADDITIONAL STAFF FOR THEM TO
MONITOR COMPLIANCE.
IN CONVERSATIONS WITH THE
EXECUTIVE, IT DOES NOT APPEAR
THAT THERE ARE EXISTING FUNDS
THEY WOULD BE USED TO ABSORB
THE COSTS AND THE COUNCIL MAY
WANT TO CONSIDER EITHER ADDING
FUNDS IN A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET
AND DURING THE 2023 BUDGET
PROCESS THIS FALL.
THAT COULD BE COMPLICATED JUST
BECAUSE OF THE GENERAL FUNDS
EXPENDITURES OUT OF FUNDING THE
REVENUES, OR PROJECTED GENERAL
FUND REVENUES BECAUSE THE
DEPARTMENTS ARE BEING ASKED TO
IDENTIFY REDUCTIONS.
THE COUNCIL MAY WANT TO
CONSIDER HOW THAT MAY IMPACT
WHEN THIS PROGRAM IS GOING TO
AFFECT.
ADDITIONALLY, THOSE ARE THE
ISSUES THAT WE SPOKE THROUGH AT
THE LAST COMMITTEE MEETING.
WITH THIS NEW BILL, THERE ARE
OTHER ISSUES I WANTED TO FLAG
FOR THE COMMITTEE.
ONE OF THOSE ISSUES IS ABOUT
TIMING.
RIGHT NOW, THE BILL IS SLATED
TO GO INTO EFFECT 30 DAYS AFTER
SIGNATURE BY THE MAYOR, THE
REGULAR TIMING FOR ANY COUNCIL
BILL . THE CHALLENGE IS THAT A
RESEARCH UNIVERSITY WOULD NEED
TO HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN
PLACE TO COLLECT THE
INFORMATION, OR, IF IT DOES NOT
HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN
PLACE, HAVE ANOTHER WAY FOR
PROPERTY OWNERS TO SUBMIT THIS
INFORMATION TO THEM AT THE TIME
THE BILL IS EFFECTIVE AND THE
FIRST DUE DATE GOES INTO PLACE.
THE COMPLICATION IS THAT,
WITHOUT KNOWING WHO THE
CONTRACT WILL BE AWARDED TO, IT
IS NOT CLEAR AT THIS TIME
WHETHER THE UNIVERSITY WOULD BE
ABLE TO SUBMIT THAT -- EXCUSE
ME, TO THAT RECEIVED THAT
INFORMATION RIGHT AWAY AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS MAY WANT TO
CONSIDER WHETHER TO PUSH THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF SOME
PROVISIONS UNTIL AFTER A
CONTRACT IS EXECUTED.
ONE MINOR ISSUE IN THE LIST OF
INFORMATION THAT IS TO BE
SUBMITTED IS THAT IT REQUIRES
INFORMATION SUFFICIENT TO
ASCERTAIN THE CURRENT HOUSING
COSTS.
GIVEN THAT THAT FORMULATION IS
JUST A LITTLE BIT VAGUE, IT MAY
BE MORE USEFUL AND
STRAIGHTFORWARD TO PROPERTY
OWNERS TO KNOW WHAT THEY NEED
TO SUBMIT BY SAYING THAT THEY
NEED TO SUBMIT JUST THE CURRENT
HOUSING COSTS, RATHER THAN
INFORMATION SUFFICIENT TO
ASCERTAIN IT.
THE SUNSET PROVISIONS CURRENTLY
IN THE LEGISLATION APPLY TO THE
MAJOR NEW SECTIONS THAT REQUIRE
SUBMISSION OF THE INFORMATION
TO THE UNIVERSITY.
GOT SUNSET PROVISION ONLY
APPLIES TO THAT NEW SECTION AND
COUNCILMEMBERS MAY WANT TO
CONSIDER ADDING THE SUNSET
PROVISION TO THE OTHER CHANGES
IN THE BILL THAT REQUIRE
CERTIFICATION SUBMISSION TO
SUCI ON A PARTICULAR SCHEDULE
SO THAT THESE PROVISIONS EXPIRE
AT THE SAME TIME, AND THERE ARE
NOT INADVERTENTLY CODE SECTIONS
LEFT REFERRING TO REQUIREMENTS
THAT NO LONGER EXIST.
ATTACHED TO MY MEMO IS ALSO
ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK FOR THE
CONSIDERATION OF THE COMMITTEE
THAT CAME FROM THE EXECUTIVE.
I WILL NOT GO THROUGH THOSE IN
DETAIL BUT SOME OF THE ISSUES
THAT I ARGUED DESCRIBE --
INCLUDING THE PIECES ABOUT THE
NEED TO UPDATE INFRASTRUCTURE
REGARDING I.T., AND THE FUNDING
ISSUE I PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED.
I WILL PAUSE BEFORE I MOVE INTO
POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS TO SEE IF
THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT
WHAT I HAVE RAISED THUS FAR.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> YOU ARE STILL ON MUTE,
COUNCILMEMBER.
>> WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY HOUSING
COST?
IS THAT THE RENT BEING CHARGED
FOR THE COST OF THE LANDLORD TO
PROVIDE IT, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE
THE MORTGAGE, OR WHATEVER?
>> YES, IT IS BASICALLY THE
RENT BEING CHARGED, THE TERM
HOUSING CAUSED IS DEFINED IN
THE CODE AND IT REFLECTS THE
STATE DEFINITION OF HOUSING
CAUSED, THE INTENT IS TO BE
MORE OR LESS GLOBALLY CHARGED.
>> THANK YOU.
>> I DO NOT SEE ANYONE ELSE
WITH QUESTIONS.
>> OKAY.
IN THAT CASE I WILL MOVE INTO
POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN HAS
AUTHORED AND COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES HAS DRAFTED AN
AMENDMENT THAT WOULD ADJUST THE
ENFORCEMENT PROVISION IN THE
BILL FOR THESE NEW
REQUIREMENTS.
CURRENTLY, ANY VIOLATIONS OF
RIO ARE SUBJECT TO -- ANY
VIOLATIONS OR FAILURE TO COMPLY
ARE SUBJECT TO CIVIL PENALTIES
OF $150 PER DAY FOR THE FIRST
10 DAYS OF THE VIOLATION AND
$500 PER DAY FOR EACH DAY
THEREAFTER.
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD
EXEMPT VIOLATIONS OF THESE NEW
PROVISIONS FROM THAT AND
INSTEAD SUBJECT THEM TO LOWER
LEVELS OF VIOLATIONS.
WE ARE LOOKING AT $500 FOR THE
FIRST VIOLATION AND UP TO $1000
FOR EACH SUBSEQUENT VIOLATION
WITHIN A THREE-YEAR PERIOD.
THESE PENALTIES WERE MODELED
AFTER THE RENTAL AGREEMENT
REGULATIONS THAT ARE IN CHAPTER
7.24 THAT SEEMED MORE
APPROPRIATE FOR VIOLATIONS OF
REPORTING.
THE RIO SCHEME, MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT IS
INTENDED TO DEAL WITH HOUSING
CODE VIOLATIONS, THINGS THAT
ARE CONTINUING FOR A LONG TIME
WHEN IT COMES TO PEOPLE HOUSING
QUALITY AND MAKING THAT CHANGE
WOULD PUT THESE REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS IN LINE WITH THE
RENTAL AGREEMENT REQUIREMENTS
IN CHAPTER 7. THAT IS THE ONLY
PROPOSED AMENDMENT AT THIS
TIME.
I WILL TURN IT BACK OVER TO
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN .
>> THANK YOU, THAT WAS
EXCELLENT, AS ALWAYS, ASHA .
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT, I AM
HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FROM
COLLEAGUES, AS IS ASHA , AND I
APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES PUTTING THE AMENDMENT
FORWARD BECAUSE I AM NOT ON THE
COMMITTEE.
>> THANK YOU, ASHA , THANK YOU
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN . DO ANY
COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE FURTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS IN
GENERAL OR ABOUT THE AMENDMENT?
THE BILL HAS NOT BEEN MOVED
YET.
I WILL DO THAT IF
COUNCILMEMBERS ARE PREPARED TO
VOTE.
I WANTED TO OPEN IT UP FOR
FURTHER DISCUSSION FIRST.
>> CHAIR?
>> GO AHEAD.
>> I REALIZE THE AMENDMENT HAS
NOT BEEN MOVED BUT I WANTED TO
SPEAK TO WHY I AM AGREEING TO
COSPONSOR THIS, IF THIS IS THE
RIGHT TIME?
>> YES.
>> THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN , FOR ASKING ME TO
PARTNER WITH YOU ON THIS.
I HAVE AGREED TO SPONSOR THIS
BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE A REAL
METHOD FOR DATA COLLECTION.
NO REAL WAY TO DETERMINE THE
RATE AT WHICH MEANT IS
INCREASING IN THE CITY.
IT IS INCREASING AND, IN THE
LAST SIX MONTHS, RENT HAS
SKYROCKETED.
WE DO NOT HAVE AN ACCURATE WAY
TO COLLECT THE DATA.
THAT PUTS US AT AN EXTREME
DISADVANTAGE.
MY HOPE IS THAT, WITH THIS DATA
COLLECTION PROVIDED TO THE
CITY, AS POLICYMAKERS, IT WILL
ALLOW US TO GET A BETTER SENSE
OF HOW MASSIVE THE NEED IS FOR
MORE HOMES THAT ARE MORE
AFFORDABLE TO PEOPLE OF ALL
INCOMES IN THE CITY.
THIS WOULD REALLY ILLUSTRATE
THE NEED FOR POLICIES AND
PROGRAMS THAT WOULD HELP KEEP
CURRENTLY AFFORDABLE RENT
AFFORDABLE.
BUT CAN ALSO HELP CENTER THE
NEED FOR MORE PUBLICLY OWNED
HOMES AND MORE PRODUCTION THAT
WE ARE TRYING TO GET OUT THE
DOOR SO THAT OUR NEIGHBORS DO
NOT GET PUSHED OUT -- IT IS A
SIMPLE TOOL IN MAKING DECISIONS
ABOUT POLICIES AND OUR
COUNTERPARTS IN THE EXECUTIVE
BRANCH AND IT WOULD HELP
RENTERS STAY IN SEATTLE.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY
AND I AM PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE
TO SWITCH TO MY PHONE BUT I
LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH
YOU ALL.
>> AGAIN, I WILL INVITE ANY
COUNCILMEMBERS TO SPEAK.
TO CLARIFY, WHETHER YOU WANT TO
SPEAK TO THE BILL AS A WHOLE OR
THE AMENDMENT BEING DISCUSSED,
THAT IS FINE, JUST LET ME KNOW.
GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
>> I SHARE COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN'S DESIRE FOR MORE
INFORMATION ABOUT THE HOUSING
INFORMATION PROVIDED BY SMALL
HOUSING PROVIDERS, AND I AM
CONCERNED BECAUSE THE 2020 --
THE ANNUAL REPORT DID SAY THAT
OURS STOCK WAS DOWN ABOUT 14%
FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR.
I WANT TO KNOW -- THAT IS
IMPORTANT FOR US TO KNOW AS WE
GO FORWARD WITH DECISIONS
AROUND LANDLORD AND TENANT
ISSUES.
ALSO, IF WE WANT TO FIGURE OUT
WHAT IS REALLY HAPPENING WITH
THE APPEARANCE OF THOSE UNITS,
OR THOSE PROPERTIES FROM THE
LIST.
