2:03. I'M SARA NELSON, CHAIR OF
THE COME TEAM. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> PRESENT (.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON?
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> HERE'S.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> HERE.
>> CHAIR NELSON?
>> PRESENT.
>> FIVE PRESENT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK
YOU TO EVERYONE WHO HAS JOINED
US TODAY, INCLUDING
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AND
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. WE HAVE A
REALLY FULL AGENDA AND HAVE TO
GET THROUGH THE FIRST THING ON
OUR AGENDA IS RESOLUTION 32170,
GRANTING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO
THE DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION
TO INSTALL, MAINTAIN, AND
OPERATE INTERACTIVE KIOSKS
DOWNTOWN. NEXT WE'LL HAVE A
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF
THE DRAFT DIGITAL TERM PERMIT
COUNCIL BILL FOR THOSE KIOSKS
AND THEN FINALLY, A POSSIBLE
VOTE ON COUNCILMEMBER MOORE'S
COUNCIL BILL 120978 RELATING TO
THE CODE OF ETHICS AND THERE ARE
FIVE AMENDMENTS TO THAT
LEGISLATION. SO I WANTED TO GET
THROUGH THE FIRST TWO ITEMS
RELATIVELY QUICKLY AND LEAVE THE
BULK OF OUR MEETING TIME TO
DISCUSS THE LAST ITEM. SO JUST
FOR HOW THINGS WILL GO DURING
DISCUSSION AND I MIGHT REPEAT
THIS AGAIN LATER, BUT WHEN
DISCUSSING THE ITEMS ON THE
AGENDA, I'LL RECOGNIZE
NONCOMMITTEE MEMBERS AFTER
STANDING COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE
HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK THEIR
QUESTIONS AND PROVIDE THEIR
COMMENTS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE WHEN WE'RE
DISCUSSING THE ETHICS
LEGISLATION BECAUSE SHE'S THE
AUTHOR OF THE COUNCIL BILL. THAT
PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY TO
ANSWER DIRECT QUESTIONS AND
COMMENTS ABOUT THAT PIECE OF
LEGISLATION. THEN IF
COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE FOLLOW-UP
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FOR OUR
PRESENTERS, I ASK THAT YOU RAISE
YOUR HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED
INSTEAD OF ENGAGING IN A BACK
AND FORTH WITH PRESENTERS. WITH
THAT, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION,
THE AGENDA WILL BE ADOPTED.
HEARING NO OBJECTION, THE AGENDA
IS ADOPTED. WE'LL NOW PROCEED
TO OUR HYBRID PUBLIC COMMENT
PERIOD. CLERK, HOW MANY SPEAKERS
ARE SIGNED UP TODAY?
>> CHAIR, WE HAVE 49 IN PERSON
AND WE HAVE 15 REMOTE.
>> WE'LL GIVE EVERYBODY ONE
MINUTE TO SPEAK. MY INTENTION
WAS TO PROVIDE UP TO AN HOUR OF
PUBLIC COMMENT. THAT LEAVES AN
HOUR LEFT AT THE END OF OUR
MEETING. COUNCIL BILL C4 STATES
TOTAL PUBLIC COMMENT PERIODS
SHALL NOT EXCEED 20 MINUTES
UNLESS EXTENDED AT THE DIRECTION
OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER. IT IS
COMMON PRACTICE TO EXTEND THAT
PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT AGAIN, WE DO
HAVE A TIME -- THIS IS A
SCHEDULED TWO-HOUR MEETING AND
WE DO HAVE A TIME LIMIT AT THE
END OF THE MEETING. SOME
COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE TO GET TO
SOME OTHER THINGS. WE WILL BE --
THAT IS HOW WE WILL BE
PROCEEDING WITH PUBLIC COMMENT.
AGAIN, JUST A REMINDER THAT
DISRUPTIONS DURING PUBLIC
COMMENT OR SPEAKING BEYOND THE
ALLOTTED TIME SIMPLY TAKES UP
TIME FOR OTHER SPEAKERS TO HAVE
THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THEIR
COMMENT. ALL RIGHT. SO DO YOU
HAVE THE LIST, CLERK, READY TO
GO? WE'LL DO ALTERNATING TEN IN
PERSON, TEN REMOTE AND THE TIME
IS NOW 2:07. SO PUBLIC COMMENT
WILL CONTINUE FOR AN HOUR UNTIL
3:07 UNLESS WE END EARLIER.
>> I'LL CALL ON SPEAKERS IN THE
ORDER THEY SIGNED UP STARTING
WITH IN-PERSON PUBLIC
COMMENTERS. SPEAKERS WILL HAVE
ONE MINUTE. WHEN YOU HEAR THE
CHIME, YOU'LL HAVE TEN SECONDS
LEFT. IF YOU EXCEED THAT TIME,
YOUR MICROPHONE MAY BE CUT OFF.
IF YOU'RE OFFERING REMOTE
COMMENT, PLEASE MAKE SURE TO
PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF.
WITH THAT, CAN WE GET NUMBERS 1
THROUGH 10 DOWN TO THE FRONT
PLEASE. THANK YOU.
>> GOD BLESS AMERICA. ONE MINUTE
IS BETTER THAN 30 SECONDS. MY
DIRTY FASCIST PIG. MY NAME IS
ALEX TSIMERMAN. I HAVE 60 DAY
FOR TRESPASSES FIVE TIMES YOU
PROSECUTE ME. MY QUESTION TO
YOU, COUNCIL, YOU KNOW WHAT THIS
MEAN, ACCOUNTABILITY. I'M
TOTALLY CONFUSED. SO I CANNOT
UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS MEAN WORD
ACCOUNTABILITY. YOU GIVE ME 18
TRESPASSES FOR MY RIGHT SPEAK
FOR TWO MINUTE OR ONE MINUTE BUT
TWO DAYS AGO COUPLE DOZEN PEOPLE
TOTALLY DESTROY EVERYTHING,
CONSTITUTION AND EVERYTHING, AND
YOU COUNCIL NELSON, VERY QUIET.
YOU NEVER QUIET WHEN I SPEAKING.
WHAT DOES -- WHAT DOES YOU
CHOICE TO UNKIND PEOPLE
DIFFERENT FROM ANOTHER BECAUSE
COUNCIL SOLVENT, SAME FASCIST
LIKE YOU.
>> THANK YOU. CAN WE GET --
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON AND
MEMBERS OF SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL,
MY NAME IS RACHEL SNELL. I'M
TESTIFYING PROUDLY AGAINST THE
PROPOSAL TO ROLL BACK RENTERS
AND ETHICS PROTECTIONS AT A TIME
WHEN VOTERS ALREADY FEEL DIVIDED
FROM THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS.
ROLLING BACK ETHICS PROTECTIONS
WILL INCREASE A LACK OF TRUST IN
YOUR CONSTITUENTS. YOU'VE HEARD
HUNDREDS OF TESTIMONIES AND
PROTESTS AND CHANTS THAT YOU NOT
GO AGAINST THE WILL OF THE
PEOPLE, PEOPLE THAT ELECTED YOU
TO OFFICE. WHY CHANGE A SYSTEM
THAT'S WORKED FINE FOR DECADES?
IF YOU DISREGARD THE NEEDS OF
CONSTITUENTS, THE VOICES WILL
BECOME LOUDER BEYOND THESE
CHAMBERS. IF YOU DON'T WANT
PEOPLE ENGAGING IN DISRUPTIVE
BEHAVIOR IN CITY HALL, DON'T
ENGAGE IN DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR BY
UNROLLING ETHICS PROTECTIONS. IF
YOU DO, THE JOKE'S GOING TO BE
ON YOU.
>> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME'S
EDDIE LYNN. I'M A PROUD BEACON
HILL RENT. TRUST IN GOVERNMENT
IS AT AN ALL TIME LOW. WE SHOULD
BE RESTORING TRUST IN LOCAL
GOVERNMENT BY STRENGTHENING OUR
ETHICS RULES. I'VE SPOKEN WITH
HUNDREDS OF DISTRICT 2 RESIDENTS
AND FOLKS ACROSS THE CITY
RECENTLY. NOT A SINGLE ONE WHO
HAS HEARD OF THIS PROPOSAL
SUPPORTS IT. OUR CURRENT SYSTEM
IS DESIGNED TO UPHOLD STATUS QUO
FOR THE WEALTHY. ALLOWING
COUNCILMEMBERS WHO ARE LANDLORDS
AND BUSINESS OWNERS TO VOTE ON
LEGISLATION IN THEIR OWN
FINANCIAL INTERESTS FURTHER
DISENFRANCHISES RENTERS,
WORKERS, AND MARGINALIZED
COMMUNITIES. WE MUST MAINTAIN
OUR CURRENT STRONG ETHICAL
STANDARDS. TRUMP AND HIS CRONIES
ARE ENGAGED IN UNPRECEDENTED
CORRUPTION. WE SHOULD BE HOLDING
THE LINE, NOT MAKING IT EASIER
FOR CORRUPTION TO HAPPEN HERE,
TOO. PLEASE VOTE NO ON ROLLING
BACK ETHICS RULES AND STAND UP
FOR THE PEOPLE AND GOOD
GOVERNANCE IN OUR CITY. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU. ] CROWD CHANTING ]
>> NEXT PERSON COME ON DOWN,
NUMBER 4, PLEASE.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON,
COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME IS CHRIS
JOHNSTON AND I'M A MID
SUPERVISOR AT DOWNTOWN SEATTLE
ASSOCIATION, METROPOLITAN
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. I'M HERE
TO VOICE STRONG SUPPORT FOR
BRINGING IKE DIGITAL KIOSKS TO
DOWNTOWN SEATTLE. THESE KIOSKS
WILL DRAMATICALLY IMPROVE WAY
FINDING, THE INTERACTIVE
REALTIME INFO WILL BE BENEFICIAL
FOR ALL. THE 108,000 DOWNTOWN
RESIDENTS, 335,000 DOWNTOWN
WORKERS, AND 9.72 MILLION ANNUAL
VISITORS. IN 2024 MID
AMBASSADORS PROVIDED 50,000
CONCIERGE SERVICE INTERACTIONS.
KIOSKS WILL CONNECT PEOPLE TO
LOCAL BUSINESSES, EVENTS, AND
CULTURAL SPOTS, DRIVING FOOT
TRAFFIC IN SUPPORT OF A DOWN
ECONOMY. I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT
THE INSTALLATION OF IKE KIOSKS
TO SUPPORT AN EVEN MORE
WELCOMING AND INVITING CITY FOR
ALL.
>> THANK YOU.
[ CROWD CHANTING ]
>> GO AHEAD, PLEASE. PLEASE
BEGIN.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M KURT
PAINTER AND I REPRESENT LOCAL
SEATTLE. WE'RE A LOCAL SIGNAGE
BUSINESS. WE HAVE TRIED
UNSUCCESSFULLY TO ENTER OUR OWN
PROPOSAL FOR DIGITAL SIGNAGE
KIOSK IN SEATTLE. DESPITE BEING
IGNORED BY THE DOWNTOWN SEATTLE
ASSOCIATION, THE MAYOR'S OFFICE
AND YOUR OWN OFFICE DESPITE
REPEATED ATTEMPTS. THE
OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF
SEATTLITES OPPOSE THIS CONCEPT.
THE TECHNOLOGY IS ANTIQUATED TO
SAY THE LEAST. WAY FINDING IS
CONTENT THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN
RELEVANT IN 1999 BUT NOT 2025.
I'M ASKING YOU TO STOP THIS IN
ITS TRACKS OR AT LEAST PAUSE THE
PROCESS SO A COMPETITIVE
ENVIRONMENT CAN TAKE PLACE. IF
YOU ARE GOING TO LITTER THE
STREETS AND EYES OF SEATTLE, WHY
NOT USE A TRULY LOCAL COMPANY
AND PROVIDE TRULY LOCAL BENEFIT
FOR SOMETHING THAT WILL BE HERE
LONG AFTER EVENTS LIKE THE WORLD
CUP. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ]
>> PLEASE BEGIN.
>> ARE YOU READY? [ CROWD
CHANTING ]
>> ARE YOU READY? WHENEVER
YOU'RE READY.
>> HI. MY NAME IS AUSTIN SHEA
AND I'M A RENTER IN DISTRICT 7
AND I STAUNCHLY OPPOSE PROPOSED
CHANGES TO THE ETHICS CODE THAT
WILL UNDERMINE THE TRUST BETWEEN
THE COUNCIL AND ITS
CONSTITUENTS. YOU ARGUE THE
PURPOSE OF THE BILL IS TO ENSURE
EVERY DISTRICT HAS
REPRESENTATION, BUT PASSING THIS
LEGISLATION WITHOUT ALLOWING US
TO VOTE ON IT DOES THE OPPOSITE.
THE RECENT ACTIONS OF THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAVE BEGUN TO
ERODE THE TRUST IN OUR
INSTITUTIONS. WE KNOW TO KNOW
THAT OUR CITY'S WITH US, NOT
AGAINST US. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT UP?
>> HI. HOWARD DALE, DISTRICT 7.
SO THIS BILL NEEDS TO BE HELD
BACK. IT SHOULD BE VOTED DOWN,
BUT IT ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE HELD
BACK. ON MARCH 5th, 2025, THE
SEEC SAID THERE ARE NUMEROUS
EXAMPLES THAT SHOWED SEATTLE'S
CURRENT ETHICS LAW IS A BIT OF
AN OUTLIER. THAT WAS SIMPLY
FALSE INFORMATION. 87% OF THE
PEOPLE LIVING ON THE WEST COAST
LIVE UNDER LOCAL OR STATE SYSTEM
OF RECUSAL. ON A STATE LEVEL THE
PERCENTAGE IS 100%. IT'S IN THE
WASHINGTON CONSTITUTION SINCE
1879 THAT ALL STATE LEGISLATORS
NEED TO RECUSE THEMSELVES, BUT
YET SEATTLE WANTS A DIFFERENT
RULE. ALSO YOU WERE LIED TO WHEN
IT WAS SUGGESTED BY DIRECTOR
BARNETT THAT EAST COAST CITIES
OR MASSACHUSETTS HAS SOME
DIFFERENT KIND OF RECUSAL LAWS.
IN FACT, MASSACHUSETTS HAS HAD
RECUSAL FOR ALL LEVELS OF
GOVERNMENT FOR DECADES. SO
AGAIN, YOU WERE FACED WITH A LOT
OF MISINFORMATION. THE LAST
AMENDMENT WAS JUST POSTED
YESTERDAY AT 5:26.
>> THANK YOU, SIR.
>> YOU NEED TO WITHDRAW THIS
LEGISLATION.
>> THANK YOU. YOUR TIME IS UP. [
CROWD CHANTING ]
>> ARE YOU READY? [ CROWD
CHANTING ]
>> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS
MICHAEL WOODY, CHIEF STRATEGY
OFFICER AT BUSINESS SEATTLE.
I'M HERE TO VOICE STRONG
SUPPORT FOR THE RESOLUTION 32170
AND THE TERM PERMIT ORDINANCE
WHICH TOGETHER WOULD ADVANCE THE
INSTALLATION OF INTERACTIVE WAY
FINDING KIOSKS IN OUR DOWNTOWN
CORE AND PARTICIPATING
NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICTS.
THESE KIOSKS ARE A DYNAMIC TOOL
TO ENHANCE THE VISITOR
EXPERIENCE AND PROMOTE LOCAL
BUSINESSES AND SUPPORT THE
BROADER ECONOMIC RECOVERY. IN
2024 WE WELCOMED 40 MILLION
VISITORS WHO SPENT OVER $8.8
BILLION IN KING COUNTY AND
SUPPORTED OVER 68,000 LOCAL
JOBS, BUT OUR RESEARCH SHOWS
MANY VISITORS ARRIVAL WITHOUT A
DETAILED PLAN AND THEY REALLY
BOOK LODGING AHEAD OF TIME. SO
THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET
THEM AROUND THE COMMUNITY AND TO
SPEND MONEY IN OUR LOCAL
BUSINESSES. WE SEE THESE KIOSKS
AS AN EXTENSION OF OUR VISITOR
INFORMATION CENTERS, BRINGING
TIMELY INFORMATION TO STREET
LEVEL.
>> THANK YOU.
>> WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO SUPPORT
THE LEGISLATION.
>> THANK YOU. NUMBER 9 AND 10
AND THEN TEN REMOTE.
>> THANK YOU. I'M NATURE
FREEMAN SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION
TO THE PROPOSED CHANGES IN THE
ETHICS CODE. I AM A MEMBER OF
THE BOARD OF WEIL AND OF SHARE
BESIDES BEING A PARTICIPANT.
I'VE ALSO BEEN A MEMBER OF THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF REAL
CHANGE AND OF THE LOW INCOME
HOUSING INSTITUTE. ALL OF THOSE
AND EVERY OTHER NONPROFIT THAT I
KNOW OF HAS A CODE OF ETHICS
WHICH SAYS IF YOU HAVE AN
INTEREST, A CONFLICT OF
INTEREST, YOU HAVE TO DECLARE IT
AND RECUSE YOURSELF. THE
DECISIONS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AFFECT MORE PEOPLE THAN THE
DECISIONS OF ANY OTHER
NONPROFIT. THAT IS A REASON FOR
STRENGTHENING YOUR ETHICS, NOT
WEAKENING THEM.
>> THANK YOU.
[ CROWD CHANTING ]
>> PLEASE APPROACH THE MIC.
>> ALEX, PLEASE SIT DOWN. NUMBER
10, PLEASE COME UP.
>> BY CHANTING IN BETWEEN
SPEAKERS, YOU'RE ENGAGING IN
DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR AND DELAYING
THE ORDERLY PROGRESS WHICH IS
NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH COUNCIL
RULES. [ CROWD
>> NUMBER 10, COME DOWN,
ELIZABETH STANTON.
>> I WANT TO THANK THE COUNCIL
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK
TODAY AND ALSO TO HISTORY OF RET
FOR WAYNE BARNETT, BUT I
ABSOLUTELY DISAGREE WITH HIM ON
THIS ISSUE. YOU LOOK ACROSS THE
COUNTRY AND WHAT WE'RE FACING
TODAY IS THE GUARDRAILS ARE
GONE. OUR CITIZENS ARE BEING
YANKED OFF THE STREET, PEOPLE
BORN HERE, AND IS NOT OUT OF THE
COUNTRY TO PRISONS. WE CANNOT
LET THIS GUARDRAIL GO. WE NEED
TO KEEP THE ETHICS RULE IN
PLACE. THANK YOU. T
>> THANK YOU.
>> WE WILL NOW PROCEED TO REMOTE
COMMENT SPEAKERS. [ CROWD
CHANTING ]
GO AHEAD.
>> NOW I'M GOING TO GO TO TEN
REMOTE SPEAKERS. FIRST REMOTE
CALLER IS GOING TO BE PETER
CONDITT. PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO
UNMUTE YOURSELF. THANK YOU.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS PETER
CONDITT IN DISTRICT 6. FIRST, I
ASK THAT YOU REJECT THE
RESOLUTION TO PRIVATIZE SIDEWALK
SPACE. THE NONCONSENSUAL KIOSKS
ON SIDEWALKS THAT ARE ALREADY
TOO NARROW WOULD STEAL OUR
ATTENTION IN THE NAME OF
CORPORATE PROFIT AND SHOULD BE
BANNED. I ALSO ASK YOU REJECT
BILL 109278. TELLING US YOU'RE
GOING TO BENEFIT FINANCIALLY
FROM A VOTE AND PROCEEDING TO
TAKE THAT VOTE DOES NOT MAKE
YOUR ACTION ETHICAL. IT MAKES
YOUR MONEY GRAB MORE BRAZEN. I
ASK THAT YOU REJECT IN
PARTICULAR AMENDMENT 2B. IF AND
WHEN LANDLORDS STAND TO BENEFIT
FROM AN UPCOMING BILL, AMENDMENT
2B COULD REQUIRE RENTERS ON
COUNCIL TO RECUSE THEMSELVES,
SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THEY ARE
LESS FINANCIALLY IMPACTED THAN
OTHER MEMBERS OF THE SAME
PROFESSION, IE, COUNCILMEMBERS
WHO OWN LAND. THIS WOULD GIVE
COUNCILMEMBERS EVEN MORE POWER.
SHAME ON YOU, CATHY MOORE. I
HOPE THE COUNCIL REJECTS YOUR
UNETHICAL BILL.
>> PLEASE PROCEED WITH THE
INSTRUCTIONS.
>> NEXT REMOTE SPEAKER, MARSHALL
BENDER. PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO
UNMUTE YOURSELF. THANK YOU.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS MARSHALL
BENDER AND I AM A RENTER IN
DISTRICT 5. I'M TALKING TO THE
COUNCIL TODAY TO ASK YOU TO
DISAPPROVE OF THE PROPOSED
ETHICS CODE AND VOTE DOWN HER
BILL AS WELL AS COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH TO CHANGE THE
LEGISLATION. LOWERING ETHICAL
STANDARDS TO ALLOW ELECTED
OFFICIALS LIKE YOURSELVES TO DO
THEIR SELF-DEAL IS A TERRIBLE
IDEA AND MOST LIKELY
UNCONSTITUTIONAL IN WASHINGTON
STATE. IF THIS CHANGE PASSES,
COUNCILMEMBERS THAT OWN PROPERTY
WILL BE ALLOWED TO DISCLOSE THE
CONFLICT OF INTEREST RATHER THAN
RECUSE THEMSELVES FROM VOTE AND
THAT MEANS ALL YOU BIG MONEY
GRABBERS, WHATEVER WILL HAVE ALL
THE POWER AND EVERYBODY ELSE IN
THE CITY WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE
LESS. THAT'S NOT GOING TO SPELL
OUT WELL FOR YOUR POLITICAL
CAREER OR THE TRUST CONSTITUTE
WENTS HAVE IN YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE, I'D LIKE TO EXPRESS HOW
DISAPPOINTING THIS IS YOU WOULD
PROPOSE THIS AND HOW SHAMEFUL
YOU ARE AS A POLITICIAN AND I
LOOK FORWARD TO ALL OF YOU
LOSING YOUR SEATS IN THE COMING
ELECTION. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
>> WHY DON'T YOU READ THE NEXT
THREE SPEAKERS.
>> YES. THE NEXT THREE REMOTE
SPEAKERS WILL BE COLEMAN MILLER,
B.J. LAST, AND MICHAEL STEWART.
COLEMAN MILLER, PLEASE PRESS
STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF.
>> HI. MY NAME'S COLEMAN
MILLER. I LIVE IN DISTRICT 2.
THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEAK TODAY. I'M HERE TO DEMAND
THE CITY COUNCIL REJECT
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE'S CHANGE TO
THE CONFLICT CAN OF INTEREST
RULES. I RESPOND THE CITY
COUNCIL FULL OF LANDLORDS AND
BUSINESS OWNERS IS ALREADY
UNREPRESENTATIVE OF OUR
COMMUNITY. IF THE COUNCIL REALLY
CARED ABOUT TRUE REPRESENTATION,
THEY WOULD PASS CAMPAIGN FINANCE
REFORMS TO ENSURE ALL SEATTLITES
WOULD HAVE A FAIR CHANCE FOR
OFFICE. THEY WOULD MAKE IT
EASIER FOR THE MARGINALIZED TO
MAKE THEIR VOICES HEARD AND MAKE
IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR CERTAIN
COUNCILMEMBERS TO CIRCUMVENT.
INSTEAD THIS LEGISLATION HAS
BEEN PUT FORTH THIS LEGISLATION
WHICH ONLY SERVES TO GREASE THE
WHEELS. IT'S TIME FOR THE CITY
COUNCIL TO PUT ITS MONEY WHERE
ITS MOUTH IS, NOT THE OTHER WAY
AROUND. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT, B.J. LAST, CAN YOU
PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE
YOURSELF. THANK YOU.
>> NAME IS B.J. LAST, A BALLARD
HOMEOWNER AND I OPPOSE THE
CHANGE TO ETHICS CODE WHICH
LITERALLY NO ONE ACTUALLY
SUPPORTS THIS OTHER THAN
APPARENTLY SOME COUNCILMEMBERS.
I ALSO OPPOSE THE RESOLUTION FOR
THE KIOSKS. YOU ALL CALL THEM
KIOSKS. THEY'RE NOT. THEY'RE
BILLBOARDS. THEIR PRIMARY
FUNCTION IS TO DISPLAY ADS.
THAT'S WHAT THEY DO. THEY ARE
BIG BRIGHT BILLBOARDS THAT THE
DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION
WANTS TO PUT IN THE MIDDLE OF
OUR SIDEWALKS AND MAKE OUR
SIDEWALKS EVEN MORE LITTERING
THEM A LOT, WHICH IS A NIGHTMARE
FOR ANYONE THAT HAS MOBILITY
ISSUES BECAUSE OUR SIDEWALKS ARE
ALREADY REALLY CROWDED, A WAY TO
MAKE THE CITY EVEN LESS FRIENDLY
AND WELCOMING TO PEOPLE WITH
MOBILITY ISSUES. THEY'RE ALSO
REALLY, REALLY BRIGHT LIGHTS
RIGHT AT EYE LEVEL. SO THEY'LL
DISTRACT DRIVERS BECAUSE ADS ARE
MEANT TO BE EYE CATCHING AND
THIS CREATES ISSUES FOR PEOPLE
SENSITIVE TO BRIGHT LIGHTS
MAKING IT HARDER FOR THEM TO BE
OUTSIDE IN THEIR OWN CITY. WI-FI
IS NOT A BENEFIT THAT YOU HAVE
TO STAND IN THE MIDDLE OF THE
SIDEWALK TO ACCESS. IT'S NOT
USEFUL. IF YOU CARE ABOUT
DIGITAL --
>> NEXT THREE, WE'LL HAVE
MICHAEL STEWART. [ CROWD
CHANTING ]
>> YOU ARE CONTINUALLY ENGAGING
IN DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR. IT'S
MAKING IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR US
TO HEAR THE PEOPLE SPEAKING
REMOTELY.
>> NEXT THREE WE HAVE MICHAEL
STEWART, RED REDD AND ALBERTO
ALVAREZ. MICHAEL STEWART, PLEASE
PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF.
THANK YOU.
>> MY NAME IS MICHAEL STEWART. I
SERVE AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
BOYER CHILDREN'S COMPANY, THE
LARGEST PROVIDER OF EARLY
SUPPORT FOR INFANTS AND TODDLERS
IN SEATTLE. I HAVE A STRONG
SUPPORT FOR THE BRIDGE PROGRAM,
A VITAL RESOURCE FOR YOUNG
CHILDREN WITH DEVELOPMENTAL
DELAYS. THIS PROGRAM IS
CURRENTLY FUNDED BY THE
SWEETENED BEVERAGE TAX. THE
BRIDGE PROGRAM IS FACING
SIGNIFICANT FUNDING REDUCTIONS
RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMUNITY
ADVISORY BOARD FOR TRANSITION TO
THE FAMILY, EDUCATION, PRESCHOOL
AND PROMISE LEVY WHICH IS UP FOR
RENEWAL. I STRONGLY URGE THE
COUNCIL TO SUPPORT THIS
RECOMMENDATION AND ENSURE EARLY
LEARNING PROGRAMS LIKE BRIDGE
ARE INCORPORATED INTO THE NEXT
FETP LEVY. DOING SO WILL HELP
SECURE SAVING LONG TERM FUNDING
FOR THIS CRITICAL SERVICE. THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION OF THIS REQUEST
AND CONTINUED COMMITMENT TO
EARLY LEARNING IN OUR COMMUNITY.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT WE'LL HAVE
RED REDD, FOLLOWING RED REDD,
ALBERTO ALVAREZ AND ELDON TA.
PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE
YOURSELF. THANK YOU.
