>>> GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE.
THE MARCH 18th -- I'LL
START OVER.
THE MARCH 18th, 2025 MEETING
OF THE SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL
WILL COME TO ORDER.
IT IS 2:03.
I'M SARA NELSON, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> PRESENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH.
>>
HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> PRESENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
>> PRESENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> PRESENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON.
>> HERE.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON.
>> PRESENT.
>> NINE PRESENT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THERE ARE NO PRESENTATIONS FOR
TODAY, SO COLLEAGUES AT
THIS TIME WILL OPEN THE HYBRID
PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD, LIMITED TO ITEMS
ON TODAY'S
AGENDA, AND THE COUNCIL WORK
PROGRAM.
CLERK, HOW MANY SPEAKERS
ARE SIGNED UP TODAY?
>> WE HAVE SIX REMOTE AND SO
FAR 50 IN- PERSON, AND WE STILL
HAVE MEMBERS OF PUBLIC SIGNING
UP
AS WE SPEAK.
>> OKAY.
SO LET'S GIVE EVERYBODY ONE
MINUTE, AND WE'LL START WITH
THE TEN IN- PERSON SPEAKERS, GO
OVER TO THE FOLKS THAT HAVE
SIGNED
UP
REMOTE AND CONTINUE WITH THE
PRESENT.
IN-PERSON.
>> THE PUBLIC COMMENT
PERIOD WILL BE MODERATED IN THE
FOLLOWING MATTER.
SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN
THE ORDER THEY ARE REGISTERED.
PLEASE BEGIN BY STATING YOUR
NAME AND THE ITEM YOU ARE
ADDRESSING.
SPEAKERS WILL HEAR A CHIME WHEN
THERE ARE TEN SECONDS OF THEIR
TIME.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS
NOW OPEN AND WILL BEGIN WITH
THE FIRST SPEAKER ON THE LIST.
>> I'M GOING TO BE CALLING
NUMBERS. WE'LL START WITH ONE
THROUGH
TEN, IF YOU COULD PLEASE LINE
UP AT THE TWO SPEAKER SETS WE
HAVE
HERE.
>> I'LL REMIND PEOPLE, PLEASE
--
JAZZ HANDS AS THEY'RE CALLED
AND NOT CLAPPING OR VOCALIZING.
GO AHEAD, PLEASE.
>> SPEAKERS
ONE THROUGH TEN, STARTING WITH
MONTY.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS
MONTY ANDERSON, SEATTLE PUBLIC
TRADES.
A LONG ROAD TO GET HERE.
I KNOW WE'RE ALL HAPPY TO SEE
HERE, BUT PROBABLY NOT.
IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME GOING ON
THIS THING.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING REALLY
HARD AND FOCUSED ON HOUSING.
THIS GENERATION OF WEALTH
BUILDING, AND I'M ASKING
FOR SOME PRAGMATIC DECISIONS
FROM THE CITY HERE TO SUPPORT
THESE
PEOPLE AND THE COMMUNITY.
I ALSO WANT TO BE CLEAR
THAT WE'RE NOT INTO THIS IDEA
OF A
DELAY.
I THINK WE HAVE HAD A LOT
OF TIME TO THINK OF THIS.
SO IN MY CLOSING STATEMENTS,
I KNOW WE HAVE A LOT COMING.
I WOULD LIKE TO THANK
EVERYBODY FOR THEIR TIME AND
COMMITMENT, TAKING TIME OFF
WORK.
I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE
COUNSEL MEMBERS FOR LISTENING TO
US, ALL
SIDES. I KNOW IT'S A TOUGH
DECISION AND
I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU
FOR PUTTING THE SPEAKERS IN
ORDER
OF
IMPORTANCE.
THAT MEANS A LOT TO ME. THANK
YOU.
[ LAUGHTER ]
>> SPEAKER NUMBER TWO.
>> HI, GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL
MEMBERS.
I'M ANDREA, AND I'M HERE
TO SPEAK IN STRONG SUPPORT.
THIS IS A THOUGHTFUL
COMMUNITY DRIVEN PLAN THAT WILL
CREATE WORKFORCE HOUSING AND
GOOD
JOBS, AND WILL OFFER
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES WITHOUT
BURDENING
TAXPAYERS.
FRANKLY, IF THIS AREA IS
NOT DEVELOPED AS THE MAKERS
DISTRICT, WE WILL SEE IT
TURN INTO ANOTHER OFFICE
COMPLEX, ONLY BRINGING MORE
CONGESTION, MORE TRAFFIC.
INSTEAD, THE MAKERS
DISTRICT OFFERS HOMES FOR
WORKERS
ININ JOBS AND A
LONG- TERM COMMITMENT TO
BEGIN MAINTENANCE JOBS, CREATING
STABLE CAREERS FOR OUR LOCAL
WORKFORCE.
BEYOND THAT, THIS PROJECT
SUPPORTS LIGHT INDUSTRY
AND HELPS SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS
AND
ENTREPRENEURS BUILD
GENERATION WEALTH.
THIS IS A WIN FOR
JOBS, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AND
I URGE YOU
TO
SUPPORT IT TODAY WITHOUT DELAY.
THANK YOU.
>> NUMBER THREE, AND IF YOU
COULD PLEASE
INTRODUCE YOURSELF
BEFORE YOUR COMMENTS. THANK YOU.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
BILLY HETHERINGTON.
I WANT TO ECHO WHAT MONTY SAID.
I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR
TAKING THE TIME TO MEET WITH
US, TAKE A TOUR OF THE
PROPERTY, LISTEN TO BOTH SIDES.
YOU WERE VOTED -- YOU
WERE ELECTED FOR A REASON, TO DO
THE DUE DILIGENCE YOU HAVE ALL
DONE AND THANK YOU FOR THAT.
TO THIS PROJECT, YOU KNOW,
WE WANT TO GET THE VOTE THROUGH
TODAY. NO DELAY.
WE'VE GOT A LOT OF BIG
COALITION OF FOLKS ON BOTH SIDES
TODAY,
AND THE FACTS ARE THIS,
500 UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
THAT, YOU KNOW, PLUS WORKFORCE
HOUSING, MAKERS
DISTRICT, EVERYTHING THAT CAN GO
INTO
A STADIUM DISTRICT DOWN
THERE WOULD MEAN FOR THE SEATTLE
RESIDENTS.
WE URGE YOU TO TAKE THE VOTE
TODAY.
THANK YOU.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
FOR THE RECORD, I'M
ASHLEY NICOLE HOLLAND FOR
HISTORIC
DOWNTOWN, ADVOCATING FOR
THE PIONEER SQUARE AND CHINA
INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT
NEIGHBORHOODS.
I SUPPORT OF COUNCIL BILL
120933, ALLOWING
RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE
DISTRICT.
WE SUPPORT THE
MAKERS NEIGHBORHOOD AS A
COMPATIBLE WAY
FOR HOUSING TO CO- EXIST ON
THE EDGE OF
INDUSTRIAL AREAS WITH MIXED USE
SPACES BUILT IN TO
ACCOMMODATE THE
INDUSTRIAL FRAGRANCE IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO
BRING MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
AND
BOOSTING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AND INCREASING PUBLIC
SAFETY. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY
TO BRING
MORE THAN 900 HOUSING UNITS TO
PIONEER SQUARE AND 50% WILL BE
REQUIRED TO SERVE PEOPLE
BETWEEN 60 AND 90% OF AREA
MEDIUM
INCOME. MORE RESIDENTS MEANS
MORE
PEOPLE SPENDING MONEY AND EVEN
MORE VISITORS TO THE
NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S GREAT FOR BUSINESSES, FOR
INCREASING SAFETY IN
THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND IT'S
GREAT FOR
OVERALL VIBRANCY OF OUR
NEIGHBORHOODS, PLEASE SUPPORT
THE BILL.
THANK YOU.
NO DELAY, VOTE TODAY.
THANKS.
>> NUMBER FIVE?
>> HELLO.
MY NAME IS LAURA COMATTA, A
20- YEAR RESIDENT OF PIONEER
SQUARE AND I WORKED IN A
GALLERY FOR 16 YEARS.
I WANT TO SAY I'M IN SUPPORT OF
THIS MEASURE, AS DIFFICULT TO
FIND WORK SPACES TO HAVE
A MAKERS DISTRICT WOULD BE VITAL
TO THE AREA.
I CAN SAY THAT I'VE
BEEN INVOLVED WITH THE
COMMUNITY MEMBERS OF PIONEER
SQUARE RESIDENT BOARD MEMBER,
AND
IT'S BEEN REALLY IMPORTANT
TO INTEGRATE PEOPLE LIKE ME
THAT CAN TELL AND TALK TO
COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO REMEMBER
THE
HISTORY OF THE SPACE AND SO
BRINGING MORE RESIDENTS IN WILL
MAKE IT A
SAFER AND MORE VIBRANT
NEIGHBORHOOD, BETTER
FOR BUSINESSES AND
SAFER FOR
EVERYBODY VISITING DOWNTOWN.
THANK YOU.
>> HELLO.
JEDD IGER WITH THE LOCAL 46.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY
TO SPEAK TODAY.
WHEN I WAS HERE A COUPLE
WEEKS AGO I MENTIONED MY MOM
GRADUATED
FROM THE HIGH SCHOOL IN 1964.
SHE STILL LIVES
HERE IN THE CITY, AND WE'LL BE
CELEBRATING
HERE 80th BIRTHDAY NEXT JANUARY.
WHEN THE VIADUCT CAME DOWN
ALL THOSE YEARS DOWN, AS SOMEONE
WHO
GREW UP ON THE PENINSULA OVER
THERE, SHE -- EVERY TIME WOULD
TALK, SHE WAS JUST
BESIDE HERSELF THAT THIS
LANDMARK
WOULD COME DOWN.
I ASSURED HER THE CITY HAD A
PLAN TO MAKE THE WATER FRONT
BEAUTIFUL.
AND I'LL TELL YOU NOW, OUR
CONVERSATION, SHE'S LIKE, OH,
HONEY, THEY DID SUCH A GREAT
JOB DOWN ON THE WATERFRONT.
I THINK WE HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO DO SOMETHING
SIMILAR HERE IN THIS MAKERS
DISTRICT.
TO HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD IN
THE CITY THAT MAKES LIFE-
LONG SEATTLE RESIDENTS PROUD TO
BE A
PART OF THIS CITY AND WHAT
THE CITY IS DOING FOR
THE RESIDENTS. VOTE YES, NO
DELAY.
>> NUMBER SEVEN.
>> HELLO.
MY NAME IS ZACH
SNYDER, I'M A RESIDENT IN
DISTRICT THREE.
HELLO, JOY.
I WALKED DOWN HERE
TODAY REFLECTING ON THE CITY I
LIVE
IN.
I'VE BEEN HERE SINCE 2016.
THOUGH NOT THAT LONG, IT'S LONG
ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND THE
CITY'S TRANSITION AND GROWING
PAINS.
I FEEL LIKE THE CITY IS MORE AND
MORE BECOMING A GET IN, GET OUT
PLACE.
YOU'VE GOT OFFICES AND SPORTS
ARENAS.
BUT WHAT I THINK MAKES THE
CITY GREAT IS WHEN YOU WANT TO
HANG OUT AND SPEND MONEY, AND
I BELIEVE COMING FROM A FINE
ARTS
BACKGROUND, THAT HAVING MAKERS
DISTRICTS ARE -- IS WHERE
PEOPLE WILL FIND THEIR SKILLS
AND
THINK
ABOUT WAYS TO CREATE SMALL
BUSINESS.
AND HAVING THAT AVAILABLE TO
THEM WILL ENSURE THAT SEATTLE
HAS MORE OF IT.
THANK YOU.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON,
COUNCIL. MY NAME IS CARL
DEYOUNG, AND
I'M A PROUD MEMBER OF MY ALMA
MATER, THE VIKINGS TAKING
THE STATE
CHAMPIONSHIP IN BOY'S
BASKETBALL.
YES.
I'M HERE IN STRONG SUPPORT OF
THE COUNCIL BILL, SEATTLE IS
FACING AN URGENT HOUSING CRISIS,
YET WE CONTINUE TO
EXCLUDE
HOUSING FROM THE KEY DOWNTOWN
DISTRICT.
THIS PROPOSAL WILL
PROVIDE WORKFORCE HOUSING FOR
THE
VERY PEOPLE WHO KEEP SEATTLE
RUNNING.
OUR TRADES WORKERS,
OUR HOSPITALITY STAFF, OUR
ARTISTS, AND SMALL
MANUFACTURERS.
CRITICS ARGUE THAT THIS WILL
DISRUPT SEATTLE'S MARITIME
AND FREIGHT ECONOMY.
LET ME BE CLEAR, WE CAN
SUPPORT OUR WORKING WATERFRONT
AND
ADDRESSING OUR HOUSING NEEDS.
COME ON, SEATTLE, WE CAN
WALK AND CHEW GUM AT THE SAME
TIME.
THE PORT OF SEATTLE IS
CRITICAL, BUT THIS DOES NOT
THREATEN
THEM, IT ALIGNS WITH THE
CITY'S LONG- TERM PLANS BY
ENSURING
THAT HOUSING IS CONCENTRATED
WHERE IT
MAKES SENSE -- [ MUTED ]
>> FOR THE RECORD, I'M CHAD
SMITH, THE POLITICAL DIRECTOR
FOR IUPTA DC-5.
I THINK I'M A THIRD GENERATION
SEATTLE-ITE.
I DON'T LIVE HERE, BUT I GREW
UP
IN THE STREETS OF
SEATTLE, PLAYED FOOTBALL IN THIS
TOWN, WORKED AS AN APPRENTICE IN
THIS
TOWN. YOU KNOW, THERE'S A
SONG CALLED -- BY STARSHIP
CALLED
"WE BUILT THIS CITY ON ROCK 'N'
ROLL. "
THIS CITY, WHEN YOU WALK
DOWN THE STREET AND YOU SEE THE
GLASS, THIS UNION, THESE
UNION TRADES BUILT THIS CITY,
AND
WE WANT
TO CONTINUE TO BUILD THIS CITY,
AND WE LIKE TO BE HERE AND
COME TO FOOTBALL GAMES
AND BASEBALL GAMES.
PLEASE PASS
THIS TODAY.
JUST DON'T PUT THIS OFF. THANK
YOU.
>> AFTER SPEAKER NUMBER
TEN, WE'LL MOVE TO SPEAKERS
NUMBERS
11
THROUGH 20. SO PLEASE START
LINING UP.
>> HELLO, CITY COUNCIL.
I'M NICOLE GRANT.
I USE SHE AND HER PRO-NOUNS.
I AM AN ELECTRICIAN, A
MEMBER OF
LOCAL 46. WE WORKED REALLY HARD
TO GET THE
FINEST LABOR STANDARDS
ANYWHERE TO BUILD MAKER HOUSING
IN
THE STADIUM DISTRICT, AND ONCE
WE GOT THOSE LABOR STANDARDS,
THIS PROJECT BECAME OUR OWN, AND
THE ENTHUSIASM AND VISION WE
HAVE
TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A
NEIGHBORHOOD
THAT'S SO SPECIAL, YOU
KNOW, THAT COMES ON THE TAILS OF
FIFA, AND THAT IS A PLACE WHERE
SO
MANY YOUNG PEOPLE WHO
HAVE GOTTEN NEW UNION CAREERS,
NOT
JUST AS APPRENTICES TO
BUILDING TRADES BUT AS BAR
TENDERS,
AS SECURITY GUARDS AND JANITORS
AT T- MOBILE PARK, AS
HOTEL WORKERS. [ MUTED ]
>> WE DO HAVE THREE ELECTEDS
AND THE TRADITION HERE IS TO
OFFER
AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
FELLOW ELECTEDS TO PROVIDE
COMMENT.
SINCE YOU ARE HERE AT THE
PODIUM, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND MAKE
YOUR COMMENT AND THEN I'LL
MOVE TO THE NEXT THREE.
GO AHEAD, PLEASE.
>> THANK YOU.
I'M HERE TO DISCUSS A POLICE
MATTER THAT HAPPENED TO ME
ON DECEMBER 23.
SOMEBODY CALLED THE POLICE ON
ME, AND WHEN I GOT THE
POLICE REPORT, IT'S A BUNCH OF
LIES.
HOW CAN WE CHARGE TO THE
COURT, BECAUSE IF SOMEBODY CALLS
ON SOMEBODY ELSE WITH LIES, AND
I SPENT 30 DAYS IN JAIL FOR NO
REASON.
THE CASE WAS DISMISSED.
HOW MUCH TIME WILL WE SAVE
WITH THE COURT TO NOT LIE TO THE
POLICE?
THAT'S A SERIOUS CALL.
I CAN GET KILLED.
POLICE WERE AT MY APARTMENT, AND
SO I ASK THE ATTORNEY I SAID
HOW CAN I PRESS CHARGES TO THE
CALLER?
OH, YOU'RE LUCKY YOU DON'T GET
CHARGED.
I SAID THAT WILL SAVE MONEY
FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND
PHONE CALLS TO 911.
THE PERSON WHO CALLED
NEEDS TO BE CHARGED.
THAT'S ALL I WANT TO SAY.
THANK YOU.
>> COMMISSIONER
HASAGAWA, PLEASE.
>> THANK YOU, MADAME PRESIDENT.
GOOD MORNING, MADAME
PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS OF THE
COUNCIL.
I'M TOSHIKO HASAGAWA.
I'M HERE WITH OUR COALITION
OF OVER 70 ORGANIZATIONS URGING
YOU TO DELAY CONSIDERATION OF
THIS
ITEM UNTIL MORE INFORMATION CAN
COME TO LIGHT.
ALL OF US DESERVE CLARITY ON OUR
OUTSTANDING UNCERTAINTIES.
THE COAST GUARD RECORD OF A
DECISION WHERE IT WILL GO IS
STEJED FOR APRIL 30th.
THE CITY RESOLUTION PASSED IN
2023 AND REQUIRED THAT WITHIN
TWO YEARS THE CITY WOULD
STUDY THE IMPACTS OF NOP-
INDUSTRIAL USES OF LAND ON
FREIGHT
MOBILITY.
WHERE IS IT?
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS UPON
YOU TO
CONSIDER HOUSING OPTIONS IN A
BROADER CONTEXT.
AND IF THE PORT IS
DISCUSSING PURCHASING THE HANSON
PROPERTIES, BUT WE NEED TO
KNOW IF HE'S INTERESTED IN
HAVING THAT DISCUSSION.
AS PUBLIC OFFICIALS, PLEASE
THOUGHTFULLY DELIBERATE THIS
AND WE WANT TO BE AT THE TABLE
TO DEVELOP A MEANINGFUL
STRATEGY.
THAT'S THE PATH WE WANT TO BE
ON WITH YOU.
SO PLEASE
WITH YOUR VOTE GIVE US
MEANINGFUL TIME.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
I CAN EMPATHIZE WITH ALL OF YOU
IN THE POSITION YOU'RE IN, AND
OUR ROLES AS PUBLIC LEADERS.
WE HAVE REALLY
DIFFICULT DECISIONS TO MAKE,
ESPECIALLY WHEN WE FEEL LIKE
WE'RE
BALANCING BETWEEN CORE VALUES.
IN THIS CASE, YOU'RE BEING
ASKED TO CONSIDER WHETHER YOU
SUPPORT THIS POTENTIALLY ADDRESS
SOME OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
CONCERNS
AND OPPOSE IT.
WE'RE IN THE MIDST OF A
GLOBAL AND NATIONAL TURMOIL.
WHAT IF THAT IS A FALSE CHOICE?
WHAT IF INSTEAD THERE WAS
A THIRD WAY
THAT WOULD SUPPORT BOTH SIDES OF
THIS AND GET
EVERYBODY ON THE SAME SIDE OF
THE TABLE?
I'M SUGGESTING THERE IS A THIRD
WAY HERE, THERE IS ANOTHER
OPTION.
AND WHAT I'M ASKING YOU FOR
IS TO USE THE
COLLABORATIVE THAT WAS SIGNED
DECEMBER 10th BY THE
MAYOR, COUNTY EXECUTIVES AND
OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES, JUST
GIVE US A DATE CERTAIN OF A
COUPLE
OF
MONTHS FOR THAT WORK TO HAPPEN.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE, COUNCIL
MEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY
TO SPEAK ONCE AGAIN IN
OPPOSITION TO 120933.
I'M YOUR OLDEST SERVING PORT OF
SEATTLE COMMISSIONER
CURRENTLY, AND I HAVE BEEN
HERE THROUGH THIS BATTLE MANY
TIMES.
I HOPE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND WHY
HAVING FULL INFORMATION
BEFORE
MAKING SUCH A DECISION IS
CRITICAL.
I'M HERE TODAY TO SUPPORT
THE EXPERT FROM THE
MARITIME INDUSTRY WHO WITH
BEST QUALIFIED TO IDENTIFY HOW
THIS
PROPOSAL PUTS OUR HIGH- WAGE
JOBS AT RISK.
FLIPPING INDUSTRIAL LANDS
INTO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES
CREATE INCOMPATIBLE USES,
RESULTING IN
MORE DELAY THAT MAKES OUR
PORT LESS COMPETITIVE.
THE PROPOSAL IS BASED
ON SELECTIVE READING OF THE EIS.
THIS IS WHAT'S CRITICAL.
WHILE THE EIS ALLOWS
FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN
SOTO, IT DOESN'T CLEAR 1st
AVENUE
FOR THE DEGREE OF DEVELOPMENT
NOW UNDER DEBATE.
AND IT ASSUMES PROTECTION OF A
200 FOOT BUFFER FOR THIS
HEAVY HAUL CORRIDOR AS IS THE
CASE THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
FURTHER, THE LEGISLATION
DOES NOT CONSIDER LITIGATION
COST
TO THE CITY IDENTIFIED IN THE
EIS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED IF
YOU CHOOSE TO VIOLATE THE 200
FOOT
BUFFER.
I
HOPE --
>> TIME IS UP, PLEASE.
>> -- ON OUR LANDS AT A
MINIMUM I URGE YOU TO COMPLETE
THE STUDY
BEFORE SETTING --
[ MUTED ]
>> WE'LL NOW RESUME IN- PERSON
COMMENT.
NUMBERS 12 THROUGH 20. THANK
YOU.
>> HELLO.
MY NAME IS EDDIE, I'M A
BUSINESS
AGENT.
I'M HERE TO RISE IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF THE OPPORTUNITY
FOR AN ALL UNION PLA
COVERING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN
THE STADIUM DISTRICT AND IN
STRONG
OPPOSITION OF A DELAY.
THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE WHO
TOOK TIME OUT OF THEIR DAYS AND
ARE LOSING WAGES TO SUPPORT WHAT
THEY BELIEVE IN.
THOSE THAT ARE PAID TO BE ON
THIS COUNCIL WOULD BE REMISS
IF THEY TOOK THESE PEOPLE'S
TIME FOR GRANT IT TODAY.
ZERO, THE NUMBER OF MARITIME
WORKERS, ZERO IMPACT ON
MARITIME JOBS IN THAT AREA.
NUMBER ONE, CURRENT UPPER ONE
OF PRIVATE INVESTORS WILLING
TO OFFER AN ALL- UNION PLA
FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN
SEATTLE.
TWO, THE NUMBER OF ARTERIAL
ROADS THAT BORDER IN
QUESTION, BE IT OVERPASSES,
LARGE CROSS
WALKS, AS A VIABLE MEANS
TO EFFECTIVELY MOVE THOUSANDS OF
FANSES IN AND OUT OF SPORTING
EVENTS. IS THAT
60 SECONDS?
>> SPEAKER 13.
[ MUTED ]
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL
MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS SAM HENN,
ASSISTANT MANAGER OF LOCAL 66.
THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO
HEAR ME TODAY.
I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE
VALUE OF THIS PROJECT THAT IT
BRINGS
TO THE COMMUNITY AND THE
WORKERS AND THE ARTISTS.
THE EIS HAS ALREADY PROVEN
THERE WILL BE NO IMPACT ON THE
FREIGHT
MOBILITY, RIGHT?
AND SO THE VALUE THEN
REALLY COMES DOWN TO THE
COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND IT'S
PARAMOUNT
WE ADDRESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WE HAVE A CRISIS, AND IT'S
PARAMOUNT THAT WE ADDRESS
THIS, AND A GOOD WAY TO DO THAT
IS TO
PROMOTE THAT
NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING RIGHT HERE
IN THIS
DISTRICT.
A DELAY TODAY COULD RISK LOSING
THIS TREMENDOUS
OPPORTUNITY. OUR MEMBERS ARE
READY TO GET
TO WORK TO SOLVE THIS
HOUSING CRISIS WE ALL
FACE.
NO DELAY AND VOTE TODAY. THANK
YOU.
>> SPEAKER NUMBER 15.
14, SORRY.
14, THANK YOU.
>> MEMBERS, I'M CHIEF OF STAFF
OF THE PORT COMMISSION.
THE PORT OF SEATTLE,
REDUCING INDUSTRIAL LAND FOR
HOUSING
IS CONTRARY -- GIVE THAN THE
PORT IS A GOVERNMENT MADE UP
OF COUNTY WIDE ELECTED
OFFICIALS.
SHOULDN'T THAT ASSERTION
BE TAKEN AT FACE VALUE?
IS THE PORT NOT A GOVERNING
BODY THAT DESERVES THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR
COLLABORATION? THE PORT AND THE
CITY
SHOULD BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE A
SHARED
FUTURE.
LET US SIT DOWN AND DISCUSS
THE FUTURE OF MARITIME IN OUR
CITY.
COUNCIL MEMBERS, IF YOU HAVE
A SHADOW OF DOUBT, DELAY THIS
LEGISLATION.
THE PORT WILL COME TO THE
TABLE WILLINGLY TO DEVELOP A
PLAN FOR
A FUTURE THAT WE CAN ALL
SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
>> NOW WE'RE AT 15. THANK YOU.
>> MY NAME IS TIA.
FOR DECADES I LIVED NEXT TO THE
STADIUM, THE BALLPARK AND THE
PORT NEXT TO THE PROPOSED
MAKERS DISTRICT.
LAST NIGHT I WROTE A MASS
EMAIL THAT TALKED ABOUT MY
DISTRICT WAS A QUARTER MILE AWAY
FROM
A SUPER FUNDS SITE.
LUCKILY, THIS ISN'T TRUE.
IT'S A MILE AND A QUARTER
AWAY OVER IN HARBOR
ISLAND. THE FINAL EIS STATEMENT
SAYS THE
DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING
WOULD RESULT IN MOST LONG-
TERM BENEFITS OF LOWER
CONCENTRATIONS OF CHEMICALS IN
SOILS AND
SURFACE WATT WE ARE A CLEAN SIDE
AND NO SIGNIFICANT
IMPACTS RELATED TO AIR QUALITY
AND
GREEN HOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ARE
ANTICIPATED.
I'VE BEEN COMING HERE SINCE
2013
ON THIS ISSUE.
AND I DON'T WANT TO TAKE
THIS ONE TO MY GRAVE.
CAN WE PLEASE NOT DELAY AND VOTE
TODAY. THANK YOU.
>> MY NAME IS SANDY SMITH,
AND FOR OVER 30 YEARS, I HAVE
LIVED, WORKED,
AND OWNED BUSINESSES IN PIONEER
SQUARE.
AND I AM IN FAVOR OF THE MAKERS
DISTRICT.
WHEN I WENT THE FIVE- MINUTE
WALK DOWN TO WHERE IT IS FROM MY
HOME AND LOOKED AROUND, I WENT,
OH, MY GOD, THIS IS PERFECT!
THIS IS PERFECT!
AND I TRIED TO GET --
CALM MYSELF BECAUSE I HEARD
THERE
WAS
OPPOSITION. I WALKED AND LOOKED
TO SEE
WHERE THAT OPPOSITION COULD BE,
WHAT
COULD IT POSSIBLY BE
IMPEDING, AND I COULDN'T FIND
IT.
BUT THE REALITY IS, WE WANT
IT, WE NEED IT, WE NEED
WORKFORCE
HOUSING.
PIONEER SQUARE IS A DIVERSE
NEIGHBORHOOD. WE HAVE PROVEN
THAT WE
CAN HANDLE A LOT OF DIFFERENCES,
AND WE WANT THE CHANCE TO
WELCOME THESE PEOPLE FROM THE
MAKERS GROUP AND ALSO TO
PROVIDE WORKFORCE HOUSING TO
CREATE MORE
SUSTAINABLE SUPPORT FOR OUR
BUSINESSES.
AND I TOO VOTE NO
DELAY, PLEASE
VOTE FOR IT TODAY. THANK YOU.
>> I'M GARIEE WITH THE
CID COUNCIL IN CHINATOWN.
I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE REZONE
FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS
HERE, AS WELL AS SUPPORTING THE
DISTRICT
STADIUM, IT WILL SUPPORT THE
CAD IN PIONEER SQUARE.
SO WE ARE ALL FOR THIS TO
INCREASE THE LIVEABILITY
AROUND THE CID, PIONEER SQUARE,
THE
BUSINESSES, WE NEED THIS TO
MITIGATE, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S
BEEN HAPPENING THE LAST COUPLE
OF YEARS DOWN THERE.
THE HOMELESSNESS,
CONCENTRATIONS OF SHELTERS, AS
WELL AS
CONCENTRATION OF THE DRUG --
CRAZY DRUG HAPPENINGS DOWN
THERE. SO WE NEED THIS TO HELP
SUPPORT THE BUSINESSES AND IN
THE CID.
THANKS.
>> HELLO.
MY NAME IS JOEL, I'M
AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING
DEVELOPER AS WELL AS A BUSINESS
OWNER IN THE
CID.
I SUPPORT THE PROPOSAL FOR FOR
NEW STADIUM AND MAKERS DISTRICT.
WE ARE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR
NEW AND CREATIVE WAYS TO BUILD
NEW
AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THIS HAS THE ADDED BENEFIT AS
I THINK EVERYONE KNOWS, AS
RELATED MAKERS DISTRICT, AS
WELL.
MANY OF THOSE BUSINESSES AS
ILLUSTRATED ARE OWNED
AND
OPERATED BY WOMEN, AND WOMEN OF
COLOR.
I'M A THIRD GENERATION
SEATTLEITE.
MY GRANDPARENTS HAD A
RESTAURANTRESTAURANT WHAT WAS
KNOWN AS
CHINATOWN. MY MOM HAD AN ART
GALLERY AND
MY DAD HAD AN ARCHITECTURAL
FIRM.
SO I KNEW GROWING UP THE
BENEFITBENEFIT PEOPLE WALKING
AROUND THRIVING IN BUSINESSES.
SO PLEASE VOTE TODAY, DON'T
DELAY.
THANK YOU.
>> HI.
WE SUPPORT COUNCIL BILL 120933.
THE OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE
A VIBRANT MAKERS DISTRICT IS
A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
NOT ONLY TO BOOST ECONOMIC
AND PUBLIC BENEFITS IN THE
STADIUM DISTRICT BUT TO BRIDGE
THAT
GAP BETWEEN MY NEAR SQUARE AND
THE CID.
BUILDINGS CONTINUE TO
DETERIORATE, VACANCIES ARE
INCREASING AND PUBLIC
SAFETY CONCERNS ARE RISING.
THE MAKERS DEVELOPMENT PROVIDES
WOMEN AND
MINORITY ENTREPRENEURS WITH
OPPORTUNITY TO GROW AND
THRIVE IN THE URBAN FORM.
THE BILL SUPPORTS THE
ADDITION OF MORE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS
IN SEATTLE.
87% OF REGISTERED VOTERS
SUPPORT THE PLAN.
INVESTING IN THIS
INITIATIVE WILL CONTRIBUTE TO
MUCH-
NEEDED STREET IMPROVEMENT
INFRASTRUCTURE, SMALL BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC CITY
ENHANCEMENT, JOB GROWTH AND MOST
IMPORTANTLY, INCREASE
OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR FAMILIES.
THANK YOU.
>> AFTER SPEAKER NUMBER 20, WE
WILL MOVE INTO REMOTE,
THE
PUBLIC COMMENT, WHICH THERE ARE
FIVE PRESENT.
SPEAKER NUMBER 20.
>> COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK YOU.
JOSHUA CURTIS, AND I WOULD
LIKE TO ADDRESS THREE ISSUES.
LICK WHICH FACTION, SOUND LEVELS
AND PROXIMITY.
LIQUEFACTION CAN BE
ADDRESSED THROUGH SEISMIC
BUILDING
CENTERS AS WE DID WITH THE
BALLPARK DID
OVER 25 YEARS AGO.
GEORGETOWN WHERE OPPONENTS WERE
IN FAVOR OF
RESIDENTIAL ZONING IS ALSO IN
THE LIQUEFACTION
ZONE. THIS IS A NOISY AREA, A
THE
EIS RECOMMENDS THAT
BUILDING ELEMENTS SUCH AS TRIPLE
PANE
WINDOWS BE APPLIED.
GEORGETOWN HAS AN
ALMOST IDENTICAL NOISE RATING.
OUR AREA IS LOCATED ACROSS
THE BAY FROM THE HARBOR.
GEORGETOWN, WHERE OPPONENTS
WERE IN FAVOR OF RESIDENTIAL
ZONING IS LOCATED NEXT TO THE
SUPER FUND SITE.
DELAYING THE VOTE WOULD BE A
DISTRACTION.
PLEASE HONOR THE DEAL
STAKE HOLDERS AGREED TO OVER TWO
YEARS
AGO AND VOTE TODAY TO
ADD AFFORDABLE HOUSING,
PROMOTE MAKERS BUSINESSES
AND IMPROVE
PUBLIC SAFETY. THANK YOU.
>> PUBLIC COMMENTERS
PLEASE PRESS STAR 6.
THE FIRST UP IS CURT SWANSON.
GO AHEAD, CURT.
>> HELLO.
I'M SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF
THE COUNCIL BILL 120933.
I'M A POLITICAL COORDINATOR
FOR THE LOCAL PIPE FITTERS
UNION.
WE HAVE WORKED ON PIPING
IN SEATTLE FOR OVER 130
YEARS. WE HAVE OVER 4,000
MEMBERS
IN THE CURRENT REGION.
WE RESPECT THE IMPORTANCE
OF TRADE AND COMMERCE AND
SUPPORT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, SMALL
BUSINESSES AND LOCAL CRAFTS
AND ACCORDABLE HOUSING.
OUR MEMBERS
COULD LOVE -- [ INAUDIBLE ]
WE BELIEVE THE FUTURE RESIDENT
BUSINESSES AND
TRADE OPERATIONS CAN CO- EXIST
AND PROSPER.
LET'S CREATE ANOTHER UNIQUE
REGION WITHIN THE CITY.
PLEASE VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE
COUNCIL BILL TODAY.
DON'T DELAY. THANK YOU.
>> NUKE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS
>> THANK YOU, OUR NEXT SPEAKER
IS PETER.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
I SERVE AS THE VICE PRESIDENT
OF THE AMERICAN WATERWAYS
OPERATORS, WHICH IS THE
ADVOCATE, RESOURCE AND VOICE
FOR THE TUG BOAT AND BARGE
INDUSTRY.
I'M ALSO A BOARD MEMBER OF
THE WASHINGTON MARITIME
FEDERATION.
OUR INDUSTRY, WHICH
SUPPORTS THOUSANDS OF FAMILY
WAGE JOBS IN
SEATTLE WASHINGTON,
OPPOSE COUNCIL BILL 120933.
AS YOU HEARD TIME AND TIME
AGAIN, WE HAD A DEAL.
ONCE THESE INDUSTRIAL LANDS ARE
REPLACED WITH HOMES THEY
ARE GONE FOREVER.
OUR COALITION HAS THIS
MESSAGE, THIS IS NOT JUST
ABOUT PROTECTING WHAT WE HAVE,
BUT BUILDING A FUTURE WHERE
OUR MARITIME INDUSTRY THRIVES
AND
OUR STATE CONTINUES TO
LEAD IN GLOBAL TRADE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU.
THE NEXT PUBLIC SPEAKER IS
MICAH.
PLEASE PRESS STAR 6, MIKE.
>> YES, GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL
MEMBERS. I'M WITH THE GENERAL
CITY
COLLECTIVE.
I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS, AND
I WANT TO THANK SARA NELSON
FOR BRING THING LEGISLATION.
WE SHOULD BE THANKING
CHRIS HANSON
FOR HOCKEY THAT'S HERE IN
SEATTLE.
NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT
HOCKEY UNTIL CHRIS HANSON WAS
TALKING ABOUT GETTING THE SONICS
BACK.
THAT IDEA GOT HIJACKED.
AND CHRIS HANSON IS A GENUINE
DUDE.
SOMETHING NEEDS TO HAPPEN
DIFFERENTLY.
I SUPPORT THIS.
DON'T GIVE IN TO THE
BULLYING ABOUT THE
PORT. EVERYTHING WILL BE ALL
RIGHT.
WE NEED SOMETHING NEW AND
FRESH IN SEATTLE AND WE NEED
HOUSING.
SO I SUPPORT THIS.
VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS.
THAT'S ALL I GOT TO SAY.
TAKE CARE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MIKE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS ANDREA.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
MY NAME IS ANDREA SATO, I'M
A MEMBER OF THE BALLPARK PSD
BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND I WORK
ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING ISSUES IN
MY
DAY JOB.
WE JOIN WITH OUR
COALITION MEMBERS TO ASK THAT
YOU VOTE
TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THE
STADIUM MAKERS DISTRICT.
AN OPPORTUNITY THAT WILL HELP
TO TRANSFORM THE LARGE AND
ABANDONED AREAS AROUND
THE BALLPARK INTO A SAFE AND
VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY
TO ADDRESS THE HOUSING CRISIS
OUR CITY FACES.
IN 2023, THE LAST- MINUTE
REMOVAL OF HOUSING AS AN ALLOWED
USE
IN THE STADIUM DISTRICT
REVERSED YEARS OF DISCUSSION BY
STAKE HOLDERS AND DISREGARDED
THE FINDINGS OF THE TRAFFIC
STUDY.
TODAY, WE ASK YOU TO REMEDY THAT
JOEF SIGHT.
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF
THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS
THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SHORTAGE
IN THE CITY, PROVIDE SMALL
MAKERS
BUSINESSES THE OPPORTUNITY
TO STAY AND FLOURISH IN THE
CITY, AND IMPROVE THE PUBLIC
SAFETY IN
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
NO DELAY, VOTE TODAY.
THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
NEXT SPEAKER IS DAVID HANES.
>> THANK YOU.
MAYBE COUNCIL SHOULD LOBBY
PRESIDENT TRUMP TO BROKE
EAR DEAL TO PUT A FEDERAL
INJUNCTION ON ALL THE PORT
AUTHORITIES, RAISE THE RATES AND
SHUT
DOWN THE PORT DURING GAME
TIME. AND SPOP TOP THEM FROM
WATERING DOWN THE INTEGRITY OF
CUSTOMS PROTECTIONS THAT ALLOW
DRUGS
COME IN.
WHO TELL OUT OUR SOVEREIGNTY
FOR BAD TRADE DEALS THAT THEY
WILL SKIM OFF OF AT TAX PAYERS
EXPERIENCE.
MAYBE COUNCIL NEEDS TO DEMAND
THAT THE PORT PUT
NOISE ABATEMENT WALLS AROUND
THE TERMINAL CLOSEST TO THE
STADIUM TO ALLEVIATE SOME OF
THE UNNECESSARY NOISE
POLLUTIONS THAT GO ON 24/7 AND
DEMAND
THE INDUSTRIAL TRAIN STOP
HONKING THEIR HORNS EVERY NIGHT
AND
AT GAME TIME.
COUNCIL SHOULD TAKE THE FINE
PRINT OUT OF THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT
WHERE IF
A DEVELOPER BUILDS LOW
QUALITY HOUSING --
[ MUTED ]
>> NOW TO IN-PERSON SPEAKERS.
>> WE WANT TO MOVE INTO
THE NEXT TEN SPEAKERS.
SPEAKERS 21 THROUGH 30.
IF YOU COULD LINE UP AT THE TWO
PODIUMS, THAT WOULD BE GREAT
AND PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF.
>> I'M CHRIS MARCH HERE,
THE PUBLIC BOARD THAT
OVERSEES PUBLIC OWNERSHIP OF T-
MOBILE
PARK.
AS STEWARDS, WE HAVE SEEN
MANY CITIES RELOCATE THEIR
STADIUMS
INTO VITAL AREAS THAT ARE SAFE
AND WELCOMING.
