>>> THE MEETING OF THE SEATTLE
CITY COUNCIL WILL COME TO ORDER
IT IS TWO: -- WITH THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
>> ROLE, ROLL CALL MAC
>> SEVEN PRESENT.
>> THANK YOU. ON THE AGENDA,
PRESENTATIONS. I AM NOT AWARE
OF ANY PRESENTATIONS FOR TODAY.
AT THIS TIME, WE WILL OPEN UP
THE HYBRID PUBLIC COMMENT
PERIOD. CAN YOU LET US KNOW HO
MANY SPEAKERS ARE SIGNED UP?
>> WE HAVE 30 ONLINE AND 27 IN
PERSON.
>> THAT WILL GIVE US AN HOURS
WORTH OF PUBLIC COMMENT. IF WE
NEED MORE TIME AFTER THAT, I
WILL CONSULT WITH MY COLLEAGUES
ON THE COUNCIL TO SEE WHETHER O
NOT THEY ARE INTERESTED IN
HEARING MORE. WE WILL START
WITH THE REMOTE TEST THE FIRES
FIRST. MADAME CLERK, I NOW
HANDED OVER TO YOU TO PRESENT
THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT AND THE PUBLIC COMMENT
RECORDING.
>> HELLO, SEATTLE. WE ARE THE
EMERALD CITY. THE CITY OF
FLOWERS IN THE CITY OF
GOODWILL, BUILT ON INDIGENOUS
LAND, THE TERRITORY OF THE
PEOPLES. THE SEATTLE CITY
PEOPLE WELCOMES REMOTE PUBLIC
COMMENT AND IS EAGER TO HEAR
FROM RESIDENTS OF OUR CITY. IF
YOU WOULD LIKE TO BE A SPEAKER
AND PROVIDE A VERBAL PUBLIC
COMMENT, YOU MAY REGISTER TWO
HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING MEDI
VIA THE SETO COUNCIL WEBSITE.
SPEAKERS ARE CALLED UPON IN THE
ORDER WHICH THEY REGISTERED ON
THE COUNCIL'S WEBSITE. EACH
SPEAKER MUST CALL IN FROM THE
PHONE AND THE NUMBER PROVIDED
WHEN THEY REGISTER ONLINE AND
USE THE MEETING I.D. AND
PASSWORD THAT WAS EMAILED UPON
CONFIRMATION. IF YOU DO NOT
RECEIVE AN EMAIL CONFIRMATION,
PLEASE CHECK YOUR SPAM OR JUNK
FOLDERS. A REMINDER, THE
SPEAKER MEETING I.D. IS
DIFFERENT FROM THE GENERAL
LISTEN LINE MEETING I.D.
PROVIDED ON THE AGENDA. ONCE A
SPEAKER'S NAME IS CALLED, THE
SPEAKERS MICROPHONE WILL BE
UNNEEDED AND AN AUTOMATIC PROMP
WILL SAY, THE HOST WILL LIKE
YOU TO UNMUTE YOUR MICROPHONE.
THAT IS YOUR QUEUE THAT IT IS
YOUR TURN TO SPEAK. AT THAT
TIME, YOU MUST PRESS STAR 6.
YOU WILL THEN HEAR A PROMPT OF,
YOU ARE UNNEEDED. MAKE SURE YOU
PHONE IS UNNEEDED -- SO THAT
YOU CAN BE HEARD. A CHIME WIL
SOUND WHEN 10 SECONDS I LEFT IN
YOUR ALLOTTED TIME. AS A GENTL
REMINDER TO REV UP YOUR PUBLIC
COMMENTS. AT THE END OF THE
ALLOTTED TIME, YOUR MICROPHONE
WILL BE MUTED. THE NEXT BECOME
REGISTERED WILL BE CALLED. ONCE
SPEAKERS HAVE COMPLETED THE
COMMENT, PLEASE DISCONNECT FRO
THE PUBLIC COMMENT LINE AND JOI
US BY FOLLOWING THE MEETING VIA
SEATTLE CHANNEL BROADCAST OR
BY THE ACTION LIST ON THE
AGENDA. THE COUNCIL RESERVES
THE RIGHT TO ELIMINATE PUBLIC
COMMENT IF THE SYSTEM IS BEING
ABUSED. OR IF THE PROCESS MPs
THE COUNCIL'S ABILITY TO CONDUC
BUSINESS ON BEHALF OF THE
RESIDENTS OF THE CITY. ANY
OFFENSES THAT IS DISRUPTIVE, O
IS NOT FOCUSED ON AN APPROACH
THE TOPIC AS SPECIFIED IN
COUNCIL RULES, IT MAY LEAD TO
THE SPEAKER BEING MUTED BY THE
PRESIDING OFFICER. OUR HOPE IS
TO PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
PRODUCTIVE DISCUSSIONS THAT WIL
ASSIST OUR ORDERLY DISCUSSION O
ISSUES BEFORE THE COUNCIL. THE
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS NOW
OPEN. WE WILL BEGIN WITH THE
FIRST SPEAKER ON THE LIST.
PLEASE REMEMBER TO PRESS STAR 6
AFTER YOU PRESS THE PROMPT , YO
HAVE BEEN UNMUTED. THANK YOU,
SEATTLE.
>> JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE
CLARITY ON THE FACT THAT WE DO
HAVE PEOPLE SIGNED UP BOTH
REMOTELY AND IN PERSON. THE
CLERKS WILL BE ALTERNATING 10
FROM EACH GROUP AND SWITCHING
BACK.
>> OUR FIRST SPEAKER IS HOWARD
GAEL .
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, HOWARD GAEL
WITH SEATTLE STOP.ORG. FEARFUL
OF THE COMMUNITY IT HAS SERVE
FOR OVER THREE MONTHS HAS
PREVENTED PUBLIC COMMENT,
THEREBY VIOLATING ITS OWN LAWS
AND ENDED MONTHLY ENGAGEMENT
MEETINGS. THE CPC HAS ATTACKED
COMMUNITY MEMBERS, INCLUDING TH
NUMBERS OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN
KILLED BY THE SPD. LAST WEEK IN
THE PRESENCE OF CPC CO-CHAIR
AND CPC DIRECTOR ATTEMPTED TO
PREVENT FIVE COMMUNITY MEMBERS,
INCLUDING FIVE MEMBERS WHO HAVE
-- FROM HAVING A DISCUSSION
WITH STAFF, MAKING BIZARRE
CLAIMS WITH SEATTLE LAW AND
DEMANDING THAT WE LEAVE THE
PUBLIC SPACE. THE ONLINE VIDEO
NOW HAS OVER 1900 VIEWS. YOU
HAVE CREATED A BODY THAT NOT
ONLY FAILS TO PROVIDE POLICE
ACCOUNT ABILITY, BUT JUST LIKE
THE POLICE, BECOME
UNACCOUNTABLE AND ACCUSTOMED TO
WIELDING POWER IN HARMFUL WAYS.
AFTER OVER 10 YEARS OF THE
CONSENT DECREE, HOW DO WE GET
HERE? BUT NEVER EVER APPOINTIN
TO THE CPC ANY COMMUNITY MEMBER
WHO HAVE DIRECTLY EXPERIENCED
SERIOUS SPD VIOLENCE. LET ME
REPEAT THAT. THE COUNCIL HAS
NEVER APPOINTED TO THE
COMMUNITY POLICE COMMISSION ANY
PEOPLE WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED SP
VIOLENCE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS ALISHA. YOU MIGHT NEED TO
PRESS STAR 6. OKAY, LET'S MOVE
ON TO THE NEXT REMOTE SPEAKER.
THAT IS -- MINOR.
>> HELLO?
>> WE CAN HEAR YOU.
>> OH, GOOD. I AM TESTIFYING O
THE TREE PROTECTION LEGISLATION
I AM URGING YOU TO DELAY
CLOSING ON THIS LEGISLATION AND
SPEND THE NEXT MONTH OR TWO
MAKING MEANINGFUL TREE
PROTECTION LEGISLATION. I HAVE
BEEN A FAMILY PHYSICIAN FOR 25
YEARS. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A
LOOK AT THIS AS A PUBLIC HEALTH
ISSUE. TREES CAUSE DECREASED
CR÷CHES, CRIME, POLLUTION,
DECREASED ASTHMA, DECREASED
HEAT STROKE AND HEAT MORTALITY
DECREASED BLOOD PRESSURE
PROBLEMS. THIS IS REALLY AN
IMPORTANT PUBLIC HEALTH PROBLEM
, PRESERVING OUR TREE CANOPY.
URGE YOU TO DELAY THE VOTE ON
THIS. THE CURRENT BILL IS
BASICALLY -- AS IS. PLEASE
DON'T PASS IT TODAY.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS CAMERON McKINNON. CAMERON,
YOU MIGHT NEED TO PRESS STAR 6.
THERE YOU GO.
>> THERE WE GO. OKAY. MY NAME I
CAMERON McKINNON. I'M THE OWNE
OF THE DEVELOPMENT FIRM LOCATED
IN EASTLAKE. LAST FRIDAY, THE
BOARD PURCHASED A -- THAT WAS
GROSSLY INACCURATE. THIS HAS LE
TO MANY MISUNDERSTANDINGS ABOUT
THE BILL. TODAY, MYSELF AND
OTHERS REPRESENTING THE
ASSOCIATION WILL TAKE OUR
TESTIMONY TIME TO SET THE RECOR
STRAIGHT WITH ACTUAL FACTS.
NUMBER ONE, THIS IS NOT A PRO
DEVELOPER BILL. THIS WOULD
NEARLY QUADRUPLE THE NUMBER OF
TREES THAT ARE CURRENTLY
PROTECTED THAT HAVE MORE
REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS. FAR
FROM THE IMAGINED IMAGE OF A
TOWN THAT IS MORE THAN 70,000
REGULATED TREES. LET'S TAKE TH
PROGRESSIVE APPROACH AND
SUPPORT BOTH HOUSING AND TREES,
NOT SIMPLY THE PRESERVATION OF
AN EXISTING TREE STOCK AT THE
EXCLUSION OF NEW, YOUNG
FAMILIES.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS LUCAS.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS LUCAS --
I AM WITH THE MASTER BUILDERS.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO STRESS ALS
THAT THIS IS A BALANCE BILL. IT
IS NOT OPTIMAL FOR DEVELOPERS.
IT MAKES IT HARDER TO BUILD IN
SEATTLE. HOMEBUILDERS LIKE THE
ONE THAT MY COMPANY REPRESENTS
WILL NOT BE REQUIRED TO PLANT
TREES IN ALL NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SITES
AND RIGHT OF WAYS AND REPLACE
TREES ON SITE. AT THAT IS NOT
POSSIBLE, THEY WILL USE THOSE
FUNDS TO PLANT TREES WERE
NEEDED. MOSTLY IN THE SOUTH I
UNDERSERVED AREAS. BASED ON
RECENT DATA, ALL THIS WILL BE
FOCUSED ON THE SOUTH AND AND
WILL HAVE A DIRECT IMPACT ON
GAINING THE TREE CANOPY NEEDED.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS SHERRY NEWBOLD.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS SHERRY
NEWBOLD. ON THE RESIDENTIAL
ARCHITECT IN BOTH THE HOUSING
ENTRY ADVOCATES. I URGE YOU TO
VOTE ON THIS BALANCED
LEGISLATION TODAY. IT IS
DEFINITELY A MORE BALANCED
LEGISLATION . IN MY OPINION
AFTER ANALYZING IT, IT LEANS I
FAVOR OF TREES SOMEWHAT AT THE
EXPENSE OF HOUSING. IT WILL
PROTECT TENS OF THOUSANDS OF
MORE TREES THAT ARE CURRENTLY
PROTECTED, AND IT WILL PROVIDE
HUNTING FOR NEW TREES,
ESPECIALLY IN SOUTH SEATTLE. I
WANT TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS FOR HIS CONSIDERATION
AND THOUGHTFULNESS TO AN TENDE
PUBLIC PROCESS TO CREATE THIS.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS KRISTIN --
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS KRISTIN.
I'M ALSO URGING COUNCIL TO DELA
PASSING THIS. THE PROCESS WAS
RUSHED. CRUCIAL STOCKHOLDERS
WERE OVERLOOKED ARE GIVEN
LITTLE OR NO TIME TO REVIEW THE
PROPOSAL. INDEED, THE
COMMISSION SAYS THAT IF IT
PASSES, THEY DON'T BELIEVE
SEATTLE CAN MEET OUR GOAL OF 30
TREE CANOPY BY 2037. THE
ORDINANCE DOES NOT REFLECT THE
CITY'S COMMITMENT TO EQUITY AND
INCLUSION. NEIGHBORHOODS LIKE
BEACON HILL AND OTHER
MARGINALIZED IS MAYBE
DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACTED BY
THE LOSS OF MATURE TREES. THE
COUNCIL VALUES -- THEY WILL
PAUL'S AND CONSULT FURTHER
STAKEHOLDERS BEFORE PASSING THI
IMPORTANT LEGISLATION. I
ENCOURAGE COUNCIL TO DO WHAT IS
RIGHT FOR ALL CITIZENS. DELAY
THE VOTING SO THERE IS ADEQUATE
TIME FOR DELIBERATION ON THIS
IMPORTANT ISSUE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. GO BACK TO
ALISHA. ALICIA, YOU NEED TO
PRESS STAR 6. ALL RIGHT. WE
WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT
SPEAKER. THAT IS ERIC.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS ERIC -- I
AM A MEMBERS OF THE MASTER
BUILDERS ASSOCIATION. THE
CITY'S OWN TREE CANOPY STUDY
STATES THAT MOST TREE CANOPY
LAWS CAME FROM CITY-OWNED LAND
IN PARKS AND NATURAL AREAS AND
IN SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.
NOT FROM DEVELOPMENT. BUILDER
LIKE ME PLANT THOUSANDS OF TREE
IN OUR CITY EVERY YEAR ,
DIRECTLY ADDING TO THAT CANOPY.
THIS WOULD REQUIRE US TO ADD
TREES IN PLANTER STRIPS TO EVER
PROJECT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND
RESIDENTIAL ZONE. IN ADDITION
TO THE BASE REQUIREMENTS, WHIC
MEANS EVEN MORE TREES ON SITES.
WE OFFER UP THIS VERY IDEA IN
OUR 2022 LETTER TO THE CITY
DISCUSSING THE TREE ORDINANCE.
WE ALSO COMPROMISED SEVERAL
TIMES IN THIS PROCESS. FOR
EXAMPLE, IN THE 11th HOUR, WE
AGREED TO A DIFFERENT MODEL OF
MEASURING TREE PROTECTION AREAS
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS DENISE WILLER.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, CITY COUNCIL
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS DENISE
WILLER. I WOULD LIKE TO URGE
THE COUNCIL TO TAKE MORE TIME T
FULLY EVALUATE THE PROPOSAL.
RIGHT NOW, IT IS FRIENDLIER TO
DEVELOPERS. ALL OF THE
AMENDMENTS WERE ADOPTED, MOST
OF THE URBAN FOUR STREET
RECOMMENDATIONS WERE VOTED DOWN
IN ITS CURRENT FORM , THIS IS
VERY IMPORTANT. FOR PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT AND IN SOME AREAS,
100%. THIS WILL ACCELERATE TRE
LOSS AND IMPACT THE RETENTION O
THE LARGER MATURE TREES. THESE
EXTINCT TREES WILL HAVE ENOUGH
OPEN PERMEABLE LAND SO THEY CAN
CONTINUE DRIVING. AS A CITY, W
DESPERATELY NEED HOUSING. WE
RESPECTFULLY ASKED THE CITY
COUNCIL NOT TO RUSH OR VOTE.
PLEASE DO FOR YOUR VOTE AND TAK
YOUR TIME TO GO BACK TO THE
TABLE, CONSIDER THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE URBAN
FORESTRY COMMISSION, THE
OVERSIGHT BOARD AND
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS TREVOR JOHNSON. TREVOR, YOU
MIGHT NEED TO PRESS STAR 6.
THERE YOU GO. OKAY, THANK YOU,
COUNCIL. MY NAME IS TREVOR
JOHNSON. AND WITH THE MASTER T
BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF KING
COUNTY AND THE BUILDERS GROUP.
ONE OF THE MOST COMMON
MISUNDERSTANDINGS THAT WE HAVE
IS THE BILL INCREASING THE
ALLOWABLE DEVELOPMENT BY
INTRODUCING THE 85%
DEVELOPMENTAL AREA. NOR IS THI
A HANDOUT TO HOMEBUILDERS. IT I
CURRENTLY ALLOWED IN THE CODE.
IT DOESN'T MEAN THEY TAKE UP 85
OF DEVELOPMENT SITES. CURRENT
ONES DEVELOP WALKWAYS,
LANDSCAPING, WILD PLANTERS ,
WHICH ARE PART OF THE
DEVELOPABLE AREA. IT CAN ONLY
BE BUILT ON WHAT REMAINS IN THE
AREA AFTER ALL THE REQUIREMENT,
ABOUT 44% OF THE SITE. AN
IMPORTANT CHANGE WILL BE THAT
THIS LEGISLATION FOR 100% OF
THE COMMERCIAL ZONE. THIS IS
IMPORTANT TO THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING COMMUNITY AND THAT
REALLY MATTERS. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR TIME. WE BELIEVE EVERYONE
DESERVES A PLACE TO CALL HOME.
WE WANT TO MAKE HIM HAPPEN.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT REMOTE
SPEAKER IS ROBERT SHANK.
>> HELLO. I AM CHAIR OF THE
SIERRA CLUB SEATTLE GROUP. THE
REASON FOR THAT, WE HAD TO
CORRECT A CATASTROPHIC MISTAKE.
WE CLEAR-CUT THE GREAT FORCE O
WHAT IS WASHINGTON PAVED
FARMLAND AND ORDERING HALF OF
THE POPULATION RATHER THAN IN
FAMILY HOUSING HERE IN THE CITY
THAT HELPED CAUSE THE CLIMATE
CRISIS. IT IS THREATENING OUR
TREE CANOPY. WE BELIEVE THE
FACTS MATTER. THE DATA IS VERY,
VERY RARE. THE MAIN THREATS
COME FROM THE CLIMATE CRISIS.
THEY GO BROWN AND SOMETIMES DI
AFTER THE HEAT WAVE THE 2021 OR
THE DROP OF 2022. WE ARE NOT
LOSING TREES IN THE CITY BECAUS
OF DEVELOPMENT. TREES CAN
HANDLE A HOTTER, DRIER CLIMATE.
THIS IS ESSENTIAL TO REDUCING
CARBON EMISSION. WE SHOULD NOT
USE THIS TO UNDERMINE OTHER
CLIMATE GOALS.
>> THANK YOU. WE WILL NOW MOVE
TO THE IN-PERSON SPEAKERS. THE
FIRST PERSON UP IS CLIFF.
>> HELLO, COUNCIL NEIGHBORS. A
YOU KNOW, MY NAME IS CLIFF, THE
POLICY MANAGER FOR -- HOUSING
IS ESSENTIAL TO HEALTH. A
HEALTHY ECOSYSTEM IS CRITICAL A
WELL. THAT IS WHY WE ARE IN
SUPPORT OF THIS TREE ORDINANCE
AS IT STANDS AND URGE YOU TO
PASS THIS ORDINANCE. WE HAVE
BEEN BUILDING AFFORDABLE
HOUSING, AND YOU SEE THIS IS A
BETTER APPROACH. I KNOW WHAT I
IS LIKE TO BE CRUSHED BETWEEN
HOUSING THE PLACEMENT , BUILDIN
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ENTRIES ARE
NOT IN OPPOSITION OF ONE
ANOTHER. THIS WILL PROVIDE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPERS
LIKE US WITH STABILITY. IT WIL
LET US KNOW WHAT IS ALLOWED AND
WHAT IS NOT. THIS HELPS
NONPROFIT BUILDERS LIKE US KNOW
IF WE CAN GO FORWARD ON A
PROJECT, LIKE OUR SOUTH PARK
DEVELOPMENT OR LOYAL HEIGHTS
DEVELOPMENT. I HOPE YOU DECIDE
TO SUPPORT THIS APPROACH SO
EVERYONE HAS A SAFE, AFFORDABLE
AND HEALTHY PLACE TO LIVE IN
SEATTLE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS STEVE -- 'S MET DEVELOPERS
KNOW BEST, THEY ARE THE
SOVEREIGNS OF THE CITY. THE
CITIZENS OF THE CITY AND WILL B
COVERED UNDER THIS ORDINANCE.
THE DEVELOPERS ON THE OTHER HAN
WILL PRETTY MUCH HAVE A FREE
HAND, AS THEY ALWAYS HAVE, AND
BELIEVE THEY ALWAYS SHOULD.
THEY KNOW BETTER. IN WATERGATE
THE OLD SAYING WAS FOLLOW THE
MONEY. LIVE IN SEATTLE, THAT
MIGHT BE ALSO TRUE. IT HAS
HAPPENED IN MANY OTHER CASES.
WE SHOULD BE TAKING A LOOK AT A
TREE ORDINANCE WAS ACTUALLY
PRESERVES TREES. THE REPUBLICAN
IN MANY FAR RIGHT GROUPS SAY
YOU ARE A BUNCH OF TREE HUGGERS
THIS ORDINANCE IS DONE BY TREE
MUGGERS. THE TREES ARE NOT
GOING TO BE SAVED. THEY CAN BE
TRANSFERRED EVERY TIME YOU WANT
TO DEVELOP. ALL OF A SUDDEN, I
BECOMES PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT
PLAN. ALL OF A SUDDEN, WE WILL
HAVE FEWER AND FEWER TREES. HO
WOULD THIS ORDINANCE IN THE LON
RUN PRESERVE THE CANOPY OF THE
OLD TREES? THE OLD TREES ARE
GENERATIONAL.
>> THANK YOU, OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS JAMES --
>> HI THERE. THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. I WANT TO
THANK EACH AND EVERY COUNCIL
MEMBER FOR THEIR SERVICE APPEAR
I REALLY WANT TO SAY HATS OFF
AND I APPRECIATE YOUR SERVICE T
THOSE THAT ARE LEAVING, THANK
YOU FOR SERVING THE CITY OF
SEATTLE. I, TOO, WORKED FOR TH
CITY OF SEATTLE. I AM ALSO A
UNION MEMBER AND A SHOP STEWARD
I AM PART OF THE CONTRACTING
FOR BARGAINING FOR A FAIR
CONTRACT. WE HAVE BEEN
BARGAINING SINCE SEPTEMBER .