I AM CONCERNED THAT THIS
LEGISLATION PLACES AN
ADDITIONAL BURDEN ON SMALL
LANDLORDS BECAUSE THE STATED
úPURPOSE, OR THE GOAL, FROM TH
SPONSOR, COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN
, IS TO HELP US MAKE LAND-USE
DECISIONS DURING THE AMENDMENT
PROCESS IN 2024.
AND SO I THINK THAT, BURDENING
SMALL LANDLORDS IN ORDER TO GET
TO THE GOAL, IS UNNECESSARY.
IN CAPE -- CASE PEOPLE WERE NOT
FOLLOWING THE PREVIOUS
ITERATIONS, PEOPLE SHOULD KNOW
THAT THIS COUNCIL BILL WOULD
REQUIRE LANDLORDS TO PRODUCE
INFORMATION ABOUT THE NET
RENTABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE, NUMBER
OF BEDROOMS AND BATHROOMS,
INFORMATION TO ASCERTAIN THE
TOTAL NET MONTHLY RESIDENTIAL
RENT CHARGED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO TOTAL MONTHLY
RESIDENTIAL RENT BEING CHARGED
OR TO BE CHARGED IF VACANT, AS
WELL AS THE AMOUNT AND IDENTITY
OF UTILITIES PAID BY THE OWNER,
INCLUDING THE RENT CHARGE AND
IS SUBJECT TO A RENTAL
AGREEMENT, THE CURRENT LENGTH
OF THE TERM OF THE RENTAL
AGREEMENT.
WELL, THERE IS A BACKGROUND
MEMO BASICALLY SAYING THAT
LANDLORDS TYPICALLY PRODUCE
ROLES ON A MONTHLY BASIS FOR
THEIR OWN INTERNAL BOOKKEEPING
TO MONITOR AND FILL VACANCIES
AND DETERMINE RENTAL REVENUE.
FOR MANAGEMENT AND TAX
PURPOSES.
BUT MOST SMALL LANDLORDS
ACTUALLY DO NOT DO THIS.
THEY DO NOT HAVE TO PUT DOWN
THAT MUCH INFORMATION AND
USUALLY THEY RECORDED THE
REVENUE ON THEIR TAX FORMS ONCE
PER YEAR.
I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS WOULD BE
A BIG JOB TO DO TWICE A YEAR.
IT IS THE WRONG TOOL FOR THE
INFORMATION WE ARE TRYING TO
GET.
SO, WE ARE TRYING TO USE THIS
INFORMATION TO FURTHER THE GOAL
OF ANTI-DISPLACEMENT, ALTHOUGH
I JUST HEARD COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES SAY THIS INFORMATION
COULD BE USED TO MONITOR RENT
INCREASES, THAT IS A DIFFERENT
PURPOSE, THAT IS A DIFFERENT
USE OF THE DATA.
BUT WE DON'T DO THAT.
WE DON'T ASK OTHER SMALL
BUSINESS OWNERS FOR THIS KIND
OF DETAILED INFORMATION.
FOR EXAMPLE, WE DO NOT ASK ALL
PRODUCE VENDORS TO SUBMIT THE
KINDS OF VEGETABLES THEY SELL
AND THE PRICES THEY CHARGE TO
IDENTIFY FOOD DESERTS ACROSS
OUR CITY AND PREVENT THE
SPREAD.
THE INFORMATION WE ARE ASKING
FOR IS PROPRIETARY, AND,
ALTHOUGH IT IS AN ANONYMOUS
ANALYSIS, WE ARE ASKING FOR THE
NAMES, THOSE NAMES ARE OF THE
PROPERTY OWNERS AND THAT IS
THIS CLOSABLE.
ANYWAY, I THINK THAT, FOR THESE
REASONS, PER THE AMENDMENT, I
WOULD SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT IF
THE LEGISLATION WOULD GO
FORWARD BECAUSE IT IS A LITTLE
BIT BETTER THAN WHAT WAS
THINK THOSE ASSETS ARE TOO MUCH
FOR LANDLORDS STRUGGLING TO
DEAL WITH THE IMPACTS OF THE
PANDEMIC ON THEIR BUSINESSES.
IN ANY CASE, THOSE ARE MY
REASONS FOR NOT FAVORING THIS
BILL.
THANK YOU.
>> DID ANY OTHER
COUNCILMEMBERS, COMMITTEE
MEMBERS, WANT TO -- I DO HAVE
SOME POINTS BUT I WILL WAIT TO
SEE IF THE COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS
OR COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ
WANT TO SPEAK . COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN , DO YOU WANT TO
RESPOND TO ANYTHING THAT HAS
COME UP?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR SAWANT . I
APPRECIATE THE CRITIQUE.
I DO NOT KNOW IF THE GROCERY
STORE ANALYSIS WORKS BECAUSE
THE CURRENT PRICES OF THOSE
PRODUCTS ARE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE
OR AS WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE
CURRENT CONTRACT RENTS ARE IN
APARTMENT PROJECTS.
THAT IS MY ONLY COMMENT.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN . THAT IS WHAT I WAS
THINKING.
COMPARING HOUSING, WHICH IS THE
BIGGEST TICKET ITEM IN TERMS OF
WHAT PEOPLE HOW TO SPEND ON,
GIVEN LIMITED INCOME, COMPARING
IT TO VEGETABLES IS RIDICULOUS
BUT DOES NOT WORK BECAUSE THE
PRICES OF VEGETABLES ARE
PBLICLY KNOWN.
THE PROBLEM IS THE PRICING IN
HOUSING IS NOT KNOWN.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY, OVERALL,
I SUPPORT THIS BILL, IT WOULD
BE GOOD TO HAVE MORE DATA ABOUT
THE RENT THAT LANDLORDS CHARGE.
IT IS IRONIC THAT, IN PUBLIC
COMMENT, THE SUPPOSEDLY SMALL
LANDLORDS SIMULTANEOUSLY CLAIM
A CHARGE LOW RENT AN OBJECT TO
DISCLOSING THE RENT THEY
CHARGE, WHICH MAKES NO SENSE,
IF YOU ARE CHARGING LOW RENT,
WHY WOULD YOU OBJECT TO HAVING
TO DISCLOSE THAT?
THIS CLAIM SEEMS TO BE FROM
LANDLORDS THAT THEY PROVIDE LOW-
RENT HOUSING AND THAT IS WHY
THEY REFUSE TO DISCLOSE THE
RENT THAT WE SHOULD TRUST THEM
BECAUSE IT IS LOW.
THAT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.
LANDLORDS AND COUNCILMEMBER
NELSON CALL THIS A BURDEN.
THIS HAPPENED LAST TIME WE
DISCUSSED THIS BILL.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW IT IS A
BURDEN TO DISCLOSE THE AMOUNT
OF RENT CHARGED.
THAT IS THE MOST BASIC FORM OF
INFORMATION THAT LANDLORDS
SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO SHARE.
IT IS STRANGE WHEN WE FOUND OUT
THAT IS NOT ALREADY A
REQUIREMENT.
IF YOU ARE A SMALL LANDLORDS
WHO SUPPOSEDLY OWNS ONE OR TWO
RENTAL PROPERTIES, IT SHOULD BE
EASIER, JUST REPORTING A COUPLE
OF NUMBERS.
IT IS NOT A GOOD ARGUMENT THAT
SOMEHOW THAT IS A BURDEN.
HOW CAN THAT BE A BURDEN?
THERE SHOULD BE SOME OTHER
REASON WHY YOU SHOULD OPPOSE
THIS.
ALSO, I WANT TO SAY, WEEK AFTER
WEEK, WE HEAR COMPLETELY
UNFOUNDED CLAIMS FROM LANDLORDS
WHO SAY THEY ARE CHARGING LOW
RENT BUT THEY ARE LEAVING THE
MARKET, THEY WILL SELL THE
PROPERTY, WE HEAR THIS IN EVERY
PUBLIC COMMENT BECAUSE THEY SAY
-- THEY CLAIM ONEROUS BURDEN,
REGULATORY BURDENS FROM THE
CITY AND THAT IS WHY THEY ARE
LEAVING THE MARKET.
THAT IS JUST NOT SUPPORTED BY
THE DATA.
IT IS COMPLETELY SPECULATIVE,
THIS CLAIM THAT RENTERS RIGHTS
ARE MORE -- OR MORE INCREASED,
PROTECTION FOR RENTERS IS
DRIVING SMALL LANDLORDS OUT OF
THE MARKET, THAT IS
SPECULATION, PROPERTY VALUES
ARE SKYROCKETING, THAT HAS
SOMETHING WHICH HAS BEEN WELL-
DOCUMENTED.
IF THE LANDLORDS ARE SELLING,
ARE THEY SELLING BECAUSE THEY
DON'T WANT TO COMPLY WITH BASIC
LAWS OF WAR BECAUSE PROPERTY
VALUES HAVE GONE THROUGH THE
ROOF AND THEY CAN CASH IN ON
THEIR PROPERTY LIKE NEVER
BEFORE?
IT IS A SPECIOUS CLAIM TO SAY
THAT REGULATORY BURDEN IS
MAKING THAT OR REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS IS MAKING YOU DO
THAT.
MAKE SURE TO MENTION THAT
CORPORATE ENTITIES ARE DIVIDED
UP INTO SMALL LLCS AND EACH
CLAIMS TO BE REPRESENTING A
SMALL LANDLORD INTEREST, THAT
IS A FACTOR WHEN PEOPLE ARE
SPEAKING, ARE THEY ACTUAL SMALL
LANDLORD SPEAKING?
WE HAVE SEEN PEOPLE FROM
CORPORATIONS SPEAK AS
REPRESENTATIVES OF SMALL
LANDLORDS.
I THINK THOSE POINTS HAVE TO BE
NOTED.
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, YOUR ZOOM
HAND IS UP.
GO AHEAD.
>> I GET THAT MY VISIBLE
ANALOGY MAY NOT HAVE BEEN APT,
BUT THE RENTS BEING CHARGED ARE
ALSO AVAILABLE WHEN YOU ARE
LOOKING FOR UNITS.
THE POINT IS, THIS -- THE
PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO PREVENT
DISPLACEMENT, WHEN WE GO TO
LAND-USE DECISIONS, AND
INCREASING HEIGHTS IN CERTAIN
AREAS, THAT IS THE REASON --
THAT IS THE STATED REASON FOR
THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.
I THINK THERE IS A BETTER WAY
OF GETTING AROUND THAT.
WE COULD SIMPLY ASK SOMEBODY TO
PERFORM THE KIND OF ANALYSIS
THAT THE COMPANY WAS DOING,
GENERATE A SCOPE OF WORK FOR
THAT CONTRACT, AND HAVE THAT
INFORMATION TO INFORM OUR LAND-
USE DECISIONS.
INSTEAD, WHAT I'M HEARING, IT
IS CLEAR, THIS INFORMATION IS
GOING TO BE USED LIKE OTHER
POLITICAL PURPOSES SUCH AS RENT
CONTROL.
LET'S JUST BE FRANK ABOUT THE
FACT THAT THIS INFORMATION IS
GOING TO BE, I THINK BURDENS
AND TO COLLECT, WE ARE NOT JUST
TALKING ABOUT WHAT ARE YOU
CHARGING FOR THE UNITS, IT IS
THE LIST OF OTHER THINGS
MENTIONED.