HERE IN SEATTLE, WHERE WE
FIND OURSELVES FACING AN
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PUBLIC
SAFETY
CHALLENGE, WE SHOULD BE
TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE STADIUM
DISTRICT TO DO THE SAME
AS PLACES
LIKE DENVER, SAN DIEGO, AND
WASHINGTON, D.C.
SINCE 2012, THE PFD HAS
WORKED WITH OUR PARTNERS TO
BRING
THIS VISION TO FRUITION.
BETWEEN 2019 AND 2022,
WE WORKED IN
GOOD FAITH WITH THOSE STAKE
HOLDERS THAT INCLUDED HOUSING
IN THE STADIUM MAKERS DISTRICT.
WE WERE DISAPPOINTED
THAT COMPROMISE WAS NOT HONORED
IN
2023. WE ASK THAT YOU MAKE GOOD
ON THAT COMPROMISE TODAY,
WITHOUT
DELAY, AND USE THIS
OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS AN
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
SHORTAGE, ALLOW SMALL
MAKERS BUSINESSES THE
OPPORTUNITY
TO STAY IN THE CITY AND IMPROVE
THE PUBLIC
SAFETY IN OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
>> SPEAKER NUMBER 22.
NO 22, ON TO 23.
THANK YOU.
>> HI.
MY NAME IS GARY JOHNSON.
A RETIRED EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY.
I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS
ISSUE
FOR 12 YEARS. THIS PROJECT HAS
BEEN STUDIED
THOROUGHLY. THIS WILL BRING A
LOT OF
BENEFIT AND THE STUDIES INDICATE
THAT
THE PROPOSED HOUSING WILL NOT
INTERFERE WITH PORT OPERATIONS
AND THE PROPOSED MAKERS STRICT
AN INCREDIBLE OPPORTUNITY TO
BRING LIGHT INDUSTRY BACK TO
AN AREA THAT HAS ZERO INDUSTRY
NOW.
PLEASE MOVE THIS FORWARD AND
DON'T DELAY. THANK YOU.
>> HELLO, COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I'M RON MANUEL.
I RISE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS.
I WORKED ON THE DOCKS FOR
ALMOST 40 YEARS.
I WANT TO THANK THE
COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO HAVE BEEN
OPEN MINDED TO LISTEN TO THOSE
OF
US WHO HAVE WORKED THE DOCKS
AND SUPPORT THE BUSINESSES OF
THIS
CITY.
THE BUSINESSES LOCATED IN
THIS INDUSTRIAL OVERLAY ZONE.
SOME OF YOU LISTENED, SOME DID
NOT.
I WILL APOLOGIZE FOR SOME OF OUR
MEMBERS THAT MAYBE CROSSED THE
LINE IN PERSONAL ATTACKS.
THOSE MEMBERS ARE
PASSIONATE ABOUT OUR WAY OF
LIFE,
THE KNOWLEDGE THAT WE HAVE
BEEN REASONABLE AND NEGOTIATED
IN GOOD FAITH WITH THE CITY
TO PROTECT OUR JOBS FROM
CONSTANT ATTACKS FROM ALL SORTS
OF
ENTITIES.
WE REACHED THE DEAL TO BE BLIND
SIDED BY THIS LAND USE POLICY
CHANGE, WHICH JEOPARDIZES OUR
JOBS, SO WE MAY HAVE ACTED OUT.
I HEARD A COMMENT ABOUT
WHO BUILT THIS CITY.
BUT IF THEY BUILT IT, A
TRUCK BROUGHT IT, A SHIP BROUGHT
IT.
THANK YOU.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, CITY COUNCIL
MEMBERS.
I AM A UNION CARPENTER
REPRESENTATIVE AND I'M A VERY
PROUD CARPENTER.
I URGE YOU TODAY TO SUPPORT
THE MAKERS HOUSING PROJECT.
THIS IS ABOUT WHAT KIND OF
CITY SEATTLE WANTS TO BE.
DO WE WANT A PLACE WHERE
WORKING PEOPLE CAN AFFORD TO
LIVE OR
JUST A PLACE WHERE THE WEALTHY
RESIDE?
THIS PROJECT HAS AN INVESTMENT
IN A WORKFORCE FOR OUR
ECONOMY AND FUTURE.
PROVIDES HOUSING FOR WORKERS,
CREATES UNION JOBS AND
KEEPS INDUSTRIES ALIVE,
ENSURING SKILLED TRADES WOMEN
AND
MEN AREN'T FORCED OUT OF THE
CITY THAT THEY HELPED BUILD.
WE CAN'T HAVE OUTDATED
THINKING HOLD US BACK.
SEATTLE NEEDS SMART,
FORWARD LOOKING SOLUTIONS.
THE MAKERS DISTRICT IS THAT
SOLUTION. I URGE YOU TO VOTE YES
AND
INVEST IN A FUTURE WHERE WORKING
PEOPLE WILL HAVE A
PLACE TO LIVE
IN SEATTLE. THANK YOU.
>> NUMBER 26.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
MY NAME IS NICK SCHULTZ, A
PROUD UBC MEMBER OF LOCAL 206.
I SPEAK ON
BEHALF OF THE WESTERN COUNCIL
SAYING, PROMOTING THIS
WILL HELP NOT ONLY JOBSJOBS OUR
MEMBERS, BUT ALSO
POSSIBLY MEMBERS FROM ALL
AROUND, ALL
ALONG THE WESTERN SIDE TO
MOVE INTO THE CITY OF SEATTLE.
A LOT OF OUR MEMBERS CAN
NOT AFFORD THIS.
THIS WILL ENHANCE THAT TIE.
ALSO, SMALL BUSINESSES
ALSO ENHANCE OTHER JOBS, NOT
JUST FOR
THE CARPENTERS BUT OTHER UNION
MEMBERS THAT HAVE BEEN
ANNOUNCED.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME. I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE FOR
THIS.
>>
HELLO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
BEING HERE TODAY.
MY NAME IS JESSICA, I OWN
A COMPANY CALLED MORNING GLORY
CHAI.
I STARTED IN 1995 IN THE PIPE
PLACE MARKET.
WE HAVE A SPACE IN GREENWOOD
CURRENTLY.
WE WERE LOOKING TO RELOCATE
INTO THE STADIUM AREA AROUND 6th
AND
MASSACHUSETTS, BUT BECAUSE IT'S
SUCH A DANGEROUS AREA
CURRENTLY, WE DIDN'T WANT TO
BRING
OUR EMPLOYEES DOWN THERE UNLESS
WE HAD A PLAN TO TRANSPORT THEM
IN AND OUT.
I STRONGLY SUPPORT THE
STADIUM MAKERS DISTRICT.
I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A
SPACE WHERE I COULD PUT MY
BUSINESS, MY 30-YEAR- LONG
BUSINESS IN
A SAFE PLACE
THAT SUPPORTS SMALL BUSINESS
MANUFACTURING.
I'M CONFIDENCE YOU'LL
FIND WAYS TO MITIGATE THE
CONCERNS OF
THE FREIGHT AND THE PORT.
I RELY UPON FREIGHT FOR MY
INGREDIENTS TO MAKE MY TEA
PRODUCTS, SO I DEFINITELY AM
IN SUPPORT OF FINDING A
BALANCE WHERE THE PORT CAN DO
WHAT THEY NEED TO DO AND SMALL
BUSINESS
IS ABLE TO BENEFIT FROM THAT
TO COMBINE EFFORT.
SO THANK YOU.
PLEASE VOTE
IN SUPPORT OF THE STADIUM MAKERS
DISTRICT.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
I'M GRACIE SANTOS, THE OWNER OF
GRACIE'S PIES.
I'M HERE AS A SEATTLE MEMBER TO
ASK THE COUNCIL TO VOTE
IN SUPPORT OF 120933 TO CREATE
A STADIUM MAKERS DISTRICT.
MY COMMENTARY KITCHEN
IS
CURRENTLY LOCATED IN THE CENTRAL
DISTRICT.
I HAVE STRUGGLED TO FIND A
PHYSICAL SPACE SINCE 2020 FOR MY
BUSINESS. AND THIS PROJECT COULD
HAVE
A HUGE ECONOMIC IMPACT
INCREASING LOCAL OWNERSHIP,
SEATTLE
TOURISM, EMPLOYMENT, AND
EQUITY FOR BUSINESS OWNERS
OF MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES.
THE INDUSTRIAL AND
MARITIME STRATEGY LEGISLATION
WAS
PASSED BY THE CITY OF SEATTLE IN
2023.
TO IN PART, CREATE AFFORDABLE
OPPORTUNITIES FOR SMALL-SCALE
BUSINESSES AND MAKERS.
OFFERING HOUSING AND
BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES TO MAKERS
IN A
TWO- BLOCK AREA WOULD NOT IMPEDE
THE MARITIME INDUSTRY.
[ MUTED ]
-- AND WE
CAN, IN FACT -- [ MUTED ]
>> NUMBER 29.
>> HELLO.
MY NAME IS BRENDAN GALLAGHER, A
MEMBER OF UFCW 3000.
I'M HERE TO SUPPORT THE
MAKERS DISTRICT BECAUSE WE NEED
HOUSING
SO THE PEOPLE
THAT KEEP SEATTLE RUN NING TO
AFFORD THE PEOPLE
THAT LIVE HERE TO KEEP SEATTLE
RUNNING.
THIS DISTRICT IS THE
OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE A VIBRANT
NEIGHBORHOOD AND UNDERUTILIZED
AREA,
SUPPORT LOCAL BUSINESSES, CREATE
JOBS, AND HELP ADDRESS THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS,
ENSURING THAT
PEOPLE WORKING, WHETHER IT BE A
GROCERY STORE, COFFEE SHOP,
RESTAURANT OR OTHER RETAIL
SPACE, CAN BUILD A LIFE IN
THE CITY WE LOVE SO DEEPLY.
SEATTLE WANTS TO KEEP ITS
WORKERS, WE NEED TO TAKE
BOLD ACTION ON HOUSING.
PLEASE SUPPORT THE BILL AND
MAKE SEATTLE A CITY WHERE
EVERYONE CAN THRIVE,
NOT JUST THOSE WHO
EARN THE MOST. THANK YOU.
>> SPEAKER NUMBER 30, THEN
31 THROUGH 40, IF YOU COULD
START LINING UP.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
MY NAME IS MATT, I'M A
PROUD MEMBER OF THE REGIONAL
COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS.
THIS IS A DIRECT
INVESTMENT INTO YOUR CONSICH --
CONSTITUENTS.
IT'S GOING TO CREATE
HUNDREDS OF CONSTRUCTION JOBS
FOR YEARS TO
COME AND ENABLE THOSE WORKERS
TO BUILD CAREERS, NOT JUST
CHASE JOBS AROUND THE REGION.
THIS IS A CHANCE TO PUT
SEATTLE WORKERS FIRST.
PLEASE SUPPORT THIS
AGREEMENT THAT SUPPORTS
ECONOMICECONOMIC
AND HIGHER
WAGES.
I URGE YOU TO VOTE YES. THANK
YOU.
>> NUMBER 31.
>> HI, MY NAME IS JAMIE HUNT.
WE'RE A DISTILLERY IN NORTH
SEATTLE.
WE HAPPEN TO BE ON A -- IN A
SHIPPING YARD.
WE HAVE A BEAUTIFUL SYNERGY OF
DISTILLERIES, THE FRUIT
TOP BREWING
WHICH WILL HOPEFULLY COME BACK,
AND THERE'S A
FISH PROCESSING UNIT IN OUR
SPACE.
WE ALL WORK REALLY WELL
TOGETHER. I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE
STADIUM DISTRICT KNOWING HOW
HARD IT IS
AS A MAKER TO FIND A SPACE.
IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO
SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY, BE
PROUD OF OUR MAKERS, MAKE IT
EASIER ON
THEM.
IT'S ALSO REALLY IMPORTANT AS A
RESIDENT, A RECENT RESIDENT
OF DOWNTOWN SEATTLE, I MOVED
FROM
WELLINGFORD TO SEE MORE
PEOPLE COMING INTO THE CITY AND
FEELING
THAT SAFETY THAT IS THERE
FOR PEOPLE COMING TO WORK,
FOR PEOPLE MOVING INTO THE
CITY. WE NEED THAT.
WE NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING
HERE
AND -- [ MUTED ]
>> HELLO, I'M ANDREA PORTER
FROM THE SEATTLE GOODS NETWORK.
WE THANK PRESIDENT NELSON
FOR HER LEADERSHIP ON THE
STADIUM
MAKERS DISTRICT PROPOSAL.
SEATTLE MADE IS A NETWORK OF
700 MANUFACTURING BUSINESSES
PRODUCING RIGHT HERE IN SEATTLE.
SEATTLE MADE BUSINESSES
INCLUDE BIKE BUILDERS, FASHION
DESIGNERS, JEWELRY
ARTISANS, GLASS BLOWERS AND MANY
MORE.
THE NUMBER ONE CHALLENGE
OUR MEMBERSHIP FACES IS
FINDING AFFORDABLE SPACE.
THIS MAKERS DISTRICT
WOULD SOLVE THIS SIGNIFICANT
HURDLE
AND CREATE A RETAIL OUTLET FOR
MAKERS.
A COLLECTIVE SPACE WHERE MAKERS
CAN SHARE INFRASTRUCTURE SUCH
AS EXPENSIVE MACHINERY.
FINALLY, AN IN- SON
COMMUNITY WHERE SMALL- SCALE
MANUFACTURERS CAN SUPPORT EACH
OTHER.
WE
ASK THE COUNCIL TO VOTE YES.
THANK YOU.
>> NUMBER 34.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, I'M MATT
DAVIES, A PROUD MEMBER OF
CARPENTERS 360.
I'M HERE IN STRONG SUPPORT
OF THE BILL, BECAUSE IT'S A WIN
FOR SEATTLE'S FUTURE AND THE
WORKING PEOPLE.
WE BUILD THIS CITY, ITS
HOMES, ITS BUSINESSES, ITS
INFRASTRUCTURE.
BUT TOO MANY OF US CAN'T
AFFORD TO LIVE HERE ANYMORE.
IF SEATTLE WANTS STRONG,
RELIABLE WORKFORCE, WE
NEED HOUSING NEAR OUR
JOBSITES, NOT TWO HOURS AWAY.
THIS PROJECT CREATES GOOD-
PAYING UNION JOBS, PROVIDES
AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR WORKING
FAMILIES AND
STRENGTHENS SEATTLE'S ECONOMY
BY KEEPING SKILLED TRADES PEOPLE
CLOSE TO THE INDUSTRIES
THAT NEED THEM.
SOME SAY HOUSING DOESN'T
BELONG IN THE INDUSTRY, BUT
INDUSTRY NEEDS WORKERS, WORKERS
NEED
HOMES, AND SEATTLE NEEDS BOTH
TO THRIVE.
I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THE MAKERS
DISTRICT AND INVEST IN THE CITY
THAT VALUES BOTH JOBS AND
HOUSING.
THANK YOU.
>> GREETINGS, COUNCIL MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS DAN, I'M A LONG
SHOREMAN.
I MOVE CARGO.
PLEASE DON'T ASK ME HOW TO
BUILD
BUILDINGS. I HAVE A LETTER HERE
TO
CITY COUNCIL OF 72
TRANSPORTATION EXPERTS OPPOSE
THING
AMENDMENT BEFORE YOU.
THERE'S 12 TRANSPORTATION
UNIONS ON THIS, PORTS, PORT
OPERATORS,
WAREHOUSES, EXPORTERS.
I ASK WHO WOULD YOU CONSULT
ON PORT OPERATIONS,
DEVELOPERS, STADIUM PEOPLE?
BUILDERS?
FOR THE FOLKS WHO OPERATE THE
PORTS?
LET'S TAKE THE POLITICS OUT OF
THIS.
WE THOUGHT WE HAD A SECURE,
LONG- TERM STABILITY
ON INDUSTRIAL LANDS IN 2023.
WE DID SEE THERE
WERE POSSIBLE LARGE PROJECTS AND
IMPACTS
COMING.
THESE MARGINAL HEAVY HAUL
CORRIDOR, AMTRAK EXPANSION
WAS STUDIED AND A MAJOR STORM
WATER
PROJECT ALL WORK FOR THE TRADES.
THIS IS A STUDY THAT WOULD
STUDY THESE ISSUES.
PLEASE LISTEN TO --
[ MUTED ]
>> WE'LL LET 33 GO AND MOVE ON.
THANK YOU.
>> HELLO, MY NAME IS
ANN, A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER, AND
I
WORK IN THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY
MANUFACTURING.
I'M HERE TODAY AS A PROUD
MEMBER OF SEATTLE MADE TO
SUPPORT THIS
BILL. MY BUSINESS IS LOCATED IN
THE SOTO AREA.
WHEN I FIRST
STARTED MANUFACTURING IN 2000 IN
THE SOUTH SEATTLE AREA FOR OVER
A DECADE IT WAS AN
ONGOING STRUGGLE TO FIND SPACES
FOR SMALL BUSINESSES AND
WORKERS HAD TO COMMUTE LONG
DISTANCES AND
EXPRESSED A DESIRE TO LIVE
AND WORK IN
COMMUNITY. SEVERAL COMPANIES
THAT MADE
IT SUCCESSFUL ARE CASCADE
DESIGN.
WEATHER EXPAND THE
OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE STADIUM
ATTENDEES
TO SUPPORT SMALL BUSINESS AND
MAKE IT A THRIVING AREA.
WE KNOW DIVERSE ZONING ALLOWS
FOR A THRIVING COMMUNITY.
THE STADIUM DISTRICT IS LACKING
DIVERSITY AND OPPORTUNITY TO
REVITALIZE THE STADIUM
DISTRICT WOULD MAKE THE
TYPE OF IMPROVEMENTS LIKE LAKE
UNION AND
THE WATER FRONT DISTRICT.
THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE
TIME TO BUILD A BETTER SEATTLE.
>> 36.
>> HELLO.
MY NAME IS ALLIE, A PROUD
LONG SHORE WOMAN.
FIRST, I WANT TO CORRECT THE
RECORD.
LABOR NEVER ENDORSED
THIS PROJECT OR LEGISLATION.
THAT WAS FALSE.
FURTHER, 120933 WAS RUSHED TO
AVOID A FULL EXAMINATION ON THE
IMPACT OF FREIGHT MOBILITY.
ALL 12 TRANSPORTATION UNIONS
OPPOSED HOUSING ON THIS SIDE.
FUTURE RESIDENTS WOULD FACE
MANY PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
HAZARDS.
TAKE YOUR PICK OF BAD
OUTCOMES AND THE HIGHEST
POLLUTION IN
THE CITY.
TOPSOIL IN NEED OF
REMEDIATION, THE HIGHEST DENSITY
OF TRAFFIC
INCIDENTS.
WHEN BIG TRUCKS GET IN
ACCIDENTS, THEY'RE MUCH MORE
LIKELY TO BE FATAL.
HEALTH OUTCOME REALITIES
OF THOSE LIVING IN SOUTH PARK
WITH
SIMILAR POLLUTION HAVE THE
HIGHEST RATES OF CHRONIC
ILLNESS, LOWER BIRTH WEIGHTS
AND HIGHER INFANT MORTALITY.
THANK YOU.
>> HI, I'M JAMIE
FLEMMING, SPEAKING FOR
TEAMSTERS.
THERE HAS BEEN A TREMENDOUS
AMOUNT OF HAND WAVING ON SOME
OF THE DANGERS OF THIS IDEA.
THE LONG STORE, I'M
SURE, HANDLED THE ISSUE OF
THE THRIVING MARITIME
INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX THAT WILL BE
AFFECTED.
I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT
THE FREIGHT CORRIDOR THAT IS
RUNNING
THROUGH WHERE WE WANT TO PUT
HOUSING.
I CAN'T FATHOM HOW
ANYONE WOULD THINK THIS IS A
GOOD
IDEA, BECAUSE SOMEBODY IS GOING
TO
GET HIT BY A TRUCK AND IS GOING
TO
DIE.
AND WE DON'T WANT ANY PART OF
THAT.
AND SO THERE ARE ALTERNATIVES.
I KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF
PEOPLE HERE THAT WANT AFFORDABLE
HOUSING. I'M ONE OF THEM.
THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE
THAT WANT THE WORK INVOLVED IN
BUILDING. I'M ONE OF THEM.
I WANT THEM TO DO IT SOMEWHERE
ELSE.
PLEASE, THIS IS
NOT THE PLACE TO
BUILD IT. THANK YOU.
>> HI.
MY NAME IS WAILEN ROBERT.
I'M A RENTER IN DISTRICT THREE.
A MERCHANT SEAMAN.
SUP HAS BEEN ON THE
SEATTLE WATER FRONT SINCE 1885.
OUR INDUSTRY HAS BEEN THE
MOST CONSISTENT SOURCE OF TAX
REVENUE FOR OUR CITY FOR OVER
100 YEARS.
TERMINAL 46 IS THE ONLY
NATURALLY DEEP WATER
BERTH ON THE ENTIRE WEST COAST.
WE CAN ALWAYS
HAVE THIS INDUSTRY IF WE PROTECT
IT.
WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING WILL
HAMPER ACCESS TO OUR TERMINALS.
I ASK THAT MY MEMBERS HAVE A
FUTURE IN THIS CITY AND THAT YOU
VOTE AGAINST THIS LEGISLATION.
THANK YOU.
>> NOW WE GO TO SPEAKER NUMBER
40, AND AFTER THAT, WE'LL GO TO
41 THROUGH 50, IF YOU CAN
PLEASE START LINING UP.
AND JUST SO AS A REMINDER,
SPEAKER NUMBER 38 IS NOT
HERE, IF THAT'S CORRECT.
THANK YOU.
PLEASE, NUMBER 40.
>> HELLO, SARAH
ESH. THE RESULT OF THE
RESOLUTION PASSED IN DECEMBER OF
2023,
SPECIFICALLY ASKED THAT THEY
WORK COLLABORATIVELY WITH THE
PORT, SEATTLE FREIGHT
AND OTHERS TO ANALYZE
TRANSPORTATION
PLANS, ET CETERA.
THIS COLLABORATION HAS
NEVER HAPPENED AND THUS,
THERE'S
BEEN NO REPORT OR ANALYSIS THAT
CAN
SPEAK TO THE IMPACT
OF HOUSING IN THIS AREA.
PLEASE DO YOUR DUE DILIGENCE.
IF HOUSING SUCCEEDS, THIS
IS WHAT I SEE, CHRIS HANSON
GETS HIS UP- ZONE,
OTHER DEVELOPERS SEE THAT THEY
CAN DO THE SAME.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING GETS
SCRAPPED.
MORE WEALTHY INDIVIDUALS MOVE
IN, DEMAND LESS NOISE AND
POLLUTION, AND THEN BEFORE
YOU KNOW IT, ALL OF OUR
INDUSTRIAL LANDS ARE GONE, SO IS
THE
PORT OF SEATTLE, AND SO ARE
THE THOUSANDS OF JOBS.
THE
ONLY PERSON WHO WINS IS CHRIS
HANSON.
THE CITY
RELIES ON THAT PORT. PLEASE
PROTECT IT.
>> SPEAKER NUMBER 41.
ROBERT.
THANK YOU.
>> I'M A LONG- TERM RESIDENT.
I'VE WATCHED A LOT
OF PEOPLE IN TRAFFIC DOWN ON THE
PORT.
IF TRUCKS ARE GOING TO
BE INVOLVED WITH
PEDESTRIANS, YOU'VE LOST YOUR
MINDS.
THEY CAN BUILD ANY
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ANYWHERE,
BECAUSE
MY NEIGHBORHOOD HAS LOTS OF
EMPTY LOTS AND I LIVE IN RAINIER
BEACH.
SO ACROSS THE STREET, THERE'S
AN EMPTY LOT.
THERE IT IS.
YOU JUST DON'T GET IT.
THERE'S A LOT OF JOBS AT STAKE.
AND A LOT OF PEOPLE MIGHT DIE
OVER THIS MIXING OF TRUCKS AND
A LOT OF PEDESTRIANS.
THERE'S ALREADY A MIX DOWN
THERE.
ANYBODY BEEN
HIT? THEY WILL IF YOU DO THIS.
>> NUMBER 42.
>> HI, COUNCIL.
MY NAME IS JIM FROM THE
MARITIME TRANSPORTATION SECTOR
WORKING HERE IN SEATTLE.
I STAND BEHIND THE PORT OF
SEATTLE TO REINFORCE PRESERVING
INDUSTRIAL LANDS.
THE CITY PASSED LEGISLATION IN
2023 DECLARING THAT HOUSING IS
INCOMPATIBLE USE
IN THE SOUTHERN NEIGHBORHOOD AND
IN THE
MARINE INDUSTRIAL CENTER.
WE RELY ON THE PORT TO
ACCESS OUR CUSTOMER BASE.
THESE LANDS ARE USED FOR
WAREHOUSING, FOR REPAIR
FACILITIES, FREIGHT
MOBILITY CORRIDORS AND OTHER
BUSINESS RELATED USES.
ONCE THESE LANDS ARE
CONVERTED TO RESIDENTIAL
HOUSING, IT
MAKES IT NO LONGER VIABLE FOR
OTHER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND
DISPLACES THE INDUSTRY
THAT GENERATES THESE JOBS AND
REVENUE THAT THE CITY RELIES ON.
THE CURRENT
PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATION IS
ADDING
TARIFFS AND WANTS TO PASS A LEVY
ON PORTS
OF FOREIGN SHIPS. THIS CANNOT
HAPPEN.
SO
LET'S PRESERVE THESE LANDS.
THANK YOU.
>> HELLO, CHRIS HARMAN.
HOPEFULLY WE CAN KEEP
SEATTLE'S PORT WORKING MOVING
CONTAINERS.
UI SAT DOWN WITH LONGLONG SHORE
COMMISSION AND YOU WORKED OUT A
DEAL.
A LOT OF PEOPLE PUT TIME,
EFFORT, AND ENERGY INTO THIS
TO CREATE WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST
CASE, WIN-WIN SCENARIO.
IT CAN'T BE ANY OTHER
WAY. IF THIS MANY PEOPLE GOT
TOGETHER TO CREATE SOMETHING,
IT'S
GOT TO BE THE BEST SITUATION.
PLEASE VOTE NO
TO KEEP THE PORT WORKING.
>> JEREMY, LOCAL 19 LONG
SHOREMAN.
COUNCILMAN MOORE AND NELSON,
I LIVE IN YOUR NECK OF THE
WOODS.
I MET YOU, COUNCILMAN MOORE,
IN FRONT OF THE QFC WHEN YOU
WERE RUNNING AND I'M VERY PROUD
AND
THANKFUL TO
THE COUNCIL FOR THE WORK YOU'RE
DOING.
I KNOW THAT 12% OF THE LAND
IN SEATTLE IS USED BY THE PORT
FOR
INDUSTRIAL PURPOSES.
WE JUST ASK THAT YOU PLEASE
FIND ANOTHER PLACE SO YOU CAN
PROTECT
MY JOB. THANK YOU.
>> SPEAKER NUMBER 45.
>> THANK YOU FOR LETTING
ME SPEAK FOR YOU GUYS.
I'M A MEMBER OF ILWU,
HAVE BEEN FOR OVER 25 YEARS.
FROM WHAT I SEE, THE
REAL PROBLEM IS THE LOCATION.
THERE'S OTHER LOCATIONS.
THE STUDY HAS BEEN DONE
THAT THIS IS NOT VIABLE.
THIS IS NOT VIABLE.
YOU'RE GOING TO CREATE
INSTANCE WHERE IS PEOPLE ARE
GOING TO
BE ENTER MINGLING WITH A SEMI
TRUCK, AND THE SEMI TRUCK
IS GOING TO WIN EVERY TIME.
IT'S 80,000 POUNDS.
IT SQUISHES.
WE'VE HAD INSTANCES WHERE
PEOPLE WERE RUN OVER DOWN THERE,
AND YOU JUST CAN'T HAUL THEM
AWAY
ON A STRETCHER.
IT HAPPENS DIFFERENTLY THAN
THAT.
SO PLEASE VOTE NO FOR MY JOB,
PLEASE.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON,
COUNCIL MEMBERS AND CHAIR
NELSON.
I'M JAY JENNINGS, VICE
PRESIDENT OF NORTHWEST MARINE
TRADE
ASSOCIATION, REPRESENTING
OVER 600 MEMBERS.
FOUNDED IN 1947, WE ARE
THE OLDEST AND LARGEST
REGIONAL TRADE ASSOCIATION.
JUST LAST MOMENT, CONCLUDING
OUR 78th SUCCESSFUL SEATTLE BOAT
SHOW.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY
TO EXPRESS OPPOSITION TO
COUNCIL BILL 120933.
IT MAY SOUND
COUNTERINTUITIVE, BUT MUCH OF
MARITIME HAPPENS ON
LAND.
ALONG WITH OUR
PARTNERS, OUR MEMBERS CONTINUE
TO BE
PLAGUED BY DEVELOPMENT, CRIME,
AND
RESTRICTED ARTERIALS
THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
WE RELY ON CARGO
SHIPPING, SUPPLY CHAIN
EFFICIENCY,
AND FREIGHT MOBILITY, ALL OF
WHICH ARE THREATENED BY THIS
PROPOSAL.
ON BEHALF OF THE
NORTHWEST MARINE TRADE
ASSOCIATION, I ASK
YOU
TO DELAY THIS PROPOSAL AND
PROTECT
THE FUTURE OF MARITIME IN
SEATTLE.
THANK YOU.
>> HELLO.
THE ALEAH LITER, I'M IN
OPPOSITION TO BILL 120933.
I'M A RANK AND FILE UNION
MEMBER FOR THE BUSINESS CITY
COUNCIL.
WE BOTH RUN OFF OF DEMOCRACY.
WE LOVE DEMOCRACY, AND
WE RESPECT THE SANCTITY OFOF
NEGOTIATION.
SO I ASK YOU TO PLEASE RESPECT
THE EXISTING PLANNING THAT
WAS ALREADY NEGOTIATED IN 2023.
AND RESOLUTION 3209 THAT SAYS
A STUDY MUST BE COMPLETED OF
NON- INDUSTRIAL USES OF THIS
LAND.
I'M NOT AGAINST ARTISTS.
I'M AN ARTIST MYSELF.
I'M NOT AGAINST THE BUILDING
TRADES. I WANT YOU TO HAVE JOBS.
I WANT TO HAVE A JOB.
I'M NOT AGAINST HOUSING.
I WAS HOUSING INSECURE MY WHOLE
LIFE UNTIL I GOT A UNION JOB.
UNION JOBS HELP WITH POVERTY.
AND SO I'M NOT AGAINST
THESE ISSUES IN GENERAL, BUT NOT
RIGHT HERE,
NOT RIGHT NOW, NOT AT THIS
PRICE.
>> NUMBER 48.
>> HELLO.
MY NAME IS T.J. , I'M A
SECOND GENERATION LONG SHOREMAN
AND PROUD UNION MEMBER.
I'M OPPOSED TO THE HOUSING
OF THE INDUSTRIAL
LANDS. THIS IS NOT LABOR VERSUS
LABOR, FOR THAT IS A FOOL'S
PERSPECTIVE.
MANY OF US ARE PROUD UNION
WORKERS.
BUT THE ARGUMENT MARITIME
WILL BE UNAFFECTED BY THIS
DECISION IS FALSE AND NEEDS TO
BE
CAREFULLY THOUGHT OUT.
THE I78 MPACT SURVEY HAS THREE
TIERS, DO NOTHING, DO LITTLE
AND DO MORE.
SO YES, MARITIME AND
FREIGHT MOBILITY WILL BE
UNAFFECTED,
BUT THAT'S DUE TO THE LACK
OF SUPPORT TO OUR TRADE
INFRASTRUCTURE.
THE SURVEY CAPTURES A WINDOW
OF TIME THAT DOES NOT
ACCURATELY REPRESENT OUR PORT'S
POTENTIAL.
WE HAVE 21 CRANES AVAILABLE TO
SERVICE VESSELS, AND THE PORT IS
BECOMING UNATTRACTIVE DUE
TO ENCROACHMENT OF INDUSTRIAL
LANDS.
THESE BUILDINGS CAN BE
BUILT ANYWHERE ON LAND, BUT WE
CAN ONLY SERVICE VESSELS ALONG
THE
WATER.
I URGE COUNCIL TO KEEP AND GROW
SEATTLE'S WORKING
WATER FRONT. THANK YOU.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
HIM NAME IS LINSEY WOLF.
I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT ONE.
THE ALLIANCE IS RESPONSIBLE
FOR --
[ INAUDIBLE ]
WE RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO
VOTE NO ON BILL
120933. NINE YEARS AGO, I HAD A
SIMILAR
REQUEST TO VOTE AGAINST THE --
AS COUNCIL MEMBER KETTLE
ACKNOWLEDGED, THE SITUATION FOR
THE PORT AND OUR
REGION'S MARITIME HISTORY HAS
NOT
AND WILL NOT CHANGE.
YOU CANNOT BUILD A DEEP WATER
PORT.
WE HOPE TO SEE THIS COUNCIL
DO WHAT IT CAN TO SUPPORT
THIS
NATIONAL ASSET INTO THE FUTURE.
THANK YOU.
>> THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED
BY SPEAKER NUMBER 50.
AND WE'LL MOVE INTO 51 THROUGH
60.
IF YOU CAN START LINING UP.
AND WE ARE AT A TOTAL OF 75
IN-PERP
IN- IN- PERSON SPEAKERS.
SO WE HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 25 TO
GO.
>> YES, THAT'S MY MATH.
THANK YOU.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY
TO SPEAK TODAY.
I CARE DEEPLY ABOUT HOUSING
IN THE CITY AS ONE WHO
WATCHED HOUSING PRICES GO UP AND
UP THROUGHOUT MY ENTIRE LIFE
BEFORE I WAS ABLE TO BUY A
HOUSE.
IT'S PROBABLY ONE OF MY
BIGGEST -- OR MY TOP ISSUE
LOCALLY AND POLITICALLY.
I HOPE THAT THE BUILDING TRADES
WILL JOIN ME IN ADVOCATING FOR
AGGRESSIVE HOUSING.
THERE'S SIMILAR RESIDENT WAS
PARKS, SCHOOLS, STORES AND
OTHER
AMENITIES NECESSARY FOR PEOPLE
AND FAMILIES TO THRIVE.
AS FOR SOTO, THE LOCAL AND STATE
ECONOMY DEPENDS ON THE
INTEGRITY OF OUR PORTS AND
INDUSTRIAL
LAND.
COUNTLESS BUSINESSES RELY ON
OUR THOUGHTFUL STEWARDSHIP OF
THIS
RESOURCE.
WITH DIRE IMPACTS TO
IMPORTERS AND
EXPORTERS. I'M SURE IT'S A
COINCIDENCE NO
SAFETY PLAN WOULD RESIDUE AN OUT
OF STATE BILLIONAIRE --
PLEASE VOTE TO PROTECT
OUR INDUSTRIAL LANDS, OUR SUPPLY
CHAIN, OUR ECONOMY AND GOOD JOBS
THAT WILL STAY IN THE CITY.
[ MUTED ]
>> 51.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL, I'M ERIC
FITCH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
THE WASHINGTON PORTS
ASSOCIATION, ASKING YOU TO
RESPECTFULLY VOTE
NO.
MY PORT MEMBERS REFLECT
THE COMMUNITIES THEY SERVE.
SEATTLE IS A MARITIME CITY.
COUNCIL MEMBER STRAUSS TALKED
ABOUT PRIDE, PRIDE IN OUR
CITY AND OUR PORT.
HE'S PROUD THAT OUR PORT
PUTS GROCERIES ON SHELVES IN
ALASKA.
I'M PROUD THAT WASHINGTON
APPLES
ARE WORLD FAMOUS.
WASHINGTON
WHEAT MAKES NOODLES IN JAPAN.
THIS IS NOT A COINCIDENCE,
THIS IS BECAUSE OF OUR
GROWERS, SHIPPERS IN OUR PORT.
SEATTLE IS A PORT CITY.
PLEASE CONSIDER THAT
WHEN VOTING
NO ON THIS MEASURE. PLUK.
-- THANK YOU.
>> GOOD AMP.
MY NAME IS LISA, AND I'M
THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE
ALLIANCE.
I'M HERE TO ASK YOU TO VOTE
YES FOR 120933 IN THE CREATION
OF
THE MAKERS DISTRICT SOUTH
OF T- MOBILE
PARK. THIS INITIATIVE REPRESENTS
A FORWARD
THINKING APPROACH TO ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT.
WHILE CREATING NEW
OPPORTUNITIES FOR SMALL- SCALE
MANUFACTURERS
AND LOCAL BUSINESSES.
THIS IS A CHANCE TO
BE INTENTIONAL ABOUT LAND
USE, LEVERAGING PUBLIC/PRIVATE
PARTNERSHIPS, AND FOSTERING
AN INCLUSIVE SUSTAINABLE
ECOSYSTEM.
THE SPECIFICS OF THIS
PROPOSAL ARE WELL THOUGHT OUT
AND STUDIED
WITH DUE DILIGENCE.
TODAY, MORE THAN EVER, IT'S
IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT THE FACTS
WITHOUT THE FEARMONGERING.
I URGE YOU TO PASS BILL 120933
AND
HELP SEATTLE'S FUTURE. THANK
YOU.
>> NUMBER 53.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCIL
MEMBERS, THANK YOU.
I'M THE TREASURE FOR THE
PILOT'S UNION, AND I LIVE IN
THE SIXTH
DISTRICT. I SPEAK IN OPPOSITION
TO 120933.
OUR MARITIME INDUSTRIAL LANDS
ARE BEDROCK
ECONOMIC FOUNDATIONS OF OUR CITY
IN SEATTLE.
OUR INDUSTRIAL LAND
SUPPORTS LONG- TERM GENERATIONAL
WEALTH.
WE MUST PROTECT THIS AREA.
ONCE IT IS DEVELOPED WITH
RESIDENTIAL, HOTELS, A MAKERS
DISTRICT, IT WILL BE LOST.
THIS LAND IS IMPORTANT TO THE
TRADE IN AND OUT AND THROUGH
OUR STATE, AND IT IS VERY
IMPORTANT FOR OUR ECONOMY, OUR
STATE ECONOMY AND OUR NATIONAL
ECONOMY.
I URGE YOU TO OPPOSE 120933.
I URGE YOU TO PROTECT
THE MARITIME INDUSTRIAL LANDS.
THANK YOU.
>> HELLO, COUNCIL.
I
REPRESENT OVER 600 BUSINESSES
ACROSS THE STATE.
THERE'S TWO CRITICAL PIECES
HERE
IN MY OPPOSITION TO 120933.
THE VIABILITY OF THE SEATTLE
GATEWAY AND SAFETY.
SEATTLE HAS AN OBLIGATION
TO RECOGNIZE IT'S NOT AN
ISOLATED
CITY BUT HOME TO A UNIQUE PORT,
WHAT MOST CITIZENS DON'T
UNDERSTAND IS THAT MOST OF THE
THINGS, YOUR COMPUTERS, YOUR
PHONES, MUCH OF IT IS
IMPORTED. SO WE DEPEND ON THE
PORT FOR
OUR EVERYDAY COST OF LIVING AND
SURVIVAL. FREIGHT MOBILITY HERE
IN SEATTLE
WOULD IMPACT THE COST OF
GOODS FOR EVERYTHING.
AS WELL AS TENS OF THOUSANDS OF
FARMS THAT DEPEND ON THE PORT
TO EXPORT FOOD.
IT JEOPARDIZES SAFETY, A TRUCK
DOES NOT
SEE -- [ MUTED ]
-- SAFETY
OF THE -- [ MUTED ]
>> NUMBER 55.
>>
GOOD AFTERNOON, CITY COUNCIL
MEMBERS.
I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR THAT
I SUPPORT ALL UNIONS.
I'M NOT HERE TO TRY TO DIVIDE
ANYONE, BUT I'M HERE TO MAKE AN
ANALYSIS, AND TO MAKE
EVERYONE ON THE CITY COUNCIL
TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT
THE FIRST TIME THAT OUR
CITY COUNCIL IS MAKING THIS
DECISION.
I WANT TO BRING SOME HISTORICAL
CONTEXT.
OUR TERMINAL IN OAKLAND,
CALIFORNIA, THE FISHER
FAMILY, OWNER OF THE GAP AND
ALSO THE
A's TEAM.
SAME SCENARIO TO BUILD IN
OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA.