WE ARE IN A PERIOD OF HISTORIC
INFLATION WHERE FOLKS' BUDGETS
I REALLY SQUEEZED. I HAVE
COLLEAGUES IN MY DEPARTMENT THA
HAD TO WORK TWO DEPARTMENT TO
MAKE ENDS MEET. THERE ARE SOME
THAT CANNOT AFFORD TO RETIRE
BECAUSE THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO
LIVE HERE. HE DOES UNDERSTAND
WHAT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
RATES ARE HERE AND THERE ARE
LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WORKING
FOR THE CITY THAT QUALIFY FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. MAKING LES
THAN A 26 1/2 DOLLARS AN HOUR.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS JOEY BULLOCK.
>> HI, EVERYONE. MY NAME IS
JOEY BULLOCK. I AM AN SDOT
EMPLOYEE. I'M PART OF THE
COALITION FOR CITY UNION . SINC
SEPTEMBER, WE HAVE BEEN WITHOU
A CONTRACT. I AM AN ENGINEER,
AND I WOULD SAY THAT WE ARE
LOSING SOME OF THE BEST AND
BRIGHTEST ENGINEERS THE CITY HA
EVER BEEN BECAUSE THEY GO ALMOS
ANYWHERE ELSE AND MAKE MORE
MONEY. WE LOST TWO ENGINEERS.
ONE FOR THE A.D.A. PROGRAM AND
ONE FOR VISION 0 FOR SEATTLE
SINCE I WOKE UP THIS MORNING.
THE CITY RIGHT NOW IS EXPECT U
TO TAKE AN 8 1/2% PAY CUT THIS
YEAR. WE ARE NOT GOING TO STAN
FOR IT. WE'VE GOT A BIG FIGHT
AHEAD OF US. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS JESSICA MARTIN.
>> THAT AFTERNOON. THANK YOU
FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY T
SPEAK. I'M HERE TO ADDRESS THE
TREE ORDINANCE. I LIVE IN SOUTH
PARK IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT
ACTUALLY IS AFFECTED BY THIS.
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, MOST OF
YOU LIVE IN AREAS WHERE YOU WIL
NEVER HAD TO WONDER WHETHER THE
TREES WILL BE CUT DOWN EXTORT
YOU. WHAT I SEE HAPPENING, WHA
IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING -- NOT
WHAT PEOPLE ARE TELLING ME IS
SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN -- LOTS ARE
SELLING, THE TREES ARE BEING CU
DOWN . AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS
GOING IN, BUT IT IS TRULY NOT
AFFORDABLE. THEY ARE BUILDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THAT'S ONE
THING. YOUR REPLACIG EXISTING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING STOCK, AND
WE LIVE IN A HEAT ISLAND THERE
IN SOUTH PARK, MOST OF US DON'T
HAVE AIR CONDITIONING. WE RELY
ON THE TREES FOR THAT. YOU
ABOUT THE MASTER BUILDER
AMENDMENT . I KNOW, I AM
THIRD-GENERATION IN MY HOME. I
HAS TAKEN THAT LONG FOR THE
STREET TO GET ENOUGH TO PROVIDE
MEANINGFUL SHADE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
>> HI, YOU GUYS. I OFTEN COME
UP HERE AND SPEAK ABOUT TREES.
TODAY, I'M SPEAKING FROM MY
PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY. AND
REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT BOTH
OVERSEAS AND IN WASHINGTON, D.C
ONE OF THE HIGH MARKS OF
CRAFTING SOLID SUSTAINABLE
PLANS FOR PEOPLE NEWLY ARRIVED
IN THE UNITED DATES WAS FIGHTIN
COMMUNITIES WITH GREEN SPACE.
IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN SOMETHING I
NOTICED IN MY RESEARCH. TREES
HAVE A DIRECT IMPACT ON HUMAN
HEALTH. THERE WAS ABSOLUTELY N
INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC HEALTH
COMMUNITY ON THIS BILL.
POSITION, AS YOU KNOW, SPOKE
EARLIER. PLEASE CONSIDER THAT
WHEN YOU VOTE.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS JULIA SHETLER .
>> HI, EVERYONE. I AM AN
ELECTRICAL ENGINEER AND SOLAR
ENERGY ANALYSTS. PLEASE VOTE NO
ON THE ORDINANCE. THIS WAS
LITERALLY WRITTEN BY THE MASTER
BUILDERS DEVELOPERS ASSOCIATION
WHAT THE DEVELOPER EXECUTIVES
INTERESTED IN BUILDING MARKET
RATE HOMES. MANY OF THESE
DEVELOPERS HAVE LOBBIED HERE
PERSONALLY, AND SOME OF THEM
ARE EVEN FUNDING YOUR CAMPAIGNS
FOR RE-ELECTION TODAY. DON'T
KID YOURSELF INTO THINKING THAT
THIS BILL IS A PROXY FOR
EXPENSING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN
SEATTLE. IT'S NOT. THE
DEVELOPERS GIVING COMMENT TODAY
ARE LYING TO YOU. THERE IS NO
EVIDENCE THAT THIS WILL SAVE
TREES. THAT WILL COME INTO THE
HANDS OF THESE DEVELOPERS AND
THIS IS RIDDLED WITH LOOPHOLES
THAT ALLOW THEM TO DO THIS
WITHOUT PUNY. I'M INSTANTLY
FAMILIAR , THIS WON'T CUT IT.
WE NEED LARGE EXISTING TREES TO
MITIGATE CLIMATE CHANGE, IMPROV
PUBLIC HEALTH, AND KEEP OUR
CITIES WALKABLE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS JUNE --
>> THANK YOU. I LIVE IN
DISTRICT TWO. I'M HERE TO
SPEAK ABOUT THE PROPOSED TREE
ORDINANCE. A FLAWED PROCESS, A
RUSHED PROCESS THAT EXCLUDED
EXPERTS, KEY STAKEHOLDERS AND
REPRESENTATIVES OF OUR MOST
VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES HAS
PRODUCED A DEEPLY FLAWED
ORDINANCE. NO ONE HERE REALLY
UNDERSTANDS WHAT THE IMPACT OF
THE ORDINANCE WILL BE ON OUR
COMMUNITIES, OR OUR TREES. I
URGE YOU TO VOTE TO TAKE THE
MONTHS OF JUNE AND JULY TO FIX
IT. ALIGN THE BILL WITH THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE NEW
DEAL, AND THE CITIES RACE AND
SOCIAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE TO
ALLOW TIME FOR THE NEW DEAL
OVERSIGHT BOARD AND THE
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE COMMITTEE
FOR THE TECHNICAL REVIEW AND
RECOMMEND AMENDMENTS . TO ALLOW
REVIEW BY THE SUSTAINABILITY AN
RENTERS RIGHTS . IF YOU VOTE
TODAY ON THIS AS IT STANDS, YOU
WILL BE VOTING FOR THE
EQUIVALENT OF A CHAINSAW, AND
YOU WILL BEAR RESPONSIBILITY
FOR THE RESULTS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS JOSHUA MORRIS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBERS,
SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE
COMMISSION WITH MY COLLEAGUE,
WILL REQUEST TWO MINUTES. WE
ASK YOU TO LAY VOTING UNTIL TH
END OF JULY. WE HAVE KNOWN FOR
YEARS THAT THE ORDINANCE IS NOT
SUPPORTING TREE PRESERVATION ,
AND IT TENDS TO LEAD TO HIGHER
RATES OF CANOPY LOSS IN
COMMUNITIES. THE STATUS QUO IS
NOT WORKING FOR OUR TREES ARE
THE MOST VULNERABLE IN OUR
CITIES. SOMETHING HAS TO CHANGE
WE HAVE NOT BEEN COMFORTABLE
ADVOCATING SUPPORT FOR THE
ORDINANCE IN ITS CURRENT FORM.
WE ASKED FOR ADDITIONAL TIME TO
REVIEW. FIRST, THE PROCESS BY
WHICH THIS WAS INTRODUCED BY TH
MAYOR'S OFFICE VIOLATED CITY
CODE. IN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE,
IT WAS TRANSPORTED TO THE CITY
COUNCIL . THIS IS WITHOUT PRIOR
REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
THIS WAS AGAINST IT. THE
PROCESS AND LAND USE COMMITTEE
WAS TOO FAST.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS LEE HALL.
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME? OKAY. THE
REVIEW PROCESS WAS TOO FAST TO
ALLOW FOR A FULL CAREFUL REVIEW
BY OTHER STAKEHOLDERS. I'M
GOING TO SKIP BECAUSE I HAVE ON
MINUTE. NUMBER THREE, CONCERNE
THAT SETTING SPECIFIC ALLOWANCE
MAY HINDER CANOPY EQUITY GOALS.
WITH REGARD TO THE SPECIFIC
ALLOWANCES, THE DETERMINATION
OF NONSIGNIFICANT SETTING A
PARTICULAR SITE COVERAGE
THRESHOLD MIGHT RESULT IN
SITUATIONS WHERE ADDITIONAL
TREES ARE ALL ALLOWED TO BE CU
JUST DO TO THE CHOICE OF A
TANGIBLE 85% DEVELOPMENT
CAPACITY FACTOR. THE ZONES WIL
BE ESTABLISHED AND ALREADY TEN
TO HAVE A LOWER CANOPY. HALF O
COMMERCIAL SEATTLE MIXED ZONES
WERE 100% SITE COVERAGE AND WIL
BE SET. THAT IS THE
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE PRIORITY
AREAS. THE UFC MAINTAINS THAT
THEY HAVE FAILED TO INCREASE
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. FOR
THESE REASONS, WE ASKED THE
COUNCIL FOR --
>> THANK YOU. WE WILL MOVE BAC
TO THE REMOTE SPEAKERS. OUR
NEXT REMOTE SPEAKER IS COLLEEN
LeCLAIR.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, CITY COUNCIL
THIS IS COLLEEN FOR NORTHEAST
COMMUNITY COUNCIL. I WANT TO
ASK YOU TO TODAY TO INCORPORAT
THIS INTO THE NEW TREE
ORDINANCE THAT ALLOWS US TO AD
MORE HOUSING. THE CURRENT BILL
WON'T IGNORE THE TREE EXPERTS.
AND OTHER COMMISSIONS RELYING
PERHAPS ON THE EXPERTISE AND
DEVELOPERS, SUCH AS THE NASHUA
ENOUGH FUNDING A CAMPAIGN
SHOWING HOW THEY GET IN THE WAY
BY THE WAY, NOT AFFORDABLE
HOMES. THIS ORDINANCE
ESSENTIALLY HAS THE DEVELOPERS
TO CHAINSAW THE CLEAR-CUT MULTI
FAMILY UNIT AND COVER 85% OF
THE STRUCTURE. THIS IS A
DECREASE IN THE REQUIREMENT OF
GREEN 50%, WHICH ACCELERATES
THE TREE CANOPY LOTS BY 50% AN
INCREASING THE ISLANDS,
ESPECIALLY IN MORE VULNERABLE
NEIGHBORHOODS. VOTE TO POSTPON
THIS AS IT IS AND RECONSTRUCT
THE PRESERVATION , 13 YEARS IN
THE MAKING FOR THE FUTURE OF
SEATTLE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS KELSEY --
>> HELLO, COUNCIL NUMBERS. I'M
THE OWNER OF THE TREE SERVICE
PROVIDER COMPANY AND THEY FOUND
A MINIMUM OR -- FISHING ARE
YOUR WERE TO GIVE COUNCIL BILL
TO THIS POINT TODAY. THE
CLARIFICATION VIOLATES THE
INCREASE PENALTIES FOR ILLEGAL
TREE WORK AND THE CHANGES TO
ENCLOSURE GREATLY IMPROVE THE
ABILITY AS WORKING A
PROFESSIONAL ARBORIST TO
CONTINUE DOING WHAT WE DO BEST,
TAKING CARE OF SEATTLE'S TREES
AND THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE WITH
THEM. WE APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR THE ARBORIST
ASSOCIATION TO BE INVOLVED WITH
THE LAND USE COMMITTEE. WE
WOULD WELCOME FURTHER SCIENTIFI
STUDIES OF POTENTIAL LONG-TERM
IMPACTS OF THE BILL. WE FEEL
GRATEFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
ADVOCATE. WE DO SUPPORT THE
URBAN FORESTRY COMMISSION AND
APPRECIATE THE REQUEST FOR MORE
TIME. IF IT COMES TO THAT, WE
WILL BE READY TO OFFER
PROFESSIONAL PERSPECTIVE.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS WOODY . YOU MIGHT TRY STAR
6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. OKAY. WE
WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT
SPEAKER. THAT IS BARBARA --
>> BARBER HERE. PLEASE DELAY
VOTE ON THE TREE ORDINANCE AND
CONSIDER THE ADVICE OF THE UFC
IN YOUR VOTE. PREDICTABILITY I
NOT A FEATURE OF THE CLIMATE
CRISIS HERE AND AROUND THE
WORLD. CHANGES ARE OCCURRING
FASTER THAN ADDICTED. IN
WESTERN WASHINGTON, WE ARE
EXPERIENCING DISEASE THAT
SCIENCE CAN EXPLAIN . IN MY
MAGNOLIA NEIGHBORHOOD, I SEE
CREATION OF THE MARKET HOUSING
WHICH IS JUST DRAWING TREE
CANOPY. SOME SPEAKING DURING
THESE MEETINGS HAVE ASKED FOR
PREDICTABILITY IN THE TREE COAT
THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO GROW
ECONOMICALLY, BUT I DON'T SEE I
REFLECTING CREATED BY 85% LOT
COVERAGE HERE. RENEWAL OF OLD
HOUSING STOCK NEEDS TO HAPPEN A
THE SAME TIME AS RENEWAL OF THE
AGING INFRASTRUCTURE. ON MY
STREETS, HUGE PUDDLES FORM AT
THE BOTTOM OF THE --
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS MICHAEL.
>> HI. THIS IS MICHAEL, I AM A
MEMBER OF THE SEATTLE GREEN
SPACES COALITION. THIS CALLS
FOR A BUDGET FOR EACH OF THE
NINE DEPARTMENTS EXPENDITURE FO
URBAN FORESTRY , WHICH WILL BE
DUE IN JUNE. IF YOU WAIT ON
THIS, THEN YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO
FIND OUT HOW MUCH MONEY YOU'RE
SPENDING, SO YOU WILL KNOW WHAT
TO DO. ITEM NUMBER TWO, HIRING
CHIEF URBAN FORRESTER WHO WILL
SORT THESE ISSUES OUT IN
CONJUNCTION WITH WHAT WE THINK
IS NEEDED TO CELEBRATE AND
SEPARATE OUT THE VARIOUS
PLAYERS. NEXT, THE EXAMINER'S
DECISION TO DENY THE APPEAL IS
NO LONGER APPLICABLE FOR THE
DNS. YOU HAVE CHANGED AND ADDE
LAND-USE ISSUES. IT IS NO
LONGER THE SAME. WE WANT YOU T
VOTE NO ON THE CURRENT PROPOSAL
AND AMEND THE HECK OUT OF IT I
THE NEXT TWO COMMENTS. THANK
YOU.
>> OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS ANDREA.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M ONE OF
THE FOUNDING MEMBERS OF THE
ARBORIST ASSOCIATION. I WOULD
LIKE TO THANK THE COUNCIL AND
LAND USE COMMITTEE FOR TAKING U
THE COUNCIL BILL. WE THANK YOU
FOR INVITING US TO PARTICIPATE
DURING THE REVIEW OF THIS
IMPORTANT LEGISLATION. WE
SUPPORT SEVERAL PARTS OF THE
BILL. THE FEW ITEMS THAT WE
SPECIFICALLY ENDORSE OUR CHANGE
TO TREE SERVICE REGULATIONS AND
CLOSER ALIGNMENT WITH INDUSTRY
STANDARDS FOR TREE CARE. WE
SUPPORT INCREASED PROTECTION
DURING DEVELOPMENT FOR
NEIGHBORING TREES. INCREASED
PROTECTION FOR TREES OF SMALLER
SIZES OUTSIDE OF DEVELOPMENT
AND EMINENCE THAT ALLOW FOR MOR
PROACTIVE MANAGEMENT OF THE US
OF THE TREE SPECIES. THE
ORDINANCE INCREASES PROTECTION
FOR TREES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY
WHILE TRADING TRUE PROTECTION
FOR TREE REPLACEMENT ON SITES
UNDERGOING DEVELOPMENT. IT
REQUIRES THAT MORE TREES BE
REPLACED IF THEY ARE REMOVED,
BUT IT DOES NOT INCREASE THE
NUMBER OF TREES PROTECTED. WE
SUPPORT THE REQUEST FOR MORE
TIME TO STUDY.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS ALAN TAYLOR.
>> HEY THERE. I AM ANOTHER
FOUNDING MEMBER OF THE ARBORIS
ASSOCIATION. I WOULD LIKE TO
THINK THE COUNCIL FOR TAKING UP
THIS ISSUE. I BELIEVE WE ARE
ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE MANY
MEANINGFUL -- OF THAT WAS ALL
THAT WAS BEING VOTED ON TODAY ,
OR THE RULES ABOUT THE
MANAGEMENT OF TREES, THIS WOULD
BE A NO-BRAINER. THE POTENTIAL
FOR SIGNIFICANT LOSSES TO THE
CANOPIES RESULTING FROM THE
DEVELOPMENT RELATED PROVISIONS
OF THIS, I'M FEELING VERY
CONFLICTED. THERE IS NO DOUBT
THAT THIS WILL BE A KEY
SOLUTION TO THE CLIMATE CRISIS
AND THE HOUSING CRISIS. HOWARD
WEIGHS THESE BENEFITS IS STILL
VERY UNCLEAR. GIVE MORE TIME
FOR ALL STAKEHOLDERS TO STUDY
THE BILL AND ITS IMPACTS, AS
WELL AS PROPERLY EVOLVING THE
COMMISSION AND --
>> THANK YOU, OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS --
>> IT LOOKS LIKE YOU ARE
UNMUTED. YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND
SPEAK.
>> HELLO? SORRY. IT WAS STILL
MUTED. HELLO. I AM 19 YEARS
OLD, I GREW UP IN SEATTLE. I
WOULD LIKE TO VOTE AGAINST THE
TREE ORDINANCE TO DETECT AND
ENHANCE TREE CANOPY. AS A YOUN
BLACK WOMAN SOCIAL JUSTICE
ACTIVIST, IT IS IMPORTANT THAT
WE TAKE CHARGE AND FIGHT FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE. WE ARE
BEING THREATENED BY A HALF-BAKE
CITY ENDORSEMENT PROJECT THAT
WILL BRING SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AN
ENVIRONMENTAL DESTRUCTION TO
SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN IN MY
HOME FOR 19 YEARS. WE CANNOT
LET CAPITALIST POLITICS CONTINU
TO THREATEN THE VITALITY AND
HEALTH OF OUR BLACK FAMILIES AN
COMMUNITIES. I STRESSED A
REQUEST TO SUPPORT THE
RESOLUTION PROVISION OUTLINED B
THE ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE
PROTECTIONS . PLANTED TREES DI
NOT OFFER THE SAME BENEFITS AS
OLDER TREES.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS -- PEARSON.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M
ADDRESSING THE PROPOSED TREE
ORDINANCE. I'M A 15-YEAR-OLD
YOUTH ACTIVISTS FIGHTING TO
PROTECT BLACK AND BROWN
COMMUNITIES. I WANT THIS TO
PROTECT THE TREE CANOPY. IT IS
IMPORTANT BECAUSE MANY OF THE
CURRENT HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT
PLANS THREATENS THE CITY'S
CANOPIES. THE COUNSELOR NEEDS
TO GET MORE TIME TO HEAR FROM
TEENAGERS AND UNDERS UNDER 18
WHO WILL BE THE ONES LEFT WITH
THIS ENVIRONMENT. THIS IS OUR
FUTURE, MUCH LIKE THE DR. SEUSS
STORY. AS WELL AS THEIR
DISREGARD FOR OUR ENVIRONMENT.
FURTHERMORE, WITH THE REST OF
OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, THEY ARE
ALWAYS -- WHEN IT COMES TO TREE
BEING CUT DOWN. ORDINANCE NEED
TO BE FIXED. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS -- MARTIN.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL. I
AM AN -- AND CONCERNED BY THE
ORDINANCE IS NOT PROTECTING
RESIDENTS, LEAVINGMY STUDENTS
EXPOSED TO A FUTURE OF LIVING
IN COMMUNITIES THAT LACK THE
BENEFITS TREES PROVIDE. THEY
ARE IN NO WAY AFFORDABLE. I URG
COUNCIL TO -- ALONG WITH
PUBLIC VOICE MORE TIME TO WEIGH
IN ON THIS IMPACTFUL ORDINANCE.
WE READ OUR CHILDREN THE STORY
OF THE LORAX AND THE CITY IS
HEADING IN THAT DIRECTION. I
ASKED THE COUNCIL TO RECONSIDER
SO THAT OUR GROUPS HAVE MORE
TIME. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. LET'S GO BACK TO
WOODY. YOU MIGHT NEED TO PRESS
STAR 6 TO UNMUTE. LET'S GO TO
-- THEIR IN.
>> HELLO, I WORK FOR LEGACY
CAPITAL REPRESENTING MORE THAN
60 HOMEBUILDERS. THIS IS
CRITICAL TO THE HOUSING CRISIS.
I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE
COUNCIL FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION
OF TREES AND HOUSING. I WOULD
LIKE TO STRESS THAT THIS IS A
COMPROMISE THAT FAVORS TREES.
THIS WILL RESULT IN LESS
HOUSING.
>> ARE YOU STILL WITH US? OKAY
I THINK YOU DROPPED OFF. WE
WILL MOVE TO THE IN PERSON
SPEAKERS NOW. THE FIRST PERSON
ON THE LIST IS TRACY.
>> MY NAME IS TRACY. I LIVE IN
SEATTLE. I'M URGING YOU TO
DELAY THE VOTE ON THIS
ORDINANCE. PLEASE GIVE IT THE
CONSIDERATION THAT IT NEEDS.