>> HELLO AND GOOD AFTERNOON,
SEATTLE VOTERS. SB120978 ISN'T
JUST BAD POLICY. IT'S A
TRUMP-STYLE CORRUPTION,
DISMANTLING OVERSIGHT, GUTTING
ETHICS AND REIS RIGHTING THE
RULES TO PROTECT POWER. THIS IS
POLITICAL INSIDER TRAINING. IF A
CORPORATION DID THIS, THE FEC
WOULD BE AT THEIR DOOR, BUT WHEN
POLITICIANS RIG THE SYSTEM FOR
THEMSELVES, THEY CALL IT REFORM.
WHO DOES THIS ACTUALLY HELP? NOT
VOTERS DROWNING IN UNAFFORDABLE
HOUSING, NOT WORKERS STRUGGLING
TO MAKE ENDS MEET, JUST THE
PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM, INSULATING
THEMSELVES FROM CONSEQUENCES. IF
YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE, YOU
SHOULDN'T FEAR ACCOUNTABILITY.
PUSHING THIS BILL PROVES YOU DO.
LET'S BE CLEAR. HISTORY WILL
REMEMBER THIS VOTE. WILL YOU BE
THE COUNCIL THAT STOOD FOR
INTEGRITY OR THE ONE THAT
LEGALIZED CORRUPTION? BILL CB
120978, KILL IT. IF YOU DON'T.
THE PUBLIC WILL HOLD YOU
ACCOUNTABLE AT THE BALLOT BOX,
IN THE COURTS AND ON THE
STREETS. THE CHOICE IS YOURS. [
CROWD CHANTING ]
>> NEXT WE HAVE ALBERTO ALVAREZ.
CAN YOU PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO
UNMUTE YOURSELF. THANK YOU. [
CROWD CHANTING ]
>> COUNCILMEMBER CATHY MOORE,
YOU ARE NOT PROUD OF THIS BILL
BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOT MENTIONED
IT AT ALL IN ANY OF YOUR
NEWSLETTERS. ROLLING BACK RULES
OF ETHICS TO ALLOW FOR MORE
CORRUPTION WOULD UNDERMINE WHAT
LITTLE TRUST WE HAVE IN THIS
COUNCIL. SELF-FUELING,
SELF-INTEREST, AND
SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS WILL INFLICT
SEVERE DAMAGE TO THE PROTECTIONS
OF PUBLIC THAT WE ALL DEPEND ON.
HARM AND CHAOS BY WEALTHY
POLITICIANS IS NOT HYPOTHETICAL.
IT IS A FACT. NO ONE ON THIS
COUNCIL IS IMMUNE TO CORRUPTION.
THIS LEGISLATION GOES FAR BEYOND
ALLOWING A SMALL GROUP OF
LANDLORDS TO LINE THEIR POCKETS.
GOD ONLY KNOWS WHAT THE FUTURE
CITY COUNCILS WOULD DO IF GIVEN
FREE REIN TO ENRICH THEMSELVES.
LEGALIZED CORRUPTION IS NOT
SOMETHING THE PUBLIC HAS EVER
VOTED FOR. COUNCILMEMBER CATHY
MOORE, TAKE DOWN YOUR BILL.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ]
>> NEXT CAN WE GET ELDON TA. CAN
YOU PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE
YOURSELF. [ CROWD CHANTING ]
>> STOP.
>> HEY, ELDON, DO YOU MIND
PRESSING STAR 6?
>> YES. MY NAME IS ELDON, COO AT
WELCOME PARK.
>> WE CANNOT HEAR PEOPLE.
>> WHO NEEDS TO BE THROWN OUT?
SENATOR NELSON.
>>.
>> THEY ARE DISRUPTING BEHAVIOR
AND DELAYING THE ORDERLY
PROGRESS OF THIS MEETING ONLY
TAKING TIME AWAY FROM SUBSEQUENT
SPEAKERS. GO AHEAD.
>> CAN YOU PLEASE PRESS STAR 6
TO UNMUTE YOURSELF.
>> CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?
>> YES.
>> MY NAME IS ELDON TAM, COO OF
FRIENDS OF PARK. I'M CALLING TO
SUPPORT THE DOWNTOWN DIGITAL
KIOSK PROPOSALS. THE DIGITAL
KIOSKS WILL BRING A MULTIPLE OF
BENEFITS TO DOWNTOWN, INCREASE
PUBLIC SAFETY, INCREASE PUBLIC
AMENITIES, INCLUDING FREE WI-FI,
SUPPORT LOCAL BUSINESSES WITH A
DIRECTORY WITH A CENTER IN EACH
LOCATION, SUPPORT THE ACTIVE
DOWNTOWN WITH THE ARTS AND
CULTURE COMMUNITY WITH SPACE
RESERVED ON THESE PLATFORMS FOR
THE CITY AND NONPROFIT TO
PROMOTE THE WONDERFUL DOWNTOWN
ACTIVITIES. THEY'RE ALSO
SELF-FUNDING WITH NO CITY
RESOURCES TO MAINTAIN OR OPERATE
THEM. I THINK THESE ARE AN
ESSENTIAL PART OF THE CONTINUED
POSITIVE PERMITS IN DOWNTOWN AND
I STRONGLY URGE APPROVAL OF THIS
PROPOSAL. THANK YOU.
NEXT IS JOSIE EBULHAR, A SOCIAL
WORKER AND MEMBER OF LOCAL 889
AND MEMBER OF WORKERS STRIKE
BACK. I HAVE SEEN FIRSTHAND HOW
THESE PROTECTIONS HAVE SAVED
CHILDREN FROM LIVING ON THE
STREET AND KEPT FAMILIES
TOGETHER. IT'S SO SHAMEFUL
THESE SO-CALLED PROGRESSIVES ARE
OBVIOUSLY SUPPORTING THIS
LEGISLATION FOR YOUR OWN
INTERESTS. ALMOST, IF NOT ALL OF
THE COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE RECEIVED
DOLLARS FROM CORPORATE PACS. THE
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS
HAVE GIVEN ALMOST $150,000 TO
COUNCILMEMBERS HOLLINGSWORTH,
AND RIVERA. MANY OF YOU WERE
ELECTED WITH THE SUPPORT OF
LABOR, BUT TO CALL YOURSELVES
PRO LABOR WHILE TO ENTERTAIN
THIS LEGISLATION IS A LIE AND
SHOULD NEVER SEE A MINUTE IN
THIS COUNCIL CHAMBER AGAIN.
>> THANK YOU.
>> PLEASE PROCEED. JUST GO
AHEAD.
>> NUMBERS 11 TO 20 FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT.
>> YOU'RE ENGAGING IN
DISORDERLY CONDUCT WHICH
INCLUDES ACCORDING TO COUNCIL
RULE 11D1B OUTBURST FROM MEMBERS
OF THE PUBLIC NOT RECOGNIZED BY
THE PRESIDING OFFICER FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT AND DELAYING THE ORDERLY
CONDUCT OR PROGRESS OF A PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD.
>> CAN WE GET NUMBERS 11 TO 20
FOR PUBLIC COMMENTERS, PLEASE.
COME ON DOWN, PLEASE. THANK YOU.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS CONNOR
NASH. I'M A RENTER IN DISTRICT
3 AND I AM AGAINST CHANGES TO
THE ETHICS CODES. IT SHOWS THAT
YOU ALL ARE JUST CORRUPT BY
CHANGING THESE ETHICS CODES AND
FIGHTING AGAINST RENTERS'
RIGHTS AND ALL OTHER CONFLICTS
OF INTEREST THAT YOU ALL HAVE.
THE CITY DOES NOT TRUST OUR CITY
COUNCIL AND THIS IS MORE PROOF
THAT WHY WE SHOULD NOT TRUST ANY
OF YOU EXCEPT FOR A SELECT FEW
OF OUR COUNCILMEMBERS ON HERE.
YOU ARE NO BETTER THAN THE
FASCIST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WHO
IS FLOUTING ETHICS RULES IN
ORDER TO ENRICH THEMSELVES.
YOU'RE NO BETTER THAN NANCY
PELOSI AND MARJORIE TAYLOR
GREENE WHO FLOUT ETHICS RULES TO
ENRICH THEMSELVES THROUGH
STOCKS. YOU ARE ALL TERRIBLE
COUNCILMEMBERS AND ALL OF YOU
SHOULD BE THROWN OUT FOR YOUR
TERRIBLE POLICIES THAT YOU DO.
YOU ALL ACTIVELY IGNORE
CONSTITUENTS AND TRY TO ENRICH
THEMSELVES AND YOU ALL NEED TO
BE THROWN OUT AND FINALLY, I
WILL USE MY LAST 15 MINUTES TO
SAY WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE
UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO?
WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER
ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? WHEN
RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER
ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? [ CROWD
CHANTING ].
>> WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE
UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? [
CROWD CHANTING ].
>> NUMBER 12, COME ON DOWN,
PLEASE. THANK YOU.
>> MY NAME IS ELLEN SOLLIN, A 35
YEAR RESIDENT OF SEATTLE. I'M
HERE TO OPPOSE THE DIGITAL
KIOSKS. YOUR ORDINANCE HAS A
NUMBER OF FATAL FLAWS YOU SHOULD
BE MADE AWARE OF. ONE, THERE'S
NO PRECONTACT RESTRICTIONS ON
ADVERTISING CONTENT OR
GUIDELINES WHICH MEANS THE ADS
WILL BE ALCOHOL, SODA,
POTENTIALLY MARIJUANA AND BEER.
THESE VIOLATE THE KINDS OF
THINGS WE'RE TRYING TO DO IN
OUR PUBLIC REALM. SECOND,
THERE'S NO PROHIBITION ON
VIDEO. THESE USED TO BE STILL
IMAGES. THESE KIOSKS NOW HAVE
THE CAPACITY FOR MOVING IMAGES,
THROWS ALL OF YOUR DRIVER
DISTRACTION STUFF OUT THE
WINDOW. THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT
FOR THEM TO PAY FOR ELECTRICITY.
THERE'S HUGE POTENTIAL FOR
LITIGATION. THERE ARE NO
PROVISIONS FOR THE TERMINATION
PRIOR TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE
PERMIT FOR ANY REASON, NO
ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM FOR
MAINTENANCE, NO PROVISIONS FOR
DSA AND IKE TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL
REPORTING AND THE NEXT STEP IS
LARGE ADVERTISING SCREENS ON
BUILDINGS.
>> THANK YOU.
>> I HAVE MY LETTER TO THE
EDITOR PUBLISHED BY THE SEATTLE
TIMES AND COPIES OF THE REPORT.
>> THANK YOU. WE'LL GIVE IT TO
COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
>> NUMBER 13, COME ON DOWN.
>> HI, I'M PAULA REESE. I'VE
BEEN A BUSINESS OWNER HERE FOR
45 YEARS. I'VE HAD TO DEAL WITH
IKE FOR 15 YEARS IN OTHER
CITIES. PLEASE VOTE THEM DOWN.
THEY'RE SIMPLY A TOE HOLD. YOU
NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHO YOU'RE
GETTING INTO A RELATIONSHIP
WITH. THEY DO LARGE DIGITAL
BUILDING FRONTS AND ALSO
STRUCTURES TEN STORIES TALL IN
MIAMI THAT'S EXTREMELY
CONTENTIOUS. LIKE L.A., WE CAN
SAY NO UP FRONT BECAUSE WE KNOW
WE'RE GOING TO GET LITIGATED
AGAINST AT GREAT EXPENSE BY ALL
THE LARGE MEDIA COMPANIES FROM
AROUND THE WORLD AND THEY
RIGHTFULLY SHOULD BECAUSE THEY
SPENT SEVEN YEARS WITH THE CITY
OF SEATTLE PRECOVID LOOKING AT
THE SAME DEAL, WHICH WAS A WAY
BETTER DEAL, AND THE PEOPLE SAID
NO JUST AS THEY DID IN THE
SEATTLE TIMES ARTICLE. OVER
2,300 PEOPLE OPPOSED THIS --
THANK YOU. I'LL LEAVE VISUALS.
>> PLEASE DO. THANK YOU. NEXT
NUMBER 14. COME ON DOWN, PLEASE.
WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
>> HELLO. I'M HERE TO SUPPORT
OUR ETHICS CODE AND IMPLORE YOU
ALL TO NOT CHANGE, TINKER WITH,
WATER DOWN OR REWRITE THE ETHICS
CODE TO BENEFIT THOSE ON THE
COUNCIL WHO WILL BENEFIT BECAUSE
THEY'RE LANDLORDS. OUR ETHICS
CODES HAVE BEEN IN PLACE 40
YEARS AND HOLD UP TO HIGH
STANDARDS LIKE CITIES LIKE
PORTLAND AND LOS ANGELES. ETHICS
CODE HELP TRUST THE VOTES MADE
BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND TO
PREVENT CORRUPTION AND IN
CLOSING, I WANT TO SAY THERE'S
UNBRIDLED CORRUPTION SPEWING
FROM THE WHITE HOUSE LIKE A
POISON AND WE DON'T WANT IT
HERE IN OUR CITY. I WANT YOU ALL
TO PROTECT OUR ETHICS CODES, NO
TO CORRUPTION. IT'S SIMPLE. I
WANT YOU ALL TO DO THE RIGHT
THING AND I WANT TO SAY
PERSONALLY I'M A RETIRED EARLY
CHILDHOOD EDUCATION TEACHER. I
HAVE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO OWN A
HOUSE IN THIS CITY AND I WILL
ALWAYS BE A RENTER AND I WANT
YOU TO KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF
HARD WORKING PEOPLE WHO CAN'T
AFFORD THE RENT BECAUSE THE
RENTS ARE TOO DAMN HIGH!
>> THANK YOU. WHENEVER YOU'RE
READY. [ CROWD CHANTING ]
>> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. [
CROWD CHANTING ]
>> MY NAME IS DEE POWERS AND I
AM A RENTER IN DISTRICT 3. I
OBJECT TO ANY CHANGES IN THE
CITY'S ETHICS CODE. SEATTLE'S
ETHICS RULES HAVE STOOD FOR 45
YEARS AS A MEASURE AGAINST
CORRUPTION. TO DISMANTLE THEM
NOW WHILE OUR COUNTRY IS REELING
FROM THE CORRUPTION, CHAOS, AND
AUTHORITARIANISM OF DONALD TRUMP
IS NOT JUST IRRESPONSIBLE, IT IS
A BETRAYAL OF THE PUBLIC TRUST.
THIS SIGNALS THAT THIS COUNCIL
MAY BE MORE INTERESTED IN
CONSOLIDATING POWER THAN IN
SERVING THE PEOPLE WITH
INTEGRITY. EVEN IF YOU BELIEVE
YOU CAN VOTE IMPARTIALLY,
THAT'S BESIDE THE POINT. TRUMP
ALSO CLAIMED TO BE ABOVE ETHICAL
SCRUTINY WHILE STACKING HIS
ADMINISTRATION WITH LOYALISTS
AND PROFITING FROM PUBLIC
OFFICE. THIS PROPOSAL OPENS THE
DOOR TO THE SAME KIND OF
SELF-SERVING BEHAVIOR. YOU ARE
NOT THE ONLY PEOPLE TO HAVE EVER
SERVED ON THIS COUNCIL AND YOU
WILL NOT BE THE LAST. GUTTING
MANDATORY MOVES AS ONE OF THE
LASTS MEANINGFUL PROTECTIONS
AGAINST CORRUPTION. WITHOUT IT
THERE IS NO REAL WAY TO PREVENT
PUBLIC OFFICIALS FROM ABUSING
THEIR POSITIONS FOR PERSONAL
GAIN. DO NOT CHANGE THE ETHICS
CODE!
>> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ]
WHEN RENTERS RIGHTS ARE UNDER
ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? FIGHT
BACK.
>> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
NUMBER 16.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS JEFF PAUL.
I AM A RENTER IN DISTRICT 3 AND
A PUBLIC SCHOOL EMPLOYEE IN
DISTRICT 7. I'M HERE TO OPPOSE
THE ETHICS CODE CHANGE. THE AS
AN EMPLOYEE WITH SEATTLE PUBLIC
SCHOOLS, I'M SUBJECT TO ETHICS
CODE I HAVE TO FOLLOW. I'M NOT
ALLOWED TO ACCEPT ANY GIFTS FROM
PARENTS ABOVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT
AND FOR A VERY SIMPLE REASON. WE
DON'T THINK OUR PUBLIC SERVANTS
SHOULD BE PROFITING FROM THEIR
POSITION, MAKES A LOT OF SENSE,
KEEPS US FROM BEING CORRUPT HOW
WE DEAL WITH DIFFERENT FAMILIES.
I THINK IT'S QUITE SHOCKING YOU
ALL WANT TO HAVE LOWER ETHICAL
STANDARDS THAN PUBLIC
SCHOOLTEACHERS AND IT'S AN
ABSOLUTE SHAME THAT YOU'RE NOT
ONLY DOING THIS ON ITS FACE, BUT
THE REASONS WHY ARE PRETTY
UNCONSCIONABLE. ONE OF THE
TENANT PROTECTIONS THAT SAYS
LOOKING TO BE REPEALED BECAUSE
OF THIS IS EVICTION PROTECTIONS
FOR SCHOOL-AGED FAMILIES AND
SCHOOL-AGED CHILDREN AND PUBLIC
TEACHERS. I KNOW FAMILIES WHO
BENEFITED FROM THIS. I'VE ALSO
SEEN FAMILIES BEFORE THIS WAS
PUT IN PLACE GET EVICTED AND
WATCH KIDS GO FROM MAKING As TO
FAILING OUT OF THEIR CLASSES
BECAUSE THEY WENT FROM HAVING NO
HOUSING. SHAME ON YOU AND THIS
SHOULD BE VOTED DOWN.
>> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ]
WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER
ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? STAND UP
FIGHT BACK.
>> YOU'RE DELAYING THE ORDERLY
CONDUCT OR PROGRESS OF THE
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
>> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY,
NUMBER 17.
>> GABRIEL JONES TO TALK ABOUT
ETHICS. I WANT TO SHARE A FUN
FACT I LEARNED THIS WEEK WITH
THE AUDIENCE BECAUSE THE
MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL ALREADY
TUNED ME OUT WHEN THEY SAW I WAS
SPEAKING. DID YOU KNOW THIS
COUNCIL MAKES 65.32 AN HOUR.
RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU DO? WOW,
WHAT A SURPRISE. YET THEY SEEK
TO MAKE MORE MONEY BY THROWING
PEOPLE ON THE STREET WHILE
THEY'RE IN SCHOOL AND CONTINUE
THE CYCLE OF POVERTY. SARA
NELSON WILL NOT LISTEN. THEY'VE
SHOWN TIME AND TIME AGAIN WHEN
WE TRY TO DO THINGS THE RIGHT
WAY. WHATEVER WE DO, SARA NELSON
WILL TEAR THEM DOWN TO ENRICH
HERSELF. WE AREN'T SCARED
BECAUSE WE WILL VOTE YOU OUT.
ANY OF YOU WHO VOTE FOR THIS, WE
WILL VOTE YOU OUT. THIS IS VERY,
VERY OBVIOUS. WE WILL FIGHT FOR
OUR COMMUNITIES AND PEOPLE AND
AT THE END OF THE DAY IF IT'S
NOT CLEAR BEFORE, WE'LL SAY IT
AGAIN. WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE
UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO?
STAND UP FIGHT BACK. WHEN
RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER
ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? [ CROWD
CHANTING ] STAND UP FIGHT BACK.
>> THANK YOU. ALEX, PLEASE SIT
DOWN.
>> ENGAGING IN BEHAVIOR OUT OF
ORDER IN THIS MEETING.
>> NUMBER 18, 19 AND 20, COME ON
DOWN, PLEASE.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS
ALEX FRANCIS, RENTER IN DISTRICT
4. I'M HERE TO URGE YOU TO VOTE
NO ON CHANGING OUR CITY'S ETHICS
CODES THAT STOOD FOR 45 YEARS.
WEAKENING THEM NOW ERODES PUBLIC
TRUST IN OUR LOCAL LEADERSHIP
AND MAKES US QUESTION WHOSE
INTEREST THIS COUNCIL TRULY
SERVES. ALTERING THESE RULES
COULD OPEN THE DOOR TO THE VERY
SELF-SERVING BEHAVIOR WE'VE
SEEN NATIONWIDE. WE CAN'T BE
SURE WHO WILL SERVE IN THE
FUTURE AND REMOVING MANDATORY
RECUSAL TAKES AWAY ONE OF OUR
STRONGEST SHIELDS AGAINST
CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS LEFT WITH
ETHICAL BREACHES INSTEAD OF
STOPPING THEM BEFORE THEY
HAPPEN. IT'S DEEPLY CONCERNING
SEATTLE ETHICS HAS NOT YET
COMPLETED ITS REVIEW, OFFERED A
FORMAL STANCE OR VOTED TO THESE
PROPOSED CHANGES. PROCEEDING
WITHOUT SHATTERS PUBLIC
CONFIDENCE AND SUGGESTS THIS
COUNCIL IS EVADING INDEPENDENT
SCRUTINY. DISCLOSURE ALONE IS
NOT TRUE ACCOUNTABILITY. IT'S
IMPOSSIBLE TO TRULY SERVE AND BE
ACCOUNTABLE TO OTHERS IF YOU
DETERMINE WHEN THE RULES APPLY
TO YOURSELF.
>> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING
].
>> IT'S DISRUPTING AND DELAYING
THE ORDERLY PROGRESS OF THIS
MEETING. GO AHEAD.
>> MY NAME IS KATE RUBEN. I'M
THE CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
SEATTLE AND VOTER AND RENTER IN
DISTRICT 2. I'M HERE TO URGE
YOU TO REJECT THE PROPOSED
CHANGE TO SEATTLE'S ETHICS CODE
TO ALLOW ELECTED OFFICIALS TO
VOTE WHEN THEY HAVE A CONFLICT
OF INTEREST. CHANGING THE
45-YEAR-OLD RULES MIDTERM
REGARDLESS OF YOUR INTENTION IS
A DIRECT VIOLATION OF PUBLIC
TRUST, ESPECIALLY NOW WHEN WE'RE
FACING UNPRECEDENTED INSTABILITY
AND CORRUPTION AT A FEDERAL
LEVEL. WE DON'T KNOW WHO WILL
BE IN YOUR SEATS IN THE FUTURE.
THIS WOULD REMOVE THE ONLY
MEANINGFUL SAFEGUARD THAT WOULD
PREVENT SELF-DEALING. WITHOUT
REQUIREMENTS TO STEP BACK FROM
CONFLICTS, CORRUPTION BECOMES A
CLEANUP JOB INSTEAD OF SOMETHING
WE PREVENT. ELECTED OFFICIALS
SHOULD BE HELD TO HIGHER ETHICAL
STANDARDS THAN THE OTHER CITY
EMPLOYEES, NOT WEAKER ONES.
PLEASE VOTE NO ON THIS BILL. I
ALSO URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON
CLOGGING UP OUR SIDEWALKS WITH
UGLY KIOSKS. THANK YOU. [ CROWD
CHANTING ].
>> QUIET IN THE HOUSE.
>> NUMBER 20. GO AHEAD.
>> HI. I'M CHAIR OF THE 34th
DISTRICT DEMOCRATS. SEATTLE'S
CURRENT CODE OF ETHICS IS CLEAR.
PUBLIC OFFICIALS MUST REMAIN
INDEPENDENT, IMPARTIAL, AND ACT
IN SERVICE OF THE PUBLIC GOOD.
SEATTLE'S DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS
STANDING LOUDLY, PROUDLY, AND
UNANIMOUSLY AGAINST THE PROPOSED
ROLLBACKS. THIS ISN'T A
DIFFICULT ETHICAL QUESTION.
IT'S SIMPLY A QUESTION OF WHY
YOU'RE HERE. CITY COUNCIL NEEDS
TO RETAIN ITS REQUIREMENTS TO
RECUSE, BUT YOU WON'T BECAUSE
YOU'RE HERE FOR POWER, NOT
PEOPLE, CORRUPTION, NOT
COMMUNITY. DEMOCRACY DEPENDS ON
TRUST. TRUST DEPENDS ON CLEAR,
ENFORCEABLE AND ENFORCED ETHICAL
STANDARDS. WE'RE LIVING IN A
TIME WHEN CYNICISM ABOUT
GOVERNMENT IS ALREADY
DANGEROUSLY HIGH. PEOPLE ARE
DESPERATE FOR LEADERS WHO ACT
WITH INTEGRITY AND SUPPORT FOR
THIS BILL DEMONSTRATES THESE
LEADERS ARE IN SHORT SUPPLY AT
CITY HALL. WE NEED MORE
TRANSPARENCY, NOT LESS, MORE
ACCOUNTABILITY, NOT LOOPHOLES
AND PUBLIC SERVICE, NOT
SELF-SERVICE. THANK YOU. [ CROWD
CHANTING ]
>> DELAYING THE CONTINUATION OF
OUR PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, WOULD YOU
LIKE ME TO RESUME IN-PERSON OR
GO BACK TO THE REMAINING THREE
VIRTUAL?
>> HOW MANY MORE PEOPLE ARE IN
LINE FOR IN PERSON IN THIS
BATCH?
>> THE LAST PERSON ENDED 11 AND
22.
>> OKAY. LET'S GO AHEAD WITH
THE LAST PERSON HERE AND THEN WE
WILL PROCEED TO THE REMOTE.
>> OKAY.
>> HI, COUNCIL. THANK YOU FOR
HAVING US TODAY. MY NAME'S
CHRIS MAKAI, DIRECTOR OF THE
WEST SEATTLE JUNCTION BIA HERE
TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF THE IKE
KIOSKS. I'M PRETTY EXCITED
ABOUT THEM. I KNOW YOU'VE HEARD
A LOT ABOUT THEIR AMAZING
CAPABILITIES, WAY FINDING,
SEARCHING, ALLOWING OUR LOCAL
PEOPLE WALKING DOWN THE STREET
TO DISCOVER NEW SHOPS AND
FINDING OUT ABOUT TRANSPORTATION
OPTIONS, BUT WHAT I'M REALLY
EXCITED ABOUT IS THE ABILITY TO
COMMUNICATE TO MY COMMUNITY
DIRECTLY. WE HAVE OVER 40 EVENTS
A YEAR IN THE WEST SEATTLE
JUNCTION AND TO BE ABLE TO
COMMUNICATE ABOUT THOSE ALONE
WOULD REALLY ACTIVATE OUR AREA
BY BRINGING PEOPLE INTO IT. IT
WOULD BENEFIT THE LOCAL
BUSINESSES. I'M IN SUPPORT OF
THESE. I'M EXCITED ABOUT THEM.
I HOPE YOU ARE AS WELL. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU. WE'LL GO FROM 21
TO 30 AFTER WE FINISH REMOTE
PUBLIC COMMENT.
>> I'M GOING TO TRANSITION TO
THE REMAINING FOUR IN REMOTE
PUBLIC COMMENTERS. ROBERT
MARVER, PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO
UNMUTE YOURSELF. THANK YOU.
>> HI. MY NAME IS ROBERT MARVER.
THIS IS MY FIRST TIME CALLING TO
A CITY COUNCIL MEETING. I'M
SPEAKING AGAINST COUNCIL BILL
120978. I THINK IT'S RIDICULOUS
THAT THE COUNCIL IS TRYING TO
REPEAL THE RECUSAL REPEAT
REQUIREMENT THAT HAS BEEN IN
PLACE FOR 45 YEARS. THE RECUSAL
REQUIREMENT HAS ONLY BEEN USED
NINE TIMES IN THE LAST 25 YEARS
FOR CITY COUNCIL. WHEN I HEAR
ARGUMENTS THAT SAY THIS CHANGE
WILL INCREASE DEMOCRATIC
PARTICIPATION, WHAT I HEAR ARE
LIES BEING SPREAD BY PEOPLE ON
THIS COUNCIL. IF I COULD SPEAK
TO SARA NELSON, YOU'VE ALREADY
LOST ENDORSEMENT FOR THE
DISTRICT DEMOCRATS AND IF YOU
VOTE YES, YOU WILL LOSE YOUR
NUMBER. THANK YOU. [ CROWD
CHANTING ] WHO DO THE LANDLORDS
LOVE? SARA NELSON.