THE COMMUNITY WAS MISLED ON
THE ISSUE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
I SUPPORT AFFORDABLE HOUSING,
BUT THE FACT REMAINS THAT
WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
DON'T TAKE AWAY GOOD PAYING
JOBS AS WEWE
THE ARGUMENT OF AFFORDABLE
HOUSING.
[ MUTED ]
>> THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, SIR.
>> NUMBER 55.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS JOHN, AND I'M IN
A TRUCKING BUSINESS.
I'VE BEEN
TRUCKING FOR -- SINCE 2012.
WE'RE HERE LOCALLY, IN
SEATTLE AND TACOMA.
WE TRY TO ADVOCATE FOR MARITIME
ZONING.
THE SEATTLE WORKING WATER
FRONT AND MARITIME ZONES
PROVIDE THOUSANDS OF WELL-
PAYING JOBS
IN TRUCKING,
WAREHOUSING, SHIPPING IS, AND
MANUFACTURING.
HOUSING AND
AFFORDABLE DEVELOPMENT IN THESE
AREAS WOULD
DRIVE UP LAND COSTS AND PUSH OUT
BUSINESSES CRITICAL TO THE
REGION'S ECONOMY.
REDUCING CONGESTION
AND PROTECTING FREIGHT MOBILITY
--
[ INAUDIBLE ]
COMBATTING THIS -- [ MUTED ]
>> LOOK, THE PROPONENTS OF THIS
MEASURE ADMITTED TODAY THAT
IT'S A FIGHT OVER TWO BLOCKS.
AND IT'S VERY TRUE, BECAUSE
IT'S A VERY PARTICULAR TWO
BLOCKS AND
A VERY PARTICULAR 200 FOOT
BUFFER.
DESPITE WHAT MANY OF YOU MAY
HAVE BEEN TOLD, THE
MARITIME COMMUNITY ARE NOT
OWNERS
WHO HATE AND OPPOSE AFFORDSABLE
HOUSING OR CONSTRUCTION JOBS OR
SMALL BUSINESS OR KITTENS OR
PUPPIES.
WE WOULD NOT
BE UNITED TO FIGHT AGAINST THOSE
THINGS.
THE ONLY REASON THAT THE WHOLE
MARITIME COMMUNITY OF THE STATE
IS UNITED AGAINST THIS
MEASURE IS BECAUSE IT REALLY
DOES CONTAIN THE SAME POISON
PILL WE
HAVE FOUGHT TO OPPOSE AGAIN
AND AGAIN AND AGAIN, FROM
THE OCCIDENTAL VACATION BACK TO
THE
2013 COTTON BOWL.
IT'S THE SAME THING.
SO PLEASE KEEP THE PORT OPEN.
IF IT WASN'T REALLY A THREAT,
WE
WOULD NOT BE HERE UNITED URGING
YOU TO OPPOSE THIS.
>> WE SUPPORT THE MAKERS
DISTRICT, BECAUSE THE DEVELOPERS
HAVE
COMMITTED TO USE UNIONS -- [
INAUDIBLE ]
THE MAKERS DISTRICT IS
DIFFERENT.
AS ORGANIZED, THE IMPORTANCY OF
THE
FAIR WAGES -- [ INAUDIBLE ]
BY COMMITTING TO THE UNION LEVEL
FOR ONGOING BUILDING
SERVICES, THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE
A
LASTING, POSITIVE IMPACT TO OUR
COMMUNITY.
THIS IS THE KIND OF COMMUNITY
WE NEED.
[ INAUDIBLE ]
AND THAT CREATES MORE GOOD UNION
JOBS FOR THE FUTURE. THANK YOU.
>> NUMBER 59.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
A LONG- TIME AUW MEMBER.
WE HEARD TODAY SOME PEOPLE DOWN
PLAYING THE EFFECTS OF THIS.
IT'S A CLASSIC CASE OF A
SPECIAL
INTEREST GROUP TRYING TO GET
THEIR FOOT IN THE DOOR.
WE'VE GOT A VIBRANT, VIABLE
WORK
HERE, 46, 30, 18, 5, THERE'S
2130 SQUARE MILES IN KING
COUNTY, CERTAINLY
THERE'S SOMEPLACE ELSE THIS
COULD BE
DONE.
THERE'S SAFETY CONCERNS FOR
KIDS.
WE DON'T WANT THEM
PLAYING AROUND TRAINS, TRUCKS,
THAT SORT
OF THING.
WE'VE ALREADY HAD SEVERAL
BICYCLE ACCIDENT FATALITIES
IN THIS AREA.
I URGE YOU TO VOTE AGAINST THIS.
THANK YOU.
>> WE'RE NOW MOVING TO
SPEAKER NUMBER 60 AND THEN
SPEAKERS
61 THROUGH 70.
IF YOU COULD PLEASE START
LINING UP.
SPEAKER NUMBER 70.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.
MY NAME IS CHARLIE, A LIFE
LONG SEATTLE
RESIDENT. DISTRICT TWO.
I'M ALSO A SEATTLE LONG
SHOREMAN.
MY FAMILY HAS LIVED IN
SEATTLE FOR
FOUR GENERATIONS. WHY DO WE COME
HERE?
IT'S A BEAUTIFUL
CITY, A WONDERFUL CITY.
THERE'S SO MANY GREAT PLACES
TO PUT HOUSING.
BUT THE HOMESTEAD BROTHERS
ARE PROBABLY ROLLING OVER IN
THEIR GRAVES RIGHT NOW AT THIS
PROPOSAL. THIS IS A HOSTILE
ENVIRONMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL
LIVING.
9,000 TRUCK TRIPS PER WEEK, NO
GREEN SPACES, NO GROCERY
STORES, NO SCHOOLS, NO PARKS.
I WAS ALSO A CARPENTER FOR A
NUMBER OF YEARS.
I'LL TELL YOU, WE CAN
BUILD HOUSING ANYWHERE.
THERE'S SO MANY GREAT PLACES WE
COULD PUT HOUSING IN THIS TOWN.
AND ISN'T THERE ALREADY A
PLAN ALREADY BEING WORKED ON?
THIS IS NOT PART OF IT, WHY?
YOU MIGHT BE SINCERE IN THINKING
THIS WON'T AFFECT THE PORT,
BUT YOU HEARD FROM PEOPLE WHO IT
AFFECTS, THOUSANDS
OF WORKERS -- [ MUTED ]
>> SPEAKERS NUMBER 61, 62.
61.
>> HELLO, MY NAME IS CHAD,
A PROUD DISTRICT SIX NATIVE.
I'M THE PORT PRESIDENT OF
THE WASHINGTON MARITIME
FEDERATION AND EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF
THE COALITION FISHING FLEET.
I'M SPEAKING TO YOU AGAIN
TO EXPRESS MY OPPOSITION TO
COUNCIL
BILL 120933.
I'M PROUD THAT AFTER MANY YEARS
OF WORK WE HAD A DEAL.
WE SHOULD NOT BE REVISITING THIS
AGREEMENT AND CREATING
UNCERTAINTY AND CHALLENGES.
TODAY, THOUSANDS OF SEAFOOD AND
AGRICULTURE WORK, THEY ARE
FACING MULTIPLE CHALLENGES
TO OUR LIVELIHOODS.
TRUMP'S TRADE WAR
IS THREATENING THE FUTURE OF OUR
FAMILY FARMERS
AND FISHERMEN.
CHANGES IN LAND USE --
WE SHOULD NOT BE
CREATING ADDITIONAL ROADBLOCKS
TO OUR
WORK.
WE SUPPORT THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING BUT WE NEED IT WHERE IT
WORKS.
I URGE COUNCIL TO NOT VOTE
ON THIS ACTION AND TO DELAY.
THANKS.
>> 62.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN.
MY NAME IS JOE WALLIN, A
LONGSHOREMAN.
I WOULD LIKE YOU TO VOTE
THIS DOWN.
A FEW THINGS I WANT TO MENTION.
THE TRAFFIC COMING INTO THE
PORT AS IT'S NOW CONFIGURED,
COMING ON SPOKANE STREET TO GO
TO TERMINALS 5 AND 18,
I WOULD DESCRIBE IT AS CRAZY.
WE BACK SEMIS ALL THE WAY UP TO
I-5 AND BEYOND.
SO WE ARE MAXED OUT WITH
WHAT WE'VE GOT NOW.
IN 2014, THE FLYOVER WAS
COMPLETED.
THE PHASE THREE WAS $34 MILLION.
WE PUT ALL THIS MONEY INTO
MAKING TERMINAL 46 WORK AND NOW
WE'RE GOING TO WALK AWAY FROM
IT.
YOU PEOPLE KNOW MY SISTER,
AND SHE'S LOOKED THIS ORDINANCE
OVER. SHE'S LOOKED IT OVER SAY
THING IS GOING TO BE A MAKERS
DISTRICT.
THAT'S HOOPLA.
NOTHING AGAINST THE MAKERS.
THE OTHER THING IS
THE AFFORDABILITY HAS BEEN
WATERED
DOWN. AND FINALLY, THIS IS
A SUBSIDIZED PROJECT.
IF YOU GIVE THEM A 12- YEAR TAX
BREAK, THAT'S A PUBLIC SUBSIDY.
[ MUTED ]
>> WE'LL BE SKIPPING 63, 64,
AND 65 WHO HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN.
WE ARE AT SPEAKER NUMBER 66.
>> ALL RIGHT.
HELLO, EVERYBODY.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
MY NAME IS AARON McKAY, AND
I'VE BEEN A LONGSHOREMAN FOR A
LONG
TIME. I LIVE IN BEACON HILL IN
SEATTLE, ONLY BECAUSE OF MY
GOOD UNION JOB THAT I HAVE.
I SUPPORT FIVE FAMILY MEMBERS
WITH THIS JOB.
THIS IS A DIRECT ROUTE TO THE
FREEWAY FROM THE
PORT. THE MAKERS DISTRICT HAS
AN ADVANTAGE OF BEING ABLE TO
BE MADE SOMEWHERE ELSE.
THE PORT CANNOT.
THERE ARE SO MANY
OTHER PLACES IN SEATTLE TO BUILD
LOW- INCOME
HOUSING.
WHY DON'T WE CONSIDER SOME
OF THOSE OTHER PLACES?
MY FAMILY AND HUNDREDS
OF THOUSANDS OF OTHER FAMILIES
DEPEND ON THIS PORT.
PLEASE VOTE THIS DOWN. THANK YOU
SO MUCH.
>> NUMBER 67.
SAYS HELLO, I'M ALLEN SMITH,
LONGSHOREMAN.
I'M URGING YOU GUYS TO VOTE NO.
EVERYBODY FROM LABOR ALL THE
WAY ON UP TO THE FEDERAL
MARITIME COMMISSION HAS
EXPRESSED
THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT HOW THIS
JOB WOULD BE A BAD IDEA, IT
WOULD
IMPACT FREIGHT
MOBILITY, IMPACT THE REST OF OUR
STATE.
THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS
OF PEOPLE THROUGHOUT
OUR STATE
WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THIS
PROJECT.
LOW INCOME HOUSING,
LIKE EVERYBODY HAS SAID, CAN BE
BUILT
ALL OVER THE PLACE.
OTHER MAKERS DISTRICTS, AS WELL.
BUT BUILDING IT RIGHT AT THAT
SPECIFIC SPOT WOULD SHOCK
OFF THE PORT OF SEATTLE.
I'M SURE SOME OTHER PEOPLE
HAVE SAID IT'S TWO TRAFFIC
LIGHTS
AWAY FROM THE REST OF THE
COUNTRY. BY CHOKING THAT OFF,
YOU'RE
GOING TO SHOW DOWN THE SUPPLY
CHAIN, MAKING THESE
PROBLEMS EVEN WORSE.
NOT ONLY THAT, BUT THESE
MAKERS SPACES THAT WE'RE
TALKING
ABOUT, PEOPLE MAKING THINGS THAT
NEED TO SHIP THEM, IT'S GOING
TO
BE VERY DIFFICULT WHEN WE CHOKE
OFF
THOSE ROUTES FOR SHIPPING.
HOW IS ANYBODY SUPPOSED TO
MAKE SOMETHING AND SHIP IT WHEN
THERE
WILL
BE DELAYS -- [ MUTED PRERN
[ MUTED ]
>> HELLO, MY NAME IS MICHAEL
COLLIDE, A CASUAL AND LONG SHORE
UNION.
I'M VERY OPPOSED TO BILL
120933.
I'VE WORKED AS A
COMMERCIAL TRUCK DRIVER AND
DRIVEN THROUGH
SEATTLE, AND IT'S NOT A NICE
PLACE TO DRIVE.
THIS WOULD MAKE IT MUCH MORE
DIFFICULT, AND THIS IS
A VERY
IMPORTANT ROUTE TO GET TO THE
PORT.
ONE OF THE BIGGEST PROBLEMS
THAT WE HAVE BRINGING MORE WORK
INTO THE PORT IS BEING ABLE TO
ACCESS THE PORT RELIABLY AND
EFFICIENTLY.
THIS WILL BE VERY
HARMFUL, AND THE PORT IS A VERY
IMPORTANT PART OF THE ECONOMIC
GROWTH IN
SEATTLE.
TO CUT THAT OFF WOULD BE
CUTTING OFF REVENUE FOR THE
CITY.
NOT TO MENTION
AFFECTING THOUSANDS OF JOBS THAT
WILL
PAY A FAMILY WAGE.
THIS IS AA -- SORRY.
IT'S A GREAT PROFESSION.
THERE'S LOTS OF GREAT
ASSOCIATED
WORK. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOU
GUYS
HELP CONTINUE THAT ON. THANK
YOU.
>> I GOT HERE LATE.
MY NAME IS NYA WU.
I USED TO WORK ACROSS THE
STREET FROM THE STADIUM AT AN
OLD TV
STATION. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT
THE
DISTRICT, THIS LAND NEAR THE
LIQUIDATION ZONE AND THIS IS
A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS FACING
DISPLACEMENT AND NAMED ONE OF
THE MOST
ENDANGERED NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE
CITY.
HOW DO WE FIGHT GENTRIFICATION?
WE NEED MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WE NEED TO BUILD IT EVERYWHERE.
WE NEED RESOURCES, BUT WE ALSO
NEED THE LARGER AREA TO BE
SAFER.
WE NEED MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR
THE CREATIVE ECONOMY
WHERE PEOPLE IN THE CID HAS
ACCESS
TO A MAKERS SPACE.
THAT WOULD BE AMAZING.
CID IS THE POOREST
NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE CITY,
COMPRISED MOSTLY OF
IMMIGRANTS. THIS PROPOSAL
CREATES
HOUSING JOBS AND OPPORTUNITIES
THAT WE
ALL DESPERATELY NEED.
SO WE NEED TO REIMAGINE WHAT
THE
ENTIRE CITY NEEDS TO LOOK LIKE
FOR HOUSING AND I
RESPECTFULLY
ASK THAT YOU -- [ MUTED ]
>> HELLO, COUNCIL, MY NAME IS
CARLIN
SMITH, DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT.
I'M HERE TO REMIND YOU
THAT SEATTLE DOES NOT HAPPEN TO
HAVE A DEEP WATER PORT.
IT'S A CITY BECAUSE OF
ITS DEEP WATER PORT.
THE STUDY DID NOT INCLUDE THE
WAIVER THAT WOULD HAVE
BEEN CHALLENGED HAD WE NOT HAD A
DEAL TO PUT THIS TO BED TWO
YEARS
AGO.
FREIGHT AND PEDESTRIANS ARE
NOT GOOD NEIGHBORS.
HOW MANY MILLIONS ARE
YOU SPENDING A MILE SOUTH OF
THERE TO SEPARATE TRUCK TRAFFIC,
FOOT TRAFFIC AND TRUCKS?
IF THIS IS ALLOWED TO MOVE
FORWARD, TENANTS WILL
BE DEMANDING YOU MAKE THE PORT
HAVE QUIET TIME AND CAN'T YOU
GET THEM TO DIM THE LIGHTS AT
NIGHT.
WE SUPPORT AFFORDING A
HOUSING, AND NEIGHBORHOODS THAT
HAVE
THE THINGS FAMILIES NEED.
THIS IS NOT THAT.
WE NEED MORE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING NOT HERE.
WE ARE NOW MOVING INTO THE LAST
FIVE SPEAKERS, NUMBER 71 THROUGH
75.
>> WHEN I FIRST MOVED INTO
BELLTOWN IN 2004, I MOVED INTO
WORK FOR THE COUNTY. I SUPPORT
AND VOTE FOR WAREHOUSING FUNDING
BUT PEOPLE WHO NEED LOW INCOME
HOUSING SHOULDN'T HAVE TO GET
IT IN INDUSTRIAL AREAS, AREAS
WITH POLLUTANTS FROM DIESEL
TRUCKS AND MACHINERY, TRAFFIC AT
ALL HOURS FOR LARGE VEHICLES
WITH POOR DISABILITY THAT CAUSE
AN OUTSIDE PROPORTION OF
PEDESTRIAN DEATHS. AREAS WITHOUT
AMENITIES LIKE PHARMACIES,
SCHOOLS, CHURCHES, PARKS, NOT AN
AREA MEANT FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE.
WE DO NEED MORE HOUSING BUT WE
NEEDED IN AREAS WITH RESOURCES.
WHAT ARE WE TELLING LOW INCOME
RESIDENTS WHEN WE PROVIDE THEM
HOUSING IN AREAS WITHOUT
NECESSITIES OF LIFE? WILL THESE
AMENITIES FOLLOW AND THEN THE
INDUSTRIAL LAND USE COMPROMISE
WAS SIMPLY A LIE? PLEASE SAVE
OUR PROSPERITY, OUR PERMANENT
JOBS AND MAKE LOW INCOME HOUSING
IN AREAS WHERE IT WILL BE
APPRECIATED. DON'T CONTRIBUTE
TO ENVIRONMENTAL RACISM AND
CLASSISM.
>> SPEAKER NUMBER 71? ALL RIGHT.
WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON TO
NUMBER 73. 74? 75? WHAT NUMBER
ARE YOU?
>> MY NAME IS MAX AND I AM
COMING TO YOU FROM A UNIQUE
PERSPECTIVE TODAY. I'M A
LIFELONG COMMUNITY MEMBER OF
SEATTLE. MY CURRENT ROLL IN THE
COMMUNITY IS THAT OF A CLINICAL
SUPERVISOR A MENTAL HEALTH
PROFESSIONAL WHO WORKS ON THE
FRONT LINES . I HAVE DEDICATED
MYSELF TO SERVING OUR
COMMUNITIES AND MOST VULNERABLE
POPULATION. I AM ALSO A
LONGSHOREMAN. OF SEATTLE'S
INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS CONTINUES TO
BE DEVELOPED, IT WILL ONLY
FURTHER THE ECONOMIC DIVIDE THAT
WE ALL CAN SEE, FURTHER PUSHING
AVERAGE CITIZENS OUT OF SEATTLE
AND MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR
PEOPLE TO OBTAIN EMPLOYMENT THAT
ENABLES THEM TO BE CONTRIBUTING
MEMBERS OF OUR SOCIETY. PLEASE
PROTECT OUR INDUSTRIAL LANDS AND
VOTE NO.
>> WE DO NOT HAVE 72, 73? WE
WILL MOVE ON TO 75.
>> HELLO. I AM A CONSULTANT FOR
THE PORT DISTRICT IN THE PUBLIC
STADIUM AUTHORITY. I STARTED
WORKING ON THIS 6 1/2 YEARS AGO.
CHARLIE BROUGHT ME ON AND ASKED
ME TO DO 70 DIFFERENT
STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS TO GET AN
IDEA OF WHERE PEOPLE WERE AT A
RANDOM ELEMENT OF THE STADIUM. A
HANDFUL OF DIFFERENT FOLKS ON
THE INDUSTRIAL MARITIME SIDE OF
THIS, WE WILL MEET PRIVATELY.
DON'T WORRY. WE TELL OUR FOLKS
WE ARE GOING TO DELAY, DELAY,
DELAY. THIS WAS SIX AND HALF
YEARS AGO. THIS HAS BEEN ALIVE
FOR 12 YEARS. WE ARE NOT WORRIED
ABOUT ANYTHING YOU PROPOSE
AROUND THE STADIUM. WE WILL HAVE
THE SAME STRATEGY WE HAVE ALWAYS
HAD. DELAY, DELAY, DELAY. COMING
OUT OF THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS,
AND WHEN AGREED WE WOULD RELY ON
THE EIF. EIF SAYS THE TRAFFIC ON
ROYAL BROUGHAM WOULD NOT CHANGE
IN TERMS OF LEVEL OF SERVICE OR
THE ACTUAL TRAFFIC TIME. THERE
WAS A 15 DAY APPEAL WINDOW AFTER
THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE WAS
PUBLISHED ON SEPTEMBER 29.
EXPIRED OCTOBER 14. HOUSING WAS
ON THE TABLE. THERE WAS NO
REASON NOT TO APPEAL.
>> THAT IS OUR LAST SPEAKER.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
EVERYBODY, FOR COMING OUT TODAY.
I APPRECIATE THE TIME THAT YOU
HAVE TAKEN TO BE WITH US TODAY.
THE LAST PERSON ON OUR PUBLIC
COMMENT LIST HAS SPOKEN SO THE
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS NOW
CLOSED. I MOVED TO ADOPT -- HOLD
ON A SECOND. IF THERE IS NO
OBJECTION, THE INTRODUCTION AND
REFERRALS CALENDAR WILL BE
ADOPTED. HEARING NONE, THE
INTRODUCTION AND REFERRALS
CALENDAR IS ADOPTED. MOVING ON,
I MOVED TO ADOPT THE AGENDA. IS
THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO ADOPT THE AGENDA. I
DO WANT TO ADDRESS THE REQUEST
TO DELAY THIS VOTE THAT WAS
MENTIONED OVER AND OVER AGAIN BY
OUR PUBLIC COMMENTERS AND I HAVE
TO SAY THAT, WE HAD A LOT OF
PEOPLE THAT TOOK TIME OUT OF
THEIR DAY TO COME HERE, WORKING
PEOPLE THAT TOOK TIME OUT OF
THEIR DAY TO COME HERE AND
PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT. WE ALL
HAD A LOT OF PEOPLE ON FEBRUARY
27 AND FEBRUARY 24 AND JANUARY
24 AND IT WOULD BE
DISRESPECTFUL, IN MY OPINION, TO
REMOVE THIS BILL FROM THE AGENDA
TODAY AFTER SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE
TAKEN THE TIME TO BE PRESENT AND
MAKE COMMENT. REGARDING THE
REASON FOR DELAY , UNDER COUNCIL
RULES, ALL COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE
THE RIGHT TO PROPOSE AN
AMENDMENT AHEAD OF A COUNCIL
MEETING BY DISTRIBUTING IT
WITHIN TWO HOURS IN ADVANCE OF
THE MEETING. THE RULES ALSO
PROVIDE THAT A LIMITED MECHANISM
FOR COUNCILMEMBERS TO PROPOSE
NEW PREVIOUSLY UNCIRCULATED
AMENDMENTS DURING THE MEETING
ITSELF. THAT IS NOT HAPPENING
HERE. MORE NOTICED -- NOTICE IN
ADVANCE OF INCOMING AMENDMENTS
IS APPRECIATED BUT IT IS
INCUMBENT UPON COUNCILMEMBERS
AND STAFF TO RESERVE THE TIME TO
ABSORB AND ANALYZE POSSIBLE
LATEBREAKING AMENDMENTS AS WE
DON'T DELAY LEGISLATION AND
COUNCIL THAT HAS BEEN VETTED
THROUGH THE COMMITTEE PROCESS
SOLELY ON THE LATEBREAKING
AMENDMENTS. THAT IS NOT OUR
PRACTICE. THIS HAS BEEN VETTED.
WE HAVE HAD THREE COMMITTEE
MEETINGS ON THE LEGISLATION.
MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES WHO ARE
NOT EVEN ON THE COMMITTEE
EXERCISED THE OPPORTUNITY TO
ATTEND AND BE PART OF THAT
DISCUSSION. THE BILL CAME OUT OF
COMMITTEE ON 2 TO 3 VOTE WEEKS
AGO. SO, THERE LE
TIME FOR DISCUSSION AND EVERY
ONE OF THE AMENDMENTS CIRCULATED
TODAY TO COME BEFORE US AND
THESE ARE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.
NONE OF THEM MAKE SUBSTANTIVE
CHANGES IN A WAY THAT HAS NOT
ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED. WE HAVE
DELAYED THIS PROPOSAL LONG
ENOUGH AND IF MY COLLEAGUES
DON'T LIKE THE AMENDMENTS OR
ARE NOT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THE
IMPLICATIONS OF THEM, THEY ARE
FREE TO VOTE NO AND THEY ARE
ALSO FREE TO VOTE NO ON THIS
BILL ALTOGETHER. SO, I AM MAKING
A STRONG ARGUMENT FOR GOING
AHEAD WITH THE AGENDA AS IT IS
SO THAT FOLKS WHO HAVE COME TO
SPEAK THEIR OPINION ON BOTH
SIDES OF THE OPINION WILL NOT
HAVE WASTED THEIR TIME AGAIN.
ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS? GO
AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
FIRST, I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE
WHO CAME DOWN HERE FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT. I UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN
CONSTITUENTS COME DOWN FOR
PUBLIC COMMENT, IT IS NOT EASY.
PEOPLE TAKE TIME OUT OF THEIR
MAYBE JOBS AND FAMILIES THAT
THEY COULD BE WITH TO COME DOWN
HERE AND JUST KNOW THAT I FOR
ONE REALLY APPRECIATE IT AND
UNDERSTAND HOW DIFFICULT IT IS.
THIS JUST GOES TO SHOW YOU WHAT
A DIFFICULT ISSUE THIS IS.
HOWEVER, DELAYING THE VOTE WILL
NOT CHANGE THAT THIS IS A
DIFFICULT ISSUE. WE HAVE HAD
MULTIPLE MEETINGS AND
PRESENTATIONS INCLUDING ROBUST
PUBLIC COMMENT LIKE WE HEARD
TODAY. WE HAVE HAD PUBLIC
COMMENT AT OTHER MEETINGS ON
THIS ISSUE. WE ALSO HAD A PUBLIC
HEARING AND WE HAVE HAD A LEGAL
CONSULT FROM OUR ATTORNEYS. WE
HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WE
NEED TO TAKE THIS VOTE TODAY.
THIS COUNCIL SHOULD NOT SET
PRECEDENT BY DELAYING THIS VOTE
AFTER THE DILIGENT REVIEW WE
HAVE HAD ON THIS ISSUE. AS TO
THE MORE RECENT AMENDMENTS THAT
WE BROUGHT, THIS IS NOT THE
FIRST, NOR WILL IT BE THE LAST
TIME THAT THIS BODY WILL
CONSIDER AMENDMENTS THAT ARE
EITHER BROUGHT JUST DAYS BEFORE
OR EVEN UPON AMENDING. I DO NOT
CONSIDER THE AMENDMENTS BROUGHT
TODAY TO BE OF A NATURE THAT
WOULD HAVE US BREAK FROM OUR
RECENT POLICY CONSIDERING
AMENDMENTS . AT THE END OF
BUDGET DELIBERATIONS FOR A VOTE
ON NOVEMBER 15, WE HAD MULTIPLE
LAST-MINUTE AMENDMENTS. WE HEARD
THREE THE SAME DAY, WALK ON
AMENDMENTS, AND FIVE AMENDMENTS
CAME ON JUST THE DAY BEFORE.
MOST OF THESE WERE AS A
SUBSTANTIVE NATURE AS THE ONES
BROUGHT TODAY AS THEY INVOLVE
FINANCIAL REASONS FOR THE
BUDGET. DURING THE RENEWAL OF
THE TRANSPORTATION LEVY AS WELL,
WE HAVE SEVEN LATEBREAKING
AMENDMENTS WITH SUBSTANTIAL
FINANCIAL CHANGES. THOSE
AMENDMENTS WERE CIRCULATED
MIDDAY FRIDAY BEFORE A TUESDAY
VOTE. I BRING THESE UP AS
EXAMPLES OF AMENDMENTS THAT WE
HAD TO REVIEW IN SHORT ORDER AND
AT LEAST ONE PUBLIC COMMENT OR
SAID TODAY, OUR JOB IS TO ENSURE
WE REVIEW AND MAKE DECISIONS IN
A TIMELY FASHION ON BEHALF OF
OUR CITY RESIDENTS AND I TAKE
THAT COMMITMENT REALLY SERIOUSLY
AND THAT WORK VERY SERIOUSLY.
AGAIN, I FEEL WE HAVE HAD AMPLE
TIME TO REVIEW. THIS IS A
DIFFICULT ISSUE BUT WE HAVE
TAKEN A LOT OF YOUR TIME, NOT
JUST TODAY, BUT OTHER TIMES. I
KNOW MANY OF YOU HAVE COME HERE
ON OTHER OCCASIONS TO GIVE
PUBLIC COMMENT AS WELL. I DON'T
THINK WE SHOULD SET PRECEDENT
TODAY BY DELAYING THIS VOTE.
THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT AND
AGAIN, THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING
HERE.
>> SEEING NO FURTHER COMMENTS,
THE AGENDA IS ADOPTED. MOVING
NOW -- OKAY. GO AHEAD AND PLEASE
CALL THE VOTE ON THE ADOPTION OF
THE AGENDA.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS'S
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> WE DON'T USUALLY BUT OUR
CLERK SAID TO DO SO.
>> THIS IS A VOTE ON THE AGENDA.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE JUST VOTED
YES, CORRECT?
>> THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA?
>> AYE.
>> MARK SOLOMON ONE?
>> AYE.
>> NINE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> WE WILL NOW CONSIDER THE
PROPOSED CONSENT CALENDAR. ITEMS
ON THE PROPOSED CONSENT CALENDAR
ARE THE MINUTES OF MARCH 11,
2025, COUNCIL 120951 WHICH IS
THE PAYMENT OF THE BILL AND
THREE APPOINTMENTS FROM THE
LIBRARIES, EDUCATION AND
NEIGHBORHOODS COMMITTEE. ARE
THERE ANY ITEMS THAT
COUNCILMEMBERS WOULD LIKE
REMOVED FROM TODAY'S CONSENT
CALENDAR? ALL RIGHT . HEARING
NONE, I MOVED TO ADOPT THE
CONSENT CALENDAR. IS THERE A
SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO ADOPT THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE
CALL THE ROLLBACK TO ADOPT THE
CONSENT CALENDAR?
>> TREND 21?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> THANK YOU. THE CONSENT
CALENDAR ITEMS ARE ADOPTED. WILL
THE CLERK PLEASE AFFIX MY
CALENDAR TO THE LEGISLATION AND
MINUTES ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR
ON MY BEHALF? WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE READ ITEM ONE INTO THE
RECORD?
>> THE GOVERNANCE ACCOUNTABILITY
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE, CB 120933, AN
ORDINANCE RELATING TO LAND AND
ZONING, AMENDING SECTIONS 23.7
4.002 AND 23.7 4.008 OF THE
SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW
RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE STADIUM
TRANSITION AREA OVERLAY
DISTRICT. THE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDS THAT THE COUNCIL PASS
THE BILL.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER DAN STRAUSS ?
>> THANK YOU. AS I SHARED WITH
THE PUBLIC AND MY COLLEAGUES
TODAY, I DO NEED MORE TIME. I
NEED MORE TIME BECAUSE OF THE
PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN UNDERWAY
AND THAT DECISION POINT THAT IS
AHEAD OF US JUST THIS YEAR. I
WILL SPEAK TO THE PROCESS A
LITTLE BIT LATER BUT I WILL SAY
THAT THIS HAS NOT BEEN A PROCESS
THAT HAS ENCOURAGED
COLLABORATION OR CONSENSUS
BUILDING WHICH IS A PROCESS
THAT, IN MY OPINION, HAS CREATED
MORE DIVISION THAN IT HAS NEEDED
TO. THE UPCOMING DIVISION POINTS
THAT WE HAVE THAT IMPACT THIS
ARE THE COAST GUARD RECORD
DECISIONS IN LATE APRIL, THE
TRANSPORTATION STUDY THAT WAS
REQUESTED TO BE ACCOMPANIED
THROUGH THE 2023 INDUSTRIAL
MARITIME CHANGES. THAT HAS NOT
COME TO FRUITION. WE HAVE, AS WE
JUST PASSED THIS LAST WEEK, FROM
THE TRANSPORTATION -- REGARDING
THE TRANSPORTATION LEVY PROVISO
AND THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN FOR
THIS YEAR, SGOT IS PLANNING TO
CREATE THE CORD OR IMPROVEMENTS
BETWEEN THE PORT AND I-95. WE
WILL HAVE A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT
OPPORTUNITIES. WE WILL HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY ONCE THOSE PROJECTS
ARE IDENTIFIED, THE PLANS OF
60%, 90% AND DELIVERED. WHAT WE
DON'T HAVE TODAY IS THE ABILITY
TO CONNECT THOSE TRANSPORTATION
IMPROVEMENTS WITH WHAT WE ARE
CONSIDERING TODAY BECAUSE THE
PROCESS HAS NOT ALLOWED. WE HAVE
COUNCILMEMBERS INTERESTED IN
CREATING MORE MEDIATION BETWEEN
DEPARTMENTS. WE HEARD TODAY FROM
THE PORT THAT THERE IS AN
INTEREST IN MAKING A PURCHASE.
JUST TODAY, WHILE WE HAVE SAT
HERE, WE HAVE RECEIVED BOTH NEW,
LEGAL ARGUMENTS. WE HAVE
RECEIVED A LEGAL AWARENESS FROM
OUR COUNCIL ATTORNEY AND AN
EMAIL HAS BEEN DISTRIBUTED
SAYING -- I'M NOT GOING TO
BREECH ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE
BUT PROVIDING MORE INFORMATION
FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY. I CAN'T
EXPLAIN ANY MORE CLEARLY THAT IF
WE ARE HAVING POLICY DISCUSSIONS
BY EMAIL WHILE PUBLIC COMMENT IS
GOING ON, IT CLEARLY STATES THAT
WE NEED MORE TIME. COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, I WILL MAKE A MOTION
HERE FOR -- I WILL MOVE TO
POSTPONE COUNCIL BILL 120933
UNTIL OUR JULY 15, 2025 MEETING
SO THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT
THE COAST GUARD RECORD OF
DECISION IS AND SO THAT WE CAN
MOVE FORWARD WITH THE SDOT
IMPROVEMENTS.
>> I HEAR THE MOTION AND I WOULD
LIKE TO PROVIDE MY OPPOSITION TO
POSTPONE -- THERE HAS BEEN A
SECOND. HERE'S THE DEAL. IS ONE
OF OUR LAST PUBLIC COMMENT
SPEAKERS, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE
DELAY, DELAY, DELAY. THE LAST
TIME, RIGHT BEFORE WE WERE SET
TO VOTE, THERE WAS A THREAT THAT
IF WE VOTED IN COMMITTEE, WHICH
IS EVEN THE SUBJECT TO A
VIOLATION OF THE SPEAKER BOARD ,
THAT WE GOT SLAMMED WITH A
LETTER THREATENING LAWSUITS. WE
WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS OF
MAKING SURE THAT WE WERE
COMFORTABLE GOING FORWARD WITH
THE LEGISLATION. WE TOOK A VOTE
AND IT HAS BEEN A WEEK AND A
HALF OR SO SINCE THEN. THERE HAS
BEEN AMPLE TIME TO BRING UP THIS
WORK THAT SDOT IS WORKING --
DOING. IF IT IS THAT IMPORTANT,
IT COULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP A
BIT SOONER. WE KNOW THAT THE
FACTS AS LAID OUT IN THE EIF IS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE RESIDENTIAL
UNITS THAT ARE PROPOSED UNDER
THIS LEGISLATION WILL NOT
IMPACT, OR WILL NOT HAVE ADVERSE
IMPACT ON PORT OPERATIONS OR
FREIGHT MOBILITY. THAT HAS BEEN
STATED MANY, MANY TIMES. THERE
CAN BE DISAGREEMENT ABOUT THAT
BUT I'M WORKING WITH THE FACTS
THAT I HAVE. REGARDING THE COAST
GUARD LETTER OF DETERMINATION, I
UNDERSTAND THAT THAT WILL REVEAL
WHAT THE COAST GUARD PLANS ON
DOING, WHETHER THEY WANT TO MOVE
THEIR OPERATIONS OR GO DOWN TO
THE TERMINAL NEXT-DOOR. FRANKLY,
IN THIS DAY AND AGE OF PRESIDENT
TRUMP, I AM A LITTLE BIT
CONCERNED ABOUT HOLDING ANYTHING
OFF UNTIL WE GET A LETTER FROM A
FEDERAL AGENCY BUT THE POINT IS,
WHATEVER THE COAST GUARD DOES
WITH THEIR OPERATION, THE
IMPACTS OF THE HOUSING ARE
FAIRLY IRRELEVANT ON WHAT IS
GOING ON ON FIRST AVENUE. I
COULD GO ON AND ON AND ON AND
TAKE UP ALL THE REASONS WHY THE
REASON FOR DELAY DOES NOT RISE
TO THE LEVEL OF CONSEQUENCE TO
MERIT ASKING THESE PEOPLE TO GO
HOME, THANK THEM AGAIN FOR
COMING AND MAKING PUBLIC COMMENT
AND, SORRY, YOU WILL HAVE TO
COME BACK AGAIN ON SUNDAY WHEN
WE HAVE TIME. WE HAVE NINE
COUNCILMEMBERS HERE. IT IS HARD
TO GET EVERYBODY TOGETHER
WITHOUT SOMEBODY BEING ON
VACATION. WE ARE GOING TO BE
HEADING INTO SUMMER AND THEN OUR
COUNCIL RECESS IN AUGUST TWO
WEEKS AND THEN VERY QUICKLY
AFTER THAT, WE'VE GOT BUDGET ON
TOP OF THE LEVEE THAT NEEDS TO
BE REVIEWED AND ONGOING WORK. I
URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE
AGAINST THE MOTION TO POSTPONE
THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION AND GO
FORWARD DOING THE WORK OF THE
PEOPLE OF SEATTLE AND MAKE A
DECISION AND THEN MOVE FORWARD
WITH EVERYTHING ELSE ON OUR
CANCEL DOCKET -- COUNCIL DOCKET.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> I'M SORRY. COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE?
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT
. I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO THANK EVERYONE
WHO CAME OUT, WHETHER YOU ARE
FOR OR AGAINST THIS BILL. I HAVE
SAID BEFORE THAT THE S -- F
STOOD FOR FLAWED BUT I WOULD SAY
TODAY THAT IT IS ALSO FOR A
FAILING GRADE WITH RESPECT TO
THIS SPECIFIC PIECE OF
LEGISLATION. I WOULD SAY IT
DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR THE 200
FOOT CHANGE WHICH IS A MATERIAL
CHANNEL -- CHANGE. AS MENTIONED
BY COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, IT
DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR THE COAST
GUARD DECISION ON PIER 46. THIS
IS MAJOR. I SUSPECT IT WILL NOT
BE ON TIME BECAUSE OF THE CHAOS
THAT IS HAPPENING IN WASHINGTON,
D.C.. IT IS INTERESTING THAT NO
ONE TALKS ABOUT THE AMTRAK
DECISION RELATED TO SOUTH
COLGATE STREET. ZERO MENTION OF
THAT. THAT IS GOING TO BE HUGE
WHEREVER IT GOES. IT WILL HAVE
MAJOR IMPACTS ON OUR MAJOR TRUCK
ROUTES. IT WILL HAVE MAJOR
IMPACTS ON OUR HEAVY HAUL
NETWORK. IT IS JUST SOUTH OF THE
PROPOSED UP SOME, REZONE. THIS
NEEDS TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR BUT IT
IS NOT ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE
DOCUMENTS THAT WE HAVE HAD. I
MENTIONED BEFORE THE WET WEATHER
TREATMENT FACILITY. THAT WILL
TAKE OUT FOUR TO EIGHT ACRES .
THAT IS THE KING COUNTY
WASTEWATER DIVISION PROJECT AND
BASED ON MY VISIT TO THE
GEORGETOWN WET WATER TREATMENT
FACILITY, I SUSPECT IT WILL BE
CLOSER TO EIGHT, NOT FOUR. UP TO
EIGHT ACRES TAKEN OUT IN TRAN23.