THANK YOU.
>> I WILL JUST GO AHEAD -- GO
AHEAD TO COUNCIL PRESIDENT
JUAREZ , COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN, I WILL GIVE YOU THE
LAST WORD BECAUSE IT IS YOUR
BILL . I WILL MAKE A COMMENT
AND MOVE THE BILL.
IF COUNCILMEMBERS, IF YOU ARE
READY TO VOTE, I WILL MOVE IT,
BUT IF, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN, YOU PREFER TO HOLD IT
, JUST LET ME KNOW.
GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ
.
>> SORRY ABOUT NOT USING THE
HAND, I COULD NOT FIND IT.
I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS
IT IS FORMAT AND I WILL TELL
YOU WHY.
I AM SPLIT DOWN THE MIDDLE BUT
ONE OF THE THINGS I TOOK REFUGE
AND MAKING SURE I UNDERSTOOD
WAS THE INFORMATION WE GOT FROM
THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
FROM JAMES YOUNG, THE DIRECTOR
OF THE WASHINGTON CENTER FOR
REAL ESTATE RESEARCH.
FOR ME, BESIDES THE GREAT WORK
BY ASHA AND THEY CARRIED A LOT
OF WEIGHT, YOU DEFINITELY NEED
THIS PROGRAM BUT I DO NOT THINK
YOU SHOULD MANDATE
PARTICIPATION.
THAT IS THE CONCERN I HAVE.
I WILL COME TO THE DEFENSE OF
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON.
I THINK THAT YOU HAVE
REGULATORY BURDENS AND YOU HAVE
REGULATORY BURDENS.
IT HAS TO BE A DIRECT -- IT HAS
TO HAVE A DIRECT NEXUS TO THE
INTENT.
RIGHT NOW, THE REGULATORY
BURDEN, WHEN I LOOKED UP THE
DEFINITION OF HOUSING COSTS
UNDER 22.204.090, THAT IS A LOT
OF INFORMATION TO BE WRITING
TWO TIMES PER YEAR THAT YOU
REQUIRE BECAUSE THE MARKETPLACE
CHANGES.
IN THIS CURRENT FORM, I LIKE
THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE
WASHINGTON CENTER FOR THE REAL
ESTATE RESEARCH PUT FORWARD,
ALSO, A LOT OF INFORMATION IS
PROPRIETARY BECAUSE, WHETHER WE
LIKE IT OR NOT, WE ARE IN A
CAPITALIST SOCIETY, WHICH IS
COMPETITIVE IN THE MARKETPLACE
AND I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY
LANDLORDS DO NOT WANT TO SHARE
THAT.
I GET THAT.
EVERYTHING ELSE THAT I SEE IN
THE BILL BY COUNCIL PEDERSEN
ABOUT THE INFORMATION -- LET
ME FIND A REAL QUICK, AND I
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON TALKED
ABOUT, THE LIST UNDER THE
22.214.040, THE LIST OF ALL
RENTAL HOUSING UNITS, WHETHER
IT IS VACANT OR OCCUPIED, THE
NUMBER OF BEDROOMS, BATHROOMS,
A LOT OF THE INFORMATION, I
DON'T FIND THAT INTRUSIVE, BUT
I WOULD DEFINITELY SUPPORT WHAT
THE CENTER PUT FORWARD AND
MAYBE WORKSHOP THIS MORE I AM
NOT PREPARED TODAY TO VOTE YES
ON THIS.
I WOULD HATE FOR THIS TO GO
FORWARD, JUST GO DOWN ON A NO
VOTE OR PEOPLE ABSTAIN.
THIS IS A LITTLE SIDE NOTE IN
REGARDS TO EVERYTHING, IT IS
NOT HELPFUL WHEN I GET SEVEN
EMAILS BEFORE 9:00 TO TRY TO
FIGURE OUT HOW WE WILL VOTE ON
THESE TWO ITEMS.
IT IS NOT THE FAULT OF EVERYONE
BUT THAT IS NOT HELPFUL, TRYING
TO GET THROUGH ALL OF THE NEW
AMENDMENTS, I COUNTED THEM UP,
SIX AMENDMENTS BEFORE 9:00
TODAY AND STILL TRYING TO WORK
OUT THE OTHER AMENDMENTS.
I CANNOT SUPPORT, IN ITS
CURRENT FORM, WHAT I AM LOOKING
AT REGARDING THE PROPOSED
COUNCIL BILL 120325.
THANK YOU.
SMACKED THANK YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT JUAREZ FOR WEIGHING
IN.
ON THE QUESTION OF ELECTING A
LANDLORD OF A CORPORATION
COLLECT THE DATA INTO THE CITY,
I COMPLETELY DISAGREE.
THAT AMOUNTS TO LETTING THE
LANDLORD CHOOSE WHAT DATA WE CA
THE DATA COLLECTED BY A PUBLIC
ENTITY -- THE DATA WOULD BE
OBJECTIVELY COLLECTED BECAUSE
IT WOULD BE COLLECTED NOT FROM
THE CORPORATION, BUT A LOT OF
THE DATA EXIST IN THE PUBLIC
REALM.
THE WAY COUNCILMEMBER NELSON IS
TALKING ABOUT IT, SHE IS MAKING
IT SOUND LIKE IT IS UNUSUAL BUT
IT IS NOT UNUSUAL TO HAVE DATA
IN THE PUBLIC REALM AND
CORPORATIONS USE THE DATA,
WORKING PEOPLE ALSO USE THE
DATA, THAT -- THE DATA
COLLECTORS DO NOT MAKE THE
DECISIONS, THE DATA COLLECTION
PROCESS WILL BE OBJECTIVE, SO I
AM NOT EXACTLY CLEAR WHAT THE
CONCERN IS, THERE WAS NOTHING
UNUSUAL ABOUT THAT.
I AM PREPARED TO VOTE TODAY BUT
COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUAREZ SAYS
SHE WOULD PREFER TO VOTE, IMPLY
THAT, AND IF IT WERE MOVED
TODAY, SHE WOULD VOTE NO.
IT IS NOT TIME SENSITIVE
LEGISLATION, SO COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN, I WILL LET YOU SPEAK
ON THIS . SMACKED THANK YOU,
CHAIR SAWANT.
THIS BILL HAS BEEN WITH THE
COMMITTEE FOR THE LAST TWO
MONTHS AND THE TWO CHANGES THAT
HAVE BEEN MADE HAVE REDUCED ITS
SCOPE, WE PUT A SUNSET CLAUSE
IN AND WE REDUCED THE
ENFORCEMENT.
THAT IS WHAT IS BEFORE YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES HAS A
SCHEDULING CONFLICT, SO, TO THE
EXTENT SHE IS HERE TO MOVE MY
AMENDMENT TO REDUCE THE
ENFORCEMENT, I AM FINE HAVING A
VOTE TODAY.
>> THANK YOU, THAT IS HELPFUL.
I WILL GO AHEAD, BECAUSE
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN IS NOT A
MEMBER OF THIS COMMITTEE , I
WILL MOVE COUNCIL BILL 120325
ON HIS BEHALF DO I HAVE A
SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU, THE BILL HAS BEEN
MOVED AND SECONDED AND IS NOW
BEFORE THE COMMITTEE.
WILL BE -- NO, WE NEED TO MOVE
THE AMENDMENT 1, COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES, I WILL OPEN BEFORE TO
YOU?
>> SO MOVED.
>> I WILL SECOND IT, THE
AMENDMENT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED.
PLEASE, CLERK, WILL YOU CALL
THE ROLE ON AMENDMENT 1?
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT?
>> NO .
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> AYE,
>> COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ ?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> FOUR IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED.
>> THE AMENDMENT HAS PASSED AND
THE COUNCIL BILL 120325, AS
AMENDED , IS BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE FOR A VOTE, ANY FINAL
COMMENTS BEFORE THE VOTE IS
CALLED?
I DO NOT SEE ANY COMMENTS.
SO, CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON BACK
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> THREE IN FAVOR, TWO OPPOSED.
THAT PASSES AS AMENDED.
>> GREAT.
IT DOES TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON?
>> MAY 31st.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU, TED, AND
THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBERS FOR
THAT DISCUSSION, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN, THANK YOU FOR BEING
HERE, THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES . THANK YOU, ASHA, AS
WELL . NOW THE AMENDMENT OF THE
SIX MONTH EVICTION DEFENSIVE
RESPONSE DECISION BY THE COURT
OF APPEALS AS I READ THE BILL
INTO THE RECORD NOW -- COUNCIL
BILL RELATING TO JUST CAUSE
EVICTIONS, CHANGING THE TERMS
OF EVICTION DEFENSES AND
AMENDING SECTIONS FOR
22.205.090 AND 22.205.100 OF
THE SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE.
ASHA VENKATARAMAN IS STILL HERE
FROM CITY COUNCIL STAFF AND
WILL PRESENT THE LEGISLATION.
GO AHEAD, ASHA.
>> THANK YOU . COUNCIL CENTRAL
STAFF, ASHA VENKATARAMAN, THE
BILL , IT AMENDS SEATTLE
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS
22.205.090 AND 22.205.100 .
22.205.090 IS THE DEFENSE PUT
INTO PLACE SEVERAL YEARS AGO
THAT WOULD ALLOW A TENANT TO
ASSERT THE DEFENSE, DURING THE
EVICTION MORATORIUM AND SIX
MONTHS AFTER THE EVICTION
MORATORIUM EXPIRES.
THAT IS BECAUSE THE MORATORIUM
-- THE CITY MORATORIUM EXPIRED
AT THE END OF FEBRUARY, THE
DEFENSE WOULD BE IN EFFECT
THROUGH THE END OF AUGUST.
AS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED, EXCUSE
ME, THIS DEFENSE WAS CHALLENGED
AND WAS IN LITIGATION, THE
COURT OF APPEALS ISSUED ITS
DECISION ON THE PROCEDURAL DUE
PROCESS PART OF THIS
LEGISLATION.
AND RULED THAT IT NEEDED TO BE
MORE CLEAR THAT A LANDLORD HAS
THE OPPORTUNITY TO REBUT THE
ASSERTION OF FINANCIAL HARDSHIP
THAT A TENANT WAS SELF
CERTIFYING AT THE TIME.
IN RESPONSE, THIS PIECE OF
LEGISLATION REMOVED THE
REQUIREMENT OF PROOF OF
FINANCIAL HARDSHIP FROM BOTH
22.205.090 AND 22.205.100 .
SO, RATHER THAN, AS
COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT DISCUSSED
IN THE COMMITTEE MEETING,
RATHER THAN ADD THE ABILITY FOR
A LANDLORD TO REBUT THE
ASSERTION OF FINANCIAL
HARDSHIP, IT REMOVES THE
REQUIREMENT TO PROVE FINANCIAL
HARDSHIP ALTOGETHER.
THAT IS THE CRUX OF THE CHANGES
THAT THIS BILL WOULD MAKE.
BECAUSE OF THE -- LET ME BACK
UP, AT THE MOMENT, THE HOUSING
JUSTICE PROJECT PROVIDE
ADVOCACY FOR TENANTS IN COURT
AGAINST EVICTION, THAT HAS BEEN
USING THE RENTAL ASSISTANCE
THAT IS UNDER CONTRACT THROUGH
THE COUNTY THAT IS AVAILABLE TO
USE FOR TENANTS.