>> NEXT WE'VE GOT JEANNIE CHUN.
STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF.
>> MY NAME IS JEANNIE CHUN AND
I'M THE CO-FOUNDER AND
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF SEATTLE
RESTAURANTS UNITED. I WANT TO
THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR THE TIME
TO HEAR FROM CONCERNED CITIZENS.
I'M HERE TO URGE YOU TO VOTE NO
ON THE ETHICS CODE RESOLUTION
BEFORE YOU. THIS RESOLUTION TO
CHANGE THE ETHICS CODE IS A
BLATANT ATTEMPT TO ALLOW
CORRUPTION FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
THAT ARE CURRENTLY LANDLORDS AND
LAWYERS TO PERSONALLY BENEFIT
FROM THEIR OWN VOTE. THE WORKERS
OF SMALL RESTAURANTS DESERVE TO
LIVE NEAR WHERE THEY WORK. THEY
DESERVE TO HAVE STABLE HOUSING
TO SURVIVE AND THRIVE IN THEIR
COMMUNITIES. THEY DESERVE THE
PEACE OF MIND KNOWING THEY WILL
NOT BE EVICTED AT A MOMENT'S
NOTICE. I HOPE THE REST OF THE
COMMITTEE SEES THE ATTEMPTS BY
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AND
PRESIDENT NELSON TO CHANGE THE
ETHICS CODE WILL NOT ERODE THE
TRUST OF THE ENTIRE COUNCIL, BUT
THE TRUST OF CITY EMPLOYEES ON
THE GROUND THAT WORK TO SERVE
OUR CONSTITUENTS ON A DAILY
BASIS. WE NEED A CITY COUNCIL
THAT WORKS FOR WORKING PEOPLE,
NOT PROTECT LANDLORDS, THAT
KEEPS COMMUNITIES SAFE BY NOT
ALLOWING EVICTIONS DURING THE
WINTER MONTHS. I HOPE THE
COUNCIL CAN SEE IT WITHIN
THEMSELVES TO SEE THE SLIMLY
VEILED --
>> THANK YOU, JEANNIE.
[ CROWD CHANTING ].
>> THANK YOU, DAVID, PLEASE
PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE YOURSELF.
>> TODAY SEATTLE CITY HALL IS A
SACRILEGE TO THE DEMOCRAT
PRINCIPLES WHERE GREEDY,
UNTRUSTWORTHY, BAD FAITH
REPRESENTATIVES ARE TRYING TO
CHANGE THE ETHICS RULES WORKING
WITH THE ETHICS COMMISSION
ADVISING HOW TO MANIPULATE THE
RULES TO APPEASE COUNCIL'S
BEHIND THE SCENES LOBBYING AND
INTIMIDATION. COUNCIL IS
CONSPIRING TO UNDERMINE ETHICS
TO GET AWAY WITH OPPRESSING THE
WORKING CLASS, BACKSTABBING THE
WORKERS AND SELLING OUT A
MULTITUDE OF GENERATIONS BY
LANDLORD TENANTS, RESTRICTIONS
ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND
SELF-GREEDY PERSONAL INVESTMENT.
THIS COUNCIL'S AMENDMENTS ARE
DOING THEIR BIDDING ATTEMPTING
TO CIRCUMVENT THE INTEGRITY OF
RULES, INTRODUCING LEGISLATION
TO CHANGE THE CONFLICT OF
INTEREST INTERPRETATION. THERE
IS UNFORGIVABLE. MAY YOU BE
PROTESTED AND CIVIL
DISOBEDIENTLY INTERRUPTED
THROUGHOUT THE REST OF YOUR
POLITICAL CAREER NO MATTER WHERE
YOU GO. ANYONE WHO VOTES FOR
THIS SHOULD RESIGN AND ANY
BUSINESS A PART OF THIS SHOULD
BE BOYCOTTED OR PROTESTED. WE'RE
BETTER OFF WITHOUT YOUR MISSED
LEADERSHIP.
>> AND THE LAST REMOTE SPEAKER,
CAN YOU PLEASE PRESS STAR 6. [
CROWD CHANTING ].
>> HEY, GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ]
WHO NEEDS TO BE THROWN OUT?
>> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY,
PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 TO UNMUTE
YOURSELF.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS ADRIAN.
I'M IN DISTRICT 2. I'M CALLING
TO URGE YOU ALL TO VOTE NO ON
THE PROPOSED ETHICS CHANGES.
RECUSALS AREN'T A NUISANCE.
THEY'RE A SAFEGUARD. REMOVING
THIS IS A DISPROTECTION AND
INVITES CORRUPTION AND
SELF-DEALING. SHAME ON YOU,
CATHY MOORE, FOR BEING A FRONT
PERSON FOR DEEP POCKETS AND NOT
FOR WORKING CLASS PEOPLE.
[ CROWD CHANTING ].
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, THAT
CONCLUDES -- [ CROWD CHANTING ].
>> I CAN HEAR YOU.
>> NUMBER 21 TO 30, WANT TO ALL
COME DOWN, PLEASE. IF YOU CAN
PLEASE STATE YOUR NUMBER AS
WELL.
>> 21. MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, MY
NAME IS KARL NELSON, A 16 YEAR
SEATTLE RENTER DISTRICT 4, SMALL
BUSINESS OWNER AND MEMBER OF THE
CEDAR CROSSING TENANTS
ASSOCIATION HERE TODAY AGAIN TO
EXPRESS MY DISAPPROVAL FOR THE
PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE CITY
ETHICS CODE. THE CODE HAS SERVED
THE CITY WELL FOR 40 YEARS AND
HELPED CREATE TRUST OF THE
ELECTORATE. IT'S AT A TIME WITH
CORRUPTION ON A NATIONAL LEVEL
AND WILL ONLY SERVE TO DAMAGE
THAT TRUST AND OPEN THE DOOR TO
RAMPANT STRIPPING AWAY WORKER
AND TENANT PROTECTIONS. IN
CONCLUSION, SEATTLE VOTERS ARE
NOT STUPID AND ALTHOUGH WE MAKE
MISTAKES, WE RARELY MAKE THEM
TWICE. I URGE YOU TO WITHDRAW
THE PROPOSED ETHICS CHANGES. [
CROWD CHANTING ] WHO NEEDS TO BE
THROWN OUT? RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE
UNDER ATTACK. WHAT DO WE DO?
>> GO AHEAD WHENEVER YOU'RE
READY. MY APOLOGIES.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS ACACIA
POTSMAN AND I'M A MEMBER OF
DISTRICT 4. COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA, YOU HAVE SAID YOU ARE
WORRIED THE LIMITATIONS OF THE
ETHICS CODE MIGHT LIMIT YOUR
ABILITY TO PROPERLY REPRESENT
YOUR CONSTITUENT. WELL, I AM
YOUR CONSTITUENT. IF YOU'RE
WORRIED ABOUT THIS MYSTERIOUS
CONTINGENT OF YOUR CONSTITUENTS
WHOSE VOICES ARE NOT
REPRESENTED, WHY HAS EVERY
FELLOW RESIDENT I'VE HEARD BEEN
OPPOSED TO THIS FLAGRANT
ROLLBACK OF VERY COMMON SENSE
ETHICS RULE? WHY HAS EVERY
NEIGHBOR I'VE SPOKEN TO BEEN
APPALLED FOR YOUR SUPPORT FOR
WHAT AMOUNTS TO LEGALIZED
CORRUPTION? IF YOU'RE TRULY
REPRESENTING THE WILL OF THESE
UNSEEN CONSTITUENTS AND NOT JUST
THE $57,000 YOU'VE RECEIVED IN
PAC DONATIONS FROM THE CORPORATE
REAL ESTATE LOBBY? WHERE ARE
THEY? I ENCOURAGE YOU TO LISTEN
TO THE COUNTLESS VOICES OF YOUR
CONSTITUENTS WHO HAVE BEEN BRAVE
ENOUGH TO SHOW THEIR CASES AND
TO SPEAK UP. VOTE NO ON THE
ROLLBACK OF THE ETHICS RULE.
>> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ]
>> AGAIN, YOUR FAILURE TO COMPLY
IS DIRECTLY AFFECTING THE
PROGRESS OF THIS MEETING.
>> MY NAME IS CHARLIE LA FAM,
THE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR OF
LABOR WHICH REPRESENTS 250,000
WORKING PEOPLE ACROSS SEATTLE
AND KING COUNTY. THE LABOR
COUNCIL IS VEHEMENTLY PROPOSED
TO THE ROLLBACK OF SEATTLE'S
ETHICS RULES. TRUSTING
GOVERNMENT IS AT HISTORIC LOWS.
IT'S TRUE FROM WASHINGTON, D.C.
DOWN TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ACROSS
THE COUNTRY. INSTEAD OF
RESTORING CONFIDENCE, THIS
PROPOSAL DOES THE OPPOSITE,
ALLOWING ELECTED OFFICIALS TO
VOTE ON POLICIES THEY STAND TO
PERSONALLY PROFIT FROM. I GET
IT, THAT THESE TYPES OF LAWS CAN
SLOW DOWN THE ACT OF GOVERNING.
THEY CAN BE FRUSTRATING, BUT
THEY ARE ESSENTIAL TO A HEALTHY
DEMOCRACY. THEY CREATE CLEAR
GUARDRAILS AGAINST CONFLICTS OF
INTEREST. THEY ENSURE LAWS SERVE
THE PEOPLE THEY'RE INTENDED TO
SERVE. SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL'S
WORKED FOR STRONG ETHICS LAWS
FOR DECADES AND CHANGING THEM
NOW FOR POLITICAL CONVENIENCE IS
A BETRAYAL OF PUBLIC TRUST.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ]
>> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY, COME
ON DOWN.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS KATIE AND I
JUST WANTED TO MENTION LIKE
EVERYONE HAS ALREADY SAID SUCH
GOOD STUFF, ABOUT THE BUT I JUST
WANT TO SAY THE ONLY REASON I
WAS HERE WAS BECAUSE I WAS LAID
OFF LAST WEEK, BUT MOST
CONSTITUENTS CAN'T MAKE IT TO A
2:00 P.M. MEETING ON A THURSDAY.
I THINK IT'S LOW KEY DIABOLICAL
HOLDING AN ETHICS MEETING AT 2
P.M. ON A THURSDAY. THE ONLY
REASON I KNEW THIS WAS EVEN
HAPPENING WAS BECAUSE MISS
ALEXIS -- SORRY COUNCILMEMBER
RINCK SENT OUT AN EMAIL. AT A
TIME WHEN PEOPLE ARE HAVING TO
DISENGAGE FROM POLITICS FOR
THEIR MENTAL HEALTH AND I FEEL
CHOOSING TO DO SOMETHING LIKE
THIS WITH THE ETHICS CODE WHEN
PEOPLE ARE LESS ENGAGED IS
TAKING ADVANTAGE WHEN PEOPLE
AREN'T PAYING ATTENTION. I GOT
LAID OFF, SO I AM PAYING
ATTENTION NOW AND I HOPE OTHER
PEOPLE ARE PAYING ATTENTION AND
I JUST DON'T SUPPORT THIS AND I
THINK IT'S TERRIBLE. THANK YOU
FOR LISTENING.
>> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ]
WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE UNDER
ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO? STAND UP
FIGHT BACK.
>> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU. MY NAME IS SETON
GRASS, CEO AND FOUNDER OF SURF
INCUBATOR. WE'VE BEEN HELPING
TECHNOLOGY STARTUPS DOWNTOWN
HERE IN THE WELLS FARGO BUILDING
FOR 16 YEARS. I SEE THE KIOSKS
AS AN INTERESTING ADDITION, BUT
I ALSO SEE A LIMITATION ONLY
HAVING 80 LOCATIONS. IT DOESN'T
ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF SOMEBODY
HAVING A POCKET SOLUTION. I'VE
BEEN WORKING THE LAST FOUR
MONTHS ON A MOBILE APP THAT'S A
WEB-BASED APP SO IT CAN WORK ON
ANY DEVICE AND IT WILL FIND ALL
THE INFORMATION THAT'S ALREADY
BEING LISTED IN THE KIOSKS AS
PROPOSED. ALSO, I'VE HEARD --
READ THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS ABOUT
THE VARIOUS VIEWS OPPOSING THE
APPLICATION AND IT OFTEN
REFERENCES A MOBILE APP. WELL, I
HAVE ONE. IF YOU'D LIKE TO LOOK
AT IT, I'D BE VERY DELIGHTED IT
SHOW IT TO YOU. IT'S EASY, FAST
AND WE CAN MAKE IT FREE. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU. NUMBER 27 THROUGH
30, COME ON DOWN, PLEASE.
>> HI. MY NAME IS CAROLINE SAYER
AND I'M FROM FREMONT DISTRICT
6. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I'M
HERE TO OPPOSE ANY CHANGES TO
THE ETHICS CODES. WHEN TRUST IN
GOVERNMENT IS SO LOW, THIS BODY
HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO LEAD BY
EXAMPLE AND REJECT PERSONAL GAIN
OVER PUBLIC SERVICE. I'M
RELYING ON YOU TO PROTECT US
ALL, TO COMMIT YOURSELF TO
PUBLIC SERVICE AND STRONG
ETHICAL STANDARDS. THE CURRENT
45-YEAR-OLD CODE WORKS AND KEEPS
OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS
ACCOUNTABLE. TO CHANGE THE CODE
IS ONE WAY OF BETRAYING OUR
TRUST AND POTENTIALLY HARMS THE
PEOPLE OF SEATTLE FOR ALL THE
WRONG REASONS. PLEASE REJECT
CHANGES TO THE CODE AND MAINTAIN
STRONG STANDARDS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. [ CROWD CHANTING ]
>> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
>> MY NAME IS NATALIE. I'M THE
ORGANIZER FOR FAIRVILLE,
WASHINGTON, A NONPROFIT WORKING
ON DEMOCRACY REFORM IN
WASHINGTON AND I'M ALSO HERE
AGAIN AS A SEATTLE RESIDENT TO
EXPRESS MY OPPOSITION TO THE NEW
PROPOSAL CONCERNING THE SEATTLE
ETHICS CODE. DEMOCRACY IS ABOUT
HAVING OUR VOICES HEARD AND SO
FAR I HAVE YET TO HEAR A SINGLE
VOICE IN FAVOR OF THIS PROPOSAL
AND I KNOW HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE
HAVE EMAILED THE COUNCIL IN
OPPOSITION. SEATTLE SHOULD BE
CONTINUING ITS LEADERSHIP IN A
JUST DEMOCRACY, NOT ROLLING BACK
PROTECTION ESPECIALLY DURING
TIMES LIKE THIS. IT HARMS
TRANSPARENCY AND DEMOCRACY AND
ERODES PUBLIC TRUST. THESE
ETHICAL STANDARDS ARE ALREADY
WORKING AND HAVE BEEN WORKING
FOR DECADES. SO PLEASE PUT
DEMOCRACY INTO PRACTICE. HEAR
THE VOICES OF YOUR CONSTITUENTS
AND MAINTAIN THE SAFEGUARDS THAT
ARE ALREADY IN PLACE AND HAVE
ALREADY BEEN WORKING FOR SEATTLE
VOTERS. PLEASE WITHDRAW THIS
UNNECESSARY PROPOSAL. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU.
>> WE HAVE FOUR MINUTES LEFT OF
OUR PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD WHICH
WILL END AT 3:07. SO WHEN YOU
GET TO 3:07, WE WILL END PUBLIC
COMMENT. [ CROWD CHANTING ]
>> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON,
COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME IS ALEX
OLSON, RENTER IN DISTRICT 4 AND
MEMBER OF WORKERS STRIKE BACK.
I'M HERE AGAIN TO SPEAK IN THE
STRONGEST POSSIBLE TERMS AGAINST
THIS ATTEMPT TO ROLL BACK THE
ETHICS CODE AND ATTACK RENTERS'
RIGHTS IN SEATTLE. IT IS THE
MOST MARGINALIZED PEOPLE WHO
WILL SUFFER MOST AND CAN WE
TRUST COUNCILMEMBERS
HOLLINGSWORTH, KETTLE, AND
RIVERA WHO HAVE COLLECTIVELY
RECEIVED OVER $150,000 FROM THE
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS
TO SUPPORT THE WORKING CLASS OF
THIS CITY? AND CAN WE TRUST
ANYONE WHO HAS TO REPEAL THEIR
OWN ETHICS CODE IN ORDER TO
CARRY OUT THEIR AGENDA? I DON'T
THINK SO. WE NEED TO SEE THESE
CORRUPT POLITICIANS FOR WHAT
THEY ARE AND REJECT THIS CRASS
AND SHAMELESS ATTEMPT TO ENRICH
THEMSELVES AT THE COST OF
SEATTLE'S MOST VULNERABLE
COMMUNITIES. WE CANNOT LET THE
LANDLORDS WRITE OUR LAWS AND
THIS ATTACK WILL NOT BE
FORGOTTEN WHEN YOU'RE UP FOR
REELECTION. I URGE YOU TO STAY
AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT FOR A RALLY
WITH WORKERS STRIKE BACK AND I
URGE YOU TO COME BACK AND KEEP
COMING BACK UNTIL THIS ATTACK IS
DEFEATED. HANDS OFF RENTERS'
RIGHTS. HANDS OFF THE ETHICS
CODE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> WHEN RENTERS' RIGHTS ARE
UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO WE DO?
>> STAND UP FIGHT BACK!
>> THANK YOU.
>>.
>> 30, LYLELY SHOREY, A MEMBER
OF DISTRICT SHORE AND A MEMBER
OF WORKERS FIGHT BACK. I SPOKE
IN SUPPORT OF RENTERS AVENUE
RIGHTS TUESDAY. I WANT TO FOCUS
ON THE ABSOLUTE ABSURDITY OF THE
SITUATION. WHAT WE ARE
DISCUSSING IS THE REPEALING OF
PART OF AN ETHICS CODE. YOU
WOULD THINK FROM THAT STATEMENT
ALONE IT WOULD BE KNOWN WHAT
CITY COUNCILMEMBERS ARE TRYING
TO CARRY OUT IS UNETHICAL BY
THEIR STANDARDS AND A BLATANT
ATTACK ON RENTERS, BUT IF WE'RE
HONEST, IT'S NO SURPRISE WHY
MEMBERS OF THIS CITY COUNCIL ARE
TRYING TO ATTACK RENTERS RIGHTS.
MULTIPLE MEMBERS ARE BOUGHT AND
PAID FOR BY LANDLORDS OR
LANDLORDS THEMSELVES,
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH,
MOORE, KETTLE, RIVERA AND SAKA
WHO IS NOT HERE. OUR CITY
COUNCIL DEMOCRATS ARE CORPORATE
CHILLS THAT CARE MORE ABOUT
LINING THEIR POCKETS THAN
PROTECTING THEIR MOST VULNERABLE
CONSTITUENTS. WE WON'T STOP
COMING BACK HERE AND YOU CAN
REST ASSURED THIS BETRAYAL
WON'T BE FORGOTTEN COME
ELECTION TIME. WHEN RENTERS'
RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK, WHAT DO
WE DO? [ CROWD CHANTING ] STAND
UP FIGHT BACK!
>> WHAT DO WE DO? [ CROWD
CHANTING ] STAND UP FIGHT BACK.
>> THANK YOU.
>> WE HAVE TIME FOR ONE MORE
PUBLIC COMMENTER.
>> HI, EVERYONE. MY NAME IS SET.
I LIVE IN CAPITOL HILL. I WANT
TO THANK COUNCILMEMBER MERCEDES
RINCK FOR HOLDING THE LINE. FOR
THE REST OF YOU, I'M WONDERING
WHERE YOUR HUMANITY IS. WE'RE
ALL SEATTLITES. WE ARE WATCHING
PEOPLE DIE IN OUR STREETS EVERY
DAY AND REPEALING AN EVICTION
MORATORIUMS IN THE DEAD OF
WINTER OR FOR FAMILIES IS
LITERALLY CONTRIBUTING TO DEATH
IN OUR STREETS. I REALLY HOPE
YOU CAN FIND YOUR HUMANITY AND
YOUR OWN ETHICS. I'M ROOTING
FOR YOU. YEAH. THAT'S ALL I
HAVE TO SAY. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU.
>> IT IS NOW 3:07. WE HAVE
REACHED THE END OF OUR PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD. IT IS NOW 3:07.
IN ORDER TO GET ON WITH THE REST
OF OUR AGENDA. I APOLOGIZE TO
THOSE OF YOU WHO DID NOT -- I
KNOW YOU CANNOT HEAR ME. YOU CAN
NOW BE QUIET. UNFORTUNATELY, THE
CHANTING BETWEEN SPEAKERS HAS
PREVENTED US FROM HEARING AS
MANY PEOPLE THAT SIGNED UP. I
APOLOGIZE TO THOSE OF YOU WHO
DID NOT GET A CHANCE YET TO
SPEAK AND I ASK THAT YOU PLEASE
SUBMIT YOUR WRITTEN COMMENTS TO
THE BOX IN THE FRONT. [ CROWD
CHANTING ] LET US SPEAK! LET US
SPEAK!
>> YOU ARE VIOLATING THE RULES
OF PUBLIC COMMENT AND ORDER
CANNOT BE RESTORED. WE WILL NOW
TAKE A 15 MINUTE -- [ CROWD
CHANTING ] LET US SPEAK! LET US
SPEAK!
>> I CAN'T HEAR YOU.
>> WE CANNOT HEAR.
[ CROWD CHANTING ] LET US SPEAK!
>> WHO ARE CONTINUING PREVENTING
US FROM CONTINUING WITH OUR -- I
ALREADY GAVE AN HOUR AND YOU
PROCEEDED TO TAKE TIME IN
BETWEEN SPEAKERS. WE WILL NOW
MOVE ON TO OUR ITEMS OF
BUSINESS. I SAID WE WOULD GO
UNTIL 3:07. WE'RE NOW PAST THAT
TIME. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE READ
ITEM 1 INTO THE AGENDA.
>> NUMBER 1, RESOLUTION 32170,
RESOLUTION GRANTING CONCEPTUAL
APPROVAL TO THE DOWNTOWN SEATTLE
ASSOCIATION TO INSTALL,
MAINTAIN, AND OPERATE -- [ CROWD
CHANTING ].
>> THE INDIVIDUALS ARE ENGAGING
IN BEHAVIOR OUT OF ORDER AND
THIS MEETING CANNOT PROCEED
UNTIL ORDER IS RESTORED. ORDER
WILL NOT BE RESTORED. WE HAVE NO
CHOICE BUT TO GO ON. ORDER HAS
NOT BEEN RESTORED AND PURSUANT
TO THE OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT
RCW4230, THE COUNCIL WILL RECESS
UNTIL THIS MEETING CAN CONTINUE
REMOTELY. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
MAY CONTINUE TO OBSERVE THIS
MEETING IN CHAMBERS. WE ARE NOW
TAKING A RECESS TO RESUME.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
[ CROWD CHANTING ]
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
[ CROWD CHANTING ]
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT. [ CROWD
CHANTING ]
>> PRESIDENT. COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
[ CROWD CHANTING ] LET US SPEAK!
LET US SPEAK!
>> TIME CONSTRAINTS. WE WILL
TAKE A 15 MINUTE RECESS AND
CONTINUE THIS MEETING REMOTELY.
THIS IS NOW 3:11.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON?
>> HERE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> PRESENT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> HERE.
>> THANK YOU. CHAIR NELSON?
>> PRESENT.
>> FIVE PRESENT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY.
WOULD YOU PLEASE READ ITEM 1
INTO THE RECORD.
>> YES. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE,
RESOLUTION 32170, A RESOLUTION
GRANTING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO
THE DOWNTOWN SETTLE ASSOCIATION
TO INSTALL, MAINTAIN, AND
OPERATE INTERACTIVE MEDIA KIOSKS
IN PUBLIC PLACES LOCATED IN THE
METROPOLITAN IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT AND IN PARTICIPATING
BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT AREAS. FOR
BRIEFING DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE
VOTE.
>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. SO, COLLEAGUES, FIRST, IS
IT POSSIBLE TO TAKE THE
PRESENTATION OFF THE MAIN
SCREEN? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COLLEAGUES, THIS IS OUR SECOND
DISCUSSION OF THIS LEGISLATION.
AGAIN, THIS RESOLUTION GRANTS
CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OF THE
DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION TO
INSTALL, MAINTAIN, AND OPERATE
DIGITAL KIOSKS IN THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY WITHIN THE
METROPOLITAN IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT. WE HAD A PRESENTATION
AND DISCUSSION AT OUR MAY 8th
MEETING AND IT'S UP FOR
POSSIBLE VOTE TODAY. AS I NOTED
BEFORE, I HAVE BEEN WORKING IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF THIS
INITIATIVE SINCE BASICALLY
TAKING OFFICE FOR MANY REASONS,
PRIMARILY BECAUSE THEY ELEVATE
AND PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR
PEOPLE TO KNOW THE LOCAL SMALL
BUSINESSES THAT ARE AROUND
PEOPLE THAT ARE LIVING, WORKING,
AND VISITING DOWNTOWN. THERE'S
A LONG LIST OF PUBLIC BENEFITS
AND ALSO BECAUSE THIS WILL
GENERATE FUNDS FROM OUR BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT AREAS WHO PROVIDE
ESSENTIAL SERVICES THAT MAKE
DOWNTOWN AND OTHER PARTS OF OUR
CITY GREAT, ESPECIALLY THE
NEIGHBORHOODS IN WHICH THERE IS
A VIA AND BIA AND PEOPLE ARE
PAYING INTO A POT OF MONEY FOR
TRASH PICKUP, ET CETERA. WE
RECEIVED A LETTER TODAY FROM
ABOUT 23 SIGNATORIES
REPRESENTING VARIOUS ENTITIES
AND ASPECT OF DOWNTOWN,
INCLUDING THE DOWNTOWN SEATTLE
ASSOCIATION, FRIENDS OF THE
WATERFRONT PARK SEATTLE, SEATTLE
KRAKEN, YWCA, THE ART MUSEUM, ET
CETERA AND THE LIST GOES ON. IT
SAYS, "WE URGE YOUR APPROVAL OF
THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION TO
ADVANCE THE IKE DIGITAL KIOSK
PROGRAM IN SEATTLE BECAUSE IT
REFLECTS YEARS OF COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT, RIGOROUS TECHNICAL
REVIEW AND A CLEAR
PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS THAT
DELIVERS BROAD PUBLIC BENEFIT AT
NO COST TO THE CITY OF SEATTLE."
INSTEAD OF ME LISTING THE PUBLIC
BENEFITS, I'LL PROVIDE THE LIST
OF THINGS THEY IDENTIFIED,
REALTIME WAY FINDING AND
INFORMATION IN 100 LANGUAGES,
BROADCAST PUBLIC SAFETY ALERTS
AND EMERGENCY MESSAGING
CONNECTED TO FEMA'S SYSTEM,
PROMOTE LOCAL BUSINESSES,
CULTURAL EVENTS AND PUBLIC
RESOURCES, INCLUDES FEATURES FOR
ADA ACCESSIBILITY AND EMERGENCY
CALL BUTTONS AND GENERATES
SIGNIFICANT REINVESTMENT IN
DOWNTOWN AND OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD
BUSINESS DISTRICTS. SO THAT IS
WHY I AM EXCITED TO HOPEFULLY
WRAP UP THIS PIECE OF
LEGISLATION TODAY BEFORE WE CAN
MOVE ON TO THE ACTUAL COUNCIL
BILL THAT ACCOMPANIES THE
RESOLUTION. SO WITH THAT WILL
THE PRESENTERS PLEASE INTRODUCE
THEMSELVES.