THAT IS HUGE. WHAT IS THE IMPACT
ON THE TRUCK ROUTE, THE HEAVY
HAUL NETWORK? THE MAJOR TRUCK
ROUTES? THIS IS SERIOUS. THIS IS
MAJOR. NO MENTION OF IT IN THE
EIF. NO MENTION OF IT IN THE
DISCUSSIONS WE HAVE HAD IN
EXECUTIVE SESSION OR HERE IN THE
COMMITTEE. NOTHING. THEN, ON TOP
OF THAT, AS MENTIONED EARLIER,
WE HAD RESOLUTION 32097 ONLY
SIGNED IN DECEMBER 2023. IT IS
BARELY A YEAR OLD AND IT TALKED
ABOUT DOING REPORT ON
NONINDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT, SITE
IMPACT ANALYSIS. WE HAVE NOT
DONE ANYTHING ON THAT. AS
MENTIONED, WE ARE INVESTING IN
OUR FREIGHT PROGRAM, THE
TRANSPORTATION LEVEE THAT HAS
WORKED SO WELL. THIS IS HUGE.
THIS IS HUGE. FOR THESE REASONS,
AND I AM ALSO THINKING OF FORMER
COUNCILMEMBER PRESIDENT TALKING
ABOUT THIS REALLY IS, THIS IS
ABOUT OUR MARITIME CULTURAL
HERITAGE THAT WE HAVE IN THE
CITY END WE CAN BUILD -- AS SHE
SAID 10 YEARS AGO, WE CAN BUILD
ONE ARENA, FIVE ARENAS BUT WE
CANNOT BUILD A DEEP WATER PORT.
THIS IS SERIOUS. THIS IS MAJOR.
AGAIN, COAST GUARD, AMTRAK, THE
SOTO WET WEATHER AND THE FREIGHT
PROGRAM WITH THE TRANSPORTATION
LEVY . FOR THESE REASONS, I
SUPPORT THE MOTION TO DELAY THIS
LEGISLATION. THANK YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK? WHO HAD THE
HAND UP AFTER COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE?
>> I DID BUT I LOWERED IT.
>> GO AHEAD.
>> ALL RIGHT.
>> GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK.
>> SOMEONE ASKED ME TODAY IF IT
WAS UNFAIR TO DELAY THE VOTE
GIVEN HOW MANY PEOPLE TURNED OUT
TODAY. IT IS. YES, IT IS UNFAIR
AND IT IS UNFAIR TO HAVE NINE
AMENDMENTS COME BEFORE US JUST
LAST NIGHT. THAT ONLY BECAME
PUBLIC LAST NIGHT, LIMITING OUR
ABILITY TO MEANINGFULLY ENGAGE
WITH OUR PARTNERS ON THIS. MY
OFFICE WANTS TO GOVERN WITH THE
PEOPLE AND ALONGSIDE THE PEOPLE
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT COUNCIL
RULES PERMITS THIS BUT JUST
BECAUSE YOU CAN , DOESN'T MEAN
YOU SHOULD , ESPECIALLY GIVEN
THE LONG CONTENTIOUS HISTORY OF
THIS PROJECT. WE ARE TALKING
ABOUT 10 YEARS OF HISTORY HERE
AND I KNOW MANY PEOPLE IN THIS
ROOM HAVE WORKED ON THIS ISSUE
AND I WANT TO HONOR THAT BECAUSE
I KNOW IT HAS NOT BEEN EASY. I
CERTAINLY FEEL THAT IN THIS
MOMENT. WHEN I LOOK IN THIS
ROOM, I SEE A LOT OF FRIENDS. I
SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE
SHARED GOALIT DOES HURT ME TO
SEE WORKING FOLKS FIGHTING OVER
THIS. IT HAS BEEN BAD FOR US . I
SEE PEOPLE WHO ARE LINED ON
THEIR SHARED GOALS FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I SHARE IN
THAT. I SEE FOLKS WHO WANT TO
SUPPORT GOOD UNION JOBS BOTH IN
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
AND PROTECTING THE JOBS WE HAVE
AT THE PORT, SUPPORTING MAKERS ,
MAKING SURE WE HAVE SAFE STREETS
AND I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A
PATH TO COMPROMISE AND I MEAN
THAT GENUINELY AND RESCHEDULING
THIS VOTE ALLOWS FOR TIME TO
CONTEMPLATE THESE AMENDMENTS
WITH STAKEHOLDERS AND OUR LABOR
PARTNERS ON ALL SIDES OF THIS
ISSUE. AGAIN, WE ARE TALKING
ABOUT NINE AMENDMENTS DROP
YESTERDAY, LEAVING MY OFFICE
LIMITED TO NO TIME TO CONSULT
WITH LABOR COURT AND ALL KEY
PARTNERS TO REALLY TALK TO THE
MERITS OF THESE AMENDMENTS. I
WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT I
APPRECIATE THE WORK OF MY
COLLEAGUES AND WHAT THEY HAVE
DONE TO WORK ON THESE AMENDMENTS
AND THEY REPRESENT, IN MY MIND,
A GREAT MOVE IN ADVANCING THIS
PRODUCT IN A WAY THAT WOULD
BUILD CONSENSUS RATHER THAN SO
DIVISION. IF WE AS A BODY HAVE
BEEN GIVEN NECESSARY TIME TO
ANALYZE AND ENGAGE WITH
STAKEHOLDERS, THE PROCESS WE
PRESENTED WITH DID NOT ALLOW
THAT TO HAPPEN AND IN MY MIND, I
VIEW RESCHEDULING AS A COURSE
CORRECTION THAT WILL ALLOW US
TIME TO TRULY RESOLVE THIS IN A
WAY THAT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY IN
THIS ROOM. ADDITIONAL TIME WOULD
ALLOW FOR US TO DO OUR DUE
DILIGENCE IN SPEAKING WITH OUR
PARTNERS TO COME TO AN INFORMED
DECISION AND GET THESE
AMENDMENTS A THOUGHTFUL
PROVISION THEY DESERVE.
RESCHEDULING ALLOWS TIME FOR THE
POSSIBILITY OF A REAL COMPROMISE
ON ALL SIDES. THE MISSTEPS OF
THIS LEGISLATIVE PROCESS HAS
SEWED DIVISION. THIS BILL WAS
INTRODUCED TWO MONTHS AGO ON AN
ISSUE THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN A
CONTENTIOUS DEBATE FOR A DECADE
AND WE SIMPLY NEED MORE TIME.
FOR MY PART, MY OFFICE HAS BEEN
HOPEFUL TO CONVENE OUR LABOR
PARTNERS TO WORK ON A COMPROMISE
SOLUTION. THANK YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT.
>> ARE THERE ANY FURTHER
COMMENTS? GO AHEAD COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE.
>> THANK YOU. WHILE THERE MAY BE
VALID REASONS TO CONTINUE THIS
SUBSTANTIVELY, I DON'T BELIEVE
THE REASONS BECAUSE WE HAVE
RECEIVED NINE AMENDMENTS IS ONE
OF THEM . THIS IS A PROCESS THAT
WORKS QUICKLY. WE ARE REQUIRED
TO ALWAYS WORK QUICKLY, TO THINK
ABOUT THINGS QUICKLY, TO DO OUR
DUE DILIGENCE. WE HAVE ALL BEEN
DOING OUR DUE DILIGENCE FROM THE
BEGINNING. I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO
HAVE GOTTEN THE AMENDMENTS
SOONER AS WELL AND I HAVE BEEN
TALKING ABOUT MY AMENDMENT FOR A
WHILE. IT HAS BEEN TRICKY
BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT HOW WE MINIMIZE
ADDITIONAL ENCROACHMENT, WHICH I
THINK IS A VERY REAL CONCERN.
THAT WAS WHY I BROUGHT
AMENDMENTS. THAT IS WHY MY
COLLEAGUE HAS BROUGHT AMENDMENTS
AS WELL. I WANT TO POINT OUT
THAT I STAYED UP UNTIL 1:00 LAST
NIGHT REVIEWING ALL OF THESE
AMENDMENTS SO THAT I COULD BE
PREPARED. TODAY, I AMENDED MY
AMENDMENT BASED ON AN AMENDMENT
COUNCILMEMBER -- COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA BROUGHT. WE ARE MORE THAN
CAPABLE REVIEWING THESE WHICH
ARE RATHER TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.
THEY ARE NOT COMPLEX SUBSTANTIVE
AMENDMENTS THAT TAKE TIME FOR US
TO REVIEW OR THINK ABOUT OR
CONSULT WITH. I HAVE HAD AN
OPPORTUNITY TO CONSULT WITH MY
COLLEAGUES TODAY AND I HAVE HAD
AN OPPORTUNITY OF PEOPLE
REACHING OUT TO ME WITH DELAYING
THE VOTE. I RESPECTFULLY
DISAGREE THAT THAT SHOULD BE THE
BASIS FOR CONTINUANCE.
SUBSTANTIVE QUESTIONS ABOUT
OTHER THINGS THAT NEED TO
HAPPEN, PERHAPS. I SUPPOSE I
WOULD OFFER -- WE HAVE EVERYBODY
HERE, LET'S NOT DELAY IT. IF IT
IS REALLY A QUESTION OF YOU NEED
ONE MORE WEEK TO READ THROUGH
THESE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS, THEN
LET'S DO IT FOR ONE WEEK BUT
THIS IS A RED HERRING WHEN WE
SAY YOU NEED MORE TIME TO READ
THESE AMENDMENTS. THAT
CONTINUANCLIE.LEABOUT THINGS. T
TOO MUCH DISHONESTY ON BOTH
SIDES GOING FORWARD TODAY.
>> POINT OF ORDER, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT.
>> IN MY OPINION, COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS -- I AM NOT CALLING YOU
OUT IN PARTICULAR BUT I AM
PREPARED AND ALLOWED TO HAVE MY
OWN OPINION ABOUT HOW THIS
PROCESS HAS PLAYED OUT. THERE
HAVE BEEN A LOT OF COMMENTS MADE
ABOUT HOW THIS PROCESS HAS
PLAYED OUT TO WHICH I HAVE NOT
RESPONDED OR ADDED MY OWN TWO
CENTS. I AM NOT CALLING ANYONE
OUT PARTICULAR AND IT HAS NOT
BEEN A PARTICULARLY WONDERFUL
PROCESS ON EITHER SIDE. WE ARE
ALL IN A DIFFICULT POSITION SO I
THINK IT IS FAIR TO ACKNOWLEDGE
THAT. THERE ARE TWO SIDES TO
EVERY COIN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I YIELD.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA AND THEN
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I WANT TO SAY SOME LEGAL ADVICE
THAT MY COLLEAGUES JUST RAISED.
WE HAVE ALL RECEIVED THE SAME
LEGAL ADVICE. I HAVE NO CONCERNS
MOVING FORWARD. I ALSO WANTED TO
ADDRESS ONE ANOTHER THING
BECAUSE I DID START MY EARLIER
COMMENTS WITH, THIS IS A
DIFFICULT ISSUE. I UNDERSTAND ON
BOTH SIDES. I HAVE SAID THIS
BEFORE, I AM A DAUGHTER OF UNION
WORKERS. TODAY WOULD HAVE BEEN
MY DAD'S BIRTHDAY IF HE WERE
STILL ALIVE BUT HE IS NOT. YOU
WAS A PROUD UNION WORKER AND A
MEMBER OF THE FACTORY FOR MANY
YEARS AS A WELDER. BECAUSE OF MY
DAD, I AM HERE TODAY. I WILL
SAY, THIS IS A HARD ISSUE ON
BOTH SIDES. THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE FOR RAISING
THAT. IT IS TRUE. IT IS A
DIFFICULT ISSUE. THERE ARE TWO
SIDES. THERE IS LABOR ON BOTH
SIDES. I KNOW THOSE OF MY
COLLEAGUES THAT I HAVE SPOKEN
WITH, THIS IS A DIFFICULT ISSUE
BUT THAT IS THE JOB. WE GOT
VOTED TO MAKE REALLY TOUGH
DECISIONS UP HERE AND WE WORK
WITH OUR CONSTITUENTS AND WE
HEAR AS MANY VOICES AS WE
POSSIBLY CAN TO MAKE TOUGH
DECISIONS. IT IS NOT EASY,
BELIEVE ME. BUT, THAT IS THE
JOB. IT IS A HARD ONE AND IT IS
ONE THAT I TAKE VERY SERIOUSLY
AND I TOO STAY UP LATE NOT JUST
LAST NIGHT BUT MANY NIGHTS. I AM
UP LATE BECAUSE I DO MY DUE
DILIGENCE WITH EVERYTHING THAT I
READ AND EVERY VOTE THAT I TAKE
AND MAKE AND PEOPLE HAVE HEARD
ME SAY ON MANY OCCASIONS, I WORK
MANY LONG HOURS BECAUSE I WANT
TO LISTEN TO ALL SIDES AND I DO
MY DUE DILIGENCE AND MY
DELIBERATION. SO, THIS IS REALLY
DIFFICULT BUT IT BEING DIFFICULT
IS NOT A GOOD REASON TO DELAY A
VOTE. WE TAKE MANY DIFFICULT
VOTES HERE AND IF WE WERE GOING
TO RELY ON THE FACT THAT THEY
WERE DIFFICULT, WE WOULD NOT
MAKE MANY VOTES BECAUSE THEY ARE
ALL DIFFICULT. WE HAVE A LOT OF
VOTES COMING UP HERE. THE
HARDEST IS ALWAYS BUDGET TIME
AND EVEN DURING BUDGET TIME, AS
I SAID EARLIER, WE HAD A FLOOR
AMENDMENTS AND THAT IS AVAILABLE
TO US BECAUSE THESE ARE HARD
CHOICES AND WE NEED TO BE ABLE
TO, EVEN DAY OF A VOTE, BRING AN
AMENDMENT. I WANT TO THANK MY
COLLEAGUE, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE
FOR YOUR COMMENT AND COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, I SEE MY TIME NOW,
THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA?
>> THANK YOU MADAME , COUNCIL
PRESIDENT. I WANT TO THANK
EVERYONE FOR TAKING THE TIME TO
BE HERE TODAY. IRRESPECTIVE OF
WHAT SIDE OF THIS PARTICULAR
ISSUE YOU HAPPEN TO STAND ON,
YOU COULD HAVE BEEN ANYWHERE IN
THE WORLD BUT YOU CHOSE TO BE
HERE WITH US TO SHARE YOUR
PERSPECTIVE, YOUR FEEDBACK AND
YOUR PRESENCE AND IT IS GREATLY
APPRECIATED. IT SHOWS YOU CARE
AND YOU ARE COMMITTED TO DOING
BETTER AS A COMMUNITY AND AS A
CITY. THANK YOU FROM THE BOTTOM
OF MY HEART. YOU DON'T NEED ME
TO TELL YOU THAT THIS IS A
DELICATE, COMPLEX ISSUE. I HEARD
A LOT OF GREAT CONCERNS, FOUR OR
FIVE TIMES ALONE TODAY AND
PUBLIC COMMENT. WE HEARD ABOUT
THE U.S. COAST GUARD PENDING
RECORD DECISION. A FEW OF MY
COLLEAGUES EVEN MENTIONED IT
HERE. SOME OF THE UNCERTAINTY
PERTAINING TO THAT. WHEN I
FIRST, MOST RECENTLY MET WITH
THE PORT -- NOT RECENTLY BUT
BACK IN JANUARY WHEN I MET WITH
THE MISSION OR AND LEADERS FROM
THE PORT, THAT WAS ONE OF THE
CONCERNS THEY RAISED. I MET WITH
THE LONGSHOREMEN. THAT WAS ONE
OF THE CONCERNS THAT WAS RAISED.
I MET WITH PORT PRESIDENT LAST
WEEK. THAT WAS ONE OF THE
CONCERNS THAT WAS RAISED.
MARITIME LABOR UNION, SAME. I
HEARD THAT CONCERN OVER AND OVER
AGAIN AND IT IS A VALID ONE.
THAT IS WHY I CREATED AN
AMENDMENT WE WILL TALK ABOUT
LATER TO PROVIDE MORE TIME. IT
IS A VALID CONCERN. I THINK
THERE IS ALREADY AN AMENDMENT TO
ADDRESS THAT, AT LEAST IN PART .
ACKNOWLEDGING THAT EVERYONE HAS
BEEN HERE, TOOK THE TIME OUT OF
YOUR BUSY LIVES TO BE HERE
TODAY, I WANT TO HONOR AND
RESPECT EVERYONE'S TIME AND NOT
FURTHER DELAY AND KICK THIS DOWN
THE ROAD. I KNOW THERE IS A
STRONG COMMITMENT ON ALL SIDES
AND I AM NOT GOING TO DO MY BEST
TO AVOID OR IMPEDE ANYONE'S
MOTIVE. I THINK EVERYONE IS
GENUINELY INTERESTED IN WORKING
TOGETHER TO MEET EVERYONE'S
NEEDS AND CONCERNS TO DO
SOMETHING TOGETHER. AND,
NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH TO DO
EXACTLY THAT BUT I WOULD SUBMIT
THAT EVEN IF WE TAKE THIS VOTE
TODAY , THERE IS NOTHING
STOPPING THE PARTIES FROM
CONTINUING TO DO EXACTLY THAT,
CONTINUING TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD
FAITH. SOME OF THAT MIGHT RISE
TO THE LEVEL OF FUTURE COUNCIL
ACTION. SOME OF IT MAY NOT .
EVEN IF WE END UP VOTING TODAY,
THERE IS NOTHING THAT IS GOING
TO STOP ANYONE FROM WORKING
TOGETHER. I AM JUST NOT
CONVINCED THAT THE PENDING
MOTION THAT WE HAVE IS FOR A
JULY 15 DATE. MY AMENDMENT, WE
WILL TALK ABOUT IT MORE LATER.
IT SAYS JUNE 30. JUNE 30 IS AN
EFFECTIVE DATE. IT ALLOWS FOR
PLANNING. IT IS FAIR TO QUESTION
WHETHER THAT IS ADEQUACY AND
SUFFICIENCY OF THAT BUT IT
ALLOWS FOR PLANNING. I AM JUST
NOT CONVINCED THAT IF WE DELAY
THIS VOTE TODAY -- THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
THIS QUESTION ABOUT WHEN WE TAKE
THIS UP IS NOT ABOUT A YES OR A
NO. TO COUNCILMEMBER SAKA'S
POINT, YOU'VE GOT AN AMENDMENT
LATER TODAY TO MAKE THE
EFFECTIVE DATE IN JUNE. IF WE
HAVE A DISCUSSION HERE, OR IF WE
LEARN NEW THINGS IN THE NEXT
MONTH THAT MAKE US WANT TO
CHANGE TODAY'S DECISION, WE
CAN'T CHANGE THAT UNLESS WE
COME BACK TOGETHER AND ASK
EVERYONE TO COME BACK DOWN HERE.
THAT IS WHY I AM ASKING TO GET
THAT INFORMATION AHEAD OF MAKING
THAT FINAL DECISION. THIS IS ONE
OF -- THIS COULD POSSIBLY BE THE
FIRST DECISION BEFORE THIS
COUNCIL THAT COULD NOT BE TAKEN
BACK. OTHER DECISIONS THAT WE
HAVE MADE HERE AROUND POLICIES
CAN BE AMENDED. THEY CAN BE
PILOT PROJECTS. THEY CAN BE
CHANGED IF THEY ARE NOT WORKING.
THEY CAN BE AUDITED WITH
BUDGETS. WE ARE ABLE TO EXPAND
FUNDING. WE ARE ABLE TO SHRINK
FUNDING. WE ARE ABLE TO MAKE
THESE CHANGES. WE ARE ABLE TO
PUT PERFORMANCE MEASURES ON THEM
IF WE CHOOSE. THERE ARE OTHER
TOOLS. ONCE THE BUILDING IS
BUILT, THAT IS A CHANGE WE
DON'T GET TO COME BACK FROM. I
ABSOLUTELY HEAR -- I DON'T WANT
TO ASK WORKING FOLKS TO LEAVE
THEIR JOBS AGAIN. FOR ME, THIS
PROCESS HAS NOT PUT PEOPLE AT
THE TABLE AT THE SAME TIME TO
HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS. THIS
PROCESS IS WHAT HAS PUT PEOPLE
PITTED AGAINST EACH OTHER. I
KNOW THAT FROM HAVING THE 23
MARITIME INDUSTRIAL WORK. THAT
WAS A VERY LONG PROCESS. IT WAS
FOCUSED ON COLLABORATION AND
CONSENSUS AND WE WERE ABLE TO
CREATE A SCHEDULE THAT WAS
CLEARLY ARTICULATED WELL IN
ADVANCE, A MONTH BEFORE THE BILL
WAS EVEN TRANSMITTED WE WERE
TALKING ABOUT THE DEADLINE FOR
AMENDMENTS. THAT IS WHY WE DID
NOT HAVE AMENDMENTS AT FULL
COUNCIL BECAUSE EVERYONE WAS
AFFORDED THE TIME THAT THEY
NEEDED TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
WHEN I TALK ABOUT AMENDMENTS,
THAT IS JUST ONE FACTOR. THERE
ARE MANY DIFFERENT FACTORS THAT
MAKE ME WANT TO DELAY TODAY. I
HEAR MY COLLEAGUES SHARING
EXAMPLES OF WHY LAST-MINUTE
AMENDMENTS ARE OKAY. I WILL
POINT OUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
THOSE EXAMPLES AND WHAT WE HAVE
TODAY IS HOW MUCH WORK HAS BEEN
DONE TO SHARE THE CONTENT AHEAD
OF TIME. I AM NOT POINTING
FINGERS. IT IS NOT A FAULT AT
ANYONE ELSE BUT SOME OF THE
AMENDMENTS WERE HELD CLOSE TO
THE CHEST UNTIL BEING PUBLISHED
AND THIS IS NOT ABOUT WHETHER OR
NOT WE HAVE THE FORTITUDE TO
STAY UP ALL NIGHT. EVERYONE LET
THE RECORD REFLECT A JUDGE CAN
STAY UP . TOUGH AS NAILS. IT IS
NOT ABOUT STAYING UP LATE AT
NIGHT AND DIGESTING INFORMATION.
IT IS ABOUT ALLOWING FOR A
PUBLIC PROCESS TO HAVE
TRANSPARENCY AND PREDICT
ABILITY. HOW MANY COUNCILMEMBERS
UP HERE RIGHT NOW KNEW THAT THE
PROJECT THAT IS BEING PROPOSED
TO BE BUILT TODAY, IF THAT
HOUSING WAS HOTELS?
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, I
APPRECIATE -- I WOULD LIKE TO
CONTINUE THE PROCESS OF VOTING
ON THIS. PLEASE DON'T
INTERRUPT. POINT OF ORDER,
PLEASE. LET'S KEEP OUR
CONVERSATION TO THE MOTION AT
HAND. I KNOW IT IS -- WOULD YOU
LIKE TO HAVE A FINAL THING?
>> I WOULD LIKE TO FINISH MY
STATEMENT.
>> GO AHEAD AND FINISH YOUR
STATEMENT.
>> THERE WAS A LOT RIDING ON
THIS DECISION. THIS IS ONE THAT
WE CAN'T TAKE BACK AND THAT WE
SHOULD PROCEED CAREFULLY BECAUSE
EVERYONE UP HERE FROM MY
UNDERSTANDING ONCE THE MAKERS
DISTRICT. WE WANT TO HAVE THE
SMALL MAKERS MANUFACTURING. WHAT
I HEARD TODAY IS THAT THE PORT
HAS IN WRITING, INTEREST IN
BUYING THAT SPACE. WHAT WE KNOW
IS THAT WE WANT LABOR BUILT
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WHERE IT IS
IS A DIFFERENT QUESTION. WHAT WE
KNOW IS THAT THIS PROJECT COULD
BE BUILT TODAY IF IT WAS A HOTEL
BECAUSE WHEN WE PUT PEOPLE'S
HOMES WITHIN 200 FEET OF NOT
ONLY A FREIGHT ROUTE BUT ONE OF
THE MOST USED FREIGHT ROUTES IN
OUR CITY, IT IS NOT GOOD FOR THE
FOLKS WHO LIVE THERE. I ASKED
FOR A DELAY SO WE CAN CONTINUE
THE CONVERSATION AND
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, IF THAT
MEANS JUST A WEEK, I AM HAPPY TO
HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. I SAID
JULY BECAUSE I THOUGHT WE COULD
GET SDOT TO GET ENGAGED . WE
COULD HAVE GOTTEN SDOT ENGAGED
HAD WE HAD A MORE SMOOTH
PROCESS. THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I FIRST WANT TO WISH A HAPPY
HEAVENLY BIRTHDAY TO
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA 'S DAD, A
WELDER . IT IS INCREDIBLE
BECAUSE MY DAD IS A WELDER AND
THURSDAY WILL BE FOUR YEARS
SINCE HE PASSED AND IT IS HIS
BIRTHDAY ON THURSDAY. AND, TO
THE COUNCILMEMBER RINCK'S POINT,
WITH THAT BACKGROUND, IT IS BAD
AND I UNDERSTAND LABOR COUNCIL
IS LOOKING FOR ANSWERS BUT IT IS
BAD, THIS SITUATION WE HAVE IN
TERMS OF LABOR IN THE DIFFERENT
SIDES OF LABOR. I ALSO LIKE THE
WORD GRACE. GRACE IS MY FAVORITE
WORD. RACE IS IMPORTANT. I
UNDERSTAND WHEN SOMEBODY SAYS,
HEY, DO AN ALL NIGHTER. GRACE
WOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHEN A
COLLEAGUE HAS A COUPLE OF LITTLE
TERRIER DOGS, A YOUNG DAUGHTER
AND A WORKING WIFE, GOING
THROUGH QUITE A BIT RIGHT NOW.
IT IS DIFFICULT. I THINK GRACE
IS A KEYWORD WE SHOULD HAVE.
THANK YOU, BY THE WAY, FOR THE
PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WAS DONE BUT
THIS IS A WORD THAT WE SHOULD BE
LOOKING AT IF WE ARE -- I JUST
WANTED TO ALSO SAY THAT I DON'T
BELIEVE MY COMMENTS ARE A RED
HERRING . IF YOU WORK THESE
ISSUES, IF YOU KNOW THE MARITIME
WORLD AND EVERYTHING ELSE, THE
COAST GUARD DECISION IS HUGE.
THAT IS GOING TO HAVE IMPACT.
THE IMPACT DECISION ITSELF ON
SOUTH COLGATE, THAT IS HUGE. IT
IS GOING TO HAVE IMPACT. THE WET
WEATHER TREATMENT FACILITY IS
GOING TO BE HUGE. IT IS NEARLY 8
ACRES. THESE ARE NOT RED
HERRINGS. WE TALKED ABOUT
DIFFICULT DECISIONS. WE ARE
SUPPOSED TO HAVE DATA DRIVEN
DECISION MAKING BUT CLEARLY,
JUST ON THOSE THREE EXAMPLES, WE
HAVE INCOMPLETE DATA. THAT IS
JUST A FACT. I DON'T BELIEVE
THAT IS A RED HERRING. I JUST
WANTED TO MAKE THAT POINT. THANK
YOU.
>> IS THAT AN OLD HAND OR A NEW
HAND? COUNCILMEMBER MOORE?
>> I WILL TAKE MY HAND OFF.
>> ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO FURTHER
COMMENTS, WILL THE CLERK PLEASE
CALL THE ROLLBACK ON THE MOTION
TO POSTPONE UNTIL JULY 15?
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE?
>> NO .
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK?
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON?
>> NO.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON?
>> NO.
>> THAT IS THREE IN FAVOR, SIX
OPPOSED.
>> ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION IS
DEFEATED AND NOW WE WILL GO ON.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE READ ITEM
ONE?
>> AT THIS POINT, WE ARE READY
TO MOVE THROUGH AMENDMENTS A
THROUGH I.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE
BASE LEGISLATION UNLESS THE
TITLE HAS TO BE READ INTO THE
RECORD. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, FOLKS.
I WILL TRY TO KEEP THIS SHORT
BECAUSE I KNOW WE NEED TO
CONTINUE WITH THE ITEM AND WE
HAVE HOW MANY AMENDMENTS? NINE.
ANYWAY, I HAVE TO SAY THAT FOR
SUCH A PROGRESSIVE PIECE OF
LEGISLATION, THERE IS AN
UNCOMMON AMOUNT OF OPPOSITION,
AT LEAST FOR SEATTLE. THERE IS A
LOT OF STRONG EMOTION ON EACH
SIDE AND SOME CRAZY ACCUSATIONS
WITH SOME ILL INTENT AS WELL AS
FAR TOO MUCH FROM MY PERSPECTIVE
APPEAR. IT JUST DOES NOT ADD UP
TO THE FACTS. THIS IS ABOUT
SEATTLE'S WORSENING HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY PROBLEM. IT IS
ABOUT SEATTLE'S WORSENING OF
PORTABILITY PROBLEM FOR OUR
SMALL BUSINESSES. WE ARE
ESPECIALLY TALKING ABOUT
WORKING-CLASS PEOPLE WHO CAN NO
LONGER AFFORD TO LIVE IN
SEATTLE. WE ARE G ABOUT
SMALL MANUFACTURING BUSINESSES
THAT ARE FORCED TO MOVE OUT OF
SEATTLE BECAUSE THEY CAN'T FIND
AFFORDABLE WORKSPACES. THESE, BY
THE WAY, ARE THE BUSINESSES THAT
ARE POISED TO BE INSPIRATIONS
AND TO BE INCUBATORS AND TO BE
THE LADDER OF UPLIFT AND
OPPORTUNITY FOR OTHER MINORITY
AND VULNERABLE ENTREPRENEURS IN
OUR CITY. THEY ARE ESPECIALLY
IMPORTANT TO TRY TO GET TO , TO
HELP STAY HERE. ANYWAY, THE
QUESTION BEFORE US TODAY IS
SIMPLY, ARE WE GOING TO DO
SOMETHING ABOUT ALL OF THIS OR
NOT? ARE WE GOING TO BUILD MORE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR NOT? ARE
WE GOING TO SUPPORT OUR MAKERS
BUSINESSES AND CREATE MORE
SPACES OR NOT? IN OTHER WORDS,
DO WE REALLY UNDERSTAND THE
AFFORDABILITY CRISIS THIS CITY
IS FACING AND ARE WE WILLING TO
ACT WITH URGENCY AND
DETERMINATION TO DO SOMETHING
ABOUT IT? THAT IS HOW I SEE
THIS. I DO WANT TO ADDRESS THE
MESSAGING ON THE SIGNS, WE HAD A
DEAL MESSAGE THAT IS COMING AT
US. YEAH, THE DEAL WAS THE EIF
AND THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
WHICH FOUND THAT HOUSING WOULD
NOT ADVERSELY IMPACT THE PORT OF
-- THE PORT'S OPERATIONS AND
RECOMMENDED RESIDENTIAL USES IN
THE STADIUM DISTRICT UP TO 990
UNITS, WHATEVER. THAT HOUSING,
50% OF WHICH WOULD BE AFFORDABLE
AT 60% TO 90% OF THE AREA'S
MEDIAN INCOME FOR 75 YEARS PER
THE UNDERLYING ZONING. THAT IS
WHAT WE'VE GOT GOING FOR US.
THIS IS TRULY MIXED INCOME
HOUSING LOCATED NEXT TO FREQUENT
TRANSIT SUCH AS A LIGHT RAIL
STATION AND THERE IS NO
CONTROVERSY ABOUT THAT. THAT IS
WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. THE
DEAL WAS NEGOTIATED AMONGST
STAKEHOLDERS FROM NOVEMBER 2019
WHEN THE INDUSTRIAL AND MARITIME
STRATEGY ADVISEMENT COUNCIL WAS
CONVENED UNTIL IT WAS PUBLISHED
IN THE FINAL EIF AND THE
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE IN
SEPTEMBER 2022. THAT IS THE DEAL
I AM TALKING ABOUT HERE. I
DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TERMS ARE
OF ANY OTHER DEAL THAT IS BEING
ELUDED TO HEAR BUT I AM JUST
GOING ON THE FACT OF WHAT I HAVE
AT MY -- THAT WERE PUBLICLY
AVAILABLE AND THAT I HAVE AT MY
DISPOSAL AS WELL. THE FACTS ARE
THAT THIS PROPOSAL WILL ALLOW
WORKFORCE HOUSING TO BE BUILT ON
TOP OF SUBSIDIZED WORKSPACES FOR
STRUGGLING SMALL BUSINESS IN AN
UNDER UTILIZED TWO BLOCK STRETCH
SOUTH OF T-MOBILE PARK THAT IS
NOW PLAGUED BY SERIOUS CRIME.
THIS WOULD BE BUILT WITH 100%
UNION LABOR BACKED AND SIGNED BY
PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENTS THAT
FOLLOW THE PROPERTY EVEN IF IT
IS SOLD AS LONG AS HOUSING IS
APPROVED TO BE BUILT. THAT IS A
PRETTY GOOD DEAL AND THAT IS WHY
THIS IS BACKED A BROAD COALITION
INCLUDING 22 LOCALS REPRESENTING
173,000 MEMBERS, 200 AFFORDABLE
HOUSING PROVIDERS AND 700
MANUFACTURING BUSINESSES THAT
ARE MEMBERS OF SEATTLE MADE AND
THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHERS AROUND
THE CITY. TWO PUBLIC STADIUM
AUTHORITIES AND PIONEER SQUARE
IN CHINATOWN INTERNATIONAL
DISTRICT NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS
STRONGLY SUPPORTED THIS PROPOSAL
FOR THE INCREASED SAFETY AT 24/7
ACTIVATION WOULD BRING. I COULD
GO ON AND DECONSTRUCT THE OTHER
REASONS FOR OPPOSITION TO THIS
PLAN BUT I JUST WANT TO PUT
FORWARD FOR NOW THAT I AM
ADVANCING THIS BILL BECAUSE I
THINK IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO
DO FOR OUR WORKERS, OUR LOW
INCOME FAMILIES AND SO MANY
SMALL BUSINESSES AND THE
VITALITY OF OUR FUTURE AND
EVOLVING CITY. THIS LEGISLATION
IS NOW BEFORE US FOR FURTHER
COMMENT AND I WELCOME MY
COLLEAGUES TO CHIME IN.
>> THAT WAS THE INTRODUCTION.
SEEING NO COMMENTS RIGHT NOW, I
THINK WE CAN GO AHEAD AND MOVE
THE VARIOUS AMENDMENTS.
>> I WILL START WITH MINE. HOLD
ON A SECOND. THERE IS -- I AM
RECOMMENDING THAT WE SUSPEND THE
RULES SO THAT OUR CENTRAL STAFF
ANALYST CAN JOIN US AT THE TABLE
JUST TO ANSWER ANY POLICY
QUESTIONS, NOT THERE TO WALK
THROUGH EACH AMENDMENT. I AM
SEEING NO OBJECTIONS TO
SUSPENDING THE RULES SO OUR
CENTRAL STAFF MEMBERS CAN SIT AT
THE TABLE. ALL RIGHT. LET'S
MOVE ON. DO I GO AHEAD AND READ
THE ACTUAL AMENDMENT? AMENDMENT
A IS SPONSORED BY ME SO I WILL
GO AHEAD AND PRESENT IT.
AMENDMENT A IS -- I MOVE
AMENDMENT A TO COUNCIL BILL
120933 .
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD
LIMIT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF
RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN THE STADIUM
TRANSITION AREA OVERLAY
DISTRICT. BASICALLY, THIS IS IN
RESPONSE A LITTLE BIT TO THE
LETTER THAT WE GOT FROM THE
PORT. THE FACTS ARE THAT IT
WOULD LIMIT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF
UNITS -- HOUSING UNITS TO 990.
THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE
GREATEST NUMBER OF UNITS THAT
WERE STUDIED IN THE F EIF. THE
POINT OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO
SEND A VERY CLEAR MESSAGE THAT
WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO HERE IS
BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE HAVE
STUDIED AND THAT THIS IS NOT AN
INTENTION TO EXCEED WHAT WAS
STUDIED AND THIS WILL ALSO
ADDRESS CONCERNS THAT THERE IS A
STEEPER VIOLATION AT PLAY. ARE
THERE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT MY
AMENDMENT?
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT?
>> GO AHEAD.
>> DO WE HAVE TO VOTE YES AND NO
ON AMENDMENTS AT FULL COUNCIL?
THANK YOU.
>> YES.
>> ALL RIGHT. I AM NOT SEEING
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. WILL THE
CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLLBACK
ON THE ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT A.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> SIX IN PAPER, THREE OPPOSED.
MOTION CARRIES END AMENDMENT A
IS ADOPTED. MOVING RIGHT ALONG,
GO AHEAD. ARE THERE ANY FURTHER
COMMENTS ON THE BILL AS AMENDED?
GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU. I MOVED TO AMEND
COUNCIL BILL 120933 AS PRESENTED
ON AMENDMENT TO BE.
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED.
>> GO AHEAD.
>> WE HAVE HEARD A LOT OF GREAT
FEEDBACK THE PAST COUPLE OF
WEEKS, THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS
IN MY JOURNEY TO LEARN MORE AND
TO BETTER UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE
SPECIFIC CONCERNS. ALL OF THEM
GREAT, ALL OF THEM BAD. I TRY MY
BEST, AGAIN, NOT TO IMPUGN ANY
MOTIVES. I THINK ALL THE
CONCERNS I HEARD ARE TOTALLY
VALID. I DON'T THINK ANY OF
THEM ARE FEAR MONGERING. THEY
ARE ROOTED IN PEOPLE'S
DEEP-SEATED VALUES, PRINCIPLES
AND PRIORITIES. IF I, AS AN
ELECTED OFFICIAL OR A POLITICIAN
WERE TO TELL SOMEONE THAT THEY
ARE FEAR MONGERING BASED OFF OF
HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT A PARTICULAR
POLICY PROPOSAL, I THINK IT IS A
LITTLE DISRESPECTFUL . WHO AM I
TO TELL YOU ALL HOW YOU SHOULD
BE FEELING OR NOT BE FEELING
ABOUT ANY PARTICULAR POLICY
PROPOSAL? ALL OF THE CONCERNS
ARE VALID. THERE IS TOO MUCH
GOVERNMENT DOING THAT ANYWAY.
ALL THESE CONCERNS ARE VALID. I
AM JUST PERSUADED BY SOME MORE
THAN OTHERS. THIS AMENDMENT IS
IN DIRECT RESPONSE TO SOME
SPECIFIC CONCERNS THAT I HEARD
DURING MY STAKEHOLDER PROCESS.
THIS IS ABOUT PROVIDING CLARITY
FOR BOTH THE PORT AND THE
COMMUNITY THAT GOING FORWARD,
THE COUNCIL WILL MAINTAIN
INDUSTRIAL LAND FOR INDUSTRIAL
USES. MY AMENDMENT ALSO MAKES
CLEAR THAT THIS COUNCIL
UNDERSTANDS THE IMPORTANCE OF
INDUSTRIAL LAND AND WILL
PROACTIVELY SUPPORT ACTIONS TO
LIMIT FURTHER ENCROACHMENT AND
REZONING OF INDUSTRIAL LAND. I
INTEND TO CEMENT THE CITY
COUNCIL'S COMMITMENT TO
MAINTAINING INDUSTRIAL LAND FOR
INDUSTRIAL AND MARITIME USES.
THE PORT AND OUR INDUSTRIAL
BUSINESSES DO NOT HAVE TO COME
OUT AND FIGHT THIS FIGHT EVERY
TWO YEARS. WE LEARNED TWO YEARS
AGO, SOME THOUGHT THIS ISSUE WAS
PUT TO BED. OTHERS THOUGHT THAT
IT WOULD BE RESURRECTED IN A FEW
YEARS AND HERE WE ARE. BUT,
EVERYONE DESERVES CONSISTENCY
AND PREDICT ABILITY IN LAND USE
POLICIES SO THEY CAN CONCENTRATE
ON DOING THEIR BUSINESS. BECAUSE
THE BILL BEFORE US IS A SHORT
BILL AFFECTING ONLY THE STADIUM
TRANSITION AREA OVERLAY
DISTRICT, I AM TOLD FROM OUR
CENTRAL STAFF THAT IT IS NOT THE
BEST VENUE FOR MAKING THAT
LARGER COMMITMENT. INSTEAD, THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS. WHEN THE
COMP PLAN IS BEFORE THE COUNCIL,
IT CURRENTLY IS , I WILL BE
PUTTING FORWARD AMENDMENTS AS
PART OF A BROADER PLAN TO MAKE
SURE THAT NO ADDITIONAL HOUSING
IS PERMITTED IN INDUSTRIAL AREAS
AND INDIVIDUAL COUNCILMEMBERS
AREN'T FREE TO WILLY-NILLY
PROPOSE SUCH CHANGES WHENEVER
THEY SEE FIT. IT HAS TO BE AS IT
-- AT A RELIABLE, CONSISTENT,
PREDICTABLE TIMEFRAME BUT I AM
TOLD THIS LEGISLATIVE INSTRUMENT
IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE
LEGISLATIVE VEHICLE FOR THAT.