HOUSING IS A CRITICAL NEED IN
SEATTLE, BUT WE HAVE TO DO IT
RIGHT. FROM MY UNDERSTANDING
RIGHT NOW, WE NEED TO TALK ABOU
THIS GUARANTEED LOT DEVELOPMEN
AREA AT 85%. WE NEED TO
REQUIRE A TREE INVENTORY, WHICH
IS AN ARBORIST REPORT, NOT PAR
OF THE CURRENT ORDINANCE.
PORTLAND OREGON, KIRKLAND
WASHINGTON, VANCOUVER, AND OTHE
CITIES REQUIRE TREE INVENTORIE
OF FRONT. THIS HELPS TO REDUCE
BOTH THE TIME AND MONEY SPENT B
BOTH DEVELOPERS AND THE CITY IN
MOVING PROJECTS FORWARD. IT I
NOT A MATTER OF REPLACING AN
OLDER TREE WITH A NEW ONE. THE
LAST ONE IS MAXIMIZING THE
RETENTION OF EXISTING TREES SI
INCHES DIAMETER AND LARGER.
THANK YOU. ALSO REMEMBER, LAST
TIME --
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS DAVID.
>> WE DO NOT HAVE TO PASS THIS
BILL TO GET HOUSING AND TREES.
YOU HAVE SEVERAL OPTIONS, CITY
COUNCIL. ONE OPTION IS TO AMEN
THIS AND TO COVER COMMUNITIES
THAT NEED TREES. RIGHT NOW,
2511 070 BASICALLY NEGATES AND
TRUMPS ALL THE ADDITIONAL
PROTECTIONS THAT WERE ADDED.
THE SECOND OPTION IS TO WITHDRA
THIS FOR FURTHER STUDY THAT TH
COMMISSION HAS RECOMMENDED. YOU
NEED TO SPEND THE TIME TO DO
THIS RIGHT. THE THIRD OPTION IS
TO PASS THE CITY BILL. IF YOU
DO, YOU'RE BASICALLY GOING
BEYOND WHAT IS ALLOWED BY STAT
REGULATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW. IF YOU PASS THIS BILL,
IT IS VERY LIKELY THAT IT WILL
BE APPEALED AND BACK TO SQUARE
ONE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
ATTENTION.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
>> HELLO. I AM A RESIDENT OF
SOUTHPARK. SEATTLE IS KNOWN AS
THE EMERALD CITY, BUT THIS WIL
TURN POOR NEIGHBORHOODS INTO
CONCRETE JUNGLES. AREAS
TARGETED FOR REDEVELOPMENT ARE
FRONT-LINE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE
ALREADY EXPERIENCING SO MANY
INEQUITIES. HEALTH OUTCOMES,
LIFE EXPECTANCY, INCOME
INEQUALITY AS WELL AS TREE
CANOPY COVER. WHAT DOES A
COMMITMENT TO TREE EQUITY IN
THESE NEIGHBORHOODS REALLY MEAN
WHEN YOU ARE ALLOWING DEVELOPER
TO REMOVE ANY TREES THAT STAND
IN THE WAY OF THEIR PROFIT?
LOOKING AT THE HEAT MAPS, IT IS
CLEAR THAT THESE AREAS ARE ALSO
EXPERIENCING DISPROPORTIONATE
HEAT, WHICH IS ONLY WORSENING
EACH YEAR. IT WILL TAKE AT
LEAST A GENERATION TO REPAIR TH
DAMAGE CAUSED BY ALLOWING THESE
TREES TO BE CUT FOR THE SAKE OF
HOUSING. THE TREES WON'T GROW
IN HEAT ISLANDS. I HAVE SEEN
TREES BY THE CITY AROUND MY
NEIGHBORHOOD DIED BECAUSE THEY
WERE NOT MAINTAINED. OUR RECORD
OF DEALING WITH --
>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OUR
NEXT SPEAKER IS KATHLEEN.
>> MY NAME IS KATHLEEN. I'M A
LIFELONG RESIDENT OF SEATTLE. I
GREW UP ON BEACON HILL. MY
FAMILY SUFFERED GREATLY FROM
THE POLLUTION THAT WE WERE
EXPOSED TO FROM THE FOUNDRY IN
THE AIRFIELD, AND THE RAILROAD
TRACKS, ET CETERA. TREES ARE
NOT AS AN AMENITY, THEY ARE A
NECESSITY. I URGE YOU TO DELAY
CONSIDERATION OF THIS BILL AN
TO GIVE THE FORCE COMMISSION
AND OTHER COMMITTEES CHANCES T
HAVE INPUT INTO THIS AND TO
CONSIDER ALL THE DIFFERENT
ASPECTS . THE WORD THAT COMES T
MY MIND IS DUE DILIGENCE. YOU
ARE CREATING WITH THE CITY
WANTS, FOR THE FUTURE, AND
WHETHER IT WILL BE SURVIVABLE.
PLEASE TAKE A LITTLE MORE TIME
AND CONSIDERATION.
>> RICHARD NICOLE.
>> YES. THIS SEEMS TO BE ONE O
THOSE ISSUES IN WHICH WE VOTE
FOR DEMOCRATS AND WE END UP WIT
REPUBLICAN POLICY. WE CERTAINL
DID NOT VOTE THE MASTER
BUILDERS ASSOCIATION. THE 85%
HUNDRED PERCENT NUMBERS THAT
THEY WERE HANDED AND PROBABLY
GIVEN TO US ARE UNACCEPTABLE,
REACTIONARY, THEY ARE NOT TO B
ACCEPTED. I'M AFRAID THAT WHAT
IS GOING TO HAPPEN, THERE WILL
BE A RACIAL ASPECT TO THIS. IT
WILL BASICALLY BE WAREHOUSE AND
BUILDINGS. THEY WILL NEVER LOO
OUT OF THEIR WINDOW AND SAY SOM
THING. I WOULD LIKE TO THINK
THAT IN THE FUTURE, CUTTING DOW
THE TREE WOULD BE LIKE KILLING
A WELL ARE KILLING AN ELEPHAN
FOR ITS IVORY.
>> THE NEXT SPEAKER IS DAVE
LeBLANC.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M A
RETIRED BOAT BUILDER THAT HAS
LIVED ON THE WEST SLOPE FOR THE
LAST 47 YEARS. WE HAVE WATCHED
THE CITY CHANGED TREMENDOUSLY.
I THINK THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE
NEEDS AMENDING AND TAKING OUT
SOME OF THE LOOPHOLES THAT
EXIST. I THINK WE HAVE HEARD A
LOT OF PEOPLE TALK ALONG THOSE
LINES. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO
ADDRESS IS WHAT I THINK IS A
COUPLE OF FALSE NARRATIVES BY
THE DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING
INDUSTRY. THE CLAIM THAT THE
RATE AND STYLE OF DEVELOPMENT
GOING ON IS MAINTAINING, OR
EVEN INCREASING THE COVER IS
JUST NONSENSE. IT IS JUST
NONSENSE. IT IS BLOWING SMOKE.
THE OTHER CLAIM THAT SO MUCH OF
THE DEVELOPMENT IS GOING ON TO
PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND
INCREASE IN POPULATION.
>> THANK YOU. SIR, YOUR TIME I
UP. SORRY. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT
SPEAKER IS NAIL --
>> SEATTLEITES WILL BE SINGING
A DYSTOPIAN SONG IF YOU PASS
THE TREE ORNAMENTS. IS THAT
COUNTERINTUITIVE? NOT REALLY.
I, MY SPOUSE AND TWO CHILDREN
HAVE LIVED HERE SINCE 2002. WE
HAVE A SEPARATE BUILDABLE
ADJOINING LOT TO OUR HOUSE. TH
ADJOINING LOT HAD A SINGLE 20
FOOT HOLLY AT MOVE IN. IT WAS
CHOKING OUT A WISP OF THE
INDIGENOUS MAPLE. I CUT IT DOW
IN 2012. I HAVE A PICTURE OF
WHAT HAS REPLACED THAT. THE
MAPLE, IN SPITE OF IT BEING
FLAT, IT LIVED. I HAVE PROVIDE
A PICTURE OF THAT NOW 35 FOOT
MAPLE . THE THREE ADDITIONAL
TREES THAT WE PLANTED TO THE
CLERK FOR EACH OF YOU , PASSAGE
OF THIS ORDINANCE WILL START MY
CHANCE OFF, WHOSE TEETH WILL
BITE INTO ALL 3.9 INCH DIAMETE
AND LARGER TREES AND DEVOUR THE
SO THAT DEVELOPMENT OF OUR
RETIREMENT IS NOT PUT IN --
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS SAGE MILLER.
>> YES, MY NAME IS SAGE MILLER
I LIVE IN DISTRICT SEVEN.
ANDREW, IT IS GOOD TO SEE YOU
HERE REPRESENTING THE COUNCIL.
AM HOPING THAT YOU WILL BE IN
SUPPORT OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT THE PUBLIC HAS MADE HERE
TODAY. I AM IN SUPPORT OF THE
URBAN FORESTRY COMMISSION'S
LETTER THAT WAS SENT FIVE DEAT
17 RECOMMENDING A DELAY IN THE
ORDINANCE UNTIL JULY. THERE AR
SEVERAL POINTS I WANTED TO MAKE
ONE, MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE
COMMISSION DID NOT HAVE
SUFFICIENT TIME TO REVIEW THE
MANY AMENDMENTS FROM THE
LAND-USE COMMITTEE. I URGE THE
COUNCIL TO SPEND TIME LISTENING
TO THE COMMITTEE , WHO YOU
APPOINTED FOR THEIR VARIABLE
EXPERTISE. TWO, THE EQUITY
TOOLBOX WAS NOT ADHERED TO. I
THINK THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO GO
BACK AND TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.
FINALLY, I THINK THERE IS A WAY
FOR TRUE --
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS SUE K. I AM A TREE HUGGER
I AM HERE TO SUPPORT THE URBAN
FORESTRY COMMISSION'S REQUEST
FOR DELAY UNTIL JULY. I HAVE
HEARD, AS SAGE HAS MENTIONED,
THEY DID NOT FOLLOW THE EQUITY
. THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT FIND
TIME FOR RECOMMENDATIONS,
ESPECIALLY FOR THESE VOLUNTEERS
THAT WORK SO HARD. I HAPPEN TO
BE HERE TO CAUTION ABOUT THIS
BEING A BALANCED ORDINANCE .
FROM MY OBSERVATION AND
EXPERIENCE, WORKING WITH
DEVELOPERS, IT DOESN'T STAY
BALANCED WHERE DEVELOPERS AND
DOLLARS ARE INVOLVED. THE CID,
THE CHINATOWN INTERNATIONAL
DISTRICT, IT ALLOWED DEVELOPER
TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING O
PAY INTO THE FUND. THEY PAID
INTO THE FUND TO OUR
GENTRIFICATION AND
DISPLACEMENT.
>> NEXT SPEAKER, JESSICA DIXON.
>> HI, GOOD AFTERNOON. I AM
JESSICA DIXON. I'M IN DISTRICT
6. WHAT WE DO KNOW, A BILL TO
REGULATE TREES IN THE CITY WAS
CRAFTED, IT WAS NOT BASED ON
NATIONAL STANDARDS AND BEST
PRACTICES FOR THE LONG-TERM
SUSTAINABILITY. TWO, THE
PROCESS HAS BEEN RUSHED. THE
BILL WAS INTRODUCED IN MARCH B
FULL COUNCIL. EVEN MEMBERS OF
THE LAND-USE COMMITTEE ADMITTED
DURING THEIR PUBLIC MEETINGS
HAVING A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDIN
WHAT THE BILL WILL HAVE ON THE
CANOPY IN THE CITY. THEY WERE
IGNORED, AS WRITTEN THAT
COUNCIL BILL BYPASSED . WHEN
THEY SCRAMBLE TO HOLD SPECIAL
SESSIONS AND RESPONDED WITH
SERIOUS -- ABOUT THE BILL, THE
WERE IGNORED. THE STAY BILL
WILL RESULT IN EVERY
NEIGHBORHOOD . I URGE THE
COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THE
AMENDMENT SUPPORTED BY THE
COALITION THAT PROVIDES A
TEMPLATE FOR A MORE MEASURED,
RESPONSIBLE, AND EQUITABLE
PROCESS. THANK YOU.
>> WE WILL NOW MOVE TO THE
REMOTE SPEAKERS. THE FIRST
SPEAKER UP IS BARBARA BERNARD.
>> HI, THIS IS BARBARA BERNARD.
I HAVE CALLED IN BEFORE. I HAV
ATTENDED CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
AND LAND-USE MEETINGS. I AM
CONCERNED REGARDING THE PROPOSE
TO THE ORDINANCE. THEY NEED THE
ORDINANCE TO PROTECT THE
ENHANCED TREE CANOPY. THIS IS
IMPORTANT TO ME BECAUSE MY
FAMILY LIVES IN A TOWNHOUSE
UNIT. THIS WAS ON AN ECA THAT
ENDED UP BEING CLEAR-CUT. AS A
RESULT, THERE ARE NO LARGE TREE
TO PROTECT THE UNIT I LIVE IN
FROM THE SUMMER HEAT. WE WERE
FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO
SAVE UP AFTER WE HAD CONTINUOU
SUMMERS OF UN-BREATHABLE AIR DO
TO WILDFIRES. THIS IS CLEARLY
NOT AN OPTION FOR RESIDENTS ON
A FIXED BUDGET. IT IS ALSO NOT
AFFORDABLE TO MOST. I QUESTION
IF THEY ARE SERVING PEOPLE THAT
-- WITH THE LARGE SHADE TREES
ON THE PROPERTY. I SUPPORT THE
AND TO DELAY THE VOTE. THANK YO
VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS PATRICK TAYLOR. STOMACH HI.
MY NAME IS PATRICK TAYLOR. I
HAVE BEEN AN ADVOCATE AND SPENT
HALF OF MY LIFE WORKING IN
CONSERVATION. THIS IS A
REASONABLE COMPROMISE TO THE
DESIRED INCREASED TREE CANOPY
AND ADDRESSING THE HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY CRISIS. THEY WIL
PROVIDE GREATER PROTECTION FOR
EXISTING TREES AND FUNDING FOR
NEW TREES. THIS WILL ENSURE
THAT MUCH-NEEDED HOUSING CAN BE
BUILT IN THE AREAS AND PRODUCIN
MOST OF THE CITY'S NEW HOMES. I
CONTRAST, THEY WILL HAVE HARSH
RULES AND ENDLESS PROCESS
LEADING TO HIGH COSTS. THE
CITY-OWNED STUDY SHOWS PUBLICL
ON LAND. THIS BILL HAS BEEN IN
THE WORKS FOR YEARS. IT IS
READY TO PASS. THIS WILL BE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THIS BILL
WORK. PLEASE VOTE TO APPROVE
THE BILL AS WRITTEN. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR TIME AND WORK AND THAN
YOU FOR LISTENING.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS KIRK ROBBINS.
>> HI. I LIVE IN BALLARD. I
HAVE LIVED HERE 13 YEARS. I'M
JUST EAST OF AN AREA THAT IS
SUPPOSED TO BE REZONED OUT OF
INDUSTRIAL BY ABOLISHING THE
BUFFER ZONE. AND THEN TURNING
IT INTO SOME SORT OF COMMERCIAL
AREA. THIS IS ALL BEING DONE
ALLEGEDLY BECAUSE THERE IS A
WHITE RAIL STATION COMING IN IN
20 YEARS. YET, THIS IS SUPPOSE
TO BE RUSHED. APPARENTLY THEY
HAVE CREATED A WHOLE SET OF
INDUSTRIAL REZONED AFTER FOUR
YEARS OF SECRET MEETINGS THAT W
CAN ONLY LOOK AT FOR A COUPLE
MONTHS. THIS IS THE SITUATION.
IT LOOKS SIMILAR TO THIS TREE
ORDINANCE. OUR REPRESENTATIVE
WAS SITTING IN THESE MEETINGS
TAKING NOTES, BUT NOT VOICING
THE VIEWS OF THE COMMITTEE.
PLEASE SLOW THIS DOWN.
>> THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER,
ALISHA.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS OF
THE COUNCIL. SORRY FOR THE --
MY NAME IS ALICIA, WHAT I DON'
UNDERSTAND IS WHY THE TREE
ADVOCATES ARE DEMANDING MORE
DELAY. AT THE SAME TIME,
COMPLAINING THAT THIS PROCESS
HAVE HEARD FROM THE STAKEHOLDER
1 MILLION TIMES OVER THE LAST
20 YEARS. YOU CAN'T CLAIM BOTH.
I ALSO DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW TH
FORESTRY COMMISSION CAN CLAIM
THAT THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS WERE
NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT. THEIR
AMENDMENTS WORK CONSIDERED BY
THE LAND-USE COMMITTEE AND
VOTED DOWN. THIS IS HOW THE
LEGISLATIVE PROCESS WORKS. SOME
OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS , THE
MANY RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE
ADOPTED WAS THE CREATION OF
URBAN FORSTER , THE PROTECTION
THRESHOLD TO INCLUDE MORE
TREES. AND WHETHER NOBODY IS
TALKING ABOUT, RESTRICTING
PROPERTY OWNERS , FURTHER
RESTRICTING THEM FROM THE RIGHT
TO REMOVE TREES ON THEIR OWN
PROPERTY.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS JESSE SIMPSON.
>> HI. I'M HERE TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT OF THE REVISED TREE
ORDINANCE. WE ARE REPRESENTING
NONPROFIT HOSING -- HOUSING
AUTHORITY. AS SOMEONE BORN AND
RAISED IN SEATTLE, I UNDERSTAND
THE DEEP CONNECTION PEOPLE FEEL
AND THE PLEASURE OF A SHADED
STREET ON A HOT SUMMER DAY. ON
THE STREETS OF OUR CITY AND IN
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHO CAN
CONTINUE TO LIVE IN SEATTLE AS
RENT RISES. I BELIEVE THE
LEGISLATION STRIKES AN
APPROPRIATE BALANCE BETWEEN THE
TWO PROTECTIONS AND ENSURING
THEY ARE NOT IN HOUSING
PRODUCTION. THIS GREATLY
RESTRICTS TREE REMOVAL OUTSIDE
OF THE TREE DEVELOPMENT. 80%
AND PERCENT OF THIS
DEVELOPMENT. I URGE YOU TO PASS
THIS ORDINANCE AND THANK YOU FO
THE OPPORTUNITY TO TESTIFY.
>> THANK YOU. OUR LAST REMOTE
SPEAKER IS WHAT HE WILL OR --
WOODY WELLER . PLEASE TRISTAR
6 TO UNMUTE .
>> PLEASE HIT STAR 6 SO WE CA
HEAR YOU.
>> I THINK WE HAVE ONE MORE
REMOTE PERSON WE CAN GO TO. THA
IS STEWART --
>> STEWART, PLEASE HIT STAR 6 S
WE CAN HEAR YOU.
>> SHALL WE MOVED TO IN PERSON
SPEAKERS?
>> YES. WE ARE RUNNING UP ON
TIME HERE. I THINK WE HAVE LES
THAN 10 MORE SPEAKERS. IF THER
ARE NO OBJECTIONS BY DOING SO,
WOULD LIKE TO EXTEND THE TIME
PERIOD FOR PUBLIC TESTIMONY AN
ADDITIONAL 10 MINUTES TO HEAR
FROM THE LAST HANDFUL OF
SPEAKERS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. WE WILL MOVE ON
TO THE IN PERSON SPEAKERS. THE
FIRST ONE IS MARTHA.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD TO BE
WITH YOU ON THIS CHALLENGING
ISSUE. I WRITE ABOUT THESE
ISSUES SOMETIMES AND HAVE BEEN
FOLLOWING THE TREE COAT SINCE
2019. GIVEN THE MISINFORMATION
IN THE HOT BUTTON ISSUE OF
HOUSING, I URGE THE COUNCIL TO
HIT RESET AND RECOGNIZE THAT IF
YOU EXPECT THIS TO ADDRESS
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THEN
ADVOCATES WILL UNDERSTAND IT
WELL TO BE AT THE TABLE. AND
SEATED BESIDE THEM SHOULD BE
EXPLOITS FROM THE URBAN FORESTR
COMMISSION. AND THE COMMUNITY
COUNCIL TO -- THE IMPORTANCE O
TREES AND CANOPY FOR A CITY
THAT IS READY FOR THE 21st
CENTURY. THIS IS NOT ABOUT
BUILDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I
THAT WERE TRUE, THE 255 ACRES
OF CANOPY LOSS BETWEEN 2016 AND
21 WOULD HAVE PRODUCED
THOUSANDS OF UNITS OF AFFORDABL
HOUSING. SKIP, SKIP, SKIP.
GRAND. NOT ONE WERE RESERVED
FOR EITHER -- ARE LOW INCOME.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MARTHA.
>> OUR NEXT SPEAKER?
>> PLEASE DELAYED THE VOTE.
EIGHT YEARS AGO, THE CITY
COUNCIL WROTE A COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN IN WHICH THEY SET A GOAL
TO INCREASE TREE CANOPY IN
SEATTLE TO 20% BY 2037 AND
EVENTUALLY INCREASE IT WITH TH
SOCIAL DISPARITIES RELATED TO
CANOPY COVER. TRAGICALLY IN TH
LAST EIGHT YEARS, SEATTLE HAS
NOT GAINED CANOPY COVER. IT HAS
LOST 255 ACRES OF CANOPY. WE
WOULD QUICKLY LOSE MORE UNDER
THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE. JUST
BECAUSE THE SEATTLE 2035
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS NOT
CREATED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, IT
DOESN'T MEAN THEY HAD TO ABIDE
BY IT. TELL ME THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL IS ABANDONING THE PLAN
TO REACH THE TREE COVER IN
PROVISIONS TO CLOSE THE RACIAL
AND SOCIAL DISPARITIES. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS SUZANNE GRANTS.
>> HELLO. I AM SUZANNE GRANT.
I'M COMING TO YOU ON THE TREE
ORDINANCE. THERE IS AN
UNWELCOME SITE IN THE
NEIGHBORHOODS, DEVELOPERS ARE
BEING GREEDY. THERE ARE HOLES
IN THE SKY WHERE THE TREES ONCE
STOOD. TREES WANT FIT WHEN
BUILDINGS COVER 85% OF THE
GROUND. EXCEPTIONAL TREES WILL
BE MURDERED WHEN THEY CUT THEM
DOWN. THERE'S A HOLE IN THE SK
WHERE THE TREE ONCE WAS,
SOMEBODY'S MAKING MONEY.