>> MY NAME IS AND I'M A SENIOR
POLICY ADVISER.
>> HELLO. I'M ALYSE NELSON, THE
DIVISION DIRECTOR.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS AMY GRAY
AND I'M WITH SEATTLE DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION.
>> COUNCILMEMBERS CALVIN CHOW,
COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE DID
HAVE A BEAUTIFUL SLIDE
PRESENTATION LAST TIME AND A
DISCUSSION. I THINK WHAT WOULD
BE HELPFUL HERE, WOULD YOU HAVE
SDOT AND OUR CENTRAL STAFF WHO
PRODUCED A MEMO WE RECEIVED
BEFORE THE MAY 8th MEETING.
CALVIN, WOULD YOU MIND
SUMMARIZING THE MAIN COMPONENTS
OF THAT RESOLUTION, PLEASE, AND
THEN WE'LL HAVE QUESTIONS AND I
WILL MOVE THE LEGISLATION. GO
AHEAD.
>> AT YOUR REQUEST, MY SUMMARY
OF THE PROPOSAL BEFORE YOU, THIS
IS THE RESOLUTION, THE FIRST
PART OF THE TWO-STEP PROCESS FOR
COUNCIL'S APPROVAL OF TERM
PERMITS. THIS TERM PERMIT IS A
LITTLE DIFFERENT FROM MOST IN
THAT IT IS A PROGRAMMATIC
PERMIT. SO MOST OF OUR TERM
PERMITS FOCUS ON AN INDIVIDUAL
LOCATION. THIS ONE IS FOR A
NUMBER OF KIOSKS THROUGHOUT
DOWNTOWN AND IN BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT AREAS. MY MEMO WHICH
IS DATED MAY 5th SUMMARIZES THE
PROPOSAL WHICH I THINK WE
DISCUSSED IN QUITE SOME EXTENT.
IT HIGHLIGHTS THE ANTICIPATED
PUBLIC BENEFITS, FREE PUBLIC
WI-FI, DISPLAY PUBLIC CONTENT,
TRANSLATION OF DISPLAYED
CONTENT, ACCESSIBILITY FEATURES,
CALL BUTTON FEATURES, AND
FINANCIAL SUPPORT WITH THE
CTSA'S MISSION. IT ALSO
IDENTIFIES THE ANTICIPATED
PUBLIC BENEFIT MITIGATIONS WHICH
INCLUDE A DECLUTTERING STRATEGY
FOR THE BLOCK FACES WHERE THE
KIOSKS ARE LOCATED AS WELL AS A
PUBLIC REALM IMPROVEMENT
STRATEGY FOR THOSE SAME BLOCK
FACES AS WELL AS REGULAR TRASH
AND DEBRIS REMOVAL AT THOSE
LOCATIONS. I'D NOTE THAT THE
DIRECTOR'S REPORT DOES
HIGHLIGHT A FEW ISSUES THAT ARE
RELATED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION
AS YOU CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL.
ONE IS THAT OFF-PREMISES
ADVERTISING IS PROHIBITED BY THE
STREET USE ORDINANCE AND SIGN
CODE. THIS LEGISLATION WOULD
PROVIDE AUTHORIZATION
SUPERSEDING THOSE RESTRICTIONS.
IT WOULD ALSO AS DISCUSSED IN
THE LAST MEETING, THERE WAS
DISCUSSION AROUND THE
SURVEILLANCE AND PRIVACY
PORTIONS OF THIS PROGRAM. WHILE
IKE DOES OFFER SECURE VIDEO FOR
PUBLIC SAFETY CALLS IN THEIR
OFFERING, THAT IS NOT A PROPOSAL
FOR THE KIOSKS THAT ARE IN THIS
PROPOSAL FOR SEATTLE. IN
ADDITION, THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
HIGHLIGHTS A NUMBER OF
STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK, POSITIVE
AND NEGATIVE, AND IT IDENTIFIES
THE SEATTLE DESIGN COMMISSION'S
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT VOTED 5-4
AGAINST RECOMMENDING THE
PROPOSAL AND PROVIDED A NUMBER
OF FEEDBACK ON CURRENT
CONDITIONS AND PUBLIC BENEFITS
THAT THE COUNCIL COULD CONSIDER
AS THIS PROPOSAL COMES BEFORE
YOU AND THEN LASTLY, I'LL JUST
SAY THAT THE DRAFT ORDINANCE
THAT'S ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA
IS WAITING FOR COUNCIL'S
INTRODUCTION REFERRAL. THAT'S
THE SECOND PART OF THE TERM
PERMIT PROCESS. IT ESTABLISHES
THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
TERM PERMIT AND IN ADDITION, THE
PROPOSED LEGISLATION WOULD
AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN AN
MOU WITH DSA THAT GOVERNS THE
KIOSK PROGRAMS, BUSINESS
PROGRAMS, THE REVENUE SHARE AND
OPERATING EXPECTATIONS FOR THE
PROGRAM. WITH THAT I'M HAPPY TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M
GOING TO MOVE THE LEGISLATION
BECAUSE IF I DON'T DO IT NOW,
I'LL FORGET LATER. I'LL MOVE
IT AND OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS
AND COMMENTS. I MOVE THAT THE
COMMITTEE RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF
RESOLUTION 32170. IS THERE A
SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU. IT'S BEEN MOVED
AND SECONDED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION
32170. NOW I WILL OPEN IT UP TO
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS.
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH,
IT'S MY IMPRESSION -- GO AHEAD.
I SEE YOUR HAND UP.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
JUST A HEADS UP, COLLEAGUES,
I'M GOING TO BE WITHDRAWING MY
AMENDMENT. I NEED TO TODAY FOR
POTENTIAL BRINGING IT BACK TO
FULL COUNCIL ON FURTHER REVIEW
OF THE LANGUAGE, MY INTENT IS
BASED OFF ENSURING ALL
NEIGHBORHOODS CAN RECEIVE SOME
TYPE OF BENEFIT, NOT JUST THE
NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE BIA
EARMARKED TO RECEIVE REVENUE. I
BELIEVE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD
DISTRICTS SHOULD BENEFIT BECAUSE
WE ARE ALL ONE CITY AND SO I
WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH
CENTRAL STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT
THE LANGUAGE IS TIGHT, BUT I
JUST WANTED TO STATE MY
INTENTIONS ON BRINGING THIS BACK
TO FULL COUNCIL, BUT I WILL BE
WITHDRAWING THIS TODAY. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT.
I APPRECIATE AND JUST WANTING TO
MAKE CLEAR THAT IS PART OF THE
SECOND PHASE OF THE INSTALLATION
OF THESE -- THE BENEFITS WILL
ACCRUE TO NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS
DISTRICTS OR BIAs ACROSS THE
CITY IN THE SECOND PHASE OF
INSTALLATION OF THIS LEGISLATION
OR THIS PROGRAM AND I COMPLETELY
UNDERSTAND YOUR REASONS FOR
WANTING TO SPREAD THE LOVE A
LITTLE BIT EVEN IF THERE IS NOT
AN OFFICIAL BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
AREA. ARE THERE OTHER
COUNCILMEMBERS ON THE COMMITTEE
THAT HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
>> CHECKING THIS MICROPHONE,
OKAY. THANK YOU FOR RECOGNIZING
ME, CHAIR. I UNDERSTAND I'M
JOINING THIS CONVERSATION TODAY
PRIMARILY RELATED TO ETHICS, BUT
I WANTED TO ENGAGE A LITTLE BIT
ON THE LEGISLATION RELATED TO
THE KIOSKS SINCE I'M HERE. THIS
IS CENTRAL STAFF.
MY WORKING UNDERSTANDINGFUL JUST
THE SEQUENCING OF THIS IS
PRIMARILY THAT THE APPROVED
RESOLUTION IS INTENDED TO INFORM
THE SUBSEQUENT ORDINANCE AND IF
THAT IS THE CASE, IS THERE A
REASON WE'RE BRINGING THESE TWO
TOGETHER IN TANDEM A PART OF THE
SAME COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR TODAY?
>> I THINK I WOULD SAY AS A
PROPOSAL, THIS TERM PERMIT IS
LARGELY THE SAME LEVEL OF
ATTENTION AT THE FRONT END
BECAUSE IT IS PROGRAMMATIC,
BECAUSE THE PERMITS WILL --
EXCUSE ME, THE KIOSKS WILL
REQUIRE FURTHER PERMITS TO BE
IMPLEMENTED. SO ISSUES LIKE
SETTING REQUIREMENTS AND THE
LIKE WILL COME INTO IT. IT IS
TRUE THE DRAFT PRESENTED TO YOU
OF THE ORDINANCE WAS PRODUCED
BEFORE THE COUNCIL HAS TAKEN
FINAL ACTION ON THE RESOLUTION.
SO THE FOLKS WHO HAVE DRAFTED
THAT ORDINANCE ARE ON THIS CALL,
CAN MAYBE SPEAK TO WHAT THEY'VE
HEARD AND HOW THEY'VE TRIED TO
ACCOMMODATE IT. OTHER THAN THAT,
IT IS AT THE COUNCIL'S
DISCRETION TO MAKE MODIFICATIONS
TO THE RESOLUTION OR THE
ORDINANCE.
>> DOES ANYBODY FROM SDOT CARE
TO RESPOND?
>> I THINK THAT WHAT CALVIN SAID
IS REALLY A GOOD SUMMARY THAT
THE PROGRAMMATIC TERM FOR IT IS
IT REALLY UNIQUE AND WHILE OTHER
TERM PERMITS WE SEE AND BRING TO
YOU, THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT
STRUCTURES THAT TAKE A LONG TIME
TO BUILD. SO THERE'S A
CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN THE PARTS
OF THE PROCESS FOR INSTALLATION
AND WHEN WE COME TO SEE COUNCIL.
USUALLY WITH A SIGNIFICANT
STRUCTURE IT WOULD ALREADY BE AN
APPLICATION AND GOING THROUGH
SDOT REVIEW FOR TECHNICAL
CONSIDERATION AND IT WOULD BE A
LOT MORE DESIGN AND THEN WE'RE
COMING BACK WITH THE ORDINANCE
WHEN IT'S MORE CLOSE TO
COMPLETE DESIGN LIKE 90%. SO
THIS IS JUST A REALLY UNIQUE
PROPOSAL WHERE IT'S SOMETHING
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NO
INSTALLATION PERMITS AND
WOULDN'T BE UNTIL THIS
RESOLUTION PHASE, BUT THERE'S
ALSO WE NEED TO GET TO THE
ORDINANCE TO ALLOW PERMITS TO BE
GIVEN FOR INSTALLATION REVIEW
AND SITE ANALYSIS.
>> UNDERSTOOD. THAT CONCLUDES MY
ONLY QUESTION FOR TODAY AND
SHOULD THIS COME BEFORE FULL
COUNCIL, I IMAGINE I'LL HAVE
SOME FOLLOWUPS, BUT THANK YOU
FOR ALLOWING ME TO PARTICIPATE
TODAY, CHAIR.
>> NO PROBLEM. REGARDING THE
ISSUE ABOUT THE SIGN CODE, IT IS
TRUE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS
BEEN NOTED. I DO NOTE THAT
ARTICLE V, SECTION 114 OF THE
CITY CHARTER DOES AUTHORIZE THE
COUNCIL TO APPROVE USES IN THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT WOULD
OTHERWISE NOT CONFORM TO THE
SIGN CODE AS LONG AS THERE ARE
-- BECAUSE OF THE PUBLIC
BENEFITS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED
WITH THE USE. SO THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT I JUST WANTED TO
GET ON THE RECORD. COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I JUST WANTED TO ECHO THAT POINT
REALLY QUICK THAT I UNDERSTAND
THIS IS A UNIQUE APPLICATION AND
FOR ME ONE CENTERED ON PUBLIC
SAFETY FIRST WITH THE DSA MID
AND EVEN PHASE 2 WITH THE
BIAs WHICH SERVE A VERY
IMPORTANT BUSINESS FUNCTION. I
UNDERSTAND GOING TO
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH'S
COMMENT EARLIER, NOT EVERY CITY
OR DISTRICT HAS BIAs. THAT'S
SOMETHING WE SHOULD LOOK AT IN
TERMS OF ENSURING VARIOUS AREAS
OF THE CITY ARE BENEFITED FROM,
NOT JUST CERTAIN AREAS. SO THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU. I DO BELIEVE THE
FACT THAT THE BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT AREAS ARE ACTUAL
CITY ENTITIES IS WHY THEY WERE
CHOSEN, BUT I'M SURE THERE CAN
BE SOMETHING WORKED OUT OR
UNDERSTOOD LATER THAT CAN BE
WORKED INTO THE ACTUAL TERMS FOR
THE SITING PROCESS AS WE GO
FORWARD. ARE THERE ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT
THIS? WELL, I WILL SIMPLY SAY
THAT I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO
MENTION THE FACT THERE ARE GOING
TO BE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF
PEOPLE IN THIS TOWN THAT ARE
HERE FOR SOME BIG GAMES COMING
FORWARD. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
I BELIEVE WILL -- THE META
BENEFIT I SEE IS ON EVERY SINGLE
BLOCK FACE, AS WAS ALLUDED TO IN
THE LETTER WE RECEIVED EARLIER
TODAY, THERE WILL BE
IMPROVEMENTS TO EVERY BLOCK FACE
WHERE THESE ARE SITED. WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT HANGING PLANTS OR
THE CLEANUP OF CLUTTER AND
DEBRIS ALREADY ON THE SIDEWALK.
SO I SEE THIS AS A CATALYST FOR
PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENT, FOR
STREET SITE IMPROVEMENTS, BUT
ESPECIALLY FOR PEDESTRIAN AND
PEOPLE WHO REQUIRE SIDEWALKS TO
GET AROUND IN THEIR DAY-TO-DAY
LIVES. SO THAT IS AN ADDED
BENEFIT THAT IT IS NOT REALLY
BROUGHT OUT THAT MUCH IN SOME OF
THE LITERATURE ABOUT THIS, BUT I
THINK WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE
NUMBER OF THESE WILL BE
INSTALLED DOWNTOWN AND HOW MANY
BLOCKS WILL HAVE THAT
IMPROVEMENT, THAT IS THE
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE VENDOR,
THAT DOES ADD AN ADDED LAYER OF
INTENTIONAL IMPROVEMENT WITHOUT
COST TO THE CITY. ALL RIGHT.
PEOPLE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO TRY
IT OUT WHEN IT WAS IN THE
BASEMENT -- NOT THE BASEMENT,
THE FIRST FLOOR OF CITY HALL ON
THE 7th OR 8th OF LAST MONTH.
HOPEFULLY YOU GOT A CHANCE TO
EXPERIENCE THE MANY APPLICATIONS
OF THE KIOSK WHEN IT WAS HERE ON
SITE. WITH THAT I WILL ASK ONE
MORE TIME IF THERE ARE ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BEFORE WE
PROCEED TO A VOTE. YES. GO
AHEAD.
>> COUNCILMEMBERS, I JUST WANTED
TO CLARIFY ONE THING, THAT THIS
IS JUST THE TERM PERMIT
AUTHORIZATION. SO IN TERMS OF
THE USE, THE BENEFITS, THOSE
TYPES OF ISSUES, THE SPECIFIC
ISSUE THAT COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH WAS ALLUDING TO
WAS REVENUES THAT WOULD COME
FROM THE SEPARATE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY AND DSA THAT'S
OUTSIDE OF THE PERMIT. I WANTED
TO MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN
WHAT IS AUTHORIZED IN THE PERMIT
AND WHAT IS A SEPARATE MOU.
>> THIS IS APPROVING THE
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN AND THE MAIN
ACTORS AT PLAY HERE. ALL RIGHT.
I AM NOT SEEING ANY OTHER
COMMENTS. I WILL ALSO NOTE THIS
HAS BEEN A PRIORITY FOR MAYOR
HARRELL AS PART OF HIS DOWNTOWN
ACTIVATION PLAN BECAUSE, WELL,
IT WILL ACTIVATE AND TO ME YES,
WE CAN GET SOME OF THIS
INFORMATION FROM OUR PHONES, BUT
LOOKING UP AND GATHERING AROUND
OR HAVING A PLACE TO GO FOR THIS
KIND OF INFORMATION PRESENTED IN
A VISUALLY APPEALING WAY IS A
WAY TO SORT OF -- IT FORCES
LOOKING UP, GATHERING, AND BEING
PART OF THE REST OF DOWNTOWN. SO
THAT IS WHY I ESPECIALLY LIKE
THE FACT THAT THESE ARE GOING TO
BE PLACED STRATEGICALLY IN AREAS
WHERE IT WILL ENCOURAGE
GATHERING GATHERING. IN ANY
CASE, IF THERE ARE NO OTHER
QUESTIONS, PLEASE, CLERK, CALL
THE ROLL CALL ON THE VOTE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> AYE.
>> CHAIR NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I
APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU ALL.
WILL THE CLERK PLEASE READ ITEM
2 INTO OUR RECORD. LET ME SAY
THIS. THE MOTION CARRIES AND THE
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE
RESOLUTION BE ADOPTED WILL BE
SENT TO THE JUNE 3rd CITY
COUNCIL MEETING. PARDON ME ON
THAT. CAN YOU PLEASE READ ITEM 3
INTO THE RECORD.
>> ITEM 2 YOU MEAN, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT?
>>.
>> YES.
>> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2, DRAFT
DIGITAL KIOSK FOR PROGRAM AND
PRODUCTION.
>> WE HAVE SOME OF THE SAME
PRESENTERS. I DON'T KNOW IF
THERE'S ANYBODY THAT HAS NOT
YET SPOKEN PRESENTING, BUT DUE
TO HOW THE TIMING WENT OF THE
LEGISLATION, WHEN THE
LEGISLATION WAS TRANSMITTED TO
THE COUNCIL, WE WILL BE HEARING
A PRESENTATION ON THE DRAFT
ORDINANCE RELATING TO DIGITAL
KIOSK PROGRAMMATIC TERM PERMIT
AND WE HAVE THE SAME PRESENTERS
AT THE TABLE AND WE'RE ALSO
JOINED BY REPRESENTATIVES OF
IKE. DSA WAS HERE. I'M NOT SURE
IF HE IS STILL HERE IN THE
AUDIENCE IN CASE COUNCILMEMBERS
HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR FOLKS
THAT AREN'T PRESENTING THE
PRESENTATION TODAY. LET'S SEE.
CAM, DO YOU HAVE ANY TO ADD
BEFORE WE MOVE TO THE ACTUAL
PRESENTATION?
>> NO. I THINK WE SHOULD TURN
THIS OVER TO SDOT. THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. PLEASE GO AHEAD, SDOT,
WITH YOUR PRESENTATION.
>> SURE. I'D LIKE TO SAY A FEW
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS AND THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR HAVING ME. TO
RECAP, THE KIOSK PROGRAM IS A
PART OF THE MAYOR'S DOWNTOWN
ACTIVATION PLAN TO BRING
VIBRANCY AND TECHNOLOGY DOWNTOWN
IN PARTICULAR IN PREPARATION FOR
FIFA SOCCER COMING TO THE CITY
IN 2026 AND UTILIZING OUR
DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION
PARTNERED ALONG WITH DIFFERENT
PARTS OF THE CITY. THE MAYOR'S
OFFICE JUST WANTED TO
ACKNOWLEDGE THE YEARS OF LEGWORK
THAT HAS BEEN DONE BY DSA AND,
OF COURSE, THE PARTNER. THIS HAS
BEEN A COMPREHENSIVE PROCESS,
INCLUDING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT,
DESIGN COMMISSION ENGAGEMENT,
AND A THOROUGH CE QA ANALYSIS.
WE APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS WE'VE
RECEIVED FROM ALL STAKEHOLDERS,
INCLUDING COUNCILMEMBERS. NOW
I'LL TURN IT TO SDOT TO GIVE
THE PRESENTATION.
>> IS IT ALL RIGHT IF I SHARE
THE SCREEN NOW?
>> YES.
>> IT WILL TAKE ME A MINUTE.
THERE WAS SOMEBODY HELPING OUT
BEFORE. I THINK I CAN DO IT,
THOUGH.
ALL RIGHT. THINK I DID IT.
>> YEA!
>> YEA. ALYSE NELSON WITH SDOT.
I'M ON SLIDE 12 OF OUR SLIDE
DECK THAT IS WITH THE AGENDA,
FAST FORWARDING TO TALK ABOUT
THE ORDINANCE. THE BOXES ON THE
SCREEN ARE KIND OF KEY ELEMENTS
WE ADDRESS AND AMY AND I WILL BE
DISCUSSING SEVERAL OF THESE
TODAY, BUT NOT IN A HUGE AMOUNT.
WE'RE HAPPY TO GET INTO
ANYTHING YOU HAVE AS FAR AS
QUESTIONS. SO AGAIN, I'LL START
ON A HIGH LEVEL. AMY WILL DIG IN
A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL AND
THEN WE'LL SEE WHERE WE'RE AT.
THE TERM PERMIT ESTABLISHES
TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE
COMMITTEE WHICH WILL BE THE
DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION.
THERE ARE MANY PROTECTIONS FOR
THE CITY, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO PROTECTION OF
EXISTING UTILITIES, REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE COMMITTEE AND VENDOR TO
REMOVE AND RESTORE KIOSKS WHERE
WE REQUIRE, REQUIREMENTS TO KEEP
THE KIOSKS IN GOOD WORKING ORDER
AND BONDING AND INSURANCE
REQUIREMENTS. WE ALSO HAVE
WORKED TO ESTABLISH SOME
SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS ON WHERE
KIOSKS COULD BE LOCATED WITHIN
THE CITY, INCLUDING PROHIBITIONS
TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE IN
LOCATIONS ADJACENT TO
APPROPRIATE LAND USES AND SITING
REQUIREMENTS DETERMINED
SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS USE DURING
OUR SDOT REVIEW AND OUR SEPA
ANALYSIS. WE HAVE DETAILED
ANNUAL RECORDING REPEATS TO HELP
US UNDERSTAND HOW THE PROGRAM IS
WORKING WITH THE DSA AND IKE. WE
WORK WITH I.T. ON COLLECTION AND
RETENTION AND HAVE WORKED ON A
MITIGATION THAT IS A REQUIREMENT
OF THE PERMIT AND WILL WORK
CLOSELY WITH THE DSA AND VENDOR
IKE TO DEVELOP THAT FURTHER
DURING OUR KIOSK INSTALLATION
PHASE. NEXT I TURN IT TO AMY.
SHE'LL GIVE US A FEW MORE
DETAILS ON THE TERM PERMIT.
>> THANK YOU, ALYSE. THE TERM
PERMIT ORDINANCE GOES INTO
SENSITIVE DETAIL ON CONDITIONS
OF THE PERMIT. IT SETS THE TERM
AND THE THE FIRST PHASE WOULD BE
16 1/2 YEARS. THE FIRST PHASE
WOULD REQUIRE CITY APPROVAL TO
MOVE FORWARD. IT'S UP TO THE
CITY TO DECIDE AT THAT POINT IN
THE FUTURE HOW TO MOVE FORWARD
WITH THIS. IT PROHIBITS CERTAIN
LOCATIONS LIKE HISTORIC
PRESERVATION IN SPECIAL
DISTRICTS, THE WATER LINE AND
SHORELINE DISTRICTS. IT INCLUDES
STANDARDS TO PREVENT DRIVER
DISTRACTION, CLEARANCES FOR
TRUCK LOADING ZONES, ET CETERA.
THERE IS LANGUAGE IN THE
ORDINANCE THAT PROTECTS STREET
TREES AND NO STREET TREE WILL BE
REMOVED TO LOCATE A KIOSK.
DETAILS THE EXTENSIVE
MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS FOR DSA
AND THE VENDOR AND THERE ARE
MAXIMUM OPERATION STANDARDS TO
ADDRESS THINGS LIKE LIGHT AND
THE BRIGHTNESS LEVEL FROM
KIOSKS. THEY MUST BE
COMPLEMENTARY TO THE SEAMLESS
SEATTLE SIGNS IN COLOR, NAME, ET
CETERA AND THERE SHALL BE NO
FLASHING OR STROBES. ALYSE
MENTIONED THE INDEMNIFICATION
INSURANCE AND BOND REQUIREMENTS.
THESE ARE IN THE ORDINANCE TO
PROTECT THE CITY IN THE EVENT OF
CATASTROPHE OR LAWSUIT, ET
CETERA. THE INSURANCE
REQUIREMENTS ARE DETERMINED BY
THE CITY'S RISK MANAGER. THE
BOND COVERS THE COST IF THE CITY
NEEDS TO REMOVE THE KIOSKS.
IT'S TO ALLOW TO ADJUST THE
BOND AND INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
IF WE DETERMINE THE AMOUNTS ARE
INSUFFICIENT TO PROTECT THE
CITY. AS ALYSE MENTIONED,
THERE'S AN ANNUAL RECORDING
REQUIREMENT, DESCRIPTION OF
REPAIRS MADE DURING THE PREVIOUS
YEAR AND SUMMARY OF ALL
COMPLAINTS, HOW THEY WERE
RESOLVED AND THE TIME FRAME TO
ADDRESS THE COMPLAINT AND A
REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE THE
STATUS OF ALL PUBLIC BENEFITS
INSTALLED. THERE'S NOTIFICATION
AND OUTREACH REQUIREMENTS THAT
APPLIES FOR THE INDIVIDUAL
INSTALLATION PERMITS AND
THERE'S PUBLIC BENEFIT
REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING REMOVING
BROKEN OR UNUSABLE BENCHES AND
OTHER STREET FURNITURE AND
AMENDING THESE TO THE
STREETSCAPES SUCH AS HANGING
BASKETS, MURALS, ART, ET CETERA
AND IMPORTANTLY AS ALYSE NOTED,
IT PROHIBITS DSA OR IKE FROM
COLLECTING ANY PERSONALLY
IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION FROM
SOMEONE WALKING BY. ALL THESE
CONDITIONS ARE IN THE
REQUIREMENTS. OUR RECOMMENDATION
IS THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE
KIOSK TERM PERMIT AND IF
APPROVED, START INSTALLING THE
KIOSKS RIGHT AWAY AFTER GETTING
INSTALLATION PERMITS AND THIS
SLIDE SHOWS THE NEXT STEPS AS
NOTED FOR EARLIER BY COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON. THE FULL
COUNCIL WILL HAVE THE RESOLUTION
JUNE 3rd. WE WOULD LIKE TO COME
BACK TO THE JULY 12th COUNCIL
COMMITTEE TO OUR BRIEFING AND
POTENTIAL VOTE AND IF THAT MOVES
FORWARD, I WOULD ANTICIPATE
GOING FULL COUNCIL WITH THE
ORDINANCE ON JUNE 24th. I'LL
TURN IT BACK TO ALYSE.
>> THAT IS BEAUTIFUL. THAT IS
OUR FORMAL PRESENTATION. THANK
YOU FOR YOUR TIME. WE HOPE THIS
PRESENTATION HAS BEEN USEFUL,
THERE'S SOME INFORMATION ON THE
ORDINANCE AND WE'RE HAPPY TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU
MAY HAVE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THIS
PRESENTATION. THANK YOU FOR
DELIVERING IT IN AN EXPEDITIOUS
MANNER. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS
FROM COUNCILMEMBERS OR, CALVIN,
DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANY THOUGHTS
OR COMMENTS?