THAT CONTRACT IS SET TO END
JUNE 30th AND NOT CLEAR IF
THERE WILL BE AN EXTENSION OR
IF THERE ARE ANY ACTUAL RENTAL
ASSISTANCE LEFT.
THE HOUSING JUSTICE PROJECT
DOES NOT ADMINISTER THE RENTAL
ASSISTANCE FUNDS FOR THE CITY
BUT IT CAN ADVOCATE FOR TENANTS
IN GENERAL.
BECAUSE OF THE EXPIRATION OF
THE CONTRACT ON JUNE 30th, THE
ABILITY OF THE ATTORNEYS TO USE
RENTAL ASSISTANCE IN TRYING TO
DECREASE THE LIKELIHOOD OF
EVICTION FOR TENANTS STOPS,
LEAVING THIS DEFENSE IN EFFECT
FOR JULY AND AUGUST.
BECAUSE OF THE PRACTICALITY OF
USING THE DEFENSE WITHOUT
MAKING THIS CHANGE THAT IS
CONTEMPLATED, EITHER IN THIS
BILL, OR THE AMENDMENT TO THIS
BILL, THE EVICTION DEFENSE
ATTORNEYS ARE LESS LIKELY TO BE
ABLE TO ASSERT THE DEFENSE,
WHICH IS THE REASON FOR THIS
BILL MOVING FORWARD.
IF IT PASSES OUT OF COMMITTEE
TODAY, THE SUSPENSION OF THE
RULES, IT CAN GO IN FRONT OF
THE FULL COUNCIL FOR
CONSIDERATION THIS COMING
TUESDAY, WHICH WILL ALLOW THE
MAYOR THE EFFICIENT AMOUNT OF
TIME TO SIGN IF HE CHOOSES TO
BE IN EFFECT BY
>> THANK YOU.
I HAVE NOTHING TO ADD AT THIS
MOMENT.
I ALREADY MADE MY COMMENT AND I
DO NOT WANT TO REPEAT THEM.
I WILL SEE WHAT COMES UP YOU.
GO AHEAD.
>> I HAVE A PROCEDURAL QUESTION.
WE FILED A MOTION TO RECONSIDER
ON APRIL 8th.
IS THAT THE LAST STOP ON THE
LITIGATION TRAIN?
TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE COURT
OF APPEALS.
>> AS FAR AS I KNOW THAT IS THE
LAST THING THAT HAS HAPPENED.
>> SO THAT HAS BEEN PENDING
SINCE APRIL 8th.
THANK YOU.
>> ANY OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS?
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> I BELIEVE THE COUNCIL WAS
UNNECESSARILY RUSHED TO
CONSIDER THIS LEGISLATION.
TO DO SO MAKES NO SENSE BEFORE
OUR EXECUTIVE SESSION ON
MONDAY, WHICH I UNDERSTAND SOME
COUNCILMEMBERS ARE WAITING FOR
BEFORE THEY PUT FORWARD
AMENDMENTS.
I SAY UNNECESSARILY BECAUSE
IT'S SUPPOSEDLY BEING DRIVEN BY
THE TERMINATION OF THE CONTRACT.
THAT CONTRACT WILL END ANYWAY
BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN THE
ASSISTANCE FUNDING WILL END.
THE END OF THAT CONTRACT IS, TO
ME, IMMATERIAL TO THIS DEFENSE.
MOREOVER SDC I ALSO HAS AN
ONGOING CONTRACT I BELIEVE.
ADVOCATES FOR THEMSELVES CAN
STILL USE THIS DEFENSE
REGARDLESS OF THE JUNE 30th
CONTRACT EXPIRATION.
THIS DEFENSE IS STILL ON THE
BOOKS DURING THE CITY'S APPEAL
OF THE RULING IN RHA'S FAVOR.
WHICH FOUND THE DEFENSE
UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR ALLOWING
LANDLORDS TO CHALLENGE THE
TENANTS SELF INABILITY TO PAY
RENT.
THAT'S WHY I WALKED THIS ON.
I UNDERSTOOD THAT THE JUNE 30th
DATE WAS IRRELEVANT TO THE
CONTINUED USE OF THIS DEFENSE
WHILE OUR MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERING IS STILL PENDING.
IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT
TAKING LEGISLATIVE ACTION TO
AMEND THE SIX MONTH DEFENSE TO
FIX THE DEFICIT IDENTIFIED BY
THE COURT OF APPEALS WOULD
LIKELY BE MOVED IN EFFORTS BY
THE COURT OF APPEALS IN HOPES
OF IT GAINING A MORE FAVORABLE
STATEMENT OF DUE PROCESS OF
LAW.
THE STAKES ARE PRETTY HIGH HERE
BECAUSE THE COURTS DECISION ON
THAT CLAIM COULD IMPACT FUTURE
LEGISLATIVE ACT EFFORTS IN THIS
REALM.
I BELIEVE IT COULD IMPACT OUR
CURRENT MOTION OF
RECONSIDERATION IN A NEGATIVE
WAY.
NEVERTHELESS WE WERE PRESENTED
WITH TWO OPTIONS FOR FIXING THE
SIX MONTH DEFENSE, SHOULD WE
DECIDE TO GO THAT ROUTE ANYWAY.
WE WERE STRONGLY ADVISED IN
FAVOR OF THE OPTION THAT
RETAINS THE REQUIREMENT FOR
TENANTS SELF CERTIFICATION OF
FINANCIAL HARDSHIP, BUT MAKES
CLEAR THE LANDLORD HAS AN
OPPORTUNITY TO REBUT THE
SHOWING.
IT RESOLVES THE DEFECT
IDENTIFIED BY THE COURT OF
APPEALS WITHOUT INVITING THE
ARGUMENT THAT NOT REQUIRING THE
TENANT TO DEMONSTRATE HARDSHIP
IS A DEFECT.
REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT FOR
SHOWING OF HARDSHIP, WHICH THIS
LEGISLATION DOES, INCREASES A
LEGAL RISK THAT THE SIX MONTH
DEFENSE WILL BE SUCCESSFULLY
CHALLENGED. WHY NOT EXTEND
PROTECTIONS TO ALL TENANTS
REGARDLESS OF THE ABILITY TO
PAY?
IT BASICALLY GOD'S THE
RATIONALE OF THE SIX MONTH
DEFENSE.
THERE IS ALREADY A PAPER TRAIL
SHOWING WHY WE PUT THE HARDSHIP
REQUIREMENT IN THERE ANYWAY.
BECAUSE OF CONTRACT LAWS.
INSTEAD OF PROTECTING OURSELVES
AGAINST CLAIMS FOR A LANDLORDS
DUE PROCESS WE ARE TAKING A FAR
RISKIER PATH OF EXPOSING THE
CITY TO POTENTIAL CONTRACT
CLAUSE VIOLATION SUITS.
I DON'T SEE WHY WE WOULD DO
THAT.
>> GO AHEAD.
>> JUST A COUPLE POINTS OF
CLARITY.
I WON'T SPEAK TO THE LEGAL RISK
PIECE.
THE CONTRACT THE CITY HAS WITH
THE HOUSING JUSTICE PROJECT, AS
YOU MENTIONED, IS TO PROVIDE
EVICTION DEFENSE SERVICES.
I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR THAT IT IS
NOT THE SAME AS THE CONTRACT
THAT WE HAVE WITH THE COUNTY.
THAT IS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT
DISTRIBUTING RENTAL ASSISTANCE.
THIS CONTRACT DOES NOT
DISTRIBUTE ANY RENTAL
ASSISTANCE.
THE CONTRACT ENDING ON JUNE 30th
IS THE END OF THE RENTAL
ASSISTANCE PIECE BEING
AVAILABLE.
THE ONLY OTHER THING I WANTED
TO CLARIFY IS THAT SOME OF THE
REASON FOR MAKING THESE CHANGES
IS THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE
HAVE FROM THE EVICTION DEFENSE
ATTORNEYS. WITHOUT THE USE OF
RENTAL ASSISTANCE THE ABILITY
TO USE THIS DEFENSE WITHOUT
MAKING A LEGISLATIVE FIX COULD
BE COMPROMISED, SINCE JUDGES
MAY BE LIKELY TO LOOK AT THE
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION.
EVEN THOUGH IT IS NOT FINAL AND
BINDING.
JUDGES COULD MAKE THEIR OWN
DECISIONS ABOUT HOW THE
EXISTING LAW VIOLATES DUE
PROCESS.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT
CLEAR.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THAT WAS EXTREMELY HELPFUL.
I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD TO WHAT
YOU SAID.
THE WAY COUNCILMEMBER NELSON
WAS DESCRIBING IT IS THE EXACT
OPPOSITE.
RIGHT NOW RENTERS ARE USING
CONTRACTING.
THIS IS A SECONDARY LINE OF
DEFENSE.
IT CONSTITUTES THE AREA THIS
BILL IS IN.
THAT CONTRACT ENDS IN JUNE.
STARTING IN JULY THIS LINE OF
DEFENSE BECOMES MORE IMPORTANT.
IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THIS BILL
IS PASSED SOON.
AS FAR AS THE CLAIM FROM
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON THAT
SOMEHOW THE MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION WILL BE
AFFECTED ADVERSELY. I
UNDERSTAND THAT YOU DO NOT
SPEAK TO THIS.
I HAVE NOT HEARD THAT CLAIM AT
ALL.
I CAN'T REALLY SPEAK TO THAT.
AS FAR AS WHY THIS BILL REMOVES
ANY REQUIREMENTS FOR REPORTING
FOR RENTERS IS BECAUSE THE
STATISTICAL EVIDENCE,
OVERWHELMINGLY, SHOWS THAT NOT
ONLY HARD-WORKING PEOPLE AND
THE POOREST AND LOWEST INCOME
PEOPLE -- IT DOESN'T WORK.
IT DOESN'T WORK IN THE WAY IT
IS SUPPOSEDLY INTENDED BECAUSE
IT CREATES COMPLICATIONS.
IN THE SPIRIT OF POSITION THAT
THE OFFICE HAS HAD ALL ALONG WE
ARE ADVOCATING THAT WE REMOVE
THE TESTING REQUIREMENT
ENTIRELY.
I CAN TELL YOU, AFTER HAVING
SUCCEEDED OUR OFFICE AND THE
RENTERS RIGHTS, AFTER WINNING
BILL AFTER BILL FOR RENTERS
RIGHTS DESPITE THE OPPOSITION
OF MANY COUNCILMEMBERS, EVERY
TIME A BILL HAS PASSED WE HAVE
HEARD FROM COUNCILMEMBERS THAT
IT WILL CREATE LEGAL RISK.
THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF
RENTERS RIGHTS STANDS.
BASICALLY THE SKY WAS GOING TO
FALL DOWN IF YOU PASSED
ANYTHING PROGRESSIVE.
THAT IS THE GENERAL THING THAT
WE HEAR ALL THE TIME.
I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO DO
IT VERY THOUGHTFULLY AND
CAREFULLY AND STRATEGICALLY.
I BELIEVE THIS BILL FULFILLS
ALL OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS.
CENTRAL STAFF HAVE HAD TIME TO
REALLY THINK ABOUT THIS AND
WORK ON THIS.