THERE'S A HOLE IN THE SKY WHERE
THE TREE ONCE WAS, CITY COUNCIL
IS ACTING FUNNY. YOU HAVE A
CHOICE. YOU MUST NOT PASS THIS
ORDINANCE AS IT IS CURRENTLY
WRITTEN. YOU MUST ALLOW MORE
TIME FOR ALL THE PARTIES TO COM
TOGETHER, WORK ON A PLAN THAT
KEEPS THE TREES IN THE GROUND,
AND BUILDING HEALTHY, AFFORDABL
HOUSING. MAKE THE RIGHT CHOICE
THANK YOU.
>> MARIA.
>> OKAY, GUYS. I HATE TO FOLLOW
THAT. MY NAME IS MARIA. I
SERVE AS THE BEACON COUNCIL
CHAIR. I JUST WANT TO THANK YO
FOR THIS VERY HEARTLESS. THERE
ARE MANY INTERESTS THAT PLAY.
HAD TWO MESSAGES FOR YOU. ONE I
THANK YOU FOR INCLUDING THE
EQUITY PLAN. THE OTHER IS THAT
THERE ARE TWO BIG HOLES IN THE
ORDINANCE. ONE, HOW TO
IMPLEMENT THE 30% TREE CANOPY
GOAL. THE OTHERS, THAT IS AN
E- -- TREES ARE AN
INFRASTRUCTURE FOR RESILIENCY.
PLEASE DEFER THE VOTE. GET IT
AMENDED. I KNOW HE SAID THERE
WILL BE TIME FOR AMENDMENT, BU
SOUNDS LIKE THERE IS NO TIME. S
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
OKAY. WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEX
PERSON WHO IS DAVID -- DUE THA
AFTERNOON. I LIVE IN DISTRICT
FIVE. RECENTLY, THEY STARTED
WORK ON A TREE PROTECTION
ORDINANCE. THEY SET OUT A
SERVER TO GET THE IMPLEMENTS
FROM THE RESIDENCE. WHAT A
NOVEL IDEA THERE. SEATTLE DOES
THINGS MUCH DIFFERENTLY. DURIN
THE LAND-USE COMMITTEE MEETINGS
THEY HAD MAJOR INPUTS FROM THE
URBAN FORESTRY COMMISSION AND
IGNORED PUBLIC COMMENTS .
CITIZENS ASK THAT THIS BE
REMOVED. IT IS TIME TO START
LISTENING TO THE PEOPLE OF
SEATTLE AND TIME TO LISTEN TO
THE IMPACTED COMMUNITIES AND
THE TREE EXPERTS ON THE SUBJECT
I URGE YOU TO THINK ON THIS
VERY SERIOUSLY. IN A SURVEY,
TWO OR THREE SEATTLE VOTERS SA
THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT TREE
CANOPY LOSS AS IT INCREASES.
IT IS UP TO YOU . THIS ORDINANC
DOES NOT DO THAT.
>> NEXT UP IS DEBORA .
>> HELLO. I AM DEBORA. I AM A
LONGTIME RESIDENT OF SEATTLE
AND CURRENTLY IN MAPLE LEAF. I
DO NOT NEED TO ADD MUCH TO
ANYTHING THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN
SAID. I DO WANT TO EMPHASIZE
THE MISLEADING NATURE OF THE
CLAIM THAT PLANTING NEW TREES
IS THE EQUIVALENT OF PROTECT
THINK THE TREE CANOPY. YES, W
NEED MANY MORE TREES. LOTS OF
TREE PLANTING. THEY DO NOT GRO
SUFFICIENTLY QUICKLY ENOUGH TO
PERFORM THE JOB THAT WE NEED T
GET DONE BOTH IN TERMS OF
PROTECTING RESIDENT AND IN
TERMS OF FIGHTING CLIMATE
CHANGE. I THINK IT IS CLEAR
THAT CONCERNS ABOUT AFFORDABLE
HOUSING ARE NOT WHAT IS REALLY
AT STAKE HERE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS STEVE.
>> MY NAME IS STEVE. I SUPPORT
THE NEED FOR FURTHER REVIEW OF
THIS ORDINANCE. I HAVE A COUPL
OF QUESTIONS, WHO HAS URBAN
FORCED HER EXPERTISE IN THE
CITY? ASKING THE BUILDING
DEPARTMENT WHOSE PRIORITY IS
HELPING BUILDERS BUILD IS A
MISTAKE. WE NEED URBAN FORCED
THEIRS IN THE CITY TO BE HELPIN
MAKE THOSE DECISIONS. WE NEED A
NEW DEPARTMENT WITH AN URBAN
FORESTRY DIVISION. RELYING
HEAVILY ON MASTER BUILDERS, BU
NOT IN THEIR FORESTRY
COMMISSION. FOR EXAMPLE, THERE
IS NO PLAN TO REACH 30% TREE
CANOPY DESPITE ALL THE TALK
ABOUT IT. IT IS JUST A GOAL FOR
2037. I ASK THAT NO MATTER WHA
HAPPENS THAT THIS COUNCIL BE
OPEN TO NEW INFORMATION AND MAK
DECISIONS BASED ON THAT ,
TRYING TO PROTECT EXISTING
TREES. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS SUSAN.
>> THAT AFTERNOON. I'M SUSAN
WARD. ALONG THE MULTIPLE
AMENDMENTS IS THE ONE ALLOWING
85% LOT COVERAGE FOR BUILDINGS
IN LOWRISE ZONES. UP TO 100%.
HOW DOES THIS FIT INTO THE TREE
CODE? IT DOESN'T. HOW DOES THI
PROTECT TREES? IT DOESN'T.
THOSE WILL BE CLEAR-CUT IN
DEVELOPMENT, AND THEIR NEW
CATEGORIES WON'T SAVE THEM.
THERE WAS AN AMENDMENT TO REMOV
THIS PROVISION. YOU AND THE
COMMITTEE VOTED IT DOWN. THEY
MAKE UP 45% OF THE CITY TREES.
THEY ARE THE EVENTUAL
REPLACEMENTS FOR THE TREES. YOU
ALL KNOW WE ARE FEELING GLOBAL
WARMING ALREADY. YOU ALL KNOW
THAT MATURE TREES PROVIDE SOME
OF OUR GREATEST DEFENSES AGAINS
IT. I WON'T REPEAT WHAT YOU
ALREADY KNOW. SEATTLE LOST 255
ACRES OF TREES IN THE FIVE YEAR
BETWEEN 2016-2021. THE NEW TRE
CODE AS IT IS NOW WILL
ACCELERATE THAT.
>> THANK YOU. THE NEXT PERSON
UP IS RICHARD ELLISON.
>> HELLO, COUNCILMAN . MY NAME
IS RICHARD. I WANT TO THANK
ALEX FOR DOING A GREAT JOB
TRYING TO HELP SAVE TREES. IF
YOU ARE GENERALLY INTERESTED IN
HELPING TREES, IT IS A
NO-BRAINER TO REQUIRE TREE
SURVEYS BEFORE THE BUILDING
PERMIT IS ISSUED. NOT HAVE A
GUARANTEED 85 OR 100% HARD
SCAPE. WHY IS IT SO HARD TO
LISTEN TO YOUR URBAN FORESTRY
COMMISSION? THE FOUNDER ONE
SAID, NO PLACE FOR BIG TREES.
THAT IS PRETTY MUCH WHAT WE ARE
PROPOSING HERE. THIS IS A
NATURE PROTECTION ORDINANCE,
THIS IS A CLEARCUTTING
ORDINANCE. IT IS AN OUTRAGE. I
GUARANTEES THAT THERE IS NO
PLACE FOR SHADE, NO PLACE FOR
KIDS TO PLAY, NO PLACE TO LIVE
EXCEPT FOR A CONCRETE JUNGLE.
WELCOME TO THE NEW SEATTLE.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, EVERYBODY
FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. WE HAV
REACHED THE END OF BOTH THE 60
MINUTES ALLOTTED AT THE
BEGINNING AND THE ADDITIONAL 1
MINUTES THAT WE ADDED FOR
ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS. WE WILL
NEED TO MOVE ON AND CLOSE
PUBLIC COMMENT. AGAIN, THANK
YOU EVERYBODY FOR YOUR COMMENTS
TODAY. MOVING ON TO ITEM E ON
THE AGENDA, ADOPTION OF THE
INTRODUCTION REFERRAL CALENDAR.
IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION, THE
INTRODUCTION AND REFERRAL
CALENDAR WILL BE ADOPTED.
HEARING NO OBJECTION, THE
INTRODUCTION AND REFERRAL
CALENDAR IS ADOPTED. MOVING ON
TO ITEM F, ADOPTION OF THE
AGENDA. IF THERE IS NO
OBJECTION, THE AGENDA WILL BE
ADOPTED. HEARING AND SEEING NO
OBJECTION, THE AGENDA IS
ADOPTED. MOVING ON TO ITEM G O
THE AGENDA, WHICH IS THE
ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT
CALENDAR, WE WILL NOW CONSIDER
THE PROPOSED CALENDAR. I WILL
QUICKLY GO THROUGH THE ITEMS ON
THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THEY
INCLUDE THE MINUTES FROM THE MA
16th 2023 MEETING. THE PAYROLL
BILL, COUNCIL BUILT 1205
NINE. SEVERAL APPOINTMENTS,
INCLUDING ONE APPOINTMENT TO
THE SEATTLE PUBLIC LIBRARY BOAR
OF TRUSTEES , ANSON APPOINTMENT
TO THE SEATTLE CENTER ADVISORY
COMMISSION. THOSE ARE BROUGHT
TO US BY THE PUBLIC ASSET AND
HOMELESS COMMISSION. ONE
APPOINTMENT TO THE FREIGHT
ADVISORY BOARD FOR APPOINTMENT
TO THE LEVY TO MOVE SEATTLE
OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. FOUR TO
THE SEATTLE PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY
BOARD. ONE TO THE SEATTLE
SCHOOL TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
THOSE HAVE COME TO US FROM THE
TRANSPORTATION AND SEATTLE
PUBLIC UTILITY COMMITTEE. THOS
ARE THE ITEMS ON TODAY'S CONSEN
CALENDAR. ARE THERE ANY ITEMS
THAT COUNCILMEMBERS WOULD LIKE
TO HAVE REMOVED FROM TODAY'S
CONSENT CALENDAR? SEEING NONE,
I MOVED TO ADOPT THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. IS THERE A SECOND
CLICK
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU.
>> IS THERE A MOVED TO ADOPT
THE CALENDAR? WITH THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE
ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT
CALENDAR?
>> [ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
>> SEVEN IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED
>> WITH THE CLERK PLEASE AFFIX
MY SIGNATURE? MOVING ON TO ITE
H ON THE AGENDA TODAY, WE HAVE
COMMITTEE REPORTS. WE FIRST HAV
A COMMITTEE REPORT COMING FROM
FULL COUNCIL. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE READ ITEM ONE INTO THE
RECORD?
>> AGENDA ITEM ONE, COUNCIL
BUILT RELATING TO THIS
REFERRED TO AS THE SECOND
QUARTER 2023 EMPLOYEE
ORDINANCE. RETURNING POSITION
TO THE CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM,
EXEMPTING POSITIONS FROM THE
CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM AND
AMENDING SECTION 4.13 .010 OF
SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE.
>> THANK YOU, I MOVED TO PASS
COUNCIL BILL . IS THERE A
SECOND?
>> THANK YOU. IT IS MOVED AND
SECONDED IT. COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ . IN HER ABSENT,
COUNCILMEMBER -- WILL PRESENT
PERIODS ON BEHALF OF COUNCIL
PRESIDENT JUAREZ, WHO SERVES
ALSO AS THE CHAIR OF OUR
GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE, I WILL
SPEAK BRIEFLY AS VICE CHAIR
ABOUT COUNCIL BILL , WHICH IS
THE SECOND QUARTER 2023
EMPLOYMENT ORDINANCE. AS WE
KNOW, IT AUTHORIZES PERSONAL
ACTIONS THROUGH QUARTERLY
EMPLOYMENT ORDINANCES. WITH
THIS SECOND QUARTER 2023
EMPLOYMENT ORDINANCE, THEY WILL
AUTHORIZE THE DIRECTOR TO
CHANGE THREE POSITIONS TO CIVIL
SERVICE STATUS . AND IT WILL
CHANGE EIGHT CIVIL SERVICE
POSITIONS TO EXEMPT STATUS.
THIS EMPLOYMENT ORDINANCE WOULD
ALSO REMOVE THE POSITIONS OF TH
ADMINISTRATIVE STATUS ASSISTANC
AND ANALYST FROM SPD . THIS IS
AS NOTED BY THE CENTRAL STAFF,
THIS IS A STANDARD TYPE OF
QUARTERLY EMPLOYMENT ORDINANCE.
I WILL THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR
YOUR SUPPORT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? SEEING
NONE, WITH THE CLERK PLEASE CAL
THE ROLL ON THE PASSAGE OF THE
BILL?
>> [ ROLL BEING CALLED ]
>> SEVEN IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED
>> WITH THE CLERK THESE AFFIX
MY SIGNATURE TO THE LEGISLATION
ON MY BEHALF? NEXT, MOVING TO
THE REPORTS FROM THE LAND-USE
COMMITTEE. ITEM TWO. WITH THE
CLERK PLEASE READ ITEM TWO INTO
THE RECORD.
>> REPORT OF THE LAND-USE
COMMITTEE, A GIANT HIM -- AGEND
ITEM NUMBER TWO. AN ORDINANCE
RELATING TO TREE PROTECTION FO
BALANCING THE NEED FOR HOUSING
PRODUCTION AND INCREASING TREE
PROTECTIONS, AND AMENDING
SECTION 23.40 4.020, 23.478 .
16, 23.48.0 FOR THE FIVE,
23.70 6.004, 23.70 6.006, AND
CHAPTER 25.11 OF THE SEATTLE
MUNICIPAL CODE. THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDS THE CITY COUNCIL PAS
THE AMENDED COUNCIL BILL.
>> YOU ARE RECOGNIZED IN ORDER
TO ADDRESS THIS ITEM.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HERBOLD, MAY
MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE?
>> I THINK PROCEDURALLY, WE WIL
HEAR FROM THE SPONSOR FIRST.
THEN WHEN I ASKED FOR COMMENTS
THEN THAT WILL BE THE TIME FOR
YOU TO MAKE A MOTION TO
POSTPONE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT
PRO TEM. IT IS GOOD TO SEE SO
MANY OF YOU IN THIS CHAMBER
TODAY. I WILL GIVE SOME REMARKS
RIGHT NOW REGARDING BOTH THIS
COUNCIL BILL 120534, THE
TREATMENT TREE PROTECTION BILL
, AND THE NEXT BILL ON TODAY'S
AGENDA, WHICH IS THE TREE
PROTECTION BUDGET
APPROPRIATIONS. FIRST, WE WILL
START WITH A BIT OF HISTORY.
THIS BILL WAS INTRODUCED ON
MARCH 21st. I INVITED COLLEAGUE
TO THE COMMITTEE. WE HAD A
TOTAL OF SIX MEETINGS, PLUS ONE
PUBLIC HEARING FOR A TOTAL OF
SEVEN MEETINGS THAT WERE ALMOST
EXCLUSIVELY DEDICATED TO THIS
BILL. THAT IS EXCEPT FOR ONE
LEGALLY REQUIRED BILL TO PASS I
THE TIMEFRAME. WE EXTENDED THE
TIME BY AN ADDITIONAL WEEK AND
HAVE PROVIDED MORE TIME SINCE
THE BILL HAS PASSED OUT OF
COMMITTEE. WE PASSED THE TREE
PROTECTION BILL OUT OF COMMITTE
ON MAY 4th AFTER A SIX HOUR
LONG COMMITTEE MEETING WHERE WE
HAD OVER 50 MINUTES TO DISCUSS
WE ONLY TAKE UP THIS LEVEL OF
POLICY DURING BUDGET. WE HAD T
MIRROR THE PROCESS TO ACCOMPLIS
THIS. THIS IS WHY MM IT'S AT
FULL COUNCIL ARE NOT WELCOME.
WE HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO
HAVE ALL COUNCILMEMBERS
PARTICIPATE AHEAD OF THE
DEADLINE. AND THE AMOUNT OF
AMENDMENTS THAT THEY ARE JUST
NOT APPROPRIATING HERE COUNCIL
THIS HAS BEEN KNOWN FOR SOME
TIME. THIS HAS BEEN BEFORE THE
PUBLIC FOR 2 MONTHS FOR A TOTAL
OF 63 DAYS. THE EFFECTIVE DATE
FOR THIS IS 60 DAYS, WHICH IS
DOUBLE THE TYPICAL TIMELINE. WE
ALSO EXTENDED IT FOR A BILL
MOVES OUT OF COMMITTEE TO FULL
COUNCIL, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN
FIVE DAYS. WE INCREASED IT TO
19 DAYS. ALMOST FOUR TIMES THE
REGULAR SCHEDULE. I HAVE HEARD
THE CALLS FOR THE DELAY. I DO
NOT BELIEVE DELAYING THE
PASSAGE OF THIS BILL IS PRUDENT
AT THIS TIME FOR SEVERAL
REASONS. THE THREAT OF
INCREASED CUTTING AHEAD OF
RESOLUTIONS IS A THREAT.
DELAYING THIS WILL LEAD TO MOR
TREES BEING CUT DOWN WITHOUT TH
PROTECTIONS IN THIS BILL. WITH
60 DAY IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE,
WE HAVE THE TIME NEEDED TO MAK
CHANGES TO ANY FLAWS SHOULD THE
EXIST. MORE IMPORTANTLY,
CREATING PUBLIC POLICY IS AN
PROCESS , MEANING WE CAN DRAFT
CLEANUP BILLS IN THE FUTURE. I'
OPEN TO WORKING WITH THE
FORESTRY COMMISSION , ADDRESSIN
CONCERNS TO CLEANUP LEGISLATION
THESE ARE NOT JUST WORDS. WE
REGULARLY PASS THESE BILLS.
LAST YEAR WE PASSED THE
REGISTRATION, AND THIS YEAR WE
FOLLOWED UP WITH A CLEANUP
REGISTRATION. THIS IS BASED ON
FEEDBACK. THIS WAS ACCOMPLISHED
BEFORE THE ITEMS HAD
UNINTENTIONALLY CAUSED HARM.
KNOW MY COLLEAGUES DO NOT WANT
TO SIT APPEAR AND PASS PUBLIC
POLICY THAT CREATES ON. WE KNOW
THAT SOMETIMES BEST EFFORTS
PRESENT REQUIRED CHANGES. IF W
DELAY THE FILE PASSAGE, WE WIL
NOT ENACT THE IMPORTANT TREE
PROTECTIONS I HAVE BEEN WAITIN
FOR FOR A HALF OF A DECADE. SOM
OTHERS HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR 2
DECADES. HAVING A BUDGET LEVEL
IN THE CONVERSATION IN FULL
COUNCIL WILL NOT BE PRODUCTIVE.
SENDING THIS BILL BACK TO
COMMITTEE AT THIS TIME WILL
CREATE MORE HARM THAN BENEFIT.
THE SCHEDULE WILL NOT ALLOW US
TO TAKE US FOR THE CONSIDERATIO
FOR MANY MONTHS BEYOND JULY.
AGAIN, WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY T
PASS CLEANUP LEGISLATION MOVING
FORWARD. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT
THIS BILL SPECIFICALLY. THE
CURRENT CODE WITHOUT THIS ONLY
PROTECTS APPROXIMATELY 17,000
TREES. THIS NEW ORDINANCE
EXPANDS PROTECTION TO A TOTAL
OF 175,000 TREES. THAT IS A
REALLY BIG DIFFERENCE. THAT IS
A HIGH NUMBER OF TREES THAT ARE
NOT PROTECTED TODAY. TIER ONE
TREES REPLACE HERITAGE TREES
THAT CAN ONLY BE REMOVED FOR
HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS. IF THE
TIER ONE TREES ARE HAZARDOUS ,
IT MUST BE REPLACED. THIS IS A
NEW REQUIREMENT . TIER TWO
TREES ARE REPLACING EXCEPTIONA
TREES. I KNOW THERE IS
DISAGREEMENT ABOUT WHAT WE CALL
THEM. THE FACT OF THE MATTER,
WE ARE ADDING PROTECTIONS TO
THESE TREES. WE ARE ALSO
LOWERING THE THRESHOLD WHERE
SMALLER TREES GET PROTECTED .
THAT IS THE EASIEST WAY TO SAY
IT. PREVIOUSLY, THEY HAD TO BE
30 INCHES IN DIAMETER STANDARD
HEIGHT . WITH THIS LEGISLATION,
IT IS NOW 24 INCHES DIAMETER
STANDARD HEIGHT. TREE GROWS AR
NOT PROTECTED UNDER TIER TWO
TREES STANDARDS , NO MATTER
THEIR SIZE. THAT WAS AN
AMENDMENT THAT I HELPED PASS.
TIER TREE THREES WILL BE TREES
THAT ARE 12 INCHES TO 24 INCHES
IN DIAMETER. THEY WILL NEED TO
BE REPLACED ON SITE IF REMOVED,
OR IF THE PROPERTY OWNER --
TIER FOUR TREES ARE BETWEEN SIX
INCHES AND 12 INCHES IN
DIAMETER. REQUIRING THAT THESE
BE DELINEATED AND SHOWN ON
PROPOSALS. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE
MORE PROTECTIONS. WE DIDN'T GET
THERE IN THIS BILL. WE ARE NOW
SETTING THE FRAMEWORK TO ADD
PROTECTIONS IN THE FUTURE. WITH
REPLACEMENT, THIS LEGISLATION
REQUIRES THE TIER TWO AND THRE
TREES THAT ARE REMOVED DO TO
DEVELOPMENT MUST BE REPLACED B
ONE OR MORE TREES. THEY MUST B
ROUGHLY PROPORTIONATE TO WHAT I
REMOVED. IT ALSO ADDS FIVE YEA
MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE
REQUIREMENTS. THE REMOVAL IS
PER MOVE -- UNLESS THE REMOVA
IS APPROVED BY FUTURE PERMIT ,
WHICH STILL TAKES INTO
CONSIDERATION THE FACT THAT THE
HAD TO BE REPLACED. THE
DEVELOPMENT AREA SHOWN DID NOT
INCLUDE THE PARCEL CONTAINING
BIO DIVERSE AREA OR CORRIDOR,
OR A PRIORITY HABITAT, PRIORITY
SETBACK, WETLAND, BUFFER, OR
STEEP SLOPE EROSION AREA.