>> JUST A REMINDER THE PROPOSED
LEGISLATION WILL ALSO GIVE THE
MAYOR AUTHORITY TO SIGN THE MOU,
WHICH IS ATTACHED AS ATTACHMENT
1 TO THE DRAFT. IF YOU'RE
LOOKING FOR DETAILS THAT GO
BEYOND THE TERM PERMIT, THEY
WOULD BE THERE.
>> GOT IT. COUNCILMEMBER
QUESTIONS?
WELL, I HAVE A QUESTION. COULD
YOU PLEASE SPEAK A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT THE SURVEILLANCE
CAPABILITY OF THESE KIOSKS.
>> YEAH. I CAN ANSWER THAT AND
IF WE HAVE MORE SPECIFICS, WE
CAN TURN IT OVER TO THE OTHER
FOLKS HERE. THIS WAS REVIEWED BY
THE CITY I.T.s TEAM THAT HELPS
THE EXPERTS FOR ALL THINGS
PRIVACY. THERE'S NO DATA
COLLECTION ALLOWED BY THE TERM
PERMIT ORDINANCE ITSELF. THERE
IS A SPECIFIC SECTION IN THE
TERM PERMIT. WE CAN LOOK IT UP
IN CASE YOU WANT US TO TAKE A
LOOK AT IT. IKE WORKS ALL OVER
THE UNITED STATES. SO THERE ARE
DIFFERENT WAYS THIS TECHNOLOGY
OPERATES IN DIFFERENT CITIES,
BUT FOR SEATTLE THERE WILL BE NO
COLLECTION OF DATA, NO RETENTION
OF DATA, NO PHOTOGRAPHY OR VIDEO
OF FOLKS. THE ONLY EXCEPTION IS
THE SELFIE CAM THAT IS SOMETHING
SOMEBODY HAS TO SIGN UP AND
ACCEPT THAT. SO THEY HAVE TO
KIND OF ACCEPT THAT AND SAY I
WANT TO TAKE MY SELFIE WITH THE
KIOSK. THAT'S THE ONLY USE.
IT'S BEEN REVIEWED BY I.T. I
THINK THE TERM PERMIT ORDINANCE
IS SECTION 25. HEAL HAPPY TO
ANSWER ANY FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS
OR TURN IT OVER TO OTHER FOLKS.
>> I ADVANCING THE AUDIENCE
MEMBERS HERE, COUNCILMEMBERS.
I'M NOT SEEING ANY HANDS RAISED
FROM MY COLLEAGUES. CAN YOU
PLEASE EXPLAIN IF THESE ARE
VANDALIZED, SPRAY PAINT, ET
CETERA, WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR
REMOVING THAT?
>> THE COMMITTEE WILL BE THE
DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION.
ULTIMATELY THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE
AND THEY'LL WORK CLOSELY WITH
THEIR VENDOR, IKE SMART CITY, TO
HANDLE ANY DAMAGE AND THE TERM
PERMIT HAS SPECIFICS ON THE
EXPECTATION THEY MAINTAIN IN
GOOD WORKING ORDER AT ALL TIMES.
>> GOT IT. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM COLLEAGUES?
OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU VERY, VERY
MUCH. WE DO HAVE THE DRAFT. THE
LEGISLATION WAS TRANSMITTED. SO
WE DO HAVE IT BEFORE US. WE'LL
BE ABLE TO DEVELOP PERHAPS SOME
MORE. I THINK CAL WILL BE
WORKING ON A MEMO ONCE HE'S
ABLE TO GO THROUGH THE PRECISE
LEGISLATION NOW THAT IT'S BEEN
TRANSMITTED AND I JUST HAVE TO
SAY THAT I HAVE HEARD -- I
RESPECT SOME OF THE CONCERNS
THAT I'VE BEEN RECEIVING BY
EMAIL, ET CETERA. I WILL ALSO
ABOUT THE AESTHETICS OR THE FACT
WE'RE PUTTING AN OBJECT IN THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY. I WILL JUST NOTE
SEATTLE IS A CITY OF INNOVATION
AND WE ARE A CITY OF TECHNOLOGY
AND IN THIS CASE WE ARE INVITING
TECHNOLOGY TO PROVIDE A WHOLE
SERIES OF PUBLIC BENEFITS THAT
DON'T JUST BENEFIT PEOPLE THAT
LIVE AND WORK HERE, BUT ALSO THE
MANY VISITORS THAT WILL BE
COMING TO TOWN IN THE NOT TOO
DISTANT FUTURE AND ALL PRESENTED
IN MANY, MANY LANGUAGES SO THAT
IT DOES OVERCOME LANGUAGE
BARRIERS AND THE MEMBERS OF THE
DISABILITY COMMUNITY HAVE
EXPRESSED SUPPORT FOR SOME OF
THE ACCESSIBILITY FEATURES THAT
ARE ALSO CONTAINED WITHIN THE
KIOSKS THEMSELVES. SO I LOOK
FORWARD TO DIGGING INTO THE
ACTUAL LEGISLATION AND
CONTINUING OUR DISCUSSION AT THE
NEXT MEETING. SO THANK YOU VERY,
VERY MUCH FOR THIS PRESENTATION
AND WITHOUT FURTHER ADIEU, WE
WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM ON
OUR AGENDA. THANK YOU VERY, VERY
MUCH FOR BEING HERE AND DESPITE
THE DISTURBANCE EARLIER, THANK
YOU VERY MUCH FOR HANGING WITH
AND WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT TIME.
THANKS.
>> THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE
READ ITEM 3 INTO THE RECORD.
>> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 3, AN
ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE CODE
OF ETHICS, DEFINING ELECTED
OFFICIAL, REQUIRING ELECTED
OFFICIALS TO DISCLOSE ANY
FINANCIAL INTEREST OR CONFLICT
OF INTEREST PRIOR TO
PARTICIPATING IN LEGISLATIVE
MATTERS AND AMENDING SECTION
4.16.030 AND 4.16.070 OF THE
SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE FOR
BRIEFING DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE
VOTE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO,
COLLEAGUES, THIS IS OUR SECOND
DISCUSSION OF COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE'S LEGISLATION WHICH IS
BEING DELIBERATED IN THIS
COMMITTEE BECAUSE THE CHAIR OF
GOVERNANCE -- WELL, THE
GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE OVERSEES
THE SEATTLE OFFICE OF ETHICS AND
ELECTIONS. THAT'S WHY IT'S
BEFORE US TODAY. WE HAVE SEVERAL
AMENDMENTS. I'VE ASKED DIRECTOR
BARNETT TO BE HERE AGAIN TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS PEOPLE
MIGHT HAVE AS THESE AMENDMENTS
ARE DISCUSSED AND FOR THE
RECORD, WILL OUR PRESENTERS
INTRODUCE THEMSELVES AND I WILL
PROCEED WITH SORT OF THE RUN OF
SHOW OF HOW WE'LL GET THROUGH
THE AMENDMENTS. SO PLEASE GO
AHEAD.
>> BEN NOBLE, CENTRAL STAFF
DIRECTOR.
>> WILLIAM BARNETT, DIRECTOR
SEATTLE ETHICS COMMISSION.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO
LET'S SEE, BEFORE WE PLACE THE
BILL BEFORE US AND CONSIDER
AMENDMENTS, AS CHAIR I'M
PROPOSING THE FOLLOWING PROCESS.
ALL RIGHT. SO AFTER THE BILL HAS
BEEN MOVED AND PLACED BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE, COUNCILMEMBER MOORE
AS SPONSOR WILL ADDRESS THE BILL
AND THEN COUNCILMEMBERS WILL
MOVE THEIR AMENDMENTS AT THE
APPROPRIATE TIME. AFTER
RECEIVING A SECOND, CENTRAL
STAFF WILL PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW
OF THAT AMENDMENT AND AFTER
CENTRAL STAFF'S OVERVIEW THE
SPONSOR WILL ADDRESS THE
RATIONALE FOR THE AMENDMENT AND
THEN FINALLY, THE SPONSOR AFTER
THE SPONSOR OF THE AMENDMENT
SAYS THEIR PIECE WE'LL OPEN IT
UP FOR DISCUSSION BEFORE VOTING.
THESE STEPS WILL BE REPEATED FOR
EACH OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
AND THE ORDER OF AMENDMENTS WILL
BE CONSIDERED IN NUMERICAL
ORDER. PLEASE NOTE WE DO NOT
HAVE AN AMENDMENT NUMBER 4. SO
UNLESS THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS
ON THE PROCESS, I'M NOT SEEING
ANY HANDS UP, ALL RIGHT. SO I
MOVE THAT --
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, SORRY, I
SEE THAT COUNCILMEMBER MOORE,
YOU LOOK LIKE YOU HAD YOUR HAND
UP.
>> YEAH. THANK YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT. I JUST NEED ONE
MINUTE. MY SCRIPT IS NOT CORRECT
ON THIS. IF YOU COULD GIVE ME
ONE SECOND.
>> SURE.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I'M SORRY,
I CAN'T FIGURE OUT WHERE MY
HAND IS TO RAISE HERE. MAY I --
HERE WE GO.
>> DO YOU HAVE -- OKAY, GO
AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> WHILE COUNCILMEMBER MOORE IS
WORKING ON HER REMARKS, I DID
HAVE SOME QUESTIONS OVERALL
ABOUT THE LEGISLATION AND SINCE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BARNETT AND
DIRECTOR NOBLE ARE HERE I
WONDERED IF THIS WAS THE
APPROPRIATE TIME TO ASK THE
QUESTION OR TO, I GUESS, MAKE
COMMENTS ABOUT THE --
>> LET ME MOVE THE LEGISLATION
AND THEN IT'S FINE IF YOU ASK
QUESTIONS. IS THAT OKAY WITH
YOU?
>> YES.
>> OKAY. I MOVE THAT THE
COMMITTEE RECOMMEND PASSAGE OF
COUNCIL BILL 120978. IS THERE A
SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> OKAY. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO RECOMMEND PASSAGE OF
COUNCIL BILL 120978 AND I WOULD
LIKE TO PROVIDE FOR
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE TO INTRODUCE
THE -- TO SAY HER PIECE ABOUT
THE LEGISLATION AND THEN GO
AHEAD AND OPEN IT UP FOR
QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GET INTO THE
MEAT OF THE AMENDMENTS. I THINK
THAT'S MORE ORDERLY. IS THAT
ALL RIGHT WITH YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> OF COURSE. THANK YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT.
>> ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED
AND SECONDED TO RECOMMEND
PASSAGE OF THE BILL.
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AS SPONSOR
OF THE BILL, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED
IN ORDER TO ADDRESS IT BEFORE WE
PROCEED TO GENERAL QUESTIONS AND
THEN AMENDMENTS. GO AHEAD,
PLEASE.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR INDULGENCE THERE. I DID
WANT TO FIRST SAY THANK YOU TO
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR ALLOWING
ME TO JOIN THE COMMITTEE AGAIN
TODAY FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION IN
ADDRESSING MY AMENDMENT AND
ADDITION A AMENDMENTS. I DID
WANT TO OPEN WITH SOME CONTEXT
FOR THIS LEGISLATION. AGAIN, FOR
SOME BACKGROUND ON THE DRAFTING,
IN NOVEMBER OUR LEGAL COUNSEL
FORWARDED TO ALL COUNCILMEMBERS,
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BARNETT, IN
WHICH HE OUTLINED THINKING ON A
POSSIBLE UPDATE TO THE SEATTLE
CODE OF ETHICS. CERTAINLY AS A
LAWYER AND FORMER JUDGE WHO WAS
AND IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ADHERING
TO PROPER RECUSAL AND DISCLOSURE
PROTOCOL, I TOOK SPECIAL
INTEREST IN THIS IDEA. I, TOO,
HAVE SHARED -- HAD MANY OF THE
SAME CONCERNS WE'VE HEARD FROM
SOME OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTERS
THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS.
CERTAINLY I THINK AT FIRST
MENTION OF REMOVAL OF A RECUSAL
PROVISION WOULD CERTAINLY RAISE
SOME BELLS FOR ME AND OTHERS. SO
I ASKED OUR LEGAL COUNSEL TO
LOOK AT OTHER MODELS FOR HOW
OTHER JURISDICTIONS HANDLE THIS
AND CAME ULTIMATELY TO THE SAME
CONCLUSION AS DIRECTOR BARNETT,
THAT SEATTLE IS SOMEWHAT OF AN
OUTLIER IN HOW OUR ETHICS CODE
IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN. SO I THINK
IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT
WHEN WE HEARD AT THE LAST
COMMITTEE MEETING FROM BOTH
DIRECTOR BARNETT AND ALSO THE
CHAIR OF THE ETHICS AND
ELECTIONS COMMISSION AND AS THEY
STATED, THERE IS NO GOLD
STANDARD HOW TO DO ETHICS AND
THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENT MODELS
AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE
DIFFERENT MODELS THROUGHOUT THE
STATES, YOU'LL SEE THERE ARE A
VARIETY OF MODELS AND THEY
OUTLINE SOME OF THOSE MODELS AS
WELL. REALLY ULTIMATELY IT
BECOMES A POLICY DECISION. I
THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO ADDRESS
SOME OF THE ISSUES OR POTENTIAL
CONCERNS RAISED EARLIER IN
COMMENTS TODAY. MANY PEOPLE HAVE
SAID WHY ARE WE CHANGING
SOMETHING AFTER 45 YEARS OF
WORKING SO WELL? I THINK WAYNE
CAN SPEAK TO THIS AS WELL,
DIRECTOR BARNETT. THIS ACTUALLY
HAS NOT WORKED SO BEAUTIFULLY
FOR 45 YEARS AND, IN FACT, THERE
HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANT CHANGES
MADE TO THE ETHICS CODE OVER THE
PAST 45 YEARS WHICH ARE NOW THE
REASON THAT WE HAVE THE CODE
WRITTEN AS IS WHY WE HAD TO
CREATE AN EXEMPTION FOR PEOPLE
TO VOTE ON TAXES AND LEVIES AND
EXEMPTION FOR A SUBSTANTIAL
SEGMENT OF THE POPULATION. I SAY
THIS BECAUSE THIS IS A WORK IN
PROGRESS. IT IS SOMETHING I
THINK WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND.
NOTHING IS CAST IN STONE.
ADDITIONAL, THE OTHER THING IS
THE CONCERN SOMEHOW THIS WILL
OPEN THE FLOODGATES TO
CORRUPTION. I WANT TO BE VERY
CLEAR I CERTAINLY DO NOT BELIEVE
THAT, NOR DO I BELIEVE THE
DIRECTOR OF THE ETHICS AND
ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT OR THE
CHAIR OF THE ETHICS AND
ELECTIONS COMMISSION BELIEVE
THAT. IT'S IMPORTANT TO
REMEMBER ALL OF OUR BEHAVIORS
ARE ALSO STILL GOVERNED BY THE
STATE CODE OF ETHICS AND THERE
ARE OUTLINED IN COUNCIL LAUREN
HENRY'S MEMOS, THERE ARE FOUR
PROHIBITED ACTS UNDER THE STATE
STATUTE. ADDITIONALLY,
REGARDLESS WHAT WE DO HERE
TODAY, THERE ARE ADDITIONAL
LOCAL PROHIBITIONS ON THE
ACCEPTANCE OF THINGS OF VALUE,
IMPROPER USE OF AN OFFICIAL
POSITION AND IMPORTANTLY, HAVING
AN INTEREST IN A CITY CONTRACT.
THAT'S OFTEN WHERE WE SEE
CORRUPTION IF THERE'S GOING TO
BE CORRUPTION AND THIS AMENDMENT
THAT I'M BRINGING FORTH AT THE
BEHEST OF THE DIRECTOR OF ETHICS
AND ELECTIONS HAS NO EFFECT ON
THAT PARTICULAR PROVISION, NOR
DOES IT HAVE ANY EFFECT ON THE
PROVISION PROHIBITING US FROM
PARTICIPATING IN QUASIJUDICIAL
MATTERS IF WE HAVE AN INTEREST
IN THAT. SO REALLY WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO LOOK AT HERE IS A WAY
TO BASICALLY MAKE SOME
ADJUSTMENT TO THE ETHICS LAW TO
ALLOW IT TO WORK BETTER. IT HAS
NOT BEEN WORKING WELL AND WE ARE
ATTEMPTING TO MACKEY SURE THAT
IT DOES NOT WIND UP BECOMING A
POLITICIZED PROCESS THAT WOULD,
IN FACT, DISENFRANCHISE VOICES
THAT ARE NOT ALWAYS HEARD, NOT
ALWAYS POPULAR AND I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT
THERE ARE MANY OTHER STATES THAT
IT APPROACH THIS IN A WAY THAT
PROVIDES MORE GUIDANCE AND ALSO
A BROADER -- IT'S NOT QUITE SO
RIGID. SO THE OTHER THING I
WANTED TO NOTE IS I HAD THOUGHT
ABOUT BRINGING AN AMENDMENT
BECAUSE OF THE SENSE OF PEOPLE
FEELING PERHAPS MOVING STRAIGHT
TO DISCLOSURE IS TOO BIG OF STEP
AND WE OUGHT TO KEEP OUR RECUSAL
PROVISION, BUT BASED ON THE
AMENDMENTS THAT COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH IS BRINGING, WE
DID NOT FEEL THE NEED TO DO. SO
THAT'S WHY I'M ONLY BRINGING
FORTH MY ONE PARTICULAR
AMENDMENT AT THIS TIME. THANK
YOU, CHAIR.
>> BEFORE PROCEEDING TO
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, I ASKED
YOU, COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA, TO
HOLD OFF UNTIL COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE COULD SPEAK. SO PLEASE GO
AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT,
AND THANK YOU, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR BARNETT, FOR BEING
HERE. I JUST WANT TO SAY I HAD
THE OPPORTUNITY, DIRECTOR
BARNETT, THAT YOU AND I SPOKE
EARLIER IN THE WEEK. I
ORIGINALLY REACHED OUT TO YOU AT
THE ONSET OF THE REVIEW OF THIS
LEGISLATION BECAUSE I WAS TRYING
TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT
BEHIND YOUR RECOMMENDATION. I
WANT TO THANK YOU FOR EXPLAINING
THE RECOMMENDATION ACTUALLY
PRECEDED THIS CURRENT COUNCIL
AND THAT WAS ACTUALLY -- I THINK
IT'S AN IMPORTANT POINT BECAUSE
THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF
DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS CURRENT
COUNCIL BRINGING THIS ONE. IN
FACT, YOUR RECOMMENDATION CAME
UP BEFORE THIS CURRENT COUNCIL
AND IT'S REALLY IN PART RELATED
TO THE ADVENT OF THIS NEW YORK
COUNCIL DISTRICT MODEL. I THINK
THAT HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH IT
AND YOU CAN CONFIRM AND --
>> YES.
>> YUP. -- AND WHAT SEEMS TO BE
MORE LEGISLATION -- EXCUSE ME.
AND WHAT SEEMS TO BE
LEGISLATION, YOU KNOW, REQUIRING
DISCLOSURE TO ADDRESS THIS
REQUIRING OF DISCLOSURE AND
QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT
TO RECUSE HAD COME UP AND HOW
AND WHAT INSTANCES AND AGAIN,
ALL THIS STEMMING FROM THE PRIOR
COUNCIL AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT MY COLLEAGUES ALSO HAD THE
BENEFIT OF OUR CONVERSATION AND
THEN ALSO TO MAKE SURE THAT I
UNDERSTOOD PROPERLY WHAT YOU
WERE COMMUNICATING TO ME.
>> OKAY.
>> SO IS THAT CORRECT, ALL OF
WHAT I LAID OUT?
>> YES. I BELIEVE IT IS. I MEAN
IT DOES COME DOWN TO THE
INTERPLAY BETWEEN THE DEMOCRATIC
PROCESS AND THE ETHICS CODE.
THAT'S REALLY WHY WE'RE ALL
HERE, BECAUSE WHAT'S HAPPENED
OF LATE IS THE ETHICS CODE IS
BEING EMPLOYED SOMETIMES TO
ATTEMPT TO FRUSTRATE A COUNCIL
MAJORITY. IF FIVE OF YOU ARE
ALIGNING ONE WAY ON A VOTE, I'M
HEARING FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE
TRYING TO PICK OFF ONE OR TWO OF
YOU TO FRUSTRATE THAT DEMOCRATIC
PROCESS. THAT'S WHERE MY
CONCERNS ARISE FROM, YES.
>> THANK YOU. THIS STEMMING FROM
THE LAST COUNCIL, NOT JUST THIS
COUNCIL, AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE
I DID SOME RESEARCH AND IT LOOKS
LIKE YOU BROUGHT A SIMILAR PIECE
OF LEGISLATION IN 2018 AND
BASICALLY THAT PIECE OF
LEGISLATION YOU BROUGHT OR TRIED
TO IN 2018, THAT RECOMMENDATION,
IS BASICALLY WHAT STANDS WITH US
TODAY.
>> ACTUALLY THAT'S NOT TRUE. WE
WEREN'T BEHIND THAT IN 2018. I
THINK THAT TOOK PLACE WITHOUT
OUR OFFICE'S INVOLVEMENT. THAT
WAS AT A TIME WHERE I BELIEVE WE
HAD THE LANDLORD TENANT STUFF
AND COUNCILMEMBER O'BRIEN,
TELLING HIM AS A LANDLORD HE
SHOULDN'T BE VOTING. SO YES,
THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT CAME UP
THEN.
>> I THOUGHT THAT IT CAME UP AS
A RECOMMENDATION FROM YOU. AT
LEAST THAT'S WHAT I FOUND
ONLINE AT THE TIME.
>> ALL RIGHT.
>> SO THAT'S WHERE I --
>> I'M NOT SURE IT WAS.
>> IF IT WASN'T FROM YOU,
THAT'S WHAT I READ.
>> OKAY.
>> YOU CAN CLARIFY IF YOU'RE
SAYING IT CAME FROM SOMEONE ELSE
OR --
>> YES. THAT IS NOT FROM US. WE
DIDN'T RECOMMEND MOVING TO A
DISCLOSURE MODEL THEN. I'VE
BEEN IN THIS LINE OF WORK FOR 20
YEARS AT THE CITY AND BEFORE
THAT FOR FIVE YEARS AT THE STATE
ETHICS COMMISSION IN
MASSACHUSETTS. TO ME, I FOUND
THE DISCLOSURE THAT WE HAVE
THERE BETTER IN TERMS OF KIND OF
REINFORCING THE DEMOCRATIC
PROCESS, MAKING SURE THAT
DEMOCRACY WORKS AND WE ELECT
PEOPLE AND YOU DO WHAT YOU'RE
ELECTED TO DO AND THEN YOU GO TO
THE VOTERS AGAIN AND THEY TURN
YOU OUT OR THEY KEEP YOU IN
OFFICE. I REALLY THINK THE ROLE
OF THE ETHICS CODE IN KIND OF
FRUSTRATING THE DEMOCRATIC
PROCESS IS A CONCERN TO ME.
>> WHICH IS WHY YOU BROUGHT THE
RECOMMENDATION?
>> YES.
>> COLLEAGUES, I JUST WANT TO
SAY I'VE WORKED AT THE CITY A
NUMBER OF YEARS AND I WANT TO
DISCLOSE I KNOW WAYNE. I'VE
KNOWN WAYNE FOR A LONG TIME.
I'VE HAD THE PLEASURE OF
WORKING WITH WAYNE. AS PART OF
MY WORK FOR THE CITY, I REACHED
OUT TO WAYNE ON MANY OCCASIONS
AND YOU CAN CONFIRM THAT, WAYNE.
>> YES.
>> I ALWAYS WANT TO BE ON THE
SIDE OF TRANSPARENCY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY AND ETHICS. THE
REASON I REACHED OUT TO YOU IS
BECAUSE I CARED ABOUT THIS
RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU MADE AND
I TRUST YOUR RECOMMENDATION.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME THIS
RECOMMENDATION CAME FROM YOU AND
ALSO IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME THAT
WE ARE REALLY LISTENING TO THE
RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU ARE
MAKING IN PARTICULAR BECAUSE YOU
ARE THE PERSON THAT THE CITY
DESIGNATED WITH LOOKING AT THE
ETHICS AND MAKING DECISIONS
ABOUT THESE THINGS, WHICH IS WHY
I'VE ALWAYS COME TO YOU. SO ALL
THAT TO SAY I BELIEVE, YOU KNOW,
THAT THIS RECOMMENDATION CAME
FROM YOU AFTER WHAT I THINK TO
BE A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION ON
YOUR PART, EVEN IF THAT ONE IN
2018 WASN'T YOU. IT HAS COME
UP.
>> YES.
>> AND THAT YOUR RECOMMENDATION
NOW, THIS IS COMING FROM YOUR
RECOMMENDATION BASED ON YOUR
EXPERIENCES YOU'VE BEEN HERE
AND ALL THAT YOU'VE DONE EVEN
BEFORE WE CAME HERE BECAUSE AS
WE TALKED ABOUT, THIS CAME UP
FOR YOU EVEN BEFORE THIS
COUNCIL.
>> YES.
>> GREAT. THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES.
THANK YOU, WAYNE, FOR BEING HERE
AND CLARIFYING FOR US. IT I RELY
ON YOU AND VALUE YOUR OPINION
THE MOST ON THIS. IT WAS
IMPORTANT TO ME WE HEARD
DIRECTLY FROM YOU THE REASON WHY
THIS RECOMMENDATION WAS COMING
AND THIS WAS SOMETHING IN YOUR
OPINION AS YOU -- QUOTING YOU
FROM THE OTHER DAY, YOU THINK
THIS IS A GOOD IDEA.
>> YES, I DO THINK IT'S A GOOD
IDEA.
>> THANK YOU, WAYNE. THANK YOU,
COUNCIL PRESIDENT. I WANTED TO
MAKE SURE YOU ALL HAD THE
BENEFIT OF OUR CONVERSATION
BECAUSE I THINK IT WAS AN
IMPORTANT ONE AND ALSO TO SAY
AND HIGHLIGHT THE TREMENDOUS
WORK WAYNE DOES EVERY DAY ON
BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE
CITY AND MAKING SURE THAT HE'S
KEEPING ELECTED OFFICIALS AND
CITY EMPLOYEES BECAUSE IN MY
WORK IT WAS REALLY RELATED TO
CITY AND THE WORK THE
DEPARTMENTS ARE DOING AND THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE. YOU KEEP US IN
LINE WITH WHAT IS THE ETHICS
RULES AND VALUES AND IT'S
SOMETHING I HIGHLY VALUE AS A
PERSON WHO HAS A LAW DEGREE.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS REALLY
VALUABLE TO ME AND SOMETHING
THAT I HOLD AS MY GOLD -- YOU
KNOW, ETHICS IS SOMETHING THAT
IS THE MOST IMPORTANT TO ME
BECAUSE AS MY DAD SAID, HE
DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING IN HIS
LIFE. HE HAD HIS WORD AND YOU
ONLY HAVE YOUR WORD. THAT'S
WHAT YOU'RE BORN WITH. THAT'S
WHAT YOU DIE WITH. SO THAT IS
HOLDING MYSELF ACCOUNTABLE AND
ETHICAL IS THE MOST IMPORTANT TO
ME ABOVE ALL ELSE. THANK YOU,
COUNCIL PRESIDENT, FOR INDULGING
ME ON THOSE COMMENTS AND THANK
YOU, WAYNE, FOR MAKING THOSE
CLARIFICATIONS THAT WERE
IMPORTANT TO ME. THANK YOU.
>> WHILE WE'RE ON THAT TOPIC I
DO HAVE FURTHER CLARIFICATION,
IF I MAY. DIRECTOR BARNETT,
WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THAT
LEGISLATION? WAS THAT
COUNCILMEMBER O'BRIEN'S
LEGISLATION AND THEN DID IT GO
TO A FULL VOTE?