WHERE WE LANDED IS, I WANT TO
SIGNAL COUNCIL 'S INTENT HERE
VIA RECITALS WITH AN EYE TOWARD
TAKING STRONGER ACTION LATER
DURING THE COMP PLAN PROCESS.
COLLEAGUES, IRRESPECTIVE OF
WHERE YOU LAND ON THE FINAL VOTE
, I WOULD LOVE TO EARN YOUR
SUPPORT FOR THIS AMENDMENT AND
FRANKLY, ALL OF MY AMENDMENTS. I
THINK THEY DO MAKE THE BILL
BETTER. I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, I
APPRECIATE ENTIRELY THE INTENT
-- WHERE THE INTENT YOU'RE
COMING FROM IS. I FEEL LIKE
LISTENING TO YOUR SPEECH, IT
SOUNDED LIKE WHAT I SAID AT THE
END OF 2023. WE NEED
PREDICTABILITY. WE NEED TO SET
UP A PROCESS WHERE HOUSING WILL
NOT COME UP IN A REGULAR
CONVERSATION. IN FACT, WE ADDED
ELEMENTS OF THOSE INTO THAT
INDUSTRIAL MARITIME READ ZONE
CHANGE. WE HAVE COME TO
DIFFERENT CONCLUSIONS. THE
STADIUM TRANSITION OVERLAY
DISTRICT IS AN AREA THAT IS A
TRANSITION BETWEEN AN URBAN AREA
AND AN INDUSTRIAL AREA. IN THOSE
CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAD IN
2022, 2023 AND EARLIER, -- IF
DAN IS STILL IN THE ROOM, DAN
YELLED AT ME IN A POLITE WAY. IT
WAS ABOUT THE HOTEL, ABOUT JUST
THE HOTELS COMING INTO THE
STADIUM TRANSITION DISTRICT . AT
THE END OF THAT WHOLE PROCESS --
I SAID, DAN, DON'T WORRY. WE
HAVE A COMMITMENT, WE ARE GOING
TO GET THIS DONE AND THIS IS
WHERE WE ARE GOING TO LAND. EVEN
STILL, HE SAID TO ME, IF WE PUT
THREE HOTELS, DO WE HAVE THE
SIDEWALK WITH TO ACCOMMODATE
THAT? IT IS SOMETHING THAT HE
BROUGHT UP YEARS AGO. AT THE END
OF THAT 23 PROCESS, I SAID, IF
WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE, THERE
WILL BE A PROCESS TO BRING
EVERYONE TO THE TABLE. THAT WAS
PART OF THE TRANSPORTATION
RESOLUTION, PART OF THIS
CONTINUING RESOLUTION. I WANT TO
GET BACK. THE PROCESS AROUND
THIS BILL HAS CREATED DIVISION
RATHER THAN COLLABORATION. I
SUBMIT TO YOU, MY FRIENDS, THAT
YOU ARE ACCURATE. THE SPEECH
THAT YOU JUST GAVE I FEEL WAS
THE SPEECH I JUST GAVE AT THE
END OF THE PROCESS IN 2023 BUT
THE REALITY IS WE ARE BACK HERE
TODAY AND THAT IS WHY I FEEL I
CAN'T SUPPORT THESE WORDS
BECAUSE I FEEL THAT OUR ACTIONS
ARE HOLLOW.
>> OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER
COMMENTS? I WOULD LIKE
COUNCILMEMBERS TO ADDRESS THE
ROOM, UNLESS ASKING A QUESTION.
PLEASE STATE YOUR COMMENTS AND
-- INSTEAD OF SPEAKING DIRECTLY
TO EACH OTHER. ARE THERE ANY
OTHER COMMENTS ON AMENDMENT TO
BE? WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL ON AMENDMENT B ?
>> GO AHEAD. I DID NOT SEE YOUR
HAND.
>> NO WORRIES. ARE WE GOING TO
HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CENTRAL
STAFF TO EXPLAIN SOME OF THESE?
>> YESTERDAY, I SAID THAT WE
WEREN'T GOING TO BECAUSE THERE
ARE SO MANY BUT I DO THINK IT IS
A BETTER IDEA AND ANOTHER
COUNCILMEMBER DID ASK THAT SO,
WOULD YOU PLEASE GO AHEAD WITH
THE DESCRIPTION?
>> FOR COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF,
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ADD FIVE
TITLES TO THE BILL , CALLING OUT
THE KEY POLICIES AND THE
CONFERENCE PLANS, INDUSTRIAL
POLICIES RELATED TO INDUSTRIAL
LAND AND PRESERVING INDUSTRIAL
LAND FOR INDUSTRIAL USES AND
THAT IS TWO STATEMENTS STATING
THAT ADDITIONAL HOUSING AND
INDUSTRIAL AREAS OUTSIDE OF THE
LIMITED INDUSTRIAL RELATED
HOUSING CURRENTLY ALLOWED WOULD
HAVE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE
INDUSTRIAL AREAS AND STATING
THAT THIS CITY INTENDS TO
FURTHER STRENGTHEN POLICIES AND
FURTHER LIMIT CHANGES TO
INDUSTRIAL AREAS.
>> OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL
RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, COUNCILMEMBER --
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA FOR BRINGING
THIS FORWARD. I WANT TO TAKE
THIS OPPORTUNITY TO RECOGNIZE
HOW MUCH WORK YOU DID PUT INTO
THIS LEGISLATION, TO LOOKING AT
THE DETAILS, TO TAKING A VERY
CLOSE LOOK AT THE MINUTIA AND
FOR CARING SO MUCH AND FOR SO
LONG ABOUT THIS PIECE OF
LEGISLATION AND WHAT YOU ARE
GOING TO DO ABOUT IT. I
RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS -- A LOT
OF THE FOLKS THAT ARE DIRECTLY
INVOLVED IN THIS LEGISLATION
LIVE AND WORK IN YOUR DISTRICT
SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING
SUCH A THOUGHT PARTNER IN
PUTTING FORWARD THESE AMENDMENTS
WITH SUCH CONVICTION AND HEART.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT. ALL
RIGHT. WE HAVE A LOT MORE TO GO
SO WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL NECK ON THE PASSAGE OF
AMENDMENT B TO COUNCIL 120933?
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> SIX IN FAVOR, THREE OPPOSED.
THE MOTION CARRIES. AMENDMENT B
IS ADOPTED. ARE THERE FURTHER
COMMENTS?
>> THINK YOU. I MOVED TO AMEND
COUNCIL BILL 120933 AS PRESENTED
ON AMENDMENT C .
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO AMEND THE BILL AS
PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT C.
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, AS A
SPONSOR, YOU ARE MOVED TO
ADDRESS IT AND YOU CAN ALSO ASK
OUR CENTRAL STAFF ARE TO
DESCRIBE IT AS WELL.
>> THANK YOU AND THANK YOU FOR
ACCOMMODATING THE REQUEST TO
ALLOW CENTRAL STAFF TO BE HERE
TO EXPLAIN. I WILL YIELD IN A
MOMENT TO CENTRAL STAFF TO
EXPLAIN ALL OF THESE AMENDMENTS.
EVERY LAST ONE ARE HIGHLY
TECHNICAL AND NUANCED SO I THINK
GETTING THE FACT PREDICATE RIGHT
FROM A CENTRAL STAFF -- ALIGNING
ON THE EFFECT OF THE AMENDMENT
WILL HELP ME DESCRIBE THE POLICY
GOALS AND PURPOSE OF THE
AMENDMENT. GO AHEAD. WELL, I
WILL YIELD TO CENTRAL STAFF.
>> PLEASE.
>> AS I THINK COUNCILMEMBERS
KNOW, THE STADIUM TRANSITION
AREA OVERLAY DISTRICT IS IN A
CENTRAL LIQUEFACTION PRONE AREA.
THAT MEANS THAT DURING AN
EARTHQUAKE EVENT, THE SOILS
COULD BE LOOSE AND ADDITIONAL
ENGINEERING IS REQUIRED FOR
CONSTRUCTION AREAS IN ORDER TO
PREVENT SERIOUS HARM TO
OCCUPANTS OF STRUCTURES IN THE
AREA. IF A PROPERTY IN THE AREA
IS DETERMINED TO BE LIQUEFACTION
PRONE AND THAT IS BY OUTSIDE
ANALYSIS, SDC I WILL REQUIRE A
COVENANT TO THE CITY INDICATING
THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER WILL
MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY IN SUCH A
MANNER THAT WILL PREVENT HARM TO
THE PUBLIC, DECLARE THAT THEY
ACKNOWLEDGE THE RISK OF HAVING A
BUILDING IN A LIQUEFACTION PRONE
AREA AND WAIVE ANY RIGHTS TO
ASSERT A CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY
FOR DAMAGES. THIS AMENDMENT
BASICALLY JUST SAYS THAT IF SUCH
A COVENANT IS REQUIRED, IT HAS
TO BE PLACED IN PERPETUITY.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. WOULD YOU
LIKE --
>> THANK YOU, MADAM COUNCIL
PRESIDENT. THIS AMENDMENT
ADDRESSES VERY SPECIFIC CONCERNS
THAT I HAVE HEARD RAISED
REGARDING HOUSING AND
DEVELOPMENT IN THE EQUIVOCATION
ZONES. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD MAKE
A CLEAR REQUIREMENT THAT
COVENANTS REGARDING THE
EQUIVOCATION ZONES ARE IN PLACE
IN PERPETUITY AND RUN WITH THE
LAND AND BE BINDING UPON THE
SUCCESSORS WITH ALL OF THE
PROPERTY. IMPORTANTLY, AGAIN, IN
PERPETUITY. RECALL, CALLING US,
THAT COVENANT MAY BE REQUIRED IN
GEOLOGICAL HAZARDOUS ZONES. WE
LEARNED ABOUT A MOMENT AGO AND I
UNDERSTAND THAT THIS REQUIREMENT
IS SIMILAR TO COVENANTS THAT
EXIST WITH OTHER EXISTING
PROPERTIES, RESIDENTIAL
PROPERTIES JUST NORTH OF THIS
AREA, REQUIRING PROPERTY OWNERS
TO MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY IN A
WAY TO PROTECT OCCUPANTS AND THE
PUBLIC, UNDERSTAND AND CONVEY
THE RISK OF LIVING IN A LIQUID
VACATION ZONE AND WAIVES CLAIMS
AGAINST THE CITY. THIS
AMENDMENT, IN LINE WITH THAT
SIMILAR PROJECTS NORTH OF THIS
AREA ENSURES THAT THOSE WHO
CHOOSE TO LIVE IN THIS VIBRANT,
DYNAMIC AND HISTORIC PART OF OUR
COMMUNITY DO SO WITH THE FULL
KNOWLEDGE THAT THERE ARE
POTENTIAL RISKS INVOLVED IN
LIVING IN HAZARDOUS GEOLOGICAL
AREAS. INFORMATION FROM CURRENT
PIONEER SQUARE RESIDENCE
INDICATE THAT SUCH COVENANTS
APPEAR BY ALL COUNTS TO BE
WORKING IN BUILDINGS IN THE SAME
EXACT LIQUID VACATION ZONE
WHICH, BY THE WAY, IS MOST PARTS
OF PIONEER SQUARE. PARTS OF SOTO
INCLUDING THE PORT AND THE
STADIUM IN GEORGETOWN AND
SOUTHPARK. COLLEAGUES, I URGE A
VOTE IN FAVOR. THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON?
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I JUST WANTED TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA . I TOO LIVE
IN A LIQUID VACATION ZONE AREA
ON BEACON HILL. WHEN I WAS
LOOKING AT DOING THE DEVELOPMENT
ON MY PROPERTY, I ALSO HAD TO
SIGN THOSE COVENANTS RECOGNIZING
THAT I WAS IN A LIQUID VACATION
ZONE, RECOGNIZING THAT I WAS AT
A HIGH PEAK AREA AS WELL. HAVING
THIS PROVISION, ACKNOWLEDGING
WHAT THE GEOLOGICAL CONDITIONS
OF THE AREA ARE, THAT HAS BEEN
ONE OF MY CONCERNS REGARDING ANY
KIND OF DEVELOPMENT WITHIN SODO
. AGAIN, I GOT INTO MY OWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ON MY OWN PROPERTY.
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT .
THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT
INFORMATION. IT REMINDS ME OF
THE ANCIENT PEAT BOG THAT ORDERS
DISTRICT 6 AND DISTRICT 5 HAVE
AN AGREEMENT THAT HAS REAL
IMPACT ON BUILDING THE BUILDING.
WHEN A SAFEWAY WAS BUILT THERE
MAY BE A DECADE OR SO AGO, IT
PUMPED WATER OUT OF THE GROUND
AND MADE OTHER HOUSES LEAK IN
THE AREA. I BRING US BACK TO WHY
LIQUEFACTION IMPORTANT WITH OUR
POLICY DECISIONS AND
DISCUSSIONS? I WILL FIRST POSE
THE QUESTION OF, WHY WERE
SKYSCRAPERS BUILT ON THE ISLAND
OF MANHATTAN? THE ANSWER IS
BECAUSE THE BEDROCK WAS EXPOSED.
USUALLY YOU CAN SEE THE SMITH
TOWER THROUGH THE OPEN WINDOWS.
IT WAS THE TALLEST BUILDING THIS
SIDE OF THE MISSISSIPPI FOR A
LONG TIME. WHY? BECAUSE IT WAS
ATTACHED TO THE BEDROCK. BECAUSE
THE ANCIENT BAY STARTED AT THE
EDGE OF WHERE SMITH TOWER IS
TODAY. WHY IS HAVING
SINGLE-STORY, DOUBLE STORY, OR
UP TO THREE-STORY BUILDINGS IN
AN INDUSTRIAL AREA THAT IS ALL
LIQUEFACTION ZONE, WHICH IS
DIFFERENT -- IT COULD BE
DIFFERENT THAN WHAT
COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON WAS
DESCRIBING BECAUSE THE
LIQUEFACTION ZONE IN THE BAY IS
ALL TILL FROM OUR HILLS WHICH IS
DIFFERENT FROM THE SETTLING BOG
THAT IS IN DISTRICT 6 AND
DISTRICT 5. SO, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, TO YOU MY ESTEEMED
COLLEAGUES TO MY RIGHT,
DIRECTIONALLY CORRECT. AMEN TO
THAT. WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE
LIVING IN LIQUEFACTION ZONES AND
IF THEY ARE, WE WANTED TO BE
KNOWN BUT WHAT THIS FEELS LIKE
TO ME IS SAYING WE HAD THE
CHOICE TO MAKE A POLICY DECISION
ABOUT WHERE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
GOES AND INSTEAD, WE ARE MAKING
A DECISION TO SAY YOU CAN LIVE
THERE -- I WILL BE VOTING NO
TODAY. THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE?
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
BEFORE I BEGIN, I JUST WANT TO
APOLOGIZE TO MIKE COLLEAGUES FOR
MY EARLIER INTEMPERATE WORDS.
THANK YOU FOR THE GRACE FOR
THAT. I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT
MAINTAINING A PRETTY. THIS IS A
QUESTION FOR LISH. WILL IT
PREVENT HARM TO THE PUBLIC OR
OCCUPANTS? WHAT DOES THAT
ENCOMPASS? HOW DOES THAT PLAY
OUT IN THIS REALITY?
>> ASSUMING THERE ARE THINGS
LIKE LOOSE ROOFING MATERIALS, ET
CETERA, MAKING SURE THAT THE
BUILDING WILL STAND DURING AN
EARTHQUAKE AS IT IS DESIGNED TO
DO.
>> OKAY.
>> SO JUST REINFORCING IT AS IT
NEEDS TO BE REINFORCED. THANK
YOU.
>> PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M
WRONG. THEY DID NOTE THAT NEW
CONSTRUCTION IN THE AREA WOULD
GENERALLY TEND TO WITHSTAND
SEISMIC ACTIVITY IN A WAY THAT
THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE CURRENTLY
THERE WOULD NOT?
>> OUR ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY IS
MUCH BETTER THAN IT WAS 100
YEARS AGO.
>> THANK YOU. I FULLY SUPPORT
THE INTENT OF THIS AMENDMENT AS
WELL. ARE THERE ANY OTHER
COMMENTS? WILL THE CLERK PLEASE
CALL DARRELL MACK ON THE PASSAGE
OF AMENDMENT C?
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> NO.
>> THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> YES. SPECTRA NEED?
>> NO .
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE X
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK?
>> AYE .
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> SIX IN FAVOR, THREE OPPOSED.
AMENDMENT THREE IS ADOPTED. THE
BILL IS ADOPTED.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA?
>> I MOVED TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL
120933 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT
B -- D.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO VOTE AS PRESENTED ON
AMENDMENT LETTER E. PLEASE GO
AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU. I WOULD ACTUALLY
YIELD AND DEFER TO LISH TO
CENTRAL STAFF .
>> GO AHEAD.
>> THE STADIUM TRANSITION
OVERLAY DISTRICT HAS DETERMINED
IN THE EIS THAT THERE IS VERY
HIGH NOISE LEVEL. WHEN THE
COUNCIL ADOPTED THE ADOPT REAL
-- INDUSTRIAL CODE ENFORCEMENT
SIN 2023, IT CHOSE TO INCLUDE A
REQUIREMENT THAT ANY HOUSING
INDUSTRIAL AREA BE DEFINED TO
MAINTAIN INDOOR NOISE LEVELS AT
OR BELOW 60 DECIBELS WHICH IS
ABOUT EQUIVALENT TO A NORMAL
CONVERSATION LEVELS. THIS
AMENDMENT WOULD REQUIRE THAT
WITHIN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT,
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS BE
DEFINED AT INDOOR NOISE LEVELS
TO 45 DECIBELS WHICH IS
EQUIVALENT TO A LIBRARY NOISE.
IT IS SOFTER THAN A NORMAL
CONVERSATION.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE?
>> OKAY. ARE THERE ANY
QUESTIONS? WILL THE CLERK PLEASE
-- I MUST SAY -- COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA?
>> MADAM COUNCIL PRESIDENT,
POINT OF ORDER, MAY HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY OWN
AMENDMENT FOR MY PERSPECTIVE?
>> YES.
>> THANK YOU.
>> COLLEAGUES, AGAIN, THIS
AMENDMENT ADDRESSES SOME VERY
SPECIFIC FOCUSED CONCERN THAT I
HEARD FROM A VARIETY OF FOLKS
THAT THOSE LOOKING TO LIVE IN
THE STADIUM DISTRICT WILL BE
SUBJECT TO CERTAIN DETRIMENTAL
HEALTH IMPACTS INCLUDING THOSE
STEMMING FROM LATIN EXCESSIVE
NOISE. IT WOULD LOWER PERMITTED
NOISE LEVELS IN THIS
NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING IN THE
STADIUM DISTRICT MEETS THE SAME
NOISE STANDARDS AS DEVELOPMENTS
WOULD IN OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS
ACROSS THE CITY. THE STATEMENT
THERE NOTES THAT THE FEDERAL HUD
STANDARD IS 45 DECIBELS FOR
RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. SAME
EFFECT STATEMENT ALSO NOTES THAT
THE SEATTLE STANDARD FOR
RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS IS
ALSO FOR THE FIVE DECIBELS WHEN
YOU LOWER THE DECIBELS, THAT
REQUIRES INCREASED SOUND
ATTENUATION. THIS AMENDMENT
SEEKS TO PUT THIS ONE NARROW
RESIDENTIAL AREA SEEKS TO
DIRECTLY ALIGN THE CODE WITH
CURRENT CITY POLICY AND FEDERAL
POLICY PERTAINING TO RESIDENTIAL
USES. I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
>> YOU JUST RAISED A QUESTION,
IF I MAY ASK, FOR LISH TO
ELABORATE . IS THE URBAN
INDUSTRIAL ZONE NOISE LEVEL SET
AT ANY PARTICULAR NOISE LEVEL?
WAS THAT SAID IN THE UNDERLYING
-- PACKET IS SET AT 60 DECIBELS
WHICH IS THE CITY'S MAXIMUM
NOISE LEVEL FOR RESIDENTIAL USES
NEAR INDUSTRIAL AREAS.
>> IS THERE ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE
CITY THAT IS LOWER THAN 60
DECIBELS?
>> A RESIDENTIAL AREA HAS 45
DECIBEL LIMIT DURING THE
NIGHTTIME AND I THINK IT IS 55
DURING THE DAY.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS AND
THAT I WOULD LIKE TO STATE MY
POSITION.
>> THANK YOU. LISH, MY
APOLOGIES. COLLEAGUES, THERE
WERE COMMENTS MADE EARLIER TODAY
THAT IT IS OUR JOB TO GET THE
BRIEFINGS THAT WE NEED TO BEFORE
WE COME TO COMMITTEE. THAT CAN
ONLY REALLY BE DONE WITH
COLLABORATION. THIS IS AN
AMENDMENT THAT I HAVE NOT HAD
THE OPPORTUNITY TO DIG INTO AND
IT IS NOT BECAUSE I HAVE NOT
BEEN WORKING HARD AND IT IS NOT
BECAUSE I AM NOT SMART. IT IS
NOT BECAUSE OF ANY OF THOSE
REASONS. EVERYONE IS BEING
PULLED IN MANY DIFFERENT
DIRECTIONS. IF LISH WANTS TO
BRIEF ANY OF US FOR AN HOUR ,
THAT IS LIVE -- NINE HOURS WORTH
OF WORK. I'M GOING TO BE
SITTING HERE AND HAVING FOR THE
PUBLIC TO SEE COUNCILMEMBERS
GETTING BRIEFED ON IT IS LIKE.
WITH THAT, I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE
ALREADY EXPLAINED IT A COUPLE OF
TIMES. COULD YOU CLEARLY STATE
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
THIS AMENDMENT AND WHAT WE
PASSED IN 2023?
>> THIS AMENDMENT REQUIRES
THICKER WINDOWS AND MORE
INSULATION IN DEVELOPMENT AND IT
RESIDENTIAL PRODUCTS IN THE
STADIUM DISTRICT THAN WOULD BE
REQUIRED UNDER OTHER URBAN
INDUSTRIAL ZONES.
>> CAN YOU REMIND ME THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ADDED
SOUNDPROOFING AND INSTALLATION?
IN THE 2023 LEGISLATION, WE HAD
THOSE REQUIREMENTS BUT WE DID
NOT ATTACH A DECIBEL LEVEL TO
THAT. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> WE DO HAVE A DECIBEL LEVEL.
IT IS AT 60. RESIDENTIAL
PROJECTS IN URBAN INDUSTRIAL
AREAS NEED TO BE DESIGNED TO
HAVE NOISE LEVELS OF 60 OR
BELOW. THIS WOULD INCREASE THE
REQUIRED INSULATION AND NOISE
DAMPENING WITHIN THE DISTRICTS.
I SEE THERE IS A VERIFICATION
PROCESS BUT HOW IS THAT
VERIFIED? IT HAS TO BE DESIGNED
TO MEET THOSE NOISE LEVELS. THEY
WILL DO NOISE MEASURING AT THE
TIME OF DESIGNING THE PROJECT,
BRING THAT DATA IN AND HAVE TO
SHOW IN THEIR PLANS THAT THE
PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD -- SO
THIS IS NOT A STUPID QUESTION --
>> HOW DO YOU TEST FOR NOISE.
THAT IS THE FIRST PART OF THE
QUESTION BECAUSE WHAT IS THE
INPUT THAT THOSE TESTS ARE
USING. IS IT THE TRUCKS DRIVING
DOWN THE STREET? IS IT A NEW
INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITY COMING IN?
DO THEY HAVE THOSE TYPES OF
UNDERSTANDING? WHAT IS THIS
BASED OFF OF?
>> WE TEST WHAT THE NOISE IS,
THE EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL.
>> SURE.
>> I THINK YOU DO A 24 HOUR
NOISE LEVEL.
>> LET'S TAKE IT OUT BUT A NEW
INDUSTRY COMES IN. IT CHANGES
THAT. DO THEY HAVE ENFORCEMENT
MECHANISMS TO REQUIRE ADDITIONAL
INSULATION OR ARE WE OUT OF
LUCK?
>> THIS IS CODE LANGUAGE THAT
WOULD APPLY AT THE TIME OF THE
DESIGN PROJECT.
>> SILICA CHANGES AND IT BECOMES
LOUDER, INDUSTRIAL USES ARE NOT
QUIET. THIS IS INEFFECTIVE,
POTENTIALLY. THIS IS ALL ABOUT
THE CURRENT STATE AS A DESIGN.
>> I WILL NOTE THAT IT IS A VERY
NOISY AREA.
>> 100%.
>> AND IT COULD BE LOUDER. THAT
IS THE POINT I MAKE. I WILL JUST
MAKE THE POINT AGAIN THAT THIS
PROJECT COULD BE BUILT TODAY IF
THOSE WERE HOUSING PROJECTS OR
HOTEL UNITS.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA, THROUGH
COUNCIL PRESIDENT TO YOU, I
STILL DON'T KNOW HOW I WILL
VOTE ON THIS ONE. THE INTENTION
IS SPOT ON BUT I HAVE 100 MORE
QUESTIONS LIKE THAT BUT I'M NOT
GOING TO MAKE EVERYONE SIT
THROUGH MY HOUR LONG BRIEFING.
SERIOUSLY, THOUGH. YOUR
INTENTION IS REALLY GOOD ON IT.
>> I AM NOT SEEING ANYBODY ELSE
WHOSE HAND IS RAISED. I WILL
SIMPLY SAY THAT THE AREA THAT WE
ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS --
THIS IS A DEPARTURE FROM HOW
OTHER AREAS OF THE URBAN
INDUSTRIAL ZONE IS TREATED. I AM
THINKING ABOUT GEORGETOWN WITH
ALL OF THOSE PLANES FLYING ABOVE
AND I DID REACH OUT TO OUR
COALITION PARTNERS WHO DON'T
HAVE A BIG HEART ABOUT THIS
AMENDMENT AND ALSO ONE OF THE
PROPERTY MANAGERS THAT WILL BE
BUILDING THIS. HE DID NOT
MENTION ANY CONCERN ABOUT
ADDITIONAL COSTS. I AM PREPARED
TO SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT. ARE
THERE FOR THEIR COMMENTS?
>> ALL RIGHT. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE
PASSAGE OF AMENDMENT D?
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, FOUR OPPOSED.
THE MOTION CARRIES AND AMENDMENT
D IS ADOPTED. ARE THERE FURTHER
COMMENTS? COUNCILMEMBER SAKA?
>> I MOVED TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL
120933 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT
D -- LETTER E.
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. WILL YOU PLEASE
PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW BEFORE
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA ADDRESSES IT?
>> MOST OF THE STREETS IN THE
STADIUM TRANSITION AREA OVERLAY
DISTRICT ARE MAJOR CROSS STREETS
WHICH MEANS THEY HAVE BEEN
DESIGNATED WITH FREIGHT AS A
PRIORITY. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD
SAY THAT AMONG MAJOR STREETS,
RESIDENTIAL PARKING, GARAGE
ENTRANCES AND EXITS ARE NOT
ALLOWED EXCEPT IF NO OTHER
OPTION IS AVAILABLE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA?
>> THANK YOU. DURING MY OWN
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROCESS, I
HEARD VERY SPECIFIC CONCERNS
THAT IT WOULD DETRIMENTALLY
IMPACT FREIGHT AND CARGO
MOBILITY AND SUPPORT STABILITY
TO MOVE CARGO. THIS ADDRESSES
THAT CONCERN, AT LEAST IN PART,
ENSURING THEY PROTECT THE
INDUSTRIAL AREA THAT PROHIBITS
ACTIVE OFFSTREET PARKING AND
LOADING FACILITIES FROM THE
AREAS MAJOR TRUCK STREETS
DEFINED TERMS SUCH AS FIRST
AVENUE SOUTH, SOUTH ROYAL FROM
WAY, COLORADO, COLGATE,
ATLANTIC. UNAFFECTED STREETS
DIRECTLY BUTTING UP TO THE
PROPERTY WOULD BE OCCIDENTAL.
THEREFORE, WOULD BE ALLOWED FOR
LOADING ZONES, PARKING ACCESS,
ET CETERA. THIS WILL UNAVOIDABLY
AND INVARIABLY REDUCE CONFLICTS
BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC AND
FREIGHT TRAFFIC AND REDUCE
CONGESTION ON THOSE MAJOR TRUCK
STREETS, PROJECTING --
PROTECTING THE FREIGHT CORRIDOR.
WILL ELIMINATE THE CONFLICTS? NO
BUT IT GOES WITH GREAT STRIDES
TOWARD REDUCING THOSE. THIS
AMENDMENT WILL HELP ENSURE
EXACTLY THAT HAPPENS. I ASK FOR
YOUR SUPPORT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
THROUGH YOU TO COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA, AGAIN, DIRECTIONALLY
CORRECT . YOU HAVE GOT TO SET UP
PARAMETERS WE ARE DEALING WITH.
A BETTER RESULT WOULD BE TO HAVE
SDOT DO THE TRANSPORTATION STUDY
THAT WAS REQUESTED DURING THE
2023 INDUSTRIAL PROCESS. A
BETTER RESULT AND YOU ALREADY
HAVE INSURED SDOT LEVY DOLLARS
ARE GOING TO CONNECT AND SUPPORT
I-90 AND I-95. I THINK A BETTER
OUTCOME WOULD GET THEM TO DO
THAT WORK AHEAD OF TAKING THIS
VOTE. MY CONCERN IS THAT, WHILE
DIRECTIONALLY CORRECT, THIS IS
ACTUALLY A BAD AMENDMENT. THE
REASON I SAY IT IS A BAD
AMENDMENT IS BECAUSE, IN
LEGISLATION, WE ARE STATING
WHERE CURB CUTS AND CURB RAMPS
COULD OR COULD NOT BE.
LEGISLATION IN THE SEATTLE
MUNICIPAL CODE IS HARD FOR
THINGS TO CHANGE. THIS LEVEL OF
DETAIL AND INPUT IS MUCH BETTER
WHEN LOOKING AT THE WHOLE
SYSTEM, WHEN DOING THAT STUDY,
WHEN DOING THE CORD OR
IMPROVEMENTS BECAUSE WHAT IS TO
SAY WE DON'T MAKE A CHANGE ON
THE MAJOR TRUCK STREETS THAT
PRIORITIZE FREIGHT GETTING FROM
THE PORT TO THE INTERSTATE BUT
THEN WE CAN'T PUT CURB CUTS
THERE . THAT IS WHY I SAY,
COLLEAGUES, WE ARE ALL GETTING
AHEAD OF OURSELVES ON THIS.
THERE ARE SO MANY FINE AND
NUANCED DETAILS THAT NEED TO BE
ATTENDED TO THAT, THROUGH THIS
PROCESS, WE ARE RUSHING ACROSS.
I APPRECIATE WHERE YOU ARE
COMING FROM ON THIS AND I THINK
THAT THIS IS ACTUALLY A BAD
AMENDMENT.
>> ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE?
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO HAVE LISH
AND COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS ABLE
TO ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS.
>> I WILL STATE THAT CURRENTLY
IN THE DISTRICT OVERLAY, THERE
IS A RESTRICTION ON CURB CUTS.
THERE IS A LIMIT OF THREE CURB
BLOCKS ON NORTH SOUTH STREET. IT
IS NOT UNCOMMON WHERE CURB CUTS
CAN BE LOCATED.
>> IF I MAY, I WOULD LIKE TO
HAVE COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS BE
ABLE TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS.
>> IF YOU ARE WELCOME TO, I WILL
WEIGH IN AFTER YOU.
>> APPRECIATE
YOU KNOW I LOVE YOU AND
APPRECIATE OUR RELATIONSHIP, OUR
COLLABORATIONS THAT WE DO
PUBLICLY IN FRONT OF EVERYONE TO
SEE AND BEHIND THE SCENES, THAT
IS WHERE THE MOST IMPORTANT WORK
HAPPENS. I DO AWARENESS AND
CONTEXT TO KNOW IT IS NOT A
NONSTANDARD DOUBLE NEGATIVE,
THIS IS NOT OUT OF THE ORDINARY
BECAUSE KNOWING WHAT I KNOW NOW,
KNOWING WHAT I KNOW NOW, PARDON
ME, KNOWING WHAT I KNOW NOW, I
DO KNOW THAT CODES AND
ORDINANCES, LEGISLATION SUCH AS
THIS IS INTENTIONALLY INTENDED
AS A GENERAL PREPOSITION TO BE
VERY SPECIFIC AND HAVE, AND THE
PROLIXITY OF A CODE IS EXPECTED
TO BE VERY SPECIFIC. AGAIN, I
DIDN'T HAVE TO SAY THAT BECAUSE
WE LEARNED THAT THIS IS NOT
TOGETHER THEY NONSTANDARD. BUT,
I'D APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK.
>> THANK YOU.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> ONE MOMENT, PLEASE. I WILL BE
VOTING , I WOULD BE OPPOSING
THIS SIMPLY BECAUSE I'M
CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPACT ON
OCCIDENTAL WHICH IS ENVISIONED
IN THE STADIUM DISTRICT TO BE
MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY AND I
AM CONCERNED IF WE PRECLUDE CARS
GOING IN AND OUT FROM FIRST,
WHERE THERE ARE ALREADY CURB
CUTS THAT ARE ALLOWED FOR IN THE
EXISTING CODE, THAT WILL PUT A
LOT OF TRAFFIC PRECISELY IN THE
AREA WHICH IS, IS ENVISIONED TO
BE FRIENDLY FOR , FOR
PEDESTRIANS, NOT ONLY RESIDENTS
OF THE HOUSE AND THERE BUT ALSO
PEOPLE WHO WILL BE PASSING BY
AND VISITING THE SMALL
NEIGHBORHOOD SPACES.
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> DON'T WORRY, IT IS EASY.
I'M NORWEGIAN AND SWEDISH.
FINISH. I DON'T KNOW WHY
EVERYONE IS GETTING CONFUSED. I
JUST WANT TO SAY THAT REGARDING
THE COMMENT EARLIER ABOUT
PROCESSING AND AMENDMENTS, WHILE
IT IS LEGAL AND WITHIN WANTS TO
BRING AMENDMENTS IN THIS
FASHION, IT DOESN'T HELP
TRANSPARENCY AND IT DOESN'T
HELP COLLABORATION. WHAT YOU ARE
SEEING FROM YOU RIGHT NOW IS
MAKING THE INFORMATION ABOUT
THESE AMENDMENTS IN REAL TIME.
THAT IS WHAT I MEAN, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON, WHEN I SAY
THAT THE PROCESS HAS BEEN SET UP
TO SO DIVISION AND NOT
COLLABORATION. THANK YOU.
>> THAT IS ASCRIBING AND INTENT
IN HOW I SET UP THIS PROCESS
THAT IS NOT THE CASE.
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> THANK YOU. SO, I DO HAVE A
QUESTION I GUESS DIRECTLY TO
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA. THERE WAS
SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT DOING A
STREET VACATION ALONG OCCIDENTAL
TO MAKE THAT A PEDESTRIAN
PATHWAY WHERE THE HOUSING IS
PROPOSED TO GO. WERE YOU AWARE
OF THAT WHEN YOU WERE BRINGING
FORTH THIS AMENDMENT? I
UNDERSTAND THE THINKING AND I'M
100% SUPPORTIVE OF WHAT YOU ARE
TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH . I'M JUST
WONDERING IF YOU WERE AWARE OF
THAT, HOW YOU ANTICIPATE PEOPLE,
IF THERE IS A STREET VACATION
FOR PEDESTRIAN ACCESS, HOW YOU
ANTICIPATE PEOPLE ACCESSING
PARKING. ARE WE LOOKING AT NOT
PROVIDING PARKING?
>> IF I MAY?
>> GO AHEAD, TRAINING.
>> THANK YOU MADAM COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, THANK YOU
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE FOR YOUR
QUESTION. I WAS AWARE OF THAT
POSSIBILITY WHEN CRAFTING THIS
AND MY MAIN GOAL WAS TO HELP
RESOLVE AND ADDRESS AND MITIGATE
AND REDUCE SOME OF THOSE
INJURIES, SERIOUS INJURIES AND
DEATHS AS A RESULT OF SOME OF
THE INEVITABLE CONFLICTS, WITH
RESPECT TO FREIGHT, CARGO
MOBILITY IN THE AREA AND THIS
WOULD BE NEW RESIDENCES. FOR ME,
THAT WAS A MORE COMPELLING
RATIONALE AND JUSTIFICATION.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS IF THERE IS
A STREET VACATION ON OCCIDENTAL
, WHILE I APPRECIATE YOUR
INTENT, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA , I
WANT TO SAY FOR THE RECORD I
APPRECIATE ALL THE AMENDMENTS
THAT YOU BROUGHT. FOR THAT
MATTER, COUNCIL PRESIDENT AND
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE BROUGHT TO
TRY TO MITIGATE FOR THE IMPACTS
OF THE LEGISLATION BEFORE US.
AND, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE DUE
DILIGENCE THAT YOU TOOK. ON THIS
PARTICULAR ONE, BECAUSE OF THAT
STREET VACATION ANTICIPATED ON
OCCIDENTAL, WHICH I SUPPORT THE
PEDESTRIAN STREET IN THAT
PARTICULAR LOCATION, I THINK
THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT WOULD
HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT GIVEN
THAT . SO, FOR THAT REASON, I
WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS
PARTICULAR ONE BUT IT IS NOT
BECAUSE I DON'T APPRECIATE WHAT
YOU ARE TRYING TO DO. THANK YOU
FOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
THIS GETS MORE INTERESTING BY
THE MOMENT IN THIS COMMITTEE.
DID I JUST HEAR THAT WE ARE
GOING TO BE, I WAS GOING TO
BRING THIS UP AS OUR TROUBLE
QUESTION LATER ON IN MY SPEECH.
WE ARE GOING TO, IS THERE A
PROPOSAL TO VACATE OCCIDENTAL
STREET IN THIS SECTION? I HAVE
HEARD IT SAID THREE TIMES BUT
THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'M
HEARING THIS. AND IS THE SAME,
IS THIS THE SAME STREET VACATION
THAT WAS VOTED DOWN A DECADE
AGO?
>> I KNOW WHERE THIS IS GOING.
>> MY NEXT GUEST IS WE WILL BE
CONFRONTED WITH A STREET
VACATION AFTER PASSING THIS
BILL.
>> FOR MY PART, THERE IS NOT,
THAT IS NOT PART OF THIS
LEGISLATION. THAT IS CERTAINLY
NOT PART OF MY INTENT WHEN I WAS
TALKING ABOUT A FRIENDLY
PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT. IN THAT
CASE, BECAUSE IT IS A NARROW
STREET AND THAT IS WHERE THE
SHOP FRONTS WILL BE FACING
OCCIDENTAL BUT I NEVER SAID
ANYTHING ABOUT A STREET
VACATION.
>> I HEARD IT THREE TIMES. I'M
WONDERING WHERE IT IS COMING
FROM.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO?
>> I CAN ADDRESS THAT. WHEN I
WENT ON A WALKING TOUR OF THE
STADIUM DISTRICT, I BELIEVE
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH
JOINED ME AND A COMMENT WAS MADE
I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT WAS
OFFHAND, OR NOT, BUT THERE WAS A
COMMENT MADE ABOUT, SO YOU NEED
A STREET VACATION HERE BASED ON
THE HOUSING, TO WHICH THE ANSWER
WAS WE MIGHT PURSUE THAT. THEN,
IF YOU LOOK AT THE DESIGNS THAT
HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED, IT DOES
SHOW PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY. ONE SET
OF DESIGNS SHOW A PEDESTRIAN
WALKWAY FOR THAT PIECE BORDERING
AT MARTINEZ AND THEN DRIVING A
BLOCK SOUTH OF THAT. IT IS NOT
BEFORE US TODAY. BUT, IT WAS
MENTIONED. I DON'T THINK IT IS
SOMETHING I WANT TO HIDE. WE
OUGHT TO HAVE EVERYTHING OUT IN
THE OPEN, ACTUALLY. THANK YOU.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I HAVE
MORE COMMENTS.