I DON'T SEE ANY SPECIFIC
CONCERNS THAT ARE JUSTIFIED. OF
COURSE I UNDERSTAND THE
POLITICAL DIFFERENCES.
I APPRECIATE EVERYONE SPEAKING
ABOUT THEM OPENLY.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS IN
TERMS OF THE DISCUSSION
PORTION?
WE WILL MOVE TO THE AMENDMENT
AFTER THE BILL IS MOVED.
ANY GENERAL COMMENTS?
I DO NOT SEE ANYTHING.
I WILL GO AHEAD AND MOVE
COUNSEL BILL 120330.
WE HAVE A SECOND?
THE BILL HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED.
I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS BILL
WITH OR WITHOUT THE AMENDMENT.
PREVENTING ANY CONFUSION ABOUT
RENTERS HAVING ACCESS TO
EVICTION DEFENSE IS THE
PRIORITY.
JUST BASED ON STATISTICAL
EVIDENCE IT IS DEEPLY
HUMILIATING. I WILL MAKE THIS
SPACE AVAILABLE FOR OUR
COUNCILMEMBERS FOR MOVING ANY
AMENDMENTS.
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> NOT AT THIS TIME.
>> OKAY.
I DON'T THINK THERE ARE ANY
AMENDMENTS.
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
PLEASE UNMUTE YOURSELF.
THANK YOU.
>> I MOVE THE AMENDMENT
DISTRIBUTED THIS MORNING TO THE
COUNCILMEMBERS AND SUBMITTED TO
CENTRAL STAFF ON WEDNESDAY FOR
PREPARATION FOR THIS COMMITTEE
MEETING, WHICH ESSENTIALLY
RETAINS THE REQUIREMENT FOR A
STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP. IT
INCLUDES LANGUAGE SAYING,
LANDLORDS HAVE THE ABILITY TO
PROVIDE THAT SHOWING.
LEE'S WALK US THROUGH THAT.
TWO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> I SHARED MY SCREEN.
HOPEFULLY YOU CAN SEE IT.
THE WAY THE BILL IS CRAFTED IT
RESTORES MUCH OF THE TEXT, AS
YOU CAN SEE IN THE UNDERLINED
READ.
IT RESTORES THAT TEXT AND ADDS
THE REQUIREMENT HERE, SORRY,
NOT THE REQUIREMENT.
THE PRESUMPTION.
THE TENANT CERTIFICATION OF
FINANCIAL HARDSHIP.
IT EXPLICITLY STATES THAT THE
LANDLORD MAY LOOK AT IT.
THAT IS FOR SECTION 2205-100.
THE LAST PIECE OF THAT IS THE
NOTICE LANGUAGE TO REFLECT HOW
THAT BILL WOULD HAVE CHANGED
THE DEFENSE.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD JUST
RESTORE THAT TO HOW IT HAS
ORIGINALLY BEEN STATED.
>> THE BILL HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED AND EXPLAINED.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS?
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
SAWANT.
I HAD ORIGINALLY INTENDED TO
BRING THIS AMENDMENT FORWARD IN
PARTNERSHIP WITH COUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA TODAY.
WE CONSIDERED THIS AMENDMENT
AFTER HAVING A CONSECUTIVE
MEETING ON THE LEGISLATION. I
APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER NELSON
BRINGING IT FORWARD FOR
DISCUSSION TODAY.
I THINK IT'S GOOD TO AIR THESE
ISSUES AND HAVE THEM DISCUSSED.
GIVEN MY CONVERSATION ON THE
PREFERRED SEQUENCING OF
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA, WHO IS
THE AUTHOR, I WILL BE
ABSTAINING ON THIS AMENDMENT
AND LIKELY THE UNDERLYING
LEGISLATION TODAY.
I DO THINK THE PUBLIC AND THE
COMMITTEE WILL BENEFIT FROM
TALKING ABOUT THE ISSUES RAISED.
IN ANY EVENT TO THOSE ARE MY
COMMENTS ON THE AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, IS THAT
YOUR HAND UP?
>> YES.
I APPRECIATE THE DIFFICULTY IN
THE SEQUENCING.
THAT IS PRECISELY WHY I'M
CONCERNED THAT WE DID RUSH THIS
ON.
LET ME BE CLEAR.
PASSING THIS QUICKLY SO THAT IT
IS DONE BY JUNE 30th WOULD BE A
CONVENIENCE FOR THE ADVOCATES
THAT ARE USING THIS DEFENSE.
IT'S NOT NECESSARY. BUT IT
WOULD BE A CONVENIENCE BECAUSE
IT'S MORE CLEAR.
I'M TALKING ABOUT PROTECTING
OUR CITY HERE.
WE SHOULD NOT VOTE ON IT.
THE POINT IS, ONE MORE WEEK TO
SIMPLY DISCUSS THIS IN AN
EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR WHAT THE
PROS AND CONS ARE IS A GOOD
IDEA.
I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR THAT
WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT
-NEVERMIND.
ANYWAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I'M RETAINING THE AMENDMENT ON
THE TABLE.
>> I WANTED TO CLARIFY, AS
DESCRIBED, THIS IS NOT THAT
COMPLICATED.
I DON'T SEE A REASON TO NOT
VOTE ON THIS DAY.
IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
WE WILL BE HAVING A VOTE.
THE CITY COUNCIL VOTE WILL BE
AFTER THE EXECUTIVE SESSIONS.
AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
THERE IS SPACE FOR AMENDMENTS
AND COUNCILMEMBERS CAN BRING
AMENDMENTS THERE.
THAT DISCUSSION CAN HAPPEN.
THERE WAS NOTHING THAT WAS
STOPPING THAT DISCUSSION FROM
HAPPENING.
I DON'T AGREE WITH
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON PRESENTING
THIS ISSUE AS IF, IF THIS IS
VOTED ON IN A COMMITTEE TODAY
SOMEHOW THAT WOULD BE A
HINDRANCE FOR THAT DISCUSSION
TO HAPPEN.
IT WON'T.
THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL
STILL HAPPEN AND CITY
COUNCILMEMBERS CAN STILL WEIGH
IN ON DIFFERENT SIDES OF IT AND
BRING AMENDMENTS AND VOTE ON
THE AMENDMENTS AS THEY SEE FIT.
AFTER ALL THE INSIGHTS HAVE
BEEN GLEANED FROM THE EXECUTIVE
SESSION.
NONE OF THAT WILL BE ENDURED.
IN MY VIEW THE BILL ITSELF IS
NOT THAT COMPLICATED.
RATHER THAN PROLONG THE
DISCUSSION HERE I THINK IT
MAKES SENSE TO GO AHEAD AND
TAKE A VOTE ON THIS AND MOVE
FORWARD BASED ON WHAT HAPPENS
AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLE ON THE AMENDMENT FIRST?
THE AMENDMENT THAT WAS PRESENTED
AND SECONDED.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER JUAREZ?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER LEWIS?
>> ABSTAINED.
>> THE AMENDMENT PASSES.
>> OKAY.
NOW THE UNDERLYING BILL AS
AMENDED, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL?
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> ABSTAINED.
>> COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ?
>> NO.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> TWO IN FAVOR. IT DOES PASS
RECOMMENDATION.
>> THANK YOU, TED.
THANK YOU FOR THE DISCUSSION.
THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THE
CLARIFICATION.
AS I SAID BEFORE THE BILL WILL
BE PLACED, CORRECT ME IF I'M
WRONG, THE BILL IS PLACED ON
THE MAY 24th CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA.
>> I WISH TO CHANGE MY VOTE IF
THAT'S POSSIBLE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS
POSSIBLE.
>> IS THAT POSSIBLE?
>> WE HAVE SOMEONE FROM THE
CLERK'S OFFICE THAT MAY BE ABLE
TO ANSWER THAT.
>> JUST TO EXPLAIN THE PROCESS.
IS WHAT IS GOING BEFORE THE
COUNCIL THE AMENDED BILL?
>> YES.
THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN
REGARDLESS OF THE VOTE.
THAT'S JUST THE PROCESS.
THAT'S WHY I WAS CLARIFYING.
REGARDLESS OF THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATION THE BILL GOES TO
THE CITY COUNCIL.
>> RIGHT.
I'M GOING TO KEEP MINE.
>> GO AHEAD.
>> BASED ON THE VOTE THERE IS A
RECOMMENDATION FROM THE
COMMITTEE TO PASS.
THE BILL, AS AMENDED, IN SIMPLE
TERMS, SIMPLY ADDS THAT
LANDLORDS CAN TAKE THE
ADVOCATION FROM RENTERS FOR
FINANCIAL HARDSHIP.
WHAT THE BILL DOES IS SIMPLY
ADD THAT OPPORTUNITY FOR
LANDLORDS TO REBUT.
THE BILL HAS A RECOMMENDATION
FROM THE COMMITTEE AND WILL GO
TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
NOW COUNCILMEMBER SAWANT HAS
THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THE
MOTION TO STEM THE RULES FOR TO
BE ON THE MAY 24th COMMITTEE
INSTEAD OF MAY 30th, AS
DISCUSSED.
>> WHAT I WAS DOING AT THE TIME
BEFORE THE DISCUSSION STARTED,
IF THERE WERE NO OBJECTIONS, I
WOULD HAVE IT ON THE MAY 24th
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SO THAT
THERE IS TIME FOR ALL OF THAT
DISCUSSION.
I DON'T SEE ANY OBJECTIONS.
THE BILL GOES TO THE MAY 24th
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA.
HOPEFULLY WE ARE DOING GOOD.
OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
WE ARE NOW ON ITEM NUMBER
THREE.
THIS IS OUR FINAL ITEM.
THE OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY
AND ENVIRONMENT AND THE RACE
AND SOCIAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE
REPORT.
PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF FOR
THE RECORD AND TAKE IT OFF.
>> THANK YOU MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE.
I AM THE INTERIM DIRECTOR AT
THE OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY.
WE APPRECIATE THE TIME TODAY TO
PRESENT OUR WORK AND REPORT ON
OUR RSJI WORK.
BEFORE I DIVE INTO THE
PRESENTATION I JUST WANT TO
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I'M GOING TO
BE DOING A LOT OF THE SPEAKING
TODAY.
THE OSE STAFF HAS DONE SO MUCH
GREAT WORK OVER THE LAST YEAR.
I JUST REALLY WANT TO
ACKNOWLEDGE THEM BECAUSE THEY
ARE DOING GREAT WORK.
WE ARE GOING TO JUMP IN. THIS
IS MY FIRST PRESENTATION IN
FRONT OF THE COUNCIL.
I DON'T KNOW IF I SHOULD SHARE
MY SCREEN OR IF THAT HAPPENS
THROUGH ANOTHER MECHANISM.
>> I THINK YOU SHOULD SHARE
YOUR SCREEN.
IT SHOULD WORK.
USUALLY THAT WORKS.
>> OKAY.
LET'S DO THAT THEN.
OKAY.
GREAT.
OKAY.
THE AGENDA FOR THIS PRESENTATION
IS A VERY SHORT OVERVIEW OF
OSE.
WE WILL THEN JUMP INTO THE
RSJI ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN 2021.
WE WILL DO A DEEP DIVE ON TWO
THINGS WE DID THIS YEAR.
AND THEN WE WILL TALK ABOUT
WHAT WE WILL BE DOING OVER THE
NEXT YEAR, WHAT WE ARE LOOKING
FORWARD TO.