>> I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS
COUNCILMEMBER O'BRIEN'S
LEGISLATION. BEN, YOU MAY RECALL
HOW THAT CAME UP IN 2018. I
THOUGHT IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN
COUNCIL PRESIDENT AT THE TIME
HARRELL WHO BROUGHT IT FORWARD,
BUT I'M NOT SURE.
>> I BELIEVE COUNCILMEMBER
HARRELL BROUGHT IT FORWARD
PERHAPS ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER
COUNCILMEMBER. THERE WAS AN
ISSUE RELATED TO WATERFRONT AND
A REQUIREMENT IN THE QUESTION
WHETHER OR NOT THAT WAS REALLY
FULFILLING THE OVERALL GOALS OF
THE ETHICS LEGISLATION OR NOT.
>> OKAY.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS?
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
JUST TO CLARIFY, I KNOW IT'S
BEEN A LITTLE HARD TO TRACK
WHERE THIS COMMITTEE'S MEETING.
ARE THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND
SEATTLE CAMERAS ON RIGHT NOW?
>> I DON'T KNOW. I'M SITTING
RIGHT HERE. I'M NOT SURE.
>> OKAY. WELL, I'LL ASK MY
QUESTIONS AND IF THE SEATTLE
CAMERA CHANNELS ARE ON, I'LL GO
BACK OUT TO CHAMBERS. YES. THIS
LEGISLATION HAS BEEN BEFORE US
BEFORE IN 2016 AND 2018. BOTH
THOSE COUNCILS RIGHTLY DECIDED
NOT TO LOWER THE ETHICAL
STANDARDS EVEN AFTER WE
ESTABLISHED OUR COUNCIL
DISTRICTS. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
BARNETT, I BELIEVE I'VE HEARD
YOU MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT THE
ETHICS CHANGE MAY BE BENEFICIAL
BECAUSE OF CONCERN WITH OUR
DISTRICT DID COUNCIL SYSTEM. FOR
EXAMPLE, IF A DISTRICT DID
COUNCILMEMBER HAS A FINANCIAL
CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND HAS TO
RECUSE THEMSELF, THE THOUGHT IS
PEOPLE IN THE COUNCIL DISTRICT
HAVE LOST REPRESENTATION. IS
THIS AN ACCURATE PORTRAYAL?
>> YES, THAT IS ACCURATE.
>> OKAY. FIRST, WE MAY BE
ELECTED BY DISTRICT. I WANT TO
BE VERY CLEAR. WE EACH REPRESENT
THE ENTIRE CITY. YOU'VE ALL
HEARD ME SAY I'M ELECTED BY THE
PEOPLE OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND
I REPRESENT THE ENTIRE CITY OF
SEATTLE. WHEN I DO MY JOB, I DO
IT ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE CITY
AND I KNOW I'M TAKING ACTIONS
IN SUPPORT OF ALL SEATTLITES
WHILE I'M ON THIS COUNCIL.
SECOND, I WANT TO CLEAR UP AND
DIG INTO WHAT I PERCEIVE TO BE A
MISCONCEPTION. IF A DISTRICT
COUNCILMEMBER HAS A FINANCIAL
CONFLICT OF INTEREST, THE
RESIDENTS IN THAT DISTINCT ARE
STILL, IN FACT, REPRESENTED IN
VOTES. THEY ARE REPRESENTED BY
TWO CITYWIDE COUNCILMEMBERS. I
THINK THAT GETS LOST SOMETIMES.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, A DISTRICT
COUNCILMEMBER RECUSES
THEMSELVES, ARE THEY STILL, IN
FACT, REPRESENTED BY THE
CITY-WIDE COUNCILMEMBERS?
>> THEY ARE. I WOULD SAY
THERE'S A SLIGHT DIFFERENCE
THERE. THEY DON'T HAVE THE
PERSON WHO THEY HAVE ELECTED TO
REPRESENT THEIR DISTRICT'S
VIEWS.
>> HAD THEY NOT ELECTED THEM?
>> THEY HAVE, BUT THEY'RE NOT
THE DISTRICT. THEY'RE NOT THE
PERSON -- YOU AND BALLARD, YOU
OWE BALLARD YOUR DUTIES AND I
THINK IN THE WAY COUNCILMEMBER
NELSON AND COUNCILMEMBER RINCK,
I'M SURE THEY GET CALLS FROM
EVERYWHERE, BUT I DON'T THINK
THEY'RE PAYING AS MUCH
ATTENTION TO PEOPLE CALL FROM
BALLARD AS YOU ARE.
>> THAT'S WHERE I DISAGREE. I
DISAGREE WE STRONGLY.
>> OKAY.
>> LET ME SHARE WHY. WHEN WE ARE
WORKING IN BALLARD, I'M WORKING
ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE CITY.
I'M USING IT AS A PILOT. I USE
THE EXAMPLE OF COMMUNITY SAFETY
AMBASSADORS. WE HAVE COMMUNITY
SAFETY AMBASSADORS AND A
COMMUNITY SAFETY COORDINATOR IN
BALLARD AND THAT PROGRAM I HAVE
WORKED TO SCALE TO THE CHINATOWN
INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT AND UP
NEXT CAPITOL HILL IN WORKING
WITH THE COUNCILMEMBERS FROM
THOSE AREAS. SO WE'VE JUST SEEN
THE COMMUNITY SAFETY AMBASSADORS
DEPLOYED IN CHINATOWN
INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT AND
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH ALSO
HAS A COMMUNITY SAFETY
COORDINATOR IN CAPITOL HILL
WHICH IS THE PRESTEP TO THE
SAFETY AMBASSADORS.
>>> I STRONGLY DISAGREE BECAUSE
IF I'M JUST GOING TO LOOK AFTER
MY OWN DISTRICT, I'M NOT
SERVING ALL SEATTLITES. THAT'S
WHERE I HAVE STRONG DISAGREEMENT
I NEED TO BE JUST AS CONCERNED
ABOUT THE GOOD AND BAD THINGS
HAPPENING IN THE CHINATOWN
INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT AS I AM
FOR MY OWN DISTRICT.
>> PARDON ME. YOU MISSED MY
INSTRUCTIONS WHEN I OPENED THE
MEETING. I DID SAY IF
COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE FOLLOW UP OR
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR
QUESTIONS FOR OUR PRESENTERS, I
ASK YOU RAISE YOUR HAND TO BE
RECOGNIZED TO CONTINUE TO SPEAK
INSTEAD OF ENGAGING IN A BACK
AND FORTH AND THAT IS ESPECIALLY
IMPORTANT AND I DID ALSO SAY I
WOULD CALL ON COMMITTEE MEMBERS
TO SPEAK FIRST. WE ARE UNDER A
TIME CONSTRAINT AND HAVE FIVE OR
SIX AMENDMENTS TO GET THROUGH. I
WOULD LIKE YOU TO FINISH YOUR
POINT AND I WILL GO ON TO THE
NEXT HAND RAISED.
>> CITY RESIDENCE ARE
REPRESENTED BY THE MAYOR WHO HAS
THE ABILITY TO VETO OR SIGN ANY
LEGISLATION. I'M ALSO NOT SURE
IN 2013 WHEN SEATTLE VOTERS
DECIDED TO CREATE COUNCIL
DISTRICTS THAT THEY INTENDED FOR
US TO LOWER OUR ETHICAL
STANDARDS BECAUSE OF IT. WHEN
MAYOR HARRELL WAS ON COUNCIL IN
2018, I'LL QUOTE FROM HIM. THIS
IS HIS QUOTE FROM 2018 SAYING,
"I'M LOOKING AT THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT WITH OUR CURRENT
EXECUTIVE. LORD KNOWS WHAT
FINANCIAL INTERESTS HE HAS
AFFECTED BY THE EXECUTIVE
DECISIONS HE'S MAKING BECAUSE
THERE'S VERY LITTLE DISCLOSURE
FROM THAT PERSON. I LOOK HOW THE
STATE LEGISLATURE CERTAIN I
THINK ARE TAKEN SOME HITS,
PROPERLY SO, BECAUSE OF THEIR
EXEMPTIONS ON THE OPMA AND I
LOOK AT WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO
CREATE AS A CITY AS A MODEL OF
TRANSPARENCY SAYING THERE'S A
MODEL OF NO FINANCIAL GAIN AND
WE'RE HERE TO SERVE THE PUBLIC
EVEN THOUGH WE ARE BY DISTRICT.
WHAT TRUMPS THAT IS IN WE STAND
TO GAIN FINANCIALLY, WE SHOULD
RECUSE OURSELVES. I KNOW THERE
WAS SOME CONVERSATION ABOUT
WHETHER MAYOR HARRELL SPONSORED
OR WAS SUPPORTING THIS
LEGISLATION A COUPLE MINUTES
AGO. HIS STATEMENT CLEARLY WAS
WE SHOULD NOT VOTE IF WE STAND
TO GAIN FINANCIALLY. THANK YOU.
>> NOTED. COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA,
DID YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP?
COUNCILMEMBER RINCK?
>> I WILL PASS. YOU CAN COME
BACK TO ME.
>> REMEMBER, PEOPLE, WE HAVE A
LOT OF AMENDMENTS TO GET THROUGH
AND COUNCILMEMBER HAS TO LEAVE,
HAS A HARD STOP. PLEASE GO
AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
>> SORRY. THIS IS THE CLERK TO
CONFIRM CHAMBERS ARE ON AND
SEATTLE CHANNEL IS ALSO ON.
>> HELLO FROM COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
I WANTED TO TAKE A MOMENT TO
RESPOND TO WHAT DIRECTOR BARNETT
HAS STATED SPEAKING AS ONE OF
THE CITY-WIDE COUNCILMEMBERS. I
REPRESENT THE ENTIRE CITY. WE
ARE ENGAGED DEEPLY IN
CONSTITUENT MATTERS ACROSS EVERY
DISTRICT. I WAS IN MAGNOLIA LAST
NIGHT LISTENING TO PUBLIC
COMMENT ALONGSIDE COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS RELATED TO THE FORT
LOTTEN PROJECT. WHETHER IT'S
TURNING STREET LIGHTS BACK ON IN
DISTRICT 1 IN WEST SEATTLE OR
DOING NEIGHBORHOOD WALKS IN
MADRONA, WE SHOW UP EVERYWHERE.
WE SERVE EVERYBODY. THE NOTION
OUR CITY-WIDE COUNCILMEMBERS'
VOTES OR PERSPECTIVES ARE NOT
POTENTIALLY AS VALUABLE OR OUR
ROLES ARE IN SOME WAY LIKE
MEANINGFULLY DIFFERENT WHEN IT
COMES DOWN TO OUR VOTES, I HAVE
TO REFUTURE THAT NOTION AND
NEEDED TO STATE THAT FOR THE
RECORD. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA.
>> I KNOW FOLKS HAVE A LOT OF
OPINIONS ABOUT THIS. I DON'T
THINK ANYONE IS SAYING THE
AT-LARGE MEMBERS ARE NOT
VALUABLE AND I DON'T THINK
ANYONE IS SAYING COUNCILMEMBERS
DON'T ALL RESPECT THE INTEREST
OF THE ENTIRE CITY, BUT WHAT
FOLKS ARE SAYING ARE THOSE OF US
THAT ARE DISTRICT SPECIFIC ARE
IN OUR DISTRICTS DAY IN AND DAY
OUT AND WE DO OWE A DUTY TO OUR
CONSTITUENTS IN THE DISTRICT
THAT THEY ARE RELYING ON US ON A
DAILY BASIS IN A DIFFERENT WAY.
I WILL SAY OFTENTIMES
CONSTITUENTS WILL REACH OUT TO
ME, NEVER HAVING REACHED OUT TO
THE AT-LARGE MEMBERS. THAT MAKES
SENSE BECAUSE THEY FEEL VERY
STRONGLY THAT I'M RESPONSIBLE.
THEY VOTED FOR ME AND I DIRECTLY
ANSWER TO THEM. I DON'T THINK
IN THIS CONVERSATION IT'S
HELPFUL TO DISPARAGE ONE OR THE
OTHER, BUT IT IS A FACT AS A
DISTRICT SPECIFIC CONSTITUENTS
DO LOOK AT US. I DON'T WANT TO
DISPARAGE DIRECTOR BARNETT'S
COMMENTS BECAUSE I DIDN'T THINK
HIS COMMENTS MEANT THAT SOMEHOW
THE DISTRICT-WIDES DON'T COUNT
AS MUCH AND I DO THINK THERE IS
A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DISTRICT
SPECIFIC AND AT-LARGE AND STILL,
YOU KNOW, REALLY WANTED TO SAY
THAT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO
DISPARAGE ONE OR THE OTHER,
ABOUT THE I DON'T WANT TO
DISPARAGE DIRECTOR BARNETT WHO
WORKS DAY IN, DAY OUT TO MAKE
SURE OUR ETHICS RULES ARE
FOLLOWED AND I THINK HE DOES AN
EXCELLENT JOB AND HAS FOR MANY,
MANY YEARS.
>> THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE ABOUT
DISTRICT REPRESENTATION HAD TO
DO WITH A VERY DISTRICT SPECIFIC
PIECE OF LEGISLATION WHICH WAS
THE ASSESSMENT FOR WATERFRONT
PROPERTY OWNERS FOR THE
WATERFRONT PARK AND I BELIEVE
THE ISSUE THERE WAS THAT THE
COUNCILMEMBER OWNED PROPERTY IN
THE VERY NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTED
BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE WAS
HIGH INTEREST IN THE LEGISLATION
BY HER CONSTITUENTS AND THEN WAS
NOT ABLE TO VOTE EITHER WAY.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I GOT THE SENSE WE'RE ABOUT TO
GO TO AMENDMENTS.
>> YES.
>> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SOME
GENERAL COMMENTS AHEAD OF TIME,
BASICALLY THREE PARTS. FIRST
PART IS UNDERSTANDING THE
CURRENT SITUATION. I RECOGNIZE
THIS DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES
THAT WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW AS
NOTED IN THE PREVIOUS
DISCUSSION, THERE'S THE
QUESTION OF REPRESENTATION, THE
WHOLE DISTRICT VERSUS CITY-WIDE
PIECE. ALSO ETHICS, PART OF THE
BASELINE AND FOUNDATION OF
DEMOCRACY, SO IT'S VERY
IMPORTANT. I RECOGNIZE THAT.
THAT ADDS TO THE DIFFICULT
CIRCUMSTANCES AND THERE CAN BE
SOME COMPLEX POLICY DECISIONS. I
DID SIT DOWN WITH OUR COUNSEL
AND SEPARATELY WITH EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE COMMISSION AND
THE COMMISSION CHAIR ITSELF.
IT'S ALSO DIFFICULT BECAUSE
THERE'S A LOT OF SWIRLING AND
CONTRADICTORY NARRATIVES AND
MESSAGING AND THE LIKE.
WONDERFUL THOSE IS THIS IDEA
WE'RE ENRICHING OURSELVES,
BASICALLY DO OUR SERVICE ON THE
COUNCIL, AND CONTRARY TO
ASSERTIONS SPEAKING FOR MYSELF,
BY THE WAY, NOT ON BEHALF OF THE
COUNCIL, JUST FOR MYSELF, MY NET
WORTH IS LARGELY DEPENDENT WHAT
THE KING COUNTY ASSESSOR THINKS
MY PROPERTY'S WORTH OR WHAT'S
HAPPENED WITH AN INFLATED STOCK
MARKET, ALTHOUGH I LIKE TO SAY I
LIKE TO THINK I HAVE A GOOD
FINANCIAL PLAN, BUT THOSE
NUMBERS AND THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES
ARE REALLY RELATED TO THAT. I
SEE THE CHALLENGE WE'RE FACING
IS PRIMARILY CENTERED ON THOSE
IN REAL ESTATE, OBVIOUSLY THE
LANDLORD QUESTION, BUT ALSO
SMALL BUSINESS AND THERE'S
DIFFERENT PIECES THAT GO TO
THAT. WE SHOULD BE HAVING GRACE
IN THIS AND CIVILITY BECAUSE WE
DO HAVE SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS ON
THE COUNCIL AND LANDLORDS AS
WELL AND RELATED TO REAL ESTATE.
IT'S A LITTLE BIT IRONIC GIVEN
THE NEW STATE LAW RELATED TO
RENT INCREASES AND THE LIKE.
REGARDING THESE SWIRLING
MESSAGES IN MESSAGING, ONE OF
THE PIECES MISSING IS THE
FINANCIAL STATE OF THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVIDERS
GIVEN THE RECENT LANDLORD/TENANT
LAWS AND THAT'S NOT BEING
DISCUSSED AT ALL. THAT'S OF
CONCERN. IT GOES TO THIS IDEA OF
THESE CONTRADICTORY MESSAGING
AND THE LIKE. JUST FOR THE
RECORD, I WAS A TENANT UNTIL I
WAS 47 YEARS OLD. I GUESS I WAS
A LANDLORD FOR A DECADE AND
NEARLY A HALF IN WESTERN NEW
YORK AND THAT ENDED YEARS AGO,
SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS AGO.
REGARDING ETHICS, IT'S
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FOR OUR
DEMOCRATIC EXPERIMENT ESPECIALLY
IN THE FACE OF CONSTANT THREATS
TO DEMOCRACY. I UNDERSTAND
WHAT'S HAPPENING IN D.C. I
DON'T LIKE WHAT'S TYING HERE
IN SEATTLE TO THE OTHER
WASHINGTON. I'M MINDFUL OF IT
AND I UNDERSTAND THE POINT. I
LIKE BEING CENTERED ON US. I'M
ALSO MINDFUL OF THE PRINCIPLE OF
PASSING AN ETHIC LAW ON
OURSELVES. THAT'S AN IMPORTANT
CONSIDERATION I THINK WE SHOULD
BE WALKING THROUGH. I'M
THINKING OF THE FACT OF OUR PAY,
THE FACT WE CANNOT GIVE
OURSELVES A PAY RAISE. MY PAY,
OUR PAY, IS THE SAME TODAY AS IT
WAS IN JANUARY 2024 AT LEAST FOR
THOSE ELECTED, CAME IN OFFICE
JANUARY, '24, AS IT WOULD BE IN
DECEMBER 2027. THAT'S A
CONSIDERATION. THAT'S A
PRINCIPLE THAT WE HAVE HERE IN
TERMS OF PASSING LEGISLATION
THAT'S DIRECTLY RELATED TO
OURSELVES. ETHICS AGAIN IN SOME
WAYS IS DIFFICULT, BUT ALSO
SOMEWHAT SIMPLE, TOO. THIS CAME
OUT IN DISCUSSIONS WITH COUNCIL
AND THOSE REPRESENTATIVES I
MENTIONED EARLIER. AS I
UNDERSTAND IT, WE HAVE ABOUT
THREE MAIN OPTIONS OF ONE IS
MAINTAINING THE BRIGHT LINE KIND
OF APPROACH, KIND OF WHAT WE
HAVE NOW, THE ADJUDICATED PIECE
AND THE DISCLOSURE WHICH THIS
BILL KIND OF GOES TO. I THINK IN
A LOT OF WAYS THESE CAN PASS THE
FAST TEST IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF
THE STATE AND COUNTRY, BUT DOES
IT PASS THE TEST HERE IN
SEATTLE? ULTIMATELY FOR ME IT'S
IMPORTANT, TOO, THAT IT'S NOT
WHAT, BUT HOW AND WHEN. CLEARLY,
THE WHY IN THIS IS CLEAR BECAUSE
OF THE FOUNDATIONAL TENETS OF
DEMOCRACY RELY ON ETHICS. FOR ME
IT'S NOT SO MUCH THE WHAT IN
TERMS OF THE LEGISLATION, BUT
HOW AND WHEN. SO THE PROCESS I
WOULD BE UP FRONT AND FRANK HAS
BEEN A LITTLE BIT FRUSTRATING
FOR ME. I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE
TO DISCUSS THIS ISSUE WITH OUR
COLLEAGUES AND MY COLLEAGUES IN
CP AND THE IDEA OF A BLUE RIBBON
PANEL THAT INCLUDED THE SEATTLE
ETHICS AND ELECTION
COMMISSION'S EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, THE COMMISSIONERS, NOT
ALL NECESSARILY, MAKE ACADEMICS
FROM U-DUB EVANS SCHOOL, MAYBE
JESUIT UNIVERSITY, FORMER
COUNCILMEMBERS. YOU MENTIONED
ONE EARLIER, COUNCIL PRESIDENT,
WHO HAVE THIS EXPERIENCE OF BOTH
SERVING CITY-WIDE AND DISTRICT
AND BEING SMART OF THAT. I THINK
THERE'S SWIRLING NARRATIVES,
QUESTIONS REGARDING OURS VERSUS
OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE IN
TERMS OF LIKE SO WHAT IS
HAPPENING TRULY AT KING COUNTY
ITSELF OR THE VARIOUS
JURISDICTIONS IN KING COUNTY AND
THE STATE AND HAVING THIS ALL
LAID OUT? I'M CONCERNED WE
WOULD BENEFIT FROM -- THE
CONCERN IS ESSENTIALLY AN INSIDE
OUT APPROACH VERSUS AN OUTSIDE
IN. I LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING A
PANEL WALK THROUGH THESE THINGS
IN A VERY TRANSPARENT WAY WITH
ALL THE VARIOUS PIECES BEING
DISCUSSED AGAIN IN THAT VERY
TRANSPARENT WAY HERE IN ' 25
AND WITH THE ELECTIONS IN
NOVEMBER BASICALLY HAVE THE
COUNCIL TAKE IT UP IN 2026.
THAT'S UP FRONT THE WAY MY
COUNCIL WOULD HAVE BEEN IF I WAS
ASKED ABOUT THIS PARTICULARLY
EARLY ON IN TERMS OF WAY AHEAD
ON THE APPROACH. WE ARE WHERE WE
ARE. SO ANOTHER APPROACH AND I
DID HAVE A DRAFT AMENDMENT 7 I
WAS THINK OF DOING AS A WALK-ON.
I THINK I MAY HOLD BECAUSE THERE
ARE A NUMBER OF AMENDMENTS AND I
WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO COUNCIL
ABOUT THOSE AMENDMENTS, TOO, TO
ESSENTIALLY CREATE AN EFFECTIVE
DATE OF JANUARY 2028 GOING TO
THE POINTS I MADE IN MY REMARKS.
AGAIN, I RECOGNIZE THE DESIRE. I
RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANT
CONSIDERATIONS AND DECISION
POINTS AND POLICY POINTS, BUT
FOR ME I JUST WANTED TO BE UP
FRONT. THIS IS HOW I LOOK AT
THIS TOPIC AND I SAY THIS WITH
ALL RESPECT TO EVERYONE INVOLVED
TO INCLUDE MY COLLEAGUE,
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT, BUT ALL MY COLLEAGUES
REGARDING THIS TOPIC. SO,
COUNCIL PRESIDENT, I APPRECIATE
THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON THIS
TOPIC AHEAD OF THE STARTING OF
THE AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. I SEE ONE MORE
HAND AND WE DO HAVE TO GET TO
THE AMENDMENTS. GO AHEAD,
COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT. I'M GOING TO KEEP MY
REMARKS BRIEF BECAUSE WE DO HAVE
AMENDMENTS TO BE VOTED ON AND I
DON'T WANT TO DELAY THAT. SO A
COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS,
EXAMPLES. SO GETTING TO THE
ISSUE OF SAY LANDLORD/TENANT
STUFF, I'M A LANDLORD. I HAVE A
DUPLEX. I LIVE IN ONE HALF AND
RENT OUT THE OTHER SIDE. IF
THERE'S SOMETHING THAT COMES
BEFORE COUNCIL THAT HAS TO DO
WITH LANDLORD/TENANT LAW THAT
AFFECTS EVERY LANDLORD, NOT JUST
ME, WOULD I HAVE TO RECUSE?
THAT'S DIRECTED AT YOU,
DIRECTOR BARNETT?
>> IS THE PROPERTY IN SEATTLE?
>> YES.
>> YOU LIKELY WOULD. IF YOU HAVE
A FINANCIAL INTEREST IN IT, YOU
WOULD STILL HAVE TO RECUSE
YOURSELF, YES.
>> SAY I'M A RENTER IN SEATTLE
AND THERE'S A LANDLORD/TENANT
BILL THAT COMES BEFORE US. AS A
RENTER, WOULD I HAVE TO RECUSE?
>> NO. JUST BECAUSE THE NUMBER
OF RENTERS IS SO MUCH HIGHER IN
THE CITY THAN THE NUMBER OF
LANDLORDS. RENTERS QUALIFY FOR
THAT SUBSTANTIAL SEGMENT
EXCEPTION.
>> OKAY. AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS
TRYING TO GET AT BECAUSE AGAIN
IF SOMETHING IS AFFECTING THIS
ONE DUPLEX OWNER, BUT IT'S
AFFECTING ALL DUPLEX OWNERS, ME
AS THE GUY LIVING IN ONE HALF OF
A DUPLEX IS NOT GOING TO BENEFIT
MORE THAN ANYBODY ELSE WHO IS
RENTING OUT A DUPLEX.
>> RIGHT. YEAH. I THINK THE
PROBLEM IS THAT THERE ARE SO FEW
LANDLORDS IN THE CITY. I THINK
THERE WERE ROUGHLY 3% OF THE
CITY WERE LANDLORDS MAYBE TEN
YEARS AGO. I CAN'T IMAGINE
IT'S MOVED MUCH. THAT'S WHY
YOU WOULD STILL HAVE TO RECUSE
YOURSELF.
>> OKAY. GOT IT. ANOTHER
EXAMPLE, I OWN A COMIC BOOKSTORE
AND THERE'S LEGISLATION BEFORE
US THAT'S GOING TO IMPACT ME,
GOLDEN AGE COLLECTIBLES, XANADU,
THE WHOLE BIT IN. THAT CASE
WOULD I HAVE TO RECUSE BECAUSE
I'M ALSO OWNING A COMIC
BOOKSTORE?
>> YES. I WOULD GIVE YOU THAT
ADVICE TENTATIVELY NOW. I'D
NEED TO KNOW A LOT MORE ABOUT
THE BUSINESS AND ALL THAT, BUT
YES, I BELIEVE YOU WOULD HAVE TO
RECUSE YOURSELF.
>> SO WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET TO
IS THIS. HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE
TO READ ALL THE AMENDMENTS?
>> YES, I HAVE.
>> IN YOUR OPINION AS THE GUY
WHO WE TURN TO, IS WHAT'S BEING
PROPOSED VIA THE AMENDMENTS
STRENGTHEN OUR ETHICS CODE OR
DOES IT WEAKEN IT AS A LOT OF
THE COMMENTARY THAT WE HEARD?
THAT'S WHAT FOLKS ARE CONCERNED
ABOUT, THAT WE'RE WEAKENING
ETHICS STANDARDS, THAT WE'RE
BASICALLY OPENING THE DOOR FOR
CORRUPTION AND I JUST WANT TO
GET A CLEAR SENSE. DOES THIS
HELP US? DOES IT HURT US? AS YOU
LOOK THROUGH THOSE AMENDMENTS,
WHAT'S YOUR TAKE?
>> I'M NOT SURE I CAN GIVE YOU
AN ETHICS TAKE. TO ME I THINK IT
MIGHT HELP FROM THE DEMOCRATIC
PROCESS. YOU'RE ALL ELECTED TO
MAKE THESE DECISIONS AND TO ME
THE ETHICS CODE SHOULD REALLY BE
TREADING CAREFULLY ANYTIME IT'S
TELLING AN ELECTED OFFICIAL THEY
CAN'T VOTE ON A MATTER.