>>> AND THIS WILL HELP FUND
PLANTING AND MAINTENANCE
PROGRAMMING AROUND THE CITY.
REGARDING TREE PROTECTION AREAS
THE TREE PROTECTION AREA IS
REQUIRED FOR ALL EXISTING TIER
ONE, TIER TWO, AND TIER THREE
TREES THAT ARE NOT REMOVED
DURING DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS
ANY TREE LOCATED OFF SITE ON
PRIVATE PROPERTY. A CLEAR
DESCRIPTION FOR DETERMINING THE
TREE PROTECTION AREA WHICH SHAL
BE DETERMINED BASED ON THE
SPECIES TOLERANE AND
EXPECTATIONS OF IMPACT OF
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. SIZE,
AGE, HEALTH, AND SOIL
CONDITIONS. IT ALSO INDICATES
THAT THE TREE PROTECTION AREA
WILL BE A STATIC NUMBER
DETERMINED BY THE TRUNK DIAMETE
METHOD. FOR EVERY ONE INCH OF
THE TREE, THE REQUIREMENT IS FO
ONE-FOOT RADIUS AROUND THE TREE
THIS WAS A CHANGE MADE IN
COMMITTEE. MADE IN REALTIME
THROUGH PARTNERSHIP WITH COUNCI
MEMBERS WITH MY PARTNERS HERE.
PROPERTIES GOING
UNDERDEVELOPMENT, A TREE
PROTECTION AREA WILL ALSO BE
REQUIRED FOR TREES LOCATED OFF
THE SITE AND NEWLY PLANTED
TREES. THIS WAS ANOTHER ONE OF
MY AMENDMENTS. IF A TREE IS ON
THE PROPERTY LINE AND HAS ROOTS
OR BRANCHES EXTENDING INTO THE
PROPERTY DEVELOPED, THAT TREE
HAS TO HAVE A TREE PROTECTION
AREA. THIS IS SOMETHING WE
INCLUDED DURING THE AMENDMENT
PROCESS. THE SECTION DOES
REPLACE CURRENT FLOOR AREA
RATIO. WITH BUILDING STANDARDS
AND LOW RISE AND MID RISE ZONES
THAT ALLOW FOR HARD ALLOWANCES
OF 85% OF THE COVERAGE. I HAVE
HEARD A LOT OF CONVERSATION
ABOUT THIS TODAY. I WANT TO BE
VERY CLEAR THAT THESE, THIS
PERCENTAGE IS BASED UPON WHAT
THE CITY REQUIRES BUILDERS TO
PROVIDE. WE ARE NOT CHANGING TH
SIZE OF THE BUILDINGS ALLOWED O
THE SITES. WE ARE SIMPLY TAKING
INTO CONSIDERATION BEYOND THE
FACT OF THE FLOOR AREA RATIO AN
THE BUILDING SITE COVERAGE WHIC
IS ONLY ABOUT 30 OR 35%, THE
CITY REQUIRES AMENITIES. COMMON
SPACE WHETHER IT IS BENCHES OR
PICNIC TABLES. REQUIRES PARKING
REQUIRES WALKWAYS. IT REQUIRES
ALL SORTS OF THINGS. AND
LANDSCAPING. UNDER CURRENT CODE
THERE IS NO FLEXIBILITY TO
ADJUST THESE AMENITY
REQUIREMENTS. UNDER CURRENT
CODE, A BUILDER COULD BE
REQUIRED TO TAKE OUT A TREE AND
REPLACE IT WITH LANDSCAPING. OR
REPLACE IT WITH A PICNIC BENCH.
THIS ISN'T OKAY, WHAT I PROVIDE
ALLOWS GREATER FLEXIBILITY FOR
BUILDERS TO REDUCE THESE
AMENITIES THAT THE CITY
REQUIRES. IN ORDER TO PRESERVE
TREES. I WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT
THAT AGAIN. THE AMENDMENTS I
HAVE PROVIDED ALLOW FOR THESE
AMENITIES TO BE REDUCED IN ORDE
TO PRESERVE TREES. BUILDERS HAV
ANOTHER OPTION. THEY COULD CUT
DOWN THE TREE AND THEY WOULD
HAVE TO PAY THE FEE WHICH AGAIN
EATS INTO THEIR PROFITS OR
INCREASES THE COST OF HOUSING.
UNDER CURRENT CODE TODAY, WE AS
CITY POLICY ARE SAYING WE SHOUL
WE SHOULD PRIORITIZE A PICNIC
BENCH OR A TREE. THIS
LEGISLATION BEFORE US CHANGES
THAT. IN ADDITION TO TREES ON
PRIVATE PROPERTY, THIS
LEGISLATION REQUIRES TREES ARE
PLANTED IN THE RIGHT OF WAY IN
SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND BUILDIN
CONDITIONS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES
STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR
DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD ADD ONE
OR MORE PRINCIPLE DWELLING UNIT
ON A LOT. EXISTING TREES SHALL
BE RETAINED UNLESS THE DIRECTOR
OF TRANSPORTATION APPROVES THEI
STREET TREE REMOVAL. IF IT IS
NOT FEASIBLE TO PLANT THEM IN
THE RIGHT OF WAY, PARKING STRIP
PLANTING STRIP, WHATEVER YOU
WANT TO CALL THAT STRIP, A FIVE
FOOT SETBACK SHALL BE PLANTED
FOR THE STREET TREES ALONG THE
INSIDE LOT OF THE FRONT YARD.
ONE STREET TREE IS REQUIRED FOR
EVERY 500 SQUARE FEET OVER THE
FIRST THOUSAND. OF ADDITIONAL
STRUCTURE WITH UP TO A MAXIMUM
NUMBER OF TREES THAT WOULD BE
REQUIRED UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
TIER ONE TREES MAY NOT BE
REMOVED. UNLESS IN EMERGENCY
SITUATIONS, OR THEY ARE
HAZARDOUS. UNDER CURRENT CODE,
THEY ARE NOT REQUIRED TO BE
REPLACED. THIS LEGISLATION
RESTRICTS THE REMOVAL OF ALL
TIER 2 TREES. REMOVAL OF A TIER
2 TREE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THA
CONSTRUCTION OR SAFETY IS NOW
PROHIBITED. WHAT WE HAVE SEEN
FROM THE CANOPY REPORT IS THAT
THE MAJORITY OF OUR CANOPY LOSS
IS OCCURRING IN SINGLE FAMILY
HOMES NOT IN DEVELOPMENT. THIS
STOPS THAT PRACTICE FROM
OCCURRING. THIS LEGISLATION
ADJUSTS THE REMOVAL LIMIT. UNDE
CURRENT CODE TODAY, THE
HOMEOWNER AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL AND A SINGLE FAMILY
NEIGHBORHOOD COULD REMOVE NINE
TREES OVER A PERIOD OF THREE
YEARS. THIS LEGISLATION CHANGES
THAT TO TWO TREES. OVER NINE
YEARS, WITH THE CANOPY
ASSESSMENT THAT WAS PROVIDED TO
THE CITY, NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL AND SINGLE FAMILY
HOMES OUTSIDE OF DEVELOPMENT IS
EXACTLY WHERE WE ARE
EXPERIENCING THE HIGHEST RATE O
LOSS. WE ALSO UPDATE THE
HAZARDOUS TREE REMOVAL
REGULATION. SO THAT THEY ARE
MORE IN LINE WITH CURRENT
INDUSTRY STANDARDS FOR TREE RIS
ASSESSMENT EVALUATION. THE OTHE
CHANGE FROM THE CURRENT CODE IS
THE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT THAT
HAZARDOUS TREES, THAT ARE THE 1
INCHES IN DIAMETER OR MORE MUST
BE REPLACED. TODAY THERE IS A
LOOPHOLE BEING USED AND ABUSED
AND THAT LOOPHOLE IS HAVING
PEOPLE COME IN, DETERMINED THAT
A TREE IS HAZARDOUS WHEN IT IS
NOT. AND IT CAN BE CUT DOWN
WITHOUT ANY REPLACEMENT. WITHOU
ANY PAVEMENT. THIS BILL DOES
ALLOW FOR TREE TO BE REMOVED OR
PRUNED. PEOPLE WANT THEIR VIEWS
FOR THE PROPERTY OR INCREASED
MARKET VALUE OR SPAN THE
POTENTIAL FOR DEVELOPMENT. OR
WAS THE RESULT OF NEGLIGENCE BY
A CONTRACTOR. THE AMOUNT, THE
PENALTY AMOUNT WOULD BE TRIPLED
AS PUNITIVE DAMAGES. THAT'S WHA
I'M TALKING ABOUT HERE.
>> PLEASE NO COMMENTS.
>> AND WE MUST PAST THESE
PROTECTIONS THAT SO MANY OF US
HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR. ALSO A
COVENANT SHALL BE REQUIRED WITH
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. THE
PROTECTION ZONE FOR TIER ONE,
TWO, AND THREE TREES. AND A
SURVEY IS REQUIRED FOR FUTURE
DEVELOPMENT. PROCESS CHANGES
REGARDING TIER ONE, TWO, THREE,
FOUR TREES INCLUDING OFF SITE
TWO, THREE, FOUR, AND TREES WIT
CANOPIES OVERHANGING AND OR
ROOTS EXTENDING ONTO A LOT ARE
REQUIRED TO BE DOCUMENTED ON AL
PLAN REVIEW SHEETS WITHIN A PLA
SET SUBMITTED FOR THE MASTER US
PERMIT OR BUILDING PERMIT. TREE
PROTECTION AREAS DETERMINED FOR
ALL TIER ONE, TWO, THREE TREES
THAT WILL BE RETAINED DURING
DEVELOPMENT ARE REQUIRED TO BE
IDENTIFIED ON THE SITE PLANS.
SITE PLANS ARE REQUIRED TO
INCLUDE ANY EXISTING TREE IN IT
ROOT PROTECTION AREA THAT IS
DOCUMENTED TO BE RETAINED BY A
PREVIOUS MASTER USE PERMIT OR
BUILDING PERMIT. FOR THE
DEVELOPMENTS THAT RESTRICT AT
LEAST 40% OF RENTAL UNITS TO
OCCUPANCIES THAT ARE 60% AREA
MEDIAN INCOME OR LESS ARE ABLE
TO INCREASE THEIR FLEXIBILITY
REGARDING THE AMENITIES I SPOKE
ABOUT. BECAUSE WHAT WE KNOW IS
THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
ARE USING PUBLIC DOLLARS TO
BUILD THE HOUSING THAT WE
DESPERATELY NEED. AND WE ARE
GIVING THEM EVEN ADDITIONAL
PROTECTIONS BECAUSE WE KNOW THA
WE NEED TO HAVE THE TREES AT
THESE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS.
CLIFF CAWTHORNE WAS HERE
EARLIER. HE WORKS FOR HABITAT
FOR HUMANITY. AND THEY DID A
DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE ROUTE THA
I WALKED HOME FROM MIDDLE
SCHOOL. HAS BEAUTIFUL TREES AND
THERE WAS A CHOICE MADE TO
PROTECT THE TREES THERE. THAT
RESULTED IN ONE FEWER UNITS.
WHILE IT MIGHT NOT SEEM LIKE ON
FEWER UNITS IS A BIG DEAL. THAT
IS ONE FEWER FAMILY THAT IS ABL
TO OWN A HOME AT AN AFFORDABLE
RATE AND CREATE GENERATIONAL
WELT AND EQUITY. IT CREATES A
NICER HABITAT FOR EVERYONE
LIVING IN THAT SPACE. I WANT TO
SEE INCREASED PLANTINGS AND THI
BILL DOES THAT. I WILL TELL YOU
THAT THERE WERE A LOT OF THINGS
I WANTED THIS BILL TO DO THAT I
DIDN'T GET TO ACHIEVE. THAT'S
WHY I WANT TO CONTINUE WORKING
WITH YOU TO CONTINUE THIS
PROCESS. FOR SOME, THEY HAVE
BEEN WORKING ON THIS BILL FOR 2
YEARS. ONE OF THE THINGS I
WANTED TO WORK ON IS THE
EXPANSION OF SPU'S TREES FOR
NEIGHBORHOOD PROGRAMS THAT HAS
ALREADY HELPED SEATTLEITES
PLANNED OVER 13,000 TREES IN
THEIR YARDS. I WANT TO SEE SITE
APPROPRIATE TREES. EXCUSE ME, I
HAVE WRITTEN MY NOTES
INCORRECTLY HERE. ONE OF THE
OTHER PLACES THAT WE ARE SEEING
A GREAT AMOUNT OF TREE LOSS IS
ON OUR CITY-OWNED LAND AND
PARKS. AND WE NEED TO ADJUST
THAT. USING IN LIEU FEES WE WIL
BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THAT. AND
WHAT I KNOW IS THAT I WANT TO
SEE THOSE IN LIEU FEES ALSO BEE
PLANTING TREES ON PRIVATE
PROPERTY AS WELL. TREES FOR
NEIGHBORHOODS PROGRAM DOES JUST
THAT. I HAVE HEARD COMMENTS
ABOUT NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
NOT HAVING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
I'LL TELL YOU WHEN I LIVED ON
63rd STREET AND BALLARD, I
WATCHED ORGANICALLY AFFORDABLE
SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TURN TO TOW
HOMES OUT OF REACH IN FAMILIES
THAT I GREW UP WITH. WHAT I
DIDN'T SEE WERE THE DOLLARS THA
WERE PAID INTO MHA THAT WENT
INTO FUNDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING
I KNOW THERE IS A CONVERSATION
ABILITY CREATED IN PLACE. UNITS
ARE IN PLACE. IT IS HARDER TO
TRACK. AND I CAN TELL YOU WHEN
SUCCESSFULLY BROUGHT AFFORDABLE
HOUSING PROJECTS TO DISTRICT
SIX, IT IS WITH THE DOLLARS THA
WERE BORN ON THE BACKS OF PEOPL
BUILDING TOWN HOMES. AND SO WHE
I LIVED ON 63rd AND I SAW THE
TOWN HOMES GO UP ACROSS FROM ME
I DID NOT SEE THE MONEY THAT WA
BEING PAID THAT CREATED THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN MY
NEIGHBORHOOD. I WANT TO TALK
ABOUT SOME OF THE AMENDMENTS
THAT HAVE BEEN PASSED.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, YOU HAD
A GREAT AMENDMENT WITH FINDINGS
FROM THE 2001 TREE PROTECTION
ORDINANCE. TEMPORARY TREE
PROTECTION. MODIFICATIONS TO
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. WE
CLARIFIED THAT THE BASIC TREE
PROTECTION CANNOT BE MODIFIED
WHICH MEANS THAT IT CAN'T BE
SHRUNK. WE USE TRUNK DIAMETER
METHOD. AND THIS WILL HELP THE
SURVIVAL OF TREES. WE ADDED THE
CONSIDERATION OF OFF SITE TREES
AS I MENTIONED THAT ARE ON AND
OWNED. UNFORTUNATELY. THIS IS A
REALITY OF OUR SOCIETY. IS THAT
TREES ARE PRIVATE PROPERTY. AND
WHEN A NEIGHBORING PRIVATE
PROPERTY OWNER HAS A TREE, WE
NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT TREE IS
PROTECTED DURING ANY DEVELOPMEN
AS WELL. WE HAVE REQUIRED SDCI
TO EXAMINE THEIR EXISTING
PROCESSES AND PRACTICES. AND
MAKE MODIFICATIONS. WE HAVE SET
THE MINIMUM IN LIEU FEE AT OVER
$8,000. THIS WOULD ALSO REQUIRE
THAT SDCI MAKE THE LOCATION.
PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE ONLINE
MAPPING TOOL BY NEXT YEAR. THE
REASON THAT I SET THAT TO THE
LEGISLATION A NUMBER OF MONTHS
AGO IS BECAUSE I WANT TO ADD
MORE THINGS TO BE REQUIRED ON
THAT PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE MAP.
AND RATHER THAN ASK SDCI TO DO
IT MULTIPLE TIMES, WE SET A TIM
LINE THAT WAS REASONABLE TO MAK
THESE OTHER ADDITION. REGISTERE
TREE SERVICE PROVIDERS THAT AR
ISSUED TWO NOTICES OF ANY
REGULATED TREE BE REMOVED FROM
THE REGISTRY. WE HAVE STATED TH
COUNCIL'S INTENT THAT SDCI
IDENTIFY OPTIONS TO REDUCE THE
FINANCIAL IMPACT OF COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH REMOVAL OF
HAZARD TREES ON HOUSEHOLDS THAT
ARE AT OR BELOW 80% AREA MEDIAN
INCOME. WE MAINTAINED AND
EXPANDED ACCESS AND PROVIDED
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO SPU TO
EXPAND THEIR TREE FOR
NEIGHBORHOOD PROGRAM. WE CREATE
A CULTURALLY APPROPRIATE
PARTICULAR TO PROVIDE RESIDENTS
OF TREE SERVICE PROVIDERS AND
PROVIDERS OF THE UPDATED TREE
REGULATIONS. WE HAVE REQUESTED
THE EXECUTIVE IDENTIFIED THE
CAUSES OF TREE LOSS ON CITY
OWNED AND CITY MANAGED PROPERTY
AND PROPOSED POTENTIAL
IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CITY'S
EFFORTS TO INCREASE TREE CANOPY
AND MAINTAIN EXISTING TREES ON
CITY OWNED AND CITY MANAGED
PROPERTY THANKS TO COUNCILMEMBE
NELSON. WE REQUESTED THE CITY
OFFICE FOR LEGISLATION FOR THE
2024 PROPOSED BUDGET THAT WOULD
ESTABLISH A FUND TO RECEIVE IN
LIEU FEES AND OTHER GRANT
DONATION REVENUES RECEIVED BY
THE CITY RELATED TO PROTECTING
OUR CITY'S CANOPIES. WE HAVE
CREATED AN INDEPENDENT URBAN
FORESTRY DIVISION WITH DEDICATE
STAFF WHILE IT IS SDCI. THE
SIGNS URBAN FORESTRY OF THE
OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY AND
ENVIRONMENT. AGAIN, MY AMENDMEN
THAT THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDED
IT ALSO CLARIFIES THAT THE RISK
ASSESSMENT BE DETERMINED WITH
ARBORCULTURE AND TREE ISER VIS
PROVIDERS ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE
EITHER AN EMPLOYEE OR PERSON ON
RETAINER WHO IS CURRENTLY
CREDENTIALED WITH AN ASI
QUALIFICATION. IT ADDS PATHOGEN
TO THE PROPOSED EXEMPTION FOR
TREES INFESTED WITH INSECTS OR
PESTS AND EXEMPTIONS THE REMOVA
OF DEAD TREES FROM SOME OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR HAZARDOUS TREE
REMOVALS. WE DO ALLOW TREE
REMOVAL TO IMPROVE ACCESS FOR
ELDERLY PEOPLE WITH
DISABILITIES. AND WE PROHIBIT
APPLICATIONS FOR NEW
DEVELOPMENTS ON SITE WITH AN
ACTIVE TREE CODE NOTICE OF
VIOLATION. THIS IS SOMETHING
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN AND I
PARTNERED ON. THIS CAME FROM A
DIRECT EXPERIENCE I HAD WHILE
AGAIN LIVING ON 63rd STREET AND
BALLARD WHEN I WATCHED A
NEIGHBOR CUT DOWN A BEAUTIFUL
TREE BECAUSE IT REQUIRED THE
BUILDING OF TOWN HOMES. AND IT
IS OKAY IN SOME WAYS IF THIS IS
DONE LEGALLY. BUT WHAT WE HAD I
THE ORIGINAL BILL WAS A
LOOPHOLE. AND WE WORKED TO CLOS
THAT LOOPHOLE. WE ALSO MODIFIED
THE PURPOSE, AND COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR
AMENDMENT REQUIRING THE REMOVAL
OF INVASIVE SPECIES. WHERE WE
ARE IN HISTORY NOW IS A
TRANSITION POINT FROM A CLIMATE
THAT WE HAVE EXPERIENCED FOR
HUNDREDS OF YEARS AND IT IS MUC
HOTTER, TREES THAT TYPICALLY
SURVIVE MAY NOT SOON. WE NEED T
TAKE OUT THE INVASIVE SPECIES
THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO THE
COMMUNITY THE LAST 200 YEARS AN
WE NEED TO PLANT TREES THAT ARE
APPROPRIATE FOR OUR REGION AND
THAT WILL SURVIVE CLIMATE
CHANGE. AGAIN, I DIDN'T GET
EVERYTHING I WANTED. I KNOW THA
THERE ARE MORE OPPORTUNITIES
CONTINUE TO WORK TO PROTECT
TREES. BUT I WILL TELL YOU WE D
NEED TO PROTECT TREES. WE WILL
EXPERIENCE GREATER AMOUNTS OF
TREE CUTTING BEFORE THE
PROTECTIONS, REPLACEMENT
REQUIREMENTS AND FEES FOR
CUTTING TREES ARE PUT IN PLACE.
WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONTINUE
WORKING TOGETHER TO INCREASE
TREE PROTECTIONS. EVEN AFTER
THIS BILL IS PASSED. BECAUSE WE
HAVE THAT ABILITY IF WE PASS
THIS BILL TODAY BECAUSE WE DON'
HAVE THE TIME TO TAKE THIS BILL
BACK TO COMMITTEE AND TAKE UP
ALL OF THESE ISSUES AGAIN. WHAT
WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO
TODAY IS PASS THIS ROUND OF
PROTECTION. AND TAKE UP
REMAINING ISSUES ON THE SIDE.
THROUGH CLEANUP LEGISLATION. WE
WILL NEVER PASS TREE
PROTECTIONS. THIS HAS BEEN THE
HISTORY FOR THE LAST 25 YEARS.