A VERY BRIEF OVERVIEW OF OSE.
I LOST IT.
SORRY ABOUT THAT.
OUR WORK IS CENTERED AROUND
ADVANCING ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
AND SUSTAINABILITY.
THAT REALLY FALLS INTO THREE
BROAD STREAMS OF WORK.
THE FIRST ONE IS IMPLEMENTING A
GREEN NEW DEAL FOR SEATTLE BY
WORKING WITH THE CITY
DEPARTMENTS AND COMMUNITY TO
INVEST IN AND SUPPORT
OVERBURDENED COMMUNITIES.
THE SECOND WORK THAT WE DO IS
FOCUSING ON REDUCING CARBON
POLLUTION AND GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS IN BUILDINGS AND
TRANSPORTATION, WHILE
SUPPORTING A JUST TRANSITION TO
A CLEAN ENERGY FUTURE.
WE ALSO BUILD HEALTHY AND
RESILIENT COMMUNITIES THAT CAN
ADAPT TO THE IMPACTS OF CLIMATE
CHANGE AND HAVE EQUITABLE
ACCESS TO GREEN SPACES AND
HEALTHY, CULTURALLY RELEVANT
FOOD.
ALL OF OUR WORK IS GROUNDED IN
THE EQUITY AND ENVIRONMENT
AGENDA, WHICH WAS A COMMUNITY
DEVELOPED AGENDA TO ENSURE
EVERYONE BENEFITS FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRESS IN OUR
CITY.
THE PURPOSES OF THIS
PRESENTATION WERE GOING TO
ORGANIZE IT INTO FIVE SECTIONS.
COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS, SERVICE
EQUITY, POLICY AND PLANNING,
AND RACIAL EQUITY LEARNING.
THE FIRST AREA THAT I'M GOING
TO FOCUS ON IS ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE LEADERSHIP.
THAT IS REALLY BRINGING IN AND
CENTERING ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
COMMUNITIES TO SHAPE CITY POLICY
AND PLAY A MEANINGFUL ROLL IN
DECISION-MAKING.
THIS REALLY MANIFESTS ITSELF IN
THE THREE BOARDS AND COMMITTEES
THAT WE SUPPORT.
THE GREEN NEW DEAL OVERSIGHT
BOARD, THE ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE COMMITTEE, AND THE
SWEETENED BEVERAGE TAX
COMMITTEE ADVISORY BOARD.
ONE OF THE REAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS
THIS YEAR WAS LAUNCHING THE
GREEN NEW DEAL OVERSIGHT.
THANK YOU TO THE COUNCIL FOR
YOUR LEADERSHIP ON THIS.
OF COURSE THIS BOARD IS ABOUT
CONNECTING FRONT-LINE
COMMUNITIES IN THE CITY AND
SHAPING POLICY PROGRAMS THAT
REDUCE CLIMATE POLLUTION,
INCREASE JOBS, AND ADVANCED
EQUITABLE TRANSITION FROM
FOSSIL FEELS BY PRIORITIZING
COMMUNITIES MOST HARMED BY
ENVIRONMENTAL INJUSTICES.
THIS YEAR THE BOARD ESTABLISHED
A VISION, VALUES, AND GOALS. IT
IS IN THE MIDST OF CREATING
BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2022
AND 2023.
ONCE THAT WORK IS CONCLUDED WE
WILL DIVE INTO CREATING A WORK
PLAN FOR 2023 AND 2024.
NEXT I WILL TALK A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
COMMITTEE.
THIS HAS BEEN PROVIDING FRONT-
LINE COMMUNITY LEADERSHIP SINCE
2017.
THERE ARE NUMBER OF WAYS THEY
ENGAGE IN OSE'S WORK.
I WILL HIGHLIGHT TWO OF THEM.
OSE IS IN CONCERT WITH
COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND OTHER
DEPARTMENTS . THEY ARE UPDATING
THE FOOD ACTION PLAN.
THE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
COMMITTEE CREATED FOOD JUSTICE
PRINCIPLES AT THE OUTSET OF THE
PROCESS, HOPING TO OUT SHAPE
THE ENGAGEMENT AND THE PRODUCT
OF THE FOOD ACTION PLAN.
SECONDLY, IT ENGAGES IN
EQUITABLE ROADMAPS FOR POLICIES.
WE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN LATER
MEETINGS. BOTH OF THESE
EFFORTS.
OUR SWEETENED BEVERAGE TAX
COMMITTEE ADVISORY BOARD REALLY
IMPACTS A VARIETY OF WAYS WE
ENGAGE ON FOOD JUSTICE.
IN PARTICULAR THE FOOD ACTION
PLAN AND EARLY LEARNING
PROGRAMS.
THOSE ARE SOME OF THE WAYS
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
LEADERSHIP SHAPES CITY POLICY.
THESE NEXT THREE ARE GOING TO
BE ABOUT DIRECT COMMUNITY
INVESTMENTS.
THE FIRST ONE IS THE
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE FUND.
OUR APPROACH THROUGHOUT ALL OF
THE INVESTMENTS WE MAKE IN
SEATTLE ARE MADE WITH DEEP
PARTNERSHIP TO BLACK, INDIGENOUS
, AND OTHER COLORED
COMMUNITIES.
THAT IS THE CASE WITH THE
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE FUND.
WE HAVE RECEIVED 146 PROPOSALS
THIS YEAR, TOTALING $2.5
MILLION.
WE ARE ABLE TO AWARD $750,000
TO COMMUNITY-BASED
ORGANIZATIONS.
YOU CAN SEE A WHOLE LIST HERE
OF FUND GRANTEES.
THE SECOND WAY WE INVEST IN
COMMUNITIES IS THROUGH SOME OF
OUR PROGRAMS THAT BENEFIT
INDIVIDUALS AND COMMUNITY
PARTNERS.
THERE ARE A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT
THINGS THAT HAPPENED THIS YEAR.
YOU CAN SEE A NUMBER OF
BULLETS.
I'M GOING TO HIT A COUPLE OF
THOSE.
THEN WE WILL TALK MORE ABOUT
THEM LATER IN THE PRESENTATION.
WE WRAPPED UP COVID EMERGENCY
GROCERY VOUCHER PROGRAMS,
DISTRIBUTING $25 MILLION IN
BENEFITS TO 14,000 PEOPLE.
BETWEEN MARCH 2020 AND APRIL,
2021.
WE ENROLLED 12,000 SEATTLE
HOUSEHOLDS TO RECEIVE $5.2
MILLION IN VOUCHERS.
75% OF THOSE ENROLLEES ARE FROM
RSJI COMMUNITIES.
THAT IS A DIRECT OUTCOME OF
OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH 12
COMMUNITY LED ORGANIZATIONS AND
ROOTED IN BIPOC COMMUNITIES AND
REFUGEE COMMUNITIES.
THIS IS ALSO THE CASE WITH
CLIMATE PROGRAMMING.
WE PROVIDED 100% PAID OIL FOR
LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS IN
PARTNERSHIP WITH THE OFFICE OF
HOUSING.
WE PROVIDED INTERNSHIPS AND
LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES VIA
BENCHMARKING AND TUNEUPS WITH
SOUTH SEATTLE COLLEGE.
WE ADVANCED THE DUWAMISH
PRIORITIES THROUGH CROSS
DEPARTMENTAL EFFORTS AND
INVESTMENTS IN AFFORDABLE
HOUSING, ACCESS TO OPEN SPACE,
AND COMMUNITY HEALTH.
THIS NEXT SLIDE IS AN OVERVIEW
OF HOW ALL OF OUR GRANTS
CONTRACTS AND PURCHASING
REFLECTS THIS PRIORITY OF
CENTERING RACIAL EQUITY.
I'M GOING TO DRAW YOUR
ATTENTION TO THE PIE CHART AND
TALK THROUGH SOME OF THE
DIFFERENT COLORS.
YOU CAN SEE THE PURPLE.
11% OF OUR 4.3 MILLION IN
EXPENDITURES GOES TO WMBI
BUSINESSES.
THE BLUE IS OUR EJ FUND.
THAT IS ANOTHER SIGNIFICANT
CHUNK OF MONEY THAT GOES TO
BIPOC LED ORGANIZATIONS.
THE SCHOOL FOOD PROGRAM.
THAT IS OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH
SEATTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS TO
CREATE CULTURALLY RELEVANT,
FRESH FOODS IN SCHOOLS.
THE TEAM WITHIN SPS IS A BIPOC
LED TEAM.
I TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT
THAT ALREADY.
COMMUNITY SUPPORT AND OUTREACH.
THAT'S ALSO THOSE ORGANIZATIONS
THAT ARE HELPING CONNECT
COMMUNITY NUMBERS TO OUR
PROGRAM.
THE NEXT AREA I'M GOING TO TALK
ABOUT IS SERVICE EQUITY.
THESE ARE SOME OF OUR PROGRAMS
THAT ARE INTENDED TO SUPPORT
ACCESS, PARTICULARLY AROUND
DECARBONIZATION PROGRAMS.
WE ARE ENSURING THAT OUR
PROGRAMS REACHED BIPOC
BUSINESSES AND INDIVIDUALS ,
MITIGATING ALL UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES.
HERE ARE A COUPLE OF WAYS WE DO
THAT.
NUMBER ONE, THROUGH THE
EFFICIENT ENERGY PROGRAM.
WE ARE PRIORITIZIG THOSE
COMMUNITY OWNED BUILDINGS OR
BUILDINGS THAT HAVE COMMUNITY-
BASED ORGANIZATIONS AS TENANTS.
AN EXAMPLE OF THAT IS THE SOUTH
PARK NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER.
FOR PRIORITY ENERGY
IMROVEMENTS.
WE ALSO ARE PRIORITIZING ENERGY
OUTREACH, PROVIDING TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE IN THOSE PRIORITY
NEIGHBORHOODS. I ALSO HIGHLIGHT
SOME OF THE WAYS OUR PROGRAM
SERVICE IMPACTS FOOD QUALITY.
WE ARE TRANSFERRING VOUCHERS TO
E BENEFITS AND WE WENT THROUGH
A PROCESS FOR THAT, SO THAT WE
COULD DESIGN THAT PROGRAM.
AND ALSO A RECRUITMENT OF NEW
RETAILERS SO THAT WE ARE
SPENDING -- THESE NEXT TWO
SLIDES ARE ABOUT POLICY AND
PLANNING.
THE OVERALL POINT I WOULD MAKE
IS THAT RACIAL EQUITY INFUSES
ALL OF OUR POLICY AND PLANNING
WORK.
WHETHER WE ARE DOING A FORMAL
TOOLKIT ANALYSIS OR NOT.
THE FIRST SLIDE IS ACTUALLY
ABOUT HOW WE ARE USING RACIAL
EQUITY TO INFORM POLICY AND
PLANNING, EVEN WHEN WE ARE NOT
DOING IT WITH THAT PARTICULAR
PROGRAM.
OUR FOOD ACTION PLAN.
WE ARE LEADING WITH RACIAL
EQUITY ON THAT.
PART OF THAT INCLUDES DEEP
ENGAGEMENT WITH THE
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE COMMITTEE
AND ALSO OTHER BIPOC FOOD AND
JUSTICE LEADERS.