>> OKAY. GOT YOU. AGAIN, WHAT
I'M LOOKING AT IS NOT EITHER
DISCLOSURE OR RECUSAL. I'M
LOOKING AT BOTH BECAUSE I THINK
BOTH WOULD LEAD TO TRANSPARENCY
WHICH WOULD LEAD TO TRUST AND
VERY SPECIFIC GUIDELINES AS TO
WHEN THE COUNCILMEMBER NEEDS TO
RECUSE AND I THINK THAT'S VERY
CLEAR FROM YOUR GUIDANCE WHEN
THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE. IS THERE
A SPECIFIC INTEREST THAT
BENEFITS ME VERSUS ANYONE ELSE
IN THE CITY THAT YEAH, OBVIOUS.
AGAIN, WE HAVE THESE AMENDMENTS.
WE'RE SHORT ON TIME. THANK YOU
FOR INDULGING ME, MADAM
PRESIDENT. LET'S GET THESE
AMENDMENTS AND GET GOING.
>> GREAT.
>> AMENDMENT 1.
>> OKAY. GO AHEAD. COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
ADDRESS THIS AMENDMENT BEFORE
RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER MOORE
AS THE AUTHOR?
>> YES, THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME
SINCE -- SORRY. THANK YOU,
CHAIR. I MOVE TO AMEND COUNCIL
BILL 120978 AS PRESENTED ON
AMENDMENT 1.
>> SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO AMEND THE BILL AS
PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT 1.
COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF, WILL YOU
PLEASE WALK US THROUGH THE
AMENDMENT AND THEN THE AUTHOR
WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO IT.
>> . THIS AMENDMENT HAS TWO KEY
COMPONENTS BOTH OF WHICH RELATE
TO TRANSPARENCY AND I THINK
COULD BE READ TRYING TO ENHANCE
TRANSPARENCY AND IN SOME WAYS
BETTER FULFILL THE INTENT OF THE
ORIGINAL BILL. SUBSTANTIVE, BUT
SPECIFICALLY FOCUSED ON
TRANSPARENCY. THE FIRST ELEMENT
HAS TO DO WITH NONLEGISLATIVE
MATTERS AND THE DISCLOSURE
REGARDING NONLEGISLATIVE
MATTERS. THE WAY THE BILL BEFORE
YOU IS DRAFTED, THERE HAD BEEN A
REQUIREMENT THAT FOR
NONLEGISLATIVE MATTERS WHERE
THERE IS A CONFLICT THAT
NOTIFICATION BY COUNCILMEMBERS
BE PROVIDED TO BOTH THE DIRECTOR
OF THE ETHICS COMMISSION AND TO
THE CITY CLERK. REPORTING TO THE
CITY CLERK WAS LOST IN THE
CURRENT DRAFTING. THIS AMENDMENT
WOULD RESTORE THAT. AGAIN, FOR
NONLEGISLATIVE MATTERS ELECTED
OFFICIALS WOULD BE REQUIRED TO
DISCLOSE IF THERE WAS A CONFLICT
OF INTEREST BOTH TO THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ETHICS
COMMISSION AND TO THE CITY
CLERK, AGAIN, ENHANCED
TRANSPARENCY. THE SECOND HAS TO
DO WITH DISCLOSURE FOR
LEGISLATIVE MATTERS FOR WHICH
THERE IS A FINANCIAL INTEREST OR
SOME OTHER CONFLICT OF INTEREST
AND JUST CLARIFYING, AGAIN, AS
WRITTEN THERE'S A REQUIREMENT
FOR A COUNCILMEMBER TO PUBLICLY
STATE THAT, THAT THEY HAVE THAT
CONFLICT, BUT THAT COULD HAPPEN
AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL AND NOT
ALL COUNCILMEMBERS WOULD
NECESSARILY BE IN ATTENDANCE AND
THEN WHEN THE MATTER MOVES TO
THE FULL COUNCIL, THERE ISN'T
SPECIFICALLY A REQUIREMENT IN
THE CURRENT BILL THAT THAT
DISCLOSURE ABOUT THAT CONFLICT
BE REPEATED FOR THE FULL COUNCIL
AND THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ADD
THAT ADDITIONAL TRANSPARENCY AS
WELL. AGAIN, IF YOU THINK ABOUT
HOW THIS WOULD WORK, IF YOUR
GOVERNOR
WAS NOT A MEMBER OF THE
COMMITTEE, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE A
MEMBER TO DISCLOSE. IF YOU WERE
A MEMBER, YOU WOULD DO IT FIRST
AND DO IT AGAIN AT FULL COUNCIL.
NOT CHANGING THE RULES WHEN
DISCLOSURE OCCURS, BUT ENHANCING
TRANSPARENCY BOTH FOR
NONLEGISLATIVE MATTERS AND
LEGISLATIVE MATTERS AS WELL.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
THE EXPLANATION. COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
ADDRESS THIS AMENDMENT BEFORE
RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER MOORE
AS THE AUTHOR OR YOU CAN HAND IT
OVER.
>> I'M BRINGING IT ON HER
BEHALF SINCE SHE DOESN'T SIT ON
THIS COMMITTEE. SO THIS IS ON
BEHALF OF COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I THINK
DIRECTOR NOBLE HAS EXPLAINED
THIS VERY CLEARLY AND WELL.
IT'S REALLY JUST TO CLEAN UP A
FEW THINGS THAT WERE NOT CLEAR
OR LEFT THAT DROPPED TO ENSURE
WE ARE HAVING MAXIMUM REQUIRED
DISCLOSURE. THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I'M NOT SEEING ANY HANDS
RAISED.
>> NO COMMENTS I'M SEEING.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> AYE.
>> CHAIR NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES AND
AMENDMENT 1 IS ADOPTED. LET'S
SEE. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE READ
-- NOT THE CLERK. YEAH, GO
AHEAD, .
>> I MOVE TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL
120978 AS PRESENTED FOR
AMENDMENT NUMBER 2 VERSION C.
>> SECOND.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED
TO AMEND THE BILL AS PRESENTED
ON AMENDMENT 2 VERSION C.
COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF, WILL YOU
PLEASE WALK US THROUGH IT.
>> ABSOLUTELY. IT'S PROBABLY
THE MOST SUBSTANTIVE AMENDMENT
BEFORE YOU TODAY. IT SEEKS
TECHNICAL POINT, TOO. THERE WAS
AN EARLIER VERSION B. THIS
VERSION C IS IDENTICAL IN TERMS
OF SUBSTANCE. THERE'S AN
ADDITIONAL RECITAL TO PROVIDE
FURTHER CLARITY FOR THE
RATIONALE AND EXPLANATION HOW
THIS WOULD WORK. I THINK I'M
GOING TO READ THOSE RECITALS.
WHAT THIS FUNDAMENTALLY DOES IS
INTRODUCE A STANDARD FOR
RECUSAL. THERE WOULD BE RECUSAL
REQUIRED IN CERTAIN
CIRCUMSTANCES, NOTABLY MORE
LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES THAN UNDER
OUR CURRENT ETHICS CODE, BUT
OBVIOUSLY SOMEWHAT MORE
RESTRICTIVE THAN THE BILL BEFORE
YOU NOW FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
IN PARTICULAR, THE ISSUE THIS IS
TRYING TO GET AT IS TRYING TO
MEASURE OR CAPTURE THE DEPTH AND
DEGREE OF THE POTENTIAL CONFLICT
AND IN CASES WHERE THAT CONFLICT
IS MOST DIRECT AND MOST
SIGNIFICANT REQUIRING RECUSAL. I
WOULD DESCRIBE THIS AS
POTENTIALLY SORT OF A MIDDLE
GROUND BETWEEN GETTING THE
CURRENT CODE WHICH REQUIRES
RECUSAL IF THERE'S ANY
FINANCIAL INTEREST AND WHAT HAS
BEEN PROPOSED WHICH WOULD
CLEARLY REQUIRE DISCLOSURE IN
ALL CASES BUT NOT REQUIRE
RECUSAL IN MOST. SO LET ME READ
SOME OF THE LANGUAGE SOME OF THE
LANGUAGE OF BOTH RECITALS AND
WHAT'S PROPOSED AND OFFER A
COUPLE EXAMPLES I'VE BEEN
WORKING ON WITH LAUREN AND I
SHOULD ADD IN ALL THIS WORK
LAUREN HENRY IS THE PRIMARY
AUTHOR OF ALL OF THESE PIECES
HERE. I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH
HER VERY CLOSELY, TO GIVE CREDIT
WHERE CREDIT IS DUE. READING
THESE RECITALS, WHILE ELECTED
OFFICIALS WILL BE ABLE TO
DISCLOSE THEIR FINANCIAL
INTEREST OR CONFLICT OF INTEREST
ON LEGISLATIVE MATTERS, WHEN THE
ELECTED OFFICIAL'S FINANCIAL
INTEREST IS IMPACTED TO A
GREATER OR LESSER EXTENT THAN
THAT OF OTHER MEMBERS OF THE
SAME PROFESSION, OCCUPATION,
CLASSES, OR GROUPS THAT ARE
AFFECTED. THE IDEA IS YOU WOULD
LOOK FOR SITUATIONS WHERE THE
ELECTED OFFICIALS' INTERESTS
ARE NOT IN LINE WITH OTHER
PEOPLE IN THE GROUP. TO USE ONE
OF THE EXAMPLES FROM EARLIER, IF
THERE WAS SOMETHING SPECIFIC
ABOUT THE DUPLEX THAT WAS OWNED
THAT MADE IT VERY SPECIFIC TO
THAT INDIVIDUAL AND I WILL USE
SOME OTHER EXAMPLES IN A MOMENT.
READING THE SECOND RECITAL IS
ALSO IMPORTANT WHEN REVIEWING
ELECTED OFFICIALS' FINANCIAL
INTEREST IN THEIR PARTICIPATION
IN A LEGISLATIVE MATTER, THE
ETHICS COMMISSION AND ITS
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WILL
DETERMINE -- AND THIS IS THE KEY
LANGUAGE -- WHETHER THE
REGULATED MATTER PRODUCES A
UNIQUE GAIN OR LOSS SPECIFIC TO
THE ELECTED OFFICIAL BUT NOT
OTHER PERSONS OR OTHER ENTITIES
REGULATED. THIS IS REQUIRING
RECUSAL IN CASES WHERE THERE'S
SOMETHING SPECIFIC TO THE
FINANCIAL INTERESTS OF THE
ELECTED OFFICIAL. THAT SAME
LANGUAGE IS REPEATED IN THE CODE
ITSELF. THE LAST PAGE OF THE
AMENDMENT, THE ADDED LANGUAGE,
HOWEVER, IF THE ELECTED
OFFICIAL'S IS IMPACTED TO A
GREATER EXTENT THAN OTHER
MEMBERS OR GROUPS AFFECTED BY
THE LEGISLATIVE MATTER, THEY
WOULD BE REQUIRED TO RECUSE. TO
OFFER UP SOME EXAMPLES AND SORT
OF IN THE SPIRIT OF ONES
COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON DESCRIBED,
IMAGINE A SITUATION WHERE ONE OR
MORE COUNCILMEMBERS IS A SMALL
BUSINESS OWNER AND THE CITY WILL
REGULATE THE HOURS IN WHICH
SMALL BUSINESSES CAN OPERATE,
ENTIRELY THEORETICAL EXAMPLE.
YOU CAN'T OPEN YOUR BUSINESS
BEFORE 9:00 A.M. AND HAVE TO
CLOSE IT BY 11:00 P.M. SOME SET
EVERY STAKEHOLDERS LOBBY FOR
FLORISTS SHOPS IT'S REALLY
IMPORTANT TO BE OPEN AT 7:00
A.M. VERSUS 9:00 A.M. IT TURNS
OUT ONE OR MORE COUNCILMEMBERS
OWNS A FLORIST SHOP. IN THAT
CASE THAT INTEREST MIGHT BE
CLOSE ENOUGH TO THEIR OWN
SITUATION TO ARGUE FOR RECUSAL.
I WOULD ARGUE IN THIS CASE THAT
WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE. THE
ELECTIONS COMMISSION WOULD BE
THE ULTIMATE ARBITER OF THOSE
SITUATIONS, BUT IT'S AN
EXAMPLE. ANOTHER ONE MIGHT BE --
A PROPERTY EXAMPLE -- TWO GIVEN
COUNCILMEMBERS OWNED RESIDENTIAL
PROPERTIES, ONE OF THEM IN A
HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD AND
THERE'S LEGISLATION THAT WOULD
IN SOME WAYS BENEFIT OR PENALIZE
FROM A FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE
OWNING PROPERTY IN A HISTORIC
DISTRICT. AGAIN, THAT IS A
RELATIVELY NARROW SITUATION. THE
COUNCILMEMBER MIGHT BE VERY
SPECIFICALLY AFFECTED. OBVIOUSLY
RATHER THAN ALL HOMEOWNERS, IT
WOULD BE THOSE SPECIFIC TO THE
PROPERTY IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT
AND THAT WOULD IN THE SITUATION
IN MY EXAMPLE I WOULD THINK THAT
WOULD REQUIRE RECUSAL. AGAIN,
THESE ALL NEED TO BE VERY FACT
SPECIFIC AND ULTIMATELY COULD
DEPEND ON THE INTERPRETATION OF
THE ETHICS AND ELECTIONS
COMMISSION. THERE'S ANOTHER
AMENDMENT FROM COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH THAT PROVIDES
POTENTIALLY A PATH TO
COUNCILMEMBERS BEING ABLE TO
SORT OUT THE SITUATIONS AND WHEN
THIS LANGUAGE WOULD REQUIRE
RECUSAL AND WHEN IT WOULD NOT.
THAT'S MY SUMMARY. I'M HAPPY
TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
>> ARE THERE ANY -- GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
THANK YOU, BEN. SO LET ME FIRST
SET THE TABLE. I'M BRINGING
FORTH A UNIVERSE OF AMENDMENTS
TODAY FROM WATCHING MY
EXPERIENCE OF THE ETHICS PROCESS
AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO
IMPROVE THOSE REGARDLESS HOW WE
FEEL TODAY ABOUT THE ETHICS AND
I THINK THERE'S ALWAYS ROOM FOR
IMPROVEMENT. SO HERE IS MY BIG
STAB AT IT AND TRYING TO BRING
FORTH SOME AMENDMENTS THAT I
THINK CAN POTENTIALLY MAKE IT
BETTER. I KNOW WE'VE HEARD FROM
THE PUBLIC ON HOW IMPORTANT
PUBLIC TRUST AND TRANSPARENCY
IS. WHETHER WE AGREE ON THE
UNDERLYING BILL OR NOT, WE CAN
ALL AGREE HOW WE CAN IMPROVE
SOME OF THE CURRENT PROCESSES.
SO CURRENTLY THE SEATTLE ETHICS
COMMISSION USES THE EXCEPTION
THAT YOUR INTEREST CAN BE SHARED
WITH A SUBSTANTIAL SEGMENT OF
THE GENERAL POPULATION IN
SEATTLE, BUT MANY LEGISLATION
TYPES DON'T ACTUALLY MEET THE
STANDARD WHICH LEAVES A LOT OF
AMBIGUOUS AND SUBJECTIVE SUBJECT
FOR OUR ETHICS COMMISSION. MY
INTENT WITH THIS AMENDMENT IS TO
GIVE ETHICS A CLEAR, CONSISTENT,
AND TRANSPARENT STANDARD TO
MEASURE OUR CONFLICTS OF
INTEREST AGAINST. THE NEWEST
VERSION ALSO ADDS A RECITAL FROM
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE'S INITIAL
AMENDMENT IN A WHEREAS CLAUSE
FOR SEEK TO DETERMINE THE
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. I ALSO
WANT TO STATE WE SHOULD KEEP ALL
THE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS IN
ADDITION TO THE STANDARDS FOR
THIS RECUSAL AS WELL. I'M MORE
THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS AS WELL.
>> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? I'M
NOT SEEING ANY. COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE. YOU'RE MUTED.
>> THANK YOU. I'M SORRY. IT'S
NOT A QUESTION. I WANTED TO
PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION, IF I MAY, WHICH IS
TO SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR
BRINGING THIS. I VERY MUCH
CONSIDER IT TO BE VERY FRIENDLY
AND I ALSO JUST WANTED TO POINT
OUT THERE ARE, AS I MENTIONED IN
MY OPENING REMARKS, A VARIETY OF
APPROACHES. THIS LANGUAGE IS
ACTUALLY UTILIZED IN A VARIETY
OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS, SUCH AS
MINNESOTA, CONNECTICUT, MONTANA,
OREGON, MARYLAND, PENNSYLVANIA,
UTAH, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT,
IOWA, GEORGIA, FLORIDA, AND
ALABAMA, ALASKA, MASSACHUSETTS,
AND ARKANSAS USE SIMILAR
STANDARDS. THERE ARE QUITE A LOT
OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS THAT TRY
TO STRADDLE THE MIDDLE BETWEEN
NONE OR ALL. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. I WILL NOTE
WASHINGTON STATE SAYS -- THE
STATE LEGISLATION ETHICS CODE
SAYS THE LEGISLATOR DOES NOT
HAVE AN INTEREST WHICH IS IN
CONFLICT WITH THE PROPER
DISCHARGE OF LEGISLATIVE DUTY IF
NO BENEFIT OR DETRIMENT ACCRUES
TO THE LEGISLATOR AS THE MEMBER
OF A BUSINESS, PROFESSION,
OCCUPATION, ON OR GROUP TO A
GREATER EXTENT THAN TO ANY OTHER
MEMBER OF A BUSINESS,
PROFESSION, OCCUPATION, OR
GROUP. THAT SEEMS TO BE THE
SPIRIT OF THAT. COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS, I SEE YOUR HAND UP, BUT
UNLESS THERE ARE OTHER
QUESTIONS, I'M CALLING FOR A
VOTE BECAUSE WE'VE STILL GOT
SEVERAL AMENDMENTS TO GET
THROUGH. I AM GOING TO PROCEED
WITH A VOTE UNLESS YOU HAVE A
VERY SHORT QUESTION ABOUT THE
SPECIFIC AMENDMENT.
>> YES.
>> GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR
YOUR SET OF AMENDMENTS AND,
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, THANK YOU
FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS BILL EVEN
THOUGH WE MAY NOT AGREE. I DO
APPRECIATE YOU CALLING THE
QUESTION. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
BARNETT, HAS THE ETHICS AND
ELECTIONS COMMISSION HAD TIME TO
REVIEW THESE AMENDMENTS?
>> NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NO.
>> HOW IS IT THAT WE ARE --
>> THE INSTRUCTIONS AT THE
BEGINNING OF THE -- I'VE SAID
THE INSTRUCTIONS TWICE AND I'M
NOT GOING TO REPEAT THEM. THERE
IS NOT TO BE ENGAGED A BACK AND
FORTH. YOU RAISE YOUR HAND TO
ASK ANOTHER QUESTION. YOU WILL
HAVE ONE VERY SHORT QUESTION AND
THEN WE ARE PROCEEDING.
>> THANK YOU. DIRECTOR BARNETT,
HOW WOULD WE BE ABLE TO RECEIVE
FEEDBACK FROM THE ETHICS AND
ELECTIONS COMMISSION? I DO AGREE
WE NEED A THIRD PARTY, WHETHER
IT'S A BLUE RIBBON COMMISSION
OR ETHICS AND ELECTIONS
COMMISSION, TO PROVIDE US
FEEDBACK.
>> I BELIEVE I HAVE TO PUT THE
QUESTION TO THEM AT THEIR NEXT
MEETING SCHEDULED FOR JUNE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> JUST TO BE VERY BRIEF, THIS
IS HAD THE EXACT LANGUAGE I
BROUGHT WHEN I DID MY FIRST
DRAFT OF THIS BILL MANY MONTHS
AGO AND THAT I BROUGHT TO THE
ETHICS AND ELECTIONS COMMISSION
FOR THEIR FEEDBACK AND IT WAS
THE FEEDBACK ON THIS BILL THAT
LED ME TO ULTIMATELY CONCLUDE
FROM DIRECTOR BARNETT THAT
TRYING TO PARSE ALL THESE
VARIOUS CATEGORIES WAS GOING TO
BE DIFFICULT, NOT IMPOSSIBLE,
BUT DIFFICULT. SO I THINK THAT
WE CAN SAY THE ETHICS AND
ELECTIONS COMMISSION HAS HAD AN
OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK SPECIFICALLY
AT THIS LANGUAGE AND WEIGH IN.
THE QUESTIONS ARE HOW DO YOU
DRAW THE GROUP? HOW DO YOU PARSE
THE INTERESTS? I DO BELIEVE,
DIRECTOR BARNETT, YOU SAID
YOU'D HAD A CHANCE TO BRIEFLY
LOOK AT THESE AMENDMENTS.
>> I HAVE, BUT THE COMMISSION
HADN'T.
>> I MISUNDERSTOOD THE QUESTION.
A LITTLE ADDITIONAL CONTEXT
THERE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE
ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT 2 VERSION
C.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLES?
>> AYE.
>> CHAIR NELSON.
>> AYE.
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES AND
AMENDMENT 2 VERSION C IS
ADOPTED. COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH, IT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING ARE YOU PROCEEDING
WITH --
>> YEAH. COLLEAGUES, I
APOLOGIZE. FOR AMENDMENT 3 I'M
GOING TO PULL IT AND I'LL SAY
WHY. I WANTED TO MAKE CLEAR THAT
MY INTENTIONS ON THIS AMENDMENT
WAS TO ASK OUR ETHICS COMMISSION
TO PUBLISH ONLY THE COMPLAINTS
DEEMED NECESSARY TO INVESTIGATE,
INCLUDING THE JUSTIFICATION FOR
INVESTIGATION AND OUTCOMES. MY
OFFICE HAS BEEN IN CONVERSATION
WITH LEGAL COUNSEL, SO I'M
GOING TO WITHDRAW THIS AMENDMENT
AND BRING MORE A STRAIGHTFORWARD
AMENDMENT. THIS WILL INCREASE
THE TRANSPARENCY PROCESS WHERE
IT WILL BE PUBLICLY POSTED IN
TERMS OF WHEN THERE IS AN
INVESTIGATION AND THERE IS
DEEMED OUTCOMES WHERE THERE'S A
CONFLICT, THAT THAT WILL BE
POSTED TO A WEBSITE AND SHOWS
THE REASONING BEHIND THE
CONFLICT OF INTEREST. RIGHT NOW
THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN AND I THINK
THAT NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT
MORE TRANSPARENT, BUT I HAVE TO
WORK ON THE LANGUAGE A LITTLE
MORE. SO I'M GOING TO WITHDRAW
THERE AMENDMENT FOR TODAY. I
APOLOGIZE ABOUT THAT. I WILL
WORK ON IT WITH LEGAL. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY.
MOVING ON, COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH, YOU'RE
RECOGNIZED IN ORDER TO MOVE
AMENDMENT 5.
>> I MOVE TO AMEND NUMBER 5,
COUNCIL BILL 120978 AS PRESENTED
ON AMENDMENT 5.
>> SECOND.
>> IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED
TO AMEND THE BILL AS PRESENTED
ON AMENDMENT 5. COUNCIL CENTRAL
STAFF, WILL YOU PLEASE WALK US
THROUGH THAT AMENDMENT.
>> YES. OF COURSE. AGAIN, THIS
AMENDMENT IS DESIGNED TO
ENCOURAGE ENGAGEMENT BETWEEN
ELECTED OFFICIALS AND THE ETHICS
COMMISSION AND DIRECTOR AND IN
PARTICULAR, IT SETS AN
EXPECTATION ON THE COMMISSION
AND ITS DIRECTOR TO PROVIDE
ADVISORY OPINIONS ON POTENTIAL
ETHICAL ISSUES IN A TIMELY
MANNER. THAT'S THE UNDERLYING
GOAL HERE, AGAIN, JUST TO
ACTUALLY READ THE LANGUAGE.
ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE ENCOURAGED
TO SEEK INFORMAL OPINIONS
REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF THE
RELEVANT LEGAL AND ETHICAL
STANDARDS AND THIS IS IN SOME
WAYS THE NEXT SENTENCE IS THE
MOST IMPORTANT AND OPERATIVE,
WHEN AN ELECTED OFFICIAL SEEKS
AN INFORMAL WRITTEN OPINION OF
THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE
ETHICS COMMISSION, SUCH AN
OPINION SHALL BE PROVIDED WITHIN
FIVE BUSINESS DAYS OF THE
REQUEST. IT'S CREATING A VERY
SPECIFIC EXPECTATION ON THE
ETHICS DIRECTOR TO RESPOND AND
TO PROVIDE INFORMATION AND
FEEDBACK TO THE ELECTED OFFICIAL
SEEKING THAT INPUT. THAT IS ITS
PURPOSE. IF THE COMMISSION MORE
BROADLY WANTS TO ENGAGE,
THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES FOR THAT
AS WELL AND REFERENCE ALSO TO
THE CITY ATTORNEY OFFICE BEING
ABLE TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO
ELECTED OFFICIALS, NO SPECIFIC
TIME REQUIREMENTS THERE, BUT
AGAIN, THAT'S THE INTENT AND
SPECIFICS THAT ARE CALLED OUT IN
THE AMENDMENT.
>> OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
COLLEAGUES, IT'S MY
UNDERSTANDING THAT WHAT I'M
TRYING TO DO WITH THIS IS MAKE
SURE THAT WE CAN GET TIMELY
RESPONSES FROM ETHICS COMMISSION
WITHIN FIVE BUSINESS DAYS TO
CONTINUE OUR BUSINESS JUST AS
LIKE SOMETIMES I KNOW THEY MEET
QUARTERLY, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.
SO JUST TRYING TO GET A QUICKER
RESPONSE FROM OUR ETHICS
COMMISSION WHICH I THINK -- SO
WE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE PUBLIC
TRUST AND PROVIDING ELECTED
OFFICIALS THE SUPPORT OF OUR
ETHICS COMMISSION AND CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO ENCOURAGE
ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR
LEGISLATIVE MATTERS BECAUSE WHAT
WE DO OFTENTIMES MOVES VERY
QUICKLY AND GETTING A TIMELY
RESPONSE IS PARAMOUNT TO THE
WORK THAT WE DO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> YES. THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED
TO CLARIFY, SO IT'S NOT
REQUIRING THE COMMISSION TO DO
FIVE DAYS. WAYNE, DOES THE
COMMISSION MEET MONTHLY?
>> YEAH. THE FIRST WINDOW OF
EVERY MONTH.
>> BUT IF YOU'RE OUTSIDE THAT
WINDOW, IT MAKES IT HARD BECAUSE
YOU HAVE TO WAIT TILL THE
FOLLOWING MONTH.
>> RIGHT. ISN'T IT ON ME? I
THINK IT'S ON THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE COMMISSION WHO
HAS TO GIVE ADVICE IN FIVE DAYS.
ISN'T THAT MY UNDERSTANDING,
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> THAT'S THE CLARITY I'M
SPEAKING BECAUSE MY EXPERIENCE
WITH YOU IS YOU GIVE ME TIMELY
INFORMATION, BUT TO BE ABLE TO
GET SOMETHING BACK FROM THE
COMMISSION ITSELF WHO MEETS
MONTHLY, YOU MISS THAT WINDOW,
YOU HAVE TO WAIT TILL THE FOLLOW
MOG
FOLLOWING MONTH.
>> I DIDN'T MEAN TO SAY
QUARTERLY. I MEANT MONTHLY. MY
BAD.
>> IT'S OKAY. I REALLY WANTED
TO GET MORE TIMELY INFORMATION
FROM THE COMMISSION. BEN, ARE
YOU TRYING TO WEIGH IN HERE?
SORRY.