THIS POLICY ISSUE HAS BEEN
CONSTIPATED. MEANINGFUL
PROTECTIONS HAVE NOT BEEN PLACE
PAST IN DECADES OF WORK. I KNOW
IN MY TIME, I PUSHED THIS
LEGISLATION FIVE YEARS IN GOOD
FAITH AND I REMAIN AT THE TABLE
AS A PARTNER CONTINUING THIS
IMPORTANT WORK. THIS IS NOT OUR
ONLY OPPORTUNITY AND THIS IS NO
THE LAST TIME WE TALK ABOUT TRE
PROTECTIONS. AND IF WE NEED TO
PASS CLEANUP LEGISLATION, WE
WILL. THIS BILL IS NOT THE LAST
OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE THESE
IMPORTANT PROTECTIONS. RATHER
IT'S THE FIRST BIG PUSH FOR
THREE PROTECTIONS IN OVER THE
YEARS. WE HAVE MORE
OPPORTUNITIES TO WORK TOGETHER.
AND THE INSISTENCE. WE HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO PASS IMPORTANT
PROTECTIONS TODAY AND CONTINUE
WORKING TOGETHER TO ADD MORE
PROTECTIONS AND MAKE
ADJUSTMENTS. CURRENT ISSUES THA
I HEARD THROUGH PUBLIC COMMENT
ABOUT TREES NOT SURVIVING.
TREESBEING MANGLED. TREESNOT
BEING PRESERVED OR IN
DEVELOPMENT. AND THAT THE
LARGEST SOURCE OF OUR CANOPY
REMOVAL IS IN SINGLE FAMILY
NEIGHBORHOODS OUTSIDE OF
DEVELOPMENT. THESE ISSUES ARE
OCCURRING BECAUSE THE
PROTECTIONS IN THIS BILL ARE NO
IN PLACE. IT'S TRUE. I HAVE
INCLUDED URBAN FORESTRY
COMMISSION AND ARBORISTS AT
EVERY SINGLE ONE OF MY COMMITTE
MEETINGS. WE HAVE 60 DAYS BEFOR
THIS BILL IS IMPLEMENTED.
SIMILAR AMOUNT OF TIME THAT
URBAN FORESTRY COMMISSION HAS
SUBMIT FOR REVIEW. WE HAVE TIME
TO IDENTIFY AND FIX THESE
ISSUES. JUST AS WE DID WITH THE
ARBORIST REGISTRATION
LEGISLATION. WE HAVE TAKEN MORE
TIME WITH THIS BILL THAN ANY
OTHER BILL IN MY COMMITTEE
DURING MY TERM. AND I HAVE TAKE
EVERY OPPORTUNITY IN THIS POLIC
DEVELOPMENT. JUST AS THE TREES
MY PARENTS GENERATION PLANTED
CREATED THE CANOPY WE ENJOY
TODAY BECAUSE IF YOU RECALL,
SEATTLE WAS CLEAR CUT. IF YOU
RECALL BALLARD AND FREMONT WERE
TREELESS IN THE 1950s . IF YOU
LOOK AT PHOTOS IT IS A VAST
DIFFERENCE FROM WHAT WE HAVE
TODAY. COLLEAGUES, I GUESS WHER
I WAS GOING WITH THAT IS THAT
TREES PLANTED TODAY CAN AND WIL
CREATE THE CANOPY WE NEED FOR M
CHILDREN TO ENJOY. JUST AS MY
PARENTS DID FOR ME. COLLEAGUES
URGE A YES VOTE ON THIS
LEGISLATION. NOT TO DELAY THIS
LEGISLATION. AND TO CONTINUE
WORKING WITH ME TO PASS THE NEX
ROUND OF PROTECTIONS. THIS ISN'
OUR LAST CHANCE. WE NEED TO
PROTECT TREES TODAY, NOT
TOMORROW. AND WHAT WE HAVE
BEFORE US IS A BALANCED BILL
THAT PROTECTS TREES IN OUR
NEIGHBORHOODS AND DURING
DEVELOPMENT WHILE MAKING THE
SPACE FOR HOUSING OUR CITY. THI
TREE PROTECTION BILL PROTECTS
THE CANOPY WE HAVE TODAY. AND
GROWS THE CANTY MY CHILDREN, MY
GRANDCHILDREN WILL BENEFIT FROM
THANK YOU COLLEAGUES. THAT IS
THE REPORT.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS. BEFORE WE MOVE INTO
DEBATE AND OTHER MOTIONS, I WAN
TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT JUST LIKE
IF OUR COUNCIL PRESIDENT WERE
HERE WITH US, SHE WOULD NOT
ACCEPT ANY DISRUPTIONS OF THIS
DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. AND I WILL
NOT EITHER. WE HAVE COUNCIL
RULES THAT DEFINE WHAT A
DISRUPTION IS. AIN'T INCLUDES
OUTBURSTS FROM MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC. AS WE ARE MOVING INTO
DEBATE ON THIS MEASURE, I DO
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU D
NOT DISRUPT THIS MEETING. ANY
COMMENTS? COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN.
>> THANK YOU. I MOVE TO POSTPON
THIS ITEM, 120-5534 UNTIL THE
LAST TUESDAY IN JULY,
APPROXIMATELY 60 DAYS FROM
TODAY.
>> SECOND.
>> IT IS MOVED AND SECONDED.
AGENDA ITEM 2. COUNCIL BILL
120534 UNTIL JULY 5, 2023.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DATE YOU AR
SUGGESTING, THAT WOULD BE
HELPFUL.
>> THANK YOU. YES. COLLEAGUES,
HAVE FAITH IN THE CITY'S URBAN
FORESTRY COMMISSION WITH THEIR
EXPERTISE AND THEIR CARE. THE
LETTER FROM THE URBAN FORESTRY
COMMISSION DATED MAY 17, 2023
STATED GIVEN THE FLAWED AND
RUSHED PROCESS, THE LIKELIHOOD
OF CANOPY INEQUITIES PERSISTING
THE UFC ASKS THE COUNCIL TO
DEFER VOTING ON THE BILL UNTIL
THE END OF JULY TO ALLOW
COUNCILMEMBER CONVERSATIONS WIT
THE UFC AND OTHER STAKE HOLDERS
COLLEAGUES, PROVIDING MORE TIME
IS IMPORTANT NOT ONLY TO HONOR
THE REQUEST OF A RESPECTED CITY
COMMISSION, BUT ALSO TO HONOR
OUR SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE AS
STATEED IN THE COMMISSION
LETTER, MAY 17. THE MAYOR'S
DRAFT ORDINANCE WAS TRANSMITTED
MARCH 27, 2023. AND REFERRED TO
THE LAND USE COMMITTEE OF MARCH
27, 2023. THESE ACTIONS OCCURRE
WITHOUT PRIOR REVIEW AND
RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE UFC. THI
APPEAR TO BE IN VIOLATION OF
SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE 3.7200.
A.3 WHICH STATES IT IS THE
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE USC TO
PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS. SUS
SUSTAINABILITY AND PROTECTION O
ASSOCIATED TREES. THANK YOU.
>> ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS ON TH
MOTION TO POSTPONE THE AGENDA
ITEM? COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> THANKS SO MUCH COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD. I HAVE CONSIDERED
VOTING FOR THIS CONSULTING WITH
AUDIENCE MEMBERS TODAY. I'M
REACHING OUT WITH CONCERNS OVER
THE PAST WEEK. HAVING DISCUSSED
THIS WITH STAKE HOLDERS,
INCLUDEING THE ADVOCATES IN THI
ROOM, I AM NOT OF THE OPINION
THAT THERE WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT
CHANGES TO THIS ORDINANCE IF IT
WERE DELAYED. AND THE QUESTION
IN FRONT OF THE COUNCIL IS
WHETHER THIS ORDINANCE CAN
COMMAND FIVE VOTES OR WHETHER I
CAN'T. AND IF IT CAN'T, A
PROCESS COULD START OVER. BUT I
DO NOT THINK WAITING WOULD
MATERIALLY CHANGE THE BILL. WE
WOULD BE HERE WITH THE EXACT
SAME CONVERSATION. I THINK THER
WOULD BE ANOTHER REQUEST IN JUL
TO DELAY AGAIN BECAUSE I THINK
THAT THE SUBSTANTIATIVE CHANGES
THAT SOME MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
ARE REQUESTING AND THAT THE
COMMISSION IS REQUESTING WOULD
NOT BE SUFFICIENT IN THAT
INTERIM TO GET THE CONSENSUS
FROM THE PEOPLE REQUESTING A
DELAY. SO FOR THAT REASON, I
THINK THE QUESTION SHOULD BE
CALLED TODAY AND THEN BASED ON
THE RESULT OF THAT, RESULT ON
THE ORDINANCE, THE COUNCIL
SHOULD CONSIDER WHAT THE NEXT
APPROACH WOULD BE. IN REGARD TO
THESE TREE PROTECTIONS. I WILL
SPEAK MORE TO THE ORDINANCE
WHEN, IF THAT MATTERS IN FRONT
OF US. BUT I'M NOT GOING TO BE
VOTING QUESTION FOR A DELAY
TODAY.
>> THANK YOU. OTHER COMMENTS.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> THANK YOU. I THINK I ALREADY
MENTIONED THIS. THERE ARE
SEVERAL REASONS I DON'T BELIEVE
A DELAY TODAY IS PRUDENT. I WIL
AGAIN SAY A 60-DAY
IMPLEMENTATION TIME LINE IS
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS BILL. IF
SERIOUS FLAWS ARE IDENTIFIED, W
ARE HERE TO WORK WITH YOU TO
ENSURE THEY ARE FIXED. WHAT DOE
NOT OCCUR SHOULD A DELAY OCCUR,
THERE IS NO PATHWAY FOR CHANGES
TO BE MADE. JUST REALLY QUITE
CLEARLY. WE WILL END UPRIGHT
BACK TO WHERE WE ARE. WHAT IS O
THE TABLE FOR CONTINUED
PARTNERSHIP COLLABORATION AND
IMPROVEMENTS IS WORKING ON
CLEANUP LEGISLATION. BUT THOSE
ARE TWO DIFFERENT PATHWAYS AND
DON'T SEE WHAT WILL MATERIALLY
CHANGE WITHIN THIS BILL WITH A
DELAY. WE AGAIN ALSO HAVE A
60-DAY, PRETTY SIMILAR AMOUNT O
TIME IMPLEMENTATION TIME LINE
THAT ALLOWS US TO FIX ERRORS
SHOULD THEY EXIST.
>> THANK YOU. A COUPLE OF POINT
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE. I WANT TO
THANK COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS AND
HIS TEAM FOR ALL OF THE WORK PU
IN THROUGH THE LAND USE
COMMITTEE. I'M GRATEFUL WE LIVE
IN A CITY THAT CARE SOS DEEPLY
FOR OUR TREE CANOPY. GETTING
THIS BILL TO US TODAY, IT HAS
BEEN NO SMALL FEAT AND I OFFER
SINCERE GRATITUDE. I WILL
SUPPORT THE MOTION FOR A HOLD,
BUT NOT OUT OF LACK OF RESPECT
FOR THE PROCESS. I DO NOT
BELIEVE THE PROCESS WAS RUSHED
OR LACKING IN DEEP ENGAGEMENT A
WE HAVE SEEN MULTIPLE
DEPARTMENTS WORKING O THIS
PROCESS ALMOST TWO YEARS NOW.
AND WE RECEIVED INFORMATION TO
SHOW HOW DEPARTMENTS HAVE
ENGAGED WITH MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC. COMMITTEE HEARINGS, AN
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARING, AS W
HAVE BEEN TOLD, THIS IS MORE
HEARINGS THAN ANY LEGISLATION
HAS RECEIVED IN SOME TIME. LAND
USE TOPICS ARE VERY TECHNICAL.
FULL OF LANGUAGE AND POLICIES
THAT REQUIRE A DEEPER THAN USUA
KNOWLEDGE OF THE SUBJECT MATTER
SO I'M VERY SYMPATHETIC AND I
UNDERSTAND THE CALLS FOR
ADDITIONAL TIME. MYSELF AFTER
THE COMMITTEE CHAIR REQUESTED
THAT THERE BE NO NEW AMENDMENTS
BROUGHT FORWARD, I RECEIVED
STRONG MESSAGES AND INFORMATION
THAT HAVE LED ME TO BEGIN WORK
ON AN AMENDMENT. THAT I BELIEVE
WOULD SUPPORT STRONGER CANOPY
PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION IN
WHAT ARE REFERRED TO AS THE
ECONOMIC JUSTICE PRIORITY AREAS
UNFORTUNATELY, CENTRAL STAFF AN
I WERE NOT ABLE TO COMPLETE THI
AMENDMENT. IN A TIMELY FASHION
AND BRING IT TO THE COUNCIL IN
THE CURRENT TIME LINE. AND THE
GOAL OF THE AMENDMENT WOULD HAV
BEEN TO SUPPORT THE ALIGNMENT O
THE ORDINANCE WITH OUR VALUES
AND GOALS IN THE GREEN NEW DEAL
RESOLUTION 31895, PRIORITIZING
HISTORICALLY LOW CANOPY AND LOW
INCOME NEIGHBORHOODS WORKING
CLOSELY WITH COMMUNITIES TO
PROTECT AGAINST ECO
GENTRIFICATION. I UNDERSTAND
THAT PLANTING OF TREES IS
PRIORITIZED FOR THESE AREAS. I
WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF WE COULD D
MORE TO ENCOURAGE PRESERVATION
OF TREES IN THIS AREA AS WELL.
ABSOLUTELY UNDERSTAND THAT THE
PARKS NATURAL AREAS THAT CONTAI
14% OF THE AREA'S CANOPY SAW A
RELATIVE LOSS OF OVER 5% AND TH
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL SAW A
LOSS OF # 1.2%. THIS SUGGESTS
THAT DEVELOPMENT HAS A LIMITED
IMPACT ON TREE CANOPY CITY WISE
A LETTER I JUST RECEIVED THIS
AFTERNOON, FROM THE DUAMISH
RIVER VALLEY COMMUNITY
COALITION. ABOUT THEIR CONCERNS
AND THEIR REQUEST FOR POSTPONIN
THE PASSAGE OF THE ORDINANCE.
THE RISK IS ESPECIALLY ACUTE IN
KEY AREAS TO MY DISTRICT. IN
SOUTH PARK. DESIGNATED AS
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE WITH
SIGNIFICANT CANOPY REDUCTION. I
WILL SUPPORT A HOLD IN THE HOPE
THAT IT WILL GIVE ME MORE TIME
TO WORK ON THIS AMENDMENT.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN. YOU
WANTED TO CLOSE OUT THE DEBATE
ON THE HOLD?
>> YES. AND I HAVE HEARD THE
ARGUMENT ABOUT A POSTPONEFUL
WILL RESULT IN A DELAY AND I
APPRECIATE THAT CONCERN. SO I
WOULD BE WILLING TO AMEND MY
MOTION TO POSTPONE IT TO
TUESDAY, JUNE 27th. WHICH IS ON
MONTH POSTPONEMENT TO THEN WE
COULD THEN AMEND THE BILL TO
SHAVE OFF THE EFFECTIVE DATE BY
30 DAYS SO THERE WOULD BE
ABSOLUTELY NO DELAY. IN THE
CURRENT TIME FRAME. SO WE CAN
ACTUALLY HEAR COUNCILMEMBER
HERBOLD'S AMENDMENT AND ADD THA
TO THE BILL. I AMEND MY MOTION
TO TUESDAY, JUNE 27th,
POSTPONEFUL FOR COUNCIL BILL
120534 TO AMEND THE ARGUMENT
ABOUT DELAY.
>> GIVEN THAT WE ALREADY HAVE A
MOTION ON BEFORE US, THAT HAS A
SECOND, CAN THE SPONSOR OF THE
MOTION AMEND HIS OWN MOTION
WITHOUT REQUIRING US TO VOTE ON
THE AMENDMENT TO HIS MOTION?
>> TO HOLD TO JULY 25th. IF THE
COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD LIKE TO
ENTERTAIN AN AMENDMENT, THEY
COULD. SO SOMEONE COULD SECOND
THE MOTION TO AMEND IT TO JUNE
27th. AND IF THE MAJORITY PASSE
THEY MOVE TO VOTE ON THE MOTION
AS AMENDED.
>> IS THAT YOUR COMMENT? OKAY.
WHETHER SECOND THAT MOTION. THE
MOTION BEFORE US NOW IS THE
POSTPONEMENT OF COUNCIL BILL
120534 UNTIL JUNE 27, 2023.
22nd. THERE IS NO FURTHER?
>> THANK YOU. FOR THIS
ADJUSTMENT. I STILL DO NOT
SUPPORT YOUR PROPOSED DELAY. AN
I AGAIN WELCOME YOU TO WORK WIT
ME ON A CLEANUP BILL. THANK YOU
>> WILL THE CLERK CALL THE ROLL
ON THE POSTPONEMENT OF COUNCIL
BILL 120534, JUNE 22, 2023.
>> THIS IS THE ROLL CALL VOTE
FOR THE MOTION TO AMEND.
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> YAY.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> NO.
>> AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TE
HERBOLD.
>> TWO IN FAVOR, FIVE OPPOSED.
>> SO THE UNDERLYING MOTION IS
STILL BEFORE US. WOULD YOU LIKE
TO WITHDRAW IT?
>> I'M READY FOR A VOTE.
>> CALL THE ROLL ON THE
POSTPONEMENT OF COUNCIL BILL
120534 UNTIL JULY 25.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> NO.
>> AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TE
HERBOLD.
>> TWO IN FAVOR, FIVE OPPOSED.
>> THE MOTION FAILS. NOW WE WIL
MOVE BACK TO DEBATE ON THE
UNDERLYING LEGISLATION. ARE
THERE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON TH
LEGISLATION? COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS? A NEW HAND?
>> THANK YOU. SO I THINK THE
QUESTION IN FRONT OF THE COUNCI
AS I STATED IS WHAT WE THINK OF
THE TREE ORDINANCE. I DON'T
THINK THERE IS A PROSPECT OF
SIGNIFICANT POLICY CHANGE. GIVE
THE DYNAMICS OF THE DISCUSSION
OVER THE COURSE OF THE YEAR. AN
WHAT I ASKED A LOT OF PEOPLE
OVER THE PAST WEEK-AND-A-HALF I
THIS TREE ORDINANCE BETTER THAN
NO TREE ORDINANCE AT ALL? IN
OTHER WORDS IS THE STATUS QUO
SUPERIOR TO THE POLICY THAT HAS
BEEN CRAFTED BY THE COMMITTEE?
DON'T AGREE WITH THE ORDINANCE
IN EVERY RESPECT. AND THERE ARE
THINGS THAT DIDN'T MAKE IT OUT
OF THE LAND USE COMMITTEE THAT
WOULD LIKE TO SEE INCORPORATED
INTO A TREE ORDINANCE. BUT I DO
THINK THAT THE PROTECTIONS AND
THE SUBSTANCE OF THE ORDINANCE
THAT HAS BEEN PRODUCED BY THE
PROCESS THAT IS CULMINATED IN
THE ORDINANCE IN FRONT OF US
TODAY IS BETTER THAN THE STATUS
QUO POLICY THAT WE HAVE RELATED
TO TREES AND IT OFFERS A
POTENTIAL PLATFORM TO BE
EXPANDED ON THROUGH THE
IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS AS CHAIR
STRAUSS ALLUDED TO IN HIS
REMARKS. I WILL GO INTO THE
REASONS THAT I THINK THAT IS TH
CASE FOR THIS BILL. FIRST, YOU
HAVE TO START WITH A PROBLEM
STATEMENT LIKE EVERYTHING THAT
WE FOCUS ON As A MATTER OF
PUBLIC POLICY. THAT PROBLEM
STATEMENT BEST EPITOMIZED BY TH
TREE CANOPY ASSESSMENT REPORT
FROM 2021. THAT HAS BEEN
REVIEWED BY THIS COUNCIL AND
SEVERAL COMMITTEES OF THIS
COUNCIL. THE TREE CANOPY
ASSESSMENT STATES OUR CITY WIDE
GOAL WHICH I SUPPORT OF A 30%
TREE CANOPY COVERAGE OVER THE
COURSE OF THE NEXT DECADE TO BE
ACHIEVED. AND THAT TREE CANOPY
ASSESSMENT MONITORS THE PROCESS
OF THE LAST PAST DECADE TO HAVE
BEEN BACKSLIDING BY HALF A
PERCENT OF TREE CANOPY SO IT
BEHOOVES US TO LOOK AT WHERE WE
ARE EXPERIENCING THE LOSS IN
TREE CANOPY AND WHAT THE CAUSES
OF THE LOSS OF TREE CANOPY ARE.
THIS WAS CERTAINLY SOMETHING
THAT GUIDED OUR DISCUSSIONS IN
THE METROPOLITAN PARK DISTRICT
WHICH I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE TH
SUPPORT. GIVEN THAT THE MAJORIT
OF OUR TREE CANOPY LOSS
REFLECTED IN THE ASSESSMENT AND
I KNOW THAT THIS SOMETIMES
SURPRISES A LOT OF PEOPLE. OUR
PARKS AND OPEN SPACES HAVE
EXPERIENCED BY FAR THE LARGEST
NET LOSS OF TREES OVER THE LAST
HALF DECADE. THE DISTRICT
INVESTMENT THAT THIS COUNCIL
DOUBLED OVER WHAT WAS INITIALLY
PROPOSED BY THE PARKS
DEPARTMENT. IN OUR PARKS AND
OPEN SPACES THE NEXT SIXPERIOD.
THAT WASN'T THE CASE IN THE
PROJECTED PERIOD. THAT
INVESTMENT IS REALLY CRITICAL
AND I'M PROUD OF THE WORK OF TH
COUNCIL. OUR PARKS AN OPEN
SPACES WHERE IT IS DESPERATELY
NEEDED. ONE OF THE OTHER
SIGNIFICANT CATEGORIES WAS LOSS
IN NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL.
THAT'S THE AREA WHERE THIS
PARTICULAR PACKAGE PROVIDES DI.