>> ONE MOMENT, PLEASE. I
APPRECIATE THAT WHEN WE ARE
TALKING WITH SOME STAKEHOLDERS
AND SUPPORTERS, WE HEAR
INFORMATION. BUT, THIS IS, THIS
IS OUTSIDE OF THE LEGISLATION AT
HAND. STREET VACATIONS TAKE TIME
TO APPROVE AND CERTAINLY HAS THE
HISTORICAL, LET'S SAY THE
HISTORY OF THIS PARTICULAR AREA.
I WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST
THAT PEOPLE FOCUS ON THE
LEGISLATION THAT IS BEFORE US
AND MAKE A DECISION ABOUT THE
MERITS OF THE PROJECT THAT IT
WILL FACILITATE. WHEN WE, WE CAN
ADDRESS INFORMATION THAT IS
PROVIDED ON A HEARSAY MANNER
LATER. COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
WE ALL LOVE UNION BUILT, WE LOVE
ANYTHING UNION BUILT. WE LOVE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WE LOVE
MAJOR SPACE. WE WANT TO SEE OUR
SMALL MANUFACTURERS THRIVE. WHAT
I DON'T LOVE IS BEING SOLD
SOMETHING THAT I'M NOT BEING
SOLD SOMETHING ELSE THEN I AM
ACTIVELY BEING TOLD. IF THE NEXT
STEP FROM HERE IS AN ALLEY
VACATION, THIS ISN'T ABOUT
AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR UNION
BUILT ANYTHING. THIS IS BACK TO
2016, ABOUT A WHOLE DIFFERENT
CONVERSATION. I WAS BRINGING IT
UP, I WAS GOING TO BRING IT UP
AS A JOKE. PLEASE, DO:. I WAS
GOING TO BRING IT UP AS A JOKE
THAT THE NEXT THING YOU SEE IS A
STREET VACATION. THE FACT THAT
IT IS ALREADY BEING CONSIDERED,
IT IS ALREADY BEING DISCUSSED,
AND I KNOW THAT COUNCIL RULES.
>> PLEASE DO NOT IMPUGN THE
MOTIVES OF OTHER MEMBERS HERE.
>> I AM NOT IMPUGNING THE
MOTIVES OF ANYONE ON THIS DAIS.
I AM NOT IMPUGNING THE MOTIVES
OF ANYONE IN THESE TUBERS. WHAT
I'M SAYING IS THAT I KNOW THAT
SDOT HAS A STREET VACATION
PROPOSAL WRITTEN UP AND IT HAS
BEEN SITTING ON THE SHELF AND IS
READY TO GO ANYTIME. AND, IF
THIS CONVERSATION IS A PRECURSOR
TO THAT, THE OUTCOME OF PASSING
THIS LEGISLATION IS PIECEMEAL
AND TOGETHER A DEAL THAT WAS
REJECTED .
>> AS THE SPONSOR, I CAN ASSURE
YOU THAT IS NOT THE CASE.
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
MY APOLOGIES IF THE , I SAW THE
SAME, I WENT ON THE SAME WALKING
TOUR. SO, THE REMARK ABOUT A
POTENTIAL IN THE FUTURE, I DID
NOT MEAN TO CREATE CONFUSION. WE
ARE NOT LOOKING AT THAT NOW.
ACTUALLY, WE DON'T HAVE
ANYTHING BEFORE US NOW. BUT, IF
THERE WAS SOMETHING CONTEMPLATED
LIKE THAT IN THE FUTURE THAT
WOULD HAVE AN IMPACT, THAT IS
THE ONLY REASON I BROUGHT THAT
UP I WANTED TO CLARIFY FOR THE
RECORD THERE IS NOTHING FOR
THIS.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> I WANT TO CLARIFY THIS WAS AN
OFF-THE-CUFF REMARK. JUST TO
CLARIFY, OFF-THE-CUFF REMARK.
>> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. MOVING
ON. IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO AMEND THE BILL.
WOULD THE CLERK PLEASE TWO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON.
>> NO.
>> THAT IS TWO IN FAVOR, SEVEN
OPPOSED.
>> THE MOTION FAILS. ARE THERE
ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE
LEGISLATION BEFORE US?
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA?
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I MOVED TO
A AMEND COMFORTABLE AS PRESENTED
ON AMENDMENT OF.
>> SECOND.
>> HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED
TO A AND AMEND THE AS PRESENTED
IN AN INTIMATE. WOULD YOU
PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW BEFORE
TRAINING CAN ADDRESS IT?
>> YES, AS REFERRED, THERE ARE
IN TO LIVING IN THE STADIUM
DISTRICT. THERE IS NOISE,
POTENTIAL IN EQUIPMENT IMPACTS.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD REQUIRE
THERE BE SIGNS AROUND
RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS DECLARING
THOSE IMPACTS SO THAT ANYONE
LIVING IN THE AREA OR THINKING
ABOUT LIVING IN THE AREA WILL
UNDERSTANDABLY IMPACTS THAT WE
MIGHT EXPERIENCE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
>> THANK YOU MADAME COUNCIL
PRESIDENT. COLLEAGUES, THIS
AMENDMENT ADDRESSES VERY
SPECIFIC CONCERNS THOSE SEEKING
TO MOVE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD MAY
NOT BE AWARE OF THE INHERENT
RISKS THAT COME WITH LIVING IN
AN INDUSTRIAL ZONE. AT ITS CORE,
THIS AMENDMENT IS ABOUT THREE
THINGS. IT IS ABOUT BOOSTING
TRANSPARENCY, PROVIDING ENHANCED
DISCLOSURES, AND STRENGTHENING
HELPFUL NOTICES. ALL WITH THE
HELPFUL GOAL OF BETTER
FACILITATING A SHARED
UNDERSTANDING OF THE UNIQUE
OPPORTUNITY, AND ASSOCIATED
RISKS, PERTAINING TO THIS
PROJECT. IT WOULD REQUIRE CLEAR
AND CONSPICUOUS NOTICES THAT
THERE ARE RISKS OF LIVING IN THE
STADIUM DISTRICT THROUGH SIGNAGE
INVISIBLE LOCATIONS SUCH AS
BODIES, LEASING OFFICES, AND
MAIN ENTRANCES OF THE BUILDING,
THE SIGNAGE WOULD EXPLICITLY
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS HISTORIC
NEIGHBORHOOD IS, AND WILL
REMAIN, IN AND AROUND AN
INDUSTRIAL AREA. THAT ISN'T
CHANGING, NOR SHOULD IT. THOSE
WHO CHOOSE TO LIVE IN THIS AREA
FOR THIS HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD,
WITH ELECTRIFICATION PRONE
SOILS, SHOULD BE AWARE THAT
THERE ARE INHERENT RISKS TO
LIVING IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, WE HAVE ONE VEHICLE FOR
DOING THAT, THE COVENANT THAT
RUNS WITH THE LAND, RUNS IN
PERPETUITY. THAT IS IMPORTANT .
AS A NOW NONPRACTICING LAWYER, I
WROTE A LOT OF CONTRACTS,
INCLUDING COVENANTS. AND I WILL
BE, I WILL ADMIT I DIDN'T
ALWAYS, I DON'T ALWAYS READ
THEM MYSELF. AND, EVEN WHEN YOU
DO READ THEM, THOSE LEGAL
DISCLOSURES AND DOCUMENTS AND
CONTRACTS AND LEGAL PROVISIONS,
THEY ARE EASY TO FORGET AND EASY
TO AVOID. OUT OF SIGHT, OUT OF
MIND. THE SIGN REQUIREMENT POSES
AN OBLIGATION FOR THE PROPERTY
OWNER , NOT THE CITY, TO POST
THINGS THAT MAKE IT CLEAR THOSE
THINGS I MENTIONED EARLIER. THIS
IS ALL ABOUT BOOSTING
TRANSPARENCY, PROVIDING BETTER
DISCLOSURES AND STRENGTHENING
NOTICES. AND, I ASK FOR SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM COLLEAGUES?
>> MADAM PRESIDENT.
>> GO AHEAD, PLEASE.
>> QUICK QUESTION, WHEN WE LOOK
AT REQUIRING THE COVENANTS FOR
THE BUILDERS AND TENANTS, TO
ACKNOWLEDGE THEY ARE IN A
LIQUEFICATION ZONE, AMENDMENT F
SEEMS TO DOUBLE DOWN ON THAT .
SO, I'M WONDERING, GIVEN
AMENDMENT C HAS PASSED, DO WE
NEED AMENDMENT F?
>> AMENDMENT C WOULD NORMALLY BE
EFFECTUATED THROUGH TERMS IN A
LEASE. IT WOULD MOST LIKELY BE
MORE PROMINENT THAN WHAT WOULD
OCCUR AS PROPOSED IN AMENDMENT
C.
>> TO FOLLOW UP WITH THAT ,
AGAIN, USING THE EXAMPLE OF MY
PROPERTY, IF I WERE TO PRINT OUT
MY PROPERTY, I WOULD HAVE TO
DISCLOSE, OR SHOULD DISCLOSE IT
IS IN THE SOIL LIQUEFACTION AREA
. IT IS IN THE HIGH PEAT AREA.
FOLLOWING THE 2011 QUICK, I HAD
TO HAVE PINPOINT ROLES TO
STABILIZE MY HOUSE TO PREVENT IT
FROM SINKING IN FOR THE BECAUSE
MY HOSTED THINK ABOUT 6 INCHES
OFF THE SOUTH SIDE. FORTUNATELY,
EVERYTHING IS LEVEL NOW. BUT,
AGAIN, IT GETS TO SOMEONE
OCCUPYING THE SPACES WOULD
ACKNOWLEDGE THE KIND OF AREA
THAT THEY ARE IN AND THAT IS WHY
I'M WONDERING, IF THEY ARE
ACKNOWLEDGING UP FRONT THAT THEY
KNOW THEY ARE IN A SOIL
LIQUEFACTION ZONE AND THE
BUILDING IS DESIGNED IN SUCH TO
MITIGATE ANY KIND OF DAMAGE FROM
EARTHQUAKE OR LIQUEFACTION, IF
THAT IS ACKNOWLEDGED GOING IN,
IS SIGNAGE THEN REALLY REQUIRED?
>> THAT IS A POLICY CHOICE FOR
YOU TO DECIDE.
>> THANKS.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH.
>> THANK YOU , COUNCIL
PRESIDENT. CAN YOU POSSIBLY
EXPLAIN WHERE THE NUMBER THREE
CAME FROM? ONE AT 50 SIGNS?
WHERE DID THREE SIGNS COME IN?
>> THAT WAS THE SPONSOR'S
DECISION.
>> THERE IS NOTHING IN THE
SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE THAT SAYS
A BUILDING HAS TO HAVE THREE
SIGNS? IT IS JUST ANOTHER THAT
WE CHOSE, NOT WE BUT THE
SPONSOR? OKAY. THAT WAS MY
QUESTION. THANK YOU.
>> YOU WANT TO ANSWER THAT
QUESTION?
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
THE CHOICE WAS MADE BECAUSE THAT
SETS THE POOR, NOT THE CEILING.
SO, THE IDEA IS THERE WOULD BE A
MINIMUM OF THREE SIGNS, AT LEAST
THREE SIGNS IN CLEAR AND
CONSPICUOUS LOCATIONS THAT ARE
OPEN, ACCESSIBLE, AND READILY
AVAILABLE FOR ALL TO SEE AND SO
IF THERE IS AT LEAST THREE,
THEN, THERE ARE, THEY ARE FREE
TO ADD MORE SIGNS BUT AT LEAST
THREE IS THE INTENT THERE. IF I
MAY ADDRESS COUNCILMEMBER
SOLOMON'S EARLIER LINE OF
QUESTIONING, MADAME COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, SO, ONE COURT , I
AGREE, IT IS PRINCIPALLY A
POLICY DECISION ON WHETHER THIS
IS TRULY NEEDED. I HAPPEN TO
THINK IT IS NEEDED. HENCE, I
DRAFTED IT AND I AM THE
AMENDMENT ALSO HERE. THIS IS THE
BELT AND SUSPENDERS APPROACH .
SOME WOULD ARGUE JUST THAT BELT
IS FINE, SUFFICIENT. I THINK
GIVEN THERE ARE UNIQUE SETS OF
CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE SOIL
LIQUEFACTION ZONE, THIS IS
INDUSTRIAL AND OUTLIER, I HOPE,
FOR HOUSING AND INDUSTRIAL LIENS
AND. WITH MY PRACTICAL EXAMPLE
EARLIER IS THAT I AM A LAWYER,
NONPRACTICING. BUT, I DON'T
ALWAYS READ A REASONABLE
PROVISION AND EVERY SINGLE
CONTRACT, EVEN READ EVERY SINGLE
CONTRACT THAT IS PUT IN FRONT OF
ME. I CERTAINLY DON'T REMEMBER
THE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS. THIS IS
ANOTHER ANALOGY WAY TO THINK OF
THIS IS THE COVENANTS IS THE
BELT, THIS IS THE SUSPENDERS TO
MAKE CRYSTAL CLEAR FOR THE
AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, LET IT BE
KNOWN. THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. I SEE YOUR HAND AND I
WANT TO NOTE IT IS NUMBER 5:20
AND WE HAVE FOLKS THAT ARE
PROBABLY INTERESTED IN GETTING
HOME TO FAMILIES AND KIDS, IN
ADDITION TO STAFF, WHO ALSO NEED
TO TAKE BREAKS. AFTER THAT,
AFTER WE VOTE ON THIS, IS THIS
YOUR LAST, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? I
BELIEVE THIS IS THE LAST, NO.
OKAY. JUST SO EVERYONE KNOWS, I
WILL CALL FOR A FIVE MINUTE
RECESS WHICH WE HAVE COMPLETED
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA'S
AMENDMENTS, IN CASE YOU WERE
WONDERING. GO AHEAD,
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> THANK YOU. TO ANSWER THE
QUESTION ABOUT WHY WAS THREE
CHOSEN, SCHOOLHOUSE ROCK TEACHES
US THAT THREE IS A MAGIC NUMBER,
MUCH LIKE HOW A BILL BECOMES
ABLE. WITH A PROCESS THAT SHOULD
INCLUDE EVERYONE WHO THE
DECISION IS BEING MADE ABOUT TO
BE AT THE TABLE. EVEN IN THE
CASE OF TODAY'S CONVERSATION,
MORE INFORMATION HAS COME TO
LIGHT TO ME THAT GIVES ME EVEN
GREATER CONCERN. AT THE END OF
TODAY'S PROCESS, BEFORE WE GO
TO ABLE TO, I WILL ASK FOR A
DELAY UNTIL NEXT MONDAY. I
SUGGEST THAT WE GET THROUGH THE
AMENDMENTS TODAY BECAUSE THIS IS
BEING TREATED AS A COMMITTEE
MEETING RATHER THAN A FULL
COUNCIL MEETING. SO, I WILL ASK
AT THE END, FOR A DELAY OF ONE
WEEK. BUT, TO GET TO THE
QUESTION AT HAND THIS IS, THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PEAT BOG
AND SODO IS ONE OF THE PEAT BOG,
THERE IS BEDROCK BELOW. THERE IS
NO. BECAUSE THE DECOMPENSATION
OF THE HIGH PEAT AT A DIFFERENT
RATE THAN THE SOIL, THAT IS HOW
YOU HAVE THE SETTLING. WHAT WE
HAVE UNDERNEATH THE TILL OF
SEATTLE THAT HAS BEEN POURED
INTO ELLIOTT BAY, WHAT IS UNDER
THAT PHIL IS WATER. THAT IS THE
DIFFERENCE IN THE SOIL
LIQUEFACTION ZONE. IT IS THE
SAME IN THE INNER BAY. WHILE I
WOULD LOVE TO BUILD HOUSING NEXT
TO THE MARKET AND THE OLD
ARMORY, IT IS A BAD IDEA BECAUSE
THE 1936 AERIAL PHOTO OF THE
AREA SHOWS WATER THERE LESS THAN
100 YEARS AGO. THAT IS THE
DIFFERENCE FOR ME ABOUT
LIQUEFACTION GENERALLY AND
LIQUEFACTION IN THIS SPECIFIC
PLACE THAT ARE THE TWO BLOCKS,
TWO STOPLIGHTS, THE FEW BLOCKS
BETWEEN THE PORT AND THE
INTERSTATES THAT CONNECT US TO
THE REST OF THE WORLD. I'M,
AGAIN, THROUGH YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, TO THE SPONSOR,
DIRECTIONALLY CORRECT. WE
SHOULDN'T BE BUILDING IN A SOIL
LIQUEFACTION ZONE. IF WE ARE,
THEY SHOULD BE AWARE. FOR ME,
THIS FEELS LIKE WE ARE MAKING A
POLICY DECISION TODAY AND THEN
WE ARE MAKING A POLICY DECISION
TODAY TO ALLOW HOUSING TO BE
PULLED IN A SOIL LIQUEFACTION
ZONE AND STICKING A SIGN ON THE
FRONT DOOR THAT SAYS YOU KNOW
YOUR RIGHTS, YOU CAN'T SUE US.
AGAIN, I WILL LEAVE FOR THE
RECORD TODAY THIS SAME PROJECT,
THIS SAME NUMBER OF UNITS THAT
PEOPLE CAN SLEEP AND COULD BE
BUILT TODAY WITHOUT A
LEGISLATIVE CHANGE IF THEY WERE
HOTELS.
>> ONE LAST COMMENT,
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA, THEN WILL
GO FOR A BOAT.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I KNOW YOU WORKED ON INDUSTRIAL
LIENS IN NEW YORK AS WELL. FOR
THOSE, AND THERE WAS A LOT OF
NOISE AND ITS INDUSTRIAL LIENS.
WERE THERE SIGNS THERE? FOR THAT
MATTER, GEORGETOWN AND SODO HAVE
INDUSTRIAL LANDS AS WELL. ARE
THERE SIGNS THERE? DID WE
LEGISLATE? I GUESS THAT IS THE
QUESTION.
>> WE DON'T LEGISLATE THIS FOR
OTHER AREAS. I DON'T RECALL
THAT NEW YORK CITY REQUIRES IT.
>> THANK YOU. APPRECIATE.
>> CAN I CALL FOR A VOTE?
>> SHORT. IF I MAY , TO CLOSE
THIS OUT, COLLEAGUES, AND ASK
FOR YOUR SUPPORT. GIVEN THE VERY
UNIQUE NATURE OF THIS PROJECT,
THIS IS A SCENARIO WHERE I THINK
IT IS PERFECTLY APPROPRIATE TO
DO SOMETHING NONSTANDARD. AND,
BECAUSE A LOT IS AT STAKE. THIS
IS THE BELT AND SUSPENDERS
APPROACH AND I HUMBLY ASK FOR
YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
>> WILL THE CLERK CALL THE ROLL
ON THE ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT F?
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON.
>> AYE.
>> THAT IS FIVE IN FAVOR, FOUR
OPPOSED.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES. AMENDMENT
F IS ADOPTED. ALL RIGHT, I'M
GOING TO GO THROUGH, EXCUSE ME,
MY NOTES. MY SCRIPT SAYS WE ARE
GOING TO GO INTO A RECESS BUT WE
WILL GO AHEAD AND ACCEDE TO
AMENDMENT G. ARE THERE ANY
COMMENT?
>> AND MOVE TO AMEND CB 120933
AT SPECIFICALLY PRESENTED ON THE
AMENDMENT G.
>> SECOND.
>> MOVED AND SECONDED TO GO
FORWARD WITH AMENDMENT G. THE
WOULD YOU PLEASE GO AHEAD AND
PRESENT AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA
AS AMENDMENT G. GO AHEAD,
PLEASE.
>> SO, STANDARD AFFECTED EIGHT
FOR AN ORDINANCE IS 30 DAYS
AFTER THE MAYOR SIGNS IT, WHICH
WOULD PUT, AFTER THE COUNCIL
VOTES TO APPROVE THIS
LEGISLATION WOULD MAKE IT
EFFECTIVE TOWARD THE END OF
APRIL THIS AMENDMENT WOULD STATE
THAT THE EFFECTIVE DATE IS JUNE
30th INSTEAD.
>> GO AHEAD, YOU MAY ADDRESS
YOUR AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
WE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN THE
PROCEDURAL VOTE BUT THIS
AMENDMENT IS DESIGNED TO ADDRESS
SPECIFIC FEEDBACK AND ELEMENTS
OF THE FEEDBACK COMING TO THE
PENDING UNCERTAINTY PERTAINING
TO THE U.S. COAST GUARD RECORD
DECISION THAT THE LATEST TO
DATE, WE HAVE HEARD, VIA PUBLIC
TESTIMONY, IS ANTICIPATED
RELEASE DATE IS APRIL 30th. THIS
WOULD EXTEND IT BY TWO MONTHS TO
ALLOW, WITH THE GOAL OF ALLOWING
MORE TIME, MORE PLANNING TO, IF
THIS, SHOULD THIS BILL PASS TO I
JUST AND SORT OF FIGURE OUT WHAT
ALL THIS MEANS. THIS IS ANOTHER
WAY OF DOING IT. IT IS A IN
MECHANISM TO ENABLE MORE
PLANNING AND I ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA. OKAY,
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I WOULD ADDRESS THIS QUESTION
HOWEVER. COUNCILMEMBER SAKA .
WHAT EXACTLY DOES THIS MEAN? SO,
WE GET THE COAST GUARD REPORT
AND THEY ARE GOING TO KEEP THE
FACILITY, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT
WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE HOUSE AND
IF THIS AMENDMENT GOES THROUGH ,
HOW DOES THAT CHANGE ANYTHING
KNOWING WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN
WITH THE COAST GUARD?
>> YOU ARE WELCOME TO RESPOND.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT,
THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
HOW DOES IT CHANGE? IT WOULDN'T
KILL OR SUBSTANTIALLY DELAY THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THIS MAKERS
DISTRICT. WHAT IT WOULD DO, AND,
AGAIN, IT IS PROVIDED AND
OFFERED TO ADDRESS SOME SPECIFIC
CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE HEARD HERE
TODAY ABOUT THE UNCERTAINTY OF
THAT DECISION AND WHAT THAT
MEANS. GENERALLY, IT IS WIDELY
UNDERSTOOD THAT THE UNITED
STATES COAST GUARD IS GOING TO
EXPAND IN THEIR CRIMINAL TO SOME
DEGREE. WHAT IS CURRENTLY
UNKNOWN IS THE SCOPE OF THAT
EXPANSION INTO THE TIMELINE FOR
WHEN THAT, WE THINK THE LATEST
ESTIMATE IS APRIL 30th. IT WOULD
ALLOW MEMBERS FROM THE PORT TO
HAVE EXTRA TIME TO FIGURE OUT
WHAT IT NEEDS FROM THEIR
PERSPECTIVE. BUT, IT WOULDN'T,
IT WOULDN'T SIGNIFICANTLY, AND
IT IS NOT INTENDED TO
SIGNIFICANTLY DELAY OR IMPEDE
THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT
AT ISSUE HERE.
>> SEE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. GO
AHEAD. PLEASE BE BRIEF.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, ARE YOU
ASKING ME TO LIMIT MY COMMENTS?
>> NO, I'M NOT. I'M SUGGESTING
THAT WE NEED TO GET THROUGH
THESE ITEMS.
>> THE PROCESS COULD HAVE BEEN
SET UP THAT WOULD HAVE AVOIDED
THESE CIRCUMSTANCES.
>> PLEASE GO AHEAD AND STICK
YOUR COMMENT.
>> THE PACKAGE OF AMENDMENTS
BEFORE A SAMPLE DEMONSTRATES
THAT THERE ARE PROBLEMS WITH
THIS PROPOSAL. THE AMENDMENTS IN
THIS PACKAGE IN TOTAL
DEMONSTRATE ACKNOWLEDGMENT BY
COUNCILMEMBERS THAT THERE ARE
ISSUES WITH THE PROPOSAL BEFORE
US. THIS AMENDMENT IS GOOD. AND,
IT DEMONSTRATES, IN WRITING,
THAT THE COUNCILMEMBERS VOTING
DO NOT HAVE FULL INFORMATION ON
ALL OF THE VARIABLES THAT ARE
IMPACTING THESE VERY FEW SQUARE
BLOCKS. IT IS THE EXACT SAME
REASONING I ASKED FOR A DELAY.
ALMOST REPEAT THEM. I WILL
SUPPORT THIS BUT I DON'T KNOW
WHAT IT WOULD CHANGE. AND, WHAT
I MEAN BY THAT IS LET'S SAY THE
COAST GUARD COMES BACK AND SAYS
WE ARE EXPANDING, THEN, THAT
MEANS EACH OF THESE CRANES THAT
WE CAN SEE FROM THE DAIS THAT
ARE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO
INSTALL AND REQUIRE TRAINED AND
SKILLED OPERATORS TO MOVE THE
TOOLS THAT WE BUILD THINGS WITH
FROM HARBOR FREIGHT AND WE BUILT
AND BY THOSE HARBOR FREIGHT
TOOLS EVERY OTHER WEEK BECAUSE
OF A BRICK TO QUICKLY, IF THEY
DON'T EXPAND AND THAT SAYS WE
ARE GOING TO CONTINUE USING
THESE MULTI-MILLION-DOLLAR
CRANES TO IMPORT THE GOODS THAT
BUILD OUR BUILDINGS AND WE SEND
IT TO FEED THE FOLKS IN
SOUTHEAST ALASKA, IF THEY DON'T
EXPAND, DOES THAT MEAN THAT WE
ARE GOING TO COME BACK AND MAKE
A DIFFERENT DECISION? THESE ARE
THE QUESTIONS THAT I WRESTLE
WITH. AGAIN, I THINK THAT THIS
IS CORRECT BECAUSE IT
DEMONSTRATES THAT WE HAVE MORE
INFORMATION TO RECEIVE BECAUSE
NOT ALL DECISIONS, WE HAVEN'T
EVEN TALKED ABOUT WASCA TODAY.
LET'S SAY THE COAST GUARD
DOESN'T EXPAND AND WE KEEP
TERMINAL 46 OPERATING MOVING
GOODS IN AND OUT OF THE COUNTRY,
DOES THAT MEAN WE WILL COME BACK
AND CHANGE THE PROPOSAL BEFORE
US? THAT IS WHAT I AM STRUGGLING
WITH. THANK YOU COUNCIL
PRESIDENT.
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY CLOSING
REMARKS? WILL THE CLERK PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL ON THE PASSAGE OF
2021?
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> YES.
>> TRAIN FOR.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
>> NO .
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON.
>> AYE.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES. AMENDMENT
G IS ADOPTED. AND, WE WILL,
BEFORE GOING ON TO OUR NEXT
AMENDMENTS, IT IS NO 5:30, WE
WILL TAKE , I WANT TO PUSH IT TO
SEVEN MINUTES SO THAT PEOPLE CAN
GET TO THE RESTROOM. WE WILL
TAKE A RECESS UNTIL --
>> I WOULD SAY WE JUST KEEP
GOING.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT.
WE WILL TAKE A BRIEF BREAK UNTIL
NUMBER 5:40. WE ARE IN RECESS
NOW.
>> IF THERE ARE TWO MEMBERS IN
THEIR OFFICES WHO CAN HEAR ME,
PLEASE COME BACK TO THE
CHAMBERS. WE ARE GOING TO RESUME
OUR MEETING.
>> WE DO HAVE QUORUM. WE CAN
RESUME THE MEETING. PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH.
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> PRESENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON. COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON.
>> PRESENT.
>> SEVEN PRESENT.
>> I WILL ANNOUNCE OTHER MEMBERS
AS THEY RETURN. WE STOPPED AFTER
VOTING ON AMENDMENT G. NOW WE
ARE ON THE AMENDMENT H. ARE
THERE ANY COMMENTS ? ON THE
LEGISLATION? OR ANY COUNCIL
MEMBERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO
PRESENT AN AMENDMENT?
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE CB 120933
AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT H.
>> SECOND.
>> THAT'S BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO MOVE THE BILL AS
PRESENTED WITH AMENDMENT H.
>> AS YOU ALL KNOW, THE CB
120933 WOULD ALLOW HOUSING AS A
CONDITIONAL USE IN THE STADIUM
DISTRICT. THIS WOULD STATE THAT
AREAS IN THE DISTRICT WEST OF
FIRST AVENUE, THE AREAS CLOSEST
TO THE PORT FACILITIES, BUT NOT
BE ALLOWED TO HAVE HOUSING.
HOUSING WOULD BE ALLOWED AS A
CONDITIONAL USE EAST OF FIRST
AVENUE.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT.
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THIS
LEGISLATION BASED ON THE
COMMENTS THAT I HAD HEARD FROM
OPPONENTS . I WAS CONCERNED
ABOUT THE ELIMINATION OF THE 200
FOOT BUFFER ZONE . LOOKED AT
WHETHER IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE TO
MAINTAIN THAT AND STILL ALLOW
FOR THE IMPORTANT HOUSING TO BE
DEVELOPED AND IT DID NOT APPEAR
THAT WAS GOING TO BE POSSIBLE.
IT DOES APPEAR POSSIBLE FOR THE
PROJECT TO GO FORWARD AND ALSO
MAINTAIN A BUFFER ZONE WEST OF
FIRST AVENUE SOUTH RUNNING THE
LENGTH OF THE STADIUM DISTRICT.
THAT IS ALL THE WAY UP THROUGH
SOUTH KING STREET. I WOULD NOTE
THAT AT THE MOMENT, THIS DOES
NOT AFFECT THE AREA BECAUSE IT
IS ZONED MNL. SHOULD THAT ZONING
CHANGE, THIS WOULD PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL PROTECTION FOR THE
WASCA AREA. FOR THOSE REASONS ,
I WOULD ASK FOR MY COLLEAGUES
SUPPORT.
>> ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
ALL RIGHT. COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT. THREE YOU,
TO THE SPONSOR, YOUR INTENT IS
CORRECT. I THINK IT GETS AT THE
ROOT OF THE ISSUE. I WILL SPEAK
THE SAME FACTS I STATED AT THE
END OF THE LAST AMENDMENT, WHICH
IS THE PACKAGE OF AMENDMENTS
THAT WE HAVE BEEN VOTING ON
DEMONSTRATE THE AWARENESS OF
COUNCILMEMBERS ON THE DAIS THAT
THIS PROJECT HAS FLAWS AND I
WILL STATE AGAIN, IF WE WERE NOT
TALKING ABOUT HOUSING UNITS AND
WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HOTEL
UNITS, HOTEL ROOMS, THIS PROJECT
COULD HAVE BEEN BUILT AS SOON AS
THE INDUSTRIAL MARITIME PACKAGE
WAS PASSED IN 23. TO THE
SPONSOR, I APPRECIATE THIS. I
WILL BE VOTING NO. I DID HEAR
ABOUT THIS ONE ON FRIDAY, WHICH
WAS THE EARLIEST OF ALL OF THE
AMENDMENTS I HAVE HEARD ABOUT.
THIS GOES BACK TO THE PROCESS
THAT THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAS
SET UP FOR US. THANK YOU.
>> ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS? SEEING NONE, WILL THE
CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ? I
DO WANT TO SAY THAT I APPRECIATE
YOU THINKING ABOUT THIS
LEGISLATION VERY THOROUGHLY,
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE. YOU AND I
SPOKE AT LENGTH ABOUT THIS
AMENDMENT WHEN YOU ARE BRINGING
IT FORWARD. I WILL BE SUPPORTING
THIS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ANYBODY ELSE? OKAY, WILL THE
CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON
AMENDMENT H?
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> NO.
>> TRAIN FOR.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA .
COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> AYE.
>> SIX IN FAVOR, TO BE OPPOSED.
>> MOTION CARRIES. AMENDMENT H
IS ADOPTED. ARE THERE ANY
FURTHER COMMENTS ON THE BILL AS
AMENDED QUESTION
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE CB
120933 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT
ONE VERSION 2, WHICH WAS
DISTRIBUTED BY EMAIL THIS
MORNING.
>> SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. WILL STAFF PLEASE GO
THROUGH AND PRESENT THE
AMENDMENT?
>> THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ADD ONE
MORE CRITERIA TO DETERMINE
WHETHER OR NOT HOUSING WOULD BE
PERMITTED IN THE DISTRICT. IT
WOULD STATE THAT AN APPLICATION
MUST INCLUDE AN AGREEMENT
STATING THAT THE DEVELOPMENT HAS
NOT USED CITY FUNDING AND WILL
NOT USE CITY FUNDING AND WILL
NOT SEEK CITY FUNDING FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT,
MAINTENANCE OF THE PROJECT, OR
ANY ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION OF
THE SITE.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE.
>> THANK YOU. SO, I DO NOTE THAT
THIS WAS AMENDED THIS MORNING IN
RESPONSE TO COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA'S AMENDMENT ABOUT THE
COVENANT REQUIRING MAINTENANCE
OF THE PROJECT TO RUN
INDEFINITELY. SO, THAT IS THE
MAIN, THAT IS THE ONLY CHANGE TO
THIS. THE REASON THAT I HAVE
BROUGHT THIS AMENDMENT IS
BECAUSE ONE OF THEM BENEFITS OR
ADVANTAGES OF THIS PROJECT IS
THAT IT IS GOING TO BE FUNDED
ALTHOUGH WITH PRIVATE MONEY AND
WE ARE GOING TO GET A
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF HOUSING
AND SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITHOUT
HAVING TO FURTHER BURDEN OUR
TAXPAYERS. SO, WHAT I WANTED TO
BE CLEAR THAT THAT, IN FACT, WAS
THE REALITY NOT JUST A PROMISE
THAT WAS LATER NOT ABOUT. AND, I
THINK IT IS IMPORTANT, GIVEN THE
PRIVATE BENEFIT THAT IS ALSO
ACCRUING FROM THIS PROJECT TO
ENSURE THAT IT IS NO CITY MONEY
GOES INTO IT, PARTICULARLY WITH
CONCERN AROUND THE SIGNIFICANT
ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION COST
THAT I ANTICIPATE WILL BE PART
OF THIS, GETTING THIS
DEVELOPMENT READY TO PROCEED. IT
IS JUST ADDITIONAL PROTECTION
FOR THE CITY. I WOULD ASK FOR MY
COLLEAGUES SUPPORT.
>> I FULLY SUPPORT THIS
AMENDMENT BECAUSE YOU ARE RIGHT,
IT DOES HIGHLIGHT THE UNIQUE
NATURE OF THE OPPORTUNITY BEFORE
US. WE DO HAVE A PROPERTY OWNER
WHO IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPING
THIS HOUSING THAT IS REQUIRED TO
BE AFFORDABLE 50% OF IT HAS TO
BE AFFORDABLE AT 60 TO 90% OF
THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME. AND,
THE, IT WILL, THE PROPERTY
OWNER, THE DEVELOPMENT WILL ALSO
BE PROVIDING FOR ACCESSIBLE,
AFFORDABLE WORKSPACES. THIS IS
BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT WAS,
THIS IS A PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT
AND IT IS GOOD TO ALSO GET IN
WRITING SO THAT THE PEOPLE THAT
ARE LOOKING AT THIS YEARS FROM
NOW RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS A
UNIQUE SITUATION AND THE CITY
IS, WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN
PUBLIC RESOURCES INTO THIS
PROJECT. ARE THERE FURTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT,
THROUGH YOU TO THE SPONSOR OF
THE AMENDMENT, THANK YOU FOR THE
INTENT OF THIS. I WILL BE VOTING
NO AGAIN TODAY. THIS FEELS LIKE
IS SAYING WE CAN BUILD
AUDIBILIZING THERE DESPITE THE
PROBLEMS WE KNOW TO EXIST WITH
LIQUEFACTION AND POLLUTION AND
IF THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, EVEN
THOUGH WE HAVE ALLOWED IT, THAT
WE WANT, THAT WE SHOULDN'T USE
PUBLIC DOLLARS . IT FEELS THAT
IF WE ARE AT A POINT WHERE WE
ARE SAYING PUBLIC DOLLARS SHOULD
NOT BE USED FOR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING HERE, WHAT ARE WE
BUILDING HOUSING YOU?
ESPECIALLY, I'M JUST GOING TO
SAY IT AGAIN, I THINK EVERYONE
IS GOING TO REPEAT IT WITH ME AT
THE END OF THIS MEETING, THIS
PROJECT COULD BE BUILT IF THE
HOUSE AND WAS HOTELS, TODAY,
WITHOUT A LEGISLATIVE CHANGE. I
WILL BE OPPOSING THIS BECAUSE,
AT THE ACE OF IT, IF WE ARE
SAYING THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE
USING OUR CITY MONEY ON THIS
PROJECT YOU SHOULD THIS PROJECT
OF HOUSING, THE HOUSING PORTION,
MAKER SPACE, ALL SUPPORTIVE, ALL
OF THE OTHER WORKSPACE, WE ARE
SUPPORTIVE OF IT. IT IS THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A HOTEL UNIT
AND A HOUSING UNIT. THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. THIS IS AMENDMENT I .
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL? GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU. YES, THIS ISN'T
ABOUT THAT WE SHOULDN'T THE
INDIVIDUAL WHO IS GOING TO BE
DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY IS A
MULTIMILLIONAIRE AND IS GOING TO
RECEIVE A FAIR AMOUNT OF BENEFIT
FROM THIS, AS ARE MANY OTHER
PEOPLE. YOU KNOW, THE WORKERS
AND PEOPLE WHO THE 60 AND 80%
AMI PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE
ABLE TO LIVE THERE. THERE IS A
SIGNIFICANT PRIVATE BENEFIT. ONE
OF THEM PITCHES WAS THAT NO
PUBLIC MONEY WOULD NEED TO GO
INTO PROVIDING AFFORDABLE
HOUSING BECAUSE OF THE BENEFIT
THAT WAS GOING TO A PRIVATE
DEVELOPER. AND , WE NEED TO USE
OUR PUBLIC DOLLARS WE ARE WE
DON'T HAVE PEOPLE STANDING UP
WITH A LOT OF RESOURCES TO SAY I
WILL BUILD THIS PUBLIC HOUSING.
WE HAVE SO MUCH NEED FOR PUBLIC
HOUSING ACROSS THE CITY THAT WE
NEED TO UTILIZE THOSE DOLLARS
WHERE WE CAN SAVE THOSE WHERE WE
DON'T HAVE THIS OFFER.
ADDITIONALLY, I WOULD NOTE THAT
MHA USES PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT
DOLLARS TO FUND PUBLIC HOUSING.
I DON'T KNOW. BUT, I ALSO
DON'T WANT ALL OF THIS PRIVATE
BENEFIT TO BE SUBSIDIZED BY
PUBLIC DOLLARS. IT ISN'T ABOUT
THAT THE CITY SHOULDN'T BE
USING IT BECAUSE THERE ARE
PROBLEMS WITH IT, IT IS THAT WE
CAN BETTER UTILIZE OUR RESOURCES
WHICH ARE LIMITED, AND FOR WHICH
WE HAVE GREAT NEED. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M NOT
SEEING ANY OTHER HANDS RAISED.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL ON AMENDMENT I.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> AYE.
>> THAT IS SIX. WANT TO BE
OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, THE
MOTION CARRIES. AMENDMENT I
VERSION 2 IS ADOPTED. ARE THERE
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THE
BILL AS AMENDED? WE NOW HAVE THE
AMENDED BASE OF LEGISLATION
BEFORE US. COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
THIS HAS BEEN A REVEALING
MEETING. I HAVE LEARNED THINGS
THAT I DIDN'T KNOW BEFORE. AND,
I SAY THAT BECAUSE THE PUBLIC
SHOULD AND ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS,
SHOULD HAVE COME INTO THIS
MEETING, A DECISION-MAKING
MEETING, WITH FULL INFORMATION.
I WAS VERY SURPRISED, I MEAN,
CANDIDLY INSERTED A JOKE INTO MY
TALKING POINTS ABOUT THE STREET
VACATION AND COME TO FIND OUT
THAT IS A REAL PROPOSAL BEFORE
US RIGHT NOW IS UNNERVING. THE
BASIC FACT THAT THIS PROJECT, AS
PROPOSED, GOOD PEOPLE IF THE
HOUSING UNITS WERE HOTEL UNITS
IS SOMETHING THAT MY BEST GUESS
IS THAT NOBODY ON THE DAIS FOR
TODAY. AND, WE HAD A NUMBER OF
AMENDMENTS, UP. WE'VE HAD A LOT
OF ROBUST DISCUSSION. AND,
TYPICALLY, THIS LEVEL OF WORK
WOULD OCCUR FROM A PROCESS
STANDPOINT. WHEN WE HAVE CENTRAL
STAFF BRIEFING US ON AMENDMENT,
WE ARE HAVING DISCUSSION AND
TAKING VOTES, THAT HAPPENS IN
COMMITTEE. THIS BILL DIDN'T GO
TO THE LAND USE COMMITTEE. MY
SUGGESTION TODAY IS THAT WE HAVE
ALL THE AMENDMENT ATTACHED TO
THE BILL AND WE TAKE A FINAL
VOTE NEXT WEEK. WITH THAT, I
PROPOSE TO POSTPONE COUNCIL BILL
120933 UNTIL MARCH 25th, 2025.
>> SECOND.
>> YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP,
COUNCILMEMBER.
>> SORRY, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. MY
AUNT WAS UP JUST BEFORE THE
REMARKS.
>> COLLEAGUES, I STRONGLY I
WOULD STRONGLY REQUEST A NOTE ON
THE MOTION TO FURTHER DELAY THIS
LEGISLATION. WE HAVE, ONE WEEK
WILL NOT, IN MY MIND, MAKE ANY
DIFFERENCE IN THE OUTCOME HERE.
WE HAVE SPENT A LOT OF TIME
LEARNING ABOUT THESE AMENDMENTS
AND LEARNING MORE ABOUT THE
PROPOSAL FOR THE STADIUM MAKERS
DISTRICT. I THINK WE ARE ALL
TOGETHER AT THE DAIS ALL NINE OF
US RIGHT NOW AND WE OWE IT TO
NOT JUST THE PEOPLE WHO CAME TO
THIS MEETING AND HAVE SAT
THROUGH HOURS AND HOURS AND
HOURS OF DISCUSSION NOT JUST TO
THE PEOPLE WHO MIGHT, WHO MIGHT
BENEFIT FROM THE HOUSING THAT IS
FACILITATED BY THE PASSAGE OF
THIS LEGISLATION OR TO THE SMALL
BUSINESSES WHO WILL BENEFIT FROM
INCENTIVIZING THE CONSTRUCTION
OF AFFORDABLE AND ACCESSIBLE
SMALL MAKER SPACE IS TO KEEP
THESE PEOPLE IN TOWN AND
PROVIDING JOBS AND OPPORTUNITIES
FOR ENTREPRENEURS LIKE
THEMSELVES, WE ALSO WILL BE TO
EACH OTHER. WE OWE IT TO EACH
OTHER BECAUSE WE HAVE ALL PUT IN
A LOT OF WORK RIGHT NOW LEADING
UP TO THIS MOMENT. AND,
DISCUSSION ABOUT , WE HAVE, THIS
WAS INTRODUCED ON JANUARY 9th
AND WE HAD OUR FIRST DISCUSSION
ON JANUARY 24th. THEN, A PUBLIC
HEARING. AND, THEN A COMMITTEE
VOTE OF 3-2. AND, HERE WE ARE
NOW READY TO MAKE A DECISION.
AND I, WHILE THE INFORMATION IS
STILL FRESH ON OUR MINDS, I
WOULD RECOMMEND, PLEASE, AND
REQUEST, PLEASE, TO VOTE NO TO
THE MOTION TO DELAY SO THAT WE
CAN FINISH THIS VERY IMPORTANT
WORK THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US IN
THE MIDST OF A HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY CRISIS AND THE
FACT THAT WE ARE LOSING SMALL
BUSINESSES, 2 TO 3 A MONTH. WILL
THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL
ON THE MOTION?
>> YOU HAVE HANDS RAISED .
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> JUST DIRECTING THROUGH YOU MY
COMMENT TO COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS, WHICH IS WHAT WOULD BE
GAINED BY CONTINUING THE VOTE
ANOTHER WEEK?
>> YOU MAY RESPOND.
>> THREE YOU TO THE ENTIRE BODY,
BECAUSE I WAS HAVING THAT
CONVERSATION WITH MYSELF, WHAT
ARE WE GOING TO GAIN? WHAT WE
ARE GOING TO GAIN IS SOME
CLARITY. WHAT WE RECEIVED IN
WRITING TODAY IS A STATEMENT
THAT THE PORT IS INTERESTED IN
PURCHASING THIS PROPERTY. WHAT
WILL WE GAIN? WE HAVE THE
ABILITY TO ASK SDOT, WHAT IS
YOUR PLAN FOR THE AREA? WHAT ARE
WE GOING TO GAIN? WE ARE GOING
TO BE TO MAKE SURE THAT BEYOND
AN EMAIL THAT WAS PASSED OUT,
THAT WAS PRINTED, THERE ARE NO
ADDITIONAL LEGAL CONCERNS THAT
HAVE BEEN, THAT WE WERE
DELIVERED TO THOSE ADDITIONAL
LEGAL CONCERNS 15, 20 MINUTES
BEFORE THIS MEETING STARTED AND
WE HAVEN'T HAD THOSE
DISCUSSIONS. WHAT ELSE DO WE
GAIN? LET ME GET TO THE OUTCOME.
THE OUTCOME DOESN'T CHANGE
ANYTHING. WE HUNG AN AMENDMENT
TO THIS BILL THAT SINCE THE
EFFECTIVE DATE IS JUNE 30th. WE
TYPICALLY, A BILL BECOMES
EFFECTIVE 30 DAYS AFTER PASSAGE.
BECAUSE WE HAVE PUT A DATE
CERTAIN ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE,
IT DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING IN
THE BILL. THIS IS NOT ABOUT ME,
THIS IS NOT ABOUT OWING IT TO
OUR COLLEAGUES, THIS IS ABOUT
OWING IT TO THE PUBLIC BECAUSE
WE ARE WORDS ON BEHALF OF THE
SYSTEM AND THE PUCESS .
AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, I AM
LEARNINEW INFORMATION ABOUT
THIS PROPOSAL ON THE DAIS AND
THAT MEANS THE PUBLIC ALSO
DOESN'T HAVE THE FULL
INFORMATION. I WAS TAUGHT IS
WHEN SOMEONE IS TRYING TO RUSH
SOMETHING, THERE IS SOMETHING
THAT COULD BE HIDDEN. SO, THE
QUESTION BACK IS WHEN WE HAVE AN
EFFECTIVE DATE OF JUNE 30th,
WHAT DO WE HAVE TO LOSE? BY
TAKING TIME TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
HAVE THE RIGHT POSITION. THANK
YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I WANT TO LEND MY VOICE TO YOUR
SON I DO NOT SUPPORT FURTHER
DELAY. I WOULD NOT CHARACTERIZE
THIS AS A RUSH. WE HAVE BEEN
TALKING ABOUT THIS SINCE BEFORE
JANUARY BECAUSE YOU HAD A PANEL
THAT OCCURRED BEFORE JANUARY TO
START THESE CONVERSATIONS. IT IS
NOW MARCH 18th. THE PORT IS
WITHIN ITS RIGHT, AND CAN,
APPROACH THE PROPERTY OWNER TO
PURCHASE THE PROPERTY. THAT
CHANGE IF WE PASS THIS
LEGISLATION TODAY. THERE IS NO,
THERE IS NO, IN TERMS OF, LIKE I
SAID EARLIER AS TO THE LEGAL
ADVICE THAT MY COLLEAGUE RAISED,
AGAIN, WE ALL HAVE RECEIVED THE
SAME LEGAL ADVICE. I HAVE NO
CONCERNS ABOUT MOVING FORWARD. I
CAN'T SAY MORE THAN THAT,
OBVIOUSLY. AND I FEEL THAT THIS,
I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE IN
TERMS OF THE PUBLIC AND WHAT WE
OWE THE PUBLIC. THEY HAVE COME
HERE MULTIPLE TIMES TO TESTIFY
ON THIS BILL. THEY'VE TAKEN
TIME OFF FROM WORK TO COME DOWN
HERE TO TESTIFY AND GIVE PUBLIC
COMMENT. WE HAD A PUBLIC
HEARING. WE DID ALL THE THINGS
THAT WE WOULD HAVE DONE FOR ANY
LEGISLATION THAT WE ARE LOOKING
AT. AND, I DON'T THINK IT
SERVES THE TOPIC, OUR
CONSTITUENTS, AND THIS BODY TO
DELAY WHEN THERE IS NO DIFFERENT
OUTCOME IN TERMS OF MORE
INFORMATION THAT WE WOULD HAVE.
WE RECEIVED ALL THE INFORMATION,
WE HAVE ALL TALKED TO CENTRAL
STAFF. I KNOW I HAD
CONVERSATIONS WITH LEGITIMATELY
PARTICULAR AMENDMENTS THAT OUR
COLLEAGUES PROFFERED, WHICH I
THOUGHT WERE ACTUALLY IN
RESPONSE TO A LOT OF WHAT THEY
HEARD FROM THE STAKEHOLDERS
INVOLVED. THE AMENDMENTS WERE
DIRECTLY TO ADDRESS THAT. SO, I
REALLY THINK WE NEED TO TAKE A
VOTE. AND, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I
APPRECIATE EVERYONE WHO GAVE THE
COMMENT DURING THIS ENTIRE
PROCESS. IT IS IMPORTANT. I'M
GLAD THAT THEY DID, AND GLADLY
SHOWED UP. I'M MINDFUL THIS IS
A DIFFICULT DECISION. JUST
BECAUSE IT IS A DIFFICULT
DECISION, I DON'T THINK WE
SHOULD DELAY OR POSTPONE MAKING
IT. THAT IS NOT A GOOD REASON TO
DO SO. SO, THANK YOU COUNCIL
PRESIDENT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IT IS MY
OPINION THAT WE SHOULD NOT MAKE
DECISIONS BASED ON HEARSAY OR
RUMOR THAT THE PROJECT, THE
PROPERTY MAY CHANGE OWNERSHIP.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS
BETWEEN THE OWNER AND THE
POTENTIAL BUYER. WE DO NOT HAVE
COMPLETE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT.
IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING LAST TIME
I TALKED TO A REPRESENTATIVE,
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT SEVERAL OF
YOU HAVE RECENTLY, THAT THE,
THERE IS NOT CURRENTLY INTEREST
TO SELL THE PROPERTY, BUT,
REGARDLESS I WANT TO REMIND
FOLKS THAT THE LETTER OF INTENT
IS SIGNED COMMITTING TO A
PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT. THEY
ASSIGNED AN ADDENDUM STATING
THAT COMMITMENT WILL BE BINDING
ON FUTURE OWNERS. THE PORT OR
WHOEVER, IF IT IS EVER SOLD, AS
LONG AS IT IS TIED TO HOUSING.
IN OTHER WORDS, AS LONG AS THIS
LEGISLATION TO ALLOW FOR HOUSING
TO BE BUILT IN THE STADIUM
DISTRICT PASSES. IF WE ALL WANT
MORE HOUSING AND WORKFORCE
HOUSING, THEN, THIS IS THE
OPPORTUNITY RIGHT NOW. THERE ARE
ALSO , UNITE HERE HAS SIGNED A
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT THAT
ENJOYS THAT HOTEL EMPLOYEES WILL
BE UNIONIZED. LOCAL 6 HAS SIGNED
A LETTER OF INTENT COMMITTING TO
THE USE OF UNION SECURITY
OFFICERS AND JANITORS AND THEY
HAVE SIGNED AN ADDENDUM THAT
WILL ALSO REQUIRE THAT THAT
COMMITMENT TO CARRY FORWARD NO
MATTER WHO THE PROPERTY OWNER
IS, AS LONG AS HOUSING IS, AS
LONG AS HOUSING AS PROPOSED IN
THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION GOES
FORWARD. SO, FOR, TO
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS'S POINT
THAT MAYBE THE PORT WANTS TO BUY
THE PROPERTY , WE NEED TO, WE
NEED TO MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON
CURRENT FACTS THAT WE HAVE AT
HAND AND THAT IS, AGAIN, WHY I
BELIEVE THAT NOTHING WILL CHANGE
BETWEEN NOW AND NEXT WEEK. VERY
LITTLE CHANGE BETWEEN NOW AND
NEXT WEEK. WE HAVEN'T EVEN HAD
TO CALL THE ROLL. THAT IS WHY WE
HAVE TO ACT TODAY. GO AHEAD.
PROCEED.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT. FOR ALL OF
THE REASONS THAT YOU JUST
LISTED, ALL OF THE UNIONS THAT
COULD BE INVOLVED IN THE
PROJECT, THAT ALL COULD STAY THE
SAME IF THE HOUSING UNITS WERE
HOTEL UNITS. I THINK THAT IT IS
BENEFICIAL FOR PUBLIC
TRANSPARENCY IF WE WAIT A WEEK
TO TAKE THE FINAL VOTE NOW THAT
ALL OF THE AMENDMENTS ARE HUNG
BECAUSE A WAY TO UNDERCUT
TRANSPARENCY WITH THE PUBLIC IS
TO PUBLISH AN AMENDMENT THE SAME
DAY OR THE DAY BEFORE A FINAL
VOTE IS TAKEN BECAUSE PEOPLE
DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO
INTERACT. SO, COUNCIL PRESIDENT,
TWITTER, TO THE CODES THAT HAVE
SPOKEN ABOUT WHY WE SHOULD NOT
DELAY, IT IS APPARENT TO ME THAT
YOU ARE MINDS ARE MADE UP. THAT
IS OKAY. FOR ANYONE WHO MAY NOT
BE, WHO MAY BE INTERESTED TO
KNOW THE ANSWERS TO SOME OF THE
QUESTIONS RAISED TODAY, WE
SHOULD WAIT A WEEK, EVEN IF ALL
OF YOUR QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN
ANSWERED TO TAKE THE WEEK SO
THAT THE PUBLIC CAN CATCH UP TO
WHERE WE ARE BECAUSE THIS IS
ABOUT TRANSPARENCY. THANK YOU.
>> WILL THE CLERK PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL ON THE MOTION TO
POSTPONE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON.
>> NO.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> NO.
>> THAT IS FOUR IN FAVOR, FIVE
LIST.
>> THE MOTION IS DEFEATED. OKAY.
MOVING ON. NOW IS THE
OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE, TO TALK
ABOUT THE BASE LEGISLATION AT
HAND. I INVITE MEMBERS TO RAISE
YOUR HANDS IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO
MAKE COMMENTS. COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT
FOR EVERYONE HERE WHO REMEMBERS
THE COMMITTEE MEETING. I'VE
ASKED COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH TO HIT ME IF I GET
ANYWHERE CLOSE TO THE GENERAL
RECOMMENDED TIME FOR
COUNCILMEMBERS TO SPEAK. AGAIN,
THANK YOU FOR ANYONE WHO HAS
COME OUT TODAY, TONIGHT. JUST A
BRIEF REMARKS, JUST TWO PAGES.
OUR NATION NEEDS OF THE PORT OF
SEATTLE. IT IS A GREAT
GEOSTRATEGIC INTEREST. I HAVE
SPOKEN BEFORE THE L.A. FIRES AND
IF THEY WENT SOUTH OVER THE L.A.
WARM BEACH PORTS, THEY WOULD
HAVE NEEDED US. OUR NATION WOULD
HAVE NEEDED US. REMINDED OF OUR
EXPERIENCE DURING THE PANDEMIC.
THE STATE NEEDS THE PORT OF
SEATTLE. IT IS A GREAT ECONOMIC
INTEREST, CONFIRMED BY THE STATE
LEGISLATURE TO INCLUDE THE
SEATTLE DELEGATION, LOCAL
GOVERNMENT AND BUSINESSES
THROUGHOUT THE STATE. OUR CITY
MEETS THE PORT OF SEATTLE TO
BREAK BUDGETARY INTERESTS. IT IS
A KEY REVENUE SOURCE YEAR IN AND
YEAR OUT, TAKE IT IN, THE KID
OUT, CENTURY IN AND CENTURY OUT.
IT IS A KEY REVENUE SOURCE IN
THE FACE OF SEVERE PHYSICAL
HEADWINDS. OUR CITY NEEDS THE
PORT OF SEATTLE, YES, BUT ALSO,
AND VERY IMPORTANTLY, THE PORT
OF SEATTLE NEEDS OF THE CITY OF
SEATTLE, WHICH IS A GREAT MUTUAL
SUPPORT INTEREST. THE PORT IS A
DISCRETIONARY PORT IN A
CUTTHROAT SHIPPING INDUSTRY. THE
2023 INDUSTRIAL MARITIME
LEGISLATION ADDRESS THIS AND WAS
THE BASIS OF THE ONE SEATTLE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN APPROACH TO
THE INDUSTRIAL MARITIME LANDS.
I'VE ASKED BEFORE, WHAT IS THE
MARITIME INDUSTRIAL IMPACT
STATEMENT OF THIS BILL? WHAT IS
THE IMPACT OF OUR FREIGHT
PROGRAM FROM THE SEATTLE
TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND THE
LOBBY? THE PORT MEETS THE CITY
TO HONOR ITS COMMITMENT FROM THE
2023 INDUSTRIAL MARITIME ACT.
YES, OUR CITY NEEDS OUR CITY
NEEDS AFFORDABLE HOUSING . IN AN
INDUSTRIAL ZONE? I FIND IT
INTERESTING, JUST A WEEK AGO
TODAY THERE WAS AN ARTICLE IN
"THE NEW YORK TIMES,", THE
HEADLINE WAS "EPA PLANS TO CLOSE
ALL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
OFFICES." IT STARTS, "THE TRUMP
ADMINISTRATION INTENDS TO
ELIMINATE ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY OFFICE IS
RESPONSIBLE FOR ADDRESSING THE
HIGH LEVELS OF POLLUTION FACING
POOR COMMUNITIES, ACCORDING TO A
MEMO FROM LEE ZELDIN, AGENCY
ADMINISTRATORS ." THE "NEW YORK
TIMES" ARTICLE THEN SAYS IN
PARAGRAPH THREE, "LEE ZELDIN !
ENDS THREE DECADES OF WORK AT
THE EPA TO TRY TO EASE THE
POLLUTION THAT BURDENS POOR AND
MINORITY COMMUNITIES, WHICH ARE
FREQUENTLY LOCATED NEAR
HIGHWAYS, POWER PLANTS,
INDUSTRIAL PLANTS, AND OTHER
POLLUTING FACILITIES. STUDIES
HAVE SHOWN THAT PEOPLE WHO LIVE
IN THESE COMMUNITIES HAVE HIGHER
RATES OF ASTHMA, HEART DISEASE,
AND OTHER HEALTH PROBLEMS
COMPARED TO THE NATIONAL
AVERAGE." WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE
FEIS. I READ THAT AND I
UNDERSTAND THAT AND I THINK
THERE IS A DISCONNECT BETWEEN
WHAT THE EPA HAS BEEN TRYING TO
DO FOR THREE DECADES AND THIS
PIECE OF LEGISLATION . IT ALMOST
HINTS THAT, IN A WAY, WE ARE
ALIGNED WITH THE TRUMP
ADMINISTRATION AND THAT IS
CONCERNING TO ME. OUR CITY NEEDS
AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUT IN A SOIL
LIQUEFACTION ZONE? IN FEIS, IT
STANDS FOR FLAWED AND AS I
NOTED, IT GIVES A FAILING GRADE
BECAUSE IT DOESN'T ADDRESS , AS
I NOTED BEFORE, THE COAST GUARD.
46 DECISION JUST TO OUR WEST.
THE IMPACT OF THE AMTRAK BNSF ON
SOUTH COLGATE STREET, JUST SOUTH
OF THE PROPOSED REZONE. THE WET
WEATHER TREATMENT FACILITY,
COVERING COMBINED STORMWATER
SEWER OUTFLOW RIGHT ALONG THE
EAST CHANNEL, RIGHT THERE AT THE
LOCATION OF WHAT WE ARE TALKING
ABOUT. AND, TWO OF THE CSOS ARE
RIGHT NEAR THE SPOT REZONE. WHY
WOULD WE WANT TO PUT SOMEONE AT
RISK OF AN EARTHQUAKE OR SALAMI?
HAVE WE LEARNED THE LESSONS OF
HURRICANE KATRINA AND OTHER
DISASTERS? OUR CITY NEEDS TO
INCREASE OUR STATUS AS A MAJOR
PORT CITY WITH A BEAUTIFUL
NATURAL DEEP WATER PORT, WHICH
IS WHAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
DOES. THE INDUSTRIAL MARITIME
ACT IS PHASE ONE OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH IS OUR
HOUSING PLAN. IT UNDERSTANDS THE
POINTS THAT WE HAVE BEEN MAKING.
I WOULD NOTE, KIND OF LIKE MY
COLLEAGUE HAS NOTED, AMENDMENTS
PRESENTED TODAY REALLY
ACKNOWLEDGE MANY OF MY REASONS
TO BE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS
BILL. BUT, I WOULD ADD THAT TO
FIX THE BILL. SO, TO CLOSE, I'M
REMINDED OF MY CONVERSATION
RECENTLY WITH FORMER COUNCIL
PRESIDENT DEBORAH WHEREAS ON
THIS BILL. SHE NOTED A FEW
THINGS. FIRST, THE FACT PATTERN
OF THIS BILL IS THE SAME AS 10
YEARS AGO. IT IS THE SAME AS 10
YEARS AGO. IF YOU MOVE FORWARD
10 YEARS AGO, IT IS KIND OF LIKE
THE STREET VACATION POINT THAT
CAME UP IN THIS MEETING. BUT
WHAT'S UP WITH THAT FACT
PATTERN , THEN, FORMER COUNCIL
PRESIDENT DEBORAH WHEREAS SAID
TO ME. SHE ALSO NOTED, AND I
AGREE THAT THIS ISN'T ABOUT
LABOR VERSUS BUSINESS, IT IS
ABOUT OUR CULTURE AND OUR
HERITAGE. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE,
WE ARE IN MARITIME PORT CITY.
THE WE SHOULD REMEMBER THAT. I
JUST WANT TO CLOSE WITH THE
QUOTE QUITE FAMOUS AT THE TIME,
A DECADE AGO, "YOU CAN ALWAYS
BUILD AN ARENA." INTERESTING, BY
THE WAY." YOU CAN NEVER BUILD
ANOTHER DEEPWATER PORT. WITH
THAT, WITH RESPECT TO THOSE IN
FAVOR OF THIS BILL, AND WILL BE
VOTING NO. COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK .
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I CHOSE TO VOTE NO ON ALL OF THE
AMENDMENTS TODAY OUT OF
PRINCIPLE THAT I EXPLAINED
EARLIER. THE LIMITED TIME TO
CONSULT WITH YOU AND OWNERS,
FOLKS AT THE PORT, CONSTITUENTS
THAT HAVE WEIGHED IN TODAY. WE
HAVE RECEIVED 11 EMAILS, MY
LETTERS, ONE LETTER WITH A
BIPARTISAN SECTION OF 30 STATE
LEGISLATORS, INCLUDING MUCH OF
THE SEATTLE DELEGATION AND SOME
OF OUR BIGGEST HOUSING,
ENVIRONMENTAL AND LABOR
CHAMPIONS, LIKE REPRESENTATIVE
JULIA REED, REPETITIVE SHARON
TAMIKA SANTOS, REPRESENTATIVE
BARRY, PREVENTATIVE DEWAR AND
REPRESENTATIVE STREEP FLAGGING
THEIR CONCERN WITH THE PROJECT
AS PROPOSED. I DON'T MAKE LIGHT
OF ANY OF THAT FEEDBACK WE HAVE
RECEIVED. A LOT HAS HAPPENED IN
THE PAST 24 HOURS. WHILE I REFER
TO THE CHARACTERIZATION THAT THE
AMENDMENTS THAT WERE BEFORE US
TODAY WERE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS
EVEN IF THEY WERE, I WOULD STILL
REQUEST MORE TIME BECAUSE OF THE
STATE OF OUR DIVISION AND THE
SAKE OF OUR PARTNERSHIPS AND THE
OPTICS OF TRAJAN IS SOMETHING
THAT HAS BEEN SO CONTENTIOUS FOR
YEARS AND GIVEN THE FACT THAT
TEMPERS HAVE BEEN SO HIGH. WE
HAVE HAD PRESIDENT FOR DELAYS ON
CITY COUNCIL, WHETHER IT WAS
WITH PICKUP, EDI OR PUTTING THE
SOCIAL HOUSING MEASURE ON THE
BALLOT. I STILL SEE AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR COMPROMISE. MY
OFFICE HAD HOPED TO DISCUSS THE
SUPPORTED DISCUSSION THAT WOULD
SEEK A COMPROMISE BECAUSE WE
STILL THINK THERE CAN BE ONE.
THERE WAS THE NOTE THAT THIS
DELAY WAS A RED HERRING. TO
THAT, I SAY, PLEASE DO NOT
IMPUGN MY MOTIVES. I
AUTHENTICALLY BELIEVE IN THE
OPPORTUNITY TO FIND A COPY IS
HERE AND THERE WAS A LOT OF TALK
TODAY ABOUT SUPPORT FOR YOU TO
BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I
TRULY HOPE TO HEAR THAT SAME
ENERGY WHEN WE TALK ABOUT
SUPPORTING OUR OTHER
OPPORTUNITIES FOR UNION BUILT
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, PARTICULARLY
WITH MAKING SURE THE SOCIAL
HOUSING DEVELOPER IS SET UP FOR
SUCCESS BECAUSE THAT WILL
DELIVER ON GOOD UNION JOBS AS
WELL . AND, I HOPE WE KEEP THE
PROCESSING ENERGY UP WHEN WE
TALK ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AND COMPREHENSIVE
DISCUSSION AROUND HOUSING
CITYWIDE AND ALLOW FOR MORE
HOUSING IN OUR EXISTING
NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE CLEAR
AIR, GREEN SPACES, SCHOOLS,
BECAUSE WORKING FOLKS DESERVE TO
LIVE IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS. I
THINK THIS PROCESS WAS
NECESSARILY PAINFUL. I IMAGINE A
LOT OF FOLKS IN THIS ROOM MAY BE
FEELING THAT PAIN AND I IMAGINE
THAT IS OUR GOD IS NOT HERE WITH
THIS BOAT. THIS WILL CONTINUE.
WHILE I AM VOTING NO TODAY, I
BEEN COMMITTED TO COVER MY IS TO
WORKING PEOPLE AND TO A PRESS
THAT SUPPORTS TRANSPARENCY AND
PARTNERSHIP. THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> I AND THE NORWEGIANS READ
OVER HERE . THIS IS NOT ABOUT
BEING A YES OR NO. THIS IS ABOUT
HOW WE GOVERN AND HOW WE LEAD BY
EXAMPLE. THIS PROCESS HAS
CREATED A VISION. I SIT UP HERE
HEARING CURRENTLY THERE ARE TWO
COUNCILMEMBERS THAT WERE HERE
MORE THAN A YEAR AND A HALF AGO.
ONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBER WHO
WAS HERE BEFORE THAT HAS SHARED
A PERSPECTIVE ABOUT THE WAY
THINGS OCCURRED AND WHAT
HAPPENED. EVEN THOUGH I WAS
THERE, I FEEL LIKE I WAS
WATCHING A DIFFERENT MOVIE. I
WASN'T JUST HERE, I WAS THERE
NEGOTIATING THIS. I WAS MANAGING
AND DISTORTING THE LAND USE, THE
AT THAT TIME. AND, WHAT I FEEL
RIGHT NOW IS THAT THERE IS A
COLLECTIVE AMNESIA ABOUT WHAT
WAS AGREED TO, WHAT WAS NOT. TO.
AND, FROM THERE, WHAT WERE THE
NEXT STEPS AND HOW WOULD WE COME
TOGETHER? IN 2023, I WOULD SAY
WAS COLLECTIVELY THE BEST
RELATIONSHIP THAT WE HAD BETWEEN
STAKEHOLDERS WHO HAVE
TRADITIONALLY BEEN AT EACH OTHER
AND STARTS FROM ACROSS THE CITY
REGARDING INDUSTRIAL LANDS. THIS
IS WHY THERE HAD BEEN NO ZONING
CHANGES EVEN DURING NHA, EVEN
DURING OTHER INCENTIVE ZONING
CHANGES. THERE WERE NO ZONING
CHANGES MADE TO THE INDUSTRIAL
ZONES BETWEEN 2007 AND 2023. SO
WHAT IS DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS
VOTE, AS I HAVE SAID BEFORE,
COMPARED TO THE OTHER VOTES THAT
WE TAKE THIS IS NOT WHEN WE GET
TO GO BACK TO. ONCE WE MAKE THIS
CHANGE IN OUR DEEPWATER PORT IS
FOREVER THREATENED. OUR PORT
ACTIVITIES, AGAIN, SEATTLE
WOULDN'T BE A CITY, TACOMA
WOULD BE THE CITY. PORT TOWNSEND
WOULD BE THE CITY, IF NOT FOR
OUR RAAND DEEPWATER
PORTS. ALL OTHER DECISIONS THAT
WE HAVE BEFORE US, WE GET TO
YOUNG MAN, WE GET TO CHECK OUT,
SEE IF IT IS A PILOT AND WE GET
TO SEE IF IT WORKS. THIS IS ONE
THAT CANNOT BE UNDONE. AGAIN,
SING IT WITH ME, THIS PROPOSAL
COULD BE BUILT TODAY IF THE
UNITS WERE HOTELS. SOMETHING
THAT IS TAKEN FOR GRANTED TODAY
IS THE CITY OF SEATTLE'S
RELATIONSHIP WITH ANOTHER
GOVERNMENT WITHIN OUR BORDERS
AND THAT IS THE PORT OF SEATTLE.
WHEN I CAME TO THE CITY COUNCIL
IN 2020, I WAS INSTRUCTED THAT
THE CITY OF SEATTLE AS AN ENTITY
HAD A VERY POOR RELATIONSHIP
WITH THE PORT OF SEATTLE. AND, I
FOUND THAT TO BE TRUE.
FLOODPLAINS IS SOMETHING WE ARE
STILL WORKING THROUGH AND HAS
REARED ITS HEAD A COUPLE TIMES.
WHAT WE HAVE ALSO FOUND IS NOT
THROUGH THE COURSE OF HAVING A
PROCESS THAT FOCUSES ON
CONSENSUS AND COLLABORATION THAT
WE HAVE REPAIRED THOSE PAST
DIFFERENCES. THIS CITY COUNCIL
HAS BENEFITED FROM THAT POSITIVE
WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH THE
PORT. THE CURRENT CITY COUNCIL
HAS NEVER EXPERIENCED A POOR
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PORT
BECAUSE HARD AND INTENTIONAL
WORK OCCURRED TO REPAIR THAT
HARM. THAT LEADS ME TO THE
QUESTION, WHY HE WASN'T THERE
AND APPEALED TO THE EIS? IF
THESE ISSUES WERE AT THE FRONT
OF THE MIND OF THE PORT AT THAT
TIME, THE ANSWER IS BECAUSE WE
WERE IN A GOOD RELATIONSHIP. THE
ANSWER IS WE ARE GOING TO
CONTINUE FORWARD BECAUSE THE
ANSWER AT THAT TIME WAS IF THE
PORT APPEALED, THE EIS, THE
LEGISLATION WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN
IN FRONT OF THE LAND USE
COMMITTEE BEFORE RECESS, WHICH
MEANS THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ON
A LOCATED, RUSHED SCHEDULE, OR
IT WOULD HAVE HAD TO BE TAKEN UP
AFTER BUDGET . THAT IS WHY. IT
IS A REALLY FUNCTIONAL REASON.
IT IS A VERY EASY ANSWER. THE
REASON THERE IS NOT AN APPEAL TO
THE EIS WAS BECAUSE WE WERE IN A
GOOD RELATIONSHIP AND AN APPEAL
WOULD HAVE DELAYED THE BILL TO
POSSIBLY NOT HAVE BEEN VOTED ON.
AND, TO THROW AWAY WORK THAT
STARTED IN 2019 THAT REQUIRED A
FACILITATOR BETWEEN
STAKEHOLDERS? BECAUSE THE
OPINIONS AND PERSPECTIVES WERE
SO DISTANT? I MEAN, AGAIN, DAN
McKISSON, LOVE YOU, MAN, YOU
WERE MAD AT ME FOR ALLOWING
THREE HOTELS. YOU WERE COMING AT
MY REGULAR, IN A POLITE AND
PROFESSIONAL MANNER. SO, THAT IS
WHY I SAY THAT THERE IS A
COLLECTIVE AMNESIA ABOUT WHAT
HAPPENED IN 2023. HE AND, TO THE
SPONSOR TO YOUR RECOLLECTION IS
NOT ONE THAT I REMEMBER . I'M
NOT GOING TO, I'M NOT TRYING TO
IMPUGN ANY MOTIVES OR ANYTHING.
I'M JUST SAYING I DON'T
REMEMBER IT THAT WAY. AND,
BECAUSE WE WERE IN A GOOD
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PORT, AND
BECAUSE THEY CHOSE TO MOVE THE
BILL FORWARD RATHER THAN INSTALL
IT, THEY DIDN'T APPEAL. AFTER
THIS EXPERIENCE, MY ONLY
RECOGNITION TO ANYONE OUTSIDE OF
THE CITY OF SEATTLE WOULD BE TO
APPEAL BECAUSE EVEN IF I TRUST
YOU AND YOU TRUST ME , I CAN'T
TRUST THAT A FUTURE COUNCIL
MEMBER WILL WEAPONIZED THIS
MOMENT THAT WE HAVE TOGETHER.
WHAT IS REALLY INTERESTING FOR
ME, I WAS READING THE "SEATTLE
TIMES" TODAY AND I SAW AN
ADVERTISEMENT FOR THE PORT ABOUT
THE PORT OF SEATTLE IS A WORKING
WATERFRONT AND IT REALLY
RESONATED WITH ME. IT IS BECAUSE
I KNOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE BEHIND
THE FENCE. FOR MOST PEOPLE,
THEIR ONLY INTERACTION WITH THE
PORT OR MARITIME FACILITIES IS
BY DRIVING PAST A CHAIN-LINK
FENCE. NEVER SEEING INSIDE. AND,
NEVER LIVING A DAY INSIDE. IN
BALLARD, ONE OF MY FAVORITE
PLACES TO POINT OUT IS PACIFIC
FISHERMAN SHIPYARD. AND WHEN I
LOOK AT IT, IT HAS ALL THE SIGNS
OF RETIRED CLOSED DOWN
BUSINESSES FROM ACROSS BALLARD.
I GOT CHEWED OUT ONE TIME I WENT
DOWN THERE TRYING TO SHOW OFF
THOSE SIGNS BECAUSE THE
IMPORTANCE IS NOT THE HISTORY OF
HOLDING BACK, BUT SUPPORTING
ABOUT PACIFIC FISHERMAN SHIPYARD
IS THE MACHINE SHOP, THE PAINT
SHOP, THE FACT THAT THEY COLLECT
ALL THEIR WATER AND DISTRIBUTED
BACK INTO THE WATERWAY. YOU KNOW
THAT RIDING THE BUS LOOKING
DOWN. ALL YOU SEE ARE THE SIGNS.
THAT IS WHAT I MEAN. WHEN I SAW
THAT ADVERTISEMENT AT THE TIMES
TODAY, IT GAVE ME A DIFFERENT
FEELING ABOUT WORKING OUT AT
THESE ORANGE CRANES OUT HERE,
MULTIMILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO PUT
IN. HOW MUCH TRAINING DOES IT
TAKE TO GET A SKILLED OPERATOR?
HOW MUCH INVESTMENT DOES IT TAKE
ESTIMATE AND WE ARE GOING TO
THROW IT AWAY? WE WILL KEEP THE
TWO OF IT IN THE CONFERENCE
ROOM. I SAY THIS BECAUSE BEHIND
THE FENCE LOOKS SO DIFFERENT.
AGAIN, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, YOU
ARE READING THE FACTS ABOUT WHAT
WAS SENT WHAT WAS NOT OCCURRING
IN 2023 IS NOT IN SYNC WITH
MINE. I AM NOT HERE TO IMPUGN
THE MOTIVES OR SAY ANYTHING WITH
THIS, I AM JUST SAYING YOUR
READING OF THE SPECS DOES NOT
ALIGN WITH MY UNDERSTANDING OF
THE FACTS. IN 2023, AND, THROUGH
THIS PROCESS, ACTUALLY, THE
QUESTION YOU RAISED MULTIPLE
TIMES ABOUT WHY WE DIDN'T MAKE
THE BALLARD INTERBAY
MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIAL CENTER,
BOUNDARIES REMOVED AND THE
CURRENT UNDERSTAND, WHY WAS THIS
COMING UP? WHEN WE CHECKED OUT
OF THE PROPOSAL THERE WERE NO,
THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION. NOBODY
SAID NO. AND, THE REASON THE
BOUNDARIES CHANGE TWICE BECAUSE
THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION . AND,
WE ASKED ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS.
IF THERE HAD BEEN ONE IOTA OF
OPPOSITION TO CHANGING THOSE
BOUNDARIES, WE WOULDN'T HAVE
DONE IT. AND, I NOW HAVE A
BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHY THAT
CHANGE UPSET YOU, OR MAY HAVE
UPSET YOU.
>> POINT OF ORDER. PLEASE,
LET'S STICK TO THE LEGISLATION
HERE.
>> AGAIN, ALL I CAN SAY IS THAT
THE BASE LEGISLATION THAT THIS
AMENDMENT IS CHANGING WOULD NOT
HAVE INCLUDED A BOUNDARY CHANGE
IF ANYONE HAD SAID NO. THIS
PROCESS, SO, THAT PROCESS, A
MONTH BEFORE IT WAS INTRODUCED,
IT WAS DISCUSSED AT COUNCIL
BRIEFING. WE HAD DEADLINES SET
UP . WE HAD CLEAR COMMUNICATION
SO THAT ALL STAKEHOLDERS HAD
EQUAL FOOTING IN THAT
CONVERSATION. THIS PROCESS BEGAN
WITH A CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING
THAT WAS CUT SHORT. ON THAT
DATE, THE INTRODUCTION AND
REFERRAL LETTER WAS SUBMITTED
SEVEN MINUTES, FOUR OR FIVE
MINUTES, I DON'T KNOW THE
NUMBER OF MINUTES, IT WAS RIGHT
NEAR THERE AT THE END.
>> I WANT TO MAKE, ONE MOMENT,
YOU HAVE BROUGHT UP THIS NOTION
THAT PROCESS ONCE NOT PROPER IN
THE INTRODUCTION AND REFERRAL
CALENDAR, WE DID GET THE
INTRODUCTION AND REFERRAL
CALENDAR AND ON TIME.
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK, PUTTING
KNEW, DID NOT ADD PARTICULAR
LEGISLATION SO WE RETRACTED IT
AND WE PUBLISHED IT.
>> THAT IS YOUR JOB TO LEAD AS
OUR COUNCIL PRESIDENT. ALL I CAN
SAY IS THAT, IN THAT
CONVERSATION, WHEN COUNCIL
BRIEFING USED TO BE A PLACE
WHERE COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD HAVE
DISCUSSIONS AND ASK EACH OTHER
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LEGISLATION,
AND BEFORE US, MY QUESTIONS WERE
ANSWERED BY A ADJOURNMENT OF THE
MEETING. WE THEN HAD A ONE-SIDED
PANEL THAT WAS THANKFULLY
BALANCED WITH A SECOND PANEL. IT
IS NOT ABOUT SCIENCE, IT IS
ABOUT THE TWO PANELS BEING
TOGETHER AND WORKING OUT OF
THEIR ISSUES. THE WAY WE GOT TO
THIS IN 2023 WAS DOING A
FACILITATOR. HERE AT THIS
PROCESS, WE NEVER BROUGHT THOSE
TWO SIDES TOGETHER. AND, THE
REASON THIS PROPOSAL THAT IS
BEFORE US TODAY WAS NOT INCLUDED
IN THE 2023 CITYWIDE UP ZONE WAS
BECAUSE THERE WAS NOT A
COMPROMISE REACHED. PART OF
DEMISE WAS ALLOWING HOTELS
THE STADIUM AREA. THIS PROPOSAL
COULD BE TODAY IF THE HOUSING
UNITS WERE HOTEL UNITS. THE FLOW
OF THIS PROCESS, FOR THIS BILL,
WAS TO WANTED THAT WE HAD NINE
AMENDMENTS TODAY. THAT MEANS IT
WASN'T READY IF THERE WERE
STILL CONCERNS AND STILL
INFORMATION COMING OUT. THE
PACKAGE OF AMENDMENTS COMING OUT
DEMONSTRATES THAT COUNCIL
MEMBERS HAD INTENT AND THEY KNOW
THAT HOUSING IN THIS AREA IS A
BAD IDEA TO FEEL COMPELLED TO
VOTE ON THIS PROPOSAL FOR THIS
PROPOSAL . TODAY, FOR EVEN ME,
NEW INFORMATION HAS COME TO
LIGHT WHICH FURTHER LEADS ME TO
BELIEVE THERE WERE COMMITMENTS
WITH THINGS SHARED IN PRIVATE.