>> NO. I MOVED OVER THAT A
LITTLE QUICKLY. FOR THIS
LANGUAGE THE ELECTED OFFICIAL
HAVING HEARD FROM WAYNE CAN ALSO
REQUEST AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEEK
GUIDANCE FROM THE COMMISSION
ITSELF AND THERE'S A REFERENCE
TO POTENTIALLY USING A SPECIAL
MEETING TO DO THAT AND THAT THE
SEC THEN WOULD HAVE FIVE DAYS
AFTER THAT SPECIAL MEETING.
THERE IS NOT LANGUAGE ABOUT THE
PROCESS TO CALL A SPECIAL
MEETING AND CANDIDLY, I DON'T
KNOW HOW QUICKLY THAT COULD
HAPPEN ON A REGULAR BASIS. THE
DIRECTOR MIGHT. YOU MIGHT WANT
THE COMMISSION'S INPUT. IT PUTS
A FIVE-DAY WINDOW ON THEIR
RESPONSE, BUT ORGANIZING A
SPECIAL MEETING OR REGULAR
MEETING WOULD BE PART OF THAT
TIMELINE AND IT'S MORE
DIFFICULT TO PREDICT.
>> THAT'S VERY TRUE, BEN. I'M
ALWAYS STRIVING TO BE VERY
RESPONSIVE. I THINK I'VE ALWAYS
AT LEAST TRIED TO BE VERY
RESPONSIVE AND IF YOU WANT TO
GET THE OPINION FROM THE FULL
COMMISSION, I'M ALWAYS ECIAL ME
GENERALLY ABLE TO DO, BUT YEAH.
I COULDN'T PROMISE IT I'M
GOING TO GUARANTEE YOU THE
COMMISSION WILL BE ABLE FOR A
SPECIAL MEETING WITHIN A WEEK,
BUT MOST TIMES THEY ARE.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
THANKS FOR THE CLARITY.
>> ALSO I KNOW I'M NOT RUNNING
THE MEETING, BUT I THINK
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS HAS HIS
HAND UP.
>> I SEE THAT. DO YOU HAVE A
SHORT QUESTION ON THIS
AMENDMENT, COUNCIL STRAUSS?
>> YES. THANK YOU. I WILL SAY
IT'S IMPORTANT FOR TO US
RECEIVE FEEDBACK FROM OUR
COMMISSION ABOUT THESE
AMENDMENTS. WE LOSE NOTHING BY
TAKING TIME TO GET THEIR
FEEDBACK, BUT IF WE RUSH TO PASS
A LAW LOWERING OUR OWN ETHICS
STANDARDS WITHOUT INPUT FROM OUR
ETHICS OVERSIGHT BODY, WE DO
RISK PERMANENTLY UNDERMINING
PEOPLE'S TRUST IN US AND OUR
PROCESS. I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE
MORE TIME WITH THESE AMENDMENTS
AND UNDERLYING LEGISLATION SO
WE'RE ABLE TO RECEIVE THEIR
FEEDBACK. YOU SHARED THERE WOULD
BE NO BACK AND FORTH, THAT WE
NEEDED TO RAISE OUR HANDS AFTER
EACH QUESTION. I HAVEN'T SEEN
THAT HAPPENING WITH OTHER
COUNCILMEMBERS. I JUST WANT TO
SEE IF THAT'S A RULE THAT
APPLIES TO EVERYONE.
>> MY QUESTIONS EXACTLY.
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA, GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU. I WANT TO FOR THE
RECORD STATE COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS HAS SAID ON A NUMBER OF
OCCASIONS NOW WE'RE LOWERING
THE STANDARD AND I WANT THE
RECORD TO REFLECT THAT WE ARE
NOT LOWERING THE STANDARDS.
THERE ARE STILL STANDARDS HERE
FOR ETHICS. WE'RE MAKING SOME
CLARIFYING AMENDMENTS AND I FEEL
REALLY STRONGLY THAT NEEDED TO
BE STATED BECAUSE I DON'T WANT
IT LEFT ON THE TABLE THAT WE
APPARENTLY ARE GOING TO AGREE TO
DISAGREE ON THAT, COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS, BUT WE ARE NOT LOWERING
THE STANDARD. THANK YOU, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT.
>> ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ON THIS? WE
ARE NOW AFTER 5:00 AND A
COUNCILMEMBER HAS A VERY HARD
STOP. I'M TRYING TO GET TO A
VOTE ON THIS PIECE OF
LEGISLATION. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE
ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT 5.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> AYE.
>> CHAIR NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY.
THE MOTION CARRIES AND AMENDMENT
5 IS ADOPTED. COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH, YOU'RE
RECOGNIZED IN ORDER TO MOVE
AMENDMENT 6.
>> I MOVE TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL
120978 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT
6.
>> SECOND. IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED TO AMEND THE BILL AS
PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT 6.
COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF, WILL YOU
PLEASE WALK US THROUGH THE
AMENDMENT.
>> ABSOLUTELY. AS DESCRIBED IN
THE EFFECTS STATEMENT, THIS
AMENDMENT IS DESIGNED TO
ENCOURAGE AND INVITE THE ETHICS
AND ELECTIONS COMMISSION TO
CONTINUE TO PROVIDE INPUT IN
THIS SPACE, IF YOU WILL. IN
PARTICULAR, IT CALLS ON THE SEC
TO REPORT ANNUALLY TO THE CITY
COUNCIL WHETHER IT HAS ANY
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NEW ETHICS
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS AND IT
AUTHORIZES AND ENCOURAGES TO
REVIEW RECUSALS, ETHICS
COMPLAINTS, REQUEST FOR ADVISORY
OPINIONS AND THE LIKE. TO USE
THE BODY OF KNOWLEDGE THEY
POTENTIALLY WILL HAVE GATHERED
OVER THE PREVIOUS YEAR AND MAYBE
YEARS BEFORE THAT AND TO
AFFIRMATIVELY MAKE
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL ABOUT
POTENTIAL MODIFICATIONS TO THE
ETHICS RULES AND LAWS. AGAIN, IT
ENCOURAGES THAT AND
AFFIRMATIVELY REQUIRES THE
COMMISSION TO RESPOND TO COUNCIL
ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. THAT
RESPONSE IN A GIVEN YEAR COULD
BE WE DON'T HAVE
RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT EITHER WAY
THE IDEA IS THERE WOULD BE AN
AFFIRMATIVE CHECK-IN WHETHER OR
NOT EVENTS IN THE PREVIOUS YEARS
OR THEIR CUMULATIVE IMPACT OVER
TIME SUGGEST THERE'S A NEED FOR
SOME MODIFICATION IN THE VIEW OF
THE ETHICS COMMISSION.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU.
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
THIS IS REALLY A REQUEST OF OUR
ETHICS REPORT ANNUALLY ON THE
STATE OF ETHICS OF THE CITY AND
RECOMMENDATION HOW WE CAN
FURTHER BUILD TRUST . THERE'S A
LOT OF CHANGING OF PEOPLE.
THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT
SCENARIOS THAT COME UP. THERE'S
A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT
ARE MOVING FAST. TO BE ABLE TO
SAY HERE ARE SOME
RECOMMENDATIONS WE WOULD LIKE TO
HELP STRENGTHEN OUR LAWS.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. IS THERE
ANY KIND OF REGULARITY WITH
WHICH WE WOULD ASK FOR OR
REQUEST THAT INPUT?
>> THIS WOULD BE ANNUALLY. SO
WE'D HAVE AN ANNUAL REPORT ON
HEY, THIS IS THE STATE OF
ETHICS. THIS IS WHAT WE SEE
CONFLICT WHICH OF
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.
>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT
REPORT TO HAVE AT SOME POINT
WHEN COUNCIL IS IN SESSION SO WE
COULD CONSIDER AND MAKE THOSE
CHANGES INSTEAD OF HAVING IT
HAPPEN RIGHT BEFORE A LONG BREAK
OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. GO
AHEAD. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM OTHER PEOPLE?
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA.
>> YES. THIS IS COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH'S LAST AMENDMENT,
I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR
IMPROVING UPON WHAT
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE BROUGHT AND,
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE,
ACKNOWLEDGING YOU HAD MANY OF
THESE AND BASED ON SOME OPINION
YOU GOT WENT BACK AND FORTH, BUT
ALSO SAY I APPRECIATE YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, AND YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR
THE TIME AND THE DUE DILIGENCE
AND ALL YOU'VE DONE TO REALLY
SUPPORT AND TAKE DIRECTOR
BARNETT'S RECOMMENDATION TO
UPDATE THE ETHICS CODE WITH THE
THOUGHTFULNESS THAT YOU'VE PUT
INTO IT. REALLY WANTED TO THANK
YOU FOR THAT AS WE'RE LOOKING
AT THIS LAST AMENDMENT AND TO
UNDERSCORE WE DID GET A
RECOMMENDATION FROM SOMEONE I
KNOW TO BE THE HOLDER OF THE
ETHICS WORK AT THE CITY AND
SOMEONE I REALLY HAVE TRUSTED
OVER THE YEARS AND THAT IS
REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME IN ALL
THIS. IF DIRECTOR BARNETT HAD
SAID DIFFERENTLY, THEN I WOULD
HAVE GONE THAT DIFFERENT
DIRECTION AND SO I REALLY WANT
TO UNDERSCORE THIS IS NOT
LOWERING OUR STANDARDS. THIS IS
MAKING SOME AMENDMENTS AS
RECOMMENDED BY OUR ETHICS
OFFICER AND, OF COURSE, EVEN
PUTTING MORE AMENDMENTS TO IT TO
MAKE IT AS ROBUST OF AN ETHICS
BILL AS IT CAN BE. SO THANK YOU
ALL.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
>> I DIDN'T HAVE A HAND RAISED.
>> OH. DID YOU SAY ANYTHING
ABOUT A WALK-ON, I THOUGHT?
>> YES. I SAID THAT EARLIER AND
AS I MENTIONED TO YOU
PREVIOUSLY, EARLIER BEFORE THE
MEETING, IT WAS A POSSIBILITY,
BUT I WILL NOT BRING AMENDMENT 7
WALK-ON AMENDMENT TODAY.
>> TODAY. OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE, I INVITE YOU TO MAKE SOME
CLOSING COMMENTS.
>> POINT OF INFORMATION.
>> PLEASE GO AHEAD.
>> WE HAVE NOT VOTED ON
AMENDMENT 6, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> GOSH, GETTING AHEAD OF
MYSELF. CLERK, WOULD YOU PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL ON AMENDMENT 6.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> YES.
>> CHAIR NELSON?
>> AYE.
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED.
>> OKAY. THE MOTION CARRIES. TWO
HANDS JUST WENT UP. LET ME SAY
THIS BECAUSE I HAVE TO. THE
MOTION CARRIES AND AMENDMENT 6
IS ADOPTED. ARE THERE ANY FINAL
COMMENTS ON THE BILL AS AMENDED
BEFORE WE VOTE ON THE BILL?
COUNCILMEMBER -- WHAT TIME DO WE
HAVE A HARD STOP FOR THIS
COMMITTEE MEETING?
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, IF I
MAY.
>> GO AHEAD. TECHNICAL PROBLEMS.
I HAVE TO BE AT AN EVENT
HONORING PRESIDENT KOWSIT. I
KNOW THIS IS AT THE END OF OUR
VOTE. IF THERE'S ANY WAY WE CAN
VOTE FOR THE FULL THING, I KNOW
A COUPLE COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE
QUESTIONS, BUT I KNOW THEY'RE
NONVOTING MEMBERS OF MAYBE IS IT
POSSIBLE TO JUST TAKE THE VOTE
AND THEN YOU CAN GET YOUR
QUESTIONS?
>> I AM FINE WITH TAKING A VOTE
AND NOT CALLING ADJOURNMENT
UNTIL COUNCILMEMBERS CAN MAKE
COMMENTS ON THE END.
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, WOULD YOU
LIKE TO MAKE CLOSING COMMENTS
BEFORE WE COME TO A VOTE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH
HAS HER HAND UP.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH,
GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
REALLY QUICK, I WANTED TO STATE
SOMETHING FOR THE RECORD, MY
INTENSE AND GOAL, NUMBER ONE,
WAS TO PROVIDE MORE STRUCTURE TO
OUR ETHICS OF WHAT I HAVE SEEN
IN MY OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE
BEHIND THE SCENES TO SEE WHAT
HAPPENS WITH CERTAIN EXPERIENCE,
SO STRUCTURE AND MORE
TRANSPARENCY AS WELL. THAT'S
WHY I HAD BROUGHT AMENDMENT
NUMBER 3 TO THE TABLE, BUT I
KNOW IT NEED TO BE WORDED BETTER
BECAUSE FROM MY EXPERIENCE IF
THERE IS AN ETHICAL DILEMMA AND
SOMEONE WANTS TO KNOW ABOUT
THAT, THEY HAVE TO FILE A PUBLIC
DISCLOSURE REQUEST AND THAT
TAKES A LONG TIME. I THINK JUST
PUTTING THAT OUT THERE AND BEING
TRANSPARENT ABOUT WHAT FINDINGS
WERE AND IF THOSE FINDINGS WERE
TO BE A CONFLICT, THAT IS THE
MOST TRANSPARENT PROCESS YOU
COULD POSSIBLY BE FROM A
GOVERNMENT'S PERSPECTIVE ON
SOMEONE'S GOVERNMENT WEBSITE.
SO I JUST WANTED TO STATE THAT
FOR THE RECORD. I DON'T CONSIDER
THAT LOWERING STANDARDS. I
CONSIDER THAT BEING HONEST AND
OPEN INSTEAD OF A TWEET OR
SOCIAL MEDIA POST OR A GOSSIP. I
JUST WANTED TO STATE THAT. I
CONSIDER THAT TO BE WAY MORE
TRANSPARENT THAN WHAT IS
CURRENTLY BEING DONE RIGHT NOW
AND ALSO AND
DATA AND INFORMATION TO PEOPLE
WITH THE STRUCTURE THAT WE NEED
TO HAVE, MORE SO WITH RESPONSES
WITHIN FIVE DAYS AND ALSO
GETTING AN ANNUAL REPORT ABOUT
HOW WE CAN IMPROVE OUR ETHICS I
THINK IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT AS
WELL, HAVING A STRUCTURED REPORT
WHERE WE CAN ANALYZE AND
UNDERSTAND AND DATA AND FACTS SO
WE CAN GET BETTER AS A COUNCIL I
THINK IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT.
SO I WANTED TO STATE THAT. I
ALSO TRIED MY BEST TO BRING
FORWARD SOME AMENDMENTS I
THOUGHT WAS MIDDLE GROUND
BECAUSE I HAVE SEEN EXTREMES ON
BOTH SIDES. IN ORDER FOR US TO
MOVE FORWARD, WE HAVE TO HAVE A
COMMON MIDDLE GROUND BALANCE
APPROACH SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD
AND THAT'S HOW I TOOK TO THESE
ETHICS PIECE. THAT'S HOW I TAKE
TO ANY TYPE OF LEGISLATION WE'RE
DOING. I'M ALWAYS TRYING TO
FIND THE COMMON GROUND SO WE CAN
MOVE FORWARD TO MAKING SURE THAT
WE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE PROGRESS
BECAUSE THAT IS THE UNDERLINING
PIECE TO OUR CITY OF BEING
PROGRESSIVE IS PROGRESS. I JUST
WANTED TO STATE THAT BECAUSE I
KNOW THAT WE CAN -- EVERYONE HAS
THEIR OWN OPINION. I GET IT.
JUST TRYING TO MAKE PROGRESS
HERE FOR A MIDDLE GROUND. THE
OTHER GROUND IS THE AMENDMENT 3,
BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE THAT IN
ENOUGH TIME, I'M GOING TO HAVE
TO ABSTAIN FROM THE VOTE TODAY
UNTIL WE GET IT CORRECTLY
BECAUSE I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE
ENOUGH TO VOTE ON THE
UNDERLINING BILL UNTIL WE HAVE
THIS AMENDMENT WHERE I THINK
NEEDS TO BE WELL. I JUST WANTED
TO STATE THAT FOR THE RECORD, MY
INTENTIONS AND THANK YOU ALL FOR
YOUR TIME, BUT I THINK WE --
YEAH. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> WHAT WAS THE TOPIC OF 3?
>> IT'S TO PUBLIC ONLY THE
COMPLAINTS WE DEAL NECESSARY TO
INVESTIGATE WHERE THERE WAS AN
ETHICAL -- WHERE THERE WAS AN
OUTCOME WHERE THERE WAS A
CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND WHY
THAT IS. SO THAT IS TO BE
PUBLISHED. THOSE ARE MY
INTENTIONS TO GET IT RIGHT WITH
LAW AND TO MAKE SURE THAT IT CAN
BE AS TRANSPARENT AS POSSIBLE.
THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT IS A
VERY IMPORTANT PIECE OF -- THAT
IS IMPORTANT. COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE, DO YOU WANT TO CLOSE US
OUT WITH ANY COMMENTS?
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> YOU'RE BEHIND SOME WRITING
ON MY SCREEN. GO AHEAD,
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE.
>> I WANTED TO STATE THIS WAS
THE POINT I WAS GOING TO RAISE
MY HAND TO SAY AS I ALLUDED TO
AND BASICALLY MENTIONED THERE IS
AN AMENDMENT 7 WALK ON. UPON
CONSIDERATION I WILL NOT BE
PLACING THAT AMENDMENT IN TODAY.
CAN I JUST SAY, TOO, AGAIN, AS I
STATED EARLIER, THERE'S A LOT
OF DIFFERENT PIECES HERE. SO I
APPRECIATE THE WORK DONE BY ALL
INVOLVED REGARDING THE
CHALLENGES THAT WE FACE TO
INCLUDE THE ADD ON OF
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH WITH
ALL HER AMENDMENTS IN ADDITION
TO WORK DONE PREVIOUSLY BY
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE AND OTHERS.
I JUST WANTED TO END THAT WAY.
THANK YOU.
>> IT IS MY IMPRESSION -- THANK
YOU VERY MUCH -- I'LL JUST SAY
ONE. IT IS MY IMPRESSION WE HAVE
STRENGTHENED THE EXISTING ETHICS
CODE. THERE IS THE MODIFICATION
OF RECUSAL OR DISCLOSURE, BUT
THERE IS A LOT TO THE ETHICS
CODE THAT HAS BEEN STRENGTHENED
BY THE SUITE OF AMENDMENTS. SE
SUITE OF AMENDMENTS BEFORE GOING
FORWARD. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY
OTHER COMMENTS? COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE.
>> THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO
SAY THANK YOU SO MUCH
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH FOR
ALL YOUR REALLY HARD WORK ON
YOUR AMENDMENTS, FOR BRINGING
THE RECUSAL AMENDMENT. I THINK
IT DEMONSTRATES OUR DEMOCRACY IS
ALIVE AND WELL WHEN WE HEAR A
LOT OF FEEDBACK AND WE ARE
RESPONSIVE AND RECEPTIVE AND WE
HAVE GONE BACK TO I THINK A
RECUSAL PROVISION THAT IS THE A
BRIGHT LIGHT, WHICH IS
IMPORTANT. IT HAS BEEN SHOWN TO
WORK IN MANY OTHER JURISDICTIONS
AND IT GIVES THE ETHICS AND
ELECTIONS DIRECTOR AND
COMMISSION SOME GUIDELINES ON
WHICH TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THESE
VERY DIFFICULT DECISIONS. I
ACTUALLY BELIEVE WE ARE NOT
TAKING THE GUARDRAILS OFTEN. WE
ARE MAKING THEM BETTER SO THAT
WE AS A COUNCIL CAN WORK MORE
EFFECTIVELY AND DO THE BUSINESS
OF REPRESENTING ALL THE VOICES.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO BRING THIS BEFORE
YOUR COMMITTEE TODAY.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER
STRAUSS. I'M SORRY.
>> OVER THE PAST FEW DAYS WE'VE
SEEN REPUBLICANS ON THE SUPREME
COURT --
>> JUST A SECOND.
>> I'M SORRY.
>> YOU CALLED ON ME.
>> AND THAT WAS -- I APOLOGIZE.
I MEANT TO GIVE COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE THE LAST WORD AND LOOKED
AT THE CLOCK AND REALIZED WE DO
HAVE TO BRING THIS.
>> I'LL JUST MAKE MY COMMENTS
BRIEF. OVER THE PAST FEW DAYS
WE'VE SEEN EVEN REPUBLICANS ON
THE SUPREME COURT TAKE PRINCIPAL
RECUSALS. JUSTICE AMY CONEY
BARRETT RECUSED HERSELF WHILE
SHE WAS THE DECIDING VOTE ON A
CASE THAT WOULD HAVE APPROVED
THE COUNTRY'S FIRST PUBLIC
RELIGIOUS CHARTER SCHOOL. IT'S
SOMETHING SHE'S ON THE RECORD
SUPPORTING BUT RECUSED HERSELF
ANYWAYS, ALL THIS TO SAY I
DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE THE
ONES LEADING WITH LEGISLATION
THAT IN MY OPINION LOWERS OUR
ETHICAL STANDARDS.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I AM
GOING TO INTERRUPT YOU NOW AND
GET THE VOTE.
>> WE NEED TO BE TAKING MORE
TIME ON THIS BILL AS I'M
HEARING THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL
AMENDMENT IDEAS AND THAT THE
COMMISSION HAS NOT PROVIDED
THEIR FEEDBACK. THERE'S NO NEED
TO RUSH THIS UNLESS THERE IS. I
HAVE ONLY SPOKE TO THE MERITS OF
THIS, THE 2016 AND THE 2018
BILLS. IF WE SEE IN THE NEXT FEW
WEEKS LEGISLATION THAT WILL ONLY
PASS BECAUSE OF THE BILL BEFORE
US, WE'LL KNOW WHY THIS PROCESS
WAS RUSHED.
>> COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS, YOU
ARE NOT ON THIS COMMITTEE. I
ERRONEOUSLY SAID YOUR NAME
BECAUSE YOU WERE AT THE TOP LEFT
OF MY SCREEN. I WAS PROCEEDING
TO A VOTE ON THIS BILL BECAUSE
WE HAD A HARD STOP AND WE'RE
ALREADY PAST IT. YOU WILL HAVE
THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THIS
WHEN IT IS BEFORE FULL COUNCIL.
I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT, BUT WE
HAVE TO MOVE ON. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE
PASSAGE OF COUNCILMEMBER BILL
120978 AS AMENDED.
>> COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SOLOMON?
>> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE?
>> ABSTAIN.
>> CHAIR NELSON?
>> I WILL ALSO ABSTAIN.
>> TWO IN FAVOR, THREE
ABSTAINED.
>> OKAY. THE MOTION CARRIES AND
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION THAT
THE BILL PASSED AS AMENDED WILL
BE SENT TO THE JUNE 3rd CITY
COUNCIL MEETING. THIS WILL COME
BEFORE THE COUNCIL ON -- HELP ME
OUT HERE, JUNE, OUR NEXT --
>> JUNE 3rd CITY COUNCIL
MEETING.
>> JUNE 3rd CITY COUNCIL
MEETING. OKAY. I ABSTAIN BECAUSE
IT DOES SEEM AS THOUGH THERE
WILL BE ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS
AND I WANT TO SEE THE FULL SUITE
BECAUSE THAT COULD CHANGE MY
VOTE AND I DON'T WANT TO HAVE
TO EXPLAIN MYSELF AFTER THE
FACT. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER
BUSINESS, THIS MEETING WILL
ADJOURN.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, WE STILL
HAVE HANDS, POINT OF ORDER.
>> YES. AND I AM THE CHAIR OF
THIS COMMITTEE AND I DO
APOLOGIZE TO THE NONCOMMITTEE
MEMBERS. I WILL MOVE MY SCRIPT
TO SEE IF THERE ARE COMMITTEE
MEMBERS THAT WISH TO SPEAK.
THERE ARE NO COMMITTEE MEMBERS
THAT WISH TO SPEAK AND WE ARE
WELL PAST TIME. I WAS GENEROUS
WITH PUBLIC COMMENT. I DO HAVE
TO END THIS MEETING SO PEOPLE
CAN GET TO OTHER ENGAGEMENTS. IT
IS NOW 5:27. HEARING NO FURTHER
BUSINESS, THIS MEETING IS
ADJOURNED.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
>> YES.
>> I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WE
HEAR FROM COUNCILMEMBER RINCK. I
WANT TO STATE FOR THE RECORD, I
DON'T WANT TO OVERSTEP MY --
>> BUT YOU ARE, IN FACT,
OVERSTEPPING AND I WILL LET
COUNCILMEMBERS THAT NEED TO
LEAVE THE MEETING, YOU ARE FREE
TO GO TO GET TO YOUR ENGAGEMENTS
AND YOU ARE FREE TO SPEAK BEFORE
WE OFFICIALLY END THE MEETING.
GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER RINCK.
>> WHEN THIS LEGISLATION BECAME
PUBLIC EARLIER THIS MONTH, I WAS
THE FIRST MEMBER OF THIS BODY TO
SPEAK OUT AGAINST IT. I'LL DO
SO AGAIN TODAY FOR THE OFFICIAL
PUBLIC RECORD. I AM AGAINST THIS
LEGISLATION BECAUSE I DON'T
BELIEVE WE SHOULD LOWER OUR
ETHICAL STANDARDS AND YOU CAN
SAY IT'S NOT LOWERING
STANDARDS, BUT IT IS BY
DEFINITION LOWERING STANDARDS.
OUR DEMOCRACY IS FRAGILE,
ESPECIALLY AS WE WATCH PROFIT
OVER PEOPLE IN THE FORM OF
PUBLIC POLICY HAPPENING IN
REALTIME IN D.C. THIS WEEK AS
HOUSE REPUBLICANS GIVE OUT TAX
BREAKS TO WEALTHY CORPORATIONS
WHILE SLASHING S.N.A.P. AND
MEDICAID FOR THE POOREST
AMERICANS AS PART OF THE TRUMP
REGIME'S BIG BEAUTIFUL TAX
BILL. THIS IS NOT THE MOMENT WE
SHOULD BE WEAKENING OUR CITY'S
CODE OF ETHICS. IN FACT, GIVEN
THE FRAGILE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT
I'D GO AS FAR TO SAY THIS IS
THE WORST POSSIBLE TIMING FOR
THIS. OVER THE PAST TWO WEEKS
ALONE MY OFFICE HAS RECEIVED
OVER 1,300 EMAILS FROM
CONSTITUENTS AGAINST THIS, MOST
OF WHICH ARE UNIQUE EMAILS, NOT
FORM LETTERS. ONLY ONE EMAIL WAS
FOUND THAT WE COULD FIND THAT
ACTUALLY SUPPORTS THIS. TO PUT
THIS INTO CONTEXT, IN THE SIX
MONTHS I'VE HELD THIS OFFICE,
WE'VE RECEIVED 3,200 EMAILS,
ALMOST ALL FORM LETTERS, ON THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SO THE FACTS
WE'VE RECEIVED, ABOUT A THIRD
OF THAT IN JUST A FEW WEEKS
SHOULD TELL US SOMETHING. THE
HOURS OF PUBLIC COMMENT WE'VE
RECEIVED ON THIS SHOULD TELL US
SOMETHING. THE PEOPLE DON'T
WANT THIS. EARLIER TODAY AS
COUNCILMEMBER STRAUSS MENTIONED,
CONSERVATIVE U.S. SUPREME COURT
JUSTICE AMY CONEY BARRETT
REDUCED HERSELF OF A VOTE ON A
CASE RELATED TO PUBLIC FUNDING
FOR WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN THE
NATION'S FIRST RELIGIOUS
CHARTER SCHOOL. WHY SHOULD
SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL HAVE LOWER
ETHICAL STANDARDS THAN THE U.S.
SUPREME COURT? TO MY COLLEAGUES
ADVOCATING FOR THIS LEGISLATION
VOTING YES TO MOVE