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL AREAS
OF THE CITY WHETHER SUBJECT TO
DEVELOPMENT OR NOT. THE REALLY
CRITICAL PIECE OF INFORMATION
FROM THE 2021 ASSESSMENT WAS
THAT WHILE WE SAW A SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNT OF TREE LOSS IN
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL, 70% O
THAT TREE CANOPY LOSS WAS NOT
RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT. IT WAS
RELATED TO A NUMBER OF DIFFEREN
ISSUES THAT SOMEONE LIVING IN A
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL THOUGH
MIGHT BE PRESENTED WITH A TREE
THAT IS ON THEIR PROPERTY. THAT
COULD INCLUDE THE TREE
CONTRACTING DISEASE OR BE IT
POSING A HAZARD RISK OR A STORM
EVENT, POTENTIALLY DESTROYING A
TREE. OR AGING TREES REACHING
THE END OF THEIR LIFE SPAN, ALL
REASONS ENUMERATED IN THE 2021
ASSESSMENT. AND IT CAN ALSO
INCLUDE REMOVING TREES TO
ACCOMMODATE OTHER USES ON A
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL PARCEL
GARDENS, VIEWS, BUILDING A DECK
BUILDING AN ADDITION TO A
DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE.
THE 70% OF TREE LOSS AND
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL THAT I
DUE TO TREES EITHER GETTING
DESTROYED OR BEING SUBJECT TO
HOMEOWNERS HAVING PREFERRED
ALTERNATIVE USES FOR A SITE
WHERE A TREE IS. THIS ORDINANCE
IN FRONT OF US CREATES A NEAR
ABSOLUTE RESTRICTION ON THE
REMOVAL OF TIER ONE HERITAGE
TREES. A CATEGORY IN THE
ORDINANCE FOR THE BIGGEST MOST
SIGNIFICANT TREES THAT WE WANT
TO PROTECT AN MAINTAIN AS PART
OF OUR CANOPY. AND INSULATING
THEM FROM ARBITRARY OR
SUPERFLUOUS REMOVAL. AND IT
RESTRICTS THE REMOVAL OF ALL
TIER TWO TREES FOR ANY REASON
OTHER THAN THEIR CONSTRUCTION O
SAFETY WHICH WILL BE PROHIBITED
FOR THIS ORDINANCE. THESE ARE
IMPORTANT CHANGES FOR A
SIGNIFICANT CATEGORY THAT THE
DATA AND THE ASSESSMENT
INDICATES CITY POLICY IS
INSUFFICIENT TO PREVENT TREE
CANOPY LOSS OR AND FOR THAT
REASON, I THINK THAT CATEGORY,
THIS ORDINANCE IS BETTER THAN
HAVING NO ORDINANCE AT ALL.
REGARDING THE LOT COVERAGE. I
THINK OUR THINGS ARE GOING TO
WARRANT ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION
FROM THE SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL.
DON'T THINK THAT THOSE
PARTICULAR CONSIDERATIONS LOOM
AS LARGE RELATIVE TO SOME OF TH
OTHER CONCERNS THAT WE ARE
DISCUSSING FOR A COUPLE OF
REASONS. THE SITES WHERE THOSE
REMOVALS WOULD BE MOST RELEVANT
ACCOUNT FOR A RELATIVELY SMALL
AMOUNT OF OUR TREE COVERAGE
COMPARED TO SOME OF THE OTHER
SITES THAT I HAVE DISCUSSED IN
MY REMARKS LIKE NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL AND OUR PARKS AND
OPEN SPACES. AND THE 85%
DEVELOPMENT FOOTPRINT IS
SOMEWHAT MISLEADING IN HOW IT
HAS BEEN PUBLICLY CHARACTERIZED
IN THAT IT IS NOT A MEASURE
NECESSARILY OF THE BUILDING'S
FOOTPRINT WHICH ACCOUNTS FOR
TYPICALLY ABOUT 30% OF THE
BUILDING SITE. BUT INCLUDES
STORM WATER MANAGEMENT.
WALKWAYS, BIKE PARKING, ON SITE
PARKING FOR CARS AND VEHICLES.
THERE IS SIGNIFICANT FLEXIBILIT
THAT IS ALLOTTED TO THIS
ORDINANCE TO MANEUVER AND
ACCOMMODATE ALL OF THE THINGS
THAT WE REQUIRE BUILDERS THROUG
OUR BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION
CODE TO INCORPORATE AND PUT ONT
A GIVEN SITE. I AM ALL FOR GOIN
FURTHER. THAT DISCUSSES HOW WE
TRIAGE AND MANDATE FOR BUILDERS
TO INCLUDE THAT COULD
POTENTIALLY CONTINUE TO COMPETE
EVEN WITH THIS BILL WITH
PRESERVING AN EXCEPTIONAL TREE.
ON SITE PARKING MANDATES. I
THINK AS A COMMUNITY, HAVING
THIS DISCUSSION IT IS A VERY,
VERY HIGH PUBLIC POLICY
PRIORITY. WHEN WE LOOK AT WHAT
WE ARE MANDATING AS A CITY TO
BUILD ON SITE, WE SHOULD
CONTINUE TO WORK TO REMOVE
TRIAGE AND GET RID OF COMPETING
MANDATES IF THEY NO LONGER ARE
CONSIDERED BY THE GENERAL PUBLI
OR BY THIS COUNCIL. TO BE A
HIGHER PRIORITY FOR THE
MAINTENANCE AND PRESERVATION OF
TREES. SO THIS BILL IS BETTER
THAN NOT HAVING A TREE
ORDINANCE. SO I WILL VOTE FOR
THIS ORDINANCE TODAY. AS HE HAS
INDICATED AN INTEREST IN A
TRUEING UP BILL. THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE POLICY.
WITH THAT, I WILL MAKE AN END T
MY COMMENTS AND TURN IT BACK
OVER TO MADAME PRESIDENT PRO
TEM.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
LEWIS. THE SPONSOR WILL HAVE
THE CLOSING REMARKS.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> YEAH.
>> YOUR HAND IS UP. DID YOU NOT
WANT TO SPEAK?
>> THANK YOU PRESIDENT PRO TEM
HERBOLD. I BELIEVE THAT IT IS
VITAL THAT WE CLARIFY THAT WHIL
THIS BILL MIGHT REGULATE AND
REFINE AND DESIGNATE MORE TREES
IT DOES NOT ABSOLUTELY PROTECT
THEM, THIS BILL STILL ALLOWS
MANY OF THESE TREES TO BE RIPPE
OUT AND DESTROYED. SO I BELIEVE
THAT'S THE OPPOSITE OF
PROTECTION. I ISSUED STATEMENTS
ABOUT PRESERVING HEALTHY TREES
THROUGHOUT SEATTLE. THEY ARE
VITAL IN THE FACE OF HEAT DOMES
AND CLIMATE CHANGE. I HAVE MOVE
FOR SUBSTANTIALIVE AMENDMENTS.
WILL READ A KEY EXCERPT WHICH
STATED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS
ON THE VERGE OF A VERY BIG
MISTAKE THAT WOULD MAKE STUMP
TOWN A MORE ACCURATE MONIKER FO
SEATTLE THAN THE EMERALD CITY.
ON TUESDAY, TODAY, THE FULL
COUNCIL IS SET TO CONSIDER A NE
TREE PROTECTION ORDINANCE. THE
TROUBLE IS THE PROCESS PRODUCED
A PRO DEVELOPER TREE REMOVAL
MEASURE INSTEAD OF ONE THAT
ACTUALLY PRESERVES AND GROWS
TREES. THE COUNCIL SHOULD VOTE
IT DOWN AND START OVER. AS IT
WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY RESULT IN
DIMINISHED TREE CANOPY. IF THIS
BILL PASSES, THERE WILL BE LESS
SHADE AND HIGHER STREET LEVEL
TEMPERATURES. I CONCUR WITH THE
COMMENTS SO I WILL BE VOTING NO
TODAY.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON
>> I'LL MAKE THIS QUICK. WITH
ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE SEATTLE
TIMES EDITORIAL BOARD, WE HAVE
TO ALSO THINK ABOUT WHERE THE
TREES ARE THAT NEED TO BE
PROTECTED SO I HAVE A LITTLE
GRAPH HERE, FROM THE TREE CANOP
REPORT THAT WAS MENTIONED BY
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS. SO THIS
LINE HERE IS NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL. THAT IS WHERE THE
GREATEST NUMBER OF TREES ARE TO
PROTECT OR TO CUT DOWN. THAT IS
WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT. AND
THIS STATUS QUO, OUR CURRENT
REGULATIONS PROTECT ABOUT 17,00
TREES WITH REGULATIONS IN THE
PROPOSED ORDINANCE, THAT NUMBER
WOULD GO UP TO 70,000. A NET
GAIN OF 52,000. THE POINT IS,
THAT'S A LOT OF TREES TO
PROTECT. THE NEXT TWO
CATEGORIES. THIS IS PARKS AND
NATURAL AREAS IN RIGHT OF WAY
EQUALS 19,313 ACRES COMPARED TO
20,841. BASICALLY N IS OUR
PROPERTY. THIS IS OUR CANOPY. I
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL, WE
LOST A NET LOSS OF 87 ACRES
SINCE 2016. AND IF YOU COMPARE
ALL OF THAT TO WHERE THE 85%
HARD SCAPE THAT HAS A LOT OF
DEBATES AROUND IT. WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT THE LOW AND MID
RISE ZONES. THAT IS TO ME, I
WANT TO SAVE THE TREES WHERE
THEY ARE RIGHT NOW AND WHERE
THEY STAND TO BE CUT DOWN. SO
THAT IS ALL MY POINT AND SO,
THAT IS WHY I WILL BE VOTING YE
FOR THIS. BUT I DO RECOGNIZE
THAT THIS HAS BEEN A DIFFICULT
PROCESS AND I THANK EVERYBODY
FOR HANGING IN THERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> DID I UNMUTE? I DID. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. I DO WANT TO
START BY THANKING ALL THE STAFF
WHO HAVE DONE A TREMENDOUS
AMOUNT OF WORK ON THIS
LEGISLATION AND PUT IN HOURS AN
HOURS AWAY FROM THEIR FAMILIES.
TO DO THIS WORK. PARTICULARLY
WANT TO THANK YOLANDA. AND ALL
OF THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO
HAVE BEEN PARTICIPATING THROUGH
THE THIS PROCESS. INCLUDING
FOLKS FROM BEACON HILL AND FROM
OTHER PARTS OF DISTRICT 2.
PARTICULARLY WANT TO THANK MARI
AND OTHERS FOR CONTACTING OUR
OFFICE. AS WELL AS THE URBAN
FORESTRY COMMISSION WHO MET WIT
MY STAFF SEVERAL HOURS IS LAST
COUPLE OF WEEKS IN SERVICE TO
THIS PROCESS AND TO OUR
COMMUNITY. AND, FINALLY, I WANT
TO THANK MARCO LOWE AND THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE FOR THE WORK THE
ARE DOING TO TRY TO CREATE A WA
FORWARD HERE. AND I WANT TO
THANK COLLEAGUES ALL THAT SAID,
I WANT TO BE REALLY CLEAR THAT
THIS IS A VERY HARD VOTE FOR ME
I HEARD FROM MY COMMUNITY
MEMBERS. HUNDREDS OF
CONSTITUENTS WHO DO FEEL LIKE
THEY DIDN'T GET A FAIR CHANCE T
WEIGH IN ON THE PROCESS. AND
PEOPLE WHO I PUT MY FAITH AND
TRUST IN AND WHO LOOK TO ME TO
REPRESENT THEM. I AM GOING TO B
VOTING YES TODAY. BECAUSE THIS
BILL IS A CULMINATION OF MANY
YEARS OF WORK BETWEEN THE CHAIR
SDCI, THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH AND
AGREE THIS BILL IS NOT PERFECT.
WHICH IS WHY I WILL COMMIT TO
WORKING WITH MY CONSTITUENTS AN
COLLEAGUES OVER THE NEXT YEAR T
MAKE SURE THAT THIS BILL
ADDRESSES SOME OF THE CONCERNS.
AND THERE ARE MANY. PARTICULARL
AROUND THE CANOPY IN THE SOUTH
END. AS COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS
ALLUDED TO EARLIER, YOU KNOW, I
IT WERE POSSIBLE FOR US TO DELA
THIS VOTE, AND ALLOW THE URBAN
FORESTRY COMMISSION TO DO THE
ANALYSIS, I THINK I COULD HAVE
SUPPORTED THAT. BUT I DON'T
THINK WE REALLY HAVE A PATH
FORWARD THERE. EVEN BEFORE THE
VOTE WE TOOK TODAY. I THINK THA
WAS TRUE SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE T
DO INSTEAD IS CONTINUE WORKING
WITH THE MAYOR'S OFFICE. WITH
SDCI AND PARKS AND SDOT AND ALL
THE OTHERS AND WITH OUR BUDGET
CHAIR. TO SEE HOW WE CAN GROW
THE TREE CANOPY IN THE SOUTH
END. I PARTICULARLY WANT TO SEE
HOW WE CAN BUILD OUR TREE CANOP
BY INVESTING HEAVILY IN CANOPY
ON PUBLIC LAND. INCLUDING THE
MANY THOUSANDS OF MILES OF
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY IN OUR CITY
AND IN AREAS LACKING INVESTMENT
AND INFRASTRUCTURE TO PROVIDE A
BROAD PUBLIC BENEFIT LIKE WE AR
NEEDING IN THE SOUTH END AND IN
DISTRICT 5. SO AGAIN WITH THAT,
I WILL BE VOTING YES AND I WANT
TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR THEIR
HARD WORK ON THIS BILL.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES. COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT
PRO TEM. I WANT TO THANK THE
FOLKS WHO COMMENTED TODAY AND
THROUGHOUT THE LAST FEW MONTHS.
THE CALLS WE HAVE HAD. THE
MEETINGS WE HAVE HAD WITH PEOPL
WHO ARE IN THE ROOM AND ONLINE.
AND AS MANY PEOPLE NOTED,
THERE'S A LOCK OF A
COMPREHENSIVE PROTECTION
STRATEGY RIGHT NOW THAT IS
LEADING TO SO MUCH OF OUR SHARE
CONCERN. AROUND MANY TREES TAKE
DOWN. OFTEN TREES TAKEN DOWN FO
MCMANSIONS. AND I THINK THAT TH
GOAL HERE IS WELL STATED. TO
GOAL TO ENSURE WE PROMOTE
PROTECTION FOR SEATTLE TREES.
AND DO THAT IN WAY THAT COUPLES
WITH OUR GOAL OF GREATER HOUSIN
DENSITY TO ALLEVIATE OUR HOUSIN
NEEDS BUT THAT WE INCREASE AND
ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN TH
CITY OF SEATTLE. WHEN WE ALLOW
FOR THAT DENSITY COUPLED WITH
TREES, IT ALSO HELPS PROTECT
ENCROACH. INTO FORESTLANDS.
FARMLANDS. AND PROTECTS OUR
CRITICAL ECO SYSTEM ACROSS THE
REGION. AS EVERYONE HAS SAID.
THIS IS A DIFFICULT BALANCE TO
STRIKE. IS CLEAR THAT
REASONABLE, EDUCATED INFORMED
FOLKS ARE LOOKING AT THIS POLIC
FROM DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES AND
IT IS EITHER GLASS HALF FULL OR
GLASS HALF EMPTY. THEY ARE WELL
INFORMED EDUCATED ANALYSES TO
WHAT CONTINUES TO BE, WILL NEED
TO BE EVOLVING AS WE PUT THIS
INTO PLACE. WE WILL NEED TO COM
BACK AND MAKE ENHANCEMENTS. THI
POLICY DID NOT GET ALL THE WAY
THERE FOR MANY. AND THIS IS JUS
PART OF THE CONTINUE YUM OF THE
COMPONENTS THAT WE NEED TO
ENSURE THAT WE ARE COMING TREE
REQUIREMENTS WITH ADDITIONAL
BUILDING REQUIREMENT SETBACKS.
COMING THIS WITH OUR SEATTLE
GREEN FACTOR REQUIREMENTS THAT
BAKE INTO CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR
PEOPLE TO TAKE ACTIONS TO
INCREASE GREEN DEVELOPMENT. THI
IN COMBINATION WITH THE URBAN
FORESTRY AND RESTORATION EFFORT
AND THE SEATTLE GREEN
PARTNERSHIP EFFORTS TO EXPAND
OUR FOREST RESTORATION WITHIN
THE CITY, NOT ONLY IN
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONES
BUT IN OUR PUBLIC LANDS AS OUR
COLLEAGUES HAVE SPOKEN TO AS
WELL. I APPRECIATE THAT THERE I
A CALL HERE FOR GREATER
PREDICTABILITY SO WE CAN BUILD
THE DENSER HOUSING. MY HOPE IS
WE CAN CONTINUE TO ALLEVIATE TH
HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS CRISIS
BY GROWING OUR STOP. I AM
INTERESTED IN AS WELL ONE OF TH
THINGS WE HAVE HEARD FROM WITH
OUR COLLEAGUES IS ALWAYS AN
INTEREST IN GOING BACK MAKING
SURE WE ARE DOING THIS RIGHT.
ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS I HAVE
HAD WITH THE AUDUBON SOCIETY AN
OTHERS IN LOOKING AT WHAT WAS
UNDERLYING AMENDMENT BEFORE, I
WILL BE LOOKING AT THE CHAIR AN
THE OTHER COUNCIL COLLEAGUES TO
DO THE TYPE OF REPORTING THAT
WAS UNDERLYING AMENDMENT B4. I
APPRECIATE THAT THE ADDITIONAL
LANGUAGE HAS BEEN SENT TO US.
AND THERE WAS CLARIFICATION THI
WAS NOT INTERESTED IN BEING TIE
THAT WE HAD INCLUDED IN LAST
YEAR'S BUDGET. IF WE CAN
SEPARATE THE ARBORIST POSITION
FROM THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL
REPORTING, THAT IS SOMETHING I
WOULD BE VERY EXCITED AND
WORKING ON WITH FOLKS IN THE
COMMUNITY TO ENSURE THAT WE WER
SUPPORTING THE NECESSARY
ANALYSIS AND FEEDBACK TO SEE
WHAT IS HAPPENING OUT THERE IF
WE ARE IN NEED OF ADDITIONAL
FOLLOW-UP LEGISLATION. WHAT IS
CLEAR IS THE BUDGET WILL NEED T
INCLUDE ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR
THAT REPORTING. A DEPARTMENT
PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO
MOVE FORWARD ON THE REPORTING
EVEN IF THE AMENDMENT WERE SEEN
AS FRIENDLY AND ADOPTED TODAY.
SO WE CAN INCLUDE THAT IN THE
BUDGET. AND I ALSO WOULD LIKE T
INCLUDE ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR
EDUCATION, OUT REACH, AND
ENFORCEMENT. SOMETHING NEEDED I
THIS EFFORT TO ENSURE THAT SOME
OF THE PROTECTIONS THAT ARE
BEING INCLUDED HERE, ARE REALLY
UNDERSTOOD. OUR COUNCIL
COLLEAGUES AND OUR COMMUNITY AT
LARGE, ON THOSE REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS IN EDUCATION AND
OUTREACH. I AGREE THERE IS MORE
WORK TO BE DONE AND LOOK FORWAR
TO CONTINUING TO WORK WITH YOU
ON THIS ITERATIVE PROCESS. I AM
HOPEFUL THAT THE PROCESSES WE
HAVE BEGUN TO PUT INTO STATUTE
HERE TODAY IN COMBINATION WITH
SOME OF THE OTHER PROTECTION
STRATEGIES ALLOW FOR US TO
ACTUALLY BUILD OUR CANOPY. I AM
PLEASED SOME OF THE THINGS
INCLUDED HELP US TO INCREASE TH
CODE REQUIREMENTS, MAKING SURE
THAT TREES THAT ARE SUBSTANTIAL
REMAIN IN PLACE. AND WE ARE
DOING THIS BY CHANGEING THE
PROCESS. THE CURRENT CODE ONLY
REQUIRES MITIGATION FOR TREES
THAT ARE 24 INCHES IN DIAMETER.
NOW WITH THIS LEGISLATION, THE
CODE WILL REQUIRE A REPLACEABLE
FOR TREES 12 INCHES OR GREATER
IN DIAMETER. TO ENSURE THERE
MUST BE THE SAME CANOPY COVERAG
AS BEFORE, SOME OF THE
REQUIREMENTS AROUND THE RIGHT O
WAY REPLACEMENT THAT REQUIRE
PUBLIC LANDS TO HAVE A 3-1
REPLACEMENT IS A REALLY GOOD
THING FOR INCREASING ACCESS TO
ADDITIONAL TREE CANOPY. AND WE
WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH FOLK
TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GROW THE
APPROACH. I APPRECIATE THERE IS
MUCH MORE WORK TO BE DONE. THAT
THE SEATTLE TIMES COVERAGE TODA
NOTED THE NUMBER OF PROTECTIVE
TREES WILL GROW FROM 22,400
TREES UNDER THE CURRENT
REGULATIONS TO APPROXIMATELY
70,400 TREES UNDER THE PROPOSED
LEGISLATION. AGAIN, NOT ENOUGH.
AND MORE WILL COME. BUT A GREAT
FIRST STEP. THIS IS NOT BEING
DONE IN ISOLATION. OUR TREE
CANOPY ASESSION SHOWED THE
BIGGEST LOSS OF TREES HAS BEEN
CAUSED BY CLIMATE CHANGE. SO
PROTECTING TREES IS PART OF THE
STRATEGY, ENSURING OUR TREE
CANOPY AND ADDITIONAL SHADE IS
OFFERED ACROSS OUR CITY. IS A
CRITICAL COMPONENT TO THAT. IT
IS PART OF A BROADER SPECTRUM I
WANT TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON.
INCREASE THE RESILIENCE OF OUR
RESIDENTS AND TO DO THIS THROUG
AN EQUITY LENS TO MAKE SURE THA
WE ARE INVESTING IN OUR
COMMUNITY'S HARDEST HIT BY
CLIMATE CHANGE. THIS IS THE
TOUGH CONVERSATION. AND I'M
PLEASED THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO
CONTINUE TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS
WITH YOU ABOUT HOW TO CONTINUE
THIS CONVERSATION ON THE TREE
PROTECTION ORDINANCE THAT THE
GOOD CHAIR HAS COMMITTED TO. AN
THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO BUILD
OFF BUDGET INVESTMENTS. THE
FUNDING THAT WE PUT IN FOR GREE
NEW DEAL INVESTMENTS FOR THE
URBAN FOREST PROTECTION. THE
QUARTER MILLION WE INVESTED FOR
GREEN NEW DEAL DOLLARS TO PLANT
IN THE RIGHT OF WAY WITH THE
FOCUS ON UNDERSERVED
COMMUNITIES. THE FUNDING WE
INCLUDED AND THE REPORT WE
REQUESTED FROM OFFICE OF
SUSTAINABILITY AND ENVIRONMENT
FOR MORE FUNDING TO PLANT TREES
AND GROW THE URBAN FORRESTING
RELATED ACTIVITY. AND THAT IN
ADDITION TO THE NEAR ONE BILLIO
DOLLARS FOR TREES AND TREE
MAINTENANCE IN DEVELOPMENT IN
PARKS THAT WAS $960,000 THAT
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS NOTED AS TH
CHAIR OF THE PROCESS. AS PART O
THE OVERALL EFFORTS,
MULTIFACETED APPROACH. I WILL B
VOTING YES ON THIS LEGISLATION.