AS WE ARE LOOKING AT HOW TO
CONTINUE TO THE CARBONIZED
BUILDINGS WE ARE WORKING IN
TANDEM WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING
ADVOCATES AND COMMUNITIES
SERVING BUILDINGS TO MAKE SURE
WE ARE CREATING TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE AND RESOURCES THAT
MEET THEIR NEEDS AND KEEP
HOUSING AFFORDABLE.
IT ALSO PRIORITIZES THOSE
BUILDINGS FOR TRANSITION.
WE ARE DEPLOYING THE FIRST IN
THE NATION INCENTIVE PROGRAM TO
CONVERT DIESEL TRUCKS TO
ELECTRIFICATION.
WE ARE ENGAGING WITH THE EAST
AFRICAN COMMITTEE TO MAKE SURE
EQUITY IS LEADING THAT WORK.
THOSE ARE A FEW EXAMPLES OF
HOW, EVEN WHEN WE ARE NOT DOING
-- THIS IS PART OF WHAT WE'RE
DOING.
WE DO HAVE RACIAL EQUITY
TOOLKITS THIS YEAR.
WE DID ONE ON THE E BENEFIT
TRANSITION.
WE DID ONE ON ROAD PRICING FOR
EQUITABLE MOBILITY.
WE DID ONE ON CARBON-BASED
BUILDING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
WE DID ONE ON SEATTLE CLEAN
BUILDINGS ACCELERATORS.
WE ARE NOW GOING TO DO A DEEP
DIVE ON THE CARBON-BASED HOLDING
PERFORMANCE STANDARD.
I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO
ROBIN, WHO IS GOING TO TALK US
THROUGH THE TRANSITION.
>> HELLO.
I AM THE FRESH BUCKS PROGRAM
MANAGER.
I WILL TALK ABOUT WHAT WE DID
AROUND THE FRESH BUCKS
BENEFITS LAST YEAR.
WE MADE THE TRANSITION FROM
PAPER VOUCHERS TO ELECTRONIC
BENEFITS.
WE DID IT LATE LAST YEAR.
THE TOOLKIT WE CONDUCTED, IN
ADVANCE OF LAUNCHING THE
ELECTRONIC BENEFIT PLATFORM,
WAS REALLY FOCUSED ON HOW TO
MAKE THE TRANSITION IN A WAY
THAT WOULD BEST SERVE THE NEEDS
OF FRESH BUCKS CUSTOMERS , WHO
MIGHT HAVE THE MOST DIFFICULT
TIME WITH THE TRANSITION TO
ELECTRONIC BENEFITS.
IN PARTICULAR THOSE OUR
CUSTOMERS WITH LIMITED ENGLISH
PROFICIENCY AND ALSO FOLKS WITH
LIMITED ACCESS TO TECH
NOWLEDGE HE RESOURCES.
THE RACIAL EQUITY TOOLKIT
INCLUDED ROBUST ENGAGEMENT OF
COMMUNITY PARTNERS, RETAILERS,
AND PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS TO
USER TEST OF THE SYSTEM BEFORE
WE LAUNCHED.
NEXT SLIDE.
THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS WE
HEARD FEEDBACK FROM OUR
CUSTOMERS AND COMMUNITY PARTNERS
THAT REALLY EMPHASIZED SOME OF
THE BENEFITS OF THE TRANSITION
TO ELECTRONIC BENEFITS.
THAT INCLUDED THE FLEXIBILITY
OF THE PURCHASE AMOUNT OF
ELECTRONIC BENEFITS. AFTER SOME
DIFFICULTIES CUSTOMERS FACED
AFTER SHOPPING WITH PAPER
VOUCHERS, WHICH WERE ISSUED IN
$10 INCREMENTS, AND NEEDED TO
BE SPENT IN $10 INCREMENTS.
ELECTRONIC BENEFITS WERE ALSO
EASIER FOR CUSTOMERS AND
CASHIERS TO USE. IT OFFERED A
MORE DISCREET PURCHASING
EXPERIENCE. THE TEST PROCESS
ALSO REVEALED SEVERAL STEPS
WHERE CUSTOMERS FACED SOME
CONFUSION.
LIKE THE NEED TO ACTIVATE THE
ELECTRONIC BENEFITS FOR THE
FIRST TIME BEFORE THEY STARTED
USING THEM.
AND ALSO NAVIGATING POINT-OF-
SALE CHALLENGES WITH THE NEW
SYSTEM.
THIS NEW ISSUE IS PARTICULARLY
AMPLIFIED WHEN THE CUSTOMER AND
THE CASHIER DON'T SPEAK THE
SAME LANGUAGE.
AS A RESULT OF THESE TOOLKIT
LEARNINGS OUR TEAM HAS MADE
SEVERAL CHANGES TO SUPPORT A
MORE EQUITABLE IMPLEMENTATION.
WE CREATED A CALL-IN ACTIVATION
LINE SO FOLKS WITH LIMITED
ACCESS TO TECHNOLOGY WOULD BE
ABLE TO JUST CALL A PHONE
NUMBER TO ACTIVATE THEIR
BENEFITS BEFORE THEY STARTED
USING THEM.
WE ALSO WORKED WITH OUR
COMMUNITY ENROLLMENT PARTNERS
TO OFFER TRUSTED LANGUAGE
ASSISTANCE FOR CUSTOMERS TO
ACTIVATE THEIR BENEFITS.
WE ALSO REVISED A TESTING AND
TRAINING PROTOCOL ACROSS THE
NETWORK TO ENSURE THERE WOULD
BE A ROBUST UNDERSTANDING OF
THE E BENEFITS PROCESSING
PROTOCOL, PRIOR TO
IMPLEMENTATION.
WE ALSO REVISED OUR CUSTOMER
COMMUNICATIONS.
WE PROVIDED VISUALLY BASED
COMMUNICATIONS. ONE OF WHICH
WAS A HOW-TO VIDEO THAT WAS
AVAILABLE IN FIVE LANGUAGES
MOST COMMONLY SPOKEN BY OUR
CUSTOMERS.
THAT'S THE FRESH BUCKS
SEGMENT.
NOW WE WILL HEAR FROM SANDRA.
>> THANK YOU, ROBIN.
THIS IS SANDRA.
I'M THE PROGRAM MANAGER AT THE
OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY.
I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT A POLICY
THAT WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF
DEVELOPING.
SEATTLE WOULD IMPLEMENT
ADMISSION STANDARDS FOR
SEATTLE'S EXISTING LARGER
COMMERCIAL AND MULTIFAMILY
BUILDINGS.
IT'S A POLICY THAT WOULD BUILD
ON THE EXISTING WASHINGTON
STATE STANDARD, WHICH ALLOWS
LARGER COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS TO
MEET ENERGY TARGETS STARTING IN
2026.
SEATTLE'S POLICY WOULD ESTABLISH
CORRESPONDING EMISSIONS TARGETS.
THE TARGETS WOULD INITIALLY
START HIGHER AND THEN THEY
WOULD RATCHET DOWN OVER TWO
DECADES UNTIL WE HAVE ACHIEVED
NET TO ZERO CARBON BUILDINGS BY
2050.
WE HAVE PREDICTABILITY OVER
LONG-TERM EXPECTATIONS BUT ALSO
FLEXIBILITY ON HOW A PARTICULAR
BUILDING WOULD ACHIEVE THE
TARGET.
WE WORKED ON A RACIAL EQUITY
TOOLKIT FROM 2020 TO 2021.
WE ARE CONTINUING TO USE AND
REVISE IT IN AN ONGOING TOOL
FOR US.
WE IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF KEY
DRAFT OUTCOMES THAT THE POLICY
SHOULD ACHIEVE.
THE FIRST OF THEM, MAKING SURE
WE ARE PROVIDING SUPPORT
SERVICES FOR LOWER RESOURCED
BUILDING OWNERS TO HELP
ALLEVIATE IMPACTS OF THE POLICY.
MINIMIZING DISPLACEMENT RISK
AND ENSURING THAT, AND
IMPLEMENT IN THE POLICY, BIPOC
COMMUNITIES BENEFIT FROM THE
SPACES.
IT WOULD CREATE JOBS. THESE
CLEAN ENERGY CAREERS CAN GO TO
BIPOC AND WOMEN.
DUE TO COVID, IMPACTS ON
EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
WAS PUT ON HOLD UNTIL 2021.
TO DEVELOP THESE PROPOSED
OUTCOMES WE RELIED ON PREVIOUS
COMMUNITY INPUT.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE REPORT
POWERING THE TRANSITION AND
LEARNING MORE ABOUT THE IMPACT.
AND A SERIES OF CROSS
DEPARTMENTAL CONVERSATIONS.
ONE MORE.
ONE OF THE CLEAR NEEDS THAT WAS
IDENTIFIED, IF YOU COULD BACK UP
. SORRY.
IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THIS POLICY
WE REALLY NEEDED THAT EXTERNAL
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT.
WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF
CONDUCTING A VERY ROBUST AND
INCLUSIVE ENGAGEMENT PROCESS.
WE ACTUALLY HAD 350 FOLKS AT
THE FIRST OPEN HOUSE.
THERE IS AN AFFORDABLE TASK
FORCE THAT IS BEING LED BY THE
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CONSORTIUM.
WE HAVE BEEN DOING FOCUS GROUPS
WITH NONPROFIT OWNERS.
WE HAVE HAD ONGOING
CONVERSATIONS WITH LABOR
REPRESENTATIVES.
THIS IS AN ONGOING POLICY
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
I DO WANT TO GO AHEAD AND GO TO
THE NEXT SLIDE.
THANK YOU.
I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE
WORK THAT IS UNDERWAY TO
ACHIEVE OUR EQUITY OUTCOMES.
FIRST OF ALL IS THE JOBS.
THERE SHOULD BE 150 TO 270
ANNUAL JOBS ANTICIPATED FROM
THIS POLICY.
WE HAVE COORDINATED WITH FAS ON
A $1.8 MILLION RFP FOR CLEAN
ENERGY JOBS AND CONSTRUCTION
TRAINING, PRE-APPRENTICESHIP
TRAINING.
WE ARE DOING TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE.
BEFORE WE EVEN PUT IN PLACE A
REGULATION WE HAVE LAUNCHED A
PRELIMINARY SUPPORT PROGRAM,
PRIORITIZED AGAIN TO UNDER
RESOURCED BUILDING OWNERS.
WE HELP THEM TO COMPLY BOTH
WITH THE STATE STANDARD AND TO
PREPARE FOR EMISSIONS TARGETS.
IN THE POLICY ITSELF IN OUR
DRAFT FRAMEWORK WE ARE FACING
COMPLIANCE, SUCH THAT THE
LARGER COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS,
THE BUILDINGS WITH THE GREATEST
IMPACT AND OWNERS WITH THE
GREATEST RESOURCES CAN TAKE
ACTION FIRST.
THEN SMALLER BUILDINGS AND
MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS WILL HAVE
A MUCH LONGER RAMP-UP PERIOD.
WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING GREATER
FLEXIBILITY AND MORE SUPPORT
FOR BUILDINGS WHERE WE KNOW
THERE WILL BE COST CONSTRAINTS
AND UPGRADES WILL BE MORE
DIFFICULT FOR OWNERS. AGAIN,
NONPROFITS, OWNERS WITH
FINANCIAL HARDSHIP,
UNREINFORCED MASONRY,
AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WE ARE ALSO ACTIVELY WORKING TO
SECURE FUNDING FOR CAPITAL
UPGRADES.