ONE OF THE FIRST PANELS THAT WE
HAD A ON THIS PROCESS WAS WHO
SAID WHAT TWO YEARS AGO. WITH
THIS NEW INFORMATION THAT COMES
TO LIGHT, IT BEGS THE QUESTION,
IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE AT HAND?
THIS PROPOSAL COULD BE BUILT
TODAY IF THE HOUSING UNITS WERE
HOTEL UNITS. FOR ME, I JUST HAVE
TO ASK, WHY ELSE WOULD THIS
PROCESS HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED IN
THE WAY IT HAS? IT WAS
INTRODUCED AT A TIME WHEN WE
DIDN'T HAVE A LAND-USE CHAIR.
IT WAS INTRODUCED WITH A COMEDY
THAT IS NOT TO. WATCHING THE
SEATTLE CHANNEL, A NOTE RELATED
TO ZONING AND LAND USE IN THE
GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE. THIS IS
OUT OF STEP WITH PAST PRACTICE.
IF THIS ONCE A TRANSPARENT AND
THOUGHTFUL PROCESS , WE WOULD
HAVE EITHER SENT IT TO THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMITTEE,
BECAUSE A FAMILIAR, ON THE
RECORD, IF THE MAYOR'S OFFICE
HAD DECIDED TO PROPOSE A CHANGE
THIS YEAR, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
>> POINT OF ORDER, WE HAVE
REACHED THERE ARE TIME LIMITS.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO CUT ME OFF?
>> WE HAVE OTHER HANDS RAISED. I
AM JUST ASKING FOR SOME RESPECT
FOR OTHER PEOPLE. GO AHEAD,
PLEASE.
>> THANK YOU. THERE HAVE BEEN A
NUMBER OF TIMES YOU HAVE CUT ME
OFF ON THE DAIS. ALL I'M SAYING
IS IF THIS WAS GOING TO BE A
TRANSPARENT, THOUGHTFUL PROCESS
THAT WE WOULD HAVE WAITED FOR A
NEW LAND-USE CHAIR TO COME, IT
WOULD HAVE BEEN SENT TO THE COMP
PLAN COMMITTEE OR IT WOULDN'T
HAVE BEEN WASHED. WE STILL HAVE
LEAVES FROM THE 2023 PROPOSAL,
THE TRANSPORTATION RESOLUTION
AND STUDY BUT ALSO FROM THE
2020. 2024 LEVY THAT HAS BEEN
TRANSPORTATION MONEY TO CONNECT
THE PORT TO THE INTERSTATES.
THIS IS NOT A DECISION WE CAN
UNDO. THIS PROPOSAL COULD BE
BUILT TODAY IF THESE WERE HOTELS
AND NOT HOUSING, NOT APARTMENTS.
I WILL END WITH WHAT I STARTED
WITH, AT THE BEGINNING, ON THE
FIRST COMMITTEE. THIS PROPOSAL
HAS MERIT. AND, THERE IS A
PROCESS THAT WE HAVE TO GO
THROUGH TOGETHER TO FIND THE
SOLUTION . THIS PROCESS HAS NOT
BEEN MET. I WILL BE VOTING NO
TODAY. THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I WANT TO CORRECT MY EARLIER
STATEMENT. IT WASN'T REALLY
JANUARY. IT FELT LIKE LONGER
THAN THAT. IT IS MID-MARCH.
NEVERTHELESS, STILL HAS BEEN
SOME TIME. I WANT TO SAY THAT
THIS PROPOSAL IS FOR LEGISLATION
FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING IN A
LIMITED AREA THAT HAD A EIS,
WHICH INCLUDED HOUSING AND DID
NOT SHOW ADVERSE EFFECTS TO THE
AREA, TO TRAFFIC IN THE AREA,
WHICH I KNOW WAS A MAJOR SOURCE
OF CONCERN TO THE PORT
ACTIVITIES. IF THE EIS HAD SHOWN
DIFFERENTLY, I WOULD NOT BE
SUPPORTING THIS LEGISLATION, AS
I DO SUPPORT THE PORT AS WELL .
THE NUMBER OF UNITS WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT WERE THOSE THAT
WERE CONTAINED IN THE EIS FOR
THAT WORK FOR SOMETHING. WE HAVE
TALKED ABOUT THE MAJOR SPACE AND
ACTIVATING THE SPACE IN POSITIVE
WAYS IN THIS VERY LIMITED AREA,
WHICH WE KNOW IS ONE OF THE BEST
WAYS TO ADDRESS PUBLIC SAFETY,
WHICH IS ALSO AN ISSUE IN THE
AREA. PLEASE KNOW THAT MY
DECISION IS BASED ON DILIGENT
REVIEW BASED ON THIS LIMITED
PROPOSAL, WHICH WAS PART OF THE
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE BASED ON
STAKEHOLDERS COMING TOGETHER
WITH THE CITY AT THE TIME. I
JUST, I REALLY DID NOT WANT TO
TAKE A VOTE WITHOUT LETTING IT
BE SAID THAT I DID DO MY DUE
DILIGENCE IN REVIEWING. I
SUPPORT ALL OUR UNION MEMBERS.
I'M NOT TRYING TO TAKE SIDES
HERE. THIS IS VERY LIMITED AREA.
AND, THERE WAS THAT EIS. I WANT
TO SAY THAT. I DON'T WANT TO
ATTRIBUTE ILL WILL TO ANY OF MY
COLLEAGUES. I DON'T THINK THAT
THAT SERVES THIS BODY WELL. I
DON'T THINK THAT IS WHAT THIS
IS ABOUT. I HAVE ALWAYS SAID,
YOU'VE HEARD ME SAY THIS
BEFORE, WE CAN AGREE TO
DISAGREE. AND, I ALSO REALLY
WANTED TO SAY WHERE I WAS COMING
FROM WITH THIS AND GIVE MY
GUARANTEES. I DO DO MY DUE
DILIGENCE WHEN I COMMITTED TO DO
THIS JOB, THAT IS WHAT I
COMMITTED TO DO. I TOOK AN OATH
WHEN I TOOK THIS JOB, AS WE ALL
DID, AND I TAKE THAT SERIOUSLY.
SO, PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS,
LIKE I SAID, I WAS A VERY
THOUGHTFUL IN MY APPROACH. I
KNOW THIS WAS A DIFFICULT
DECISION AND NOT EVERYONE IS
GOING TO BE PLEASED ABOUT IT.
AND, I ALSO APPRECIATE THAT MY
COLLEAGUES DID SOME AMENDMENTS
TO GET US TO A PLACE WHERE I
THINK THERE IS SOME, THERE WAS
SOME FURTHER COMPROMISE TO BE
HAD. AND, I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE
THAT. PLEASE KNOW THAT AND THANK
YOU.
>> TRAIN FOR.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYONE
FOR COMING TODAY AND BEING HERE.
I KNOW THAT WE HAVE BEEN HERE
FOR A LONG TIME SO I WILL NOT
SPEAK FOR 10 MINUTES. I WILL DO
TWO MINUTES. SOMEONE CAN TIME
ME. I'M LOOKING AT THE CLOCK. I
KNOW THAT ONE OF THE FRUSTRATING
POINTS THAT I HAVE HAD ONE IS
TRYING TO GET THROUGH THE
TALKING POINTS SITES AT ENDICOTT
STREET TO THE FACTS, TO BE
HONEST. THAT WAS REALLY
DIFFICULT, JUST TO UNDERSTAND
BOTH POINTS. I KNOW THIS IS BEEN
ON THE TABLE FOR A LONG TIME. TO
HAVE THREE MONTHS TO GET CAUGHT
UP AND UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING,
UNDERSTAND BOTH SIDES,
UNDERSTAND ALL OF THE LAYERS
THAT HAPPEN, IT WAS TOUGH. SO,
THAT I KNOW THAT THIS IS A TOUGH
VOTE IN WHATEVER WAY THIS GOES.
I HAVE SOMEONE IN THE AUDIENCE
TODAY WHO I AM THE GOD. TO HIS
TWO KIDS AND HE IS A
LONGSHOREMAN. HE HAS RAISED HIS
FAMILY ON THAT SALARY. AND, HIS
FAMILY AND RAISED MY GOD KIDS TO
BE THE PHENOMENAL MEN THAT THEY
ARE TODAY. SO, I KNOW HOW
IMPORTANT THIS IS. BUT, I ALSO
WANT TO SAY, WHATEVER WAY THE
VOTE GOES, THAT MY COMMITMENT AS
THE CHAIR OF THE SELECT
COMMITTEE FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN, WE ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING
OBVIOUSLY INTO WAYS AND WORKING
WITH THE BOARD TO MITIGATE
INTENTIONALLY THE IMPACT AND
JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE
PROTECTING OUR INDUSTRIAL LANDS.
I THINK IT IS INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT TO OUR CITY. I GET IT,
I KNOW THAT WE ARE A DEEP WATER
PORT, HOW IMPORTANT THAT IS. I
SAID THAT OBVIOUSLY IN COMMITTEE
THAT I WAS SITTING IN FOR THIS
ORIGINAL NUMBER WHEN IT WAS
INTRODUCED IN THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AND GOVERNANCE, HOW
WE ARE A , ON'S REPORT. 70% OF
THE PRODUCTS THAT COME HERE GO
THROUGH US TO GET TO OTHER
NETWORKS ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TOP SEVEN
PORTS, WE ARE THE NUMBER SEVEN
BUT YOU LOOK AT THE OTHER PORTS,
A LOT OF THEM ARE THE
DESTINATION PORT. THEY CAN
SUPPORT A LOT OF THE PRODUCTS
THAT COME THERE. UNDERSTANDING
THE IMPORTANCE OF OUR PORTS. NO
MATTER WHICH WAY THIS GOES, AS
THE CHAIR OF THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN COMMITTEE, I WILL BE
DEDICATED TO MAKING SURE THAT WE
CONTINUE TO PROTECT OUR
INDUSTRIAL LANDS AND YOU HAVE
THAT COMMITMENT FROM ME ON THE
RECORD AS WELL AND ALSO IN FRONT
OF THE GENTLEMAN HERE, WHO I IN
THE GUT. TO THOSE HIS TWO KIDS
AS WELL. THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
>> THANK YOU MADAME COUNCIL
PRESIDENT. I WANT TO THANK EVERY
PERSON FOR BEING HERE TODAY .
EVERYONE IN THE ROOM CURRENTLY,
DWINDLING NUMBERS, AS EXPECTED,
WITH FIVE HOURS INTO THIS THING
. BUT, EARLIER, WHEN WE STARTED,
IT WAS STANDING ROOM ONLY. I DO,
AGAIN, WANT TO ESPECIALLY
APPRECIATION AND GRATITUDE TO
EVERYONE FOR CARVING OUT TIME TO
BE HERE TODAY. IT IS IMPORTANT,
YOUR FEEDBACK AND PERSPECTIVE IS
IMPORTANT. THIS PROPOSAL IS
ABOUT PEOPLE. PEOPLE IN THE
ROOM, MANY PEOPLE IN THE ROOM
HERE, I HAPPEN TO KNOW
PERSONALLY. I KNOW YOU BECAUSE
OUR KIDS PLAY ON THE SAME SOCCER
TEAMS. THEY PLAY ON THE SAME
SOFTBALL TEAMS. SOME OF YOU EVEN
HAVE COACHED MY KIDS IN VARIOUS
SPORTS. OUR KIDS GO TO THE SAME
SCHOOLS IN SOME CASES. I'M NOT
PARTICULARLY RELIGIOUS ANYMORE.
I DON'T PRACTICE MY BORN INTO
RELIGION, OR ANY RELIGION, FOR
THAT MATTER, BUT, IF I HAD, I
SUSPECT THAT MANY OF US WOULD BE
WORSHIPING TOGETHER IN OUR
COMMUNITY. I KNOW MANY OF YOU
WELL BECAUSE WE ARE PART OF THE
SAME COMMUNITY. MANY OF YOU
HAPPEN TO BE MY OWN
CONSTITUENTS. I HAVE A DUTY TO
YOU. AND, THIS IS THE AREA AT
ISSUE HERE TODAY IS MY OWN CITY
COUNCIL DISTRICT, DISTRICT ONE.
IT IS AN AREA THAT I KNOW VERY
WELL. HAD BASKETBALL SKILLS
CLINICS, THERE IS A GYM, A
BASKETBALL GYM IN THE BUILDING.
HAD BASKETBALL SKILLS CLINICS
FOR MY OWN KIDS. USED TO WORK AT
THE ACROSS THE STREET ON THE
OTHER SIDE OF FIRST AVENUE FROM
THIS SPACE. WHENEVER, FOR ABOUT
A YEAR, WHENEVER I WENT INTO THE
OFFICE, I LOOKED ACROSS AND SAW
THE SAME PROPERTY AT ISSUE. LIKE
MANY OF YOU, OTHER MEMBERS OF
THE PUBLIC, I REGULARLY ATTEND
VARIOUS GAMES AND EVENTS AT THE
NEARBY STADIUMS. I'M GOING NEXT
MONTH. MONSTER TRUCKS ARE IN
TOWN. KIDS ARE GOING TO SEE
GRAVE DIGGER AND EL TORO LOCO.
IT IS ANOTHER EVENT I WILL BE
THERE. WE CAN QUIBBLE ABOUT 5
MILLION PEOPLE A YEAR, WHO KNOWS
HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE IN THE AREA.
I DO KNOW A LOT. AT LEAST 1
MILLION. I'M VERY, VERY
FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA. IT IS MY
DISTRICT. VERY, VERY FAMILIAR
WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS. MANY OF
THEM ARE MY DIRECT CONSTITUENTS.
THAT IS WHY I HAVE TAKEN GREAT
PAINS TO TRY MY BEST TO DO THE
WORK OF UNDERSTANDING THE
ISSUES, UNDERSTANDING THE
UNDERLYING CONCERNS. SEEKING TO
ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS TO THE
FULL EXTENT POSSIBLE IS PART OF
MY AMENDMENTS. THEREFORE, I
THINK WE ULTIMATELY CREATED A
THOUGHTFUL, BALANCED PACKAGE AS
THE AMENDED RULE PRESENTS . BUT,
A LOT OF WORK WENT INTO THAT.
DOZENS AND DOZENS OF MEETINGS
AND CALLS AND HUNDREDS OF
EMAILS. THAT WAS FROM COMMUNITY.
I APPRECIATE ALL OF IT. THAT
SAID, I ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT
THERE HAVE BEEN SOME VERY
PASSIONATE OPINIONS AND
DIVERGENT VIEWS ON ALL SIDES,
ESPECIALLY, AND INCLUDING, BY MY
OWN DISTRICT CONSTITUENTS. PORT
AND LONGSHORE WORKERS, MARITIME
INDUSTRIAL TRADE WORKERS . MANY
OF THEM LIVE IN DISTRICT 1,
PARTICULARLY IN WEST SEATTLE.
ALSO, THE VALLEY AS WELL BUT
ESPECIALLY WEST SEATTLE AND
RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES,
BUSINESS OWNERS IN AND OUT OF
THE STADIUMS, INCLUDING DISTRICT
1 AND PIONEER SQUARE IN THE SODO
AND OTHERS . I AM ACCOUNTABLE
FOR PRODUCING RESULTS ACROSS THE
CITY AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL IN
POLICY AREAS SPANNING FROM
PUBLIC SAFETY, PUBLIC
INFRASTRUCTURE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING , YOU NAME IT. ANYTHING
WITHIN THE CITY'S WILL HOUSE, I
AM ACCOUNTABLE FOR. THAT ABILITY
IS SOMETHING I DON'T RUN AWAY
FROM, I RUN TOWARD. THAT IS HOW
I LEAN. THAT SAID, I PAID
CLOSEST ATTENTION TO MY
CONSTITUENTS IN THE DISTRICT 1,
WHO I AM DIRECTLY ACCOUNTABLE
FOR AND TO. AND, I HAVE
LISTENED, READ, RESOURCES FROM,
MET WITH, TAKING TOURS OF THE
IMPACTED AREA ALONGSIDE
CONSTITUENTS ON ALL SIDES OF THE
ISSUES, STRIVING HARD TO LEAVE
NO STONE UNTURNED AS BEST AS I
COULD, AT LEAST. AND, I AM
GRATEFUL FOR THE INTENT AND
PASSIONATE CARE AND CONCERNS FOR
THIS IMPORTANT AREA OF OUR CITY.
AND, AS THE OVEN STATED ADAGE
GOES COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA REFER
TO IT, REASONABLE MINDS
DISAGREE. WE CAN DISAGREE . THE
RATIONAL THOUGHT AND SOUND
JUDGMENT, USING VARIOUS
INTERVENTIONS, PEOPLE CAN ARRIVE
AT DIFFERENT CONCLUSIONS ON THE
SAME EXACT ISSUE AND IT CAN
ENGENDER DIFFERENT FEELINGS
ABOUT SOMETHING. I AM NOT HERE
TO TELL ANYBODY HOW THEY SHOULD
BE FEELING ABOUT ANY POLICY
PROPOSAL. WE'VE HAD TOO MUCH OF
THAT LATELY. SO, AGAIN, MY
AMENDMENTS WERE INTENDED TO
REFLECT THE STRONG VALUES, THE
SUPPORT FOR THE POOR, THE
MARITIME INDUSTRIAL SECTOR,
FREIGHT AND CARGO MOBILITY,
OPERATIONS MORE BROADLY. THEY
ARE SO CRUCIAL TO OUR ECONOMY
AND FOR THE WELL-BEING OF
RESIDENTS AND SMALL BUSINESSES
ALIKE. FROM A POLICY
PERSPECTIVE, I APPRECIATE THAT
THERE ARE MANY RISKS IN EVERY
DECITHERE ARE
MEDICATIONS WE CAN OPPOSE NOW
AND SHOULD COMPOSE NOW AND
CONTINUE TO REVIEW, REASSESS,
REEVALUATE AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE. THAT'S
ALWAYS GOING TO BE THE CASE. I
ALSO RELY ON MAKING DATA-DRIVEN
DECISIONS WHILE WEIGHING THE
POTENTIAL RISKS AGAINST THE
POTENTIAL BENEFITS. WHILE NO ONE
HAS THAT MAGICAL CRYSTAL BALL
WHO CAN CHANNEL THE FUTURE, WE
WORK FROM THE KNOWN DATA AND
KNOWN EVIDENCE THAT WE HAVE
AVAILABLE AT ANY GIVEN TIME IN
ANY GIVEN MOMENT. AND, TODAY, I
WOULD BE SUPPORTING THIS
LEGISLATION. FOR ME, MY SUPPORT
IS ABOUT THREE THINGS. IT IS
ABOUT: AFFORDABLE HOUSING,
REVITALIZING AN UNDERUTILIZED
AREA TO HELP SPARK FURTHER
ECONOMIC ACTIVITY IN THE AREA.
AND, I THINK IT DOES A GOOD JOB
OF PRESERVING VITAL OPERATIONS
AND JOBS. THE AMENDED VERSION.
WE HAVE AN AFFORDABILITY,
AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS IN OUR
CITY. IT IS NO SECRET. ONE OF MY
HIGHEST PRIORITIES IS TO ADDRESS
THIS CRISIS HEAD ON BY
SUPPORTING POLICIES AND PROJECTS
TO QUICKLY BUILD MORE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING. COUNCILMEMBER RINCK,
CHALLENGE ACCEPTED. I WOULD
ARGUE IT STARTS NOW . THIS
PROPOSAL WOULD CREATE WORKFORCE
HOUSING IN SMALL COMMERCIAL
SPACES AND GENERATE GOOD PAYING
UNION JOBS. AND, I BELIEVE ALL
WITHOUT ANY MATERIAL ADVERSE
IMPACT ON VITAL OPERATIONS. NOT
NO IMPACT, WITHOUT MATERIAL
ADVERSE IMPACT. A UNIQUE
OPPORTUNITY HAS PRESENTED ITSELF
HERE, ONE THAT WOULD ENABLE UP
TO 990 UNITS OF WHICH 50% MUST
BE BETWEEN 60 AND 90 AMI,
WITHOUT A SINGLE DIME OF CITY
INVESTMENT TO BRING THIS TO
LIFE. I WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE FOR ENSURING
AS MUCH WITH THAT THOUGHT WILL
START THE AMENDMENT. THIS IS A
VERY DEFINED, NARROW AREA FOR
HOUSING. AS I NOTED, I INTEND TO
MAKE SURE THAT NO FURTHER
HOUSING CAN BE DEVELOPED VIA
ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS DURING OUR
COMP PLAN PROCESS. I ALSO NOTE
THAT THERE ARE SMALL,
MICRO-ENTREPRENEURS AND MAKERS
TODAY WHO WOULD BE ABLE TO
AFFORD THESE NEW UNITS, OF WHICH
ABOUT 70% ARE WOMEN AND PEOPLE
FROM BLACK AND BROWN AND ASIAN
COMMUNITIES. THIS STRIKES ME AS
A GOOD PROPOSAL TO HELP CENTER
THOSE COMMUNITIES AND BRING
FEDERAL WORKFORCE HOUSING. YOU
KNOW I'M A FAN OF WHAT OTHER
CITIES ARE DOING . CERTAIN
THINGS IN POLICY DISCUSSIONS WE
HAVE HERE IN SEATTLE MIGHT BE A
MATTER OF FIRST IMPRESSION FOR
OUR CITY BUT THEY ARE NOT,
ALMOST NEVER A MATTER OF FIRST
IMPRESSION IN TERMS OF A POLICY
PROPOSAL THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED
SOMEWHERE THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY
AND SOMEWHERE THROUGHOUT THE
WORLD. YOU PROBABLY KNOW I FOCUS
HEAVILY AND TRY TO UNDERSTAND
BEST PRACTICES AND OTHER
JURISDICTIONS, WHAT HAS HAPPENED
AND OTHER CITIES WE KNOW SUCH AS
BIRMINGHAM, PORTLAND, DENVER.
THERE IS A MAKERS HOUSING RIGHT
NEXT TO AN INDUSTRIAL AND LOFTS.
I WAS JUST IN SAN FRANCISCO A
FEW WEEKS AGO NEAR THE STADIUMS
AND INDUSTRIAL AREAS. I SAW WHAT
APPEARS TO BE HOUSING. SO,
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS MY TOP
CONCERN AND REASON FOR
SUPPORTING THIS BILL,
PARTICULARLY GIVEN IT WOULD
AUTHORIZE THE CONSTRUCTION OF
CRITICALLY NEEDED WORKFORCE
HOUSING IN PARALLEL. I THINK WE
ARE ABLE TO ADD SOME SOLID
SAFEGUARDS TO DRAW A FIRM LINE
IN THE SAND TO MAKE CRYSTAL
CLEAR THAT THIS IS IT AND TO
MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT TO DO ON
A GOING FORWARD BASIS AND
PROVIDE NEEDED CLARITY AND
CERTAINTY TO ALL COMMUNITIES.
THERE IS TALK OF THE TRAFFIC
ROUTES AND ALL OF THIS STUFF IS
CONFUSING. I UNDERSTAND IT. I
WAS CONFUSED AT FIRST. THE
STREET DESIGNATIONS CAN MAKE
YOUR HEAD SPIN. FREIGHT
CORRIDORS, MAJOR TRUCK STREETS.
JUST TO NAME A FEW. IT IS
TOTALLY UNDERSTANDABLE, IN MY
VIEW, WHY THERE ARE WIDELY
DIVERGENT CONCERNS AND POTENTIAL
IMPACTS ON FIRST AVENUE SOUTH. I
SHARE ANY CONCERNS THAT COULD
FURTHER HAMPER CARGO MOBILITY TO
THE PORT AND ANYTHING THAT COULD
REDUCE JOBS. I DON'T THINK, I
DON'T THINK THIS RISES TO THE
LEVEL. THE EVIDENCE THAT I HAVE
SEEN DOESN'T GIVE ME THAT
CONCERN , PERSONALLY. WHO KNOWS
WHAT CAN HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE
AND WHO CAN PREDICT WHAT MIGHT
HAPPEN ON A GOING FORWARD BASIS.
BUT, I THINK IT IS INCUMBENT ON
ALL OF US TO MONITOR AS
DEVELOPMENTS ARISE. I KNOW I
WILL BE CLOSELY BECAUSE THIS IS
MY, AGAIN, THIS IS MY DISTRICT.
FINALLY, I JUST NOTE THAT WE
LEARNED FROM A COUPLE OF MY
COLLEAGUES, COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS , COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE,
OTHERS ABOUT THE UNIQUE HISTORY
HERE , NOT JUST FROM A COUPLE
YEARS AGO WHEN THIS WAS MOST
RECENTLY ADDRESSED , BUT ALSO
FROM ABOUT 10 YEARS AGO. 2015 OR
2016, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY. AS
WAS NOTED, BACK THEN, IT WAS A
TOTALLY DIFFERENT PROPOSAL,
TOTALLY DIFFERENT PLAN . THE
SCOPE WAS WAY DIFFERENT. THE
UNDERLYING PROPERTY, THIS IS THE
SAME EXACT PROPERTY THAT WAS AT
ISSUE IN 2016, WHEN CITY COUNCIL
VOTED IN A DIVIDED VOTE 5-4
AGAINST ON A PROPOSAL THAT WOULD
HAVE ALLOWED THE CONSTRUCTION OF
A NEW ARENA TO POTENTIALLY BRING
BACK THE SONICS. I REMEMBER
THINKING , ACTUALLY, NO ONE
APPEARED ONCE SERVING ON THE
CITY COUNCIL AT THE TIME. I
DELIVERED AT THE TIME USING A
MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC PAYING
ATTENTION TO WHAT IS GOING ON,
CYNICALLY ENGAGED, I REMEMBER AT
THE TIME THINKING THAT SEEMS
LIKE A FAIR, RATIONAL THING TO
DO. IT IS VERY SPECULATIVE TO
SAY WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE DONE OR
HOW YOU WOULD HAVE APPROACHED
SOMETHING IN HINDSIGHT. AT THE
TIME, THINKING I PROBABLY WOULD
SUPPORT THAT. AND, IF I WOULD
SUPPORT THAT, IF IT MEANT
BRINGING THE SONICS, I'M GOING
TO SUPPORT THIS LIMITED
CONSTRUCTION FOR HOUSING IN THE
MIDST OF AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING
CRISIS. IF I THOUGHT THERE WAS
ANY COMPELLING EVIDENCE SHOWING
THAT THE OTHER IS IN
CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT IN
AN UNDERUTILIZED PART SODO WOULD
BE DETRIMENTAL AND ANY MATERIAL
RESPECT TO PORT OPERATIONS,
ACTIVITY, OR JOBS, I WOULD
ABSOLUTELY NOT SUPPORT THIS .
ARE THERE RISKS AND IMPACTS THAT
ARE NOT YET FORESEEN? CERTAINLY
POSSIBLE. ABSOLUTELY. THAT IS
WHY I WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO
PARTNER WITH THE PORT, LABOR
ORGANIZATIONS, IRRESPECTIVE OF
WHICH SIDE OF THE ISSUE YOU WILL
LAND ON, AND OUR NEIGHBORS,
DISTRICT 1, ON HOW TO ENHANCE
SUPPORT TO INCREASE EFFICIENCIES
AND GROWTH OF MARITIME, FREED,
AND THE CARGO INDUSTRIES. THIS
IS NOT THE END, THIS IS THE
BEGINNING OF AN IMPORTANT
POSITION THAT WE WILL CONTINUE
TO HAVE. FOR THOSE REASONS, I
WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS BILL
TODAY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
SOLOMON. GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO KEEP
THIS VERY BRIEF. THERE'S A LOT
OF THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SET ON
THE DAYS TO THE FOLKS OUT THERE
REGARDING THEIR THOUGHT PROCESS
FOR THEIR PRIORITIES. AND, I
FEAR A LOT OVER THE ROOMS. I'M
NOT GOING TO TAKE TOO LONG. I
WANT TO MAKE A COUPLE OF IN
RICHMOND. I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE
THE PORT. I WANT TO THANK YOU
FOR THE TOUR WE HAD ON FRIDAY.
THANK YOU FOR TAKING ME OUT TO
TERMINAL FIVE AND SHOWED ME THE
INCREDIBLE OPERATION OUT THERE.
I HAD NO IDEA JUST WHAT KIND OF
THROUGHPUT YOU ALL HAVE. AND AS
HAS BEEN SAID, IF I THOUGHT IN
ANY WAY THAT ANY PROJECT, I
DON'T CARE WHAT PROJECT, IF ANY
PROJECT WOULD BE THREATENING TO
FREIGHT MOBILITY OR PORT
OPERATIONS OR OUR MARITIME
ECONOMY, WOULD IT BE FOR IT. I
REALIZE THAT IT IS FAR TOO
IMPORTANT. I ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT
I HAVE FRIENDS IN THE ROOM
REALLY WANT A MAKERS DISTRICT.
THEY REALLY WANT THIS PROJECT IN
SODO. AND, AS I HAVE SAID
BEFORE, IT SEEMS THIS HAS BEEN
PUTTING CITY COUNCIL AGAINST
PORT, LONGSHOREMEN AGAINST
BUILDERS COUNCIL MEMBERS AGAINST
COUNCILMEMBERS. REGARDLESS OF
HOW THIS SHAKES OUT, I DON'T SEE
THIS AS THE END OF THE PROCESS.
I SEE IT AS A CONTINUATION OF A
PROCESS. A CONTINUATION OF THE
COLLABORATION BECAUSE I DO
BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A WIN-WIN
FOR EVERYBODY INVOLVED. I DO
BELIEVE THAT IT IS NOT EITHER
OR. IT CAN BE BOTH A AND. SO, I
DO BELIEVE IT IS POSSIBLE.
REGARDLESS OF HOW THIS SHAKES
OUT, IN THE WORDS OF THE
BEATLES, "COME TOGETHER." WE CAN
COME TOGETHER TO FIGURE THIS
OUT. WE CAN COME TOGETHER TO
MAKE IT WORK. LET'S DO THAT.
LET'S COME TOGETHER. THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH COUNCIL
PRESIDENT. I WILL BE BRIEF IN MY
REMARKS. I WANT TO THANK
EVERYBODY WHO CAME HERE TODAY
AND ALL THE PEOPLE WHO LEFT. I
WANT TO THANK THE PORT FOUR
OUTREACH AND FOR THE TOUR AND
FOR FILLING ME IN. I WANT TO
THANK THE PROPONENTS OF 242 AND
THE MAKERS AND BUILDERS, THE
CARPENTERS, ALL THE PEOPLE WHO
HAVE OFFERED THEIR PERSPECTIVE
AND OPPORTUNITY TO TOUR THE
DISTRICT. I THINK IT IS CLEAR
THAT I DON'T PRETEND TO LIKE
THIS LEGISLATION, I DON'T
PRETEND TO LIKE THE WAY THIS
PROCESS HAS PLAYED OUT. WE CAN
BE BETTER, WE CAN DO BETTER. WE
ARE A WORK IN PROGRESS. AND, I
DON'T WANT TO DOWNPLAY THE
LEGITIMATE CONCERNS THAT I HEARD
FROM THE PORT. I KNOW THAT I AM
STEPPING INTO THIS, THIS HAS A
LONG HISTORY AND I FEEL LIKE
I'M STEPPING INTO THE CONFLICT
IN NORTHERN IRELAND OR SERBIA,
YOU KNOW, BROTHER AGAINST
BROTHER, SISTER AGAINST SISTER
AND IT IS AN UNCOMFORTABLE PLACE
TO BE. AND, I THINK THE
AMENDMENTS THAT I BROUGHT MADE
IT CLEAR THAT I SHARE SOME OF
THOSE CONCERNS AND ATTEMPTED TO
ADDRESS THEM WITHIN THE CONFINES
OF THE LEGISLATION AND I WANT TO
SAY A TREMENDOUS THANK YOU TO MY
COLLEAGUE, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA,
FOR ALL THE AMENDMENTS THAT YOU
BROUGHT PARTICULARLY THE CLAUSES
AND I VERY MUCH ON WITH YOU AND
MAKING SURE THAT WE DON'T
CONTINUE TO MAKE PROMISES THAT
WE BREAK OR THAT WE DON'T
NECESSARILY HOLD TO IN A WAY
THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND US TO
HAVE MADE THEM AND THAT WE
CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN INDUSTRIAL
LAND. THAT IS INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT. BUT, I ALSO HAVE TO
LOOK AT WHAT ARE THE
OPPORTUNITIES THAT ARE PROVIDED
HERE? WHAT I'M SEEING IS AN
OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE A
TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF LIVING WAGE
JOBS, UNION JOBS. I'M SEEING AN
OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE JOBS FOR
SMALL MAJORS AND SMALL
BUSINESSES. I HAVE A SMALL
BUSINESS IN MY DISTRICT, WHICH
WOMEN'S INITIATIVE. THEY WORK
WITH WOMEN FROM AFGHANISTAN.
THEY WORK WITH WOMEN FROM SYRIA,
THEY WORK WITH WOMEN FROM OTHER
WAR-TORN NATIONS WHO COME HERE
NOT BEING ABLE TO SPEAK A WORD
OF ENGLISH, HAVING NEVER BEEN
ABLE TO WORK OUTSIDE THEIR HOME.
NOTHING IS GIVEN, WHICH THEY
USUALLY COME HERE WITH IS BEING
ABLE TO DO SO AND THEY WERE ABLE
TO PUT THAT SKILL TO USE AND
PROVIDE THESE WOMEN WITH JOBS,
INDEPENDENCE, AND FUTURES. AND,
THAT , THAT WORK IS THREATENED,
REALLY, BY OUR CURRENT TRUMP
ADMINISTRATION AND WE HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY HERE TO PROVIDE FOR
THEM, TO HAVE A MAKERS DISTRICT,
TO CONTINUE TO EXPAND, TO
PROVIDE THE INCREDIBLE
OPPORTUNITIES FOR THESE WOMEN.
THAT IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE. THESE
ARE THE TENSIONS THAT WE HAVE
BEFORE US. IT REALLY ISN'T
TRYING TO CHOOSE ONE OR THE
OTHER . TRYING TO SEE HOW WE CAN
FIND A MIDDLE GROUND. I KNOW IT
DOESN'T FEEL LIKE THERE CAN BE
MIDDLE GROUND. IT IS MY JOB TO
TRY AND FIND IT. AT THE END OF
THE DAY, WHAT THIS VOTING IN
FAVOR OF THIS LEGISLATION IS
VOTING IN FAVOR AND MORE UNION
JOBS, CREATING MORE LIVING WAGE
JOBS FOR UNION MEMBERS, FOR
SMALL MAKERS, FOR PEOPLE OF
COLOR, FOR WOMEN WHILE AT THE
SAME TIME ATTEMPTING TO MAINTAIN
JOBS AT THE PORT AND ATTEMPTING
TO NOT ENCOURAGE FURTHER ON THAT
IMPORTANT CAPACITY THAT IS SO
CRITICAL TO THIS CITY, TO OUR
COUNTY, AND TO OUR STATE. FOR
THOSE REASONS, I WILL BE VOTING
IN FAVOR. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU 2011.
>> JUST WANTED TO RESPOND TO A
COUPLE THINGS, THROUGH YOU,
COUNCIL PRESIDENT, TO OUR
COLLEAGUES, THAT COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA AND COUNCILMEMBER MOORE
SHARED. TO BOTH OF YOU, YOUR
HEART IS IN THE RIGHT PLACE. I
THINK THAT IF YOU HAD BEEN HERE
A COUPLE YEARS AGO, LIKE AS WE
WERE, THROUGH YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT TWO COUNCILMEMBER
SAKA, AS WE WERE WALKING INTO
THE HALL AFTER THE RECESS, I
THOUGHT YOU STOLE MY SPEECH FROM
TWO YEARS AGO. YOU DIDN'T,
THOSE WERE YOUR OWN WORDS. FOR
ME, THOSE WORDS RING HOLLOW TO
COME BACK HERE WITHOUT A PROCESS
THAT ENGAGES EVERYONE. SO, THAT
FURTHER ENCROACHMENT, I ALREADY
MADE THAT PLEDGE. I SAID WE ARE
GOING TO HAVE THESE THREE HOTELS
AND THAT IS IT. AND FOR US TO
COME BACK AND SAY BUT A LITTLE
IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN AGAIN,
FEELS HOLLOW TO ME. WHAT IS
NEXT, INTERBAY? THERE WAS WATER
LESS THAN 100 YEARS AGO. VERY
SMALL MANUFACTURING SPACE THAT
THE PORT OWNS. I WANT THAT LAND
TO BUILD THE MEMORIAL MAGNOLIA
PAGE. I SURE THAT BECAUSE WE
HAVE ALREADY BEEN THROUGH THIS
DANCE THAT BOTH OF YOU JUST
EXPLAINED. THIS PROPOSAL,
THROUGH YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> ROBERTS RULES DOESN'T HAVE A
RESTROOM OPTION, JUST NOTING.
PLEASE KINDLY REFRAIN FROM
ADDRESSING YOUR COLLEAGUES. YOU
ARE WELCOME TO MAKE YOUR POINT
AND WE WILL ALL HEAR IT.
>> YES, MEMBERS WILL KINDLY
RETURN ADDRESS ALL REMARKS
THROUGH THE CHAIR.
>> THROUGH YOU TO MY COLLEAGUES.
YOUR RECOLLECTION OF 2016 I HEAR
THAT. THIS VOTE WOULD BRING THAT
BACK. THE JOBS THAT WERE CREATED
TO BUILD THE STADIUM, NEVER
LOST. IN FACT, REBUILDING
CLIMATE PLEDGE ARENA IS WHAT LED
TO CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING
TRADES OUT OF THE PANDEMIC
RESTRICTIONS FASTER THAN IN
OTHER PLACES BECAUSE FOLKS LIKE
MONTY AND BILLY GOT DOWN TO WORK
AND MAKE SURE THAT THE SITE
COULD OPEN FASTER WITH GOOD AND
SAFE PROCEDURES THAT WERE THEN
USED STATEWIDE. AND, BECAUSE OF
THEIR WORK, WE HAVE AN NBA
LOCKER ROOM TODAY. THIS WOULD
CHANGE. THIS BILL BEFORE US
DOESN'T CHANGE THAT. I SEE
WHERE I BELIEVE BOTH OF YOU ARE
COMING FROM. IT IS THE SAME
POSITION I WAS IN. I THINK WE
ARE REALLY CLOSE TOGETHER, IT IS
JUST WE HAVE A SLIGHTLY
DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR ENGAGEMENT. THAT IS
ALL, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> THANK YOU, EVERYBODY, FOR
YOUR COMMENTS. I PUT THIS
FORWARD BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS
THE RIGHT THING TO DO FOR LOW
INCOME PEOPLE, SMALL BUSINESSES,
AND FAMILIES, AND ALSO THE
VIBRANCY OF THE CITY. THE PEOPLE
THAT ARE BEING LEFT OUT BY THE
SKYROCKETING ON AFFORDABILITY IN
THIS CITY. THIS IS A PROPOSAL
THAT WE HAVE ON THE TABLE TO
ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE ISSUES AND
CONTINUE TO WORK TOGETHER ON
SOME OF THE BIGGER ISSUES THAT
FACE US. I BELIEVE WHAT IS
REALLY ON THE TABLE IS THE
THREATS THAT WILL COME FROM
THINGS LIKE TRADE POLICY, FROM ,
LET ME JUST START AGAIN. I THANK
EVERYBODY FOR HAVE SAID. YOU'VE
MADE MY POINTS ALREADY. I WANT
TO THANK THE PARTNERS IN THE
ROOM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
YOUR ATTENTION. AND, I
APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION
IN STAYING HERE FOR SO LONG. I
BELIEVE OUR HEARTS ARE IN THE
RIGHT PLACE. WE FILTER
INFORMATION DIFFERENTLY AND WE
COME TO DIFFERENT CONCLUSIONS.
UNLESS THERE ARE ANY OTHER
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, I WOULD
LIKE TO CALL FOR A VOTE. I'M
SEEING NONE. CLERK, PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL ON COUNCIL BILL 120933.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS.
>> ABSOLUTELY NOT.
>> TRAIN FOR.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON.
>> AYE.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON.
>> AYE.
>> SIX IN FAVOR, THREE OPPOSED.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES, THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. I WILL SIGN THE
LEGISLATION. THANK YOU,
EVERYBODY.
>> TIME ?