BUT AM COMMITTED TO WORKING WIT
YOU ON THE REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS AND THE EDUCATION
AND OUTREACH AND ANY FUTURE
LEGISLATION THAT THE COUNCIL AN
THE COMMUNITY ARE ABLE TO DO.
APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S GREAT
COMMENTS AND WELL INTENTIONED
COMMENTS FROM EVERYBODY WHO
PROVIDED THIS COUNCIL WITH THEI
FEEDBACK.
>> THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA. I HAVE A FEW WORDS. I
WOULD LIKE TO GIVE BEFORE
TURNING IT BACK TO THE SPONSOR.
FIRST I WANT TO ADDRESS THE
STATEMENT THAT THE NEW ORDINANC
WILL PROTECT 88,000 TREES, MORE
THAN THE 17.7000 PROTECTED UNDE
THE CURRENT CODE. I UNDERSTAND
THAT PEOPLE REACT IN A VERY
VISCERAL WAY. THE NEW ORDINANCE
WILL REGULATE 88,000 TREES FAR
MORE THAN THE 17,700 PROTECTED
UNDER THE CURRENT CODE. IT WON'
NECESSARILY PROTECT ALL OF THEM
IT WILL REGULATE THEM. SOME WIL
BE REMOVED BUT IT DOES INCREASE
VERY BROADLY THE NUMBER OF TREE
FOR WHICH THERE WILL BE A
REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENT. I THIN
THAT IS STILL VERY, VERY
IMPORTANT. BUT I DO, LANGUAGE
MATTERS. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT
AGAIN, THE FOLKS WHO HAVE
CONCERNS, CONTINUING CONCERNS
ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR VERSION O
THIS TREE ORDINANCE FEEL VERY
STRONGLY ABOUT THE LANGUAGE AND
CORRECT LANGUAGE AND MAKING THE
DISTINCTION ON WHETHER WE ARE
PROTECTING TREES OR REGULATING
THEM. REGULATING MEANS SOME WIL
BE PROTECTED AND OTHERS MIGHT
NEED TO BE REPLACED.
NEIGHBORHOODS IMPACTED BY RACIA
AND ECONOMIC INJUSTICE NOT ONLY
STARTED WITH LESS CANOPY, BUT
ALSO LOST MORE THAN THE CITY
WIDE AVERAGE. CONTRIBUTED TO
RESTORATION PROGRAMS. THE LOSSE
OUT-PACED THE GAINS. TREE CANOP
COVER IS CRITICAL FOR LOWERING
TEMPERATURES AND REDUCING HEAT
ISLAND EFFECTS IN OUR WARMING
CLIMATE AND TREES ARE KEY
COMPONENT OF OUR CLIMATE
PREPAREDNESS IN RESILIENCE
STRATEGIES AS THEY PROTECT US
FROM EXTREME HEAT AND IMPROVE
AIR QUALITY. THE REPORT FINDS
THAT AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE,
A 13% INCREASE IN TREE CANOPY I
ASSOCIATED WITH A .5-DEGREE
REDUCTION IN TEMPERATURE. AS WE
HAVE HEARD IN THE PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND THE SIX COMMITTEE
MEETINGS AROUND THIS BILL, URBA
TREES ARE NOT JUST DECORATIVE.
THEY ARE IMPORTANT FOR CLEAN AI
QUALITY. AND BENEFITS AND
WILDLIFE IN OUR CITY. BALANCING
OUR CITY'S NEEDS FOR DENSITY AN
CONSERVATION THROUGH A LENS
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IS NOT
EASY. TO PROVIDE RECOMMENDATION
ON LEGISLATION CONCERNING URBAN
FORESTRY MANAGEMENT APPRECIATE
THAT MANY OF THE AMENMENTS THAT
WERE HEARD IN COMMITTEE ARE
AMENDMENTS THAT WERE PROPOSED B
THE URBAN FORESTRY COMMISSION.
BUT AS APPOINTED LEADERS IN THE
URBAN FORESTRY, I APPRECIATE .
CONSTITUENT FEEDBACK FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE STAKE
HOLDERS SHOW WHILE THERE ARE
STRONG REGULATIONS IN THIS BILL
THAT MANY BELIEVE IT IS STILL
NOT QUITE IN A PLACE THAT BEST
PROTECTS THE TREES IN OUR MOST
DISENFRANCHISED COMMUNITIES. MY
CONSTITUENTS IN SOUTH PARK. IN
CLOSING MANY OF THE EMAILS WE
RECEIVED IN THE LAST TWO DAYS,
SPECIFICALLY STATE IN THE
SUBJECT LINE, FIX THE TREE
ORDINANCE. DON'T VOTE IT DOWN.
AND SO, I AM LITERALLY DECIDING
AS I AM LISTENING TO THE DEBATE
FROM MY COLLEAGUES, LISTENING T
PUBLIC COMMENT, AND WITH COUNCI
MEMBER STRAUSS' COLLEGE TO
CONTINUE TO LISTEN TO COMMUNITY
STAKE HOLDERS AND TREAT THIS
POLICY AS ITERATIVE AND FIX IT
IF NECESSARY, AS WELL AS BUDGET
CHAIR MOSQUEDA'S COMMITMENT TO
PROPOSE NEW REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS AND EDUCATION AND
ENFORCEMENT. REALLY APPRECIATE
THE COMMITTEE FOR THE WORK. THE
ENGAGEMENT OF MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC AND STAKE HOLDER GROUPS
AND I KNOW OUR CONSTITUENTS WIL
LOOK FORWARD TO OPPORTUNITIES T
ENGAGE WITH THE URBAN FORESTRY
COMMISSION, SDCI. TO FIGURE OUT
HOW THE LEGISLATION CAN INCLUDE
REQUIREMENTS TO MONITOR AND WOR
WITHIN THE IMPLEMENTATION TO
MEET THE NEEDS WE HAVE HEARD SO
MANY COMMUNITY MEMBERS IDENTIFY
THANK YOU. AND WITH THAT,
SPONSOR? CLOSING REMARKS.
>> I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE
WORDS PRESERVE, PROTECT, AND
REGULATE. PROTECTIONS DO OCCUR
EVEN IF PRESERVATION IS NOT
ATTAINED. THIS BILL ABSOLUTELY
PRESERVES, PROTECTS, A GROWS OU
TREE CANOPY. I APPRECIATE YOUR
PARTNERSHIP IN THIS RETURN. AND
APPRECIATE YOU QUOTEING THE
EDITORIAL BOARD, THEIR WRITING
WAS CONTAINED WITHIN THE OPINIO
SECTION OF THE NEWSPAPER. IF TH
NEWS ARTICLE PROVIDES DETAILED
REPORTING OF WHAT THIS BILL WIL
AND WILL NOT DO. THAT NEWS STOR
WAS CONTAINED WITHIN THE
NEWSPAPER SECTION OF THE NEWS.
WANT TOO TAKE A STEP BACK AND
THANK EVERYONE WHO HAS WORKED O
THIS BILL. ESPECIALLY THANKS TO
NAOMI LEWIS. MY LAND USE CLERK.
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN. TOBY,
AND SO MANY OTHERS. I URGE
COLLEAGUES TO SEE THE FOREST
THROUGH THE TREES. AND THAT THE
PERFECT IS NOT THE ENEMY OF THE
GOOD. JUST LIKE THE TREES MY
PARENTS GENERATION PLANTED,
TREES PLANTED TODAY CAN AND WIL
CREATE THE CANOPY WE NEED FOR M
CHILDREN. WE NEED TO PROTECT
TREES TODAY. NOT TOMORROW. NOT
IN JUNE. NOT IN JULY. WE NEED T
PROTECT THEM TODAY. AND WHAT WE
HAVE BEFORE US IS A BALANCED
BILL THAT PROTECTS TREES IN OUR
NEIGHBORHOODS. AND DURING
DEVELOPMENT. WHILE MAKING SPACE
HOUSING OUR CITY THE FASTEST
GROWING CITY. THIS GROWS THE
CANOPY FOR MY GRANDCHILDREN SO
THEY CAN BENEFIT FROM IT AS
WELL. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. WITH THAT, WILL
THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
ON THE PASSAGE OF THE BILL?
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> YES.
>> AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TE
HERBOLD.
>> YES.
>> SINCE IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED.
>> THE BILL PASSES. AND THE
CHAIR WILL SIGN IT. WILL THE
CLERK AFFIX MY SIGNATURE ON MY
BEHALF? THANK YOU.
>>> MOVING TO ITEM 3. WILL THE
CLERK READ IN ITEM THREE INTO
THE RECORD?
>> COUNCIL BILL 120535. AMENDIN
ORDINANCE 126725 WHICH ADOPTED
THE 2023 BUDGET CHANGING
APPROPRIATIONS FOR VARIOUS
DEPARTMENTS AND BUDGET PATROL
LEVELS. AND VARIOUS FUNDS. ALL
BY A THREE QUARTER VOTE OF THE
CITY COUNCIL. THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDS THAT CITY COUNCIL
PASS THE AMENDED COUNCIL BILL.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER,
STRAUSS, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.
>> THANK YOU. THESE ARE THE
BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS THAT WORK
TO IMPLEMENT THE BILL WE JUST
VOTED ON.
>> THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY
COMMENTS ON THE BILL? SEEING NO
COMMENTS, SPONSOR, ANY CLOSING
REMARKS?
>> THESE ARE THE BUDGET
APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE BILL WE
JUST VOTED ON.
>> WILL THE CLERK CALL THE ROLL
ON THE PASSAGE OF THE BILL?
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT HERBOLD?
>> YES.
>> SEVEN IN FAVOR. NONE OPPOSE.
>> THE MOTION PASSES. WILL THE
CLERK AFFIX MY SIGNATURE? MOVIN
TO THE REPORT FROM THE FINANCE
AND HOUSING COMMITTEE. ITEM
NUMBER 4 ON THE AGENDA. WILL TH
CLERK READ?
>> THE REPORT OF THE FINANCE AN
HOUSING COMMITTEE. COUNCIL BILL
12572. AMENDING ORDINANCE 12649
WHICH ADOPTED THE 2022 BUDGET.
CHANGING APPROPRIATIONS TO
VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS AND BUDGET
CONTROL LEVELS. THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDS CITY COUNCIL PASS TH
COUNCIL BILL.
>> THANK YOU. CCOUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS
BILL WAS PASSED UNANIMOUSLY FRO
THE HOUSING COMMITTEE. IT IS TH
2020 EXCEPTIONS BILL. THIS
REQUEST FOR THE BUDGET INCREASE
INTENDED TO RESOLVE INSTANCES
WHERE DEPARTMENT OVERSPENT THEI
REVISED 2022 BUDGET ALLOCATIONS
THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO
TEM.
>> THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY
COMMENTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS?
SEEING NONE, ANY CLOSING
COMMENTS?
>> THAT'S IT.
>> ALL RIGHT.
>> WILL THE CLERK PASS ON THE
BILL?
>> YES.
>>
>> SEVEN IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED
>> THANK YOU T BILL PASSES AND
THE CHAIR WILL SIGN IT. WILL TH
CLERK PLEASE AFFIX MY SIGNATURE
TO THE LEGISLATION ON MY BEHALF
ITEM 5.
>> AGENDA ITEM 5. COUNCIL BILL
120573. AMENDING ORDINANCE
126725 WHICH ADOPTED THE 2023
BUDGET INCLUDING THE 2023-2028
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
CHANGING APPROPRIATIONS TO
VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS AND BUDGET
CONTROL LEVELS. THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMEND THAT'S CITY COUNCIL
PASS THE COUNCIL BILL.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 120573
IS THE 2022 CARRY FORWARD
ORDINANCE. THIS REQUEST APPROVA
FOR THE 2023 BUDGET FROM SEVERA
CITY FUNDS. AS DESCRIBED IN THE
CENTRAL STAFF MEMO, THESE CARRY
FORWARD INCREASES WERE BUDGETED
BUT NOT COMPLETED. DUE TO CAUSE
WHICH COULD NOT REASONABLY HAVE
BEEN FORESEEN AT THE TIME OF
MAKING THE BUDGET, I I WILL NOT
WE ARE WORKING WITH THE CITY
BUDGETS OFFICE TO REALLY LIMIT
THE NUMBER OF DOLLARS THAT DON'
GET SPENT IN THE CALENDAR YEAR.
THE LEGISLATION WE VOTED ON THE
EXCEPTIONS BILL. THESE SHOULD B
MOVING FORWARD WHEN A SITUATION
COULD NOT BE REASONABLY FORESEE
AT THE TIME. THIS ONE MOVED OUT
OF THE COMMON SENSE COMMITTEE.
WOULD RECOMMEND THE VOTE IN
FAVOR OF THE CARRY FORWARD
ORDINANCE AS WELL.
>> FANTASTIC, THANK YOU SO MUCH
ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS?
>> JUST ABOUT READY TO TRY TO
REACH OUT TO YOU. GIVEN THERE
ARE NO COMMENTS AND I DON'T
BELIEVE THERE ARE CLOSING
REMARKS, WILL THE CLERK CALL TH
ROLL ON THE PASSAGE OF THE BILL
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PRO TEM
HERBOLD.
>> IT PASSES.
>>> MOVING TO ITEM 6.
>> REPORT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S
EDUCATION CIVIL RIGHTS CULTURE
COMMITTEE. 1. THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDS THAT CITY COUNCIL
PASS THE COUNCIL BILL.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER
MORALES AS CHAIR OF THE CIVIL
RIGHTS AND CULTURE COMMITTEE,
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED TO ADDRESS
THIS ITEM.
>> I HAVE FOUR BILLS COMING THA
ARE ALL LANDMARKS RELATED TO
SCHOOLS. THIS IS MADISON MIDDLE
SCHOOL. THE MAIN ENTRANCE,
LOBBY, AND, THE SITE ITSELF. BU
DID NOT APPLY TO ANY IN KIND
MAINTENANCE.
>> I AM ASKING FOR A YES VOTE.
>> ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS ON TH
LEGISLATION?
>> CALL THE CONTROL.
>> MOSQUEDA, NELSON, STRAUSS?
COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS? COUNCIL
PRESIDENT PRO TEM HERBOLD
>> YES.
>> THANK YOU. A, SORRY, THE BIL
PASSES AND WILL THE CLERK AFFIX
MY SIGNATURE TO THE LEGISLATION
>> RELATING TO HISTORIC
PRESERVATION. THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDS CITY COUNCIL PASS TH
COUNCIL BILL.
>> THANK YOU.
>> MAGNOLIA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
WAS BUILT IN 1927 AND ADDED ONT
IN 1931 AND 1940. IT IS LOCATED
IN THE MAGNOLIA NEIGHBORHOOD. A
BEAUTIFUL BUILDING. I HAVE A
COUPLE OF FRIENDS WHO WENT TO
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL THERE. THE
CAFETERIA, FIRST FLOOR CENTRAL
HALL. BOOK ROOM. ORIGINAL
CLASSROOMS. AND, FOUR STAIRWAYS
AND LIGHT FIXTURES, BUT NOT TO
IN KIND MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS
AND THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS
PASSAGE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, ARE
THERE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
SEEING ANY? WOULD THE CLERK CAL
THE ROLL?
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> YES.
>> AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TE
HERBOLD.
>> YES.
>> THE BILL PASSES AND THE CHAI
WILL SIGN IT. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE AFFIX MY SIGNATURE TO TH
LEGISLATION ON MY BEHALF? MOVIN
ONTO ITEM 8. WILL THE CLERK REA
THE SHORT TITLE FOR ITEM 8 INTO
THE RECORD.
>> AGENDA ITEM 8. 120565.
RELATING TO HISTORIC
PRESERVATION OPPOSING CONTROLS
UPON DANIEL BAGLEY ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL. A LANDMARK DESIGNATED B
THE PRESERVATION BOARD.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES, YOU
ARE HALFWAY THROUGH.
>> IT WAS BUILT IN 1920. IT IS
LOCATED IN THE GREEN LAKE
NEIGHBORHOOD. CONTROLS IN THE
AGREEMENT RELATE TO THE SITE.
CENTRAL ENTRANCE. CENTRAL STAIR
CORRIDORS AND CLASSROOMS. NOT T
MAINTENANCE OR REPAIRS AND THE
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS PASSAGE.
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES? ANY
COMMENTS? NOT SEEING ANY, WILL
THE CLERK CALL THE ROLL?
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PRO TEM
HERBOLD?
>> YES.
>> IT PASSES AND WILL THE CLERK
AFFIX MY SIGNATURE ON MY BEHALF
MOVING ONTO ITEM 9. WILL THE
CLERK READ THE SHORT ITEM?
>> COUNCIL BILL 120566. RELATED
TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION. IT I
RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL PASS
THE COUNCIL BILL.
>> THANK YOU. AND COUNCILMEMBER
MORALES?
>> WEST SEATTLE HIGH SCHOOL WAS
BUILT IN 1917 WITH NUMEROUS
LATER ADDITIONS . THE MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY OUT OF
COMMITTEE.
>> ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS? WILL THE CLERK CALL
THE ROLL?
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> YES.
>> AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TE
HERBOLD?
>> YES.
>> SEVEN IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED
. WILL THE CLERK IN ITEM TEN,
PLEASE READ THE SHORT TITLE FOR
ITEM TEN IN?
>> REPORT OF THE TRANSPORTATION
SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES AGENDA
ITEM 10. COUNCIL BILL 120557.
RELATED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATIONS HAZARD
MITIGATION PROGRAM AUTHORIZING
THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION TO ACQUIRE,
ACCEPT, AND RECORD ON BEHALF OF
THE CITY OF SEATTLE. THE
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THAT CITY
COUNCIL PASS THE COUNCIL BILL.
>> THANKS SO MUCH. YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED IN ORDER TO ADDRESS
THE ITEM.
>> THANK YOU PRESIDENT PRO TEM
HERBOLD. COLLEAGUES, COUNCIL
120557 IS FOR THE SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION'S
HAZARD MITIGATION PROGRAM. THE
BILL AUTHORIZES THE SDOT
DIRECTOR THE ACCEPT VARIOUS
EASEMENTS ALONG RAINIER AVENUE
SOUTH RELATED TO A COMPLETED
PROJECT RELATED TO DANGEROUS
HILLSIDE EROSION. THE COMMITTEE
UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED PASSAGE
OF THIS COUNCIL BILL. THANK YOU
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL MEMBER
PEDERSEN. ARE THERE ANY
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? SEEING
NONE, PEDERSEN, ANY CLOSING
COMMENTS? OKAY. WITH THAT, WILL
THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
ON THE PASSAGE OF THE BILL?
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> YES.
>> AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TE
HERBOLD?
>> YES.
>> SEVEN IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED
>> THE BILL PASSES AND THE CLER
WILL SIGN IT. MOVING ONTO ITEM
11. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE READ
THE SHORT TITLE FOR ITEM 11 INT
THE RECORD?
>> AGENDA ITEM 11. COUNCIL BILL
120574 RELATED TO SEATTLE PUBLI
UTILITIES DECLARING CERTAIN
PROPERTY RIGHTS AT THE PUMP
STATION PROPERTY. THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDS CITY COUNCIL PASS TH
BILL.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN?
>> THANK YOU. COLLEAGUES,
COUNCIL 120574 ENABLES SEATTLE
PUBLIC UTILITIES TO SELL TO THE
CITY OF SHORELINE TWO SMALL
SLIVERS OF PROPERTY ALREADY
LOCATED IN SHORELINE. THERE WER
NO PUBLIC COMMENTERS FOR THE
PUBLIC HEARING AT OUR COMMITTEE
THE COMMITTEE UNANIMOUSLY
RECOMMENDED PASSAGE OF THIS
BILL.
>> SEEING NO ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS, WILL THE CLERK CALL
THE ROLL ON THE PASSAGE OF THE
BILL?
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER LEWIS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MORALES?
>> YES.
>> AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TE
HERBOLD?
>> YES.
>> SEVEN IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED
>> THANK YOU T BILL PASSES, THE
CHAIR WILL SIGN IT. WILL THE
CLERK AFFIX MY SIGNATURE
ERIC THAT COMPLETES THE CITY
REPORTS TO ITEM I ON THE AGENDA
IS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT.
THERE WERE NO ISRAEL FROM THE
CONSENT CALENDAR. MOVING TO J,
ADOPTION AND OTHER RESOLUTIONS.
THERE ARE NO RESOLUTIONS FOR
INTRODUCTION AND ADOPTION TODAY
FINALLY, ON OTHER BUSINESS. IS
THERE ANY OTHER BUSINESS TO COM
BEFORE THE COUNCIL TODAY?
>> THAT ENSURE? COUNCILMEMBER
BEFORE? AND WHEN I DO WANT TO
NOTICE THAT THE SOCIAL HOUSING
DEVELOPER BOARD WILL BE HOLDING
ITS FIRST MEETING TODAY AT 5:30
HERE AT CITY HALL IN ROOM 370.
THAT IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC IF
FOLKS WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND.
>> THAT IS EXCITING NEW
BUSINESS. THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER MORALES. IS THER
ANY OTHER BUSINESS TO COME
BEFORE THE COUNCIL TODAY? I AM
SEEING NINE. THIS DOES CONCLUDE
THE ITEMS OF BUSINESS ON
TODAY'S AGENDA. THE NEXT
REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY COUNCI
MEETING WILL BE HELD ON THE
30th. THANK YOU ALL. WE ARE
CONCERNED.
>> RECORDING STOPPED.
>> THANK YOU.