NOT JUST TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
BUT ALSO HELPING OWNERS COMPLY
WITH THE MONEY IN THE BANK TO
GO TOWARD CAPITAL UPGRADES.
WE HAVE REALLOCATED SOME
PREVIOUS FUNDS TOWARD CAPITAL
GRANTS TO PILATE TWO OR THREE
PRIORITY HOUSING PROJECTS TO D
CARBONIZED.
WE HAVE ANOTHER GRANT PROPOSAL
FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WE ARE VERY CLOSELY TRACKING
THE INFRASTRUCTURE
OPPORTUNITIES THAT SHOULD BE
COMING OUT THIS FALL.
THANK YOU.
I WILL TURN IT OVER TO STEPHANIE
.
>> THANKS, SANDRA.
GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS STEPHANIE HENRY.
I'M WITH THE FRESH BUCKS TEAM.
I SERVE ON THE OSE CHANGE TEAM.
AT OSE WE ARE WORKING TO
FOSTER RELATIONAL LEARNING AND
SUPPORTIVE CULTURE THAT USES
ANTIRACIST PRINCIPLES AND
VALUES DIVERSE PERSPECTIVES AND
EXPERIENCES.
IN SUPPORT OF THAT GOAL WE
ESTABLISHED VOLUNTARY AND
OPTIONAL CAUCUSES FOR WHITE
PEOPLE AND BLACK, INDIGENOUS,
AND PEOPLE OF COLOR.
THESE ARE FACILITATED SPACES TO
UNPACK OUR INTERNALIZED RACISM
AND DEVELOP A SYSTEM OF
ACCOUNTABILITY WITH EACH OTHER.
PHYSICAL ACT EFFORT FOR BLACK
FARMERS.
OUR TEAM IS SMALL BUT MIGHTY.
ONE OF OUR SUBGROUPS FOCUSES ON
HIRING.
FROM RESUME REVIEWS, TO
RETENTION, TO OFF BOARDING.
THIS IS OF PARTICULAR INTEREST
BECAUSE THE UNDERREPRESENTATION
OF BIPOC WITHIN THE
ENVIRONMENTAL SECTOR AND OSE.
ANOTHER SUBGROUP PARTICIPATES
IN THE YEARLY BUDGET PROCESS.
AS JUSTIN MENTIONED WE REVIEWED
OUR OFFICE WIDE YEAR-TO-DATE
WOMEN AND MINORITY BUSINESS DATA
. PROGRAM LEADS ARE ENCOURAGED
TO BE MINDFUL OF THEIR SPENDING
AND THE IMPACT OF WOMEN AND THE
BIPOC COMMITTEE.
WE ARE INVOLVED IN THE CITYWIDE
RACIAL EQUITY TEAM.
WE CAN BE AWARE OF AND ENGAGE
IN CITYWIDE ISSUES AND ACTIONS.
THANK YOU.
I WILL HAND IT BACK.
>> THANK YOU, STEPHANIE.
THIS IS OUR FINAL SLIDE.
WE ARE HAPPY TO TAKE QUESTIONS.
WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO 2022.
WE ARE ALREADY IN THE MIDST OF
2022.
BUT WE ARE WORKING CURRENTLY
WITH OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH BIPOC
COMMUNITIES TO TACKLE THE
CLIMATE CRISIS AND BUILD
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES.
ONE MAJOR PRIORITY IS THIS
GREEN NEW DEAL IN PARTNERSHIP
WITH THE OVERSIGHT BOARD AND
OUR OTHER CITY PARTNERS ACROSS
DEPARTMENTS.
WE ARE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT
ESTABLISHING THE DUWAMISH
DISTRICT TO REDUCE VULNERABILITY
TO CLIMATE IMPACTS WHILE
KEEPING PEOPLE AND BUSINESSES
IN THAT COMMUNITY PREVENTING
DISPLACEMENT. SCALING UP EQUITY
, LEADING IN POLICY PROGRAMS,
WE MENTIONED THE
ELECTRIFICATION PROGRAM.
WE TALKED IN DEPTH ABOUT THE
BUILDING ELECTRIFICATION
PROGRAM.
TO REALLY ENSURE THAT BIPOC AND
OTHER UNDER RESOURCED PEOPLE
BENEFIT FROM THE CLEAN ENERGY
TRANSITION THAT IS HAPPENING,
WE NEED TO BE DOING IT RIGHT
NOW.
WE ARE EXPANDING THE FRESH
BUCKS NETWORK TO SERVE THE
DIVERSITY SEATTLE RESIDENTS. WE
ARE PRIORITIZING BIPOC
LEADERSHIP IN THE FOOD ACTION
PLAN UPDATE.
WE ARE ALSO ADDRESSING TREE
CANOPY COVERAGE DISPARITIES AND
URBAN FOREST HEALTH.
INCLUDING PILOT EFFORTS TO
INDUSTRIAL LANDS IN THE
DUWAMISH VALLEY.
THAT CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION.
I AM HAPPY TO TAKE QUESTIONS.
I WILL STOP SHARING.
>> THANK YOU ALL FOR THE
EXCELLENT PRESENTATION AND THE
UNDERLYING WORK YOU HAVE
SHOWCASED IN THE PRESENTATION.
I APPRECIATE ALL OF YOU AND
YOUR EFFORTS.
I WILL OPEN IT UP TO THE
COUNCILMEMBERS.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE ONE COMMENT.
OBVIOUSLY OSE.
-- THE TIMES WE ARE LIVING IN
CALL FOR THOSE. FOR THAT
EMPHASIS.
I APPRECIATED THAT.
THE OPEN HOUSE THAT YOU
MENTIONED ABOUT BUILDING
ADMISSION STANDARDS, I ALSO
WANT TO CONGRATULATE YOU FOR
THAT.
I DID THAT FROM MY OFFICE.
I WAS THE POLICY ANALYST FOR
THAT OFFICE.
ALSO THE CLERK ATTENDED THAT
OPEN HOUSE.
IF YOU WANTED TO ADD ANYTHING
FROM YOUR EXPERIENCE THERE YOU
ARE WELCOME TO.
I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSCORE,
BASED ON THE MOST RECENT DATA
THAT WE HAVE, IT IS REPORTED
THAT GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
MUST PEAK BY 2025.
JUST IMAGINE WHAT A TALL ORDER
THAT IS, GIVEN WHERE WE ARE.
IT'S OBVIOUSLY NOT JUST ABOUT
THE CITY OF SEATTLE.
THIS IS A GLOBAL CHALLENGE THAT
WE ARE FACING.
THE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
HAVE TO PEAK IN 2025 AND THEN
BE HALVED IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS
TO GIVE THE WORLD A CHANCE OF
LIMITING FUTURE HEATING. IF
THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN THE WORLD
FACES A CATASTROPHIC INCREASE OF
THREE DEGREES CELSIUS.
IN SPITE OF ALL OF THESE
WARNINGS, AND THIS IS JUST THE
LATEST WARNING, BIG BUSINESS
AND GOVERNMENTS CONTINUE TO
MAKE INVESTMENTS TO PRODUCE NEW
FOSSIL FUELS, ADDING TO THE
DISASTER.
WE MENTIONED IT BEFORE IN THIS
COMMITTEE.
IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE WORLD'S
BIGGEST 60 BANKS PROVIDED
NEARLY $4 TRILLION OF FINANCING
FOR FOSSIL FUEL COMPANIES SINCE
THE CLIMATE DEAL IN 2015.
DESPITE THE DRAMATIC REDUCTION
IN ENERGY USE AT THAT TIME,
BECAUSE OF THE LOCKDOWN AND
STAY AT HOME WORK FROM THE
PANDEMIC, THE OVERALL FOSSIL
FUEL FUNDING ASTOUNDINGLY
REMAINED ON AN UPWARD TREND.
FOSSIL FUELS IN 2020 WAS HIGHER
THAN IN 2016.
WHICH IS A SHOCKING BUT
CLARIFYING INDICTMENT OF
CAPITALISM'S INABILITY TO SOLVE
THE CLIMATE CRISIS.
IN THAT CONTEXT ESPECIALLY THE
WORK OF ANY GROUP OF
INDIVIDUALS THAT IS WORKING
AGAINST IT, THAT IS TO BE
APPRECIATED.
I ALSO WANTED TO MENTION THAT
UNDER THE POLICY AND PLANNING
SLIDE, AND AS YOU MENTIONED
JUST NOW, THE ELECTRIFICATION
IS AN EXCITING PROGRAM.
THE TRUCKS THAT TAKE SHIPPING
CONTAINERS BACK AND FORTH FROM
THE PORT TO THE TRAIN STATION,
THEY ARE QUOTE UNQUOTE
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS.
THEY OFTEN DRIVE THEIR OWN
TRUCKS AND THEY ARE PAID
POVERTY WAGES.
THE CRISIS THAT THEY HAVE BEEN
IN IS A LONG-STANDING ONE.
WE HAVE WANTED TO ORGANIZE THEM
BUT IT IS FULL OF OBSTACLES
BECAUSE OF THE INDEPENDENT
CONTRACTOR DESIGNATION.
OSE HAS FUNDS TO ELECTRIFY
TRUCKS BECAUSE THOSE DRIVERS
SIT THERE ALL DAY WITH IDLING
DIESEL FUEL ENGINES.
IT'S A TERRIBLE SOURCE OF
GREENHOUSE GASES.
IT'S AN IMPORTANT PILOT.
IT IS STARTING MODESTLY.
HOPEFULLY WE WILL BE SUCCESSFUL
AND IT CAN BE IMPLEMENTED MORE
BROADLY.
IF YOU WANTED TO ADD ANY POINTS
ON THAT YOU ARE WELCOME TO.
COUNCILMEMBERS, COMMUNITY
MEMBERS, IF YOU WANTED TO MAKE
ANY COMMENTS OR ASK ANY
QUESTIONS.
I DON'T SEE ANYONE.
OSE MEMBERS, DID YOU WANT TO
ADD ANYTHING?
>> I WILL ONLY ADD THAT I
THINK THIS IS AN EXCITING
OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN HOW TO DO
THIS, AND THEN BUILD OUT THE
PLAN TO SCALE.
THERE ARE 1000 TRUCKS THAT IDLE
ON CITY STREETS AND 4000 ACROSS
THE REGION.
REALLY DOING GOOD, DEEP POLICY
WORK THAT IS FOCUSED ON HOW TO
BUILD OUT IS REALLY PART OF
WHAT WE ARE DOING.
WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO
REPORTING MORE ON THAT AS WE
IMPLEMENT THE PROGRAM.
>> DEFINITELY.
I APPRECIATE YOU PUTTING THE
NUMBERS ON IT BECAUSE IT GIVES
YOU A SENSE OF THE SCALE OF THE
PROBLEM. IT WILL BE VERY
EXCITING TO ADDRESS THAT.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING MORE
ABOUT THAT PROGRAM AS WELL.
I DON'T SEE ANY COUNCILMEMBERS
CHOMPING AT THE BIT.
I GOT A CHUCKLE FROM MANY OF
YOU, WHICH WAS GREAT.
OSE, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR
WORK.
THANK YOU TO THE COUNCILMEMBERS
FOR TODAY'S COMMITTEE.
I'M SEEING NO FURTHER COMMENTS.
I WILL GO AHEAD AND ADJOURN THE
COMMITTEE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.